Of all the things that a rational, well-adjusted person might possibly want to hang in their home, a painting of Donald J. Trump ogre-like visage ranks somewhere around biological waste and a signed autograph from Subway Jared.
Americans are exposed to enough of their gibbering moronic president on a daily basis without having to subject themselves to his sullen, beady gaze while trying to relax at the end of a long day. Apparently, Trump never received the memo.
A new report from the New York Post recounts an incident in which a 6-foot-tall — yes, SIX FOOT TALL — painting of Trump was put up for auction at a 2014 charity event benefitting The Unicorn Foundation and held at Mar-a-Lago.
Trump put up $10,000 in the hopes of setting off a bidding war…but nobody else ended up placing a bid. He was then stuck paying thousands of dollars for a gaudy painting of himself in a beautiful example of financial self-flagellation. Rather than pay out of pocket though, he funneled money from the Donald J. Trump Foundation to cover the bill.
The Post reports that the incident is at the forefront of a lawsuit leveled by the New York Attorney General in response to “suspect spending” by the charity in question. The president is accused of using foundation money to pay off creditors and decorate his golf club with the portrait. The foundation is also accused of being “used to collect and distribute funds at the direction and for the benefit of the Trump campaign.”
His lawyers testified about the embarrassing painting expenditure today.
“So Mr. Trump donates $10,000 to start the bidding, and then when the bidding goes on and no one else bids, they’re stuck with the painting,” Trump’s attorney said, requesting for the case to be dismissed.
The foundation and the campaign worked hand in hand to stage a televised “Trump for Vets” event in Iowa a week before the state’s caucuses. The event brought in $5.6 million of tax-free donations — $2.8 million of which went straight into foundation coffers while the remainder went to charitable groups, according to the AG.
The judge said the question was whether the Trump campaign directed payment of the proceeds from the foundation to specific charities in order to curry favor with voters — which would be illegal.
While it’s too soon to tell what the outcome of this lawsuit will be, for now, it’s enough to simply have Trump’s humiliating portrait saga exposed to the public.
Original reporting by Julia Marsh at the New York Post.