0 convictions. 0 evidence that Trump's campaign colluded with any illegal interference. And most of Russia's "interference" can hardly be pinpointed as malicious obstruction of the democratic process when examining only the action in itself. For example, why is the release of confidential democrat E-Mails meddling in the election? Would it still be meddling if they had released them without the intent of giving Trump a benefit? Would the democrats have denied the opportunity if they had the chance? And russian associated groups are free to post propaganda wherever they want. Just as anybody else is. Sure, the accuracy to which it was done is impressive, but can still hardly be called illegal. On that note, couldn't receiving endorsements from basically all leaders of all western nations be considered meddling as well?