WATCH LIVE: House Grills FBI Director Comey On Trump-Russia Ties At 10 AM ET

It’s worth restating explicitly the mischief of ‘collusion’ that this inquiry is aimed at. Note that I’ve just written this in 5 minutes, so it will be likely be inadequate.

1. A foreign power cannot interfere with a US election.
2. Interference is not a legal concept. It is a basic political concept that our constitutional democracy must operate elections that wholly reflect the will of American citizens and not the will of a foreign power.
3. Interference is much more readily to be inferred if the foreign government in question is hostile to the USA. The Russian Federation is a such a hostile foreign power.
4. It follows that a presidential candidate must not invite, aid, encourage, or authorize such interference. (I would argue that this has already been established).
5. ‘Collusion’ occurs when the invitation to interfere occurs secretly.
6. Collusion need not involve a bilateral agreement. It can be unilateral, e.g., a general or standing promise to any foreign power that the foreign power will be rewarded should it interfere with the US election on behalf of the promisor (Trump).
7. Nor does collusion have to involve an express agreement or quid pro quo. Like any agreement, it can involve actions that result in a tacit or implied understanding that the foreign power should feel free to interfere in the election.
8. An express quid pro quo is not necessary, because a quid pro quo automatically follows from the invitation to interfere. Because, once the invitation has been received and accepted, the interfering power is in a position to demand favors in return on the threat of revealing the interference.

Harvard Law U.S. Attorney vs. actual cattle farmer.