Isaac Saul (19:34)
Alright, that is it for the left and the writer saying, which brings us to my take. Ever since the Tree of Life shooting in Pittsburgh in 2018, going to a synagogue has had an air of stress to it. For worshipers of all kinds Christian, Jewish, Muslim, et cetera, the thought easily creeps in. You check your surroundings. You are constantly aware of whether something might feel off or if there's a new face in the crowd you've never seen before. As sad as it is, I know that I have a hard time putting my head down in prayer, closing my eyes and losing myself in a service without first scanning the room, checking the closest exits and eyeing up fellow worshipers for odd behavior. These churchgoers almost certainly have similar fears, especially given the mass shooting during morning Mass at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis last year. So I can only imagine the fear, shock and discomfort of sitting in a service when dozens of people suddenly barge in jeering your pastor. Pulling out microphones and cameras and blocking entrances and exits. By Don Lemon's own account, churchgoers were scared enough that some ran from the building in tears, gathering up their children or family members to get out. Some said protesters physically blocked them from getting to Sunday school classes their children were attending. The reason given for confronting these churchgoers was that they had a pastor who had also led an ICE office in St. Paul, Minnesota. As far as I can tell from the video, the pastor, one of eight at the church, was not leading services and did not appear to be in attendance. I'm also unaware of him being accused of any particular wrongdoing in his role with ice, Though the agency's actions in Minnesota have invited plenty of reason for protest in the last few weeks, I want to be clear that I find this form of protest abhorrent not only is it likely illegal, it's also nonsensical. Churchgoers do not carry the sins of a pastor having a profession that is out of favor if they were even aware of his job, and they should not be punished for it. At the same time, when I first read the headlines about Don Lemon's arrest, I was extremely alarmed. Arresting journalists is another example of this administration's crackdown on free speech, and it's a chilling message to reporters everywhere that they could be next if they step out of line. In a reader question last week, I noted that even though Lemon seemed overtly sympathetic to the protesters he was covering, his attitude presented more of a breach of basic journalistic ethics than his actions presented a violation of law. But it appears that Lemon's sympathy was just the tip of the iceberg. The more information that has come out, the more his conduct looks like it may be outside the boundaries of protected journalism. The indictment levels plausible allegations that may also justify his arrest, that Lemon obstructed worshipers trying to leave the church, that he participated in pre planning of the event, and that he aided the protesters in concealing their plans from the public. In his own videos, Lemon reminds protesters not to give away where they were headed. On camera, it should go without saying, but someone performing real journalism doesn't offer advice to suppress information so one can carry out their plans without consequences. On camera, he interviews a pastor from the church, very obviously asking bad faith questions and repeating talking points from the very activists he purports to be covering as an objective journalist. As he leans in toward the pastor, who appears understandably uncomfortable being suddenly surrounded by cameras and microphones in his church, Lemon tells him, please don't push me. When the man's hand appears to make contact with Lemon's arm, it certainly didn't look like a push. Again, Lemon is leaning into the pastor's face, telling him that people have the right to assemble even though they don't have the right to assemble in a church, and then ignoring the pastor's request that they leave the premises. Watching the entire sequence, Lemon does not look like a good faith actor, and in my eyes, certainly not a sympathetic character. Lemon seemed to hide behind his title of journalist while openly supporting what he purported to be neutrally observant. You don't have to take that from me. While inside the church on his live stream, with worshipers scrambling behind him to find their kids and get out of the church, Lemon informed his audience that you have to be willing to go into places and disrupt and make people uncomfortable. That's what this country is about, is this journalism? Since he posted his church disruption video, Lemon has been daring the DOJ to arrest him, saying they'd make him the new Jimmy Kimmel. Well, after several tries, they made good on that invitation on Friday, which of course isn't much to celebrate either. Lemon can be an unsympathetic character, while his arrests can also fit into a larger, more unsettling pattern of the Trump administration cracking down on free speech. From frivolous lawsuits against news organizations to deporting college students for op eds, Trump has made it clear he'll use any tool at his disposal to silence and destroy people who criticize him. Here he got an opportunity to go after a longtime critic, someone he's openly loathed for years, and he did not hesitate to take that opportunity. Now the question of whether Lemon violated the law will come down to specific allegations in the indictment, like whether or not, by the definitions of the statutes the government is using, he blocked worshipers from leaving the church. The DOJ will also ask what Lemon knew and when. He insisted he didn't know what was going to happen, though on his own livestream, he said, we kind of do, but we don't know how it's going to play out. And the indictment alleges he attended planning meetings before the disruption. Lemon's communications with the activist groups will be pored over and analyzed against his later statements. My suspicion is that the bar to convict will be too high, which is why these charges were initially dismissed by multiple judges. Crucial to the government's case against Lemon will be proving that he obstructed churchgoers who were trying to get out of the building. In the videos Lemon posted and others online, I haven't seen evidence of them that Lemon did post up outside the church and even near doorways while trying to ask attendees questions. But did he prevent anyone from leaving? Did he force them to take different routes to get out? Was he intentionally trying to block them? That case seems much harder to prove. Even writers on the right who are very critical of Lemon's actions concede that a conviction seems hard to fathom. Similarly, I think it will be hard to peg Lemon for organizing or coordinating the event simply by attending organization or coordination meetings. That, too, seems like something he could reasonably call an act of journalism, even if his advising protesters veered into a form of activism on its own. All of this applies to Georgia Fort, a lesser known reporter who was also arrested and whose actions have not obviously crossed into criminal territory based on What I've seen that Lemon and Fort probably won't be convicted is a good thing, as I'd much rather have a country that errs toward protecting a free press from government charges than the opposite. Unfortunately, the whole affair will probably make Lemon and this gonzo activist style of journalism even more popular. He'll become a martyr, just like he wanted. In an ideal world, this shouldn't even enter the partisan spin cycle. Lemon's credibility as a reporter should be permanently destroyed. Any of the activists who could be credibly charged under the FACE act should face charges because people in places of worship shouldn't have to fear this kind of intrusion. And the Trump administration should stop sending federal agents to roundup journalists for their admittedly poor behavior. We don't live in that world, but I sure wish we did. All right, that is it. For my take, I'm going to send it over to Audrey Moorhead, our associate editor, for a dissent.
