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

[Ruminations]

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. Stop making this about Trump. This is about a church in Minnesota.

You feel that way. But how do other journalists feel?

SPJ strongly condemns arrests of journalists covering anti-ICE demonstration in Minnesota | Society of Professional Journalists

www.spj.org

I trust a journalism to evaluate quality journalism over a stranger on the internet.

MOO

 

[Ruminations]

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.

<modsnip>

It's is alleged in a dubious charging document that over eager, under credentialed prosecutors finally were able to file (we think- it's not signed) on the third attempt after two strikes.

It is an allegation. It is not proven.

Journalists, if they saw it, would very likely report it. That is one reason I don't believe it is legit. I think we just might learn it was hearsay and conjecture that would never make the trial, even if the case does.

So now, we are reeling way off topic to a broken arm that might have occurred, and might be related to the cities church protest, but we are not discussing the topic of this thread: The arrests of journalists.

MOO

 

[otto]

We don't know it even happened.

It's is alleged in a dubious charging document that over eager, under credentialed prosecutors finally were able to file (we think- it's not signed) on the third attempt after two strikes.

It is an allegation. It is not proven.

Journalists, if they saw it, would very likely report it. That is one reason I don't believe it is legit. I think we just might learn it was hearsay and conjecture that would never make the trial, even if the case does.

So now, we are reeling way off topic to a broken arm that might have occurred, and might be related to the cities church protest, but we are not discussing the topic of this thread: The arrests of journalists.

MOO

A woman swore under oath that she suffered a broken arm while fleeing the church with crying children.

A journalist was present. A journalist should report on injuries suffered during the loud, disruptive incident in the church. Because the journalist did not report the injury, we should disbelieve that it happened?

paragraph 43; affidavit in support of arrest warrant

 

[Ruminations]

But you can't compare these. Don Lemon's charges stand on their own. Good's death is no defense. In fact, it will likely be used by the prosecution against him.

<modsnip>

Good's murder is going to be used against him?

That doesn't even make sense.

Good's murder was horrific, especially seeing a glove box filled with toys that belong to her 6 year old. But Lemon didn't shoot her.

What happened at cities church was rude, maybe rising to a level of minor charges on the part of the protesters, but I will take being called a nazi over being shot dead everytime. (Hint: being called a nazi hurts less if you are not a nazi.)

But I am simply not following how you are concluding that a murder in the same neighborhood on a different day is somehow going to be evidence that covering a protest as a journalist was a chargeable crime? Please explain.

MOO

 

[Sillybilly]

Sorry, too many alerts coming in. Have to close the thread for a bit folks.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

We have not finished total review and cleaning up in this discussion, so some alerts have yet to be deal with.

The thread is open again, but DO NOT send any alerts on any posts prior to this post. Also of note, over-alerting may result in members losing their posting privileges or removal of their ability to use the Report feature.

The thread is about Don Lemon's arrest, so before you hit Submit, make darn sure your post is related to Don Lemon's arrest. Make sense ?

Bickering, rudeness, personalizing may result in a temporary or permanent loss of posting privileges. Post accordingly.

Thank you.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Interesting. Sonza’s work history doesn’t appear to include any courtroom or experience, typical for Ohio Republican appointments to important positions requiring legal qualifications.

Orlando Sonza

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

So this guy with no courtroom experience is going to prosecute these journalists. That will be interesting.

Ah, no.

Looking a bit more in depth, Sonza was a prosecutor in the Hamilton County (OH) prosecutor's office; the county includes Cincinnati. Meet Orlando Sonza, candidate for for Ohio's 1st Congressional District

Interesting background, and not in a negative sense.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Ah, no.

Looking a bit more in depth, Sonza was a prosecutor in the Hamilton County (OH) prosecutor's office; the county includes Cincinnati. Meet Orlando Sonza, candidate for for Ohio's 1st Congressional District

Interesting background, and not in a negative sense.

He's certainly well-educated and seems to do well academically. I'd expect him to have a better grasp of the Constitution. This is a BS case created against Lemon and Fort only to help him make a national name for himself.

