The Trial of Donald H. Rumsfeld: A Novel

by William Cooper

“Cooper’s writing is bold and intelligent. The mysterious narrator adds intrigue, and the courtroom sequences are written with striking tension that keeps readers hooked.” Novels' Nest

“A dazzling blend of fact and fiction. This propulsive novel will delight, enrage, and—above all—deeply entertain.” Michael McKinley, bestselling author.

Donald Rumsfeld was a major player in American history. In this riveting alternative history, he's put on trial for his role in the United States 2003 invasion of Iraq. The story charts Rumsfeld's rise to fame and power, the fight with President Donald Trump that leads to his prosecution, and his spellbinding trial at the International Criminal Court. Told through the eyes of a mysterious narrator whose identity—and pivotal role in Rumsfeld’s downfall—are eventually revealed, The Trial of Donald H. Rumsfeld is a tale of politics, betrayal, and the explosive mix of unbridled ambition and absolute power.

Praise for award-winning author William

“Compelling and sensible.” Kirkus Reviews

“A compelling rallying cry.” Publishers Weekly

“Insightful, sensitive, and accessible.” Alexander Yen, The University of Oxford

“Essential reading.” Thomas E. Patterson, Harvard University

"If you enjoy intelligent fiction where you also learn something, The Trial of Donald H. Rumsfeld is a book for you!" Goodreads reviewer

Genres: Fiction, Historical Fiction, Mystery, Thriller, Novels, Politics, Alternate History

287 pages, Hardcover

Published September 10, 2025

About the author

William Cooper is the author of The Trial of Donald H. Rumsfeld: A Novel. An attorney and national columnist, his writings have appeared in hundreds of publications globally including The New York Times, CNN, and Newsweek. He hosts the “Books and More” podcast. Publishers Weekly calls his commentary about American politics “a compelling rallying cry for democratic institutions under threat in America.” Visit him online at will-cooper.com.

Reviews

[Sherry Sharpnack · Rating 5 out of 5]

I thank the author, Mr. Cooper, for sending me this novel with an alternative look at what could (should) have happened to Donald Rumsfeld.

Mr. Rumsfeld was a driven, supremely self-confident man who worked for Republican governments, starting with Nixon. When Democrats were in the White House, he turned Searle into a powerhouse drug company. He became the youngest Secretary of Defense in US history under President Ford, returning to the position for George W. Bush.

The novel begins with Mr. Rumsfeld on trial for war crimes in the International Criminal Court at The Hague. It then goes back in time, charting Mr. Rumsfeld's (Rummy) rise through government with each chapter heading a different date. I could actually feel his fear and horror when the plane hit the Pentagon on 9/11/2001. He was apparently helpful in rescuing folks that day. So the novel does a great job of displaying WHY Rummy was absolutely POSITIVE that Iraq should be invaded. Maybe Iraq did/didn't have weapons of mass destruction. He and Dick Cheney, the Vice President, reasoned that if Iraq didn't have WMD's right then, they soon would have. They therefore misled President Bush - hiding a crucial tape recording between Qusay Hussain and Tariq Aziz in which they discuss Iraq's LACK of WMD's. Over Secretary of State Colin Powell's and NSA Director Condi Rice's vociferous objections, Rummy and Cheney talked Bush into the catastrophic war for which we US taxpayers are still on the hook.

Then the book veered from actual history into imagined. In this novel, GW Bush succumbs to his alcohol addiction and resigns from office. Shortly thereafter, then President Cheney succumbs to a heart attack, leaving his VP, Rummy, as the second unelected VP/POTUS in US history. Rummy then decides that regime change is also necessary in Iran. Sen. John McCain successfully passes through the Senate a law reinforcing the Senate's ability to declare war, (as it always has been), not the President. Rummy ignores this, to the ignominy of US forces in Iran. Rummy loses the next election in a landslide b/c of this. He retires to Taos, NM, and life is good, although he is still enough of an egoist to look for his name in the newspaper. (Eye roll)

Until -- President Trump agrees NOT to block extradition of Rummy and his VP, John Bolton, to the International Criminal Court. Armed men hustle him from his home at sunrise and he is incarcerated at The Hague. The closing arguments of the Court's lawyer and Rummy's lawyer were fascinating, and the reader is left wondering what will happen to Rummy? Will he spend the rest of his life in prison, the first American President convicted of War Crimes?

