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

  • #841
  • #842
Pam Bondi et al don't even need the charges to stick. They got their arrest b rolls. They got to sanctimoniously announce that freedom of worship will be protected. (As if that is going to distract me from the fact the citizens' rights to be on their own sidewalks or cars without getting killed has been taken away.) Pam Bondi is hoping people think, well, if he got arrested, he must have done something wrong. And thus, even though the charges won't stick, she has achieved her goal.

MOO
I agree, and I truly think Pam Bondi knows the charges won’t stick. She doesn’t care, it’s all just political theater to hype up the group of people who are so convinced that their religious freedoms are under attack, primarily white Christian nationalists. Who ironically enough, are the same people pushing for more religion in schools (but only Christianity), more religion in politics (but only Christianity), and seem to support the violent removal of their literal neighbors, which is the complete opposite of any of Jesus’ teachings. I say this as a Christian myself, who goes to church regularly and supports the freedom of religion in this country (but this goes for ALL religions, not just Christianity), nothing about the current administration is Christian and I have a hard time understanding how or why any Christian person supports it. All just MOO.
 
  • #843
I agree, and I truly think Pam Bondi knows the charges won’t stick. She doesn’t care, it’s all just political theater to hype up the group of people who are so convinced that their religious freedoms are under attack, primarily white Christian nationalists. Who ironically enough, are the same people pushing for more religion in schools (but only Christianity), more religion in politics (but only Christianity), and seem to support the violent removal of their literal neighbors, which is the complete opposite of any of Jesus’ teachings. I say this as a Christian myself, who goes to church regularly and supports the freedom of religion in this country (but this goes for ALL religions, not just Christianity), nothing about the current administration is Christian and I have a hard time understanding how or why any Christian person supports it. All just MOO.
Scripture is pretty clear about treatment of strangers and those in need. AFAIK, there is nothing Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, or Secular Humanist about this. The protest that Lemon was covering was a protest against ICE. There is no argument that ICE is acting in a Christian way. Being that they are behaving extra-judicially, going against training, and targeting law-abiding people, there isn't even the, "but the law" argument. It's pretty rich if anyone thinks this administration is pro-Christian.

The protesters were not anti-Christian. They were anti ICE.

Lemon was not a protester. He was a journalist.

MOO
 
  • #844
Scripture is pretty clear about treatment of strangers and those in need. AFAIK, there is nothing Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, or Secular Humanist about this. The protest that Lemon was covering was a protest against ICE. There is no argument that ICE is acting in a Christian way. Being that they are behaving extra-judicially, going against training, and targeting law-abiding people, there isn't even the, "but the law" argument. It's pretty rich if anyone thinks this administration is pro-Christian.

The protesters were not anti-Christian. They were anti ICE.

Lemon was not a protester. He was a journalist.

MOO
Exactly. The main person is a minister and civil rights lawyer. Come on now.
 
  • #845
  • #846
If you have facebook/instagram, here is Ronan Farrow on the arrests of journalist of Don Lemon and Georgia Fort. Or maybe it works here regardless.

He did the Harvey Weinstein story as well. That’s really worth a read.
He is a winner of the Pultzer Prize for Public Service in 2018.
 
Last edited:
  • #847
As Ms. Armstrong stated in her interview with Chris Cuomo, her desired effect of the protest was to inform both the parishioners and the public that the church had a pastor that works for ICE. She wasn’t specifically protesting to David Easterwood, but more to spread awareness that churches may not be a safe haven for immigrants if they employ a pastor who is also serving as an ICE agent. So it truly didn’t matter that Mr. Easterwood was there, IMO. But she clearly explains her reasons for protesting that church during her interview.
Don Lemon was tipped off about the protest ahead of time, but did not know that the protest would disrupt the church service. As an independent journalist, should he be gathering information, or "arguing with a parishioner about immigration enforcement" ?

Armstrong wanted to draw attention to Mr Easterwood, and to inform the congregation about his involvement with immigration law.

Was there no better way to inform the congregation about Mr Easterwood than to traumatize families with children? Armstrong sounds like a well-educated woman, a civil rights lawyer. Could she not inform them by handing out a pamphlet at the doors of the church? Why was trauma used to communicate her opinion to people attending church? Why did Lemon choose to associate himself with trauma-style communication?

"At the event, hosted by Black Lives Matter Minnesota and other local organizations ... the church protest over the weekend was organized by Nekima Levy Armstrong, a civil rights lawyer. She said she wanted to draw attention to a church leader, David Easterwood, who also appears to be the acting director of ICE’s field office for enforcement and removal operations in St. Paul.
...

Ms. Levy Armstrong, the church protest organizer, said that in the lawsuit filed earlier this month against ICE’s tactics, she saw that Mr. Easterwood was named as a defendant for overseeing “a racial profiling campaign of massive scale and with devastating consequences,” and connected him with the church. She compared Mr. Easterwood’s appearance in an October news conference alongside Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem with a sermon he delivered at the church that was posted to YouTube.

Ms. Levy Armstrong said she circulated her plan for interrupting the service on social media as a way to raise awareness among the congregation of Mr. Easterwood’s involvement in the immigration crackdown."​

January 19, 2026

"Lemon said he was at the demonstration as a journalist. He said he was tipped off ahead of time but did not know the activists would disrupt the service. He can be seen arguing with a parishioner about immigration enforcement."​

January 30, 2026
 
  • #848
Don Lemon was tipped off about the protest ahead of time, but did not know that the protest would disrupt the church service. As an independent journalist, should he be gathering information, or "arguing with a parishioner about immigration enforcement" ?

Armstrong wanted to draw attention to Mr Easterwood, and to inform the congregation about his involvement with immigration law.

