Communications between Donald Trump’s attorney and Stormy Daniels have been handed over to Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office – as the office prepares to potentially indict the former president on criminal charges.
Ms Daniels’ attorney Clark Brewster told CNN that the records between the adult film star and Mr Trump’s personal attorney Joe Tacopina date back to when she was seeking legal representation in 2018.
Mr Brewster said that the messages reveal that Ms Daniels had disclosed confidential information to Mr Tacopina about her situation involving the former president.
Neither The Independent nor CNN have seen the communications in question.
However, the revelation has raised questions as to whether the attorney could be sidelined from his defence of Mr Trump in the hush money case.
Back in 2018, Mr Tacopina appeared on CNN and suggested he had been in communications with Ms Daniels about representing her in the hush money probe.
“I can’t really talk about my impressions or any conversations we’d had because there is an attorney-client privilege that attaches even to a consultation,” he said.
Mr Tacopina has denied there is any conflict in the case.
In a statement to The Independent on Wednesday, Mr Tacopina insisted that there “was no attorney-client relationship” and that he had never met or spoken with Ms Daniels.
“There is no conflict, and there was no attorney-client relationship. I neither met Stormy Daniels nor reviewed her documents. Instead, someone inquired on her behalf if I would represent her, and of course I refused the request,” he said.
“I sidestepped what was an unexpected question by a TV host by providing a response that lacked clarity. However, for the sake of such clarity now, kindly note that I never stated that he spoke with or met Stormy Daniels. And that is because I did not do so.
“My reference to the attorney-client privilege was merely intended to terminate the inquiry, because someone on Stormy Daniel’s behalf did ask whether I would represent her and I did not wish to discuss the matter on television. However, those circumstances do not give rise to an attorney-client relationship in any form.
“No confidential information was shared to my office, certainly nothing that she hasn’t said publicly.”
Concerns about a potential conflict come as Mr Tacopina’s past comments have also resurfaced, revealing he once called the hush money payments “illegal”.
In a separate 2018 panel discussion on CNN, Mr Tacopina said that the payments and alleged falsification of records about the money was an “illegal agreement” and “fraud”.
“I mean, you know, once that net is out, once the microscope is on you, everything is fair game,” he said.
“And it’s hard to argue, ‘oh, you can’t look at this or you can’t look at that’. So, yes, if there’s an issue with that payment to Stormy Daniels being that it was made on behalf of the candidate. Okay. And it was not declared. That’s fair game. Unfortunately, if that’s the case.”
He added: “And you know, quite frankly, you know, Michael Cohen, again has made statements that would give rise to suspicion.
“For any prosecutor to say that doesn’t make sense, that a lawyer took out a home equity loan with his own money, paid somebody that he didn’t even know on behalf of a client who, by the way, had the wherewithal and the money to afford $130,000.
“And, by the way, didn’t tell the client about the settlement agreement. It’s an illegal agreement. It’s a fraud, if that’s, in fact, the case. It doesn’t pass the straight-face test, and quite frankly, if that is what happened, we have a potential campaign finance issue,” he added.
When reached by The Independent for comment, Mr Tacopina emphasised that twice during his 2018 appearance he made the statement: “If that is in fact the case”
“I was opining on a hypothetical that was posed by the host without [knowing] any of the facts. That is [why] I qualified my statements. The facts as I have now learned clearly show, that is NOT in fact the case,” he said in an email.
“My mind hadn’t changed about the issue but what has changed is that I learned the facts.
“My response was based on a hypothetical question … which is why I qualified my response TWICE.”
Mr Tacopina has been going on a media blitz in recent weeks as his now-client Mr Trump is on the brink of a potential indictment.
In a historic day for America, Wednesday could mark the first time a current or former president has ever been indicted on criminal charges.
Manhattan prosecutors have been investigating whether Mr Trump falsified the Trump Organization’s business records when Mr Trump’s former lawyer and “fixer” Michael Cohen made a payment of $130,0000 to Ms Daniels days before the 2016 election.
Prosecutors claim that the money was used to silence Ms Daniels about an alleged affair she had with Mr Trump.
Mr Trump has long denied having an affair with the adult film star.
Mr Trump’s former fixer and personal attorney Cohen was convicted of tax evasion, lying to Congress and campaign finance violations related to the payments to Ms Daniels. He was sentenced to three years in prison.
Now, Mr Trump could be indicted as soon as Wednesday for his part in the payments.
The Manhattan grand jury investigating Mr Trump’s role will convene at 2pm on Wednesday afternoon.
The panel is then expected to hear from at least one more witness.
It is not clear who this witness is.
After hearing from all witnesses, the jury will then vote on whether or not to indict Mr Trump.
This means that an indictment could come by Wednesday at the earliest.
The source told Fox News that – if an indictment is handed down – the former president will not appear in court until sometime next week after Mr Trump’s attorneys and the Secret Service make arrangements with prosecutors.
In a sign that his looming indictment could be giving him trouble sleeping, Mr Trump was posting on Truth Social late into the night again on Tuesday.
At around midnight, the former president shared a Fox News article with the headline “Sources say real chance DA may choose not to charge Trump as rumors swirl”.
This came after Mr Trump has spent days making a series of posts on the platform complainining about the Manhattan probe.
On Saturday, he had claimed on his Truth Social platform that he was expecting to be arrested on Tuesday and called on his supporters to “TAKE OUR NATION BACK!”
His comments instantly drew comparisons to his rhetoric in the aftermath of his 2020 presidential election loss – rhetoric that ultimately culminated in the January 6 Capitol riots.
Mr Trump’s legal team later walked back the former president’s timeline for an arrest, confirming that they have not been notified that he will be indicted – or given a time for if or when it could happen.
And Tuesday came and went with no indictment.
Meanwhile, New York officials are bracing for potential protests or unrest if or when an indictment lands.
Local, state and federal law enforcement agencies have been preparing security plans, including additional security around the Manhattan Criminal Court where Mr Trump could appear to face charges.
