Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ford_Prefect

(8,610 posts)
Sat Oct 30, 2021, 03:41 AM Oct 2021

The claim was that they could not determine what the data was which passed between them.

So no specific determination of collusion or information sharing could be made. But that doesn't mean they did not do it. What it meant and still means is that the data can't be read, only the traffic connection between the devices.

As a former IT guy there would be no reason to have such connections and maintaining them unless something of import was traveling along them. There is no benign purpose which fits the scenario. It's very much like when the Neo-Cons under W/Cheney used private email services to handle their memos and in-house communications to avoid federal public records law along with Congressional scrutiny.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The claim was that they c...