Posted on 12/01/2023 8:50:04 AM PST by Morgana
Traci ant and Myers’s.
Just because the democrats are immoral and tolerate fraud and lying that is criminal doesn’t mean we have to. A military academy academic pledge states “I will not lie, cheat nor steal, nor tolerate any among us who does”
Our founding fathers pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor for that which was moral.
It is better to be on the side of morality than on the side of convenience. Even if we do lose the majority. The real question of character is were the house 217-216 majority, would these men and women still expel an abject liar? We would find quickly who indeed shares our values or who does not.
This is a stunning example of utilitarianism vs deontology. A utilitarian will always screw you.
I missed it, when was he convicted of being a criminal?
Pollard,
Thanks for the list of idiots.
I see the two Republicans from my state(Oregon) are “suckers & losers.”(Cliff Bentz & Lori Chavez-Remer)
Which is unsurprising if you know anything about Oregon Republicans. Bob Packwood is smiling as he heads to the Dorchester Conference from his homes in DC & NYC.
Santos is a creep, no doubt. BUT, Adam Schiff, Hillary Clinton did real damage, with consequential lies to this country. It is sickening to see what these hypocrites have gotten away with. I DO NOT trust or love this country because of the two levels of justice.
As far as I know, no republican has been expelled from congress, at least since the civil war.
Alcee Hastings - Those are the two words the Republicans should utter every time a dem mentions ethics. And, they could always throw in Al Sharpton and Tawana Brawley if they get tired of saying Alcee Hastings. Too many Republicans are too anxious to display moral outrage and virtue signal. The dems care about nothing but winning. The present Republican leadership are either too weak and stupid to stand against the evil the dems represent, or they are actually supporting it.
The Republican Party would have it hung around their neck either way …
If he were expelled, we can wring our hands that we are worried in 2024
If he survived we would have it hung around our neck that we didn’t
7 days is a lifetime in politics. No one will remember this guy’s name by Jan 1 let alone next November. Not a factor.
But if someone does, then a distinction can be drawn that we toss our trash when we find it instead of letting it fester. Standing on the moral thing to do, this lose - lose can be turned into an opportunity. That’s not only good politics — it’s the right thing to do.
“Had he, that’s for his constituents to decide. This is a case of representatives who weren’t voted into office by Santos’ constituents deciding he can’t be their representative. It’s disgust on my and against what the GOP should stand for regarding federalism and a constitutional republic.”
Agreed.
It’s also worth mentioning the the grounds for expulsion can be whatever the House decides - but the House ideally should have waited for the courts to rule on his guilt or innocence and then expelled him.
Some Republicans argued Santos should not face potential expulsion unless he is eventually convicted of a crime.
“Since the beginning of this Congress, there’s only two ways you get expelled,” said Representative Matt Gaetz, a Florida Republican, on Thursday. “You get convicted of a crime or you participated in the Civil War. Neither apply to George Santos, and so I rise not to defend George Santos, whoever he is, but to defend the very precedent that my colleagues are willing to shatter.”
Liars expel a liar for lying.
Hypocrisy, thy name is “Congress”.
If they want him nothing bars him from running again
I am pleased to see the Great State of WEST Virginia completely absent from that list.
but slalwell and blumenthal remain in congress.
Which she won’t do unless she believes she has a Dem wired for the position.
By that standard, the entire democrat delegation deserves expulsion, along with about half the republicans.
Why does Schiff have a seat? Why does Ratskin have a seat?
so, where does this leave um on swalwell & schiff?
Seriously. We can discern the truth. I am first and foremost a free citizen of the United States. I can exercise my own judgment. And this was a political act that does not require validation by a jury. The same people who say when was he convicted will howl when there is an open and shut case in the other side. We would be calling for a nameless D to be expelled before a jury convicted. I really don’t need to wait for a jury to tell me my opinion that this guy is a total POS.
So, yes, I have judged this guy to be a criminal. I am not in the fence and neither are the vast majority of Americans. So a political consequence has happened before a criminal consequence. And even were he found not guilty by some technicality, this guy still needed to go
It’s a political questions the the Rs got ahead of. It’s what you do when you need to correct something wrong.
Those defending having him in the house because it is expedient don’t understand the principles of the founding of America. We hold these truths to be self evident isn’t followed by unless you have a three seat majority.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.