the o'reilly factor is on tonight. >> when you criticize something and you have no idea what you're criticizing, it undermines your credibility. >> house speaker john boehner blasting tea party groups over the budget criticism. we'll have the latest on this republican split and whether the two sides can heal the rift. >> if you like your plan and you like your doctor, you keep your plan, you keep your doctor. >> more bad news for obamacare as the president's now infamous health care plan has been dubbed the lie of the year. we'll take care of that. >> in times square, they put up a very obnoxious, in my opinion,

ad, who needs christ in christmas? you walk through times square, this is what you see. >> and the man behind a controversial atheist billboard will be here to defend his christ in christmas. >> the o'reilly factor begins now. hi, i'm in for bill o'reilly. thanks for joining us tonight. let's get to our top story. infighting in the gop. the house overwhelmingly approved a bipartisan two-year spending plan yesterday in hopes of averting another government shutdown, but 94 congress people voted against it, most of them tea party conservatives who worried the deal will increase government spending in the short term, and that's not sitting well with speaker john boehner. >> frankly, i just think they've lost all credibility. they pushed us into the fight to

defund obamacare and shut down the government. most of you know, my members know, that wasn't exactly the strategy i had in mind. i'm as conservative as anybody around this place. and all the things that we've done over the three years that i've been speaker have not violated any conservative principal, not once. >> an aggressive approach by the speaker given the conciliatory tone he's had with the tea party in the past. joining me now from washington, brad blakeman, former spokesperson to george w. bush and news director from the tea party network. john, i want to start with you right off the top. john boehner says he's as conservative as anybody. would you agree? >> congratulations, john boehner, because you now are remotely going to be claimed the john mccain of the house. that's exactly what he's trying to do with this. i wear his scorn like a badge of honor. and that band-aid we had put in our party that was going to give

us a chance of winning in 2014, literally john boehner just ripped it off, and it's almost like he enjoys seeing the infighting between the two crowds. >> some of the push-back in the conservative group, what went through the house yesterday had a lot of spending increases with some tax issues down the road that may or may not ever show up. your thoughts? >> there is perception and there is reality. the perception is this is a huge budget deal. it is not, but it moves us in the right direction, we have divided government. the tea party in some -- without the tea party think that they want to rule in a government that they wish they had. i would rather rule in reality in the government we do have. in divided government, there must be compromise. is this a great agreement? no. but the fact is there are two things this budget does. one, it creates regular order, a return to the house having control over the power of the purse, which is their constitutional responsibility. >> let me stay with you for one second right there.

the power of the purse is on the right. it happens to be on the right, the gop has it. isn't there a case to be made that if it wasn't for the tea party they wouldn't have the power of the purse right now? >> the tea party was a terrific help. but they weren't a help in the fall when they helped shut down the government and they're not a help now. we have to keep our high eye on prize. let's figure out 2014 is where we're going. obamacare is imploding. why are we not united? we have a sure case we had for two decades in a sure budget. >> people are moderate. they say we need to win first. we need to keep the house, we need to keep the senate and then the rest of it. do you disagree? >> it's not that i disagree, but brad just said he blamed the tea party on the shutdown of the government, and at the same time we need to be united on

obamacare. the reason we shut down the government is because the conservatives said it would be as disastrous as it was, and obama refused to let it go. so obama was the one who shut down the government. ta the ptea party is the one who said we're going to let it shut down as is. that's not what john boehner said yesterday. he pointed fingers at the tea party and tried to demonize us. that's what people in the beltway want to do. i think they're wrong. and john boehner, if you don't want your party to win in 2014, why would you open this wound? he played right to the democrats. thank you, john boehner, and this is because of him. >> no, he didn't. wait a second -- you don't have the votes to do what you seek to do. and -- >> in the house, we did. >> and paul ryan is not a politician, he is a states

