182
Ex-Olympian who touched Reflecting Pool charged with felony destruction of property by Trump’s DOJ
(www.independent.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2026
182 points (99.5% liked)
politics
30517 readers
3141 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What are the chances of 12 people putting this guy away for picking up a piece of the orange failures blue failure?
My guess is exactly zero
About to get another unanimous no-bill from the grand jury.
You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride.
This. They still are making him have a really bad time, and all because Donvict does not want to talk about his obvious failure here.
I would note grand juries are required to charge someone with a felony, meaning they did already get atleast (13 of 23?) a majority of the grand jury to agree he did do the crime.
However, there have already been multiple cases dismissed for incorrect procedure during grand juries under this admin, so it is possible that is the case for why the grand jury would agree to charge in this case.
Update: I was incorrect, there is generally 30 days from the time of arrest for a grand jury to be convinced to indict. See below
No they aren't. They tried to charge the sandwich guy with a felony and the grand jury refused to do it so they had to downgrade the charge to a misdemeanor.
You are correct.
Nowhere did I see it said on my sources on grand juries but I looked up the Wikipedia for the DC Sandwich Guy case and: "U.S. law typically gives the Justice Department 30 days to secure an indictment after an arrest."
https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/grand-jury-declines-indict-man-arrested-throwing-sandwich-us-agent-source-says-2025-08-27/
(this is the source cited by Wikipedia but seems to just be stated without source itself in the article)
And then the jury said not guilty to that, despite the full confession in court lol
I think they still have to bring the charge to the grand jury.
From the article:
Well Thats some fuckin bs
I became more confused upon trying to look it up.
"A grand jury focuses on preliminary criminal matters only and assesses evidence presented by a prosecutor to determine whether there is “probable cause” to believe an individual committed a crime and should be put on trial. If the grand jury determines there is enough evidence, an indictment will be issued against the individual"
Source: https://www.uscourts.gov/court-programs/jury-service/types-juries
That makes it sound to me like they would need to do that rather than charge him, as the right to indictment by grand jury for federal felonies is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.
https://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment5.html
My issue with assuming he has been indicted by a grand jury though is that in the article is specifically uses "charged" over and over and charges are brought by Attorneys not Grand Juries.
So maybe just admin doing crime?