Well, we don't have it yet, so it's hard to say for sure. And I'm skeptical about the framing and tone of the summary letter Barr wrote – I'm sure it contains only true statements, but isn't the full Mueller report supposed to be hundreds of pages long? I don't think a summary this simple would do it justice unless Mueller decided it was important to waste people's time – remember, a lot of people were anticipating a short, 10-20 page document that would require Congress to compel testimony extracting more details.

Here's my guess: we should be slightly surprised. Not, ya know, super duper surprised. The report has some pretty good news. No coordination – I'm sure that's an accurate headline for the report, at least in part. And we should all remember why anyone even cared to ask – we saw him, on television, encouraging Russian spies to hack Clinton's emails and release more damaging stuff, and we know from the President's own son's Twitter that Russian agents used the promise of damaging information for Clinton's campaign to arrange a meeting – a meeting whose goal it was to undo the sanctions we put in place after they started murdering lawyers who questioned their regime (among many other offenses). We know both sides wanted to make a deal. They said so, and they showed up to the table to talk.

They didn't make that deal, it seems, which is a massive relief. Of course, given the public facts, it's unlikely there was no wrongdoing uncovered. It's Trump – flip over a random stone and you'll find wrongdoing. It is baffling optimism to say Mueller wouldn't have noticed impropriety.

And that's the tricky part about this conversation. The best way to read the Mueller report is to assume he's a professional, to take his lack of finding evidence for something as good evidence it didn't happen, and to respect his analysis of standard investigatory legal issues. The dude is a pro, which is why I'm so glad he didn't find anything indicating a tacit or explicit agreement between our current president and one of America's biggest geopolitical rivals to subvert US law – a lazy investigator or a stooge would find nothing, yes, but in a way that gives me almost no information at all.

But it turns out that one question isn't the sum total of everything he learned. He was tasked with investigating the topic, and indicted a surprising number of people. Trump's campaign manager is probably going to die in prison. There's no triumphalist shouting that doesn't make me more interested in all the other things the investigation found. And I don't know what those things are. At the end of the day, the most interesting elements of the report are still private – they likely detected not just wrongdoing, but crimes, very important ones given how they sought the cooperation of many of the people who ended up indicted. I just want to know what they learned, in those conversations. Trump's personal career isn't nearly as important as answering questions about what happened, when, where, and why. Don't get me wrong, my relief is sincere – but that's only about Trump, not about the improper influence people like Micheal Cohen were openly selling. There were so many bad actors, we miss something important noting only that Trump's misbehavior wasn't criminal.