Fact check: What was the involvement of Perkins Coie in the funding of the Steele dossier?

1. Summary of the results

The involvement of Perkins Coie in the funding of the Steele dossier is confirmed by multiple sources, including ^[3], ^[1], and ^[2]. According to ^[1], Perkins Coie hired Fusion GPS to assist in the law firm's representation of the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, and the Clinton campaign and the DNC helped pay for the opposition research ^[1]. Additionally, ^[2] states that Perkins Coie's lawyer Marc Elias hired Fusion GPS to assist in the law firm's representation of the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee ^[2]. However, ^[3] claims that the law firm hired Fusion GPS, which then manufactured a false 'dossier' designed to steal an election ^[3]. The key point of agreement among the sources is that Perkins Coie played a role in hiring Fusion GPS, which was involved in the creation of the Steele dossier.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Some sources provide more context than others, with ^[1] and ^[2] offering a more nuanced explanation of the events, stating that the Clinton campaign and the DNC helped pay for the opposition research ^[1] and that Marc Elias hired Fusion GPS ^[2]. On the other hand, ^[3] presents a more critical view of the events, claiming that the dossier was manufactured to steal an election ^[3]. The motivations and intentions behind the creation of the dossier are still a matter of debate, with different sources presenting different perspectives. Some possible alternative viewpoints that are not presented in the analyses include the potential involvement of other parties in the funding of the dossier, or the possibility that the dossier was not entirely fabricated. Possible beneficiaries of the different viewpoints include:

• The Clinton campaign and the DNC, who may benefit from the more nuanced explanation presented in ^[1] and ^[2]
• Critics of the Clinton campaign and the DNC, who may benefit from the more critical view presented in ^[3]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement asks about the involvement of Perkins Coie in the funding of the Steele dossier, but does not provide any context or background information. This lack of context may lead to misinformation or bias, as different sources present different perspectives on the events. For example, ^[3] claims that the dossier was manufactured to steal an election ^[3], which is a more sensational and critical claim than the explanations presented in ^[1] and ^[2]. Potential beneficiaries of this framing include:

• Critics of the Clinton campaign and the DNC, who may benefit from the more critical view presented in ^[3]
• Those who seek to undermine the credibility of the Steele dossier, who may benefit from the claim that it was manufactured to steal an election ^[3]