Criticism of the Grassley-Graham criminal referral of Christopher Steele hasn’t aged well. Let’s do a look-back at how media and commentators received the referral in January 2018.
First, the @senjudiciary Ranking Member tried to buttress the now debunked allegations in the Steele dossier.
The Ranking Member even issued a now-somewhat-embarrassing “refutation” of the referral. feinstein.senate.gov/public/_cache/…
CNN commentator @renato_mariotti says the referral, which called into question Christopher Steele’s credibility, wasn’t a “legitimate effort” … hmm…
He also made the surprising claim that the “dossier isn’t bogus” without any apparent factual backing…
Evidently, the @FBI did the same when seeking spying authority on an American citizen. Here’s what the IG said (p. 360): 
Liberal columnist for the Washington Post, @JRubinBlogger, called the referral “entirely inappropriate” and said it “raises a real question as to Grassley’s credibility.”
washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-tu…
washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-tu…
Fellow liberal blogger @MaxBoot thought “the Steele dossier looks more credible all the time.”
.@NormEisen, WHO NOW WORKS FOR HOUSE DEMOCRATS ON IMPEACHMENT, thought in March 2018 that the “dossier is more & more corroborated by the day.” Nope.
Eisen thought “Fusion GPS & Steele were careful & responsible” and the Grassley-Graham referral was “not merited”
But the IG, who Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats spent today praising for his independence and thoroughness, disagreed with all of them (p. 239):
The IG called the FBI’s unsourced flip flop on Steele’s contacts with the press “disturbing.” Those contacts were at the heart of the referral.
The IG also reported that it was the Grassley-Graham referral that alerted officials about Bruce Ohr’s involvement in feeding Steele’s oppo research to the FBI *after* Steele was fired as a source for lying about those contacts with the press (p. 235):
Even straight news reporters pushed out claims that weren’t substantiated about the dossier and its relevance to the FISA. CNN’s @jimsciutto said US gov’t had “corroborated portions” of dossier—when in fact, sub-source said it was bunk.
And he noted that FBI would vet and “corroborate information in dossier on its own before using such intel to justify the FISA”… Nope.
CNBC’s @JohnJHarwood was repeating unsubstantiated conjecture about how the dossier ‘holds up well over time’
Former WSJ and current WaPo reporter Shane Harris went out on a limb to make this claim, which has not borne out:
Actually, despite the credibility issues of its author and the uncorroborated nature of its substance, and its political origins, the Steele dossier played a “critical and essential role” in the FBI’s decision to pursue the FISA against Page (p. iv):
If you have more examples of unfortunate analysis that hasn’t aged well (it’s in no short supply) about the dossier or the FISA warrant from the last two years, reply with them here.
