Former CNN host Don Lemon is at it again—this time accusing ESPN personality Stephen A. Smith of “cozying up to white people” simply for offering a lawful perspective on the ICE shooting that left anti-ICE protester Renee Good dead.
According to Lemon, the only possible explanation for Smith’s comments is money. Yes, money. Because apparently agreeing with the law and acknowledging facts now automatically means you’re auditioning for right-wing billionaire status.
“I try not to criticize, especially Black men… because we get so much sh*t. The rules are different for us,” Lemon began, before immediately doing exactly that. He then accused Smith of talking about issues he “has no idea about” and claimed Smith hops on “White boy, right-wing podcasts” to bash Black people for profit. Subtlety was not invited to this rant.
Lemon went further, calling Smith’s remarks “shocking” and alleging a deliberate attempt to ingratiate himself with white audiences. “It’s gotta be for the money,” Lemon declared, before fantasizing out loud about how rich he would be if he became a Black conservative journalist. “Like a gazillionaire,” he said—apparently unaware that making up numbers doesn’t strengthen an argument.
Here’s the inconvenient reality: Stephen A. Smith is already very well compensated. His eight-figure ESPN contract exists because of sports commentary, not political takes. If defending law enforcement were a fast track to cash at ESPN, half the network would’ve tried it by now—and spoiler alert, they haven’t.
Lemon’s outburst stems from Smith’s comments earlier in the week regarding the ICE agent who shot Renee Good. Smith said the officer’s actions were “completely justified” from a legal standpoint and that he did not expect a prosecution. He also added a humanitarian critique, questioning whether the officer could have shot the tires instead.
Smith explained that Good ignored law enforcement, attempted to flee, and placed the officer in danger—facts that matter in real life, even if they’re inconvenient on cable news panels. Acknowledging those facts does not make someone a sellout; it makes them honest.
Lemon, however, doubled down, accusing Smith of shifting his “stock and trade” from sports to bashing Black people—despite the fact that both Good and the ICE officer were white. The racial angle, like much of Lemon’s argument, simply doesn’t hold up.
It’s also worth noting that defending ICE is hardly a popularity play within ESPN’s overwhelmingly liberal media ecosystem. If Smith were truly chasing approval, this would be a strange way to go about it.
In the end, Lemon’s tirade says far more about his own worldview than Smith’s. For some on the Left, independent thinking—especially when it comes from someone they assume should agree with them—is treated as betrayal. But Americans of all backgrounds are increasingly tired of that script.
Stephen A. Smith gave an opinion grounded in law, facts, and personal judgment. Don Lemon responded with accusations, hypotheticals, and dollar-sign envy. One approach moves the conversation forward. The other just fills airtime.
And the good news? More people are starting to notice the difference.
