issues being used in ways that can effect our infrastructure, effect the stability of our financial systems and effect the integrity of our institutions like our election process. i just received a couple weeks back -- it wasn't widely reported on, a report from our cyber security commission that outlines a whole range of strategies to do a better job on this. but it's difficult because it's not all housed. the target of cyber attacks is not one entity but widely disbursed and a lot of it is private like the dnc. it's not a branch of government. we can't tell people what to do. what we can do is inform them, get best practices.

what we can also do is to on a bilateral basis warn other countries against these kinds of attacks. and we have done that in the past. so just as i told russia to stop it and indicated there will be consequences when they do it, the chinese have in the past engaged in cyber attacks directed at our companies to steal trade secrets and proprietary technology. i have had the same conversation with president shi and what we have seen is some evidence that they have reduced but not completely eliminated these activities partly because they can use cutouts -- one of the problems with internet and cyber issues is that there is not always a return address. by the time you catch up to it

attributing what happened to a particular government can be difficult, not always provable in court even though our intelligence communities can make an assessment. what we have also tried to do is to start creating some international norms about this to prevent some sort of cyber arms race because we obviously have offensive capabilities as well as defensive capabilities. and my approach is not a situation in which everybody is worse off because folks are constantly attacking each other back and forth, but putting guard rails around behavior of nation states including adversaries so that they understand that whatever they do to us we can potentially do to them. we do have some special challenges because often times our economy is more digitalized, more vulnerable partly because

we are a wealthier nation and more wired than some of these countries and we have a more open society and engage in less control and censorship over what happens over the internet which is also part of what makes us special. last point -- the reason i'm going on here is because i know you guys have a lot of questions about this and i haven't addressed all of you directly about it. with respect to response, my principle goal leading up to the election was making sure that the election itself went off without a hitch, that it was not tarnished, and that it did not feed any sense in the public that somehow tampering had taken place with the actual process of voting. and we accomplished that.

that does not mean that we are not going to respond. it simply meant that we had a set of priorities leading up to the election that were of the utmost importance. our goal continues to be to send a clear message to russia or others not to do this to us because we can do stuff to you. but it is also important for us to do it in a thoughtful, methodical way. some of it we do publically. some of it we will do in a way that they know but not everybody will. and i know that there have been folks out there who suggest somehow that if we went out there and made big announcements and thumped our chests about a bunch of stuff that somehow that would potentially spook the russians, but keep in mind that we already have enormous numbers

of sanctions against the russians. the relationship between us and russia has deteriorated sadly significantly over the last several years. so how we approach an appropriate response that increases cost for them for behavior like this in the future but does not create problems for us is something that is worth taking the time to think through and figure out. that's exactly what we have done. so at a point in time where we have taken certain actions that we can divulg publically we will do so. there are times where the message will be directly received by the russians and not publicized. i should point out, by the way, part of why the russians have been effective on this is because they don't go around announcing what they are doing.

it's not like putin is going around the world publically saying look what we did. he denies it. the idea that somehow public shaming is going to be effective i think doesn't read the thought process in russia very well. >> did clinton lose because of the hacking? >> i'm going to let all the political pundits in this town have a long discussion about what happened in the election. that is a fascinating election. i'm sure there are going to be a lot of books written about it. i have said what i think is important for the democratic party going forward rather than try to parse every aspect of the election. and i have said before i couldn't be prouder of secretary

clinton, her outstanding service. i think he has worked tirelessly on behalf of the american people and i don't think she was treated fairly in the election. i think the coverage of her and the issues was troubling. but having said that, what i have been most focussed on appropriate for the fact that i'm not going to be a politician in about, what is it, 32 days? 31? 34? what i said is that i can maybe give counsel and advice to the democratic party. the thing we have to snend most time on because it is the thing we have the most control over is how do we make sure that we are showing up in places where i think democratic policies are needed, where they are helping, where they are making a

difference, but where people feel as though they are not being heard and where democrats are characterized as coastal liberal latte sipping politically correct, out of touch folks we have to be in those communities. and i have seen that when we are in those communities it makes a difference. that is how i became president. i became a u.s. senator not just because i had a strong base in chicago, but because i was driving around down state illinois and going to fish fries and sitting in vfw halls and talking to farmers and i didn't win everyone of their votes, but they got a sense of what i was talking about, what i cared about, that i was for working people, that i was for the

middle class, that the reason i was interested in strengthening unions and raising the minimum wage and rebuilding our infrastructure and making sure that parents had decent child care and family leave was because my own family's history wasn't that different from theirs even if i looked a little bit different. same thing in iowa. the question is how do we rebuild that party as a whole so that there is not a county in any state, i don't care how red, where we don't have a presence and we are not making the argument. because i think we have the better argument. that requires a lot of work. it's been something that i have been able to do successfully in my own campaigns. it is not something i have been able to transfer to candidates

in mid terms and sort of build a sustaining organization around. that is something that i would have liked to have done more of, but it is kind of hard to do when you are also dealing with a bunch of issues here in the white house. and that doesn't mean, though, that it can't be done. i think there are going to be a lot of talented folks out there, a lot of progressives who share my values who are going to be leading the charge in the years to come. >> so this week we heard hillary clinton talk about how she thinks that the fbi director's most recent announcement made a difference in the outcome of the election. we also just heard in an oped her campaign chairman talk about something being deeply broken within the fbi. he talked about thinking that the investigation early on was lackadaisical.

what do you think about those comments? do you think there is any truth to them? do you think there is a danger there that there is calling into question the integrity of institutions in a similar way that donald trump's team has done? and second part to that is that donald trump's team repeatedly -- i guess giving the indication that the investigation of the russian hack as well as the retaliation might not be such a priority once he is in office. so what do you think the risk is there? are you going to talk to him directly about some of those comments he made? >> well, on the latter point as i said before the transition from election season to governance season is not always smooth. it's bumpy. there are still feelings that are raw out there.

there are people who are still thinking about how things unfolded. and i get all of that. but when donald trump takes the oekt of office and is sworn in as 45th president of the united states he has a different set of responsibilities and considerations. i have said this before. i think there is a sobering process when you walk into the oval office. and i haven't shared previously private conversations i have had with the president-elect. i will say they have been cordial and in some cases have involved me making some pretty specific suggestions about how to ensure that regardless of our obvious deep disagreements about policy, maybe i can transmit some thoughts about maintaining

the effectiveness, integrity, cohesion of the office of various democratic institutions. and he has listened. i can't say that he will end up implementing, but the conversations themselves have been cordial as opposed to defensive in any way. and i will always make myself available to him just as previous presidents have made themselves available to me as issues come up. with respect to the fbi i will tell you i have had a chance to know a lot of fbi agents. i know director comy. they take their job seriously. they work really hard. they help keep us safe and save a lot of lives.

and it is always a challenge for law enforcement when there is an intersection between the work that they are doing and the political system. it's one of the difficulties of democracy generally. we have a system where we want our law enforcement investigators and our prosecutors to be free from politics, to be independent, to play it straight but sometimes that involves investigations that touch on politics and particularly in this hyperpartisan environment that we have been in everything is suspect. everything you do one way or the other. one thing i have done is to be

pretty scruppial s about not weighing into investigation decisions or prosecution decisions or decisions not to prosecute. i have tried to be really strict in my own behavior about preserving the independence of law enforcement free from my own judgments and political assessments in some cases. and i don't know why i would stop now. thank you, mr. president. on aleppo, your views of what happens, responsibility in russian government, the assad regime, but do you as president of the united states, leader of

the free world feel any personal moral responsibility now at the end of your presidency for the carnage that we are all watching in aleppo which i'm sure disturbs you? secondly, also on aleppo, you make clear practical disagreements and president-elect trump has throughout his campaign and said again last night that he wants to create safe zones in syria. do you feel like in this transition you need to help him toward implementing that or is that not something you should be doing? >> mike, i always feel responsible. i felt responsible when kids were being shot by snipers. i felt responsible when millions of people had been displaced.

i feel responsible for murder and slaughter that has taken place in south sedan that is not being reported on partly because there is not as much social media being generated from there. there are places around the world where horrible things are happening and because of my office, because i'm president of the united states i feel responsible. i ask myself every single day is there something i could do that would save lives and make a difference and spare some child who doesn't deserve to suffer? so that's a starting point. there is not a moment during the course of this presidency where i haven't felt some responsibility. that is true, by the way, for our own country. when i came into office and people were losing their jobs

and losing their homes and pensions i felt responsible. and i would go home at night and i would ask myself was there something better that i could do or smarter that i could be that would make a difference in their lives that would relieve their suffering and relieve their hardship? so with respect to syria, what i have consistently done is taken the best course that i can to try to end the civil war while having also to take into account the long-term national security interests of the united states. and throughout this process based on hours of meetings, if you tallied it up, days or weeks

of meetings where we went through every option in painful detail with maps and we had our military and we had our aid agencies and we had our diplomatic teams. sometimes we would bring in outsiders who were critics. whenever we went through it the challenge was that short of putting large numbers of u.s. troops on the ground uninvited without any international law mandate, without -- at a time when we still had troops in afghanistan and we still had troops in iraq and we had just gone through over a decade of war and spent trillions of

dollars and when the opposition on the ground was not cohesive enough to necessarily govern a country and you had a military superpower in russia prepared to do whatever it took to keep its clients involved and you had a regional military power in iran that saw their own vital strategic interests at stake and were willing to send in as many of their people or proxys to support the regime. in that circumstance unless we were all in and willing to take overseeria we were going to have problems and that everything else was tempting because we wanted to do something and it sounded like the right thing to do but it was going to be impossible to do this on the

cheap. and in that circumstance i have to make a decision as president of the united states as to what is best -- i'm sorry, what is going on? somebody is not feeling good? why don't we have -- we got -- we can get our doctors back there to help out. somebody want to go to my doctor's office and just have them -- >> all right. where was i? so we couldn't do it on the cheap. now, it may be -- can somebody help out, please and get doctor in here?

is somebody grabbing our doctor? >> thank you, mr. president. >> of course. in the meantime, just give her a little room. doctor will be here in a second.

you guys know where the doctor's office is? just go through the palm doors. it's right next to the map room. there he is. okay. doctor is in the house. so and i don't mean that -- i mean that with all sincerity. i understand the impulse to want to do something, but ultimately what i have had to do is think about what can we sustain? what is realistic? my first priority has to be what is the right thing to do for

america. and it has been our view that the best thing to do has been to provide some support to the moderate opposition so that they could sustain themselves and that you wouldn't see anti-assad regime sentiments just pouring into al qaeda or isil, that we engaged our international partners in order to put pressure on all the parties involved and to try to resolve this through diplomatic and political means. i cannot claim that we have been successful. and so that's something that as is true with a lot of issues and problems around the world, i

have to go to bed with every night. but i continue to believe that it was the right approach given what realistically we could get done. absent of decision, as i said, to go into much more significant way. and that i think would not have been sustainable or good for the american people because we had a whole host of other obligations that we also had to meet, wars we had already started and were not yet finished. with respect to the issue of safe zones, it is a continued problem, a continued challenge with safe zones if you are setting up the zones on syrian territory then that requires some force that is willing to

maintain that territory in the absence of consent from the syrian government and now the russians or the iranians. so it may be that with aleppo's tragic situation unfolding that in the short term if we can get more of the tens of thousands who are still trapped there out that so long as the world's eyes are on them and they are feeling pressure, the regime and russia concludes that they are willing to find some arrangement perhaps in coordination with turkey whereby those people can be safe. even that will probably be temporary but at least it solves a short term issue that will

arise. unfortunately, we are not even there yet because right now we have russians and assad claiming that basically all the innocent civilians who were trapped in aleppo are out when international organizations, humanitarian organizations who know better and who are on the ground have said there are tens of thousands who are trapped and prepared to leave under pretty much any conditions. right now our biggest priority is to continue to put pressure wherever we can to try to get them out. >> do you take responsibility not withstanding that direction or help president-elect trump? >> i will help president-elect trump with any advice, counsel information that we can provide so that he once he is sworn in

can make a decision. between now and then these are decisions that i have to make based on the consultations i have with our military and the people who have been working this every single day. peter alexander. >> mr. president, thank you very much. can you given all the intelligence we have heard assure the public that this was once and for all a free and fair election? and on russia do you feel obligation now as they have been insisting that this isn't the case to show the proof as it were, to declassify some of the intelligence and evidence that exists? and as it relates to donald trump on this topic are you concerned about his relationship with vladimir putin especially given some of the recent cabinet picks including his selection for secretary of state, rex tillerson who toasted putin with champagne over oil deals together? thank you. >> i may be getting older

because these multi part questions i start losing track. i can assure the public that there was not the kind of tampering with the voting process that was of concern and will continue to be of concern going forward, that the votes that were cast were counted. they were counted appropriately. we have not seen evidence of machines being tampered with. so that assurance i can provide. that doesn't mean that we find every single potential probe of every single voting machine all across the country, but we paid a lot of attention to it. we worked with state officials,

et cetera. and we feel confident that that didn't occur and that the votes were cast and they were counted. and so that is on that point. what was the second one? >> about the declassification? >> look, we will provide evidence that we can safely provide. that does not compromise sources and methods. but, i'll be honest with you, when you are talking about cyber security a lot of it is classified and we are not going to provide it because the way we catch folks is by knowing certain things about them that they may not want us to know. if we are going to monitor the stuff effectively going forward

we don't want them to know that we know. so this is one of those situations where unless the american people genuinely think that the professionals in the cia, the fbi our entire intelligence infrastructure, many of whom, by the way, served in previous administrations and who are republicans are less trustworthy than the russians then people should pay attention to what our intelligence agency is saying. this is part of what i meant when i said that we've got to think about what is happening to

our political culture here. the russians can't change us or significantly weaken us. they are a smaller country. they are a weaker country. their economy doesn't produce anything that anybody wants to buy except oil and gas and arms. they don't innovate. but they can impact us if we lose track of who we are. they can impact us if we abandon our values. mr. putin can weaken us just like he is trying to weaken europe if we start buying into notions that it is okay to intimidate the press or lock up dissidents or discriminate

against people because of their faith or what they look like. and what i worry about more than anything is the degree to which because of the fierceness of the partisan battle you start to see certain folks in the republican party and republican voters suddenly finding a government and individuals who stand contrary to everything that we stand for as being okay because that's how much we dislike democrats. i mean, think about it. some of the people who historically have been very critical of me for engaging with russians and having

conversations with them also endorse the president-elect even as he was saying that we should stop sanctioning russia and being tough on them and work together with them against our common enemies who was very complimentary of mr. putin personally. you know, that wasn't news. the president-elect during the campaign said so. and some folks who had made a career out of being anti-russian didn't say anything about it. and then after the election suddenly they are asking why didn't you tell us that maybe the russians were trying to help our candidate? come on.

there was a survey some of you saw where are -- this is just one poll, but pretty credible source, 37% of republican voters approve of putin. over a third of republican voters approve of vladimir putin, the former head of the kgb. ronald reagan would roll over in his grave. and how did that happen? it happened in part because for too long everything that happens in this town, everything that is said is seen through the lens of does this help or hurt us relative to democrats or relative to president obama.

and unless that changes we are going to continue to be vulnerable to foreign influence because we lost track of what it is that we are about and what we stand for. with respect to the president-elect's appointments, it is his prerogative as i have always said for him to appoint who he thinks can best carry out his foreign policy or his domestic policy. it is up to the senate to advise and consent. there will be plenty of time for members of the senate to go through the record of all his appointees and determine whether or not they are appropriate for the job. >> mr. president, i want to talk about vladimir putin again just to be clear, do you believe

vladimir putin himself authorized the hack and do you believe he authorized that to help donald trump? and on the intelligence, one of the things donald trump cites is saddam hussein and weapons of mass destruction and they were never found. can you say unequivocally that this was not china, that this was not a 400 pound guy sitting on his bed as donald trump says? and do these types of tweets and kinds of statements from donald trump emboldin the russians? >> when the report comes out before i leave office that will have drawn together all the threats. i don't want to step on their work ahead of time.

what i can tell you is that the intelligence i have seen gives me great confidence in their assessment that the russians carried out this hack. the hack of the dnc and the hack of john podesta. now, the -- again, i think this is exactly why i want the report out so that everybody can review it. and this has been briefed and the evidence in closed session has been provided on a bipartisan basis, not just to me. it has been provided to the leaders of the house and the senate and the chairman and ranking members of the relevant committees. and i think that what you have seen is some folks who have seen the evidence don't dispute. i think the basic assessment that the russians carried this out. i think what i want to make sure

of is that i give the intelligence community the chance to gather the information, but i make a larger point which is not much happens in russia without vladimir putin. this is a pretty hierarchal operation. last i checked there is not a lot of debate and democratic deliberation particularly when it comes to policies directed at the united states. we have said and i will confirm that this happened at the highest levels of the russian government. and i will let you make that determination as to whether there are high level russian officials who go off rogue and decide to tamper with the u.s.

election process without vladimir putin knowing about it. >> i wouldn't be wrong in saying the president thinks vladimir putin authorized -- >> i'm giving you what i'm going to give you. what was your second question. >> do the tweets and do the statements by donald trump embolden russia? >> as i have said before i think that the president-elect is still in transition mode from campaign to governance. i think he hasn't gotten his whole team together yet. he still has campaign spokespersons sort of filling in and appearing on cable shows. there is just a whole different attitude and vibe when you're not in power as when you are in power. so rather than me characterize the appropriateness or

inappropriateness of what he is doing at the moment i think what we have to see is how will the president-elect operate and how will his team operate when they have been fully briefed on all of these issues and have their hands on all levers of government and have to start making decisions. one way i do believe that the president-elect can approach this that would be unifying is to say that we welcome a bipartisan, independent process that gives the american people an assurance not only that votes are counted properly, that the elections are fair and free, but that we have learned lessons

about how internet propaganda from foreign countries can be released in the political bloodstream and that we have strategies to deal with it for the future. the more this can be nonpartisan, the better served the american people are going to be which is why i made the point earlier. i will keep on repeating this point. our vulnerableability through russia or other foreign power is directly related to how divided, partisan, dysfunctional our political process is. that's the thing that makes us vulnerable. if fake news that is being

released by some foreign government is almost identical to reports that are being issued through partisan news venues then it's not surprising that that foreign propaganda will have a greater effect because it doesn't seem that far fetched compared to some of the other stuff that folks are hearing from domestic propagandists. to the extent that our political dialogue is such where everything is under suspicion, everybody is corrupt and everybody is doing things for partisan reasons and all of our institutions are full of actors,

if that is the story line that is being put out there by whatever party is out of power, then when a foreign government introduces that same argument with facts that are made up voters who have been listening to that stuff for years who have been getting that stuff every day for talk radio or other venues, they are going to believe it. so if we want to really reduce foreign influence on our elections then we better think about how to make sure that our political process, our political

dialogue is stronger than it has been. mark lambert. >> thank you, mr. president. >> i'm going to move from russia to china for a moment. your successor declared subsequently that he wasn't sure why the united states needed to be bound by the one-china policy. he suggested it could be used perhaps to get better terms on a trade deal or cooperation from north korea. there is already evidence that tensions between the two sides have increased and just today the chinese have seized an under water grown in the south china sea. do you agree as some do that our china policy can use a fesh set of eyes and what is the big deal with having a phone call with president of taiwan or do you believe these are setting us on

a collision course? >> great question. i'm somewhere in between. i think all of our foreign policy should be subject to fresh eyes. i think one of the -- i have said this before. i am very proud of the work i have done. i think i am a better president now than when i started. but if you are here for eight years in the bubble you start seeing things a certain way and you benefit from the democracy benefits, america benefits from some new perspectives. and i think it should be not just the prerogative but the obligation of a new president to examine everything that has been done and see what makes sense and what doesn't. that is what i did when i came in. i'm assuming any new president will take the same exercises. and given the importance of the

