Conservative Analysis of Expulsion of United States Representative George Santos

Republican United States Representative George Santos of New York was expelled from Congress last week by well over the necessary two thirds vote, with almost half the House of Representatives GOP caucus joining the majority Democrats in favor. The freshman was accused of deceiving voters about his background to get elected last year and of various financial crimes, including stealing from his political campaign. Most Republicans opposed the expulsion. They did not defend Santos’s record, but cited the concern of establishing a precedent of not waiting for a criminal conviction. The anti-expulsion Republicans claimed it was necessary to give Santos the “presumption of innocence.” However, the presumption of innocence only applies within the legal context of an accusation of a crime, as it refers to the burden of proof on the prosecution. It does not have to be respected by the general public, or even government officials, including Congress. Each of the chambers of Congress may decide whether to expel a member, based on its own judgment, as expulsion is a congressional prerogative, for which there is no requirement that there be a conviction, or even that the expulsion be only for crimes, for which is there is precedent in both chambers for expelling members. The House Ethics Committee had issued a scathing bipartisan report on Santos, who had acknowledged at least some of his lies about his background. His defrauding of the voters by misleading them about his background, although not a crime, nonetheless made his election fraudulent and thus illegitimate. Although slightly short of a majority among Republican House members, even this result is encouraging, as it validates the idea that Donald Trump’s Republican nomination for and election to the presidency in 2016 was also illegitimate because he had deceived the voters about his background. For example, Trump exaggerated his wealth, hid his foreign conflicts of interest, paid hush money to women with whom he committed adultery, and lied when he denied that he was still conducting business with Russia while a candidate for President, among numerous deceptions that he and his supporters, both domestic and foreign, engaged in to win the election fraudulently. At least the expulsion of Santos reaffirms the idea that this defining type of election fraud ought not be tolerated, but there is much more to be done as the acceptance of the 2016 by minimizing or denying it has continued to undermine elections and confidence in them.