Have you spent the past week pouring over the Mueller Report? Quite the page-turner from what I hear. Although, with all the redactions, it’s kind of like trying to readA Christmas Carolwithout ever seeing the name Ebenezer Scrooge in print.

The Washington spin cycle went into full rotating mode as soon as the document hit the streets. The White House was gleeful, and from all indications, had a right to be. Mr. Mueller and his minions didn’t find anything absolutely beyond-the-shadow-of-a-doubt concrete in the collusion area.

Many members of the loyal opposition, on the other hand, were apoplectic, seething, irate, furious, spitting mad . . . take your pick.

It’s relatively easy to kind of guess what type of comments were flying around 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue after the report’s release: “No collusion, no collusion, no collusion. Told them that from the beginning. Complete waste of time and $25 million. Let’s go after the accusers.” But it would really have been interesting to listen in on some of the conversations that took place as members of the Democratic hierarchy huddled together to formulate a response and plan the next move.

Maybe the discussion between Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Jerry Nadler, and Adam Schiff went something like this:

NANCY: Are you kidding me? Nothing? No collusion? Read it again. That has to be a mistake.

CHUCK: We’ve been through it ten times already.

NANCY: Adam, you swore you had evidence. Where is it?

ADAM: Well, I, uh, I may have misspoken just a bit there.

NANCY: Wishful thinking isn’t the same as facts.

CHUCK: This is a disaster. We all know the guy’s guilty. Why doesn’t everybody else see that?

ADAM: Ya see, that’s what I was thinking, and . . .

NANCY: Maybe you’d better stop thinking for a while, Adam.

CHUCK: You did make some pretty outlandish predictions.

ADAM: Oh, look who’s talking. Like you were silent on the subject, Chuck! I couldn’t turn on MSNBC without watching you solemnly swearing Trump and Putin were soul mates.

JERRY: Perhaps I could interject a thought.

NANCY: Be careful, Jerry. You weren’t exactly silent through all this either.

JERRY: True. But I’m thinking there’s a ray of hope here.

ALL OTHERS: Tell us!

JERRY: The way I read it, collusion is off the table. But Mueller didn’t concretely say anything about absolutely, positively, no lack of obstruction. I think there may be some wiggle room there.

NANCY: Hmmm. Go on. Wiggle away. We’re listening.

JERRY: What if we went after Trump on the idea he obstructed the investigation from the get-go? You know, hold a few hearings, subpoena half the Capitol.

CHUCK: We could drag that investigation out for a long time.

NANCY: At least a year. Maybe more. Through November 2020?

ADAM: Hey, I could say we’ve already got the proof . . .

ALL OTHERS: No!

ADAM: Sheesh. It was just a thought.

NANCY: Slowly and deliberately. That’s the way to go.

JERRY: I’m pretty sure we could get some of the media to get on board with this.

GENERAL LAUGHTER

CHUCK: That’s a good one, Jerry.

NANCY: If we go with obstruction, you know McConnell and FOX are going to bring up Nixon and Clinton.

ADAM: Who cares? Nobody ever liked Nixon and the Clintons are washed up. But don’t tell anyone I said that. By the way, she’s not running again, is she?

JERRY: Not as of today.

CHUCK: So, do you have any specific obstruction of justice in mind, Jerry?

JERRY: Nah. But we’ll find something. Hey, c’mon, it’s Trump. He ain’t exactly Mr. Clean.

NANCY: I like this. Let’s run it up the flagpole. Somebody get Maxine on the phone and tell her to start the “Impeach 45” haranguing again.

CHUCK: She’ll be thrilled.

NANCY: Okay, anything else on the agenda? Anybody want to talk about immigration or climate control or the economy or healthcare? You know I’ve got a few new members who are really kind of vocal about those things. They may not care so much about obstruction as a selling point back in their districts.

CHUCK: You’re still the Speaker, aren’t you?

NANCY: Yeah.

CHUCK: Then speak.

NANCY: You HAVE seen what I’m up against, haven’t you?

JERRY: It’ll work out. Adam and I can make sure everybody gets some face time on TV to make a few statements. They don’t even have to talk about obstruction if they don’t want to.

NANCY: Works for me.

Okay, okay, so perhaps the conversation may have been a little different. But with the way Washington works, it’s plausible, isn’t it?

 

©MMXIX. William J. Lewis, III – Freelance Writer