0:01

This is beyond a

0:03

reasonable doubt with your

0:06

hosts, Mark Garagas and

0:08

Gary Smith. Wow.

0:11

Is that a new intro? No,

0:15

no, it's not. That's the same one. It might have

0:17

been a little distorted on your end because of the

0:19

way it's coming through Zoom, but that is the good

0:21

old classic with Mike Dawson right there. Yeah,

0:24

it was awesome, Dawson. I always thought he had

0:26

music behind it, but maybe I'm just hallucinating. There's

0:28

music behind it. It's just coming through Zoom a

0:30

little weird for you because you you're on a

0:32

different device today. Got it.

0:35

Got it. Well, we've got a we've

0:37

got a bite sized bard today.

0:39

Why don't we at

0:43

least start with one of my favorite exchanges?

0:45

Do you have some can you do a

0:47

couple of cut ups from

0:49

Congress this week? Sure. Let's start

0:51

here. I'd like to know

0:53

if any of the Democrats on this committee are

0:55

employing Judge Michonne's daughter.

1:00

No, no, no, no. Please tell me what that has

1:02

to do with Mayor Garland. Is she

1:04

a porn star? Oh, Goldman,

1:06

that's right. He's advising. OK. So

1:10

that for those who are just listening,

1:12

that's Marjorie Taylor Green asking.

1:14

I think she's looking up at the at

1:18

Comer and and the

1:20

chair, who's chair, I think,

1:22

of the committee or

1:25

and asking if anybody

1:28

is employing the judge

1:30

in Trump's case, the

1:34

daughter. And so then she

1:37

says Goldman. So I believe that

1:39

Dan Goldman had met or has

1:42

a relationship with the judge's daughter

1:44

is what she's referring to. That's

1:46

been publicized. So let's go. And

1:49

then the neck, you'll see the

1:51

next deal coming up

1:53

shortly. Right. Here

1:55

we go. Is

1:58

it my son who? Do

2:02

you know what we're here for? You know we're here.

2:05

I don't think you know what you're here for. Well

2:08

you don't want to talking about I think your

2:10

fake eyelashes are messing up. Order.

2:14

Marjorie Taylor Green. And that's

2:16

not who is who she referring to. She's

2:21

referring to another colleague

2:24

across from the aisle and her

2:26

fake eyelashes. So we

2:28

have now reached the point where as

2:30

you can imagine it's only going to

2:32

go. So Gary play it again. Order.

2:36

Mr. Chairman. Order. I

2:38

do have a point of order and I would like to move

2:40

to take down Ms. Green's words. That's

2:48

AOC coming in. That

2:50

is absolutely unacceptable. How dare you.

2:54

I'm getting a little so thin. Are

2:56

you feeling her words down.

2:59

Oh girl baby girl. Oh really. Don't

3:01

even play baby girl. I don't think

3:03

we are going to move and we're

3:05

going to take your words down. I

3:07

second that motion. So

3:10

who will have to fail. Ms.

3:12

Green agrees to strike her words. I believe

3:14

you're right. Hold on

3:17

then after Mr. Perry's you'll be recognized

3:19

in Ms. I'm not apologizing. I am

3:21

not apologizing. Come

3:24

on guys. Why

3:28

don't you debate me. Mr. Chairman.

3:30

The minority. You're not. You're

3:32

not. You don't have enough in. Chair recognizes Mr.

3:35

Perry. Okay. Move to strike.

3:37

I move to strike. I move to strike. I

3:39

move to strike. I move to strike. I

3:42

move to strike. Order. That's two requests to

3:44

strike. That's two requests to strike. Oh

3:47

they cannot take the word. Another motion

3:49

to strike her words again. Here's the

3:52

correct the correct apology. Ms. Green do

3:54

you ask unanimous consent to strike your

3:56

words? I

4:00

repeat again for the second time. Yes,

4:02

I'll start my words, but I'm not apologizing.

4:04

Without objection, without objection. Mr.

4:07

Chair, point of order. Who's

4:12

Ms. Crockett? I'm just curious,

4:14

just to better understand your ruling,

4:16

if someone on this committee then

4:19

starts talking about somebody's bleach-blind, bad-built,

4:21

butch body, that would not be

4:24

engaging in personalities, correct? A what

4:26

now? Chairman,

4:28

I make a motion to strike a- Are

4:32

you able to just play that

4:34

one more time? That's our Congresswoman

4:36

Crockett, and that's Cope or Askin.

4:38

Say, what do you think? Say

4:40

what now? Correct. Uh-oh,

4:43

what now? Sorry,

4:46

I didn't back it up far enough. Let me try one

4:48

more time here. Point of order. He's

4:53

Ms. Crockett. I'm just

4:56

curious, just to better understand your

4:58

ruling, if someone on this committee

5:00

then starts talking about somebody's bleach-blind,

5:03

bad-built, butch body, that would not

5:05

be engaging in personalities, correct? A

5:08

what now? So, you

5:10

know, Gary, you know why this resonated

5:12

with me for many years, I described

5:14

on cable news that the

5:17

bleach-blonde former federal prosecutors

5:20

that would be commentators, I

5:23

was excoriated at various times from

5:26

that commentary. Now we have congressional,

5:28

they've taken it once, they

5:30

really went into the hater

5:32

home mode with the, what

5:34

was it, bleach, blood, bad-built,

5:36

butch body? Now, say

5:39

that five times fast. I mean, you

5:41

got a lot of the alliteration, if

5:43

nothing else. I mean, that's just, it's

5:45

bravo. But it is wild that it

5:48

has jumped from Fox News commentary,

5:50

which is, you know, to a

5:53

certain extent entertainment into Congress itself.

5:56

Yeah, yeah, I'll tell you, it's something

5:58

else. they're arguing

6:00

about that this

6:02

past week, Michael Cohen was on

6:04

the stand. And, you

6:07

know, I didn't send it to you, but I

6:10

was reminded I ran into Todd Lemon

6:12

last night at a wedding and it

6:15

made me think my free association, Todd

6:17

Lemon, Anderson Cooper. I saw Anderson

6:21

Cooper lamenting. I believe

6:23

he was in the courtroom talking

6:26

about the cross-examination

6:30

by the

6:32

Trump's lawyer of

6:35

the prosecution's

6:38

arguably last witness.

6:41

And I say arguably because you never

6:43

know the defense puts on a witness,

6:45

the prosecution, even though they said they

6:47

rested, could always come back with rebuttal.

6:49

But Michael Cohen was

6:51

arguably the prosecution's last witness.

6:54

And the defense

6:56

in the case walked

6:59

through by

7:01

all accounts. And I looked at

7:03

the transcript, I believe it was

7:05

the transcript, and the people who

7:08

were in the courtroom did a

7:10

masterful job of basically

7:12

creating what I like to call it

7:14

as others who call it betrays

7:17

my age a very basic moment of

7:19

the witness. Yeah, there's

7:21

been a lot of coverage of his testimony

7:24

and, you know, he's

7:27

the defense, you know,

7:29

did a good job of sort of pointing to

7:31

the different times that he has lied and then,

7:33

you know, gone back and said, I was only

7:35

lying, you know, to cover my ass. And it

7:37

just it didn't seem like

7:40

he stood up necessarily as the best

7:42

witness. Well, you

7:44

know, the interesting part about

7:46

this is you've got

7:48

somebody who's got the conviction that

7:51

he's admitted to lying under oath.

7:53

So now, as Like

7:55

I said, this is usually a federal

7:58

technique where you put the witness. You

8:00

have the were displayed the other way to

8:02

say I lived there but I'm told the

8:05

truth now. The. Problem with

8:07

that. Is. Blubber.

8:09

Avoid Generally in most jurisdictions

8:11

there is a variation on

8:13

a witness willfully false. A

8:16

witness willfully false Unstructured is

8:18

if you add the jury.

8:20

Believes. That a witness was willfully

8:22

false is a bacterial part of the

8:25

testimony. You. May

8:27

disregard. These. Higher the

8:29

of the testimony meaning strike. As.

