Former CNN journalist Don Lemon arrested after church protest in Minnesota
reuters.com
reuters.com
If there is video evidence it should be easy to decide for the court.
https://youtu.be/s7jsQKRoNEY?si=gmHgnnxBrbgXR525
It was clearly not a protest but obstruction by others. And he was not taking part of the obstruction, just documenting it.
I can understand DOJ charging him with conspiracy if he took part of the planning, but arrasting him was probably not needed (whether conspiracy took part or not), as he didn't seem to disrupt the church.
The DOJ just wants to scare people out of protesting or reporting on crimes, score some points with their religious base, and "own the libs" by turning the FACE act around, probably in retaliation for the (IMO overcharging) of the "Pro Life Grandmother" aka Paula “Paulette” Harlow:
>“[The defendants] forcefully entered the clinic and set about blockading two clinic doors using their bodies, furniture, chains, and ropes,” the US Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia said.
The story includes a link to the entire livestream. You may be interested in the interview with protest coordinators before they enter the church.
I remember seeing an edited video on the order of 5 minutes long on Don Lemon's own channel that seems to be gone now, although the livestream is still there.
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/30/don-lemon-appears-i...
This is the kind of crap minorities always have to put up with in the US. Cops can arrest you for things that are absolutely against the law and have you prove your innocence. It doesn't matter what the court thinks at Trump will field a huge range of lawyers to ensure the process is as painful as possible. His idea of justice is if you piss off the king he should have the right to behead you.
[0]: https://www.scottrlarson.com/blog/blog-resist-unsubscribe/
> In an unusual move that drew a rebuke from the chief federal judge in Minnesota, Patrick Schiltz, the Justice Department filed emergency applications to get Schiltz and then the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals to overrule the magistrate judge. Schiltz told prosecutors that if they disagreed with a magistrate judge's decision, they must instead seek an indictment from a grand jury in order to arrest Lemon.
> In a letter filed in court records, Schiltz wrote that Lemon and his producer "were not protestors at all."
> "There is no evidence that those two engaged in any criminal behavior or conspired to do so," the chief judge wrote.
Popular comments on the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4ctuhv-cck) from within the first couple of days after upload make problems with the pro-Lemon narrative quite clear.
Not mentioned is that the interview with the activists discloses a clear plan to "make the [congregation] feel uncomfortable", and that Lemon's interviews were quite hostile and aimed at furthering the protesters' point of view. At one point he could be seen to lean on an interviewee while saying "don't touch me". The protesters did not leave when asked.
Everyone who watches the footage is encouraged to consider how they would perceive the actions if this had taken place at a mosque or synagogue rather than a church. It's curious that Reuters could apparently find several "Free press advocates [who] voiced alarm over the arrests", but not any freedom of speech advocates concerned with the congregation's right to freedom of association on private property.
It's also strange that the article goes into extensive detail about Lemon's background and similar actions by the Trump administration, but is silent about the apparent motivation for the choice of venue for the protest (the lead pastor, Jonathan Parnell, was suspected of having ties to ICE) which makes the action seem rather like harassment.
> "There is no evidence that those two engaged in any criminal behavior or conspired to do so," the chief judge wrote.
Claims made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Pointing to a video is not providing evidence. However, I'm more than willing to watch a timestamped link and read an explanation of the evidence in your words (perhaps several, if required; I just don't want to spend a lot of time refuting this).
Occam's Razor suggests (really, screams at the top of its lungs) this is further political retaliation from an administration which is now infamous for its acts of political retaliation (among other things). Why would they be telling the truth this time? Further than that, why should any of this administration's evidence be trusted after the AI manipulation stunt? (Dismissing false evidence as a joke meme is not justification.)
This whole ICE thing is a psychological operation. It's media manipulation and all the people violently protesting are useful idiots falling for it, or they're feds in disguise instigating more violence to turn around and give more crackdowns.
Don Lemon is one of the chosen media elites. He can sexually assault people and nothing happens. He's a terrible human being, but nothing will come from this. It's all smoke and mirror.
Go outside and turn off your phones people.
To me this arrest looks like lawfare. It looks like the administration abusing its power to violate the first amendment.
Lincoln was not a good guy or pro-American (anti-speech, anti-due process), but he's viewed positively only because he won.
and as far as the Washington Compost, we know from the Church Committee the CIA likely has operatives in there. So unlike Lincoln, there was no real need to raid WaPo. It was likely just for show.
No, it's real. The media didn't make it up, the people in the streets aren't crisis actors. Sometimes things actually happen. Sometimes what the media reports on is actually real.