Trump DOJ Indictments Often Reported As Retribution

Major outlets like The Washington Post (WaPo) and The New York Times (NYT) framed legal actions against Trump allies during the Biden administration as straight news versus those against perceived enemies of Trump in his second term.

• Steve Bannon (Contempt of Congress): Indicted on November 12, 2021, by a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., for defying a subpoena from the House Select Committee investigating the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack. He was convicted in July 2022 and sentenced to four months in prison (served starting July 2024). This stemmed from his refusal to provide documents or testimony about Trump's post-2020 election efforts.
• Peter Navarro (Contempt of Congress): Indicted on June 3, 2022, on two counts for similarly ignoring a subpoena from the January 6 committee. Navarro, a former Trump trade advisor, claimed executive privilege but provided no documentation from Trump to support it (unlike other aides like Mark Meadows). He was convicted in September 2023, sentenced to four months in March 2024, and served time starting that month.
• James Comey (Trump-Era Example): Indicted on September 25, 2025—two days before the current date—on one count of making a false statement and one count of obstructing a congressional proceeding, tied to his 2020 Senate testimony. 

Both Bannon and Navarro cases were rare prosecutions for contempt referrals from Congress so where were headlines screaming "Biden weaponizes DOJ against rivals." NYT on Bannon had no prominent mention of Biden directing the case; instead, it highlighted career prosecutors in the public integrity unit.

Fast-forward to 2025: Trump's DOJ has pursued cases against figures like Comey, with WaPo and NYT framing them more explicitly as potential "retribution" or norm-breaking, often tying them to Trump's public calls for investigations. This echoes the user's contrast—now it's "Trump getting his enemies."

NYT on Comey (September 26, 2025): "With Comey Indictment, Trump Gets Retribution but Shatters Norms" led with the prosecutor's "drive to indict" overriding DOJ traditions of political distance. It contrasted Biden's hands-off approach to Trump probes (no social media demands for prosecution) and noted Trump's preemptive cheers, raising "the prospect of more arbitrary charges." The piece highlighted internal dissent among prosecutors who "stepped back" from the case.

WP Coverage: Similar tone in pieces like "Trump Predicts More Indictments After Comey and Claims It’s Not Revenge," quoting Trump's denials but emphasizing his social media posts lamenting inaction against foes like Sen. Adam Schiff or NY AG Letitia James. 

It framed the timing (just before the statute of limitations) as suspicious, unlike the "straight news" style for Bannon/Navarro.

The shift isn't isolated: During Trump's 2023-2024 indictments (e.g., January 6, classified docs), WaPo and NYT often contextualized them as responses to evidence of wrongdoing, with headlines like "Trump Indictment: Jan. 6 Riot Was ‘Fueled by Lies’ From Trump." But for Trump-initiated probes, the lens widens to include risks to democracy and selective prosecution.