The Nixon Defense: What He Knew and When He Knew It

by John W. Dean

Based on Nixon’s previously overlooked secret recordings—a revelatory new look at Watergate by one of its key figures
 
Watergate forever changed American politics, and in light of the revelations about the NSA’s wide­spread surveillance program, the scandal has taken on new significance. Yet remarkably, four decades after he was forced to resign, no one has told the full story of Nixon’s involvement in Watergate.
 
In The Nixon Defense, former White House Counsel John Dean, one of the last major surviving figures of Watergate, draws on his own transcripts of almost a thousand conversations, a wealth of Nixon’s secretly recorded information, and more than 150,000 pages of documents in the National Archives and the Nixon Library to provide the de­finitive answer to the question: What did President Nixon know and when did he know it?
 
Through narrative and contemporaneous dia­logue, Dean connects dots that have never been connected, including revealing how and why the Watergate break-in occurred, what was on the mys­terious 18.5 minute gap in Nixon’s recorded con­versations, and more.
 
In what will stand as the most authoritative account of one of America’s worst political scan­dals, The Nixon Defense shows how the disastrous mistakes of Watergate could have been avoided and offers a cautionary tale for our own time.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Politics, Biography, Presidents, American History, Us Presidents

784 pages, Hardcover

First published July 29, 2014

About the author

John W. Dean served as White House Counsel for United States President Richard Nixon from July 1970 until April 1973. In this position, he became deeply involved in events leading up to the Watergate burglaries and the subsequent Watergate scandal cover-up. He was referred to as the "master manipulator of the cover-up" by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). He pleaded guilty to a single felony count, in exchange for becoming a key witness for the prosecution. This ultimately resulted in a reduced prison sentence, which he served at Fort Holabird outside Baltimore, Maryland.

Dean is currently an author, columnist, and commentator on contemporary politics, strongly critical of conservatism and the Republican Party, and is a registered Independent who supported the efforts to impeach President George W. Bush.

Reviews

[Christopher Saunders · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's only natural that John Dean, one of history's greatest rat finks, would continue profiting off his experience as Richard Nixon's repentant consigliere for decades after the fact. Published right after the 40th anniversary of Nixon's resignation, The Nixon Defense meticulous recounts every step of Nixon's cover-up from the day of the break-in through the revelation of the White House taping system. In one sense, there isn't much that's truly new here, especially for anyone who's read Stanley Kutler's books on Watergate or Dean's own memoir Blind Ambition. All the same, Dean puts his meticulous legal skill to excellent use, documenting that Nixon directed the cover-up from the word go, demolishing any pretense that he was set up or manipulated by others. Perhaps feeling the need for a new angle, Dean makes a few speculative leaps about motivations and responsibility: he fingers John Ehrlichman as the most likely person to have ordered the actual break-in, a conclusion I'm not overly convinced about (one of CREEP's bigger creeps, Mitchell or Magruder perhaps, seems a more plausible culprit). That said, Dean's painstaking recreation of his boss's fall from grace (without minimizing his own role) provides high-caliber ammo against any remaining Nixon apologists.

[Donna Davis · Rating 5 out of 5]

John Dean is a man with a mission, one that has lasted him most of his adult life. This comprehensive tome is the sort of documented, primary evidence that is only done by someone who's got a large stake in setting the historical record straight. Dean is that man.

It goes to show that even though the First Amendment has become narrower in some ways, what with the NSA helping itself to all of our phone records and no reporters or photographers being permitted in war zones anymore, yet in some ways it has become much broader. If you are curious about these transcripts yourself, you can get onto the website Dean offers at the very beginning of his missive, or you can do as I did, and go to YouTube. I don't know whether all of the transcripts are there; I wasn't on a mission with a scope as large as Dean's, and there were many, many hours of taped conversation; YouTube has so much material, some of it historical and/or arcane. But during my surf I did note that there was a lot of what would previously have been considered restricted material there. It wasn't just the resignation and the Checkers speech; it was a tremendous amount of data. Send out your thanks to the gods of technology, which is what made Dean's newer and more comprehensive transcription possible.

I was in high school during the Watergate scandal, in a nearly 100% Caucasian,mostly affluent Republican suburb outside Portland, Oregon. My high school peers said things like, "Oh well of course he lied, but he's still a better president than McGovern would have been", and "Wow. Rose Mary Woods. Now there's loyalty!"

My own father, a conservative Republican, scowled at my sister and me as we avidly viewed the presidential resignation speech. He poured himself another, another and yet another glass of bourbon and shook his head, telling us that the president was a fine man who had been viciously hounded by a liberal press. For those of us who lived through this American political saga, it's about context.

For those who seek less detail than is included here or want a novel-like story arc, I would recommend "All the President's Men", which is a briefer and less repetitive narrative told by one of the investigative journalists who uncovered the Watergate scandal. For those who are sticklers for detail, either for academic or professional reasons or because, like me, you are addicted to Watergate material, this will be a deeply satisfying read.

To put it another way: if, like me, you had to get a copy of The Pentagon Papers and read what the US government tried to suppress, then you also ought to read this book.

At first, I thought Dean’s tone was a little too plaintive, given that he had cooperated in a cover-up himself, albeit under protest, for nearly a year. Once I got into the trial material and saw the vindictive and purposeful way Richard Nixon and those who worked for him set about to “destroy Dean”, I no longer felt that he protested too much. The machinations of Nixon’s revenge are worth a thesis unto themselves, so I will let that bit go and move on. You’ll have to read the book if you want more about Nixon’s vengeance.

What did Nixon know? I started to provide it in bullet points here, and realized it was just no fun that way. Let me say this much: Dean does answer the question. Nobody living knows more about this subject than John Dean. It has become his life’s work. If you invest yourself in 700+ pages of text, you will not come away feeling cheated, unless you skim and miss things. I didn’t.

It was not only Nixon’s self-righteous attitude when it was clear that he was legally and morally wrong that I found disturbing, but also the tone. The racist and sexist remarks that punctuate the conversations he has with his highest-level advisors cannot simply be written off as relics of that point in history. It is appalling.

What is equally appalling is that upon learning of the burglary at the Democratic headquarters, Nixon, Haldeman and Ehrlichman find no moral objection to what has been done; hell, they’ve authorized far worse things, as we later learn. No, what disturbs them is how badly the job was done, how unprofessional the burglars were. It sounds like something out of a Godfather sequel.

And it just gets worse. By the time Dean decides that Nixon cannot be redeemed and goes to the prosecutor to explain what has happened and try to gain immunity, we see Nixon vow first not to speak to him and to fire him as White House counsel; then to “destroy” him, which is ugly but can have multiple meanings, literal and figurative; and then ultimately Dean must enter a witness protection program for awhile because of the mountains of death threats that are received daily. Dean’s counsel wants to know whether Nixon would try to have him killed, and at first Dean, who does not ruffle easily, thinks not. But then he muses that it's possible the president would arrange something through his pal, Bebe Rebozo.

I had heard from friends who had read more than I had that Mitchell, Haldeman and Ehrlichman were serious thugs. This transcript and the brief paraphrasing that connects its pieces (not unlike Sheehan’s Pentagon Papers) makes all of it quite real. This man was supposedly the leader of the free world! He used public monies to bring down retribution on his enemies (his own word), and used other people’s tax dollars to fund a remodeling and extension of his home in San Clemente. He continually revised the truth according to what was convenient for him.

