>> his perjury was used as an obstruction count as well. same with nixon, nixon was charged with obstruction as well although it never got to the vote of the house. >> the president's lawyer claiming the president cannot obstruct justice. is he grasping at straws or is he right? >> partly he's grasping at straws. even in the nixon era, the president of the united states can obstruct justice, and president nixon did, as john deal well knows. there was a slush fund that was in existence. there was a conspiracy within the white house to use that slush fund to silence and alter testimony of witnesses. that's, you know, prime example of obstruction of justice. i think what, though, john dowd and the white house, what they're saying, what they mean is that the president's decision to fire the director of the fbi, james comey, which he's entirely permitted to do and has complete power to do under article 2 of the constitution, cannot, itself, be an act of obstruction of justice and the analogy would be to the nixon era, nobody during the nixon era claimed