We live in different worlds I don’t care enough to make examples but I do care enough to notice how routine this can become once you’ve gone out of the way to l

We live in different worlds I don’t care enough to make examples but I do care enough to notice how routine this can become once you’ve gone out of the way to lay down the building blocks. Google and some email clients suggest who to CC nowadays. You dont have to think about it. The counsel is already hired and there. Just CC and who cares what is being discussed. Thats what the article is about. Think about the difference in power, many people get a lawyer for a reactionary reason. Because the threat and damage already occurred, the utility of a lawyer is extremely limited. Alternatively when a lawyer is there preemptively, at all times, the threat is simply harder to materialize. My point is that its much less likely that people were consciously trying to hide something - most of the time - which is my point. Everything can have a semblance of legal advice, putting the onus on the government to parse that first or decide if its even worth parsing that, in comparison to just getting a subpoena rubber stamped and railroading someone into prison. One is more expensive than the other. “Hm we don’t know what they did, what legal strategy they employed, and even if we got a subpoena on the little evidence we have, we cant use any of their communications for evidence, attempting parallel construction will leave us caught red handed, and we already know they have the funds to see this through, maybe we should stick with someone that cant afford their base level of rights” Like a lawyer, it is extremely easy for me to compartmentalize my appreciation of the tools from the theoretical negative consequence you chose to imagine. I chose to imagine all the people that take plea deals from an overzealous government.