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

[bearfossils]

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?

My point is it WAS applied to white Christian protesters and they were all pardoned, and the administration which pardoned them — the same administration obsessed with silencing and punishing news agencies and journalists — turned around and used that act to punish someone acting on their constitutional rights to free speech and freedom of the press. So why is it offensive for one group but applicable for the other? What’s the difference?

It does matter that Don Lemon is black because Donald Trump has a long history of racism, especially toward black Americans. This is one more example of his contempt. He has repeatedly and happily shared his racist views toward non-whites, so it isn’t absurd to think he and his administration would take biased and unfair actions against non-white individuals — members of the press even more so, since his government has focused hard on denying the rights of journalists and the freedom of the press.

And your <modsnip> hypotheticals about mosques are irrelevant. Show me proof of that; because I have plenty of African, Middle Eastern, and Muslim friends, and I can assure you that none of them have any faith in this administration extending their powers and efforts toward them the way they do toward white Christian nationalists: a group that he and his people have repeatedly and incessantly talked about bringing to power over others.

But yeahhhhhh…”IMO”/“MOO”.

 

[PrairieWind]

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.

Well I think you are wrong. But I don't think any journalist should follow into a church and interview people while this is going on. That is becoming PART of the story, not covering it. Invading a church or place of worship is dangerous and incites VERY strong feelings. The "pastor/attorney" that led this protest knew this and is counting on it. DL is a smart guy, he knew what he was doing. I think it is disgusting and an insult to journalism. Does he think this increases people's of journalists? It doesn't. <modsnip>

 

[otto]

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

The journalist was in the church at the time the woman was injured fleeing the church. For unknown reasons, the journalist has not reported on the woman who was injured due to the loud, disruptive people that were at church on Sunday morning.

It is surprising that the journalist did not report on injuries that occurred during the incident. That seems newsworthy.

 

[PrairieWind]

My point is it WAS applied to white Christian protesters and they were all pardoned, and the administration which pardoned them — the same administration obsessed with silencing and punishing news agencies and journalists — turned around and used that act to punish someone acting on their constitutional rights to free speech and freedom of the press. So why is it offensive for one group but applicable for the other? What’s the difference?

It does matter that Don Lemon is black because Donald Trump has a long history of racism, especially toward black Americans. This is one more example of his contempt. He has repeatedly and happily shared his racist views toward non-whites, so it isn’t absurd to think he and his administration would take biased and unfair actions against non-white individuals — members of the press even more so, since his government has focused hard on denying the rights of journalists and the freedom of the press.

And your <modsnip> hypotheticals about mosques are irrelevant. Show me proof of that; because I have plenty of African, Middle Eastern, and Muslim friends, and I can assure you that none of them have any faith in this administration extending their powers and efforts toward them the way they do toward white Christian nationalists: a group that he and his people have repeatedly and incessantly talked about bringing to power over others.

But yeahhhhhh…”IMO”/“MOO”.

<modsnip: Quoted post was modsnipped>

But those Christian protesters were in fact charged criminally by the United States, tried and convicted, and often imprisoned. The President's option to pardon is wholly separate. It would be wrong for the United States to NOT charge these protesters as well. That would be equal protection under the law.
Race should, and as far as I can see doesn't, have anything to do with this. Other than the fact that the leader is Black, and the victims are White, has led many progressives to just assume the result must somehow be "just."

And you can call my hypotheticals <modsnipped> if you want, but we all know my point it correct.

 

[otto]

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?

According to the journalist:

"Don Lemon is doubling down after being caught red-handed conspiring with anti-ICE radicals who raided a Sunday church service in St. Paul, casting blame on the parishioners whom he labeled “entitled” and accusing them of “white supremacy.”

“I think people who are in religious groups like that — it’s not the type of Christianity that I practice — but I think they’re entitled, and that entitlement comes from white supremacy,” Lemon said of Minnesota’s Cities Church in a jaw-dropping interview with lefty “I’ve Had It” podcaster Jennifer Welch."

Don Lemon blasts Minnesota churchgoers harassed by anti-ICE protesters for ‘entitlement’ and ‘white supremacy’

Don Lemon is doubling down after being caught red-handed conspiring with anti-ICE radicals who raided a Sunday church service in St. Paul, casting blame on the parishioners whom he labeled “e…

nypost.com

 

[J. J. in Phila]

P

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).