At first, I wondered: did Nixon have some sort of psychiatric disorder that made him unable to process clearly? But as the story unfolded, I could see exactly how well he tracked events. His temperament and loyalties were ever-changing and always in line with his own self-interest. He could not, absolutely could not bear for the burglary scandal to touch his dear friend and former law partner, John Mitchell, who headed up the Committee to Re-elect the President. Absolutely not! It was unthinkable, but only until the jig was obviously up. And when Mitchell had to be sacrificed, then Nixon just didn’t talk to him anymore. That was it, over, done. And then, everything was Mitchell’s fault; his old friend was more like a waste basket by the door. When you see a problem, toss it onto the Mitchell pile. He did it.

Then of course he had other two best friends, Haldeman and Ehrlichman, who were the only people he still trusted (and though this book is about politics, it's interesting that the First Lady is never mentioned; he doesn’t eat dinner with her, doesn’t have her out on the presidential yacht…we hear from Tricia and Julie, his daughters, during the peak of crisis, but the guy’s wife is practically invisible).

But Haldeman and Ehrlichman should not be culpable for all the illegal things they have helped him plan and execute, and so he decides that his counsel, John Dean, should serve as the go-between, so that everything that is told to Nixon by Dean would (he thought) be covered by attorney-client privilege. And this is when Dean begins to squirm, as things that are illegal, immoral, and untenable are sent via him as the presidential filter. At first he just does what the boss says; then he starts to tentatively warn him that he’s getting into some deep water here; and eventually he is laying it on the line, and Nixon tells him that of course, those discussions never occurred, and these things never happened.

Later, when Dean realizes that he cannot work with Nixon without breaking the law, he goes to the prosecutor, hoping to avoid prison. Then, Dean is no longer the guy Nixon trusts, and in fact every bad thing anyone who ever worked for Nixon ever did, is said to have been done by Dean. It is a fascinating transformation. And the way Nixon first clings to Haldeman and Ehrlichman, and seems to actually be a little afraid to fire them, but he then is ready to lay blame at their door (while suggesting to Haldeman on the side that he can pardon him when the whole thing is over). Fascinating. It is so dreadful that I found myself tempted to add this book to my “horror” shelf.

Here’s the obvious analogy I see: when people go to the zoo, some of them want to see the giraffes, the hippos, the monkeys, and then they get their cotton candy and take the kiddies home.

But others have to visit the small dark building where the reptiles slither around.

And so it is with Nixon buffs: we cannot help but be transfixed by that which seems so sinister, so repulsive to our own humanity. We look because we can’t stand not to look. Once we look, we cannot look away.

Dean’s revenge is in having the last word about what was done during that terrible time, and in making absolutely plain what the truth is. He is painstaking in using new technology to improve the historical record. Payback is sweetest when you are absolutely correct, and if there is a theme to this publication, there it is. And now most of the ugliest players are dead and cannot come back to wreck havoc upon the living anymore. May they rot where they lie.

If like me you cannot look away, read Dean’s record of this criminal conspiracy to cover up covered up obstructed justice by the man who held more power than any other politician, and by his loyal minions. The repetition of the conversations in some ways is entirely appropriate because it shows the level of obsession, and in particular, of Nixon's obsession with the power that his presidency provided, at least for a time, and how badly the public's trust and resources can be misused and abused.

If you read it at night, you may want to leave the light on when you go to sleep. Nixon is dead, but you just never know who the hell is out there.

[Sara · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although somewhat tedious and not edited very effectively in a few spots, this is probably going to be considered the definitive book on Watergate. If you like the Oliver Stone film "Nixon", you will most likely enjoy reading Dean's perspective. Amazing how nobody in politics today has fully learned from Nixon's downfall of hubris. We keep making the same tired mistakes repeatedly--to what end?

[Matt · Rating 5 out of 5]

John Dean offers this insightful look into the build-up of the Watergate affair, and the subsequent demolition of trust in America's political core. Dean presents not an argument from his own perspective, but cobbles together a narrative that includes actual conversations caught on the infamous Nixon taping system, as well as diary entries of the POTUS and his closest advisors. Dean does parachute into the narrative at times, offering his own perspective, but allows the conversations and entries to speak for themselves. The narrative builds from Nixon learning of the break-in at the Democratic National Committee in June, 1972 through to the realisation that those within his inner circle were complicit in sending directives or sullying their hands during this and one other break-in. Building from there, Dean offers the fast-paced scramble that took place once Nixon realised what was going on and how to create a buffer for himself, while trying to protect some of his key advisors, with ideas of immunity or pardons. As the political damage deepens and Nixon is searching for a scapegoat, he turns to his counsel, Dean, and throws him to the lions, forcing Dean's resignation, in hopes this will quell the storm. Dean remains stalwart as he is called before the grand jury and the Senate Committee tasked with investigating the Watergate events. Told in such a way that the reader is left in awe at some of the admissions made in private to obfuscate justice and protect a few men. Not to be missed by the political fanatic, especially those who are opened minded to the taint that politics can leave on certain people and how power acts more as an intoxicant than aphrodisiac.

The seamless nature of the narrative remains one of the book's greatest assets. It reads as fiction, not because it is so bombastic, but due to the smooth nature of the delivery and flow from day to day, character to character. Dean has removed the choppiness one might expect in even a quasi-academic piece, where quotes from the telephone conversations or diary entries would leave the pace jilted. Instead, it is a collaboration of paraphrasing and, when important, direct quotes, that allows the reader to forge onwards so effectively. Breaking the narrative down into smaller and more digestible pieces, both segments of importance and individual days, Dean allows all the actors to have their time in the spotlight and implicate themselves thoroughly. There are too many to name here, but the list of men whose choices, insights, and decisions helped shape the decision by Nixon to cover-up what he knew and when goes to the core. Equally effective is the brash nature that Nixon takes to all this, that he can sweep it under the rug or delegate whipping boys to take the fall. The amount of detail is staggering, but not crippling to the lay reader, whose interest may be the scheming but not the intricate political or criminal details that could be trudged up by a legal mind. Minutiae is left to the law review articles, while Dean offers up the most comprehensive collection of summaries I have ever come across to develop an understanding of who knew what and when, as well as the fabrication of events and documents to protect certain people and flay others. Brilliant and sinister all in one collection.

I would be remiss not to address certain key elements of the overall presentation of this book. The attentive reader will realise that one cannot approach any piece of non-fiction that deals in history or document interpretation without understanding the inherent bias in a narrative. Add to that, an author who has been seriously scorned and betrayed by some of the key players in the story, and you have red flags at every chapter break. The reader must invest so much trust in Dean's accounts, both that they are not marred in the passage of four decades (as recollections tend to get at least become partially foggy after that time) and that the paraphrasing of tapes, or inclusion/exclusion of certain passages will not skew the larger narrative. While Dean is clear to elucidate in the preface that he scoured the tapes and their transcripts, there is a certain degree of scepticism necessary in any reader, unless one chooses blind faith. Even then, it remains solely one man's interpretation of events. Not to get too philosophical here, but isn't that the foundation of history, biased interpretation? That being said, the reader must take this all in with a grain of salt and see where things go during the analytical process. Surely, there will be some gobsmacked moments as well as the raising of at least one eyebrow during certain passages.

Dean pulls no punches, but does not seek to exonerate himself while leaving others to hold the blame. As the title suggests, he tries to give the reader a chance to see what Nixon might say he knew or did not know as it related to Watergate. Additionally, it might give the reader some insight into what the Senate Committee might have discovered, or both Houses discussed, if impeachment had moved forward. Whatever the take, it is an eerie view into how dirty politics could be. The reader must thank the late President Richard Nixon for installing this taping system, leaving hours and hours of incriminating evidence on hand for synthesizing. Power corrupts, but it also gives a false sense of infallibility and living above the law. Thankfully, people like John Dean (and David Frost) can poke the bear and force it to dance for the people.

