How about focusing your argument on the indictment and its relationship with the following claims:

(1) The Trump campaign conspired with Russia (media narrative).
(2) Russian influencing in the US presidential election (Mueller brief). 

The media regularly confuse 1&2 and I would argue if you feel strongly that the current indictment goes a long way towards (1) - you would have a difficult time defending the DNC, Clinton campaign and Podesta group on similar accusations far more directly related to key players and with more concrete leads. 

Of course you could argue the hiring of Manafort reflects poorly on the Trump campaign judgement & vetting. Fair enough (I am sympathetic to it)  - if you ignore Podesta Group and similar "shady" dealing from DNC/ Clinton aligned operators - but none of it relates strongly to (1) and (2) based on what we know so far. 

Please point out how applying this logic = being brainwashed by Breitbart?