i'm eric bolling in for bill o'reilly and please remember that the spin stops here because we're looking out for you. breaking tonight, the obama administration announces its retaliation against russia for their cyberattacks meant to interfere in our electoral process. as tensions between washington and moscow heat up. just 22 days away from donald trump assuming the presidency. welcome to "the kelly file." i'm sandra smith in for megyn kelly. the white house today announcing their punitive actions including the sanctioning of nine individuals and entities, the removal of 35 russia intelligence operatives from the united states and the closure of two russian owned compounds in new york and maryland. when asked why the administration didn't leave this

decision to president-elect trump's administration, eric schultz responded with this. >> the president is leaving office in a couple of weeks but he's the president from now until then. and the president-elect once he assumes office on january 20th will be able to make these decisions. >> schultz was asked about concerns that the obama white house is pushing president-elect trump into a diplomatic corner. >> if the next president wants to decide to reallow in senior intelligence officials from russia, they can do that. if the next administration wants to lift sanctions against senior russian intelligence, they can go ahead and do that. >> as for his part, mr. trump said quote, it's too many for our country to move on to bigger and better things. nevertheless in the spres of our

country and its great people i will meet with leaders of the intelligence community next week in order to be updated on the facts of the situation. we'll have reaction from pete hoekstra and charity hurt. but we begin with white house kevin cork who is in honolulu with the president. >> reporter: good evening from hawaii. 72 hours, that's how long three dozen russian operatives have to get out of the u.s. they have been expelled by the obama administration at least in part in retaliation for alleged russian cyber hacking activity. president obama making a statement about his decision today and it reads in part, these actions follow repeated private and public warnings that we have issued to the russian government and are a necessary and appropriate response to harm u.s. interest in violation of international norms of behavior. he went on to add this, these actions are not the sum total of our response to russia's

aggressive activities. we'll continue to take a variety of actions at a time and place of our choosing, some of which will not be publicized. >> our bottom line is that what russia as been engaged in is unacceptable and the president is sending a message to tell them to cut it out. that's why he ordered aexpressive action. >> reporter: as you know, the white house is not shy of accusing vladimir putin of orchestrating the attacks. of course it all exposed allegations of democratic party infighting and a concerted effort by senior party officials to can den soif eventual party nominee, hillary clinton. the russians snapped back ridiculing president obama with a tweet, writing, i'm quoting, president obama expelled 31 diplomats in cold war deja vu as everybody will be glad to see

this last of this hapless administration, lame duck. now experts tell us yes, you can see some of the sanctions, things you can get your arms around. that's easy to spot. what you're probably not going to see, however, is a cyber power that america has and will certainly utilize to retaliate against the russians. >> in cyberspace these things don't always have the media consequences like a bomb going off or bring in a fighter jet and bombing insurgents in a certain area. it is a different type of warfare with different types of ways to measure it. >> reporter: he's saying that there's going to be a lot more to this story, much of which we will not see, although it's also, to be fair, certain that we'll find out a lot more about the russian response in the days to come. sandra. >> thank you. joining me now with more poet hoekstra, adviser to president-elect trump transition team, julia ra din ski.

congressman, i'll start with you first. why now. all signs point to russia behind this. the response from the white house, he's the president with just a few week to go. he's been there for eight years. what about the timing? >> you can't get into barack obama's head on this. there's in reason why 22 days left in his administration he's muddying the waters and making things for difficult for the incoming president. congratulation to donald trump. he's not letting this distract him. he's continuing to focus on the agenda that he wants to implement beginning on january 20, which is about getting the economy moving, defeating isis and reforming or repealing obamacare. >> when you look at a statement, he's saying exactly that, come on, let's move on. let's a lot of things to get to like the economy but he says for the best interest of the country and the american people, he will sit down and find out the facts

from intelligence. >> well apparently he's been preefs on the facts or at least i hope he's taken breefs peef b fact. that is a little speechless considering the fact that he's got access to briefings that the rest of us don't have. move on, move on from the fact that we had a foreign power infiltrate and hack some of our democratic institutions, move on from the fact that this could easily happen. >> are you a fan, first of all, of us implementing the sanctions on russia and do they go far enough? >> i don't think they go far enough. but i will say this, short of seizing whatever assets we have in the west and the ability to seize that belong to vladimir putin personally and to members of his inner circle that control the kremlin, short of thatting with nothing goes far enough. if you want to punish vladimir

