Select Page

Why do so many people believe Trump is being politically persecuted?

Why do so many people believe Trump is being politically persecuted?

There is no doubt that Trump complains a LOT about being unfairly persecuted by Democrat prosecutors and judges throughout the judicial system.  In his typically pugnacious style, Trump calls them “crooks” and “political hacks” who are out to block him from returning to the Oval Office.  According to Trump, it is all a grand conspiracy – the worst in American history.

On the other hand, the never-Trumpers say he is guilty as hell and should be punished to the max – and even beyond.  In their view, Trump should be disqualified to hold any office in America – and spend the rest of his life behind bars.  There is no sating the obsessed Trump-hating resistance movement’s taste for political blood.

But does Trump have a point?  Are all those court cases just the rule-of-law in action – or are there political underpinnings?  Are laws being employed to achieve justice – or to disrupt and destroy a political campaign?  Are they all connected by mutual interest or a desire to interfere with Trump’s prospect of reelection?  And why DO so many folks believe that Trump is being subjected to unfair prosecution?

Pushing aside Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric, and his opponents’ sanctimonious narratives, is there any indication that some or all of Trump’s court cases may be motivated and pursued so aggressively for purely political reasons?

Let us first look at the big picture in detail.  What would lead Trump to say such things … and so many Americans to believe him?

1. All the cases have been brought by Democrat prosecutors – some of whom had campaigned on a promise to “get Trump.”  With the exception of Florida, all the cases are in Democrat strongholds, in which judges and juries — both trial and grand juries — are composed predominantly of Democrats.  Most folks know that prosecutors have great discretion, and they can get a grand jury indictment of a ham sandwich – as the saying goes.  Political bias and enormous discretionary power raise legitimate questions of fairness and political bias.

2. The unprecedented number of cases against Trump suggests two possible political motives.  They take him off the campaign trail and they cost him tens of millions of dollars in legal fees – diminishing the time and money he has for campaigning.  Those outcomes are beyond refutation and widely reported across all media.  It also suggests what I call a “conspiracy of self-interest” in which people with common interests follow similar strategies without formally conspiring.  Taking Trump to court can be seen as an overarching political strategy in which operatives intuitively know what to do.

3. The timing of the cases strongly suggests the possibility of political strategy.  They have all been piled up to hit their peaks at the most critical times in the political season – after being essentially ignored for years.  Is that just coincidence?  To be specific:

  1. The alleged encounter with E. Jean Carroll happened 28 years ago, and yet no legal action was taken until Trump was running for President.  It first came to public attention in her 2019 memoir – timed to the 2020 campaign.
  2. The Campaign Finance Case is the result of alleged actions taken four years ago.  Such cases are usually dispatched fairly quickly by administrative action by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) – and generally are not criminal cases.
  3. Special Counsel Jack Smith’s January 6th and White House Documents cases were not commenced by the Department of Justice for more than two years following the events – and not until Trump was running for reelection.  Smith appears to be violating two DOJ policies.  Department guidelines forbid timing such legal actions with an eye on an election — which is exactly what the Special Counsel is doing in terms of requesting trial dates.  This would also be a stark exception to the timing of such cases, which usually take years from start to finish.  It is obvious the warp speed approach has everything to do with the election.  Smith is close to violating another DOJ rule that shuts such investigations down on the eve of an election – either 60 or 90 days prior.  The timing is also subject to another unresolved question.  Does the 60 or 90 days count back from Election Day or the earliest early voting date – which is in September.  In short, everything Smith is doing seems to be designed to have the greatest impact on the election.  That puts political interests ahead of an impartial legal process.
  4. The Georgia Vote Fraud Case was not brought for almost four years following the events of January 6, 2021, and the controversial phone call between Trump and Georgia Governor Brian Kemp.  Again, the timing seems to be more related to the upcoming election than the events or normal court calendar issues.
  5. The Fake Electors Case.  Same thing.  A long wait and then a sudden prosecution in the middle of an election.
  6. Efforts to take Trump off the ballot happened long after he made clear his intent to run for reelection.  Those efforts could have commenced four years ago – more closely aligned with the effort to keep Trump off the ballot as the primary objective of the second impeachment.   Again, the case seems to be timed for maximum impact on the election.

None of these cases have been pursued at more appropriate times.  The Department of Justice did not pursue Trump following the events of January 6, 2021, even as it was pursuing hundreds of others involved – and not until Trump was preparing for another run.  After prolonged delays in all these cases, prosecutors are suddenly in a rush-to-judgment clearly timed to the election. 

