Seth Abramson did a thread about this back in June when the obstruction charges were starting to float around. I corralled some of the tweets into this discussion:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029175368
Some of the relevant tweets:
Obstruction of Justice IS a legal term and federal criminal statute. It has a strict legal definition. It is NOT open to interpretation.
Obstruction of Justice is NOT a political term. Politicians may NOT define it in whatever way pleases them or may advantage their party.
The federal Obstruction of Justice statute does NOT take into accountor care about whatsoeverhow a defendant's actions made you FEEL.
The Obstruction of Justice statute ALSO does NOT take into accountor care about at allwhether an investigation was in FACT obstructed.
Questions tomorrow about how Trump's actions made Jim Comey FEELor about whether those actions IMPEDED an investigationare IRRELEVANT.
Therefore any Obstruction of Justice case against President Trump IS aboutalmost exclusivelythe nature of the words he said to Comey.
If the words Comey CONTEMPORANEOUSLY RECORDED as having been said by Trump were indeed said, Trump IS guilty of Obstruction of Justice.
Another lie you'll hear tomorrow is Obstruction of Justice is hard to prove. It isn'tat all. Because it's NOT a specific intent crime.