In the scene w/the FBI interrogating Adriana and they threaten her to charge her w/intent to distribute cocaine (I think). How would that EVER hold up in court, they have a recording of Adriana and Christopher doing coke, neither say the word “cocaine” nor do they mention selling it. They have no case, right? And why the HELL wouldn’t she have a lawyer with her?
Concessions:
They were (successfully) trying to scare her - hence (BARF)
They had more than enough evidence to search the place, so if they wanted to just hold her there they could have searched Chris’s place and found enough blow to bring Halston back from the dead
Either way, they don’t have much of a case based on the evidence they had while questioning her, am I wrong?
They did the same thing with Monica Lewinsky. They said look, we can turn you in now because we have the recordings that Linda Tripp made, or you can work for us and dig Clinton into a deeper hole by continuing the relationship and recording everything.
So in this case, I think they have enough to put her away based on the drug thing - they have a substantial case here because the FBI girl witnessed them do it. So she says, look, you won’t go to jail if you try to get Christopher to spill more information that we can use.
This sets up a great dynamic. Since she only gets information from Christopher, that’s going to put them in a rift. I wonder how long she can fool him.
As Mr. Salads points out, they have the eyewitness testimony of an undercover FBI agent plus whatever they would get upon executing a search warrant at the club, Aidrianna’s apartment and Chris’ apartment. They’d have more than enough to make the drug charge stick.