The aggressiveness of the various prosecutions seems to corollate to the increasing possibility of a Trump reelection.  It is hard to believe that all the cases piling on at the strategically critical point in the election cycle are coincidences.

4. And what about the cases themselves?  Have the cases been overcharged?  And have the judgments of the courts – where decisions have been rendered – been excessive?  (1) In the E. Jean Carroll Case, Trump was found “liable” for defamation based on his claims of innocence of sexually assaulting the New York writer in an upscale department store.  Her claim of rape was dropped.  Even considering it was a second offense of defamation, most legal experts thought the $90 million judgment was excessive to the crime and to other similar cases.  Whether intended or not, the huge penalty impacted Trump’s ability to fund his campaign.  It had political implications, especially in view of the enormous amount. (2) The Corporate Fraud Case raises a lot of questions.  Why was it filed in a way that precluded a jury?  It has been reported that the Trump case is the only one in which the usual “victims” did not lose any money.  And the almost half a billion dollar fine (with a daily interest payment of $117,000) and the ban on doing business in New York have been described as unprecedented.  That literally means Trump was NOT treated according to judicial norms.  The question is, why?

5. Are there indications of Unequal treatment?  In the Documents Case, both Biden and Trump knowingly took and retained classified documents for personal use.  Both acts were illegal.  Trump is charged and Biden was not. Yes, there are significant differences in the cases – which naturally lead to Trump’s more severe prosecution.  But that does not seem to be sufficient reason to NOT prosecute Biden at all.  In fact, Special Counsel Robert Hur clearly stated that Biden broke the law.  His ONLY reason for not indicting Biden is that his age and memory loss would make it hard to win a conviction.  And of course, no trial could commence until after Biden left the presidency.

Summary

This commentary is not a defense brief for Trump’s innocence in any of the cases, but merely to suggest that there can be legitimate reasons why good people can suspect the motives of the prosecutors and be sympathetic to Trump’s view of political persecution.  It helps to explain why in the face of so many legal entanglements, Trump can remain competitive with Biden – even outpolling him.

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.

35 Comments

  1. Dan tyree

    A huge question is why did Trump instruct his staff to offer 10000 national guards to help protect the Capitol? Does that mean that Trump is guilty or being railroaded? What say you Frank?

    • Dan tyree

      PS. Nancy Pelosi referred the guard being sent

  2. frank stetson

    We really don’t know that Trump did that. We have one guy who went from Secret Service agent to White House deputy chief of staff for operations. I erred before, he did that in 2019, well before the incident. So it’s him against Hutchinson at this time and Loudermilk should call all to testify including Bowers who would have been on the other end of the Meadows calls.

    Two things are still true:
    1. Trump ordered no troops, no memo, no communication
    2 On 1/6 Trump did NOTHING for over three hours as the riot raged, the building storm, the police battered. Do you know what a three hour brawl is like? It is life affecting even if uninjured.

    Loudermilk has the 1/6 committee by the proverbials if correct. So, do the work, investigate, call Meadows, Bowers, Ornato, Hutchinson, Meadows, whatever —– call em all in to testify in open sessions. My God Man, you can vindicate Trump and crucify the 1/6 committee in one action. If it is true and they buried it, they are toast. DO IT already and quit yammering to FOX. Do the work.

    However, given the Biden impeachment, the Hunter Biden conspiracy, classified corvette controversary, success by the House, this is one time I would bet against The House.

  3. frank stetson

    Damn Horist, you write the story, but they ask me the questions.

    Come on guys, read Larry’s piece. Please.

    • larry Horist

      Frank Stetson … Up late? I generally call it a night around midnight or so. But a least I can still read and comprehend. You lament about being asked questions when I do not see any questions directed to you. In context, it seems Dan’s questions were more likely directed to me — or just rhetorical. And why complain considering all the writing you do on this site. You seem to thrive on being in the middle and stirring the pot.
      More than anyone — even the commentators. I sometimes seem like its your raison de vivre.

      • frank stetson

        Stealth Horist: It was 10pm, not midnight. Fix your clock. But tanks for sharing your schedule. Good to know. As far as your little reading comprehension smack about, look to the mirror old man, your grip on reality is slipping ever more. Perhaps an earlier bedtime.

        “when I do not see any questions directed to you,” when Dan opened with: “What say you Frank?” Damn, that seems to be a question and I swear he’s directing it to Frank…..how’s that mouth, got room for another foot?

        ” it seems Dan’s questions were more likely directed to me” if you were a total narciscist making reality that suits yoru personal needs. Just like your politics.

