Motion Rescission of Decisions By Smithsonian Defendants Sajet, Kurin and Trustees

U.S. DISTRICT COURT - DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (WASHINGTON D.C.) 6.24.18 Julian Marcus Raven v.

Kim Sajet & Richard Kurin

] ] ] ] ] ]

Docket # 1:17-cv-01240-TNM Hon. Judge McFadden

OPPOSED MOTION FOR RESCISSION OF DECISIONS BY DEFENDANTS SAJET & KURIN AND SMITHSONIAN TRUSTEES (1) To the honorable Judge McFadden, Plaintiff ‘pro se’ Julian Marcus Raven motions the Court to rescind the decisions made Director Kim Sajet and by Dr. Richard Kurin. The arbitrary rejection of Plaintiff’s lawful Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery application and subsequent lawful appeal filed by Plaintiff to be heard by the Board of Regents, the Trustees of the Smithsonian Institution.

THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION IS A TRUST

(2) “James Smithson, esquire, of London, in the Kingdom of Great Britain, having by his last will and testament given the whole of his property to the United States of America, to found at Washington, under the name of the "Smithsonian Institution," an establishment for the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men; and the United States having, by an act of Congress, received said property and accepted said trust; Therefore, For the faithful execution of said trust, according to the will of the liberal and enlightened donor,…”(Bold added.) Preamble to the Smithsonian Act of Congress August 10th, 1846,

(3) Hunter v. United States, 30 U.S. 173, 188 (1831) (“It is the peculiar province of equity, to compel the execution of trusts.”), Hopkins v. Granger, 52 Ill. 504, 510 (1869) “It is one of the oldest heads of

1

chancery jurisdiction, to execute and control trusts and trust funds.” The Court’s role and discretion when dealing with trustees and trusts is broad and plenary.

(Please see article on discretionary powers of the Courts in trust cases. https://www.americanbar.org/publications/probate_property_magazine_2012/2013/january_february_201 3/article_ebner_shutting_down_fiduciary.html)

THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION ACKNOWLEDGES ITS TRUST STATUS AND FIDUCIARY DUTY TO TRUST BENEFICIARIES

(4) In striking contrast to the actions and arguments of Defendants Sajet and Kurin, the Smithsonian Institution does publically acknowledge its fiduciary duties, which binds and submits the Smithsonian Institution to the common law of trusts, in the instant case, the Uniform Trust Code for the District of Columbia: “The Smithsonian Institution is a public trust whose mission is the increase and diffusion of knowledge. The Smithsonian was established by the United States Congress to carry out the fiduciary responsibility assumed by the United States in accepting the bequest of James Smithson to create the Smithsonian Institution. We are accountable to the general public as well as to the Smithsonian’s multiple stakeholders in carrying out this responsibility. We recognize that the public interest is paramount.” Statement of Values and Code of Ethics, Smithsonian Institution, 2007

THE ROLE OF THE COURTS IN THE EXECUTION OF TRUSTS RUN BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

(5) Below are a series of citations from authorities and case law concerning the administration of Indian lands held in trust by the Federal Government. These quotes shed light on the issue of the relationship between the Federal Government and the beneficiaries in the administration of a trust

2

in which the government is trustee. Just replacing the word ‘Indians’ with the ‘American People’ or ‘Citizen Beneficiaries of the Will of Smithson’ or even Plaintiff in this case, illuminates marvelously, the entire case which is before the Court.

American Indian Policy Commission Final Report, Department of the Interior https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/migrated/cobell/commission/upload/6-­‐1-­‐ AmIndianPolicyComm_FinRpt_Chp-­‐4-­‐Trust-­‐Responsibility_May1977.pdf

(6) “…It should be noted that many of the 11 Commission task forces discussed factors in the development of the Federal Trust relation.1 Moreover several excellent law review articles and general essays have examined Federal judicial decisions, statutory and treaty law, and the historical evolution of the trust doctrine.2

COMMON LAW TRUST PRINCIPLES APPLY TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

(7) “In addition to good faith and loyalty, the fiduciary relationship also requires that the trustee exercise the care, diligence and skill of a prudent person in managing the trust assets of the beneficiary. The common law principle has been directly applied to the Federal trust responsibility to Indians. United States v. Mason, 412 U.S. 391(1973): Menominee Tribe v. United States, 101 Ct. Cl. 10 (1944): Manchester Band of Pomo Indians, Inc. v. United States, 363 F. Supp.

1238 (N..D. Cal. 1973)” American Indian Policy – Trust Responsibility, Page 128 (Department of the Interior.gov) (Please read pages 125-­‐138)

1 See U.S. Congress, American Indian Policy Commission, Final Report of Task Force 2 For example R. Chambers, Judicial Enforcement of the Federal Trust Responsibility to Indians, 27 Stanford L.R. 1218 (1975)

3

(8) “The United States holds legal title to the Indian Lands, yet those lands cannot be disposed of or managed contrary to the equitable title resting with the Indians. This means that while the United States Government has the appearance of title as the nominal owner of Indian Trust lands, it is actually holding title entirely for the benefit and use of the Indian owners.” Page 126 (Bold added.)

“Trustee’ Duty of Care (9) The Federal duty can also be likened to the “implied trust” in common law whereby a trust is created by operation of law. Generally, such trusts are recognized by the courts on the basis of an implied intention to the parties to a transaction (resulting trust) or on the basis that recognition of a trust is necessary in order to prevent the unjust enrichment of one party who committed fraud, deception or some other wrongdoing(constructive trust)3. In such circumstances, the requirements and restrictions imposed on a trustee are recognized though no formal trust document creates them.” (Bold added.)

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ACTIONS MEASURED AGAINST COMMON LAW

(10) “This analysis of the United States duty to Indians as that of a trustee to his beneficiary is supported by many judicial decisions where common law trust principles were used to measure the actions of the Federal Government toward the Indians.4 Whether the creation of the responsibility is deemed an express trust or implied trust and whether the nature of the duty is identified as an active trust or a passive trust, the results are the same: the Federal Government

3 5 A. Scott, Law of Trusts 3013-­‐3216 (3d ed. 1967) 4 E.g. United States v. Mason, 412 U.S. 391(1973): Manchester Band of Pomo Indians, Inc. v. United States, 263 F. Supp. 1288 (N.D. Cal. 1973).

4

is a fiduciary and as such is “judged by the most exacting fiduciary standards” 5 This means that it must act with good faith and utter loyalty to the best interests of the beneficiary.6 It must keep the beneficiary informed of all significant matters concerning the trust and must not engage in “self dealing”7. Under common law principles, if the trustee manages the trust property in such a way that he may benefit (such as, for example, buying property for himself) and the beneficiary has not been fully informed of the transaction and consented to it, the transaction is voidable by the beneficiary, even though the trustee may have acted in good faith and the bargain was fair and reasonable. And even if the beneficiary did consent to the transaction prior to its taking place, he may still be able to void it if the trustee can be shown to have failed to disclose essential facts which he knew or should have known, or if he fraudulently induced consent, or if the bargain was not fair or reasonable.”8 Page 128 (Bold added.)

SUPREME COURT OPINION ON THE MATTER

(11) “There is no doubt that the United States serves in a fiduciary capacity with respect to these Indians, and that, as such, it is duty bound to exercise great care in administering its trust. See, e.g., Seminole Nation v. United States, 316 U.S. 286, 296-­‐297(1942)…As Professor Scott has written, “A trustee is under a duty in administering the trust to exercise such case and skill as a

5 “the Government is something more than a mere contracting party. Under a humane and self-­‐imposed policy which has found expression in many acts of Congress and numerous decisions of this Court, it has charged itself with moral obligations of the highest responsibility and trust. Its conduct, as disclosed in the acts of those who represent it in dealings with the Indians, should therefore be judged by the most exacting fiduciary standards.” (Bold added.) Seminole Nation v. United States, 316 U.S. 297 (N.D. Cal. 1973) 6 Manchester Band of Pomo Indians Inc. v. United States, 363 F. Supp. 1238(N.D. Cal. 1973) For further elaboration on this standard or performance, see 5 A. Scott, Law of Trusts 1298 (3rd Ed. 1967) 7 5 A. Scott, Law of Trusts 1277-­‐1299 (3d ed. 1967) 8 Id. at 1298

5

man of ordinary prudence would exercise in dealing with his own property.” United States v.

Mason 398 F. 412 U.S. (1973)(Bold added.)

ESTEEMED JUDGE CARDOZO ON THE MATTER OF UNBENDING FIDUCIARY DUTY

“Many forms of conduct permissible in a workaday world for those acting at arm's length, are forbidden to those bound by fiduciary ties. A trustee is held to something stricter than the morals of the market place. Not honesty alone, but the punctilio of an honor the most sensitive, is then the standard of behavior (bold added). As to this there has developed a tradition that is unbending and inveterate.

Uncompromising rigidity has been the attitude of courts of equity when petitioned to undermine the rule of undivided loyalty by the ‘disintegrating erosion’ of particular exceptions ( Wendt v. Fischer, 243 N.Y. 439, 444). Only thus has the level of conduct for fiduciaries been kept at a level higher than that trodden by the crowd. It will not consciously be lowered by any judgment of this court.” (Bold added.) Meinhard v. Salmon, 249 N.Y. 458, 464 (N.Y. 1928)

SMITHSONIAN BOARD OF REGENT’S IRC REPORT DECLARES BREACHES OF TRUST ARE VOIDABLE BY THE COURT

(12) In the Independent Review Committee Report (IRC) commissioned by the Board of Regents in 2007 to investigate allegations of corruption at the Smithsonian Institution. The IRC committee on pages 28-­‐31 clearly submits the Smithsonian Institution as a trust to common law regulating trusts.

