White House

Report: 'Outraged' Stephen Miller Threw Away His $80 Sushi Order After a Bartender Cursed Him Out

Kind of a self-defeating way to react



White House Senior Adviser Stephen Miller was so upset after a bartender followed him out of a restaurant and cursed at him that he threw away $80 worth of sushi, according to The Washington Post.

Miller reportedly told his Trump administration colleagues that when he went to pick up some takeout sushi, a bartender at the restaurant followed him out the door. The bartender called Miller's name, then cursed him out and flipped him off, prompting an "outraged" Miller to throw the sushi away, the Post says.

It's not the only time that Miller, who's faced criticism for his role in crafting the Trump administration's strict immigration policies, has reportedly been heckled. One neighbor even put up "Wanted" posters featuring Miller's photograph near his apartment.

Nor is Miller the only Trump official who's been called out in public. White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was asked to leave a Virginia restaurant last month, just days after Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen was heckled by protesters while she ate at a Mexican restaurant. And last week, a protester confronted former White House Chief Strategist Steven Bannon at a bookstore and called him a "piece of trash."

Such incidents are not unique to the Trump administration, according to Karl Rove, political strategist for former President George W. Bush. Rove claims to the Post that hundreds of demonstrators once converged outside his home and started banging on his windows. Aware that protesters were always ready to pounce, Rove explains that "we were very circumspect in Washington."

This may, however, by the first time a federal official has responded to a heckler by throwing away $80 worth of his own food.

NEXT: SCOTUS Nominee Brett Kavanaugh Sees Perils of Aggressive Administrative State

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The Progs are REALLY going to hate living under these rules.

    They will bitch and moan…but revenge will occur. Period.

    1. That is never going to happen.

      Firstly, the more government jobs available the higher number of progressive voters. There are like five conservatives that live in DC- when will any conservative have the opportunity to ‘confront’ a Democratic member of a presidential administration? Secondly, Republican voters tend to be married with children and older (according to polling data)- not the type of people that waste their time harassing others about politics.

      And if such a scenario did happen where a member of a Democratic administration were harassed this article would be written a hell of a lot differently.

      1. I agree. There won’t be any “living under these rules” for the left. They’ll just push and push, and push, and the first clue they’ll get that they’ve pushed too far will be dead bodies. Because they’re pushing people who’ve got no time for just being obnoxious, but DO have their breaking points.

        1. ‘Dead bodies?’ Because someone called a jerk a jerk?

          That’s just the autism talking, Brett Bellmore.

          1. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland|7.9.18 @ 3:40PM|#
            ”Dead bodies?’ Because someone called a jerk a jerk?”

            Well, as an annoying asshole you are sort of used to it, right, asshole?

            1. Please do not insult my anus by drawing comparisons with the Reverend K.

          2. Because someone called a jerk a jerk?

            No, and please, pick “intelligent and well informed” or “blindingly stupid and oblivious” as your persona, thanks.

          3. Revtards gotta revtard

          4. REVVVVVVV I need an anime recommendation. What do you recommend?

            1. Raging, bitter malcontents are among my favorite right-wing authoritarians.

              Open wider, clingers.

              1. ^This is what it looks like when you only post things you have prepared in advance, because you are absolutely certain someone will call out your stupidity, but they don’t and you look like a schizophrenic instead.

          5. Steve Scalise say hi, Rev.

            1. Heather Heyer doesn’t, goober.

        2. In related news, my county contracted with the state university to open a training program in forensic pathology when the number of suspicious deaths sent to the county hospital overwhelmed the existing staff.

        3. Historically, when the Right goes violent it doesn’t leave the bodies around to find. People just disappear.

      2. Another reason to fire as many bureaucrats as possible. Most of them are Democrat voters.

        After they are fired, they have less money to contribute to the Democratic Party.

      3. Yeah, its really not. Progressive government officials have little reason to ever enter the red enclaves.

    2. Ugh, what has this place become. 70 comments of conservatives bitching about liberals and liberals bitching about conservatives. Not a single mention of how if this happened to Robby, he would never throw $80 worth of takeout fruit sushi away.

      1. soave-flake, to be sure

      2. Well, thanks for saving me the trouble of reading it all. Disappointing.

      3. Robby wouldn’t have even heard the shit talking, how deep he was in his frushi eating frenzy.

      4. I’ve heard no evidence he pays for it

        1. So you’re saying he is some sort of burglar of frushi?

          1. He does look like someone whose exploits could best be described as “capers.”

            1. “Capers” is also a word used to describe the size of Robby’s dogs.

          2. Does he say “Robby Robby” during the theft?

        2. Great hair and the receiving of free stuff is just coincidence.

    3. It’s almost cute that you’re naive enough to think they’ll ever be held to the same standards.

  2. I may very well end up being wrong, but I think the more people do this (heckle the administration like this) and the more it gets publicized, the more they are going to turn this administration into a martyr in the eyes of a lot of people.