        Complain? My, your denfensive sensitivity meter runs hot. How you get from a question to me to my complaining about a fake question from your special personal reality is beyond me.

        If I stir the pot, check the facts. More often than not, I am factually correct. Opinionated, some spin on top sometimes, but pretty much spot on for the facts. Unlike you as even this silly little personal attack shows. You seem to be blinded to the very name: FRANK. Which is what I am, not who I am. Put that in your stetson and wear it. Better yet, let me crap in it first like you did in that post, and you can wear it then. Amazingly, you will still be the same: full of it.

        Keep it coming old man, keep it personal. fuck the facts, you got your reality and that’s what counts. For you.

        Let me know when you desire to actually discuss issues.

        • larry Horist

          Frank Stetson … I was referring to MY habit of working past midnight. Geez. You need to spend more time on reading comprehension before your shoot off. Fix you brain.

          • Frank stetson

            It was 11 pm, you asked if I was up late and referenced 12am, so my bad in reading what you wrote and not the thought of the moment from your aged brain. Just like Trump, no wonder your understand the loon; you just make it up as usual to what suits you at the moment.

            No matter what, reader/customer usually wrong, Horst claims he’s right, is right even if he has to cover his misstatements with whitewash.

            Thanks for getting back on point, nothing personal, as is his way.

            Tell you what. I’ m sorry. I apologize for misunderstanding your clarity. My fault, my bad. I’m sorry.

          • Frank stetson

            That’s not what you said. Fix your writing. It was ten, you commented on my being up late, said you like 12, so next time I will just guess what’s in larry’s mind that he can’t express in writing. At leas not well.

            Good to get back to issues and away from the personal stuff like your bedtime and work habits. .

        • Tom

          Frank, you say, “You seem to be blinded to the very name: FRANK.”. Well you know what they say, “Love is blind.”

          • FRANK STETSON

            OR “even a blind Horist finds some Hey once in awhile.”

            OR “So Jesus took the blind Horist hand and led him out of Hillary’s village. Then Barkley spit on the man’s eyes and put his hands on the man and asked, “Are you gay or trans?” And he looked up, and said, I see men.” just to keep it on point with the article :>)

    • Dan tyree

      We are trying to make you look intelligent. And Trump did request guards. They have the record

      • tom

        Dan, it was the District of Columbia officials that called in National Guard troops, not Trump. Frank is correct. Trump was asked to, but he made no such move. See this Dept. of Defense release. *https://www.nationalguard.mil/News/Article/2466077/dod-details-national-guard-response-to-capitol-attack/* I hope this will clear up the matter.

        • larry Horist

          Tom … Six times the Capitol Police requested National Guard and were denied each time by … the House sergeant-at-arms under Speaker Pelosi. The Trump Defense Department offered to send in troops … and gain rejected by the House that believed the presence of soldiers would be bad “optics.” DC Mayor Browser rejected a written offer to send in troops. It is not as clear cut as you try to make it. At best it can be said that Trump did not order in the military, but not that he blocked it. The initial negative responses came from the Mayor and the House. It is fair to ask why Trump did not order troops ..and equally fair to ask why the Mayor and the House rejected requests from the Capitol Police. Some of the requests were in advance of the rioting. It is fair to argue that the riot many never have taken place if military troopers were surrounding the Capitol Building. Instead security was obviously woefully inadequate. At some points of entry, there appeared to be no security or passive security. More than anything, rioters entered the building because of lack of security … and a failure of a lot of folks more culpable than Trump.
          https://www.npr.org/2021/01/11/955548910/ex-capitol-police-chief-rebuffs-claims-national-guard-was-never-called-during-ri

          • FRANK STETSON

            Wow, Horist repeats the same 2021 story: “Six times the Capitol Police requested National Guard and were denied each time by … the House sergeant-at-arms under Speaker Pelosi.” He’s on to something but, once again, mired in the past, professing partisanism, and unable to double-check the update now that it’s 2024. The NPR story googles first, but if you look for updates from the Congressional record, WIKI, WAPO his book, you find……

            First —- the SaA does not report to Pelosi, according to WIKI: “the sergeant at arms works in concert with the Senate sergeant at arms and the Architect of the Capitol. These three officials, along with the chief of the Capitol Police ex officio, comprise the Capitol Police Board.” Pelosi is not on the board. The board operates under the direction of the Committee on House Administration and Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. This is now proven to be a screwed-up chain of command. You have heard that before I believe. BUSTED and I don’t know why you keep saying this again and again.

