The Times reasoning is impeccable from a legal perspective. However, I would caution people about equating the Nixon, Clinton, and Trump obstruction cases.

Clinton’s obstruction was related to a frankly spurious investigation. There were no consequences to the United States or its citizens in what was being investigated as there was no case (and no necessary pardons to end it).

Nixon and Trump’s cases differ meaningfully as the obstruction was to get around uncovering potential information that they acted illegally in getting elected to the very office of the Presidency. The sanctioned break-in of Democratic HQ was serious relative to whether Nixon was fit to be President.

Trump’s case is the worst of all as there is some chance he or his team may have colluded with a foreign power to tip the election in his favor. That is both treason and tampering with…