today on "inside politics," expelled. the house just voted to kick george santos out of congress. his response to the historic move, to hel ll with this place we'll go live to capitol hill in moments. plus airstrikes, combat and bloodshed as the israel-hamas collapses and fighting vums. this as an explosive new report is out about what israel knew about the hamas terror plot more than a year before the attack, and why did they dismiss those warnings. i'm going to ask the reporters who broke the story. and remembering a trailblazer. sandra day o'connor, the first justice died today at the age of 93. tributes are pouring in honoring her life and legacy both on and off the bench. i'm dana bash. let's go behind the headlines and "inside politics." we start with that breaking news on capitol hill. george santos just became the third lawmaker since the civil war to be kicked out of the house of representatives by his peers. manu raju is on capitol hill. manu, wow. >> reporter: historic, unprecedented. it's something that's caused deep divisions within the republican ranks. ultimately, 105 republicans voted for his ousting. they needed 77 republicans to vote for george santos' expulsion. so they cleared that hurdle. 311-114. 290 were needed for the two-thirds majority, but never before in american history have we seen someone expel led from the house without being convictioned of a crime. the others expelled were members of the confederacy, which is why a lot of republicans had pause for concern. the speaker of the house himself announcing his opposition behind closed doors. he said he was concerned about the precedent set by an accusation, kicking him out of congress. but the leadership team did not whip the vote and tell their members how to vote they should vote their conscious. this effort led by republican freshmen who believe santos was unfit for office and was pushing for him to get there and now will contend with the fact this narrow majority has gone even narrower. before mike johnson could only lose four votes, bnow he can ony lose three votes making this such a significant move. and also this seat will now be subject to a special election in a district that joe biden carried. some something that republicans could lose. the house democratic superpac just announced plans to spend big in that district to try to turn it blue ahead of the special election, so the political ramifications so significant amid this historic and unprecedented vote that santos left congress no longer a member of congress, and now has to worry about his trial date. >> our panel is here with their reporting and insights. david chalian, lauren fox, eva mcend and laura lopez with the pbs news hour. lauren, you are on capitol hill all day every day. i know you have encountered george santos many, many times, and have been following this vote. did it surprise you? >> i thought it was really interesting because it was kind of surprising some of the members who were in the room. i was in the chamber as the vote began. you saw members standing back, looking up at the board, counting the votes as they came in. it was going to be a close call. you had republican leadership saying behind closed doors and publicly that they had reservations and concerns about setting this precedent, ousting someone from congress, who hadn't been convicted of a crime. i think that was really part of the reason a that it felt like the momentum last night and this morning was going in santos' favor. but then again, you had so many members who were concerned about setting a precedent where you have someone who is accused of so many things in this ethics report and gets to remain in congress. there would have been a a precedent set is either way. >> that's a really good point. tony gonzales, his fellow republican, he's out of texas, tweet ed this this morning. today is the day we can santos. it was actually despite that. >> that's texas for expel. >> thank you, david chalian. that, obviously, proved to be true, but it wasn't clear going in. >> i think that what was really fascinating was watching the house republican leadership decide at the end to vote against this measure. and to save santos. it just seems there was a last-minute attempt, don't want to describe motives here, but not to have their major ity get narrower. at least of all the leaders, the most interesting, she's from new york and surrounded with all those frontline, vulnerable republicans in these tough districts that delivered the majority to the house republicans in '22. and she also was saying, no, santos can stay, when they have all been calling for him to go. it just seemed to me they were together saying, hey, as the leaders here, we do think this becomes a larger problem. maybe it's the present argument, but it's a larger political headache for them to have the narrower majority. at the end of the day, what are we talking about here? this guy, santos was for a year just a black mark on the institution, a black mark for the house republican conference. and obviously, had had just worn out his time for any good will with enough of his fellow republicans. >> to david's point, the spectacle of congressman santos was really a natural outgrowth defined by chaos, alternative facts, really stressing our institutions. and we saw today the house take a vote at least and say, listen, we have got to abide by somewhat of a minimum standard. i also want to mention the swonts. there was this group the concerned citizens of the district. they have been organizing for months for this outcome. really putting pressure on the republicans in long island to do all the they could to get rid of congressman santos. a lot of what we saw today was a result of that. >> i want to go back to what you were alioouding to, and ta is despite the fact that the vote to expel him succeeded, the last-minute push by the leadership, including the house speaker, which the people don't know this, it is unusual for the speakerer of the house to actually cast a vote. the fact that he did and announced ahead of time he would and then the other leaders in the republican conference followed suit, was very interesting. let's listen to what dave joyce, a member of the republican conference said going into this vote. >> he told us to vote our conscious. that's what his conscious told him to do. but for me, it was a pretty simple case having been there since the beginning. and one thing about 25 years as a prosecutor before i got to this place, the good thing about this case, i donlt need anybody to explain it to me. the numbers speak by themselves. >> the numbers is the back story. he's not only in big trouble in the courts with the prosecutions, but there was this damning ethics report that came out a few weeks ago. >> that ethics roeport outlined that he used campaign funds for trips, for lavish trips, for botox treatments, clothes, and he also said this came down to theft. members who voted to oust him said it was very clear based on the ethics report and what we heard about the federal trial that santos was stealing money from his campaign donors, and the e-mail was sent out saying he was strollen from by santos' campaign. that appeared to also push republican votes back against santos. but i think that the point that you made, maybe it was at the core of this. ultimately, they department want their majority to get smaller. speaker johnson is having a hard time already with republicans and just keeping support in line for him and what he. thes to see pass. with another republican out of the house, that's going to make his job a lot more. >> in the short-term, the question is whether making the majority smaller now will give them a little bit more of a chance to hold on to it in the 2024 elections. i just want to go through a little bit of what we were just referring to. campaign funds used on botox, lavish hotels, onlyfans, knowingly filed false reports, substantial evidence of fraudulent campaign loans. so that's what he's been accused of. in a bipartisan ethics committee. this is what he said on the way out. he said, after the vote, it's over, the house spoke. that's their vote. they just set new dangerous precedent for themselves. . why would i want to stay here. to hell with this place. >> over the last 48 hours, reporters have repeatedly pressed santos to explain those purchase, to explain line by line. if he says it's not fair, explain what's not fair about it. and time and time again, her said i'm not going to go line by line. there will be a time and place in the future. if you're a member of congress and you're on the fence about whether or not you think santos should stay, whether or not you think he did it, then if the guy accused of doing something doesn't even want to explain that there is some kind of reason behind this ethics report that he wasn't guilty, then that would be the opportunity to do it. and he didn't take multiple opportunities. i do think it's worth reminding viewers he was given those chances to explain himself. >> that's very important. he is saying, not just to hell with this place, but he's going to try to take some of his now former republican colleagues d down. he said i will have fun on my way out. don't worry about it. and he said that he is going to name names. i have plenty of receipts. >> so he's going to try the madison cawthorn route, it seems. i don't know how far that will get him. it won't get him his seat back. something that interests me is now that he has to pivot to focusing on the all of his criminal troubles, is this he no longer has this title sort of as a shield. as a bargaining chip for prosecutors. i have covered mall feasant elected officials in the past, and they have been able to negotiate lesser time is i will resign and won't run again. now congressman santos doesn't have that. >> let's look ahead to what we were alluding to, which is the fact that there is now an empty seat. and it's in the new york, i'm prepared to undertake the solemn responsibility of filling the vacancy in the third district. the people of long island deserve nothing less. >> i don't think she means she's going to fill the vacancy, but she's going to call for a special election. but you heard what speaker johnson was bringing the gavel down, he ordered the clerk to inform the governor of new york of the now vacant seat because she has to call the special election. there are no primaries in the special election. the party committees, for fans of bah back room deal, they get together and decide who their nominees are going to be. so it will be interesting to see if indeed people who have already declared their intention to run for the seat in november are selected and run in the special and get a jump start on their election. that's going to be coming up within the next 80 days or so. we're going to have a special election. >> remember, this was one of those seats that republicans took out of democratic terse ta terrain, i should say. let's look at that. in 2020 joe biden won the area that is now the third district. 53% to donald trump's a 45%. that's where this special selection going to be held. for what is now a seat. >> it was previously held by a democrat of new york. and i just got information from a source he's going to be meeting tonight with some queens democrats talking to chairs and pote potentially ready fadying for a. democrats would like it because he has experience in that district. he's a more moderate democrat. they lost that seat, they think, because he decided not to run. so this is one of those multiple seats in new york where democrats are hope ing they can flip it back. >> everybody, standby. next, we're going to look at what's happening in israel. the truce between iz rattle and hamas is over. once again, explosions are rocking gaza. we're live on the ground, next. plus we'll look at a damning report about what israeli intelligence knew about hamas' plans before its barbaric murder of more than 1,000 israelis on october 7th. s. now to the middle east where explosions are rock ing the region. this video from moments ago shows flares over the gaza skyline after the week-long pause expired. also just in to cnn, video of israel's iron dome intercepting incoming hamas rockets near tel aviv today. there's growing fear about what all this means for the 137 hostages israel says are still being held captive by hamas terrorists. cnn's oren liebermann is covering all of the developments from tel aviv. let's start with what is happening opt the ground with the resumed military campaign. >> reporter: israel promised it would resume its campaign in gaza, and that's what we're seeing. punish ing strikes focused on southern gaza and rafah, which is the area of the border crossing. according to israel, they have hit more than 200 terror targets across those areas. the challenge is that southern gaza is exactly where israel told palestinians from northern gaza to evacuate to earlier in this war. according to health authorities in gaza, more than 100 palestinians have been killed as a result of israeli strikes and that put more pressure on a health system is nearing the brink of collapse with hospitals overflowing. the u.n. called a resumption of fighting catastrophic for gaza. meanwhile, we saw launches towards central tel aviv. we saw off the balcony where i'm standing at least ten iron dome intercepters launch ed at the rockets fired here. it's the fist time we have seen rockets launched this fire in more than two weeks. so both sides, as they promise ed, certainly resuming fighting here. there's no signs that this will lelt up here as israel continues in its goal of trying to destroy hamas. >> no sign that they are going to let up, but are there any signs of negotiations going on to dry to get these hostages out, which you'd think would create another pause this that fighting you're talking about? >> reporter: so there are ongoing negotiations between israel and hamas indirectly. those are being led by qatar and egypt and the united states. the goal is to get back to the truce agreement, which had very specific guidelines and requirements for every 10 women and children hamas released, there would be another pause of 24 hours in fighting. the question is, does hamas and other organizations in gaza have ten women and children to meet that requirement? israel claims they do for at least one or two more days of pause. hamas says they don't. they wanted to talk to israel about the release of elderly men, as well as men and women of fighting age. so younger men and women but israel rejected is all attempts a at trying to have those discussions. a state department official said negotiations are ongoing and expressed some level of optimism, perhaps even in the next day or two. but in terms of the military, there's no truce. the military is at war. >> as you have heard many more times than i, they argue d the only reason the hostages were able to come out is because of the military campaign. so we'll see what happens. oren liebermann, thank you for your reporting there. now we're going to go to a new bomb shell report in "the new york times." israeli officials knew hamas had an attack planned for october 7th more than a year before it happened. here's part of what that story said. the approximately 40-page document, which israeli authorities conamed jericho wall, outlined point by point the kind of devastating invasion that led to deaths of about 1,200 people. joining me now is one of the reporters of this blockbuster story. thank you so much for being here. i want to start by reading more about the report that you did. it says in part, hamas followed the blueprint with shocking precision. the document called for a barrage of rockets at the outset of the attack, drone os to knock out the security cameras and aught mated machine guns along the border and gunmen to pour into israel on motorcycles and foot, all of which happened on october 7. that is so chilling. this was a report, as you said, 40-page report, how far up the chain did it get as far as you know? and why wasn't it -- why didn't anybody heed to this or think it was actually possible in the highest levels of the government? >> this document, was not neglected. massive resources and efforts were put into the operations to get it. it was sent to israeli intelligence. that work data from hamas from the overall efforts of israeli intelligence to get as much as possible from hamas. this attack plan is very sophisticated. i don't remember any document that has so much secrets on israeli preparation for war than the cameras, the machine guns, it was not written by israeli defense establishment. it suggests it's not coming from open sources. but besides that, intelligence saw this document, except for one analyst that thought differently. israel intelligence, all the analysts that saw this said this is a road map. they don't have the capacity or experience. >> let me jump in there and your kreeg and coauthor of this story is now on with us. let me just add to what we just heard from ronan. this is also in your piece. underpinning all these failures was a single fatally inaccurate belief that hamas lack ed the capability to i attack and would not dare do so. that belief was so engrained in the government, officials said, they disregarded growing evidence to the contrary. adam? >> yeah, i think that's right. one of the themes was that israeli intelligence saw this document. in fact, i think it was a military official who said this document was a compass. and this is where they wanted to head, but they had not arrived there yet. and you know that the israeli government and the israeli military, while they are concerned about the document, they hadn't disregarded it. they put an fornous amount of time and effort into trying to understand it and understand hamas' capabilities. they came to this conclusion, and it's partly a failure of imagination that hamas wasn't capable of carrying out such a sophisticated attack. i have to tell you, i reported on 9/11 and al qaeda and bin laden. there are extraordinary parallels to what happened in the weeks leading up to 9/11 and how our government reacted to having that information. like the israelis, we had collected an enormous amount of intelligence about what al qaeda intended to do, but at end of the day, we failed to imagine. >> you brought that up. i just actually want to pull up what the 9/11 commission said. it's exactly to the point that you're making. the most important failure was one of imagination. we do not believe leaders understood the gravity of the threat. officials told us they understood the danger. we believe there was uncertainty as to whether this was just a new and especially venomous version of the ordinary terrorist threat in the united states had lived with for decades or if it was radically posing a threat beyond any experience. so it's a exactly as you just said. but ronan, the question is, not to say that people in america don't take security threats seriously. they absolutely do. but the existential threat that israel faces is just different given the geography and everything else that we have known since 1948 about israel. so the question is still why was there this disconnect between the people working so hard on this report and the preparedness or lack thereof inside the benjamin netanyahu government. i just want to remind our viewers of something that the prime minister put out there, but then deleted. this was on october 28th. so this was a few weeks after the october 7th attack. at no point was a warning given to prime minister benjamin netanyahu on hamas' intention to start to war. on the contrary, all the defense officials, including the heads of intelligence, assessed that hamas was deterred. this was the assessment submitted time after time to the prime mini