person who realizes in a divided government in order to get anything done, you have to reach across the aisle. are we going to get everything we want? no, but we'll advance the ball enough. >> we'll get 10%, possibly. the only thing republicans can claim is they cut down on government sequester. the democrats are 90% happy with this bill. you have harry reid advocating for this bill. >> you know what it tells me as a lawyer? when both parties are ticked off at the accomplishments that are made, we probably got a pretty good compromise. and what really we should be doing is thinking about 2014. let's keep control of the house, let's get the senate back and put the president in a box. because in your world you would like to believe that obama doesn't exist, but he does, and we have him for three years. let's make the best of a worse situation. >> i take a step back and do this. this is what you have to do. there is a pendulum that swings back and forth. sky, i have to be honest with you. it seems like the pendulum is swinging away from the tea party

right now because of the government shutdown. they're getting the blame for that. would you disagree with it? >> it's because the established republicans didn't like the good things that came out. ted cruz had his highest ratings. his ratings were high when congress and the house were low. if brad would ever take a step outside the beltway and come to nashville, tennessee where i am, he would see that the majority of americans don't agree with what the white house is doing. >> we're trying to change that. >> this compromise is saying it will be better off ten years down the road than it is today. ten years ago we were just coming out of the clinton era and the cbo was predicting not only would we have zero deficit, we would have $3 million surplus. ten years ago and it's not true. >> i have something that may unite the far right of the party and the center right of the party. take a look at the former speaker of the house, nancy pelosi. >> so this morning you told your members, embrace the suck.

that's a quote. >> yes. it's a quote, yes. >> before i get to the substance of the bill, where did you get that from? >> i think it really captured the moment, wouldn't you think? >> scotty, i would contend we've been embracing the suck for about five years now. >> i think it's hilarious nancy pelosi is using this militaristic term coming out of nancy pelosi. those are probably a few of the words i don't want to hear come out of her mouth. >> nancy pelosi is certainly not the artful order. we remember her words about obamacare. let's pass the bill before we find out what's in it. not very good words. >> i knew we could find something we all agree on. we'll have to leave it there. thank you very much. next on the rundown. president obama wins the lie of the year award. we'll tell you about that. and later, should the usa give edward snowden amnesty if

he promises to stop leaking top secret information? those reports after these messages.

in the impact segment tonight, calling out obamacare deceit the lie of the year award, drum roll, and the winner is, president obama. >> if you like your plan and you like your doctor, you won't have to do a thing. you keep your plan, you keep your doctor. now, if you have or had one these plans before the affordable care act came into law and you really like that plan, what we said was you could keep it if it hasn't changed since the laws passed. >> see that last part, if it hasn't changed. that part slight here. joining me now from nashville, chris cofinas, a democrat

strategist. that first part we heard, he said it somewhere around 24, 25 times, you can keep your plan, period. it was when he changed it on november 24 when he said, this is what we really said, only they hadn't really said that before. >> the president clearly, i think, misspoke. they weren't as clear as they the needed to be or as direct as they needed to be on what impact the health care plan would have, particularly on people who already have health care. >> what do you mean, he misspoke? he said, what we said was -- and they hadn't said that before. that's not misspeaking. that's a lie. >> i understand you want to call it a lie. >> time out, time out. i didn't. politofact did. >> i understand that. i'm not going to call the president a liar. i'm going to say he made a mistake. he made a big mistake. he's had to own up to it and he's paying the political

consequences for it. when you get hit in the polls in terms of trust and credibility, that's what's happening right now, he's going to have a long way back to re-earn that trust. i think the administration's focus is he's trying to fix things and make sure things are getting better, not simply going back and relitigating what he should have said and what he should have been doing in terms of being clear to the american people about what the impact would be. >> one of the big problems, as this was going on, you can keep your plan, period, prior to his reelection campaign. >> there is no question he was using this to sell his plan, he was using this to sell his reelection, and i think the bigger question is you could try and give him the benefit of the doubt and say at the very beginning, he didn't really know they were going to lose their plans. but at some point, he did. he continued to say this phrase over and over again, and chris gets the cold star for coming on and trying to defend this, but this is a lie. it breaks every pinocchio scale

