any minute now we could hear from the ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy who has been meeting behind closed doors with senators pleading for new aid. we have learned that one republican walked out of the meeting early. what does that tell us? >> there is a lot going on the hill right now. the house rules committee is gearing up to gavel in. the republicans are locking down the votes to get the support they need for the biden impeachment hearing and a vote could come up any time. and we are closely watching a federal courthouse in new york where expelled former congressman george santos is expected to soon show up. we are learning about new deal that there is a plea deal he is seeking. with sara sidner and john berman, i'm kate bolduan, and this is cnn "news central." and breaking this morning, ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy is behind closed doors with the u.s. senators at this moment pleading for new money to fight vladimir putin. he says that the money is crucial for ukrainian survival and right now, it is being held up by u.s. politics. he could come out to speak any minute now, and we are keeping a close eye on that. we just learned that a republican senator walked out of this meeting early. cnn's manu raju is watching this on capitol hill, and j.d. vance could not be bothered to stay the whole time, manu? >> he walked out and said his mind has not been changed and he is one of the skeptics who would deny the aid, and another senator who decided not to go to the meeting because of the opposition of the aid to ukraine, but zelenskyy has a high hurdle here to green light the aid to ukraine amid a separate dispute with the changing immigration laws to deal with the migrant crisis at the border with mexico. they want a deal on immigration first before they agree to more aid to ukraine. so even while zelenskyy is making the pitch, we don't expect many minds to be changed, including when we caught up with congressman lange as if they would be amenable to more aid, and could you punt on immigration and approve -- >> no, no, no. again. we have a responsibility not the united states of america, and that would be going back to my home state and saying that we care about people in another country rather than the people in our own needs. we need to pay attention to our own needs before we deal with other countries. no way to get it done this week. >> is there any way to get this done? >> it will go into a resolution of 2024 before this is actually going to be resolved. >> reporter: the senators are starting to come out, and early read is that he gave remarks and took some questions, and senator thom tillis, he got a warm reception, and the resources that he needs to win the war, and received some questions about corruption in ukraine and if the aid was to buy yachts and whatever, and those concerns were answered head-on, and this debate over whether it can be reached, but ominous side of senator johnson who zelenskyy is going to meet with in a matter of moments he said that he would be prepared to send the house home for the christmas holiday if there is no way to get a deal in the senate is within reach. he said, what do i have the house twiddle the thumbs while waiting for the senate to act. so the reality is that it could very well wait until next year, and the question is what does it mean for the future of ukraine. >> manu, there is a microphone there behind you where he can take questions, and we will go right back there when president zelenskyy comes out. and now, we will keep an eye on the house rules committee, because any moment the committee is going to vote on formalizing an impeachment inquiry into president biden. this is centering around the business dealings of his son hunter, and that investigation has been going on in congress and the house for months already, and now with this step, the push by the house republicans will gain strength and power. cnn's lauren fox is tracking this. she is back with us. lauren, the house rules committee, and i am told that they have gavelled in, and what is going to happen here? >> we expect that the house rules committee is going to approve this moving forward, but what is significant is what happens on the floor tomorrow when it comes up with a vote, and the question is the house republicans going to be 100% unified behind this move to launch officially an impeach ment inquiry. and you remember that house speaker said that he would look into the inquiry. but in many ways it does not change the work that the three committees have been doing, but on the other hand, it does send the signal that the republicans are united behind this effort. i want to distinguish that the house republicans might be open to voting for an impeachment inquiry, because in the minds of some of those who are skeptical before, they believe that this is an effort and a way to get more information from the biden administration, from the white house, and they want to continue working through and getting the information they need for the inquiry. but on the other hand, you have a lot of republicans who are still arguing that this is different than a vote to impeach joe biden, and many of those republicans who are running in swing districts still say that they have to get more evidence. they have to understand a close tie between the president and that money that was coming from foreign governments, and they want to see a direct tie that has not been established yet. that is a key difference here between the impeachment inquiry and vote to impeachment president biden and tomorrow, of course, the vote on the impeachment inquiry, and again, kate, the question is at the end of the investigation, what do the republicans do then? kate? >> what do they do or find or not find, and we know one thing that is far out. but today, the whole effort is going to gain some new steam with this vote and tomorrow with the vote on the floor. good to see you, lauren. sara? >> the house judicial special counsel normi ieisen is here to discuss this, and you always bring the heat, so what do you see with this particular impeachment inquiry? >> sara, thanks for having me back. the biggest issue with this impeachment inquiry is that after years of looking, including an intense investigation since the republicans took over the house of representatives, there is no evidence of joe biden engaging in any financial or other impropriety that would give rise to an impeachment or even an impeachment inquiry. the republicans are making claims about biden's involvement in pressing for the ouster of a corrupt prosecutor in