Lawmakers from both
sides of the aisle
commemorated International Holocaust
Remembrance Day on Friday,
including this one.
I would like to take a moment
to acknowledge
a grandmother
of one of my deceased staffers
who the 93 year old survivor of Auschwitz
and is also
one of the few survivors of her family
who was tragically
lost at the hands of Nazi murders.
anti-Semitism is a plague in this nation,
and it is undoubtedly up to us
to ensure
this kind of tragedy
is never to be seen again.
So just as a reminder, George Santos
lied about being Jewish.
And not only that,
he also lied about his grandparents
escaping the Holocaust.
I've seen how socialism destroys
people's lives
because my grandparents
survived the Holocaust.
For a lot of people
who are descendants of World
War Two refugees
or survivors of the Holocaust,
a lot of names and paperwork were changed
and in name of survival.
So I don't carry the family.
Last name that would have been
the BRAF scheme
That is.
It's amazing.
But but it's it's
just in the context of this very sober
and somber
moment of Holocaust remembrance.
I mean, there's no shame.
Exactly.
I actually had in my office
the House floor
camera up and I was not alerted
that he was going to take the floor.
And all of a sudden I was like,
oh, no, he's not going to really do this
right now.
He's just trolling us at this point.
So, yes, no shame is one thing here.
But
for all the distraction
that is George Santos,
I do think the campaign finance piece of
this is the piece
we should keep our eyes on
because it is clear
Kevin McCarthy
and House Republicans
are not interested
in doing anything about Santos.
But if indeed
there is a criminal investigation
into his campaign
finances that emerges with an indictment
that will change the calculus, that will
all of a sudden
that will change
Kevin McCarthy's behavior.
One would imagine
as it relates to George Senator to.
So I would keep our eyes on
what's happening with his finances.
It's pretty much the only thing
that might change the calculus,
because the unwillingness,
particularly on the House
Republican side, is so high.
I mean, this Jorge Santos,
I mean, the audacity is kind
of stunning on every level.
And to your point
about the shamelessness of this act.
But I think
also we see someone
who is reveling in their newfound fame.
I think it speaks to
a new type of Congress
we have on our hands
where we think
that there are some figures
who are there
for the serious business of legislating,
but there are other figures
who are there
for the very unserious business of
just trying to become a celebrity.
Well, here's
the thing about being on Capitol Hill.
You're not going to escape the reporter's
entourage.
You doing the Lord's
work, trying to get some
answers out of Jorge Santos
why did you amend your
FEC reports to say 500?
Let's make it very clear.
I don't amend anything.
I don't touch any of my FEC stuff. Right.
So don't be disingenuous
and report that I did,
because you know
that every campaign hires a fiduciary.
So I'm not aware of that answer.
And we'll have an answer for the press
regarding the amendment from yesterday
when it was
the one
was the source of your funds, sir.
What was the source of that money?
Mr.
Sanders,
you listed the wrong name of a treasurer.
Why did you list the wrong name
of your treasurer
and your campaign finance forms?
I'll have the conversation with you.
What?
You become a better honest reporter.
I'm asking you directly.
Reporter No, that
Now, this is
all good and
and fine
until the feds come calling, right?
Yeah.
And a Department of Justice
investigation, right?
Writing the FEC, looking in this.
I mean, they think that
that totally changes the calculation.
I think that everything we've seen
to date has been relatively disingenuous.
But I would also argue
that we've entered an era of politics
where a lot of politicians lie
about things.
That being said,
you actually Donald Trump
was it yesterday saying
that George Santos told
a lot of whoppers.
And so when you have
the former president,
who was known not to be the most honest
calling you out for your level of honesty
there, does perhaps
elevate that situation.
But I agree with everyone here
at this table.
I don't think it changes
nothing changes a calculation for House
Republican leadership
unless there's an actual investigation.
Yeah.
And this is all despite the fact
that according to a new poll
out this week,
his constituents want him to go at 64%
of Democrats, 49% of Republicans and 59%
of independents.
New York state voters say
he should resign. Meanwhile,
Alex, just listen.
This is
Kevin McCarthy
responding to questions
about why he won't do something,
really anything
to try to at least cordoned off
Jorge Santos
from being a member in good
standing in the House of Representatives.
I try to stick by the Constitution.
The voters elected him to serve.
If there is a concern
and he has to go through the ethics,
let him move through that.
The voters of his district
have elected him.
He is seated.
He is part of the Republican conference.
You know, I'm standing by him
because his constituents voted for him.
And as former Speaker
Paul Ryan put it just a few weeks ago,
he was elected,
but based on a fraudulent candidacy,
it seems.
Look,
I think it's not totally indefensible
as an argument
to say
the guy got elected
and I don't
particularly want him to be elected.
But here we are.
And so
let him participate
in the business of the body.
It's very hard to make that argument
in the convincing way
when you're also trying to kick Ilhan
Omar off the Foreign Affairs Committee
because you object to elements of her,
her worldview.
Right.
That she was also elected
by her constituents in Minneapolis.
And so if you
if you take the view generally that,
you know,
the voters
are the ultimate arbiters of all this
and we have to be deferential to them,
you need to sort of stick to that.
I will say
this is totally characteristic
of Kevin McCarthy
to make decisions
based on the most short
term calculus possible
and then make a different set
of decisions
whenever that calculus changes.
But look,
he needs that vote right now
or he thinks he needs that vote
right now.
He doesn't want a special election
on Long Island under these circumstances.
But the problem is,
you are going to need
to win that seat again in two years.
One way or another.
And if George Santos just four strings
you along until he actually winds up
running for reelection,
that's a bigger headache.
Or if the voters of that district
see you and your party
as coddling this guy
who is just an
unbelievably offensive character, then
even if he doesn't run for reelection,
good luck to your next candidate.
Yeah.
And I mean, his colleagues
among New York Republicans
are basically making that argument.
They're like,
we need this guy gone
because he's hurting all of us.
But also, we should note
he is
on Capitol
Hill trying to make friends,
having a bit of a tough time
because other members
kind of don't
want to be associated with him
because I think everybody recognizes
that they could be kind of tarnished
by an association with someone who,
frankly, they don't even know who he is.