Should outgoing Obama administration have sanctioned Russia?

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," December 29, 2016. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Kimberly Guilfoyle, along with Richard Fowler, Eric Bolling, Katie Pavlich, and Tom Shillue. It's 5 o'clock in New York City. And this is "The Five."

The Obama administration retaliates against Russia after determining the country interfered with our election. President Obama announced a series of actions today and says the response won't stop there. More now from Fox's Rich Edson at the State Department. Rich.

RICH EDSON, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Good afternoon, Kimberly. In a widespread response from the Obama administration, especially on the sanctions front, they have sanctioned the top Russian intelligence services, GRU and the FSB along with top Russian officials, individuals, and companies. On top of that, the U.S. is kicking out 35 Russian diplomats based in the United States. In a statement, the State Department says quote, the department took these actions as part of a comprehensive response to Russia's interference in the U.S. and to a pattern of harassment of our diplomats overseas. Republican senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham in a statement say quote, the retaliatory measures announced by the Obama administration today are long overdue. But ultimately, they are a small price for Russia to pay for its attack on American democracy. The two senators say they will also push increased Russian sanctions in next year's senate sessions. Also, the Obama administration says it's closing down two Russian pieces of property that the administration charges the Russians use for intelligence gathering. Russian officials say they will retaliate. Kimberly, back to you.

GUILFOYLE: All right. Thanks, Rich.

Now, we haven't today from president-elect Trump. But yesterday, he said this about the hacking controversy.


DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT-ELECT: I think we have to go on with our lives. I think the computers have complicated lives very greatly. You know, the whole age of computers has made it where nobody knows exactly what is going on. We have speed, we have a lot of other things, but I'm not sure we have the security that we need. I have not spoken with the senators and I certainly will.


GUILFOYLE: All right. That response yesterday from president-elect Donald Trump. Bolling, no word yet from the president to be, but definitely, an international situation.


ERIC BOLLING, CO-HOST: They're telling me Vladimir Putin is weighing in right now. He is saying quote ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. That's all you got? So, honestly, look, they're expelling 35 Russian diplomats. Get them out of here. Get them out of here. And then the two -- we will call them cells. One in Maryland, one I believe on the west coast, they are going to close them down as well. They were spying machines. You should have done that a long time ago. But as far as sanctions, these are pretty toothless sanctions. There are no economic sanctions, there are no oil embargo sanctions, and nothing like that. What President Obama has done though, he has effectively painted Donald Trump in the corner -- President Donald Trump in the corner. Because Trump yesterday you heard the comment saying, hey, let's move on with our lives. Meaning, let's go forward. Take the step forward and increase the relationship or embrace the relationship with Russia. What President Obama has now done has said, listen, Donald Trump, if you want to remove these sanctions, you are basically going against our FBI, CIA, DNI, and eliminating their opinion from what President Obama did. And I think that's a very difficult thing he's going to have to tightrope probably with the help of the Russians. As far as sanctions go, there was nothing there. There's no there there.

GUILFOYLE: Now, Katie, what about this? The timing of it you know with less than three weeks until there's a new administration really putting us in a corner here with Russia. And saying, OK, these operatives are out. President Obama knew about this to begin with.


GUILFOYLE: Why didn't he do something then?

PAVLICH: I think President Obama's move to at least look like we're doing something about Russian interference is important. And I think we should take a step back and take politics out of this. I don't think Democrats or Republicans should be cheering about benefitting or being hurt by what the Russians may have done. But with that being said, I agree with Eric. This seems like a very weak response by President Obama, which means two things. A, it's deeply political, which is very obvious. The second thing is that, President Obama has to walk a very tightrope here because if we respond with a full on cyber attack, the Russians will respond to us, which could put us into a full-blown cyber war. And based on our infrastructure and what the cyber analysts have been saying over the past 10 years, the United States isn't ready for that. We don't have the infrastructure to protect against something like that.

And so, based on the timing, yes, it's political. But based on the long- term prospect of this, Russian interference in our national security and foreign policy, no matter what it is, whether election or whether it's something else, we should all be condemning that, which...

GUILFOYLE: Shouldn't be tolerated.

PAVLICH: Right. It shouldn't be tolerated, regardless who it benefits.


BOLLING: ... now from anyone else.

GUILFOYLE: What do you think about the president's move?

RICHARD FOWLER, GUEST CO-HOST: I think the president is in a really tough situation. If he acted before the election, folks like Eric would have been, oh, he is trying to put his hands on the scale of the election, rah, rah, rah, rah, rah. What the president says is...


BOLTON: I say rah like that?

FOWLER: Yeah. You say it just like that, Eric. All right. The president has waited to get the information. He waited for election to be over. He responded. Also, we don't know what the president did that is classified. So like people in Russia could be without power right now. We just don't know.


FOWLER: And Putin would never tell us.


GUILFOYLE: What about this response, Tom? What do you make of it?

TOM SHILLUE, GUEST CO-HOST: Can we go back to the Cold War and do things in secret?


SHILLUE: We're announcing everything. Look, we announce what we're doing.

FOWLER: We didn't announce all of it.

SHILLUE: Oh, yeah. He said there might be some more. But we also announced we could do more. But we don't want to because we -- they said, we can't deal with what would happen if we engaged in a full-on cyber war with them.


SHILLUE: It's like you know if this were wrestling, I'm going to hit you back, but I'm going to hit you not as hard as you hit me. I mean, that doesn't work.

