Swivel Defense: Scott Jennings Halts Tezlyn Figaro’s Dizzying Spin on Democrat Redistricti...
Rep. Sarah McBride’s Kwanzaa Greeting Tees Up a Pile-On
Wajahat Ali Reminds JD Vance That a White Man From a Christian Family...
Ilhan Omar’s Husband’s Firm Scrubbing Names From Website as Her Worth Grows to...
Keir Starmer Is Delighted That Man Who Wants the Genocide of White People...
Dead Week Dreams: Health Goals, Less Noise, More Beach – What X is...
WaPo Triggered by ‘Overtly Sectarian’ Christmas Messages From Trump Administration Officia...
Paws and Reflect, Tim: Governor Tweets Cat Pic Instead of Addressing Minnesota's Multi-Bil...
Maryland Man Kilmar Abrego Garcia Now Posting Cringe Lip-Sync TikTok Videos
Minnesota Star Tribune's Year in Review Ignores Massive Fraud Scandal: Protecting Dems at...
European Lists All of the Advantages He Has as Compared to Americans
JonBenét Ramsey Case Revived: Advanced DNA Testing Offers Breakthrough as Dad Pleads for...
The 'JD Vance Is Worse Than Trump' Hyperbole Has Arrived Three Years Early
Rep. Jasmine Crockett: People Are Understanding It's Not Good to Have a Con...
Ron DeSantis STILL Waiting for CBS to Update This Panicked Decades-Old Warning About...

The Washington Post--Trump painting story is a huge nothingburger and here's why

You’ve probably heard by now that Donald Trump used $20,000 in money from his charitable foundation to buy a 6-foot-tall painting of himself. Sounds bad, right?

Advertisement

So, where did the “$20,000 earmarked for charitable purposes” end up? Is Trump busted?

Err, no. Not even close. The $20,000 ended up with the charity, right where it was supposed to:

Got that? Donald Trump’s foundation gives money to charities. Here’s the check to prove Donald Trump’s foundation gave $20,000 to the charity. What’s the problem?

The Washington Post, which broke this nothingburger of a story, has been on a quest to find the elusive painting, possibly tracking it to Trump golf course in Briarcliff Manor, N.Y.:

Advertisement

But they wouldn’t let the reporter in:

The Post argues that the painting, if it’s hung on the wall at the golf course, violates IRS rules, and that’s why it’s a big deal:

If the painting is still hanging in the club, “it’s on display, in his business enterprise. It’s not on display in a charitable enterprise. It is arguably enhancing the experience of playing golf there,” said Marc Owens, the former director of the IRS division overseeing tax-exempt enterprises. “It’s not a charitable use. It is a noncharitable use.”

That’s all they got? Of all the things to focus on, this is incredibly stupid. Move on, guys.

***

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement