The main conclusion is a very good one for President Donald Trump: Mueller found that neither Trump nor anyone in his campaign interacted or coordinated with the Russian Government to help him win the election, according to attorney General Bill Barr's assessment of Mueller's report.
In short: We know a hell much more about what Mueller found – and what it all means for Trump and the country – than we did a week ago. Or even three days ago, when Barr acknowledged that Mueller had completed his investigation and submitted it. But there are also a number of issues left over – about the Mueller report itself, why so many people in Trump's circles lied about their interactions with the Russians and whether we would ever hear from Mueller.
Below are the nine most urgent unanswered questions.
Why did Mueller not personally speak to Trump?
The question we still do not know the answer to whether Mueller was fully satisfied with Trump's written reply or whether he would like to follow up with a personal interview. And if the latter is true, Mueller simply didn't mean that Barr and / or Deputy Attorney Rod Rosenstein would have signed it?
Will we ever see Trump's written answer?
Will we ever see the full Mueller report?
It is the second part of this quote that gives plenty of room for interpretation. As Barr later states in the letter, he believes there are parts of the Mueller report that cannot be legally released. He also added that he still "needs to identify any information that may affect other ongoing issues, including those that Special Counsel has referred to other offices."
Given all that, it is unlikely that the public will ever see the entire Mueller report. The question is, how much does Barr hold back – and why. For his part, Trump said Monday afternoon that the release of the full Mueller report "wouldn't bother me at all."
Why did Mueller punt on obstruction and left the decision to Barr?
] In Mueller's report he wrote the following about the question of whether Trump prevented the probe in Russian interference: "While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it does not release him either." By choosing not to offer any definitive conclusion on whether Trump prevented justice, Mueller knew that he left the issue to Barr, who as a citizen in 2018 had written a note in which he did so that Trump had not actually prevented justice when it came to the firing of former FBI director James Comey. Wrote Barr:
"Mueller should not be able to demand that the president submit to an interrogation of alleged obstruction. If this department is captured, this theory will have potentially catastrophic consequences, not only for the presidency but for the management industry as a whole. and the department in particular. "
During his confirmation negotiation, Barr sought to downplay the import of the note – insisting that at that time he was a citizen without access to the full facts of the case and that his point was a narrow, legal one. Nevertheless, Mueller had to know when he left Barr's obstruction decision that AG was very likely to choose not to pursue it.
(One possible explanation of why Mueller did what he did is that he simply has no evidence of a reasonable doubt, and aware that he was dealing with the president of the United States, simply did not want to push the envelope – left that decision to the highest law enforcement official in the country.) 
Why did Barr choose to include and directly quote Mueller on the "not exonerate" line of obstruction?
This one is complicated. Barr, a Trump employee, is well aware that he is considered by many Democrats as a Trump Protector – some chairman put the job to make sure nothing attached to the Mueller probe ever came to the oval office. Barr also knows that at the special law of law, he is the gatekeeper of all the information that Mueller collected during the 22-month survey, and as such he will be heavily investigated for what he authorizes to be release and more importantly what he Dont do.
And then Barr will send a very clear signal that he does not overturn the scales when it comes to what he included in his summary of the Mueller report. So yes, the big headline is that Mueller did not state that there was coordination or coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. But Barr also quotes directly from Mueller when it comes to the issue of obstruction – isolates himself from accusations that he protects Trump against hard conclusions by the specialist adviser.
Has Mueller uncovered any evidence of the interaction?
Trump and his administration immediately confiscated Barr's summary of the Mueller report by insisting on his often repeated claims that "NO COLLUSION" had been proved. And he's probably right! But that's not what Barr said. Barr quoted from the report saying "[T] that his investigation did not show that members of the Trump campaign conspired or co-ordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
There are differences in some threads that may indicate the interaction and the ability to establish conversations beyond reasonable doubt. In fact, there is a relatively wide gap between these two things. So did something that Mueller showed up fall into that hole? If so, what?
Why were there so many contacts between the Russians and the Trump campaign if there was no cooperation? And why did so many suffer from them?
Why didn't they succeed if they failed to protect a broader collaborative effort? Perhaps keeping investigators away from other crimes not related to Russia's interference efforts in the 2016 campaign. Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort ended up being sentenced for economic crimes in connection with his contacts with the Ukrainian government.
Or maybe the people Trump attracted (and attracts) were simply as comfortable lying as telling the truth. Despite Trump's repeated claims, his campaign (and his administration) was not exactly the best and clearest minds in the political and legal worlds.
Will we ever hear from Mueller even though the report?
How much of the Steele dossier was confirmed by Mueller? And what parts?
We testify that Comey and others had the Congress's testimony that the Ministry of Justice had confirmed some elements of the case composed of the former British spy Christopher Steele. (Fusion GPS's opposition research efforts were initially paid by a conservative news center, but later funded by Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee.) But what parts of the dossier that the Justice Department confirmed to be true, we never knew. Did Mueller's results confirm parts of Steele's dossier that the original FBi study did not? Again, if so, which parts?
Although the Steele dossier has become a political football – and the most tasty parts of it have never been confirmed – it is still one of the most important documents in this study. So, how true is that?
How useful was the collaboration between former Trump partners such as Flynn, Gates and Cohen for the Mueller study?
The Special Council's office and the Southern District of New York cared for each of these men – and more – for believing that they used information they and they alone had to catch larger fish in the operation. But now the Mueller study is over, and none of those supposed to be "bigger fish" – Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner – has been charged or will be charged.