We know that Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee gave negative research firm Fusion GPS over $1 million to find evidence that then-candidate Donald Trump had colluded with Vladimir Putin’s Russia to fix the 2016 election.
But how deeply involved was the former secretary of state in preparing the dossier that emerged?
If you believe that Hillary would pay an organization like Fusion GPS and not oversee every last detail of their work, you don’t know Hillary Clinton.
She is obsessive, particularly when it comes to negatives to use against a political opponent. She and I used to worry over every word in our negative attacks in Arkansas and against former Sen. Bob Dole in the 1996 election.
Have no doubts: This dossier was, as we know, funded by Hillary and, therefore, it was almost certainly written under Hillary’s minute and forceful supervision. No freelancing allowed.
If the Clinton campaign was funding it and Cody Shearer was involved in preparing it, you have to know that Hillary Clinton was running this project personally — although, of course, secretly.
This dossier was conceived, funded, mapped out, written and peddled to the media in Hillaryland. It’s not Christopher Steele’s dossier. It’s not Glen Simpson’s or Fusion’s or even Cody Shearer’s. They are the hired help. It was and is Hillary Clinton’s handiwork.
As the campaign against Trump stalled out, Hillary grew desperate. Her standard negatives weren’t working. Trump’s divorces, tax returns, bankruptcies, his university “scam” were all not working. He was nipping at her heels in the polls and his negative ratings had not yet knocked him out of contention.
So Hillary brought in her big guns — the black ops, secret police, detectives she had kept around ever since she first used them to besmirch women whose charges of sexual harassment, groping and even rape were hindering Bill’s rise to power. Now, under the direction of Cody Shearer, she put them to work digging up material to “prove” that Trump was in league with Putin.
But, there was one problem: He wasn’t. Even her top operative came up empty, so she resorted to Plan B: She made up the “facts.”
She put Trump in a hotel room in Moscow with hookers. She fantasized that Mike Cohen, Trump’s lawyer, went to Prague to set up the collaboration with the Russians. She included every rumor and fiction she had to to make the story of collusion stick.
But she couldn’t release it under Cody’s name. It was radioactive. He was involved in a scam relating to the Cheyenne-Arapaho indian tribe that had been induced to give the Democratic Party $100,000 in the hopes that the government would intervene in a drilling rights dispute on tribal land. He was also implicated in taking money from Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic to arrange his surrender to the International War Crimes Tribunal. It turned out to be a scam as well.
So Hillary hunted for a more reputable source to whom she could attribute the dossier, preferably one who would be treated respectfully by the FBI. She found one in Christopher Steele, a former British spy in Moscow who went on to lead the MI-6 Russia bureau.
Having worked on the international soccer scandal with the FBI, Steele was trusted at the Bureau and credible with the media. So, by Steele’s admission, he met with Shearer, who provided him with much of the material in the dossier. Then, under Steele’s name, it was peddled to the media.
This dossier has Hillary’s fingerprints all over it. It was, simply, a campaign document — no more, no less — that unfortunately sent the FISA Court and the FBI and Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller off on a wild goose chase to find evidence that Trump had colluded with Putin to fix the election.
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.