relationship between the united states and china, given how much is at stake in terms of the world economy, national security, our presence in the asia pacific, china's increasing role in international affairs, there is probably no bilateral relationship that carries more significance and where there is also the potential if that relationship breaks down or goes into full conflict mode that everybody is worse off. i think it is fine for them to take a look at it. what i have advised the president-elect is that across the board on foreign policy. we want to make sure that we are doing it in a systematic

deliberate intentional way. and since there is only one president at a time, my advice to him has been that before he starts having a lot of interactions other than usual courtesy calls that he should want to have his full team in place, that he should want his team to be fully briefed on what has gone on in the past and where the potential pit falls may be, where the opportunities are, what we have learned from eight years of experience so that as he has been maybe taking foreign policy in a new direction he has all the information to make good decisions and by the way all government is moving at the same time and singing from the same

hymnal. and with respect to china and let's just take the example of taiwan, there has been a long standing agreement. the united states and to some degree t degree -- mainland china does. china views taiwan as part of china but recognizes that it has to approach taiwan as an entity that has its own ways of doing things. the taiwanese have agreed that

as long as they are able to continue to function with some degree of autonomy that they won't charge forward and declare independence. that status quo although not completely satisfactory to any of the parties involved has kept the peace and allowed the taiwanese to be a pretty successful economy and a people who have a high degree of self-determination. but understand for china the issue of taiwan is as important as anything on their docket. the idea of one-china is at the

heart of their conception as a nation. and so if you are going to up end this understanding you have to have thought through what the consequences are because the chinese will not treat that the way they will treat some other issues. they won't treat it the way they treat issues around the south china sea where we have had a lot of tensions. this goes to the core of how they see themselves. and their reaction on this issue could end up being very significant. that doesn't mean that you have to adhere to everything that has been done in the past. it does mean you have to think it through and have planned for potential reactions that they may engage in. all right. >> thank you, mr. president.

two questions. >> leaves us in a really good spot if we make good decisions. >> what do you think when they meet on monday and thinking of changing their votes? do you think they should be given an intelligence briefing about russian activity or bear in mind everything you said? should votes be bound? and do you think that electoral college reform -- >> sounded like two but that was all one. i love how these are. i have two questions. each one has four parts. >> on the democratic party, your labor secretary is running to be chair of the democratic national

committee. is the vision you see him putting forward what you think the party needs to be focussed on? and what do you say to complaints that say future of democratic party shouldn't be a continuation of some of your political approach? part of that is complaints that decisions that you have made as president have structurally weakened dnc and democratic party and they think that led to some losses in elections. do you regret those decisions? >> and say that tom perez has been i believe one of the best secretaries of labor in our history. he is tireless. he is wicked smart.

he has been able to work across the spectrum of, you know, labor, business, activists. he has produced. when you look at his body of work on behalf of working people, what he has pushed for in terms of making sure that workers get a fair deal, decent wages, better benefits, that their safety is protected on the job, he has been extraordinary. now, others who have declared are also my friends and are fine people, as well. and the great thing is i don't have a vote in this. so we'll let the process unfold. i don't think it is going to happen anytime soon. i described to you earlier what

i think needs to happen which is that the democratic party whether that is entirely through the dnc or through rebuilding of state parties or some other arrangement has to work at the grass roots level, has to be present in all 50 states, has to have a presence in counties, has to think about message and how are we speaking directly to voters. i will say this that i could not be prouder of the coalition that i put together in each of my campaigns because it was inclusive. and drew in people who normally weren't interested in politics

and didn't participate. but i would like to think i think i can show in those elections i always cast a broad net. i always said first and foremost we're americans, that we have a common creed, that there is more that we share than divides us and i want to talk to everybody and get a chance to get everybody's vote. i still believe what i said in 2004 which is this red state blue thing is a construct. it is a construct that has gotten more and more powerful for a whole lot of reasons from gerrymandering to big money to the way that the media is splintered and so people are just watching what reinforces their existing biases as opposed

to having less than different points of view. there are all kinds of reasons for it. but outside of the realm of electoral politics i still see people the way i saw them when i made that speech fu, full of contradictions, there are regional differences, but basically folks care about their families and having meaningful work. they care about making sure their kids have more opportunity than they did. they want to be safe. they want to feel like things are fair. and whoever leads the dnc and any candidate with the democratic brand going forward i want them to feel as if they can reach out and find that common

ground, speak to all of america. and that requires some organization. and you're right that -- i said this in my earlier remarks that what i was able to do during my campaigns i wasn't able to do during mid terms. it's not that we didn't put time and effort into it. i spent time and effort into it. but the coalition i put together didn't always turn out to be transferrable. and the challenge is that -- some of that just has to do with the fact that when you are the party in power and people are going through hard times like they were in 2010 they are going to punish to some degree the president's party regardless of what organizational work is done. some of it has to do with just some deep standing traditional challenges for democrats like

during elections the election is over and we do better with a younger electorate. we know those things are true. i didn't crack the code on that. and if other people have ideas about how to do that even better i'm all for it. so with respect to the lectorts i'm not going to weigh into that issue. again, it's the american people's job and now the lector's job to decide my successor. it's not my job to decide my successor. i have provided people with a lot of information about what happened during the course of the election. but more importantly the candidates themselves i think talked about their beliefs and

their vision for america. the president-elect i think has been very explicit about what he cares about and what he believes in. and so it is not in my hands now it is up to them. long term with respect to the electoral college, the electoral college is a vestige, a carry over from an earlier vision of how our federal government was going to work that put a lot of premium on states. used to be that the senate was not elected directly. it was through state legislatures and the same type of thing that gives wyoming two senators and with about half a million people and california with 33 million get the same

two. so there are some structures in our political system as envis n envisioned by the founders that sometimes are going to disadvantage democrats, but the truth of the matter is that if we have a strong message, if we are speaking to what the american people care about typically the popular vote and the electoral college vote will align. and i guess part of my overall message here as i leave for the holidays is that if we look for one explanation or one silver bullet or one easy fix for our

politics then we are probably going to be disappointed. there are just a lot of factors in what's happened not just over the last few months but over the last decade that has made both politics and governance more challenging. and i think everybody's raised legitimate questions and concerns. i do hope that we all just take some time, take a breath. this is certainly what i am going to advise democrats to just reflect a little bit more about how can we get to a place where people are focussed on working together based on at least some common set of facts? how can we have a conversation

about policy that doesn't deeminize each other? how can we channel what i think is the basic decency and goodness of the american people so it reflects itself in our politics as opposed to it being so polarized and so nasty that in some cases you have voters and elected officials who have more confidence and faith than a foreign adver saers than they have in their neighbors? and those go to some bigger iss issues. you know, how is it that we have some voters or some elected officials who think that michelle obama's healthy eating

initiative and school nutrition program is a greater threat to democracy than our government going after the press if they are issuing a story they don't like? right? that's an issue that i think we've got to wrestle with. and we will. the people have asked me how do you feel after the election and so forth. i say, look, this is a clarifying moment. it's a useful reminder that voting counts, politics counts, what the president-elect is going to be doing is going to be very different from what i was doing. i think people will be able to compare and contrast and make

judgments about what works for the american people. i hope that building off the progress we have made that what the president-elect is proposing works. what i can say with confidence is what we have done works. that i can prove. i can show you where we were in 2008 and i can show you where we are now and you can't argue that we are not better off. we are. and for that i thank the american people and more importantly i thank -- not more importantly, as importantly, i was going to say josh earnest. for that i thank the american

people. i thank the men and women in uniform who serve. when i was doing my last christmas party photo, they are pretty long, right at the end of the line the president's marine corps band comes in and i take a picture with them. it was the last time i was going to take a picture with my marine corps band after an event. i got a little choked up. i was in front of marines so i had to tamp it down. but it was just one small example of all the people who have contributed to our success. i am responsible for where we screwed up, the successes are widely shared with all the amazing people who have been a part of this administration.

thank you, everybody. >> and that's president obama wrapping up his end of the year news conference. welcome to "closing bell." our john harwood is at the white house. he spoke for more than an hour touched on hot button issues with china and russia. >> reporter: he will get more chances in january. kelly, he was very disbursive this afternoon on russia. he reiterated the strong conclusion that russia was behind the electoral hacking strongly implied that he believes vladimir putin person wale was involved. on china -- and one other thing on russia, he urged president-elect trump to embrace the idea of a bipartisan

investigation of that election. the president-elect so far has not accepted the idea that russia was responsible nor has he embraced the idea of a bipartisan investigation. so we will see what happens there. on china he said that fresh eyes may benefit americans policy on china like foreign policy towards other countries. he urged the president-elect to go slowly, to be deliberate and make sure he had a thought out strategy that anticipated consequences that goes to the core of china's self-identity. on the issue of foreign interference in our politics said it was a question of americans not losing touch with our values and he was fairly specific in laying blame for the success of that russian intervention to the fact that partisanship has gotten to the extent that some in mas are more

willing to believe what comes from overseas, fake news than they are their own intelligence agencies. he pointed to the republican party. he said that 37% of republicans had a high opinion of vladimir putin and used that as evidence that he said would make ronald reagan roll over in his grave. >> what happened with the incident in the back of the room? was that a colleague in the media? >> yes. it was a colleague in the media. people in here were standing for quite a long time. it got quite warm in the room. and a woman, i didn't recognize her so i don't know her name. she passed out. she was picked up by colleagues. they gave her some water and then the president stopped the news conference and called for the white house physician who met her on the drive way outside and gave every sign that everything was going to work out just fine. >> thank you. john harwood covering this press

conference. later we have cnbc senior contributor and former trump adviser larry kudlow. joining us to talk about today's market action is cnbc contributor evan newmark, chris johnson from jk investment group. rick santelli is here and steve grasso joins us here, as well. steve, first to you, art cashin was just saying 1.1 billion on the close. we close more or less unchanged. >> quadruple and you had rebalancing. a lot of pension funds rebalancing. that accounts for the massive flows that you saw even on the opening and especially on the close all of those funds basically 99.9 are gauged to the close and that is why you saw that bloated volume. >> didn't seem there was a lot of movement during or after the press conference. not much there to move the

needle. seems markets were spooked. >> i don't know that they were spooked. there definitely was movement. considering how much movement we had this week specifically -- i don't know that it is -- there was a movement five basis points but keep in mind we closed up a dozen on tens, pretty much close to the same on twos where 30s were virtually unchanged. dollar index close to a percent on the week. i think market movement is going to continue because the policy of our fed going against the grain of all other central banks is going to have a huge adjustment process. when you add in -- we have higher value if the dollar goes higher. you add in uncertainty that will impact trade policies once we

get the new president in the white house. this is something to pay close attention to. >> what are you paying close attention to? the markets had an unchanged week so we consolidated after huge gains in the first weeks after the election. >> from a technical perspective we have seen the market kind of get to one of those oversold periods where we just extended ourselves too far too fast. there is still a huge migration going on in the market right now from some sectors namely technology into what we will call infrastructure or economically strong areas of the market. i think that is where you will see a lot of these money managers and retirement investors actually moving their funds. that will be a little long term bullish for the market. >> do you have specific areas that you like most here? >> absolutely. we are still very hot on the materials sector right now. industrials, transportation stocks are also doing well. one of those that we have been

very hot on since the summer is regional banks. this is just a great story from the sentiment perspective. the market was ignoring the stocks. there is a balance sheet positive for the higher interest rates. it's not there for larger financial institutions. we love regional bank stocks. >> we didn't get down 20,000 this week. we are about 150 points shy. some big moves in interest rates and big moves in the dollar. >> i think your obsession with the dow and whether it is at 20,000 is a little irritating. i don't think this stuff matters. >> you don't think it is historic moment? >> no. what really matters is the reallocation by large money managers that will take place over the next two weeks and most of january. i think there are tectonic shifts going on in the market between what mattered last year in 2016 and 2015 and what will matter in 2017. >> let me ask you this.

do you think they are going to be moving out of stocks because they are going to rebalance or are they going to move in when they think it is safe to play? >> i think it will change. i think the stuff -- over the last year what haz-mattered is really central banks. it has driven interest rates. what drives everything -- i don't know if i am being buzzed off. what drives all of it -- >> that was the bs meter. >> what drives that is trump administration going forward particularly if someone like larry kudlow ends up in administration you will see whether or not the old paradigm of the new normal is the best we are going to do. i think there could be real changes and that means bonds bad, bad place to be. look what happens with currencies, oil, much more so that is what will -- >> those numbers i think are important because everything said about the rotation pulls people into the market whmpt we

see today financials lag, you saw reits out perform it has to be something for everyone. when financials are quote/unquote overbought or energy is overbought you wind up seeing guys take a back seat and buy something else but the round numbers pull people into the market. the fear of missing out is higher when you go over 20. >> what do you have to say about this move in rates and in the dollar? by the way, there was a story earlier about the fact that japan is the biggest holder of u.s. debt even more so than china. i wonder how that factors back into politics being discussed. >> it is interesting because with respect to the market tlz is a lot of run way to markets. i think we can enhance our growth rates. no market is going to move in a linear fashion. interest rates are going to be problematic with fed and growth hitting at the same time. i like your last question. keep in mind that the most

recent data we have treasury international capital flows released that is october data. and in october together all holders of our debt liquidated about 64 billion which brings total to 321 billion. nobody thought donald trump was going to win in october so i don't think the politics of the day is going to mesh into the story quite yet. that will be for a time in the future. >> thanks for sticking around. be sure to catch steve with the crew on fast money. he is going to take to the charts to figure out when the dow will hit the 20 k number and how much further it has to run. it all begins at 5:00 p.m. eastern. larry kudlow will join us next with his take on what president obama had to say about the election, putin and china in his last news conference of the year. and there is something of a

trump rally in russia, too, as the stock market there is outpacing the dow's gains since the election. we will discuss whether you should be a buyer there. you're watching cnbc, first in business worldwide. is happening before our eyes. shift in human history sixty to seventy million people are moving to cities every year. at pgim we help investors see the implications of long term megatrends like the prime time of urban expansion, pinpointing opportunities to capture alpha

in real estate, infrastructure and emerging markets. partner with pgim the global investment management businesses of prudential.

