Disgraced ex-congressman Santos begins 7-year prison term
Santos reported to the federal prison in Fairton, New Jersey, as confirmed by the Bureau of Prisons. Prosecutors argued that his social media activity contradicted his claims of remorse, leading Judge Joanna Seybert to impose a sentence of seven years and three months in April.
The downfall of the Long Island representative followed revelations that he fabricated nearly his entire background, including false claims about his education, religion, and career. Elected to the House of Representatives in 2022, Santos was indicted a year later for stealing campaign donors' identities and misusing their credit cards.
A congressional ethics investigation found that Santos diverted funds for Botox treatments, subscriptions to the OnlyFans adult website, luxury Italian goods, and vacations to the Hamptons and Las Vegas. His elaborate deceptions included falsely stating he worked for Goldman Sachs, was Jewish, and had been a college volleyball star.
The congressional probe concluded that Santos 'fraudulently exploited every aspect of his House candidacy,' leading to his historic expulsion. He became only the third lawmaker ejected from Congress since the Civil War, joining a list previously reserved for traitors and convicted criminals. - AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
39 minutes ago
- The Sun
Brazilians protest Trump tariffs with effigy burnings
BRASÍLIA: Brazilians set fire to effigies of Donald Trump in protests across several cities Friday, denouncing the US president's politically motivated trade tariffs. Anti-Trump demonstrations were held in Brasília, São Paulo, and Rio de Janeiro, signaling worsening relations between two of the Americas' largest economies. The protests, though modest in attendance, reflected widespread anger over Trump's decision to impose a 50 percent tariff on Brazilian exports and sanction Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes. The US president openly admitted the measures were retaliation for Brazil's prosecution of his political ally, former president Jair Bolsonaro. Bolsonaro, a far-right leader, is currently on trial for allegedly plotting a coup after losing the 2022 election. His supporters stormed Brazil's Congress in January 2023, echoing the US Capitol attack by Trump supporters two years earlier. A Brazilian general testified that the alleged conspirators also planned to assassinate leftist President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and other officials. Trump dismissed the trial as a 'witch hunt' and sanctioned Moraes, who has been a vocal critic of Bolsonaro and tech billionaire Elon Musk over online disinformation. The US Treasury Department also froze Moraes' assets and imposed a travel ban. Moraes, presiding over Bolsonaro's coup trial, vowed to remain firm. 'This Court, the Office of the Attorney General, and the Federal Police will not bow to these threats,' he said in a rare public statement. He emphasized Brazil's commitment to democracy and national sovereignty. The 50 percent tariff on Brazilian goods is set to take effect on August 6. Meanwhile, Bolsonaro faces strict conditions, including an electronic ankle monitor, a nighttime curfew, and a social media ban pending his trial, where he could receive a 40-year sentence. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio accused Moraes of human rights violations, including arbitrary detentions and suppression of free speech. The escalating dispute highlights deepening political and economic tensions between the US and Brazil. - AFP
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Ghislaine Maxwell moved to Texas prison amid Epstein case scrutiny
WASHINGTON: Ghislaine Maxwell, convicted accomplice of disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, has been relocated from a Florida prison to a minimum-security federal facility in Texas, according to the Bureau of Prisons. The transfer follows a rare two-day interview with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche last week, though details of their discussion remain undisclosed. Maxwell's lawyer, David Markus, confirmed she cooperated fully during questioning. The British socialite, serving a 20-year sentence for recruiting underage girls for Epstein, has reportedly sought a pardon from former President Donald Trump, a longtime associate of Epstein. The Federal Prison Camp Bryan in Texas, where Maxwell is now held, houses 635 female inmates. The move comes amid growing scrutiny over Epstein's connections, with Trump recently claiming he distanced himself from Epstein after the financier allegedly 'stole' employees from Mar-a-Lago. Virginia Giuffre, one of Epstein's accusers who died by suicide in April, was among those allegedly targeted. Her family has urged Trump against pardoning Maxwell, calling her a 'monster who deserves to rot in prison.' - AFP
Malay Mail
an hour ago
- Malay Mail
US Supreme Court poised to assess validity of key voting rights law
WASHINGTON, Aug 2 — The US Supreme Court signalled yesterday that it will assess the legality of a key component of a landmark federal voting rights law, potentially giving its conservative majority a chance to gut a provision enacted 60 years ago that was intended to prevent racial discrimination in voting. The brief order issued by the court raises the stakes in a case already pending before the justices involving a legal challenge to an electoral map passed by Louisiana's Republican-led legislature that raised the number of Black-majority US congressional districts in the state from one to two. The justices said they will consider whether it violates the US Constitution for states to create additional voting districts with populations that are majority Black, Hispanic or another minority as a way to remedy a judicial finding that a state's voting map likely violates the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The case, due to be heard by the justices in their next term that begins in October, sets the stage for a major ruling expected by the end of June 2026 that could affect the composition of electoral districts around the United States. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority. The dispute strikes at tensions between the Voting Rights Act, passed by Congress during the US civil rights era to bar racial discrimination in voting, and adhering to the constitutional principle of equal protection, which limits the application of race when the borders of electoral districts are redrawn. Boundaries of legislative districts across the country are reconfigured to reflect population changes every decade in a process called redistricting. The court previously heard arguments in the case in March. But in June, the justices declined to issue a ruling and indicated they would invite the parties to address additional questions. Rick Hasen, an election law expert at UCLA, called the stakes enormous, writing in a blog post that the court seems to be asking whether the section of the Voting Rights Act at issue 'violates a colorblind understanding of the Constitution.' The action follows a major ruling by the court in 2013 in a case involving Alabama's Shelby County that invalidated another core section of the Voting Rights Act that determined which states and locales with a history of racial discrimination need federal approval for voting rule changes affecting Black people and other minorities. 'This Court is more conservative than the Court that in 2013 struck down the other main pillar of the Voting Rights Act in the Shelby County case,' Hasen wrote. 'This is a big, and dangerous, step toward knocking down the second pillar.' The matter is being litigated at the Supreme Court at a time when Republican President Donald Trump is taking steps to eliminate programs related to diversity, equity and inclusion that aim to promote opportunities for minorities, women, LGBT people and others. In the Louisiana case, state officials and civil rights groups appealed a lower court's ruling that found the map laying out the state's six US House of Representatives districts - with two Black-majority districts, up from one previously - violated the constitutional promise of equal protection. A group of 12 Louisiana voters identifying themselves in court papers as 'non-African American' sued to block the redrawn map. A lawyer for the plaintiffs did not respond to requests to provide the racial breakdown of the plaintiffs. The state and the rights groups are seeking to preserve the map. Black people comprise nearly a third of Louisiana's population. During the first round of arguments in the case in March, lawyers for Louisiana argued that the map was not drawn impermissibly by the legislature with race as the primary motivation, as the lower court found last year. The map's design, the Republican-governed state argued, also sought to protect Republican incumbents including House Speaker Mike Johnson and No. 2 House Republican Steve Scalise, who both represent districts in the state. Black voters tend to support Democratic candidates. Arguments in the case centered on Louisiana's response to US District Judge Shelly Dick's June 2022 finding that an earlier map likely violated the Voting Rights Act and whether the state relied too heavily on race in devising the remedial map. Dick ruled that a map adopted earlier that year by the legislature that had contained only one Black-majority district unlawfully harmed Black voters. Dick ordered the addition of a second Black-majority district. The Supreme Court in 2023 left Dick's ruling in place, and it previously allowed the map at issue in the current case to be used in the 2024 election. A three-judge panel in a 2-1 ruling in April 2024 found that the map relied too heavily on race in the map's design in violation of the equal protection provision. The Constitution's 14th Amendment contains the equal protection language. Ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the American Civil War, the amendment addressed issues relating to the rights of formerly enslaved Black people. — Reuters
