To collude is to make secret agreements, and in this present political milieu it reminds of behind the door type of bargaining, trading favors.
In business practice, this is not much of a eye-raiser, but in terms of commingling of political and business
interests, it is strictly a matter of potential criminal illegality.
The trend of late, at least from the 1960’s onward, for the legal system, generally, is to liberalize interpretation of the black-letter of the law, by using what they call policy consideration, so as to account for the changing public sentiments which have changed.
This is at the bottom of the Kavanough Supreme Court nomination fiascal, he is a presumed ultra conservative, and there are people in Congress, Republicans for the most part, who don’t care a bit about a Democratic take over, because they know, if there is an earth shaking issue between the parties, and it reaches the Supreme Court, the matter will be disposed favorable to the Republicans. This is a mileau, which cares more about interpretation then tacit, under lying agreement.
I think that’s the tactical workings of it.
But it’s a lot more to this tactic, it presumes a centered position, which folds back to an initial position of a middle , centrist ground, to which the reactionary republicans want to steer the U.S. back, which ostensibly would create a collusion between an internationally tacit agreement, looking like a present international consensus, and if it succeeds, the present administration can view this as a successfully presenting an Independent form of governance, which has changed the meaning and scope of Judicial and Executive governance.
Congress , sandwiched between the two, would be demeened to the role of a kind of institutionalized rubber stamp.