What do you think?
Rate this book
Liar's Kingdom: How to Stop Trump's Deceit and Save America
From MS NOW legal analyst and veteran federal prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, an urgent summons to tackle the scourge of political lies in America—and prevent a figure like Donald Trump from ever rising again.
“The 2020 election was a total FRAUD!” “I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.” “There is NO WAY Biden got 80,000,000 votes!!!” These and other lies by Donald Trump sparked a historic insurrection to topple our democracy and undermined the public’s faith in elections. The Trump administration’s deceit has enabled the use of law enforcement and the military against the people, the unlawful deportation of immigrants, and the disregard of international rules meant to promote a civilized and peaceful world. Other politicians, inspired by the success of the political lie, have flooded the public square with falsehoods of their own.
As Andrew Weissmann reveals, our vulnerability to politicians’ lies stems from a flaw in America’s legal system—one that can be fixed. But it will take courage, creativity, and a willingness to look beyond our borders to other countries that have already confronted this crisis. A slim, elegant treatise, Liar’s Kingdom is a playbook for stopping politicians like Trump from holding office in the future—and for saving our democracy. We are entitled to more from our government, and Weissmann shows us how we can get it.
“The 2020 election was a total FRAUD!” “I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.” “There is NO WAY Biden got 80,000,000 votes!!!” These and other lies by Donald Trump sparked a historic insurrection to topple our democracy and undermined the public’s faith in elections. The Trump administration’s deceit has enabled the use of law enforcement and the military against the people, the unlawful deportation of immigrants, and the disregard of international rules meant to promote a civilized and peaceful world. Other politicians, inspired by the success of the political lie, have flooded the public square with falsehoods of their own.
As Andrew Weissmann reveals, our vulnerability to politicians’ lies stems from a flaw in America’s legal system—one that can be fixed. But it will take courage, creativity, and a willingness to look beyond our borders to other countries that have already confronted this crisis. A slim, elegant treatise, Liar’s Kingdom is a playbook for stopping politicians like Trump from holding office in the future—and for saving our democracy. We are entitled to more from our government, and Weissmann shows us how we can get it.
214 pages, Kindle Edition
First published May 19, 2026
About the author
Andrew Weissmann
7 books83 followersAndrew Weissmann is a Professor of Practice. He teaches courses in national security and criminal procedure.
Andrew served as a lead prosecutor in Robert S. Mueller’s Special Counsel’s Office (2017-19) and as Chief of the Fraud Section in the Department of Justice (2015-2019). From 2011 to 2013, Weissmann served as the General Counsel for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He previously served as special counsel to then-Director Mueller in 2005, after which he was a partner at Jenner & Block. From 2002-2005, he served as the Deputy and then the Director of the Enron Task Force in Washington, D.C., where he supervised the prosecution of more than 30 individuals in connection with the company’s collapse. Weissmann was a federal prosecutor for 15 years in the Eastern District of New York, where he served as the Chief of the Criminal Division. He prosecuted numerous members of the Colombo, Gambino, and Genovese families, including the bosses of the Colombo and Genovese families.
Andrew is the co-host of the popular podcast Prosecuting Donald Trump and is a frequent legal analyst for NBC/MSNBC. He serves on the board of Just Security and writes frequently for it, The New York Times, The Atlantic, & The Washington Post. His memoir about the Special Counsel investigation, Where Law Ends: Inside the Mueller Investigation , was a New York Times bestseller.
He has taught criminal law and procedure at Fordham Law School and Brooklyn Law School. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from Columbia Law School. He has a Bachelor of Arts degree from Princeton University and attended the University of Geneva on a Fulbright Fellowship.
Andrew served as a lead prosecutor in Robert S. Mueller’s Special Counsel’s Office (2017-19) and as Chief of the Fraud Section in the Department of Justice (2015-2019). From 2011 to 2013, Weissmann served as the General Counsel for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He previously served as special counsel to then-Director Mueller in 2005, after which he was a partner at Jenner & Block. From 2002-2005, he served as the Deputy and then the Director of the Enron Task Force in Washington, D.C., where he supervised the prosecution of more than 30 individuals in connection with the company’s collapse. Weissmann was a federal prosecutor for 15 years in the Eastern District of New York, where he served as the Chief of the Criminal Division. He prosecuted numerous members of the Colombo, Gambino, and Genovese families, including the bosses of the Colombo and Genovese families.
Andrew is the co-host of the popular podcast Prosecuting Donald Trump and is a frequent legal analyst for NBC/MSNBC. He serves on the board of Just Security and writes frequently for it, The New York Times, The Atlantic, & The Washington Post. His memoir about the Special Counsel investigation, Where Law Ends: Inside the Mueller Investigation , was a New York Times bestseller.
He has taught criminal law and procedure at Fordham Law School and Brooklyn Law School. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from Columbia Law School. He has a Bachelor of Arts degree from Princeton University and attended the University of Geneva on a Fulbright Fellowship.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 112 reviews
June 25, 2026
3.75 marked down.
"Liar's Kingdom" is very solid and important work. Weissmann, a former Assistant U.S. attorney and General Counsel for the FBI (and, according to Donald Trump, a "bad guy"), has the experience and credentials to argue his case about the danger of political lies and what steps might be taken to address the problem. As he demonstrates, freedom of speech is not absolute in the US: there are recognized limitations on what you can and can't say. A company can't, for example, say that its jellybeans cure cancer if they don't. Speech is limited too in defamation cases. Surely willfully misrepresenting the outcome of a presidential election is as damaging to the country as false claims about products and people. He examines US laws that are currently on the books to deal with lies and examines the applicability of those laws to political speech. Then he uses examples of laws from Germany, France, and Brazil, to look at how other countries have dealt with the matter. He fully acknowledges and discusses how those legal, cultural, and political infrastructure differ from ours and how any strategies we adopt from their experience must be adapted to work in the US. He suggests three possible responses, arguing how each might work, how it might be challenged on Constitutional grounds, and what would be needed to overcome such challenges.
The book was written for the general reader, not the legal community. That said, he does -- necessarily -- descend somewhat into the weeds so readers might understand the legal and political contexts and constraints of each proposal. Some readers have understandably found this part of the book slow going. I don't see how Weissmann could have written meaningfully without this material.
I'm not an attorney so I can't pretend to know whether his arguments pass judicial muster. I can only evaluate them in terms of whether I thought he was making sense and that the internal logic of his arguments was consistent. I found him convincing but I'm less than optimistic about his recommendations being adopted.
I share Weissmann's deep concern about the threat Trump's lies (and the lies of virtually everyone in his circle) hold for democracy. The key frustration I have is that any statutory solution to the problem requires that Congress and SCOTUS act with integrity and at least some conviction. As I write this I see little likelihood of either of those bodies rising to the challenge.
"Liar's Kingdom" is very solid and important work. Weissmann, a former Assistant U.S. attorney and General Counsel for the FBI (and, according to Donald Trump, a "bad guy"), has the experience and credentials to argue his case about the danger of political lies and what steps might be taken to address the problem. As he demonstrates, freedom of speech is not absolute in the US: there are recognized limitations on what you can and can't say. A company can't, for example, say that its jellybeans cure cancer if they don't. Speech is limited too in defamation cases. Surely willfully misrepresenting the outcome of a presidential election is as damaging to the country as false claims about products and people. He examines US laws that are currently on the books to deal with lies and examines the applicability of those laws to political speech. Then he uses examples of laws from Germany, France, and Brazil, to look at how other countries have dealt with the matter. He fully acknowledges and discusses how those legal, cultural, and political infrastructure differ from ours and how any strategies we adopt from their experience must be adapted to work in the US. He suggests three possible responses, arguing how each might work, how it might be challenged on Constitutional grounds, and what would be needed to overcome such challenges.
The book was written for the general reader, not the legal community. That said, he does -- necessarily -- descend somewhat into the weeds so readers might understand the legal and political contexts and constraints of each proposal. Some readers have understandably found this part of the book slow going. I don't see how Weissmann could have written meaningfully without this material.
I'm not an attorney so I can't pretend to know whether his arguments pass judicial muster. I can only evaluate them in terms of whether I thought he was making sense and that the internal logic of his arguments was consistent. I found him convincing but I'm less than optimistic about his recommendations being adopted.
I share Weissmann's deep concern about the threat Trump's lies (and the lies of virtually everyone in his circle) hold for democracy. The key frustration I have is that any statutory solution to the problem requires that Congress and SCOTUS act with integrity and at least some conviction. As I write this I see little likelihood of either of those bodies rising to the challenge.
May 29, 2026
Actual options for change
I found his writing easy to read and understand. The author's explanation of current law was clear AND his proposals for changes to protect the future were thoroughly presented. I appreciated the hope reflected in these pages. Greatly needed and hopefully a usable template for our recovery after these current dark times. Thank you, Mr Weissmann!
I found his writing easy to read and understand. The author's explanation of current law was clear AND his proposals for changes to protect the future were thoroughly presented. I appreciated the hope reflected in these pages. Greatly needed and hopefully a usable template for our recovery after these current dark times. Thank you, Mr Weissmann!
May 25, 2026
A must Read!
This book gives me hope. Great examples for saving democracy, pitfalls etc. This book is a must read!
Thank you Andrew
This book gives me hope. Great examples for saving democracy, pitfalls etc. This book is a must read!
Thank you Andrew
June 1, 2026
i am an outlier for my rating. this was very disappointing. the first half is a replay of the past 10 years and the failed lawsuits and prosecutions against the current president. Not sure why this was necessary. unless the reader has been living under a rock. one quarter is a look at laws in France, Germany, and Brazil’s. This was interesting and would have liked more about these laws and their implementation against lower level politicians. Last quarter is discussion of proposed laws and their implementation. Very surface discussion. i have great respect for Andrew Weissman. However, this book could have been an Atlantic article and have just as much impact.
May 26, 2026
Just plain truth! This current government is disgraceful and I’m glad there are people that are not afraid to speak 🗣️ the plain facts!
May 26, 2026
Quick, informative read detailing how lying can be prosecuted in almost every aspect of our society. But lying about our elections can't. These lies weaken our democracy and destroy public trust. Mr Weissmann explains how, like Germany and Brazil, we can safeguard our democracy against lies perpetrated by any future wannabe strongmen.
May 26, 2026
Practical Solutions for Countering Political Lies
Weismann attacks the problem and consequences of lying by our politicians and offers solutions based on how other countries deal with this phenomena so prevalent today. His suggested solutions are well worth considering.
Weismann attacks the problem and consequences of lying by our politicians and offers solutions based on how other countries deal with this phenomena so prevalent today. His suggested solutions are well worth considering.
June 6, 2026
The last few weeks lends a great deal of credence to the ideas and positions offered by former federal prosecutor, NYU Law professor, and MS NOW contributor Andrew Weissmann. The American people have experienced a President who has put forth a plan to pay convicted January 6th followers from a fund of close to $1.8 billion and provide himself and his family immunity from IRS prosecution from actions taken in the past and what could occur in the future. Further, the man responsible for the fund, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has continued to lie and cover up the Epstein files and prosecute anyone President Trump would like to seek revenge against (yesterday it was announced he was being put forward to be the permanent Attorney General). Trump has also nominated Bill Puilte as DNI to oversee all intelligence services even though he has no experience in the field and his main calling has been to dig up dirt on Trump’s perceived enemies. We are also exposed to the daily untruths put forth by Mark Wayne Mullin, the newly appointed Secretary of Homeland Security dealing with immigration issues and justifying the actions taken by ICE. If that is not enough we can watch the briefings offered by Pete Hesgeth, the Secretary of Defense justifying the murder of people on the open seas and further lies dealing with the conduct and state of the war with Iran. Then there is NSC head and Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s verbal machinations about the war in Iran, the state of negotiations, and positions the President actually believes in. Apart from the daily lies offered by the President on a myriad of issues be it the 2020 election, funding for his new ballroom, the reflecting pool, and massive arch he wants to build the public has become increasingly cognizant of the vast sums, roughly $4 billion the Trump family has amassed since Trump’s second term began. In addition, Trump has used “insider trading” to the tune of millions of dollars to augment his personal wealth. The operative words in all of these examples are fraud and lies.
Some might argue that what I have written is too partisan and over the years Democrats are just as guilty. I would point out that history and incontrovertible facts would disagree. The question must be raised; is there a solution to all the lying and corruption that screams from the headlines each day. In his latest book, LIAR’S KINGDOM: HOW TO STOP TRUMP’S DECEIT AND SAVE AMERICA, Andrew Wiessmann reviews examples of corruption and lies and how politicians get away with it and offers solutions on how we can hold people accountable for their actions and statements to try to invigorate our democracy. In a blend of personal observations and sound legal opinions Weissmann confronts the “chipping away of the rule of law” that has been ongoing the last few years. According to the author we need to shore up our legal system against demagogues who seek to use lies to destroy our democracy. Candidly, Weissmann asks why can people lie in politics, to gain office, power, and wealth with no legal consequence, when in other areas of lying and fraud they can be prosecuted? It is clear we are a nation awash in lies and fraud.
Weissmann offers a number of examples to support his critique. The one that is repeated over and over in the monograph is that the 2020 election was a fraud and that Trump actually won (which he repeats on a daily basis). This has become a litmus test for Trump and anyone serving in the government. Trump is allowed to get away with the lies because there is no criminal law that says the lie is illegal – no civil law imposes any punishment for such falsehoods. In the end one-third of Americans support these lies.
Weissmann draws on his vast prosecutorial experience to provide examples of when lies can be prosecuted. He delves into the Enron case highlighted by the actions of Kenneth Lay who was effectively prosecuted as his lies brought material benefit. He focuses on organized crime centered on Vincent Gigante and the Genovese mob family, the environmental lies of Volkswagen and others. Remarkably it is a crime to lie to shareholders, it is a crime to lie to Congress, but it is not a crime to lie to the public. The problem is that lies metastases – i.e., J6 pardons, ICE enforcement and its consequences. We now learn that out of the 1500 J6 people pardoned, 97 have been charged with new crimes unrelated to J6, a number of which deal with sexual abuse and violence.
Our current media marketplace exacerbates the problem as it permits lies to flourish with no accountability. Weissmann is dead on arguing that our “media marketplace is polluted with propaganda, disinformation, and emotional manipulation all in the guise of defending the First Amendment. In short, authoritarians use the cloak of the freedom of speech to promulgate false factual speech and drown out the truth.” With the arrival of AI differentiating the public lie from the public truth is only going to grow harder in the future and as a society we have no strategy to deal with it.
Since we have no domestic solutions to try and mitigate the problem of fraud and lies in the public sphere Weissmann turns to other countries for possible solutions. He explores the case of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil. An example that mirrors that of Trump and how the Brazilian parliament has passed laws that rest on the premise that people have the right to truthful information in elections that supersedes the right of free speech when deliberate falsehoods threaten the democratic order. In France Marine Le Pen is barred from holding office for five years because she engaged in embezzlement and was convicted. In Germany there are laws that forbid free speech pertaining to a particular subject, denying the existence of the Holocaust is a prime example. Interestingly, the United States has laws that do not allow convicted felons to run for office, but it is only a state statute and does not exist on the federal level.
Weissmann proposes a Truth in Elections Act built on existing law. The Stolen Valor Act of 2005 redrawn in 2013 criminalizes lying about military honors with the “intent to obtain money, property, or other tangible benefits” which has survived a Supreme Court challenge. For Weissmann the courts are the key to any reform. Due process has the ability to get at the truth – we have a jury system that in most cases people take seriously. However, you need a Justice Department that is not headed by the President’s personal lawyer whose sole purpose is to carry out the revenge whims of the occupant of the White House. Some might find Weissmann’s short volume a polemic, however, his views are based on facts and the law, two things that most people would have difficulty arguing with, unless your name is Trump.
Some might argue that what I have written is too partisan and over the years Democrats are just as guilty. I would point out that history and incontrovertible facts would disagree. The question must be raised; is there a solution to all the lying and corruption that screams from the headlines each day. In his latest book, LIAR’S KINGDOM: HOW TO STOP TRUMP’S DECEIT AND SAVE AMERICA, Andrew Wiessmann reviews examples of corruption and lies and how politicians get away with it and offers solutions on how we can hold people accountable for their actions and statements to try to invigorate our democracy. In a blend of personal observations and sound legal opinions Weissmann confronts the “chipping away of the rule of law” that has been ongoing the last few years. According to the author we need to shore up our legal system against demagogues who seek to use lies to destroy our democracy. Candidly, Weissmann asks why can people lie in politics, to gain office, power, and wealth with no legal consequence, when in other areas of lying and fraud they can be prosecuted? It is clear we are a nation awash in lies and fraud.
Weissmann offers a number of examples to support his critique. The one that is repeated over and over in the monograph is that the 2020 election was a fraud and that Trump actually won (which he repeats on a daily basis). This has become a litmus test for Trump and anyone serving in the government. Trump is allowed to get away with the lies because there is no criminal law that says the lie is illegal – no civil law imposes any punishment for such falsehoods. In the end one-third of Americans support these lies.
Weissmann draws on his vast prosecutorial experience to provide examples of when lies can be prosecuted. He delves into the Enron case highlighted by the actions of Kenneth Lay who was effectively prosecuted as his lies brought material benefit. He focuses on organized crime centered on Vincent Gigante and the Genovese mob family, the environmental lies of Volkswagen and others. Remarkably it is a crime to lie to shareholders, it is a crime to lie to Congress, but it is not a crime to lie to the public. The problem is that lies metastases – i.e., J6 pardons, ICE enforcement and its consequences. We now learn that out of the 1500 J6 people pardoned, 97 have been charged with new crimes unrelated to J6, a number of which deal with sexual abuse and violence.
Our current media marketplace exacerbates the problem as it permits lies to flourish with no accountability. Weissmann is dead on arguing that our “media marketplace is polluted with propaganda, disinformation, and emotional manipulation all in the guise of defending the First Amendment. In short, authoritarians use the cloak of the freedom of speech to promulgate false factual speech and drown out the truth.” With the arrival of AI differentiating the public lie from the public truth is only going to grow harder in the future and as a society we have no strategy to deal with it.
Since we have no domestic solutions to try and mitigate the problem of fraud and lies in the public sphere Weissmann turns to other countries for possible solutions. He explores the case of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil. An example that mirrors that of Trump and how the Brazilian parliament has passed laws that rest on the premise that people have the right to truthful information in elections that supersedes the right of free speech when deliberate falsehoods threaten the democratic order. In France Marine Le Pen is barred from holding office for five years because she engaged in embezzlement and was convicted. In Germany there are laws that forbid free speech pertaining to a particular subject, denying the existence of the Holocaust is a prime example. Interestingly, the United States has laws that do not allow convicted felons to run for office, but it is only a state statute and does not exist on the federal level.
Weissmann proposes a Truth in Elections Act built on existing law. The Stolen Valor Act of 2005 redrawn in 2013 criminalizes lying about military honors with the “intent to obtain money, property, or other tangible benefits” which has survived a Supreme Court challenge. For Weissmann the courts are the key to any reform. Due process has the ability to get at the truth – we have a jury system that in most cases people take seriously. However, you need a Justice Department that is not headed by the President’s personal lawyer whose sole purpose is to carry out the revenge whims of the occupant of the White House. Some might find Weissmann’s short volume a polemic, however, his views are based on facts and the law, two things that most people would have difficulty arguing with, unless your name is Trump.
May 30, 2026
Excellent Read
Well written and clear argument I am a big fan of Andrew and appreciate his hard work and understand his approach
Well written and clear argument I am a big fan of Andrew and appreciate his hard work and understand his approach
May 23, 2026
I am an admirer of Andrew Weissmann and enjoy him when he provides legal analysis and commentary on television. I've been accused of being a "legal nerd" for years because I like reading legislation and appellate court decisions. But this book was a difficult slog for me.
July 12, 2026
Although this is a short book, many parts seemed to drag on. I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Weisssmann and watch him frequently on TV.
He details how other countries deal with lying in elections and other essential aspects of a democracy. He further writes about having similar laws in our country.
To me, this is a pipedream. Congress , as it currently is comprised, doesn't have any interest in changing the status quo and prevent the current situation where lying is commonplace.
He details how other countries deal with lying in elections and other essential aspects of a democracy. He further writes about having similar laws in our country.
To me, this is a pipedream. Congress , as it currently is comprised, doesn't have any interest in changing the status quo and prevent the current situation where lying is commonplace.
May 24, 2026
This is the book we need for these political times. Not only does Weissmann clearly elaborate the issues, but he also offers practical solutions which can help. Although primarily a legal discussion, Weissmann presents his arguments in a clear, non-technical way that makes it easy to understand. Highly recommend.
May 21, 2026
A little hope...
June 10, 2026
The thing is, unless and until the Republican Party stops being a nest of spite-driven ignorant cult members fueled by nothing but greed and hate, then nothing can or will save America.
But! I really appreciated this book a lot, because Weissmann brings a very measured yet forthright and well-informed view to the issues raised in it, and his ideas are not just smart and interesting, they are also wholly feasible...if, as I said, we ever get back to having an at least mostly sane GOP, not to mention a Supreme Court that isn't stacked with six bitter grievance mongers doing the party's bidding. The posited new laws/statutes that Weissmann suggests are eminently reasonable and would really not be that difficult to implement, and I agree that they could go a long way toward preventing a future iteration of Trump and the fever he brought in with him.
For me personally, as someone who pays a lot of attention to the news, the earlier chapters where he was going through the details of certain things like the 2020 election, January 6, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, etc, went into a little more detail than I thought was necessary. But I recognize that not everyone reading this book is going to be as familiar with all of this stuff and I do think it's valuable to really lay it all out there for people to take in before going into the "and here's what we can do" sections.
Definitely a worthwhile and important book for these current times. Also, Andrew didn't say it but I will: If you wanna save America, vote blue in the fucking midterms. Because if we can take back Congress, that's a huge step toward that goal.
But! I really appreciated this book a lot, because Weissmann brings a very measured yet forthright and well-informed view to the issues raised in it, and his ideas are not just smart and interesting, they are also wholly feasible...if, as I said, we ever get back to having an at least mostly sane GOP, not to mention a Supreme Court that isn't stacked with six bitter grievance mongers doing the party's bidding. The posited new laws/statutes that Weissmann suggests are eminently reasonable and would really not be that difficult to implement, and I agree that they could go a long way toward preventing a future iteration of Trump and the fever he brought in with him.
For me personally, as someone who pays a lot of attention to the news, the earlier chapters where he was going through the details of certain things like the 2020 election, January 6, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, etc, went into a little more detail than I thought was necessary. But I recognize that not everyone reading this book is going to be as familiar with all of this stuff and I do think it's valuable to really lay it all out there for people to take in before going into the "and here's what we can do" sections.
Definitely a worthwhile and important book for these current times. Also, Andrew didn't say it but I will: If you wanna save America, vote blue in the fucking midterms. Because if we can take back Congress, that's a huge step toward that goal.
June 20, 2026
What this book isn’t: A book k meant to simply bash Trump. Rather, it’s an intelligent description of how our Constitution falls short of protecting us from lies that affect our elections. The author is a constitutional law professor and former DOJ lawyer with extensive experience and I have been listening to him for years and I always learn from him. What’s great about this book is that he not only outlines the problems with politically motivated lies but also he lists examples of three other countries that have consequences of knowingly spreading untruths to change the outcome of elections. Brazil, France and Germany all have laws to keep politicians from doing this. He also gives three examples of hypothetical laws that would protect our country from this problem. It is informative and very easy to follow and even offers some hope to what seems like an unfixable problem. I listened to the audiobook which was narrated by the author. It’s a hart book,only around 4 hours so it doesn’t drone on with needless information. It gets right to the point. I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in salvaging the integrity of our elections.
June 22, 2026
Author Andrew Weissmann discusses the pervasive lies that are being disseminated to the public by politicians and spread by the media. But he doesn’t just call out the untruths, he offers examples of ways that other countries have dealt with similar problems through enacting laws that make politicians and lawmakers accountable. However, it is incumbent on the voters to elect representatives who will actually enact the laws necessary to shore up our democracy. This is such an important book, especially as we celebrate the 250th anniversary of the USA.
July 22, 2026
Good book by an author who knows what he's talking about. The book is focused on stopping election lies and from what I read, makes a persuasive case. Have to admit I skimmed a fair amount, but I read enough to recommend the book to you if you are interested in how to safeguard our democracy in general, and prevent another character like the current Fraudster-in-Chief from coming to power through the endless repetition of lies.
May 30, 2026
Excellent, constructive ideas for fixing our democracy along with some humor and good stories.
Kudos to the editor - this was a SHORT 4 hour audiobook!
I learned so much about how Bolsinaro and Trump pulled the same election antics, but how Brazilian law protected their country. The idea of a very specific anti election lie law, aimed at candidates trying to do harm (eg still protecting private speech) and possibly a civil law (no immunity or pardon can nullify it) is a great idea!
A very thorough examination of how the law could work and how to avoid unintended consequences/protect all but election denial speech.
Kudos to the editor - this was a SHORT 4 hour audiobook!
I learned so much about how Bolsinaro and Trump pulled the same election antics, but how Brazilian law protected their country. The idea of a very specific anti election lie law, aimed at candidates trying to do harm (eg still protecting private speech) and possibly a civil law (no immunity or pardon can nullify it) is a great idea!
A very thorough examination of how the law could work and how to avoid unintended consequences/protect all but election denial speech.
August 2, 2026
Mandatory reading/listening. Healthy dose of facts and hope.
Read
August 3, 2026Read with J & J.
June 29, 2026
Brief and extraordinarily clear. Reminds me of some of Lincoln’s analyses. Very elegant and a pleasure to read. Highly recommended
May 21, 2026
Andrew Weissman is a very talented and knowledgeable legal expert who has a knack for explaining the law to someone like me who has a minimal understanding of U.S. law. I appreciate his ability to look at the U.S. states and from other democracies around the world to explain what we could do to make our democracy better, stronger, and resilient.
I would also highly recommend the Illegal News with Sarah Longwell, a Bullwark show. Sarah has Andrew on often to explain to us non-legal people how exactly the current corrupt Trump administration is blatantly breaking the law and expecting Americans to shut up and like it. 5 stars!!
I would also highly recommend the Illegal News with Sarah Longwell, a Bullwark show. Sarah has Andrew on often to explain to us non-legal people how exactly the current corrupt Trump administration is blatantly breaking the law and expecting Americans to shut up and like it. 5 stars!!
May 25, 2026
Like CEOs are prohibited from lying to their stockholders, Weissmann says US politicians should be prohibited from lying to voters. A great study.
July 15, 2026
I should say at the outset that I came to Liar's Kingdom without intending to: it was the short, available title I checked out while demonstrating a library app for my channel, and I review it with real reservations about wading into overtly political books at all. Taken on its own terms, Andrew Weissmann's slim treatise distinguishes itself within a crowded genre by being a remedy book rather than a diagnosis book. Where most accounts of American democratic erosion end with alarm, Weissmann, the former Mueller prosecutor, Enron Task Force leader, and FBI general counsel, builds his seven chapters like a legal brief, moving from the problem, through the governing law, through comparative authority, to a specific proposal. His central observation is arresting in its simplicity: American law punishes lying under oath, lying to Congress, lying in securities filings, lying in advertisements, and lying about military honors, yet no criminal law reaches a politician's deliberate lie that an election was stolen, the falsehood most corrosive to self-government and the one that fueled an insurrection.
The book's strengths are those of its author's training. The inventory of contexts in which American law already punishes falsehood reframes the usual First Amendment debate, shifting the question from whether a free society may punish lies, since it demonstrably does, to why this particular lie is exempt. The chapter built around the Stolen Valor Act and the Supreme Court's Alvarez decision is the finest short explanation of the constitutional treatment of false statements I have encountered in a popular book, mapping precisely where falsehoods tied to fraud, gain, or concrete harm lose their protection. The comparative chapter, surveying Germany's Holocaust denial statute, Brazil's conviction and imprisonment of Jair Bolsonaro over his election lies, and analogues in France and England, effectively establishes that the United States is the outlier among democracies. And the personal frame is quietly affecting: the book opens at a 2019 lunch where Weissmann's parents, who came of age during the McCarthy era, and in his father's case escaped Vienna after the Anschluss, debate which historical analogy best fits the moment.
The book's limitations are the mirror image of its virtues, and readers should weigh them. This is an advocate's brief, openly adversarial toward its principal subject, not an evenhanded survey; the standing counterarguments, that Alvarez itself struck down the original Stolen Valor Act with warnings against governmental arbiters of truth, that any law policing election lies hands enforcement machinery to future administrations of every stripe, and that the American speech tradition is deliberately more protective than the foreign models cited, are engaged from one side of the podium. Weissmann's chapters on intent standards and procedural safeguards exist to answer them, but the reader seeking the strongest opposing case must look elsewhere, and I confess I have not yet surveyed the published rebuttals myself. There is also a paradox the book cannot escape: it prescribes careful legal reasoning to a political culture it has just diagnosed as unmoved by careful reasoning, and its remedies presuppose legislative conditions that do not currently exist, a dependency the author concedes.
As a reading experience, I found it lucid, brisk, and honestly discouraging, in the way a clear X-ray can be discouraging; a few hours with the author's own capable audiobook narration will leave most civically attentive readers heavier than they began. But I want to end where my historian's instincts land. An author who states his thesis openly, marshals his evidence, and shows his reasoning has produced something of durable worth, whatever becomes of his proposal, and future historians of this period will be glad to have so clear a statement of one side of a live constitutional argument. What such an argument is worth to the wider culture in the present environment, I truly do not know. Recommended for readers who want to understand the law of political falsehood, for admirers of the author's legal analysis, and for skeptics willing to spar with a well-made case; readers seeking escape from contemporary politics, or a neutral survey of the debate, should look elsewhere.
For more of my thoughts, check out my video:
https://youtu.be/vFGBv2su6_w
For more reviews, check out my channel:
http://www.youtube.com/@SpencerReadsE...
The book's strengths are those of its author's training. The inventory of contexts in which American law already punishes falsehood reframes the usual First Amendment debate, shifting the question from whether a free society may punish lies, since it demonstrably does, to why this particular lie is exempt. The chapter built around the Stolen Valor Act and the Supreme Court's Alvarez decision is the finest short explanation of the constitutional treatment of false statements I have encountered in a popular book, mapping precisely where falsehoods tied to fraud, gain, or concrete harm lose their protection. The comparative chapter, surveying Germany's Holocaust denial statute, Brazil's conviction and imprisonment of Jair Bolsonaro over his election lies, and analogues in France and England, effectively establishes that the United States is the outlier among democracies. And the personal frame is quietly affecting: the book opens at a 2019 lunch where Weissmann's parents, who came of age during the McCarthy era, and in his father's case escaped Vienna after the Anschluss, debate which historical analogy best fits the moment.
The book's limitations are the mirror image of its virtues, and readers should weigh them. This is an advocate's brief, openly adversarial toward its principal subject, not an evenhanded survey; the standing counterarguments, that Alvarez itself struck down the original Stolen Valor Act with warnings against governmental arbiters of truth, that any law policing election lies hands enforcement machinery to future administrations of every stripe, and that the American speech tradition is deliberately more protective than the foreign models cited, are engaged from one side of the podium. Weissmann's chapters on intent standards and procedural safeguards exist to answer them, but the reader seeking the strongest opposing case must look elsewhere, and I confess I have not yet surveyed the published rebuttals myself. There is also a paradox the book cannot escape: it prescribes careful legal reasoning to a political culture it has just diagnosed as unmoved by careful reasoning, and its remedies presuppose legislative conditions that do not currently exist, a dependency the author concedes.
As a reading experience, I found it lucid, brisk, and honestly discouraging, in the way a clear X-ray can be discouraging; a few hours with the author's own capable audiobook narration will leave most civically attentive readers heavier than they began. But I want to end where my historian's instincts land. An author who states his thesis openly, marshals his evidence, and shows his reasoning has produced something of durable worth, whatever becomes of his proposal, and future historians of this period will be glad to have so clear a statement of one side of a live constitutional argument. What such an argument is worth to the wider culture in the present environment, I truly do not know. Recommended for readers who want to understand the law of political falsehood, for admirers of the author's legal analysis, and for skeptics willing to spar with a well-made case; readers seeking escape from contemporary politics, or a neutral survey of the debate, should look elsewhere.
For more of my thoughts, check out my video:
https://youtu.be/vFGBv2su6_w
For more reviews, check out my channel:
http://www.youtube.com/@SpencerReadsE...
June 8, 2026
A Strong Case for Accountability, but What Comes Next? ⚖️
Andrew Weissmann’s Liar’s Kingdom begins with a fascinating premise. 🤔 He points out that in the United States there are numerous laws that prohibit false statements—you can’t lie to Congress, lie on a loan application, or lie to the IRS. Yet despite these protections against dishonesty, there are no broad laws that prohibit politicians from lying to the American electorate. Weissmann contrasts this with countries such as Brazil, France, the United Kingdom, and Germany, which have various legal mechanisms aimed at holding political leaders accountable for knowingly false statements. 🌎
His central argument is that the United States should consider similar measures because unchecked political dishonesty can further erode trust in our democratic institutions. 🏛️
I was already familiar with Andrew Weissmann from seeing him on MSNOW. He is clearly a brilliant attorney with an impressive background and wealth of experience. 👨⚖️ However, I found myself wondering whether this book may resonate more strongly with lawyers, legal scholars, and policy experts than with the general public.
While I understood and appreciated the concepts he was presenting, parts of the book felt somewhat dry and difficult to engage with. 📖 The discussion is naturally framed through a legal lens—as one would expect from a former prosecutor and attorney—which at times made it feel more like a legal argument than a broad public conversation. I often found myself wanting the book to move beyond the hypothetical and spend more time exploring practical questions: How would these ideas actually be implemented? What steps would be required to turn them into law? Is there a realistic path for building public support and political momentum behind such reforms? 🤷♀️
I also found myself wrestling with some of the practical challenges. For example, when journalists fact-check political debates, they frequently identify false or misleading statements from candidates on all sides. 📰 But are all of those statements intentional lies? Or are some the result of confusion, faulty memory, misunderstanding, or the pressure of responding in real time during a high-stakes debate? Weissmann discusses mechanisms for correcting false statements after the fact, but I wondered whether that could become an endless paper chase or whether there is a workable middle ground that balances accountability with reality. ⚖️
To be clear, I support the broader goal of holding politicians accountable for deliberate deception. ✅ I simply wanted more discussion about how these ideas could move from theory to practice and what safeguards would be needed to make them fair and effective.
Ultimately, I think the book raises important questions and presents thought-provoking ideas. 💭 My challenge was not with the substance of the argument but with the presentation. I often felt there was a mismatch between the intended audience and my experience as an interested general reader. I wanted to connect with the book more than I did, but the legalistic approach sometimes made that difficult.
For that reason, I settled on a four-star rating. The ideas are compelling and worthy of discussion, but I would have appreciated a more accessible and practical exploration of how they might work in the real world.
Andrew Weissmann’s Liar’s Kingdom begins with a fascinating premise. 🤔 He points out that in the United States there are numerous laws that prohibit false statements—you can’t lie to Congress, lie on a loan application, or lie to the IRS. Yet despite these protections against dishonesty, there are no broad laws that prohibit politicians from lying to the American electorate. Weissmann contrasts this with countries such as Brazil, France, the United Kingdom, and Germany, which have various legal mechanisms aimed at holding political leaders accountable for knowingly false statements. 🌎
His central argument is that the United States should consider similar measures because unchecked political dishonesty can further erode trust in our democratic institutions. 🏛️
I was already familiar with Andrew Weissmann from seeing him on MSNOW. He is clearly a brilliant attorney with an impressive background and wealth of experience. 👨⚖️ However, I found myself wondering whether this book may resonate more strongly with lawyers, legal scholars, and policy experts than with the general public.
While I understood and appreciated the concepts he was presenting, parts of the book felt somewhat dry and difficult to engage with. 📖 The discussion is naturally framed through a legal lens—as one would expect from a former prosecutor and attorney—which at times made it feel more like a legal argument than a broad public conversation. I often found myself wanting the book to move beyond the hypothetical and spend more time exploring practical questions: How would these ideas actually be implemented? What steps would be required to turn them into law? Is there a realistic path for building public support and political momentum behind such reforms? 🤷♀️
I also found myself wrestling with some of the practical challenges. For example, when journalists fact-check political debates, they frequently identify false or misleading statements from candidates on all sides. 📰 But are all of those statements intentional lies? Or are some the result of confusion, faulty memory, misunderstanding, or the pressure of responding in real time during a high-stakes debate? Weissmann discusses mechanisms for correcting false statements after the fact, but I wondered whether that could become an endless paper chase or whether there is a workable middle ground that balances accountability with reality. ⚖️
To be clear, I support the broader goal of holding politicians accountable for deliberate deception. ✅ I simply wanted more discussion about how these ideas could move from theory to practice and what safeguards would be needed to make them fair and effective.
Ultimately, I think the book raises important questions and presents thought-provoking ideas. 💭 My challenge was not with the substance of the argument but with the presentation. I often felt there was a mismatch between the intended audience and my experience as an interested general reader. I wanted to connect with the book more than I did, but the legalistic approach sometimes made that difficult.
For that reason, I settled on a four-star rating. The ideas are compelling and worthy of discussion, but I would have appreciated a more accessible and practical exploration of how they might work in the real world.
June 2, 2026
SHOULD BE REQUIRED READING FOR ANY HIGH SCHOOL AP U.S. GOVERNMENT CLASS
I'm a retired high school social studies teacher. During my tenure I taught mostly freshman world history and U.S. Government to juniors. My husband, who shares my absolute disgust with the state of our country under this current administration, would often ask me how Trump and his sycophants can get away with so many blatant lies was, while perhaps immoral or unethical, it is not against the law in this country for politicians to make false, even egregious ones. Remarkably, these gross untruths are protected by the 1st Amendment. True that if you tell lies that harm another individual our legal system offers protections. You can sue them in civil court (slander if the offense is by spoken word, or libel if it is written), but to speak openly to the public, especially when running for political office, politicians can get away saying most anything.,
It actually is understandable. Who will be the arbiter of what is, and what is not the truth? What if its the political party in power? In a democracy, the truth can be a tricky thing. The Supreme Court has explained that in our society we operate within a "marketplace of ideas." The American people, so the logic goes, are smart enough to, sooner or later, ferret out the truth. In a free society the truth will always eventually prevail! Or will it? Remember Kelly Ann Conway in Trump's first term? The infamous "alternative facts?" Trump is in power undermining our democratic institutions every single day because a large percentage of the populace has drunk his Kool-Aid.
Besides simply trusting (hoping) that we'll eventually "right our ship," isn't there something within the law to stop this blatant dishonesty? Lifelong lawyer, author of two previous books on the law, once the top attorney in the FBI, a team member in the Mueller investigation, NYU law professor, and now MS NOW contributor, Andrew Weissmann takes this question head-on in this high accessible book. He's writing is easy to follow (I was only in the weeds once) and he frames his arguments using his extensive personal experience, as well as precedent from previous cases. He offers practical solutions based on successful models from Brazil, the U.K., Germany, and France who DO hold their politicians to account when they lie to win elections and gain power.
