You are incorrect. According to the article, according to DoL, the DoL has found etc. There is a big difference, and my original statement is the correct one assuming that the Guardian is being truthful (which they probably are). If the DoL had provided evidence then the Guardian themselves would state that the DoL has found this evidence. You can't go to court and tell the judge and/or jury, "I found such-and-such evidence which proves that Google discriminates!", you have to actually provide that evidence.