    1. Not really.

      Broadly speaking, his supporters are just going to have their views affirmed, his detractors are going to feel justified, and the squishy middle will mostly shrug and say “that’s politics”.

      It’s like how eight years of calling Obama a Kenyan-Muslim didn’t really move the needle much as the only people that cared were the folks that already made up their minds.

      Or to put it another way… actual independents (folks that swap from Republican to Democrat and back over the course of elections) generally aren’t paying attention. The people paying attention are people that are already committed.

      1. Some nutcases might have thought Obama’s authorized biography was accurate, but I didn’t hear of his cabinet officials being attacked in public.

        This sort of thing really isn’t compatible with the continued functioning of a free democracy. You normally assume that you’re not going to be subject to attacks walking down the street on the basis of working for an elected office holder.

        A certain faction of the Democratic party has decided that just being identifiably a Republican makes you a valid target for abuse.

        1. I think he claimed to be Kenyan when it was convenient to be Kenyan.

          His mom was a US citizen, so I think any claims he isn’t “natural born” rest on a variety of technicalities that have changed over the years. Technicalities that fall under the heading, “Garfield was a usurper.”

        2. This sort of thing really isn’t compatible with the continued functioning of a free democracy.

          Jesus Christ, when the fuck did the so-called conservative right become such a bunch of collectivist snowflakes? You all need to admit your communist sensibilities, move to CA where you belong, and leave the US to actual Americans.

          Democracy can only function properly when the government is afraid of the people it is supposed to represent.

          That doesn’t mean intimidation should always win the day, but it does mean that our public servants should have balls large enough to handle someone saying something mean, or even (gasp!) death threats. Grow the fuck up, you god damn children.

          And if government were to become paralyzed by partisan disagreement, so fucking what?

          1. For the record, I think it was unnecessary for that council rep to end up wearing a cast.

          2. “Democracy can only function properly when the government is afraid of the people it is supposed to represent.”

            While I agree with this statement, and have written the same (not here) as my key takeaway from Machiavelli’s Discourses on Livy, what we’re seeing here is not citizens being fed up with a corrupt and grasping government. Instead, it’s Democrat/Progressive agitators (Brownshirts) attempting to push an agenda of government supremacy – just for their faction.
            In fact, much of what the Progressive Brownshirts are agitating against is the return of sovreignty to the American people.
            There is good intimidation, a natural occurrence borne of a citizenry’s frustration, and there is factional violence. The latter is what we have here.

        3. You normally assume that you’re not going to be subject to attacks walking down the street on the basis of working for an elected office holder.

          And, frankly, that might be a major part of the problem. If more of these people were worried about personal consequences of their policy positions more of them might start caring what the rest of us think about their policies.

      2. It’s not about the independents though. Right of center people who are ambivalent or critical toward Trump are more likely to rally behind the administration due to events like this. The converse may be true for left of center folks, but for stuff that’s more unambiguously ‘bad’, the aggrieved side feels more galvanized while the other side feels more defensive or disillusioned, working to the advantage of the former.

        Maybe incidents like this have no effect. To the extent that they do though, it’s more about rallying the troops than recruiting new ones.

        1. I’m not sure this is perceived as unambiguously bad to many who are against him.

          1. I think this actually drives more people into Trump’s column. It’s just like the people who rioted wherever Trump went to speak during the campaign. The American voter doesn’t like people who behave like fascists. They’re weird that way

            1. I wonder how many people actually hear about this. Is this big news in many locations?

              1. This isn’t the first incident, as noted in the article. I’m sure a lot of people have probably read at least one of the stories that have been reported on.

                1. There is a reason why Pelosi and Schumer are getting grief from the socialist Left for denouncing these tactics

                  1. I wonder. Because all of us here are definitely in a political bubble, the amount we hear about it is probably well above the average person. I wonder how much people do hear on an average basis?

                    1. I saw several of these stories while just casually listening to the morning news for the traffic and weather. Of course the spin is quite different – closer to “evil racist gets what’s coming to him”. But if there is one thing I’ve noticed in the last year it’s that every single news outlet is paying fanatical attention to anything tangentially Trump and spinning it furiously in the most negative way possible. And given the ridiculous nature and transparent BS to so much of it, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if it backfires with a lot independents.

                    2. I’m sure Republicans in Missouri, Indiana, and West Virginia will be more than happy to remind voters.

        2. I don’t think normal people give a fuck about the feelings of politicians or their lackeys, and I think the only reason you are pretending to give a fuck right now is because your team cheerleaders are telling you you’re supposed to care right now.

      3. The people paying extra attention when they otherwise wouldn’t be are all the people horrified by president Trump.

        1. Only you would think that.

        2. The people paying extra attention are no doing so because the media is telling them too.
          Outsourcing your thinking is much easier than straining the few brain cells you have.

          Same is true on both sides.
          Human society trends towards ease. Thinking is hard.
          I’m sure you can figure out the rest Tony.

        3. I am paying extra attention and I am not horrified by President Trump.

          I pay extra attention because you lefties want to kill me and Libertarians like me.

          1. At Reason, everyone is a libertarian.

      4. ‘ the squishy middle will mostly shrug and say “that’s politics” ‘

        The squishy middle doesn’t like a ruckus, nor the people who make them.

        Advantage the Right.

    2. I’m just surprised that people who write for a publication funded by a pair of brothers that are demonized as bogeymen by the Left are cool with mob action. Getting chased out of a Georgetown cocktail party is going to be rough

      1. So, I just read the blog post above. Where exactly does it say that Reason endorses mob action?

        1. He already knows what they think, why bother reading the article?

    3. I’ve been thinking the same thing. What happens if the tables get turned? On the other hand, sometimes evil needs to get called out. If people treated Nazis like this would it have prevented much violence or would it have provoked? I’m not saying Trump equal to Hitler but it seems that there is a point where this kind of public rebuke does become warranted. Unfortunately, if they can’t convince the majority that this public outrage is warranted it will create a backlash. If Weintstein walked into a bar would anyone mind if this happened? I doubt it. Even Trump supporters would accept this kind of public outrage in his case.

      The big drawback is that progressives will not be able to show any kind of progressive signaling at a NASCAR event and likewise, conservatives will not be able to signal their ideals at the local co-op. We will further segregate ourselves. This would be fine if Trump and his ilk really are akin to the Nazis and their support is waning. It will force them to wither away and die politically. But even if they are akin to Nazis and their support stays steady or rises we are further escalating the divisions in this country and that just sucks.

      1. This phenomenon is entirely a creation of the MSM. It’s really quite impressive how effective they are at whipping up the outrage.

        1. This sort of thing really isn’t compatible with the continued functioning of a free democracy.

          Absolutely, and both teams are exactly the same way.

          Lambasting Trump lackeys in public is virtue signaling inspired by the MSM, and the outrage on the right is exactly the same thing. In reality, none of this is even news.

      2. We will further segregate ourselves.

        Further from what?

        Go look at a county-level breakdown of the 2016 election. Or the 2012 election. Or 2008. Or any modern election really. What you see is that even in states that went 70-30 one way or the other (and few states ever swing more then that these days) you find large pockets of support for both major candidates in most states. Even while Democrats get more support on the North East and West Coast, Republicans still get plenty of votes.

        Then go look at a similar map for 1860. You see that support is a lot more geographically concentrated. The whole rural-red/city-blue thing didn’t happen at al.

        We’re so much less politically segregated now then we have historically been. We might be on a trend-line one way or the other, but even if we’re heading towards more geographic segregation we have a long way to go before we get to Civil War levels of disagreement.

        1. I think he means intellectually and socially segregated, not geographically.

          A city with a 30/40/30 Red/Center/Blue mix can still have a situation where no Reds and Blues openly mingle in any places where Team Affiliation is central.

          1. I think that most of the mingling is probably just happening outside of the political bent set. Most people don’t have strong political ideals, but they still register someway or another.

        2. Then go look at a similar map for 1860. You see that support is a lot more geographically concentrated.

          Gee, what was going in 1860 that might explain something like that? Hmmm, I wonder…

          1. Yes, that is the point. People keep arguing that we’re getting close to another Civil War, but refuse to actually look at what that looked like. We have to self-segregate a lot more before that’s a realistic worry.

            1. ^This is what it looks like when you’re incredibly stupid and you think transportation and communication are the same as in 1860, so population patterns and their movement should be too.

              1. Which fits Escher’s point too, since it’s basically that the statements that segregation like this is leading to a new civil war is not justified.

        3. Airplanes lead to a new geography of politics. Hence the progressive desire to ban cars from cities and the conservative opposition to road and home construction in rural areas. The suburbs are where we all mix.

      3. If people treated Nazis like this would it have prevented much violence or would it have provoked?

        If people had tried that with Nazis before they got into power, they’d have been beaten up by Brownshirts.

        If they tried it after, they’d get arrested by the Gestapo.

        That people feel safe treating their targets like this suggests they know the targets aren’t Nazis.

        1. The Nazi’s would not have done nearly as much if they had not invade other countries. Stopping Saddam from keeping Kuwait tempered his genocidal tendencies.

      4. Heraclitus,

        A certain Mr. Booth would agree with you. He was a Democrat who hated a Republican president.

  3. Um, isn’t this exactly what y’all say folks should do?

    “Why would you want cake from someone that hates you?” and all that jazz? Is sushi someone different from cake here, in that wanting sushi from someone that hates you makes sense where wanting cake from someone that hates you doesn’t?

    ‘Sides, it’s not like the $80 is a big set-back for him. It’s like if I spitefully threw away an apple or something. A pittance, the gesture of contempt worth the price.

    1. Difference is that sushi isn’t as delicious as cake

      1. This Story is a crock.
        Sushi “to go” in the Summer time ? No way

        1. I get sushi to go all year round.

          1. I have never tried Wal-Mart sushi. Or Cracker Barrel sushi.

            Do you recommend them?

            1. Wal-Mart sushi is okay grocery store sushi. Cracker Barrel doesn’t have sushi. Hope that cleared things up.

            2. Kosher Shoprite sushi is a great treat. Walmart has wonderful staff and a diverse selection of items for a range of customers, but I’ve never tried their sushi.

            3. By the way, Rev, you may have to revise your opinion of Walmart. There’s one across the street from the airport that specializes in private jets that travel between LA and NYC. It opened a few years ago.

              1. Walmart is a huge, impersonal business catering to a downscale customer base. It is objectionable in some ways (abusive pursuit of subsidies, treatment of employees and sometimes vendors, right-wing leanings), unobjectionable in others (provides product at a reasonable price, sometimes to consumers who have relatively few choices).

        2. At night? Why not?

          Sushi is originally street food.

          It can survive being taken home, even in the summer.

      2. Difference is that sushi isn’t as delicious as cake
        What the fuck? Almost every cake baked in the US is primarily sugar and flour, therefore bland and monoflavored.

        Sushi is way more delicious than cake, on average.

        Only the worst people would disagree with this assessment.

    2. That the bartender wasn’t fired shows that the establishment is not interested in business.

      1. They made $80 off of him. Or are you referring to the lost business of real Americans who love Trump and eat gourmet sushi on the reg?

        1. “Republicans buy sneakers too”

        2. They made 25, 30$ off of him tops, in profit. And if they loose one future order from him, it’s, hmm, -100% return on investment. They better hope the progs start progging harder in the takeout business.

        3. I buy thousands of dollars of Japanese food each year. I also bring business clients in for Naga-sakis (1 part eggnog and 3 parts saki).

          The Japanese restaurant that I frequent treats me with much-a respect-a. They know who pays for the lights to remain on.

          1. Did you turn italian there for a minute at the end?

        4. The average guy coming into the restaurant wouldn’t recognize the face of a Trump staffer, but he would notice that the bartender in the restaurant’s uniform is berating a customer.

      2. It provides a great example of why it’s a good idea to ignore economists.

        Economists assume individuals will act according to their rational economic interests. Exactly who involved in this was doing any such thing? Was ABC acting in their rational economic interest by canceling Roseanne?

        When your fundamental assumptions are wrong, there’s not a lot of reasons to assume your conclusions are correct.

        1. Was ABC acting in their rational economic interest by canceling Roseanne?

          I’m sure they thought they were. How many years did NBC keep employing what’s-his-name on the Today show knowing full well what a womanizer he was? I seriously doubt ABC dumped Roseanne because woke.

        2. Economists assume individuals will act according to their rational economic interests.

          Only in aggregate.

          I recommend you stick to edgy usernames reeking of cultural and ideological insecurity. You really seem to have difficulty with literacy, economic or otherwise.

    3. It’s just “crumbs” as they say.

    4. No, it isn’t, you’re just a dishonest douche bag. Reason didn’ say bakers should refuse to serve gay weddings. They said they should be legally allowed to refuse to do so.

      It’s really tiring having to repeatedly explain this to you idiots: thinking it should be legal to do something, and thinking someone should do it, are not the same fucking thing.

      1. Dude, reread and try again. I said nothing about whether or not any given restaurant had a legal right or should have a legal right.

        My point was entirely on the other side of the equation: knowing the vendor’s animosity towards him, why would the customer want it?

        1. Yes. Doug Stanhope has a joke just about that.

        2. knowing the vendor’s animosity towards him

          That’s an awfully big assumption. It’s possible he didn’t know there was any animosity towards him on the part of the bartender or anyone else until he went and picked up his food, at which point the bartender recognized him and started yelling at him.

          1. All that’s different is the timing, before or after order made. The central concept, that the vendor’s feelings towards you should change your desire for the product, remains the same.

            That said, pretty sure the timing didn’t change how y’all felt about Take the Cake from Toledo, Ohio?.

            And that said, the main response I’ve seen from y’all is that I’m right on the cases being analogous, and that Miller shouldn’t want the sushi anymore. So if you think this is different, you appear to be in the minority.
            ?Woman places an order for a birthday cake, to be picked up the following week. Baker then e-stalks the customer, discovers that she’s a lesbian, and cancels the order because God.

            1. Why would people want to buy a cake from a stalking baker anyway?

              1. Haven’t you seen that lady’s snapchat account? It’s popular locally in certain circles.

            2. You’ve got to be a moron in you think that the timing is immaterial. It’s like claiming self defense in a fight you start and then also throw the first punch in, after all the only thing that’s different is the timing.

        3. My point was entirely on the other side of the equation: knowing the vendor’s animosity towards him, why would the customer want it?

          What would Jesus do?

          1. Feed the entire wedding party with a single piece of cake, try to pawn off water as wine, then flee by running barefoot across the pond?

    5. Yes. This is what should be done. We shouldn’t be getting a fucking supreme court case out of it.

      1. Nope. No law needs to be involved at all here.

        I’m thinking this probably doesn’t help in the long run, but it should not be illegal.

        1. Things you should have told your nominee last election, Mr. Sarwark

          1. If cake was involved this would be entirely different. Don’t be ignorant.

    6. Yeah, would you have trusted that food not to have been poisoned? Throwing it away was good judgment.

      1. +1

  4. “Kind of a self-defeating way to react”

    Sort of like tariffs.

    1. I’m sure the bartender was really pissed about trade restrictions too.

      1. “Hey brah, ain’t you ever read anything by David Ricardo? Comparative advantage, bitch. You know how much the price of my infinity scarves has gone up?”

      2. My mom used to have aunts in the USA with cousins behind the Iron Curtain. Every time those aunts visited relatives behind the Iron Curtain, they brought bras and toilet paper to give to the relatives. Any you thought our trade barriers might get difficult.

  5. This may, however, by the first time a federal official has responded to a heckler by throwing away $80 worth of his own food.

    I’d throw away the food too. Who wants a grundel roll? I would though cancel the credit charge because the food may have been tampered with and he was verbal accosted by the restaurant staff.

    1. Send them some pizzas . With pineapple.

    2. I would have returned the food as something wrong with it and demand my money back.

      Then get the bartender fired.

      Companies allowing employees to disrespect customers is just bad business.

      I would fire any employee who disrespected a customer no matter what the political position. I run a business not a Union where you can mouth off to your paying customers and still get paid.

      1. I would fire any employee who disrespected a customer no matter what the political position.

        A bigoted employee who refused to serve a gay customer? A superstitious employee who refused to fill a prescription? A yahoo clerk who refused to issue a marriage license?

        1. A bigoted employee who refused to serve a gay customer?

          Depending on the situation, yes. Would do it without getting the government involved.

          A superstitious employee who refused to fill a prescription?

          Depending on the situation, yes. Would do it without getting the government involved.

          A yahoo clerk who refused to issue a marriage license?

          If I ran a marriage licensing company, yes. But that’s impossible to not get the government involved.

        2. An English teacher at a public school who gives a student a “D” on an essay without any constructive criticism, because she doesn’t like the general tone of the paper? A cop who denies service to people on a certain block, because he doesn’t want to get shot on that block? A social worker billing medicare who spend’s a client’s time on social justice concerns?

  6. Why wouldn’t you throw out food given to you by somebody insane enough to not just verbally attack a customer, but to follow them out of the restaurant while on the clock? Who knows what might be in it if they’d recognized you before preparing it?

    We’re talking about nutcases here, It’s not worth risking being poisoned.

    1. He has chosen Wisely.

    2. This was my thought.

      “Can I get a name for that order?”

      There’s no way I’d eat that food.

  7. Self defeating? I guess it depends on how you feel about food poisoning. Last time I had it I would have paid more than $80 to make it go away. If Miller figured there was a chance someone knew who the order was for it wouldn’t be smart to eat it. I think I would have taken it back for a refund though.

    1. I’d have taken it back for a refund, but I’m ornery, I’d have relished filing assault charges after the bartender started throwing bottles at me. Miller probably has different tradeoffs between being injured and getting in the faces of impolite people.

    2. Don’t prominent people order stuff under phony names? I’m sure Brad Pitt doesn’t make hotel reservations in his name.
      Then again, how many of us would recognize this forgettable faced dude if he walked into our sushi place?

      1. I’m always ready to identify and freak out on public officials.

      2. “Who’s Bradrigel Pitterson, anyway?”

  8. This story is a crock.
    Sushi “to go” in the summer time ? Who does that ?

    1. The man is a monster. He probably drinks milk outside at summer barbecues.

      1. I saw that Stephen Miller not only drinks milk outside at summer barbecues, he puts ice in his milk.

        He is a danger to all humanity.

        1. Not just milk. SKIM milk.

        2. And he drinks beer from a can with a straw.

        3. I saw that Stephen Miller not only drinks milk outside at summer barbecues, he puts ice in his milk.

          What a moron. Everybody knows you just freeze the gallon solid and then sip it as it thaws.

          1. I’m finally rethinking the 1st Amendment.

    2. I get sushi to go all year round.

      1. I’ve done it in AZ too. You’re from Atlanta too, right? So, two places not near water, getting sushi in the summer. It’s all good baby.

        1. Outside Atlanta but enough people that fish does not sit long and it is flown into the busiest airport in the USA every day. They can also get fish from off Georgia and Florida coasts.

          You have to be careful with what restaurant you buy raw fish from but my favorite Japanese place is ???

        2. All American sashimi is supposed to, legally, be deep-frozen to kill parasites, anyway.

          So it doesn’t make any difference at all whether it’s anywhere near water.

          Your fish isn’t “fresh”, and cannot and should not be, in that sense.

          1. Yeah. I know. It’s all good, baby.

          2. Its more: can they keep it cold enough and have enough customer turnover to not get old thawed fish.

  9. I agree that tossing the food was the right move. At best he was going to be ingesting some righteous loogiaki. At worst, rat poison.

  10. This is like US magazine. Living in the moment.

    1. You would read US Magazine

      1. He only reads it for the celebrity sideboob.

      2. Sorry you don’t love America enough to read it’s official magazine.

      3. US Magazine makes too many assumptions.

        Assumptions makes asses out of you and magazines.

        1. Assumption is what you get when you combine “ass” and “umption”.

  11. To be sure, if anybody from the Trump administration deserves to be treated like shit, it’s this turd. Just look at that eminently punchable face – that creep’s got some kind of BDSM sex dungeon fetish gone wrong storyline slotted for his obituary.

    1. Oh David Carradine, you left us too soon.

      1. He was always coming and going.

    2. So, it’ll read:


  12. You’d think a guy who looks that much like a penis would have come up with a better way to handle heckling by now.

    1. He did. Why do you think he became a high level government official.

    2. Even though he looks like a penis, he wasn’t the dick in this story

    3. He usually tapes a wiry looking merkin to his chin before grabbing the pickup order, but there was a 1 PM he had to make it back to in time.

    4. Especially being literally Hitler, he probably gets heckled a lot.

      1. I thought Andrea Merkel was literally Hitler?

        I mean, she’s got Refugee Camps now, and Camps = Hitler, and she’s even German!

  13. It’s a rather dignified reaction. I’d be tempted to throw the sushi at the guy while screaming rape

    1. Read my mind, well at least the throw it at the guy part.

  14. Next time call me. I’ll eat it.

  15. When will the Post return to covering Mrs. McGuire’s award-winning giant turnip at the county fair?

    1. Just as soon as they can think of a way to report it ironically or make it sound dirty.

    2. When Team Blue takes the White House and they need an excuse to avoid covering a scandal?

      1. Team Blue is never getting into the White House for the foreseeable future.

    3. As soon as Jeff Bezos finds a way to spin the turnip as colluding with Russia to help Putin control Trump.

  16. This may, however, by the first time a federal official has responded to a heckler by throwing away $80 worth of his own food.

    And possibly the last time the issue doesn’t go before a federal judge.

    1. It’s not libertarian to question protected class status, because that word literally means nothing

      1. “libertarian”?

    2. One time Ted Kennedy freaked out at a Golden Corral and did nearly that much damage to the chocolate fountain.

      1. What, by driving his chocolate car off of the chocolate bridge and into the chocolate moat?

        1. Yes. The Martha’s Vineyard Golden Corral is grandiose.

        2. That sounds like a euphemism for a really advanced sex act.

          1. It’s not that advanced. Ted Kennedy pulled it off.

            1. To be fair, car sex means something different to us normals.

  17. I would have just made sure the bartender was fired.

    He was rude to a customer. Cause for termination.

    If the manager didn’t fire the bartender, I would look to have the manager fired for keeping rude employees that disrespect paying customers.

    If a company executive didn’t fire the manager, I would have the executive fired for keeping managers that keep disrespectful employees on staff.

    If its a small business, I would hire some bums to picket in front of the restaurant carrying those front/back signs letting everyone know that the restaurant employees racist employees.

      1. It would be a lesson in being prepared to back up your childish little comments while at work.

        Be professional to all customers and potential customers or expect someone to fuck with you and get you fired.

    1. This happened in DC. This is a city that lives, eats, and breaths off of rent-seeking. Hence the fact that it’s overwhelmingly progressive. The bartender probably boosted business there

      1. I would look at the money to hire bums to protest as money well spent.

        1. Forget about protesting, give the bums $20 each to go in and have a few drinks. Nothing like having a bunch of chronic drunks smelling of urine taking up space on your bar stools to drive out the other customers.

          1. Can I do both?

  18. Oh, and apropos of the headline, was it Stephen Miller who was “outraged” or the bartender?

  19. This Miller situation isn’t a case of a business refusing to serve someone.

    It’s about a customer paying a business for food, the business providing the food, and adding some curses and flipping off to the customer’s experience.

    I don’t know about Washington, D. C., but in some jurisdictions this might be seen as a breach of contract.

    Unless they’re specifically into that sort of thing, customers don’t pay to be abused and insulted.

    Sounds like the business wanted to have its cake (or sushi) and eat it too – taking a customer’s money but mistreating him in a way not contemplated in the purchase agreement.

    1. Your “solution” sounds like a wide-open invitation to abuse of the businesses… If I am a proggy, I’ll go to Chic-Fill-A, get pissed off that the servers don’t have enough nose rings and anti-Trump T-shirts, and throw away my chicken McFuckits or what have you, and then blame and sue Chic-Fill-A!