Kudos, Mr. Dean for this wonderfully crafted book. I cannot praise you enough for all you hard work and dedication to offer up a well-documented approach to Watergate and Nixon's implicit guilt therein.

Like/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/

[Terence M [on a brief semi-hiatus] · Rating 4 out of 5]

"The Nixon Defense" - by John W Dean
Audiobook 26:00 Hours - Narrated by Joe Barrett.
"3.5-Stars ^ 4-Stars - I Really Liked It and Wish I Had Finished It"

I am conducting a review of my 4,306 "not-yet-listened-to audiobooks", because of my difficulty reading or listening to any books at the moment. This is mainly due to recurrent health issues which I am assured will improve with time. Huh! At 80 years old, "tempus doth fugit" for me, (pardon my bastardised Latin), it better start improving soon! Anyway, I am supremely confident that improvement is underway and according to the various wills of Odin, Zeus, Loki, et al, I will be reading listening apace very soon!

During my "Unheard Books" review, I came across the following comment in my Reading (listening) Activity for "The Nixon Defense":
July 8, 2017 – 60.0%
"I have this book on "pause" atm. It is very long, very detailed and very interesting, but I need a decent break from it for the time being."
My brief, yet necessary, review is based on this comment.

It is now almost four years since I "paused" this audiobook, but I do remember really enjoying what I had heard and while I cannot remember exactly why I initiated the "pause", I assume it was to do with the vagaries of my health which became quite intrusive at about this time.

I had taken almost two months to listen to 60% (approx 16 hours) of the audiobook and now I think I would find it very difficult to recover the enthusiasm to tackle it again.

Normally I do not give a rating of more than 1-Star if I do not finish (DNF) a book, but I have made exceptions and I have usually explained why. This book was ideal for Watergate "junkies", of which I was one during the time of the 1972 break-in and the following events. I have always had an interest, from afar, in US politics, so it was natural for me to take a special interest in Watergate.

"The Nixon Defense" was well-written, and very well narrated. I do not regret having listened to the 16 hours I did, but I do regret not finishing the book.

[Aaron Million · Rating 5 out of 5]

While I very much enjoyed John Dean's personal memoir about his White House years, Blind Ambition, this book is even better. Despite being less personal than the earlier book, this one has the dual benefits of both the passage of time (this was published in 2014) and most all of the tapes relating to Watergate being fully transcribed. Thus, Dean was privy to much more information than he was back in the 1970s, and the passions of that era had subsided. Additionally, by this time other major participants (Richard Nixon, H.R. Haldeman, John Ehrlichman, G. Gordon Liddy, among others) had written their own versions of events, and while not always reliable as to truth, their efforts do provide a portrait of their thinking then and afterwards. The result is a detailed, literally day-by-day look at the unfolding mess of Watergate as it relates to what Nixon knew, when he knew it, and what actions he took.

Dean starts at the beginning, when the botched burglary occurred on June 17, 1972 at the Watergate complex. He then examines things in minute detail, not necessarily from Nixon's perspective (despite all that Nixon himself wrote or said about the affair, his own thinking on it will probably never truly be known because what he did write and state often were at odds with the facts), but from Nixon's timeline. The infamous taping system is what allows for a book like this to be written so definitively, because thanks to the transcriptions - some of them done by Dean himself - we know much of the actual conversations that Nixon had, who he had them with, when, and where. Not every single conversation or call that he had during this period was recorded (there was no recording equipment at his homes in FL or CA, for instance), most of them were. Nixon had the secret taping system installed in the Oval Office, his EOB office (which he used almost as much as the Oval Office), and Camp David. Plus he recorded all of his phone calls. Unlike his predecessor Lyndon Johnson, who only recorded the calls that he wanted recorded, Nixon's system was set up so as to automatically record any conversation or call that Nixon was involved in: it was voice-activated. Why did Nixon have it set up this way? There is a simplex explanation: because he was a mechanical klutz.

Nixon was in Key Biscayne, FL when the burglary occurred and it's quite clear that he did not know of nor specifically approve that particular "dirty tricks" operation. But as soon as he returned to Washington, D.C., he immediately began the ultimately doomed attempt at covering it up. Haldeman, his gruff Chief of Staff, and Ehrlichman, his surly domestic policy adviser, controlled the administrative side of the White House for Nixon, and they controlled this cover-up too. It began with Nixon and Haldeman cooking up a plan to have the CIA tell the FBI to stop investigating Watergate as it was a CIA operation. That was blatantly false. The CIA had zero involvement in Watergate. Things just spiraled from there, with the web of lies and deception growing more and more tangled as the lies heaped on top of each other until there was soon a mountain of them and too many people involved for none of it to come out.

While all of the recorded conversations (except one that Dean surmises was destroyed by Haldeman, and another involving the infamous "18 1/2 minute gap") have been transcribed elsewhere, Dean does not repeat those verbatim here. With few exceptions, he picks out the portions that pertain specifically to the cover-up. Reading all of these, one really wonders if Nixon actually got any work done from about late February 1973 onward because he became obsessed with the cover up while repeatedly denying to everyone that he was covering up. Also, the amount of foul language in them, and the continued rehashing - even within the same conversation - made me really question just how on-the-ball Nixon was at times.

And Nixon isn't the only one who comes across looking foolish here. Just about everyone does, Dean included at times. But Nixon, Haldeman, and Ehrlichman were the three who were simultaneously most important to the cover-up and also the most divorced from reality. They steadfastly continued to lie while somehow thinking that they would never be caught, and sometimes I even got the impression that they really believed that what they were doing was not morally or ethically wrong. As Dean writes about them on page 302, after a typical discussion: "This conversation was not unlike most Watergate conversations that involved Ehrlichman and Haldeman, and increasingly me, which always became circular, because while telling the truth was not an acceptable approach, everything short of the truth raised serious problems."

As you might imagine, most of these guys come off looking horrible. Aside from Nixon and Haldeman, nobody else knew that they were being recorded, so they were not generally cautious with their verbiage. And for Nixon and Haldeman, each seemed to behave as if they had forgotten that the conversations were tape recorded. Although Nixon did, at least sometimes, remember that he was being recorded as he would try to walk to a corner of the room far from the microphones when he had something especially incriminating to say. Yet most of the time, he just spoke without regard to the taping. I think that he figured that the existence of the tapes would never be made public, and even if somehow they were, that since they were his he would claim executive privilege and deny access to anyone else (as he repeatedly failed to do in 1973 and 1974). So, a logical question to ask is: why didn't he destroy the tapes prior to being issued a subpoena on them? There is no good answer to this question, although Dean does explore this. By the time that their existence was discovered, Nixon was placed in the untenable position of either holding onto them but denying access, or destroying them and being accused of covering up duplicitous behavior and criminal actions. He chose the former, even then thinking that he would never be forced to give up control of them.

Dean writes in a less personal but still knowledgeable tone. He injects himself into the discussion where needed (which is a lot) but tries to stay in the background quite a bit and let Nixon's and the others' own words literally speak for themselves. If you have any interest in Nixon or Watergate, this book is a must-read. Otherwise it might not be for you as Dean really goes deep into the scandal and there are a lot of people whose roles you need to remember as the conversations unfold. Thanks to the tapes, this is a first-hand look at a presidency disintegrating in real-time.

