Here’s the bullet points on today’s NYTimes bombshell:
+ Trump tried to get White House counsel Donald McGahn to stop Jeff Sessions from recusing himself. He raged that Sessions wasn’t protecting him.
Mr. McGahn was unsuccessful, and the president erupted in anger in front of numerous White House officials, saying he needed his attorney general to protect him. Mr. Trump said he had expected his top law enforcement official to safeguard him the way he believed Robert F. Kennedy, as attorney general, had done for his brother John F. Kennedy and Eric H. Holder Jr. had for Barack Obama.
Mr. Trump then asked, “Where’s my Roy Cohn?” He was referring to his former personal lawyer and fixer, who had been Senator Joseph R. McCarthy’s top aide during the investigations into communist activity in the 1950s and died in 1986.
+ Trump moved to fire James Comey in March 2017, as soon as Comey publicly revealed the Trump-Russia investigation.
+ After Comey’s public testimony, Trump was so anxious to fire Comey that one of the White House lawyers misled the President and suggested that he did not have the authority to do so.
+ “Four days before Mr. Comey was fired, one of Mr. Sessions’s aides asked a congressional staff member whether he had damaging information about Mr. Comey, part of an apparent effort to undermine the FBI director.” The effort included releasing one negative story about James Comey every single day.
+ Trump tried to send a letter to Comey stating that the Russian investigation was “fabricated and politically motivated,” but his aides stopped him from doing so.
+ Mueller has been investigating a false statement Trump dictated on Air Force One last July in relation to the Trump Tower meeting. In that regard, Michael Wolff’s book says that a White House spokesman quit because he believed the President had obstructed justice.
So, it’s an open and shut case of obstruction of justice, right? I mean, just look at the evidence available in this single NYTimes article. That’s enough, right?
The experts are divided about whether the accumulated evidence is enough for Mr. Mueller to bring an obstruction case. They said it could be difficult to prove that the president, who has broad authority over the executive branch, including the hiring and firing of officials, had corrupt intentions when he took actions like ousting the F.B.I. director. Some experts said the case would be stronger if there was evidence that the president had told witnesses to lie under oath.