Clinton, DNC connections to Trump dossier funding could create election law issues

[SpankMe]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by DonViejo (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: The Hill via MSN

The politically-explosive revelation that Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic Party paid for some of the research that produced an uncorroborated election-year dossier connecting President Trump to Russia may have broken campaign laws.

The Washington Post reported Tuesday that the Democratic National Committee and Clinton's campaign funded some of the research by the firm Fusion GPS, but routed the monies through a law firm. Their campaign reports listed no payments to Fusion GPS and the expenses attributed to the law firm Perkins Coie are described as legal work, not opposition research, the paper noted.

"The issue is number one, did the campaigns pay for this service? And apparently, based on press reports, they did," Baran said. "And number two, if they did, then it should have been accurately reported in some fashion on their FEC reports."

"By failing to file accurate reports, the DNC and Hillary For America undermined the vital public information role that reporting is intended to serve," CLC said in its complaint.

Read more: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/clinton-dnc-connections-to-trump-dossier-funding-could-create-election-law-issues/ar-AAu3kFk?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

---

So, did the Republican campaigns that preceded Hillary for America's involvement properly disclose the oppo research? Or, did the Repubs also get to Fusion GPS through a law firm or other research intermediary and fail to properly report.

One thing that bugs me about this story is that it implies that only the Dems sought the dossier. It doesn't adequately convey the important fact that the Dems took the account over from Repub primary campaigns - who should have had the same reporting requirements, but who probably reported the same way the Dems did.

[Dopers_Greed]

1. Great, the DNC blows it again!

Repugs are going to use this to sink Mueller.

[Fred Sanders]

5. Disagree, Doper. Notice the hypocrisy of Trump paying Cambridge Analytica millions for

opposition research, not to mention meeting with a foreign government for more research?

About the FEC thing I do not see that as a big deal as disclosure was made of payments to the law firm.

Opposition research monies paid to an American research group is OK. Meeting with foreign governments for research is NOT OK.

[jl_theprofessor]

41. They're both violations of the law.

[Hamlette]

45. is it?

I hired people to do research on cases I was working. Did it all the time when I worked for an insurance company. The bill would have said "expenses" or "costs" or "research" but it was hiring a PI to find out if the guy really had a bad back. (It was a terrible job and I didn't last very long, but I don't believe in insurance cheats either).

How much did Hillary actually know? And it seems the law firm, if they billed it as lawyers' hours, are the ones at fault. I'd like to see the bills.

[EL34x4]

10. The Wall Street Journal today called for Mueller's resignation.

Yeah, I know the WSJ is a right-wing rag. Still, they're not exactly Breitbart.

[onenote]

28. Link?

I did an online search but couldn't find it.

[EL34x4]

34. See post #33 below. (n/t)

[Orangeutan]

30. This is an inaccurate statement, if I'm looking at the right article on the WSJ website.

A Wall Street Journal columnist wrote an opinion piece calling for Mueller to recuse himself. Is that the article you're referring to? Big difference between that and saying the paper itself lent its institutional voice to call for his recusal/resignation in a lead editorial. BIG difference.

[EL34x4]

33. It's behind a paywall but here's what I found.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-russians-and-the-fbi-1508971759?mg=prod/accounts-wsj

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted the following excerpt:

"Mr. Mueller is a former FBI director, and for years he worked closely with Mr. Comey. It is no slur against Mr. Mueller’s integrity to say that he lacks the critical distance to conduct a credible probe of the bureau he ran for a dozen years. He could best serve the country by resigning to prevent further political turmoil over that conflict of interest."

https://hotair.com/archives/2017/10/26/wsj-mueller-step-collusion-case-focuses-fbis-use-russian-disinformation-fisa-warrant/

The WSJ article is credited to the Editorial Board

[Sunlei]

12. Not true, be brave like Hillary Clinton- Truth will out!

[Mediumsizedhand]

18. So with false smears, you will help the Republicans?

[Dopers_Greed]

24. Still, the M$M is spinning this to accuse Dems of impropriety

The "both sides do it" argument, if you will.

Even if there was no actual wrongdoing by Clinton (I don't think there was), the public is not going to see it that way.

[George II]

32. No they didn't and no they won't. This will go away quickly.

[zentrum]

2. This will totally muddy

.....the waters. Very unfortunate. Helps the Trump cover-op and changes the narrative.

[Mediumsizedhand]

16. Yes, Republicans are good at that, and some Dems participate. Are you gonna be an enabler?

[zentrum]

42. If you're talking to me

...personally, no of course not.

But let's not be in denial about how it will be spun into a Democratic, (rather a "Democrat&quot conspiracy.

[Mediumsizedhand]

43. Kerry being a war hero was spun into him being a coward. That is Kerry's fault how?

[George II]

3. This is a bogus claim, nothing wrong was done, no law was violated. A hit job.

[Demit]

25. Yes it is. It's a classic Hillary Clinton story of "clouds" and "questions."

"We don't have all the facts, but if it turns out that _______, then that would mean ________. It certainly has the appearance of _________."

It just never fucking ends.

[BootinUp]

4. Anytime a Dem is asked about it

He/She should ask for clarification whether it's the dossier originally prepared for a Republican primary opponent of Trump.

[B2G]

8. So why arent' they?? nt

[Sunlei]

6. TO BAD people are ALLOWED to hire PIs to check out other people. Republicans hired PI first.

Republican party spent MILLIONS & MILLIONS of taxpayer money AND their own 'political charities' money to try to find 'dirt' on Clinton.

