KELLY FILE

Former Clinton spokesperson on battle over Russia; Huckabee and Goolsbee debate election 'rigging' reports

This is a rush transcript from "The Kelly File" December 12, 2016. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SHANNON BREAM, GUEST HOST: Breaking tonight, the Clinton campaign now seeming to challenge the results of the 2016 election. Trying to get the results overturned after campaign Chairman John Podesta goes on the record saying, members of the Electoral College should be briefed on Russian interference before they cast their votes for president.

Welcome to "The Kelly File." I'm Shannon Bream in for Megyn Kelly. This could be the single biggest development on the 2016 election since Hillary Clinton conceded to Donald Trump. Exactly one week before the Electoral College is scheduled to formalize the vote for Donald Trump as our next president, a bombshell from the man who ran Clinton's campaign. John Podesta siding with ten of the electors who were now demanding information on the Russians and Mr. Trump.

Podesta saying, quote, "The bipartisan electors' letter raises very grave issues involving our national security. Electors have a solemn responsibility under the Constitution and we support their efforts to have their questions addressed."

In moments, we'll be joined by representatives of both campaigns. Karen Finney and Katrina Pierson, but we begin with Trace Gallagher reporting from our West Coast Newsroom. Trace?  

TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Shannon. These 10 members of the Electoral College say it's not their duty to simply rubber stamp the Election Day results but instead to, quote, "investigate, discuss and deliberate." So, they sent a letter to Intelligence Director James Clapper asking to be given an Intel briefing before they cast their votes on December 19th, writing, quote, "The elector is required to know from the intelligence community whether there are ongoing investigations into ties between Donald Trump, his campaign or associates and Russian government interference in the election."

The electors go on to say, "The information will help them decide whether Mr. Trump is fit to serve as president." And the Clinton campaign is supporting this effort marking the first time the campaign has publicly question the legitimacy of Trump's victory. Despite repeatedly saying, they would accept the results. Hillary Clinton's top political advisor John Podesta calls the group of electors, bipartisan but it should be noted only one of the ten members is a Republican and he has long been a vocal Trump critic.

The other Democrats including Nancy Pelosi's daughter Christine. In this letter comes on the heels of this weekend's by two Democratic Congressmen David Cicilline of Rhode Island and Jim Himes of Connecticut who suggest the Electoral College should consider blocking Trump's election. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What finally pushed me over the edge was when the president-elect of the United States criticized the CIA and the intelligence community. Can you imagine what the leaders in Beijing and Moscow and Tehran are thinking as they watched the next president of the United States delegitimize and criticized his own intelligence community and stand up for the defense of Russia, one of our prime adversaries?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GALLAGHER: And while the U.S. government largely believes that Russia did interfere with the campaign, there is disagreement over the motive. The CIA believes it was to help Trump. The FBI believes it was to undermine the U.S. political system. Of course there is zero evidence the voting process itself was in any way disruptive -- Shannon.  

BREAM: All right. Trace Gallagher, thank you very much.

Joining us now, Karen Finney who served as the Clinton campaign senior spokesperson.

Karen, thanks for joining us tonight.

KAREN FINNEY, FORMER CLINTON CAMPAIGN SENIOR SPOKESPERSON: Good to be with you.

BREAM: Let me ask you about these questions that the electors may have.  Nine of the ten come from states where Hillary Clinton won. So, is this much to do about nothing? What is the point?

FINNEY: Well, I think let's just take a step back here, Shannon. I mean, my goodness. Remember the days when the party of Ronald Reagan was talking to very toughly to Mikhail Gorbachev to tear down that wall. And now, look at where we are, we are talking about Russian interference hacking, we are talking about a broad agreement between our intelligence agencies that there was some malfeasance on the part of Russians and their attempt to undermine our election. As you pointed out, there is some disagreement of conversation about whether or not, you know, what the ultimate motive was.  And actually the other part of what --  

BREAM: But doesn't that make a big difference? Because what we're hearing is from unnamed sources so no name assigned to it. They're talking about the CIA saying, they think the ultimate goal was to help Donald Trump. The FBI not going there. I mean, there are two top agencies and they don't agree.  

FINNEY: But remember, we're talking about a broad agreement between 17 intelligence agencies. And just one other point here, Shannon --

BREAM: Russia was involved but also --

FINNEY: But Shannon, let me --

(CROSSTALK)

FINNEY: Shannon, Shannon, hold on. Well, but more importantly, Let me just finish one sentence. You know, that also goes to the point that Mr. Podesta was making which and others have which is why in addition to the letters, the electorals are asking for a briefing. All of this information at some point should be made public to the American people. I mean, we as the American people, we are the greatest democracy on the planet. We need to know if the Russians are trying to infiltrate our government in these nefarious ways.

