Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz appears to be living through a remake of the Seinfeld Soup Nazi episode. However, Dershowitz is facing a new culinary menace in Martha’s Vineyard. Chef Krem Miskevich has barred the famed lawyer from buying pierogis because of his political views . . . and liberals are applauding him for it. Welcome to Pierogi Politics, it is the same distasteful politics that is tearing apart this country . . . only with an added carbo load.
Dershowitz has previously described how his liberal neighbors, who were friendly when he was advancing liberal causes, have blacklisted him in the elite community due to his defense of Donald Trump. He is treated as a persona non grata and shunned by the wealthy community.
Now the blacklisting has extended to food. Dershowitz would regularly go to the West Tisbury Farmers Market and buy food from the Good Pierogi. Then Miskevich decided to join the mob and bar him from eating.
Miskevich (who goes by pronouns “they” and “them”) also accused Dershowitz of misgendering by referring to “him” in passing (Dershowitz said that he would happily use his preferred pronouns). However, Miskevich admits it is his political and legal views that led him to blacklist the professor.
Dershowitz is now pursuing legal action against the West Tisbury Farmers Marketand posted a statement on his YouTube channel last week, stating “He didn’t approve of my politics so he wouldn’t serve me.”
Dershowitz suggested that the initial rejection may have been due to his wearing a pro-Jewish T-shirt. In his initial encounter, he had reminded the vendor that Massachusetts law prohibits refusing service based on race, religion or sexual orientation: “You couldn’t say I don’t serve black people, you couldn’t say I don’t serve gay people, you couldn’t say I don’t serve Jews.”
The police were called in the incident and led Dershowitz away.
“When he came to our booth, I experienced a surge of emotion. As a chef, I love to share what I cook with the public, regardless of who they are. In this case, what was in the forefront of my mind was the fact that this was the high-profile attorney who represented several sexual predators and abusers including Jeffrey Epstein.”
Dershowitz is entirely in the right here, and the treatment that he received was outrageous. What is chilling is how hate is now celebrated on the left as a perverse type of virtue signaling.
We have seen how the left has embraced blacklisting, an abuse that was once associated with the McCarthy period. In 1950, columnist and civil libertarian Max Lerner penned a chilling prediction in the New York Post about the Red Scare: “There is a hate layer of opinion and emotion in America. There will be other McCarthys to come who will be hailed as its heroes.”
It turns out it would come from the left. From the start of the first Trump Administration, restaurants refused to serve well-known Republicans and their families.
Calls for blacklisting have come from city councils to public interest groups. Others called for banning those “complicit” from college campuses, while still others demanded a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” to “hold Trump and his enablers accountable for the crimes they have committed.” Daily Beast editor-at-large Rick Wilson added his own call for “humiliation,” “incarceration,” and even ritualistic suicides for Trump supporters in an unhinged, vulgar column.
Writers and editors have joined blacklisting efforts targeting Trump supporters, conservative justices, and authors like JK Rowling for their political views. It is all part of the Orwellian logic of the left, intolerance in the name of tolerance, blacklisting in the name of free speech.
We have also seen lawyers increasingly targeted by the left for their clients, a tactic once used against liberal lawyers representing unpopular criminal or civil clients. That includes the successful targeting of a Harvard professor for representing Weinstein. Many leading lawyers helped fund the Lincoln Project in its national effort to harass and abuse any lawyers representing the Republican party or President Trump.
This week, President Trump even had to sign an executive order to deter “debanking” where financial institutions discriminate on the basis of political or religious views.
Now, back to Dershowitz. Liberals are applauding the denial of food to people who do not share their political views. Indeed, Miskevich is parading and posturing like the MLK of Martha’s Vineyard for joining the mob against a single, unpopular neighbor. Instead of treating food as a basis for shared dialogue and exchange, Miskevich wants to weaponize it to use against those who dare to hold opposing views.
What is particularly striking is how these are many of the same people who insisted that a Colorado baker should be required to make cakes that violate the owner’s religious and free speech rights. In Masterpiece Cakeshop and later cases like 303 Creative, the left hounded business owners for refusing to sell products that celebrated same-sex marriages. They were outraged that such denials are hateful and intolerant.
