Itās nothing personal, youāre just an idiot. There was enough evidence to indict Maxwell. Obamaās FBI sat on the file as well.
If he was involved in any criminal activity, that wouldnāt be politicizing the DOJ. The premise of your stance is a fallacy.
Biden weaponized the DoJ:
School board parents / ādomestic terrorismā framing (2021 Garland memo)
After the National School Boards Association letter to the White House (which used ādomestic terrorismā language regarding threats/harassment tied to COVID policies, CRT, etc.), Garland issued an October 2021 memo directing the FBI and U.S. Attorneys to address a ādisturbing spikeā in threats, intimidation, and harassment against school officials. FBI assessments followed (including a āthreat tagā). Internal DOJ/FBI emails (later released in Trump-era reviews) showed career officials warning it looked political (āAnti-MAGA Task Forceā), that most cited conduct was First Amendment-protected, and that evidence of widespread violence was thin. No parents were prosecuted as domestic terrorists under the memo; the NSBA later apologized for its letter language. Critics called it an attempt to chill parental speech; defenders noted it targeted only threats of violence, not debate. ļæ¼
FACE Act enforcement against pro-life activists
The Biden DOJ pursued cases under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act against anti-abortion protesters, including high-profile ones with aggressive tactics. A prominent example is Mark Houck (Catholic father of seven): FBI agents conducted a pre-dawn raid at his home in 2022 over a 2021 shoving incident with a Planned Parenthood escort (local authorities had declined charges). He was charged federally, faced years in prison, and was acquitted by a jury in 2023 after ~1 hour of deliberation. He later received a ~$1.1 million settlement from the government. A 2026 Trump DOJ āWeaponization Working Groupā report (based on internal records) alleged broader bias: collaboration with pro-abortion groups for targeting info, harsher recommended sentences for pro-life defendants (~26.8 months average) vs. pro-abortion ones (~12.3 months), withholding of evidence, religion-based juror screening in some cases, and under-enforcement against violence targeting pregnancy centers. The prior administration framed it as protecting clinic access after Dobbs; critics called it selective and ideological. ļæ¼
Investigations and prosecutions of Donald Trump
Special Counsel Jack Smith (appointed by Garland) brought federal cases on classified documents (Mar-a-Lago search approved by Garland) and 2020 election interference/Jan. 6-related matters. Critics cited the unprecedented nature of charging a former president/leading opponent, timing relative to the election, and reports of Biden privately expressing to aides that Trump should be prosecuted or that the probe was too slow (e.g., New York Times reporting). Biden publicly commented on the documents matter (calling Trumpās handling āirresponsibleā and potentially compromising sources/methods) while the probe was pendingāviolating post-Watergate norms against presidential commentary on DOJ investigations. He also urged prosecution of Jan. 6 committee subpoena holdouts (later calling his wording inappropriate). Garland and Smith maintained decisions were independent; special counsel rules provided insulation. No public evidence shows Biden ordered specific charges. ļæ¼
Hunter Biden investigation handling
IRS whistleblowers (Gary Shapley and another agent) alleged preferential treatment by DOJ/Delaware U.S. Attorneyās office under David Weiss (a Trump appointee retained by Garland): slow-walking steps near elections, tipping defense counsel to investigative moves (e.g., storage unit), blocking certain warrants/interviews, allowing statutes of limitations to lapse on some tax years, and deviations from normal process. They claimed investigators were restricted from pursuing leads involving Joe Biden and that felony recommendations were not fully pursued. Hunter was later charged (gun and tax cases), convicted/plead, then received a broad presidential pardon in which Biden criticized the DOJ process as selective/unfair. Defenders noted Weiss was independent, the case produced charges/convictions, and political sensitivity required caution. ļæ¼
Other frequently cited actions
ā¢ DOJ civil lawsuits against Republican-led states (e.g., Georgia election law, Texas abortion restrictions), framed by critics as using the department for partisan policy goals rather than pure legal enforcement.
ā¢ Scale and severity of Jan. 6 prosecutions (hundreds of cases, including non-violent entrants charged with felonies), contrasted by critics with lighter treatment of 2020 riot violence in some progressive cities.
ā¢ Public White House/DOJ messaging or coordination on priorities that aligned with Democratic interests (e.g., reproductive rights task forces).
ā¢ Later Trump DOJ reports and personnel actions framing additional Biden-era decisions as politicized.
He reported Epstein to the South beach police department and fbi in the early 2000ās. The mainstream media verified Trump banned Epstein from mar-a-lago.
If anything he was an informant. If he was involved in criminal activity, he wouldāve been indicted when he reached peak celebrity status hosting the apprentice.
Diddy, Weinstein, both fell.
Leading up the election in 2016, Julian Assange of Wikileaks was interviewed by the mainstream media and said, āif he had anything on trump weād release it. We canāt find anything on him.ā
Now conduct some research about Huma Abedin, Robert Maxwell, Anthony weinerās laptop, McCarthyism, Kissinger, the Podesta Brothers - John podesta, etc.
We should permanently eradicate child predators from our society.
0
u/Moist_Age_6400 1d ago
Itās nothing personal, youāre just an idiot. There was enough evidence to indict Maxwell. Obamaās FBI sat on the file as well.
If he was involved in any criminal activity, that wouldnāt be politicizing the DOJ. The premise of your stance is a fallacy.
Biden weaponized the DoJ:
School board parents / ādomestic terrorismā framing (2021 Garland memo)
After the National School Boards Association letter to the White House (which used ādomestic terrorismā language regarding threats/harassment tied to COVID policies, CRT, etc.), Garland issued an October 2021 memo directing the FBI and U.S. Attorneys to address a ādisturbing spikeā in threats, intimidation, and harassment against school officials. FBI assessments followed (including a āthreat tagā). Internal DOJ/FBI emails (later released in Trump-era reviews) showed career officials warning it looked political (āAnti-MAGA Task Forceā), that most cited conduct was First Amendment-protected, and that evidence of widespread violence was thin. No parents were prosecuted as domestic terrorists under the memo; the NSBA later apologized for its letter language. Critics called it an attempt to chill parental speech; defenders noted it targeted only threats of violence, not debate. ļæ¼
FACE Act enforcement against pro-life activists
The Biden DOJ pursued cases under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act against anti-abortion protesters, including high-profile ones with aggressive tactics. A prominent example is Mark Houck (Catholic father of seven): FBI agents conducted a pre-dawn raid at his home in 2022 over a 2021 shoving incident with a Planned Parenthood escort (local authorities had declined charges). He was charged federally, faced years in prison, and was acquitted by a jury in 2023 after ~1 hour of deliberation. He later received a ~$1.1 million settlement from the government. A 2026 Trump DOJ āWeaponization Working Groupā report (based on internal records) alleged broader bias: collaboration with pro-abortion groups for targeting info, harsher recommended sentences for pro-life defendants (~26.8 months average) vs. pro-abortion ones (~12.3 months), withholding of evidence, religion-based juror screening in some cases, and under-enforcement against violence targeting pregnancy centers. The prior administration framed it as protecting clinic access after Dobbs; critics called it selective and ideological. ļæ¼
Investigations and prosecutions of Donald Trump
Special Counsel Jack Smith (appointed by Garland) brought federal cases on classified documents (Mar-a-Lago search approved by Garland) and 2020 election interference/Jan. 6-related matters. Critics cited the unprecedented nature of charging a former president/leading opponent, timing relative to the election, and reports of Biden privately expressing to aides that Trump should be prosecuted or that the probe was too slow (e.g., New York Times reporting). Biden publicly commented on the documents matter (calling Trumpās handling āirresponsibleā and potentially compromising sources/methods) while the probe was pendingāviolating post-Watergate norms against presidential commentary on DOJ investigations. He also urged prosecution of Jan. 6 committee subpoena holdouts (later calling his wording inappropriate). Garland and Smith maintained decisions were independent; special counsel rules provided insulation. No public evidence shows Biden ordered specific charges. ļæ¼
Hunter Biden investigation handling
IRS whistleblowers (Gary Shapley and another agent) alleged preferential treatment by DOJ/Delaware U.S. Attorneyās office under David Weiss (a Trump appointee retained by Garland): slow-walking steps near elections, tipping defense counsel to investigative moves (e.g., storage unit), blocking certain warrants/interviews, allowing statutes of limitations to lapse on some tax years, and deviations from normal process. They claimed investigators were restricted from pursuing leads involving Joe Biden and that felony recommendations were not fully pursued. Hunter was later charged (gun and tax cases), convicted/plead, then received a broad presidential pardon in which Biden criticized the DOJ process as selective/unfair. Defenders noted Weiss was independent, the case produced charges/convictions, and political sensitivity required caution. ļæ¼
Other frequently cited actions
ā¢ DOJ civil lawsuits against Republican-led states (e.g., Georgia election law, Texas abortion restrictions), framed by critics as using the department for partisan policy goals rather than pure legal enforcement.
ā¢ Scale and severity of Jan. 6 prosecutions (hundreds of cases, including non-violent entrants charged with felonies), contrasted by critics with lighter treatment of 2020 riot violence in some progressive cities.
ā¢ Public White House/DOJ messaging or coordination on priorities that aligned with Democratic interests (e.g., reproductive rights task forces).
ā¢ Later Trump DOJ reports and personnel actions framing additional Biden-era decisions as politicized.