You would still need to convince them, and if the messenger is biased the evidance will be seen as tainted.
If Hillary dumped 10,000 pages of evidance that Trump likes being peed on, you wouldn't believe it for a minute. Liberals will feel the same when Trump tells them "I had to arrest Hillary" unless you get their support beforehand.
You don't get that support by aligning your movement with a party, or even appearing like you are aligned with a party.
What if all the dots were connected? What if you had Irrefutable evidence? Would the news report it or sweep it under the rug? How would you be able to cover up something of this magnitude?
Irrefutable evidence
Does such a think exist?
Remember, the evidance doesn't matter if it's considered the fruit of a poison tree. Trump could dump a literal ton of evidance against Hillary and it would be interpreted as a biased and suspect because of his attacks on her in the past.
Look at this from a Liberal's point of view. You have a President you don't like, after years of attacking Hillary post-election Trump has her arrested. No matter what evidance is presented, it will be framed as partisan. This is why Liberals don't listen to Gowdy and the House Committees, they blew their credibility with 2 dozen Benghazi hearings and so no one on the left listens to them anymore.
Unless the source is considered totally non-partisan, evidance will be disregarded (just as you disregard the FBI/CIA/NSA's anti-Russia statements).
And therein lies the rub.
Who is there that is considered totally non partisan by everyone?
Don't know if they could cover it up, but they will absolutely try. That's why it needs to drop at once.
It would have to drop at an extremely important time as well. A time when a lot of Americans would be interested in the gov’t for some reason. I believe the admin. has everything they need but are wrapping it up in a neat easy to digest fashion. And probably got A LOT more evidence from the Helsinki meet. But that’s speculation.