Posted on 06/06/2023 8:59:03 AM PDT by lightman
Former Trump presidential adviser Stephen Miller’s America First Legal formally demanded that Target be transparent in the midst of backlash against the big box chain for its decision to sell “pride”-related items for children.
The group, working on behalf of the National Center for Public Policy Research (NCPPR), served Target Corporation with a “formal demand for the production of corporate books and records” about its alleged support for a “radical LGBT political agenda” that has reported cost the company billions in market valuation since the middle of last month, according to a news release issued Tuesday.
Because the NCPPR is a Target shareholder, America First Legal (AFL) said that its client has concerns about the possible risk that’s being posed by selling LGBT-related merchandise.
“Target’s 2022 annual report acknowledges that the corporation’s core customer base is made up of ‘families,'” AFL wrote. “It further recognizes the serious risk to Target’s company’s financial prospects if that core customer base sours on the corporation” by saying, “Our continued success is dependent on positive perceptions of Target which, if eroded, could adversely affect our business and our relationships with our guests and team members.”
In spite of that, according to AFL, Target’s management “recklessly bent the knee” to leftists by donating to GLSEN, which describes itself as a group that “Promotes LGBT Activism in Schools” and “apparently supports this mission because funding GLSEN is knowingly, or with reckless disregard, subsidizing GLSEN’s policy of violating parents’ rights and promoting secret gender transitions for kids.”
Other concerns that were flagged by AFL include the more than 100 products under Target’s “LGBT Pride: Kids’ Clothing” section on its website, “which are often modeled by very young children and almost always feature themes designed to attract and interest them, like rainbow Mickey Mouse symbols.” Products include LGBT-themed bibs, onesies, and other items for newborn children.
In a statement, Miller wrote that “for Target to voluntarily and aggressively associate itself with this movement is an act of sabotage against Target shareholders and a destroyer of value—including for countless Americans for whom shares of Target are part of the pension funds, mutual funds and retirement accounts on which they depend.”
AFL “is proud to represent American shareholders financially harmed by Target’s descent into gender extremism and child exploitation,” said Miller. Stephen Miller's third-grade teacher suspended Stephen Miller returns to the White House in Washington on April 5, 2018, after an event in West Virginia. (Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times)
The Epoch Times approached Target for comment on Tuesday. Backlash
Over the past month, Target’s shares have declined by about 15.71 percent, although on Tuesday morning, the retailer’s stock increased by about 1 percent over Monday’s trading. Starting in mid-May, a number of conservative influencers on Twitter expressed alarm at “pride”-related products that were being sold at Target, including the aforementioned LGBT items for small children and infants.
Target’s stock was downgraded again on Monday by KeyBanc Capital Markets from overweight to sector weight on Monday, although analysts did not mention the boycott. They instead stated that consumer spending pressures caused by the federal renewal of student-loan repayments are the reason why the stock was downgraded.
“While we still believe in the LT [long-term] margin recovery story, we downgrade TGT to SW given increasing consumer headwinds over the next 12-18 months,” wrote KeyBanc analyst Bradley Thomas in a note, according to MarketWatch.
About a week before that, a JPMorgan analyst downgraded Target to neutral due to “too many concerns rising” regarding the retail giant, including the boycott.
Target last month said in a statement that it would be removing some of those products. That statement further claimed that store employees received threats or had to deal with customers’ “confrontational behavior” over the products.
“Since introducing this year’s collection, we’ve experienced threats impacting our team members’ sense of safety and wellbeing while at work,” Target said, without elaborating. “Given these volatile circumstances, we are making adjustments to our plans, including removing items that have been at the center of the most significant confrontational behavior.”
In that statement, the Minneapolis-based firm did not specify which products had been taken from its shelves. A number of onesies and shirts that sparked the outrage were still available online as of Tuesday morning.
Another item that drew anger on social media was a so-called “tuck”-friendly swimsuit that appears to be marketed to males who claim to be transgender females. A spokesperson for Target told news outlets last month that the item was only being sold to adults and not children.
The boycott comes on the heels of a highly visible public backlash against Bud Light after the Anheuser-Busch-owned brand decided to produce a can of beer with transgender activist Dylan Mulvaney’s face on it. And like Target, several other retailers like PetSmart and Kohl’s have faced scorn for selling similar, “pride”-themed products.
Stockholder lawsuits will slow this insanity. Of course, the little people will have to wait for the class actions, which will get them nothing.
Correction...
Walmart sells Gay stuff
Very good.
Without a valid lawsuit these type of demand letters are worthless, it’s all performative conservative virtue signaling.
I’d be all for a major class action lawsuit which allows discovery and force Target to produce the documents, otherwise talk is cheap
I drove by a target in Daytona yesterday. Full parking lot.
What happened to the quote the other day, “How does me being gay affect you?”.
Let me count the ways.
It appears that you are affecting me more than me being a straight person affects you.
I prefer boycotts to strongly worded letters. They have instant repercussions.
The is the first steps towards a potential shareholder lawsuit. One that could end up encompassing BlackRock, who owns 10% of Target’s stock.
We do what we can...
and ‘getting the word out’ about these groomer/mutilator companies is a plus.
Boycott Target, Bud Light, Disney and any company sporting the sexual mutilation and sterilization of children.
I have several mutual funds. After digging into the actual holdings, it turns out that around 30 percent of the funds are high ESG rated companies and those stocks are losers. Even if their sales are going up, the stock prices are going steadily down and some of them have been doing so for years. The rest of the stocks generally keep the funds making a small percentage but not during a downturn. But go to each company’s website and they’ll boast about how much money they spend on virtue signaling. I won’t be buying anymore funds and I’m selling the ones I have. As far as I’m concerned, these funds have breached their fiduciary duty.
Absolutely boycott the companies you listed, but sending a demand letter for documents will be met with a big FU, unless a formal lawsuit and discovery happen.
Yes, that would be better. You’re right on that...
But in the meantime the drip ,drip, drip of our hatred for these groomers/mutilators mustn’t stop. Every thing we can do against them that’s legal needs to be done. Even if it’s not that effective. The totality of our hatred and commitment will wear them down..
While Obama was in office the government made sweetheart loans to Blackrock and they bought some thirty thousand houses in the Tampa area to serve as Section 8 housing. In answer to your question on who is funding Blackrock, well, you are. And me, and thee, and thou...
200 LGBTQ groups demand Target restock Pride merch, release statement now
Demand...that is the key word here. Nobody can demand a store carry something. The store is free to decide for itself. However, if enough customers tell (not demand) a store they want something (or do not want something) then it is usually in the store’s interest to give the customers what they want.
In this case, less than 3% of the population will actually buy these products, and only 7% support even carrying them. Leaving 93% of the customers in opposition to carrying these products. It does not take a genius to see that sacrificing 93% of your business to satisfy a falsely entitled 7% is a stupid financial decision.
So demand away, groomers. It will allow the civilized and sane 93% of our society to identify which corporations to bankrupt.
cottagecheesecake590
1 hour ago
OUTSTANDING!! Go for the jugular.
smart move
What will wear them down is a crashing price of their stock and profits, throw in a class action lawsuit from the shareholders and that is the recipe for success
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.