[elklindo69]

Well guess whose house didn't get raided by the FBI....yup the email Lady.

LMFAO

WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI searched Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate as part of an investigation into whether he took classified records from the White House to his Florida residence, people familiar with the matter said Monday, a move that represents a dramatic and unprecedented escalation of law enforcement scrutiny of the former president.

Trump, disclosing the search in a lengthy statement, asserted that agents had opened up a safe at his home and described their work as an “unannounced raid” that he likened to “prosecutorial misconduct.”

The search intensifies the months-long probe into how classified documents ended up in more than a dozen boxes located at Mar-a-Lago earlier this year. It occurs amid a separate grand jury investigation into efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and adds to the potential legal peril for Trump as he lays the groundwork for another run.

[johnforbes]

I agree with Elkin who was pointing out the unequal application of the law.

Supposedly, Hillary had staffers buy hammers and they beat cell phones on the floor to destroy evidence, and she deleted 33,000 emails under subpoena.

It is also a miracle that Elkin's baronial mansion, Mar a Dumpo, has not been raided.

[brandon]

Trump was just overheard thanking his buddy Director Wray for kicking off his 2024 campaign.

[elklindo69]

I agree with Elkin who was pointing out the unequal application of the law.

Supposedly, Hillary had staffers buy hammers and they beat cell phones on the floor to destroy evidence, and she deleted 33,000 emails under subpoena.

It is also a miracle that Elkin's baronial mansion, Mar a Dumpo, has not been raided.

Mike Pence
@Mike_Pence
·
Oct 28, 2016
.
@realDonaldTrump
and I commend the FBI for reopening an investigation into Clinton's personal email server because no one is above the law.

So the rule of law only applies to her but not him.

Yup....stepped in it again Johnnie.

[johnforbes]

Elkin, please wake up.

Supposedly, there was a dispute of some sort about Archive material which Trump took with him.

In the case of the Clintons, they even took paintings and chairs and whatever out of the White House after their dismal time there.

But why wasn't a subpoena issued for the material if they wanted it? There was no risk of maliicious destruction, which would be the test for issuance of a search warrant.

No one is above the law...except Hillary, and Hunter, and any important Democrat.

Elkin, are you glimpsing the wider point yet? A rational person favors "equal justice under law."

It does not say, above the entry to the Supreme Court, "Special Treatment for Important Democrats."

[elklindo69]

There is nothing that the DOJ could ever say that would cause even a single Trump supporter to go back and say...In light of the evidence a court-ordered search warrant was understandable. So what is it that we know now from the FBI raid? Trump was hiding a dozen or so boxes of classified documents at his home after he had pretended to have turned it all over.............and yet he was still keeping them in a location were only a handful of people knew about?????????

Therefore, Trump took documents he wasn't allowed to take with him. The documents were classified material that Trump keeping illegally. He refused to give it all back. Law enforcement went out and attempted to recover the classified material in very respectful way and Trump wouldn't. So law enforcement came and got it back.

And now the right wing loons have gone nuts because the FBI was seeking to recover top secret materials???

[Clownkicker]

Ya gotta laugh at ignorant assholes like Matt Gaetz who was all outraged that "If they can do it to Trump, they can do it to anyone."

Well DUHHHH... I should hope so. This is America, where no one is above the law. "Rule of law" Republicans have been spouting that for decades, but not now.

Republicans are actually on TV saying that Trump is above the law, that this is outrageous, and they think that is a rational position to take.

Then ya gotta point out the hypocrisy to johnforbes who absolutely hates hypocrisy. Republicans like Taylor Greene are doing exactly what they condemned BLM for doing by calling to defund law enforcement.

I guess Taylor Greene and other Republicans at long last know how it feels to be black, eh? Trump was lucky he wasn't home or the police might have just shot him in his bed for no reason.

[elklindo69]

Apparently ex President Donald "Fuck Around" Trump collided with Attorney General Merrick "Fuck Around and Find Out" Garland.

Trumpers......Unseal the warrant!!!

DOJ____OK

Also Trumpers....OH shit

[johnforbes]

The warrant won't contain anything interesting, but the supporting affidavits would if they were released (probably won't be).

Obama took 33 MILLION pages of documents to Chicago, and argued with the Archives about they as all former presidents do.

Was his house raided?

[Clownkicker]

johnny, Trump's stolen classified documents had been subpoenaed and Trump was ordered to turn them over, but he refused to do so for months. A raid was the only way to ensure they were preserved.

No other president (Obama or Clinton or anyone) ever refused to turn over subpoenaed documents as you are pretending. You made it up. And if you weren't talking about subpoenaed documents, then you're just a dishonest partisan douche bag comparing apples and oranges to satisfy your compulsion to lie about everything (a la Trump) and for your purely partisan purposes of confusing the dimwitted.

Besides, Trump has a track record of destroying documents. His staff had to regularly save them from the trash can and tape them beck together. The ones Trump flushed down the toilet are, unfortunately, gone.

But you don't care. It's just your criminal president destroying documents he is required by law to preserve.

[elklindo69]

The warrant won't contain anything interesting, but the supporting affidavits would if they were released (probably won't be).

Really Johnnie....

The search warrant revealed that Trump is under investigation for violating the Espionage Act.

Now just let that one sink in.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-sec ... h-warrant/

[johnforbes]

WASHINGTON, D.C. — With many Americans up in arms over the unprecedented raid of former President Trump's residence in Mar-a-Lago by the FBI, Attorney General Garland released a statement to assure everyone the raid was completely justified. Eyewitnesses noted he looked unusually fetching in an elegant Dolce & Gabbana evening gown and a Dior sun hat.

"We wouldn't raid Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate or Melania's wardrobe unless it was absolutely, 100% necessary," said Garland. "I resent any accusation that this raid was influenced by partisan politics or my insatiable desire to wear pretty designer dresses." The Attorney General then did a little spin in his purple gown as the press gasped with delight.

FBI Director Christopher Wray echoed the statement as he strode up to the Hoover Building in a dazzling pair of diamond-encrusted Alexander McQueen stilettos. "The men and women of the FBI are paragons of unassailable integrity and impartiality, and any suggestion otherwise is murderous treason," he said. Several news outlets present also noted the delicious smell of Chanel No.5 in the air.

At publishing time, Trump took to Truth Social to announce that all his golf clubs were missing."

[johnforbes]

Presidents make classifications, and can declassify too.

Elkin doesn't know much, but Elkin is still bitter because his own estate -- the peerless beauty we know as Mar a Dumpo -- was also raided.

[elklindo69]

When Trump was president he had the authority to declassify any document wanted to while he was president...but not any longer. So now I can't see how he can claim that he declassified documents while he was still in office because there is no evidence to prove it.

From what I understand the materials that the FBI confiscated nuclear related documents and those cannot be declassified BY LAW.

[Clownkicker]

Ya know, Rand Paul would have had a lot more credibility if he had called for a repeal of the espionage act ten years ago instead of now when a Republican is caught violating it.

"The most notorious spies were prosecuted under the Espionage Act of 1917, including Robert Hanssen and Aldrich Ames, who are serving life sentences in prison for spying for the Soviet and Russian intelligence services while they worked for the FBI and CIA, respectively.

But while Hanssen and Ames were charged under Section 794 — gathering or delivering defense information to aid a foreign government — Trump is being investigated for potentially violating Section 793 — gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, which also includes refusal to return information that is demanded by the government."-CBS news

So as dimwit johnny can see, whether or not the documents had been declassified (which of course they were not) it is irrelevant to the law Trump has violated. It is well documented that Trump refused to return documents demanded by the government.

It's pretty staggering that Republicans (and johnforbes) are now making excuses for keeping sensitive materials to the security of the country in a basement storage area accessible to his immigrant staff and secured only with a padlock. And this was only after his lawyers had to tell him to get the friggin padlock. It will be pretty difficult for Republicans to insist they actually care about the security of the country.

[Clownkicker]

"According to the search warrant, Trump is also under investigation for two other potential crimes not related to the Espionage Act. They include 18 USC 2071, involving removing, falsifying or destroying public records; and 18 USC 1519, obstruction of justice. The latter carries a 20-year maximum prison sentence, double what someone would face under Section 793 of the Espionage Act.

In January, the National Archives and Records Administration said it retrieved 15 boxes of records from Mar-a-Lago, some of which contained classified national security material. It then asked the Justice Department to investigate. That led to the FBI executing a search warrant Monday at Mar-a-Lago, with the agents seizing 11 sets of classified documents, including four sets that were classified "top secret." Trump has claimed that all the documents were declassified.

