What’s your standard of evidence? Do the recent Dutch revelations do anything for you?
I’m not really sure what you’re claiming. Are you denying that there were ongoing contacts between members of the Trump campaign and the Russian government, or just that the members of the campaign that have pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about those contacts were trying to cover them u?
If the former, why would the the people being charged acknowledge that they had such contacts? If, as you seem to imply, the only crime was a misstatement of facts to the FBI, which is what they’re pleading guilty to, what are they getting out of the deal? They’re already pleading guilty to the worst charge you think they could be found guilty of, so what are they getting in exchange for going along with a story that is, by hypothesis, false?
If the latter, where prior to the guilty pleas did they acknowledge the contacts? The senior campaign staff repeatedly denied any contact between members of the campaign and the Russian government. If that was the party line, is it really plausible that when Papadopolous and Flynn lied to the FBI about their contacts with the Russian government, they did it by accident?
As for underlying crimes, both Flynn’s and Papadopolous’ contacts could well have been criminal independently of their having lied about them. Assuming that they were, we would be seeing basically what we’re seeing now: pleas to lesser charges in exchange for their continued cooperation. The fact that they’ve only been charged with the lesser offenses isn’t evidence that no more serious offenses were committed.