for having me on the woman at
the center of this. Joining me
is stormy. Daniels attorney
Clark Brewster. Mr. Brewster
appreciate you joining us, you
tweeted quote. The indictment of
Donald Trump is no cause for
joy. I'm wondering what is going
through your mind tonight and
what you make of the reporting
that he faces more than 30
counts related to business
fraud. Well I think it's a sad
day where we had you know,
former leader of our country.
President, United States
indicted um, and so it doesn't
give me any joy to see that. I
mean, he's loved by many,
followed by many respected by
many, and the idea that he gets
indicted is going to be sad. Too
many people. I don't think it
brings joy at all. But on the
other hand, I have great respect
for the process. The grand
jurors that listen to this
evidence. Listen to the
testimony reviewed the
documentary documentary evidence
and made a decision. They were
conscientious, I think, spend a
lot of their their time of
public service time. And if it
does go to show one thing, I
mean, he hasn't presumption of
innocence. But now task of
determining his guilt or
innocence and alternative. And
also it's a simple concept. No
man is above the law, so ah, I
think in one aspect we've got a
system that's really working
correctly. I understand you
actually inform miss Daniels of
this indictment. What did she
say? Well I mean, she just had
come in from the out outside in
. Just returned my phone call
and your phone had blown up. She
didn't have her phone with her,
and she she wasn't surprised
because I really do believe over
the last three or four weeks,
particularly it was, it seemed
to be likely or inevitable that
an indictment be returned. Ah
but I think she's relieved. I
think she really, really is.
It's a fight against his
rejection of truth and his
manufacturing of stories that
really motivated her to try to
cooperate in any way certainly
to get the truth out. And they
have this jury. At least the
grand jury make that decision.
Miss Daniels did not testify to
this grand jury. I know you met
you both met via zoom, I believe
with New York prosecute. About
two weeks ago. Can you talking
all about the substance of that
meeting or how that meeting
went. Well, I mean, obviously, I
can't. I don't want to talk
about the new the specific
questioning, but basically it
was a discussion about the
chronology and the development
of what happened back when she
interacted with Mr trump back
in, oh, six and forward and then
the events that led up obviously
to the payoff of the
nondisclosure agreement or the
hush money, and so she, I think
was able to give some context
and some specifics to that. I
know you said in the past office
so that she would be willing to
testify if in case if this in
when this goes to trial, you
know a lot of the facts in the
case. You certainly know miss
Daniels representation of those
facts. What do you think? What
kind of a case how difficult do
you think this is for the former
president's defense team? Well
you know, to the extent that
they play the hand they've been
playing, which is just denial
and accusation and character, uh
, assassination of her and
others, including Mr Cohen. I
don't think that's going to be
effective. Frankly in a
courtroom, it might play out in
the in the in the court of
public opinion for people that
that are still adhere and
believed to what he says. But I
think in a court that's not
going to play very well. I
really think it comes down to
documents statements made
captured conversations and the
application of the law that this
prosecutor and this grand jury
has decided. Form the elements