News You Can't Use

Justice Department Struggles to Convince 12 People That Hurling Lunch Meat Constitutes Federal Crime

In a stunning blow to prosecutors who apparently believed submarine sandwiches posed a clear and present danger to national security, a Washington DC grand jury declined to indict Sean Charles Dunn on felony charges for throwing a sub at a federal agent.

The incident involved Dunn hurling what witnesses described as "a perfectly good sandwich" at a Customs and Border Protection agent during Trump's federal takeover of DC. The sandwich, reportedly a salami sub, was captured on video in what legal experts are calling "the most documented lunch-related assault in federal history."

Federal prosecutors had initially sought felony charges, apparently convinced that sandwich-throwing represents the gravest threat to law enforcement since the invention of the food fight. However, the grand jury - composed of 12 DC residents who presumably understand the difference between a sandwich and a weapon of mass destruction - politely declined to ruin someone's life over airborne lunch meat.

"This is clearly a miscarriage of justice," sobbed a federal prosecutor while dramatically clutching a photograph of the offending sandwich. "If we don't prosecute sandwich-throwers to the fullest extent of the law, what's next? People throwing bagels? Hurling hot dogs?"

Dunn, who worked as a Justice Department international affairs specialist before being fired for his sandwich-related activism, now faces misdemeanor charges. Legal experts note this represents a significant downgrade from "dangerous sandwich terrorist" to "guy who got really mad and threw his lunch."

The case has become a symbol of resistance, with "Free the Sandwich Guy" t-shirts appearing throughout DC. Local restaurants have started offering the "Sean Dunn Special" - a sub served with a side of righteous indignation and instructions on proper throwing technique.

Grand jury members, speaking anonymously because apparently sandwich cases are now matters of national security, expressed confusion about why federal resources were being devoted to prosecuting lunch-related incidents. "We've got real crimes to worry about," said one juror. "Someone throwing a sandwich is basically Tuesday in DC."