Wow.
https://www.oakridger.com/zz/news/20190420/how-legal-dispute-drove-end-of-special-counsels-probe
Key part is on obstruction and interview of POTUS
“That wasn’t the only disagreement between the attorney general and the special counsel - Mueller’s report features a lengthy pushback against a legal theory of obstruction advocated by Barr.
As a lawyer in private practice last year, Barr wrote a scathing memo critical of what he viewed as Mueller’s overly broad interpretation of a part of the federal law against obstruction, saying it was meant to be limited to very specific acts such as destruction of documents.
“It is inconceivable to me that the department could accept Mueller’s interpretation,” Barr wrote. “It is untenable as a matter of law and cannot provide a legitimate basis for interrogating the president.”
At the time, Mueller’s team was pressing for an interview with the president, and Barr’s memo argued forcefully that no interview was justified because of what he viewed as Mueller’s erroneous, overly broad view of the obstruction law.
In what is arguably the most technical and dense section of the report, Mueller’s team pushes back hard against such arguments, saying the law in question is broad and “captures corrupt conduct, other than document destruction, that has the natural tendency to obstruct contemplated as well as pending proceedings.”
