Hillary Clinton’s Motion Says Trump's Legal Challenge Against Her Has ‘No Merit as a Lawsuit’

Late last month, Donald Trump lodged a lawsuit against Hillary Clinton, her campaign, and dozens of others, accusing them of an “unthinkable plot” to create “a false narrative” that he was colluding with Russia during the 2016 US presidential election.

Hillary Clinton’s attorney has claimed that former US President Donald Trump's lawsuit against the ex-Secretary of State, which he filed last month, should be scrapped because it has “no merit”.

David Kendall wrote in the motion seen by the news website Axios that the 45th president’s lawsuit could be compared to a “fundraising tool, a press release or a list of political grievances” and that it has no place “as a lawsuit, and should be dismissed with prejudice”.

The motion also reportedly argues that by waiting years to file the lawsuit, the statute of limitations for Trump's claims against Hillary Clinton have expired.

“Notwithstanding his rousing, all-caps call to action, Plaintiff waited four years, four months, and twenty-four days before filing suit. His delay renders each of his claims untimely,” Kendal pointed out.

He then stressed that “even were the Plaintiff's claims timely, they are still meritless,” adding, “to be clear, Clinton vigorously disputes the allegations in the Complaint. But even taking those allegations as true, Plaintiff fails to plead any cognisable legal causes of action”.

Trump's Lawsuit Against Hillary Clinton

In late March, Trump filed a 108-page lawsuit which alleged that Hillary Clinton, her campaign, the DNC, former FBI Director James Comey and scores of others "maliciously conspired to weave a false narrative" that he was "colluding with a hostile foreign sovereignty" in an effort to "cripple Trump's bid for presidency”.

The suit seeks damages exceeding $24 million in legal fees, defence costs, and related expenses. It also seeks to recoup the loss of present and future business dealings.

Durham Investigation

The developments come amid US Special Counsel John Durham's ongoing investigation into Trump’s alleged collusion with Moscow. The probe kicked off in 2019, when then-Attorney General William Barr told Durham to lead a review into the "Russiagate" probe launched by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in July 2016 to determine if the FBI’s inquiry into the allegations of Trump's "collusion" with Moscow was legal.

This was preceded by the US Justice Department releasing a redacted version of then-Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report, which summarised the outcome of his probe into allegations of the Trump-Russia collusion and Moscow's alleged interference in the 2016 US election. According to the report, Mueller’s investigation found insufficient evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

Moscow has repeatedly rejected allegations of its interference in the US political system, stressing that the claims were made to explain the election loss of Trump's opponent and distract public attention away from actual instances of election fraud and corruption.