Republicans are just mad because they got caught & exposed as corrupt, colluding attackers of Americas democracy.

[mercuryblues]

7. My guess would be that the republican

that originally commissioned this report also had the payment go through a 3rd party. Fusion GPS is not on any FEC filings or we would know what campaign was the original source of the dossier.

[Sunlei]

20. I guess JEB! but it could be any one of the 13? on stage the Republicans-foxman knocked off stage.

could have even been trumps largest Republican backers who paid for it just to see what sexual adventures & any criminal stuff trump did when he 'played' beauty contest King, in Russia.

[lapfog_1]

9. However

this would only be true if the Campaign ORDERED the oppo research to be done.

If the law firm billed the campaign for "legal fees" but used the monies to pay Fusion GPS without the campaign knowing about it, the law firm might be in trouble (fraud), but not the campaign.

After all, the Clinton campaign did not use the contents of the dossier before the election (or after), and Hillary says she was unaware of the contents of the dossier until it was published.

The Law Firm might have thought that getting the opposition research already paid for by a yet unnamed Republican rival of DJT in the primary would be a "speculative investment" but later decided not to forward it to the campaign because of the explosive and unconfirmed charges it contained.

[B2G]

15. But GPS Fusion hired Steele AFTER

the DNC and Clinton took over the research. He wasn't engaged prior to that.

My understanding is that the dossier in question was compiled by Steele.

[lapfog_1]

23. That really doesn't matter

It is the engagement of Fusion GPS by the law firm that matters.

[B2G]

26. Not following.

You said this:

"this would only be true if the Campaign ORDERED the oppo research to be done."

Since Steele was hired after they took over, they obviously did.

[lapfog_1]

29. no...

What evidence do you have that Clinton or the Clinton campaign ordered the engagement of Fusion GPS for opposition research and for the law firm to bill the hours and the cost as "legal fees".

If they billed it as opposition research... this wouldn't even be an issue, but the billing as "legal fees" is what might get them in trouble as it runs afoul of campaign finance rules.

[B2G]

31. They billed it as Legal Fees.

It was in the law firms records and you just stated that. It was obviously not billed as opposition research and it obviously was.

Never mind. I feel like I'm going in circles here.

[lapfog_1]

35. You are

because you haven't demonstrated that the campaign ordered the opposition research to be conducted by Fusion GPS. Or that they even had knowledge of the research.

[George II]

37. They paid the law firm to conduct research, the law firm was responsible for choosing...

....what research was to be done. That was probably left up to the firm itself.

[B2G]

38. Oh. OK.

[Not Ruth]

40. Associates and Accounts Receivable at law firms, can you weigh in on if this is normal procedure

[DURHAM D]

11. LOL

Right...

[Exultant Democracy]

13. Should be laughed out of court.

It one of the most absurd claims I’ve ever heard. Legal work is exactly how they should have categorized it considering that the firm wasn’t doing the research but acting as a legal method for going after the information for the benefit of the campaign.

This is what Trump Jr should have done himself, rather than take the meeting. If he hired a law firm it would have moved Russia far enough away from the principle that they might have been bullet proof.

[Mediumsizedhand]

14. We already knew Republicans started it and was handed off to Democrats. What is "explosive"?

[Iliyah]

17. Bring it on!

Complaint . . . discovery . . . then the full document . . . and who initial made payments for it!

[Dawson Leery]

22. It is believed that Jeb's campaign started this.

[yallerdawg]

19. "The Hill" still after Hillary.

Another reason why we have the Dotard.

[underpants]

21. "politically-explosive". The Hill is desperate to keep up with the leak centers

Namely WaPo and NY Times.

[Freethinker65]

27. They/GOP want to focus on Hillary but she is boring. The dossier is not boring.

Bringing the dossier back into the foreground is actually not good for Trump. Sure, they can argue to death about who paid for it with what $$ (it started with a Republican I think). They can drag Clinton into it ...but all she needs to do is keep repeating I never mentioned Trump and the hooker party, Trump and the money laundering, Trump and his advisors meeting with the Russians as specifically mentioned in the dossier item #...At every media opportunity the Democratic Party should talk about some part of the dossier and that the Intelligence leading to its gathering has not been disproven and was originally commissioned by a Republican for opposition research.

[Marthe48]

36. Shiny keys, tinkle, tinkle, tinkle

Way to redirect the point of all of this crap. trump is the bad guy here, his henchmen and his russian pals. Just off the cuff, at least Clinton paid a U.S. (as far as I know) law firm for the research, not computer hackers from foreign countries. Someone said that Rachel Maddow reported months ago that Jeb Bush paid for the initial research. What other candidate has the network and money to find someone who knows someone who knows something? Let's not forget the BFEE. If you want to twist things around, who knows if someone in the research company isn't a mole for trump? Or one of his henchmen? Or one of the rich donors?

If any Demo gets in trouble about this, I don't know how I can't lose the last of my faith and trust in our system.

[vkkv]

39. It wouldn't have anything to do with RUSSIA if TRUMP WAS NOT INVOLVED.

Deb. Wasserman-Shultz - the gift to the GOP that keeps on giving..

And no, I am not a misogynist, but every time I say bad things about DWS, I get yelled at or abused or well.. bitched at.

[jalan48]

44. UGH. We don't need this right now. The dossier is begining to sound like a Trojan horse.

[DonViejo]

46. Locking....

This is not LBN, but rather, opinion and analysis of what might happen.