The Gatekeepers: How the White House Chiefs of Staff Define Every Presidency

by Chris Whipple

"The first in-depth, behind-the-scenes look at the White House Chiefs of Staff, whose actions--and inactions--have defined the course of our country What do Dick Cheney and Rahm Emanuel have in common? Aside from polarizing personalities, both served as chief of staff to the president of the United States--as did Donald Rumsfeld, Leon Panetta, and a relative handful of others. The chiefs of staff, often referred to as "the gatekeepers," wield tremendous power in Washington and beyond; they decide who is allowed to see the president, negotiate with Congress to push POTUS's agenda, and--most crucially--enjoy unparalleled access to the leader of the free world. Each chief can make or break an administration, and each president reveals himself by the chief he picks. Through extensive, intimate interviews with all seventeenliving chiefs and two former presidents, award-winning journalist and producer Chris Whipple pulls back the curtain on this unique fraternity. In doing so, he revises our understanding of presidential history, showing us how James Baker's expert managing of the White House, the press, and Capitol Hill paved the way for the Reagan Revolution--and, conversely, how Watergate, the Iraq War, and even the bungled Obamacare rollout mighthave been prevented by a more effective chief. Filled with shrewd analysis and never-before-reported details, The Gatekeepersoffers an essential portrait of the toughest job in Washington"--

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

400 pages, Paperback

First published April 4, 2017

About the author

WHIPPLE is an acclaimed writer, journalist, documentary filmmaker, and speaker. A multiple Peabody and Emmy Award-winning producer at CBS’s 60 Minutes and ABC’s Primetime, he is the chief executive officer of CCWHIP Productions. Most recently, he was the executive producer and writer of Showtime’s The Spymasters: CIA in the Crosshairs.

Reviews

[Diane · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a fantastic book on American politics, covering nearly 50 years of U.S. presidents and their White House chiefs of staff.

I was keen to pick up The Gatekeepers after seeing it referenced in a news story when Reince Priebus, Donald Trump's chief of staff, was fired in July. The book explains why the role of White House chief of staff is so important, and has fascinating stories from the administrations of Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama.

When I started reading this book, I didn't expect to get as engrossed in it as I did. The stories were so interesting that I raced through it in two days, amazed at how our political history continues to repeat itself. Some of the players involved were so arrogant and egotistical that it damaged the administration; other times the president himself was so disorganized that even a disciplined chief of staff couldn't keep order. After finishing this book, I better understand how difficult that staff position really is, and why it's considered such a powerful post.

While reading, I frequently paused to marvel at how connected everyone is in Washington — it really is its own little world, with the same people sticking around for decades.* So it shouldn't be a surprise that the young up-and-comers in the Ford administration, two fellas by the names of Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, later became such huge players in the G.W. Bush administration. (One of the biggest shocks I had reading this book was seeing Cheney described as a pleasant, humble guy in the '70s. Surprising, right? Cheney was so despised and controlling during the GWB years that several people in the book commented on how much he had changed.)

*Sidenote: I was also shocked by how presidents and their chiefs kept making the same mistakes (often despite warnings from previous administrations) and of hearing the same names pop up over and over again that I could have put on a tinfoil hat and run around shrieking, "WAKE UP, PEOPLE! EVERYTHING'S CONNECTED!!"

There are so many great stories from recent history in The Gatekeepers that I highly recommend it to anyone interested in American politics. I'd also recommend it as a guide to managers, often for examples of what NOT to do.

Favorite Quotes
"You have to be the person that says no. You've got to be the son of a bitch who basically tells somebody what the president can't tell him." — Leon Panetta, chief of staff to Bill Clinton

"Somebody's got to be in charge. Somebody's got to be the go-to guy who can go into the Oval Office and deliver a very tough message to the president. You can't do that if you got eight or nine guys sitting around saying, 'Well, you go tell him.'" — Dick Cheney, chief of staff to Gerald Ford

"A great president can get away with a mediocre chief of staff; a mediocre president can't possibly." — Robert Reich

[Matt · Rating 5 out of 5]

Chris Whipple offers a stunning look behind the curtain and into the depths of the West Wing, wherein resides some of the most powerful unelected figures in the American political machine. At the pinnacle of this group is a man (for there has yet to be a woman in the role) who wears the moniker Chief of Staff (CoS). Charged with keeping the various factions at bay and protecting the President of the United States (POTUS), the CoS serves primarily as a gatekeeper, but also as the one whose job it is to fall on any political grenade and take the brunt of any blowback for decisions made in the Oval Office. Whipple explores the role of Chief of Staff, loosely formed under Eisenhower, and how it became an essential part of every West Wing since Nixon rose to power in 1968. No POTUS has been without one (save for the early years of Jimmy Carter, who thought he could do it alone), sometimes acting as a sounding board and at other times that sober second thought to prevent disaster. Whipple explores each of the CoS who filled the role, beginning with H.R. Haldeman, who guided a cutthroat Nixon away from early disaster, only to find himself stained with Watergate, which led to the downfall of his boss. Members who served in the role of Chief would make a name for themselves, returning decades later to serve even more important roles, such as Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, who guided the brief Ford presidency along some shaky tracks. Others, like James A. Baker III, would serve under Reagan, but return to guide future presidents with key political advice (read: Bush 41 and 43). Even the likes of Obama’s picks to fill the role would not find themselves rooted for long, especially Rahm Emanuel, who was the first of four men to guide the troops under the last POTUS. As Whipple argues throughout, the role is not for the feint of heart or those who have a strong personal friendship with POTUS, but rather requires a backbone and the ability to say no to the Leader of the Free World, especially at the most inopportune moments. Whipple does a masterful job a recounting some of the behind-the-scenes moments and gives foundation to major events each POTUS faced, showing how the CoS played a role in events, even when they may not have wanted to step forward. Of greatest interest, looking ahead, Whipple uses his findings to forecast the need for a strong person (or persons) to serve as CoS to the 45th POTUS, prone to march to the beat of his own Twitter characters. Political junkies will love this book, which is not bogged down in too much minutiae, though it is a sobering look for anyone with an inkling of political interest.

I approached this book as a lesser dose of politics in these deeply divisive days in America. While not an American myself, I have a keen interest in political history south of the Canadian border, something that Whipple offers here. Whipple uses key events and clashes between POTUS and CoS to illustrate that there were many times when decisions did not flow as smoothly as they might have appeared in front of the camera. There are also numerous mentions of Chiefs having to rein in their bosses, who were hellbent on making stupid mistakes, placing ego before pragmatism. With a narrative that entertains as well as educates, Whipple draws on first-hand interviews as well as documented evidence to provide the reader with as thorough a look behind the doors of power, save when doing so might violate national security. The reader can sit back and see the progression of the role of Chief of Staff, though there were times when Chiefs refused to learn from their predecessors, citing political or ideological reasons. While the role is surely political, Whipple argues that it is more a shepherd herding sheep, no matter their political stripe. And, wherever possible, protecting the man in the Oval Office from political shrapnel.

Kudos, Mr. Whipple, for such a wonderful piece. I can only hope that I find more of you work in the coming years, as it was informative but not preachy. Well worth the time invested.

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

A Book for All Seasons, a different sort of Book Challenge: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...

[Jean · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found this a most interesting book to read. I learned a lot of information not only about the chief of staff but also about the president and his administration. The chief of staff(COS) is the highest-ranking White House employee. According to Whipple the chief of staff can make or break an administration. The author states the chief of staff is the second most powerful job in government. I found it most interesting to learn about the lessor known and written about but very important men. I was unaware that President Jimmy Carter chose not to have a COS. Whipple reviews the high and low points of past administrations’ chief of staffs. I was most interested in H.R. Haldeman, President Nixon’s COS, and Leon Panetta, President Clinton’s COS. I had forgotten that Dick Cheney was President Ford’s COS.

The book is well written and meticulously researched. The author interviews the seventeen-living chief of staffs. Apparently, there have been 28 COS’s since 1968. Whipple enhanced the narrative with his many interviews. Whipple’s writing style is very easy to read and he tosses in some humor. Whipple provides a valuable understanding of the positon and its duties. Whipple is a journalist and this comes through in his writing.

I read this as an audiobook downloaded from Audible. The book is almost 12 hours long. Mark Bramhall does a good job narrating the book. Bramhall is an actor and award-winning audiobook narrator.

[Steven Z. · Rating 5 out of 5]

At a time when the oval office is occupied by a man who seems to know no bounds of decency when it comes to race, hounds people who disagree with him on twitter, and vilifies individuals who he views as disloyal or refuse to do his bidding like former FBI head James Comey or Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller, it is refreshing to read Chris Whipple’s new book THE GATEKEEPERS: HOW THE WHITE HOUSE CHIEFS OF STAFF DEFINE EVERY PRESIDENCY. Recently President Trump fired his Chief of Staff, Reince Pribus, a man who had little influence over the President. Since Trump is enamored with generals, he finally convinced John Kelley, a former Marine general to become his new Chief of Staff. Kelly made it clear his role was not to reign in the President, but to bring order and efficiency to the West Wing. It is clear that Kelly does not totally subscribe to the historical role of the Chief of Staff as defined by Leon Panetta, who successfully rescued Bill Clinton’s presidency who states that, “you have to be the person who says no. You’ve got to be the son of a bitch who basically tells somebody what the president can’t tell him.” If you had hoped that Kelly would influence or temper Trump’s tweets and actions all you have to do is evaluate the President’s reaction to events in Charlottesville, his rally in Phoenix, his reaction to the ongoing Russia investigation, and his pardon of Sheriff Joseph Arpaio of Maricopa, AZ.

Whipple does the American people a service by describing and evaluating the men who have served as Chiefs of Staff dating back to the presidency of Richard Nixon. In each case we see individuals battle to keep the Chief Executive on message, fully briefed on issues, and to project themselves as presidential unlike the dysfunctional situation that currently plagues the White House. The key for the Chief of Staff is to instill discipline and focus on the West Wing as Leon Panetta was able to do to get Clinton reelected in 1996. The most important task for the Chief of Staff is to always tell the President what he may not want to hear. Whipple is correct that the role of the Chief of Staff is to translate the president’s agenda into reality. “When the government works, it is usually because the chief understands the fabric of power, threading the needle where policy and politics converge.” For example, without James Baker who stood between the press, Congress, and internal factions, Reagan’s presidency would have been a failure. Further, without Leon Panetta to bring discipline and order to the White House Clinton would have been a one term president; without Robert Kennedy, John F. Kennedy had to deal with the Bay of Pigs; Lyndon Johnson did not have a strong Chief of Staff and he was swallowed by Vietnam. As President Eisenhower told Richard Nixon, “every president has to have its own son of a bitch.”

One of the most surprising points that Whipple makes is that the most advanced model of organizational structure at the White House was developed by H.R. Haldeman - the problem is that he did not follow his own ideas resulting in Watergate. For later Chiefs of Staff eventually they would fall back to Haldeman’s structure. Other surprising points include the career of Dick Cheney who was a sensational organizer during his tenure as Chief of Staff under President Ford, and almost got Ford reelected in 1976, but when he became Vice President under George W. Bush his entire world view had changed as he morphed into the defacto chief. Many have conjectured why, and point to 9/11’s impact as being responsible.

The chief that one should not model was Hamilton Jordan who served under Jimmy Carter. Jordan was not interested in the nitty gritty of policy and found basic White House protocol incomprehensible. Jordan exacerbated his situation by his continual offending of Congressional leadership. What made matters worse for Jordan was when Carter was elected the new president believed he was “the smartest person in the room” and acted as his own chief and the net result was the seeming failure of the Carter presidency despite his energy policy, the Camp David Accords, arms control, and the Panama Canal Treaty. The opposite of Carter was Ronald Reagan who didn’t think he was the smartest person in the room, and knew how to delegate and have a strong Chief of Staff. Apart from Iran-Contra, Reagan’s presidency is seen as a success as Baker made Reagan understand the political process of the presidency would be closely linked to his acceptance in Washington, something Carter never bought into, and navigating between the ideologues and pragmatists that served the president.

The strength of Whipple’s book is how he reviews the highs and lows of each administration by focusing on the actions of the diverse Chiefs of Staff who organized the West Wing and made it run efficiently. By doing so Whipple explains the strategies and actions taken and judges whether their approach to governance was effective or not. In the process the history of each administration is dealt with, and at times Whipple uncovers “nuggets” that have not been covered effectively by other authors. A case in point is the reputation of Leon Panetta and by turning the Clinton administration around he proved you didn’t have to be “a bully or an attack dog to be an effective Chief of Staff. You just have to be very smart. You have to know when to be tough, and also when to let the reigns be a little looser.” The Clinton administration also produced Erskine Bowles and John Podesta who demanded that Clinton treat them as peers despite their friendships and were able to be honest and upfront with him which led to a balanced budget, the States Children’s health Insurance Plan and the survival of the Lewinsky Affair.

Andrew Card who would have the longest tenure as a chief saw James Baker as a role model, but 9/11 would produce a new “Dick Cheney.” Whipple explores why this occurred conjecturing with CBS’ Bob Schieffer that it could have been his heart condition that was responsible. Whipple reviews the debate and actions that led to the ill-fated invasion of Iraq. He does not really add anything new to the discussion, but what emerges is a marginalized Card who could not navigate between Powell, Rice, Rumsfeld, and the Vice President. One of the most controversial chiefs was Rahm Emanuel who served under President Obama. Whipple does an excellent job explaining the different factions within the Obama administration and Emanuel’s role particularly guiding legislation through Congress as he was able to overcome the scars left over from the Clinton administration in gaining the passage of the Affordable Care Act. Once Emanuel is replaced, Whipple is dead on in explaining why Emanuel’s replacement William Daley was a failure in his short stint at the White House, and how Dennis McDonough was able to counter Obama’s “Chicago crowd” as like Emanuel he was a strong communicator, something that Daley was not.

In a sense by reviewing each Chief of Staff’s tenure Whipple has created a handbook for President Trump’s Chief of Staff. He does so by presenting a theoretical approach to the position, but also the realities that each man faced. The political pragmatism that is needed to be successful emerges under the auspices of Baker, Emanuel, Panetta, and others, a characteristic that seems to be missing in the current White House. Whipple writes with the journalistic flair one would expect from a multiple Peabody and Emmy award winner and in the current environment there are many people in power who should consult it. If the Trump presidency eventually is unsuccessful in reaching its goals, Whipple has already explained why.

[Margaret · Rating 4 out of 5]

4/5

This book describes the evolution of the position of the modern White House Chief of Staff from the presidency of Richard Nixon to that of Barak Obama. (The book was published in 2017, and there is the briefest of epilogues taking a superficial view of the first few months of the Trump presidency during the tenure of Reince Priebus and on into the beginning of John Kelly’s service. It’s almost unfair to make judgments about a presidency that was not yet a year along.) Whipple had interviewed all the living former chiefs of staff for his 2013 documentary called The President’s Gatekeepers, and this book doubtless arose out of that film. The book is clearly written and easy enough to follow along. As someone old enough to remember all these characters, reading the book served as sort of a walk down memory lane.

