The problem for the White House is that its spin presumes three things to be true, all of which seem debatable:

First, it presumes that the public actually cares about the quid pro quo, rather than viewing Trump telling a foreign leader to investigate a political rival as a prima facie abuse of presidential powers. Or, to use a term that Trump wouldn’t like, the public might see it as prima facie evidence of “collusion” between Trump and a foreign power that aims to influence the election — the sort of direct evidence that was lacking in the Mueller report.

Second, the White House line presumes that the public won’t see the White House’s record of the conversation as containing a quid pro quo. But there are plenty of readings by which it does. In the conversation, Trump directly invokes the idea of “reciprocity” between the United States and Ukraine. He says “we do a lot for Ukraine …. We spend a lot of effort and a lot of time.” Zelensky also discusses the purchase of Javelin missiles from the U.S. All of this comes before two fairly direct requests — Trump calls the first one a “favor” — that Trump makes of Zelensky, one concerning a cybersecurity firm called CrowdStrike and the other concerning Biden.

Third, it presumes that there won’t be more evidence of a quid pro quo that emerges later on. Given how rapidly the story is developing, that doesn’t seem like a safe bet, either.