put putin, you don't impose sanctions on intelligence agencies or by kicking out a few diplomats, that is speckles and weak. the only way to hit vladimir putin where it hurts is to go after his pocketbook. i don't know if the administration is doing that behind the scenes. but if they are not, the sanctions do not go far enough. >> charlie, there's absolutely no evidence that russia hacked the election itself. the cia and the fbi both agree that russia hacked john podesta. but the election itself, there's no proof that was hacked. >> kind of the big news here is that finally president obama is getting upset. and you know, we've seen over the past eight years vladimir putin and his allies, they're gassed people, invaded countries, they've sought nuclear weapons, done weapons

tests. and we haven't heard a peep, nothing more than finger wagging out of the administration. i think it's great that president obama is finally getting upset with vladimir putin. i agree that it's probably not enough. but i think it's very instructive that, you know, none of these other things raised his eye. what upset him was that vladimir putin did something, according to the administration, that went after president obama politically and that's the one line you can't cross with this guy. and because they went after him in a political way, they're going to react. and i think that pretty much sums up the entire administration. >> can i just raise one thing. the act which barack obama did sign went very far in punishing a lot of the people in putin's inner circle. i don't think it went far enough. but to say that we have not retaliated against the russians for their behavior in the past under the administration is not accurate. i think obama's failure with respect to russia has been woeful so i'm not defending his

ak actions. >> we have to sit around and see what russia's response is going to be. russia's foreign ministry, a spokesman has put out a statement, saying if russia takes new hostile steps, it will receive an answer. congressman, what are they saying? >> it will be interesting to see. it could be a tit for tat and tomorrow putin will expel 36 americans from the moscow embassy. but he may decide that he's going to restrain himself. he's looking towards january 20, we will have a new president. he'll take a look at what this president does with the sanctions that president obama has put in place and believing that maybe there is an opportunity for a little bit of a fresh start. remember, the other news today is for about the last four hours it was russia and turkey that

negotiated a cease-fire in syria, something that our secretary of state and this president have been unable to do. they weren't even in the room when this happened. and so putin is, right now, is working from a point of strength. i don't think he really needs to get into a tit for tat with president obama although he may. he really doesn't have that. >> charlie, you do wonder when he ultimately sits down and he sits down with intelligence, gets briefed on this, gets all of the facts on this, you wonder if president-elect trump is going to take them at their word because he's already been skeptical of what has been coming out of our intelligence agencies and to be quite frank, congressman, you said it's right to be so. will he take them at their word? >> i think it's a good thing that he's going to sit down with them and i think it's a good thing that president trump just like any president should be skeptical of everything he hears. but i think, you know, the real question here is whether donald

trump decides, you know what, i'm going to try to forge a relationship with vladimir putin to fight a global war on terror. and therefore put aside some of these other disagreements. and if he makes that decision, you know, he did campaign on that, that is what he said he would do and he got elected president promising that. so it might make a lot of people uncomfortable. it makes me uncomfortable to be in bed with somebody like vladimir putin. but if the president sees this bigger picture as a bay to go after the scourge of terrorism around the globe, then you know -- >> and cybersecurity is an enormous threat that we face every single day. and donald trump was asked about this when he stepped outside of mar-a-lago. here's his most recent response to that if we can listen right now. >> i think we ought to get on with our lives. i think the computers have complicated lives greatly. the whole age of computer has made it where nobody knows what's going on.

