The general population should be aware that people/administration staff/CEOs in corporations lie, they lie a lot, and even if they get caught there is little consequence as there is no You Must Tell the Truth Act of 1688.
People in government however are allegedly accountable to their financiers, i.e. the tax payers, that being the general population.
The accounting must be spot on, the tender process must be legitimate in accordance with the law and able to withstand any sort scrutiny.
With regards to obtaining data from an alleged terrorist at the time, in 2016, the head of the FBI a James Comey stated that the bureau paid $1.4 million in order to retrieve the data from the iPhone 5C of Syed Farook.
It was not until years later that it was revealed that the price was not $1,400,000 as Comey stated but rather $900,000 or half a million dollars less.
So, did the books state that taxpayers paid $1,400,000 for the service?
If so, then what did the $500,000 really go to?
Another Black Ops?
In any event the FBI lied.
How many more lies have the public paid for?
Can they be really trusted in other matters?
See article from phonearena.com of the headline:
Long running mystery is solved; this is the firm that unlocked terrorist's iPhone
We now know the answer to a long-running mystery that involves the Apple iPhone. In December 2015, in what was later called a terrorist attack, married couple Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik shot to death 14 people in a San Bernardino office building. Apple got involved when a court ruled that the tech giant had to unlock Farook's iPhone 5c.
Name of company that unlocked terrorist's iPhone 5c in 2016 is finally revealed
Apple CEO Tim Cook refused to follow the court order because doing so would require Apple to create a special version of iOS for the government to use. The executive feared that this special software-dubbed Govt.OS-could leak once in the hands of institutions like the FBI resulting in the loss of privacy for every iPhone user. Eventually, the FBI paid a data extraction company to unlock Farook's phone although the identity of that company was only guessed at until now.
Before we get to that name, let's step back and look at the issue. The FBI felt that inside the alleged murderer's phone it might find evidence pertaining to the San Bernardino attack along with a list of places Farook might have been scoping out for future attacks. Those who agreed with Apple's decision not to abide by the court's ruling worried that the government was setting a precedent for unlocking handsets while others felt that Apple was supporting terrorism.