Advertisement

Even as Trump shreds the Constitution, keep your eye on the Epstein files

A protester holds a photo of Jeffrey Epstein with Donald Trump
A protester near Pershing Square in June holds a photo of Donald Trump with his longtime friend Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender.
(Joshua Lott / The Washington Post via Getty Images)
0:00 0:00

This is read by an automated voice. Please report any issues or inconsistencies here.

The arrest of independent journalists Don Lemon and Georgia Fort, in connection with an anti-ICE protest that interrupted a church service in Minnesota, is a test for the American people. Well, some of us. Many of us already didn’t like what we saw happening across the country. Many believed the un-American threats during the campaign and voted against this regime in 2024.

So this is a test for the Americans who — after seeing law enforcement seemingly use a 5-year-old as bait and shoot Renee Good and Alex Pretti to death — still said they’re on board with everything.

The voters who agreed with Donald Trump when he said “they’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime” back in 2015, and were OK with him 10 years later, popping up in the Epstein files and pardoning criminals — including a corrupt former Latin American leader who took bribes to let 400 tons of cocaine be smuggled into the U.S.

Advertisement

This isn’t a test for the voters whose biggest concern was the price of groceries or border security. This is a test for the voters who used that rhetoric about groceries and the border as cover for their unsavory feelings about immigrants. The same feelings that greeted other groups — the Jews, the Italians, the Irish — when they first came to this land. The ethnicity may be different, the conspiracy theories may be new, but at the end of the day, it’s the same old predictable story.

So, if you’re the type to cast a ballot just to own the libs, the arrest of journalists is a test for you.

On Jan. 18, protesters — believing one of the pastors at Cities Church in St. Paul was also the acting field director of the local Immigration and Customs Enforcement office — entered the building and disrupted a service. The only reason anyone outside of St. Paul knew any of this is that we have freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Because people like Lemon and Fort had the courage to be there, knowing they had 250 years of American tradition backing up their right to do their jobs. That’s the point of the 1st Amendment.

Remember, if we don’t have journalists like Fort and my friend Lemon — people who are willing to do the work required to document history, or read legislation, or hold elected officials accountable — then you no longer have freedom of the press. You have state-controlled media by way of oligarchy. That may feel good to some factions now, but the problem with “now” is that it never lasts. The Constitution, though, has a real opportunity to stick around. But it needs constant protection.

In the old days, the ultra-rich used to buy local media companies to make money or for prestige in the community. Now it feels as if many owners’ goal is to control and curb journalism. Once the free press is in a cage, free speech has little room to fly. That is the byproduct of this wave of media consolidation, whether the billionaires who are engaged in these acquisitions planned to do that or not.

In addition, historically journalism has been under attack by governments not because it was a threat to society, but because it threatens those who want to control society. The reason most presidents spar with journalists is that they want to control the narrative.

Advertisement

But it appears the current president wants to control reality.

The impulse to rewrite reality is why Trump established Truth Social. It’s why the administration posts AI-generated images and doctored photos.

The sense that the president can create his own truth is why one day, the administration can defend the 2nd Amendment, and the next, suggest that legally carrying a weapon is a fatal mistake. After all, if he is free to trample the 1st Amendment, what’s the problem with kicking the 2nd around whenever he needs to?

Trampling the rights of the people: that is the test — for the rapidly dwindling minority of Americans who still stand behind Trump. He’s experimenting to see if enough of his supporters will accept having their rights taken away so long as the theft appears not to hurt them.

For the many Americans who have never voted for Trump, the arrests of Lemon and Fort are not a total shock. We have seen the “Trump 2028” hats and take this thinly veiled threat against the 22nd Amendment seriously.

But for the Americans who vehemently denounced President Obama for wearing a tan suit, where exactly is “arresting journalists for doing their job” on the threat-to-democracy scale? And why do you think Trump is doing this now?

Nearly a year ago, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said she had the Epstein client list on her desk for review. Then the administration waffled and refused to turn over its files. On Friday, it finally did release 3 million pages of documents.

Advertisement

And on Thursday night, knowing that release was imminent, the Justice Department just happened to arrest journalists.

That doesn’t feel like a coincidence.

It doesn’t even feel like politics. It all feels like a test democracy desperately needs America to pass.

YouTube: @LZGrandersonShow

Insights

L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.

Viewpoint
This article generally aligns with a Left point of view. Learn more about this AI-generated analysis

Perspectives

The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.

Ideas expressed in the piece

  • The arrest of independent journalists Don Lemon and Georgia Fort represents an unconstitutional attack on the First Amendment and freedom of the press, as both journalists were present at the Minnesota church protest solely to document and report on the events, exercising their fundamental right to cover newsworthy incidents.[1] The timing of the arrests appears deliberately coordinated with the release of Epstein files to distract public attention from significant documents the administration had previously refused to disclose.[1] The Trump administration’s prosecution of journalists threatens to establish a dangerous precedent where the government can criminalize reporting and asking questions, which fundamentally undermines the role of independent media in holding elected officials accountable.[2] Media consolidation controlled by billionaires, combined with government suppression of independent journalists without corporate backing, creates conditions for state-controlled media rather than a free press protected by constitutional tradition.[1] The arrests demonstrate that the current administration prioritizes controlling reality and narrative over governing within constitutional constraints, as evidenced by the administration’s deployment of AI-generated and doctored images and its shifting positions on constitutional rights.[1] This action serves as a critical test for Americans who claim to support democratic values and the Constitution, particularly those who voted for Trump despite campaign rhetoric about immigrants and now witness the suppression of press freedom.[1]

Different views on the topic

  • The federal government maintains that the FACE Act, which protects places of worship from violent disruption and obstruction, applies to all individuals including journalists and does not contain exceptions permitting reporters to use force or physically obstruct worshippers exercising their First Amendment rights.[1] Attorney General Pam Bondi emphasized that the arrests stem from the disruption of a church service, framing the government’s position that places of worship deserve protection from intrusion, stating “WE DO NOT TOLERATE ATTACKS ON PLACES OF WORSHIP.”[1] The indictment alleges that Lemon was involved in a broader conspiracy that included pre-operation briefing at a shopping center and took steps to maintain operational secrecy, suggesting the charges relate to coordinated illegal activity beyond mere journalism.[2] Federal prosecutors argue the case involves nine defendants engaged in physically occupying the main aisle and rows of chairs in a manner that oppressed, threatened, and intimidated congregants and pastors, with specific allegations that Lemon positioned himself at the main door and physically obstructed churchgoers attempting to exit.[2] The defense of First Amendment protections for journalism does not extend immunity from laws of general applicability that prohibit force, threats, intimidation, or physical obstruction of lawful activities, regardless of the defendant’s stated purpose.[1]

A cure for the common opinion

Get thought-provoking perspectives with our weekly newsletter.

By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service and our Privacy Policy.

Advertisement