>> harris: it's been a busy day. can you imagine being the white house press briefing today? kjb, karine jean-pierre, and being the white house press secretary you know you are going to get a ton of questions. stick with israel, a sticking point with them not wanting to pause, it has heated up and you have seen the coordinator for strategic communications john kirby talking about it. watch fox. "america reports" now. >> sandra: thank you, harris. less than a year out from the

presidential election, the republican's top candidate is back in court with family and finances in the spotlight. former president donald trump's daughter ivanka trump giving testimony, taking the stand as the latest with it for the prosecution in the civil fraud trial against her father. hello, welcome, i'm sandra smith in new york. >> john: i'm john roberts in washington and this is "america reports". ivanka trump taking center stage, appearing on the stand under subpoena. >> sandra: appeals court removed her as a defendant back in june because she was no longer part of the trump organization by 2016 and the statute of limitations had already expired. >> john: her appearance follows testimony by her father on monday and her two brothers last week. nate foy live outside the courthouse in new york. what's going on right there right now? >> john, sandra, good afternoon. right now the court is on lunch and ivanka trump will take the stand once again when the afternoon session begins at

2:15. so far, she's calm and composed on the witness stand, pretty aggressive questioning coming from the state attorney general's office about her involvement in securing loans as a former executive of the trump organization. specifically at the doral property, some transactions dating back to 2011, outside the statute of limitations. ivanka, a former executive, former co-defendant in the trial as you had mentioned, her brothers, eric and don, jr., and her father are co-defendants in the trial. while entering the courthouse, new york attorney general letitia james spoke about her as if she was still a defendant. listen to this. >> miss trump will do all that she can to try to separate herself from this corporation but she's tied to the trump organization and to these properties that she helped secure financing for. >> ivanka's brothers, eric and

don, jr., they testified last week they had no involvement in preparing statements of financial condition, something ivanka has also said on the stand. they said they left the accounting to the company's accountants. president trump himself said under oath on monday this case should be dismissed immediately, calling attorney general games a political hack and the judge biased. trump laid out his defense on truth social writing no victims, no defaults, conservative financial statements, 100% disclaimer clause, corrupt attorney general, trump hating judge equals no case. ivanka's testimony is expected to stretch into tomorrow. trump's lawyers are going to question her as well so she does not have to come back up to new york from florida when trump's lawyers present his defense later on. back to you. >> john: we'll see if we hear from the former president's

attorneys today. nate, thank you. >> senator jordan, ranking member nadler and members of the committee. >> palestinians deserve to speak on the genocide of their families. >> is the white house's view that these actions should be condemned? >> i've sort of kind of seen the reporting here and there, i'm not going to go into specifics on that particular thing. >> sandra: it is a busy afternoon in washington. any moment now, the white house press secretary karine jean-pierre is set to take questions from reporters after she once again bungled the biden response to antisemitism. anti-israel protestors disrupted a house judiciary hearing on the rising threats against jewish students across america's college campuses. the controversy comes as israeli troops are fighting in the heart of gaza city, the idf is attacking the vast network of underground tunnels used by

hamas. fox team coverage from across the globe, and the breaking news from the war in the middle east. trey yingst is live in southern israel for us. where does the battle for gaza city stand at this moment, trey? >> sandra, good afternoon. the battle rages on behind me inside the gaza strip between israeli forces and hamas militants that continue to ambush those troops. israelis say the death toll among their soldiers is 31 troops since the operation began. and the israelis are pushing deeper into gaza city. we understand at this hour palestinian media reports they are within half a mile of the al-shifa hospital, the largest hospital in all of gaza and also the location the israelis say is holding hamas leadership underneath the hospital in the tunnel network under gaza. this is a difficult battle as the israelis push in. they are using air force and artillery units along the border

to support infantry troops. and thousands of palestinians headed south heeding the warnings from the israelis to get out of the battle zone. some reports indicate up to 50,000 palestinian civilians took this evacuation corridor that was developed by israel on the road that runs from the northern part of the strip to the southern part. in the southern part of gaza, we do know more aid is making its way not gaza strip. israelis say more than 600 aid trucks have made it into gaza since the war began. this is a key point as israelis go back and forth with their allies and biden administration. we did question a commander about the process to get aid into gaza. take a listen. >> those trucks are coming on the crossing, taking israeli security clearance, and then by a convoy, this convoy enters to

gaza to the u.n.. and we are monitoring this aid as much as we can. we said and i'm saying again, if we will see, hamas will take hold on this humanitarian aid, we will stop it. >> the aid trucks go to an israeli crossing where they are inspected and then monitored to the rafah crossing between gaza and egypt before the aid makes it to the palestinian people. >> sandra: trey, we will check back in with you shortly. thank you. >> john: a heated start to a house hearing on the growing antisemitic trend at some of the colleges and universities. several hecklers disrupted proceedings and initially prevented witnesses from speaking. eventually lawmakers did get to hear from students and experts about what they are witnessing on campuses across the country. hillary vaughn is live on capitol hill. division on full display today.

>> you are right, this hearing today kicked off to kind of an ironic start, pro palestinian protestors shout over jewish college students invited by lawmakers to testify about the threats, the attacks and the antisemitism that they are experiencing on campus. but talking here today, sharing their viewpoint they found just as difficult on capitol hill as they do back on campus. these students told lawmakers that many of them have seen swastikas on campus, and don't think the schools are doing enough. and they say massive pro palestinian anti-israel protests are funded by somebody and want to follow the money. >> the protestors followed out don't understand they are playing into the hands of iran. we need to fully fund investigations into the funding that goes to antisemitism.

>> but democrats say republicans need to put their money where their mouth is, saying if they really want to fight antisemitism they need to fully fund president biden's request for more money for the office of civil rights and say if the gop supports freedom of speech, they would not have censured rashida tlaib. >> she did not threaten anybody, or advocate for violence. >> but in part using the phrase from the river to the sea, part of the hamas charter and used to call for the destruction of israel and genocide of the jewish people. >> john: she declared that was an aspirational slogan. a lot of her colleagues, as well as other americans disagree with that.

hillary, thank you as always, appreciate it. >> sandra: jonathan turley, constitutional law attorney, george washington university law professor and fox news contributor. great to see you. more from the pro palestinian protestors at today's hearing, listen. >> over 10,000 people have been killed and you are trying to silence free speech of students. >> i'm speaking up against genocide, because of antisemitism. how is that [bleep]. >> palestinian students cannot be censored. >> sandra: the college campuses, we see the rise in antisemitism and threats on college campuses all over. weigh in on this moment, jonathan. >> sandra, what you saw in the committee hearing is nothing new from us in academia. we have seen these types of deplatforming efforts as it's

called used on campus to prevent others from hearing opposing views. that's what ripping down the hamas hostage fliers are all about. these people believe it's an exercise of free speech. one of my kids at george washington university just a few days ago saw a person walking through the campus, ripping down those hostage fliers, including in front of our law school. that sense of entitlement did not just development this week. it's really been taught to these students, and it's been taught to them, including by university professors. there are professors that believe that silencing others is a form of free speech, told them that free speech is harmful, and has to be controlled. you have major media that is now expressing shock but "new york times" published pieces by a professor who said that he was totally ok with protestors killing conservatives.

so, the "new york times" which banned senator cotton had no problem in publishing people like that. so, for those of us who have been on college campuses for years and watched conservatives, libertarians, dissenting faculty, silenced, this is not new. and indeed, many of the faculty objecting have not been heard before in the last few weeks and i'm glad that we are beginning to focus on what is happening on our campuses. >> sandra: but perhaps more than just a focus on that, perhaps there will be accountability. you have now the education secretary warning schools could lose federal funds if they don't adequately fight this growing antisemitism, but the colleges are certainly under a lot of pressure in this moment. every word they say, every statement they put out, what do you believe the college campuses need to do in this moment? >> well, you know, i've said that i oppose efforts to ban

palestinian groups because i believe that we need to protect free speech for everyone. and at the same time, however, people need to feel safe. a lot of the students at g.w., other campuses don't feel safe because of the rhetoric that's being used by many of these protests. and so universities have to walk that fine line, but higher education is based on free expression and free thought. and we have to be resistant to banning of groups while also insisting that groups have to refrain from threatening language, and most importantly, we need to discipline students who are tearing down fliers, preventing others from speaking. we should have been doing that for years, and we should do that now. >> sandra: it would be really interesting to see where the white house goes with this. i want to highlight obviously we are watching what's happening on capitol hill and we are about to hear from this white house who also has struggled with their

messaging. we mentioned karine jean-pierre and the message from the microphone that she quickly had to then good and clarify via a statement and a tweet about her response to those that are ripping down the pictures of the kidnapped children in this country. this seems to be a moment that is highlighting a lot of where we stand as a country. young people, government officials and beyond. >> it does. yeah, it's -- for jean pierre, i was left sort of dumbfounded by that moment. why is that a tough question? you know, this particular thing that she was referring to is antisemitism, it's anti- -- efforts here are directed towards jewish people and in tearing down these fliers. put up your own fliers. there is a solution. so, it shouldn't be a tough question to support free speech

while pursuing those who would deny others the chance to speak. and you know, part of -- i've been really shocked by the level of threats and reckless rhetoric we have seen on our campuses, i've talked to jewish students who are very concerned, i know some parents have asked their kids to come home because they don't have faith that the universities can protect them. we need to stop that. i mean, universities need to be a safe space for everyone to be heard and heard respectfully. >> sandra: bari weiss said it's power to a movement that threaten not just jews but america itself. incredible piece in this moment. jonathan, thank you so much. we have some breaking news to get to. >> john: indeed, let's go to the white house where john kirby, the national security council spokesman is talking about getting americans out of gaza as he takes questions at the daily briefing.

jump in here. update at the crossing at rafah, more than 80 trucks crossed, total 650, again not enough, we will work to push that and as of now, aware of more than 400 americans and family members who have been able to depart and support of our embassy on the ground and egypt. there have been no change in that number since yesterday. so, no more u.s. citizens or family members got out since the last time -- since yesterday when i was up here talking to you guys. i thought i would give you an update. that's it. >> is there a reason why more americans have not left and do you have an update on the number of americans still in gaza now. >> the fact that we know we have 400 or so out so far, that leaves a population of about 5

to 600 left when you count family members in there. so, we are working to get them all out, obviously. and the reason why changes every day. i mean, as i said before, this is a dynamic situation. sometimes it's the vetting process, sometimes it's obstacles, not physical obstacles but policy obstacles that hamas might throw up. so, we are confident the flow will continue, but as i've said before, we shouldn't comfort ourselves in thinking that every day it's going to be sort of a similar approach and a similar number and some sort of similar sense of ease here every day. it has to be worked almost all over again. >> and you mentioned the comments earlier today. where he said that post war environment palestinian-led governance in gaza unified under -- unified with the west bank under palestinian authority. is that the stated policy of the

united states that gaza and west bank need to be reunified control, and they can control what is the final governance structure in gaza so who controls what will happen in gaza. united states, is it israel, is it the palestinian people. >> it's, as the secretary said, we want to make sure that gaza and the west bank are for the palestinian people, and that they have a vote, they have a voice that they get to be the determining factor in what governance looks like where they are living in their homes. and that remains our policy and will going forward. what does the governance structure look like and when does it get put in place and who are the players that are going to help, all that we are working out. those are all the questions we are asking ourselves and the questions we are asking of our partners. i can't stand here today and tell you that this is exactly what the structure is going to be, but that is -- that is what

we are trying to drive to is a process to get answers to those questions. >> secretary blinken was said there was a final -- a goal in mind, unified control of gaza and the west bank under the palestinian authority. is that not u.s. policy? >> we believe the palestinians should be in charge of their future and they should be the determining voice and factor in their future. >> can you confirm the president and prime minister netanyahu discussed a three-day humanitarian pause when they spoke most recently, and if so, how are discussions going? >> i can't confirm those reports. i can confirm in almost every conversation that we are having with the israelis right now, we are talking about the benefit of humanitarian pauses and again, you saw the g7 foreign ministers also unite around that idea. >> how are discussions on that going? >> we are continuing to have those discussions. i don't have an update for you. i would remind that there are and already been a couple of small humanitarian pauses to

allow people to get out, including a small number of hostages who have been released. this is not a now idea but something we believe should be continued, to continue to be pursued. >> comments refer to a "transition period" after this conflict. could you expand on that and explain what does a transition period look like to this administration? >> i think he was referring to this idea, and came up yesterday, where prime minister netanyahu talked about an indefinite period on the ground. i think he was referring to the idea, the fact that in the immediate aftermath of conflict it's certainly plausible that at least for some period of time israeli defense forces are still going to be in gaza to manage the immediate aftermath and security situation but that nothing has changed about our view, it shouldn't be the long-term solution, about an idf

reoccupation of gaza as a long-term governance solution. >> one additional question. the u.n. commissioner for human rights said after visiting the rafah border he was witnessing the gates to a living nightmare and he said that while hamas, what it did on october 7th was a war crime, he also has concerns about the collective punishment of palestinians, amounting to a war crime. what is the administration response and what he would say. >> without responding directly to every comment made by every official around the world, i would just tell you that we are watching these events as closely as we can, of course, we are in constant touch with our israeli counterparts. we are not going to react to every event on the battlefield but we are continuing to stress to our israeli counterparts, and you heard from secretary blinken as early as today, cautious, careful and deliberate as possible and avoid taking civilian life as much as they can and the prosecution of the operations. now, you had asked me yesterday

about golan heights. so i just wanted to be fair here. there has been no change in our position on the golan heights. i think secretary blinken talked in february of 21, no change in the policy as long as the situation in syria remains as it is, we understand that israel has legitimate security needs there in the golan heights. so no change, no policy change. >> is the palestinian authority capable of letting gaza now, once the fighting backs down. >> i don't know now, we have a final solution here on how gaza will be governed, steve. and obviously the palestinian authority would have to be a part of that discussion from the get-go, and as well as with other regional partners. but w wee that solution set now. what we do believe, as secretary blinken said, the palestinian

people should be in charge of their destiny and future. >> and when you are trying to get american hostages out, how does that work? are you in direct contact with hamas? >> some of our partners do and helpful in that regard. >> any progress to note? >> i had no specific progress to announce or speak to today, other than that we continue to be focused on trying t get all the hostages out, all of them. and in order to do that, as we saw with the first four that got out, two americans and two israelis a couple days later, there were -- there was enough of a pause in the fighting to allow for their safe passage, and that's what we are trying to get cemented, an agreement for as many pauses as might be necessary to get all of them out. but it's a delicate negotiating process and we are still working at it. >> on that note, john, and thanks for coming again, by the

way. should we be thinking about humanitarian pauses in the context of hostages, because you referenced the last time the prime minister agreed to some, it was to allow hostages out. or are there other factors, getting more aid in. etc. every time it has happened so far it's for the hostages alone. >> i would recommend you think about it in terms of all the above. i mean, obviously one of the most urgent pressing needs is to get the hostages, to get their release secured, back with their families. that's key priority. but it's also a priority to get aid in and also to allow for people who are not hostages t find a way out of gaza or ways out of gaza. so, it's all of the above. but the key focus right now is definitely on hostage release. >> is the lack of humanitarian

pauses a factor in why hundreds of americans are still stuck there? >> there are lots of complicating factors to the earlier question i got about why we haven't seen more movement over the last 24 hours. and the need to be able to cross rafah safely without fear of coming under fire is certainly one of those factors. >> thank you. >> just to follow up on that hostages, israeli government sources telling abc news israel won't accept release of 10 to 15 hostages, they want closer to 50. is that what the white house agrees with? >> i'm not going to negotiate in public. >> can you talk more about what demands hamas is making to release these hostages? i know you are not in direct contact. any guidance you can give. >> again, i'm not going to get into negotiate in in public. we have a way to communicate with hamas, we are using that

way, and we are doing everything we can to get these folks back with their families. but i think you can understand that i could be putting all that process at risk if i talk about the negotiating stance of one or another partner in this. >> any sense of proof of life that, anything you can give us as far as how you would know these hostages are alive right now? >> i'm not aware of any specific proof of life for specific hostages to include the small number of americans that are still being held hostage. we don't have any indication to the contrary they are not still alive, so we are operating under that assumption. >> thanks, careen. admiral, a few days hezbollah delivered a speech that sought there might be more violence in the northern front. over the last days, has the u.s. tracked any escalation there, what have you expected? >> we have seen some rocket attacks from southern lebanon into northern israel but have

not seen a wholesale effort by hezbollah to join this fight or to open up a "second front." >> and as a follow-up, is there a sense as to what sort of role at the moment tehran might be playing, communication with the forces there in the north? >> you mean hezbollah forces? aside from the fact that they continue to resource, train, and provide capabilities to hezbollah, i'm not aware of anything overt that i could speak to today. but i mean, i don't want you to take away from that that we are sort of blind to the fact that hezbollah is supported by tehran. >> john, we are reporting that qatar and egypt are negotiating a deal with hamas to release up to 15 hostages if there is a 48-hour humanitarian pause. is that something the u.s. would support? or -- >> i just got that question. i'm not going to negotiate in public. >> i know you talked about the universe of hostages.

how much does the u.s. know who they are, and identify who all the people are? >> american hostages? >> the entire group of hostages. who they are, where they are from. >> i don't know the degree which we in the united states here have perfect visibility on all the identities of all the hostages. that has been an effort that we have been working on with our israeli counterparts. certainly the israelis are also working hard to make sure they know who is in that population. we have a good sense of the small number of americans who they are, but you know, out of privacy concern, we are not going to talk about that. >> do you know how many pauses it would take to get everyone out? >> it would depend on what's negotiated, how much in each pool and over what period of time. what i can tell you is we want t stay open to the idea that it might take, in fact likely could take more than one humanitarian pause to get them all out.

>> i know you can't get into details about the length of the humanitarian pause under negotiation, logistically would that work for the idf forces on the ground in gaza. stay camped out, expectation to leave? how would that even work? >> again, without getting into hypotheticals and not talking for another military, what we are talking about here is temporary fixed in time, short duration, hours to days, depends on the need. and then also localized in terms of the map. so it would be an agreement that for a set period of time on, in this -- in these grid coordinates, there would be a pause in the fighting. that does not mean there won't be or couldn't be fighting outside that zone during that same period of time. so all of that has to get factored in and i have no doubt on the israeli side as they look at each proposal, they'll think about the impact and potential impact on their military

operations on the ground or in the air. >> i have a few questions on ukraine. >> a few, how many is a few? i'll take my pen out here. >> a dispute in recent days in the ukrainian leadership whether the war has reached a stalemate. what's your assessment, and does the president still believe that ukraine can win back its territory? >> okay. obviously as i've said many times before we are not going to characterize ukrainian military operations. they can speak for this. president zelenskyy talked about this on sunday that he does not believe that they are in a stalemate but that's for him and his commanders to talk about.

what i can tell you is that the front from the donbas area and beyond, remains an active front, and there is fighting along that front, all along that front. the ukrainians will be the first to tell you that they aren't making and have not made as much progress on the counteroffensive as they would like, and that's why we are so focused on making sure we continue to provide security assistance to them so that they can make the most of the time they have left before the weather is really going to set in and make it harder for them to make any progress. and your question, does the president believe they can, absolutely we believe that they can win back their territory. i think they have been underestimated since the beginning of this conflict. they are capable, strong, brave, they have good command and control, and there's no doubt in our mind that they can continue to succeed. but, you know, the enemy gets a vote. russia has planted tens of

thousands of mines along that front, making it harder for them to advance and as i said, the weather is not cooperating here for much longer. >> security assistance for ukraine, a group of senate republicans demand border security measures, including changes in asylum policies. as a condition for further aid for ukraine. is the president open to such changes and how much funds do you still have available for ukraine from the previous appropriations? >> first question, i would just say that the reason why the president included border security funding in the supplemental is because he agrees that we need cooperation from congress to improve our capability at the border, and if they are serious about wanting to help with border needs, then pass the supplemental request that the president submitted. and as for the money that's left, what i can tell you is that roughly -- of the total

funds provided to ukraine since the beginning of the war, in excess of $60 billion, and that's not just security assistance, that's economic and financial, humanitarian assistance. greater than 90% of security assistance replenishment funds have been expended now and the defense department is down to about $1.1 billion of replenishment money left as we head into the wintertime. so, as i've said before, the runway is getting shorter and that's why we need that supplemental request approved. >> thank you. guterres was talking about the deaths that occurred in gaza, and said something clearly wrong the way israeli military operations are being run. does the u.s. agree with that assessment? >> again, i'm not going to

armchair quarterback this fight from this podium. we are not going to react to every event, every strike on the ground. we are going to continue to provide israel with what it needs to defend itself and to go after hamas leadership. and we are going to continue to urge them as you heard secretary blinken say in tokyo, urge them to be as cautious and deliberate when it comes to civilian casualties as possible. we recognize many, many thousands of palestinians have been killed and wounded in this conflict. and each one is a tragedy, we grieve and mourn with each family grieving and mourning, and that's why we are going to continue to stress the law of armed conflict be fully and completely complied with. >> one thing that falls under your purview, something the white house and campaign and the president's allies often say, one of the selling points is his leadership on the world stage, according to ukraine, israel, his ability to rein -- nato, and

37% of voters believe biden is the world leader, and 48% think trump is. >> we are not focused on polls at the national security council, not going to -- it's not going to govern the policies we are developing. the options we are providing to the commander in chief or the way we executed on the options. it would take me an hour to get to, point to chapter and verse this president has done on the world stage to advance national security interests. >> john, does the president think that israel's plan to ousted hamas is achievable militarily? >> the president believes, because he's seen it on our own, on the efforts to go after isis and after al-qaeda, that it is absolutely possible. through military and other

means, to disrupt and degrade, if not decimate a terrorist network's ability to resource itself, to plan, to operate and execute attacks. we are not gonna, again, characterize or analyze publicly israeli war plans. they should be the ones speaking to that. right now, they are focused on putting pressure on hamas leadership, specifically in gaza city, and they are pursuing that through military means and again, we are doing everything we can to help them. >> how important is the timeline to that belief that this is achievable? and the reason i ask is because of this polling that shows americans are very deeply divided on israel's counter attack, only 36% said it's very important or extremely important to provide aid, 40% of americans said the military response has gone too far, and among democrats, it's 58%. is he at all concerned about backsliding in support for this mission among key constituencies

of his base? >> as a leader who has been, you know, deeply involved in the middle east for much of his public life, he understands there is a lot of complex history here and understands there is a lot of strong feelings on all sides about what's going on right now. he appreciates that. but he's not going to -- he's not going to develop policy options here for the united states or administer our national security interests, again according to polling data, which shifts and change. he's going to do it based on principles, based on a firm belief and israel's right to exist as a nation and the israeli people right to live in peace and security as well as the palestinians, and that's going to govern how he makes his decisions with respect to our national interest, to include, jacqui, his firm belief and the promise of a two-state solution and how we cannot abandon that. >> sends american troops into

