Monique Presley

And that's what you did.

And in Minnesota, a church is a public venue on private property, meaning nobody had to ask permission to go in there.

Now, if they had asked the protesters to leave because they were being civilly disobedient or they had asked the cops to remove them, none of that would have had anything to do with you because you were the person in the media who had every right under Minnesota law and federal protections under the Constitution to cover the story.

Let me go a little bit deeper.

Minnesota is a one party consent state.

So the people who were in the church

had no reasonable expectation of privacy.

So not just you covering the story, but your cameraman, your microphone, your footage, your live video, all of that is covered under what the fourth estate used to do regularly and now only does sometimes, and that's report the story as it's happening.

So for the Harmeet Dhillons and the Pam Bondys and for all of the rest of them and them and them and them, you can throw the FACE Act and the CARE Act and the KKK Act.

How dare you on Martin Luther King Jr.

holiday day?

bring up the KKK Act and say that you're going to use it to charge a Black man with doing his job.

There's no low point that they will not go.

But my point, because I am, as Charles said, I'm going to sit in the seat of a legal analyst and say that we all saw the facts because the footage is available.

And you, even in the church, said you were covering, not participating.

And then you spoke and interviewed the leader, the pastor who was there that day.

And he didn't ask you to leave.

He stood there and talked to you.

So there's not any argument that you were even trespassing someplace that you were not welcome.

And that's my opening, my closing.