we want to know what you think. that's all the time we have left this evening. we will see you back here tomorrow nighty factor" is next. >> bill: "the o'reilly factor" is on tonight. >> mandatory five year prison sentence for aggravated felons who are deported and then come back. who on earth would oppose that law? >> bill: 42 democratic senators did. now, case law will be reintroduced into congress. with donald trump behind it. we will have the inside story. >> the declassified report came out yesterday. it has proven that donald trump is indeed putin's manchurian candidate. >> bill: charges continue that president-elect trump is too soft on the russian leader, putin. what does brit hume think of that? he will be here. >> how thrilled argue about trump's inauguration? >> i'm ecstatic. >> bill: also, tonight, asking

the quotes about the upcoming presidential inauguration. >> pumped up for the inauguration? >> pumped up, baby. >> bill: caution, you are about to enter the "no spin zone" ." "the factor" begins right now. ♪ >> bill: hi, i'm bill o'reilly. thanks for watching us tonight. "kate's law" reintroduced. that is a segment of this evening's "talking points memo." first, the big picture. i believe donald trump separated himself from his republican competitors last year by being very tough on illegal immigration. mr. trump made it very clear to the american people that he believes folks entering the usa illegally should be held accountable for that action. he also championed "kate's law," which would impose a mandatory minimum five year prison term on foreigners convicted of crimes in the usa who reenter after being deported.

"kate's law" specifically says that convicted felons are the targets, not chambermaids or farmworkers. as you may know, the factor came up with this law after 32-year-old kate steinle was shot to death, allegedly by an illegal alien, juan francisco lopez-sanchez. that man had been deported five times but illegally entered here six times. how could that possibly happen? how could a guy avoid a long prison term defining deportation all those times? it is insane! and america is at fault for allowing it to happen. the toll on the family is immense. >> the day she was killed, we were walking arm and arm on pier 14 in san francisco, enjoying a wonderful day together. suddenly, a shot rang out. kate fell. she looked at me and said, "help me, dad." it was the last words i will

ever hear from my daughter. >> bill: the murder trial begins in california february 17th. also, last friday, federal judge said to the steinle family, they are free to sue the u.s. government. the federal government, for general negligence. but the judge did dismissed the claims against san francisco county. that is too bad. that is why "kate's law" is needed. no american family should suffer at the hands of convicted foreign felons who defy deportation. "talking points memo" believes one of the main reasons i donald trump won the presidency is that he felt outrage over kate steinle, while many other politicians, including the entire democratic party and president obama, did not. even if you are not politically involved, failing to harshly punish foreigners who defy deportation after committing heinous crimes in this country is inexcusable. the government is there to protect the people, not to look the other way when things like

immigration breakdown. and remember, san francisco let sanchez go, let him out of jail, after they requested the county hold him. how bad is that? this time around, we can expect "kate's law" to pass, as the democrats will have a very hard time blocking it. that will be a tremendous victory for every american citizen. that is the memo. now, for the top story reactions, joining us from washington, charles krauthammer. harry reid is gone. he single-handedly rallied enough democrats to block "kate's law" in the senate's last time around. do you expect it to pass? >> yes, i do. i mean, as you say, we have had an election. immigration was a major issue. kate steinle is a slam dunk. it is really hard to imagine a logical argument against it. i don't think it is the most important of the measures. it is probably -- it is way down

the list because the population to which it applies is rather small. but as you say, i agree with you on this, it is very symbolic and it is a sign of things to come. there was essentially a referendum on and immigration the details weren't there. but in the current mood of the country, with the new administration that made immigration a major issue, i think it would be very hard for it to be filibustered. there are ten democratic senators who are coming from states that went republican, that one for trump come up for reelection in 2018. they would have to tread very carefully to oppose this law. >> bill: okay. now, if we had a plebiscite in this country on "kate's law," do you think 90-10, it passes? 90-10? >> it would be a significant majority. >> bill: okay. that is number one. so, harry reid and the democrats have blocked the law, blocked it in the face of overwhelming

support from the american people, it shows me that he has contempt for us. the second thing is, once you get critical mass, "kate's law" is critical mass, this drug dealer, this is what he was, six times, was able to come illegally across the border. six times. that means we don't have an effective border. all right, that means we don't have a justice system that works because he was caught all those times! and sent back all those times! an end nothing happened to him! that means, we have complete chaos and anarchy in our immi justice systems! doesn't not? >> what it means is, we need to be serious about preventing illegal immigration of all kinds. there, the real results, the real payoff will be number one, cutting of sanctuary cities mso,

you don't get cities like san francisco not cooperating with the feds. that will be far more effective in any case law. second, you build a barrier, so that it actually becomes difficult for people to come in. they can't walk in anytime they want. the israelis have a fence, other people have fences, all over europe, and they work. the third would be e-verify. you cut down on immigration by having people use a very effective federal system to check on their illegal status. there is no work -- the fourth is the visa. i mean, 40% of the people over stay. so, those are the four measures. >> bill: there got to be penalties, also attached. how does this make you feel? every time i engage the other side, the liberal side, on "kate's law," they always equated, this guy, this heinous

guy, who will be convicted in san francisco, with farmers come up with house painters, they ner would break it out, because we are only talking here about felons. "kate's law" is directed against criminals who have been convicted of heinous crimes. not people who paint houses and to come across. but the other side wouldn't see that, wouldn't give you that. it was an attack on migrants, attacking migrants, o'reilly. i found that so despicable, did you? >> your argument is not with me. your argument is with harry reid, who is now in a blissful retirement. your argument is with a pot of democrats, for whom immigration is totally symbolism. anything that seems to be opposing illegal immigrants is seen as an issue that they cannot use politically. the democrats have made it very clear they always wanted immigration as an issue and not as a policy. well, those days are over.

the republicans are now in charge, they are serious about immigration. the only question is, what kind of laws will they pass and how effective will they be. again, look, i admire your passion about "kate's law" and i think it is a good idea. but it ranks very low on the list of things that are actually going to be making a difference. >> bill: that will start it, though. that will start it. once you get past, then, you will see the other things come up and the momentum will start to build. but this family, their steinle family, needs justice. this is a symbolic play. our senators and congresspeople got to do the right thing. they have to. it just makes me sick. all right, charles, we appreciate it. next, on "the rundown," putin versus trump. the controversy still very hot. we will talk with brit hume about it. about it. later you won't see these folks at the post office. about it. later they have businesses to run.

they have passions to pursue. how do they avoid trips to the post office? stamps.com mail letters, ship packages, all the services of the post office right on your computer. get a 4 week trial, plus $100 in extras including postage and a digital scale. go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again.

♪ >> bill: "impact segment," the putin trump controversy. there are two stories here. first one, russia did try to create chaos in the american presidential election and putin knew about it. president obama has ancient russia, as we all know. but he could have done that last august. he waited until the last minute, i believe, so that putin issued a reprisal, he wouldn't have to deal with that, the next president would. that is speculation, i admit it. there is no other explanation for president obama not stepping up earlier when u.s. intelligence agencies and knew the russians were hacking into the democratic political machine. second story, whether the hacking influence the vote. here, it is impossible to say. i believe few americans made their voting decision based upon what clinton campaign manager john podesta said in emails. however, to be fair, the hacking situation diverted the press and got a lot a coverage. so, you could say, or the clinton campaign because it cut into the trump bashing by the

press, which is almost nonstop. joining us now with his assessment, brit hume is in florida this evening. now, first of all, do you think trump is being too soft on putin? >> yeah, i think he probably is. look vladimir putin is a bad actor. two prior presidents, two of trump's immediate predecessors try to make common cause with him. it didn't work in either case. i think trump will eventually figure this out. but's, so far, i think he nurses this notion that he, by virtue of his personality and his way, will be able to stand shoulder to shoulder with putin and to do business with him. maybe he can. but i doubt it. i think you will figure it out before long. >> bill: all right, so, the intent, we know, is for the united states to have a better relationship with russia. trump is going to try to make that happen and we'll see. that is fair enough. now, on the e-voting side of the hacking controversy, do you know anyone who went to the polls and

said, i am voting for trump because of john podesta? do you know anyone? >> no. i don't think anybody who is serious about this believes that the hacking of the emails affected ultimately the outcome of the election. her however, as i think, bill, whatever coverage those embarrassing emails did not help the clinton campaign. it is worth pointing out here, would you keep hearing this talk about hacking the election or interfering in the election, it is certainly true that they tried to interfere or at least influence the campaign. obviously, there was no effect on the voting, in terms of the actual election day exercise of people's franchise. i simply didn't occur. >> bill: you know what i can't understand, all the reportage says that putin didn't like hillary clinton. and wanted trump to win. all right.

so, be careful what you wish for. trump wins and who does he put as secretary of defense? perhaps, the toughest guy, anti-russian guy, he doesn't hate russia, he is not going to take any nonsense from russia. whereas, hillary clinton never would have put a person like that and secretary of war position. secretary of defense position. never. it would have been a softer, secular, nonmilitary guy. i am trying to think, why would putin want to do a tougher guy, trump, then hillary clinton? do you know? >> what i think happened, bill, even with the intelligence community seems to think i'm a e hillary clinton and didn't like sanctions that were imposed and didn't like her. he started back in 2015 with this effort, which was intended to discredit her believing that she was going to be the next president. so, he was seeking to weaken

her. that makes a certain kind of sense. at that point, of course, no one recognized that trump was going to come to the floor, be the nominee, and ultimately, be elected. obviously, as trump advanced, it became hard to tell where the line could be drawn between hurting her and helping him because everything that hurt her helped him once it became one-on-one between them. in the end, he got to someone he preferred, but i think he may be right, bill, you have to be careful what you wish for in a situation like this. the trump appointments, mattis in particular, and his intelligence agency appointees, suggest to me, that the honeymoon with russia, such as that is, will not last very lon long. speed when i look at geopolitics and i say, okay, you can never really understand the true motives because putin is never going to tell you what he did or what he didn't do. but now, this is being used to denigrate, this is my last question for you, trump's victory. so, the people who don't like

trump are saying, the only reason he won was because of putin and putin's hacking. and that is it too. >> i think that's right. i think he needs to learn, trump does, that there are certain criticism but he doesn't need to react to. by doing so, he keeps these stories alive buys into them, and indulges a certain adolescent side that show up in his tweets. my sense about the criticism is, he would have been wise to ignore it. he would have been wise at the outset you say, if there was an attempt to interfere in the campaigns, we condemn that. we don't approve of that. we will take appropriate action, which i think i'm a basically, bill, is what he is now done, would you think about it. you notice all the reaction coming from the trump camp after the briefing he got on this intelligence information was pretty positive about it. it was a constructive -- so, doesn't it strike you, bill, that he probably listened to

that and was impressed by it and is now on a different place with regard to putin and this intelligence to than he had been? to be what i know for a fact that he does not want this issue to besmirch his victory. that is paramount for him. brit hume, everybody. >> can't blame him for that. i don't think he did. >> bill: what is the truth about guantanamo bay? "the factor" is investigating how many released prisoners go back to terrorism. later, tucker carlson on hollywood bashing donald trump last night. also from a jesse watters in the upcoming inauguration. those reports afafafafaf

♪ >> bill: "factor followup" segment tonight, as you know, president obama vowed when he was elected in 2008, to close

the prison at guantanamo bay, cuba. currently, president-elect trump vows he will not close gitmo. according to analysis by director of national intelligence, president bush the younger released 532 men being held on terror charges. about 35% of them come a pretty big number, are either suspecter confirmed of going back to terrorism. as of july, 2016, president obama released 161 terror detainees. 12.5% of them are either confirmed or suspected of going back to the dark side. joining is now from philadelphia, dr. james mitchell, author of the book, "enhanced interrogation, inside the minds and motives of islamic terrorists trying to destroy america." so, the percentage and a president obama, going back to terrorism, much lower than under president bush, doctor, why? >> my impression is that it probably is because the length of time.

the people that bush released were quite some time ago. i think it takes a little while for the effects of being in guantanamo to wear off and for them to get back into their old behaviors. >> bill: i have been to guantanamo bay twice. i heard from some folks there that when a. detainee is released and sent back to the middle east, they ar suspicion as possibly being a double agent, so, they can't go right away back to the battlefields. >> i think that probably is true. there are going to be suspiciou. my impression is that that is probably where double agents would come from, or at least you would suspect they would come from, if you are part of a terrorist organization. it would be very suspicious of people who were supposed to be held indefinitely who suddenly showed up again on your doorste. >> bill: know, left. if they are the worst of the worst, right? >> right. i looked at those. the people who are left are

people like explosive experts, people who are experts in chemicals and poisons, people who are experts in surface-to-air missiles, and rpgs, and trained assassins, and mountain and urban warfare instructors. so, they really are pretty horrible people. >> bill: khalid shaikh mohammed is still there? >> he is still there. >> bill: he is the architect of 9/11. it will be interesting to see if president obama lets any more of them out in the next 11 days. do you anticipate that? >> i'm hoping he doesn't do that. i think you'd be a horrible mistake. especially, if he does what i think i had heard him say where they were going to return them to the countries of origin. because the most of these folks are yemeni. if you drop them in the middle of yemen, a failed estate, kind of a civil war, i can't imagine they would do anything except go back to being a jihadist. to speed when americans who sayt

unlimited detention without military tribunal court is basically against human rights. you can't keep these people forever unless you adjudicate them on some level. do they have a point? >> i think they have a point. i think the people who have been involved in killing americans, especially like khalid shaikh mohammed, and the other men associated with 9/11, should have had a military trial. they should have already had their sentences carried out. >> bill: do you know why that didn't happen? i have called for that, as well. i have called for those military trials. even bo bergdahl, we can get a trial on him. why? what is a problem? >> i think the problem is really with the obama administration. you know, he pled guilty to all of those crimes, including killing daniel pearl. then, the obama administration set it aside. let me tell you what that guy thinks. i spent a lot of years with ksm. what he thinks, that is a sign from his god that what he needs to do is carry out the so he can

pull out other people to it. instead of doing what i think president obama thought he was doing, what he was actually doing is giving those guys hope so they would be able to recruit more people by dragging this out as long as possible. >> bill: doctor, we appreciate it. you can hear more from dr. mitchell on the "contributing factor" podcast. simply punch it up on billoreilly.com. plenty more had as a "the factor" comes along this evening. tucker carlson of the hollywood bashing trump last night, what a fiasco. bret baier on whether the trump cabinet nominees will get confirmed. watters talking to folks about the inaugurationonononon

♪ >> bill: "personal story" segment tonight, ten years ago, i would have been all over the trump bashing at the golden globe awards last night. but now, many of you have convinced me, it doesn't matter. it just doesn't matter. as bill murray said in "meatballs." it doesn't matter what a show biz people say about politics. therefore, i now rarely cover that, and all, much of the relief of george clooney. however, the golden globes rhetorical fiasco last night, getting a lot of play. here to analyze it, tucker carlson, whose program, ""tucker carlson tonight," as opposed to this morning, moves to 7:00, moves to 9:00 from 7:00. you were on at 7:00, you are going to be at 9:00 right after a "the factor."

carlson, you are very fortunate to have my lead and with the ratings here. you know? >> yes, i am. very, very aware of that. >> bill: the check is in the mail. are you going to cover this globes thing tonight? how are you going to do it? speak of yet, we are. i agree with everything you said. whenever privilege people act like victims, though, it annoys me so much. i think there are a couple deeper questions worth exploring. the first -- i'm not going it's to defend a trump come he can defend himself, he's got twitter -- the first is, hollywood is a business, a mass-market retail business. do they understand their customers? they seem to hate them, which is striking to me, that is one of the reasons hollywood is in trouble financially. the second question, how they learned anything from the election? you, me, everyone paused and said, what it does mean, i didn't expect this to happen. they haven't. they retreated in on themselves under side of the rest of the country is evil and that is the explanation. i don't think it is worth batting around. >> bill: i will tell you what is going on, carlson, write this down for your show, okay? this is what is going on. for these people come of this is