I mean, our brave men and women in our intelligence agencies and are, served in uniform, you know, they fight to get us this kind of information and to uncover these kinds of things. And I think, you know, their next commander-in-chief, Mr. Trump, owes it to them to not just dismiss them out of hand but to listen to the information. And I think again if the electors are suggesting that part of their constitutional duty, is they want to hear a briefing, they want to hear information so that they themselves feel confident --

BREAM: But these are people who weren't going to vote for Trump any way except for one who has been a critic of him anyway. You have nine who come from states where Hillary Clinton won so what difference does it make to those nine?

FINNEY: But Shannon, are you seriously suggesting, just more importantly, are you suggesting that it's not disconcerting --

BREAM: No, no, no, not at all. All I'm saying is, it's not goings to change their vote. I'm not saying it's not disconcerting at all. In fact Donald Trump and a number of top GOP senators have said, they will investigate. We have Bob Corker -- important relation. We have McConnell, we have Graham, we have McCain --

FINNEY: Yes.

BREAM: We have others saying, this is not okay with us and we want to make sure that we get to the truth.  

FINNEY: And the fact that it's been so bipartisan is incredibly powerful.  Here's the point about the electors. It's not about who they would or would not have voted for. It is about something that is much greater. And I pray that if anything comes out of all of this, you know, in the election, it is that, we as Americans come back and remember that this is part of this foundational core of our democracy.

So, it's not about how, you know, who is going to vote for whom. It's about our elector saying, it is our constitutional duty to know the answers to these questions. I mean, Alexander Hamilton, you know, this was one of the very intents of creating the electors in the first place. So, I see them as trying to do their job. I don't think there is an assumption that this would change the nature of the outcome of the election. And in fact there's an opportunity here for many to actually take bold steps to stand up to Russia and right these wrongs and make sure that they don't interfere in our government, in our country in any way further.  

BREAM: All right. Well, I think we can all agree it's good that there's bipartisan fervor for trying to get some answers.

FINNEY: Absolutely.

BREAM: And that we can agree on. Karen, great to see you tonight. Thank you for joining us.

FINNEY: You too, Shannon.

BREAM: Also tonight, Katrina Pierson serve as Trump campaign national spokesperson. All right. Katrina, good to see you as well. What do you make of these concerns, that really every American, people on both sides of the aisle are saying, should be concerned about any foreign government that would want to try to influence our national presidential election in any way.  

KATRINA PIERSON, FORMER TRUMP CAMPAIGN NATIONAL SPOKESPERSON: Well, we should be concerned about that if that were the case. I mean, what we see now, you know, so much for accepting the election results. This is just the worst case of denial that I have ever seen. The working class voters rejected the Democrat Party this cycle. They have blamed everyone. Every week it's a new blame. First, it was FBI Director Comey, then it was racism, sexism, misogynism, all the isms. And then they blamed the media for the coverage of the candidates.

And now, it's the Russian's infiltration of the election process. The White House today came out and said that that was not the case. They simply cannot accept the fact that they had a flawed candidate that did not have a clear message and more importantly could not connect with the voters. I mean, what were they thinking that the Russians did? Did Vladimir Putin call CNN and ask them to help Hillary Clinton cheat?

BREAM: We have to look at the fact that there were 17 intelligence agencies that went public and said, Russia has been interfering or those connected to Russia. Because a lot of times, it's not the government itself but we know it is hackers friendly to a government and maybe that's what happened here. But those intelligence agencies came forward and said, there is no doubt to this fact that Russia is getting involved in hacking.  And a lot of people will say, listen, they released information that was detrimental to the DNC, to the DCCC, it wasn't good for one side of the ticket much more than it wasn't good for the other side of the ticket.  

PIERSON: Well, of course. I mean there's hacking that goes on all of the time. But what are they actually saying? In order for this to have worked, they would have had to interfere with the election process itself.  That's the accusation that's being made here and that's what the White House came out today and said, did not happen. And that is the problem.  We have a situation where you have a party that lost handedly and they simply cannot cope with it. But you know what's really happening here?

Perhaps this Russian hacking fiasco is a just a distraction from a motion that was filed just last week by Judicial Watch wanting to unseal the video depositions of Hillary Clinton's top staffer and the FBI investigation of her e-mails. There is nothing going on with this election process. The White House came out today and said it and that's exactly what the --

(CROSSTALK)

BREAM: But you know, the President ordered that he wants a full review of all Russian hacking back even to the 2008 election when there were breaches involved in the Obama and McCain campaigns.

