Turn It Up: Hero With A Hero Is Icing On the Cake
Sandwich Guy art on K Street in D.C.
Photo by Franziska Wild
Further
Abby Zimet
Nov 08, 2025
COMMON DREAMS
Hope glimmers. After an election that saw “democrats in array” rising up to thunderously repudiate anything connected with a doddering tyrant - “Apparently Americans liked the East Wing more than anyone thought” - the final small sweet revenge was a jury acquitting D.C.'s valiant Sandwich Guy for the crime of making it pellucidly clear, with mustard, he doesn’t want stormtroopers in his town. One sage: “The only way this week could’ve been better for America was if Dick Cheney died again.”
On Tuesday, voters came out in sometimes record numbers - New York saw its highest turnout in over 50 years - to reject MAGA cruelty, inequity and greed, and win “just everything.” New Jersey and Virginia saw double-digit wins for women governors - a veteran and former CIA officer - reflecting a failure of anti-trans bigotry and resurgence of Democrats’ big tent. There were comparable wins from Connecticut and Pennsylvania to Mississippi and Georgia. Maine overwhelmingly rejected an effort to restrict mail-in voting, Colorado willingly raised taxes on the rich to fund school lunches, California’s re-districting Prop. 50 passed by an almost 2 to 1 margin; Newsom showed how to fight Trump - “After poking the bear, this bear roared” - and urged other states to also “meet this moment head-on.”
Most thrillingly, New York’s Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani evinced “the way to win is to include everyone. All everyone,” and he did in an off-off year yet. One analyst: “Republicans raved every Democrat was Zohran Mamdani, and Americans said, ‘Sign me up.'” In Mamdani’s electrifying speech - Eugene Debs! - to an exultant crowd, he rebuffed a politics that has “bowed at the altar of caution (and) paid a mighty price...Too many working people cannot recognize themselves in our party.” “We chose hope together,” he said. “We won because we insisted that no longer would politics be something that is done to us. Now, it is something that we do...New York will (be) a city built by immigrants, powered by immigrants and, as of tonight, led by an immigrant.” To Trump: “To get to any of us, you will have to get through all of us.”
He and his vassals will also have to exit the alternative reality bubble - and immense cognitive dissonance - revealed this week in Miami, where Trump spoke at an opulent America Business Forum to billionaires from Saudi Arabia to Silicon Valley. As Republicans lost every election in sight, the government shutdown became the longest in history, and 42 million people, including 3 million in Florida, faced hunger, the assembled tycoons paid $2,000 - but got a $50 gift card for food - to hear a vengeful old man babble, ramble, boast, confuse “Communist” South Africa with South America, and nonetheless gloat about the “economic miracle” he’d delivered to usher in a reeling America’s “golden age.” Like the tawdry Great Gatsby party he held, “They just can’t seem to stop doing things shockingly out of touch.”
Meanwhile, per the advice of his ghoulish mentor Roy Cohn, Trump is using the courts as a “personal cudgel” against his perceived enemies. Along with terrorizing blue cities, prosecutors have gone after over 20 anti-ICE protesters, often with “impeding” charges. In Chicago, prosecutors charged primary candidate Kat Abughazaleh with “conspiracy” after roughing her up at a protest. In L.A., a goon shot Carlos Jimenez, absurdly claiming self-defense, after he tried to warn marauding troops that kids were coming out of a school. In Chicago, head Nazi Greg Bovino, who’s told ICE thugs to arrest anyone who makes “hyperbolic” comments, charged a protester with giving him a groin injury purportedly requiring a two-week leave to recover; prosecutors just dropped the case after video, shockingly, showed they lied.
And so it goes. Mostly, the fascists, being inept, lose. (GOP) Judge Karin Immergut just permanently blocked Trump from inflicting “all necessary troops” on “war-ravaged” Portland OR after finding “no credible evidence” there was need for them and insisting “the facts - not the President’s political whims - guide how the law is applied.” Ouch. Still, the most failures have been earned by laughably unqualified US Attorney Jeanine “Boxwine” Pirro, who keeps trying and failing to get grand juries - seven at this point - to indict the proverbial ham sandwich. Her latest and most public effort to “turn a gag-gift-worthy moment into a federal criminal offense” was the case of folk hero, Air Force veteran and former DOJ attorney Sean Dunn, 37, who “brought a sandwich to a fascism fight” - specifically, a salami sub - and won.
In the infamous case of “the hoagie heard around the world,” Dunn, in a pink shirt and holding a just-bought, now-historic sub, confronted troops skulking on a downtown DC corner, reportedly about to raid a gay club there. He yelled they were fascists who should get out of his town; then he got in the face of 23-year-veteran Border Patrol agent Gregory Lairmore, yelled some more, hurled his sub at Lairmore’s bullet-proof-vested chest, and took off running. Thugs gave chase, caught and handcuffed him, and released him without charges. But for the “retaliatory animus” of the thin-skinned toddler in power, it would’ve ended there. Instead, video of the encounter went viral, the toddler got pissed, and a SWAT team went to Dunn’s apartment, complete with pulpy heavy-metal video of the action, to arrest him.
Insisting on the preposterous narrative Dunn was pretty much the Zodiac killer and not a guy who threw some bread, Pirro theatrically announced felony assault charges against him: “This guy thought it was funny. Well, he doesn’t think it’s funny today.” An equally off-the-wall Pam Bondi chimed in, raving about “assault on a law enforcement officer” and claiming Dunn was “an example of the Deep State” (who worked at the DOJ). Pirro tried to get a grand jury to indict him; they (hilariously) declined, but she finally got a misdemeanor charge to stick. And so to the federal jury trial starting Tuesday - in rare poetic justice, the day after National Sandwich Day - to protect our brave troops from food fights and send the dubious message to a restive populace: “Mess with this government, and it will mess with you.”
