Matt Viser, The Atlantic; How the Reflecting Pool Vandalism Case Fell Apart
"The charges seemed ridiculous to his supporters. But when I recently spoke with Hearn, he told me that the case was hurting his ability to sleep at night. He had once carried the Olympic torch for his country, and he was now worried about being the center of a political firestorm. “It’s unsettling,” Hearn told me, “to feel like I’m being targeted by my government.”"
Glenn Thrush, The New York Times; In Dropping Reflecting Pool Case, Pirro Draws Trump’s Wrath
"Jeanine Pirro faced the cameras on July 2 with characteristic self-assurance to announce the indictment of the 67-year-old ex-Olympian David Hearn for trashing “sacred” government property, President Trump’s highly prized but shoddily renovated Reflecting Pool.
“This is not only a priority for the president, but for myself,” said Ms. Pirro, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, disclosing felony vandalism charges against Mr. Hearn for touching the lining of the pool in front of the Lincoln Memorial. She added: “We will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Hearn willfully destroyed property.”
This was not the case.
Ms. Pirro’s office dramatically reversed course on Friday, not only withdrawing the charge against Mr. Hearn but blasting the Interior Department for the rushed and “botched” renovation, along with U.S. Park Police officials who fed bad information that led her to publicly cite “tremendous evidence” against Mr. Hearn. In the process, intentionally or not, she skated perilously close to contradicting Mr. Trump — and he noticed.
Ms. Pirro’s 20-page filing did not refer to, much less rebuke, Mr. Trump for claiming the damage was caused by left-wing vandals rather than his administration’s missteps. But it raised innate doubts about his assertion that criminals had slashed the pool’s lining with a “knife or blade.”...
Mr. Hearn’s team maintained that he had merely “touched a piece of coating that had already detached, released it when asked to do so by a park employee, and left the pool in no worse condition in which he found it.”
Photos and testimony introduced in the case had indicated that substantial cracks had already appeared, and water started leaking from the pool, before Mr. Hearn’s visit. Mr. Hearn’s lawyers questioned whether that information had been made clear to grand jurors, complaining of “irregularities that reflect a misleading presentation.”
His legal team was “evaluating all legal remedies,” Mr. Eisen said."
Scott Pelley , 60 Minutes; Maricopa election officials work to restore belief in the ballot as some continue to sow doubt in elections
"Shelby Busch started a political action committee which investigates what she calls widespread fraud in Maricopa County—fraud no credible investigation has found. She's taken in nearly a million dollars in donations for the work of her PAC. And the Arizona Republican Party awarded her the leadership of its delegation at last summer's national convention...
Busch still questions whether signature verification was proper and whether some ballots were collected illegally. She's an administrator in a medical practice.
Scott Pelley: You're self-educated--
Shelby Busch: That's correct--
Scott Pelley: --when it comes to elections.
Shelby Busch: That's correct.
Scott Pelley: In a recent case a judge disqualified you from testifying in the case because he said you were, quote, "Obviously unqualified... not even in the ballpark."
Shelby Busch: That's one judge's opinion. who is a radical leftist who is legislating from the bench and I don't believe that it had any merit in my credibility whatsoever.
Scott Pelley: Is there a danger in undermining people's faith in the election system by persisting with these conspiracy theories that no one has been able to validate?
Shelby Busch: Again, I'm going to disagree with you, sir, respectfully-- it has been validated. And because--
Scott Pelley: Where? By whom?
Shelby Busch: The election officials--
Scott Pelley: Give me-- give me a court case. Give me something.
Shelby Busch: I don't need a government official with a vested interest in disproving information to tell me whether what I have is valid. It's up to each individual citizen, as a member of this society, to review the evidence, to think for themselves and make those decisions.
Scott Pelley: It's valid 'cause you say it is.
Shelby Busch: I say it's valid because I say it is. And if somebody looks at it, they can determine whether it's valid. The evidence speaks for itself. Data does not lie. Data doesn't lie. Election officials do."
