Don Lemon going to be charged under KKK Act!

West · January 31

26 minutes ago, robosmith said:

A LOT of journalists have podcasts these days. Welcome to the 21st century, gomer.

The video shows him asking questions and they are free to leave, LIAR.

Read the indictment which was signed by a grand jury. Lemon blocked a doorway. Duh

robosmith · February 1

4 hours ago, West said:

Read the indictment which was signed by a grand jury. Lemon blocked a doorway. Duh

According to whom? Indictments are nothing but unrebutted allegations since all the evidence comes only from the prosecutor. You can't even point to where the indictment is posted.

Edited February 1 by robosmith

User · February 1

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

According to whom? Indictments are nothing but unrebutted allegations since all the evidence comes only from the prosecutor. You can't even point to where the indictment is posted.

Well, if you were not such a coward, I already posted it here. You can easily find it yourself if you cared, but you just want to play the dumb sea lion game.

CdnFox · February 1

2 hours ago, robosmith said:

According to whom? Indictments are nothing but unrebutted allegations

You said the exact opposite when we were talking about trump's indictments. You stated that the indictments were fact and proof that trump had broken the law.

You are such a lying sack of crap

Deluge · February 2

Hopefully Lemon will sit in prison so he can cool off his racism.

Nationalist · February 2

Donna LeMon is a goof. His relevance is destroyed...by his own doing. At CNN of all places.

I hope they stick him in a cell with Guido The Killer Pimp!

Moonbox · February 2

On 2/1/2026 at 1:40 AM, CdnFox said:

You said the exact opposite when we were talking about trump's indictments. You stated that the indictments were fact and proof that trump had broken the law.

Did he actually say that, or is that what you've invented in your head and will never be able to cite, as usual?

Regardless, a grand jury indictment doesn't count for much of anything. The old joke in legal circles is that you can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich in the US.

These are junk charges and follow a long and storied history of Trumpian legal frivolity. The case will likely flop and get dismissed, or at best fail. The whole intention here is to make it expensive and potentially dangerous to criticize the Great Orange Baboon.

User · February 2

3 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

These are junk charges and follow a long and storied history of Trumpian legal frivolity. The case will likely flop and get dismissed, or at best fail. The whole intention here is to make it expensive and potentially dangerous to criticize the Great Orange Baboon.

So... do you think Don Lemon did anything criminally wrong that day? What about the others there in that "protest"

You are absurdly comparing Trump's civil suits to the Department of Justice bringing criminal charges against someone based on federal laws that were clearly outlined in the indictment.

You are also dishonestly making this about criticizing Trump, when Don Lemon can do that all day long and often does, and is still doing so now... this has nothing to do with criticizing Trump. Don Lemon criminally trespassed into private property, into a house of worship, where he participated in the actions to harass and intimidate the worshippers, prevent them from worshipping, prevent them from leaving, and refused to leave when asked.

Those are all crimes.

You would be screaming bloody murder to charge Pro-Life people if they did this to an abortion clinic.

Deluge · February 2

8 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Did he actually say that, or is that what you've invented in your head and will never be able to cite, as usual?

Regardless, a grand jury indictment doesn't count for much of anything. The old joke in legal circles is that you can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich in the US.

These are junk charges and follow a long and storied history of Trumpian legal frivolity. The case will likely flop and get dismissed, or at best fail. The whole intention here is to make it expensive and potentially dangerous to criticize the Great Orange Baboon.

Fox knows all about that in the Dominion voter fraud case.

CdnFox · February 2

38 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Did he actually say that, or is that what you've invented in your head and will never be able to cite, as usual?

Oh dear, i see you jumped in to chase me around again and bark like an angry puppy It's like it's the only reason you come here,

Was someone mean to you again in the real world? You felt dejected and your self esteem was down so you thought you'd come here and try to make yourself feel better by attacking ohters? Pretty sad

And yes, he did say that.

I'd post the proof but I know you well enough to know that if I wait a couple minutes you'll do it for me without realizing it

How's the math lessons coming?

Moonbox · February 3

22 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I'd post the proof but...

you don't have any, so you won't? In the Dark Basement Universe you inhabit, rules of logic and reasoning work backwards. Instead of proving your claim by posting your proof, you've decided it's more effective to just keep insisting on your claim ad nauseum and explain all of the reasons why you won't provide proof. Brilliant. 👌

22 hours ago, User said:

So... do you think Don Lemon did anything criminally wrong that day?

Other than trespassing and not leaving when he was asked? Probably not. A Minnesota and then a Federal Appeals judge both refused to sign the requested warrants, which is a better indiciation of the strength of the charges than the rubber-stamping of a Grand Jury indictment.

When we see some evidence that Don Lemon was harrassing and intimidating worshippers at the church, maybe I'll re-evaluate. Being there with his producer/camera man doesn't qualify, nor does standing somewhere inconvenient.

