A timeline of the rise and fall of former US Rep. George Santos
Less than three years ago, George Santos was an up-and-coming Republican political star, flipping a House seat in New York City's suburbs.
But he soon came under fire for lying about his life story, and on Friday, the now-former congressman was back on Long Island for a very different announcement: He was sentenced to more than seven years in prison for fraud and theft.
Nov. 8, 2022: Santos defeats Democrat Robert Zimmerman in the first known congressional election featuring two openly gay candidates.
Dec. 19, 2022: The New York Times publishes a story questioning whether Santos fictionalized his resume.
Dec. 26, 2022: Santos admits fabricating some details of his biography, including that he had a degree from Baruch College and had worked for Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. Despite calling himself 'a proud American Jew" in a position paper, he insists he 'never claimed to be Jewish' but rather 'Jew-ish.'
Dec. 28, 2022: Nassau County prosecutors say they have launched an investigation into Santos.
January 2023: Santos is sworn into office. Questions surface about how he financed his campaign after filings offer contradictory accounts.
Jan. 31, 2023: Santos steps down from his congressional committees but says he won't resign.
February 2023: Revelations surface that Santos had been charged with stealing puppies in Pennsylvania in 2017 by using bad checks. The case was dismissed after Santos said the checks came from a checkbook that had been stolen from him.
March 2, 2023: The House Ethics Committee announces an investigation into Santos.
May 10, 2023: Santos is indicted and pleads not guilty to federal charges that he stole from donors and his campaign, collected unemployment benefits he didn't deserve and lied to Congress about his wealth.
Oct. 10, 2023: A new indictment accuses Santos of stealing donors' IDs and making unauthorized charges to their credit cards. Santos pleads not guilty to the revised charges later that month.
Nov. 16, 2023: The House Ethics Committee says in a scathing report on Santos that it amassed 'overwhelming evidence' of lawbreaking, concluding flatly that he 'cannot be trusted.'
Dec. 1, 2023: Santos is expelled by the House on a vote of 311-114, easily clearing the two-thirds majority required.
December 2023: Not long after being expelled from the House, Santos is found to be offering the public personalized video messages for up to $200 on Cameo.
February 2024: Santos sues late-night host Jimmy Kimmel, alleging Kimmel deceived him into making Cameo videos that were used to ridicule Santos on the show.
April 23, 2024: Santos drops his longshot, independent bid to return to Congress, a month after announcing his candidacy. His campaign committee reported raising no money in March 2024.
Aug. 19, 2024: Weeks before the case was to go to trial, Santos pleads guilty to wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, blaming his ambition for clouding his judgment and saying he was 'flooded with deep regret.' The same day, a judge dismisses Santos' suit against Kimmel, saying the host's use of the Cameo videos for criticism and commentary was a fair use.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Crypto Market Structure Bill Moves Out of House Committees, Stablecoin Action Pending
The House Agriculture and Financial Services Committees sent a major bipartisan message after advancing the U.S. crypto market structure bill on Tuesday, marking the first of several expected developments in the advancement of digital assets legislation expected this week. The House Financial Services Committee was hashing out some of the final details in a marathon hearing on Tuesday on the bill to set up digital assets market oversight before voting to advance it 32-19, even as the Agriculture Committee voted to advance the bill 47-6. At the same time, the Senate's legislation to regulate stablecoin issuers was rolling toward a final vote. This year's effort to finally set the U.S. stage for crypto trading, known as the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, was the focus of markups — special hearings in which congressional panels consider amendments and put a final polish on legislation before advancing it to the chamber floor. In this case, two House committees were considering the Clarity Act at the same time on Tuesday, and the agriculture panel finished first. "The Clarity Act provides certainty on digital assets to market participants, fills regulatory gaps at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission, bolsters American innovation and brings needed customer protections to digital asset related activities and intermediaries," said the agriculture panel's chairman, Glenn "GT" Thompson, as he opened his committee's hearing. The panel's ranking Democrat, Representative Angie Craig, noted that "this is not a perfect bill," but also said the tens of millions of Americans using