Democrats' hopes soared this week when news broke that former FBI Director James Comey had evidence that President Donald Trump tried to interfere with the FBI investigation into Gen. Mike Flynn's ties to Russia.
But those hopes were dashed on Wednesday when legal experts agreed there was no case of obstruction against Trump.
Professor emeritus at Harvard Law School Alan Dershowitz writes in the New York Daily News that “on balance, the obstruction case against President Trump is not strong, as a matter of law”.
Elizabeth Price Foley, professor of constitutional law at Florida International University College of Law, states that President Trump’s alleged statements to Comey do not constitute an obstruction of justice.
“Indeed, if they did, virtually every communication between criminal defense lawyers and investigators would be a crime,” she wrote in an op-ed for the New York Times.
"Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that Mr. Trump intended an implied offer of continued employment in exchange for Mr. Comey’s dismissal of the Flynn investigation, it would be implausible for Mr. Comey to construe it as such," she wrote.
Attorney and Fox News host Eboni K. Williams (pictured top) also weighed in, saying even if Trump suggested backing off the investigation of Flynn, that would not be enough for an impeachment.
"It must be made with specific intent; meaning that he specifically said it for the sole purpose of shutting down this Flynn investigation," said Williams on Wednesday's 'The Fox News Specialists' show.
Trump supporters point to the fact that Comey himself said he received no requests from anyone to stop the FBI investigations at a Senate hearing earlier this month.
When asked if he would stop the investigation if anyone asked him to, Comey said no, “Because it would be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something that — without an appropriate purpose."
Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images