The insightful report states: “The duties required of one in such a fiduciary capacity are well established in the law. The duty of care generally describes the level of attention required of a director in all matters related to the organization. This duty of care is perhaps more accurately described as a “duty to be informed.” A director has the responsibility to become informed about an issue before making a business decision relating to the issue. A director will fulfill the duty of

6

care if, prior to making a decision, he or she seeks out and considers all material information reasonably available to him or her. To fulfill the duty of care, the directors should follow deliberate procedures and consult with appropriate committees, officers or employees of the organization or other outside experts in making corporate decisions. This often means going beyond what is provided to the board by in-­‐house staff, including consulting with outside experts, talking directly to, and questioning, employees with knowledge of the facts and, above all, asking thoughtful and probing questions. Board members may not simply rely on the word of senior management without further inquiry.

(13) The duty of loyalty requires a director to act in the interest of the entity rather than in the personal interest of the director or some other person or organization. More importantly, the duty of loyalty encompasses an obligation of directors and key employees with financial or other decision-­‐making authority to avoid conflicts of interest. For a director, a violation of this duty may result in personal liability for a breach of fiduciary duty. For the organization, such a breach may allow a court to void the corporate transaction in which a conflict was present.”

(Bold added.) IRC Report Pages 30,31 https://www.si.edu/content/governance/pdf/IRC_report.pdf

DEFENDANTS SAJET AND KURIN’S ACTIONS AND DECISIONS MUST BE MEASURED AGAINST THE COMMON LAW OF TRUSTS

(14) 1. The Duty to Administer Trust: “Upon acceptance of a trusteeship, the trustee shall administer the trust in good faith, in accordance with its terms and purposes and the interests of the beneficiaries, and in accordance with this chapter.” § 19–1308.01., Uniform Trust Code, District of Columbia

7

(15) 2. The Duty of loyalty: “(a) A trustee shall administer the trust solely in the interests of the beneficiaries.(b) Subject to the rights of persons dealing with or assisting the trustee as provided in section 19-­‐1310.12, a sale, encumbrance, or other transaction involving the investment or management of trust property entered into by the trustee for the trustee’s own personal account or which is otherwise affected by a conflict between the trustee’s fiduciary and personal interests is voidable by a beneficiary affected by the transaction unless: (1) The transaction was authorized by the terms of the trust; (2) The transaction was approved by the court; (3) The beneficiary did not commence a judicial proceeding within the time allowed by section 19-­‐1310.05; (4) The beneficiary consented to the trustee’s conduct, ratified the transaction, or released the trustee in compliance with section 19-­‐1310.9; or…” § 19–1308.02. Uniform Trust Code, District of Columbia

(16) 3. The Duty of Impartiality. If a trust has 2 or more beneficiaries, the trustee shall act impartially in investing, managing, and distributing the trust property, giving due regard to the beneficiaries’ respective interests. § 19–1308.03. Uniform Trust Code, District of Columbia

(17) 4. The Duty of Prudent Administration: “A trustee shall administer the trust as a prudent person would, by considering the purposes, terms, distributional requirements, and other circumstances of the trust. In satisfying this standard, the trustee shall exercise reasonable care, skill, and caution.” § 19–1308.04. Uniform Trust Code, District of Columbia

(18) 5. The Duty of Record Keeping: “(a) A trustee shall keep adequate records of the administration of the trust.” § 19–1308.10. Uniform Trust Code, District of Columbia

8

SMITHSONIAN FEDERAL OFFICIALS KIM SAJET AND RICHARD KURIN’S ACTIONS AND DECISIONS CONSTITUTE BREACHES OF TRUST AND THUS ARE VOIDABLE

(19) On their faces, both the Sajet decision and Kurin decision violate the terms of the Smithsonian Institution’s governing and controlling will of James Smithson. The will states that the object of the Smithsonian will expressed in the Smithsonian Institution is categorically, specifically and solely for the “…increase and diffusion of knowledge.” Smithsonian Act of Congress, 1846. The will of James Smithson, held in trust by the United States, declares: “…In the case of the death of my said Nephew without leaving a child or children, or the death of the child or children he may have had under the age of twenty-­‐one years or intestate, I then bequeath the whole of my property subject to the Annuity of One Hundred pounds to John Fitall, & for the security & payment of which I mean Stock to remain in this Country, to the United States of America, to found at Washington, under the name of the Smithsonian Institution, an Establishment for the increase & diffusion of knowledge among men.”

(20) The details of the decisions are clearly laid out in Plaintiff’s ‘Amended Complaint’ and ‘Motion in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss’. What is crystal clear in Defendants’ decisions is that of the complete absence of any adherence, compliance or obedience to the will of James Smithson. Thus facially, Defendant’s actions constitute a breach of trust. Every decision by the defendants was made to hinder, resist, stifle and distort knowledge, rather than fulfilling the will of the testator. This is evinced by the complete absence of any reference in both the 11 minute arbitrary phone call from Defendant Sajet to Plaintiff and the written refusal by Dr. Richard Kurin to the will of James Smithson, the terms of the will, the Congressional Act of 1846, Smithsonian Institution’s standards & procedures or portraiture consideration, ethics or values or any sense of any of the common law duties owed the beneficiaries of the will of the James Smithson.

9

(21) Multiple fiduciary duties were completely violated by Defendant Sajet’s personal anti-­‐Trump animus which tainted all of Defendant Sajet’s decisions. The duties of Loyalty, Care, Impartiality, Administration and Recordkeeping were completely violated constituting egregious breaches of trust and fiduciary duty.

(22) Defendant Sajet personally called Plaintiff off the record, argued with Plaintiff, fabricated arbitrary standards, distorted established standards, lied when confronted with the facts, insulted Plaintiff’s art and then ended the argument by flexing Defendant Sajet’s authority as the Director of a government institution authoritatively declared: “I am the Director of the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery, your application will go no further, you can appeal my decision all you want!”

(23) No effort by Defendant Sajet or Defendant Kurin was made as ‘agents’, ‘functional fiduciaries’ or ‘trustee delegates’ to abide by the fiduciary duty of loyalty to the will of Smithson and its beneficiaries, in this case, Plaintiff. No effort was made by either defendant to abide by the fiduciary duty of care to abide by the clearly written will and the codified and constituted Smithsonian Institution’s policies and procedures for the consideration, processing and historical analysis of portrait consideration whether for donation, acquisition or loan, since neither forms of contributing to the ‘increase and diffusion of knowledge’ are distinguished in written policy.

(24) In Defendant Kurin’s third of a page, or just over 100 word reply to Plaintiff’s 44 page appeal, he refused to hear, acknowledge or respond to the contents of the appeal. The 44 page appeal document consisted of: the appeal letter to the trustees, the Smithsonian Board of Regents detailing the arbitrary and capricious actions of Defendant Sajet, the 20 page original Smithsonian application and the multiple official letters of recommendation from lawfully elected public representatives of upwards of 200,000 members the American People who are also beneficiaries of

10

the will of James Smithson. There were letters from art collectors and regional radio host Frank Acomb. There were also 18 copies of a 18x30” full color print of the painting. The official elected representative’s opinions, reflected the will of The People, the voices of upwards of 200,000 beneficiaries of the will of Smithson were completely ignored and not even even considered.

(Please see the letter attached.) It is clear that Defendant Kurin was either incapable, unqualified or unwilling to lawfully consider Plaintiff’s appeal.

(25) Defendants Kurin’s refusal to cite the Will of Smithson, established procedures, policies and standards, but rather apply the vague and arbitrary recently created ‘tradition’ as a reason for denial and undocumented deliberations with Defendant Sajet, coupled by the refusal to acknowledge Plaintiff’s appeal or give Plaintiff a chance to be heard all constitute violation of clearly established fiduciary duties:

PLAINTIFF’S REQUESTS MADE TO DEFENDANT KURIN WERE IGNORED

(26) Plaintiff’s letter in response to Defendant Kurin’s letter(Please see Letter in Response attached.) was completely ignored by Defendant Kurin. In Plaintiff’s response, Plaintiff requested answers to Defendant Kurin’s arbitrary letter to which Plaintiff never received a reply. Defendant Kurin by refusing Plaintiff’s request has stated that Defendant Kurin has the last word no matter how arbitrary and Plaintiff has no recourse or right to be heard or have Plaintiff’s legitimate questions answered. Defendant Kurin by refusing Plaintiff’s request has trampled on the preeminent duty of Loyalty which states: “(a) A trustee shall administer the trust solely in the interests of the beneficiaries.” § 19–1308.02. Uniform Trust Code, District of Columbia

11

(27) Defendant Kurin, by refusing Plaintiff’s request has breached the fiduciary Duty To Inform and Report: “(a) A trustee shall keep the qualified beneficiaries of the trust reasonably informed about the administration of the trust and of the material facts necessary for them to protect their interests. Unless unreasonable under the circumstances, a trustee shall promptly respond to a beneficiary’s request for information related to the administration of the trust. (b) Subject to subsection (e) of this section, a trustee: (1) Upon request of a beneficiary, shall promptly furnish to the beneficiary a copy of the trust instrument;” § 19–1308.13. Uniform Trust Code, District of Columbia (Bold added.)

