Isn't it more like neither one of them investigated?
Non-sequitur. Doesn't change the fact that the argument about replacing Shokin as an anti-corruption measure is completely without merit.
It seems like Trump asking the new Ukrainian president to investigate was like asking the Kremlin to investigate Russian crime.
Trump never asked Zelensky to investigate anything. He simply asked for answers about Crowdstrike (pertaining to the 2016 election) and about why Shokin was fired. At no point did Trump ask Zelensky to investigate the Bidens.
The reason that I brought up Manafort.
You brought up Manafort to divert away from the realization that your defense of Biden has zero merit.
How Paul Manafort Helped Elect Russia's Man in Ukraine
excerpt:
But that’s not how U.S. diplomats saw it at the time. A U.S. embassy cable sent from Kiev to Washington in 2006 described Manafort’s job as giving an “extreme makeover†to a presidential hopeful named Viktor Yanukovych, who had the backing of the Kremlin and most of Ukraine’s wealthiest tycoons. His Party of Regions, the cable said, was “a haven†for “mobsters and oligarchs.â€
https://time.com/5003623/paul-manafort-mueller-indictment-ukraine-russia/
Perfect, just perfect. BTW Trump said in post acquittal presser he has always been a politician and I believe him. Even though he never bothered to register to vote in an American election until 1987.
That's really beautiful and all. Except it has absolutely ZERO to do with Trump and his phone call. You do realize that Zelenskyy is President of Ukraine and not Yanukovych, right? And you also realize that Trump's ties with Paul Manafort were permanently severed before Trump even became President, right? So your tactic of slinging mud and hoping something sticks is not something that is tolerated on a Conservative forum, primarily because it is made up of people who are able to reason and think critically. In other words, bringing up Manafort's name is a huge red flag that let's everyone know that you aren't able to come up with anything credible against Trump.
I can accept anyone taking issue with Trump for things he has actually done. He's divorced twice, engaged in infidelity, went through several bankruptcies, has fallen short of a few campaign promises, and doesn't always take Conservative positions. I get it. These are all valid concerns of various degrees of importance to anyone. But I absolutely positively will not allow non-rational Democrat talking points being recited here to go unchallenged. So each time you come up with this 'the reason Biden got the prosecutor fired was to fight corruption' bullshit, I am going to challenge you on it. Because to me TRUTH matters. And I will never ever ever sacrifice TRUTH in order to push a political agenda. Capisce?