Smithfield Foods has been slammed with a historic $2 million penalty for child labor violations at its Minnesota meat factory, leading to unprecedented calls for industry-wide reform. Smithfield denies knowingly hiring minors, citing false identifications It has not accepted liability. The Penalty and Its Implications Smithfield, a meat processing giant, agreed to a $2 million settlement with the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) over allegations of employing minors in hazardous conditions at its St. James plant, marking the largest child labor enforcement penalty in the state’s history. This fine signals a severe warning to the industry, emphasizing the dire need for rigorous monitoring and compliance with labor laws, particularly concerning vulnerable youths. Investigations revealed that Smithfield employed at least 11 minors, aged 14 to 17, engaging them in dangerous tasks such as operating machinery and handling chemicals. Violations were found over a period from 2021 to 2023, highlighting systemic lapses in labor practices within meat processing facilities. Industry-Wide Repercussions Smithfield is now tasked with conducting industry outreach and ensuring compliance with child labor laws in collaboration with staffing agencies and contractors. This measure reflects a growing demand for accountability and transparency in employment practices. The company has also committed to presenting on child labor compliance at upcoming industry events to foster awareness and prevent future infractions. Smithfield Foods has agreed to pay $2 million to resolve allegations of child labor violations at a plant in Minnesota, officials announced Thursday.https://t.co/9DkHX21n1V — The Virginian-Pilot (@virginianpilot) November 15, 2024 The recent surge in child labor cases has prompted legislative amendments in Minnesota, including changes to the Child Labor Standards Act expected to take effect in August 2024. These actions aim to strengthen protections for minors, emphasizing the urgent need for better enforcement and compliance standards across industries traditionally reliant on immigrant labor, like food processing. Smithfield’s Stance and Broader Issues Smithfield maintains that they oppose child labor and claim to have been deceived by minors using false identification to pass E-Verify checks. Their stance underscores the complexities of addressing child labor in environments heavily reliant on temporary foreign workforce and high turnover rates. This issue is part of a broader narrative of exploitation within various U.S. industries. Investigative reports have cast a harsh light on the exploitation of migrant children, spurring discussions about the intersection of immigration policy and labor practices. Former U.S. border czar Tom Homan has advocated for workplace immigration raids to combat these abuses and bolster protections for vulnerable workers. Sources: Child labor at Smithfield foods Child labor violations at Smithfield The post Major Food Company Faces Consequences Over Factory Employment Practices appeared first on The Conservative Brief.

Could Donald Trump’s return to power hasten an end to the Ukraine war, defying conventional expectations of international diplomacy? Let’s hope so. What will stop the bloodshed? Zelensky’s Surprising Prediction Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently shocked many by suggesting that the ongoing war in Ukraine could end more swiftly if former U.S. President Donald Trump returned to power. This bold assertion highlights a possible shift in strategy by Ukraine to align with Trump’s distinctive diplomatic style, which has historically favored direct negotiations and deal-making over prolonged military engagements. Zelensky seems prepared to leverage Trump’s transactional approach, possibly offering military support to Europe and access to Ukraine’s natural resources as bargaining chips. This strategy may aim to secure favorable terms in peace talks, reflecting the urgency from Ukraine to find a resolution as the conflict impacts their nation significantly. BREAKING: Ukraine President Zelensky just said that Trump will end the war with Russia faster thanks to his policies – Ukraine media "Certainly, with the policies of this team that will now lead the White House, the war will end sooner. This is their approach, their promise… pic.twitter.com/62R0DgsQK9 — Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) November 15, 2024 Trump’s Proposed Path to Peace Trump has publicly stated his intention to end the Ukraine conflict swiftly with a mix of peace talks and a strategic plan. His proposal includes establishing a buffer zone and requiring Ukraine to abstain from joining NATO for twenty years. This plan aims to satisfy Russian demands for diminished Western influence near its borders, something that current leaders have struggled to negotiate. While Trump’s administration might focus on China as a primary geopolitical rival, his team’s efforts to address the Ukraine conflict promptly may signal a recalibration of U.S. foreign policy priorities. Figures like Marco Rubio and Peter Hegseth indicate a strong interest in resolving European conflicts to concentrate on the growing tensions with China. DYK? Trump called zelinsky & told him that the billions of US tax dollars & American weapons to Ukraine will stop. Ukraine will have to buy weapons from now on. The $$ saved from Ukraine will be used to fix the homeless crisis here & to help our struggling vets. pic.twitter.com/8STHPd9IvC — A. Rios (@easternair355) November 15, 2024 Potential Reconfiguration of Alliances This renewed international chess game raises questions about European countries like Lithuania and France, urging their neighbors to consider an increased military presence in Ukraine should U.S. aid decline under Trump’s administration. The specter of diminished American involvement poses challenges for the sustainability of European support without significant U.S. backing. Meanwhile, concerns grow over Russian electoral interference in former Soviet territories like Georgia and Moldova, with fears of escalating Russian imperialism. Ukrainian President Zelensky’s latest remarks signal an openness to negotiate with Russia for a “just peace,” potentially reshaping alliances and strategies in the region as the conflict develops. Sources: Trump looks to end war quickly. What’s next from Ukraine? The post Zelensky’s Surprising Forecast: Trump’s Role in Ukraine War’s End? appeared first on The Conservative Brief.

In a surprising judicial decision, trials connected to the January 6 Capitol incidents face delays as speculation grows over potential presidential pardons from Donald Trump. Will Trump pardon the J6ers? The judge thinks it’s likely. Judicial Pause: Strategic Delay in Capitol Trials Federal courts, responding to potential political shifts, have postponed several trials related to the January 6 Capitol attacks. Judges Carl Nichols and Rudolph Contreras, appointed under different presidential administrations, opted to delay these proceedings. Their decisions arose from the prospect of President-elect Donald Trump issuing pardons, which may render these trials unnecessary. The predicted administrative transitions suggest a complex dynamic between political predictions and judicial prudence. Judge Contreras’s ruling marks a unique case in which requested delays reflect defendants’ expectations of clemency. William Pope, acting as his own counsel, argued that his trial might waste resources should pardons occur. Prosecutors opposed the trial delay, contending a pardon probability was insufficient to halt proceedings. Despite opposition from the Justice Department, these judicial pauses underline strategic resource management efforts and contemplation of procedural necessity. Judges postpone Jan. 6 trials on verge of Trump presidency https://t.co/aRoDZu5boM — POLITICO (@politico) November 14, 2024 Political Promises and Judicial Prudence Donald Trump’s vow to pardon over 1,500 individuals charged for January 6 events fuels the debate over these trial delays. While no formal clemency policy exists yet, the expectation of pardons led Judge Nichols to tentatively set trial dates beyond potential administrative changes. Nichols’ courtroom faced prosecutorial challenges, as noted by attorney Marina Medvin, with uncertainties cited over forthcoming trial proceedings. “As soon as the prosecutor asked for a trial date, Judge Nichols confronted her on whether she could assure the court that this matter would be moving forward to trial once the new administration takes office,” said Marina Medvin, attorney for two defendants in Nichols’ courtroom. The court’s decision-making process reveals how anticipated shifts in executive power influence judicial practices. The delays align with resource conservation measures, avoiding unnecessary jury activities. Divergent opinions among federal judges reflect the ongoing complexities surrounding both January 6 and a changing political environment impacting these decisions. BREAKING: Two federal judges agreed Thursday to postpone criminal trials for defendants accused of breaching the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, agreeing that President-elect Donald Trump’s imminent inauguration could make the proceedings unnecessary – Politico pic.twitter.com/decL44yr9d — Breaking911 (@Breaking911) November 14, 2024 Judicial Decisions Amid Political Expectations Judges Carl Nichols and Rudolph Contreras, representing different presidential appointments, initiated trial delays based on diverse judicial and political assessments. While Contreras acknowledged the pragmatic approach to anticipated pardons, others, like Judge Paul Friedman, maintained an independent judicial obligation principle, denying delay requests. Friedman’s ruling underscores the judiciary’s role and responsibilities amid political uncertainties. Contreras’s alignment with resource conservation marks a judicial consensus to weigh the potential administrative advantages of trial suspensions. Meanwhile, the broader judicial community grapples with managing procedural responsibilities and adhering to constitutional mandates amid forecasts of new political winds. Sources: J6ers get a break Judge delays J6 trials The post Unseen Factors Stalling January 6 Trials and Possible Trump’s Pardon Moves appeared first on The Conservative Brief.

