Rafael: Donald Trump is in Manhattan to face charges a jury has brought against him.

It is expected the Former President will not go down without a fight.

The play-by-play from insight the stash inside the courtroom to Donald Trump's response and more from across the city and the nation, but tonight, we delve into how much Trump's appearance today will affect his long history of legal battles.

But a look at his playbook to weaponize courts in his favor and an investigation of the Trump family's rise to wealth and power.

This special edition of "MetroFocus" starts now.

♪ >> This is "MetroFocus," with Rafael Pi Roman, Jack Ford, and Jenna Flanagan.

"MetroFocus" is made possible by Sue and Edgar Wachenheim III, Filomen M. D'Agostino Foundation, The Peter G. Peterson and Joan Ganz Cooney Fund, Bernard and Denise Schwartz, Barbara Hope Zuckerberg, and by Jody and John Arnhold, Dr. Robert C. and Tina Sohn Foundation, The Ambrose Monell Foundation, Estate of Roland Karlen.

Rafael: Good evening and welcome to "MetroFocus."

I am Jack Ford.

Is Donald Trump the most to do president in U.S. history?

The new book suggests not only a resounding yes but that over his lifetime, Donald Trump has learned to weaponize the legal system to his advantage and even carry the artist into the Oval Office -- carried the practice into the Oval Office.

A new book offers a comprehensive analysis of his legal challenges, beginning with a racial discrimination suit early in his New York real estate career.

It is written by Jim Zarin, former district attorney for New York and the that's a self-described Republican.

Everything you need to know about Donald Trump you can learn from the way he has used or abused the legal system for well over three decades.

Nice to have you here.

Jim: Nice to be here with you.

Jack: Let's start with the big picture.

You say that litigation is the key to understanding Donald Trump.

What do you mean by that?

Jim: We inherited the adversarial system from the English.

It was felt that the adversary system was the best way to arrive at the truth, because the competing sides would pull forward their best arguments and tell their side of the story.

Trump some of the legal system differently, as a weapon as that she weapon to destroy the adversary, not necessarily to get at a lie.

The legal system could be a potent weapon.

Jack: You have written before on courts and court systems, but what about this straight me do decide to do this book?

Jim: I started with an inviting interest in Roy Cohen.

He met Trump in 1973.

I am from my days in the U.S. attorney's office.

Trump met him in a bar.

He had been served for a violation of the fair housing act because he disseminated in housing.

The case against him was overwhelming.

He went to a number of reputable lawyers we sent it to settle with the Justice Department and agreed not to discriminate anymore.

Cohen setting up and was advised, fight, attack, counterattack, and we will beat them into the ground.

Trump like that advice.

He retained Cohen as his lawyer.

They counter claim against the government for $100 million and launch an attack against government attorneys, saying they were engaging in Stormtrooper-like your tactics in the way they approach witnesses and employees of the Trump Organization.

The judge quickly dismissed this kind of claim for $100 against the government and held a hearing and found that the lawyers were guilty of no misconduct.

That is all that happens.

The end of the day, Trump settle with the Justice Department, agreed not to disconnect, and got the same salty would have gotten -- same result he would've gotten me he had done what was suggested in the first place.

Jack: This is a mileage meter in a car.

The numbers are rolling over.

Enter government -- it came to you quickly.

Some 3500 losses.

People might look at that and say, are you really talking about many losses?

Jim: I did not count them myself, but USA Today use the three 500 figure and it was corroborated by the American Bar Association, which sides 4000.

It is publicly thought that Trump had more the top three were for developers in the U.S. combined.

I thought 3500 was safer than 4000.

I was mortgage did in the types of litigation.

Jack: Talk about that.

The book is a compelling read.

You do not try to collect each and every case, but you do talk about different categories.

Which sorts of categories do you find work most interesting to you?

Jim: Trump brought more cases where he was on the receiving end, although he was on the receiving end of a lot of suits.

