unleashes fresh attacks on gaza. the idf warning civilians in the southern part of the strip they are in a war zone. we're following the latest on the ground and the state of negotiations for hostages. donald trump's defense attorneys are facing a fulton county judge for the first time fighting to have the georgia election subversion case thrown out on first amendment grounds. but does this have any chance of working? and george santos joining a not so elite club. he becomes just the sixth member of the house of representatives ever to be voted out of congress. we're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in here to "cnn news central." israeli combat operations are back underway after a week-long pause in fighting. the idf unleashing on gaza in its mission to leliminate hamas. critical aid has stopped flow ing into the enclave and the idf is urging civilians to evacuate the southern city dropping leaflets, calling the area, a quote, fighting zone. while the truce is over, hostage negotiations are not. oren liebermann is following the latest for us. tell us when you are hearing. >> reporter: the war very much become on, as it has been since the truce expired at 7:00 this morning. both israel and hamas have said they were ready to resume fighting and frankly, they have very much shown it. israel unleashing powerful strikes across southern gaza including a major city in southern gaza and near rafah where humanitarian aid is no longer flowing in as of this morning according to an eyewitness we're in touch with there on the ground. that's despite secretary of state antony blinken saying that the the humanitarian aid needs to continue to alleviate and help the humanitarian crisis unfolding in gaza. blinken also said that israel needs to take steps to reduce the number of civilian casualties. so far, as a result of israeli strikes, more than 100 palestinians have been killed. i just heard from my cameraman that there are interceptors being launched. i can see two iron dome interceptors launch from our position here towards rockets incomiincoming from gaza. that's the second set of launches we have seen this evening. others happening about a half our ago. you'll see those interceptions. a coupler yerl today, we saw ten of those so hamas show ing its ability to still wage war now that the truce has ended. hospital authorities or health officials in gaza saying the biggest facility is at 200% capacity. so you get a is sense of the difficulties trying to manage the number who have been injured and killed as a result of the fighting there. negotiations continuing to try to bring about a truce again, as we keep an eye on the sky here. negotiations continuing. israel in touch with hamas through the u.s., egypt and qatar. there's been some opttimism expressed. despite the fighting we're seeing on the ground right now, there i just heard the interceptions coming from my left there. the loud bang in the air of iron dome picking a off incoming rockets a couple more bangs there. the challenge is israel demands ten women and children released for another pause in fighting. hamas insists they don't have that ability since they don't have that many women and children at this point. they want to talk to israel about expanding it to include elderly men as well as maybe jol soldiers. israel refused those negotiations. that's where we stand here. we'll keep an eye on the sky and what's happening in gaza. >> a lot of activity there in tel aviv where you are with interceptions from the iron dome from incoming rockets. we will keep an eye on that. oren liebermann live for us in tel aviv, thank you. >> let's discuss the situation more with a former member of israeli intelligence. he served as national security adviser under former prime ministers. he's now a senior international fellow for the foundation for defense of democracies. thank you so much for being with us. part of the reason that talks broke down is not providing names of ten living hostages. we understand that hamas doesn't have all of them. they are in the hands of other fundamentalist groups. with that in mind, where do negotiations go from here? >> first of all, this is a hamas narrative. hamas knows exactly where all the live hostages are. i'm totally convinced of this. the idf ref rest cue d one of te female soldiers in the apartment. as you said before, randomly sca scattered around. they have put them all together. there are many more of the hostages that have died under the hands of hamas in gaza. i would presume this is the reason why they cannot provide more names. hopefully i'm wrong. hopefully there are more dame names. if this was the case, ween coucould continue because they have made it clear they will continue the ten a day there's been about 80 already. more than i expected. i thought hamas would play the bargaining chips more tightly. for the future, hamas a at moment insists that for the release of men or younger men, they want many more prisoners to be released. he wants terrorists to be released. the government cannot agree to that at this point. to the fight ing resumes. >> i do want to ask you about jericho wall. that's the name of the 40-page document that the "new york times" obtained that was circulating among israely officials. it shows a blueprint for the attack that hamas carried out on october 7th. that was circumstlating more tha year before this attack happened. i want to share some part from the