Return to Transcripts main page

The Brief with Jim Sciutto

Epstein Files Released; DOJ Not Told To Redact Trump's Name In Epstein Files; Kennedy Center Board Votes To Rename It "Trump Kennedy Center"; U.S. Strikes Targets Inside Syria Tied To ISIS; E.U. To Offer Ukraine $105 Billion Loan; Files Tied To Jeffery Epstein Case Released; Prosecutors Share New Details Of Brown Univ. Suspect; Brown Univ. Suspect Found Dead; World Champion Vs. The Youtuber. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired December 19, 2025 - 18:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[18:00:00]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR, "THE BRIEF": Hello and welcome to our viewers joining us from all around the world. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington, and

you're watching "The Brief."

Just ahead this hour, the U.S. Justice Department releases thousands of files related to Jeffrey Epstein after months of political pressure. The

E.U. decides to lend its own money to Ukraine rather than use those frozen Russian assets. I'll speak to the E.U.'s ambassador to the U.S. And

YouTuber Jake Paul is set to box former heavyweight champion Anthony Joshua in just a few hours' time.

We do begin though with the breaking news. The U.S. Justice Department released some of the many, many files it has on the late sex offender

Jeffrey Epstein. CNN teams are now going through those documents. There are a lot of them. It will take time to sift through them.

One image just released shows former President Bill Clinton in a jacuzzi next to another person whose face is redacted. Another shows him holding a

drink next to Epstein. Unclear where or when those particular photographs were taken. CNN has reached out to a spokesperson for Bill Clinton

regarding those images. It is important to note he has never been accused by law enforcement of any criminal wrongdoing related to Epstein. The

spokesperson has repeatedly said he cut ties with him before his arrest on federal charges in 2019, years before, and did not know about those crimes.

Today is the deadline for the DOJ to release all of the files it has remaining on Epstein. That was passed by a large bipartisan majority in

Congress signed into law by President Trump. The Epstein Files Transparency Act was passed 30 days ago. Only one House member voted against it,

Republican Clay Higgins.

However, this morning became clear there might be a problem with following the letter of that law. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said he was

not going to release all the files today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TODD BLANCHE, U.S. DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL: I expected that we're going to release several hundred thousand documents today, and those documents will

come in in all different forms. Photographs and other materials associated with all of the investigations into Mr. Epstein. And so, I expect that

we're going to release more documents over the next couple of weeks. So, today, several hundred thousand and then over the next couple weeks I

expect several hundred thousand more.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Last month the House Oversight Committee released 20,000 pages of records it received from the Epstein estate through a congressional

subpoena. Those files included multiple emails which mentioned President Donald Trump. We should note, however, Trump has not been accused of

criminal wrongdoing in the Epstein case. He has also denied any involvement.

Joining us now from Capitol Hill, Annie Grayer. I wonder what the reaction is there because of course as you know it was enormous bipartisan support

to release all the documents. Are lawmakers satisfied with what the administration did today?

ANNIE GRAYER, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Well, we're not hearing a lot from Republicans so far, Jim, but Democrats are pretty upset by what is

happening. They do not see what the Department of Justice has done today as complying with the law. They wanted all documents to be released today and

they have major concerns. The top Democrat on both the House Judiciary and top Democrat on House Oversight put out a joint statement and said that

they were looking at all options on the table including legal actions.

I recently spoke with Congressman Ro Khanna who co-authored the legislation that led to the mandated release of these files and he said he's thinking

about inherent contempt, you know, criminal cases, civil cases, even impeachment if it led to it and the Department of Justice does not

ultimately comply with releasing everything.

Now, I've also obtained a letter that Todd Blanche sent to Congress today explaining the redactions that went into the release today and the process

for how the over 200 Department of Justice attorneys who worked on this matter, what the process that they went through.

[18:05:00]

And Blanche said that over 1,200 names of victims and their families were redacted as part of this process and also went through all of the

information related to any victim or potential victim about how their personal information was going to be redacted and just made the case for

why DOJ has a right to withhold certain information, particularly if it is related to an ongoing criminal investigation. But Democrats say that's not

enough that the law mandates release of everything and I don't think that they are going to be satisfied until they get all of that.

Another interesting thing that Blanche said to Congress is that one of the things that DOJ lawyers had to look at was collecting names for Congress of

any powerful political figure or individual who maybe was a perpetrator of those crimes, and to me that's kind of as close as I think we could get to

a so-called Epstein list of people and that list will eventually be supplied to Congress.

But it sounds like we're not going to get everything today. Blanche told Congress that he thinks this will be all wrapped up in two weeks. And the

question is will Democrats, will Congress, both sides of the aisle be satisfied with the materials that come out? Will there always be this

question of, well, what if there is something else? That's going to be determined. But we know at least for now Democrats are not happy with how

DOJ is handling this.

SCIUTTO: Annie Grayer, on the Hill, thanks so much. So, let's ask a Democrat, Democratic Congressman Stephen Lynch of Massachusetts. He's a

member of the House Oversight Committee. Congressman, thanks so much for joining us again.

REP. STEPHEN LYNCH (D-MA): Good to be with you, Jim. Thanks for having me.

SCIUTTO: So, the DOJ released some but not all of the documents. Are you satisfied with what you saw today?

LYNCH: Absolutely not. You know, first of all, we've been dragging the Department of Justice kicking and screaming, you know, let's remember what

happened here. So, Pam Bondi said, the files are on my desk. I've got the - - you know, the Epstein files. Then all of a sudden, she says they don't exist actually. And now, they're saying there are so many files that we

can't release them all at once. It's going to take a little while.

And some of the documents that we got today were so heavily redacted, we don't know the context of those documents. So, I think there's going to

have to be a point at which both parties go before a judge and the Department of Justice is going to have to defend every single redaction

that they made because this is another level of obstruction that stops these victims, these survivors from getting justice.

SCIUTTO: Are you saying that the Justice Department is obstructing the law here by an impartial release?

LYNCH: I think so. Look, it is not by accident that they're sending pictures of Bill Clinton, OK? Susie Wild, the White House chief of staff,

said there's nothing in the Epstein files that implicates Bill Clinton, that indicates that he's done anything wrong. Yet, the first thing we see

is, you know, these pictures of Bill Clinton and also when the committee itself was interested in interviewing people connected with this case and

witnesses, they wanted -- they didn't want to see Alex Acosta, who actually gave the sweetheart deal to Epstein to begin with, they wanted to see

Hillary Clinton, they wanted to interview her.

And it, you know, just belies the -- you know, the warped view that the White House and my colleagues on the Republican side have of this case.

SCIUTTO: Thomas Massie, your Republican fellow member of Congress, he said he's spoken with victims' lawyers and that they told him they know there

are at least 20 names of men who are accused of sex crimes in the possession of the FBI. Of course, we didn't see that today. Have you heard

similar information?

LYNCH: Well, when we sat with a group of the survivors, there were six or eight, and we had -- they had their attorneys with them. So, in those

discussions, they did indicate that there were individuals that they felt should be brought into this and that were involved in, you know, abusing

these women. So, we'll have to see whether or not they're going to come forward with those names and if there are any documents that sort of

reinforce their involvement here.

SCIUTTO: Reading from the law that Congress passed requiring the release of these documents, it says quite simply in plain English that not later than

30 days after the date of the enactment of this act, that's the day, that all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative

materials must be released. Did the DOJ break that law here?

[18:10:00]

LYNCH: They have not complied with it so far. That's the Epstein Transparency Act that we passed. There's also -- the other part of this is

the subpoena that came from, you know, the committee itself. Robert Garcia, the ranking member, and Summer Lee, who was the subcommittee ranking member

at the time. There are also requests for nine categories of documents, but what we've received so far has been so scattershot, we don't know what

categories they're actually responding to. We don't know what the context are of some of these documents.

To be honest with you, the Epstein estate did a better job at organizing information that the committee wanted to see than the Department of Justice

has done so far. It's almost like they're grudgingly dumping information, but they're not providing context or any details on where these documents

came from.

SCIUTTO: It goes to a broader issue of compliance with the law here, because today, as you know, the president put his name on the Kennedy

Center, which was founded by an active Congress and named by an active Congress. Did the president break the law by putting his name on the

Kennedy Center?

LYNCH: Well, at the very least, you know, I just think that it was typical of this president, just so low class, you know, to put your name. I mean,

this guy's a sick guy. I mean, to do something like that, I mean, really, you know, to put your name above John F. Kennedy's name and his whole

legacy. I mean, that just shows you, you know, what an egomaniac this president really is.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Final question. The president says he does not have an obligation to notify Congress or seek its approval before potentially

ordering military strikes against Venezuela. In your view, would that constitute breaking the law?

LYNCH: That is not the position of his, the Joint Chiefs of Staff or the other officials who represent him in that context, including secretary of

defense, secretary of state. You know, they've made assurances that they would comply with, you know, the War Powers Act and that anything of, you

know, serious magnitude or duration would immediately come back to Congress for approval. They would comply with the law. So, he's at odds once again

with his own leadership.

SCIUTTO: Congressman Stephen Lynch, thanks so much for joining.

LYNCH: Thank you, Jim. Good to be with you.

SCIUTTO: Well, other news this evening, the U.S. has struck multiple targets in Syria tied to ISIS. President Trump confirmed the attacks a

short time ago, saying he ordered retaliation on ISIS after ISIS fighters killed two U.S. soldiers in Syria. One official tells CNN the strikes hit

dozens of targets, including infrastructure and weapons caches. The gunman who killed those two U.S. service members had been part of Syria's internal

security service. His connections to ISIS, not clear. The group has not formally claimed responsibility for the attack.

Joining me now is Colonel Cedric Leighton. I wonder, as you look at these strikes, are they punitive or impactful, right? I mean, do they genuinely

inflict lasting damage on the group or was this more about sending a message?

COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST AND U.S. AIR FORCE (RET.): I think it was more about sending a message, Jim. But one of the

key things we'll have to look at is exactly what the battle damage assessment is after these strikes. So, supposedly at least a dozen

different targets have been hit. Some say a couple more than that. And basically, you're looking at all of the areas such as in northeastern

Syria, as we're seeing here, where it will have an impact on ISIS.

Now, when you look at ISIS as a group to hit targets that include the infrastructure, that's a much more difficult thing to do than to hit the

infrastructure of an established state like Syria or in Iraq or Jordan. So, that becomes one of the most difficult aspects of really finding out from a

battle damage assessment perspective whether or not these strikes have been more punitive in nature and actually made an impact on ISIS fighting.

[18:15:00]

SCIUTTO: So, you heard in the introduction that ISIS has actually not claimed responsibility, which it often does for its attacks, right? It

advertises its involvement.

LEIGHTON: Yes.

SCIUTTO: And the information we have so far is that these were members of Syrian forces here. Is it clear to you why the president struck ISIS then?

Does he believe that it was actually ISIS involved in this or is there something else going on here?

LEIGHTON: I think he believes that it was ISIS and he probably has received assurances from the government of al-Sharaa, the president of Syria, that

these were in fact ISIS fighters not associated with the government of -- his government of Syria. Of course, it remains to be seen. Is this actually

going to be the case? Are we going to have other groups perhaps claiming responsibility or are there rogue elements within the new Syrian government

that may possibly be doing something like this? But this kind of reminds you of the so-called green on blue attacks that we experienced in places

like Afghanistan and Iraq.

SCIUTTO: No question. And of course, Syria has a lot at stake here, right? If it were to be held responsible for these attacks, given lifting of

sanctions, et cetera. Colonel Cedric Leighton, thanks so much.

LEIGHTON: You bet, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Still ahead, the European Union has decided to fund Ukraine for two years, backing a major loan. However, they are not using frozen Russian

assets. How did they come to that decision? We'll have more details coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: E.U. leaders have finally reached a deal to keep Ukraine's economy and military funded through 2027. They opted not, however, to use frozen

Russian assets to fund that loan. Instead, they're going to borrow from investors. Kyiv will not have to pay back the money, though, unless Russia

pays war reparations.

In Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin held his annual press conference today. He said he is willing to consider a temporary pause on

strikes if Ukraine were to hold an election. He also claimed that the West must treat Russia with, quote, "respect."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VLADIMIR PUTIN, RUSSIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): There won't be any operations if you will be respecting us, treating us with respect. If you

won't be tricking us, defrauding us, as you did with NATO expansion to the east, you said that there won't be eastwards expansion of NATO, not for an

inch. That is almost a direct quote.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[18:20:00]

SCIUTTO: Joining me now is the ambassador of the E.U. to the United States, Jovita Neliupsiene. Thanks so much for taking the time.

JOVITA NELIUPSIENE, EUROPEAN UNION AMBASSADOR TO THE U.S.: Thank you for having me.