Grade: A

[Marylyn Eubank · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was exactly what I expected - long, tedious, and full of information. Watergate is my first political memory, and I went through a Watergate fixation in junior high school. I remember learning the meaning of the word scapegoat and the idea of a snowball effect. Reading this book reminded me of that period in my life, and Dean answered some questions for me as well. I recommend it if you are truly interested in what Nixon knew and when he knew it. Be sure to make it all the way to the end to get the full scoop on the eighteen and a half minute gap in the secret recordings. I listened to the audio version.

[Germany · Rating 5 out of 5]

Loved it. I opted for the audiobook which was not only entertaining but informative. I was 11 when he finally resigned, but I didn't grasp what had happened. It was a fascinating time in history, and appalling behavior by the president.

[Bill Manzi · Rating 5 out of 5]

This John Dean book should be very interesting to those that remain fascinated by Watergate, or Richard Nixon. I watched all of the Dean testimony before the Watergate Committee, and I was amazed, as a youngster, at his command of detail. That same command is exhibited here, with Dean having access to the library of Watergate tapes that are now part of the public record. Dean’s testimony before the Ervin Committee, as detailed as it was, was made without the benefit of review of the tapes made by President Nixon. This book allows Dean, a participant in the acts of conspiracy and obstruction of justice, to review the audio tapes, and create a truly impressive record of how the Watergate matter unfolded, using those tapes to let us hear directly from the participants, taking us from the start of the cover-up to the end.

The book brings us some of the major figures of the Nixon Administration, and some of the lesser lights that played an outsized role in the Watergate scandal. For those that might not be familiar with those players the book may not be the best place to start a study of Watergate, but you will get here eventually. From Jeb Magruder all the way to John Mitchell the story has a large cast of individuals that were wrapped up in the Watergate scandal, and other acts of the Nixon Administration, that toppled the President.

Richard Nixon truly was, if nothing else, a ruthless and brilliant politician, who was on every national ticket from 1952-1972, with the exception of 1964. The White House recordings show us how Nixon tried to “manage” the Watergate affair from the start, and truly botched it badly, despite his usually strong political instincts. Dean takes us along on a calendar ride, examining the White House political response to the initial break in at the Watergate, and then follows the calendar expertly, showing us how this initial political brush fire turned into a conflagration. As time passes, whether it be Watergate or other matters, our memory tends to fade, with the motivations of those involved part of that memory loss. Dean gives us not only a good review of the timeline but a pretty good narrative on the motivations of the individuals we get to hear through President Nixon’s taping system.

So what happened to Nixon’s usually solid political instincts, and how did he manage to get himself directly caught up in the conspiracy to obstruct justice? As badly as Nixon handled the matter the tapes show us a President who almost made it out of this mess wounded but intact. Without the tapes Nixon might have been able to weather the storm. Nixon started by looking to limit the fall-out to the five burglars and E. Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy, hoping to get guilty pleas and light sentences that would contain the scandal there. But the connection between these 7, and the White House through the Nixon re-elect committee, and the direct connection between Hunt and Chief of Staff Bob Haldeman, and Presidential Domestic Advisor John Ehrlichman, and Presidential “troubleshooter” Charles Colson, presented some real political problems for the Nixon White House. These problems were not limited to the Watergate matter, which was the true crux of Nixon’s problem. A real investigation of Watergate would likely uncover other, unrelated to Watergate illegalities that might come to light and that were directly tied to the Nixon White House, and likely to Nixon himself. That fact, more than Nixon’s direct handling of Watergate, in my view, led to the unraveling of the cover up. As Nixon plugged one hole in the dike other leaks sprung forward, eventually overwhelming Nixon and leading to disaster for his presidency. Bob Haldeman saw the risk after the break in, on June 20, 1972:


“Haldeman, however, did record in his diary that evening: ‘I had a long meeting with Ehrlichman and Mitchell. We added Kleindienst for a little while and John Dean for quite a while. The conclusion was that we’ve got to hope the FBI doesn’t go beyond what is necessary in developing evidence and that we can keep a lid on that, as well as keeping all the characters involved from getting carried away with any unnecessary testimony.’ “

Dean, John “The Nixon Defense” Page 19

As the White House and the Nixon re-elect Committee both scrambled to find out what the exposure was they came into information that would likely have put former Attorney General (and head of the Nixon re-elect Committee) John Mitchell at serious risk. Activities related to the break in at the office of Daniel Ellsberg’s (the man who released the Pentagon Papers) doctor presented a real problem. The tangled web of illegal activities directed by the Nixon Administration made localizing the Watergate break in to the actual burglars next to impossible. Nixon’s desire to protect an old associate, and the former Attorney General of the United States, John Mitchell, from legal peril contributed greatly to the eventual collapse of the cover-up.

Beyond the direct connection to the White House the investigators were able to trace the money, connecting the dots on money found back to the Nixon re-elect Committee, and eventually back to major players in the Nixon money operation. Haldeman outlined the problem for Nixon on June 23, 1972:

“ ‘Now on the investigation, you know, the Democratic break in thing,” Haldeman began, ‘we’re back to the problem area, because the FBI is not under control, because Gray doesn’t exactly know how to control them, and their investigation is now leading into some productive areas.’ More specifically, he explained, the FBI had ‘been able to trace the money ‘ found on the burglars to the bank that issued the new hundred-dollar bills , although not to the individuals to whom the bills had been given. ‘And, and it goes in some directions we don’t want it to go.’”

Dean, John “The Nixon Defense” Page 56

Acting FBI Director L. Patrick Gray, appointed on an interim basis to replace J. Edgar Hoover, proved to be a disaster in every respect as FBI Director. When Nixon reluctantly, at a later point, sent Gray up for confirmation as Director the Senate hearing on that appointment turned into a major disaster for Nixon, as well as for Gray. The Nixon team, realizing that matters were indeed getting out of hand, concocted the idea to use the CIA to “warn off” the FBI, and get them to limit, or stop the investigation. 

“Haldeman then continued with his recommendation regarding the out-of-control FBI: ‘That the way to handle this now is for us to have [CIA deputy director Vernon] Walters call Pat Gray and just say, stay the hell out of this business here, we don’t want you to go any further on it.’”

Dean, John “The Nixon Defense” Page 56

Nixon bought in, and so directed Haldeman, on June 23 in advance of a Haldeman meeting with Vernon Walters and Richard Helms of the CIA:

“‘I’d say, the primary reason, you’ve got to cut it the hell off, I just don’t think , ah, it would be very bad to have this fellow Hunt, you know, he knows too damn much. And he was involved [in the Watergate break-in], we happen to know that. And if it gets out, the whole, this is all involved in the Cuban thing, it’s a fiasco, and it’s going to make the FBI’-he had misspoken and corrected himself-‘the CIA look bad, it’s going to make Hunt look bad, and it’s likely to blow the whole Bay of Pigs thing, which we think would be very unfortunate for the CIA, and for the country at this time, and for American foreign policy. And he’s just got to tell them, lay off.’”

