There *is* a clearly defined fact-based evidence of what collusion looked like.
Ryan Bohl

So the “collusion” that we’ve been hearing about for the better part of a year was actually a conspiracy between Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer to have a meeting, but not exchange documents? That seems rather anti-climactic, no?

The issue is that nothing that you describe is unlawful. In fact, since the Cold War was not a declared war, this could not be “treason.” Not to mention that accepting opposition research relevant to a political campaign is neither “levying war” against the US, nor “giving aid or comfort” to an enemy state.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.