8:32

The jury can do that and

8:34

that is are different formulations, both

8:36

federal and state jurisdictions but that

8:38

he a basic precept of both

8:40

at the Law is that's the

8:43

case. Here's a guy who is

8:45

admitted michael code to lying under

8:47

oath. And leading to

8:49

that. Were a

8:51

variation of that. Now testify,

8:54

Get his directors the body

8:56

bags. Specifically these phone calls

8:59

to keep Schiller who was

9:01

dead Trump's bodyguards a row

9:03

rebels around specific. Recollections:

9:06

He has regarding the so

9:09

called payments in the bookkeeping.

9:12

If you. I'm. In.

9:14

That was a direct. Odd. Cross

9:16

it looks like that was

9:18

dismantled. A. Bit in fact it

9:21

had to do with a fourteen

9:23

year olds. He was doing some

9:25

spoofing an old had engaged to

9:27

track. that doubt it was spared.

9:29

Do it is you. If

9:31

that is as powerful as

9:33

it seems, then. The

9:36

prosecution as a whale of a

9:38

problem periods. My tradition is they're

9:40

going to have to come back

9:42

in stop now a minute you

9:44

they've had. One. Of

9:47

the great things about. Doing.

9:49

That. It. Having that witness

9:51

probably just said stay employed. Right

9:54

before the to Juri takes a

9:56

break, his that's what's resonating with

9:58

the jury. The. Downside.

10:02

To that from the defense. Damn

10:04

boy is it gives the prosecution

10:06

two or three days to try

10:08

to reprogram the witness of I

10:10

use reprogram in the most. Used

10:13

to be sick way. He had

10:15

to come back and try to

10:17

get up off the ground because

10:20

by all accounts of everybody in

10:22

the courtrooms he has based on

10:24

the Us snippets of the trade

10:26

scripts, it appears that he was

10:28

just dead wrong or destroyed A

10:31

map is a sexual ah but

10:33

even the directs it's interesting. Each

10:35

also had gone. Now

10:37

you have such you were. I was just

10:40

a I find it interesting that you pointed

10:42

out two or three days because I was

10:44

wondering I wanted to get some ah, some

10:46

predictions from you. As far as how this

10:48

case unfolds, it does seem like we're nearing

10:50

the end. However, we also are coming into

10:52

a week where we're only going to have

10:54

As you said, two or three days there's

10:56

not going to be court on Friday. There's

10:58

not going to be court on Monday, so

11:00

you know what how you think this plays

11:02

out and with given that, it's unlikely that

11:04

they're going to want to hand this to

11:06

the jury before afford a break. And

11:08

you know have them come back on Tuesday.

11:11

Having had a long weekend you know to

11:13

potentially forget things or or to you know

11:15

sort of checked out and I started to

11:17

aberrations without for ya the the closing fresh

11:20

in their mind. Or you

11:22

know there's a there's a lot going

11:24

on here. I'd various types of bash

11:26

stations. One of the things why restored

11:28

Big Kelly so last week in. College.

11:31

While we were on the

11:33

show, Trump had agreed to

11:35

debate Joe Biden. Is

11:37

the President's ear? Do. And

11:40

I might be the a belief

11:42

is that the result he did.

11:45

That is said. She's. Got

11:47

a real fear He big.

11:51

A truck. ah is

11:53

subjected of this judge rebate

11:55

to get into custody and i

11:57

say why why why say

11:59

that because anybody

12:02

who has done this for a period

12:04

of time will tell you, and I've

12:07

yet to meet somebody who has disabused

12:09

me of this notion, if

12:11

you are convicted of multiple felonies in

12:14

state court, different than federal

12:16

court, state court, in

12:19

virtually all jurisdictions, almost

12:21

every judge will remand you, put

12:24

you into jail, ending sentencing. This

12:26

does not happen as frequently in

12:28

federal court, happens in state

12:30

court. Now, add to that, not

12:33

only is there the real possibility

12:35

that Trump will be convicted of

12:39

multiple felonies, he's also got

12:41

a judge who comes in

12:43

to this verdict,

12:46

so to speak, if we get

12:48

it in the next 10 days, with

12:51

having excoriated the

12:54

defendant on trial, aka President Trump,

12:56

for violations of the gag order,

12:58

threatening jail just for violating or

13:01

purported violations of the gag order.

