The Adam and Dr. Drew Show - #1862 Last One Out of Saigon

Episode Date: May 8, 2024

This week, criminal defense attorney, Mark Geragos makes his long awaited return to co-host with Adam in Dr. Drew's absence. Mark starts off the shows by talking about the latest in President Donald Trump's trial, they also discuss Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels. Plus, the Tik Tok revival of the California Governor's last appearance on The Adam Carolla Show. Please Support Our Sponsor: Manscaped.com, use promo: AdamDrew

The infamous true crime series cold case files. You explained to me how she went over the edge of that cliff. Is back with new podcast episodes. The victim's own sock was used to strangle her. Immersing you in harrowing tales. We immediately thought that was foul play. That will give you a desire for justice. He heard a slight noise and turned around and she was no longer there. immediately thought it was foul play. That will give you a desire for justice.

He heard a slight noise and turned around and she was no longer there. Take the journey with investigators as these new cold case files unfold. He's done with these teenage girls and he dumps them. With some of the most chilling true crime stories ever heard. And he deserved to be caged, locked up like the animal he is.

Listen to the Cold Case Files podcast now, available wherever you get your podcasts. All for free. Watch all your favorite crime dramas like CSI and Blue Bloods. Or your favorite action dramas like Breaking Bad on Stories by AMC or The Walking Dead Universe. Plus, Pluto TV has hundreds of drama movies and TV shows. Download Pluto TV on all your favorite devices for free. Pluto TV. Stream now, pay never. May 12th, Bircham's back. on the He catch you doing something wrong, he chuck a screwdriver at you. Megan Kelly. I'm getting into being an esports mom. It's like being a soccer mom.

Who can stay in her pajamas? Kyle Dunnigan. Mom, it's heated, does acupuncture, and can insult my competitors in 20 languages. Danny Trail. Sharing this moment with you makes killing all them guys worth it. Patrick Warburton. Real Men Stuff Feelings Down with Red Meat Cigarettes and Violence, and Roseanne Barr. Hello Mr. Burcham. Go to DailyWirePlus.com and enter the code ADAM25

to sign up for a Daily Wire Plus annual membership and receive 25% off. Check it out today, DailyWirePlus.com and get ready for Mr. Burcham on May 12th. Choirplus.com and get ready for Mr. Burcham on May 12th Recorded live at Corolla one studios with Adam Corolla and Mark Garagos. You're listening to the Adam and Mark show Yeah, get it on got to get on a church again and get it on dr. Drew's out of the country maybe not sure where he is but I'll tell you who's here and when I say here I mean there at his home office mark Garaga is fresh out of court hustled back to be with us and weigh in on all that's going on in society lots of legal wranglings going on out there today good good to see you Mark.

Good to see you too, but can I ask one question? Drew and Susan did not go on Douglas' honeymoon, did they? I think they did, I think they're chaperoning. I don't know that that's something I approve of, I think that's a little, I mean that's almost the subject of an old love line gag. My in-laws came with me on our honeymoon. Yeah, they used to call that helicopter parenting.

And I used to have a joke, which is my mom didn't pay a lot of attention to me. And if she was to be classified as a helicopter parent, she would have been the last one out of Saigon. Well, if we want to update it to Jen whatever, we would say the last one out of Afghanistan. Yes, I should update. So it's been all on the news, the whole Trump trial has been really going nuts in the news and as I tell you all the time,

anytime I see a news story and some commentator weighing in, I always think, oh, I got to get Mark's take on this. I will tell you, and I sent this to Emmy and hopefully he's got it. So they found the judge, Judge Murchon, found Trump in contempt last week and issued an order, we're doing this on Tuesday, this drops tomorrow, and he issued an order on Monday, May 6th. And you have to, the reason I sent it to Emmy is because I reread this order three times and I am, look, you know me, anybody who knows me knows I'm not a Trump, I'm not a Trumper, I'm not a Republican,

I don't have, I don't share much of the ideology. However, this trial is so outlandish to me, this trial is so ridiculous to me that I wanted somebody to just put up on the screen because you're not gonna get this in the reporting of this trial. All you'll hear is this breathless reporting that he's been, you know, 10 instances of contempt,

jail is next. I want you to see what the statements are that form the basis. Do you know, by the way, as you sit here? You never know by the media reporting. For contempt, I have to admit that I am a lay person, but I do think in a logical way, this may be the first big trial I've heard of in my lifetime, where I'm not really sure what the crime was, which is a pretty interesting place to be in as an American,

where it's the biggest trial right now, this side of the OJ trial and some other notable trials. But I mean, it's dominating the news. And we're used to as Americans, which is, well, what's the trial about? Well, they think OJ killed his wife and the waiter. Okay. And then what's the Rodney King trial about?

Well, they think these police brutality, that's what we're talking about here. And what's the George Floyd trial about? Well, they think this officer killed him with his knee and cut his windpipe off. But this has gotta be the only trial where if I stopped and asked 50 people on the street, what is this trial about?

What is the crime? I don't think they would know. And I'm not sure what the crime is either. Of course, you could tell us what they're claiming the crime is,. Of course, you could tell us what they're claiming the crime is, but it still doesn't logically track. He was with a porn star 18 years ago. She signed a nondisclosure.

He paid her off to keep her quiet, and that was 18 years ago. I don't know what else, I don't know what the, where is the actual crime part? I understand that the things come afterward, the gag orders and the misconduct and stuff like that, but I still don't know what the base of it is. Well, I think first, and I hate to be a one trick pony,

because I'll tell you this, but I think we have to see what it is. And they do have some of these statements that you can put up from the order. My favorite one is. And they do have some of these statements that you can put up from the order. My favorite one is he was found beyond a reasonable doubt. The judge found that the statement, and maybe Emi can just read it for us.

I think I had it up because you're going to, Trump said something to the effect of, you know, this trial is unbelievable, 95% of the jurors or the jury pool are Democrats. And that was one of the counts of contempt. Right. That, I mean, we're in America, the presidential contender, the leading presidential contender, who by the way is leading in the polls right now, who by the way is in a criminal trial, the first time in American history, and he makes the statement

that this is a rigged deal, 95% of the jury pool is Democrats, and that's a contempt. I, I just, I blows my body. I mean, by the way, I'm by no means a expert in the New York state system, criminal contempt procedure. But my understanding of criminal contempt, before you can start threatening to do somebody's, take away somebody's liberty. I've actually tried criminal contempt cases to a jury.

And this, whatever it was that was last, I believe Thursday, where they did a proceeding on this, I don't believe it was an appropriate legal proceeding to find somebody in contempt such that you can take their liberty. And I don't, for a minute, think any of the laundry lists of statements that he made are contemptible, meaning susceptible, of him being in contempt. He is—and you've heard me talk about this forever—the leading case on this is Shepard versus Maxwell. It's a US Supreme Court case. It's from 60 or 70 years ago. It was the basis for the TV series, The Fugitive.

And the doctor who was convicted, Effley Bailey, a 29 or 39 year old Effley Bailey, got it reversed at the Supreme Court because of the overwhelming publicity. It wasn't the defendant that they were trying to throw the contempt on. It was that the prosecutor and the media were horn-swaggling and beating the crap out of the defendant.

Here, Trump is trying to defend himself, and he's being gagged as the witnesses are going out there and saying and talking about him and slamming the hell out of him. It's astonishing to me. And if you're a criminal defense lawyer, when you're the last stop on the constitutional freight train,

you have to be appalled by this, although a lot of my colleagues aren't. Well, we're entering a dangerous era, which is your personal feelings and or animosity toward one person could be so great that you're willing to sort of look the other way in terms of the law and in terms of rights and in terms of freedoms and in terms of the system and how the system was built to work. And that we can agree is a scary time. I mean, we all understand that,

remember when the bridge was shut off in New Jersey because, God, what's this? Chris Christie, Chris Christie had a beef with somebody politically and said, you know what? I'll screw you, I'm shutting this bridge off. And we all agree that we don't want any of that in our politics because we're waiting to get over the bridge while you guys are having a cat fight about something politically.

Well, I think we feel the same way about the judicial system. We want it up and running. We want it functional. We want the justice, lady justice, to be blindfolded and to have the scales of justice in front of her. We don't want it tipping one way or the other. And I think if you're being intellectually honest, that's what you would say. Regardless of whether you liked Chris Christie or hated Chris Christie, we don't want to live in a world where you like Chris Christie so you defend him shutting the bridge or you hate the other guy. So you defend Chris Christie.

It just is it right to shut the bridge or not? The answer is no, then we should all arrive at the same page. This seems pretty clear. And by the way, if I'm not mistaken, and we can fact check me on this, I think that the criminal convictions in that bridge gate or whatever the term was for it were reversed by the US Supreme Court, but not before people's lives were upended and turned upside down in the interim and Chris Christie never got filed on. And you have to wonder why was it that that that people were convicted

and had to go all the way to the US Supreme Court to say wait a second here this legal theory makes no sense well the Trump case for those who don't know I think was not you know it was it's been discussed and passed over I think the prior DA of New York said there wasn't enough meat on this bone and I've said that this was you side bands was the previous DA to Alvin Bragg who is the current DA right and so it's not like it wasn't looked at and passed over before. Somebody looked at it, who probably wasn't a Trump fan, and said, there's not enough meat on the bone, so let's let this one go.

I wonder in cases like this with the judge, with people like the judge, who seem to be leaning toward the prosecution, constantly being accused of sort of being an inside man for the prosecution when nobody wants you to act that way as a judge, at least from a society, we don't want bias from the judge. It would seem like he would be more careful about his actions because of the appearance, you know, like I've I've used the example all the time, you know in Little League

I don't know the umpire didn't show up So one of the dads, you know volunteered to umpire the game and his son is pitching And I think that dad would be very careful calling balls and strikes But if the guy threw one over the catcher's head and it hit the backstop and he yelled strike, then everyone would look at him and go, Oh, come on, you're doing what we thought you were going to do. It's so obvious. And I feel like this judge is doing a lot of that.

And I don't know why he's not more cautious about it. So look, I'm going to mention a couple of things. Again, in the quotations or the transcript of what the judge said, he actually said, I believe this was on Monday, May 6th, something to the effect of, I don't want to have to put you in jail. It requires all kinds of problems because we're in the middle of a presidential election. His words, not mine, and I'm paraphrasing.

And it's a logistical nightmare because obviously you've got secret service, you've got a state court putting a federal candidate in a presidential election in custody in a state. And I don't want to do that. And my immediate as maybe it's just because I'm a defense lawyer, my immediate reaction is, and you've heard this from me before, wait a second, Less than 90 days ago, the Southern District of New York, which is the federal prosecutor who passed on taking this case against Trump, they did prosecute Michael Cope. They turned over a treasure trove of documents to the state who had not had it when they indicted Trump.

They did that on the eve of trial. The judge, only because in my humble opinion, the prosecutor admitted there's thousands of documents were on the 11th hour before trial. I'm gonna give you a 30 day continuance. Todd Blanch, who was Trump's lawyer, says, are you kidding me? Right before trial, you're going to do a document dump on me,

and you're going to just continue this so it's closer to the election, which the judge admits yesterday. He knows. And you've heard this, my example before. Out of all the days, the 1,500 days of the last four years, we needed to get this state court trial to trial right now less than six months out from the election so that we can take him off of the campaign

