August 19, 2024 • 35 mins
George Santos runs for Congress and wins. Then the stories he told on the campaign trail start to fall apart. Semafor’s Kadia Goba wants to figure out where his money is coming from. Saurav Ghosh, of the Campaign Legal Center, finds the Santos filings suspicious. As Santos’ criminal trial approaches, Producer Amy Gaines McQuade walks Jake Halpern through the moment when the cracks began to show.
Note: George Santos is now expected to plead guilty, as first reported by Talking Points Memo.
This is a developing story. We will update listeners as more information becomes available.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Pushkin. Okay, so, how are you going to start this?
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Well, I'm really excited. This is kind of new for us.
Speaker 1 (00:27):
Absolutely a little role reversal. Amy gains McQuaid as my producer.
She's worked on the past four seasons of deep Cover.
It may not have heard Amy's voice about in effect
you did, because when we do a season of deep Cover,
Amy's the one that reads through all thousand pages of
the court transcript and knows every last detail. She's the
(00:49):
one who helps me track down sources and wed through
hours of interviews to make the episodes that you've heard.
So while we're hard at work on the next season
of deep Cover, we have a special mini series for
you in a brand new format. About a year ago.
Amy comes to me and says, look, there's this story
I really want to report. A story that took place
(01:10):
in fact where Amy grown up, A story about a
man who may just be one of the greatest liars
of all time, which got my attention because it sounded
an awful lot like a deep Cover story unfolding in
real time.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
George Anthony de Volder Santos, Oh.
Speaker 3 (01:30):
Good morning, chabach allom too, everybody.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
This is him speaking to the Republican Jewish Coalition in
twenty twenty two.
Speaker 3 (01:38):
I'm a first generation born American, like many in our
great nation. My parents came to this country in search
of the American dream.
Speaker 4 (01:45):
Today.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
He ran for Congress to represent New York's third District
on Long Island, which is where I grew up. And
a huge part of his message was this that he
was the embodiment of the American dream. And that message
worked because he won.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
Only in this country can the little boy born in
a basement apartment in Jackson Heights, Queens in New York
City become a United States congressman at thirty four?
Speaker 1 (02:13):
Okay, interesting, So I know there's a lot more that
he said on the campaign trail, but can you just
give me the recap.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
So the version of George Santos that he sold on
the campaign trail was that George Stantos was a successful
businessman working in the financial industry. He claimed that he'd
worked for Goldman, Sachs and City Group. He claimed that
he had gone to college at Baruch and NYU. He
(02:40):
had also told some stories about his personal life.
Speaker 4 (02:44):
I'm very proud of my Jewish heritage. I'm very proud
of my grandparents' story.
Speaker 2 (02:49):
Claiming Jewish heritage and said that some of his family
members had survived the Holocaust. Here he is speaking to
a reporter for a Jewish news service.
Speaker 4 (02:59):
I'm so proud to be able to keep our family
going forward and showing that not only did we survive,
but now I'm able to go advocate and fight for
other Jewish people all across my my district.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
So the story that he told was an inspiring one.
Here he was the son of Brazilian immigrants who had
built this impressive life for himself, living in New York
City as an openly gay man, working on Wall Street,
getting into politics, and it seemed like this moment when
he won would just be the cherry on top. He
(03:33):
was going to be a congressman.
Speaker 1 (03:35):
I mean, it's inspiring. I'm kind of inspired hearing it.
Speaker 2 (03:39):
But in the coming weeks and months, another narrative would
start to emerge, a different version of George Santos, one
that was far more alarming. And if it were true,
then this was a man who lied, cheated, and stole
from people who trusted him, basically one man with two faces,
(04:02):
and it left a lot of people, including myself, wondering
who is the real George Santos. I think the thing
that a lot of people might remember is the New
York Times story that broke in December of twenty twenty two,
because it was pretty explosive.
Speaker 1 (04:21):
Yeah, I remember that headline.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
The story revealed that Santos had essentially fabricated a lot
of information on his resume. But through my reporting, I've
been finding that that story was really just the beginning.
So George Santos is actually scheduled to go to trial
in just a few weeks in September. He's facing a
whole bunch of charges, wirefraud, money laundering, falsifying records, identity theft,
(04:49):
a whole bunch. I've been talking with lots of people
to essentially try and figure out how did George Santos
go from lies about where he went to school and
where he worked to allegations of serious federal crimes, crimes
that could land him in prison for roughly two decades,
and just how deep to his go. This is deep
(05:11):
Cover George Santos, Episode one the campaign. Jake, I want
to go back in time to that moment when the
New York Times story broke, because that's when the cracks
(05:31):
in Santos's facade really start to show. Okay, So two
journalists at the New York Times, their names are Grace
Ashford and Michael Gold, they come out with this massive story.
It's called who is Rep. Elect George Santos? His resume
may be largely fiction. The headline from this story is really,
(05:54):
maybe this guy isn't who he claimed to be? And
that for me was a moment where I heard from
basically everyone in my life who knew I was from
Long Island and knew that I worked on stories like this,
and just you know, asking me, what the fuck what
happened here? Who is this guy? And how did he
(06:15):
get elected? He's, you know, living this double life essentially
who he says he is in public, but who he
actually is in private. And one person who is in
the center of this mess was George Santos's communications director.
Her name is Nasa Woomer. Do you remember where you
were when the New York Times story broke? Oh?
Speaker 5 (06:36):
I do?
Speaker 6 (06:37):
I know exactly where. I was actually coming out of
the Starbucks and it broke, and I was heading into
our office right by the State House.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
And the timing here is really interesting because she actually
accepted the job right before the New York Times story broke.
Speaker 6 (06:57):
Everyone is sending like, Niassa, have you seen this? Oh
my god, is this the guy you're working for? My
stomach had dropped, and I thought, what the well, I
don't want to say the F bomb, but but that's
what I'm thinking.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
At this point, like how many days on the job
is she?
Speaker 2 (07:13):
By the way, so Nesa hasn't actually started working for
Santos in that moment. She's still working in Boston for
the Republican administration there, so she's not actually even in
touch with George Santos. But she did hear through the
grapevine through some staffer that a story about Santos would
be coming.
Speaker 6 (07:34):
I already knew there was going to be a hit piece,
but my understanding was that this was just going to
be We thought it was going to be a traditional
hit piece of conservative Republican Flip's Democrat seat.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
But of course that was not the New York Times
story at all. The New York Times story made clear
that a lot of the stories that George Santos had
told on the campaign trail were at best inaccurate, at
worst entirely fabricated. And so after the story publishes, Santos
comes out with this statement through his attorney that says
(08:09):
it's no surprise that Congressman elect Santos has enemies at
The New York Times who are attempting to smear his
good name with these defamatory allegations.
Speaker 6 (08:19):
I even spoke with the chief of Stuff and he
said he's speaking with his lawyers. They're going to handle it.
