i think it's fairly uncontroversial to point out that they unquestionably both cheated. and, i'm not in the camp that argues it tends to balance out.
you may claim there's no evidence, and while that evidence may be useful in prosecuting a case or getting a judge to agree with you (but might not be, depending on the judge), it doesn't really answer the question. these guys are pros - they're very good at cheating. they do it all of the time. they don't just leave incriminating evidence lying around. so, arguing that you can't find any evidence isn't really much of an argument for anything except the talent of the cheaters.
but, we tend to look the other way, and what trump is really up against here is a precedent - if trump decides he's going to go after the democrats for any cheating that they no doubt did, he's opening the floodgates for the democrats to go after him and his own party for their own no good behaviour. and, it's for that reason that this is unlikely to go much of anywhere beyond the lowest hanging fruit available.
what bush did to gore was just too easy to not do it, but gore dared not escalate. call him up and have a talk to him about that.
likewise, if giuliani sees an easy kill...
i don't see that happening, though - trump's comments should be interpreted politically, rather than legally.
but, are they all a bunch of liars and cheaters and thieves?
yeah. they are.