These types of equations that I build apply in many areas. It occurred to me that the US government may have gotten itself into a Gordian knot of exculpatory infinites. If a person has a vast data base of information, it is very easy to cherry pick data that implies any conclusion. It would seem that if I were suspected to be one thing or another, good or bad, that in the process of normal legal discovery, it would require that I have all the data that was ever collected by any government agency. If there were a classified video of a person committing a crime of which I am accused, what possible justice could ensue if even the prosecution was kept from that information? It would seem that if the supreme court decisions are upheld, the only way that I could really know if there were proof of my innocence, would be to have access to everything. I know that it will simply be twisted around to support whatever intent and goal the collectors may desire, but in a logical world they would have shot themselves directly in the foot.
If I ignore parts of any data set, I will likely come to the wrong conclusion. The Σ(sum) of parts is not the sum of some of the parts. It would seem that collection of information is not the risk, but that intent to corrupt, which is and has always been the goal of those who seek power over others. Maybe I am just imagining things. No politician would ever consider manipulating the voting system for their benefit, I think a salamander named Gerry proved that.