Politics

The Steele Dossier and the Perils of Political Insurance

Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the recent admissions of Christopher Steele, the author the controversial dossier used as part of the basis for the secret surveillance conducted on Trump associates by the Obama Administration.

Here is the column:

The wonderful thing about insurance is that you can cover just about anything, so long as you are prepared to pay the premium.

Model Heidi Klum insured her legs for $2.2 million, twice the amount of the insurance on fabled actress Betty Grable’s limbs. Lloyd’s of London once insured a 12-foot cigar. KISS bassist Gene Simmons’ tongue ($1 million), Pittsburgh Steeler Troy Polamalu’s hair ($1 million), Bruce Springsteen’s vocal cords ($6 million), even Rolling Stone Keith Richards’ middle finger ($1.6 million) — all insured.

But what about an election?

According to former British spy Christopher Steele, that was precisely the concern of the Clinton campaign when it paid him and research firm Fusion GPS to compile his controversial dossier on Donald Trump. Despite being widely declared the shoo-in for the White House, the Clinton campaign wanted insurance — and Steele and Fusion were there, as one insurer famously says, “like a good neighbor.”

Steele was recently called for a deposition in London in a defamation action filed by three Russian bankers for allegedly false claims in the dossier. Steele’s statements included some surprising admissions, particularly regarding the purpose of his contract with the U.S. law firm of Perkins Coie.

Throughout the campaign, and for many weeks after, the Clinton campaign denied any involvement in the creation of the dossier that was later used to secure a secret surveillance warrant against Trump associates during the Obama administration. Journalists later discovered that the Clinton campaign hid the payments to Fusion as a “legal fees” among the $5.6 million paid to the law firm. New York Times reporter Ken Vogel at the time said that Clinton lawyer Marc Elias had “vigorously” denied involvement in the anti-Trump dossier. When Vogel tried to report the story, he said, Elias “pushed back vigorously, saying ‘You (or your sources) are wrong.’” Times reporter Maggie Haberman likewise wrote: “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.” Even when Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta was questioned by Congress on the matter, he denied any contractual agreement with Fusion GPS. Sitting beside him was Elias, who reportedly said nothing to correct the false information given to Congress.

Later, confronted with the evidence, Clinton and her campaign finally admitted that the dossier was a campaign-funded document that was pushed by Steele and others to the media.

In one of his answers to an interrogatory, Steele explained: “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 U.S. 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.”

Steele’s testimony suggests that the dossier was not just a political hit job but a type of insurance for a catastrophic political event. 

The dossier ultimately found its way from a Fusion GPS employee, Nellie Ohr, to her husband, Justice Department official Bruce Ohr. From there, it became the basis of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants targeting figures like Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, signed off by the Obama administration with the involvement of later-fired FBI director James Comey and his deputy, Andrew McCabe. (Ohr was later demoted over his involvement.) Page was never charged with a crime while key players like Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson invoked the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination to refuse to answer further questions from Congress.

The FBI knew the dossier was part of a Clinton campaign operation but told the secret FISA court that it was only speculating about a possible political motive for the material. Notably, however, the FBI’s warrant application indicates that Steele denied knowing the purpose behind the dossier. In the 412-page application, the FBI buries the issue in a footnote, stating that Steele was hired by Fusion GPS to conduct research on Trump and that “The identified U.S. person never advised [Steele] as to the motivation behind the research into [Trump] ties to Russia. The FBI speculates that the identified U.S. Person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit Candidate #1’s campaign.”

We now know that Steele and Fusion GPS aggressively shopped the dossier with any reporter who would listen, while also pitching it to Ohr and the FBI. Notably, the dossier story was broken by investigative journalist Michael Isikoff who recently admitted, “When you actually get into the details of the Steele dossier, the specific allegations, we have not seen the evidence to support them, and, in fact, there’s good grounds to think that some of the more sensational allegations will never be proven and are likely false.”

