George Santos, the elected Republican congressman using a falsified resume

Accused by the New York Times of lying about key elements of his career, the Republican admitted on December 26 that he had falsified certain parts of his biography.

My sins are that I embellished my CV. Pardon“. George Santos thus recites his remorse in the columns of the American daily newspaper The New York Post on Monday, December 26. It is that the American representative, elected member of Congress from the state of New York after the midterm elections in November 2022, is in the eye of the storm in USA.

In question: his resume, duly falsified during his campaign, and dismantled point by point after a New York Times investigation published on December 19. The publication of these lies caused a sensation in the American press, prompting his opponent to demand his resignation even before his inauguration.

No trace of the chosen one

The case begins a few weeks ago. In one study, New York Times reveals that George Santos, the son of Brazilian immigrants born in Queens, New York, and an openly gay graduate, may have lied about several items in his biographies, such as earning a degree in finance from Baruch College in New York in 2010, and passages to the Citigroup bank or the investment bank Goldman Sachs. Spokespersons for these three entities insured New York Times that they had found no trace of the newly elected, who will take office at the beginning of January.

Baruch College confirmed to AFP that it had not found a George Santos, who graduated around 2010, in its archives. The New York newspaper also casts doubt on the function of an association, “animal lovers united“(“friends of pet united“, in English), made by the former candidate, and also believes that his financial consulting business, “Devolder Organization», «is a kind of mystery“.

In his account to the House of Representatives, submitted in September, George Santos assures that the company paid him a salary of 750,000 dollars and dividends of between 1 and 5 million dollars. But the form did not contain “no information about customers who may have contributed to such exchange, an apparent breach of the obligation to disclose any compensation over $5,000 from a single source“, according to the American newspaper.

that New York Times is categorical: this story constitutes “a the most astonishing examples of a would-be parliamentarian falsifying essential elements of his biography.After that, accusations rained down from his opponents, whom he had beaten during the midterm elections. “The truth is that Santos totally lied to the voters (…) and does not deserve to represent Long Island and Queens” responded his Democratic opponent, Robert Zimmerman. The latter called for his resignation and a “immediate investigation by the House Ethics Committee, the Federal Election Commission and the Attorney General“. The accused’s reaction is immediate. George Santos first makes contact via a statement from his attorney, Joseph Murray, saying to himself “not surprised that haters at the New York Times are trying to smear it with defamatory accusations“.

“I’m not a criminal”

On December 26, George Santos finally admits: he admits never to have worked for the prestigious banks Goldman Sachs or Citigroup or to have a university degree, contrary to what he claimed. The future deputy also reveals that he was married to a woman for years, even though he was perceived as the first openly gay Republican to win a seat in the House of Representatives.

On the other hand, the apologetic Republican adamantly denies any wrongdoing, even though New York Times revealed court records in Brazil that show Santos was charged with fraud as a juvenile. It is identified asby full name, date of birth and parents’ names“. The future elected representative swept aside the idea of ​​giving up the seat he will occupy from January 3 in the House of Representatives, declaring to New York Postnot be a criminal“.

New York state, considered pro-Democrat, saw several elected seats in the House of Representatives swing to the Republican side, contributing to their narrow majority in the lower house in Washington. The Democrats retained the majority in the Senate.

.

Leave a Comment