I really enjoyed reading this novel that demonstrates how hubris can overcome one's common sense and dedication to the law. I'm not sure I agree with how the novel's court case turned out, but I can understand it. 4.8ish stars rounded up to 5.

[MM Suarez · Rating 5 out of 5]

"He knew that he had, in fact, committed a grievous error: he of all people had confused what he knew with what he didn’t."

Clever! Clever! Clever! Given the serious topic I am not sure it's appropriate to say that this was a fun read, but it sure was for me. I was in my very early twenties in the eighties, and very, very busy, but I was generally aware of Donald H. Rumsfeld and the events depicted in this alternative history political thriller. The author does such a great job of weaving this fictionalized story with real life characters, that at times I found myself believing the whole thing, but unfortunately Rumsfeld was never prosecuted for his actions, and while I don't believe that an International Criminal Court was the proper venue, I do think a U.S. court should have done the job. The ending was, and I'll have to repeat myself very clever, an enjoyable read.

[Rhonda · Rating 4 out of 5]

Definitely a most informed read. Learned quite a bit about our "good ole boy" system on the hill. Makes you wonder what else we haven't been told about.

[Glen · Rating 3 out of 5]

I won this book in a goodreads drawing.

Donald Rumsfeld goes to trial over whether he lied about weapons of mass destruction.

It really reminded me of the fictional biography of President Reagan from a few years ago.

[Angie Boyter · Rating 5 out of 5]

Alternate history, but can help understand the present…
Donald Rumsfeld was an important figure in recent American history, serving as United States Secretary of Defense during two major events: the attack by terrorists on September 11, 2001 and the invasion of Iraq by the US in 2003. These events certainly make for interesting reading in and of themselves. William Cooper has produced an even more enjoyable story by imagining that Rumsfeld follows up to become president in 2005. “Rummy” loses a bid for a second term to Barack Obama but is later targeted and brought to trial by President Trump for actions he took as Secretary of Defense. This is material for good reading, and the author adds a number of elements that added to the fun.
Plenty of intrigue is built into the nature of the main plot, and even more is added by the presence of a shadowy narrator who observes and reports on the events. Instead of “whodunit” we have “whowroteit”, and I kept guessing wrong.
The characters are nicely done also. Rumsfeld and other real figures of history come across as genuine people, which can help a reader understand some of their actions and decisions.
I enjoyed recalling some of the history of an era that I lived through and was intrigued by some of it that I had not known, such as George H W Bush’s fairly serious drinking problem.
Each chapter begins with an excerpt from Rumsfeld’s Rules, a real book that grew out of pithy, compelling, and often humorous observations about leadership, business, and life that Rumsfeld had collected and that President Ford liked so much he had them distributed to the White House staff. I had not heard of it but now have a new addition to my long Want to Read list! Prime among Rumsfeld’s Rules is the idea of “known knowns, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns”. It is cited often in the book and is a good concept to think about in life.
The charges against Rumsfeld and the portrayal of his trial give the feel of a legal thriller, and I was eager to hear the verdict! The ending of the book was gripping and clever.
As someone who lived through the era when this book took place, I can especially relate to it, but no matter what your age, if you enjoy intelligent fiction where you also learn something, this is a book for you!

[Justin · Rating 4 out of 5]

A complimentary copy of this book was received following a Goodreads giveaway. I enjoyed the researched combination of history with the fictional narrative. Some portions blended both for the alternative take on history. This type of writing seems really relevant in 2025. It was a quick read and would recommend for those that lived through the listed historical events or an interest in the topic. Highly recommended!

[Courtney Pityer · Rating 5 out of 5]

I won this in a giveaway.

[Dan (ThatBookIsOnFiyah) · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting mix of historical events and fiction

In a time when the President of the USA flaunts the Rule of Law at every turn, this story makes some intriguing points - about the history of 9/11, its aftermath, and the Iraq War. The author seems to have done a very thorough job of maintaining good historical research and sticking to those facts, up to a point, when he veers into the fictional aspects of his story. Mr. Cooper has created a believable scenario where Donald Rumsfeld, as Sec of Defense, could have become President. He has also used the true facts to develop the justification for his fictional trial of Mr. Rumsfeld. This was an enjoyable read and I recommend it to anyone who has a fascination with history, as I do. I also want to thank Goodreads for the giveaway that allowed me to win this book.

[Mary · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was blessed to receive this book as a Goodreads Giveaway. I was surprised by the parallels to the current war in Iraq which sparked my curiosity in the discussions surrounding today's political arena.

