On Friday's "O'Reilly Factor," the host and his guest Geraldo Rivera had quite a lively debate on Attorney General Eric Holder's announcement concerning Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other terrorists being tried in New York City.
As you might imagine, Rivera was all for it, and Bill O'Reilly, well -- not so much.
Although this wasn't on par with their classic battle over illegal immigration in 2007, it still was pretty feisty (video embedded below the fold with highlights, fuller transcript, file photo, h/t Story Balloon):
GERALDO RIVERA: But I say this. Hasan would be executed in a military court or a civilian court, just as John Allen Muhammad was sentenced to die and was executed last Tuesday night by lethal injection in Virginia. And as Khalid Shaikh Muhammad will be when he's brought, justly, to the city that was the scene of his horrible crime...
BILL O'REILLY, HOST: You're crazy on that.
RIVERA: And is convicted by a federal jury and sentenced to die.
O'REILLY: Look, there's -- there's such a thing called harm reduction. Do you know what that is? Harm reduction? That in any kind of a public exposition, you try to do the least harm you can.
RIVERA: You know...
O'REILLY: Listen, Geraldo. You've got to -- you've got to think about this. You and I are New Yorkers, and we have been forever. Geraldo is born and raised, and very -- we lived on Long Island. The pain that the 9/11 families experienced is the same today as it was eight years ago. It hasn't gone away.
You're going to have a circus trial here, a circus trial where water boarding, the CIA, the Bush administration, Dick Cheney, that's what's going to be on display, not Khalid Shaikh Muhammad.
RIVERA: I disagree.
O'REILLY: I'll tell you, I can't believe you disagree with me, because you know how much pain the 9/11 families are going to experience.
RIVERA: You remember Ramzi Yousef? Do you remember the blind Skeikh?
O'REILLY: Yes.
RIVERA: They were charged for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. I was in the World Trade Center. I looked at the hole they made. Only because their bomb was a little less powerful than they intended, the buildings did not fall down in 1993. They were tried in the southern district of New York. They were convicted and sentenced.
O'REILLY: It's a different thing. They were living here.
RIVERA: They were colleagues and brothers of these murderers.
O'REILLY: No, they were living here like Zacarias Moussaoui was in Minnesota when he was picked up. Nobody had a beef with that civilian trial. Although it was a circus.
RIVERA: Then what did Cuba have to do with these people?
O'REILLY: No.
RIVERA: We...
O'REILLY: Khalid Shaikh Muhammad was picked up in Afghanistan.
RIVERA: In Pakistan. You used -- you used the term "risk reduction." That's what Guantanamo Bay was in the minds of the bureaucrats. They said what are the risks here? The risks aren't really escape. People don't escape from maximum federal prison. The risk is the publicity or the propaganda.
O'REILLY: Terror attacks, whatever.
RIVERA: The United States Constitution might offer too many rights to these people.
O'REILLY: Would you have brought -- would you have brought Herman Goering after World War II here?
RIVERA: Guantanamo Bay was a shyster's trick to evade the United States Constitution.
O'REILLY: I don't think that for a second. I think it was a smart move.
RIVERA: And justice will be done where it deserves to be done in the shadow of the buildings they destroyed.
O'REILLY: Look, No. 1, you're insulting the military justice system.
(CROSSTALK)
O'REILLY: I've got 30 seconds. I've got 30 seconds. Would you have brought Herman Goering from Berlin to New York City to try him after World War II? Would you?
RIVERA: Yes.
O'REILLY: That's crazy!
RIVERA: I would have loved -- I would have loved to see him stand before the relatives of those Jewish people and the other -- and the other people that he massacred. Let him come here.
(CROSSTALK)
O'REILLY: ... in front of a military tribunal.
RIVERA: We have nothing to fear. These people don't scare us.
O'REILLY: Harm reduction.
Geraldo, everybody. Very passionate, as always.
RIVERA: Thank you.
O'REILLY: He like me, Geraldo. I swear.
RIVERA: I really do.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Geraldo is the walking,
November 14, 2009 - 14:16 ET by bigtimerGeraldo is the walking, talking definition of 'Shyster' as he termed the Bush administration using the military tribunals to evade the Constitution.
He makes me ill.
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
Evade the Constituton
November 14, 2009 - 14:43 ET by allanfCongress established Miltiary Tribunals in 2006. There is nothing unconstitutional about these tribunals. According to Article I
Congress shall have the power
And in Article 3:
Bingo
November 14, 2009 - 15:30 ET by ThoreauNicely put
Geraldo engaging in a battle of wits????
November 15, 2009 - 15:04 ET by Patriot IIThat can't happen, he comes unarmed!! A little like a one legged man in a butt kicking contest!!! what a clown!
Fox News will soon rid
November 14, 2009 - 15:36 ET by d1carterFox News will soon rid themselves of this arrogant self aggrandizing buffoon called Heraldo.
RIVERA: We have nothing to
November 14, 2009 - 15:37 ET by motherbeltRIVERA: We have nothing to fear. These people don't scare us.
Just as his sister-from-another-mother Rosie O'Donnell said:
Don't fear the terrorists. They're mothers and fathers too.
He doesnt practice law, I
November 14, 2009 - 20:27 ET by Dan The Man 2He doesnt practice law, I dont think he ever has.
Courts to do Administration Dirty Work
November 14, 2009 - 14:42 ET by retspookretspook
I was talking today to a friend of mine in the local coffee shop. He is a retired FBI agent and we both agreed why this trial is going to be held in the U.S. court system. Obama, Holder and probably most democrats in Congress want this trial to be held here so they basically can put the CIA on trial. They can crucify the CIA here and claim they had nothing to do with it. I don't think the American Public realizes what this will do to the Intelligence gathering techniques used by the CIA and other entities. This is a huge mistake. He should be tried in GTMO by a Military tribunal, found guilty,which they have admitted, and then shot. While they are doing this perhaps they could include Hasan in he same firing squad
President Sarah
November 14, 2009 - 14:45 ET by allanfIf we had President Sarah, she would probably fly down to Gitmo, get out her Moose gun and take care of this pest herself. Instead we will be treated to years of government secrets being exposed and a possible acquital because proper criminal arrest procedures were not followed.
Don't Forget To Include...
November 15, 2009 - 09:20 ET by Wildcatter1980...Bush, Cheney, Gonzalez, the other intelligence gathering agencies, and the military, too.
The left is embodied by the words L&O DA Jack McCoy uttered when he said "It's about time..." The left is obsessed about this not out of a sense of "justice". No, they are obsessed out of fear; fear that people will realize that Bush, Cheney, the CIA and the other intelligence gathering agencies and the military are doing the right thing and protecting the country from its enemies and those who wish to do harm to us.
(BTW-That line caused me to turn off not only L&O, a long time favorite show of mine, but also NBC. Now I will only watch when my favorite sports teams are being televised by NBC and that is it! Period.)
--
We need to stop calling them "Progressives" when in reality they are big government "Socialists" who no longer value the individual's rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Does Heraldo....
November 14, 2009 - 15:00 ET by thedailyzingwork for the White House, or Mrs. Dunn, perhaps?? Check out what happens to Anita Dunn when she went up against Fox News. Click here: http://thedailyzing....
Jerry Rivers: Guantanamo
November 14, 2009 - 15:01 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonJerry Rivers: Guantanamo Bay was a shyster's trick to evade the United States Constitution.
In other words, enemy combatants, captured on foreign soil, not wearing uniforms to distinquish themselves from the civilian population have "Constitutional Rights" granted by jerry rivers himself?
Pre liberal seizure of the United States Government geneva Conventions or spies, saboteurs, and terrorists:
It was held that because the partisans did not have clearly marked insignia, indicating their status as lawful combatants, killing them was not a war crime. Military courts were not willing to endorse the notion that saboteurs and secret partisans had the same status as lawful combatants.
Thanks to liberals that HATE the Constitution such as pelosi, reid, obama and jerry rivers, instead of being shot bright and early the day after capture, they get 'rights' that are supposed to be RESTRICTED TO LAWFUL CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!
Do you suppose anybody heard me yelling in their eyes?
"no matter how low you set the bar, liberals can never quite measure up." -Me
http://gjresult.com
Ya Beat Me To It!
November 15, 2009 - 09:24 ET by Wildcatter1980I was hoping no one else had posted "Gerry Rivers" instead of his stage name.
--
We need to stop calling them "Progressives" when in reality they are big government "Socialists" who no longer value the individual's rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
A few things, Herr Aldo.
November 14, 2009 - 15:31 ET by Mike Bratton1) Constitutional rights and protections are, by definition, for citizens of the United States--no matter what you, Holder, or Obama believe to the contrary.
2) Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his buddies aren't citizens of the United States.
3) Therefore, they don't get to enjoy Constitutional rights and protections.
4) What those shining examples of the socio-political system of Islam did was an act of war, not a mere violation of law. Therefore, the response against them and theirs should be a military one, rather than a response of the criminal justice system.
5) You and Bill O'Reilly should take that little comedy act of yours on the road.
--Mike
www.thebrattonreport...
Mike Bratton...
November 14, 2009 - 19:35 ET by Jer1) Constitutional rights and protections are, by definition, for citizens of the United States--no matter what you, Holder, or Obama believe to the contrary.
2) Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his buddies aren't citizens of the United States.
3) Therefore, they don't get to enjoy Constitutional rights and protections.
I'm sure you don't mean to suggest that, say, a Swiss tourist charged with a crime at Disney World would neither be subject to U.S law nor the protections of constitutional due process.
Jer
Wow, Jer, that was a swing and a miss from you!
November 14, 2009 - 21:18 ET by Mike BrattonHonestly, I expect better! Flew right by this one, did you not? Quoting myself thusly, and like so:
"4) What those shining examples of the socio-political system of Islam did was an act of war, not a mere violation of law. Therefore, the response against them and theirs should be a military one, rather than a response of the criminal justice system."
Are you attempting to equate Swiss tourists at Walt Disney World with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Jer? Seriously?
Well, I just thought of something. Let's do just as you suggest. Yes, I absolutely mean to say that a coordinated group of five Swiss terrorists who plotted to fly passenger jets into Epcot and Main Street USA, killing 3,000 tourists, and freely admitting their conspiracy (motivated by their worship of the movie Heidi, which they insist commands them to wage war against Americans because we think it was wrong of NBC to leave the 1968 Jets/Raiders game early to air the movie) even before their trial was to begin--yes, those people should be treated to a military response, not a criminal-justice one.
Now, if Sven from Geneva gets ticked off because his Fast Pass didn't work, and he punches out Mickey Mouse? It's generous of us to treat him as we would any other frustrated tourist. The yawning chasm of difference, however, between Sven and Khalid should be obvious--especially to someone as intelligent as you are, Jer.
--Mike
www.thebrattonreport...
Let's do just as you
November 14, 2009 - 23:53 ET by Dan The Man 2Let's do just as you suggest. Yes,
I absolutely mean to say that a coordinated group of five Swiss
terrorists who plotted to fly passenger jets into Epcot and Main Street
USA, killing 3,000 tourists, and freely admitting their conspiracy
We can call the act Jerhadi. And act of Jerhad.
No, Mike...it was a solid single to center
November 15, 2009 - 01:07 ET by JerMy intention was not to dismiss your core thesis [with which I generally concur], but merely to point out the flaw in your introductory syllogism. Let's restate it with some limited but important modifications:
1) Constitutional rights and protections are, by definition, primarily for citizens of the United States--but are not, without exception, restricted in applicability to US citizens.
2) Swiss tourists charged with crimes while temporarily sojourning on American soil will nevertheless be tried in accordance with the laws of the United States.
3) Therefore, they are afforded rights and protections by and under our Constitution even though they are not US citizens.
It is because of my deep respect for your intelligence that I believed this clarification would be useful. It doesn't directly affect the soundness of the balance of your argument.
Jer
Since we're rephrasing, Jer, let's try this.
