The Mueller Report: Presented with related materials by The Washington Post

by The Washington Post

The only book with exclusive analysis by the Pulitzer Prize–winning staff of The Washington Post, and the most complete and authoritative available.

Read the findings of the Special Counsel’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, complete with accompanying analysis by the Post reporters who’ve covered the story from the beginning.

This edition from The Washington Post/Scribner contains:

—The long-awaited Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election

—An introduction by The Washington Post titled “A President, a Prosecutor, and the Protection of American Democracy”

—A timeline of the major events of the Special Counsel’s investigation from May 2017, when Robert Mueller was appointed, to the report's delivery

—A guide to individuals involved, including in the Special Counsel’s Office, the Department of Justice, the FBI, the Trump Campaign, the White House, the Trump legal defense team, and the Russians

—Key documents in the Special Counsel’s investigation, including filings pertaining to General Michael T. Flynn, Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen, Roger Stone, and the Russian internet operation in St. Petersburg. Each document is introduced and explained by Washington Post reporters.

One of the most urgent and important investigations ever conducted, the Mueller inquiry focuses on Donald Trump, his presidential campaign, and Russian interference in the 2016 election, and draws on the testimony of dozens of witnesses and the work of some of the country’s most seasoned prosecutors.

The special counsel’s investigation looms as a turning point in American history. The Mueller Report is essential reading for all citizens concerned about the fate of the presidency and the future of our democracy.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, History, Law, Audiobook, Reference, Government

736 pages, Paperback

First published April 20, 2019

About the author

The Washington Post provides authoritative local, national and international news — with reporting on politics, technology, business and culture — offering readers and users entertainment and information they need to know, plus expert original commentary, insight and analysis, 365 days a year.

Reviews

[Bill Kerwin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Okay, so I’ve read The Mueller Report, every blessed word, including the footnotes, the appendices, the speaking indictments, Trump’s written answers to Mueller's list of questions, and all the supplementary materials included in this helpful edition issued by The Washington Post. Then I thought about it for almost a week. Here are my conclusions.

Yes, yes, yes!—on all three counts. Interference, Interference, Interference! Collusion, Collusion, Collusion! And Obstruction, Obstruction, Obstruction! What is more, almost all of the obstruction was instigated or personally executed by President Donald J. Trump—continually, maliciously, actionably—in a myriad of ways.

First of all, interference in the 2016 election. The Russian government interfered—in what the report deems a “sweeping and systematic fashion”—in two principal ways: 1) by hacking into computer systems hosted by Democrats (DNC, DCCC, Hillary for America), leaking damaging Democrat emails at crucial moments in the campaign, and penetrating state and county computer election systems (Illinois and Florida), and 2) by disguising themselves as Americans and manipulating social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) in order (at first) to damage Hillary’s presidential prospects and (later) to help elect Donald J. Trump. The hacking was done by the GRU—the Russian equivalent of our CIA—and the media manipulation by the IRA (International Research Agency), a company owned and operated by Russian oligarch Yevgeniy Prighozhin, a multimillionaire restauranteur and caterer sometimes known as “Putin’s Chef.”

So did all this Russian help win Trump the presidency? There are too many variables to say for certain, but the election was close (Hillary would be president today if a mere 107,000 Trump voters in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania would have just stayed home), and the Russians were good at what they did: they exploited America’s racial, economic and cultural divisions, worked hard to suppress the black vote, and specifically targeted the crucial swing states that tipped the election toward Trump.

And collusion? Lots of collusion. Russians continually reach out to Trump's people, and Trump's people obliging reach back. For example, on August 2nd, 2016, Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort and his assistant Robert Gates met with Konstantin Kilimnik—a “former” Russian intelligence agent with close ties to Putin’s friend the oligarch Deripaska—at Manhattan’s posh cigar bar The Club Havana. There they discussed the internal campaign polling data that Gates, instructed by Manafort, had been sending Kilimnik for the last three months, emphasizing the importance of the “battleground” states Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota. Hmm. Manafort sends swing-state polling data to Russia, Russia targets swing-states on social media. Sure sounds like collusion to me.

The kind of collusion indicated above, however, is not what Mueller was looking for. Collusion, as the report is careful to point out, is not a legal term. What Mueller was searching for instead was the evidence of a criminal conspiracy, and for that you must be able to prove coordination—an actual agreement, whether tacit or expressed—between the Russians and the Trump campaign. Although I believe the above encounter between Manafort and Kilimnik implies this sort of coordination, and certainly led me to infer that it existed, it could not be used in a court of law to prove a count of criminal conspiracy. And that goes for Donald Jr. in the Trump Tower meeting, Carter Page in Moscow, and Pappadopolous in London too.

