The Editors (National Review) · National Review

Episode 845 : Lemon's Run-In with the Law

February 3, 2026·1 hr 7 min·6 clips

Don Lemon's arrest exposes how his 'straight down the middle' CNN persona was always a disguise for a left-wing hack.

Rich Lowry opens by framing Don Lemon's arrest as evidence that journalists who project neutrality while working for CNN reveal their true ideological orientation once they leave. Jim Geraghty notes that Lemon arguably wanted to be arrested, as the arrest restores the public attention he lost after his CNN departure. Noah Rothman explains the specific charges — conspiring to deprive church congregants of civil rights and violating the FACE Act, which protects both churches and abortion clinics — and says a grand jury's return of the indictment indicates the evidence was at least compelling on its face. Rothman notes that Todd Blanche's CNN appearance, where he denied any interest in making an example of a Trump critic, fails to pass the smell test given Susie Wiles' public admission that Trump seeks retribution against opponents. Cook makes the most systematic legal argument, holding that the First Amendment does not create a journalist exemption from criminal liability, that the law does not distinguish between press-credentialed individuals and TikTok users, and that the 'no First Amendment carve-out' principle was already applied to eight January 6th videographers. Cook argues the real danger is not the prosecution but the possible outcome where Lemon receives a dispensation others would not. Lowry notes Lemon's use of 'we' to describe the disruption and his camera being turned off before entry as the most damaging factual evidence. The Epstein segment opens with Lowry noting that three million documents were released but revealed no bombshell cover-up conspiracy, while several prominent figures — including Bill Gates, Howard Lutnick, Steve Bannon, Brett Ratner, Mehmet Oz, and Bill Clinton — appear in embarrassing contexts. Lowry reports that the statutory deadline for the release was December 19th, 2025, and that the Justice Department inadvertently released unredacted images of underage girls before correcting the error. Rothman argues that releasing unredacted, contextless tip-line material creates conditions for conspiracy thinking and impugns people who may have done nothing wrong, comparing it to the problematic Kennedy assassination document releases. Cook makes a principled distinction between accepting that Epstein-linked figures behaved badly and endorsing the government's right to release private communications — invoking the small-L liberal values of privacy and presumption of innocence. Geraghty focuses on the Branson email — 'bring your harem,' sent in 2013 after Epstein's guilty plea was public — as evidence that many elite figures knew exactly what they were associating with. The panel agrees that all of Epstein's prominent associates had the resources to investigate him and that the 'I had no idea' defense strains credibility. The stolen-land exit question briefly introduces a celebrity argument that no one can be illegal on stolen land, which the panel declines to engage seriously, with Cook arguing it implies that no government on earth has legitimate authority to enforce laws.

As heard by us

A brisk look at media scandal, file releases, and blue-state fiscal pressure.

Don Lemon's arrest, more Epstein files, and the question of how badly the blue states are doing give the episode a clear frame. The best section is where the hosts move from headline outrage to the larger institutional fallout: what the press looks like once attention fades, how…

Read the full review in PlayNext →

Why you'd press play

A brisk panel on scandal, file releases, and blue-state fiscal pressure.

Read the full recommendation in PlayNext →

Listen to the show on

Apple Podcasts Spotify

Play clips from this episode More from The Editors (National Review)