Dean, John “The Nixon Defense” Page 61

That tape would eventually be considered the Nixon “smoking gun” tape which would, when released, finish him off politically. Nixon’s involvement in the cover-up was clear, and it also involved knowledge of perjured testimony, suborning additional perjury, and approval of the payment of hush money to the original Watergate defendants. This book brings us much more than an indictment of Nixon. Dean shows us Nixon and his staff trying to their best to seal this off before it crippled them, and largely failing each step of the way. It really is a fascinating story, with Dean showing, in my view, a bit of sympathy for Nixon. He never whitewashes Nixon’s actions, but shows that Nixon really was trying to ascertain some of the particulars with regards to people close to him. What was Mitchell’s level of knowledge, in advance, of the Watergate break in? Who authorized what, and when? Dean speculates, and shows fairly convincingly, that Nixon, for all his faults, was pretty poorly served by his closest associates, including Haldeman, but especially Ehrlichman and Mitchell. Plenty of blame to go around, but Nixon had to weed his way through some internal evasions, and outright lies, from top staff, who came to realize the legal jeopardy that they were in. As Nixon came to the same realization he continued to try to contain the matter, but as his co-conspirators fled the ship, (John Dean initially, but many others later) he resorted to the same types of internal evasions, and outright lies, that had helped to get him into the mess. Dean, realizing before the others that the group, including Nixon, was likely guilty of a conspiracy to obstruct justice, warned Nixon in his “cancer on the Presidency” talk of March 21, 1973 that serious legal problems lay ahead for the key staff, including Haldeman, Ehrlichman, Mitchell, and Dean himself. It would not be possible, in light of that tape, to make the case that Nixon did not understand the conspiracy to obstruct justice that was ongoing.

Did I learn anything new from the Dean book? I did in fact find out that the Nixon White House, through the President himself, had a pretty good feel for what the Justice Department was doing by Presidential talks with AAG Henry Peterson, and with AG Richard Kleindienst. Neither man was charged with wrongdoing for those conversations, with Peterson eventually ceding control of the investigation to Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox. Nixon was not shy about asking, and without question received information that he should not have had from both Peterson and Kleindienst. I was a little surprised by the extent of the involvement of Haldeman and Ehrlichman in the operational side of the “intelligence” operations mounted by the Administration. I never realized the extent to which they had participated, especially Ehrlichman. They had greater legal exposure than the conspiracy to obstruct, which is likely a key reason that Nixon could not go down the “full hang out” road. I also learned that the Nixon Administration, through Haldeman, had a very clear understanding that some of the most damaging press leaks were coming from FBI Associate Director Mark Felt, “Deep Throat” of Woodward and Bernstein fame. Dean paints Felt as eager to undermine Acting Director Gray, who was not considered to be a true FBI man, as well as ambitious for the FBI Director’s job. In today’s world Felt might be characterized as part of the “Deep State.” If Nixon had survived politically Felt would not have been in a very good position.

The times were different but some important lessons can be taken from the Watergate scandal. Having the President “interfere” at a Justice Department charged with investigating crimes committed by members of his Administration, with the President possibly being a subject of investigation, is a pretty bad idea. When the facts came to light on Nixon’s actions major figures in the GOP decided that the country was more important than the Party, and made it clear to Nixon that they could not support his continuing in office. When Nixon fired the Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox it was Republican Attorney General Eliot Richardson, and then his Deputy William Ruckelshaus that refused his order, and created a political firestorm by themselves being fired by Nixon. Nixon always considered his actions “fighting back” politically, and consistently pointed to the actions of Democratic Presidents, who he felt had committed similar illegalities. The “What Aboutism” argument is not a recent creation. But as Nixon came to find out obstructing justice is not the same as political infighting. For those looking to learn more about Watergate I highly recommend this book.

[Kristi Richardson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am a Watergate junkie. I watched the proceedings on television nightly and read the newspapers and columnists and 60 minutes religiously. This book helps bring all of my personal experiences back to me and Mr. Dean gets a chance to tell the rest of the story.

Mr. Dean points out that not all of the tapes in the White House were transcribed by the end of the Watergate hearings and he personally went to work on them the last ten years with assistants to help him so that he could put to rest in his own mind what the President knew and when he knew it.

There are a lot of questions that get answered in this book. It seems the White House was pretty sure the entire time who Deep Throat was and they believed it was due to Mr. Felt's desire to be head of the FBI and not have to report to a non-FBI political appointee. This could just be the bias of Mr. Dean and the White House so I take that part with a large grain of salt.

I found it very interesting the accolades Dean was given by the President and Haldeman and Ehrlichman in the early tapes and how they turned on him when they knew he was going to testify.

He also gives us a deeper understanding of what the burglars were doing at the Watergate after all these years. Obsession was something Mr. Nixon was very good at.

The 18 1/2 minute gap is explored and the plausible explanation on what was on this tape and who did the actual erasing is shared in the second Appendix of this volume.

I would recommend Mr. Dean's previous book of Blind Ambition as a companion piece to this book. This is a great follow up to the former tome as there is a lot more information available than was at the time of the first book's publication.

For anyone worried about the NSA's spying on us, you should read this book. The Nixon White House was obsessed with dirty tricks, bugging and enemies getting payback. Do we really want anyone to attempt such over stepping of laws and boundaries again? Mr. Nixon honestly believed that as President he was above the law and they didn't apply to him.

I received a copy of this book as part of the first reads giveaways.

Read this book!

[Jarred Goodall · Rating 4 out of 5]

Obviously, Mr. Dean and others researched, dug, and worked hard to produce this work. It helped me further delve into the Watergate scandal, from a person who was not only lived through it, but was a part of it. I loved the details and the evidence provided by Mr. Dean, which he backed with evidence from the tape transcribing, and from other sources. I would recommend this book for Watergate and other political scandal fans, like myself. You will definitely learn some things you did not already know.

