Select Page

Biden evades the long arm of the law

Biden evades the long arm of the law

The Report by Special Counsel Robert Hur investigating President Biden’s possession of government documents – including highly classified documents – has determined that there is no need to prosecute.  That conclusion would be understandable if the report had exonerated Biden from illegal possession of those documents.  But nooo!  It read like an indictment.

The Report said that Biden “knowingly” and “willingly” possessed classified government documents — a violation of the law.  That he “knew” many of the documents were classified at the highest level. That he knew at the time that he was not authorized to take them.  And that he shared some of the documents with others who were not authorized to see them.  The Report indicated that Biden had lied to investigators on three occasions.

  1. Biden falsely claimed that he did not have any classified documents even those he had quite a few.
  2. He claimed all documents were kept in locked files, when even highly classified documents were found in damaged cardboard boxes in his garage.
  3. Biden claimed he never showed the documents to others, but evidence established that he did, including classified documents.
  4. He claimed he did “not recall” receiving a briefing from the National Archives over handling of such documents – and that he did not know he was supposed to return them — even though he signed a document acknowledging the briefing.

In response to a question, Hur said the lies were not material to the investigation and did not influence the outcome.  Really?

Hur also stirred the debate over Biden’s age and mental acuity.  In the Report, Hur wrote that Biden’s memory was “significantly limited.”  Hur said Biden had “diminished faculties in advancing age.”  He described Biden “as struggling to remember events and straining at times to read and relay his own notebook entries.”

Why would Hur go into such detail regarding the mental acuity issue?  Simple.  In justifying his decision to not prosecutor further, Hur claimed that Biden’s memory would make it difficult to win a conviction.  The Report stated that “We also have considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would present himself to a jury, as he did in our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

Ironically, the strongest arguments for not recommending an indictment to the Department of Justice were based on two things unrelated to the possible crime – Biden’s current mental condition and a comparative analysis with the Trump case. 

Hur’s Report stressed the differences between Biden and Trump.  The Report said that Biden returned the documents upon request.  He fully cooperated with investigators – a claim that conflicts with the lies he told investigators.

Conversely, Trump is accused of resisting the return of documents, concealing evidence and other obstructionist activities.  Fair enough.  Those are legitimate distinctions in the two cases.  BUT … is that a basis for such different decisions?  The political class on the left will say “yes.”  But that does not make it true.

Personally, I question the fact that Hur would put so much of his decision on the Trump case.  In fact, is there a legal basis for deciding an outcome in one case based on such comparisons?  No.  Such comparisons are usually reserved for sentencing, but not when considering an indictment.  In fact, courts often bar such comparisons as prejudicial in determining guilt. 

Essentially, Hur appears to have made his decision to disregard Biden’s culpability based on Trump acting worse and Biden having obvious mental acuity issues.

CNN legal analyst Eric Honig did not see either of those as determinant considerations in terms of the commission of a crime.  He said that at best the decision not to indict was a close call – right on the edge.  He said he was surprised with the outcome in view of the incriminating evidence Hur cited in the Report.

Honig also shot down Hur’s contention that the state of Biden’s memory today is grounds for declining to prosecute.  To question Biden’s understanding of his actions, Hur would have had to establish memory problems at the time the documents were taken.

To understand the torrent of criticism that resulted from the Report, think of it as bank robbery.  One defendant admits guilt and returns the money.  The other does not and goes to extremes to thwart the investigation.  The second defendant may incur more charges or harsher punishment, but that does not mean the other bank robber deserves a get out of jail free card.  It may also serve as an example of how the rule-of-law is superseded by the rule-of-man – called prosecutorial discretion.

In the crazy world of law and politics, the decision to not charge Biden may be a small gift to Trump.  There is such a thing in law called “discriminatory prosecution.”  It means that a person is unfairly prosecuted while others with similar charges are not.  It is not an easy point to win in a court-of-law, but you can bet Trump’s lawyers will be using it in his documents case.

