According to a report from the HuffPost, a company co-owned by Jared Kushner was on the losing end of a lawsuit over violations of consumer tenant laws in the state of Maryland, with the judge issuing a scathing decision,
Kushner -- the son-in-law of former president Donald Trump -- is co-owner of Westminster Management and the company JK2 along with his brother Joshua, which had been accused of violating state laws protecting tenant rights.
According to the report, Administrative Law Judge Emily Daneker ruled Thursday that the company owned by the two brothers "repeatedly violated state consumer protection laws by collecting debts without required licenses, charging tenants improper fees and misrepresenting the condition of rental units."
The judge issued a 252-page decision that called the violations "widespread and numerous."
The lawsuit was filed in 2019 by Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, as part of a series of suits going after 25 companies accused of violations.
As for the judge, the brother's company was cited for charging "illegal fees thousands of times over the course of more than two years, such as wrongly charging more than $332,000 in agent fees," with Judge Daneker writing, "These circumstances do not support a finding that this was the result of isolated or inadvertent mistakes."
The judge did not agree with Frosh's contention that the company, "...illegally misrepresented their ability to provide maintenance services and were not violating consumer protection laws during the entire period alleged by the attorney general," which the Kushner company described as a victory.
According to the report, both the Kushners and the attorney general have 30 days to appeal the decision.
You can read more here.
Stories Chosen For You
'Not just another accessory on Musk's little rocket': Flight attendants union leader sounds off amid reports of sexual misconduct
A union leader advocating for more than 50,000 flight attendants is speaking out amid reports about Elon Musk's alleged settlement paid to an attendant for sexual misconduct
.According to Business Insider, "SpaceX, the aerospace firm founded by Musk, paid a flight attendant $250,000 to settle a sexual misconduct claim against Musk in 2018."
The news outlet also reported: "According to interviews and documents obtained by Insider, the flight attendant accused Musk of exposing his erect penis to her, rubbing her leg without consent, and offering to buy her a horse in exchange for an erotic massage."
On Friday, May 20, Sara Nelson, president of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, weighed in with a critical response to the report. She said behavior like this is one of the driving forces behind flight attendants' decision to unionize nearly eight decades ago.
In Nelson's statement posted via Twitter, she said: "Flight attendants are not just another accessory on Musk's little rocket."
Nelson went on to offer her assessment of some of the more disturbing aspects of the damning report. She said: "The fact that he required flight attendants to become licensed masseuses on their own dime demonstrates what we see all too often — the super rich think they own everything and have to pay for nothing. This attitude is all too common to flight attendants and something all workers have had to deal with from day one."
Despite the incriminating report, Musk appears to be denying the claims. In an emailed statement to Insider, he reportedly described the report as a "politically motivated hit piece," also saying, "If I were inclined to engage in sexual harassment, this is unlikely to be the first time in my entire 30-year career that it comes to light."
According to a report from Rolling Stone's Jay Michaelson, Donald Trump may be gone -- for the moment --but his legacy of running roughshod over settled law and general disruption of norms will go on for generations because he managed to pack the courts with 226 judges who will sit in judgment for decades due to lifetime appointments.
As Michaelson pointed out, while the focus is most often on Trump-appointed Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, it is at the lower federal court level where he has changed the course of jurisprudence for years and years.
According to the report, a substantial percentage have a great deal in common in that they are most likely to be white and male to a highly disproportionate degree.
"For a start, they’re 84 percent white and 76 percent male, well out of proportion to the population, which is 58 percent non-Hispanic white, and 50 percent male. (At the appellate-court level, the slant is even greater: 43 of Trump’s 54 appointees are men,) he wrote before commenting, "Keep that in mind the next time a court decides something about women’s rights to control their bodies."
Worse still, he adds, is the fact that the former president's picks -- with the able assistance of far-right conservative organizations like the Federalist Society and now- Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) -- are not the best of the best.
