Skip to content

Election Watchdog Fines Clinton Campaign For Lying About Steele Dossier In Finance Filings

Share

The Federal Election Commission fined Hillary Clinton’s campaign this week for lying about the discredited Steele Dossier in campaign filings.

The FEC said Hillary for America violated the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 — which requires political committees to disclose payments over $200 per year and notate the purpose of the funds properly — by falsely attributing the money used to orchestrate the Russian collusion hoax as “legal services” on finance filings.

As Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation revealed, Perkins Coie, the law firm hired by the Clinton campaign, paid Fusion GPS more than $1 million, $175,000 which was used to fund opposition research designed to undermine then-Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. Fusion GPS then hired Christopher Steele to compile negative and false secondhand accounts designed to tie Trump to the Kremlin that were subsequently fed to corporate media reporters and government officials.

This coordinated effort by Clinton allies, some of whom have been indicted for lying to the FBI, to lie about their political enemies sparked the Obama administration’s efforts to spy on Trump and his campaign under knowingly false pretenses.

For lying about the purpose of campaign funds, the FEC ordered Clinton’s campaign to pay $8,000 to the commission in the next 30 days. The Democratic National Committee was also fined $105,000 for the same violation.

The news comes one week after former President Donald Trump announced he is suing Clinton and a myriad of other Democrat operatives for peddling false information that he was colluding with Russia to steal the 2016 election.

“Acting in concert, the Defendants maliciously conspired to weave a false narrative that their Republican opponent, Donald J. Trump, was colluding with a hostile foreign sovereignty. The actions taken in furtherance of their scheme — falsifying evidence, deceiving law enforcement, and exploiting access to highly-sensitive data sources — are so outrageous, subversive and incendiary that even the events of Watergate pale in comparison,” the complaint states.