trail because we're going to prosecute him because of the 2016 election. And this goes back to your point, the theory being that he paid off Stormy Daniels 130 grand through Michael Cohen, working with Keith Davidson. Keith Davidson testified that he never, and Stormy's then lawyer, never spoke to Trump, only spoke to Cohen, and that it was done to protect Trump. Now mind you, there are all kinds of people

who heard that evidence and said, well, there you go. He was trying to rig the 2016 election. It was election interference. That's the crime that the prosecutor is saying. That Stormy Daniels was paid 130 grand so that the American people on the heels of the Access Hollywood tape would not hear Stormy Daniels and they would not have that in their mind

when they went in to vote in November of 2016. That's the crime eight years later. I don't think they understand that they're dealing with a Tinder box that's been soaked in kerosene. That if you took Trump, found him guilty, especially in the middle of New York with that judge and that jury pool, and got him off the presidential trail. I don't think they realize that America is not going to put up with that, that there's

going to be repercussions, that there could possibly be violence. I don't think they really know what they're dealing with Or maybe they do and they just don't care Alright, let me tell you about Manscaped the handyman trusted by more than 10 million men worldwide for trimmers hygiene and shower Formulations and I'm one of them the Handyman compact face shaver delivers a quick close shave. The unique dual blade standard foil shaver and long hair leveler blade knocks down up to three days worth of growth. Features skin safe technology to reduce nicks and cuts. Water waterproof for quick cleanup. That is a big deal

easy to Maneuver and reach tricky spots rechargeable battery up to 60 minutes runtime on a single charge Airplane friendly so you can take it with you on the road. I believe in this product So I got a special deal for you all go to man scaped product so I got a special deal for you all go to manscaped.com and use the code Adam Drew at checkout for 20% off the handyman that's manscaped.com use the promo code adamdrew and get the 20% off but well I will tell you that let me I would even go that far. I'll just tell you what I think will happen. I've seen this a million times. I used to say this in the 90s when defending McDougal in the Whitewater thing. I'd say Republicans, be careful. You have this fight all the time with Republicans. Be

careful. This is going to happen to you. What you're doing to Bill Clinton, it's going to come around because you can't to borrow your phrase. It can't go any other way. I will make the bold prediction. If this happens the way I, it's unfolding, you're going to find either in Texas or in Georgia or some other state where there is a, a political opponent of put in whatever Democrat you want, whether it's Joe Biden post-election, whether it's some other Democrat, they'll indict that Democrat. And they will do the exact same thing. And the Democrats, my party, my crew, my posse, are going to be screaming, how in the world can this happen? This is

a perversion of the justice system. This is election interference. This is the craziest thing I've ever heard. They've turned the Constitution on its head. No, you guys did it. When you guys, when the Democratic Party became the cheerleaders for the prosecution and you would resurrect cases that have been passed over a number of times. It's hard for anybody who is trying to be objective to say to me, this is where we need to deploy our resources in the criminal justice system in the state court of New York. What is the possibility, let's just say he's convicted on all counts. I don't know that most laypeople, including myself, knows what that physically looks like.

Does that physically look like a prison term? What does that physically look like? And when might they rest? Well, I'm going to tell you right now what that looks like. If this is like virtually 95% of all criminal cases in the state courts across the country, if you are convicted of multiple felony counts after a jury trial in the state court,

when that jury verdict is read, the judge will tell the defendant, I'm remanding you into custody. Right then and there, pre-sentencing, you go, don't pass go, don't collect 200 bucks, you're going into jail. Take your watch off, take your jewelry off, take your belt off, you're going into custody.

That's what will happen. He will be remanded. Mind you, he may be remanded beforehand because after he saw the order telling him that he could not talk about this case, that he couldn't, he said something else about Michael Cohen, something about him being a convicted liar. By the way, he is a convicted liar. I mean, that's a, he's speaking truth. He's in the middle of a political campaign.

We used to believe that the Constitution says that the most pure, gravamid, poor political speech is in a political campaign. He's telling the truth in a political campaign. He's telling the truth in a political campaign. Mind you, the First Amendment is broader and more expansive than that. If he gets remanded into custody, he bet there's a clip of him yesterday coming out of the courthouse, say the Constitution is bigger than this. I hate to be the one who has to defend him, but he's right. The Constitution to defend him, but he's right. The constitution protects your ability to use free speech and talk about core political speech.

We are literally watching our societal losing of their minds. And mind you, I could go on and on about the way the evidence is being characterized in this case, which is appalling to me. What is the timeline? So the picture that is being painted by the prosecution is access Hollywood tape comes

out. There is a Republican kind of groundswell of support that he should pull out of the campaign. It's way too close. That would have been, he would have been looked upon as one of the great losers of all time. Seth Abramson, who is about as progressive a writer as you will find, does a thread that I just read today that talks about how just under siege he was. That's what the prosecution is trying to show. He was under siege. I got it. I remember that eight years ago, however long ago it was, with the access Hollywood would take. You and I

used to talk about him. Or Billy Bush, remember? I know, he didn't do anything. And they slaughtered Billy Bush. But supposedly, the other thing, and I bring this up, you have to believe that he believed that this was for the election. But as Seth Abrahamson just argued, I think forcefully and compellingly today, he didn't think there was a chance in hell he was going to win the election. That Trump was doing this, his motivation was for his brand, number one, the running for against Hillary, and number two, that he had all kinds of business deals that Michael Cohen was working on and others were working on for him, the thought he was going to lose, but

that at least he was saving himself from the embarrassment of having to resign and not go into the election. He didn't do this with an expectation of winning. And that's what the defense should be. You should take their argument and turn it inside out. Nobody thought Trump was gonna win. Do you remember that night? I broke up one of my closest friendships with the guy you used to call rich guy number two because I bet him that Trump would win. And he, and every, I could have made a fortune

if I had just expanded that. everybody thought he was going to lose it was accepted wisdom that night was when people melted down nobody thought he was going to win in 2016 you have to remember that and the idea that now they're saying in retrospect that he did it so we can win I think is a perversion of what the facts were at the time So when do you think this trial is gonna wrap? June oh really Be a little while. Yeah, I think it's gonna be a while I mean I you know, it's always hard to say, you know

He has said he wants to testify given what the judge ruled that Eddie wants to testify, given what the judge ruled that all of the various things can come in. And the judge did that, and it's not just me saying this, I saw another writer, legal commentator saying this, coming on the heels of the Harvey Weinstein conviction being reversed in New York, because the judge in that case, who, mind you, Judge Burke is no longer on the bench. After that conviction, he was removed or resigned or left the bench.

The highest court in New York ruled that telling Harvey Weinstein, if you take the stand, we're going to let in the character assassination portion of this case, it interferes with his right to testify. They've done the same thing with Trump. So not only do you say, you're bringing in stuff that's uncharged conduct, and that is a no-no, that violates, they call it in New York, the Molino doctrine, but telling them that if you take the stand,

we're gonna let the prosecution cross-examine you on stuff that's not charge conduct. That becomes a violation of both the Fifth and the Sixth Amendment. I will say as a side note, I interviewed Michael Cohen for an hour, maybe two years ago, and I found him to be

hysteric, and I literally, and I've never said this in all of my years of interviewing people, I literally told him that if he didn't calm down, I was gonna hang up on him, which I've never had to do with, I mean, I think I hung up on Gloria Allred once, but it wasn't because she was being a hysteric. No, no, sorry. I didn't hang up on Gloria Allred. I hung up on Ann Coulter. Okay, that's the person I hung up on. Gloria Allred I just argued with for 25 minutes on Yeah, some of your Gloria Allred clips to be rival,

they don't surpass, but rival. You know, your most famous clip, which has now been revitalized on TikTok. A whole new generation has seen it. Do you know which clip? Yeah, TikTok is so weird because I'm so far removed from all of that. But last night I was in the kitchen with Sonny and he said,

you know, I was like, I went on a chat or group chat or something with some of my friends and they're talking about your argument with Gavin Newsman was on TikTok. And I, and I realized, oh, that's the power of, of TikTok. Somebody whacked it into a one and a half minute bite-sized morsel and just sort of threw it up there. And it garnered views.

