Newly released emails, whistleblower claims, and renewed scrutiny revive longstanding questions about political bias inside federal law enforcement.
The Senate Judiciary Committee has opened a sweeping new inquiry into whether senior Justice Department officials improperly blocked an FBI investigation into the funding of the Steele dossier by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC)—a move that could reopen one of the most contentious chapters in modern political history.
Committee Chairman Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-IA) said Friday that a whistleblower has provided evidence suggesting that two top Justice Department officials—both of whom later helped lead the Arctic Frost investigation into former President Donald Trump—played key roles in shutting down a separate FBI probe into Democrats’ actions during the 2016 election.
The allegations, first reported by The Washington Times, have reignited a debate that many in Washington believed had faded: whether senior Justice Department and FBI officials shielded Democratic political actors while aggressively pursuing cases involving Trump.
Whistleblower Claims: DOJ Officials Blocked Questions About Clinton-DNC Payments
According to Grassley, a whistleblower provided the committee with email exchanges from June 2019 involving:
-
Richard Pilger, then an official in the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section
-
J.P. Cooney, a prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for D.C.
-
An unidentified FBI agent attempting to investigate the origins of payments used to commission the Steele dossier
The emails show Pilger and Cooney rejecting and discouraging the agent’s inquiries into what he described as the “unambiguous concealment” of payments made by the DNC and the Clinton campaign.
Those funds were used to hire the opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which in turn employed former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele to compile a now-discredited dossier of allegations about then-candidate Donald Trump.
The whistleblower agent wrote in one message:
“In my years of being an agent… I have never been met with such suspicion or response intended to have me go away.”
He also said Pilger had made “obvious threats” that he believed were “intended to have a chilling effect” on his questioning of the Clinton-DNC payments.
Grassley says the emails raise serious concerns that DOJ leadership “intervened to shut down a legitimate investigation.”
The Steele Dossier: A Political Flashpoint Returns
The Steele dossier became one of the most controversial documents of the 2016 election cycle.
The DNC and the Clinton campaign, working through the law firm Perkins Coie, paid Fusion GPS more than $1 million, labeling the payments as generic “legal services” rather than opposition research. Steele then produced a dossier that made explosive—but unverified—allegations about Trump’s ties to Russia.
The FBI, led then by Director James Comey, later used parts of the dossier to support the opening of a secret counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign.
For years, Republicans argued that the dossier was a politically motivated tool disguised as intelligence. The new Senate inquiry reopens that debate—with fresh evidence suggesting internal resistance to scrutinizing the dossier’s funding.
Pilger and Cooney: Central Figures in Two Eras of Political Investigations
Starlingly, the two DOJ officials accused of blocking the Clinton-DNC investigation later became central actors in cases targeting Trump.
Richard Pilger:
-
Served as director of DOJ’s Election Crimes Branch
-
Played a key role authorizing the Arctic Frost investigation — a special counsel probe led by Jack Smith into Trump’s post-2020 election conduct
J.P. Cooney:
-
Was a senior prosecutor in the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office
-
Later became Smith’s deputy in the Arctic Frost probe
To Grassley, the connection is alarming.
“These records show the same partisans who rushed to cover for Clinton rabidly pursued Arctic Frost,” he wrote in a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel.
He described Arctic Frost as “a runaway train aimed directly at President Trump and the Republican political apparatus.”
2019 Emails Show DOJ Pushback Against FBI Agent Asking About Concealed Payments
The June 2019 emails paint a picture of tension—and possible obstruction—inside the DOJ.
Pilger Accuses Agent of Bias
In one exchange on June 21, Pilger scolded the FBI agent for pressing the issue:
“This demonstrates bias and a rush to judgment,” he wrote.
Pilger claimed the agent was interpreting the payments as concealed without sufficient evidence.
Cooney: “Not a good candidate” for investigation
One week earlier, Cooney also pushed back, telling the agent that the issue was:
“Not a good candidate to open for a false reporting case.”
He argued the DOJ would have “an exceedingly difficult time” proving the DNC and Clinton intentionally misreported the payments.
Cooney noted that because the funds flowed through Perkins Coie, the payments could technically be classified as legal services—even though the firm passed the money on to Fusion GPS.
FEC: DNC and Clinton Campaign Misreported Payments
The dispute eventually shifted from potential criminal inquiry to civil enforcement.