did you know slow internet can actually hold your business back? say goodbye to slow downloads, slow backups, slow everything. comcast business offers blazing fast and reliable internet that's over 6 times faster than slow internet from the phone company. say hello to internet speeds up to 250 mbps. and add phone and tv for only $34.90 more a month. call today. comcast business. built for business.

we have cut dependence on foreign oil by more than half, enacted the most sweeping reform to protect consumers. none of these actions stifled growth as critics predicted. instead the stock market has nearly tripled. >> that was president obama in his final end of the year news conference. joining us now is cnbc senior contributor larry kudlow. that was president obama kind of taking a victory lap on the stock market. >> well, who am i to stand in the way of his victory lap? my view is stocks rebounded because stocks rebounded, company profits had a big increase after the crash of 2008-2009. i think this was largely profits driven. fed interest rates 0. i'm sure that contributed.

i don't think it contributed as much as some people do. as profits have slipped in the last quarters the stock market has stopped rising until what appears to be the trump rally. i don't juwant to make this sou partisan. i don't want to trample on that stuff. >> i guess the question larly now for everybody is can a market double or triple after it just tripled? what kind of policies no matter how great they might be for growth can possibly follow up on that kind of performance? >> i believe as you heard me say it a lot of times lowering tax rates on businesses as mr. trump intends to do at the republican congress along with personal tax cuts will increase the economy. it did under jfk and under reagan and clinton. i think it will do it again. i think in four or five years

over the next stretch you could run the economy at 4% growth. there are going to be corrections. i don't want to be -- there will be tough sanctions. rick santelli was talking about rising interest rates. it is real interest rates which is a growth signal and probably profit signal. there are going to be corrections. >> and as evan was saying in the last discussion this could be a huge sea change when you guys and he named you specifically if you come into the white house and are able to push for the pro growth stuff here. corporate tax reform was spoken about broadly. can it happen and happen right away? and so how confident do you feel that everything being priced in right now and all the excitement that will actually come to the fore. >> i hate to say it but i agree mostly with evan on this

particular one. your question is really a difficult question and a hard one. i think you're asking me about the timing of the business tax cuts or the whole tax cut package. and there is discussion in washington. i don't think they have made up their mind. bear with me on this. you may have two budgets and two reconciliation bills. reconciliation means 51 votes in the senate. you may have a budget in 2017 that will cover 2017. that is where the obama care reform is going to happen. you also have a second budget for 2018 and that would also include reconciliation instructions to have the tax cuts. >> so obama care is going to come first? >> i don't know. this is the thing. the discussion is going on and i don't want to speak out of turn because i just know the discussion is happening and hasn't been decided on. i will give you one concern that

i learned many years ago with the reagan tax cuts. if you delay -- if the public knows you are going to lower tax rates, big incentive to invest, if you delay the bill and delay the incentive marginal rate cut you are going to delay the economy. it could make 2017 a slower economy than it would otherwise be the case. i would simply urge to move quickly on both the health care front and the tax reform front because i don't want to lose ground in 2017. >> you could urge from the outside or the inside. any news you want to share with us? >> no news. no particular comments. i love what i'm doing and i have to have my kelly evans session every friday. >> it is reported you would take over as the cea chair, council of economic advisers to the president, a role in which all policies you feel so passionate

about, you have been coming on day after week after month talking about the need for corporate profits improving and free trade is so important to you. are you going to go on the inside and push to make this stuff happen? >> i don't know and i really can't comment on all of that. i will stand for the principles that i have stood for so many years. you have heard them in recent years and perhaps at nauseam. i understand. i want the american economy to grow because i think growth solves a lot of problems, not every problem. it helps to deal with poverty and helps with the deficit. it helps with the debt. economic growth makes americans optimistic. they make americans optimistic. i miss that optimism. i believe it can return. i believe mr. trump can be a very dynamic leader on this whole issue.

>> larry, no matter what your role is we hope you keep coming back and joining us to talk about it. larry kudlow. we have 35 minutes to go -- we are 25 minutes past the close. the trump rally did slow down. the dow continues to flirt with 20,000 mark. what if the reforms don't get done? the potential risks to the rally we will talk about. christmas falling on a sunday could have a big impact on shipping companies working to get your gifts under the tree in time. we'll explain coming up. king l? a basketball costs $14. what's team spirit worth? (cheers) what's it worth to talk to your mom? what's the value of a walk in the woods? the value of capital is to create, not just wealth, but things that matter.

morgan stanley there's a lot of places you never want to see "$7.95." [ beep ] but you'll be glad to see it here. fidelity -- where smarter investors will always be. if only the signs were as obvious when you trade. fidelity's active trader pro can help you find smarter entry and exit points and can help protect your potential profits. fidelity -- where smarter investors will always be.

the dow closing slightly lower today. here is the post election rally. it has been helped in part by expectations of tax reform under president-elect trump. the dow up 8%. the tax cuts could total $6.2 trillion. a lot of that is priced in now. what if tax reform doesn't happen as planned? joining us are terry haines along with michael, chief u.s. economist at jp morgan. welcome to you both. mike, start us off talking about how am uch you think is priced in here and what are the odds that we can deliver $6.2 trillion? >> we think it is not about -- i think regulatory reform is

another issue. i think it will be tough to get the entirety of the trump plan through. the ryan plan which is somewhat less ambitious or less costly will be tough to get through. it is pretty sweeping in terms of the corporate tax code. there are winners and losers. it will be a food fight i think. >> you have seen a number of these food fights. maybe the first budget effort goes towards obama care and second towards corporate tax reform. how do you gauge the odds of this happening? >> larry has done a lot of my work for me this afternoon. he knows a great deal about this. and what he laid out generally is exactly right. what i think is that you are likely to see tax reform early in the second half of calendar year 2017. i think the house and senate will work very hard using special budget reconciliation process to try to push this up and i think they are going to

use the august recess as the back stop here which would make a lot of sense. that is what bill clinton did in 1993 and reagan in 1981. i think you will see the same urgency here. >> you talked about how this was going to be a food fight. so there is going to be a kind of theoretical argument over whether faster growth would pay for the tax cuts. how would you approach the analysis of whether that will be true? >> i suspect the joint committee on taxation will find it is going to increase growth to pay for a lot of tax cuts. we are skeptical that it will encourage investment as much as it hoped for. but i do think that is one area. i think another area to keep an eye on is that the so-called border adjustments are a big part of how the lower top marginal rate gets paid for. that you can't really separate without making it cost a whole lot more which may be a problem for some of the deficit hawks.

