Transcript
Harmeet Dhillon on Don Lemon's Outrageous "N Word Treatment" Comment and Promises WAY More Arrests
From Megyn Kelly · Episode page · Watch on YouTube
· 16 min · 2,814 words · 26 timestamped sections
This is the full, timestamped transcript of "Harmeet Dhillon on Don Lemon's Outrageous "N Word Treatment" Comment and Promises WAY More Arrests", an episode of Megyn Kelly published January 23, 2026 (16 min, about 2,814 words). It mentions 6 people, works and ideas, including Face Act, Biden DOJ, Clan Act, Abby Lel, Jane's Revenge.
What this episode is about
The discussion centers around Don Lemon's controversial comments likening his legal challenges to being given the "n-word treatment," which Harmeet Dhillon strongly criticizes as offensive and disconnected from the realities of systemic racism. She highlights the impropriety of his remarks, particularly in light of attorney-client privilege, while also addressing the serious issues facing the Department of Justice in their current legal battles.
Key takeaways
- Don Lemon's claim of 'N-word treatment' confuses privilege with real oppression; he enjoys a luxury most don't.
- When a magistrate judge refuses a warrant, it signals either ignorance or a rare moment of judicial independence.
- Lemon's attorney-client privilege breach showcases a growing trend of legal theatrics; the courtroom isn't a talk show.
- The Face Act's civil rights history illustrates how laws can be weaponized in surprising and contentious ways.
- Two-tiered justice exists, but it's often in our perceptions; just as much as who's being treated unfairly.
Who speaks in this episode?
- Megyn Kelly (Guest) · 6 min speaking
- Harmeet Dhillon (Guest) · 10 min speaking
What is discussed, and when
Notable quotes from "Harmeet Dhillon on Don Lemon's Outrageous "N Word Treatment" Comment and Promises WAY More Arrests"
Privilege communications. That's super helpful. I really appreciate it. And Abby Lel, his lawyer, had nothing to do with the magistrate judge refusing to sign off on arresting…
about Abby Lel · atIgnorant of the second half of the Face Act, which is protecting houses of worship. Why is that? Because all they've ever heard of is Obama and Biden DOJ going after pro-life…
about Biden DOJ · atWill this be the year you decide to talk to somebody from Birch Gold Group? you've been thinking about it.
about Birch Gold Group · atNow, can I ask you about some elements on the Face Act? So, to prove a violation under the Face Act, you have to prove that by force, threats, or physical obstruction, they've interfered with religious observance. And Dave.
about Face Act · atIt's kind of a I would call it quasi terrorist organization designed to terrorize people of faith. And this was in the wake of the DOS.
about Jane's Revenge · at
Who and what is mentioned in this episode?
People
- Abby Lel — Person · Referenced attorney (Don Lemon's lawyer, per transcript) · 1 mention · first at
Identified as Don Lemon's lawyer and discussed in relation to the magistrate judge's refusal to sign off on an arrest warrant (speaker claims she had nothing to do with it).
Concepts & topics
- Face Act — Concept · Core topic · 8 mentions · first at
Central to the discussion about legal actions and protections under the Face Act, particularly in religious contexts. - Biden DOJ — Concept · Key argument · 3 mentions · first at
Refers to the current administration's Department of Justice and its approach to enforcing laws like the Face Act. - Clan Act — Concept · Key argument · 3 mentions · first at
Discussed as a historic civil rights law being applied in current legal contexts.Okay? So now we're using it the way it's supposed to have been used. And so to a degree, they're ignorant. on the Clan Act, it is a venerable statute with a long and story and very important history. I really respect this law.
- Jane's Revenge — Concept · Referenced group · 1 mention · first at
Mentioned as a group involved in activities that were prosecuted under laws like the Face Act.
Sponsors
- Birch Gold Group — Company · Sponsor · 3 mentions · first at
Mentioned as a sponsor offering financial services, specifically gold investment opportunities.
Full transcript with timestamps
Back to Don Lemon for a second. He doubled down on the inanity in the following comment. I have got to run this by you. You may have heard it. Here it is. Saut uh five last night.
It's not about justice. You know how I know it's not about justice? Because I have the best attorney in the country, I believe, to deal with this who takes on this administration without fear at all. And this attorney has worked with some of the worst accused criminals in history. And even those people, just like Donald Trump, who is a 34 time convicted felon, are always allowed usually to self-report. In these situations, why you see the the activists in in Minneapolis or Minnesota, why you see a um a per walk, which they were supposed to get rid of that, right? because they said they were unconstitutional. Why you see that?
Because they want those images out there. They want to embarrass people. Same situation. If they had come here to do that, they wouldn't let me self-report. And so when I asked council and people, well, why why is this happening? And one person who I respect the most, this doesn't come from my council, who I really respect said, because they're giving you the n-word treatment.
Okay. thoughts on that, Har? I mean, who thinks Don Lemon is a victim? Who thinks that we're giving him the n-word treatment? That's really offensive to me as a person who grew up in the deep south and saw the clan in my town when I was growing up like Don Lemon living in the Hamptons or whatever. You are not ever being subjected to that kind of treatment. That's absurd. Secondly, thank you for, you know, continuing to talk and reveal attorney client privilege communications. That's super helpful. I really appreciate it. And um Abby Lel, his lawyer, had nothing to do with the magistrate judge refusing to sign off on arresting uh Don Lemon. So you have to understand that we at the Department of Justice these days in the most aggressive and important fights that we're facing, we're we're kind of out man two against one. You he didn't even need a lawyer. The magistrate judge uh was kind of standing in as judge and
jury. His role, by the way, is a gatekeeper. Is there a probable cause? His rule role is not the jury's role, and his role is not to give commentary or opinion on it. And so, I I do think that the judge, magistrate judge was out of line. And so, we will see. We will see. There are many more moves to be had here. And Don Lemon keeps running his mouth, and I really appreciate it.
It's so unusual for a magistrate to not sign off on there being probable cause and and issue the warrant. I mean, every lawyer, every lawyer that we've talked to, and we have a lot of them in our MK media network, former prosecutors, former defense or current and current defense attorneys saying this is unheard of virtually. I mean, unless like there's absolutely no case, and there is there is obviously probable cause for both face act and the conspiracy against rights charges for lemon. So, I mean, was it nakedly partisan, Harine? I know you're limited somewhat in what you want to say, but like was it obviously a partisan thing? Well, let me state with regard to the face act. First of all, like attorney general Keith Ellison, many lawyers and even apparently now magistrates and judges are entirely ignorant of the second half of the Face Act, which is protecting houses of worship. Why is that? Because all
they've ever heard of is Obama and Biden DOJ going after pro-life protesters using that law uh praying outside abortion clinics and abuse of the FAC Act. That's the those are the headlines. And frankly on the right, uh, Republican attorneys general and prosecutors didn't bring these claims. That's also a fail. Okay? So now we're using it the way it's supposed to have been used. And so to a degree, they're ignorant. Um, on the Clan Act, it is a venerable statute with a long and story and very important history. I I I really respect this law.
It is uh one of our oldest, perhaps the oldest civil rights law that I uh am charged with administering here at the United States Department of Justice. And it dates back to an era where local law enforcement and state law enforcement um was weaponized against people of color in this country after the uh emancipation of the slaves. And so, you know, it it is this is exactly the purpose for which it was intended to be used conspiracy to violate somebody else's civil rights. Is there any more fundamental civil right, Megan, than the right to pray to God peacefully in a house of worship? I It is the first amendment of the United States Constitution. It is the basis on which this country was founded.
And so, um, I look forward to getting convictions under both of these statutes eventually, uh, against all the people charged.
Let me read you what Matt Murphy said to us. He's part of our MK true crime network and he's a lifetime uh prosecutor out in Orange County. Uh and he he said the following. Uh he said, "In 26 years as a prosecutor, I never saw a judge actually reject an arrest warrant. This will be an Obama, Biden, Clinton to Clinton appointee." This was before we knew. Uh two-tier justice activist judge guaranteed. And then he said, um, "Terrifying children like this is ghoullish. It's clearly a federal crime." the guy filmed himself in the parking lot and he said these are well sanctimonious lefty blank holes. Um I think you would agree with all of that.
Do we know because you point out like the magistrate is not like a nominated judge by by a sitting president. So was it a Democrat who put who chose this magistrate judge and put him on their bench?
