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

[Betty P]

On the pastor's left was a parishioner or lay person.
Georgia is standing quite a bit back. Her microphone is not visible in this picture, but I have seen it be barely visible in other pictures.

View attachment 646862

‘I Might Get Arrested, People’: How MAGA media outlets are fueling Trump’s crackdown on the press.

How MAGA media outlets are fueling Trump’s crackdown on the press.

www.cjr.org

Those MAGA “media” people seem a little unhinged, to say the least

The MAGA media response turned from anger to glee when Lemon and Fort were arrested last week. They were indictedalong with seven others on allegations that they “conspired and agreed with one another and with other persons…to injure, oppress, threaten, and intimidate” multiple people. (The Justice Department initially had trouble bringing chargesagainst Lemon after federal magistrate and appellate judges rejected the case.) “These arrests have been hilariously fun to look at and laugh at,” Johnson said on his show. “When are we gonna get the Don Lemon mug shot?”

“Hey, congratulations.… It’s great that they finally got him,” Pool said on his podcast. “But what are we gonna do about the fact that there is an active insurgency? I mean, this is sedition, this is seditious conspiracy!”

Seditious conspiracy? That’s quite a leap. JMO

 

[CSIDreamer]

A private platform moderating content is legal and is not the same as government suppressing speech.

IMO, the government is not suppressing speech when it safeguards the equally important right to worship free of intimidation and interference.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Meanwhile.

House Republicans advance bill to repeal FACE Act​

written by Kate Scanlon 2:57 PM June 12, 2025

House Republicans advance bill to repeal FACE Act

Abortion opponents said the Biden administration weaponized the law by not pursuing proportionate charges against those who vandalized pro-life facilities.

www.osvnews.com

The same guy introduced the bill in 2023. It is not going anyplace: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/5577

IMO.

 

[SouthAussie]

IMO, the government is not suppressing speech when it safeguards the equally important right to worship free of intimidation and interference.

The govt could have achieved both. Prosecute the protesters, and allow the reporters to report on the protest without prosecution.

imo

"Even if an assembly is declared unlawful or is dispersed, that does not terminate the right of journalists to monitor protests."

https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default...Human-Rights-Context-Protests-Journalists.pdf

 

[J. J. in Phila]

The govt could have achieved both. Prosecute the protesters, and allow the reporters to report on the protest without prosecution.

imo

"Even if an assembly is declared unlawful or is dispersed, that does not terminate the right of journalists to monitor protests."

https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default...Human-Rights-Context-Protests-Journalists.pdf

Then the question returns to Lemon's actions.

MOO

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

No, it does not. There are areas cordoned off from the public at fires or crime scenes. The press cannot get past those.

Where did I say otherwise? I said: "Bad analogy. Can he cover a fire? Sure. Can he run a stop sign on the way to cover the fire? No. Do journalistic credentials allow him access to the fire once he's there? Yes, for the most part."

So I don't know what you're responding to. "For the most part" is important because obviously there are some areas that no one but law enforcement has access to. But areas cordoned off doesn't mean journalists don't have access to the fire from other places. If it did, then journalists would literally never be able to videotape anything the general public can't, and we know that isn't true. Press credentials do get you into places the general public can't be. From White House press briefings to VIP funerals to backstage or red carpet at awards shows to areas of the Pentagon to fires to police briefings to crimes scenes. I'm not sure how this is up for argument when we post stories from journalists who've been in these places every single day on WS.

MOO.

A journalist cannot engage in illegal activity while "doing journalism" and claim that he is exempt from that law.

MOO.

No one has said any such thing. Don't know what you're responding to or what point you're making.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Because, under FACE, it is cordoned area. If he were to follow a group of anti-abortion activists into a clinic, it would be the ame situation.

Except then he'd be pardoned by the POTUS, so...

MOO

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Those MAGA “media” people seem a little unhinged, to say the least



Seditious conspiracy? That’s quite a leap. JMO

It feels very much like a portion of the country learned what the word seditious means after 1/6 and have been using it to apply to everything they don't like ever since.

MOO.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

No one has said any such thing. Don't know what you're responding to or what point you're making.

Snipped for emphasis.

Don Lemon is. If he was claiming that his actions were legal, he would not have put forth the claim of being of journalist.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Except then he'd be pardoned by the POTUS, so...

MOO

It depends on who POTUS is.

 

[Hexe]

Snipped for emphasis.

Don Lemon is. If he was claiming that his actions were legal, he would not have put forth the claim of being of journalist.

It's his job. Why isn't he supposed to mention his job that he was performing in that church?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

It's his job. Why isn't he supposed to mention his job that he was performing in that church?

Because if he was able to function in the church as he did, without violating the law, he would not have to mention his job.

IMO.

 

[Hexe]

Because if he was able to function in the church as he did, without violating the law, he would not have to mention his job.

IMO.

I do not understand. He cannot say "hey, I was just doing my job" because if he wasn't arrested he would not have to explain himself? That's what you mean?
I'm seriously lost.

 

[SouthAussie]

Because if he was able to function in the church as he did, without violating the law, he would not have to mention his job.

IMO.

I don't think there is any reason to try to negate a reporter's role in reporting protests. Of course Don is going to say why he was there, reporting.
I have posted this link several times, as you have noted. And I have yet to see any photos that show that Don was acting as a protester.


"Even if an assembly is declared unlawful or is dispersed, that does not terminate the right of journalists to monitor protests."

https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default...Human-Rights-Context-Protests-Journalists.pdf

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I don't think there is any reason to try to negate a reporter's role in reporting protests. Of course Don is going to say why he was there, reporting.
I have posted this link several times, as you have noted. And I have yet to see any photos that show that Don was acting as a protester.


"Even if an assembly is declared unlawful or is dispersed, that does not terminate the right of journalists to monitor protests."

https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default...Human-Rights-Context-Protests-Journalists.pdf

Not a valid legal source, i.e. not statute or case law.

Video is appropriate than a still photo. IMO

 

[Hexe]

Not a valid legal source, i.e. not statute or case law.

That's the page of the Human Rights Office of the United Nations. I'd say they are a very valud source of info about the human rights.

MOO

 

[J. J. in Phila]

That's the page of the Human Rights Office of the United Nations. I'd say they are a very valud source of info about the human rights.

MOO

Not a valid legal source in the US.

IMO