Congress is set to vote on whether it will expel Rep. George Santos (R-NY) after a damning House Ethics Committee report outlined a series of allegations of misconduct against him. Santos, for his part, is vigorously fighting to retain his seat after a group of other lawmakers from Long Island introduced the resolution to remove him from the lower chamber.

During a hearing on Thursday, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) addressed his colleagues and explained why he plans to vote against the measure, referring to other members of Congress who were in similar, or even worse, positions and still remained in their seats.

He started by pointing out that historically, “there’s only two ways you get expelled, you get convicted of a crime or you participated in the Civil War,” and that “neither apply to George Santos.”

Gaetz said he is not defending Santos, but trying to safeguard “the very precedent that my colleagues are willing to shatter.”

The lawmaker continued, noting that Santos has not yet been convicted of a crime and managed to make a jab at Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), who got away with pulling a fire alarm to disrupt a legislative session last month:

Mr. Santos hasn't been convicted of anything, but we haven't even moved to expel the people who have. Mr. Bowman plead guilty to a misdemeanor for his little fire-alarm stunt weeks ago. So while the Ethics Committee is marching to throw George Santos out of Congress, they take no action as to someone who actually plead guilty to a crime. What's that all about?

Gaetz also brought up former Rep. Duncan Hunter, who “used campaign money on girlfriends and trips and home improvements and all sorts of personal lavishes” and “pled guilty to a number of those crimes and continued to serve in Congress.”

I will be voting AGAINST the resolution to expel @RepSantosNY03 from the House of Representatives.

Here’s why 👇 pic.twitter.com/glONsRxvhy

— Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) November 30, 2023

The controversy stems from allegations that Santos is being accused of committing campaign finance fraud and misusing campaign funds. The Ethics Committee documented extensive examples of poor bookkeeping and instances of defrauding donors.

The report details numerous allegations against Santos, who is already facing several federal charges related to use of campaign funds and defrauding donors. The document states that Santos “sought to fraudulently exploit every aspect of his House candidacy for his own personal financial profit” and that he “blatantly stole from his campaign.

Santos is believed to have spent campaign funds on Botox, spas, plastic surgery, designer clothing, and other luxuries. He also spent over $2,000 in campaign funds on trips to Atlantic City and over $3,000 on Airbnb while vacationing in the Hamptons.

The lawmaker is also being accused of withholding or falsifying “information on statutorily required disclosures of his campaign and personal finances to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and the House.”

According to the report, Santos also reported fabricated loans to his political committees to persuade donors and party committees to continue donating to his campaign. He later diverted these funds for personal use.

Even further, the Ethics Committee alleges that Santos showed a consistent pattern of obstructive behavior and lack of cooperation with the investigation. He tried to avoid accountability by providing limited documents, often delayed, and failed to voluntarily testify before the committee while also throwing off the investigation through false statements and half-truths.

Santos has been under scrutiny since winning his seat in Congress. He has already survived one vote to expel him. Nevertheless, Gaetz’s comments underscore that the outcome of the upcoming vote will hinge on one question: Is Congress willing to jettison a long-held tradition, when it comes to removing members from its chamber?

In this current era in American politics, it stands to reason that there is a very distinct possibility that those seeking to boot Santos might just be on board with redefining this historical norm. On the other hand, other lawmakers might decide it is better to wait and see whether Santos will be convicted of a crime.