A daily roundup of the biggest stories in right-wing media.

Conservative media was abuzz over the New York Times’ report that Donald Trump Jr. had been told about Russian efforts to aid Trump in winning the election and Trump Jr.’s subsequent tweet of an email confirming the Times’ story. “There Is Now Evidence that Senior Trump Officials Attempted to Collude With Russia,” a National Review headline conceded. “The Russian investigation isn’t a witch hunt anymore, if it ever was,” National Review’s David French wrote. “It’s a national necessity.”

From the available evidence, it looks like Donald Jr., Paul Manafort, and Jared Kushner (the latter two were forwarded the e-mail chain and attended the meeting) attempted to cooperate in what they were told was an official Russian government effort to “support” Donald Trump. The meeting became meaningless to them only after it was clear that the Russian lawyer couldn’t deliver the goods. In other words, this isn’t the smoking gun that proves actual “collusion” with Russia, but rather evidence that Trump Jr., Manafort, and Kushner tried to collude with Russia.

Let’s define our terms. The word “collusion” doesn’t have precise legal meaning. It’s largely a political term that refers to claims and allegations that the Trump team worked in some way with Russians as part of the alleged Russian effort to elect Trump. In other words, to claim that Trump officials colluded with Russians is not the same thing as claiming that they violated the law. As with many political operations, including dealings with foreign governments, their actions can be unsavory without being illegal.

The Federalist’s David Harsanyi agreed. “It doesn’t matter if Rob Goldstone, the, um, colorful go-between, was lying about the source of the information,” he wrote. “Because the fact is that three trusted members of Donald Trump’s campaign—his son, son-in-law Jared Kushner, and then-campaign manager Paul Manafort—were willing to take a meeting with a foreign agent to see oppo research they assumed was passed on from another government. Which, aside from all other things, is inconceivably stupid.”

On social media, some conservatives offered various defenses of the campaign’s actions:

It's hard to take seriously the people saying @DonaldJTrumpJr committed treason when many of these same people think @xychelsea is a hero. — Josh Hammer (@josh_hammer) July 11, 2017

The Democrats are screaming TREASON! when Don Jr didn't even break basic law. — Bill Mitchell (@mitchellvii) July 11, 2017

Any pieces out there explaining why what the DNC did w/ the Ukraine gov't. is fine but what didn't happen w/ a Russian lawyer is treason? — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) July 11, 2017

The Ukraine story referenced by the Federalist’s Sean Davis—about efforts by Ukranian officials to provide opposition research about Paul Manafort to the DNC—was the subject of a Monday night segment on Hannity.

“Oh! They went to the Ukrainians—an outside entity, another country,” Hannity said. “Where’s the outrage over this?”

These responses dismayed conservative talk radio host Steve Deace, who shared his thoughts on Facebook:

[I]t started with there’s no evidence of collusion. Then we moved on to collusion isn’t criminal. Since Trump Jr. is now showing us evidence of the collusion, next we’ll transition to who wouldn’t want oppo research on their opponent? Even if it was offered by a hostile foreign country run by the former head of the KGB, who I’m sure is completely trustworthy and has know ulterior motives in sowing further dissension within the country? In fact, many of us are already there.

[W]hat threatens a free people is when they become so closely tethered/identified with their political class, that they debase themselves to participate in their corruption, hypocrisy, and lack of character. For if we are the people who vote these politicians in, and these politicians come from us, that means we have polluted our own water table at its source.

Townhall’s Guy Benson agreed:

I'm really bothered by some conservatives' embrace of a new standard under which 'if it's not a literal crime, it's NBD.' Really? 2/ — Guy Benson (@guypbenson) July 11, 2017

Would we accept this from the other side? Oh, HRC may have lied about Benghazi, and Lois about IRS targeting & Obama about healthcare... 3/ — Guy Benson (@guypbenson) July 11, 2017

...but that wasn't technically illegal (look at all this wiggle room!) so thats all a big nothingburger, you conspiratorial ingrates! 4/ — Guy Benson (@guypbenson) July 11, 2017

In other news:

Multiple outlets ran posts on NYPD officers turning their backs on New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio at the funeral for assassinated officer Miosotis Familia. “De Blasio has taken heat from police officers for his ambivalence over Black Lives Matter protests, as well as remarks he made in the wake of the Eric Garner incident,” a Fox News post read. Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association President Pat Lynch appeared on Fox & Friends to criticize de Blasio for flying to Germany to deliver a speech instead of attending a vigil for Familia.

NYPD PBA President Pat Lynch calls out Mayor de Blasio for trip to Germany after NYPD Officer assassination pic.twitter.com/ot3La1HZsM — FOX & friends (@foxandfriends) July 11, 2017

“Fellow police officers came out. The family was there standing with candles in silent prayer,” Lynch said. “He was protesting over in Germany.”

“[T]his has not been the first time cops have turned their backs on de Blasio,” Independent Journal Review’s Pardes Seleh wrote. “Dozens of NYPD officers turned their backs on his speech after the deaths of Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos, two cops who were fatally shot unprovoked on a Saturday afternoon.”