Former FBI director James Comey essentially laid out an obstruction of justice case against President Donald Trump, highlighting for a Senate committee and a national television audience some of the critical encounters that will be considered in any evaluation of whether Trump committed a crime.
There was evidence of possible intent: when the president cleared the room so he could ask Comey – without the attorney general or his son-in-law present – about the investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s contacts with Russian officials after the 2016 election.
There was the suggestion of quid pro quo: when Trump repeatedly raised the status of Comey’s job as he asked for loyalty.
And there was the consequence: when Comey, having not steered investigators away from Flynn, was fired by Trump in May, long before the end of his 10-year term.
Comey, a former prosecutor, did not connect those dots explicitly to allege obstruction. But he posited someone who might.
“I don’t think it’s for me to say whether the conversation I had with the president was an effort to obstruct,” Comey said. “I took it as a very disturbing thing, very concerning, but that’s a conclusion I’m sure the special counsel will work towards, to try and understand what the intention was there, and whether that’s an offense.”
