Care to guess...

[_MeDotOrg]

For the same reason that they no longer care about rape allegations against Kavanaugh, perhaps?

Mueller's authority for the investigation is to examine Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections, including exploring any links or coordination between Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and the Russian government, "and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation".

So 'collusion' is only one aspect of the Mueller investigation, whose primary purpose is to investigate Russian interference. Part of the investigation having to do with the GRU operatives outside the jurisdictional reach of the US has already been shown in the indictment of those foreign nationals. We know that there is a pretty compelling electronic case against the Russian operatives outside the US. We just don't know if, when and how there may have been coordination with anyone inside the US.

Do a lot of Democrats speculate that there was collusion? Yes. But I think by this point in time, having Democrats scream "Collusion!" while Trump screams "No collusion!" isn't really going to move the needle much in either direction right now. I think we'll know a lot more in the weeks following the election.

Fabrications, whether made up about Kavanaugh or solicited about Mueller, should be condemned. They demonstrate a lack of faith in the processes of democracy. There will be investigations into both.

[_Dr Exiled]

Exiled, you live in another universe divorced from reality. Clinton is the only candidate who could have lost to Trump? Did you forget she got the majority vote by 3 million

Yup. Trump was not the choice of most Americans who voted.

... and the only reason she lost was the Comey letter?

Given the huge impact of that letter at a crucial moment very late in the campaign, and the very small margins by which some key states were lost to Trump, I'd say that absent the Comey letter she would probably have won.

So, not Russia, but her use of a private server to hide what she was doing led to her loss?

Also, let's not forget that Sanders would have won going away.

[_subgenius]

Exiled, you live in another universe divorced from reality. Clinton is the only candidate who could have lost to Trump? Did you forget she got the majority vote by 3 million

Yup. Trump was not the choice of most Americans who voted.

This is an ignorant view for how President is elected.

... and the only reason she lost was the Comey letter?

Given the huge impact of that letter at a crucial moment very late in the campaign, and the very small margins by which some key states were lost to Trump, I'd say that absent the Comey letter she would probably have won.

this really contradicts your previous ignorant sentiment about popular vote, yet its not smarter. The only silver bullet for Hillary's loss was Hillary.

[_DoubtingThomas]

...why Democrats aren't campaigning on Russian collusion?

and when is Hillary Clinton getting arrested?

[_Gunnar]

For the same reason that they no longer care about rape allegations against Kavanaugh, perhaps?

The focus on opposition to Kavanaugh should always have been on his well corroborated record of lying under oath before congress, attested to even by his republican colleagues and duly reported to Chief Justice Roberts.

Unfortunately and scandalously, Conservatives don't care about perjury when it is committed by one of their own.

Unfortunately, it’s only atypical for conservatives to suborn perjury in confirmation hearings, not to passively accept it. Conservatives have been accepting perjured testimony from favored nominees at least since the time of William Rehnquist, who lied about two matters in 1971 and again in 1985: his involvement in voter suppression efforts in Arizona in the 1960s, and his intellectual authorship of a memo written for Justice Robert Jackson, 1952 opposing the unanimous decision in (Rehnquist could not deny writing the memo, but claimed — against all evidence — that it represented Jackson’s views, not his own. New evidence of Rehnquist’s views in 2012 further undermined his claim).
But conservatives have really outdone themselves this time, since the example Mystal called attention to is just one of at least five examples that have by now come to light. In fact, Mystal himself called attention to another one, also raised by Senator Leahy:

[_subgenius]

...why Democrats aren't campaigning on Russian collusion?

and when is Hillary Clinton getting arrested?

probably not soon enough, but Repubs arent exactly shying away from her like Democrats are from "Russia!"...ya know, kinda the point here.

[_Chap]

Exiled, you live in another universe divorced from reality. Clinton is the only candidate who could have lost to Trump? Did you forget she got the majority vote by 3 million

Yup. Trump was not the choice of most Americans who voted.

This is an ignorant view for how President is elected.

Nope. It's simply a true statement of fact. Most Americans who voted did not want Trump.

... and the only reason she lost was the Comey letter?

Given the huge impact of that letter at a crucial moment very late in the campaign, and the very small margins by which some key states were lost to Trump, I'd say that absent the Comey letter she would probably have won.

this really contradicts your previous ignorant sentiment about popular vote, yet its not smarter. The only silver bullet for Hillary's loss was Hillary.

Nope again. We all know that it is not enough to win more total votes than your opponent in a Presidential election: you have to get them in the right places. If Clinton had won a few more votes in crucial states, she would have won. The Comey letter is acknowledged to have had a big negative impact in the last few days of campaigning, and without it she might have got those few extra votes.

I agree that the Clinton candidacy was not an ideal one - but the Trump candidacy was just as bad, if not worse.

[_subgenius]

Nope. It's simply a true statement of fact. Most Americans who voted did not want Trump.

But it is an irrelevant fact, especially in the context it was posted.

If Clinton had won a few more votes in crucial states, she would have won.

This is basically true for every election loser.

The Comey letter is acknowledged to have had a big negative impact in the last few days of campaigning, and without it she might have got those few extra votes.

Nope, it is arguable speculation that has been long since dismissed....while it may have been a contributor, its influence was negligible....in other words, without the letter, she still would have lost.

I agree that the Clinton candidacy was not an ideal one - but the Trump candidacy was just as bad, if not worse.

Worse is a matter of opinion, the results are a matter of fact.

[_DoubtingThomas]

probably not soon enough, but Repubs aren't exactly shying away from her like Democrats are from "Russia!"...ya know, kinda the point here.

probably not soon enough? Hahahaha!

[_subgenius]

probably not soon enough, but Repubs aren't exactly shying away from her like Democrats are from "Russia!"...ya know, kinda the point here.

probably not soon enough? Hahahaha!

yet, still not an answer why the lack of 10 foot pole touching for - "Russia!".