When they say a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich

it depends on the lies used by the prosecutor to the grand jury. I think it's a good bet that the point here was to get the indictment no matter what lies had to be told to the grand jury. It should not surprise anybody if the so called "evidence" presented to the grand jury bears no resemblance to anything that will be provided in discovery or used at trial.

Obviously anybody who works for, is associated with or represents Crumb the 1st is chosen because they have no ethical problem with telling lies. Should Hackagain be concerned that in the end of all of this her law license may end up with the same fate as Ghooliani? Even a ham sandwich could figure that one out.