Former DOJ Official Explains Why Jeanine Pirro’s Office Failed To Get Indictment on D.C. Sandwich Thrower

A former assistant attorney general at the U.S. Department of Justice said federal prosecutors failed to secure an indictment against the D.C. sandwich thrower because of their attempt at “overcharging” him.

This month, Charles Sean Dunn was seen on camera hurling a sub at a Customs and Border Protection agent before fleeing the scene amid President Donald Trump’s clampdown in Washington, D.C. Dunn, 37, was later apprehended and charged with felony assault against the officer. At the time, Dunn worked for the Department of Justice’s criminal division, but was subsequently fired by Attorney General Pam Bondi. The case against Dunn was brought by the office of U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro.

After the incident, Pirro recorded a video in which she said, “He thought it was funny. Well, he doesn’t think it’s funny today because we charged him with a felony assault on a police officer, and we’re going to back the police to the hilt.”

A D.C. grand jury was unmoved by Pirro’s attempt to secure an indictment, and on Wednesday’s Deadline: White House on MSNBC, ex-DOJ official Mary McCord offered an explanation.

“I mean, we have a video,” she noted. “We can see exactly what happened. I’m not sure what else a grand jury would need. So, this says to me, this is a grand jury that is essentially nullifying. They’re saying, ‘You’re presenting something
here, and we either don’t think it meets the elements of the crime, or even if it does, you are so overcharging, that we refuse to go for it.'”

McCord went on to say that the DOJ has Dunn dead to rights on a crime, just not the crime it tried to charge him with.

“It’s a sandwich,” she continued. “Should he have done it? No. Is it technically an assault on a police officer? Yes. If it’s going to be charged at all – and most of the time, something like this would not be – it would be a misdemeanor at most… The grand jurors, they hear lots of evidence in lots of cases. So it’s not like they come in just to hear this case. So they’ve seen real crime, right? They’ve had cases presented to them that are actual, real crimes. And I’m sure they have returned indictments. And this one was a bridge too far.”

Watch above via MSNBC.