Featured image via Angel Chevrestt

A man is suing a West Village, New York bar for allegedly refusing to serve him because he was wearing a MAGA hat.

According to the New York Post, the plaintiff is one Greg Piatek, 30, from Philadephia.

The alleged incident took place on January 28, 2016.

Piatek claims his first attempt at ordering a round of drinks went well. But when he tried to get a second round for him and his friends, the server noticed his hat and skipped them.

Piatek eventually confronted the bartender, who allegedly ultimately got him the second round of drinks but slammed it down.

That’s reportedly when a third bartender confronted Piatek and asked him if his hat was a joke.

“I can’t believe you would support someone so terrible and you must be as terrible a person,” she allegedly said, adding, “don’t even try to order a drink from me. I won’t even get you a drink.”

The issue was apparently ultimately raised with the bar’s owner, who said, “anyone who supports Trump – or believes what you believe – is not welcome here and you need to leave right now because we won’t serve you.”

Piatek’s lawyer Paul Liggieri describes the incident as “humiliating,” mocking the bar’s name by calling his client’s time there his “saddest hour.”

Piatek (left) with his attorney Paul Liggieri

Fox News reports that Piatek and his lawyer are bringing their case before Manhattan’s Supreme Court.

Many social media users have expressed praise for the man taking a stand.

Sources:
Fox News
New York Post

  • RooThree Story

    Using a non-white lawyer too. I love this. Perfect.

    • Whey Standard

      Italians are considered non-white?

      • Rob B

        The word white doesn’t mean anything. Italians are not Irish, are not French, are not Russian.

        • Whey Standard

          Right, and Bob is not Jim is not Frank is not Albert. Race and ethnicity are social constructs, defined as society chooses to define them, and generally in rather arbitrary way. The comment I was replying to though is based on the idea that these constructs exist, so what’s wrong with responding using that assumption, with the most popularly accepted iteration of it?

          • Rock Raider

            The gay wedding cake was not even discrimination at all so your reasoning is false.

            you are just another hypocrite leftists nazi/communist

          • Whey Standard

            I haven’t made any comments about any gay wedding cakes prior to this one, so your comment makes no sense. I’ve always wondered, why focus on the gay wedding cake? That’s at least a close call, though I ultimately disagree with the court’s decision, because I think there’s artistic expression in creating a cake that’s protected by the First Amendment. But the far clearer case is the New Mexico Supreme Court decision punishing a wedding photographer for refusing to photograph a gay couple’s wedding photos. That to me is a clear violation of the First Amendment.

            But here’s the real problem, I disagree with the law punishing all three of these business owners, the baker, the photographer, and the bar owner. You seem to only disagree with the first two, but you’re fine with the law punishing the bar owner. Beyond the fact that the only one that is not even ostensibly prohibited by law is what the bar owner did, what exactly is your principle that you’re going off of here?

          • Christopher Lee Hartsock

            THANK YOU.

          • John Smith

            discrimination.

      • amendingangel

        No. Roo is three stories short of a complete structure.

    • legtingle

      I don’t quite get the “non-white” thang…but he is cute and quite the dresser!

  • Bill Rowland

    Just curious what legal tact they are going to take. Do anti discrimination laws apply?

    • Rotu

      Violation of his civil rights? Right to free speech?

      • Whey Standard

        Neither of those are applicable. Political affiliation is not a protected class under federal or New York (or any state that I know of) public accommodation laws, and the “right to free speech” is a right you have against government action, not against private action. You can’t go crying to the government because you don’t like the things I’m saying, but if I’m on your property you can kick me off for saying things you don’t like.

        • Pearlbuck

          Yep. Doesn’t mean the guy shouldn’t raise hell, though. Then, after defenders of the bar articulate their versions of what you’re saying, ad nauseum, a clear precedent will be set for other places to kick out anyone who speaks against Trump or guns or immigration reform, or for feminism, or Black Lives Matter or Hillary or Bernie. Right?

    • Grunt

      Race, religion and creed. Sadly most ignore the Creed part

      • Whey Standard

        Creed, in antidiscrimination law, is tied to religion. A “creed” is a formal declaration of religious belief.

