other places across the world. these trips were not disclosed, and in fact remained largely secret. until now, there s some ambiguity about what justice time it should have disclosed. under federal law. the justices currently put only minimal amounts of information on their annual financial disclosure forms. they also have no no formal ethics code or wait for the public to lodge complaints, ethics complaints against the justices and have them resolved in some way, the justices say that they abide by rules for lower court judges, but it s very difficult for the public to know if they do. in 2011 the last time chief justice john roberts addressed the ethics issue, he said, essentially trust us. we follow rules that lower court judges use. he said he had confidence in all of his colleagues, but he has been essentially silent since then, even though these questionable activities keep coming to public light. neither chief justice john roberts, no joint nor justice. thomas responded to our q
delegated to receive any ethics complaints. if they look serious, they will be referred to this group of people to do a basic investigation of the facts. and we will call the chief justice of the 11th circuit courts of appeal into a panel, and they would make a decision about whether there has been an ethics decision or not. the opinion of 11 circuit court chief justice would certainly set a hard mark. they would almost be obliged to follow it. i would put a big, big check, and did turn on the misbehavior of the court that they now know there is no method for investigation. they could conceivably come up with a report saying that in this instance, we believe justice thomas should ve recused himself in this instance, had he been a member of this court we would ve required him to recuse himself. as you say, that would not force him to recuse himself the next time, but there would not
a little bit hairy or, when it become apparent that there was actually pretty strong motive from the conservative justices, in order to backstop this decision. trying to make everyone see it, and nobody could go get squishy on it. that s when the investigation went awry, and it hasn t been the same since. what is the chief empowered to do, looking at the situation? he could say, okay, i m going to open up a complaint department here. this is what i m going to do. it seems to me that it would be one of those areas where there is no guidance, which is what is that an opportunity where s chief should actually seize the absence of guidance to create something? the chief is also the chairman of the judicial conference. they re directly or through the judicial conference he could say that this person s delegated to receive any ethics complaints. if they look serious, they will be referred to this group of
cast s vote again and again for mccarthy, even making a somewhat odd hand gesture during one of his votes. he s not responded to meet inquiries about what that was all about. by the end of the week, george santos seemed to found some new friends. yoking it up with marjorie taylor greene. hiring a former producer of the steve bannon podcast as a senior staff member. finally, he was sworn in along with the rest of the house after mccarthy finally won his 15 vote for speaker early saturday. as he begins his second week in washington, this week as an actual congressman, george santos is still facing local and federal investigations. the reopening of a fraud case back in brazil, three new ethics complaints, and multiple calls for congressional ethics. joining me now is grace, new york times reporters behind the original explosive investigation into george santos. there s a lot to keep track of, so i suppose we should just start with the latest. there is a complaint, there is the brazil news
committees one marjorie taylor greene who was stripped from assignments. paul gosar, who was removed for violent rhetoric and george santos who faces four criminal investigations and two new ethics complaints today. we re back with tim and jen. jen, how should democrats respond to this? i mean, first of all, i think it s important to remember when marjorie taylor greene was kicked off a committee, 11 republicans also voted for that because her rhetoric was so offensive that republicans also thought it was offensive. i think that democrats need to do is what schiff is doing. call out what they re doing. deflect. not do the work of the people. it s not as if the house is going to go amazing policy work right now anyway. so what the democrats need to do