So let me explain to your audience how magistrate judges work. I've gone before many of them and often uh we lawyers who are looking for speedy resolution of our cases, we stipulate to magistrates actually trying cases uh where there's a bench trial situation. So I I I respect the role of the magistrate judge, but the magistrate judge is an employee of the federal court. They have tenure appointments. They are selected by the district court article 3 judges. So the life tenure judges in the district court, they put out a a posting. uh people apply for the job. Uh they get go through an interview process, they get selected, so they're hired by the court.
So, if you have a a certain bias in who gets appointed to the court because of the notorious blue slip process, who can get through the uh archaic and frankly needs to go blue slip process in 2026, then you're going to have a um biased selection panel and you're going to have uh an outcome of this type of person. And even so, I don't presume any person who administers justice is biased. I deeply respect judges and I think many of them try to do the right thing no matter whether they're Democrat or Republican. I've gotten good outcomes from Democrat-appointed judges particularly in constitutional issues. So, but when you have a conflict of interest issue, which emerged after this ruling, um you know, that's a concern. every person, every officer of the court, including myself. I've I've accused myself from cases here at the Department of Justice where I have a bias or a perceived bias.
It's actually not just a bias. It is avoiding the appearance of impropriy. And where your wife works for a guy who has prejudged the outcome of the issue, the Face Act doesn't apply. Um, you know, ICE is bad. We're going to get them. We're going to sue them. Which, by the way, they've lost now at the ETH Circuit. We obtained an administrative stay from the ETH circuit against that silly lawsuit that they filed to enjoin and endanger ICE officers. Uh that's a significant conflict. And so I see some commentary out there. Why is the DOJ so dumb? Why did you present your arrest warrants to this judge? We do not judge shop. I don't know if the other side may do that. That's actually illegal and unethical. We cannot judge shop. We do not judge shop. Uh this was the randomly assigned magistrate. I don't know if we would have gotten a different outcome from another, but you know, we this one should have recused himself in my
opinion. That's just my opinion. Um but that's why you have that. Now, typically you go up the food chain. You don't like the outcome of the magistrate judge, you know, you get a chance to ask a district court judge. And so I'll just leave it at that. And then there are other moves we can make. We are literally not even a week away from this uh invasion of this church occurring. These arrests are rapid within the scope of how the DOJ normally operates. I can assure you. Uh and so, you know, there will be more to come in this case. I I I hope to identify with the help of the public video evidence and other data that we have at our disposal, which the FBI is working on, every single person who came uninvited into that house of God and get them.
How soon do you think we'll see more arrests? Um, arrest warrants have to be signed off, you know, by this process. So, I it hopefully will be days, but I I can't give any promises.
Yep. Yeah. We're somewhat beholden to the judiciary. We're totally on that. A new year means new financial goals like making sure your savings are secure and diversified. Will this be the year you decide to talk to somebody from Birch Gold Group? You know, you've been thinking about it. They use an educated approach with a deep understanding of macroeconomics. There are forces pushing the dollar lower right now and gold higher, which is why they believe every American should own physical gold. So, until January 30th, if you are a first-time gold buyer, Birch Gold is offering a rebate of up to $10,000 on qualifying purchases. To claim eligibility and start the process, just text MK to the number 989898.
Birch Gold can help you roll an existing IRA or 401k into an IRA in gold, and you are still eligible for a rebate of up to 10,000 bucks. Consider making right now your first time to buy gold and take advantage of a rebate of up to $10,000 when you buy by January 30th. Text MK to the number 989898 and claim your eligibility today. Again, text MK to 989898. Now, can I ask you about some elements on the Face Act? So, to to prove a violation under the Face Act, you have to prove that by force, threats, or physical obstruction, they've interfered with religious observance. And Dave Arinberg, who we love, he's former Palm Beach County attorney. He's a Democrat.
He says he's a centrist. Um, but he he said on the show the other day in a debate with Mike Davis, that he doesn't think you guys are going to pass the force, threats, or physical obstruction piece of the act because he's looked at the case law and said in his interpretation, typically force uh or physical obstruction would suggest preventing exit from the church. Like in the abortion clinic cases, it was people blocking women from trying to get into the clinic. And I took issue with that, Harie, because there was a famous case just over the past couple years under the Biden DOJ where they went after abortion. It was an abortion clinic.
