DOJ seeks to block subpoena for Trump deposition

[msfiddlestix]

74. Weird.

This quote is really quite puzzling:

The department argues in a court filling Friday that Strzok has not shown that Trump "possesses directly relevant information that cannot be obtained from other sources."

That argument seems to be a bit weird to put it as politely as I am able to muster at the moment.

Unless it's a misquote, DOJ seems to be suggesting unless there's a written memo/directive explicitly citing this action based on the obvious rational, then it isn't a legally valid claim.

Statements out of his own mouth ought to suffice legally.

Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding this entire point DOJ is making.