The Dems are absolutely freaking out about the investigations and indictments of everyone involved in telling us we don’t get to elect whom we want.  In one of the most brazen examples of projection I have ever seen, the Dems are accusing President Trump of trying to be a king, for seeking retribution against members of “the resistance” who tried to prevent him from assuming and fulfilling the duties of his office.

Duh!  Of course he’s seeking retribution.  It’s what he’s sworn to do as our chief executive.  That’s what that whole “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” thingy in the Constitution means.  All legal punishment is retribution for harm done to an individual or to society.  It’s the “punishment” part of the crime-punishment equation that deters criminal behavior.  The Soros D.A.s must have skipped class on that day.

For any CNN viewers out there, who have been drinking the “retribution” Kool-Aid and thinking The Donald’s actions are starting to look a bit “Hitlery,” let me reassure you.  There is no equivalency between what the Biden/Garland DoJ did and what the Trump/Bondi DoJ is doing.  The former were practitioners of lawfare, and the latter of law enforcement.  One is the use of the law for politics, and the other is use of the law for justice.

In the movie Jesse Stone: Stone Cold, police chief Jesse Stone says, “I don’t box.  I fight.”  His companion asks, “What’s the difference?”  Jesse replies, “Rules.”  Trump is boxing.

In sports, rules make a game fair.  In criminal justice, rules make enforcement fair.  That’s why we have policies and ethical standards that the legal profession is sworn to abide by — and which the Garland DoJ ignored with reckless abandon starting about an hour after they took their oaths.  The rules put the “equal” in “equal justice,” by ensuring that laws are applied as intended, equally to everyone.

Let’s compare and contrast the Biden and Trump Justice Departments.  What the Biden/Garland DoJ did was lawfare: strategic use of the law as a weapon to achieve a political objective.  What the Trump/Bondi DoJ is doing is law enforcement: compelling compliance with duly passed legislation to achieve social order.  Let’s consider a few examples for comparison.

Performative Enforcement

The Garland DoJ dragged Roger Stone out of his home in his PJs to be arrested for a nonviolent crime, with network news crews broadcasting the performance.  The Bondi DoJ allowed James Comey to self-surrender and discreetly enter the courthouse through a side entrance.

Creative Interpretation

The Garland DoJ applied laws in ways never intended (January 6 prosecutions, which have been struck down by the Supreme Court).  The Bondi DoJ applies laws exactly as intended by the Legislature (Letitia James mortgage fraud).

Nullification

The Garland DoJ usurped the authority of Congress by refusing to enforce the laws it disagreed with (immigration), effectively nullifying laws by fiat.  The Bondi DoJ is honoring its duty under the Constitution by enforcing the laws passed by Congress (immigration).

Selective Enforcement

The Garland DoJ enforced laws based on political affiliation (charging Trump for classified documents possession and excusing Biden for classified documents possession).  The Bondi DoJ enforces laws equally regardless of political affiliation (charges were dropped against Eric Adams, a Democrat).

Fishing Expeditions

The Garland DoJ investigated people without a legal predicate (Arctic Frost), picking the person and looking for the crime.  The Bondi DoJ has investigated only where there is overt evidence of wrongdoing (in response to referrals with evidence for Comey, Brennan, James, and Schiff).

In every case, the actions of the Biden/Garland DoJ were done to achieve a political objective: lawfare.  In every case, the actions of the Trump/Bondi DoJ are being done to enforce duly enacted laws as they were intended: law enforcement.  See the difference?

Those on the political (and moral) right are gleefully tossing around the term “FAFO.”  It stands for “Eff” Around and Find Out.  The actual definition is somewhat different, and definitely NSFW.  Look it up if you’re curious.  What it means is that if people keep doing things they shouldn’t, A.G. Bondi may introduce them to the concept of “consequences.”

Retribution is the “finding out” that hopefully deters future temptations to “eff around.”  That’s why what Trump and Bondi are doing is necessary, regardless of how it appears to the “can’t we all just get along” crowd.  The reality is that after the Biden crime wave, we need a bunch more “finding out” to change the risk-reward calculus for future oath-breakers who manage to con their way into office.  If Bondi stands down now because it “looks bad,” we’re going to see a lot more Mar-a-Lago panty raids in the future.

John Green is a staff writer for The American Free News Network and a state content writer for Convention of States Action.  He is an engineer with 40+ years of experience in systems and organizational development.  He can be reached at greenjeg@gmail.com.

Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.