PIERSON: Sure.

BREAM: He wants it all done before he leaves office on January 20th. So clearly he thinks there's an issue and there are number of people like I said on both sides of the aisle who have expressed grave concerns and have come to the conclusion that Russia did have some undue influence on not necessarily hacking into voting machines and changing votes but changing voters' perceptions about the two candidates and that's significance when people are going to the polls in a tight race.  

PIERSON: Well, I think back in 2008 and 2009 that was China. But we absolutely should know what's going on with regards to cyber warfare because it is a problem and we don't want those types of things to be influencing the election. And, you know, some of these hacks, they don't even know where they came from. There are discrepancies among the intelligence agencies about exactly who did what and when. There is no evidence or maybe there is evidence. We don't know. The election process --  

(CROSSTALK)

BREAM: Well, there is with respect to what they said about those 17 agencies joining together.  

PIERSON: Absolutely. But just today, the letter that was sent to Clapper today is saying you need to tell us what's going on here because there are discrepancies among the intelligence communities about what actually happened.

BREAM: Information, interpretation are good things.

PIERSON: At the end of the day -- oh, absolutely. But at the end of the day, the election process itself was not interfered with and the White House came out today and said that.  

BREAM: All right. We got to leave it there, Katrina. Thank you.  

PIERSON: Great to be here.

BREAM: All right. When then candidate Trump worried about the election being rigged, the media lost its mind. You remember that well.

Up next. Howie Kurtz shows us how the media is reacting to these comments about rigging from the Democrats.  

And then Governor Huckabee and Austan Goolsbee join us on worries the Clinton camp is putting our entire system at risk.

Plus, Judge Napolitano warned months ago that the whole Russian allegation could be a red herring. He is just ahead to explain why.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON, D-FORMER PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: You know, every time Donald thinks things are not going in his direction, he claims whatever it is rigged against him. We've been around for 240 years. We've had free and fair elections. We've accepted the outcomes when we may not have liked them. He is denigrating, he's talking down our democracy and I for one am appalled that somebody who is the nominee of one of our two major parties would take that kind of position.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BREAM: That was Secretary Clinton not even eight weeks ago slamming President-elect Trump for daring to suggest that the election results might just be up for debates. But Mrs. Clinton was far from alone. The larger media never missed a beat when it came to denouncing Mr. Trump for declaring the election was in danger of being rigged. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Donald Trump has forfeited any right to serve as the American president because he has violated one of the basic tenants of our democracy.  

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's dangerous I think in the future in some ways for our country. People are really feeling that this election is going to be rigged.  

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The real danger here is when Trump lies to his supporters about the others who are trying to steal the election, some of his supporters believe him. Mr. Trump, think of your children. America is great partly because everyone accepts the results of elections. For decades in the past and hopefully for decades to come. Inventing a conspiracy theory is no way to make America great again.  

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BREAM: Now that November has come and gone, with results some in the media seem to outright despise, we've noticed outlets like The New York Times has done a complete 180 on that rigging claim. Back in October, The Times wrote top Republicans must reject the ridiculous notion that a national election can be rigged. But now they're singing a different tune, proclaiming, failing to resolve the questions about Russia would feed suspension among the millions of Americans than a dominant team of his candidacy turned out to be true. The election was indeed rigged.

Here to break down -- is "MediaBuzz" host Howie Kurtz. Good to see you tonight, Howie.  

HOWIE KURTZ, HOST, "MEDIABUZZ": Hi, Shannon.  

BREAM: All right. So, tell us a little about this. I mean, where are we going here? Because you read the papers. We all read them eight weeks ago. And now we're hearing a different tune today.  

KURTZ: The media went haywire when Trump used to talk again and again about a rigged election because the feeling was, he was just setting up an alibi for himself after Hillary Clinton inevitably would win the race.  Well now as you just quoted, "New York Times" and other outlets saying, hey, there could be a rigged election here. Because the Russian hacking allegations, The Times says, there's a darkening cloud over Clinton's -- excuse me of a Trump's presidency and a liberal times columnist Paul Krugman just today says the election is tainted in part because of the hackers and in part because Hillary won the popular vote. Except that this Electoral College thing, you know, it's in the contusion.  

BREAM: It is. We've all read it. You've probably got in your pocket constitution. I keep going in my purse. So, e we know that's actually a fact. But you know, is there any explanation or any self-reflection by any of these media outlets do you think who are flip-flopping? And do they see -- do they have copies of what they wrote a few weeks ago?

KURTZ: Self-reflection is not a great quality in the mainstream media, otherwise we would see a lot more hand wringing about the way this passed race was covered. And look, I take these, the CIA allegations, Russian hacking seriously. The fact that they were leaked anonymously to the Washington Post makes it harder to discern just what is real. It's all very murky as often as the case (INAUDIBLE). But now that we have John Podesta, you know, asking for the electors asking to get a special briefing, which there's only one reason you would ask for that if you were on the Clinton campaign. And that is to get them to flip away from Donald Trump.

BREAM: Uh-hm.

KURTZ: The more the media play this up, I think the more they will be embracing a kind of a fringe theory that really could end up stealing the election from the guy who won 306 electoral votes.

BREAM: But I thought the fringe was suggesting something crazy like a national election could be rigged.  

KURTZ: Well, look, I mean, everyone knows that even if it turns out to be true, and I think there should be an investigation, that Russian hackers were trying to undermine the election, where obviously in favor of Trump and not Hillary Clinton. You know, the idea that this flip the election, what really turned the election was Michigan, and Wisconsin and Pennsylvania where Hillary Clinton barely campaigned in two of those states and where Donald Trump made that connection with white working class voters who rejected the Democratic nominee, that's what turned this election. So now to try to say if only I had not been for Vladimir Putin, Hillary Clinton would have won strikes me as kind of sour grapes. But I think this is going to get quite a ride in the media before the electors finally vote -- Shannon.  

BREAM: All right. And there is still so many unanswered questions. We'll stay on it. I know you will. Howie, good to see you.

KURTZ: Same here.

BREAM: All right. Here now with more, FOX News contributor, Trump supporter and former president candidate himself, Governor Mike Huckabee.  And former chief economist to President Obama, Austan Goolsbee. Good to see you both, gentlemen.

Mike Huckabee: Thank you very much, Shannon.

BREAM: All right. Austan, I want to start with you. I mean, what do you make of this? And of course, one of the things that Donald Trump said in response this weekend was, there have been a litany of excuses. This is just the latest one and what it came down to was, the polling showed people didn't trust her, they didn't like her and they didn't connect with her in the important rust belt. I mean, the votes are there. We're not talking about the Russians hacking into machines and changing votes, right?

AUSTAN GOOLSBEE, FORMER CHIEF ECONOMIST TO PRESIDENT OBAMA: I think that's right. And I'm not advocating that they go down and say let's try to reverse the Electoral College vote. I think that would be weird. I think that you would have justifiable howls from the Republican side about doing that. But I think the way you have portrayed it, that this is a flip-flop by the media, I think, is very misleading. Because the thing that Donald Trump was condemned for rightfully by people in both parties was for alleging that the vote was rigged if he lost with no evidence ahead of time. That's totally different --

BREAM: Well, and what he got --

GOOLSBEE: -- than if there actually is evidence of foreign influence, we should investigate it. That's not the same thing at all.  

BREAM: What he got so much pushback for was during that debate with our own Chris Wallace when he said, we accept the results of the election, he said, yes, I am going to wait and see, we're going to see what happens. I mean, he wasn't even talking about anything being rigged. And that's when we saw Mrs. Clinton go on and say, you have to accept --

GOOLSBEE: No. Not the case. Not the case.  

BREAM: -- you have to accept the results even when you don't like them.  And she talked about how denigrating it was to the system to suggest that there was something --  

GOOLSBEE: Yes. And it is --

BREAM: -- untoward when there was no evidence of it.

GOOLSBEE: To suggest that it is rigged with no evidence before the outcomes and to literally say, if I do not win then it is rigged by my opponent, that is outrageous. This is totally different. There's actual evidence from the CIA that the Republican leader of the Senate and the Republican leader of the House say needs to be investigated. That's a totally different situation.  

BREAM: All right. Governor Huckabee, I want to bring you in here.  Because what we're getting are leaks from an unnamed source says, they were debriefed or part of this briefing by the CIA saying that yes, everybody agrees that there was some untoward action by Russian actors potentially linked directly to the Russian government. But to make the leap that they somehow changed the election results is a big one.  

GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: That's beyond any belief. I mean, you have to believe in unicorns to go there. The fact is there were allegations that the Russians may have hacked into the DNC computers but there's no evidence whatsoever that it had any impact on the election. My gosh, we just got word tonight that they recounted the votes in Wisconsin and Donald Trump had 162 more votes than he had when they first counted.  This is so unbelievable. And I'm ashamed for the Democrats and the press.  But then I repeat myself.