And I just said, okay, well, like they need to
handle it immediately, because you know, this is this is
really bad.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
And is Santo's freaking out at this point.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
So I can't vouch for how Santos is feeling because
I have not spoken with him directly.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
We've tried, yes.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
Yes, we've reached out to him for comment. So far
he's declined those requests. But Santos appears to have been
attempting some damage control. He's not giving a ton of interviews,
but he does grant one to Fox News and it's
a guest anchor, so it is Tulca Gabbard conducting the interview.
Speaker 7 (09:02):
First question I really want to ask you now that
all this has been revealed, is what does the word
integrity mean to you?
Speaker 3 (09:11):
Well, Tulsi, thank you for having me, you know, to
answer your question. Integrity is very important, and bellis What
does it mean?
Speaker 5 (09:18):
Though?
Speaker 2 (09:19):
What does it mean?
Speaker 7 (09:19):
Because the meaning of the word actually matters in practice.
Speaker 3 (09:24):
Of course, it means to carry yourself in an honorable way.
And I made a mistake, and I think humans are
flawed and we all make mistakes.
Speaker 2 (09:32):
Tulsi, this is.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
Fox News and he's a Republican and he's getting very
hostile treatment here. So, I mean, lord knows what would
happen if he had gone on MSNBC or even CNN.
I'm wondering how is this playing out with his constituents.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
Yeah, I mean, I remember the reaction was pretty swift.
Speaker 5 (09:55):
George Chantlis's campaign last year was a campaign of decei, lies, fabrication.
He deceived the voters of the third Congressional district.
Speaker 2 (10:07):
That's Joe Chiro, head of the Republican Party in Nasa County.
This is from a press conference they held where he,
along with other New York Republicans, actually ask for Santos' resignation.
Speaker 8 (10:19):
There's absolutely no way mister Santos can be an effective
member of Congress and represent the people who elected him.
Speaker 1 (10:30):
One of the questions I have is like, talk to
me about this district that elects him.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
Yeah. So Santos ran in New York's third congressional district,
which if you've ever looked at a political map, you
know these districts get drawn in a kind of crazy,
nonsensical way. When you look at the district itself, it
holds part of Nasa County, which is where I grew up,
and specifically in my neighborhood, I can say it's a
lot of working class folks, so people who commute into
(11:01):
New York City every day, cops, firefighters, teachers. It also
includes the north shore of Long Island, which is like
Gatspeak country. There's lots of big houses and old money.
And over the years the district has changed, the lines
have been redrawn, but by the time that Santos was running,
the district included a little sliver of Queens which is
(11:23):
actually where Santos grew up.
Speaker 1 (11:25):
It's funny because when you describe it, I totally almost
get why he would have to be a guy, that
would be a chameleon, that would have to be able
to play a lot of different parts, because his constituency
is just like a crazy cross section of America.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
Yeah, and I think when George Santos is running for office,
he is building the narrative around himself that he started
from nothing and built himself into a successful businessman in
the financial industry. So he claims that he was working
for Goldman Sachs, he claims that he was working for
(12:02):
City Group.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
None of these things are true. None of that is
a crime.
Speaker 2 (12:07):
That's true. But it's around the same moment in time
that new reports are emerging that Santos is being investigated
for actual crimes he may have committed.
Speaker 9 (12:18):
The Republican District Attorney of Nassau County says she's looking
into whether any of those fabrications amounted to crimes, and
federal prosecutors are also looking into Santos's financial disclosures. Stunning
revelations and questions about his personal and professional life continue
to come to light, including new questions about the money
(12:38):
he spent on his campaign.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
We'll be right back. So when the New York Times
story comes out, there are a number of things that
(13:05):
are exposed, but there are also a lot of questions remaining.
And so I think, you know, reporters, especially reporters who
are working in DC can kind of smell blood in
the water, right, and they're like, what else can I
find out about this guy?
Speaker 10 (13:20):
I was trying to cover the New York area because
I'm a New Yorker, and I understood that there was
this buzz that there were some members that might actually
overcome some of the Democratic nominees that were running for Congress.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
Okay, Jake. So this is Kadea Goba, and she's a
political reporter for Semaphore, which is this sort of newer
journalism outlet.
Speaker 10 (13:43):
So I set out in October to interview a bunch
of them. George Santos did not give me access after
he won. He was like, he became a challenge to me.
I needed to talk to this man.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
Kadia actually worked at BuzzFeed before she was with Semaphore,
but she hasn't always been a journalist. This is a
second career.
Speaker 10 (14:04):
I was in the clothing industry for over two decades
as a sales rep. So this is sort of a
midlife crisis that worked out anyways.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
So near the end of twenty twenty two, Kadilla is
working as a reporter on Capitol Hill and she meets
George Santos, in person. She gave him her card. You know,
I'm a reporter working on the hill, would love to
be in touch, but he doesn't give her his But
she gets his phone number anyways, and she wants to
(14:37):
talk to him, so she's calling a lot, even though
he would never pick up until this one time.
Speaker 10 (14:43):
I remember very distinctly he either called me back or
picked up the phone this one time and said, I
remember not giving you my phone number, which I thought
was very funny because he understood who had been calling him,
but just was intentionally ignoring me.
Speaker 2 (14:59):
Whatever.
Speaker 10 (15:00):
Fine, He eventually picked up the phone, and he told
me that at that time he was going on Fox,
that I shouldn't tell anyone, but maybe he could talk
to me afterwards.
Speaker 1 (15:11):
Wait, this is the same interview that we heard at
the top with Tulci Gabbard.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
Yep.
Speaker 10 (15:17):
So I watched the interview and it went terribly.
Speaker 2 (15:22):
My question is do you have no shame?
Speaker 3 (15:25):
Look, I understand everybody wants to knitpick at me. I'm
going to reassure this once and for all. I'm not
a facade. I'm not a persona.
Speaker 10 (15:34):
You could tell he was uncomfortable. It wasn't what he expected.
I think he thought this was going to be a
good opportunity for him to talk about what happened or
explain his situation, and none of that happened. So of
course I kind of just texted him after the interview
was over and kind of said like, are you free
(15:55):
or do you want to talk? And he texted back
like something like get your pen and paper ready.
Speaker 1 (16:04):
Wow. That kind of surprises me. Given how badly it went,
you think maybe he would be a little guns Oh.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
I think Kadilla's view was the opposite that. You know,
he thought that the Fox interview would be a good
opportunity and then when it went so poorly, he's just
kind of panicking, and he's he's open to talking to
people because he wants to clear the air. Right, he's
in crisis mode, I see.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
So yeah, they just get back up to the plate
again kind of thing.
Speaker 10 (16:31):
And sure enough, like maybe fifteen minutes later, he called me,
and I think I talked to him as he drove
from the Fox studio home.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
So what is your goal in that interview? What is
the big question you want to ask?
Speaker 10 (16:45):
Clearly I want to ask where he got his money from,
because that was like the big discrepancy.
Speaker 2 (16:49):
Right, He had presented himself on the campaign trail as
this wealthy, successful individual. How much money does he have
really and what is the source of that money?
Speaker 1 (17:01):
So this is what Kadia is talking about, the big
the discrepancy and where did the money come from?