DEFENDANTS DO NOT DENY, DEFEND OR REFUTE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS

(28) Defendants have neither defended nor denied Plaintiff’s claims laid out in the Amended Complaint. Defendants by all accounts, will be unable in any shape or form to demonstrate that they have adhered to, complied with any of the common law duties owed the beneficiaries of the Will of Smithson, in the instant case, Plaintiff.

(29) Thus Plaintiff’s claims of breach of trust are sound. To remedy these breaches of trust at this stage of litigation, the Court receives lawful guidance from clearly laid out trust laws in § 19– 1310.01. of the Uniform Trust Code of the District of Columbia: Remedies for breach of trust.

(a) A violation by a trustee of a duty the trustee owes to a beneficiary is a breach of trust. (b) To remedy a breach of trust that has occurred or may occur, the court may: (1) Compel the trustee to perform the trustee’s duties; (2) Enjoin the trustee from committing a breach of trust;

12

(3) Compel the trustee to redress a breach of trust by paying money, restoring property, or other means; (4) Order a trustee to account; (5) Appoint a special fiduciary to take possession of the trust property and administer the trust; (6) Suspend the trustee; (7) Remove the trustee as provided in section 19-­‐1307.06; (8) Reduce or deny compensation to the trustee; (9) Subject to section 19-­‐1310.12, void an act of the trustee, impose a lien or a constructive trust on trust property, or trace trust property wrongfully disposed of and recover the property or its proceeds, or (10) Order any other appropriate relief.

TRUSTEE DECISION TO DELEGATE TO DEFENDANT KURIN MUST BE RESCINDED

(30) Trustees may delegate to ‘agents’: “§ 19–1308.07. Delegation by trustee. “(a) A trustee may delegate duties and powers that a prudent trustee of comparable skills could properly delegate under the circumstances. The trustee shall exercise reasonable care, skill, and caution in: (1) Selecting an agent; (2) Establishing the scope and terms of the delegation, consistent with the purposes and terms of the trust; and (3) Periodically reviewing the agent’s actions in order to monitor the agent’s performance and compliance with the terms of the delegation. (b) In performing a delegated function, an agent owes a duty to the trust to exercise reasonable care to comply with the terms of the delegation. (c) A trustee who complies with subsection (a) of this section is not liable to the beneficiaries or to the trust for an action of the agent to whom the function was delegated. (d) By accepting a delegation of powers or duties from the trustee of a trust that is subject to the law of the District of Columbia, an agent submits to the jurisdiction of the courts of the District of Columbia.” (Bold added.)

(31) As can be seen from Defendant Kurin’s letter, there is absolutely no compliance with the: ”purposes and terms of the trust.” “§ 19–1308.07 (2). The letter is unlawful, evasive, arbitrary and devoid of any sense that the beneficiaries are the primary concern of the trust: “(a) A trustee shall administer the trust solely in the interests of the beneficiaries.” (a) Duty of Loyalty § 19–

13

1308.02., “Upon acceptance of a trusteeship, the trustee shall administer the trust in good faith, in accordance with its terms and purposes and the interests of the beneficiaries, and in accordance with this chapter.” § 19–1308.01. , Uniform Trust Code, District of Columbia

(32) The Court thus has the authority both to rescind the decisions made by Defendant’s Sajet and Kurin and also the decision to delegate that the trustees made. The trustee decision is not supported by record, only by reference in Defendant Kurin’s letter. Plaintiff did not receive a response from Chancellor John Roberts or the Board of Regents to whom Plaintiff directly appealed according to § 19–1308.13. The Duty to inform and report. (a) A trustee shall keep the qualified beneficiaries of the trust reasonably informed about the administration of the trust.

(33) Discovery needs to occur in order to discover the individual/s who received the appeal and the nature of the trustee deliberations and of the terms of the delegation from the trustees to Defendant Kurin: Which trustees received the appeal? Since 18 named copies were sent to each member of

•

the Board of Regents via Chancellor Roberts.

•

Did The trustees read the appeal?

•

Why was the decision made to delegate the appeal to a non trustee ‘agent’ Defendant Kurin?

•

Who made the decision to delegate the responsibility?

•

Was the decision made according to § 19–1308.02. Duty of loyalty. (a) A trustee shall administer the trust solely in the interests of the beneficiaries and The Duty of Prudent Administration: “A trustee shall administer the trust as a prudent person would, by considering the purposes, terms, distributional requirements, and other circumstances of the trust. In satisfying this standard, the trustee shall exercise reasonable care, skill, and caution.” § 19–1308.04. Uniform Trust Code, District of Columbia

•

What were the instructions given by the trustees to Defendant Kurin?

•

Did the trustees form a quorum to make the decision?

14

Is the decision to delegate the appeal to Defendant Kurin contained in the minutes of a

•

meeting according to § 19–1308.10. Recordkeeping and identification of trust property: (a) A trustee shall keep adequate records of the administration of the trust.

•

Where are those minutes if they exist and if they do not exist why do they not exist?

•

Did the trustees according to § 19–1308.07(2) Delegation by trustee, establish “the scope and terms of the delegation, consistent with the purposes and terms of the trust?”

Did the trustees according to§ 19–1308.07(3) Delegation by trustee review “the agent’s

•

actions in order to monitor the agent’s performance and compliance with the terms of the delegation.”?

(34) The Court also has the authority to order Chancellor John Roberts and rest of the trustees to hear Plaintiff’s lawful appeal according to section 19–1310.01.(1,4,9) of the Uniform Trust Code for the District of Columbia.

(35) Chancellor John Roberts, who also is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, would clearly be the right person to chair the matter of the appeal according to the law of the District of Columbia § 19–1308.06. Trustee’s skills. “A trustee who has special skills or expertise, or is named trustee in reliance upon the trustee’s representation that the trustee has special skills or expertise, shall use those special skills or expertise.” (Bold added.)

EQUITABLE RELIEF

(36) On page 54 of Plaintiff’s ‘Amended Complaint’ Plaintiff has requested equitable relief since the outset: “That the Court exercise its discretionary powers over the Government Trust and order full compliance according to all the relevant Smithsonian Institution rules and procedures related to the this case, to be officially fulfilled and documented for public record which includes the re-­‐ consideration of Mr. Raven’s application.”

15

(37) Plaintiff thus requests lawful pre-­‐discovery equitable relief by the Court exercising the Court’s complete discretion in the instant case as it relates to the Smithsonian trust and rescind all of the decisions made by Defendant’s Sajet and Kurin and the Board or Regents, the Smithsonian Trustees, whilst the case moves forward into discovery and trial.

(38) Plaintiff, as beneficiary of the will of James Smithson invokes § 19–1308.02.(b) of the Uniform Trust Code in the District of Columbia which states that the: “…management of trust property…or which is otherwise affected by a conflict between the trustee’s fiduciary and personal interests is voidable by a beneficiary..”(Bold added.) to void Defendants Sajet and Kurin’s decisions since their decisions were not “authorized by the terms of the trust” § 19–1308.02(1).

Plaintiff also invokes the Court’s plenary powers over the Smithsonian Trust to void Defendants’ decisions and Smithsonian Trustee decision to delegate according to § 19–1310.01. (9) where the Court is given the power to “void an act of the trustee”. ‘Agents’ or ‘Directors’ acting as delegates of the trustees are “subject to the law of the District of Columbia, an agent submits to the jurisdiction of the courts of the District of Columbia.” § 19–1308.07.(d)

Plaintiff requests the Court to order Plaintiff’s appeal (attached) be heard by the Smithsonian Board of Regents for a lawful hearing. Plaintiff requests the Court to order that Plaintiff’s application for the consideration of acceptance and display of Plaintiff’s Trump portrait ‘Unafraid And Unashamed’ be processed with November 8th, 2018 as the first requested date for display as a tribute to the historic 2015-­‐16 presidential campaign and unprecedented victory of Donald J. Trump. In the event that the legal process has not been fulfilled by that date, then January 20th, 2019 be considered. In the event that January 20th, 2019 does not coincide, then November 8th 2019. That the display be for 30 days as was the case with the Obama ‘Hope’ poster. That any and

16

all discussion for further display, acquisition or donation be conducted once the portrait has been considered and approved for display.

Sincerely,

Julian Marcus Raven 2524 Co. Rt. 60 Elmira, New York, 14901 607-­‐215-­‐8711 info@julianraven.com

I hereby certify that on 6.24.18 a copy of this motion has been mailed to Attorney Braswell at the Department of Justice

17

Julian Marcus Raven 2524 County Route 60 Elmira, New York 14901 December 7th 2016 SMITHSONIAN NATIONAL PORTRAIT GALLERY PORTRAIT DECISION APPEAL Office of the Regents Smithsonian Institution 1000 Jefferson Drive SW #113 Washington, D.C. 20560 To The Board Of Regents Of The Smithsonian Institution CC: Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.; CC: Vice President Elect Mike Pence; CC: Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.; CC: Senator John Boozman; CC: Senator Patrick J. Leahy; CC: Senator David Perdue; CC: Representative Xavier Becerra; CC: Representative Tom Cole; CC: Representative Sam Johnson; CC: Barbara M. Barrett CC: Steve Case; CC: John Fahey; CC: Shirley Ann Jackson; CC: Robert P. Kogod CC: Risa J. Lavizzo-Mourey; CC: Michael M. Lynton; CC: John W. McCarter, Jr. CC: David M. Rubenstein Porter N. Wilkinson, CC: Chief Of Staff To The Regents, Rachel Parker, CC: Deputy Chief of Staff to the Regents CC: Smithsonian Legal Counsel Department P.O. Box 37012, Washington, DC 20013-7012 CC: Director Kim Sajet Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery Your Eminent Members Of The Board Of Regents Of The Smithsonian Institution, My name is Julian Raven, artist and painter of the Trump Portrait ‘Unafraid And Unashamed’.

