that when he talks about what she would like to do to people he perceives as his enemies, he's often not lying. new reporting to that effect tonight, in cup with several other reports suggesting that he meant what he said over the weekend, when he said this. >> we pledged to you that we will root out the communist, marxist, fascist, and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country, that's a lie and steal and cheat on election. >> vermin, the former president on veterans day nola's went on to say, quote, the threat from outside forces is far less sinister dangerous and grooving the threat from within. our threat is from within. after that, he pays foreign dictators calling russia, china, -- and tough. the washington post story right on the -- hitler, misogyny. cnn presidential -- telling the postal language is the language that dictators used to instill fear. that's what dictators do. other historians and scholars of fascism echoed that assessment, to which the former presidents campaign spokesperson responded inwards that also kind of sounded a lot like things dictators might say. quoting now, those who tried to make that ridiculous assertion are clearly snowflakes grasping for anything because they are suffering from trump derangement syndrome, and they are sad and miserable existence will be crushed when president trump returned to the white house. crushed, vermin, enemies within. it's probably the starkest clearest version of other sentiments he's expressed in the last year. >> in 2016, i declared, i am your voice, today i add, i am your warrior, i am your justice, and for those that have been wronged and betrayed, i am your retribution. >> he is a warrior. he's never serving, but he's a warrior. former president back in march, it's tempting to write off what he just said as some kind of a stiff, like locke or a, build a wall, or citing lines from the snake poem. his motivation for retribution is now connected to a dehumanized target, people he calls vermin. it's coupled the means for making it happen. he's a leading republican candidate for president. there is new reporting on that under the headline, trump allies prescreen way for unprecedented power grab. quoting from it now, if trump were to win thousands of trump loyalist would be ready for legal, judicial defense, regulatory and domestic policy jobs. his inner circle plans to purge anyone views as hostile to the plans, he calls agenda 47. separately, the washington post and people spoke with him reports of former presidents allies have been mapping out specific plans for punishing critics and the points, with him, quote, naming individuals he wants to investigate or prosecute. something he talks about out loud and doesn't even bother denying. >> they call it weaponization. the people are not going to stand for it. they have done something that allows the next party. if i happen to be president and i see somebody who is doing well and beating me very badly, i'll, say go down and ignite them. >> that sounds reasonable. attorney general john mitchell who later went to prison for his role -- watch what we do what we say. that was his way of reassuring the public that some of the candidate nixon's harsher campaign rhetoric would not become policy. the question tonight, how comforting with those same words be now? joining us now is ceo and cofounder. jim, walk us through, what the former president's allies are actually planning. >> if you go back to the last time when he won, there was a lot of the same language, a lot of this tough guy routine. but, when he got into office, he was surrounded by people who would put restraints on him. he did not really understand how many levels of the bureaucracy could gum up his instincts and his worst instincts. they learned from that. what we found is when you talk to people at the heritage foundation, when you talk to people around donald trump are used to work for donald trump, who understand machinery of government, they now put together a very well oiled machine, one year in advance of potentially winning the election, that's allowing them to vet and screen people for their loyalty to trump and their belief in stretching the rule of law in ways that donald trump would like them to stretch if you were in office. the reason i think the story is important is it's one thing when he uses this language and doesn't put it into action. but, when you listen to him and he tells you what he's going to, do punish political enemies, round of illegal immigrants, potentially get rid of 1 million or so people who live in the united states, try to maybe go after flag officers and generals who he does not considered to pass the loyalty litmus test. if you know how government works and you can figure out how to purge ten, 20, 30,000 people from all those positions that make activities like that possible, that turned those policies or those ideas into action, you could have a much different administration, and really see restraints lifted that we've had in the previous 46 presidents. anybody who is a trump supporter listening to this are like, we love this, that's what we want, we want the administrative state purged and we want a new order and some of the tough guy, strongman routine because if you like crime is high and immigration is serving. i think if you're not donald trump supporter, you are concerned because this would be uncharted territory. we're talking about doing things that he's saying. we're not saying it's anonymous sources, he's saying. this is the things he's saying he's going to do, and they're going to have the machinery to do it. i think that shows the stakes of the election. i would not fall for this people surrounded by clowns. there are some clouds around, no doubt about it, but there's going to be some really serious people involved in the process who understand government who are going to have a government ready to roll. >> the trump campaign has put out a statement saying, quote, policy recommendations from external allies and recommendations. who are the groups who are pushing this overhaul and how close are they to the former president? >> heritage foundation doing a lot of the work, a lot of the sit out questionnaires, the 4000 different potential applicants asking them their favorite political figure, their favorite political book, what is their ideology. but, then you look at the people who are advising both heritage foundation and some of these other outside groups that are involved. they're all trump people. johnny mcentee who is head of presidential personnel who's really one of the architects of trying to figure out the purge and the first term of the trump presidency as an adviser to these efforts. stephen miller talks with these people all the time. so, sure, the heritage foundation what they would say is this is available to anyone, but everybody knows that donald trump is likely to win the nomination. they know they cannot make the mistake they made before, which is just rolling town and not have team ready to rock and roll. they're going to have at this time. i think we pushed almost instantly into uncharted territory. i think the second term, if you were to win, would be much more like the final days of the trump presidency than the first two years. really trying to push the boundaries, really trying to see if you can stretch the rule of law to do things, whether it's punishing political enemies are getting rid of people you don't feel share your political beliefs, punishing media entities. >> how would that work at the department of justice? you have career, law enforcement people, how it suddenly that worked in the doj? >> any of the agencies, nothing to, it but there is one of the ideas they have at the end of the presidency was this idea of recategorize-ing people in the government as -- which would allow them to get around union laws, gets around things and make it harder to fire people who are kind of permanent in civil service center in government. that's what much of government is. you hear about secretary, as you know the vice president, a lot of the work and whether it's the doj and department of homeland security is done below, that people who will often serve both parties. if you could suddenly just and mask and get rid of them, which they would try to do, maybe the court should step in and say you can't do it, maybe they say you can. there's a big debate about whether or not he can do what he wanted to do under schedule. evelyn people think he could. even if he didn't, as long as you have the people waiting, you can re-assign anybody you want to. you can put people in the gigs that you know have the power that supports your agenda. that will be radically different this time from last time. anybody who doesn't like donald trump, are someone who likes him and once more of it, the truth is he was not good at governing particularly in early years because he did not have people who shared his philosophy around him, and he did not understand the pull the different levers of government. trump has no interest in this. his brain does not work that way, he's not sitting here thinking about who i'm going to put where, and how a second term is going to win. he's very cinematic and loves rhetorical part of the job. but, it's beneath him, there's going to be a much bigger, well oiled sort of prescreened, pretrain, group of people ready to come in. >> fascinating, thanks so much. still to come tonight, the eldest son of former president took the witness stand today as a defense begins in its case. the civil fraud trial in new york. he called his father a visionary in the world of real estate. a judge has already said his that persistently committed fraud. we'll have more details on that ahead. what it's like in the ground in gaza with cnn's nick robertson. >> to disarm defense today in the civil fraud trial against himself and brother and father and called out a visionary and artist with real estate. trial is now in its seventh week with allegations at the trump inflated asset prices to secure better financing and insurance terms. the judge already is ruled the former president and co defendant including trump junior had consisted and repeated fraud. kara scannell joins us with more of the testimony. what stood out to you in the testimony today? >> donald trump jr. was on the stand for about three hours today, much of his testimony was like a promotional video for the trump organization. he described how he said his father was a visionary. he saw things that people could not see, and he was an artist. so they, went more than a dozen of the properties and showing glossy photos of them on the screen in the courtroom. donald trump jr. would describe how he said his dad would take air building and turn it into a spectacular residence, how he would take a swamp land in florida and turn it into a spectacular golf course. you took the old post office building in washington d. c., which trump jr. described as a war zone and transform that into one of the finest hotels in the world. a lot of bravado, a lot of pitching is, and the use of spectacular by my count at least 15 times. he did say he took umbrage was with the value of mar-a-lago which is a tax assessment that at least $18 million. this is something donald trump 's father has been voicing a lot of criticism about anytime he's walking in and around the courtroom. don junior was saying that the atrium in mar-a-lago alone would cost $80 million today to build. so, trying to make the point that these values that trump touch was something that would have justified some of the evaluations they put on this. they did not get into specifics company by company of the evaluations. this was really more of an exercise of allowing him to describe the trump brand. she discovered the family business, and to put the gloss on transformations they made. the judge had given them some leeway and the attorney general told the -- you had six weeks to put your case. he's giving them time to put on. there's anderson. >> who else is defense expected to call? >> the next few days, we're expected to hear from some expert witnesses who will testify about real estate. they also said they will recall some of those trump organizations, executives in the finance department. also today, saying eric trump will be back on the stand, and it's very likely the former president will also make a return to the witness stand. . anderson >> carris canal, thank you so much. former federal prosecutor just carruthers here. she's now a professor at school of law. do you think his testimony helped? >> i think it was largely irrelevant. i think the judge lets him talk, because he's giving the defense the opportunity to make their case, and he's clearly very sensitive to being viewed by arguably bias and favor of the government. nothing don jr. said today goes to the heart of the case, in terms of the specifics about whether the statements of financial condition were fraudulent or not. the judges already ruled that -- objectively, those evaluations in the statements were fraudulent. so, there was nothing specific about donald trump jr., it was long -- sweeping statements nothing very specific. arguably, it may have hurt him, because as i understand, he may have repeated some specifics that were actually wrong, like the number of floors in one of the properties. so, it may actually have been counterproductive. >> both donald trump jr. and eric trump have distanced themselves from these financial statements to the extent, or they try to at least. eric trump is going to take the stand as well. do you expect the same sort of thing from his testimony? >> it's hard to know what to expect, and maybe the same type of grandiose they, met with the value of the company, the value of the assets from their perspective. if there is any legal relevance to these kinds of statements of superlatives and their belief or the implicit believe in the value of. it goes to the question of intent, because a judge has to make a finding about whether or not these individuals acted with intent to defraud others. so, perhaps, by putting on this presentation, they're demonstrating their good faith belief in the assets. that could be a reason for them to rely on this testimony and the presentation of this sort of glossy presentation. >> didn't, when the former president testified earlier, he alluded to bankers testifying in his defense. are there going to be bankers, or have they caught bankers? >> not yet, defense just started his presentation today. i am really looking to see if they do call those bankers, what the former president essentially promises that those people would take the stand, the witnesses from the banks and say we did not rely on the statements. >> financial statements not really matter in our evaluations. >> exactly. it would go to the materiality question which is what the judge has the wrong for the remaining causes of action. so, i am really keenly interested to see whether or not the defense will be able to put forward witnesses who will make the statement on behalf of the banks. >> it's pressing. jessica, thank you so. much >> thank. you >> knew reporting from gaza. fresh evidence that hamas is using hospitals for coverage. that is ahead. you want to be able to provide your child with the tools or resources they need. with reliable internet at home, through the internet essentials program, the world opened up. fellas, fellas. that's how my son was able to find the hidden genius project. we wanted to give y'all the necessary skills to compete with the future. kevin's now part of this next generation of young people who feel they can thrive. ♪ ♪ >> we have new reporting tonight on the fighting in gaza, the challenges any easy assumptions about. it this included cnn nick robertson saw today embedded with the idea of deep inside the territory. witnessing destruction is bad as nick, reported more than three decades of experience covering conflict as he's ever seen. as well as evidence of hamas is using hospitals to shelter command bunkers, weapons, and possibly hostages. earlier today, president biden said hospitals, quote, must be protected, but then later administration spokesperson knowledge what hamas is doing complicates that effort. >> it makes it much harder for any military force to go after those targets, because the hospital itself ought to be as the president says, predicted. he's really talking about this incredibly difficult conundrum that israeli military forces are facing right now. >> that reaction was prompted by watson and nick robinson sought to be with the idea forces in gaza. he joins us shortly. joining us now is washington post national security reporter who shares the new exclusive on what hamas had in mind beyond the october 7th massacre, namely, second phase with deeper attacks into israel. he's also the author of black flags, the rise of i. s. i. s., and i'm just glad he can join us tonight. joe b., this is a fascinating article you written, because of the humanitarian crisis in gaza and images of suffering taking place, especially around hospitals and in hospitals. the international pressure on -- mounting from your reporting. this is exactly what hamas wanted and planned for. >> yeah, i think that picture is becoming pretty clear for us now. hamas wanted to see some hostages, they see value in obtaining hostages for swapping with prisoners that israelis are holding. as we're seeing it now, hamas really wanted to shake up the region, wanted to put the palestinian resistance movement back on the agenda to get people talking about this and thinking about this. as our reporting shows, they really expected the israelis to heads back hard, maybe not quite as hard as they did, but hard enough to bring world opinion down on israel, which is sort of a second phase of this happening now. nobody talks about october 7th anymore, the focus is on what israel's doing in response. that works very well from hamas's point of view, it changes the subject, and they're happy with. that >> let's just pause on that for a moment. they planned this massacre. they communicated the slaughter of men, women, and children, 1200 or so. in israel, they do not build any bomb shelters for their own people, knowing that israel would respond. they did not attempt to do anything to protect their own citizens, palestinians in gaza. they wanted this response by israel. they have publicly said on arabic channels about embracing and wanting motors. they did nothing to protect their people. >> they're very proud and they say this publicly. we're all about martyrs. we want to create martyrs. it creates our cause. you're actually right, hummus new this counterstrike was coming. so, obviously they stockpiled food and water and fuel for themselves. nobody else in gaza got this warning. nobody else was told, you got to pick up medicine because you're going to be under a siege for a while, or you have to make sure you get plenty of food for your generator. people of gaza, 2 million folks who live there and have to live under these conditions were not warned at all. they're the ones paying the price for that right now. it fits very well with hamas's plan. >> hamas controls the images which come out of gaza. and he cameraman who work in gaza knows where you point, where you're allowed to point the camera and where you're not allowed to point the camera. obviously, civilian death toll is horrific and that is the major story there. but, the other story is, hamas does not exist in any video from gaza. if you are looking at the images we're looking at right now, you do not see any tunnels, you do not see any rockets being fired, and he locations of rockets, because if you're a cameraman in gaza, you cannot videotape the. you cannot point the camera tomas. >> absolutely. it's bee