Steele’s recent comments magnify the concerns. Ultimately, the dossier was used for precisely the purpose described by Steele: It led to the special counsel investigation, which quickly diverted to other criminal allegations unrelated to the dossier’s most sensational claims, like hacking or coordination with WikiLeaks and Russian trolling operations. Indeed, Democratic leaders’ new claims of a “massive fraud” in the election is the alleged violation of campaign finance laws to pay hush money to a porn star and former Playboy bunny.

I supported the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller, and still support the completion of his investigation without interference. Yet, we should not be willfully blind to the implications of the dossier’s use to support a secret FISA investigation. 

Some of us have long criticized the secret court as operating below the constitutional standard set out in the Fourth Amendment for searches and seizures. In this case, using that secret court, a dossier funded by the Democratic presidential candidate was given to the outgoing Democratic administration to investigate advisers to the Republican challenger and his business dealings. That alone should be deeply troubling, even without the unproven allegations.

Of course, Clinton wasn’t the only candidate seeking political insurance. The controversial Trump Tower meeting with Russian operatives was held to hear promised evidence of alleged criminality by Clinton and her foundation; both candidates sought information from Russian sources to undermine each other. That may be unseemly, but it’s not unlawful.

The submission of at least one of Mueller’s reports may be just weeks away. Regardless of whether he finds crimes, it was important for this investigation to reach its proper conclusions. Yet, no matter how it ends, concerns will remain over how it began … as a political insurance plan.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

195 thoughts on “The Steele Dossier and the Perils of Political Insurance”

    1. dn, What is so difficult to understand that certain companies do research for others and the different research being done has different implications? The requested Republican research had nothing to do with the research done by the Hillary campaign yet you wish to foolishly link the two together. I guess what you are trying to say is that if you shop at a store that is guilty of tax evasion you must somehow be guilty as well. That doesn’t make sense, but maybe making sense isn’t a requirement for comments on this blog.

        1. Perhaps you are correct Ivan, but there are people that might even exist on this list that cannot understand things of this nature. Not everyone has an IQ greater than 100 and that unfortunately is the midpoint of the curve.

            1. David, check again. Are you telling us that non adults account for a bulge on the other side of the curve? Just what are you trying to say?

              1. Juveniles have an age-adjusted score.

                As is well known, the average Stanford Benet IQ
                score goes
                up,
                generation
                by
                generation.

                1. David median IQ is 100. You said “Last time I checked the average adult IQ in the USA was 114.” I’d like some clarification along with a citation. I don’t think the graph is 100% symmetrical in reality and averages differ from medians (I think there may be a slight increase to the right). However, unless you wish to better define your statement then I think that according to you the gross mean IQ today would not be 100 but range somewhat closer to 114. That I don’t think would be true but I am willing to listen to your explanation if you are able to produce one.

            2. David Benson is the God Emperor of Making Stuff Up and owes me twenty-four citations (one from the OED, one from the town ordinances and two from the Old Testament), an equation and the source of a quotation, after twenty-eight weeks, and needs to cite all his work from now on. – you have a citation for the 114 IQ being the average for American adults? We really need a citation on this, not the word of a retired mechanical engineer.

                2. David, if I recall your specialty involved computers and your age might preclude a specific degree in the field. If I remember correctly the first specific degrees in the field weren’t being offered until around 1962. Did you come in from a specific computer science degree or as another type of engineer?

    2. That’s not what the article says; Paul Singer/ Free Beacon did hire Fusion GPS, but after Trump secured the nomination by c.April-May 2016, the Singer/Beacon funding stopped.
      Steele was subsequently hired AFTER DNC and Hillary campaign hired Fusion GPS, and after Singer-Beacon were no longer the clients.
      The fact that the supporters of Trump’s GOP primary opponents funded opposition research prior to Steele coming on board is used to make the bogus claim that the Steele/ Russian Dossier project was started by a GOP backer.
      Nice try, though.

  2. Muller will get Trump, after all didn’t he tell Putin he’ll have more leverage after the election, oh darn that was Obama. Well didn’t he sell %20 of our uranium to the Russians? Drat that was Hillary. Well anyway didn’t he get $500,000.00 from the Russians for giving a Speech. Oh $hit that was Bill. Gee I wonder who the colluders are.

    1. Haha. More “uranium” nonsense. Where’s the “MORE BENGHAZI HEARINGS!!” and some “Whitewater” or “Vince Foster” tomfoolery? Pro tip: hannity plays you for a fool, just like all the other gullible rubes, dupes, klan wannabees, pocket-traitors and grifters on the make.

      this is to “oh, I gave up reading the news when I dropped out of high school” brucie

  3. Why are you still referring to this as an insurance policy? You’re a constitutional law professor, you can do better than that. For 2 years we’ve had the ifs and buts of what might possibly, may be crimes committed by Trump and his entourage. So give it a go. Stop with the insurance policy whitewash and with the facts you’ve finally acknowledged, what are all the possible crimes that were committed to create this insurance policy? Then, let’s have a discussion on what those crimes have done to the psyche of this country? How has our national security been impacted by undermining this president and his administration?

  4. Right now, there have been allegations that campaign finance laws were broken by the Trump campaign allegedly using funds to pay off women to keep quiet. However, missing in that statement is the obvious campaign finance violation of paying for “legal services” to Perkins, Coie for what was really opposition research.

  5. Regardless of whether he finds crimes, it was important for this investigation to reach its proper conclusions.

    What!? Is that how this is supposed to work? Give Mueller a blank check to go looking for crimes wherever he wants and for whatever he wants? Everything in your post is exactly what we have been talking about for 2 years. A proper conclusion would have been to admit early on they were investigating the wrong people. Had Mueller’s team worked as tirelessly at investigating the real conspiracy in all of this, we’d have more than process crime indictments being dished out. No, those criminals merely got fired, demoted, retired with pensions, book tours, speaking engagements, fawning media coverage and half the country willing to undermine a legitimately elected President and his administration. Is that the proper conclusion you believe our system of justice should be looking for?

    1. News flash: The Special Counsel’s investigation has led to 30 indictments. Here in the real world, the manifestly correct people are being investigated. But by all means, keep recounting the breathless fables of the wackjobs.

      this to “oh, hannity never mentioned that” olly

      1. News Flash!!!: No matter how hard you try, your posts will never amount to that 1 billable hour you were hoping for in 2018. With all that free time, perhaps 2019 will be the year you finally get caught up on your Ethics CE’s.

      2. The NPC Marky Mark Mark runs the “Russians were indicted, the Russians were indicted” script.

  6. Have any parts of the dossier been shown to be false, as yet? As I understand it, parts are “true,” and parts are “unsubstantiated.” All the hubbub is over who paid for it and why, and not about the actual info contained therein.

    1. Jay, it appears you don’t recognize the fact that generally a negative cannot be proven and that spoiled milk mixed with good milk leaves all the milk spoiled. That sort of leaves you carrying an empty bag or a lot of sour milk.

      Try listing the true parts of the dossier and what they mean. Very little. What appears important to you is what your immagination does with the insigificant parts that have not been disproven.

    2. Actually the claims about the dossier have been false because it was developed and distgributed based on lies and falsehoods and multiple logical fallacies by the press. Hillary and the Democrats lied about paying for it, Justice lied to the FISA court about its origin and creator, Perkins Coie lied about being involved in it, Nellie and Bruce Ohr lied about its origin and corruptly distributed it, Comey lied about adequately vetting it, Podesta lied about involvement. Mark Elias lied about coordinating it, Fusion GPS lied about it to spread political disinformation to reporters. Jay – It”s upon the accuser to prove in courts so tell us the meaningful information that YOU know is VERIFIABLY TRUE. But don’t be a LIAR like the rest of them. (And hopefully no one will write a fairy tale about you one day!)

      1. The amount of lying that went on to produce the Steele Dossier and break FBI rules while weaponizing the bureaucracy is incredible yet some rely on the inability to prove a negative as their proof of rightousness. That type of thinking indicates a supreficiality so extreme that the person doesn’t recognize their total lack of competence on the subject matter at hand.

