children. don't et treat them as criminals. any type of stereotype with black people when you're dealing with these children, allow them to have a bad day, allow them to have the laugh out loud, to live the american dream. >> debra roberts shared the gallery. it runs through december 23rd. finally today, two new teams face ing off in the celebration bowl right next door. this will be the 8th year of the game featuring top football programs at historically black colleges and universities. this year my howe pie son are going against some team in florida. it's florida a&m. so congratulations to you for making it. but you know who is going to win. they are now at the celebration bowl making their debut. good luck to the rattlers. but when it comes to the winner,

hu. if you know you know. thank you for jojoining me t to. i'i'll see youou next satuturda 8:00 a.m. smerconish is up next. there's an election coming, but you'll never hear jack smith say so. the supreme court is about to have more influence on the outcome of a presidential election than at any time since is the 2000 decision in bush verv. gore. jack smith asked the court to bypass the appellate level and make a decision about whether donald trump is entitled to immunity. and separately, this week they agreed to hear a challenge to a law used to prosecute hundreds of january 6th defendants for obstructing or impeding an official proceedingsing, which could impact smith's prosecution against trump on those charges. here's what's interesting to me.

nowhere in the government's petition is there any specific reference to the 2024 presidential election, but that's clear ly what is driving smith's request. in making his case, here's what he told the court. quote, this case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy whether a former president is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office or is constitutionally protected from federal prosecution when he's been impeeached before the criminal proceedings begin. the justices have already agreed to fast track the request they decide if a ruling is now appropriate. trump's lawyers have until next thursday to respond. as noted in the petition, trump is scheduled to begin trial before the honorable judge in the d.c. district court on march 4, 2024. the following day march 5th is super tuesday. republican voters in 15 states, including california, north carolina, tennessee, texas, utah, and virginia, will cast

their nominations ballots on that day. if that trial date stands, it means trump's case will be heard seven months after his indictment. in contrast to many january 6th defendants, who will have had nearly two years to prepare for trial. in trump's case, his lawyers estimate there are 13 million pages in the discovery process. here's how smith justified his expedited request. there was a heading in his petition. it said this case warrants this court's immediate review. he offers this argument in reference to supreme court rule 11. a writ before judgment is appropriate when the cases of such imthe pertive public importance as to justify deviation from normal practice and to require immediate determination in this court. as to why the rush, here's what smith wrote. if appellate review of the decision below were to proceed

through the ordinary process in the court of appeals, the pace of review may not result in a final decision for many months. even if the decision arrives sooner, the timing of such a decision might prevent this court from hearing and deciding the case in this term. what does that mean? it means trump could win the election. and order all charges be dropped or self-pardon ending this prosecution forever. which explains why the coming election is the vold mort of it. there's already a perception among many voters that this prosecution and the other three criminal prosecutions, as well as the new york civil fraud case and the everies to disqualify trump under the 14th amendment are all providing trump with a political benefit. how else to explain in the latest iowa poll from the "des moines register" trump has 51% of the vote. his next competitor is ron desantis with only 19% followed

by hnikki haley with only 16%. or according to cnn polling, in a head to head with president biden, trump leads by 10 points in michigan and 5 in georgia. the core principle of the doj is never a act in a way that would be perceived as political,s especially within 60 days of an election. question, is jack smith being political when he acts with an eye toward the election calendar as is plainly the case here, or is he simply fulfilling his role as a prosecutor, who wants to ensure that a case he's worked up actually gets to a jury? that's the test. now smith faces a bigger obstacle. the delay and possible dismantling of his case while skots reviews the obstruction charges. it was never a good fit for what happened on january 6th.