[Ari Damoulakis · Rating 3 out of 5]

First of all, my profound thanks and gratitude go to William for providing me with a free copy of this book.
I made my speech synthesizer read through this book at a very fast speed so that I could write a review.
I will first say this. William, you might not like that I could not give this book maybe as high a rating as you might have been hoping for, but, as I will explain in this review, some of it could be my fault, some could be what I did or did not expect from such a book, and I also am not sure whether the author is trying to make a point in the book that I disagree with.
First, you can tell this book was written not to be a bestseller. It is written more for quite a sophisticated and niche gourmet audience who must have the ability to appreciate and understand a more complex story.
One can tell William has very good acumen and probably a very high IQ.
I want to review the book and explain my relationship to it, but there are some points the characters in this book seem to be making that I might not be agreeing with.
I do not know whether the book was trying to make a point that international leaders or American citizens should be handed over to the ICJ.
I believe they should.
I also totally disagree with the judge’s sentencing and the reasons he gave for it.
We are having this whole debate with Russia and Israel now, and whatever position we take, I hope we can at least all agree that international law is a paper tiger, whatever the ICJ ever decides is meaningless since they can’t even bring anyone to trial, and we live in a basically realist world where the strong do what the want and the weak bare what is decided for them.
Even the whole UN Security Council system is a total mess with five power vetos. I don’t pretend to know how it should be reformed, but am just stating the obvious that it is just not working.
So the book.
It has amazing word paintings and scene descriptions.
I was not the right audience for this book for quite a few reasons.
I do not enjoy alternative history fiction with real characters.
The second reason the book was difficult weas I was still in high school during the Iraq war.
I followed the TV news closely, and afterwards I even studied Politics, but my problems were that I have never felt like reading the memoirs from that period by American liberal or conservative politicians from that time, because firstly that whole war upset me and I still believe it was illegal, we watched it unfolding live, but even more importantly and unfortunately, I just literally did not have access to American political books at that time. Even on Audible we were geo-restricted from many of them.
These days, I would do things differently and read as much as I can, even if I totally hate whoever I would consider wrong in one of the wars we have going on at the moment.
So I liked in this book, William obviously did a lot of excellent research and reading so I didn’t have to.
I knew who Rumsfeld was, but I never bothered to know too much of his back story, and, since I’m not that generation, I do not know much about American history during the times of the Cold War.
Luckily the book does an excellent job there.
You do not need to know your American history to read this book.
I didn’t like though that there is a huge jump in the book, a gap between the mid 1980’s, suddenly going to the late 90’s.
The one part of the book stops where Rumsfeld meets Saddam and is shocked by how little he asks of America while he is at war with Iran.
You don’t get to know unless you have read your history what exactly happened between that time, the Gulf War, did Rumsfeld’s mind evolve? Was it also really true that Saddam often tried to assassinate the first President Bush?
There are characters in this book, generals and people and such, dialogue, and, if you don’t know your history, you have no idea who is and who is not fictional.
If you are a young person, if you don’t know your history, this book will be difficult reading for you, and, if you are of Gen Z and after, probably quite incomprehensible.
If you do not like Politics and/or Law, this book is also not for you.I am going to admit that there is a really good chance that I am quite unfair to this book and not appreciative enough because I am often unclear about what the real roles of some people were during the Bush Administration, functionally speaking. Even today I do not really understand exactly the positions and duties of many persons in the American political system and what they actually do, never mind that roles are created and destroyed, or whole departments are created or destroyed or renamed?
Maybe you just need to know your American politics much more than I do and that maybe would make a person appreciate and understand the book more?
Unfortunately for me the American political system and structures often seem rather complicated, only the bureaucracy and the EU seem even more confusing. Some countries just have easier politics than others.
Also remember that many of the opinions in this book are those of Rumsfeld and not the author playing politics.
For example how the book talked about the eras of Carter and Clinton.
I had to remind myself that this was the Rumsfeld or Republican point of view.
Apart from the Iran mess, many of in other countries who have read about the Carter Presidency and his humanitarian work afterwards totally admired him and wonder if the world might have been better or at least different if he had had another term.
And the same with Clinton.
I know I was very young, but I followed the news a tiny bit. We were optimistic. I remember he even came to SA.
The character of Rumsfeld just before September 11 and going on afterwards is extremely well developed and crafted. A lot of research and sources were again consulted to make him believable.
Unfortunately, ok, this is fiction, but not much time is spent on the devastation that was probably caused by his war on Iran.
Do I believe Bush and his crew should have been held accountable for Iraq? Absolutely. Even if there were WMD’s, with the information I know, I don’t think Saddam was posing a threat to another sovereign state, and I believe the pieces I read that, at the time, he had nothing to do with international terrorism.

The book also does not address this puzzle.
You bomb Iran probably because of the nuclear weapons as well, that could be one of the reasons. We saw what NATO did in Libya, despite them giving up their weapons and stopping terrorist activities. So who on earth can blame India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea for not making sure they do have them for their security, and who would be surprised if other states don’t start in the future?
Anyway, coming back to Iraq, I still remember Sky News showing the largest anti-war march in Britain’s history, their Prime Minister had the whole episode with the dodgy dossier and many inquiries, but he has suddenly quietly been made a sir by the British Government.
The public had no say, and even in 2005 they could only vote for two pro-war candidates.
To be honest, when all is said and done, I still feel very unsure what the exact points were that this book and author was trying to make, and, since it is fiction it would have been nicer to have something more concrete.
Unfortunately, as a person who wishes they could be an idealist, I’d have liked a proper prison sentence. But then, the author is driving the story, not me.
On the other hand, I also can’t help, with quite such a muddy ending, wondering if the author is trying to warn readers in America to be weary of the ICJ, critical of unstable American presidents to use the ICJ to settle scores?
I suppose it is the ambiguity of the book and the conclusion that would make the book appealing in the realm of legal fiction?
But, speaking only for myself, when I do see international law in such a mess and nations exempting their citizens from prosecution by the ICJ, then this book isn’t really my cup of tea in these times.
People can circumvent the ICJ, well then, let all the powerful countries exclude their citizens and let’s have a more realist and chaotic world instead of finding a more just, idealistic way forward for civilization.
Even though I wish that, I don’t think it will happen, or, if it eventually does, some really drastic events will have to happen to somehow brake the stalemate we’ve had for decades.
But none of that seems likely at all.
If this book did want to show Rumsfeld as, what I also believe he was, a very ruthless, arrogant, and quite unfeeling character, it did the job. I know there were a few moments of tenderness and vulnerability, but advocating for a totally unnecessary war where so much life was lost removes those moments of ‘human’ for me.
We see the exact same behavior, for example, by the Extremist Israeli Finance Minister, the 7 October planners, or the President of Russia.
Unfortunately humans are really good at behaving appallingly, and some are just much more appalling than others.
But yeah, the novel shows Rumsfeld as totally odious.
The sad thing is, ok, we are lucky Rumsfeld never became president, but Bush and his behavior seems more acceptable, apart from the Iraq war, compared to the government at the moment.

[Chad Manske · Rating 4 out of 5]

William Cooper’s “The Trial of Donald H. Rumsfeld: A Novel” is the kind of political fiction that feels uncomfortably close to the world seen on C‑SPAN and in declassified memos, then tilts just enough to become intoxicating alternate history. Cooper imagines a universe where Rumsfeld not only masterminds the 2003 invasion of Iraq but later ascends to the presidency, only to be dragged before the International Criminal Court years later at the instigation of President Donald Trump. The novel braids three timelines: Rumsfeld’s early rise from ambitious Illinois congressman to power broker, his tenure as George W. Bush’s defense secretary, and the slow‑burn political knife fight that culminates in his prosecution at The Hague. Structurally, the book is a legal thriller wrapped in a mystery, narrated by a shadowy observer whose identity becomes the novel’s most satisfying reveal. The ICC trial sequences are sharply paced, with prosecutors weaponizing “Rumsfeld’s Rules” and snippets of Iraq‑era briefings to box their quarry into yes‑or‑no answers about war crimes, collateral damage, and “unknown unknowns.” Cooper’s cross‑examinations crackle with energy, capturing both the swagger and the slipperiness that made the real Rumsfeld such a confounding public figure. Cooper’s great trick is that he never reduces Rumsfeld to a cartoon villain; instead he presents a restless, egotistical, oddly charismatic operator who fears irrelevance more than failure. Scenes with Joyce Rumsfeld, Gerald Ford, and Bush sketch a man whose need to shape events—Afghanistan, Iraq, even history’s verdict—outstrips his ability to control their consequences. The book worries at questions of ambition, impunity, and democratic fragility, using Trump’s decision to target his predecessor as a sardonic commentary on how accountability in Washington is always personal, never principled. Cooper writes in a clean, highly readable style that smuggles serious argument inside propulsive storytelling; the pages move like a beach read but leave the aftertaste of a law review article. A few late‑stage alternate‑history flourishes verge on the implausible, yet the closing chapters—trial verdict, unmasked narrator, and final reckoning—land with a genuinely gripping snap. For readers who lived the Rumsfeld years, this novel is both razor‑edged entertainment and a disturbingly plausible thought experiment in what accountability for the Iraq War might actually have looked like.

[W e n d y : ) · Rating 5 out of 5]

Captivating

The book very closely follows the events and lives of many of our top leaders. The fiction intertwined masterfully, creating a story that is engrossing. Another great book by Mr. Cooper.

[karl moeslein · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well written and intriguing kudos for a terrific read

I enjoyed every page and stayed up way too late because it was a terrific read and couldn't wait to see how it finished. One of the best books I've read in years

[Ellen · Rating 4 out of 5]

4 stars.
Thank you to the author and the publishers for allowing me the opportunity to read this book. I really found it extremely interesting and well written. Well done!

[Betty Stoneking]

VERY GOOD BOOK

[Maria · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thoroughly enjoyed this book. While it's considered a novel it was also rich in history. At times it seemed to be very relatable to our current times.

[Myles · Rating 3 out of 5]

GREAT STORY!

It helped me understand who Donald H. Rumsfeld is! I didnt know who he was before reading this! Every educational! Their was no issues with this story! Im not really that much into politicians but I love thrillers! That's why I believe this story deserves a 3 star from me!

[Hana Fitz-William · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very interesting take on the life of Rumsfled. The way the characters were woven into the story was excellent and over all this was a pretty good read. I could reccomend this book as it is helpful in understanding our current and prior political climates.

[Eugene Kernes · Rating 4 out of 5]

Is This An Overview?
Intelligence and intention do not necessarily produce quality decisions. Intelligence and intention can also produce justifications for one’s own ideas, even to contradictory evidence. This led Donald H. Rumsfeld, known as Rummy, to withhold information that had dire consequences. Rummy’s often expressed view, is that weakness if provocative. But the show of strength, creates antagonists. To overcome a weakness, to cover up for weakness, decisions are made to compensate with a greater show of strength, which further exacerbates the situation.

To defend America, Rummy needed America to go to war. To justify the war, information was manipulated. War that cost innocents their lives, while being told that that war is for the good of America. A war meant to provide stability and democracy to the region attacked. As opposition mounts, the international community learns that the war need not have happened, and use the International Court to make the case. Rummy is put on trial. What is the outcome of the trial?

Caveats?
This book uses a mix of real references, real events, real people, but with many fictional details and events. Meant to make prominent certain political information, that can have dire consequences. The difficulty is understanding what information is real, and which is fiction. Some events are clearly identifiable, but others require background information. The characters are based on real people, who made decisions that are detrimental to the American people, but are not turned into caricatures.

[Rosemary Standeven · Rating 5 out of 5]

It took me a bit of time to get into this book, but when I did, I was fully engaged, and really invested in seeing the outcome. My main initial problem was that I am not American, and was a bit vague about the real-world occurrences mentioned in the book. I was much happier once it got into 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq – events that I remember well.
This is a work of historical fiction. It seems to stick initially to the facts – until it doesn’t – then it becomes an excellent ‘What if ….’ novel.
What if major political figures could be put on trial for actions and/or lies of omission which lead ultimately to war and the subsequent deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and the destruction of a country? Should they go to trial? Who decides?
There are undoubtedly very few people who would not have clamoured for a trial of Hitler, had he not committed suicide. In our current world order, many want Putin and Netanyahu arranged for war crimes. Leaders in the Balkans wars of the 1990s were tried ,and others.
Do the crimes that the politicians/leaders are alleged to have committed arise from fear? From a genuine desire to serve their country? To protect their ego? To avoid being driven out of power? From maliciousness? From evil? Or just because they cannot conceive of a world in which their decisions could be wrong?
Rumsfeld comes across as a very intelligent and capable politician and business man. He was undoubtedly a true patriot, who put his country first. But he also comes across as arrogant and vain, and incapable of self-doubt. His decisions (in reality and in the book) lead to many deaths and an ongoing catastrophe in the Middle East. There is currently no end in sight – so can the means be justified?
If we start to indict world leaders, where do we draw the line?
I highly recommend this book to everyone who has an interest in politics (not just US politics) or recent history

[John Morgan · Rating 4 out of 5]

“The Trial of Donald H. Rumsfeld” by William Cooper is a good political thriller. The novel is an alternative history of Donald Rumsfeld’s political career over several Republican administrations. The alternative history portion of the novel really begins with his installation as the Defense Department secretary during the George W. Bush administration. The alternative history revolves around the Iraq War and the justification of the war on the existence of WMDs. There are a number of interesting political theories at work that lead to his trial and the policies of Donald Trump and his desire for political revenge on people who don’t show fealty to him.

