His most important conclusion is a very good one for President Donald Trump: Mueller stated that neither Trump nor anyone in his election campaign was nested or co-ordinated with the Russian government to help him win the election, so Bill Barr's assessment of the miller's report.
In short, we know a lot more about what Muller has found – and what Trump and the country mean – than a week ago. Or even three days ago, when Barr acknowledged that Müller had finished his investigation, and presented it. However, there are still a number of questions – about the current Müller report, why so many people in Trump's orbit have lied about their interactions with the Russians, and whether we'll ever hear from Muller.
Below are the nine most urgent unanswered questions.
Why did not Mueller speak personally with Trump?
The question we ask I do not know yet whether Mueller's answer is completely satisfied with Trump's written answers or whether he would like to have a personal conversation. And if the latter is true, does not Müller believe that Barr and / or Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein have signed the contract?
Will we ever see Trump's written answers?
Will we ever see the full Mueller report?
It is the second part of this quote that leaves a lot of room for interpretation. As Barr clarifies later in the letter, he believes that there are parts of the Müller report that can not be released by law. He added that he still needed to "identify any information that might affect other ongoing affairs, including those that the Special Counsel referred to other offices."
Given this, it is unlikely that the public will ever see the full Mueller report. The question is how much Barr holds back – and why. Trump said on Monday afternoon that publishing the full Mueller report "would not bother me at all."
Why did Müller pounce on obstacles and leave the decision to Barr
In Mueller's report he wrote about the question whether Trump had obstructed the investigation by Russian intervention: "Although this report does not address that It comes to conclusion that the President has committed a crime, he does not relieve him. " By deciding not to make a definitive conclusion about whether Trump would obstruct the judiciary, Mueller knew that he left the question to Barr, who as a private citizen had written a memo in 2018, in which he made the case that Trump did not actually hinder the Justice when former FBI director James Comey was released. Wrote Barr:
"Mueller should not be able to demand that the president submit to an alleged disability, and if adopted by the department, this theory could have devastating consequences, not just for the presidency but for the executive as a whole and especially the department. "
During his hearing, Barr tried to downplay the meaning of the memo, insisting that at the time he was a private citizen with no access to the full facts, and this point was narrower , legal point. Nevertheless, Mueller had to know that the AG did not want to give up the decision on the obstruction of Barr.
(One possible explanation for why Muller did what he did is that he simply did not have any reasonable doubt and are aware that he had and wanted to deal with the President of the United States simply did not hit the envelope – he handed that decision over to the country's chief police officer.)
Why did Barr choose to include Mueller in the "Do Not Relieve" line on obstacles and direct leads?
This is complicated. Barr, a Trump envoy, is aware that many Democrats consider him a Trump Protector – someone the President has used to make sure nothing connected to the Mueller probe ever enters the Oval Office has arrived. Barr also knows that through the special statute statute, he is the gatekeeper of all the information Mueller has gathered in the 22-month investigation, and as such, is intensively scrutinizing what he approves of his release and, more importantly, what he does not.
And so Barr wants to set a clear sign that he does not tilt the scales when it comes to what he has included in his summary of the Müller report. So, yes, the big headline is that Müller could not find any coordination or collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. However, Barr also quotes Müller directly when it comes to the issue of disability – protecting himself from prosecution for shielding Trump from hard conclusions by the special advocate.
Did Müller reveal any indications of collusion?
Trump and his government immediately resorted to Barr's summary of the Müller Report, insisting that his oft-repeated allegations of "NO COLLUSION" had been proven. And he is probably right! But that's not exactly what Barr said. Barr quoted the report as saying, "[T] The investigation did not reveal that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in their election interference activities."
There is a difference between some lines of evidence that suggest collusion and the ability to make collusion without reasonable doubt. In fact, there is a relatively large gap between these two things. So, did anything that had come to Mueller come into that void? If yes, what?
Why was there, when there was no collusion, so many contacts between the Russians and the Trump campaign? And why did so many of them lied about it?
If they did not lie to protect a broader understanding, why did they lie? Perhaps to keep investigators away from other crimes that have nothing to do with Russia's intervention in the 2016 campaign – the chairman of Paul Campaign, an electoral campaign organization, was eventually convicted of financial crimes in connection with his relations with the Ukrainian government.
Or maybe the people Trump put on (and puts on) was just as pleasant to lie as telling the truth. Despite Trump's repeated claims, his campaign (and his administration) was not exactly the best and brightest in the political and legal world.
Will we ever hear from Müller himself about the report?
How much of Steele Dossier was confirmed by Müller? And which parts?
We know from the congressional statements made by Comey and others that the Department of Justice has confirmed some elements of the dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele. (Fusion GPS's opposition research efforts were originally funded by a conservative news agency, but later funded by Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee.) But what portions of the dossier the Department of Justice has confirmed to be true have never been discovered. Did Müller's findings confirm some parts of Steele's dossier that did not exist in the original FBi investigation? If so, which parts?
Although the Steele dossier has turned into political football – and the worst parts of it have never been confirmed – it remains one of the most important documents in this investigation. How true is it?
How useful was the cooperation of former Trump employees like Flynn, Gates and Cohen in the Mueller investigation?
The Office of the Special Representative and the Southern District of New York cut plea looks at each of these men – and much more – in our view, to use information that they alone possessed to obtain larger fish in the operation catch. But now the Mueller investigation is over, and none of the alleged "bigger fish" – Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner – has been charged or charged.