There was actually two people who went after one of these pregnancy uh counseling centers with negative spray paint on the outside of it. And it said something like, this isn't exact, but it was something to the effect of either you'll support abortion or you're going to get it. You know, it was like it was a threatening kind of spray paint, but there was no blocking of anything, but it was a threat. So, it might have been considered quote threatening. You tell me whether those people were physically obstructing or using force. I don't know. But in that church, the behavior was threatening. Har I I just don't think there's any argument that they they that they were not threatening the people saying hands up don't shoot. Kids don't know what that means. They don't know it's a reference to Ferguson. They hear hands up and they hear people talking about shooting. They have the aggressive William Kelly shouting in
their faces with I mean explicit like anger and and challenges and insults. They have kids running out of the church, getting in the van, slamming the doors to get away from people, screaming in their faces. They have kids cowering. They have kids crying. You tell me how you make the force threats or physical obstruction piece of the statute.
Okay. Absolutely. So, first of all, we've had the Face Act since 1994. There have been many prosecutions under the Face Act, almost all of them against pro-life um protesters or silent objectors. And you have you can't just look at the words of the statute. You have to look at how the courts have interpreted it and what convictions have been had and upheld on appeal. And so, for example, there have been numerous convictions by the Biden DOJ. Uh, I think I can count of three cases off the top of my head where people were convicted for silently praying outside an abortion clinic, not chaining themselves to the doors or blocking the entrance, and certainly not going inside and creating a ruckus and shouting at people um on an operating table. That's that's so so so so that's not the standard. The case you mentioned is Orura Pesa versus United States which I personally argued and defended the
conviction of in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals just three or four months ago and I went into court and defended the Clan Act application to this particular fact pattern and the some people who were charged with face act violations in that case some of the conspirators plead guilty. And so you're correct. This was spray painting. This was aggressive threats, kind of violent threats. And in response to those threats, each of these uh clinics, which were religiously based clinics, had to hire additional security. They had to not allow walk-ins to their clinic. So they weren't able to serve some women in crisis. They required appointments only. They had to, you know, the workers there were in fear. Some people called out sick because they were afraid. And this organization was called Jane's Revenge.
It's kind of a you know, I would call it quasi terrorist organization designed to terrorize people of faith. And uh and this was in the wake of of the DOS decision.
So when you look at the case law, um people have been convicted under the face act for much much less than exactly what happened here. But let's look at the words of the protesters themselves. First of all, William Kelly shouted racial racially charged language within this church and also outside the church. He made it clear that the white and Christian nature of these people was part of the motivation of harassing them. Don Lemon himself stated before and after that the purpose of this so-called protest obstruction was to put people in fear and make them uncomfortable and make them traumatize them. Um and then we have photographs of children crying and their mothers hugging them and moms ushering children out the back and and strong Christian men standing up to defend their families. that is in response to putting them in fear. And you're absolutely correct. You're using the word shoot and hands up in a house
of God. You're shouting out and obstructing the purpose for which people are there. If this isn't a violation of the Face Act, I don't know what is. Thanks so much for watching. If you like what you just saw, hit the subscribe button for more clips and full episodes.
Questions about this episode
Who speaks in "Harmeet Dhillon on Don Lemon's Outrageous "N Word Treatment" Comment and Promises WAY More Arrests"?
Megyn Kelly (Guest), Harmeet Dhillon (Guest).
What is "Harmeet Dhillon on Don Lemon's Outrageous "N Word Treatment" Comment and Promises WAY More Arrests" about?
The discussion centers around Don Lemon's controversial comments likening his legal challenges to being given the "n-word treatment," which Harmeet Dhillon strongly criticizes as offensive and disconnected from the realities of systemic racism. She highlights the impropriety of his remarks, particularly in light of attorney-client privilege, while also addressing the serious issues facing the…
What is mentioned in this Megyn Kelly episode?
6 people, works and ideas are mentioned, including Face Act, Biden DOJ, Clan Act, Abby Lel, Jane's Revenge. Each one on this page links to its own page with every episode that mentions it.
How long is "Harmeet Dhillon on Don Lemon's Outrageous "N Word Treatment" Comment and Promises WAY More Arrests"?
The episode runs 16 min; the transcript is about 2,814 words in 26 timestamped sections.
More from Megyn Kelly
About this transcript: the episode's spoken words as captioned on YouTube, split into timestamped sections. Reclip.Me locates every person, work and idea in the text, keeps the time it is first named, and quotes the words around it verbatim. Last updated January 24, 2026.