BOLTON: I'm coming from over here.


GUILFOYLE: I want to talk about Putin's reaction.

BOLLING: Here is part of the problem. What we have here is, we're looking -- Katie and I and a lot of conservatives are saying, well, there's not many teeth to those sanctions.


BOLLING: Where are the real sanctions? And maybe because there's not enough evidence. We're still waiting to see the evidence. I heard 17 agencies said there's evidence.

FOWLER: What more evidence do you want?

BOLLING: How about something?

PAVLICH: They did it today.


FOWLER: There was a 17-page report by the FBI and Department of Homeland Security that said Russia engaged in our election. John McCain and Lindsey Graham...


BOLLING: They didn't say how they engaged though. We need to know that.

FOWLER: We need to take the wheel.


PAVLICH: We need to reiterate that when we say that Russia was influential in the election, it would have no bearing on the outcome. Donald Trump would have won regardless.


PAVLICH: Regardless of the interference. They make the statement that there was this interference that implies they were involved in hacking voting machines. That's absolutely not true.

GUILFOYLE: There's no evidence of that whatsoever.

PAVLICH: Absolutely. So I think it's important to remind people that regardless of the interference here, which we should take seriously moving forward and Donald Trump should take seriously at the cyber warfare situation, this would have had no change in the election. And therefore, people like Obama should put his ego aside and realize they lost.

FOWLER: At one point on this, I agree with Katie. I think the reason why Democrats lost is because we didn't have a conversation with working class Americans. I agree there. And I don't think the emails...

GUILFOYLE: Or a good candidate.


PAVLICH: Yeah, that, too.

FOWLER: The e-mails did or did not play into it. I don't really know, right. But I think what has to be said is the fact they did engage, if it happened to the RNC and their emails were hacked, I think it doesn't matter if you are black, white, Republican, Democrat, Nazi party, everybody should have the...


BOLLING: Were they hacked? Were they hacked?



BOLLING: Or were they leaked?

FOWLER: And the Podesta e-mails.


SHILLLUE: We don't know that.

BOLLING: Show the proof. Show the evidence that they were actually hacked, not an insider leak.

FOWLER: I don't know how much information you want.

BOLLING: I understand Russians giving it to Wiki Leaks and have them leaked that way. But the question is how were they hacked? And frankly, honestly, the bigger issue is China hacking into everything we're doing including all our businesses.

GUILFOYLE: On a daily basis.


BOLLING: Intellectual property.

FOWLER: I agree. And here is the thing, I think the interesting problem for Donald Trump going into this is for him to counter balance China, he is going to need Russia to help him. So the more the president acts -- I think the Trump administration and their foreign policy is going to be painted into a little bit of box. And they are going to have to find new ways to counter balance China, if they're also fighting Putin at the same time. I give you that.

SHILLUE: Why are we using the phrase interfering with the election? You used it in your read, Kimberly. We're using it on every news show. Why don't we stop using that phrase? Why don't we say what they did? They hacked into the DNC computers.


SHILLUE: It's a judgment call saying they interfered with the election. It's so -- it's part of the national conversation. Obama says it. And we repeat it. Why do we repeat it, Kimberly?

PAVLICH: Because the Russians want you to repeat it, Tom.

GUILFOYLE: I don't know, Tom.


GUILFOYLE: Call me out on the show.

BOLLING: Hillary Clinton needs a scapegoat. She needs people to realize that there are things, that there is a reason she lost other than as Kimberly aptly points out, she was a terrible candidate. It's either the voting booths, it's the Russia, the alt right, then it was the Russians again, then it is the voting booth. Bottom-line is she lost.

FOWLER: There's still something to be said that you have a foreign entity hacking e-mails of a major political party in the United States of America. That's problematic.

BOLLING: Show me the proof they were hacked and not leaked.


GUILFOYLE: We don't know for sure is what he is saying. Because OK, you do, you had seen it in Hannity who said it was provided -- given to them, that they did not hack. That's a leak. And that could be even from your own camp.

FOWLER: The Department of Homeland Security and the FBI and a 17-page report -- I read most of it, right. There was a lot of coding that I didn't understand. I'm sorry. I'm not a coder. But it talks about the fact that the Russians received this information and then they gave it to...

BOLLING: And that's true.


FOWLER: When Putin gets access to a party's e-mails and says, I'm going to leak this because I want to interfere and or try to put my finger on the scale of our elections, that's problematic, Eric.

BOLLING: You still haven't proven that they actually were hacked and not leaked. The other part that says the 17 agencies ended that report with hey, trust us.

GUILFOYLE: OK. So we agree on the following. One, this looks like impotent rage. That's what I call it. They get kicked out, not very effective sanctions, really not going to upset, offend or keep Vladimir Putin up at night. Doing it at the -- in the ninth inning, Eric, instead of when he said he found out about it, President Obama, which was more of like the first inning. He could have done something about it then if he was concerned about interference with the U.S. election. Maybe they didn't want to bring it up because they thought Hillary Clinton was going to win. And now, it's spoiled apples, grapes, oranges, fruit of that sort. All right.

FOWLER: The whole fruit store is spoiled.

GUILFOYLE: Exactly, the whole fruit store.

Coming up, a top lawmaker in John Kerry's own party is slamming the Secretary of State for going after Israel and forgetting the history in the Middle East. What impact will this have on the United States? We will talk about that with our guest Dr. Sebastian Gorka next.


