Last week, the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) inspector general released a dense, 100-page report detailing its investigation into unauthorized leaks of classified information during the first year of President Donald Trump’s administration. While dry on the surface, the report contained explosive revelations about the now-debunked Russia collusion hoax that engulfed the political and media landscape following Trump’s 2016 election victory. Three key bombshells hidden within the document expose not only the involvement of congressional Democrats but also the DOJ’s questionable handling of the leaks.
After Trump won the 2016 election, anonymous federal operatives and congressional staffers began leaking classified information to media outlets. This coordinated effort was designed to paint Trump as a secret Russian operative who had conspired with Vladimir Putin to “steal” the presidency. Leaks appeared regularly in The Washington Post, The New York Times, and CNN, all of which pushed the unfounded Russia collusion narrative.
One particularly significant leak came in April 2017, when The Washington Post published a story revealing that the DOJ had secured a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to spy on Carter Page, a former Trump campaign aide. The warrant relied heavily on the now-infamous Steele dossier, a discredited document funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign. At the time, the story was presented as evidence that the Trump campaign was under legitimate suspicion, fueling the Russia conspiracy theory.
The DOJ inspector general’s report now sheds light on the chaos that followed these leaks and the deliberate efforts to manipulate public opinion.
Bombshell 1: Democrat Staffer Fingered as Potential Leaker
One of the most surprising revelations in the report is that a Democrat congressional staffer voluntarily approached the FBI early in the investigation. The whistleblower told the FBI he suspected two members of Congress, along with several Democrat staffers, of leaking classified information to the media.
While the report doesn’t name the whistleblower or the congressmen under suspicion, a 2021 New York Times article previously identified then-Rep. Adam Schiff and Rep. Eric Swalwell—both California Democrats serving on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI)—as being under DOJ investigation. Schiff, who chaired the committee’s Democrats, and Swalwell, known for his vocal support of the Russia collusion narrative, were central figures pushing the hoax on media outlets like CNN and MSNBC.
Schiff, now a U.S. Senator, publicly claimed for years to have “evidence” proving Trump’s collusion with Russia, though such claims were never substantiated. Swalwell, for his part, made headlines for his intimate ties to Chinese spy “Fang Fang,” who targeted him as part of a honey-trap operation.
The whistleblower told investigators that “Member 1”—widely believed to be Schiff—had a history of leaking classified information, while “Member 2” (Swalwell) sought to manipulate public opinion by sharing such leaks. However, the DOJ determined that the whistleblower’s testimony lacked “direct evidence,” and the investigation moved at a glacial pace.
Bombshell 2: DOJ Delay and Stonewalling
The report reveals that although the whistleblower named a Democrat staffer as a likely source of the leaks, the DOJ took years to act. The staffer, who reportedly accessed classified documents in a secure congressional “Read Room,” was not interviewed until three years later—and only after then-Attorney General Bill Barr reopened the investigation in 2020.
According to the inspector general’s findings, phone records showed the staffer had communicated directly with the reporters behind the leaked articles. In fact, the staffer’s phone activity coincided with the timeline of the classified material’s release to The Washington Post.
Despite this, the DOJ ultimately dropped the investigation without filing any charges. The senior staffer’s explanation—that he had been communicating with the reporters long before the leaks occurred—was apparently sufficient for investigators to close the case. It’s hard to imagine Republicans receiving the same leniency.
Bombshell 3: Selective Surveillance and Political Bias
Perhaps the most damning revelation in the inspector general’s report is the DOJ’s decision to surveil congressional staffers on both sides of the aisle equally—despite overwhelming evidence that Democrat operatives were behind the leaks. Of the 43 congressional staffers monitored during the investigation, 21 were Democrats, 20 were Republicans, and two held nonpartisan roles.
At the time, HPSCI Republicans, led by Chairman Devin Nunes, were working tirelessly to expose the Russia collusion hoax for what it was: a politically motivated smear campaign. Democrats on the committee, meanwhile, were the ones aggressively pushing the conspiracy theory into the media. Yet the DOJ inexplicably treated both sides as equally suspicious.
A career prosecutor justified the approach by stating that investigators “could not assume political motives” and needed to explore “all possibilities.” The Carter Page FISA leak, he claimed, could have come from either party. However, this argument falls apart under scrutiny. The Page FISA story was clearly intended to incriminate the Trump campaign, making it absurd to suggest Republicans on HPSCI would leak such information.
The corporate media played a critical role in perpetuating the Russia collusion narrative. Pulitzer Prizes were awarded to journalists like Ellen Nakashima, Devlin Barrett, and Adam Entous, whose reporting relied heavily on leaks that turned out to be false. Instead of holding government officials accountable for their actions, the media became active participants in a campaign to delegitimize a sitting president.
As the inspector general’s report highlights, many of the key players in the DOJ and FBI—including former Director James Comey and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe—were not only complicit but central to the Russia hoax. Both men were removed from office, but neither faced significant legal consequences. Under the Biden administration, some of these disgraced officials were even rewarded with payouts and professional rehabilitation.
The inspector general’s findings also reveal a troubling pattern of dismissing whistleblower testimony. The report notes that the whistleblower claimed to have overheard the Democrat staffer discussing plans to use a spouse’s phone to conceal communications. The DOJ, however, brushed off the testimony as lacking foundation, despite uncovering separate “indicators” that the staffer and their spouse had shared accounts.
This pattern raises serious concerns about whether the DOJ was ever truly committed to stopping the leaks or if its priorities were politically motivated.
The inspector general’s report paints a clear picture of dysfunction, bias, and selective enforcement within the DOJ. Rather than aggressively targeting those responsible for leaking classified information, investigators appeared to protect key players in the Russia collusion hoax.
The report also underscores the need for sweeping reforms. Until the DOJ is held accountable for its role in weaponizing leaks and surveilling political opponents, trust in the institution will remain broken.
The Russia collusion hoax was one of the most damaging political scandals in modern U.S. history, fueled by deliberate leaks, media complicity, and a politicized justice system. While some details have finally come to light, the lack of accountability continues to leave the American people with more questions than answers.
Leave a Comment