November 15, 2009 - 01:49 ET by Mike BrattonIt's what I originally said in points 1 and 4, blended together; were it a beverage, it would have much more "drinkability." Thusly, and like so:
Constitutional rights and protections are, by definition, for citizens of the United States. If they are extended to non-citizens, it is by discretion, not by mandate. When individuals who are not American citizens wage acts of war upon the United States, the mandate must be to dispense with discretion and treat those individuals as what they are--enemy combatants.
The Constitution is just what it says in the Preamble: A document wherein "We the people" have established "for ourselves and our posterity" a "Constitution for the United States of America." Not for the planet. For ourselves, and for our posterity.
When people don't buy into the ideal, they don't get the protection as a matter of course. Or, in a sane America, they wouldn't.
Of course, our new dictator-in-chief fancies himself President of Earth as well, so why shouldn't he direct his subordinate to treat bloodthirsty terrorists like regular citizens? No doubt Obama thinks it'll make us look good in the eyes of the Vulcans when they make first contact, so we'll have a quicker entry into the Federation... Sorry, I digress.
Giving aid and comfort to the enemy, which Obama and Holder are doing by routing these terrorists through the criminal justice system rather than the military path, is a definition of treason. Perhaps the only good thing to come out of this insane trial is that there is now an incontrovertible, substantive reason to impeach Barack Hussein Obama.
Mmm, mmm, mmm.
Thanks for the kind words, by the way--and thanks to you, Jer, I will never be able to look at Swiss tourists the same way again.
--Mike
www.thebrattonreport...
Sooooo,,, by extension if
November 15, 2009 - 14:47 ET by BDSooooo,,, by extension if 500 Cuban paratroopers somehow appeared in Florida we would have to have the FBI take the lead?
This is nonsense. These persons were combatants by every stretch of the imagintion which relegates them to the Military chain rather than civil.
End of story.
Fox News
November 14, 2009 - 17:45 ET by Southern votershould immediately replace RIVERA with Lou Dobbs ...I have always changed channels when Geraldo is on ...Lou Dobbs would fit right in at Fox !!!
I do the same thing SV,
November 14, 2009 - 19:16 ET by rockyracoonI do the same thing SV, Jerry Whorealdo Rivers gives me a gag-like reflex to push buttons on my remote. Alas, he isn't the only one.
Facts are like kryptonite to the liberal.
Fox News
November 14, 2009 - 17:48 ET by Southern votershould immediately replace Geraldo with Lou Dobbs...!!!
Military and Civilian Courts are like night and day-
November 14, 2009 - 17:59 ET by JIMMY1660procedurally.
my concerns-as the crazies come from all over the world to see this circus. staff in the courts/jail will be exposed and potential targets of these terrorists.
there are not enough Marshall's or NYC cops to protect them away from the court house.
these are true crazies-taking a life or two will make them even bolder.
this is a big mistake.
BHO- The Anti-Christ
Eric Holder-
November 14, 2009 - 19:59 ET by BKeyserEric Holder- Spineless.
Conservative Endowment for the Arts
BK... Perfect. He is
November 14, 2009 - 20:03 ET by bigtimerBK...
Perfect.
He is with the enemy within...always has been.
I despise him, have for too many years to count.
'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart
Responsibility
November 15, 2009 - 07:36 ET by bolivarWhen this clown is found not guilty OR gets off on a technicality I (and the whole country) will hold the cipher AND holder personally responsible for any and all crimes and acts said terrorist has committed. They will answer to the American people for flaunting the Constitution and its remarkably good thinking. The Founders knew much better than the current administration that bad guys will do all they can to do evil and kissing thier butts and wiping them afterward and begging for forgiveness all over the place has consequences. By the way, I do not capitalize the cipher nor holder - they don't even deserve that level of respect.
The latest "bowing" incident" makes our cipher look even more pathetic than he already did and that is going some. Will this clown do anything to make the office of the president look more ridiculous and demean it?
I have no use for liberal thinking - it is just so......passe.
Last time these 2 met,
November 15, 2009 - 08:00 ET by wiwfLast time these 2 met, there was nearly a fist fight. I'm surprised the set didn't explode halfway through the debate!
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy