benjamin netanyahu is expected to speak to the media on the state of the war. this comes as israeli intelligence analysts poedly warned officials of plans of a major hamas invasion over a year before the october 7th attack. they were dismissed by their superiors. secretary of state, antony blinken saying, the security failure will be investigated. >> there is going to be plenty of opportunity for a full accounting of what happened on october 7th, including a look back to see how what happened, who knew what when. and israel has been very clear about that. right now, the focus is on making sure that they can do everything possible to ensure that it doesn't happen again. >> since the resumption infighting yesterday, israel says it has struck more than 400 hamas targets -- killing at least 200 palestinians, that is according to the gaza health ministry, joining me now from tel aviv, israel, nbc's david noriega, what can you tell us about these new israeli strikes? and the state of affairs when it comes to talks? shi >> alex, the war has resumed. it's important to note, israel's military campaign is now seeming to expand from being focused initially on the northern half of the gaza strip, to now including much of the southern half of those 400 targets that you mention that the idf says it has struck in just the last two days. many are in cities like him notice in rafah to the south. this is significant, a large number of civilians were displaced from the north into the south, the numbers that the hamas-run health ministry inside gaza has issued for casualties in the last couple of days, they say of those 200 killed, most are women and children. the idf, for its part, says it does not target civilians, its targets or hamas operatives in infrastructure, and it blames any civilian deaths on hamas, moreover, it says that it is giving people very specific precise orders to evacuate, civilians precise orders to evacuate that said, what we hear from civilians on the ground in gaza, they feel there is nowhere safe to go. many of them have already been made to evacuate sometimes more than once. as far as the state of talks, israel withdrew the team that it had in qatar today engaged in those talks. as of now, at least in terms of israel's involvement those talks seem to have collapsed. that said, the u.s. and other diplomatic actors are continuing their efforts. particularly the, u.s., which according to the white house, says they're still at least eight americans being held captive inside gaza. as far as why those talks broke down israel blamed hamas. it says hamas failed to follow through on its promise to turn over certain hostages, specifically women in children, which was the framework of the agreement. the u.s. backs up that assertion, here's what secretary of state tony blinken had to say on that point. take a listen. >> hamas renege on commitments it made, in fact, even before the pause came to an end, it committed an atrocious terrorist attack in jerusalem. killing three people, wounding others, including americans. it began firing rockets before the pause and it, as i said, it reneged on its commitments it made in terms of releasing certain hostages. >> alex, there is a bit of a lack of clarity right now around the question of exactly how many women in children hostages are left inside of gaza. that's very important, that's what was agreed upon in the existing framework for the first cease-fire, if we're in a situation where for more hostages to be released, they're gonna have to be men or even particularly soldiers, that's gonna require an entirely new and probably very different framework for an agreement. whether or not brexit gonna see that happen anytime soon, that remains to be seen. alex? >> you know, david, i'm looking at the official website of the hamas movement, there was a statement that was given by the deputy head of the political bureau of hamas, it is a shake sally -- he said the remaining prisoners we have our soldiers and former soldiers. there are no negotiations regarding them until the end of the aggression. to that point, there are female soldiers, correct? in israel? it could be that they believe any women that remain our soldiers. >> that's right. what the israeli authority says, by their count there are 17 women and children still left in gaza. it's not clear exactly how many of them are children. how many of them adult women. especially, there's even, i should say, there is some dispute around who considers who a soldier. there are people that hamas considers soldiers, particular women, where women of fighting age, who can potentially be in the idf or reserves, whether that they're actually serving at the time of their abduction. these are all sticking points. from what we're hearing, these are the sticking points that cause these, particular round of a temporary truce to collapse. those are the sticking points that are gonna remain sticking point in any future negotiations. >> okay, thank you so much, appreciate your live report there. we look forward to speaking with you again. in the meantime, for all of you, the turmoil over this conflict hitting homefor one member of congress. congressman adam smith of washington state says that his home w vandalized this week by cease-fire activists. smith says his garage was spray-painted with free gaza. among other things and the congn will be joining us in just a few minutes to discuss this. as well as the chances of another cease-fire in the middle east. let's go now to some more breaking news on this saturday, some stunning new rulings in two cases against donald trump. the judge in the federal election interference case rejeintrump's claim of absolute immunity from criminal prosecution. that cision coming on the same day a federal appeals court ruled trump does not have presidential immunity in civil cases brought by capitol police officers, democratic lawmakers, who sued trump. in 2021. let's go to nbc's dasha burns, joining us from cedar rapids, iowa. where donald trump is expected to speak a little later on today. how are folks reacting, dasha, to trump's latest legal round of troubles? >> look, alex, every time you hear about legal setbacks for the former president, they might be legal setbacks for him, they are also often political setbacks for his rivals, you can almost hear a collective groan from those folks, particularly from the likes of florida governor, ron desantis. they know that this means he owns another news cycle, they also know that this means that his supporters rally around him, that he really every time this happens, gets a real jolt from the