Hillary Clinton breaks silence in first national press interview since launching 2016 bid

This is a rush transcript from "The Kelly File," July 7, 2015. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MEGYN KELLY, HOST: Breaking tonight, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton breaking her long silence in her first national media sit down. She takes heat on being trustworthy, answers questions on her family foundation and again gets dogged on the e- mail scandal that will not go away.

Welcome to "The Kelly File," everyone. I'm Megyn Kelly. Tonight, almost 90 days after declaring her candidacy for president and after weeks of hearing critics accuse her of ducking the media, Hillary Clinton has wrapped up her first national interview of the 2016 race.

First, she was asked about the fact that nearly six in 10 Americans say, they do not believe she is honest or trustworthy and she says specifically, this has been a theme that has been used against me and my husband for many, many years dismissing it as part of a constant barrage of attacks largely fomented by the right which immediately drew comparisons to her response when her husband was accused of having an affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.


JANUARY 27, 1998 (ph)

HILLARY CLINTON, THEN-U.S. FIRST LADY: The great story here for anybody willing to find it and write about it and explain it is the vast right wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president.


KELLY: Next, she was asked about her use exclusively of a private e- mail account while she was secretary of state. And her decision to delete tens of thousands of her e-mails before ultimately years later returning those documents to the State Department.


CLINTON: Well, let's start from the beginning. Everything I did was permitted. There was no law. There was no regulation. There was nothing that did not give me the full authority to decide how I was going to communicate. Now, I didn't have to turn over anything. I chose to turn over 55,000 pages because I wanted to go above and beyond what was expected of me. And now I think it is kind of fun. People get a real time behind the scenes look at, you know, what I was e-mailing about and what I was communicating about.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Wearing warm socks, you said to John Podesta.

CLINTON: Exactly. And --

KEILAR: Working a fax machine.

CLINTON: Yes. A secure fax machine which is harder to work than the regular.



KELLY: That's fun. She was asked about the Clinton Foundation and the allegations as asserted by the book "Clinton Cash" and further reported on by "The New York Times," the "Wall Street Journal" and Fox News, that she may have done favors for companies in countries while Secretary of State in exchange for donations to her family charity. At that point, Mrs. Clinton said, she had no plans to say or do anything about the Clinton Foundation other than to say how proud she was and that the work of the foundation should continue and there was much more where we will get too in a minute.

But first, FOX News digital politics editor Chris Stirewalt is here.  So, that's fun --


The e-mail scandal -- it's so fun. Now it's just fun. I mean, it was kind of shocking to hear her come out and say -- and Shannen Coffin is here, he's been following the e-mail controversy, you know, by the letter.  But to dismiss that as just fun and she did nothing wrong. To dismiss the Clinton Foundation as I'm just not going to talk about that other than go team and to talk about the honest and trustworthy thing, right wing conspiracy which is like, six out of ten Americans. Like, are they part of it?

CHRIS STIREWALT, FOX NEWS DIGITAL POLITICS EDITOR: Well, they have been duped. Don't you see? It's not important at all that Hillary Clinton destroyed the documents that she says would exonerate her. I destroyed the evidence that would clear me if you saw it. But take my word for it.

KELLY: It's fun.

STIREWALT: That's fun. And John Podesta socks and ha-ha, giggle, giggle. So, she says, that that is the vast right wing conspiracy that is working against her. It's not just the same as she said back in the '90s when she turned out to be rather wrong about what her husband had been doing.

KELLY: Not necessarily her fault.

STIREWALT: Not necessarily her fault. It is the same as what the Obama administration does now which is to say, your line of inquiry is not valid. It is the judge's mail defense and he has got Danny Noonan sitting across from him, he says, Danny, are you good? Do you want to be good or do you want to be bad, Brianna? Do you want to be good or do you want to be bad? Do you want to be one of those bad reporters who asks about bad things or do you want to be a good reporter?

KELLY: So, basically, what she was saying to the CNN reporter was, are you stupid?


KELLY: That is what she was trying to telegraph in the nicest possible way. Are you stupid? No one cares about Clinton Foundation. No one cares about e-mails. Although it's fun to talk about. And no one cares about the honest and trustworthy thing because even though those six out of ten people have been duped.

STIREWALT: And you must choose the matrix for the Obama White House and now for the Clinton campaign is, you must choose and you can either ask questions that we have deemed to be unacceptable which will cast you as Fox  like, or unacceptable outre, you will not be allowed back. You will not be allowed in. You will be shunned if you bring up these things. And I want to tell you, I thought of you, councilor, when Hillary Clinton said, here is how I feel about the family foundation that is swarmed with controversy and no one thinks was handled appropriately when she said, and so that is all I'm going to say about it.

And the fact that her interviewer said, okay, moving on. Just like, okay, well, then if that's how -- if you think it's really good then I guess we will just move on and didn't say, full stop, hold on, I'm sure you think it's great, but I want to ask you about the Russian uranium deal. I want to ask you about lifting the barriers to a deal for your friend in Colombia. I want to ask about specific details reported in the "New York Times," "The Washington Post," come on.

KELLY: He hadn't saved time for the question on the end which is about which character on "Saturday Night Live" Hillary likes to see play her more. I mean, I don't want to rip on my fellow journalist.

STIREWALT: No, exactly. It's tough.

KELLY: But, you got it. When you get that first sit-down, you got to make it count. And she had the first sit-down. And listen, they made news. So, we will leave it at that.

STIREWALT: We'll leave it at that.

KELLY: Chris, good to see you.


KELLY: So, Mrs. Clinton covered a fair amount of ground in this interview but one of the claim is already being challenged involved what she said about those e-mails and her insistence that no rules were broken.

Shannen Coffin is the former DOJ civil division assistant deputy attorney general and former council to Vice President Cheney. Robert Zimmerman is a democratic strategist and co-founder of Zimmerman/Edelson on public relations.

Guys, thank you for being here.


KELLY: So, Shannen, I want to just play for the viewers again, what she said on e-mails. Do we have the call for a sound bite? Waiting.  Listen to her.


CLINTON: So, yes, this is being blown up with no basis in law or in fact. That's fine, I get it. This is being in effect used by the Republicans in the Congress. Okay, but I want people to understand what the truth is.


CLINTON: And then she goes on Shannen to say, that she did exactly what Secretary Powell did.

SHANNEN COFFIN, NATIONAL REVIEW EDITOR: Right. Right. But look, let's start with where the law is and what the law required. And the law plainly required that she keep copies of records that were on her private e-mail. And as a result she was at least from regulations that were in place from 2009 she was violating those rules.

KELLY: Uh-mm.

COFFIN: And she was -- we've see now that she destroyed records, that she altered records that she provided the State Department and then she concealed those records from state during her entire tenure at the State Department.

KELLY: What do you make of the new assertion that this is a shift from what she saw when she spoke at the U.N. This is -- she is now on her heels now. Now, she is out in front in saying, I did nothing wrong. In fact, I went above and beyond what was required of me and I did exactly what Secretary Colin Powell did and no more.

COFFIN: I don't know how she could possibly say that. In 2011 Hillary Clinton sent an unclassified cable out to the field that said, stop using private e-mails, everyone in the State Department. She was doing exactly that. And she did that in 2011 because that's what her own regulations required. Her own regulations said that.

KELLY: The other thing, Robert, is that she, Colin Powell did use private e-mails. She is right about that but he didn't use exclusively private e-mail. And that is really what got her into trouble. It wasn't - - just she had a private e-mail account. She's right. A lot of politicians do. It was the exclusive use of it and the failure to turn over any of those e-mails --


KELLY: Over to the State Department when she left.

ZIMMERMAN: When you get through all Shannen's partisan spin and partisan rhetoric, the only thing that Colin Powell did differently is that Hillary Clinton turned over all of her work-related e-mails as was asked by the State Department.

KELLY: But he did his -- he did his State Department business. No, but I just want to make sure we are talking on this same point. What her critics had said is that he, yes, had personal e-mail and did some state business on it and shouldn't just turn it over but he did state business on --

ZIMMERMAN: Excuse me, Megyn. He did all of his State Department business on his personal e-mail and he turned over none of them.

KELLY: No, that's not true.

ZIMMERMAN: He claims he didn't have them. That's well documented.  He said that on national interviews. So, my point simply Megyn is, you know, Shannen can do spin the Republicans or operatives or out there trying to make issues of the foundation that have already been disproved by every objective analysis including the "Wall Street Journal." In fact, the author or -- excuse me.

KELLY: They said, there was no smoking guns.

ZIMMERMAN: No, they said there was no evidence showing any favoritism. And the same way the author of the book --

KELLY: Proving it.

ZIMMERMAN: Excuse me, Megyn.

KELLY: Yes, I just want to make sure that we are clear.

