Special Counsel John Durham’s false statement charge against former Perkins Coie attorney Michael Sussman is scheduled to go to trial next month. Durham has subpoenaed documents from Fusion GPS, the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign in connection with the trial.
A funny thing happened on the way to the courthouse. Everyone involved has asserted attorney-client privilege to withhold documents. Perkins Coie of course served as a cutout in the development of the Russia hoax by Fusion GPS and others, but the services performed by Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS were not exactly legal, at least in the professional sense.
Andrew McCarthy commented in his NRO column (behind the NRO paywall) over the weekend: “That’s an amusing touch in a case where the central allegation is Sussmann’s insistence that he was not acting as an attorney for the Clinton campaign.” Jonathan Turley adds to the hilarity at his site in the post “FEC Fines the Clinton Campaign and DNC for Conduct Related to Steele Dossier.”
In her weekly Wall Street Journal column (behind the Journal’s paywall) this past Friday Kim Strassel also found some humor. For example:
In their 2019 book, “Crime in Progress,” [Fusion GPS principals] Messrs. Simpson and Fritsch brag that Perkins Coie had hired them to dig into Mr. Trump. Which flags another problem: It’s tough for Fusion and others to claim their work product is privileged when they ladled it out to the press and agencies and profited from a book that openly describes internal discussions with Perkins Coie.
Margot Cleveland takes up the most recent filings on the claims of attorney-client privilege here, as does Techno Fog here. Mr. Fog’s post is full of interesting tidbits. As to the documents in issue, there must be some good stuff in there.