Was there really a quid pro quo? Does it matter?

As usual, the defense for a person caught doing bad things is to create chaos and confusion, which provides lots of opportunity for deflection, distraction, denial, and obfuscation. And of course, gaslighting and bald-faced lying. Trump is a master at it, as are many of the Republican leaders. About the only forces available to moderate such behavior are integrity and ethics, which were jettisoned by these people long ago.

But back to the quid pro quo. The con men are trying a variety of sleight of hand tricks; it’s not illegal, it’s a common practice in diplomacy, it never happened, the Ukrainians didn’t know that the military aid was on hold, and my favorite - Trump is too incompetent to set it up. Something for something, that is quid pro quo. It’s an exchange, a deal... when it’s shady and unethical it’s called a bribe.

But when it is the threat of taking of something of value away from another, unless they do what you want, it’s called extortion. Extortion is an interesting act in that it’s simply the threat - it doesn’t have to be consummated. It also contains an element of force and implied harm. It’s not an exchange of something for something, there is no deal. It’s “do what I want, or else I will make you suffer.”

Extortion. Not quid pro quo. It is common - in organized crime.

You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.
R. Buckminster Fuller