Not only is tongue scraping a thing, but it's been a thing for thousands of years. The use of tongue cleaners and scrapers goes far back to ancient times in India and is still practiced today. Tongue scraping is part of an Ayurvedic morning routine for grooming practices but also has health benefits. Many holistic healers and people who practice natural medicines know about this technique, and today, I’d like to share it with you. Tongue Scraping: Your Way To A Healthier Life I know it might sound crazy, or even strange, but tongue scraping is totally legit and packed with oral and general health benefits. Our tongue is exposed to toxins that can be found in the very foods, drinks, and the air we consume and ingest. Believe it or not, even our emotions have a role in releasing toxins into our body. Tongue scraping is considered to be one of the best methods to start with when initiating a full body cleanse or detox. It makes sense as a precautionary measure to remove as many toxins as possible before they can enter the body and cause possible damage. How Do I Know If There Are Toxins In My Body? There are numerous signs or symptoms that result from toxins in the body. These signs are usually quite small and are often overlooked – allowing space and time for even more toxins to enter the system. Here are some signs of toxins entering the body: Bad breath Body odor Bloating Aches & pains Coating of film on your tongue Fatigue & weakness Constipation and or diarrhea   Detoxifying helps remove toxins from our body. As I mentioned earlier, there are different phases, stages, techniques, and tools when it comes to Ayurveda and Holistic Natural Healing. I think adding a tongue scraper into a detox routine is a pretty good idea. Benefits of Tongue Scraping | It helps eliminate bad breath caused by the buildup of food particles, bacteria, and toxins. It removes the particles and everything else off your tongue, eliminating the film. If there is too much buildup of toxins and bacteria in our mouth, they end up traveling through our body and make us feel sick. Tongue scraping is great for your oral hygiene. It enhances your sense of taste. Removing that film from your mouth helps clean off your taste buds. When they’re cleaner, things taste much better. Unaddressed, this issue leads to us using too much salt, spices, or sugars to our food, which can all have a negative effect on our bodies if they're over consumed. It removes undigested food and other particles from your tongue. Those particles can add to the buildup of toxins and bacteria, as well as the potential risk of plaque buildup and cavities. The gentle scraping of the tongue helps stimulate our internal organs. This helps us gear up and get ready for the day ahead. It also helps those who usually skip the most important meal of the day by making our belly wake up and feel hungry. It promotes digestive help. There are a variety of options when it comes to tongue scrapers. You can find them in plastic and stainless steel. The stainless steel version is more traditional and eco-friendly, because it's reusable and can be recycled if desired. There are also plastic versions that are disposable, but I highly recommend the stainless steel. There's a wealth of information including videos on tongue scraping techniques and how-to’s that are available. If you're into detoxing the body and cleansing, it might be a good idea to look into getting a tongue scraper. I think they’re incredible and it's made a huge difference on my oral hygiene. Plus, I've also noticed the close-to-immediate effects it has on my organs. How Do You Use A Tongue Scraper? | OK, so what you do is hold the tongue scraper with both hands. Stick your tongue out as far as it will go and be comfortable. Place the scraper as far back on your tongue as you can without triggering your gag reflex and gently scrape from the back of your mouth to the front. Rinse off the scraper and repeat until it’s clean. It can typically take 7-15 strokes before your tongue is clean. Gentle is the key. Scraping your tongue too hard can cause pain to your tongue and is not necessary. Remember just gentle smooth strokes. AshleysGreenLife shows us how to scrape our tongue and why we should do it:  There is a world full of medicine out there! I hope today’s walk through the medicine cabinet finds you well! Medicine comes in many shapes, sizes, and forms, and today was more about a technique than an actual medicine. Remember, preventative medicine is essential to our health. Happy healing! Did you find this list helpful and interesting? Let us know in the comments below. Check out helpful these 7 tips to developing healthy habits in your kids! Follow us on facebook, instagram, pinterest, and twitter!

Democrats Misread Two Big Issues in This Election

Los Angeles Times owner Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong sat for a rare interview Thursday on the Fox News Channel’s Fox News @ Night to double down on his push to bring balance to the struggling, liberal newspaper and respond to the editorial board members who quit when he ordered the paper to not offer an endorsement in the 2024 presidential campaign. In a report setting up the interview, our friend and host Trace Gallagher noted Soon-Shiong has been “heavily criticized by the left” and promises “bigger and bolder steps to promote trust in media and ensure all voices are represented.” Correspondent William La Jeunesse added the Times “has really drifted kind of the left for several years…and it’s not just in the editorial section, but in the news pages as well[.]”     After laying out the hubbub over the non-endorsement and outrage among Times journalists to his promise to have the paper become more “fair and balanced, so that all voices are heard and we can respectfully exchange every American’s view,” Gallagher pointed to Soon-Shiong a news headline from the end of the campaign: “Trump’s big rally doubles down on hatred.” Though an e-mail from editor Terry Tang hours later tried to downplay what he saw as “concerns” about his Fox hit, Soon-Shiong seemed pretty definitive in answering “the latter” to Gallagher’s question about changing the editorial board or the entire paper. “I think one of my concerns is you as a journalist would understand that’s news versus opinion. And we’ve conflated news and opinion. So, the first thing I want to do is ensure that we explicit say this is news. And if it’s news, it should just be the facts period. And if it’s an opinion, that’s maybe an opinion of the news and that’s what I call now a voice and so, we want voices from all sides to be heard. And we want the news to be just the facts,” Soon-Shiong explained. The horror! Soon-Shiong explained his desire to change the editorial board by “looking for people like” L.A. Times columnist and CNN senior political commentator Scott Jennings because “all voices” are “important” while, for editors, their words “have a real impact” and should tread more carefully. Gallagher asked what this means for his broader mission to regain readership in the Greater Los Angeles area (click “expand”): GALLAGHER: It’s interesting because the election, the voters were very clear on what they wanted, the mandate, even in in Southern California where you have — you have Orange County and you have San Bernardino County and you have Riverside County that are more Conservative. How do you reach out to them? They are your readers. How do you trust — get their trust back? SOON-SHIONG: Well, in fact, if you look at the 2022 map of California, look at the 2024 map of California, the change has been rather dramatic moving towards the right as well as being very Liberal as before. So, it is our responsibility to maintain democracy to have the views of all our California readers, in fact the views of all the national readers to be — to be add. Because if we just have the one side, it becomes nothing else but an echo chamber and so, it’s going to be risky and difficult. I’m going to take a lot of heat which I’m already am. GALLAGHER: Yes. SOON-SHIONG: But you know, I come from the position that really it’s important for all voices to be heard. La Jeunesse had the final question: “[I]n her resignation letter, your [editorial page] editor said ‘we have spent eight years railing against Trump.’ Do you think that hurts the public trust and do you have a problem with political bias at large?” Soon-Shiong emphasized the need for the press writ large to both more clearly differentiate what’s a news story versus one with a defined opinion as well as that “[t]he trust of the population in the press is lower than that even of Congress today because of” bias. “How about having a paper that is completely having the views of all,” he proclaimed. To see the relevant FNC transcript from November 14, click “expand.” FNC’s Fox News @ Night With Trace Gallagher November 14, 2024 11:27 p.m. Eastern TRACE GALLAGHER: Well, the owner of the Los Angeles Times was heavily criticized by the left when he quashed the editorial board’s endorsement of Kamala Harris ahead of the election. Well, now, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong is taking bigger and bolder steps to promote trust in media and ensure all voices are represented. The senior national correspondent William La Jeunesse is here with that story tonight. William, good evening. WILLIAM LA JEUNESSE: Well, Trace, the paper has really drifted kind of the left for several years, you know. And it’s not just in the editorial section, but in the news pages as well and that, you know, things like climate change, income inequality, issues dear to progressives, well, it finally came to a head over the Harris endorsement. 