Quid Pro Wait What?
By 
There’s a reason that the rest of the Obama-era Republican leadership regarded Kevin McCarthy is an affable moron:
“Name me one thing that Ukraine did to release the money. Nothing,” McCarthy said, referring to U.S. aid that Congress had allocated for Ukraine. The money was released in September after public and congressional outcry over the White House’s interference with the funds.
“To have a quid pro quo, you have to exchange, both sides, for another thing” McCarthy said. “Nothing transformed.”
Asked whether it was OK for Trump to demand investigations even if Ukraine did not comply with the demand, McCarthy pivoted to the White House memorandum of Trump’s phone call with Zelensky, refusing to speak about testimony from State Department officials.
“Nowhere in that phone call is there a quid pro quo,” he said.
That assessment is at odds with White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney’s comments during a recent press conference. Mulvaney said that Trump’s insistence on an investigation into a pro-Trump conspiracy theory was one reason the White House withheld the aid. Muvlaney soon reversed himself, and McCarthy clung to that reversal.
It is a well-known principle of criminal law that it’s not kidnapping unless someone pays the ransom.