He had seats with all of his partners.

He would sue them for $1 billion, tried to get money.

These were his partners.

He had principals...as his partner in the G.M.

building in New York.

He had Chinese partners on the west side, one was a Hong Kong partner who said Donald Trump likes litigation for lunch.

All these litigations were dismissed unfavorably for Trump.

Those releases with partners.

You would to Berlin the that for money laundering in Atlantic City.

He would to sue taxing authorities.

He would sue the counting of Palm Beach for an 80-foot high flag pole in front of Mar-a-Lago.

He sued the Chicago Tribune who said one of his projects would be an eyesore.

That case was dismissed.

The one that I always enjoy recounting is Trump apparently got wind of the fact that on Long Island, there were two people, a father and a daughter, who owned a travel agency called Trump travel and is it was called Trump travel into tours because they Boca bridge tours.

Trump had never been in the travel business.

He had never been in business on Long Island.

But he got wind of this and sued them for using his name.

They exhausted their life savings defending the suit.

The daughter said, why what I want to use the name Trump anyway?

He is misogynist and racist, but they stuck to their guns.

At the end of the day, there was a settlement, where they read -- they agreed to reduce the size the sign of Trump Travel.

Jack: I would suspect that either Trump or his supporters would say this is just another illustration of him utilizing the laws in a way that is maybe more creative than others.

He saw an area where he could gain an advantage by using the laws.

The president was asked about the variety of bankruptcies involving his companies and he said, "I used the laws that existed."

I suspect they would say this is just a matter of him using laws to his own advantage.

What would your answer be?

Jim: He lost most of the cases, so the law was not on his side.

He was really relying on the American system of justice where each side pays his or her own fees.

Jack: Kisses at the British system where loser pays.

Jim: Someone, like the couple on Long Island, they were bankrupted defending the case that Donald Trump brought.

Why did he bring the case?

Because these people were cussing him money?

No.

He brought the case out of spite.

That is the misuse of the legal system.

Jack: Last question.

There is so much in this book that people interested should read.

They will find a compelling, whether they agree or not.

But in taking it into today in the impeachment inquiry, you talk about how Roy Cohen's lasting message Donald Trump was never apologize, you do not surrender, you do not settle.

You always attack.

Are you seeing evidence of that advice playing out today in terms of the president and his allies in the impeachment inquiry?

Jim: Yes.

The other canon of Reichardt was the matter what happens, always claim the victory and go home.

When Trump as a truck that has a conversation with the President of Ukraine, clearly pressuring him to investigate Joe Biden and threatening to withhold aid as a quid pro quo, and this is been corroborated by at least six people, one of whom has recently changed his testimony.

Trump has historically engaged in a way where you do not really meet the charges made against you, but you attack the accuser.

It is exactly what he has done in the Ukraine investigation.

He has attached the whistleblower.

Whistleblowers and symptoms do not have firsthand knowledge.

Secondly, the whistleblower was corroborated.

Third, there is no issue with what the whistleblower said, but still, he wants his identity revealed.

He wants to say he committed treason.

He is out to find spies.

Roy Cohen is out to find spies.

When Trump says Adam Schiff should be executed for treason, that is right out of the Roy Cohen complained of.

We see this resident again and again in Trump's behavior.

Jack: Given what you say, are you worried you could become a lesson number 3501?

Jim: I hope I am.

It would do wonders for the sale of the book.

Michael Wolf's book fire and fury probably would have sold about 3000 copies but it sold one million after Trump.

Jack: Always a pleasure.

Thank you for spending time with us.

♪ Jenna: Good evening.

The Trumps, two power-hungry American dynasties.

That is a new book, the questioners, the terms and a marriage of power.

It looks and to help both families rose from humble roots to the pinnacle of power and influence, health they harnessed politics to gain valuable tax rates and built their wealth on programs designed to help the middle class, often to the exclusion of Blacks and other minorities.