Presiding over what he called “the simplest case in the world” was US District Judge Carl Nichols. And it should have been, especially since the perp, at the scene of the crime, had already confessed, boldly proclaiming, “I did it. I threw a sandwich.” Still, it took two days and much bickering as the jury of 12 of Sandwich Guy’s peers struggled to remain straight-faced during what one observer called “a strange sort of performance art,“ both amusing and menacing. The opening statements clearly laid out both sides’ differences. Defense: ”He did it. He threw the sandwich.“ Also, so what: See First Amendment.” The government: “No matter who you are, you can’t just go around throwing stuff at people if you’re mad.” Also poor traumatized Officer Lairmore, who was just protecting the public, from sandwiches.
There was squabbling over words in a charge that cites “forcibly opposing, impeding or interfering” with federal agents on duty. What’s “forcibly”? Defense: A sandwich doesn’t constitute force any more than “an eight-year-old throwing a stuffed animal in the middle of a temper tantrum.” Prosecution, leaning hard into bellicose language: “Here we have the defendant throwing - it’s a sandwich, but throwing it hard...at point-blank range...He takes the sandwich, he cocks it back.” There’s the “impact” through the vest. Also, it’s not just a sandwich; there was “screaming,” “cussing,” “attempting to instigate.” (The judge reminds the jury speech isn’t assault). And, like an IED in Fallujah, prosecutors note the victim’s harrowing testimony the sandwich “kind of exploded. I could smell the onions and mustard.” The horror! The horror!
Meanwhile, Sandwich Guy sits in the cafeteria on lunch break, eating soup. A friend’s GoFundMe for him - “Help support the Sandwich Guy” - notes his ten years of service in Afghanistan, the Forest Service, the DOJ: “He is proud of his career serving the people of the United States.” Back in the courtroom, defense attorney Sabrina Shroff shreds Lairmore’s claim the sandwich “exploded” with video showing said sandwich still wrapped on the sidewalk. “Do you recognize that sandwich?” she asks. Lairmore waffles. Shroff: “You don’t see there’s mustard on it?” Lairmore wilts. No. “You can’t tell there’s ketchup on it?” No. “Mayonnaise? Lettuce? Tomato? No. ”In fact, the sandwich hasn’t exploded at all has it?“ Lairmore, helpfully, ”It looks like a little bit is coming out towards the bottom.“
Shroff also cited two “gag gifts” Lairmore said, sheepishly smiling, he got from co-workers: A plush sandwich he put on his shelf at work and a cartoon patch of Dunn throwing the sandwich, with the words “Felony Footlong,” he put on his lunchbox. So much for trauma, she suggested. Her closing argument was fiery. “This case, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is about a sandwich,” she declared. “A sandwich that, according to agent Lairmore, somehow both exploded on his chest in a spray of onions and mustard, but also landed intact on the ground still in its Subway wrapping.” Most vitally, she argued, a sandwich cannot be a weapon worthy of federal charges, especially facing off against a bulletproof vest. Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo glumly dissented: “We’re not just talking about a sandwich.”
Social media lapped up the coverage. They “relished” the testimony, they argued it “didn’t pass mustard,” they called Lairmore’s claim “baloney.” They summoned “12 Hungry Men.” Asked, “Do you see the sandwich seated in the courtroom today?” Argued, “If the sub doesn’t fit, you must acquit.” Snarled, “Say hello to my foot-long friend.” Asked, “Show us on this doll where the sandwich touched you.” Mused, “Not all gyros wear capes.” Insisted, “I did not have a relationship with that sandwich.” Proclaimed, “Liberte! Egalite! Panini!” When the verdict came Thursday - with every juror voting for acquittal - they celebrated Sandwich Guy “beat the wrap,” “justice, like a good sandwich, was served,” and, like them, an anti-fascist jury looked at the video, decided what mattered, and essentially said “what sandwich?”Outside the courthouse after the verdict, Shroff thanked jurors for their "affirmation" that dissent is "not just tolerated." "It is legal," she declared, "and it is welcome." Sandwich Guy also thanked the jurors, as well as "family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it was emotional or spiritual or artistic or financial." "I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything," he said. "That night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants...Let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says ‘E pluribus unum.’ That means ‘from many, one.’ Every life matters no matter where you came from. No matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free." A nation salutes you. Warren Zevon would have too: "Enjoy every sandwich."
Outside the courthouse after the verdict, Shroff thanked jurors for their "affirmation" that dissent is "not just tolerated." "It is legal," she declared, "and it is welcome." Sandwich Guy also the jurors, as well as "family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it was emotional or spiritual or artistic or financial." "I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything," he said. "That night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants...Let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says ‘E pluribus unum.’ That means ‘from many, one.’ Every life matters no matter where you came from. No matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free." A nation salutes you. Warren Zevon would have too: "Enjoy every sandwich."
Hope glimmers. After an election that saw “democrats in array” rising up to thunderously repudiate anything connected with a doddering tyrant - “Apparently Americans liked the East Wing more than anyone thought” - the final small sweet revenge was a jury acquitting D.C.'s valiant Sandwich Guy for the crime of making it pellucidly clear, with mustard, he doesn’t want stormtroopers in his town. One sage: “The only way this week could’ve been better for America was if Dick Cheney died again.”