cryptocurrency "will continue to grow whether Congress acts or not, but if we don't act, it will grow without the consumer protections that retail investors need and deserve, protections like those that govern other corners of the American financial system." The House bill outlines the jurisdictional borders between the two U.S. markets regulators and establishes a new leading role for the CFTC over the trading of digital commodities, which represents the bulk of crypto activity. Because the two congressional committees each oversees different elements of the crypto market — commodities and securities — each has a piece of the relevant jurisdiction, so the panels' work to amend the legislation will have to be melded. Congressional staffers said that the products of successful markups from each committee would then be combined into a unified "committee report" to be considered by the wider House. The legislation has been continually overhauled right up to the markups, with Republicans hoping to keep enough Democrats on board that a bipartisan support can influence how much the Senate embraces the bill if it passes the House. But Democrats in the House Financial Services Committee were still meeting to examine points of the bill they have concern with as recently as late Monday. Representative David Scott, one of the Democrats who serves on both committees, expressed the discontent of some in his party. "The bill allows crypto firms to bypass proper oversight and ignore investor protections, as I have outlined on multiple occasions here and in the finance committee," he said, arguing that the bill doesn't properly fund the commodities regulator. "The CFTC, though essential, is not designed to oversee retail-facing investment products." Scott added, "This is a gift to the worst actors in this industry." Others remain concerned that the legislation doesn't directly block senior government officials — most notably President Donald Trump — from personally benefiting from crypto business interests. Maxine Waters, the top Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, raised similar concerns when she introduced an amendment Tuesday to the HUD Transparency Act of 2025 that would direct its inspector-general to investigate a suggestion that the Department of Housing and Urban Development might evaluate crypto or stablecoins for payments. "Unfortunately, Trump and his administration are trying to force crypto down the throats of people living in HUD-assisted housing," she said. "I for one would want to know if HUD is using Trump's stablecoin, how they choose the stablecoin and what fees are being paid into the president's pocket." During Tuesday's markup, Democrats on the Financial Services Committee offered dozens of amendments to do everything from block Trump from profiting off of or engaging in crypto ventures to setting requirements for the minimum number of commissioners the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission must have before engaging in any rulemaking. These amendments all failed along party lines. While the House moves forward on the Clarity Act, the Senate is nearing a potential final vote this week on the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins of 2025" (GENIUS) Act, which would erect guardrails for the issuance of U.S. stablecoins, the dollar-based tokens that underpin a wide swath of crypto trading. Majority Leader John Thune, the Senate's top Republican who has recently joined the effort to push forward the stablecoin legislation, made a procedural move on Monday to soon advance to a final vote. Industry insiders are preparing for a vote as soon as Wednesday. Jaret Seiberg, a policy analyst at TD Cowen, said in a note to clients that Thune's move meant a "limit what amendments can be considered before a final vote on the package," including making it difficult for the backers of unrelated credit-card legislation to use the stablecoin bill as leverage to force consideration of their own effort. That was one of the final potential roadblocks to Senate advancement on the bill, which has already drawn strong bipartisan votes as it moved through the process in that chamber of Congress. The legislation's sponsor, Senator Bill Hagerty, had made it clear that the bill faces a very tight window for adoption this year, considering what else is on the Senate's plate. The GENIUS Act was on the Senate's floor agenda for Tuesday, with a 2:30 p.m. amendment deadline. If the GENIUS Act passes the Senate, it'll head to the House, where a similar stablecoin bill already awaits, having cleared its committee hurdles. At that point, lawmakers will have to decide their strategy on how to proceed, whether to include the stablecoin matter alongside the market structure bill as a single package, whether the House can just take up the Senate's bill as written or whether the House will seek to hash out its own version. UPDATE (June 11, 2025, 04:00 UTC): Adds Financial Services Committee vote.
