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

[Ruminations]

It is not necessarily rare that they are requested. It is rare that the request is granted.

IMO.

I do not recall the transcripts being given in the Starr investigation of Bill Clinton, though some of Clinton's video testimony was released.

Well, there was no grand jury involved there.

It was a congressional investigation.

You are right that GJ transcripts are rarely released.

Please read the motion to see why this situation may very well be an exception- as was a recent, similar US case.

MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Well, there was no grand jury involved there.

It was a congressional investigation.

You are right that GJ transcripts are rarely released.

Please read the motion to see why this situation may very well be an exception- as was a recent, similar US case.

MOO

Yes, there was: https://www.npr.org/1998/07/27/1034469/starr-grand-jury-investigation

There was also a grand jury investigation in Watergate, in addition to the Ervin Committee and finally the House Judiciary Committee.

MOO

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Another interview about the case from the universally beloved Harmeet Dhillon.

 

[Ruminations]

Yes, there was: https://www.npr.org/1998/07/27/1034469/starr-grand-jury-investigation

There was also a grand jury investigation in Watergate, in addition to the Ervin Committee and finally the House Judiciary Committee.

MOO

There were a number of GJ cases since this nation was born.

Rarely has the work of the GJ been made public. You are right about this.

Please read the motion for why the case that is the topic of this thread is very likely going to be an exception, as was another recent federal case.

MOO

 

[Charlot123]

Totally agree. I don't understand why they chose that manner of protest and I personally think it's in extremely poor taste to disrupt a church service. I would think protesting outside the church would be much more effective appealing to church goers and non church goers alike to let them know the pastor is a .

I’d agree with you 100% if boundaries were kept both ways: I don’t ever walk into anyone’s house of worship, and no one comes proselytizing at my house or office (yes). In other words, not to misbehave, we all have to first start behaving like citizens of a secular country. Because we are.

The case of Don Lemon is hard to comment on because I was not there and can’t imagine how much of a commotion was created. So I am trying to think logically: in cases when we have no potential to interrupt any act, be it protest, commotion, violence, crime, do we have the right to register the event for history?

I think we do. Otherwise we won’t have any proof that events happened. (If we didn’t have photos of burning crosses, or much worse, no one could prove that that part of US history took place. For sure, there would be many deniers. Just an example). And what about subway attacks? What if the observers are unable to interfere, but can make photos? It is photographing violence, but at times such photos help finding criminals, and are very useful at court.

Journalists come to make photos of any protest march, for good or bad reason - they assemble in advance, not knowing how the protest will end. Sometimes they end unexpectedly, even violently, but it all becomes part of our history.

We have no evidence that Lemon was going to use the photos and videos for nefarious purposes. He was just live-streaming the event, not commenting. Had he later published it with calls for violence/disruption, it would be one thing. As it happens, he was just live-streaming it.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

In the last video of Dhillon I posted, she said that a defendant had previously been accused of interfering with a church in DC. I looked it up and found it was William Kelly (aka dawokefarmer). This incident is not mentioned in the charging documents, which I believe makes it unethical for Dhillon to speak about it. Throughout her interviews, she has said several things about the case which are not in the indictment. But she loves the public, and really likes to talk, she can't help it! moo

This is an article about Kelly and a DC church.

Anti-ICE agitator who stormed Minnesota church service also harassed congregants at Pete Hegseth’s church

An anti-ICE agitator who stormed a Minnesota church on Sunday has also been accused of harassing churchgoers in Washington, D.C., for several months.

www.yahoo.com

He reportedly had been protesting outside of Christ Church DC, which is Pete Hegseth's church, and so probably why he and several others have protested there. You may remember the church has already been mentioned in this thread because a founder of that church also started Cities Church. He was not arrested for anything there though.

The article does say Kelly was arrested in DC for a separate incident by Secret Service in December for disorderly conduct. He was loudly yelling at someone on the street, much like he did at Cities Church.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

She has been lying about this case in public according to the motion to release the grand jury transcripts.

They cited some of the same videos I linked above. It's not just her such making ill-advised out of court statements though -- the motion quotes other DOJ officials and Trump. The section C quoted below has most of that discussion.

C. Pressure from President Trump and Main Justice to Bring Charges
The above-described extraordinary requests were not happening in a vacuum. Rather, the government’s frantic and unprecedented legal maneuvers were occurring as President Trump and senior Administration officials were publicly calling for charges against Mr. Lemon and others. They were doing so using hyperbolic and conclusory language that could leave no prosecutor uncertain as to their desired outcome.

