Nothing to See Here, Folks...

     Literally.
     An hour and a half after Bill Barr's dog and pony show of a press conference this morning, the heavily-censored version of Robert Mueller's report was released to the US Congress and the American people on the DOJ's own website.
     What you see above are just four of the first 11 pages that follows Mueller's Executive Summary of the 448 page report. I've taken several other screengrabs of the heavy-handed censorship but I'm sure you get the idea.
     Obviously, I haven't had the chance to read much beyond the Executive Summary but this paragraph strikes me as being perhaps the most important in the report. Mueller wrote (emphasis mine):

Under applicable Supreme Court precedent, the Constitution does not categorically and permanently immunize a President for obstructing justice through the use of his Article II powers. The separation-of-powers doctrine authorizes Congress to protect official proceedings, including those of courts and grand juries, from corrupt, obstructive acts regardless of their source. We also concluded that any inroad on presidential authority that would occur from prohibiting corrupt acts does not undermine the President’s ability to fulfill his constitutional mission. The term 'corruptly' sets a demanding standard. It requires a concrete showing that a person acted with an intent to obtain an improper advantage for himself or someone else, inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others. A preclusion of 'corrupt' official action does not diminish the President’s ability to exercise Article II powers. For example, the proper supervision of criminal law does not demand freedom for the President to act with a corrupt intention of shielding himself from criminal punishment, avoiding financial liability, or preventing personal embarrassment. To the contrary, a statute that prohibits official action undertaken for such corrupt purposes furthers, rather than hinders, the impartial and evenhanded administration of the law. It also aligns with the President’s constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws. Finally, we concluded that in the rare case in which a criminal investigation of the President’s conduct is justified, inquiries to determine whether the President acted for a corrupt motive should not impermissibly chill his performance of his constitutionally assigned duties. The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.

      In other words, Mueller is saying it isn't up to the Justice Department to make a determination as to whether a president committed obstruction and that it never was. Remember, it was never in the Special Counsel's job description to hand down indictments. The 38 that were handed down were just ancillary. Mueller was saying the final arbiter of the question as to whether or not Trump committed obstruction ought to be Congress. Barr's position was that Mueller should've made that determination, which is, at best, very flawed legal reasoning. Mueller kicked the ball into Congress's court. This is very far from being an exoneration. Mueller was inviting Congress to look at the entire report, not a heavily redacted version, THE ENTIRE REPORT, to determine whether or not Trump committed obstruction and other crimes.