gaza to get american hostages? >> no plans to put american troops on the ground in combat in this fight and we are pursuing a series of steps, largely through negotiations to get our hostages out. >> thank you, karine. john, do you think that hamas, do you believe hamas is holding all the hostages in gaza or other groups like islamic jihad and others, and use the same channel communication via your partners to try to deal with them. >> we don't have a perfect picture about where everybody is, what condition they are in, or how they are being held. we cannot -- we cannot rule out the possibility that other groups than hamas may have hostages they are holding. >> yesterday you said there is no red lines militarily for israel. but is there any political red lines. i think the secretary blinken when he said that no transfer of palestinians and no, in a way,

allowing for a security buffer zone that would be on palestinian land. is it something that administration will convey to the israelis and i'm sure seen the images of thousands, 15 thousands, women and children, walking on foot with little belongings from northern gaza to southern gaza. you believe this is not against international law when they require them to move from place to place. >> i appreciate the efforts to have us react in realtime to events, i'm not going to do that. my question about permanent displacement, that is not a new policy. secretary blinken was reiterating what we have said time and time again since this conflict began, that we do not support, and won't support any kind of permanent displacement of palestinians outside gaza. >> i would like to take another stab at east asia today, please. first of all, on monday the

president biden is meeting indonesia's president, second largest muslim country in the world. what is his message to the president and why does the statement the white house put out about this make no mention of the situation in gaza when we know that that president is going to a meeting of the organization of islamic cooperation the day before where that's the main subject. >> i can't speak to the announcements, specifics of the announcements. i mean, if we listed every single topic that every single discussion the president has with every single leader came up, no end to the announcements. i have no doubt the situation in the middle east should come up. i don't think you should read anything into the fact it was not in the announcement. i would not worry about that. clearly a lot on the plate to discuss with the president, and president biden looks forward to that, particularly when it comes

to the security, economic and diplomatic challenges that remain in the indo-pacific. >> can you confirm japanese media reporting that november 15th is the date of the biden-xi meeting. can you confirm that and preview for us, please? >> no, and no. >> i wanted to ask you again about the civilians living in gaza. you talked about pushes for humanitarian pause and you don't support permanent displacement of those civilians outside of gaza. >> that's right. >> can you lay out what the u.s. position is then on protecting the civilians from these airstrikes or from other israeli military operations given that, yeah, what the u.s. position is on protecting these people when they have nowhere else to go. >> you are talking about the civilians moving to the south or are near the crossing, yes. with the caveat we are not

involved militarily in this conflict, we urge our israeli counterparts not to take military action, strikes, that would put innocent civilians in greater harm's way, in all cases, but certainly particularly in those cases where these folks are doing exactly what they have been asked to do, which is move out of north gaza and into south gaza and to collect near the crossing as we continue to try to get folks out. so, we have been very plain about our concerns over military action that could put those folks in greater harm's way. >> are you putting any pressure on neighboring countries to take in palestinians fleeing gaza temporarily? i know you said you don't support permanent displacement, what about a temporary solution? >> that's going to be up to those countries to decide, what their refugee policies are and i'm not aware of any specific

asks that we are making of oat countries to take in a certain number. we understand that most people, most palestinians, they don't want to leave. it's home, and i -- and we know that some of them are worried that if they were to leave, you know, that they might not be able to go back in. so, it's not -- the most pressing issue right now is the internal displacement of more than a million, i think it's like a million and a half right now, and making sure that they are as safe as possible to your first question. but i'm not aware of any specific discussionses with other countries about refugee resettlement. >> thanks, karine. >> two questions. first on the middle east, understanding it's closed for security reasons, can you say when you think rafah will reopen fully? >> well, i mean, it remains open for stuff getting in, as i said, 80 more trucks overnight, a good

thing. and i wouldn't characterize it as closed, not in a permanent sense. just that we were not able to make any progress over the last 24 in terms of people getting out, but that doesn't diminish our confidence we'll get folks out over time. but every day it's a series of negotiations, every day it's a series of discussions about process and procedure and vetting and all that, and you know, there's going to be some days we are more successful than others. but we are not considering it permanently closed. >> separately, sorry, on the dfc announcement of the $553 million invest in the port terminal, as the u.s. tries efforts to counter what you see as china's unsustainable infrastructure lending in the region. can you talk about the strategy here and how it's working to win over global countries on that front.

