The furore surrounding the Rafale deal is starting to resemble an Abbas-Mustan thriller with its constant twists and turns, claims and counter-claims. Much like one of the duo’s movies where the name of the film (Race, Humraaz, Player, Badshah, Soldier, Aitraaz) is repeated ad nauseum, the deal also has all the players shouting Rafale without any deeper meaning or context.

From claims by a former French premier not wanting his dalliances becoming public to estimates costs which don't match real ones, the high-pitched rhetoric hasn’t been matched by facts to back up any claims of improbity.

On Friday, another attempt to claim any skulduggery fell flat even though it appeared - for a brief moment – that the Opposition had finally found a chink in the armour.

Holding up a report, Congress president Rahul Gandhi, jeering like a cat who finally had its cream, claimed: “I want to speak to every member of the armed forces of this nation... Here, it is absolutely clear that the prime minister has stolen Rs 30,000 crore of your money, bypassed a process, and given it to his friend Mr. Anil Ambani.”

Citing former Defence Secretary G Mohan Kumar’s ‘dissent note’, Gandhi said: “Now, it is crystal clear that the ministry itself has said, and I will read it to you, 'It is therefore clear that the parallel discussions by the PMO has weakened the negotiation of the MOD and the Indian Negotiating Team. We may advise PMO that any officers who are not part of the Negotiation Team may refrain from having parallel parleys with the officer of the French government'.”

Of course, the report, much like Yudhisthir’s only lie was just a half-truth and missing a crucial piece of information – the Defence Minister’s reply.

Responding to the claims on the floor of the House during Zero Hour, Sitharaman compared the constant questions about Rafale to flogging a dead horse. She also reminded Congress of their own PMO ‘interference’, Sonia Gandhi’s dreaded NAC which was almost a parallel cabinet.

But aside from the ad hominem attack, Sitharaman’s reply showed how the devil in the detail had gone missing in the newspaper report.

While it was true that the Defence Secretary had dissented to PMO’s ‘parallel parlays’, the fact of the matter was that Parrikar had also replied to the bureaucrat to explain the situation.

The subsequent document showed that Parrikar had replied to the note by the Defence Secretary calling it an overreaction. He even urged him to clear it up with the PMO’s principal Secretary.

Parrikar wrote: "It appears that the PMO and French president's office are monitoring the progress of the issue which was an outcome of the summit meeting. Para 5 appears to be an overreaction. Defence Secretary may resolve with Principal Secretary to PM."

Meanwhile, Air Marshall SBP Sinha, who led the negotiations called the ‘article an attempt to malign the negotiation that happened for the procurement of the 36 Rafale jets’. He said that the note was internal matter and had nothing to do with the Indian negotiation team that he headed.

The exchange hardly suggests any over-arching ‘interference’ by the PMO beyond observation, and the Opposition have to come another day to find some dirt that truly sticks.