I don't know why they thought they could get away with claiming that the authenticity was unverifiable. The whole point of emails is that you end up with at least two copies, one on your computer and one on someone else's. The remote one passes through several servers and headers are added. If there is a reply then that reply has to exist on the remote machine. Then you have timestamps on everything. Once you get past a small number of emails faking it becomes horrific.
As for the FARA violation, that sounds like Comey's "no intent" ruse. He made it work at least twice for the Clintons, once for White Water and again for Hillary's emails.
Thank you for the summary. very interesting.
I don't know why they thought they could get away with claiming that the authenticity was unverifiable. The whole point of emails is that you end up with at least two copies, one on your computer and one on someone else's. The remote one passes through several servers and headers are added. If there is a reply then that reply has to exist on the remote machine. Then you have timestamps on everything. Once you get past a small number of emails faking it becomes horrific.
As for the FARA violation, that sounds like Comey's "no intent" ruse. He made it work at least twice for the Clintons, once for White Water and again for Hillary's emails.