Also, it is only fair to say that none of these incidences of collusion can explicitly be tied to President Trump. Not only is there no proof he instigated them, but there is not even any evidence that he knew about them beforehand. There is, though, sufficient reason to suspect that if Trump instigated collusion or had any foreknowledge of it, we would still not be able to discover any evidence because of the way Trump has persistently, blatantly, unethically obstructed every legitimate attempt to examine his conduct from mid-January 2017 up to the present day.

Volume II—where Mueller treats obstruction of justice—is clearly the most damning section of the report. From Trump’s initial cover-up of the Flynn affair; through his termination of FBI director Comey; his attempts to force McGahn to fire special counsel Robert Mueller; his scheme to limit the scope of the special counsel's investigation by excluding all past events (including Russian tampering) and concentrating exclusively on future elections; his personal concoction of a false "adoption" cover-story to account for the "dirt on Hillary" Trump Tower meeting; his efforts to force Attorney General Sessions to "unrecuse" himself and take charge of the investigation; his attempts to force McGahn to lie about Trump's attempts to force McGahn to fire Mueller; his efforts, personally and through his lawyers, to induce Cohen to lie before Congess; up to his continual efforts to dangle pardons before Manafort and Cohen, followed by threats against Cohen and his family. All of this--complete with footnotes--has an persuasive cumulative effect.

I believe the following excerpt from the Mueller report communicates the president's state of mind:

[W]hen Sessions told the president that a Special Counsel had been appointed, the President slumped back in his chair and said, "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."

The president clearly acts like a guilty man, and, in his attempts to keep his crimes hidden, he has committed—and continues to commit—other crimes in plain sight: each a clear, actionable instance of obstruction of justice.

Mueller makes all this clear in Volume II. At least it’s clear to me.

If you wish to learn Mueller’s rationale for not making “a traditional prosecutorial judgment,” I’ll let you explore the Special Counsel’s fine legal reasoning for yourself. But I will share with you Robert Mueller’s last words on the matter:

[I]f we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President 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 the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

So what's next? I don't know. The rest is up to Congress. Or, failing that, the American electorate in the year 2020.

I must admit, though, that the following questions continue to haunt me: What is Donald Trump so afraid of? What exactly is it that he is so determined to hide?

[karen]

my copy arrived damaged - it was like every third word was blacked-out. very poor quality control. am awaiting replacement.

UPDATE: replacement copy arrived with the same printing error! how embarrassing! why would anyone be satisfied reading only half of a story? will get from library.

UPDATE: library copy - same thing! it is SHOCKING that THIS TERRIBLE PRINTING ERROR is being allowed to JUST SIT THERE, SMUGLY. it is SHAMEFUL! shouldn't there be more outrage about THIS TERRIBLE PRINTING ERROR? CAN WE NOT RECALL THIS TERRIBLE PRINTING ERROR and get A NEW, FRESH COPY? i don't even need a 100% pristine book with zero typos or factual errors, just one that is A LITTLE LESS FLAWED so i don't have to feel so lousy about myself, as a reader. we need to do better about PRINTING BOOKS going forward. otherwise, █████ is going to be █████ like █████. and then we'll be █████.

come to my blog!

[Zander Willoughby · Rating 3 out of 5]

Author refused to make up his mind on important plot points.

[ij · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read the Washington Post’s presentation of “The Mueller Report.” This edition included introduction and commentary by reporters, Rosalind S. Helderman and Matt Zapotosky. The actual Justice Department provided report includes color-coded redactions throughout. This was dry but interesting reading and think the reporters did a fair job in their commentary.

[Greg · Rating 4 out of 5]

Feb. 11, 2025:

We are fucked.

Original Review

Obviously, I did not read this volume since it is not out yet. But I spent the weekend reading a pdf of the report, which is available from a number of sources. Not sure I will ever feel clean again.

No need to go into an analysis or rehash parts of it. There are plenty of more reputable sources, the one I tend to agree with most is Mehdi Hasan, one of the very few journalists left in DC/American-based broadcast media. One of the most quoted passages is when Individual-1 exclaims, "I am fucked" when he learned of the opening of the Mueller probe. I beg to differ. It is we, Americans and citizens around the world who value democracy, transparency in government, and honest discourse who are fucked.

Until Republicans admit that their party has veered to enable fascist behavior and start to put their country above the party, we are fucked. Until Democrats quit equivocating about whether the duty to begin impeachment proceedings is dictated by the Constitution or by political expediency, which is always timid, we are fucked. And until his most devoted followers, who have devolved into a cult, quit basing their political views on various shades of resentment, racism, and xenophobia, take off the blinders that maintain their opinions, we are fucked.

The biggest lesson I learned is how Individual-1 is (not seems) incapable of interpreting anything that happens anywhere as being about anything but him. His willful ignorance of history, tradition, decency, and the Constitution literally comes through on every page of the report. That kind of stupidity in the presidency may well end the American experiment forever.

Perhaps the best summation of how fucked we are came in a tweet from actress Patricia Arquette: "Take away for the day—You can get impeached for lying about a blowjob but not for meeting with foreign spies multiple times who are actively working to overthrow our free elections—got it!" That's basically the best précis of the Mueller Report I've yet seen.

[Raymond · Rating 5 out of 5]

"The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion." -Volume 1

"Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations. The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels ... The President's efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests." -Volume 2

Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his team have finished their investigation after indicting 34 people (26 of whom were Russians) and getting 7 guilty pleas. They have also submitted a report of over 400 pages. Volume 1 chronicles how the Russian government interfered in the election as well as the connections between the Trump campaign and Russia. Volume 2 covers the potential acts of obstruction by the President of United States in response to the Russian investigation. Below I provide a review of each volume and then discuss my overall thoughts of the report.

In Volume 1, the Mueller team goes into detail on how the Russians interfered in the election. First, by a social media campaign and second by hacking into the computers of Democratic campaign workers and Clinton staffers and releasing the hacked material to the public. I was fascinated to learn, in the social media section, that around 126 million U.S. Facebook accounts and about 1.4 million U.S. Twitter accounts were in contact with Russian accounts. The Russian's social media strategy consisted of posting political messages with the intent of dividing voters so that they would more likely support Trump (and Sanders during the Dem primary) and less likely to support Clinton. The investigation identified multiple contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia during and after the election season (e.g. Trump Tower Moscow Project, planning for a potential Trump and Putin meeting before the election, the infamous Trump Tower meeting, Manafort and Kilimnik meetings, poll data sharing, etc.). It is important to say that the investigation did not find evidence of coordination/conspiracy between Russians and the Trump campaign but it is very concerning that members of the Trump campaign were open to receiving potentially damaging information from the Russians. Lastly, one question that still remains for me is: why did former Trump campaign officials lie about their contacts with Russia? Several people would not be in legal trouble today if they had not lied to Congress or the Special Counsel's office.

Volume 2, ultimately does not find whether or not the President obstructed justice. Instead the report lays out numerous incidents where the President may have obstructed justice. The report shows various contradictory statements by the President that were confirmed to be false by other members of his Administration. One of the most disconcerting aspects of Volume 2 is the fact that so many individuals felt "uncomfortable" when the president directed them to do something that would potentially influence the investigation (e.g. Richard Ledgett's account on page 56 of Vol. 2 was the most eye opening to me). Also is seems like everybody (Comey, McGahn, Priebus, Rogers and Ledgett, Lewandowski, etc.) was taking notes on their interactions with the President. What does it mean when people feel so strongly that they have to take contemporaneous notes about these interactions? The last 22 pages of Volume 2 provide a legal seminar on the definition of obstruction. Mueller's office gives a legal rationale for why Congress can pass laws redefining obstruction so that controversial acts (that do not involve official conduct) by the President are applicable and will not intrude on the President's ability to take care that the laws are faithfully executed. Based off of my reading of the report there is evidence of episodes where Trump did and episodes where he did not obstruct justice. Mueller's office decided not to indict or make a determination on obstruction because of the Office of Legal Counsel's guidelines that a sitting president can not be indicted.

Overall, Mueller's team has put together an impressive record of what did and did not happen in the 2016 election and the first two years of the Trump administration as it relates to the Russia investigation. Mueller and his team have provided a great service to this country by uncovering the truth using detailed analysis and by confirming prior news reports and echoing books such as Woodward's Fear: Trump in the White House and Comey's A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership.

[Chaunceton Bird · Rating 5 out of 5]

The report itself is nearly 400 pages long, but it's pretty readable. Robert Mueller and his team write clearly and thoroughly. It is a wonderful thing to live in the United States and have access to these types of high-level reports on investigations into the highest level of our government.

This edition is great, it has an informing introduction to orient the reader, and it follows the report with an article juxtaposing the lives of Mueller and Trump.

Overall, this is a report I would recommend to everybody, and this is the edition I'd recommend.

[Mary · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book has the strange distinction of being a "bestseller" that apparently no one bothers to actually read. Perhaps folks are intimidated by the number of pages or they think they've heard it all before. Please put those doubts aside and READ THIS REPORT. Even with all the redactions it is fascinating, well-organized, clearly written, and, most surprising to me, a real page-turner.

[Louise · Rating 5 out of 5]

The US press has done a great job. If you have been following the story The Mueller Report will provide background and more detail for everything you already know. This 2 volume book and its appendices will serve as a reference document for many years to come.

