Remember how the FBI let Cheryl Mills sit in when the FBI questioned Hillary in July? They did so because they bought the story that Cheryl was unaware of Hillary's email setup/private server while they were at State, and that Mills only became aware of it when State asked Clinton to turn over her emails to them, at which time she represented Clinton.

A new email release shows this to be utter poppycock

From: cheryl.mills@gmail.com

To: john.podesta@gmail.com

Date: 2015-03-07 21:41

Subject: Fwd: POTUS on HRC emails

we need to clean this up – he has emails from her – they do not say state.gov

This is from H.A. Goodman writing for The Daily Caller:

This WikiLeaks Email Proves Cheryl Mills And Hillary Clinton Lied To The FBI

Before explaining why this WikiLeaks email destroys the rationale for Clinton’s bizarre legal arrangement, let’s address why the FBI allowed the subject of a criminal investigation to evade questions. According to a Law Newz piece by Chris White, Cheryl Mills claimed she learned about Clinton’s server only after defending Clinton during the legal struggle:

Goodman relies on background explanation from a Law Newz piece to explain how Mills was able to claim attorney-clien privilege:

Here’s What Probably Led to Blow Up During Cheryl Mills’ FBI Interview

During the deposition, Mills’ attorney, Beth Wilkinson, objected to a number of questions on the basis of attorney-client privilege and instructed Mills not to answer various questions. It was further explained that Clinton left the State Department in 2013, she then hired Mills to serve as part of her personal legal team. In that capacity, Mills claimed she helped coordinate Clinton’s response to the demand that she return her emails to the State Department. Therefore, Mills would claim attorney-client privilege prevented her from answering questions about how they decided to turnover documents.

However, Mills could not claim attorney-client privilege covered information she learned during her time as Clinton’s Chief of Staff. So, as Shannen Coffin, a former DOJ attorney, recently explained in an article at the Weekly Standard, “To fix that problem, Mills conveniently claimed that she did not know anything about Clinton’s email setup during her tenure at the State Department and only learned of relevant facts in her later capacity as Mrs. Clinton’s personal lawyer.”

(snip)

This essentially allowed Mills to claim attorney-client privilege covered any question, so long as Mills either first learned the information or refreshed her recollection about the information in her capacity as part of Clinton’s legal team, after leaving the State Department.

Here's more from the Weekly Standard piece

The Curious Case of Cheryl Mills

Mills's knowledge of facts learned while serving in a non-legal capacity at the State Department could not possibly be protected by an attorney-client privilege. To fix that problem, Mills conveniently claimed that she did not know anything about Clinton's email setup during her tenure at the State Department and only learned of relevant facts in her later capacity as Mrs. Clinton's personal lawyer. Mills's implausible claim she was unaware of the nature of Clinton's email setup during her tenure at State is undermined by documents showing that Mills was deeply involved as chief of staff in resolving questions regarding Clinton's email use. A March 2009 memo addressed to Mills from the assistant secretary for diplomatic security, for instance, advised against Clinton and her staff using BlackBerry devices in the executive suite, known as "Mahogany Row," because it was a secure area. Similarly, an August 2011 email chain addressed "communications issues" flagged by Mills, including a suggestion from State Department IT officials (later rejected by Huma Abedin) regarding the possibility of a State-issued BlackBerry for Clinton.

Even more specious is Mills's assertion that certain facts she became aware of as Clinton's chief of staff—such as why she knew that Clinton had transitioned her email to a clintonemail.com address very early in her tenure—were off-limits because she had "refreshed her recollection" as to those facts during her time representing Clinton in the private sector. Mills could only "refresh" her recollection because she had knowledge of those facts during her tenure as Clinton's chief of staff, putting those facts well beyond the protection of any privilege.

Especially given its criminal investigation into Clinton's email use, the Department of Justice had every reason to challenge an overbroad assertion of attorney-client privilege by a critical fact witness such as Mills. Indeed, Mills's

Read 'em and see what you think...