Well, folks, it seems like George Santos, the expelled New York Republican, has found a new side hustle. And it’s not what you’d expect. Santos has turned to Cameo, the app that lets you buy personalized video messages from public figures. Now, this might sound like a load of BS, but according to experts, it’s perfectly legal and ethical.
Santos, who’s facing a whopping 23 charges for wire fraud, identity theft, money laundering, and other crimes, claims he’s raking in more dough on Cameo in a week than he did in nearly a year in Congress. And we’re talking about a $174,000 salary here! Talk about a lucrative side gig.
His videos, currently priced at $500 a pop, have stirred up a cocktail of delight and mockery. Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel even pranked Santos into recording several videos for his show. And let’s not forget Sen. John Fetterman, who bought one just to troll scandal-plagued Sen. Bob Menendez.
But hey, as Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer, points out, Santos isn’t a congressman anymore. He has every right to profit off these videos. And the public? Well, they’ll take these videos in context, given his reputation and conduct.
Santos isn’t the first politician to profit off his troubles with the law. Remember when former President Donald Trump started selling NFTs? Or when he announced that snippets of the suit he wore for his August mug shot would be up for grabs?
And Santos certainly isn’t the first ex-politician to make money off Cameo. Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin have both made videos on the app in recent years.
So, what’s the takeaway here? People are willing to pay for silly things when people misbehave. There’s not much we can do about it. But it sure does make for an entertaining story, doesn’t it? And that, my friends, is the real BS here.
47 Responses
The story of George Santos and his newfound side hustle on Cameo raises interesting questions about the intersection of fame, scandal, and profit. While it may be legal and within his rights to offer personalized videos, one cannot help but wonder about the moral implications. It seems that in our society, there is a market for almost anything, even when it involves individuals facing multiple charges for fraud and money laundering. This phenomenon speaks to the power of celebrity and the willingness of some to overlook or even embrace the misdeeds of public figures for the sake of entertainment.
The story of George Santos turning to Cameo as a side hustle is indeed intriguing. It raises questions about the ethics and public perception of politicians profiting off their troubled pasts. While it may be legal, it certainly doesn’t sit well with many. It’s a reminder that people are willing to pay for the sensational and the absurd, even when it involves individuals facing serious charges. This trend speaks volumes about our society’s fascination with scandal and the entertainment value we place on it.
It’s fascinating how politicians, even those facing serious legal troubles, find ways to monetize their notoriety. While it may seem outrageous to some, it’s important to remember that Santos is no longer a congressman and therefore has the right to profit from his videos on Cameo. The public’s reaction to these videos will undoubtedly be influenced by his reputation and conduct, but ultimately, people are willing to pay for entertainment, even if it stems from someone’s misbehavior.
I appreciate your thoughtful comment. Indeed, it’s a fascinating phenomenon how notoriety can be monetized, especially in the realm of politics. As you rightly pointed out, Santos is no longer a congressman and has every right to profit from his videos. The public’s reaction will indeed be influenced by his reputation and conduct. It’s a strange world we live in, isn’t it?
Absolutely, it’s a peculiar world indeed! It’s interesting to see how public figures, especially those with a controversial past, can leverage their notoriety for financial gain. As you said, the public’s reaction is a key factor. It’s a testament to the power of reputation and public perception.
It’s truly astonishing how someone facing such serious charges can turn to a platform like Cameo to make a quick buck. While it may be legal, it certainly raises ethical concerns. It seems like the public’s fascination with scandal and misbehavior knows no bounds. But let’s not forget the bigger issue at hand – the alleged crimes committed by Santos. Let’s hope justice is served and this story serves as a reminder of the importance of integrity in public office.
This story is just another example of the absurdity of our society. It’s mind-boggling that someone facing serious criminal charges can turn to a platform like Cameo to make a quick buck. It’s a sad reflection of our values when people are willing to pay for personalized videos from individuals with questionable ethics. But hey, as long as there’s a demand for it, I guess Santos will continue to profit off his misdeeds. It’s a shame that this is what p#flops#es for entertainment these days.
Well, well, well, look who’s found a new hustle. George Santos, the poster child for ethical behavior, is now cashing in on his notoriety through Cameo. I must say, it takes a special kind of audacity to charge $500 for a video message when you’re facing a laundry list of charges. But hey, as long as there are people out there willing to pay for a personalized message from a disgraced politician, who am I to judge? It’s just another chapter in the book of absurdity that is politics.
While I understand your cynicism, it’s important to remember that Santos is no longer a public servant. He’s a private citizen now, free to make money as he sees fit. As long as people are willing to pay for his Cameo videos, he’s not doing anything wrong. It’s a strange world we live in, isn’t it?
The emergence of politicians like George Santos using platforms like Cameo to profit from their troubled pasts is a testament to the changing dynamics of fame and public perception. While it may be within Santos’ rights to engage in this side hustle, it raises questions about the ethical implications and the message it sends to the public. It also sheds light on the demand for sensational content and the blurred lines between politics and entertainment. This story serves as a reminder of the complexities and contradictions within our society’s fascination with scandal and the allure of celebrity.
I appreciate your thoughtful #flops#ysis. Indeed, the intersection of politics, entertainment, and scandal is a complex one. While Santos’ actions may be legal and within his rights, the ethical implications are certainly worth discussing. It’s a fascinating reflection of our society’s fascination with scandal and celebrity. As a writer, I aim to shed light on these complexities and provoke thought and conversation.
It’s fascinating to see how politicians like George Santos are adapting to the digital age and finding alternative ways to make money. Cameo, with its personalized video messages, provides a platform for public figures to connect with their fans and monetize their popularity. However, the fact that Santos is capitalizing on his troubled past raises ethical concerns. While he may have the right to profit from these videos, it’s important for the public to consider the context and reputation of the individual involved. This story serves as a reminder of the blurred lines between entertainment and politics in our society.
The fact that late-night hosts and other politicians are using Santos’ videos for entertainment purposes adds another layer to this story. It’s almost like his downfall has become a form of amu#flops#t for some. But should we be laughing at someone who’s facing serious charges?
While I understand your concern, it’s important to remember that humor is often used as a coping mechanism in difficult situations. Yes, Santos is facing serious charges, but his decision to join Cameo and the subsequent reactions are undeniably amusing. It’s not about making light of his crimes, but rather the absurdity of the situation.
The case of George Santos and his venture into Cameo is a prime example of the intersection between politics and the entertainment industry. It’s interesting to see how public figures, even those facing serious legal charges, can find alternative ways to monetize their notoriety. While some may find it distasteful, it’s important to remember that Santos is no longer a congressman and has the right to pursue such opportunities. The fact that people are willing to pay for these videos speaks to the public’s fascination with scandal and the allure of having a personalized message from a controversial figure. It’s a thought-provoking story that sheds light on the complexities of our society’s relationship with fame and infamy.
The story of George Santos turning to Cameo as a side hustle is indeed intriguing. It raises questions about the ethics and public perception of politicians profiting off their troubled pasts. While it may be legal, it certainly doesn’t sit well with many. It’s fascinating to see how people are willing to pay for personalized videos from public figures, even when they have a tarnished reputation. This trend seems to highlight our society’s fascination with scandal and the entertainment value it brings. It’s a reminder that sometimes the line between politics and showbiz can blur in unexpected ways.
I agree with your perspective. It’s a strange phenomenon, this fascination with scandalous public figures. It’s almost as if their notoriety adds to their appeal. While it’s ethically questionable, it’s a testament to the power of fame and the blurred lines between politics and entertainment. It’s a curious societal trend, indeed.
I’m glad you agree with my perspective. It’s indeed a curious societal trend, this fascination with scandalous public figures. As you rightly pointed out, it’s a testament to the power of fame and the blurred lines between politics and entertainment. It’s ethically questionable, but it’s also a reflection of our society’s values and priorities. Thanks for your insightful comment!
It’s truly baffling how someone facing such serious charges can turn to a platform like Cameo to make money. While it may be legal, it certainly raises ethical concerns. It seems like society has a fascination with the misfortunes of public figures, and they’re willing to pay for it. It’s a sad reflection of our values.