SCIUTTO: So, can you explain how did Europe end up with a loan to Ukraine rather than accessing these frozen Russian assets?

NELIUPSIENE: Well, I think that what is the most important and what is the news of the day is actually that Ukraine will be supported by 90 billion

euros or 120 billion euros -- dollars, sorry, in the upcoming next year and the year after. This is the news of the day. This is what is the most

important for financial support, for the humanitarian support, for the energy systems which are bombed by Russia and definitely for Ukrainian

defense. That's the key.

Yes, there are nitty-gritties. There are lots of different opinions. We have 27 member states with difference -- with a different approach how to

reach the point where we want to go. And so, this is why we ended up with the loan. But I have to admit the assets are frozen and they are frozen for

imminent time or until the war is stopped and Russia starts paying reparations.

SCIUTTO: Was it a mistake, though, not to use Russia's own money? Now, this is money coming from Europe, in effect, Russia's own money for the war that

it started and the damage that it has caused.

NELIUPSIENE: Well, it's always the possibility to do one way or another. We still hold all this money, all those assets in Euroclear. So, that's for

sure. And we always have a possibility to secure and to use that. But I think what is most important is actually to move forward as soon as

possible and as bold as possible to help Ukraine. That's the reason why we moved, because this was the fastest possible move.

SCIUTTO: Was the U.S. at all impactful here? Did it oppose the use of those frozen assets?

NELIUPSIENE: Well, first of all, the assets, the 200 billion are in Europe, in Euroclear, which is -- and it's only European decision to move. There

are some assets which are in U.K., in U.S., in Japan and some more countries. This is the decision of those countries. And we very much focus

and hope actually that these assets will be used as well or to securitize or to backstop the other loans or actually to use them directly. And U.S.

actually has a law for that, which is called the Repo Act.

SCIUTTO: As you know, many European leaders believe that Russia's next target after Ukraine are other European nations. And of course, we've

already seen hybrid war tactics employed by Russia on a number of European states. When you hear President Putin say today, it's nonsense, his word,

that Russia would attack Europe. What's your response?

NELIUPSIENE: Well, you know, there are multiple airports in Europe actually experience some kind of the drone flies over, which they have to hold their

activity. There was an air balloon show actually across the Lithuanian border. I put a little bit of a joke, but it's actually serious because you

have to hold airport activities. You have the undersea infrastructure, which was harmed last summer.

So, you have all those activities, which are actually a hybrid threat and poses a threat for the societies, be it in the E.U. or be it in NATO

countries. And, you know, to -- the idea probably is to destabilize, to drive a wedge, to check the boundaries. And I think that the reaction Putin

saw probably surprised him because the reaction instead of, oh, we will double thing or we will change our mind was actually quite the opposite.

The European countries are investing 900 billion euros in their defense. Their hybrid is one of the areas where we want to build our resilience, the

same as anti-missile, anti-air defense, you know, their cyber security. So, we will be -- we are getting ready to be stronger than we are.

SCIUTTO: The Ukraine and its European partners made significant changes to the original 29-point Ukraine peace proposal. Are the U.S. and Europe now

aligned on a peace proposal for Ukraine? Are you together on this?

[18:25:00]

NELIUPSIENE: Well, I think that everybody -- you heard a lot of leaders actually speaking about that. That for Europe and for Ukraine, they're

moving forward to finding the peace, peaceful solution or ceasefire, whatever it holds, the direct attack on Ukrainian territory, it's

important.

And as we can move to make sure that the peace is just, that Ukrainian territory and international borders are not a question, and that Ukraine

has a possibility to choose the way of life, this is what actually -- I think that on both sides of Atlantic there is a pretty clear understanding

who is the aggressor and who is the victim.

SCIUTTO: You heard Vladimir Putin say there though today that, well, he might consider a pause in attacks if Ukraine holds elections, in effect

Russia demanding Ukrainian elections. What's Europe's reaction to that?

NELIUPSIENE: Well, first of all, you have to really negotiate for the peace, not pretend negotiating. And if you are actually serious about that,

there was several suggestions, you know, there was a Thanksgiving suggestion, there was a Christmas ceasefire suggestion. Like, if Russia is

serious, they can hold the attacks. And instead of, like, in the daytime saying that we are ready for peace and in the nighttime bombing Ukrainian

schools, energy infrastructure, churches, that's not the way how you build the peace.

