• #661
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

Jim Acosta had a similar journalistic path as Lemon, most of his career on legacy media and now is streaming via his own channel on Youtube and substack.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #662
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

Jim Acosta had a similar journalistic path as Lemon, most of his career on legacy media and now is streaming via his own channel on Youtube and substack.
Same with Megyn Kelly 🤪 she’s now an independent journalist with her own broadcast on SiriusXM after being at Fox, NBC, etc. for her whole career. I wonder if she’s considered a “former” journalist? 🤔 MOO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #663
Something to consider, of the 2 names that have been redacted on the indictment.

Purely speculative but it's possible they're redacted because they chose to cooperate & give testimony to who was there, who knew what, and when, and how things all went down. If that's the case & part of the allegations against Lemon are coming from the protestors themselves, that seems pretty damning.
My computer is limited. Are the redacted names those of witnesses? Or are the redacted names those of other people charged? Witnesses with redacted names might be minors etc.

But....names redacted from a section describing other defendants etc. could show that the protest crew is starting to fragment. As you stated fragmentation could include a willingness to provide information against Don Lemon. Then again, redacted names may mean totally different.

In general, fragmentation of groups facing criminal charges is pretty common- despite past pledges of undying loyalty etc. It looks like they have nine protesters in custody so far and had seven in custody at the time Lemon was indicated.

Seven might be a "magic number" statistically in this matter. Ala big enough to include those with mixed feelings, and varying degrees of dedication in addition to the true believers who are in it for the "long haul".
 
  • #664
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

The end result of the protest, which is widely supported, is that a man who works as a federal officer has been exposed and, as a result, we know where he attends church. He was not at church at the time of the protest.

The methods used to achieve this goal violated the rights of numerous unrelated individuals, including children.

Yesterday, someone requested proof that protesters confronted children with "do you know your parents are nazis, they're going to burn in hell."

1770060211920.webp

p.18

 

Attachments

  • 1770060068107.webp
    1770060068107.webp
    66.4 KB · Views: 11
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #665
My computer is limited. Are the redacted names those of witnesses? Or are the redacted names those of other people charged? Witnesses with redacted names might be minors etc.

But....names redacted from a section describing other defendants etc. could show that the protest crew is starting to fragment. As you stated fragmentation could include a willingness to provide information against Don Lemon. Then again, redacted names may mean totally different.

In general, fragmentation of groups facing criminal charges is pretty common- despite past pledges of undying loyalty etc. It looks like they have nine protesters in custody so far and had seven in custody at the time Lemon was indicated.

Seven might be a "magic number" statistically in this matter. Ala big enough to include those with mixed feelings, and varying degrees of dedication in addition to the true believers who are in it for the "long haul".
Two of the redacted names in the charging documents are of defendants. There are numerous other redactions throughout the document but it's not certain in many cases who those people are.

It's my speculation that at least some of the people involved in this may have had a drastic change of heart. I'd hope seeing terrified kids and elderly folks would have been enough to stop them in their tracks. Maybe it did.

jmo
 
  • #666
Thankfully someone has weighed in with the legal aspects of this debate.

The end result of the protest, which is widely supported, is that a man who works as a federal officer has been exposed and, as a result, we know where he attends church. He was not at church at the time of the protest.

The methods used to achieve this goal violated the rights of numerous unrelated individuals, including children.

Yesterday, someone requested proof that protesters confronted children with "do you know your parents are nazis, they're going to burn in hell."

View attachment 641268
p.18

I don't see Don Lemon's name on the page you've posted (page 47).
Aren't we supposed to be discussing him only?
IMO.
Edited to be more clear.
 
  • #667
  • #668
The language in the indictment is very disturbing. I feel as though indictments should be limited to facts, not politically charged language and accusations. IMO the DOJ will have trouble substantiating the accusations against Lemon. Language implying Lemon participated in an "attack" and insinuating it was a "violent crime" really feels overblown.

Legal proceedings aren't willy-nilly, you have to definitively and strongly prove the things you're accusing the defendant of. Multiple judges refusing to sign a warrant due to lack of evidence + Bondi having to rely on a grand jury says a lot about the charges. If the charges were sound, why would two separate judges refuse to sign a warrant?

Lemon was pretty clearly there as a journalist and operating in a journalistic capacity. It'll be difficult to substantiate that he was being violent, physically obstructing people, and using force or threats of force - which is seemingly why judges refused to sign an arrest warrant on those grounds. I didn't see him behaving like that in the videos.
 
  • #669
I don't see Don Lemon's name on the page you've posted (page 47).
Aren't we supposed to be discussing him only?
IMO.
Edited to be more clear.
In my earlier post, I presented a link to the indictment, where the names of those charged is included. I then included a link to the affidavit used in support of arrest warrant. The two legal documents are related. Each requires the other to understand the reason for the arrests. Both documents support the arrest of Don Lemon. It is for the courts to sort out his level of participation as an independent journalist, protester, both, or none.

There is no separate and individual affidavit and indictment for Don Lemon. He is charged as a protester.

1770061539675.webp


 
  • #670
In my earlier post, I presented a link to the indictment, where the names of those charged is included. I then included a link to the affidavit used in support of arrest warrant. The two legal documents are related. Each requires the other to understand the reason for the arrests. Both documents support the arrest of Don Lemon. It is for the courts to sort out his level of participation as an independent journalist, protester, both, or none.

There is no separate and individual affidavit and indictment for Don Lemon. He is charged as a protester.

View attachment 641271

The judge refused to sign the arrest warrant for Don Lemon and some others. The names he did sign for arrest were protesters.
 
  • #671
The language in the indictment is very disturbing. I feel as though indictments should be limited to facts, not politically charged language and accusations. IMO the DOJ will have trouble substantiating the accusations against Lemon. Language implying Lemon participated in an "attack" and insinuating it was a "violent crime" really feels overblown.

Legal proceedings aren't willy-nilly, you have to definitively and strongly prove the things you're accusing the defendant of. Multiple judges refusing to sign a warrant due to lack of evidence + Bondi having to rely on a grand jury says a lot about the charges. If the charges were sound, why would two separate judges refuse to sign a warrant?

Lemon was pretty clearly there as a journalist and operating in a journalistic capacity. It'll be difficult to substantiate that he was being violent, physically obstructing people, and using force or threats of force - which is seemingly why judges refused to sign an arrest warrant on those grounds. I didn't see him behaving like that in the videos.
There may be a problem based on a recording of the pastor asking Don Lemon to leave the building. Lemon replied, asking whether the pastor was telling him that he is not allowed to worship. That is, the independent journalist requested permission (in a confusing manner) to worship during the protest. The pastor agreed that he could worship.

Don Lemon left the building 13 minutes later. He did not spend any time worshipping. Read the document for details.

1770061898983.webp




Lemon was specifically asked to leave private property, and did not immediately leave. Reasons this may be a problem:

 
  • #672
In my earlier post, I presented a link to the indictment, where the names of those charged is included. I then included a link to the affidavit used in support of arrest warrant. The two legal documents are related. Each requires the other to understand the reason for the arrests.

View attachment 641271

That particular page, however, doesn't name him at all, so the attachment that you posted doesn't relate to DL at all.
The link is fine and important, but that attachment is about Kelly's alleged actions, not Lemon.
IMO.
 
  • #673
There may be a problem based on a recording of the pastor asking Don Lemon to leave the building. Lemon replied, asking whether the pastor was telling him that he is not allowed to worship. That is, the independent journalist requested permission (in a confusing manner) to worship during the protest. The pastor agreed that he could worship.

Don Lemon left the building 13 minutes later. He did not spend any time worshipping. Read the document for details.

View attachment 641272



Lemon was specifically asked to leave private property, and did not immediately leave. Reasons this may be a problem:

Again, any trespassing charge would need to come from the church itself pressing charges against Don. The federal government has no jurisdiction to charge Don with trespassing in this case. I guess we will see if the church decides to press charges against him.
 
  • #674
That particular page, however, doesn't name him at all, so the attachment that you posted doesn't relate to DL at all.
The link is fine and important, but that attachment is about Kelly's alleged actions, not Lemon.
IMO.
I posted a screen shot earlier, with the link to the indictment, that detail 3 counts of what are called "overt acts" that do in fact name Don Lemon and the acts he is charged with committing during this protest in the church. In all 3 counts, he's alleged to have physically restricted people's freedom of movement during the protest inside the church.
 
  • #675
  • #676
That particular page, however, doesn't name him at all, so the attachment that you posted doesn't relate to DL at all.
The link is fine and important, but that attachment is about Kelly's alleged actions, not Lemon.
IMO.
Several names in the affidavit in support of arrest warrant are redacted. However, nine people are mentioned in both documents. That is, Don Lemon's name is in the indictment only because it his name must be in the affidavit (blacked out).

If that is not the case, then someone in the affidavit is not listed in the indictment and Lemon's name is in the indictment without a supporting affidavit.



~ in my opinion ~
 
  • #677
Lemon, among others stood in close proximity to the pastor in an attempt to oppress and intimidate him, and physically obstruct his freedom of movement while Lemon peppered him with questions to promote the operation’s message.

While talking to the pastor Lemon stood so close, causing the pastor’s right hand to graze him and then admonished him “please don’t push me”.

This doesn’t seem like the actions of a reputable journalist. imo

This is what I’ve seen in the video and also in the indictment as linked throughout this thread. imo
 
  • #678
Lemon, among others stood in close proximity to the pastor in an attempt to oppress and intimidate him, and physically obstruct his freedom of movement while Lemon peppered him with questions to promote the operation’s message.

While talking to the pastor Lemon stood so close, causing the pastor’s right hand to graze him and then admonished him “please don’t push me”.

This doesn’t seem like the actions of a reputable journalist. imo

This is what I’ve seen in the video and also in the indictment as linked throughout this thread. imo
It's in the affidavit, and in video footage. Four names are included in describing who "cornered" the pastor while Lemon was speaking to him.

1770063866759.webp


1770063880313.webp


 
  • #679
It's in the affidavit, and in video footage. Four names are included in describing who "cornered" the pastor while Lemon was speaking to him.

View attachment 641276

View attachment 641277

Thank you for providing a link.
 
  • #680
I added the link for the court documents related to the federal magistrate and Appeals court rulings for anyone interested


Interesting that the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals judge states that the Complaint and Affadavit clearly establish probable cause for all five arrest warrants. So taking the matter to the grand jury seems entirely appropriate with regard to the 8th circuit ruling.

the Complaint and Affidavit clearly establish probable cause for all five arrest warrants, and while there is no discretion to refuse to issue an arrest warrant once probable cause for its issuance has been shown, Ex Parte United States, 287 U.S. 241 (1932); see also United States v. Santtini, 963 F.2d 585, 593-596 (3d Cir. 1992), the government has failed to establish that it has no other adequate means of obtaining the requested
 

Guardians Monthly Goal

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
149
Guests online
2,036
Total visitors
2,185

Forum statistics

Threads
643,741
Messages
18,804,505
Members
245,228
Latest member
moebu
Top