The Steele Dossier: Origins and Proven Fabrications
The information comes from six years of reporting on Russia Gate complied from the 50 plus articles in this Substack series titled "Durham Investigation answering the 5Ws and the How questions."
The Steele Dossier, a series of 17 memos compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele between June and December 2016, alleged salacious ties between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and the Russian government. Commissioned as opposition research by Fusion GPS—funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee (DNC) via Perkins Coie—it claimed a “well-developed conspiracy of cooperation” involving Trump aides like Paul Manafort and Carter Page. Steele shared the reports with the FBI starting July 5, 2016, but they reached Crossfire Hurricane investigators only in mid-September. Despite its unverified nature, the dossier fueled FISA warrants, media leaks, and the Mueller probe. Investigations, including Special Counsel John Durham’s 2023 report and a July 2025 declassified appendix, exposed it as largely fabricated hearsay, with no substantive allegations corroborated by the FBI despite efforts like offering Steele $1 million for proof.
Key Fabrications Proven False
Durham’s probe and related probes revealed the dossier’s claims stemmed from unreliable sub-sources like Igor Danchenko (Steele’s primary source, handling ~80% of raw intel) and Charles Dolan (a Democratic operative). Danchenko was indicted in 2021 for five counts of false statements to the FBI about his sources, including fabricating contacts; he was acquitted in 2022 but admitted much was “rumor and speculation.” Here’s a breakdown of major debunked claims:
• Michael Cohen’s Prague Meeting (Report 2016/136): Alleged Trump’s lawyer met Russian officials in Prague to coordinate election interference. Proven false—no travel records, and sub-source Olga Galkina denied knowledge in her 2017 FBI interview. The FBI found zero supporting evidence.
• Carter Page’s Secret Moscow Meetings (Report 2016/94): Claimed Page met Rosneft CEO Igor Sechin and Kremlin official Igor Divyekin in July 2016 to discuss a 19% stake in Rosneft oil shares as a quid pro quo for lifting sanctions. Page denied this in five FBI interviews (March 2017) and earlier recordings; Rosneft publicly refuted it. A confidential source (CHS-1) misrepresented a conversation, but audio showed no admission—only media speculation. This underpinned all four FISA applications on Page, riddled with 17 omissions/errors.
• Trump’s Kompromat at Ritz-Carlton Moscow (Report 2016/080): Graphic allegations of Trump engaging in sexual acts recorded by Russian intelligence. Danchenko called it “rumor and speculation” from casual bar talk; no evidence emerged, and sources like hotel staff provided none.
• Sergei Millian Phone Call and GOP Insider Claims: Danchenko fabricated a late-July 2016 call from self-proclaimed Trump associate Sergei Millian (Source E in Report 2016/95) about WikiLeaks dumps, based on a YouTube video—no phone records or meeting. He also invented a “GOP friend” source for Manafort resignation details (Report 2016/105), later admitted by Dolan as fabricated from public news to impress Danchenko.
• Broader Russian Compromise Ties: Claims of Kremlin kompromat on Clinton and Trump’s awareness of DNC hacks via Page. Uncorroborated; a 2017 U.S. intel report suggested Russian services knew of Steele’s work by early July 2016, hinting at disinformation fed to sources.
The 2025 declassified Durham appendix ties these to a Clinton campaign plan (outlined in March 2016 intel memos) to fabricate Trump-Russia “scandalous revelations,” including mafia links, using assets like Steele. FBI intel from July 2016 (e.g., forged Leonard Benardo emails) detailed a multi-stage smear, approved by Clinton to distract from her emails—deemed likely authentic by Durham’s team.
FBI’s Flawed Use Despite Red Flags
The FBI incorporated the unvetted dossier into Crossfire Hurricane by September 19, 2016, using it for probable cause in Page’s October FISA despite known issues: Steele’s Clinton funding (omitted from applications), Danchenko’s 2009-2011 counterespionage probe (ignored), and contradictions in January 2017 interviews. The FBI dismissed exculpatory evidence (e.g., Page’s denials as “rehearsed”) and never interviewed Dolan, despite Steele flagging him. This “confirmation bias” enabled surveillance and leaks (e.g., Yahoo! News article citing Steele), but Durham found no predication for full probes—labeling it a “seriously flawed” rush job.
Impact and Reckoning
The dossier’s fabrications eroded trust in institutions, amplified media hysteria (e.g., BuzzFeed’s 2017 publication), and prolonged lawfare against Trump, despite Mueller’s 2019 no-collusion finding. As Durham noted, it exemplified FBI failures in vetting opposition research. While some broad suspicions of Russian influence held (e.g., contacts via “agents of influence”), specifics were bogus—rumors layered with bias, not intel. This saga underscores the perils of politicized “raw intelligence” in elections. 1
References and Citations
All the References and Citations for the information presented in this article are documented in the 50 plus articles under this Substack series titled “Rule of Law-Corruption-National Security and Durham Investigation answering the 5Ws and the How questions.” AI assisted in the organization for formatting purposes only.
[Note: This analysis was created by a former Retired DEA Supervisory Special Agent John Seaman with over 30 years’ experience conducting complex conspiracy investigations. Seaman is the co-author of an article Taliban Include Heroin Kingpins in Leadership - by Gretchen Peters and John Seaman - SpyTalk and author of Ideology and Political Correctness Trump Reality and reference in article The secret story of how America lost the drug war with the Taliban - POLITICOPOLITICO]