it was originally passed as part of a corporate governance law that forbade things like de destroying documents or tampering with witnesses. prosecutors used it in lieu of contentious charges like insurrection or set is addition to describe how the mobs disrupted the election certification at the capital. if the supreme court rules that the statute was improperly stre stretched to cover trump's involvement in that disruption, it would be bad news for the government, indeed, it could cripple smith's attempts to pin the violence of january 6th on trump. the timing of the immunity case, the judge has issued an order that, quote, further proceedings that would move this case toward trial would be paused until the issues are resolved. which is exactly what donald trump wants. like so much else had in this election cycle, it's complicated, it's unprecedented, it is unpredictable. you want to know what you think. go to my website at s

smerconish.com and answer today's poll question. will donald trump face any criminal trial before election day? joining me now is elie honig, the cnn legal analyst, former prosecutor and author most recently of "untouchable." so great to have you here. do you agree that smith sand th judge are acting based on the election schedule? >> i do agree with you. i think any fair-minded observer has to agree with that as well. just look at sjack smith's conduct in this case. the motivating principle behind every procedural request he's made has been speed. has been getting this trial in before the election. let's take a couple examples. the trial date, the average federal conspiracy and fraud trial takes a year and a half to two years before indictment and trial. in this case, we have dozens, hundreds of january 6th rioters

caught on video, straight-forward cases. they were given a year and a half to two years between indictment and trial. jack smith originally requested five months out he wanted a january trial set for two months later. so donald trump is being given far less time to prepare than other defendants. jack smith won an argument on immunity in the district. and went right to the supreme court. i think the smart move. the only reason you asked the supreme court to do that on an expedited basis is if you're racing against the clock. >> i referred to the election as the petition that he filed. why not say that? why not simply say there's an election on the horizon. i'm afraid this guy is going to get away. >> you will never hear them utter the word election. instead, they use this lack wang

language about the need for resolution. here's why jack is not willing to do it. two reasons. doj rules say you are not supposed to do anything that could impact an election. you're supposed to affirmatively try not to take steps that might impact an election. the second thing, and i think jack smith is right about this, if he is to say we really need to try this case before the election, donald trump is going to seize on that aggressively. he's going to say, see, when i tell you this is political, jack smith has admitted he wants to be tried before the election and that's political. he's wary of that. >> evaluate that. we agree that he is acting, the judge is acting with an eye toward the election calendar. now i want to hear elie honig assess is the propriety of him doing exactly what he's doing. on one hand, he's being political. the other hand, i guess you'd say probably like you, he's an aggressive prosecutor. he's worked the case up.

he wants to get before a jury. >> right. don't like the game playing, the wordsmanship that we're seeing. i think jack smith ought to say it or not. first of all, if jack smith is try ining to get this case trie before the election and he clearly is, that is political. the counter argument would be, well, jack smith just wants the american voters to have resolution before they go to the ballot box. i understand that. as a voter, i would like to know. but here's the problem with that argument. jack smith doesn't just want to get this trial done and let the chips fall where they may and let the consequences be what they can be. he's the prosecutor. he believes this case. he wants this case to result in conviction. so his position isn't just, well, i want this case tried before the election. his position really is i want donald trump convicted before the election. i have no problem with the first part of that. it's his job to want and try to convict donald trump. but the second part of that, before the election, that's where its crosses the line to the political, in my view.

>> chat gpt tells me, so take it with a grain of salt, between january 6th and today is 1,074 days. the point needs to be made that if smith is now racing against the clock, i argue he had a big window to bring his case a lot sooner than he actually did and wouldn't now be facing the time constraint. >> so i don't see this as jack smith's fault. it took him seven or eight months to indict. i see this as merrick garland's fault. you're absolutely right. we're now in this calendar crunch. we're about to turn the corner into 2024. they are trying to cram in these trials. it's looking increasingly like we're only going to get maybe one trial, if that. the analogy i would make is this. if you lived a half hour away from the airport and had a 4:00 flight, it's like leaving your

house at 3:15 p.m. you're leaving yourself with no wiggle room if things go wrong and things always do. this is what happened with the doj. they waited two years before they got serious and appointed jack smith. he moved fairly quickly, but the fact of the matter is by the time they dropped the indictment, they wasted two and a half years leaving themselves with no wiggle wroom room. >> speaking of time crunch, i'm limited on time. say something about the merit or lack thereof of trump's immunity claim. >> i think trump has what we could call a puncher's chance to succeed. he's less than 50% likely to succeed. i thus he has more than a 10% chance to succeed. he could get lucky. this is a 6-3 conservative supreme court. they ruled against him in the past. i think he's going to have thomas and alito in his corner. the three liberal justices will be against him. it's going to turn to barrett and cavanaugh and roberts do.

