HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » The improbability of Geor...

Wed Jan 25, 2023, 07:08 AM

The improbability of George Santos' $199 expenses

Rep. George Santos’ congressional campaign reported dozens of transactions just cents below the threshold that would have triggered a requirement to preserve spending records — an unusual spending pattern that is now part of broader complaints about alleged financial improprieties.

Santos, who admitted in December that he faked parts of his biography, already faces a complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission alleging his campaign repeatedly reported suspicious expenses. Those included eight charges of exactly $199.99 at an Italian restaurant in Queens and another $199.99 charge at a Miami-area hotel where rooms do not usually go for less than $600 per night. The specific amount matters because campaigns are required by law to keep receipts or invoices for expenses greater than $200.

Campaigns rack up millions of dollars in expenses and thousands of line items per campaign, but it is rare for them to notch even one $199 expense, according to a POLITICO review of campaign finance records. FEC data shows more than 90 percent of House and Senate campaign committees around the country did not report a single transaction valued between $199 and $199.99 during the 2022 election cycle.

Santos reported 40 of them.



https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/25/george-santos-199-expenses-00079334

7 replies, 1177 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 7 replies Author Time Post
Reply The improbability of George Santos' $199 expenses (Original post)
RandySF Jan 25 OP
3Hotdogs Jan 25 #1
fescuerescue Jan 25 #4
Irish_Dem Jan 25 #2
dembotoz Jan 25 #3
LiberalFighter Jan 25 #5
Mr.Bill Jan 25 #6
kgray96057 Jan 25 #7

Response to RandySF (Original post)

Wed Jan 25, 2023, 07:30 AM

1. I agree it is an unlikely scenario. What was the purpose? Did he somehow pocket money?

Was this a way to launder campaign donations?

I get it is strange. What was the purpose?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 3Hotdogs (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 25, 2023, 09:25 AM

4. I don't know what's going on there but I've done something similar

At the company I used to work for, anything expense over $25 required a receipt. There was a few times when I had a legitimate expense, but I had lost the receipt.

So if I had a meal that I spent $28.99 cents on, but had lost the receipt, I would ask for a reimbursement of $24.99.

Now mind you I even told my boss this and he seemed unconcerned. (We could also fill out a bunch of paperwork regarding the lost receipt, but neither of us wanted to do that)

That practice meant that I lost $5 instead of losing $28.99.


Is that what's going on there with Santos? I have no idea. But I was reminded of this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Wed Jan 25, 2023, 08:09 AM

2. The GOP criminals keep showing us how they commit their crimes.

They think we are stupid losers because we follow the law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Wed Jan 25, 2023, 08:51 AM

3. knowing what you can get away with is a time honored tradition

avoiding red flags is a good thing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Wed Jan 25, 2023, 03:10 PM

5. Who was his treasurer?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Wed Jan 25, 2023, 03:22 PM

6. If they don't change that rule,

every republican in Congress will do it next time. Require receipts for everything and call it the Santos Rule. That should go over well with his peers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RandySF (Original post)

Wed Jan 25, 2023, 03:24 PM

7. $199

I am more interested in where the rest of the money went. A $400.00 discount on a hotel room? A break on a bill at a restaurant? If someone else paid, how much was paid and who paid it? If he was offered a discount, or a freebie, and the charge was setup to make it look _less_ suspicious- which would be stupid, but, well, we're not dealing with a super-genius here- who offered and why?

Look, Congress operates along a very old managerial principle on screw ups and malfeasance: Didn't happen if nobody important noticed. Some insider trading, a little payola, a little quidding pro quo-ing? Eh. Lotsa people do it. Gonna get that nice couple of years on a do nothing corporate board or as a highly paid academic with neither classes or duties when you leave government? Fine. Kinda implies a reward for doing someone's bidding? Think nothing of it.

Santo's running tab of issues and problems and oopsies, however, is getting that important notice. I assume he has been told that his survival in Congress depends on how faithful a puppy he is; how obedient and well behaved. They can deal with his constituents (shaddup, who cares) and the public (look, Hunter Biden!) if he only sits when told to and comes when called.

But here he is, crapping on the rugs, knocking over the objets d' art, and barking like a fool whenever he sees his own shadow.

Unless he has something damned clever to pull or a powerful ally with same? He's done.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread