This broke a few days ago apparently but it’s worth posting now as former FBI Director Jim Comey plays Sergeant Schultz (look it up, millennials) and claims to know nothing about about how the Steele dossier made its way through the FBI or who he himself briefed on it.
But the author of that dossier, former British spy Christopher Steele, is being a bit more forthcoming about his work on the dossier that was used to obtain FISA warrants to spy on Trump associates and has now been determined to have never — read that again: never — been verified as true.
In fact Steele admitted in court that Hillary Clinton’s law firm “Perkins Coie wanted to be in a position to contest the results [of the 2016 election] based on evidence he unearthed on the Trump campaign conspiring with Moscow on election interference.”
The information is contained in a sealed statement he made on August 2 related to a lawsuit brought by three Russian bankers in London. The banker’s American-based attorneys filed a libel lawsuit containing Steele’s statement last Thursday in Washington against Fusion GPS, the firm that hired Steele to write the dossier.
In an answer to interrogatories, Mr. Steele wrote: “Fusion’s immediate client was law firm Perkins Coie. It engaged Fusion to obtain information necessary for Perkins Coie LLP to provide legal advice on the potential impact of Russian involvement on the legal validity of the outcome of the 2016 US Presidential election.
“Based on that advice, parties such as the Democratic National Committee and HFACC Inc. (also known as ‘Hillary for America’) could consider steps they would be legally entitled to take to challenge the validity of the outcome of that election.”
Makes Comey’s admission that the dossier was never verified — neither before nor after it was used to obtain warrants to spy on Trump associate Carter Page and used to insinuate that Trump had done all manner of things that amounted to collusion with Russian operatives to steal an election — that much more disturbing, doesn’t it?