![](\"https:\/\/media.wired.com\/photos\/5cb102f7b74ae74fb0060546\/master\/pass\/Barr-1139784293.jpg\"\/)
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Credit to Author: Brian Barrett| Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:22:04 +0000<\/strong><\/p>\n On March 22, <\/span>special counsel Robert Mueller turned in his long-anticipated report<\/a> on Russian interference in the 2016 election\u2014and the question of whether President Donald Trump obstructed justice. Now you can read the whole thing for yourself. Or at least what\u2019s left of it, after attorney general William Barr\u2019s redactions.<\/p>\n Barr had initially released a brief summary<\/a> of the report\u2019s key findings in a four-page letter he sent to Congress on March 24. His takeaway: The Trump campaign did not coordinate or conspire with Russia, and there was not sufficient evidence to charge Trump with obstruction of justice.<\/p>\n He expanded on those initial thoughts in a remarkable press conference Thursday morning, repeatedly stating that the Mueller report "found no evidence" of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Barr also confirmed that Trump's legal team had the opportunity to read the report in advance. He further said that investigators had identified 10 incidents related to potential obstruction of justice.<\/p>\n "The deputy attorney general and I concluded that the evidence developed by the special counsel is not sufficient to establish the president committed an obstruction of justice offense," Barr said Thursday, adding that they "disagreed with some of the special counsel's legal theories." The attorney general went so far as to describe Trump's probable state of mind at the time, implying that it was exonerating: "The president was frustrated and angered by his sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents and fueled by illegal leaks."<\/p>\n Within all of these determinations and comments lurk a number of questions that can only be answered by the report itself. What evidence did Mueller have in mind when he wrote, as Barr told Congress, that \u201cwhile this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him\u201d? Why did some of Mueller\u2019s team reportedly bristle<\/a> at Barr\u2019s characterization of their work? How much of the report would Barr redact?<\/p>\n