an hour ago
US Justice Department says Trump can cancel national monuments that protect landscapes
BILLINGS, Mont. -- Lawyers for President Donald Trump's administration say he has the authority to abolish national monuments meant to protect historical and archaeological sites across broad landscapes, including two in California created by his predecessor at the request of Native American tribes. A Justice Department legal opinion released Tuesday disavowed a 1938 determination that monuments created by previous presidents under the Antiquities Act can't be revoked. The department said presidents can cancel monument designations if protections aren't warranted. The finding comes as the Interior Department under Trump weighs changes to monuments across the nation as part of the administration's push to expand U.S. energy production. Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Natural Resources Committee, said that at Trump's order, 'his Justice Department is attempting to clear a path to erase national monuments." Trump in his first term reduced the size of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase Escalante National Monuments in Utah, calling them a 'massive land grab." He also lifted fishing restrictions within a sprawling marine monument off the New England Coast. Former President Joe Biden reversed the moves and restored the monuments. The two monuments singled out in the newly released Justice Department opinion were designated by Biden in his final days in office: Chuckwalla National Monument, in Southern California near Joshua Tree National Park, and Sáttítla Highlands National Monument, in Northern California. The Democrat's declarations for the monuments barred oil and natural gas drilling and mining on the 624,000-acre (2,400-square-kilometer) Chuckwalla site, and the roughly 225,000 acres (800 square kilometers) Sáttítla Highlands site near the California-Oregon border. Chuckwalla has natural wonders including the Painted Canyon of Mecca Hills and Alligator Rock, and is home to rare species of plants and animals like the desert bighorn sheep and the Chuckwalla lizard. The Sáttítla Highlands include the ancestral homelands of the Pit River Tribe and Modoc Peoples. All but three presidents have used the 1906 Antiquities Act to protect unique landscapes and cultural resources. About half the national parks in the U.S. were first designated as monuments. But critics of monument designations under Biden and Obama say the protective boundaries were stretched too far, hindering mining for critical minerals. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Lanora Pettit wrote in the Trump administration opinion that Biden's protections of Chuckwalla and the Sattítla Highlands were part of the Democrat's attempts to create for himself an environmental legacy that includes more places to hike, bike, camp or hunt. "Such activities are entirely expected in a park, but they are wholly unrelated to (if not outright incompatible with) the protection of scientific or historical monuments," Pettit wrote. Trump in April lifted commercial fishing prohibitions within an expansive marine monument in the Pacific Ocean created under former President Barack Obama. Environmental groups said Tuesday's Justice Department opinion doesn't give him the authority to shrink monuments at will. 'Americans overwhelmingly support our public lands and oppose seeing them dismantled or destroyed,' said Axie Navas with The Wilderness Society. Biden established 10 new monuments, among them the site of a 1908 race riot in Springfield, Illinois, and another on a sacred Native American site near the Grand Canyon. Since 1912, presidents have issued more than a dozen proclamations that diminished monuments, according to a National Park Service database. Dwight Eisenhower was most active in undoing the proclamations of his predecessors as he diminished six monuments, including Arches in Utah, Great Sand Dunes in Colorado and Glacier Bay in Alaska, which have all since become national parks. Trump's moves to shrink the Utah monuments in his first term were challenged by environmental groups that said protections for the sites safeguard water supplies and wildlife while preserving cultural sites. The reductions were reversed by Biden before the case was resolved, and it remains pending. President Theodore Roosevelt signed the Antiquities Act after lobbying by educators and scientists who wanted to protect sites from artifact looting and haphazard collecting by individuals. It was the first law in the U.S. to establish legal protections for cultural and natural resources of historic or scientific interest on federal lands.
