The bar has been lowered when it comes to journalists documenting illegal activities due to Jan. 6 and how they treated independent journalists who were there
“Based on my findings, federal prosecutors in January 6 cases claimed that shouting in favor displayed their bias and effectively removed their legitimacy as journalists.”
This is why we have laws and a court system. The prosecutors presented evidence and the defense presented evidence. Judges and jurors had the opportunity to hear both sides of the issue and their verdict was heard. Those convicted of illegal activity have the right to appeal the verdict.
Anyone that joined the protest/riot could have claimed to be a journalist and some did. The court had an opportunity to decide if the journalists’ claims were honest or simply self-serving in an attempt to take advantage of the constitutional right to free speech and assembly while committing a crime. The court had an opportunity to decide if the journalist’s were dis-associated observers or if they were there for other purposes.
Don Lemon will have the same opportunity. The trial should be available for free viewing everywhere.
And just for the record, it is clearly illegal to enter private property to interfere with a persons or a groups right to free expression and religious services whether that property is a church or an abortion clinic. A public trial can do a lot to establish guidelines for further protest, and to establish all of our rights as free citizens.
I feel the same way you do. I don’t feel like we should stoop to the low standards used on January 6. I also believe that don lemon is thrilled he’s being arrested. It will give him press time doesn’t deserve.
I actually love the timing of this arrest… Lemon (who I’m guessing will be released from custody before sundown) and his lemmings will have a field day platforming his arrest during this Grammys Awards ceremony (yawn…) weekend. He’ll be covered 24x7 by MSM outlets and other hacks, and just imagine Hollywood and music industry loudmouths “speaking their truth to power” on his behalf the next 48 hours … hoping this becomes a huge distraction for the actual Grammys event.
People like Lemon are not journalists, they are fifth columnists. They are advocates for their Marxist and globalist masters, using our constitution as a veil to hide their true intentions. Undermining the United States and its institutions.
Seems to me it’s fair to let the case play out. I’d like to hear if there is factual evidence about what he knew and when he knew it-I suspect he created a lot of this evidence himself. He’s on video before the protest saying, “So that’s what we’re doing here, and after we do this operation, you’ll see it live, these operations are surprise operations… “ That sounds to me like he’s acting in the capacity of a protestor or agitator, not a journalist. A journalist would not be part of a “we.” A journalist would be an outside observer. He also made statements after the protest that indicated motive. I have a hard time believing a journalist who worked at CNN did not know there’s a difference between peaceful protest (e.g. holding signs outside the church) and going into the church to disrupt services, which they did not have a legal right to do.
I'll admit to feeling schadenfreude about his arrest, but it was a bad precedent five years ago, and no better now.
“Based on my findings, federal prosecutors in January 6 cases claimed that shouting in favor displayed their bias and effectively removed their legitimacy as journalists.”
This is why we have laws and a court system. The prosecutors presented evidence and the defense presented evidence. Judges and jurors had the opportunity to hear both sides of the issue and their verdict was heard. Those convicted of illegal activity have the right to appeal the verdict.
Anyone that joined the protest/riot could have claimed to be a journalist and some did. The court had an opportunity to decide if the journalists’ claims were honest or simply self-serving in an attempt to take advantage of the constitutional right to free speech and assembly while committing a crime. The court had an opportunity to decide if the journalist’s were dis-associated observers or if they were there for other purposes.
Don Lemon will have the same opportunity. The trial should be available for free viewing everywhere.
And just for the record, it is clearly illegal to enter private property to interfere with a persons or a groups right to free expression and religious services whether that property is a church or an abortion clinic. A public trial can do a lot to establish guidelines for further protest, and to establish all of our rights as free citizens.
Very insightful. Thank you for drawing the comparison to J6. Appreciate you!
Tend to agree with Sean Lee, but as Jin Moore writes, Democrats will use this to proclaim its Hitler all over again.
I feel the same way you do. I don’t feel like we should stoop to the low standards used on January 6. I also believe that don lemon is thrilled he’s being arrested. It will give him press time doesn’t deserve.
He definitely wanted to get arrested. He's an attention whore.
I actually love the timing of this arrest… Lemon (who I’m guessing will be released from custody before sundown) and his lemmings will have a field day platforming his arrest during this Grammys Awards ceremony (yawn…) weekend. He’ll be covered 24x7 by MSM outlets and other hacks, and just imagine Hollywood and music industry loudmouths “speaking their truth to power” on his behalf the next 48 hours … hoping this becomes a huge distraction for the actual Grammys event.
People like Lemon are not journalists, they are fifth columnists. They are advocates for their Marxist and globalist masters, using our constitution as a veil to hide their true intentions. Undermining the United States and its institutions.
Sounds off.
Like a bad precedent.
Seems to me it’s fair to let the case play out. I’d like to hear if there is factual evidence about what he knew and when he knew it-I suspect he created a lot of this evidence himself. He’s on video before the protest saying, “So that’s what we’re doing here, and after we do this operation, you’ll see it live, these operations are surprise operations… “ That sounds to me like he’s acting in the capacity of a protestor or agitator, not a journalist. A journalist would not be part of a “we.” A journalist would be an outside observer. He also made statements after the protest that indicated motive. I have a hard time believing a journalist who worked at CNN did not know there’s a difference between peaceful protest (e.g. holding signs outside the church) and going into the church to disrupt services, which they did not have a legal right to do.