DOJ Report Uncovers Key Details in Russia Hoax Leak Investigation

Last week, the Department of Justice’s inspector general (IG) quietly released a 100-page report shedding light on the DOJ’s surveillance of media and congressional staffers during its 2017 investigation into classified leaks. The investigation, launched amid the hysteria surrounding the debunked Russia collusion narrative, aimed to discover who was leaking sensitive information damaging to President Donald Trump. However, buried in the dense document are three bombshell revelations that expose the corruption and political motivations surrounding the Russia hoax.

When Donald Trump shocked the political establishment by winning the 2016 presidential election, Democrats in Congress and anonymous operatives within the federal government went into overdrive to delegitimize his presidency. Through carefully orchestrated leaks to the media, they painted Trump as a Russian agent working in tandem with Vladimir Putin to “steal” the election.

Outlets such as The Washington Post, The New York Times, and CNN became willing participants, amplifying these leaks and fueling public paranoia. Among the most impactful stories was an April 2017 Washington Post piece revealing that the DOJ had secured a FISA warrant to surveil Carter Page, a former Trump campaign adviser. While the story suggested that the DOJ had credible evidence linking Trump to Russian collusion, it later emerged that the warrant relied heavily on the discredited Steele dossier and contained falsified information.

Nevertheless, journalists who perpetuated the false narrative, like Ellen Nakashima, Devlin Barrett, and Adam Entous, were celebrated, even receiving Pulitzer Prizes for their coverage.

Bombshell #1: Whistleblower Identifies Congressional Leakers

One of the most startling revelations in the IG report is that a Democrat congressional staffer voluntarily approached the FBI at the beginning of the investigation. The staffer identified two members of Congress and additional Democrat staffers as likely sources of the classified leaks.

While the IG report does not name names, a 2021 New York Times article already disclosed that Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell—both California Democrats serving on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI)—were under investigation for their potential involvement in leaking classified information.

Schiff, who was HPSCI’s top Democrat at the time, was deeply embroiled in pushing the Russia collusion narrative. He regularly appeared on CNN and MSNBC, claiming he had “secret evidence” proving Trump’s ties to Russia. Schiff’s claims, later proven false, stoked public fear and mistrust, all while Schiff himself was suspected of leaking classified information.

Swalwell, meanwhile, was another vocal promoter of the hoax. Adding to his credibility issues, it was revealed that Swalwell had been targeted in a “honey-trap” operation by a Chinese spy named Fang Fang. Despite these glaring red flags, both Schiff and Swalwell remained on HPSCI until they were removed in 2023 by then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

The whistleblower told the FBI that Member 1 (Schiff) had a history of leaking classified information, while Member 2 (Swalwell) appeared to be releasing sensitive details to shape public opinion. Despite these serious claims, the FBI determined that the whistleblower lacked “direct evidence” to pursue the case further.

Bombshell #2: The DOJ’s Focus on a Senior Democrat Staffer

The IG report reveals that investigators zeroed in on a senior Democrat staffer as the main suspect in the leaks. The whistleblower identified this staffer, and additional evidence pointed to their involvement. The report states that the individual accessed classified material in the “Read Room,” a secure location for reviewing sensitive documents, on at least one or two occasions in early 2017.

Phone records obtained by the DOJ revealed that this staffer’s phone was in contact with reporters from The Washington Post and The New York Times around the time the leaks were published. Specifically, the staffer communicated with the journalists shortly before and after accessing the classified material.

This evidence seemed damning, yet the DOJ chose to accept the staffer’s flimsy explanation. The staffer claimed they had been in regular contact with these reporters for a long time and dismissed any suspicion of leaking classified information. In a move that raises eyebrows, the FBI opted to drop the investigation without pressing charges.

Adding to the intrigue, the report also notes that there were “indicators” suggesting the staffer and their spouse shared phone accounts. The whistleblower claimed to have overheard the staffer admitting to using their spouse’s phone to make calls, likely to conceal activity. Instead of pursuing this lead, the DOJ dismissed the whistleblower’s testimony as “having little foundation.”

Bombshell #3: Equal Surveillance Despite Unequal Motivations

While the investigation purportedly sought to identify the source of leaks damaging to Trump, the DOJ’s surveillance choices tell a different story. According to the report, the DOJ secretly monitored the communications of 43 congressional staffers: 21 Democrats, 20 Republicans, and two nonpartisan employees.

This decision raises serious questions. At the time, Republicans on HPSCI were focused on debunking the Russia collusion narrative, while Democrats were aggressively pushing it. Despite the overwhelming likelihood that the leaks came from Democrat sources, the DOJ inexplicably pursued both sides equally.

The lead prosecutor justified this decision by claiming that “leakers’ motivations are unknown” and that both parties “had potential political motivations” to leak the Carter Page FISA warrant story. This rationale defies common sense. The FISA warrant leak was transparently designed to implicate Trump and his associates, a goal aligned with Democrat interests. No reasonable observer would suspect Republicans of leaking information that harmed their own party.

The IG report, while dense and dry, paints a troubling picture of the DOJ’s handling of the Russia collusion investigation. It reveals a department reluctant to pursue Democrat operatives implicated in leaking sensitive information, even when evidence pointed directly at them. At the same time, the DOJ stonewalled Republicans like then-HPSCI chair Devin Nunes, who worked tirelessly to expose the hoax.

Many of the key players responsible for perpetuating the Russia hoax—such as former FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe—were later revealed as leakers themselves. While they were removed from office, the Biden administration later rewarded some of them with financial payouts.

The report’s findings underscore a broader issue: the DOJ’s selective enforcement and lack of accountability. By refusing to aggressively investigate those responsible for fueling the Russia collusion hysteria, the department further eroded public trust in its integrity.

The DOJ’s handling of the leak investigation highlights a dangerous politicization of federal agencies. Leaks of classified information were weaponized to undermine a sitting president, yet those responsible faced little to no consequences. Meanwhile, Republicans who sought the truth were treated with suspicion and had their communications surveilled.

These bombshell revelations serve as a reminder of why the DOJ requires substantial reform. A system that enables political operatives to manipulate investigations for partisan gain cannot be allowed to continue unchecked. As the next administration takes office, addressing this institutional corruption must be a top priority.

The Russia hoax was not just a media creation but a coordinated effort involving members of Congress, federal staffers, and complicit government agencies. For the sake of restoring trust in our institutions, those responsible for this manufactured scandal must be held to account.