you know i got two home runs. you got two jacks. and then my grand slam. i signed a ball for you. okay. and it says papa i love you. why did you do that? because you've taught me everything about baseball. oh hunny bunny, that's so sweet. (♪♪) (♪♪)

i'm boris sanchez in washington, d.c. alongside anderson cooper in tel aviv. we begin this afternoon with the israeli government confirming some of the most disturbing reports that have surfaced in the wake of the hamas terrorist attacks this weekend. the prime minister's office says that babies and toddlers were

found decapitated in the small community of kfar aza. that's the kibbutz where israeli defense forces say that hamas butchered civilians, though hamas denies it attacked children. the unprecedented atrocities have put months of bitter division within the israeli government on pause. they have now formed an emergency unity government and war cabinet and in a few hours the u.s. secretary of state will be in israel to meet with senior officials. anderson? >> boris, here in israel 300,000 reservists have amassed near the border with gaza, signaling a possible ground invasion could be imminent. overnight the first shipment of u.s. munitions arrived here in israel, that of course to bolster israel's arsenal. the pentagon has tasked suppression operators to assist the idf, the israeli defense forces for planning with potential hostage rescues. it is believed that hamas has captured more man 100 hostages,

slim jihad claimed they had 30. overall there are an unknown number of americans being held hostage. the white house says at least 20 u.s. citizens are right now unaccounted for and the state department now confirms at least 22 americans have died in israel, that is up from just 14 that was the number about 12 hours ago. so those numbers are growing. right now i want to get you to cnn's nic robertson who is in sderot by the gaza border. what have you been seeing over the last several hours? >> reporter: yeah, just literally, anderson, as you were coming to us there, i don't know if you can pick that up, there is going -- there -- so what we're hearing there is gunfire, heavy machine gunfire. it's hard to tell how far away it is, it's -- we're in a safe location from that gunfire, but that's something new. that's not something we've been hearing so much of recently. we've also been seeing and hearing heavy artillery strikes

on gaza, the big yellow flashes that you may see behind me in the next couple of minutes, a few seconds later, perhaps 10, 15 seconds later you will hear the huge explosion here. but that machine gunfire, that's something new. we've seen today additional troops deployed around the area we're in, sderot, a couple miles from the border fence with gaza. so the tempo of troop presence, the tempo of their activity, the patrols around here are getting bigger, bigger numbers of troops in the patrols. minnesota gunfire again. we've seen tanks this evening as well towards the fence with gaza, that's something new, we haven't seen that until this evening. so the picture of -- the picture of what troops are doing, it's really developing and as i say, this is quite a new development to have that gunfire over there. we don't know why, it sounds closer than the actual border fence itself, but we do know the

security around here has really been stepped up because every day there seem to be several concerns that there have been infiltrations by hamas. john is telling me here our cameraman to expect these explosions. there might be another explosion coming up behind me shortly. that's -- that heavy impact there, that was the impact associated with that flash you saw. so you get an idea of how far away from us that impact is. if you see the flash and you wait maybe 15 seconds for that to hear the bang, then that gives you an idea. it's a good few miles away, perhaps seven or eight, and there will be another explosion coming soon, i think, from what john was indicating here behind me. they've seen -- there was another one. so that's the tempo of what's happening. >> nic, with the gunfire that

you have now been hearing, what we have been hearing somewhere behind you, talk about that a little bit because obviously what has occurred in sderot and ashkelon early on is attackers on the ground, gunmen on the ground slaughtering people. israel has worked hard to try to eliminate all of those -- all of them on the ground. is the area secure in the sense of from a -- your ability to move around? >> reporter: it's much more controlled than it was. there are a lot more police check points around and they are enforcing controls -- enforcing controls on who can use the road. much more strictly than there were before. we understand that the concern about hamas cells being out there, some who have gone underground, that they've been holed up in a location, they're running out of food, running out of water and they're breaking out but also you get more troops

on the ground like we've seen, they cover more ground, they're more likely to come into contact with these elements. we've seen these armored fighting vehicles out today and they come mounted with a heavy machine gun on the front of them and that's the type of heavy machine gun that i think that we're hearing there. so it could be that a group of soldiers they've established themselves in a field or wherever their location is, they got guards on their perimeter and they might have picked up some movement or they might have seen something through thermal imaging or night vision or whatever it is and they've realized that that's a target and they're going after it. so i think more and more of this may come. >> and, nic, you were at kfar aza yesterday and i want to talk about it because over the last 24, 36 hours we have been starting to -- the full picture of what occurred on some of these kibbutzes is becoming clearer. kfar aza near oz is another one. kfar aza is the site of these atrocities that the israeli

government has now confirmed, babies were beheaded. talk about what you saw, you talked to the commander on the ground there. >> reporter: yeah, toddlers and babies beheaded. you know, when i think now -- because you and i were talking about this last night and we didn't see any of the bodies. i really would not have expected the israeli defense forces to be parading out bodies of decapitated children. it is such a sensitive issue. but, you know, when i reflect back on what the commander said to us, the major general in charge, you know, again, i will repeat -- repeat this line because it really sticks. he said i was shocked by what you found, the massacre. he said that i was reminded he said of what general eisenhower said when he found the atrocities, when he found the death camps after world war ii, he said get the press in here, show them.

i think that's what was taking place yesterday. and i realize now that when he said there was beheadings and that families were being killed, he was really understating the brutality of what he had seen and what he was aware of because we've now heard it now from the prime minister's spokesman confirming this. so it kind of just adds that other degree of incredulity, i think, that could be that level of barbarity. the commander was telling us these families, some of them, their hands were bound when they were executed. so the shock level here is just horrific and for him it was reminding him of what is -- you know, what his parents had gone through. they left europe and they were survivors, they were survivors of the second world war. yeah. we don't need to say more when you have those points of reference. >> yeah. nic robertson, thank you. we will come back to you shortly. i want to bring in alex

marquardt right now. we are learning new details from u.s. intelligence about when and what iran knew or may have known about the terror attacks on israel. what have you learned from forces? what are you hearing from the government? >> reporter: anderson, there is no question that iran bears major responsibility here. the administration still sticking to their line that iran was complicit in this attack because of the years of funding, of training, but what we're hearing from u.s. intelligence sources and people familiar with the intelligence is that for now there is still no smoking gun that directly connects iran to the execution, to the planning, to the approval of this attack. certainly they are complicit because of the support they have given to hamas over the years, but for now and they're still going through the intelligence, there is no direct tie. in fact, we're told by u.s. intelligence officials that iranian officials expressed some

surprise at this attack. now, understand that surprise may come around the timing of it. i spoke with a senior israeli official who said that he really doubts that iran was not aware of this plot. another senior israeli official spoke with our colleague matthew chance just recently saying that iran effectively gave the grown light for this operation, that they might not have been aware of the timing but they are certainly aware of this hamas operation. again, both israeli and american intelligence communities now as is protocol going back and combing through any evidence that they may have looked over to see if there's a more direct connection between iran and these attacks over the weekend. >> alex marquardt from our bureau in washington. thanks very much. i want to go back to boris sanchez. boris? >> anderson, we do have some breaking news just into cnn. there was a big vote among republicans in the house today to determine a new speaker and

the gop's nomination for speaker has gone to steve scalise, the republican congressman from louisiana, winning the gop's nomination for speaker on a secret ballot that is per multiple sources in the house of representatives. a major win, but not a guaranteed path to the speakership. he still needs a majority of the entire chamber to replace kevin mccarthy, the ousted speaker who was removed by the house last week. let's get to you capitol hill right now. i believe we have cnn's manu raju in place. manu, this is a big win for congressman scalise. >> reporter: yeah, no question about it. this victory coming barely clearing the majority threshold that he needed to be nominated as speaker of the house. that majority threshold was at 111 republican votes. he got 113 votes. the vote was 113-99 defeating jim jordan who had the support of former president donald trump, had the support of a lot of conservatives, including the

ones who voted to oust kevin mccarthy as speaker. this vote to elevate steve scalise who is currently the house majority leader, the number two under the speaker to the speakership essentially is a sign that he has some work to do because of the fact that in order to be elected as the house speaker you need to have 217 votes on the house floor and at the moment as you can see a long ways from getting that. in fact, there was a debate inside the conference this morning about whether the person to be nominated as speaker should have to clear that 217 vote threshold behind closed doors in the conference meeting. scalise's supporters defeated that motion, jordan's team believed that could help him get elected to the speakership. now the work is cut out for scalise who has to try to avoid the same fate as kevin mccarthy who in january went through 15 rounds on the house floor to get the requisite number of votes to be elected speaker. can he do that? that is one of the big questions that he will have to deal with

here. a number of members voted present because they didn't like their choices, they had concerns about some of the answers that these two men gave. others were with jim jordan and jordan himself has not said that he would vote for scalise. i asked him that question going into this conference meeting. he said i will get behind whoever can get 217 votes. well, scalise did not get 217 votes. if jordan does not get behind scalise that could lead to a messy fight on the house floor. now where does this go from here? they have to make a decision of when to bring this to the full house. it could happen as soon as this afternoon, could go into next week, could go into tomorrow. that will be a key decision here. scalise will have to ultimately decide if he wants to take a risk, go to the floor if he does not have the votes locked down here. a significant moment after this house has been paralyzed following the historic vote, unprecedented vote to oust kevin mccarthy as speaker. now the republicans have voted on a nominee, can he get the votes, elected speaker and can they move on key issues, whether it's aid to israel, aid to

ukraine, avoiding a government shutdown by mid-november? all major questions after republicans nominating steve scalise the house majority leader to be the next speaker of the house, boris. >> manu raju, please stand by and keep us updated with any new information that you get. joining us now is cnn's dana bash, you were literally on the phone moments ago before joining us. a long list of priorities for the house, aid to israel, aid to ukraine, but chiefly the house is paralyzed until they elect a new speaker. how big is this development that steve scalise is now the republican nominee? >> huge. huge. but i think we need to underscore, highlight, put in bold the key caveat that manu was just talking about which is that with every other leader of the congress, house, senate, all you need is a majority of the people in your party and then you are the leader, and this is a constitutional role, the speaker of the house. second in line to the presidency, which means that there is going to be a vote on

the floor. people who were not under a rock in january know that that is something that tends to be difficult sometimes, it certainly was with the 15 rounds that mccarthy had to go through in order to get that. and so the question is right now how quickly is steve scalise going to be able to get those who voted for jim jordan and according to manu and our team it was pretty split, to get them to come over and support steve scalise. so as quickly as that happens, that will answer the first question that you asked me, boris, which is how and when will it get on with the business of the american people? and, look, the pressure is on. this isn't just a run-of-the-mill vote. not just because the government is going to run out of money in about a month, but because of these crises on the world stage. and, look, this does tend to

