‘Free beer when Trump dies’ brewery loses its state permits

BS BRIEF:

Wisconsin’s Department of Revenue has issued notices revoking Minocqua Brewing Company’s brewer permits at its Madison and Minocqua locations, along with a warehouse permit at one site. Owner Kirk Bangstad has until August 4 to appeal and may continue operating while that appeal is pending.
The state action stems from alleged alcohol-permit, shipping and tax violations—including beer produced in Illinois and brought into Wisconsin—not directly from Bangstad’s revolting social-media posts celebrating the possibility of President Donald Trump’s death.
Bangstad is attempting to cast himself as a progressive political prisoner, but even by his own account the state identified unauthorized sales, shipping violations, untaxed beer and an unpermitted warehouse. Free speech protects his ugly opinions. It does not provide a complimentary liquor license.

‘FREE BEER WHEN TRUMP DIES’ BREWERY LOSES ITS STATE PERMITS

The Wisconsin brewery that publicly fantasized about pouring free beer upon the death of President Donald Trump is now facing a sobering development of its own.

Wisconsin’s Department of Revenue has issued notices revoking Minocqua Brewing Company’s brewer permits for its locations in Madison and Minocqua, as well as an alcohol-beverage warehouse permit connected to one location. The notices are scheduled to take effect August 4 unless owner Kirk Bangstad files an appeal. The company may remain open while that administrative appeal proceeds.

Bangstad, naturally, is not responding with a quiet call to his lawyer and a careful review of the state alcohol code. He is responding like Kirk Bangstad.

“As you can imagine, I’m not taking this lying down.”

The liberal activist and brewery owner vowed:

“We’re going to fight the state of Wisconsin tooth and nail, and once again, they’ll have to pry me out of my taprooms before I stop selling beer to thirsty progressives who come to visit us.”

Bangstad is also asking supporters to fund another legal fight, claiming that these battles routinely cost him heavily before he even reaches a courtroom.

“Every time this happens, I rack up $100K in legal bills before we even see a judge.”

He urged readers to contribute to the company’s legal-defense fund and insisted that Wisconsin is using minor infractions to destroy what he calls the state’s “most progressive brewery.”

The most important fact in this story is the one most likely to disappear beneath the political theatrics.

Wisconsin has not publicly said it revoked Bangstad’s permits because he hates Trump, mocks Republicans or posts vile jokes about political violence. The regulatory allegations involve the operation of his alcohol business.

According to Wisconsin Public Radio, the alleged violations include operating an unauthorized retail outlet, violating alcohol-shipping laws and possessing untaxed beer in an unpermitted warehouse. Bangstad acknowledges that taxes were owed but argues that the total was small and that revocation is wildly disproportionate.

The dispute began after state agents seized approximately 1,200 cans of Minocqua beer from the company’s Madison and Minocqua locations in June. Bangstad says the confiscated product was worth roughly $25,000. The state’s case reportedly involves beer made by an Illinois contract brewer and then transported into Wisconsin without the permits and tax treatment regulators say were required.

Bangstad says the underlying unpaid excise-tax amount was approximately $500. He claims he tried to resolve the matter but was prevented from doing so.

“We told DOR agents that we had complied with all of their demands since the beginning of the year, and had TRIED to pay the measly $500 in Wisconsin excise taxes, but they hadn’t let us.”

He added that the department had given the company no warning that its beer would be seized while the permit dispute was still being worked through.

The brewery has sued the state over that seizure, arguing that Wisconsin unfairly burdened its contract-brewing arrangement and treated its out-of-state production differently from similar arrangements used by other companies.

The Department of Revenue has not embraced Bangstad’s persecution narrative.

The agency told reporters it is committed to the “fair and consistent enforcement” of Wisconsin alcohol regulations and is required to ensure that permit holders comply with state law.

Bangstad says the violations identified by the state amount to less than $500 in lost tax revenue or unlawful sales and do not justify shuttering a business he values at roughly $2 million. He says his lawyers have never seen regulators punish another brewery so aggressively.

He also claims the investigation grew out of more than 80 complaints from conservative critics, including absurd accusations that his brewery put COVID-19 vaccine in beer or spit in customers’ food.

From there, Bangstad’s list of possible villains expands quickly. He has suggested that beer distributors, the Tavern League, Republicans, corporate Democrats, Gov. Tony Evers’ administration or an inexperienced enforcement agent could be behind the effort.

“Either Agent Zautner is wildly overzealous, or she’s doing the bidding of beer distributors who want to cancel us and/or establishment Democrats in Wisconsin’s Executive Branch who want to silence us.”

He also insisted:

“There’s no doubt in my mind that both beer distributors AND Republicans want me out of this state.”

An Evers spokesperson previously rejected that claim, saying the Department of Revenue enforces tax and permitting laws regardless of a person’s location, identity or political beliefs.

“The governor expects his cabinet agencies to follow and enforce state laws, and he expects the Department of Revenue to continue doing the job they’re supposed to do.”

It is worth noting that the current enforcement action is occurring under a Democratic governor.

That makes Bangstad’s attempt to sell this as a simple MAGA revenge operation slightly more complicated than his fundraising pitch suggests.