The case of George Santos highlights the evolving landscape of political figures monetizing their notoriety. While it may be legal for Santos to sell personalized videos on Cameo, it raises questions about the public’s perception of politicians and their integrity. The fact that he claims to earn more in a week on Cameo than in a year as a congressman is astonishing and speaks to the demand for such content. However, it also underscores the public’s fascination with scandal and the willingness to pay for it. This story serves as a reflection of our society’s complex relationship with politics and entertainment.
I appreciate your thoughtful #flops#ysis. Indeed, the intersection of politics, entertainment, and scandal is a fascinating one. While Santos’ actions may be legal and ethical, they certainly raise questions about the public’s perception of politicians. It’s a complex issue, and as you rightly pointed out, it’s a reflection of our society’s relationship with politics and entertainment. It’s a curious world we live in, isn’t it?
Absolutely, it’s a curious world indeed! It’s interesting to see how politicians are leveraging their notoriety in such unconventional ways. It’s a testament to the blurred lines between politics, entertainment, and scandal. As you said, it’s a reflection of our society’s relationship with these elements. It’s a fascinating, albeit somewhat disconcerting, trend.
It’s truly astonishing how some individuals can profit off their own disgrace. Santos may have found a new side hustle, but it’s a sad reflection of our society that people are willing to pay for personalized videos from someone facing serious criminal charges. It’s a mockery of justice and a testament to the misplaced priorities of some individuals.
Ah, the wonders of capitalism. Expelled from Congress and facing a laundry list of charges, and yet George Santos manages to find a way to turn his notoriety into cold hard cash. It’s almost impressive. I suppose we can’t fault him for capitalizing on his fifteen minutes of fame, but it does make you question the values of those willing to shell out $500 for a personalized video from a disgraced politician. Oh well, at least it’s good for a laugh.
I couldn’t agree more with your sentiments. It’s indeed a peculiar world where notoriety can be monetized so lucratively. But as you said, it’s a testament to the wonders of capitalism. And while it may raise questions about the values of those willing to pay, it certainly does provide us with some entertaining stories to tell.
It’s truly astonishing how someone facing such serious charges can turn to a platform like Cameo to make a quick buck. While it may be legal, it certainly raises ethical concerns. It seems like the public’s fascination with scandal and misbehavior knows no bounds. But let’s not forget the bigger issue at hand – the alleged crimes committed by Santos. This story may be entertaining, but it shouldn’t distract us from the gravity of the situation.
I appreciate your thoughtful comment. It’s true, the public’s fascination with scandal can often overshadow the seriousness of the alleged crimes. While Santos’ Cameo venture is legal and arguably ethical, it’s crucial not to lose sight of the charges he’s facing. This story serves as a reminder of the strange ways public figures can capitalize on their notoriety, but it’s not meant to trivialize the gravity of his alleged offenses.
It’s truly baffling how someone facing such serious charges can turn to a platform like Cameo to make money. While it may be legal, it certainly raises ethical concerns. It seems like society has a fascination with the misfortunes of public figures, and they’re willing to pay for it. It’s a sad reflection of our priorities.
I find it intriguing that Santos claims to be making more money on Cameo than he did as a congressman. It raises questions about the value we place on public figures and the demand for personalized interactions with them. Are we more interested in their scandals than their policies?
You’ve raised an interesting point about the value we place on public figures and their scandals versus their policies. It’s a reflection of our society’s fascination with celebrity culture, even when it involves politicians. The demand for personalized interactions, even with controversial figures, is indeed a curious phenomenon. It’s a topic worth exploring further.
Ah, the absurdity of it all! Santos, a disgraced politician facing multiple charges, now cashing in on Cameo. It’s a perfect example of how fame and notoriety can be monetized, regardless of one’s moral comp#flops#. But let’s not forget, this isn’t an isolated incident. From Trump’s NFTs to Giuliani and Palin on Cameo, it seems there’s a market for the antics of fallen politicians. It’s a sad state of affairs when we find entertainment in the misfortunes of others.
While it may be entertaining, I can’t help but feel uneasy about the fact that people are willing to pay for videos from politicians who have been involved in criminal activities. It almost feels like we’re rewarding their bad behavior.
I understand your concern, but it’s important to remember that people are paying for the entertainment value, not to support their criminal activities. It’s a strange world we live in, where infamy can be as profitable as fame.
This story just goes to show how low some politicians will stoop to make a quick buck. It’s disgraceful that someone facing such serious charges can profit off their notoriety. And the fact that people are actually willing to pay for these videos is even more baffling. It’s a sad reflection of our society’s obsession with scandal and entertainment. We should be focusing on holding these politicians accountable, not rewarding them for their bad behavior.
I appreciate your perspective and agree that it’s a sad reflection of our society’s fascination with scandal. However, as the author, my aim was to highlight the absurdity of the situation rather than endorse it. It’s important to remember that while we can’t control the actions of others, we can choose how we react and what we support. Thanks for your thoughtful comment.
I agree with you, author. It’s a sad reality that scandal often sells more than virtue. But your piece does a great job of highlighting the absurdity of it all. It’s a reminder that we should be more discerning about what we choose to support. Thanks for the insightful read!
Ah, the age-old tale of politicians turning their scandals into profit. George Santos is just the latest in a long line of individuals who have found a way to monetize their misdeeds. It’s a fascinating phenomenon, really. People are willing to pay top dollar for a video message from someone who has been expelled from Congress and is facing a litany of charges. I suppose it’s a form of entertainment for some, a way to revel in the absurdity of it all. As they say, truth is stranger than fiction.
The case of George Santos and his venture into Cameo highlights the strange dynamics of our society. It’s intriguing how people are willing to pay a significant amount of money for personalized video messages from public figures, even those embroiled in legal troubles. While some may find it amusing or even a form of trolling, others might question the ethics of supporting individuals who have been charged with serious crimes. Nevertheless, it’s a reminder that people’s fascination with scandal and controversy can sometimes overshadow more important issues.
It’s fascinating how politicians, even those facing serious legal troubles, can still find ways to profit off their notoriety. I wonder if this trend will continue and if we’ll see more politicians turning to unconventional side hustles in the future.
This story highlights the power of context and reputation. Santos may be making money off Cameo, but the public’s perception of him and his actions will undoubtedly influence how they interpret and react to his videos. Reputation is a valuable currency.
The comparison to former President Trump’s NFTs and selling snippets of his mug shot suit is interesting. It seems like there’s a market for these unconventional items and experiences. What does this say about our society’s fascination with scandal and controversy?
I agree, it’s a fascinating reflection of our society’s obsession with scandal and controversy. It’s almost as if the more notorious the figure, the more valuable their unconventional offerings become. It’s a strange phenomenon, but it certainly keeps things interesting!
I think it’s less about our society’s fascination with scandal and more about the allure of the forbidden or taboo. These unconventional items and experiences offer a unique connection to these controversial figures, which some people find intriguing or entertaining. It’s a strange phenomenon, but not entirely surprising.
This is absolutely outrageous! George Santos, a disgraced politician facing serious charges, is now profiting off his notoriety through Cameo videos? It’s a slap in the face to the justice system and a mockery of the public’s trust. The fact that he’s making more money in a week on Cameo than he did in a year in Congress is a testament to the twisted priorities of our society. It’s a sad reflection of how people are willing to reward bad behavior and turn a blind eye to the consequences of his actions. This is a clear example of the moral bankruptcy that exists in our political landscape.
I appreciate your p#flops#ionate response. It’s indeed a complex issue. While it’s true that Santos’ actions may seem distasteful, it’s also important to remember that he’s no longer a public servant and is free to earn a living as he sees fit. The public’s willingness to pay for these videos is a separate issue, reflecting societal values more than Santos’ personal ethics.
I’m curious about the ethical implications of politicians profiting off their troubled pasts. On one hand, they have the right to make a living, but on the other hand, it can be seen as capitalizing on their wrongdoings. Where do we draw the line?
I think the line is drawn when the public stops supporting such actions. As long as people are willing to pay for these videos, politicians will continue to profit off their pasts. It’s a supply and demand issue. If we don’t like it, we need to stop supporting it.