historically be a moment that galvanizes and rallies in a bipartisan way the american people, and certainly puts pressure on congress to get its act together. >> sure. >> we have seen it in big moments before. this is not the way it was, and we've seen lots of bits of evidence of that, that hardliners continue to be hardliners and i'm not sure that even what we're seeing in israel, for example, will be something that will ease the way for steve scalise as it would have maybe just a few years ago to just get the votes and move on. >> let's talk about his path toward the speakership because as you noted with kevin mccarthy there were 15 rounds of votes over four days. he made some major concessions to the hardliners in his party including that one vote necessary for a motion to vacate. how does scalise convince those who perhaps oppose him and we know he's got some rivals in the house even among republicans, how does he get them over to his

side? >> we have to -- this was a behind closed doors meeting, it was a secret ballot. we don't know yet and i'm sure our excellent reporters are going to find out momentarily if there were any promises along those lines that steve scalise made to not only hardliners but to some of the moderates who are really upset about the way in which the republicans -- the eight republicans who ousted mccarthy went about doing that. so we don't know what has gone on behind closed doors. what we do know is that some of what happened with kevin mccarthy was personal. yes, there were a lot of complaints about spending and about promises made and not promises kept, but some of it was personal. so i mention that by suggesting that perhaps with the steve scalise, there might be a bit

more grace in the short term to say, okay, we're going to let you do your thing and not put these -- the shackles on you. >> dana, i hate to cut you off but we want to get straight to manu raju. >> i'm confident. >> it's going to happen today? >> oh, yes, by as early of 3:00. >> so you expect a vote on the floor today? >> yes, we will get a 56th speaker. because that seat has become vacant i'm announcing i'm running for majority leader. >> you are? >> yes. >> are you disappointed? >> disappointed? the only thing i'm focused on right now is getting back to business. >> is the vote going to be this afternoon? >> [ inaudible ]. >> reporter: are you guys with me? congressman, who did you end up voting for just now?

>> steve scalise. >> steve scalise. so are you expecting the vote to happen this afternoon? >> that's what we're told. we will see what happens. >> reporter: he only got 113 votes, are you concerned this is going to take some time to get to 217? >> it is my hope that our conference comes together so we can elect a speaker. >> reporter: i'm not sure if you guys are still with me. mr. bishop, who did you end up voting for just now? >> i don't have a comment right now. >> reporter: are you disappoint that had steve scalise won? all right. i know you guys are still on with me. we're trying to get some reaction from some of the members here. one of the big things that we just heard is that we expect a vote this afternoon. congressman, who did you end up voting for just now on the floor? in the secret ballot? >> i'm not going to tell you who i voted for but i'm planning on voting for the scalise who came out of conference. >> reporter: are you concerned that he may not get 217 votes or could face the same issues that mccarthy faced? >> excuse me.

>> i hope we will get to 217 on the floor. and that we do that quickly. >> reporter: what was it like in there? a was the mood pretty contentious or divided in there. >> there was a lot of rounds of applause after steve was announced as the winner and i think that there's going to be a lot of work to be done before we come to the floor to make sure that we get to that 217 number. >> reporter: did jim jordan endorse steve scalise in there? >> i'm not going to comment. >> reporter: i heard that he did not. is that your understanding? >> he said he would vote for whoever could get to 217 on the floor. >> reporter: there's another big question here, guys, is that what will jim jordan do? will he get to say that he is behind steve scalise. i've heard from multiple members, you heard the congressman saying that jim jordan didn't explicitly say that he's endorsing steve scalise, he will get behind whoever can get 217 votes on the house floor. can steve scalise get there? he didn't get there in the conference meeting and what will some of those members who may

want concessions will they fall in line? there seems to be some confusion, too, about the timing of all of this. some of the members believe that there could be a vote this afternoon to elect the next speaker of the house. we will see if that's officially announced today. perhaps the scalise team wants to push ahead, wants to force the vote and doesn't want to force this to linger because the longer that he lingers the more deals he may have to cut with some of those hardliners who essentially ended speaker mccarthy's -- kevin mccarthy's speakership. he wants to avoid them. scalise so far has indicated he has not cut those side deals, he said that to his conference last night but he might have to do that in order to get to 217 votes. perhaps by going to the floor and daring some of the members to vote against him, he may not have to do -- cut some of those side deals. we will see ultimately how this plays out. it's also interesting here, guys, to note this was a secret ballot election, some of these members simply don't even want to talk about how they voted. congressman dan bishop who was aligned with some of those hardliners in his conference, no

the saying how he voted just now. some of them indicating that they will still vote for scalise if he is on the floor, but a divided republican conference at this key moment here deciding to move forward with steve scalise and the narrow west of margins internally, but can he get there? can he get the votes to be elected speaker? i a lot of the republicans hope that he can get there but the question is how will he be able to get that done and whether some of those detractors ultimately will fall in line. i'm going to ask mr. fry, who did you end up voting for? >> i was jim jordan. publicly jim jordan. >> reporter: are you disappointed it was steve scalise. >> it was a fair process. we had two great people running. now we have to elect steve scalise as the next speaker of the house. >> reporter: are you expecting this to happen this afternoon? >> i think so. >> reporter: another member also thinking that scalise is going to take it to the floor this afternoon and we will get the votes. this is of course a jordan supporter, congressman russell fry. so some of them will ultimately fall in line but there's always

that handful of members, this is the risk of the narrowly divided house that kevin mccarthy -- that doomed his speakership. 221 members in the house that means 217 votes -- he can only afford to lose four votes in order to reach that 217 vote threshold here. pretty chaotic moment with this republican conference, has been unable to figure out how to move ahead, now choosing steve scalise and we get them out of this state of paralysis, that remains the big question at this key moment, guys. >> manu, let's step back. talk to us about steve scalise's path to the nomination. he's somebody who was elected to the house back in 2008, he wasn't exactly part of the freedom caucus wave in 2010. manu, do you have someone? >> i do, the congressman from michigan. who did you end up voting for? what was it like inside the room there? >> let me tell you what it was like inside the room.

it was, i think, a fairly cooperative spirit, there was robust expressions, you know, the rule about whether we were going to come out with a confirmed 217 or not, obviously went down, that rule vote failed or that proposed amendment failed, but i'm not going to say who i voted for because i know who i will be voting for on the house floor, it's going to be steve scalise. i hope the rest of my colleagues will follow that as well. we need to restore the stability of the house of representatives and we need to make sure that everything from having a check on this administration to making sure that we're affirming and confirming our support of israel. there's some very important things that need to happen. >> reporter: how worried are you that the same thing could happen to kevin mccarthy, that this could go on and on on the house floor and if he wins the speakership he could be facing the same handful of members who can scuttle his moves at every turn? >> it's very possible, which was one of the reasons why i publicly had said i thought we

should get that 217 confirmation vote behind closed doors, the caucus decided not to do that, so i abide by that. i just hope people are going to abide by the spirit of that, so if we didn't have a formal rules change, that's fine, i hope the spirit of that, though, does hold. >> reporter: are you worried that could drag out for some time? >> i hope and pray not. i hope we will be able to move quickly and get this done as as soon as as we can. >> reporter: do you think it will happen this afternoon in. >> i hope so. i think that's the work that hopefully now speaker elect scalise will be working on. >> reporter: thanks for your time, sir. appreciate it. so there you heard it from the congressman about where things stand at the moment. the vote is still -- they think it could happen this afternoon, but as you can hear from the congressman, didn't want to say who he voted for, but also fully recognizing that this is unpredictable. we don't know what's going to happen on the house floor. as soon as this afternoon will members fall in line, will they

simply say that we have to get the house moving because the house cannot move at this moment. mr. massey, are you concerned at all about the outcome? >> concerned? >> reporter: did you back mr. jordan? is that right. >> yes, i voted for jordan. >> reporter: are you concerned about scalise winning? >> i'm concerned he doesn't have the votes to get to 218 so we should probably resolve that before we go to the floor. >> reporter: you don't think he can get there, to 218? >> i don't think he has -- i didn't say i don't think he can get there, i said i don't think he has the votes right now. >> reporter: what do we have to do thogt there? >> we need to have meetings and talk. >> reporter: there's some talk it sounds like talking to other members that they want to have a vote this afternoon. would that be a mistake in your view? >> it's actually up to mr. scalise now when the vote happens. >> reporter: but would it be a mistake to have the votes this afternoon in your opinion? i mean, if it happened do you think it would be a bad idea? >> i don't care whether it happens or not. >> reporter: if it goes to the floor will you vote for scalise? >> i have a meeting with scalise to talk about this. >> reporter: thank you.

so from one congressman right there, thomas massey, still deciding whether or not he will vote for steve scalise. wants some more time to discuss it with the members. i can tell you he's not alone who probably feels that same way about whether or not he will actually be ready to vote for him. i'm going to try to ask congressman -- mr. perry, are you going to vote for steve scalise on the floor? mr. perry? mr. perry? okay. he didn't answer my question there. but that's another question is whether or not some of these members who may have voted for jim jordan, maybe abstained, may have voted present will vote for steve scalise. thomas massey wants some more time and he may not get that more time because the scalise supporters are eager to take this to the floor and have a vote immediately this afternoon. we will see if that's the decision of steve scalise, but another important thing that thomas massey pointed out, this is ultimately the decision of the speaker nominee, steve scalise. when does he want to have this vote? is it time to just pull the bandage off, fight this out on the floor, see what happens.

that is a huge risk. one of the fights that they had internally today is to avoid that. they wanted -- some of the members, including namely the jordan supporters wanted to fight this out behind closed doors, take some time, figure out which candidate to get to 217 votes which is going to be the magic number on the floor and then not have that drawn out long floor fight. scalise's team did not want that. they were concerned if they went down that route he would not win the nomination. but now they are left with the prospects of not getting the votes on the house floor after getting barely a majority of his conference to support him in the nomination. so what will those other 99 members do, will they all fall in line? a lot of them will. a lot of them are willing to support this nominee on the floor of the house. a lot of them like thomas massey who backed jim jordan not ready to back scalise yet. wants to have some meetings. so perhaps they may have to wait a little bit of time. we will see, though, what the house majority leader now speaker nominee steve scalise decides to do about the timing of this critical, critical vote.

guys. >> manu, stand by and keep us updated on who you are able to speak to as these republicans are exiting this closed door meeting. we have jamie gangel joining the conversation. something that struck out to me as manu was playing interference with the republicans as they were leaving, the variety of answers we got, some of them were enthusiastic about steve scalise, some like thomas massey said they needed more time and there is not just disagreement about who they may support but also when they should hold this vote. >> as we say not so much. there is nothing better than watching manu navigate the hallway. and to your point, we saw two members in a row, one it appears is voting for scalise, the other one, massey, said that he's concerned he doesn't have the votes. there was a comment about that they hope and pray. hope and pray. kevin mccarthy hoped and prayed and he went 15 rounds.

i think that -- what's the number here? four votes. they can only afford -- scalise can only afford to lose four votes. that does not sound like he's there. >> and, boris, the timing and the votes, they are all very much connected and it is the first test and this is what you were referring to, jamie, the first test of leadership for steve scalise. not only whether he has the votes immediately or whether he will choose to hold the vote and i think the official term is jam -- and jam the rest of his conference and say, really? you want to do this all over again? okay. let's see how it goes. and historically somebody who is in the cat bird's seat, somebody who will have the gavel eventually, the members of the conference who are not so sure, they decide i don't want to cross him or her. so i'm just going to go along

and go with the flow. and that is one of the most fascinating things that i'm going to be watching in the next few hours as to whether steve scalise will step into that power role and how he uses his power. >> power is the key point because the speaker can say you're on this committee, you're not on this committee. where is your office. there is so much power, it's how they exercise it. >> there's got to be some incentive to offer those members that might be resisting, kasie hunt joining us now. your reflections on the breaking news. >> it sounds like we're going to be sitting here for a few hours covering all of this breaking news. to pick up on what dana and jamie were saying, clearly -- i don't think scalise has another option, dana, than just to take this -- >> push through. >> basically say i dare you to vote against me. i dare you to do this thing that so many of you say that you don't want. honestly, you know, he has -- scalise, we don't know the outcome of this private ballot vote, but we do know that matt

gaetz, for example, chief flame thrower has said he would be fine with scalise as being speaker. my question is how many of the people who are opposed to scalise are ones who are willing to break all the glass because that really is what has differentiated these eight from the rest because usually all of those incentives that you were walking through they work, right, a threat to, you know, no the put you on the committee that is going to help your district that's going to get you reelected or get you more power or more money or whatever, they stopped working with this group of eight. i'm not convinced that they are going to do the same sort of maneuvers with steve scalise. i think that's the test here. >> let's stand by for a moment because manu raju is back on capitol hill with a republican who was in the room for that closed door vote. manu? >> reporter: congressman, the chairman of the house administration committee, you were just in the room right there. talk to us about what was it like in there given how emotional the last week has been. tensions have been so palpable within your conference.

how did that play out behind the scenes and who did you ultimately vote for? >> the whole question is with the challenges our country is facing from inflation to a border crisis to our ally israel being under attack by terrorists and hamas, it's essential that we unite. that conversation was about how we come together. speaker nominee, steve scalise, i think will be a spectacular leader, i look forward to voting for him on the floor. hopefully that comes sooner rather than later because of the significance of the challenges that we face. >> reporter: can you say who you voted for? >> i kept that private through the process but truly because i believe both jim jordan or steve scalise would have done an excellent job. now speaker designee steve scalise i think is going to do a great job. i look forward to us calling this vote sooner rather than later. every day that goes by where we don't have a speaker of the house is to the detriment of not only us as republicans but really to the country. in particular at a period of time as such historical significance. so i'm optimistic we will be

able to get there today. >> reporter: he got 113 votes, 99 members voted against him. you know the narrowness of this majority, we witnessed the 15 ballots in january, that the same thing could happen again to steve scalise. >> it's not done until it's done. i'm optimistic that we're i believe to convince all members of our conference that the significance and importance of being united outweighs any individual's personal preference as it relates to the speaker's race. i believe steve scalise will do a spectacular job. that said, we need to make sure that we have a full united group, ultimately speaker designee steve scalise will make the decision when this vote should come before the house, i'm hopeful that it comes sooner rather than later, but the need to unite, the need to come together at such a significant moment in our history can't be overstated. >> reporter: what do you think of the eight members, the republicans who voted to oust speaker mccarthy at this moment as you've gone beyond steve scalise, everything we've seen this past week, what is your message to those eight

republicans? >> i wildly disagreed with the move last week that called for a motion to vacate. i think it was the wrong move. in large part because its left us without the leadership structure that we need in such a significant moment in time. so i disagree with the approach. that said, i think now is the moment for us to make sure that we're looking and moving forward and uniting behind a leader it is our opportunity to do that. >> reporter: do you think jim jordan should get behind steve scalise? i heard he said in the room he would get behind whoever can get 217 votes. should jordan say i'm backing steve scalise? >> i will let everyone speak for themselves but what i'm hearing is the need to unite. and i think that is true and consistent across the conference that we need to come together and unite behind one leader and as won the conference vote speaker designee steve scalise is that man for this moment in time. i think he will do a spectacular job. but the need to unite is what i continue to hear from most of our members that said as we've

