The information vacuum inside Russia controversy

Put aside, for a moment, the raging controversies over this or that aspect of Donald Trump, the Russians, and the election. And then ask: What do we know about the allegation at the heart of the matter: Did Trump, his campaign aides, or his associates collude with Russians to influence the 2016 campaign?

The answer is, we know nothing. After all the investigating, after all the talk, after all the yelling — the public knows nothing. There may be people at the highest levels of U.S. government secrecy who know the answer, but even that is not clear at the moment.

The most definitive statement of the current situation came Sunday on NBCs “Meet the Press.” James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, admitted that he does not know of any evidence that proves collusion, or even points toward collusion.

“Does intelligence exist that can definitively answer the following question, whether there were improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian officials?” NBC’s Chuck Todd asked Clapper.

“We did not include any evidence in our report ... that had anything, that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians,” Clapper answered. “There was no evidence of that included in our report.”

“I understand that, but does it exist?” asked Todd. “Not to my knowledge,” said Clapper. “If it existed, it would have been in the report?” asked Todd.

“This could have unfolded or become available in the time since I left the government,” Clapper responded. “But at the time, we had no evidence of such collusion.”

Remember that Clapper was head of national intelligence until Jan. 20. There have been reports the Trump Russia hacking investigation was going on last summer, that it accelerated in the fall, and that it has been moving along ever since. So Clapper was there for most of the investigation. And he says he knows of no evidence of collusion.

Other government officials who know less than Clapper — but who should still know something — are in the dark. On Feb. 27, Republican Rep. Devin Nunes, who is the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said, “We still have not seen any evidence of anyone that’s — from the Trump campaign or any other campaign, for that matter, that’s communicated with the Russian government.”

What all that suggests is that there is an information vacuum at the core of the Russia election controversy. Everybody is talking about things they don’t even know happened.

The vacuum has not stopped President Trump’s accusers, who are suggesting there is incriminating evidence of collusion the public has not seen. “There are transcripts that provide very helpful, very critical insights into whether or not Russian intelligence or senior Russian political leaders — including Vladimir Putin — were cooperating, were colluding, with the Trump campaign at the highest levels to influence the outcome of our election,” Democratic Sen. Chris Coons told MSNBC Friday. “I believe they exist.”

The problem, for Coons, and other Democrats, is that his belief might not be based in fact. On Saturday, Coons’ office released a statement saying he did not mean to suggest “that he is aware of transcripts indicating collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.”

Recently an anonymous Washington politico told Axios’ Mike Allen of the Russia election case, “This is the rare case where the smoke IS the fire.” That’s clever, but no, the smoke is not the fire. The fire is the fire. And right now, no one seems to know if there is any fire at all.