Select Page

Can Trump avoid an indictment?

Can Trump avoid an indictment?

No matter what you think of President Trump as a person or the achievements of his administration, there is no doubt that the status of various legal cases are not trending in his favor.

Much to the chagrin of the Trump haters, I have often drawn the critical difference between a court-of-law – with all its constitutional requirements and protections – and the political court-of-public-opinion – susceptible to rumors, disinformation, and false accusations.  One is designed to find truth through the analysis of facts by both sides.  The other is vulnerable to passion and perception as opposed to reality.  In a court-of-law, they build cases to win convictions.  In the court-of-public-opinion, they create bogus narratives to win elections.

Hard core loyalists have expressed their chagrin that I will express my dislike for the personal traits of the man – and am unwilling to follow his script.  In terms of his legal vulnerabilities, I have taken a wait and see posture – noting that any accusations against Trump will be harder to prove in a court-of-law. As far as the Select Committee’s political dog-and-pony show, nothing new.  Whatever they determine will be meaningless political fodder if it does not lead to action by the Department of Justice.

I have also opined in the past that Trump’s greatest danger may be from his activities as head of the Trump Organization in the years before the presidency.  Many of his actions following the 2020 presidential election pose less vulnerability, in my judgment – but not zero. Allow me to explain.

Three recent events must be VERY disturbing to Trump – and may portend serious problems ahead.  

The Raid on Mar-a-Lago

The first is the FBI raid on his residence at Mar-a-Lago.  (Most folks understand it was a raid despite the efforts of those on the left to redefine it as some sort of “visit”.)  

To say this was unprecedented is an understatement.  It set off a hornets’ nest of anger among Trump loyalists – and others.  The surface explanation is the recovery of White House documents that Trump says are his – and Attorney General Merrick Garland claims to be the property of the American people.  Having worked for the White House on two occasions, I am inclined to believe that most of those documents should not have been removed.

I think the Trump haters lose on the issue of classified information since the Constitution gives the President unfettered powers to declare things declassified – and the Constitution prescribes no process other than the President saying so. There is no clarity on the process. Trump even argues that taking the records home automatically declassifies them – and there are no laws to say he is wrong.  It is an unsettled issue that needs a constitutional amendment and a decision by the Supreme Court to any challenges.

There is the 1978 Presidential Records Act that seems to cover the improper removal.  How far Attorney General Garland can take that law, in this case, is yet to be seen.

Perhaps the greatest danger to Trump as an aftermath of the raid is the discovery of evidence of other potential crimes.  While Garland may not have sufficient reason to raid Trump’s home on other issues, the DOJ can use anything they coincidentally find – things that might impact on the Georgia Case or the New York Case.  Some have speculated that fishing for other evidence was the real purpose of the raid.

The Georgia Case

Sorting out what Trump and others did that was perfectly legal and what may not be is complicated.  For example, the Trump haters see his request for 11,780 votes as a demand to steal those votes.  However, it could just as easily mean that Trump believed there were thousands of illegal votes and he only needed 11,780 to be thrown out.  I would be surprised if that resulted in even an indictment – and it is impossible to imagine a conviction.  So, there must be something else.

The Georgia case warmed up a bit with the announcement that former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani is now a “target” of the investigations.  That means the local prosecutor believes she has sufficient evidence to indict and convict Giuliani of a crime … a serious crime.

We do not yet know the nature of the crime – or whether it will lead to Trump, himself.  The best speculation is that it is lying to investigators.  If that is the charge – as opposed to vote fraud – Trump will be in the clear.  At this juncture, there is nothing specific being reported that links Trump to any vote fraud in Georgia – or anywhere else.  The left-wing media accused Trump of being guilty of many things in the past, but fails to produce any compelling evidence.

The New York City Case

I have opined in the past that the greatest legal threat to Trump may be in the New York Case – where the Trump Organization is being investigated for a range of criminal business activities.

It may seem a bit cynical, but my opinion is at least partially based on the fact that he has been a major New York City real estate developer for decades.  I think the potential of having broken the law is rather high.  It is not just because he is Donald Trump, but that almost any major urban real estate developer would be found to have committed crimes — if investigated.  The opportunities are vast and the consequences generally nil.

The New York City Case went from warm to hot with the announcement that the Trump Organization’s chief accountant and family friend, Allen Weisselberg, has pled guilty to 15 felonies over the course of many years.  This is not an indictment.  Weisselberg has seen the evidence against him and decided that he has no credible defense — and can only limit his sentence by pleading “guilty,”

Knowing the structure of the Trump Organization – and the Donald’s reputation for knowing everything that goes on – it is difficult to imagine that criminal fraud could have been ongoing for years without his knowledge.  It will have to be proven, of course – but it does not look good for Trump.

Also, Weisselberg will now be facing sentencing.  Flipping on Trump – and other members of the family – is the only way he can lessen his jail time. Given the long intimate relationship Weisselberg has had with the Trump family, if he flips, I would say that Trump is in deep doo-doo.

Remember … the prosecutors will not lesson Weisselberg’s sentence unless he can produce very convincing evidence on the boss.  The only positive option for Trump is if Weisselberg hangs tough and refuses to flip on Trump – taking the longer sentence.  Hard to imagine that happening no matter how close the family ties have been over the years.

The Capitol Hill Case

Nothing new with that one.  In fact, it has become a tiresome repetitious regurgitation of old accusations—and the insurrection, coup attempt, civil war hyperbole is starting to wear thin.  That case — being relentlessly pursued by Speaker Pelosi’s one-sided Select Committee – is long on accusations and very short real evidence of anything that would stand up in a court-of-law.


If I had to give odds, I think the odds of Trump being indicted for something before the 2024 presidential election is at least 60/40.  And the odds for a conviction are 50/50.  I do not think we will see anything close to insurrections, sedition or treason. 

(And for those of you on the left and right who want to interpret this commentary as a political judgment for or against Trump, it is not. It is just what I objectively deduce from what I see happening.)

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. frank stetson

    I am still hopeful that Mitch and Kevin will want to avoid the damage to the party and to the office and impeach the guy. As part of that, he would only need to admit the Biden is the rightful POTUS. Doesn’t even need to discount The Big Lie.

    But I think they waited too long and it’s too close to the midterms. I think Trump, the perennial believer in his own Houndini like grifter-gonna-get-caught radar is off and he hasn’t raised his hand for help, as long as he’s raising donations….

    And why would Democrats put themselves in for that type of abuse after Impeachment II, the Ukrainian extortion scheme?

    Nope, I think this train will not be derailed and Trump has legal issues with business and politics in numerous State and Federal forums. There will be indictments but, so far, everyone close has taken one for the grifter. Don’t expect that to change. The documents are a murky mess. NY business trial will show his tax evasion. Georgia will try someone, or a few folks, for election tampering. And 1.6 —- they are awaiting conviction from Meadows down. Will it go up from Meadows. I think so. I know better, but once again, I think so. Then there’s always the Carroll Defamation Case, the Swalwell Incitement Suit, Bass Incitement Suit, Doe Class Action Suit, Mary Trump Fraud Case, and the Capitol Police Class Action Suit — three of them so far, plus the Metro Police version for a fourth and even the Scotland Unexplained Wealth Orders Suit, Westchester Golf Course Tax Valuation Suit, and the Trump Tower Suit, Cohen Retaliatory Imprisonment suit. This grifter certainly attracts a crowd, that’s for sure.

    Trump’s company must consist of 1) family members and personal assistants 2)three brand experts 3) a contracts guy 4) two accountants, and 5), 666 lawyers.

    • Jonathan

      Go ahead and leave the country. Trump is coming back. There’s nothing to indict

  2. frank stetson

    Actually there’s a baker’s dozen cases which could nail Trump, but I would gather NY, GA, and DOJ- 1.6 and DOJ/National Archives document mess are the big ones. The documents seems to be a slam dunk on multiple vectors IF the Presidential Documents Act means anything and/or the nature of the classified documents adds the National Security angle — declassified or not.

    And thanks Jonathan, I do plan to travel and appreciate your appreciation. But I see no reason for a grifter like Trump nor his frenzied blind sheep followers to force me to do that.

    • Luke

      You refuse to consider that Trump might be innocent. I don’t know. But I do know that Hillary committed felonies by destroying emails that were under subpoena. And not a damned thing was done about it. That said, I have zero respect for our government or our so called justice system. If Trump’s guilty I hope he gets away with it. You two faced liberal idiots think this is a joke. Trump’s gone and most likely will never be president again. If you want to see someone prosecuted let’s start with Hillary. I know. She’s been investigated over and over. But it only takes one. And obstruction of Justice with the emails is a damned good place to start. But I guess that people are afraid of the suicide list. And yes, I believe that too. No, I can’t prove it and I really don’t give a fuck. I’m just fucking tired of double standard dealing in our joke of a justice system. Anything lately about Nancy pelosi’s inside trading? Me neither. I guess that one got flushed. And yes, I believe that the election was stolen but I realize that people who could have stopped it refused to act. But at least Trump got to put three great people on the scotus. But keep hoping. They might lock Trump up. And you and Hillary can have an orgasm over it. If you two ain’t too old, that is.

      • Frank dtetson

        If Hillary is guilty, indict her and take her to court.

        Yes I think Trump is guilty of many things. He’s a grifter. But I know he violated the Presidential records act, pretty plain n simple.

        The question for you true believers is: why did Trump have 35 boxes of the people’s papers hidden at mar a loser?

        Why when he claimed he returned them all, 15 boxes, did he keep 20 more boxes?

        What possible reason would a guy who does not read want paper? Why would he hide them, lie about them, and then have to be raided to find out he had them all the time. Why?

        • Luke

          And my question to you is why did Hillary destroy thousands of subpoenaed emails if she was not hiding her crooked shit. But no, that’s old news and I don’t understand why the laws on destroying evidence and obstruction of Justice wasn’t enforced. Forget Hillary. Nothing will be done to that sleazy bitch. It’s over. Our laws ain’t being enforced in much of the country today. Politicians own the courts and DA offices. Especially in New York. Our justice system is a fucking joke. And people like you are ok with that I only used Hillary as an example. I’m not stupid enough to think anyone will ever hold her accountable.

          • Frank stetson

            Asked and answered already.

            But you apparently can’t answer why a guy who doesn’t read has 35 boxes of the peoples papers?

  3. Lyudmila


  4. Mike

    Larry, while I suspect that trump will avoid an indictment, you and all of your fellow writers at the windbag post are misinformed on the classification issue. The President does have authority to declassify NSI material, however he does not have the ability to declassify RD or FRD, so if any of those documents are that category, the argument is moot. Also, he does not have the ability to declassify information related to spies, which the highest level of classified material likely referred to. So there tis…

    • larry Horist

      Mike … Putting our snide comments aside (which is self condemning), I shall respond to the issue. As I understand from constitutional scholars, the power of the President over all federal classified information is unlimited by any laws or bureaucratic regulations. How that power is exercised is not defined in the Constitution. That is what needs to be resolved with a constitutional amendment — which I had proposed in another commentary. On what basis do you see the President’s power limited in specific instances? The 1978 Presidential Records Act does not touch on the issue of declassification. Any law restricting presidential power would run smack dab into the Constitution and be decided by the Supreme Court.

      The categories you not are generally accepted bureaucratic procedures for classify and declassifying sensitive information. but they do not override the President’s arbitrary powers granted by the Constitution. Another way of looking at it. The Executive Branch has procedures to evaluate potential presidential pardons — but it does not prevent a President from pardoning anyone he pleases at anytime in the presidency. He does not even have to do it in writing — but they do for obvious reasons.

      • frank stetson

        I hope Trump uses Larry’s classified defense. Since document classification is not even mentioned on the warrant, the judge can ask: “bwhaaaaat,” a legal term for “do you even know what you are being charged with?” No, if I were Trump, I would be looking at my risks re: the warrant, not Larry’s whacko defense or Hillary whataboutisms. I would be worried about the espionage act, obstruction (again), removal and destruction, and other salient parts of the actual warrant. I would also hire some real lawyers.

        There’s also the National Archives Presidential Documents Act for which Trump is guilty, generally not much of a crime but with 35 boxes of stolen documents, classified may get more interesting here. Larry’s right, this Act has never been tested in court, no one has ever been this bold, this stupid, but who knows until it gets to court. But according to the act, he’s guilty as sin.

