Rise and Fall of George Santos: A Tale of Deception and Consequence

George Santos, the controversial ex-Republican congressman from New York, faced his reckoning on Friday as a federal court sentenced him to over seven years in prison. His 87-month sentence marks the end of a chaotic chapter in which Santos surged from obscurity to notoriety, notorious for his incredible fabrications and criminal activities. Last year, Santos admitted guilt to charges of wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, among other deceptions such as lying to Congress, fraudulent unemployment claims, and cheating campaign donors out of significant sums. Standing before Federal District Court Judge Joanna Seybert in Central Islip, N.Y., Santos, at 36, appeared subdued—far from the boastful politician whose wild claims transformed him into a national joke and a target for ‘Saturday Night Live’ parodies. “Mr. Santos, words have consequences,” the judge remarked. “Your election was built on lies.” Santos must report by July 25 to begin his sentence.

While his tall tales paved his dubious ascent, it was Santos’s financial misdeeds that precipitated his downfall. Even before a courtroom resolution, the House took the unprecedented step of expelling him in December 2023 without a conviction. An ethics probe revealed Santos used campaign funds for personal luxuries like Botox and designer goods, prompting a bipartisan majority to oust him. This alliance of Republicans and Democrats signaled a rare break from party loyalty, a stark contrast to the current political climate where former President Trump seeks party unity with his influence. Although Trump has freely exercised presidential pardons, there’s no sign he intends to assist Santos, who, despite aligning closely with Trump’s politics, remains out of favor.

Santos, after failing a 2020 congressional bid, supported Trump’s unfounded election fraud claims and falsely accused voter fraud against himself. In 2022, he won a previously Democratic-leaning Long Island district, seen as a pivotal moment for the Republican Party. However, his victory was constructed on a web of lies soon uncovered. He falsely claimed Holocaust refugee ancestry, lied about his mother’s whereabouts during 9/11, and boasted nonexistent Wall Street credentials. This deceit supported his claim of lending substantial funds to his campaign, a ruse among several schemes identified by New York federal prosecutors as efforts to enrich himself and his campaign through fraudulent means.

In a 2023 indictment, prosecutors alleged Santos exploited donor trust, misused campaign finances for personal indulgence, exaggerated fundraising achievements, falsified congressional wealth disclosures, and engaged in unemployment fraud. Judge Seybert, adhering to prosecutor recommendations, deemed an 87-month sentence appropriate to underscore “the seriousness of his unparalleled crimes” and to safeguard the public from future fraud. They criticized his irreverent social media presence, indicating little remorse, and his pursuit of financial gain via his notorious reputation, evident in his personalized video sales and his tongue-in-cheek podcast “Pants on Fire.” Santos’s hurried Cameo price reduction preceding his sentence further reflected his focus on profit.

Santos’s defense sought a lighter sentence of two years plus probation, highlighting his acceptance of wrongdoing and commitment to repaying nearly $375,000 in restitution. Nonetheless, Santos has oscillated in his acknowledgment of guilt. Publicly, he accuses the Justice Department of politicized prosecution, refuting his admitted campaign fund misuse. Yet he told The New York Times he would forgo seeking a pardon, citing a need for “accountability and responsibility.” However, acquaintances remain skeptical of his sincerity. “I wouldn’t trust a word out of his mouth,” remarked Peter Hamilton, who once befriended Santos under the alias Anthony Devolder and lent him money for an apartment, only to be ignored until Santos gained public prominence. “He conned his way into Congress,” Hamilton continued, “A seven-year sentence isn’t enough.”