Why Woodward book poses real challenge to White House
President Trump appears intensely interested in how he is portrayed on cable news. As a former reality show star, he鈥檚 involved in decisions about who is dispatched to defend the White House on television, what they鈥檙e supposed to say, and general strategy for fighting negative broadcast stories. He鈥檚 so detail-oriented in this area that reportedly he鈥檚 decided to film some recent statements in the Rose Garden because he believes the lighting outdoors makes him look better.
That makes it ironic that some of the biggest media crises of his presidency have had their roots in a much older, slower, denser medium: books.
The pattern began in July 2017, with 鈥淒evil鈥檚 Bargain,鈥� the book by journalist Joshua Green that portrayed now-fired aide Steve Bannon as a key strategist behind Mr. Trump鈥檚 election. Then this spring came fired FBI Director Jim Comey鈥檚 memoir, 鈥淎 Higher Loyalty,鈥� which questioned Trump鈥檚 honesty. Both were No. 1 New York Times bestsellers.
Why We Wrote This
Some books about the Trump White House can be faulted on several fronts. But the latest comes from Bob Woodward, a highly experienced journalist whose track record means its contents are harder to dismiss.
This year a string of books also has portrayed purported dysfunction in the White House itself. Journalist Michael Wolff gained remarkable access for his 鈥淔ire and Fury,鈥� though critics have faulted what some say is Mr. Wolff鈥檚 sloppy reporting. Omarosa Manigault Newman, a former 鈥淐elebrity Apprentice鈥� contestant and White House aide fired for allegedly abusing her office, weighed in with 鈥淯nhinged,鈥� a gossipy tell-all unexpectedly supported in parts by secret tape recordings. Both these reached the top Times bestseller spot, as well.
But it鈥檚 the third book in what鈥檚 now a 鈥渃haos trilogy鈥� that the White House might find the hardest to counter in the public marketplace of ideas. Veteran reporter Bob Woodward鈥檚 鈥淔ear: Trump in the White House鈥� does not even come out until next Tuesday. But leaked stories about its contents, including multiple accounts alleging top aides have questioned the president鈥檚 intelligence and demeanor, have exploded across cable news and sent the White House scrambling to reply.
Woodward is a preview of how some history books might treat the Trump presidency after it is over. That does not mean they will necessarily be as critical, but they will draw on the same sort of sources 鈥� wide-ranging interviews with former and current officials. The story of the Trump presidency may be less and less under the president鈥檚 control from here.
Woodward鈥檚 approach of shaping seamless narratives has its critics. But 鈥減ound for pound, year after year, nobody has taught us more or brought more information to bear on what is happening at the highest levels of government,鈥� says David Greenberg, a professor of history and journalism at Rutgers University and author of 鈥淩epublic of Spin: An Inside History of the American Presidency.鈥�
White House response
In some ways the White House response to the preliminary news gust from Woodward鈥檚 forthcoming book reflects the book鈥檚 theme of a White House that is chaotic every day 鈥� riven by factions, dismissive of the man in the Oval Office, constantly one step behind events.
Administration spokespeople were slow to respond to this week鈥檚 initial Washington Post story on the book鈥檚 contents, which includes accounts of top aides calling Trump 鈥渕oron鈥� and 鈥渋diot,鈥� sometimes with profane adjectives attached. The Post also released tape of a Trump-Woodward phone call from August, in which the president says no one ever told him that Woodward wanted to interview him. Trump then semi-contradicts this, saying that Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina had told him, but he had received no official notice of the request from communications staffers.
On Tuesday afternoon and Wednesday, however, the White House geared up, with Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis and Chief of Staff John Kelly issuing statements forcefully denying their use of derogatory words about their boss, and calling the book 鈥渇iction.鈥�
But White House aides weren鈥檛 saying that the White House is in fact a 鈥渟mooth-running machine,鈥� as Trump sometimes insists. Woodward鈥檚 book attributes some of its more hair-raising scenes, such as Mr. Kelly鈥檚 rants about his boss, to interviews with multiple (unnamed) officials who were present at the time. That鈥檚 difficult to completely refute. By Wednesday afternoon, White House reporters noted a slight change in the tone of official statements, implicitly accepting some internal strife.
鈥淎lmost everyone agrees that my Administration has done more in less than two years than any other Administration in the history of our Country,鈥� on Wednesday. 鈥淚鈥檓 tough as hell on people & if I weren鈥檛 nothing would get done. Also, I question everybody & everything-which is why I got elected!鈥澛�
If nothing else, it is apparent that dozens of former and current Trump staffers did talk to Woodward. Many seem to have sat for hours. If past practice is any guide, Woodward taped many of those interviews, says Dr. Greenberg, who was an assistant to the journalist for three years in the early 1990s.
Trump鈥檚 core supporters won鈥檛 believe Woodward鈥檚 book, or may not care if the stories actually are true. Trump critics are quick to believe the worst. In that sense, 鈥淔ear鈥� probably won鈥檛 change many minds in a country already divided over the Trump presidency.
But in general, Trump is not known for assiduous adherence to the facts, given the many fact-checker tabulations of his misstatements.聽Woodward, however, is a brand known for dogged reporting since Richard Nixon was in office.
Woodward a digger for detail
Woodward isn鈥檛 interested in analytical writing, theorizing, or other abstract aspects of journalism, says Greenberg. He鈥檚 a 鈥渏ust the facts, sir,鈥� reporter.
鈥淥ne thing I think Woodward does really well, because he is interested in information, is that he will ask questions like, 鈥榃hen did you meet so-and-so? What was the first thing you said when you met them?鈥� and so on,鈥� says Greenberg.
Presidents Bush, Clinton, and Obama all cooperated with Woodward to some degree in books about their presidency. All had some complaints about particular incidents or depictions. Some officials, such as former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, have battled publicly with the author over their portrayals.
Going forward, the questions 鈥淔ear鈥� has raised for Trump include: Can he disprove any of it? Will anyone else quit? Will more stories come out? On Wednesday afternoon, The New York Times published purportedly written by an anonymous senior Trump official. In the piece, the official says they are indeed working to contain the worst instincts of a president they feel is erratic and unsuited for the job.
鈥淢any Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trump鈥檚 more misguided impulses until he is out of office,鈥� the story says.
