The Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary Clinton have been charged by the Federal Election Commission for lies surrounding the funding behind the Russia dossier that was used to create debunked and false ties between former President Donald Trump and the Kremlin.
The Washington Examiner reports that the FEC announced the fine, stating that the DNC and the clinton camp were both guilty of violating rules on describing payments via the Clinton law firm to the research firm Fusion GPS.
In total, $1,024,407.97 was paid to law firm Perkins Coie for information on Fusion GPS. The Clinton camp claimed that the funds were being put towards legal services.
$849,407.97 was sent from the DNC, with $175,000 being sent from the Clinton campaing.
The FEC says that the law was clearly violated.
Neither the DNC nor the Clinton campaign have admitted to lying, but the findings will not be contested.
“Solely for the purpose of settling this matter expeditiously and to avoid further legal costs, respondent[s] does not concede, but will not further contest the commission’s finding of probable cause to proceed” with the probe, the FEC said.
The complaint was originally filed by the Coolidge Reagan Foundation over three years ago.
“For over a year, Democratic officials have accused the Trump Administration of collaborating with foreign interlopers to influence the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election,” they wrote.
“In reality, it was the Clinton-backed Democratic machine that conspired with foreigners in violation of both federal campaign finance law and basic decency to manipulate the election.
“Using their law firm, Perkins Coie, LLP, as a front to shield their illegal machinations from public scrutiny, Hillary for America and the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”) worked with British national Christopher Steele to generate and disseminate the so-called “Steele Dossier”—a collection of lies and spurious allegations against the President compiled at great cost. The dossier was valuable due to the substantial and illegally unreported cost of generating it, its use in attempting to sway the outcome of the election, and the veneer of credibility it possessed as a result of the various sources of information from which it was derived and the obfuscation of its origin as a politically motivated campaign trick,” they wrote.