[Evan Tolas · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Nixon Defence is a outstandingly good book about the Watergate scandal of the Nixon presidency. It objectively tells the story of one of the most defining occurrences in American politics. As a book that not only makes the standard points it also takes you inside the Nixon Whitehouse. The author was an employee in the Nixon administration. This Book accels in all ways to tell a competent, interesting and mostly unbiased view. This allows the reader to take their own stance and come to their own conclusions and their own opinions.
The Nixon Defence is a book that describes the 1972 Watergate break in and the lies and events that led to the impeachment of Richard Nixon. It tells the inside story by the author, John W. Dean. Dean was an attorney who served as White House Counsel for United States President Richard Nixon from July 1970 until April 1973. This book is not apart of any series but is among many in depth reviews of related topics in American politics by Dean. The book is 635 pages long and is quite a challenging read as it at times is very bland. However, it gets rolling when you are interested in an event it is describing. As a person who studied a whole unit for the Watergate scandal and played the role of H. R. Haldeman voluntarily it is safe to say I love to read about this topic. But even for me it was a bit dry and boring at times. The most important thing for the reader to do before reading this book is to get an unbiased look at the occurances of the story as this book has a noticeable lean to the conservative views of this scandal. As this problem is relevant this is hands down the best way to look at the watergate scandal and the Nixon administration as it is written by a person who stuck with Nixon till the bitter end. John Dean served jail time for his actions. The book is shaped in a formal method at times. It feels like you are reading the transcript of a documentary. You definitely get the information and the juicy details of the scandal. But it is so boring and uninteresting that you need to be intrigued by the topic to stay with it for the long run as I personally was.
The book is set during the administration of the 37th President of the United States Richard Nixon. The book covers the topic of the watergate scandal and the attempted coverup of the truth by the Nixon Administration. The book is written by John W. Dean who was an attorney who served as White House Counsel. The book documents the inside view of the Watergate scandal of 1972. Where unknown assailants broke into the Watergate Hotel, which was the Democratic National Committee headquarters, and the stealing of secret documents and the installing off wiretaps to key members of the Democratic Parties phones. This was done in order to gain dirt on Nixon's opponents. The book goes over the investigation through the events in chronological order to show the gradual proof of guilt of President Nixon and the information that eventually led to his impeachment. This book shows the inside view of the scandal from the viewpoint of John Dean who was a diehard Nixon supporter. He was referred to as the "master manipulator of the cover-up" by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Dean often voluntarily interfered with the FBI investigation. He did this by means of slander and attempts to blackmail members of the FBI. Dean later plead guilty to a single felony count in exchange for becoming a key witness for the prosecution. By doing this he successfully received a reduced time in prison for his actions. As an insider his story in this book plays a key part in understanding the Watergate scandal and the inner workings of the Nixon Administration.
The book is mainly set around the events of the 1972 Watergate trial of members of the Nixon Administration and the accusations of the ties of the break in to the Administration. This setting is portrayed clearly as there are very few times the book deviates from the context and only to give context to another occurrence or part of Nixon's administration. John dean describes these events in the immense detail. His writing style is crucial in the telling of the story and how he conveys it to the reader. This is a book about events it doesn't focus on the individuals. The reader can assume the main character could be Nixon or Dean himself. That being said Nixon is portrayed in his true scummy but yet cunning personality and style unique to him. To best describe Nixon would be to compare him to a con man such as Al Capone. A lot of his career is overshadowed by crime whether that be the Watergate breakin or the illegal invasion of Cambodia during Vietnam War. Nixon did some good things. He founded many new governmental environmental agencies. It is up to the reader to determine whether it was that he truly cared about those issues or if that was just a front to block criticism and build his positive public reputation. As with politics based books your opinion on whether Nixon is likeable depends on your political stance and your values more importantly. The book doesn't describe much interactions between Nixon and Dean. Nixon was his boss and it can be assumed that they had met often in person while he was in the White House. Although there are many books about Nixon it is hard to relate to him because of his actions. Nixon’s behavior pushes the reader farther and farther into the mindset of disliking him and it is understandable and effective in the context of the book. Through his actions, Nixon cheated the system of elections in his attempts to cover up the details of the Watergate break in. He entered a metaphorical minefield. His crazy behavior was interesting and it made him a somewhat good antagonist to the author and his perspective.
The book mainly takes a focus on the Watergate break in and the trial. It gives a brief insight into the personal details of the Nixon Administration including things like the Nixon tapes or how he acted behind the scenes while in office. The book paints a good picture as it makes the metaphorical battle between good and evil. The Nixon Administration takes the role as the evil and the public and the press as good. This book doesn't shy away from the public attacks on the media by the administration in order to silence the opposition and the attempts to bribe or cover up details of the crimes Nixon was committing while in office. The book keeps to the idea that it is important to search for the truth and to have nothing stop you in the way of finding said truth or getting to a conclusion at the end of the day. The book has a theme of the importance of facts as that it is the most important thing to have when it comes to finding the truth. Facts and not feelings. One of the most memorable quotes comes from not the author or Richard Nixon but from H. R. Hadelman. He says “Now, on the investigation, you know, the Democratic break-in thing, we’re back to the problem area, because the FBI is not under control,”. This is a chilling view of the thought process of the White House at the time to stop by all means of the continuing the investigation into Watergate. It sets the vibe for all the actions and people inside of the White House at the time. Quotes like these is what made the book interesting and tolerable through the dry and bland at times.
Although the story of the Nixon administration and the Watergate scandal are interesting. It is important now more than ever to understand what happened then and what is going on in modern day politics. The events back then are a lot like what is going on inside of the current Presidential Administration. Although the story is interesting it is hard to recommend this book to everyone because it is bland and very padded out. The wording is lackluster. It is also sophisticated but a bit too so and it ends up being draining and hard to get into. This is a book to definitely read occasionally so you don't lose interest in it. It is definitely aimed at a much more mature audience like college students, adults, and for people who are really into politics and American history. Although this is the hands down best book about Watergate as it provides lots of insight into the scandal that is often not found in other books as the author, John Dean, was apart of the administration during the time. When the book hit its marks i felt immense levels of intrigue in the story it was telling and it made me coming back for more. If there was one thing i could compliment about the writing style of the book it would be that it was official and makes you feel like you are pulling the papers out of a White House filing cabinet and reading them aloud as it feels so official in a scene that most books cannot capture like this one. The author feels like he put is heart and sole into this book. He put most of is political biases behind and told the truth full story of what really happened behind the scenes. This goal is achieved masterfully as it resonates this feeling of moving apart the curtains to see what was going on. The book feels like it is all there and is the best Watergate book i have read to date. Everything is down to earth and very little things are exaggerated and everything is based on noted historical events and occurrences. My favorite part of the entire book was when Dean describes the breakin at the Watergate Hotel and the discovering of the use of the CIA in the breakin who were hired and paid off by the Nixon administration itself. These points are almost unbelievable. If i was the author i would shorten it down atleast anywhere by 50- 100 pages and compact the text although this mindset may be a bit ignorant as there is a lot of important stuff that would need to be trimmed down and that is a most likely a bad idea.
The Nixon Defence is a outstanding and intriguing book that deserves more praise and is amazing for people who can get past the minor problems. The text describes one of the most trying times in American Politics by one of the persons involved in the scandal. Although it was a good read i can only give this book a ⅗ stars. It is interesting and really up my alley when it comes to books I just lost interest at times because of how honestly boring it could get, the book could use a bit more intriguing language as way to get the reader sucked in like lots of other good book.

[Socraticgadfly · Rating 2 out of 5]

One doesn't need to crib a Roger Stone interview, as one person on Amazon did, to find problems with this book.

Indeed, per the nonpartisan Nixon Tapes website, one can read about Dean blaming his previous book's editor, the well-known Alice Mayhew, for allegedly inserting material into his previous book, a claim she has called an "L-I-E." http://nixontapes.org/dean2.html

As with previous Dean writings on Watergate, there are two main questions:
1. How much is he whitewashing Richard Nixon?
2. How much is he whitewashing John Dean?

On the first, we can see that at play in the opening pages of the prologue. Dean contrasts Nixon and McGovern's approaches to Vietnam, and makes it look like McGovern wanted to cruelly, callously abandon South Vietnam. But Dean never mentions Nixon's late-1968 violation of the Logan Act (and possibly treasonous activity) with his contact via Anna Chennault with South Vietnamese leaders, encouraging them to reject the Johnson peace plan.

Nor does he note, in his brief discussions of Nixon's orders to burgle the Brookings Institute in 1971, that what Nixon sought was NOT (or not just) a copy OF THE Pentagon Papers, but copies of Lyndon B. Johnson's intercepts of Nixon campaign contacts with Chennault, which he (wrongly) suspected were held there.

Beyond that, while Nixon may not have technically ordered the June 17, 1972 burglary of the Watergate, with the burglaries of Daniel Ellsburg's psychiatrist, the discussed burglary of Brookings (even though not carried out) and other things, it's clear that Nixon's general marching order to the Committee to Re-Elect the President indicated no stone should be unturned in doing this. Given that the idea, under Project GEMSTONE, was first discussed in January 1972 and that both Dean and Jeb Magruder were parties to such discussions, at a minimum, the fact that neither of them alerted Nixon to this, or if they did, he didn't squelch it, show that Nixon himself, contra Dean's claims, must be considered as at least an indirect father of the action.

Dean, who is still a definite conservative, despite books rejecting certain aspects of modern GOP conservativism (he went to military school with Barry Goldwater Jr., is still good friends with him, and still calls himself a Goldwaterite) has long sought to polish Nixon's apple as best he could on Watergate in particular and his administration in general.

