of the campaign itself? so, we were very curious about, this my colleague david and i took deep dive into the expenditures, and a lot of her of things jumped up at us immediately, the biggest one was the painted s to the company, cleaner 1 to 3. they were listed as being an apartment rent for staff, and with deposit, and that was a little bit unusual because you, know, first of all it is a cleaning companies seems to be, or second of all the address given was for a suburban home in huntington new york where they indicated that mr. santos himself might be saying. a couple of neighbors that he might be saying, there so that was unusual and the fcc has some pretty strict rules about, the use of campaign funds for personal expenses, when we reached out, he told us that those were totally legitimate expenses, they were being used for his campaign staff. he said that they were disclosures, and he said whether that in and of itself
my colleague dana and i took a deep dive into the expenditures. a number of things jumped out at us immediately. the biggest one was these payments to a company called cleaner 123, and they were listed as being for apartment rent and apartment rent for staff, rent and deposit. that was a little unusual because, you know, first of all, a cleaning company or seems to be, but second all, the address given was for a suburban home in huntington, new york, where our reporting had indicated that mr. santos himself might be staying. a couple neighbors there told us he had been staying there. that was unusual. and the fec has some pretty strict rules about the use of campaign funds for personal expenses. when we reached out to mr. santos, he told us that these were totally legitimate expenses. they were being used for his campaign staff. they were on the disclosures. whether or not that in and of itself is legal campaign finance experts were a little mixed on. they all sort of said it would