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

[otto]

Wow. 1st, this is not about the protest. It's about arresting journalists covering a protest.


2nd, if we were talking about the protest, fair enough about the arm fracture, but there is reason to doubt it. Why would a person run out an office door? And with all the snow, couldn't there be a number of causes of a slip and fall? And it appears that it was reported the next day. As if someone decided to leave a different door, then somehow fell and fractured their arm, which they they reported to police the next day. Let's see the video.



MOO

The fact about the injury was in response to remarks that there were no injuries during the loud, disruptive incident at church on Sunday morning. There were physical injuries, and, based on the affidavit, there were psychological injuries.

https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2026/01/CASE-026-cr-00025-LMP-DLM.pdf

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

 

[J. J. in Phila]

That is neither factually nor legally correct.

The slip and fall was in the other case

I was referring to the other case, and the fall was in the newstory.

Lemon was being charged with violating the 1st Amendment rights of others, and conspiring with others to do so.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

That’s your opinion. Anti-abortion activists have been executing doctors, nurses, and bombing clinics for decades, resulting in the deaths of dozens and dozens of innocent citizens. They have long been known as a domestic terrorist group. Journalists don’t have the same history.

And the law was used “correctly” against one group, and a biased government decided to pardon those people and disregard the law. So what’s the difference here? Why does this administration feel like journalists should be harshly subjected to this act while others who happen to align with their political views shouldn’t?

This administration has repeatedly said it is actively going after “anti-Christian” groups even though we live in a democracy with a constitutional right of separation of church and state, and this entire government is full of white Christian nationalists. So it matters when they show a clear bias is legally punishing certain groups and individuals over others.

“IMO”/“MOO”.

The people that were arrested were not executing anyone. As far as the story says, they were advocating violence.

Pardons are a different thing.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

And this pastor, Paula White, has condemned Lemon: 'Shameful': Pastors, Christian leaders react to activists storming So. Baptist church in Minnesota

Not a great source as it's coming from a televangelist, prosperity gospel grifter, Christian nationalist, who led a prayer at the Jan 6 pre-insurrection rally (in other words, the perfect choice for Trump's administration).

 

[bearfossils]

The people that were arrested were not executing anyone. As far as the story says, they were advocating violence.

Pardons are a different thing.

You still didn’t answer my question. Why is one group of people exempt from the FACT act while another being punished by it?

No one at the church Don Lemon was documenting was hurt, and he wasn’t responsible for committing anything close to violence.

Are disruptions okay at clinics because our government believes abortion clinics deserve to be disrupted but disruptions at churches aren’t allowed because our government prioritizes them, despite our democratic rights?

This prosecution boils down to racism, silencing free press, and legal favoritism for Christian nationalists.

“IMO”/“MOO”.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

You still didn’t answer my question. Why is one group of people exempt from the FACT act while another being punished by it?

No one at the church Don Lemon was documenting was hurt, and he wasn’t responsible for committing anything close to violence.

Are disruptions okay at clinics because our government believes abortion clinics deserve to be disrupted but disruptions at churches aren’t allowed because our government prioritizes them, despite our democratic rights?

This prosecution boils down to racism, silencing free press, and legal favoritism for Christian nationalists.

“IMO”/“MOO”.

I think they both should be. The anti-abortion group was. Their members went to prison.

If Lemon, et al., are convicted, another POTUS can pardon them. However, the law should be evenly enforced.

 

[PrairieWind]

You still didn’t answer my question. Why is one group of people exempt from the FACT act while another being punished by it?

No one at the church Don Lemon was documenting was hurt, and he wasn’t responsible for committing anything close to violence.

Are disruptions okay at clinics because our government believes abortion clinics deserve to be disrupted but disruptions at churches aren’t allowed because our government prioritizes them, despite our democratic rights?

This prosecution boils down to racism, silencing free press, and legal favoritism for Christian nationalists.

“IMO”/“MOO”.

