You are just going to insist on pushing the ad hominem, aren't you?
...but not here in the real world:
There is a difference between abuse and something done in accordance with the normal rule of law. I'm not sure your link is factual in all accounts, but even assuming it is, this does not justify a refusal to follow the normal rule of law in regular legal proceedings.
What needs to be done here is for the Abuse to be stopped, and the normal and usual legal processes to be implemented as they have existed since our government was founded.
Stopping the existing abuses is certainly necessary, but it is far from sufficient. Would you (for example) let an embezzler keep his job, with continued access to company funds, if he gave back the money he’d been caught stealing and promised not to do it again?