by Debra Heine, PJ Media:

The DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign funneled cash to ex-British spy Christopher Steele to help them “challenge the validity of the outcome” of the 2016 election in the event Clinton lost, according to a new British court filing.

Steele, the author of the Democrat-financed anti-Trump dossier alleging Trump campaign collusion with Russia, said in court that he was hired by Democratic law firm Perkins Coie so they would be able to contest the results of the election should Clinton lose, the Washington Times reported.

So, long before the Democrats and the media caterwauled about President Trump’s suggestion in October 2016 that he might not accept the results of the election if Hillary Clinton won, the Clinton campaign and Democrats were conjuring up an intelligence disinformation campaign to actually undo the results of the election if Trump won.

This information was initially contained in a sealed August 2 declaration in a defamation lawsuit against Steele brought by three Russian bankers – Mikhail Fridman, Petr Aven, and German Khan — in London. The trio’s American attorneys recently filed Steele’s answers in a separate libel lawsuit in Washington, D.C., against Fusion GPS, the shady investigative firm that worked with Steele to dig up dirt on Trump.

“Fusion’s immediate client was law firm Perkins Coie. It engaged Fusion to obtain information necessary for Perkins Coie LLP to provide legal advice on the potential impact of Russian involvement on the legal validity of the outcome of the 2016 US Presidential election,” Steele wrote in a sealed declaration. “Based on that advice, parties such as the Democratic National Committee and HFACC Inc. (also known as ‘Hillary for America’) could consider steps they would be legally entitled to take to challenge the validity of the outcome of that election.”

According to newly unearthed British legal filings, Christopher Steele testified that the DNC/Clinton campaign funneled cash to him to help them “challenge the validity of the outcome” of the 2016 election in the event Hillary Clinton lost. https://t.co/Z7MTRaqBNb pic.twitter.com/sm4i4VaKGF

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) 17 December 2018

The Democrats never filed a challenge, but the fact that it was on the table suggests that the Clinton campaign considered Trump to be a much stronger candidate than they ever let on. It also suggests that Clinton was willing to do whatever it took to secure the presidency. In the end, the intelligence wasn’t strong enough for her to challenge the election, but it was good enough for Democrats to use to hobble Trump’s presidency with deep state leaks, media hit jobs, and a special counsel investigation.

Read More @ PJMedia.com