The Russian Hoax

by Gregg Jarrett
Broadside Books

book review by Christopher Klim

“…based on this record, no other conclusion is reasonably supportable.”

Thinking people remember where they were when former FBI Director James Comey gave his famous July 5, 2016 news conference absolving then-candidate Hillary Clinton of criminal behavior regarding her mishandling of secure government documents on an insecure server while Secretary of State and then covering up her error in judgment after it became evident. Let’s pause for a moment and think about that sentence: A U.S. Secretary State placed an insecure server in her private residence, passing countless classified documents during a four-year period, and then attempted to hide the fact when it was exposed, and yet no clear crime was identified by the U.S. Justice Department, of which the FBI is an entity. How could this possibly not be a problem or a clear violation of the Espionage Act at the very least if not obstruction of justice?

As the server story unraveled, along with the working machinations of the Clinton Foundation, more unprosecuted crimes emerged regarding their conduct. The Clintons, who have been given a pass for decades for questionable dealings with the simplistic excuse of merely toeing the line of the law, have evidently been caught way over the line in a number of areas. Classified documents were handled outside of all established protocol, exposing national secrets and safety to foreign entities. During this investigation, details of the Clinton Foundation’s quid pro quo dealings saw the light of day. While these facts were being uncovered, other U.S. citizens were being prosecuted for similar espionage violations and public officials were being jury-trialed for similar abuses of power for personal gain. The power of the office of the Secretary of State does not excuse or lessen these crimes; in many ways, it makes them worse.

Clinton’s e-mail server is the starting point for MSNBC and Fox News anchor and legal analyst Gregg Jarrett’s clear, insightful, and stunning exposé of the entire “Russian collusion” fraud, as prosecuted daily in the news media. Through heavily footnoted and supported facts, as opposed to the media opinion du jour, Jarrett reveals the major crimes of the Clintons, the cover-up, and then the Russian hoax designed to damage a political candidate and his ensuing presidency through an unverified, at times comical, document known as “the dossier.”

What is the dossier and how was it used? Jarrett summarizes the key points that no one denies. Here’s what we know: The dossier is a Clinton-funded collection of allegations against candidate Donald Trump, assembled from “raw” Russian intelligence through former British spy, Christopher Steele. The document claims that Trump associates Carter Page and Paul Manafort met with Russian agents to gather information against Hillary Clinton. It also asserts that Trump had been groomed for political office by Vladimir Putin. Of course, all parties deny these charges. It is important know that none of its claims have been verified to date, no one in both the FBI and CIA bothered to verify it, and when placed under oath in British court, Christopher Steele admitted the dossier was essentially unverified and bogus.

Steele likely believed the dossier would only be used as a political campaign smear tactic, while he collected a multi-million dollar paycheck for his work. He couldn’t have possibly known that the unverifiable dossier, because it appears to be entirely false, would eventually become the centerpiece for obtaining a FISA warrant against a presidential candidate, and then the impetus for a special council run by Robert Muller and his band of avowed Clinton supporters. It’s important also to keep mind that while charges have been leveled on Trumps associates, not a single charge has been leveled regarding so-called Russian collusion. It’s also important to understand that Russian collusion in of itself is not a crime. So what are we doing here?

The entire Russian hoax has a secondary political function beyond an unconstitutional attempt to unseat a duly elected president. Through the use of a willing media, it serves as a distraction to the Clinton’s, the FBI’s, and the Justice Department’s clear violations of the law. It is unlawful to misrepresent facts or lie to a judge in order to obtain a warrant. It is unlawful to deny a citizen’s Constitutional rights. It is unlawful to use a government office for personal or political benefit. It is unlawful to mishandle and expose privileged and secure government documents. It is unlawful to obstruct justice. FBI Director James Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, Intelligence Chief James Clapper, Bruce Ohr, and the notorious Peter Strzok and his girlfriend, Lisa Page, appear to have done much of this and more. The web of lies and people involved is bigger, and given its scope and the evidence uncovered to date, it’s become impossible to believe that President Obama and his inner circle, including National Security Advisor Susan Rice, had no understanding of their actions.

Be angry about what these arrogant people have done. This is what happens when diversity of opinion is actively rooted-out and group think takes over. It’s fascism in its purest form. Government has been poisoned by group think. We see it in the news and all over the Internet. Group think always leads to pervasive ignorance, while purporting to be the wisest people in the room.

While the country is saddled with a demoralizing special council which appears to have the sole purpose of unearthing any dirt whatsoever on President Trump—anyone remember Ken Starr—former FBI Director James Comey has since gone on a sycophantic book tour, maintaining his innocence with impalpable doses of self-righteousness. On one hand, you can hardly blame him. It appears that he was influenced by Clinton-beholden and then-U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch to support one political candidate by forgiving her of criminal behavior, and then launched an unfounded investigation against another to destroy him. He’s gone too far down the road to perdition to turn around, and his commitment to a life-defining, career-destroying, and eminently corrupt path is clear. However if justice still exists in the U.S., he and the aforementioned government officials will face a jury of peers for various charges.

Jarrett’s book is perhaps the most insightful and clearest description of what has happened and where we are right now within this unholy mess. The United States needs its justice department cleaned up. Our system of laws badly relies on it. Jarrett helps shine a light.

RECOMMENDED by the US Review

Advertisements
The Book Killers: Weak Point of View

The Book Killers: Stilted Writing

In this ongoing series, Christopher Klim, author and senior editor of the US Review of Books, takes a look at common errors that undermine books.

The word stilted is defined as stiff, self-conscious, and/or unnatural. In a book, this concept is just as unwelcomed. For example…

It was a starry night. An owl flew low beneath the moon. Joe loved Jane so much that he thought his heart might burst. But nothing would stand in their way now. He swept her off her feet and carried her through the threshold of their lives together.

“Stop right there,” said the shadowy figure coming from behind the light post.

“No, not you!” Jane gasped.

“Have you forgotten about your husband?” the stranger barked.

“Sir, you must reconsider your approach,” Joe said.

The above passage forms a parade of clichés, passive verbs, hackneyed concepts, repetitions, invariable sentence structure, overly formal speech, and talking heads. Neither entertaining nor enlightening, these issues combine to stultify the reader. Let’s discuss a few of these problems.

Clichés, passive verbs, repetitions, overly formal speech, and even hackneyed concepts boil down to laziness on part of the writer. To complicate their existence, writers may become comfortable with these phrases and scenes during multiple readings to the point where a false sense of confidence in the prose arises. This is why cooling off periods—days or weeks if allowable between revisions—are vital to identifying problematic writing. Try to think of these issues as placeholders that will be replaced with stronger phrasing and construction. If the writer is not surprised or energized by his/her words, then no one else will be.

Talking head syndrome occurs when the characters provide information that either they should already know (i.e. “Hello, I’m Bob, your uncle.”) or barely relates to the conversation. This happens when the writer tries to relate narrative information through the character’s mouths. It is always obvious, and it saps momentum and authenticity from the work. In the example above, the entire dialogue should be replaced.

Invariable sentence structure, which is typically a repetition of subject-verb sentences without changes in presentation or structure, reveals the writer’s skill level or lack thereof. Fluctuations stimulate the reader’s mind. Changing sentence structure also is used in relation to the tone of the story. For example, short and quick sentences work for action scenes and humor, especially punch lines. Longer sentences can be found in romantic prose. Leading and trailing phrases form a variety of transitions. The list here is long and can be observed in any good literature and nonfiction narrative.

Many early writers are so eager to get their ideas on paper that they overlook the words themselves. On face value, that statement seems like a paradox, but it is only the normal course of a writer’s development. Skilled writers won’t accept stilted writing in their work, and during the revision process, they learn to identify their particular bad habits and eliminate them.

Here’s a cliché: All writing is rewriting. It also happens to be an axiom of the process.

Next in the The Book Killers series: Unfocused Openings

Previously in The Book Killers series: Inferior Word Choice 

The Book Killers: Weak Point of View

The Book Killers: Amateur Covers

In this ongoing series, Christopher Klim, author and senior editor of the US Review of Books, takes a look at common errors that undermine books.

In book selling basics, the author attracts the reader and the first page sells the book, but nothing allows a potential reader to disregard a book like an unprofessional cover. The US Review encounters poor book covers on a regular basis: drab, confusing, amateurish designs or some combination of the three. So let’s take a look at book cover basics.

1) The main title should be visible from twenty feet away. This is accomplished through a combination of font, size, and color contrast. A title that is viewable from a distance in a bookstore is as easily read when reduced in size for on-line sales.

2) Title visibility applies to the spine as well. For most of its commercial shelf life, a book will be placed spine out. The title should be as large and as high contrast as possible.

3) Make the subtitle informative. While I’m not a fan of employing subtitles, except for nonfiction, book series, or very short main titles, the subtitle should be essential to the book’s message. Overall, the title and subtitle combination should not be overlong. The best titles are brief—something a typical person can remember and tell another.

4) Don’t forget the back matter. The back of the book is where business takes place. Most retailers won’t sell your book without a standard bar code in the lower right corner or a clearly visible price and genre designation.

5) Keep the book summary to 100 words or less. It’s true. A book can be explained in one short sentence. The New York Times Bestseller List bestseller list has been doing this for decades. Avoid putting a book on the back of a book. (FYI, the author bio is not a back cover essential. While it must be included in the book, it’s easily located on either the last page, inside flap, or back cover.)

6) Gather authoritative endorsements. People want to read quotes regarding the book, but not from the author, publisher, or author’s friends. Build authority for the book with commentary from recognizable experts (i.e. known authors, celebrities, or subject-related practitioners), as well as feedback from professional book review publications.

7) Employ thematic artwork. Artwork that definitively relates to the content describes the book in advance. There is a reason why romances feature a rapturous women and science fiction titles present glossy hi-tech images on their covers. The correct audience is subconsciously drawn to it. Furthermore, the color palette used evokes different emotions. Horror titles make good use of black and red. Young adult romances paint the cover in virginal white and pink. Also, men and women are attracted to different colors for different genres. The psychology of color is an advanced science, which leads us to the final element of cover design.

8) Hire a professional. Most authors are not visual artists, but a professional book designer or even a talented artist should have an innate or trained sense of image and color. Book designers can be contacted through the Internet. At the very least, struggling artists can be found locally. Check their portfolios to see if their work matches the sensibilities of the prospective book. Fees will range from nominal to pricey, but a good cover is worth it. Photoshop’ed self-made covers constructed on the cheap (and often like kindergarten artwork) are easier to spot than a title from twenty feet away, and they will debase the entire book.

The much-used aphorism “You can’t judge a book by its cover” is philosophically correct, but in reality, more people do this than don’t. A great cover sells the book as well as the author sells the book. When considering a cover design, visit a bookstore for trends and ideas within the genre. Taking the time, as well as hiring a professional, gives a book that likely took months if not years to write the jacket and marketing potential it deserves.

Next in The Book Killers series: Inferior Word Choice

Previously in The Book Killers series: Poor Structure

Sheep No More: The Art of Awareness and Attack Survival

by Jonathan R. Gilliam

Post Hill Press

reviewed by Christopher Klim

“Despite what some security ‘experts’ may say, fear is not a gift.”

Former Navy SEAL and FBI Special Agent Jonathan T. Gilliam takes a decidedly philosophical approach to self-defense: Each of us are potential targets of crime and violence to various degrees depending on our experience, education, and exposure. Throughout the book, Gilliam reverses the perspective to that of the attacker—albeit military, criminal, mass murderer, or terrorist—so that we better understand how potential targets are formed and how we become the target.

Some of this is common sense, such as targets are selected to minimize the attacker’s exposure and maximize results. For example, military operations often strike before dawn in enemy strongholds, a mass murderer selects a crowded venue with weak security, and a criminal, if not emotionally driven, identifies a singular target in the most secluded area. All attackers do surveillance prior to striking, and they have a goal in mind. Even an emotionally driven attacker allows a few seconds to convince himself that he can hurt his target, identifying how and where he will strike.

Much of what an attacker does is size up potential vulnerabilities. He’s identifying a target and looking for a way in. All too often, we make ourselves vulnerable through ignorance and complacency. Sure, we might know of danger, but either don’t know where to look or even look at all. While the safest method is to flee from trouble, including the choice to avoid trouble areas in advance, this is not always a realistic approach in today’s world.

To better protect yourself, Gilliam suggests that you assess yourself as a target. Divide your life into sectors and then sub-sectors based on routine and activities. Within each sector are critical assets, critical areas, and critical times. Using comprehensive sector identification, critical areas of vulnerability will emerge along with potential avenues of approach for attackers. He finishes off this evaluation with a target equation that helps measure who, why, where, how, and when an attack will occur. If done thoroughly, it won’t just be one type of attacker identified. This analysis can be applied to every sector/locale within your life.

Knowing your areas of vulnerability will help you close avenues of approach, but you’ll never be able to eliminate them all. Eventually you’ll have to assume a defender’s mindset or what to do when an attack is underway. Here, pre-planning inspires a mindset that ultimately becomes instinctive, as opposed to making up a plan in the moment which is virtually useless.

Much of what Gilliam purports is developing the habit of situational awareness, especially in highly vulnerable areas such as moving freely through unfamiliar areas or pausing inside contained public areas, but even familiar situations and places become vulnerable based on the available avenues of approach and the time of day. For example, different types of home-related criminals strike the target at different times of day. Gilliam stresses a healthy dose of “what-if,” which inspires confidence and wards off fear.

The author uses many examples, both famous and personal to reinforce his dual-think approach (i.e. imagining the attacker and planning a defense against vulnerable targets). This method is at the core of his call for self-defense through awareness, which will help you evade an attack if you haven’t first avoided it through planning. As Gilliam says, freezing up or panicking during an attack, which is exactly what the overwhelming majority will do because they have no plan, may in fact seal your fate. At the very least, fear reduces your options and their effectiveness.

Gilliam’s overall approach to self-defense is built from years in the military and law enforcement and tempered by the reality of current events. His multifaceted experience brings unique insight, cutting past the charlatans. Most of us are never going to be Zen masters of self-defense, but we can increase our odds considerably by following Gilliam’s suggestions. He reminds us that as individuals we can keep walking about the planet either remaining paranoid of potential events (ignorance), naively hoping for the best outcome (complacency), or becoming educated about the sources and methods of potential attackers (awareness) and thereby increasing our odds of success and/or avoiding trouble altogether.

RECOMMENDED by the US Review

Three Things to Consider When Purchasing a Book Review

With hundreds of thousands of books published annually, marketing your book can be a daunting task. One of your choices will inevitably come down to whether or not to purchase a book review. Here are three major factors to consider:

Be suspicious of a publication that refuses to reveal a reviewer’s name or credentials.

Professional Writing – A number of aspects go into a professionally written review. First, is the staff populated by professionals? This seems obvious, but many review sites are writer mills, allowing virtually anyone who is interested to pen a review. Other review sites barely compose a staff. These are mom and pop shops that tend to hang an Internet shingle for business, purport authority, and write reviews on their own. These are not professionals at work, no matter how slick or jazzy their websites appear. Look at the publication’s staff page, if it even has one. Are there more than a handful of writers? Be suspicious of a publication that refuses to reveal its reviewers’ names. The byline credit is a basic courtesy given to a professional freelancer, and virtually none would work without obtaining a byline for their portfolio. Second, is the review publication consistent across the masthead? A professional review publication has guidelines and an editor who keeps its staff and articles in line. Each review should have consistency, generating both authority and confidence in the publication. Third, does the reviewer address both the book content and the writing? Any sixth-grader can write a book summary, but a professional will critique a book through informed commentary that also addresses the writing itself. If the review narratives appear summary-driven, conversational, or employ a first-person tense, these are not professional writers at work.

Here’s a dirty little secret about the industry: Many review publications are purchasing Twitter and Facebook followers to create the illusion of having a large audience…

Authentic Readership – Are there dedicated subscribers, visitors, and followers of the review publication? A professional review means nothing if no one reads the publication. Weekly, monthly, and annual visitors are metrics that can be easily measured (and provided to the author). Does the publication have a subscriber base? If not (or if it’s insignificant), the publication cannot assert relevance for its work. And if the publication merely dumps its reviews on an on-line aggregator (that next to no one reads), it will not be of any service to the author. Next, validate the publication’s social media following with one of the free analytical tools, such as TwitterAudit for Twitter followers and LikeAnalyzer for Facebook likes. Here’s a dirty little secret about the industry: Many review publications are purchasing Twitter and Facebook followers to create the illusion of having a large audience, when in fact it is only a fraction of what it appears to be. This is useless to the author, as well as unethical on the part of the publication. See our article on this subject: Fake Social Media: More Common Than You Think.

A high price does not guarantee quality or readership.

Cost-Effectiveness – Most authors’ budgets are limited, and spending hundreds of dollars for a book review is not acceptable. Often these reviews are no better than that which you can obtain from a free book review site like The Midwest Book Review, which ranges from good, semi-professional coverage to amateur reviews. A high price does not guarantee quality or readership. A professional book review can be obtained for less than one hundred dollars, but be certain to closely examine the publication’s writing and readership in advance.

…you have to ask: What business is the review publication really in?

Warning: If the publication or its editors are up-selling manuscript editing services or the like, you have to ask: What business is the review publication really in? Are they a review publication, or are they a money-milking operation? The work of an editor and the work of a reviewer should never cross paths. An editor ensures quality, and a reviewer measures it. When the reviewer and editor become one entity, integrity flies out the window. (Hmmm… let us review the wonderful manuscript we just helped you edit… hmmm… not very trustworthy.) Furthermore, many of the side marketing services offered by review publications are built on a promise of viewership and not supported by real data. Ask for site traffic data or evidence of real of readership. For example, The US Review of Books is consistently a top Google search for “book reviews” in a very crowded field and has a strong monthly readership in the tens of thousands, as well as thousands of additional on-line visitors and followers on social media.

Remember, a book review is only the beginning of an essential conversation about the book.

Deciding to purchase a book review can be an effective tool when marketing a book. It can provide pull-quotes for marketing and stock materials for a media kit and press releases. It can even seed eventual sales. Remember, a book review is only the beginning of and essential conversation about the book, but it will neRead this article on creating a feedback loop to help kick-start your marketing efforts.

The US Review of Books is a professional review publication sent to more than 18,000 monthly subscribers, including thousands of additional followers on Facebook and Twitter. The US Review is staffed by professionals and is highly praised by authors and publishers

The Smear: How Shady Political Operatives and Fake News Control What You See, What You Think, and How You Vote 

by Sharyl Attkisson
Harper Books

reviewed by Christopher Klim

“In the news business a ‘great get’ used to mean that you, as a reporter got an exclusive story as a result of your ingenuity, shore-leather journalism, and persistence. Today it simply means you’re the recipient of a White House or political party leak.”

Imagine your friend just told you that the former President of the United States was dealing drugs from the White House. This friend quoted several articles from apparent reputable news sources who are calling for the prosecution of the former president. The story is everywhere, echoed on the twenty-four hour news cycle. You are shocked, but then after a cursory examination of the facts, you realize that the story sources are unnamed, the facts are unsubstantiated, and the experts are questionable. Your friend has bought into fake news—a smear campaign against the former president’s legacy. Your friend is an intelligent, good person, but you are embarrassed for him or her, that they were duped so completely.

Now, substitute former president for current president and switch drug dealing for Russian collusion. The story is just as bogus as the first example, but the person duped by it could be you. It has you upset and repeating it to friends, and the people running the smear campaign are patting themselves on the back for a job well done.

This scenario isn’t entirely your fault. You’re a busy, industrious person, who relies on the snippets of news gathered from print, radio, and/or television. Unfortunately, those sources are the dog being wagged by the vast smear industry on both the left and right side of politics. You likely don’t know who the smear merchants are, how they work, and how much they influence twenty-first century thought. Luckily, Sharyl Attkisson, one of the last investigative journalists of integrity left in a field of pretty faces and posers, identifies the producers of heavily biased and fake news and their methods of delivery. It’s a fascinating and startling tour, which exposes just how far journalism has fallen.

Attkisson begins by mapping the various groups and modes that deal in negative information, where an adherence to the truth is practiced if and only if it serves their purposes. Once the exclusive domain of PR firms and media departments, smears are generated routinely by super PACS, think tanks, nonprofits, shadow organizations accepting and allocating dark money, activist journalists, and a variety of real and fake persons and groups on the Internet. These organizations carry a billion dollar war chest, feeding multi-layers of slime producers through shadowy sub-organizations and multi-pronged subterfuge. With tremendous manpower and resources, they can mobilize at a moment’s notice to sway the public away from reason—all while appearing to be either the exclusive authority on a particular subject, from a different origin than in actuality, and/or much larger in numbers when in fact the source could be a single person you’ve never heard of yet posing as thousands.

“During the ’90s the flow of misinformation was established.”
–David Brock, political operative

Master propagandist and Nazi Joseph Goebbels, who had mastered Edward Bernays philosophies of mass persuasion and weaponizing information, believed that the truth could be manufactured by the state. While Goebbels might be daunted by the extent of the current propaganda industry, its objective has remained consistent: to obtain and maintain power by any means possible.

The American smear can trace its roots to the earliest days of politics. Jefferson, for example, smeared Adams through the press to effectively boot him from office and assume his job. Attkisson reveals today’s players—men like David Brock, a failed conservative gun for hire turned left-wing political operative, and his flagship organization Media Matters. He is both admired and reviled, depending on whether you’re on the giving or receiving end of his dirty work. This giant of the smear industry has likely rationalized his actions as a necessary means to an end. Keep in mind that Hitler and Stalin employed the same logic and tactics—the deliberate isolation and personal destruction of anyone who did not tout the party line.

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect for Attkisson is the media’s willingness to play along with smear tactics, behaving as an echo chamber for dirt without factual verification and in some cases generating the dirt themselves. Many of today’s journalists want “to change the world.” This would be fine if it meant the traditional journalism role of informing the public by recording events and uncovering facts, but the sentiment seems to be to actually change the world via reporting. This makes it easier for activist journalists, of which there is no shortage, to accept questionable leads to advance both their careers and personal agendas. In the past, a news bureau editor would ask reporters to “go find a story,” perhaps with a lead or two in hand. Today, a news bureau editor says, “This is the story. Now go find supporting material,” which often includes unnamed sources and little else. The storynow comes from high up in the corporate boardrooms and government hierarchy, instead of down on the streets where stories actually exist. Keep in mind that a former editor of Pravda, Russia’s premiere state newspaper, once admitted that it didn’t matter if the people realized that its newspaper’s stories were not true, only that they, the soviet government, determined the truth.

“[Trump thinks] he can control exactly what people think, and that is our job.”
–Mika Brzezinski, MSNBC

The result of activist smear journalism has been threefold. First, the average consciousness is no longer tangent to the facts, missing stories altogether and absorbing mostly commentary designed to obfuscate reality. You have to operate as your own journalist to uncover what’s really happening—digging, probing, and questioning everything—an impractical task in a busy world. Second, the thinking public has lost faith in once-heralded media institutions. Media outlets have pared down their editorial focus to a handful of topics, and then put on blinders to resist the facts. Like Pravda, they’ve predetermined the truth. Great, prizewinning journalists have walked their halls, and some still do, but the media has self-tarred and feathered itself via a lack of journalistic integrity. They’re hopping around, burning, half-crazed at times, and they are the only ones who don’t see the hideous joke they’ve become. Third, this journalistic implosion kicked open the door for a brash, big-mouthed, brilliant, bully outsider to become President of the United States, simply because he pointed out that the media was dishonest, and then the media lifted up this candidate by, well, lying about him.

And if you didn’t see the last election as anything other than a people’s revolution—about insiders vs. outsiders, about the players vs. the citizens, about socialist insurgency vs. libertarian pushback—then you weren’t paying attention. You were likely still mesmerized by the big media machine and its droning message.

“I think we spend too much time in New York.”
–Dean Baquet, executive editor New York Times

Sharyl Attkisson is no conservative. Her reporting on the Bush administration’s Halliburton connection, for example, was insightful and relentless. However, for turning a spotlight on the media, Attkisson has drawn fire from the smear merchants who cannot understand why doing her job includes investigating both sides of the political fence. It’s a good thing she’s a tough veteran of news ink. She’ll survive. Her book bravely dives into the bad, the ugly, and the ugliest of modern media. If you want to remain ignorant, don’t read The Smear. Keep regurgitating media talking points. They love it! The only question will be: How much power are you going to lend these people by not paying attention, by not calling them out? Attkisson has called them out.

Throughout the book, the author maintains grace and an obvious passion for a field and the principles it had once pledged to uphold. Her writing is clear, accessible, and carries appropriate depth for the subject matter without being condescending or leading. Isn’t that what good journalists are supposed to do? She should change her name to something other than a journalist, perhaps traditional journalist or truth teller or fearless fact finder. Or maybe those other guys should change their names to political hacks or yellow journalists or flat out liars.

RECOMMENDED by the US Review

JFK and the Reagan Revolution: A Secret History of American Prosperity

by Lawrence Kudlow and Brian Domitrovic
Portfolio Books

reviewed by Christopher Klim

“Circumstances called for final and definitive policy—and Kennedy chose Treasury’s recommendation: supply-side economics.”

To many, the study and discipline of economics seems like a dark science practiced by witch doctors who are more skilled at explaining what just happened in the world of business and finance than making sense of current developments. Very few experts make salient arguments, much less absorb the breadth of the important issues, instead delving into the details and missing the point altogether. However, Kudlow and Domitrovic’s recent offering on late twentieth century American prosperity makes sense of what worked and what struggles to work, thereby laying down an obvious course too simple and effective to ignore.

Lawrence Kudlow—an economic commentator and former presidential administration advisor—and Brian Domitrovic—a professor, historian, and economic institute researcher—examine the genesis of President Kennedy’s economic strategy and, later, its reemergence within President Reagan’s administration. In the early Kennedy days, the economy lagged, unemployment was rampant, and taxes were high and full of loopholes. Kennedy, gaining his feet in the Oval Office, stayed the course with dismal results, but as the economy floundered and the president’s experience grew, he listened to different voices within his administration. They told him to cut taxes and aim for growth. This bold economic move would become an important yet forgotten component of Kennedy’s legacy, perhaps overshadowed by his civil rights achievements. As any philosopher or student of sociology would know, it is extremely difficult to elevate a society within a challenging economic framework. Historically, lasting change comes with an improvement of conditions. Drastic change, and not always for the better, foments under dire conditions.

Central to the prosperity discussion is the Keynesian vs. Supply-side economics debate. In brief, Keynesian economists assert that the economy is influenced by the aggregate demand of consumption, government spending, exports, and investments, which are often supported by a large and heavy-spending government—think stimulus money and regular intervention by various federal regulatory bodies. Supply-side economists push for low taxation and deregulation, allowing for greater flow of goods at lower prices, which in turn leads to more jobs and higher wages. Keynesians believe that a large government fueled by hearty taxes allows the authorities to tinker with economic metrics to the benefit of the people. Supply-siders want to shrink government and let the economy run itself, increasing tax revenue through economic growth.

Most presidents are faced with a choice to accept Keynesian economics. The successful administrations battle it. While it took Kennedy’s assassination to solidify both his growth-oriented economic vision and key civil rights legislation, these choices led to golden years of prosperity for the middle class on both economic and social fronts. Years later, when President Reagan inherited a lackluster economy, he summoned much of Kennedy’s plan to recreate a new American revival. (In turn, President Clinton coat-tailed this movement by mostly leaving their system alone.) The similarity between the diverse figures of Kennedy and Reagan was an ability to listen to and sift through a cadre of intelligent advice and their core faith in the middle class as the heart and soul of the nation. Their plan was deceivingly simple: lower taxes in business and income, which stimulates production and jobs and then results in additional tax revenue via motivated wage earners and corporate expansion. As a result, most everyone is working and self-empowered.

The authors use straightforward language, historical anecdotes, and key sources to map the successes and failures of both the Kennedy and Reagan economic plans. By marrying the course of these historic presidencies, the authors highlight American progress, while contrasting it against its left and right turns into faltering policies. During the discussion, the authors limit their personal politics, even though it is indeed politics that impedes real growth again and again. If there were an E=MC2 for economics, the C or constant in the equation would be misguided and dirty politics. As the authors reveal, the interplay of politics and economics has become so contentious that both parties to various degrees have abandoned their legacies of success. And everyone but Washington seems to be suffering.

This is a compelling and important book, which should be delivered to every senator and congressman as required reading.

RECOMMENDED by the US Review