I disagree. On one side you have a narrative that doesn't have a basis in reality. On the other, you have a narrative that is based in reality though the allegations aren't proven.
The Trump-Russia thing seemed fake from the beginning as the Dems were loudly proclaiming that "Russia hacked the election" which, despite being preposterous, morphed into Trump colluding with Russia based on a rehashing of the joke about Putin finding Hillary's lost emails. The very foundation of that narrative was born out of politics and, to date, hasn't appeared to have anything more than that as a basis.
The Trump wiretapping on the other hand came out of the leaked information and has a basis in, at very least, the campaign to oust Flynn. That alone proved that there was surveillance and unmasking. It was also leaked and used politically. That's not in question at this point. The only thing in question is "who leaked" it, "why was the surveillance done", and "were any laws broken".