Representative George Santos (R-NY) has been expelled from Congress.
The House voted 311-114.
The event is the first House expulsion since 2002.
Santos’ expulsion follows a report from the House Ethics Committee claiming the representative filed false reports with with Federal Election Commission and used campaign funds for personal items.
According to the report, Santos “engaged in knowing and willful violations of the Ethics in Government Act as it relates to his Financial Disclosure (FD) Statements filed with the House.”
Social media users condemned the expulsion, saying other members of Congress have participated in far worse activities.
One individual tweeted that Congressional members “invest in stocks based on legislation that they know will affect the market,” “help family members secure government contracts,” and “spent $16 million in taxpayer money investigating Trump when they knew it was based on a lie by Hillary.”
Activist Scott Presler asked, “Should we expel every Congressman that has lied, engaged in insider training, misused congressional funds, & accepted bribes from foreign countries,” and named “Warren, Pelosi, Clarke, Menendez.”
Turning Point USA Founder Charlie Kirk asked, “How about brother lover Ilhan Omar? How about magic stock picker Nancy Pelosi? How about Maxine ‘I have my whole family on payroll’ Waters? How about genocide advocate Rashida Tlaib? How about fire alarm freak Jamaal Bowman? How about gold bar traitor Bob Menedez? How about the serial liar Adam Schiff?”
Representative Cory Mills (R-FL) said, “The bottom line is today’s unprecedented action taken by the House could influence and endanger George Santos’ right to a fair trial by playing judge, jury, and executioner.”
Before the vote, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said he had “real reservations” about the vote to expel Representative George Santos (R-NY).
During a news conference, Johnson stated, “There are people of good faith who make an argument, both pro and con, for the expulsion resolution for Santos.”
“There are people who say, you have to uphold the rule of law and allow for someone to be convicted in a criminal court before this tough penalty would be exacted on someone. That’s been the precedent so far. There are others who say, well, upholding the rule of law requires us to take this step now because some of the things that he’s alleged to have done, or the House Ethics Committee having done their job, are infractions against the House itself.”
“We’re going to allow people to vote their conscience,” Johnson added. “I think it’s the only appropriate thing we can do. We’ve not whipped the vote, and we wouldn’t. I trust that people will make that decision thoughtfully and in good faith.”
“I personally have real reservations about doing this. I’m concerned about a precedent that may be set for that.”