And it brings the storage to the modern age, when the two families would use those same practices to consolidate their power globally.

Joining us now Sandra Bernstein, who for decades has been counseling money, power, and corruption in business and politics.

She is also the cohost of the podcast Trump Inc.

This book is intense.

First, this seems to be the administration that has spawned a million bucks.

What was it about this narrative that you found unique?

>> What I wanted to do was to tell that is the story of what is happening now and in the White House, but to tell the whole multigenerational saga of these two families and how they came together.

But it is also about democracy and the choices we have made or not made that have led to increased influence of wealth in modern politics.

Every day, we see more influence than the day before.

Even for me, I have covered corruption, particularly in New York and New Jersey, for a quarter-century.

I have never seen anything like what is going on now.

I wanted to tell the stories of the two families plus us, our democracy, the choices we have made.

Different choices we could make in the future to correct for some of these trends.

Jenna: Also, I want to ask about the world of.

That makes -- word "oligarchs."

That makes most people think of Russia.

Why that word?

>> When I came up with a title, I did not know about all of the Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs that we would learn about through the Mueller report come in the Ukraine investigation, but what I did understand fundamentally was that in society, there is a greater influence of wealthy people on government.

Let me backtrack a moment.

One of the ah-ha moments was during Paul Manafort's trial.

A witness was put on the stand, a consultant who worked with Paul Manafort in support of the correct Ukrainian strongman present.

They kept him in power for 10 years.

The wind is -- witness said, rich people, they call them oligarchs.

I thought to myself, there is no super path, no campaign finance committee.

The oligarchs just pay consultants to get the candidates they want with the understanding that those candidates will enable them to keep getting richer.

It becomes a spiral.

To get richer, can support the candidate they like more and that is what is happening in Ukraine.

We are not there yet.

We still have a system of disclosures, democracy, but we are moving towards that.

One of the big movers towards that is it Donald Trump, both because of the ways he behaved as a businessman and the way he has been behaving as president.

As a businessman in New York, and I did not realize this when I started writing, he acted like an oligarch.

He gave so much money to local elected officials and expected something in return.

I have called many public officials and descent, do you know that so-and-so give you a donation?

They say well, they support my politics.

Donald Trump, when I would call people and ask do know why he give this to you?

They would say, oh, yes.

He told me.

He called me screaming.

He said, I gave you a $20,000 contribution.

Where is my permit, tax break?

He had an extremely transactional view of politics, even in a world where everybody understands you need to contribute to people because they control your business.

Donald Trump and his father were outliers.

They had this same practice of contributing to officials either we get benefits in return.

One of the tax breaks got for one of his earliest years, I just checked, is worth $400 million total.

He sold the property.

This is what is now the grand Hyatt hotel.

He no longer owns it, but he negotiated a 40-year tax break that the city is still pain.

Negotiated this system of giving to politicians, expecting back, and even more.

That is the oligarchic model.

He has brought it to the White House.

In the White House, he has telegraphed to wealthy people, I will treat you the way I expected to be treated as a businessman.

He does this openly.

People who pay for his hotels, golf courses, not to mention the old-fashioned people who give to his campaign get preferential treatment.

There are tapes.

He treats it out.

If he does not like you, he was giving you need to be investigated by the Justice Department.

That, too, is oligarchic behavior.

The total has gone up.

Jenna: One thing that I also thought was interesting is that your book does not let anyone off the hook.

What I think so many people might at this point associate with the president is that while he is part of the problem with the GOP, but the whole time, he was donating and expecting favors from both parties.

>> As a matter of fact, he started his career by controlling the Brooklyn democratic process.

That is one of the major ways the Trump family real estate this was built by getting the favors, the federal loan packages, which were often controlled by people controlled by the party.

For him, it was not only not for many years.

-- it was not only not Republican, it was Democrat for many years.

This country is dealing with the consequences.

We just past the 10th anniversary of the citizens United.

That decision allowed unlimited corporate contributions into campaigns.

