this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2023
216 points (98.6% liked)

politics

19136 readers
4504 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

From the article:

Of all of the revelations to emerge from the federal prosecution of Representative George Santos’s treasurer, the most outrageous is the existence of a $500,000 loan that did not in fact exist.

The fictional loan goes to the heart of one of the most vexing questions surrounding Mr. Santos since he was elected to Congress last year: How did a man of seemingly modest means suddenly accrue enough money to lend his campaign a half-million dollars?

The answer, it turns out, is simple: He did not. And that fact could have serious ramifications for his case.

In May, Mr. Santos, a New York Republican, was charged with 13 felonies in three unrelated financial schemes, to which he has pleaded not guilty. On Thursday, his campaign treasurer, Nancy Marks, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy related to her oversight of Mr. Santos’s finances.

It is clear that prosecutors see a link between Ms. Marks’s criminal activity and Mr. Santos. The same team of U.S. attorneys handled their cases; the proceedings share the same court docket number and were overseen by the same judge, Joanna Seybert.

Mr. Santos has not been charged with falsifying the loan or with other campaign finance violations, and Ms. Marks’s lawyer has said that she is not cooperating with prosecutors. But Mr. Santos’s proximity to the criminal activity admitted by Ms. Marks would seem to leave him vulnerable to additional charges.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are we still doing fuckwad or nah?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

We can make an exception