Regardless of the controversy, the legal threat to Biden is over.  Or is it?  If Trump returns to the White House, what is to prevent him from re-opening the investigation?  And at a time when Biden no longer enjoys immunity from prosecution.   There is no double jeopardy because Biden was never tried and found innocent.  It was an administrative outcome to not prosecute, not a judicial determination of innocence or guilt.  Apart from the legal arguments, the Democrats’ decision to mount criminal legal actions against former President Trump could set a precedent that bites Biden in the butt.  If justice does not work, karma often does.

So, there ‘tis.

About The Author

Larry Horist

So,there‘tis… The opinions, perspectives and analyses of Larry Horist Larry Horist is a businessman, conservative writer and political strategist with an extensive background in economics and public policy. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman. He has served as a consultant to the Nixon White House and travelled the country as a spokesman for President Reagan’s economic reforms. He has testified as an expert witness before numerous legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress. Horist has lectured and taught courses at numerous colleges and universities, including Harvard, Northwestern, DePaul universities, Hope College and his alma mater, Knox College. He has been a guest on hundreds of public affairs talk shows, and hosted his own program, “Chicago In Sight,” on WIND radio. Horist was a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago and served as Executive Director of the City Club of Chicago, where he led a successful two-year campaign to save the historic Chicago Theatre from the wrecking ball. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He is praised by readers for his style, substance and sense of humor. According to one reader, Horist is the “new Charles Krauthammer.” He is actively semi-retired in Boca Raton, Florida where he devotes his time to writing. So, there ‘tis is Horist’s signature sign off.


  1. Dan tyree

    Democrats seem to avoid being held accountable. Remember killery Clinton? No one was able to prove anything. Good for her. Not many people hold sway over others by threats of death. But retard joe was proven guilty by investigation and gets a free pass. And the silence of the commiecrats is deafening.

  2. Tom

    Larry, I have a great idea. Lets forgive (not drop) the document handling charges from both men. Lets just go with the remaining charges. Seems to me that they are all against Trump.

  3. Andrew Gutterman

    I find this to be wildly ironic:

    “On November 1, 2017, Hur was nominated by President Donald Trump to be the next United States Attorney for the District of Maryland.”

    For once Trump did something right.


      Andrew, unlike Republicans, Democrats don’t beleive in purging the government based on political party identification. Democrats beleive people serve the Constitution, not the party. Garland picked Hur specifically to avoid any partisan optics. Garland had to approve the report and could have sent it back for edit. I guess he figured this “Comey surprise” was legal and would leak out anyways. It just seems that it’s a bit off the beam for determining whether or not to bring charges about documentation. To Horist’s point, would you leave the bank robber off the hook because of memory issues? Would you even mention memory issues in a bank robbery?

      But damage done, Biden has to face this for the rest of his term, campaign, next term if elected, as well. It will never go away and should be present for Trump too. Fair’s fair.

      • Harold blankenship

        Frank you not only lied but you told a damned lie. Are you talking about the same party who threatened to pack the SCOTUS because they don’t always get their way? And a coup was launched against Trump the day that he came down the escalator and announced a campaign. The commiecrats started screaming Russia before anyone voted. And if your commie party is so worried about serving the constitution why does leftists judges try to legislate from the bench over not agreeing with the written constitution of the founding fathers? I could go all day with facts about them trying to water down the constitution. And I read the town hall daily report quoting leftists threatening to attack conservatives in our homes and places of worship if trump wins the election. So much for serving the constitution. All the more reason to keep and bear arms. And we mean it.

        • Mike f

          Harold-In your references to the Supreme Court, you must be talking about the Republicans who actually did pack the Supreme Court? No actions by democrats could be considered as odious as what Mitch did to obama’s nominee and then years later to rush trump’s nominee. Yo think otherwise is simply ignorant…

    • larry Horist

      Andrew Gutterman … Team Biden is not happy with AG Garland. They cannot understand why he picked this guy. But … Garland still expresses confidence in Hur. It is also ironic to see those who chastised Trump for calling folks in the DOJ “political” — and now they are singing off the same song sheet. Ya gotta love the hypocrisy.


