It's true that the Latin words quid pro quo don't appear in the House's articles of impeachment against President Trump, but the White House's argument that they aren't in there because the allegations "didn't exist," is a bit of a stretch.

President Trump's personal lawyer Jay Sekulow made that case on Wednesday, claiming the articles don't contain any accusations of a quid pro quo. The White House subsequently promoted the comment via Twitter.

"Adam Schiff today talked about quid pro quo. Notice what's not in the articles of impeachment: allegations or accusations of quid pro quo. That's because they didn't exist." pic.twitter.com/RbbZS9nQ0u — The White House (@WhiteHouse) January 22, 2020

But the Trump administration is probably taking things a little too literally. When looking at the language in the article accusing Trump of abusing his power, the House pretty clearly summed up what amounts to an allegation of a quid pro quo — they just used other, English words to describe Trump's interactions with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Tim O'Donnell