MN - Journalist Don Lemon arrested for church protest, Minneapolis, 18 Jan 2026

[LAborn]

DL is a very wealthy man so It's not all about the money and this "journalistic major leagues" when viewers have been leaving the MSM in droves and are following the independent journalists and lawyers on their social media platforms.
There are financial estimations online on how much a creator could be making from their platforms.
It's a lot and comparing it to the salaries they got from the news corporations means squat when one wants reliable, unrestricted reporting and the creator has the freedom to deliver just that.
CNN did Lemon a favor by booting him and settled with him for about 24 million.
Don is more than fine,
imo

Maybe some older people don't understand how lucrative Youtube is. Lemon had a huge following from the get go.

 

[Hexe]

Good point regarding the purely legal analysis.

What other analysis should we employ in the thread discussing if arresting Lemon was a correct decision or the power abuse?

 

[witchway]

Did he have a driver he paid? Did he pay the videographer? Did he not warn them about the FACE Act and that they would all be breaking federal law? If they were also arrested because they were working for Lemon in good faith, then I wonder if they can file a civil lawsuit against him. As a former journalist, he should have known that it was illegal for him to storm a church with a group of agitators during a worship service. I can't imagine a journalist and videographer/team storming an abortion clinic and filming what goes on there.

What facts are this opinion based on.

I think it’s been well established he did not “storm” a church.

Realize being indicted does not automatically equal guilty.

He is not a “former” journalist as many here have explained.

Why do I keep reading comparisons to “abortion clinics” Don Lemon was not in one. If this is regarding the FACE Act, then please say how he violated the act by being in a church.

 

[Cryptic]

What other analysis should we employ in the thread discussing if arresting Lemon was a correct decision or the power abuse?

There may be two concepts at play:

Concept one- Should Lemon's motives be examined?

Websleuths permits the examination of motives in regards to possible perpetrators. Once Lemon was identified as a possible perpetrator (charged), the examination of his motives is routine. There are very likely thousands of threads on this forum where motives of possible perpetrators are discussed

Concept Two: What factors should be examined to show a legitimate arrest, or abuse of power?

I don't know. One test could be if other journalists have pulled stunts and been penalized. But.... this might be hard as journalists pulling similar stunts seem to be exceedingly rare. There might be a reason for that.

 

[Cryptic]

If they were also arrested because they were working for Lemon in good faith, then I wonder if they can file a civil lawsuit against him.

Good point. I think the videographer who has been charged is very likely to file a lawsuit. The ability to file a lawsuit however, may depend on Lemon and her being found guilty.

I think the videographer's best bet would be to plea bargain (Mercy your honor, I am not a major league pro and relied on the famous and seemingly mega knowledgeable Lemon to vet the stunt), then sue Lemon.

 

[Cryptic]

DL is a very wealthy man

I don't know- is he?

Some humans spend everything they earn- and more. This concept holds for humans working in a big box store, pro athletes and Don Lemon.

I have no idea as to the current state of his finances. I do agree that he very likely earned millions in the past.

 

[witchway]

Good point. I think the videographer who has been charged is very likely to file a lawsuit. The ability to file a lawsuit however, may depend on Lemon and her being found guilty.

A lawsuit would be seemingly be strengthened If the videographer has texts of Lemon dismissed any concerns etc.

What? Now a videographer may have texts of Don Lemon dismissing any concerns. Where is this? What lawsuit?

There (not you in particular) appears to be an attack on Don Lemon as a journalist and nefarious unfounded accusations on his intent with no basis in fact. MOO and JMO Yikes

 

[Cryptic]

What? Now a videographer may have texts of Don Lemon dismissing any concerns. Where is this?

I deleted that from my post.

But, yes a videographer may (key word) have evidence that would strengthen a lawsuit against Lemon. Videographers and other contract employees can be pretty astute and question employers- even Don Lemon.

Heck, I saw a carpenter question blue prints once. Granted, the housing developer was not Lemon, but he still noticed something he felt unusual / strange about a load bearing structure and... questioned it. The matter was looked into and determined to be sound.

 

[Summerliz03]

Law is not founded in “vibes” and feelings. MOO.

 

[LAborn]

Pretty good article outlining 1st amendment protection on public vs. private spaces. Unless DL had prior authorization from the church, this could be an issue for him. My impression is sharing recordings without proper consent could be problematic because it's a private space and people expect a degree of privacy, unlike public spaces. Why First Amendment Protections Are Limited in the Don Lemon Arrest — EEW Magazine

 

[Summerliz03]

Pretty good article outlining 1st amendment protection on public vs. private spaces. Unless DL had prior authorization from the church, this could be an issue for him. My impression is sharing recordings without proper consent could be problematic because it's a private space and people expect a degree of privacy, unlike public spaces. Why First Amendment Protections Are Limited in the Don Lemon Arrest — EEW Magazine

I agree with you. The federal government can only charge a trespassing charge for a federal property, not a private church. So the church itself could file a trespassing charge against Don, but the federal government cannot charge him with that (and they haven’t). I guess we’ll have to see if the church itself presses charges against him for the trespassing.

 

[Cryptic]

Law is not founded in “vibes” and feelings. MOO.

Civil law and criminal law are very different matters.

Civil law (laws suit) might (key word) permit "It vibed strange, but the boss assured me everything was ok" concepts.

For example, a boss dismissing voiced concerns from others may increase liability if things go wrong. Boeing was evidently told by many people that the 737 max design gave them "bad vibes" for various reasons. Could this type of evidence been presented against them in a civil lawsuit to show a lack of concern?

 

[LAborn]

I agree with you. The federal government can only charge a trespassing charge for a federal property, not a private church. So the church itself could file a trespassing charge against Don, but the federal government cannot charge him with that (and they haven’t). I guess we’ll have to see if the church itself presses charges against him for the trespassing.

Ohhhhh!! Thanks for pointing out that distinction, I was forgetting the limits of the feds. Good point!!

 

[Summerliz03]

Civil law and criminal law are very different matters.

Civil law (laws suit) may permit "It felt strange, but the boss told me everything was ok" concepts. But... I am not a lawyer either.

I’m also not a lawyer. Don Lemon was charged with a criminal crime, not civil. They don’t go on vibes and feelings. I was more commenting on the multiple posts here that go into their personal feelings of how upset people are that the protesters went into the church. Those feelings really do not matter with this case. It’s that Don Lemon is a journalist. All MOO.