Well, the "Mueller Report" is finally out there for the public to view.  I'm sure there are millions pouring over its every word trying to find something that will prove their side of the debate about guilty or innocence.

Not sure if the Barr presser really did anything to tell us things we didn't already know.  But, it was sure telling that Barr used the word collusion as if it were really part of the report.  The actual report only talked about coordinating and conspiring.  Is this guy really an attorney?

Parts that I found interesting:
Part I, Page 10

Further, the Office learned that some of the individuals we interviewed or whose conduct we investigated - including some associated with the Trump Campaign - deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature encryption or that do not provide the long-term retention of data or communications records.  In such cases, the Office was not able to corroborate witness statements through comparison to contemporaneous communications or fully question witnesses about statements that appeared inconsistent with other known facts.

Accordingly, while this report embodies factual and legal determinations that the Office believes to be accurate and complete to the greatest extent possible, given these identified gaps, the Office cannot rule out the possibility that the unavailable information would shed additional light on (or cast in a new light) the events described in the report.

Part I, Page 173

In sum, the investigation established multiple links between Trump Campaign officials and individuals tied to the Russian government.  Those links included Russian offers of assistance to the Campaign.  In some instances, the Campaign was receptive to the offer, while in other instances the Campaign officials shied away.  Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities.

So, from my own comprehension, it appears that some facts and statements could not be verified due to deleted or non-retrievable communications.  And although there was constant and repeated communication with Russians, the campaign is blameless?  Certainly seems to be a lot of ducks on the pond, but no one seems willing to call them ducks.

As for Part II, which deals with obstruction.  Here are a couple of jewels that caught my eye.

Page 8   Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about Trump's conduct.  The evidence we obtained about Trump's actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment.  At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that Trump clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state.  Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment.  Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that Trump committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

For the 30+% who still believe anything that comes out of the orange blowhole, this will be viewed as complete victory.  For the other 60+% it will mean a variety of things.  The only reality that I want to see is this menace moving back to NY in January 2021.