Peter Baker (1) (1967–)

The authors set out to document, as they put it, “the inexorable culmination of a sustained four-year war on the institutions and traditions of American democracy.”

Of Donald Trump, they write:

"He did not know that Puerto Rico was part of the United States, did not know whether Colombia was in North America or South America, thought Finland was part of Russia, and mixed up the Baltics with the Balkans. He got confused about how World War I started, did not understand the basics of show more America’s vast nuclear arsenal, did not grasp the concept of constitutional separation of powers, did not understand how courts worked. ‘How do I declare war?’ He asked at one point, to the alarm of his staff, who realized he was unaware that the Constitution prescribes that role for Congress. He seemed genuinely surprised to learn that Abraham Lincoln had been a member of the Republican Party. ‘He knew nothing about most things,’ observed one top aid. Advisers soon realized they had to tutor him on the basics of how government worked.”

…and yet, he became the 45th President of the United States!

As President, he was always concerned more about appearance than substance. He loved the trappings of office, and never passed up a good photo-op. He made many appointments to key positions based on how well the candidate would look on television rather than on their qualifications. He even spent “exhaustive amounts of time each morning combing and twisting the long strands of his awkwardly colored hair.”

Watching television took up an inordinate amount of Trump’s time. He passed many hours watching his favorite network, Fox, and often made decisions based on how they would play with his ratings. Although his family and friends had relatively easy access to him, key members of his administration frequently had trouble gaining his attention. Newt Gingrich even said “The two most effective ways of communicating with Trump are ‘Fox and Friends’ and ‘Hannity.’”

But television wasn’t the only media outlet he wanted to dominate. He used Twitter as an outlet for outrage and a means for self-praise, and “fact-checking was never part of the process.”

His foreign policy, if he can be said to have had one, revolved around his “conviction that the country had been taken for a ride by foreign allies and adversaries alike.” Everything was about transactions with Trump, and all transactions were about “winning,” which to Trump generally meant getting money or favors. He alienated traditional allies and courted enemies and adversaries.

He sought constant adulation and was much more interested in appearing in rallies than in governing. He surrounded himself with sycophants and yes-men, and fired aides who dared to challenge his whims. He turned most conversations into some way of bragging and exaggerating about his supposed “accomplishments.” He lied constantly: the Washington Post fact checker counted 30,573 false or misleading public statements he made while president!

Baker and Glasser follow Trump’s chaotic presidency in carefully researched detail from his false claims of the biggest inauguration crowd in history to his aborted effort to overturn his loss in the 2020 presidential election. It was, in their words:

". . . an unimaginable period in our history when the United States had a leader for the first time who neither knew nor subscribed to many of the fundamental tenets of the Constitution and even actively worked to undermine them."

Evaluation: This book is an excellent, almost day by day, summary of the Trump presidency. Every chapter outlines reasons for enlightened citizens who love the United States to be angry.

(JAB) show less

This massive (over 700 pages) accounting of the four years this country survived the presidency of Donald J. Trump does a public service to the U.S. I firmly believe if it were somehow possible to get every voting citizen to read “The Divider,” Trump would fade into oblivion. Unfortunately, not only is that not possible, but as of this writing Trump is the leading candidate of both political parties to be re-elected president in 2024. In fact, he is so far ahead of any of his Republican show more primary opponents, it would be possible for him to forego all campaigning and he would still be nominated. That may very well be what he is doing right now since his early campaign events are very controlled and not the kinds of events designed to win over voters not in his base. What is most disturbing about Baker and Glasser’s book is that their book is evidence that one of our two political parties is arguably rotten to the core. The fact that a solid majority of Republicans fervently stand behind Trump now that he has been impeached twice and is facing more than 35 (and counting) criminal indictments is more depressing than the possibility of Trump winning a third term because it is proof that our democracy is broken. Time will tell our future, but it is not bright show less

Days of Fire is an interesting, fairly objective, narrative of the Bush presidency and the role and relationship of Dick Cheney and President Bush. It focuses on the events that overtook the Bush presidency and the actions of Bush and Cheney as they attempted to lead the country through the myriad of disasters - most of their own making.

There can be no doubt that Bush - immediately after 9-11, found his voice and guided the country effectively for the first year of the War on Terror. show more However, even the most ardent Bush supporter would have problems understanding the U.S. involvement in the Iraqi war. The disaster that occurred there - despite the surge that saved the war - would define his presidency.

The book treats Bush fairly, he comes off as well meaning and compassionate but with an unfortunate willingness to shoot from the hip without due consideration. It amazed me that almost all his policies seemed to change significantly throughout his eight years of presidency. The book however certainly doesn't hide the numerous mistakes made and how by being loyal to a fault he made things worse.

Cheney however comes to the Vice President's role fully formed - he is what he is and he won't be anything else - and as a result comes off as a cold hearted bastard.

It also was surprising to learn about the in-fighting between Bush's top aides and the agendas that were being fought for and how Bush was under-served by most of them.

Interesting and well written, certainly not the last word on the Bush presidency, but an important one, Days of Fire is a worthy read. show less

I spent a fair amount of the time I was reading this book wondering why I putting myself through Trump's presidential term again. It was awful enough living through it the first time!

Which should tell you something about the urgency of the prose, the immediacy of the writing, which is excellent. I find this to be a very readable, yet very detailed and documented, history of Trump's time in the White House. I recommend it.