Bangstad’s business troubles arrive after months of escalating posts about Trump’s death and attempted assassination.

In January, Minocqua Brewing posted:

“Free beer, all day long the day he dies.”

The company urged customers to save the post and promised to honor the offer when the unnamed individual died. In a reply to someone asking whether the timetable could be accelerated, the brewery wrote:

“Well that’s up to you and your ability to act like a cia agent.”

Although Trump was not explicitly named in that initial post, the company’s subsequent comments and promotion made the target unmistakable.

After the April shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, the brewery went further.

“Well, we almost got #freebeerday.”

The post continued:

“Either a brother or sister in the Resistance needs to work on their marksmanship or he faked another assassination to get a positive news cycle.”

And then:

“Regardless, we stand at the ready to pour free beer the day it happens.”

Those posts reportedly prompted interviews by the FBI and Secret Service. Federal authorities said the Secret Service follows up on perceived threats involving the president and other protected officials. Bangstad and his attorney denied that the brewery was planning violence or genuinely encouraging anyone to harm Trump.

Bangstad has tried to characterize the offer as a joke.

The Wisconsin Democratic Party apparently did not find it particularly amusing. Bangstad said state Democrats disavowed him over the “free beer” campaign.

Under the process outlined by the Department of Revenue, Minocqua Brewing may appeal to the department secretary by August 4. If it does, a hearing examiner will be assigned to review the dispute and recommend findings of fact and conclusions of law.

The company can continue operating during that process.

The brewery has received revocation notices, but the doors are not necessarily being padlocked on August 4. Bangstad has an administrative remedy, and he has made clear that he intends to use every legal avenue available.

The eventual outcome will depend on the evidence behind the state’s alleged violations, whether Minocqua’s contract-brewing and shipping arrangements complied with Wisconsin law, and whether revocation is a proportionate penalty.

Those are legal and regulatory questions.

Whether Bangstad’s posts were repulsive is considerably easier to answer.

MY TAKE:

Let me see whether I understand the progressive business model here.

First, you brand your brewery as a political headquarters with taps.

Then you promise free beer when the president dies.

Then, after somebody actually shoots at the president, you complain that the gunman needed better aim.

Then the FBI and Secret Service stop by—because apparently federal agents have not yet developed a sense of humor sophisticated enough to appreciate assassination chic.

Then state alcohol regulators allege that you have been moving beer across state lines without the necessary permits and taxes.

And now you are the victim.

Of course you are.

Everybody is always the victim in progressive politics, particularly the fellow selling “Fascist Tears IPA” while passing around the legal-defense collection plate.

Now, let us be precise because precision is what separates commentary from propaganda.

The state should not revoke this man’s permits because he hates Donald Trump.

It should not revoke his permits because his politics are obnoxious.

It should not revoke his permits because his social-media feed reads like the diary of an emotionally unstable resistance cosplayer trapped in a brewpub.

Free speech includes ugly speech. It includes stupid speech. It even includes the kind of speech that makes decent Americans wonder whether somebody has spent too much time sampling his own inventory.

But free speech does not exempt a brewery from alcohol laws.

If the Department of Revenue can prove that Minocqua Brewing illegally transported beer, failed to pay required taxes, operated unauthorized retail locations or stored untaxed alcohol in an unpermitted warehouse, then Bangstad should face the same consequences as any conservative brewery, apolitical brewery or neighborhood tavern.

Same law. Same evidence. Same penalty.

That is the standard.

Bangstad argues that the amount involved was less than $500 and that stripping multiple permits is the bureaucratic equivalent of using a flamethrower to kill a mosquito.

Maybe he has a point.

He is entitled to appeal, and the state should have to justify the severity of its punishment. Government agencies should not be permitted to crush a business merely because they located a technical violation buried beneath three hundred pages of liquor regulations.

But Bangstad has a credibility problem—and it is one he brewed himself.

He politicizes everything. He markets politics. He sells political merchandise. He raises money through political outrage. He labels regulators corrupt, Republicans authoritarian, Democrats cowardly, distributors conspiratorial and critics MAGA trolls.

When every person who tells you “no” becomes part of a conspiracy, people eventually begin to suspect that the common denominator may be standing behind the bar.

There is also something especially rich about a man who joked that a presidential assassin needed better marksmanship suddenly appealing to Americans’ sense of fairness and proportionality.

Where was the concern for proportionality when somebody fired at the president?

Where was the solemn respect for democratic norms when his brewery wrote, “We almost got #freebeerday”?

Where was the opposition to political violence when the company invited a “brother or sister in the Resistance” to work on their aim?

That was not clever. It was not edgy. It was the moral equivalent of a drunken teenager shouting from the back seat—and then acting shocked when an adult pulls the car over.

So yes, let Bangstad have his hearing.

Let the state show its evidence. Let a neutral examiner decide whether the permits were properly revoked.

But spare us the heroic resistance routine. Kirk Bangstad is not Nelson Mandela with a beer flight.

He is a political provocateur who built a business around outrage, repeatedly picked fights with authorities and now wants his customers to finance the consequences.

The beer may be progressive. The hangover belongs entirely to him.

DBS WIRE SOURCES: