>> a lot of students having a rough day on campus in tuscaloosa. it's safe to say there's never going to be another college football coach as great as s saban. saban had the crimson tide ranked first at least once during all but one of his two seasons -- or at least all but two of his seasons in alabama. every player recruited by saban in four years won a title. while announcing his retirement yesterday, saban said in a statement, it's not just about how many games we won and lost, but it's about the legacy and how we went about it. we always tried to do it the right way. and now the talk is who is going to replace saban as the next tide head coach. oregon's dan laning who was a graduate in 2018 the heavy favorite right now according to bet online. you got lane kiffin who coached under saban for three seasons. he's second on that list,

texas's steve syarkisian, ryan day down there, phil. you've got a lot of fan bases around the country kind of panicking because they might lose their coach if they decide to go to alabama. i don't know who would want that job, it's impossible shoes to fill. >> talk about foot steps to follow, the process, the process, what a leader. thanks, andy. >> thanks, buddy. "cnn this morning" starts now. >> one on one on the debate stage. far more focused on each other. >> you're invisible in new hampshire, down in the polls in iowa, why should we think you can do anything in country. >> we don't need another mealy mouthed politician who just tells you what she thinks you want to hear. >> hard to see how they think they're going to overtake him while barely laying a finger on him. >> chris christie drops out. >> no one would tell the truth about donald trump. >> making unofficial remarks on a hot mic skewering his former rivals.

>> how that reverberates into any potential endorsement we will see. >> this does not affect the iowa campaign, but going into new hampshire it certainly does. >> a new york judge has barred donald trump from delivering a closing argument at his civil fraud trial. >> a new opportunity to criticize the judge. >> he believes rules shouldn't apply to him. he refuses to accept the rules. he gets to play the victim. good thursday morning, everyone, it is the top of the hour, i'm phil mattingly with poppy harlow in new york. it was a huge night of politics, and it's going to continue into today. we are showing you live pictures out of new york city. former president trump expected to be back in court today for closing arguments in that $370 mil $370 million civil fraud case. trump choosing to go to court instead of it staying and campaigning in iowa with less than four days until monday's iowa caucuses. he was in des moines last night at a town hall while his republican rivals squared off at

a cnn dewabate. >> ron desantis and nikki haley sparring on policy issues with heated exchanges on immigration, the economy, and overseas conflicts. they also offered tepid criticism of republican front runner trump, but they saved their sharpest attacks clearly for each other. >> when you need someone standing and fight for you, don't look for nikki haley, you won't be able to find her if you had a search warrant. >> you've got $150 million and you've gone down in the polls in iowa. why should we think you could manage or do anything in this country. >> i debated the governor of california gavin newsom. thought he lied a lot. nikki haley gives him a run for his money and may be more liberal. >> every time he lies, drake university don't turn this into a drinking game, because you will be overserved by the end of the night. >> desantis went on to call haley a quote, mealy-mouthed politician. haley plugged her new website,

rondesantislies.com 16 times. >> chris christie no longer in the race, suspending his campaign, but not before he was caught on a hot mic blasting his former rivals. eva mckend, just four days left. >> reporter: no doubt last night's dedatebate was clarifyi for some voters as policy differences came into focus. the problem for both of them is that the former president, he remains the front runner and they seemed reluctant to go after him too forcefully. former u.n. ambassador nikki haley and governor ron desantis taking center stage in the final debate before the iowa caucuses. and the gloves were off. >> if he would spend as much time trying to prove why he thinks he would be good

president, he would be doing a lot better in the polls. >> this is the u.n. way of thinking that we're somehow globalists. you can take the ambassador out of the united nations, but you can't take the united nations out of the ambassador. >> reporter: while the front runner was absent, trump chose to attend a second fox news town hall event and teased a possible vice president. >> i know who it's going to be. >> give us a hint. >> reporter: the dueling events taking place as one of trump's biggest critics steps aside. >> anyone who is unwilling to say that he is unfit to be president of the united states is unfit themselves. >> reporter: the former governor of new jersey also found himself in a hot mic moment criticizing haley. >> she's going to get smoked, and you and i both know it. she's not up to this. >> trump seizing on it. >> i know her very well. and i happen to believe chris christie's right. i'm not exactly worried about.

>> reporter: haley and desantis reminding voters of trump's absence on the stage again, something they both agreed on, but voters don't seem to mind. >> i wish donald trump was up here on this stage. >> donald trump should be on this stage. s he owes it to you here in iowa. >> reporter: but neither took the opportunity to strongly denounce him or argue he's unfit for office. >> so when you look at donald trump, i have said i think he was the right president at the right time, i agree with a lot of his policies, but his way is not my way. >> if trump is the nominee, it's going to be about january 6th, legal issues, criminal trials, the democrats and the media would love to run with that. >> reporter: but desantis and haley spent most of the debate going after each other and trying to prove who can be the toughest on stage. >> re >> do not trust nikki haley with illegal immigration. that's like having the fox guard the hen house. nikki haley opposed the border wall in 2016. she ridiculed it. i'm telling you, you need a

wall. >> go to desantislies.com, i said you can't just build a wall. you have to do more than build a wall. it was having the wall and everything else. you can't trust what ron's saying. >> reporter: desantis arguing haley's record as south carolina's former governor proves she isn't ready for the white house. >> she says she's always supported school choice, and she failed to deliver. she blames other people. leadership is about getting things done, stop making excuses. make it happen. >> reporter: haley firing back in a blistering takedown of his campaign. >> if leadership's about getting things done, how did you blow through 150 m$150 million in yo campaign. we went and saved our money, we made sure we spent it right. it's not your money. it's other people's money and you have to know how to handle it. if you can't handle the financial parts of the campaign, how is he going to handle the economy when it comes to the white house. >> there's arguably more at stake here for governor desantis who has invested so heavily in

iowa. he'll often like to remind folks that he has visited all 99 counties. but the both of them, they're running out of time to make their case to iowans. they're both criss-crossing the state, four days left to go until the iowa caucus. i should remind you, though they didn't make our debate stage last night, asa hutchinson, the former governor of arkansas, vivek ramaswamy, they are competing here in iowa as well. >> important reminder. eva mckend, we appreciate you as always. thank you. a lot to get to, cnn senior political commentator anna navarro is with us. and josh barro writer of the very serious news letter and the host of the very serious podcast. thank you for being here. >> plus skmiand minus for haley desantis last night. >> i found the entire debate exhausting, i was happy it was being moderated by jake tapper

and dana bash, both of whom have children, the bickering that went on for two hours i think was exhausting and not a good look for republicans. i saw a focus group afterwards that cnn did, i think it was gary tuchman where he asked who won and who lost, and four said desantis had won, four said haley had won and two said trump had won. i'm on the side that says trump won. it's bad for the process that he didn't show up. it's disrespectful for voters. it's terrible for iowa, but he's avoiding this circular firing squad, very infantile exchange of insults for two hours. it was insult palooza. >> it's a pretty smart political strategy for struftrump and his not to engage. he tried to shift the wording or framing of some of his most controversial remarks. we'll see if that's allowed to happen. part of the issue is whether or not you can attack the guy who's 30 points up.

you would think yes. when you look at the numbers, the type of attacks we saw last night and the decision not to attack on character, listen. >> do you believe donald trump has the character to be president again? >> well, i'm running because i'm the guy that's going to be able to engineer a comeback for this country. i appreciated what president trump did. let's be honest, he said he was going to build a wall and have mexico pay for it, he did not deliver that. >> i think the next president needs to have moral clarity. i have said i think he was the right president at the right time. i agree with a lot of his policies. his way is not my way. i don't have vengeance. i don't have vendettas, i don't take things personally. >> the moral issues, the character issues, it's not like there's a shortage of them. why don't they attack on that? what are they seeing? what are their campaigns seeing? >> what they're seeing is what happened to chris christie, which is that wasn't a huge market in the primary electorate

for someone whose primary message is donald trump is unfit for office. there's a small portion that thinks that, but for the most part the rest of republicans either are die hard donald trump fans, they're not going to be moved by anything or they were open to new options, maybe open to a new direction but don't necessarily want someone whose main message is donald trump is bad. the bind that that got folks like ron desantis and nikki haley in up to this point is you do have pull away some people that like donald trump and you have to persuade them you're better. if you are somebody sitting on the sidelines considering trump or these alternatives, i'm not sure anything you saw made you think, gosh, let me change my mind. that's also what you saw in that cnn focus group. none of those participants said that these debates have really changed their mind in a big way. >> quite a town hall address, if you will, from chris christie, j josh, last night. many people pointing to it as one of his best.

ironically, it's as he is dropping out. what he said to this issue is so striking, he talked about the soul of the country, and he said by far the most important issue is the character of the candidate, a couple hours later, nikki haley, ron desantis could have address that had with trump. they chose not to. what is the significance of christie pulling out in this mom moment? >> i think partly if he stayed in and got 11% in new hampshire or 9% or whatever it would have been, he would have been blamed for the fact that nikki haley didn't pick up those votes and by getting out, he can basically say this isn't my fault. look, he's here with this very clear and consistent message about trump. i think it's bizarre that he couldn't find his way toward endorsing nikki haley if he really thinks -- >> this might be why. can we listen to the hot mic moment last night? here. >> she's going to get smoked, and you and i both know it. she's not up to this. desantis calling me petrified that i would -- >> politicians get past things

like this all the time. the 1980 primary between ronald reagan and george bush senior was extremely bitter. ronald reagan was like i'm paying for this microphone and basically trying to one up, and bush senior ends up on the ticket. politicians run races against people and get out and endorse them all the time enwven when i seems weird. if he wants to stop trump from receiving the nomination, he ought to be able to put aside policy disagreements, even if he thinks nikki haley is an underwhelming politician. i don't think she's going to win this either, but how is it productive for him to be saying that in an environment where it's going to be heard -- >> do you think it would help haley if he endorsed her before iowa. >> i think it's probably better to wait past iowa and new hampshire. the posture that he's taken here, i don't know the extent to which he was actually thinking that he was keeping these

comments under wraps. the endorsement is going to be less valuable now that everybody knows he thinks she's going to get smoked, but we'll see. >> to that point, trump last night very clearly having a general election strategy. again, people are loathe to give him credit for anything. that was a different format and a different frame from him, and it was intentional. and to josh's point, it's kind of the ball game, what is the level of transfer between christie supporters to haley that we've seen in the polling. >> 6 in 10 christie voters said they would go to nikki haley next. that question wasn't contingent on an endorsement. if your preferred candidate drops out, where do you go. 60% is not 100%. and haley needs about 100% of those people in order to be really competitive with donald trump. the problem that she's going to run into is there's a choice between say her, desantis, rama ramaswamy, but there's also the choice to stay home, and so does something like a christie

endorsement kind of give permission to those voters who are the independents, democrats who make up a big part of new hampshire's electorate say i know it's cold. i know you don't love these people, but you've got to turn out. that could have some value if he chose to go that way. >> iowans know how to deal with the cold, not as well as their neighbors to the north, but they know how to deal with the cold. they're going to be fine on monday. thank you all very much. >> thank you. just a few hours, donald trump will head to another courtroom. you're not going to hear from him during the closing arguments, we're going to tell you why coming up. also, israel in international court northern to defend itself actions in gaza. it is a case with high stakes that could shape this war.

this morning donald trump set to attend closing arguments in his $370 million new york civil fraud trial. the former president will not speak in court. according to emails between trump's team and the judge,

there had been discussions of having trump speak during closing arguments. >> but judge arthur engoron wrote that trump's team yesterday, saying, quote, not having heard from you by the third extended deadline, i assume that mr. trump will not agree to the reasonable lawful limits i have imposed as precondition to giving a closing statement above and beyond those given by his attorneys and that therefore he will not be speaking in court. the judge argued that limits would have prevented trump from delivering what he called a campaign speech. joining us now cnn's senior legal analyst and former cr district of new york, and former investigative counsel for january 6th select committee. former attorney for the eastern district court. tib die owe, is this rare? like what happened here, the e-mails back and forth, trying to negotiate whether or not he would give a closing statement, the judge giving extended deadlines and saying you've got seven minutes to respond to me, you're not talking. >> it is rare. the rare part is the fact that the judge considered allowing

the former president to deliver a closing argument. >> at all. >> at all. that's not normal. when you go to court and you choose to be represented, you have a lawyer for a reason. that lawyer represents you. speaks on your behalf. you don't get to go back and forth between whether you want to be pro se, meaning representing yourself or having counsel represent you. so typically a judge would not consider this. you wouldn't have the opportunity to say i've had lawyers the entire time, but now i have things i need to get out. in fact, most judges if a client stood up or a defendant stood up would tell you to sit right back down. your lawyer speaks, not you. >> why do you think he did in this case? >> frankly, i think he was get giving some level of deference of former president trump being the former president. i think there have been concerns about so-called muzzling the president, impacting his first amendment rights, the gag orders. i think those concerns probably influenced the judge's decision hear to allow him to potentially speak. what the judge did was give very reasonable restrictions.

