Select Page

Is Trump Being Prosecuted or Persecuted?

Is Trump Being Prosecuted or Persecuted?

President Trump has a lot of folks on the left who really, really hate him.  They totally abandon the American justice system’s foundation that a person is innocent until convicted in a court-of-law.  They say – without equivocation that Trump is guilty, guilty, guilty of every infraction that can conjure up – and that no matter how minor the infraction, he should be subjected to the most extreme punishment.

We need to remember that from the time Trump was elected, the left launched an unprecedented Resistance Movement – the main purpose of which, by their own words, was to never allow Trump to be “normalized” as President.  The calls for impeachment rose in the days shortly after his election – and before he was inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States.  On the day after his inauguration, Democrats introduced the first bill of impeachment.

During most of his presidency, the left successfully proffered outrageous conspiracy theories against Trump – mainly focused on the phony  Steele Dossier and conspiring with Russia in the meddling in the 2016 election. Both his impeachments seemed more political than justified.

Democrats, left-wing media, and entrenched left-wing bureaucrat establishment were out to get Trump from Election Day 2016 to today.  That is beyond refutation.  The various prosecutors made no secret of the desire to “get Trump.”

In noting that, I am not absolving Trum of a crime, he may have committed.  On that question, we have to await the outcomes of the various cases.  And I see Trump as his own worst enemy in terms of his excessively hostile and provocative language.  But one bad behavior does not justify opposing bad behavior.

Trump and his more ardent followers claim that the former President is an innocent man who is being pursued by aggressive, politically motivated, out-of-control prosecutors – the victim of prosecutorial persecution.

I write this commentary as a person who has never been a fan of Trump.  I have previously opined that he has damaged the Republican Party in terms of voter popularity.  I hope he will not be the Republican standard-bearer in 2024.  However, my foundational conservative principles demand that the justice system of the Republic operate as much as possible with fairness and justice on all sides.

That is why I have been critical of the massive and unprecedented political, media, and legal campaign that has been mounted by those on the left.  I have no problem with Trump being held accountable for any illegal things he may have done – big things or little things.  That means things that have been FAIRLY prosecuted and adjudicated in a court-of- law.  I further believe that he should be indicted for clear evidence of possible lawbreaking – but NOT based on prosecutorial excesses or abuses.  Trump is not a ham sandwich – and should not be indicted just because it is easy.

That means we have to examine the various cases being investigated against issues of legitimacy, fairness, and appropriateness in each of the cases – and the relationship between them.  In other words, is Trump being treated fairly by prosecutors, or is he the victim of a coordinated, excessive, and politically partisan prosecution?  In other words, is the “establishment” out to get him?

Looking at the various cases being pursued against Trump, it does seem that there is arguably an unprecedented excessiveness and aggressiveness in the pursuit of charges.

Stormy Daniels Case

The Stormy Daniels Case is the first case to result in an indictment.  By all measures it is at least the weakest of cases against Trump — and being pursued on unique and novel interpretation and application of the law.  The case itself is relatively minor relative to the other cases involving Trump – and the attempts to elevate it to a jailable offense are inappropriate.

Even the anti-Trump folks are critical of this case on two basis – first that it should not be the initial case to reach indictment since it could weaken other cases.  Others on the left believe that the case is wrongly prosecuted – and is more likely than not to result in an acquittal.  That would be a disaster for those who want to see Trump punished severely.  

Georgia Vote Case

The prosecutor in this case is arguing that Trump attempted to coerce public officials – especially the Governor and Secretary of State– to undertake illegal actions to flip the vote in Georgia and award the presidential electors to Trump.

The case hangs on the meaning of his telephone request for the Governor to find 11,780 votes to change the outcome.  The interpretation by the prosecutor and the anti-Trump media is that he was calling for the Georgia officials to make up votes that were never caste.  

But that call is not necessarily solid evidence.  Trump can easily argue that he believed there were thousands of illegally caste votes for Biden – and he wanted to find at least 11,780 of them.

The Georgia case will be harder to prove in a court-of-law than it is being pursued in the court-of-public opinion, where facts are superseded by opinion and biases.

The Mar-a-Lago Documents Case

The improper possession of White House files is a misdemeanor that can result in a civil fine – and often no judicial action at all.  This case is more problematic based on Trump’s refusal to release all the documents – and suggestions that he may have committed obstruction of justice.  

It is a messy case, but even at its worse is not likely to land Trump in the hoosegow.  The case puts Attorney General Merrick Garland in a difficult position.  It can be argued that the fact that they found documents – including top secret documents – in the position of President Biden – demands a certain level of equivalency – even though Biden returned the documents and Trump has not.

But there is a political reality with which Garland has to deal.  If he were to indict the Republican candidate for President and allow his likely opponent – and the person who appointed Garland – off the hook, the political implications could be very damaging to the Department of Justice.  The difference in the cases would be subordinated to the similarities – and the impression of gross political bias.  Garland could credibly be accused of meddling in the 2024 presidential election, unlike any other U.S. Attorney General since John Mitchell during the Watergate scandal.

The January 6th Case

In the left-wing court-of-public-opinion, Trump is determined to be guilty of insurrection … a coup attempt … and an ongoing plan to steal a future election.  Politically, this is a big deal for Democrats and the left-leaning media, but not the open-and-closed case they portray in the press.

It is true that more than a thousand people have been arrested for various crimes associated from entering the Capitol Hill Building – including trespassing, vandalism, theft, assault and battery, and a variety of lesser crimes.  These are the kind of charges that are commonly associated with a riot.  

A hand full of the thousands of assembled protestors have been convicted of promoting an insurrection – but legally, those convictions do not make the larger event an insurrection.  That is clearly established by the less serious charges against the vast majority of the rioters.

One can easily criticize Trump for his reckless language and his failure to more expeditiously call on the rioters to cease and desist – and go home.  But that is not criminal conduct as defined in law.   The Special Counsel will not find it easy to put together an indictment of Trump based on his actions on January 6, 2021. 

This is another case where a court-of-law and the court-of-public-opinion have very different views of criminality.  In the former, it is merely a matter of public opinion driven by mendacious narratives advanced by a grossly biased media.  In the latter, prosecutors have to meet a number of legal requirements and reach a high level of evidence to reach a conviction.  That court-of-law has protections for the accused that the court-of-public does not have.  


In addition to looking at each case individually, the most disturbing aspect may be the apparent coordination between the various prosecutorial agencies.  We see that in the debate over which case goes first.  The political establishment is obviously strategizing a means for stacking the cases in such a manner as to cumulatively create the most anti-Trump results possible across the board.  That does not indicate fealty to the law – but the influence of politics.  The coordination is prima facie evidence of politicization.   

Many on the left openly admit that they hope that the various cases, themselves – apart from outcomes – will damage Trump’s political … will consume time that would otherwise be devoted to campaigning … and will further sully his reputation.  That, alone, is an abuse of the justice system.

These actions give the best support for Trump’s claim that he is the victim of a judicial establishment out to get him based more on politics than justice.  It disturbingly suggests a prosecutorial conspiracy.

If American justice is founded on how popular a person might be – or how his political views offend one side of the political and philosophic divide – then America is taking on that practice of a banana republic.  And that should scare any freedom-loving citizen regardless of political views.

So, there ‘tis.

Author’s Note: This commentary was written just prior to the indictment.  Rather than speculate, the next commentary will be following the release of the indictment and the specific charges.

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 write this commentary as a person who has never been a fan of Trump. I have previously opined that he has damaged the Republican Party in terms of voter popularity. I hope he will not be the Republican standard-bearer in 2024. However, my foundational conservative principles demand that the justice system of the Republic operate as much as possible with fairness and justice on all sides.” Oh my. Trying to land a DeSantis campaign job? Too old……

    Nothing in this pleases me, Republicans should have taken their party back and tossed Trump to the curb long ago. That’s the real problem in all this. People like Larry let him get away with it and he took as much as he could. It’s a fractured and broken party replete with a variety of extremist splinters Trump emboldened that are, in a word, deplorable. On this NY case, it’s just hush money and fake corporate finance, pretty boring. I could care less about fines and serving time; I want him to leave politics, ruin Don Jr’s chance to coattail, and just go away, get out of the news. I don’t think any of these cases do that. No matter what facts hit the table, the Deplorables will claim witch hunt and donate more and chances are, he can still run.

    I have disliked this criminal well before he entered politics. He begged NJ to allow him to save us and we ended up bailing him out as his NJ workers took it on the chin. May have been legal, but was not fair.

    NY is a nothing unless the felony(s) are meaningful. Most certainly it does not legally hurt his campaign efforts. But I think there is a pretty good paper trail on a lot of this, just not much in the way of punishment.

    Mar A Document is a slap unless they try “national security” angle and that’s really tough to prove. Even if he was heading that way, probably too soon for him to seal the deal doing wrong anyway. Obstruction will not amount to much, if even tried.
    Georgia is a good one, there are more phone calls.

    1.6.2021 is also tough to tie the Don to the street soldiers unless Meadows or someone like him, flips. If that happens, Katy-bar the door.

    The rape case starts in a few weeks and there will be a few women chiming in as to the predisposition of the man. At minimum, that will be fun.

    Frankly, wait and see. We are a nation of laws, innocent until guilty, let it roll. FYI: Georgia is kind of open until we understand the nature of the other phone calls that were taped. That indictment will hit, if it does, but the end of the month. Does not sound like the pretty picture you are painting, might be worse than you think. The rape case will be just tawdry.

    Strap in, these cases will be ongoing for years.

  2. Tom

    Ok, Independent Court is in session, Honorable Judge Tom presiding!

