Accordingly

I don't think I have ever used the word "accordingly" before in my life.  But it is a major buzzword in the Mueller Report, and describes a conclusion.  Again, some of these are in the negative. Here are the occurrences of it.

Accordingly, while this report embodies factual and legal determinations that the Office believes to be accurate and complete to the greatest extent possible, given these identified gaps, the Office cannot rule out the possibility that the unavailable information would shed additional light on (or cast in a new light) the events described in the report.

Accordingly, the Office did not charge any Campaign associate or other U.S. person with conspiracy to defraud the United States based on the Russia-related contacts described in Section IV above.

Accordingly, taking into account the high burden to establish a culpable mental state in a campaign-finance prosecution and the difficulty in establishing the required valuation, the Office decided not to pursue criminal campaign-finance charges against Trump Jr. or other campaign officials for the events culminating in the June 9 meeting.

Accordingly, the Office concluded that the evidence was insufficient to prove that Sessions was willfully untruthful in his answers and thus insufficient to obtain or sustain a conviction for perjury or false statements.

Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

Accordingly, determinations on intent are frequently reached without the opportunity to interview an investigatory subject.

Our investigation accordingly did not produce evidence that established that the President knew about Flynn's
discussions of sanctions before the Department of Justice notified the White House of those discussions in late January 2017.

Accordingly, the President accepted the recommendation of his Deputy Attorney General to remove James Comey from his position."

The evidence accordingly indicates that news that an obstruction investigation had been opened is what led the President to call McGahn to have the Special Counsel terminated.

Accordingly, since no established principle of interpretation would exclude the presidential conduct we have investigated from statutes such as Sections 1503, 1505, 1512(b), and 1512(c)(2), we proceed to examine the separation-of-powers issues that could be raised as an Article II defense to the application of those statutes.

Accordingly, because the separation-of-powers question is "whether the removal restrictions are of such a nature that they impede the President's ability to perform his constitutional duty," a restriction on removing an inferior officer for a corrupt reason-a reason grounded in achieving personal rather than official ends-does not seriously hinder the President's performance of his duties. 

Accordingly, based on the analysis above, we were not persuaded by the argument that the President has blanket constitutional immunity to engage in acts that would corruptly obstruct justice through the exercise of otherwise-valid Article II powers.
Accordingly, the President has no reason to be chilled in those actions because, in virtually all instances, there will be no credible basis for suspecting a corrupt personal motive.
Accordingly, the President's conduct of office should not be chilled based on hypothetical concerns about the possible application of a corrupt-motive standard in this context.