Skip to content
Search AI Powered

Latest Stories

The Big Grift Could Open A New Legal Front Against Trump

The Big Grift Could Open A New Legal Front Against Trump
Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

At last Monday’s January 6 Committee hearing, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) proved highly effective in conveying both the gravity and the expanse of the Big Lie, showing how Trump was told repeatedly by his top advisors that there was no election fraud.

There was, however, another kind of fraud: the one perpetrated on the back of the Big Lie, what she called the Big Rip-off but which I call the Big Grift.


Grease for the Grift

The gist of the Big Grift is this: The Trump campaign used bogus election fraud claims to fuel a massive fundraising campaign, raking in some $250 million in donations from their outraged base of small donors.

Senior Investigative Counsel Amanda Wick led this part of the hearing in a video presentation.

Wick said:

“As the Select Committee has demonstrated, the Trump campaign knew these claims of voter fraud were false, yet they continued to barrage small dollar donors with emails, encouraging them to donate to something called an Official Election Defense Fund."

But the thing is, there was no such fund.

It never existed.

Instead, the money went to a separate entity called the “Save America PAC” which was created on November 9, 2020.

Wick noted:

“Most of the money raised went to this newly created PAC, not to election-related litigation."

As Rep. Lofgren observed, the Big Lie was needed to keep the Big Grift going, resulting in pointless legal challenges that had no chance of success.

Lofgren noted:

“If the litigation had stopped on December 14, there would have been no fight to defend the election and no clear path to continue to raise millions of dollars.”

Wick also showed that millions flowed from this PAC to organizations that were affiliated with Trump allies. Other funds went to Trump hotels.

Five million was used to fund the rally at the Ellipse on January 6 where a speaker like Kimberly Guilfoyle was paid a fee of $60,000 just to give a speech that lasted under three minutes.

Another one million went to the non-profit that employs Mark Meadows, Trump’s former chief of staff, just weeks after the House formed the January 6 Committee, raising serious questions over the purpose of that donation, e.g. whether it was used to buy Meadows’ cooperation and loyalty.

Rep. Lofgren said:

“Throughout the committee’s investigation we found evidence the Trump campaign and its surrogates misled donors as to where the funds would go and what they would be used for.”

And in remarks to reporters after the session, she added:

“It’s clear that he intentionally misled his donors, asked them to donate to a fund that didn’t exist, and used the money raised for something other than what he said. Now it’s for someone else to decide whether that’s criminal or not.”

What Laws Might These Fraudulent Solicitations Have Violated?

That someone else is likely Matthew Graves, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, along with his staff. If what the Committee says is true—and there is no reason to believe they cannot back up all these claims with extensive documentation and witness testimony—then a whole new front might open in the ongoing investigation and possible prosecution of Trump and his allies.

For starters, intentionally making false claims in solicitation emails in order to defraud small donors is textbook felony wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1343. Violations are punishable by up to 20 years in prison. Those who conspired to commit the fraud along with the Trump campaign could face charges for wire fraud conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 1349.

We have already seen one flavor of this particular sort of grift. Trump advisor Steve Bannon and his associates used it in the “Build the Wall” campaign to scam small donors out of $25 million.

While two associates of Bannon pled guilty and likely will serve years in prison for it. Bannon allegedly also pocketed a large sum, in his case allegedly one million dollars, but managed so far to escape accountability because of a last-minute pardon by Trump.

There’s another wrinkle.

I’m often asked whether Trump and his cohort might face federal RICO charges—which stands for the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization Act—for their various election fraud activities. RICO was popularized because it was used to take down mob bosses, of which Trump seems a certain shade.

But I’ve cautioned in the past not to see RICO as a “go-to” because these cases are complex and require the proof of both a “criminal enterprise” and a “predicate act” that triggers the law, so over something like election fraud it always seemed a bit of a stretch.

But financial crimes, especially where the money trail is hard to follow and prosecutors might need broad authority to examine the sprawling books of various companies, are exactly where RICO can be useful. The law was initially designed to take on organized crime.

There’s also a civil component to it that could impose treble damages against a defendant organization. So in theory, the Justice Department could consider RICO charges if it felt it needed to crack the books open, especially if it wants to show that the Trump Campaign used the funds to bribe or influence politicians like Mark Meadows, a classic kind of RICO crime.

And a bonus: It so happens, even though “election fraud” isn’t a specific RICO predicate act, “wire fraud” is. In fact, it is one of the enumerated predicate acts under “racketeering activity” and is the most common predicate act used in civil RICO cases.

The “why” of the Big Lie makes perfect sense once you see how it supercharged the Big Grift. And charging Trump and the Trump campaign with financial crimes may ultimately prove easier than moving forward with other charges where the evidence and the facts are harder for juries to assess, such as the crime of obstruction of an official proceeding.

Don’t worry, more charges could always be added in later.

The Big Grift of $250 million is tangible, the logic of it more straightforward. And the American public is more likely to take a jaundiced view of people personally lining their pockets from small donors off of false election fraud claims.

Will the Justice Department act here? Unclear, but we do know that it is paying close attention. Attorney General Merrick Garland told the press on Monday after the revelations that he is indeed watching the January 6 Committee hearings.

Then he added:

“And I can assure you that the January 6 prosecutors are watching all of the hearings as well.”

More from News

Jeff Ross
Mike Coppola/Variety via Getty Images

Comedian Jeff Ross Shares Photos Of Puffed Up Lip After Allergic Reaction To Ice Cream

Insult comic Jeff Ross revealed he had a medical emergency after a show Saturday night that resulted in a trip to the ER. However, he assured fans the show must go on despite "looking like Mickey Rourke at the end of The Wrestler."

Ross recounted the ordeal on Instagram, showing his swollen lip taking over his face from eating burrata ice cream after his Take a Banana for the Ride show in Mill Valley, California, near San Francisco.

Keep ReadingShow less
screenshot of Jesse Watters on Fox News
Fox News

Jesse Watters Offers Mind-Numbing New Claim About Masculinity—And Is Instantly Dragged

Problematic Fox News MAGA pundit Jesse Watters has made another bizarre claim about masculinity.

Having already taken exception with eating ice cream, drinking milkshakes, and taking bubble baths, Watters is now targeting tech jobs.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump with the Dodgers
Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

Trump Leaves Everyone Confused With Hilariously Bizarre Word Salad Tribute To The Dodgers

President Donald Trump was widely mocked after he welcomed the 2024 World Series-winning Los Angeles Dodgers to the White House on Monday with a bizarre, tangential, and rambling speech.

The team arrived at the White House on Monday morning, where Trump, in his remarks, praised two-way star Shohei Ohtani and infielder Mookie Betts. The Dodgers had defeated the New York Yankees in five games to clinch their second World Series title in five seasons.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump
Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

Trump Roasted After Giving Clunky New Nickname To People Criticizing His Tariffs

President Donald Trump was criticized after he pushed back against critics of his tariffs, coming up with a new nickname for the "weak and stupid" people who oppose them.

The Trump administration’s newly imposed tariffs on imports from various countries have unsettled consumers, triggered a trade war, disrupted global markets, and sparked widespread fears of a potential recession in the U.S. and beyond.

Keep ReadingShow less

Childhood Experiences People Thought Were 'Normal' But Weren't At All

Content Warning: Child neglect, child abuse, narcissism, gaslighting, people-pleasing, and other traumatic childhood experiences

It's important for us to work on ourselves, to continue bettering ourselves throughout our limited time on this earth, and a key way of doing that is acknowledging what we do not know, and working on that.

Keep ReadingShow less