[otw_shortcode_dropcap label=”T” font=”Ultra” background_color_class=”otw-no-background” size=”large” border_color_class=”otw-no-border-color”][/otw_shortcode_dropcap]he Clintons’ favorite British spy, Christopher Steele, maybe off the hook by Democrats and Clintonites, but is actually facing consequences in the United Kingdom. Today a British judge ruled Steele “violated a data privacy law by failing to check the accuracy of the information in his infamous dossier, ordering the former spy’s firm to pay damages to two businessmen he wrongly accused of making illicit payments in Russia” reported Just the News.
Specifically, Steele’s firm, Orbis Business Intelligence was ordered to pay “about $22,596 in American currency – each to Petr Aven and Mikhail Fridman as compensation for a violation of Britain’s Data Protection Act of 1998.” If only the same were being done for those who violated the Freedom of Information Act in the United States, but Democrats will make sure that never happens.
Justice Mark Warby of the High Court of England and Wales determined that “while Steele had a national security interest to share his intelligence with U.S. and British authorities, several of the allegations in Memo 112 of the Steele dossier were ‘inaccurate or misleading as a matter of fact,” reports Just the News. Nice to see Britain actually cares about lying intelligence officials.
“That is an allegation of serial criminal wrongdoing, over a prolonged period. Even in the limited and specific context of reporting intelligence for the purposes I have mentioned, and despite all the other factors I have listed, the steps taken to verify that proposition fell short of what would have been reasonable” Judge Warby ruled with regard to Steele’s failure to check the accuracy of his allegations.
Just the News discusses “though a matter of British law,” the ruling should also have an impact here in the United States, “where the Justice Department continues to investigate the actions of the FBI in the Russia collusion probe, including its interactions with Steele and agents’ honesty with the FISA court.” Additionally, “the ruling further accentuates that much of the Steele dossier contained unproven Internet rumor or false information, some possible from Russian intelligence, as the Justice Department inspector general concluded last December.”