Replies

Comey's saying his forensic team at the FBI got what they needed to do their analysis (server images and logs) from CrowdStrike.

He doesn't say that. That's your own interpretation of what he said.

Reply 43...

COMEY: In the case of the DNC, and I believe the D triple C, but I'm sure the DNC, we did not have access to the devices themselves. We got relevant forensic information from a private party, a high class entity, that had done the work but we didn't get direct access.
BURR: But no content.
COMEY: Correct.
BURR: Isn't content an important part of the forensics from a counter-intelligence standpoint?
COMEY: It is but what was briefed to me by the people who were my folks at the time is that they had gotten the information from the private party that they needed to understand the intrusion by the spring of 2016.

If he meant a forensic team he would have said forensic team.
Why are you putting words in his mouth?

Here is some more info for you...
27:42... January 10, 2017 Russia's Role in Election-Year Hacking

Pick on the associated transcript link below the video. I can't seem to find a transcript of that hearing yet.

FBI Director Comey: Agency requested access to DNC servers

In a hearing with the Senate Intelligence Committee Tuesday afternoon outlining the intelligence agencies’ findings on Russian election interference, Comey said there were “multiple requests at different levels” for access to the Democratic servers, but that ultimately a “highly respected private company” was granted access and shared its findings with the FBI.
“Ultimately what was agreed to is the private company would share with us what they saw,” he said. The company to which Comey was referring is CrowdStrike, a cybersecurity company doing the internal defense and investigation for the DNC.

Here ya go...ODNI Statement on Declassified Intelligence Community Assessment of Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent U.S. Elections Start at 40:00 mark. Chairman Burr. Director Comey, let me talk about forensics for just a minute, because the FBI has the expertise there. I know there's tremendous investigative value when the FBI is actually able to conduct their own forensics review on devices that have suffered cyber intrusions and attacks. I believe there's some confusion, though, or at least some conflicting reporting as to whether the FBI requested access to the DNC's services, the Democratic Congressional Committee servers, and John Podesta's personal devices. Did the FBI request access to those devices to perform forensics on them?

Director Comey. Yes, we did.

Chairman Burr. Would that access have provided intelligence or information helpful to your investigation and possibly to the findings included in the intelligence community assessments?

Director Comey. Our forensics folks would always prefer to get access to the original device or server that's involved. So it's the best evidence.

Chairman Burr. Were you given access to do the forensics on those servers?

Director Comey. We were not. A highly respected private company eventually got access and shared with us what they saw there.

Chairman Burr. But is that typically the way the FBI would prefer to do the forensics, or would your forensics unit rather see the servers and do the forensics themselves?

Director Comey. We'd always prefer to have access hands-on ourselves if that's possible.

Chairman Burr. Do you know why you were denied access to those servers?

Director Comey. I don't know for sure. I don't know for sure.

Chairman Burr. Was there one request or multiple requests?

Director Comey. Multiple requests at different levels, and ultimately what was agreed to is the private company would share with us what they saw.

No forensic study was conducted by any division of the FBI. If there had been one it would have violated the agreement that was made.

Sorry, but from the evidence at hand that is the only conclusion that I can draw.