SCIUTTO: Do you trust that the U.S. will hold Vladimir Putin to account?

NELIUPSIENE: Well, we trust President Trump really puts a lot of effort in making sure that the peace deal is achieved.

SCIUTTO: Well, we can hope, perhaps for Christmas. Ambassador Neliupsiene, we do appreciate you joining the program.

NELIUPSIENE: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Well, thousands of Epstein documents are indeed out, but some files remain missing, despite the law being quite clear on a full release.

Senate Democrats are discussing how to hold the Trump administration accountable now. We're going to dive into what the options are, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:30:00]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Jim Sciutto. And here are the international headlines we're watching today.

The U.S. Justice Department released some of the many files it still has on Jeffrey Epstein. Friday was the deadline for the department to release all

of the files in full. Earlier today, however, the deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche, said the DOJ will not release all the files today.

The U.S. has conducted airstrikes on Syria, according to two U.S. officials. They say the strikes were in retaliation for a recent attack, a

deadly one, on American troops there, which killed two U.S. soldiers. The strikes are said to have hit dozens of targets connected to ISIS.

Washington is now home to the Trump-Kennedy Performing Arts Center, at least according to the sign on the front. Workers installed a new lettering

above the name of the late President John F. Kennedy, after the Board of Trustees, a hand-picked board, at the center voted to change the name.

There are questions, however, about whether the board has the authority to rename the institution, given that it was created by an act of Congress and

named by an act of Congress.

Well, as we've noted, the Justice Department released Trove documents from its investigations of Jeffrey Epstein. Now, Trove includes photos, like one

here, of former President Clinton with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, who is now behind bars for sex trafficking. It is unclear where and when these

particular photos were taken.

CNN has reached out to a spokesperson for Clinton. It is important to note, Clinton has never been accused by law enforcement of criminal wrongdoing

related to Epstein. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche says the DOJ will release more files later, even though, by statute, the deadline to release

everything was midnight today.

Joining me now, Jeff Swartz, former Florida judge, professor at the Thomas Cooley School of Law. Good to have you back. I read the law. The law said

everything by today. DOJ did not release everything by today. Does that mean they broke the law?

JEFF SWARTZ, FORMER FLORIDA JUDGE AND PROFESSOR, THOMAS M. COOLEY LAW SCHOOL: Well, first of all, great to see you, Jim. It's been a long time.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

SWARTZ: Yes, they have. But the question is, there's no enforcement arm. There's nothing in there finding it to be a felony or a misdemeanor. The

only thing that can happen would be either Congress finds the administration, particularly Pam Bondi, in contempt of court, or an action

is filed in front of a judge to enforce the statute. And then you would go to contempt if they don't comply with that. So, that's the only arm of

enforcement that anybody really has, other than impeachment.

SCIUTTO: Yes. I mean, isn't that a statement on America right now, right? No consequences. How about the redactions? Is the DOJ required to justify

each redaction individually? Democratic Representative Ro Khanna made that case a short time ago on CNN, or can it just give broader explanations,

which it seems to be doing right now, to say, well, we still got work to do, getting names and addresses and so on out of there?

SWARTZ: OK. First of all, I'm having a very hard time going through the documents, and I've tried to. The way there's no search engine, there's no

search mechanism. Many documents are, in fact, just all over the place. A lot of it are just the pictures and things like that.

I think that, in fact, they do have an obligation if they're going to assert a reason why they're not going to comply, such as whether it is a

privileged document, whether it is a communication which is covered by some form of work product or protection of people's identities, that type of

thing. They're going to have to set forth why that document is redacted. I found one document which was 12 pages long, and all it was was black. There

was nothing there.

SCIUTTO: It's almost comical, right?

SWARTZ: And yes, they do have to explain. The statute says they have to explain.

SCIUTTO: So, while we're on the subject of the law, there was another law passed, I believe, in 1971 creating the Kennedy Center Memorial Center for

the Performing Arts, naming it the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. And yet Trump picks a board that changes the name, and now the name is up

there. Is that against the law? I mean, do you need an act of Congress to change the name?

SWARTZ: Well, you have to have an act of Congress to change the department of the - you don't have a War Department anymore -- or you do, as opposed

to a Defense Department that is named by Congress, same thing here. And I don't see any way that that board had the power to do it.