It is with the most pressing urgency that I am writing you due to the fast approaching inauguration of President Elect Donald J. Trump on January 20th, 2017. The reason for the urgency is my intention of showing my painting as a historic tribute to Mr. Trump’s unprecedented election campaign at the National Portrait Gallery.

Due to the purpose of the National Portrait Gallery to be a pictorial record of individuals who have “…made significant contributions to the history, development, and culture of the people of the United States, and of the artists who created such portraiture and statuary." i It is without question that an artistic, pictorial record must be made at the National Portrait Gallery that embodies, captures and expresses this most remarkable presidential election campaign because of its unquestionable contribution to our remarkable American history!

1

There will be many portraits painted of President Elect Trump, there are many portraits of Mr. Donald Trump as a private citizen from before the campaign, but there is only one positive proTrump portrait/painting of note and recognition. The painting was created by a private citizen of these United States, back in the summer/fall of 2015. It embodies the candidate, vision, passions, desires, hopes, symbols, patriotism, faith and will of the American people by graphically and prophetically depicting Mr. Donald J. Trump as the man who would become the 45th President of the United States in a dramatic composition whose narrative embodies our most cherished and sacred aspirations as Americans.

This historic creative journey began back on July the 9th 2015, when most people considered Mr. Trump’s candidacy to be a joke! The details of the journey are attached as part of the application that I sent to the Director of The National Portrait Gallery, Kim Sajet. Due to the unfortunate response to my application from Director Sajet I have written this appeal at her prompting, since Director Sajet’s final words to me were, ‘Your application will go no further, I am the director and you can appeal it all you want.’

This very surprising and disturbing personal phone call from Director Sajet took place on December the 1st, 2016 at 11:34 A.M. and it lasted for 11 minutes.ii Without any cordial, polite, official, formal, educated, substantive or even procedurally accurate written decision or response from the Director of the National Portrait Gallery to my 20 plus page application that was forwarded to her by the Director Of The Affiliations Department Harold Closter, my application was rejected! The application included official letters of recommendation from New York elected representatives of over 200,000 citizens; Congressman Tom Reed, Senator Tom O’Mara, GOP chairs, Elmira Mayor Mandell, Councilwoman Moss and others including radio host Frank Acomb and Art Collectors Davis/Gates. Director Sajet embarked on an undocumentediii, unofficial, biased and personally opinionated rejection of my painting.

One would think that the very standards for acceptance of portraits established by Congress in 1963 would be at the forefront of Director Sajet’s objections? It would also seem appropriate that a work of art such as mine be examined in person due to its scale. The director’s first objection was about the painting’s size! My protestations at the arbitrariness of her objection produced an eventual backtracking and apology from the director! Nowhere in the established standards by Congress for acceptance for a painting was scale ever mentioned! But due to the personally biased opinion that was rendered by Director Sajet, scale was her first mistake!

The size, nearly 7x15 foot painting (7” x 8’ x 16’ and nearly 300lbs in weight in its beautiful decorative red, white and blue frame) is part of the Trump narrative in the portrait, which obviously Director Sajet cared little for! As an artist who paints huge paintings in my 6000 square foot studio in upstate New York and who has always enjoyed Donald Trump’s propensity for doing things ‘YUGE!’, our personalities coincided! ‘YUGE’ was to become part of the historic campaign and part of many of Mr. Trump’s comments. He became the master of ‘YUGE’, his lifestyle, his architectural exploits, his plane and ultimately his campaign can be described as ‘YUGE!’. Thus a portrait/painting that appropriately expresses Mr. Trump’s personality would by nature be ‘YUGE’!

Since the experience of seeing the huge (105 sq. ft. surface area.) painting in person cannot in any way be appreciated through highly reduced and compressed digital images of only a few square inches on an iPhone or comparatively small computer screens, an informed, honest and objective decision should be made after seeing the painting in person, one would think?

2

The many, many, incredible personal responses to the painting testify to this reality. As the artist, I have had the privilege to watch this happen across the country from NY to LA and throughout the 2015-2016 election campaign. I have been moved by the way in which the painting produced so many powerful and positive emotional responses. Even by those who did not like Mr. Trump, obviously not all of them, but I received so many positive compliments even from Bernie Sander’s supporters, Black Lives Matter protesters, democrats and independents. To note the respect the painting has commanded I share this other story. Over the past 7 months a 12x25 foot vinyl copy of the painting has hung on the front of my art studio, which is located in a low income, highly democratic area. And although the banner and I were initially threatened, 7 months later the banner remains intact!

Art has the power to transcend the typical political discourse, producing positive dialogue and understanding. The positive, visionary hope filled image of the portrait inspires people, commands respect and educates since it is layered with symbolic imagery that tell our American story! Our Nation is in need of healing and restoration. My painting is a tool that has accomplished that, in the many conversations I have had and to the degree that it has been seen across this country. The painting’s destiny to continue this work now rests in your hands.

With this appeal, I am requesting that the Board Of Regents issue an immediate ‘stay of judgment’ in the hasty and biased rejection of my application by Director Sajet. I hereby petition that your Eminencies give an honest and thoughtful consideration to the remarkable and historic story that accompanies the painting. That non-biased and artistic opinions be given to the dramatic nature of the manner of inspiration and spiritual depth through which I was inspired to paint the painting. Also the nearly 600 hours of at times agonizing artistic struggle in the execution of the painting be included in the consideration. Consideration must be given to the resulting effect and the life transforming power upon my personal life as an artist, patriot, political activist and newborn citizen of my new home, the United States of America. I request that consideration be given to the totally unique nature of the painting, since it is not a stylistic reproduction of any other portrait or artistic period. It is unique, and I can testify to that, having been to all of the major museums in England, France, Holland, Spain and New York and personally seen a great number of the worlds most acclaimed artworks, as well as having studied the history of art. I request that thoughtful and respectful consideration be given to the letters of support by elected representatives and others who have personally witnessed this story in one degree or another. Also, that the historic journey and the way the image of the painting was woven into the fabric of this historic presidential campaign be weighed in this process.iv Finally, that based upon the standards for acceptance for portraits to be accepted into the National Portrait Gallery and because the Congress of The United States has decreed; “…the standards for accepting portraits varied considerably from other galleries. Even today, in every instance, the historical significance of the subject is judged before the artistic merit of the portrait, or the prominence of the artist.”v, that this standard be applied to my painting.

Since personal bias can affect one’s judgment, if the predetermined Congressional standards are ignored in these matters of historic artistic determination, we must remember that this process was established for the sole purpose of securing a historical and pictorial archive of our American story for this or any other particular time in our history. And if yourselves or any other individual can find a portrait that better represents, captures and embodies the dramatic election campaign of now President Elect Donald J. Trump then by all means I will accept the

3

determination of the Board Of Regents in that selection. Most Eminent members of the Board Of Regents, you have been entrusted as civil servants with a grave, honorable and patriotic duty to most accurately and truthfully tell our story to our children and to our children’s children!

Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions. And please consider this appeal also as an open invitation to my art studio in Elmira, New York to personally experience the Trump Portrait and Painting ‘Unafraid And Unashamed’ to assist in making your final decision Please be considerate of the fact that January 20th, 2017 is fast approaching and it would be most fitting to pictorially and artistically celebrate and coincide with this historic inauguration of the 45th president Of The United States, President Elect Donald J. Trump, by having my portrait on display in the National Portrait Gallery. The National Portrait Gallery established precedent for this type of tribute and event on January the 17th, 2009 when the grassroots produced Obama ‘Hope’ poster by Yosi Sergant and artist Shepherd Fairey was displayed just in time for then President Elect Barack Obama’s historic election campaign!

Yours sincerely, Julian Raven

4

PLEASE FIND ATTACHED: Smithsonian Application Letters Of Recommendation The Press Release The Radio Interview Link Various emails

FOOTNOTES:

i http://siarchives.si.edu/history/national-­‐portrait-­‐gallery

ii

iii Personally I would tend to believe that the phone call record exists somewhere in

the NSA or some other data and intelligence recording facility! iv www.thetrumpportrait.com v http://siarchives.si.edu/history/national-­‐portrait-­‐gallery

5

Smithsonian Institution Dr. Richard Kurin Acting Provost/Under Secretary for Museums & Research

December 9, 2016 Mr. Julian Marcus Raven 2524 County Route 60 Elmira NY 14901 Dear Mr. Raven: We appreciate receiving your letter of December 7 to the Smithsonian’s Board of Regents, regarding your proposal to exhibit your portrait of President-elect Trump at the National Portrait Gallery. The Board has referred your letter to me for a response.

Consistent with recent tradition, the Gallery has long planned to hang a portrait of the President-elect before his Inauguration. A portrait of Mr. Trump from the National Portrait Gallery’s collection will be on display at the Gallery beginning January 13, 2017.

The decision about whether to acquire or display a work of art at the National Portrait Gallery rests in the first instance with that museum’s director, curators and historians. I have spoken with Kim Sajet, director of the National Portrait Gallery, and concur with her decision to decline your offer and continue with the museum’s plan to display a portrait of Mr. Trump from our collections.

Thank you for your interest in the Smithsonian and the National Portrait Gallery.

Sincerely,

Smithsonian Castle on the National Mall 1000 Jefferson Drive, SW, Art Room 219 MRC 040 PO Box 37012 Washington DC 20013-7012 (202) 633-5240 Telephone (202) 357-7031 Fax kurin@si.edu Email

Julian Marcus Raven 2524 County Route 60 Elmira, New York, 14901 December 11th, 2016 607-215-8711

Dr. Richard Kurin, Acting Provost and Under Secretary For Museums & Research Smithsonian Castle on the National Mall 1000 Jefferson Drive, SW, Art Room 219 MRC 040 PO Box 37012 Washington D.C. 20013-7012 (202) 633-5240 (202) 357-7031 Fax Kurin@si.edu

Dear Dr. Kurin, I did receive your letter emailed to me late on Friday the 9th of December 2016 in the afternoon. Below you will find my response. Please find your comments in red, mine are in black.

“We appreciate receiving your letter of December 7 to the Smithsonian’s Board of Regents,” It was not just a letter, but a letter of “Appeal” consisting of over 20 pages in length and in response to the arbitrary, biased and procedurally illegal objections to my painting by Director Kim Sajet, which are clearly laid out in the appeal and Press Release. My primary email version was sent to the Chief Of Staff Wilkinson with the request that it be forwarded to each member of the board.

Is this email of yours a response from each member of the board? Are you speaking in the capacity as an appointed member by Congress to express such a sweeping opinion? Or was my request to forward the ‘Letter of Appeal’ ignored and given to you for a response? It seems strange to me that again in such a short amount of time, by someone not addressed in the email and in such a short and vague manner my formal appeal was not attended to by the right persons, since addressing any of the information directly in the appeal was not included in your letter! For your information, hard copies are on their way to each member of the Board of Regents so that they can attend to this matter as they were appointed. All of this has come about because Director Kim Sajet failed to give due consideration and due process to my application to the National Portrait Gallery as documented. “…regarding your proposal to exhibit your portrait of President-elect Trump at the National Portrait Gallery. The Board has referred your letter to me for a response.”

This reply is another hasty attempt to continue to deny me my rights as a member of the American Citizenry to a fair hearing and redress in the matter of my grievances that has been presented before each esteemed member of The Board Of Regents. It is another insult both to the founder of the Smithsonian Mr. James Smithson whose dying wish, was that an institution bearing his name be established for the ‘increase and diffusion of knowledge.’ and to the clearly stated standards of consideration established by congress in 1963. Nearly at every step of this application process so far, has been met with a disposition that shows complete and utter disregard, indifference and a willful dereliction of duty regarding the expressed Will Of The People, in this case expressed by the official support of my application to the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery by elected New York representatives of over 200,000 people! There seems to be a continual effort to refuse my application before it has been evaluated by the Congress established ‘process’ that should be guided by established principles that should be honored and followed! It behooves me that this ‘process’ is continually alluded to and at the same time the ‘process’ is continually ignored?

“Consistent with recent tradition, the Gallery has long planned to hang a portrait of the President-elect before his Inauguration.”

It has only been just over a month since Mr. Trump became President Elect, and you say the National Portrait Gallery has “long planned”; please supply me with documentation to that effect at your earliest convenience. With the dramatic win by Mr. Trump, one would have thought that this ‘long planned’ event would have been made public as soon as it was planned as obviously it indicates that the Smithsonian is excited about this historic event and its ability to ‘Increase and diffuse knowledge.’

Why would a “long planned” event involving showing an irrelevant and dated photo of Donald Trump justify completely ignoring a work of art that specifically deals with the election, like the Obama poster did? Why is it only now that the Smithsonian is announcing this after my application highlighted the NPG established precedent by showing the Obama poster on January 17th, 2009? Also, since the subsequent rejection of my historic portrait has come to light in the media, why since it was ‘long planned’ was it not mentioned before my application on the 1st Of December 2016? Ah yes, I get it, it must have been a great secret because of the surprise and suspense surrounding such an exciting ‘long planned’ event, since such a monumental and inspiring work of art, an old, 1989 photo of Donald Trump, to quote the Smithsonian press release, “tossing an apple in the air with his right hand” was going to go on show!

Why would this ‘recent tradition’ be so prohibitive and rigid to even considering another portrait of Donald Trump that happens to be something that reflects the recent dramatic election rather than a photo from 1989, which is anything but relevant to the election? It is akin to you showing a photo of Donald Trump as a baby to commemorate this historic and unprecedented Presidential win that is pregnant with the massive potential increase and diffusion of pictorial knowledge! Since I imagine the ‘recent tradition’ alludes to the January 17th, 2009 showing of the election campaign Obama poster, why would not that same tradition demand a politically relevant work of art be shown like the Obama poster was? Why would the Smithsonian which ‘owns’ 8 Obama portraits, according to Director Sajet, be so closed to the idea of showing or even acquiring another Trump Portrait, thus increasing and diffusing pictorial knowledge? And why would it be so terrible to have 2 or more portraits on show at the same time for the inauguration for this most historic event? Why not show them all and include this undeniably prophetic, patriotic, symbolic and now historic portrait of now President Elect Donald J. Trump?

“A portrait of Mr. Trump from the National Portrait Gallery’s collection will be on display at the Gallery beginning January 13, 2017.”

So the Smithsonian NPG received and showed, whether by gift or by acquisition, a poster/portrait of then President Elect Obama back in 2009 before the inauguration of then another historic Presidential election and displayed such to commemorate and celebrate the massive increase and diffusion of pictorial knowledge, correct? And regardless of the questionable story behind the creation of the poster, one cannot deny its historicity and relevance to the Obama campaign and so rightly it should have been shown. It would have denied the art world a voice in sharing in that historic moment that so many millions of Americans celebrated.

When it comes to my application to show an equally relevant and historic presidential campaign work of art, mine is denied. I an not offering my work as a gift or requiring that you purchase or even consider my work for purchase, it is simply to show the work for the inauguration. My painting may not have received the same degree of exposure that the Obama poster did and there are reasons for that. The same resistance to showing my work of art at the Smithsonian was experienced since the first day it was unveiled back on November 1st, 2015. The hostility and hatred in Academia, Hollywood, The Media and especially the Art World towards Mr. Trump is more than well documented and that attitude was also directed at my painting!

But regardless of the ‘degree’ of recognition, there is no doubt to the objective and honest mind that the sole, relevant and recognized pro-Trump work of art, portrait and painting from the historic Trump campaign was my painting ‘Unafraid And Unashamed’!

“The decision about whether to acquire or display a work of art at the National Portrait Gallery rests in the first instance with that museum’s director, curators and historians. I have spoken with Kim Sajet, director of the National Portrait Gallery, and concur with her decision to decline your offer and continue with the

museum’s plan to display a portrait of Mr. Trump from our collections. Thank you for your interest in the Smithsonian and the National Portrait Gallery, sincerely Richard Kurin.”

Mr. Kurin, again without giving a substantive educated critique, with no historical commentary, no election relevance or significance, no consideration as to the “increase in knowledge’ that would come, no consideration of the Museum’s standards for acquiring/showing a portrait, you concur with Director Sajet in her unfounded and illegal objections to my application. If you were just a private gallery, you could be so arbitrary, but the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery belongs to ‘We The People’ and so you ultimately work for us. And so it will be determined by the appointed representatives/members of the Board Of Regents who also work for ‘We The People’ of the United States of America to serve our interests in the creation of our pictorial historical narrative for us and for our children’s children to enjoy.

“There is a process we go through when we acquire a work of art and it has to be decided by the museum’s curators and director, so it’s a process, and we really don’t need to go through such a process since we already have our own.” Linda St. Thomas http://www.mytwintiers.com/news/local-­‐news/smithsonian-­‐institution-­‐rejects-­‐elmira-­‐artists-­‐ trump-­‐painting/617527260

Here the Smithsonian has taken another approach in its reasoning for the objection to my painting.

Here the ‘process’ again is mentioned as binding and yet in my case it is ignored since the consensus seems to be that the Smithsonian has enough art relating to Donald Trump. Amazingly the Smithsonian spokeswoman said you ‘really don’t need to go through such a process because you already have enough art of your own?’ Where is the ‘increase and diffusion of knowledge’ in such a statement? The application ‘process’ is voided, ignored and bypassed because you have enough pictorial knowledge of Donald Trump from 20 years ago? This statement would indicate that the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery only needs a few old paintings or photos of any subject and that is enough! Rejecting the idea that an INCREASE of new art, new photos, new portraits, new PICTORIAL KNOWLEDGE of historic figures and historic events are relevant and necessary to accurately tell our American story. It is like digging up an old photo of the Twin Towers from when they were built and showing that image alone to describe the horrors of the 911 terror attacks and of their destruction, willfully ignoring and censoring any image, this any pictorial knowledge that actually shows the attack, subsequent destruction, the chaos that ensued, the reconstruction and then ongoing yearly memorialization! My goodness, what type of an institution has the Smithsonian become?

