Anchor Harris Faulkner also lamented that Santos’ expulsion is a loss for Israel.

Harris Faulkner insists she’s a journalist, not a right-wing partisan, but yet again she proved otherwise on her Fox News show today. In a discussion with Republican Rep. Kat Cammack about the expulsion of Rep. George Santos, Faulkner said not a word about his shocking record of lies, deceit, a boatload of federal criminal charges against him and an admission of theft.

Cammack said that despite a damning ethics report on Santos, she voted against expulsion because “I am very concerned about setting a precedent that in the people's house 750,000 people in New York's third congressional district would be left without representation. And so while we have so many issues to contend with in our government, I felt that it was inappropriate to deny those constituents in his congressional district, their right to representation.”

Never mind that those 750,000 New Yorkers voted for a fictitious version of Santos. Faulkner certainly didn’t mention it.

Instead, Faulkner suggested Santos should have stayed in Congress because of his support for Israel. “Look, one of the things he's been very vocal about is supporting Israel throughout its war against the bloodthirsty terrorists of Hamas, who killed innocent citizens on October 7 in Israel. That war continues and he's been very vocal and very emotional about that issue,” she said. “That’s one of the voices that gets quiet.”

Cammack agreed but said that her vote was not a political one, but “from a constitutional perspective, denying representation in the people's House.”

Faulkner’s follow up? “What happens in a court of law if the charges against George Santos don’t stick?” Cammack called that a great question. And she’s right. But a) the Ethics Committee found “substantial evidence” he had violated federal criminal laws (that’s plural); b) the guy has already admitted to stealing a checkbook and using it to purchase goods under a fake name; and c) he “misled, exaggerated to or lied to voters about much of his life, including his education; his career; his check fraud case in Brazil; his animal charity; being a landlord; the 2020 election results; and his ties to the Holocaust and Judaism, the Sept. 11 attacks and the Pulse nightclub shooting,” as The New York Times has documented.

Justin Barragona pointed out that Faulkner also expressed concern for Santos’ mental state. She noted that he had been sitting alone in the House chamber, “a little slumped in his chair.” She asked if Cammack had spoken to him since the vote and “what was his sort of demeanor before and after?" Again, not a word of concern was uttered about Santos’ duped constituents.

As the conversation neared a close, Cammack issued her warning to Democrats who overwhelmingly voted to expel. “Be mindful on the other side,” she warned. “If we have a Democrat that is put forward without a conviction, we need to step forward and have a consistent voting record here. I think that's critically important.”

Faulkner interjected a hearty, “yes!”

“Because Americans are sick and tired of the double standard. Right?” Cammack continued.

Faulkner loved it. “So that's fascinating!” she exclaimed, obviously delighted. “That is fascinating,” she repeated. Then she made it clear she looks forward to the retribution. “And we can't tell the future, but we know that people do all sorts of things,” Faulkner said.

Faulkner went on to say that she’s going to be watching the Santos case “very closely” because “I don't think you right the ship then, if those charges don’t stick.”

The discussion closed with Faulkner saying it is “wonderful always” having Cammack on the show.

Although I agree with the expulsion, I also think there are legitimate arguments against it. But it's supposed to be Faulkner's job to provide context to Cammack's argument. She didn't even try.

You can get another glimpse of Faulkner's bias below, from the December 1, 2023 The Faulkner Focus.