This isn't hard to find. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20... has over 500 references. The senate committee report was over 1300 pages. The evidence is readily available and as well documented as you could expect. At a certain point, the onus is on you to provide refutations on why what exists doesn't meet your impossibly high bar.
Your very link quotes: 'investigators “did not have sufficient evidence” to prove active participation in the hacks or knowledge that the electronic thefts were continuing.'
Please do not spam non-evidence. It's "an impossibly high bar" for you. But do not call it evidence. I am familiar with the level of information collection that occurs, and I do not view this as a high bar.
That quote is specifically referencing whether Trump actively participated in the efforts, which is not part of any of this discussion (though many of his close associates did).