On the day the government initially sought arrest warrants for Mr. Lemon and Ms. Fort, President Trump politicized the protest at Cities Church—and Mr. Lemon specifically—at two separate events. First, during a January 20, 2026 press conference at the White House, President Trump stated:

And they have to be abused by guys like Don Lemon, who’s a, you know, loser, lightweight. I saw him, the way he walked in that church. It was terrible. I have such respect for that pastor. He was so calm. He was so nice. He was just accosted. What they did in that church was horrible yesterday.4​

Then, during an interview the same day with Katie Pavlich of NewsNation, he stated:

And then you have the agitators, anarchists, you know, I watch sort of everything, I see it all. And I see people, screaming, “Shame, shame,” you know. This is not people that are like living in Minnesota, these are professional paid people, they’re like actors. I mean, I watched the guy last night in the church, he was, and not just Don Lemon, Don Lemon’s a loser, but I watched a guy last night in the church. This guy’s a professional guy and he, he actually admits to it, he gets paid a lot of money to go and cause trouble.5​

At the same time, Attorney General Pamela Bondi was also publicly pushing for charges against Mr. Lemon and others who were at Cities Church, stating, “We are coming after you if you participated in that. I don’t care if you’re a failed CNN journalist, you have no right to do that in this country. We don’t live in a third world country.”6 Attorney General Bondi rejected the premise that Mr. Lemon is an independent journalist, instead calling him “an online agitator,” while acknowledging that “if you are a journalist and you are covering a story” that may factor into the legal analysis.7 Similarly, when asked about Mr. Lemon on Fox News, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche stated “freedom of the press extends to a lot of different areas, but it does not extend to somebody just trespassing and being embedded with a group of rioters.”8

Perhaps most notably, President Trump’s pick to lead the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, Assistant Attorney General (AAG) Harmeet Dhillon, sat for an extensive interview to discuss the matter, while the Eighth Circuit was considering the Emergency Petition for Mandamus. In relevant part, AAG Dhillon explained:

[Don Lemon] is not out of legal jeopardy, and he has lawyered up . . . . We’re gonna pursue this to the ends of the earth. 9
. . .
The attorney general herself was there on the ground and managing this process with my principal deputy, a brilliant young lawyer. And so you know we are not giving up the fight here at all[.]1
. . .
Abbe Lowell, his lawyer, had nothing to do with the magistrate judge refusing to sign off on arresting Don Lemon. So you have to understand that we at the Department of Justice, these days, in the most aggressive and important fights that we’re facing, we’re kind of out-manned two against one. You know, he didn’t even need a lawyer. The magistrate judge was kind of standing in as judge and jury.11​

In yet another statement, AAG Dhillon denounced Mr. Lemon’s reporting as “pseudo journalism” unworthy of First Amendment protection.12

These statements by President Trump, Attorney General Bondi, Deputy Attorney General Blanche, and AAG Dhillon all occurred while the government was actively and furiously seeking reconsideration of the Court’s refusal to issue the arrest warrants from the duty magistrate, the Chief Judge of the District of Minnesota, and the Eighth Circuit.

moo

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Here's the motion they filed to obtain the grand jury transcript.

Joint MOTION for Disclosure of Grand Jury Proceedings

You can download other case documents at this link.

United States v. Levy-Armstrong (0:26-cr-00025)

None of their filings have merit, IMO.

Presidents, and by extension, the Executive branch has discretion in enforcing laws. This has occurred under Biden and Obama as well, with it being likened it to prosecutorial discretion under Obama. Obama’s newest prosecutorial discretion initiative: What it means for immigrants and families - National Immigrant Justice Center

Lemon's argument is basically, **I don't like it when it is applied to me.**

 

[Ontario Mom]

In the last video of Dhillon I posted, she said that a defendant had previously been accused of interfering with a church in DC. I looked it up and found it was William Kelly (aka dawokefarmer). This incident is not mentioned in the charging documents, which I believe makes it unethical for Dhillon to speak about it. Throughout her interviews, she has said several things about the case which are not in the indictment. But she loves the public, and really likes to talk, she can't help it! moo

This is an article about Kelly and a DC church.

Anti-ICE agitator who stormed Minnesota church service also harassed congregants at Pete Hegseth’s church

An anti-ICE agitator who stormed a Minnesota church on Sunday has also been accused of harassing churchgoers in Washington, D.C., for several months.

www.yahoo.com

He reportedly had been protesting outside of Christ Church DC, which is Pete Hegseth's church, and so probably why he and several others have protested there. You may remember the church has already been mentioned in this thread because a founder of that church also started Cities Church. He was not arrested for anything there though.

The article does say Kelly was arrested in DC for a separate incident by Secret Service in December for disorderly conduct. He was loudly yelling at someone on the street, much like he did at Cities Church.

For those of us in this church community, we already knew Kelly was the foul mouthed troublemaker at the church in DC. I don't think it's unethical at all. Many people already knew it, and she was simply pointing it out.

jmo

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Since this has come up, even in high profile cases, grand jury transcripts do not get released. This is one from 28 years ago that are still not released: https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000164-800f-d85b-a776-bc9f7a0f0000

At times, they are introduced as evidence in a trial or included in an indictment or presentment, so some may be seen in the Lemon case in that regard.