So now art submitted by the People to the Smithsonian Institution, the museum that belongs to the People for consideration for becoming part of the pictorial historical narrative of the American People during this historic election of Donald J. Trump is refused because you already have enough images? Amazing, with the spokeswoman’s comments the Smithsonian is now even barred from acquiring any more Trump related artwork since it has officially stated that it has enough! Wow, in Trump’s case 4 portraits are enough but in Obama’s case 8 portraits! But then again, precedent by acquisition would indicate that at least 8 Trump portraits would need to be acquired to be fair to the presidential collection?

It is clear to me that Director Sajet’s original series of personal and unfounded objections, bypassed the requirement to have the consideration pass through the ‘process’. So in effect you and Director Sajet have agreed, that my painting is not even worthy of qualifying for the ‘process’, since neither of you have demonstrated in any way how my painting does not meet the standards for consideration and acquisition established by Congress. It has been refused regardless of the established criteria for such a refusal! I would accept such an arbitrary refusal from a private institution where there is no recourse or process of appeal. Where on a whim somebody because of personal taste, prejudice or utter dislike can refuse a work without the slightest consideration. But since the Smithsonian Institution belongs to the people of the United States, every consideration will be given to every possible avenue of application and appeal to ensure that every respect and every detail of due process is afforded me as determined by the laws that govern the United Stated Of America and its institutions.

“A portrait of Mr. Trump from the National Portrait Gallery’s collection will be on display at the Gallery beginning January 13, 2017.”

By failing to even consider my application, by failing to show my historic work of Art, which is directly related to the election of Donald J. Trump, the Smithsonian has in effect barred any relevant commemorative expression in the arts from taking place and has abdicated its responsibility to be an institution established for the ‘Increase And Diffusion of knowledge’. The Smithsonian rather seems to have become an irrelevant and dated museum, using dated material or old pictorial knowledge, where the increase and diffusion of knowledge has ceased, one of the Achilles heels of institutions built on archival knowledge.

Some of the 60 plus million people who voted for Donald Trump, who will travel to D.C. for the inauguration and there after will have a 20 year old photo graph of Donald J. Trump “… tossing an apple up with his right hand.” to see at the Smithsonian! Wow! How intellectually stimulating, how enlightening and O my, how exciting!

Mr. Kurin, in all honesty how many people do you think are going to go out of their way to see an old, dated and uninspiring photo of Donald Trump throwing an apple in the air? Just on a purely business level this decision seems to want to fail or keep people away!

Sincerely,

Julian Raven

Julian Raven, Artist 714 Baldwin St., Elmira, New York, 14901 November 15th, 2016 607-­‐215-­‐8711

Executive Director, Kim Sajet The Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery CC: Chief Curator, Brandon Brame Fortune Curatorial Department 8th St NW & F St NW, Washington, DC 20001

CC: Kristin A. Swain, Executive Director Of The Rockwell Museum Of Art CC: Brian Lee Whisenhunt, Incoming Executive Director OF The Rockwell Museum Of Art CC: Patty Campbell, Smithsonian Liaison at the Rockwell Museum Of Art 111 Cedar St, Corning, NY 14830

Application To Show The Trump Portrait/Painting, ‘Unafraid And Unashamed’

By Artist Julian Raven at the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery For The Inauguration of President Elect Donald J. Trump on January 20th, 2017.

1

The Presidential Portrait/Painting has an incredible backstory of inspiration and creation, complex narrative told through layered symbolism and a historic grassroots campaign journey in support of President Elect Donald J. Trump. The painting is predictive in that it depicted Donald J. Trump as the 45th President of the United States of America, it was created in the summer of 2015.

My name is Julian Raven; www.julianraven.com, I am a professional artist residing in Elmira, New York. With the historic election of Mr. Donald J. Trump, soon to be inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States of America, it is only fitting that at his inauguration, American art history and the art world be included.

As the artist who painted the prophetic, symbolic, patriotic and historic Trump portrait/painting ‘Unafraid And Unashamed’ I respectfully submit my request, to have my work on show at the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery for the presidential inauguration on January the 20th, 2017.

The unique and compelling story of the massive, nearly 8x16 foot work of art in its final finished framed dimensions, must be told since it is the only painting to have been created at the beginning of the campaign back in the summer of 2015 by the grassroots and to have predicted the Trump Presidency and then to have been part of a historic grassroots political campaign. As an artist, I was inspired to create this portrait never having met Donald Trump. Alone and in my 6000 sq. ft. art studio in Elmira, New York, I spent nearly 600 hours wrestling with this monumental task.

Never have I had such a powerful experience of inspiration and the subsequent burning and consuming desire to embark on such a project. It is the thing of artist’s dreams to have the level of spiritual intensity rest upon me as it did.

“The mission of the National Portrait Gallery is to tell the story of America by portraying the people who shape the nation’s history, development and culture.”

In harmony with this mission statement, there is no other individual on earth right now with the prominence, fame and historic impact like President Elect Trump and there is no other painting on earth that corresponds with this most significant time in human history!

In 2009, the National Portrait Gallery established an important presidential campaign art precedent. With the showing of the Obama graphic ‘Hope And Change’ commissioned by Yosi Sergant and created by artist Shepherd Fairey on January the 17th, 2009, the relevant and pertinent historic work of art celebrated in parallel the inauguration of President Elect Barack Obama on January the 20th, 2009. http://face2face.si.edu/my_weblog/2009/01/now-­‐on-­‐view-­‐portrait-­‐of-­‐barack-­‐ obama-­‐by-­‐shepard-­‐fairey.html

Now on the heels of another unusual and totally unique Presidential election result, President Elect Donald J. Trump’s totally unprecedented election has its own historic work of art to celebrate his inauguration.

2

The Trump Painting & Portrait ‘Unafraid And Unashamed’ story written on August 26th, 2016

“It began on July 9th, 2015. As I was looking intently at a photo of Donald Trump and listening to him speak, I hear the words 'Unafraid And Unashamed' ticker tape through my mind as the image of a Bald Eagle swooped down to snatch a falling American flag and flag pole. I began to find images of eagles online snatching fish out of the water to see if I could find the right posture and attitude I could see in the vision. At the time I was busy working on other projects in my studio. I went about my way, but the image did not leave my mind, it was seared onto the screen of my mind. It began to grow within, increasing in pressure as time passed, 'paint the Trump painting, Trump painting, Trump painting...' it was as if the image was saying to me, ‘get on with it’….the pressure continued to increase!

On August 20th, I finally sat down at my computer to work on the image of the Trump Painting. I worked on creating an eagle from the images I found in July that was both snatching and screaming. My 13 year old daughter Victoria, came into my office and asked me what I was doing working on an eagle, since I had told no one what I was thinking. Also it was a departure from my recent abstract expressionist work! Victoria thought I was going to build a sculpture of the eagle, since at that time, I was working in steel. I told Victoria that I was working on a painting in my mind, without telling any details. Victoria left the room and then did an about face and said out of the blue, 'Dad, why don't you paint a painting of the Eagle and give it to Donald Trump so WHEN he becomes President he can hang it in the White House.' I was stunned by the utterance, out of the mouth of babes the spirit now spoke to me. I sat there staring at her innocent and beautiful face, I was amazed, speechless and in awe! She shrugged her shoulders and left the room! Victoria had no idea I was planning to paint a painting about Donald Trump, which included a Bald Eagle; somehow she connected the dots and spoke!

The very next morning, August the 21st, I went to CNN online to see what Mr. Trump was saying that day. There was a video segment about a Time Magazine photo shoot at Trump Tower. I pressed play, as it was about a 'visitor' Trump had that morning at Trump Tower.

Who was this visitor I wondered? Suddenly, as the video rolled, there on the screen, in front of me was a photo of Donald Trump standing in his office, that very morning with a Bald Eagle perched on his arm! I was stunned! I stared at the screen in disbelief. The lighting in the photo was very strong and it looked superimposed. I actually thought it was a hoax, a fake, a Photoshop of Donald Trump with a bald eagle. That somehow, someone knew what I was thinking about The Trump Painting and was fooling with me....I continued to stare at the screen in disbelief! I felt like a car had hit me, the jolt was so powerful, it really messed with my perception; I could not believe my eyes! WOW! WOW! WOW! I was dumbfounded by this staggering series of events!

Think about it for a moment, for nearly six weeks I had been thinking daily about an image of Donald Trump's face staring out at me, a Bald Eagle rescuing symbolically the falling American flag, as I daily tried to compose the Trump Painting on the

3

screen of my mind. This could have just been a good idea I had, painting a painting of Trump could be a smart move as an artist, it could be a 'big deal' for my career...But I was very busy working on other projects, steel sculpture in particular which was very exciting, more so than what was going on inside my head. But the image of the Trump Painting replayed itself daily in my mind.

The internal pressure had eventually increased to the point where I had to sit down and start actually working on the elements in the Trump painting in the physical sense. So finally I am at my computer working on the Eagle, creating a snatching & screaming Eagle. This is the first day that I sat down to work on developing image, the only day since July 9th. Then out of nowhere my daughter Victoria engages me about the Eagle and then says what she said out of left field that very night. I knew then I had to paint the painting. And then, the very next morning, I see the photo of Donald Trump in his office with the Bald Eagle perched on his arm, then the video of the Bald Eagle sitting on his desk. Amazing! I nearly fell off my chair!

