Was there a quid pro quo in President Trump’s phone call with the president of Ukraine? That is, did he ask for an investigation of a political opponent in return for providing military aid that Congress had already approved?
There is, of course, not an explicit request. There never is. But it’s pretty obvious anyway to anyone who’s not desperately trying to pretend things away. Here is conservative David French:
I haven’t been a litigator since 2015. I haven’t conducted a proper cross-examination since 2014. But if I couldn’t walk a witness, judge, and jury through the transcript of Donald Trump’s call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and demonstrate that a quid pro quo was more likely than not, then I should just hang up my suit and retire in disgrace.
Here’s an attorney friend of mine via email:
In the legal world, where there is well-established case law on what constitutes a QPQ, particularly in criminal matters, the Ukrainegate transcript would appear to fall into the garden-variety lay-up category.
Of course there was a quid pro quo. We aren’t children here.