BOLLING: It was hard to watch John Kerry's combative speech yesterday that was highly critical of Israel. Many lawmakers on both sides of the aisle were outraged by it including the senate's incoming Democratic leader Chuck Schumer. In a statement, the senator admonished Kerry for forgetting the history of settlements in Gaza where Israel had settlers withdraw and Palestinians responded by sending rockets into Israel. Schumer fears Secretary Kerry has quote emboldened extremists on both sides. More now with our special guest tonight, Dr. Sebastian Gorka, professor of strategy and irregular warfare at the Institute of World Politics and author of Defeating Jihad. We welcome Dr. Gorka. Now, Dr. Gorka, you said yesterday, the administration will go down as the most anti-Israel U.S. administration since it was created. Here is my question though. Have they been that way all along or are they just now admitting to it, and showing the world how really anti-Israel they are?

DR. SEBASTIAN GORKA, AUTHOR OF DEFEATING JIHAD: I think from the get-go, I think if you look at the last eight years, what is the track record of U.S. foreign policy, really, let's just look at what the legacy is. The legacy is that whoever you are, if you love America, if you want to be our friend, this administration will abandon you and will weaken you. Remember, the people who helped get President Obama elected were sent by this administration to Israel to try and defeat the reelection of Prime Minister Netanyahu. That tells you everything. If are a inimical to U.S. values, if you a terrorist sponsoring states like Iran, if you are an individual or a nation, a leader that rejects everything the founding fathers fought for, then you will be molly coddled. You will be assisted. You will be empowered. That's the Alice in Wonderland world of U.S. foreign policy in the last eight years.

And I don't know about you, guys, but I just can't wait for January 20th because we're going to do a 180 with this nation. We will treat our friends as friends and our enemies will be on notice, Eric.

BOLLING: Doctor, we're going to bring it around. Kimberly, I just want to point out something. When you do what John Kerry and the Obama administration did yesterday, you offer currency, you provide currency to the Palestinians, they're at the negotiating table. They just gave them a whole lot of political currency. KG.

GUILFOYLE: All right. Hi, Dr. Gorka.


GUILFOYLE: So I couldn't agree more with what you said just now and last night. It just really seems that he is going out of his way, President Obama, to undermine our one Democratic ally in this region that's already on fire. And o what end do you think he is doing this? Is it part of the reason to create a problem for president-elect Donald Trump going in on the 20th?

GORKA: I think they just simply can't help themselves. They can't resist. They're so driven by their partisan ideology. I asked a friend of mine, who is a senior State Department official, just last night I said, so -- he was really for this. He said, wow, this is -- we really showed them this time. And I said does it change anything? Is it going to bring us a solution? He said, no, not at all. Then what are you talking about? Why did you do this? Totally unnecessary. In medicine, there's something called the Hippocratic Oath. And it says, whatever you are going to do as a doctor, your first rule is do no harm.


GORKA: This administration, it's the opposite. Whatever we do, turn over the table, slow gasoline on the fire, throw the firecrackers into the room. It simply is the opposite of common sense. It has to be ideological, Kimberly.

GUILFOYLE: You are right. It's operating as an accelerant in the region that is already you know highly compromised. So three weeks left and they seem to still be wanting to create problems.

BOLLING: OK. Dr. Gorka, Richard Fowler asking a question.

FOWLER: Dr. Gorka, so here is my question. At the beginning of this, you talked about this idea that you know the president has sort of made this big enemy in Netanyahu. But it was a couple months ago, President Obama gave the Israelis a $38 billion -- the biggest ever aid package in American history. I mean, is that not supporting our allies?

GORKA: It is. But it just is another piece of how schizophrenic this administration is. Remember, this was the administration that was -- we're going to lead from behind. That's our bumper sticker, war in the Middle East are bad. What did the Obama administration do in the first nine months of the Obama administration, the first nine months? This anti-war president killed more people with drone strikes than President Bush did in four years. This is the lack of consistency. It's the dangerous mix of when you add ignorance to arrogance. When you add those two together, this is what you get.

FOWLER: I think if you would ask the Obama administration, they would say the reason why. And I'm not saying I agree with drones. I think their drones, they are problematic. But the idea behind drones, we put drone out there, so we don't have to you know put our men and women in harm's way. And they can operate them effectively outside of that. But either way, I think the main point for me is if you ask any city struggling in America, people in flint for a $38 billion aid package, I'm sure they would take it.

PAVLICH: Dr. Gorka, Katie Pavlich here. Aid packages are passed by Congress.


GORKA: And signed by the president.

PAVLICH: That's the first thing. But second, my question is, we have a new president who is coming into office now. The Israelis are clearly hoping and I think believe that he will that he will be a better president for Israel than President Obama has been. My question is on two fronts. How does president Trump mitigate the damage from this U.N. resolution? And the second question is, how does he navigate what we have now in the Middle East with Syria, with Iraq, with Egypt, with North Africa? How does he now try and put that fire out because as you have said and Kimberly also said, it's on fire?

GORKA: How long have I got, Katie, maybe 40 seconds to fix the Middle East?


PAVLICH: I know. Sorry.

GORKA: OK. So, number one, the resolutions of the Security Council raised to the level of international law. So there's nothing we can do about that unilaterally. However, as the highest donor to the United Nations, as the most important powerful nation in the world, we have a lot of leverage. The people who supported this, the 10 nations that supported this, will be punished whether it's economically, whether diplomatically or whether it is just rhetorically. They will be frozen out at least for a period of time. That's clear from just the statements made already by president-elect Trump.

What can we do in the Middle East? In the Middle East, the first thing that has to be done -- I have been stating this again and again and again, I've told General Flynn, other people on the transition team, look, the first thing we have to do is we have to win back our friends. There are people bleeding right now, Muslims bleeding for us and for our values in the Middle East. Remember the Jordanian fire pilot burnt alive. The nations of the Middle East, they should be our friends, like Jordan, like Egypt, have been completely neglected and abandoned sometimes like Egypt by this administration. The first thing the president -- the new commander- in-chief has to do is to build back those relationships, because they have to trust us, if we are going to stabilize the Middle East. That's what I expect Donald Trump to do.

BOLLING: OK. Tom Shillue.

SHILLUE: Dr. Gorka, Tom Shillue. I want to know why know why, why do you think the administration is changing now? If they really meant it, why didn't they approach Israel in this way earlier in their administration? Is it because it's just a parting shot and he doesn't mean it?

GORKA: I can't talk for them. I think the best answer is I think you have it. I think it's sheer bloody mindedness. They're doing it because they can do it. And they want to send a message to all those people who are with them, who think that Israel is the evil force in the Middle East. And despite being surrounded by millions and millions of people who wish to do it harm, that somehow they are the dark force of the region. It's really - - for somebody that lives in the real world that understands who our true friends are, I have no explanation for you. Please knock on the door of the White House.

BOLLING: Dr. Gorka, before we let you go, so the thought is, what was the intent of this? Was this to settle the score with Netanyahu basically at the expense of the Israeli people or was it to further complicate Donald Trump's foreign policy as he takes the office?


GORKA: Great question, Eric. Look, I don't believe in conspiracy theories. I find them immensely entertaining. But they're called theories for a reason, because they're not fact. And having watched the last eight years, I don't see Machiavellian strategists in the White House. I see a person with an MA in fictional writing called Ben Rhodes as the deputy national security adviser. These guys aren't Kissinger, these guys aren't big brains. They don't have a master plan. It is sheer willful bloody mindedness and done out of spite. If I had to put money on it, Eric, it was done to say, we can do this and we're going to do it to you. Happy Christmas, Happy Hanukkah.

BOLLING: Kill two birds with one stone I guess also, doctor.

GUILFOYLE: It is ignorance and arrogance like he said, so true.

BOLLING: Thank you very much, Dr. Gorka.

Ahead, so much for a smooth transition, president-elect Donald Trump and President Obama in a war of words, but after a late night call between the two, will there be a truce? Next on The Five.


PAVLICH: President Obama boldly stated this week he would have beaten president-elect Trump if he ran for a third term, even though Americans soundly rejected his policies. Even some on his side are stating the obvious. The president is to blame for not Hillary Clinton's loss, but for destroying his Democratic Party. Here is an editor at the far left, Huffington Post.


SAM STEIN, HUFFINGTON POST SENIOR POLITICS EDITOR: When you look at the destruction of the Democratic Party under Barack Obama's leadership, and you have to wonder, you know, what was the political -- what were the electoral benefits that he gave to the party? He leaves them in a much worse position. The states are decimated. They have lost control of the House and the Senate. The governorships are decimated. So, yeah, maybe he is obviously a gifted candidate. He did win election twice by substantial margins, but you know his legacy as a politician is a bit muddied by all that.


PAVLICH: So, Richard, my first question goes to you. Is winning the White House twice with President Obama worth losing 1,000 seats across the country and putting 30 Republicans in charge of governor mansions across the countries?

FOWLER: You're putting me on a hot seat.

PAVLICH: We need answers on how you are to rebuild the party.

FOWLER: I think every party goes through its times in transition. I think you know the Republican Party was sort of decimated when we won in 2008. And we're going to have to rebuild. I think that's a far fact to say this president hasn't done a lot to move this country forward. Not only do we have 72 consecutive months of job growth, but according to Gallop, the president has a 56 percent approval rating, which is one of the highest we have seen in recent history. When George Bush left the White House, he had a 31 percent approval rating. The only person that beats Barack Obama is Ronald Reagan at 62 percent approval rating. He can't run for a third term. That's very obvious. But I do believe that you cannot blame Hillary's loss on the president. Hillary didn't do a good enough job of selling her message to the American people.

GUILFOYLE: We agree with that.


BOLLING: How do you explain President Obama who was probably Hillary's greatest advocate, surrogate on the campaign trail, maybe his wife Michelle was the greatest one, how do you -- what happens when he says, you know what, vote for Hillary is a vote for my legacy and then...

FOWLER: I don't people believed him. I don't think voters believed them. Look at those people who said I voted for Obama twice and I voted for Donald Trump.


BOLLING: Is the current core Democratic ideology, platform, still intact? Do you want to push this forward the next four, eight years?

FOWLER: Oh, absolutely.


BOLLING: Do you have to do a quote, unquote autopsy which the Republicans did eight years ago?

FOWLER: You know, I think the reason why we lost this election is because we didn't have a convincing narrative for working class Americans. I think we have to go back to those roots.


BOLLING: You were sure of it until November 8.

FOWLER: The candidates who ran on that message won their reelection.

PAVLICH: Kimberly.

GUILFOYLE: I'll tell you -- I'll tell you this. He said he wanted to be a transformative figure in American politics, and he certainly was. He wanted to be transformative like Reagan. And other than Reagan, nobody did more to put conservatives and Republicans in office and back in the White House than President Obama. I mean, that's the result.