reporting about why more wasn't done to prevent it. underpinning all these failures was an inaccurate belief that hamas lacked the capability to attack and would not dare to do so. that belief was so engrained in the government officials said they disregarded growing evidence to the contrary. you served in the government until january. were you aware of this document that had come across your radar? >> i was not aware of this document as of january when i finished my role. i was aware of intelligence analysis that hamas was preparing to surprise us. we have been under this assumption for years before that. it is true that during that time, the assumption was by the idf that hamas was not capable of doing so, but also, we were in the process of negotiating a deal to release four hostages from 2014. and during this time of negotiations, i think the situation was a bit different at the time i'm sure that hamas continues their preparations. it is a disastrous failure of all of our establishment to pick those signals in time and to present them in a way that the government could make the decisions. it is also a failure of the government that did not follow up on these issues and make sure there was readiness throughout this time the way that a government should do, the way that myself and national security adviser has done on other issues during this time. this publication sheds some light. there's more to come. things will be revealed. there will be no other way but to have a very serious discretinvestigation from top t bottom. >> as a result of that, what does accountability look like? who should be held accountable for these failures? >> i would broadly say in these kinds of failures, accountability belongs to everybody but it starts on the top. the fact that something like this happens means that the processes that the government has made, the prime minister made, that the cabinet has been conducting fade failed to make sure those threats have been put out there. they have no doubt in my mind that the heads of security establishment have already said they feel complete responsibility and would be accountable for this. even i said that. i serve issed during this time. we all -- every day i ask myself what would have happened otherwise in those circumstances. but the responsibility starts from the top. >> do you think prime minister benjamin netanyahu should resign? >> i would not address that. it's a political question, but i will say that i will say this. if he thinks he can evade the speedometer for something that happened so long into his government, with all of the past history of the way that we dealt with hamas over the years, i think he's wrong. i'm sure that he will need to take responsibility. >> we have to leave the conversation there. we appreciate you sharing your perspective with us. >> thank you. let's take a look now at israel's military offensive in gaza with our cnn military analyst james marks. let's start with the airstrikes by the idf today. we're looking at rafah in this and also both are in southern gaza, which is where israel told palestinians to evacuate down from the north to when the conflict began. you had the military dropping these leaflets. here's one designating it a fighting zone now warning tpeope to evacuate to the rafah area. what does israel's focus here on southern gaza signal to you and what are the complications this brings about? >> it's certainly an expansion of the fight. the pause is a result of the hostage release. we totally understand that. i think we should all expect there will be on the part of hamas a desire to have some additional pauses. this is an opportunity for them to reply, refit, improve their positions. what this means is that the fighting is going to continue. gaza city now is a location where the idf has established a footprint, is doing so now in depth. would say pursuits of leadership, both military and political leadership of hamas in the gaza city area. they will expand their operations further south. operations on the ground will usually and we're seeing it play out today will be proceeded by an effort from the air to strike command and control activities. then the notion of precision strikes comes into effect not only from the air, but also on the ground. that becomes rather surgical in nature. that's what israel is doing right now with these airstrikes. >> i want to talk to you a little about that. you had secretary of state just in israel. he called israel's military, quote, one of the most sophisticated militaries in the world. point being, they need to be doing better, is what he was getting at there. the u.s. has been urging israel to be more precise in its targeting as you were mentioning. you can see here in this drone video that we're look ing at, this is from the city this week. just blocks and blocks of buildings that have been turned into rubble. what would more precise targeting look like. >> you can deliver in the upper right window or lower left window. once it gets inside, it starts to explode. you seat kind of damage you're seeing there. barrage bombing would have zero infrom structure at all. this is a distinction of the difference of what the israelis are trying to do is to press these attacks with notices, as you described, which is get out of town, move to these locations, we are going to telegraph. we're going to broadcast what we're trying to achieve. then we're going to go after these targets. increased precision really gets to the notion of collateral damage. you want to try to eliminate as best you can civilians that are caught in the middle of this. that innocence will, in fact, die. innocence are not being targeted, but that's a result of strikes where the hamas wrap themselves in palestinians. so you're going to end up with stuff like this. so precision is a matter of degree. some places it looks very, very surgical. other places the images that you're portraying now demonstrate what someone could say is precise targeting. st it's not as precise as somebody ls's definition. >> up until the seven-day truce, israel's ground operation was very much focused on the north. that's where we were looking. can the idf maintain gains they made, even as civilians are potentially returning to that area and the idf turning more focus to the south where they say hamas leadership has fled? >> yes. what you just described is the nature of the three-block war. civilians can move back in. israelis can hold the terrain that they have in northern gaza that they have take over. israeli forces are not going to vacate that. they can hold that, but it now becomes an economy of force. you don't use the mass, but you hold what you have. then you expand further south. you can relocate civilians back in. that is that you can three-block war being you can fight on one block, you can build a hospital on the next block, and you can try to maintain peace on the third block. those decisions being made by 18 and 19-year-old soldiers, that's what you're describing right now. it's well within the doctrine of what the israelis do. it's what the u.s. military does and has great experience in. >> general marks, thank you so much. obviously, a lot of questions raised by this renewed fighting. we appreciate your perspective. >> thank you. we are also following two big headlines from the trump legal world with a ruling here in d.c. setting a new precedent about whether the former president is protected from civil lawsuits. plus george santos out, expelled by the house in a bipartisan vote. now former congressional colleague, one of them says santos stole thousands of dollars from him and his mother. we're following two big legal developments that affect former president trump. he was handed a major setback in a an athe peels court. this was a three-judge panel ruling that trump is not protected by presidential immunity when it comes to being sued over things related to january 6th. >> in atlanta right now, trump's lawyers are about to appear in court to defend him for the first time in the racketeering kiss that's tied to the 2020 election interference in georgia. they are trying to get that case dismissed. paula reid and zach cohen are here to discuss. also with us is correspondent for law fair, thank you for being with us. zach, talk to us about what's been happening inside the courtroom today. >> if hearing from trump's lawyers is the main event of today, the warm-up act has been one of the lawyers for his fellow codefendant also charged in this case. that's david schaffer, the top fake elector in georgia. he's accused of organizing all of these fake electors to sign those certificates and sending them to congress. schaffer's attorney is arguing there were no fake electors because they weren't fake. they were contingent electors. and really they were just on standby because donald trump was still trying to fight this out in court. if that sounds familiar, we have heard this before from the same attorney who argued this same point. they move to federal court unsuccessfully. now the federal judge was not having this argument. it would be interest figure the judge is more receptive to it. we are still waiting to see the main event to make the debut. >> we're actually watching one of his attorneys right now. let's listen in. >> the indictment alone is sufficient. i think that's what hall indicates. i would ask you to reconsider that part. thank you. >> thank you. >> let's begin with the state's argument, and we'll see where we land. i know we had some other counsel stepping in at 1:30. maybe if you're taking this argument, we could pick it up there with the hall case. which was not one any party raised at the outset, but certainly seems on point in this issue. >> i don't think i have it. >> we need to add him as an admin. >> we will keep an eye on what is happening here in this fulton county courtroom. as we talk about what is happening today, anna, one of the arguments from trump's lawyers is that he's protected by the first amendment. but the charges go well beyond just speech. they have to do with a lot of action. this judge has already rejected similar arguments from co-defendants. >> right. you're very right. he has rejected similar arguments from co-defendants that those arguments arose with zud knee powell and ken chesebro. and the judge rejected those arguments. he said basically that the first amendment claims were not ripe, meaning that there needed to be more factual development. and if folks were just listening to the judge just now, he mention ed this case called hal. that is a new case that trump's attorneys have raised in their own arguments. they are trying to get mcafee to reconsider or his reasoning that he raised in the chesebro and powell denial of the first amendment claims based on this new case. it remains to be seen whether he will do so. but even if he decides that now