There was no collusion with Russia, as long as you ignore that, and that, and that, and that, and…

Oh. Okay. The recent addition to Trump’s eccentric stable of legal advisers - Rudi Giuliani - says there isn’t a stitch of evidence that Donald Trump colluded with Russia - even though Giuliani hasn’t seen any of Mueller’s information - so on his word, we can take that to the bank. After all, Don Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort’s meeting with at least 5 Russians on June 9, 2016, (in Trump Tower of all places) two of whom had known ties to Russian military intelligence, wasn’t collusion. Rob Goldstone who would also attend that meeting had even written in one of the earliest emails to Don Jr., quote "This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump." unquote. Plus the subject line of the email sent to Don Jr. and forwarded to Jared and Manafort states right at the top “Russia-Clinton-private and confidential,” so 'a confidential liaison with Russians and their government's support proves it wasn't collusion.

Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Russian lawyer who met with Don Junior and those other officials in Trump Tower, acknowledged on NBC news Friday, April 27^th that she is not just a lawyer but a source of information for top Kremlin official and confidante to Vladimir Putin, Yuri Y. Chaika, the prosecutor general…but of course, interacting with a self-admitted Russian government informant isn’t collusion.

President Trump concocted a cover-up story aboard Air Force One that Don Jr., Jared, and Paul were just meeting with the Russians to discuss a suspended child adoption program - which fell apart days later when Don Junior released the email chain showing it was a clandestine meeting with the Russians to get dirt on Hillary Clinton - but that doesn’t suggest collusion.

At a Wilkes-Barre, Pa campaign rally in October 2016, Trump quoted almost word-for-word from a supposedly recently recovered Hillary Clinton email regarding the Benghazi attack in 2011 that was posted on the Russian propaganda website Sputnik. The information was discovered to be a false story spun by Sputnik and upon exposure they immediately took it down. Trump never retracted his statement, but naturally, quoting from a Russian propaganda site wouldn’t be an act of collusion.

Michael Flynn violated the Logan Act by discussing the President Obama-enacted U.S. sanctions with Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak in several phone calls on Dec. 29, 2016, but that wasn’t collusion. Trump later defending Flynn for that very act and claiming he “didn’t do anything wrong” and “I would have expected him to do it” isn’t remotely collusion.

 Jeff Sessions having at least three discussions during Trump’s campaign with that very same Sergei Kislyak that he initially told a Congressional committee he “didn’t remember” isn't indicative of collusion.

Jared Kushner contacting Kislyak in December 2016 to see if members of the Trump administration could use the Russian embassy’s communications to contact the Kremlin instead of using U.S. services can’t seriously be mistaken for collusion.

Also, Jared having - what the White House described as - a "relationship meeting" with Sergei Gorkov, president of sanctioned Russian bank VEB in mid December 2016 as part of Trump’s efforts to establish a back channel to Putin, could never be confused with collusion.

President Trump meeting in the Oval Office with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and ambassador Sergei Kislyak, then banning any U.S. media from covering the occasion but allowing a TASS photojournalist unlimited access, giving away highly-classified intelligence from Israel to the Russians during that meeting, and bragging about his firing James Comey the day before got rid of “the Russia thing,” would NEVER be misconstrued as collusion.

Felix Sater, a Trump business associate who boasted of connections to Vladimir Putin, sent back and forth emails to Michael Cohen about a Trump Tower Moscow project and that Donald Trump had personally signed a letter of intent for it in October 2015, contradicting his repeated assertions that he has had no business dealings in Russia. But plainly, no one would accept THAT as collusion, would they?

The distinction in Giuliani’s mind is, everyone in Trump’s campaign, transition team, and his administration, DID interact with the Russians, but since Trump doesn’t know what the word collusion means, how can he be guilty of committing it? Besides, he can’t remember doing any of it, or hearing about any of it…ergo...there wasn’t any collusion. Whew, there you have it, the guaranteed "not a stitch" of evidence as Giuliani interpreted it., Everybody's innocent. Case closed.