The Department of Justice on Wednesday charged Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., with seven counts of wire fraud, three counts of money laundering campaign funds, one count of theft of public funds and two counts of making materially false statements to the House of Representatives. With the exception of unlawfully applying for and receiving unemployment benefits, the allegations brought against Santos involve crimes only political figures can commit.
With the exception of unlawfully applying for and receiving unemployment benefits, the allegations brought against Santos involve crimes only political figures can commit.
If Santos is found guilty, then he must be punished. Not just because such a verdict would indicate that he violated specific criminal statutes, but also because the types of crimes alleged here go to the heart of what it means to breach the public trust. These are crimes that undermine our political system and whatever faith we have left in a functioning democracy.
Santos has pleaded not guilty to all of the charges and, in a now-familiar retort to criminal charges, called the indictment a “witch hunt.”
The Department of Justice here alleged that Santos lied when he was running to become a member of Congress and then lied once he was one. The first set of allegations in the indictment involves a fraudulent campaign finance scheme to essentially steal money from people who believed they were giving campaign contributions. Specifically, the DOJ alleges that Santos directed a political consultant to ask people for money by saying the money would be used to help elect Santos, when, the DOJ alleges, the money was used by Santos to pay for personal expenses like designer clothes.
The next set of allegations involves lies Santos reportedly told once he was in Congress, namely, false statements on House Disclosure Reports. House members must complete these reports in order to promote government transparency and accountability. The DOJ alleges that Santos both inflated income he received from some sources and completely failed to disclose income he got from others.
There is simply something different about the crimes at issue in Santos’ indictment — again, they are political crimes. The allegations, if proven would demonstrate that Santos is not only a criminal, but that he is not fit for public office. Not because he has lied, but because his lies undermine his ability to hold a position of public trust. One theory for this is that impeachment is only appropriate for political crimes. Because when people commit those crimes, they should no longer be able to hold a position in a representative government. When someone drinks and drives, it threatens our ability to safely travel. When someone steals money from political contributors and lies on official disclosure forms, it threatens our ability to trust and rely on our elections and elected officials. The truth is, we already knew Santos was unfit for office — he’s lied about everything from where he attended school, to where he worked, to his family history, to founding a charity and more. Maybe in our post-truth world, in which a former president of the United States can sit in front of a live TV audience and tell lies, that doesn’t matter as much as it used to. But the criminal allegations against Santos strike at the core of what it means to structure our government in a way that hands over our power to a select few to represent us. If they commit crimes to get or keep power, then we can no longer trust our government to function.
Jessica Levinson is a Loyola Law School professor and MS NOW columnist. 
