You wrote:
"To get a federal judge to approve a search warrant, there has to be substantial evidence and probable cause. That federal agents executed this warrant at the home of a former president indicates that they have overwhelming evidence to substantiate it."
Federal judges can make appropriate approval decisions for a search warrant IF they are provided accurate and true information supporting them. The FBI already has a history of using information they KNEW to be false to secure a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump Campaign (see Page, Carter). A DOJ attorney also falsified exculpatory information from the CIA in that same effort. Based on that history, it's hard to simply believe "federal agents… have overwhelming evidence to substantiate it" until such evidence is made available to the public.
Not one of the people I know who "… were shouting 'LOCK HER UP!'" were "… cheering at the prospect of Trump personally jailing whoever he wanted…" The chants reflected a very specific action for a very specific person. Anyone who's ever held a TOP SECRET and above security clearance (like myself) and I have to believe many of those that simply tuned into FBI Director James Comey's press conference where he methodically laid out how Hillary Clinton and her minions broke the law in multiple ways repeatedly were flabbergasted when he indicated the FBI were recommending no charges be brought. To my knowledge, no one involved was even sanctioned by the State Department for their roles.
Comey's rationale was that those involved never INTENDED to break the law. EVERYONE ever read into a TOP SECRET code word program (at least in the Air Force) signs a paper acknowledging INTENT is not a requirement when violating the law. I have to believe that the Department of State does something similar. In any event, it's not possible for information to have moved onto Hillary's unsecure server she used to thwart Freedom of Information Act Requests and to stymie Congressional oversight from higher security networks (SECRET and TOP SECRET networks) without someone INTENDING to do so. Intent was satisfied. Comey's decision was entirely political.
You assert that "Biden has gone to extraordinary lengths to distance himself from the Department of Justice and restore the notion that the president doesn’t interfere with its independence". Your linked article provides no support for that assertion. Other than statements by his Ministers of Truth, there is no evidence to support it. The fact President Biden might "distance himself" from the DOJ isn't surprising. He probably wouldn't know what DOJ stands for without it being printed on a card given to him by one of his handlers. That doesn't mean the Biden White House remains "distanced". They were intimately involved in the drafting of the letter from the National School Board Association requesting federal assistance for supposed threats of violence occurring at school board meetings and the DOJ's response to treat moms and dads concerned about their children's education as national security threats.
https://nsba.org/-/media/Files/NSBA-Report.pdf?la=en&hash=A001354D23C9AE88B54D398270C9790D91B01FF9
