Since Your Humble Blogger took the opinion that we shouldn't make assumptions about the Mueller report until it was complete, perhaps there's an obligation now, even though it isn't entirely out, to make some assumptions. Or at least observations.
First—while I am surprised, honestly, that the investigation was able to conclude that Our Only President's campaign refrained from active co-operation with Vladimir Putin's attempt to subvert the democratic process, it is clearly a Good Thing. I will note that the conclusion is really only that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute, not that such co-operation never happened, but it seems to me that if there was active co-operation, there would be enough evidence that Mr. Mueller would not just shrug and give up looking for more. I don't actually know anything! But what seems likely is that there was no organized or even acknowledged and condoned activity by the campaign to abet the extensive covert attacks by a foreign nation. And that's great! It would be very bad if a successful—or for that matter an unsuccessful Presidential campaign actively aided a foreign attack on our nation. I'm glad that didn't happen.
It doesn't even appear that the campaign as such was aware of the extent of the attacks—I mean, lots of people seem to have been aware that there was “meddling“, but it's plausible that they thought it was mild stuff, a kind of ratfucking or dirty-tricks set of pranks. And the campaign, both as an organization and as a collection of individuals, acted irresponsibly in closing their eyes to that stuff, even if they weren't properly aware of the rest of it. And it's far more outrageous that the Administration—that the Government of the United States of America—has taken the position that this foreign assault wasn't anything to worry about, eve after the extent of it was revealed, presumably because this time it happened to be on their side. But as far as the time leading up to the election, when active co-operation with our own law-enforcement would have been essential, they may well not have known that it was a big deal. So that's all right.
The other aspect, of course, is that Our Only President used his position to obstruct the investigation into the attack, not (it seems) because of any guilt on that matter but because he is a crook who chose to surround himself with crooks, and also because he appears to view any investigation into him and his associates as inherently illegitimate, and I think because his instinct in all cases is to lie and threaten, rather than co-operate, even if co-operation could be to his advantage. Mr. Mueller seems (we of course only have the Attorney General's word for this, but Mr. Mueller has had the opportunity to deny it, if this were an outright lie) to have decided that this obstruction is not obviously and unquestionably illegal. And it's worth saying that he knows the law and Your Humble Blogger does not. I am absolutely willing to posit that the obstruction is not a criminal violation, while it is also (in my strong opinion) a clear danger to the country, a betrayal of the President's duties and an impeachable offense. But that is outside Mr. Mueller's brief, and he seems to have correctly chosen not to stray from that brief.
But—and after five hundred words, I am finally getting around to my point—the most important thing is that the investigation occurred and was completed, despite constant interference at the highest level. This is a great moment for our country, while of course also being a low point and an international disgrace. And Our Only President, again, has entirely the wrong attitude. He has said that no President should ever again be investigated in this way, which is, in my opinion, the reverse of the lesson of the Mueller Report. The lesson is that serious allegations against the President and his associates should be investigated, and investigated seriously, and that we should know whether those allegations are true or false. The President must follow the law, which means that we as a nation must be able to oversee whether the President is following the law—which means that sometimes we must investigate the innocent in order to know whether or not they are innocent. Which is why we must respect the rights of people who are under investigation, or even have been charged with crimes, because some of them will be innocent. That applies to Presidents and streetwalkers and CEOs and border-crossers and hoodie-wearers and protesters and shotgun holders. It applies to allegations of collusion with foreign nations to undermine American democracy and allegations of shoplifting, allegation of terrorism and allegations of trespassing, allegations of murder and allegations of mopery. That's the rule of law.
I am proud to live in Mr. Mueller's America. I may not be entirely pleased with the report (when and if I get to see some significant parts of it) but I am pleased that we as a nation investigated the President and made conclusions based on evidence. That's what should happen, for this President and for the next one that has such serious allegations made.
Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,