perfect. but the strategy to defend that call and the alleged quid quo pro not so perfect. here s the pressure on those shifting sometimes contradictory strategies. the first defense, of course, was to dismiss the whistle proceeder s defense entirely as false. then the president and his allies made it clear no quid pro quo on the call. more details appear, including the white house s own rough transcript, acting chief of staff nick mulvaney says the opposite. let s be clear what you described is a quid pro quo. we do that all the time with foreign policy. i have news for everybody, get over it. mulvaney almost immediately walked those comments back. as more testimony emerged, sworn testimony, republicans took a new approach, attack the process. they stormed a closed door hearing where a key witness was about to testify. it is a sham and it s time for it to end. what is happening here is not fair. the next tactic, discrediting