Mycroft, you belong on the CT forum.
Mueller does not need a lawyer, nor is he corrupt, you're smokin' something.
Declinations (exoneration) and prosecutions are functions of scope (of mandate), they are the default objectives in all investigations, to either clear or indict, the target(s). Scope ( of mandate ) has to do with the type of investigation(s) that is being assigned to the SC.
The "mandate" is not about who gets the report, file that in the self-evident truth file. But what of it? To say so is meaningless.
All SC investigations are declinations decisions or prosecution decisions. IN this special case, because an indictment of the prez is not possible, it shifts to declination or roadmap for impeachment by Congress. That was the determination by Mueller. HE did not state it, specifically, but if you read the report, one must ask oneself, "who is this report communicating to?". If it is to the general public, and all of the A) B) C) components of obstruction law, as they relate to each obstruction item described ( and there are many ) this type of detailed description would not be necessary. But, if it were for congress, information the can use to make impeachment determinations, then it makes sense.
Both were provided in volume's 1, and II, respectively.
Declination is an exoneration ( more or less, depending ). This is the default to execute the mandate,i.,e determine if decline or prosecute.
Therefore, to assert "Mueller NEVER had the mission of exonerating Trump", is a pointless statement.
Also, those who assert "the Mueller investigation was a failure", fail to grasp the simple fact that all investigations start with probable cause, then an investigation to determine declination or prosecution.
Either outcome means the investigation was successful.
Those who say "Mueller is out to get Trump", are dullards and do not understand what an investigation is for.