MOO

 

[Ruminations]

None of their filings have merit, IMO.

Presidents, and by extension, the Executive branch has discretion in enforcing laws. This has occurred under Biden and Obama as well, with it being likened it to prosecutorial discretion under Obama. Obama’s newest prosecutorial discretion initiative: What it means for immigrants and families - National Immigrant Justice Center

Lemon's argument is basically, **I don't like it when it is applied to me.**

Have you read them?

Of course they have merit.

The procedures to bring these charges were different and unlawful. There is no prosecutorial discretion to change laws and procedures.

MOO

 

[Ruminations]

Since this has come up, even in high profile cases, grand jury transcripts do not get released. This is one from 28 years ago that are still not released: https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000164-800f-d85b-a776-bc9f7a0f0000

At times, they are introduced as evidence in a trial or included in an indictment or presentment, so some may be seen in the Lemon case in that regard.

MOO

This case is different. It is not about how long ago the case was. It is about the evidence of irregularities surrounding this particular GJ action.


MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Have you read them?

Of course they have merit.

The procedures to bring these charges were different and unlawful. There is no prosecutorial discretion to change laws and procedures.

MOO

Lemon is not claiming unlawfulness. He is, effectively, claiming that the Trump administration is targeting him. The problem that the Trump administration can target him for breaking the law.

Remember those claims that the charges would be dismissed. Didn't happen.

MOO.

 

[Betty P]

They cited some of the same videos I linked above. It's not just her such making ill-advised out of court statements though -- the motion quotes other DOJ officials and Trump. The section C quoted below has most of that discussion.



moo

Isn't it usually the defense team that tries to leak evidence in pretrial when they have a weak case (e.g. Richard Allen's attorneys)? ICBW, but usually the prosecution isn't attempting to "try their case in the news media" before the trial begins. Will the defense team have to ask the judge to issue a gag order?

JMO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

This case is different. It is not about how long ago the case was. It is about the evidence of irregularities surrounding this particular GJ action.


MOO

What are they? The problem is that Lemon knows only about his video, and that may be problematic.

MOO

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Fort is being arraigned today. So is Trahern Jeen Crews.

https://www.facebook.com/ByGeorgiaFort/posts/pfbid044kNNT9S6ZKAuTwguzKR1upiUM3Ky7qC5K3W45BbF3M828xFdqZKtmDQAJNdrkfQl

 

[Ruminations]

Lemon is not claiming unlawfulness. He is, effectively, claiming that the Trump administration is targeting him. The problem that the Trump administration can target him for breaking the law.

Remember those claims that the charges would be dismissed. Didn't happen.

MOO.

Indeed, he (through his attorneys) is claiming that he, not so much personally but as a journalist, is being targeted.

That is one of the reasons there is tremendous merit to the argument that the GJ process was irregular.

There is an avalanche of evidence that the GJ was not told that Lemon was covering this protest as a journalist. When the judges that rejected the charges asked for more information about this, the prosecution did not provide it, and instead went to the GJ. There is no reason to believe the prosecution brought different information to the GJ.

Furthermore, the GJ was more vulnerable than judges to the kind of misinformation that the prosecution pumped out. How many talking heads have there been swaying the public with dribble like, "journalists are not allowed to break the law," when we all know that Lemon is not claiming he's allowed to break any laws. He's claiming (and has the receipts) that he was lawfully reporting on a protest.

If talking heads run around lying to the public that Lemon claims he is above the law, indeed such that this talking point is naively repeated in this very thread, what did they say to the GJ?

MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Indeed, he (through his attorneys) is claiming that he, not so much personally but as a journalist, is being targeted.

That is one of the reasons there is tremendous merit to the argument that the GJ process was irregular.

There is an avalanche of evidence that the GJ was not told that Lemon was covering this protest as a journalist. When the judges that rejected the charges asked for more information about this, the prosecution did not provide it, and instead went to the GJ. There is no reason to believe the prosecution brought different information to the GJ.

Furthermore, the GJ was more vulnerable than judges to the kind of misinformation that the prosecution pumped out. How many talking heads have there been swaying the public with dribble like, "journalists are not allowed to break the law," when we all know that Lemon is not claiming he's allowed to break any laws. He's claiming (and has the receipts) that he was lawfully reporting on a protest.

If talking heads run around lying to the public that Lemon claims he is above the law, indeed such that this talking point is naively repeated in this very thread, what did they say to the GJ?

MOO

That is immaterial.

If Lemon broke the law, e.g. by failing to leave when ask, he broke the law. It makes no difference if he were a journalist or a fry cook. There is no privilege to break the law if you are a journalist and if you are covering a story,

To give an analogy, a credentialed newspaper reporter rushing to cove a fire cannot run a stop sign to get there and expect notto get a ticket.

MOO,

 

[Hexe]

There is no privilege to break the law if you are a journalist and if you are covering a story,

Lemon never claimed any privilege.

MOO