When President Donald Trump asked to borrow a Van Gogh painting, Guggenheim Museum chief curator Nancy Spector instead vulgarly offered him a gold toilet. However, just when the raging liberal feminist thought her insult hit Trump where it hurts, her political stunt backfired in a devastating way.
Despite their claim to represent love and tolerance, liberals resort to puerile violent and oppressive tactics when faced with opposition to their political demands. Simply put, there is no ploy too low or criminal for the left when it comes to imposing their agenda on the masses.
Along with psychotically screaming at the sky, dressing as female genitalia, and smearing themselves with menstrual blood in an ostensible effort to “resist” President Donald Trump, frail-minded feminists actually believe they are fighting the administration by hurling tasteless insults at the White House.
Likewise, Guggenheim Museum chief curator Nancy Spector likely believed that she had championed the war on Trump by responding to his request for a timeless Vincent Van Gogh painting with a heavily-used gold toilet constructed by satirical artist Maurizio Cattelan. Unfortunately for Ms. Spector, her little prank may have come at the expense of something much more valuable than the aforementioned art pieces.
After rejecting President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania’s request to borrow Van Gogh’s “Landscape With Snow” and instead insultingly offering them a used gold toilet, Guggenheim Museum’s chief curator and token hardcore liberal feminist Nancy Spector may have jeopardized the organization’s tax exempt status, potentially compromising the future of the non-profit museum’s multi-million-dollar dispensation.
Although Spector is allowed to openly spew her ultra-liberal leanings and anti-Trump views, which she often does on social media, her underhanded museum dealing with the White House could be considered a violation of the IRS’s tax exemption requirements under section 501 (c) (3), which one Twitter user pointed out under one of Spector’s most recent posts.
According to the government’s website, while the legislation does not disallow organization leaders from expressing their views, their political bias must never be injected into any part of the organization’s functions or dealings, which appears to have been the basis for Spector’s rejection and subsequent counter-offer.
“The ban on political campaign activity does not restrict leaders of organizations from expressing their views on political matters if they are speaking for themselves as individuals,” the requirement states. “Nor are leaders prohibited from speaking about important issues of public policy. However, for their organizations to remain tax exempt under section 501(c)(3), leaders cannot make partisan comments in official organization publications or at official functions of the organization.”
“Violating this ban may result in denial or revocation of the organization’s tax-exempt status and the imposition of an excise tax on the amount of money spent on the activity,” the requirement concludes.
Although Spector attempted to make her offer seem as sincere as possible, a blog she penned last year reveals that she viewed Cattelan’s gold toilet as specifically anti-Trump, proving that her rejection was based on political bias, according to Fox News.
She argued that “Trump is synonymous with golden toilets.”
“Cattelan’s anticipation of Trump’s America will, perhaps, be the lasting imprint of the sculpture’s time at the Guggenheim,” she wrote.
Spector blew up headlines when her personal email to the Trumps concerning their request to borrow a priceless painting was repaid with the chief curator’s counter-offer, which appeared polite on the surface but reeks of scathing political bias and obvious satire underneath.
Spector included a photograph in her email, saying, “We are sorry not to be able to accommodate your original request, but remain hopeful that this special offer may be of interest.”
The toilet could be “a long-term loan,” she wrote. “It is, of course, extremely valuable and somewhat fragile, but we would provide all the instructions for its installation and care.”
The Guggenheim has remained mum, refusing to respond to reporters’ questions on the matter. It’s likely that they are preparing to do damage control for the impending backlash they face not only from angry patrons but possibly the IRS as well.
While Spector’s controversial move would have to be reviewed by the IRS, it’s undeniable that her response could be deemed politically-biased. Furthermore, her leadership position in the museum makes her direct dealing with the U.S. President a particularly dangerous one as far as her organization’s tax status is concerned.
Spector’s hatred has consumed her, leaving her unable to control her actions and separate her personal views from her job. She is a danger to her organization’s functionality and should be removed from her position before she brings further suspicion on the museum’s worthiness for a tax-exempt status.