    Larry, I think you open yourself up to criticism when you say that “I have never been a fan of Trump.”. One of the definitions of being a “fan” is, “a person who has a strong interest in or admiration for a particular person or thing.” I seem to recall that you often said you did not like Trump’s arrogance and belligerence, BUT you also said you liked his policies.


    GUILTY OF LYING AND FELONIOUS USE OF THE WORD NEVER: This court has determined that liking Trump’s policies means you WERE A FAN in that according to the fourth definition of the word “fan”, you Larry Horist “had a strong interest and/or admiration” for the man’s policies, and policies are derived from the way a man thinks and views issues. Therefore you are really saying you like the way Trump thinks. Therefore you like and are a fan of at least half of the man, thus the use of the word “never” is a lie.

    Larry Horist, this court pronounces you innocent of being a fan of Trump’s personality but guilty of being a fan of Trumps thinking!


    1) Payments to silence a person is not against the law because it can be considered a “settlement”. However, payments to silence a person and cover the illegal in 16 states act of adultery (yes adultery is a crime in 16 states) and the character of poor judgement when you are running for an office whereas strong legal and moral character and good judgement are desirable traits for the job works to deceive the persons of those 16 states with regard to Trumps legal and moral character – thus Trump did commit a crime in 16 states and did attempt to deceive the voters with regard to his lack of legal character and lack of moral character, his criminal behavior as defined by 16 states where he was on the ballot, and his poor judgement. GUILTY, confirm by trial.

    2) Payment itself may be a crime if: a) paid out of campaign finances, b) paid out of corporate finances as a “consultant” or “expense” unless the corporation’s specific industry code includes the code for pornography, or the code for sex industry, as per the Dept. of Labor code list. PRESUMED INNOCENT, SEND TO TRIAL trace the money to the source.

    3) GA Find the Votes – has multiple interpretations. Regardless of interpretations, Trump is attempting to badger and influence an elected public official of the people, to intervene in the administration of a government process for personal gain. GUILTY, confirm by trial.

    4) CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS INCLUDING TOP SECRET DOCUMENTS – Mishandling classified document offenses is a serious crime that can carry severe penalties ranging from fines, to imprisonment, or both. Fines can be in the $100Ks of dollars and imprisonment from 5-20 years! These offenses are defined by a variety of statutes, including 18 USC § 783(b), 18 USC § 793(e), 18 USC § 952, and 18 USC § 1924.
    GUILTY, confirm by trial.

    Judges note: Larry, I had to know these criminal codes as part of my yearly “security indoctrination” when I worked with these document on the USN IUSS SOSUS Project. Your textual treatment of this issue is way too casual and shows a “bias towards Trump” which is further evidence that you actually are a “fan of Trump”. Fans are always biased towards their idol.


    5) RAPE CASE: Presumed innocent until proven guilty at trial.

    6) TAX EVASION CASE: Not given any mention in this blog but will be going to trial at some point. Presumed innocent until proven guilty at trial.

    The Honorable Frank Stetson is correct when he says, “Republicans should have taken their party back and tossed Trump to the curb long ago. That’s the real problem in all this. People” like Larry let him get away with it and he took as much as he could. It’s a fractured and broken party replete with a variety of extremist splinters Trump emboldened that are, in a word, deplorable. ”

    Again, the theme that keeps running through everything is lack of legal and moral character and a willingness to push all things to the edge, poor judgement, disrespect for positions of authority, lying, cheating, conniving, and an above the law attitude. IS THIS REALLY WHAT GOP WANTS TO OFFER THE USA FOR A PRESIDENT?

    • larry Horist

      Tom … Shame on you. You have blown whatever semblance of independence and objectivity you may have had. And frankly, I have always seen your constant self-proclamation of independent thinking to be doth protesting too much. You need to appear before the Objective Court of Reason and Reality The fact that you so often feel obligated to proclaim your independent status gives evidence to the reality that your actual postings suggest the contrary. They counter your claim by showing a consistent left-wing bias — and a willingness to express opinions that are not valid. Like your associate, Frank Stetson, you engage in arrogance by assuming cutesy guises as judges and referees, when in fact you are just another obsessive opinion producing with all the biases that go with it. You also take on the left-wing habit of declaring — maybe even erroneous believing — that your personal opinions are … facts.

      If your read my commentaries, I have given a fairly objective analysis of thee cases against Trump — noting those I thought were weak and those I thought were strong. Hardly the writing of a blind fan. No, Tom, you have embraced biased dishonesty to make you case.

      My writings and history well establishes evidence that I am not a “fan” of Trump far better than your gratuitous claim. The very definition you provided confirms that I am not a “fan.” You define “fan as “a person who has a strong interest in or admiration for a particular PERSON or thing.” I have no “strong interest or admiration for” Donald Trump. That should be obvious to even you if you remember what I have written in the past. Did you not understand the meaning of the definition that you so pathetically misapplied it? To your misguided logic, being a constant critic of a PERSON makes you a fan of that PERSON.

      Your latest post is nothing more than an arrogant opinion and ad hominin attack of a liar. I say that because I do not believe your gross misrepresentation is due to ignorance — unless you have suffered some sudden mental decline.

      If I were to employ the arrogant assumption of a mystical authority — as you and Frank like to do — I would convict you as a blatant liar with an indelible “L” on your forehead. LOL.

      • frank stetson

        I think you said it all when you copped “Your latest post is nothing more than an arrogant opinion and ad hominin attack of a liar” as you accuse poor Tom of being Frank-ish, arrogant, suffering mental decline, pathetic, misguided, biased, and many other names.

        It’s simple: I have looked, can not find, perhaps you can, since you say it’s you. Just find us a great case of you saying what we say you say different here. Can you find me anything like: “I write this commentary as a person who has never been a fan of Trump.”

        You had choices in your response. You chose full attack. I wonder why you don’t realize that Tom and I are your most fervent readers. We like your Republican stand most often, your ability (when you actually choose to discuss, with facts, an issue with your readers), and we do listen. Yes, we push back and often are discouraged. Not by being corrected by a salient argument supported by inconvertible, unassailable facts, but by your barrage of garbage.

        Back to the facts. You said it. Tom reacted to it. The solution is obvious. Show the readers where you say “I have never been a fan of Trump” knowing full well we think you have been saying: hate the man, love the policies. That seems different to us, and if that’s the case, perhaps you can tell us why it isn’t different.

        Oh, and FYI, so,there‘tis…you slamming frank which will make Joe G. conclude you are gay. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. Remember, I am not really Frank, but you will always be a son of a Horist. (you gotta admit, the double double entendre, homophone is quite clever if I do say so myself :>)

        • Tom

          Well said Frank! I totally agree. I like Larry’s blogs very much and do value his opinions which I do often think about. And yes, I enjoy the pushing back by him, you. We three are all very deep thinking individuals who all want the best, but we have different views of what is best and how to deliver it. And you make a very good point that if liking his policies is different than liking the man, please explain how? What confuses me most (and this may be me, I dunno) is when Larry says he does not like Trump but then spends multiple paragraphs defending Trump and even mentioning typical Trump supporter narratives. I have never felt Trump is being “persecuted”. I have always been of the thought that he has broken laws in many ways and was awaiting the time for him to be “prosecuted”.

        • larry Horist

          Frank Stetson … Did you miss the fact that Tom opened his case by calling me a liar and then proceeded to lie about me being a fan of Trump … A “Trumpster” in fact. But then you are not a good judge of the truth. I like how you like to be the judge .– declaring you own sophomoric attempts at humor as “quite clever.” I guess you were concerned that readers may have not recognized your cleverness — and you were right to worry. I am just amazed how much time an energy you guys put into being the obsessive counterpoints to me and this site — with such looooong meandering repetitious postings. I did not do the research — and I do not intend to — but I think you guys may each write more than I do. I sometimes wonder who you think you are reaching … who you are influencing. To me, it looks more like mental masturbation. But carry on if it makes you feel good.

          • Tom

            I was only calling you a liar about your use of the word “never” with regard to liking Trump. That is all, nothing more. You made it more than it was – Classic Trump.

          • frank stetson

            Larry, it’s just sweet that we have you working so hard to be so dismissive when it just ends up being childish, your name calling and personal attacks.

            I will continue writing, I do like engaging with you right wingers on the issues; the personal attacks, not so much.

            I can understand why you hate people who write so much; self loathing becomes you. Perhaps you should let up. At least until you having something of value to share. Not this.

          • larry Horist

            Frank Stetson … You make me laugh. You like to engage with right wingers but “personal attacks, not so much.” I just ran across your response to Bill Sheridan in another post in which you called him “a rat bastard pygmy pricked, needle necked, pencil dick.” Frank, you are just a self-promoting crock of crap.

          • frank stetson

            You are not a professional journalist Larry. It shows sometimes. This is one of them. Otherwise, you would not have stooped to taking my tirade out of context leaving off the pre-amble caveat. Try the real context:

            “Bill Sheridan: you have crossed the line. Transgender, gays, and the rest are all people. They are as human as you or I. Even though most here will not agree, I try to stick to facts and issues, but on this one I will say you are a rat bastard pygmy pricked, needle necked, pencil dick.”

            Yeah, you are right. After BILL went to hate speak, I launched into an ad hominem tirade.

            And if he keeps it up, I will do it again. Although, I forget sometimes, it’s been so long and I should have gotten it right: Bill Sheridan is a pencil-necked, needle-nosed, pygmy prick. There, use that one next time you want to condemn me Larry.

            Although I really wonder how you could allow, agree, demur on that hate speak but pick up on my personal attack. That seems very selective and partisan. But certainly not a stand-up guy to let his shit just ooze on by.

  3. Darren

    Say what you will, quote as many things as you like, Trump will be getting my vote.
    He remains the only president in my life time to actually try to fix the CRAP created by the Washington Status Elites.
    Before Trump It did not matter weather it was Democrat or Republican president who took office, neither one did what the American people asked of their President to do.
    Once you realized that, it will make sense why neither party liked him when he took office.
    Getting elected to Congress is the golden Lottery Ticket that every elected official worked for his whole life.
    As far as I am concerned good for them.
    The error for me is when they throw the American people under the buss and do what ever they feel is in their best interest and not yours or mine.
    Obama, Bush, same Crap, different tittle. Biden does not even count as very few people play poker with the Joker in the deck.
    Trump should have been President and will become President again!

    • Tom

      There is perception and then there is reality.

      Perception is that “Trump did a lot for me.”

      Reality is that Trump did little to nothing for the average red necked American white male that loves him so much. He could not give a shit about them. He gave them more debt, higher prices for many good and services because of the lost trade war that inflicted many tariffs on the products they buy, most of them ended up with more federal income tax while he generously gave tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations, he started the inflation cycle we are currently in by sending you at least two federal checks with a letter making sure you knew it was from him, he misled the red neck public at large on the effects of Covid, as some died, he paid people to keep details of his shady personal life from your ears and eyes, he attempted to repeal Obama care and put 12 million people, some white rednecks, out of health care and said he would replace it but did not, most truth trackers said he told people some form of lie 72% of the time, and in general Trump puts his interests way ahead of your interests!

      But now that the 34 charges against Trump have been read, for just $47 you can buy a tee shirt with a fake mug shot of Trump to help his campaign. They make great Christmas gifts for family members that are GOP leaning.

      • larry Horist

        Tom … shame on you again. You arrogantly claim “reality” in support of your OPINION. But even worse, you create a false quote as an unsupported perception… Perception is that “Trump did a lot for me.” … and then use it as a straw man to support your counterpoint — which is just more of a rant than an intelligent issue-based response.. That is the method of arrogant propagandists. There can be no unity or respect for opinions when there is no tolerance of alternative opinions and FACTS. And you condescension of the “red neck public” reinforces your image as an arrogant elitist. And you should stop saying “we independents” because I know independents, and you do not represent their diverse views. You are one man with one opinion … period. Get back to that, and you may be worthy of civil and intelligent dialogue. As of now, you appear to have taken up residency in the imaginary and surreal world of Stetsonville.

        • Tom

          Again Larry in classic Trump style, you attack me for my thoughts, attempting to cancel me, and said nothing about the issues I mentioned. Classic Trump. Yes, you do like Trump. A tree is judged by its fruit! :>)

          • larry Horist

            Tom … You whiney self victimization does not go well. No on is cancelling you. I did not attack you for your thoughts — as you allege — but I did respond to your unwarranted and untrue characterizations of me. I respond to what you write. You know that I refer to myself as a First Amendment extremist. I fully respect you right to speak — even to insult me or misrepresent my opinions … or make false statements about me. I state my opinion and present my facts in my commentaries. As I have told Frank, I have neither the time or desire to carry on a prolonged exchange that you and Frank so eagerly desire. I have better uses of my time. Time to blow the whistle on this meaningless bickering. I

  4. frank stetson

    It’s OK, into each life a little arraignment must fall.

    We know what it’s all about
    Hangin’ around
    Nothin’ to do but frown
    Arraignment days and Mondays always get me down

    Being serious, I am not sure what you got for your vote. This economy was fueled by massive debt, just like he ran his businesses, many times into bankruptcy. He, and now you, own 25% of the entire debt of the US, all piled up in four short years. 45 Presidents, combined, own 75% of the debt; Trump alone, in only four years, owns 25%. Just don’t see me saying: “please sir, can I have some more?” At the bottom line, I just can’t see the value of this guy for America.

    And he lost the popular vote on his first run; couldn’t get re-elected for love, money, or his cheating, and I can not see him taking the nomination unless the majority of Republicans completely lose their minds.

    However, you have your opinion, and it’s yours to have.

  5. Tom

    Wow Larry! You really get vicious when you are outed.

    You do like Trump’s policies, that is straight from your posts. If you like his policies then since policies come from a persons thoughts on an issue, you like some aspects of the person – thus you can not use the word “never” because you have been a fan of his policies and much of his thinking . Therefore you have liked aspects of Trump, thus you can not use the absolute “never”.

    Your posts have always said you do not like the packaging of Trump. There are many products in the grocery store where I may not like the packaging but I like the product so I buy it anyway. And this is the source of your conflict and continued waffling over Trump. You disguise your conflict by saying such things as “I have never been a fan of Trump.” after you write four previous paragraphs of poor poor Trump is such a victim and so many of those darn libs are unfair. Then you defend him after you say you are not going to defend him! You even go on to say, “but NOT based on prosecutorial excesses or abuses. Trump is not a ham sandwich – and should not be indicted just because it is easy.” I think 34 indictments and multiple hush payments and tax issues etc. are real, but you say he is indicted because “its easy” when in fact, he broke the law multiple times in NY. Your flip flopping by saying you do not like Trump but then you buy into the narrative of all Trump lovers that he is being persecuted by the left, media, and that it is purely political and “easy, etc. indicate you are in sympathetic vibration with Trump!

