Despite President Trump's bipolar take on the issue this week, the facts clearly show that Russia meddled in the 2016 election.

While the breadth of the attack was rather substantial and focused heavily on Democrats, there is still no proof that actual votes were changed. Even if that appalling suggestion were a reality, the impact on the election as a whole would be nearly inconsequential. Of course, this doesn't mitigate the serious nature of election tampering. At the very least, we should work to strengthen the system.

Still, those with a deep hatred for the 45th president make the jump from established facts to conjecture very quickly. Namely, that Russian meddling in the election automatically means that vote results were different than they would have been and Hillary Clinton, the runner-up in one of the most divisive elections in American history, was robbed of the presidency. Furthermore, they absolutely contend that there was known collusion between Trump, his team, and Russia.

[Also read: Trump diagnoses the haters with 'Trump Derangement Syndrome']

As someone who voted third-party on Nov. 8, 2016, I have no political skin in the blame game. Most of all, I'm concerned with the truth. As it stands right now, the meddling that we know took place did not sway the outcome. On top of that and at present, there is no evidence of known collusion.

Just this week, we've seen how difficult it is for the president to admit that election interference occurred. On Monday, while standing next to Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump insisted that Russia had not tampered with the election. Only 24-hours later, he changed his tune entirely and backed away from his previous declaration.

It is deeply frustrating (and if we're being honest, dangerous) for the president to have made such statements. However, it is also highly inappropriate for members of the media and others within the political sphere to insist that this ego-driven impropriety is anything else. Some view what occurred on Monday as confirmation of long-held suspicions regarding collusion. They may believe and want that to be the case, but the evidence just does not line up with their wishes.

When individuals make this claim I do want to ask them, "Have you seen the president?" Regardless of which political side your feet come down on, it should be relatively easy to admit that Trump's narcissism is one for the record books. He routinely boasts of his own brilliance, forethought, and prestige. One of his favorite topics of conversation is his dominance over the "fake news" media. Do you really believe a man who is so self-obsessed could keep from mentioning his ingenuity when it comes to throwing a presidential election in his favor? Would he actually be successful in keeping details of his involvement under wraps? This is a man who can't resist flaunting himself. If he were involved in a crime to bring about the biggest upset in political history, he'd be the first one to tell us.

His faux pas on Monday, egregious as myself and others have said it was, does not point to a bigger scandal. His about-face, as irritating and inelegant as can be, reveals nothing of depth, either.

You don't have to be a staunch supporter of Trump to recognize the legitimacy of his presidency. You also don't have to approve of his behavior these past few days in order to conclude that collusion didn't play a part in his victory.

To some of the bigger players, that Trump was not involved in the Russian plot to influence the election is more disappointing than if the opposite were true. An organic victory after eight years of Barack Obama is too great a sting. A real estate magnate turned reality star beat the woman the Democrats had anointed.

At least with collusion, things make sense. With no proof of collusion, they're left with emptiness and loss. And those are far greater hurdles to overcome than anger.

Kimberly Ross (@SouthernKeeks) is contributor to the Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential blog and a senior contributor at RedState.com.