Santos in federal custody as feds unseal 13-count indictment

Just found this



Scott MacFarlane
@MacFarlaneNews
·
12m

The Dept of Justice has filed a motion in federal court in New York, essentially saying it has NO position on whether the court should unseal the names of who helped Rep George Santos (R-NY) make bond in his criminal case




Show this thread

 

And this.



Scott MacFarlane
@MacFarlaneNews
·
2h

NEW: Rep George Santos (R-NY) defense attorney asks court for additional time to respond to filing by news media seeking unsealing of documents showing who paid Santos’s bond in criminal case

 

I'm among many who have no problem if the judge detains Georgie until trial and keeps the 3 people's identity sealed.
The only reason he even gives a **** about the 3 is because it pertains to him and his lack of money.

'George Santos' lawyers argue identities of 3 people who secured his $500K bail should remain sealed'
Source: CBS News

'Defense attorneys for Rep. George Santos, Republican of New York, filed a motion under a court-imposed deadline Monday night, arguing the court should keep sealed the records identifying the three people who helped him make the $500,000 bond in his federal criminal fraud case. Federal judge Anne Y. Shields had ordered Santos to respond by Monday at 5 p.m. to court motions by media outlets who have asked to unseal records showing the identities of the three individuals.

His defense argues the three people who helped provide Santos' bond "are likely to suffer great distress, may lose their jobs, and God forbid, may suffer physical injury." "There is little doubt that the suretors will suffer some unnecessary form of retaliation if their identities and employment are revealed," Santos' motion also said. It closed with the declaration, "My client would rather surrender to pretrial detainment than subject these suretors to what will inevitably come."

According to new court filings in Santos' case, the House Ethics Committee, which is investigating Santos, has also requested the identities of the individuals who helped him make bond.

The judge ordered Santos to respond to requests to reveal the identities of the three individuals last week, but his defense attorneys requested and received a delay to do so until Monday. The judge's order specified that there would be "no further extensions of time" for Santos to respond.'

Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/george-santos-court-deadline-reveal-3-people-who-secured-500k-bail/

 

Well, you can always try to get into Mar A Lago with $10 to see if you can see President Trump. You are not his type, blonde, female, and available.

 

Appears that he argued his case so what can they appeal on?

'Judge grants request for George Santos’s bond sponsors to be unsealed'

"U.S. Magistrate Judge Anne Shields gave Santos until noon Friday to appeal the ruling, ordering the names to remain under seal in the meantime.

Murray previously indicated Santos would rather go to jail ahead of trial rather than allow the suretors to face the public attention.

“My client would rather surrender to pretrial detainment than subject these suretors to what will inevitably come,” Murray said.

Federal prosecutors took no position on the unsealing request.'

cont:
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...-george-santoss-bond-sponsors-to-be-unsealed/

 

They've named the charges, but unfortunately it will probably still be some time until we know what the actual evidence is.

You know, the specifics that will allow us to independently think for ourselves and decide if Santos really did those things.

Often the media seems to do a really horrible job reporting that type of stuff.

And oftentimes prosecutors get multiple criminal charges out of a single crime, only one thing that was allegedly against the law. That is not uncommon.

 

Discovery isn’t a public process. The trail can be, but discovery; not so much.

 

Isn't the whole point of a trial to lay out the evidence?

We want to know exactly what it is a person is accused of having done.

What specific criminal statutes they supposedly transgressed is only of secondary importance.

 

Potential Plea Deal Coming In George Santos Case
Santos is negotiating with Federal prosecutors

• Troy Matthews
• 3 hours ago

snips:

'Disgraced New York Congressman Republican George Santos has been negotiating with Federal prosecutors, indicating a possible plea deal may be coming in his case.

Prosecutors recently submitted a request to Judge Joanna Seybert in the Eastern District of New York for a delay in hearings until October 27th to allow defense counsel to review "a substantial production of discoverable material."

Prosecutors went on to to state: "Further, the parties have continued to discuss possible paths forward in this matter. The parties wish to have additional time to continue those discussions."

Santos allegedly embezzled contributions from supporters, fraudulently obtained unemployment benefits, and lied in disclosures. Santos' fundraiser Sam Miele was arrested for fraud after pretending to be Kevin McCarthy's Chief-of-Staff Dan Meyer on fundraising calls and emails for Santos.

Any plea deal would likely include Santos stepping down from Congress, forcing a special election for his Long Island, NY seat. Such an election may result in his seat flipping to Democrats in a House of Representatives with an already tiny Republican majority.'

cont:
https://www.meidastouch.com/news/potential-plea-deal-coming-in-george-santos-case

 

Let's see what happens and what the plea deal says or does not say.

 

'Rep. George Santos' former campaign treasurer will plead guilty to a federal felony, prosecutors say'
Source: AP

Updated 11:20 AM EDT, October 5, 2023


NEW YORK (AP) — The ex-campaign treasurer for U.S. Rep. George Santos is scheduled to enter a guilty plea to an unspecified felony in connection with the sprawling federal investigation of financial irregularities surrounding the indicted New York Republican, prosecutors say.

Nancy Marks is a veteran Long Island political operative. Marks served as the campaign treasurer and close aide to Santos during his two congressional bids. Marks resigned amid growing questions about Santos’ campaign finances and revelations Santos had fabricated much of his life story.

Marks’ plea is scheduled to take place in a Central Islip courtroom on Thursday afternoon. It comes as Santos faces a 13-count federal indictment centered on charges of money laundering and lying to Congress in an earlier financial disclosure.

Marks and Santos haven’t returned messages seeking comment. The investigation of the first-term congressman has also engulfed Marks, a key behind-the-scenes figure in Long Island Republican politics who built a business as a treasurer and consultant to dozens of local, state and federal candidates.'

Read more: https://apnews.com/article/george-santos-nancy-marks-4d249e9d5e83fd25ed1a19a9e13d3246

 

Rules on congress need to be changed. First, the ability for constituents to recall an elected official. Second, immediate term limits, not to exceed 4 terms. Lastly, anyone in office held to the same laws their constituents are mandated to follow.

 

Why should Congress vote to change their own rules? They get an A+ on their report cards every two years. We, the people, completely approve of what happens in Congress, based on how we vote to keep them in 95% of the time.

 

Seems we even have more charges forming at a current President but then the DOJ has been slow walking those for years so the statute of limitations could run out.

 

You're not wrong... Congress currently has a 19% approval rating, yet both sides of the isle are nearly guaranteed reelection for the mere fact, everyone refuses to votes for anyone other than their (D) or (R).

Maybe all who are tired of this circus finally revolt and vote for the (I) so that maybe.... just maybe, we can get some new laws on congress. A boy can dream anyhow

 

Probably not since virtually no one will run with an (I) after their name.

 

Usually is an (I) on the ticket in most elections. I've voted a few times for em!

 

I always vote I for any federal office. If no I available, anti incumbent, regardless of party. If we stop demonizing each other and focus on the real problem, it would go a long way. But, we’ll fight about cakes and bathrooms and the 10 commandments, and nothing will change.

 

'George Santos Indicted on Additional Criminal Charges – Now 23 In Total'

Oct 10th, 2023, 5:57 pm

"Fabulist Rep. George Santos (R-NY) was charged Tuesday in a superseding indictment with 23 criminal counts including conspiracy, wire fraud, aggravated identity theft, and credit card fraud.

The DOJ indictment reads, “Santos allegedly led multiple additional fraudulent criminal schemes, lying to the American public in the process.” Santos pleaded not guilty in May to the original 13 counts alleging “duped donors, stole from his campaign, and lied to Congress about being a millionaire, all while cheating to collect unemployment benefits he didn’t deserve,” noted the AP at the time.

Santos has grabbed headlines since entering Congress as the Republican was revealed to have lied about everything from his resume to his education to even his heritage. Amid calls to resign, Santos has remained defiant and been an acting member of the House Republican conference.'

cont:
https://www.mediaite.com/news/just-...-additional-criminal-charges-now-23-in-total/

 

snip

“As alleged, Santos is charged with stealing people’s identities and making charges on his own donors’ credit cards without their authorization, lying to the FEC and, by extension, the public about the financial state of his campaign. Santos falsely inflated the campaign’s reported receipts with non-existent loans and contributions that were either fabricated or stolen” stated the United States attorney prosecuting his case.'

 

Cassie Semyon
@casssemyon
·
3h
GEORGE SANTOS leaving the House GOP meeting tonight says “I have no idea what you guys are talking about,” when asked the 23 new charges he is facing. Members had to check us phone, and Santos claimed he hadn’t looked at his phone at all.

 

Who's gonna pay for your lawyers George?
Ole' Marge and Ole' Elise?
Maybe "my Kevin"?


Featured snippet from the web

In response to the new indictment, Santos denied the charges Tuesday night and told CBS' Nikole Killion he was entitled to due process and would fight the indictments "until the bitter end."

2 hours ago

 

The Cuomo episode isn't one of the Democrats brightest moments. It took months, when he clearly was ethically compromised, they tried to hang onto him as long as they could. Al Franken was a similar situation. The only time the Dems act is when the optics look terrible. And even then, its a vast right wing conspiracy.

 

And I’m sure, based on the last administration, that the DOJ is not allowed to charge a sitting president. Hell, Mueller said, for that reason, he wouldn’t even reach any conclusions about charging a sitting president.

So there’s that.

Not that there’s any evidence Biden has done anything wrong. But if he has, it’s a question for the legislative branch, not the judicial branch.

 

Not that strawman again.

Based on a mere rule at the DOJ there is nothing in the Constitution preventing it. Mueller fed a lot of BS, he like Ken Starr did, could have referred criminal charges for impeachment and removal so he could prosecute, then if that did not occur hold any indictments until Trump left office and then proceeded just as then IP Ray did forcing Clinton into a plea bargain over multiple felonies he was prepared to prosecute.

If Trump could never be charged with a crime then what was the purpose of a criminal investigation to begin with? Why waste all the time of those criminal investigating something that could not be prosecuted?

And not that false narrative again there is ample evidence of Biden wrongdoing along side his family and it is a question of the DOJ but unfortunately being covered up by the same.