Legally, if the tapes showed sex with underage girls, it’s child porn. She can get away with calling it that even if the girls were 17.
I agree that there probably isn’t a single client list, as it wouldn’t be necessary. That said, one could easily assemble one merely by going over who is on tape.
That is exactly the point.
You could call someone under 18 a child in these circumstances but most people do not do it.
Why? Because average and/or professional people do not try to sensationalize information.
Bondi’s legalistic approach is exactly what I am talking about:
“See I was not really lying.”
Such people are quickly fired in any organization.