We are seeing the effects of that.

Donald Trump benefited from that, that decision was consciously wealthy families.

The divorce family, the Prince family, related to -- the DeVos family, the pre-family, related to Betsy DeVos.

They wanted to get rid of campaign-finance religion.

They won.

They broke the system along the way.

In Ohio in 2010, that was after the court decision.

As say things -- Ads pictures of pretty borrowers, basic cash.

They say Washington is terrible.

It was 24/7, a noticeably big boost in television airtime.

If you are a rational person, and all you hear all the time is of the government is stealing from you and then Donald Trump comes in and says the government is stealing and I am going to fix it, that was an acknowledgment he made good use of.

He did not fix it.

He wrote it beyond recognition, but he was able to prey upon the system that was broken by people before him.

Jenna: I want to talk about the stories of both these families.

These are two immigrant families, which, juxtaposed to some of the policies of the administration, it is ironic.

Let's start with the Trumps and then the Kushners, which is a harrowing story.

>> Donald Trump's grandfather immigrated in 1885, the gilded age with big disparities in wealth.

It was not just that people were wealthy.

He wanted everyone to know it.

There was a restaurant, Delmonico's, with an artificial lake.

People have old toilets in their homes.

Big mansions up and down the Hudson Valley, people were wealthy and one of the world to know it.

But the difference between that time and our own was you could still change social class for that is what Trump did.

He worked as a barber in New York, went west, got into hospitality, first in Seattle, then the Yukon.

During the last gold rush, he burst a series of restaurants in the Yukon, catering to the appetites of victors for food, liquor, access to sex.

He situates his restaurants in places where there will be in a lot of foot traffic.

He makes money, comes back to New York, and invest in real estate in Queens.

That is it right at the time that the government is getting ready to build a bridge to Queens.

Queens, which had been cut off from Manhattan.

You had to come from Brooklyn or by boat, it is about to become more accessible, which means that land is going to become more valuable.

Now becomes a template for the Trump family business.

They understand is not just the land but the way the government is going to do things to enhance the value of the land that is important.

Then they begin this cycle, mostly with Fred Trump, then Donald Trump, of donations, tax benefits.

One stray item in the book is about how Trump Tower -- there is a term called Tiffany location, or the best in the city.

Trump Tower was billed at the actual location of Tiffany spread that, Donald Trump was able to say he was entitled to big tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks design for affordable housing.

That was the Trump family business model.

That is how the business developed.

When Trump past the tax cuts and jobs act in 2017, because it allowed summers working Asian of wealth but very wealthy coming particular corporations, and what it meant was that the social elasticity that his grandfather had benefited from what available -- was available to people.

It is hard to change class now and it was during the Gilded Age.

Now, Joe and Ray Kushner had four children.

There was a split in the family.

Some of Joe Kushner's cousins have made different choices.

One of the things I wanted to point out was that, while these families are emblematic, they are not typical.

The matrixes.

-- they matrixes.

One thing I wanted to do in the book was to trace the choices that these families make, because whether or not they are the correct choices -- and I show where they are made --, there is a sense of there is power and understanding what happened here.

Jenna: Thank you for this great book, for your fabulous podcast.

I really cannot emphasize enough how much of a fascinating read and a better understanding it gave me of these two families.

♪ >> Thanks for tuning into "MetroFocus."

You can listen to our podcast where you get your podcasts.

Simply ask your smart speaker to play MetroFocus: The podcast.

It is also available online and at the NPR one app.

♪ >> "MetroFocus" is made possible by Edgar Wachenheim III, Filomen M. D'Agostino Foundation, The Peter G. Peterson and Joan Ganz Cooney Fund, Bernard and Denise Schwartz, Barbara Hope Zuckerberg, and by Jody and John Arnhold, Dr. Robert C. and Tina Sohn Foundation, The Ambrose Monell Foundation, Estate of Roland Karlen.