closing arguments are about commenting on the material relevant facts and evidence, applying the law to those facts and making the argument about how the facts finder h, the jud should interpret that all together. that's what the judge said the former president had to do. what he couldn't do is giving a campaign speech, attacking the judge, attacking the judge's wife, attacking the law clerk. not only did the former president not abide by the deadlines, but chose not to come, shows you what the former president wanted to do is a campaign speech and not a closing argument. >> no doubt he'll speak outside the courtroom. remind people what's at stake in this case. some of it's already been decided by this judge, no jury here. but some crucial parts will be decided now. >> the short answer is the future of the trump organization. i mean, the entire ability of the trump org to continue doing business is what's at stake here. this is a civil lawsuit brought by the new york state attorney general letitia james against the trump organization and various individuals including donald trump. the allegation is that trump and

his organization vastly inflated the values of their properties, their assets in order to get loans that they maybe wouldn't otherwise have gotten or perhaps at better interest rates. important to know, the judge has already found on one of the causes of action, one of the claims here in favor of the attorney general and against donald trump. that was something the judge decided before the trial. the judge said just based on the filings i have before me, i'm resum ruling in favor of the a.g. there are still six other causes of action related to submitting false documents and that kind of thing, what the attorney general is now asking for is 3 $370 million in disgorgement, we're taking away ill-gotten gains, and most importantly cancellation of the trump organization's business certificate, which you need to do business in the state. when trump's lawyers, they're arguing for the future of the business. >> hasn't there been some question on the latter part of what the a.g.'s office is asking

for, can they really kgo that far? >> legally the a.g.'s office can ask for that, the judge can do that. there is a fair question about whether it's overkill, when you look at this case and other similar cases involving fraud, it's hard to find another example where the new york state a.g. has asked for the corporate death penalty on a company like this and scenarios like there. there's scenarios where innocent victims were essentially stolen from and still this wasn't sought. "the washington post" ran a compelling editorial a few months ago arguing that this -- the remedy sought here was overkill. >> in terms of the remedy, is this something where the judge -- since there's already been one decision made, where he writes something today, a month, two months? when do we know? >> i think what he said is potentially by the end of the month. because the judge is well steeped in these facts here, i suspect that he's already been drafting his opinion. he knows what he's going to do

here. these closing arguments are going to be less impactful because the judge is a fact finder. he doesn't need as much of the lawyers to put together the arguments for him the way you would if you had a traditional jury. i suspect he's already drafting an opinion and we'll see it come out in the next few weeks. >> we're going to be deprived of some of the drama that normally comes with this, you don't know when the jury's going to come back and then they stand up. >> can i ask why no jury? >> the well, the law here would say because what the remedy that the a.g. is seeking doesn't require a jury, but it's important to remember -- >> requested it. >> trump's team could have asked for it. there's a little bit of gray area there. they did not ask for it, and i think if they had asked for a jury, they would have had a decent chance of getting one. >> i always think that's an important point to make on everything. they chose this route. >> thanks, guys, appreciate it. after the apology that wasn't to jimmy kimmel, aaron rodgers will not appear on espn for the rest of the nfl season. the details behind this decision ahead. and hunter biden causing quite a stir making an unannounced visit to capitol

hill yesterday. representative katie porter was in the room when he showed up unexexpectedly.. she's gogoing to joioin us next.

today hunter biden is expected to appear in a federal courtroom in los angeles. he is facing nine count ts including failure to file and pay taxes and filing a false or fraudulent tax return, and this comes after the president's son really sparked chaos, pandemonium, full, on capitol hill. he made a surprise visit there. house republicans were just starting the process of holding him in contempt for not complying with their subpoena to sit for a closed-door deposition last month. he defied that subpoena saying he'd only publicly testify and to put it lightly, republicans were not pleased. >> you are the epitome of white privilege, coming into the oversight committee, spitting in our face, ignoring a congressional subpoena to be deposed. what are you afraid of? you have no balls to come up here and -- >> mr. chairman, point of inquiry. >> mr. chairman -- >> the lady's recognized -- >> if the gentle lady want thes to hear from hunter biden, we can hear from him right now. >> i think that hunter biden

