President Donald Trump and U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro became embroiled in an unusual public dispute earlier this month, and the fallout from the disagreement may still be unfolding.
Trump criticized Pirro after her office moved to dismiss charges against four people accused of damaging the newly renovated Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. Among those charged was former Olympic canoeist David Hearn.
Advertisement
Since then, a Washington, D.C., public forum on violent crime featuring Pirro has been abruptly canceled for the second time in two months.
The event, titled “Violent Crime in DC: What’s Worked and What’s Next,” had been scheduled for Monday and was expected to feature Pirro alongside interim Metropolitan Police Chief Jeffery Carroll for a discussion with residents about crime and public safety.
Advertisement
The D.C. Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, which organized the forum, did not provide a specific reason for the cancellation.
The council said it had no additional information to share and was instead evaluating how best to organize future opportunities for public engagement.
Advertisement
The same forum had initially been scheduled for June before being canceled without a public explanation. Organizers subsequently rescheduled it, only to cancel it again Monday.
The latest development comes amid heightened scrutiny of Pirro following her disagreement with Trump over the Reflecting Pool prosecution.
Pirro’s office initially pursued felony charges against Hearn over allegations that he deliberately damaged the pool’s newly installed liner.
Prosecutors later moved to dismiss the case after receiving additional evidence that raised questions about whether the damage resulted from vandalism or problems with the recently completed renovation.
Trump sharply criticized the decision, saying he was “really disappointed” in Pirro and accusing her of having “folded like an umbrella.”
The president has continued arguing that the pool was deliberately vandalized and has publicly urged prosecutors to reconsider the decision.
Trump spent the weekend highlighting court documents on Truth Social that referenced what he described as a “highly credible witness.” According to the documents, the witness claimed to have seen the 67-year-old Hearn “violently” tearing at the pool’s newly installed blue lining.
Trump subsequently called on Pirro to “revisit her hastily made decision” to abandon the prosecution.
Advertisement
The Wall Street Journal reported this week that the Justice Department is examining the matter, raising the possibility that the case could receive additional scrutiny following Todd Blanche’s confirmation as attorney general.
Blanche has faced questions about the department’s handling of politically sensitive prosecutions but declined to directly address reporters’ questions about Pirro’s decision in the Hearn case.
Meanwhile, the federal judge overseeing Hearn’s case agreed last week to dismiss the charges.
Another hearing is expected next month to determine whether the dismissal should be entered “with prejudice.” Such a ruling would generally prevent federal prosecutors from bringing the same charges against Hearn again based on the alleged conduct at issue.
Advertisement
Pirro’s own office acknowledged significant problems with the government’s original understanding of what happened at the Reflecting Pool.
In its filing seeking dismissal, prosecutors said the “American flag blue” sealant applied during the recent renovation began peeling “almost immediately” after the work was completed.
That information raised questions about whether at least some of the damage initially blamed on vandalism could instead have resulted from problems with the material or its installation.
Advertisement
Pirro’s office also criticized the information it initially received from the Interior Department.
The department “provided less than fulsome information at the outset of this case,” prosecutors wrote in the filing.
The dispute has left Trump publicly pushing for another look at the case while Pirro’s office has maintained that evidence discovered after the initial charges raised sufficient questions to justify dismissal.
This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.
