Santos was charged with theft in 2017 case tied to Amish dog breeders

[Elderberry]

Politico By Jacqueline Sweet 2/9/2023

Rep. George Santos was charged with theft in Pennsylvania’s Amish Country in 2017 after a series of bad checks were written in his name to dog breeders, according to the court and a lawyer friend who helped him address the charge.

Just days after $15,125 in checks were made out for “puppies,” according to the memo lines, Santos held an adoption event at a Staten Island pet store with his animal rescue charity Friends of Pets United, according to the store’s Instagram account and a person who attended the event.

The charge was dismissed and his record expunged after Santos claimed someone had stolen his checkbook, according to the court and the lawyer.

The Pennsylvania theft charge, which has not previously been reported, is the latest revelation in a dizzying array of scandals for the beleaguered New York congressman, who fabricated much of his campaign biography. Santos is facing at least five law enforcement probes including an FBI investigation into his role in a service dog charity scheme tied to Friends of Pets United and a Brazilian fraud case.

Santos has said he merely fabricated parts of his résumé and has denied breaking any laws. A spokesperson and a lawyer for Santos did not respond to a request for comment.

More: https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/09/santos-charged-theft-2017-dog-breeders-00082091

[DefiantMassRINO]

What's Santos' immigration/citizenship status?  Could he be deported if he's convicted of a felony?

[Elderberry]

What's Santos' immigration/citizenship status?  Could he be deported if he's convicted of a felony?

The NY Times/George Santos/Immigration/Marriage Maze
Many unanswered questions

Center for Immigration Studies  By David North on January 17, 2023

https://cis.org/North/NY-TimesGeorge-SantosImmigrationMarriage-Maze

    Mr. Santos, who is openly gay, had been married to a woman. The report did not offer conclusive details, but some people briefed on the findings wondered whether the marriage was done for immigration purposes.

Although that article ran on for 91 column-inches in the print edition, there was no follow-up text on “the immigration purposes” charge. The suggestion was just left hanging there.

Was that for her immigration purposes, or for his?

The marriage, according to the records, was between George Anthony Devolder Santos and Uadla Santos-Viera. She could have been an alien and he a citizen, and for reasons perhaps known only to them, he had done her a favor and entered into a marriage of convenience for her so that she could become a citizen. They divorced in 2019. Under these circumstances the alien often pays the citizen in the case. If this were true, it would just be another blemish on his messy record.

The Times did not explore either that possibility or the next one.

The other, more serious implication, is that Santos, once an alien, married the lady, presumably a U.S. citizen, so that he could become a citizen, and that only because of this marriage was he able to run for the House. Their marriage took place on August 2, 2012, in Manhattan and can be verified in the city’s files.

Such speculation was fueled by Santos’ multiple lies and by reports that sometimes he said that he had been born in Brazil, where his parents had lived. He says that he was born in Queens on July 22, 1988; if that is true, then he is a native-born citizen, and did not need to marry for naturalization purposes.

But had he been born in Brazil, would such a marriage make him eligible for the House in 2020, when he first ran (and lost), or two years later when he ran and won? This is where the Times reporting really collapses.

-----

So there are multiple possibilities in this case:

1.   Santos was born in Brazil, became naturalized sometime after August 2, 2015, and is a citizen but not long enough to meet the seven-year rule.

2.   Santos became naturalized quickly after the marriage and was eligible for the House in 2022, but not in 2020.

3.   Santos was born in Brazil, naturalized earlier than November 2013 without regard to a marriage, and was eligible in both elections, but he has been lying about a birth in Queens.

4.   Santos is a green card holder.

5.   Santos was born in Brazil and has no legal status in the U.S.

6.   Santos was born in Queens on July 22, 1988, as he claims.

7.   Santos was born in the U.S. and married Uadla so that she could become a citizen.

8.   Santos married her for legit reasons.

Research Needed.

[GtHawk]

The NY Times/George Santos/Immigration/Marriage Maze
Many unanswered questions

Center for Immigration Studies  By David North on January 17, 2023

https://cis.org/North/NY-TimesGeorge-SantosImmigrationMarriage-Maze

    Mr. Santos, who is openly gay, had been married to a woman. The report did not offer conclusive details, but some people briefed on the findings wondered whether the marriage was done for immigration purposes.

Although that article ran on for 91 column-inches in the print edition, there was no follow-up text on “the immigration purposes” charge. The suggestion was just left hanging there.

Was that for her immigration purposes, or for his?

The marriage, according to the records, was between George Anthony Devolder Santos and Uadla Santos-Viera. She could have been an alien and he a citizen, and for reasons perhaps known only to them, he had done her a favor and entered into a marriage of convenience for her so that she could become a citizen. They divorced in 2019. Under these circumstances the alien often pays the citizen in the case. If this were true, it would just be another blemish on his messy record.

The Times did not explore either that possibility or the next one.

The other, more serious implication, is that Santos, once an alien, married the lady, presumably a U.S. citizen, so that he could become a citizen, and that only because of this marriage was he able to run for the House. Their marriage took place on August 2, 2012, in Manhattan and can be verified in the city’s files.

Such speculation was fueled by Santos’ multiple lies and by reports that sometimes he said that he had been born in Brazil, where his parents had lived. He says that he was born in Queens on July 22, 1988; if that is true, then he is a native-born citizen, and did not need to marry for naturalization purposes.

But had he been born in Brazil, would such a marriage make him eligible for the House in 2020, when he first ran (and lost), or two years later when he ran and won? This is where the Times reporting really collapses.

-----

So there are multiple possibilities in this case:

1.   Santos was born in Brazil, became naturalized sometime after August 2, 2015, and is a citizen but not long enough to meet the seven-year rule.

2.   Santos became naturalized quickly after the marriage and was eligible for the House in 2022, but not in 2020.

3.   Santos was born in Brazil, naturalized earlier than November 2013 without regard to a marriage, and was eligible in both elections, but he has been lying about a birth in Queens.

4.   Santos is a green card holder.

5.   Santos was born in Brazil and has no legal status in the U.S.

6.   Santos was born in Queens on July 22, 1988, as he claims.

7.   Santos was born in the U.S. and married Uadla so that she could become a citizen.

8.   Santos married her for legit reasons.

Research Needed.

But if Santos had married his sister democrats would be okay with it...right?

[Fishrrman]

One could make a pretty interesting movie based on this guy's "accomplishments"...!