a business decision, not a polil decision, doesn't come from the heart. meryl streep might be an exception because she is a valued liberal and she doesn't o pander for jobs. they come to her. but for the rest of the cadre, they know they will get jobs, job offers, if they play into the system of liberalism that runs hollywood. i mean, it is as simple as that. it's a business decision for them. they have to do this. they think, in order to work. at that is what is going on. >> that may be absolutely right. it is clearly an insular world, clearly, there is mandatory groupthink, anyone who doesn't agree with that is cast out. my only point is they need the rest of the country to survive. they are selling a product. if apple decided that anyone who bought a samsung phone should be denounced and attacked or if the middle of the country was somehow evil and they expressed

that, they would lose business. >> bill: people have short memories, and the entertainment vehicle is entertaining enough, they overlook it. that is the history of it. it gets nasty. this is where i object. you know, meghan mccain, who is on "outnumbered," some guy, i had never heard of it, i had to ask who it was, attacked her, because she objected to the golden globe fiasco last night. it was a fiasco. people aren't tuning into here political opinion. if you want to do that, run for congress. all right? come on. i mean, because meghan mccain, a very nice woman, does this, t, some guy uses the f word on her and stuff like that. that nasty stuff, there should be some price to pay for it. >> it is understandable. if you see politics as a religion, not just a means, like most conservatives, most normal people think of it as a thing you have to do in order to secure freedom or whatever, they see it as an end in itself. they have abandon religion and this has replaced head. so, anyone who disagrees is not just wrong, he's an apostate, he

must be salida. there is a ritual which burning. the stakes are higher for the left on the right. >> bill: are these people in hollywood, i know them all, i hd four movies produced, they are not true believers. a guy like george clooney is coming to some of them are. but most of them are calculators, they calculate what to say. tell you what you want to hear. that is what they are playing too. all right, "tucker carlson tonight" takes over the 9:00 slot. of course, in the left, all of their headline was "three white guys in prime time. o'reilly, carlson, hannity." the three white guys, not the three amigos. you can't wear this and bro anymore, that is out. okay, it is the three white guys. >> i heard that. [laughs] can't apologize for my gender. as the kids are saying now, i was born this way. >> bill: it depends on what you do with it. >> that's true. >> bill: i hate to say this, carlson.

you did very well at 7:00. okay. management, who can read the ratings went, carlson did pretty well at 7:00 o'clock. let's try him at 9:00. it doesn't matter whether you are white or chinese. it's about getting people to watch it. last word. >> i love your talent imitation. thank you. >> bill: i have been in this business way too long, carlson. you will be doing what i am doing 20 years from now. >> [laughs] i can't wait. thank you. >> bill: good luck on your show. when we come back, there will be a lot of bad vibrations as donald trump cabinet nominees come up for confirmation this week. bret baier has some thoughts. then, watters talking the inauguration with the folks. >> any advice for president-elect donald trump? >> run. >> for a second term? >> no. run period. >> bill: "the factor" will be

♪ i checked, everything's there...

wait a minute... hey... hold on, i can explain. you better have a good answer... switch to geico and you could save a ton of money on your car insurance. why didn't you say so in the first place? i thought you's was wearing a wire. haha, what? why would i wear a wire? geico. because saving fifteen percent or more on car insurance is always a great answer. >> bill: thanks for staying with us. i am bill o'reilly. if the "unresolved problems" segment, concerning donald trump's cabinet nominees. jeff sessions will be grilled by

the senate judiciary committed to you. here, the author of the big new book, "three days in january," should be out tomorrow. bret baier. we will get to that book in a moment. i am not going to cover these hearings that much on "the factor" because it is politicking. i know you live in. for that on i'm glad you are covering it, the people know whe to get it. but do i want to hear the nominees, trump's cabinet nominees a smeared? i don't want to hear that. >> every administration has to go through this process and we have to ask the tough questions. every administration, even though it appears they have the votes to get them all through, especially thanks to democrats in 2013 changing the rules, now, all they need is 51 votes to get the nominee through. >> bill: in the senate. >> remembered that tom daschle got tripped up by about texas and the ended up being not the age of hhs record terry. nobody saw that coming. so, there is usually at least

