I am also going to guess that if Trump had used "Executive Privilege" on any part of the report, you (and the media) would be using that as the RED HERRING that he did something and is trying to hide something, therefore he is guilty.
BUT....
Since he refused to use executive privilege, not one peep from you or the media about him not using it. And giving him credit... Had he USED it = GUILTY... When he doesnt use it = GUILTY
Possibly. I don't know what the precedent is on "executive privilege" nor how often it has been invoked by past presidents. I'd probably snap react to it and call bullshit on it, but would later dismiss it as a matter that Congress will (hopefully) eventually get to.
I haven't seen WGN or ABC news herald the refusal of EP by the president. But isn't that like saying ... actually nevermind, its a fair point. Media should have indicated something to that effect if they are also going to report on those 10 acts of possible obstruction.
+1
Lets take a look at two other investigations and see what you (and the media) would be saying if we substituted the person with Trump.
1. Trump and his administration was investigated for running guns in another country, was known as "Fast and Furious". Trump used his "Executive Privilege" to have his emails that were part of the investigation, removed from the public report!
2. During the Investigation into Trump, the FBI sent him a subpoena to hand over his private server, his emails and all devices connected to his private server. Trump and his team then Bleach Bit the server to wipe it clean, deleted 10's of thousands of emails, smashed and "lost" most of the devices connected to that server.
Your head, and the MEDIAS heads would be rolling and screaming 24hours a day for the next 10000 years!
I admittedly don't know much about the Fast and Furious other than some super shady shit happened. After a quick google it looks like Obama eventually gave up the goods? Was Obama, himself, personally a subject of the investigation? Or his administration? Were they redacting/witholding information related to an investigation into his administration? Again I'm just not that familiar with all the ins-outs of this particular case.
As for 2. I get that most of my opinions align with democrats (lately), but I have no love for Hillary Clinton, didn't vote for her, and I'd probably buy Trump a beer if he found a way to make something stick and expose the Clintons as the criminals they appear to be. They're slimy as fuck.