Speaker 2 (17:06):
Yeah, and Kadia is following this, and I think it
would be fair to say that a lot of reporters
were fixated on this question at the time of you know, okay,
George Santos has been exposed as a potential liar. What
else could he be lying about? It appears on paper
like George Santos has a lot of money, but is
that actually the case? And it's around this time that
(17:28):
many people start looking at his campaign finance filings. And
one of those people is a guy named Sarav Ghosh.
Speaker 11 (17:35):
I'm the director of Federal Campaign Finance Reform at Campaign
Legal Center, and what I work on every day are
the laws that govern how people raise and spend money
when they're trying to convince others to vote for them.
Speaker 2 (17:51):
He was a lawyer at the FEC, which is the
Federal Election Commission, and it's basically Sarov's job to find
people violating campaign finance laws.
Speaker 1 (18:01):
I see, so he's like a nonprofit do good or
private detective exactly.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
So Siav and his team would eventually file a complaint
with the Federal Election Commission, and some of the things
that they flag actually show up later on in the
federal indictment against Santos.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
Interesting, I see.
Speaker 2 (18:22):
Uh, you know that week between Christmas and New Year's
when basically no one wants to work. Yeah, definitely that
week Surav and his team were actually surprisingly busy. They
started reviewing santosis campaign finance filings, and a few things
stick out to Surrov right away.
Speaker 11 (18:41):
There was this glaring disconnect between his personal finances, as
he had reported on financial disclosure form that every House
candidate is required to file, and his campaign reports, which
indicated he had loaned his own campaign a ton of money,
a six figure sum north of seven hundred thousand dollars.
Speaker 2 (19:04):
Wow.
Speaker 11 (19:05):
So it's it's very I won't say comment, it's not
unheard for a candidate to loan his own campaign that
kind of money, or even to just give it to
the campaign outright, but you typically expect to see backing
that up a financial disclosure that shows, well, this person
is wealthy, right, they have the assets, they have the income.
(19:27):
With Santos, it was the exact opposite.
Speaker 2 (19:30):
So one thing quickly that I should just mention to you.
Jake Santos actually ran for Congress twice. He ran first
in twenty twenty. He lost. SIREV look through those records too,
he claimed to loan his unsuccessful twenty twenty campaign something
like eighty thousand dollars. That didn't really make sense because
(19:52):
in twenty twenty he had personal assets and income of
just fifty five thousand dollars according to his self reporting,
So it was just fifty five thousand dollars.
Speaker 11 (20:02):
Fifty five thousand, yeah, wow, So it made no sense
how somebody with fifty five thousand dollars could even afford
to loan his campag eighty thousand dollars.
Speaker 2 (20:11):
So what Suraba is outlining here is that alongside those
campaign filings, he's supposed to also be reporting what kind
of income he's making, what kind of assets he has.
And Surav's looking at this and just truly saying the
math isn't adding up. And then when you get to
twenty twenty two, when he's running the second time, he's
(20:31):
loaning his campaign even more money that there's one loan
in particular of five hundred thousand dollars. In March of
twenty twenty two, Santos files a disclosure form that lists
his assets and income. In this document, you can see
he lists an apartment in Brazil that he values somewhere
(20:51):
between half a million and a million dollars. He says
he has somewhere between one hundred and two hundred and
fifty thousand dollars in a checking account. And then there's
this business called the Devolder Organization, and he values the
Devolder Organization as somewhere between a million and five million dollars.
Speaker 11 (21:11):
That's one of his surnames as de Vold. And he
claimed that this organization, which was founded within months of
losing in the twenty twenty election, he claimed that this
company was basically an overnight success story.
Speaker 1 (21:26):
And he was.
Speaker 11 (21:27):
Very ambiguous and sketchy, quite quite honestly about what the
company did and how it made so much money overnight.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
So he's filing these disclosures with the House, is that correct?
Speaker 2 (21:42):
Correct?
Speaker 1 (21:43):
Basically saying like, look, I've got this apartment in Brazil,
I've got this company over here, Like yeah, I'm a
wealthy man like I am more than capable of loading
my campaign this money. And my question is was that true?
Did he actually have any of these assets or was
this also part of his fabulous's tale.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
So Sarav is looking at this and to be very clear,
sav does not believe the financial disclosure form. I think
also because he's looking at the previous forms and just saying,
how did this materialize overnight? Right? And he's also suspicious
of like what's driving this income? And that is a
question that Kadella, the reporter you heard from earlier, is
(22:25):
also very interested in getting an answer to you know,
what is going on with George Santos and his money,
Where is this alleged income coming from? And just to say,
if it's not already clear, all of this is happening
at the same time. So we have Sarav, who's our watchdog.
Him and his team are digging into these campaign finance
(22:47):
reports in the week between Christmas and New Year's and
that same week, Kadea, the clothing sales rep turned journalist,
is trying to get that interview with George Santos and
she's going to finally get it in the moment after
his disastrous interview on Fox, and so he's actually calling
(23:09):
her on the drive home from the Fox studio.
Speaker 10 (23:13):
This is also eight o'clock at night, So I'm like
in my apartment. You know, Congress has been out for
weeks now, and I was like, I can't believe this
is happening. I'm actually interviewing this guy that everyone is
talking about. So I was working with like a Hanvis
and kind of was just like, so, how'd you.
Speaker 2 (23:33):
Get all of this money? That was like my first question.
Speaker 10 (23:36):
He gave this scenario where like, okay, let's say someone
buys a boat and they don't want to go through
like the normal chain, they want a smaller broken tree.
I come in and I kind of negotiate the deal
and you know, introduce them to potential sellers. And he
called this thing capital intro. He kept saying capital Intro,
(23:57):
and I was like, well, what is that? And he
explained that capital introduction you basically just connect hedge fund
people with investors.
Speaker 2 (24:07):
Essentially. What is.
Speaker 12 (24:10):
That?
Speaker 1 (24:10):
Doesn't even really make sense to me, Like how does?
But okay, so he's like he's like a connector. I mean,
had the guy ever actually sold a boat?
Speaker 2 (24:21):
The New York Times would later report that the FBI
was curious about this question too, and in fact, there
was at least one yacht sale that Santos brokered while
he was running for Congress that there are a lot
of questions about. But that's about all we know, Okay,
But jumping back to December twenty twenty two, Kadella just
(24:42):
had that interview with George Santos and he told her
that he works in capital introduction. This is what Kadea
reports attributing to George Santos, of course, and that brings
us back to Sarav, who reads Kadia's reporting, And for Sarav,
it's just not really checking out. And I think even
(25:04):
if what Santos told Kadea is true, maybe he did
sell a boat or two, but from Sarab's perspective, this
still doesn't really account for the massive cash windfall that
he appears to have almost overnight, I see. And so
Sarav's question, and what he's trying to piece together through
(25:24):
the reporting that's emerging is what is the full picture
of Devolder? You know, what kind of business is Devolder doing?
What kind of money is Devolder bringing in right?
Speaker 1 (25:35):
And is it enough business that it could explain these
massive contributions of the campaign. What half a million dollars
right exactly?