Volume 1 is a choppy read. It is a flood of facts told in episodes that are usually about the acts of individuals who were in contact with Russians. Unlike Volume 2 (as below) there is almost no discussion of the potential criminalty of any of these acts. . An example is Paul Manafort’s sharing of polling data. How is this not either a conspiracy with a foreign power or a prelude to an in-kind campaign donation? Another example is the detail on how the Republican platform plank on the Ukraine was changed. The story just hangs with no explanation of why, which would have (and should have) led to a discussion of how a foreign power influenced the campaign. These are two of many examples.

Volume 2, by contrast, is very clear. It details the acts of obstruction and then tests each against the legal definition of the 1) obstructive act; 2) the nexus for a public hearing and 3) an intent to obstruct. There is discussion of both legislative histories and judicial interpretation that pertain to each act. Issues such as pardons, separation of powers, a prosecutorial argument for a broad interpretation of terms, and legal definitions of terms are given.

The investigation is far from over. There are many redactions for ongoing matters. Appendix D lists 11 transferred and 14 referred matters; only 3 cases were completed.

Since so much has been written about this – here are a few of my observations:

The JDA – joint defense agreement seems like formalized witness tampering. Witnesses consult to coordinate their stories.

Less than a page was given to the breach of state and local election systems. Only 2 states (Fl & MI) are named. No machines were examined. I cannot imagine any method, ongoing matter or privacy issue that overrides the public’s right to know which systems these are and specifically how they were breached. Three states had very narrow margins- how do we know their 80,000 votes (total) were not due to machine tampering. Why is this not not getting more attention? I have to wonder if this is at the heart of the cover up.

It is still not clear to me what Michael Flynn knows that Trump extended himself towards him so much to protect. His treatment by both Trump and the prosecutors stands in great contrast to that of Michael Cohen.

Approximately 5 hours after Trump’s “Russia if you are listening..” statement, the hack of HRC’s personal email began.

This is the first time I've seen the Trump Tower Moscow deal in dollars. It does not appear Trump would put up any money. For the use of his name he’d get between 1-5% of all condominium sales; 3% of rentals and other revenue; 3-4% of the gross, an incentive of 20% of gross operating profits and a $4 million “up front” fee. It seems that Michael Cohen is acting on his own for this and not much is getting done. The project has been under discussion for years and no site has been selected. It looks like a no risk annuity that Putin dangles before Trump (and may explain the president's fawning behavior towards Putin) for his own purposes.

The report shows that Julian Assange is clearly not a journalist. The report derails how he coordinated his releases to damage the Democrats and actively promoted the theory that Seth Rich hacked the Democrats which he knew to be false.

Almost all of Trump’s terse answers (which are typically shorter than the questions) to Muller’s questions begin with or include “I don’t recall.”

The volume could live without the Washington Post commentary. The Introduction’s first sentence sets a tone for WP’s contribution by saying that the investigation was “born of” the president’s “rage”. True or not, this type of rhetoric does not match the purpose or the weight of this important work.

[Francesca Calarco · Rating 4 out of 5]

Perhaps the most important work I’ve read all year, The Mueller Report is a sobering account that I would recommend to any voting-aged American. Divided into two volumes, this comprehensive report examines Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election, as well as obstruction of justice committed by individuals related to the Trump campaign and presidency.

Reading and assessing a federal document is no simple task for most anyone in the general public. To best understand the report’s contents, I chose The Washington Post’s edition as it also included a detailed list of the players involved, a cohesive timeline, a glossary of legal terms, as well as other official documents with guidance on how they related to the Mueller Report. The Post’s guidance served well to contextualize, rather than editorialize, keeping in the spirit of Robert Mueller’s intention.

Volume I:

While I had seen the headlines on reports from U.S. intelligence agencies stating that the Russians interfered in the 2016 election, it was quite chilling to learn about the specifics, at least in the cases explored by the Special Counsel. Notable were the efforts of the Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian organization that has since been charged. The IRA mainly orchestrated a social media campaign, posing as American individuals to spread pro-Trump and anti-Hillary memes and groups. I hate to admit it, but I saw people I know post some of their generated anti-Hillary content on my own social media feed. They were horrifically effective.

Most daunting was how the IRA would pose as pro-Trump individuals to generate buzz for rallies, and then ask an actual American to host as they would not be present themselves. To perpetrate some of these activities, members of the IRA acquired American bank accounts under false identities for the sake of making payments for these purposes. A great deal of the early pro-Trump frenzy appeared grassroots oriented, and even if this report shows much of the blatant hate was artificially generated by a foreign agent, I can’t even say I’m happy given the outcome.

