Again with the twisted reporting? :doh
Lets look at the Guardian "quotes:"
So we have terms like collusion, contacts, links, etc., all words which mean different things, but all designed to make it sound like Trump and Putin were "collaborating" to steal the election.
Seems to me just more propaganda to feed the needy masses on conspiracy theory.
Contacts during a campaign can have many different purposes, usually seeking influence with the prospective candidate for some special interest or another. For example, in the case of the Russians who promised "dirt" on Hillary but only wanted to get their foot in the door to discuss restrictions on Russian adoptions. (BTW, finding "dirt" is a pretty standard campaign practice, as we can see with the DNC funding of that infamous "Steele Dossier.")
Yet many other's, like with the Russian Ambassador at campaign events are just normal examples of political schmoozing, much like any Capitol Hill dinner party.
I often wonder how many such "contacts, links, etc." the Democrats had during that same period and during prior elections...of course we have no sleuthing from our news agencies regarding those pillars of virtue, winners or losers.
IMO Trump's denials of "Russian contacts" were all about not having any that involved Russian's controlling or guiding his campaign
. Again "HYPE" to undermine a seated President.
IMO nothing to see here for those with an open mind folks. :coffeepap: