Customer Reviews

All the President's Men (30th Anniversary Edition)

5 star:		(75)
4 star:		(17)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(9)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

With the recent revelation that second-in-command FBI agent Mark Felt was indeed, as often conjectured, "Deep Throat," Woodward and Bernstein's "All the President's Men" is sure to experience a revival of interest. And why not? It is riveting writing with the cloak-and-danger stuff that would make Ian Fleming jealous.

The opening words of the opening chapter lure in readers. "June 17, 1972. Nine o'clock Saturday morning. Early for the telephone. Woodward fumbled for the receiver and snapped awake. The city editor of the Washington Post was on the line. Five men had been arrested earlier that morning in a burglary at Democratic headquarters, carrying photographic equipment and electronic gear. Could he come in?"

The break-neck pace never stops. Page after page-turning-page, Woodward and Bernstein offer the political detective story of the century with their Pulitzer Prize-winning investigation that smashed the Watergate scandal wide open. In the process, they expose the inner workings of the Washington power elite and the inner workings of a paranoid President who approves a bungling burglary to seal an election that was never in doubt in the first place.

Buy it today. Or, dust off your old copy. This is water-cooler talk and you don't want to be left out.

Reviewer: Bob Kellemen, Ph.D., is the author of "Martin Luther: Pastoral Care in Historical Perspective," "Soul Physicians," "Spiritual Friends," and the forthcoming "Sacred Companions: A History of Soul Care and Spiritual Direction."

Time has not dulled the impact of "All the President's Men". It's been thirty years, now, since the thwarted break-in at the Watergate. Most of the higher-ups in President Nixon's administration have passed away, and subsequent generations reared on Iran-Contra and Whitewater may not even remember what the fuss was about. But from the very first page of this book, history becomes life and events rush forward to the inevitable conclusion that still seems impossible today.

Woodward and Bernstein's reporting is the major thrust of the first half of "President's". We watch both reporters work late into the night, interviewing reluctant and/or anonymous witnesses in an attempt to find out just why the Watergate burglars had connections with the White House, and how far up the political chain of command those men were connected. Along the way, mistakes are made and a reputations are wrongfully derailed. But the story -- the crimes and the subsequent cover-ups may have indeed been directed by the President of the United States himself! -- takes on a life of its own, and Woodward and Bernstein become witness to the defining story of an era.

Much of "All the President's Men" has passed into legend, especially the unrevealed identity of Woodward's executive branch contact known only as "Deep Throat". The Watergate players to this day still debate just who Deep Throat was -- John Dean seems to publish a book on the subject every five years. Time has proven most of the accusations correct -- for an interesting exercise, try comparing Woodward's and Bernstein's discoveries with the corresponding daily entries in "The Haldeman Diaries"). The book gives so few clues as to make the exercise nearly impossible, even to those of us who've read all there is to read about Watergate and Nixon. Was it John Dean? Alexander Haig? Perpetual Nixon apologist Bill Safire? The answer will be made known in my lifetime, but I would like to think sooner rather than later.

Although 30 years is a short time in American history, in politics it can be a lifetime. The meticulous triple and quadruple-checking of the Washington Post staff has given way to the unfounded accusations that support a half-dozen instant political bestsellers. Certainly no-one uses the passive voice quite as monotonously as do Woodward and Bernstein. These defects, however, are minor: the antics of Colson and Liddy and Haldeman and even the amusing capers of Donald Segretti remain fascinating in print even today.

When you're done with "All the President's Men", I recommend "The Final Days" (by Woodward and Bernstein) and "The Haldeman Diaries", and then the rebuttal books put out by Nixon staffers such as Haig and Erlichman.

What is largely forgotten is that in the summer of 1972, Bob Woodward and Carl Berstein were two young but complete nobody reporters assigned not to political reporting but the Washington Post's Metro section. When they were assigned to cover a "fourth rate burglary" at the Watergate Hotel, it changed the course of their careers and of American History. It is no exaggeration that had more conventional Washington political reporters been assigned to the Watergate story, it might never have been exposed in enough detail to bring down Richard Nixon. This book is an American classic. Though it lacks historical perspective on the Watergate affair, it is vital to anyone who wants to understand the greatest American political crisis of the Post World War Two era.

On June 17, 1972 Bob Woodward received a telephone call and was asked to cover a burglary of Democratic headquarters; he had just finished some stories on the attempt to assassinate George Wallace. All five burglars stood out against the usual suspects in police court; all had CIA connections.

Page 21 tells of the investigation into McCord's activities; he worked full-time for the Committee to Re-elect the President. McCord followed orders unquestioningly, did not act on his own initiative. Two of the burglars had the name and phone numbers of Howard Hunt. This number led to Charles Colson, then to the R. Mullen Company. Pages 24-25 tell how address books and telephone numbers were used in this investigation, with off-the-record reports. While this burglary was bungled, how many others succeeded (p.26)? The purpose of the break-in was for "scandal, gossip" (p.27). [To find someone vulnerable to bribery or blackmail who could be used as a spy or saboteur.] There were too many coincidences in this story (some of these burglars were around when offices of prominent Democratic lawyers were burglarized). While a burglary usually means taking something away, it could also be used to plant incriminating papers. Days later John Mitchell resigned as manager of the Nixon campaign (p.30). Bernstein went to Miami, and found out that a $25,000 check donated to President Nixon's campaign was deposited to the bank account of one of the Watergate burglars (p.44). Page 45 gives an example of how confidential medical records are used in politics. The GAO audit determined that over $500,000 in campaign funds was mishandled (p.40). They learned about money-laundering (p.54). Page 55 explains how this is raised for protection money.

Bob Woodward had a secret source ("Deep Throat") who confirmed information that had been obtained elsewhere (p.71). These reporters had different styles (pp.49-51). The big news was that Attorney General John Mitchell authorized campaign funds for apparently illegal activities (p.98)! Page 104 explains a clever denial. Both reporters had sources in the Justice Department who could confirm details (p.111). An unfair accusation in the 'Washington Post' could ruin careers. The Watergate bugging made little sense by itself, but could indicate part of a broader campaign (pp.113-4); page 116 gives an example. Page 127 tells how a faked letter could derail a successful campaign! The Nixon take-over of the Federal agencies was presented (p.130), as if it were subjecting the government and nation his personal whims. There was subversion of the electoral process (p.135). This was unprecedented in scope and intensity (p.143). Page 147 tells of an imposter who imitated the voice of a McGovern campaign official. There were other horror stories from the Muskie staffers (p.148). Control of the operations was traced to Nixon's appointments secretary, who had daily access to the President. The rest of this book covers events from 1973 until early 1974. Page 273 summarizes the connections (Chapter 13).

A "third rate burglary" led to White House personnel. Further investigations lead to wide-scale illegal fundraising, and political sabotage that involves misdemeanors and other crimes. Most of those involved had little experience in politics. The idol with feet of clay came crashing down. Most people under 40 missed these events; learn about it from this book.

I am not an American, and I often find that I come short when discussing political history with my American friends. Therefore, I am always looking for books that can fill gaps in my knowledge. "All the President's men" is such a book.

The beginning of this book contains a "Cast of Characters", a detailed description of persons and their involvement in the case. If you are a like me, you make sure to dog-ear this page for your reference, as you work your way through the flurry of different names and places. Fear not, the struggle of keeping track of everyone involved is worth it!

This book provides us with two distinct "different" story-lines. First, a fascinating description of investigative journalism. We learn how newspapers work, the fights over cover-page stories, the importance of getting your name under the story line, and arguments and discussions in the editor's office. I particularly came to admire the owner of the Washington Post, Cathrine Graham, for her tremendous courage during this period. The newspaper received threats, directed to specific people, as well as with regards to possible lawsuits. The case could have brought the paper down and destroyed it completely. Second, the very detailed and interesting guide to the collapse of Richard Nixon, the 37th President of the United States.

The Watergate Scandal started innocently enough, with a simple break-in in the Democratic headquarters in the Watergate Hotel. The "Washington Post" had Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward covering the case. The two inexperienced reporters would soon see that the more they kept digging, the more obscure and unbelievable the story got. In the end, they had a list of people involved including the top level of government, the US intelligence community and ultimately, the White House itself.

What most people don't think of is that, back in the summer of 1972, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein were two young and enthusiastic, but complete "nobodies" in the world of journalism. What they had in common was that they both worked in the Washington Post's "Metro section", but not much more. They disliked each other, and were not keen on working together. So, after spending the first months using a lot of energy mistrusting each other, they learned how to trust each other and work together.

