This is a pretty jaundiced view of the whole affair. You rightly call out hysterical commentary for hyperbolic claims with no demonstrable facts behind them – when it suits your pre existing opinion, but then take other claims with no proof as definitive. You can’t have it both ways.
The most important point in my opinion regarding Flynn’s resignation is if we know Trump knew about the transcripts conflicting with what Flynn told Pence since Jan 26 (this is now established fact not speculation) why did Flynn only resign after the story broke? And if it’s perfectly legal and fine as you claim (we’ll ignore the Logan act – no one would bother prosecuting it) why did he resign at all?