On Tuesday, voters came out in sometimes record numbers - New York saw its highest turnout in over 50 years - to reject MAGA cruelty, inequity and greed, and win “just everything.” New Jersey and Virginia saw double-digit wins for women governors - a veteran and former CIA officer - reflecting a failure of anti-trans bigotry and resurgence of Democrats’ big tent. There were comparable wins from Connecticut and Pennsylvania to Mississippi and Georgia. Maine overwhelmingly rejected an effort to restrict mail-in voting, Colorado willingly raised taxes on the rich to fund school lunches, California’s re-districting Prop. 50 passed by an almost 2 to 1 margin; Newsom showed how to fight Trump - “After poking the bear, this bear roared” - and urged other states to also “meet this moment head-on.”
Most thrillingly, New York’s Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani evinced “the way to win is to include everyone. All everyone,” and he did in an off-off year yet. One analyst: “Republicans raved every Democrat was Zohran Mamdani, and Americans said, ‘Sign me up.'” In Mamdani’s electrifying speech - Eugene Debs! - to an exultant crowd, he rebuffed a politics that has “bowed at the altar of caution (and) paid a mighty price...Too many working people cannot recognize themselves in our party.” “We chose hope together,” he said. “We won because we insisted that no longer would politics be something that is done to us. Now, it is something that we do...New York will (be) a city built by immigrants, powered by immigrants and, as of tonight, led by an immigrant.” To Trump: “To get to any of us, you will have to get through all of us.”
He and his vassals will also have to exit the alternative reality bubble - and immense cognitive dissonance - revealed this week in Miami, where Trump spoke at an opulent America Business Forum to billionaires from Saudi Arabia to Silicon Valley. As Republicans lost every election in sight, the government shutdown became the longest in history, and 42 million people, including 3 million in Florida, faced hunger, the assembled tycoons paid $2,000 - but got a $50 gift card for food - to hear a vengeful old man babble, ramble, boast, confuse “Communist” South Africa with South America, and nonetheless gloat about the “economic miracle” he’d delivered to usher in a reeling America’s “golden age.” Like the tawdry Great Gatsby party he held, “They just can’t seem to stop doing things shockingly out of touch.”
Meanwhile, per the advice of his ghoulish mentor Roy Cohn, Trump is using the courts as a “personal cudgel” against his perceived enemies. Along with terrorizing blue cities, prosecutors have gone after over 20 anti-ICE protesters, often with “impeding” charges. In Chicago, prosecutors charged primary candidate Kat Abughazaleh with “conspiracy” after roughing her up at a protest. In L.A., a goon shot Carlos Jimenez, absurdly claiming self-defense, after he tried to warn marauding troops that kids were coming out of a school. In Chicago, head Nazi Greg Bovino, who’s told ICE thugs to arrest anyone who makes “hyperbolic” comments, charged a protester with giving him a groin injury purportedly requiring a two-week leave to recover; prosecutors just dropped the case after video, shockingly, showed they lied.
And so it goes. Mostly, the fascists, being inept, lose. (GOP) Judge Karin Immergut just permanently blocked Trump from inflicting “all necessary troops” on “war-ravaged” Portland OR after finding “no credible evidence” there was need for them and insisting “the facts - not the President’s political whims - guide how the law is applied.” Ouch. Still, the most failures have been earned by laughably unqualified US Attorney Jeanine “Boxwine” Pirro, who keeps trying and failing to get grand juries - seven at this point - to indict the proverbial ham sandwich. Her latest and most public effort to “turn a gag-gift-worthy moment into a federal criminal offense” was the case of folk hero, Air Force veteran and former DOJ attorney Sean Dunn, 37, who “brought a sandwich to a fascism fight” - specifically, a salami sub - and won.
In the infamous case of “the hoagie heard around the world,” Dunn, in a pink shirt and holding a just-bought, now-historic sub, confronted troops skulking on a downtown DC corner, reportedly about to raid a gay club there. He yelled they were fascists who should get out of his town; then he got in the face of 23-year-veteran Border Patrol agent Gregory Lairmore, yelled some more, hurled his sub at Lairmore’s bullet-proof-vested chest, and took off running. Thugs gave chase, caught and handcuffed him, and released him without charges. But for the “retaliatory animus” of the thin-skinned toddler in power, it would’ve ended there. Instead, video of the encounter went viral, the toddler got pissed, and a SWAT team went to Dunn’s apartment, complete with pulpy heavy-metal video of the action, to arrest him.
Insisting on the preposterous narrative Dunn was pretty much the Zodiac killer and not a guy who threw some bread, Pirro theatrically announced felony assault charges against him: “This guy thought it was funny. Well, he doesn’t think it’s funny today.” An equally off-the-wall Pam Bondi chimed in, raving about “assault on a law enforcement officer” and claiming Dunn was “an example of the Deep State” (who worked at the DOJ). Pirro tried to get a grand jury to indict him; they (hilariously) declined, but she finally got a misdemeanor charge to stick. And so to the federal jury trial starting Tuesday - in rare poetic justice, the day after National Sandwich Day - to protect our brave troops from food fights and send the dubious message to a restive populace: “Mess with this government, and it will mess with you.”
Presiding over what he called “the simplest case in the world” was US District Judge Carl Nichols. And it should have been, especially since the perp, at the scene of the crime, had already confessed, boldly proclaiming, “I did it. I threw a sandwich.” Still, it took two days and much bickering as the jury of 12 of Sandwich Guy’s peers struggled to remain straight-faced during what one observer called “a strange sort of performance art,“ both amusing and menacing. The opening statements clearly laid out both sides’ differences. Defense: ”He did it. He threw the sandwich.“ Also, so what: See First Amendment.” The government: “No matter who you are, you can’t just go around throwing stuff at people if you’re mad.” Also poor traumatized Officer Lairmore, who was just protecting the public, from sandwiches.