Whipple’s approach is largely pragmatic. He calls the chief of staff the second most powerful job in Washington. The chief is first a gatekeeper, but he (all of them were men) also serves to speak for the president, to speak the truth to the president, and to keep channels open with Congress and others with the power to enact the president’s wishes. The job is brutally demanding by any standard. Whipple doesn’t choose favorites by party line affiliation; instead, he looks at how well the chief has served his president. Ronald Reagan’s second chief, Howard H. Baker Jr., is clearly everyone’s favorite. As Reagan was not an expert in many things he needed to be an effective president, Baker’s work filled in and made Reagan into a successful president. Reagan, for his part, knew enough to name Baker and to work well with him. On the other hand, Jimmy Carter’s view of himself as the one who ought to do everything prevented him from naming a chief for quite a while, an action which fatally damaged his presidency. (Carter’s chapter is aptly titled “The smartest man in the room.”)

I don’t usually read too many books of this sort, so it’s difficult for me to evaluate how accurate or insightful it really is. On the other hand, I enjoyed reading it, and most of what Whipple wrote made sense. And most of what the chiefs themselves said during their meetings to discuss the position and to offer assistance to a new president also made sense. I especially enjoyed the introduction to the book, which describes a December 5, 2008 meeting of twelve of the former chiefs with Rahm Emmanuel, who was about to become Obama’s chief. They all saw the severity of the economic situation and were there to offer advice. Whipple titles this short chapter “I brought my pillow and my blankie,” a statement attributed to Emmanuel and indicative of how frightened he was of the enormity of the job ahead (2). And I also could not help noticing what the former chiefs who showed up eight years later on December 16, 2016 to advise Reince Priebus had to say:

Ten chiefs, Republicans and Democrats, showed up; and as they gathered around the long table in McDonough’s [Denis McDonough was Obama’s fourth and last chief] office, none doubted the enormity of the challenge facing Priebus. “We wanted to help Reince in any way we could,” said Jack Watson, who served Jimmy Carter. “But I don’t think there was a chief in the room that thought he was going to be able to do the job, given Trump as his president.” Most of the former chiefs believed Trump was intellectually and temperamentally unfit for office—and few thought Priebus could rein him in or tell him hard truths. “We were thinking, ‘God bless him, Godspeed, and Good luck,’” said Watson. “But he doesn’t have a prayer.” (297-98)

All in all an interesting book and a good read. I bet the documentary was a pleasure too, although I have not seen it.

[LauraBeth · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this book because of its inside look into one of the most powerful (and most difficult) positions in the world, the White House Chief of Staff. Chris Whipple is an excellent journalist and in his hands, this book reads like a fascinating documentary. He interviews all 17 living Chiefs of Staff and throughout the book, I found myself turning to my husband and saying, "Did you know...? and "Listen to this..." This is probably one of the first books that I've ever read aloud parts to him because it was so fascinating and full of newsworthy information (and some juicy tidbits) that was simply new to me. If you enjoy reading about American politics and Presidents (or if you just enjoy watching the West Wing), you'll definitely want to read this well-written book. I predict that The Gatekeepers will win some literary honors for non-fiction in 2017 and will definitely be included on the "best of" year-end lists.

Many thanks to Crown Publishing and NetGalley for allowing me to read an ARC in exchange for an honest review.

[Colin · Rating 2 out of 5]

Quick read filled with plenty of interesting anecdotes across several administrations, but (perhaps because of the key role the chief of staff plays across a host of issues) the book often tends to get side tracked into more discussions of the major challenges or scandals that consumed those administrations, leading the nominal focus on the chiefs to drift. Underscores the importance of the role, but aside from a few highly generalized takeaways - chief of staff has to be an honest broker of the interagency, has to be able to tell the president he’s about to do something dumb - there’s not a lot more here.

[Yun · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Gatekeepers is a well-researched look at the White House chiefs of staff under Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr., and Obama; and their styles, abilities, accomplishments and failures in that role. The book explores the relationship between a chief's effectiveness and his president's ability to get things done during that time.

It talks about how the role has evolved into its modern reincarnation, what each president wants from their chiefs, and the consequences of that seminal choice. It's full of interesting details and tidbits, offering a backstage look at the defining moments in each president's tenure from the chief of staff's perspective.

I've long-held a fascination with the role ever since John Spencer played chief of staff Leo McGarry on The West Wing, and it's heartening to read that just like on the show, most chiefs are there working tirelessly to do the best they can for the country and for their president.

One note here: there is a quote in the book that completely gives away the ending of Agatha Christie's Murder on the Orient Express. I was in shock when I read it, just in the middle of the book without any spoiler warnings. It's not ok to give away another book's ending, and I'm very disappointed it was included in the book. So be warned.

[Randal White · Rating 5 out of 5]

Awesome! I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book. Whipple created an accounting of the White House Chiefs of Staff from Nixon through Obama. The successful and the not so successful. The successful ones were given the authority to actually control the fire hose of information coming into the President. And to prevent the people who attempted to go around them to reach the President with what they thought were unique and special needs. Similar to the military, a lieutenant does not jump the chain of command and go directly to the general, he goes through channels. Otherwise, the General (President) would be overwhelmed with opinions and subject to following the most influential talker, regardless of facts. As I finished reading this book, I was left with a feeling of awe in how well some of the Chief of Staffs could "herd cats" successfully. It takes a real talent. I read a lot of political history books, and this one ranks up there with the best. It fills in a lot of holes and explains a lot of actions that I wondered about in my reading of presidential memoirs. Highly recommended!

[Frank Theising · Rating 5 out of 5]

I’ve been on a bit of a Presidential bio kick lately, working towards a goal of reading at least one biography on each of our 45 Presidents. Those biographies, naturally, tend to focus heavily on the President and his decisions, with only a cursory examination of the other key players in a presidential administration. With a few exceptions, the Chief of Staff did not figure prominently in the narrative (the two exceptions being H.W. Brands’ Reagan: The Life and James Cannon’s Gerald R. Ford: An honorable Life). Naturally, I failed to grasp what a huge role the Chief of Staff plays in the success or failure of a presidential administration. I try not to give a lot of books 5 stars and only do so if it meets some specific criteria. One of those criteria, is if a book significantly influences my way of thinking about a subject. This book did that. It’s fair to say that the information in this book will remain in the forefront of my mind as I continue my journey through presidential biographies. Indeed, it comes to mind constantly as the drama of the Trump Administration unfolds daily before us. The version I read ends with Obama but the author recently published an article covering the first year of the Trump Administration.

That said, the book is not perfect. A few times, I felt the author was overselling his case a bit in order to defend his thesis. After reading this, it would be all too easy to conclude that every failure was the result of the Chief of Staff when that is clearly not the case. Still, that is a minor quibble. The only truly disappointing section of the book is the chapter on George W. Bush. The author barely mentions Bush’s two chiefs of staff at all, choosing instead to cover the blunder of the Iraq War. Andrew Card was chief of staff for five years, yet we learn next to nothing about what he actually did. The author implies that Cheney kind-of took over but doesn’t follow that aspect of the story through to a satisfying end. He should have kept coming back to what Card was or was not doing, what Cheney had wrestled away, and why that wasn’t working for the Bush Administration. Instead we get a rehashed account of the decision making leading up to the Iraq War. I thought about knocking my rating down to 4 stars for this but I feel the book truly did revolutionize the way I look at a presidential administration and think that alone justifies the 5 star rating.

