When Donald Trump publicly declares he disagrees “100%” with one of his own appointees and asks “I don’t know what she was thinking?” on Truth Social, that is not a subtle nudge. That is a full break, out in the open, for everyone to see.
The target of that frustration is Jeanine Pirro, and the issue is her office’s decision to drop charges against David Hearn, a 67-year-old three-time Olympian accused of damaging the newly installed lining of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.
Pirro’s office indicted Hearn in July, alleging he used his bare hands to tear apart the sealant lining that had recently been installed at the pool. At the time, the language from prosecutors was firm. They said they had evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Hearn had “willfully destroyed” federal property and acted “forcefully and violently.” A grand jury agreed and handed down an indictment. Hearn pleaded not guilty.
Then on Friday, the charges were dropped. The explanation offered was that the damage was largely the result of a rushed and defective installation, making it a contractor problem rather than a criminal one.
As originally reported, Trump responded Saturday by releasing video that complicated that explanation considerably. The footage appears to show the pool’s lining being cut with a knife or box cutter, not peeled apart by bare hands. That is a meaningful distinction. A blade cutting through a national monument’s lining is not evidence of poor installation. It is evidence of deliberate destruction caught on camera.
Trump pointed to additional details that support the vandalism argument. Beyond the damage linked to Hearn, there was a reported 350-foot gash cut into the pool’s bottom. There was also “86 47” burned into the grass nearby, a political message, not the fingerprint of a sloppy contractor.
The contractor defense deserves scrutiny on its own terms. Installation problems and deliberate criminal damage are not mutually exclusive. A liner that was imperfectly installed can also be a liner that someone chose to cut with a blade. The fact that there were pre-existing issues with the pool does not erase what the video appears to show happening to it. A grand jury already reviewed the evidence and found it sufficient to indict. That bar does not simply disappear because the installation timeline was messy.
Pirro has left open the possibility of reinstating charges. Given that she is now facing direct, public criticism from the president who appointed her, that option is likely being weighed carefully.
Trump called it vandalism and released video to back the claim. A prosecutor who built a case strong enough to secure an indictment, then walked it back, now owes the public a more convincing explanation than defective workmanship.
The question of what Pirro was thinking is one a lot of people are apparently asking right now.