[18:35:00]

The question is, who's got standing to walk into court and say, you can't do that, take his name off of there, until the speaker of the house is able

to get control over the Republicans and get something passed.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Well, there you go. It's up there for now. Jeff Swartz, Cooley School of Law, thanks so much for joining.

SWARTZ: Have a Merry Christmas, Jim.

SCIUTTO: You too. Coming up, prosecutors share new details about the suspect in the mass shooting at Brown University, plus his alleged

connection to that second shooting, and details on exactly how police tracked him down. That's after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: The suspect in the mass shooting at Brown University has now been found dead of an apparent suicide. 48-year-old Claudio Neves Valente was

himself a former student at the university a number of years ago. Prosecutors say they believe Neves Valente was responsible as well for the

killing of an MIT professor days later. Both he and the professor had attended the same academic program in Portugal. Authorities are now trying

to figure out why. Danny Freeman has this report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Our Providence neighbors can finally breathe a little easier.

DANNY FREEMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Tonight, relief across New England as two manhunts came to a dramatic close. The man suspected of

opening fire on a Brown University classroom and killing an MIT professor identified as 48-year-old Claudio Neves Valente. Found dead Thursday

evening in a storage facility in New Hampshire with a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was all about groundwork, public assistance, interviews of individuals, and good old-fashioned policing.

FREEMAN (voice-over): After hundreds of tips and several leads, police got two big breaks. First, a Reddit post flagged to investigators, which read

in part, I'm being dead serious, the police need to look into a gray Nissan with Florida plates, possibly a rental. That was the car he was driving.

Then this person, who investigators said was in proximity to their suspect on the day of the shooting came forward with key details, including

information about the suspect's voice, his appearance, his car, and even a confrontation where the man asked the suspect, your car is back there. Why

are you circling the block? According to a police affidavit.

[18:40:00]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I remember last night watching his interview, and he blew this case right open. He blew it open.

FREEMAN (voice-over): Once they had the description of the man and the rental car, pieces started to fall into place, including a connection to

the murder of MIT professor Nuno Loureiro outside of Boston.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There is a video footage of him entering an apartment building in the location of the professor's apartment.

FREEMAN (voice-over): The car was eventually found abandoned in New Hampshire at a storage facility where Neves Valente rented multiple units.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was evidence that was observed from outside the car that matched our crime scenes, meaning mask, clothing, satchel, which

you can see on that video.

FREEMAN (voice-over): Inside one of the units, authorities recovered two 9mm Glocks, high-capacity magazines, and a bulletproof vest. The suspect

was a Portuguese national who once went to Brown more than two decades ago, but didn't graduate, and who studied at the same Portuguese university when

the slain MIT professor was there, but it's still unclear if the two knew each other.

Law enforcement officials tell CNN they do believe Neves Valente targeted Loureiro, but do not believe he specifically targeted any of the victims of

the Brown University shooting. But Providence's mayor telling CNN Friday they're not done searching for a motive.

BRETT SMILEY, PROVIDENCE MAYOR: We won't give up in trying to answer those questions. I think the Providence community, the Brown community really

needs to know that in order to get true closure.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: The U.N. secretary-general says the people of Gaza still need humanitarian help, but is welcoming a new report that concludes the war-

torn enclave is no longer suffering famine. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said there is still critical remaining work for Gaza, even as President

Trump repeatedly hails the advent of peace in the Middle East.

U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff is due to meet with top officials from Qatar, Egypt, and Turkey to discuss attempts to move on to the next phase

of the peace deal, including disarming Hamas and how, who will temporarily govern Gaza, and which countries would be part of a stabilization force. A

number of countries have said they're not ready to send troops.

Paula Hancocks takes a closer look now at those buildings in Gaza which the Secretary General was talking about.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): These buildings defy gravity. Top floors collapsed. Vast slabs of concrete are tenuous and

balanced. Pock-holed walls that do not look strong enough to hold the ruins together. Yet countless families across Gaza have no choice but to live

inside this wreckage. Buildings exposed to the elements. No protection against winter storms.

Hiyam Abu Naber (ph) says her family cannot move back to their home in Shuja'iyya, as the Israeli military occupies the area.

On the first day of the storm, she says, we could hear stones cracking above our heads. Sand was falling into our eyes. We covered our heads to

protect us from the water.

