...was motivated to help Trump win the election because they hate Hillary Clinton for comparing Putin to Hitler. As universally reviled as Hitler is, he's even more hated in Russia, where over 20 million Russians reportedly died in WWII. Comparing Putin to Hitler made the Russians see red, so to speak.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2014/03/05/hillary-clinton-says-putins-action-are-like-what-hitler-did-back-in-the-30s/?utm_term=.c288a619f4e6 And if you think Mo Brooks is a RINO, he was talking about impeaching Hillary Clinton a year before the election. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mo-brooks-hillary-clinton_us_5625053de4b0bce3470156I find it very interesting that both sides are supporting the CIA. Makes you wonder why both sides are supporting. What dirt does the Clinton crime synidicate have on the Republicans saying they support the CIA position....
...a bit much given what we know. He could have decided that Clinton would be someone he'd rather not deal with. He might have just wanted to show the world that our elections were vulnerable to interference, or he might have been rooting for Trump--we know they like each other--but even if our intelligence assesses the probability of Putin's involvement to be so high as to be beyond serious debate, determining the precise Why it was done is a magnum jump.
Besides, the most vocal supporters of Trump on this matter are not a very rational bunch, unless you consider Richard Spencer and Kellyanne Conway as rational. OTOH, nowhere in our Constitution can I find a clause implying that any of our citizens are required to be rational. So...our democracy is good enough for who it's for.