You can't rewrite history. She did not personally pay for it. This opposition research was originally funded by “conservative political website The Washington Free Beacon to provide general opposition research on Trump and other Republican presidential candidates. Subsequently, a second customer was found for it. The law firm of Perkins Coie bought a copy, on their own volition, as a research document. They only paid $66,500 (reimbursed by the DNC, to be sure) for their copy, of the 35-page "dossier," originally commissioned during the Republican Primaries.
The way this story has been mis-told, over and over, one would think that Mrs. Clinton personally commissioned the faulty "dossier." As opposition research tool it would appear unremarkable. It is an analysis of facts and rumors blended together to offer fodder to the customer. It was only when it was used by law enforcement, that it became problematic. And the miscreants involved have been publicly identified. This is my short synopsis of publicly available facts. I am sure that you only inadvertently missed them in your due diligence.
Mrs. Clinton reports that she only learned that the dossier was in the possession of her campaign, after they were reported by Buzzfeed. She said she would have preferred if they became public before, not after the election. It would have made more sense to do that, then to keep secret the damning tidbits in them. Otherwise, why pay $66,500 for them? These are her inputs, as reported by subordinates. They are therefore subjective reporting and can't be given the same weight as objective facts.
