Like Don Lemon, Media Are Literally Just Doing Far-Left Activism
An opinion piece in The Federalist by Brianna Lyman criticizes CNN host Don Lemon for joining and live-streaming a group of anti-ICE activists who entered a St. Paul church during services as part of a planned “Operation Pull-Up.” The article recounts Lemon’s on-camera remarks defending the protest as protected free speech and his confrontation with the pastor, while noting Lemon later said he had no affiliation with the organizers and was “chronicling protests.” Lyman and others quoted in the piece argue that the action amounted to intimidation of worshippers, not journalism, and note a commentator’s suggestion that Lemon could face legal exposure for being “embedded” with the protesters. The column places the incident in a broader critique of left-leaning corporate media, accusing them of partisan propaganda and citing examples involving Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, The Washington Post’s coverage of a Minneapolis shooting, and a New York Times story about identity theft.The author concludes that Lemon’s conduct was activist rather than journalistic and uses the episode to argue the media serve as a communication arm for the left.
Don Lemon, alongside anti-ICE agitators in Minnesota, barged into a St. Paul church during services on Sunday. The group of far-left activists disrupted the prayer service, chanting “ICE out,” all while Lemon live streamed the intimidation of Christians in their own sanctuary.
It wasn’t a spontaneous operation, as Lemon explained during a livestream. According to Lemon, the agitators — reportedly led by Nekima Armstrong, Daunte Wright, and others — had planned what they called “Operation Pull-Up.” Before the church invasion, Lemon live streamed a monologue previewing what was to come: These activists “surprise people, catch them off-guard, and hold them to account. And so that’s what we’re doing here, and then we’re — after that, after we do this operation, you’ll see it live. And these operations are surprise operations, again I can’t tell you where they’re going.”
“These are resistance protesters; they’re planning an operation that we’re going to follow them on.”
In other words, Lemon embedded with these radical activists and planned on broadcasting their activism.
Upon invading the church, Lemon told viewers that “the freedom to protest” is what the First Amendment is for. He also confronted the pastor, asserting that the agitators’ hijacking of the service was protected free speech. Notably, the First Amendment guarantees Americans the right to practice their religion freely — something worshippers could not do due to Lemon’s insurrection. Lemon continued interrogating the pastor until he asked Lemon to leave.
The incident has caused outrage, prompting Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon to suggest Monday during an appearance on The Benny Show that Lemon claiming he was merely “committing journalism” does not necessarily prevent him from being charged for being “embedded” with those agitators.
Notably, Lemon has since tried to backtrack his involvement, according to the New York Post. “I had no affiliations with that organization. I didn’t even know they were going to this church until we followed them. We were there chronicling protests,” Lemon claimed.
“Once the protest started in the church, we did an act of journalism, which was report on it and talk to the people who were involved, which included the pastor, members of the church, and members of the organization. That’s it.”
But terrorizing Christians in their place of worship isn’t “an act of journalism” anymore than live streaming a break-in makes someone a crime reporter. If Lemon wanted a story, he could have contacted the church and its congregants afterward and reported on what happened to them. Instead, he accompanied, legitimized, and amplified a coordinated act of intimidation before hiding behind “journalism.”
But Lemon’s behavior isn’t unique; it’s part of a much larger problem: The left-wing corporate media are merely propagandists for the left and the Democrat Party.
Consider how the propaganda press treated Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (the same governor overseeing these insurgency operations in Minnesota) during the 2024 election. The propaganda press worked overtime to praise him — portraying his disastrous debate performance as “passion” and framing his “masculinity” as “terrifying to Republicans.” Meanwhile, serious allegations of Covid-19 fraud under his administration received little attention or scrutiny — a fact made even more notable by the recently uncovered Somali fraud scams plaguing Minnesota.
Or take The Washington Post’s recent “analysis” of the Minneapolis shooting involving an ICE agent who was nearly run over. As The Federalist’s Shawn Fleetwood wrote, the headline — “Video shows ICE agent in Minneapolis fired at driver as vehicle veered past him” — wasn’t about informing the audience of “what actually happened” but was “instead seeking to advance the Democrat Party’s anti-ICE agenda.”
Then there’s The New York Times, which managed to frame the story of an illegal alien who stole an American man’s identity for 15 years (during which debt, tax problems, and even DUIs were accumulated under the American man’s name ) as a victim.
From Lemon “embedding” with activists who storm a church to left-wing corporate media churning out propaganda on behalf of Democrat candidates and policies, the left-wing media apparatus proves itself time and time again to be merely a communication arm of the left.
None of this was journalism — it’s activism. And Lemon’s church invasion made that point clearly.
Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist. Brianna graduated from Fordham University with a degree in International Political Economy. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
