The opposition research project that ultimately produced the controversial Trump-Russia dossier was initially backed by the conservative Washington Free Beacon website, it was revealed late Friday.
Free Beacon editor Matthew Continetti said in a statement that the publication had retained Fusion GPS to “provide research on multiple candidates in the [2016] Republican presidential primary,” as well as Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton.
Continetti’s statement denied that the Free Beacon “had contact with, knowledge of, or provided payment for any work performed by Christopher Steele,” the former British spy who produced the now-infamous dossier. The dossier, which was published by Buzzfeed in January, contained unverified and lurid allegations about dirt the Russians had on then-candidate Donald Trump and his campaign’s possible connections to Moscow.
Free Beacon’s connection with Fusion GPS was first reported by the Washington Examiner. According to the Examiner’s report, lawyers for the Free Beacon told the House Intelligence Committee that the website funded the opposition research project was funded between the fall of 2015 and the spring of 2016.
At some point after that, Fusion GPS was retained by Mark Elias, an attorney representing the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign. Fusion GPS then hired Steele to compile the dossier.
According to the Washington Post, the Clinton campaign and DNC paid more than $9 million to Elias’ firm Perkins Coie that, in turn, retained the political consultants who commissioned the research. Before that, the research was backed by an unknown Republican client.
But it’s unclear how much of that $9 million went toward the dossier. And it’s unclear who exactly at the Clinton campaign and DNC might have known how it was being spent.
In his statement, Continetti also denied having any knowledge “of the relationship between Fusion GPS and the Democratic National Committee, Perkins Coie, and the Clinton campaign.”
“We stand by our reporting, and we do not apologize for our methods,” Continetti added. “We consider it our duty to report verifiable information, not falsehoods or slander, and we believe that commitment has been well demonstrated by the quality of the journalism that we produce.”