we've got speed but we haven't got the security that we need. >> what did you make of his response there? i mean does that sound like he's taking this seriously and sees this as a very serious threat? >> well i think overall he sees cybersecurity as a very serious threat. i mean we know that over the last four to eight years, it's china, north korea, it's iran, it's russia. they've all been hacking towards the united states and guess what, we've been doing it the other way as well. i think the other thing that you get when you go into cyberspace, the rules of war in cyberspace have not been clearly defined. so if we retaliate, what do the russians do to come back and those types of things. you know, in all other areas of warfare, the parameters are understood by both sides. in cyberspace it is not. so we've got to be very very careful that this does not spin out of control and go into a direction that we're all going

to be very uncomfortable with. >> it does seem that president obama is trying to get a lot done in his last few days that he's in office. >> well, let me say this. what he's trying to do is obviously set it up for donald trump to not be able to trump back some of the positions that he's done. but look, there are people like john mccain and lindsey graham who have been doing god east work on this suggesting that they're going to put together a package of real sanctions with real teeth in it and will put it oun the president's desk. the question for donald trump is going to be is he going to side with the bipartisan group members of congress all of which agree that the russians did hack into the democratic institutions or is he going to side with vladimir putin and lift some of the sanctions and not go forward with them. that's the situation that president obama is setting up for president-elect trump. i will also say, you know, i remember back in 2000 when george bush looked into vladimir

putin's eyes and saw his soul and thought he was a fantastic person. he was excused of that notion when russia went into georgia. hillary clinton tried to do the reset button thinking he could work with vladimir putin and she couldn't. donald trump will learn the same thing. he's set up a template by which the west is the boogie man and he will learn that quickly and if he doesn't it will be to his detriment. >> i think a lot of people are falling into the trap of judging him before he's in office. good to see you all. thank you for being here tonight president-elect trump signaling that major changes could be coming to the va. the fulfillment of the campaign promise to take care of our veterans looks to be his top priority right now. plus, new anger over two new national monuments named by

president obama out west. utah congressman jason chaffetz is here live to react. and could the growing risk between the u.s. enisrael be having a similar effect on the democratic party? we'll ask brooke gold stooern and larry kosh about that next. >> this is the reason why we don't have peace. there's another coalition. the coalition to have palestinian authority with hamas which is a terror organization that is openly committed to israel's destruction and who has israel's destruction and who has chartered calls for the

isjust wanna see ifa again? my score changed... you wanna check yours? scores don't change that much. i haven't changed. oh, really? ♪ it's girls' night they said business casual. i love summer weddings! oh no. yeah, maybe it is time. maybe i should check my credit score. try credit karma. it's free. oh woah. that's different. check out credit karma today. credit karma. give yourself some credit.

breaking tonight, open revolt inside the democrating party as we're witnessing some of the most high profile names on the left bristle at president obama's recent handling of israel. remarks that mr. kerry later defended as necessary. >> -- which is a very comprehensive effort that is moving israeli settlers into the west bank increasingly making the possibility of two states

very difficult if not impossible. if you have more and more settlements being built in the area that is supposed to be the future palestine, it makes it harder to have the future p palestine. >> chuck schumer, and elliott angle, the top democrat on house foreign affairs. our correspondent has more on that part from this story in washington. >> good evening. secretary of john kerry's speech criticizing israel has drawn a robust response from benjamin netanyahu and some democrats. for over an hour he outlined president obama's plan to reach peace. and while he did criticize the palestinians for glorifying terrorists, he spent much of his speech criticizing israel on its

settlement building. the top democrat says that approach is misguided. >> it's easy for us to sit and point fingers saying the israelis should do this or that. i didn't hear much from john kerry about what the palestinians need to do. it's easy for us to do it. >> chuck schumer writes in a statement, quote, while secretary kerry mentioned gaza in his speech, he seemed to forget the history of the settlements in gaza and the palestinians responded by sending rockets into israel. some democrats are applauding kerry. the second ranking democratic in the house writes in a statement, quote, secretary kerry's remarks outlined long standing american principles that only a two-state solution is a viable one. i continue to believe that the u.n. security council is the wrong forum. >> and now a state department official is responding to some of these responses, saying,

quote, stating uncomfortable facts doesn't 'em bolden extremists, dangerous steps on the ground by both sides do that. >> joining me now, brooke gold tooen a -- goldstein and larry korb. i want to start with you first, brooke. we had allen dian dershowitz on night. is the damage done irreversible? >> the united nations has been inr engaged in a decline of racist moves that are going to damage any peace. and why we see a nonparp zahn disgust to what kerry is pushing is because what he's a future islamic state. he's saying basically that jewish homes in samaria are an

obstacle to the creation of a future palestinian islamic state, that this state should be you free. that is racist, segregation and apart tied. further he's saying this state should be ruled by the plo, a terrorist group that recruits its own children as suicide bombers. while he's waxing poetic about whether israel can remain a democracy, he's asking them to create an islamic state when the middle east is now in chaos because of all of the fake line being drawn >> and the timing of all of this of course is being requesteques. we looked to the words coming from the secretary of state and then we looked to the words of key top democrats in washington and it seems there's some in-fighting and serious disagreement within their party. >> well, there's no doubt about it. the middle east has been con n

contentious when i worked in the amou administration. what's interesting is the prime minister before netanyahu, also his minister of defense, he basically said today, two-thirds of the people in israel supported kerry's speech. and one person you didn't nen mention in here was senator dianne feinstein, a strong supporter of israel, the ranking member on the senate intelligence committee, she applauded kerry for having a bold speech. and this idea that it was against israel, no. if you look at it, the first two thirds of the speech were criticizing the palestinians when he listed the five impediments. now the other one got the most attention. but the fact of the matter is, he did call out for the things that brooke was talking about with the palestinians saying they can't continue do do this kind of stuff, empower

extremists if in fact that's what they want. they're not going to get it if they keep on doing these things. and the other reason is that this year settlements are up 40%. okay. and so the fact of the matter is, if you don't say anything it's going to become more and more difficult to get that. >> let me get brooke in here. >> this is a racist presupposition that jews have no legal right to settle -- >> no. it's the geneva convention. >> absolutely not. >> hold on, larry. >> don't say don't have a legal right. >> if you dispute the borders of p palestine as a jewish state, you have to dispute the legitimacy of every single border carved up by the mandate, including saudi arabia, including iraq, including jordan which you know was created by the exact same

mandate document that guaranteed palestine from the river to the sea as a jewish state. palestine is a term used to identified you dayian smear ama. it was meant as a derogatory term. there was no such thing as a muslim ethnicity in palestine. anything else is historical revisionism. you have muslim majority states that comprise of 99% of the middle east. and carve up another islamic state run by a terrorist organization is not a solution to anything. and if you promote that, you're promoting furthering terrorism. >> wait a second.

a hugh barack accepted this. the geneva convention said you cannot settle a territory which you conquer. that's the basis on which -- >> right. and whose territory was conquered? >> all right. this is surely a disagreement that is translating into so much disagreement in washington. we have to leave it there. thanks to both of you for coming and and having the debate. a troubling head line for law enforcement. as we see a major uptick in killing of police officers, are the recent protesters by groups partly responsible. and as democrats look back toward their november defeat, fonler obama staffer suggesting that one of their issues might be their disconnect of people of fe faith. president-elect trump saying there could be a shakeup for american veterans when it comes to health care. we have a powerful lineup here

to debate. >> i've been saying we're going to take care of our veterans. we're going to make it great for the veterans because the ♪is it manwich night?

♪ put some manwich on the table... and give boring weeknight meals, the night off. ♪make tonight a manwich night

breaking tonight, america's largest health care provider

could be in for a major shakeup. president-elect trump is signaling that the status quo at the va will not be allowed to continue under his watch and that improving care for our veterans could be all about limiting the government's current monopoly on services. peter doocy has the latest from inside president-elect trump's mar-a-lago estate where key meetings took place yesterday. >> reporter: a public-previous option is on the table for the veterans administration and a senior official is explain while president-elect trump is wanting to do this. some vets love the va, some vets want to two to the va. the idea is to come up with a solution that solves the problem. it's not the easiest thing in the world because you've got all of these kingdoms out there. in the federal government it's hard to break things up and

