268
Are we still on the Reflecting Pool? I quit YouTube, but that was the last time I heard about the Reflecting Pool, which was about two weeks ago from Shapiro.
Maybe I'm focusing on the wrong part but... a thousand dollars in damages? I know a lot of people in the states can't rub two dimes together, but a thousand dollars is like... nothing. Especially for the government and not some guy working two jobs.
They're claiming he should go to jail for 10 years for maybe causing a thousand dollars of damage to public property? I bet a single church could put together a bake sale one time and raise a thousand dollars.
Obviously if the tables were flipped, and some guy was out there breaking drinking fountains and cutting down trees in a park I'd be pissed... but this doesn't even feel like an interesting lie!
Imagine what they would charge the contractor that fucked up the pool? >!nothing!<
Laws like that were written a long time ago and never adjusted for inflation.
It’s an excuse to attack an average citizen and hopefully get away with it, so they can flex a fascist muscle.
Likely the charge is for federal property damage over $1000. So they could be saying it's a million dollars. Who know what stupid shit they'll put in.
If I can go to a public monument and cause a million, or even a thousand, dollars of damage by touching something in a public place with my hand, it's not really my fault at that point. It's the fault of whoever made it so fragile.
Not surprising, and a good move by Hearn's attorneys. The Trump DOJ has already established a terrible track record for improperly presenting cases to grand juries, and given how much of a reach even charging this guy is, I would almost expect the DOJ attorneys involved to have 'finessed' the grand jury presentation to secure an indictment on such thin evidence.
Looking forward to seeing how this turns out.
It doesn't make any logical sense that these charges are still being pursued, particularly after draining the pool and seeing the visible motorcade damage.
How can someone claim on the one hand that a heavy motorcade couldn't have possibly damaged the pool surface, but also argue that it was fine until this man did $1000 damage with his bare hands. Any sane (unbiased) person would laugh in their face and throw it out.
It makes sense when you know that the goal is to control the conversation about the reflecting pool. If we're arguing over fake vandalism and unjust prosecutions, then we're not arguing over the legal authority to make renovations to national landmarks, the no-bid contracts awarded to donors, or the shoddy rush job that actually caused the problem.
It's a similar tactic that's been used when ICE murders, deports, or arrests legal residents and citizens. Immediately accuse them of being domestic terrorists and, if they're still alive, charge them. Everyone starts arguing over the legitimacy of the accusations and charges instead of the fact that a government paramilitary full of undertrained goons is targeting people based primarily on skin color and language and refusing to backtrack because they have actual quotas on how many people they are required to abduct.
Yep it's all about djt using the doj as his attack dog and making life hell for anyone who doesn't bend the knee.
It's just insane amount of corruption, fraud and abuse from the admin
Literally 1984
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink
I don’t think people quite understood what it actually meant until recently, and thought it meant just “knowing the truth while fully embracing a fiction”.
There are already reports of chunks of coating coming off before he was accused of damaging it. How can they prove that he ripped coating and not just touched it? Also, how would you rip up pool coating with your bare hands?
It's easy to do when it's falling apart due to the incompetence of Trump hired idiots.
this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2026
268 points (100.0% liked)
politics
30578 readers
1999 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