Crenshaw Declares No ‘Quid Pro Quo’ in Whistleblower’s Report, Lays out the ‘Twofold’ Issue

Gage Skidmore/Flickr

Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) is declaring that there’s no “quid pro quo” in the whistleblower complaint against President Donald Trump regarding the president’s controversial phone call with the Ukrainian president.

Noting he’s read over the transcript of the phone call as well as the whistleblower’s report, Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) said on Twitter, “Neither document seems to provide evidence of quid pro quo or election interference.”

“The issues being raised are twofold: is it legal for President Trump to ask about allegations regarding a political opponent, and is it appropriate?” Crenshaw added.

While answering the first question, the Republican lawmaker said it was legal for “the United States to work with foreign governments on investigations, especially an investigation involving American influence.”

As for the second question on if it’s “appropriate,” Crenshaw made it clear that that’s “simply a political question. But it is a question of style, not legality.”

Crenshaw isn’t the only Republican lawmaker who made a note of the whistleblower’s complaint, as House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) said in a press release, “The transcript was clear. There was no quid pro quo as Democrats claimed.”

“They accuse President Trump of something atrocious, then move the goalposts when the allegations turn out to be false,” Scalise wrote, adding, “The media also continues to botch crucial facts, resulting in real-world consequences.”

“Democrats’ hatred of President Trump blinds them to the facts of the case, and they cannot be trusted to tell the truth as they continue to pursue their impeachment-at-all-costs strategy.”

However, some Republicans lawmakers have expressed concerns over the complaint and transcript, including Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who said the transcripts are “troubling in the extreme.”

As IJR previously reported, Counselor to the president Kellyanne Conway blasted the complaint as “really more blowhard than whistleblower.”

What do you think?

33 pledges
Upvote Downvote


newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Phyllis Softa

LOL…Didn’t Crenshaw tweet that there was no evidence of collusion and obstruction in the Mueller Report?? He should have read it before tweeting. As IJR Journal reported on August 18th. Crenshaw stated that the Hong Kong protesters demonstrated without any acts of violence and wanted Antifa to follow their lead. Hong Kong protesters had been filmed by US media throwing bricks at the police—Tossing bricks is considered an act of violence. That is not exactly what I call a peaceful demonstration or what I want for the Poor Boys–Alt-RIGHT or Antifa!!!


contusion-“What Crenshaw is confused about it that, in the case of impeachment, quid pro quo isn’t necessary.” Since a quid pro quo is what the dims are screaming about and the ONLY thing that this impeachment inquiry is about, you seem to be the confused one here, contusion.

MariaRose Randazzo

They don’t understand big words like quid pro quo in their versions of the definition of words.


What these Leftist morons have been unable to read is the AGREEMENT signed between the US and Ukraine TWENTY ONE (21) YEARS ago in which both Countries agreed to look into and exchange information (intelligence) on the corruption like that initiated by VP Biden to protect his son from an investigation. Trump is merely following that AGREEMENT as is President Zelensky.

Biden NEEDS to be investigated and indicted for abusing the power of his office AND using taxpayer money ($1 Billion) as leverage to suppress an investigation by having the prosecutor fired (who was only doing his job).

General Confusion

“Crenshaw Declares No ‘Quid Pro Quo’ in Whistleblower’s Report” Headline

What Crenshaw is confused about it that, in the case of impeachment, quid pro quo isn’t necessary.


Does anyone else think it’s odd/stupid that this is being investigated by the “whistleblowers” claim, yet said whistleblower NEVER HEARD THE CONVERSATION BETWEEN TRUMP AND UKRAINE’S PRESIDENT? Let that sink in….the complaint was not HEARD by w.b. Someone else “heard” it and told the W.B. about it. So how many people repeated this claim before it got to the W.B? Anybody remember the game of “TELEPHONE”?


Mitt Romney is a democrat in a republican suit.


To sum up what biden said is. If you want the $1b you fire that lawyer you 6 hours to decide. You can call b.o. and he will agree. That’s ok according to the demwites. Trump asking their new president to look into that and they want impeach him. He didn’t say anything about the election. If what joe did is a crime why wouldn’t we want to look into it. So joe wasn’t running for president it would be ok to ask that question





Clinton Claims Trump Has Turned US Foreign Policy Into a ‘Cheap Extortion Racket’

Christine Blasey Ford

Kamala Harris Wants Kavanaugh Investigated on Anniversary of Dr. Ford’s Testimony