    And then just like Trump, you attempt to attack and destroy the messenger which distracts from the message that yes, you are a Trump fan. You just do not like the packaging. But rather you would like to question my independent voter registration and manner of thinking about issues rather than party loyalty like you. Yes I am registered Independent, I am moderate, and when answering your blogs it is important to differentiate myself from Dems and GOPs because I do not want them thinking that just because I agree with them on an issue that I am suddenly just like them and their Dem or GOP friends. Again, please allow me to educate you (as I did in previous blogs) on what an “Independent / Unaffiliated voter” is: It is a person that does not have party loyalty and does not sing any party line but votes on individual issues and can see the whole range from liberal to conservative and everything inbetween. An Independent processes all of the issues of concern, and forms a composite opinion on which party candidate is the best for the Independent thinker. Independents often split tickets. So yes, sometimes I might look like a liberal, sometimes like a conservative, sometimes like a moderate – I can see the whole spectrum.

    Larry, honestly, I think you understand as much about Independents / Unaffiliateds as you do about social security privatization fund rewards.

    I cannot speak for Frank Stetson but I doubt that he considers me an “associate”. I think we view each other more or less as informed human beings that have opinions based on research and experience that at times agree and at times disagree. Ask Frank if I am an associate on the issue of Homosexuality, Transgenderism, Border security solutions, actually I am your associate on these issues. On Social Security, Trump, financial markets, national debt, I am Frank’s associate. Can you begin to see the spectrum that I range here Larry?

    Regarding personal opinion versus fact, Larry my dear friend, you are very guilty of expressing personal opinion as fact. This is the perverbial case of the pot calling the kettle black! LOL At least on most of my opinions I do reference the articles, and I always reference my stats. You rarely reference anything – even Frank Stetson complains about this. But I do not mind, it gives me a chance to verify your words as opinion or fact or both and learn something from the articles.

    And do not think that I did not notice that your whole response was about me personally, on and on, calling me many names and making many false accusations – but that’s ok. Its all in fun, and we know that! But do realize I did notice you did not say a one word about the Trump issues and verdicts, and I was right!!! But its ok if you do not say anything. And I promise to try to take your tender heart into consideration when I write my future comments.

    • larry Horist

      Tom ….. You really cannot distinguish between “personality” and “policies?” I shall try to help you. Personality –“the combination of characteristics or qualities that form an individual’s distinctive character.” Policies — “a course or principle of action adopted or proposed by a government, party, business, or individual.” One is the qualities of the person … the other are the course of actions pursued by various entities, including the person. And you need to understand that “Trump policies” is a catch all phrase for policies pursued by an “administration” — not only by Trump personally. They are policies held and pursued by many while his personality traits are exclusively Trump’s. I hope that helps.

      • Tom

        Larry, I appreciate your tutelage attempt. Not sure it did much good though. You see, you missed my point. I called you a liar about your use of the word “never”, and nothing more. I honestly do not feel you can use the word “never” like you did. You see, I have read all of your post throughout the years. I have seen you say you dislike Trump’s personality but like his policies. I have read paragraphs that you have written that sound like you are a Trump lawyer. You defend him quite often in a back handed kind of way. Then you criticize him and distance yourself. But then you sing the Trump song, like “Prosecuted or Persecuted”, where you and all of us know the DA filing the charges is a 26 year veteran of the office and very familiar with NY law. And then you sing the Trumpster talking points as if the DA is way off base, when he is not – and that is our system. If the DA feels a crime has been committed he or she files charges! You conveniently ignore some of Trumps most egregious acts such as adultery which is (and you did not mention and most likely did not know) is an illegal act and punishable in 16 states – but that does not bother you that he deceived voters by trying to buy (in 3 cases) the witness and news articles to bury them so that those 16 states and their voters would not know – but that does not seem to bother you!. You call his document retention’s nothing more than misdemeanors which I personally know is false based on working with those documents and being indoctrinated to the law every blessed year! Yes, I actually had to go to a lecture and read those laws and penalties, then sign a paper that I am knowledgeable of what will happen to me if I mishandle classified documents – its not a misdemeanor!!! You are all over the map when it comes to Trump. And all of your posts are always slanted in a manner so as to give Trump the benefit of the doubt – when he does not deserve it!!! You nail to a cross the other side while giving Trump a casual wink and nod!

        So what do you expect me to believe about you when it comes to Trump. The best I can say is that you confuse and obfuscate Trump and the issues. And then you attacked me in classic Trump rant style for simply calling you a liar when it comes to the use of the word “never” and labeling you a Trumpster – which you appear to be. I am your reader and I am giving you feedback about how you appear to others – but you would rather attack me than think seriously about what I am saying! I spent 8 lines total on you. The remaining paragraphs were about the Trump legal issues. You spent 27 lines attacking me and 0 ZER0 lines about discussing the issues I presented!!! THAT IS CLASSIC TRUMP!!!