However, in Masterpiece Cakeshop, the owner insisted that he would sell cakes to same-sex couples and anyone else coming into his store. He only drew the line at preparing cakes expressly celebrating same-sex marriages as an expressive act that violated his core beliefs.
In this case, Miskevich is refusing to sell pre-made pierogi based on a political litmus test. It is not clear that this violates the law, but it is wrong. If Dershowitz asked Miskevich to cater a pierogi-based party in celebration of Trump, I would support his right to decline as a matter of free speech given his dislike for conservatives. However, this is the denial of service for pre-made pierogis based on viewpoint discrimination.
There is little doubt that Miskevich will haul in customers by pandering to the mob. The only thing that is more enticing today than the love for good food is the hate for opposing views. The problem is that feeding on hate will never satiate people; they simply want more servings. That insatiable appetite is destroying this country and now Miskevich is contributing to it one pierogi at a time.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of the best-selling book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.“
This column appeared on Fox.com
Why do you make a point to specify that Krem’s preferred pronouns are they/them, then proceed to misgender them for the entire article? Also Krem is a polish jew, so this incident clearly had nothing to do with antisemitism and everything to do with Dershowitz being a POS.
Likely about 100% of local police-chiefs have practiced unconstitutional blacklisting for at least 200 years – each and every day.
In the 21st Century, following U.S. Supreme Court rulings like “Carpenter v. U.S.” and “U.S. v. Jones” (rulings outlawing unconstitutional surveillance and blacklisting), likely 100% of America’s police-chiefs simply ignore U.S. Supreme Court rulings.
This law breaking by local police-chiefs taints state and federal officials also, since many state & federal officials start learning these illegal tactics in local police departments. Since local, state and federal officials ignore laws outlawing blacklisting, there are no checks & balances on these illegal practices – there is no government watchdog.
This is the foundation of illegal unconstitutional-blacklisting, enforcement needs to be start at the local level.
From the article, “No Pierogi for you:…” by Jonathan Turley, I quote a paragraph:
“In this case, Miskevich is refusing to sell pre-made pierogi based on a political litmus test. It is not clear that this violates the law, but it is wrong. If Dershowitz asked Miskevich to cater a pierogi-based party in celebration of Trump, I would support his right to decline as a matter of free speech given his dislike for conservatives. However, this is the denial of service for pre-made pierogis based on viewpoint discrimination.”
OF-INTEREST
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) requires Form N-400 be completed by persons who apply for naturalized U.S. Citizenship. From that form, I include a quotation.
Reference: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/n-400.pdf
(page 7 of 14)
Part 9 Additional Information About You (continued)
.
.
Have you EVER ordered, incited, called for, committed, assisted, helped with, or otherwise participated in any of the following:
7.a Torture?
7.b Genocide?
7.c Killing or trying to kill any person?
7.d Intentionally and severely injuring or trying to injure any person?
7.e Any kind of sexual contact or activity with any person who did not consent (did not agree) or was
unable to consent (could not agree), or was being forced or threatened by you or by someone else?
7.f Not letting someone practice his or her religion?
7.g Causing harm or suffering to any person because of his or her race, religion, national origin,
membership in a particular social group, or political opinion?
Relevance of quotation:
Professor Turley wrote (quoted in full paragraph, above): “In this case, Miskevich is refusing to sell pre-made pierogi based on a political litmus test. It is not clear that this violates the law, but it is wrong.”
USCIS Form N-400, Part 9, Question 7.g is evidence that USCIS considers “causing harm or suffering to any person because of his or her race, religion, national origin, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion” to be worthy of consideration in the processing of an application for naturalized U.S. citizenship.
Martin Ross Cawthon
Dearborn, Michigan
MRC:
I doubt that refusal to sell a perogi is going to be deemed “harm or suffering.” That said, it is patently unethical to refuse service based on one’s profession or political leanings. In fact, it’s unAmerican.
Hey Turley you are wrong in your take on Pereogi Gate – Dershowitz was denied service based on the vendor’s opinion that Dershowitz is a scumbag. The vendor is entitled to his opinion and as a private business has the right to refuse service to anyone. His opinion that Dershowitz is a scumbag is based on widely available public information. 1) Dershowitz was a VERY CLOSE ASSOCIATE OF CONVICTED SEXUAL DEVIANT AND PREDATOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN (sorry for “yelling”, all caps for emphasis only) 2) Dershowitz is known to have stalked and mercilessly stalked, harassed, intimidated & threatened Epstein’s accusers in his quasi-legal efforts to “defend” his filthy rich client 3) Dershowitz himself is said to have sexually molested Epstein’s underage victims and settled with now “suicided” Virginia Guiffre with his criminal guilt still unlitigated 4) Dershowitz was intimately involved with Epstein’s “slap on the wrist” negotiations & settlement with the US government for numerous criminal charges against Epstein back in the 1990’s – his excuse presumably is that even the most egregious criminal “deserves a defense” 5) Dershowitz has long cynically & purposefully twisted language conflating “Zionism = Israel = Jewish” and publicly stated that people who dare oppose Zionism or the State of Israel are in fact vicious “antisemites” in his attempt to shut critics down, & muzzle citizens’ constitutionally guaranteed rights to free speech. The 4 reasons to refuse Dershowitz service stated previously are just a short list.
THAT IS WHY HE IS HATED EVEN BY MANY JEWS, NOT BECAUSE NOW HE IS TRYING TO SUPERGLUE HIS D**K TO DONALD TRUMP’S.
Turley do not whitewash genuine true card-carrying scumbags & whiners like Dershowitz. He’d like you to think ppl are discriminating against him because he’s clinging to Trump’s coattails or because he’s Jewish. Nope,nothing could be further from the truth – it’s neither of those. It’s because he is a pompous lawyerly scumbag who has shown himself to be a bad person so he’s playing the victim card. He rightly should be shunned & banished by all decent people & he is finally getting exactly what he has long deserved.
Everyone has every right to dislike Dershowitz and to personally exclude scurrulous creatures like this from social or business interaction.
Sounds like the drunk rolling in garbage.
“Dershowitz himself is said to have sexually molested Epstein’s underage victims”
Now that is proof. It is widely believed that you are an enormous boob. Take that!
D.Downing posted Dershowitz was denied service based on the vendor’s opinion that Dershowitz is a scumbag.
Soviet Democrat D.Downing has a lifetime of experience as a reprehensible scumbag and founding member of the Democrats’ New Hitler Youth Movement.
How DARE Dershowitz sue grifters who claimed he was a sexual predator, based only on their claim, with no actual proof!
Would you like to address and make excuses to justify your status as a scumbag anti-Semitic Soviet Democrat, D.Downing?
Or would you prefer to just assure us you actually have some friends who are Jewish – some of your friends are also actually black?
Since Krem Miskevich is a Polish Jew, here’s a joke for him:
“I’ve got a friend who is half-Polish and half-Jewish. He’s a janitor, but he owns the building!”–Jackie Mason
“That insatiable appetite is destroying this country and now Miskevich is contributing to it one pierogi at a time.” A strong statement, and probably true. The Left is in fact engaged in a non-violent (most of the time) civil war against middle-America.
A couple days ago, Matt Taibi spoke with Walter Kirn on ATW about an intellectual evolution in which the Legacy Media, using AI, will be able to establish an ongoing official history of the country that bears no relationship to reality. Truth will not be valued or even recognized. Dissenters will become invisible.
Where is this leading? Perhaps to the re-creation of the Soviet Union or Mao’s China. Or perhaps to another reaction like the Trump presidency, but ten times stronger, bringing about the destruction of the soft power of the Left.
People in this country have become disgusting. You are welcome to your political views which may differ from mine, but you
are a nasty disgusting individual when you allow your political views to dictate your business and areas that should have nothing
to do with politics. I guess you would leave someone dying on the street if you knew that disagreed with your politics.
OT
When the George Floyd incident first hit the news, and before the trial, I said here that I could see no clear legal path to a conviction of Officer Chauvin. But I allowed that actual law may not be an impediment to conviction.
Much more information has come out since then and it overwhelmingly supports my initial thought– the police did nothing wrong.
Innocent police officers have been tossed into prison for a political narrative despite the law. It is a deep stain on our judiciary that no appeals court or trial judge has had the courage to defend the law rather than cower to the mob.
At least I am no longer alone in my disgust with these disfiguring ‘judicial’ proceedings.
https://amgreatness.com/2025/08/10/why-derek-chauvin-will-languish-in-prison-regardless-of-the-facts
Amen, meanwhile the real racists curb stomp whites at any opportunity. These recent beat downs in Cincinnati should be prosecuted as hate crimes and the victims should be able to sue the City for failure to protect them from being persecuted for the color of their skin.
Madman, true and the media encourages and defends black grievance and crime. At times I wonder who or what is funding these malignant narratives. Whoever or whatever certainly doesn’t have racial harmony or the good of the country in mind.
Officer Chauvin never knelt on George Floyd’s neck. He pressed his knee into Floyd’s upper back to keep him down.
George Floyd experienced a panic attack and subsequently respiratory distress, due to a fentanyl overdoes. The overdose and panic attack made him want to flee, but he couldn’t escape the poison breaking open inside his own body. He asked to get out of the vehicle, and asked to lie down, and struggled in panic.
If George Floyd was alone in his own living room, he still would have died that day, at that hour, because fentanyl is deadly. We all know fentanyl is so poisonous that merely opening the cap to a pill bottle containing fentanyl, close enough to inhale some of the aerosolized powder, can arrest your respiration. George Floyd’s death occurred earlier in the fentanyl crisis.
If someone died in police custody today, with an overdoes of fentanyl in their system, we would think of course it was the fentanyl that killed him. There wasn’t that widespread public knowledge 5 years ago.
If I could change anything about how the police handled Floyd, I would say that the “If you can talk, you can breathe” myth needs to die. You can talk right up until you pass out from respiratory distress. You can still make sounds and a few words with no more than the slightest puff of air. Police training needs to emphasize that speech does not negate a respiratory distress diagnosis. Narcan is now standard issue, so there’s more readily available help for overdoses. I would tell Chauvin to change Floyd’s position between prone and supine, or even sitting up, to try to find a better position to help his diaphragm, but that wasn’t Chauvin’s training. His training was to use a control hold, which he did. George Floyd would have died anyway, but if Chauvin kept trying to reposition him, it would have been clear he was trying to help him survive.
Ultimately, Chauvin followed police protocol for his precinct, and was sacrificed to the mob. George Floyd was a drug addict and convicted felon, who pistol whipped a pregnant woman, and whose deliberate, poor choices put him in the ground before his time, like too many people.
“Officer Chauvin never knelt on George Floyd’s neck. He pressed his knee into Floyd’s upper back to keep him down.”
I remember seeing this one video showing the both sides of Derek Chauvin (his left and right side) of the incident. On Derek Chauvin’s left side (the footage the world had been shown), it does appear he had his knee on George Floyd’s neck. But the video footage showing Chauvin’s right side showed that he didn’t had his knee on Floyd’s neck but rather Chauvin’s knee was placed between Floyd’s shoulder blades.
That being said, while I don’t think Derek Chauvin is innocent of all of the charges against him. I do believe he was overcharged. The only charge I personally believe he was guilty of was the charge of second degree manslaughter. As Chauvin showing indifference to Floyd’s life and the potential danger Chauvin was placing Floyd in. The only reason why Chauvin was charged with all of those other charges was due to the mob wanting vengeance to satisfy their bloodlust. Personally, I don’t think Chauvin had gotten a fair trial.
Danny: “I personally believe he was guilty of was the charge of second degree manslaughter. As Chauvin showing indifference to Floyd’s life and the potential danger Chauvin was placing Floyd in.”
Watch the whole video. None of the officers was indifferent. They called for an ambulance. They had to control his thrashing. He had 11 ng/Ml of fentanyl in his system while 9 ng/Ml is often fatal. He had an enlarged heart and 90% blockage in some arteries. He also had an adrenal tumor. Oh yes, he had Covid. The police were innocent.
George Floyd’s condition prior to being arrested by Derek Chauvin was much worse than you describe. Floyd’s lungs were inflated to more than twice their normal size because of massive amounts of fluids accumulating in his lungs, making breathing exceptionally difficult.
