On Election Night 2016, former US Ambassador Michael McFaul sent a sarcastic tweet "congratulating"

[Tommy_Carcetti]

...the Russian government on their victory.

For months prior, McFaul had been targeted ruthlessly by online Russian trolls and propagandists who were making no secret about the fact that Russia was doing all they could to throw the election for Trump.

Bottom line: Of course there was collusion.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Of course there was "collusion."

The question we're waiting to have answered by Mueller and maybe other prosecutors is whether those acts of collusion also constituted prosecutable conspiracies, because they aren't the same thing. If it's determined that Mueller won't/can't prosecute Trump for the crime of conspiracy, either because he didn't find evidence sufficient to establish proof beyond a reasonable doubt of an underlying crime, or (more likely) because he will observe the old OLC opinions that a sitting president can't be indicted, there is still the political fallout from all that collusion.

Maybe Trump might be able to say "No indictable conspiracy!" but "No collusion!" - not so much.

[fountainofyouth]

2. "Collusion" isn't necessary for the story to make sense

Russia and Trump both independently benefited from the interference. An approving nod from a distance was all that was needed to keep it going.

[UniteFightBack]

3. It was so obvious that rump was repeating RT himself...they came out with something and he was

fucking saying it a short time later.