Trump accepted help from a hostile foreign power, lied about it and obstructed justice

"what difference does it make at this point?"

Exactly what "devastating and damning content" are you talking about? The report that conclusively proves no one connected with the Trump campaign colluded or conspired with Russia? That one? Or the report that concluded there wasn't enough evidence to indict Trump for obstruction? Or would it be the opinion of the Attorney General - the only opinion that truly matters here - that there was no obstruction?

Exactly what is either "devastating" or "damning"?

It has enough evidence to prosecute, but as I'm sure you are aware it is against the policy of the DOJ to prosecute a sitting president, so the report presents the evidence and the congress must decide what to do with it.

Bullshit answer is bullshit.

I quote Attorney General William Barr :

"The Special Counsel's decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel's office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel's obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president"

No, there is not enough evidence to prosecute.

I don't care what your delusional, cry-baby liberal ass wants to imagine, that is the fact of the matter.

I respectfully disagree with AG Barr's decision to reach such a conclusion. If the DOJ guideline is not prosecute a sitting president then you can't reach a conclusion one way or the other. This means the only remedies for Presidential Conduct are up to Congress. Mueller presented the facts, now Congress decides what to do about it. Incidentally the Mueller report was only concerned with Russian interference in the election, so other matters like hush money to a prostitute and the emoluments clause are not covered.

This is different than the situation in which we had special prosecutors such as Kenneth Starr who saw it to be his duty to recommend or not recommend impeachment. Mueller was not a special prosecutor.

Btw, you made a pretty good logical argument, not sure why you resorted to name calling at the end. I strenuously disagree with you, but don't feel the need to do that.

Who gives a flying f**k what you think?

The Attorney General of the United States issued the ONLY opinion that matters.

If you can't understand that, then quite literally you are too stupid to have this conversation.

Okay, I tried to have a civil conversation with you, but that's not possible, so good-by

Now we know in addition to being so f**king stupid it's painful, you are a liar as well. This is why patience is a virtue - I see you have commented more after saying you are leaving.

I guess it goes to show you are too f**king stupid to know what good bye means. That means I was right - you are too stupid to have this conversation.