The solution is actually fairly simple. It is not couched in complicated legalize impossible for a lay person to comprehend. Instead of using the "marketplace of ideas" concept, why not apply a far more common concept in our legal system: "beyond a reasonable doubt." This is a high standard, so it's likely our election processes will not be inundated with nefarious charges and accusations. Let a judge and jury decide if a candidate is lying. Don't we deserve truth from our elected leaders? Consequences can be as little as disbarment (the offender is no longer allowed to run for office, sometimes for a set number of years), to fines or even prison.
America is hurting. Weissman has written a prescription(s) that can, at minimum, mitigate this cancer eating at our democratic institutions. We, the electorate, must insist our elected leaders adopt a cure against this corruption or risk losing our democracy!
I'm a retired high school social studies teacher. During my tenure I taught mostly freshman world history and U.S. Government to juniors. My husband, who shares my absolute disgust with the state of our country under this current administration, would often ask me how Trump and his sycophants can get away with so many blatant lies was, while perhaps immoral or unethical, it is not against the law in this country for politicians to make false, even egregious ones. Remarkably, these gross untruths are protected by the 1st Amendment. True that if you tell lies that harm another individual our legal system offers protections. You can sue them in civil court (slander if the offense is by spoken word, or libel if it is written), but to speak openly to the public, especially when running for political office, politicians can get away saying most anything.,
It actually is understandable. Who will be the arbiter of what is, and what is not the truth? What if its the political party in power? In a democracy, the truth can be a tricky thing. The Supreme Court has explained that in our society we operate within a "marketplace of ideas." The American people, so the logic goes, are smart enough to, sooner or later, ferret out the truth. In a free society the truth will always eventually prevail! Or will it? Remember Kelly Ann Conway in Trump's first term? The infamous "alternative facts?" Trump is in power undermining our democratic institutions every single day because a large percentage of the populace has drunk his Kool-Aid.
Besides simply trusting (hoping) that we'll eventually "right our ship," isn't there something within the law to stop this blatant dishonesty? Lifelong lawyer, author of two previous books on the law, once the top attorney in the FBI, a team member in the Mueller investigation, NYU law professor, and now MS NOW contributor, Andrew Weissmann takes this question head-on in this high accessible book. He's writing is easy to follow (I was only in the weeds once) and he frames his arguments using his extensive personal experience, as well as precedent from previous cases. He offers practical solutions based on successful models from Brazil, the U.K., Germany, and France who DO hold their politicians to account when they lie to win elections and gain power.
The solution is actually fairly simple. It is not couched in complicated legalize impossible for a lay person to comprehend. Instead of using the "marketplace of ideas" concept, why not apply a far more common concept in our legal system: "beyond a reasonable doubt." This is a high standard, so it's likely our election processes will not be inundated with nefarious charges and accusations. Let a judge and jury decide if a candidate is lying. Don't we deserve truth from our elected leaders? Consequences can be as little as disbarment (the offender is no longer allowed to run for office, sometimes for a set number of years), to fines or even prison.
America is hurting. Weissman has written a prescription(s) that can, at minimum, mitigate this cancer eating at our democratic institutions. We, the electorate, must insist our elected leaders adopt a cure against this corruption or risk losing our democracy!
June 15, 2026
I listened to the unabridged 5-hour audio version of this title (read by the author, Hachette Audio, 2026).
Weissmann, MSNOW legal analyst and veteran federal prosecutor, offers a lawyerly view of how political lies are breaking our democracy and what to do about it. Most political lies in the US carry no consequences and can't be prosecuted. Exceptions include lying under oath, lying to Congress, lying to federal agents, lying to financial institutions, and lies that constitute libel. Even in such cases, prosecution and punishment are rare. Donald Trump has faced no legal penalties for his repeated lies about the 2020 election, as well as a barrage of other lies to the American people.
Weissmann wonders why lying to the American people to gain votes and win public office is treated as a less-serious offense than lying to Congress or to an FBI agent. In the case of Trump's lies about the 2020 election, libel lies do not apply, because he does not accuse a specific individual or company. Rudy Giuliani, who accused a couple of election workers of cheating, and Fox News, that accused a voting-machines company of fraudulent modification of votes, were ordered by courts to pay hefty sums to the victims. But Trump does not name names, claiming simply that "they" or "the deep state" cheated to make him lose. All of his claims have been dismissed by courts, yet he has not been held responsible for endlessly repeating the same lies.
Other countries do have laws against lying to the people. For example, Brazil tried former President Jair Bolsonaro for lying about election fraud and punished him with a 27-year jail sentence. It can be argued that lying to millions of people in order to win elections is a more-serious offense than lying about one person (libel), yet our laws do not have provisions for punishing the former. The Stolen Valor Act, which punishes anyone who lies about having won, say, a Medal of Honor (because of the harm done to the real winners of the honor), is the closest thing we have to the new laws Weissmann advocates.
Weissmann argues that "the right to truthful information in elections supersedes the unfettered right to free speech when deliberate falsehoods are made that threaten the democratic order." He suggests that "truth in advertising" should extend to politics, and that candidates who lie should be disqualified from running for public office.
Weissmann, MSNOW legal analyst and veteran federal prosecutor, offers a lawyerly view of how political lies are breaking our democracy and what to do about it. Most political lies in the US carry no consequences and can't be prosecuted. Exceptions include lying under oath, lying to Congress, lying to federal agents, lying to financial institutions, and lies that constitute libel. Even in such cases, prosecution and punishment are rare. Donald Trump has faced no legal penalties for his repeated lies about the 2020 election, as well as a barrage of other lies to the American people.
Weissmann wonders why lying to the American people to gain votes and win public office is treated as a less-serious offense than lying to Congress or to an FBI agent. In the case of Trump's lies about the 2020 election, libel lies do not apply, because he does not accuse a specific individual or company. Rudy Giuliani, who accused a couple of election workers of cheating, and Fox News, that accused a voting-machines company of fraudulent modification of votes, were ordered by courts to pay hefty sums to the victims. But Trump does not name names, claiming simply that "they" or "the deep state" cheated to make him lose. All of his claims have been dismissed by courts, yet he has not been held responsible for endlessly repeating the same lies.
Other countries do have laws against lying to the people. For example, Brazil tried former President Jair Bolsonaro for lying about election fraud and punished him with a 27-year jail sentence. It can be argued that lying to millions of people in order to win elections is a more-serious offense than lying about one person (libel), yet our laws do not have provisions for punishing the former. The Stolen Valor Act, which punishes anyone who lies about having won, say, a Medal of Honor (because of the harm done to the real winners of the honor), is the closest thing we have to the new laws Weissmann advocates.
Weissmann argues that "the right to truthful information in elections supersedes the unfettered right to free speech when deliberate falsehoods are made that threaten the democratic order." He suggests that "truth in advertising" should extend to politics, and that candidates who lie should be disqualified from running for public office.
June 15, 2026
I'm reviewing this and gave it 4 stars - It was not what I was expecting to read. I watch Andrew Weissmann frequently on MSNOW when he guests and think the world of him. I was not expecting to read a couple hundred pages about potential new laws that Congress should be writing. I'm very glad someone as bright and valued as Mr. Weissmann is, is thinking of these things, and hopefully many legislators and their clerks and aides are looking into doing this.
My own point of view is that it's hopeless. We can write all the legislation we want, but the lies will still be told and will sell to the voters -- by the time anything is investigated and depositions and discovery is taken whether in court or by Congressional hearings, the person will probably be out of office or the whole thing will be moot. The time lag will do it especially for congressional reps. I think Mr. Weissmann forgot to mention what that guy Santos (I think that was his name) got elected with, the series of lies that were to the point of being completely ridiculous.
I am appalled that in the entire state of Maine, the Democrats have not been able to find a decent person to run for Senate against the eternal infernal Susan Collins and that guy was the best they could find. There has to be someone on a school board or community program or something that could run for Senate. It's time to stop depending on Susan Collins to finally decide - ultimately with her own party - but she teases, decade after decade.
Anyway, I appreciate the time and effort that Mr. Weissmann spent while spending time in the beautiful city of Paris, to propose new legislation. Whether anything gets passed or even discussed, I don't think it will ultimately save our democracy -- because it will always be spun in favor of the party in power. There are so many constant lies everywhere out of everyone's mouth, where else would we start to decide who to complain against. It's really hopeless.
My own point of view is that it's hopeless. We can write all the legislation we want, but the lies will still be told and will sell to the voters -- by the time anything is investigated and depositions and discovery is taken whether in court or by Congressional hearings, the person will probably be out of office or the whole thing will be moot. The time lag will do it especially for congressional reps. I think Mr. Weissmann forgot to mention what that guy Santos (I think that was his name) got elected with, the series of lies that were to the point of being completely ridiculous.
I am appalled that in the entire state of Maine, the Democrats have not been able to find a decent person to run for Senate against the eternal infernal Susan Collins and that guy was the best they could find. There has to be someone on a school board or community program or something that could run for Senate. It's time to stop depending on Susan Collins to finally decide - ultimately with her own party - but she teases, decade after decade.
Anyway, I appreciate the time and effort that Mr. Weissmann spent while spending time in the beautiful city of Paris, to propose new legislation. Whether anything gets passed or even discussed, I don't think it will ultimately save our democracy -- because it will always be spun in favor of the party in power. There are so many constant lies everywhere out of everyone's mouth, where else would we start to decide who to complain against. It's really hopeless.
August 1, 2026
Andrew Weissmann notes that the standards for truth telling are high in a court of law, but in political discourse (often designed to deceive) the standards are so low as to be non-existent. He defines the problem and poses legislation to combat it.
If you follow the news you will know the problem. It is covered through examples in the first 3 chapters.
In Chapter 4 Weissmann explains how, through legislation, liars can be held accountable. He uses the Stolen Valor Act which the Supreme Court was held to be too broad and how, following input from the Justices’ opinions, was revised and a successful prosecution resulted. The revised Stolen Valor Act can serve as a model for legislation to cover lies told in the political arena.
Other models are shown in Chapter 5 where Weissmann looks at statutes in Brazil, France and Germany . He shows how their laws to curb lies in politics can work. In the next chapter he relates elements that can be used to create laws for the US. He gives three samples and shows how they can work.
Through this narrative you can see the art of drafting legislation. There is a lot to consider, such as the breadth of what will be covered. For instance, facts (not opinions), specific content (Germany bars Holocaust denying), the impact of the lie, etc. Then there is the punishment: fines? Jail time? Disbarment from office? Proof needed for conviction (i.e. beyond a reasonable doubt?). He notes that in criminal law, the liar can get a presidential pardon, which is not available in civil law.
There are examples of how such laws can be weaponized.
This book is short, pithy and practical. It is heavily noted and has an Index.
I hope this book is widely read and discussed and hopefully, when the time comes this issue (and the parallel issue of lies in the media) will be addressed.
If you follow the news you will know the problem. It is covered through examples in the first 3 chapters.
In Chapter 4 Weissmann explains how, through legislation, liars can be held accountable. He uses the Stolen Valor Act which the Supreme Court was held to be too broad and how, following input from the Justices’ opinions, was revised and a successful prosecution resulted. The revised Stolen Valor Act can serve as a model for legislation to cover lies told in the political arena.
Other models are shown in Chapter 5 where Weissmann looks at statutes in Brazil, France and Germany . He shows how their laws to curb lies in politics can work. In the next chapter he relates elements that can be used to create laws for the US. He gives three samples and shows how they can work.
Through this narrative you can see the art of drafting legislation. There is a lot to consider, such as the breadth of what will be covered. For instance, facts (not opinions), specific content (Germany bars Holocaust denying), the impact of the lie, etc. Then there is the punishment: fines? Jail time? Disbarment from office? Proof needed for conviction (i.e. beyond a reasonable doubt?). He notes that in criminal law, the liar can get a presidential pardon, which is not available in civil law.
There are examples of how such laws can be weaponized.
This book is short, pithy and practical. It is heavily noted and has an Index.
I hope this book is widely read and discussed and hopefully, when the time comes this issue (and the parallel issue of lies in the media) will be addressed.
August 3, 2026
A book about truth in elective politics should practice truth in its own promotion. The dust jacket, asserts, in part, "A slim, elegant treatise, Liar's Kingdom is a playbook for stopping politicians like Trump from holing office in the future--and for saving our democracy." "Slim" and "elegant" are apt descriptions of this book by one of our most serious, devoted and articulate legal practitioners and journalists. I would add, "eminently reasonable": Weissmann knows his way around statutory language most likely to achieve its purpose and, as we say, "pass constitutional muster." This may also be its chief weakness: our politics today has no use for consummate rationality; everything in our politics, and, increasingly, in our courts, turns on gut instincts and base self-interest, as reflected in Leah Litman's recent book, "Lawless: How the Supreme Court runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes" (the title says it all, or much of it). But simply because there may not be the political will to fix our democracy does not change the fact that it is badly in need of repair, and that we will lose it unless we take some action. We could do much worse than starting with Weissmann's straightforward, understandable proposed federal laws to restrain politicians from dealing in patently false statements about our electoral processes. Weismann is a capable and clear writer, but he is not a firebrand. This quiet, determined, persistent book could easily be lost in the cacophony of our shouting political discourse (still, it was an instant No. 1 NYT bestseller, which gives cause for some optimism). But I cannot think of a message more important to be heard and acted upon than the course of action he lays out here. Buy it, read it, and tell everyone you know about it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 112 reviews