Well as far as I understand, this discussion is about voting and not prosecution. A prosecutor's job is to seek the greatest penalty they think they can feasibly get, so of course they're going to focus on charges that carry the greatest penalty. A voter's job, in the context of presidential elections, is to choose between a series of power-hungry hyenas to lead the Executive branch of the government. Not voting is counter-productive and under the current system voting third-party is also counter-productive, so a voter has an incentive to consider all of the "crimes", and even the good sprinkled amongst them, and not tunnel-vision on the worst.

So debating the "lesser charges" could not be more relevant, because who you vote for matters and the government does a heck of a lot more than support Israel. If I follow your line of false equivalence, I can only envision 2 conclusions:

1. Who you vote for does not matter at all, just flip a coin.
2. There's no point in voting at all, leave the decision to everyone else.

Yes, the current system is corrupt and is awful, and it needs to change, but in the meantime elections are still held and decisions are still made about things like education funding, women's bodily autonomy, trans rights, student debt, and so on and so on. Saying nothing else matters because the political parties that have a duopoly on power support Israel's genocide campaign is short-sighted at best. As far as I can tell what you're advocating for is voter apathy, and I fail to see how that's productive.