What cause his lungs to become inflated to more than twice their normal size? Hint #1: It had nothing whatsoever to do with Derek Chauvin and was a preexisting condition. And what caused this preexisting condition?
Hint #2: Floyd used a substance long-term and in massive quantities that begins with the letter “f” and ends with the letter “l.”
I have. Here’s the body cam footage from Officer Thomas Lane. Though I could be mistaken as to whose bodycam footage was shown. It could had been the other officer who first appeared on the scene with Thomas Lane, Officer J. Alexander Kueng.
“RAW: Released George Floyd body cam footage from former officers Thomas Lane and J. Alexander Kueng” – KARE 11 (YouTube)
I don’t think anyone could find a longer video than the bodycam footage of Officer Thomas Lane. I also have seen the testimony from EMT Derek Smith.
“Paramedic in Derek Chauvin Trial Reveals Shocking New Testimony” – Law&Crime Network (YouTube)
Here’s the statute for second-degree manslaughter under Minnesota law from 2020.
https://web.archive.org/web/20210226201954/https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.205
(1) by the person’s culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or
It was that definition of second-degree manslaughter the reason why Derek Chauvin was charged and convicted of. Regardless if I agree with it or not.
“He had 11 ng/Ml of fentanyl in his system while 9 ng/Ml is often fatal. He had an enlarged heart and 90% blockage in some arteries. He also had an adrenal tumor. Oh yes, he had Covid.”
I agree. That was ultimately what cause George Floyd’s death, a lethal dosage of fentanyl (along with other illegal drugs I do believe) in his system. He was going to die regardless, chances are. But what most notably Derek Chauvin did was exacerbated Floyd’s already stressed out conditions (brought on by his illegal drug usage) which ultimately led to his death. Hence the negligence on Chauvin’s part.
But once a suspect have been restrained and handcuffed (or in Floyd’s case, restrained, handcuffed, and restrained again), that suspect stop being such a huge threat to police officers. Unless you think otherwise.
Karen you could not be more wrong. MSNBC and CNN have declared George Floyd to be a Saint and Derek Chavin to be a tool of the Devil. A hundred years from now, an entire religion will be based on George Floyd as a Prophet who saved humanity from itself. In fact, a hundred years from now, there will only be two religions, Islam and Floydism, as they share their mutually common goal of peace through terrorism.
The entire George Floyd case was a complete travesty of justice and was a fait accompli long before the trial. Listen to then “Judge” Amy Coney Barrett providing Congressional testimony on the case after first reading my summary of her statements below.
Based soley on a single except of a video played by the media over and over and over, Barrett expresses the following opinions:
1. DEREK CHAVIN IS A RACIST.
2. DEREK CHAUVIN CONVEYED HATRED TOWARD GEORGE FLOYD.
3. DEREK CHAVIN COMMITTED ACTS OF VIOLENCE AGAINST GEORGE FLOYD.
4. DEREK CHAVIN EXHIBITED BRUTALITY TOWARD GEORGE FLOYD.
Now, even a reasonably competent pre-law student knows that NO GENUINE JUDGE would EVER render such opinions under oath in a Congressional hearing regarding a criminal defendant or potential criminal defendant before the defendant even had an opportunity to defend himself in his trial. But here you have a so-called actual judge already pronouncing Derek Chauvin GUILTY based on a single except of a video. Now, you probably don’t know this, but there were several videos of the entire incident from beginning to end, including police body-cam videos, and until you see those and autopsy results, you cannot even render a reasonably competent and informed opinion of what actually happened. But that presented no ethical issues for Barrett, who stated that she was, in effect, ready to convict and sentence Officer Chauvin without even a bare minimum of evidence. Barrett also opines from this single except from a single video among several videos that the entire United States is RACIST too.
You can see in response to the above that Sen. Dick Durbin is positively thrilled that President Trump (in his first term) stupidly nominated a Kangaroo Court Faux-“Judge”–based on some RINO recommendation–who couldn’t care less about justice. And when I saw her response live when it happened, I was stunned to see how such a travesty of justice could occur at a national level. Totally shameful and fraudulent from beginning to end.