Because when The New York Times has to dig out to the bottom of the bird cage to see what they wrote eight weeks ago when they were whining about how terrible it was Donald Trump was saying something, and then they turn around and say the same thing, you know what the evidence of a rigged election was?

The exposure of the DNC emails that showed that it was rigged against Bernie Sanders and toward Hillary Clinton. It was a fixed deal. And that was one of the things. I think the more amazing thing is those DNC emails revealed just the contempt that Hillary and her chief lieutenants had for the working class people of America. And that's why she lost. And Democrats need to accept the results of a fair and free election which is what they lectured Republicans about.  

BREAM: Austan, really clearly before I have to go. I mean, clearly those revelations were not good for her or the DNC.  

GOOLSBEE: Yes. I agree -- I am not disagreeing with the Governor. I do not think that they should be going and trying to persuade the Electoral College to change their vote. I think that's just a bridge too far. I do think that they should investigate Russian interference in our political process. The Russians are trying to interfere in Western European political voting process and that is a big deal and it should be investigated. And to allege that that's the same thing as when Donald Trump was saying that the election was stolen when there was no evidence and before it took place, I just think is a different subject.  

BREAM: Yes. Yes. And there's still a debate about whether here or there was that same evidence of Russia being able to do that. So far, none clear that we know of. Governor, just a one word answer, yes or no. Are you in favor in many of your GOP counterparts, senators on The Hill say that they want to see this investigated, would you sign on to that?  

GOOLSBEE: Just depends on what they want to investigate. I mean, that's the real answer.  

BREAM: That's not a yes or no.  

GOOLSBEE: But the yes or no is -- well, yes investigate whether Russia is hacking but do something about cyber defense. Don't try to overturn the results of elections. The people have voted. It's over.

BREAM: Yes.

GOOLSBEE: These guys lost.  

BREAM: All right. We'll leave it there. Governor, Austan, good to see you both. Thank you.

Is it possible that it wasn't the Russians behind all of this election hacking? Well, Judge Napolitano raised that possibility months ago. And he's here to explain why.  

Plus, Buck Sexton and Matt Bennett are here on the new fight between the President-Elect and the intelligence community. Stick around.  

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS WALLACE, HOST: According to the Washington Post, the CIA has concluded that Russia intervened in the election to help you win the presidency. Your reaction.  

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BREAM: Breaking tonight, President-Elect Donald Trump's rumored pick for deputy Secretary of State is weighing in on Russia's alleged involvement in election hacking. Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton told Fox News that it is possible some utter entity is behind the hack in what could be a false flag operation. Mr. Bolton went on to clarify this morning that this is not what he meant. He didn't mean it was about the Obama administration at least. Joining me now is Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst who actually raised the possibility of the hacking coming from inside our government back in August. Do you have a crystal ball, judge?

ANDREW NAPOLITANO, FOX NEWS SENIOR JUDICIAL ANALYST: Well - Shannon, good evening, it is always a pleasant to be with you. I raised it then, because former management officials in the NSA now retired had raised it and had suggested that there was animus against Mrs. Clinton in the NSA and that NSA people who know all, see all, they can tell every hack there is and they know about all of the leeks, because they have records of it, because they control all of the fiber optics in the country would know about this.

Now we got to have some basics stand. There's hacking and there's leaking.  Leaking is when someone internally or remotely reveals information improperly to a third party. That is what happened to Mrs. Clinton. It happened with the drum beat, day after day after day, 47, 48,000 emails that were leaked. Hacking is when someone remotely enters an information system and alters it remotely. So that the operator of the system doesn't know there was an alteration. That is what did not happen here. No matter what the The New York Times and the Washington Post are opining this morning, they cannot point to any evidence whatsoever that the outcome of the election was altered by foreign agents. There certainly was leaking, that leaking could have been facilitated by people in the NSA, by a rogue in Mrs. Clinton's campaign or by a foreign entity. But that was a leak.  That was not a hack.

BREAM: Well Judge, we did have some polling around the time that all of these leaks were bubbling up. That there were people who said their vote would potentially be changed, because of some of the things what was revealed in the leaking, so in that way could you that Russia did impact the election?

NAPOLITANO: If there was evidence that Russia did the leaking. But the leaking probably came from someone on the inside or someone who had access through the fiber optics through which the communications ran that means somebody in the NSA or somebody who was once in the NSA. Well how do we know this? We know it because for better or worse, whatever you think of them, Edward Snowden revealed all of this and revealed the nature and extent of the NSA's tentacles in all of the fiber optic traffic in the United States of America. Not to get too much in the weeds, the leaking could not have occurred without the NSA knowing about it. And if anybody hacked in and altered internal systems, the NSA would know who the hacker was and when they did it. We haven't heard any of that.

