The author of last year's biggest bombshell political bestseller claims in his new book that Special Counsel Robert Mueller drafted a three-count obstruction of justice indictment against President Donald Trump but decided not to pursue it.

Michael Wolff's first anti-Trump tome, 'Fire and Fury,' largely fell apart under the withering eye of fact-checkers and his own admission that he included stories he believed were untrue.

A week before book number two, 'Siege,' hits stores, Mueller's spokesman Peter Carr – known in Washington mostly for holding his tongue – says flatly that its marquee claim is false.

Wolff writes that his claim is 'based on internal documents given to me by sources close to the Office of the Special Counsel.'

The Guardian reported Tuesday that it has seen them. But Carr insisted in an email to DailyMail.com that '[t]he documents described do not exist.'

An author claims in a new book that Special Counsel Robert Mueller considered charging President Donald Trump with three felonies but decided against moving forward with an indictment after it was drafted

Michael Wolff, the author of 'Siege,' says he has the draft indictment but Mueller's spokesman tells DailyMail.com that such documents 'do not exist'

President Trump has seen no practical legal consequences from the 22-month-long Mueller probe; the special counsel cleared him of colluding with Russians to swing the 2016 election and concluded nothing about whether he obstructed justice

'Fire and Fury' has sold nearly 5 million copies. The coming controversy over Wolff's next bombshell will likely drive a new flurry of book buying among anti-Trump partisans intent on seeing the president denied a second term.

Wolff's new book will provide explosive fodder for anti-Trump partisans but also will reignite controversy about his own methods

The Justice Department and its sub-agencies like Mueller's office operate under the guidance of an opinion from Office of Legal Counsel that it would be illegal to indict a sitting president.

Wolff writes that Mueller's team anticipated pushback against its three criminal charges, writing a legal memorandum in opposition of a courtroom motion to dismiss them.

He claims that Mueller's draft indictment included charges of obstructing justice, witness tampering and retaliating against a witness.

Wolff, according to The Guardian, writes that the draft indictment covers Trump's actions beginning 'on the seventh day of his administration, tracing the line of obstruction from National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s lies to the FBI about his contacts with Russian representative[s], to the president’s efforts to have [FBI director] James Comey protect Flynn, to Comey’s firing, to the president’s efforts to interfere with the special counsel’s investigation, to his attempt to cover up his son and son-in-law’s meeting with Russian governmental agents, to his moves to interfere with Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe’s testimony.'

And it hinged on Mueller's belief, according to Wolff, that Trump went to 'extraordinary lengths ... to protect himself from legal scrutiny and accountability, and to undermine the official panels investigating his actions.'

After 22 months of investigating Russia's efforts to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Mueller delivered a 448-page report to Attorney General Bill Barr that doesn't mention any deliberations about whether he had the legal authority to charge President Trump with a crime.

Because his team took for granted that indicting Trump would go nowhere, they didn't make any effort to discern if he engaged in criminal activity. That makes it difficult to understand how a draft of a charging document might have existed.

Mueller ultimately exonerated Trump and his campaign of claims that they had colluded with Moscow and its agents to impact the election's results.

But he left open the question of whether Trump had obstructed justice, laying out nearly a dozen events that could become the basis for a case if the Justice Department were to pursue one.

Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller in 2017, jointly determined that the evidence wasn't strong enough to sustain a charge.

Mueller's office operated under legal guidance that stated a sitting president couldn't be indicted, so his team made no effort to determine whether Trump committed a crime; that's difficult to square with Wolff's claim that a draft indictment sat on his desk for a year

Congressional Democrats have taken steps to reopen that question through a handful of aggressive investigations, which Trump is dismissing as an unfair attempt at a 'do-over.'

Wolff will find himself facing renewed questions about his methods when 'Siege' is published on June 4.

His first Trump book included a prologue that stated: 'Many of the accounts of what has happened in the Trump White House are in conflict with one another; many, in Trumpian fashion, are baldly untrue. These conflicts, and that looseness with the truth, if not with reality itself, are an elemental thread of the book.'

'Fire and Fury' included lengthy quotations from private conversations, reported in a way that left readers wondering how Wolff obtained them. He also freely described the thoughts and feelings of people he wrote about.

President Trump claimed last year that it was '[f]ull of lies, misrepresentations and sources that don’t exist.'

White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders called the book 'complete fantasy and just full of tabloid gossip.'

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the legendary Vogue editor Anna Wintour were among famous names in 'Fire and Fury' who said Wolff's stories about them were 'absurd,' 'untrue' and 'preposterous.'