It's just strange that, despite criticising Trump constantly, he'd choose this specific thing to defend him on.
He could have said nothing.
He could have reasonably assumed that "client list" is short hand for data on who the clients are; a list formed posteriori by the investigators.
But instead he said "people who think there is a way to learn the identity of the clients are crazy".
For a successful author, such poor grasp on the language is suspicious.