ukraine, but sara, we looked at that in the first trump impeachment, and there is no there there. and many authorities have said so. they are claiming that the payments were illegitimate, and they turn out the be loans or the payments for the son's truck, and there is simply no connection of joe biden's wrongdoing, and so therefore no basis for the impeachment or even an inquiry. >> but norm, the republicans say, but, look, we are on a fact-finding mission, and the impeachment inquiry is how we will get tot the fact, and doe it make sense to you? >> it doesn't, because the nature of impeachment is that you have to have some predicate, some indication of wrongdoing to even have an inquiry, and that is the reason that kevin mccarthy was not able to put an inquiry on the floor for a vote. he simply declared they were going to have an inquiry, and i think that in particular for those 17 members of the house of representatives from districts that voted for joe biden, this is a very uncomfortable vote. that is the reason for delay, because not just democrats or partisans, but independent observers, and even republican members like congressman ken buck say that there is no connection of joe biden's connection to wrongdoing, and how can you open the inquiry, if there is no showing of the wrongdoing after intense investigation? >> so i wanted to talk to you about and noticed at looking at the language of this potential impeachment inquiry is almost verbatim the same kind of language used for the inquiry into donald trump in 2019 with one glaring difference. the gop version today leaves out language mandating that the investigation be transparent. what does that say about this inq inquiry? >> well, i think that it is an unfortunate omission. the transparency is an essential part of looking at what they are doing, and to me, it is allowing inference that the house republicans don't want people to see behind the curtain to have the full transparency, because they have found no basis to open an impeachment inquiry. consider the contrast with 2019 when you had a whistle-blower later proven to be correct saying that donald trump had shaken down ukrainian president zelenskyy by coincidence in congress today, and shaken him down by withholding nearly $300 million desperately needed u.s. aid. nothing like that here. and if you can open up a inquiry, they can say that we are going toep up one into me or you or me or anyone, that is not the united states of america, and you need some indication of wrongdoing, and not complete goose eggs, and that is all the republicans have here, and that why they don't want transparency. >> norm eisen specken plainly here on cnn. thank you. and now, george santos is arriving at court, and could a plea deal be on the horizon? and now s, president zelensy at capitol hill. and now s, more fighting as israrael says ththey h have e fe weweapons stasashes. moments ago, expelled congressman george santos arrived at a federal court in new york attending a status hearing as a new court filing revealing that he is in talks with prosecutors about a possible plea deal. brynn gingras has more. >> yes, 23 federal charges is what the former congressman is facing. and among those, he is accused of stealing from his donors to enrich his own life and personal lifestyle. today is a status conference hearing and in the past, what we have seen is that the prosecutors are turning over pages and pages of evidence, and some of those are pages of documents, and we expect more exchanges of documents, but in what the prosecutors have hinted is that they want to strike a deal. they have asked for another status hearing in 30 days and the goal is to resolving this matter without the need of a trial. and george santos hinted at this himself when he spoke to our local affiliate wcbs. >> the plea is not off of the table, and so there is conversations of what happened in congress. everybody should be afraid of going to jail, because it is not a pretty place, and i want to work hard to avoid that as much as possible. >> and keep in mind that his campaign manager have struck deals on the charges they were facing, so it is possible that there is a deal imminent. this hearing is getting started this morning in a little bit, and we are waiting to see if santos, himself, will speak to us. we will keep you posted. back to you. >> thank you, brynn. john? this morning, russian opposition leader alexei navalny is still meeting and the white house wants answers. his lawyer said that he had quote left their colony, but they could not confirm where he is now, and the white house says they are deeply concerned. fred pleitgen is with us for the latest. fred, what is the status here? >> it is completely unknown. one thing to point out is how difficult it is for navalny's lawyers to get that little bit of information from the russian prison system, and more difficult for them to find alexei navalny, and for the last two days he was supposed to appear on a video link from where he is, and he has not shown up in the past two days. the people inside of that prison said there were issues with the electricity and then they did admit that alexei navalny is no longer listed in the prison, and then they admitted that he had left that prison, and that is how far his lawyers have gotten that he had left that prison, but it is unclear where he is. we know that he was supposed to be transferred to another jail which has a tougher regime than the one he has been in so far. it is not unheard of for prisoners when they are in the process of being transferred to be off comms, but they don't know if that is the case, but they simply don't know. all of this is extremely concerning for the folks at navalny's organization and his family as well. he has had some serious health issues in jail over the last couple of weeks and his daughter spoke last night on ac360, and she said this. >> if i were to get a message out to him, i don't know. i just want, i want the people not just him, but i want others to know that i have hope and for other people to have hope that we can change the regime if we work together. >> so there's dasha navalny saying that she has hope, but at this point in time, she simply and they do not know where he is, and maybe it is a transfer going on, but they do not know. >> fred plightgeeitgen on the p of alexei navalny. and not far from the white house is the senate leaders chuck schumer and mitch mcconnell who are walking out, and they have chosen not to speak with reporters. what are you seeing, manu raju. >> yes, we did nexpect chuck schumer and mitch mcconnell to talk to the press, but maybe they will meet after the next group of meetings. he is going to be meeting with the speaker of the house hakeem jeffries, and perhaps he did not want to meet with the press at this critical moment, but we did meet with the senators from the early readout of what happened in the room here, and we are told that he talked about the border issue, and that is what is holding up the aid with ukraine, and having to do with the u.s. border issue that republicans are insisting. hold on a moment -- senator mcconnell! senator mcconnell, did the meeting change your approach at all? okay. so we will see if it is going to change anything, and what we have heard is that if you don't deal with it, you will see a influx of migrants from ukraine, because it may collapse. >> it was a very powerful meeting, and president zelenskyy made it clear how he needs help, but if he is going to get the help, he will win this war, and he outlined in great detail, a, the help he needs, and how lit help him win, and how many of the republican colleagues are talk about how they are winning this war, and if they help, and if he can get the help he needs, we will win. and yet we all made it clear that if we lose, putin win, and this is very, very dangerous for the united states. so we cannot let putin influence through any surrogate what is, what we need to do for ukraine. he also made one other point, that he needs aid quickly. if we don't give the aid quickly, several things will happen. first the military needs, but second europe and many other allies are going to say, what is going on here, they are not giving them the aid. thank you. >> reporter: john, are you still with me here? so chuck schumer saying that the money has to be dealt with immediately, and he did not give a time frame, and that is one of the major questions if congress can deal with this before they leave town for the year, but the white house says it needs to be done this month, and otherwise, ukraine is going to be kneecapped. and that is what i tried to ask chuck schumer is if it has to be done this month, because right now, there is no indication that congress will be reaching a deal on the separate issue of immigration before aid can be approved and there is indication it is going to be punted into next year, and what is going to happen if that situation does occur which is widely occurring in the capital. he said quickly -- but what is "quickly" mean? that is the problem debated in the capital, and this is the issue that was debated behind closed doors, how soon ukraine will fall if they are not rescued with hundreds obillions of aid. >> thank you, manu raju. and now, president zelenskyy is on to a meeting with house speaker mike johnson who is the individual most standing in the way of the quick, immediate u.s. aid to ukraine. and now with us is retired u.s. general, retired u.s. general mark hertling. and president zelenskyy is a seasoned politician now, and he knows that the aid is being held up by u.s. politics, and without judging it, it is u.s. politics holding up the aid, and how does a foreign leader approach that? >> i think that zelenskyy more than perhaps any other leader in a long, long time has been enmeshed in u.s. politics for reasons having nothing to do with him and his country. it has happened under president trump and now president biden, and so he is a vis savvy about and americans need to immediately send that aid, and politics are in the way, and it is unfortunate, but sadly, it has to be dealt with. immigration is now tied to ukraine aid. >> he mentioned, we are told, the border issues and he said, you will end up with more ukrainian immigrant, and can he say, hey, separate the border issues or make a deal on the border and get me my money? >> i think that he has to tread carefully here, and he will. he is going to acknowledge that there a border question, and he is not going to say dealing or fix it now, because he does not want to be seen as meddling in the politics, but at the same time he is making a good case of why we should support ukraine, because if putin wins in ukraine, we will well face him in one of the nato allies, and because it is going to cost more money, and lives at stake. >> and general, there was a headline in new york times that struck me, and i want to paraphrase it, and it is the military leaders meet after the failed ukrainian counter offensive. and the word they used was the failed counter offensive, and so the meetings are happening at time when ukraine, and maybe you don't think it is failed, but it is certainly not making progress that it hoped for in the counter offensive, and how do you change that? >> yeah, john, first, i would like to say that the use of the word "failed" in that article was unnecessary and incorrect by the way. ukraine has significantly gained back some of the territory that they lost from russia. they did not gain all of their objectives, but that is truly where we are right now as the ambassador herbst just said. that are at an inflection point and existential threat, and they have to have aid. if congress delays this, and does not vote for it before christmas, it is going to delay it exponentially before the new year, and ukraine is facing a russia that has generated more manpower and ammunition from the allies like iran and north korea and generated more actions on the battlefield, and ukraine has to go somewhat on an active defense mode in the next couple of months while russia attempts to attack the infrastructure in winter just like before, and ukraine has to defend the russian counter attacks and they need arms and ammunition to do that and they have been in a tough war for two years and just to continue to exist, they have to have this aid from the united states. it is critical, and ukraine at an inflection point. congress is tieing this to aid to the border cries is and getting more funds to the border, but it is a problem that has existed for decades. ukraine right now needs money right now. >> the same new y"new york time article used the word "failed" is also saying they need to hold and strengthen their forces to make sure russia doesn't make any further inroads into the area. >> yes, it is a good strategy to continue to defend on the ground, and reduce the amount of maneuver warfare that ukraine has been attempting, and hold the positions on the ground while continuing to strike key targeting areas of russia, ammunition cache, fuel caches and troop movements and key communication lines, and that is going to be what the u.s. generals and the ukrainian generals will be discussing over the comi