Read the following excerpt from this news item and then I'll tell you what amuses and interests me about it…
Trump attorney Joe Tacopina may be violating ethics rules by representing the former president in a case involving adult film star Stormy Daniels, according to a legal expert. Tacopina made the rounds on television this week to accuse Daniels of "extortion" in the $130,000 hush money payment during the 2016 campaign and argued that Trump was the real "victim" in the case.
But New York University Law Prof. Ryan Goodman discovered that Tacopina "has had an attorney-client relationship" with Daniels because she once reached out to him about representation, and his representation of Trump in the case may violate American Bar Association and New York state ethics rules.
If this case was about someone else, I'd pay it zero attention and have no reason to care much about which fake blonde who screws people for a living emerged triumphant. But the whole Stormy Daniels case exposes the emptiness of those who claim their support for D.J.T. is based on morals or character or even Christianity. I'll bet most of them felt Bill Clinton disqualified himself from public office because of Monica or other dalliances. But to them, Trump paying off a porn star and other admissions can be easily overlooked or dismissed as Fake News.
But what this particular news item does is to remind me that lawyers make passionate, personal arguments on behalf of their clients. They may earnestly believe what they say but that's not mandatory. Joe Tacopina has been all over the news, loudly trying to deal with all the contradictory statements uttered by his client. He was clearly hired as much for his skills on-camera as for his skills in-court. And he'd totally be on the other side, pushing narratives he now denounces, if Ms. Daniels was his client.