grammar - The Guardian: "It does indeed [...] misleading them [...]"

Reading an article by The Guardian, I stumbled upon a sentence which I cannot make sense of:

Yes, the worst things you may have heard about the National Defense
Authorization Act, which has formally ended 254 years of democracy in
the United States of America, and driven a stake through the heart of
the bill of rights, are all really true. The act passed with large

margins in both the House and the Senate on the last day of last year
– even as tens of thousands of Americans were frantically begging
their representatives to secure Americans' habeas corpus rights in the
final version.

It does indeed – contrary to the many flatout-false form letters I
have seen that both senators and representatives sent to their
constituents, misleading them about the fact that the NDAA destroys
their due process rights. Under the act, anyone can be described as a
'belligerent". As the New American website puts it,

...

I understand the meaning of the sentence. I just can't make sense of the grammar. It does indeed what? It does indeed misleading them? Or does "It does indeed" refer to a previous sentence, as in

I think it violates my rights. It does indeed - contrary to the fact that many lawyers might tell me otherwise.

I posted the previous paragraph so that you can see that this isn't the case either.

Answer

What probably happened is that the piece was edited and a crucial antecedent — what the "It" that begins the first sentence of the second paragraph referenced — got removed because an editor thought it was material that could be cut for length. Something on the order of

... Millions of Americans fear that the bill abolishes their rights to due process.

It does indeed ...

would have tied everything together nicely.

The big problem with journalism moving from print to the Web, as I see it, is that the cycles are so fast that normal editing suffers and copy-editing is virtually non-existent.