on the map. this may be the best one of all time. >> i'm thinking there is another one that comes to mind. "i did not have sex with that woman." pretty big. >> i think politicians very frequently have made mistakes in terms of what they said. president bush said mission accomplished, or basically insinuating mission accomplished and we know that wasn't the case. when presidents speak, when presidents make misstatements, when they're not as clear as they need to be with the american people, there is a political consequence that needs to be paid, and that's what's happening right now. >> i'm going to ask chip this. it's one thing to misspeak and say you can keep your plan period. it's the part where he said, what we said in the past. we have it 25 times on tape saying you can keep it and he's trying to walk that back. age of video. we'll call it up. >> he didn't just misspeak once or twice, he did it over and over again. we've heard this before, but what did the president know and

when did he know it becomes the real truth? when did he know this misspoken word became a lie? at some point he had to know it but he kept trying to sell it for reelection and to get the plan passed. >> chris, let me throw you a bone. the other people on the list, the other ones that weren't named lie of the year were kevin coult coulter. >> if you're a public figure and you go out and make certain dramatic and bold statements, especially if you're an elected public figure, there will be consequences to be paid when you're not as clear as you need to be. i think in the president's case, he made a mistake. he's owned up to it. that, i think, is a big distinction between him and other politicians in the past. >> he didn't own up to it, chris. he blamed someone else for it which he's done ever since he became president. he didn't say the buck stops

here, he said it was somebody else's fault. >> that's not true. in the interview as well as the press conference he did at the white house, he made it very clear the buck stops with him. he made it very clear he regretted what he said. >> i think if you look at that again, he never says i'm sorry to the american people for lying to them. >> no, he said i regret for not being clear on what i meant to say. >> did he ever go back and say what he said was wrong? no, he tries to mince the words and use legalese saying, this is what i meant to say. >> that is the real question, when did he know? over the course of the last -- recently, as well, maybe the last two years or so, we keep hearing the president say, i didn't know. i heard about it when you heard about it. i heard about it, i watched tv. i read it in the newspaper. chris, do you believe when you hear he heard about the irs

stuff, he heard about benghazi, you can keep your plan, period, when you hear it on fox? >> i do believe it. what happens in certain administrations is certain staff want to protect their boss so well, they don't tell them what's happening. i think that's in terms of the president, in terms of the irs, in terms of benghazi as well as the website. i think that is a bigger issue in that the president needs to kind of step back and ask himself, why are the people around me not telling me what i need to hear? because if i'm going out and saying things to the american people that will turn out to not be as accurate as it needs to be, that's a political problem. that's what i think he needs to fix. >> we're going to leave it there. directly ahead, the white house press corps furious with jay carney without access to the president. and an atheist billboard in times square is trying to take christ out of christmas. we'll talk to one of the men

behind that display, coming up.

in the factor follow-up segment tonight, the white house press corps taking on jay carney ever again? the obama administration's ever changing rules on not allowing access to the president, jay carney was on the offensive. >> i will not live to see the day, and neither will you, when independent journalists who cover the white house will say, i got all the access i wanted, today or next week or next month. it's not going to happen. >> fox news white house correspondent henry ed. not all access, how about some access, right? >> that's the thing. they're setting this bar about while you guys want so much, i

think what the president was talking about was just less access to the president, meetings in the oval office, for example, with world leaders that are close sometimes to the media altogether and were basically told it's a private event, it's a private discussion, and then a short time later, there will be an official white house photograph put out. so if a white house photographer on a government salary is allowed in that meeting, why can't we get 30 seconds to a minute in there so we can take independent photos, write independent stories about what's going on? it's almost like an arm of the administration putting out their own story without letting us into some of the same meetings. >> it's more policy if you can get away from it, but your job, ed, is to ask that question you asked and get that response, and then we can talk about it. let's talk about that. will there be any changes? it seems the only thing we're getting is pitsus. good photographer. let's hear the real story,

