Running on Empty

There are certain markers one looks for to see how terrified people are in politics when publicly making their case when pushing back against bad news.  At the low end is the “Wait, that’s all you have???” Syndrome.  Often that manifests itself by a person going dark with total silence (perhaps the most passive, but wisest maneuver) or an aggressive “But her emails!!” reverse attack to try changing attention.  Sometimes though pure desperation is the result, if the person being defended was arrested for the political equivalent of killing a family, crying out haughtily, “You’ll notice the police didn’t charge him with burning the house down!!’”
 
We’ve seen several of these at play with the Mar-a-Lago search.  My favorite have been – “See how redacted it all is, that’s because they have nothing” and “There was nothing in the affidavit about nuclear weapons!!”, ignoring the reality that a) anything about nuclear weapons would be redacted, b) the affidavit was, however, filled with evidence of taking the most highly top secret documents, and c) the issue wasn’t about nuclear weapons but taking secret government property.
 
But one of the best examples of pure, jaw-dropping “Wait, that’s all you have???” emptiness in trying to defend Trump came this past weekend from Mick Mulvaney.  While I know that he's just one voice (not that others have been much better), what makes his efforts all the more notable is that he was acting White House Chief of Staff for Trump, someone who more than most anyone outside of the Press Secretary should be adept at responding to attacks on his boss.
 
Actually, what makes this even more one of the best examples of pure, unabashed “Sorry, I got nothing” emptiness is because it’s a twofer.
 
First, Mulvaney tweeted --
 
“It appears this raid was, in fact, just about documents. As even some on the left have opined: that is simply outrageous.”
 
Putting aside that this wasn’t a “raid,” but a legally authorized search with a warrant --if this is the best a high-end Republican spokesman like Mick Mulvaney can do to explain Trump taking troves of sensitive government documents, some the most intensely-classified, highly secret, then they know they're in deep trouble. Mr. Mulvaney seemingly wants you to think the FBI was looking for hidden nuclear weapons. Or a secret radio hook-up between Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong-Un and al Qaeda leadership with tapes of their plotting to overthrow the country.  In fact, what we ALL KNOW and all knew from the very first and no one had any doubt to the contrary -- the FBI search was always and only about finding that contain the most-sensitive and top secret defense documents and are government property.  Of course, it was “just about documents”!!!
 
Furthermore, as a bonus, Mr. Mulvaney ignores explaining who even remotely "on the left" has ever "opined" that looking for stolen documents at Mar-a-Lago was "simply outrageous."  That is known as flailing wildly to the most overwrought degree with silly, desperate GOP smoke and hoping others are far too blinded and stupid (both are required) to notice you’re throwing around chimera but forgot the chimera.  (By the way, the biggest clue of this is Mulvaney’s use of the word “opined.  Any other specific word normally used in the English language would be dismissed at first glance.  “Opined” is obtuse enough that people can scratch their head and wonder what in the world is he trying to suggest???”)  The only other possibility is that by people “on the left,” Mulvaney just means to the left of himself, Trump and Attila the Hun on the far right, which would be normal right wing.
 
But that was only his start.  Because along with throwing out his big ball of empty “Wait, that’s all you have???”, Mulvaney had to show his desperation with the GOP classic of doubling down.  And so, what we got was --
 
“So, if the classified documents from Mar-a-Lago turn out to be from Crossfire Hurricane (the 2016 Russia hoax) and they exonerate Trump…what happens next?”
 
How empty is this as a defense?  Let’s put it this way – Mulvaney’s question reminds of when years ago, when I was a counselor at Camp Nebagamon summer camp, there was this 11-year-old kid in my cabin, we’ll call him Jimmy Glipton, who one day got concerned about something and asked me (and I’m pretty close to be accurate with this, because it’s not a question you easily forget) – “So, Bob, so what would happen if all of a sudden, if suddenly the sky opened up and suddenly thousands of dogs started to fall down and also if also big lightning bolts crashed down and there were bombs dropping and everything and all over, and what would happen???”

I don’t remember my answer exactly, but it was along the lines of a calming, “That’s not going to happen.” Which interestingly is the same as I would say to Mick Mulvaney.
 
After all, given that what Mulvaney calls the "Russia hoax" was actually documented as being actually real in the Mueller Report (which actually said – in reality -- that there was contact with Russians, but that no charges could be recommended because there was regular obstruction from the Trump administration), the odds of his whimsical “what if” scenario is zero.  In fact, Jimmy’s scenario is more likely.  Meanwhile, far more to the point, the whole issue, the specific legal issue, the exact reason for the warrant is that Trump stole sensitive government documents -- whatever the documents say.
 
And as my friend Don Friedman wisely pointed out – “Seriously, if any of those documents exonerated Trump, he would have released them long ago, while he was still President. Give it up, Mick.”
 
And this is the best that Mick Mulvaney, former acting Chief of Staff to Trump has.  Doubled-down.  These are the best arguments from someone whose career was to explain away Trump’s actions as best he can.
They got nothing.
 
And making it worse is that for some reason, perhaps known only to God, CBS News has hired Mick Mulvaney to be an analyst.
 
It’s their decision whether or not they want to retain their credibility as a news organization and get rid of Mick Mulvaney.  That’s out of my hands, of course.  But if they do fire him, and are stumped trying to find another voice of reason at his same level, I can get them in touch with Jimmy Glipton.