[Carol · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book had a lot of facts about Donald Rumsfeld that I hadn't heard before. It is interesting to read about him and compare that to todays political climate.

[Mark · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars

Thank you to Goodreads Giveaways and to author William Cooper for providing me with a Kindle copy of this semi-fictional and semi-alternative historical account of the career of former Chief of Staff to President Gerald Ford, former Secretary of Defense to President Ford, and former Secretary of Defense to President George W. Bush, Donald H. Rumsfeld.

The primary focus of this book is whether certain members of the Bush administration, particularly Rumsfeld, knew or should have known that the Iraqi regime under Saddam Hussein did not possess weapons of mass destruction in early 2003 just prior to the invasion of Iraq by the United States. The justification of the invasion of Iraq by the United States was based on enforcement of United Nation Security Counsel Resolution 1441, the resolution that required that Iraq voluntarily dispose of all weapons of mass destruction, so if Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, the invasion would not have been justified under international law. If Rumsfeld knew or should have known that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction and still pushed for the war in Iraq, should Rumsfeld be held accountable as the Iraqi war lead (a) to the deaths of many Iraqi civilians, (b) to the complete destruction of both Iraqi military and civilian institutions that caused a vacuum filled by various insurgent groups, (c) to general instability in the Middle East, and (d) to the deaths of American soldiers, a large financial cost to the United States, a diminishing of the United States in world public opinion, and a lack of faith of the American public in its governing institutions?

Though the focus of this novel is whether the war in Iraq was justified based on evidence available at that time, there are several themes that are prescient to international relations today. First, should the role of the United States be to maintain the status quo in the Middle East and avoid confrontation or should the United States take concrete action, including hostile action, to further US interests in that region? Second, how should decision makers address confirmation bias that often causes policy makers to ignore inconvenient facts that are contrary to their ideological beliefs? Third, does the concern that a country or a terrorist group may desire to attack the United States homeland in a manner equal to or greater than the attacks on September 11, 2001 justify preemptive military action against the concerning country or terrorist group? The Vietnam conflict was based on the “domino theory” that was prevalent in the 1950s and 1960s that communism would spread country to country such that democracies had to fight communism in each country to prevent that country’s neighbors from succumbing to communism. The “domino theory” later proved inaccurate so will concerns about possible attacks on the United States homeland to justify preemptive wars later be determined inaccurate as well? Fourth, how is the conflict resolved between the legislative and executive branches over which branch has superiority in determining whether preemptive military force may be used? Recent use of military force to strike suspected drug boats off the coast of South America as well as military intervention in Venezuela and Iran has again raised questions about whether Congress must authorize such actions due to its constitutional power to declare war or if the President may or its powers as commander in chief to take such actions without Congressional approval. Discussions of reviving the War Powers Act that were noted in this novel are now front page news as some in Congress want to reign in military action currently being take in Iran. Fifth, should foreign bodies have the power independently to review and judge decisions made by the executive branch or does the executive branch have discretion to filter and distill information by using good faith judgment when making decisions?

This book is organized in six parts that are mostly in chronological order with the exception that the first part provides the reader with some background of the International Criminal Court trial to which Rumsfeld is subject. The first 60% of the book (a) provided historical context of Rumsfeld’s rise from a young Illinois Congressman to being one of the most influential foreign policy makers in the later parts of the twentieth century and (b) examined evidence from early 2003 considered by members of the Bush administration to determine whether Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and noted the split between the hawkish members of the administration (Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney) and the diplomatic members of the administration (National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice and Secretary of State Colin Powell). Initially, I did not care for the alternative history portion of the novel that commenced 60% into the novel. The alternative history outlined how Rumsfeld transitioned from Secretary of Defense under President Bush to becoming the President and immediately upon becoming President, Rumsfeld unilaterally attacked Iran. I finished this book on February 24, 2026, just a few days before the United States and Israel commenced military action against Iran. My initial reaction of incredulousness for this alternative history changed based on events that occurred shortly thereafter.