What follows are my notes on the book:

The fate of every presidency arguably hinges on this little-understood position. The chief of staff translates the president’s agenda into reality. When government fails, it can often be traced to the shortcomings of the chief. The executive branch has the most awesome responsibilities of any corporation in the world, the largest budget of any corporation in the world, and the largest number of employees. Yet the entire management structure has to be formed in a period of 75 days.

H.R. “Bob” Haldeman and Richard Nixon

Neither Kennedy nor Johnson had a true chief of staff. Kennedy achieved little and Johnson was driven from office defeated. Nixon brought in a lot of strong, idiosyncratic personalities and needed a “tough SOB” to keep them in line. Haldeman would be that man. Haldeman read everything he could on how to organize the White House. He devised the staff system used by every president since. Nothing would go to the president that wasn’t staffed out for lateral coordination and reviewed by competent staff. No one was to be permitted to “end-run” the staff process and pitch their own agendas directly to the president. An image sprang up that Haldeman was isolating the president and preventing him from hearing diverse views he needed to make informed decisions. But that narrative wasn’t true. Haldeman actually worked to get more people in to see a president who was pathologically shy and who preferred memos to meetings. Haldeman had become adept at shelving many of Nixon’s orders that were beyond the pale. But some of the president’s other confidants were less squeamish. People like Chuck Colson and Ehrlichman began meeting with the president privately creating the end-run situation Haldeman had worked so hard to prevent. The Watergate Scandal ensued not because Haldeman had isolated the president but because people stopped following his system.

Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and Gerald Ford

When Ford came in, he initially kept the overbearing General Alexander Haig in place during his transition. From the start Ford announced that he would govern with eight or nine advisors reporting directly to him, a “spokes of the wheel” approach. Inevitably, his White House resembled a kids’ soccer game, everyone running toward the ball. The undisguised contempt between Ford loyalists and the Nixon holdovers didn’t help the situation, meaning Haig was often cut out of the loop. Staffers and cabinet secretaries would come and go into Ford’s office as they pleased to get him to sign things. The free for all meant there was no way to record what was discussed or decided. Donald Rumsfeld, who had been running his transition, warned him that the approach he had used in congress would not translate to the executive branch but Ford was adamant. Rumsfeld left for his new job at NATO. Ford’s surprise pardoning of Nixon created a firestorm in both the White House and the across the country. The chaos that ensued led Ford to conclude that Rumsfeld was right and he was brought back in as the new Chief of Staff in exchange for a promise to be appointed to a cabinet post at a future date. Rumsfeld curtailed the free-for-all access to the president and made it clear the trains would run on time. The workload was tremendous and Rumsfeld brought in Dick Cheney to be his deputy. Rumsfeld was the tough SOB that the nice-guy Ford needed to keep things in order. Rumsfeld clashed with VP Rockefeller and convinced the President that his promise to let Rockefeller be in charge of the administration’s domestic agenda was ludicrous. Rumsfeld would staff Rockefeller’s proposals out which killed many of his big spending proposals. Cheney, then genial and self-effacing, proved to be a valuable deputy and his eventual promotion to Chief of Staff (when Rumsfeld became Secretary of Defense) was universally welcomed. He had a softer management style but was every bit as firm as Rumsfeld had been. The performance of Rumsfeld and Cheney kept the administration moving and almost won the president a second term in spite of the overwhelming odds.

Hamilton Jordan, Jack Watson, and Jimmy Carter

Attorney Jack Watson was one of Carter’s closest advisors. Watson believed Carter was always the smartest man in the room and was quite possibly the smartest president we’ve ever had. Cheney had warned the incoming president that the whole “spokes of the wheel” approach was a recipe for disaster but Carter and his advisors were suspect of anything that resembled Nixon’s imperial presidency. They wanted a return to the JFK/LBJ model of a White House without a chief. Carter chose not to appoint Watson as chief of staff. Watson’s rival, Hamilton Jordan, didn’t want the positions or its responsibilities yet he moved into the chief’s office next to the president’s. Jordan would also antagonize congressional leaders by refusing to return phone calls. Carter was unable to prioritize and without a chief of staff, there was nobody to sort through the thicket and force him to stay on track. Carter’s response was to work even harder. As the crises continued to mount, Carter realized the spokes of the wheel approach wasn’t working and even the true believers were becoming disillusioned with the president. As the Iranian Hostage Crisis dragged on and Reagan gained in the polls, Carter finally appointed Watson as his chief. Watson belatedly got the White House Staff functioning again but it made little difference with all the mounting crises: inflation, unemployment, sky-high interest rates, Iran Hostage crisis, etc. Reagan beat Carter in a landslide.

James A. Baker III and Ronald Reagan

Ed Meese was the likely candidate for Reagan’s chief of staff but he was habitually, horrendously disorganized. Baker was a close friend of Bush and worked on his campaign. Baker impressed both Ronald and Nancy and he accepted the job. While Carter was “the smartest man in the room,” Reagan was considered an “affable dunce.” Baker was brilliant and a pragmatist (he would spend the next four years battling the ideologues in the administration). Baker worked out a deal with Meese, Meese would be special counselor to the president and in charge of policy while he would control the paperwork, speechwriting, and access to the president. Under this arrangement Baker cleverly seized control of the levers of power. Baker met with his predecessor Watson for lessons learned. Reagan had a few core beliefs: reducing government, a strong military, and cutting taxes…but he needed a chief of staff to work out the details on how to achieve these goals. After the assassination attempt, Baker sensed an opportunity and he helped to push through tax reform. Reagan was prepared to make deals with Democrats in order get some of his priorities through. Baker facilitated that give and take kept the president from touching any third rails that would harm his presidency (like Reagan’s desire to make social security voluntary). The infighting wore Baker down and he kept his eye open for an off ramp. When Secretary of Treasury Don Regan proposed they swap jobs he agreed and they went before the president who accepted the plan without question.

Don Regan, Howard Baker Jr., Kenneth Duberstein and Ronald Reagan

Unlike Baker, Regan focused on the “Chief” part of his title and not the “staff” part. Regan began constantly appearing on TV and in pictures next to the president instead of working behind the scenes. The first big controversy was on the 40th anniversary of WWII when Reagan was to lay a wreath at a German cemetery that, unbeknownst to them also held the graves of some Waffen SS. Regen ducked responsibility and a rift grew between Regen and Nancy Reagan. The NYT published stories saying Regan was the power behind the throne and angry phone calls began to grow between Regan and Nancy. The press picked up on a story in a Lebanese newspaper that the US had traded weapons to Iran in exchange for the release of hostages held in Lebanon. Unbeknownst to Reagan, members of the NSC were taking some of that money and clandestinely diverting it to the Contras in Nicaragua. It is almost impossible to imagine this scandal occurring if Baker had remained as chief. In a heated phone call, Regan hung up on Nancy, sealing his fate. Former Senate Majority leader Howard Baker was brought in as the new Chief. Baker’s wife had cancer, so Duberstein was brought in as an assistant and began carrying much of the load. They began to turn the ship back around. The President’s televised speech admitting mistakes with the Iran-Contra scandal appeased the American people. Reagan was a people person, that’s how he learned. Regan had closed the door to the Oval Office. Baker and Duberstein filled their rolls as gatekeepers but got people moving through again. With Reagan’s “tear down this wall” speech in Berlin, Duberstein had returned Reagan to the starring role.

