Tonight, the man who spent decades helping run Donald Trump's family business, Mallen Weiselberg, could be on the verge of pleading guilty for the second time, this time to a perjury charge, we are told. The 76-year-old was the Chief Financial Officer of the Trump Organization for decades. He went to jail at Rikers for about 100 days last year. That was for his role in running a 15-year tax fraud scheme at the Trump Organization. Now, tonight, there is new reporting from the New York Times has been confirmed by CNN that Weiselberg is in talks to potentially plea guilty to a perjury charge, this time related to Trump's civil fraud trial, where he, Alan Weiselberg, would have to admit that he lied on the stand during his own testimony. The timing here is also key as we are learning more about this new reporting, because right now we're waiting on the judge in this case to decide what the penalty is, essentially how much Donald Trump owes. A reminder, the attorney general in the closing arguments asked for north of $370 million and is a ruling that could threaten Trump's entire real estate empire. I'm joined tonight by the senior editor at Forbes, Dan Alexander, who is the guest on this story because it was his reporting that exposed Weiselberg's alleged lies under oath on the stand.

Dan, when you look at this, and we don't know, I should note, which statement exactly it is that could potentially go towards this perjury charge if he does play guilty here. But you noted in your reporting that there were emails and notes from him that are believed to be at the center of this. What did you pick up on and what you believe that he lied about as he was trying to distance himself from Trump's financial statements?

Yeah, so remember the trial the year was about Trump lying about his net worth. And one of the key examples of that is that Trump was claiming that his penthouse was 30,000 square feet when in fact it was 10,996 square feet. And Alan Weiselberg was on the and was trying to explain that he really had nothing to do with this. And as he was making that claim, it was obvious to me that he was lying. I went back through our notes and could track years of conversations that he had had with our reporters, where he was really focused on the penthouse, where he was trying to claim that it was 30,000 square feet or even 33,000 square feet. I think at one point, Donald Trump had it. And he was trying to claim that it was wildly overvalued. So This is clear documented stuff that you can say, he's claiming one number, the document show another number, and he was lying.

You noted in that story that you had documents that prosecutors didn't. Did you hear from their office after that?

So their office did go back and look through documents with the Trump organization. They tried to do an additional forensic look, and they put some paperwork in the docket about that. They did not come after us or anything, but everything that we have is out there. We've released tapes of Trump lying about the size of his penthouse. We've put out the notes of Weiselberg's conversations over the years. All of this stuff has all been laid out. It's very clear.

It's a remarkable piece of journalism. Dan Alexander, thank you for that. For more on this breaking story, we have former federal prosecutor Ellie Honig here there as well. Ellie, you heard what Dan said there. I mean, this was a groundbreaking article that pretty flatly stated that they believed Alan Weiselberg had lied. All of this is coming as Judge Engron has not decided yet. He said by the end of January, obviously, that was yesterday, wasn't definitive, but could that play a role in why we haven't heard from him yet?

Absolutely. If I'm in Judge Engron's position here and getting ready to issue a big verdict in ruling, and now I hear this, and now we've all heard it, that one of the key witnesses committed perjury in front of me, I slam I'm on the breaks and I say, I'm not going to rule until I know the specifics of this. Now, I think it's likely the judge probably discredited Alan Weiselberg's testimony anyway because it was contradicted by so many of the facts as Dan just laid out. But you have to know this as a judge. If you're going to issue a ruling, and if it turns out Weiselberg lied, that's going to harm the Trump organization when it comes time for the verdict.

How could it bode for Donald Trump himself?

It's a problem for Donald Trump because he's going to be on the receiving end of this verdict. It is important, though. There's an important detail in the reporting that Weiselberg's deal that he's working on or towards with prosecutors does not necessarily involve Alan Weiselberg cooperating against Donald Trump. That doesn't surprise me. This guy is not in position to cooperate. I've cooperated some really bad guys, but the problem is when you have an inveterate liar multiple times convicted, if he takes this play, you can't put that person on the stand and ask a jury to believe him.

Also, when we talk, I mean, Alan Weiselberg, fiercely loyal to Donald Trump, I should know. But I think one thing we forget about, which the New York Times noted tonight, is that he got a $2 million severance package that required him not to cooperate with any law enforcement investigation unless he was legally required.

That was stunning to me. I've never heard of such a thing. I don't think that's enforceable to say you won't cooperate with law enforcement. It certainly undermines what prosecutors are trying to do. Unless legally required, I guess that could mean a subpoena for trial or anything. But that's a shocking detail to put into a severance agreement in addition to the amount. So they're clearly, Trump and his people are trying to keep Weiselberg in the fold here, I think, because they're worried about him flipping.

Yeah, and I should note, he has not actually agreed to this yet. He's just in talks to potentially do so. It could fall apart. We've seen it happen with other plea deals. Ellie Witness, or Ellie Honig. Thank you. Ellie Witness.

I could be a witness, too, if I saw something.

He would be a great witness on the stand. I do want to turn now to conservative attorney and one of Donald Trump's fiercest critics who anyone who watches the source would know. George Conway is here. George, I mean, if this does come to fruition for Alan Weiselberg, the theme here would be in both guilty pleads that he was lying on Donald Trump's behalf, would it not?

Yes. It's actually not surprising because that's what Donald Trump does to people. We've seen numerous circumstances where Trump has gotten people to lie or obstruct justice or perform illegal acts to protect him, even sometimes when he hasn't even asked them to do it. They understand what he wants them to do. You see all these people who are indicted, including his own chief of staff at the White House in Georgia. We've seen Michael Cohen We've seen Weiselberg previously. Donald Trump is just a cloud of deception. He creates a culture of lying and deception and illegality wherever he goes. If you are associated with him, you have to be very, very careful. You're taking a risk. I mean, there are lawyers who are losing their licenses or are being threatened with losing their licenses for defending him. It never, ever stops with him. He asks, he expects people to do illegal things for him.

Here's what I'm confused by, which is Alan Weiselberg was in jail for 100 days in Rikers just one year ago. He went at the beginning of 2023. He testified on the stand after that. If there were emails and documents to back up or to contradict what he was saying, why would he lie?

It's just beyond me. I think that he's doing it because he wants to protect his boss or he doesn't want his boss to get mad at him. He doesn't want retribution from his boss. The people who work for Donald Trump are abused family members in some ways. They shatter at the thought of displeasing him. They're afraid of retaliation, and they instinctively end up doing the wrong thing because that's what Donald Trump expects them to do.

The district attorney in Manhattan, Alvin Bragg, may be the only person to bring a case against Trump this year. We don't know what's going to happen with the other indictments, but we know that Trump's team is focused on slowing them down. Could something like this strengthen his hand, Bragg's hand, going into that trial?

I think indirectly. I mean, this does not directly impact the charges that are involved in the case that DA Bragg has brought. That's actually the falsification of documents relating to the hush money that Donald Trump paid through Michael Cohen to Stormy Daniels, the porn star. So this doesn't directly relate to that. But I think it's a very, very important warning to any witness who's called to testify in that case on either side that they better not lie, because if they lie, then they could end up like Weiselberg at Rikers or someplace unpleasant like that.

Yeah, it's a remarkable development in this story. George Conway, thank for that. Ellie, we don't know what's going to happen here with this and whether or not he's taking it, but big picture, how do you see it?

Well, I think George makes a good point there. I think that this actually will tie Trump's hands a bit at the Manhattan DA's trial, because That's why. If they were planning on calling Alan Weiselberg to say, for example, Donald Trump had nothing to do with the way these hush money payments were logged. It was me, the CFO, and it was Michael Cohen, their star witness. He can't do that now. He's neutralized now.

So it could deny Trump a potentially helpful witness. Exactly.

It takes Alan Weiselberg off the table as a potential defense witness. Like I said before, you're not calling him as a prosecutor. The guy's going to have at least one conviction and probably two for perjury if he takes this plea. But it also means he can't come in as some surprise witness to try to tank the case in Trump's favor.