Scandal in the Wind 2023. George Santos gets Sashayed

[Tekken_Guy]

From a political standpoint, you'd think Republican's would rather risk a low turnout special and potentially get a half decent incumbent as opposed to a high turnout presidential year where democrats have a good chance of taking the seat back against a no name. Unless they think it's a one term rental and would rather maximize what little time they have left here.

Or maybe Republicans like their odds in the general more than in a special election, and don’t want to narrow the majority halfway through the term.

[oldtimer]

From a political standpoint, you'd think Republican's would rather risk a low turnout special and potentially get a half decent incumbent as opposed to a high turnout presidential year where democrats have a good chance of taking the seat back against a no name. Unless they think it's a one term rental and would rather maximize what little time they have left here.

Republicans don't have a chance in any special election, they are all D+10 shifts.

It's only 12 months till the normal election anyway.

[Birdish]

From a political standpoint, you'd think Republican's would rather risk a low turnout special and potentially get a half decent incumbent as opposed to a high turnout presidential year where democrats have a good chance of taking the seat back against a no name. Unless they think it's a one term rental and would rather maximize what little time they have left here.

Or maybe Republicans like their odds in the general more than in a special election, and don’t want to narrow the majority halfway through the term.

From a political standpoint, you'd think Republican's would rather risk a low turnout special and potentially get a half decent incumbent as opposed to a high turnout presidential year where democrats have a good chance of taking the seat back against a no name. Unless they think it's a one term rental and would rather maximize what little time they have left here.

Republicans don't have a chance in any special election, they are all D+10 shifts.

It's only 12 months till the normal election anyway.

I'd agree that Republican's might prefer the odds in the general vs a special, but that NY-AD-27 special gives me pause as a democrat. If there were a special here, I'd honestly consider republicans favored with the current backlash City Democrats are currently receiving.

[Pres Mike]

Wasn't the Santos vote supposed to be at 6:30? They are still voting on the Rashida motion (which failed).

Why does congress always leave the most important and interesting votes for late at night. Do they want prime time ratings?

[Tekken_Guy]

From a political standpoint, you'd think Republican's would rather risk a low turnout special and potentially get a half decent incumbent as opposed to a high turnout presidential year where democrats have a good chance of taking the seat back against a no name. Unless they think it's a one term rental and would rather maximize what little time they have left here.

Or maybe Republicans like their odds in the general more than in a special election, and don’t want to narrow the majority halfway through the term.

From a political standpoint, you'd think Republican's would rather risk a low turnout special and potentially get a half decent incumbent as opposed to a high turnout presidential year where democrats have a good chance of taking the seat back against a no name. Unless they think it's a one term rental and would rather maximize what little time they have left here.

Republicans don't have a chance in any special election, they are all D+10 shifts.

It's only 12 months till the normal election anyway.

I'd agree that Republican's might prefer the odds in the general vs a special, but that NY-AD-27 special gives me pause as a democrat. If there were a special here, I'd honestly consider republicans favored with the current backlash City Democrats are currently receiving.

Nassau likely shifts to the left in the special though.

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1719839860658229708

She can stuff it. She'd vote against expulsion even if the probe found wrongdoing

[GeorgiaModerate]

The vote is underway.

[Oryxslayer]

The motion is on the floor and has over 150 GOP NAY votes, so it is deemed to have failed. Interestingly, we also seem to have some Democrats voting against it.

[wbrocks67]

Wholly disappointing to see so many Ds voting against it.

[Sestak]

TOTALLY EXONERATED!

[Pres Mike]

Unbelievable

[wbrocks67]

Did some Ds vote against it because they want to see him remain in congress, so that he's a continued albatross for Rs or something?  Otherwise I see no way for them to vote no. He's objectively done more than enough to be voted out of congress.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Did some Ds vote against it because they want to see him remain in congress, so that he's a continued albatross for Rs or something?  Otherwise I see no way for them to vote no. He's objectively done more than enough to be voted out of congress.

It's possible that some of them want to give the Ethics Committee investigation a chance to finish first.  I'm just speculating here.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Very disappointed in some of the names on here.

https://twitter.com/MI_James57/status/1719873415383798005?s=20

[Horus]

Very disappointed in some of the names on here.

https://twitter.com/MI_James57/status/1719873415383798005?s=20

FFs. Santos is entertaining and this had no chance of passing anyways. He makes the GOP look bad too.

[Arizona Iced Tea]

He is innocent until proven guilty, we shouldn't be expelling people without due process.

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

F—king of course Menendez’s name is on there

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

Very disappointed in some of the names on here.

https://twitter.com/MI_James57/status/1719873415383798005?s=20

That’s a wild list of names

[Pres Mike]

He is innocent until proven guilty, we shouldn't be expelling people without due process.

They aren't even trying to expel him for his legal crimes. Like fruad, writing bad checks, stealing campaign money, etc.

They want to expel him because he is a clown who lied about...

-His mom dying on 9/11
-His grandmother being a holocaust victim
-Being Jewish
-Going to a prestigious high school he NEVER went to. In reality he barely got his GED
-He was a star vollyball player Baruch college. He never went to ANY college
-Starting an animal charity
-About being the first gay republican married to a man. He NEVER married a man. Only a woman
-Claimed he was an extra on the children's show "Hanna Montana"
-Had friends who died at Pulse
-Not being a drag queen

Like, how are folks on this forum defending this guy? There is no doubt in my mind that if Republicans had a larger minority he would have been expelled months ago. 78% of people in his district want him gone

[Morning in Atlas]

My king is alive.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

He is innocent until proven guilty, we shouldn't be expelling people without due process.

They aren't even trying to expel him for his legal crimes. Like fruad, writing bad checks, stealing campaign money, etc.

They want to expel him because he is a clown who lied about...

-His mom dying on 9/11
-His grandmother being a holocaust victim
-Being Jewish
-Going to a prestigious high school he NEVER went to. In reality he barely got his GED
-He was a star vollyball player Baruch college. He never went to ANY college
-Starting an animal charity
-About being the first gay republican married to a man. He NEVER married a man. Only a woman
-Claimed he was an extra on the children's show "Hanna Montana"
-Had friends who died at Pulse
-Not being a drag queen

Like, how are folks on this forum defending this guy? There is no doubt in my mind that if Republicans had a larger minority he would have been expelled months ago. 78% of people in his district want him gone

If Santos deserves to be expelled because he lied, so do all members of congress.

[Pres Mike]

He is innocent until proven guilty, we shouldn't be expelling people without due process.

They aren't even trying to expel him for his legal crimes. Like fruad, writing bad checks, stealing campaign money, etc.

They want to expel him because he is a clown who lied about...

-His mom dying on 9/11
-His grandmother being a holocaust victim
-Being Jewish
-Going to a prestigious high school he NEVER went to. In reality he barely got his GED
-He was a star vollyball player Baruch college. He never went to ANY college
-Starting an animal charity
-About being the first gay republican married to a man. He NEVER married a man. Only a woman
-Claimed he was an extra on the children's show "Hanna Montana"
-Had friends who died at Pulse
-Not being a drag queen

Like, how are folks on this forum defending this guy? There is no doubt in my mind that if Republicans had a larger minority he would have been expelled months ago. 78% of people in his district want him gone

If Santos deserves to be expelled because he lied, so do all members of congress.

Are you really putting Santos's lies in the same league as voting for/aganist certain policy?

[Tekken_Guy]

He is innocent until proven guilty, we shouldn't be expelling people without due process.

They aren't even trying to expel him for his legal crimes. Like fruad, writing bad checks, stealing campaign money, etc.

They want to expel him because he is a clown who lied about...

-His mom dying on 9/11
-His grandmother being a holocaust victim
-Being Jewish
-Going to a prestigious high school he NEVER went to. In reality he barely got his GED
-He was a star vollyball player Baruch college. He never went to ANY college
-Starting an animal charity
-About being the first gay republican married to a man. He NEVER married a man. Only a woman
-Claimed he was an extra on the children's show "Hanna Montana"
-Had friends who died at Pulse
-Not being a drag queen

Like, how are folks on this forum defending this guy? There is no doubt in my mind that if Republicans had a larger minority he would have been expelled months ago. 78% of people in his district want him gone

Lying is not a crime.

[kwabbit]

He is innocent until proven guilty, we shouldn't be expelling people without due process.

They aren't even trying to expel him for his legal crimes. Like fruad, writing bad checks, stealing campaign money, etc.

They want to expel him because he is a clown who lied about...

-His mom dying on 9/11
-His grandmother being a holocaust victim
-Being Jewish
-Going to a prestigious high school he NEVER went to. In reality he barely got his GED
-He was a star vollyball player Baruch college. He never went to ANY college
-Starting an animal charity
-About being the first gay republican married to a man. He NEVER married a man. Only a woman
-Claimed he was an extra on the children's show "Hanna Montana"
-Had friends who died at Pulse
-Not being a drag queen

Like, how are folks on this forum defending this guy? There is no doubt in my mind that if Republicans had a larger minority he would have been expelled months ago. 78% of people in his district want him gone

Lying is not a crime.

Isn't that a truism? Lying can often be a crime, as evidenced that Santos is under federal indictment for a variety of offenses that essentially amount to lying. Is lying sometimes legal? Yes. But you're essentially defining lying as the type of lying that isn't illegal, so of course it isn't a crime.

[Dr. MB]