Newly uncovered emails suggest a troubling double standard at the Department of Justice (DOJ) that might just make your blood simmer.

Documents released by Republican Senate Judiciary Committee chair Chuck Grassley reveal that DOJ attorneys Richard Pilger and J.P. Cooney, who later played key roles in special counsel Jack Smith’s case against Donald Trump, previously worked to shield the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee (DNC) from a criminal investigation over questionable financial reporting tied to the infamous Steele Dossier as the Daily Caller reports.

Let’s rewind to the 2016 presidential election cycle, when the DNC and Clinton campaign funneled a hefty $1,024,407.97 through the law firm Perkins Coie.

Clinton Payments Hidden as Legal Fees

Perkins Coie then passed those funds to Fusion GPS, the opposition research outfit behind the Steele Dossier -- a document alleging ties between Trump and Russia that’s since been widely discredited.

On Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings, the Clinton team and DNC conveniently labeled these payments as “legal services,” a description that raises eyebrows when you consider what they were really buying.

Fast forward to 2019, and along come Pilger, from the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section, and Cooney, from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, who both argued against launching a criminal probe into this apparent misreporting.

DOJ Decision Halts FBI Investigation

Their opinions carried weight -- enough that the FBI decided not to investigate the matter at all, according to a memo Grassley recently made public.

Now, isn’t it curious that the FEC later slapped the Clinton campaign and DNC with a $113,000 fine in 2022 for failing to properly disclose the funding of that very dossier?

Seems like a classic case of “rules for thee, but not for me” when you consider how these same DOJ players later turned their sights on Trump with gusto.

Double Standards in DOJ Actions?

Cooney, for instance, became a top prosecutor on Jack Smith’s team, while Pilger assisted in reviewing and approving aspects of the Arctic Frost investigation tied to Smith’s case, per Grassley’s records.

Grassley himself didn’t mince words, stating, “Whistleblowers came to my office years ago to sound the alarm that the Justice Department inappropriately interfered in efforts to investigate potential criminal activity committed by Hillary Clinton and her campaign.”

That’s a gut punch to anyone who believes in equal justice under the law—how can the same folks who gave Clinton a pass be trusted to pursue Trump without bias?

Grassley Demands Accountability

Grassley also noted, “These records show the same partisans who rushed to cover for Clinton rabidly pursued Arctic Frost, which was a runaway train aimed directly at President Trump and the Republican political apparatus,” in a statement released on Thursday.

His point stings with truth: if the DOJ can pick and choose who gets a free pass based on political affiliation, what’s left of public trust in our institutions?

Look, no one’s saying Clinton or Trump should be above scrutiny, but the scales of justice shouldn’t tip depending on whether you’ve got a “D” or an “R” next to your name.

Justice Must Be Blind, Not Selective

This saga leaves a bitter taste -- when DOJ insiders can block an investigation into one camp’s shady dealings, only to later spearhead a crusade against the other, it smells like politics, not principle.

The American people deserve better than a system where justice seems to wear partisan blinders, and Grassley’s push for transparency is a step toward holding the powerful to account.

Until the DOJ proves it can play fair, stories like this will keep fueling the suspicion that the game is rigged -- and that’s a loss for all of us who still believe in the rule of law.