Originally Posted by OneHungLo

That's a total lie.

Now I'm well aware there need not be a crime for obstruction to take place, but when you look back on any of Trump's behavior knowing full well there was no underlying crime, it would be very difficult to try someone on obstruction. For example -- looking back knowing there was no collusion, he was perfectly in his right to fire Comey. Now if there was collusion and he fired Comey, you certainly could argue there was obstruction.

Now apply that (no underlying crime / collusion) to any and every instance of obstruction..