        • Rock Raider

          oh jeex you hypocritical punk.

          Its okay for your side to do it but not the other.
          Classic nazi

        • Rock Raider

          wow did you just make that shit up

          RETARD

          You cannot discriminate. There is no fucking difference between this and the gay wedding cake

          You delusional freak You are what is wrong with this country.

          • Whey Standard

            ““no preference shall be given, by law, to any creed, religious so­ciety, or mode of worship; and no man shall be com­pelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship, or to maintain any ministry, against his consent.” This section is one of seven, in successive order, all addressed to the one subject-matter — the complete di­vorcement of State and Church, and the language of the section itself indicates that as the object in view. The word “creed” has a definite meaning, as a formal declaration of religious belief.”

            Hammer v. State, 173 Ind. 199, 204 (Ind. 1909)

            I find no case in any New York court extending “creed” to anything being religious belief. Can you?

          • amendingangel

            Whey knows what he/she is talking about. You don’t.

    • charles_1

      Defamation of character. They may be able to have a policy to not serve someone wearing a hat. But you can’t call them a “terrible person” without a substantive reason. Especially not in a public setting.

      • Whey Standard

        What? Of course you can. “Terrible person” is a pure matter of opinion, protected by the First Amendment.

        • Richard Josephus

          no one said the bar owner could not say what he wants.. when he denied service he discriminated against the hat guy.. pretty simple.

          • Whey Standard

            The guy in the comment I replied to quite explicitly said the bar owner can’t call the patron a “terrible person”, how on earth can you claim “no one said the bar owner could not say what he wants”?

            And yes, he discriminated against the hat guy, just as restaurant owners who ban patrons without shoes or shirts from their facilities (as they are often required to do by law) discriminate against those people. The question, from a legal perspective, is not whether the bar owner “discriminated” against someone, but whether they did so on a prohibited basis. Under federal and New York state public accommodations law, it is illegal for most business establishments (not all, it depends on their line of business) that hold themselves out as open to the public to discriminate against patrons on the basis of certain characteristics, like race, religion, gender, sex, ect. We call these “protected classifications”. “Political affiliation”, just like “attire”, is not a protected classification under federal or New York state public accommodations laws.

        • Pearlbuck

          It’s ok to punch a “Nazi” now, so I assume it’s ok to punch someone who calls you a terrible person. Right?

          • Whey Standard

            Neither of those things seem ok, if the motivation is purely that they’re a Nazi or called you a terrible person.

          • Rock Raider

            you are wrong and this is wrong.

            You are a nazi for agreeing with this shit.

            Go fuck yourself

          • Pearlbuck

            I agree, although Richard Spencer is not even a Nazi. But we are living in a Progressive popular culture that has decided that it’s ok to to physically attack people for not following the pc rulebook, because “words can abusive.”

          • amendingangel

            Richard Spencer is a Neo-Nazi.

          • Pearlbuck

            He is a member of The National Socialist Worker’s Party? Or he has quoted people who belonged to that party, and , thus, in your mind, he is a “Nazi”?

          • amendingangel

            A Neo-Nazi, Pearl. Not a Nazi. Some of his quotes:

            “America was, until this last generation, a white country designed for ourselves and our posterity. It is our creation, it is our inheritance, and it belongs to us.”

            “We don’t exploit other groups, we don’t gain anything from their presence. They need us, and not the other way around.”

            “Leftists (who sometimes understand us better than we understand ourselves) have always sensed this; they know that when we talk about immigration, we’re not really talking about immigration.”

          • Pearlbuck

            He’s a white separatist. That is NOT synonymous with Neo-Nazi, and it’s a moot point, anyway. Even a Neo-Nazi has the right to exercise his First Amendment rights in America, without being punched in the face. People who laugh and applaud that type of terrorism are pigs.

          • amendingangel

            People who support hate speech are pigs. Back to the pen, Pearl!

