Okay, go on, post the evidence that Biden or his son did something wrong. I'm waiting.

Meanwhile, we have proof that Trump and Guiliany did something wrong. He crossed the line of the law, Again.

He did post his evidence. It was that video. Not all evidence is absolute (i.e. a video of Biden actually having a discussion with Ukraine about this scenario).

If a murderers hair is found at a crime scene, they may well be accused and found guilty of the murder, even though nobody actually saw them commit it. All of the events in the video posted are facts. That doesn't necessarily imply Biden is guilty, but it absolutely is...evidence. And it really doesn't look good for Biden either. But people have been saying this for a LONG time and the general population has ignored it, as they seem to when our leaders (besides Trump) abuse their power.

Just because I'll get some, you are just supporting Trump therefore your argument is null. Trump is scummy and guilty as hell. But so is Biden.

Who cares if Biden is guilty or not.  One crime doesn't absolve the other.  The question is, did Trump commit a crime trying to use the POTUS office to gain dirt on a political opponent.  The problem as always with Trump is that there probably was a dozen different ways he could have gone about this whole thing but because he has no respect for the POTUS office and the rules that apply he did it Trump way.  This was incredibly stupid and you would believe someone would have told him so but since he already fired all those people, here we are again with another dumb scandal.

Ahhh, so lets say that Biden is guilty of a crime, what does that have anything to do with what Trump did.  You are using the same deflection points as Trump and his base but does any of this absolve the what Trump is being accused of.

Senate has 54 republicans, this is a waste of time. The votes are not there.

He will not get impeached, but they might feel the backlash in the senate if they block it with their usual "Moscow Mitch ludicrous answers©"

So basically the president is above the law? because of the political views of the senate?

Seems some people are confused... tell me... if Trump diverted aid away and then called the President, why does this establish a link between one and the other? Is this even illegal? He's doing stuff that has been done in the past without impeachment! 

Like phoning the Costa Rican president to tell them that using the UN was pointless when Costa Rica was still an unstable mess. 

If he's extorting Ukrine, to use its intelligence agency to gather information on his behalf, on opponents to win a 2020 election.
And useing the threat, of no longer aiding Ukrine protect itself if needed, against russia.

If he sends his personal lawyer for "talks" reguarding this matter, and hes on tape/paper doing so?

Then he covered it up, by haveing them remove the written down accounts, of the call's contents.
(apparently when a president talks to other leaders around the world, theres people in the white house that write down the context of the calls ect)
(if trump did nothing wrong, why did he go against protocol, and have the accounts erased/removed?)

Thats why "if trump diverted aid away" and called a president, is a issue.
He threatend a country's saftey to get dirt on opponents, to meddle in the elections of 2020 in the USA.


You really dont see any issues with this?

Now it comes down the the whistleblowers and the 6+ other that claim to have overheard the calls or seen the written accounts.
And if the senate will uphold the law, if the person that broke it is the president (if theres evidence of wrong doing).

*edit:
I'm not super into the case, and just watched abit of the hearing that was live streamed.
This is my understanding of the events, after watching that. If I'm wrong about something feel free to correct me.

Biden's actions are not evidence of a crime.  At best, they are evidence of an ulterior motive.  If by evidence you mean any evidence whether it is at all persuasive or not, then yeah it's evidence.  If, as people usually do, you mean convincing evidence, then no.

On the other hand, Trump held back aid with no valid reason presented prior, asked a foreign official for a "favor" right after discussing how good the US has been to him, and then suggested that the foreign leader coordinate with his personal lawyer.  Of course, there is also the issue that Biden was, according to Trump, trying to use his power, which his office doesn't really provide much of, to get his son off the hook.  Troubling to be sure if true, but nowhere near as troubling as using one's power to undermine our democratic process.

I'm weary of the enlightened/cynical centrist defending Trump by pointing out that Democrats have done something similar.  These situations, in their gravity and in the amount of evidence, are nowhere near comparable.