Christopher Steele, the Russia-Collusion Hoaxer, Regrets Nothing By David Harsanyi
The former British spy who helped create the fake Trump/Russia-collusion narrative stands by his work.
I f Donald Trump . . . scratch that . . . if any Republican operative had produced a fictitious oppo file on the life of Joe Biden that: (a) crammed in every rumor and conspiracy theory he could find, leaving just enough truth to make it plausible; (b) went to gullible or willing political and journalistic allies in an effort to mislead the public and undermine trust in the presidential election; (c) was used to plunge the nation into years of hysterical paranoia regarding Russian interference; and (d) was then sent to law-enforcement agencies as a way to help launch a cascade of useless investigations, from special-counsel probes to congressional inquiries, all of which ended up producing exactly zero indictments related to “collusion” . . . that person would be treated like Lin Wood or Alex Jones — or worse.
But some ratf***ers are more successful than others. And one of the architects of the swindle, retired British spy Christopher Steele, is now “stepping out of the shadows.” He’s the subject of a Hulu documentary and an interview with former Clinton operative George Stephanopoulos (now with ABC News), in which he discusses the infamous “Steele dossier.” But this designation gives what is ultimately a fabricated oppo-research file, paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC, an unearned le Carré flourish.
The former spy says he stands by “the work we did, the sources that we had, and the professionalism which we applied to it.” Most consequentially, the dossier created the “collusion” claim, contending that Trump, who did himself no favors constantly praising Putin, and his campaign had “accepted a regular flow of intelligence from the Kremlin, including on his Democratic and other political rivals.”
No one has ever shown that to be the case. Not Robert Mueller — whose revered name was only spoken in hushed tones until he found nothing to report on the 2016 criminal-conspiracy front. Indeed, today, the former prosecutor is conveniently characterized by the deceitful Adam Schiff (a congressman who has yet to share the hard, “direct” evidence of sedition he had promised) as a man in deep cognitive decline. And not Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz, who couldn’t corroborate any of Steele’s most notorious contentions. Nor has any reputable journalist proved otherwise — though it’s becoming increasingly difficult to find any journalists one can describe as “reputable,” in part thanks to what the media hysteria over “Russian collusion” has revealed.
Yet speaking to ABC News, Steele maintains the dossier’s claims may still surface so long as Trump remains active in politics. “I don’t think this book is finished,” he explains to Stephanopoulos. “By a long shot.”
Perhaps not. But Steele maintains the bogus claim that Michael Cohen traveled to Prague in a Russian collusion-related plot. If it were true, Trump’s former lawyer could have shared this explosive news about sedition with the press after falling out with the former president, or with authorities when asking for leniency on his “prison term.” Yet he did not.
There’s more:
Perhaps the most attention-grabbing headline from the Steele dossier—and another claim that remains uncorroborated—was a report of the supposed existence of a “pee tape” allegedly collected by Russian intelligence services. According to the dossier, the tape purportedly shows Trump “employing a number of prostitutes to perform a ‘golden showers’ (urination) show in front of him” on a bed where the Obamas supposedly once stayed.
Steele told ABC News he believes the alleged tape “probably does” exist—but that he “wouldn’t put 100% certainty on it.”
This is tantamount to interviewing a Birther. To put it in perspective, this is the same media that worked to bury a legitimate New York Post story about Hunter Biden’s emails that may have implicated the presidential candidate. The kind reverence shown this shady former spook (Steele once lobbied a Justice Department official on behalf of Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, whose Washington mansion was just raided by the FBI) is journalistic malpractice. In a healthy media environment, Steele would be treated as a fraud, not as a prophet. But hey, we’re used to it.
And no one who participated in creating the fake Russia “collusion” narrative has ever paid a price. Not one mainstream reporter has shown any genuine interest in finding out how he was supposedly hoodwinked. We now know the DOJ, which withheld contradictory evidence when it began spying on those in Trump’s orbit, was, in part, using the dossier as justification. We have proof that many of the relevant subsequent FISA-warrant applications — almost every one of them, in fact — were based on “fabricated” evidence or riddled with errors. We know that members of the Obama administration who had no genuine role in counterintelligence operations nevertheless unmasked Trump’s allies. And we now know that, despite a dearth of evidence, the FBI railroaded Michael Flynn into a guilty plea so it could keep the investigation going.
It is almost surely true, as well, that those who passed along the Steele “dossier” were passing along, or giving credence to, real Russian disinformation. That now includes Stephanopoulos. The only difference between the dossier truthers and 2020 truthers is that the former had the entire media working for them. They still do.
Comments are closed.
