Politicians lying

[17thfabn]

Politicians and lying they seem to go hand in hand.

Recently New York U.S. Congress Member elect George Santos (Republican) has apparently taken it to a new level.

Most of the Democrats in New York shocked, truly shocked that Santos has taken lying to an epic level. 

https://www.npr.org/2022/12/29/1145950468/n-y-rep-elect-george-santos-is-being-investigated-for-lying-about-his-past

It appears that even though his lying is off the charts, even for a politician, he appears to have broken no laws.

Predictably the Democrats are calling for him to resign. If he would resign his  temporary replacement until the next election would be named by the Democratic Governor of New York.

Santos has said he will not resign but will not run for reelection. 

From a practical prospective I don't see why he would resign. His political carrier is at a dead end. Might as well take the two year ride in D.C. I though the same thing with former Governor Northam of Virginia (Democrat). Of course the Republicans where up in arms calling for  him to resign. Same situation . He knew his political carrier was over. May as well finish out your term and enjoy your perks.

On the other side of the aisle here is an oldy but a goodie by the late Senator Harry Reid of Nevada who was Senate Majority leader at one time. 

During the 2012 Presidential election  he accused fellow Senator and Republican Presidential nominee of not paying his taxes for ten years. When asked years latter about his lie Reid said 

“Well, they can call it whatever they want,” Reid said. “Romney didn’t win, did he?”

https://time.com/3765158/harry-reid-mitt-romney-no-taxes/

I'm sure we can all think of plenty of examples of lying politicians.

[Ivanhoe]

The puzzling thing is why the state party apparatus completely failed to do a basic background check.

 

[Ssnake]

Politics is about influencing people and getting support by the people. Few things are as effective for that as well-crafted lies delivered with perfect timing. Of course politicians will lie. I don't chastise them for it. The idea that you can be a successful politician and not lie, ever, is simply unrealistic.

There are situation where I would even demand that they hide the truth. If a bank run can be avoided with a lie, it usually should be. (You should also have the bankers clean up their mess and check the regulating authorities why they failed to spot the situation before it became nearly public, and then possibly amend the law if such a change promises an improvement without causing greater harm elsewhere. But, tell a lie while the situation develops!)

 

As useful tools as lies are, they work best if used sparingly, and if you don't let yourself be caught in them. Lies are a double-edged tool that can end careers if you get caught with them on too many occasions, especially if you used them for selfish petty reasons (looking at you, Boris Johnson).

[Rick]

5 hours ago, 17thfabn said:

Politicians and lying they seem to go hand in hand.

Recently New York U.S. Congress Member elect George Santos (Republican) has apparently taken it to a new level.

Most of the Democrats in New York shocked, truly shocked that Santos has taken lying to an epic level. 

https://www.npr.org/2022/12/29/1145950468/n-y-rep-elect-george-santos-is-being-investigated-for-lying-about-his-past

It appears that even though his lying is off the charts, even for a politician, he appears to have broken no laws.

Predictably the Democrats are calling for him to resign. If he would resign his  temporary replacement until the next election would be named by the Democratic Governor of New York.

Santos has said he will not resign but will not run for reelection. 

From a practical prospective I don't see why he would resign. His political carrier is at a dead end. Might as well take the two year ride in D.C. I though the same thing with former Governor Northam of Virginia (Democrat). Of course the Republicans where up in arms calling for  him to resign. Same situation . He knew his political carrier was over. May as well finish out your term and enjoy your perks.

On the other side of the aisle here is an oldy but a goodie by the late Senator Harry Reid of Nevada who was Senate Majority leader at one time. 

During the 2012 Presidential election  he accused fellow Senator and Republican Presidential nominee of not paying his taxes for ten years. When asked years latter about his lie Reid said 

“Well, they can call it whatever they want,” Reid said. “Romney didn’t win, did he?”

https://time.com/3765158/harry-reid-mitt-romney-no-taxes/

I'm sure we can all think of plenty of examples of lying politicians.

Regarding the not paying taxes lie. A larger malice was the press not telling an easily obtainable truth. 

[TrustMe]

All politicians be it left or right desire power over us. This is inherently dangerous and we should never trust these people.

[Markus Becker]

So he made up an impressive past to be more appealing to the voters? Silly but way less serious than walking back on election promises IMO and definitely nothing justifying a criminal investigation. 

[17thfabn]

8 hours ago, Ivanhoe said:

The puzzling thing is why the state party apparatus completely failed to do a basic background check.

 

Good point. The Republicans did a poor job of vetting him, the Democrats did a poor job in their opposition research. 

[17thfabn]

3 hours ago, Markus Becker said:

So he made up an impressive past to be more appealing to the voters? Silly but way less serious than walking back on election promises IMO and definitely nothing justifying a criminal investigation. 

I don't think politicians want the precedent of lying being a crime. It would come back to bite them all. 

[Markus Becker]

8 minutes ago, 17thfabn said:

I don't think politicians want the precedent of lying being a crime. It would come back to bite them all. 

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) added that Santos should be "banned from taking the oath for Congress," and Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) introduced the Stop Another Non-Truthful Office Seeker (SANTOS) Act, which would require candidates "to disclose under oath their employment, educational, and military history so we can punish candidates who lie to voters about their qualifications."

 

[Ivanhoe]

9 minutes ago, Markus Becker said:

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) added that Santos should be "banned from taking the oath for Congress," and Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) introduced the Stop Another Non-Truthful Office Seeker (SANTOS) Act, which would require candidates "to disclose under oath their employment, educational, and military history so we can punish candidates who lie to voters about their qualifications."

 

Those efforts would certainly have prevented Biden from holding office.

