The House Ethics Committee said it has already issued more than 30 subpoenas in its investigation of Rep. George Santos (R-NY).
Listen To This Story
The House Ethics Committee on Thursday provided an update on its investigation of Rep. George Santos (R-NY). The panel is looking into allegations that the controversial lawmakers committed a variety of crimes ranging from campaign finance violations to sexual misconduct.
“The [Investigative Subcommittee (ISC)] is actively working to resolve this matter in an expeditious timeframe and has issued over 30 subpoenas and more than 40 voluntary requests for information,” the panel announced.
Specifically, the committee stated that it is investigating whether Santos engaged in unlawful activity with respect to his 2022 congressional campaign, provided false information to the House of Representatives, violated federal conflict of interest laws, and engaged in sexual misconduct toward a job applicant.
In addition, following Santos’s indictment last month, the committee expanded its investigation to also look into allegations that the lawmaker fraudulently obtained unemployment insurance benefits.
In its update, the panel also noted that it is coordinating its own activities with the Department of Justice (DOJ).
“The Committee is aware of the risks associated with dual investigations and is in communication with [DOJ] to mitigate the potential risks while still meeting the Committee’s obligations to safeguard the integrity of the House,” the committee said in its statement.
Although many Republicans have said that Santos should not be in Congress, that he should not run again, and/or that he should resign, when given the opportunity to expel him from the House of Representatives last month, they all voted to merely refer the matter to the Ethics Committee.
Identities of Bail Guarantors Revealed
Also on Thursday, a federal judge released the names of the guarantors of Santos’s $500,000 bail.
The lawmaker had tried to keep their identities hidden and had even said that he would rather go to jail than have them revealed. Not surprisingly, that turned out to be false.
In any case, his reluctance to name names had led to speculation that the guarantors were connected to his alleged criminal activities.
However, it turned out that his father and aunt had provided the money to keep Santos out of jail.
In rejecting the argument that the guarantors would be harassed once their names were released, the judge indicated that this was yet another way in which the lawmaker hoped to get attention.
“Defendant’s continued attempts to shield the identity of his suretors, notwithstanding the fact that he is aware their identities are not controversial, has simply created hysteria over what is, in actuality, a nonissue,” US District Judge Joanna Seybert wrote.