BREAM: Judge Napolitano, always great to see you.

NAPOLITANO: Good to see you.

BREAM: All right this Russian hacking or leaking claim also led to new controversy after the President-Elect went on Fox News Sunday and dismissed a CIA report on Russian interference.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT-ELECT DONALD TRUMP: I think it is ridiculous. I think it is just another excuse. I don't believe it. I don't know why. And I think it's just -- you know they talk about all sorts of thing. Every week, is another excuse. We had a massive landslide victory as you know in the Electoral College. I guess the final numbers now are at 306 and she is down to a very low number. No, I don't believe that at all.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BREAM: All right now some of the members of the intelligence community are reportedly taking issue with those comments. I'm joined by Buck Sexton, former CIA analyst and host of the "Buck Sexton Show" in the voice radio and Matt Bennett former Deputy Assistant to President Clinton. Good to see you both.

MATT BENNETT, THIRD WAY: Thank you.

BUCK SEXTON, "BUCK SEXTON SHOW" HOST: Thank you.

BREAM: My head is going to explode with all of these explanations. And you all understand the cyber warfare better than I do, but Matt, the distinction is important if we're talking about going in changing votes, rigging election machines, voting machines, that kind of thing. It's different than saying material was leaked that was unflattering to the candidates.

BENNETT: No question. And the point that you made in the earlier segment is exactly right. We don't have any evidence that anybody messed around with the voting machines or the actual vote. We do now have evidence from 17 intelligence agencies, with all due respect to the judge's retired folks from the I.C., the agencies themselves are reporting that it is the Russians that went in, got information from the DNC and from Podesta's e- mails and made those public. And that is extraordinarily dangerous for a hostile foreign country to be trying to mucking around with our elections.  They probably didn't impact the outcome, but they definitely were trying to have an impact and that is really scary.

BREAM: And Buck, people on both side of the aisle are saying every American should care about this and should be worried and they want answers.

SEXTON: Everyone should care, but the question is to what extent and also why do Democrats care so much about this at this point in time. I think it's quite obviously because of the results of the election. This is part of a much broader narrative. These notions, that Russia did something, that may have influenced some people at some point in the election with that Donald Trump is ail illegitimate president. The he didn't actually win the election whether it's the fake news that we All right hearing about for quite a while after Trump won.

Or that the FBI Director threw the election for Trump. There's been this slew of stories, one after the other, all of them with the same intent, and that is to be legitimized essentially un-elect Donald Trump as president in the eyes of the American people, to take that not my president meme, which become very popular, the day after the election and make it real for people. He is not actually your president because Russia got him elected.  People are writing this. This was written today in "The New York times," it has been written else in the editorial pages, that it's not a real election, that Russia threw this for him. That is nonsense.

There is consensus within the I.C. that Russia's was involved in this.  That has been out there for a quite some time. What Russia's intent for us and also the extent of its involvement, those are still open questions, but the media is trying to rush up in there now, because it would do so much damage to Trump in the meantime.

BREAM: Well Matt, I see you shaking your head over here. I'll give you a chance to respond. But the "The New York times" writing about this said it is not clear that the intent was to go in and influence this election for Donald Trump. That is coming from the "The New York Times."

BENNETT: That is right. We don't have the faintest idea what their intent was. We have some circumstantial evidence. I mean it's clear that the people around Trump and Trump himself were a lot more friendly with Vladimir Putin that the people who are in Hillary Clinton. And it does seem, they would have interest in helping Trump get elected, but we don't know that for sure. What we need and I think what most responsible Democrats want is a real investigation into these efforts on the part of a major global adversary to impact our elections. That is a huge thing, if the shoe were on the other foot and Clinton had been elected and this was alleged about her, Republicans would likely be going bananas. And we need some sort of investigation.

BREAM: Well I have to think if Trump was making this allegations having lost, they would not be received well.

SEXTON: They wouldn't be receiving well, but again keep in context, the likelihood that anything actually came from this. It's been known for some time. This is not new by the way that foreign countries would try to influence with their overly or covertly another countries election and in this context, in this case, sure we should investigate and take a look at it, but we are going to find out that this actually change anything, but it does gives the democrat a Democrats a tiny violin they can play about how sad they are about Donald Trump winning the election.

BREAM: Matt, bring this tonight, its back up. Good to see you both, thank you, gentlemen.

SEXTON: Thank you.

BENNETT: Good to see you.

