On Sep. 24, the House Select Committee on Jan. 6 issued the first of what would eventually become more than a dozen subpoenas—so far. That first cluster went out to four men: former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, former Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino, former Pentagon Chief of Staff Kash Patel, and full-time scumbag Stephen Bannon. Bannon loudly refused to cooperate, was held in contempt by the House, and is now facing months in court as the Justice Department presses the case for criminal contempt. Former Trump attorney Jeffery Clark, who was subpoenaed in October, is likely facing his own contempt proceedings next week after announcing he would not cooperate with the committee.

But Meadows apparently chose a different path. As The Washington Post reports, back on Nov. 12, Meadows sent word that he would cooperate with the select committee, both when it comes to turning over subpoenaed documents and in terms of providing his own testimony. 

The level of Meadows’ “cooperation” is far from clear. During past investigations, including Trump’s first impeachment, members of his staff often put forward a pretense of cooperation as a means of delaying the process and preventing Congress from moving swiftly toward findings of contempt. Meadows could easily be pulling that same string, teasing the committee with claims of cooperation, then using the conflict to smugly reaffirm his loyalty to Trump above all.

But the negotiations with the select committee have been going on for weeks, which seems to suggest that there’s actually something to this proposal. Which begs the question: Why would Mark Meadows want to talk?

The easiest answer is also the most cynical. Meadows has a new book out, and sitting down with the House Select Committee is almost certain to be a moment that will get network cameras to tune in, hoping for a revelation. Meadows could testify to exactly those items he’s let slip in the book, no comment his way to everything else, and ultimately use his time on camera to insist that his loyalty lies in Mar-a-Lago.

That, unfortunately, seems like not just the easiest, but the most likely outcome.

There’s also a very good chance that if Meadows is trying to carve out this space to treat the committee as a stop on his book tour, it could lead to the whole thing being called off. Committee Chair Rep. Bennie Thompson continues to say that as a witness, Meadows is expected “to provide all information requested and that the select committee is lawfully entitled to receive.” Meanwhile, Meadows’ attorney George Terwilliger insists that Meadows is still seeking an appearance that “does not require Mr. Meadows to waive executive privilege or to forfeit the long-standing position that senior White House aides cannot be compelled to testify before Congress.”

Those two positions don’t exactly seem close.

But, according to the Post, there is a level of “cautious optimism” within the select committee. The hope is that Meadows will make an agreement that might still place his direct conversations with Trump in the White House off limits while opening Meadows to other questions about the planning, execution, and follow-up to the rally and assault on Jan. 6.

In any case, a reading that Meadows cooperation with the committee indicates any sort of wall breaking down, or the first step in a flood of Trump cohorts finally ready to rush forward and reveal the truth, is extremely premature. Not only could the cautious optimism that he will appear at all turn out to be ill-founded, there’s no doubt that if Meadows does eventually sit down in the committee hearing room, he’ll do so as a staunch defender of Trump, unwilling to give the committee anything that would illuminate the actual strategy behind Trump’s efforts to overturn the election.

What makes that absolutely certain is … that book. While early leaks from Meadows’ book might have let slip that Trump tested positive for COVID-19 before the first debate, the thrust of the book is solidly in the “only Trump can save us” school of current Republican politics. There’s not a hint in anything released so far that Meadow’s book will be anything more than a tongue-bath tribute to “the chief.”

In fact, how Meadows tells that story of the vaccine test is instructive. After admitting that Trump tested positive, Meadows goes on to quickly say that a second test found him negative. And that’s that. He doesn’t mention that Trump continued to roam around Air Force One, speaking to reporters and others without a mask after he was informed of the positive test. He doesn’t explain why the next day Trump spoke at a podium in the Rose Garden that was moved to be over 10 feet away from everyone else. He doesn’t explain why Trump arrived late at the debate and failed to take the required COVID-19 test on arrival.

Meadows gives a teaspoon of truth, followed by a dump truck-load of Trump praise. Don’t expect that ratio to change if he actually sits down for the committee.