>> it's not about winning folks over, we are not telling people they can't enter into investment arrangements with the p rc, that said, the president has worked hard and now over the last two years to advance what he called the pgi, the program for global investment and infrastructure, which is providing an ever increasing amount, investment opportunities for lower, middle income countries to seek more fair, more transparent, and quite frankly, more economically beneficial investment opportunities for their own infrastructure, all and the world. and he's talked about that at some length. it is providing -- we believe it is providing them alternative funding to help their own economies and their own people so they don't have to rely on the "belton road initiative,"

low results so far. >> idea of the humanitarian pauses versus a ceasefire. we talked about how those are very different things. in that context, would, say, a 72-hour humanitarian pause be different than a ceasefire? my question is, how long are humanitarian pauses, humanitarian pauses? >> humanitarians pauses are as long as they need to be for accomplishing whatever the specific purpose is, aid in, getting people out, they have to be as long as they need to be. just to be clear, to kind of reset here, talk about a ceasefire, when you use that term, when that term is implied, a general ceasefire, it cessation of hostilities for an indefinite purpose. ceasefire, at the end game and time to negotiate, brass tacks,

how are we going to end this war and we don't support that at this time. a ceasefire right now benefits hamas. it certainly also legitimizes what hamas started on october 7th. it would give them a propaganda win. see, look, now there's a ceasefire and so we are going to be an equal party to this and we have every right to continue to stay in governance in gaza and they don't and they're not. a ceasefire not only gives them time to plan and execute, but legitimizes what they started on october 7th, and that's unacceptable to president biden, and understandably so to the israeli people. a pause is temporary, localized, specific purpose. >> thank you, john. i have two questions. secretary blinken and defense secretary austin south korea and hold talks with their count counterpartners.

what role do you expect south korea to play in the middle east conflict. secondly, currently the united states is focusing on the war in ukraine and the middle east, hamas and israel wars. does the united states have a strategic plan in case of an emergence on the korean peninsula or taiwan. >> we always strive to be prepared for contingencies on the korean peninsula and in the region and the president has devoted more energy and resources for making sure we can meet the security commitments to the republic of korea, training events, intelligence collecting capabilities off the peninsula

and robust sport in the indo-pacific, naval, air and ground, and in lock step, you'll see this on hand as our defense and foreign ministers meet shortly to make sure that that alliance remains iron clad. on the first question, i know, i remembered it, actually remembered it this time. we are not going there hat in hand to ask south korea to do something specific for the middle east. those are sovereign decisions. they have to decide for themself. they have been terrific friends and partners and allies in the region but even with the support to ukraine, as ukraine battles for its independence, and those are issues the south korean people through elected leadership have to make. >> john, you mentioned earlier that the administration is in constant touch with your israeli counterparts.

do the israelis update you or apprise you of the progress they are making in this conflict against hamas? >> yes. >> and those conversations, are they with diplomatic officials, intelligence officials, military officials, can you give an update about who your counterparts are when you talk about that? >> it's all the above. >> and next week the apex summit is taking place while two conflicts are ongoing in ukraine and also this war between israel and hamas. how important is next week's apex summit given all of that that's going on? >> i think it underscores how important these kinds of relationships are, these kinds of conversations are, particularly with our friends and partners in the indo-pacific. you know, you can't -- yes, we are focused on the middle east and in europe, but we have not and will not turn a blind eye to the security challenges that remain in the indo-pacific, and

there's a lot of crossover. there are certain governments in the indo-pacific they're watching very closely how the united states manages support to ukraine and support to israel, and maybe certain lessons from that. all the more important we have the discussion in san francisco. >> circle back to ukraine. with all of the concern about what's going on in the middle east, and again as we just discussed in the indo-pacific, we also have some concern among the people who have left ukraine who are in the united states worrying that perhaps it's become a forgotten war and it's a lower priority. are there any assurances from the administration that could alay those concerns? >> look at the supplemental the president submitted a couple weeks ago, biggest chunk of that is for ukraine, for economic assistance, for security assistance, replenishing our stocks, i think, you know, our -- we prioritized it

appropriately and obviously it's not something at all that we are -- that we are walking away from. in fact, quite the contrary. >> thank you. given that india has good relationship with israel and palestine, do you see any role for india, given in the last few years this acquisition working with other countries -- >> india is a key strategic partner and i think you saw that on full display when prime minister modi was here. we will leave it to them to decide what their stance is on any crisis around the world including the middle east. >> thank you. >> john: john kirby wrapping up

the national security portion of that briefing there. and a lot of talk, sandra, about whether or not there was going to be a press from the president for three-day pause in the fighting in gaza to try to get hostages out. kirby dismissed the idea of a ceasefire, but the idea of a series of pauses localized though they might be still very much on the table. >> sandra: spent a lot of time trying to talk about the difference between a pause and a ceasefire. kirby saying it likely could take more than one humanitarian pause to get all the hostages out. as all of that was going on, john, crossing the wires was a statement from israel's military spokesperson saying hamas has lost control, has lost control of northern gaza. so we are monitoring all of this, john. >> john: and we will disseminate and rumimate over that, and john kirby coming up on "the story" with martha at 3:00.

