If you read the report,all of it, you will see that muller says he could not come out and say was guilty of obstruction because DOJ policy is that they don’t comment on the guilt of parties in cases where they can not file an indictment. It’s right there in black and white.You should stop assuming I haven't read it. I haven't read all of it, but I'm working on it.
Conspiracy to commit murder is pretty easy to prove. Plans, written statements, verbal statements... I know someone personally who conspired to murder her husband. She hired someone to do the job and planned everything. She was caught and will serve prison time until she's dead.
The thing about a president trying to stop an investigation because he knows he's guilty and aims to use his authority to stop it is a different thing. You have to know his state of mind - his intent. All facts point to Trump knowing he was not guilty of this and knew it was a burden on his presidency. Mueller could not come to his own conclusion that Trump actually committed obstruction. He passed the ball to congress. This has nothing to do with indicting Trump. It has to do with Mueller coming to a firm finding that Trump was, with absolutely certainty, guilty of obstructin. He could have still written that in his report even without an actual indictment. He chose not to.
So instead Mueller detailed the 10 instances that could meet the definition of obstruction. Then he provided an analysis of the evidence of each of those instances against the three necessary legal elements. Like I said, there were several that only met one or two of the elements. However, there were also several that mueller says met all three elemements. In other words, several cases that didn’t constitute obstruction and several that did.
BTW, I thought you said this wasn’t about intent