            Horist, I know it’s Republican myth to blame Pelosi and Democrats for everything, but can you not see in Congress there is the House and the Senate, and they both have Sargent’s at Arms? That’s just the first hurdle you have to pasting this on Pelosi alone. BUSTED

            Horist, you are on to something, and I think the American people, and Chief Sund deserve a full and impartial hearing on the issue. He called, six times, so what went wrong? I looked and the initial reports which said as you do. However, he came out with a book, and testified in Congress in 2023 as well as a WAPO interview which changes things a bit.

            In business, there are times when you must just fall on your sword for the greater good and for doing what’s right. Sund failed in that when he accepted NO six times although even that number needs investigation. He should have gone over the top, to the press, whatever, but he should have fallen on his sword. Maybe he should have called Pelosi, Schumer, and minority leaders.

            It is clear that the system, the process, the chain of command, sucked —- some of which has been fixed, but not sure all. You don’t do active police work by committee, much less a committee that is not necessarily expert in the task. The American people also deserve a full accounting as to the “fixes.” For example, police organizations must share info and intelligence, like the fixes put in place post 9/11.

            According to the WAPO “He’s previously said the Pentagon dragged its feet in responding to the events of Jan. 6 — even after besieged law enforcement officials pled for additional support.” That’s not true, leo never got to the Pentagon that I can see.

            He first asked House Sargent at Arms, Paul Irving for the National Guard on January 3rd. Paul Irving denied it saying “bad optics” and that was that. No Pelosi, no Board, he let it drop. He resigned.
            The morning of the 6th, his personal intelligence said pretty much a “mom and pop” affair, so far.
            According to Sund, “at 12:58 on 1/6, call went to Paul Irving requesting the assistance, the approval of the National Guard, and this is where it gets important. It gets important that your viewers realize that I am the only chief of police in the United States that has a federal law, a federal law, that prevents me from calling in federal resources, either before an event, like I tried to do on January 3rd, or during an attack like was happening on January 6th, without getting the board, the Capitol Police Board’s approval. So, that was my next call.”

            OK, you get the drift here — he’s calling for help, boss says no, he keeps calling and accepting no. He also says he called the Senate Sargent at Arms who also resigned. Sund regrets his resignation but it was his failure to escalate —- six times according to his accounts.

            OK, it’s a hard knock life but all three failed and should have offered resignations where I would have responded with a demotion alternative. These are not stupid, uneducated, untrained, people with little experience. Quite the opposite. But they should have escalated as high as they could and they did not. The two supervisors demurred and Sund accepted.

            Horist says: “The Trump Defense Department offered to send in troops” to which I can find no support and “bad optics” is used all over the Sund account and not the Trump account. There is no written order for troops and the only reference is Trumps’s best-boy Ornato, who has been refuted by Hutchinson and others. Meadows demurred from testimony. But he may still be compelled and that’s the next step to get to the truth of that.

            I cannot find a “rejected a written offer to send in troops” from the Trump administration to Bowser.
            “it can be said that Trump did not order in the military, but not that he blocked it” a difference without a distinction given the job, given his proximity, given it was an immediate result of his rally. Why didn’t he make the call while watching it unfold on TV? Over three hours. You just can’t accept that as a rational response; there was something else going on with Trump.

            “More than anything, rioters entered the building because of lack of security … and a failure of a lot of folks more culpable than Trump” is BULLSHIT and rejects the notion that these folks, in control of their own lives, broke the law. More than anything, that is first and foremost. They are criminals. Bluebloods law.

            Bottom line: something screwed up.
            – Intelligence failed
            – Organizational structure failed decision making
            – Individuals failed and accepted NO without escalation
            – The President failed his oath of office to protect the nation from all enemies, foreign and domestic

            And probably a few more. Now we just piss on each other instead of finding the truth that America deserves to know. The House investigation needs to be apolitical and get to the facts, the fixes, and disseminate that to the public. They have failed except to piss on each other. All the failures noted above need to be investigated with fixes implemented.

            The WAPO interview is 1/12/2023 and free to anyone. Congressional testimony transcripts are out there too. Also, try WIKI for Sund, Irving, and Stenger — passages for 1/6 in each. And thanks, Horist, this one is totally fu’d and fascinating.

            And if we really want to know the truth about the underlying crime — rigging the 2020 election —- get the Geogia, Florida, and DC cases to court before the election so America can see Trump exonerated, or not by the evidence, by the truth, as best as we can get to it. Or we can make Trump King and erase much of this not by the Rule of Law, but by the Rule of Trump.

