mr. tacopina? >> he doesn't take into account the entire scheme that was involved here. you have to break up a little bit. what happened here is that there was -- mr. pecker, david pecker from the "national enquirer," who volunteered to donald trump to be able to look out for any possible women that may raise issues about him during the campaign. >> a wider scheme? >> a wider scheme that involved karen mcdougal, the former playboy playmate that donald trump had a two-year affair with. >> and we played an audio recording to mr. tacopina of trump -- you hear his voice talking to cohen about that. >> and that's deadly that's his voice talking about it it makes him a witness to that case and it makes him a witness to the entire scheme because you can't look at that without looking at the $130,000 paid to stormy daniels and if the d.a.'s office is smart, what they ought to be doing is also incorporating in their indictment the overall theme that what donald trump did was to use his company as a piggy bank basically to make false statements to banks, to insurers, putting in fal

mr. tacopina would probably agree that that presents that greatest threat. but at the same time, if it is a misdemeanor, i do know what mr. tacopina would say, well, wait a minute, it was michael cohen that initiated these payments. it was michael cohen who got reimbursed. trump believed he was being legal fees. and michael cohen, michael cohen, michael cohen is that guy. but we've all known for about a long time that if there's a prosecution, the defense will stand on the idea that michael cohen as a liar and a fraudster. and of course, the prosecution will use michael cohen likely do while cooperating with witnesses, and say, okay he may be a criminal, but it takes a criminal to catch a criminal. but beyond michael cohen, this case will be a document case. and it's true there are checks made out to michael cohen, but they are made out to michael cohen, which may bolster trump's argument that in fact it was just doing what his lawyer told him to do and paid his lawyer directly. and joe tacopina is right and that michael cohen did go in and plead guilty, and

place that series of written exchanges led to a direct, conversational, lengthy conference with mr tacopina is firm. so i would, uh, say that he's at least conflicted to a point where he couldn't represent opposition on that issue against her. and the was there a retainer that tacopina asked for from miss daniels. yes at the conclusion of the exchange of information. a few days in the conversations in the emails, mr tacopina, according to stormy, uh, trademark stuff quoted a retainer figure that she would have to come up with and cash she told him she would consider and see whether she could raise those funds. ultimately she then interviewed michael libonati and chose to go that route. and so mr tacopina wasn't formally retained, but all the information which led to his decision the quota retainer figure. had occurred. clark clark brewster. i appreciate your time. thank you. my pleasure. thank you. of the new york grand jury case. maybe moving slowly. not so. the classified documents case, donald trump's attorney goes back in front of a grand jury tomorrow. this time attorney client privile

mr. tacopina. know.úa.i think that was an ill-advised post that one of his social media people put up and ■ he quickly took it down when he realized the hotoric in the >> you're only referring to the baseball bat. he didn't take down the other rhetoric. wait a minute. wait a minute. wait a minute. you're referring to the baseball bat that was featured in "the new york post" cover and it wasi a rough hit. there was -- here's the thing, % we went through january 6th.x0 so it's not that a possibility that trump's rhetoric creates violence. it's already happened once.q5ti happen?xd 'm not -- i'm not accepting that proposition that his rhetoric created violence. i think violence was on thee1 w that day. but i'm not here to discuss that, chuck.ñre1 i'm not going to defend or condemn anything regarding social media. it's not what i do.lpqi] i'm not a trump pr person. i'm a litigator and a lawyer, and i'm talking about this case in manhattan, which is a case Ñi that would not be brought for 1k when we use the offic