seen play out we have some individuals in this conference who don't feel that call, but hopefully they will feel that by the time we come to the floor. >> reporter: congressman, thank you for your time. that is the big question as the congressman just detailed here is whether or not some of those members, those holdouts, the eight members who voted to oust kevin mccarthy, many of them did not vote for steve scalise, they voted for jim jordan. steve scalise of course was mccarthy's top deputy, they didn't always get along, they had a bit of a frosty relationship at times, but nevertheless a lot of them did vote for jim jordan to be speaker. will they come along in this key vote where you can only afford to lose four republican votes and of course how jim jordan messages this is important, too. the congressman suggesting that he suggested unity but other members suggested that he would get behind whoever got 217 votes which scalise did not get behind closed doors. some of those key questions will percolate in the hallways as they move towards a vote as soon as this afternoon but, again,

that decision is up to the speaker nominee steve scalise. if he wants to roll the dice or if he needs more time to cut deals to win over some of those skeptics. >> still a lot of questions to answer. i wanted to ask you something that the congressman from wisconsin brought up, something that dana alluded to previously and that is the external pressure that is now on congress because you talked about the incentives that scalise can offer some of his members but obviously there is a lot happening and one of the key issues that i think is likely to be first up for whoever is elected speaker, if it is indeed scalise it will be the top of his list is aid to israel. how does what is happening in the middle east ultimately move members members that may be reluctant to move forward with the speakers race. >> i think it clarifies the stupidity of the situation in general. the fact that the u.s. government is currently incapable of acting to fulfill the president's request for additional aid because eight republicans decided they wanted to depose their speaker. when you contrast what is going

on with the pictures in israel and the horrific crimes committed and need to take action, i think that makes it starkly clear to people. we will see. i mean, every single time i've predicted that they would -- or thought that perhaps they would get it together and this wasn't actually going to happen, it has happened. right? right? but, no, no, it hasn't. i think -- look, all bets are clearly off with this republican conference. i think all of us who are invested in a functioning government regardless of what views you may hold about what that government should be doing or how it should be conduct tgself would say, hey, let's move on, we have really big concerns in the world. dana, i don't know about you but i remember sitting on tv last week and saying hypothetically this would be a really big problem if there is an actual crisis and i don't think anybody was sitting there thinking there was going to be a massive crisis, but here we are, the deadliest day for the jewish people since the holocaust. the u.s. government unable to do something. >> and the flip side of that is

because of that, the holdouts feel that they have more leverage. there are two sides. there is the pressure to cave that we were talking about before manu came on and then the flip side of that is the leverage. i mean, i was just texting with one of the eight who voted to oust mccarthy and i said are you going to support scalise and the answer was not yet. >> there are a couple of names of people who i'm sort of curious how they will weigh in. donald trump. he backed jordan. >> an embarrassing moment for him. >> it didn't work out. and so, you know, what is he going to do at this point? kevin mccarthy, scalise was his number two, they didn't always get along so well, but -- and does kevin mccarthy really have any sway right now because he was kicked out by the matt gaetz eight. to dana's point, i mean, we will

have to go through the eight, but there's one that you've been texting with who said not yet. >> it wasn't a no. >> it wasn't a no, but what's the horse trading going to be here? scalise can go -- nancy pelosi -- >> jamie, we have to cut you off. here is steve scalise speaking on capitol hill, the newly nominated republican potentially headed for the speakership of the house. >> first i want to thank my house republican colleagues for just designating me as the speaker. obviously we still have work to do, we're going to have to go upstairs on the house floor and resolve this and then get the house opened again. we have a lot of work to do. not just in the house for the people of this country, but we see how dangerous of a world it is and how things can change so quickly. we need to make sure we're sending a message to people all throughout the world that the house is open and doing the

people's business, making sure that we're unequivocally standing in our first resolution that we pass under speaker steve scalise will be to make it clear that we stand with israel, the mccaul/meeks resolution will be our first order of business but obviously there's a lot more work to do. the conversations we've been having with my colleagues over the last few days leading up to this show that there is a resolve that we need to get back to work. there is a lot of business to take care of. families are struggling across this country. we passed a lot of legislation to help families get back on track, to address our border crisis, to get our economy moving again, to address the spending in washington that's driving inflation, high energy costs. all of those bills that we passed and that we're going to continue to pass that are sitting over in the senate need to be taken up. we've passed over 70% of the bills to fund the government,

dealing with appropriations and setting the priorities as this nation's spending and the senate has taken up zero. the senate has to start doing their work. by the way, in that legislation, including the state foreign ops bill, the defense appropriations bill includes funding for israel, things like iron dome, precision guided missiles, things that could be used today to help them in this war. so there is a lot to do. i'm also going to be calling on president biden to sit down and talk about the crisis at the border, as we have an open southern border and we've seen millions come in in the last few years, including people on the terrorist watch list, from all over the world. if he doesn't know now after what happened, we cannot have an unsecure border. we've got to secure america's border. we've passed legislation to do that. it's time we sit down and have a conversation about how to secure

america's border and it's not a republican or a democrat issue. there are democrats all over the country who have been calling on the president to do this, too. that's a conversation we need to have today. there is a lot of busy work to do, a lot of important work to do on behalf of people who are struggling. not only here in america, but who are concerned all around the world. we're going to provide that vision. we have a lot of work to do. [ inaudible ]. >> that was louisiana congressman steve scalise, the newly minted republican nominee for house speaker. he went through the priorities for the house. he said we have a lot of work to do, we realize how dangerous of a world it is. he said, quote, we need to send a message to the world. clearly, as we rejoin our panel, putting some pressure on lawmakers by evoking the ongoing conflict in israel. >> right. and appropriately so, although i

