There's a world of you who believe Trump clean on the Russian thing, and clean on the firing of James Comey. Bless, you. Each of us has our own opinion. Yours is fine.
Mine does differ. As what has transpired has sunk in on me, I have come to believe he might be guilty of obstruction of justice. He says Comey told him three times he was not under investigation.
And, he now denies he did, but reports say he asked for Comey's loyalty. Asking for loyalty when you are wondering if you are under investigation is asking for the investigation to steer away from you or to find nothing amiss with you and the Russians.
Why is that not obstruction of justice? To me, it clearly and plainly is. You, as the boss, approach the person conducting the investigation, asking if you are under investigation, and saying, "Come on, now, be loyal to me," and that is not to be taken as an effort to turn the investigation away from you?
I suppose many will say it is not, and I suppose each of us has an opinion. My opinion is that it is a definite attempt to turn the investigation away from him.
If there are tapes of the conversations between Comey and Trump, they should be subpoenaed. If he asked for loyalty, it is obstruction of justice.
Firing Comey, in and of itself, might be an effort to influence the investigation. If you can fire the person who might be investigating you, and replace him with someone else, you might be able to influence the direction of the investigation. Only two FBI directors in history have been fired. When it is one of only two firings, and there exists the possibility you were under investigation, of course we are going to wonder if you fired the director because you are under investigation.
Once you have confessed that you wonder if you are under investigation, you better not fire the director of the investigation, because it clearly does point to you trying to steer the investigation.