indictment, attorney general merrick garland is voicing support for special counsel jack smith. we ll show you his new remarks. plus new polling shows that trump s support among republicans is standing strong despite his mounting legal troubles. we ll break down those new numbers. and the judge handling trump s classified documents case, aileen canon, is coming under new scrutiny for having very little trial experience. that new reporting and so much more is straight ahead. good morning and welcome to way too early on this thursday, june 15th. i m jonathan lemire. thanks for starting your day with us. for the first time since donald trump s federal indictment, we re now hearing from attorney general merrick garland. speaking to reporters yesterday, garland declined to answer questions about the case, but he defended special counsel jack smith, the man that he appointed to lead the investigation into the former president. so as you know i can t talk about particulars o
trump onsie and just have it on hand rapid response every time ron desantis says something to differentiate himself from donald trump. yes, they ve been playing that a lot, but i say gif. the differences go on. thank you,nc my friend. and thanks to you at home for joining us this evening. it was november 12, 2020, and there was a lot going on at the time. it had been less than a week since the networks called the 2020 presidential election for joesi biden. donald trump was just beginning his campaign to deny that result and try and overturn it. just a few days prior trump s lawyer, rudy giuliani, gave his infamous four seasons landscaping press conference to contest thela election results. we all remember that. trump had decided to deny president-elect biden to the classified presidential daily briefing as was the custom in presidential transitions, which in t retrospect seems a bit ironic. just one day later senator lindsey graham would make a phone callou to brad raffen
disapproval or instituting their own policy for banning books at the risk of losing crucial state funds. and although protecting libraries from censorship should not be a partisan issue here, let me note that the bill was passed by the democratic led state legislature with zero yes votes from republicans. the new law in illinois is a rare counter point to the headlines that you ve seen across the country about attempts by conservative groups to remove books they consider unsuitable for children from taxpayer funded public schools and libraries, books which are largely about the lgbtq community and/or people of color. now, although illinois has passed the first law of its kind, it may not be the last state to do so. the new jersey legislature, which is, by the way, led by democrats is considering a similar bill. that s the show for tonight. see you again tomorrow. way too early with jonathan lemire is coming up next. with republicans lashing out at the justice department following d
judgept howell in the district columbia ruled the crime fraud exceptioned applied and she cou pierce the attorney-client privilege and allow evan corcoranal to testify at the grd jury. i think there s an argument to be made that the law of case is that is crime fraud and every judge who handles this case should accept that ruling.ep but i imagine an argument could be made now we re talking about admissibility at trial which is different from theil admissibilt of the grand jury. t so i imagine trump and his lawyers will file that motion and try to get judge canon to get a different ruling on that to exclude that evidence. i imagine they lllu also try to suppress the evidence obtained in thede search. they ll probably makehe an argument for selective prosecution and that the case should be dismissed on that d basis. there are rumors they re going to file a motion to dismiss on the basisdi of prosecutorial misconduct. so i think there will be lots ow motions and most of them i think will
sort of plea agreement in the future, and what would it look like? it s impossible to predict what doj might be open to. i mean, i think we can look back to 1974 when for whatever reason the powers that be decided to resolve a potentially criminal case against the president and ultimately former president of the united states after richard nixon resigned rather than hold him accountable for his crimes. i think that sends at least an atmospheric signal that maybe presidents are above the law, and if they get caught violating the law, they can just sort of negotiate their way out of criminal responsibility. i think doj probably would have been receptive to a meeting, would have heard out the trump defense team on a possible settlement. i think it s foolish in the extreme for donald trump to have scuttled, you know, even a meeting like that. because, jonathan, when i was a federal prosecutor, i often was