mr. tacopina he said in the end he thought it was fair and we covered a lot of ground what you heard from on this matter, which by the way is not the most serious legal matter facing donald trump, made you think what what was your take on what you heard? >> it would be hard to convict donald trump to get beyond a reasonable doubt he's not going to be convicted for saying no on air force one not under oath, lying about -- saying no to something he should have said no comment on. believe me, i think what he did could well be illegal ultimately, but in the big scheme of things convicting him six years later for something that happened eight years before that when he paid hush money to cover something up when john edwards did something korch rabble and didn't get convicted i think it's going to be hard. >> donald trump deservingts to be convicted of a million things >> you've spoken out on many cases. >> i'm not a lawyer. >> neither are the jurors. whether you call in a trial balloon, a leak, or other indicia, they're stitth siing there thinking about -- this is real this is not people on tv

that is mr. a "tacopina's job rt now.za&ç it wasn't z3=i >>qe?"ç ichange.m the place to find a place. who's on it with jardiance? ♪ ♪ we're the ones getting it done. we're managing type 2 diabetes and heart risk. we're on it with jardiance. join the growing number of people who are on it with the once-daily pill, jardiance. jardiance not only lowers a1c, it goes beyond to reduce the risk of cardiovascular death for adults with type 2 diabetes and known heart disease. and jardiance may help you lose some weight. jardiance may cause serious side effects including ketoacidosis that may be fatal, dehydration, (that can lead to sudden worsening of kidney function), and genital yeast or urinary tract infections. a rare, life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this infection, ketoacidosis or an allergic reaction, and don't take it if you're on dialysis. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. a once-daily pill that

that's what's amazing to me that mr tacopina has to face mr giuliani, contradicting his own client that no. these weren't legal fees. the federal district prosecutors know they're not legal fees. that's where i suspect a lot of fraudulent. okay alright, lenny, listen, i have to go. but i want to ask you. you're an attorney. you're sitting there you have been in with clients before you were there for every you set interview that he did with alvin brags office correct here. so judging by the questions, and every time you went back, i'm sure the questions they went from 30,000 ft to three ft. or however you wanna classified however you you want to put it here? so considering what the questions were. and what you were observing. where do you think the charges will go here? what do you think it is? i think the charges in the granular detail that this group of professionals that we spend so much time with asking michael about different documents and all of the corroborating evidence. i think where this goes to is a jury with a single question. do you believe donald trump's denial that just be

so, mr tacopina. um, that you never met miss daniels and didn't have any , uh, attorney client? uh relationship. in fact, in february of 2018, there was a fair amount of exchange between miss daniels and mr tacopina is firm. uh she had a number of not only conversations but extensive emails outlining details of this transaction involving the former president as well as witnesses. in a chronology and what took place that series of written exchanges led to a direct, conversational, lengthy conference with mr to campinas firm so i would say that he's at least conflicted to a point where he couldn't represent opposition on that issue against her. and the was there a retainer that tacopina asked for from miss daniels. yes at the conclusion of the exchange of information. a few days and the conversations in the emails, mr tacopina, according to stormy, uh, trademark stuff quoted a retainer figure that she would have to come up with and cash she told him she would consider and see whether she could raise those funds. ultimately she then interviewed michaela banotti and chose to go that

mr. tacopina, of course, he lied, but it doesn't matter.t now put your client behind the 8 ball on that one, too. >> mr. costello, what he also said, quote, cohen decided on his own to take care of this. i said where did you get the money? he said i took out a loan because i wanted to keep it secret from my own wife and from melania. he claims he has evidence and he hasn't released it and he claims to have evidence that would prove this and at the time you said that. >> it's absolutely not true. i don't know what conversations he's referring to. we talked about the case. we talked about certain documentation while we were there. it was not a multiple-hour conversation and so on. it was relatively quick from what i remember, maybe 30, 45 minutes at best. short of that, again, he's making up so many stories here because he's playing to a party of one. he's doing what everybody does and, listen, i said the same thing to jim jordan and mark meadows and i said i know the game that you're playing. i know the play that you're playing because i wro

