♪ allies facing a critical diplomatic test. and the top diplomat pushing to extend the pause in israel's war with hamas. but with hours to go before the truce ends, how long will israel agree to hold off? and will they listen to pleas from the u.s. to take a more targeted approach?

an a historic day in the house. law lawmakers expelling george santos. and coast guard reports concealed from the public for nearly ten years, containing racism, hazing and sexual assault across the agency. we're following these major developing stories and many more, all coming in right here to "cnn news central." ♪ here in just over an hour, the house is set to debate on an expulsion resolution for republican congressman george santos. the new york freshman ahead of tomorrow's vote that could make him just the sixth house member in history to get booted from the house. santos ripping his colleagues in a morning news conference, saying that they are guilty of

double standards and that he's being bullied in the wake of that scathing houth ethics committee report. it says that santos spent thousands of dollars on things like botox. personal vacations, paying off personal credit cards and luxury goods. cnn's lauren fox is live on capitol hill here. lauren, this, of course, will be a rare vote, a historic vote, what can we expect to come out of this? >> reporter: yeah, we expect that the house is going to begin debate around 2:30 this afternoon. we expect pay vote on whether or not to expel george santos will happen tomorrow. obviously, there's still a lot of questions on whether or not the votes are going to be there to take this action. you heard yesterday from house speaker mike johnson that he had some reservations about moving forward with expelling a member of congress who had not been convicted of a crime. that is a concern that you are hearing from other members as well, including jim jordan, the

chairman of the house judiciary committee. their word, their views, of course, weighing heavily at how members are looking at tomorrow's vote. i would note that george santos this morning spoke to his supporters and his strategy was to deflect and distract from the allegations raised in the house ethics report. in fact, he was asked whether any of those allegations were true. he said he was not going to go line by line in the report. he said at some point in the future he would be willing to do that. but not understanding whether or not he misused campaign funds, one of the core allegations alleged against him in that report. he also said he didn't participate fully in the ethics committee probe but he did participate to some extent when i pressed him for why he didn't sit down for an interview something requested of him. obviously, the press conference this morning made clear, he is defiant. he is not planning to step aside

but obviously pressure mounting as that vote is expected tomorrow on important to expel george santos. >> yeah, so much pressure. lauren fox live on the hill, boris. >> so if congressman santos is expelled this week, he would be the first house member in more than 160 years to be kicked out week being convicted of a crime. expulsion is very rare. it's the harshest form of punishment in the chamber and in two centuries only five members have been kicked out. three of them around the start of the civil war back in 1861, john clark, john reed and henry burnette fought and got the boot. notably, only two house members expelled. 1980, pennsylvania democrat michael myers got caught by the fbi taking a $50,000 bribe. and jim trafford from ohio was convicted of bribery, fraud, tax

evasion and forcing his aides to do chores on his family farm. notably, they were convicted before expelled. congressman santos has pled not guilty to 23 different charges including fraud and identity theft. he's said to go on trial next year. but that commission alleges that he spent tens of thousands of dollars of political donations, designer brands, the onlyfans website and fancy vacations, allegations that santos has categorically denied. so what would it take for him to get kicked out? two-thirds of the house must vote in favor of expelling him. a figure they haven't reached on two previous attempts to expel the congressman. house speaker johnson saying they are having real reservations about supporting expulsion, likely because of this. republicans control the house by

ultra thin, 2 and 18, only 13 more. and we know, brianna, every quote counts. >> certainly does, we're joining by manu raju, barbara comstock and tim naftali. manu, as republicans are deciding whether to vote him out, we have the speaker telling them to weigh their conscience. what are they weighing here? >> yeah, some of them are deciding, waiting to decide to vote when it will ultimately come down. some of them are concerned about the precedent that is set as boris noted this is the first time ever that someone is kicked out of the house, without being

a member of the confederacy or conviction. and also the sheer politics of this, him getting kicked out of the how's would narrow the majority. raises the majority in the district that joe biden carried. that means that democrats could pick up that seat and something that republicans are, frankly, concerned about. i talked to the new york republicans who are freshmen, the ones pushing him out. i asked about it this morning, about the fact that speaker johnson has reservations about this. they still said it's time for republicans to kick him out, regardless of the political consequences. >> we don't know who he is at all. he's a dedicated committed con man in the halls of congress. and access to government secrets. to a lot of things that could be damaging to this country. he has to go. george santos is doing what every con man and 4-year-old does, ignore the truth, take no

responsibility and point at others. and there is a bipartisan, comprehension ethics report. that is his due process. it is concluded, it's comprehensive. and it proves he's a con man, a fraud and a criminal and shouldn't be a member of congress. >> now, george santos is actually speaking to reporters right now off cameras. one of our colleagues speaking with him, harry talbot said santos is someone who spoke with speaker johnson over thanksgiving. he made it clear to mike johnson how upset he is about the process. he told him he's not resigning. mike johnson reportedly said are you surely you want an asterisk next to your name and no one has pressured him to resign. >> that is what pressure looks like, so maybe he doesn't understand that's possible. >> tim, over to you. we kind of went through the history of expulsion in the house. he would become the sixth member

of the house to be kicked out of the body. put this in context for us, how significant is this historically? >> well, this would be very significant. first of all, this would be the first time a republican member of the house had ever been kicked out. and this would be the first time that a majority would kick out a member of that majority without basically being forced by the judicial system to do it. and given the period we're in right now, where lots of people seem driven by situational ethics where honor and shame don't seem to be attached to many of the participants in congress, it would be very healthy, one would argue, if santos were actually sent packing by his fellow members, fellow party members, without needing to go to a court to be -- for the fact that he's a con man to be proven.

>> then, congresswoman, when you look at the speaker's decision on this, how much of his hesitation to support expulsion is actually about setting precedent, as he says, or do you think it's more about keeping that thin majority? >> i think the concern really is more about that thin majority. because this report was done bipartisanly, you have a republican chairman of the ethics committee. it's very detailed. and most of the members are very familiar with, you know, campaign finance and what you can spend. your money on and what you can't use it for. so, when they read that report, they understand how, you know, flagrant his was. his own staff, you know, people who have now testified or pled guilty, you know, in the judicial system already. so people are familiar with that. and really, he's been gimven a

lot of opportunities to resign. and, you know, as been pointed out, usually shame would have already driven somebody from office at this point and somebody would have already resigned at this point. so i think, you know, the new york delegation, the people who are close to this. the new republicans, the freshmen members, this is very painful for them, they've been the ones leading the charge, regardless how close the majority is. and i do think -- i certainly hope they will get that large number of republicans, i heard it was somewhere near 90 or so. and i home for their sake, because they're the ones who are going to pay the price if george santos isn't gone. >> yeah, notably, many of them coming from districts that joe biden won in 2021, flipping those seats. manu, when it comes to the politics of this, how does that impact a republican agenda? >> well, look, if they lose a

seat here, that's significant. in the current divide in the house, mike johnson could lose four and get his votes through. george santos gets kicked out that goes down to three. and each vote is considerably significant, especially seeing how difficult it is to usher through an agenda along party lines. that one vote could be hugely significant. which is why a lot of people do not think this expulsion will pass tomorrow because of the sheer political concerns. but i should note, we still don't have a clear sense whether the two-thirds majority will be reached. i talked to many this morning saying i'm still weighing, i'm still thinking about it and the republican membership is not telling them how to vote one way or the other. we don't know how the rank and

file will come down which is why there's a lot of uncertainty with pressing event tomorrow. >> i will say, there is it something of the santos drama that seems of the moment, i think the hoax of it or the fact that details are very verifiable, and there's only a matter of time before he got caught with it. when you look back at this, how do you think history is going to remember this member with current politics? >> you mean the fact it's more like the talented mr. ripley? well, it's interesting that -- one reason i believe why you're not seeing a whipping for votes is that donald trump has not supported santos. and i don't think the republican base really much cares what happened to santos. and in many ways, this is a clear vote that many republicans have faced in the last couple of

years. i think historians, future historians, will talk about our social media era, and the creation of identities. the role that created identities played in the 2016 campaign and the extent to which our politics have changed because you can run a campaign without actually existing. i don't mean you're not alive. but the person you present to the american people is actually not you. so, an example, it's an example of political catfishing, that's what it was and is. >> congresswoman, i'm wondering do you think if this third attempt at expelling him fails, it will be a stain on your party? >> well, i think it is. that's why i mean, kudos to mike lawler and those new york republicans staying after this. they deserve this vote and have it succeed. in new york, george santos'

constituents deserve a real congress person who is doing real work for them and sitting on committees and getting stuff done. this is not a member that is doing anything at this point other than collecting a federal paycheck can which he doesn't deserve. and the clear evidence is already there. any other member at this point would have left at this point. and clearly, you know, if they had 20 more republican members they would have already gotten rid of him. i think, regardless of the numbers, other people are leaving. kevin mccarthy might leave. bill johnson is -- congressman bill johnson from ohio is taking a position to leave and be a university president. you can't be held hostage to this one person who is out there threatening to expose members with things. who knows what things he might make up in the future. they need to rid the body of the person who's, you know, really hurting good members like those on new york republicans are

trying to get this motion through, you know, already. >> yeah. so fascinating that the shaming hasn't worked. the pressure hasn't worked. historically, lawmakers have resigned for way less than what he's accused of doing. >> shameless i suppose he is, a lot less. >> barbara comstock, manu raju, tim naftali, thank you. coming up the latest extended truce between israel and hamas set to expire in just a few hours as secretary of state antony blinken continues diplomatic meetings in the region. we'll bring you those discussions in just a few moments. plus, a cnn investigation found coast guard leaders with a damaging report on hazing and racism and assault. what the agency is saying about the results? and later, inflation cooling. what that could mean for your wallet this holiday season. we'll bebe right bacack.

a short time ago, two more hostages were returned to israel. and in the coming hours, hamas is expected to release another group. it's part of the one-day extension of the now seven-day truce in gaza. secretary of state antony blinken is in the region, trying to keep that truce going. and earlier, he met with israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu. he's also scheduled to meet with the leader of the palestinian authority mahmoud abbas. but today, there was more bloodshed. three people were killed at a shooting in a bus station in jerusalem. hamas has claimed responsibility for that attack. cnn is tracking this and we have cnn's alex marquardt to break it down. alex, secretary blinken back in the middle east for the third since october 7th. what are the focus of these talks? >> well, this is really a pivotal moment for us, boris. the u.s. has been pushing really for the beginning of this pause

to try to get it going, to try to get it extended as long as possible. we have the first two-day extension, today is the seventh day. u.s. would like to see as many hostages coming out and would like to see as much aid going in as possible. on the back of israeli warnings that their intending to ramp-up their military operations. it's really just a question of when. today, we see more hostages coming out. we believe it's eight total today. blinken is certainly there to press the israelis to essentially try to figure out a way to keep these hostage releases going. but he knows that israel definitely wants to get back to their military operation. here's a little bit of what he had to say while in israel. >> we have been focused relentlessly on trying to secure the release of hostages. this process is producing results. it's important, and we hope that can continue. >> so, what could this military

operation look like? well, the u.s. is very afraid, essentially that if israel were to start up operations again and go into the south, that it could look like what we've seen in the north. and that's just utter destruction and devastation. we've seen more than 14,000 people killed. the vast majority of the gazan population, around 1.8 million people are displaced. and so the administration has been issuing warnings to the israelis saying if you're going to do this, you've got to be a lot more cautious. you have to be a lot more surgical about going after hamas. it remains very much to be seen whether israel is going to heed that warning. >> also some new reporting about where truce negotiations stand and the potential for this truce to get extended. what can you tell us? >> well, it looked for a moment last night that things were falling apart. israel said if you give us ten people per day, we'll extend the truce. we understand there's not one but two different lists hamas presented to israel last night

that they just found unacceptable. they finally got to a stage what we're going to see eight people released which is obviously less than ten, that's because there were two extras released yesterday. so the assumption, the hope, obviously, is that things go according to plan today. far from a done deal. and that hamas, again, tonight will offer another ten people for tomorrow. but there is a belief, wolf -- excuse me, boris -- at that point that is when hamas may not be able to locate any more women and children. and then this part of the deal, this deal will be done, essentially, and that's when israel may start to start the operations again. and that could start as soon as this weekend, boris. >> already signs that that truce is potentially is weakening these attacks by hamas in jerusalem. alex marquardt, appreciate the compliment, i'll take that. brianna. let's talk now with former

prime minister naftali bennett. he's enlisted in the idf reserve. mr. bennett, can you tell us what you were hearing about another extension of this pause, or this truce? >> well, this truce is -- or pause is very temporary. it's the sole goal from israel's perspective is to get out as many hostages as we can. one way or another, it's going to end a few days at max. or tonight might be the last batch if hamas can continue providing at a rate of ten hostages a day, we'll continue. but i believe over the next few days, we'll continue, resume the attack to eliminate hamas. >> what about getting male hostages out? >> look, i'm not in the negotiation team. i'll just say that one way or another, idf is ready, like a

spring coil ready to attack on the southern part and dismantle hamas. we have to end this war without hamas existing anymore. >> but, it sounds like, as you're talking about the time line here, the expectation is get as many women and children hostages out, but resume the war before negotiating to get male hostages out. is that correct? >> again, i'm not in government right now, so i can tell you what i think we're doing and what we need to be doing, but i'm saying it's a matter of one day here or there, where we're going to resume the attack. >> as israel is considering this, because one day, you're there before resuming attacks in gaza obviously not allowed for getting out these male hostages. there are so many, and obviously so many hostages who have not

gotten out but there are more there, prenaum dominantly male. is that what israel would have to exchange which would be male palestinians and prisoners many of whom may have been convicted of extremely violent offenses including murder that calculation is a military disadvantage so great, that it doesn't make sense to do that right now? >> yeah, that's what's in balance. what i will say is the following, the reason hamas came to the table now to begin with is because of the war and our taxi on hamas on the northern part of gaza. we put them under enough pressure and the idf successfully operated for a few weeks, and it brought hamas to a point where they said stop, stop the war. let's pause the war and we'll hand out the hostages. i think the best way to get more hostages out is actually to resume the pressure.

>> you're also facing -- israel has also been facing pressure from families of hostages which is the pressure on the other side of this. what do you say to those families who say let's priority tize getting those hostages out. so many women and children have come out, leaving their spouses, leaving their fathers behind in gaza. >> i mean, every israeli for us is a whole world, a whole universe. we care about everyone. we also care about potential deaths from future terror attacks that will be conducted by the very terrorists that are released. so it is a balance. i'll remind you that leader himself of hamas was released in a hostage deal about a decade ago. look at the havoc and the terror that he's done. so, it's a very complicated equation. >> the u.s. and israel are discussing the possibility of

moving civilians in gaza back north, if israel attacks southern gaza when this war resumes. the concern, of course, that hamas leadership has moved south amid this process. how do you move people north if 40 -- or how do you have them move north if 40% to 50% of the structures there have been damaged. where do they go, where do they stay? >> it doesn't have to be necessarily to the north. in southern gaza, there's another areas that we can declare safe havens where we won't attack and can send people temporarily to those safe havens. i'm not going to pretend that it's pleasant down in in gaza. it's not. there's massive destruction in gaza, as a direct result of hamas' unprovoked attack october 7th. >> secretary of state antony blinken here in the u.s. said far too many palestinians have been killed. allies of israel, strong allies,