MOO.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

He's certainly well-educated and seems to do well academically. I'd expect him to have a better grasp of the Constitution. This is a BS case created against Lemon and Fort only to help him make a national name for himself.

MOO.

He does have prosecutorial experience, which Betty P. raised.

My opinion is that it has nothing to do with Sonza, because it is a strong case.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

You feel that way. But how do other journalists feel?

SPJ strongly condemns arrests of journalists covering anti-ICE demonstration in Minnesota | Society of Professional Journalists

www.spj.org

I trust a journalism to evaluate quality journalism over a stranger on the internet.

MOO

I would not, because it could be an attempt to circle the wagons.

We know that SPJ did not have all the evidence the grand jury did, because they only had Lemon''s broadcast. The indictment indicates additional videos.

MOO

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

I find it interesting that much of the anti-abortion activists argument mirror those of the people invading the church: Anti-abortion activist who led a clinic blockade is sentenced to nearly 5 years in prison

That case is a good contrast to Lemon's to show how much weaker this one is.

Here is Handy's indictment. First of all it's written with much more neutral objective language, compared to the highly politicalized language in Lemon's (like calling defendants "agitators"). The Handy one lists lots of specific acts that are clearly violations of the law, whereas the Lemon indictment has mostly either allegations irrelevant to the charges or describes the acts in vague terms, not specific actions. And where it is in specifics it is contradicted by the video evidence we can see.

It's not surprising since this indictment has been drafted by inexperienced, political appointee hacks, as the career prosecutors in that division either all quit or refused to work on this case. Same goes for the investigator who signed the Affidavit, who is also very inexperienced. He's not even in the FBI, he's a member of ICE and DHS, and only since March of last year. Why the hell is an ICE employee working on a civil rights law case? I guarantee he has no experience in this area. He is very hacky too, he also uses the "agitator" term, and he describes the Renee Good case as: "Good was recently involved in an illegal protest to disrupt immigration enforcement activities, which led to an officer involved shooting as a result of her assault on an immigration officer," when none of that has been adjudicated, nor even investigated. Such gross gaslighting.

The prior cases were also typically filed months, even years, after the incident, but this one was filed within days. Another sign of a hacky hit job, that it's foremost for political purposes not a legitimate pursuit of justice.

Below are some of the overt acts alleged in the Handy case.

20. Once inside the Clinic’s waiting room, HANDY, SMITH, HARLOW, MARSHALL, HINSHAW, IDONI, GOODMAN, and BELL set about blockading two Clinic doors.

21. HANDY directed conspirators on what to do.

22. HINSHAW and MARSHALL moved chairs in the Clinic’s waiting room to block a door to the Clinic’s treatment area.

23. HARLOW brought with her a duffle bag that contained a chain and rope.

24. SMITH, HARLOW, MARSHALL, HINSHAW, and BELL sat in the chairs they had placed to obstruct passage into the Clinic’s treatment area and chained and roped themselves together.

25. GOODMAN and IDONI went into the hallway outside of the Clinic and stood in front the doorway of the employee entrance to the Clinic.

26. When Patient A arrived at the Clinic lobby for a scheduled reproductive health service, MARSHALL and other conspirators blocked her from entering the Clinic’s treatment area.

27. When Patient A attempted to use the employee entrance in the hall to gain access to the Clinic’s treatment area, GOODMAN and IDONI blocked Patient A from entering the Clinic.

28. HANDY stood at the doorway of the Clinic’s main entrance, and blocked individuals trying to enter the waiting room.

29. At the same time that the conspirators began blockading the Clinic, DARNEL, who was standing outside of the Clinic’s building, used Facebook to live-stream a video of the conspirators’ activities. He started the live-stream by saying, in part, that at that moment, “we have people intervening physically with their bodies to prevent women from entering the clinic to murder their children.”

An easy open and shut case that plainly violates the FACE Act law.

Here's another case, US v. Citizens for a Pro-Life Society, et al. Handy was charged in that case as well. Many of the defendants in these prior cases are repeat offenders, this complaint details the numerous times each defendant has been arrested for similar acts. So they knew exactly what they were doing, that they're breaking the law, showing clear willful intent, which is quite absent in the Lemon case. Here are some of the allegations in this one:

49. NOWC staff quickly told Defendants Gies, McDonald, Moscinski, and Whipple to leave and evacuated their patients into a secured portion of the facility.

50. While the patients were being taken out of the waiting room, Defendant McDonald forcefully grabbed a patient’s body and told her not to go through with the abortion.

51. After the patients had left the waiting room, Defendants Gies, McDonald, Moscinski, and Whipple repeatedly refused to leave.

52. While in the waiting room, Defendants Gies, McDonald, Moscinski, and Whipple occupied nearly the entirety of the waiting room by laying or kneeling directly on the floor.

53. Cuyahoga Falls Police Department officers soon arrived at NOWC and told Defendants Gies, McDonald, Moscinski, and Whipple to leave.

54. Defendants Gies, McDonald, Moscinski, and Whipple refused to leave.
.....
75. Bedford Heights Police Department officers soon arrived at BHSC.

76. While being questioned by police, Defendant Smith stated, “I went inside because they’re killing babies in there.”

77. Police officers instructed the RRR participants to leave BHSC’s property and the adjoining private property where participants were congregating.

78. The RRR participants who were unlawfully trespassing refused to leave BHSC’s property and the adjoining private property.

79. Next, Defendant Handy kneeled down directly in front of the entry door to Planned Parenthood’s facility and refused to move.

Another case is US vs Thomas, with another similar fact pattern. This one was filed in 2017, in Trump's first term, back before the recent mass purge of anyone who wouldn't go along with his obscenely corrupt weaponization of the DOJ.

The Lemon indictment doesn't come close to alleging or substantiating anything comparable against Lemon or the protestors. Lemon will easily not be convicted of the charges. And I have doubts about convicting the protestors as well, or if they are, that it will be for light sentences.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

That case is a good contrast to Lemon's to show how much weaker this one is.

Here is Handy's indictment. First of all it's written with much more neutral objective language, compared to the highly politicalized language in Lemon's (like calling defendants "agitators"). The Handy one lists lots of specific acts that are clearly violations of the law, whereas the Lemon indictment has mostly either allegations irrelevant to the charges or describes the acts in vague terms, not specific actions. And where it is in specifics it is contradicted by the video evidence we can see.

Snipped for emphasis.

Handy is much less detailed.

MOO.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Snipped for emphasis.

Handy is much less detailed.

MOO.

Can you elaborate with specific examples?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Can you elaborate with specific examples?

Compare both indictments.

 

[SouthAussie]

The former CNN anchor Don Lemon has warned the US must “keep fighting” for its right to a free press, calling it “the breath in the lungs of democracy” following his arrest alongside another journalist by the Trump administration.

..... speaking on Saturday at a Human Rights Campaign event in New York City, Lemon said: “Our society cannot breathe without the freedom of the press, the freedom of speech.

“I felt the smothering, the suffocation. I saw how quickly a voice can be targeted, how easily truth can be distorted … I saw how fast a story can be turned into a warning.

“But I’m not an activist. I’m not a protester. I’m a journalist. And my calling is not to shout – but my calling is to witness. And that’s what they’re afraid of – that witness … to tell the truth.”

Arrested journalist Don Lemon urges US to ‘keep fighting’ for right to free press

Ex-CNN anchor arrested after covering anti-ICE protest says it was ‘very frightening’ to experience official overreach

www.theguardian.com

 

[Inthedetails]

It aches to see people dismiss the vital importance of a free press while they express outrage at protestors they don't approve of (and I don't approve of disrupting a worship service either).

It seems people are willing (eager?) to toss away our valuable first-amendment protection of the free press because people they don't like yelled in a place they should've have been....and a journalist they don't like was there with a camera and mic.

Democracy doesn't work without a free press.

This comment is about the arrest of journalists, not about the protestors.

jmo

p.s. I don't condone disrupting a worship service.

 

[Ruminations]

A woman swore under oath that she suffered a broken arm while fleeing the church with crying children.