tacopina t represent her. that could be a problem for -- then mr. joe tacopina has conflict of interest and could not represent than trump i that hush money case, at least according to new york. law today, a representative fo joe tacopina said that his client had never met storm daniels and that someone els approached him on her behalf and mr. joe tacopina refused the request. but in a 2018 appearance on cnn, joe tacopina himself seem to suggest his legal connection with stormy daniels were stron enough to give her attorne client privilege >> joe, i understand that yo had some communication wit stormy daniels at some point >> you know, obviously there i attorney-client issues let's put it this way. >> oh! >> go ahead. oh, wow, what? -- >> jack, let him finish. >> the question is whether i was contacted or asked t represent -- the answers, yes i was, but can't go into anything further >> that potential conflict between trump lawyer and storm daniels could explain why th prosecutors in the manhattan da's office spoke with ms. daniels earlier this week.

mr. trump's lawyer, joe tacopina, he confirms that the manhattan d.a.'s office wanted mr. render today. tacopina along with other aides rebuffed that request saying the secret service needed more time to prepare the secret service is denying that to nbc. two secret service officials telling nbc news that mr. trump's detail could be ready to transport him to new york at a moment's notice, that they are simply taking orders based on the date the manhattan d.a. and mr. trump's defense team agreed to, that agreed to date we are told is now tuesday. >> peter alexander, dermot shay, thanks, guys. >>> in other news, extreme storms are expected to slam over a dozen states today, severe thunderstorms, strong winds, and tornados that could put more than 50 million people at risk in the midwest and mid south heavy rain and flash flooding expected to hit the mississippi valley, then quickly move through the midwest and tennessee valley through the night. the risk area also includes parts of mississippi that were already so badly devastated by tornados last week that killed 26 people. >

mr. tacopina -- >> they're murky though. >> they're murky and about the tabloid being involved for the trial's going to be quite specific the fall guy here we know is mr. cohen. that part is not a mystery. >> he already fell he already served time. >> the fall guy fell so the fall guy is on the ground they're saying the guy on the ground did all this. that for a jury becomes a question of why. why would someone take a risk and go to prison for the benefit of donald trump? that's a convicted case. why would he do all that to believe part of their defense is to believe that someone went out of their way to deceive then president trump about those later payments. >> we're waiting to see michael cohen come out of the grand jury room he'll talk to reporters. we'll wait to see whether a decision on charges comes today or tomorrow. ari, thank you very much. >>> more breaking news this time from capitol hill. former los angeles eric garcetti was finally confirmed to be the ambassador to indiana i the vote caps a two-year battle over his confirmation, a confirmation that he allegedly held back claims

mr. tacopina on. people have different reactions. michael, the point that some americans might blanch at this when the founders thought what >> the founders wanted every person to be subject to the same laws obviously, they did not fully practice what they preached. we have tried to do that more or less ever since. that's the whole idea, that even a president has to answer for him or herself the amazing thing is for centuries, that has not been required you see this possible crime spree by donald trump before he became president, certainly during when he was president, insurrection, possibly overthrowing our democracy and the results of a free and fair election, and then crown it all off with withholding classified documents, evading the truth about them and refusing to give them up. you wonder why this happened i would say historically, it's not exactly by accident that for two centuries you treat presidents like some kind of privileged characters who are not required to face juries, this is what happens >> it goes the other directi

mr. tacopina, who i know from other venues, he uses adjectives and attack words i know lawyers when they use attack words and they don't use facts, it means they don't have facts. now not a single fact has undermined anything that michael cohen has said under oath in contrast to mr. trump, who refuses to show up when he is under oath, he takes the fifth amendment. >> there's another one people don't think about enough this is the false statements to the u.s. congress. now, those were not about stormy daniels. those were actually about trump tower or -- explain that >> facts get in the way of rhetoric a false statement to congress is a serious crime. number one, he was directed to make those false statements by donald trump >> what were they about? >> this is the abserbty of the assertion it was a crime he was having conversations and negotiations about building trump tower in moscow. trump said to him, i don't want you to say that during the campaign i want you to lie and say there are no discussions even while there were discussions. so michael said there were three discussions rather t