[Ivanhoe]

5 hours ago, Ssnake said:

 

There are situation where I would even demand that they hide the truth. If a bank run can be avoided with a lie, it usually should be. (You should also have the bankers clean up their mess and check the regulating authorities why they failed to spot the situation before it became nearly public, and then possibly amend the law if such a change promises an improvement without causing greater harm elsewhere. But, tell a lie while the situation develops!)

The problem with that type of "noble lie" is that reality is usually 24-48 hours ahead of the lie. I forgot about the Trump administration trying to convince the public that there wasn't panic buying of TP, hand gel, etc. In the context of 2020, really stupid thing to do. We live in the era of 4G phones that can SMS photos of empty store shelves, and post same up to social media.

And the problem with lying is that future credibility is shot. The USian public health system tried to scare Americans into another panic concerning monkeypox, and it was totally ignored.

[Ssnake]

1 hour ago, 17thfabn said:

Good point. ..., the Democrats did a poor job in their opposition research. 

...which probably explains 110% of the outrage. Now they hate him even more.

[Ssnake]

56 minutes ago, Ivanhoe said:

Those efforts would certainly have prevented Biden from holding office.

Eh, these are all lies just as well. They have no chance of making it into law, so their inventors can just as well milk them for their full PR potential.

[Ssnake]

50 minutes ago, Ivanhoe said:

The problem with that type of "noble lie" is that reality is usually 24-48 hours ahead of the lie. ...

And the problem with lying is that future credibility is shot. 

Well, you conveniently cut my quote short - which continued with

6 hours ago, Ssnake said:

As useful tools as lies are, they work best if used sparingly, and if you don't let yourself be caught in them. Lies are a double-edged tool that can end careers if you get caught with them ...

 

[17thfabn]

1 hour ago, Markus Becker said:

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) added that Santos should be "banned from taking the oath for Congress," and Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) introduced the Stop Another Non-Truthful Office Seeker (SANTOS) Act, which would require candidates "to disclose under oath their employment, educational, and military history so we can punish candidates who lie to voters about their qualifications."

 

Wasn't Swalwell involved with the Chinese Communist Spy Fang Fang?

I like to post pictures of Fang Fang!

Of course the bill will go no where since the Republicans will control the House. It would be a nightmare to enforce. Every one would want to accuse the other side. 

[Markus Becker]

47 minutes ago, 17thfabn said:

Of course the bill will go no where since the Republicans will control the House. It would be a nightmare to enforce. Every one would want to accuse the other side. 

Laws like this used to exist but they were ruled unconstitutional. 

And yes, this is just political dick waving. 

[Markus Becker]

2 hours ago, 17thfabn said:

Good point. The Republicans did a poor job of vetting him, the Democrats did a poor job in their opposition research. 

Was his election competitive or did he run in a reliably red district?

Edited January 2 by Markus Becker

[17thfabn]

23 minutes ago, Markus Becker said:

Was his election competitive or did he run in a reliably red district?

Santos won 54 to 46 %. Reports say that it had been a Democratic district, but with redistricting it had shifted to more Republican. 

[Murph]

3 hours ago, Markus Becker said:

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) added that Santos should be "banned from taking the oath for Congress," and Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) introduced the Stop Another Non-Truthful Office Seeker (SANTOS) Act, which would require candidates "to disclose under oath their employment, educational, and military history so we can punish candidates who lie to voters about their qualifications."

 

Then let us apply that to "Da Nang Dick" Blumenthal, Ilhan "I married my brother" Omar, Joe Biden, and 99% of the Democrat Party.....  I think that anyone running for office needs to be strapped to a polygraph after a dose of Sodium pentohal......

[PCallahan]

I agree with earlier commentators who said that the shocking thing about the Santos situation is that Democratic opposition research didn't pick up on it.  Really, verifying an opponent's educational and employment claims are Day 1 stuff for opposition research, and not at all hard to do (I did opposition research during the first five years of my career, first on the US House side, and then the US Senate side).  Santos' claims should have been remarkably easy to prove incorrect.  Hell, media scrutiny (pre-election, not the NY Times post-election stuff) should have exposed them (apparently, one small local paper did raise questions, which were ignored -- if nothing else, that should have set Dem hounds on the trail).

[Wobbly Head]

21 hours ago, Murph said:

Then let us apply that to "Da Nang Dick" Blumenthal, Ilhan "I married my brother" Omar, Joe Biden, and 99% of the Democrat Party.....  I think that anyone running for office needs to be strapped to a polygraph after a dose of Sodium pentohal......

There is one major problem with that. Lie detectors only detect people knowingly telling a lie. It's those people who believe their policies are correct and will pass a lie detector test. These are the people who scare me, rather than some lying politician who will comprise when presented with facts that don't support his policies.

[Ssnake]

A thumbtack in your shoe may cause sufficient distress to make lie detector results inconclusive. It's really bizarre how the US still clings to them as being something that can be submitted as evidence in a court when pretty much any other country has thrown them out for their unreliability.

[Murph]

3 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

A thumbtack in your shoe may cause sufficient distress to make lie detector results inconclusive. It's really bizarre how the US still clings to them as being something that can be submitted as evidence in a court when pretty much any other country has thrown them out for their unreliability.

Texas does not allow the polygraph to be admissible in court.  The Feds on the other hand swear by it and treat it as the Holy Grail.    

[Ssnake]

Let me guess: They can decide which results to keep, and which to discard?

[17thfabn]

28 minutes ago, Murph said:

Texas does not allow the polygraph to be admissible in court.  The Feds on the other hand swear by it and treat it as the Holy Grail.    

I don't think lie detector results are admissible in any court, state or federal in the U.S. They are sometimes used as an investgative tool to help eliminate possible suspects.

They are also used for job screening for police, fire and some federal agencies. Some security agencies such as the CIA used to give employees routine polographs to see if they may be compromised.