--- title: The Significance of Mueller's Testimony on Obstruction description: Special counsel Robert Mueller didn't bring conspiracy charges, but it may be because of the obstruction he encountered. canonical: https://time.com/5635276/mueller-testimony-obstruction-conspiracy-analysis/ author: Joyce White Vance article:opinion: true article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2019-07-25T23:56:00.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-02-24T00:05:01.963Z article:section: Ideas og:title: This Might Be the Most Important Part of Mueller's Testimony og:description: It's worth paying attention to his exchange with Congresswoman Val Demings. og:url: https://time.com/5635276/mueller-testimony-obstruction-conspiracy-analysis/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltc8203e81a03b3e05/698a0068656a3f38d5bd8a22/robert-mueller-testimony-analysis.jpg?branch=production&width=1024&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 1024 og:image:height: 576 og:image:alt: Robert Mueller Congressional Testimony Analysis og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: This Might Be the Most Important Part of Mueller's Testimony twitter:description: It's worth paying attention to his exchange with Congresswoman Val Demings. twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltc8203e81a03b3e05/698a0068656a3f38d5bd8a22/robert-mueller-testimony-analysis.jpg?branch=production&width=1024&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # This Might Be the Most Important Exchange in the Mueller Testimony > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: August 2026. ## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=d2ecc9e4-52b1-4a47-8632-40f92628e3dc&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### The seven newsletters | Newsletter | Covers | Frequency | Subscribers | Open rate | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily | 540,000 | 45.6% | | Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | 430,000 | 50.7% | | Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Daily | 240,000 | 54.1% | | Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Tuesday and Saturday (2x per week) | 40,000 | 31.7% | | D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Monday to Saturday (3x per week) | 85,000 | 37.0% | | Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) | 40,000 | 34.2% | | In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) | 25,000 | 28.6% | Source: TIME, August 2026. Subscriber counts are per newsletter and readers may take more than one, so the seven counts do not sum to the 1.1 million+ unique newsletter audience. ### Key data points | Metric | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 | | Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 | | Highest open rate | 54.1%, Health Matters | TIME, August 2026 | | Largest list | 540,000, The Brief | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Publishing since | 1923 | TIME | ### TIME Newsletters: key statements * Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read. * All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=d2ecc9e4-52b1-4a47-8632-40f92628e3dc&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). * The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, health, culture, and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=d2ecc9e4-52b1-4a47-8632-40f92628e3dc&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What newsletters does TIME publish? TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (daily health), Worth Your Time (culture, twice weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, three times a week), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers. #### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to? It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters. #### Are TIME's newsletters free? Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent. #### Who writes TIME's newsletters? TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk. #### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter? Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement.  by [Joyce White Vance](https://time.com/author/joyce-white-vance/)  ## Joyce White Vance Jul 25, 2019 11:56 PM UTC  Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller makes an opening statement before testifying to the House Judiciary Committee about his report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election in the Rayburn House Office Building July 24, 2019 in Washington, D.C. Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller makes an opening statement before testifying to the House Judiciary Committee about his report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election in the Rayburn House Office Building July 24, 2019 in Washington, D.C. Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images  by [Joyce White Vance](https://time.com/author/joyce-white-vance/)  ## Joyce White Vance Jul 25, 2019 11:56 PM UTC Yesterday, America saw [hearings](https://time.com/5629528/robert-mueller-testimony-live-updates/) on the two volumes of the Mueller Report. First, House Judiciary took up the analysis of potential obstruction of justice charges in Volume II. In the afternoon, the Permanent Standing Committee on Intelligence considered the Trump campaign’s relationship with the Russian government and Russia’s ongoing threat to our elections. Although two separate hearings took place, it would be a mistake to consider the issues they raised in isolation from each other. Mueller’s now well-known legal conclusions were (1) that he had insufficient evidence to charge a conspiracy between any members of the Trump campaign and the Russian government and (2) that DOJ policy prevented him from making a charging decision about a sitting president so he would simply lay out his evidence for 10 potential instances of obstruction of justice by the President. The report suggests, and Mueller’s testimony yesterday made clear, that there is an important interplay between the government’s inability to charge a conspiracy and obstruction of justice. Obstruction of justice is a crime that is independent of any underlying or substantives crime that may have been committed. It is well-established that defendants can be charged with obstruction when they are not being charged for any other crimes. This is so, as Mueller stated in his [May 29, 2019 press conference](https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/special-counsel-robert-s-mueller-iii-makes-statement-investigation-russian-interference), because, “\[w\]hen a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation, or lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of the government’s effort to find the truth and hold wrongdoers accountable.” Mueller’s testimony yesterday highlighted the connection between obstruction and collusion. When he discussed his decision not to indict a conspiracy, he did not characterize it as one made because there was no evidence. It was because he did not have _sufficient_ evidence – in other words, enough evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. There was plenty of evidence of connection between the campaign and Russia, ranging from shared internal polling data to Trump’s request that Russia find Hillary Clinton’s emails to the appearance of the top tier of Trump’s campaign team at a meeting explicitly requested so the Russian government could provide election help to “Mr. Trump.” Mueller had plenty of smoke, but he lacked a smoking gun. During the morning session with the Judiciary Committee, Congresswoman Val Demings, the former police chief of