Trump's Reflecting Pool Case BACKFIRES in MIND-BOGGLING Fashion

Donald Trump just destroyed his malicious prosecution felony case relating to the reflecting pool.Before it even began, he trotted out Jeanine Pirro, who's brought the case, the United States attorney for Washington DC.And when she did this press conference, she proceeded to say things that just blew up the case before it even started.Now, there was no case, in my opinion, before it even started.They charged David Hearn with a destruction of property felony count.When you actually look at the indictment that was brought, you can't really even decipher what they're saying that he did.

On June 19th, David Hearn went to the reflecting pool.He was a two -time Olympic canoeist.He showed up because of It being on the news as falling apart at all the algae in it.The bottom liner was all falling apart because they threw all this hydrogen peroxide into the water.And so he looked at it.He said he dipped his hand into it like we all knew that it was all ripped up.

before and it was all not because of humans, but because when you pour hydrogen peroxide on a paint lining and think that that's going to solve the algae, that destroys the paint.So we all saw, I think I was describing it before the David Hearn thing.I was saying it looks like a mutant, like stingray in there, you know, these like globs would form and that's from the hydrogen peroxide.And that's from, you know, the shoddy, the horrible work that was done to it in the first place.But Donald Trump went out there, it's vandals this, it's vandals that.He made his DOJ concoct a case, go after a high profile person or go after people, say they're the vandals.

Meanwhile, Trump went out there and said, yeah, they were slashing the middle with box cutters and they were ripping it apart.It was this Antifa thing and all of this thing.Then they charge this guy, David Hearn, put his hand in.There's no photographs of the guy.I've seen photographs.The only photographs I've seen is the guy half naked.

I think there was someone who calls herself a reflecting pool influencer and she's like an ultra mega person.Um, who, who did like a video of it and she was like right there.And like, I think David Hearn immediately spoke to the, you know, to like the park police, like, Hey, do you see what's going on there?You can see his hand.He put on his gloves right away.It was like, he took a chunk as a souvenir.

You literally can see his hands.And so anyway, it's, uh, they, they got, they, they bring in an indictment against the guy based on this for, for a felony.Janine Pirro does this press conference and then you can see how, you know, I, it's, I didn't think that there could be a worse case than the James Comey trial.a seashell case, but this may be worse than the seashell case.I never thought there could be the 86 -47 seashell case, this one right here.And you know, this is like the biggest idiocracy thing.

As Aaron Rupert says, this press conference is beyond parody.It's true.I don't have the words to capture it.It's like a deleted scene from idiocracy.First, let me show you, though, when Jeanine Pirro says he caused damage that was over $1 ,000.And a reporter was like, How do you prove that?

Like, how are you going to prove that to a jury where he didn't take it?There's no photos of him doing it.In fact, the only photo shown putting on gloves afterwards, it was clearly destroyed before he got there.Listen to what she says.Play this clip.

and experienced, there was an effort, a violent effort to rip up the ceiling from the bottom of the pool.And irrespective of whether or notyou know, we think that, you know, there there is some situation that preceded it.We can state and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he caused damage and that damage is over a thousand dollars.

How do you prove that with an expert?

Come to the trial.We'll hear all that at the trial.Right now we believe it's his bare hands, both hands.Oh, he damaged it.He damaged the pool.He damaged this pool.

I mean, what does she think this is?And by the way, she said she's going to prove it with experts.Kind of.101 rules of evidence.You can't have an expert testify to something that's within the province of a lay witness.So it's actually not something an expert witness would likely even be able to testify to.

And all of these witnesses who saw it, she was irrespective of what took place before he got there.What do you mean irrespective of what took place before he got there?Do you realize this case will now be focused on all of Donald Trump's lies?By the way, in my view, Trump should probably be a witness.You know, I mean, if I was David Hearn, Donald Trump's kind of, and I know Donald Trump's going to not testify, but he's probably, you know, a witness based on he probably made this order to Jeanine Pirro to do this and to go after, you know, to go after this.We have our witnesses.

Who are these witnesses?I wonder.Here, Jeanine Pirro, though, you know, as she goes, she's like,

Many of those employees have come from around the country because they are proud of this nation.They are proud of the 250th anniversary that we are about to experience.Many of them have decided to step away from their desks and to go outside and actually work next to the pool to witness what was going on, as opposed to staying in a cool office.These are the witnesses that we're talking about in this case.These are the people who care about this particular monument and what is going on.

I want to bring in Harry Litman from the Talking Feds YouTube channel.She goes, I'm not going to talk about the case.Then she proceeds to talk about the case.You see how weak it is when she actually gets it.It's just the stupidest case imaginable.But then apparently her witnesses appear to be Trump plants.

If you listen to what she said about these witnesses, they seem to be people from MAGA who the Trump regime put there.to gin this up.I mean, that's kind of what, you know, and these people in a real case, they're going to be cross examined.They're going to be asked questions.You know, the Brady material is going to have to be turned over and this case is going to fall apart.And then, you know, the cycle, Harry, the liberal judge, the Trump hating judge dismissed this case and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

We were going to get the vandals, but the judge threw it out.

It heads on that track.We've been down this route.It's this track.You know, you think about you and I three years ago, four years ago, those frivolous RICO cases that he would file against people in Florida where the judges would say this is the stupidest thing ever and sanction him and Alina Haba a million dollars.This is the DOJ version of that, Harry.