While the ceasefire appears to be holding, the United Nations says two years of Israeli strikes have left more than 80 percent of buildings

destroyed or damaged. Of those buildings still standing, almost none would be considered habitable elsewhere in the world.

Awan Al-Haj (ph) says every building in this area of Khan Younis is the same. Gaza's civil defense recommends the displaced should leave damaged

buildings during the rains. But for most, there is no other option. He says the storm comes, then sand, water, rubble comes down, just like this. Every

building has collapses. But what is the alternative? Is the alternative to go and sit by the sea or in a tent in the freezing cold or in the water?

This woman agrees. Her granddaughter was born just days ago. She says their tent flooded and collapsed during the last storm. They now shelter in

wreckage she knows could become their tomb. If we do not die because of the Israelis, she says, we will die when the house collapses on us. Because

this roof, this entire living room roof is going to fall.

And they do fall frequently. When this building in Al-Shati camp collapsed Tuesday, it killed the owner and injured two others. One of the neighbors

says, houses keep collapsing. Someone do something about how we are living. Day after day, a house falls. Day after day, people die.

[18:45:00]

The United Nations says it's blocked by Israel from directly bringing aid into Gaza. It says 1.3 million Palestinians need urgent shelter this

winter. Israel says close to 310,000 tents and tarpaulins have entered Gaza recently.

It is an impossible choice for Palestinians who survived the war. A limited number of tents that can flood or be swept away or a ruined building that

could collapse at any time.

Paula Hancock, CNN, Abu Dhabi.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: The lurking danger in Gaza. Coming up next, one of them has an Olympic gold medal. The other, no medal, but 20 million YouTube

subscribers. So, how will they fare against each other in the ring? We preview Netflix's big fight between Anthony Joshua and Jake Paul.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: New York City retailers are gearing up for the last-minute Christmas rush this weekend. I might be in that rush. As usual, they're

enticing shoppers with some really incredible window displays. CNN's Harry Enten and John Miller hit the streets of midtown Manhattan to take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: This is one of my favorite times of the year. And perhaps there's nothing more magical in New York City this

time of year than going window shopping and enjoying all the great windows. And all the great stores that there are.

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT & INTEL ANALYST: I love window shopping. Maybe we can buy a nice window.

ENTEN: Maybe you can buy me a nice one. All right. You ready?

MILLER: I'm ready.

ENTEN: Let's go shopping.

MILLER: All right.

ENTEN: So, here we are at Tiffany's, John. Is this jewelry impressive or should we find someplace else to shop for the loved ones in our lives

besides ourselves?

MILLER: I think we need to go a little bit down in price range.

ENTEN: All right. Now, we've made our way to Bergdorf Goodman's, which I'm told is a personal favorite of yours?

MILLER: Yes. Yes, very much.

ENTEN: And is that because your middle name is actually Bergdorf?

MILLER: If it comes with a discount, I'll take it.

ENTEN: There you go.

MILLER: I think the thing about Bergdorf's is the window display is never about the products.

ENTEN: OK.

MILLER: It's very impressionistic. Like this one is all about time, which, when you do all your Christmas shopping at Christmas Eve, is an important

part.

ENTEN: It's lacking on the time. What is this dress?

MILLER: Well, first of all, I think it's a little bit about sequins. But I think it's more about white hair.

ENTEN: Yes, it seems. And you, as an expert, I, of course, not really much of one when it comes to white hair, except for when --

MILLER: Give it time.

ENTEN: Give it time. All right. We've made our way down to Saks Fifth Avenue. And it feels like every store, or at least every other store here,

pays homage to, of course, the icon of New York City, the pigeon. That's a pigeon, I think, in a cage.

[18:50:00]

MILLER: Yes.

ENTEN: It's the first time ever that someone has tried to domesticate a pigeon here in New York, instead of just trying to shoo it away.

What type of window display is this?

MILLER: So, this is -- Saks always goes, this is like an advent calendar.

ENTEN: I am of the belief that there's a special thing that's going to come out of this window. It's a menorah. Yay. We did it.

MILLER: So, this --

ENTEN: This is it.

MILLER: The famous Rockefeller Center Christmas tree.

ENTEN: It makes me want to convert a little bit. All right. John, we've made our way downtown to perhaps the most iconic store associated with the

Christmas season here in New York. And that, of course, is Macy's.

MILLER: So, their Christmas windows usually tell a story about a character. But this year, they're telling the story of the Macy's Christmas windows in

the Macy's Christmas windows.

ENTEN: Now, what was that called?

MILLER: It's life imitating art, imitating life imitating art.

ENTEN: Do we want jingle bells, deck the halls, or we wish you a merry Christmas?

MILLER: Go with jingle bells. We can't screw it up.

ENTEN: I beg to differ.

ENTEN AND MILLER: Jingle bells, jingle bells, jingle all the way. Oh, what fun it is to ride in a one-horse open sleigh.

ENTEN: Merry Christmas, happy Hanukkah, season's greetings, happy holidays to all of you. Bye, John.

MILLER: Bye, Harry.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: Well, a two-time unified heavyweight champion versus a YouTuber. We're just a few hours away from a boxing showdown like no other as Olympic

gold medalist Anthony Joshua takes on influencer-turned-boxer Jake Paul. The match is raising genuine safety concerns given the significant

difference in both experience and size between Joshua, a professional fighter, and Paul. The match will be streamed on Netflix.

Mike Coppinger is the senior insider for Ring Magazine. So, I mean, first question, Mike, beyond the spectacle, is Jake Paul going to be in danger in

the ring?

MIKE COPPINGER, SENIOR INSIDE, RING MAGAZINE: Yes, first off, thanks for having me. And look, I think anytime you're in a fight, right, you have

some danger, but the danger is amplified a hundredfold here, right? Anthony Joshua is not 58-year-old Mike Tyson. He's not a former UFC fighter past

his prime. He's a 36-year-old former two-time heavyweight champion who's not too far removed from giving a pretty tough fight to Oleksandr Usyk,

who's one of the two best pound-for-pound fighters in the world.

So, I'm surprised this fight's even happening, and I do believe that there's not going to be any sort of chicanery involved, whereas the fight's

being staged, or I see a lot of speculation regarding that.

SCIUTTO: Yes. I mean, because that was one of the criticisms, or at least questions, about the Tyson fight was not just his age, but that, you know,

you kind of fixed the conditions a little bit to extend it, get some viewers, et cetera. I mean, is there any way to do that here?

COPPINGER: I find that hard to believe that that would happen here. You have to remember, right, Anthony Joshua is still, like you said, he's 36-

years-old. He's not in his prime necessarily, but he's not too far removed from it, and he has a two-fight deal lined up next year, a two-knock fight

in February, followed by a mega fight with Tyson Fury that's been in the works for years.

So, I think it becomes very difficult to sell a fight with Tyson Fury that would be the biggest fight in British history if you go the distance with a

Jake Paul, right?

SCIUTTO: Yes, no question. All right. So, let's talk -- and by the way, some of the strategy here, right, is to draw eyeballs, and that's going to

happen, it seems, already, but in terms of boxing strategy, does Jake Paul just try to land a blow early, or does he run away?

COPPINGER: Yes, good question. The ring is actually bigger than usual. It's 22 by 22. The typical ring is 20 by 20. I don't think that has a big

difference here. But yes, I think Jake Paul's going to have to try to move, and he's the smaller guy in there, uses footwork, and try to land that big

shot. Joshua has one real flaw, it's his chin, his punch resistance. He's been knocked out twice now.

SCIUTTO: Is this more a boxing match or a television streaming event, right? I mean, listen, there were already questions about professional

boxers going head-to-head, right, just concerns about, you know, health effects, brain injury, et cetera. What is this that we're about to watch?

COPPINGER: Well, I think there's a reason why it's happening in Florida, and with the Florida Commission, right? I don't think that this would be

happening in Nevada or California. I don't know that to be sure, but I think it would be much more difficult to get this fight sanctioned there. I

do think it's more spectacle than it is boxing match.

[18:55:00]

But I think you have to give Jake Paul a lot of credit. I mean, when he started fighting, I think it was 2020. If you would have told me he was

fighting Anthony Joshua, you know, five, six years later, I would have said you were kidding. So, I hope everyone comes out OK with this, and I do

think there's a lot of danger for Jake Paul, no question.

SCIUTTO: Well, just a few hours away, we'll know. Mike Coppinger, thanks so much for walking us through it.

COPPINGER: Thank you for having me.

SCIUTTO: And thanks so much to all of you for joining us today. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. I do wish you all the happiest of holidays. You've

been watching "The Brief." Please do stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:00:00]

END