‘Well That’s News’: Kaitlan Collins Taken Aback When Hegseth’s Lawyer Says Client’s Accuser Is No Longer Bound by Confidentiality Agreement

A lawyer for Pete Hegseth told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins that the woman who accused his client of rape in 2017 is no longer bound by a confidentiality agreement.

President-elect Donald Trump nominated Hegseth as Secretary of Defense last month. Since then, Hegseth has been dogged by allegations of serial adultery, smelling of alcohol while on the job, and, most seriously, rape. He has denied the rape and alcohol accusations.

In 2017, Hegseth, then a Fox News host, spoke at a Republican convention in Monterey, California. In the early hours of the following morning, a woman – whose identity is not publicly known – says Hegseth raped her in a hotel room. She reported the alleged assault to police, who investigated and ultimately did not file charges. Last month, it was reported that Hegseth paid her an undisclosed sum. Both parties signed a confidentiality agreement.

On Thursday’s edition of The Source, Collins interviewed Tim Parlatore, an attorney for Hegseth and former attorney for Trump. She pointed to some remarks he made about the accuser allegedly extorting his client.

“You said that you believed it’s extortion. But of course, as you know, extortion is also a crime,” she noted. “So, if you felt that it was extortion, why not go to the police at the time?”

“Well, it was a decision that we made,” he replied. “And, you know, the the email from the attorney, I don’t you know, it was something that I don’t know if it quite rises to the level of a criminal extortion that the police would take it on. But I think it certainly does meet the definition under the California law for civil extortion, and it was something that we were considering at the time. And, you know, quite frankly, with the violation of the agreement, if he is not confirmed as the Secretary of Defense, we may still bring a civil extortion claim against her.”

Collins asked Parlatore if Hegseth plans to sue the woman if the nomination fails.

“Absolutely. If the false claims of somebody that was part of an extortion that was then put out and violation of the settlement agreement ultimately causes him to lose his future employment opportunities, then yes,” he responded. “That is something that is worth bringing a lawsuit against her and her friend and potentially even the attorney for her. Yes”

“We’ve heard some people say that she should be released from that nondisclosure agreement that was part of the settlement agreement,” Collins noted. “Is there any consideration between you or Mr. Hegseth of doing that?”

Parlatore’s response elicited a surprised reaction from the host:

PARLATORE: Well, so, first of all, it’s not– a nondisclosure agreement is something where one party agrees not to disclose. This is a confidential settlement agreement that had confidentiality on both sides. That agreement has since been breached by her. And so as a result, I sent notice to her attorney that that agreement is no longer– has any force in effect. That’s one of the reasons why I can talk about it here because prior to that, the agreement prevented Mr. Hegseth from talking about her conduct. So, there is no NDA to release her from. And if she wants to go and talk about it, she can do it. I mean, certainly, she would do it at her own peril of a further defamation lawsuit, but– and additionally NDAs–

COLLINS: Well that’s news. People have been calling for her to be able to speak, and you’re saying, I mean, you’re his attorney, you’re saying that from the agreement which you negotiated, that she can come out and speak on CNN or wherever she chooses?

PARLATORE: Of course, of course. However, if she doesn’t tell the truth if she repeats these false statements, then she will be subject to a defamation lawsuit. But no, she– and she’s well aware of that. Her attorney was well aware that because of the breach of the agreement, that is no longer in any force in effect, she is free to speak if she wants. I’ve heard people saying, you know, we should release him release her so that she can testify before the [Senate Armed Services] Committee. There is no such thing as an NDA that prohibits somebody from complying with a subpoena.

Watch above via CNN.