        1. Haha. More fables. Your “CONSPIRACY(!!)” must reach deep into the American citizenry for it to include the members of various federal petit and grand juries–which are made of of your peers.

          this is to “ya, he’s likely a traitor, but he’s mean to hillary so I likes him” allan / allen

          1. Mark M is back. He always seems to have a bit of dogsh!t stuck to his shoe and he feeds off of it.

          2. The NPC Marky Mark Mark runs the “grand jury, which only has to vote by a majority” came out with a true bill. Who was it that said they could get a prosecutor to indict a ham sandwich in a grand jury? Hmmmm???????

  7. A “steel dossier” is another name for a border wall which has spikes at the top to scare off climbers. Hillary was a climber. Trump climbed. Mueller is a mule with an err. Not a Missouri Mule. One can mull over such things but let us get that ugly dork’s photo off the airwaves and newspapers. Mull err Mull err bo bull er. Banana fanna fo fuller. Stix Baer and Fuller. Eat ickDay Mull err.

  8. Turley misses the point. Sure, everything he notes is extremely problematic and demands investigation. Sure, the matters he notes are clearly within the purview of the Mueller investigation. But it is now a matter of public record that Mueller, Huber, Horowitz and almost the entirety of Congress have no interest whatsoever in investigating anything which might impact on Democrats.

    The “investigation” in D.C. represents how the political establishment deals with its own. You think the average lawyer in Kansas City or Tampa or Phoenix could simply get away with Elias’ conduct? Of course not, but in D.C. there are no ramifications for him or any of the HRC lawyers/fact witnesses granted immunity, etc. Three quarters of Americans believe the media w/o credibility and look upon members of Congress as virtual country club scumbags. Three quarters of Americans believe D.C. corrupt and beyond-hope partisan. D.C. and American media do not understand most Americans and in the main have disdain for what constitutes one half of all American citizens. This is a very dangerous situation in which corruption, conspiracy theories, and more corruption thrive. There is a reasonable chance events will end badly and mamby-pamby columns like those periodically from JT are not enough to throw cold water on D.C. faces.

  9. Isn’t Meillar the social justice warrior who kept two Italian guys in prison even though he he New they were innocent. Yah, he’s the one. He also gave Whitey Bulger immunity from prosecution while he went after the Italian Mafia in the Boston area. While Bulger was under this protection he was killing some of his 19 victims that we know about. Meuller has been chasing Trump for 2 years now. What’s he got? Zip, nada, nothing. This is almost like the Democrats giving cover to illegal criminal aliens. I get it if you don’t like Trump. 2020 is coming, how about candidates and a platform that the people can get behind.

    1. More fairy tales; unless of course one rationally believes that 30 indictments equates to “nada.”

      this is to “I went ahead and got a ‘hannity was here’ tattoo across my lower back” bobbie

    2. No, Mueller had nothing to do with any of that: it was a special FBI task force, run out of DC, that kept all the local US Attorney offices where they operated in the dark “to prevent leaks”.

  10. Give me a break. You still have faith in Mueller and his band of Dumocrat hit men? The only thing that they have done is scare the hell out of anyone that would give up their mother to show they are meaningful. Hillary, DNC, msm and all the rest have screwed Bernie, President Trump but most of all the American people.

    1. Here in the real world, the vast majority of “the American people” are quite satisfied with the direct of the Special Counsel’s investigation. So sorry for your loss, and isolation.

      this is to “hillary was also on the grassy knoll” zambi

  11. The Steele dossier is just one component of the Democratic Party’s crookery over a period of eight years. Nothing will be done about any of it. And, of course, Democratic voters know nothing about public affairs, pretend it isn’t happening, or are perfectly content with this sort of behavior.

  13. Russian collusion is a non-starter. Emoluments, Israeli collusion, mental dysfunction, all need investigation.

        2. Tom Nash – it is just as believeable that Steele had support from the British govt and therefore the Steele Dossier is British interference in an American election.

    2. None of these need investigation. Pretty funny that you of all people want someone examined for mental dysfunction.

    3. So having wasted 35 million plus on one NON-crime you want to wasste how much more on three other NON crimes for a total of how much on all NON crimes instead of going after actual crimes. Change the name To Clinton and the word collusiion to conspiracy and you have slam dunk jail time plus add RICO violations. Then we can pay for putting all those people in prison

      1. Awesome. Thanks for the in-depth, hard-hitting legal analysis, “counselor.” Pro tip: hannity doesn’t even play a lawyer on TV. So sorry for your condition.

        this is to “when I use CAPS that means I’m uber-serious” mikey

  14. It seems, with the lack of support on BillHillary’s latest speaking tour, that most people are now understanding they are “Pure Evil”.

    1. Both my TV and SmartPhone have 1020 PPI.
      The resolution from the 2016 campaign investigations is more like 102 PPI.

  16. I would feel better if I thought someone was going to do something positive about this mess.

    1. So far Mueller has refused to start doing anything positive except fatten his bank account.

      1. So you don’t consider a record number of indictments of people trying to interfere in our election a “positive/”

        1. He indicted people on petty process crimes. This isn’t that difficult to understand, but the self-image of partisan Democrats depends on them not understanding it.

    2. Paul

      Have a little more patience. Our long national nightmare is well on its way to being over. Unfortunately, a new Pence nightmare is waiting in the wings. His “Legalize Freedom” approach to making his brand of religion the path and the way, will result in actions that will astound the ruling class of this country. Especially those narrow minded “patriots” in Dryzona.

      1. Please. Pence would be a breath of fresh air after the damage Trump is doing to democratic institutions. There is no comparison between the two.

        1. “Pence would be a breath of fresh air after the damage Trump is doing to democratic institutions.”

          I hear unfounded mass hysteria from the left, but what I don’t hear are examples. Why? The left is unable to make cogent arguments that deal with fact rather than immagination. Apparently many have never learned logic or how government works.

          I wait for examples, but expect the hysterical ones not to be able to provide any.

          1. Or, more accurately, you can’t recognize facts, evidence, reason or logic. Pro tip: you just keep on ‘doin you, playa; it’ll all be over soon.

            this is to “I use a ‘pee cup’ so I don’t hafta miss any of hannity’s circus” allan / allen

            1. It seems Mark is an expert at throwing sh!t. I wonder how many billable hours he gets from doing that type of stuff. He must work for the firm of Sleaze, Sleazier and Sleaziest.

            2. The NPC Marky Mark Mark runs the “Pro Tip” script pretending to know something it does not really know.

  17. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/08/30/gwus_jonathan_turley_sessions_brilliant_to_have_utah_us_attorney_john_huber_team_up_with_dojs_ig_instead_of_appointing_second_special_prosecutor.html
    The Huber-Horowitz investigations were supposed to in lieu of the appointment of a 2nd Special Counsel to investigate the 2016 campaigns.
    At things stand now, it does not appear that JT’s analysis was correct.
    It looks like Horowitz has done his part, but what has Huber done?

  18. The fact that Steele contacted numerous media outlets and fed them material from the Russian Dossier ( before the 2016 election) is an indication that the dossier was more than “an insurance policy” to challenge a potential win by Trump.
    It was not for lack of effort that the established media did not publish the allegations from the Russian Dossier; they did not “bite” on Steele’s sales job because they would not run with unsubstantiated allegations in the final leg of the 2016 campaign.
    The objective of Steele, and probably Simpson and others, was to get this dossier story ( or elements of it) “out there” in the news prior to the election.
    With respect to the comments in the closing paragraph of JT’s column, about the importance of this investigation reaching its proper conclusions, the broad fishing expedition authorization from Rosenstein to Mueller specified that Mueller could target one campaign (and only one campaign) for investigation, and anyone associated with it.
    Supposedly, U.S. Attorney Huber was selected by Jeff Sessions to investigate beyond the activities of the Trump campaign. That was in November of 2017.
    There is no word on what, if anything, Huber is doing; DSS commented here recently that Huber has done virtually nothing in the way of an investigation.
    If that is correct, then the civil suits might shed some light on the activities of Steele, Fusion GPS, Orbis, Glenn Simpson, Marc Elias, and others.
    In the absence of any serious DOJ-authorized investigation, the tidbits from the civil suits might be all that we get.

      1. Which those of us who have made multiple surface travel trips through that area have still failed to see or find or whatever. .

  19. Ѧƞ ựƞđϵᴦłƴїƞǥ ḉαựṩϵ ѳƒ ţħїṩ ӎϵṩṩ їṩ ţħϵ βїłł αƞđ Ħїłłαᴦƴ ₵łїƞţѳƞ ᴘϵƞḉħαƞţ ƒѳᴦ їƞţᴦїǥựϵ αƞđ đᴦαӎα. Ѧƒţϵᴦ ţħϵ ᴘᴦϵṩїđϵƞḉƴ ѳƒ ţħϵ ƒѳᴦӎϵᴦ ḉαӎϵ ţѳ α ḉłѳṩϵ ѳţħϵᴦ ᴘѳłїţїḉїαƞṩ ṩħѳựłđ ħαⱴϵ ţαҟϵƞ їţ ţѳ ħϵαᴦţ ţħϵ αӎѳựƞţ ѳƒ ţїӎϵ αƞđ ᴦϵṩѳựᴦḉϵṩ ṩϙựαƞđϵᴦϵđ їƞ ṩϵᴦⱴїḉїƞǥ ţħϵ đᴦαӎα Ƀƴ ţħϵ ᴘᴦϵṩїđϵƞţ αƞđ ħїṩ αṩṩѳḉїαţϵṩ αƞđ ħѳѡ łїţţłϵ ᴦϵӎαїƞϵđ ţѳ Ƀᴦїƞǥ αɃѳựţ ṩѳӎϵ αḉţựαł ǥѳѳđ ƒѳᴦ ţħϵ ᴘϵѳᴘłϵ ѳƒ ţħϵ ḉѳựƞţᴦƴ.

    Ɲѳѡ, ѳⱴϵᴦ α đϵḉαđϵ łαţϵᴦ, ţħϵ ṩαӎϵ ᴘѳłїţїḉαł đᴦαӎα αƞđ їƞţᴦїǥựϵ łϵṩṩϵƞṩ ţħϵ Ƀϵƞϵƒїţ ţħϵ ᴘựɃłїḉ ḉαƞ ᴦϵḉϵїⱴϵ. Їƞ ţħϵ ϵƞđ ƞѳţħїƞǥ ᴦϵαłłƴ ḉħαƞǥϵṩ ƒѳᴦ ţħϵ Ƀϵţţϵᴦ. Їţ’ṩ ĵựṩţ α ӎαţţϵᴦ ѳƒ ƒїƞαłłƴ ḉѳƞḉłựđїƞǥ ţħϵ đїṩţᴦαḉţїѳƞ.

    Ᵽϵᴦħαᴘṩ їƞ α ѡαƴ їţ їṩ ƒᴦѳӎ αƞѳţħϵᴦ ᴘϵᴦṩᴘϵḉţїⱴϵ α Ƀłϵṩṩїƞǥ, ƒѳᴦ їţ ӎїǥħţ Ƀϵ ţħϵ ḉαṩϵ ѡħϵᴦϵ α Ƀαđ ᴘѳłїţїḉїαƞ–ѳƞϵ ţħαţ ṩϵϵӎṩ ţѳ ƞϵⱴϵᴦ ǥѳ αѡαƴ–їṩ Ƀϵţţϵᴦ ḉѳƞţαїƞϵđ ţħαƞ αłłѳѡϵđ ƒᴦϵϵ ᴦϵїǥƞ ţѳ đαӎαǥϵ ţħϵ ḉѳựƞţᴦƴ ƒựᴦţħϵᴦ. Ѧṩ łѳƞǥ αṩ ţħϵƴ αᴦϵ αţţαḉҟїƞǥ ϵαḉħ ѳţħϵᴦ, ţħϵƴ αᴦϵ ƞѳţ αţţαḉҟїƞǥ ḉїⱴїłїαƞṩ.

Comments are closed.