breaking news on "ana cabrera reports," hunter biden indicted with nine new tax charges including three felonies. we'll detail the allegations made by the special counsel in this case including money spent on a lavish lifestyle. escorts, cars, and drugs instead of paying taxes. we're also watching the united nations this hour about to convene an emergency meeting on gaza with a new warning that conditions inside the strip are nearing a humanitarian catastrophe. plus, just hours before the start of hanukkah, shots fired at a synagogue in albany, new york. the rising fears of anti-semitism here at home. also ahead, las vegas police releasing this new video of the shootout with the man who opened fire at unlv. and first to nbc, new accounts of the gunman's obsession with vegas. ♪♪ it is 10:00 eastern. thanks so much for being with us on a friday. i'm ana cabrera reporting from new york, and we begin with that breaking news. hunter biden indicted on tax crimes. the president's son facing nine tax-related charges including three felony counts. in a damning 56-page filing, the special counsel alleges hunter didn't just fail to pay his taxes but that he spent millions on an extravagant lifestyle, on drugs, escorts, luxury hotels, exotic cars, clothing, and in short everything but his taxes. in a statement to nbc news, hunter's lawyer says quote, based on the facts and the law, if hunter's last name was anything other than biden, the charges in delaware and california would not have been brought. joining us now is nbc's justice and intelligence correspondent ken dilanian along with julie tsirkin on capitol hill and former federal prosecutor, former senior investigative counsel for the january 6th house committee. ken, this is a sweeping indictment. what else is in these 56 pages? >> good morning, ana. you know, hunter biden had a chance to resolve these tax charges by pleading guilty over the summer to failing to file a return in a deal that called for no jail time. but that deal fell apart, and now prosecutors, as you said, have thrown the book at him. they're charging him here with tax evasion and fraud saying that he had the money to pay his taxes but instead spent it on a lavish lifestyle that included drugs, escorts, expensive clothing and luxury cars. and when he finally filed the tax return in 2018, they say he lied about business deductions to lower his tax burden. the indictment says he sent a $10,000 wire transfer to his accountant. that $10,000 was used to purchase a membership in a sex club. prosecutors say while some of this conduct came while mr. biden was addicted to drugs, they say even after he got sober, he continued to dodge his tax obligations, ana. >> tib die owe, your take on these allegations, these new charges? >> these are serious charges, and i don't want to diminish that, but i think these charges should be placed in the broader context of the investigation. we are now five years into the hunter biden doj dance that's been happening, and i think it's telling that when doj sought to resolve these charges, they were seeking probation, right? they were seeking probation on misdemeanor tax charges and the gun-related charges for failing to disclose that he was an addict was going to be dealt with through a diversion program. that's what doj thought was an equitable and just result. now that that deal fell through, doj sought to escalate in a dramatic way. this is after five years, and even five months i think since the deal fell apart. i think there are real questions about the delay with which doj acted here. i think that point from hunter biden's lawyer as to whether this would be happening if his last name wasn't biden is a real question. i would say as a former doj prosecutor, more and more it looks like that to me. it looks like someone who's not get ago fair shake and is being treated more harshly because of their proximity to the president. >> and ken, didn't hunter already pay back the taxes? >> he did pay most of the taxes and often prosecutors will take that into account, ana, in a tax case in a way that benefits the defendant. in this case they did that because in spite of all this evidence we're seeing now, they were ready to allow him to admit to only misdemeanors and serve no jail time, and republicans were furious about that. they called it a sweetheart deal. but once hunter biden walked away from that deal, that no longer mattered, the payment of the taxes. prosecutors went after him hard, and they have what appears to be an airtight case of tax evasion and fraud. and hunter biden's lawyers and others are saying this prosecution is unfair, and they may be right. the jurors won't be asked whether it's fair. they'll only be asked to decide whether prosecutors have proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt. >> the maximum penalty here if convicted is 17 years in prison. temadayo, do you see it coming to that? >> i think if i'm hunter biden's lawyer i'm seeking to resolve this nonetheless. he's supposed to testify before congress, and i expect now with this additional indictment, he's not going to do that. he's going to be worried about his criminal exposure and not republicans on the hill, but i do think there should be resolution here. if the special counsel was already offering a plea deal, i think what's clear is that hunter biden didn't just walk away from the deal. the judge got in the middle. the judge took issue with both what role she would play in monetary compliance with the diversion program going forward and the issue with whether or not the coverage he would get from other crimes was too expansive. at its core, what the doj wanted, that was not the issue, which was probation. i think if the doj is fully acting equitable, it would follow that. when i look at the indictment and i see mentions of drugs and escorts and really gratuitous information, it does speak to the conduct, it starts to look slightly a little bit more vindictive as opposed to going right by the book. >> you mentioned the plea deal, a guilty plea for two misdemeanor tax charges, that looks pretty good now. was it hunter's team that made a mistake in not trying harder for that plea deal to resolve in what they had initially thought they were agreeing to. >> it's really hard to say not being in the room, but what i would suspect, even though doj prosecutor is always going to say that public opinion doesn't matter, if doj was willing to offer one deal, what i suspect the hunter biden team said stick with the spirit of that deal. stick with the severity which you saw the case for that deal. with public pressure, if doj came back and said we now want more for you, we want you to plead to more aggressive charges, more serious charges, have more criminal exposure, i suspect that's where it fell apart. at that point if you're his lawyers, the idea of taking it to a jury may seem more appealing. >> i want to bring julie into the conversation here. as temdayo mentioned, republicans on capitol hill are threatening to hold hunter biden in contempt of congress if he doesn't appear for a closed-door deposition next week. he initially said i won't go behind closed doors. i'll do it publicly. were there also, of course, moving forward with this separate impeachment inquiry into the president himself, we should note president biden isn't accused of any wrongdoing related to this new indictment. so does the new charges, the new indictment change any of that and where do both pieces stand right now. >> reporter: certainly, and you've heard already how that could affect hunter biden potentially appearing before the committee behind closed doors, which we already did not expect and the committee said they're willing to hold hunter biden in contempt of congress if he does not come before the panel on wednesday. it also has an impact on moderates. those vulnerable republicans that were maybe concerned about voting to move forward with a formal impeachment inquiry. now these charges, these new tax charges could bring them some cover to be able to support that kind of step. we already heard, for example, from new york republican mike lawler who today had said that these charges are very concerning, and he will be voting yes to move forward on that formal impeachment inquiry. the second thing here is, though, if hunter biden does not appear, the committee holds him in contempt of congress and then that vote on this impeachment inquiry could happen as early as wednesday. that could potentially put hunter biden in a worse spot if they continue to escalate this investigation, and we already know, by the way, that despite this being a vote on an impeachment inquiry and not on impeachment articles that speaker mike johnson is willing to go that far. he said time and time again that if the evidence, if the committee's investigation warrants, he's willing to move forward to a formal impeachment inquiry of president joe biden, hunter biden's father as early as january when they come back in the new year and certainly all of these pieces are tied together as we continue to see to light in hunter biden's case. >> very quickly, julie, do they have those votes for an impeachment inquiry if they were to take a vote? >> that's the big question, but certainly republicans wouldn't put something on the floor. they've been hesitant to do that even when former house speaker kevin mccarthy in september announced this impeachment inquiry. remember, they didn't hold a vote despite him even vowing at the time to do so. he criticized former house speaker nancy pelosi and how she handled the impeachment inquiry into the former president donald trump, and so if they are putting this on the floor, they must feel confident that they do have those votes and they're not going to put those vulnerable house republicans in a bind by moving forward on this. >> julie tsirkin, ken dilanian and temdayo. former president donald trump is back on the witness stand on monday. trump will be the final witness for the defense. at the heart of this case claims the trump family manipulated the value of assets to get tax benefits and favorable loan terms. trump attended the trial yesterday maintaining his innocence even though a judge already found trump and his co-defendants liable for fraud msnbc legal analyst lisa rubin was in court yesterday and joins us now. you have spent a lot of time in that courtroom during this trial which started way back on october 2nd. it's been almost two plus months. what are you looking for as trump takes the stand on monday. >> the first thing i'm looking for is actually whether he takes the stand. you know that the former president is subject to a gag order. he tried earlier this week to escalate and rush along an appeal of that gag order in the hopes of having it lifted before he took the stand and he failed to do so for reasons that are probably too detailed for our viewers. the long and short of it is, that gag order can't be lifted before monday afternoon or evening at the earliest, and that means team trump has a very difficult choice to make. allow donald trump to literally sit within inches of the principal law clerk who he has already talked about twice in violation of the gag order and sustained two different fines about, or keep him at home against what i imagine are his deepest wishes to go and vindicate himself. if he takes the stand, i expect donald trump to say the banks were happy lenders. nobody was damaged, nobody suffered any financial losses. he relied at all times on his accountants and of course there were no material misstatements in his financial statements because on balance, even if there was an error here or there, it was on balance and accurate reporting of his assets. >> we mentioned how the president was in court yesterday, he didn't have to go, but here's how he described being there during the lunch break. >> the attorney general committed fraud, and you just saw it right up there. she's a fraud. this whole case is a fraud. it's election interference. it's keeping me here instead of iowa and new hampshire. you just saw it. the attorney general's a fraud. she committed fraud. >> actually, the judge ruled that he committed fraud. he says the attorney general in this case is keeping him off the campaign trail. he could have been in new hampshire or iowa yesterday. to be clear, he didn't have to be there in court yesterday. what's the strategy there? >> the strategy is twofold. one, again, to convince his base these being politically persecuted, but also to give himself an excuse for not going to iowa or new hampshire. i'm not a political correspondent, but if you talk to our colleagues who have been on the campaign trail, they will tell you that the number of times that trump has gone to iowa and new hampshire in this campaign cycle are fewer and further between than he would like to admit. so it's a convenient excuse that he has to be in the courtroom for a civil trial where his attendance is not legally mandatory. >> we'll be watching closely on monday. lisa rubin, thank you for your coverage and analysis. >> when we're back in 60 seconds, the u.n. security council's push for a cease fire between israel and hamas as the secretary general warnings of a humanitarian catastrophe in gaza. plus, the start of hanukkah is bringing heightened fears as a man is charged for firing a shotgun outside a new york synagogue. also, what would you do with $22 million? the wild legal filing involving the jacksonville jaguars and what their ex-financial manager allegedly spent the team's money on. and you're not alone if you have had trouble finding certain medications. what's behind the growing drug shortage in our country and why it seems to still be getting worse. eems to still be getting worse. (wife) seriously? a better plan is verizon. (husband) they'd take this mess? (caroler) ♪ very much so. just trade in that old phone. ♪ ♪ for a free 5g phone, plus netflix and max ♪ (wife) you really just should have done that. (caroler) ♪ this didn't land, she didn't like that. ♪ (husband) honey! i immediately get it! (avo) thisole, in any condition, into a galaxy s23+ on us. and now add netflix and max to your plan for just $10 a month. save big this holiday. only on verizon. breaking news this morning in the israel, hamas war. the united nation's security council is voting now on whether to urge an immediate cease fire, just as the u.n. secretary general warnings of an impending humanitarian catastrophe in gaza. nearly 2 million displaced, homes destroyed, very little aid getting in right now, including food and water. one spark of hope, we're learning that one of the crossings into israel, the karen shalom crossing from israel into gaza is set to be reopened in the coming days for inspections of aid trucks. i want to bring in nbc's raf sanchez in tel aviv, israel, along with christopher o'leary, the former director of hostage recovery for the u.s. raf, the u.n. has been warning of these deteriorating conditions in gaza for weeks now. what is the latest? >> they've been warning for weeks, ana, and they are running out of words. they are saying gaza is on the brink of irreversible disaster, if the world does not act right now to impose the cease fire and then to get humanitarian aid to the people who need it. there are more than a million civilians inside of gaza who are sheltering in u.n. facilities, so that's schools, medical compounds. but the u.n. is warning that their ability to deliver humanitarian aid is on the verge of collapse, and a lot of this was laid out in a pretty extraordinary letter that the director of the u.n. relief works agency, which is the agency that deals with palestinian refugees wrote earlier today. he says i never expected to write such a letter predicting the killing of my staff and the collapse of the mandate i am expected to fulfill. more than 130 u.n. staff had been killed so far since the israeli bombardment of gaza began after the hamas terrorist attack on october 7th. he says his staff are bringing their children into work with them every day in the hope that maybe, maybe those u.n. facilities will be safe, but the u.n. is saying there is nowhere near enough aid getting into gaza right now, and for what little aid is getting in, there is not enough fuel to distribute it to the people who need it the most. ana. >> again, we're keeping our eye on the u.n. security council here. i want to play what secretary blinken had to say about what might come after the war. let's listen. >> we cannot have an israeli reoccupation of gaza. we cannot have forced displacement of palestinians from gaza. we cannot have the territory of gaza diminished in any way. >> raf, are we hearing anything from israeli officials about their next steps in this war and after the fighting ends? >> reporter: you know, they've been vague about what happens in the day after this war, the day after hamas. i was speaking to a senior israeli official earlier, and he said one of their hopes is that people in gaza will remember that it was hamas who attacked on october 7th, that it was hamas who brought israel crashing down on top of the people of gaza, and they hoped that there would be an appetite among people in gaza for a new leadership that's not hamas. but i put it to this official that here in israel, everybody knows somebody who was kidnapped, who was killed on october 7th inside of gaza. everybody knows many, many people who were killed by israeli bombs, and while the prime minister of israel talks about the importance of not just demilitarizing gaza, but also deradicalizing, i asked him, does it feel like israel is creating the conditions for radicalization inside gaza given the scale of civilian casualties, given the scale of the destruction. he said it's going to be on the international community to provide a lot of money to rebuild gaza and try to rebuild the future there. ana. >> raf sanchez, thank you very much for your reporting amid all the fighting. there are still 137 hostages inside gaza, and now christopher, we're learning that israel is considering flooding the tunnels beneath gaza where we believe some of those hostages are being held. so what's the calculation here? wouldn't this be a death sentence for hostages? >> can't explain it. can't explain the tactics they've employed up to this point, both from the counterterrorism perspective, they're not effective at all, and everything that he kofd about radicalization they're recruiting the next two generations of hamas fighters for sure. not when there were hostages likely being held down there. it's a tactic that's been utilized before in the region, but it would certainly put the hostages into peril especially not knowing their exactly location. so that would be of real concern. >> at last check, there were about 20 women and two children still being held hostage in gaza. why do you think hamas has refused to release them? >> yeah, i think it's been talked about quite a bit. some of them were victims of rape likely and the concern is that their stories are going to get out. you know, that is a concern for hamas because they are winning the information war right now. israel quickly went from victim to villain, and october 7th as we spoke about the last time, has been eclipsed by their activity. so having the hostages come out and talk about how barbaric they were treated both on october 7th and since and that they were not treated like human beings, it's a human rights violation. hostage taking is a human rights violation. >> some of the hostages who have been released have now returned to almost completely destroyed to learning their family members were killed. can you talk to us about what is next for those hostages as they try to reenter society? >> yeah, so in the united states after we failed in 2013 to '15 with the hosta