The Corner

Politics & Policy

Just Say You’re Sorry

There’s a growing argument on the right that the media and the Left are out to get Scott Pruitt because he’s an effective EPA administrator doing things conservatives like and many liberals detest. I think this is entirely plausible — indeed, probable. I also think it’s plausible that he did some things he shouldn’t have.

I haven’t followed all of the minutiae, but as a general matter, when the press goes into a feeding frenzy, it’s often because it smells blood in the water. The media may be exaggerating Pruitt’s alleged misdeeds, but at the very least, he has given the appearance of chumming the water.

Just going by Pruitt’s performance in his interview with Fox News’s Ed Henry, his explanations for giving raises to two staffers and his condo deal seem dodgy and all-too-defensive.

What I don’t get in situations like this is why Pruitt — or, say, Ben Carson before him — can’t just say, “I messed up.” In real life, people screw up, and bosses ask, “What were you thinking?” and then the response is to offer an explanation (not pretend you didn’t know anything or, in Carson’s case, blame your wife). I can think of all sorts of explanations for why Pruitt did what he’s alleged to have done that would be satisfactory to reasonable people — if he started from the premise that he made a mistake.

The “It’s not the crime; it’s the cover-up” cliché is grounded in a basic human dynamic. People tend to be very forgiving of mistakes when they’re owned up to. We get much angrier when we’re lied to, because it feels both like an insult to our intelligence and a kind of bullying; “You must pretend to believe something you don’t believe.

The Obama administration was full of people who committed far worse transgressions — John Koskinen at the IRS, Eric Holder at DOJ — who offered (fairly disingenuous) apologies, promised to take “full responsibility,” and stayed in their jobs. Admittedly, the press was looking for reasons to move on from those stories, but even so, such statements give the press no place to go. When you lie or obfuscate, you invite more investigation. If you admit it, apologize, and go back to work, you make those who continue to harp on the matter seem obsessed, repetitive, or boorish.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

Yes, They Are Coming for Your Guns

At the Democratic-primary debate in Houston last night, Beto O’Rourke formally killed off one of the gun-control movement’s favorite taunts: The famous “Nobody is coming for your guns, wingnut.” Asked bluntly whether he was proposing confiscation, O’Rourke abandoned the disingenuous euphemisms that have ... Read More
White House

Politico Doubles Down on Fake Turnberry Scandal

It's tough to be an investigative reporter. Everybody who feeds you a tip has an axe to grind. Or, alternatively, you find yourself going, "I wonder if . . . ?" You put in your research, you talk to lots of people, you accumulate a huge pile of information, but you still haven't proved your hypothesis. A wise ... Read More
Culture

Four Cheers for Incandescent Light Bulbs

It brought me much -- indeed, too much -- joy to hear of the Trump administration's rollback of restrictions on incandescent light bulbs, even if the ban will remain in place. The LED bulbs are terrible. They give off a pitiable, dim, and altogether underwhelming "glow," one that never matched the raw (if ... Read More
White House

Rachel Maddow’s Turnberry Tale

To a certain kind of Rachel Maddow viewer, there are few more titillating preludes to a news segment than the one she delivered Monday: “If you have not seen it yet, you are going to want to sit down.” Maddow’s story began, as many of her stories do, with President Trump, this time focused on his hotel ... Read More