  4. K SNY

    And the Judged ruled that Ma-La-Go was only to be valued at $18 million. How does the judge know what property values are in Florida?
    May appraiser put at close to $300 to $325 million.

  5. John D Cole

    Donald Trump gave his borrowed foreign money to paycheck to charity removing the globalists control over him while he was President so he had to go by any means.

  6. aqua

    Trump promised to get the swamp, if they didn’t cheat on the Trump-Biden election he would have eliminated a lot of them. So, now they are trying very hard to do it again, because there are a lot of swamp creatures left, and they will stop at nothing to save their hides.
    Border a disgrace, kids being taught to change their sex, kids learning how to lick others feet, kids sticking dollar bills in lGBTQ dancers pants. Illegal migrants killing Americans, stealing, and so on. I am not going to wear out my printer buy listing the rest. I am sure common sense people get the drift.

  7. Charles

    The political persecution falls into place easily when you sit back and look at Trump’s history as a politician. First he is attacked withe the Russia Hoax and Impeached twice with Democrat Fantasy. After loosing an election he had clearly won he continued to be attacked with misrepresentation and outright lies. He loves his country and is willing to put up with nonsense to fix what is broken becoming the leader of GOP opposition. and then runs for reelection. Once it is clear he will run and most likely win a mad rush by Democrat Prosecutors takes place to file all kinds of Fantasy Indictments to harass his efforts. Of course establishment GOP applaud because he will shake up their ordered live and let live relationship with Democrats and replace it with it must be good for America and the American people not politicians.

  8. 3Xe1ioaiNITxtqNW5CaZEzpxpY4ggtEQJVxO4x0v98I=

    and all the things hunter did and joe and james is not noticed
    and what the clintons did and nancy did is all swept under the rug
    it’s the democrat way to blame and destroy everyone but themselves
    james is just another fool going after trump thinking she can buy trump’s property
    and the the judge clueless on real estate
    this is all a waste of time and money
    and while they are keeping us busy with this crap they are doing other underhanded things which we will suffer later after it’s done
    just look at the amount of illegals who is supporting them,
    and how many have raped killed others and it’s ok
    but we will bs you with trump crap to do our dirty deeds

  9. Wes Kussmaul

    The alleged encounter with E. Jean Carroll happened 28 years ago, and yet no legal action was taken until Trump was running for President.
    Yes, that’s often the way it works with public figures, and particularly political public figures. Probably unfair, but certainly not unique to Trump.

    The Campaign Finance Case is the result of alleged actions taken four years ago.

    Also probably over aggressive

    The Georgia Vote Fraud Case was not brought for almost four years following the events of January 6, 2021, and the controversial phone call between Trump and Georgia Governor Brian Kemp. Again, the timing seems to be more related to the upcoming election than the events or normal court calendar issues.

    We all heard the outrageous phone call. You’re right, prosecution should have started right away. Trump should have been in jail starting a couple years ago. Just imagine anyone but a mafioso asking a state official to fabricate twelve thousand votes in such a brazen manner. Romney told it straight: it was made clear that he should be concerned about the safety of his family and himself. Mafiosos like Trump simply know that threats of physical harm work wonders.

    The Fake Electors Case. Same thing. A long wait and then a sudden prosecution in the middle of an election.
    Again, the case seems to be timed for maximum impact on the election.
    Correct. He should have been in jail for that too, serving a sentence consecutive with the Georgia sentence, or vice versa.

    After prolonged delays in all these cases, prosecutors are suddenly in a rush-to-judgment clearly timed to the election.

    Yes, you are correct. Criminal activities should be pursued with alacrity. Either politics, kompromat or mafia-style threats of violence account for the delay. The important thing is that this menace be taken off the streets quickly, lest he harm more of Jeffrey Epstein’s recruits.

    4. And what about the cases themselves? Have the cases been overcharged? And have the judgments of the courts – where decisions have been rendered – been excessive? (1) In the E. Jean Carroll Case, Trump was found “liable” for defamation based on his claims of innocence of sexually assaulting the New York writer in an upscale department store.

    Just his claims of innocence? How about his disparaging remarks before large audiences?
    Oh wait, he disparages everybody, friend and foe, as often as you and I use any adjective – it’s just his way of speaking. He is mentally ill. But I guess we don’t lock such people up anymore.

    The Corporate Fraud Case raises a lot of questions. Why was it filed in a way that precluded a jury?

    Because his stupid lawyer (he only hires stupid ones) screwed up and failed to ask for a jury.

