A top women’s group is calling for CNN anchor Don Lemon to be suspended from covering politics over his comments about women and age this week while discussing Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley.
“While Don Lemon’s egregiously sexist comments about women being ‘in their prime’ have no place on CNN or anywhere in the news media, this isn’t the first time Lemon’s bias has influenced his on-air reporting,” said Bridget Todd, director of communications at UltraViolet, a leading national gender advocacy group. “From athletes to politicians and even his co-anchors, Lemon has used his power and platform to consistently undermine and demean powerful women.”
Lemon sparked widespread backlash Thursday morning with comments criticizing Haley, who has called for competency tests for politicians over the age of 75.
“This whole talk about age makes me uncomfortable. I think it’s the wrong road to go down. She says people, you know, politicians or something are not in their prime,” Lemon said on the air. “Nikki Haley isn’t in her prime, sorry.”
“A woman is considered to be in their prime in 20s and 30s and maybe 40s,” he added.
Lemon, hours later, sent a tweet from his personal account saying his comments were “inartful and irrelevant, as colleagues and loved ones have pointed out, and I regret it.”
Todd said Lemon, one of CNN’s most recognizable personalities who was tapped to co-host the network’s revamped morning show, should not be allowed to cover politics moving forward.
“The anchor’s cavalier public apology for such flagrantly patronizing, chauvinistic remarks signifies nothing of accountability or consequence,” she said. “The network should also continue to monitor Lemon’s on-air appearances for gender bias, and be prepared to take additional action if needed.”
Lindsay Clancy’s attorney acknowledged that she killed her children during trial. So why did he later argue that prosecutors failed to prove she committed the killings? And why did the judge reject his request for a finding of not guilty?
I’m Nate the Lawyer, and in this video, I break down the courtroom clips, the defense’s Rule 25 motion, and the judge’s decision.
There is a critical distinction between arguing that someone did not commit a crime and arguing that the government failed to prove its case. That distinction is at the center of this video.
We examine the Massachusetts case Commonwealth v. Curtis, how it relates to the defense’s argument, and the evidence the judge cited when denying Clancy’s motion. We also cover the separate question of criminal responsibility and why the court allowed the charges to stand.
Watch the opening clips, then follow the legal breakdown before deciding whether the defense’s argument was a contradiction.
CHAPTERS
00:00 The attorney’s ...
Three arrests since taking office. A request to more than double her salary. And dashcam footage of a four-vehicle crash. You can’t make this stuff up.
Harris County Treasurer Carla Wyatt wanted her salary increased from roughly $140,000 to $305,000. I’m Nate the Lawyer, and we’re breaking down the news reports, the outcomes of her earlier criminal cases, and the questions voters should be asking about accountability in public office.
Her first DWI case was dismissed after she completed a pretrial diversion program. A grand jury declined to indict her in the vehicle burglary case, and she denied wrongdoing. Her attorney also disputed the later DWI allegation. Arrests are not convictions.
We’ll also examine dashcam footage of a separate crash that police attributed to Wyatt. She was cited for failure to control speed; the crash report stated she showed no signs of intoxication or a medical emergency.
Does this record warrant another term in office—and a bigger paycheck? Or am I being ...
Sunny Hostin's claim that she was the lone holdout juror in the 1991 Daniel Rakowitz murder trial was contradicted by contemporaneous reporting from four news outlets. Hostin, a co-host of The View, stated on air that she single-handedly persuaded eleven fellow jurors to return a not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity verdict in the case of the so-called Butcher of Tompkins Square Park.
Juror Valerie Holmes told the New York Post, the New York Daily News, and Newsday in February 1991 that the actual holdout was an unemployed man seeking to extend his $15-a-day juror fee and three free daily meals. A law enforcement source from the period also confirmed to the Post that the holdout was a man.
And We’re Back!
And we're back, y'all. I appreciate every single one of you supporting the channel right here behind the paywall. You get the unvarnished analysis, the procedural realities, and the raw legal breakdowns before the mainstream algorithms try to throttle the reach, shadowban the facts, or bury the story.
The Inside Story of an 11-to-1 Jury Room
Today, we are diving into the exclusive sit-down interview with three jurors from the Lindsay Clancy trial who finally broke their silence—and what went down in that deliberation room is crazy, y'all!
Now, the public saw a hung jury mistrial. But when these jurors walked through what actually happened during deliberations, it wasn't some evenly divided debate over the facts.
It was 11 to 1 for Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity.
Eleven jurors were ready to sign the forms committing her to a state psychiatric facility. And the lone holdout? The other jurors revealed that he actually admitted during deliberations that he had reasonable doubt, but refused to vote not ...
And We’re Back!
And we're back, y'all. I appreciate every single one of you supporting the channel right here behind the paywall. You get the raw receipts, the unredacted files, and the unfiltered legal analysis before the algorithms try to throttle the reach, shadowban the facts, or bury the story.
The Narrative Completely Collapse
Today, we are diving right back into the Karmelo Anthony murder case out of Texas, and the newly leaked text messages published in full context by the Daily Mail are completely crazy, y'all!
Quick recap: Karmelo Anthony was convicted of murder and sentenced to 35 years in prison for fatally stabbing 17-year-old Austin Metcalf in the chest at a track meet. The internet immediately turned this into a massive, racially charged civil rights crusade. Activists rallied, social media commentators took up arms, and an online GiveSendGo fundraiser hauled in over $630,000 for his defense before it was pulled from public view.
Now, his legal team and family have launched a brand-new $250,000 legal defense ...
And We’re Back!
And we're back, y'all. I appreciate every single one of you supporting the channel right here behind the paywall. You get the raw receipts, the procedural breakdowns, and the unfiltered legal analysis before the algorithms try to throttle the reach, shadowban the facts, or bury the story.
The Mirror-Image Case Nobody Talked About
Today, we are looking at a case out of Linn County, Iowa, that is an absolute mirror image of the Lindsay Clancy tragedy—and the legal outcome on this one is crazy, y'all!
For the past year, social media and the legal commentary circuits have been arguing one specific talking point: "If a MAN had strangled his children and claimed psychosis or mental breakdown the way Lindsay Clancy did, he would be convicted of First-Degree Murder and sent to prison for life in two seconds flat."
Well, a man did do it. Almost a year after Lindsay Clancy strangled her three children in Massachusetts, 45-year-old insurance executive Matthew Schlier strangled his 5-year-old son, Jack, to death in Marion, ...
