So yes, you admit that it would be APROPRIATE for Biden to pressure Ukraine to remove Shokin as part of conduct of good foreign policy.
His public bragging about doing it for that reason would be well deserved.
So given that clear possibility, why would one strongly believe that it was done for INAPROPRIATE reason, aside of course from political bias? And how would a prosecutor prove it in a court of law?
Well, you have to prove an act of Quid Pro Quo. You have to prove an explicit agreement that so far there is not serious evidence of.
Facts don't even establish that Burisma was interested in removing Shokin, that he really was their big problem, nevermind Biden getting asked and agreeing to do it for personal gain.
Archers testimony was that he never heard about Shokin being a problem and from what he was told, Burisma had Shokin under control. This supports earlier statements by Ukranian official saying that Shokin had shelved Burisma investigation for two years. He also never witnessed Biden getting asked or discussing ANYTHING business related.
So you have right about NOTHING at this point except partisan noise on Joe Biden. I'm just not sure you dupe rightwingers have the gray matter to understand that clearly.