George Santos, the ex-New York congressman convicted of fraud and other charges, is facing sentencing. He subsequently pleaded guilty to both wire fraud and aggravated identity theft. In a recent letter to the court, Santos said he is deeply ashamed and accepted full responsibility for his actions. He directly addressed the criticisms of his social media attacks and the prosecution’s efforts to seek a 24-year prison sentence for him.
Santos, 36, pleaded guilty on Tuesday. He did contest the prosecution’s claim that he has made no effort to pay back the $580,000 owed under the terms of his plea agreement. He called out his social media posts for being utilized “as a sword against him” throughout his legal battle. Now, prosecutors are using these posts in an attempt to sway a judge toward a seven-year sentence. They note that Santos has yet to show a single shred of true contrition for his conduct.
To reduce the impact he must face, Santos’s defense team is arguing for a sentence of two years behind bars. He argues that the seven-year proposed term would be too extreme. “Saying I’m sorry doesn’t require me to sit quietly while these prosecutors try to drop an anvil on my head,” Santos stated, emphasizing his view that he is being unfairly treated.
Throughout the legal process, Santos brazenly confessed to the lies and thievery. He admitted to defrauding people during his entire scam run for the United States House of Representatives, New York’s third congressional district. Not only did prosecutors ignore this admission, they called him “unrepentant,” meaning that they think his apologies are insincere.
In a post I wouldn’t call retrospective on social media, Santos recently described himself as a “scapegoat,” making him even more difficult to read on the issue of accountability. He expressed that contesting the severity of a proposed sentence does not equate to denying guilt, stating, “Contesting the severity of a proposed sentence is not the same as contesting guilt, and punishing protected speech because it questions punishment should trouble anyone who values fair prosecution over personal vindication.”
The court will take a variety of factors into account as it decides Santos’s fate at his still-to-be-scheduled sentencing. His attorneys argue that he’s made considerable efforts to rectify the decades-long financial harm he caused. At the same time, federal prosecutors continue to stress the egregiousness of his offenses and the effect they still have on victims.