The company was called Cleaner 123, and over the course of four months it received nearly $11,000 (R$57,300) from the campaign of George Santos, the elected representative from New York who seems to have invented entire sections of his life.
The expenses were listed as “staff apartment rent” on Santos’ campaign disclosure forms and gave the address of a modest suburban home on Long Island, New York. But a neighbor said Santos himself had lived there for months, and two others said they saw Santos and her husband coming and going, in possible violation of the rule prohibiting the use of campaign funds for personal expenses.
The payments to Cleaner 123 were among a series of unusual expenses documented in Santos’ campaign files that experts say could warrant closer scrutiny. There are also dozens of expenses pegged at US$199.99 (R$1,043) – one cent less than the amount for which federal law requires receipts.
Expenses include more than $40,000 (R$208,600) in air travel, a figure so exorbitant that it resembles the campaign records of party leaders in Congress, not a newly elected congressman who is still performing. to local voters.
It is not known whether the spending was in fact illegal or just unusual. Federal and local prosecutors this week said they would launch investigations into Santos’ finances and background.
Santos, a Republican, was elected in the 3rd Congressional District, a key district in Queens and Long Island, after a failed bid for the same seat in 2020. He has come under intense scrutiny after a New York Times investigation revealed that he distorted details of his academic resume, work history and properties, as well as a previously undisclosed criminal charge in Brazil.
The report also raised questions about Santos’ financial situation, which is reported to have improved dramatically since 2020, when he reported earning just $55,000 (R$287,000) a year.
Santos declined to give an interview to the Times. But in the ten days since the story was published, he has admitted an impressive array of falsehoods. Earlier this week, he told The New York Post that he denies any criminal conduct, saying: “My sins here are gilding my resume.”
On Thursday night (29), Joe Murray, attorney for Santos, said in a statement that some money was spent “recklessly” by a company that had been fired by the campaign more than a year ago, but that all spending was legal. . Payments to Cleaner 123 were for legitimate expenses on behalf of employees who moved to the district, he said, as well as hotels booked to house employees and people who helped with the campaign.
“Campaign expenses for team members, including travel, lodging and meals, are normal expenses for any competent campaign. The suggestion that the Santos campaign engaged in any irresponsible spending of funds is simply ludicrous,” Murray said.
Santos is expected to take office in Congress on Tuesday (2), when the Republicans will start a new term with a small majority in the Chamber of Deputies. While local Republican leaders condemned Santos’ cover-ups, those in Washington remained silent.
Questions arose about Santos’ residence when a reporter tried to contact him in Whitestone, Queens, the address listed on his voter registration. Santos’ former landlord said he had moved in August.
Santos told the Post that he was living in Huntington, Long Island, at his sister’s house. But court documents, as well as interviews with neighbors and a janitor, show she lives in Elmhurst, Queens.
Campaign disclosures, however, show that Santos paid Cleaner 123, which cites the house in Huntington as an address, nearly US$11,000 (R$57,300) in rent and a deposit. When contacted by phone, a Cleaner 123 representative confirmed that it was a cleaning company, but hung up before answering why he received rent from Santos
Many questions remain about Santos’ campaign spending: it is not clear what expenditures were made on behalf of the team, or for the candidate himself. Federal Election Commission (FEC) regulations say campaigns cannot pay their candidates’ personal expenses, including rent or utilities. Several campaign finance experts said paying rent to employees is unusual and could be a violation, though they said the FEC rarely acted in such cases.
Santos’ campaign files show other irregularities: he listed a flood of expenses below US$ 200 – more than 800 items in total –, a number that far surpassed that of candidates for similar offices. More than 30 of those payments came in just under the threshold at $199.99, listed as office supplies, restaurants and Uber, among other things. While FEC rules urge applicants to keep receipts for purchases under $200, applicants are only required to keep them for expenses above that amount.
Throughout the campaign, Santos spent US$30,000 (R$156,500) on hotels, US$40,000 (R$208,600) on airline tickets and US$14,000 (R$73,000) on services automobiles — and records suggest he also maintained a campaign vehicle.
The spending was funded from a fund of more than $3 million (R$15.6 million), accumulated by four fundraising committees during the 2022 election cycle. The money came from small donors, former Republican taxpayers in Long Island and other seats and campaign committees of other Republican candidates. The largest donors benefited Santos with the maximum amounts allowed, in some cases directly, in others through a Republican super PAC (political action committee) or the Republican National Congressional Campaign Committee.
Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist for consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said the spending was unusual. “Usually, a deputy candidate tries to spend as little as possible on accommodation and travel, because he needs that money for campaign purposes,” he said. “George Santos seems to be just living the luxurious lifestyle.”
With a wealth of experience honed over 4+ years in journalism, I bring a seasoned voice to the world of news. Currently, I work as a freelance writer and editor, always seeking new opportunities to tell compelling stories in the field of world news.