There was squabbling over words in a charge that cites “forcibly opposing, impeding or interfering” with federal agents on duty. What’s “forcibly”? Defense: A sandwich doesn’t constitute force any more than “an eight-year-old throwing a stuffed animal in the middle of a temper tantrum.” Prosecution, leaning hard into bellicose language: “Here we have the defendant throwing - it’s a sandwich, but throwing it hard...at point-blank range...He takes the sandwich, he cocks it back.” There’s the “impact” through the vest. Also, it’s not just a sandwich; there was “screaming,” “cussing,” “attempting to instigate.” (The judge reminds the jury speech isn’t assault). And, like an IED in Fallujah, prosecutors note the victim’s harrowing testimony the sandwich “kind of exploded. I could smell the onions and mustard.” The horror! The horror!
Meanwhile, Sandwich Guy sits in the cafeteria on lunch break, eating soup. A friend’s GoFundMe for him - “Help support the Sandwich Guy” - notes his ten years of service in Afghanistan, the Forest Service, the DOJ: “He is proud of his career serving the people of the United States.” Back in the courtroom, defense attorney Sabrina Shroff shreds Lairmore’s claim the sandwich “exploded” with video showing said sandwich still wrapped on the sidewalk. “Do you recognize that sandwich?” she asks. Lairmore waffles. Shroff: “You don’t see there’s mustard on it?” Lairmore wilts. No. “You can’t tell there’s ketchup on it?” No. “Mayonnaise? Lettuce? Tomato? No. ”In fact, the sandwich hasn’t exploded at all has it?“ Lairmore, helpfully, ”It looks like a little bit is coming out towards the bottom.“
Shroff also cited two “gag gifts” Lairmore said, sheepishly smiling, he got from co-workers: A plush sandwich he put on his shelf at work and a cartoon patch of Dunn throwing the sandwich, with the words “Felony Footlong,” he put on his lunchbox. So much for trauma, she suggested. Her closing argument was fiery. “This case, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is about a sandwich,” she declared. “A sandwich that, according to agent Lairmore, somehow both exploded on his chest in a spray of onions and mustard, but also landed intact on the ground still in its Subway wrapping.” Most vitally, she argued, a sandwich cannot be a weapon worthy of federal charges, especially facing off against a bulletproof vest. Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo glumly dissented: “We’re not just talking about a sandwich.”
Social media lapped up the coverage. They “relished” the testimony, they argued it “didn’t pass mustard,” they called Lairmore’s claim “baloney.” They summoned “12 Hungry Men.” Asked, “Do you see the sandwich seated in the courtroom today?” Argued, “If the sub doesn’t fit, you must acquit.” Snarled, “Say hello to my foot-long friend.” Asked, “Show us on this doll where the sandwich touched you.” Mused, “Not all gyros wear capes.” Insisted, “I did not have a relationship with that sandwich.” Proclaimed, “Liberte! Egalite! Panini!” When the verdict came Thursday - with every juror voting for acquittal - they celebrated Sandwich Guy “beat the wrap,” “justice, like a good sandwich, was served,” and, like them, an anti-fascist jury looked at the video, decided what mattered, and essentially said “what sandwich?”Outside the courthouse after the verdict, Shroff thanked jurors for their "affirmation" that dissent is "not just tolerated." "It is legal," she declared, "and it is welcome." Sandwich Guy also thanked the jurors, as well as "family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it was emotional or spiritual or artistic or financial." "I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything," he said. "That night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants...Let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says ‘E pluribus unum.’ That means ‘from many, one.’ Every life matters no matter where you came from. No matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free." A nation salutes you. Warren Zevon would have too: "Enjoy every sandwich."
Outside the courthouse after the verdict, Shroff thanked jurors for their "affirmation" that dissent is "not just tolerated." "It is legal," she declared, "and it is welcome." Sandwich Guy also the jurors, as well as "family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it was emotional or spiritual or artistic or financial." "I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything," he said. "That night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants...Let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says ‘E pluribus unum.’ That means ‘from many, one.’ Every life matters no matter where you came from. No matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free." A nation salutes you. Warren Zevon would have too: "Enjoy every sandwich."
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Abby Zimet
Abby Zimet has written CD's Further column since 2008. A longtime, award-winning journalist, she moved to the Maine woods in the early 70s, where she spent a dozen years building a house, hauling water and writing before moving to Portland. Having come of political age during the Vietnam War, she has long been involved in women's, labor, anti-war, social justice and refugee rights issues. Email: azimet18@gmail.com
Full Bio >
Abby Zimet
Abby Zimet has written CD's Further column since 2008. A longtime, award-winning journalist, she moved to the Maine woods in the early 70s, where she spent a dozen years building a house, hauling water and writing before moving to Portland. Having come of political age during the Vietnam War, she has long been involved in women's, labor, anti-war, social justice and refugee rights issues. Email: azimet18@gmail.com
Full Bio >
'Should have known better': Ex-US attorney hammers Jeanine Pirro over Sandwich Guy 'waste'
Adam Nichols
November 8, 2025
U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ferris Pirro speaks during a press conference REUTERS/Annabelle Gordon
An ex-US attorney slammed a current one Saturday for adamantly pursuing a farcical case she said should never have been prosecuted.
Barbara McQuade wrote for MSNBC about the case of Sean Dunn, an Air Force veteran who threw a Subway sandwich at a Customs and Border Protection agent, which she wrote had become a striking example of prosecutorial overreach and resource misallocation.