base. any folks that might be considering looking or thinking about somebody else, they really come and rally in and support him. and for folks around here, they've been telling us, look, they are not worried about this they believe, of course, this is the base. this is a trump event, he's gonna be speaking here in just a matter of hours here. the supporters here, they believe he did nothing wrong, they believe this is a system of injustice, as he often calls it. on the campaign trail. this is though the primary. this is the republican base here. what changes is if he does, as many folks expect, become the republican nominee it's a different story when it comes to the general election. and then the narrative changes, and that he needs to convince people that are not the red meat base that these legal setbacks, the cases that are going to be playing out against the backdrop of the 2024 election, are not too distracting. are not going to be something that means he cannot focus. on the real kitchen table focus -- issues that people worried about. those are gonna be the hardest case to make to a general electorate than it is to a primary electorate, alex? >> very good point, we're in the primary electorate season. we'll see what happens in the general. thank you so much, dasha burns, for that. joining me now, politico senior legal affairs later, josh gers josh, good to see you. let's talk first about this ruling, this one by judge tanya chutkan. this in the criminal electi interference case, where she wrote, que, whatever immunity 's a sitting president may enjoy, the united states has only one chief executive at a time. that position does not confer a lifelong get out of jail free pass. former presidents enjoy no special conditions on their federal criminal liability. to this ruling surprise you at all, josh? what does this mean for special counsel jack smith's case against trump? >> well, alex, it's a critical ruling it didn't surprise me, i have to say, because of the approach that judge chutkan has taken in earlier cases, where she delivered a similar back of the hand to trump's arguments. that he had some special rights as a former president. she emphatically says again, in this decision, that he does not. it is also interesting to me, alex she didn't even hold a hearing, an argument session, on this motion by trump's lawyers. claiming that he has an absolute immunity for most types of activities he would've undertaken while he was president. so, that indicates to you two things. one, how little she thought of the validity or the merits of trump's arguments, but also that she didn't want to waste time. this is the first criminal case in the set of four that trump is facing right now, the first one scheduled for trial in march 4th, which may sound like a long way away. but believe you me, once we get to the holidays, that's going to be right around the corner. so she's swatting this down knowing that trump is going to try to appeal it. and that has the potential, if it takes too long, to derail the start of this case on march 4th. >> as you well know, trump's attorneys, josh, they are expected to soon appeal this. that would potentially dey the trial that set for march 4th. as you know, the supreme court has held that presidents are immune from civil liability for actions related to their official duties. but they've never grappled with the question of whether that immunity extends to criminal prosecutions. how do you see this playing out. >> well, there will be an appeal first, alex, to the dc circuit court of appeals. that's the same appeals court that just yesterday delivered this opinion on the civil lawsuits trump is facing. saying that he doesn't have absolute immunity for those, it seems to be very likely that they'll reach the same conclusion in this case and say that there's nothing that guarantees that a former president cannot be charged with crimes that took place while he was in office or allegedly took place while he was in office. so, i think that's where it goes in the first stage. what happens in the supreme court is hard to say. although, if you look back over the last three or four years, alex, especially since the election in 2020, trump has not had much, of any success at the supreme court with any of the issues that he or his supporters have tried to raise. at least when they seem to pertain to him personally. including the challenges to the 2020 election. might it get some traction in the supreme court? it might, i think the big question is is this a case they decide to formally take? in the arguments on? that would almost certainly mean this trial can't go forward on march 4th, or is it something that is resolved with something less than that. just a paper ruling, saying we're not gonna take this up right now. >> josh, why do you think it took a whole year to get this ruling? from the d.c. federal appeals court? there were three of them, it was unanimous, we should 0.1 was a trump appointee, why so long? why a whole year? >> well, that's something we pointed out earlier this week, this decision seem to have been stuck for so long. as you say, there was one trump appointee on the panel, although he seemed to agree with the democrat who's the chief judge -- sreenivasan, who wrote the main opinion. it's a little bit baffling. it's about three times longer than the d.c. circuit typically takes to resolve a case after oral argument. it's possible in some of the nuances of the ruling because the intention it was gonna get, the judge wanted to make sure they had absolutely right. it should also know that about halfway through that period, they went to the justice department and said can you explain to us what you think a president civil immunity is in civil lawsuits, the these are cases that don't actually involve the justice department, their private parties like the members of congress in the police officer suing trump peonly. >> all right, well, certainly did their due diligence let's put it that way, it begs the question about appeals. why? but i guess that's the process. josh gerstein, thank you much. coming up later this hour we're gonna hear from hannibal davin, the former spokesperson for the january 6th committee. we're gonna hear about liz cheney's new book, and it's revelations that might surprise even the most jaded never trumpers. in the meantime, he's gone. so was he bullied? or did he have it coming? what constituents are former congressman george santos are saying, that's coming up later. first, congressman adam smith on the next steps in the israel-hamas war, in the vandals that struck his home, we're back in a quick 60 seconds. quick 60 seconds. about three or four years ago, i wasn't feeling as if i was as sharp as i used to be. i saw the prevagen commercials. after a short amount of time taking prevagen, i started noticing a difference-- that i'm remembering this, i'm remembering that. i stopped taking prevagen and i found myself slacking back so i jumped right back on it. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. the chase ink business premier card is made for sam who makes, everyday products, designed smarter. genius! like 2.5% cash back on purchases of $5,000 or more, so sam can make smart ideas, a brilliant reality! chase for business. make more of what's yours. >> even more breaking news, the house of the ranking member of armed services committee vandalized by israel-hamas war protesters. news just came to light a short time ago. democratic representative adam smith says the barrage of his home in bellevue,waington, was defaced by cease-fire activists right around the same time the truce between israel and hamas and yesterday. the words, free gaza, cease-fire, and baby killer were spray-painted on the garage doors. and congressman adam smith of washington shining the right now from california, where he has been attending the reagan national defense forum. welcome, my friend. weeot too far apart from each other here, out of the valley of los angeles. that said, theseactivists are using provocative and illegal tactics, the facing ferocity, as they push for a cease-fire. what's your response to it, overall, and, also their demands on you to call for a cease-fire? >> part of it overall, a very troubling trend in american politics, on both the extreme right and extreme left. first, fall there's an incredibly arrogant self righteousness about them, that whatever they want test to be absolutely right, and no matter what, they have to get it. they don't fundamentally belief in representative democracy and having, dialogue and debate and elections and living with the outcome of those elections. and second of all, the other troubling aspect of the trend is certainly those on the right have done this many times. they try to intimidate people who disagree with them. they use threats, intimidation, in some cases, violence, to do that. and fundamentally, that gets to the core of our representative democracy. a representative democracy is about open public debate, elections, clear sets of rules. once you decide that those don't apply, once you decide the intimidation is unacceptable tactic, you are threatening the very foundation of representative democracy, and the suspect have been in the seattle area for quite some time, the city council, former police chief, that they show up at their homes and threatened them in a variety of different ways, and it's really troubling and problematic. the best thing we could do is aggressively pushback against, which i intend to, i'm not going to be intimidated by this, i believe in representative democracy, and i have met with groups like this many times, i'm not blocking access, and giving them the opportunity to make their case in the way it should be made, so, that is, it's a very troubling direction. the broader issue is absolutely worth and open, public debate. what's going on in gaza right now as deeply troubling. no one is happy about the humanitarian crisis going on there. where we disagree is precisely how to handle it, and that's where we should have that discussion. like i said, we've had it, you don't need to try to resort to intimidation and creating the possibility for violence in order to have that debate. >> yeah, 100%. you are gonna be having that debate again, but i can ask you in your home, so they would search for safety during this spray-paint and vandalism attack? >> my wife was home, that's a troubling aspect of it, i mean, who knows? i don't honestly believe the people who did this had any violent intent or intended to break in, but mobs take on a mentality of their own. which is one or more people, and also, you know, my children are you know, college age or just beyond so, they're not home all that often but what if when my kids is coming home at 1:00 in the morning, and these people are there? the risk of a confrontation like this escalating is significant. so, yeah. it's already some. i mean, it's part of the job, so it doesn't bother me, that's a certain point. but certainly, we need to be worried about it as a family, and so does every other elected official out there today. and that really shouldn't be the case,. >> you say it's part of the, drop the question, is should it be to this extent. but let's move on to talk about the fighting, which we know, has resumed between israel and hamas. secretary of state blinken has said israel has a clear plan to minimize civilian casualties after he urged israel to protect innocent life, but i'm curious your analysis, sir if the situation end of the biden administration's approach here. >> there are several layers to. it first of all, i'm really disappointed in the reporting that doesn't emphasize as much. it is hamas who is placing civilians at risk. they have, you know, throughout their history, used civilians as shields. they have placed their military operations under hospitals, under civilian locations, they've seen a lot of reporting that's like, well one side says one thing, once i associate the. there's absolutely no debate this is precisely what hamas is doing. and then, when hamas attacks and brutally murders civilians across the border, israel has to try to go find those people, the laws of warfare, number one, make it clear that the war crime here is being committed by hamas who is hiding behind civilians. absolutely, gives the other side the right to go after those military targets, even if they are hitting, so. and we need more widely understand that. i think president biden is taking the right approach on this. look, i think israel needs to think more broadly. they can't just go in and, you, know without any concern for civilian casualties but we've seen a change in that. humanitarian aid is coming into gaza. and initially, in the immediate aftermath of october 7th, israel was talking about coming in right now, cut everything off, president biden, secretary austin and others, you know, really went in there to work with israel on taking a different approach. but look, a cease-fire would basically say that we ought to let hamas get away with a murder set they committed, and we should block israel from trying to hold those people accountable and crucially stop them from ever doing it again. i don't think that's