BREAM: All right we are now hearing reports that the senate wants to kill parts of the Iran deal and we're told that move though, could inadvertently put a hundred thousand U.S. jobs on the chopping block. Marc Thiessen and Robert Wolf are next with the risk on both side of this debate.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BREAM: Developing tonight, new questions about whether the senate should kill parts of the Iran deal. That move could kill a Boeing deal to sell some 80 jets for nearly $17 billion, a deal which reportedly supports 100,000 U.S. jobs. Our Chief National Correspondent Ed Henry has details from Washington. Good evening, Ed.

ED HENRY, SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good to see you Shannon, well it was the President-Elect back on twitter today going after another defense contractor, Lockheed Martin about cost overruns, associated with the F-35.  That came as a yes. He may be girding for yet another big battle with Boeing. You remember last week he took to twitter to after the defense contractor, because of cost overruns allegedly associated with the brand- spanking-new air force one.

The company stock took a major hit because of all of that. And that the sticker shock, that Mr. Trump was talking about on twitter, he said quote, Boeing is building a brand-new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order. Well as you noted, there may now be a bigger fight over the nearly $17 billion agreement that Boeing is forging with Tehran to sell them new planes. The door of course is open on that kind of trade, because of President Obama's broader nuclear deal with Tehran. But remember, Mr. Trump vowed during the campaign, he would rip that deal to pieces.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: My number one priority is to dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran. I know deal making and let me tell you, this deal is catastrophic for America, for Israel and for the whole of the Middle East.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HENRY: Now Boeing knows they have an uphill battle here so they are sort of putting their lobbying message out in a language that Mr. Trump may understand with making it all about yes, U.S. jobs. The Boeing statement saying quote, today's agreement will support tens of thousands of U.S. jobs directly associated with production and delivery of the 777 and nearly $100,000 U.S. jobs in the U.S. Aerospace value stream for the full course of deliveries. The first airplanes under the agreement are scheduled for delivery in 2018. Here is the bottom-line, Boeing realizes, think about all of the PR that the president-elect tried to get out of saving roughly 1,000 jobs involving Carrier in Indiana. This is 100,000 jobs at stake, 100 times what Donald Trump was talking about just a week ago. Shannon.

BREAM: Right you are, Ed Henry, great to see you from Washington.

HENRY: Thank you.

BREAM: And now here with more, Marc Thiessen is a Fox News contributor and former chief speech writer to President George W. Bush and Robert Wolf, Fox News contributor an economic adviser to President Obama. Good to see you both.

MARC THIESSEN, AMERICAN ENTERPRISING SCHOLAR AND FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR:  Good to see you, Shannon.

ROBERT WOLF, CEO OF 32 ADVISORS: Good to see you, Shannon.

BREAM: All right, Marc, we have U.S. jobs hanging here in the balance, but there are a lot of people who say they don't want a penny going to a recognized state sponsor of terrorism. Money is fungible. It goes over places as do planes.

THIESSEN: And not only is money fungible, but planes are fungible apparently, because this is not just an oculus deal for some commercial aircraft for the Iranian regime. Iran air is a tool of the Iranian revolutionary guard. These Boeing planes will not simply be ferrying commercial passengers and cargo. They are going to be ferrying Iranian troops, Iranian weapons, Iranian terrorist paramilitary operatives around the world to destabilized the Middle East and other U.S. interest and kill innocent people. Iran air has been sanctioned repeatedly by the U.S. Treasury Department. They've been using Iran Air jets to ferry rockets and weapons to Hezbollah and other groups since 1980's. If you want to know where Hezbollah gets the rockets that they use to fire over the border and kill innocent Israeli women and children, they get them through Iran air.  So, I don't think Boeing workers want to producing the planes that the Iranian revolutionary guard corps is using to ship weapons to Hezbollah and the Assad regime that killed half a million people.

BREAM: Robert, how do you respond to that, because there are - even when we are talking about saving jobs here, there are lives that are put at stake by we know terrorism acts that come out of this country. Why do we want to help them with anything?

WOLF: Well, listen, there are no sanctions today. And Boeing is a public company. They're a global company. And they're working with 0fact so they have the ability to trade. And unfortunately whether we like it or not, if they don't sell them, airbus will. And so the question is, does Boeing have to continue to do commerce around the globe with those countries that are not sanctions. The answer is yes. Once the p5+1 lifted the sanctions, countries are going to do business with them. Boeing is not going to be the only U.S. Company that is going into Iran. And so the answer today, it gains tens of thousands of jobs, 100,000-plus jobs if you look at what's from off of the assembly line, vendors, procurement. And at the end of the day, listen when I was at UPS, we did not do business with those countries that were sanctions and those countries that were not sanctioned we did.  That is how a public company has to act. And obviously, you have to look at this.