>> how strong a group are those deficit hawks? when you talk to other people about the rally they say it is predicated on more spending even if it is better that it does increase the deficit from that macro point of view. do deficit hawks have a hand to play? >> i make two comments about that. one is that speaker ryan has said pretty directly that the house republican plan is something that would be deficit neutral over ten years and reiterated that earlier this week. and secondly i think you will find with a lot of deficit hawks that the politics will shift around. one of the things they have been concerned about is potential attacks from the right politically. now they are going to be confrbted with potential attacks from trump supporters. very much stay tuned on the politics. i think it takes months for that to develop. >> finally and quickly let's say

the whole thing maybe you take the trump version or ryan version gets done, how much do you think it would boost growth? >> i think in the short term not a whole lot. we have pencilled in about 25 basis points to growth over the course of about two years. longer term i think it is more debatable. i think a lot of it comes back to the issue of how much it really does encourage investment f. it does i think that could be a positive for productivity growth. we are a little more skeptical that it will generate the surge in cap x. >> quarter point here, quarter point there. pretty soon you have 4% gdp growth. that is how it is supposed to work. appreciate it. it's time for a cnbc news update. let's get to sue herera. >> here is what is happening. the fbi is supporting the cia's conclusion that russia interfered in the presidential election with one of russia's

goals to support republican candidate donald trump. cia director john brennan says there is a strong consensus among them on russian interference. the body of astronaut john glenn will lie in state yt ohio state house rotunda a memorial service will be held at ohio state university tomorrow. and the biggest storm to hit southern california in some time is causing flooding problems closing some highways and intersecti intersections. and the general manager of the atlanta braves has career advice. in an answer to a question he tweeted look for internships. don't worry about the money. work hard and don't have expectations beyond being part of a team. assume nothing. one young person tweeted back what about humans who need to

eat to survive? any advice for them? that's the news update this hour. i don't know. it sounds like pretty good advice to me. >> what is the problem? >> i don't see a problem with it. i really don't. >> work hard, you part of a team. >> that is the way you and i did it. remember the internships? remember the working the overnights? remember all of that? >> i think sometimes it feels like we are still working overnoilth. >> that is true, too. have a great weekend. >> you, too. mylan living up to the promise four months after telling lawmakers it would deliver a cheaper version. the product is set to hit the market.

president obama addressing u.s. relationship with russia in a news conference amid reports russia hacked the u.s. election. >> our goal continues to be to send a clear message to russia or others not to do this to us because we can do stuff to you. but it is also important for us to do that in a thoughtful, methodical way. some of it we do publically.

some of it we will do in a way that they know but not everybody will. >> well, despite obama ramping up rhetoric against the country russian stocks reported inflowing of nearly half a billion dollars. with donald trump seemingly having a better relationship with russia is it an opportunity to buy there? let's bring in harvey who runs a russia fund. harvey, first to you, this has been quite a week in terms of performance in terms of people buying the russian market. do you think it is a good opportunity? >> i think the market still has upside and probably one of the cheapest markets in the world. i think it is still very unloved and it has got a long way to go to get back to old highs. some of the marc stuff,

investigation will come out. valuations are really good. dividend yield on the market is like 4%. companies are super profitability. if oil stays over $50 this market is going to go higher i believe over time. >> you're not so convinced, though. some of the marc concerns include the performance of russia's economy. so what other concerns do you have about investing in russia? >> i have four major concerns starting with the fact that russia is just bread and butter is oil and natural resources. and the oil prices have sort of peaked we don't think that the oil prices are likely to go very far from here so i think this will probably stall their economy. the other problem is the major

hurdle they have is the economic sanctions from both eu and u.s. i don't know how they get around that. i don't think mr. trump by himself can do much about that at this point. >> do you think there will be a roll back of sanctions? >> not for the next six months. but eu is getting tired of the sanctions. there are a lot of members who are not in favor of them. trump would like to get rid of them. i don't know that his party agrees with him. i don't think it is necessary to have the sanctions go away for the market to do well. the companies that are under sanctioned have been some of the best performing stocks this year. i met with them recently and asked what the effect on you be if you got out of the sanctions? they said zero because they have already repositioned themselves to live in a world of sanctions. i don't think that they will

come off in the short term. i don't think it really matters as much. >> what about the currency risk in all of this. while it may make the gains in the market look good it means in dollar terms you are not getting that much. >> i was in russia recently. i stayed at the ritz carlton which is the best hotel in town. it was $250 a night. used to be $750. i think the only kurpancy i have seen cheaper is maybe ukrainian. i think the market is pricing in lower oil. i don't think it is pricing in $55 oil at all. i don't believe oil is going a lot higher, either. nobody does so we can all be wrong. >> we know where to watch now as it moves. thoughts on whether russia is a good investment. thank you. shopping and shipping. it's that time of year. we will see what the likes of

fed ex and ups have planned as december 25 nears. and the holiday movie season is underway with disney releasing the first stand alone "star wars" film. mary buys a little lamb. one of millions of orders on this company's servers. accessible by thousands of suppliers and employees globally. but with cyber threats on the rise, mary's data could be under attack. with the help of at&t, and security that senses

and mitigates cyber threats, their critical data is safer than ever. giving them the agility to be open & secure. because no one knows & like at&t. i'm stressed trying to figure out this complex trade what's with the dog-sized horse? so i brought in my comfort pony. well, you could get support from thinkorswim's in-app chat. so you don't need a comfort pony. so what about my motivational meerkat? in-app chat on thinkorswim. only at td ameritrade.

we just got eight days of shopping until christmas. it falls on a sunday this year. that may mean more last minute

shoppers. morgan brennan is at a new jersey truck stop -- morgan -- you're freezing. you are at a new jersey truck stop. do tell. >> reporter: i get the best assignments and all the best weather. i have to say. if you have been out driving over the last couple of days you have probably noticed many more trucks on the road, many are goods destined for door steps and destined under the tree. in terms of ups and fed ex we are in full blown crunch mode at both companies as next week is the busiest and toughest in terms of operations for both of those companies for the entire year. today is the last day for guaranteed ground shipping which is service most retailers use for free shipping. monday likely the busiest day for ups and one of four that is expected for fed ex with both carriers handling double average daily package volumes.

