As somebody who's served in a grand jury, it really is humiliating for them.
Not sure to what extent the process differs there, but in my experience the process is managed by a district attorney or assistant DA, and testimony for cases is a parade of mostly cops and prosecutors with a sprinkling of state's witnesses for especially dramatic cases. You literally don't hear from the defense at all (by design). And it's constantly drilled into you that this is just a preliminary stage -- you're not voting whether they're guilty, just whether the matter deserves further scrutiny in court.
To have that level of bias -- before whatever unprofessional/extralegal bullshit the incompetent administration team pulled -- and still get not just a failed indictment, but one with ZERO votes from the grand jury (which are typically larger than the traditional twelve) is hilarious.
How is interviewing EU officials to game out a plausible strategy by which Trump might annex Greenland right-wing propaganda? It's not arguing that it's a good thing, or justified. They published many more stories talking about how the Greenland thing was a disaster for American soft power.