military promotions. >> the senator describes as a draw with his contentious fault with the pentagon. we are describing it that way, let's go to cnn live on capitol hill. what are you hearing? >> there's a lot of relief, it's a bipartisan opposition. he has very little support from the senate republican congress for trying to block all military promotions. something that has never been done before, nothing that any senator can do under the rules for the senate. what he has done is hold up every military promotion until the pentagon grants him a policy requiring reimbursement for military personnel to travel out of state for abortions, the pentagon said it would not do that, after some time, an increasing number of republicans is tommy turberville needs to back down, they said that he would in fact back down. they decided instead of holding up and all nominees. he would release them, about 450, that would allow all of them, they are four star ranked generals and those are people he wants to have individual roll call votes on. he will have the rest of them to be approved in one fell swoop. something chuck schumer said could happen as soon as this afternoon. those nominees have been confirmed by the senate, if one senator decides to hold up the process either the majority takes time-consuming steps to oppose objections or the blockades can last for months on end, that's what happened here with turberville. it's unclear what he accomplished, the pentagon still has this policy, he believes he's got some concessions that helped him out to achieve some of his ultimate objectives, exactly what that is but i can tell you he talked to republicans in particular. they were considering changing senate procedures to overcome turberville's blockade. they don't have to do that anymore now that turberville has agreed to back down. >> very interesting developments, thank you for that. >> we are tracking more breaking news this time on the january 6th investigation into former president donald trump, jack smith wants to present evidence at trump's trial next year, his u.s. -- increase support shows he intended to inspire violence as part of a conspiracy led to overturn the 2020 election. >> let's get more on this with paula reid, tell us more about what this means, and how significant it is. >> this is the first time we are getting a preview from the special counsel of the case that they intend to present next march when they try former president trump related to january 6th and claims of elections of version, in this new filing, they are putting him and his lawyers on notice about exactly what they put before a jury, they point specifically to his continued public support for people who attack the capital. they point to the fact he's suggested he could pardon some of them if he is re-elected and has also referred to them as times as hostages, prosecutors say this is evidence he conspired to in spite -- inside that leads -- inside violence. this also listing things that happened before january 6th, you may remember in a 2020 presidential debate, then president trump was asked to denounce the extremist group the proud boys, instead of denouncing them he would publicly speak directly to them telling them to quote stanback in standby. we now know that members of that group embraced that, many of them were involved in the attack on the capital. they also talk about how he refused to commit to a peaceful transition of power leading up to the election and then following the election, they point to how he attacked anyone who refuted his claims of election fraud, notably that they point to the fact that for over a decade going back to 2012, they say trump has claimed fraud any time he did not like or agree with an election outcome, this is fascinating because it is the first time we have seen how prosecutors intend to support these charges as they become the first the first prosecutors to try former president trump, the first of two federal trials we expect next year, this plan will have to be approved by the judge overseeing this case, the judge, tonya would like to approve this pam -- plan but this is all subject to her approval. >> paula reid, thank you so much for the very latest on that , a significant development. tomorrow, republican voters are going to see it is the least crowded stage, kind of an intimate stage if you will in the 2024 race for president, only four gop candidates are set to debate, the republican national committee saying chris christie, ron desantis, nikki haley, and vivek ramaswamy are the only ones qualified. >> republican promoters -- voters will not see donald trump who leads all polls by seemingly comfortable margins will be fundraising in florida, we want to deep dive into all of this with our senior adviser on the tim scott presidential campaign, we should note the senator got out of the race, alec thompson is which -- with us, a political correspondent. i want to tell you about chris christie because he just barely with a very little time left squeaked into this debate, there is reporting in the new york times that some republicans are telling him to do what he did not do and get out of the race early, what are you hearing? >> i'm hearing he's not going to do that, you're absolutely right, he barely squeaked in, it's not clear he actually made it, he's definitely going to be on the stage, the actual guidance of who qualifies for the stage is a little ambiguous, they just said he did make it. with a lot of analysts as of last week, biden did not have the polling. just to give you an idea if there is another debate, he may not make it. as for him dropping out, i talked to his team and they have indicated they don't plan to, they even suggested he could stay until next summer. obviously, the campaign does not end, they run out of money, unclear if he would be able to do that, the biggest threat is in new hampshire when him and nikki haley are tied for second place, you have to imagine a lot of the vote would go to the next most moderate candidate which would be nikki haley. >> what about the possibility of liz cheney? i did not even finish the question. >> i'm sorry. >> she's obviously toying with this idea but there's a lot of considerations about what that would mean and who that would influence the most, what do you think? >> i failed to see who the audience is and constituents, certainly democrats will not come on board, she was flawed among republicans, i have nothing personal against liz cheney, i failed to see a what's new in the book or new in her message, candidly what is aside from trump, what would be her vision or rationale for actually serving in office, that's an important part too. >> it seems like a message rationale, she wants to be there as a foil to donald trump. if you throw that in there as a real possibility, who do you think she might actually pull votes away from considering some democrats like her? >> chris christie, to be fair, chris has been the most in this field, strived consistently at a moral level against trump, he's at 70% right now. i would expect to see that on the debate stage, he's done a little bit. that's somebody you take votes from, one thing i would add to that, i think there are these independent voters that are called the double voters, people that take donald trump and joe biden, if she were to run as a third-party candidate, she would appeal to them, in terms of her larger mission, that would hurt that mission because there are some people that would otherwise vote for joe biden that vote for her. i would expect her goal is to prevent donald trump, she said she could end up supporting joe biden, i would not be shocked if we see her speak at the convention. >> that would be a moment for sure, i want to ask you about nikki haley, she's getting attention, her push to reform medicare and other entitlements is significant but if she makes the general election, that argument may play well in the primary, perhaps so much in the general. >> look at where we were 20 years ago, in large part, the george bush second term got derailed after he proposed reforming social security, really it was trump who flipped the party to we are not protecting social security, that's become essentially the primary platform, my boss did not want to raise it if you go back 20 years, that's a different party orthodox, and a large part, nikki haley is going against the grain but the devil is in the details when you say you want to reform medicare and social security, there's very sticky policies you have to commit to that will take off either side. >> what do they need to do and how do you think the dynamic changed with these four being the ones on the stage? is there much of a change do you think? >> i think so, in part because we do not know if there will be another debate before iowa, this is a case for some candidates to make their last real push on the stage, nikki haley arguably has been the best debater, the most consistent debater across all these, if you are ron desantis, you have to stop her momentum and that will be his main thing, you already see him preview the attack, you will see nikki haley what she's done in interviews to be dismissive of them, you're only here because you are behind. if she's getting and coming from all sides because she is the candidate with momentum, she was stands a pylon from all the other candidates. >> when it comes to ron desantis, he has support in iowa and recently completed the -- leading all 99 counties, support from the governor from even evangelical leaders, can you pull out a surprise win quick he >> highly doubtful, he can get a second and that might be a equivalent of a win, when you go through all 99 counties, trump has been to seven and he's pretty high up, that says a lot where this race, this campaign, the selections nationalized, you don't need to go to every rural county in iowa to make a difference, that will tell us not only about ron desantis, where's iowa campaigning going to go? >> such a unique place these candidates, in this debate, in this race as they are having to race amongst themselves but not really with the contender, the lead contender. i just wonder, what does that do to them as they are getting ready for this moment, is there staring down the iowa caucus? what is it really at this point they are running for? >> they are all running to become second place then hoping that the one-on-one race against donald trump, that somehow they can win, even if there is no current data, basically all data shows the field consolidates his vote share will increase, some of those people currently supporting ron desantis or nikki haley would go to heaven, that is the hope, this is a debate for second place, then the hope is that somehow, if you are one-on-one against donald trump, there is a month gap between january 3rd new hampshire caucus, february 24th south carolina primary, if you get him one-on-one, maybe something can change but it is a big shot. >> matt, alex, so great to have you both. we are times we are in. so unique and great to discuss with you guys, still to come, the israeli military now says it is and circling gaza's second largest city in the south, this comes as u.s. officials are describing the quote apocalyptic situation with no safe place to go, we are live from the region next, the house is set to vote on a republican resolution that contends -- condemns anti- semitism globally with high- profile democrats who often -- who happened to be jewish, are urging colleagues to vote present. we will l tell you why coming g against hamas. civilians, many of them placed with nowhere to go, israeli defense forces are entering the third phase of the war in northern and southern gaza. idf leaders say the leaders are and circling gaza's second largest city as well as the refugee camp in the north. the u.n. says that civilians are running out of laces to flee, warning of an apocalyptic situation that is only getting worse as israeli forces urged civilians to evacuate larger sections of gaza, let's take live to tel aviv. what more is the idea saying it's an ongoing operation in gaza? >> it is not clear what is meant by a third phase of this conflict, it does appear that israel is entering a new phase, they say they are securing the gains made in the north like the refugee camp, they say it had the hamas command and control and hamas militants, we are seeing very clear moves towards the south, towards the city of han eunice which is the biggest city in southern gaza, the top commander for israel's army and military in the south said that today was the most intense day they've seen since the beginning of the ground operation that started at the end of october in terms of the number of hamas militants killed, the amount of fighting, the number of firefights so according to israel's military, they are encircling han eunice and operating at the heart they say major concerns now not only , mainly because of the number of civilians who are in and around han eunice, it is understandable why this is a target. hamas leadership has gone towards there, so have so many people who are told to flee the northern part of the gaza strip in the initial phase of this operation, now you have hundreds of thousands of people who are either fled or are living there for now being told the humanitarian officials saying that they assume that many of these civilians will be going towards rob bonta -- rafaelle where we see a lot of people, you have shelters bursting at the seams, people setting up tents, living on the streets, it's becoming an untenable situation with both civilians and humanitarian workers saying simply that nowhere in gaza is safe. >> it is notable the white house is maintaining the public position that israel has been receptive to its encouragement to take more steps to save civilian lives in gaza, we understand there is no reporting that indicates that view is not shared by everyone in the white house. >> they have been saying publicly and rather diplomatically that israel has been receptive, we heard very clear warnings from the uppermost biden administration officials. secondary blink and -- secretary blinken saying that intent is well and good, actions matter. the secretary of defense, lloyd austin saying if these high civilian death tolls continue, israel could win tactically but essentially lose in the long term, one senior administration official spoke to her colleague, mj lee that they would not describe israel's attitude towards these american warnings as receptive, and on the aid front, we also heard that the u.s. expects israel to continue sending aid into gaza allowing ada to be sent to gaza despite the fact the fighting has been renewed but very clearly and publicly today, the spokesman matt miller saying that israel is not doing enough to allow aid into the gaza strip and that more needs to be done. >> alex, live from tel aviv. >> there is a fight unfolding on capitol hill, democrats and republicans at odds over proposed supplemental military aid to ukraine for its nearly two-year-old war with russia, chuck schumer vowing to hold a procedural vote on funding for ukraine tomorrow, we have cn -- cnn on capitol hill live, what are lawmakers saying ahead of tomorrow's vote? >> republicans are preparing to vote against advancing the presidential supplemental package arguing they want to see robust policy changes to the u.s. southern border, specifically they argue that more money or the southern border which the president supplemental request did include is not enough, in fact they have been trying to work behind closed doors and over the course of the last several weeks with their democratic colleagues to try and find a middle ground on immigration policy, given the fact this is an issue that is vexing congress for the past couple of decades, no middle ground has been found, things reached an e pass -- impasse over the weekend, negotiators are trying to find a way back to the table and trying to find a way forward in the meantime, chuck schumer says he has to move forward with trying to advance this package and republicans say they will not support it, they are not going to provide the nine republican votes necessary in order to advance this package to a final vote, that gives you a sense of just how frustrated members up here on capitol hill are, given the fact republicans and democrats largely agree that they do want to continue funding the war effort in israel and ukraine, they argue those are close allies of the united states and yet republicans and democrats see the view very differently on how to handle immigration with republicans insisting that border policy changes be included. >> all right, lauren fox, obviously something to watch, we appreciate the report. as rsv cases search, parents are struggggling to get antibod treatmentsts to sit -- preveven ilillness for r their babibies, have m more on that t just ahea 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. it is just that time of year, viruses are practically everywhere, it sparked a rush especially among the parents to shield little ones from the notorious rsv, the virus leads to more than 2 million hospital visits among kids younger than five, the new vaccine is proving to be a act about protecting babies and toddlers, finding one is a major challenge for many, here with more is now cnn medical correspondent meg tyrell, tell us about by why rsv is such a nuisance and details on the vaccine. >> rsv is a common virus most of us get by the time we are toddlers, typically does not cause huge problems, for very little babies and for the elderly it can be pretty severe, this is the first season we have new protection from both of those groups, public health experts are particularly excited about an antibody shot which is approved for babies because in clinical trials, it was shown to reduce risk by 75%, there's a real hope this would keep babies out of the hospital with rsv this season, it cost about $500 per shot, public health experts have been very excited. >> why's it so hard for parents to get their hands on it? >> this is so disappointing to a lot of people in the field, initially it was approved in july by the fda for babies, with that price tag, about $500 the initial concern that hospitals and pediatricians may not stockett because they were not sure they would get reimbursed, by the time october came around, the fall season and rsv was starting to pick up, one of the manufacturers said that demand was outpacing supply, higher than anticipated, the cdc started recommending infants under six months of age and those medically vulnerable be prioritized for the shot, really we are in a situation where a lot of doctors and parents feel like we are in a shortage. >> demand outpacing supply, how bad is rsp this year? >> unfortunately, we are off to another big rsv season, babies filling hospital beds, we hoped they would get this in order to prevent hospitalization of their babies with rsv, we spoke with one mom looking for the shot, cannot find it and her baby was hospitalized, while it is not as bad as last season, you can see it is not a great season for rsv and the hope of the shot has not been realized this fall at least. >> it parents can't get their hands on a dose, what can they do to protect their kids from rsp? >> late in pregnancy, there's another maternal rsv vaccine. pregnant people can get that to protect babies in the first six months, that is one option. for babies and little kids, otherwise it is just the stuff we all tried to do, washing hands as much as we can, staying home when sick, anything you can do as parents, we all know it's hard. >> very difficult. meg tyrell, thank you so much for the reporting period still tracking a ton of stories including razor wire along the u.s. southern border there to stay at least for now, we have details on a new court ruling that keeps it from being cut down, new details on a shark attack killing an american woman in the bahamas, stay with us, we will be right back. the u.s. house has just passed a republican-led resolution condemning anti- semitism in the united states and globally. the measure introduced by jewish republican lawmakers contained language that is concerning to some democrats, it includes this wine -- a line that firmly states anti-zionism is anti-semitism. joining with his perspective, we have jake from massachusetts. i understand you voted yes on this, is that right, can you tell me about your boat? >> good afternoon, thanks for having me on., jewish member of congress and represent a big, diverse jewish constituency since october 7th are feeling increasingly afraid and alienated, it's import -- important to use every opportunity condemn anti- semitism. this resolution is duplicative. the time now to move past resolutions and towards action, that means speaker johnson puts in a bipartisan bill to support israel on the house floor so we can send our ally the support it needs as we fight terrorism. >> including congressman -- there are other reviewers who are jewish as well, they did call ahead of this vote on your caucus to vote present. this was the quote latest unserious attempt to weapon nice jewish pain and the jewish problem of anti-semitism to score cheap political points, can you tell us why you decided to vote yes in what you think about their point was? >> >> i know how thoughtful they are on this issue and how passionate they are and helping to combat it, this is for every member's conscience and how they can be a vote for their constituents. in my town halls and conversations, i think they continue to want to see unequivocal action and statements against anti- semitism. were i strongly agree with my fellow members on the democratic caucus is that this is duplicative, this resolution. we need to be focused on supporting not just israel but luke -- ukraine, taiwan, and humanitarian aid to gaza as well. that's what the president has asked congress to do, speaker johnson in particular is obstructing this measure to defend democracy overseas. >> what do you say to your democratic colleagues who say the u.s. should impose some conditions on aid to israel. they have concerns israel is not executing this more as carefully as it should. it >> every country is bound by the law of armed conflict as is israel, they have adhere to it in their operations. they have contact with both the israeli cabinet and senior leadership to adjust tactics. there is really not a huge need to condition aid, what is most critical as we support israel as it tries to win this war which is dismantling hamas and rescuing hostages. then we support palestinian people, working with neighbor states, not just israel. they help realize their equal measure of security and dignity, and prosperity. >> do you think that this ratio at this point, we are talking about more than 15,000 palestinians that have been killed. israel is saying a third of those are hamas militants. two civilians to one combatant, is that acceptable, does israel need to do better because there is a perception we are learning in our reporting that israel is not receptive to u.s. suggestions that they need to do better. >> we will, series of bad choices, this war i think in particular. every civilian death is a tragedy. israel is required to uphold distinction, necessity, and proportionality. unless it is able to destroy hamas, there is futures suffering in the future. by the palestinian people, the israeli people as hamas continues to terrorize them. while this more as a nightmare, israel needs to finish its part going forward. >> i know that you certainly of all people know war is a nightmare, you served in afghanistan and we should not lose sight of the attack they suffered on october 7th. i do wonder from your perspective, having served in afghanistan knowing what the ratio was noncombatants and combatants there. what we are seeing in gaza far surpasses what you saw in afghanistan. i don't mean to argue points of degree, the u.s. faced a lot of criticism and skepticism. that conflict as well, is that an acceptable ratio when it is so big whether it is creating more terrorists? >> israel of course has to be mindful of that equation. it does not put forward an equation, any military target needs to be sufficiently valuable, civilian collateral damage can be justified in the court of law, israel is subject to that. destroying hamas's ability to wage terror is a high-value and legitimate objective. when israel should be under pressure continuing to abide, hamas is the only entity in this entire universal conflict that can end the suffering. hamas agrees to abide by the law, he did that -- hamas did that. it would not require it lays down its laws or charter. you have two free hostages and use palestinians as you human shields, they can israeli -- engage israeli combatants in accord with the law of armed conflict. hamas can end all the sub right now. >> it is very clear hamas is not abiding by that. they have committed war crime after war crime. there are experts who are split on how israel is prosecuting its war as well. i know as you said, it is not specific when it comes to numbers. is that an acceptable number, two civilians for every combatant? >> trying to quantify the suffering of this war i think is the wrong approach. this war is a nightmare for all involved, every civilian who is killed, israeli and palestinian is a tragedy. those individuals and families have hopes and aspirations. >> let me ask you this then, you said that hamas cannot be allowed to govern. they need to get rid of hamas, do you worry that something else is bad as hamas, worse than hamas is being created? >> which is why it is so critical we help them win the war, winning peas, working with the abraham accord and abraham accord adjacent countries to search -- transition to competent civil administration. maybe they are a part of that, maybe not. the gazan people deserve governance that helps them manifest and realize that their destinies, helps them have a better future. that cannot happen until hamas is destroyed. nobody wants hamas to have to be dismantled through this bloodshed, hamas is deciding this is what it has to be. >> we very much appreciate you being with us, thank you so much. >> take care. >> still to come, a potential major shift in college athletics , the ncaa is proposing a rule that allllows highgh revevenue prograrams to direrectly pay athleteses, we have e new detat ahead.d. a new proposal from ncaa president charlie baker allows top division i schools to pay athletes directly for the first time. in a letter, baker outlined how the highest resource schools would be put in a new tier or subdivision requiring them to require compensation to at least half their student athletes, let's discuss with senior sports senior reporter, michael mann. thanks for sharing your afternoon with us, this is largely a response to some of the problems that have been generated by the main image and likeness rule, the ni l, let's take a look through what that is and what this tries to address. >> for a long time, the ncaa did not allow college athletes to enjoy a right they have, you can do an endorsement deal and make money, the ncaa shifted course and 2021 allowing that to happen and since then, some college athletes have done very well and the ncaa believes that some schools are directly paying or perhaps through boosters and i owe money, this policy change is significant because it involves as you mentioned direct payment to athletes and partnering between schools and athletes, it's a more transparent process and is a more equitable process the athletes are getting paid, it separates these top schools from the rest which could help the schools. >> michael is the breakdown included in the proposal over how much certain student athletes would earn? >> there is a minimum part of it in terms of $30,000 a year, there is not a maximum, of course the maximum really comes down to recruiting these top schools, recruiting with each other and they will be bidding against each other, some might feel troubled and say i thought this was college sports, amateur sports. some of these coaches are making $10 million a year, you can argue why shouldn't these schools compete as they compete for coaches and college athletes, it is fair the labor is getting some money from this. >> the students are putting their lives potentially or their health at least at risk by playing the sport that generates enormous money for the school at 12, in terms of other students, recruitment, tuition et cetera. i'm wondering, what if the school decided does not want to be part of that new subdivision, a top-tier school that says we want to stay with the rest of d1, what happens then? >> this is the best part of it, the school does not have to be part of it, they don't have to pay anything to athletes if it wishes to adopt a more traditional model, it can leave that subdivision and enter it. it gives school discretion, many schools cry that they are poor and cannot pay athletes, it will be interesting to see if in fact schools adopt a more traditional approach, the cost would be leaving this more marketable division and i think many would say they're going to be skeptical that schools will do that because they are making so much money through college sports as you noted, it is not just tv money, it's also impact on donations, alumni, admissions. some want to go, schools actually forgo that, it will be an interesting answer going ahead. >> student athletes essentially become school employees though they are not being called that. >> you could argue they are employees, there are other college students who are employees, there are work-study students who are employees at dartmouth college, the students in dining services are employees of the school and they are unionized. for a student at the same time, that concept is considered very controversial by -- it may be less controversial going forward. >> i'm putting you on the spot, yes or no answer, there'd sfu get snubbed not being included? >> yes, they got snubbed by don't think it's illegal. >> michael mccann, thank you so much. >> it is time to check it out cushions, potentially a purse, there is an unclaimed lottery ticket in order to worth millions of dollars, time is running out to clean it -- claimant. details straight ahead. >> it is time to check out those old lottery tickets that may be collecting dust somewhere and an old purse, jacket pocket, because time is running out for one lucky winner to claim their $44 million jackpot. a quick pick from a gas station in florida, they never claim the prize. that expiring december 11th if nobody claims it, 80% goes to education and the rest put back into future prize pools. that's a place people like my family stayed when i used to visit disney world, he does not know. >> boris's sister, check your purse. right now. thank you so much for joining us, the lead with jake tapper starts right now