Clinton campaign’s attorney-client privilege claims to block Special Counsel Durham subpoenas unlikely to succeed

Indications are that Special Counsel John Durham is on the verge of unveiling the entirety of the 2016 anti-Trump Russian collusion conspiracy theory concocted by the Hillary Clinton campaign with assistance from a variety of alleged co-conspirators all linked together by way of the Democrat-aligned Perkins Coie law firm.

Clinton and the other purported plotters have all attempted to hide behind that law firm and claim attorney-client privilege in an effort to dodge Durham, but that ploy is likely to fail according to some legal experts, The Conservative Brief reported.

The reason why the attorney-client privilege claims will likely fail is that many of the involved actors had, for all intents and purposes, effectively waived that privilege previously by sharing the purportedly privileged information with other third parties like the federal government and the media.

Attorney-client privilege broadly claimed by alleged anti-Trump conspirators

The Washington Examiner reported earlier in April that the various attorney-client privilege claims had arisen in response to subpoenas issued by Durham as part of the prosecution of former Perkins Coie and Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann, who had lied to the FBI about who he was working for while handing over fraudulent and false anti-Trump information.

Durham’s team has pushed back on those privilege claims and asked the judge overseeing the Sussmann case to review and rule on them, given that the subpoenaed information that has been withheld or redacted because of those claims could be pertinent and vital to the case.

It is unclear how the judge will handle the situation, but according to Just the News and three legal experts it discussed the issue with, the effort is likely to fail and could potentially even backfire on those making the claims.

That’s not how this works

“It is clear as a matter of law and legal ethics that legal research intended to be made public is not protected by attorney-client privilege,” Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz told Just the News. “Even if it were, any privilege would be waived by testimony given about the research or the product.”

The “legal research” Dershowitz referred to is an overly generous description of the debunked “dossier” compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele on behalf of opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which was hired by Perkins Coie, as well as the disproven allegations of connections between Donald Trump and Russia’s Alfa Bank that Sussman had provided to the FBI under false pretenses.

“The attorney-client privilege, from my former federal prosecutor days, is eviscerated if you share with a third party,” former Trump administration official Kash Patel, who helped initially uncover the anti-Trump Clinton conspiracy while working for the House Intelligence Committee, told Just the News’ John Solomon.

“But what John Durham is saying — he’s coming in over the top and saying, ‘No, no, you can’t hide behind the privilege laws. This is an attempt to block information of an ongoing fraud. You cannot use the attorney-client privilege. There’s a crime-fraud exception,'” Patel added.

Desperate delay tactic

Likewise, House Judiciary Committee member Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) told the outlet that the last-minute privilege claims asserted by Clinton campaign cronies suggested they had grown desperate to try and block or delay the inevitable unveiling of the full scope of their conspiring to frame and smear Trump ahead of the 2016 election.

“I don’t think it’s going to be a winner. I think they’re going to lose on that. And, you know, it’s starting to unravel for them pretty quickly. And they just don’t want the truth to come out,” Biggs said.

Latest News