The Chicago Tribune on the lesson to be learned from George Santos:

There is convincing evidence that freshman U.S. Rep. George Santos, a Republican, lied about his alma mater, his employment history, his ethnic heritage, his family history, his sporting prowess, his financial skills and the source of his campaign funds.

Santos has admitted to “embellishments” ... but has denied breaking any laws. Yet Politico reported Wednesday that Santos’ campaign had filed numerous expenses all with the improbably precise amount of $199.99, just one cent below the threshold that would have triggered a requirement to preserve invoices or receipts . ...

We add our voice to the massed choir that calls for Santos’ resignation . ...

The Santos situation is a reminder that once unsuitable candidates are elected for public office, they are very difficult to remove because colleagues weigh the possibility of other consequences, especially for themselves . ...

When it comes to local races, voters cannot always trust the media with the biggest reach to do that job for them.

For example, as The Washington Post eventually noted, a small paper on Long Island cast ... doubts on the veracity of Santos’ back story, as the paper was doing its ... due diligence by scrubbing the candidate via publicly available records.

Back in September, Long Island’s The North Shore Leader figured out that Santos had not adequately explained the source of a sudden increase in his net wealth, and that he appeared to own no actual U.S. real estate despite claims of owning mansions. The North Shore Leader is a Republicanleaning newspaper, but Santos was a bridge too far. “He’s most likely just a fabulist,” the paper wrote. “A fake.” ...

That should have been the end of Santos’ candidacy right there, but the problem was that no one appeared to have paid attention in the ensuing weeks. The fine work done by the North Shore Leader did not stop Santos.

Perhaps the paper itself did not do all it could have to get the word out about this “fabulist” and “fake” on the ballot. But this surely was a reminder that even though we hear a lot about the collapse of local news in America, there remains some excellent, on-the-ground journalism. In this case, at least, the issue was not a lack of reporting on the inconsistencies in Santos’ story, because clearly there was such reporting, but on the problem of nobody with a bigger megaphone actually paying timely attention . ...

The result was the election of a man who egregiously deceived his supporters ... and who thus had no right to be in office as their representative. The facts were in plain sight if anyone had cared to look . ...