…”Clinton and Co. supplied information for the dossier.”
Neo Neocon — Feb 5, 2018
Both of those allegations describe an extremely disturbing and dangerous set of circumstances, if true. The newer allegation can be found in this memorandum sent from the Senate Committee on the Judiciary (Chairman Charles Grassley, and Lindsay Graham) to Deputy AG Rosenstein (DOJ) and FBI Director Wray, about a potential violation of 18 U.S.C. § 100 by Christopher Steele:
…when information in those classified documents [supplied to the Committee by the FBI] is evaluated in light of sworn statements by Mr. Steele in British litigation, it appears that either Mr. Steele lied to the FBI or the British court, or that the classified documents reviewed by the Committee contain materially false statements…
Mr. Steele also admitted in the British litigation to briefing journalists from the Washington Post, Yahoo News, the New Yorker, and CNN in September of 2016. Simply put, the more people who contemporaneously knew that Mr. Steele was compiling his dossier, the more likely it was vulnerable to manipulation. In fact, in the British litigation, which involves a post-election dossier memorandum, Mr. Steele admitted that he received and included in it unsolicited-and unverified-allegations.
That filing implies that he similarly received unsolicited intelligence on these prior to the election as well, stating that Mr. Steele “continued to receive unsolicited intelligence on the matters covered by the pre-election memoranda after the US Presidential election.”…
One memorandum by Mr. Steele that was not published by Buzzfeed is dated October 19, 2016. The report alleges that…the report was the second in a series and that the report was information that came from a foreign sub-source who “is in touch with, a contact of, a friend of the Clintons, who passed it to [redacted].” It is troubling enough that the Clinton Campaign funded Mr. Steele’s work, but that these Clinton associates were contemporaneously feeding Mr Steele allegations raises considerable concerns about his credibility.
His credibility? How about their culpability? Steele was just a useful instrument, a conduit through which information passed and who afforded plausible deniability to the Clinton campaign—which never expected any of this to come to light, anyway.
To recap: it appears that there is good evidence that the “Trump colluded with Russia” story was devised and disseminated by the Clinton campaign, which seeded the story in various ways—working through Steele, Fusion, the media, and the FISA court, not just to fund the report but to influence and supply information for its content. The actions of the Clinton operatives may have constituted collusion with Russia, as well.
Anyone who professes to care about the rule of law and the integrity of our elections, court system, and government institutions, should care and care deeply about this.