So Trump’s campaign manager shuffling internal campaign polling data to a Russian Intel Officer (the Senate Intel Committee’s characterization, not mine), while Russian Intelligence is busy waging a directed psyops campaign against the American public, and then lying about it to the FBI is not evidence of collusion? Trump’s close associate Roger Stone had advanced knowledge of hacked DNC materials from Wikileaks and told Trump, but not the FBI, then lied about it to Congress. Not evidence of collusion? Trump’s son, son in law, and campaign manager met with a now convicted Russian spy in Trump’s house, who laid out terms for delivering materials damaging to Clinton - relaxed sanctions. Trump lied about this meeting’s existence to the American public. Not evidence of collusion?

To summarize:

Trump knew Russia was trying to help him. He knew they wanted to offer dirt on Clinton in exchange for better relations. The hacked information was indeed delivered, meanwhile Trump’s campaign was funneling internal data to Russian Intel, which was attacking The election. And surprise surprise, the Republican platform that year was softer on Russia than it ever had been in the last 40 years. Suddenly Republicans don’t care about Russian annexation of Crimea? For no reason at all?

No evidence? Really? Let me guess, you only read the Bill Barr memo, which a Federal Judge has noted seemed to be intentionally misleading of the Mueller Report. I guess you also haven’t read the Senate Intel report, which lays out 900 pages of evidence related to Russian interference of the 2016 election, and the Trump campaign’s entangled involvement with it.

Maybe you don’t believe they colluded, but let’s remember that the original, official Trump campaign line was that they had zero contacts and zero deals with Russia. This turned out to be a complete lie.