John Sununu, Samuel Skinner, James A. Baker III, and George H.W. Bush

Sununu was the opinionated and pugnacious governor of New Hampshire. He already had two strikes against him that should have been warning signs: he had already been a “principal” as Regan had, and he was an outsider to Washington. Bush recognized Reagan was different, that he needed a director, but Bush wanted something different. The press had accused him of being spineless and uninspiring. Bush was determined to be seen calling the shots, not his chief. Many of Bush’s decisions (like his VP selection) were often total surprises known only to himself. Sununu had a hair trigger, was overbearing, and often cussed out the staff, thinking everyone would view him as tough. His deputy Andy Card thought otherwise and when Sununu’s troubles mounted, had few friends to back him up. On foreign policy, Bush’s team worked together harmoniously. Bush adroitly managed the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Gulf War. Though his calm handling of these situations was portrayed as emotionless and uncaring in the press. But when trying to pivot to his domestic agenda, Sununu proved a liability. His scorched earth approach was alienating his own staff and members of congress. Oblivious to the sharks circling, Sununu was caught using military aircraft for personal travel and resigned. Samuel Skinner, a Chicago businessman was brought in who was immediately overwhelmed. Bush was in the midst of his annus horribilis (throwing up on the Japanese prime minister, an economic slump, and faced third party challenger Perot). To save his presidency he turned to a trusted friend, James A. Baker III. Baker began to turn the ship but was brought in too late to make a difference and Bush lost to Clinton.

Thomas McLarty, Leon Panetta, Erskine Bowles, John Podesta, and Bill Clinton

Clinton was a brilliant politician but undisciplined. In a last minute, seat of the pants move he brought in Thomas McLarty, a friend from Arkansas, to be his Chief of Staff. The White House would start out without any organization. Meetings would go on for hours, people would just wander into the Oval Office…it was a mess. McLarty would prove too nice to enforce discipline or tell the president “no.” Ambitious aides and liberal factions began jostling for the president’s favor. Clinton was easily knocked off message. A frustrated Hillary brutally critiqued the chief’s management of the staff. Clinton had some successes (NAFTA) but his signature issues were stalled and his administration paralyzed. Clinton was still trying to be everything to everyone. McLarty was out and OMB Director Leon Panetta was brought in. Panetta was shocked how informally the White House was run (McLarty didn’t even have an organizational chart of the staff). Panetta brought in Bowles as his deputy. They analyzed the president’s schedule, showing him where his time was going and comparing that to what he said his priorities were. Panetta also too charge as gatekeeper. After the Republicans retook the House in 94, Panetta and Bowles helped Clinton prepare for his faceoff with Gingrich and the month long government shutdown that followed. Little did Panetta know, Dick Morris had slipped in behind his back as Clinton’s ghost advisor. Panetta recognized Clinton needed Morris and worked out a compromise where Morris stayed on as an advisor but did not have any power over the staff. As Panetta put the ship back on course, Clinton won reelection. When Panetta left after his second year, Bowles moved up to be the new chief. Bowles constantly fought to keep the President on track whenever he came out of his office with his next great idea. Bowles was devastated when the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke. Bowles couldn’t bring himself to deal with it and left in the fall of 98. Clinton’s fourth and final chief was John Podesta. Podesta was determined to keep the presidency moving but had to deal with the challenges of Gore running for president and Hillary running for the Senate. Podesta championed the use of executive power to achieve smaller objectives.

Andrew Card, Joshua Bolten, and George W. Bush

With Bush’s election, Cheney and Rumsfeld were coming home to the White House. Andrew Card, a close friend of the family, was the new Chief of Staff. Card was organized and efficient. Baker was his role model but understood that Bush, like his father, didn’t appreciate the idea of the chief of staff being the power behind the throne. Traditionally, the chief of staff has more power than the Vice President. The events of 9/11 transformed Bush’s presidency and vaulted Cheney into a position of prominence. Typically, the VP has trouble even getting into the Oval Office for lunch, but now decisions were flowing through Cheney. Cheney and Rumsfeld would lead the push for the Iraq Invasion. Despite serving more than five years in the position, Card is barely mentioned again in the rest of the chapter and the author dives into the Iraq War. After Card resigned, OMB Director Joshua Bolten was called in as the new chief. Bolten felt Bush was not well served by his security apparatus. Rather than bringing him options they were bringing him a strategy to bless. Bolten was instrumental in pushing Rumsfeld out as Secretary of Defense. 9/11 started his presidency, the financial crisis would end it. Bush was told by his advisors that we were on the brink of another Great Depression. Despite it violating his beliefs, he swallowed the medicine being offered and signed the $700B Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to bail out Wall Street.

Rahm Emanuel, William Daley, Jacob Lew, Denis McDonough, and Barack Obama

A month before the election, Obama held a secret meeting to begin considering who would hired by the administration. Panetta and Bowles both turned down offers to be his chief of staff. Congressman Rahm Emanuel quickly gained the attention of Obama. With control of both houses of Congress there was a tremendous opportunity to generate change. While Rahm certainly filled the “tough SOB” character the job required, he too struggled with keeping factions of moderates and true-believers in check. After pushing through the stimulus package, Obama overrode Emanuel to focus on healthcare reform. Once given his marching orders, Emanuel was laser focused and relentless, twisting arms and cutting deals (with congressmen and the pharmaceutical industry). James Baker believed Obama blundered in his hands off approach, letting Congress write the legislation for his #1 priority. The bill passed on a party line vote and the Democratic majority was wiped out in the next election. When Chicago Mayor Daley retired, Emanuel left to pursue that position. Former JPMorgan executive Bill Daley was brought in as the new chief in hopes of countering the anti-business image of the administration. With no knowledge of the government’s inner workings, he was a bad fit from the start. When the “Grand Bargain” fell apart over the intransigence of the Tea Party, the focus shifted overseas toward the Bin Laden raid. It was a rare moment of triumph for Daley. In 2011, the White House announced Daley would share responsibilities with Pete Rouse, cutting his legs out from under him. Frustrated and bitter, Daley resigned. OMB Director Jack Lew was brought in. Lew remained only a short time before being nominated to replace Geithner as treasury secretary. Denis McDonough came in and instilled some discipline (it probably didn’t hurt that Jarret and the Chicago Mafia had departed by this time). Still, Obama was too much like Carter, smart but unsocial. They never mastered the give and take needed to get things done in DC. McDonough argues that the environment shifted and this criticism is unfair…they didn’t have to deal with the hyper-partisan environment like he did. McDonough’s greatest failure involved the botched rollout of healthcare.gov. Obama had been asking for months if everything was good but McDonough never ensured the system was properly tested. It was an embarrassing failure on the President’s signature issue. Obama focused on executive orders to get his agenda through. Obama’s decision not to enforce his red line in Syria occurred after one of his “wrap sessions” with McDonough on the White House lawn.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

I went down the internet rabbit hole of information about this book. Here's what I found.

According to Publisher's Weekly, this 2017 book contains “[r]epurpos[ed] original interviews conducted for a documentary film that Whipple cowrote, The President's Gatekeepers”. This film was broadcast on the Discovery Channel in 2013, according to imdb.com. As of this writing, you can see the film in two one-and-a-half hour episodes on Apple TV and Amazon Prime. You can also see both episodes on Vimeo, free of charge and no registration required, via Chris Whipple's website, see here.

I have not watched The President's Gatekeepers in its entirety, but the bits I watched seem to support the claim above about repurposed original interviews.

However, the book contains new material in chapters on President Obama's second term and the first year of President Trump's, so the book is not 100% recycled. This also helps to explain why this later part of the book contains interviews with people who requested anonymity, while the rest does not.

I recently used a page from history.com in a class I was teaching. It contained the following quote from Niccolo Machiavelli: “The first method for estimating the intelligence of a ruler is to look at the men he has around him.” This might have served as a better epigraph for the book than any of the three quotes from actual White House Chiefs of Staff that appear in that space of this book.

A long time ago, I spent a few years in a low and menial clerical position in the U.S. Department of State. However, the position was in proximity of powerful people, from whom I took orders, usually indirectly, very occasionally directly. At that time, I worked for people from a political party which I did not vote for, but the organization seemed to work as well as such a vast and vague bureaucracy possibly could, and I thought, “Hmm, so this is what government work is like.” I admired the people who worked in this fashion, while continuing to disagree with them. I also (in common with my work colleagues) lived in mortal terror of displeasing those who were determined to make the wheels of the organization turn more quickly, which I guess is not an unusual way of getting people to do their jobs as quickly and correctly as humanly possible.

I found out later that the place and moment where I worked was a place of usually well-functioning order and efficiency, and that things can, and did, get much more dysfunctional and inefficient. To my dismay, this is what happened when a political party whose policies I agreed with assumed the reins of power.

All of this is to say: You need not just one, but several, strong leaders to keep a large organization from going off the rails and it usually falls to one or more of these leaders to be the enforcer, the heavy, the guy who will kick down when necessary but will NOT kiss up if the big boss is better served by some unpleasant-sounding honesty. The most easy-to-read parts of this book are the parts when someone of such a character is the White House Chief of Staff, the more painful parts are when the C. of S. does not function in this manner. The most painful parts are when the newly-installed powers decide that a C. of S. is not necessary, and all decisions can be made either by the President himself or by a large and chaotic committee of whoever is walking by the Oval Office at the moment a decision must be made.

Each section contains anecdotes which reveal more about the people involved than they probably wanted. Nixon hated modern art in US Embassies and felt that there were too many Jews in government service. Carter personally managed the use of the White House tennis courts. Dick Cheney, when he was Chief of Staff, played childish practical jokes on the White House press corps. Clinton was chronically late because, once he started a conversation about politics that interested him, no one had the authority to shut him down. Nancy Reagan's consultations with an astrologer resulted in certain Presidential plane flights leaving at 3 a.m. “Trump clearly had no idea how to govern” (Kindle location 5137).

The author doesn't make recommendations, and the list of do's and don'ts for Chiefs of Staff is implied not stated.

This book was easy to read and contained a lot of interesting information about how we've got into the sorry state we find ourselves in.

Read a brief review of this book from the New York Times here.

[Emily Gean · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of my favorite books of 2021, probably my favorite non-fiction. If you have any interest in politics, it’s a must read. So so good and so interesting.

The author interviews past chiefs of staff and presidents. Each chapter covers a different chief of staff and president, starting with Nixon. Highlights the role each chief of staff has played and how that has influenced each presidency. SO GOOD

[Barbara (The Bibliophage) · Rating 5 out of 5]

More reviews at TheBibliophage.com.

As I was reading Chris Whipple’s book, The Gatekeepers, I couldn’t help but notice how much access he had to the group of 17 White House Chiefs of Staff since Nixon’s H.R. Haldeman. Then I learned that the book was the byproduct of a documentary series on Discovery. That explains a lot about the number of interviews Whipple was given by this large group of political insiders. However, it should only serve to make you more interested in reading the book, not less.

We spend so much time in history class discussing the accomplishments of various Presidents. But unless you’re a political wonk, you may not know much about the Chief of Staff, who’s essentially the Chief Operating Officer of the White House. The President is the visionary, and the Chief is the guy who takes the vision and translates it to action. And as we know from experience during the last eight-plus years, creating results from those actions isn’t easy or quick.

I think that’s what struck me the most from Whipple’s research and interviews. Being Chief of Staff is a massive amount of work. It’s truly 24/7/365. So much so that most Chiefs are only in that position for two years. The Chief needs to be political, and have connections all over Washington. It’s how things get accomplished. But some Presidents have chosen people from their home territory as their Chief. Whipple explains the pitfalls of such a choice.

The other thing Whipple makes clear is the relationship that Presidents have with their Chiefs. The Chief is the guy who’s willing to tell the President when something is a bad idea. Again, the interviewees shared the good, the bad, and the ugly. Reading the book felt like I had a side chair alongside the Oval Office’s iconic Resolute desk.

Whipple’s writing style is conversational and smooth. He takes one long chapter for each administration, starting with the transition period where one administration plans to replace the last. He finds just the right balance between details and overview, never getting lost in the minutiae. Somehow Whipple remains focused on the Chief’s perspective, which was unique and enlightening for me.

After reading The Gatekeepers, my appreciation for Chiefs of Staff (especially those holding the position for more than two years) has grown exponentially. This unelected and unconfirmed (by the Senate) position is held by men with tremendous power and responsibility. They are wranglers, negotiators, power brokers, and insomniacs. I highly recommend this captivating view into the corridors of the West Wing.

Thanks to NetGalley and Crown Publishing for the opportunity to read the digital ARC in exchange for this honest review.

[Linda · Rating 5 out of 5]

Aaron Sorkin’s “The West Wing” was the first that I recognized what the title “Chief of Staff” meant. This book really brings home that a good chief of staff is fundamental to a President’s administration.
Chris Whipple, gives a brief history of the first named Chief of Staff under President Eisenhower before looking at all of the Chiefs from Richard Nixon’s H. R. Haldeman to Barack Obama’s Denis McDonaugh.

Some were excellent at the job (e.g. James Baker for Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and Leon Panetta for Bill Clinton) allowing a smooth running administration. Others (Jimmy Carter’s Hamilton Jordan) were erratic at best resulting in divided loyalties among the administration staff. Some were prima donalds aspiring to BE the president and others truly understood that ego was anathema to the job and therefore to the President and the country.

Well written. Well researched. Full of information about personalities that can be surprising (Dick Cheney wasn’t always considered to be “Darth Vader.” Oh, and don’t miss the story of Ronald Reagan and Queen Elizabeth riding horses.

Politics aside, this book is for everyone interested in the inner workings of the White House.

[Owen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Won this in a Goodreads giveaway (yes, they exist) in 2017 and finally got around to reading it.

Pros: Informational and non-partisan, unique topic, extremely well-researched (I think Whipple interviewed every living Chief of Staff), solid anecdotes

Cons: Having baseline knowledge of Chiefs of Staff would have been beneficial - I really knew nothing about the topic beyond Rahm Emanuel going into this but Whipple started name-dropping immediately; wished there were more section breaks within chapters

[Daniel Burton · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of my favorite do-it-yourself therapies for the everyday grind is to put on my grungy clothes, plug in my headphones, and fire up the lawn mower. I mow, and I listen to a book, and then when I start to run out of grass, I find other yard work. On a good Saturday, I can crank through a novel or a history and get some yard work done, and it makes for a good Saturday.

As I listened to "The Gatekeepers: How the White House Chiefs of Staff Define Every Presidency" this last week, I couldn't help but wonder if it's a Saturday that almost no one in the book has ever experienced. The level of octane and devotion and time--the sheer amount of time--required to work in the White House in the modern presidency makes it difficult to believe that anyone there has any semblance of a life anything like most Americans (not to self: because I mow my lawn and do yard work, does that mean I'm like "most Americans? To be filed away and answered later). And the stakes? The stakes are the highest in the world, a veritable Game of Thrones, or House of Cards...minus the beheadings and murders.

Well, at least as far as anyone knows. (And yes, I know comparison to either of those tv dramas is more than a bit cliche.)

In any case, The Gatekeepers was a great read. Starting with the opening of the Nixon Administration and H.R. Haldeman and finishing with the Obama Administration's Rahm Emmanual, Bill Daley, Jack Lew, and Denis McDonough, Chris Whipple tells the story of each Administration through the lens of how that chief of staff addressed the problems each president faced. There are greats here, like the incomparable James Baker, as well as others who were either failures or just men out of their depth, like John Sununu, Donald Regan, or Bill Daley. Through their eyes you see war, domestic policy, and the internecine warfare of Washington politics.

It's a fascinating and enjoyable history, one I readily recommend.

[Christopher Saunders · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Gatekeepers examines the role of White House Chiefs of Staff from Nixon through Obama, and the impact they had on their respective Presidents and the day-to-day maintenance of government. Impeccably researched (featuring interviews with most of the surviving chiefs of staff), Whipple emphasizes the role of Chief of Staff as combination office manager handling staff, "Lord High Executioner" enforcing the President's orders, diplomat and negotiator with Congress, Cabinet and others. He emphasizes the importance of Bob Haldeman's carefully structured staff system under Nixon, even though it ultimately failed Haldeman because of his unwillingness to confront his chief. Whipple offers the thesis, reasonable though oversimplified, that a President is only as good as his staff, in particular blaming the failures of Carter, Reagan and George H.W. Bush on their chiefs being asleep at the wheel (the incompetent, disengaged Hamilton Jordan; the overbearing Don Regan, on whose watch Iran-Contra unfolded; John Sununu, Bush's frothing pitbull). Which seems fine so far as it goes, until one considers how Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney were effective chiefs of staff (at least in terms of job description) who couldn't save Ford's presidency, how Andy Card's managerial expertise didn't save George W. Bush from poor decision-making and infighting, or how Clinton and Obama managed largely successful presidencies despite a rotating door of staffers. Still, a worthy look at a political topic often overlooked by lay readers.

[Sean Asbury · Rating 2 out of 5]

It doesn’t take long to determine which side of the political isle that the author is on. After that determination, the depiction of all republicans as bad and democrats as humble world savers.
Spelling, facts (referring to the Oklahoma bombings in Kansas City) and personal opinions make this frustrating.
The epilogue was nothing but Trump bashing - in a book about past COS.

[Susan · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is such a good book. Very informative. It has great stories and gave a great overview of the chiefs of staff from Nixon on.

[Bob · Rating 4 out of 5]

Summary: A study of the White House Chiefs of Staff, from the Nixon through Obama administrations, and how critical the effective execution of this role is to an effective presidency.

During the final weeks of the Bush (43) administration, an unprecedented meeting took place in the office of Josh Bolten, Bush's last Chief of Staff. Eleven of the thirteen living former Chiefs showed up (absent were James Baker and Erskine Bowles). People like Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Leon Panetta, Howard Baker, and Andy Card came together with incoming Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel to share the benefit of their experience. 

Chris Whipple uses the narrative of this meeting as a starting point of a study of the critical role the Chief of Staff plays that marks a Presidency as effective or not, as able to skirt dangerous pitfalls, or tumble into them. His description and quotes of Leon Panetta from this meeting captures the critical essence of the book's thesis:

"Leon Panetta was probably the most popular person in the room. The son of Italian immigrants, jovial and outgoing, he was equally at home on his walnut farm in Monterey, California, and in the corridors of the West Wing. But as Bill Clinton's second chief--replacing McLarty--Panetta had wielded an iron fist inside a velvet glove. When he arrived, Clinton's presidency was on the ropes, his ambitious agenda threatened by fights over gays in the military, the Whitewater scandal, and other distractions.  The damage was self-inflicted, caused by Clinton's indiscipline and sloppy staff work. Panetta stepped in and brought discipline and focus to the White House--enabling Clinton to regain his traction and go on to win a second term. Now it was Panetta's turn to tutor Obama's incoming chief: 'Always, always be straight and honest with the president of the United States,' he said. 'Always tell him what he may not want to hear--because frankly, a lot of people in the White House will always tell the President what he wants to hear' " (p. 7).

Whipple paints a portrait of effective chiefs as those who combine candor, focus, organizational discipline, the confidence of their president, emotional intelligence, and a tireless work ethic. Too friendly with the president, and they often end up shielding him from essential truths that can bring down a presidency. Too indisciplined or administratively unskilled, and they squander the opportunities of leadership. Too harsh, and they alienate the people who they need to work with to enact a president's vision. Most of all, they are skillful gatekeepers, making sure those who need to see the president do, while protecting the president's energies and focus and time to think, and from powerful individuals who would unduly influence a president outside established executive branch processes.

The study begins with H.R. Haldeman, who in fact shaped the staff system that every effective chief has practiced. It was lapses in Haldeman's discipline, allowing Erhlichman and the plumbers free reign, as well as his unwillingness to tell Nixon the hard truth about Watergate at the start, that brought down his presidency. Strong staff leadership by Rumsfeld and Cheney enabled Ford to nearly defeat Jimmy Carter, despite the tarnish of Watergate and the Nixon pardon. Carter's decision to be his own chief of staff for the first years of his presidency, and the influence of Jordan and Powell that reinforced the indiscipline that resulted weakened his presidency. Only bringing in Jack Watson, the disciplined yet sociable ex-Marine, established some order, but too little, too late. James Baker was probably key to the presidency of Ronald Reagan, as well as recovery momentum in the later Bush (41) presidency. Baker brought all the skills discussed to provide a president inexperienced internationally with the counsel needed to shrewdly confront the Soviet threat. Later, Ken Duberstein was the chief who encouraged Reagan to retain the most famous words (against State Department advice) for which Reagan is remembered when he said at the Brandenburg Gate, "Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall."

Mack McLarty was Clinton's first chief, and as a close friend of Clinton, presided over chaos, that was only reversed when he was replaced by Panetta. In the Bush (43) presidency, the likable Andy Card was no match for Bush's Vice President Dick Cheney. It was obvious that Bush didn't place the same confidence in him as in Cheney, which Whipple connects to the failures of in the decision to invade Iraq, over the reservations of Secretary of State Colin Powell, whose reputation was tarnished as victory gave way to chaos and a prolonged and costly occupation. Again, after Rahm Emmanuel left to run for mayor of Chicago, Bill Daly illustrated the pitfalls of a weak chief, in contrast to Denis McDonough, who helped Obama keep his political promises through executive order when faced with a recalcitrant Congress.

The book also underscores how critical it is that presidents choose strong chiefs they trust with the requisite skills and qualities of character. Whipple observes that this may be especially important with Donald Trump, as an outsider with limited political experience. It is an interesting question whether Reince Priebus enjoys the president's confidence and is able to exercise the gate-keeping and organizational disciplines necessary to an effective presidency. If Whipple is right, it seems to me that one of the most important lessons President Trump can learn is getting the right person in this position and then being willing to listen to that person.

