Discussion: Trump Lawyers: He Had No Choice But To Blow $10K On A Painting Of Himself

TPM Article Topics
1
Trump Lawyers: He Had No Choice But To Blow $10K On A Painting Of Himself Trump Lawyers: He Had No Choice But To Blow $10K On A Painting Of Himself Back to article
2

Doesn’t explain why he bought the painting with charity monies and not his own.

33 Likes
3

If I understand the story correctly, it’s the five second rule.

6 Likes
4

“They’re making a mountain out of a molehill,”

8 Likes
5

How does that make it ok to use charity money? If he used his own money than sure, that can happen, but the choice was made to spend a charities money to bring bidding up.

And if that was some automatic thing to try and help charity than why would Trump not make a good move and replace the money or more into the account instead of using it like a checking account?

13 Likes
6

“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 attorney Alan Futerfas told Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Saliann Scarpulla.


So, the rules of the auction were such that winners of items had to pay for them out of funds on deposit with a charitable foundation in their name, or one they formed and controlled? Bidders were prohibited from remitting personal funds for payment.

Got it.
18 Likes
7

So here’s the thing: the trump “foundation” didn’t bid $10K. Trump or one of his agents did. It’s not until the auction was over and a check had to be tendered that the decision was made to use foundation money. Using foundation money to buy anything in a charity auction is dicey at best, because there’s always going to be some benefit accruing to the people in control of the foundation.

16 Likes
8

It’s the legal principle temporarius confusione, in which you make a proposition that might sound reasonable if the judge is paying no attention at all and hope it slides by.

18 Likes
9

Any of Trump’s rally speeches follow this principle.

5 Likes
10

In a nutshell.

6 Likes
11

He thought someone would pay over $10,000 for his mug on a canvas. He is clearly delusional.

9 Likes
12

Exactly.

3 Likes
13

Sounds like money laundering to me.

4 Likes
14

Let’s go with oscam’s razor on this, stupid man, stupid portrait of stupid man, other bidders didn’t need/want portrait of stupid man at any cost. And stupid man is smart enough to never to pay with his own money, always use someone elses.

And if I remember correctly Trump and kids(?) hadn’t given the Foundation any money since the aughts?

6 Likes
15

[quote=“zillacop, post:11, topic:79579, full:true”]
He thought someone would pay over $10,000 for his mug on a canvas. He is clearly delusional.
[/quote]He always overvalues his worth … and his intelligence, popularity, likability, accomplishments, relevance.

Should have started the bidding at about $3.50.

5 Likes
16

What diff? None of the foundation money ever went to charities anyway, and the Drumpfs don’t even bother with head fakes.

The larger question was why was no one bidding? I’m guessing his well-heeled guests knew the “charity” auction was another grift but they were happy to gobble the free canapes.

2 Likes
17

Please provide link to info about the other case the judge is waiting on…what is status of that…? Could be of interest…c’mon TPM…

1 Like
18

Maybe if he’d have bid $500 … but then he has no concept of how the rest of us spend money.
Poor victimized man

3 Likes
19

Because, Silly Rabbit, it was always meant to be a (tax-free) checking account. I know it’s hard to keep up with tRump’s vileness, but if you just think of the worst possible explanation for any act, you will probably nail it. LOL

2 Likes
20

Trump Lawyers: He Had No Choice But To Blow $10K On A Painting Of Himself

Who among us has not faced this same dilemma?

7 Likes