house republicans escalating probe into president biden. a couple hours from now, the full house will vote on formalizing a biden impeachment inquiry. the gop's probe has failed to show links between biden and his son's questionable business dealings. republicans think the resolution will give them more leverage. this morning hunter biden showed up at the capitol right outside as you see, offering to testify publicly in the probe. but republicans want a closed door interview first. so, now, they say they're going to pursue a contempt of congress referral against hunter biden. manu raju has been following this. you've been a busy man on capitol hill today. what do we expect to see in the coming hours? >> reporter: we expect the republicans will get the vote to authorize the impeachment inquiry. the inquiry has been going on since september, when then speaker of the house kevin mccarthy announced this investigation would go forward. they don't need a vote to authorize the inquiry. republicans are trying to show forward momentum. they argue they can have more power if it gets dragged into court. the reality is they want to show momentum. they want to show republican unity behind the idea of an impeachment inquiry. what's clear in talking to so many republican members is there is not unity about whether joe biden should, in fact, be impeached because of the fact that they plainly acknowledge they do not have proof yet to show that joe biden acted corruptly on behalf of his son to benefit his son, hunter biden's business dealings. that needs to be gathered during the impeachment probe. the speaker of the house believes they have the vote to go ahead. he made clear this is an issue that his party will get behind. >> do you think you'll have all republicans to vote for the impeachment inquiry today? >> i think it's going to pass. that's all i'm going to say about it now. >> do you think hunter biden should have shown up today? >> i certainly do. >> do you think he should be deposed again? >> thank you. >> reporter: and i asked him there, do you have any concerns about the impacts that this vote may have on vulnerable members of congress? he didn't address that specific question. that's all he had to say at the moment. in talking to the same vulnerable members, they're saying this is different than impeachment. this is simply an investigation in the days ahead. it's still a very significant move by the house to go down this road. a lot of members say once you open the door, ultimately you may charge the president for high crimes and misdemeanors that happened to three other presidents in american history. >> that's right. where do things stand with hunter biden? contempt is on the table. could there be more negotiations for a testimony? >> reporter: that is the threat right now by the house oversight chairmen james comber and jim jordan, the judiciary chairman. they are moving ahead with contempt proceedings. that will time to take out and stretching into the new year and they would have to vote in the committee and full house and refer him to for federal criminal charges. at that point, a decision would be made by the u.s. attorney about whether or not to charge hunter biden with contempt of the house. it's happened before. it happened with other people who have defied subpoenas in the past. will it happen again with hunter biden? that's a process that will take months and months to play out. >> as we saw with steve bannon. manu, thank you so much. in a few hours, house republicans are expected to vote on their resolution to formalize the impeachment inquiry. remember, house speaker kevin mccarthy unilaterally launched the inquiry in september. so far, the probe has struggled to produce conclusive evidence of wrong doing by the vice president. there's only been one hearing related to the inquiry since it launched. here's what one expert witness, called by republicans, said there. >> i do not believe that the current evidence would support articles of impeachment. that is something that an inquiry has to establish. >> i'm not here today to even suggest there was corruption, fraud or any wrong doing. in my opinion, more information needs to be gathered. >> nevertheless, last week's tax indictment of hunter biden ohm boldined republicans. three felony charges out of six total. they argue the vote will strengthen the legal standing against the white house and fortify their subpoenas of key witnesses. we want to dig in to one of the central claims against biden. that in 2016, as vice president, he abused his powers to pressure ukraine to fire this top prosecutor, victor shokan. he was allegedly investigating the ukrainian energy company and hunter biden, of course, served on the board at the time. republicans are arguing vice president biden forced him out to protect his son-in-law. biden did push for the prosecutor to be fired. that was consistent with bipartisan u.s. policy at the time. multiple republican senators called for him to be fired, including senator ron johnson of wisconsin. the firing was also applauded by european union allies who saw it as a way to root out corruption in ukraine. even back in 2019. donald trump's own special envoy to ukraine testified that the firing was widely understood to be the right policy and this. david holmes, a former diplomat in ukraine testified in his understanding, shokane was not at that time pursuing investigations of the bidens. this is just one example of why several republican lawmakers have emphasized caution over the impeachment inquiry, believing it could potentially backfire. while others are ready to go full steam ahead. pam. >> all right. thanks so much, boris. for more on this, we're joined by democratic congressman jared from florida. the impeachment resolution inquiry is expected to pass. what are you hearing from your moderate republican colleagues on this vote? >> well, listen, i think they're making a grave mistake. i've talked to some of them. they're afraid of donald trump. this is what donald trump has demanded of the republican party. he has 50% of the nation's impeachments in american history. he's got 100% of the indictments. all 100% of the indictments and joe biden has none of those. they're trying to run up the score. look, this is going to rally democrats and independence around the president to see them do impeachment with no evidence. chuck grassily is leading the investigation came out today and said there is no evidence based on everything they've seen. all of the tens of thousands of documents that have been turned over by the biden administration. something the trump administration didn't do in their investigation. the republican's own witness in committee said of everything we know, there's no evidence to impeach joe biden. doesn't rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors. >> and, of course, republicans argue they're not getting what they're asking for from the white house. that's why they need to formalize this to give them more tools as part of their legitimate oversight. that's what they argue. >> yeah, that's nonsense. why do you think the chairman brought the reporters into the room to see the boxes and boxes and boxes of documents they've assembled? where do you think they got the documents from? you can't claim you're not getting compliance when you have 50,000 pages of documents that have been turned over to you. you've done half a dozen depositions. you've taken all of this other testimony. you've held hearings and brought government witnesses in during the hearings. they've gotten tremendous compliance from the white house. the problem is the evidence doesn't show that joe biden did anything wrong. and so, you know, look, the chairman worked very hard at trying to convince the american people that joe biden did anything wrong. the only thing the chairman has discovered after all of this evidence that has been produced is that hunter biden is the son of joe biden. >> do you think articles of impeachment are a fore gone conclusion no matter what this probe turns up? >> that's where my moderate friends are making a mistake. do you think they'll be satisfied with inquiry and the freedom caucus is going to be satisfied? they'll be beating the drum every single solitary day to bring those articles of impeachment. look, the 118th congress is historic. this is what they're going to be known for. expelling a member. they'll be known for removing their own speak and are doing this impeachment. not a single real accomplishment. when israel needs aid. when ukraine needs our help. when our allies are looking to see if the united states can deliver on their promises. when we got issues to solve around this country for the american family and find middle ground on the border, my republican colleagues are too busy doing this fake impeachment inquiry. to show you how serious they are about this, as soon as they take the vote, they're going to run out of town for three weeks. they're going to leave. they're literally going to go away. it's so serious and important for the country. the evidence is so serious, they're going to vote and run. >> i want to ask you about hunter biden. he was subpoenaed to come today and sit for a closed door deposition. he came to the hill. he made some remarks outside of the capitol building and said that he wouldn't sit for a closed door deposition. he wanted to do a public hearing. now republicans are saying that they're going to pursue contempt of congress and refer it potentially to the department of justice. do you think he should have complied with the subpoena? >> well, listen, chairman comer, on national television several times said hunter biden needs to testify. he can either come sit for a deposition or come to a hearing of his choosing. those are the chairman's own words. so hunter biden called his bluff and said no problem, i'll come to a public hearing. that caught the chairman off guard. i'm sure he regrets the invitation. this is the first instance we have a witness taking the chairman up on his invitation to testify publicly. to be transparent. for hunter to answer all of the questions. remember, republicans control the committees. they control the rules in committees. they can keep hunter there for ten hours in front of the cameras. the chairman is scared and running away. he's going to try to hold someone in contempt who is trying to come and testify publicly. hunter, obviously, he's been indicted and things he has to deal with. if he's found guilty, he'll have to deal with the penalties. democrats believe in justice. we believe in the rule of law for donald trump. we believe in the rule of law for hunter biden. the idea they'll hold someone in contempt who wants to testify in front of the american people just shows you the chaos congress we currently serve in. >> thanks for coming on. >> thank you. coming up, the supreme court is weighing on the abortion rights case. plus, the families of american hostages believed to be held by hamas just met with joe biden. we'll tell you about that after this break. the supreme court is set to take on the first major abortion case since the landmark ruling that overturned row v. wade in 2022. >> now the conservative leaning court will decide whether to impose restrictions on the pill mifepristone. it's been used by millions of women over the last two decades. >> paula reid is here to explain. this is one of the biggest cases of the term. right? >> reporter: absolutely. it could have consequences for the presidential election. here, once again, you have the conservative leaning court jumping into the abortion issue less than a year after they overturned roev. wade. a decision would come by july, which is in the middle of the presidential election side. since roe was overturned abortion has been a hot issue on the campaign trail. here specifically we're talking about access to the most commonly used abortion medication. mifepristone. that, when used with another drug, it accounts for a significant number of abortions in the united states. lower courts have tried to restrict access to mifepristone. right now the decisions are on hold while the supreme court looks at this issue. this drug was approved for 23 years. they approved it in 2000. in the past few years, they've made it more accessible. you can get it through tell medicine or delivered by mail. opponents, abortion rights opponents argued the fda didn't vet the safety here and didn't adequately account for risks when they made it more accessible. some people said that's a trojan horse to further restrict abortion nationwide. this, as you said, pamela, this is going to be one of the biggest cases of the term. definitely one to watch and repercussions for people across the country. the presidential candidates. this will bring abortion to the forefront no matter what they decide. >> we saw how it galvanized voters. how could this impact people living in states where abortion is still legal? >> reporter: it's fascinating because right now, it's accessible nationwide, but we have to see what they decide. because they're looking at this as a nationwide issue. now, it's possible they could couch it sort of like they had with the state rights' argument. the idea they would restrict this nationwide, that would certainly be a significant ruling. again, this has consequences not just for u.s. citizens but for this election. this is something that could really impact the outcome of the 2024 election. >> yeah. it certainly could. and as you know, so much of it was about state's rights. that's something we'll look at it, too. however they rule on it aligns with the argument there. >> reporter: absolutely. it's shaping up to be a huge turn at the supreme court. they're taking up this. it deals with regulation and abortion. they have the big special counsel case. i mean, for, again, for the legal nerds over here. are you a legal nerd, boris? >> i dabble. >> reporter: join us. this is going to be a huge term. in this case, the fact they granted this, this is going to be one of the marquee cases this year. >> definitely. you'll be one busy lady, paula. this just in to cnn. the white house says u.s. national security adviser jake sullivan will conduct extremely serious conversations with israeli officials during his visit to the country this week. this as the united states is pressing israel to conduct a more surgical campaign against hamas. the hamas controlled health ministry says more than 18,600 people have been killed since october 7th. more than 50,000 have been injured. there have been more than 327,000 cases of infectious diseases documented. joining us now is executive director of doctors without borders usa. thank you so much for being with us this afternoon. talk to us about the latest conditions your staff is seeing in gaza. especially with mounting reports of infectious disease. >> yeah. the infectious disease situation is gulling. of course, in a context of a total siege where people lack medicine. they lack drinking water, clean water, we are seeing an increase in skin rashes, skin diseases, lice, things that are exacerbated by the unhygienic conditions. we're seeing a lot of diarrhea. we're seeing fevers. it's all related to the kinds of inhumane living conditions that people find themselves in. >> the world health organization is reporting that less than a third of hospitals in gaza are functional right now. how are your doctors prioritizing the care that they provide? >> it's a horrific situation because the few hospitals that are functioning are sometimes surrounded by tanks. sometimes there's sniper fire all around them. just on monday, one of our doctors was shot and injured from the outside. so a bullet piercing the hospital and you know, here is somebody at the bedside of patients. we've had colleagues killed. we've had colleagues unable to move because of all the violence and the fighting. and so what happens in the hospitals is that people who are there are unable to receive care because even the medical staff cannot always reach the hospital and do time when they're coming and going between checking in on their families and so forth. in the hospitals themselves, it's a continuing catastrophic situation. too many patients, insufficiency of medicine, not enough space. a lot of people sheltering in hospitals. still no water or food. and a lot of things are going on outside of the hospitals as well. in the last month, we estimate that there are 5,500 newborns. babies born in these kinds of horrible conditions. awful in the rubble or in the camps. and the pregnant and lactating mothers lack enough nutrition. so they are famished. they are thirsty. they're getting sick and unable to look after these newborns through breast-feeding. there aren't options because of the total siege. so all in all, completely catastrophic situation, which is all the more reason for the entire humanitarian community to be calling, as we have, strong and loud for a cease fire. >> avril, you mentioned one of the surgeons being hit. the organization says it was by sniper fire. i'm wondering what your response is to the idf who argue they only operate in and around hospitals being used by hamas and other armed groups. what's your response? >> well, time and again they make these allegations without offering substantial proof. or any evidence to convince those who are observing collective punishment of civilians in gaza in attacks on medical facilities that are full of patients. full of medical staff. of course, should be protected because attacking a hospital is a violation of humanitarian law. it's a war crime. and so if there is evidence, let us see it. we do not see it. consistently, our staff are just trying to do the work of saving lives. relieving the suffers without painkillers and without medicines. doing the best they can. all these allegations frankly are a diversion and it's not something that we can corroborate at all. we don't see it. what we see are hospitals that are full of sick and injured people, and a lot of people who require reconstructive surgery, followup care, long term post operative care, management of infections. right now, we have so many people that are coming in and declared dead upon arrival because there's just so little healthcare and this is one of the great objections we've been screaming about. is that people have a right to receive healthcare in a conflict. we're used to working in conflict zones, and for the life of us, we cannot understand why such gruelty, such outrage gruelty towards civilians who have the right to be able to seek healthcare and receive it. so, for us, this cease fire and then the consistent votes by the united states, votes against humanity at the united nations on a couple of occasionsover the last few days is so disappointing. we need the cease fire to be able to deliver the aid, reduce the suffering and killer. >> we have to leave the conversation there. appreciate you sharing your perspective. >> thank you. more news just in to cnn. the white house indicated that president joe biden received a heads up before hunter biden's statement to the press outside the u.s. capitol earlier today. here's the white house secretary being asked about this. >> look, you know, the president was certainly familiar with what his son was going to say. and i think what you saw was from the heart from his son. and you've heard me say this. you've heard the president say this. when it comees to the president and the first lady, they are proud of him. continuing to rebuild his life. they are proud of their son. >> with five weeks until the iowa caucuses, republican hopeful vivek ramaswamy joins abby philip. tonight at 9:00 p.m. only on cnn. you're probably not easily persuaded to switch mobile providers for your business. but what if we told you it's possible th