Fact check: Who funded the research for the Steele dossier?

1. Summary of the results

The research for the Steele dossier was funded by the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC), who hired the research firm Fusion GPS through the law firm Perkins Coie ^[1]. The Clinton campaign and DNC acknowledged their role in paying for opposition research on Donald Trump that helped fund the dossier, with Perkins Coie revealing its clients' involvement in hiring Fusion GPS ^[2].

The funding arrangement involved Perkins Coie hiring Fusion GPS in April 2016 after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee ^[3]. This established a clear financial chain: Clinton campaign/DNC → Perkins Coie (law firm) → Fusion GPS (research firm) → Christopher Steele (former British intelligence officer who compiled the dossier).

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question omits several crucial contextual details that provide a more complete picture of the dossier's funding timeline:

• Initial Republican funding: Fusion GPS was initially hired by Republican foes of Trump before the Democrats became involved ^[3]. This means the opposition research project began with Republican funding and was later taken over by Democratic interests.
• Timing of Democratic involvement: The Democrats only began paying the research firm after Trump became the presumptive nominee, suggesting the funding shifted from Republican primary opponents to general election opponents ^[3].
• Legal intermediary structure: The use of Perkins Coie as an intermediary created a layer of separation between the political campaigns and the research firm, which may have been designed to provide legal privilege or distance the campaigns from direct involvement in opposition research activities.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself is straightforward and factual, asking for specific information about funding sources. However, the framing could potentially lead to incomplete understanding if not provided with full context:

• The question doesn't acknowledge the dual-party nature of the funding, which could lead to the misconception that only Democrats funded the research from the beginning.
• Without context about the timeline and transition from Republican to Democratic funding, the answer might be used to suggest partisan motivations while ignoring that both major political parties had interests in opposition research on Trump during the 2016 election cycle.
• The question focuses solely on funding without addressing the broader context of how opposition research is commonly conducted in political campaigns by both parties.