mr. tacopina and i were discussing but higher altitude the feds have the receipts that trump posted thatls payment as legal expenses. they say the accounting was done when cohen submitted an invoice which was not in connection with any legal services just a lie it's pretty cut and dry. it's in writing, hiding that money by falsely claiming it was money for a lawyer now, unlike some other business practices where trump claimed he wasn't in the loop, here what's also legally different is tape showing that trump personally worked on these solutions, if you want to call it that, and what the d.a. might ultimately call lies or misleading crimes, because he worked with a tabloid and mr. cohen to suppress counts of more than one woman over time trump's cfo would not testify against him, but cohen is not alone. there is another adviser a lawyer named a.j. delgado and she's posting a new criticism and allegation about the misuse of these kinds of legal fees she said that misuse is what trump world does quote it's going on for years they'll set and pay someone off and to not admit they settled, di

mr. tacopina did reference john edwards was pressured o this kind of campaign violatio and he largely beatthat case. he was not a sympathetic defended the jurors thought that it was going too much at him over two little there are as defenses here, we will try to become all of them obviously. >> doing weekends for us right here on msnbc today, thank you my friend. of course you can catch ari on beat weekdays at 6 pm easter on msnbc >> not to bring in barbara mcquade, a legal analyst and former u.s. attorney fro michigan barbara, we talked about this little bit at the top of the show, we think we know how thi might go down if indeed ther is an indictment in new york city this week but we are in uncharte territory with the forme president. can you walk us through little bit of just the mechanics of what we might see take place if indeed tha grandeur and the prosecutor manhattan decide to act this week >> yeah richard, one of th things that complicates this and it's so unusual is that th defendant, if don trump' charge, has secret service protection i imagine that there has to be some coordina

mr. tacopina went on air, essentially saying it's a lie, it didn't happen, there was no sex, and there was just no payments, it was an extortion, that is all derogatory information about somebody who he appears to have -- at least he said he used to represent. so that will all get worked out. in terms of the case, the actual case that everyone is focusing on, i think the import is that it would be extremely unlikely that tacopina would appear as counsel of record for donald trump meaning that if he did that, then i think the d.a. office would really pursue this, saying you cannot be counsel of record and have represented a witness. >> here's the thing, david jolly, if you are a normal person going through this, you would be hunkered down with your lawyers, going through legal strategy, taking their counsel. instead you have reporting that the former president is most interested in a media spectacle, and i just wonder if he's going to get the public response that he's dreaming and hoping for? >> yeah, first of all, can we just talk about how bad at life donald trump actually is. the entire

mr. tacopina he it is a dicey roll of the dice to have a lawyer like this at a moment that is dicey for thery. but it's so on brand we moved from the political celebrity circus aspect of this to a court of law, very serious court of law. >> charlie, because of trump there's so many patterns we can reflect back on. judges have not been as daunted by trump's political super powers as members of the senate have been. i think you had a federal judge who was the first to say that donald trump likely committed felonies many of the judges said out loud in courtrooms and in filings that donald trump continues to create a climate where recidivism is a high risk for insurre insurrectionists it's a place that hasn't been as cowed by trump as other branches of government. >> a lot of his legal tragedies is intimidating judges from taking actions now he's waging this two-front war. his political appeal, which will be to keep throwing red meat to gin up the base is in conflict with the much more sober and restricted message he's going to have to have an it's going to be interesting to see how he finesses

mr. tacopina who currently represents trump, what i'm hearing is a final response from you, i'm hearing thehing wasn't really a crime, other people, john edwards and others, have done stuff like this, it's not a campaign crime, but if you do charge it as that not only is it legally not a crime but whatever was bad mr. cohen went rogue and did. and so it's sort of a -- amidst the messiness i don't know that mr. cohen looked to everyone -- people make their own minds. i don't know that he looked like the most fair or charitable narrator of someone he claims to used to help. i don't know. people can make up their own minds about any of these lawyers. but what we're seeing rise from this process say multitiered legal and factual attack on what might be coming out of this office. >> i agree with you on both those counts. including in particular that he's saying you don't have a case because you don't have a credible witness because i'm going to do the work to make it clear. even if he felt as a matter of ethics that he should go and make sure this evidence is put before the grand jury, but we kn