right? >> if a foreign administration were doing this, we would call it propaganda. with jay carney, there is always a push and pull with republican administrations, democratic administrations and it's never going to be perfect. we're just pushing for more, and i think to answer your question, there will be some changes because i think the white house is feeling the pressure, and i think from the president on down, they realize the reason why this matters, some people think it's a little distraction and they're complaining. no, this is history. we're trying to get access to the president of the united states doing his job. we deserve some of that access. we won't get it all, but i think there will be some changes because the bottom line here is this is a president that talked about his transparency, more transparent than any other in history. >> you're being generous saying this is history, but it's also the debate. when you have independent photographers taking pictures of the president doing certain things, some of them are clumsy. if they're not allowing that to get out there, you're curbing

the debate the way you want. >> independent images might catch a moment that the administration doesn't want to put out there. but if it's only images put out by a government-paid photographer, you're of course going to get the president in the most flattering light possible. they should put that on instagram and twitter and put the president in the best light. but there should also be independent lenses, independent notebooks going in there at the same time. >> the way i understand this, i could be wrong, they were waiting for that picture. and in one president obama has one foot up on the table and he's pointing. it's almost like a commando type picture. they seem staged to me. am i wrong? >> i don't know if they're staged. on the bin laden photo, the way

understand it, there was a top secret or classified document on the table. obviously, that shouldn't be out there, but there were allegations it was edited out or something. if something like that happens, it does raise eyebrows about what could be edited out? it just all begs the question of we should have more access so we can get that independent lands on history. >> maybe the folks don't understand how it works with the poll reporting, the poll video cameras. what about something like that with still images? >> right, it's not just still images, it's our video cameras as well to get into these events. you have a poll of 13, 14 reporters between still cameras, video reporters, those are the folks that get access to the oval office and whatnot. again, these might be meetings with the world leader, a meeting

with his gun control task force or something, and these are the great issues of the day, immigration reform, whatever it may be want access to those news events. there were others that access got pushed back. if we feel more restricted, we're going to push back again. playing more ahead, will the u.s. government make a deal with edward snowden in order to prevent more embarrassing nsa leaks? also ahead, the war on christmas is on full display in times square. we'll talk to one of the atheists behind this billboard, and we hope you stay tuned for those reports.

in the unresolved problems segment tonight, new developments in the case of former fbi agent robert levinson who went missing in iran in 2007. the state department has long denied that levinson was working for the u.s. government when he disappeared, but according to the associated press, levinson was actually working on a rogue mission for the cia. >> why did the administration falsely say for years that levinson was a private citizen in iran on a business trip, and would you continue to say that now that it's been proven to be untrue? >> bob levinson was not a u.s. government employee when he went missing in iran. as there is an ongoing investigation into his disappearance, i'm not going to comment further on what he may or may not have been doing in iran. i'm not going to fact check

every allegation made in the story you reference, a story we believe was highly irresponsible to publish and which we strongly urged the outlet not to publish out of concerns for mr. levinson's safety. >> the news agency decided to publish that sensitive information yesterday after sitting on it for three years. joining me now, lieutenant anthony schaefer who wrote the book "the last line." carney said levinson was not working for the u.s. government when he went missing in 2007. that is directly counter to what the ap has reported, right? >> that's drebtirectly washingt speak for he wasn't an employee but he may have been working for us. that's how they parse this. it's clear he was working under contract of some sort for the cia. let me make it clear, as a case officer who has done this sort of thing, you don't dispatch u.s. government people into harm's way, you try to find people who have placement and

access who are naturally able to do this. and for goodness sake, you don't send a former fbi agent who has a high profile to begin with in harm's way in the way they've done this. i think any way you cut it, the bottom line is we as the u.s. government has some responsibility for levinson being where he was at in the wrong place at the wrong time. >> why would the white house push back before giving the details? or do they know the details and they're trying to bury the story? >> one of the things they should have done on get ahead of the story. any time you get caught flat-footed like this, you then are reacting to the story they would have been better off putting the story out there and saying, look, we didn't know the facts. these are the facts and it looks like this individual may have been working for us in a rogue operation. that way you set the dial. >> this story comes directly out of -- it's almost scripted perfectly to the series on television.