in light of this new case that he can look at these first amendment arguments, i still think that it's a very slim chance that trump will succeed here. as you mentioned, the first amendment, although it is robust, it does not protect inducement to fraud, which is one of the charges that's involved here that's been brought against trump and ot others. so inducing the fake electors to make claims that were false in terms of representing themselves as the legitimate electors from the state of georgia, theses are things that would not fall within the protections of that, so i think on the merits of this first amendment claim, i'm doubt ful that trump will succeed. >> not the only development for trump in court. there was an appeals court ruling that zach kind of alluded to. walk us through that. >> this is a big one. we have been waiting for this decision for a long time. here the court of appeals concluded that he can be sued for his actions on january 6th. they are not saying he's liable. what this means is that capitol hill police officers, lawmakers, others who have sued trump related to january 6th, they can have their day in court. trump and his lawyers previously argued he couldn't even be sued he enjoyed immunity. protection that all federal officials enjoy when they are conducting their official duties. he argued i was acting in my official capacity, so i can't be sued. here the court after appeals found that, no, you were at a pro-trump rally and acting as an office seeker, not a novoffice holder. so they are drawing a line between your conduct as a president or someone who is campaign ing. they said, quote, when he acts unofficial capacity, he's subject to civil suits just like any other private citizen. now trump has reacted through his spokesperson saying, quote, the facts fully show on january 6th president trump was acting on behalf of the american people carrying out his duties as presidential. now the big question here is what does this mean in a criminal context? because we know that he's likely going to try a similar argument while this was a about civil suits in the criminal context, he goes to drtrooil in washingt, d.c. in march related to election subversion and january 6th. we don't have any definitive answer on immunity in the criminal context. here you have a court of appeals saying that not everything you do while in office is protected. so not good news for the former president. >> trying to make this a first amendment issue is the goal to try to get this to go to the supreme court? is that likely? >> that's usually always the goal. he wants to take it to his friends. it's the first amendment argument or this with immunity. these are a the lot of fascinating questions really ripe for review. but it's unclear how willing this court is going to be to wade into these big questions that could potentially have an impact on the outcome of election. >> thank you all so much. we appreciate the discussion. and still ahead, republican congressman george santos forever etched in history as the sixth member to be booted from the house, expelled now. his parting message, to hehl with t this place.e. the power goes out and we still have wifi to do our homework. and that's a good thing? great in my book! who are you? no power? no problem. introducing storm-ready wifi. now you can stay reliably connected through power outages with unlimited cellular data and up to 4 hours of battery back-up to keep you online. only from xfinity. (car engine revs) home of the xfinity 10g network. (engine accelerating) (texting clicks) (tires squeal) (glass shattering) (loose gravel clanking) fst it's over. words from george santos as he had left capitol hill departing even before the gavel fell on the final vote. >> an historic moment, the house overwhelmingly voting to expel santos. a majority vote, 311-114. they needed two-thirds. this came after a litany of alleged wrong doings. let's talk with melanie zanona on capitol hill. get us up to speed here. >> this was an historic and stung moment here on capitol hill no one really knew what the outcome was going to be. there was some positive signs for santos this morning after all top republican leaders said they were going to vote against expelling him. we're learning about a new development that occurred that helped impact some votes and flipped them to support expelling george santos. max miller, ohio republican, informed his colleagues in a letter this morning that santos stole from him and his family. so max miller decided to donate to santos when he was a congressional candidate. miller is jewish and saud he thought at the time he was supporting another jewish candidate because as you remember, santos lied about being jewish. but earlier this year, miller learned that santos had charged his credit card and his mother's credit card above the legal limit, thousands of dollars more than what they authorized and without their knowledge. and miller had to spend thousands of dollars in legal fees clearing it up. manu raju the caught up with him. here's what he had to say. >> this is just another example of republican who is can't lead. and that's really shameful. the speaker and everyone in leadership knows that this man is a crook. santos took not only my credit card personally, he took my mother's credit card personally, and he swiped them both for an additional $5,000 marking it as on overdonation. i have it by the fec. what i can tell you within in document, i won't disclose any other names, he defrauded 350 people for hundreds of thousands of dollars on undies closedment amounts. >> so just one example of the fraudulent behavior that santos is alleged to have engaged in. and it's just why you saw 105 republicans ultimately vote with democrats to expel him, bringing the santos sa ga to an end,s at least here on capitol hill. >> really a stunning development there from congressman miller. thank you so much for that. let's get some analysis now with gloria borger. santos argued, and his defenders argued, that this sets a dangerous precedent. does it though? >> the beauty is in the eye of beholder. i think that there was enough evidence against santos to vote to expel him. as max miller was just saying, people on capitol hill knew that the guy was a crook. he had defrauded his constituents. and was going to have to pay for it in court because he's got some indictments he has to deal with. so i think this was a particular case where santos did not make many friends on the way out. he's saying i have the receipts on people. he's very vindictive. so i think in addition to the list of things that the committee came up with, there was also a sense that this guy did you want belong in congress. aside the fact he wasn't exactly popular. >> he's promise iing a lot. i think even republicans who didn't support his ouster are hoping this means they are going to hear a little less about and from george santos, but it's a little unclear if that's the case. do you think he is really going to scorched earth on people? is this just another george santos overpromising stuff he never delivers? >> i don't pretend to know him, so it's hard to say whether he's saying this to be ungracious as he's been going out the door, but you never know what someone like santos is going to do. now he says he's got names, receipts, et cetera about the terrible way members of congress behave. the american public already believes that members of congress don't behave well, butt the popularity is like 13%. but i think they want to get rid of him. there's going to be a race for his seat. that's going to be held in the not too distant future. and the big question is it going to be a democrat this time because he won the district by 9 points so he could the republicans that. let's see what he does. >> it strikes me that so many the republicans voted to oust them, yet many of them support a different lawmakers, you could say, that's facing 90 plus charges, including civil lawsuits over sexual assault, over fraud, and they are supporting that candidate for the white house. >> you're talking about donald tr trump, yes, they are. he doesn't serve in the congress, but they are supporting him. in the senate, you have the same issue with senator menendez, who has been indicted. the senate hasn't voted to throw him out. i think what made the difference here is this was an arduous task taken on by the internal house ethics committee. it's bipartisan. when they came up with the bill of particulars, in a lengthy report, that was something a lot of members paid attention to. they understand they didn't want to set the precedent of expel ing someone before he's been convicted and all the rest of it. when their own internal watchdog came out with this incredible report, a lot of members said that's what i was waiting for. i don't think we can have him in this body anymore. >> i think max miller made that case in a letter to colleagues. that made a difference. >> he said he wouldn't reveal other names. >> at least 350 names. >> i don't think we have heard the end of this. >> gloria borger, thank you. we look forward to having you back when we hear more. still to come on "cnn news central," fighting super bugs. the new approach researchers are taking toment colt bat germs that have evolved to resist antibiotics. goli, taste your goals. an alarming number of back ftier ya are not responding to antibiotics and has led to a spike in infections and forced scientists to find other ways to fight them. chief medical correspondent sanjay gupta spoke with researchers looking to nature in the fight against super bugs. >> there's some really good stuff here. >> reporter: today epidemiologists are take ing men a hunt for naturally occurring viruses, but a special quality. they eat bacteria. they are perfect predators. >> they drop it in and try to collect some water. there's a little bit. sgrr although they can be found almost anywhere, when it comes to fajs, the dirtier the location, the better. >> any idea how many would potentially be in there? >> one drop of water can have up to a trillion in it. >> reporter: just one of which could be used to treat a bacteria for which we currently have no oibs. >> anybody who is watching this is going to have a different perspective on what they would tipically ignore. waste that has no water. instead, the idea that can could be medicine. >> reporter: you probably have never heard of this, and neither did stephanie. but eight years ago, they became a deeply personal mission for her. >> what happened? how did you get interest in this? >> it's certainly something i fell into. >> reporter: while on vacation together in egypt, her husband tom became very sick. >> the clinic diagnosed with pan crete tights. it caused giant ab sets to form. but that wasn't the worst of it. but that made an apartment for this superbug to develop. >> they developed resistance. that means medications designed to treat them no long er work. this is what tom's superbug looked like. it's considered one of the impossible ones. >> i put the key words like the name of his superbug and alternative treatments, and up popped a paper that had buried in it fage therapy. >> it was a start, but with trillions upon trillions in the world, finding the right fage for a specific infection is the real challenge. think of it as an endless number of keys for just one lock. and to make things even more complicated, despite being around for more than 100 years, fage therapy has never been used in the west. >> when they were really embraced by the former soviet union, that was seen as something soviet science, soviet medicine. what the enemy was using. >> reporter: stephanie and tom did not care about that. he was dying. she, along with her colleagues at the university of california san diego, were now on a mission to save his life. >> what are we looking at here? >> where you see the bacteria are being killed like here and here, you know that she got a fage from that waste water that's killing that bacteria. >> when you see a plaque develop, that's a very good sign. >> yes, it's a very good sign. it gets us excited. >> reporter: there were few labs in the united states that were stoouding these, but scientists a at the navy and texas a&m university stepped in to help stephanie scour the world. and it worked. here's where think found the fages for tom. sewage treatment plants, barnyards, all containing naturally occurring fages. >> as soon as they were ready, they said we have to go. because he's really close. >> he's really close to dying? >> yeah. after we injected it into his bloodstream, even though he was in multistage organ failure, he woke up from his coma, lifted his head off the pillow and kissed his daughter's hand a couple days later. >> that gives me goose bumps. >> without a doubt, as hard as it is to believe, spending nine months in the hospital, it was worth it. >> it's your legacy. >> it's your legacy. >> it's our legacy. >> there you go. >>. >> reporter: a legacy born of this mother earth providing medicines for so much of what ails us, if we just take the time to stop, listen, and look. dr. sanjay gupta, cnn, san diego. >> what a report from our dr. sanjay gupta. sandra day o'connor has d died. how the naugs is remembering this trailblazer who made history asas the firstst woman serve onon the u.s. . supreme c. first time i connected with kim, she told me that her husband had passed. and that he took care of all of the internet connected devices in the home. i told her, “i'm here to take care of you.” connecting with kim... made me reconnect with my mom. it's very important to keep loved ones close. we know that creating memories with loved ones brings so much joy to your life. a family trip to the team usa training facility. i don't know how to thank you. i'm here to thank you. she ushered in a new era of the supreme court, inspiring men jen rations of women to join the legal profession. sandra day o'connor passed away today at age of 93. joan joins us now with more. it's hard to overstate the influence that sandra day o'connor had. >> it really is. in the law, for years, we all lived under her influence. especially in abortion rights, it was really felt. but she had a very distinctive personality. i think that's reflected some of the statements that are coming. here's what former president obama said today. when a young sandra day graduated from stanford law school near the top of her class, she was offered just one job in the private sector. her perspective employer asked how well she type d and told he there might be work for her as a legal secretary. fortunately for us, obama goes on, she set her sights a little higher becoming the first woman to serve on the supreme court. she defined can do, as well as how to pragmatically influence the law that we all lived under until recently. and now let me tell you what former president bush said. his father happened to be vice president when reagan selected sandra day in 1981. she was determined and honest, modest and contract, dependable and self-reliant, she was fun and funny with a wonderful sense of humor. she grew up on a ranch. she was very down toert. she had a direct way of dealing with someone. she used to tell her clerks, don't get cute. so i can't overstate her influence on the law. her influence with the other justices and lawyers across the country, which is why people are responding this way. >> notably, back in 2009, she was at a legal conference. this is well before the reversal of roe v. wade, she complained that some of her decisions were being dismantled. >> i was the one who asked her the question, and this was before what i'm going to tail light you about that was so significant. she said how would you feel? and that's how she spoke. but since then the supreme court reverse d what she wrote with te 2022 decision on dobbs. just this year reversed her milestone opinion on racial affirmative action on campuses. and it has rolled back her decisions on the separation of church and state. our country's law is much different now than when sandra day o'connor retired and had such an prim im print on the law. >> her influence still felt across the country. >> vy much. >> passing away at 93 years old. joan, thank yojoan, thank you. stay tuned to cnn. we're back in just moments.