Kimberly Guilfoyle Was Paid $60,000 For Speech At Donald Trump’s January 6th Rally, Committee Member Says

kimberly guilfoyle, Donald Trump Junior’s fiancé and former adviser to his father’s reelection bid were paid $60,000 for a two-minute speech at the Stop the Steel rally before the attack on the Capitol, according to one of the committee members on January 6.

In an interview with CNN, Rep. zoe lofgren (D-CA) stated that Gilfoy was “paid”, amounting to “$60,000 for two and a half minutes” for the introduction he gave at the rally.

“I’m not saying it’s a crime, but it’s a misery,” Lofgren told Jake Tapper.

Tapper was elaborating on a portion of Monday’s January 6 committee hearing in which Lofgren presented evidence that the Trump campaign collected $250 million from supporters after the election, apparently to pursue claims of election fraud in the courts. For. In reality, though, most of the money went to Save America PAC, with $5 million going to Event Strategies Inc., which helped the platform. January 6 According to the committee, the rally on the Ellipse. Other money went to the Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows Charitable Foundation and America First Policy Institute, as well as the Trump Hotel Collection.

Gilfoy, a former Fox News commentator and ex-wife of California Governor Gavin Newsom, met with the committee in April. His lawyer did not immediately return a request for comment.

Lofgren’s statement was in response to questions about whether members of the Trump family had personally benefited from a post-election fundraising attack. As shown at the hearing, donors were blanketed with emails asking them to contribute to the “Election Defense Fund.”

“People were duped by the former president,” Lofgren said on CNN. “They believed the election was stolen and they should go to the Capitol at the behest of the president. I think the average donation from those guys.. false email requests was something like $17. These weren’t rich people. They were betrayed by the president.” A big lie was also a big deception.

Lofgren would not say whether it would be a crime to personally profit from such donations. “We are a legislative committee. It’s up to someone else to decide.”

“The money was not used for what he told his donors – ‘this is to protect the election,'” Lofgren said. “It was for a completely different purpose. I think it was misleading and not right.”