Experts: George Santos unlikely to be unseated even if wrongdoing confirmed

WASHINGTON — As Democrats call for an ethics investigation into incoming Rep. George Santos (R-Nassau/Queens) over questions surrounding his financial dealings and personal credentials, ethics experts said it would be a long shot to unseat him even if a probe confirmed wrongdoing.

Santos, who in November won New York’s 3rd Congressional District seat after decades of Democratic control, is facing calls by some Democrats to step aside after a New York Times investigation published Monday indicated Santos misrepresented key facts about his education, work experience and business dealings.

The story found that details Santos touted about his background during his successful campaign against Democrat Robert Zimmerman could not be verified.

Baruch College, New York University, Citigroup and Goldman Sachs — all institutions Santos said he had attended or worked for — told the newspaper they had no record of his purported time there.

The report also raised questions about whether Santos has been transparent about the dealings of his private consulting firm Devolder Holdings, and whether he properly reported his income sources on federal financial disclosure forms.

Santos has yet to publicly address the assertions other than issuing a statement via his attorney, Joseph Murray, that attacked the newspaper’s coverage.

The statement did not dispute the assertions in the story.

Murray did not return a Newsday email seeking comment Tuesday.

Stanley Brand, a former general counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives, said the “serious question” before House lawmakers is whether the House Ethics Committee could discipline Santos for alleged conduct that occurred before he was elected.

“They have to confront this issue of whether his conduct before he became a member is cognizable in the House,” Brand told Newsday.

Brand, a professor at Penn State Law School, noted the possibility the U.S. Department of Justice could look into the questions surrounding Santos’ financial disclosure forms and campaign finance reports.

Santos on Twitter touted a family business of 13 rental properties, but he did not list them on his campaign finance disclosure reports as required by law, according to the Times story.

He also reported earning dividends of between $1 million and $5 million from Devolder, but has not disclosed the company’s client list as would be required for any dealings involving more than $5,000, according to the Times.

“The law requires him as a candidate to disclose everything, and if he didn't disclose them, or he disclosed them and they were false — that could open him up to at least the civil action by the Department of Justice,” Brand said.

Republicans are set to take over the House in January with a slim majority.

And political analysts told Newsday it was unlikely GOP leaders including Rep. Kevin McCarthy (D-Calif.), who is trying to lock down enough House GOP votes to become House Speaker, would press the Ethics Committee to prioritize an investigation into Santos.

Santos has said he supports McCarthy’s bid for Speaker.

“McCarthy is sitting on a razor-thin congressional majority, so his default position will likely be to say the people of New York's 3rd Congressional District made their decision and he'll abide by it,” said Kevin Madden, who served as a top aide in the unsuccessful 2012 presidential campaign of Republican Mitt Romney.

“But that's just for now," Madden, a veteran GOP strategist in New York and Washington, told Newsday. "The trajectory on a story like this one usually only gets worse, never better.”

McCarthy’s office did not return an email seeking comment.

Beth Rosenson, an associate professor of political science at the University of Florida who has written extensively about congressional ethics and investigations, said if Santos is found to have committed wrongdoing, the House potentially could remove him from office.

But she noted removal only has occurred only a handful of times, during the Civil War.

Rosenson said the Speaker could also remove him from legislative committees, but that, too, is rare.

More likely Santos would be subject to censure or reprimand, both of which are verbal rebukes, Rosenson said.

Dennis F. Thompson, professor of political philosophy at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, told Newsday the Ethics Committee "doesn't investigate misleading campaign speech.”

Also, “New York State election law, as far as I can tell, does not cover false statements of this kind,” Thompson said.

The Office of Congressional Ethics, a federal agency that investigates ethics complaints involving lawmakers, could launch its own probe.

The office could forward findings to the House Ethics Committee, which would then decide whether to sanction Santos.

Asked if the agency was looking into Santos, the Congressional Ethics Office said in an email to Newsday that because all investigations are confidential the agency “is not able to confirm or deny any specific investigations.”

With Tom Brune