In Service of Confirming What Seems Too Good to be True
Thursday, January 12th, 2023

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay
No matter how many times we’re warned, we don’t seem to learn. Cheaters slip in everywhere, not just in high profile positions.
This experience is worth repeating. I interviewed a bright young woman applying for a college scholarship. What a career she seemed to have had and how articulate she was, and she was only a college sophomore. Her fashion blog, she boasted, was written to help disadvantaged women look hip and cool at little cost. It actually featured clothes and accessories accessible only to those with the heartiest trust funds. The applicant counted on nobody checking. This lie red flagged that other parts of her application were untrue and bounced her right out of the running.
Early in the first episode of the Netflix series, “Madoff: The Monster of Wall Street,” one of his duped customers cautioned, “Even if god sends you a résumé, check the references.” Human resources guru Greg Giangrande—who writes a column for the NY Post and appears weekly on the WOR 710 Radio morning show for starters—said yesterday what we know: If your lie on a résumé is discovered even after 25 years of superb work, you’ll be fired.
Nevertheless, some people fly loose with facts and others don’t confirm basic ones about financial experts or congressmen and women.
George Santos, who currently represents a congressional district in Queens and Long Island NY, like the uber perfect scholarship applicant, was too good to be true which The New York Times discovered. Yahoo News reported that “much of his résumé appeared to have been manufactured, including claims that he owned numerous properties, was previously employed by Goldman Sachs and Citigroup and had graduated from Baruch College.”
The press, now challenged, piles on with discoveries daily. They found that he’d falsely claimed his grandparents were Holocaust survivors and when challenged said he was “Jew-ish.”
Did his late filing financial disclosures without appropriate details break the law they ask?
According to New York Times reporters Michael Gold and Grace Ashford “a watchdog group, the Campaign Legal Center, called on the Federal Election Commission to investigate the congressman, accusing him of improperly using campaign funds for personal expenses, misrepresenting his spending and hiding the true sources of his campaign money.” Brazilian law officials also have a bone to pick with him regarding fraud charges. The reporters wrote that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy was silent about allegations reported in The Washington Times and CNBC that to raise funds one of Santos’s staffers impersonated McCarthy’s chief of staff.
Were the man’s challengers and opponents in the 2022 campaign asleep? The Internet makes checking easy. An intern or college volunteer could verify a person’s employment or college attendance/graduation claims. So why do we accept anyone’s word? Has this always been the case? Are Madoff and Santos one-offs and are most future employees or candidates or financial advisors vetted if not carefully, at least for the basics? Could it be that to most the truth doesn’t make a difference?

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay