So

credit card fraud, it's a pretty big deal. How much are we talking about money wise here?

there's one example in particular that's laid out in the indictment, and to protect this person's identity, it's anonymized. So they're only referred to as contributor number 12. So this all begins when contributor number 12 sends their credit card info to the Santos campaign. And the Santos team charges it for more than they should on that day. And this is an issue for two reasons. The first being that contributor number 12 did not authorize this overcharge, but also it's over the limit of what's allowed, which back in 2022 was $2,900 that you could give once for the primary, and then again in the general election. Okay,

so in theory that's $5,800 for the two. Now, what's the deal with contributor number 12? How much over was this person charged?

contributor number 12 was charged $15,800. So almost $16,000 in contributions, which is $10,000 over what is technically allowed.

Wow. I mean, is that... Is that a mistake? You want to say like, right?

Did this

happen more than once? It

did. So Santos and his team attempted over $40,000 of contributions from Contributor 12 over the course of a few months. So they repeatedly charged his card. And then we see an even more brazen act when the indictment lays out that Santos just started sending money to his own personal account directly. Again, without any authorization from contributor number 12. So in one case, they used their credit card billing information to transfer more than $11,000 to Santos's personal bank account. He's

like a kid in a candy store with no one watching, it seems like. And

this is also the first time in the indictment we hear about something that prosecutors call company number one. At a certain point during the 2022 campaign, Santos uses the credit card billing information of contributor 12, charges $12,000, and it hits the account of company number one.

What is company number one? So

the House Ethics Report and other reporting has identified company number one as redstone strategies. Redstone strategies is all over this indictment as

company number one. And let me guess, it was formed just before the election.

It was formed in November 2021. So yes, around the time that Santos is mounting his campaign for the 2022 election. It was formed in Florida. Santos is a major stakeholder of Redstone Strategies. He has tried to distance himself, but his fingerprints appear to be all over this company. they are charged $12,000 to Redstone Strategies. And then it seems like what prosecutors allege in the indictment is that most of that $12,000 goes from Redstone Strategies directly to Santos's personal bank account again.

Okay, so I have a question about contributor number 12. How did this person not notice that their credit card was being charged excessively by tens of thousands of dollars? Like at my house, when I see like an Amazon charge for $9.99, they don't recognize, I'm like, huh. So what's going on here? Yeah,

it's a good question. I wish I had an answer for you.

Okay.

And I should say that there are two other donors who each made contributions of $25,000 to Redstone Strategies. That is a problem for multiple reasons. And Redstone Strategies was not set up to accept political contributions. It was not actually registered with the proper authorities.

Where does that money go?

So they were told that money would go to pay for advertising, but it looks like that money, almost all of it, so $50,000 total, went directly to Santos's personal accounts. In the indictment, they say that that went to cash withdrawals, personal purchases of luxury designer clothing, credit card payments, a car payment, payments on personal debts. The house report gets even more specific. They claim that some of that $50,000 was actually spent at Hermes, the fancy designer store, over $4,000. Right,

which is a legitimate business expense if you're going to convince donors at the Villa Guerrilla that you are the man.

Yeah, maybe he thought that that was justified. You know, so much of Santos's campaign was trying to keep up appearances and court the Cathys of the world, right? And show them that he was on their level. And so maybe he felt like he needed to engage in this kind of spending keep up this persona. By the time that that second indictment is out and the House ethics report has been published, a lot of people are just done with George Santos for at least some Republicans in Congress. They've seen enough. And they have one more vote to oust him from Congress in December of 2023.