they have shown an ability to go either way on these type of issues. so he has a chance. he's unlikely to succeed. >> i'm so glad that you were here today. i always enjoy your expertise, but i wanted to frame this and let people know. i don't think it's been sufficiently addressed what's coming. there's potentially a supreme court decision. we don't know yet if they are going to make a decision on the merits, but come january or february, potentially is going to rock this election. final from you? >> two of them. there's the immunity decision. there's also an obstruction decision, which could cripple jack smith's case going forward. it could knock out the two top charges in the case. i think we are going to see decisions that are going to be right up there with bush vs. gore in terms of importance. >> elie honig, happy holidays. thank you as always. >> you too. thank you. you want to know what you

think. make sure you're voting at smerconish.com. will donald trump face any criminal trial before election day? i think now that you have heard the analysis, you're in a better position to go and vote. from the world of x formerly known as twitter, what do we have? any criminal trial won't matter unless trump loses in 2024. so it's up to the voters. i think it matter. the odds are stacked so overwhelmingly there being a camera in the courtroom because the federal courts don't permit it. although a request has been made. cnn is a part of that petition, i'm not sure. if there were cameras and all networks, which i'm sure they would, cleared the deck and showed that trial, it could have an impact on the outcome of the election. otherwise, i agree with your observation. still to come, two of ron desantis' florida gop allies were exposed to a participating in a three-way liaison.

some see at being at odds of their values. he called for the gop chair to step down. he refused and his wife refuses to step down from the sarasota school board. will the governor who endorsed her remove her? plus even if israel succeeds in eradicating hamas and ends the war, thomas freedman just back from the middle east is worried about what comes the morning after the morning after. he's here to explain. the war is the subject of rob rogers editorial cartoon for smerconish.com. check this out. the cartoon legends are one of the favorite subscriber s that you get. it's free.

if israel fulfills its mission in reradicating hamas ad puts abened to the war, then what? who will pick up the pieces and rebuild a functioning government? clarissa ward filed an amazing report from inside gaza this week after bearing witness to the devastating wreckage of buildings and infrastructure destroyed from the war and

visiting a field hospital established by the uae. and on friday the idf said it accidentally shot and killed three hostages who were shirtless and waving a white flag in gaza. u.s. officials say israel is transitioning into another phase of the war focused more on precise attacks against hamas leaders. this comes after president biden warned that israel is losing international support. as the destruction and civilian death toll continues to rise, it's unclear how much it would cost to rebuild. my next guest argues that no arab nation or lawmakers on capitol hill will support funding or reconstruction of gaza unless israel has committed to a two-state solution. here's what the israeli ambassador to the uk said on that issue. >> without offering a state to palestine, how wcan there be peace? >> the world should know now the reason the courts failed is the

palestinianss never wanted a state next to israel. they want a state from the river to the sea. >> so without the firstoundatio a two-state solution, what is there left to build from the rubble inside gaza? pz in his latest piece, thomas freedman writes, israel has skilled and wounded thousands of innocent gaza civilians. hamas knew this would happen and did not care. israel must. it inherit responsibility for a disaster that will require a global coalition years to fix and manage. join ing me now is the three-tie columnist and author of seven best-selling books thomas freedman. thank you for coming back. i read the most recent column. couldn't help but conclude that this is all going according to plan for hamas. am i right? please explain.

>> from the very beginning, ooirp's goal has been to as long as they are immeshed in the west bank, it will be a moral disaster and a problem. obviously, israel faced a huge military dilemma after the attacks, the barberism of the attack. but from the very beginning, i argued that israel should ask what is worse and do the opposite. but unfortunately, it went in. now it's in extremely deeply. it's committed to ultimately taking over all of gaza. and what i was arguing the last piece, if you're going to

control, if 7 million jews are going to control 3 million pal stint yans in the west bank and 2.1 million palestinians in gaza without any political horizon, we're talking about a political who whohorizon, you'll never ge the international support you need to maintain that. and you'll be isolated and economically overstressed. that's been my concern. >> i found very interesting you're having just returned from saudi arabia to share the perspective that you heard from the saudis. that they worry a whole new generation is being radicalized. i wonder whether the biden administration has that as a paramount concern. >> i would say two things. first of all, let's start from 30,000 feet. what's been going on in the world? what's happening in the world is that ukraine has been trying to join the west. israels was trying to join the east through normalization with

