Which sounds like something Trump & his Russian friends want you to believe.
This raises to mind the matter of the Steele dossier.
As I understand the history of it -- and I can be corrected -- the Republicans first employed Steele to investigate Trump before their primary. Then the DNC or related entities subsidized him. Steele had been a British intelligence operative for MI6 until 2009, and ran the Russia desk for MI6.
Now the argument of the GOP -- put forward by people like Graham-Cracker, Jordan and others -- is that somehow the dossier is tainted because the Democrats contracted for it. Here, their underlying assumption is that the Democrats simply asked Steele to concoct a fiction. But if I were to run a campaign and gathered opposition research, would I not want to know the Truth of any "dirt" that could be found on a candidate? What better propaganda to spin about the opposition than a propaganda of absolutely True dirt?
They jump to this other hole in the sieve of possibilities because they themselves engage in that sort of nonsense -- Black or Grey propaganda. Numerous instances can be cited over the last decade or more. "Let's create a fiction, sell it as the truth, and see if it sticks."
Enough of the Steele dossier has been confirmed by corroborating sources that the former hole in the sieve of possibilities proves out. The Democrats simply wanted to know the Truth about Trump, and hired an intelligence veteran to continue what he'd already started on behalf of pre-primary GOP.
As a footnote to that, it would seem that the GOP establishment before the primary would have been interested in the Truth about Trump. After the primary, they'd have an incentive to spin falsehood. But not before the primary. That sort of research is an internal matter -- to find out how Trump might make the party vulnerable.
