"Strongly suggests" should not be confused with "certainty" by a sloppy reading. Indeed, its not hard to repeat the QQO explanation already on the table.
Jupiter's moons are comparatively tiny compared to its mass, and numerous compared to our Moon. So any tidal forcing would be even smaller and less coherent. "Show (QQO) has nothing to do with Jupiter's moons," is again a red herring demand. There will always be >0 effect between masses, even if quite insignificant as tidal forcing or excitation.
Geophysical "infatuation" (curiosity) with QQO case is in large part for its direct mapping to QBO case, for comparison's sake (Case-Based Reasoning (CBR)). As noted before, geophysical similarity cases are reasoned over like natural Controlled Experiments.
QQO literature typically invokes QBO for direct comparison, as you surely understand as rational. Vertical Coriolis, and related dynamics, are sufficient basis for a hypothesis that a modified ENSO-QBO would prevail even without the Moon. For all we know, such Moonless theoretic ENSO-QBO cases might even be less chaotic.