← The Rubin Report
The Rubin Report
Don Lemon Forgot About This Piece of Evidence Which Could Send Him to Jail | Harmeet Dhillon
00:29:14
Loading summary
Transcript42 lines
- [00:00]
T-Mobile Spokesperson
Think switching to T Mobile is a whole complicated thing? Nah, it's easy. You can do it almost anywhere in.
- [00:05]
Just 15 minutes, even poolside like Drewski, you can switch to T Mobile and unlock savings that are built to last. With T Mobile's Better Value plan, you can save over $1,000 a year versus Verizon at, at and T. Save on streaming, satellite and more benefits than they leave out.
- [00:20]
Now I get all the VIP perks.
- [00:22]
Start saving from day one and for a limited time get T Mobile's Better Value Plan. I know you love deals plus switch right now and will even pay off your old phone up to 800 bucks. What do you think of all that?
- [00:33]
Dave Rubin
Drewski?
- [00:34]
T-Mobile Spokesperson
Stay chilling. Just switching. It's better over here.
- [00:37]
Harmeet Dhillon
Check the math.
- [00:37]
T-Mobile Legal Disclaimer Voice
@T mobile.com bettervalue savings versus comparable plans at, at&t and Verizon plus the cost of optional benefits, plan features and taxes and fees vary with three plus lines of Better Value Plan three plus new lines and two eligible four to three plus lines and five plus years on T Mobile postpaid plan required. Qualifying credit required. Checkout in 15 minutes or less per line. Get up to $800 per line via virtual prepaid card. Typically takes 15 days after rebate submission qualify unlock device credit service poured in on you plus days with device ineligible carrier and timely redemption required. No cash access and card expires in six months. Card issued by Sunrise Banks NA member.
- [01:00]
Advertisement Voice (1-800-Flowers and Stamps.com)
FDIC looking for a Valentine's gift she'll truly love 1-800-Flowers.com knows what she wants. For 50 years, 1-800-Flowers has helped guys like you get it right. Delivering millions of fresh Valentine's roses nationwide. 1-800-Flowers offers premium fresh cut flowers backed by their seven day freshness guarantee plus same day delivery when you need them on time. Valentine's is coming up and bouquets are selling fast so don't wait on this order today at 1-800-FLowers.com podcast. That's 1-800-FLowers.COM podcast.
- [01:30]
Harmeet Dhillon
We strongly believe that all of the nine people who've been indicted so far by the grand jury had both violations. They all went inside, they all obstructed, harassed, intimidated, frightened people were actually injured in this melee and on top of that they all planned to do it. They met outside and Don Lemon helpfully provided us with live stream video of planning of him bringing donuts and coffee to the co conspirators of using the Royal we repeatedly when he was talking about what we were going to go inside and what we were going to do, he even turned off his microphone at one point to conceal what the co conspirators were talking about doing.
- [02:22]
Dave Rubin
I'm Dave Rubin, and joining me today is the assistant Attorney General for the civil Rights division at the DoJ, my old friend and Twitter colleague Harmeet Dhillon. Harmeet, it's nice to see you.
- [02:35]
Harmeet Dhillon
Nice to see you too, Dave.
- [02:36]
Dave Rubin
You know, although I've never hired you as a lawyer, I consider you my lawyer. Is that strange? You're. You're basically the one person I call if I've got a legal question. And you do it for free. I just want people to know that, like, you really care about all of this stuff. So I'm just saying some nice things about you.
- [02:53]
Harmeet Dhillon
Up top. Well, I do it for free for you, Dave. Let's not invite all your viewers to call me with their legal aid questions.
- [03:01]
Dave Rubin
Fair? Fair. All right. Well, it is great to see again. Obviously, there is a lot to talk about here. I suppose we should first dive in with some of this Don Lemon stuff. Indicted by a grand jury in Minnesota, does not go to jail, at least yet some of this will be fought over. Can you talk a little bit about the SAFE act, why it was passed, how it pertains, how this case involving Don pertains not only to the worshipers, civil rights, the protesters, civil rights. And in this case, Don, who says he's a journalist. And I just don't even know if that's a special protection anymore in an age where everybody holds cell phones.
- [03:46]
Harmeet Dhillon
Yeah, well, so first of all, I don't even think of this as the Don Levin case. I think of this as the Church Cities case. And Don is one of indicted individuals and many who are yet to be indicted who violated federal law in a couple of different ways. So the FACE act was passed in 1994, and it was.