This book raises important questions about how to evaluate foreign threats and the advisability of using military action to address those threats, the challenges of initiating military action without a detailed plan to address how the country will function once military operations ceases, and the process that should occur domestically prior to the United States engaging in military action.

[Alison Bradbury · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow - just...wow.

This is an odd mix of history and imagining. Most of the people are real and some of the events actually happened, however, at a certain point in the book we head into 'alternative history.'

Donald Rumsfeld was a political powerhouse. Serving as Secretary of Defence, for the second time, under President Bush, he is in charge on September 11th during the terror attacks on America. Rummy, as he is known, is deeply upset that this has happened on his watch and seeks to make sure that it never happens again. He makes choices and decisions with VP Dick Cheney that ultimately lead America into war in both Iran and Iraq. Through a variety of circumstances, Rummy ends up as President in this alternative version.

I really enjoyed the way this was written. It was political, but not too highbrow, entertaining and, most importantly kept me reading to find out what happens. I think the book poses the very important political question of how 'justice' for war crimes is something that we in the West are not necessarily subject to. This is at the heart of the book, as Rummy begins the novel on trial at the International Court of Justice. This is not something we could ever imagine happening in real life - Middle Eastern leaders, yes, but American leaders...not unless hell froze over. However, it is clear from this book that it is something that should happen.

Rummy has just finished giving his testimony and we are now taken on a tour of his life, history and how he got to this point. I loved the 'mystery' narrator who can both see everything and detail thoughts and conversations that they weren't there for. The reveal is particularly clever even though I was a tiny bit ahead of it - it was still masterfully handled. The trial element is exciting and I was on the edge of my seat waiting for the jury to come back with the verdict.

This is a political, courtroom drama that, in my head, I couldn't help but imagine as a TV series. In short, it is brilliant.

Thanks to William Cooper for the copy in exchange for an honest review.

[John Harper · Rating 3 out of 5]

I love counterfactual history, and this book has an interesting premise: what if Bush can't lick his alcoholism? Instead of history as we know it, he resigns and Vice President Cheney takes over. Then Cheney has a heart attack and defense secretary Rumsfeld takes over. And, because Rumsfeld is a huge hawk, he shortly thereafter invades Iran.

Otherwise, things are pretty much the same until 2018. Trump is elected and because Rumsfeld doesn't back Trump's campaign, Trump decides to let the International Criminal Court prosecute Rumsfeld for war crimes in Iraq.

It's an ernest attempt at a political thriller from Cooper, who primarily writes political op eds. And it's a nice early outing, but it leaves a lot to be desired as a novel.

Plot
The counterfactual doesn't occur until late in the book. About halfway through Rumsfeld becomes president, more than 2/3 of the way through he invades Iran, and only in the last 50 or so pages is he put on trial. Most of the book is spent imagining actual history. This could serve to build context and character, but really doesn't because it doesn't show us much we don't already know.

The trial part isn't actually very interesting, either. And it's not very believable. As I write this, Trump has decided about two weeks ago to invade Iraq, but the idea that Trump, the man obsessed with the King-President and America First would allow an American president to be extradited to Europe for a kangaroo court is ludicrous.

Plus the entire Iran invasion just doesn't really matter. It doesn't do anything, doesn't change any of the history after it, and doesn't come up in his trial at all. That's kind of odd.

Characters
I can't really get the hang of what Cooper is trying to say about Rumsfeld here. I listened to several interviews with the author, and his main point is that people are complicated, they make mistakes, they do the best they can, etc.

But the middle road means that Rumsfeld doesn't actually have much of a character in this book. There's so much incongruity between the guy Cooper paints and the actions he takes. There isn't much interiority either.

All the characters act the same, talk the same, sound and feel the same. They're not separated. And they all kind of sound like mouthpieces for the author. This isn't really a true exploration of character or of any idea deeper than "we're all just trying our best."

Prose
The book has a plot device of an unnamed narrator but it a) doesn't add anything b) doesn't actually make sense because the narrator also appears in third person as a character and c) knows all these things about Rumsfeld's feelings that the narrator couldn't know. It's really an omniscient third person narrator with the occasional "I" thrown in.

Otherwise, the prose is just clunky and unexciting. Actually, there's one really steller bit of writing on page 137 of my hardcover copy.

