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

[Summerliz03]

Because of time frame, more evidence can be presented to a grand jury.

You might want to look at the Jerry Sandusky threads.

No thank you.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

No thank you.

Looking at those threads is probably the best way to see how, and how well, a grand jury functions.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Looking at those threads is probably the best way how a grand jury functions.

Probably not for this case, which had a federal grand jury, and so has a lower standard of evidence threshold.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Probably not for this case, which had a federal grand jury, and so has a lower standard of evidence threshold.

It is about the same standard.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Here is the handbook for federal grand juries: https://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/sites/dcd/files/HandbookFederalGrandJurors.pdf

 

[Ruminations]

Looking at those threads is probably the best way how a grand jury functions.

There is plenty of flexibility on the part of prosecutors as to how they use grand juries.

I think you are a little confused about the goals of the prosecutors in the case you cited and in the case we are discussing here. As I believe happened in the case you cited, grand juries can be used to get witness statements under oath and in secret to establish facts for a possible future case. This is especially valuable in cases where victims can or will be re victimized as justice is sought.

There is absolutely no evidence that this particular case would use a grand jury in that way. There are no secret witnesses. The prosecutors simply presented their version of events and crime elements and asked, "If we prove what we assert, did a crime occur?"

The cases are not analogous.

It is public record (and damaging to the prosecution) that there was excessive eagerness to bring these charges. This was not an investigative grand jury- it was a box to check because prosecutors needed the grand jury or a judge to agree charges could be brought. The grand jury was just the first way that "worked" for the prosecution to bring these charges.


MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

There is absolutely no evidence that this particular case would use a grand jury in that way. There are no secret witnesses. The prosecutors simply presented their version of events and crime elements and asked, "If we prove what we assert, did a crime occur?"

Snipped for emphasis.

We do not know if there is any additional evidence or not. There may be an informant. There may be a Signal chat.

 

[Ruminations]

Probably not for this case, which had a federal grand jury, and so has a lower standard of evidence threshold.

It is extremely unlikely that the prosecution wasted a moment in the grand jury process with elaborate witness interviews. They just wanted to arrest their targets.

I wasn't there, so IMO. But nobody posting on this thread was there either. Nor am I aware of any certified experts on grand juries on this thread.

MOO

 

[bearfossils]

If the goal was to inform, why the drama? Why the anger?

What was the independent journalist documenting - shock treatment of families with children attending church?

View attachment 642242

FBI Affidavit in Suport of Arrest Warrant | PDF | U.S. Immigration And Customs Enforcement | American Government

This affidavit, submitted by Special Agent Timothy Gerber, outlines the investigation into a group of agitators who disrupted a religious service at Cities Church in St. Paul, MN on January 18, 2026. The group, led by Nekima Valdez Levy-Armstrong and Chauntyll Louisa Allen, coordinated their...

www.scribd.com

Journalists don’t need to “justify” the stories they are following or why. The purpose of journalism is to document, and especially in the time we are living in where fair and free news media is being denied, devalued, and dismantled in favor of disinformation. Journalists have a right to report and share the truth of what is happening in our country: if that happens to be a protest that breaks out in a church, then the people have a right to know about it, and have free access to information gathered by journalists covering it. Freedom of the press is one of our fundamental rights, and one of the first rights to be oppressed and denied by an authoritarian government that seeks to manipulate and control the dissemination of information.

We’ve already seen multiple public news agencies and media groups defunded or eradicated by our current government, which has also repeatedly spoken about being dedicated to eliminating any kind of agency which perpetuated “anti-Christian” views and has thumped their chest repeatedly about being a Christian government. It makes total sense for journalists to be following protest groups around Christian churches or to be interested in documenting both those groups and the churches themselves.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Several of Lemon's co-defendants spoke to the media on 1/20.

Jmo, I wholeheartedly co-sign what they say about ICE, but I find their methods counterproductive, even if they did not break the law.

 

[Rolypolyoly]

Was Lemon involved with planning the protest? We don't know.

The protest organiser herself has said no. She confirmed he knew nothing and was not involved at all.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

The protest organiser herself has said no. She confirmed he knew nothing and was not involved at all.

And there is the possibility that she is not being honest.

 

[bearfossils]

And there is the possibility that she is not being honest.

Same way anyone in that church service or the law enforcement involved in this case could be lying too, right? I mean, if you don’t think she’s being honest, then why do you believe others involved are? Is there a certain quality involved that one would possess that makes you believe that one group or individual are being honest or not?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Same way anyone in that church service or the law enforcement involved in this case could be lying too, right? I mean, if you don’t think she’s being honest, then why do you believe others involved are? Is there a certain quality involved that one would possess that makes you believe that one group or individual are being honest or not?

A. Because there is video.

B. Because the charge has to be based on some evidence, probably beyond the video. A prosecutor cannot say, "This happened," to a grand jury. He has to say "This happened and here is the evidence."

 

[bearfossils]

A. Because there is video.

B. Because the charge has to be based on some evidence, probably beyond the video. A prosecutor cannot say, "This happened," to a grand jury. He has to say "This happened and here is the evidence."

Yeah, because it’s not like this administration has been caught manipulating photo and video footage with AI for their own purposes at all. One more reason to justify independent journalists being present to document events that they have every right to.

Interviewing people and filming events, even with what one might perceive as a bias, is legal and within Lemon’s right as a journalist. Making people uncomfortable is not the same as a supposed "coordinated takeover-style attack" on the church, the pastor, or the congregants. Lemon never “by force or threat of force or by physical obstruction, intentionally injure(d), intimidate(d) or interfere(d) with" the service. You might not like it, it may have hurt people’s feelings, but no one was prevented or harmed during the service by Lemon. Children crying or people being upset by protestors wasn’t the fault of Lemon.

Him being sympathetic to the protest he was following as a journalist is not the equivalent of starting said protest or leading it. By your train of thought, Trump should have been brought up on a multitude of charges for initiating, encouraging, and celebrating an act of insurrection — yet he remains president. Why hold a single journalist to such a false and strict standard while others violate those same standards without repercussions? It only makes it more obvious that these charges are based on political and racist reasoning instead of “the law”.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Yeah, because it’s not like this administration has been caught manipulating photo and video footage with AI for their own purposes at all. One more reason to justify independent journalists being present to document events that they have every right to.

Interviewing people and filming events, even with what one might perceive as a bias, is legal and within Lemon’s right as a journalist. Making people uncomfortable is not the same as a supposed "coordinated takeover-style attack" on the church, the pastor, or the congregants. Lemon never “by force or threat of force or by physical obstruction, intentionally injure(d), intimidate(d) or interfere(d) with" the service. You might not like it, it may have hurt people’s feelings, but no one was prevented or harmed during the service by Lemon. Children crying or people being upset by protestors wasn’t the fault of Lemon.

Him being sympathetic to the protest he was following as a journalist is not the equivalent of starting said protest or leading it. By your train of thought, Trump should have been brought up on a multitude of charges for initiating, encouraging, and celebrating an act of insurrection — yet he remains president. Why hold a single journalist to such a false and strict standard while others violate those same standards without repercussions? It only makes it more obvious that these charges are based on political and racist reasoning instead of “the law”.

It is not the "Administration," nor a question of Lemon's biases. It is the need to show that Lemon was involved in the planning.

I strongly suspect that the DOJ has personal messages showing that Lemon was involved in the planning stage. They have either gotten access to the messages, have someone leaking them, or both.

FBI probes alleged Signal chats used to track agents as Homan shares 'drawdown' plan in MN

White House Border Czar Tom Homan vowed Thursday to stay in Minnesota and continue leading ICE operations until the problem is gone.

wjactv.com