    It has been reported that the Trump case is the only one in which the usual “victims” did not lose any money.

    ARE YOU KIDDING? “The only one”?????? So you and I are now free to make fraudulent claims to get victims to put money at risk, as long as no liquidity event actually materializes the losses we caused? Not quite. That is illegal in any jurisdiction on Earth. It’s a criminal offense as well as civil. Once again, why is he not in jail?

    But in reality money was not at risk. The loans were not just guaranteed but underwritten by Deutsche Bank, ie Putin’s front. Every mafioso knows you need to do your dirty work in the back room behind a legitimate fruit stand.

    And the almost half a billion dollar fine (with a daily interest payment of $117,000) and the ban on doing business in New York have been described as unprecedented. That literally means Trump was NOT treated according to judicial norms. The question is, why?

    Because his offenses were unprecedented.

    5. Are there indications of Unequal treatment? In the Documents Case, both Biden and Trump knowingly took and retained classified documents for personal use. Both acts were illegal. Trump is charged and Biden was not. Yes, there are significant differences in the cases

    Yah, like obstruction of justice. That should have been the charge, not mistreatment of classified documents. One more consecutive sentence.

    – which naturally lead to Trump’s more severe prosecution. But that does not seem to be sufficient reason to NOT prosecute Biden at all.

    Yes, OK, what’s your point. Mike Pence also got caught with classified docs at home. Hillary too I think. People are careless about taking work home with them. They should never be on paper anyway. Access to the digital docs should be gated by 4096 bit RSA keys. And they should be encrypted of course.

    In fact, Special Counsel Robert Hur clearly stated that Biden broke the law. His ONLY reason for not indicting Biden is that his age and memory loss would make it hard to win a conviction. And of course, no trial could commence until after Biden left the presidency.

    And Reagan should have faced prosecution for Iran-Contra.

    • larry Horist

      Wes Kussmaul … Great response. You make a lot of interesting points. My commentary was an effort to put together why I think so many folks think Trump is being persecuted. It is who the see the cases. i was not deciding the cases one way or the other.. I think you may have mis-fired on a couple points. As it was reported, under the law that the New York case was filed, jury trials are not allowed. Some have suggested that Trump’s attorney could have requested anyway, but it would have ben futile. And reports stated that Trump’s was the only case brought in which victims did not lose any money. That is just a fact. It does not give license to commit victimless fraud, but it should require a stronger case, perhaps. Many people see that as unfair — and that was my point. As I understand it, Pence was never in the crosshairs of prosecutors because he had very few document and credible denial that he did not pack them up and only knew of the existence after the issue was raise with Trump. The Pence case lacked the all important “intent.” In the Reagan case, prosecutors could not establish that Reagan knew about the clandestine operation. Oliver North claimed he did not, and there was no hard evidence to prove
      otherwise. Maybe folks are wrong to believe Trump is being persecuted, but they do have an argument. that was my point. Good analysis of my analysis.

  10. Darren

    Larry, its not all the actions that have been taken against Trump so much as all the LACK of ACTION against EVERYONE ELSE!
    Why was there no Actions against Pelosi or even questions asked about the National Guard?
    Why did Hunter get a Free Pass with the IRS, DOJ, FBI?
    Why does Biden have Documents he should not have and BUBKISS?
    Why was the J6th committee allowed to unfairly exist?
    Why is Schiff and Hillary NOT in Prison?
    Why is the J6th patriots in Prison for ridiculous lengths of time? ( Just to scare Trump voters )
    Why are the Democrat’s allowed by Judges to creating new laws to justify prosecution & Persecutions?
    Why were Trumps speeches’ allowed to be Modified to viewers?
    Politician’s DID ALL THIS TO THEM SELVES by NOT listening to what the people wanted
    and doing what was best in their own interest.
    Then along came a Fresh idea, let the people govern and NOT politicians Dictate!
    Thank you Mr. President Trump!

    • larry Horist

      Darren … Those are the pertinent questions that have been ignored for obvious reasons. The entire insurrection narrative is floated on spin, misinformation and outright lies.

  11. Mike f

    Larry, your senility is at work again. Your timing is way off in section 3 and 4. Classified documents case was opened less than a year after maralago raid-not 2. And your statement about Jan 6 indictments being 4 years after the actual events-I am sortof a math guy, so I realize that date doesn’t occur till next year-Jan 6 2025. You really need to give it up and admit that you have lost it (just like trump). As I said earlier, I call out bullshit and replace it with facts (busted😁)

  12. Pee wee Black

    Mike is one sick bastard~

  13. frank stetson

    Banned again from a long post without links.

    Lots more shut down of free speech now.

  14. frank stetson

    one more time, …. part 1

    “Let us first look at the big picture in detail. What would lead Trump to say such things … and so many Americans to believe him?” Because they are frustrated enough to believe his many lies? That would be my guess. Fact is they are denying facts, denying the media, denying the government, and accepting the word of proven liars. Williams, O’Reilly, Carlson, Jones, FOX news, all have been punished by the court for lying. All are still getting paid today, some handsomely. Clinton, Trump, egregious liars punished for it by courts, congress, whatever. We have become comfortably numb to lies and liars welcoming the AI fake news fabrication era with open arms.

    ENOUGH, I say. It’s time to talk about the cherry tree and who chopped it down. Stop paying these folks to lie. Stories about persecution are fine, but what about the crimes? The fines? History? And where’s the line? Blow job in the oval? Dinging Sandy Hook parents for profit? Telling you covid just the flu? Little stormin of the Capitol?

    Well, since this is not a court of law, how about prior acts? His own words? What about all the shit that’s gone down in court? Doesn’t the past portend the future? continued……

  15. frank Stetson

    part 2

    From the 1970’s to today, Trump, or Trump businesses, have transgressed the law many times, and every time blames politics, witch-hunts, persecution and being a victim. He calls Black prosecutors racist, rape victims told they like it, and contractors with bills, criminals. He has been in over 4,000 cases, a number that probably is not achieved by any other billionaire, or even business in America. According to author, Nick Penzenstadler, Trump has been involved in more legal cases than his fellow real estate competitor magnates Edward J. DeBartolo Jr., Donald Bren, Stephen M. Ross, Sam Zell, and Larry Silverstein, combined.

    Is Trump a victim of persecution? Or is he just a grifter breaking the law to make a buck whenever he can get away with it. The law paints a factual picture, based on evidence, based on witnesses, under oath and the threat of perjury that says:

  16. fRANK STETSON

    part 3 is a listing of all historical trump crimes. it is banned from pbp and I give up.

  17. FRANK STETSON

    p3
    In the 90’s, fined for discriminating against Blacks in his rental properties, sent to “training,” and has to have special ads, infomercials, etc. to tell Blacks he will rent to them.

    Fined almost $1 million by a federal judge who characterized him as “a prolific and sophisticated litigant who is repeatedly using the courts to seek revenge on political adversaries.” With 4,000 cases and 10,000 threats of cases, you better believe that fact.

  18. FRANK STETSON

    OK, apparently something is being blocked by PBP’s extreme free speech program. Does not seem to be length, could be targeted words, poster-repetition, something weird. If this post makes it, it’s not author repetition.

    I don’t mind the censorship but thing PBP should be transparent about their “rules.” Otherwise, it’s just persecution and hidden cesorship.

  19. FRANK STETSON

    Part 4 was a long list of criminal convictions, fines, penalities, throughout Trump’s career showing he is not persecuted, he is a criminal that often runs afoul of the law. Your law. Our law. It ended with:

    Either these are the facts or our entire legal system is corrupt and since we are a nation of laws — we are corrupt. Or he is just a grifter who thinks he can get away with anything, including rape. He states he does not even remember her. Or his wife. Sigh. Well, he does now thanks to the law.

    Am I persecuting him. No, these are the facts as adjudicated in a court of law in the public record. He could contest, he could appeal, he could sue for perjury, or he could run for President to gain immunity and pardon power. This guy has been a grifter his entire life. Lawsuits are a major parot of his business and how he does business. He has built a legal defense team to cover every possible litigation and he sues, as in he persecutes through prosecution, at the drop of a hat, at a whisper of his name in vain. Legal entanglements are his stock and trade as much as renting you a room with a gold toilet.

    Horist is just playing OZ so don’t look at the man behind the orange-haired sweaty red-eyed chapeau. Chapeau to you, sir!

  20. Tom

    This article has a Stop The Spin rating of STS-5.

    Amazing amount of spins, lies, and deliberate rejection of truth as well as not presenting the facts. This article is a Larry fairy tale.