35 years ago, America’s largest metro daily rolled off the presses with a circulation of 1.2 million. Today, it’s down by two-thirds. Last month, the L.A. Times itself made headlines when owner Dr Pat Soon-Shiong, the city’s richest man spiked an endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris. Instead, he wanted to see both candidates’ policies side by side, let the readers decide. His editorial board disagreed. Three resigned in protest. This week, Soon-Shiong called the board very left politically, and said he wants the Times to be, “fair and balanced, so that all voices are heard and we can respectfully exchange every American’s view from left to right to the center. Coming soon. A new editorial board.” Two days before the election, his editorial board called Trump a, “vindictive authoritarian, consummate racist, and malignant narcissist.” Whereas, they unanimously praised Harris. One calling her, a fiery, swaggery speech maker, a commanding candidate, smart and compelling. GEORGE GASCON CAMPAIGN AD: With George as D.A., we can make it happen. LA JEUNESSE: The paper also endorsed progressive D.A., George Gascon, and opposed tough on crime, Prop 36, while voters overwhelmingly went in the opposite direction. So, one editor who resigned said, “we are a very liberal paper. Our readers are, for the most part, Harris supporters.” In fact, Trump won more California counties than Harris, Trace, including four in Greater Los Angeles. GALLAGHER: William, thank you and stand by. Back to you in a moment. Let’s bring in the owner and executive chairman of the Los Angeles Times, Dr. Patrick Soon Shiong. Sir, it is great to have you on the show. It really is. And William is, as he was telling us, I think he’s right. He makes a fair point when he says because the Los Angeles Times on the — on the headline, this is on the front page, one of the things reads, Trump’s big rally doubles down on hatred. That’s the news, it’s not the op-ed. And I’m wondering when you say you want this paper to be fair and balanced, do you plan to just fix the editorial section or are you planning to go over and redo the entire paper? PATRICK SOON-SHIONG: I think the latter. I think exactly — I think one of my concerns is you as a journalist would understand that’s news versus opinion. And we’ve conflated news and opinion. So, the first thing I want to do is ensure that we explicit say this is news. And if it’s news, it should just be the facts period. And if it’s an opinion, that’s maybe an opinion of the news and that’s what I call now a voice and so, we want voices from all sides to be heard. GALLAGHER: Yes. SOON-SHIONG: And we want the news to be just the facts. GALLAGHER: When you talk about the editorial board because it when you tweeted it seemed like you were going to get rid of the entire editorial board. They have it all left. Is that the plan to redo the entire editorial board or just fill in the people that have left? SOON-SHIONG: Again, I think it’s important for us to differentiate the editorial board is responsible for these opinions on these voices. So, right now, we don’t have an editorial board if we were truly about ourselves that are balanced. And so, I’ve gotten beaten up about fair and balance. So, I’m looking for people like Scott Jennings. Scott Jennings who is on CNN and he’s one out of six usually in the — in the room where we need to have all voices, the right, the left, and the moderate, the center and I think it’s important because the editors are responsible of stories that are told and stories that are not told. Editors have this nuances of the word hatred versus could the President-Elect make a real impact. And we need views from both sides. And my goal is not to change that entire editorial board for that — for that perspective. GALLAGHER: It’s interesting because the election, the voters were very clear on what they wanted, the mandate, even in in Southern California where you have — you have Orange County and you have San Bernardino County and you have Riverside County that are more Conservative. How do you reach out to them? They are your readers. How do you trust — get their trust back? SOON-SHIONG: Well, in fact, if you look at the 2022 map of California, look at the 2024 map of California, the change has been rather dramatic moving towards the right as well as being very Liberal as before. So, it is our responsibility to maintain democracy to have the views of all our California readers, in fact the views of all the national readers to be — to be add. Because if we just have the one side, it becomes nothing else but an echo chamber and so, it’s going to be risky and difficult. I’m going to take a lot of heat which I’m already am. GALLAGHER: Yes. SOON-SHIONG: But you know, I come from the position that really it’s important for all voices to be heard. GALLAGHER: William, are we missing something here? LA JEUNESSE: No, I was just going to say you know, in her resignation letter, your editor said "we have spent eight years railing against Trump. Do you think that hurts the public trust and do you have a problem with political bias at large? SOON-SHIONG: I think that’s exactly what the press needs to understand. The trust of the population in the press is lower than that even of Congress today because of this. Because you look at one paper and said that’s just right and one paper just left. How about having a paper that is completely having the views of all? So, the fact that we wrote over the last four years, I don’t know whether that was news or that was opinion. And mostly that was opinion but conflated as if it’s news. So, the first step I want to do is have the layperson say this is just a voice, what I call an opinion and not news. LA JEUNESSE: And news will be labeled. SOON-SHIONG: Exactly. And I’m going to do that. GALLAGHER: Dr. Soon-Shiong, thank you for coming. William, thank you. We appreciate your time. SOON-SHIONG: Thank you for having me.

