Biden not only admitted shaking down the Ukrainians he bragged about it ! Just more Democratic deflection .

Yes he did admit it. The world wanted him to do it and it was perfectly fine, right up till 3 days ago. Now it's a huge crime and I'm the one deflecting?

One man has a pee pee tape he doesn't want released. The other, DOING HIS JOB!

It wasn't OK then, but he had protection from on high. He has no protection now, and it's important for the American voter to know the kind of conniving politician Biden is. Now is the PERFECT time to shine sunlight on it.

Or...the Dems jump on this fast and torpedo old clottin-eyed Joe's prez bid. The you have 2 ultra-radical "spend and tax" socialist leading the dem ticket. Sounds like someone's playing 3d chess while others are playing checkers.

Nobody cares about who's running for Prez. Means nothing against Trump's behavior. Deflecting, that's all you're doing.

Ooooooh.. of course, how could I have not seen that. Thank you for making such a clear and lucid point. You are so smart and I bet you get all the girls.

Now that's deflecting.

The whistleblower was not a participant in the call and had no direct knowledge, which was known at the time that the original story was published (in the 2nd to last paragraph). Like the rest of the garbage accusations, this one went down in flames.

imgflip.com/i/3bc3bw

We have no idea who the whistleblower is and what involvement in the call he or she had. You're making shit up. You guys are all waiting for the Biden story to stick, hoping that confusion and muddling the facts will work yet again. It's not working this time. Any investigation against Biden's son was over months before Biden gave the ultimatum. This prosecutor was a known corrupt prosecutor. Everyone wanted him gone. So much so Biden bragged about getting it done. It was a win for him and a win for us.

Trump has admitted enough today to warrant impeachment. The only story here is whether the Dems have the balls to move forward with doing something about the most corrupt presidents in US history.

We don't know, but the CNN article author does, and that author says SPECIFICALLY in their article that the whistleblower had no direct knowledge of the phone call, and was basing their statement on something they heard from someone else - not in the course of their work (outside of work).

Otherwise known as "hearsay"

I don't care if you believe me, but you might want to believe the author of the article that set your panties on fire.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/20/politics/donald-trump-whistleblower/index.html