the strongest of allies, are questioning the legitimacy of how israel is executing its war even as, of course, they are appalled by what happened on october 7th. should that impact israel's actions? should you take that into consideration? >> there's no secret sauce or secret way to tweezer terrorists out of civilians, if they use the civilians as human shields. in the reserve service, i served for decades as a commander of missile rocket hunter actions. i was very good at it. and i can tell you after decades of doing it, it's impossible. there's no way to tweezer out and just hit the terrorists, if the terrorists are determined to kill their own gaza citizens as a result of it. so, we're going to have to do what we need to do.

we're doing it as best as we can to minimize casualties. but there's no magic wand. and if anyone has a magic wand, health let us know and we'll use it. >> that may be true that hamas uses human shields but that doesn't absolve hamas of international law. >> and we're abiding by international law. >> when you look at public opinion how hamas is executing this and you have strong allies, there is a debate about aid to israel, attaching conditions, so many concerns here of americans, including american taxpayers who have a say in this how this is being executed. what do you say to them? they hear you saying that you are abiding by your opinion in international law. but there are also experts who say you are not and they do not feel it is up to the standard

they would require. >> well, i would say we're fighting your war. because the west is next. and if we don't defeat hamas, you're going to face hamas-like organizations in the united states. it happened before. when suicide terrorists started in the middle east. it happened. it hit. i was there on september 11th, 2001. we're at the forefront fighting radical islam terrorism. it's going to hit london, paris, madrid. how do i know? because that's exactly what happened the last time. therefore, it's in american taxpayers' interests to back us fighting the war. we're not asking to you send soldiers. and we're not asking to you fight our war. but i do think it should be appreciated that we're fighting the global war on radical islamic terror. >> naftali bennett, we do appreciate your time today. thank you so much for being with

us. >> thank you. and up next, a report that coast guard leaders doesn't want you to see. cnn just obtained it. we'll have that, next.

in order for small businesses to thrive, they need to be smart, efficient, savvy. making the most of every opportunity. that's why comcast business is introducing the small business bonus. for a limited time you can get up to a $1000 prepaid card with qualifying internet. yep, $1000. so switch to business internet from the company with the largest fastest reliable network and that powers more businesses than anyone else. learn how you can get $1000 back for your business today. comcast business. powering possibilities.

coast guard leaders concealing a damning report that exposed racism, hazing, discrimination and sexual assault. cnn exclusive reporting found that the report was kept hidden

for eight years. cnn chief investigative reporter pamela brown joins us. pam, you got a copy of the report, what does it show and how was it concealed? >> well, boris, for nearly a decade, leaders concealed yet another report of the coast guard. this one includes racism, hazing, discrimination and sexual assault across the agency. the so-called culture of respect report obtained by cnn was based on interviews of hundreds of coast guard employees and shows anything but a culture of respect. among the alarming conclusions coast guard personnel accepted behavior as status quo and the coast guard does not have measures to prevent sexual assault. coast guard members have been discriminated against and sexually harassed. c.g. personnel accept behavior.

even though the report is from 2015, cnn spoke to dozens of employees who say the culture hasn't changed. and in many ways that's no surprise if it's kept concealed. >> well, this report is not new and yet another report. and cnn has been doing extensive reporting on the coast guard, right? >> yeah. that's right. there's a pattern emerging, boris, blake ellis, melanieny hicken, we did our report in july, when cnn found a damning report about sexual assault at the coast guard academy was purposely buried for years. and the after our story, coast guard commandant linda fagan. >> and it seems like the coast guard is figuring out what's wrong and conceals the results

of the report? >> right. that's a key question in all of this right. we talked to so many people who are survivors of sexual assault in the coast guard, hazing, ris achl, sexism. and they believe if these reports were made public perhaps, boris, the culture would have changed and what happened to them might have been prevented which is sad. >> so what's the response by the coast guard on this new report? >> so, the coast guard is going to release this report to the public next week when tell releases the results of a 90-day review that was ordered after cnn's first story. a spokesperson said the sags has already addressed nearly half of the recommendations that the latest culture of respect report outlines, boris. >> important reporting and clear making a difference. pamela brown, thank you so much. >> thank you. still to come on "cnn news central" after blocking some 400 military promotions, senator tommy tuberville may be backing down. we have details when we come back.

♪ just in, republican senator tommy tuberville is signaling that he'll back off of his hold on top military nominees as soon as next week. instead, he says he'll refocus his blockade on a smaller number of what he calls woke nominees. cnn's manu raju is following this for us, manu, what does tuberville say? h >> reporter: yeah, he's indicating that he will back gown next month after 450 military getting their promotions, with the pentagon,

it's policy providing reimbursement for military services who travel out of state for reproductive services including abortions. he's not giving that demand. the pentagon has not moved on that. but he's facing relentless pressure including from his own party to back off. he's now indicating he will, next week, instead of focusing on a smaller number of nominees he considers woke, even if he did not get what he wanted over the abortion policy. >> now, we're working towards getting which i've been very much for, getting the promotions over with. we need to get them promoted. i don't know what they're going to do with the resolution. but we're going through all of the people that are up for promotion. we will promote people in the very near future. this is people that are running our military. i think that we need to make sure that people that are our generals and admirals should be vetted to some degree. but also, understand that we need to get these people

promoted. it's been a long time for some of them. >> reporter: the reality here is that tuberville was poised to get roiled by a bipartisan supermajority in the senate. there was discussion you log the nominees to get confirmed in essentially one fell swoop, rather than going one by one, which is what the democratic leaders did not want it do because of floor time. but they're planning to change procedures and would need republican support to do that. and it was expects, bes briannay would get the support. and tuberville seeing he would back down from the unprecedented stand especially next week, with all of the confirmations waiting for the promotions, brianna. >> he said a number of things that he need to be vetted. they're constantly vetted,

right? this is a job where they're vetted consistently at every turn for promotion. and he said these are the people running our military. it's actually civilians who are overseeing the running of the military. is he just trying to save face here? >> reporter: in a lot of ways this is what he's trying to do, you're absolutely right. the nomination, vetted through a confirmation process here. and ultimately recognizing that he needed to say and got something out of it. it's unclear what that something actually is. >> we'll be watching, this is a huge move, manu, thank you for bringing that. coming up what the latest inflation data shows about the health of the u.s. economy. we'll have that.

a key gauge bringing good news on the economy. u.s. inflation cooling to its lowest level in more than two years. this takes more pressure off the fed and could mean an end to its rate hike spree. joining us now is matt egan. matt, what's in the new report? >> reporter: when you think about why voters give this economy such poor marks, so much comes down to cost of living -- food, gasoline, housing. the reality is there is growing evidence that inflation is cooling off. today's report is the fed's

favorite inflation indicator. as you can see on the chart, there's a big improvement. last summer we were looking at 7%. this is the lowest level on two and a half years. month over month prices were unchanged between september and october. we've not seen a zero reading for this metric since the depths of covid crisis. it reflects the fact that gasoline prices have tumbled. prices at the super and restaurants have eased. it doesn't mean that inflation is defeated or mean that voters will love this economy, but it does show some real progress and we shouldn't dismiss this. over on wall street investors are very pleased because this does add to some confidence that the fed is going to be able to keep its war on inflation on hold. in fact, investors are betting the next move from the fed is

not going to be a rate hike, it's actually going to be a rate cut sometime next year. boris, that would be great news for consumers because it would mean cheaper borrowing costs. >> that would be a huge deal. the rare occasion when cooling is a good sign. matt egan, thanks so much. still to come, secretary of state antony blinken will speak after meeting with key leaders in israel and gaza. we'll bring that to you live with the truce between israel and hamas set to expire in a few hours.