[New York University law proffessor Ryan] Goodman said that the obstruction statute is not necessarily limited to obstruction of a Justice Department criminal investigation, but it could apply to the National Archive's ability to collect presidential records.

"It could well be that what the Justice Department has in mind is not obstruction of an investigation, but simply interference or obstruction of the ability of the National Archives to properly administer government documents, presidential records," he said.

Whether the Justice Department decides to bring charges under the Espionage Act against Trump ultimately comes down to intent, Goodman said.

"Trump is in some ways adding to the incriminating evidence by claiming that he declassified information, because then it shows that he has knowledge of what was in the documents," Goodman said.

Both Goodman and Moss noted that the documents at Mar-a-Lago do not have to be classified for the Espionage Act to apply."-CBS news

[johnforbes]

With Hillary, Comey said he did not pursue charges because there was no way to prove intent, and in that he was correct.

Comey said no rational prosecutor would charge her.

As to Trump, nobody doubts that some grand jury in NY or DC (hugely pro-Democrat areas) will indict him in an attempt to prevent him from running in 2024.

But, if Trump got elected, should he raid the mansions of Obama and Hillary?

I don't think that sort of nutty behavior is healthy unless America has fully become a Banana Republic.

If Clown can ever recover from his deranged hatred of Trump, he might even agree.

[Clownkicker]

johnny, the laws Trump broke don't require proving any intent, because they are not crimes of intent.

They are crimes of fact, not intent. You can have any intent you can dream up, but you are still guilty of the crime.
It's like you telling the magistrate "But I didn't INTEND to break the speed limit, so I can't be held responsible for a ticket for breaking the speed limit."

Yes, dimwit, you can.

Trump put the nation's security in jeopardy by having secrets in unsecured locations, even after being subpoenaed. No one, not even the President, can store SCIF classified documents outside a SCIF facility, regardless of whether they were declassified by some nut job or not.

As to Trump raiding Hillary's or Obama's, the difference is they didn't steal classified documents that were then subpoenaed and which they still refused to turn over to authorities.

There is nothing you could raid them for. What subpoenas did they refuse to comply with?

You should really take a class in law sometime, dummy. Someone has to do something illegal for you to charge them with.

[johnforbes]

Actually they do, and that is why Comey delved into the topic.

As to Hillary, she ordered her staff to buy hammers and they beat Android phones to bits on the floor.

She not only had classified material, but destroyed it.

Trump, like any president -- and Obama's exec order clarified this -- is the ultimate classifying authority, and he had a standing order to declassify.

Nor need a president memorialize that sort of order in writing -- stating it as policy orally will suffice.

As everybody knows, this is all about trying to disqualify Trump from runing in 2024.

[Clownkicker]

Trump rapping with rappers
https://www.instagram.com/p/Chr44pkA9Ke ... atch_again

[johnforbes]

https://dailycaller.com/2022/08/26/brea ... justified/

[Clownkicker]

"With Hillary, Comey said he did not pursue charges because there was no way to prove intent, and in that he was correct."-johnfibs

For years johnforbes has been here claiming that Hillary was not prosecuted because she is a Democrat (supposedly exempt from the law) and because Comey was corrupt.

Now dimwit johnny is here admitting that Hillary shouldn't have been prosecuted and that Comey was not corrupt after all.

johnforbes , like all Republicans, has a real problem with keeping his hypocritical stories straight.

Unfortunately for johnny, not only did he admit Hillary shouldn't have been prosecuted, but he doesn't realize that he also admitted Trump SHOULD be prosecuted because Trump's crimes are not crimes that hinge on one's intent.

[johnforbes]

No, that's not what I said.

Comey knew that Hillary had intent and she demonstrated that by deleting the files, BleachBit-ing the server, and hammering her android phones to bits on the floor.

But Comey was correct in saying intent is tough to prove, and he let her skate (which was even beyond his function there).

Prosecuting Trump would be a losing deal politically for Democrats, and we all know this is all about politics.

When you raid a party leader 90 days before an election, it is political.

[Clownkicker]

"When you raid a party leader 90 days before an election, it is political."-johnflubs

And who is responsible for that scenario, johnny?

