Kamala Harris Visits Gas Station Being Sued by the Biden-Harris Administration

As we pointed out earlier Monday, Vice President Kamala Harris, Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff, and Vice Presidential candidate Tim Walz stopped off at a Sheetz convenience store to pick up some snacks, although there won't be as many Doritos in that bag Walz picked out thanks to corporate greed and "shrinkflation," another scam big businesses started along with Biden's inauguration.

Every road trip needs a snack break.

Doritos acquired. I got you, @KamalaHarris. pic.twitter.com/5nXfEARqwF
— Tim Walz (@Tim_Walz) August 18, 2024

David J. Urban noted that things were a bit awkward, seeing as the Biden-Harris administration is suing Sheetz for violating the Civil Rights Act.

EMBARRASSING 😳 Apparently, @KamalaHarris forgot that the #BidenHarrisAdministration is SUING @Sheetz for requiring criminal background checks of their employees when she visited for some snacks yesterday. (h/t @ZitoSalena) #YouWantToRunOurCountry? https://t.co/leBiHgTbQr pic.twitter.com/TysiTBnTA6
— 🇺🇸 David J. Urban 🇺🇸 (@DavidJUrban) August 19, 2024

Salena Zito reported for the Washington Examiner in April that Joe Biden had visited a Sheetz as well despite their criminal wrongdoing.

Just one day after the president’s orchestrated Sheetz run, the Biden administration hit the privately held convenience store chain with a federal lawsuit in which federal officials say the company discriminated against minority job applicants. The theory, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, is that because the company uses criminal background checks to screen job seekers, somehow that’s a violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
The Civil Rights Act prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, and national origin. EEOC attorney Debra M. Lawrence wrote that criminal background checks “cause a disparate impact because of race or other protected classifications.”
Lawrence went on to say the employment hiring practices must be shown by the employer to be necessary to ensure the safe and efficient performance of the particular jobs at issue.
“Even when such necessity is proven, the practice remains unlawful if there is an alternative practice available that is comparably effective in achieving the employer’s goals but causes less discriminatory effect,” Lawrence added. The suit said Sheetz discriminated against black, Native American, and multiracial job seekers by weeding out applicants who failed a criminal background check.