In addition to what you posted, Sandra Day O'Conner passes away and Israel suffers their Bin Laden PDF memo fiasco where it is now public that their government knew of the attack plan and dismissed it.
Finally congress proved they have all control and the voters are just there to support their riches. Regardless of what a horrible person santos is he was voted in by the voters and thrown out by congress. Maybe we should throw out any politician who lies but then we would have no congress which would be a win for us. Who was the last honest politician, yea I can’t think of one either.
It is in the best interest of the enemies of democracy's to label every politician dishonest.
I suggest people who do that should look within themselves first before they declare every politician is dishonest. Politicians are human beings just like the folks who continuously call them dishonest -- some are, most are not. It's just that the dishonest ones get all the attention from media.
Those who claim all politicians are dishonest are the ones who'd welcome a totalitarian strongman who'd tell them only he can fix their problems.
I'm thinking they're also the same people who actually believe Ronald Reagan was a great president who was also an impeccably honest person. LOL!
Yes Anon, some politicians intentionally lie. Some unknowingly say stuff that is not true. Some Say stuff they want to do, and fail to get it done.
But Santos is in another category, has been indicted by the US DOJ and has shwn zero remorse, even using those lies to burnish his reputation.
He's also used campaign money for non campaign purposes, breaking the law. As someone who runs a non profit and has to abide by those laws, I appreciate Congress and the DOJ saying that just because he is a Congressman, he is still required to abide the same laws I have to.
In the end, Santos broke the rules of the House, which has autonomy under the Constitution, to make and enforce their own rules. It's that three branches of government thing.
So he's out. Primarily because his own party deemed him too big an unrepentant fabulist person who will soon be sitting in jail.
Thankfully, Congress has insured you, me, Shaw and the rest of the American people that we will not be paying him a Congressional pension, salary, health insurance or per diem expenses any longer.
I think that's good. Because he was useless in Congress. Even to his own party.
Rev, There you go again saying if he is indicted he is guilty. Does this apply to to menendez or just republicans. My fear is we are allowing congress to decide who is kept and the voters be damned.
"He's also used campaign money for non campaign purposes, breaking the law." Please remember, his campaign chief has already pled guilty of this.
But again, the House is not a court of law. it's a political body. And they are bound not by the rules of a court. They can set their own rules, as prescribed in the Constitution and they, again, have judged him guilty.
All members of Congress know the rules.
Santos broke those rules, according to the House Ethics Committee.
skud, when I read your comments it's as if you've no idea that words have meaning.
When a human is indicted it means the case has already been presented to a Grand Jury who found there was enough evidence to proceed with prosecuting the case. If the GJ hadn't found anything there wouldn't have been anything.
Being charge of a crime means a human is suspected of committing a crime and there is some evidence. Grand Jury - lots of provable in court evidence. Charges - evidence collected under the law but not placed under the level of scrutiny as is done with a GJ.
If you'd been keeping up with the news you'd have read the account of a GOP congress critter who said Santos was always going to be removed once he preyed on a fellow congress critter and his mom.
Yep, that's what they said. The grifting of constituents - not so bad. Grifting one's fellow in the House? Oh yeah, removing time. This wasn't the Democratic parties doing although they helped move the process along. This was all GOP infighting which is why Santos is spilling the T on his way out.
Grey, An indictment does not always end in a conviction and some believe you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I do realize that is and outdated concept.
Rev, Why not just eliminate the expensive process of voting and let congress determine who they want. That process couldn't be any worse than the current system.
I went looking to see if anyone who'd been indicted by a grand jury wasn't charged and found that it does happen. That said, a grand jury indictment means the prosecution proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt, a far higher bar than probable cause. In watching years of cases a grand jury indictment generally means prosecution has compelling evidence that the defendant did the crime.
In a court of public opinion there is no innocent until proven guilty. That said I've witnessed skud exemplify this over and over with their baseless accusations against their regular cast of villains (odd how they are all liberal, female, or democratic voices).
The House kicked out Santos. Get mad at me all you want but the House decided Santos was too toxic to remain in office. Perhaps he shouldn't have grifted his fellow congress critters but I've already made that point, which you skud ignored. Why is that skud?
12 comments:
Now only 534 to go
So much big news today.
In addition to what you posted, Sandra Day O'Conner passes away and Israel suffers their Bin Laden PDF memo fiasco where it is now public that their government knew of the attack plan and dismissed it.
How surprising MAGA's want him in.
NOT really.
Who knows. He just might become tRump's VP on the 2024 ticket. LOL!
Finally congress proved they have all control and the voters are just there to support their riches. Regardless of what a horrible person santos is he was voted in by the voters and thrown out by congress. Maybe we should throw out any politician who lies but then we would have no congress which would be a win for us.
Who was the last honest politician, yea I can’t think of one either.
Anonymous:
"Who was the last honest politician, yea I can’t think of one either."
That's because you're a cynic who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
It is in the best interest of the enemies of democracy's to label every politician dishonest.
I suggest people who do that should look within themselves first before they declare every politician is dishonest. Politicians are human beings just like the folks who continuously call them dishonest -- some are, most are not. It's just that the dishonest ones get all the attention from media.
Those who claim all politicians are dishonest are the ones who'd welcome a totalitarian strongman who'd tell them only he can fix their problems.
I'm thinking they're also the same people who actually believe Ronald Reagan was a great president who was also an impeccably honest person. LOL!
Yes Anon, some politicians intentionally lie. Some unknowingly say stuff that is not true. Some Say stuff they want to do, and fail to get it done.
But Santos is in another category, has been indicted by the US DOJ and has shwn zero remorse, even using those lies to burnish his reputation.
He's also used campaign money for non campaign purposes, breaking the law. As someone who runs a non profit and has to abide by those laws, I appreciate Congress and the DOJ saying that just because he is a Congressman, he is still required to abide the same laws I have to.
In the end, Santos broke the rules of the House, which has autonomy under the Constitution, to make and enforce their own rules. It's that three branches of government thing.
So he's out. Primarily because his own party deemed him too big an unrepentant fabulist person who will soon be sitting in jail.
Thankfully, Congress has insured you, me, Shaw and the rest of the American people that we will not be paying him a Congressional pension, salary, health insurance or per diem expenses any longer.
I think that's good. Because he was useless in Congress. Even to his own party.
Rev, There you go again saying if he is indicted he is guilty. Does this apply to to menendez or just republicans. My fear is we are allowing congress to decide who is kept and the voters be damned.
Skud... one again, show me the quote.
And before you post this...
"He's also used campaign money for non campaign purposes, breaking the law." Please remember, his campaign chief has already pled guilty of this.
But again, the House is not a court of law. it's a political body. And they are bound not by the rules of a court. They can set their own rules, as prescribed in the Constitution and they, again, have judged him guilty.
All members of Congress know the rules.
Santos broke those rules, according to the House Ethics Committee.
So they fired him.
skud, when I read your comments it's as if you've no idea that words have meaning.
When a human is indicted it means the case has already been presented to a Grand Jury who found there was enough evidence to proceed with prosecuting the case. If the GJ hadn't found anything there wouldn't have been anything.
Being charge of a crime means a human is suspected of committing a crime and there is some evidence. Grand Jury - lots of provable in court evidence. Charges - evidence collected under the law but not placed under the level of scrutiny as is done with a GJ.
If you'd been keeping up with the news you'd have read the account of a GOP congress critter who said Santos was always going to be removed once he preyed on a fellow congress critter and his mom.
Yep, that's what they said. The grifting of constituents - not so bad. Grifting one's fellow in the House? Oh yeah, removing time. This wasn't the Democratic parties doing although they helped move the process along. This was all GOP infighting which is why Santos is spilling the T on his way out.
Grey, An indictment does not always end in a conviction and some believe you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I do realize that is and outdated concept.
Rev, Why not just eliminate the expensive process of voting and let congress determine who they want. That process couldn't be any worse than the current system.
I went looking to see if anyone who'd been indicted by a grand jury wasn't charged and found that it does happen. That said, a grand jury indictment means the prosecution proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt, a far higher bar than probable cause. In watching years of cases a grand jury indictment generally means prosecution has compelling evidence that the defendant did the crime.
In a court of public opinion there is no innocent until proven guilty. That said I've witnessed skud exemplify this over and over with their baseless accusations against their regular cast of villains (odd how they are all liberal, female, or democratic voices).
The House kicked out Santos. Get mad at me all you want but the House decided Santos was too toxic to remain in office. Perhaps he shouldn't have grifted his fellow congress critters but I've already made that point, which you skud ignored. Why is that skud?
Post a Comment