Fox's Geraldo Rivera: Trump administration should obstruct House impeachment inquiry, use subpoenas to “blow their nose”
Published
Citation
From the October 10 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends
GERALDO RIVERA (FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT-AT-LARGE): Regardless of what Biden's motive is, he's joining a process that is fundamentally flawed. Where's the constitutional due process. You know, love him or loathe him, President Trump deserves, you know, his rights. And his rights dictate, as they did for Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, one in 1974, the other in 1998, there has to be a vote on whether or not Congress has an impeachment inquiry. There's been no vote. You have a half a dozen committee chairman running off, throwing subpoenas if it was confetti in a Mardi Gras parade, you know. And there's no due process for the president, Republicans can't ask questions, they can't subpoena their own witnesses. So I urge the president to resist. This is a kangaroo court, Adam Schiff is Captain Kangaroo, and, you know, Nancy Pelosi is the bandleader.
STEVE DOOCY (CO-HOST): Yeah but, Geraldo, it's working for Democrats. You look, you know, at public sentiment, and it seems to be turning. More people are saying, you know, we probably should have some sort of an inquiry into this. And that number about the number of people who felt that he should be removed -- that could only be explained that the Democrats are getting their message out while the Republicans have not been that successful at it.
RIVERA: Well the Democrats have an adoring media, the drumbeat has been incessant. The president hasn't adequately confronted -- I think the addition of Trey Gowdy will be helpful to have some -- a strong, experienced, former prosecutor, former congressperson, you know, taking some of the, some of the public heat from the president. And keep steering it back to the fundamental, the fundamental question. You cannot allow the Democrats to proceed with any kind of righteousness unless they abide by constitutional due process. My God, it is simple. Unless this Congress votes, unless the House votes -- they'll probably win the vote if they have the vote, but unless they do vote, then the Republicans have no rights, they subpoena, can subpoena no one. Where is the fairness in this? At some point the American people will see through the propaganda and demand, as the president does, whether they love him or loathe him -- as I said, it doesn't matter pro-Trump, anti-Trump, that doesn't matter. What matters is, he's the president of the United States, and the historic precedent in the 20 and 21st Century, the person accused in this most profound, distressing experience for any president deserves to have fairness. Just as any defendant in any court. I know it's a political process, but even politics has to depend in some measure on precedent. Precedent here is clear. Nixon, they voted in '74. Clinton, they voted in '98. Why is Nancy Pelosi not allowing this Congress to vote? If I were the president, I would resist every subpoena, I would deny them every single witness, I would fight them tooth and nail, and let the courts decide whether or not the House can proceed without constitutional due process.
...
RIVERA: Strategically, I say the president has to fight them tooth and nail. He can't sanctify this, or confirm this process. This has to be something that, you know, this is, this is a bar fight. This is tooth and nail. There's nothing nice about this. Every time Nadler or Schiff or any of them issues a subpoena, the White House should use it to blow their nose.