One of the greatest ironies that Donald Trump’s election victory helped expose is the futility of radical feminist ideology. After Trump’s win, self-styled feminists — who, for some reason, believed the election was a referendum on "bodily autonomy" and the right to kill their unborn children through abortion — boasted on social media that they're now going to embrace traditional values in sex and relationships. Well, kind of. This reaction not only promotes conservative family values, but it naturally reduces abortion. A win-win for everyone. While feminists aren't promoting traditional family values per se, they are embracing key traditional values including abstinence and being intentional about partner selection. A social media post that went viral on the morning after Election Day encapsulated the ironic collapse of radical feminist ideology in the wake of Trump's victory. "I am very much a radical feminist, I just don’t talk about it much. but I am literally so serious. guard your womb, SERIOUSLY. if [sic] you choose to be with a male, make sure he actually values & respects you at a human f***** being. this is ridiculous," the post read. — (@) To recap: Because Trump won the election, feminists are now promoting the intentional decision to guard their wombs. In practical terms, this means not having random sexual encounters and engaging in sex only in the context of a deeply committed relationship — ideally marriage — in which both partners share the same outlook on life. This reaction not only promotes virtue, but it naturally reduces abortion. A win-win for everyone. The tremendous irony, of course, is that had feminists always vowed to exercise such discipline over their bodies and in their relationships, abortion likely would not have been their primary voting issue because they would not have needed to use abortion as birth control. Not only are radical feminists accidentally promoting traditional values that negate the reason for nearly all abortions, but many are embracing the so-called 4B movement. A vestige of South Korean culture in the 2010s, the 4B movement embraces four fundamental tenets: No sex. No giving birth. No dating. No marriage. The popularity of the movement exploded on social media after Trump's victory, with women posting videos of themselves on TikTok pledging to become the movement's newest adherents. One woman who spoke with the New York Times said she felt compelled to adopt the 4B movement because she needed to put “my best interest into my hands.” Those interests, it turns out, include not having random sexual encounters, choosing not to engage in relationships with uncommitted partners who do not share similar moral beliefs, and removing the possibility of abortions. On Election Day, Trump pulled off many feats that his detractors thought were impossible, including winning the popular vote, winning a significant share of nonwhite voters, and significantly narrowing margins in deep-blue bastions. But who could have predicted that his victory also would expose the shallowness of feminist ideology while driving feminists to embrace conservative beliefs on sex and relationships? Conservatives everywhere give you thanks, Mr. President-elect.

The Party's OVER! Politico Says Lobbyists 'Used to Getting Their Way' Fear RFK Jr. As Head of HHS (Good!)

SHE FOUGHT: Listen to the Absolutely Heartbreaking Opening Statements in the Laken Riley Murder Trial

Former Biden WH Aide Issues Dire Warning to Democrats, Media Over New Slurs Aimed at Pete Hegseth