A minor point of correction, but I don't think it is alleged that Trump personally tried to hide the evidence.  I think that was White House staff.

When your the president you dont do manual labor.
He had a minion carry out his orders..... but its effectively the same thing.

He had erased/removed something against protocol that should have been in records.

Unless he gets a hurricane map and a sharpie.

I have not seen any allegation that he ordered this.  Remember that the people surrounding Trump are smarter than him, and probably realized the trouble before he did.

I'm happy about the impeachment. He'll never ever ever get indicted and that's okay.

The upside is - at this point, impeachment is inevitable. So this is going to go to the Senate. If the Democrats can sell their narrative to the public, this will be a hard vote for Susan Collins, Martha McSally, Cory Gardner, Thom Tillis, and any other vulnerable Senate Republican.

Best part, red-state Democrats can vote no without any repercussions, since Republicans won't indict Trump anyway.

Trump just pulled a Kobe Bryant on Mike Pence. Lol, it would be funny.....no it would be off the charts crazy if both Trump and Pence go down on this dumb crap and Pelosi end of being President. Man you talk about comedy gold.

Two things:
1) I do not consider Youtube videos evidence unless they are a primary source (which is basically never). If they are sourcing something, provide the link to that. Otherwise, I am just getting the news as filtered through the mouth of someone whose opinion I really couldn't care any less about. If it is a primary source, then please post either time stamps or direct quotations with time stamps. Otherwise, you are just wasting everyone's time.
2) Impeachment does not require the Senate. At the moment, the House already has enough votes for impeachment, so it is highly likely that Trump will be impeached. However, conviction is handled by the Senate and it is unlikely that he will be convicted. That doesn't mean that this effort is meaningless, and the result is also not set in stone.

Hated her. Crook through and through. Not every scandal about her was true, but she was as fake as they come, the most patently obviously manufactured candidate I've ever seen, and some of the scandals were true (like rigging the 2016 primary). And defending that rapist husband of hers, it's just despicable, she did that for the power. I'm no fan of Saudi Arabia and hate Trump's connections to them, but Hillary also had some very shady, very real connections to them and I'm honestly not sure that the situation in Yemen would have turned out even the slightest bit different under a Clinton presidency. She'd at least have condemned the Khashoggi killing, and probably wouldn't have ended the Iran deal so we'd not have to deal with the current tensions and commitment of troops to Saudi Arabia, but she's still a war hawk and we'd probably have a different conflict somewhere else instead. She says her constantly taking money from corporate donors doesn't affect her, but her connections to the Podesta brothers tell a different story, she's clearly a crook. I despise Trump, but if there's a silver lining to his presidency, it's that such an unprecedented crushing loss by her has destroyed her political career and done a great deal to remove some of her influence over the party. I just wish she'd stop talking and slink away into the shadows like the joke she is. I once heard her loss described as a decapitation of the Democratic Party's power structure, and indeed, such a seismic shift in their power structure hasn't been witnessed in my lifetime, and I can only see it as a good thing.

Yes.  The votes aren't there, nothing is going to happen.  This is ultimately will be a waste of tax payer money.

A prosecutor (as an example) won't press charges unless he/she believes there is a likelihood of a conviction.  In this case there is a zero percent change of a conviction.  

I never said Biden committed a crime. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. You can be guilty of many things.

Not sure why the entirety of the evidence is expected this quickly in a case like this. Don't the Reps get a couple months to smear before they start an investigation, and then a couple more years of continued smearing and false allegations, before the final report is released? So hard to keep track of the rules these days.

Giuliani has made it clear he has statements from numerous individuals who tried to get info from Ukraine to the US through the Embassy I believe, and it never made it through. He's going straight to the source to make sure it's heard and documented first hand.

I don't see where Trump said something that makes him guilty of a crime at this point. Since when is informing another country that they might have a problem, and should probably look into it, a problem? Just because it may potentially work out in Trumps favor, makes it a problem? What about the Clinton Foundation and the Dems when it comes to the steel dossier that led to the Russia investigation, which was handled at least partially through Ukraine? What about Biden and Ukraine and how it's coincidentally helping out his son?

If Biden did commit a crime, and he is guilty, then Trump is simply pointing out the possibility to Ukraine so they can look into it. Kinda like preventative maintenance for an assembly plant. Should employee's who see the need for looking into something before it becomes a problem, just shut their mouths and let whatever may happen, happen, as much trouble as it may cause by turning a blind eye? What if by saying something that turns out to be useful, they receive something beneficial to them?