one that ends up causing a problem. >> bill: if it's about the law or if it's about somebody who did something wrong, with sessions tomorrow, they will imply he is a racist. you know that is the game, that is simply. senator sessions is a racist, he can be attorney general. this is the cheapest form of political discourse. i hate to even mention it, but it is going to happen. >> it is going to happen. frankly, some of it is about firing up the base. some of it is about delaying and building up kind of this momentum that democrats think the inauguration could produce for protests and other things. for the bottom line, built, most, if not all of these nominees are going to get throuh without problems. to speed when i was just going to ask you that. unless there is a major faux pas on the part of the nominee, all right, it is going to happen that they will be confirmed. but the unpleasantness and the nastiness at this juncture in

our history is off the charts. >> there are few whoe targeted. rex tillerson, secretary of state. he is in the crosshairs because of ties to russia. there's an article about a dealings that exxon had with iran. you mentioned sessions. tom price at hhs, some concerns about his investments in the past. betsy devos, education, huge teachers union, as you know. >> bill: grandstanding, the democrats will grandstand. now, the republicans, they pretty much let obama's nominees in '09 go right through, right? >> they did. the interesting thing about chuck schumer's response today, he sent this letter out. it's a copy of a letter of mitch mcconnell sent to harry reid in 2009, saying, these things have to be done before we can move these appointees forward. there is a bullet point list of all of these things that have to be done. he crossed out harry reid's name and put mitch and sent him back the letter.

it is politics. but those things have not been done, democrats will push on that. >> bill: i'm going to try to avoid this. if there is a smearfest, we will cover it tomorrow. now, president obama has is addressed telling us how he is the greatest president of all time except for dwight eisenhower. you just wrote a book on eisenhower, "three days in january," dwight eisenhower's final mission. now, is there this book relevant to today? >> it is. >> bill: how? >> first of all, this is three days, january 17th, eisenhower delivers his farewell address, three days later, jfk delivers his inauguration speech. their farewell address is designed for a couple of things. one, a warning to kennedy about caution on the national security front. the military-industrial complex is the lima gets a lot of attention. there's also talk about deficits, about bipartisanship. >> bill: he is giving advice to the young jfk. >> he is. and the country. a blueprint for the way forward. what happened was, as you know,

researching these things, you find these nuggets. >> bill: absolutely. >> bill: we found oral histories that had not been tapped, stuff that had never ben explored on this particular three days. i used that to jump back and looked at eisenhower's presidency and kind of a narrative way. to >> bill: i like ike. you think he was a good president, right? >> i do. people can decide at home after they look at all he got it done. >> bill: fox news is covering the history industry, that is for sure. it needs to be covered. bret baier, things were coming in. we appreciate it. good luck on the book. watters on deck, talking to the folks about the upcoming inauguration. watters is next. ♪

♪ >> bill: back in the book segment tonight, "watters' world," the 58th presidential inauguration, just 15 days away. the question tonight, our folks interested in it? we sent to watters out to find. ♪ >> pumped up for the inauguration? >> pumped up, baby. the only republican i need. >> you blend. >> how excited are you for terms inauguration? >> very excited. >> i am ecstatic. i am so happy. >> thank you so much for being such a painful slog back. while you're at it, give me a nice paper, i can pour lemon juice on it. >> how excited are you for the inauguration? speak i literally have no trump. >> any expectations for the inauguration?

>> i'm expecting there to be a lot more riots. >> a bunch of protesters but going to be there not knowing why they are there. >> i think he will start mellowing out. i think he will start acting more professional. >> are you a professional? >> some celebrities have boycotted participating in this festivities. how do you feel about that? >> i feel like everyone has the right to their own opinion. >> you are absolutely right. >> we all have free will. we are in america. we can do whatever we want. >> he would be okay with people boycotting obama's inauguration? probably not because i'm a democrat and i love him. >> is a good stance for individual freedom and who we want to support. there is probably going to be a lot of backlash for whoever does decide to sing at his inauguration. >> which celebrities would you like to see preformatted terms inauguration? >> actually, none. i don't think it is a place they should be performing and making a big things about her. >> who would you like to see

preformatted terms inauguration? >> chelsea handler. [laughs] we need to laugh about this. >> mariah carey could probably use some redemption. >> artists are artists. they are creative but they are not always realistic. >> i made you a painting. >> are you going to go to the inauguration? >> is it like a festival? >> of the strokes. the strokes would be cool. >> i don't know who that is and i don't care to find out. >> do you know who i think should perform the inauguration? >> milli vanilli. >> trump going to a lot of balls on inauguration. you think you should dance? >> he might have a few moves. >> it will be huge. i had to. i had to. >> probably trumps advisor, i would tell him to come but that would be the call. that would gain the youth vote. i would vote for him if he did

that. >> good thing you are not as advisor. >> yet, i would. >> if he does a complete 360 and changes what he has gone against and actually does right by us, then, he'll have my support. >> humana 180? >> 360 starts back where you started. >> i am and english major, noth major. >> can i try on your glasses? >> go ahead, take them off. [laughs] >> how do i look? >> you look amazing. you look like an actual diva. >> welcome to the '80s. >> bill: all right, here is watters. so, your program on saturday, got big ratings, right? >> i can't believe it. football is on and people actually watch my show. i'm shocked. >> bill: did you know the game was as boring as a game could possibly be? congratulations. the numbers were good. >> thank you. >> bill: the second question i have for you, on friday, you make your debut with the spin stops here in oklahoma, how

nervous are you? >> i was thinking about popping my collar. the people in oklahoma told me that sends the wrong message there. >> bill: they will hang you there. >> miller and i will not save you. you die on that show, you die. >> there is no lifeline? >> bill: no. are you nervous? >> i think i should be but i am not yet. i will be. i am more nervous about flying out there with you on the plane. >> bill: yeah, well, we'll get there. i am sorry, people in oklahoma. tulsa on friday night, watters live debut. congrats on the show. we will see you on thursday. back to "tip of the day," americans that the country is ignoring. but their heroes. "the tip" moments away. ♪

test. test.

>> bill: i'd like to tell you about some very heroic americans that don't get much attention in a moment.

adult book. rising sun, number one. girl on a train, too. and tidying up, five. the book is closing in on 1,500,000 copies sold. we thank you all very much and hopefully we will have a movie announcement soon. check out killing the rising su sun. he was accused of misleading on some stats, but no lie was ever proven. nothing definitive. because of the internet, more and more americans like you are convicting on allegations in the court of public opinion.

come on. that's unfair. you can't do that. not relevant to discussion, peter. when the too guests had their say, i had mine. they don't like the truth you speak, o'reilly, so they avoid it. well, we hope senator graham will be on this week. we've been hoping to have him for a long time. correct, bonita. black lives matter is a pressure group in business to protect

black americans. their job description doesn't expand to whites. if black lives matter really lived up to its name, the group would be protesting daily in the chicago neighborhoods where black people are being murdered in record numbers. right? let me get this right, because this coming friday, we are upstaging the inauguration on january 20th? good grief, man, get a grip! everything is available on billo'reilly.com. the tip of the day, we sincerely hope the president-elect trump is going to help american fats as he has promised to do. when an american is fighting for his country, or her country, it

impacts their family big time. they founded a charity, actor tom hanks always steps up and helping the vets. it's all part of the elizabeth dole foundation. it seeks to ensure that they have the resources they need to help their wounded loved ones. we hope you will check out hidden heroes.org. hiddenheroes.org. that is it for us tonight. spout off on "the factor" from anywhere in the world. word of the day, do not be tendentious. tomorrow, president obama gives his farewell address. i will have my personal assessment on mr. obama on "the

factor," right after the address. please or member that the spin stops here. we are definitely looking out for you. ♪ >> tom: welcome to "red eye" hello, everyone, i am tom shillue. let's talk with tvs andy levy at the "red eye" deck. >> lala land breaks the record for most golden globes winds. we have meryl streep to talk about instead of that grossly overrated movie. the iphone turns ten years old, it's now older than most of the children who are forced to make it. finally, "gq" says man bangs are making a comeback. >> tom: thank you, andy, let's welcome our