Gov. Dannel P. Malloy and the state Democratic Party thought themselves awfully clever in the 2014 election when they were able to qualify for $6.5 million in public campaign financing and still steer outside donations into the campaign. It was quite the trick, since state candidates qualifying for the public money swear off accepting any large special-interest donations. The Democrats were even able to get money from executives at companies that have state contracts or are eligible to bid on them. The legislature outlawed such donations in Connecticut after the contract-steering scandal that drove Gov. John G. Rowland out of office and into prison.

How did Malloy and the Democrats manage it? They collected and spent money under the looser federal campaign spending laws. Taken out of that federal account was about $300,000 for mailers that pushed people to get out and vote for Malloy.

The problem, aside from the cynicism and sleaze of the whole arrangement, is that Malloy was a state candidate, not a federal one. Democrats offered the thinnest of justifications, calling the mailers get-out-the-vote material, not a Malloy appeal. Anyone looking at them would conclude differently.

The State Elections Enforcement Commission investigated, seeking all communications among Democratic officials concerning the tactic. The party objected, saying it was a federal matter. In the end came a deal in which the Democrats agreed to pay a record $325,000 settlement and not again use federal rules to circumvent state prohibitions. The SEEC, in turn, ended the probe.

Malloy and the Democrats were hoping that was the end of things.

Not so fast.

Now arrives reports that a federal grand jury is looking into whether Democratic officials violated federal campaign law by directing money to a state campaign. Federal investigators may yet get a look at those internal communications that evaded state investigators when the SEEC agreed to settle.

Federal prosecutors should pursue this probe aggressively, asking the questions necessary to get at the root of this scheme to direct money into a tight race for governor, money that would otherwise be blocked by state laws. That could include questioning the governor.

We leave it to the legal process to determine if laws were broken, but note that it sure doesn’t look good.