23 hours ago, User said:

You are also dishonestly making this about criticizing Trump

Somewhere, eventually, you must realize that "YOU JUST HATE TRUMP" isn't an actual argument. People's dislike of the man don't magically negate criticism against him.

User · February 3

19 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Other than trespassing and not leaving when he was asked? Probably not. A Minnesota and then a Federal Appeals judge both refused to sign the requested warrants, which is a better indiciation of the strength of the charges than the rubber-stamping of a Grand Jury indictment.

Are you not aware of the FACE Act or do you just not think he violated it?

The Federal Appeals court said there was probable cause to arrest him, they were determining if there was a need for an emergency appeal of the Magistrate Judge ruling, not on the merits of the case, and in fact said the DOJ had other legal avenues to pursue charges, including Grand Jury, and there was no need to act in an emergency to overrule the Magistrate.

22 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

When we see some evidence that Don Lemon was harrassing and intimidating worshippers at the church, maybe I'll re-evaluate. Being there with his producer/camera man doesn't qualify, nor does standing somewhere inconvenient.

Have you read the indictment? It outlines exactly what evidence exists, as it was recorded on video.

You should start by actually evaluating what exists already instead of pretending it didn't happen.

Deep down you know how absurd your position is which is why you ignored my Pro-Life comparison.

23 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Somewhere, eventually, you must realize that "YOU JUST HATE TRUMP" isn't an actual argument. People's dislike of the man don't magically negate criticism against him.

Another one of your famous Straw men arguments, as I did not just say you just hate trump here. See you in another day when you come up with some other lame response or just run away.

CdnFox · February 3

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

you don't have any, so you won't? In the Dark Basement Universe you inhabit, rules of logic and reasoning work backwards. Instead of proving your claim by posting your proof, you've decided it's more effective to just keep insisting on your claim ad nauseum and explain all of the reasons why you won't provide proof. Brilliant. 👌

LOLOL - oh dear, you're so butt hurt about looking stupid that now you're having weird daydreams about me and trying desperately to convince yourself that your stupidity is all my fault

You're not interested in the truth and proofing is of no interest to you or relevance. You just keep blathering the same nonsense even when people have proven you wrong four or five times over

. Then you get mad and you follow them around the forum barking at them like a chihuahua

That's for don lemon the indictment shows a great deal more than you're suggesting. It still has to be proven in court but it sounds like you're struggling with reality in this case as well

WestCanMan · February 4

On 2/2/2026 at 12:03 PM, Nationalist said:

Donna LeMon is a goof. His relevance is destroyed...by his own doing. At CNN of all places.

I hope they stick him in a cell with Guido The Killer Pimp!

TBH, breaking the law will just make him more popular among the cultists.

Leftists LOVE their own lawbreakers. Even murderers and assassins.

The fact that Lemon broke the law by inflicting himself on white Christians is a huge feather in his cap. That's why all the leftists are defending him. They don't view anything that happened in that church as a crime.

Nationalist · February 4

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

TBH, breaking the law will just make him more popular among the cultists.

Leftists LOVE their own lawbreakers. Even murderers and assassins.

The fact that Lemon broke the law by inflicting himself on white Christians is a huge feather in his cap. That's why all the leftists are defending him. They don't view anything that happened in that church as a crime.

And, as is always the case, in time he'll be outed as a criminal.

Time, my friend. It is their worst enemy.

robosmith · February 4

On 2/2/2026 at 1:59 PM, Moonbox said:

Did he actually say that, or is that what you've invented in your head and will never be able to cite, as usual?

Regardless, a grand jury indictment doesn't count for much of anything. The old joke in legal circles is that you can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich in the US.

These are junk charges and follow a long and storied history of Trumpian legal frivolity. The case will likely flop and get dismissed, or at best fail. The whole intention here is to make it expensive and potentially dangerous to criticize the Great Orange Baboon.

MAGAts don't recognize Trump's total corruption of his DoJ.

So many agents have quit because they are DISGUSTED. 8 MORE in MN this week.

robosmith · February 4

5 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

TBH, breaking the law will just make him more popular among the cultists.

Leftists LOVE their own lawbreakers. Even murderers and assassins.

The fact that Lemon broke the law by inflicting himself on white Christians is a huge feather in his cap. That's why all the leftists are defending him. They don't view anything that happened in that church as a crime.

A fake indictment that the judges would not approve points to his INNOCENCE.

User · February 4

29 minutes ago, robosmith said:

A fake indictment that the judges would not approve points to his INNOCENCE.

There is no “fake” indictment, he was indicted.

Only one Judge didn’t approve and the appeals court found probable cause, and advised DOJ to take other avenues.

CdnFox · February 4

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

MAGAts don't recognize Trump's total corruption of his DoJ.

But you told us the doj was uncorruptible! He brought this up when we discussed Clinton running across the tarmac etc.

It's amazing how the doj can't be possibly corrupted when someone you like is in power and how it can be completely and easily totally corrupted when someone you don't like is in power

You get this is why nobody takes you seriously right?

robosmith · February 4

Analysis: Is the case against Don Lemon about winning — or about chilling journalism?

Quote

Legally speaking, the federal charges against journalists Don Lemon and Georgia Fort are complex and unusual, sparking debate among lawyers about the legitimacy of the cases.

But politically speaking, it’s pretty simple. The Trump administration wants to punish perceived opponents and raise the cost of critical news coverage.

“This moment is bigger than two journalists,” a coalition of 40 journalism and free press groups said. “It is about whether the First Amendment has meaning when reporting is inconvenient to those in power.”

Or as Fort herself said in an interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, “Journalism is on trial.”

...

So the twin arrests were partly a show of force by the federal government and an expression of power, given that a magistrate judge rejected the government’s initial attempt to charge Lemon and several others.

The Department of Justice, under pressure from prominent MAGA media influencers to arrest Lemon, then took the case to a grand jury and secured indictments that way.

CdnFox · February 5

27 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Analysis: Is the case against Don Lemon about winning — or about chilling journalism?

REALITY: DON BROKE THE LAW AND THAT ISN"T JOURNALISM, AND NOW THE RACIST BIGOT IS GOING TO WIND UP IN JAIL WHERE HE BELONGS

User · February 5

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

Analysis: Is the case against Don Lemon about winning — or about chilling journalism?

False dilemma.

Don Lemon broke the law.

Moonbox · February 5

On 2/3/2026 at 4:55 PM, User said:

The Federal Appeals court said there was probable cause to arrest him

No, the federal appeals court ruled there was not, in a 2v1 ruling. The one dissenting judge was a 2017 Trump appointee who the American Bar Association Standing Committee for the Federal Judiciary unanimously declared not qualified for the job - a rare distinction.

After multiple prosecutors declined to take the case and 3 of 4 judges punted it, Trump's losers in the DOJ went for the Grand Jury indictment - a process with a success rate close to 100% and that virtually never fails.

On 2/3/2026 at 4:55 PM, User said:

Have you read the indictment?

Actually I have, so maybe you could refer us to what Don Lemon did that was so horrifying and what specific criminal behavior he engaged in?

Was it the part that he stood close to the pastor? Or where he stood near the doorway? Or was it where he "approached menacingly?" 🤡

User · February 5

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

No, the federal appeals court ruled there was not, in a 2v1 ruling. The one dissenting judge was a 2017 Trump appointee who the American Bar Association Standing Committee for the Federal Judiciary unanimously declared not qualified for the job - a rare distinction.

After multiple prosecutors declined to take the case and 3 of 4 judges punted it, Trump's losers in the DOJ went for the Grand Jury indictment - a process with a success rate close to 100% and that virtually never fails.

They ruled on the emergency nature, not on the merits of the arrest. The Judge you cite as dissenting didn't even dissent; he wrote a concurring opinion and did, in fact, call out that there was clear probable cause for an arrest, as I said, but that there was no emergency for them to intervene.

You continue to either have no clue what you are talking about or just have no care at all for the truth.

“The Complaint and Affidavit clearly establish probable cause for all five arrest warrants, and while there is no discretion to refuse to issue an arrest warrant once probable cause for its issuance has been shown … the government has failed to establish that it has no other adequate means of obtaining the requested relief,” Grasz wrote.

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/24/doj-trump-minnesota-don-lemon-protest-00745589

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

Actually I have, so maybe you could refer us to what Don Lemon did that was so horrifying and what specific criminal behavior he engaged in?

Was it the part that he stood close to the pastor? Or where he stood near the doorway? Or was it where he "approached menacingly?" 🤡

It is not a matter of subjectively saying what is "so horrifying," only what was against the law. However, watching little children cower in fear with their parents in the pews because they were scared of all these people who had just invaded their church should be horrifying to you and you would be screaming if Pro-Life folks did this to an abortion clinic.

You sit here saying you read the indictment, then want me to tell you what the criminal behavior was? IT WAS IN THE INDICTMENT.

You already admitted Lemon engaged in the criminal behavior of trespassing and now you play dumb asking what specific criminal behavior he engaged in.

Don Lemon physically obstructed people from leaving so he could pepper them with questions.

Nevermind that Don Lemon filmed himself planning and participating in the planning to do all of this.

If he stayed on the sidewalk outside he would have been just fine.

Moonbox · February 10

On 2/4/2026 at 11:27 PM, User said:

They ruled on the emergency nature, not on the merits of the arrest.

No, they ruled on the request, which they denied unanimously. The Minnesota District Chief Judge had already written opinions on that request, and the appeals panel cited him in their decision. A couple samples of his response:

The five people whom the government seeks to arrest are accused of entering a church, and the worst behavior alleged about any of them is yelling horrible things at the members of the church. None committed any acts of violence.”

....

(3) The government lumps all eight protestors together and says things that are true of some but not all of them. Two of the five protestors were not protestors at all; instead, they were a journalist and his producer. There is no evidence that those two engaged in any criminal behavior or conspired to do so.