        In the future, if you want to use the word “never” please do make sure you can defend that word and stop trying to hide behind the obfuscation of personality versus policies/politics. You like Trump’s policies and therefore you like Trump’s thinking. If you want, you can separate them by saying something like, “I have never liked Trumps personality but I do like his policies despite his behavior which has landed him in a legal quagmire.”

        And do realize, your attack on the Dems is inappropriate. The DA feels he has a good case and can prove Trump did violate NY law. AND!!! Two-thirds of Independents are cheering for the DA!!! Yes, we overwhelmingly want Trump out for good. We want the GOP to put on their man pants, strap on their kahunas, and take their party back so we can have a quality POTUS candidate!!! So do not bitch at me when I mention I am an Independent!!! You did not consider Independents in your post!!! Yes we are the largest voting block, and we are not for Trump! We are smart enough to realize that the legal system may be the only way to get rid of Trump in view of a GOP that has no testicles!

  6. frank stetson

    Tom, you nailed it. and I liked the court stuff, one of your best. and yes, we are not associates, never will be. we may agree on some things where you are thinking right, disagree on a lot where you are not :>)

    but unlike our relationship with Larry, we actually respect each other, act professionally, and try to stick to the facts, our opinions, and do not trash each other with personal attacks like the one I made above :>)

    he only stoops to the personal attacks when he can’t find the facts to argue his case legitimately. appears that is happening more often every day.

    • larry Horist

      Tom …. I was not outed. That is an arrogant response.

      • Tom

        I was only outing your flip flop posts on Trump, as I said earlier. You are conflicted on Trump as many of us are. I have never seen a POTUS that is such a divider and enigma! He thrives on division and chaos. That is why we cannot have him as a POTUS again. And that is why I support the DA and say he is not being persecuted, he is rightfully being prosecuted. Now lets let the case unfold.

    • larry Horist

      Frank Stetson … LMAO Your obsession has been to trash me personally at virtually every turn. I write an issue-based commentary and you attack me. And now you act sanctimonious. Come on Frank …. admit it. You get off on visceral debate. It is what you do … who you are. I should put you back on the “do not necessitate” list. :<)

      • Tom

        Awww Larry, don’t be mean, its not becoming of a gentleman. I have seen posts where Frank agrees and compliments you. I have seen posts where he partially agrees and offers counterpoints. I have seen posts where he disagrees with you. Censoring Frank would harm your posts and deny us all of the value he brings to the table with his opinions. They are as valuable as yours. I think you, me and Frank have one big thing in common, we like to know the truth. We may not always like the truth we hear, but at least we get to hear it.

    • Tom

      I agree Frank! We can disagree without being disagreeable. That is the hallmark of intelligence. We may not always agree but we always to try to understand eachother’s point of view. And you and Larry have both modified some of my points of view for which I am thankful. And again, great posts you did on Social Security. I have found more that confirms what you said. Great job!

  7. frank stetson

    Once again, “he only stoops to the personal attacks when he can’t find the facts to argue his case legitimately. appears that is happening more often every day.”

  8. Mike f

    Larry, Fitst, let me wish you a happy Passover. I hope you enjoy your Seder this evening. Second, do they pay you by the word, you write more and say less than about anyone I know. You clearly are far from objective, while those on the left were talking impeachment from day 1, Nancy (who you love to criticize) held off until he really stomped on it. He deserved impeachment both times, but since you don’t even know the definition of the word objective, I would never expect you to understand that. As far as all the cases against him, is he guilty of those charges? It is obvious that he is guilty of them all. Is the first indictment a felony? That is far from certain-but he obviously paid off each of those individuals for political purposes and hid the expenses. The rest of the cases are far more serious, each worthy of jail time. Would these cases be brought forward if he were not running for president ? Most definitely. The reason being that he blabbed while he was running the first time (and while he was President) that he did things that he got away with because he was SMART. Those words don’t sit well with those of us that believe in the rule of law (plus all the bullshit he has gotten away with throughout his career). So there you have it, a concise description of what you attempted to explain away in 1000 words…

    • larry Horist

      Mike f …. Some day I hope you will explain to me why you use Anti-Semitic tropes to apply Jewish references to me when you know that (1) I am not Jewish and (2) that I have the highest regard for the Jewish community. You tie them to your attacks on me — using them as a pejorative by association. It is really quite low class and ignorant, And to what purpose? You obviously have a low esteem for Jews if you constantly associate them with people or opinions you do not like. In all the comments you have provided in response to my writings, you have have used the Jewish allusions a lot … but never said a nice word about Jews. I think that says it all.

      • frank stetson

        Thanks Mike: Like Larry, I am not Jewish, but I love the people, not so much the policies :>)

        My dinner, in honor of Passover and my friends was an incredible brisket flanked by some kugel, spinach, matzo ball soup, and a most fantastic, totally healthy charoset. Of course, some macaroons for dessert. All low fod-map cuz it’s trendy and made by a kitchen supported by Mt. Sinai Hospital. We passed on the gefilte, that’s a bridge too far :>) Think we have enough to roll it one more time.

        As a tuxedo’d college kosher caterer, I think I have been to more mitzvah’s that most rabbi’s. And this place was chock-a-block with men with those tats. It was that era. Tough bunch. Didn’t soften em, boss was a racist pig. Know one thing: never trust a women in a long dress, who knows what’s going on there… so many Dusin Hoffman moments, ah the memories. So many matchbooks, so many phone numbers, so many condo’s, what’s a college boy to do?

        Only attended one real seder, they had fun by not telling me I had to speak, good sense of humor these Jews. I even tried the herbs, bitter. This was one fun family, mom and dad would be arrested every year at one protest or another. I figured, “hey, that’s what I want to be when I grow up.” Any day now :>)

        After the Kosher Caterer gig, I moved on to managing a chain gang, but that’s a different story. But yes, there’s still a sex angle.

        Happy Passover!

      • Mike f

        Larry, sorry your Seder did not agree with you, but then few things do. Yes, as a proud jew-ish man, I do understand the religion, and I understand that conservatives love to point to their support of Israel with pride, and yet those same people somehow feel it is okay to denigrate George Soros. I understand that you are terrified that your readers will believe that you are actually Jewish. I have no problem with you being one of us-that is your misconception. However, none of your ramblings regarding antisemitism gets to the gist of my comments, that trump is merely being prosecuted for the crimes he has committed and not persecuted because he is running for President. He is a very flawed individual who never should have been within miles of the Oval Office, however the results of 2020 indicate the old adage ‘fooled me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me’. Americans were not fooled a second time, nor will they be fooled a third time..

    • Tom

      As an Independent/Unaffiliated voter, I can tell you that two- thirds of us agree with what the NY DA is doing and the way you feel. You are correct, Trump needs to be prosecuted. He makes a laughing stock of our legal system and dares us to prosecute him. Well, now his dares have gone to far. If his criminal antics are not stopped now it will only be harder later. He revealed who he was way back when he said, “I could shoot someone in the middle of NY City and get away with it!” Remember that line!???

      While Larry may write a lot of words, he is using a technique known as “scaffolding” where you layer your thoughts much like a scaffold you see painters using. So it does take more words. But he often has good points. As do you.

  9. kid rock

    Trump’s greatest contribution to our society has been the infamous awareness of how much, “Hate,” there is in our society.
    So sad, but always real in Godless society.

    • Joe Gilbertson

      Actually, “hate” in America was waning, the KKK and extremist groups were getting smaller, very few race based protests and so forth. The Obama came along and told everyone they should start hating each other. Obama was the worst President in history for this and other reason. Biden is a freakin’ mess, but Obama consciously worked to undermine America.

  10. frank stetson

    Ever notice how “actually” is often defined as: “let me tell you why you’re wrong.” My take is you better be right when you pull that one. Joe is not right. Actually.

    Actually, Joe, in the first year of Obama, hate crimes were down as they were for six out of his eight years — every year had less hate crimes, as measured by the FBI. Where did you draw your erroneous conclusions that seem to be missing something like facts……

    According the the FBI database, Obama runs approximately 6,000 cases a year. In 2015 and 2016, they inched up adding about 300 cases or 5% per year. In the first year of TRUMP, we added close to double any Obama year with a massive 1,000 cases or close to 20% increase with TRUMP. In one year. About 5% per year under Obama. Trump’s empowering of hate groups and extremists enabled by Republicans who stood down, not ready to tackle hate, bolstered the assholes into action. Then in 2018 and 2019, pretty flat, and then up a whopping 10% in 2020 which does not account for any hate crimes on 1.6.2021 where you might say none happened, but Pence and Pelosi could feel your hate :>(

    IOW, there was more increase in hate crimes in four years of TRUMP than in eight years under Obama.

    Biden got 10% in his first year, but we are still bleeding off of the time of TRUMP, a time of increased hate crimes and extremism which is not vanquished yet. The snakes have not yet crawled back under the rocks where they lived before TRUMP.

    Happy Easter Joe, learn to research or at least fact-check. There’s a number of us now that do.

    BUSTED for bad numbers, again. Must be drunk, again.
    So, I am not sure where you are coming from, I used the FBI Hate Crime Data Base:

    2010 6,628 crimes
    2011 6,222
    2012 5,796
    2013 5,928
    2014 5,479
    2015 5,850
    2016 6,121
    2017 7,175
    2018 7,120
    2019 7,314
    2020 8,120
    2021 9,065
    You may find slight differences due to publication date; they do update. I would give Joe the mulligan on that, but face it, he got it wrong 8 years in a row, that’s just plain being wrong. Again.

  11. EMMA


  12. frank stetson

    Another example of our need to improve education in this country.

    Thank you Emma.