In the summer of 2015, Donald Trump entered the race for president. Almost immediately, political opponents began digging for anything they could use to stop him. That same year, the Democratic National Committee experienced a hacking incident, which officials eventually blamed on Russian operatives.
But even before the FBI confirmed the hackers’ identities or motives, a narrative began forming: Russia was working behind the scenes to help Trump win. That story would evolve into one of the most damaging hoaxes in modern political history.
At the center of the storm was a former British spy named Christopher Steele. Hired initially by anti-Trump Republicans and later by the Clinton campaign, Steele worked for a private firm called Fusion GPS. His assignment was simple: find dirt on Trump.
The result was the now-infamous Steele dossier—a 35-page document filled with sensational accusations. Among them were claims that Trump had been groomed by Russian intelligence for years, that Russian operatives held compromising video footage of him, and that he had deep and corrupt financial ties to Russian oligarchs.
Most of the claims in the Steele dossier were never verified. Some were sourced from anonymous third parties. Others were proven false outright. Yet despite its questionable origins and lack of evidence, the dossier became the foundation for an FBI investigation into a sitting presidential candidate.
Even as doubts mounted inside the intelligence community, the FBI used the dossier to justify a secret surveillance warrant against Trump campaign aide Carter Page.
The agency applied under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), relying heavily on Steele’s claims. Internal memos show that FBI officials knew many parts of the dossier were unsupported, but they failed to disclose that to the FISA court.
In fact, the FBI used the Steele dossier as late as 2017—even though agents had already concluded that several claims in it were either unverifiable or false.
The damage was enormous. Media outlets seized on the dossier’s contents, reporting them as fact. Headlines screamed about treason, kompromat, and secret Kremlin backchannels.
Politicians spoke as if Trump had already been proven guilty. Any voices that questioned the evidence were dismissed as conspiracy theorists or traitors.
But behind closed doors, the truth was much different. As later investigations revealed, the FBI was warned several times about the unreliability of Steele’s sources. One of Steele’s main contacts even told agents that the allegations had been exaggerated or misunderstood. Still, those warnings were ignored. The investigation continued, and public trust suffered.
This was a coordinated effort to interfere in an election—after the votes had already been cast. By feeding a false narrative to the American people and spending taxpayer dollars to support it, federal officials attempted to delegitimize the president before he was even sworn into office.
The Obama administration’s role in this cannot be ignored. Officials at the highest levels were briefed on the dossier. Some helped circulate its contents. Instead of stopping an investigation based on faulty intelligence, they allowed it to grow—knowing full well the information behind it was flawed.
Worse still, nobody has been held accountable. The officials who authorized the surveillance, misled the courts, and spread false claims remain in high-ranking positions, media roles, or private careers untouched by consequences.
Meanwhile, the public is left with deepened divisions, a weakened belief in elections, and a justice system that seems more political than impartial.
The Steele dossier was a government weapon used against a rival. If the United States is going to protect its democratic institutions, it must begin with honesty and accountability. Until federal agencies are forced to answer for their abuse of power, this kind of deception will happen again—and next time, it could be worse.
The post How the Steele Dossier Became a Politically Fueled Attack on Trump appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
