Now I have heard everything?

I read that the President engaged in an "illegal solicitation of an investigation" stated as if that was actually a real crime. Now let's forget for a second that such a crime doesn't actually exist on any statute anywhere.  Even if it did (and it doesn't) it most certainly would not and could not apply to people who actually (by definition of their job) have authority and responsibility to make determinations on investigations. Which most certainly the President of the United States has.

But let's imagine that such a fake statute actually "did" exist. What would make the solicitation of an investigation illegal? Certainly the investigation would first have be found to be completely unwarranted. People who have committed crimes or otherwise put themselves into positions to be investigated by their own actions, have no legal recourse to challenge the premise of an investigation. They (based on certain due process) are allowed to challenge the means of the investigation and to expect that their constitutional rights are respected.

But if you are suspected of breaking the law, and there is legitimate cause to investigate, then there can be nothing "illegal" about such an investigation.

So would the argument be that the situation in the Ukraine with Hunter Biden not be a valid investigation? Certainly at one time there were prosecutors and investigators who believed that there was something there. According to the actual investigator of that case, he was pulled off the case by the new Prosecutor (approved by the Obama administration) and the case was never reassigned. The new President of Ukraine seems to believe that there was a cover up of this situation and claims to want to get to the bottom of it.

To be completely blunt. The MSM suggesting that the case was investigated and closed is a blatant crock of shit lie. It has no basis other than the original statement provided by the people who ended the investigation. Seriously, if we simply accept the excuse of everyone who is accused of wrongdoing, then we would never find a single person guilty of anything. Not sure exactly how brain dead you would have to be to take those statements at face value.

But let's compare apples to oranges here and ask ourselves the question of the day. If fundamentally unwarranted investigations driven by political (not legal) goals would be considered illegal, then how many of the current investigations into the President (who is also a political candidate just like Biden) would be also illegal? Given that the President cannot be charged with a crime and given that the idea of impeachment is completely pointless. Given that he has been exonerated of the Russian Conspiracy allegations by at least three Congressional and one Special Counsel investigation. Given that none of the investigations have found any actual law breaking by the President. Then it's 100% entirely clear that each and every one of the investigations into the President is politically motivated.

Doesn't that make them all "illegal" based on the same standards that apply to declaring the Hunter Biden Burisma Holdings investigation to be illegal?