Flip to it now, if you've got it. Ready? Read it out.

It's Bush's actual speech to the nation from March 9, 2023. I don't know who wrote that, but it's fantastic.

To Mr. Cooper: in an interview you said you might continue to write fiction, depending on how this book does. I have the book. I enjoyed it overall, despite some of my mixed feedback. I hope you do write that next novel.

[Behrooz Parhami · Rating 4 out of 5]

Donald Henry Rumsfeld [1932-2021] was an American politician, businessman, and naval officer who served as the US secretary of defense from 1975 to 1977 under President Gerald Ford, and again from 2001 to 2006 under President George W. Bush. He also served in US Congress and held a variety of other government & private-sector positions. Rumsfeld’s tenure as secretary of defense was mired in controversy, including his pushing of a link between al-Qaeda and Iraq and the scandal arising from torture and prisoner abuse at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison. He faced allegations of war crimes and starting wars under false pretenses, hence the fictional trial of this book.

The novel’s plot has Rumsfeld entering into a fight with another Donald, that is, President Trump, which leads to his prosecution and a trial at the International Criminal Court. The novel is narrated by a mysterious character, whose identity and role in Rumsfeld’s downfall are eventually revealed. A key message to the reader concerns the dangers of a mix of unbridled ambition and absolute power.

I have previously read and reviewed two books by William Cooper, one fiction and one nonfiction, giving them 4 stars.

A Quiet Life: A Novel:
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

How America Works … and Why It Doesn’t:
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

Like the previous two books, The Trial of Donald Rumsfeld is well-written and highly engaging. It is structured like a diary, with dates as titles of its fairly short chapters. The novel consists of a prologue, six numbered parts, and four concluding chapters.

- Part One: Cross-Examination (Ch. 1, October 14, 2018)

- Part Two: Rummy’s Rise (Chs. 2-11, June 29, 1963, to September 10, 2001)

- Part Three: The Tape (Chs. 12-39, September 11, 2001, to June 30, 2005)

- Part Four: Iran (Chs. 40-54, July 20, 2005, to October 24, 2005)

- Part Five: Taos (Chs. 55-61, January 8, 2010, to September 19, 2018)

- Part Six: The Trial (Chs. 62-70, September 23, 2018, to October 19, 2018)

- Concluding chapters (Chs. 71-74, October 20, 2018, to October 21, 2018)

A 2008 nonfiction book, The Trial of Donald Rumsfeld, shares its title with this novel. The nonfiction book is a compilation by the Center for Constitutional Rights, which presents evidence of war crimes against Rumsfeld and the Bush administration, using primary documents, whistleblower testimony, and plaintiff statements on torture/abuse in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo.

[Joe · Rating 2 out of 5]

I am generally not a fan of alternate reality styled books, especially those involving politics. Unfortunately, this book reminded me of why that is the case. I would have preferred reading a behind the scenes account of what actually happened, rather than an alternate reality account that took pot shots at certain politicians (i.e. Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush and Trump). I also didn't care for the writing style, and more specifically, the snippets of stories that contained far too much attention toward irrelevant details rather than meaningful substance. For example, in Rumsfeld's meeting with President Bush, there was unnecessary focus on how badly Rumsfeld needed to go to the restroom. Other examples include describing what people were wearing and what they looked like, with appearance often portrayed in a demeaning way. The last 50 pages or so, covering life after retirement and the trial, and revealing who the narrator was, were more entertaining and compelling. {H}

[Tami · Rating 3 out of 5]

I received this book as a Goodreads Giveaway.

I read about 60% of the book before I got frustrated with the fabrications in the book. I realize that it's historical fiction, but it completely rewrites some parts of history (for example, pretty early on it makes the assertion that Donald Rumsfeld was temporarily president). I'll eventually read the rest of it, but it isn't keeping my attention right now.

[Ashley Ross · Rating 2 out of 5]

I received an e copy of this book from a good reads giveaway. I really wanted to like this book, but I quickly realized that it was not for me. This story is a what could have happened alternate reality around the Bush administration. It was not a difficult read but I did have a hard time wrapping my head around the storyline having known the actual history and outcome around the aftermath of 9/11.

[Amanda · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thank you to the author for allowing me the Giveaway!

This was really interesting and just forced me to consider a whole different side of things. It also forced me to consider what else we do not know that the government and higher-ups are hiding, which I know is a lot.

But, if the government can hide things like this, what else can they hide?