        • larry Horist

          Frank Stetson… Still having problems comprehending. The issue was “declassification.” That is a different issue than the taking of the documents — which is covered by the 1978 Presidential Records Act. You are rebutting the wrong issue.

          • frank stetson

            Still beating your wife? Your question requires the condition to exist, a condition you judge me as having had for some time. How’s your heroin problem coming?

            Larry admonishes me saying “Frank Stetson… Still having problems comprehending. The issue was “declassification.” That is a different issue than the taking of the documents — which is covered by the 1978 Presidential Records Act. You are rebutting the wrong issue.”

            Oh I have been schooled! Don’t talk about the PRA, Larry says it’s the wrong issue. Of course in his previous comment he notes: “ The 1978 Presidential Records Act does not touch on the issue of declassification. Any law restricting presidential power would run smack dab into the Constitution and be decided by the Supreme Court” so in reality, Larry opened the rebuttal to the wrong issue to begin with. I hope he self-flagellates appropriately :>)

            Not to mention, that I, opened with: “There’s also the National Archives Presidential Documents Act …” the key word being “also,” as in additionally, in addition to, according to Webster.

            Thanks for the admonition on reading comprehension improvements. I think you have proved once again that’s ASLO a good idea. :>)

      • Mike

        Larry, The most cursory internet search will verify what I have stated above. The President does not have the power to declassify nuclear secrets, or information relating to spies, due to the potential grave harm that he could do to our nation, and other nations who share secrets with us. This is due to the fact that a given President is not considered to be an expert in nuclear weapon technology, and therefore should not be the person responsible for declassifying such information. You are showing your ignorance, and your inability to do a thorough search on the facts, instead accepting right-wing propaganda as “gospel” in order to prop up a crooked individual who happened to be elected President in 2016…..

        • larry Horist

          Mike … Granted that there is a special bureaucratic procedure in place that does not allow the President to declassify certain nuclear and intelligence information. You might even say it is a good procedure. But according to constitutional scholars, it runs afoul of the power granted to the President in the Constitution. I did a quick search and did not find an actual laws that prohibits the President. Perhaps you can find such a law. If no legislation, then it is simply a bureaucratic regulation with zero enforcement power over the Constitution. And even if it is a law, can it stand up to a court challenge? Most of the experts I find belief that the constitutional power of the President to declassify is absolute. Saying he does not have the power — and even having a traditional bureaucratic process — does not change the reality. That is why I proposed a constitutional amendment to limit the President. To determine who is correct, we may have to wait for the Supreme Court to weigh in.

  5. Joseph S. Bruder

    Nobody on the “left” is calling the raid on Trump’s property anything but a “raid”. And truthfully, anyone else charged under the Espionage Act would have been arrested and taken away in handcuffs, especially for such an egregious act. Trump has been portrayed by his supporters as a victim, but he had every opportunity to comply with the law, and refused. Here are the most used excuses used by right-winged media (PGP’s favorite has been #2)

    1 – Trump suggests evidence was ‘planted’
    2 – Trump declassified the documents
    3 – Trump had a standing order to declassify anything that he took home
    4 – Trump had attorney-client privilege
    5 – Guiliani’s theory that Trump was “protecting” the documents

    I may have missed one or two… All of these are patently stupid, given that it’s almost two years since Trump was in office.

    Regarding the Georgia case, you write “We do not yet know the nature of the crime – or whether it will lead to Trump, himself”. Trump was caught ON TAPE pressuring the SOS to find him 11780 +1 votes. It was pretty clear. The only reason Trump isn’t charged yet is because prosecutors work their way up to the top dog. And It didn’t happen in just one state either. Guiliani is probably the last step before they get to Trump himself. Look to other states or the DOJ to bring other cases forward.

    For the New York case, it’s hard to say if Trump will get a criminal indictment, but at the very least, they could seize all or most of his assetts. Trump and his idiot spawn between them cited 5th Amendment rights about 1000 times, in a civil case where they are supposed to be defending the company’s practices (and by the way, pleading the 5th was something Trump himself said “only mob bosses do”). Trump and his family did nothing to defend the company, so his case is pretty much a lost cause. Since Weisselburg got a criminal indictment, and is now on the hook to testify against Trump, it’s a good bet that Trump will be indicted for this one too.

    And finally, regarding the Jan 6th coup attempt – this was a huge conspiracy among dozens of people with everything pointing to Trump at the top. Certainly, anything coming out of the Jan 6th Committee is evidence, but rest assured, the DOJ has all that and more. There were so many moving parts to this conspiracy, that nobody is going to get away with lying, especially Trump.

    I can’t predict when all this will happen, because the DOJ makes sure their cases are solid before proceeding to indictments. Probably the espionage case is furthest along, since they’ve already raided Trump’s illegal residence in Florida and gathered evidence against him. There could be DOJ cases prepared for the state-level crimes waiting in the wings. Also, there seems to be a bit of a crunch in Trump finding qualified lawyers to take his case. His current lawyers are doing an abysmal job, and Trump hasn’t even been charged yet. That’s what happens when you have a history of stiffing your lawyers (and everyone else he’s ever done business with), and most of Trump’s lawyers have ended up disbarred and/or getting charged with crimes. What goes around comes around. Trump is going to be down to slip-and-fall lawyers before too long.

    But for an economist, your estimate of the odds of Trump getting indicted are WAY off. Besides 60/40 being low, there are a minimum of four separate investigations here. Larry, you should know your statistics better than that. Even going with your 60/40, each investigation is independent of the others. In other words, to get the chance of indictment, you multiply the chances of non-indictment together and subtract from 1 (100%). 40% (.4) multiplied 4 times is .0256, and subtracting from 1 gives a 97.44% change of indictment.

    I think that Trump’s numbers are worse than that – I’d give him 90% chance of indictment on the espionage charge, 90% on election interference, and about 80% each on the other two (only because they’re state-level instead of DOJ, which could change). That raises his chances of indictment to about 99.96%.

    Maybe you and old Joe can visit Trump in federal prison.

    • Joe Gilbertson

      The possibility of an indictment is not because Trump is guilty of anything. It is because the Democrats are desperate to hang something on him so that they can prevent him from running for President again. Most of your logic here is gratuitous and nonsensical, and you have ignored the reality that Trump’s authority over classified document is absolute.

      • Joseph S. Bruder

        Note that in Georgia, as I said, Trump is ON TAPE pressuring the SOS to change the vote totals. That is an obvious and documented crime. No politics there, he was caught red handed.

        Trump is a private citizen, and had in his possession 10 classified documents. Again, that’s an obvious crime and the evidence is clear. No politics there, and Trump could have avoided it if he’d returned the records when asked. What’s he going to do with classified material? Keep it as a memento while he jeopardizes national security (which he probably has already done just by having it in an unsecured facility)? The obvious answer is that he planned to sell it. He deserves a long prison sentence for that.

        In the New York case, Weisselberg is already indicted and found guilty. Trump, Inc maintained two sets of books, one for paying taxes and the other for getting bank loans. Another clear violation of the law, not political, and Trump and his family had to know what was going on. There’s a chance Trump and spawn won’t get charged criminally, but I would bet against it. They will, for sure, get everything taken away.

        That leaves the Jan 6th riots. It’s pretty well documented that Trump was the driving force behind the whole conspiracy, as he was calling fake electors and SOS’s directly. The conspiracy encompassed about 2/3 of the Republicans, and the entire White House. Trump tried to steal the Presidency by force – a coup attempt.Yes, it’s political, because elections are political, but he also broke a lot of laws doing it. The DOJ is not going to let him get away with it, because we can’t make it that easy for the next attempt.

        NOBODY, DOJ nor state prosecutors, would go after an ex-President if they didn’t have the evidence and a solid case to back it up. You’ve got to figure that chance of conviction on at least some of the charges is going to be about 90%, which means Trump has about a 99.99% chance of getting convicted.

        Since when do conservatives go soft on crime? Just because Trump is your favorite cult leader, doesn’t mean he hasn’t committed multiple crimes. We’ll wait for the indictments and jury trials, but the evidence already in plain sight is already pretty damning. He should be indicted and get his day in court to defend himself, and go directly to jail when he’s convicted.

        Oh, and BTW, your new format (not sure how new, exactly), is a pain in the ass. Every time I move the cursor, pictures pop up and cover the whole screen.