will also say that this has been scalise's message from the get-go in saying that, hey, we need to, you know, get it together, this is what i would do right away. i think he's making also i hear the governing argument, which is an argument that does resonate with a significant -- i mean, just keep in mind most of these people voted for kevin mccarthy to remain speaker. this he don't want this sideshow and scalise is speaking to that. >> this was a campaign speech. i mean, the new add to that would be stand with israel. he knows what's going on and what people are looking at, but i still say behind the scenes what is the horse trading that is going on with the matt gaetz eight, with the people who voted for jim jordan and, dana, you and i were just sending notes to each other and i wrote down the world "health." his health is a problem. >> he has blood cancer. steve scalise has blood cancer. now, this is something that everybody in the republican

conference knew and knows and, i mean, i talked i'm sure each of you has talked to a republican going into these discussions about who should be the next speaker and steve scalise's health has been something that is obviously concerning, but not concerning enough for the majority of the house republican conference. the question is whether that's going to play in at all when you get to the goal and the necessity of 217 votes on the house floor. >> let's pause for a moment and go back to manu raju on capitol hill because, manu, as you've been playing defense trying to watch members leaving the meeting one person has not spoken out and that is jim jordan who lost in the nomination process to scalise. what are you hearing about his perspective following this historic vote? >> reporter: yeah, i mean, typically in these contested leadership races you oftentimes see these members who have been running against each other come out together, show a sign of support, show a sign of unity, try to move on past what can be

kind of a bitter personal affair, these behind the scenes private leadership contests. we did not see that right here. jim jordan was not flanked next to steve scalise, in fact, we're told that he's still in that room. we're told privately that he didn't explicitly endorse steve scalise, in fact, he said something along the lines of i will get behind whoever gets 217 votes on the floor. he had said that publicly, too, several times to me as i had asked him before this vote, but the fact that he said it after the vote also is significant. you can only get 217 votes on the house floor if you can only lose -- if you lose four republicans. so it's unclear how that would happen without the support of jim jordan and a lot of his own supporters here. so perhaps there need to be further discussions with jim jordan about getting his backing and getting his -- a lot of his backers in line behind scalise. some question, too, i didn't hear scalise say explicitly when

the vote would be on the floor because that has been a debate. a lot of these members want to end this all together. this has been a difficult week for the house republicans. things are completely paralyzed. they know how bad they look. they're concerned about the political fallout. they just want to move ahead, but going ahead without the votes is a huge risk that scalise and his team know full well the question is when do they roll the dice and try to dare their members to vote against this or do they try to hash this all out behind the scenes and if they do the latter that will only drag out for some time but the first question is what will jim jordan do? will he get behind scalise and will his supporters also ball fast you will in line as they try to put this messy episode behind them. >> a messy episode indeed. please keep us posted if you see the congressman from ohio. let's discuss with a republican lawmaker who was in the room, joining us is new york congressman mike lawler. thank you so much for sharing part of your afternoon with us. i know it's been a busy one. first, did you vote for steve scalise to be nominated as

speaker and will you vote for him once the vote happens on the floor? >> no, i did not. and i haven't decided yet, made a final decision, but i think it's part of the challenge that we have had throughout the year. the majority of the majority has been disregarded by a handful of members repeatedly and flagrantly and as a result we deposed of our speaker a week ago with 208 democrats. throughout this entire week i have asked repeatedly of both candidates what their plan is to deal with that, and frankly there hasn't been one. that is part of my frustration, you know, as we move forward. there was a motion to ensure that we change the rules for this election to make sure that

we have 217 votes before going to the floor and i think it is foolish to rush this to the floor unless you know you have 217 votes. i think that is a challenge at the moment. so it's going to be -- it's going to be interesting later today when we go out to the floor to vote. >> yeah, i bet it's going to be interesting. congressman, what does steve scalise need to do to earn your vote? you alluded to creating some kind of structure in which a motion to vacate would not be on the table the way it was for mccarthy, who was ultimately ousted. what else does scalise need to do to become the 56th speaker in your eyes? >> look, there needs to be accountability and when you have a conference of 221 members and it requires 218 at any given point to

then you need to have structure, you need to be able to work together as a team. and i think that has been one of the biggest challenges throughout these ten months, is the handful of people who have refused to work as a team. and unless there is accountability on that, it makes it very hard moving forward. the idea that somehow just changing -- rearranging the deck chairs here is going to fix the problem or somehow that kevin mccarthy was the problem is laughable. kevin mccarthy did a phenomenal job as speaker. and i think the question for those moving forward is what is actually going to change that's going to fix the problem. and so far i still haven't heard an answer to that. >> congressman, you were a vocal supporter of speaker mccarthy. you voted against his ouster. you had very choice things to say about those who pursued the motion to vacate.