Orlando, questioned Mueller about witnesses [who lied to investigators](https://thehill.com/homenews/house/454519-mueller-agrees-lies-by-trump-officials-impeded-his-investigation). He told her that they fell along a spectrum from witnesses who did not tell the whole truth to “outright liars.” Demings asked whether this impeded the investigation and Mueller said he generally agreed. This is the exchange we should be focusing on. > [](https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1154050132947718144) Although Mueller was constrained from offering a prosecutorial judgment on obstruction, [more than 1,000 former federal prosecutors](https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1), Republicans and Democrats, from across multiple administrations have opined that if Trump were not a sitting president, he would have been indicted for his conduct. Now take the obstruction committed by the president, amplify it with the witness problems Mueller reported, and consider what that means in regards to Mueller’s conclusion he lacked sufficient evidence to charge a conspiracy. Mueller actually did that assessment for us. In Volume I of the report, p. 10, he reveals that some witnesses used the Fifth Amendment to avoid testifying, while others lied or offered incomplete testimony. Still others destroyed evidence. He concluded, “while this report embodies factual and legal determinations that the Office believes to be accurate and complete … given these identified gaps, the Office cannot rule out the possibility that the unavailable evidence would shed additional light on (or cast in a new light) the events described in the report.” In the low-key fashion we have come to expect from the former special counsel, this is an acknowledgment that obstruction may well have impacted investigators’ inability to charge conduct that the public has watched unfold over the last two years. Did the President’s obstruction and the obstruction of those around him keep the truth from coming to light? Was there a conspiracy? The short answer is, we don’t know for sure. There are, at least so far, no tapes like the ones that came out of Richard Nixon’s office. The publicly available information makes it look like misconduct was committed, but Mueller determined he came up short on the technical legal requirements for charging. We are left to ask whether this is how an American president should behave. Are we comfortable with a president who believes the public should be kept in the dark? Trump didn’t sit for an interview. He didn’t give full responses to written questions. Is that a commitment to justice and truth? Is that upholding the oath of office? Prosecutors left a roadmap for Congress to use to try to answer those questions. During yesterday’s hearings, a number of Republican members were outraged by what they called Mueller’s unprecedented decision to “not exonerate” the President on obstruction. They argued it was not a prosecutor’s job to exonerate. But the situation Mueller faced is not one federal prosecutors typically encounter because the main tool in the prosecutor’s toolkit, bringing charges via indictment, was not an option here. The steps Mueller took were only unprecedented because he was in uncharted territory with a sitting president – the only person in our system of justice who cannot be indicted – who went to great lengths to try to keep the truth from being uncovered during a criminal investigation. Not only did the president decline to be interviewed or provide full answers to many of the written questions posed to him, he tried to fire the special counsel and tried to cover up his directions to White House counsel Don McGahn in that regard, he tried to persuade then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to “unrecuse” from the Russia investigation and limit its scope so that his own campaign would be excluded from its reach, and he encouraged key witness like Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn and Michael Cohen to remain loyal to him, not to cooperate with prosecutors. Prosecutors didn’t have a binary choice between charging and not charging when it came to Trump. The choices were, don’t charge, as with conspiracy, or don’t charge but lay out the evidence that makes clear that that decision, while compelled by DOJ policy, was not an exoneration. As we continue to review Mueller’s testimony, determine what it means and what should come next, it’s critical that we focus on the seriousness of the evidence in Volume I of the report regarding the multiplicity of contact Trump and his campaign had with the Russians and the open arms with which they accepted Russian activity designed to turn American voters toward him. Mueller wanted focus on his conclusion that it was not possible to exonerate the President on charges of obstruction. As Ohio Republican Mike Turner pressed him near the end of the Intelligence Committee hearing on whether DOJ had the power to exonerate people and whether it was appropriate for him to say that the investigation had not exonerated the President, Mueller suddenly pushed back. He told Turner that he included his conclusion on the lack of exoneration in the report because the Attorney General might not know this was their conclusion and “he should know it.” Mueller was not writing a report for the public. He was writing the confidential report to the Attorney General that the special counsel regulations called for. The Attorney General ignored Director Mueller’s conclusion. In fact he navigated 180 degrees from it to declare that the investigation had given the President a clean bill of health – no collusion, no obstruction. But that is not the case in either regard, and in fact, it may be that it was the obstruction that led to the absence of conspiracy charges. We would do well to take Mueller’s unheeded warning to the Attorney General to heart as we move forward. ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"OpinionNewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/5635276/mueller-testimony-obstruction-conspiracy-analysis/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/5635276/mueller-testimony-obstruction-conspiracy-analysis/"},"headline":"This Might Be the Most Important Exchange in the Mueller Testimony","datePublished":"2019-07-25T23:56:00.000Z","dateModified":"2026-02-24T00:05:01.963Z","description":"Special counsel Robert Mueller didn't bring conspiracy charges, but it may be because of the obstruction he encountered.","url":"https://time.com/5635276/mueller-testimony-obstruction-conspiracy-analysis/","keywords":["mueller report","Robert Mueller","special counsel"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltc8203e81a03b3e05/698a0068656a3f38d5bd8a22/robert-mueller-testimony-analysis.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Joyce White Vance","jobTitle":null,"url":"https://time.com/author/joyce-white-vance/"}],"articleSection":"Ideas","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltc8203e81a03b3e05/698a0068656a3f38d5bd8a22/robert-mueller-testimony-analysis.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"Robert Mueller Congressional Testimony Analysis","caption":"Mueller Testifies On Investigation Into Election Interference Before House Committees","creditText":"Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/ideas/","name":"Ideas"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"/tag/mueller-report/","name":"mueller report"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/5635276/mueller-testimony-obstruction-conspiracy-analysis/","name":"This Might Be the Most Important Exchange in the Mueller Testimony"}}]}] ```