I’ve not read the book but I’m familiar with the tale.
As I will pretty much never take a Clinton associate’s word at face value, I also looked around to see what the other side of the story was.
The other side of the story seems to be the more credible of the two, although I’m not sure I believe either one. Most likely there were bad actors on both ends of the situation.
I’m not sure where you’re getting that he was a “Clinton associate”? What’s that based on?