Full article:
https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/
I think it's mostly clickbait. The use of words like "shadow campaign" and "cabal" is just to get you to wrap your head around the idea that there were driven people who wanted to ensure a particular outcome, without claiming to have broken any laws in the process. It's like Ball wanted to leverage the spirit of Qanon, but from the left.
There are some concerning aspects, though. Nothing new, just confirmation of the same old narrative:
They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time. They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears.
My concern is around this notion of "disinformation." As many have asked, "who decides?" If you say that something is disinformation, how did you come to that conclusion?
What if the information is accurate, but obtained in a way that is illegal? It's not something that will hold up in court, but it's still true.
Then there are court procedures, themselves. Like the notion that one cannot bring a case to court if there is no injury, but then, once there's an injury, there's no remedy. In both situations, the case is thrown out for lack of standing.
The article is basically just a nothing-burger, but some spicy with condiments.