Dr. Phil McGraw attempted to defend former President Donald Trump’s legal woes, only to face a barrage of questions and challenges from CNN anchor Abby Phillip over his claim that Michael Cohen shouldn't have been allowed to testify in front of a jury.
The discussion centered around the Stormy Daniels hush money trial and the subsequent guilty verdicts on all 34 felony counts.
Phillip wasted no time questioning Dr. Phil's assertions, prompting him to explain his views on what he perceives to be a lack of due process in Trump's case.
Dr. Phil argued that the jury had been exposed to "prejudicial information" that went against basic legal principles. However, Phillip was quick to counter his arguments with examples from legal practices.
"Would you mind telling us — I mean, tell us why you think he didn’t get due process. I mean, the proceedings, we had reporters in there. I was there for a lot of it. There was a judge and he adjudicated a lot of these questions. Why do you think he wasn’t given a fair process?" Phillip asked.
Dr. Phil responded, "I think there are some things that are considered black letter law or hornbook law, that’s just really not something that is controversial at all that was violated."
As the discussion delved deeper into the specifics of the case, Phillip challenged Dr. Phil's views on the admissibility of testimony from individuals such as Michael Cohen, a key figure in the trial.
Dr. Phil argued that Cohen's plea deal and admission of guilt could unfairly prejudice the jury against Trump, but Phillip pointed out common legal practices where such testimony is admissible.
"Well, really, give me examples of where that has been considered appropriate," Dr. Phil questioned the host.
Phillip responded firmly, "I mean, look, prosecutors are prosecuting organized crime all the time. And in a lot of those cases, they are relying on co-conspirators to put people who are at the higher levels of the organization behind bars."
Never miss a story — sign up for the OK! newsletter to stay up-to-date on the best of what OK! has to offer. It’s gossip too good to wait for!
Despite Dr. Phil's insistence on his stance, Phillip remained steadfast in challenging his arguments based on legal precedents.
"It happens in mob cases all the time. I don’t — look, Dr. Phil, I don’t understand why you would think that Michael Cohen, who is a key person in a lot of the narrative here, should not have been allowed to testify in this case," Phillip retorted. "Michael Cohen was not charged with falsifying business records ... he was not prosecuted for that crime."