There were 21 candidates running at that time on both sides, Republican and Democrat. Why was it that only Trump decided to take a picture with a Bald Eagle that morning? None of the other candidates took pictures with a Bald Eagle, as if this was some ritual that presidential candidates do when running for office. Even for Trump it was unusual. How many photos exist of Trump with an Eagle perched on his arm? Just one! If Trump was a collector of Eagles it would not be that odd, but on that day, August 21st, 2015 Donald Trump alone does a photo shoot with the Bald Eagle.

People I think interpret unusual series of events as we seek to discover God's guidance, in our efforts into tap into and understand the plan for our lives and for our tomorrows, at least that is what I do. There are ideas, visions, plans etc. we can have within ourselves, that when they are confirmed on different levels from the outside without anyone knowing what is going on inside, it indicates to me an intervention from a Source greater than self since it is now out of our control. Could this all have been coincidence or is the Hand of Destiny really in control, was this a spiritual revelation indicating Trump would become the 45th President of the United States? Remember this was last year, 2015 when Trump was up against 16 other republican candidates!

What does this all mean? What was Trump trying to say? Does this series of 'events' tell a story that is speaking of future events? Remember at that time Donald Trump was not being taken seriously. At that time and until this day Trump's candidacy has been mocked, ridiculed and 'expertly' explained as continually imploding by all manner of political professionals, commentators, experts in the media, talking heads on TV and radio pundits!

Trump has defied political gravity; Trump won the Republican nomination and defeated 16 other professional and formidable political opponents and this he did as an outsider, businessman and political novice never having been elected! Trump's candidacy has been nothing but meteoric, historic and prophetic. This story of the inspiration and creation of the Trump painting 'Unafraid And Unashamed' speaks to that very fact and is a physical 'sign' that captures this historic presidential race like

4

nothing else by painting a picture of the future.

On this date August the 26th, 2016 the Trump painting which was completed last year in September 2015 so far has painted a remarkable picture of what we are seeing taking place right now. The contents of the painting, the symbols contained all point to Donald Trump as the next President of the United States of America! We will know on November the 8th, 2016.

Please enjoy the rest of the story about the creation of the Trump Painting and how the inspiration of this painting opened up a door to a grassroots political campaign that has taken the artist, New Born citizen and Alternate New York Delegate Julian Raven from coast to coast.”

Painting The Portrait

Abstract expressionism has been one of my techniques in my personal search for the creative language that best expresses and captures the intensity and passion of my heart. The excitement, energy and joy the ‘Drip & Splash’ technique creates within me is exhilarating. But it is limited in its ability to convey detailed information.

When considering how I was going to paint the Trump Portrait I considered my advanced ‘Drip & Splash’ technique. I had painted back in 2014 a 7-­‐foot portrait of Alan Henning, the British cab driver murdered by ISIS in Syria, called ‘The Power Of Kindness’. This laid the groundwork for the Trump Portrait and I was close to painting the massive painting with drips of paint, but the details in my mind seemed to require grater clarity. The Henning portrait was extremely challenging, and very hard to control. So I rightly decided to pick up my brushes again and discover the challenges of using tiny brushes when one is used to throwing gallons of paint around! Ha-­‐ha, it was like asking someone to paddle their canoe in a pond after white water rapids were their ‘thing’!

I did not plan the painting other than I knew that the head would be full size, for me that was nearly 7 feet tall. I did not want the body since it was the face I saw in the photo, it was the expression of determination, and the stare of Trump saying I am going to get it done! I am tough, determined and ready to rescue America! The eagle had to be at least 8 feet; it ended up being 9 feet long approximately.

It was a great challenge for me since I did not know exactly what I was going to paint, I trusted the spirit of inspiration to guide me and it did. I literally followed the impulses in my heart. I had waited to so long to start the painting that when that series of events came, I hade only begun to work on the eagle, creating a snatching screaming bird, there was nothing else. So the morning of the CNN video, I left my home and built the stretcher in my studio and began painting and did not stop until it was done. I could not stop myself. I worked the painting out on the canvas. That is probably why it took me so long because I redid portions of it over and over and over and over again! If x-­‐rayed, the painting would look like a sketchbook!

For nearly 6 weeks I was a different man. I could not interact with my family normally nor attend to household responsibilities. Thank God I have a patient and

5

wonderful wife and family! I hardly slept, which caused me to drink unusual amounts of coffee to keep me awake. It was a totally consuming work. I did not see friends, or tell friends what I was doing, not even my mother knew what I was doing! Night and day I worked. It was brutally hot some days. Then, as the painting’s end was in sight, it was autumn and quite chilly. It was an experience that has changed my life forever!

I tried to create a beautiful composition of fantastic lines. Carefully, I created interesting negative spaces and I was very careful not to pack the composition and lose its feeling of space. I wanted the painting’s style to be interesting to children; one that everyone could enjoy -­‐ the artistically informed as well as the average person. This was one of the reasons I did not use the drip technique. My children and my wife were the only people who knew what I was doing for the two months that I ‘fell off the radar’. They were both my sounding board and my encouragement. The painting had to be a bold reflection of Trump in its scale, intensity, drama, energy and bold coloring. It developed into this cosmic global vision as seen from above. Donald Trump’s impact globally already speaks to the earth being used symbolically.

It is dreamlike, even surreal as it speaks of the dream/vision of the fall and rescue of America under President Trump, but it also is a dream since it is set at the waking hour, the time of dreams, as the sun rises in the east. Even though painting is layered in Theistic symbolism, since I am a follower of Jesus Christ, and since I was inspired, I made sure it did not read as a religious painting. That type of imagery can distract and ‘pigeon hole’ the work into a sub category that then limits the amount of people who will enjoy it.

Most of the elements in the painting are telling a story. Even Trump’s hair is a meteoric symbol that actually is not sitting on his head. This speaks to the ‘meteoric’ rise of Trump and his hair being such a feature of his personality. I even deliberately made the roots visible, since at the time there was so much debate as to whether his hair was real; the painting shows it being real! The long stretched flag developed from a simple falling flag to a fluttering, reversed, faded, frayed, torn flag (symbols in the tears.) on the right to a restored and new flag on the left under the wings of the Eagle. The flag is a time continuum or timeline. From its founding where the flag attached to the flag pole ropes that are cut off from the flag pole, the ropes which are symbols to the new stripes, stars and ink being pulled down from above and out and through Trump. The pensive, intense and determined look on Trumps face, and yet the Bald Eagle is screaming, sounding the alarm as if that is the cry of the eagle, the sprit of the land coming through Donald Trump. ‘Make America Great Again’ is a tough phrase to visualize in a simple image. I have made the falling fading flag that is rescued speak to that saying. It is the image of making America Great Again as the flag is restored. Mysteriously, the portrait with all of its intensity, smiles, revealing the ‘big hearted’ man behind the steely eyed stare. This is seen in the original more than in the reproductions.

There is much more to the story and the interpretation of the symbolism, which I hope to share with you if you decide to honor my request to show the painting for the inauguration.

6

The painting is in acrylics on stretched canvas. It is beautifully framed in a red, white and blue ornate decorative frame. The final dimensions are nearly 8x16 feet.

It weighs about 250 lbs. It is ready to hang with French cleats and it has its own custom crate.

Grassroots Campaign

The reactions of people who have seen the actual painting have been a pleasure to watch and hear as an artist. Many people have seen the image of the painting and speak positively of it. But it is the experience of the scale of the portrait that evokes massive emotional responses. Some people virtually yell out loud, using expletives when they see it! The ‘OOs’ and ‘Ahhs’ are great when the painting is unveiled. The two most dramatic reactions were as follows. One man paced up and down in front of the painting rubbing his arms, as he exclaimed out loud how he had goose bumps all over his body. One woman, upon seeing the painting stood there silently. It was an awkward silence and a first since most people react out loud. This one woman stood there, stared silently and left. The artist thought she didn’t like the painting.

Later she emailed the artist to apologize and explain how the painting left her speechless. She could not speak….That was a powerful reaction!

From the snowy wilderness of the Iowa Caucuses to the pinnacle of political art shows in LA at Politicon 2016, The Trump Painting has been seen and enjoyed by thousands of people. The Trump Painting 'Unafraid And Unashamed' was seen at the 'Art Of Politics' Art Show along with the 'Hope And Change' painting, by artist Shepherd Fairey to provocative conservative street artist SABO. Here is the invitation from Yosi Sergant, inspiration and publicist of the Obama painting ‘Hope And Change’ by Shepherd Fairey.

“Dear Julian, My name is Yosi Sergant. I am the former White House Arts Liaison and Dir. of Communications at the National Endowment for the Arts. I would love to invite you to participate in a group show I am producing at this years Politicon taking place in Pasadena, CA from June 24-­‐26th (politicon.com). We expect about 5,000 attendees and the speakers/panelists include the likes of Sarah Palin, Anne Coulter, Glen Beck, James Carville, David Axelrod and the cast of the Daily Show… and many more. The show includes artists such as Shepard Fairey, Robbie Conal, Michael D’Antuono, T-­‐Rock Moore, SABO, The Art Wing Conspiracy, Mear One, Illma Gore and a few others. It will be fantastic. We’d love to include Unafraid and Unashamed in the show. I look forward to hearing from you. Kind Regards, Yosi"

The Trump Painting even traveled to Trump Tower in New York City where a copy proudly hangs in the Trump Campaign Headquarters since November 1st, 2015.

Having been elected as an Alternate Delegate from New York, as a newborn American citizen, Julian Raven attended the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, 2016. As part of the New York delegation a copy of the Trump Painting was on display at the Cleveland Renaissance Hotel. It served as the backdrop for countless photos with many of the distinguished guests at the New York Delegation.

Present at the New York delegation were former Speaker New Gingrich, Rudy

7

Giuliani, Congressman Collins, Congressman Reed, GOP Chairman Ed Cox, Chemung County Chair Rodney Strange, Yates County Chairwoman Sandy King, Schuyler County Chair Lester Cady and many more. Julian Raven also boldly and proudly displayed a copy of The Trump Painting in the Public Square in the center of the anti Trump protests at the convention. The painting powerfully transcended the heated opposition to Trump, creating positive dialogue with Bernie Sander’s supporters and Black Lives Matter protesters who showed great respect for the painting even though they opposed Trump. It was common to hear, “I hate Trump, but I love the painting…” This was mission accomplished for the arts, as the painting was a tool for generating positive interaction. Even at the artist’s studio where at 25 foot vinyl version of the painting hangs it has been a tool for positive conversation. From a multitude of initial threats, the hostility was diffused and minds were changed concerning Trump. 6 months later the banner still hangs in a Democrat neighborhood proving the power of art to be an instrument of creative dialogue.

Yosi Sergant, inspiration, patron and publicist of the Shepherd Fairey presidential poster even said about the Trump Painting And Portrait, that is was ‘visionary, positive and a hope filled work of art, even though being a self proclaimed ‘hard core leftist’ and not a fan of Donald Trump.

The image of the Trump painting was also featured in the viral video (5 million Views) ‘The Trump Family I know’ produced by Trump Executive, Lynne Patton. It was also shown on screen during the Cleveland RNC convention. Julian Raven received acknowledgement and praise from politicians, the media and friends who saw the image at the RNC or on their television screens across the county, for that great achievement! The image of the Trump portrait/painting was to become the only work of art included in the RNC convention. By this inclusion at the RNC, the image of the painting became a part of American political history, another step in this remarkable ‘art history’ story.

Please see video: https://www.c-­‐span.org/video/?c4612500/trump-­‐family-­‐know-­‐ video (Also see the massive media coverage at www.thetrumppainting.com

Following the RNC in Cleveland, the Trump painting has been a continual fixture in Grassroots rallies in Elmira, New York. It also was part of RNC annual dinners, with high-­‐ranking New York Republican sitting politicians being present; New York Senator Tom O’Mara, Chemung County Chairman Rodney Strange, Elmira Mayor Daniel Mandell, , Schuyler County Chairman Lester Cady, Yates County Chairwoman Sandy King, Assemblyman Friend, Assemblyman Palmesano and many other distinguished members of the Republican Party. Julian Raven would speak and explain some of the symbolism in the painting and receive standing ovations as a result!

Now the next stage of this historic journey is upon us. The prophecy is fulfilled, Donald J. Trump will become the next President of the United States on January the 20th, 2017. Will the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery be part of this story?

That decision rests upon you.

8

Attached are some of the official letters from elected representatives and important individuals who represent over 200,000 New York citizens and have spoken on their behalf by supporting the effort to have the Trump portrait and painting on show as a tribute and for the inauguration of the next President of the United States.

Obviously this work of art is a massive Trump supporter magnet. It will guarantee some of President Elect Trump’s 60 million supporters will have a place to visit to see the historic work of art!

Sincerely appreciative of your time,

Julian Raven

MEDIA: Some of the many stories. Please visit the Trump Painting website to see all of the images and media stories.

Powerful Signs in the making of the ‘Unafraid And Unashamed’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MaAK31nDxU The Making of The Trump Painting/Portrait ‘Unafraid And Unashamed’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9xO_Fe3FOA November 1st, 2015 the beginning of the fine art grassroots campaign for Donald trump by Artist Julian Raven http://www.twcnews.com/nys/binghamton/news/2015/11/1/local-­‐artist-­‐unveils-­‐ patriotic-­‐painting-­‐inspired-­‐by-­‐donald-­‐trump.html Unwavering support, Mayor Mandell Recommendation http://www.mytwintiers.com/news/local-­‐news/unafraid-­‐and-­‐unashamed-­‐meet-­‐ the-­‐man-­‐behind-­‐the-­‐trump-­‐painting Beyond Rage And Anger To America, Vision Of Hope https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB3h7TNboJM Washington Free Beacon-­‐ Culture-­‐ Loyal Supporters. http://freebeacon.com/culture/immigrant-­‐christian-­‐abstract-­‐expressionists-­‐for-­‐ trump/

9

New York Times: Art Section: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/us/politics/california-­‐staff-­‐workers-­‐ illness-­‐republican-­‐convention.html The only Pro-­‐Trump painting to be included in the anti-­‐Trump Huffington Post’s Art gallery ‘If This Art Could Vote’: http://ifthisartcouldvote.huffingtonpost.com/

Please see more at: www.thetrumppainting.com www.julianraven.com www.facebook.com/julianravenUSA www.twitter.com/julianmraven www.wordpress.com/julianraven

CC: Senator O’Mara, New York CC: Congressmen Reed and Collins, New York CC: Mayor Mandell, Elmira, New York CC: Assemblymen Friend and Palmesano, New York CC: Chairmen/Chairwomen Cox, Strange, Cady, King and Sempolinski, New York CC: Chemung County Legislators, Kenneth J. Miller and Joe Brennan CC: Frank Acomb, Frankly Speaking Radio CC: Brad Davis & Andrea Gates, Art Collectors CC: Lynne Patton, Trump Org.

Letters of recommendation attached. Some are still in production and will be forwarded when they arrive or I am still waiting on the original signed version.

The Trump Painting/Portrait ‘Unafraid And Unashamed’ by Julian Raven

10

11

CHAIRMAN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION COMMITTEES AGRICULTURE BANKS CODES ENERGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS FINANCE INSURANCE INVESTIGATIONS& GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS IUDICIARY TRANSPORTATION

THE SENATE STATE OF NEW YORK

ROOM 307 LEGISLATIVE OFFICE BUILDING ALBANY. NEWYORK 12247 518) 455-2091 FAX. 1518) 426-6976

IA

333 E WATER STREET, SUITE 301 ELMIRA. NEW YORK 14901 (607) 735-9671 FAX. (6071 735-9675 E-MAIL onrnrunysena1e gov

p

THOMAS F. O’MARA SENATOR 58TH DISTRICT

November 1 6. 201 6

Mr. .ltilian Raven

2524 (‘0. Rt. 60 I tlinira. New ‘ork 14002 Dear N’lr. Raven: I hank you br tiNs opportunity to express my strong support br your &iplicaition to the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery to have your portrLlt of President—elect Donald trump.

-i naIl-aid and nashallied. displayed at the (jul lery in eonjllnction ith the President—elect’s Inauguration in January.

As your representative in the New York State Senate. I believe that your incredible work would be an appropriate and impactiul addition to the National Portrait Gallery’ during this time, and a truly’ patriotic tribute to our new President.

I sincerely hope that the selection committee will give your work every consideration and if I can be ol an l’urther assistance or provide any additional thoughts. please don’t hesitate to contact me. It would he my pleasure to do so.

Sincerely.

%;:

AC?1t’-

I homas F. (1 Mara N VS Senator. 5wl District

Joseph Sempolinski Chairman, Steuben County Republican Committee

Mr. Julian Raven 2524 Co. Rt. 60 Elmira, NY 14902 Dear Mr. Raven, I write in regards to your application to the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery to have your painting “Unafraid and Unashamed” displayed at the celebration for President-Elect Donald Trump’s inauguration.

I hope that your application is received positively by the Gallery. I admire the passion and patriotism that you have displayed through your artwork and I hope that you will be able to share that art with the whole nation through this opportunity.

I know that as a newly minted citizen this election has been of particular importance to you personally and I hope that your application is successful.

Sincerely,

Joseph Sempolinski Chairman, Steuben County Republican Committee

THE NEW YORK REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEE ED COX, CHAIRMAN November 28, 2016 Dear Mr. Raven, Thank you for the opportunity to express my strong support for your application to the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery for your portrait of President-elect Donald J. Trump to be displayed at the gallery in conjunction with the January 20th inauguration.

We were proud to have this piece prominently displayed at the New York delegation hotel during the 2016 Republican National Convention. Our status as the home state committee of the Republican nominee attracted several top national figures who had the opportunity to view this striking and memorable piece of political art.

It has already been enjoyed and remarked upon by many, but its display at the inauguration by a New York artist would be an appropriate commendation for our President-elect. This honor would have a special significance given your position as an alternate delegate for Mr. Trump’s campaign at this year’s convention, and as a loyal member of the Republican Party.

Please allow this communication to serve as my enthusiastic support for this endeavor. If anyone on the selection committee would like to speak to me further, please feel free to have them reach out to my office.

We wish you the best of luck in this pursuit and look forward to seeing your piece again in Washington D.C. this January.

Sincerely,

Edward F. Cox Chairman