Speaker 2 (25:43):
And so Sarab is just trying to connect these dots.
And there's two things that Sirov is fairly suspicious of.
The first is that Santos is not listing any clients
on these disclosure forms, and you know, Siav and multiple
others flag that because if you're in this so called
capital introduction industry, you should have clients. That's basically the
(26:07):
whole business model. So that's concerning. The second is that
Sirov is also suspicious about the timing of all of this.
He notices that Santos declares his candidacy one month and
then he incorporates de Volder the next month, and then
(26:28):
he's making loans to his campaign the month after that.
Speaker 1 (26:31):
That's fucking crazy.
Speaker 2 (26:35):
Like how many boats do you have to sell? A Yeah,
make that up.
Speaker 1 (26:40):
I mean, that's like the greatest success story of all
the time if it's true. Dude sold some yachts mighty quick.
Speaker 2 (26:49):
And there's something about that that's just not sitting right
with Sirov, and that leads him to wonder, Okay, where
is Santos actually getting this money from and he has
a couple theories about that.
Speaker 11 (26:59):
So in our mind, this was a possible straw donor scheme.
A straw donor scheme is basically a scheme in which
someone is making a contribution to a candidate or a
pack through someone else. So Santos, in our mind, was
getting money from some external source. And that could be
(27:20):
a corporation, it could be a billionaire, it could be
a foreign national. So any of these possibilities struck us
as deeply problematic in our mind. You know, it wasn't
his money, it was someone else, and not knowing is
part of the problem, maybe the biggest problem.
Speaker 1 (27:38):
It's interesting to me because to me, I get why
Sarab thinks that it's a straw donor, because that's like,
that's his his his purview, that's his job. He's looking
at people who are skirting finance campaign finance law. Right,
he doesn't realize that he's actually going after like a hustler.
Is there a paper shail that shows like a deposit
(28:01):
to his campaign coffers.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
That's not required. Okay, so he can say I loaned
this out to my campaign, but he doesn't actually have
to back that up. With a wire transfer or a
bank account showing that money hits right. And so it's
a requirement for transparency, but it's limited, and so he's
(28:24):
able to stay on paper. Yes, I am a wealthy businessman,
and I was able to loan my campaign this six
figure sum.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
I see, okay, because where I thought this was going
was that the loan was bullshit and this was just
a way for him to make money.
Speaker 2 (28:46):
Well, you might be right about that, so, Jake. What
the government has alleged is that Santos lied in these
campaign finance reports in a sense inflating his fundraising numbers.
So prosecutors alleged that at least some of these loans
that Santos said he made to his campaign did not happen,
(29:11):
and they also alleged that he fudged these numbers for
a very specific reason.
Speaker 11 (29:19):
Santos he understood that his campaign had to report earning
a certain amount or report raising a certain amount of
money to get support from the party, and so that
was something that the investigations revealed, is that he had
emails where he was making it clear that he was
(29:40):
trying to establish, you know, that he'd hit those benchmarks
and so qualified for the kind of support from the
Republican Party that only folks with that amount of financial
viability would be able to receive.
Speaker 1 (29:55):
If I'm understanding this correctly, and this guy is coming
in and selling a whole story about how much money
he made and how much money he's loaned his his campaign,
and it smells like bullshit. The question is to what end?
(30:17):
And if I'm understanding this correctly, he was actually trying
to hustle the Republican Party basically, just to convince them
that he was healthier and stronger and a bigger baller
than he really was.
Speaker 2 (30:28):
Yeah, and I think that there's a clear goal here,
and this is supported by what the government outlines in
the indictment. I mean, what they allege is that Santos
and his campaign treasurer Nancy Marx did this in order
to gain support from the Republican Party. And Nancy is
the person on his staff that is responsible for those filings. Now,
(30:51):
I should tell you Nancy Marx took a plea deal
last year for her role in some of this, and
I expect to hear a lot more about all of
this at trial. I mean, this program that Santos receives
by hitting these fundraising benchmarks, right, Yeah, he gets support
(31:12):
with ads, he gets support splitting the cost of polls,
focus groups, what they call coordinated expenditures, which is basically like,
we're going to spend money with you and for you, right,
And so if he's trying to get into office, he
understandably wants this support from the Republican Party.
Speaker 1 (31:33):
Does sirob think that any money actually even existed like
this five hundred thousand dollars? Was it ever real or
is it just all on paper just like a full
on like charade.
Speaker 2 (31:49):
So this is something that I've dug into a lot,
and the story is actually really complicated. What the government
alleges is that at a certain point in time related
to that twenty twenty two campaign, George Santos claimed to
have loaned his own campaign five hundred thousand dollars. What
the government alleges is that loan never happened, No money
(32:11):
changed hands in that moment. Now, some reporting has indicated
that maybe later on some money might have gotten moved
around to try and potentially make the books look better.
But what the government is charging in their indictment is
that this loan did not happen when the campaign said
(32:33):
it happened, and that it happened for a specific reason,
and that was to hit these campaign benchmarks, the fundraising benchmarks,
in order to get this support at a critical moment
in his campaign.
Speaker 1 (32:47):
I get it, you know, he using his personal charm
and potentially his lies is like getting popular support. But
it's one thing to claim you were a successful businessman.
But then by loaning yourself this money or appearing to
you're passing the second test, which is he has the
war chest to make this work, We're going to supplement
(33:07):
that money. Being the Republican Party and really helped push
him over the line.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
And it actually goes a step further. What the government
is alleging is that he that Santos and Nancy Marks
also conspired to put fake donations on the books in
the names of people who never either never gave or
didn't given that amount. What it looks like is that
they were really manipulating these reports to present a version
(33:34):
of Santos's campaign that was much healthier than the reality.
We've spent this episode talking about this moment in December
of twenty twenty two, when the New York Times reporting
kind of blows the story open and then everyone is
trying to figure out what else they could find out
(33:55):
in the wake of that.
Speaker 1 (33:56):
Right, it might quibble with your phrasing of that. It
doesn't seem like the Times blows the story open. It's
more like they find a crack and that the sad
may be a fairly big one, but a crack, and
that the sod that he has created about this super
successful businessman that he is. And it's like, then all
these other people are kind of like peering into the
crack and being like, what else is in there?
Speaker 2 (34:18):
Yeah, No, you're right, And I will say that this
is really just the beginning of what will be uncovered
about George Santos, and ultimately this is a story of
personal betrayal. Coming up on the next episode of Deep Cover.
George Santos.
Speaker 12 (34:35):
His mom is pretty central his campaign. He called her
a Wall Street executive. He said that she escaped the
South Tower during nine to eleven. He said that she
was a big political actor.
Speaker 6 (34:47):
There are a few people in this world you should
not lie to. You're a lawyer, your doctor, and your
communications director.
Speaker 1 (34:55):
This series is produced by Amy Gaines McQuaid and Joey
fish Ground. Our editor is Karen Chakerji. Our executive producer
is Jacob Smith, mastering by Jake Gorski, fact checking by
Anica Robbins. Our show art was designed by Sean Carney.
Music in this episode is from Luis Gerra and Epidemic
(35:15):
Sound Special thanks to Sarah Nix, Eric Sandler, and Greta Cone.
I'm Jake calpern
Pushkin. Okay, so, how are you going to start this?
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Well, I'm really excited. This is kind of new for us.
Speaker 1 (00:27):
Absolutely a little role reversal. Amy gains McQuaid as my producer.
She's worked on the past four seasons of deep Cover.
It may not have heard Amy's voice about in effect
you did, because when we do a season of deep Cover,
Amy's the one that reads through all thousand pages of
the court transcript and knows every last detail. She's the
(00:49):
one who helps me track down sources and wed through
hours of interviews to make the episodes that you've heard.
So while we're hard at work on the next season
of deep Cover, we have a special mini series for
you in a brand new format. About a year ago.
Amy comes to me and says, look, there's this story
I really want to report. A story that took place
(01:10):
in fact where Amy grown up, A story about a
man who may just be one of the greatest liars
of all time, which got my attention because it sounded
an awful lot like a deep Cover story unfolding in
real time.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
George Anthony de Volder Santos, Oh.
Speaker 3 (01:30):
Good morning, chabach allom too, everybody.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
This is him speaking to the Republican Jewish Coalition in
twenty twenty two.
Speaker 3 (01:38):
I'm a first generation born American, like many in our
great nation. My parents came to this country in search
of the American dream.
Speaker 4 (01:45):
Today.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
He ran for Congress to represent New York's third District
on Long Island, which is where I grew up. And
a huge part of his message was this that he
was the embodiment of the American dream. And that message
worked because he won.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
Only in this country can the little boy born in
a basement apartment in Jackson Heights, Queens in New York
City become a United States congressman at thirty four?
Speaker 1 (02:13):
Okay, interesting, So I know there's a lot more that
he said on the campaign trail, but can you just
give me the recap.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
So the version of George Santos that he sold on
the campaign trail was that George Stantos was a successful
businessman working in the financial industry. He claimed that he'd
worked for Goldman, Sachs and City Group. He claimed that
he had gone to college at Baruch and NYU. He
(02:40):
had also told some stories about his personal life.
Speaker 4 (02:44):
I'm very proud of my Jewish heritage. I'm very proud
of my grandparents' story.
Speaker 2 (02:49):
Claiming Jewish heritage and said that some of his family
members had survived the Holocaust. Here he is speaking to
a reporter for a Jewish news service.
Speaker 4 (02:59):
I'm so proud to be able to keep our family
going forward and showing that not only did we survive,
but now I'm able to go advocate and fight for
other Jewish people all across my my district.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
So the story that he told was an inspiring one.
Here he was the son of Brazilian immigrants who had
built this impressive life for himself, living in New York
City as an openly gay man, working on Wall Street,
getting into politics, and it seemed like this moment when
he won would just be the cherry on top. He
(03:33):
was going to be a congressman.
Speaker 1 (03:35):
I mean, it's inspiring. I'm kind of inspired hearing it.
Speaker 2 (03:39):
But in the coming weeks and months, another narrative would
start to emerge, a different version of George Santos, one
that was far more alarming. And if it were true,
then this was a man who lied, cheated, and stole
from people who trusted him, basically one man with two faces,
(04:02):
and it left a lot of people, including myself, wondering
who is the real George Santos. I think the thing
that a lot of people might remember is the New
York Times story that broke in December of twenty twenty two,
because it was pretty explosive.
Speaker 1 (04:21):
Yeah, I remember that headline.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
The story revealed that Santos had essentially fabricated a lot
of information on his resume. But through my reporting, I've
been finding that that story was really just the beginning.
So George Santos is actually scheduled to go to trial
in just a few weeks in September. He's facing a
whole bunch of charges, wirefraud, money laundering, falsifying records, identity theft,
(04:49):
a whole bunch. I've been talking with lots of people
to essentially try and figure out how did George Santos
go from lies about where he went to school and
where he worked to allegations of serious federal crimes, crimes
that could land him in prison for roughly two decades,
and just how deep to his go. This is deep
(05:11):
Cover George Santos, Episode one the campaign. Jake, I want
to go back in time to that moment when the
New York Times story broke, because that's when the cracks
(05:31):
in Santos's facade really start to show. Okay, So two
journalists at the New York Times, their names are Grace
Ashford and Michael Gold, they come out with this massive story.
It's called who is Rep. Elect George Santos? His resume
may be largely fiction. The headline from this story is really,
(05:54):
maybe this guy isn't who he claimed to be? And
that for me was a moment where I heard from
basically everyone in my life who knew I was from
Long Island and knew that I worked on stories like this,
and just you know, asking me, what the fuck what
happened here? Who is this guy? And how did he
(06:15):
get elected? He's, you know, living this double life essentially
who he says he is in public, but who he
actually is in private. And one person who is in
the center of this mess was George Santos's communications director.
Her name is Nasa Woomer. Do you remember where you
were when the New York Times story broke? Oh?
Speaker 5 (06:36):
I do?
Speaker 6 (06:37):
I know exactly where. I was actually coming out of
the Starbucks and it broke, and I was heading into
our office right by the State House.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
And the timing here is really interesting because she actually
accepted the job right before the New York Times story broke.
Speaker 6 (06:57):
Everyone is sending like, Niassa, have you seen this? Oh
my god, is this the guy you're working for? My
stomach had dropped, and I thought, what the well, I
don't want to say the F bomb, but but that's
what I'm thinking.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
At this point, like how many days on the job
is she?
Speaker 2 (07:13):
By the way, so Nesa hasn't actually started working for
Santos in that moment. She's still working in Boston for
the Republican administration there, so she's not actually even in
touch with George Santos. But she did hear through the
grapevine through some staffer that a story about Santos would
be coming.
Speaker 6 (07:34):
I already knew there was going to be a hit piece,
but my understanding was that this was just going to
be We thought it was going to be a traditional
hit piece of conservative Republican Flip's Democrat seat.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
But of course that was not the New York Times
story at all. The New York Times story made clear
that a lot of the stories that George Santos had
told on the campaign trail were at best inaccurate, at
worst entirely fabricated. And so after the story publishes, Santos
comes out with this statement through his attorney that says
(08:09):
it's no surprise that Congressman elect Santos has enemies at
The New York Times who are attempting to smear his
good name with these defamatory allegations.
Speaker 6 (08:19):
I even spoke with the chief of Stuff and he
said he's speaking with his lawyers. They're going to handle it.
And I just said, okay, well, like they need to
handle it immediately, because you know, this is this is
really bad.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
And is Santo's freaking out at this point.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
So I can't vouch for how Santos is feeling because
I have not spoken with him directly.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
We've tried, yes.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
Yes, we've reached out to him for comment. So far
he's declined those requests. But Santos appears to have been
attempting some damage control. He's not giving a ton of interviews,
but he does grant one to Fox News and it's
a guest anchor, so it is Tulca Gabbard conducting the interview.
Speaker 7 (09:02):
First question I really want to ask you now that
all this has been revealed, is what does the word
integrity mean to you?
Speaker 3 (09:11):
Well, Tulsi, thank you for having me, you know, to
answer your question. Integrity is very important, and bellis What
does it mean?
Speaker 5 (09:18):
Though?
Speaker 2 (09:19):
What does it mean?
Speaker 7 (09:19):
Because the meaning of the word actually matters in practice.
Speaker 3 (09:24):
Of course, it means to carry yourself in an honorable way.
And I made a mistake, and I think humans are
flawed and we all make mistakes.
Speaker 2 (09:32):
Tulsi, this is.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
Fox News and he's a Republican and he's getting very
hostile treatment here. So, I mean, lord knows what would
happen if he had gone on MSNBC or even CNN.
I'm wondering how is this playing out with his constituents.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
Yeah, I mean, I remember the reaction was pretty swift.
Speaker 5 (09:55):
George Chantlis's campaign last year was a campaign of decei, lies, fabrication.
He deceived the voters of the third Congressional district.
Speaker 2 (10:07):
That's Joe Chiro, head of the Republican Party in Nasa County.
This is from a press conference they held where he,
along with other New York Republicans, actually ask for Santos' resignation.
Speaker 8 (10:19):
There's absolutely no way mister Santos can be an effective
member of Congress and represent the people who elected him.
Speaker 1 (10:30):
One of the questions I have is like, talk to
me about this district that elects him.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
Yeah. So Santos ran in New York's third congressional district,
which if you've ever looked at a political map, you
know these districts get drawn in a kind of crazy,
nonsensical way. When you look at the district itself, it
holds part of Nasa County, which is where I grew up,
and specifically in my neighborhood, I can say it's a
lot of working class folks, so people who commute into
(11:01):
New York City every day, cops, firefighters, teachers. It also
includes the north shore of Long Island, which is like
Gatspeak country. There's lots of big houses and old money.
And over the years the district has changed, the lines
have been redrawn, but by the time that Santos was running,
the district included a little sliver of Queens which is
(11:23):
actually where Santos grew up.
Speaker 1 (11:25):
It's funny because when you describe it, I totally almost
get why he would have to be a guy, that
would be a chameleon, that would have to be able
to play a lot of different parts, because his constituency
is just like a crazy cross section of America.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
Yeah, and I think when George Santos is running for office,
he is building the narrative around himself that he started
from nothing and built himself into a successful businessman in
the financial industry. So he claims that he was working
for Goldman Sachs, he claims that he was working for
(12:02):
City Group.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
None of these things are true. None of that is
a crime.
Speaker 2 (12:07):
That's true. But it's around the same moment in time
that new reports are emerging that Santos is being investigated
for actual crimes he may have committed.
Speaker 9 (12:18):
The Republican District Attorney of Nassau County says she's looking
into whether any of those fabrications amounted to crimes, and
federal prosecutors are also looking into Santos's financial disclosures. Stunning
revelations and questions about his personal and professional life continue
to come to light, including new questions about the money
(12:38):
he spent on his campaign.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
We'll be right back. So when the New York Times
story comes out, there are a number of things that
(13:05):
are exposed, but there are also a lot of questions remaining.
And so I think, you know, reporters, especially reporters who
are working in DC can kind of smell blood in
the water, right, and they're like, what else can I
find out about this guy?
Speaker 10 (13:20):
I was trying to cover the New York area because
I'm a New Yorker, and I understood that there was
this buzz that there were some members that might actually
overcome some of the Democratic nominees that were running for Congress.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
Okay, Jake. So this is Kadea Goba, and she's a
political reporter for Semaphore, which is this sort of newer
journalism outlet.
Speaker 10 (13:43):
So I set out in October to interview a bunch
of them. George Santos did not give me access after
he won. He was like, he became a challenge to me.
I needed to talk to this man.
Speaker 2 (13:56):
Kadia actually worked at BuzzFeed before she was with Semaphore,
but she hasn't always been a journalist. This is a
second career.
Speaker 10 (14:04):
I was in the clothing industry for over two decades
as a sales rep. So this is sort of a
midlife crisis that worked out anyways.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
So near the end of twenty twenty two, Kadilla is
working as a reporter on Capitol Hill and she meets
George Santos, in person. She gave him her card. You know,
I'm a reporter working on the hill, would love to
be in touch, but he doesn't give her his But
she gets his phone number anyways, and she wants to
(14:37):
talk to him, so she's calling a lot, even though
he would never pick up until this one time.
Speaker 10 (14:43):
I remember very distinctly he either called me back or
picked up the phone this one time and said, I
remember not giving you my phone number, which I thought
was very funny because he understood who had been calling him,
but just was intentionally ignoring me.
Speaker 2 (14:59):
Whatever.
Speaker 10 (15:00):
Fine, He eventually picked up the phone, and he told
me that at that time he was going on Fox,
that I shouldn't tell anyone, but maybe he could talk
to me afterwards.
Speaker 1 (15:11):
Wait, this is the same interview that we heard at
the top with Tulci Gabbard.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
Yep.
Speaker 10 (15:17):
So I watched the interview and it went terribly.
Speaker 2 (15:22):
My question is do you have no shame?
Speaker 3 (15:25):
Look, I understand everybody wants to knitpick at me. I'm
going to reassure this once and for all. I'm not
a facade. I'm not a persona.
Speaker 10 (15:34):
You could tell he was uncomfortable. It wasn't what he expected.
I think he thought this was going to be a
good opportunity for him to talk about what happened or
explain his situation, and none of that happened. So of
course I kind of just texted him after the interview
was over and kind of said like, are you free
(15:55):
or do you want to talk? And he texted back
like something like get your pen and paper ready.
Speaker 1 (16:04):
Wow. That kind of surprises me. Given how badly it went,
you think maybe he would be a little guns Oh.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
I think Kadilla's view was the opposite that. You know,
he thought that the Fox interview would be a good
opportunity and then when it went so poorly, he's just
kind of panicking, and he's he's open to talking to
people because he wants to clear the air. Right, he's
in crisis mode, I see.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
So yeah, they just get back up to the plate
again kind of thing.
Speaker 10 (16:31):
And sure enough, like maybe fifteen minutes later, he called me,
and I think I talked to him as he drove
from the Fox studio home.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
So what is your goal in that interview? What is
the big question you want to ask?
Speaker 10 (16:45):
Clearly I want to ask where he got his money from,
because that was like the big discrepancy.
Speaker 2 (16:49):
Right, He had presented himself on the campaign trail as
this wealthy, successful individual. How much money does he have
really and what is the source of that money?
Speaker 1 (17:01):
So this is what Kadia is talking about, the big
the discrepancy and where did the money come from?
Speaker 2 (17:06):
Yeah, and Kadia is following this, and I think it
would be fair to say that a lot of reporters
were fixated on this question at the time of you know, okay,
George Santos has been exposed as a potential liar. What
else could he be lying about? It appears on paper
like George Santos has a lot of money, but is
that actually the case? And it's around this time that
(17:28):
many people start looking at his campaign finance filings. And
one of those people is a guy named Sarav Ghosh.
Speaker 11 (17:35):
I'm the director of Federal Campaign Finance Reform at Campaign
Legal Center, and what I work on every day are
the laws that govern how people raise and spend money
when they're trying to convince others to vote for them.
Speaker 2 (17:51):
He was a lawyer at the FEC, which is the
Federal Election Commission, and it's basically Sarov's job to find
people violating campaign finance laws.
Speaker 1 (18:01):
I see, so he's like a nonprofit do good or
private detective exactly.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
So Siav and his team would eventually file a complaint
with the Federal Election Commission, and some of the things
that they flag actually show up later on in the
federal indictment against Santos.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
Interesting, I see.
Speaker 2 (18:22):
Uh, you know that week between Christmas and New Year's
when basically no one wants to work. Yeah, definitely that
week Surav and his team were actually surprisingly busy. They
started reviewing santosis campaign finance filings, and a few things
stick out to Surrov right away.
Speaker 11 (18:41):
There was this glaring disconnect between his personal finances, as
he had reported on financial disclosure form that every House
candidate is required to file, and his campaign reports, which
indicated he had loaned his own campaign a ton of money,
a six figure sum north of seven hundred thousand dollars.
Speaker 2 (19:04):
Wow.
Speaker 11 (19:05):
So it's it's very I won't say comment, it's not
unheard for a candidate to loan his own campaign that
kind of money, or even to just give it to
the campaign outright, but you typically expect to see backing
that up a financial disclosure that shows, well, this person
is wealthy, right, they have the assets, they have the income.
(19:27):
With Santos, it was the exact opposite.
Speaker 2 (19:30):
So one thing quickly that I should just mention to you.
Jake Santos actually ran for Congress twice. He ran first
in twenty twenty. He lost. SIREV look through those records too,
he claimed to loan his unsuccessful twenty twenty campaign something
like eighty thousand dollars. That didn't really make sense because
(19:52):
in twenty twenty he had personal assets and income of
just fifty five thousand dollars according to his self reporting,
So it was just fifty five thousand dollars.
Speaker 11 (20:02):
Fifty five thousand, yeah, wow, So it made no sense
how somebody with fifty five thousand dollars could even afford
to loan his campag eighty thousand dollars.
Speaker 2 (20:11):
So what Suraba is outlining here is that alongside those
campaign filings, he's supposed to also be reporting what kind
of income he's making, what kind of assets he has.
And Surav's looking at this and just truly saying the
math isn't adding up. And then when you get to
twenty twenty two, when he's running the second time, he's
(20:31):
loaning his campaign even more money that there's one loan
in particular of five hundred thousand dollars. In March of
twenty twenty two, Santos files a disclosure form that lists
his assets and income. In this document, you can see
he lists an apartment in Brazil that he values somewhere
(20:51):
between half a million and a million dollars. He says
he has somewhere between one hundred and two hundred and
fifty thousand dollars in a checking account. And then there's
this business called the Devolder Organization, and he values the
Devolder Organization as somewhere between a million and five million dollars.
Speaker 11 (21:11):
That's one of his surnames as de Vold. And he
claimed that this organization, which was founded within months of
losing in the twenty twenty election, he claimed that this
company was basically an overnight success story.
Speaker 1 (21:26):
And he was.
Speaker 11 (21:27):
Very ambiguous and sketchy, quite quite honestly about what the
company did and how it made so much money overnight.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
So he's filing these disclosures with the House, is that correct?
Speaker 2 (21:42):
Correct?
Speaker 1 (21:43):
Basically saying like, look, I've got this apartment in Brazil,
I've got this company over here, Like yeah, I'm a
wealthy man like I am more than capable of loading
my campaign this money. And my question is was that true?
Did he actually have any of these assets or was
this also part of his fabulous's tale.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
So Sarav is looking at this and to be very clear,
sav does not believe the financial disclosure form. I think
also because he's looking at the previous forms and just saying,
how did this materialize overnight? Right? And he's also suspicious
of like what's driving this income? And that is a
question that Kadella, the reporter you heard from earlier, is
(22:25):
also very interested in getting an answer to you know,
what is going on with George Santos and his money,
Where is this alleged income coming from? And just to say,
if it's not already clear, all of this is happening
at the same time. So we have Sarav, who's our watchdog.
Him and his team are digging into these campaign finance
(22:47):
reports in the week between Christmas and New Year's and
that same week, Kadea, the clothing sales rep turned journalist,
is trying to get that interview with George Santos and
she's going to finally get it in the moment after
his disastrous interview on Fox, and so he's actually calling
(23:09):
her on the drive home from the Fox studio.
Speaker 10 (23:13):
This is also eight o'clock at night, So I'm like
in my apartment. You know, Congress has been out for
weeks now, and I was like, I can't believe this
is happening. I'm actually interviewing this guy that everyone is
talking about. So I was working with like a Hanvis
and kind of was just like, so, how'd you.
Speaker 2 (23:33):
Get all of this money? That was like my first question.
Speaker 10 (23:36):
He gave this scenario where like, okay, let's say someone
buys a boat and they don't want to go through
like the normal chain, they want a smaller broken tree.
I come in and I kind of negotiate the deal
and you know, introduce them to potential sellers. And he
called this thing capital intro. He kept saying capital Intro,
(23:57):
and I was like, well, what is that? And he
explained that capital introduction you basically just connect hedge fund
people with investors.
Speaker 2 (24:07):
Essentially. What is.
Speaker 12 (24:10):
That?
Speaker 1 (24:10):
Doesn't even really make sense to me, Like how does?
But okay, so he's like he's like a connector. I mean,
had the guy ever actually sold a boat?
Speaker 2 (24:21):
The New York Times would later report that the FBI
was curious about this question too, and in fact, there
was at least one yacht sale that Santos brokered while
he was running for Congress that there are a lot
of questions about. But that's about all we know, Okay,
But jumping back to December twenty twenty two, Kadella just
(24:42):
had that interview with George Santos and he told her
that he works in capital introduction. This is what Kadea
reports attributing to George Santos, of course, and that brings
us back to Sarav, who reads Kadia's reporting, And for Sarav,
it's just not really checking out. And I think even
(25:04):
if what Santos told Kadea is true, maybe he did
sell a boat or two, but from Sarab's perspective, this
still doesn't really account for the massive cash windfall that
he appears to have almost overnight, I see. And so
Sarav's question, and what he's trying to piece together through
(25:24):
the reporting that's emerging is what is the full picture
of Devolder? You know, what kind of business is Devolder doing?
What kind of money is Devolder bringing in right?
Speaker 1 (25:35):
And is it enough business that it could explain these
massive contributions of the campaign. What half a million dollars
right exactly?
Speaker 2 (25:43):
And so Sarab is just trying to connect these dots.
And there's two things that Sirov is fairly suspicious of.
The first is that Santos is not listing any clients
on these disclosure forms, and you know, Siav and multiple
others flag that because if you're in this so called
capital introduction industry, you should have clients. That's basically the
(26:07):
whole business model. So that's concerning. The second is that
Sirov is also suspicious about the timing of all of this.
He notices that Santos declares his candidacy one month and
then he incorporates de Volder the next month, and then
(26:28):
he's making loans to his campaign the month after that.
Speaker 1 (26:31):
That's fucking crazy.
Speaker 2 (26:35):
Like how many boats do you have to sell? A Yeah,
make that up.
Speaker 1 (26:40):
I mean, that's like the greatest success story of all
the time if it's true. Dude sold some yachts mighty quick.
Speaker 2 (26:49):
And there's something about that that's just not sitting right
with Sirov, and that leads him to wonder, Okay, where
is Santos actually getting this money from and he has
a couple theories about that.
Speaker 11 (26:59):
So in our mind, this was a possible straw donor scheme.
A straw donor scheme is basically a scheme in which
someone is making a contribution to a candidate or a
pack through someone else. So Santos, in our mind, was
getting money from some external source. And that could be
(27:20):
a corporation, it could be a billionaire, it could be
a foreign national. So any of these possibilities struck us
as deeply problematic in our mind. You know, it wasn't
his money, it was someone else, and not knowing is
part of the problem, maybe the biggest problem.
Speaker 1 (27:38):
It's interesting to me because to me, I get why
Sarab thinks that it's a straw donor, because that's like,
that's his his his purview, that's his job. He's looking
at people who are skirting finance campaign finance law. Right,
he doesn't realize that he's actually going after like a hustler.
Is there a paper shail that shows like a deposit
(28:01):
to his campaign coffers.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
That's not required. Okay, so he can say I loaned
this out to my campaign, but he doesn't actually have
to back that up. With a wire transfer or a
bank account showing that money hits right. And so it's
a requirement for transparency, but it's limited, and so he's
(28:24):
able to stay on paper. Yes, I am a wealthy businessman,
and I was able to loan my campaign this six
figure sum.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
I see, okay, because where I thought this was going
was that the loan was bullshit and this was just
a way for him to make money.
Speaker 2 (28:46):
Well, you might be right about that, so, Jake. What
the government has alleged is that Santos lied in these
campaign finance reports in a sense inflating his fundraising numbers.
So prosecutors alleged that at least some of these loans
that Santos said he made to his campaign did not happen,
(29:11):
and they also alleged that he fudged these numbers for
a very specific reason.
Speaker 11 (29:19):
Santos he understood that his campaign had to report earning
a certain amount or report raising a certain amount of
money to get support from the party, and so that
was something that the investigations revealed, is that he had
emails where he was making it clear that he was
(29:40):
trying to establish, you know, that he'd hit those benchmarks
and so qualified for the kind of support from the
Republican Party that only folks with that amount of financial
viability would be able to receive.
Speaker 1 (29:55):
If I'm understanding this correctly, and this guy is coming
in and selling a whole story about how much money
he made and how much money he's loaned his his campaign,
and it smells like bullshit. The question is to what end?
(30:17):
And if I'm understanding this correctly, he was actually trying
to hustle the Republican Party basically, just to convince them
that he was healthier and stronger and a bigger baller
than he really was.
Speaker 2 (30:28):
Yeah, and I think that there's a clear goal here,
and this is supported by what the government outlines in
the indictment. I mean, what they allege is that Santos
and his campaign treasurer Nancy Marx did this in order
to gain support from the Republican Party. And Nancy is
the person on his staff that is responsible for those filings. Now,
(30:51):
I should tell you Nancy Marx took a plea deal
last year for her role in some of this, and
I expect to hear a lot more about all of
this at trial. I mean, this program that Santos receives
by hitting these fundraising benchmarks, right, Yeah, he gets support
(31:12):
with ads, he gets support splitting the cost of polls,
focus groups, what they call coordinated expenditures, which is basically like,
we're going to spend money with you and for you, right,
And so if he's trying to get into office, he
understandably wants this support from the Republican Party.
Speaker 1 (31:33):
Does sirob think that any money actually even existed like
this five hundred thousand dollars? Was it ever real or
is it just all on paper just like a full
on like charade.
Speaker 2 (31:49):
So this is something that I've dug into a lot,
and the story is actually really complicated. What the government
alleges is that at a certain point in time related
to that twenty twenty two campaign, George Santos claimed to
have loaned his own campaign five hundred thousand dollars. What
the government alleges is that loan never happened, No money
(32:11):
changed hands in that moment. Now, some reporting has indicated
that maybe later on some money might have gotten moved
around to try and potentially make the books look better.
But what the government is charging in their indictment is
that this loan did not happen when the campaign said
(32:33):
it happened, and that it happened for a specific reason,
and that was to hit these campaign benchmarks, the fundraising benchmarks,
in order to get this support at a critical moment
in his campaign.
Speaker 1 (32:47):
I get it, you know, he using his personal charm
and potentially his lies is like getting popular support. But
it's one thing to claim you were a successful businessman.
But then by loaning yourself this money or appearing to
you're passing the second test, which is he has the
war chest to make this work, We're going to supplement
(33:07):
that money. Being the Republican Party and really helped push
him over the line.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
And it actually goes a step further. What the government
is alleging is that he that Santos and Nancy Marks
also conspired to put fake donations on the books in
the names of people who never either never gave or
didn't given that amount. What it looks like is that
they were really manipulating these reports to present a version
(33:34):
of Santos's campaign that was much healthier than the reality.
We've spent this episode talking about this moment in December
of twenty twenty two, when the New York Times reporting
kind of blows the story open and then everyone is
trying to figure out what else they could find out
(33:55):
in the wake of that.
Speaker 1 (33:56):
Right, it might quibble with your phrasing of that. It
doesn't seem like the Times blows the story open. It's
more like they find a crack and that the sad
may be a fairly big one, but a crack, and
that the sod that he has created about this super
successful businessman that he is. And it's like, then all
these other people are kind of like peering into the
crack and being like, what else is in there?
Speaker 2 (34:18):
Yeah, No, you're right, And I will say that this
is really just the beginning of what will be uncovered
about George Santos, and ultimately this is a story of
personal betrayal. Coming up on the next episode of Deep Cover.
George Santos.
Speaker 12 (34:35):
His mom is pretty central his campaign. He called her
a Wall Street executive. He said that she escaped the
South Tower during nine to eleven. He said that she
was a big political actor.
Speaker 6 (34:47):
There are a few people in this world you should
not lie to. You're a lawyer, your doctor, and your
communications director.
Speaker 1 (34:55):
This series is produced by Amy Gaines McQuaid and Joey
fish Ground. Our editor is Karen Chakerji. Our executive producer
is Jacob Smith, mastering by Jake Gorski, fact checking by
Anica Robbins. Our show art was designed by Sean Carney.
Music in this episode is from Luis Gerra and Epidemic
(35:15):
Sound Special thanks to Sarah Nix, Eric Sandler, and Greta Cone.
I'm Jake calpern
Host
Jake Halpern
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!