        • Joe Gilbertson

          I heard the tape, everyone has heard the tape, there were no threats, no leverage being used, it was just Trump asking the guy to get his shit together. It was not a crime except in your imagination. Kind of like the Ukraine call that you made such a big deal about.

          Trump was not a private citizen when he declassified the documents, he was president of the U.S.A.

          You adopted every lie and exaggeration for the liberal BS media. No point in even answer the rest.

          • Joseph S. Bruder

            “I need you to find me 11780 + 1 votes” is a far cry from “get your shit together”.

            Even if he waved his magic wand and declared them declassified, there is a follow-up to that where documents are officially marked and put into the public record, which was never followed. And if they were anything related to nuclear anything, the President DOES NOT have the power to declassify them. But regardless of whether or not Trump declassified the documents is irrelevant to the Espionage act. His actions took place AFTER he was President. He was a private citizen mishandling documents critical to the security of the US.

            Trump was President, not King, not God (at least not to anyone not in his cult). As much as he tried, he was not and is not all powerful or above the law.

            If Obama had taken home a drawing of a flower from the 10-year old daughter of the President of France, you would be screaming bloody murder about how he broke the law. A little perspective is in order.

          • Joe Gilbertson

            No, its not.

            Typical Democrat thinking the bureaucracy is in charge. The President LITERALLY has the power to declassify ANYTHING.

            As I recall, Obama took 33 million documents home with him.

            Quite flapping around like an old woman with a dog in her flower garden.

    • larry Horist

      Joseph S. Bruder — Recently you claimed I used a photo that was not from the raid on Ma-a-Lago. You were wrong. Now you say “no one” on the left calls the raid anything but a raid. Again… you are wrong. Several talking heads on CNN and MSNBC went to great lengths to say it was NOT a raid. Some said it was a “search.” To proffer their non-raid narrative, they noted that the FBI agents wore suits and did not break down the door — as if that changes the definition. It was a raid by any other name. I am surprised as a fan of left wing media you could have possibly missed all that — since they spend time attempting to redefine the activity. It was not a one-off by some obscure panelist. Sometimes, JSB, I think you are so impassioned on your mission to demean your brother and press your beliefs that you get over your skis. A little less hyperbole would be beneficial.

      And as far as computing odds, you need to go back to the classroom. First of all, I was giving you the odds of any indictments … period. How did you determine the odds when you predicted that Trump would be locked up by now?

      • Joseph S. Bruder

        Are you planning to complain that I’m related to the editor in every reply? We agree to disagree, and needle each other as brothers often do. You can ask him if he’s upset about my comments. You’re using this fake vendetta as a way to discredit my posts without adressing the arguments. Get a life!

        You’re criticising my estimates, but how do you arrive at yours? There are at least 4 independent investigations and you’re going to paint them all with one brush? Lump them all together and call it a partisan attack on Trump? You, like the rest of the country, have seen the large amounts of evidence against Trump on at least some of his crimes. Some of the evidence has been in the public view all along, some cases have indictments against Trump’s direct underlings, some are further along than others. No prosectur is going to bring charges against a former President unless the evidence is air-tight. At least I have a process, you just take a blind guess at some number that will not anger your conservative fan base but allows you to claim to be unbiased. You are not.

        • larry Horist

          Joe S Bruder … brother needling? You attack him repeatedly on his own site. I do not think that is typical of brotherly disagreement. Sounds to me more like a Gosar sibling. I have family members who disagree with me politically. We even argue. But they do not come to this site repeatedly to attack me — not even once. It is called love and respect. My “numbers” that you criticize are my OPINION … as are yours. Like so many left-wingers you arrogantly assume your opinion is fact. As with all opinions, we will have to wait and see. To your question … I have. The conflict is between your and him … I just question your bringing it to a public forum. And on one point, you may be correct. I do see it as a credibility issue. Apparently, you do too.

  6. Mike

    Joe, Go back to school. Your ignorance of the issues at hand is showing…

  7. Joseph S. Bruder

    Joe: Obama DID NOT take 33000 documents home with him. He transferred 33000 documents from the White House to the National Archives, legally, the way it’s supposed to be done. Take a big number out of context, add a different context, and it becomes a LIE. Trump created the lie to deflect from his own criminal actions, and you should know better than to repeat anything that Trump says as truth.

