I'm not clear what you are saying.
Trump has denied collusion with the Russians 105 times (
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.acda71932350)
Don Jr. said the meeting was about Russian adoption
Kellyanne Conway denied the Trump campaign had links to Carter page
Hope Hicks denied Trump officials met with officials from the Kremlin.
Kellyane Conway said that no one from the campaign met with anyone from Russia who hoped to meddle in the election.
Reince Priebus denied they had any contact.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders said no contact took place.
Sean Spicer said there was no contact.
Don Jr. denied meeting with Russians about the campaign.
But then emails showed that the meeting Don Jr. claimed was about Russian adoption actually was billed as a meeting with compromising information about Clinton.
Cohen says there was a strategy meeting prior to this meeting with the Russians which included Trump.
And now Giuliani says that "collusion is not a crime".
So for two years we have heard every denial in the books about how "there is no collusion", "fake news" and "witch hunt". But now it seems that both Cohen and Manafort are going to confirm that there was in fact collusion, and Giuliani is tasked, not with denying that, but with saying "collusion is not a crime".
We know the Russians hacked the election, we know that this involves a number of crimes (hacking, election fraud, defrauding the American public, etc) and we now have evidence of a conspiracy with the Trump campaign. So what is the defense now? Let's play the name game. Yes, conspiracy to commit a crime is a crime, aiding and abetting a fraud is a crime, obstruction of justice is a crime, but since we haven't used the term "collusion" well, I guess Giuliani is confused.