...1) what are the specific laws that Trump is alleged to have violated and 2) what is the evidence in support of same? Further, why hasn't he been charged?

I'll even make it even easier for you. Let's leave the legal aspects out of this since there's obviously no case. Let's just talk about "collusion". Answer these questions for me:

-- What is the definition of "collusion" in this case?
-- Exactly what are you alleging Trump did? Be specific -- dates, locations, actions.
-- Did he ask for Russian help in winning the election?
-- Whom did he ask for help? Be specific.
-- What sort of help?
-- Was it provided?
-- How was it provided?
-- When was it provided?
-- Did he offer anything in return?
-- How do you know that?
-- What did he offer?
-- What was his means of providing it?
-- Did he provide it?
-- How did he provide it?
-- When did he provide it?
-- How do you know that?

That's 16 questions off the top of my head, and I bet you can't answer a single one.

As for attacking a source, of course I can attack a source. I can't attack their facts, but I can absolutely attack any subjective conclusion they draw. For example, if they say Trump flew to Moscow on January 18, 2021, and they have the flight receipts to prove it, then I can't use their bias to challenge that fact. On the other hand, if they then say they conclude Trump visited in order to "collude with Russia" -- i.e., a subjective opinion -- then I can absolutely point out that their political bias calls into question their conclusion. That doesn't disprove their conclusion (nor is that my responsibility), but it does cast doubt on it.
[Post edited by Los Angeles Hoo at 01/18/2021 4:50PM]