13:03

Mind you, for anybody who's listening,

13:05

I'm not so sure that any

13:07

of those things, the supposed

13:10

violations of the gag order stand up on

13:12

appeal. That

13:15

even argues more forcefully for

13:17

this judge to remand, put

13:19

President Trump in jail. Now,

13:23

what's the calculus there? Trump

13:25

called his bluff, basically, and saying,

13:28

I'm going to go do the debate.

13:30

You put me in jail, you've stopped

13:32

me from doing the debate, you've interfered

13:34

directly, as I've been claiming

13:37

all along, with the election on

13:39

a debate that's already going

13:42

to be agreed to CNN,

13:44

I believe. CNN in the

13:46

Atlanta studio with no audience.

13:49

Yeah. So, You're going to tell

13:51

me that at this point, this

13:54

judge is going to just ignore

13:56

that and say I'm going to

13:58

remain the fugitive. It really

14:00

good the polls and put

14:02

a busy custody pending certain

14:04

sites in a case that

14:06

is already play big that

14:08

I to judge have got

14:11

a H E I eat

14:13

irreconcilable. ah your robot a

14:15

bowl of a conflict of

14:17

interests as that I've been

14:19

threat that A good way

14:21

to keep a good tethered

14:23

to my court room is

14:25

the heart and soul of

14:27

the presidential election. I think

14:29

it's like. Maybe I attribute

14:31

too much machiavellian integer but

14:34

that to be explain exactly

14:36

why he agreed obediently to

14:39

a debates aldo were in

14:41

June on Cnn. And

14:44

I also notice of disagree

14:46

Dubai or both of these

14:48

candidates without the presidential debate

14:50

commission being involved using to

14:52

that. Particular wrinkle has to

14:54

do with and and a seer They possibly there

14:56

could be a third member of the debate. Yes,

15:00

that's exactly right as I think.

15:03

If you believe. Roberts.

15:06

How did he. T. It is

15:08

located within the past week that

15:10

he believed he would qualify under

15:12

the rules that were set up,

15:15

so that also takes about a

15:17

bit. It's clear that Trump has

15:19

now done the calculus. Which.

15:22

Which is somewhat counter intuitive,

15:24

at least. Additionally, that Robert

15:26

Doris Day takes more votes

15:28

away from him that somebody.

15:31

Yeah. It's it's I is very interesting so

15:33

I I guess back to my original question

15:35

and when using this may go to a

15:37

jury. Do you think that we can be?

15:39

We could have spent some time before June

15:41

seventeenth? Must Michael. I

15:44

it all adds up to say because.

15:47

They. The prosecution's got the right

15:49

to do rebuttal. I even if

15:52

I the defense I did a

15:54

call. Ah, Michael Collins.

15:56

But. prior lawyer who was testified last

15:58

week or it at least they were showing

16:01

clips of him desk-fying in

16:03

front of Congress, in

16:05

which he was saying that

16:08

he had told Michael Cohen, if

16:10

you've got anything at all on President

16:12

Trump, now's the time to give it

16:14

to me to save your

16:17

proverbial ass, and that

16:19

he told him once, twice, multiple times

16:21

that he did not. That

16:24

is a powerful witness. Having

16:26

said all of that, remember,

16:29

I've said from day one, the

16:33

die was cast in a case like

16:35

this, which I think has

16:37

such political overtones during jury

16:39

selection. So it's not like

16:41

you're changing anybody's mind, but

16:43

what you are doing in

16:46

this case, and with closing arguments, is

16:48

sort of closing the deal, so to

16:50

speak, with whoever may or may not

16:52

be with you. Yeah.

16:56

Well, we'll be watching carefully, and as we

16:58

head into the long Memorial Day, it is

17:00

Memorial Day this coming holiday,

17:02

correct? As we head into a long

17:04

weekend, we will be watching carefully to see whether

17:07

or not that rebuttal does come to pass, and

17:09

when it may be headed to the jury. Love

17:12

it. Gary, thank you so much for

17:15

the bite-sized bar today. I'll see you hopefully

17:17

tomorrow. Looking forward to it, Mark. Thank you

17:19

for your time, as always. Bye-bye. Thank

17:21

you, bye-bye. Thanks

17:23

for listening to Reasonable Doubt. Subscribe

17:26

on YouTube at youtube.com slash

17:29

reasonabledoubtpodcast.