Throughout Thursday's hearing,
former FBI Director James Comey was careful not to say whether he
thought President Trump broke the law. That was evident in an exchange
with West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin.
"Do you believe this will rise to obstruction of justice?" Manchin asked Comey.
"I don't know. That's Bob Mueller's
job to sort that out," Comey replied. "I don't think it's for me to say
whether the conversation I had with the president was an effort to
obstruct."
Deferring to the special counsel, Comey instead laid out his version of the facts, including that Mr. Trump -- after firing National Security Adviser Michael Flynn -- urged Comey to drop his investigation into Flynn's post-election conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.
"I took it as a direction," Comey said.
But
even if Comey thought that, it's not necessarily a crime. What's key
for obstruction is intent: whether Mr. Trump thought that firing Flynn
was punishment enough -- or whether he "corruptly... endeavors to
influence, obstruct or impede" the investigation for an "improper
purpose."
Scott Fredericksen
CBS News
Scott Fredericksen, a former federal prosecutor, spoke to CBS News.
"The
one overall takeaway today is obstruction of justice," Fredericksen
said. "The fundamentals might be there, potentially, but there is more
investigation in the future."
And some of Comey's testimony, like
an exchange with Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr,
bolstered Mr. Trump's claims that he did not obstruct.
"Did the
president at any time ask you to stop the FBI investigation into the
Russian involvement in the 2016 U.S. elections?" Burr asked.
"Not to my understanding no," Comey said.
But
this is more of a political matter. A sitting president has never been
indicted. The Constitution says impeachment is the punishment for
committing high crimes and misdemeanors, which means obstruction of
justice is whatever a majority of Congress says it is.
No comments:
Post a Comment