Noooope. If what the DoJ is saying is true, then it’s pretty clearly abuse of privilege. I’m stunned if G did this, because other employers have made a point of

Noooope. If what the DoJ is saying is true, then it’s pretty clearly abuse of privilege. I’m stunned if G did this, because other employers have made a point of saying not to do this (also I would be questioning why their own lawyers allowed it?) The reason is very simple as I understand it: if you are found to have abused privilege a judge can decide that you lose privilege on relevant communication, and if you have something systematic as is being alleged here, then the judge may simply declare that you waived/forfeited privilege. Abuse of privilege is not a novel, recent, or in anyway unreasonable claim. It is established law and has been for a very long time. Hell, It can also be brought up in civil cases between private entities. Do not try to “technically” or “clever” your way around the legal system.