You mean like this: "“Protesting inside a church and interrupting worship services reveals the true colors of a segment within our society committed to disorder and chaos, openly dismissive of the rule of law, and deeply antagonistic toward our Judeo-Christian values." Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, and lead pastor of New Season Church, in Sacramento

'Shameful': Pastors, Christian leaders react to activists storming So. Baptist church in Minnesota

Pastors and other ministry leaders have roundly condemned a group of activists in Minnesota who disrupted a Sunday service at a Southern Baptist church in St Paul, where a local official with U S

www.christianpost.com

 

[PrairieWind]

The journalist was in the church at the time the woman was injured fleeing the church. For unknown reasons, the journalist has not reported on the woman who was injured due to the loud, disruptive people that were at church on Sunday morning.

It is surprising that the journalist did not report on injuries that occurred during the incident. That seems newsworthy.

Alsmost as if he wasn't there to "cover" the whole story and what was going on (the people having to flee out the side and back doors) but only to interview the pastor (while the pastor would normally be ministering to his congregation, ie there to disrupt the service).

 

[Inthedetails]

It is surprising that the journalist did not report on injuries that occurred during the incident. That seems newsworthy.

snipped

Send a tip to another reporter to cover it.

jmo

 

[bearfossils]

Well I think you are wrong. But I don't think any journalist should follow into a church and interview people while this is going on. That is becoming PART of the story, not covering it. Invading a church or place of worship is dangerous and incites VERY strong feelings. The "pastor/attorney" that led this protest knew this and is counting on it. DL is a smart guy, he knew what he was doing. I think it is disgusting and an insult to journalism. Does he think this increases people's of journalists? It doesn't. <modsnip>

<modsnip: Removed personalizing comments>

Lemon had every right to be there and document the situation. If the act meant to punish people from blocking access to a clinic was ignored and mocked by an administration that pardoned people previously prosecuted by it, then they should have to justify using it to punish someone else exercising their rights as a citizen and journalists.

Explain to me why it is an assault against America when white Christian protesters are “unfairly” prosecuted by it and why they deserve to be pardoned and excused, but Don Lemon deserves to be prosecuted and punished by the same law.

“IMO”/“MOO”.

 

[bearfossils]

The journalist was in the church at the time the woman was injured fleeing the church. For unknown reasons, the journalist has not reported on the woman who was injured due to the loud, disruptive people that were at church on Sunday morning.

It is surprising that the journalist did not report on injuries that occurred during the incident. That seems newsworthy.

It seems equally newsworthy that the administration actively worked toward pardoning domestic terrorists who were involved in blocking women from accessing a clinic and punished under the FACE act and complained about that act in the past, but felt no issue in using the same act to punish a journalist covering a protest a church. I’m surprised they didn’t bother to discuss or defend that.

“IMO”/“MOO”

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

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

MOO

Don Lemon's actions involved behavior that infringed upon the right to freedom of religion and worship.

imo

 

[bearfossils]

Don Lemon's actions involved behavior that infringed upon the right to freedom of religion and worship.

imo

Well, now they have maybe vaguely an eighth of an ounce of the experience of what the rest of Americans have been experiencing for years.

“IMO”/“MOO”

 

[PrairieWind]

It is absolutely not separate when that administration both pardoned one set of individuals then decided to prosecute another. These actions don’t happen inside a bubble; unless you live inside that nice little white Christian nationalist bubble that is repeatedly defended and promoted while others are suppressed.

Race matters for the reasons I posted before that you gleefully ignored. Unless you think a racist president is irrelevant.

“IMO”/“MOO”

So you see how this is narrowing? Anyone who speaks for the protection of the church is a "white christian nationalist." Is that it? As we continue to debate this, that is what it always seems to narrow down to. No matter what reasoning is put forward, it always just comes down to , "well, you're just a white christian nationalist." Which, to me, means you know are wrong but have just resorted to that last, most base of emotions.

 

[Inthedetails]

bbm:

[Supreme Court] Justice Potter Stewart argued in a concurring opinion: That the First Amendment speaks separately of freedom of speech and freedom of the press is no constitutional accident, but an acknowledgment of the critical role played by the press in American society. The Constitution requires sensitivity to that role, and to the special needs of the press in performing it effectively." ....

[T]he Court has recognized that laws targeting the press, or treating different subsets of media outlets differently, may sometimes violate the First Amendment. Further, it does seem clear that, to some extent, the press, because of its role in disseminating news and information, is entitled to heightened constitutional protections—that its role constitutionally entitles it to governmental sensitivity, to use Justice Potter Stewart’s word.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt1-9-1/ALDE_00000395/

 

[SouthAussie]

The journalist was in the church at the time the woman was injured fleeing the church. For unknown reasons, the journalist has not reported on the woman who was injured due to the loud, disruptive people that were at church on Sunday morning.

It is surprising that the journalist did not report on injuries that occurred during the incident. That seems newsworthy.

Probably because Don left through the front door, and the person who broke their arm from slipping left through a different door. Can't report on an issue that you are unaware of (if he didn't, in fact, mention it in his video. IDK)

imo

 

[Sundog]

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.

A bad day does not cause psychological injuries. It may, but anyone claiming that the protest "injured" them

<Snipped for focus>

A "bad day"? Children crying and telling their fathers that they thought they would be shot that day while sitting in their church pews praying with their families and church community and pastor? Aggressive and violent chants of "don't shoot" and telling children their parents are Nazis and will go to hell?

Children, the elderly, and congregants overall were traumatized by this event and to call it a "bad day" is way beyond the pale.

 

[Tutter]

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.

Were the Founding Fathers Christian Nationalists? Is every Christian a Christian nationalist?

No one would ever have stood for an invasion of a mosque or temple. Only a Christian church is where it is no big deal.

 

[bearfossils]

This is a case about a criminal complaint against Don Lemon. YOU are making this about everything else. The court will need to keep this focused on these actions and these defendants.
Half of what you are posting is about racism. What racism?
Lemon had NO right to be in that church, legally, morally, or ethically. And THAT, is really the point. This protest was WRONG. I think everyone is agreeing this was a terrible idea. So stop defending people that did such a horrible and dangerous and inflammatory act.
Don Lemon broke the law. White, conservative defendants have gone to prison for the same. Why is Don exempt because he is Black? And stop with the journalism thing, I'll admit he is a journalist, but that doesn't mean his actions were as a journalist. He didn't cover most of the story going on in that church because he was too busy conducting the PURPOSE of the protest; to disrupt the service and confront the congregation.

You’re ridiculous. i’m not going to argue with you anymore. You can’t discuss anything intellectually or lawfully, and are totally obsessed with whining about how this church deserves to be treated different than any other entity in this country. Christians love to defend their right to terrorize others and violate their rights, but we should all have our hearts broken oven a church service being mildly disrupted. “Rights for me, but not for thee!”

I’ve repeatedly explained to you why race, journalism, and the administration matters in regard to this case, and you brush it off without empathy and insist on this case existing in a magic bubble. Ignorance is bliss.

“IMO”/“MOO”.

 

[Summerliz03]

Were the Founding Fathers Christian Nationalists? Is every Christian a Christian nationalist?

No one would ever have stood for an invasion of a mosque or temple. Only a Christian church is where it is no big deal.

As I stated in my other post, this country was founded on religious FREEDOM, not as a Christian nation. Our founding fathers did not want the US to have one centralized religion, that’s the whole point. I do not think ANY type of church should have a protest in it. I think I’ve said this at least 10 times in this thread.

I myself am a proud Christian whose children attend religious school and I’m at church every single Sunday. I also think the current administration pushing Christian nationalism is wrong, it goes against everything in the Bible and everything Jesus taught. I think ANY religion pushing Nationalism is wrong - it’s a form of religious extremism. But I also do not believe there is any current attack on Christians or Christianity in this county. All MOO.

 

[Inthedetails]

Regarding this case specifically, bbm:


Gabe Rottman, vice president of policy for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, made the following statement:

“It’s obviously concerning any time journalists are arrested in connection with their reporting. To our knowledge, it’s unprecedented for the Justice Department to deploy the federal laws it has previously cited in this case against journalistic activity.

“Historically, the limited number of cases that have been brought against a journalist documenting a protest on private property have been handled as trespass cases at the state level. Those charges are almost always dropped, or if the cases go to trial, the journalists typically prevail.”

RCFP statement on arrests of journalists Don Lemon, Georgia Fort

“To our knowledge, it's unprecedented for the Justice Department to deploy the federal laws it has previously cited in this case against journalistic activity.”

www.rcfp.org

About the source: The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) is the leading pro bono legal services organization for journalists and newsrooms in the U.S. The Reporters Committee provides legal representation, amicus curiae support, and other legal resources at no cost to protect First Amendment freedoms and the newsgathering rights of journalists across the country.
More about the source:
Overall, we rate the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) as Least Biased due to its nonpartisan focus on defending journalistic rights and press freedom. We also rate it High for factual reporting based on thorough sourcing and adherence to professional journalism standards.

Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) - Bias and Credibility

LEAST BIASED These sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appeals to emotion or

mediabiasfactcheck.com