Don't be confused. This doesn't mean that Trump is a convicted criminal. For that you would need a jury and a trial in which the burden of proof has been met. So you can spare us that argument. We can safely say that there is more than enough evidence that he committed a crime. Many crimes, in fact. And more and more evidence keeps popping up. To the point where it would be absurd at this point for any moderately reasonable human being who analyzes the facts, to still claim that he is not a proven criminal. For YOU (not a jury) to conclude that something... anything... is "proven" you don't need a conviction. You just need PROOF. So don't confuse "proven" with "convicted". Now, the details of the judge ruling are sealed. But we do know that she ordered an exception to the client-attorney privilege. This happens in cases in which the privilege is being used to cover up for a crime. Here is the best explanation I've heard. Again, we don't know what this is about, but we do know of the suspension. One example, for illustrative purposes only. Say that Trump told his attorneys that he had turned in ALL the government documents that he stole. But he didn't. The judge determines that Trump lied to his attorneys. His attorneys issued a statement to the court on behalf of their client saying that Trump turned in all the documents he stole because... Trump told them so! This is a crime! The client suspends the privilege so investigators can find out if the crime was committed by Trump alone, or if he colluded with his attorneys. You can deny all you want. But PROOF that Trump is a criminal keeps piling up. So there is no point in denying that, even though he is not a convicted criminal, he is most definitely a proven criminal.