      Your baby feelings are your baby feelings, and I cannot be held responsible for them, in a sane nation!

      1. Being mad that the servers aren’t wearing what you like isn’t quite the same as the servers yelling obscenties at you, flipping you off, and following you outside the restaurant, is it?

        “Feelings” are not the issue here.

        1. He’s a government agent. This is specifically what the 1st amendment is for.

          1. He’s too stupid to understand where that leads.

        2. “Feelings” are not the issue here.

          Yes, they are. Sticks and stones, may break my bones, but words will never hurt me. Once we let go of that simple idea, and let Government Almighty “validate” our hurt baby feelings… Or NOT validate our hurt baby feelings, at the politically correct whims of Government Almighty… Then we have let the Evil One incarnate loose, to prey on us at its whim! FUCK the shit out of Government Almighty!!!! Free speech uber alles!!!

          I can turn an un-hearing ear to verbal obscenities. I can NOT turn an unfeeling body to the violence of Government Almighty!!!!

          1. People can contract away parts of their free speech, and I think there’s a case to be made that when you make a contract to provide someone with a good or service, your implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing doesn’t allow you to insult the customer while purporting to serve him.

    2. But they never promised not to be assholes to him either. Just to provide Sushi.

    3. Unless they actually assaulted him (not claimed), or actually contaminated his food (if so, Miller disposed of the evidence himself), there’s probably not a basis for a lawsuit.

      Assuming he wanted retribution, about the best Miller could have hoped for was to try and get the guy fired.

      1. Cum to think of it, I have frequented WAAAYYY many business establishments, and to MY tastes, NONE of them have NEARLY enough hard-core erotic porno pics posted on the walls!!!

        I have threatened many of them with lawsuits, and none of them gave a shit, and I can’t find any lawyers to take up my cases!!!

        WHY does no one seem to give a shit about what does and does not hurt MY baby feelings, dammit!?!?!?

        1. Start at Starbucks. They have lots of money to settle with and apparently cave to crazy customers.

        2. The Met has a cafe inside and plenty of nude statues.

          1. But are the nude statues lustily humping each other? Nothing less will do!!!

    4. I think there’s at least an argument that insulting your customers violates the covenant of good faith and fair dealing which is implied in most contracts.

      If you dislike someone enough to flip them off and cuss at them, you should just refuse their business and preserve your options.

  20. $80 sushi lunch?!? Proof positive that these leeches on the taxpayers are paid too much!!!

    Throwing it away in a hissy fit?!?!? Way-way-double-proof, these fuckers are paid WAAAAY too much!!!

    1. Eh, if he was grabbing lunch for three or four people, it’s not unreasonable. Maybe just two if it’s super fancy.

  21. I would have thrown it away too. It was probably filled with boogers and cum. Miller can suck it though, what a piece of shit.

  22. You gotta stand up to Nazis before they become, like, actual fucking Nazis. If history has taught us nothing else.

    1. It is rotten and dismal that a world of so many hundred million people should be ruled by a single caste that has the power to lead millions to life or to death, indeed on a whim…This caste has spun its web over the entire earth; capitalism recognizes no national boundaries…Capitalism has learned nothing from recent events and wants to learn nothing, because it places its own interests ahead of those of the other millions. Can one blame those millions for standing up for their own interests, and only for those interests? Can one blame them for striving to forge an international community whose purpose is the struggle against corrupt capitalism? Can one condemn a large segment of the educated St?rmer youth for protesting against the greatest ability? Is it not an abomination that people with the most brilliant intellectual gifts should sink into poverty and disintegrate, while others dissipate, squander, and waste the money that could help them? ? You say the old propertied class also worked hard for what it has. Granted, that may be true in many cases. But do you also know about the conditions under which workers were living during the period when capitalism “earned” its fortune? –Joseph Goebbels.

      Funny how easy it is to have such a shit understanding of Naziism (and history in general) that you misidentify whom you’re resisting against, ending up actually promoting the thing you claim to be fighting.

      1. It’s funny how we have people working in the White House with ties to actual fucking Nazis. I don’t hold Republicans in very high esteem but even I didn’t see that one coming.

        1. Which “ties” are you thinking of? Can you be specific?

          (Is there a WH janitor whose brother’s ex-wife is a Nazi?

          That’d be a “person working in the White House” with “ties to actual Nazis”, note.

          If you mean something that isn’t a laughable joke, though, specify.)

          1. I’m talking about Steven Miller and Richard Spencer in this specific instance.

            1. So he really meant fake Nazis, but he’s stupid

              1. I’m good with no form of Nazis working in the White House, what about you?

                1. No Nazis, Huh?

                  How are socialists ever going to get your support for not becoming President?

