this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2026
182 points (99.5% liked)

politics

31093 readers
1747 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
Theonetheycall1845@lemmy.world
JuBe@lemmy.world
Lasherz12@lemmy.world
182
Ex-Olympian who touched Reflecting Pool charged with felony destruction of property by Trump’s DOJ (www.independent.co.uk)
submitted 2 months ago by sanitation@lemmy.today to c/politics@lemmy.world
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NekoKoneko@lemmy.world 62 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Hearn “forcefully and violently” pulled the pool’s lining, she said.

But asked whether the pool’s lining was already damaged when Hearn touched it, Pirro said she was “not going to get into the evidence.”

“What I told you is what our witnesses saw and experienced,” she said. “Irrespective of whether or not we think there is some situation that preceded it, we can state and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he caused damage.”

I swear, these people somehow seem to be addicted to the sounds of their own voices and yet can't even hear themselves talk.

[–] Blackfeathr@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago

I'm surprised Pirro even knew where she was, on the count of her being shitfaced 24/7.

[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago

The pool's lining was asking for it

[–] kylie_kraft@lemmy.world 56 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

This is classic Controlling the Conversation. If they can make it about "vandalism," then we're not talking about the shady deals and shoddy work that actually destroyed the Reflecting Pool. Don't fall for it.

[–] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] Steve@startrek.website 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

About to get another unanimous no-bill from the grand jury.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

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.

[–] HappyCatLuvs_U@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

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

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] HappyCatLuvs_U@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

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)

[–] Steve@startrek.website 3 points 2 months ago

And then the jury said not guilty to that, despite the full confession in court lol

[–] Steve@startrek.website 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I think they still have to bring the charge to the grand jury.

[–] isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

From the article:

David Hearn, a two-time whitewater racing world champion who competed in the canoe slalom at three Olympic Games, was indicted by a grand jury Thursday in D.C. Superior Court on one felony charge, according to court records.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 1 points 2 months ago

Well Thats some fuckin bs

[–] HappyCatLuvs_U@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

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?

[–] treehugger6@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

What is insane to me is that there are still Americans that think they live in a normal country. If I was an American I would crawl to Canada or Mexico.

[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 24 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Moving to another country is complicated and difficult even under normal, stable circumstances. Doing it successfully (not ending up broke and homeless with no support) requires a lot of planning and money, or else a lot of help from someone else.

Even if the other country is willing to let you immigrate, and you have good prospects for a regular income and a stable living situation, you have to leave friends and family behind. That means leaving your support system. If you have children that's going to be very difficult. If you have aging parents that you support, or other family with medical issues, it may be impossible.

Really, the only people who think picking up and moving to another country is something you can just do are young, single, above the poverty line, and have no dependents.

[–] Wataba@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The alternative is death or incarceration.

[–] minnow@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

And when the critical factor for being able to choose immigration over death/incarceration is money... Well, a lot of us simply don't get a choice.

My engineer friend is halfway through the immigration process. Me? I have a solid 9 to 5 that I bust my ass at every day but I don't have enough money for gas to get to the border, much less to immigrate.

I'll never be an immigrant, and not by choice.

When the time comes, if I'm very VERY lucky, I might live long enough to become a refugee. That's my only alternative to your alternative.

[–] orlyowl@piefed.ca 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Is the term "ex-olympian" actually correct? I would say the guy is still an olympian because he is a person who competed in the olympics.

[–] vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

No it's not correct. The term commonly used is usually something like "retired olympic athlete".

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caitlyn_Jenner

Edit: The "ex-" title they are giving him is intentional. It carries negative connotation and implies he was banned/fired from competing or something.

[–] Almacca@aussie.zone 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

He's gonna get soooo much money from the lawsuit.

[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago

Yes and the people responsible don’t care because there will be no consequences for them

[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Why isn't Trump being charged with felony destruction of property?

Why isn't Trump being charged with felony destruction of the government (AKA treason)?