- [04:05]
Dave Rubin
Oh, I'm sorry, I think I said SAFE Act. That's the other thing going on with election integrity. It's the Face act.
- [04:12]
Harmeet Dhillon
That's also a good law. That's a good law, by the way, and I support it, but in my individual capacity. But the FACE act in 1994 was mainly passed to protect abortion clinics from being obstructed by pro life protesters. Okay? And the terms are defined broadly, so it also includes crisis pregnancy centers have come under that. But this law wouldn't have passed without bipartisan support. And so to get that bipartisan support, Congress added in a provision giving the same protections to houses of worship. And there it laid dormant for over 30 years until my department in the DOJ under Pam Bondi brought the first DOJ Fasack case regarding an attack on a synagogue in West Orange, New Jersey, last year. This is the second of our cases that we are bringing, the first criminal case that we are bringing, and I have, I won't say how many, but numerous other cases under investigation, mainly involving attacks on synagogues. Now, what the Biden DOJ pioneered. So a violation of the FACE act is first violation is a misconception, misdemeanor, and then if you do more of them, it escalates to a felony. The Biden DOJ prosecuted many, many pro life protesters who prayed silently outside an abortion clinic. Not what we're talking about here. They didn't go in live stream while an abortion is happening, put their mic in the face of the doctor performing the abortion or providing counseling to a pregnant woman. Just by standing outside, you're seen as obstructing or intimidating or what have you. And then they use the Klan act, which is a much old, probably the oldest of the federal civil rights laws that I administer, short of the Bill of Rights, that makes it a crime to intimidate and violate somebody's civil rights or conspire to do that, where two or more people conspire to violate somebody's civil rights. And this dates back to the Reconstruction era in our country after the Civil War, where actually it was local and state law enforcement that was conspiring to prevent newly freed slaves from enjoying their full civil rights. So that's how important and old that law is. We call it the Klan act, the Ku Klux Klan act. That's the shorthand for it. So when you violate the Klan act and you conspire to violate the rights that are protected by the Face act, you can be held liable for a felony under federal law. And so that's what the Biden DOJ did repeatedly. And I went to court to actually defend one of their prosecutions at the Court of Appeals. And that's the law of the land. Now, you can do that. You can apply higher sentencing if appropriate. So to show that, though you have to show somebody was planning and knew about it and had some knowledge of something that was about to happen or took part of it. We strongly believe that all of the nine people who've been indicted so far by the grand jury had both violations. They all went inside, they all obstructed, harassed, intimidated, frightened. People were actually injured in this melee. And on top of that, they all planned to do it. They met outside, and Don Lemon helpfully provided us with live stream video of planning of him bringing donuts and coffee to the co conspirators of using the royal. We repeatedly, when he was talking about what we were going to go inside and what we were going to do, he even turned off his microphone at one point to conceal what the co conspirators were talking about doing. We also see in that video an organized two stage system where they first sent in a wave of, if you would call it, decoys, who went and sat in the audience. Like other parishioners. They were white, let's call them the white allies of this, you know, BLM protest, if you will. And then when the people who kind of were the primary movers of, of catalyzing this protest came in, then everyone jumped up, frightened the hell out of people who came there to pray. Over 400 people, people were rushing for the exits. Ladies fell and slipped on the ice. People were prevented from getting their children from the Sunday school upstairs because they were blocked by these protesters. Everyone's seen the calm demeanor of Pastor Jonathan Parnell, and you can even see Don Lemon blocking someone from leaving while sticking a mic in his face. These are all violations, clear violations of the law. And we're going to prove that by pointing to the numerous prosecutions that have been by prior departments of justice in these similar cases.
- [08:55]
Dave Rubin
So, okay, so legally you feel you have a tight case. Now, what would you say to the people that would say, and you're hearing this across mainstream media right now, and plenty of it at the Grammys, But Don Lemon is a journalist, and as a journalist, he was just on the ride with them. He was just reporting on what was happening, and he should have, in essence, some special protections.
- [09:20]
Harmeet Dhillon
Well, Don Lemon might have gone to the leering school of journalism where they did not teach the distinctions in the First Amendment. The First Amendment is not a license to violate other people's First Amendment rights. He said, oh, well, this is the First Amendment. When the pastor said, this is shameful. It is shameful that you came in here into this house of God and you brought your political things into this church. And Don Lemon says this is the First Amendment. Well, no, the First Amendment, as you know, Dave, has, as, as, as we've discussed, has specific time, place and manner restrictions. You don't get to do your protest in a federal courthouse or in the post office, obstructing people from getting their mail or in the White House or, you know, in, in even on certain sidewalks. You have to get a permit if you're going to do things that obstruct. And you have to give notice. They didn't do any of that. They treated this private property as a public park to conduct their protest. And they did it to the exclusion of the intended purpose of that space, namely to worship God in the way that the followers of that church, city's church, are used to doing. I mean, Pastor Parnell himself has eight children, and many of them were in that church that day. He's terrified for his wife and his kids. We see video of them pulling, pulling out at the end. They're holding each other, they're crying. Let me say to the devil's advocate, people who say, but he's a journalist, do we want to see this type of a scene with neo Nazis doing a protest in a synagogue or, you know, people who dislike Islam doing a protest in a mosque? Not everyone is going to be as peaceful and a mild servant of God as Jonathan Parnell. There will be violence. There will be anarchy. There will be a retreat from houses of worship because people will be afraid to go there. That is why we have a zero tolerance policy for this. And that includes anybody who calls themselves a journalist, but is obstructing, intimidating, threatening, and otherwise violating the Face Act. Right.
- [11:37]
Dave Rubin
I mean, the irony of the very same people who for years have been telling us they need safe spaces now not allowing for protected spaces for people to exercise their First Amendment right to free speech is rather extraordinary. Let me ask you for a moment to take your lawyer hat off and your government hat off and just talk about this from an optics perspective, because one thing that I am sympathetic to is that perhaps now the government is just giving Lemon what he wants, which is his chance at martyrdom. So this is separate than the legal issue. This is more of like, an optics and narrative issue. Do you. Does that jive with you in any way?
- [12:15]
Harmeet Dhillon
Well, it could, but now I'm going to give you another logical ploy, which is the slippery slope argument. Now, several of the people arrested Don Lemon happens to have his, you know, weirdo following. That's fine, whatever. Like, I respect the First Amendment. As you know, I've represented numerous journalists, including people who disagree with me. And I'm a former free speech lawyer in private practice. Several of those people call themselves journalists. What if they all call themselves journalists? What if all of the people who want to disrupt an abortion clinic, a mosque, a synagogue, a church, a gurdwara, a Hindu mandir, what if they want to go in there and say, hey, we're all journalists. Let's put a little journalism badge, just like all these phonies Put a service animal jacket on their dogs and just say, hey, I'm a journalist. Today I get a free pass to violate your First Amendment rights in the place you go for sanctuary. That's where this argument will extend to. I don't care if he's a journalist or not. I'm not disputing that he was once employed by cnn. Some people tune in to see what he has to say. Okay, that's not relevant to whether he broke the law. And let me point you to the examples of numerous examples by the prior administration of prosecuting people who call themselves journalists. The Obama administration prosecuted people who are indisputably journalists, including, or I would say prosecutor investigators Cheryl Atkinson and James Rosen. The last DOJ did not prosecute, but raided, harassed, and caused to spend possibly millions of dollars in attorney's fees. Project Veritas. For the thought crime of not publishing Ashley Biden's diary. Okay, so those are. I didn't make the rules. But the rules are, and the Congress made these rules. There's no get out of jail free card. This is not monopoly for podcasters.
- [14:16]
Dave Rubin
Yeah, and by the way, when. When everyone is. When no one's a journalist, everyone's a journalist. And when everyone's a journalist, no one's a journalist. And that I don't think, John, I don't think Don Lemon is any more of a journalist. Then you're right than any of these other people that could have walked in there with the phone. Let me ask you something broadly on state of protest in the country, because it seems to me that whether it's BLM one day or Hamas stuff the next day.
- [14:39]
Goldbelly Advertisement Voice
Hey guys, have you heard of Goldbelly? Oh, my God, it's the coolest thing ever. It's this amazing site where they ship the most iconic famous foods from restaurants across the country, anywhere, nationwide. I've never found a more perfect Valentine's gift. They ship Chicago deep dish pizza, New York bagels, Maine lobster rolls, and even Ina Garten's famous cakes. Seriously. So if you're looking for a Valentine's Day gift for the food lover in your Life, head to goldbelly.com and get 20% off your first order with promo code.
- [15:08]
Advertisement Voice (1-800-Flowers and Stamps.com)
Gift, shipping, billing, admin, payroll, marketing. You're managing all the things, so why waste time sending important documents the old fashioned way? Mail and ship when you want, how you want with stamps, dot com, print postage on demand 24, 7 and schedule pickups from your office or home. Save up to 90% with automated rate shopping. That's why over 1 million small businesses trust stamps.com. go to stamps.com and use code podcast to try stamps.com risk free for 60.
