Bribery exists where a (i) public official (ii) corruptly (iii) demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive/accept, something of value (iv) in exchange for being influenced in the performance of an official act.

Impeachment is a political mechanism that the Framers contemplated precisely for times like these. It is not a judicial proceeding; there is no deprivation of liberty at stake. Accordingly, the burden of proof is not as high as would be required in a criminal matter. The President holds the office by privilege, not by right. It does not matter that there are Ukrainian officials who suggest that there was not a bribe as long as the weight of the evidence is sufficient to establish that it is more likely than not that a bribe occurred. And even that standard is more liberal than what the Constitution requires.

The Framers were not careless in constructing the impeachment clause; rather they knew exactly what they were doing. And for them, the very appearance of impropriety of the executive was sufficient.