start over. and now the president-elect is also talking about why a private option is appealing to him. >> i don't want to see veterans waiting in lines for weeks. and you know in many cases they have a minor illness and it takes so long to see a doctor it turns out to be a major illness and i don't want to see that. >>. >> reporter: we don't have many details yet and it is a shift that some major veteran groups signaled they will not like. but it fits with the final promise of a 10-point plan laying out the president-elect's position. number ten, quote, ensure every veteran has the choice to seek care at the va or a private service provider of their choice. around trump administration no veteran will die waiting for service. the idea of this came after the president-elect met at mar-a-lago with executives from some of the best health care provider, mayo clinic, johns hopkins and the cleveland

clinic, whose coe has been mentioned as a leading contender to win the va secretary nomination. a transition official said the president-elect is not feeling pressure to quickly nominate a va secretary, instead saying this is taking so long because he wants to make sure he finds someone who shares his understanding of what the va's most urgent needs are. marc's t thiessen, nomiki k, investigator reporter, and guy benson, a political editor at town hall.com and a fax news contributor. good to see you tonight. marc, is it a good idea to shake up the whole system? >> it absolutely is a good idea. what trump is proposing here and it seems to be very, very early in the process but it's not larly nlar

particularly new or controversial. the veterans act allows veterans who have been waiting in line for more than 30 days to go to a private doctor. what trump seems to be talking about is dramatically expanding that to more veterans and i think it's a great idea. it's very much like school choice. under school choice if you like your public school you can stay in your public school but if you're stuck in a failing public school, you're not forced to stay there. you can get a vouch and go to a private school and get your child the education they need. if you love your va doctor, you get to keep it. but if you're stuck in a va hospital are where there are long wait times and you're not getting the care you need, you get to go to a private doctor. >> it shouldn't a huge shock that changes are coming. donald trump promised this on the campaign trail and we know it's a problem. some vets love the health care they receive, many hate it.

something needs to be done. he identified that. he won the election. >> veterans deserve the best care possible and no doubt the va needs reform. the problems root in the fact that the va has not been funded correctly. they've been playing political football cutting funding for the va. in 2010 there was $1.4 billion cut led by republicans, that's $690 million to the va that was cut. of course the goal was they wanted to privatize the va so they could make money off of the va and veterans. this could be solved, veterans would receive the proper care if the va was funded completely. the problem is it's been slashed and cut at the expense of our veterans. they're suffering the consequences of the political games. >> this partial privatization, they say this is one of the options on the table. i want to tell you what we're

deal with as far as what americans want here. the vast majority of veterans, 87% believe the federal government should provide health care system but 50%, half of them say the health care system that's being provided is just not living up to the promise. >> well it definitely is not living up to the promise, not just in sub standard care that we've seen in a bunch of instances around the country but also long waiting lines covered up by the bureaucrats trying to protect their bonuses in the va scandal. the standard quo is unacceptable and the veterans deserve better. since 2000 the va's budget has roughly tripled since 2000. this is not just hey, let's take out the money shovel and pile more cash on to this. this is a systemic problem that needs rooth and branch we form. and giving the opportunity to veterans to escape the system that might be failing them and

go seek private care, i think that's a no-brainer. >> we all agree we want to absolute best for our veterans. democrats picking up the pieces after the surprising defeat of hillary. they're complete disconnect with religious voters. a piece out today from the atlantic declares that deficit as a near crisis with the former director describing the problem as follows, the ignorance of the democrats in not even pretending to give the voters a reason to vote for them. marc thiessen. >> why would you give someone a reason to vote for you if you want to force them to change their religious views, which is essentially what the democrats want. in 2015 hillary clinton gave a speech to a women's panel in which she said, this is a direct quote, when it comes to aworgs and gay marriage, deep seeded

religious beliefs have to be changed. excuse me. it's the job of the president under the constitution to protect the rights and views and advocate for them. this calls on the obama administration which tried to forced the little sisters of the poor to provide contraceptives against their religious beliefs. when you find yourself fighting the little sisters of the poor in the supreme court you're doing something wrong. i'm sorry. >> that was one example catholic nuns in this protected legal battle with the obama administration to try to force them to facilitate the purchase of something that's against their religion. i think what we've seen is for a lot of americans christians in particular, it's not just ignorance that they sense from the democratic party or the obama administration, it's an open hostility where people feel like their views are being cast as bigotry that have to be stamped out bip an aggressive