It's this DOJ version.of it.I always, I can hardly contain, this is just me from my experience, but I was U .S.attorney, and my God how it's drummed into you that the U .S.

proves its case in court, and when it comes time to talk about an indictment, you can talk about the allegations in the indictment, making clear the presumption of innocence.This this imposter of a U .S.attorney came out and said, I'm not going to talk about the evidence and that every friggin thing she said was outside of the bare bones indictment itself.You can't prejudice the jury that way by time.This is really the equivalent, as as we learned in the grand jury, said, oh, don't worry, we have all of this stuff.

We have all these witnesses.It is so, prosecutorial ethics 101 that it's not permitted.And when I see it happening again and again in this godforsaken administration, it's like chewing on aluminum foil.Okay, so that's how I'll try to recover my composure and go to your second point.The case is going nowhere.The guy, by the way, I don't know, he's a 66 -year -old, very kind of impressive, composed, former Olympian.

He says he reached in to touch to see what it feels like.And they're gonna have what?They're gonna have, as you say, witnesses who came there to celebrate the 250th anniversary.I think there are about 11 of those.who are gonna say, what?He ripped it out with his bare hands and did, okay, so where is the evidence?

What happened to this stuff?Why would he lie so clearly?You go there and you've heard all about it.You're not looking to damage it.You're looking to figure out what the hell and how has this debacle kind of happened.And then that's the third point.

The Washington, the DC statute that they've charged him under requires that it be malicious, looking to damage all the things that Trump is saying.I don't see a world in which they have this evidence.And, you know, this will probably be one of those cases that never even proceeds to a verdict.But if so, it's like sandwich guy.You know, once again, they're going to be humiliated, they must know they're gonna be humiliated.And it's just the initial effort of, is it to please Trump or before July 4th or what, to come out and make these scurrilous charges.

But this is the agency that's entrusted with complying with constitutional rights, the presumption of innocence and the like, and to see Jean Perrault just basically saying, Trust me, I got some real great witnesses there and we know nothing about them.As you mentioned, the discovery here, the Brady material, you're the Midas Mighty, you all know this, I think the Fed Heads as well, but you gotta turn over anything you have that tends to be exculpatory.If it comes to it, the cross -examination of these witnesses, man, oh man, this is a case that is really heading straight to a crash.against a wall.Some people have been charged who this would be ruinous for.This seems to be one of the guys who's like, bring it on.

He's got really solid lawyers from the public interest community.So I don't even think, we talked about Jack Smith in another video and how he seemed completely calm about the whole prospect.I think that's what you're going to find out about this guy.They really did pick on the wrong guy.But the main thing is they picked the wrong case because they don't have any fucking evidence.And for her to go out and just talk about it like that is just a complete complete their election.

Let me predict what happens, though.Everybody still talking about the Don Lemon criminal case?No.Why?Because the Trump regime then designates it complex.They say they can't pull out the documents.

They do delays, and they delay, and then there's motions, and then there's this or there that.And so this is the Trump cycle.This is what he did with his regular that you know they bring out janine pierrot you know the corrupt fox host turned prosecutor whatever she does not get their headline i bet you let me let me predict every move that they're so easy to predict They're bringing bullshit cases against a bunch of other people, too.So now they're going to say it's a complex case where they want to combine it or consolidate it or put it on a track like that.So then they're going to say, you know, it's not its normal fast track.And then they're going to say we need more time for discovery.

Then we're going to get motions from David Hearn and his lawyer saying, no, we want to speed it.They're not turning over this or that or the other things.There's different fights.The judge orders against them.They say the judge is against us and it's unfair.Hearn files all of these malicious prosecution motions.

You and I will be talking about this in October or November, and then there'll be a big hearing around then, probably gets dismissed or, you know, or some meaningful event first happens, maybe around Christmas, who knows, maybe it gets pushed to 2027.And that's kind of the cycle of one of these things.you know, that's my point What do you say Harry?

Yeah, so look, I think it doesn't go to conviction I think more likely than not it doesn't go to trial and somehow their hope it's all a PR effort, right?It's all to somehow support the boss in this unproven Search and they've so screwed up the reflecting pond.It must be vandals but some part of them is absolutely indifferent.They just think, well, this first kind of PR hit that suggests that the as they just put it in their press in their press statement, Donald Trump was telling the truth again.They think that when the time comes and it's dismissed, people will have forgotten about it.And, you know, if that's right or if that's wrong, the cynicism and the indifference to justice and the actual person, defendant, who they want to put in the pokey is breathtaking.

and that's whether their calculation is right or wrong.To me, there's a pretty big hit when the sandwich guy walks, when they dismiss the Comey case as they will again, when this one totally crashes and burns, when judges completely rip into them for grand jury misconduct and the like.But you know, it's an administration.This plays to their base.And I guess their base doesn't really blame them, even though it's about as bad as it can be for a Department of Justice, right?Charging someone without evidence in order to serve the political agenda of the president, you know, how much, how much more tyrannical can you get?

Yeah, everybody search TalkingFeds on YouTube.Subscribe to Harry Litman's YouTube channel and subscribecalled TalkingFeds.Tell him I said hello in the comments.Thanks, everybody, for watching.Thanks, Harry.

Thank you, Ben.

Thanks for watching TalkingFeds.If you enjoyed this video, please remember to like and subscribe.And for a lot more content, all of my essays, ad -free podcasts, and weekly Ask Me Anything Q &A sessions, check out the TalkingFed's Substack and please subscribe there as well.Talk to you later.