Trump Lawyer Gets Absolutely Roasted By CNN


*Start on your path to ditching bad habits. Head to and use code ROF to save 10% off the Journey pack.
Donald Trump’s lawyer Joe Tacopina got absolutely roasted by a CNN panel hosted by Don Lemon this week over comments he made in the past about the Stormy Daniels case (many years ago) versus comments that he’s making in the media today that totally contradict what he said in the past. Tacopina has a glaring conflict of interest in this case, but it is unlikely to get him removed from proceedings, as Ring of Fire’s Farron Cousins explains.

Link –

Check out our merch by visiting our store:

Subscribe to our podcast:

Become a member today!:

Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!:

Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire’s video content!

Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel:

Be sociable! Follow us on:

*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.

The media has been loving, not just the potential Trump indictment for this week, but also Donald Trump’s lawyer, Joseph Tacopina and his flip flopping on whether or not Donald Trump committed a serious crime. Because as we all know, back in 2018, Joe Tacopina went on the corporate media and said how serious this is and how bad it was for Donald Trump. But he’s singing a much different tune today. So CNN n host, Don Lemon decided he was gonna finally just show the world the two competing versions of Trump’s lead attorney that we’re dealing with. So here is the clip from cnn. Not only does it show the hypocrisy of Tacopina, but it also has legal analyst, Jennifer Rogers, taking a pretty good shot at Tacopina after the clip airs. So here it is,

And then so forth. I’m gonna play what he said back in 2018, and then what he’s saying. Now, here it is.

I mean, you know, once that net is out, once the microscope is on you, everything is fair game. 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, 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, 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. Um, if that’s in fact the case, it doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t pass the straight face test. And, and quite frankly, if that is what happened, we have a potential campaign finance issue. Does anyone actually believe anyone left, right, middle, whatever that, that if someone else were accused of, of paying hush money to avoid a public sex scandal in the manner that Donald Trump is alleged to have, um, avoided a public sex scandal, they would be prosecuted. The answer is on 100%, no.

Okay, so you have the, the Stormy Daniels attorney possibility of, of piercing attorney, attorney-client privilege. Let’s set that aside. He is now representing Donald Trump. Back then, he was making, it appears, correct me if I’m wrong, the complete opposite argument of what he’s making today.

So this is why people make jokes about lawyers, right? Lawyers are advocates. They’re not fact witnesses. So,

So this is why people make jokes about lawyers, huh? I mean, she’s not wrong and she’s not wrong with her analysis. You know, the lawyers are supposed to be the advocates. They’re not material fact witnesses and all of that. But she also understands, as everybody else on that CNN panel understood Taina might not only have a conflict of interest, but he said these things publicly. So there’s literally nothing to stop. Prosecutors in Manhattan should trump get indicted and go to a criminal trial. There is nothing to stop them from showing these clips during an opening or closing statements, uh, from reading the clips during their, you know, proceedings. Whatever it is, they can bring up Tino’s own words to use against him. Now, is that gonna convince the jury that Donald Trump is a hundred percent guilty? Probably not. But what it will do is let that jury know that this guy over here arguing the case on the other side, did once say that this is a pretty serious deal that could send Donald Trump to jail.


Leave a Comment