He might have been able to move his own numbers and ticket up in terms of favorability. But the Democratic Party is left in complete ruin because it was more about this president than it was about the party.

PAVLICH: And Tom, they have a lot of rebuilding to do over at the DNC. They have their own civil war going on. How do you think that they're going to be able to move forward, since they've devastated their bench? Not in D.C. necessarily but across the country.

SHILLUE: Well, one thing they have to realize -- I'm glad Richard made that point -- is that approval rating is meaningless. It doesn't mean anything. Because President Obama, his approval rating is going to continue to be high. It's going to go sky high after he's out of office.

I predict -- let's go into the future -- that President Trump will be re- elected with the lowest approval rating in history. Again, proving my point that approval rating, it doesn't mean anything. people think, President Obama, he is a great guy. But they don't agree with his policies. And so that's why Democrats lose.

FOWLER: Here's the thing. One thing that we saw from the Clinton administration, right, Bill Clinton did very well is he sold small things as big things. Right? So when he gave out free lunch, which is a small thing in the grand scheme of things, he sold it as a big thing.

This president did a lot of small things and was not good enough -- and he said it himself -- at selling it. For example, folks...


FOWLER: No, I mean, I'm being very real. The one bill that I always turn to is the Credit Card Bill of Rights. Your credit card bill now gets -- comes on the same day every month. Before that didn't happen. They have to...

PAVLICH: We're getting in the weeds here on this topic.

FOWLER: No, no. That's an everyday working-man issue. When you sit at the kitchen table, one topic...

BOLLING: No, no, no. You know what an everyday working-man issue is...

FOWLER: It is.

BOLLING: That really is substantially higher than that? Not money, wages.


FOWLER: We've been fighting you guys on wages.

BOLLING: Wages have been stagnant for a decade. Now I'm not saying all...

FOWLER: Let's raise the minimum wage, then.

BOLLING: Under George Bush and President Obama wages haven't budged in ten years. Finally starting to tick up.

PAVLICH: Let's move on to our next topic with the transition.

So President Obama's term is over. And Trump is coming in in a couple weeks here. And right now, it's a bit hard to tell if Mr. Obama and President-elect Trump are getting along.

But yesterday, Mr. Trump put out a tweet, saying he's doing his best to disregard the many inflammatory statements and roadblocks from the president. He thought it was going to be a smooth transition, and then wrote, "NOT!"

But later in the day, he appeared outside his home in Florida and said the transition was going smoothly and that the president phoned him and had a very nice conversation.

So Kimberly, we see these two guys kind of poking each other's egos a little bit. But as we've heard, the transition level at the staff is actually going pretty well.

GUILFOYLE: Yes. The transition process, I think, is going very well. He's ahead of the game, by all accounts, in terms of past presidents and putting people in important positions. I think that's going very well. I think they're looking forward to these next three weeks happening and going by very quickly.

Because it seems that, unfortunately, President Obama is having a hard time letting go of the strings. He's, like, still trying to control, make moves, do a lot of things right before he goes out.

And you see President Trump, who people are saying, "I wonder if he can be presidential." Well, he's showing that he can be presidential, because he's not responding back or doing anything today or making any kind of comments, given the developments of what's happening with Russia. He's biding his time.

FOWLER: I hear that.

PAVLICH: Richard, why would Obama say something like, "I would have beat Trump in a third term"? Why would he say that?

FOWLER: I think it was very tongue in cheek. It can happen. But with that being said, I mean, it was tongue in cheek. But it can't happen. Right? Because he can't run for a third term.

PAVLICH: Why would he take that shot?

FOWLER: But beyond that point, I think there's something to be said about the Donald Trump Twitter account, which will be -- we'll be talking about for the next four years. You can't say, "Consumer confidence is up. Thanks, Donald." I mean, that's not presidential, in my opinion.

SHILLUE: It is now!

BOLLING: That was a play on... GUILFOYLE: The highest it's been in 15 years.

BOLLING: ... President Obama's "Thanks, Obama" line that he kept throwing out there. "Thanks, Donald."

FOWLER: The reason consumer confidence is high is because for eight years the president has been working on fixing this economy.

PAVLICH: He lost a thousand seats.

We're going to -- we're going to move on.

FOWLER: Hey, listen, but we created -- we created 72 consecutive months of job growth for the American people.

BOLLING: One second. There are fewer Americans working today than when there were when President Obama took over. Period.

FOWLER: There was a 10 percent unemployment rate when President Obama took over. Actually higher than that. Now it's at 4 percent. Four percent.

BOLLING: Ninety-one million people left the work force.

FOWLER: Four percent.

PAVLICH: I think that's based -- Tom, what do you have to say about Obama being the legacy behind the new economic bump that we're seeing?

SHILLUE: Well, listen, I don't care what day my credit card statement comes. I just want more money so I can pay it.


FOWLER: A lot of people do care, Tom, though.

PAVLICH: Especially after -- especially after buying Christmas presents.

GUILFOYLE: We will give him that one amazing accomplishment.

FOWLER: There's more than just one.

BOLLING: Your credit card bill comes on the same day every month.

GUILFOYLE: And more people are defaulting on them than ever before. But at least we get the bill on the right day.

PAVLICH: Well, all have lots more cards.

BOLLING: There's terror happening in San Bernardino when your credit card bill comes.

PAVLICH: OK. Moving on. All right. Ahead, it's going to be a speech for the history books. President-elect Trump has already begun working on his inaugural address. He reportedly told friends he's drawing inspiration from two former presidents. Find out which ones next.



SHILLUE: In about three weeks, President-elect Trump will deliver the biggest speech of his life, his inaugural address. Steven Miller, his incoming White House policy advisor, is helping him write it. But Mr. Trump is reportedly crafting the first draft himself and is looking to these two predecessors for inspiration.


JOHN F. KENNEDY, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty. And so my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.

RONALD REAGAN, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem.

Now, so there will be no misunderstanding, it's not my intention to do away with government. It is rather to make it work. Work with us, not over us. To stand by our side, not ride on our back.


SHILLUE: According to The Washington Post, the president-elect told some of his visitors yesterday that Reagan's style and Kennedy's articulation of grand national ambitions will be central to how he thinks in his own speech.

Kimberly, you were rapt attention on Reagan there.

GUILFOYLE: I love it, yes. Well, Reagan and also on JFK. And Katie and I were kind of mouthing, remarking to one another that he sounded like a Republican, JFK did.


GUILFOYLE: And I know that's somebody that President-elect Trump really admires. When Bill Gates was there, he said that he -- after the meeting that he reminded him of JFK.

So I think these are two really important speeches and two important presidencies to draw inspiration from. These are people that he admires, and they're really similar to the message that he was echoing throughout his campaign. Like, make government work for you, efficient, effective. Lean it out if you need to.

And the idea, too, that the United States will not cower in fear. We will stand. We will stand alone in times of adversity. And we will stand with our allies and beware our enemies.

SHILLUE: Yes. Eric, Steven Miller...


SHILLUE: ... he does not mince words. He wrote the famous speech at the convention that everyone called dark. What are you expecting from this one?

BOLLING: So these speeches, they should last -- I don't know -- 15 to 25 minutes. I'm hoping it's not a real long one. Here's what I want to hear, though.

When -- so we heard Donald Trump, you know, bring it, bring the fire, bring the flame, get the crowd going throughout the whole campaign, throughout the primary, through the general election. On inauguration day, when he's standing there with the Capitol behind him, I want to hear Donald Trump from the heart. Because when he talks from the heart, he is influential. So -- as evidenced by people who don't like Donald Trump will spend 15 or 20 minutes with him. They'll go to Trump Tower and come out going, "You know what? He's a good guy. He means well. He wants to win, and he wants the best for the country."

I think if he does that for 15 minutes on the steps of the Capitol, he will win not only Republicans' hearts, anti-Trumper hearts but also a lot of Democrat hearts.

SHILLUE: Yes. What do you think, Richard? What's going to -- what's the one thing he has to say to you and your friends to, you know -- to charm you?

FOWLER: I guess my heart is for sale now?

GUILFOYLE: Everybody, baby. Tu corazon, mi corazon. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) corazon.

FOWLER: But in all seriousness, I think what I want to hear from this president is rebuilding -- how we rebuild America. Right? So he talks about -- obviously, can't talk about policy. But at least framing up what this -- you know, how do we rebuild America, how do we, you know, quote unquote, "make America great again," if that's a thing.

PAVLICH: It's a thing.

FOWLER; I mean, because I also want to -- the question I always ask is, when was it not -- like, what does make American great again? When was it great, so we can go...

BOLLING: There were a couple instances in the American history where you could say it wasn't so great.

FOWLER: Give me one.

BOLLING: One, Jimmy Carter. The end of Jimmy Carter.

FOWLER: No, give me a year. Give me a year.

BOLLING: 2009 and 2010 America was definitely on our heels.

GUILFOYLE: Make it great again. Like Reagan.

PAVLICH: I look forward to Donald Trump in his inauguration address discussing what makes Americans proud to be Americans. I think that he'll do a very good job of that.

I like that he's pulling from Ronald Reagan, who was a very big advocate for small government.


PAVLICH: The federal government, according to almost everyone in America, is far too big, far too expansive, far too regulatory, as the boot of -- on the necks of individuals and on small businesses.

So he can talk about, I think, what makes everyone proud to be an American rather than what makes us different and why we're divided. And I think that it will probably be pretty good, based on his speech writer and based on who he's drawing inspiration from.


PAVLICH: I'm looking forward to it.

GUILFOYLE: He's starting and doing a draft himself. And then -- and Steve Miller is hugely talented. And they Echo the same voice and theme. So that -- they work well together. And apparently, the rest of the team members are working on it, as well.

SHILLUE: All right. Next, it was one of the most popular gifts this Christmas. But is Amazon Echo more creepy than cool? The device could help solve a murder case in one state. Details ahead.


FOWLER: You may have heard about this story in the news. Amazon Echo, a popular personal assistance device, is now at the center of a murder investigation.

Police in Arkansas are trying to get Amazon to share data collected from an Echo the night of a crime. It may contain evidence that could solve who killed a man in a hot tub.

The device is selling like hot cakes this Christmas season. Amazon Echo is a hands-free speaker that you control with your voice. Echo connects to the Alexa voice service to play music, provide information, news, sports scores, weather and more. Echo can hear what you say and how you say it any time of the day. Is that cool or is it creepy?



FOWLER: ... you have one.

GUILFOYLE: I have one. And so I asked Alexa before I left -- I got one for my son. He really -- he researched it and loved it a lot. So I asked it, I'm like, "Alexa, give me news articles about you being -- you know, for a murder investigation." And so she started playing me the updates for, like, NPR.

So my son said, "Mom, she's not telling you."

I said, "That's correct." Because Amazon is saying they won't release the information.

I find this fascinating as a former prosecutor. You want to use any tools you can to be able to get information. That's why you want stuff from cell phones and phone records. And I mean, Eric doesn't like this. I get it. It's so creepy.

But this is the problem. I get it. So it's a violation potentially, your privacy. You have it. When I started talking about her, she lit up, because she heard her name.

BOLLING: They're not knocking on the door anymore with the search warrant. They go, "Let's go right inside the house. Let's go right inside." Look, I'm all...

GUILFOYLE: Amazon is not giving it over.

BOLLING: Not yet. But then, we didn't think Verizon was giving over our phone records either, and they were, as well.

So I'm all for technology. I like this. But I'm the -- I'm the guy who puts the tape over the camera on the TV.

PAVLICH: Me too.

BOLLING: I'm afraid of hackers. And everything that's going on in my house.

FOWLER: I think, to add to that, I think our phones are already listening to us. Have you ever, like, tried to Google something in your phone, and as soon -- like, you said it. And then you put in one letter and the whole thing comes up? I think our phones are already spying on us.

SHILLUE: Oh, yes.

FOWLER: So I think Alexa increases the spying.

SHILLUE: Yes. That's why I didn't get it. I'm not comfortable with this. I bought some speakers this Christmas.

GUILFOYLE: It doesn't talk.

SHILLUE: I wanted ones that weren't listening to me. I have -- I mean...

FOWLER: Everything is listening to you, Tom.

SHILLUE: I'm not going to murder anyone in a hot tub. But I mean, maybe some minor crimes.

GUILFOYLE: Oh, my gosh.

SHILLUE: There's some things I don't want...

GUILFOYLE: Play this back.

SHILLUE: ... Alexa listening to.

BOLLING: Misdemeanors.


GUILFOYLE: This is why I don't let Alexa sleep in my bedroom. It's a big problem, right?

SHILLUE: Where do you keep your...

GUILFOYLE: It's in my son's room.

SHILLUE: You could actually -- could you access and find out what your son is saying to it when you're not there?

GUILFOYLE: Well, but he stores stuff on there. Like, he's like, "Alexa, add this to my list." And it's, like, his list of things he wants or whatever, or things he doesn't want to forget, or things he's mad about.

PAVLICH: It can store so much information. According to this, it's only 60 minutes, right?

FOWLER: But it's recording you. That's recording you.

PAVLICH: That's enough. Unless this thing can do my laundry, I don't want one. So I don't have one. I don't want one.

FOWLER: I didn't even get the Amazon button, where you could order laundry detergent.

GUILFOYLE: It plays music. You can say, like, "Alexa, tell me a joke." And then she gives you one joke after the next.

PAVLICH: It's the beginning of the end.

BOLLING: You ready for this, too? Here's a little twist in the story, too. So now Amazon has all this information on you. Right? That's a lot of data. What you're ordering, what you like, what your likes are.


BOLLING: And now they can go ahead and -- who knows what they're going to do with it. They can use it for themselves; they could sell it. There are a lot of privacy issues.

And by the way, when you sign up for these things, you sign away all your privacy rights.

FOWLER: Absolutely.

GUILFOYLE: There will be no Alexa in the Bolling household.

SHILLUE: But it can do your laundry. It can start your appliances. So you can...

PAVLICH: Why are you telling me this? This is tempting now.

GUILFOYLE: Yes. It does everything.

PAVLICH: Alexa, do the laundry.

GUILFOYLE: Weather updates. You can set your alarm. It wakes you up very nicely in the morning.

PAVLICH: Didn't they make a movie about this a couple years ago with Joaquin Phoenix, the movie called "Her"? And he fell in love with his computer? Something like...

GUILFOYLE: There's a disorder like that.

FOWLER: The voice, I fell in love with the voice.

PAVLICH: Cell phone or -- I'm not going to worry about it, because I don't want one. No thanks.

FOWLER: Katie doesn't want one.

PAVLICH: No, sorry.

FOWLER: "One More Thing" is up next.


GUILFOYLE: It's time now for "One More Thing." Do you need some comfort? Are you stressed out when you travel? Do you wish the TSA would actually do a better job? Don't worry. Hug a pig. Yes, literally.

So meet Lilu (ph). Lilu (ph) is an airport therapy pig. How cute? What a cutie-patootie. So she's a small spotted Juliana pig, in case you were wondering, that helps calm the travelers. And she's the first non-dog member of the airport's Wag Brigade.

Where could this be happening, you ask, if you can't read the screen? San Francisco, my old hometown. So the Wag Brigade walks through the airport with the handlers. They soothe everyone's anxiety. So they're animal -- like Xanax, essentially. Hopes of making the experience more enjoyable.

Like, when you lose your bag or your flight gets canceled, or you know, whatever, you get detained in an awkward strip search, this will make you feel better about it. I think it's very, very cute.

So let me ask you something, everybody. You want to watch -- we've got Bolling on "O'Reilly" tonight. We've got me on "Hannity" tonight, and I've got a fantastic all-star list of guests. Kellyanne Conway is going to be on from the Trump transition team and chief advisor to the president-elect. Anthony Scaramucci, also from the transition team. Dr. Thomas Sullo (ph), who is retiring after many years, Katie, of having an incredible column.

PAVLICH: Absolutely.

GUILFOYLE: That's going to be a nice conversation to have. Incredible. Yes, very bright man. And Dr. Sebastian Gorka. So that was, like, the tease that you got earlier when he was on "The Five." So join us at 10 if you can and Bolling at 8 on "O'Reilly."

BOLLING: And at 8, take a look at this full screen -- pull it up -- 8 p.m., "O'Reilly Factor." Will be sitting in. We have Reince Priebus. And he's going to weigh in on the recent -- the Russian sanctions, the White House -- there were the White House sanctions and whether or not Donald Trump, president-elect, will respond. That's going to be a big interview.

And also, I have Harvey Levin, who -- TMZ, he's the producer and founder of TMZ. TMZ broke the story on both Carrie Fisher dying and Debbie Reynolds dying last night. So we'll sit down with Harvey and talk to him about both of their lives, their legacies and where they go from here. So stay tuned for that.

Also, this one right here: don't forget, New Year's Eve, Kimberly.

GUILFOYLE: There we go.

BOLLING: Kimberly and I will be doing "All-American New Year's," 11 to -- check it out, it's actually 10 to 1 a.m., unless they cut us an hour back. I'm not sure, K.G.

GUILFOYLE: I don't know what happened here. Because they told us we've got to be here very early.

BOLLING: I'm pretty sure it's 10 to 1, but whatever.

GUILFOYLE: I like the picture of us. We look like we're on vacation in Florida or something.

FOWLER: Too bad it will be cold.

GUILFOYLE: Thanks, Debbie Downer. Debbie Downer Fowler.

BOLLING: It's not going to be that cold, like 35 degrees. It's great.


PAVLICH: She really has a fabulous jacket that everyone should tune in and see.

FOWLER: Check out the jacket.

GUILFOYLE: Thank you.

PAVLICH: She's got a fabulous coat she's got ready to go.

FOWLER: I heard Eric is going shirtless.

GUILFOYLE: Potentially.

BOLLING: Kathy Griffin said she may take off her top, and I said, "We'll see."

PAVLICH: Let's not see that.

GUILFOYLE: You know we're right next to, like, Anderson and Kathy.

FOWLER: Uh-oh.

GUILFOYLE: It may be like a cable news rumble.

SHILLUE: Bing, bing, bing, bing, bing.

PAVLICH: It's not going to be that crazy, everyone. Tune in. It's going to be PG for the most part.

FOWLER: It's going to be all-American.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, all American. Exactly.

PAVLICH: All-American. OK. It's the end of the year. We're almost to 2017. We're rounding out 2016, and I'm here to do Greg Gutfeld's job and to talk about the most annoying words of 2016, according to a new Marist poll. So we have them here up on the screen.

"Whatever" came in as No. 1, with 38 percent of the vote for most annoying word or phrase of 2016.

"No offense, but," second place.

"You know, right," third place.

Fourth place, "I can't even."

And fifth place, one of Donald Trump's favorite words, "huge."


PAVLICH: Those are the four -- top five, actually. The top five.

SHILLUE: Huge. Huge.

PAVLICH: Actually, I claim (ph) next year.

GUILFOYLE: I like those.

SHILLUE: OK. Christmas dinner at the Barrett (ph) family. They were all ready to sit down, and someone ate the turkey. Who ate the turkey? They went into the hallway. Mystery solved. Take a look at this.




GUILFOYLE: Oh, my god.

BOLLING: Are you kidding me? He ate the whole thing?

SHILLUE: He ate the whole turkey.

PAVLICH: Oh, my gosh.

SHILLUE: He left, like, one nibble.

GUILFOYLE: OK, but like, not the bones, right?

FOWLER: Can I just say, I would take the pig over this dog any day of the week?

GUILFOYLE: Well, the dog looks like a pig now. Did you notice the body shape?

PAVLICH: Is it OK? Or is it at the vet now?

GUILFOYLE: No, it's not -- the poor dog. And then when you eat the turkey, the tryptophan makes you, like -- take a little nap.

SHILLUE: Exactly.

GUILFOYLE: OK. Well, hope he feels better. OK, Richard, what do you have?

FOWLER: I thought I would end with a little bit of cheer. So for seven years, Sarah Clark worked as a waitress at Pita Jungle in Phoenix, Arizona. Now Pita Jungle is like any place else. You order humus. You know? Good place to go.

She is now nine months pregnant. Her baby is due the day before my birthday. And her husband doesn't have a job. So she's trying to make all the extra tips she can. And she got a special tip from a special customer. So after a $61.30 bill, she got a $900 tip. And the inscription reads, "This money -- this is the money that God gave to us, and so we are giving it to you."

GUILFOYLE: How nice is that? What a lovely story.

BOLLING: That's a really, really nice story. A colleague of our tips amazing. Once in a while he'll do this in...

GUILFOYLE: Sean Hannity.

BOLLING: He will just throw a tip down that just makes your mind spin.

GUILFOYLE: The most generous man in the world.

PAVLICH: Really.

GUILFOYLE: I challenge anybody to tell me somebody more generous than Sean Hannity.

SHILLUE: The most generous man in the Pita Jungle.

GUILFOYLE: All right. Here we go. Pita.

Set your DVRs so you never miss an episode of "The Five." That's it for us. "Special Report" is next. And Bolling and I will see you later.

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.