Don Lemon is back in the spotlight, and it’s not for reasons he would likely prefer. New video evidence has surfaced of Lemon admitting that he had foreknowledge of planned protests at a church in St. Paul, Minnesota, leaving many to question the integrity of his reporting. This incident unfolded when Lemon traveled to Minnesota to cover ICE operations, claiming he aimed to share the unvarnished truth about the situation.
“I’ve seen enough. I’m heading to Minnesota to report on ICE and bring you the truth,” Lemon stated in an Instagram post ahead of his live stream. His decision to go live on YouTube on Sunday was met with a storm of controversy as anti-ICE protestors made their way to Cities Church, allegedly targeting it because the pastor worked for ICE.
During the live stream, as the uproar broke out, Lemon narrated the chaos, saying, “This is the beginning of what’s going to happen here.” He reported that many parishioners had left the service as the protestors shouted at the pastor. Despite the disruptive nature of the event, Lemon asserted that these protestors were exercising their First Amendment rights. “This is what the First Amendment is about, the freedom to protest,” he declared. “I’m sure people here don’t like it, but protests are not comfortable.”
However, Lemon’s defense as a mere bystander was quickly undermined by emerging footage. In this video, he acknowledged prior communications with protest leaders, specifically stating he was aware that the protestors planned to storm the church. This admission casts a long shadow over his earlier claims of ignorance regarding the protestors’ intentions. Rather than simply reporting news, he appeared to be embedded with the protestors and shared connections with well-known activists like Nekima Armstrong.
The implications of this incident ripple beyond Lemon’s personal credibility. The Justice Department has already announced an investigation into potential violations of the federal FACE Act related to the protest. This law protects access to reproductive health services, and while not directly linked to the protest at hand, it reflects a broader context in which protests targeting specific venues are scrutinized.
The response to Lemon’s actions has been sharply divided. Some defend his right to report while claiming he was just doing his job; yet others are less forgiving. His behavior raises questions about journalistic ethics and the role of media figures in potentially instigating unrest rather than simply covering it.
As the investigation continues, the focus will be on not only the legality of the protest itself but also the responsibilities of those reporting on it. Don Lemon’s actions and statements will likely remain a hot-button topic in discussions about media accountability and the fine line between reporting and activism. With the fallout from this incident still unfolding, it remains to be seen how both Lemon and the public will navigate the implications of this revelation.
"*" indicates required fields
