I think the motion tries to cure this very issue.
I don't want to stick my neck out on something that a different person is going to respond to. The protection that we baked into this suggested motion was to have the law clerk come and testify about his review of the documents and to say whether the government satisfied the original motion or not. Presumably, if they say no, we're back where we are. If they say yes, it's satisfied, I would assume the privilege point would disappear.
I don't know how else to solve this problem, other than the language that I thought we were on the verge of agreeing to. If you're not comfortable with the language, then I guess we'll go back to the drawing board.
I feel like I've said what my understanding of it is. We should see if the committee has the will to support it.