No, that's just the opposite of what I stated dumbass, but there is no corruption that's been pointed out against Trump. The President asking a foreign leader to corroborate with an investigation into corruption, is not corrupt. You use assumptions toward Trump, to actual first hand knowledge against the Democrats.
The Democrats have been screaming for impeachment since election day, that is different than investigating something after it happened such as Benghazi where a US ambassador was freaking killed.
I'm not pointing or deflecting, the transcripts entire point is because the whistleblower thought it was going after political opponents. What Trump mentioned was Biden's corruption, that's the reason.
What has Trump done anywhere close to level of what Biden bragged about?
Bill, you say you mean one thing and then you argue another.
There's been quite a bit of corruption smoke around Trump...
Again, if there is "first hand knowledge against the Democrats" then why hasn't the GOP and/or FBI done anything about it? You listen to too much Faux News.
The GOP called for investigation after investigation and came up dry on each and every one. Each time they failed to uncover what they suggested happened they called for another investigation. How quickly we seem to forget.
So why did Trump direct them to move the transcript of his call from the normal server that non-classified would be kept to the server used for classified information? There was no classified information or national security aspects to the call?
And what is this? "The other thing,
There's a lot of. talk about Biden's son,. that Eiden stopped the
prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so
whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.
Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if
you ·can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me." <--asking a foreign government
Also, the entire transcript of the call takes at max 5 minutes to read...10 minutes if you're a slow, slow reader. From the transcript..."July 25, 2019, 9:03 - 9:33 a.m. EDT". Dude, if you think that transcript is the entirety of a 30 minute conversation then you're really, really gullible.
Today, not only did we find out, for a fact, that it was mostly all second hand hearsay, but we also learned that a good portion of the complaint was third hand b.s. based on anonymously sourced media articles. Absolutely none of whistlblower's complaint was based on first hand information. Keep up the good work, comrade.
As if second hand information can't be credible.