ramage wrote: No I did not read the New Yorker article, it is behind a firewall. Please expand on it otherwise your comment is, as I posted, not understandable.
The ball is in Congress's court, as per the Constitution.
"If we had had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so," Mueller said. "We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. The introduction to Volume Two of our report explains that decision. It explains that under longstanding department policy, the president can not be charged with a federal crime while in office -- that is unconstitutional -- even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view."
"Charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider," he also said.
“There were multiple systematic efforts to interfere with our election and that allegation deserves the attention of every American.”