should be arrested right here right now and go straight to jail. >> biden did not stay to answer questions from the committee. the damage, though, already done. watch. >> there is one thing that republicans and democrats seem to have in common today, which is that we're willing to be players in a game. both sides at times using this hearing to take shots at our favorite political nemeses. this is a game where nobody wins and everybody loses. it is washington at its worst. and i'll tell it like it is without pointing the finger at either party. this sucks. >> joining us now is that woman you just heard from, democratic congresswoman of california, katie porter. she's a member of the oversight committee, and she was there as this all went down. congresswoman, great to have you. thanks very much for being with me. i wonder what you have to say to this, james comer after all that went on another network and here's what he said.

>> i think that the american people saw the arrogance and entitlement of the president's son. look, so in my opinion, the bidens are the ones that got played today. >> he did defy that subpoena for what they called for, which is a closed door deposition. comer did say they would invite him to testify publicly after a closed door deposition. why is hunter biden's position acceptable or do you not think it is? >> i actually do not understand why the republicans here have an unacceptable position, which is if hunter biden was willing to testify before all of us, before the american people, republican, democrat, all of us in open -- in an opening hearing room, that seems to me to provide more accountability, more actual oversight than the closed door private deposition. we're in the people's house. we should be doing the people's business in front of the american people. so i didn't really appreciate

all of the stunts that were yesterday, all of the partisan bickering. it was exhausting. especially in the midst of what was going on over in the capitol, which is republicans couldn't even get it together for us to do any legislative business. we had canceled votes. might be a new year, but it's the same old bs that we saw last year on capitol hill. >> look, and by the way, you got to fund the government pretty soon. we'll goet to that in a moment. just this perspective from "the wall street journal" editorial board who writes despite democratic claims that hunter is right to refuse because he offered to testify in public. that's not his choice. his choice is answer the question put to him on invoke his fifth amendment right to decline. 2021 you and a number of other democrats held mark meadow and steve bannon in contempt for failing to cooperate with the january 6th committee. the question here is why is this different? >> well, i think in the january 6th situation, they refused to provide any information at all. i think here the issue is -- my suggestion to my republican

colleagues, i went over to the other side of the hearing room and talked to a couple of my republican colleagues who shared my frustration, frankly, at what was going on yesterday. i said have him come in. he clearly knows his way to the oversight room. he managed to show up today to create all that chaos early in the hearing. have him testify publicly. if he takes the fifth, we'll know that. if he says things that we think for whatever reason require follow-up in a private deposition, then that's the move then, but i think -- you know, i think here what republicans are hoping to gain from is the spectacle of hunter biden, rather than giving answers. look, that's what oversight's about. it's about getting information. this is the committee where real work used to in the not so distant past happen. this is the committee where i got free covid testing for every single american. this is the committee where i held big pharma, their feet to the fire for price gouging. even under this republican majority. we had some productive hearings early in the term.

for instance, one on unemployment fraud. so i think the answer here is if he's willing to come in publicly and testify before all of us, the american people, then let's do that. then if there is a need for some reason classified information, i don't know what it would be, to have a private deposition, then we'll take that up when it's time. >> i think the question is would he abide by that, by any sort of behind closed doors -- >> he has said multitple times e will do an open testimony in front of the american people at the oversight committee. let's start there. i mean, i think one of the challenges here is we don't have any facts to support any wrongdoing by president biden, so it isn't clear what the republicans are even seeking. >> let's talk about the work you guys have to do to keep things running for the country, potentially a partial government shutdown is eight days away and what we saw yesterday in the house is some house conservatives tanking a procedural vote in protest of this bipartisan agreement. do you think we are headed at least for a partial government shutdown. >> i have seen this show, this

movie so many times, and it is just -- i wish this series would be canceled. the shutdown show is terrible. and it's really anxiety producing for american families, federal workers, their kids, people, seniors, people who rely on government assistance to continue to have this. we have seen in the past as you know, continuing resolutions that continue to fund government. we've done that since the end of september. i think it's a possibility we do that again, but the more troubling thing is we're watching what's happening to speaker mike johnson is really a kind of replay of what we saw happen to kevin mccarthy. there doesn't seem to be any resolution within the republican caucus about being willing to fund the fgovernment. that is work the republicans have to do within their own party. there's not a lot democrats can do to help them get there. >> the deal reached between speaker johnson and leader mccarthy includes 20 billion in cuts to irs funding now, in 2024, rather than more spread