saudi arabia, which would open the way to the rest of the muss limb world. russia and iran and hamas understood that. they have been seeking to block both. that's the geopolitical frame here. it seems to me that we need a counter strategy to that. now the saudis are ready to go ahead. it depends how the war ends, but they are committed to a security alliance and normalization with israel. but they understand this is the first sort of omnichannel war. it has a deep military component. it has a deep digital component. i would argue that while israel maybe win ningen opt the physicl component, hamas has basically lured it into rad icalizing a whole new generation that was not emotionally involved in this issue, including in the arab world. the arab world is very complicated, because you have a lot of young arabs really focused on developing their own

countries now. they are fed up with palestinian question. but they also are deeply wounded by emotionally what's going on in gaza and they are affected by it. so you have all these conflicting emotions going on today across the arab world. >> given the current composition of the war cabinet, how much leverage does the biden administration even have today? this growing rift continues to garner more and more headlines. it seems like benjamin netanyahu has completely, my words not yours, sold out to those extreme force this is are around him. what position does that put biden in? >> those are my words, not yours. i totally agree. israel cannot win this war with benjamin netanyahu as prime minister holding the position politically that he's holding. which is that he will not talk about any kind of palestinian state, any kind of political

horizon for the palestinians after that war. no one expects a state to be born tomorrow, but it's sitting down and figuring out what the palestinians need. they need to get their act together. the pa is a corrupt and ineffective organization. also much more what palestinians have done. we need a new legitimate moderate palestinian authority. that can only come with help from israel and the uae, from saudi arabia, from egypt, from jordan. that effective pa can be the answer to a lot of questions. it can be the answer to who can govern gaza in partnership and then later alone with israel. and ultimately who can be the partner for a two-state so solution. it's not going to happen overnight, but if your position, which is benjamin netanyahu's position is to run against joe

biden, that's what benjamin netanyahu is.com. you're never going to have the american partner you need for transitioning out of gaza. you'll end up with million jews controlling 3 million in the west bank, 2 million in gaza alone, and that's politically unsustainable. >> tom, i have a colin powell question. i want to put it on the screen. a lot of comments were appended to your most recent column, as is often the case. this was the number one column when i read it. this was the number one let's be real. israel broke gaza. israel should pay to rebuild it. why should they expect american taxpayers or gulf oil states to pay to repair what they have broken. in the end, who pays? >> in the end, i'm sure everyone is going to have to pay something. israel is going to pay something. the u.n. is going to pay something. america is going to pay

something. israel did break it, but actually they broke it after hamas broke it. so i think getting into that isn't really helpful. my point is to focus right now not to describe the problem. it's to think about creative solutions. there's a lot of people ready to invest, it's not just donation, invest in a creative solution. would it be a huge economic political social wound for the entire region. it could be the keystone to a new middle east. >> going forward, i'm going to say as repeated by colin powell, the tom freedman pottery barn rule says you break it you bought it. appreciate you being here. >> you too. thank you. let's see what you're saying on social media. what's from the world of x?

the israeli war is never going to end in our lifetime. there's no scenario where either side or more important ly the powers that feed off the conflict will allow anything but an immediate cessation of hostilities. what i found most encouraging about tom's column, which i recommend everybody read, is that despite all that's transpired and all the images we're seeing despite all the bloodshed on both sides, the arab world loosely defines still wants to see a two-state solution and get this all behind us. there might be opportunity with all of the ugliness. so let's hope rooigt. but that requires a two-state commitment from israel that right now is not forthcoming. i want to remiend you. go to smerconish and vote on today's poll question. i address this with elie honig earlier in the program.

will donald trump face any criminal the trial before election day? up ahead, in florida, the head of the state gop sand his wife who co-authored the parents bill of rights, were exposed to being in a three-way arrange mment th accused christian of having separately raped her. will the ongoing scandal force ron desantis to remove his ally from the school board? and you want to remind you when you vote on the poll question. sign up for the news letter. you'll find content from award-winning cartoonists. how about this from steve breen. poison ivy, it's titled.