    Larry: I write to agree or disagree with opinions, whether they’re yours, Joe’s, or another contributor. It’s you who seems to need to belittle my opinions by bringing up this supposed feud between Joe and I, and characterizing all of my opinions as just “bad blood”. I would bet that my opinions are a closer to mainstream than yours, and probably a lot more than Joe’s. Your editor is a big boy, he can take care of himself. He’s not above throwing a few barbs my way either. If he thinks I’ve gone overboard, he can tell me himself.

    • larry Horist

      Joe S Bruder … I just try to put your comments in some perspective because they are needlessly hostile in a personal way and way to the edge of extreme. . You may believe that our views are closer to mainstream, but I would put them on the ragged irrational edge of political opinion. You seem to write out of hope rather than observation and objective analysis. For example, you have been predicting a huge defeat for the GOP in November. No one — even on the left — has that view. Your personal accusations of crimes is pervasive — but the law and opinion are not necessarily the same. You think Trump will spend serous time in jail. I doubt it. You accuse him of sedition and I doubt he will ever be tried for that. As repugnant as some of his actions have been, they do not rise to your claims. I would not be surprised to see Trump indicted — and I would not even bet against a conviction somewhere along the line — but nothing like your alleged “mainstream” view. Question: If you were so interested in remaining unrecognized, why did you select the screen name meaning Joe;s Brother? You hinted… I got the hint.

    • Joseph S. Bruder

      Oh, correction: it’s now 300 CIA and NSA documents too, with Trump’s grubby paw prints on them. Now, suddenly, CIA agents in the field have to start worrying about whether Trump has exposed them or not. NSA workers will have to worry about their security and the safety of their families. How many pictures of documents does Trump have on a burner phone or stashed on a thumb drive somewhere.

      Frankly, I’m surprised old Joe would still be supporting Trump at this point.

      • Joe Gilbertson

        Its zero classified documents.

        By policy, the president, indeed no one outside the originating agency is provided with the names of foreign agents. Every President has agreed to this.

        The President doesn’t use thumb drives or burner phones. And he is not allowed to drive a car (much less hijack one, per your conspiracy theories).

    • Joe Gilbertson

      You are ugly and your mother dresses you funny.

      And you are nowhere close to mainstream. Mainstream isn’t even aware of the screwed up theories you espouse.

  8. Frank stetson

    +1JSB. Larry’s still in love too.

    The question remains; why did Trump have this stuff?

    The man is toast on the Presidential Records Act. Larry is right, only a test of the law itself is his only hope.

    On the rest; classified, unclassified, the only thing that matters is national security and the risk of potential espionage. Unfortunately, the proof for that starts with the type of documents and what’s being classified SCI documents look pretty bad for the Don but we will only hear that second hand. We will never know what’s in those papers. But Don’s pool boy might :-(.

    • Joe Gilbertson

      Frank, for the last time. He is entitled for whatever reason. Obama kept over 30 million pages.

      Are you being purposely obtuse? Or have you been drinking again?

      • Joseph S. Bruder

        Stop with the “Obama did it” accusation. He did not “keep” 30,000 documents. He transferred them to the National Archives.

        “He is entitled” is past tense. Trump was entitled, within limits, until he was no longer President. After he was no longer President, he was asked to return them, because they were not his property. He refused, it became a criminal matter, and his illegal home was raided. I happen to believe that Trump never declassified anything, you believe he did. OK, we can disagree on that for now. It doesn’t matter to the Espionage Act that was the basis of the raid. Trump still violated the law and risked the security of the country. He will be indicted on this one for sure.

        • Joe Gilbertson

          Everything you just said is incorrect, you just made it up. Complete crap.

          • Frank stetson

            No, I’m pretty sure the opinions are correct because they are Joseph’s opinions. I’m also pretty sure his spot on with the facts.

            It was the espionage act. and Obama did transfer the 30,000 pages to the national archive. Jfgi

  9. frank stetson

    Once again Larry, I am not a drinker. I have noted this many times, but you seem to feel it tweaks me and you seem to really enjoy putting pain in a stranger. Got to get your rocks off somehow now that everyone else denies you for being a dick. Well, I don’t know that to be true, it’s just what everyone says. Let’s ask Bruder…..

    As for the last time, what is your problem?

    “On the rest; classified, unclassified, the only thing that matters is national security and the risk of potential espionage.” OK, I will go s l o w for Slow Joe. On the rest….. means the entirety, the total, the big magilla. Classified, unclassified, the only thing that matters….means no matter what the documents security level is, it does not matter, the only thing that does matter is “national security and the risk of potential espionage means….. document classification was not in the warrant: national security and espionage issues were. Along with obstruction, a Trumpian top ten offense.

    I really don’t know why you have such a hard on for document classification instead of focusing on the criminal issues at hand noted in the warrant. And since you obviously didn’t read it, here it is: You can put it into a pdf, search on classified, and see that it’s not germane to the major points noted as possible crimes in the warrant.

    You are arguing a nothing burger that not one of Trump’s own lawyers has made much of a fuss about. Frankly speaking, and only I can be Frank between the two of us, it’s a red herring diversion that, like Trump’s tossed burger, will never stick to the wall.

    Yes, the MSM is a buzz with it. Glad to see the stupid people take the bait. Nice job.

    • Joe Gilbertson

      he doth protest too much

      • Frank stetson

        Joe must be on Turnip’s legal team given the advise excellence.

        700 pages of classified, plus 11 more sets; that’s close to two reams of sensitive material.

        But Joe says it’s the King’s right and now this info is free , free, free at last.

        Like Trump, he shoulda read the warrant.
        National Security

        And dead bang guilty on the Presidential Records Act,

        And now he wants to release the affidavit. I hope rhey do, brilliant. .

        • Joe Gilbertson

          Zero classified documents. You should read the Constitution.

          You have no idea what “sensitive material” means. If you did you would want Hillary in jail.

          • frank stetson

            Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

            Sorry, but the National Archives said Trump returned 700 pages of sensitive Classified documents.

            IF they were not classified, why would you throw up the Hillary whataboutism?

            11 more sets of of classified were found in the raid after Trump’s lawyer signed off on a “there’s no more classified here.” Why would she say “no more” to cover a “never was?” And apparently, you were not allowed to understand what TS/SCI means from your vast experience in that world. Probably never even saw one.

            Again, my Sisyphean Trumpian sycophant, the warrant did not mention classified or unclassified. It did mention:

            1. removal and destruction of documents

            2. Espionage Act violations

            3. Obstruction of Justice

            The warrant never mentions what you have your knickers so knotted up about. But on the issue of Trump’s immaculate declassification process or TIDP:

            1. There is no record of said process ever existing.

            2. After more than a year, Trump never told anyone he declassified anything so, as far as the Universe knows, it was still classified except in the mind, or lack thereof, Trump.

            3. When aske if he had classified info, he said no. He did not say “I’ve declassified it all.”

            4. When he returned 700 pages of classified info, he did not say “I’ve declassified it all.”

            Even though it does not matter to the warrant, and the rest will be solved in court, it sure seems pretty darned strange.

            And most importantly, sycophants like you have yet the answer the real question: why did Trump decide to squirrel away 35 boxes, a wall five boxes high by seven boxes wide, collected mostly over the last 12 months of his reign of corruption? What was his reason or purpose for doing this?

            Got any answers or just more crickets?

          • Joe Gilbertson

            I’m tired of explaining it to you over and over and over again. You don’t seem to have enough memory retention to remember what I said and why I know. Do you have liver damage too?

          • Joseph S. Bruder

            What a crock of shit… “read the Constitution”? There’s nothing in there about classified documents or how the President handles documents. And it’s irrelevant anyway. Pull stuff out of your ass much?

          • Joe Gilbertson

            The Constitution says that the President is the head of the executive branch. Are you still confused?

          • Frank stetson

            Yup, Joe, the man with an answer for everything has nothing but crickets. He can’t give a reason why Trump might’ve had 1000 pages of classified documents almost 35 boxes of documents. What is the man and avid reader?.

            It’s high noon tomorrow for the affidavit. I wonder how many times we will not see the word classified or declassified in that document.

  10. larry Horist

    Frank Stetson. Did I say anything about your drinking habits? No. So why the comment addressed to me. Did you get confused?

    • Frank stetson

      Yes Karen, I was confused.

    • Joseph S. Bruder

      Gilbertson said it…