There is an old joke about politicians, that never ceases to lose its relevance.
Question:
How do you know a politician is lying?
Answer:
His lips are moving
We did
expect a certain amount of embellishments when politicians talk about their
records.
Even
regular people unknowingly overstate or understate or at times the human memory
plays tricks.
But there
is a difference between embellishments and blatant lies, not a
product of confusion, but instead an attempt at self-aggrandizement.
In the
matter of fabrication, few can surpass Hillary Clinton
On March
17, 2008, Hillary claimed
that as first lady she landed “under sniper fire” during a trip to
Tuzla, Bosnia, she made in March 1996. The goal was to depict herself as
the fearless first lady who placed herself in peril to comfort the people of
war-ravaged Bosnia.
Well, it
soon turned out to be a complete fabrication.
Videos
began to surface that showed Hillary arriving on the tarmac and being greeted
by a child who offers her a copy of a poem. It was such a massive lie that
even the
Democrat mouthpiece the WaPo had to step in and fact-check Hillary.
When
caught Hillary said she 'misspoke'
Hillary
is not a combat soldier who has been in various wars and confused one
occurrence with another. She did not misspeak, the fabricated to deceive
her voters.
Hillary's
lies are many and continue to this day.
We move
to George Santos, who seems to have received a doctorate from the Hillary
Clinton University of fabrication.
Santos
did not embellish his resume, he instead created a fictional character.
Santos
fabricated his education, his work experience, his religion, and even his
charity work,
Santos
claimed that he graduated from Baruch College, New York, and worked for
Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. But there is no evidence that he received a
college degree or worked at either financial giant.
Santos
claimed to have founded a tax-exempt animal rescue charity that saved more than
2,500 dogs and cats.
All of
these were complete falsehoods.
He
claimed he was Jewish and had ancestors who fled the Holocaust. This was a
vile fabrication and an affront to one of the darkest chapters in
human history.
He
claimed to have “lost four employees” at the Orlando nightclub shooting in
2016. There is absolutely no evidence to support the claim.
Santos
claimed to be from a wealthy family fortune that owned 13 properties. That too
is a lie.
Under
intense political pressure, Santos
admitted to fabricating some of the claims and stood by others,
despite contradictory evidence.
The lies
are numerous, purposeful, blatant, and unjustifiable.
Santos is
a disgrace.
It is
baffling that the liberal media, Santo’s political opponent, and even
government agencies who relish targeting Republicans failed to do an elementary
investigation of Santos
But
Santos unknowingly revealed a lapse or perhaps a flaw in the electoral system.
Currently,
individuals running for the House, Senate, or President become candidates when
they raise or
spend more than $5,000 in contributions or
expenditures.
Candidates
must register using a Statement of Candidacy within 15 days of becoming a
candidate.
The form
requires candidates to enter their personal information and details about their
postal address. Also required is the name of the campaign and the various other
PACs.
However,
there seems to be no place for education, work experience or charity.
This
information should be mandatory. Nominations must be accepted only after a
thorough background check of the claims made in the form. In Santos’s case, a
few phone calls would have exposed his lies.
This is
part of the swamp culture.
The GOP
House must pass a law that mandates thorough background checks that the
candidate has to pay for if he intends to contest any elections
Now for
the big question
What
happens to Santos now?
Santos
appeared determined to try to weather the scandal.
Santos
told the New York Post: "I campaigned talking about the people's concerns,
not my resume... I intend to deliver on the promises I made during the
campaign."
He was
sworn in just yesterday and is now the first openly LGBTQ
Republican to be elected to Congress. But no Democrat is celebrating
this inclusiveness, in this case, they are not wrong.
Federal
and local prosecutors in New York have opened investigations into whether
Santos violated any laws during his campaign. And, in Brazil, prosecutors
said they
planned to revive fraud charges connected to the stolen checkbook.
Robert
Zimmerman, the Democrat who Santos defeated during the November midterm
election, said he should resign and face him again in a special election.
https://twitter.com/ZimmermanRob/status/1607743701794578433
The media
is also very outraged and some are demanding that Santos resign.
The gist
of their outrage is that voters were given false information and any voting
decision based on lies is unacceptable. Hence the election is invalid.
They also
used the story to attack Trump and all
of the GOP.
The media is responsible for most of the big lies of our times. It is hence quite ironic that they are suddenly pontificating about the importance of being factual. But the self-righteous often fail to comprehend irony and neither do they possess any self-awareness.
What
about the 2020 election where government agencies, the news media, and big tech
have colluded to block the Hunter Biden laptop story?
Suppressing
damaging information about one candidate is the equivalent of fabrication
because facts remain hidden from voters.
A Media
Research Center poll revealed that
16% of Biden voters said they would have voted differently if Hunter Biden's
laptop story was known to them. Another survey showed that a whopping 79
percent of Americans suggest President Trump likely would have won
reelection if voters had known the truth about Hunter Biden’s laptop
Some may
say that Santos’ scale of lying was much worse than Hunter Biden’s story being
suppressed. But the scale of lying is irrelevant, what matters is that it affected
voting decisions.
If Santos
is forced to quit, why should Biden remain in office?
You would
think that Santos suffered enough controversies for one human at any juncture.
But there
was more.
The NY
Post carried a story that accuses Santos of flashing a white power
symbol in the House Chambers. While casting his 10th vote for Kevin McCarthy
for House Speaker. Santos unfolded his arms to reveal his left hand making a
sideways “OK gesture,” a symbol co-opted by white supremacists.
This
claim seems as ludicrous as Santos’s resume.
The media
is fabricating about a fabricator.
So how
should the GOP handle this?
If Santos
resigns or is forced out of office it would prompt a special election in a swing
seat, and lead to a potential loss which will remove the GOP’s already slim
majority.
The GOP
doesn't have to support Santos but they do not have to actively work towards
dethroning him.
If Santos
is unseated, the GOP must remind voters of his similar the situation is to that
of the 2020 elections. While it will change nothing, it will help highlight the
disparity in standards applied to both parties.
Santos
can redeem himself by voting for the right issues.
Also appears on American Thinker
Comments
Post a Comment