In a fiery late-night exchange on CNN, host Abby Phillip and Dr. Phil McGraw engaged in a heated debate over whether former President Trump received proper due process during his recent criminal trial. The discussion took an unexpected turn as the conversation quickly shifted from an interview about McGraw's earlier interview with Trump to a passionate argument about the fairness of the trial process.

McGraw expressed sympathy for Trump, stating that he believed the trial did not provide him with the appropriate due process. He emphasized that his concerns were not exclusive to Trump, asserting that he would have the same viewpoint regardless of the individual involved. However, Phillip expressed confusion and sought clarification on the reasoning behind McGraw's stance.

One of McGraw's primary contentions centered around the testimony of Michael Cohen, the prosecution's star witness. He argued that Cohen's credibility came into question during the trial, and the jury was exposed to prejudicial information that was irrelevant to the case at hand. McGraw believed that allowing such testimony from an individual who had made a non-prosecution agreement undermined the fairness of the trial.

Phillip countered McGraw's argument by highlighting that it is not uncommon for prosecutors to use witnesses who have taken plea deals to testify against their alleged co-conspirators in mob cases and other similar prosecutions. She suggested that McGraw's concerns about Cohen's testimony may not be valid in the broader context of legal proceedings.

The debate between McGraw and Phillip continued, with McGraw challenging Phillip to provide other examples where witnesses with plea deals had been allowed to testify. He clarified that he was not arguing against Cohen's testimony itself, but rather against the potential prejudice it may have caused among the jurors.

Throughout the discussion, both parties acknowledged that Cohen was not prosecuted for the same crime as Trump but ultimately returned to the central issue of whether Trump had received a fair trial. McGraw had previously criticized what he referred to as the "weaponization" of the justice system following Trump's guilty verdict, expressing concern about the potential consequences for the country.

As the segment on CNN came to a close, McGraw reiterated his warning to Trump about seeking revenge and retribution, emphasizing that such actions were not in the best interest of the country. He urged Trump, and by extension others in positions of power, to consider the impact of their actions on the nation as a whole.

The debate between Dr. Phil McGraw and Abby Phillip highlighted the ongoing discourse surrounding due process in high-profile criminal trials. The differing perspectives on Trump's trial demonstrated the complex nature of legal proceedings and the challenges in ensuring fairness and impartiality.