A journalist was present. A journalist should report on injuries suffered during the loud, disruptive incident in the church. Because the journalist did not report the injury, we should disbelieve that it happened?

paragraph 43; affidavit in support of arrest warrant

No.

You already cut and pasted that, but I think you are unaware of how little it means.

The affidavit was by the person who threw together that info which literally could be hearsay. The broken arm person didn't give an affidavit. The affadavit is by the person who wants to bring charges. And his knowledge could be based on rumors. There is no indication in paragraph 43 that the affiant even got this info directly from the person with a broken arm. There is a hint someone called it in to local police the next day.

This document is not court ready. Nothing has to be proven to put it in the document you are reading.

It is not an adjudicated list of events. Its not proven. It's not decided what, if anything, from the document would be admissible in court. It's an accusation that someone signed.

MOO

He does have prosecutorial experience, which Betty P. raised.

My opinion is that it has nothing to do with Sonza, because it is a strong case.

And, it's okay to have a minority opinion, of course. Most main stream analysts agree that the charges are somewhat weak but possible against the protesters, but extremely weak against the journalists and dangerous to democracy nonetheless.

Some people have strongly-held feelings against the protesters and the journalists, but they are reporting the feelings that they and other have. In other words, some people wish there were clear, harsh legal repercussions for the protesters, but they are not able to reasonably assert that there could be with the USA's current legal system. (In other countries, such as Russia and Iran, they would be correct in their analyses.)

Being that most analysts recognize the weakness of the case against the protesters and especially against the journalists, they conclude that the point of these legal actions is not to win this case. It is to chill protests and journalism so that extra-judicial killings and kidnappings can continue with less push-back. Thus, even in losing the case, according to persons who support the very unpopular actions of ICE and federal agents, they win. Because they get a little less pushback.

Pro- federal agent people who have seriously analyzed this don't think the case is strong. They think the strength of the case doesn't matter. The point is to chill, not prevail.


MOO

Legal experts explain why charges against Don Lemon and Georgia Fort are so chilling

"The playbook to come for our civil rights, our constitutional rights, and racial democracy," civil rights leader Maya Wiley tells theGrio.

thegrio.com

The Case Against Don Lemon Is Junk, and Dangerous

If the Cities Church case falls apart, it will not be the first such embarrassment for Trump’s Justice Department.

www.theatlantic.com

The federal charges against Don Lemon raise serious concerns for press freedom

Don Lemon faces federal charges after entering a Minnesota church with disruptive protesters to cover the event. What does this mean for press freedom and First Amendment rights?

www.thefire.org

 

[Hexe]

A woman swore under oath that she suffered a broken arm while fleeing the church with crying children.

A journalist was present. A journalist should report on injuries suffered during the loud, disruptive incident in the church. Because the journalist did not report the injury, we should disbelieve that it happened?

paragraph 43; affidavit in support of arrest warrant

If I may ask: what does it have to do with Lemon's behaviour during the demonstration in the church? He was not indicted on missing vital info but on blocking and obstructing. Also, a lousy journo that misses vital info on the scene is still a journo, protected by the First Amendment. So what is exactly the point of discussing this unfortunate injury?

MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

It aches to see people dismiss the vital importance of a free press while they express outrage at protestors they don't approve of (and I don't approve of disrupting a worship service either).

It seems people are willing (eager?) to toss away our valuable first-amendment protection of the free press because people they don't like yelled in a place they should've have been....and a journalist they don't like was there with a camera and mic.

Democracy doesn't work without a free press.

This comment is about the arrest of journalists, not about the protestors.

jmo

p.s. I don't condone disrupting a worship service.

I do not see this as a free press issue. To use an analogy, can a reporter cover a burning building? Yes. Can a reporter help set fire to the building and then cover the story? My answer is no; I think that would be the answer of most people.

Was Lemon a participant in a crime. IMO, yes he was. He was not functioning as a journalist.

 

[Hexe]

Was Lemon a participant in a crime. IMO, yes he was. He was not functioning as a journalist.

If there is any evidence he was doing in that church anything else but documenting the protest and interviewing the witnesses/victims, I'd love to see it. As for now I've seen nothing of this kind.

MOO