Collusion not a crime? True, but not exactly the point

WASHINGTON » President Donald Trump denies any “collusion” with the Russians, while his lawyer Rudy Giuliani said Monday that it’s not even a crime. Case closed? No. Giuliani is right that the term “collusion” isn’t a precise one when it comes to U.S. law. But that doesn’t change the potential legal fallout stemming from the Russia investigation, which could touch on laws against computer hacking, election fraud and conspiracy against the United States.

A look at the buzz term “collusion” and what we’re really talking about:

GIULIANI on Fox News on Monday: “I have been sitting here looking in the federal code trying to find collusion as a crime . ... Collusion is not a crime.”

TRUMP on Twitter on Sunday: “There is No Collusion!”

THE FACTS: Giuliani is technically right that election collusion isn’t a precise legal term. (While we’re at it, election “meddling” isn’t either.) The U.S. code mostly uses the term “collusion” in antitrust laws to address crimes like price fixing. But there are plenty of specific laws on the books that could apply if Trump’s presidential campaign is found to have collaborated with Moscow, including a conspiracy to defraud the United States. There are also laws against election fraud, computer hacking, wire fraud and falsifying records, if those apply. So far, special counsel Robert Mueller has accused the Russians of hacking into Democrats’ computers and stealing emails, as well as trying to stoke U.S. tensions before the 2016 election using social media. Mueller has already accused Trump’s former campaign chairman and another top aide of working as foreign agents for Ukrainian interests and funneling millions of dollars from the work into offshore accounts used to fund lavish lifestyles. Mueller might decide, for example, that a crime was committed if he finds evidence that an American was involved in the hack of Democrats, either by soliciting it or paying someone to do it.