- [15:38]
Dave Rubin
Days or anti ice stuff or whatever it is that we've just accepted that on any given moment in any usually blue city, people can just take over the streets. You mentioned that there are places that you can't protest or you have to get, you know, dispensation from the government or you have to get a, you know, some sort of allowance in essence. But it seems to me that doesn't really matter. I mean, I understand that that's the law in a lot of places, but you know, you can just walk down fifth Avenue with thousands of people holding up Palestinian flags and just stop commerce, stop ambulances from going through and everything else. Do you feel that, that, that the ship has just sailed on that? That these people just have free rein now to do whatever they want?
- [16:16]
Harmeet Dhillon
Well, you know, it's a very good question. It's a one way ratchet. Okay. And over the years I have advised numerous. I've participated in protests myself. I've done that from, from childhood actually. There are things I believe strongly about my, you know, people around me may have, or in college or what have you. You go out there and you protest legally and you follow orders and you then leave. But here's what it is. BLM had a hundred thousand person protest march in Los Angeles during COVID There was no permit for 100,000 people to shut down traffic in Los Angeles. At the same time I went to court to litigate Gavin Newsom's denial of a permit to protest on the lawn of California's Capitol for a congressional candidate sought that. And someone protesting the state's refusal to issue gun licenses. Federal firearms licenses. Sorry, not federal firearms licenses, but gun training permits during that time period and they were denied. And you know what they did? They honored that denial and they went to court to challenge it. But the other side of the street, I guess Covid did not matter. If it's a BLM protest, there's a magic shield. Just like if you're Don Lemon, you claim you're a journalist, that's a magic shield from liability. So it is unfortunate that we have one sided enforcement of our laws. When young conservatives wanted to have certain speakers at UC Berkeley, they applied for permission. There was going to be a protest over the denial. They went and tried to get a permit and. And the other side just comes with bats and knives and nunchucks and starts a melee. And somehow, because liberal cities have Been have been trained by the DOJ Civil Rights Division over the years that if you enforce the law, you're going to get in trouble as a cop or as a city. And so I don't blame them in a way, but when this lawlessness occurs, they've been trained to stand down. I mean, I saw it myself in a 2016 rally for then candidate Trump. I was in San Jose. I did the Pledge of Allegiance. I met the future president backstage. Everyone is exiting peacefully and suddenly a riot comes along. There are 200 riot police standing there. And by the way, I love the police. These people are risking their lives for us. I don't think they went into policing to stand there and watch taxpayers get beaten by a mob. But when I sued the city, and that is what I learned, I learned that their crowd control practices are such that if that kind of thing happens and it only happens on one side, for the most part, they just stand there and watch while citizens get beaten and nothing happens, no one gets arrested. That's the state of the law in some of our blue cities in the United States. Many of them, in fact. It is a dirty secret. And people need to be aware that when you're going into these types of situations where a protest could break out, you're on your own. Everyone make a exit plan for how they're gonna get their family safely out of there. And my goodness, are we gonna start saying that about going to church now? That everyone should have a ice free. I mean, not the ice with the uniforms, but literally the ice that people slipped on when they were running out in Minnesota to try to get away. Should everyone have a safety plan or an exit strategy in case a journalist brings a protest into your worship service? That is just not sustainable in this country that was founded on the principles of freedom of religion.
- [19:46]
Dave Rubin
So if, if the blue cities and states are not going to do anything about that, and if the previous DOJ told them, you know, you can just kind of told the police, don't do much or get away with whatever you want or let the governors do nothing or whatever it might be. I mean, you are involved now. We have a much better DOJ now. To me, it almost like it's almost as if they want you guys to overreact so that they can say, ah, see, Trump is that craz, crazy authoritarian. But if. But if you guys don't do anything, we just leave the cities to the jackals.
