The investigation moves to the Capitol.
The investigation of Mr. Trump’s activities related to Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, including efforts to impede the inquiry, is moving from the executive branch to Congress, where the matter is anything but resolved.
Representative Jerrold Nadler, Democrat of New York and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, issued a subpoena on Friday, demanding that the Justice Department hand over the complete and unredacted version of the Mueller report and all of the underlying materials by May 1.
“Even the redacted version of the report outlines serious instances of wrongdoing by President Trump and some of his closest associates,” Mr. Nadler said on Friday. “It now falls to Congress to determine the full scope of that alleged misconduct and to decide what steps we must take going forward.”
Mr. Nadler has said it is too early to decide whether impeachment proceedings are warranted.
He and other Democrats criticized the attorney general for a sparse summary of the Mueller report favorable to the president last month and for publicly defending the president and making excuses for some of his actions during a news conference on Thursday morning before the report was even released.
Mr. Nadler said Mr. Barr is scheduled to testify before his committee on May 2, and he also has asked Mr. Mueller to testify no later than May 23. Mr. Barr said on Thursday that he had no objection to Mr. Mueller testifying.
Senator Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader, said in a Twitter post on Friday that the Mueller report shows how “dishonest” the president is.
Trump lashes out against “Crazy Mueller Report.”
In a pair of Friday morning Twitter posts, Mr. Trump criticized the special counsel investigation, led by Robert S. Mueller III, suggesting some of the material cited in the report was fabricated and accusing the special counsel investigators of being Democratic “Trump Haters.”
Mr. Trump sent the tweets from his Mar-a-Lago resort, where he is spending the weekend.
A day earlier, Mr. Trump and his supporters celebrated the investigation’s conclusions and the lack of criminal charges against him. On Thursday, Mr. Trump said he was “having a good day.” Ahead of an event at the White House for wounded troops, Mr. Trump said, “It’s called ‘no collusion, no obstruction.’ There never was, by the way, and there never will be.”
White House press secretary stands by her defense of Comey firing.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, defended on Friday a claim she made in 2017 that the White House had heard from “countless” people who worked at the F.B.I. who had lost confidence in James B. Comey, then the director.
During an interview with the special counsel that is detailed in the report, Ms. Sanders said her choice of words was a “slip of the tongue.” When investigators asked her why she repeated the “countless” claim — which reporters had questioned her on — in a separate interview, she said it was made “in the heat of the moment that was not founded on anything.”
In an interview with Fox News on Thursday night, Ms. Sanders said, “I used the word ‘countless,’ but it’s not untrue.”
On Friday, Ms. Sanders told ABC’s “Good Morning America” that “there were a number” of current and former members of the F.B.I. who agreed with Mr. Trump’s decision.
“It wasn’t a scripted talking point,” Ms. Sanders told ABC about her word choice. “I’m sorry that I wasn’t a robot like the Democratic Party,” she said.
The report’s release offers some answers but leaves many questions.
The Justice Department’s release of the report on Thursday elicited claims of validation from the White House and Democrats — and endless analysis of an unprecedented investigation into a foreign adversary’s efforts to influence American democracy and whether the president tried to obstruct justice.
Did Russia try to influence the 2016 presidential election? Yes, according to the special counsel team.
Did the Trump campaign criminally conspire with Russia to try to influence the election? No, the report found.
Did Mr. Trump obstruct justice? Unclear.
Attorney General William P. Barr said Mr. Mueller’s team did not make a determination about whether Mr. Trump obstructed justice, but he and the deputy attorney general did: “The evidence developed by the special counsel is not sufficient to establish that the president committed an obstruction-of-justice offense,” Mr. Barr said on Thursday morning before the report was released.
But the report itself, even with redactions, describes a much more complicated consideration as investigators struggled to determine whether a number of the president’s actions constituted criminal obstruction of justice.
“If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment,” the report said. “The evidence we obtained about the president’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred.”
Trump’s defenders focus on the roots of the Mueller inquiry.
Representatives Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows, two of President Trump’s staunchest allies in Congress, presented a two-pronged defense of Mr. Trump during an appearance on CNN on Friday morning.
They repeated the bottom line conclusions presented by Mr. Trump and Mr. Barr — no collusion and no obstruction — even though the report made clear that the Trump campaign expected to benefit from Russia’s election meddling.
And they attacked the origins of the special counsel investigation, echoing Mr. Trump’s comments on Twitter.
“What we have to understand is the predicate of this whole investigation,” Mr. Meadows said, suggesting that the officials who began and who oversaw the Russia investigation were anti-Trump. “To suggest that there was no bias at the predicate of this investigation is not accurate.”
Mr. Barr has said he will review the F.B.I.’s investigation of the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia, including whether there was any “improper spying” by American intelligence agencies. During the early days of his presidency, Mr. Trump accused the Obama administration of spying on him.
— Katie Benner