Adult film actress Stormy Daniels recently filed a complaint and alleged that one of former President Donald Trump’s attorneys in his hush-money case has a conflict of interest. However, the New York attorney grievance committee dismissed the complaint via Conservative Brief.
It has come to light that Daniels filed the complaint earlier this year, claiming that lawyer Joe Tacopina had a conflict of interest due to his previous dealings with her. Daniels was paid the money that was at the core of Trump’s criminal case in 2016.
“Following an investigation of the allegations in the above-referenced complaint filed against you, the Committee has determined to take no further action,” Jorge Dopico, chief attorney for the Attorney Grievance Committee of the First Judicial Department, told Tacopina in a letter.
Tacopina had no conflict of interest, according to the September ruling of the judge supervising Trump’s hush money case, even though the Trump lawyer had promised not to cross-examine Daniels should she testify in court.
“Now both the court and the disciplinary committee have ruled that there was no conflict or ethical violation at all, as I have said from day one. It seems that Stormy Daniels and her joke of a lawyer’s 15 minutes of fame have come to an appropriate end,” Tacopina told The Hill in an email.
In the case, Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to payments he made to Michael Cohen, his personal attorney and former fixer, for Daniels’ silence regarding claims that she had an affair with him.
Tacopina’s involvement sparked questions at the time of Trump’s April arraignment. In a letter, Daniels’s lawyer, Clark Brewster, disclosed that Daniels had previously gotten in touch with Tacopina’s legal office to inquire about the hush money arrangement.
Tacopina has maintained for a long time that he never met with Daniels and never represented her.
“I trust that the grievance committee gave the complaint diligent and careful consideration,” Brewster said in an email. “In reporting the facts to the committee, I simply felt obliged under the rules of professional conduct to disclose the facts implicating a rule violation and thereupon leave it to a well-constituted committee to render its judgment.”
The current date of Trump’s trial in this case is set for March 25. The former president is attempting to reenter the White House, and this is one of his four ongoing criminal cases.