According to Michaelson, "They were, statistically speaking, remarkably less qualified than usual. In four years of Trump, the nonpartisan, nonpolitical American Bar Association rated 10 of his nominees as 'not qualified,' something they’d done only 12 times in the previous 27 years. (True to form, Republicans have attacked the American Bar Association itself,") adding that there are plenty who are qualified even if their views are outside the mainstream.
Speaking with the journalist, Lena Zwarensteyn of Fair Courts Program of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, claimed the picks were designed for maximum and enduring effectiveness.
“The plan was to put on as many folks who have an extreme ideology as possible,” she stated. "This is a very long-term project that a very narrow extreme group has had, largely in response to the civil rights movement integrating communities and schools. It is a systemic plan to roll back progress we have made on civil and human rights.”
Even more alarming, Michaelson reports, "Trump’s minions chose the youngest cohort of judges in recorded history, some of these people are in their thirties and forties. That means they could still be on the bench in 40, even 50 years."
Reflecting on reports that the Supreme Court will soon hand down a ruling that will all but eviscerate the landmark Roe v Wade protections for women seeking an abortion, Michaelson said Trump's judges will be doing their work under less scrutiny until their decisions are published and then possibly upheld by other conservative justices higher up the legal ladder.
"The thing to understand here is that while big cases like Dobbs and Roe come along once every few years, every day there are incremental cases that either bolster or erode our civil rights. Just as progress is gained one small step at a time, it is lost the same way," he wrote before warning, "The advance of Christian nationalism is a steady drip-drip-drip, eroding rights a little bit at a time, by judges we don’t hear much about until it is too late."
You can read more here including examples of Trump-appointed judges who have already handed down controversial rulings during their brief time on the bench.
Business owner in Marjorie Taylor Greene's district fears 'retaliation' for supporting her GOP primary opponent
According to a report from CNN on how things look on the ground in Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's Georgia district with the voters heading to the polls on Tuesday, there is growing discontentment with the controversial lawmaker among Republican voters and a bit of fear of the lawmaker for opposing her re-election.
As CNN's Simone Pathe reports, more than a few voters stated they like what Taylor Greene stands for before admitting they don't care for the way she has represented them or conducted herself since they sent to Congress in 2020.
With the focus of Pathe's piece on Taylor Greene's only serious opponent, Jennifer Strahan, for the Republican Patry nomination, a few conservatives stated they are already in the mood for a change after two years of the freshman lawmaker.
According to Pathe, "The controversial Greene is often mentioned in the same breath as other Donald Trump acolytes in the US House, such as North Carolina Rep. Madison Cawthorn, who lost his primary earlier this week. But unlike in the Tar Heel state, where Republicans -- including the state's junior GOP senator -- mobilized against Cawthorn, Greene hasn't encountered the same level of organized opposition -- or spending -- against her."
That doesn't mean there is ant a groundswell of opposition to her re-election with one voter explaining why he has already cast his ballot for Strahan and a local business owner wishing to remain anonymous about her support for Strahan out of fear of Taylor Greene.
Kenneth Studdard of Dogwood Books said he has a view of a local cafe Taylor Greene patronizes when she is in town, and said he already voted for the challenger fully knowing her chances of an upset are slim in the highly conservative district.
"If you're Strahan, you're trying to do two things: Hold her under 50 (percent) and come in second," he explained.
Another business owner spotted putting a Strahan sign in their shop window, didn't want to be named in the CNN report.
According to Pathe the owner "had trepidatiously put a Strahan sign in her shop window, [and] said Strahan would be more effective in Washington but requested anonymity out of fear of retaliation -- specifically the fear of receiving a threatening voicemail from the congresswoman."
"My stomach is churning just talking to you," the shop owner told CNN.
According to the executive director of VIEW PAC whose mission is to elect Republican women to Congress, Taylor Greene is a hindrance to their work.
"It's unfortunate that in 2020, we elected some really tremendous Republican women and the only one people talk about is the only one who has no business being in Congress," Julie Conway told CNN.