It Looks Like ‘Squad’ Member’s New Husband She Secretly Married Broke the Law in a Major Way

It appears the newest “squad”-mate might have as little respect for the law as his wife has for law enforcement.

After news broke this week that far-left Rep. Cori Bush of Missouri had secretly married a man her campaign had hired for security services, questions started to arise about the ethics of a congresswoman paying a romantic partner with campaign funds.

Now, thanks to a Fox News report, new questions are being raised about the possibility that Bush’s new husband had broken the law himself.

According to Fox, Cortney Merritts — the new Mr. Cori Bush — has been apparently providing professional security services to his now-wife without benefit of having a current private security license.

And on paper at least, St. Louis takes that kind of thing very seriously.

Trending:

Massive Migrant Caravan Marches Toward US with LGBT Flags Flying as Mexican President Snubs Biden at Summit

In fact, the website of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department, which handles private security licensing, has this sentence right near the top:

“With the exception of St. Louis Police Officers, all persons performing a security function in the City of St. Louis must be licensed to do so through the Private Security Section. “

According to Fox, a public records request filed Monday with the department found no license for Merritts had been issued in a decade.

Should Cori Bush’s husband be prosecuted if he broke the law?

Yes: 100% (81 Votes)

No: 0% (0 Votes)

The “last security license issued to that individual expired in 2012,” an administrator said, according to Fox.

If Merritts was, in fact, operating as a security detail without with an expired license, it’s worth pointing out that the St. Louis PD addresses that very issue in its “Private Security Section” under “frequently asked questions“:

“May I work on an expired license?”

“NO. Working on an expired license or no license subjects you to arrest and booking. Companies or agencies that knowingly employ someone without a license subjects them to a fine and/or liability in a civil action.”

Is the uppercase “NO” not emphatic enough? Is the threat of arrest and booking not serious enough? Is the information that companies…

Source