And President Donald Trump's pick for Washington, D.C. US attorney, ex-Fox star Jeanine Pirro, was hammered for heading the investigation.
"Pirro should have known better than to file assault charges because the facts didn’t satisfy the elements of the offense," McQuade wrote in a column titled, "US Attorney Jeanine Pirro wasted our money pursuing sandwich thrower."
"To prove an assault under the federal statute, the prosecution must establish not just that Dunn threw the sandwich at the agent, but that the act constituted a 'forcible assault.'"
A Subway sandwich bouncing off an agent clad in body armor certainly didn't meet that standard, she wrote.
Dunn admitted to throwing the sandwich as an act of protest against President Trump's federal law enforcement surge into Washington, D.C. The jury ultimately agreed with his defense, returning a not-guilty verdict.
The prosecution's case hinged on proving a "forcible assault," which legally requires demonstrating a "reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm." However, the evidence and testimony made this claim seem ridiculous, McQuade wrote.
She wrote that defense attorney Sabrina Shroff masterfully dismantled the prosecution's argument, declaring, "A footlong from Subway could not and certainly did not inflict bodily harm." When Dunn threw the sandwich, it hit the agent's bulletproof vest, prompting laughter in the courtroom when the agent testified about sandwich "explosions" and condiment stains.
Shroff's closing argument was particularly pointed: "If the vest is designed to protect an agent from gunfire, it is definitely going to keep you safe from a sandwich."
Pirro defended the prosecution, stating, "Even children know when they are angry, they are not allowed to throw objects at one another." However, the article argues that not every inappropriate action warrants criminal charges.
But McQuade wrote the prosecution's approach raised serious questions about resource allocation. The federal government invested significant time and effort in a high-profile arrest, even posting video of Dunn's arrest on social media - a violation of Justice Department policy.
Dunn had already suffered professional consequences, losing his job as a paralegal at the Department of Justice. The criminal prosecution seemed unnecessary and potentially distracting from more serious cases that might have gone unaddressed, McQuade wrote
FOX TV JUDGE
Adam Nichols
November 8, 2025
RAW STORY
U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ferris Pirro speaks during a press conference REUTERS/Annabelle Gordon
An ex-US attorney slammed a current one Saturday for adamantly pursuing a farcical case she said should never have been prosecuted.
Barbara McQuade wrote for MSNBC about the case of Sean Dunn, an Air Force veteran who threw a Subway sandwich at a Customs and Border Protection agent, which she wrote had become a striking example of prosecutorial overreach and resource misallocation.
And President Donald Trump's pick for Washington, D.C. US attorney, ex-Fox star Jeanine Pirro, was hammered for heading the investigation.
"Pirro should have known better than to file assault charges because the facts didn’t satisfy the elements of the offense," McQuade wrote in a column titled, "US Attorney Jeanine Pirro wasted our money pursuing sandwich thrower."
"To prove an assault under the federal statute, the prosecution must establish not just that Dunn threw the sandwich at the agent, but that the act constituted a 'forcible assault.'"
A Subway sandwich bouncing off an agent clad in body armor certainly didn't meet that standard, she wrote.
Dunn admitted to throwing the sandwich as an act of protest against President Trump's federal law enforcement surge into Washington, D.C. The jury ultimately agreed with his defense, returning a not-guilty verdict.
The prosecution's case hinged on proving a "forcible assault," which legally requires demonstrating a "reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm." However, the evidence and testimony made this claim seem ridiculous, McQuade wrote.
She wrote that defense attorney Sabrina Shroff masterfully dismantled the prosecution's argument, declaring, "A footlong from Subway could not and certainly did not inflict bodily harm." When Dunn threw the sandwich, it hit the agent's bulletproof vest, prompting laughter in the courtroom when the agent testified about sandwich "explosions" and condiment stains.
Shroff's closing argument was particularly pointed: "If the vest is designed to protect an agent from gunfire, it is definitely going to keep you safe from a sandwich."
Pirro defended the prosecution, stating, "Even children know when they are angry, they are not allowed to throw objects at one another." However, the article argues that not every inappropriate action warrants criminal charges.
But McQuade wrote the prosecution's approach raised serious questions about resource allocation. The federal government invested significant time and effort in a high-profile arrest, even posting video of Dunn's arrest on social media - a violation of Justice Department policy.
Dunn had already suffered professional consequences, losing his job as a paralegal at the Department of Justice. The criminal prosecution seemed unnecessary and potentially distracting from more serious cases that might have gone unaddressed, McQuade wrote
DC “Sandwich Guy” Who Threw Sub at CBP Agent Acquitted on Fed Assault Charges
The immigration agent claimed that the harmless sub had “exploded” on his bulletproof vest.
By Chris Walker ,
The immigration agent claimed that the harmless sub had “exploded” on his bulletproof vest.
By Chris Walker ,
November 7, 2025
An art piece depicting an individual throwing a sandwich is seen on August 17, 2025 in Washington, D.C.Kayla Bartkowski / Getty Images
Ajury in Washington, D.C. has acquitted Sean Dunn, the man who was accused of assaulting a Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) officer by throwing a “sub-style sandwich” at him.
The case was handled by the office of U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, a former Fox News host and staunch ally of President Donald Trump. Her office had originally sought to have Dunn charged with felony assault, but after a federal grand jury rejected that idea, prosecutors aimed to charge him with a misdemeanor.
Although typically a rare occurrence, several cases in Washington D.C. have been rejected by grand juries, seen as being overreaches on the part of Trump’s Justice Department.
