They did not “run operatives in a foreign country”. The DNC and the Clinton campaign went to a domestic source for oppo research.
His assertions repeatedly fail any serious examination. He’s also stating, falsely, that the Clinton campaign “ran operatives in a foreign country”. The implication is that Trump wasn’t doing anything unusual by obtaining help from the Russians to get information on Hillary Clinton. This goes to the second deception in Nunes’s questioning: that it is inappropriate for political parties “to run operatives in foreign countries to dig up dirt on their opponents”. What’s more true is that the Clinton campaign hired a private domestic intelligence service to research Trump and they included information they obtained overseas. But that doesn’t fit Nunes’s narrative, which is that the Democrats went overseas to research their political opponent. So, an accurate statement about this collection of memos originally from Christopher Steele is that it was funded by both a conservative website and Democrats.
TESIMONEY DNC SERVER WHAT DID THEY HAVE TO HIDE FREE
This opposition research was originally funded by “conservative political website The Washington Free Beacon to provide general opposition research on Trump and other Republican presidential candidates.” It was only later that “an attorney for Hillary Clinton's campaign and the DNC separately hired Fusion GPS to investigate Trump”. The Trump-Russia dossier, as it is known on Wikipedia, was produced by Fusion GPS, which is actually based in Washington, D.C. In this exchange, Nunes asserts “the Democrats had paid for that information.” This isn’t quite true. Hill, do you think it’s appropriate for political parties to pay operatives to dig up dirt on their opponents? I wouldn’t be in a position to dispute that, sir.ĭo you think it’s appropriate for political parties to run operatives in foreign countries to dig up dirt on their opponents?ĭr. And then in addition, I have read about those issues, but I’m not an expert on them.īut you’re not disputing that the Democrat and the Clinton campaign were the source of funds that funded the Steele Dossier. Understood, but I do want to be clear about that. Not accusing any involvement of you with the Steele Dossier. So I do want to be clear that all that happened before I arrived in Ukraine. I’m not accusing of involvement, I’m just asking if you, not even if you knew at the time, but you now know today that the Democrats had paid for that information.
So sir, I never had any involvement directly with. Hill’s testimony, but the Steele Dossier that contained initially that initial information that was fed in the F.B.I., were you aware that the Democrats had paid for that information? Here is the relevant part of the questioning:Īnd you’re aware that the … you heard Dr. Devin Nunes and the witnesses, David Holmes and Fiona Hill, about the Steele “dossier” (actually a private intelligence report that contained allegations of misconduct and conspiracy by Donald Trump and the Russian government). One interesting line of questions in Thursday’s Intelligence Committee hearings was an exchange between Rep.
elections, or a "hired gun" used to attack Trump Christopher Steele: A hero who tried to warn about the Kremlin's meddling in U.S.