How Hillary and the Democrats played Russia card

Here’s what’s missing from that account: Clinton’s campaign paid this “well-respected former British spy,” setting in the motion the entire affair. Let’s stop and consider what that means for a moment. Nobody has revealed how much money was involved — but Elias’ law firm was paid $12.4 million by the DNC and the campaign during the election. How much of that went to Steele? How much did Steele pay his former Russian contacts to spin their spicy tale of Trump cavorting with Russian prostitutes, masking real estate deals as bribes, and generally setting himself up to be blackmailed?

I don’t want to cast aspersions on Michael Steele, whom many besides Hillary describe as “respected,” but there’s something about spreading so much cash around as part of an investigation that makes the information suspect. It’s why “checkbook journalism” is rarely considered investigative reporting at all: The money creates an incentive to make things up. Viewed through this prism, it all looks less like a genuine investigation and more like a sting operation orchestrated by the Democrats to win an election.

To this day, the only regret expressed by Clinton or her supporters is that they couldn’t place the Steele dossier in the media before the election, though it wasn’t for lack of trying.