out. are you comfortable with losing some of that irs funding that democrats have pushed so hard for? >> cutting the irs's funding is really back as wards frankly, it doesn't accomplish anything. the whole point of funding the irs is so that the irs can fulfill its mission, which is funding the government. if we're actually trying to make sure government has resources and that we're not overspending that we have money coming into our kau fcoffers to pay for the programs we agree we need, we ought to fund the irs. every dollar we put into the irs returns four or five times the revenue in terms of collection of taxes that are legally owed. so this is a very kind of disingenuous strategy to suggest that somehow cutting funding from the irs is solving our budget problems. it won't. >> the cbo laid out what it would mean in terms of adding to the deficit. but you would agree to it

reluctantly to get a budget. >> we have to fund the government. a shutdown is unacceptable. but i think that it is important as we're still in the middle of this debate to educate the american people that cutting the irs funding is deepening our deficit problems, not solving it. >> the shutdown show not a netflix series that i would want to watch. let's hope the american people don't have to live it. congresswoman katie porter, thank you. >> thank you. and we do have breaking news on the nfl front, bill belichick and the new england patriots are reportedly parting ways after 24 seasons. more on a monumental shift to the league next.

that breaking news from the nfl, according to multiple reports, bill belichick is out as the new england patriots' head coach. that is after 24 legendary seasons. he's considered by many to be the greatest pro football coach of all time winning six super bowls. the head coach of the patriots, two more as a defensive coordinator for the bill parcells new york giants. there's no word if belichick plans to retire or move to another team next season. we have cnn's andy scholes who's going to join us with more. there has been a lot of talk about this over the course of the last couple of months, and yet, wow. >> yeah, you know, we knew this day might be coming as you mentioned, phil. after 24 years and the most successful run any coach has ever had with bone team in leage history, it still comes as a bit of a shock. bill belichick went to nine super bowls. he won six of them with tom brady. it was his coaching and the longevity of it that makes it so

impressive. they won the three super bowls early in his time with the patriots, in '01, '03, '04. went ten years, had to rebuild a whole new team around himself and tom brady and they ended up winning three more, six total with bill belichick. over the last years since tim brady left, it hasn't been going as well in new england. this season they went 4 and 13, and the questions started to really come about, you know, could bill belichick both coach and still be the general manager and pick all the players because a lot of their drafts have not gone very well for the patriots. but bill belichick, they're going to have a press conference later today, him and owner robert kraft at noon eastern where they're going to talk about this. all the reports right now phil and poppy, it's not like nick saban, it's not saying bill belichick is retiring. it's just saying him and the patriots are parting ways. so bill belichick, and you know, i think is still going to continue coaching. >> with who?

>> there's the question now, the patriots, there's now eight openings in the nfl including the patriots. you know, some of the landing spots that have really been thrown out there are the atlanta falcons, could he coach the team that he infamously beat in that super bowl coming back from down 28-3. the washington commanders have an opening now, the seahawks. the los angeles chargers are an intriguing option because they have justin herbert at quarterback, los angeles, he could go out west. but the big thing is in my opinion, guys, is bill belichick, he is 15 wins shy of becoming the all time winningest coach in league history. i think that's something that's important to him. he would need to coach at least two or three more seasons to accomplish that. where that's going to be, that now becomes the big question. >> it's going to be a great press conference. he's known to just be so effusive and ebb ewe lent with the media. >> right now as we speak, israel is in court defending itself in

the international court of justice against allegations of genocide in gaza. a former prosecutor for the international criminal c court jojoins us.

