The infamous dossier created to advance the false narrative of Donald Trump having ties to Russia is finally getting the investigative attention it deserves. To date, the details have been damning — but not for President Trump.
A House committee chairman is going head-to-head in a DC-area US District Court with the political opposition research firm, Fusion GPS, according to The Washington Times. At the center of this legal dispute is the question of whether or not Fusion GPS paid journalists.
This is the latest in a line of investigative efforts that now has Fusion GPS fighting in court. This result was expected after it was revealed that Fusion GPS used campaign money from the Democrat Party and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign to create the dossier. Fusion GPS paid former British spy, Christopher Steele, to create the document, which ultimately contained a great number of inaccurate and unverified claims based on information obtained from Kremlin officials. It is suspected that these officials were paid for the information provided.
In Florida, an alleged victim of the dossier has brought a case to the US District Court, demanding that the website, BuzzFeed, disclose who initially provided them with the dossier, which they subsequently published in full. Russian entrepreneur Aleksej Gubarev of XBT Holding is accusing BuzzFeed of libel after their published dossier included an accusation that Gubarev installed “porn, viruses, and spyware” on Democrat computers.
Representative Devin Nunes (R-CA), Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, signed off on a subpoena forcing TD Bank to release Fusion GPS’ financial records. The records were necessary evidence in investigating who paid Fusion GPS for the dossier, and who was then paid by Fusion GPS.
The court battle revealed that Clinton campaign attorney, Marc Elias, and his firm Perkins Coie LLP, paid Fusion GPS on behalf of the Democrats for the dossier.
Rep. Nunes expanded his subpoena request, demanding “the names of journalists and law firms that Fusion GPS might have paid,” according to The Washington Times. Fusion GPS attorneys again requested a judge block the request, calling it a “ridiculous notion” and citing First Amendment protections. Of the records, Fusion GPS attorney’s argued, “And they are not pertinent, as they are not related to Russia or Donald Trump.”
However, lawyers for Fusion GPS did not deny that it had made payments to journalists.
There’s nothing illegal about opposition research — something that both parties utilize for campaigns. But there is something very wrong with making payments to journalists to influence their reporting and what stories they decide to push into the mainstream.
Back in July, Thor Halvorssen, head of the Human Rights Foundation, testified in the Fusion GPS case alleging that the firm had a history of retaliating against journalists and whistleblowers, launching “smear campaigns … dossiers containing false information … [and] carefully placed slanderous news items,” among other intimidation tactics.
A House committee chairman is investigating Fusion GPS to determine if the company paid journalists. Do you think it’s possible Fusion GPS paid off journalists?
Halvorssen further said that Fusion GPS was able to influence the Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg News, and The Economist to kill stories before they were published. Halvorssen stated: “Fusion GPS isn’t an ‘opposition research’ or a crisis communications company. Fusion GPS is a group of highly paid smear experts who function as an accessory to the crimes committed by Derwick Associates.”
This again brings up the question of why there hasn’t been a Special Counsel appointed to look into the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign — even after her own counsel admitted to the same acts the Left accuses Donald Trump of doing; acts they insisted required a Special Counsel to investigate. One key difference is that the crimes Donald Trump is accused of are based on rumors, while Clinton’s lawyer admitted the campaign’s involvement in the same type of crimes.
Since Democrats are all about “finding the truth” and “protecting national security,” they should want to find out the whole truth about the actions of both parties. It’s suspicious that they are not.