    Horist: Calling folk political, nor folks. Based on example. Garland picked the guy for the reasons Garland noted. For the optics of being non-partisan. He also reviews and approves the document —– that’s where the left might rightfully be upset. My guess is it would have leaked anyway so what the hell. WTF —- gotta face it anyway, bring on the debates!!! Let sleepy joe take on sweaty don in a BATTLE OF THE AGES. Couldn’t be more accurate in a title.

    I think the funniest was watching John Stewart on both Biden and Trump on age. Trump couldn’t remember shit. His own statements on memory, his ex-wife, I mean he’s a blank slate. Biden gets righteous at the podium, ends it, walks away, the scrum is yelling questions, and then……Biden turns. Stewart is pricless repeating what I said since 2021: DON”T ANSWER ON THE FIRING LINE AFTER THE CLOSE. It’s incredible how often he fucks this up. Like every time. How many times since 2021 has he been warned by staff who must puke every time he turns… He’s ok from the firing line in most other places, ok free wheeling in from the podium, it’s just the turn…. It’s not memory, or iditocy —- it’s the worst bad luck in the world. If lightning will strike, this is the time. And sure enough —- mixes up Mexico with whatever other country —– talk about proving Hur’s point. Harmless, but really funny. At least his gaff is not asking Putin to be our heavy and stomp any NATO nation that falls short of funding goals. Without a walk back. Without an apology. Heck, that’s what you get when you want to be “dicktator for a day.”

    • Americafirst

      What is iditocy? It’s not in the dictionary.

  5. Frank stetson

    Hb: where the “the party” threaten to pack scotus? When is an investigation a coup? You are right about Russia given Trump has been dealing with them for decades. Makes sense. I don’t know what judges you are whining about. As to the rest, yeah, some facts would be appropriate. Go for it. As far as your taunt about your arms: who cares? Probably what the KC shooter said right before he went full Trump on kids. Suck on your arms, no one cares.

    You whine more than Horist. Bunch of victims with the world against you. Maybe it’s just your poor life choices.

    • Americafirst

      You whine just as much, even more when you can’t get your verbal way with others.

    • Harold blankenship

      It’s all good. One of your tranny queers attacked a church. But hey!!! Why don’t I just give up my guns because someone shot some people at a parade. A hell of a reason. I’m sorry it happened but I didn’t do it. Wait until the facts come out. It will be leftist with an ax to grind that did the shootings. Probably democrats.

      • Frank stetson

        HB: What does a trans attacker of a church have to do with any of this and how do you divine the trans was a democrat? You some sort of trans political expert? Does that mean all hetero shooters are Republicans except the black ones where Horist says more and more every day? Where do you find these fascinating factoids?

        And you believe the teen shooters vote?

        Dude, you’re pushing soap up a rope if you are pushing most mass shooters are democrats. Given where the guns are, good luck with that.

        About 10% of trans and 15% of lbt are registered Republicans; could be standing right next to you in the voting booth. But you are 100% BUSTED for conclusions without facts.

  6. Americafirst

    Wow! So many non-words used and misspellings in the blogs on several stories by Frank Stetson. I think he is drunk, or he wouldn’t do that as I remember a post he made chastising someone for a typo that Frank called him out for misspelling. Again, WOW! Mr. Perfect seems more perfect than ever. LOL

    • Frank stetson

      AF u got it wrong. I noted after six years, Horist still had a typo. Did not say much more than that douchebag.

      I typo all the time. Especially when thumb typing on the phone. Wanna really get down on me? I have a bs in journalism, was a technical writer, and still spell poorly.

      One difference; no typos in anything professional. Hardly one. Numbers even better.

      But this is for fun, so whut da phaukk.

