Did he follow the Law of the Land? Did he do the job he was elected to do as laid out in the Constitution? Was he legally empowered to do anything other than what he did? I will submit that whether I like it or not he followed the law of land and did in fact do the job as it is laid out in the Constitution. He may not have liked it, he may not have agreed with it but he was bound to follow through with the established precedent and Law of the Land and Constitution. In the face of threats, bullying, and pressure he executed his responsibility. History will prove this out. I may not like it or agree with it but that does not change the facts. He was bound to do exactly as he did.