140
Trump wouldn't want someone who is more of a grifter than himself. Santos is the Platonic Ideal of Grift: so incredibly tactless and immoral that it's hard to believe he's lying as much as he is.
What if Santos cuts him in in the grift, though?
Santos’s grift isn’t profit, it’s annoyance. Trump likes to be annoying for attention, but doesn’t do anything if it’s not making money.
What if Santos takes off his mask and he’s really Fred Trump, Donald’s father?
My new year's resolution (because I guess now those are just things we hope happen) is that George Santos will be in jail in 2025.
That seems to be the career trajectory for people who align themselves with the Mango Mussolini.
If this follows the GOP pattern of projection, it will come to light in the future that Santos himself is not an American citizen having traveled here from another country and entered undocumented.
You jest, but we don't actually know if he's a citizen at all.
He has claimed at various times to have been born in the US and in Brazil. He's lived in both locations, and is wanted for questioning for crimes in Brazil.
How can he be an elected congressperson without clear citizenship?
Because he's a republican who is pro-Trump, so the screaming maga don't care as much about his crimes or lies, afterall they say "every politician lies" and then vote for the liars who say the shit that the maga like.
So the republicans in power cover for him, until it became too much for them.
You misunderstand me. I’m not asking about how people could vote for him. I’m asking how can he legally be on the ballot/swore in? Surely there’s some form at some point where he has to put some citizenship proof, be it a driver license or passport number.
I’m on a visa, can I put my name on the ballot and be sworn in?
You need to be a citizen for at least 7 years to be eligible to hold office, but Santos may have just lied on the paperwork, and the people in charge of checking that shit have little incentive to actually check, because Santos is a Republican who blindly supported the agenda, until he became a liability to the party.
Jesús fucking Christ 🤦 he truly shows how much further the right can still debase themselves if they don't wake the fuck up
But then they'd be woke. They would still rather be... slept?
And when I wake up, you better hope...you better hope you're asleep! Sweet dreams, lilac!
Mystery Men, underrated movie
Santo's for Trumps VP and they both run the country from prison.
That'll be an interesting and hilarious fall of the new Rome.
Probably one of the few ways for him to get a job.
He could also go to the theatre with Boebert.
Birds of a loser flock a little closer.
As former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom who recently abdicated her throne as Queen of Denmark, i'd say they're eminently qualified!
That’s some Grade A asskissery! Well played!
I dunno. It's pretty obvious Conservative Pick-Me behavior, and I don't think Trump is attracted to his type.
Yeah. The guy isn’t appalled by him to the point he needs to force himself on him.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
“My new year resolution is that President Trump returns to the white house and in 2025 I can be appointed Director of ICE,” Santos wrote in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter.
ICE has had their hands tied for far too long with the sole exception of the great four years of DJT,” Santos wrote, referring to Trump by his initials.
Santos interacted with the media frequently during his time in the House as he faced numerous political scandals that ultimately led to his ouster last month in a 311-114-2 vote.
Santos faces 23 federal criminal charges related to allegations that he misled donors, fraudulently received unemployment benefits, lied on House financial disclosures, inflated his campaign finance reports and charged his donors’ credit cards without authorization.
The House Ethics Committee also released a scathing report finding there is clear evidence Santos committed serious crimes, which helped compel some holdouts to vote for the embattled lawmaker’s ouster after two attempts to expel him failed.
In the post on X, however, Santos said he knew “exactly” what was needed to lead ICE properly and made an informal public bid for the hypothetical position.
The original article contains 425 words, the summary contains 193 words. Saved 55%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
He can be Secretary of Ramen Management when those two clowns are in prison.
Doesn't he know Trump hates losers?
Fucking Santos is reminding me more and more of Kissinger (both being kiss-asses to get power when they have no fucking clue about anything). I guess next Santos will say "We should nuke Europe".
He should get the job, he’s been the Director of ICE under 3 other administrations, it says so in his resume.
I mean, given that he served for almost a decade as Trump's VP and Chief of Staff, it really seems like he's a no brainer for a cabinet position
this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2024
140 points (93.8% liked)
politics
19144 readers
2289 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS