Review of Fire and Fury

The new book Fire and Fury by Michael Wolff has been released early due to the widespread interest and buzz surrounding the details that began to leak out. The final catalyst being the President’s lawyers sending a cease and desist letter to the publisher, Henry Holt, it was released 4 days early. The move was comment enough, but they followed it with a statement that said powerfully, “We will not allow any president to achieve by intimidation what our Constitution precludes him or her from achieving in court.”

            For all of the buzz that it generated the majority of the meat so to speak was included in the excerpt offered on New York Magazine’s website, available here. Any detail missed by that has since been taken up by the press with all the dignity of the tabloids President Trump once generated so much content for. From all of this we see a portrait of a president that is in over his head and not suited or qualified for the job at hand. Even more troubling, in a Krueger-Dunning effect case-in-point moment, Mr. Trump does not realize that he has these limitations. But the absolute worst revelation for me from the book is not these things which could have been inferred already, but the total awareness of those around him of his shortcomings. Previously one could have thought that everyone in the administration had a blind spot in realizing the President’s lack of aptitude, instead they are willfully suppressing the urge to do the right thing in favor of an attempt to enrich themselves.

            The book has come under serious attack from several angles. Foremost, it has been decried as simply impossible to get the quotes he got. A piece of reporting that had to be a work of fiction based on second, and third hand accounts. That is, of course, until he stated that the explosive conversation between Steve Bannon and Roger Ailes that grabbed many of the early headlines was in fact a dinner for 6 hosted by Mr. Wolff and attended by another journalist that corroborated the accounts. Then Mr. Wolff helpfully offered that he had hours of tapes from which the majority of the quotes in the book came. Next, the book was assailed for being over the top. Even if the quotes were right he was mischaracterizing the people in them. Other than minor clarifications and red-faced explanations, most of the people have not denied their portrayals directly, rather trying to discredit the entire work.

            Mr. Wolff’s greatest problem and where his book is by far most easily picked apart are the details. He gets wrong what department cabinet secretaries run, who was present at a breakfast that Ivanka Trump attended. Who was in which meeting when, and so on. There are many of these criticisms. While it could mean the book is indeed a work of fiction because details essential to fact checking turned out to be errors, to conclude this you would then need to ignore the body of reporting that has since backed up much of the book, along with the outside corroboration, of others present or the subjects themselves. Instead the explanation that I believe fits more comfortably is that Michael Wolff is a garbage journalist that practices in a garbage section of the field of journalism. He is a tabloid writer, not accustomed to some of the subjects whom he mentions, nor the scrutiny with which his work will be subjected. These errors are unforgiveable as far as the process that led to their inclusion, but not necessarily of the work as a whole. This would mean the majority of the book can still be correct even if someone’s name was Mark, instead of Mike.

            The question I believe is most central to this work would be: does this book have value? Both to the larger conversation of our politics and the 14 bucks and change I spent on it. Answering the latter first, I would say sure, I don’t hate that I dropped some cash on it. The prose is good, the story, for what it is, is compelling. One could hardly complain that you are getting a deeper longer view than a palace intrigue article that might appear in the New York Times or Axios.

            The broader question of value comes from palace intrigue style. If you believe that type of article has value then this should absolutely carry water with you. The two best sourced reporters on the White House beat would without question be Maggie Haberman at the New York Times, and Mike Allen at Axios. It is obvious that they have multiple people within the administration talking to them, and sometimes it is obvious that they want those sources to keep talking to them. If ever they get called in for criticism it is not for the work that they do, but for the next step they refuse to take. Mr. Wolff, by contrast, has no intention of holding on to his sources. He has been kicked out of the West Wing forever by Chief of Staff John Kelly and is free to print everything that he has. From this we can see a portrait of the President and his administration painted by someone whose only duty is, theoretically, to the reader. Being a tabloid star, Mr. Wolff, still must prove that his intentions are pure, or have a preponderance of probability. The work of Ms. Haberman and Mr. Allen make Mr. Wolff’s account likely even probable.

Beyond what it offers the blood thirsty it does do a decent job of going through the people that populate Trump world. Those who may not consume every scrap of news available might not recognize every name, and in the year that Trump has had in office it is often hard to remember when people have entered and exited frame.

            I feel uniquely targeted by this book because it does tell me my worst fears that previously had all come from inference and imagination, are, in fact, true. It is easy to digest that way. The sourcing problems could be as glaring as even the strongest critics say, but I have an inclination to believe already. No criticism could change that the major subject of the book, Mr. Trump’s unfitness for office, needs to be discussed now. Those protecting him, members of congress, members of the administration, even members of the media, must be called to account for the damage they are allowing him to do to the country and our government.

This book does not change policies, it does not change how one party or the other should construct their agenda. It could not change what is right and what is wrong. It does start a conversation about Presidential fitness. A worthy one that we must have now and then remember for every presidential election for the rest of our lives.