Clinton campaign and DNC paid for Trump Dossier

[SunsetBengal]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/clinton-campaign-dnc-paid-for-research-that-led-to-russia-dossier/2017/10/24/226fabf0-b8e4-11e7-a908-a3470754bbb9_story.html?utm_term=.d0a77c8be304

Quote:The Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee helped fund research that resulted in a now-famous dossier containing allegations about President Trump’s connections to Russia and possible coordination between his campaign and the Kremlin, people familiar with the matter said.
Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained Fusion GPS, a Washington firm, to conduct the research.
After that, Fusion GPS hired dossier author Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community, according to those people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Elias and his law firm, Perkins Coie, retained the company in April 2016 on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Before that agreement, Fusion GPS’s research into Trump was funded by an unknown Republican client during the GOP primary.
The Clinton campaign and the DNC, through the law firm, continued to fund Fusion GPS’s research through the end of October 2016, days before Election Day.
Former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele compiled the dossier on President Trump’s alleged ties to Russia. (Victoria Jones/AP)
Fusion GPS gave Steele’s reports and other research documents to Elias, the people familiar with the matter said. It is unclear how or how much of that information was shared with the campaign and the DNC and who in those organizations was aware of the roles of Fusion GPS and Steele. One person close to the matter said the campaign and the DNC were not informed by the law firm of Fusion GPS’s role.
The dossier has become a lightning rod amid the intensifying investigations into the Trump campaign’s possible connections to Russia. Some congressional Republican leaders have spent months trying to discredit Fusion GPS and Steele and tried to determine the identity of the Democrat or organization that paid for the dossier.

Trump tweeted as recently as Saturday that the Justice Department and FBI should “immediately release who paid for it.”
Elias and Fusion GPS declined to comment on the arrangement.
A DNC spokeswoman said “[Chairman] Tom Perez and the new leadership of the DNC were not involved in any decision-making regarding Fusion GPS, nor were they aware that Perkins Coie was working with the organization. But let’s be clear, there is a serious federal investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia, and the American public deserves to know what happened.”
Brian Fallon, a former spokesman for the Clinton campaign, said he wasn’t aware of the hiring during the campaign.
“The first I learned of Christopher Steele or saw any dossier was after the election,” Fallon said. “But if I had gotten handed it last fall, I would have had no problem passing it along and urging reporters to look into it. Opposition research happens on every campaign, and here you had probably the most shadowy guy ever running for president, and the FBI certainly has seen fit to look into it. I probably would have volunteered to go to Europe myself to try and verify if it would have helped get more of this out there before the election.”
Marc E. Elias of Perkins Coie represented the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. (Matt McClain/The Washington Post)
Some of the details are included in a Tuesday letter sent by Perkins Coie to a lawyer representing Fusion GPS, telling the research firm that it was released from a ­client-confidentiality obligation. The letter was prompted by a legal fight over a subpoena for Fusion GPS’s bank records.
People involved in the matter said that they would not disclose the dollar amounts paid to Fusion GPS but that the campaign and the DNC shared the cost.
Steele previously worked in Russia for British intelligence. The dossier is a compilation of reports he prepared for Fusion GPS. The dossier alleged that the Russian government collected compromising information about Trump and that the Kremlin was engaged in an effort to assist his campaign for president.

U.S. intelligence agencies later released a public assessment asserting that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to aid Trump. The FBI has been investigating whether Trump associates helped the Russians in that effort.
[FBI once planned to pay former British spy who authored controversial Trump dossier]
Trump has adamantly denied the allegations in the dossier and has dismissed the FBI probe as a witch hunt.
Officials have said that the FBI has confirmed some of the information in the dossier. Other details, including the most sensational accusations, have not been verified and may never be.
Fusion GPS’s work researching Trump began during the Republican presidential primaries, when the GOP donor paid for the firm to investigate the real estate magnate’s background.
Fusion GPS did not start off looking at Trump’s Russia ties but quickly realized that those relationships were extensive, according to the people familiar with the matter.
When the Republican donor stopped paying for the research, Elias, acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC, agreed to pay for the work to continue. The Democrats paid for research, including by Fusion GPS, because of concerns that little was known about Trump and his business interests, according to the people familiar with the matter.

Those people said that it is standard practice for political campaigns to use law firms to hire outside researchers to ensure their work is protected by attorney-client and work-product privileges.
The Clinton campaign paid Perkins Coie $5.6 million in legal fees from June 2015 to December 2016, according to campaign finance records, and the DNC paid the firm $3.6 million in “legal and compliance consulting’’ since November 2015 — though it’s impossible to tell from the filings how much of that work was for other legal matters and how much of it related to Fusion GPS.
At no point, the people said, did the Clinton campaign or the DNC direct Steele’s activities. They described him as a Fusion GPS subcontractor.
Some of Steele’s allegations began circulating in Washington in the summer of 2016 as the FBI launched its counterintelligence investigation into possible connections between Trump associates and the Kremlin. Around that time, Steele shared some of his findings with the FBI.
After the election, the FBI agreed to pay Steele to continue gathering intelligence about Trump and Russia, but the bureau pulled out of the arrangement after Steele was publicly identified in news reports.

The dossier was published by BuzzFeed News in January. Fusion GPS has said in court filings that it did not give BuzzFeed the documents.
Current and former U.S. intelligence officials said that Steele was respected by the FBI and the State Department for earlier work he performed on a global corruption probe.
In early January, then-FBI Director James B. Comey presented a two-page summary of Steele’s dossier to President Barack Obama and President-elect Trump. In May, Trump fired Comey, which led to the appointment of Robert S. Mueller III as special counsel investigating the Trump-Russia matter.
Checkpoint newsletter
Military, defense and security at home and abroad.

Sign up

Congressional Republicans have tried to force Fusion GPS to identify the Democrat or group behind Steele’s work, but the firm has said that it will not do so, citing confidentiality agreements with its clients.
Last week, Fusion GPS executives invoked their constitutional right not to answer questions from the House Intelligence Committee. The firm’s founder, Glenn Simpson, had previously given a 10-hour interview to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Over objections from Democrats, the Republican leader of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Devin Nunes (Calif.), subpoenaed Fusion GPS’s bank records to try to identify the mystery client.
Fusion GPS has been fighting the release of its bank records. A judge on Tuesday extended a deadline for Fusion GPS’s bank to respond to the subpoena until Friday while the company attempts to negotiate a resolution with Nunes.

[Belsnickel]

Tl;dr: Research began in GOP primary w/ money from anon donor. Picked back up in general by Clinton/DNC. Opp research that was funded, as these things tend to be, through layers of protections. This isn't anything new, we actually knew this not long after the dossier came out.

[GMDino]

(10-25-2017, 04:48 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Tl;dr: Research began in GOP primary w/ money from anon donor. Picked back up in general by Clinton/DNC. Opp research that was funded, as these things tend to be, through layers of protections. This isn't anything new, we actually knew this not long after the dossier came out.

I wonder if the new investigation by the GOP will push to find out who in the GOP started the whole thing?

And I wonder if there are tapes...

[SunsetBengal]

(10-25-2017, 04:48 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Tl;dr: Research began in GOP primary w/ money from anon donor. Picked back up in general by Clinton/DNC. Opp research that was funded, as these things tend to be, through layers of protections. This isn't anything new, we actually knew this not long after the dossier came out.

I'd be willing to bet that the GOP opponent who initiated this research was Jeb Bush.  But anyway, sure, we have known who was behind it for quite some time, but why is this story now getting play?  The articles I saw are recent, very recent.

[JustWinBaby]

(10-25-2017, 04:48 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Tl;dr: Research began in GOP primary w/ money from anon donor. Picked back up in general by Clinton/DNC. Opp research that was funded, as these things tend to be, through layers of protections. This isn't anything new, we actually knew this not long after the dossier came out.

It was, however, apparently news to a few folks at the NYT who claimed they were lied to and pushed back against when investigating this.....shocking, I know.

This is also the first time I've seen a clear line drawn between opposition research in the Repub primaries, and Steele and the Dossier being on Hillary and the DNC. Not exactly equivalent things.

[JustWinBaby]

(10-25-2017, 04:56 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I'd be willing to bet that the GOP opponent who initiated this research was Jeb Bush.  But anyway, sure, we have known who was behind it for quite some time, but why is this story now getting play?  The articles I saw are recent, very recent.

I believe it was the NYT that reported this back in March (along with a few other places).  Then it appears they were basically told to drop the story, and they did...and the rest of the mainstream media followed suit.

[Goalpost]

The dossier has never been proven accurate. I would like to know further how the FBI participated in this and whether a phony story was used for reason to wiretap.

[NATI BENGALS]

Woah.... Leakers?!

Bad right?

Is hiring an American firm to research a political opponent better or worse than working with an unfriendly foreign government while their legion of trolls spread misinformation to shatter our democracy? Tough question. Im so confused.

[NATI BENGALS]

(10-25-2017, 05:01 PM)Goalpost Wrote: The dossier has never been proven accurate.  I would like to know further how the FBI participated in this and whether a phony story was used for reason to wiretap.

I thought any wire tapping that might have happened was because trumps campaign manager was an unregistered foreign agent

[BmorePat87]

(10-25-2017, 04:48 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Tl;dr: Research began in GOP primary w/ money from anon donor. Picked back up in general by Clinton/DNC. Opp research that was funded, as these things tend to be, through layers of protections. This isn't anything new, we actually knew this not long after the dossier came out.

yea CNN reported this months ago when the story about the dossier dropped. They just now have another source confirming it.

[SunsetBengal]

Oh yes, "everyone knew", and that's why they were trying to hide their involvement? Nothing to see here, just following up with what the GOP started; Sure, that's why the FEC is looking into possible violations of campaign funding law..

[Belsnickel]

(10-25-2017, 07:13 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Oh yes, "everyone knew", and that's why they were trying to hide their involvement? Nothing to see here, just following up with what the GOP started; Sure, that's why the FEC is looking into possible violations of campaign funding law..

No one here is saying that what was done by everyone involved wasn't shady as hell, or even possibly illegal on some level. We're just saying this isn't news. What is being reported in the article in the OP was revealed back when the dossier was really heavy in the news.

Right now, I'm more interested in finding out who is benefiting from trying to bring this and the uranium deal thing back into the public eye. Someone is putting an agenda in motion by making sure things like this get back in the media circus, even though the information isn't really anything new. This causes the public to pay attention and results in lawmakers changing their agenda. So who benefits from this?

[Millhouse]

Hillary and others in the DNC would never do anything to undermine our democracy in motion. Oh wait, Bernie Sanders, nevermind.....

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

I funded offshore oil drilling this afternoon when I paid Exxon for a tank of gas.

[SunsetBengal]

(10-25-2017, 07:18 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: No one here is saying that what was done by everyone involved wasn't shady as hell, or even possibly illegal on some level. We're just saying this isn't news. What is being reported in the article in the OP was revealed back when the dossier was really heavy in the news.

Right now, I'm more interested in finding out who is benefiting from trying to bring this and the uranium deal thing back into the public eye. Someone is putting an agenda in motion by making sure things like this get back in the media circus, even though the information isn't really anything new. This causes the public to pay attention and results in lawmakers changing their agenda. So who benefits from this?

The American Public.  Drain the Swamp.  

This was one of Trump's campaign promises.  He has to set an example to prove that he meant it. (or at least appear to)

[JustWinBaby]

(10-25-2017, 07:18 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Right now, I'm more interested in finding out who is benefiting from trying to bring this and the uranium deal thing back into the public eye. Someone is putting an agenda in motion by making sure things like this get back in the media circus, even though the information isn't really anything new. This causes the public to pay attention and results in lawmakers changing their agenda. So who benefits from this?

It's obviously Republicans hitting back for the whole collusion story which, to-date, seems to be largely a non-story and, perhaps, an abuse of power founded upon fabricated "evidence". Damage has been done, and now they'll go after their pound of flesh.

Very interesting that Mueller - 1 year into this investigation - was examining the Dossier and interviewed Steele.  Is he looking into it because something has become relevant, or is he looking into it because he's questioning the very foundation of the entire investigation?  The former explanation is an odd one well over a year into the investigation, but perhaps he is now tasked with trying to justify an investigation that has found nothing.

Let's also not assume that "Russian interference" was only designed to benefit Trump, rather than undermine the entire Democratic process.  That would also "justifiably" put Clinton and the DNC on the radar.

[Belsnickel]

(10-25-2017, 07:27 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: The American Public.  Drain the Swamp.  

This was one of Trump's campaign promises.  He has to set an example to prove that he meant it. (or at least appear to)

Except he has surrounded himself with swamp dwellers and is supporting swamp-friendly policies. So he would only being appearing to drain the swamp to those willing to ignore all of that.

[Belsnickel]

(10-25-2017, 07:29 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: It's obviously Republicans hitting back for the whole collusion story which, to-date, seems to be largely a non-story and, perhaps, an abuse of power founded upon fabricated "evidence". Damage has been done, and now they'll go after their pound of flesh.

I have little doubt this is the case. I don't know about the abuse of power, but I have zero doubt it is a tit-for-tat.

(10-25-2017, 07:29 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Very interesting that Mueller - 1 year into this investigation - was examining the Dossier and interviewed Steele.  Is he looking into it because something has become relevant, or is he looking into it because he's questioning the very foundation of the entire investigation?  The former explanation is an odd one well over a year into the investigation, but perhaps he is now tasked with trying to justify an investigation that has found nothing.

One year? Mueller's appointment was just barely 5 months ago. This investigation is not very old, especially when looked at in comparison to other special counsel investigations.

(10-25-2017, 07:29 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Let's also not assume that "Russian interference" was only designed to benefit Trump, rather than undermine the entire Democratic process.  That would also "justifiably" put Clinton and the DNC on the radar.

Oh, I've said from the start that the interference was more to just **** with us, and was more anti-Clinton than pro-Trump.

[SunsetBengal]

(10-25-2017, 07:39 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Except he has surrounded himself with swamp dwellers and is supporting swamp-friendly policies. So he would only being appearing to drain the swamp to those willing to ignore all of that.

I understand, thus the (or at least appear to)

[JustWinBaby]

(10-25-2017, 07:46 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: One year? Mueller's appointment was just barely 5 months ago. This investigation is not very old, especially when looked at in comparison to other special counsel investigations.

Ehhhh, I'm saying regardless if it's 5 months or 14 months in, I think it's pretty curious to be examining/questioning the foundation of the investigation at this point.  5 months or 14 months in, you're not going back to the beginning.....on top of leaks the focus might be shifting, again, but would certainly be a plausible explanation of why you're interviewing Steele at this point.

Point being, they've been following-up on Steele's leads and intel for over a year - shouldn't you be well past deposing him?  You've independently corroborated his evidence and accusations or not - what value does he have to an investigation that has long moved on from the Dossier?

I would add I remember reading Steele had paid Russian informants to compile that Dossier, many of whom were former KGB and govt officials.  He's not an American citizen, but does that mean he was a go-between for people in the Clinton campaign and DNC being "agents of a foreign govt"?