It arrived late on a Sunday afternoon and it was a stunner.

After nearly two years of investigation, 2800 subpoenas, nearly 500 search warrants and

interviews with 500 witnesses, special counsel Robert Mueller had reached his conclusion.

He found no evidence that President Trump or anybody in his campaign conspired with the

Russians to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

So declared Attorney General William Barr in a TURSE 4-page letter to Congress.

Trump of course immediately proclaimed total vindication.

It was proof, as he had said over and over again, there was no collusion.

But there are questions, big ones that remain on the table.

On the other major issue, Mueller investigated whether Trump obstructed justice, the special

counsel reached no conclusion.

Really?

Mueller didn't recommend inviting the president, but he didn't exonerate him either.

Instead it was Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, both of them, Trump appointees,

who decided that Mueller's evidence did not add up to a crime that should be prosecuted.

How exactly did they reach that conclusion?

And why were they, and not Mueller, the ones who made the call?

The whole purpose of appointing a special counsel in the first place was to avoid any appearance

of conflicts of interest by political appointees.

And yet, at the end of the day, two political appointees, beholden to the president, made

what may have been the most consequential decision of Trump's presidency in Trump's favor.

We'll discuss what that means and where things go from here on this special episode of Skull

...