The other main case evaluated in Volume I was how the Russian federation's main intelligence directorate of the general staff (GRU) hacked members of the Clinton campaign. These were direct efforts taken by members of the Russian government, following Trump’s on air statement, “Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.” Trump never sat down to speak with the Special Counsel, but in his (aka: his lawyers’) written response, he affirmed that he made the statement, “in jest and sarcastically.” That said, the operatives of GRU did not get the joke, but I digress.

At the conclusion of this volume, no one affiliated with the Trump campaign was charged with committing illegal conspiracy or coordination with the Russians. While many in the media claimed this was a win for the country and that all should be happy the President did not outright commit treason, I feel this public claim to be a bit of a stretch (also, a really low bar—the lowest bar). Members of the Trump campaign (specifically Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner) were certainly guilty of wanting to commit a crime, but they were not charged due to difficulty of “proving willfulness” and in “valuing promised information.” Essentially, they were not charged because they were too incompetent to follow through on their intended crime, which was further compounded by the vagueness of their comprehension. Even if the Trumps never successfully “colluded,” the fact that it was stupidity that prevented the treason is in no way a win for the country.

What I was left wanting with this section, was more information on Trump and his business’ history of financial relationships with Russian entities. Given how fast and loose the president and his family plays with the Emoluments Clause, especially with promoting and favoring Trump hotels when conducting foreign business and travel, I feel that perhaps some of the redacted areas under “Harm to Ongoing Matter” may relate to this shadier element of the president’s personal conduct. But that’s a bombshell for another day.

Volume II

It is Volume II that contains the hottest tea (as the kids say) and most damning evidence against numerous members of Trump’s inner circle, including the president himself. In cases of white-collar crime, federal prosecutors rarely ask questions they do not already have the answers to. Why so many thought they could lie under oath is beyond me, especially folks with legal backgrounds and “expertise.” Stupidity and greed coalesce quite a bit in this one.

This section details the President’s conduct in the Michael Flynn investigation, the President’s firing of FBI Director James Comey, the President’s efforts to remove and/or impede the investigatory efforts of the Special Counsel, the President’s efforts to prevent information on the Trump Tower meeting from “leaking,” the President's desire for Attorney General Jeff Sessions to reverse his recusal (followed by bullying him into resigning), as well as the President’s conduct involving Michael Cohen (this is the section that indirectly involves Stormy Daniels). Overall, my takeaways from this was that Trump oversees a remarkably toxic work environment (though it is hard to feel bad for the shady figures who chose to associate with him), and that he really, truly has no understanding of the Constitution or law in general. That, or he simply does not care. Most damning though, is Robert Mueller’s final conclusion:

“Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgement, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intents presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgement. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President 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 judgement. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

This conclusion may seem a bit perplexing at first—Why wouldn’t you charge someone so clearly guilty?—but the assessment makes perfect sense in context when you understand that the Department of Justice (DOJ) falls under the federal executive branch of government. For a subset of the executive branch to pass a legal judgement on the head of the executive branch (aka: the President), they would inadvertently impede the President’s ability to lead and preempt the constitutional process for addressing presidential misconduct. In part, this dates back to a 2000 memo issued by the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) that a sitting President cannot be federally indicted.

More so, as outlined in the Constitution, the way to address presidential misconduct would be through impeachment proceedings instigated by Congress (the legislative branch)—so goes governmental checks and balances. The fact the Mueller clearly states that after their lengthy investigation, he was unable to exonerate the President (something the President would later blatantly lie about to the press and on Twitter), clearly shows that Congress has a Constitutional obligation to start impeachment hearings, at least in theory.

Will this actually happen? Well, no. I can definitely see why the more liberal freshman Congresspeople want to move on impeachment hearings, but I also understand Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s reasoning for choosing not to follow through. Even if the House (which currently has a Democratic majority) were to impeach the president, for him to be voted out of the office of president would require a 67% majority vote from the Senate, which is not going to happen because they have a Republican majority. Furthermore, partisan voting could create the visage of perceived innocence, which could hinder legal procedures taken against President Trump once he is out of office.

For anyone interested in learning more, Vox made a really thorough educational video on Impeachment and its history in the United States, as well as why no President has ever been removed from office by Impeachment. I know this was the dream for many in anticipation of this report’s release, and the outcome was not what most desired. Even if Congress does not act, the American voter certainly has an obligation to act come the general election in 2020. At the end of the day, the Special Counsel’s investigation led to 34 people being charged with crimes—26 Russian nationals, 1 Dutch National, and 7 U.S. Nationals (including Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Michael Flynn, Richard Pinedo, George Papadopoulos, Roger Stone, and Michael Cohen)—this reality is more than significant.

