Though no proof has been disclosed to support the claim President Donald Trump colluded with the Russians to influence the 2016 presidential election, the events that have followed could negate the importance of such a revelation, Washington Examiner columnist Byron York maintained.
In a column on Monday, York explained Democrats seeking to undo the president were now focusing on claims of obstruction of justice based on charges he tried to derail the investigation, writing, "It might not matter if collusion occurred or not. A cover-up would be enough to do the job."
"The Trump-Russia case could become the ultimate illustration of the old Washington saying that it's not the crime, it's the cover-up. In this case, there might be no underlying crime at all," York wrote.
Prior to Trump firing James Comey as FBI director, attention was aimed at the claim of Russian collusion. But, York explained reports published in The New York Times in the aftermath of the firing charged the president with seeking to quash investigations into the matter.
"As each revelation came, there was more talk of obstruction," York wrote. "Focusing on alleged obstruction, the president's enemies no longer have to find an underlying crime on his part to attempt to remove him from office."
York maintained "Trump has good arguments to make in his defense, beginning with what legally constitutes obstruction," but stated what his detractors have managed to do was to obstruct his presidency in the meantime.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.