# Liberal Host Goes Silent When Shown New EVIDENCE Exposing Don Lemon Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=be-IVrI3d5o Recap page: https://rapidrecap.app/video/be-IVrI3d5o Generated: 2026-02-13T16:03:29.503+00:00 --- ## Quick Overview The host concludes that Don Lemon did not illegally break the law by recording interviews with his phone outside a church, arguing that the distinction lies in whether the protesters were actively protesting or simply present, and Lemon's actions did not meet the legal standard for intimidation under the Face Act. **Key Points:** - The host argues that Don Lemon recording people outside a church with his cell phone does not constitute illegal intimidation under the Face Act. - The key distinction is whether the individuals were actively protesting or simply present, noting that Lemon's crew was filming people who were present. - The host claims that if Lemon was in the building and chanting, that would be different, but he was outside where people were leaving the service. - The host points out that Lemon claimed he had no prior knowledge that the location was a church, which he argues is relevant. - The host differentiates between Lemon's actions and the protesters' actions, stating that the protesters were chanting and screaming, which he considers disruptive. - The host states he will re-examine the exact verbage of the incident, admitting he is not a lawyer regarding the specific legal standard. - The video includes footage of Don Lemon's crew confronting individuals outside a church in snowy conditions (0:26-0:34, 2:47-2:57). ![Screenshot at 0:00: The host begins his analysis of the Don Lemon incident from a home office setting, gesturing emphatically while seated in front of bookshelves.](https://ss.rapidrecap.app/screens/be-IVrI3d5o/00-00-00.jpg) **Context:** The video centers on a debate between two hosts regarding an incident where journalist Don Lemon was criticized for recording people outside a church with his phone, an action his critics suggested was intimidation or illegal under the Freedom to Access Public Evidences Act (Face Act). The host reviewing the situation attempts to differentiate Lemon's actions from illegal conduct by analyzing the context of the recording and the behavior of the people involved, including those who were protesting and those who were simply leaving the premises. ## Detailed Analysis The discussion revolves around whether Don Lemon and his camera crew broke the law by recording people outside a church, specifically referencing the Face Act. The host argues that Lemon's actions were not illegal because the people being filmed were not actively protesting or intimidating anyone; some were just leaving the church. The host recounts the evidence, including footage of Lemon's crew confronting an older man outside in the snow (0:26), where the confrontation escalated with the crew questioning the man about his beliefs. The host asserts that Lemon's crew was recording people who were present, not necessarily protesting, and that Lemon himself was not inside chanting. The host concedes he is not a lawyer but suggests that if the individuals were not actively protesting, then recording them does not meet the threshold for intimidation under the Face Act, which typically targets obstruction or disruption of religious services. He notes that Lemon claimed he did not know it was a church when he arrived, which is a crucial detail. The core of the argument is that the conduct of the protesters (chanting and screaming) was disruptive, whereas Lemon's act of recording was merely documenting people leaving, which he argues is not illegal harassment or intimidation. ### Context of the Confrontation - Host recalls a debate with a friend about presenting evidence to Don Lemon's associate regarding Lemon's actions - Lemon knew he wasn't supposed to go into the building where a protest was occurring - The host presented evidence to Lemon's friend. ### Analysis of Don Lemon's Actions - Lemon arrived with a camera crew and took out his cell phone to record; the host questions if this is conducting interviews or pushing an ideology onto people in the church - The host argues that recording people leaving is not the same as actively protesting inside. ### Legal Distinction and Evidence - The host questions whether the people were actively protesting or just present, suggesting that if they were just present, it is not intimidation under the Face Act - The host notes that if they were inside chanting, it would be different, but they were outside - The host states he needs to review the exact words used to define 'protester' vs. 'person present'. ### Court Case Relevance - The host mentions that if Lemon is not convicted of the serious charges he faces, it proves the point - The host suggests that if Lemon's actions were illegal, it should be provable in court, but he believes the case against Lemon is weak. ![Screenshot at 0:10: Split screen showing the host in his office on the left and the interview subject \(the friend of Don Lemon's associate\) on the right during the discussion.](https://ss.rapidrecap.app/screens/be-IVrI3d5o/00-00-10.jpg) ![Screenshot at 0:26: Footage clip showing Don Lemon's associate confronting an older man outside a building in the snow while holding a phone to record.](https://ss.rapidrecap.app/screens/be-IVrI3d5o/00-00-26.jpg) ![Screenshot at 0:33: Don Lemon's associate smiling inside a car, wearing a beanie and glasses, discussing the situation.](https://ss.rapidrecap.app/screens/be-IVrI3d5o/00-00-33.jpg) ![Screenshot at 2:09: The host uses exaggerated hand gestures to illustrate how Don Lemon allegedly created a frame to record himself.](https://ss.rapidrecap.app/screens/be-IVrI3d5o/00-02-09.jpg) ![Screenshot at 2:48: Footage clip showing the confrontation outside the church entrance with multiple people present in the snow.](https://ss.rapidrecap.app/screens/be-IVrI3d5o/00-02-48.jpg)