once again dredging up lies about the 2020 election, just six weeks before the iowa caucuses. this afternoon, trump accused president biden of, quote, waging an all-out war on american democracy, and his chain hand campaign handed out these signs, you can see it on the screen, "joe biden attacks democracy." the former president told supporters at another rally today that he hopes judges will let him prosecute the 2020 election, and encouraged them to go into ballot tabulating facile at this times in 2024 to, quote, guard the votes. kristen holmes has been following the trump campaign today. she's in cedar rapids, iowa, for us. kristen, what's the latest? >> reporter: yeah, jim, essentially, this is the most forcible rebuttal we've seen from former president trump to the argument that president biden has routinely made, that a second trump term would be a threat to democracy. he even vaguely referenced a speech that biden gave in september when he talked about maga republicans to be a threat to democracy and american institutions. listen to some of what trump had to say. >> so, if joe biden wants to make this race a question of which candidate will defend our democracy and protect our freedoms and i say to crooked joe and he is crooked, the most corrupt president we've ever had, we will win that fight, and we're going to win it very big, very big. >> reporter: so, jim, what exactly is he saying is a threat to democracy? he's touched on a number of things. he said it's about try ing toll control vehicles you drive, but most of what he has been focused on, unsurprisingly, is the allegations against him, the multiple indictments that he has faced, and this argument that he has continued to make donald trump, that this is election interference. saying that biden is interfering with democracy, he's been charged because of these subpoenas, indictments, arrests. that is the core of why he is saying that joe biden is having an assault on democracy. i also want to read to you one thing he said directly. he said his campaign is a, quote, righteous crusade to liberate our republican. clearly, here, a forceful rebuttal to what president biden has been arguing over and over again, that former president trump is a threat to democracy. we're going to be keep listening here, he's obviously still going, he seems to be going a little bit off-track, but we'll have ears open to listen to his messaging. a clear pivot to the general election, as he is leading in most polls here in iowa, just six weeks ahead of that caucus. >> yeah, sounds like a lot of classic trump projection there. he was the one that tried to overturn the 2020 election results, it was his supporters who tried to overturn the election results by storming the capitol, and so on on january 6th. and just to ask you a followup question, kristen, you had some new reporting this week, not everybody in the republican party is onboard with trump's renewed focus on obamacare. i think trump said earlier this week, something along the lines of, quote, obamacare sucks, but that's not what the polls show. >> well, jim, that is exactly what he said, he said that he wanted to come up with an alternative. first, he said he wanted to replace obamacare, then he wanted to come up with an alternative, which, a lot of republicans were alarmed by, given the fact that even when he was in the white house and they had a full control of republican po power in washington, they were unable to return obamacare. and another thing to mention here is that trump said he was going to come up with a health care plan, but never did present a plan there. but democrats are seizing on that, not surprising. obamacare is more popular, and it's not something that republicans really want to go after again unless there is a clear path. now, we'll show you, i think we have some of it cut here, but the biden campaign actually launched an ad in response to this, slamming trump, saying that he wants to take away health care. this has given them a new sense of ammunition in this potential general election match-up in 2024. >> yeah, the biden campaign will welcome that fight on obamacare. okay, kristen, thank you very much, reporting from iowa for us. we know we have many of these events coming up for you, so, we appreciate it. come very tough rulings in the trials of former president donald trump this week. a federal judge ruling the former president is not immune from criminal prosecution, just hours after a separate appeals court had a similar ruling on civil liability. let's discuss w. judge chatutkan did not mince words, writing, in part, trump's four-year service as commander in chief did not bestow on him the devivine right of kings. judge chutkan almost seems to relish, a little bit, soft of getting up in trump's grill, if i can use nonlegal parlance. >> she's a good writer. she's a tough writer. she's a very sharp judge. and in this case, a lot of these cases, turn, they win or they lose, on what happens before the trial. what the judges do on these big legal questions. donald trump was making a very big bid here to get this case tossed, saying that because he had been the president at the time that this had happened, he had some protections, he wanted there to be an immunity because of the constitution, because of the presidency, and judge chutkan said, this just isn't in the constitution. it's not what the people who wrote the constitution wanted to allow for presidents. and that if former presidents didn't have the ability to be prosecuted for things that they did in office, then that would not be part of what the constitution wants us to have as equal justice under law. she says it's essential to be able to bring cases like this to have justice work in this country you and so, she denied these claims from donald trump, these arguments he was making, that this is a really big issue that has to get settled, and now we have the judge ruling on this and saying, let's go, we're going to move to trial. there are a couple other things she has to look at and say whether she will, you know, toss certain charges in this case, and some other things, he's argued that this was the big one. >> yeah, sounds like the trump defense strategy is to say immunity then, immunity now, immunity forever. he wants immunity from everything. what's your analysis of what came down from the judge yesterday? >> i think it's a very good analysis, very sound, just like in the civil matter, the court of appeals recently was very sound, too. i do think from my legal analyst perspective, it's a little bit of much ado about nothing about the constitutionality issue. it's so fact-specific to this particular president, i mean, yeah, it will arise again the next time we have a former president running for re-election that's charged with 91 counts. so, he's trying to yield the first amendment as his defense here. it's all pretty much a red herring, because common sense, non-lawyers would say, of course a former president can't have a permanent get out of jail free card. it makes perfect sense not to do that. but our legal system tries to be so far that no matter how off the argument is, you have to wind through the system. and of course this will cause more delay, but on a legal grounding, it's very, very solid. >> i want to ask you about that in just a moment. we saw a similar ruling from an appeals court on the issue of these civil lawsuits, sounds like similar outcome. >> yeah, a lot of people, including judge chutkan, were waiting to see what the d.c. circuit would do on these civil lawsuits. a bunch of people filed lawsuits against donald trump, trying to hold him accountable for january 6th, that attack on the capitol. my count, eight lawsuits, at the very least, were all on hold, including a lawsuit before judge chul chutkan. he sai she said, this decision come out from the d.c. circuit, it say, there's no ability to have immunity broadly for what donald trump was saying and doing before he was president. there's a different between presidential speech and campaign speech, even if you are stitting president running for re-election. there is going to be an opportunity for donald trump in these lawsuits to go and argue the facts, whether or not what he said on january 6th was part of his campaign or whether it was part of his governance, but that decision is another really big one that judge chutkan even cited in her criminal case decision. we have an appeals court weighing in now on this question of immunity, and those cases, too, are going to be able to go forward, at least a little bit, for now. >> yeah. and shan, do you think we're going to see this issue of presidential immunity end up at the supreme court? and to that end, it goes back to the point you were saying earlier, if they keep throwing these things out in front of these judges, various challenges on all sorts of different grounds, i mean, one would think, at some point, they're going to be successful in delaying some of these trials, and maybe the federal election interference trial that has been scheduled for march may not happen in march if they're success successful. what do you think? >> i think there's plate good chance they'll succeed. the one in florida, about the classified documents issue, it's complicated, just on the logistics, because there's classified material. in d.c., no question jack smith tried to really streamline this, maximize the chances of doing it fast. chat chutkan's moving very fast. i think the supreme court will probably take the case, just because it screams constitutional issue, i wish they wouldn't take it. >> yeah. and the immunity question in the criminal case in d.c. with judge chutkan january 6th, that has to be settled before trump goes to trial. it has to be as a right for a criminal defendant. >> yeah, they could decline to take it to the court of appeals, but i don't think they will. >> do you think the supreme court could say, yes, you have immunity in that case? >> i think it's legally very unlikely. they haven't been fans of his arguments and this seems like a no brainer. >> allll right, very good. thank you, guys, really appreciate it. coming up, we're following some breaking news. a news conference in los angeles under way right now. we're going to show it to you -- there it is -- about a possible serial killer targeting the homeless. we'll break that down for you in just a few moments. you're live in the "cnn newsroom." breaking news. police in los angeles have just made a major announcement in a manhunt for a possible serial kill whole allegedly murdered a number of homeless people in recent days. camila bernal is with us from l.a. what are we learning? >> reporter: hey, jim. so, now we know that a man has been arrested, not just for three killings, but authorities now saying they believe this man is responsible for four different killings. killing three people that were unhoused here in los angeles, and then also following someone home, robbing them, and killing them, as well. and so, police now saying this is a man they hope to prosecute after this arrest. that is the current focus. i want you to listen to what the police chief just said as this press conference is ongoing. >> this afternoon, it is with tremendous pride that i announce their collective work, in concert with the work of los angeles sheriff's department, beverly hills police department, has resulted in the identification and arrest of the individual we believe is responsible for these vicious crimes. tragically, that same individual is also believed responsible for the murder that occurred during a follow-home robbery, making this suspect responsible, we believe, based on our investigation, for the murder of four individuals over the course of four days. >> and this is a los angeles resident, 33 years old. authorities announcing that arrest just moments ago. and saying that this has been the work of the task force of everybody coming together, trying to identify this person. they were also able to identify a vehicle, and that's really what led them to that arrest. they say that vehicle was spotted in the different areas where they believe the unhoused people were murdered. and say that during this past week, what this man essentially did was walk up to homeless individuals, shot them, and left. these were people who were sleeping on the streets, who were alone, and who were in open areas, whether that was a sidewalk or an alley, and that's how authorities dwan sort of connecting the dots, by seeing these killings. they say the first one happened on sunday at around 3:00 in the morning. the second, on monday just after 5:00 in the morning, and wednesday, 2:30 p.m. they said that the victims were two hispanic men and one black man. now, we do not know the identity of that fourth person that authorities now say was killed, as well. we're obviously getting all of that information right now as that press conference is ongoing, but this, of course, had taken los angeles over the last 24 hours, because this is a city that houses so many unhoused individuals, and so, authorities just asking people to be careful, to contact family members that they knew lived on the streets, to really try to warn them and to make sure they had a safe place to sleep at night, because so many people were worried about what could happen over the next couple of days. now, authorities saying they have the person they believe is responsible. they'll now focus on that prosecution and what comes next. they still say they do not have a motive, they do know that he was targeting unhoused individuals, but in terms of why he was doing it, they say that's obviously part of that ongoing investigation, and eventual prosecution, jim. >> all right, very disturbing case. camila bernal, thank you very much for that report. we appreciate it. israel says it has hit more than 400 targets in the 24 hours since the truce ended. can they forge another agreement to stop the fighting? a live report from tel aviv is next. now to the latest in the middle east. intense fighting has picked back up in gaza after a nearly week-long truce ended between israel and hamas. the israeli military says it carried out more than 400 strikes in ga saza since the tr expired yesterday. israel's recalled its team of negotiators from qatar, saying talks are at a dead end over the remaining hostages held in gaza. matthew chance is live in tel aviv with more on all this. matthew, any sense as to how israelis are reacting to this collapse in hostage negotiations? >> reporter: well, i think israelis are divided about it. obviously it's disappointment there haven't been more handovers of hostages, that truce, that pause in the fighting to allow for those hostage releases, it's been very successful for seven consecutive days. and, you know, and then it basically fell apart. and for the past two days, there's been a return to the kind of intensive violence that we saw in the period before the truce was declared. and so, there's been a lot of impact on palestinians on the ground. there have been up to 400, according to the israeli military, strikes on separate targets inside the gaza strip. and, of course, the impact that has on the hostages is something that many israelis are profoundly concerned about. there was a vigil earlier today in the center of tel aviv here, where thousands of people turned out to show their support for the 130 or so hostages that are still inside the gaza strip. some of them chanting, you know, kind of messages, such as, "everyone out now, everyone now, everyone now." that's what everyone was chanting. and a lot of criticism that we heard from people inside that crowd of thousands of people that the government is not doing enough to prioritize the release of those hostages. that's what they want. of course, the country is divided on that. united in the sense that everybody wants the hostages released. but they're divided in how the best way to do that is. there are some in the government that believes the current run of hostage releases has run its course and now is the time to apply as much military pressure as possible to hamas in order to force them back to the negotiating table and to get more hostages set free, but you know, regardless, it's a very political, emotional issue in this country right now, as you can imagine, jim. >> absolutely. and any sense as to how the hostage talks might get restarted? is it just a matter of time, at this point, matthew? what do you think? >> well, i think ultimately, it is, and i think ultimately, there will have to be further negotiate for more hostages to be let out, i mean, that's what the israeli government says they're doing. they're saying they've restarted this military campaign. with the express purpose of putting as much military pressure as possible on hamas, because they say that's the best chance that the hostages inside the gaza strip have of being set free. and so, you know, at some point, it's going to have to be a meeting again of the various mediators and various sides to try and hammer out some kind of deal. the sticking point, as far as the israeli sources that i've been speaking to are concerned, is the ratio, or one of the sticking points, the ratios of palestinian prisoners released for every hostage. it's 3 to 1 at the moment. so, ten hostages released, 30 palestinians released from israeli jails. when it comes to the men, many of them who are serving in the israeli military who are held hostage, hamas are going to want a much higher ratio. they're going to want more prisoners released than they get for the women and children. so, that is just one of the obstacles facing the mediators in this current period. >> all right, matthew chance, thank you for that reporting, as always. we appreciate it. nearly two months after hamas' brutal assault on israel, new details are emerging on the massive failure of israeli intelligence. security experts have wondered how israel, with such a strong reputation for its intelligence community, could have missed a massive terrorist attack that killed some 1,200 people. this week, "the new york times" reported that israeli officials knew of hamas' plan more than a year before the attack. israeli authorities obtained a blueprint, but dismissed the plans as aspirational. joining me now to talk about this is former defense secretary william cohen. secretary cohen, great to see you, as always. what is your sense of all of this, the israeli government, intelligence community, you know this all too well. very strong reputation globally for the intelligence apparatus in israel. how did they miss this? how did they get it wrong? >> i think it's a combination of arrogance and ignorance. arrogance that they had very little regard for hamas, thinking that it was all aspirational, they didn't have any particularly talent or capability. and so, it was sort of -- we can handle it under any circumstances, they're not really a threat. the ignorance comes about in terms of, they didn't have sufficient evidence for them, at least, except for one woman in the -- woman analyst who said, this is something, it's very close to what we know they've been planninging and yet she was disregarded. so, they just assumed that they were superior, that hamas were inferior, incapability, and you had one woman who had the intelligence, she had it, others had it, but she believed that her assessment was the accurate one, and she was dismissed. a woman has to prove herself much more capable than a man in order to be called successful. >> and i -- this is another key question in all of this. when it comes to accountability, israeli officials have said they will investigate the intelligence failures when the war is over. isn't that a bit of a copout, considering how long that could potentially take? the israelis said they're going