 Is there any scenario in which you feel it is okay to lie? No, I don't think lying is excusable ever, period, right? There's no circumstance, especially if you're legislating for the American people right now. So what I might have done during the campaign does not reflect what is being done in the office. History has shown that the American people can pretty much forgive anything. But that starts with a sincere apology normally, a lot of remorse shown. Prevailing opinion is you have not yet shown that. You know, I don't know what you mean by that because I have shown... Well, you seem angry. I'm not angry. Not angry at all. I'm... Are you sorry? I've been... I've said I was sorry many times. I've behaved as if I'm sorry. Look, if you want to compare emotions, people show emotions differently. I am sorry. I'm deeply sorry. I feel that calls have been calling supporters to apologize directly to them for that. And you know, I don't know what is asked of me right now when you ask, Oh, you have not shown remorse or you don't seem to look sorry. I don't know what looking sorry looks like to you, Caitlin. It looks like you're resigning, George, but yet he still refuses to take real accountability. Now, he did recuse himself from his committee assignments, but I think that he knows that that alone is insufficient. 78% of his constituents want him to resign, but it's cool. He said sorry. All is forgiven. I don't think that it works that way. Maybe when you're like a preschooler, kindergarten, perhaps, although that's pushing it, that's sufficient. But when you are a member of Congress who lied to get into Congress, who lied to your constituents, and the overwhelming majority of them want you to resign, that is what real accountability looks like. And with a straight face, he honestly said these words, I don't think lying is excusable ever, period. Excuse me? What did you just say? You don't think you don't think that lying is excusable ever, period? You are George Santos. So I think that we're beyond that portion of this whole scandal. You should just own up to the fact that you are a compulsive liar and say, yes, I did lie. And while I think lying is wrong, perhaps I have a problem telling the truth. It's just part of my nature. I'm really working on myself. But all of this comes off as so disingenuous and unsurprisingly so because it's George Santos. Again, perhaps the biggest liar in the United States. Now, the part that really stood out to me was when the OAN host said, you seem angry. And he said, I'm not angry at all. Like it was so awkward, so cringe inducing that I felt like I wanted to jump out of my own skin. But more from this interview because, believe it or not, it gets better. What would you say, George, that you would have done differently? I wouldn't have lied about the education. Is that it? Is there anything else you can think of that you regret lying about? What do you even say about him? He doesn't understand the problem. You're still doing it, George. You're still lying. But now you're lying about lying. So there's just, he can't help himself. Again, he is a compulsive liar and it's like word vomit. He has to be deceitful. He has to be disingenuous. Now, in this next clip, he's going to, believe it or not, seriously try to portray himself as the victim, which to me is just hilarious, but nonetheless, let's hear him out. People should be judged under actions and not by trial by fire through the media, which is what I've experienced for the last couple of weeks. As you noted in your opening, you said that politicians have broken the fabric of trust with the American people. But that trust has been broken through betrayal in elections when they campaign on certain issues. And when they go into their offices, they behave and act and vote and deliver completely opposite of what they promised during the electoral process. So that's more so what I believe you're referencing to and to what the American people has learned to feel deception on. Well, the business of politics is littered at the highest levels with deceit, mistruth, corruption, of course. And this is kind of the time that you're now entering politics. So with that climate in mind, I guess where do you want to start? And is your story, your upbringing maybe? Okay, we don't need to see his response there. It's just very banal. I just wanted you to see the unintentionally hilarious way that the OAN host worded that question. You know, we're at a time where politics is at the height of deceit, mistruths, corruption, and it's also the same time that you're entering politics. I don't know if she intended for that to be funny, but the way that she had that serious look on her face as she low key dissed him was genuinely hilarious. So good job to that OAN journalist. I never thought that I would say this. But when you're like comparing a piece of shit to a mountain of shit, you can see the differences. You can smell that there is a difference between these two things. Now, he basically makes it seem as if he's the victim because people should be judged for their actions. Now you might question, well, isn't that what the media is doing? They're judging you for your actions? Oh, no, no, no. What he means is that actions are different from words. So if you do something physically, you punch someone, that's bad, but lying. I mean, sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me. So it doesn't matter. Brother, I need you to understand that to lie is to take an action. You are an adult. You are not a child. So to lie is no different than taking an action. So by calling out your lies and holding you accountable, you are being judged by the media for your actions. I mean, he's trying to differentiate between actions and lies, physical actions, non-physical actions, tomato, tomato. I mean, he's just, he's such a weasel and that became abundantly clear 10 seconds into this interview. Now he contends that other politicians, they've also broken the trust because the trust of the people because, quote, when they campaign on certain issues and when they go into their offices, they behave and act and vote and deliver completely opposite of what they promised during the electoral process. So maybe he lied about himself, but other politicians, they lie about priorities, specifically the priorities and promises that they make to their constituents. So which one is really worse in your opinion? Both. Both are bad. But we're not just talking about, you know, a politician pledging to support a particular policy so they can lock down some constituent group. Because yes, politicians lie all the time, hence why people don't trust politicians. But what you did is so much worse than that. And he's trying to portray himself as some principled warrior for the policy positions that he ran on. He made these promises to his constituents. And even though he lied to them, well, he's going to go to Congress and he's going to do what he set out to do, except you don't really have an agenda. I looked at his policy platform and it's like literally seven or eight paragraphs. You ready for it? Inflation bad, crime bad, taxes bad, energy independence good. We should do things to better prepare for the pandemic, but nothing specific. That's it. That's the extent of the policies that he ran on. But he's trying to make it seem as if, you know, he came into Congress with a mission and he had these goals and priorities and he's not leaving until he finishes the job. You represent nothing. You're hollow. You're corny. You have no ideas. You don't have a coherent political ideology. It's just liberals bad lefties bad and I want more power. That's it. That's the extent of your politics. So for him to pretend as if he cares about like some deeper cause, which is why he ran for Congress. It's an insult to the intelligence of his constituents further because you're still lying because we can see through you and realize that it's all bullshit. Now to lie about, you know, attending Baruch College and being a star volleyball player is one thing. That's silly. That's that's weird. But it's another thing to lie on forms because that means that you are a fraud and you brought the law and could face actual time in jail. And there's more and more evidence that he did indeed break the law. Mother Jones reports last week, Mother Jones reported that more than a dozen top donors to Representative George Santos's first congressional campaign did not appear to exist. The donations from people whose names or addresses could not be confirmed told more than $30,000. This pattern of questionable contributions Mother Jones has learned extends to Santos' successful campaign last year. According to Santos' campaign filings with the Federal Election Commission, his recent campaign pulled in more than $45,000 from relatives who lived in Queens. This included a mail handler who gave more than $4,000, a painter who donated the maximum of $5,800 and a student who also contributed $5,800. One of Santos' relatives who was recorded as giving $5,800 says that they did not make any donation to Santos. On Tuesday, a Mother Jones reporter visited the Queen's home of this relative, informed that two donations of $2,900 each were listed under this person's name and address in Santos' campaign finance reports. The relative who asked not to be identified said, I'm dumbfounded. The relative had no idea where the money for these donations came from and remarked, it's all news to me, the person added, I don't have that money to throw around. So he's so brazen that he's using his own relative's names, something that you can easily check. And even they are shocked by him. This story is so weird and I honestly can't wait to watch the movie for it. But that is a different level of why, because that is something that can get you into a world of trouble. It is illegal to lie on campaign finance forms. You cannot submit a contribution under a false name, but the Justice Department has asked the Federal Election Commission to pause enforcement of any laws that he may have broke while they conduct their own parallel criminal investigation into other areas where he may have committed fraud. So it's just a mess and needless to say, he is in serious trouble. And even now when we know everything there is to know about him, he's still dishonest, because fundamentally that's who he is. He is a liar. He is a deceitful person to his core. And I would argue that perhaps it's even innate at this point. Like he might not be able to help himself. He might literally have to lie because it's like a compulsion or something. I don't know, but either way, he's a complete clown. And if he genuinely wanted to be accountable, he would resign. But he's not going to do that because again, he cares about one thing and one thing only, his personal power. So here we are.