fast they made that decision and how they did it. as we know, the attorney general did not receive the mueller report until friday afternoon. so he was able to take all of the evidence that robert mueller laid out on both sides of the obstruction argument for charging for obstruction and not. these difficult issues he talks about in this letter. and they were able to decide less than 48 hours later that there was no obstruction. and, of course, this now makes sense why reporters have been told over and over again this weekend that rod rosenstein was in the room. because i don't think that the attorney general wanted to have this decision squarely upon his shoulders. he does give us some insight, however, into how he made this decision. one thing he considered, he said they considered the intent with respect to obstruction, and they decided that there was not intent, because there was no underlying crime related to russian election interference. that's something we've talked about a lot with legal scholars on our network about the fact that it can sometimes be difficult to charge obstruction when there's no underlying