          • Pearlbuck

            “Hate speech” is purely subjective, and if everyone’s definition of it was embraced by the law, there would total censorship. You’re scum, and you’re stupid. And people like you are the reason Trump won. So thanks for that, you pathetic little wannabe despot.

          • amendingangel

            Hate speech is not subjective, you odious hag! I smacked you down and you resorted to name calling.

          • Pearlbuck

            You exposed yourself as the silly little airhead you are. Such a sad little wannabe fascist you are. Viva the First amendment, you brainwashed, intellectually bankrupt cretin.

          • amendingangel

            Pearl, have a drink and shut up.

          • Pearlbuck

            In other words, you have no argument, because you’re used to blathering into echo chambers, and the portions of your brains capable of critical thinking have atrophied. Poor little loser.

          • Pearlbuck

            Why are you such an anti-semite?

          • amendingangel

            Get help.

          • Pearlbuck

            Not much of an argument, amending. Here’s the former chief rabbi of Israel sharing his views on the Goyim:
            “Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel.”

            “In Israel, death has no dominion over them… With gentiles, it will be like any person – they need to die, but [God] will give them longevity. Why? Imagine that one’s donkey would die, they’d lose their money.

            “This is his servant… That’s why he gets a long life, to work well for this Jew.”

            “Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat… That is why gentiles were created.”

            His funeral was the largest in the Jewish state’s history, and all of the most powerful leaders in Israel attended to sing his praises. Bibi loved him. Are you going to punch Bibi in the nose? Le me know.

          • amendingangel

            Pearl, how did you segue to the Jews? You’re not all there.

          • Pearlbuck

            Answer the question, phony. And I’ll keep rubbing your nose in your own airheaded hypocrisy, loser. You’re out of your depths here, and your jr. high school-level attempts at gaslighting won’t fool anyone.

          • amendingangel

            Kiss me Pearl, you cougar, you!

          • Pearlbuck

            Call out those millions Jews and Bibi for their support of hate speech, and then go and punch them all in the nose, phony. Your butthole sure puckered up when I called your bluff, didn’t it. Coward.

          • amendingangel

            Pearl needs a hug!

          • Pearlbuck

            “There is a huge gap between us (Jews) and our enemies, not just in ability but in morality, culture, sanctity of life, and conscience. They are our neighbors here, but it seems as if at a distance of a few hundred meters away, there are people who do not belong to our continent, to our world, but actually belong to a different galaxy.” former Israeli president Moshe Katsav.

            Awwww…. poor lil amending bit off more than he can chew. 🙁

          • amendingangel

            Pearl, I don’t know why you’re on the topic of Jews. I’m not interested.

          • Pearlbuck

            Of course you’re not. You bloviated about how the answer to “hate speech” is violence, and then I called your bluff. Because you’re a phony and an airhead. And I love shooting fish in a barrel.

          • Mandy Gershon

            Aw, couldn’t handle a real debate, so had to go pick on someone else and resort to name-calling. Can’t handle freedom, so had to pick on a guy wearing a hat proclaiming America can be great. You must be some kind of commie-pinko-fag. I hear places like Russia love people like you.

          • amendingangel

            A real debate? You don’t know how to debate. You just repeat yourself over and over. Freedom of expression can have consequences. You’ll have to learn to live with them. That bar owner had the freedom to ask the patron to leave, according to New York law. As a matter of fact, I can’t imagine why this attorney took his case.

            Pearlbuck offers no debate. She is a raving lunatic. Defending her proves you’re nothing but a partisan hack and I was right about you from the beginning. I think you need a real life. This constant posting to me and saying nothing is bizarre.

          • Mandy Gershon

            You fail to consider another’s point of view. That tells me you have not just a judgmental mind, but a tyrannical one. As long as everyone does what you think they should do, they’re free — in YOUR world. Well, let me clue you in: This is not just YOUR world. You need to learn to live and let live. You need to learn that not everyone will agree with the way you think — and if they did, what a dull place the world would be.

            And if you can’t imagine why “this attorney took his case,” then you can’t imagine the real meaning of freedom and I hereby reiterate everything I just said in the above paragraph.

            You stoop to calling people a lunatic when your small-minded thinking cannot fathom someone else’s point of view. (That’s definitely a loss in a debate.) Your lack of ability to understand that I’m not a partisan hack also shows your lack of understanding and ability to even conceive another point of view besides your own. (Prejudice much?) You’re not right about anything. You’re just upset that Trump is president and you want the world to stand behind you while you blame him for all your woes. (That will solve nothing because you have to actually know what the problem is before you can solve it.)

            And of course, my posting to you is bizarre to you, but your posting to me is not. Typical small-minded thinking.

            Someday, your judgmental prejudice is going to bite you in the arse. I can only hope that you grow up before you wreak more havoc on the world.

          • amendingangel

            We’re done. You are a liar and you stand for nothing that you claim to. You simply want to provoke me. I don’t share your view of the world and you do not honestly represent yourself. You steal my values and try to pass them off as your own. The liberty, the freedom, the democracy, these are all liberal tenets! You aren’t a liberal! Why do you pretend to be one? No one, who voted for Trump stands for these values. A liberal would have said that the man had a right to wear the hat but, it was a bad idea. That would have been an honest viewpoint….which is the way I feel about the situation. Just like, you don’t wear a Red Sox cap in a Yankee bar….unless, you’re looking for a confrontation. You can fool yourself but, you do not fool me. You are a fake and you are no advocate of freedom. Quite the contrary….you’re an advocate for everything that Trump stands for which is anything BUT freedom. You can shove Trump and the hat guy up YOUR arse! This sanctimonious claptrap is mind-numbing.

          • Mandy Gershon

            You’re done, that’s for sure. I sure as hell wouldn’t steal your values. Your values would mean that people would have to agree with you or be beaten. You don’t seem to understand values like: Live and let live. I don’t think you understand what freedom really means.

            No, I’m not “a liberal.” “A liberal” would try to tell me how to act. So would “a conservative.” I’m just a free American.

            This just proves your NYC isn’t as “diverse” as you claim if people are going to beat people up over a certain kind of hat. We don’t have such problems in Alaska. We don’t have “Yankee bars” because we’re a bit more diverse and understanding. You pretty much made my point for me. (And it has *nothing* to do with Trump.)

          • amendingangel

            The top 10 most multicultural cities in the world: Amsterdam, London, Los Angeles, Paris, New York City, San Francisco, Sal Paolo, Singapore, Sydney, Toronto. No mention of the one you claimed to be.

          • Mandy Gershon

            I see no source to back that up. I’ve already proven Anchorage has the most diverse neighborhood in the nation by quoting two sources stating so.

          • amendingangel

            Google it.

          • Mandy Gershon

            Again.

            These are for 2015 and 2016.

            (My previous reply was deleted, I imagine because it’s very difficult to share sources without putting out actual links. You may have to Google it yourself.)

            At CNN: /2015/06/12/us/most-diverse-place-in-america/

            At Smithsonian Magazine: /travel/mountain-view-alaska-diversity-immigration-smithsonian-journeys-travel-quarterly-180959441/

            At America Aljazeera: /multimedia/2015/8/most-diverse-neighborhood-in-us-is-in-alaska.html

            At Only In Your State /alaska/most-diverse-place-america-mountain-view-ak/

            At Anchorage Daily News: /education/article/anchorage-melting-pot-diversity/2015/05/24/

          • Mandy Gershon

            I’ve attempted to provide you with the 6 links that pop up right off the bat at Google. Please read at your leisure.

          • amendingangel

            I cannot provide the links. It goes to pending

            2016 Most Diverse Cities in America – New York Ranked 6th, Anchorage, AK ranked 85th -NBC News

            Queens Has More Languages Than Anywhere In The World-Business Insider

            10 Most Multicultural Cities In The World – New York City ranked 5th, with Queens, New York being the most multicultural – The Culture Trip

            Queens Is Tops In Diver-city – NY Daily News

          • Mandy Gershon

            You’re talking about cities. I’ve been talking about neighborhoods.

          • amendingangel

            Queens is not a city, it is a borough. Queens is the most
            diverse “place” on the planet, according to the Guinness Book of World Records. You’re using land mass as a criteria.

          • Mandy Gershon

            I’m not using anything except a bunch of sources that, as we both noticed, ABC won’t let us cite without deleting our posts. 😉

          • amendingangel

            A LAWYERS PERSPECTIVE on this lawsuit:

            Let’s set the scene. It’s 6:30 p.m. on a Saturday night in Manhattan. You’re with some pals and decide to go to grab a drink at a hip bar in the West Village, at a place just down the street from the famed Stonewall Inn. You walk into the swanky bar, admiring all of the beautiful, trendy New Yorkers, all the while wearing… a “Make America Great Again” hat. Talk about a fish out of water.

            Well, it turns out that Greg Piatek, a 30 year-old accountant from Philly, decided he was going to do just this. Hey, I commend him. It takes a brave soul to walk through one of New York’s most notoriously gay and liberal neighborhoods flashing support for an administration which threatens to denigrate the very values and rights that this community holds dear. Now you would think Mr. Piatek would’ve recognized that he was essentially flipping the bird to this community by prancing around its neighborhood in Trump campaign garb. But, evidently, this symbolism was beyond Mr. Piatek’s comprehension.

            So, when Mr. Piatek rolled into The Happiest Hour on West 10th Street (barely a 5 minute walk east from Stonewall Inn) with his buddies, boasting his favorite Trump campaign paraphernalia, he was alarmed when the bartenders refused to serve him. He was even more alarmed when the bar’s manager stood behind his employees, purportedly telling Mr. Piatek, “Anyone who supports Trump — or believes what you believe — is not welcome here! And you need to leave right now because we won’t serve you!”. Mr. Piatek was then unceremoniously shown the door.

            Mr. Piatek has now hit back at the bar, filing a lawsuit in Manhattan’s Supreme Court. I haven’t been able to get my hands on a copy of the Complaint but, from the press coverage, it seems that Mr. Piatek is taking the “emotional distress” angle, claiming that he was deeply embarrassed by the incident.

            Let’s go through the legalities first. The paramount issue here – a private establishment’s right to refuse service – has been at the center of our public dialogue for a bit. The debate has traditionally centered on the difficult headbutting of religious freedom, as protected by the 1st Amendment, with our anti-discrimination laws. Ironically, the conservative position has generally been in support of a private establishment’s right to refuse service, espousing the 1st Amendment as a justification for doing so. However, in an interesting twist, Mr. Piatek – the “conservative” – is arguing against the establishment’s right to refuse service, seemingly attempting to use the 1st Amendment now as a sword instead of a shield.

            Nevertheless, the critical distinction here is that this matter doesn’t involve religious freedom or any other protected classification. Rather, Mr. Piatek is essentially seeking damages stemming from the bar’s “discrimination” against him based upon his political ideology. Unfortunately for Mr. Piatek, political ideology is not a classification protected by our anti-discrimination laws. The 1st Amendment – which protects freedom of expression – also won’t save the day for Mr. Piatek because our right to express ourselves does not, necessarily, extend to privately-owned establishments.

            Again, I haven’t seen Mr. Piatek’s pleading, but I suspect that his reliance on tort theories for the infliction of emotional distress, rather than on allegations of constitutional infringements, is precisely because the Constitution, and the subsequent progeny of federal law, afford him no protection for his political beliefs.

            And, if we’re being frank about it, I’m not even sure that tort law will provide any relief. Generally, in order for their to be a cognizable claim for damages based upon emotional distress in New York, the conduct complained of has to be “extreme and outrageous”. This will ultimately be a question for the finder-of-fact, but Mr. Piatek may be hard-pressed to find a New York-based judge or jury who will agree that the bar acted “outrageously” enough to warrant an award of damages, especially in light of the symbolic connotations of Mr. Piatek’s act, which he seems to be overlooking.

            In a weird way, I feel for Mr. Piatek. While I’m certainly not a Trump supporter, I’m disheartened by this catastrophic chasm that now divides this country. This country was birthed on the premise of an open public discourse, where people can freely speak their minds and be heard by even their most staunch rivals. But it seems that our ability to stomach each other – even for the sake of maintaining a public dialogue – has dissolved completely.

            Then again, less than 100 days into Donald Trump’s already outrageous presidency, Mr. Piatek’s hat represents far more than a political allegiance. For the West Village community, and others like it, the hat signifies an imminent threat to their very existence and elicits fear. Put simply, the hat is an affront to them.

            The Legal Chick
            Erin Ehrlich, Esq.

            Attorney, Legal Commentator

          • Mandy Gershon

            I agree w/your legal stance. I find it ironic that it flies in the face of everything these so-called liberals claim they stand for, which is really very sad, so I also agree with you on that.

            I’m also not a Trump supporter, but I do tend to try to look at both sides of an issue and when I see someone being bullied, I tend to not side with the bully. Perhaps the person wearing the hat was the bully, but from the way the media has put it across, it does not seem to be the case. It seems those in the bar were the bullies. I wasn’t there, so I could be wrong.

            However, if the people in the bar are so afraid of their position that they feel the need to throw him out, they must feel pretty weak.

            In Alaska, we live and let live, whether you like Obama or Trump, the Dallas Cowboys or the Patriots, etc. We have loud voices and we use them, but we don’t so easily disregard people’s freedoms. Diversity is something to be embraced, not feared and beaten down by bullies.

            I hope you enjoy the legal field. I found it disheartening and it held little joy for me. I changed careers a couple of decades ago and have been much happier.

          • amendingangel

            That is not my legal stance. That was the opinion of Erin Ehrlich, Esq. I found it and thought you might be interested.

            I don’t think the bar owner/staff felt weak at all. I think that this man’s presence may have caused patrons in the bar to feel uncomfortable. If someone is wearing offensive clothing, the bar owner has a right to ask the patron to leave.

            Liberals don’t stand for oppression of any group. The Trump hat is a symbol of oppression. It is a symbol of hate, divisiveness, alienation, intimidation and authoritarianism. This man stands for all of those things when he dons that hat and people will have a reaction. Try and see both sides.

          • Mandy Gershon

            I can’t control how people feel. I am only in control of how I react to any given situation. These people, liberals or not, were reacting on baseless fears. Obama becoming president made people feel and believe much the same way, too. If people oppressed Obama supporters, I would react the same way. A hat saying “Let’s Make America great again” is not offensive unless you go out of your way to believe it’s offensive. Too many people are getting offended for silly reasons. You don’t kick people out of a public area simply because they don’t agree with you, and for all we know, this man simply believed in the words on the hat and not in Trump. There were a lot of assumptions being made by the bar. You say that you can understand why they felt that way; and sure, I can understand human nature in that regard as well. However, this is America. It’s not “Gangland.” These guys acted very unAmerican when they did this to a patron. Now, if he went in boasting of Trump, I might kick him out myself. However, if it went down like the article I read, the bar was in the wrong.

            You asked me to see it both ways. Now I ask you: If that bar gets away with treating people like this, what kind of precedence do you think that will set? Don’t you think if such things are allowed to continue, the country will become even more divided?

            Personally, I’m sick of Republicans and Democrats. The DNC really proved how despicable they can be during this last election. Now I’m watching to see if the Republicans do the same. I’d prefer having a completely different party to believe in (nonpartisan as it is), but I’m not feeling very hopeful. It’s like watching two children wreak havoc on the entire country.

            I also want to apologize for past messages. I wrote some of them in anger — much like the bar reacted. So, yes, I can understand that sort of behavior. I just don’t like it when it’s done, even when I’m the one doing it.

          • amendingangel

            Fascism is not a baseless fear. It is very real with the election of Trump.

          • Mandy Gershon

            It’s no more real with Trump than it was with Obama.

          • amendingangel

            That is absolutely false! There was nothing even remotely fascist about Obama. Look up what it means.

          • Mandy Gershon

            LOL!

          • amendingangel

            You’re ignorant. Really.

          • Mandy Gershon

            You make me laugh. Really.

          • amendingangel

            First, the fascist creates an enemy or a scapegoat. Trump has done that. Muslims, Mexicans, immigrants, the media, Democrats and bears. Second, the hyper-nationalism. He’s done that. “America first,” Make America Great Again, hiring Bannon, a White Nationalist, etc. Third, discrediting the media. He’s done that. “Enemy of the people,” “fake news,” etc. Fourth, he empowers the free market. He’s done that with massive deregulation…workplace safety, environmental protection, fair pay. Fifth, he weakens the power of the civilian. He’s done that. He just signed a bill weakening women’s rights on the job. He’s also de-funded Planned Parenthood. He will go after unions since he’s anti-union, weakening the American worker. Sixth, strengthens the military. He’s done that and wants to increase military spending. Seventh, he’s de-funded the arts and humanities departments. Eighth, public broadcasting. He’s defunding that. Ninth, he defies the authority of the judicial system. Tenth, he wants to change the Constitution to fit his agenda. Again, hiring deconstructionist Steve Bannon and appointing saboteurs and deconstructionists to positions of authority. People who will destroy, rather than improve the departments they were appointed to. Eleventh, he’s incited violence at his rallies.

            Funny, isn’t it?

          • Mandy Gershon

            You sound like the Obama-haters, except this time, it’s Trump.

          • amendingangel

            Racism vs fascism. White, conservative people hated Obama because they believed he took something from them that was rightfully theirs…the White House. Right wing hate groups grew at historic levels when he was in office. Trump is a neo-fascist. Obama was a centrist. Trump’s ideology will oppress factions of society. It has already begun, which I pointed out in my previous post.

          • Mandy Gershon

            Obama screwed us over. Not saying Trump won’t, but I’ll wait and see. Obama had no qualms about violating our rights. He didn’t care about the Constitution, our country’s founding document. He had no qualms about violating the 4th Amendment and certainly didn’t like the 2nd one. He was fine with spying on Americans and allies as well. What would you call that?

          • amendingangel

            You assume I like Obama. I don’t. But, he did not violate the Constitution. Now what, Mandy? Are you going to fess up that you support Trump or, are you going to continue the illusion of diplomacy? He’s already screwed us. It’s puzzling that you don’t see this.

          • Mandy Gershon

            You’re not being very diplomatic.

          • amendingangel

            Why would I be receptive to an oppressive form of government? I would have to be mentally incompetent to accept such a thing.

          • Mandy Gershon

            I wouldn’t be receptive to oppression, either.

        • charles_1

          “Opinion” is not a shield from defamation. If it was then nothing would be defamation.

  • gwilson5150

    That’s right! If a bakery can be FINED out of its existence for not making a gay cake, this bar should be sued and fined out of its existence for not serving a Conservative Trump supporter.

    • DaisyToo

      Great minds and all that … 🙂

  • DaisyToo

    Meanwhile, businesses have been shut down when their owners have practiced freedom of religious expression for not providing services to gay ‘marriages’. Hope he puts the bar out of business forever.

    • Christopher Lee Hartsock

      Proving once and for all that two wrongs DO make a right?

      • DaisyToo

        No. Proving that one can – LEGITIMATELY – take a legal stand against actual discrimination. Here’s what to do w/your political conscience: Vote. You don’t get to throw people out of your place of business because their right to vote offends you.

      • Factory

        “Render unto Caesar, that which is Caesar’s”. It’s a religious concept you likely won’t understand…

  • ModdKenwood

    death to the left

  • Jason Bulsa

    Winning! told to leave BN bookstore here for wearing Trump Flag Cape after death threat. posted on twitter

  • Diana Maras

    I would think that just posting the experience and the bar name would be enough for reasonable people to stop drinking there. Let them have their assholes and go drink somewhere else. If all the assholes go there just think how nice every where else will be.

    • Ricsuave

      It’s NYC. If anything that would get them MORE business from the lefties.

      • Christopher Lee Hartsock

        You mean the GOOD bars would be drained of SJWs?

      • amendingangel

        That’s a great bar!

    • TinLizzie

      Did you notice that the name of the bar was not mentioned in this story?

  • Bobby Stevens

    This happened in January of 2016 and he’s suing now?

    • Greg Cobb

      No, it says that’s when it happened.

      • Hamm Sammichez

        Were there MAGA hats even available then? I’m thinking that this is a typo and they meant 2017.

  • Pearlbuck

    If they kicked him out for wearing a gay pride hat, it would be an international incident. The entitlement and hypocrisy of Progressives is at an all-time high.

  • SchmierrNippel

    Sue the shit outta them, give winnings to bakery owners who lost business

  • Delia Cooper-Kramer

    Good its about time people stand up to the liberal cry babies.

  • BBSteve

    If someone does not want to serve you, why do you want to go there? – the hat may be a cause for arguments, and the patron should consider that – reguardless, the same goes for Hillary Hats…

  • BBSteve

    I also would not wear a Red Sox hat in NYC…too old to argue…

  • jb

    That guy is 30? He looks 45

  • Chris Richardson

    Considering New York passed a law forcing bars to serve pregnant women, I don’t see why this guy couldn’t win his lawsuit.

  • budfudlacker

    Nice! Time to fight fire with fire.

  • Christopher Lee Hartsock

    My God, the flip-flops.
    Well, my rabid comrades, I’ll go odd-man out here:
    TAKE YOUR BUSINESS ELSEWHERE. Isn’t that what everyone else was screaming about the gay bakery? I know I was. Getting the courts involved… isn’t that the sort of government-force involved in conscience we thought was such a bad thing?
    Look, I don’t care for the left. At all. AT ALL.

    That’s kinda why I don’t want to ACT like them.

  • Demi Anderson, MAGA

    Bartenders need to come up with a drink and call it “The MAGA” and if anyone refuses to make it, sue the joint.

  • Mark S

    I approve!

  • Michael Prince

    All the different discussions going on here about different aspects of the situation and I can’t believe no one has said anything about the only thing that matters. Are people really this ignorant? And if you think that’s being mean, I suggest you look up the definition of ignorance.

    Anyway, there is only one thing someone needs to know, to know that this court case is going to be won. It’s called the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which makes it illegal to discriminate against an individual based on their political beliefs. And if that isn’t good enough, there’s another thing called The First Amendment, which guarantees an individual the right to Freedom of Expression.

    Oh, and since the bar is considered a Place of Public Accommodation, that also makes it illegal for them to discriminate against someone based on their political beliefs. So, that’s three different ways I can think of off the top of my head that the bar violated this mans civil rights.

    And while I’m on the subject, how can anyone who owns a business in this day and age, not know these simple rights that ALL Americans have? You’re pretty stupid if you run a business and don’t know these things. That bar is either going to go out of business and be shut down because of this, or, it’s going to come under new ownership.

    • amendingangel

      That is a heck of a lot of wrong! You must be exhausted.

  • Lumpdog

    I hope he puts them out of business, talking about MAGA!

  • Michael Grace

    Hope he wins a YUGE settlement!

  • Allison Freed

    Why do Democrats hate America?

    • amendingangel

      I take offense to that comment because it is screechingly inaccurate. Are you black? They will deny this because, no racist admits he is one but, MAGA is code for Make America White Again. You need to see the writing on the wall instead of claiming people who believe everyone is equal, hate America. What do you think the term, “great again” means? It is a longing for a time when people of color peed in the bushes on the side of the road because they weren’t allowed to use public rest areas, or sit at lunch counters with white people, or, drink from the same water fountain, or, were forced to sit in the back of the bus, or, attend the same schools and churches as whites. You look pretty foolish posting here.

  • CMGill

    Aw, poor little snowflake.

  • Pineneedle

    How is this any different then what Twitter, Facebook, Reddit & Google are doing? They all need to be sued

  • I used to kick people out of my college flat when they passed on the bong.

    In fairness, in my case it was a longstanding rule, so they knew what they were getting into when I opened the door and told them to get out…. and of course the hallucinations later when they continued smoking and saw freddy kreuger coming at them…

    Ah, Evan. May you rest in peace, buddy.