i'm a little anxious, i'm a little excited. i'm gonna be emotional, she's gonna be emotional, but it's gonna be so worth it. i love that i can give back to one of our customers. i hope you enjoy these amazing gifts. oh my goodness. oh, you guys. i know you like wrestling, so we got you some vip tickets. you have made an impact. so have you. for you guys to be out here doing something like this, it restores a lot of faith in humanity. so how will ron desantis

respond to calls that he fire a school board member who participated in a three-way and happens to be married to the chair of the state republican party? this week all four of the fellow i sarasota school board members called for her resignation. it relates to circumstances surrounding an investigation of her husband christian zig who is accused of rape. he's not been charged. brigt has not been accused of any criminal wrong doing. here's the back story. according to an affidavit, a woman told police on october 2nd, there was a planned sexual encounter between her and christian and bridget. bridget cancelled leading the other woman to cancel, but christian showed up at the woman's home. she said she was not in a place to consent because she had been drinking tequila all day, but he

had sex with her and she later called her sister and said she had been raped. christian says the it was consensual and refused requests to step down. his lawyer says he will be exonerated. why has this private life choice touched a particular public nerve? in the interview with detectives, she admitted the couple had a previous three-way sexual encounter with the woman over a year ago and it only happened one time. and her group moms for liberty has led efforts in the state and beyond to remove books from classrooms i they deem inappropriate for kids u unincluding those with lgbtq themes. bridget also helped author the parents bill of rights, which ron desantis signed in 2022 and desantis appointed her to the board that manages the special tax district. she said this. in the past. >> know where they stand and

hold them accountable. >> at this week's school board meeting outside of which one protester held up a sign reading don't say three way, bridget rejected calls to resign. >> as people may know, i serve on another public pord. this issue did not come up and we were able to forge ahead with the business of the board. >> she can't be recalled. only governor desantis can remove her. i should mention we reached out to bridget to appear on the program and did not hear back. joining me now is tom edwards, the only democratic member of the sarasota school board. he sent a letter to the governor warning her continued presence on the board is going to be a profound distraction from their work. on what basis do you think that governor desantis should remove mrs. ziggler? >> quite frank ly, the details

are reason enough to justify the distraction that he himself feels his party chair brings to the state of florida. i'm focused solely on student achievement and academic outcomes, and this distraction that she and the details of that investigation bring are exactly a distraction, even though she's not accused of anything ul illegal. nonetheless, the hypocrisy joined into the details of the investigation clearly meets that school board is going to have difficulty trying to do the work for the students. >> is it necessarily hypocrisy? >> i'm not in a business of judging people of their private homes. i'm in the business of

overseeing academic achievement in student outcomes. everything that she will say moving forward will fall under the scrutiny of can it be tr trusted, is it hypocritical or political? and then the next thing is that her colleagues on the board who voted side by side with her in just a about every instance really brings into question the trust of the entire board. so my fear is that it will be a constant distraction from what we're there to accomplish. >> there's a perception i want to discuss with you. i talked about this on my radio program. i was surprised by the number of callers who said, well, those books ought to be banned. the perception is there are books widespread to students all across america depicting, among other thing, oral sex. are there books that we need to be worry about our kids adhavin

access to at a young age? is that what she's banned? >> so let's back up a second. i think everybody is in agreement that in the initial don't say gay bill, the law was drafted to say we didn't want to discuss sexual orientation or gender in k-3. i don't think anyone has an argument about that, but frankly, that was never, ever happening. we didn't need a law to prevent that from happening but it created the chaos around the lgbtq plus community. further more, here's what i really want to say. the hypocrisy of what she has done is the low-hang ing fruit. what really has happened is that students' self-esteem and mental health has been seriously wounded and damaged. because while they are in the formative years, they heard don't say gay. so what you're discovering your identity in the world, you're attacked by that very entity. that happened to black children.

whitewashing black history. the benefits of slavery. you have until the third power. >> i want to make sure i ask you this. i watched a local florida report, i think it was your local fox affiliate. it was you being heckled. i think that's a kind word in a public setting at a school board meeting. and i'm going to say it. someone shouted out that you were a groomer. correct me if i'm wrong in terms of the allegation. when i watched it, i said to myself, who the hell is going to serve on a local school board other than some fringe type because the decent people that i can think of are going to say, i don't need it. i'll go give to my community in some other respect. my point is larger than sarasota, i'm worried that decent people are bypassing community involvement. >> well, that's a very valid

question. and that's what i'm really trying to explain to you about the mental health element. i was that young person in the '70s trying to figure out their identity. and it was a very different world at that time. and my self-esteem was cob substantiate ily challenged. now look at what's happened to those communities, those marginalized communities across the united states. it didn't just happen in sarasota. it didn't just happen in the state of florida. governor desantis took those policies on the road deliberately and dlubtly harmed children with only for their own personal political gain. many it is being rejected as ron desantis is on that political trail. people are very angry and you can look at a the public comments that happened just recently in our school board and grandparents and parents and students came out to chastise

her for that very damage and that very real pain that was done. >> it's going to be very interesting to see what governor desantis does about her position on the school board. tom edwards, happy holidays. thank you for being here. i appreciate your time. >> thank you so much for allowing me the aublt to showcase what's gone wrong. >> thank you, sir. checking in on social media reaction that's come in during the course of the program. what do we have? from the world of x. i never say it. follow me on x. she's a hypocrite, but what you do behind closed doors is your business. is it bad she doesn't want kids to know about threesomes? interesting. i don't have time. this is not the forum. is she necessarily a hypocrite? if you're really think it through, or not. not that i'm comfortable with a person who is as politically

motivated as she has become in opposition to lgbtq issue, then i don't think she's fit to serve in that capacity. my two cents. is there a question of hi hypocrisy is more complicated. that's all i'm saying. still to come, more of your best and worst social media comments. don't forget to vote on the poll question at smerconish.com. will donald trump face any criminal trial before election day. while you're there, sign up for the free daily newsletter. jack oman, look what he sketched for my daily newsletter. it's free and worthy. that is well done.

i'm told we have a lot of social media reaction. i'm involved in all the usual

places on social media. follow me. do whatever you do. send in your comments. i love addressing them during the course of the program. all these lawsuits are nothing more than election interference, real election interference. this is a reference to my conversation with elie honig talking about the big picture. where are we in the election? that's the perception. whether that's the reality. that's the per spception by mag and some who are not in maga. and how do we know that? with every passing indictment, donald trump's numbers have increased such to the point that he's really got a strangle hold on the nomination. so your point is that's election interference. someone else would say what are you going tad? let that conduct go unresponded to? you can't do that. here's another reaction from today's program. looks like you are coming out publicly full trump. so much for you claiming to be unbiassed.

sad. why? i'm a trump because i sit is here having read the legal documents and explained to the audience something that i have not heard anybody else say with clarity. which is that jack smith is operating in accordance with the election timetable. and so too is the judge. in so far as they want to get this case to trial. and that donald trump might otherwise bring it to a halt and self-pardon. so for explaining ta to the audience and putting that in font of you all of you front and center, the fact that come january or february, we're going to have a supreme court case or two, the likes of which we haven't seen since bush vs. gore, that makes many a that makes me calling balls and strikes and calling a solid for the audience and presenting an issue, that come 2024, it will drive the entire news cycle. but you're welcome.

still to come, the final results was poll question. go to smerconish.com and tell me, will donald trump face any criminal trial, any trial before election day?

there's where we stand. so far. 28,921 votes cast. will donald trump face any criminal trial before election day? 65% say yes. two thirds are saying, one-third no. my hunch is part of the two thirds is wishful thinking. the correct answer is probably not. it rests largely in the hands of the supreme court. he'll face one and only one if

he faces any at all. and i go back to something that i said to el ie honig, one more than a thousand days have elapsed since january 6th everything trump did, most of what he did was in the public domain, merrick garland should have moved more quickly than he did. and the second observation is, think of this. seven months from indictment to trial for trump, two years for january 6th, other defendants, does that seem fair and equitatable? mullll it over.. i'll seeee you next t week.

hello again. and welcome. it's time to get together and break down the