Legal Eagle reviews the Mueller report
I think this is a good analysis that puts the Mueller report in context. Essentially, Mueller could not say the President committed a crime, because the President cannot be indicted; but Mueller could have said the President was innocent, if he believed the President was innocent. What is notable is that Mueller did not state that the President was innocent. Basically, Mueller could not have said the President was "guilty", but he could have said either that the President was "not guilty" or "not not guilty", and Mueller opted for "not not guilty". The Mueller report was not an impeachment referral, though Mueller did reaffirm the oversight authority of Congress over the Executive Branch. Mr. Mueller is "the quintessential institutionalist" and essentially played the report as safe as he could.
But still, there were some damning passages. Mueller had some evidence of conspiracy and collusion, but probably not beyond a reasonable doubt. But when it came to obstruction of justice, it was particularly damning, and Mueller noted he found substantial evidence of acts that could give rise to obstruction of justice:
(This video has subtitles for those who have a hard time listening to videos.)
_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin
It has to be, because he can't directly accuse or indict a sitting President. Doesn't mean the report is useless, though.
_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin