I'll add, that you can see this same hypcritical double standard in what evidence people are prepared to believe, and what their standards are for "evidence". If you are on team Hillary, the slightest rumour about Donald is worth retweeting/posting/speculating. And Hillary's scandals are partisan nonsense to be moved on from post-haste. And if you are on team Donald, visa-versa.
A small example, in this thread Josh says Hillary Clinton had no intent to commit a criminal act. An amazing conclusion for which we, or he, or anyone else, has no evidence. Timebandit says if there was a criminal offence committed by Hillary, the Republicans would have seen her charged, but the lack of charges proves it's time to move on. Sort of a postmodern take on absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.
Apply these same standards to the evidence for Russia gate, and what do you get?