in the first three weeks alone following 7 october, israel deployed 6,000 bombs per

week. at least 200 times it has deployed 2,000 pound bombs in seven areas of palestine designated as safe. >> right now you are looking at live pictures from the hague in the netherlands as israel is in court there this morning to defend its actions in gaza in a case with huge stakes. it could shape the war against hamas. the international court of justice is just wrapping up its first day of hearings. in this case, it has been brought by south africa. it accuses israel of committing genocide in gaza. this has sparked protests outside the court. you see there the streets of the netherlands, pro-palestinian and pro-israel demonstrators showing up. dutch police had to separate the groups. in a petition late last month, south africa alleged that acts and omissions by israel are genocidal in character and they are committed with the intent to destroy palestinians in gaza and as part of the broader palestinian national racial and

ethnic group. more than 23,000 people have been killed in gaza since october 7th. that is according to the hamas-controlled health ministry. millions have been displaced and the united nations has warned the entire population in the war-torn gaza strip faces the risk of famine. israel firmly rejects south the idf is doing its utmost to minimize civilian casualties while hamas is doing its utmost to maximize them. the idf urges palestinian civilians to leave war zones by making phone calls, providing safe passage corridors. >> the united states specifically the secretary of state an thony blinken denounci the petition. listen to this. >> the charge of genocide is meritless. it's particularly galling given that those who are attacking israel, hamas, hezbollah, the

houthis, as well as their supporter, iran, continue to openly call for the annihilation of israel and the mass murder of jews. >> the international court of justice is a main judicial body of the united nations. a 1948 convention after the holocaust made genocide a crime. it gave the icj, this court, the authority to determine whether states nations have committed it, so the question is what happens with this case brought by south africa? no one really knows better than the former chief prosecutor at the ic, which prosecutes individuals for war crimes and genocide while the international court of justice settles disputes between nations. i appreciate you being with us on such a significant day. i would like your take now that the first day of argument is over. we'll hear israel's side tomorrow. south africa is asking israel to completely suspend their military operations in gaza. do you think these allegations have merit? where do you thing this court

goes? >> south africa is transforming the war conflict into a justice discussion. i think that's crucially important because i like to say they are the victims. israel are victims and palestinian victims. so the south african move is helping us to move from war to justice. what will happen with that? i think the most important thing is in a couple weeks, the court will decide to issue prohibitional measures, and one point very clear is the blockade of water and gasoline is illegal. that blockade is directly against civilians. you can discuss the bombing. the bombing is more complicated legally, but the blockade is illegal. so i expect that in a couple

weeks, the court of justice, the international court of justice will decide israel should stop the blockade and issue to stop the blockade. >> one of the key questions i have in all of this is about hamas' actions. it is indisputable that hamas uses palestinian civilians as human shields. they often base their operations around civilian infrastructure. do hamas' actions and the way it attacked israel on october 7th, does that factor in to a potential ruling here? >> well, hamas clearly committed genocide, to me. i say that because his intention to destroy israelis in the region. hamas now is using civilians as a shield.

hamas, in the international justice, states appear. that's why the ruling will not be about hamas, because it's not a state. >> but just, you're exactly right on the technical terms, however, hamas is the entity within gaza that israel is fighting. >> yes. but the solution for hamas is a criminal case. that's why it's important the other court in the hague, the international courts has opened an investigation in gaza, so the international court planning by the leaders and that for me is what we have to do. to control hamas crimes, go for justice. but for me, there are two aspects because hamas is an organized crime group. okay. the basic organized crime groups are controlled by leaders and money.

and we are not doing that. israel is not prosecuting hamas leaders or israel is not investigating the money flowing in. they announced weeks ago to explain the money flows to hamas. we should do that. we are killing soldiers. no more killing soldiers. prosecute the generals. >> one more question that i have for you is, it's kind of complicated but it is important in terms of achieving justice, whichever way you think it should go. israel is not party to the rome statute. that's the part of this that created the court. hamas, as you said, a terror group you said is committed genocide. is there a question when this court rules does any of it get implemented? >> israel is part of the

genocide convention. south africa in the case before the court, that's about the convention. in the other court, the international court, palestine was accepted. >> in 2015. >> by u.n. first as a state and then the court accepted in 2015, and 2021, the court opened an investigation in gaza. and it's jerusalem and west bank. so the procedure was in israel and was in ramallah and he announced it. i am conducting an investigation. we do not know who is investigated, but hamas could be investigated by israeli judges and by the international criminal court, by both, because but of course, the international criminal court could also investigate bombings committed by israel. >> it's very crucial hearing, it will continue.

we'll keep following it. we appreciate your expertise. thank you. >> thank you. gop rivals nikki haley and ron desantis exchanging sharp attacks in last night's cnn debate, trying to score political points against each other though largely avoiding criticizing donald trump.