On Thursday's The O'Reilly Factor on FNC, during a discussion of the terrorist attack in Nice, France, self-described liberal Republican FNC analyst Geraldo Rivera seemed to be in touch with his more right-leaning side as he criticized President Barack Obama for not dealing with ISIS and depriving them of a safe haven from which to attack the West.
Rivera declared that "I want to love the President," but then lamented that President Obama's Cairo speech in his first term was "misguided," as he "just didn't understand the Middle East." The FNC liberal further complained that "sometimes he's too cool for school."
After he emotionally recalled that his daughter had been near the suicide bombings in Paris, and advised viewers to seek out the graphic images of violence that were wrought on innocent people in Nice, Rivera then made the case that there was less terrorism in the West while the U.S. was fighting radical Muslims in Iraq:
I spent a lot of time reporting for you and Fox News from Iraq during the surge 2007, 2008, 2009. There is no doubt that when we were putting the military pressure, profound pressure crushing al-Qaeda which was ISIS, the grandfather of ISIS, in their bases, we were destroying them, we were wiping out their leaders. As we did that, as we applied that pressure, the more we pounded them, the less they attacked externally, the less resources they could devote to sending these killers in our midst.
The liberal FNC analyst then turned to complaining about President Obama's failure to deal with ISIS:
GERALDO RIVERA: There is an absolute incumbent priority that I cannot for the life of me understand why he has not yet done it-
BILL O'REILLY: "He" being President Obama.
RIVERA: -on the President of the United States to wipe out the caliphate that allows them not -- when they might be plotting in a rented flat in Paris, fearful that the landlord would rat them out. Instead, they are in Raqqa or they are in Mosul. They are surrounded by their money. They are surrounded by their internet and their resources. They are plotting these attacks because we allow them this geographic territory...
After agreeing with host Bill O'Reilly that Congress should declare war on ISIS and that NATO should be called upon to wage war against the radical Islamic entity, Rivera also declared that Russia should be made part of the coalition.
O'Reilly then described Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's political situation:
O'REILLY: Hillary Clinton then finds herself in a very interesting position, all right, because she's far more hawkish than Barack Obama, wouldn't you agree?
RIVERA: Definitely. I would absolutely agree with you.
O'REILLY: All right, so she either has to separate from the President and say, you know what, enough is enough, we got to get NATO involved, we got to get a declaration of war or run on what Barack Obama has done.
Rivera than returned to fretting over President Obama's handling of the Middle East:
You know, I want to love the President. I just think that sometimes he's too cool for school. I think this whole misguided starting at the Cairo speech. He just didn't understand the Mideast. He doesn't understand what it takes to defeat the enemy.
After O'Reilly declared that the ISIS jihadists could be defeated in a week, Rivera added:
I agree with you, and I don't know why -- I can't for the life of me understand -- maybe he just didn't want to admit that he was wrong not to see them as the profound, existential threat.
Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Thursday, July 14, The O'Reilly Factor on FNC:
GERALDO RIVERA: But we are clearly at war. I spent a lot of time reporting of you and Fox News from Iraq during the surge 2007, 2008, 2009. There is no doubt that when we were putting the military pressure, profound pressure crushing al-Qaeda which was ISIS, the grandfather of ISIS, in their bases, we were destroying them, we were wiping out their leaders. As we did that, as we applied that pressure, the more we pounded them, the less they attacked externally, the less resources they could devote to sending these killers in our midst. There is an absolute incumbent priority that I cannot for the life of me understand why he has not yet done it-
BILL O'REILLY: "He" being President Obama.
RIVERA: -on the President of the United States to wipe out the caliphate that allows them not -- when they might be plotting in a rented flat in Paris, fearful that the landlord would rat them out. Instead, they are in Raqqa or they are in Mosul. They are surrounded by their money. They are surrounded by their internet and their resources. They are plotting these attacks because we allow them this geographic territory that is -- it mostly reminds me of FARC in Colombia, the terrorist group that had a geographic territory in the heart of Colombia from which for a half of a century, they wreaked havoc on Latin America.
Now, we have this caliphate. It gives hope and sustenance to these murderers. It helps convert foot soldiers to their cause. It allows them to do their plotting. It allows them to launch these horrific attacks. And who is next? Who is next? Who's next going to be watching fireworks and get killed?
O'REILLY: We're going to get hit again. But if you understand that, and I understand that, and Leon Panetta understands it, and all the Department of Defense Secretaries under President Obama say the same thing, we told the President that he has to be more aggressive in wiping out ISIS. Every single one said it. Yet, the President of the United States has chosen not to do it. So my question tonight is: Should the American people now demand a declaration of war by Congress? Yes or no?
RIVERA: I would -- I would -- I have asked for that, thinking legality, yes.
O'REILLY: All right. Should NATO now be confronted that you are going to go to war with us because you're in our alliance? An attack on one NATO member is an attack on all, by Article Five. France just got attacked again. The Paris attack, Hollande wanted NATO in. And guess who stopped it? Guess who stopped it? President Barack Obama stopped it.
RIVERA: Let me see you and raise you. Not only NATO but I think Russia must also be engaged. Those talks now that are filled with suspicion and what's really the agenda here or there. Putin must be engaged. It must be the civilized world against ISIS. We must wipe out this cancerous terrorist network of extremist Islam. We must wipe them out in their rats' nest, and we must use all the forces we possibly can.
O'REILLY: Okay, now, Donald Trump, you just heard him, is going to run on that, right? I don't know how vehement he's going to be. I don' t know. I mean, his reacting to my questions. "Yes, I would get NATO involved. Yes, I would want a declaration of war." He hasn't been out front in calling for that, but he says he wants it. Hillary Clinton then finds herself in a very interesting position, all right, because she's far more hawkish than Barack Obama, wouldn't you agree?
RIVERA: Definitely. I would absolutely agree with you.
O'REILLY: All right, so she either has to separate from the President and say, you know what, enough is enough, we got to get NATO involved, we got to get a declaration of war or run on what Barack Obama has done.
RIVERA: You know, I want to love the President. I just think that sometimes he's too cool for school. I think this whole misguided starting at the Cairo speech. He just didn't understand the Mideast. He doesn't understand what it takes to defeat the enemy.
O'REILLY: All right. Now people are dying all over the world, people are dying all over the world because 30,000 jihadists have not been wiped off the planet when that could have happened in a week.
RIVERA: I agree with you, and I don't know why -- I can't for the life of me understand -- maybe he just didn't want to admit that he was wrong not to see them as the profound, existential threat.
O'REILLY: I don't want to speculate about it, but I think that this attack in France now, I think critical mass has been reached. I still don't think he's going to do anything. But when we get hit again -- and I use the word "when" -- we will, all right? -- then, that will be the time.