but they shield the president from a lot of rogue activity that goes on. is that accurate? >> this is a trick question, isn't it? >> i'm just trying to figure out if the president really knew levinson was in and around for us. >> based on what i know, and i can't say everything i know, this was a true rogue operation. the analysts who always have a natural affliction with the direct operations guy, they didn't know. the analysts don't understand vetting and other things, which are necessary. we go through six months just to be trained to be an operative, to run these types of operations. there's reasons they train us. what happened here was you had a complete rogue operation off the books doing things they shouldn't have, and the best thing, obviously, was to get it back in control. no adult ever found it, so what you see here is tragically bad operations run by amateurs at the time they probably didn't know about this.

there are black operations known at that level, but this is not one of those. >> it's a true case of when the president only knows about it when he watches tv. it seems to be a common theme. ed snowden is in russia right now. there is rumor that there may be some sort of potential for him to be offered amnesty if he were to come back and stop leaking some of the secrets he has. your thoughts on that one? >> there is rumors. i believe that there has been some talk about this amongst the folks dealing with snowden. and the answer is there is about 1.5 million documents out there we still don't know what he has. bottom line is i think they know what it is and they're worried about it coming out, and that's why they're coming to the table considering this. i was talk to ing tie colleague about this very issue. there are ways to do this that would protect those secrets not revealed yet. clearly snowden's life will never be the same, but it does speak volumes. >> you said there is a way to protect the secrets.

what is that? >> you basically have to bring him in, get him in a room. you go through everything regarding what they're about to give him. he signs to it, and he has to give a complete debriefing about everything he had. he got authorization he wasn't entitled to have in the nsa. they haven't fully rectified that. so the knowns, unknowns are so overwhelming right now that the nsa is considering bringing it back to find out all the things he actually took with them. i don't think it will make a difference, because the chinese and the russians have copies of everything. i'm not sure it's in his best interest to do this. i'm not sure how i feel about it. the question becomes, is there a political world to bring him in, and that's the thousand-dollar question we just don't know the answer to yet. >> i spent time interviewing ed snowden's father, lon, snowd sn

and he said, come back. face your demons. i don't know why he would do that because of the risk of being tried for treason. it couldn't get much worse than that, could it? >> no, it couldn't, and i think tht where they'll have a cause in every solemn agreement, and it proves you won't tell us what you took with you. and he will sign for that and that's always a danger. frankly, that is something he should be concerned about because it's a live issue, it's something not row solvesolved. >> thank you very much, sir. one man who put up an atheist billboard in times square will be here to defend his tactics.

thanks for staying with us. i'm eric boly in for chris o'reilly. last week the group american atheists put up a billboard in times square that says, who needs christ during christmas? nobody. that caught somebody's attention, and we wanted to know why atheists attack those of faith. with me is the community director for the afternoon

atheist organization. wow, dave. wow. how mean can you be? >> we're not attacking anybody, we're just stating facts, that you don't need christ to celebrate christmas. millions and millions of people in this country have a great christmas without christ having anything to do with it. christians in this country don't really care about jesus. >> whoa, whoa, whoa. you're talking to one. >> some do, but christmas is not about jesus. it's about spending time with your family. >> you do realize that the first part of christmas is christ, and that's what it's based on. >> i understand the name is that. but valentine's day is named after st. valentine but it's not about a saint, it's about romance. things change over time. this is not about christ. >> says who? >> it's a fact. people don't care. >> this is your opinion, it can't be fact. you can't say it's a fact that christians don't care about christ in christmas. >> some do. many christians don't.

