• radix@lemmy.worldEnglish
    361·
    1 year ago

    some leading members of GOP leadership voicing concerns about setting a precedent of ousting a lawmaker who had not been convicted of a crime.

    The thing about ethics rules is that they are more expansive than legal rules. If you are just going to defer to the legal system, why have any ethical rules at all?

    There are all sorts of things that are awful, but still legal. If a Representative marched down 5th Avenue in a literal swastika-and-iron-cross nazi parade, I would hope they would be expelled, despite being a legal (though reprehensible) exercise in free speech.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        91·
        1 year ago

        And because that’s how they did it, they find it perfectly normal and natural to say that ANY action against trump whatsoever must be based on made up lies.

  • sylver_dragon@lemmy.worldEnglish
    28·
    1 year ago

    Wow, this guy must have pissed off too many of his fellow GOP House members. I would have expected them to close ranks and support him, at minimum until he was actually convicted. But, this speaks to him being pretty unpopular within his own party.

    • the_frumious_bandersnatch@programming.devEnglish
      16·
      1 year ago

      Just before the vote was about to begin, Rep. Max Miller of Ohio, one of Santos’ Republican colleagues, sent an email to the full Republican conference, writing that he and his mother were victims of credit card fraud tied to Santos’ campaign and that he would be voting to remove Santos.

      “Neither my Mother nor I approved these charges or were aware of them,” Miller wrote in the email obtained by NPR. “We have spent tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees in the resulting follow up.”

      It’s literally because it was starting to affect them personally.

      https://www.npr.org/2023/12/01/1215899764/george-santos-expulsion-house

    • girlfreddy
      91·
      1 year ago

      Because he’s embarrassing them. It’s the one thing most people are unable to tolerate.

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
      4·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think bipartisan ever meant “every single Republican and Democrat agreed.” A handful of Dems voted no too

  • Rusticus@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    1 year ago

    With half the indictments of Trump it’s obvious he’s weak sauce. If he had 94 indictments maybe he’d be the Republican nominee for president.