BREAM: Shouldn't there be a greater moral good, a greater moral call regardless of commerce and bottom lines and dollars?

WOLF: Well the answer is yes and they're working with the U.S. Government who was part of this deal. They're also using no acts in bank financing.  So it is not adds if they're being finance by the U.S. but there is tens and thousands jobs to built this planes. Now, if President-Elect Trump decides to go differently, like he did in that speech, that is one thing, but you should know, Secretary of Defense that he is talking about, General Mattis said it's unlikely we're going to reverse the deal. You know, we have to right now assume it is business as usual.

BREAM: Ok. And really quickly Marc, I want to ask you, because we know, Boeing is a top military contractor, it is one of the things that Trump used allegedly when it came to united technologies and Carrier. When you do a lot of business with the U.S. Government, you do have more leverage.  Do you think it happens with Boeing?

THIESSEN: I think he has the all leverage he needs. He decides to re- impose the sanctions in congress. There is a bill in the house, the senate can take it up and it can be killed. And look, Airbus is not going to come in and do this, because they have 10 percent American made products so they are covered by the same sanctions. And the fact is, the treasury department has said, these people use Iran air to ferry weapons to terrorists. We don't want to be a part of that.

BREAM: All right gentlemen, it is good to see you both, thank you.

THIESSEN: Thank you.

WOLF: Thank you.

BREAM: All right just when you're trying to wrap up the Christmas shopping, there's a new warning, that bone chilling temperatures are about to hit most much of the U.S.

Plus "The Kelly File" digs into an investigation that reportedly uncovers heroine condition, an abortion clinics across the country. This all comes if Planned Parenthood wonders if they're going to be the first casualty in a new abortion war that is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BREAM: Breaking to night, millions of Americans bracing themselves for some of the coldest temperatures this century. Forecasters are warning that a polar vortex is about to grip much of the central and eastern U.S. bringing dangerously cold temperatures and wind chills that could dip to 30 to 40 degrees below zero in some places. The northern plains expected to see the worst of it. It comes just days after a brutal snowstorm hit the great lakes and the northeast, causing school closures, car clashes and a whole lot of canceled flights.

New reaction tonight to a pro-life group's latest fight to expose what they call a horrific abortion clinic conditions across 32 states. It's all part of the group's effort to rebuke the Supreme Court for loosening abortion restrictions back in June. So what did they find? Trace Gallagher has details live from L.A. Hi, Trace.

TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Shannon, a 135-page report by the anti-abortion group American Unite for Life does include graphic details, but the group says the goal is to compel state legislators into pushing for new restrictions on abortion. Last summer the Supreme Court struck down at Texas anti-abortion law. That mandate abortion clinics have the same standard as surgical centers and doctors who perform abortions have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. Critics called the law a sham and say it cut the number of abortion clinics in half. In his majority opinion, Justice Stephen Briar said for women the medical benefits did not justify the burden they placed on abortion access. But Americans United for Life has now has found horrific abortion clinic conditions in 32 states like West Virginia, where a doctor reportedly failed to fully remove an aborted fetus from the mother's uterus. In California, a woman who had a severe reaction to anesthesia died, because the doctor allegedly failed to recognize the toxicity and then failed to respond. And a Florida clinic failed to provide an adequate area for cleaning and sterilizing instruments. Pro-choice advocates say these examples are cherry picked and extremely rare. What is not in dispute is that because of Donald Trump's victory, the pro-life movement is emboldened and for proof you need only look to Ohio where the legislature just passed a bill banning abortions after a heartbeat is detected. That is at roughly six weeks before some women even now that they are pregnant. Governor John Kasich has not said if he will sign that bill. Shannon.

BREAM: Thank you, Trace. And we will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BREAM: Forbes Magazine names Megyn's new books "Settle for More" among its list of the 2016 top ten nonfiction books for leaders and entrepreneurs.  Here are just the few of the reasons why. Michelle Golden tweets, Megyn Kelly, thank you for igniting my fire within. It is never too late. Love "Settle for More." And pick up a few more for gifts. It is a good holiday idea.

Karen More sent message with the attached picture, earmarked dozens of pages, added a touch of sharpie well loved, and full of wisdom and wit, #settleformore.

And Jessica George says, I laugh and cried every step of the way through your books. Thank you for your transparency and inspiration, #settleformore.

Thanks for watching. I am Shannon Bream. This is "The Kelly File."

Content and Programming Copyright 2016 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2016 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.