Santos Expelled from House

[Failzero]

Wrong. Denial of our fundamental notions of fairness over common sense.

What would have been the harm in awaiting a conviction?

Democrats would have kept a Dem Congress-critter Around even after a conviction

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Stefanik was right. The balance of your post is just you reiterating your mindless, preconceived and biased position.

again...

LaLota: Santos has been afforded ‘much more process than a person in his shoes deserved’​

LaLota: Santos has been afforded ‘much more process than a person in his shoes deserved’

Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) pushed back against allegations Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.) was not afforded due process during the House Ethics Committee’s investigation, arguing the embattled law…

thehill.com

“Mr. Speaker, while this proceeding is not covered by the due process clauses, George Santos has indeed been afforded much more process than a person in his shoes deserved,” LaLota said during a debate on the expulsion Thursday.

...

Santos has long argued he was not given due process in the House Ethics Committee’s investigation, which he has repeatedly called “rushed” as part of an effort to push the New York Republican out of the lower chamber.

LaLota, along with House Ethics Committee Chair Michael Guest (R-Miss.), largely rejected Santos’s argument Thursday, pointing to Santos’s decision to not testify before the committee. Santos claimed the committee’s deadline to testify was the same day he needed to go to court, adding the committee required a “hard-liner yes or no,” and that “they wouldn’t settle for anything else.”

“Santos had every opportunity to be heard when the Ethics Committee invited him to confront the accusations, an invitation Santos rejected,” LaLota said on the floor.

Guest also pushed back against Santos’s claim that he was cooperative with the committee’s investigation, telling the House floor “the record of investigation reveals otherwise.”

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Democrats would have kept a Dem Congress-critter Around even after a conviction

/\

mirror

projection

deflection

deception

deceit

degeneracy

 

[Failzero]

/\

mirror

projection

deflection

deception

deceit

degeneracy

I wish the GOP would learn all those tricks from Democommies

 

[okfine]

Wrong. Denial of our fundamental notions of fairness over common sense.

What would have been the harm in awaiting a conviction?

You are one sad person and don't expect a pat on the back, either.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I wish the GOP would learn all those tricks from Democommies

Childish name calling. You go to Trump U with Liability?

 

[BackAgain]

You're triggered, BackFlush. We see it. Otherwise why comment about his due process if you don't care, you lying douche.

The Constitution provides that each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings. So, tough titties, you're wrong, BackFlush. Like always.

His lies did him in. He admitted to being a lying liar himself. Now he can focus on his criminal indictments full time.

George Santos Admits to Lying About College and Work History (Published 2022)

The congressman-elect confirmed The New York Times’s findings that he had not graduated from college or worked at two major Wall Street firms, as he had claimed.

www.nytimes.com

And you're a stain, BackFlush. Just like your boy Santos.

You’re just bleating again Stumblin’ Dickweed.

 

[Oddball]

again...

LaLota: Santos has been afforded ‘much more process than a person in his shoes deserved’​

LaLota: Santos has been afforded ‘much more process than a person in his shoes deserved’

Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.) pushed back against allegations Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.) was not afforded due process during the House Ethics Committee’s investigation, arguing the embattled law…

thehill.com

“Mr. Speaker, while this proceeding is not covered by the due process clauses, George Santos has indeed been afforded much more process than a person in his shoes deserved,” LaLota said during a debate on the expulsion Thursday.

...

Santos has long argued he was not given due process in the House Ethics Committee’s investigation, which he has repeatedly called “rushed” as part of an effort to push the New York Republican out of the lower chamber.

LaLota, along with House Ethics Committee Chair Michael Guest (R-Miss.), largely rejected Santos’s argument Thursday, pointing to Santos’s decision to not testify before the committee. Santos claimed the committee’s deadline to testify was the same day he needed to go to court, adding the committee required a “hard-liner yes or no,” and that “they wouldn’t settle for anything else.”

“Santos had every opportunity to be heard when the Ethics Committee invited him to confront the accusations, an invitation Santos rejected,” LaLota said on the floor.

Guest also pushed back against Santos’s claim that he was cooperative with the committee’s investigation, telling the House floor “the record of investigation reveals otherwise.”

Fucking bullshit....He was never convicted of anything.

Was a different story with James Traficant....At least he got the pantomime of due process before being removed.

But it's always (D)ifferent for your team.

James Traficant - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[BackAgain]

You are one sad person and don't expect a pat on the back, either.

You’ve got nothing. And it always shows.

I Have been and still am entirely correct. This is why you won’t address the facts or the logic.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

You are one sad person and don't expect a pat on the back, either.

You can point out to BackAgain that people who at first were not onboard with expulsion, waited as until more evidence was in from the Ethics committee. You can point out there actually was anything but a rush to judgement. But to go back again to facts... wasting your time. Liability is like a dog with a bone he refuses to give up -- not knowing the bone is poisonous. Or like Trump ignoring legal advice to comply with a federal subpoena because 'They're mine!'

 

[Oddball]

You can point out to BackAgain that people who at first were not onboard with expulsion, waited as until more evidence was in from the Ethics committee. You can point out there actually was anything but a rush to judgement. But to go back again to facts... wasting your time. Liability is like a dog with a bone he refuses to give up -- not knowing the bone is poisonous. Or like Trump ignoring legal advice to comply with a federal subpoena because 'They're mine!'

Where was the criminal conviction, assclown?

 

[okfine]

You’re just bleating again Stumblin’ Dickweed.

Oh look. The fool is getting madagain.

 

[BackAgain]

Where was the criminal conviction, assclown?

Dainty will continue to evade that pertinent fact.

 

[BackAgain]

Oh look. The fool is getting madagain.

Nah. Just a bit more dismissive of your always feeble posting efforts.

Don’t cry.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Fucking bullshit....He was never convicted of anything.

Was a different story with James Traficant....At least he got the pantomime of due process before being removed.

But it's always (D)ifferent for your team.

James Traficant - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Failed comparison, but tell us -- hen did the Ethics committee take up an investigation?

 

[Nostra]

Since he's the first candidate found to be running and being elected on a completely fabricated background, there's little precedence to make predictions based on party.

Fauxcohontas Warren beat him to it.

 

[okfine]

Nah. Just a bit more dismissive of your always feeble posting efforts.

Don’t cry.

Poor BackAgain. Hah Ha Ha!

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Where was the criminal conviction, assclown?

Where is it demanded there be a criminal conviction? It's about House Rules. Read the US Constitution.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Dainty will continue to evade that pertinent fact.

Weeee the silly name calling. You closet case Manly-boy/girls always assume those types of attacks sting. Its projection --

Fact is no conviction of a crime is needed to expel a member. The types and amount of rule violations here are record setting.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Oddball and BackAgain can play Tag Team all they want. Bullies and blowhards always feel safer in groups.

Don't pay attention to their silly illogical arguments. Stick with facts and they lose.