            2. Cite your evidence that Miller is a Nazi or shut the fuck up.

              1. And your butt hurt feelings don’t count.

    2. Yup. People should have really should up to socialist Nazis in America before the destroyed the high quality of education in the USA

      1. You wouldn’t know a high-quality education if it forced you to give it a handjob in the locker room.

        1. That post is what it looks like when you know you’ve made a fool of yourself and don’t care.

        2. Oh Tony. Your horrible English language skills are evidence that I am correct.

        3. Defined “educated”

        4. “You wouldn’t know a high-quality education if it forced you to give it a handjob in the locker room.”

          While I in no way agree with you…
          this is one of the funniest lines I’ve read in a while. For so, so many reasons.

    3. “Act like a Nazi to stop make believe Nazis”

      The 2018 Democratic messaging could use some work

      1. “A bike lock in every hand, and…”

        Damn, this is hard, they do have a challenge.

        1. “…and two illegal immigrant children in every garage!”

    4. Psychiatrists got the ball rolling on that whole Nazi genocide thing. Genocide starts with people trusting state certified professionals with their feelings and relatives.

  23. This may, however, by the first time a federal official has responded to a heckler by throwing away $80 worth of his own food.

    I suppose it’s possible that maybe he threw the food away because he figured he couldn’t be sure that they didn’t spit in it (or worse)?

  24. Crane, who deployed to Iraq three times, told IJR that Handler essentially shouting that the president is a “domestic enemy” into the void of the internet is foolish:
    Chelsea, please stop. Your comments about the president being a domestic enemy while he was negotiating a nuclear peace deal with the North Koreans are not true or helpful. Nor are your recent comments about the first lady, her broken English and her “dumb jacket” while visiting refugees at the border. This seems to be standard operating procedure for you on the heels of your criticisms toward Ivanka and her sitting on her father’s lap for a photo op. We get it, you hate the president, his family and his entire administration.
    Sadly, your comments are not hurting the president or going to achieve your ultimate goal of getting him impeached. It just reminds the rest of us in the “silent majority” how far removed and triggered you and your buddies on the left really are.
    Eli Crane, a Navy SEAL provides a priceless reply to comedienne Chelsea Handler

    1. (contd)
      “We are not fooled or reversed by you or your equally delusional peers in Hollywood, your interviews or your Twitter tantrums. It just exposes all of you for not really giving a damn about the real issues affecting real people and a reminder of exactly why Trump was elected in the first place. We see this administration stoking the fires of a booming economy, slashing regulation to set the potential of capitalism free. We also finally see the rest of the world regain their healthy respect for the United States of America again. We see a diminished ISIS, we see unemployment at their lowest point in decades, we also see a roaring stock market and consumer confidence trending up in lockstep.
      We understand that you all have a lot to be upset about. Not only did the celebrity businessman who you all made fun of and told us didn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of becoming president prove you all wrong in one of the biggest presidential upsets in history. All of you also told us that the economy would fail, a hotheaded Trump would most certainly start a nuclear war and that the Mueller investigation would prove undeniable collusion with the Russians….”

      1. “Talk to Americans in Nebraska, New Mexico, Idaho and Montana. Ask them why Trump’s approval ratings are higher that Reagan and Obama’s at the same time. Ask them if Trump is a “domestic enemy.” Ask them if Trump’s tax plan and the economy is affecting their lives. Talk to them about immigration, border security, MS-13, sanctuary cities, school safety and gun control. Try really hard to not dismiss their opinions and label them racists, bigots, homophobes and much more because they don’t agree with your position.
        Chelsea, we all want you and your Hollywood pals to continue to enjoy your First Amendment rights to freedom of speech, even Tom Arnold and De Niro. We even welcome your criticisms and opinions. We just ask that you show “some” respect for the office, if not the man and his family while they are working hard on issues that affect us all. Donald Trump is far from perfect, Chelsea, but he’s much further from a domestic enemy.”

  25. Maybe he realized that the bartender probably spit (or something worse) on the sushi? After all, left wing celebs on twitter have been urging such acts

  26. It is remarkable to see the level of love for a bigoted, authoritarian government employee being exhibited at a libertarian website.

    And to think that some people say libertarians are anti-social, disaffected, marginalized, self-absorbed misanthropes!

    1. …who flip off paying customers?

      1. …and hurt their baby feelings? With WORDS and GESTURES?!?! You want Government Almighty to PROTECT us against such things?!?!?

        1. The government should enforce contracts, including any implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

    2. Why do you just drop little tantrums about “bigotry” and disappear? What are you trying to accomplish?

  27. It’s getting to be like it was for Geo. Wash.

  28. I’d throw away a $170 order of anything if I had the slightest suspicion the staff in the eatery might be spitting in my takeout. If the present tension escalates into another civil war, as Michael Moore seems to either suggest or urge, you should think in terms of the movie GANGS OF NEW YORK, only with more and better firearms involved.

    1. This

      Don’t consume food or drink from people shrieking “Nazi!” at you

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.