i'm wondering if you think the former speaker is now helping the effort to avoid what would be a messy fight on the floor or if he has concerns himself that may lead to more drawn-out conflict. >> i'm not going to speak for anybody else. i'm just going to speak for myself and what my concerns are at this point. >> and so congressman, do you think that the others involved, the eight members who voted to oust speaker mccarthy, now have outsized influence over who the next speaker is going to be? what's your message to them? >> well, i think that's the problem here. we had eight people who teamed up with 208 democrats to remove a duly elected republican speaker. and there has been no reckoning on that. there has been no frankly honest and frank discussion about that. and so i still have concerns

about how this works moving forward. and i've expressed those concerns. and you know, seemingly on deaf ears. but i think before going to the floor, you know, the speaker designee better make sure he has 217 votes. >> on that note every vote on the republican side is going to count. and this is sort of a sidetrack. but it gets to the main question of electing a new speaker. you actually recently, i think as soon as today, reco-sponsored legislation to expel congressman george santos from congress. there was a superseding indictment that was filed yesterday. ten new charges that he's facing including identity theft, all sorts of fraud. given that the margins are so slim for republicans, specifically in electing a new speaker, potentially on aid to ukraine also, is it the right time to try to expel congressman george santos? >> well, that's kind of ironic

coming from the press. i mean, they've been pushing for the man to be expelled for months. look, it takes 2/3 to expel a member from congress. there were not 2/3 votes back in may when the initial expulsion resolution was brought, which is why it was referred to the ethics committee. myself and my new york colleagues wanted to allow the time for the investigation to, you know, be handled. but with the guilty plea of his treasurer admitting to the very scheme that he has been now twice indicted on with 23 felony counts, he cannot serve. i've said repeatedly since december he needed to resign. i believe that. and in the absence of his resignation the time to act is now. i mean, it just -- it's clear

with his treasurer's guilty plea what occurred. and as far as i'm concerned he should not be a member of congress. >> to be clear, congressman lawler, i was not in any way defending the actions of george santos. i just wondered how the math might come into play because it seemed like it did come into play when kevin mccarthy -- >> we can't do anything -- >> -- asking santos to resign -- >> we can't do anything -- we can't do anything until there's a new speaker anyway. the reality is it has been introduced. it will be a privileged resolution. and there will be a vote on it. >> congressman, how much does what is happening in israel, the attack by hamas, a brutal attack on civilians in israel, how much does that weigh into your decision-making when it comes to electing a new speaker? >> look, it's obviously very important. there are a lot of important

issues that my colleagues who chose to connect with 208 democrats to remove the speaker last week should have thought about before doing it. and the reality is from our border to the spending to the crisis in israel and ukraine, we have a lot of challenges that we need to deal with, that we need to get back to work on. but whoever the speaker nominee is needs 217 votes and they need to make sure they have it. >> is it fair to say you believe those eight republican members that voted to oust kevin mccarthy have put national security at risk given that the house is now frozen before it can elect a speaker? >> look, currently the administration has the ability to do what it needs to do. we need to obviously increase aid to israel to help with supplemental funding, especially for the iron dome. and we need to get back to work on that expeditiously.

so look, at the end of the day we have a job to do. we need to elect a speaker. we need to get focused on the issues that matter to the american people and impact our allies around the world. >> congressman, i also wanted to ask about the classified briefing house members received earlier on the situation in israel. obviously, there are things that you can't share with us. but i'm wondering what stuck out most to you about that briefing, if you perhaps learned anything about the number of americans currently being held hostage by hamas. >> look, we did learn some classified information. obviously, i'm not able to share a lot of it. but you know, we are concerned about those that have been identified as missing. you know, we have not confirmed that they are in fact hostages at this point. but certainly my objective in the immediate is to get our

hostages, potential hostages back and to make sure that any american citizen who wants to leave israel and come back to the united states is able to do so expeditiously. it's why i've called on the administration to get military aircrafts to israel immediately so that we can get folks home. the biggest challenge right now is united states commercial airlines are not flying into israel because of the insurance and the security risks. and so as a result we need to make sure that we get military aircrafts in to help evacuate our citizens. >> have you heard anything from the administration, perhaps the state department on a potential airlift? >> we've been told an announcement will be coming within the next 24 hours or so. but they need to move expeditiously. >> congressman, i also wanted to get your perspective because cnn's reporting is that there are -- is conflicting

information about iran's potential involvement in the hamas attacks over the weekend. there is israeli information that says iran effectively gave hamas the green light, and yet on the u.s. side there's intelligence that says that tehran was caught off guard by the attacks over the weekend. which side do you lean toward, or what do you believe is the truth? >> well, if that was true, i have a bridge to sell you. look, iran is the biggest state sponsor of terror. they have funded and backed hamas for years. the idea that somehow they were caught off guard is the biggest load of nonsense i've heard. they are absolutely involved. and any notion to the contrary people should disabuse themselves of quickly. >> and congressman, i also wanted to get your thoughts on the 300,000 israeli troops that have been mobilized. it appears as though a ground

operation into gaza is imminent. i'm wondering what you think the end goal should be for israel. is it the dissolution of hamas? >> not the dissolution. the elimination. hamas is a terrorist organization hellbent on wiping israel off the face of the earth. and they should no longer exist. and anyone affiliated or associated with them should reap the consequences of it. >> are you concerned at all that doing so could lead to a protracted military presence in gaza by israel that would likely lead to what would seemingly be an endless war? an insurgent sort of combat in an urban landscape with millions perhaps or hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties. does that concern you? >> let's understand what happened here. hamas, a terrorist organization, invaded israel with the express