comay, i want to ask you this. did the bureau interview everyone who originated an email that ultimately went to sec. clinton that contain classified information. >> i don't think so. nearly everyone but not everyone - you and i had a discussion the last time about intent. you see the statute differently. my opinion doesn't matter, yours does, you're the head of the bureau. in my judgment, my judgment, you read an element into the statute that does not appear on the face of the statute. then we had a discussion about intent. why would you not interview the originator of the e-mail to determine whether or not the originator had a conversation with the secretary herself. >> there was a handful of people that the team decided it wasn't a smart use of resources to track down. one was a civilian in japan, as i recall, recall, who forwarded something that got classified as it went up and the other was a group of low level state department who had written things that end up being classified. nearly everyone was interviewe

director comay, i want to just follow up on one of senator paul's question and start with this in terms of the midteens situation in orlando. i understand he was investigated and he was interviewed twice by the fbi and then the inquiry was closed. is that true? >> yes he was interviewed twice during an 11 month investigation and then the preliminary was closed. in that investigation, was there any work done to see what he was doing online? >> in other words, you interviewed another person, was there anything looked at to see what he was doing online? >> as i understand that there were no search warrants for the content of any of his devices. >> i guess my question is, there's even work you can do without a search warrant, just publicly, was anything done to see whether he was saying anything online or doing anything without having to get a search warrant. >> in public space. >> to the fbi do anything? >> i don't know the answer. i don't think so at this point. >> okay so one of the things as i understand from what i've heard in prior things that was not done. as i look at the situation,

. >> when i hear some of these things, i sat and listened to director comay and listen to reports, heid say that the fbi did not find evidence that secretary clinton's email system was hacked by foreign agents. the implication that was just made by the gentle lady is that did not in fact happen and that is not what he said. what he said was he would not be able to determine. [inaudible] mike morel was actually supporting sec. clinton for president and said any good intelligence service would have anything on any classified system but particularly something that secretary clinton's e-mails, the issue that the subpoena is driving at is you have a lot of classified information on unclassified servers. you have people like pagliano who were involved in that and we have a fact pattern in which those e-mails were deleted after , not only being revealed publicly, not not only being after subpoenaed by congress but after they had a conversation with people affiliated with secretary clinton and then of course we now have these transcripts found by people online that someone with a similar prof