an hour ago
Trump's actions in Los Angeles spur debate over deportation funds in his 'big, beautiful' bill
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' in Congress includes more than tax breaks and spending cuts — it also seeks to pour billions of dollars into the administration's mass deportation agenda. Republican leaders capitalized Tuesday on the demonstrations in Los Angeles, where people are protesting Trump's immigration raids at Home Depot and other places, to make the case for swift passage of their sprawling 1,000-plus-page bill over staunch Democratic opposition. House Speaker Mike Johnson said the One Big Beautiful Bill Act delivers 'much-needed reinforcements,' including 10,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, $45 billion to expand migrant detention facilities and billions more to carry out at least 1 million deportations a year. 'All you have to do is look at what's happening in Los Angeles to realize that our law enforcement needs all the support that we can possibly give them,' said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. The focus on some $350 billion in national security funding comes as action on the massive package is lumbering along in Congress at a critical moment. Trump wants the bill on his desk by the Fourth of July. But Senate Republicans trying to heave it to passage without Democrats are also running up against objections from within their GOP ranks over the details. At the same time, Democrats are warning that Trump's executive reach into California — sending in the National Guard over the governor's objections and calling up the Marines — is inflaming tensions in what had been isolated protests in pockets of LA. They warned the president's heavy-handed approach has the potential to spread, if unchecked, to other communities nationwide. 'We are at a dangerous inflection point in our country,' said Rep. Jimmy Gomez, who represents the Los Angeles area. 'Trump created this political distraction to divide us and keep our focus away from his policies that are wreaking havoc on our economy and hurting working families," he said. "It's a deliberate attempt by Trump to incite unrest, test the limits of executive power and distract from the lawlessness of his administration.' At its core, the bill extends some $4.5 trillion in existing tax breaks that would otherwise expire at the end of the year without action in Congress, cutting some $1.4 trillion in spending over the decade to help offset costs. The Congressional Budget Office found the bill's changes to Medicaid and other programs would leave an estimated 10.9 million more people without health insurance and at least 3 million each month without food stamps from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. At the same time, CBO said the package will add some $2.4 trillion to deficits over the decade. One emerging area of concern for Republican leaders has been the bill's status before the Senate parliamentarian's office, which assesses whether the package complies with the strict rules used for legislation under the so-called budget reconciliation process. Late Monday, Republicans acknowledged potential 'red flags' coming from the parliamentarian's office that will require changes in the House bill before it can be sent to the Senate. Leaders are using the reconciliation process because it allows for simple majority passage in both chambers, were GOP majorities are razor-thin. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said Republicans are preparing to address the concerns with a vote in the House, possibly as soon as this week, to change the package. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer seized on the House's upcoming do-over vote as a chance for Republicans who are dissatisfied with the package to reassert their leverage and 'force the bill back to the drawing board.' 'They say they don't like parts of the bill — now is their opportunity to change it,' Schumer said. On Tuesday, Vice President JD Vance was dispatched to speak with one GOP holdout, Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who has pushed for deeper spending reductions in the bill to prevent skyrocketing deficits from adding to the nation's $36 trillion debt load. Other Republican senators have raised concerns about the health care cuts. But Republicans are in agreement on border security, deportation and military funding, over the objections of Democrats who fought vigorously during the committee process to strip those provisions from the bill. The package includes about $150 billion for border security and deportation operations, including funding for hiring 10,000 new ICE officers — with what Johnson said are $10,000 hiring bonuses — as well as 3,000 new Border Patrol agents and other field operations and support staff. There's also funding for a daily detention capacity for 100,000 migrants and for flights for 1 million deportations annually. The package includes $46 billion for construction of Trump's long promised wall between the U.S.-Mexico border. Additionally, the bill includes $150 billion for the Pentagon, with $5 billion for the military deployment in support of border security, along with nearly $25 billion for Trump's 'Golden Dome' defense system over the U.S. Separately, the bill adds another $21 billion for the Coast Guard. Democrats have argued against the deportations, and warned that Trump appears to be stirring up protests so he can clamp down on migrant communities. Rep. Nanette Barragan — whose district represents the suburban city of Paramount, where the weekend Home Depot raid touched off protests — implored Americans: 'Listen to the words of this administration: They're using words like insurrection. They're using words like invasion.' She warned the administration is laying the groundwork for even steeper actions. 'That's a concern,' she said. 'That is dangerous. It's wrong.'
