Fox News The O'Reilly Factor - Transcript
Fox News Network
SHOW: THE O'REILLY FACTOR (20:37)
August 24, 2004 Tuesday
HEADLINE: Personal Story
GUESTS: Jerrold Nadler
BYLINE: Bill O'Reilly
BODY:
O'REILLY: Thanks for staying with us. I'm Bill O'Reilly. In the PERSONAL STORY segment tonight, the FBI versus the anarchists. You may remember scenes like we'll show you in Seattle, and also in Italy, where people who want to destroy the establishment-it really doesn't matter what establishment, any establishment-ran wild, destroying property and hurting people.
Now, these self-described anarchists will be showing up next week here in New York City for the Republican Convention. In preparation for that, the FBI has interviewed some people the government believe may become violent. But some congresspeople have objected to those interviews, and here is one of them, Jerrold Nadler, a Democrat from New York.
So you know my take on this. I'd let these people demonstrate in Staten Island. That's where they'd be if I were in charge, because I don't trust them. I understand dissent, I understand the need for protest, but I do believe that these people are going to cause trouble and hurt other people.
REP. JERROLD NADLER, (D), NEW YORK: It depends which people you're talking about. There are clearly some people who you're right about. The problem that we have here, and the letter that we wrote simply asked the inspector general of the Justice Department to investigate whether the FBI was doing what it should do, which is to say, investigating groups and individuals where they have some reason to believe that they're planning violence or planning any crime...
O'REILLY: Yeah.
NADLER: ... or whether the FBI is simply engaging in political intimidation by talking to people about whom, and about whose groups, they have no such information.
O'REILLY: Why wouldn't you give the FBI the benefit of the doubt?
NADLER: Well, it's not a question of giving them the benefit of the doubt.
O'REILLY: Why? It hasn't been proven that they intimidated anybody.
NADLER: Nothing has been proven. There are media accounts that lead us to believe that this is what's happening. We didn't accuse anybody of anything. We asked the IG to look into it and to find out.
O'REILLY: All right, well, look, I don't care. I think it's a waste of time. But you cede that some people coming here to New York City, and some people who live here in the city, are going to try to cause trouble next week.
NADLER: I assume that, certainly.
O'REILLY: OK, yeah, we all do. We all assume that they will do...
NADLER: I'm very concerned with that, yeah.
O'REILLY: So in order for the authorities to be proactive, I would want the FBI to pinpoint these individuals...
NADLER: Absolutely.
O'REILLY: ... and go and see them, and say, "We're keeping our eye on you, and if you do anything, it's not going to go down well." And I don't consider that intimidation if there's a reason, a basis to do it.
NADLER: Well, as I said, if there's a reason and a basis to do it, if you have information that certain individuals or a given group is planning a crime-and we're talking about crimes, violence-then yes, then you have every right to do that.
O'REILLY: But you have to have information in order to go to that person's home.
NADLER: But the allegation that we've had, the allegations that were printed in the press, I should say, is that the FBI is sending people to the homes of people who are not...
O'REILLY: Like my mom in Levittown...
NADLER: No, no, no...
(CROSSTALK)
O'REILLY: She hasn't had a visit yet, Congressman.
NADLER: No, but college students who are planning to go for a protest, for a peaceful protest, and who are members of groups who are planning peaceful protests.
O'REILLY: Yeah, all right, but I'm giving the authorities-and I always do this, maybe I'm a bad American-but I always give the authorities the benefit of the doubt until they show they don't deserve that.
NADLER: But that's fair enough.
O'REILLY: I think so.
NADLER: And all we asked was for the inspector general of the Justice Department to look into this and see what is the case.
O'REILLY: All right, what's a fair compromise here? These people are coming to New York...
NADLER: The fair compromise is exactly what you said, which is that - - and exactly what the law says-which is that the FBI has every right and duty to investigate people about whom it has real information that they may be committing or planning to commit a crime, or certainly violence.
O'REILLY: How sympathetic are you to the right to protest next week? See, this is the line. The mayor of New York City has said, "Look, these people can protest, but they're going to protest where we tell them to."
NADLER: I think that's a separate problem from what we're talking about.
O'REILLY: No, but I mean, I want you-I'm going to appoint you the mayor of New York City. Mayor Nadler... you like that, don't you?
NADLER: I'm not so sure.
O'REILLY: All right, Mayor Nadler, now, I don't want them in Central Park, because they rip up the turf and that's no...
NADLER: I would disagree with that. I think the mayor's making a bad mistake.
O'REILLY: So you'd let them go into Central Park.
NADLER: Yeah, I would, because first of all, Central park historically has been the commons in New York. It's the place where we always have large concerts...
O'REILLY: Yeah, concerts... different than guys wanting to hurt people.
NADLER: We're not talking about people who are going to hurt people...
O'REILLY: We're talking about the potential of that.
NADLER: No.
O'REILLY: No?
NADLER: No. That is not the problem that the mayor has articulated as why they're denying the park.
O'REILLY: But do you know what the situation is?
NADLER: That is not what the problem is. You can flood the place with police. And you cannot, by the way, if someone has legitimate protests or legitimate free speech-whether it's protest or approval, it doesn't matter-and wants to bring a quarter of a million people to Central Park, if you allow a quarter of a million people for a rock concert, you must allow...
O'REILLY: No, you have to have a license for all of that...
NADLER: Yes, but you cannot...
O'REILLY: ... a bond.
NADLER: Yes, but you cannot discriminate based on...
O'REILLY: Violence.
NADLER: No.
O'REILLY: We don't want to discriminate against violent people, do we?
NADLER: Based on violence, you certainly can. But the fact that people say we want to protest the convention, the war, whatever, does not give you...
O'REILLY: Look, they're up at Central Park. That's pretty far away from Madison Square Garden. Nobody down there is going to hear them. This is just a big dog and pony show.
NADLER: No, it's not a big dog and pony show.
O'REILLY: Sure it is. Nobody at the Republican Convention is going to hear anybody in Central Park.
NADLER: Well, in that sense, any demonstration is, unless it's right at the Garden. In that sense, yes, any demonstration not right at the Garden is a dog and pony show. But the fact is, that's what they want. The purpose of a protest is to get media coverage for your point of view.
O'REILLY: And tear up the turf so that we all have to pay more money here, including your constituents.
NADLER: Yes.
O'REILLY: You should be looking out for them.
NADLER: But free speech, number one, is worth money.
O'REILLY: Is it?
NADLER: Yes.
O'REILLY: Twenty million?
NADLER: If necessary.
O'REILLY: Not me. I'm putting them on Staten Island. They can have free speech over there.
NADLER: Number two...
O'REILLY: Still in New York.
NADLER: Number two, constitutionally, if you allow a quarter of a million people for a rock concert, you have to allow a quarter-they do the same damage to the rock concert...
O'REILLY: The rock concert isn't the same, because the rock...
NADLER: From the grass' point of view, it's the same.
O'REILLY: The rock promoters, and I know this to be true, put up a bond.
NADLER: Then you can require a bond.
O'REILLY: But they don't have the money, because anarchists reject all money.
NADLER: But we're not talking about the anarchists.
O'REILLY: They don't have any money.
NADLER: We're not talking about the anarchists.
O'REILLY: Yes, that's who's...
NADLER: No. No, the groups that are applying-there are several different groups. The group that says they'll bring a quarter of a million people...
O'REILLY: Right.
NADLER: ... is not predominately anarchist.
O'REILLY: Well, they don't have the money, Mr. Nadler.
NADLER: And if that's the case, then they can't get it.
O'REILLY: That's right, and that's the case.
NADLER: But they're being refused it even though they claim that they can come up with a bond.
O'REILLY: They can't...
(CROSSTALK)
NADLER: You have to put them to the proof. Put them to the proof.
O'REILLY: Last question. If they get out of line, I hope the police really prosecute them, not like San Francisco, where they let them all go. Here, I want to see these people go to jail. I want them in Rikers.
NADLER: It depends what people do.
O'REILLY: Well, if they break windows and stuff like that...
NADLER: Oh, yes, if they break windows and things like that, yes. I've got to tell you something, though. More than 30 years ago, I was the chairman of something called the Westside Peace Committee. And our job, our job... we formed... we had everything from the extreme left to the Young Republicans in it.
And our job was (UNINTELLIGIBLE)... whenever the national anti-Vietnam war people called a protest, we should be prepared to have a local operation.
O'REILLY: Right.
NADLER: And we would have a meeting, and we had all kinds of people, and there was always one guy there who said, "What do you mean a torchlight parade, or a candlelight parade? Trash them, break the windows..."
O'REILLY: And you beat the living daylights out of him, didn't you?
NADLER: No, we just assumed that that was the FBI provocateur.
O'REILLY: Oh, you see...
NADLER: And we ignored.
O'REILLY: ... you see, you assumed it was the FBI.
NADLER: And we ignored him. And we ignored him.
O'REILLY: All right, Congressman. We appreciate you coming in...
NADLER: And that was the point.
O'REILLY: Let's just hope nothing bad happens, all right. It's not fair to the folks who live there. Next up, Amber Frey grilled by Mark Geragos. We'll have analysis of that in a moment.