Trump could have complied with the subpoena months ago. Or he could have simply turned over the documents last year when they were first requested, without a subpoena. But he didn't. The Justice Department would have been thrilled with that. Instead, Trump intentionally put off compliance to force a raid and make a political issue of it.

Unfortunately, the Justice Department can't let criminals skate just because they are good at playing politics with their crimes. No one is above the law.


"With Hillary, Comey said he did not pursue charges because there was no way to prove intent, and in that he was correct."-johnflubs

"For years johnforbes has been here claiming that Hillary was not prosecuted because she is a Democrat (supposedly exempt from the law) and because Comey was corrupt."-me

"No, that's not what I said."-johnfibs

Yes, it is precisely what you said. You said many, many times that Hillary was not prosecuted because she was a Democrat, and that Comey had a case but just looked the other way because of her party affiliation. That the same as saying Comey is corrupt--to fail to enforce the law for partisan reasons.

But you made the mistake of admitting that Comey was correct in not prosecuting her, so that puts the lie to your repeated lie that Hillary was not prosecuted because she is a Democrat.
"With Hillary, Comey said he did not pursue charges because there was no way to prove intent, and in that he was correct."-johnflubs

The rest of your post is just more of your pointless yammering that doesn't refute a thing I said, though you pretend it does.

[johnforbes]

I agree that, if some librarian from Archives wanted me to hand over some boxes (which were packed by GSA per regulation, not by Trump), I'd get some staffer to just hand them over.

If you need dates and such for some memoir, or for some future campaign, jot down that info.

But, if Biden's folks merely wanted the boxes, why didn't they get a subpoena duces tecum?

The same magistrate who hated Trump would have signed that too.

Perhaps what was really going on was that the boxes contained info related to "Crossfire Hurricane" and people were frantic to get them back for CYA purposes?

The general public will probably never find out. After all, the full information about 1963 and JFK isn't known. I'm certainly not a conspiracy theorist of any kind, but wouldn't you think pretty much anything from 1963 could now be revealed?

[Clownkicker]

johnny, the search warrant was signed by a Trump appointee. Your attempts to color this as a partisan attack is only exposing your ignorance of the matter.

Meanwhile, back at the crime scene:

" In their 36-page filing, top [Justice] department officials laid out in extraordinary detail their efforts to obtain highly classified records they allege were improperly stored at Mar-a-Lago since Trump's departure from the White House, and the resistance -- which they describe outright as obstructive conduct, that they were met with by Trump's representatives in their efforts to have them handed over.

The government included multiple exhibits to support its argument, including one photo purporting to show an FBI photograph of documents recovered from a container in Trump's personal office with colored cover sheets showing classification markings including TOP SECRET/SCI, with one showing a marking that appears to refer to information obtained by confidential human sources.

Officials revealed that after they issued a grand jury subpoena to Trump's attorneys on May 11 to obtain all remaining classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, "the government also developed evidence that government records were likely concealed and removed from the Storage Room [at Mar-a-Lago] and that efforts were likely taken to obstruct the government's investigation," according to the filing.

"This included evidence indicating that boxes formerly in the Storage Room were not returned prior to counsel's review," officials added in the filing, referring to a lawyer for Trump who said all the records from the White House "were stored in one location," the storage room, and "that there were no other records stored in any private office space or other location at the Premises and that all available boxes were searched."

The DOJ said in its filing that the subpoena return date was May 24, but Trump's team asked for an extension that the government initially denied before offering an extension until June 7. A lawyer for Trump contacted the DOJ on June 2 "and requested that FBI agents meet him the following day to pick up responsive documents," according to the filing.

This gets to the June 3 visit by a small group of FBI agents and Jay Bratt, the head of DOJ's counterintelligence division, which ABC News has widely reported on. In the filing, the DOJ said the information produced during this visit was "a single Redweld envelope, double-wrapped in tape, containing the documents," suggesting that counsel for Trump was handling the documents in a manner that was classified.

"When producing the documents, neither counsel nor the custodian asserted that the former President had declassified the documents or asserted any claim of executive privilege," the filing said. "Instead, counsel handled them in a manner that suggested counsel believed that the documents were classified: the production included a single Redweld envelope, double-wrapped in tape, containing the documents."

In its filing, the DOJ also revealed that during this visit, Trump's lawyers allowed a visit to the storage room but prohibited government personnel from looking through the boxes that remained in the storage room.

"Critically, however, the former President's counsel explicitly prohibited government personnel from opening or looking inside any of the boxes that remained in the storage room, giving no opportunity for the government to confirm that no documents with classification markings remained," the filing said."-ABC news

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... li=BBnb7Kz

So much for Trump supposedly being "cooperative" with the subpoenas. It's outright obstruction.

[johnforbes]

No, obstruction is when Hillary ordered staff members to go to a hardware store, buy hammers, and then hammer android phones (13) to bits.

Obstruction is when Mueller's people were ordered to return their govt phones, and all of them had been erased by Googling how to erase phones by repeatedly entering passwords.

Every president since Nixon has argued over papers.

The Presidential Records Act is not a criminal statute.

So serve a subpoena duces tecum, but a raid of the house of your upcoming political opponent?

That is:

[Clownkicker]

johnforbes seems to need a little competent legal help to understand the legal issues here.

"Andrew Weissman, a veteran federal prosecutor who worked on the special counsel investigation into Trump's ties to Russia, examined the department's late-night filing, which ran 40 pages long and included a photo of classified materials found stashed in boxes and desk drawers at Mar-A-Lago.

The former prosecutor summarized the government's position, which shows that Trump knew he had highly classified materials and lied to the government to hide the 26 boxes of documents for more than 18 months, and they had evidence he knew where those items were located at his private resort.

The documents were found with Trump's passports and other personal items, and the former president's lawyers gave false statements to DOJ about where the items were located, even after being served with a subpoena, Weissman said. "Do you think this all happened for 18 months WITHOUT Trump knowing, and his lawyers did this without consulting with the client?" he said.

"And all this evidence is BEFORE we consider witnesses who we called at the trial about Trump's knowing that he should not take docs from WH, and should send them to Archives, that he was in charge of packing material from WH, that the process was secretive, that the lawyers [Evan] Corcoran and [Christina] Bobb could not ethically file the certification without discussing with Trump."

He said the former president's attorneys will be required to reveal who authorized their false statements, and surveillance video and witnesses will show who moved the boxes to obstruct their discovery -- and Weissman said the evidence will be too much for Trump to overcome.

"There is only one verdict consistent with this proof; we ask you to return a verdict of: guilty on espionage related charges (793/2071); guilty on contempt of GJ subpoena (402); guilty on obstruction related charges (1001/1519) guilty on unlawful retention of govt docs (641)," Weissman said."-Raw Story

Notice that none of this hinges on your silly red herring about Presidential declassification power. There is only reference to four specific criminal statute violations. Your only argument about this is irrelevant to what's really going on.

You're welcome for the badly needed lesson in the law, johnny.

[johnforbes]

Oh come on, Weissmann was the number 2 guy for the fake Mueller probe, where they knew in the first 2 weeks there was no evidence to support their Russia collusion hoax, but kept the "investigation" going for another 2 years for political purposes.

He is entirely non-credible.

[Clownkicker]

Yeah, johnny, I can see how you want to divert from the fact that the search warrant was not based on declassification of documents but was actually based on specific criminal statutes that Trump violated.

It doesn't matter whether you find him credible or not, dummy. You can't deny the facts of the search warrant that make every one of your posts on this topic simply irrelevant partisan bullshit.

(By the way, even a president can't simply declassify documents containing names of covert operatives or that would endanger covert operatives, nor can he declassify any nuclear documents. Your claim that the president is the ultimate declassification power is just more of your partisan bullshit.)

[johnforbes]

Any president, whether I happen to agree or disagree with his policy positions, was entrusted with power by tens of millions of citizens.

The president is the ultimate declassification authority.

These issues will eventually end up with the Supreme Court, of course.

But why isn't the Left upset that Obama took over 30 MILLION pages of stuff with him when he departed?

Because this is all 100 percent political baloney.

[Clownkicker]

Again, this ISN'T about declassification, dimwit.

It's about your refusal to discuss the actual criminal issues contained in the warrant by repeatedly using irrelevant diversions about declassification because you are an intellectual pussy.

[johnforbes]

Instructing staffers to buy hammers and beating 13 cell phones to bits, that was obstruction but Hillary waltzed away.

Mueller's staff Googling how to erase their phones before turning them over, that was too.

So we do have fine examples of obstruction, but Democrats are protected and not charged.

Supposedly, there was a dispute of some sort about Archive material which Trump took with him.

In the case of the Clintons, they even took paintings and chairs and whatever out of the White House after their dismal time there.

But why wasn't a subpoena issued for the material if they wanted it? There was no risk of maliicious destruction, which would be the test for issuance of a search warrant.

No one is above the law...except Hillary, and Hunter, and any important Democrat.

It does not say, above the entry to the Supreme Court, "Special Treatment for Important Democrats."

[Clownkicker]

johnforbes, in all his "law and order" hypocrisy is now telling us that he believes if one person gets away with committing a crime, then EVERYONE should get away with committing crimes.

Well, unless they're black, of course. He supports police killing them just for shits and giggles, even when they haven't done anything illegal.

[johnforbes]

Not at all.

Equal justice means that Hillary would be charged for obstructing justice.

If deleted 33,000 emails under subpoena, bleaching the server, and hammering phones to bits isn't obstruction, what is?

[Clownkicker]

johnny, this thread is about Trump getting raided for three specific criminal violations.

If you actually believe Hillary should be prosecuted (despite your own assertion that Comey was correct in NOT prosecuting her) then why can't you comment on the subject of this thread, that Trump should also be prosecuted?

Instead, you keep trying to distract from the topic just because the Trump Administration refused to prosecute Clinton, as if that somehow makes it okay for the Biden Administration to not enforce the law.

Try to stick to the topic of the thread, johnny. I know your ADHD and obsessive/compulsive disorder makes that difficult for you, but try.

[johnforbes]

No, the point is lack of equal application of the law.

If there hadn't been an increase in the chance that Trump might run in 2024, his golf club would not have been raided.

Hillary clearly did obstruct justice, and you need intent to have staffers instructed to go buy hammers to beat cell phones to bits, and you need intent to erase a server and use BleachBit software to destroy any ability to retrieve.

Having completed that Clarence Darrow-esque argument, I rest my case as rays of late afternoon sunshine bathe my noble countenance.

[Clownkicker]

"Hillary clearly did obstruct justice, and you need intent to have staffers instructed to go buy hammers to beat cell phones to bits, and you need intent to erase a server and use BleachBit software to destroy any ability to retrieve."-johnflubs

Then why did you say that Comey was right not to prosecute her because he couldn't prove intent? You really need to learn to get your cognitive dissonance under control, johnny.


"No, the point is lack of equal application of the law."-johnflubs

Once again johnforbes is asserting that just because the Trump Administration refused to enforce the law, that means he wants the Biden Administration to refuse to enforce the law. In other words, just because Hillary may have gotten away with something, johnforbes now insists that Trump should be allowed to get away with multiple crimes, just to be fair, in the name of "equal application of the law."


"If there hadn't been an increase in the chance that Trump might run in 2024, his golf club would not have been raided."-johnfibs

Do you have any evidence to support that lie, johnny? Of course you don't.

For 18 months Trump refused to comply with both polite requests and civil subpoenas for the documents. Then Trump claimed that all documents had been returned when it is clear he knew they hadn't all been returned. Among the documents labeled "Secret" and "Top Secret" there are documents that include names of human intelligence assets which even a president cannot declassify. Trump is a clear threat to America's security.

The even more frightening thing is that there were also 43 empty document sleeves with classified banners from which Trump had already removed the documents. Where did they go, johnny? Doesn't that concern you? Even if the documents were declassified, that doesn't mean the information should be simply floating around among Trump's minions. If anything, he would have been raided far sooner if everyone wasn't worried about accusations of political bias accusations being leveled against them. Only when it became impossible to ignore any longer was the raid carried out.
https://www.fox13news.com/news/trump-se ... mar-a-lago

Having completed your Clarence Williams III-esque argument, you should rest your overmatched brain that has been out in the sun at Fire Island too long.

[johnforbes]

You misunderstand.

Sure, I was not a fan of Hillary. Yes, she had intent.

And it was not Comey's call whether to prosecute; that was a call for Justice to make.

But, as much as Comey was pompous, he actually did wander his way to the proper conclusion about that.

Besides, surely those emails were present on other servers owned by intel agencies, and could have been retrieved?