In conclusion, if you have an interest in this report—definitely read it. Even if you don’t, you could still get a copy to listen to on audiobook for free from your library—just throwing that out there. Rating such a document seems ridiculous, but I settled on 4 stars as there was a great deal of information redacted as “Harm to Ongoing Matter,” “Investigative Technique,” or “Grand Jury.” I would LOVE to know what these sections state and infer, though what we have for now is quite damning all on its own in my humble opinion. Either way, I have never felt more ready to vote come 2020, and I hope you do too.

[Nospin · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a great release of the Mueller investigation as it includes full background and cast of characters and timelines which are exceedingly useful to refer to.

The report itself is exceedingly well done and amply referenced. It lands on Congress for next steps.

I personally think he proved enough on Jr and Manafort working as Campaign Manager while passing campaign data to Russian after changing Ukraine policy at convention seems enough of a conspiracy to me. There's a lot of other interactions between Trump's campaign and Russians shown throughout and in detail.

[Bettie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Explore a detailed view of the Mueller report The Axios Visuals team pored over the Mueller report and categorized each passage of the text to note what events, people, organization and places are mentioned. We ended up categorizing over 2,500 bits of text, and found over 400 unique entities. How it works: Want to see how many times former White House counsel Don McGahn pops up? Or the part where Mueller tosses the ball to Congress? Use the search tool and you can find anything you need. This is a wonderful tool!

- Randy Rainbow Song Parody

[Josh Tandy]

Could have used an editor. Lot of Russian names, hard to keep track.

[Sandi · Rating 5 out of 5]

Below is a summary of what I read. I tried to be as unbiased as possible.

Volume I

Volume I investigated Russia's interference in the 2016 election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton as well as whether there was evidence that met the legal definition of a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. "Collusion" was not examined as it is not a crime.

There is overwhelming and undisputed evidence of Russia's interference in the election to hurt Hillary Clinton and, later, to benefit Donald Trump. This includes a covert and far-reaching social media campaign where Russian operatives posed as American citizens to organize grassroots events, shape public options, and purchase advertising that would hurt Hillary Clinton's campaign and form a negative narrative about her. This social media campaign reached many millions of people. The Russian interference campaign also included the hacking of DNC emails and the hacking of email accounts belonging to members of Hillary Clinton’s election campaign. These emails were later released by Wikileaks at strategic times to do the maximum damage to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

The special counsel did not find evidence that met the legal definition of a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. Some media speculation of their coordination was likely overblown. However, on many occasions, the Trump campaign was open and receptive to Russian overtures for election help. This includes multiple meetings between high profile campaign representives and Kremlin operatives including the infamous Trump Tower meeting which included Trump's son, son-in-law, and campaign manager who were there for the express purpose of seeking "dirt" on Hillary Clinton from Russia. This also included Trump publicly asking Russia to find Hillary Clinton's emails which was followed by attempted hacks by Russia the same day. Despite these interactions with Russia, Donald Trump and his sons publicly lied about not only their interactions with Russia, but also mocked those that said Russia was interfering in the campaign.

Further, Trump was convinced that Hillary Clinton's server had been hacked and personally ordered campaign aides to "find" private emails which he planned to make public. Trump adviser Roger Stone communicated regularly with Wikileaks and informed Trump about upcoming hacked email releases (hacked by Russia) before they were public. Trump was gleeful in response. When the hacked emails came out, he reported their findings multiple times daily at campaign rallies and in media interviews. Despite all of this, the special counsel did not find there to be a criminal conspiracy and also reflected on 1st Amendment rights when deciding against deeming this a criminal conspiracy.

Volume II

The Mueller Report outlines a comprehensive, and seemingly overwhelming case for obstruction of justice. At every possible turn, Donald Trump sought to impede the investigation and protect his own interests.

1. Trump used social media, interviews, and private pressure to get the Attorney General to unrecuse himself in order to protect him. When Trump was unsuccessful in doing so, he ultimately fired him and replaced him with an AG that he felt would end the investigation.

2. Trump threatened witnesses and dangled pardons to protect himself. He even went so far as to publicly call witnesses "rats" and threaten prosecution of their family members. He praised witnesses that remained "loyal" and refused to cooperate.

3. Trump launched a public and private campaign to get the AG to prosecute Hillary Clinton as well as members of the FBI who criticized him and opened investigations of him.

4. Trump tried very hard to fire the special counsel and was only unsuccessful because people refused to carry out his orders.

5. Trump refused to testify and told many lies in his written statement.

6. Trump tried to get the FBI Director to "let Flynn go".

7. Trump fired the FBI director and publicly stated that it was due to the Russia investigation. He told Russian officials in the White House that firing Comey "relieved a great pressure." He has not denied this.

The Mueller report expressly states that the sole reason Trump was not charged with a crime is his position as president. If it were not DOJ policy against charging a sitting president, it can be implied that Donald Trump would have been charged with Obstruction of Justice.


Presidential Powers

Some notes on the unique powers of the president if he is under investigation:

Unlike any other individual in the United States of America, the president has unique and far-reaching powers that protect him if he is under investigation. These include:

- control over the Department of Justice

- control over the Attorney General who ultimately decides whether a crime has been commited. He may replace the AG at any time if he so chooses.

- control over the Special Counsel who he may fire at will.

- control over the FBI Director who he can fire at will

- power of the pardon - the ability to pardon witnesses.

- executive privilege that means he can decline to make information available at any time.

- power over the judicial branch and the ability to choose judges who he deems favorable.

- influence power given his position and his ability to shape public opinion

- and ultimately, freedom from being charged with a crime due to DOJ policy against charging a sitting president.

[Lisa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Everyone needs to read The Mueller Report

[Daniel S. · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Mueller Report reads like All the President's Men meets the Keystone Cops.

While the Special Counsel ultimately concludes that no one in the Trump Campaign conspired with Russian agents during the 2016 election, it certainly wasn't for lack of trying. Time-and-time again, members and affiliates of the Trump Campaign reached out to Russian connections to try to obtain information that could be used against Hillary Clinton. They ultimately never succeeded, because at the end of the day, they were simply too incompetent to collude.

The most damning section of the report is Volume II, which discusses President Trump's numerous efforts to obstruct the investigation. The Special Counsel ultimately decided not to accuse the president of a crime simply because as a matter of constitutional law, the Special Counsel did not believe he was allowed to do so.

Nevertheless, a fair reading of Volume II can only support one conclusion: The President of the United States is a pathological liar who repeatedly attempted to thwart the investigation.

The President demands loyalty from those around him, but not to any office or set of values. The kind of loyalty the President demands is personal loyalty. The image that emerges from the Mueller Report is that of a president who has no concept of the value of truth. He rewards those who lie on his behalf and punishes those who refuse.

Ironically, those who protected the president from his own worst impulses by refusing to carry out his orders are the ones the president has fired or forced to resign. The more he surrounds himself with people whose loyalty to Trump exceeds every other personal value, the more he exposes himself to future prosecution once he is out of office.

If anything, the Mueller Report is warning that we are quickly approaching the Mad King stage of the Trump Presidency.

[Kasa Cotugno · Rating 4 out of 5]

I shut it down after spending an entire day "reading" the audio version, only to see that Kelly Ann Conway is ignoring a subpoena on 45's orders. I was mad before. I'm incandescent now. And I'm off to read something cheerful.

[Claudia · Rating 5 out of 5]

Tough to read, because the intended audience is NOT causal readers...this is a legal document with all the dryness and focus on details.

Even so, I interacted with the text, reading actively with my stickies and pencil. I may have written a bad word or so in the margins...

If Individual One and his campaign didn't collude (not a real word in law) or conspire, it's because they were too stupid. They were a bunch of Keystone Kops, looking potential leaders up on LinkedIn and Twitter. They googled because they were so ignorant of how to run a campaign.

Volume two lays out all the ways the Campaign and Individual One subverted justice and the intent of the law. Time and again...the pattern of this administration is to demand 'loyalty' and to do whatever Individual One wants..he truly wants his whims to be law.

This edition has the full text of answers (supposedly under oath) that Individual One wrote...or took dictation, or let Rudy just fill in the blanks for him. Over thirty times the man who brags about having a wonderful memory, wrote some variation of 'I don't remember.'

This administration is a horror...And nothing has improved.

[Read a Book · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's difficult to evaluate this fairly due to all of the hype and politicization of the issue. Take this review with a grain of salt.

While a tremendous wealth of information, much of it appears to be out of context or misleading. This could be because it IS misleading, or because critical comments in redacted sections inform further details.

Other sections are quite repetitive - you will have 'Trump Tower Moscow' tattooed on your brain by the end of the reading.

Some sections are solid nuggets of narrative - particularly those relating to the conduct of specific individuals. The specific subsections dedicated to them tend to be more cleanly written than others.

I also wish that the writers had spent more time clearly defining what evidence of each criminal charge would entail (what qualifies, what does not). Though they briefly go over this via legal jargon, it is not thoroughly unpacked. Hence, it is extremely difficult to draw an informed and agreeable conclusion despite the wealth of evidence.

The real concern is that the Report's readers will likely fall victim to confirmation bias by applying the evidence and narrative to fit their preconceived notions. Due to the sheer length of the Report, as well as the diversity of topics covered, there are few safeguards to such a separation of viewpoints.

