Barr definitely put his own spin on the report with his initial statements on the "principal conclusions".
It's accurate to say that Mueller declined to accuse the President of obstruction of justice, but he goes out of his way to explain that he did not think he should do so even if the evidence warrants it. He offers:
1) OLC guidance against indicting sitting President
2) Sealed indictment might leak
3) Might interfere with Congress's ability to hold the President accountable
#3 is pretty key, and I think Barr's response to this question this morning is significantly misleading:
Reporter: "Did the special counsel indicate that he wanted you to make the decision or that it should be left for Congress? And also, how do you respond to criticism you're receiving from congressional Democrats that you're acting more as an attorney for the president rather than as the chief law enforcement officer?"
Barr: "Well, special counsel Mueller did not indicate that his purpose was to leave the decision to Congress. I hope that was not his view, since we don't convene grand juries and conduct criminal investigations for that purpose. He did not -- I didn't talk to him directly about the fact that we were making the decision, but I am told that his reaction to that was that it was my prerogative as attorney general to make that decision."
Clearly the reporter doesn't mean that Congress should decide whether DOJ indicts the President. The question was whether Mueller intended for Congress to determine whether and how to hold the President accountable for obstruction of justice. There's evidence in the report that Mueller thinks that's the preferable alternative given the constraints he listed out.
All that being said, no, there's no slam dunk. Nobody in the Senate is going to suddenly want to convict after impeachment based on this report. Mostly it's stuff we already knew.