Why is this about "Christian nationalists?"
Don't we do the same thing with those that storm into mosques and disrupt prayers?

 

[bearfossils]

The people that were arrested were not executing anyone. As far as the story says, they were advocating violence.

Pardons are a different thing.

And those “protesters” were preventing women from accessing healthcare which was within their rights. They violated and were prosecuted under the FACE act, which is literally named after defending the right to access clinics without disruption. They were aggressively harassing and stopping women from receiving care from doctors that they are entitled too, and which used to be a constitutional right—before the same group who pardoned those domestic terrorists moved on to remove those abortion rights from women. I’m sure that’s just a coincidence though, right?

“IMO”/“MOO”.

 

[bearfossils]

Why is this about "Christian nationalists?"
Don't we do the same thing with those that storm into mosques and disrupt prayers?

Because this government has put Christian nationalists into power and aggressively used it as an excuse to violate and oppress the rights of others in this country despite the supposed separation of Church and State.

And when you use an act that was made to protect the right of women to access healthcare clinics without disruption, one that was used to punish anti-abortion protestors who were later pardoned by the Trump administration, then used by the same administration to punish a black journalist covering a protest at a Christian church — it matters. It shows a clear bias by our government and law enforcement which excuses and protects one group while punishing and denying rights to another. Especially when that administration actively worked to limit the healthcare rights of women in this country while bragging about promoting “Christian values”.

“IMO”/“MOO”.

 

[Summerliz03]

Christian Nationalism is the political ideology of this administration and has been actively pushed by almost every high ranking official in our government. I’m not adding MOO because it’s not an opinion, that’s a fact.

Here is my opinion - if this protest happened at a mosque, temple or even a synagogue, I doubt the DOJ would have the same response we are seeing.

 

[Ruminations]

The fact about the injury was in response to remarks that there were no injuries during the loud, disruptive incident at church on Sunday morning. There were physical injuries, and, based on the affidavit, there were psychological injuries.

https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2026/01/CASE-026-cr-00025-LMP-DLM.pdf

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

There MAY have been someone who claims she fell and broke their arm (something few would lie about). But there were no contemporaneous media reports, and, while it is in the indictment, the indictment pointed out that the information reached dispatchers the next day.

So, would someone who, for example, was casually leaving the building and happened to fracture their arm pin that on the protest? Seems unlikely to me, but possible. It would only seem credible to me if that person were extremely pro-ICE to the point that they would lie for the cause.

Would an over zealous b-team of loyalist prosecutors twist the words of a person whose arm was broken to try to make it fit the indictment? Maybe. Especially given how weak this indictment is, and how motivated the prosecutors are. Personally, I do believe that prosecutors tracked down that fracture. IMO. I want to see the sworn testimony about these injuries and what caused them.

A bad day does not cause psychological injuries. It may, but anyone claiming that the protest "injured" them psychologically has a heavy lift showing that they have a wound caused by that day. A mental health professional has to examine a person before we can say there were psychological injuries.

And, once again, this thread is about journalists arrested for documenting the protest. That is what journalists do. And when they no longer can, we have a dictatorship.

If we have no free press, we have no free country.

MOO

 

[Inthedetails]

And, once again, this thread is about journalists arrested for documenting the protest. That is what journalists do. And when they no longer can, we have a dictatorship.

If we have no free press, we have no free country.

MOO

snipped and bbm

100%.

jmo

 

[bearfossils]

Don't we do the same thing with those that storm into mosques and disrupt prayers?

LOL that you think our government would treat them the same when he actively mocked a Muslim politician who was attacked by a pro-Trump man and has worked to prevent Muslim groups from receiving government funding. Never mind him calling African countries “sh*thole nations”.

But yeah, waiting with baited breath for them to defend mosques.

“IMO”/“MOO”.

 

[PrairieWind]

Because this government has put Christian nationalists into power and aggressively used it as an excuse to violate and oppress the rights of others in this country despite the supposed separation of Church and State.

And when you use an act that was made to protect the right of women to access healthcare clinics without disruption, one that was used to punish anti-abortion protestors who were later pardoned by the Trump administration, then used by the same administration to punish a black journalist covering a protest at a Christian church — it matters. It shows a clear bias by our government and law enforcement which excuses and protects one group while punishing and denying rights to another. Especially when that administration actively worked to limit the healthcare rights of women in this country while bragging about promoting “Christian values”.

“IMO”/“MOO”.

LOL
the FACE act was meant to protect clinics AND places of worship. You seem to want to leave that last part off. There is ZERO evidence this was racial in any way. EXCEPT that protester leader is Black and led an assault on a predominantly white church.

Lets turn this around. A group of white people are going to conduct a protest by marching into a mosque in St. Paul to take over and stop their morning prayers. They wish to raise awareness to the worshipers of their leaders involvement in the billion dollar fraud case. They ask DL to come along to document it. Keep in mind, their intent is to stop the prayers from happening. Is that ok?

 

[Summerliz03]

LOL
the FACE act was meant to protect clinics AND places of worship. You seem to want to leave that last part off. There is ZERO evidence this was racial in any way. EXCEPT that protester leader is Black and led an assault on a predominantly white church.

Lets turn this around. A group of white people are going to conduct a protest by marching into a mosque in St. Paul to take over and stop their morning prayers. They wish to raise awareness to the worshipers of their leaders involvement in the billion dollar fraud case. They ask DL to come along to document it. Keep in mind, their intent is to stop the prayers from happening. Is that ok?

I would also support DL’s right to cover a protest at any place of worship. I stated this above. The point is - the DOJ wouldn’t treat it the same way IMO. I don’t think they would have the same reaction if a group of white protestors went into a mosque, a predominantly black church, a temple, etc.

 

[Inthedetails]

I would also support DL’s right to cover a protest at any place of worship. I stated this above. The point is - the DOJ wouldn’t treat it the same way IMO. I don’t think they would have the same reaction if a group of white protestors went into a mosque, a predominantly black church, a temple, etc.

I think the DOJ's reaction is both about the church, yes, but also because they are going after journalists they don't like and sending a message to others that they'd better be "nice."

Like telling Kaitlyn Collins to smile.

It's not a journalist's job to be nice or to smile.

jmo

 

[PrairieWind]

I would also support DL’s right to cover a protest at any place of worship. I stated this above. The point is - the DOJ wouldn’t treat it the same way IMO. I don’t think they would have the same reaction if a group of white protestors went into a mosque, a predominantly black church, a temple, etc.

Oh please. There would be hell to pay if that happened. Not only would DL NOT participate, he would be demanding the arrest of those invading the mosque. It would be a hate crime. And few would support this.
Invading a place of worship for protest should never be acceptable to anyone.

 

[witchway]

Oh please. There would be hell to pay if that happened. Not only would DL NOT participate, he would be demanding the arrest of those invading the mosque. It would be a hate crime. And few would support this.
Invading a place of worship for protest should never be acceptable to anyone.

Well it didn't happen so it’s not applicable what he would do or not do.

 

[Summerliz03]

I never said I would support a protest in a place of worship - I don’t think it should happen at any type of church. But I would support that protest being covered by a journalist.

But I 100% do not think the DOJ would be handling it the same way if this happened at a mosque, temple, etc. And I say this as a Christian who is at church every Sunday. The push that there’s some kind of “war on Christianity” is completely made up by the Trump administration IMO. The United States was not founded as a Christian nation, it was founded for religious freedom. Aka practicing any religion you choose. Yet this administration is the one pushing for more Christianity in public schools and in our politics. They don’t even hide the fact that they want the US to be a Christian nation. All MOO.

 

[PrairieWind]

Well it didn't happen so it’s not applicable what he would do or not do.

That is right, it didn't happen in a mosque. It happened in a Christian Church, and it appears that many here think that is just fine and dandy.