Was there no better way to inform the congregation about Mr Easterwood than to traumatize families with children? Armstrong sounds like a well-educated woman, a civil rights lawyer. Could she not inform them by handing out a pamphlet at the doors of the church? Why was trauma used to communicate her opinion to people attending church? Why did Lemon choose to associate himself with trauma-style communication?

"At the event, hosted by Black Lives Matter Minnesota and other local organizations ... the church protest over the weekend was organized by Nekima Levy Armstrong, a civil rights lawyer. She said she wanted to draw attention to a church leader, David Easterwood, who also appears to be the acting director of ICE’s field office for enforcement and removal operations in St. Paul.​
...​
Ms. Levy Armstrong, the church protest organizer, said that in the lawsuit filed earlier this month against ICE’s tactics, she saw that Mr. Easterwood was named as a defendant for overseeing “a racial profiling campaign of massive scale and with devastating consequences,” and connected him with the church. She compared Mr. Easterwood’s appearance in an October news conference alongside Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem with a sermon he delivered at the church that was posted to YouTube.​
Ms. Levy Armstrong said she circulated her plan for interrupting the service on social media as a way to raise awareness among the congregation of Mr. Easterwood’s involvement in the immigration crackdown."​

January 19, 2026

"Lemon said he was at the demonstration as a journalist. He said he was tipped off ahead of time but did not know the activists would disrupt the service. He can be seen arguing with a parishioner about immigration enforcement."​

January 30, 2026
So in other words stay at home? A journalists job is literally the opposite.
They knew what they were facing and were willing to do it. I am glad this happened as it really did shed light on what is happening here. Historically we never would have known for example about Watergate, but a few brave journalists and a brave undercover informant…jmo
 
  • #849
  • #850
I think this thread will just continue to go in circles until the next hearing on the 9th and we learn more information from both the prosecution and the defense. IMO, Don Lemon reporting on news people don’t like doesn’t make him less of a journalist and doesn’t make what he did illegal. I wasn’t even a Don Lemon fan before this, never watched him on CNN, don’t follow him now. I have zero opinions on him as a person or journalist. I would say the same thing about this case if it was Megyn Kelly covering an anti-abortion protest. Journalists covering the news is not illegal and at this point, I haven’t seen any evidence that Don Lemon was acting as a protestor and not a journalist. All MOO.
 
  • #851
Pam Bondi et al don't even need the charges to stick. They got their arrest b rolls. They got to sanctimoniously announce that freedom of worship will be protected
Exactly! I keep thinking about tRump's perfect phone call to Zelenskyy to ask him to "SAY there is an investigation into Biden & Hunter", there doesn't even have to be one, just say it! IMO
 
  • #852
So in other words stay at home? A journalists job is literally the opposite.
They knew what they were facing and were willing to do it. I am glad this happened as it really did shed light on what is happening here. Historically we never would have known for example about Watergate, but a few brave journalists and a brave undercover informant…jmo
It's about methods. Did the congregation need to be shocked, or are they reasonable people who could understand a message through calm verbal or written communication?

What did the independent journalist achieve by "arguing with a parishioner about immigration enforcement?" Why did the independent journalist ask the pastor whether he was allowed to worship when the question was not genuine? After the pastor welcomed him to worship, the independent journalist remained in the church for another 13 minutes but did not worship.

Did the independent journalist ask himself whether trauma-style communication is most effective with a church congregation? Did he report on that style of communication when the message relates to notifying people about an immigration officer?

Why didn't any of the protesters/ independent journalist stop and ask themselves whether the best method to inform parishioners about the job roles of a member of their church was to disrupt a church service? Was the independent journalists story about informing people about the identity of individual immigration officers?



~ in my opinion ~
 

Attachments

  • 1770137034957.webp
    1770137034957.webp
    37.1 KB · Views: 3
  • 1770137382350.webp
    1770137382350.webp
    73.3 KB · Views: 3
  • #853
In my opinion, shock and trauma style communication, to inform a church congregation about a member of their church, should not be condoned. That is the story that should have been told by the independent journalist. That is a message that everyone can understand.

Although people are upset with federal officer methods in upholding immigration law, there are lines that should not and cannot be crossed under any circumstances. Anger due to federal immigration officer actions does not justify traumatizing children in a church.

~ in my opinion ~
 
  • #854
It's about methods. Did the congregation need to be shocked, or are they reasonable people who could understand a message through calm verbal or written communication?

What did the independent journalist achieve by "arguing with a parishioner about immigration enforcement?" Why did the independent journalist ask the pastor whether he was allowed to worship when the question was not genuine? After the pastor welcomed him to worship, the independent journalist remained in the church for another 13 minutes but did not worship.

Did the independent journalist ask himself whether trauma-style communication is most effective with a church congregation? Did he report on that style of communication when the message relates to notifying people about an immigration officer?

Why didn't any of the protesters/ independent journalist stop and ask themselves whether the best method to inform parishioners about the job roles of a member of their church was to disrupt a church service? Was the independent journalists story about informing people about the identity of individual immigration officers?



~ in my opinion ~
They thought a coordinated invasion of the church, while engaging in acts of oppression, intimidation, threats, interference, and physical obstruction was a good idea. ( imo and from the indictment that includes Don Lemon).

The only peaceful people that day, were the congregants, who accepted strangers among them. Don Lemon had the nerve to ask the pastor if they were not allowed to worship. Why didn’t the just sit quietly and worship?
 

Guardians Monthly Goal

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
247
Guests online
2,093
Total visitors
2,340

Forum statistics

Threads
639,460
Messages
18,743,242
Members
244,629
Latest member
Hanoody_Senwar
Back
Top