The perception of the DOJ as a political tool is no longer a one-sided complaint. Republicans cite prosecutions of figures like Steve Bannon, while Democrats point to Trump's direct influence on indictments. This shared belief from both sides of the aisle is causing a complete erosion of the institution's credibility as an independent body.
Republicans and Democrats contribute equally to the nation's fiscal crisis via different tactics. Republicans gut the IRS and cut taxes while Democrats expand spending. Both actions are popular with their respective bases and donors but push the country closer to bankruptcy.
Jodi Cantor, who broke the Weinstein story, identifies the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation as the turning point for the #MeToo movement. Before it, there was broad factual consensus and figures from both parties faced consequences. The Kavanaugh allegations politicized the issue, splitting public perception along ideological lines.
While President Trump is framing John Bolton's indictment as political retribution, the case was already being built by the Department of Justice under the Biden administration. This pre-existing foundation makes the charges appear more legally substantive and less like a simple political attack, creating a complex situation for Bolton's defense.
When the investigation reached the President's inner circle, the government machine mobilized against the anti-corruption bodies. Ukraine's security services arrested several detectives involved in the probe, accusing them of collaborating with Russia. This tactic attempts to reframe a legitimate investigation as a threat to national security.
The US has historically benefited from a baseline level of high competence in its government officials, regardless of party. This tradition is now eroding, being replaced by a focus on loyalty over expertise. This degradation from competence to acolytes poses a significant, underrecognized threat to national stability and global standing.
An administration has no incentive to fully resolve a major public scandal because its unresolved nature makes it a perfect "red herring." It can be used repeatedly to distract the public and media from current policy failures or other damaging news, making perpetual ambiguity more politically useful than transparency.
The inability to execute basic administrative functions, like correctly appointing a prosecutor, is more than just embarrassing—it's a national security risk. It projects weakness and incompetence on the world stage, eroding the 'brand' of American capability and emboldening adversaries who see a clown car instead of a superpower.
Using legal attacks against political opponents ("lawfare") is a societal gangrene. It forces the targeted party to retaliate, turning elections into existential battles for survival rather than policy contests. This high-stakes environment creates a powerful incentive to win at any cost, undermining democratic norms.
The indictment of former FBI Director James Comey highlights a strategy where the legal process itself is the punishment. The goal is not to win in court but to intimidate opponents by forcing them into expensive, time-consuming legal battles, creating a chilling effect on dissent regardless of the case's merits.
Political allies often remain silent critics until a leader's power begins to wane. The recent increase in Republicans publicly questioning Trump's economic grasp demonstrates this principle. This belated courage is more about political survival and opportunism than genuine conviction, emerging only after the personal risk has subsided.