this past week we had several reports indicating both companies had been scrambling to deliver on slot of packages. ups having the hardest time with on time performances. fed ex mainly flat. ups down 3%. ups telling me the vast majority of customers getting packages on time, some locations where volumes had surged beyond expectation and weather caused delays but that overall volumes are running in line with ups's 700 million package forecast which represents 14% growth over last year. fed ex, a little more tight lipped ahead of earnings on tuesday. i want to update for peak season is expected saying only right now it is proud to achieve outstanding service in the first few weeks of the peak season. keep in mind in this final week heading into christmas every year we tend to see a spike in last minute online shopping.

that is a situation dented both companies performances. the way the calendar falls this year that spike could be even bigger than usual. this is the thing in focus overcoming days. service and on time delivery and cost management. that will be what investors are watching to make sure that their efforts to get the packages out in time don't cut into profits. >> if i am using amazon are they basically still relying on these or how much are they trying to do themselves? >> it's a great question. two thirds of amazon's volumes here will move out through the u.s. postal service. it's the reason you are seeing usps deliver on sundays and the reason they have been for the past couple of weeks. you will see them delivering on christmas day in some locations. ups and fed ex are delivering for amazon. according to one analyst i have spoken to about 5% to 7% of the

overall packages that will be moved to people's door steps by amazon, 5% to 7% of volumes will be done in house by amazon or through their own network. >> i did not realize usps was such a big part of this. >> yes. actually everybody focuses on the fact that amazon is building the in house network prior to snarls in 2013. it is the fact that also the u.s. postal service is growing so fast in terms of volumes that there are worries that its ability to continue growing that it won't be able to grow as quickly as it has been growing. that is another reason why amazon has been building in-house network. >> as long as they can make their pension obligations this could be great news for them. morgan, thank you with no gloves, no hat. morgan brennan out there in new jersey. mylan is ready to make good

on its promise of a cheaper version of that epipen allergy treatment.

welcome back. mylan is about to make good on its promise to provide an affordable alternative to its allergy treatment epipen. >> meg tirrell with more on how much this treatment will cost. >> so mylan is planning to introduce what it calls an authorized generic version of the branded epipen next week to pharmacies. this is something it told us about several months ago over the price of its allergy treatment, the epipen, more than $600 for a two-pack up from about 100 several years ago. now an authorized generic is kind of confusing to people, actually identical to the branded product. but the price will be about half

that of the branded price at least on the list level. $300 for the two-pack, hitting pharmacy shelves next week. a lot of people would ask, why introduce this identical product, but calling it an authorized generic, instead of lowering the price of the branded product? it all goes back into what mylan ceo has been talking about with the complicated nature of the health care system and the involvement of middlemen. she said here in a statement today, the quote, every day escalating out-of-pocket costs impacting new patient population. however, this broader systemic issue will not be solved in a meaningful and sustainable way by our industry's responses. this could be considered by some to be a reactive or one-off response with the industries talking more about, needing to reform the entire system and bring more transparency to it. and so you are seeing a lot more talk of middle meb like express scripts, cvs and their involvement in the system. a key question now is, how will this impact mylan's bottom line and will the benefits managers and insurers be incentivized to

use the generic or branded where they may get a cut in rebates, kelly. >> also, meg, i feel like the attention made people want to come up with their own cheaper versions. is that gaining traction? is it a totality active to the mylan products? certainly there are other players that have been incentivized to jump back into the space and the fda, of course, having a lot of pressure ratcheted up to look at alternatives. teva, of course, developing the other generic version, but ran into troubles at the fda and didn't get their application processed. so they're expected to come back with an identical generic version and that is an open question. some speculating mylan introducing this generic to get ahead of the product. >> right. meg, thank you. into luke, no yoda, no chewy, no problem? disney is hoping that is the case as it releases "rogue one."

if it will be a force at the box office, next. ♪ we're drowning in information. where, in all of this, is the stuff that matters? the stakes are so high, your finances, your future. how do you solve this? you don't. you partner with a firm that advises governments and the fortune 500, and, can deliver insight person to person,

on what matters to you. morgan stanley. ♪ for decades, investors have used a 60/40 stock and bond model, with little in alternatives. yet alternatives can tap opportunities that traditional assets can't. and even though they're called alternatives, they're actually designed to help meet very traditional goals. that's why invesco believes people should look past conventional models and make alternatives a core part of their portfolios. translation? goodbye 60/40, hello 50/30/20. when a moment spontaneously turns romantic, why pause to take a pill? or stop to find a bathroom? cialis for daily use is approved to treat both erectile dysfunction

and the urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas for pulmonary hypertension, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any symptoms of an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis and a $200 savings card. welcome back. "star wars" "rogue one" debuting

in theatres yesterday. after the success of last year's "the force awakens," will this be another hit for disney? julia boorstin has a look at the numbers. what have we learned, julia? >> well, kelly, it's not going to be as big as "portion awakens" but fandango reports it's the top ticket seller and the second of all-time behind force aquawakenawakens, and mak biggest thursday night preview of the year. disney said the film is on track to pull in somewhere in the high $60 million range domestically through this evening. and the film is expected to gross as much as $300 million worldwide this weekend. piper jaffray estimates it will generate more than is billion in total revenue for disney. it's a key test of the potential to expand lucasfilm outside "star wars" core narrative, to turn it into an annual event to film not just the studio but demand for consumer products and

the two "star wars" in the works in orlando and anaheim. disney shares have been under pressure on concerns about the health of espn, but the studio dominated one quarter of the u.s. box office this year with five of the top ten films, including "finding dory" and "captain america." piper jaffray still projects disney will top $7 billion at the box office this year, putting it ahead of universal's industry record last year of $6.9 billion. kelly? >> that's not allowed. you know, universal has got to keep the crown. when is it opening in china, julia. >> it's not opening in china yet. and that's because there is another massive film that's opening in china this weekend called "the great wall" what's really interesting, "the great wall" is the first of its kind in that it's a true co production between u.s. companies and starring matt damon. u.s. companies and chinese companies. so it's a huge sort of experiment. the budget was $150 million. it did pretty well in its first launch in china. it's not a record-breaker.

not a massive hit. but we're definitely watching to see how it does this weekend and many are watching to see how it does not just in china where it probably will be a hit but internationally probably won't be as successful as it is in china. >> yeah, i thought the trailer was crazy. but thanks for joining us, julia, with the box office rundown. and thank you everybody for tuning into "closing bell" this afternoon. have a great weekend. "fast money" begins now. live from times scare, this is "fast money." and i am brian sullivan and melissa has a well-deserved day off. your traders tonight, tim seymour, karen finerman, steve grasso and guy adami. tonight on "fast." you have to wait for another day for dow 20k. stocks retreating so just when will the dow hit that magic 20,000 milestone? does it even matter? we'll take to the charts. plus, where is the retail nirva nirvana? consumer sentiment resurging, christmas just around the corner. why are some of the retail stocks struggling so much? we have a special report.