  7. Darren

    The walls are closing in on Biden and his worthless son. From Extortion, Pay to play, you name it.
    What better way to get out of what is instore for Biden than to say he is incompetent to stand trial.
    This way when the criminal charges start rolling along there is president that he can not be tried.
    Yea, we all know he is inept, republicans new that from the get go. Only now the rest of the country is seeing it.
    Some will keep their heads berried in the sand to save face, income , and a job.
    Other Dem supporters on this site will never admit they were wrong about Biden from
    the beginning. I do not feel they are stupid, just to stubborn to leave the theatre when the lights go on and people are leaving.
    Well good luck with that. Biden is the WORST PRESIDENT IN HISTORY!
    Maybe if Trump gets in office we do not have to learn to speak Chinese.

  8. Ron C

    Just once I would like to actually read the double standards clause, that is repeatedly used for the democrat party, just once! It is used every single time, and stand by it is going to be used again for Hunter Biden!

  9. Andrew Gutterman

    My preference is for BOTH Biden and Trump to drop out so as to allow younger folks to run. I do not expect that to happen, they are both too selfish for that, especially Trump. Biden may be forced out when it becomes obvious to all that he really is an “elderly old man” with issues, while Trump may get convicted of something. Interesting times we live in.

    I tell my friends who may vote for Trump that they are really voting for his VP.

    • Dan tyrer

      All the more reason to select a good vp

    • Frank stetson

      AF u got it wrong. I noted after six years, Horist still had a typo. Did not say much more than that douchebag.

      I typo all the time. Especially when thumb typing on the phone. Wanna really get down on me? I have a bs in journalism, was a technical writer, and still spell poorly.

      One difference; no typos in anything professional. Hardly one. Numbers even better.

      But this is for fun, so whut da phaukk.

    • Frank stetson

      AG: IMO, I really expected Biden to do one n done, pick a successor around year two and do a Washington in service to country and presidency. I was disappointed.

      I am also disappointed in how he’s treated his cabinet; does not seem to be the great mentor I expected.

      And here we are. Both old, both weird memories, weird statements, one goofy, one mean. One alleged wrong doings. One proven liable and criminally guilty for a number of things. And here we are

  10. Tom

    A big hurdle that seems to have been ignored in this decision of Hur is the question that should be answered by a neurologist, which is, “Is Biden mentally competent to stand trial.” And this evaluation could focus on memory as a part of competence. Seems like Hur made the decision himself but he was not qualified to make that decision. Most good DA’s I have ever known would have the accused submit to a competency test.

    So based on the immense push back by Biden who claims he is competent, Hur should pull back his report, acknowledge the mistake, and change the conclusion to competent for trial but make a statement on mental competence and require a test by a third party neutral neurologist to properly determine medical competence.

    • larry Horist

      Tom … Two things you seem to have overlooked. According to Hur, the main reason for NOT recommending Biden’s indictment was a perceived inability to win a conviction. You do not need to be a doctor to be able to perceive diminished acuity. As the television prosecutors noted, Hur had to explain why there was no prosecution in view of the evidence. I can understand that. ‘Also, Hur did not say that Biden was incompetent to stand trial. He said he could stand trial but would likely be acquitted based on jury sympathy for an old man with memory problems. And also keep in mind that Biden cannot be prosecuted while President — he has immunity.

      Are you suggesting that Hur withdraw his Report … declare Biden competent to stand trial … AND recommend prosecution after Biden leaves office? That would leave later assessments to medical professionals. I could go with that. I believe that would have been the proper course of action.

  11. Mike f

    It is rather obvious that Hur’s report is merely a partisan hit job. There is much extraneous information whose sole purpose is to reflect poorly on Biden. Hur knows he doesn’t have a case, and filled his report with opinion and innuendo which reflects very poorly on his judicial capabilities. The right wing hones in on Hur’s statement that Biden willfully kept classified documents (in his opinion) but then ignores later statements that Hur is unsure of his opinions. And yes Larry, there is a huge difference between someone being caught with a few, relatively low level classified documents who turns them over immediately and someone who deliberately takes hundreds of classified documents up to the very highest levels, then refuses to turn them over to investigators as r hides them to prevent them from being discovered. To say that these two cases are interchangeable is certainly the comment of an ignoramus.