and let's bring in morgan ortagus. so, you hung with us through that entire briefing. >> reliving my days at the state department. >> john: you were giving some color commentary. the idea even of a three-day pause, call it a temporary ceasefire, whatever you want, critics say that just plays into hamas' hands and israel of that mind as well. >> what are we getting for it, the first question. are we getting any hostages out. so, to preemptively call for the three-day ceasefire, pause, humanitarian pause, semantics here, but if you don't guarantees, and you call the pause and expect hamas to cough them up, i don't think it's going to work. i don't think anybody thinks it's going to work. >> john: maybe they give you 1 or 2, and they say continue the

pause and maybe more. kirby was trying to differentiate between a pause and a ceasefire, what he said about a ceasefire. >> humanitarian pauses are as long as they need to be for accomplishing whatever the specific purpose is, whether it's hostages out or aid in or getting people out. they have to be as long as they need to be. but just to be clear, to reset here, talk about a ceasefire, when you use that term, when that term is implied, a general ceasefire, it connotes a cessation of hostilities for indefinite period with a purpose to finding an end to the conflict. >> john: he said it would legitimize hamas's position. >> i agree, there is no reason to call for a ceasefire right now. as everyone has said and everyone has reaffirmed this, of course it would give hamas the opportunity to rearm, to fortify their positions, and israel, i do not believe, can have a

ceasefire until they have a dismantled the command and control center of hamas, until they can make sure that it is no longer a threat to the israeli people. and as it stands today on this very day, israel cannot say that to its people. look at it even from a military perspective or a political perspective, what politician in israel can stand if they started with a ceasefire right now before the job is done. that's not even a politically tenable situation for any israeli politician. >> john: if anybody was wondering what hamas' overall intent is, it was a great article in the "new york times" i pulled a quote from, ahmad, a former hamas leader in lebanon said they will keep going october 7th again and again and again. what the "new york times" -- >> why we have to stop them. >> john: hamas leaders said they waged the october 7th attack on israel because they believed the palestinian cause was slipping away and only violence could revive it. i hope that the state of war

with israel will become permanent on all the borders and that the arab world will stand with us, hamas media adviser told the "new york times." >> he's right, what happened with the abraham accords, the first peace deals in 26 years is the impossible happened, which is gulf arab states recognized israel's right to exist, they normalized relations without having a deal with the palestinians in the process. saudi as we know was on their way to making some sort of deal as well. and in fact, i was in qatar, i was on my way to israel to meet arab delegations there with the atlantic council when these attacks happened. and so not only were they trying to get the palestinian and their cause, so to speak, back on the news, the radar, they did not want peace between saudi and israel, they thought it would permanently recognize the right of the jewish state to exist in

the middle east. it would mean if you have mecca and medina making peace with jerusalem, that would effectively end the hamas cause, what they chant for, from the river to the sea. remember, they don't want a two-state solution. they want to get rid of the jewish people in the middle east and israel, either through death or forcibly removing them, but again, the whole point was if saudi and other countries followed suit and recognized that israel was a legitimate jewish state, then that ended the terrorist organization's goal. so they had to get -- they had to do this attack and inflame the middle east and stop the ability of the whole middle east to recognize that there is a jewish state that has a right to exist and thrive and be a part of the broader community of nations in the middle east. >> you were with the administration as the abraham accords were being negotiated. if israel manages to decapitate

hamas and things settle down, how long before the world can get back on track prior to october 7th. >> very interesting things out of saudi arabia over the past few weeks. there was a bipartisan delegation that went to saudi arabia, mind you, several democratic senators were on that trip who had been enormously critical of saudi arabia and who basically said they didn't want anything to do with them pt on that trip we learned from the public reports from the senators that the crown prince essentially did not take it off the table, that they could eventually make peace. we also know that we had that reporter which is a middle east news channel owned by saudi arabia that grilled miss shaw, the former hamas leader and know from public reports that saudi has intercept some of the missiles that were reportedly headed towards israel coming from the houthis in yemen. so almost a defense of israel, at least saudi indication. >> john: maybe once this is over

it might not take that long. >> what has to happen when this is over, john, the gulf arab states have to take the palestinian cause more seriously. abbas is on his 19th year of a four-year term, he canceled elections four years ago, hamas has been running gaza. no one wanted to deal with the palestinian. they were fine for it to be israel's problem and now they have to come together as an international community for a political solution that works for everybody. >> john: see if they can get that done. morgan, great to spend a lot of time with you. my best to adina. >> john: a jewish business owner showing support for the israeli hostages was stunned to see many of his staff quit in protest. >> sandra: so what happened? new yorkers showed up and lined up all the way around the block to help keep those doors ope