Before reading Whipple's account, I thought of the Chief of Staff as just another member of the President's inner circle, but I hadn't reckoned with the importance of this position in the modern presidency where economic policy vies with natural disasters, human tragedies, and international drama on a daily basis. To execute vision, to maintain focus when faced with dozens of possible priorities, to keep "teams of rivals" in harness rather than going rogue, to be both the needed sounding board, and the honest voice are critical ingredients in helping presidents be effective. It also takes a rare blend of leadership and humility. As one of the chiefs remarked, the danger of the office is to emphasize the "chief" part (as Donald Regan did), rather than the "of staff" part. Whipple's book helps us appreciate this rare blend, and the figures who have served us well, or less well, in this role.

____________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher through Blogging for Books. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own.

[Emily · Rating 5 out of 5]

Obsessed! Really great quick history of the staff of the White House. This book went in depth on a few specific issues from each presidency and gave great insight into each chief and each president. The personal interviews really helped and it was a fun read!

[Anthony Colucci · Rating 5 out of 5]

Extra points for audiobook narrator doing soft impressions of each president

[Teo Ekstrom · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really excellent book. A great mix of systemic analysis and just fun, inside-baseball type stuff. Changed the way I think about the presidency, and what it means to be a good or a great president. Would recommend to anyone.

[Dominic · Rating 5 out of 5]

The media obsessively scrutinizes the records of key presidential appointees, including cabinet secretaries, Supreme Court judges, and ambassadors. These positions require Senate confirmation because we deem them so important that we do not trust them to the president alone. Yet, ironically, the appointment most critical to the success of the presidency, the chief of staff, requires no Senate confirmation and often receives little public scrutiny. In "The Gatekeepers," Chris Whipple looks at the history of modern chiefs of staff and shows why they really do determine the success of the president's agenda.

Whipple covers ever chief of staff for every president going back to H. R. Haldeman, Nixon's first chief. Ironically, despite his ultimate fate, Haldeman's tightly controlled process proved to be the model that later successful chiefs would emulate. All of the successful chiefs emphasize the importance of process, having a clear procedure for making decisions in the White House and clear lines of authority. The chief effectively limits access to the president, making sure he is not overrun by people seeking his personal intervention. Some presidents, such as Jimmy Carter, initially viewed the Haldeman model as reminiscent of Nixon's "imperial" excesses, yet all presidents eventually adopted that model.

Whipple also shows the delicate balance between the "chief" and "staff" parts of the job. The chief manages the White House staff, yet ultimately serves the president. The chief of staff position creates considerable opportunity to manipulate the president and pushing an agenda. Some chiefs, like H.W. Bush's John Sununu, let their egos get the better of them and demanded privileges typically associated with the president or other principals. Yet, such chiefs ultimately fail and undermine the president. As Reagan's first chief Jim Baker observes, the emphasis is on "staff," not "chief."

Whipple claims that chiefs of staff are often responsible for the success or failure of a presidency. It's a bold claim, one that he backs up. The chief is responsible for managing the president agenda, making sure that he can do the job to which he was elected. Jimmy Carter famously found himself micromanaging the White House because he refused to empower his chief. Just as important, the chief is responsible for bringing problems to the president's attention. One of the reasons Reagan's National Security staff became embroiled in the Iran-Contra scandal was that Don Regan didn't effectively keep tabs on what the NSC staff were doing.

I expected this book to be interesting, but I also found it to be surprisingly funny. Whipple's anecdotes often had me laughing out loud. Whipple depicts the chiefs of staff as people with all their foibles and flaws, and some of these men were quite lively personalities. For example, Dick Cheney's advice to Rahm Emanuel: don't let the vice president run roughshod over you (as Cheney did to Bush's first chief, Andrew Card).

Speaking of Cheney, I also enjoyed seeing major political figures in a completely different light. Many of the chiefs of staff have gone on to other important political roles. Cheney obviously became Bush's Vice President, Rumsfeld became Defense Secretary, John Podesta chaired Hillary's campaign, Rahm Emanuel is now mayor of Chicago, etc. Some of these individuals underwent considerable changes over time. As Ford's chief, Dick Cheney was seen as affable and funny (yes, that Cheney!).

Overall, this is an excellent book for history buffs. Whipple's writing makes "The Gatekeepers" a fun and effortless read. Even as a longtime student of history, I learned quite a bit from this book. Highly recommended.

[Deacrunner · Rating 4 out of 5]

I would've given this five stars were it not for the feeling that Whipple digressed during the W. Bush years and centered his discussion more on the Iraq War than on the efficacy (or lack thereof) of Andrew Card. Also, he seems to hold Obama's circumventing of Congress in favor of a greater reliance on executive orders after the 2014 mid-terms as an example of Denis McDonough's effectiveness as a chief. This detracts from his argument since it suggests powerful chiefs should shun Congress rather than do the hard work it takes to be a political operative and shape both sides of the aisle towards an agenda.

[Susan · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a worthwhile read. From Nixon to Obama, the book reviews the highs and lows of each presidential term. Presidential legacies can be damaged or greatly facilitated by a president's chief of staff. The book is very readable.

[Verna Carre · Rating 3 out of 5]

If you are political wonk and want to go behind closed doors, this is the book.

[Brendan Grubb · Rating 4 out of 5]

Up until about three days ago, the position of White House Chief of Staff was little more than the answer to a trivia question or an unimportant title attached to a name in a news story. I had no idea how integral this position was to a functional White House. This book does an excellent job describing the roles performed by the Chief of Staff, and I enjoyed the straightforward organization Whipple used of giving each presidency its own chapter (unless you're Ronald Reagan, in which case you get two!).

Given how relatively recently this position was established (just one of the many things I learned in this book), it was possible for every Chief of Staff in the modern era to be introduced and examined. This was fascinating as it allowed the strengths and weaknesses of everyone who has ever held this position to be analyzed in the context of their actions and decisions. It was also interesting to learn about the successes and failures of each President through the lens of their Chief of Staff because this provided new insight into well-known events (such as Watergate, Operation Desert Storm, "tear down this wall", etc.)

One of the most important qualities of the CoS is the ability to speak truth to power, and this seems more crucial for the government today than ever. After finishing this book, I declare myself convinced of Whipple's argument that the Chief of Staff defines each presidency, and learning more about the Chief of Staff is something that I absolutely will find myself doing after each new one is appointed.

[AliceC09 · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 stars, rounded down. I really enjoyed this book. It is a fascinating behind the scenes look at the inner workings of the White House.

What makes the book so special is the quality of the interviewees- a number of former chiefs of staff, at least one former president, along with other high ranking advisors and cabinet officials. As someone who has done interviews myself with national-level government officials, I'm impressed.

While I'm glad Whipple was able to add a brief bonus chapter about the Trump presidency, I'd be fascinated to read more (of course, with that White House, and the character, or lack there of, of people in it, there's a good chance what we would hear would be pretty misleading).

One small thing that annoyed me is that he constantly edited the word "fuck" as "f*ck". There's no need for the partial censorship, especially since it is part of a direct quote - other blue language is printed as is.

Ultimately, this book is well worth reading for people interested in behind the scenes tales of the presidency.

[Joan · Rating 4 out of 5]

I started this review with 3 stars thinking more like 3.5. I then changed to 4 stars because I was so impressed with the neutrality of the author. He focused on one thing: how did the chief of staffs do their jobs? He ignored their party. By that I mean he didn’t go easy on one because of their party. Obviously the party mattered but he did not let that influence how he wrote. He divided each chapter up by President and discussed all of the chief of staffs serving, one by one. I feel like I got a much better idea how Washington DC works from this book. This is essential reading if you want to understand government.