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

[Hexe]

Not necessarily. There is more time in a grand jury.

I do not follow. What dors time have to do with evidence presented to the GJ?

 

[Inthedetails]

Daniel Rosen took office as U.S. Attorney in Minnesota in October.

After the recent turmoil in Minnesota and resulting resignation of 14 prosecutors (bbm):


Unease among prosecutors has continued to mount as the Justice Department announced a criminal investigation into leading Democrats in the state and charges against nine people, including two journalists, accused in connection to a protest at a church in St. Paul, Minn., where an ICE official serves as a pastor.

In recent days, as Mr. Rosen has sought to steady an office on edge, colleagues say he has made comments that unsettled them further. Several people said that Mr. Rosen vowed not to ask anyone to do anything illegal — an assurance that normally, the people said, would go without saying.

Mr. Rosen, a commercial litigator who had no prior criminal litigation experience, also has conveyed that the office, under his leadership, was committed to furthering the goals of Mr. Trump.

Prosecutors Began Investigating Renee Good’s Killing. Washington Told Them to Stop.

Federal prosecutors had a warrant to collect evidence from Ms. Good’s vehicle, but Trump administration leaders said to drop it. About a dozen prosecutors have departed, leaving the Minnesota U.S. attorney’s office in turmoil.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Betty P]

Not necessarily. There is more time in a grand jury.

If they have solid evidence, fine. Let them bring it. I don't think they do. If you think Lemon was seeking attention, he would have gotten that whether the demonstration was inside or out on the street. JMO, the demonstration seemed to me like something planned on the spur of the moment.

They can speculate all day, but without evidence, its meaningless. Convening a GJ just looks like vindictiveness and an attempt to impugn the reputation of journalists and instill fear in them to discourage unfavorable news coverage. JMO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Here is the actual charging document: https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2026/01/CASE-026-cr-00025-LMP-DLM.pdf

 

[J. J. in Phila]

If they have solid evidence, fine. Let them bring it. I don't think they do. If you think Lemon was seeking attention, he would have gotten that whether the demonstration was inside or out on the street. JMO, the demonstration seemed to me like something planned on the spur of the moment.

They can speculate all day, but without evidence, its meaningless. Convening a GJ just looks like vindictiveness and an attempt to impugn the reputation of journalists and instill fear in them to discourage unfavorable news coverage. JMO

They have the evidence and you can see from the indicimet what he is accused of.

Sorry, grand juries are good tools for getting evidence. They are not "vindictive," but vindicating.

 

[Summerliz03]

Here is the actual charging document: https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2026/01/CASE-026-cr-00025-LMP-DLM.pdf

This has been shared in this thread no less than 10 times. I have read the entire document. I have not seen anything in that document that shows me that Don Lemon was acting as a protestor and not a journalist inside that church. No videos I’ve seen of the protest shows me that Don Lemon was acting as a protestor or that he himself broke the FACE Act with his actions. All MOO.

 

[witchway]

This has been shared in this thread no less than 10 times. I have read the entire document. I have not seen anything in that document that shows me that Don Lemon was acting as a protestor and not a journalist inside that church. No videos I’ve seen of the protest shows me that Don Lemon was acting as a protestor or that he himself broke the FACE Act with his actions. All MOO.

Might I add and unsigned? jmo

 

[Betty P]

They have the evidence and you can see from the indicimet what he is accused of.

Sorry, grand juries are good tools for getting evidence. They are not "vindictive," but vindicating.

From what I'm reading in the news media, it looks like the GOP DOJ is planning to use some crazy conspiracy theories (CT) to make their case. That probably won't stand up in court. The CT is getting so far "out there" that they're losing all credibility. Case in point: Trump endorsing the CT Gov. Walz hired killer Vance Boelter to shoot House Speaker Melissa Holtman, her husband and the Hoffmans. CT from DOJ just falls flat. If that's the circus they want to present during a GJ, it's wrong and won't work. Instead of discrediting the journalists, they end up discrediting the Trump Administration. JMO

President Trump pushes false conspiracy on the Hortman killings, implicating Walz involvement

President Trump shared a video claiming that Tim Walz was responsible for the killing of Minnesota lawmaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, a conspiracy theory that has been debunked several times since the fatal Minnesota lawmaker shootings in June 2025.

www.fox9.com

 

[J. J. in Phila]

This has been shared in this thread no less than 10 times. I have read the entire document. I have not seen anything in that document that shows me that Don Lemon was acting as a protestor and not a journalist inside that church. No videos I’ve seen of the protest shows me that Don Lemon was acting as a protestor or that he himself broke the FACE Act with his actions. All MOO.

