MTG Calls for Commutation of George Santos's Sentence
In a letter to the Office of the Pardon Attorney, Greene said she believed the former New York congressman's seven-year sentence 'extends far beyond what is warranted' and accused current members of Congress of committing 'far worse offenses,' though she didn't specify which individuals or actions she was referring to.
Santos, who was expelled from Congress in 2023 just months into his first term, was sentenced to 87 months in federal prison in April after pleading guilty last year, and has been incarcerated since July 25.
'I wholeheartedly believe in justice and the rule of the law, and I understand the gravity of such actions,' Greene wrote in the letter, which she shared on the social media platform X on Monday night. 'However, I believe a seven-year sentence for such campaign-related matters for an individual with no prior criminal record extends far beyond what is warranted.'
Greene went on to say that Santos 'committed himself to serving his constituents and did whatever it took to represent their interests in Washington, D.C,' adding that 'he is sincerely remorseful and has accepted full responsibility for his actions.'
Read More: MAGA Stalwart Marjorie Taylor Greene Signals Potential Split From Republican Party
'While his crimes warrant punishment, many of my colleagues who I serve with have committed far worse offenses than Mr. Santos yet have faced zero criminal charges,' Greene said. 'I strongly believe in accountability for one's actions, but I believe the sentencing of Mr. Santos is an abusive overreach by the judicial system.'
'Commuting his sentence would acknowledge the severity of his actions and simultaneously provide a path forward in allowing him to make amends for his crimes and strive to better serve the people in his community,' she continued.
Trump has granted clemency to a number of people since he was sworn in for his second term, including some of his own supporters who had been convicted or charged in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol. He has also pardoned multiple former politicians who were convicted of a variety of charges, including fraud and campaign finance offenses.
When asked about Santos in an interview with the right-wing cable news channel Newsmax on Friday, Trump acknowledged that the former New York congressman 'lied like hell' but didn't close the door on the possibility of pardoning him, saying, 'Nobody's talked to me about it.'
Santos's brief time in Congress was dominated by controversy after the New York Times reported that he had lied about key parts of his biography and campaign, including claiming he had worked at prestigious Wall Street firms. He was expelled from Congress following his indictment on nearly two dozen criminal charges and the release of a House Ethics Committee report finding that there was 'substantial evidence' he violated federal law.
Roughly three-quarters of the House voted to expel him, including 105 Republicans. Greene was one of the 112 Republicans who voted against expelling Santos.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Appeals court rules Trump clamp-down on spending data defies Congress' authority
A federal appeals court panel shot down a Trump administration bid to make secret a public database of federal spending that researchers say is crucial to ensure the administration is not flouting Congress' power of the purse. In an order issued Saturday evening, the three-judge D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel voted unanimously to give the administration until Friday to put the data back online. Two of the three appeals judges assigned to the matter also signed onto a forceful opinion declaring that the administration's bid to conceal the data was an affront to Congress' authority over government spending, one that threatened the separation of powers and defied centuries of evidence that public disclosure is necessary for the public good. 'No court would allow a losing party to defy its judgment. No President would allow a usurper to command our armed forces,' Judge Karen Henderson, a George H.W. Bush appointee, wrote in support of the decision to deny the Trump administration's request to keep the data under wraps while litigation over the issue goes forward. 'And no Congress should be made to wait while the Executive intrudes on its plenary power over appropriations.' The Trump administration ignited the legal battle when it decided in March to abruptly shut down the database, claiming the widely available public data threatened the president's ability to manage federal spending. Henderson noted that the decision came amid a torrent of lawsuits questioning whether the administration was preparing to illegally 'impound' — or withhold — congressionally mandated spending required by law to disburse. The administration claimed the database also forced the disclosure of information meant to be shielded from public view. U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan rejected that view out of hand last month, in a lawsuit brought by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the Protect Democracy group. The Clinton-appointed judge ordered the administration to immediately restore the website. The Justice Department quickly appealed and won a short-term