joe tacopina, seen here saying "mr. luthor! mr. luthor! it, but superman got away again!" tacopina went on msnbc yesterday, and things got a little spicy when host ari melber played video from eesidt clearly lying to reporters about the hush money. >> do you know about the $130,000? >> then why did michaels take this? >> you have to ask michaels. michael is my attorney, and you have to ask him. >> stephen: "ari, a lie doesn't count unless it's in court! that's in the constitution. okay, i just lied about that, but we're not in court, so it doesn't count! and since there's no judge here, i'm not the one who clogged the toilet in our men's room." [laughter] [applause] tacopina, tacopina. then tacopina did what you should always do when someone brings receipts. try to grab the receipts. >> that's not alive. >> that's not a lie? >> that's not a lie? >> did you know about this? did you know about this? >> stephen: wow! he tried to grab the evidence! i'd like to see this guy in court. "judge, judge, shut up for a second! gimmie that!" "enough wit

okay, so, tacopina, thank you. thank you, mr.. right now. breaking tonight, house judiciary chairman jim jordan, he is now demanding testimony from two anti trump manhattan prosecutors who embarrassed the album bragge and resigned last year. now, all because bragge was talking too long or taking too long to bring charges against donald trump. they got. it was more house judiciary chairman. i'll get it out. jim jordan is with us . jim , how are you, sir? judiciary. i can say it if i try real. so the question i first want to ask you is your reaction to what happened today. you just heard you just heard from joe tacopina. what is your reaction to their analysis of this case? well, i think i think alvin may be going back to what he initially thought when he first won the job, which was he shouldn't bring this case. so i think the sort of in the overall picture on the fundamental question is what changed? we know the department of justice wasn't going to bring the case. as you said , the previous district attorney , mr. vance, wasn't going to bri

mr trump if he's the defendant, let's assume your lawyer joe tacopina used to represent somebody who can now be a witness against you. are you okay with that? usually the defendant will say yes, he's my lawyer. i want him as my lawyer. i wave it. it's fine. and then what the judge will often do is say okay, but tacopina, you are sealed off. you cannot cross examine stormy daniels, who you had an attorney client relationship with and you cannot use or disclose any information that she gave you. and then the courts really trust attorneys as officers of the court to make good on that. thank you very much client. privileged explaining that ellie honing. thank you so much for explaining this also well, and i do apologize that you didn't get to talk to erica was supposed to be all jp that you were stuck with. you were gonna shut afterwards. wake up from now to this critical decision as we look at the fight against inflation so hours from now. we will learn if the fed chair has decided to hike interest rates again. and, of course, if that is a yes, the next question is by how much matt eaga

mind, wasn't there ar reports that joe tacopina wa going to be representing storm daniels in some shape or form? do you recall that ever? is that true, in the past? >> mr. second pena but the said that he discussed representing her so he would be the source on that, and that is on the recor confirmation from several year ago. but there is no indication tha he went ahead and did represen or so if you want to get into the weeds on the ethical rules, if you even engage potentiall representing someone sometimes then you're not supposed to be on the other side of that case but i have not seen a public confirmation that he actuall went forward and did represent or i definitely had one more wild piece to this. and let's remember, if the payments to miss daniel's part of the case against trump in new york, we are talking about a case where the lawyer from miss daniels went to jail, the lawyer for mr. trump at th time mr. cohen went to jail. his replacement, mr. saka peÑa trying to blame the thrust o any crime that did occur on th former lawyer, mr. cohen it is what legally, alex, we would call a total mess. >> yeah, to say the. lisa thank you for that lisa has