ZIMMERMAN: They said, there was no evidence showing favoritism.  According to the Wall Street Journal investigation. And in fact, Amazon had to reissue the book "Clinton Cash" with major revisions to correct the inaccuracies in that book. So, the reason you don't see either the e-mail attacks or the attacks on the foundation registering the polls, because Hillary Clinton still holds a 40 percent lead over her democratic competitors nationwide. And nationwide she is leading over the Republicans --

KELLY: She is leading Bernie and the other guys whose names escape me at the moment easily. And, you know, she is obviously the favorite for the democratic nomination.

ZIMMERMAN: Because --

KELLY: But how is she going to get away with saying six out of ten voters thinking that she is not honest is part of a right wing conspiracy?

ZIMMERMAN: Because Megyn, when you look at poll, and this is important now, objectively, when anyone goes from -- anyone enters the political sphere and becomes a candidate. And their poll, the trustworthy issue always goes down. Always when they were a candidate, always do worse than polling them before they run. The point here is, when you ask the question, do you trust Hillary Clinton to fight for you, to stand up for you, that is when she leads all the Republicans or all the Democrats. Here is the point, Megyn.

KELLY: We don't trust her but we trust her to fight for us.

ZIMMERMAN: Well, look at the polling, Megyn.


KELLY: Wait. Let me ask you this. No, listen, let me ask you this.  The other thing she did in this interview was, she talk about the republican field.


KELLY: And she had some choice words for them on the subject of immigration. She condemned them for not condemning Donald Trump's remarks and went on to say this. Listen.


CLINTON: They are all on the same general area on immigration. You know, they don't want to provide a path to citizenship. They range across the spectrum of being either grudgingly welcome or hostile towards immigrants.


KELLY: Okay. Now, the problem for her on that, Robert, is Jeb Bush who is considered to be the favorite by many polls is married to a woman who is from Mexico. He has children who are half Mexican.


KELLY: You know, hostile towards immigrants?

ZIMMERMAN: Because Hillary Clinton --

KELLY: How is that going to fly?

ZIMMERMAN: Because I'm really glad you bring this up because these are the types of issues that ultimately the American people focus on and ultimately determine election results. Hillary Clinton's put out a very bold plan for a pathway to citizenship. Every one of the republican candidates, everyone including Jeb Bush, opposes a pathway to citizenship.

KELLY: He wants a pathway to legal status not citizenship. Does that make him hostile towards immigrants?

ZIMMERMAN: Actually, what he said today was, he wants to have a conservative solution to the problem. I don't know what that means. But if you provide undocumented --

KELLY: He is married to a Mexican immigrant. How do you say he is hostile? Well, he married her begrudgingly.

ZIMMERMAN: Because even though -- I can tell you why he is hostile Megyn --

KELLY: He's begrudge against her.

ZIMMERMAN: Because he is condemning for the undocumented workers who were here. Eleven to 12 million of them. Second class citizenship as opposed to finding them a way to earn their citizenship. So, that means our military -- our young undocumented workers who are in the military, college graduates, people who are earning, contributing to our society are condemned to live a second class life.

KELLY: You know, I don't think he ever said nobody gets citizenship but --

ZIMMERMAN: Yes. He did, Megyn.

KELLY: We'll see. My interview with him and we specifically went over this. But anyway, let's talk about it.

ZIMMERMAN: He never said citizenship.

KELLY: As a matter of fact, Jeb Bush said citizenship before he said, legal status. The question about whether he's -- and she reversed herself on this subject, as well specifically on the issue of driver's licenses and other --

ZIMMERMAN: But the bigger point Megyn is -- the reason --

KELLY: I got to go.


KELLY: It's over between us. Always a pleasure speaking with you both.

COFFIN: Good to be with you.

KELLY: Also tonight, the state of New York joining others who are changing the rules when it comes to sex on campus. And I don't mean sexual assault. The rules have changed with respect to sex. While activist groups in other states offer up consent contracts complete with pen, breath mints and condoms. Welcome to 2015.

Brit Hume is here next on how this is actually no joke. And why every family with college age kids needs to pay attention.

Plus, high profile Democrats now joining those demanding change after an illegal immigrant with a long felony record murders this young woman in front of her father. But wait until you see what we found when we dug into the record on sanctuary cities and who is supporting them. Stay tuned for our investigation.

And then, can these six cops get a fair trial in the city of Baltimore? "The Kelly File" tonight has his hands on the explosive argument to move this case and Kevin Jackson is moments away.


KELLY: Well, a big story developing tonight as New York joins a growing list of states passing tough new rules when it comes to sex on campus. Today, New York's Governor Cuomo signed a law each party must consent knowingly and voluntarily when it comes to sex. Yes, he is now telling you exactly how it is going to go. Now, the cause is good. It is part of an effort to stop sexual assault. And this movement has now reached a point.

However, where some groups are offering and feel it is necessary to have written consent contracts that you are supposed to sign before you engage in the act where you write down, look, this is a quote, "Yes, we agree to have sex!" With an exclamation point. Oh, applause in the studio. Coming with the contract, there is a condom, there's a pen and there is a breath mint and they recommend now that you take a photo of you and your lover with the contract signed before you engage in the act.

Brit Hume is our FOX News senior political analyst and it has come to this Brit because -- as I say and I know you agree with me. The cause is good. Everybody wants to diminish sexual assault on college campuses. But it has gotten to the point of ridiculousness where now, they want verbal consent every step of the way.


KELLY: So, it's like, you start the kissing and it progresses and there is still be a yes and a yes and a yes and a yes and a yes.

HUME: Well, it suggests that people who are drawing up these new plans for how a concern is to be given, have never had any sex because you kind of don't want to stop each stage along the way to give each other bulletins about the level of your consent. What we're seeing here Megyn, what we are seeing here is nothing short of the regulation of sex. When I was in college a half a century ago, there were no co-ed dorms. There were very strict rules about when you could be around girls on the campuses, where you could take them, what hours they could stay out until all the rest --

KELLY: That's a video of your college years.

HUME: Well, I hope you don't. But what I would say about that is, that was a recognition of the fact that as you might have put it back then, boys will be boys and, you know, guys are pretty lusty and you needed to be careful when you got them around young women particularly if there were parties and alcohol. So, the rules are pretty tight. Well, the sexual revolution that began -- did away with that and led in -- to their hookup culture that we have seen in recent years.

KELLY: Today, just take a look at the -- across their country.

HUME: Well, it was the culmination of the deregulation of sex. Now, what we are seeing is that these people don't particularly like some of the results of that and what they see is a result to that. And they are trying to re-regulate it and that's where we are.

KELLY: Here is the reason it is so concerning. Because it is important to improve the rights of women who are victims of sexual assault on college campuses. But we are going in a direction and we have been covering this repeatedly on "The Kelly File" where we completely -- we almost entirely eliminate the rights of men. And there is a presumption on these campuses, thanks to the Obama administration of guilt. There's a presumption of non-consent. And if you are a young man who gets accused, it is your burden to go in there and prove consent and we are getting to the point now, where you have to have a contract. And if you don't you are going to be presumed a rapist.

HUME: And not just a contract but some kind of two person selfie with the two of you holding up the little consent form.

KELLY: Which your parents tell us we shouldn't be doing.

HUME: Well, incriminating evidence I suppose in one sense but exculpatory evidence in another.

KELLY: And the presumption comes from this place Brit, that the Obama administration has imposed which is sexual assault victims need more protection than the defendants. And here are the instructions handed down by the administration. Public and state supported schools must provide due process to the alleged perpetrators, okay, but there's a shout out to the man. But basically it's not too much due process. Schools must ensure that the steps taken do -- those due process rights, to the alleged perpetrators, do not restrict or unnecessarily delay the protections for the complainant. So, it's all about the complainant which okay, but there are other rights. And there's a question about whether these universities should be engaged in the business of adjudicating these disputes at all as we've seen in the Duke case, in that Colombia University case and others have serious questions attached to them.

HUME: Absolutely, Megyn. And it has been so serious, in fact, that a group of Harvard Law professors wrote a letter expressing their joint alarm at the erosion of due process rights for the accused in these cases. And some of the systems that have put in place on these campuses where they have their own system for adjudicating these matters are so one sided as to be constitutionally suspect and obviously unjust and that, you know, the Columbia University case where you had the woman running around the mattress the whole time despite the fact that, you know, he had been judged not guilty by the college and she was a hero for that.

KELLY: Uh-mm.

HUME: But that wasn't so much a fault of the university but it was a problem.


HUME: But this is what we have seen.

KELLY: She was taken to the State of the Union by Senator Gillibrand of New York.

HUME: Exactly right.

KELLY: Anyway, Brit, great to see you.

HUME: Thank you.

KELLY: Talk about things I never thought I would never be discussing with Brit.

Well, big news out of Baltimore tonight where the defense wants this case moved arguing it cannot find an unbiased jury in the city of Baltimore. Kevin Jackson is here next to tell us whether he thinks that is true.

Plus, new fallout from the viral video showing a college football player punching a woman in the face. See why some folks now want the woman to face criminal charges. Really?

And today, we learn Bill Cosby had previously admitted to giving sedatives to women he wanted to have sex with. See what's likely to happen, next, with the man they once called America's TV dad.


KELLY: Well, new developments tonight in the case against those six Baltimore police officers accused of causing the death of Freddie Gray.  Tomorrow, the Baltimore police will launch an independent review of their handling of the April riots in the wake of the Freddie Gray arrest and death. This comes as THE KELLY FILE obtains a new defense motion asking for a change of venue in the case arguing these police officers cannot find an unbiased jury in Baltimore.

Kevin Jackson is the executive director, TheBlackSphere.net, a conservative radio host and author of the book, "Race Pimping."

Kevin, good to see you. So, do you believe that is true? Do you believe Baltimore which is a minority/majority city cannot be unbiased in assessing the fate of these cops?

KEVIN JACKSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THEBLACKSPHERE.NET: Baltimore wants to finish the series at home, Megyn. The only thing missing is they haven't named the hanging judge just yet. There is no way they can be unbiased in Baltimore. Absolutely no way. It's one thing that they've got the people against, you know, ala Ferguson in New York, and the anti-cop sentiment. But it's a whole other thing all together when you have the people who are supposed to be defending the police officers who have done the type of things that the prosecutor has done and the mayor has done.  So, no, they absolutely cannot get a fair case there.

KELLY: You know, we saw in Ferguson a reluctance by some witnesses to speak out publicly in defense of the police officer Darrell Wilson. Behind closed doors they did. They told the DOJ that man did charge Officer Wilson. And I saw it. And these were African-American witnesses testifying against the African-American decedent, Michael Brown in that case.


KELLY: Do you think there is a similar concern here that jurors won't feel comfortable finding in favor of the officers unless there be a backlash from the community?

JACKSON: Absolutely. You know, with the grand jury, it was behind closed doors so we don't know who those people were in Ferguson and hopefully never will because I think they certainly did the right thing.  And there's no -- putting them at risk. But when you have a public trial like this and effectively a lynch mob mentality, sort of a frontier justice and you have, politicians quite frankly Megyn, who want to make a name for themselves, they see this as a way to the next step in their careers.  Look, if I were one of the jurors, I wouldn't want to be involved with this and come back with a not guilty verdict. And then there were so many other inconsistencies. I mean, six people, involved on this, I think if you were a cop just standing around looking you got charged with manslaughter.

KELLY: Uh-mm. The other thing is, that the defense in its motion alleges that Baltimore citizens and activists have openly come out and encouraged citizens to register to vote in order to help convict the officers in the case. And they cite the fact that some specifically said the only way we get a conviction here is by being represented on juries.  And so, there are young people who are out there right now planning to run massive voter registration campaigns to get that conviction, to get what they consider to be justice for Freddie Gray.

JACKSON: And that's incredulous, Megyn. Because as you said early on, you know, you are talking about a city run by black people. The majority of the people there are black. Everybody in the food chain of this whole thing, this whole issue is black. So what are you doing? I mean, if you are trying to stack the deck, it is already stacked. And again, I go back to this anti-cop sentiment that has already been brewing across the nation. Again, there is no way these cops will get a fair shake and the defense is good to move. It's a shocking thing quite frankly is that Baltimore is fighting it.

You would think that number one, they would have already exonerated a few of the people because all six of these people certainly aren't guilty.  And, you know, I have seen some of the forensics and its preliminary but it looks like they may not even get the conviction depending upon what happened. So, you would think they would be saying, you know, what? In the spirit of fairness, let's allow this case to be moved but they are not doing it.

KELLY: Like we can win anywhere. But, you know, they think they like their chances in Baltimore. Kevin, good to see you.

JACKSON: You too, Megyn.

KELLY: Well, some high profile Democrats are now joining those demanding change, after an illegal immigrant with a long record allegedly murdered this young woman in front of her father for no reason at all. Up next, our investigation into sanctuary cities, wait until you see what we found, the reversal by the Obama Administration in a day.

And is it right that the Subway Restaurant chain has suspended its relationship with Jared from Subway, even though he's not been charged with any crime. Our legal team is here on what's happening with this.

Plus, Former Cable News Anchor, Lynne Russell says the Second Amendment saved her life from a would-be robber. We'll speak live with the woman who featured this on top of her wedding cake. Don't miss Lynne.


From the world's headquarters of Fox News, it's The Kelly File, with Megyn Kelly.

KELLY: Growing outrage tonight over the death of a young woman in California, at the hands of a man who had been deported from the United States five separate times. Francisco Lopez-Sanchez had seven felonies under his belt before being arraigned on murder charges today, and he was supposed to be deported last March. But because San Francisco is a self- proclaimed sanctuary city, and because Lopez-Sanchez had no violent offenses on his wrap sheet, authorities instead decided to let him back on to the streets. Fast forward to last Wednesday when Katie Steinle was fatally shot by Sanchez, who confessed while walking along a popular San Francisco pier with her dad. Her heart stopped beating on that pier as she pleaded with her father to save her life. He apparently shot her for no reason. Now there are serious questions about the so-called sanctuary that prevented this man from being deported as he was supposed to be.

Trace Gallagher live in our west coast newsroom with the very latest.  Trace?

TRACE GALLAGHER, LOS ANGELES: And Megyn, because there is no legal definition of a sanctuary city, what it means varies from place to place.  But immigration and customs enforcement or ICE says currently, there are more than 200 states, cities and local jurisdictions with policies that help shelter illegal immigrants from being deported. We can't show them all, but on this map, red indicates states that have one or more sanctuary cities. And while most of the sanctuary cities have decided not to cooperate with federal agents, there is confusion on how the feds plan to deal with them. For example, back on March 19th, the New ICE Director, Sarah Saldana, went before Congress and begged for help. Listen to her.


SARAH SALDANA, ICE DIRECTOR: Last calendar year, state and local jurisdictions rejected more than 12,000 ICE detainer requests, these are convicted criminals.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Would it help you if we clarified the law to make it clear that it was mandatory that those local communities cooperate with you?

SALDANA: Thank you. Amen, yes.


GALLAGHER: Amen. But after getting pressure from the ACLU, immigrants rights groups, and others, one day later, Saldana made an abrupt about face, saying "any effort at federal legislation now to mandate state and local law enforcements compliance with ICE detainers will, in our view, be a highly counter productive step, and lead to more resistance and less cooperation in our overall efforts to promote public safety." And yet, when the San Francisco Sherriff's Office ignored an ICE detainer, and released suspected killer Francisco Sanchez, ICE told us "we are not asking local law enforcement to do our job, all we're asking is that they notify us when a serious foreign national criminal offender is being released to the street, so we can arrange to take custody." It is unclear if Director Saldana gave that statement an amen. But we should note that while the San Francisco sheriff's stands by the city's sanctuary policy, the city's police union has now come out and condemned it, Megyn.

KELLY: Thanks Trace. Joining me now with reaction, Marc Thiessen, a Fox News Contributor and Former Chief Presidential Speech Writer to President George W. Bush, Marc, thank you for being here. And so let's just go through that again. Ok, so the head of ICE, listen to what she was asked and what she said in March.


SALDANA: Last calendar year, state and local jurisdictions rejected more than 12,000 ICE detainer requests, these are convicted criminals.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Would it help you if we clarified the law to make it clear that it was mandatory that those local communities cooperate with you?

SALDANA: Thank you. Amen, yes.


KELLY: To make it clear, to mandate, the cooperation of those cities, thank you, amen, yes. And then the next day, the next day, she comes out and says any effort at federal legislation to mandate local compliance with ICE detainers will be highly counter productive. Obviously someone got to Ms. Saldana.

MARC THIESSEN, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Absolutely. What happened is she was called in the carpet, because the immigration groups and the ACLU went ballistic, and she was forced to recant her statement. And this is the problem we have right now, Megyn, is that we have a total collapse of the system that is supposed to protect us from criminal illegal aliens being released into our communities, at both federal and state level. And President Obama, you recall when he issued that immigration order, executive order, he said we're going to focus on felons, not families, on criminals, not children. And what they are doing are two things. This is what's happening. Number one, the Obama Administration is releasing every year, tens of thousands of criminal aliens into our communities, and at the same time, they are protecting the now 200 plus cities across this country that have sanctuary policies.

KELLY: That's it right there, because the fault is clearly with San Francisco for having the policy in the first place, and allowing this guy back out when there was an ICE detainer on him, which they did not honor.  And their response is ICE knows we don't honor those. That doesn't excuse you for not doing it. Ok, so the fault is clearly with them. But the question is what has the Obama Administration done to hold these sanctuary cities accountable?

THIESSEN: Absolutely nothing. The director of ICE asked Congress to help her. She came to them and pleaded with them, saying the lack of cooperation is increasing. The problem is getting worse. And said amen when they said would you like some authority to crack down on these folks.

KELLY: Thank you, yes!

THIESSEN: Yes, amen. Amen.

KELLY: And then she is sent to the woodshed. Clearly, she's been taken out behind the woodshed. We have seen it happen before. We saw it happen with Dempsey, and Hagal when they came out and spoke the truth about ISIS, and then had to reverse themselves. But this is clear as day, and it is on a very controversial issue. This is the woman in charge of ICE, who is begging them for help, and yet none was provided, and she was forced to reverse her own position on it. Mark, I'll give you the last word.

THIESSEN: Sure, but it's also I want to make it clear, it's not just the local community's fault. The federal government is at fault too.  Because one, they are releasing all these people, and two, there is a Boston Globe investigation that found that they have released hundreds of sexual predators who are criminal aliens, and they failed to tell the local communities that they've released them, or even make them registered sex offenders. So the problem is both at the federal and the local level, and it's getting worse.

KELLY: Marc, thank you.

THIESSEN: Thanks, Megyn.

KELLY: Well, a guy, Jared from the Subway Commercials had his house raided by the feds this morning. And tonight, he has lost his gig as a spokesman for the restaurant chain. Our legal team is next on what is really happening there. And then a big-time college quarterback is caught on camera punching a woman in the face, and now some are calling for her to be charged? Plus, could Bill Cosby be facing new criminal charges, after it turns out he gave sedatives to women he wanted to seduce, to put it charitably towards him, the hard reality facing the comic, up next with Mark and Arthur.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are talking about a car now. I knew something was wrong when we went down there, and the man saw that she brought her father. So I don't think I can find the keys for the car. Well, I don't think I can find the money.


KELLY: At one time they called him America's TV Dad. But now a prosecutor is saying Bill Cosby could soon face serious sexual assault charges. In a new revelation out today, Cosby admitted back in 2005 that he obtained sedative drugs, known as Quaaludes, with the intention of giving them to women he meant -- I guess we say -- to seduce. The women would say to rape. Arthur Aidala is a New York Trial Attorney, and Fox News Legal Analyst. And Mark Eiglarsh is a Criminal Defense Attorney, and a Former Prosecutor. And Mark, you say this as no surprise, but many people despite the fact that we are in the 40s, over 40 women who have accused him, have been dismissed largely as they just hate him, they are out to make a buck, they want P.R., accusing him of raping them. You say you are not surprised, because you believed them all along?

MARK EIGLARSH, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Megyn, I wasn't there, so I can't say with certainty that he is guilty. But when the number of victims approaches the number of bagels I order at an Eiglarsh Family brunch, you've got to start thinking there's something to this.

KELLY: How big could the conspiracy be? And yet Mark -- I mean Arthur, the evidence comes out because the judge was ticked off. There was a motion to unseal the documents in this case, and the judge said you know what, I'm going to unseal the documents in this case. And here is why.  Here is the second full screen. Not this one, Scott, the second one. This is what the judge says. He says Cosby donned the mantle of public moralist, and mounted proverbial electronic or print soap box to volunteer his views on among other things, childrearing, family life, education and crime. He said he did it so many times, he is revealing and let's put up the second full screen now, that this testimony among others. When you got the Quaaludes, question to Cosby, was it in your mind you were going to use them for young women that you wanted to have sex with? Yes.

ARTHUR AIDALA, NEW YORK TRIAL ATTORNEY: Ok, so there are a couple of things going on here. The lawyers for Mr. Cosby did not have a very strong reason why this shouldn't be disclosed. Their real reason -- their real argument was, judge, it's going to be embarrassing to our client, Mr. Cosby, and that was the judge's answer to that. Putting on my hat as criminal defense attorney or someone who will be defending Mr. Cosby here, my understanding from portions of the transcript is that he was then asked, did you give it to this person who this lawsuit was about, and he said yes, and she took it consensually, and we took it together.


KELLY: And then asked he was asked about others, and the lawyer didn't let him answer that question. The lawyer was like, oh crap, real damage is being done here. Here we are today.

AIDALA: That is what a lawyer is supposed to be doing.

KELLY: I'm not blaming the lawyer, I'm blaming the lawyer for not objecting earlier on his behalf, and although I'm glad we now know what appears to be the truth about Bill Cosby. I've got to move on.

This college quarterback is caught punching a woman in the face. His lawyer goes on the Today Show, today it's Jose Baez, the lawyer, and says she hit him first. He claimed she kneed him in the groin, and that she punched him first. And now family members of the quarterback are asking that she be charged. She be charged, Mark.

EIGLARSH: Come on, really? Listen, did he reasonably fear bodily harm, did he need to strike back when you watch this video tape? I think that anyone that suggests that is being intellectually dishonest. And that's not the answer. The answer is for him to get the help that he needs to continue saying what he did was completely wrong, it was criminal, there was no legal justification for it.


KELLY: Let me ask you this. Let me ask you this, Arthur. In these cases where we see women strike men, should assault charges generally follow? When the woman doesn't hurt the man?

AIDALA: Well, that's the thing, you just hit the nail in the head.  Especially in New York, you have cause at least substantial pain, so you just hit someone and you don't hurt them, that's the law. Substantial pain, redness, substantial pain...


KELLY: Let me move on because something bad is happening with Jared from Subway, Mark. What is it?

AIDALA: It kills me, poor Jared.

EIGLARSH: Well, listen. We don't know. We know that law enforcement is at his house. We know that they are seizing his electronics. And I have never met a law enforcement officer who gets promoted based on how many people they let go. So my suggestion is -- not that he's done anything wrong, but that law enforcement believes...


KELLY: Somebody in his foundation being charged with child pornography but not Jared.

AIDALA: Correct.

EIGLARSH: Megyn, I agree. I'm not saying he did anything wrong.  However, I believe that he didn't consent to them going in and taking these things. They got a warrant based on probable cause that in that affidavit, they're alleging that his e-mail probably received certain images that they believe are child pornography.


AIDALA: Mark, that's not what his lawyers are saying. His lawyers are saying he's cooperating fully. And Megyn, any foundation like this is under a tremendous amount of scrutiny regarding their finances. And obviously, if the person who is running the foundation has child pornography -- it's called due diligence.


KELLY: Who knew Jared from Subway would wind being so controversial.  I got to go. It's over between us.


KELLY: Up next, this story went everywhere. After Former Cable News Anchor, Lynne Russell, remember her on CNN, said the Second Amendment saved her life from a would-be robber. She is here with us live, right after the break to tell us her story in person.


KELLY: A long time cable news anchor on the other side of the story tonight. Lynne Russell says she is alive today because the Second Amendment saved her life and her husband's, during a robbery attempt last week in New Mexico. Lynne joins me now by phone, Lynne, thank you for doing this. So you were on a road trip with your husband on the historic Route 66, you stop at a motel, a man approaches as you as you go out to your car to get something, what happens next?

LYNNE RUSSELL, FORMER CNN ANCHOR: Well, my hands were occupied because I was holding something in both hands. And I had my hotel door open. And he pushed the door open literally, showed me the gun. Tossed me inside, slammed the door. And my Special Forces husband comes out of the bathroom soaking wet and stark naked, and says what's going on here? And he advances to the room and put himself in front of our two which were sitting on -- the two legal guns, we were carrying them legally to the bedside table. And we tried to keep him busy and we went around and offered him this and that. And finally, I was able to slip one of the guns into my purse and hand it to him and say, do you see anything in here we can give the man, and Chuck said oh yes I do. And he put his hand on the gun and one thing led to another. And the guy grabs one of our possessions, brief case, headed to the door, turned around and opened fire on my husband. And he returned fire. And Special Forces, he returned fire. And in my mind it's absolutely no doubt that we are alive today, and we just had our first anniversary on the Fourth of July because of the Second Amendment, because of my husband, his focus, and his dedication, and the fact that we had that legal gun with us.

KELLY: We're showing you the top of your wedding cake, which is unusual. But you've both been in law enforcement, you in addition to your time as a CNN Anchor. You say quickly, I'll ask you this, you're sorry the man is not dead, why?


RUSSELL: Because I'd like to kill him again. I lie in bed fantasizing about all the different ways that I could do it. I just want to say, we were on the way to California because my husband invented something important to the country.


KELLY: He served in the green berets, thanks for being here. We'll be right back.


KELLY: So by the way, Lynne says her husband, Chuck de Caro is doing much better, for those of you asking. So we're glad to hear that.  Tomorrow night, Dana Perino, Dana Loesch, and Mark Fuhrman, Dana's. Go to Facebook.com/thekellyfile or on Twitter @Megynkelly, we've got 1 million followers now.  See you tomorrow.

Content and Programming Copyright 2015 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2015 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.