pause of Sullivan's decision. But Saturday's ruling by the appeals court panel ends that pause. Henderson agreed with Sullivan, saying Congress' power is 'at its zenith' when it comes to both approving federal spending and requiring details of that spending to be publicly disclosed. In other words, only Congress — not the administration — could decide to shut down the database. Judge Robert Wilkins, an Obama appointee, joined Henderson's 25-page opinion. The third judge on the panel, Biden appointee Bradley Garcia, voted with Henderson and Wilkins but did not join her opinion. The ruling lands just as a simmering fight over Trump's authority to dictate federal spending has been ramping up on Capitol Hill. Trump has long flirted with the notion that the president has the power to impound funds that he views cut against Executive Branch priorities, and courts have eyed warily his administration's decision to mass-terminate federal grants and contracts representing billions of dollars in congressionally required spending. The Justice Department has argued that the funds for those terminated programs could be reissued in plenty of time to satisfy Congress' requirements, but Trump budget officials have floated workarounds that have made some lawmakers uncomfortable. The decision Saturday is not a final ruling on the underlying legal question about whether the administration is obliged to make the data public. But unless the full bench of the appeals court steps in or the administration gets relief from the Supreme Court, the ruling means the data is likely to be public within days. The panel agreed to give the administration until Aug. 15 to restore the database.
Politico
7 minutes ago
- Politico
Appeals court rules Trump clamp-down on spending data defies Congress' authority
'No court would allow a losing party to defy its judgment. No President would allow a usurper to command our armed forces,' Judge Karen Henderson, a George H.W. Bush appointee, wrote in support of the decision to deny the Trump administration's request to keep the data under wraps while litigation over the issue goes forward. 'And no Congress should be made to wait while the Executive intrudes on its plenary power over appropriations.' The Trump administration ignited the legal battle when it decided in March to abruptly shut down the database , claiming the widely available public data threatened the president's ability to manage federal spending. Henderson noted that the decision came amid a torrent of lawsuits questioning whether the administration was preparing to illegally 'impound' — or withhold — congressionally mandated spending required by law to disburse. The administration claimed the database also forced the disclosure of information meant to be shielded from public view. U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan rejected that view out of hand last month, in a lawsuit brought by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the Protect Democracy group. The Clinton-appointed judge ordered the administration to immediately restore the website. The Justice Department quickly appealed and won a short-term pause of Sullivan's decision. But Saturday's ruling by the appeals court panel ends that pause. Henderson agreed with Sullivan, saying Congress' power is 'at its zenith' when it comes to both approving federal spending and requiring details of that spending to be publicly disclosed. In other words, only Congress — not the administration — could decide to shut down the database. Judge Robert Wilkins, an Obama appointee, joined Henderson's 25-page opinion. The third judge on the panel, Biden appointee Bradley Garcia, voted with Henderson and Wilkins but did not join her opinion. The ruling lands just as a simmering fight over Trump's authority to dictate federal spending has been ramping up on Capitol Hill. Trump has long flirted with the notion that the president has the power to impound funds that he views cut against Executive Branch priorities, and courts have eyed warily his administration's decision to mass-terminate federal grants and contracts representing billions of dollars in congressionally required spending. The Justice Department has argued that the funds for those terminated programs could be reissued in plenty of time to satisfy Congress' requirements, but Trump budget officials have floated workarounds that have made some lawmakers uncomfortable. The decision Saturday is not a final ruling on the underlying legal question about whether the administration is obliged to make the data public. But unless the full bench of the appeals court steps in or the administration gets relief from the Supreme Court, the ruling means the data is likely to be public within days. The panel agreed to give the administration until Aug. 15 to restore the database.
NBC News
7 minutes ago
- NBC News
Texas Democrats rally against redistricting effort
People in Austin rallied against Texas Republicans on Saturday, as the party pushes forward with a plan to add five GOP congressional seats, and potentially cement Republicans' control of Congress in Washington. It comes as Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton ramps up his legal battle against Democrats who fled the state to stop the effort. NBC News' Ryan Chandler has moreAug. 10, 2025
