Democrats continue to ignore the lack of evidence to support their Russian collusion theories

Jonathon Turley:

...
This week, I was live on MSNBC’s program when I was cited in a presidential tweet about collusion. President Trump quoted my previously stated view on Fox News that I remain “skeptical” about the collusion theories advanced by critics and that I find these theories “implausible based on the evidence” currently available.

MSNBC host Ari Melber immediately disagreed and said I was assuming that the absence of evidence means that a case could not be made. Putting aside that I expressly referred only to the known evidence and left open the possibility of new evidence, the exchange reflects a common disconnect in the analysis of collusion theories. Critics of the president seem more than willing to speculate on highly attenuated evidence of some criminal conspiracy but refuse to acknowledge the continued absence of any direct or even plausible evidentiary basis for collusion.

The fact is that the Russians did not have to collude to achieve their purpose of disruption and influence. Russian intelligence is not known to run “colluders” in carrying out secret operations and rarely expose their operations in gratuitous meetings. Collusion theories tying Donald Trump to a Russian conspiracy remain the case of the dog not barking.
...

Of the 100 charges filed by Robert Mueller in his investigation not one of them alleges collusion by anyone.  None.  Neither Mueller or the FBI or the proponents of the Steele dossier have found evidence to support such an allegation.  Nothing was turned up in the spying on Carter Page that would support it.

Trump opponents appear to be living in a fantasy world at some point.  They are like the kid whose parents got tired of him pestering them for a horse who gave him gift-wrapped presents of horse poop to shut him up and he instead goes tearing through the house looking for the horse responsible for the poop.