Dunn, who became known as the “D.C. Sandwich Guy,” became somewhat of a local folk hero following news of the sandwich throw. Several memes of the incident appeared online, and graffiti depicting him throwing the sub appeared around D.C.
Dunn has admitted to throwing the sandwich, with his lawyers arguing it was a protest gesture during a demonstration against President Donald Trump’s anti-immigrant crackdown in D.C. in early August. The prosecution had reportedly embellished the extent to which Dunn’s actions affected the CBP agent, Gregory Lairmore, claiming that the hoagie was thrown violently, at “point-blank range.”
Lairmore testified that the sandwich had “exploded all over my uniform” and that he had “mustard and condiments” on him, including “an onion hanging from my radio antenna” following the incident — a testimony that was lambasted on social media shortly after it became public.
Following the sandwich toss, federal agents chased Dunn through the streets and temporarily detained him. He was released, but arrested at his home later on.
The depiction of events surrounding the sandwich throw was challenged during the trial — pictures of the offending sandwich after the incident occurred showed that it was still in its wrapper, on the ground, after it hit Lairmore’s bulletproof vest.
Dunn’s defense lawyer also noted that Lairmore and his colleagues later joked about the event, with his coworkers buying him gag gifts like a plush toy sandwich, demonstrating that the incident wasn’t a major event in the officer’s life, as the prosecution had depicted.
“They’re joking about it with each other, and they’re joking about it with Agent Lairmore. Why? Because they think it’s funny,” defense attorney Sabrina Shroff said.
After several hours of deliberation, the jury came to the conclusion that Dunn had not committed a criminal offense. In response to the outcome of the case, Dunn relished the fact that he was acquitted.
“I’m relieved, and I’m looking forward to moving on with my life,” Dunn said. “I am so happy that justice prevails, in spite of everything happening.”
Polling in the nation’s capital showed overwhelming opposition to President Donald Trump’s federal takeover of the city, with one survey showing that 79 percent of D.C. residents were opposed to the action. A Reuters/Ipsos poll last month shows that Americans are also opposed to militarization of U.S. cities more broadly, with nearly 3 in 5 respondents (58 percent) saying troops should only be sent to areas that face an external threat.
Ajury in Washington, D.C. has acquitted Sean Dunn, the man who was accused of assaulting a Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) officer by throwing a “sub-style sandwich” at him.
The case was handled by the office of U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, a former Fox News host and staunch ally of President Donald Trump. Her office had originally sought to have Dunn charged with felony assault, but after a federal grand jury rejected that idea, prosecutors aimed to charge him with a misdemeanor.
Although typically a rare occurrence, several cases in Washington D.C. have been rejected by grand juries, seen as being overreaches on the part of Trump’s Justice Department.
Dunn, who became known as the “D.C. Sandwich Guy,” became somewhat of a local folk hero following news of the sandwich throw. Several memes of the incident appeared online, and graffiti depicting him throwing the sub appeared around D.C.
Dunn has admitted to throwing the sandwich, with his lawyers arguing it was a protest gesture during a demonstration against President Donald Trump’s anti-immigrant crackdown in D.C. in early August. The prosecution had reportedly embellished the extent to which Dunn’s actions affected the CBP agent, Gregory Lairmore, claiming that the hoagie was thrown violently, at “point-blank range.”
Lairmore testified that the sandwich had “exploded all over my uniform” and that he had “mustard and condiments” on him, including “an onion hanging from my radio antenna” following the incident — a testimony that was lambasted on social media shortly after it became public.
Following the sandwich toss, federal agents chased Dunn through the streets and temporarily detained him. He was released, but arrested at his home later on.
The depiction of events surrounding the sandwich throw was challenged during the trial — pictures of the offending sandwich after the incident occurred showed that it was still in its wrapper, on the ground, after it hit Lairmore’s bulletproof vest.
Dunn’s defense lawyer also noted that Lairmore and his colleagues later joked about the event, with his coworkers buying him gag gifts like a plush toy sandwich, demonstrating that the incident wasn’t a major event in the officer’s life, as the prosecution had depicted.
“They’re joking about it with each other, and they’re joking about it with Agent Lairmore. Why? Because they think it’s funny,” defense attorney Sabrina Shroff said.
After several hours of deliberation, the jury came to the conclusion that Dunn had not committed a criminal offense. In response to the outcome of the case, Dunn relished the fact that he was acquitted.
“I’m relieved, and I’m looking forward to moving on with my life,” Dunn said. “I am so happy that justice prevails, in spite of everything happening.”
Polling in the nation’s capital showed overwhelming opposition to President Donald Trump’s federal takeover of the city, with one survey showing that 79 percent of D.C. residents were opposed to the action. A Reuters/Ipsos poll last month shows that Americans are also opposed to militarization of U.S. cities more broadly, with nearly 3 in 5 respondents (58 percent) saying troops should only be sent to areas that face an external threat.
“No assault with a deli weapon after all,” joked one reporter after the verdict.
Banksy-style posters depicting a protester throwing a sandwich at Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth appear in the Georgetown neighborhood on August 31, 2025 in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Andrew Leyden/Getty Images)
Brad Reed
Nov 06, 2025
COMMON DREAMS
Sean Dunn, the former US Department of Justice employee who was famously hurled a sandwich at Customs and Border Protection officers this past summer, has been found not guilty on misdemeanor assault charges.
Jurors acquitted Dunn on Thursday after deliberating for several hours after his trial ended on Wednesday afternoon. According to CNN, Dunn told reporters after the verdict that he was “relieved and looking forward to moving on with my life.”
‘How Is That an Assault?’ DC Residents Scoff as Trial Starts for Man Who Chucked Sandwich at Trump Agent
US Attorney Jeanine Pirro had originally tried to charge Dunn with felony assault, but lowered the charge to a misdemeanor offense after a grand jury in Washington, DC refused to indict him.
Dunn was caught on camera angrily throwing a sandwich at federal immigration enforcement officers back in August, and he could be heard calling the officers “fascists,” and telling them they were not welcome in his city.
Shortly afterward, Pirro vowed to throw the proverbial book at Dunn for his food-tossing transgression.
“He thought it was funny,” Pirro said in a video she posted on social media. “Well, he doesn’t think it’s funny today because we charged him with a felony. And we’re gonna back the police to the hilt! So, there. Stick your Subway sandwich somewhere else.”
Dunn’s case became a cause célèbre for many Washington, DC residents who have opposed President Donald Trump’s decision to deploy the National Guard and to conduct aggressive immigration raids in their city.
Many journalists reacted to news of Dunn’s acquittal by deploying a number of sandwich-related puns.
“Apparently you can indict a ham sandwich but you can’t convict turkey sub,” joked tech journalist Kara Swisher in a post on Bluesky.
“You could say he... beat the wrap,” wrote Los Angeles-based independent journalist Mel Buer.
“If the hoagie didn’t hit, you must acquit!” wrote The Bulwark’s Sam Stein on X.
“No assault with a deli weapon after all,” remarked Wall Street Journal reporter Josh Dawsey.
“Congratulations, US Attorney Pirro, for making Sean Dunn the hero that DC deserves,” wrote journalist Marcy Wheeler.
“Another jury finds another Trump DOJ case sub-par,” wrote Adam Klasfeld, editor-in-chief of All Rise News.
Local hero: ‘DC sandwich guy’ found not guilty of assaulting officer with sub
By AFP
November 6, 2025
Sean Dunn (2nd from left) was arrested after throwing a sandwich at federal law enforcement in protest against Trump's crackdown on crime, with his act of defiance going viral on social media - Copyright AFP JUSTIN TALLIS
Asad HASHIM
A US man charged with using a sandwich to assault a law enforcement officer was acquitted Thursday after a jury decided that charges brought by President Donald Trump’s prosecutors were baloney.
The prosecution made a surprise local hero of 37-year-old Sean Dunn, who was protesting Trump’s shock takeover of law enforcement in the capital Washington.
He was accused of flinging a “sub-style sandwich” at an armed Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agent on August 10 in a busy nightlife district after shouting expletives at the officer.
The officer was part of a huge crackdown ordered by Trump, with multiple agencies and troops deploying in Washington and several other Democratic-run cities, ostensibly to fight what the Republican president says are crime waves and anarchy.
Prosecutors wanted serious felony charges, but a grand jury refused to indict Dunn — a rare occurrence. A misdemeanor charge was filed and Dunn faced a maximum of one year in prison if convicted.
While prosecutors ultimately proved ham-fisted, Dunn had appeared to be in a serious pickle.
Right after hurling his sandwich he was chased down, then released, only to be arrested in a raid on his home that was publicized by the White House.
As video of the initial altercation went viral, Dunn was quickly dubbed “DC sandwich guy,” becoming a symbol of resistance to Trump. Stylized images of him in mid-sandwich-attack appeared on posters, graffiti, T-shirts and even a popular Halloween costume.
Trump’s much-touted crime crackdown has seen an increase in arrests and indictments, but US media analysis of the data shows much of that has come from pursuing minor offenses in court.
The top Trump-appointed prosecutor for Washington, Jeanine Pirro, has pursued maximum penalties for all arrests since taking office, including in the Dunn case.
Dunn was a paralegal at the Justice Department at the time of the altercation and was fired from his position.
On Monday, as proceedings opened, Judge Carl J. Nichols noted that he expected the trial to be a short one as “this is the simplest case in the world.”
Dunn’s defense did not dispute that he threw the sandwich at the officer, instead arguing that his action did not constitute an offense, and that the charges against him were a “blatant abuse of power.”
Much of the case centered on the definition of key terms, including whether the throwing of a soft object constitutes an act that is “forcible,” and whether Dunn’s action impeded the officer in the conduct of their duties.
On the first day of court proceedings, the defendant, dressed in a black-and-white patterned sweater, appeared subdued as his defense team engaged in feverish consultation.
Dunn’s defense has contended that he was being selectively prosecuted due to his political views, having called the federal officers “fascists” before he threw the sandwich
By AFP
November 6, 2025
Sean Dunn (2nd from left) was arrested after throwing a sandwich at federal law enforcement in protest against Trump's crackdown on crime, with his act of defiance going viral on social media - Copyright AFP JUSTIN TALLIS
Asad HASHIM
A US man charged with using a sandwich to assault a law enforcement officer was acquitted Thursday after a jury decided that charges brought by President Donald Trump’s prosecutors were baloney.
The prosecution made a surprise local hero of 37-year-old Sean Dunn, who was protesting Trump’s shock takeover of law enforcement in the capital Washington.
He was accused of flinging a “sub-style sandwich” at an armed Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agent on August 10 in a busy nightlife district after shouting expletives at the officer.
The officer was part of a huge crackdown ordered by Trump, with multiple agencies and troops deploying in Washington and several other Democratic-run cities, ostensibly to fight what the Republican president says are crime waves and anarchy.
Prosecutors wanted serious felony charges, but a grand jury refused to indict Dunn — a rare occurrence. A misdemeanor charge was filed and Dunn faced a maximum of one year in prison if convicted.
While prosecutors ultimately proved ham-fisted, Dunn had appeared to be in a serious pickle.
Right after hurling his sandwich he was chased down, then released, only to be arrested in a raid on his home that was publicized by the White House.
As video of the initial altercation went viral, Dunn was quickly dubbed “DC sandwich guy,” becoming a symbol of resistance to Trump. Stylized images of him in mid-sandwich-attack appeared on posters, graffiti, T-shirts and even a popular Halloween costume.
Trump’s much-touted crime crackdown has seen an increase in arrests and indictments, but US media analysis of the data shows much of that has come from pursuing minor offenses in court.
The top Trump-appointed prosecutor for Washington, Jeanine Pirro, has pursued maximum penalties for all arrests since taking office, including in the Dunn case.
Dunn was a paralegal at the Justice Department at the time of the altercation and was fired from his position.
On Monday, as proceedings opened, Judge Carl J. Nichols noted that he expected the trial to be a short one as “this is the simplest case in the world.”
Dunn’s defense did not dispute that he threw the sandwich at the officer, instead arguing that his action did not constitute an offense, and that the charges against him were a “blatant abuse of power.”
Much of the case centered on the definition of key terms, including whether the throwing of a soft object constitutes an act that is “forcible,” and whether Dunn’s action impeded the officer in the conduct of their duties.
On the first day of court proceedings, the defendant, dressed in a black-and-white patterned sweater, appeared subdued as his defense team engaged in feverish consultation.
Dunn’s defense has contended that he was being selectively prosecuted due to his political views, having called the federal officers “fascists” before he threw the sandwich
Sandwich thrown by protester 'exploded' and left mustard stain on border agent, court hears
IT REMAINED WRAPPED, CBP LIES!
Kayla Epstein
Kayla Epstein
BBC
November 6, 2025
moment a sandwich is thrown at federal agent in Washington DC
A US immigration agent has testified he could feel through his ballistic vest the impact of a sandwich hurled at him by a Washington DC protester, who has gone on trial for assault.
Customs and Border Patrol agent Gregory Lairmore told the jury the snack "exploded all over him" and he "could smell the onions and mustard" on his uniform.
Neither side disputes that Sean Dunn, 37, did in fact lob obscenities and a deli-style sandwich at officers deployed by President Donald Trump to patrol the nation's capital in August. But Mr Dunn's lawyer argues it was not a criminal act.
The incident was captured on video and went viral, making Mr Dunn a symbol of opposition in Washington DC to Trump.
Government prosecutors initially tried to secure felony charges against Mr Dunn, but a grand jury declined to indict him. Prosecutors have instead charged him with a lower-level misdemeanour assault.
Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to Washington DC this summer sparked outrage from some of the city's residents, who saw it as a politicisation of the military. The White House argued the forces were necessary to crack down on crime.
According to charging documents, Mr Dunn approached a group of officers at about 23:00 on 10 August, calling them "fascists" and shouting: "Why are you here? I don't want you in my city!"
The court witnessed a re-enactment from Mr Lairmore on Tuesday as he took the stand to testify against Mr Dunn.
"I could feel it through my ballistic vest," he said of the sandwich's impact, adding that an onion string hung from his police radio and mustard stained his shirt.
Mr Dunn's lawyer, Julia Gatto, said in her opening statement that hurling the sandwich was a "harmless gesture that did not, could not, cause injury".
But prosecutor John Parron said Mr Dunn must be held accountable.
"No matter who you are, you can't just go around throwing stuff at people because you're mad," Mr Parron said, according to the New York Times.
After the alleged assault came to light, Mr Dunn was fired from his job as a paralegal in the Department of Justice.
November 6, 2025
moment a sandwich is thrown at federal agent in Washington DC
A US immigration agent has testified he could feel through his ballistic vest the impact of a sandwich hurled at him by a Washington DC protester, who has gone on trial for assault.
Customs and Border Patrol agent Gregory Lairmore told the jury the snack "exploded all over him" and he "could smell the onions and mustard" on his uniform.
Neither side disputes that Sean Dunn, 37, did in fact lob obscenities and a deli-style sandwich at officers deployed by President Donald Trump to patrol the nation's capital in August. But Mr Dunn's lawyer argues it was not a criminal act.
The incident was captured on video and went viral, making Mr Dunn a symbol of opposition in Washington DC to Trump.
Government prosecutors initially tried to secure felony charges against Mr Dunn, but a grand jury declined to indict him. Prosecutors have instead charged him with a lower-level misdemeanour assault.
Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to Washington DC this summer sparked outrage from some of the city's residents, who saw it as a politicisation of the military. The White House argued the forces were necessary to crack down on crime.
According to charging documents, Mr Dunn approached a group of officers at about 23:00 on 10 August, calling them "fascists" and shouting: "Why are you here? I don't want you in my city!"
The court witnessed a re-enactment from Mr Lairmore on Tuesday as he took the stand to testify against Mr Dunn.
"I could feel it through my ballistic vest," he said of the sandwich's impact, adding that an onion string hung from his police radio and mustard stained his shirt.
Mr Dunn's lawyer, Julia Gatto, said in her opening statement that hurling the sandwich was a "harmless gesture that did not, could not, cause injury".
But prosecutor John Parron said Mr Dunn must be held accountable.
"No matter who you are, you can't just go around throwing stuff at people because you're mad," Mr Parron said, according to the New York Times.
After the alleged assault came to light, Mr Dunn was fired from his job as a paralegal in the Department of Justice.
Getty Images
A man, who was later arrested for assaulting law enforcement with a sandwich, interacts with Border Patrol and FBI agents along the U Street corridor on 10 August.
No comments:
Post a Comment