I mean, I got people, and it's a great way of finding out that people that are close to you never listen to you on your podcast Because we probably talked about that Gavin Newsom interview what a hundred times a bit of them Yeah, and and while the Gavin Newsom interview is is awesome The glory all-red one is every bit is good. It's just she's not Gavin Newsom and I think People don't need her put in her place as much as they feel like they need Gavin Newsom put in this place. But in terms of flipping the script and

trying to make some points and then of course coining the phrase crystal brain. And then and then crystal appears. That's right. Right. yes. You were prescient about that. I was prescient about it. Yeah, I talked to Cohen on February of 2021, and the subject of January 6th came up, and I said, I don't think it rises to the level of a coup. I think it was more chaos and more riot and Whatever negative things you want to ascribe to it, but I would not call it a coup and

He just started going insane and he got so agitated and Animated that at a certain point I just said I will hang up on you if you do not calm yourself down a little bit. Now, I think I was right about it not rising to the level of a coup, but Cohen is volatile and kind of hard to wrangle and difficult and bright, but also very emotional.

Like I don't know how he's gonna do under cross on that stand. Well, what has been testified to so far is that Keith Davidson, who was Stormy Daniels' lawyer at the time, says that when he was talking with Michael Cohen, says that when he was talking with Michael Cohen, Cohen said that he was very agitated, very upset, that he's saved Trump's ass multiple times, and that there's no job for him in D.C.

So this is after the election, he's upset about that. You know, whether he thought he was going to be attorney general or White House counsel or, you know, head of civil rights, I mean, whatever the legal positions are, that's what the the prosecution's witness said. He said in the prosecution's case in chief. Well, that tells you, and that was once again, I watched the, you know, my stations meeting MSNBC or CNN, I'm in the bubble. That the interpretation of that as evidence was,

well, so obviously Trump knew. No, the more reasonable interpretation is, this guy was trying to whack-a-mole all the issues so that he could curry favor with Trump without Trump knowing. And by the way, the definition of reasonable doubt is, if you have two reasonable interpretations, one pointing towards guilt, one pointing towards innocence,

even if they aren't equal, you have to adopt the one pointing towards innocence. That statement by Cohen is not inculpatory. That is a lot more exculpatory for Trump. Well, we'll see how it plays out, but I mean, I don't have a lot of confidence in that jury or that judge. Well, let's talk about that in the next episode.

I think we should. And I've also got some Hunter Biden stuff too, as well, hot off the press. Netflix is a joke, that'll be tonight. I'm doing a show at the Kukaburra Lounge and Leno's gonna be there and Jay Moore's gonna be there and Rob Schneider's gonna be there and TJ Miller it's a stacked line of maybe a few tickets left and then Las Vegas May 16th at Jimmy Kimmel's club you just go to adamcrawl.com for all the live shows what do you got Mark? the Jimmy Kimmel's Club. You just go to AdamKerrle.com for all the live shows. What do you got, Mark?

Hey, if you're in the Hamptons this month, go by Capri. If you're down in Palm Springs, the weather is perfect. Go by the V, stop by Gigi's. And if you're in St. Clemente, go by Casa Tropicana and visit Peer Side Restaurant. So, until next time, Adam Kerrle for Mark Garaga. Say it! Mahalo! Until next time, Adam Crow for Mark Garagas. Say it! Mahala! Or your favorite action dramas like Breaking Bad on Stories by AMC or The Walking Dead Universe. Plus, Pluto TV has hundreds of drama movies and TV shows. Download Pluto TV on all your favorite devices for free. Pluto TV. Stream now, pay never.