many christians pretend they care. they only go to church twice a year. it's just not that big a deal to them. >> but dave, who are you to say what christians can or can't believe in? >> they can believe what they want. but what we're saying is if you don't care about this stuff, don't pretend to care. if you want to sleep in on christmas, sleep in. >> we're showing your billboard. it says "who needs christ in christmas?" and the last part that's offensive to me, what do you mean, nobody? >> jesus has been dead for a long time. you don't need him, for one thing. it's not about that. >> no, because that's relevant. 70% of americans are christian. i would say there's a lot of people who need christ. >> if people want to celebrate christmas with christ, that's their choice. but you can celebrate christmas without christ. don't drag your family to church if you don't want to go to church. if you hate church, you don't

have to go. you can skip it. that's my point. >> christmas is really about the kids. do you think this billboard, kids walking through times square and seeing that, do you think that's good for kids? >> kids don't care about it, either. they care about presidents, they care about spending time with family and friends, they care about cocoa, they care about a number of things. it's not about god. >> i vehemently disagree with you. i'm a practicing catholic that wants my son to care about those things and i hope he does. >> you can hope that, but frankly it's his choice. there are children of catholic parents, but that's his choice. >> why do you do this on christmas? it's mean spirited. atheists, about 2.5% of the american population, right? >> arguably, i would say it's more than that. >> atheists? because the numbers i read is under 3%, everything i read. it depen

>> it depends how you ask the question. >> you're offending all these people. >> i don't mean to offend you. it's not about offense, it's about quality. you can enjoy christmas however you want. it's your holiday. do what you like. have fun. >> don't you love america? america is founded on these believes, founded on it. it's written in our constitution. >> america is founded on separation of religion and government. >> america was founded -- it's on our currency, in god we trust. >> only since the '50s because of the cold war. >> and you have a problem with that as well. elected officials are sworn in on what? a bible. >> not necessarily. they can affirm. >> they're sworn in on a bible or a koran or any other form of religious symbol, right? >> if they want to. it's not required. in fact, you can't have religious testimony. >> where are you on thanksgiving? >> i spend it with my family, usually. >> where are atheists on

thanksgiving? >> it's a secular holiday. it has nothing to do with religion. celebrate it how you want. >> it seems mean spirited on christmas. don't you realize that some people get inspiration from this. i go to church every single day over there at st. patrick's cathedral. i light candles every day. you know why? because i like it. it makes me feel good. >> then go ahead, we're not stopping you from doing that. but we're saying for the people who don't care about jesus, you don't have to pretend to care. it's okay to be honest about that. it's okay not to force your family to do it, too. >> i'm all for free speech. i'm a big, big defender of the first amendment. >> glad to hear it. >> why do you need to attack christians? for the shock value? >> no, we're not attacking, we're improving. we're telling people you can be honest, you can celebrate the way you want to instead of the way society pressures you to. if you don't care about jesus, then don't say you do. >> do i need a big billboard in

times square to tell me that? >> it's not for you, then. it's for the people who are -- >> as offensive as you think a cross is to people, that's as offensive to me as someone who believes in christ. >> that's fine, but it's not about that. >> we'll have to leave this here. have a merry christmas, dave. >> happy holidays. in case you missed it last night of rejecting an ad for a catholic hospital because it didn't mention jesus, they reluctantly re-ran the ad. if you would like to shop in bill o'reilly's christmas store, the proceeds go to charity. we have hats, pens, we've got it all. if you sign up to be a bil

billoreilly.com premium member, you get his book. when we come back, things in north korea are only getting crazier. kim jong un executes his own uncle. we'll tell you what it means, coming up.

in the back of the book segment tonight, nobody is safe from north korea's power-crazed leader kim jong-un, not even those who were once nearest and dearest to him. he executed his uncle, a one-time father figure and mentor who is being charged as a traitor. he just ordered the killing of his old girlfriend.

and, remember, this guy has a nuclear weapons program. joining us from fox news, lieutenant colonel raffle pelph. thanks for joining us on this story. kim jong-un gets crazier. he's 30 years old, power-crazed already. >> with killing his uncle, let's be fair. who among us hasn't wanted to kill a relative or two over the holidays. seriously, this is truly something to worry about. i think the media has gotten it wrong. you are reading about a division in the leadership of north korea. no. what killing his uncle tells you is there is no division and no division that will be tolerated. kim jong-un is power-crazed, power mad. we are dealing with a nuclear armed nero or caligula.

to understand him, put aside the dry textbooks. study the crazy caesars. this is dangerous at a time when china is acting very aggressively in the east china sea. nearly colliding with one of our ships, declaring the defense zoneses. our allies are at logger heads with each other. i would be amazed and delighted if we can get through the next few years without a shooting incident. >> he takes over two years ago. the world is waiting to see. it was billed as he would be the reformer, modernize north korea. instead he replaced most of the senior leadership. the reason he becomes less stable rather than more stable, he's got nukes and isn't afraid to test missiles around the peninsula. we should be worried about him, should we not? >> we certainly should. he is surrounded by more yes men than president obama. this guy doesn't have a grip on

reality. he's almost destined to miscalculate to overjudge his capabilities. his military leaders won't tell him, oh, we can't do that, fearless leader. the potential for a miscalculation is enormous. most wars don't start because a master plan. they start because somebody does something really dumb ass stupid. >> he kills his uncle and girlfriend but embraces dennis rodman? >> the human heart is a crazy beast. i can't even respond to that. >> i want to turn back to something we walkie-talkied about the colonel schafer. robert levinson, former fbi who may or may not be a cia agent in iran. your thoughts? >> i find myself in the embarrassing position of agreeing with jay carney. the a.p. never should have broke the story. it makes it much harder, if not

impossible for iran to quietly give him back. now the story is out. >> he's been gone since 2007. the a.p. found out around 2010. they said they would wait. they have waited three years. doesn't look like we are closer to getting levinson so they went with it. that's a bad idea? >> it is. it's a separate issue with this administration. the above administration the has n't tried to help them in cuba, taken hostage in north korea or other americans in iran. the obama administration doesn't protect citizens. that's a given. the best hope for getting this guy back, if he's still alive, would have been quiet diplomacy, a quiet swap. now you have made it a macho thing with iran. >> can i push back a little bit? >> sure. push back at me all you want.

>> for me the best diplomacy would have been negotiating the nuclear deal they negotiated in the last month or so. >> you're right. >> it would have been a great time to talk about it. >> you're absolutely correct. we should have said to the iranians before this broke that, hey, you are hurting from sanctions. no deals, no talk until you give levinson back. obama cares about the deal, not about individual americans and their fates. >> unfortunately. >> it's tragic. >> it is. thank you very much. up next, vice president joe biden on what to buy the most powerful man in the world for christmas, moments away.

finally tonight president obama won't be getting presents from his second in command this year. >> have you gone christmas shopping for the president yet? >> are you kidding me? he's shopping for me. >> how hard is it to shop for

the president? >> we exchange birthday gifts, not christmas gifts. >> okay. >> he gave me a great birthday gift. >> how hard is it to pick out gifts? >> it's hard, but we both love golf so we usually give each other something having to do with golf. i gave him a unique golf bag last time. he gave me this really cool deal where you get to practice putting. it's a little gadget he gave me. it's great. >> at least they don't have to worry about the post christmas gift returns. if you are still looking for christmas gifts, bill and dennis miller's two new bolder fresher shows make great gifts. tickets are going fast for the show on friday, march 28, charleston, south carolina at the north charleston performing arts center and saturday, march 29, knoxville, tennessee, at the civic auditorium. that's it for us tonight. thanks for watching.

catch me on saturday at 11:30 a.m. t. bill welcome back monday. remember, the spin stops here because we are looking out for you. back of the book segment tonight. welcome to the a big night tonight on "the kelly file." charles krauthammer live with an interesting new explanation of what really went wrong with obamacare. plus, a new warning from surgeons tonight. >> we just don't know. >> they don't know what plans will be available, what services will be available. no one knows what will happen january 1st. >> dr. novak is here in a "the kelly file" exclusive. and a special message from mistletoe madison. wait until you see how she's doing two weeks after she was told it's better to beg than to work without the proper paperwork. we