(CENTRAL ISLIP, N.Y.) U.S. Rep. George Santos pleaded not responsible Friday to revised prices accusing him of a number of frauds, together with making tens of 1000’s of {dollars} in unauthorized prices on bank cards belonging to a few of his marketing campaign donors.
The New York Republican appeared at a Lengthy Island courthouse, the place a lawyer entered the plea on his behalf. Santos beforehand pleaded not responsible to different prices, first filed in Could, accusing him of mendacity to Congress about his wealth, receiving unemployment advantages he did not deserve, and utilizing marketing campaign contributions to pay for private bills like designer clothes.
The court docket look got here the morning after a few of Santos’ Republican colleagues from New York launched an effort to expel him from Congress.
Santos didnt communicate to reporters as he left the courthouse, however smiled and waved at a small group of protesters shouting insults from throughout the road.
A choose tentatively scheduled a trial for September, which might come after the state’s congressional main. U.S. District Choose Joanna Seybert turned down a request by prosecutors to have the trial as quickly as Could.
Learn Extra: The Expenses Towards George Santos Have been A Lengthy Time Coming
Santos is free on bail whereas he awaits trial. He has denied any critical wrongdoing and blamed irregularities in his authorities regulatory filings on his former marketing campaign treasurer, Nancy Marks, who he claims went rogue.
Marks in flip has implicated Santos. She instructed a choose when she not too long ago pleaded responsible to a fraud conspiracy cost that she had helped Santos trick Republican celebration officers into supporting his run for workplace in 2022 via bogus Federal Election Committee filings that made him look richer than he actually was, partly by itemizing an imaginary $500,000 mortgage that had supposedly come from his private wealth.
Santos has continued to signify his New York district in Congress since he was charged, rejecting requires his resignation from a number of fellow New York Republicans.
U.S. Rep. Anthony D’Esposito, who represents a congressional district subsequent to the one which elected Santos, launched a decision Thursday calling for Santos to be expelled from the Home, saying he wasn’t match to serve his constituents. He was joined by 4 different New York Republicans, U.S. Reps. Nick LaLota, Michael Lawler, Marc Molinaro and Brandon Williams.
Santos posted a cryptic notice on X, previously referred to as Twitter, saying, Every thing has an finish in life, however later added three factors of clarification.
1. I’ve not cleared out my workplace. 2. Im not resigning. 3. Im entitled to due course of and never a predetermined end result as some are searching for, he wrote.
He has beforehand mentioned he intends to run for reelection subsequent yr, although he may face a prolonged jail time period if convicted.
Throughout his profitable 2022 run for workplace, Santos was buoyed by an uplifting life story that was later revealed to be rife with fabrications. Amongst different issues, he by no means labored for the foremost Wall Avenue funding corporations the place he claimed to have been employed, did not go to the school the place he claimed to have been a star volleyball participant, and misled individuals about having Jewish heritage.
Whereas Santos hasn’t confronted any prison prices associated to the lies he instructed the general public, he does face allegations that he propped up his picture as having made a fortune within the investing world by submitting a false monetary disclosure to the U.S. Home.
Earlier than Santos entered his plea Friday, the choose held a listening to to contemplate doable conflicts of pursuits for Santos lawyer, Joseph Murray, who’s an acquaintance of two different people who find themselves a part of the case.
Marks was the treasurer of Murrays failed 2019 marketing campaign for Queens district lawyer. Murray mentioned he additionally has a private relationship with an unidentified Particular person No. 1 listed within the indictment. Murray mentioned he wouldn’t participate in cross-examination if that particular person had been known as as a witness.