- [20:18]
Harmeet Dhillon
Well, no, that's true. And so you know, what's happening on the immigration enforcement side, that's not my lane. And I think the people, I mean, I met Tom Holman last week in Minneapolis with the Attorney General and others and Chris Rea, the number two, the co deputy at the FBI. These are tremendous professionals. I highly respect them. You know, sometimes mistakes are made that the DOJ does investigate. And so, you know, normally law enforcement looks at that. But I will tell you that what we are seeing here is there is a shift and we're getting attacked for it. So it's just damned if you do, damned if you don't, I don't think. And I don't really care. As you know, Dave, I'm not here for a popularity contest. I'm very plain spoken. I do what I think is right and damn the torpedoes. And that is really the attitude, I think, of this president as well. So yes, someone may get their 15 minutes of fame, they may get off on being arrested, whatever, that's fine. But what we can't tolerate is a repeat of what we saw. That is why we acted so swiftly. I am a person of faith. I think everyone should be able to go to their temple, church, synagogue and feel safe there for a couple of hours ever how long you're there, send your kids to Sunday school there. We can't tolerate any of this protest coming into our houses of worship. If we do, we will have lost the ability to worship peacefully in this country because I guarantee you that every provocateur is gonna be live streaming their nonsense from a place with a captive audience of God fearing people who won't fight back. Of course they won't fight back in front of an altar. You know, that's just not done. We all have our instincts.
- [21:57]
Dave Rubin
Right.
- [21:58]
Harmeet Dhillon
It was a hostage situation, really.
- [22:00]
Dave Rubin
Right. It also strikes me that we've already ceded so much ground to them. We know that they can just take over malls whenever they want. As I said, they can take over fifth Avenue whenever they just concede this last. This last thing. That's the irony, watching the women of the View defending this. And as you pointed out, it's like, man, if a couple people in MAGA hats showed up at a mosque, you guys would be screaming your heads off. It's quite absurd. Right, right, of course, of course, absolutely. Let me ask you just more broadly speaking, now that you're, you know, a year or so into this new gig, you know, everyone talks about the swamp and draining the swamp and all of these things. What have been the challenges for you outside of the obvious legal cases, but just kind of reforming a Justice department that I Think we would both agree certainly that was a little out of whack, let's say for the last four years.
- [22:52]
Harmeet Dhillon
Oh, totally out of whack. And not for the last four years. I'm going to tell you, it's been out of whack for 40 years. And no matter who was the President of the United States, it didn't matter. Like, literally same people were burrowed in here. Totally. Like the very epitome of the deep state things in the corners that you never want to talk about, you know, of this building. And so when I came in here, it was like, you know, cleaning the Aegean stables. You know, we just basically said, look, these are the President's priorities and we're going to enforce all of the federal civil rights laws. But with these priorities that caused more than half the people working here to head for the exits, including some who'd been here for four decades, and I think not even five decades. And that's not a bad thing. But the challenge is you still have to enforce the law and then you have to find new people to come in and do that, and you have to find new good people who want to come to D.C. and do a job. And typically for a lawyer, it's a pay cut to come to D.C. and do this job. It's a very prestigious job. It's a very important job. I find it a very rewarding job, but it is a challenge to staff in that circumstance. I think today I may have had half a dozen hit pieces by the national news media across my inbox. They harass our employees. They reach out to us, our lawyers, they make up lies. The former lawyers who quit and now are having FOMO because we have done so much exciting work. And in the headlines they make up lies, they breach their ethical duties and reveal attorney client communications. So these are some of the disappointing things I've seen. One of the others is when I started as a lawyer over three decades ago, you could count on no matter who appointed the judge, you're going to get some baseline consistency and adherence to the laws. Okay, you could. I practiced law in San Francisco for 25 years, one of the most left wing places. But I honestly got a fair shake from most of those judges. Most of the time I did not feel like, oh my gosh, I should just like pack up my tent and leave because of who appointed these judges. That was not the case today. What we saw during the last administration is some really radical judges joined the bench and to the point where they get slapped down on the same issue. Again and again and again by the Court of Appeals. They don't respect the Court of Appeals. They don't respect Supreme Court precedent. They write like tone poems instead of opinions. There are some nutty opinions that have come out. And so it's really hard because the law is supposed to be something where it's like a machine. You should be able to predict what the outcome's going to be based on clearly established norms. It's not like a machine, it's more like a slot machine now where you plug it in and you don't know what's going to happen. I mean, you could hit the jackpot or you could just go home broke. That is the current situation. Now, that is frustrating. It doesn't have to be that way. We're not going to accept it being that way. We kind of need to get some more of the judges confirmed and on the bench so that we can have kind of a back to a normal judiciary that isn't biased against one side or the other.
- [26:04]
Dave Rubin
Is that, is it the only way to fix it through just getting more of Trump's judges confirmed? And I guess what's the holdup on that? But also, is there anything you really can't do anything with a true activist judge? Right. I mean, once they're sworn in, there's virtually nothing that can happen to stop them. Right. I mean, they can keep just giving terrible rulings. And it is what it is for the most part.
- [26:24]
Harmeet Dhillon
I mean, I don't really want to stray into the other branches of the government, but of course there are tools that Congress has to deal with people who are truly violating their oath. You want to be careful with that and judicious about it because you don't want that being abused either. But I think others have spoken to the slow pace of confirmations and I think that that issue is well known what the problem is. So I'll just leave it at that.
- [26:48]
Dave Rubin
That fair enough. What else are you focused on right now? I mean, I think most people see the lemon thing seems to be the thing, as annoying as it is. Obviously there's all sorts of protest related stuff, things of that nature. What are the other places that you're kind of looking at Anything sort of surprise you in this year?
- [27:07]
Harmeet Dhillon
Well, you know, the church protest issue is really just shouldn't even call it a protest. Church obstruction issue is last couple of weeks really, we have seen a significant increase on attacks on houses of worship and anti Semitism in our country. That is a big focus and has been in this administration. I'VE had to unfortunately visit several synagogues that have been attacked by violent mobs and we are investigating those and hope to be announcing some actions there pretty soon. But there's so many other things that we cover. Dave, I'm passionate about the Second Amendment. I'm a gun owner here in the District of Columbia and I'd love to have an AR15 here in the District of Columbia, but I can't yet. So we've sued the District over that issue. We've sued Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department for slow rolling concealed carry permits. We filed numerous briefs in the Supreme Court to support our Second Amendment rights. That is something brand new that this DOJ did, this administration did under Pam Bondi and President Trump. I'm really excited to be part of that. We have been more active than I think any other Republican administration in history with respect to voting issues as well, getting involved in several cases. I personally signed off on suing 25 states, including the District of Columbia as a jurisdiction, 24 states and the District of Columbia. And we've reached settlements with several jurisdictions. We have supported Wyoming's voter ID law successfully in court. We've reached an agreement from North Carolina to clean up its inaccurate and bloated voter rolls. We've supported the Fulton county ballot effort for the 2020 ballots with civil litigation that's now been handled in a criminal process as well. And we have a bunch of other things on the horizon. But some of the other stuff that we do here is also very important. I and passionate about the rights of the disabled. We've got a big case against Uber for discriminating against blind riders, people with either sight disability and or seeing eye dogs. I mean, they get mistreated by that company. We protect our service members. Our service members have special rights under federal law that they and their spouses have some mobility rights to move around and have licenses wherever they are. They also are protected from arbitrary plan terminations, lease termination fees and things like that. So we've gone to bat for them. I'm in charge for the government of helping to spearhead the elimination of DEI in public hiring and in education. That's a huge project. We have negotiated half a billion dollars in settlements for just a handful of America's top institutions and we are continuing to march forward and go after those. And there are probably 10 other things that I've forgotten in that long sentence.
- [30:05]
Dave Rubin
I wanted to end actually on the DEI stuff. So if we could do that just for just for two minutes. So, okay, so it seems like we're dismantling DEI in the institutions, although it also seems like a lot of the colleges and maybe corporations, they're just sort of rebranding it. They're not calling it DEI anymore. They're renaming departments. They're just shifting people around. I mean, once you guys get the initial win, okay, this, this institution got rid of dei, do you just walk away at that point and hope that it's going to work out, or do you then have, do you have the ability to keep your eye on them in a way to make sure that they're not constantly changing?
- [30:40]
Harmeet Dhillon
Well, we do have that ability. So the good news is that every time the federal government gives a dollar to a recipient, that agency has the right to go in and then follow up and make sure that, excuse me, the grant conditions are being met, which always include following federal law. Well, federal law now, not just according to this administration, but the Supreme Court, is that you can't discriminate in hiring or in admissions on the basis of race and other protected characteristics. So we always have the right. Maybe they're going to do a deal and then wink, wink, nudge, nudge, they backslide. We can open up a new investigation there so we don't let them get away with it.
- [31:17]
Dave Rubin
Harmeet, I wish we had more time. I hope we can do this as many more times as you'd like to during your tenure at the doj. Then, well, beyond that for you. And I feel like we're like old souls in this Internet fight. So it's just a joy to see you doing what you're doing and I hope to see you soon.
- [31:36]
Harmeet Dhillon
Thanks for having me, Dave. I really appreciate it.
- [31:38]
Dave Rubin
Thanks.