secular government. it is that fear, that concern, that explains why donald trump did so well among christian, including winning the majority of catholics, among perhaps millions of voters who had some pause and weren't necessarily huge fans of his. it's been the direction of the obama administration that got people off thaf r their butt to vote against hillary clinton. >> are democrats stopping, taking a look within looking at what the problem is and identifying it? obviously it was there. >> the problem was not religion. the problem was the economy. donald trump is just as pro-choice as hillary clinton was. as far back as 1999 he advocated against banning late term abortion abortions. over half of registered catholics are democrats, 80% of african-american protestants are democrats, this is not a crisis of the democratic party. this is really about the economy. people vote for the economy first. in fact it was a major story

line by the washington times that donald trump was winning voters on the economy who were putting their pro-life believes second, third to the economy because that's what the voters care about. people have their personal beliefs. >> you won't get a disagreement with me there. it's always been about the economy. democrats didn't even stay on message there. it was an historic year for u.s. law enforcement not in the way that one might hope. as we learn that the ambush style attacks have result fld the biggest surge of officer deaths on record. we'll debate what's going on here and how america's finist and their families are dealing with their disturbing news. new outrage after president obama dedicated two new national monuments in utah and nevada. jason chaffetz will be here to my business was built with passion...

but i keep it growing by making every dollar count. that's why i have the spark cash card from capital one. with it, i earn unlimited 2% cash back on all of my purchasing. and that unlimited 2% cash back from spark means thousands of dollars each year going back into my business... which adds fuel to my bottom line. what's in your wallet?

test. test test. test. test test. test. test test. test. test test. test. test test. test. test

>> native americans support the move. >> there are sites that were destroyed. >> we're our own government and have a right to speak over our land. >> support is disputed. adding insult to their injury, utah land basting.

opponents say this is a case of the misusing the antiquities act. as with hundreds of moves they hope to undo it with the hech of the new president. >> thank you. our next guest happens to represent one of the states included. congressman, it's good to see you. >> good evening. >> it's arrogant. he's taking more land than there is in the state of delaware as a national monument. if you're living there, you're a rancher and have resources there

is not a single person in utah so there is not a single person in favor, but the president did it anyway. >> so he's in his right to do so. this falls into the 1904 act giving the president power to designate national monuments. but why now, do you5÷think? >> well -- well, i think the arrogance of what he did is going to provide an opportunity to challenge that. the act was put in place.

but are you kidding me? this is the stay of utah. 70% of the land is controlled by the federal and state government. >> if there is concern what did you say? >> i'm the chairman of the oversite committee. i can investigate and shoot subpoenas. >> are you going to? >> this is no choice. we asked for it. never did he discuss this with us. they gave us 50 minute notice they're going to do this.

>> i've got a call saying 50 minutes the president is going to designate the monument. we've got assurances that no decision had been made but they'd put this into motion a long time ago. it's a radical agenda. affecting people in nevada, in utah, in the oceans. across the country from coal miners and just hope the president-elect donald trump will do what he said he's going to do because this is coming midnight monument just has to go. >> congressman, thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> up next, new numbers showing

2016 was a deadly year for u.s. law enforcement. we'll debate what is behind this fight with former new york city police commissioner joining us right after the break. there they are. us i think we could finally get youra bigger place. yeah, let me check my score too. try credit karma. it's free. credit karma. give yourself some credit.

disturbing new ♪ disturbing new numbers revealing 2016 will go down as one of the deadliest on record for u.s. law enforcement. thanks to so-called ambush-style attacks we saw in dallas and baton rouge, 2016 saw the most dramatic surge in officers being fatally shot since records were created. 64 officers killed by firearms in 2016, up more than 50% from 41 in 2015, and that's got some folks wondering what's really going on behind these numbers. bernard kerick is the former commissioner of the new york city police department. eric guster is an attorney and political commentator. i will start with you first, sir. what is behind this? >> i think a lot of it is this anti-cop rhetoric that is getting people to do this. there's been over 50% increase over last year in cops being gunned down, but close to 300% increase in cop assassinations,

executions, where people walk up to a bunch of cops standing in front of a place, slaughter them, blow their brains out while they're sitting in a car having lunch, a 300% increase in those type of assaults on cops. that's beyond, you know, domestic violence. >> how can police do their job in this kind of environment? >> look, they're going to do their job regardless. my son is a cop in newark, new jersey, on the newark swat team. these men and women go out every day, like the cops in new york city, you will have 6,000 cops in times square on new year's eve in a very dangerous situation. they do it, they do it well. >> we thank each and every one of them. >> in dangerous times. >> eric, the numbers are concerning, gun-related deaths, 2016, 64 gun-related deaths. you look back at 2015, there were 41. there's clearly a trend here. >> there is. there are too many guns on the street, too many dirty guns on the street, and so many cops go to domestic violence scenes

where a lot of these shootings occur, and there is some anti-cop sentiment but i believe the media blows it out of proportion tremendously that causes those things to fester. >> i think i want to stop there because i would like to get the former police commissioner to respond to that. >> look, i think there is the anti-cop rhetoric stuff. i think it started at the white house. >> no way. >> started at the white house. >> no way. >> it's been done -- dubbed down through governor -- >> holding police accountable is not a problem. >> holding police accountable is not a problem. >> the obama administration wants to hold police accountable and they don't want to be held accountable for certain things and that's not anti-cop. >> how it is a direct result of the obama administration? >> let's say black lives matter, which is a hate group, okay. >> 71% of cop shootings occur by white men. what is your excuse for that? >> black lives matter is a hate

group. you have government officials in our government today that support groups like that, that call for the assassination of cops. >> see, this is fake. this is a lie what he is telling you. he is leading us down the road and saying black lives matter, that's the first thing he just said. >> let's go back to address the idea there's too many guns on the street because -- >> no, let me address that, because i'm tired of saying black lives matter over these cop shootings, when 71% of the shootings are done by white men. people come on television and say black lives matter is the cause, and that's not true. black lives matter and other organizations want to hold police accountable for the things they do. >> democrats like to address the idea there are too many guns on the street, they want to implement new gun lives. half of the officers killed in the line of duty were killed with guns, the highest in more than two decades. >> let me talk about that for a second. chicago has the harshest,

probably the strongest gun laws in the country, chicago and illinois. okay. florida, you could just about buy guns in any store you want over the counter, okay. chicago has more homicides, close to more homicides than the entire state of florida. >> i thought we were talking about police shootings though. >> we are. >> we are, but when you are talking about guns, you want to talk about guns, gun access, let's talk about it. >> let's bring it to the problem we have with police in this country. final thoughts? >> the problems that we have, there needs to be more community policing as far as reaching out to the community, and that will ensure people and citizens to tell police officers what's going on, and it will ensure their safety. >> clearly it is a problem. the numbers are daunting to look at as we wrap up 2016. >> it is. >> thank you both for being here. >> it is. >> all right. we will be right back.

have you picked up your copy of megyn's new boorks "settle for more." linda writes in part, her story is truly inspiring and shows us a secret to becoming extremely successful. i like the way she handles adversity emotionally and publicly. i would recommend this book to young people who could benefit from a boost to their futures. i want daughters to read it. truly, truly inspiring, besides being a great story of megyn kelly's eventful life. you can pick up your own copy of "settle for more" on amazon or in book stores near you. it does make a great gift heading into the new year. all right. chime in on the conversation.

go to facebook.com/thekellyfile. i'm sandra smith, in for megyn kelly tonight, and this is "the kelly file". ♪ ♪ welcome to "hannity." president obama is imposing sanctions on russia over allegations of election hacking. i'm kimberly guilfoyle in for sean tonight. kellyanne conway and former u.s. ambassador john bolton will be here with reaction. first, earlier today the obama administration punishing russia with sanctions, including expelling 35 russian diplomates from the u.s., and closing russian-owned compounds in new york and maryland. russia responding by threatening to retaliate and saying the move was done to hurt the incoming administration. and president-elect trump is reacting by putting out a statement that reads, quote, it is time for ourou