Fox's Charles Hurt complains Democrats are using “squirrely words like quid pro quo, bribery” to describe Trump's abuse of power regarding Ukraine
Hurt denies there was a quid pro quo, then claims: “I don't even know what that means, really. I don't know what language quid pro quo is”
Published
Citation
From the November 13, 2019, edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends
STEVE DOOCY (CO-HOST): Ahead of today's public impeachment hearings, Adam Schiff kind of moved the goal posts, now adding bribery to the list of President Trump's possible impeachable offenses. Here to discuss, Fox News contributor and Washington Times opinion editor Charles Hurt.
...
CHARLES HURT (FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR): Adam Schiff shouldn't be talking about founders' intentions, because nobody in Washington has mangled founders' intentions more than Adam Schiff. When they envisioned this process, part of the reason that I've always so loved the story of our founding is the way the founders envisioned the worst people being in politics. Yet, they couldn't envision this. You have these people who have taken one of the most powerful tool the legislative branch has, impeachment, and they've turned it into a political cudgel, which is not at all what they, the founders, intended. And so when you hear Adam Schiff and Democrats use all these squirrely words like quid pro quo, bribery, all these things, it's all because they can't specify exactly where Donald Trump broke any law or did anything particularly wrong. And they have to move away from quid pro quo because there was no quid, and there was no quo. Ukraine got its money and there was no investigation. So when there is no quid or pro, you can't keep saying quid pro quo. Even though I don't even know what that means, really. I don't know what language quid pro quo is.
DOOCY: It's Latin, OK?
HURT: Is it Latin? So, when--
DOOCY: It's Latin to everybody. People don't understand that, and that's why -- and you know this, Charlie, today is the start of a TV show.