Fusion GPS’s work researching Trump began during the Republican presidential primaries, when the GOP donor paid for the firm to investigate the real estate magnate’s background.
Fusion GPS did not start off looking at Trump’s Russia ties but quickly realized that those relationships were extensive, according to the people familiar with the matter.
When the Republican donor stopped paying for the research, Elias, acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC, agreed to pay for the work to continue. The Democrats paid for research, including by Fusion GPS, because of concerns that little was known about Trump and his business interests, according to the people familiar with the matter.
Those people said that it is standard practice for political campaigns to use law firms to hire outside researchers to ensure their work is protected by attorney-client and work-product privileges.
One person close to the matter said the campaign and the DNC were not informed by the law firm of Fusion GPS’s role.
More: Clinton campaign, DNC paid for research that led to Russia dossier
Although the above Washington Post article refers to a GOP "donor" - I've also heard from various news sources that the Russian "dossier" investigation was initiated and funded by a GOP candidate or donor who contracted with Fusion GPS, who in turn subcontracted to Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence officer. Then, after Trump won the Republican Primary Election, the GOP candidate or donor terminated the investigation. Then, apparently Fusion GPS contacted the Hillary Clinton Campaign and the DNC - who then funded the rest of the investigation. So far, it is unknown who the GOP candidate or donor was. It is also yet unknown whether Hillary Clinton was aware of the Russian "dossier" investigation. Also, reportedly, the investigation never started out looking for Russian collusion with the Trump campaign - but pointed that way as Steele went deeper into his investigation.
Also, what would have been illegal, or even unethical, if Hillary Clinton had used any of that information in her presidential campaign? After all - wasn't that just "opposition research"?
Please correct anything that I am not understanding correctly - with only "credible" sources. I honestly want my understanding to be the correct understanding.
Fusion GPS did not start off looking at Trump’s Russia ties but quickly realized that those relationships were extensive, according to the people familiar with the matter.
When the Republican donor stopped paying for the research, Elias, acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC, agreed to pay for the work to continue. The Democrats paid for research, including by Fusion GPS, because of concerns that little was known about Trump and his business interests, according to the people familiar with the matter.
Those people said that it is standard practice for political campaigns to use law firms to hire outside researchers to ensure their work is protected by attorney-client and work-product privileges.
One person close to the matter said the campaign and the DNC were not informed by the law firm of Fusion GPS’s role.
More: Clinton campaign, DNC paid for research that led to Russia dossier
Although the above Washington Post article refers to a GOP "donor" - I've also heard from various news sources that the Russian "dossier" investigation was initiated and funded by a GOP candidate or donor who contracted with Fusion GPS, who in turn subcontracted to Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence officer. Then, after Trump won the Republican Primary Election, the GOP candidate or donor terminated the investigation. Then, apparently Fusion GPS contacted the Hillary Clinton Campaign and the DNC - who then funded the rest of the investigation. So far, it is unknown who the GOP candidate or donor was. It is also yet unknown whether Hillary Clinton was aware of the Russian "dossier" investigation. Also, reportedly, the investigation never started out looking for Russian collusion with the Trump campaign - but pointed that way as Steele went deeper into his investigation.
Also, what would have been illegal, or even unethical, if Hillary Clinton had used any of that information in her presidential campaign? After all - wasn't that just "opposition research"?
Please correct anything that I am not understanding correctly - with only "credible" sources. I honestly want my understanding to be the correct understanding.
Last edited:
