You have missed a great deal, it turns out. You need to be become a regular reader of WAPO. Although it is true that the preponderance of the evidence that is so far publicly available is in the nature of circumstantial evidence, as in for example, "Mr. Trump was found at the scene of the crime with a smoking revolver in his hand, but there is,
as yet, no evidence that the bullet recovered from the victim came from that particular revolver. Mr. Trump claims that he was shooting pigeons in the park and just happened to stumble on the body of a 'very bad person.' "
In addition to the voluminous circumstantial evidence implicating Mr. Trump in illegal activity in general, there is some hard evidence that is now publicly known. Mr. Trump, your President, has of course already been a defendant in a numerous civil suits and has used his money to escape from some serious criminal charges as well. He routinely avoids formal conviction by agreeing to settle out of court for substantial sums. One instance that even the most naive are familiar with is his participation in Fraud with regard to his bogus Trump University which cost him 25 million to avoid a conviction. Another well known instance is when his former wife accused him of Rape, a serious crime for which poor people have been sent to prison. He did the same in that case, i.e., a large financial settlement made to a former wife bought her retraction of the charge, and avoided having the case end up in court. When he settles he tries to get the details sealed and a non-disclosure agreement from the plaintiff. An innocent man does not need that protection nor does an innocent man involve himself in over 4000 lawsuits in one lifetime. Here is just a sampling of the voluminous circumstantial evidence of Trump's corruption and law breaking. For more evidence I would refer you back to the source you cited, viz., the "Washington Post" and also any number of "Vanity Fair" articles on Trump should prove illuminating.
A much abbreviated list of strong circumstanial evidence of corruption would include all of those points raised by ExGOPer here:
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/the-trump-russia-collusion-count-definitive-list.323154/. A person who wants to bury their head in the sand would say, "well most of those things did not involve trump." But of course they involved Trump. I can confidently assure you he had knowledge of every bit of this. Furthermore Trump hired Russian agents as both his Campaign Manager and his National Security advisor. That's direct evidence that could be introduced should he eventually be tried for Treason.
Trump fairly recently paid ~400 million in cash for certain off shore properties. Trump will not voluntarily release his tax returns, and his bank accounts are of course private, so there is no way for the media to get hold of the information that would prove that Trump did not have access to 400 million of his own cash. But people rather familiar with the transaction have remarked that this sum would have been impossible for trump to raise from his cash flow and savings based on Trumps own admissions and his known holdings. Ergo a rational person would conclude the money was borrowed. But the sellers have no information as to the source of the funds. They are under the impression it was unencumbered cash. If the money was borrowed, it might have been a 'signature loan,' perhaps from "buddy" or 'wealthy benefactor' with no collateral required, otherwise there would have been liens involved. Or still another possibility is that the money came via illegal money laundering operations. The properties bought are all hemorrhaging a lot of money,i.e., big money losers. Let's draw or own conclusions here.
Currently Mr. Trump is the defendant, along with his family members, of a suit filed By the New York Attorney General, alleging "persistent illegal activity"
in regard to the "Donald J. Trump Foundation." Below are just a few of the allegations in the filing that there is hard evidence to back. You'll find the specific detail on all the evidence in the filings.
That's what you wanted isn't it!. I am not inclined to look the filing up for you, because your apparent blindness to hard evidence plus the mountain of circumstantial evidence that exists for Trump's illegal activities neither bothers me nor makes me feel any obligation to try and convince you of anything. I am going to leave the convincing up to prosecutors and the courts. Enjoy your bliss I say.
A few of the allegations in the suit filed by the New York A.G., naming Trump and his family are:
'extensive support' to the then-candidate’s 2016 campaign, in violation of campaign-finance laws; $5000 being used to advertise Trump Hotels; $10,000 spent on a giant portrait of the president, later found on display at the the sports bar at Trump’s Doral golf resort; and $258,000 that was used to settle lawsuits against Trump and his businesses, including $158,000 paid to a guy who sued the Trump National Golf Club after it failed to pony up a promised $1 million for scoring a hole-in-one at a charity tournament
And, by the way, in this post I've mostly ignored the overwhelming portion of circumstantial evidence for Trumps extensive, illegal money laundering activities involving Russian Oligarchs who provide the financing for his many shady enterprises. Also, I have specifically not gone into his clear violation of the terms of his lease on the Washington D.C. Hotel, nor his persistent, clear violation of the Emollient's clause of the Constitution, on which there are pending suits.
Don't be surprised if Trump's Tax Returns figure front and center in this new, New York suit!!! Now it is only a matter of time before we find out whether he will do jail time -- after he has been removed from office of course-- and what the extent of damage he has done to the Republican party will be. On the other hand, perhaps he will go on to serve eight glorious years as "a stable genius" (his characterization, not mine) and nothing more will be said of his criminal activities. The prosecutors will all slink away with their tails between their legs. At least Mr. Trump's supporters can always hope. Regardless, just as Ingrid Bergman and Humphrey Bogart will always have Paris, they will always have 'Benghazi,' the 'Witch Hunt,' 'Fake News,' the 'missing emails,' and 'Lock Her Up!' And the rest of us will always have the "Orange One" with the little dick.
Please read my posts in entirety before responding. To wit: (for your benefit I've adopted a phrase from legal jargon you'll understand. 
)