biden knew about his sons exploitation, its arguable that he used his office to further his sons career, and his son did not act alone in that.also theres legitimate question that biden participated in an effort of the ukraine to influence the election against trump. the conflict of interest with his son was well documented within the obama administration, and theres conflicting stories as to the intent of his requesting dismissal of the prosecutor. so whats the harm in investigation, there seems to be more than adequate cause? why would it hurt to investigate biden?

@jamesjohn There's no serious disagreement about the dismissal of the prosecutor. The election influence theory is completely bonkers. No, this was just about getting some foreign leaders to make statements that could be used as propaganda in the election. Never mind how problematic it is to illegally hold up aid in order to coerce them and to involve your personal lawyer!

As for the conflict of interest, the fact is that as bad as it was (and I hope that's enough to sink Biden in the primary), it was not illegal and did not influence Biden's actions. Moreover, if it was so serious, why didn't the Republicans investigate it at the time?

@WilyRickWiles as far a I'm aware theres no credible evidence that trump held up aid because the ukraine hadn't released a statement. sondland specifically said he was testifying to his "presumptions" the election influence theory was not completely bonkers at the time trump held aid. if he believed it to be true, then this whole thing fall apart. and thats the point in my mind, intent. sondland testified about a "feeling" not facts. and serious question, I'm not trying to be argumentative, what is inherently illegal about a quid pro quo? as far as I'm aware, is not impeachable, its business. this all relies on intent , and proving that trump intended to withhold the aid because of an investigation into his rival. well what if he legitimately believed his rival was a crook? if biden were a crook and doing something illegal, how could trump ever investigate without breaking the law?

@jamesjohn It was a violation of appropriations law to hold up the aid, a violation of campaign finance law to involve Giuliani, and bribery to solicit something of value in exchange for an official act, from a foreign government no less. Moreover, impeachment is a political process.

@jamesjohn Let me ask you something, was investigating alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election and Hunter Biden official US policy with respect to Ukraine?

@dd54 FTFY: that wasn't investigating Burisma

No one was "silent." It was the longstanding policy of the US and its international allies.

@wilyrcikwiles and there lies the issue. theres only one side of the argument being presented a the moment. and its going to be rough impeaching the president if all you have is presumptions. nothing outside of peoples opinions and heresy have been presented. so far we have witnesses that heard someone say something they think leads to quid pro quo. also its important to remember that ukraine officials didn't know the aid was being withheld. I'm really not trying to defend trump on this one, I'm trying t understand things from a different perspective. it just seems like theres nothing factual there, and so far this whole inquiry has been opinions, heresy and presumptions. it still doesn't answer the question about how the president cn possibly open an investigation into biden without committing a crime. it seems that biden did something as illegal or unethical as trump. how is trump supposed to legally investigate biden , being that he's a political rival?

so i suppose what Im getting to, to swerve back to the topic, is that if biden initiated a quid pro quo, and we're holding an inquiry to impeach trump over a very similar quid pro quo, isn't it hypocritical to not investigate biden?didnt he solicit something of value in exchange for an official act? and talk about it openly on television? in the interest of his son or not, shouldn't that be investigated?

@wilyrickwiles it's a smokescreen. And we both know it. If the Democrats had someone who actually heard or knew something damning, it would've been all over the media. So far, nothing but crickets. Their "star" witnesses have all said they weren't aware of any problems with Guiliani being involved, and none of this has anything to so with a campaign, so that's out the window. Every president in the history of presidents has put conditions on foreign aid. It's got nothing to do with appropriations "law" to put conditions on a country in order for them to receive aid from the US. And conflating quid pro quo and bribery because Biden might be tangentially implicated in a potential corruption investigation in a country that is KNOWN for its corruption is laughable.

@WilyRickWiles "Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries in the world," King added to the Post. "It's part of U.S. policy, as we give aid, that they be eliminating corruption."