These two young men set in motion a powerful legacy, which extends well beyond their first set of writings for the Washington Post. They covered the case that stands as a milestone in US history. The Watergate Scandal won Woodward and Bernstein fame and fortune, including the Pulitzer Price. Their book "All the President's men" details all the events of one of the greatest political scandal in US history, which in the end, brought down a President.

"All the President's men" is fast-paced, and easy to read. It gives a very good summary of the Watergate Scandal (and American history) to the lay reader.

Comparing the Watergate Scandal with the election in Florida a couple of years back, or Clinton's Lewinsky affair and Travelgate, I think that "All the President's men" puts things in perspective for us, and highlights a REAL political scandal.

I couldn't recommend it more. A page-turner!

Even after repeat viewings of the film "All the President's Men" on DVD, and really appreciating what a classic it is, it cannot beat the original book. In fact, along with "The Final Days," the film is even *better* when read in tandem with the book. Students should be reading it in either high school or college - it is not only compulsively readable, but manages to help those of us born after Watergate understand what really happened. And it's also a great introduction to life inside the (Washington D.C.) Beltway.

The reputation of journalism as a profession, and the ideal of truth and accuracy in reporting, has taken a beating. In the last few years, between the Jayson Blair scandal at the New York Times and the New Republic embarassment with Stephen Glass, it's refreshing to read this book and see what journalism is meant to be. For one thing, Woodward and Bernstein endeavored to be objective even when describing themselves, and their own actions - being honest about their own weaknesses and habits as reporters. There is no bombast or ego here, or in "Final Days", about what brilliant reporting they did, or how they broke this white-hot story when they were both quite young. It makes Blair and Glass's arrogance much harder to stomach.

I loved this book. As a thirty something who never studied watergate in school this book made me understand why it is so often talked about.
Unlike the movie, the book penetrates the viciousness of the Nixon slush money machine and its undermining of Nixon's opponents' political campaigns through many awful deeds. The watergate break-in itself was really only the tip of the iceberg and that is not addressed in the movie. This book would be a fascinating read as fiction and as non-fiction is one of the greatest tales ever told. The book like the movie is also exciting, dangerous and suspenseful as the two reporters put their lives on the line for the sake of American history.

In the sub-genre of journalistic memoir, there simply is no book better than this. It is written still in the heat of battle - as it was being put together, Nixon had not yet resigned - and conveys the sense of being under pressure from public power, from the fears and lack of cooperation of individuals, and from their own human fallibility; conveys it better than anything except, perhaps, a war diary. As writing, it has not aged. And it is worth having for one very good reason: that Watergate has shrunk in the memory. After many succeeding penny-ante scandals, artificially built up to be something they were not, it is important to remember that the President at the time did not go down for the silly raid on the National Democratic Committee, nor even for having a few outright sleazeballs in his ante-room, but - to put it bluntly - for turning the White House into a criminal association within the meaning of the act. Secret intelligence, slush funds acquired from corrupt businessmen, sabotage, slander, destruction of documents, behind-the-scenes fixing - even arson and threats of violence - were the daily bread of the Nixon camp, the way they did business. If they had a choice between a legal and an illegal way to do anything, they chose, not the legal one - nor even the one that made most sense in terms of non-moral efficiency - but the illegal one, as a sort of constitutional preference. There has never been anything like this in the White House, before or - fortunately - since: everything that may be quoted against any other President, up to and including Teapot Dome and Ulysses Grant's inglorious time in office, simply pales in front of the daily, routine criminality of the Nixon men. At the time, the Republican Party at large was quite clear that the Nixonites were an entity apart, dedicated purely to the personal power of the President. And long before the Plumbers ever broke into Watergate, Richard Nixon was in hock and virtually paying blackmail to them and to similarly unscrupulous characters for a score of illegal acts; in the end, that, more than any break-in, made the exposure of the President virtually inevitable.
Just as inevitable, of course, is revisionism. I know that someone called Colodny has come up with an "alternative" account that charges that John Dean arranged for the break-in to cover up for his wife's involvement in a call-girl ring and then sold the President and his colleagues down the river to protect himself; and that Alexander Haig worked against the President and manipulated Woodward and Bernstein. The second statement is highly unlikely, in view of the fact that nobody comes out of THE LAST DAYS - the book that followed this - worse than Haig, who is shown to be a smooth careerist whose "military" career saw him go from Colonel to four-star General within six years at the White House, and who has loyalty for nobody but himself; a strange way to promote him to the public. The first only shifts the blame from one Nixon sleazeball to another, without doing anything to alter the fact that the Nixon administration, as a whole, was corrupt with a depth and thoroughness that, while not unfamiliar in American municipal politics, was and remains unique at national level. The evidence is beyond denial, and plenty of it is aired in this book - unbreakable paper trails such as the cheque signed by a perfectly honest Republican fundraiser called Kenneth H. Dahlberg, which ended up in the bank account of one of the burglars: with this sort of hard fact staring at us in the face, what does it matter whether John Dean lied or not?
Indeed, the best way to understand what happened in America between 1969 and 1973 may perhaps be to think of the politics of Chicago or Tammamy Hall transplanted to the federal level: comparison with corrupt Third World regimes is not very helpful, because Third World politics do not have the elaboration, thoroughness and reach that Nixonism had.
This, in the end, is the main value of this memoir: as a sort of pre-emptive strike against revisionism, reminding us that - whatever its ramifications - the Watergate affair was unique in its extent and depth, and should never be simply normalized in memory by aligning it with footling items about smeared cigars and hanging chads.

