Question about evidence re: Comey memo

[djg21]

15. Huh?

It's hearsay, but it comes in as under an exception to the hearsay rule as a business record or present sense impression (or it may be used to refresh Comey's recollection). Before being accepted into evidence, the memo needs to be authenticated, which would require Comey to testify and lay the foundation as to how and why he prepared it.

Is it enough? It certainly presents a question of fact and it would be up to a jury to determine whether or not to believe SCROTUS or Comey and whether it evidenced obstruction. I'd want more proof if I were prosecuting.