In 2022, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) fined:
-
The Clinton campaign: $8,000
-
The DNC: $105,000
The fines cited the misreporting of the dossier-related payments.
But the FEC action was civil—not criminal—and it did not examine whether DOJ improperly shielded Clinton-connected entities.
Grassley Seeks New Records: “This Investigation Was Shut Down”
Grassley is now seeking:
-
All DOJ and FBI emails
-
Internal memos
-
Communications between Pilger, Cooney, and supervisors
-
Notes regarding earlier attempts to investigate the DNC-Clinton payments
He said the whistleblower materials strongly indicate that DOJ officials took steps to:
-
discourage agents
-
block investigative leads
-
dismiss concerns out of hand
-
prevent the opening of a formal probe
He also suggested the behavior fits a broader pattern of “selective prosecution”.
The Arctic Frost Connection Raises New Political Questions
At the heart of Grassley’s concern is the overlap between DOJ personnel who allegedly stonewalled an inquiry into Democrats and those who later pursued Trump aggressively.
Grassley frames the issue as one of institutional consistency.
If senior DOJ officials believed a misreported million-dollar political payment was “not a good candidate” for investigation, he argues, why did those same officials later push a sweeping special counsel probe into Trump?
Republicans say the answer is ideological bias.
Democrats argue that Arctic Frost involved entirely different legal issues.
The Senate Judiciary Committee will now determine whether any DOJ actions in 2019 constituted:
-
improper influence
-
political favoritism
-
obstruction of investigative activity
-
retaliation against agents
The Broader Significance: A Revival of Old Battles
The controversy arrives at a moment when national politics remains deeply polarized over the role of federal law enforcement.
To Trump allies, the emails validate a long-held view that the Clinton campaign received preferential treatment — and that investigations involving Trump were handled with zeal.
To Democrats, the allegations amount to a recycled effort to rewrite history and undermine the legitimacy of past investigations.
Yet even critics of the former president acknowledge that the whistleblower emails represent legitimate oversight concerns.
They raise questions about:
-
DOJ transparency
-
the consistency of prosecutorial standards
-
the internal pressures investigators may face
-
whether political considerations influenced investigative decisions
What Comes Next
The Judiciary Committee’s inquiry is entering its initial phase.
Grassley has demanded:
-
records
-
emails
-
internal DOJ legal analyses
-
supervisory communications
-
testimony from DOJ and FBI officials involved
Depending on what those records reveal, the committee could escalate its probe through:
-
public hearings
-
subpoenas
-
inspector general referral
-
potential legislation addressing DOJ investigative guidelines
The Justice Department has not yet commented on Grassley’s requests.
Conclusion: A Familiar Story Reopens a New Chapter
Nearly a decade after the Steele dossier first entered the political bloodstream, its impact still reverberates.
The new whistleblower allegations resurrect a long-running dispute about how federal agencies handled politically sensitive cases—and whether their decisions were driven by facts or by favoritism.
For Grassley, the issue is not simply the dossier itself but what he views as a pattern:
-
Hesitation to investigate Democrats
-
Aggressive pursuit of Republicans
-
Lack of transparency
-
Erosion of public trust
For the Justice Department, the challenge now is to respond to these allegations without deepening the perception of partisan tilt.
And for Congress, the inquiry marks yet another chapter in the long, unresolved story of how 2016 continues to shape the country’s legal and political battles.
Ethan Blake is a skilled Creative Content Specialist with a talent for crafting engaging and thought-provoking narratives. With a strong background in storytelling and digital content creation, Ethan brings a unique perspective to his role at TheArchivists, where he curates and produces captivating content for a global audience.
Ethan holds a degree in Communications from Zurich University, where he developed his expertise in storytelling, media strategy, and audience engagement. Known for his ability to blend creativity with analytical precision, he excels at creating content that not only entertains but also connects deeply with readers.
At TheArchivists, Ethan specializes in uncovering compelling stories that reflect a wide range of human experiences. His work is celebrated for its authenticity, creativity, and ability to spark meaningful conversations, earning him recognition among peers and readers alike.
Passionate about the art of storytelling, Ethan enjoys exploring themes of culture, history, and personal growth, aiming to inspire and inform with every piece he creates. Dedicated to making a lasting impact, Ethan continues to push boundaries in the ever-evolving world of digital content.