By now, most people know what this book is about. Woodward and Bernstein were the Washington Post reporters who blew open the case of the Watergate break-in in 1972 and brought it to the steps of the white house.

So you might think there isn't much to learn from reading the book. That's a big mistake.

First of all, this is a great read. It's a page turner. Even though we all know how it comes out, watching it unfold is exciting. Woodward and Bernstein write very well, and there's a lot of humor sprinkled in as well.

Second, this book is a cliff-hanger. It was published in the spring of '74, several months before Nixon's resignation. Because of this, it's not written with the resignation as "the point," and that gives it a very different perspective than most retrospectives of the Watergate era. It pays attention to all the steps of the investigation that get glossed over in the rush to the resignation most historians indulge in.

Third, now that we know who "Deep Throat" was, you can read this book with a whole different set of eyes. Knowing who it was, it looks perfectly obvious who it must have been, even though it wasn't obvious at all until very recently. It's fun to know that you know the secret that the book refuses to reveal.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, this book outlines in staggering, depressing detail how much the American people just didn't care for so long. Nixon was reelected with 49 states and 61% of the vote AFTER much of the scandal broke. We tend to say, when watching the news, "If this scandal was really important, like Watergate, we'd know." Well, we didn't even know when we heard about Watergate, and that is perhaps the scariest lesson of all.

It has been 31 years since a small group of men entered the Watergate office building on the banks of the Potomac River for the purpose of gathering intelligence to be used against the Democrats in the 1972 election. There are many young adults who were not around then, and this is all the more reason to give a very high recommendation.

This is the story of two young reporters at the Washington Post, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, whose reportage of the Watergate break-in and the subsequent cover up led to the resignation of President Nixon on August 9, 1974.

These two journalists, so dissimilar in may ways, forged a trusting and cooperative relationship born out of initial competitiveness (and disrespect for each other). The book is written in the "third person" which, from a standpoint of style, was probably the best way to proceed instead of bouncing back and forth from one person to the other.

We know quite a bit more about Watergate today than we knew three decades ago, but this is the book that really brought the main story into focus. The people who inhabit the book are all memorable: The two reporters; Hugh Sloan, a man whose integrity made him leave the Committee to Re-Elect the President rather than be a party to what was going on; the female accountant (whose name is not mentioned in the book but who has since gone public) who reluctantly helps Bernsetin while he drinks numerous cups of coffee; the men and women who were too frightened to help.

And, of course, there is "Deep Throat," the mysterious source who helped keep Woodward on track and whose identity is speculated about even today, so many years after these events.

If you haven't read this book, please do before you read any other book on the Watergate affair (the movie of the same name is also wonderful -- with the cinematographer choosing shots which emphasized the massive government buildings as a backdrop against the insignificant looking figures of Woodward and Bernstein -- played by Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman, respectively).