    1) Larry ask if “Trump has a point” but shows bias by calling Trump opponent’s opinion as “sanctimonious”. 2) Larry shows bias as he calls those that wish to see Trump prosecuted for his transgressions as “obsessed”. and political Dracula’s – whatever happened to Americans just wanting the legal system to be applied fairly and consistently like conservatives like to see!! 3) Larry points to all of the prosecutors being Dems, and the indictments as “ham sandwiches” but never realizes that the GOP legislators all march to tune Trump and maybe GOP prosecutors are not prosecuting because they are following the Trump tune! 4) Larry purports that the timing can only be political in nature and forgets that Trump’s constant motions have affected the original timing! That is why the trials are playing out now! And Trump is not done with motions, not nearly done yet! Timing has been Trump’s strategy, to get the trials pushed past the elections. 5) E. Jean Carrol is a person, not the Dem party, thus the reasoning here is a bit twisted. Perhaps she acted as an individual. 6) The DOJ hesitated investigating and prosecuting due to not wanting to do this to a former president, so they went very carefully and slow. Again, Larry takes on a persecution complex allied with Trump’s persecution feelings rather than looking at all of the facts on timing. Trump has been the main influencer of timing! 7) The Georgia Voter Fraud Case actually started when allies of Trump, at Trump’s behest, filed a lawsuit against Kemp for voter fraud on Nov 25, 2020. And then Trump called Raffensberger “an enemy of the people” on Nov 26, 2020. By Feb 11, 2021 Willis is already investigating the case. In 2022 Willis gets the local Fulton County judge and special grand jury involved due to Trump minions throwing road blocks and refusals to cooperate. Trump and his minions were responsible for the time waste, not Willis. March 20, 2023 Trump attorneys file a 500 page brief to squash the Special Grand Jury report and remove Willis from the case. On August 14th of 2023, Trump and his 18 allies failed in their effort and were all indicted at once. Total time from case initiation to indictment was about 2 years and 9 months – mostly due to Trump and his allies motions and stalling techniques. It was not almost four years as Larry implies. Larry needs to actually write the facts because at his age his memory is failing! See *https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-investigation-timeline-fulton-county-georgia/* So disregard Larry’s items 4,5,6, they are lies. 8) Larry refuses to realize that all of these cases piling up before elections are not Dem fault, they are the result of endless Trump stall techniques and motion delays by a GOP SCOTUS that is pro-Trump. They are allowing Trump to game the system in a way that readers could never do! 9) Larry “whataboutism” says E. Jean Carrol charge of rape was “essentially dropped”- not true. The judge actually said “substantially true” The judge dismissed or essentially dropped the Trump counterclaim!!!. BIG DIFFERENCE! It was actually incorporated into the original 5 million judgement against Trump. Federal Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled in August that the jury verdict showed Carroll’s rape allegation was “substantially true” and dismissed the counterclaim. In May, Carroll was awarded a combined $5 million for sexual abuse and for a 2022 denial by Trump that the jury concluded defamed Carroll. 10) Both Biden and Trump are not being charged for possession of the documents. Trump is being charged for refusal to return highly classified documents with nuclear secrets and his repeated refusal to return that resulted in a search of his residence. He is also being charged for obstruction of justice – something Larry just skips over very lightly.

    No, Trump is not being politically persecuted. No Trump does not have a point! Trump is a narcissist and will always feel persecuted when he is caught doing something illegal – because to Trump, it is all about Trump, not about rule of law.

    Trump having a feeling of persecution does not eliminate the facts that even his own party senate leader said he was responsible for Jan 6. Rape and defamation are not a political activities, and he was convicted on facts, not feelings. Trying to replace electors with fake electors and trying to find enough Georgia votes are both political – and both illegal. So there is a political component to these two crimes, but it was Trump that was being criminally political – most of us call these charges rule of law. Trump thought he could be Orban.- it didn’t work. Trump railed against Democrats for downplaying violations of law and taking forever to prosecute – but now he is doing the same thing and his SCOTUS judges are allowing it! Every judge has tip-toed around Trump, giving many delays that you and I would never get. He is being given privilege by the legal systems – something that you and I would never get.

    Conclusion: The reason “Good people can suspect the motives of prosecutors” is because articles such as this that Larry writes encourage this behavior by not fairly presenting the facts and mixing in lies and deceit.

    • larry Horist

      Tom … I am genuinely curious why you and Frank talk so much ABOUT me as TO me. You seem to think you have some significant audience to play to. My commentaries here and through re-posting reach tens if not hundreds of thousands of people. Reader comments are not nearly as well read, and almost never appear in re-posts. To me, it seems to be delusional to speak to an audience that may not exist. You are lecturing to a mostly empty auditorium. If you want to address me… attack me … directly, okay. That seems legitimate. But pontificating to a world that does not exist … well … that is something else. That is also why I called your rating system silly. What good does it do other than to make you feel more important and clever? So, why?