Connect with us

Politics

Ocasio-Cortez’s ‘Tax the Rich’ Dress Designer is Deadbeat Who Owes Over $100k in Taxes

Published

on

AOC

The saying there’s “no such thing as bad press” has just been proven wrong by progressive sweetheart Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The New York congresswoman did not do any favors for herself, nor her friend Aurora James by wearing a gown she designed to the famous Met Gala. The white dress with “TAX THE RICH” painted in red down the back caused a stir as the message fell flat in the midst of millionaires and billionaires.

Generally, a dress designer would do anything for press, particularly from the famous Met Gala attended by the socialites of the world. For James, however, it will likely be her biggest regret. James is “a notorious tax deadbeat with unpaid debts dogging her in multiple states” reported the New York Post.

The Post found tax records showing IRS tax liens totaling $103,220 in the parent company of her fashion brand. There are also “three open warrants in New York State for failing to withhold $14,798 in income taxes from employee paychecks (plus twelve other since-resolved NY tax warrants), and a $17,000 fine for failing to carry worker’s compensation insurance,” writes Mediate.

Mediate continues, “She’s also a rent deadbeat, the Post claims, describing an eviction action by James’ previous landlord – along with a demand for more than $25,000 plus interest for staying beyond her lease. The case was settled for an undisclosed amount.”

One landlord reportedly sued the designer for over $5,000 in unpaid rent, and complained she had never paid rent “in a timely manner.” Former employees described her brand as a “sweatshop that relied on legions of unpaid interns working full-time jobs.”

One former contract employee told The Post “I experienced a lot of harassment when I worked for her…Aurora would ask me to do things that were not in anyone’s job description, like scheduling her gynecological appointments. The work environment was so hostile that I was afraid to ask for my check.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

POLL: Huge One Year Swing of Independent Voters Saying Government ‘Doing too Much’

Published

on

White House

What a difference a year can make. Particularly a year filled with government infringements and overreaching. In a Gallup poll released Thursday, findings show Americans have drastically shifted perspective on how much they want the government involved in their lives.

Gallup News tweeted the results along with the headline “Americans again favor a reduced government role in solving problems facing the country after supporting a more active government role last year.”

52% percent of those polled say the government is doing too much on issues that should be dealt with by businesses and individuals. Only 43% say the government needs to do more to address citizens’ problems.

The numbers have almost flopped from only one year ago when 54% said the government should be doing more, and 41% disagreed. The annual Gallup Governance survey was conducted September 1-17.

The Gallup Poll release stated “the shift toward favoring a more active government role in 2020 was seen among Democrats and independents but not Republicans — likely a response to the coronavirus pandemic and in particular to then-President Donald Trump’s approach to handling it.”

“Trump generally opposed government efforts designed to slow the spread of the virus, such as face mask requirements and business and school closures.” The poll found independent voters shifted their opinions greatly.

“The percentage of independents who said the government’s doing too many things jumped from 38% in 2020 to 57% this year. Republicans edged up from 74% to 80% and Democrats crept up from 13% to 18%.”

Gallup also highlighted the fact that 2020 was only the second time in the poll’s 29 years of asking about the role of government that at least half of Americans supported an active role for government. The first time occurred in 2001 in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Continue Reading

Politics

Former Obama Ethics Chief Slams Psaki Over Dismissing Questions On Hunter Biden

Published

on

Walter Shaub

Walter Shaub, the former head of the federal government’s ethics office under President Barack Obama, slammed White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Wednesday in response to her dismissal of questions about whether the identity of buyers for Hunter Biden’s art would stay anonymous.

“At least five prints of Hunter Biden’s artwork have already been sold for $75,000 each and a team of lawyers is vetting potential patrons who plan to attend his upcoming gallery show in New York City — which has now been delayed until the spring,” The New York Post reported last week. “It’s unclear who purchased the reproductions — which cost a fraction of the top price of $500,000 for an original piece by President Biden’s scandal-scarred son — or if any more were sold after the LA show opened.”

During Tuesday’s press briefing, Psaki told a reporter asking about the anonymity of the buyers of Hunter Biden’s art, “I know this is your favorite topic, but it, again — it still is the purview of the gallerist. We still do not know and will not know who purchases any paintings. And the President remains proud of his son.”

 

“These are legitimate questions,” Shaub said in response to Psaki’s comments. “It’s disappointing to hear [Psaki] send a message that the WH thinks the public has no right to ask about ethics. After the last 4 years, these questions have never been more important. I know this isn’t a popular opinion, but this stuff matters.”

“There is no ethics program in the world that can be built around the head of state’s staff working with a dealer to keep the public in the dark about the identities of individuals who pay vast sums to the leader’s family member for subjectively priced items of no intrinsic value,” Shaub tweeted Wednesday. “If this were Trump, Xi [Jinping] or [Vladimir] Putin, you’d have no doubt whatsoever that this creates a vehicle for funneling cash to the first family in exchange for access or favors. Nor would you doubt that the appearance of monetizing the presidency was outrageous.”

Continue Reading

Leo's Hot List