Critics Say Don Lemon Arrest Threatens Press Freedom (Full Transcript)

A speaker claims judges found no evidence against Don Lemon, calling DOJ actions unusual and warning the case may intimidate journalists.
Download Transcript (DOCX)
Speakers
add Add new speaker

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: I'm just here photographing, I'm a journalist. The arrest of journalist and former CNN anchor Don Lemon is shocking on so many levels, starting with the fact that going after journalists for actions that are almost arguably always protected by the First Amendment. That's shocking, as well as the Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon labeling Don and the protesters domestic terrorists, which is arguably a violation of the D.C. Bar Code of Professional Conduct. But beyond that, the charges have already been rejected by two different judges. The Justice Department's initial arrest warrant against Don was rejected by Magistrate Judge Douglas Micco, who signed off on three other arrest warrants, but not Don's. And then the Justice Department immediately appealed it, which is very surprising. And in fact, the chief judge, the Honorable Patrick Schultz, a former clerk for Antonin Scalia at the U.S. Supreme Court and also a George W. Bush appointee, commented in a letter how surprising it was, saying that he had surveyed all of the judges, some of whom have been judges in our district for over 40 years and no one can remember the government asking a district judge to review a magistrate judge's denial of an arrest warrant. Beyond that, and more importantly, Judge Schultz looked at what the Justice Department was saying about Don and wrote Lemon and his producer, quote, were not protesters 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. No evidence. And still, the Justice Department, under Pam Bondi, the attorney general, and Donald Trump, the president, still pressed on. And one wonders, are they trying to pursue justice or are they trying to pursue revenge or retribution or trying to scare journalists out of doing the important work of journalism?

ai AI Insights
Arow Summary
A speaker describes the arrest of journalist and former CNN anchor Don Lemon as alarming and potentially unconstitutional, arguing that his actions were protected by the First Amendment. They criticize Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon for labeling Lemon and protesters as domestic terrorists and suggest this may violate professional conduct rules. The speaker notes that two judges rejected the Justice Department’s arrest warrant efforts, including an unusual appeal of a magistrate judge’s denial. Chief Judge Patrick Schultz reportedly stated Lemon and his producer were journalists, not protesters, and that there was no evidence of criminal behavior or conspiracy, yet the Justice Department continued pursuing the case, raising concerns about retaliation and intimidation of the press.
Arow Title
Speaker Condemns Don Lemon Arrest as Press Intimidation
Arow Keywords
Don Lemon Remove
journalist arrest Remove
First Amendment Remove
Justice Department Remove
arrest warrant Remove
magistrate judge Remove
appeal Remove
Patrick Schultz Remove
Harmeet Dhillon Remove
domestic terrorism label Remove
professional conduct Remove
press freedom Remove
Pam Bondi Remove
Donald Trump Remove
retaliation Remove
Arow Key Takeaways
  • The speaker argues arresting a journalist for newsgathering is likely protected by the First Amendment.
  • Two judges reportedly rejected the arrest warrant request(s), and an appeal of a magistrate denial is described as highly unusual.
  • Chief Judge Patrick Schultz is quoted as saying Lemon and his producer were journalists, not protesters, with no evidence of criminal conduct or conspiracy.
  • Labeling Lemon and protesters as 'domestic terrorists' is portrayed as improper and potentially unethical.
  • Continuing prosecution despite judicial skepticism is framed as possible revenge/retribution and a warning to the press.
Arow Sentiments
Negative: The tone is critical and alarmed, emphasizing 'shocking' actions, lack of evidence, and concerns about retaliation and intimidation of journalists.
Arow Enter your query
{{ secondsToHumanTime(time) }}
Back
Forward
{{ Math.round(speed * 100) / 100 }}x
{{ secondsToHumanTime(duration) }}
close
New speaker
Add speaker
close
Edit speaker
Save changes
close
Share Transcript