At the same time, of course, he's sought to polish his own apple vs. other key players in the Nixon Administration in general and Watergate in particular.

By ending the narrative at July 16, 1973, and putting what happened after that in just a few pages of appendix, Dean's able to do that. The flip side of him turning state's evidence is that, before Nixon could show that he would be disloyal to him (or others), Dean acted first, rather than taking the fall, a la Haldeman and Ehrlichman.

In turn, that shows that this book is still missing psychological elements, starting with those of Dean himself. How does he feel about being the first larger player to jump the sinking ship of the man he still tries to connect to the Goldwater version of Republicanism?

And, to the degree Dean is still trying to cover for himself or his old boss, or both, the death of Colson 2 years ago made it another bit easier.

Finally, Dean's one appendix, on the 18-1/2 minute tape gap, serves nothing. After narrowing down the list of likely erasers of the tape, Dean refuses to look at any one of them as more likely than the others. He even claims it's not that important; real, professional historians would certainly disagree. He also gets coy on exactly what was likely erased, after giving some general parameters.

This isn't quite a one-star book. It does fill in some edges and corners. And it sheds more new light on the character of Dean, even though that surely wasn't his intention.

I'll take a look at the new Brinkley book on the tapes to see if it shines any important new historic light, but it appears even more wooden than this book.

[Chris Holmes · Rating 4 out of 5]

To be certain, The Nixon Defense is for dedicated Watergate junkies only. The sheer amount of information, almost exclusively in the form of transcripts, would test anyone else's patience and resolve. And even at that, there are so many names and places thrown at the reader that I would not recommend this for someone only passingly familiar with Watergate.

Dean's writing style is unobtrusive, which works here because the star of the show is the hundreds of conversations captured in the Oval Office and other locations from the time immediately after the break-in until Richard Nixon's taping system was finally shut off on July 18, 1973, two days after it became public knowledge as a result of the Senate Watergate Committee hearings.

I was struck by a few things reading this account. Of course the level of underhandedness and criminality in the Nixon administration is well-known by this point, and all this book did was add some more detail to that aspect.

A few things did surprise me, however. I was fascinated to see the glimpses of Nixon who, at times the tapes reveal, was fully aware of what he was doing and what it meant. He raised the specter of impeachment for his actions well before that was even a public consideration. What this book reveals is that he pulled off perhaps the greatest act of compartmentalization in political history.

Secondly, I was shocked at just how all-consuming the topic of Watergate became in the White House well in advance of the Senate hearings. It makes one wonder just how in the hell Nixon or his staff found time to actually do their jobs, because they often had several long conversations daily as they formulated and reformulated their Watergate defenses.

In all, what The Nixon Defense lacks in drama it makes up for in thoroughness and sheer weight of evidence. If you've read All the President's Men multiple times and want more, this is the book for you.

[Nancy Kennedy · Rating 4 out of 5]

If I weren't a Watergate junkie, I'd probably give this book only three stars. This data dump will test your resolve! John Dean's book is all about the White House taping system and how the tapes answer Sen. Howard Baker's now famous question from the 1973 Senate Watergate hearings: "What did the President know and when did he know it?"

My advice is to read the chronology of events and the appendices in the back of the book before you start at the beginning. That way you'll have a better idea of the arc of the narrative, which gets bogged down in an almost day-by-day account of the conversations Nixon had about Watergate with all the usual suspects. Better still, you'll get a sense of what pages you can safely skip without losing track of the narrative. I'm glad that someone (John Dean, or his employees) had the tenacity to go back to the Watergate tapes and transcribe them for the public, but I don't think the average reader will appreciate the effort. The tone of the book also bothered me a little -- Mr. Dean seems eager to both place himself at the center of the action, yet exonerate himself at the same time.

But if you're more interested in the Watergate scandal than the average American, this book will add to your knowledge for sure. A better read that came out recently is Bob Woodward's The Last of the President's Men, an account of his extensive interviews with presidential aide Alexander Butterfield. It gives more of an idea of Nixon as a person, rather than as a voice on a tape. And speaking of voices on tape (or the lack thereof)... you'll enjoy Appendix B, which is an examination of what really might have been on those 18 1/2 minutes of erased tape! Though who erased it remains a mystery. Rose Mary Woods isn't a villain!

[Yaaresse · Rating 4 out of 5]

Update: 2018 Revisiting a couple of books I thought might have been "wrong book, wrong time" and were DNF'd. Finally got through this one. My opinion from before is pretty much the same: I can't fault the writing or the exhaustive effort Dean makes to set records straight and explain things, but it was just work to read it all. I do think it deserves a bump in my rating for quality of writing.

Good thing I lived through the damn Watergate thing or I might have been completely overwhelmed.
____________________________
DNF.
This is an exhaustive (and exhausting) look at the transcripts and documents pertaining to Watergate. John Dean probably knows more about this topic than any man alive, and he has thoroughly sifted through and documented who did what to whom, when, where, and how. The "why" is still up for grabs, but I think it's safe to say greed, power, arrogance, and self-entitlement all played into it.

This is not a very readable book in spite of Dean's valiant efforts to make it so. It's reading as work -- worthwhile if you're really into the subject matter, a slog if you aren't. Us 50-somethings who can clearly recall Watergate probably have a little more interest in the topic than younger readers, but I'm not so fascinated that I could maintain interest in material that reads like a graduate level course in the Nixon administration. (If I were, this would be the perfect book to read.)

[Stewart Sternberg · Rating 4 out of 5]

While one admits Dean is biased, this recounting of the cover up, much of which covers from many tapes not previously made available to the public is gripping. The best thing about this slightly overlong book is the clarity which one finds in the web that was Watergate. While little here is new, it is still Compellimg.

[Bob · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book doesn't really add any knowledge to what we've known for decades, but it clarifies conversations that experts previously couldn't discern or weren't sure who was speaking. This made the book worthwhile for me to read.
John Dean is certainly a good writer who has pretty much milked Watergate for all it's worth.

[E Mac · Rating 5 out of 5]

To me, this was a hard read, not word wise, but the repeating over and over questions from the president to his aids. John Dean uses the Nixon tape to show how Nixon knew nothing about the break in of the Watergate and after learning of it, started the process of covering it up and the beginning of his obstruction of justice charge. Many of the efforts to restrict or stopping the investigation reads like a tutorial that the present administration seems to be following. Several ideals as to the defense of Nixon are talked about and some of them transcribed verbatim from the tapes. At one point all all interviews and testimony except Dean’s gave Nixon a “Get Out of Jail” card. The tapes also reveal that in April 72, Haldeman told Nixon who was leaking investigation information to the press or in other words, the name of Deep Throat. This information was not acted upon as it would reveal the plant and if fired, would release more information about the investigation because of his position. Also that month, Nixon directed Haldeman, one of only two people that new that taping was being done besides detailed CIA personnel, to destroy the tapes. But for what ever reason, did not do in. All was revealed when the Supreme Court ruled to turn over the reminder of the tapes not previously viewed by Judge Scrica. One of the last things Nixon did before leaving the Office of the President, was deny pardons for Haldeman and Erlickman. Some said that it was because they had nothing to offer to Nixon. Finally in the appendix is the story of the 18 and a half minute tape was erased. Experts said that Rose Wood could not have done it as she had testified. Dean explains when he thinks was missing. Recommend this for the serious political science student that wants to know the background of the biggest scandal up to that time of the Presidency.

[Karen Hannum · Rating 3 out of 5]

Maybe closer to a 4 than 3. For me it was a trip back to my junior high and high school years. As others have stated Dean's prose is dry. What do you expect from a lawyer going over a subject that basically defined his life? There were times when I felt he was veering into Lenny Bruce style obsession, but he always pulled back. I would NOT recommend this as a comprehensive study of Watergate, but it does make a good supplement.

Now a note about why it was 'marked down'. Honestly, the edition I read was edited very sloppily. Once we get into the second half of the book the editor must of quit.

The minimal definition of a sentence is a noun and a predicate. Sometimes we need a verb. Sometimes we need an object. Really, Penguin/Viking Press, did you just tell your editors to run it through MS Word's grammar checker? No, you couldn't have, even that would have caught the glaring errors.

There were typos galore. Apparently Tricky Dick raised funds by charging for his stories (retailing instead of retelling). I forgive Mr. Dean and or his interns, helpers, aides whatever you call them. But really Viking Press, it looks like your editors need a refresher. I get that you are not Simon and Schuster level publishers. But I expected a better level of editing than a vanity press.

[Phillip · Rating 2 out of 5]

I think if one if looking for a Nixon reference book, this isn't bad to have in your library. But if you're looking for a book that will be interesting and educational ... you may fall asleep with this one. I think the title is misleading - I thought the author might be trying to present a defense (such as one might be...) for Nixon in Watergate, but I think the title should be read "The Nixon Defense Shattered: Revealing What He Knew and When He Knew It." The book itself is the author (and one has to take his word that its an objective presentation, despite him being quite involved) turning the Nixon tapes into a narrative format. However, when I say "narrative format", all I mean is that he summarizes the Watergate portions. I think this is where the fault in the book lies - there is no real attempt at narrative, but rather rote summaries of daily tapes that does test the readers' patience.

The author is going for a first time transcription of many tapes, and so that's why it does work well for reference and research reasons. But if you're looking for that Nixon book to lay things out in an entertaining and gripping way - this is not the book for you. Only serious researchers need apply for this one.

[Stuart · Rating 5 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book but you'd have to be pretty deep into Watergate lore to get much from it.

John Dean retrieved all of Nixon's tapes, had them transcribed and listened to all the Watergate related conversations. He then recounts the conversations,
some of which he was a participant in.

The theme of the book is to answer the question he was faced when grilled by congress. "What did Nixon know and when did he know it?". This is the whole crux of the Watergate scandal that Nixon and his cronies lied about what they knew and when they knew it and implicated each other more and more as the plot developed.

It's clever because I don't believe that Dean released all the transcriptions and highlights those that makes him sound good. Since it is probably the most in depth analysis of the tapes it is a must listen book for Watergate buffs and Dean being a chief participant gets to add additional information so of which was new to him as he heard conversations about him for the first time.

All in all, it's an interesting book, 26hrs in all. I listened to the audiobook and the performer attempted a Nixon voice but his breathy performance as the weakest part of the package.

[Joe Minnock · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dean is an interesting figure in history. He has largely been applauded because he was willing to cooperate in ending the cover-up, and here, 50 years later, he is portrayed as the lawyer who tried to persuade Nixon not to cover up and failed. This book does bring back to the fore his seedy role in the events leading to Watergate, and his key role in managing the cover up.

But what is troubling about the tapes that have been newly released is that they demonstrate Dean pretty much failed his client--the president. The tapes reveal that Nixon clearly misunderstood criminal law, believing that steps after the break in would not constitute obstruction of justice. Dean claims that his March 21 "cancer on the presidency" meeting was him "pleading" with Nixon to stop the cover up. The tapes, then and after, show Dean never advised his client that he was involved criminally.

Nixon was a lawyer and so should have known that his conduct was neither legal nor moral, but one does wonder whether better advice from,his lawyer and advisors would have led to a better result.

[Paula · Rating 4 out of 5]

A long book but takes you through Nixon's entire recorded administration. It reads as I envision one day the Trump administration will as we will hear how they work daily, not on the people's business, but to cover up and obstruct the unveiling of their illegal activities.

The reader in the audio book does an excellent, low key Nixon impersonation while relaying some parts making it even more interesting...particularly when he curses in his accent. A lot of history and a lot of players to track as their lies progress, as they easily become targets/scapegoats of Nixon. Also as John Dean realizes he is going to be blamed for the cover up by Nixon if he doesn't get him first and takes you into some of the daily focus of this administration as Water Gate unfolded.

Several parallels to how the future could play out for Trump including the fact that his base stuck with this man until the day he finally resigned.

[Jeremy · Rating 3 out of 5]

What an interesting read. I've always been interested in the break-in of the DNC Headquarters at the Watergate in 1972 being the student of history that I am. This book wasn't exactly what I thought it was going to be about. Essentially a compilation of the Nixon tapes documenting the discussions that President Nixon had with various people on his staff about Watergate and the cover up. Mixed in was some analysis by John Dean, but it's mostly a transcript of everything that was said.

This book is a very good companion to what exactly was going on in the White House from 1972 to 1973 and the steps that President Nixon and his closed advisers took to cover up the activities of the break in.

I'm glad I took the opportunity to read this book, and will continue my own personal research on learning more about not only President Nixon but his presidency.

[I J Haworth · Rating 4 out of 5]

Comprehensive Detail of Nixon and Watergate

Dean had a central role in the cover-up of Watergate before revealing the criminality of Nixon's top advisers to avoid his own conviction and a hefty jail sentence. This is the fifth book on Watergate I've read recently. It isn't a book for those looking for an introduction to the scandal. It assumes prior knowledge and it's especially useful tying up loose ends and exposing Nixon's behaviour during the unfolding scandal that terminated his presidency. Dean's earlier book 'Blind Ambition ' and, of course, the Pulitzer prize-winning book 'All the President's Men' by Woodward and Bernstein are much more informative reads for those seeking an introduction to the subject.

[Robert Sparrenberger · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very detailed look at the watergate crisis through the eyes of the council to the White House, John dean. The book focuses heavily on the secret recordings Nixon made at the White goose between different staff members with dean adding his insights. It takes a bit of time to get familiar with the style of this book because it relies so much on the tapes. But once you do, you can’t believe how much time Nixon spends covering all do this stuff up. There are so many lies it’s hard to tell who knows what.

The details can be a bit overwhelming at times and Not for someone who does not know the players and relationships well but worth the time.

[Daniel Silliman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Large chunks of this book are excruciating, as Nixon and his top aides repeat, rehash, recycle their thoughts about what happened with the Watergate break-in, what precipitated it, and the fall out that followed, without ever actually trying to learn more. It's not the crime, it's the cover up--at length. Dean has done a great service documenting all of this and laying it out chronologically, but the book is still a maddening exercise in listening to people lie to each other and themselves for years.

[Tanya Hurst · Rating 5 out of 5]

I Ioved this book, and I definitely recommend it to anyone interested in the Nixon Administration and Watergate more specifically. I will say that if you are not very familiar with the events and all the major players, though, the level of detail in this book with all the conversations might seem overwhelming. So first read a good Nixon biography (I recommend the one written by John Farrell), The Final Days by Bernstein and Woodward, or any of the other many books that discuss the events, and then jump head first into this one. It's definitely worth the read.

[Mike Smith · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very detailed look at how Nixon handled the Watergate cover up via his own secret recordings. Dean (one of the main actors in the scandal) transcribes and adds his own personal recollection to tell the story of when and what Nixon knew about Watergate. Dean has a tendency to sugar coat his own involvement somewhat but not too aggresiously. A telling look at how Nixon's presidency unrivalled by trying to cover up for his aides involved.