[Budd Margolis · Rating 5 out of 5]

I do not expect many to change their minds by this thorough, professional and intense investigation but this document is a vital step towards restoring the American belief in justice for all. Special counsel Robert Mueller has had a most distinguished career as a decorated soldier and public servant ending his career as head of the FBI. What the report does is archive evidence and avoids traps which would prolong endless litigation. He was curtailed but navigated and the redactions which amount to 7.25% and mostly deal with the Russian investigation, among 14 ongoing investigations, shows the depth of the corruption which Trump encouraged if not directed himself. The Trump organisation is shown to be more like a mafia of idiots who created much of their own problems. Why Trump continues to deny Russia had anything to do with influencing the campaign continues to be a mystery as Volume One of the report clearly spells out the evidence and conspirators. proving the nexus or link to Trump is, at this time, hard. Much of the Mueller report is written in legalise and code it seems. The report states it was impossible to prove the Presidents innocence. Volume 2 deals with the obstruction of justice issues which point more precisely at the President. The investigation is historic in scope, charges, arrests & convictions which indicate the level of corruption the Trump campaign and WH team reached. Those who believe this investigation was politically motivated are in a world of delusional deception. Mueller in possibly his last posting, defended our constitution with great clarity, intellect, honour and integrity. I believe he deserves the medal of honour. Reading this in an ebook format makes it easy to check the thousands of references and to capture highlights. It is not a simple read and a week later we are still finding hidden gems. It is a legal work and the Wash Post adds much material which really provides a clear picture of the terms, personalities, laws and circumstances which have consumed the past 2+ years.

[Adam Brill · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bob Mueller is an anticlimactic narc. We've spent too much time fixating on whether Trump is guilty and not enough time being like holy shit the Russians systematically spread misinformation and there's literally nothing in place to stop them from doing it again ok I'm done with political posting

[Katie Nelson]

I’m not going to rate or review this one because of the political nature of this document. I am proud of myself for reading the whole thing and I believe that every elected official in our federal government should be required to read it.

[Bryan Craig · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is required reading. It’s important to set aside President Trump and AG William Barr’s assessment here and read this. Underneath the legalese, readers will find there is something here.

Mueller’s audience is not to the American people or Congress, but to the DOJ. Also, Mueller is a lawyer himself, so his style is setting up a legal argument. It makes it a tough read at times, but the message still remains important not to ignore.

The Russians interfered with our election. Clearly. Also, he does not exonerate the president in his conduct, and readers will see what actions Trump and his team did. This is just one quote that gets lost in the media: “Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including the Russian-interference and obstruction investigations.” (419).

[Laura L · Rating 4 out of 5]

Please read or listen to this report. Even with the redactions it is terrifying and damning.

It’s available for free on Audible.

[Donald Powell · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very long legal memorandum. History will judge this tome more than I can. Based upon the premise of the "Animal Farm" memorandum that a president cannot be charged with a crime, the analysis is a distortion of logic and misses the point. The effort was odd, with no deposition of the President and no enforcement of any effort to get to the truth of the Russians' connection with the President. The obstruction case is clear and yet the form, length and intellectual exercise of the report have oddly made it vanish from existence. We live in very odd times indeed.

[Tremayne · Rating 5 out of 5]

Robert Mueller and his team did a fantastic job providing a cogent and profound assessment of Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election. I find it so interesting that although they did not find him guilty, they also do not exonerate President Trump.

[Suzanne Zeitouni · Rating 4 out of 5]

Could have been a 5 if the juiciest parts weren't blacked out! Seriously, read the report.

[Gregg · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's okay. Somebody blacked out all the important plot points, but it still holds up.

[Juliana · Rating 4 out of 5]

A Confederacy of Dunces Goes to Washington, D.C.

[Rosemarie Donzanti · Rating 4 out of 5]

I decided to tackle the Mueller report because I wanted to formulate my own opinions about the investigation and the findings/recommendations. Relying on the media, especially single source interpretations of the data, is confusing, frustrating and self serving. If you decide to read, I recommend first reading the chapter intros, summaries, and recommendations. The detail between these are great references but very detailed and extremely repetitive. I did dive into the detail but I am going to go back and just focus on the higher level information. What did I get out of the report?... A foundation for formulating my own opinions on what I hear going forward. I ask a lot of questions when someone is telling or retelling a story because knowing if something in the telling is “fact” or “opinion” is so important. Both matter but it is critical to know the difference. A final thought...whatever you want to believe can be validated by reading the report, regardless of your political leanings.


“The IRA later used social media accounts and interest groups to sow discord in the U.S. political system through what it termed "information warfare”. Facebook estimated the IRA reached as many as 126 million persons through its Facebook accounts. In January 2018, Twitter announced that it had identified 3,814 IRA-controlled Twitter accounts and notified approximately 1.4 million people Twitter believed may have been in contact with an IRA-controlled account.”
― The Washington Post, The Mueller Report