Rep. Zoe Lofgren On Kim Guilfoyle’s $60K Speaking Fee on Jan 6th: ‘Not Saying It’s a Crime, But I Think It’s a Grift’

The dictionary defines the word “grifter” as “a con artist: someone who swindles people out of money through fraud.”

Rep. Zoe Lofgren told CNN’s Jake Tapper that she thinks former President Donald Trump and his surrogates — in particular, his future daughter-in-law Kimberly Guilfoyle — are grifters, though it’s not clear if they committed a crime in their grift.

At issue is news that Guilfoyle was paid $60,000 for a two and a half minutes introduction speech at the Elipse on January 6th, just hours before the Capitol was attacked by outraged Trump supporters convinced that the election has been stolen. It had not been.

During Monday’s Select Committee hearing, these and other damning details emerged regarding Trump’s ostensible knowledge that the election was not stolen, but that his continued complaints led to a remarkably lucrative fundraising machine. $250,000,000 was raised for an alleged legal defense fund that apparently did not exist. Grift.

Following Monday’s hearings, Lofgren sat with Tapper and made clear that, in her purview, the rioters on that day were under the influence of Trump’s ravings. “People were conned by the former president. They were conned into believing that the election had been stolen and that they should go to the Capitol, as the president asked them to,” she noted. “I think the average donation from those emails — false email requests, something like $17, these were people that weren’t rich people. They were conned by the president. It was a big lie and also a big rip-off.”

Tapper recalled a question she was asked by his colleague Manu Raju if the committee (on which she sits) has found evidence that Trump and his family, “personally benefitted from donations,” to which she said yes. “That’s a serious allegation,” he noted before asking “Do you have more details? Is that a crime?”

“I don’t know,” Lofgren demurred. “We’re a legislative committee, so that’s for somebody else to decide. But, for example, we know that Guilfoyle was paid for the introduction she gave at the speech on January 6th. She received compensation for that.”

“But is that a crime?” Tapper pressed.

“I’m not saying it’s a crime, but I think it’s a gift,” said Lofgren.

” It’s a grift because you’re telling Trump people, Trump supporters out there, give us money to…” Tapper pressed, to which Lofgren interjected “Go to court to defend this election, when in fact…”, after which Tapper completed her thought by adding “And then, instead, Kim Guilfoyle gets paid money.”

“$60,000 for two and a half minutes,” Lofgren reiterated before adding “You had money going to Mark Meadows’ foundation and to another foundation that hired the trump supporters who lost their jobs. So it wasn’t what he said to his donors, this is to defend the election. It was an entirely different purpose. I think that was deceptive and not right.”

Grifters. Maybe not criminals under strict definitions of fundraising and political statutes. But grifters? Definitely.

Watch above via CNN.