My question is, what bona fide reason do Wade/Willis have for asserting attorney/client privilege to keep Bradley’s testimony out of the record?
The inescapable inference is that the testimony, if allowed, would prove that the relationship began before Willis hired Wade, and thus that Wade lied in his affidavit, and Willis lied by extension by submitting his affidavit in support of her position.
Why wouldn’t this be similar to a defendant taking the fifth? In a criminal trial, that cannot be taken as an admission of guilt, but in a civil trial, it can. Although the charges against Trump and co-defendants are criminal, in this hearing there is no criminal issue. Therefore, why isn’t the judge permitted to infer that the claim of privilege to keep the testimony out is an admission?
That’s a good question. The hearing was regarding a motion by the defense in a criminal trial to have the prosecutor disqualified. It’s not a civil trial and the prosecutor is not a defendant. The judge hasn’t made a determination yet if Attorney/Client privilege applies. He is, however, admitting the evidence under seal for now. The Trump team is getting as much as they can on record, seemingly to force a criminal investigation into Willis and Wade.