See that....that's the goalposts moving that you're moving. Still, you can use your short bus brain. These things are difficult when three letter agencies lie as easily as you breathe, but you're capable of it. (You didn't read the file, though, just own up to it.)

By admitting that they forensically examined the laptop they pretended they didn't have, then by saying they can't release the data on it because of you know, sources and methods or some such, they thereby admit that DNC report used previously to say that there was no connection is false without saying it's false. It's like telling your wife you weren't cheating on her but no, she can't see your cell phone.

"The FBI’s belated disclosure of the existence of the forensic report (and the related chain of custody forms) raises new questions about the adequacy of the Bureau’s search, its good faith in prior disclosures, and the lawfulness of its attempt to shield all information relating to the work laptop from public disclosure under FOIA. "

[snip]

"...[obtaining the laptop data] would not normally require a comprehensive forensic report, unless there were encrypted files or other challenges that could point to communications with Wikileaks."

[snip]

"If the FBI has the work laptop in its secure evidence room, as it claims, then the revelation of seven pages about that worktop (or its contents) would not allow the Russian defendants or anyone else to destroy evidence. And if the three-page forensic report was produced by CrowdStrike rather than the FBI, then the FBI needs to explain how revelation of the records “would provide criminals and foreign agents of foreign powers with information about the United States government’s investigation and enforcement strategies…” That is particularly true since the FBI simultaneously claims that it did not rely on the work laptop or its contents. "