The only thing that I saw was the transcript. Overt Acts 23, 24, 25, and 28, would be FACE Act violations, specific to Lemon. A grand jury presentment is unsigned, since that point was brought up.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

From what I'm reading in the news media, it looks like the GOP DOJ is planning to use some crazy conspiracy theories (CT) to make their case. That probably won't stand up in court. The CT is getting so far "out there" that they're losing all credibility. Case in point: Trump endorsing the CT Gov. Walz hired killer Vance Boelter to shoot House Speaker Melissa Holtman, her husband and the Hoffmans. CT from DOJ just falls flat. If that's the circus they want to present during a GJ, it's wrong and won't work. Instead of discrediting the journalists, they end up discrediting the Trump Administration. JMO

President Trump pushes false conspiracy on the Hortman killings, implicating Walz involvement

President Trump shared a video claiming that Tim Walz was responsible for the killing of Minnesota lawmaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, a conspiracy theory that has been debunked several times since the fatal Minnesota lawmaker shootings in June 2025.

www.fox9.com

This is not Trump. This is a grand jury.

 

[Inthedetails]

bbm:

David Harris, a University of Pittsburgh law professor specializing in criminal law, said the charges against the protesters are more tenable, given the federal laws against disrupting the free exercise of worship. “A court will have to sort that out,” he said.

But charges against reporters are troubling, he said.

“Charging journalists for being there covering the disruption does not mean they were part of the disruption,” Harris said. “Don Lemon and other journalists are the way that we the public are finding out what is happening in these spaces,” he said. “They are our eyes and ears. The message that is being sent is that journalists like Don Lemon and others should feel intimidated from doing this.”

What to know about the civil rights charges Don Lemon faces for covering church protest in Minnesota

(AP) — The arrests of Lemon and independent journalist Georgia Fort are especially troubling for legal experts and media groups who worry about the chilling effect on coverage of the Trump administration.

religionnews.com

About the source, bbm:
Religion News Service (RNS) is a news agency covering religion, ethics, spirituality, and moral issues. Based at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., RNS has a network of correspondents worldwide, providing news and information on all faiths and religious movements to the nation’s leading newspapers, news magazines, broadcast organizations, and religious publications. RNS wire reports are distributed to more than 170 media outlets, including The Washington Post, Huffington Post, National Public Radio, Chicago Tribune, and religious outlets. The total circulation of these outlets exceeds 100 million readers. They are affiliated with the Missouri School of Journalism at the University of Missouri.

Religion News Service (RNS) - Bias and Credibility

LEFT-CENTER BIAS These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[J. J. in Phila]

This has been shared in this thread no less than 10 times. I have read the entire document. I have not seen anything in that document that shows me that Don Lemon was acting as a protestor and not a journalist inside that church. No videos I’ve seen of the protest shows me that Don Lemon was acting as a protestor or that he himself broke the FACE Act with his actions. All MOO.

The ones previously posted here are redacted, at least that I could see. The one I posted in not, and is from PBS.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

bbm:

David Harris, a University of Pittsburgh law professor specializing in criminal law, said the charges against the protesters are more tenable, given the federal laws against disrupting the free exercise of worship. “A court will have to sort that out,” he said.

But charges against reporters are troubling, he said.

“Charging journalists for being there covering the disruption does not mean they were part of the disruption,” Harris said. “Don Lemon and other journalists are the way that we the public are finding out what is happening in these spaces,” he said. “They are our eyes and ears. The message that is being sent is that journalists like Don Lemon and others should feel intimidated from doing this.”

What to know about the civil rights charges Don Lemon faces for covering church protest in Minnesota

(AP) — The arrests of Lemon and independent journalist Georgia Fort are especially troubling for legal experts and media groups who worry about the chilling effect on coverage of the Trump administration.

religionnews.com

Snipped for emphasis.

There is a line being drawn between covering a story and participating in it. A reporter can cover an bank robbery. If he is covering the planning of it, rides with the robbers to the bank, follows them in with a camera, and leaves with them, he has probably crossed a line.

OTOH, if they had called Lemon, and said, be at the church at a certain time, he might not have had a problem.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I do not follow. What dors time have to do with evidence presented to the GJ?

They have more time to go over evidence.

 

[Inthedetails]

This is from Jan 31, btw.

BBM:


[A] magistrate judge rejected the government’s initial attempt to charge Lemon and several others.

The Department of Justice, under pressure from prominent MAGA media influencers to arrest Lemon, then took the case to a grand jury and secured indictments that way.

https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/31/media/don-lemon-trump-georgia-fort-civil-rights-doj

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Some of you may wish to take a look at this: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/151/125/497636/

SCOTUS has not heard a case, but there is an issue.

I fail to see the relevance of that case with this one, unless your point is that the courts should consider DL a journalist?

BBM.

"WCW employs Madden to produce tape-recorded commentaries, which are replayed to callers on WCW's 900-number hotline. These commentaries promote upcoming WCW wrestling events and pay-per-view television programs, announce the results of wrestling matches and discuss wrestlers' personal lives and careers."

This is something a marketer or video production professional would do, not a journalist.

"No other court, however, has considered whether the privilege may be invoked by those like Madden who are neither "pamphleteers" nor "metropolitan publishers," and certainly not engaged in investigating, publishing, reporting or broadcasting in the traditional sense."

Completely different from Lemon.

"Based on the rationale of Baker, the court concluded that "the critical question in determining if a person falls within the class of persons protected by the journalist's privilege is whether the person, at the inception of the investigatory process, had the intent to disseminate to the public the information obtained through the investigation." von Bulow, 811 F.2d at 143. In contrast, a person who "gathers information for personal reasons, unrelated to dissemination of information to the public, will not be deterred from undertaking his search simply by rules which permit discovery of that information in a later civil proceeding."

And also:

"As we have indicated previously, we agree with von Bulow that the person claiming privilege must be engaged in the process of "investigative reporting" or "news gathering." Moreover, we agree with Shoen, which held that the critical question for deciding whether a person may invoke the journalist's privilege is "whether she is gathering news for dissemination to the public." Shoen, 5 F.3d at 1293. We hold that individuals are journalists when engaged in investigative reporting, gathering news, and have the intent at the beginning of the news-gathering process to disseminate this information to the public. Madden does not pass this test."

This sounds like Lemon.

MOO.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I fail to see the relevance of that case with this one, unless your point is that the courts should consider DL a journalist?

"WCW employs Madden to produce tape-recorded commentaries, which are replayed to callers on WCW's 900-number hotline. These commentaries promote upcoming WCW wrestling events and pay-per-view television programs, announce the results of wrestling matches and discuss wrestlers' personal lives and careers."

This is something a marketer or video production professional would do, not a journalist.

"No other court, however, has considered whether the privilege may be invoked by those like Madden who are neither "pamphleteers" nor "metropolitan publishers," and certainly not engaged in investigating, publishing, reporting or broadcasting in the traditional sense."

Completely different from Lemon.

"Based on the rationale of Baker, the court concluded that "the critical question in determining if a person falls within the class of persons protected by the journalist's privilege is whether the person, at the inception of the investigatory process, had the intent to disseminate to the public the information obtained through the investigation." von Bulow, 811 F.2d at 143. In contrast, a person who "gathers information for personal reasons, unrelated to dissemination of information to the public, will not be deterred from undertaking his search simply by rules which permit discovery of that information in a later civil proceeding."

This sounds like Lemon.

MOO.

That is no longer a subject for this thread, though it may be in court.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

This is from Jan 31, btw.

BBM:


[A] magistrate judge rejected the government’s initial attempt to charge Lemon and several others.

The Department of Justice, under pressure from prominent MAGA media influencers to arrest Lemon, then took the case to a grand jury and secured indictments that way.

https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/31/media/don-lemon-trump-georgia-fort-civil-rights-doj

A grand jury is not subject to that influence.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

The only thing that I saw was the transcript. Overt Acts 23, 24, 25, and 28, would be FACE Act violations, specific to Lemon. A grand jury presentment is unsigned, since that point was brought up.

The video shows those allegations are garbage.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

There may be evidence to the contrary.

And there may not be.