What do you think?
Rate this book
Collusion, Conspiracy, and the Plot That Brought Nixon Down The Real Watergate Scandal (Hardback) - Common
An aging judge about to step down. Aggressive prosecutors friendly with the judge. A disgraced president. A nation that had already made up its mind. The Watergate trials were a legal mess—and now, with the discovery of new documents that reveal shocking misconduct by prosecutors and judges alike, former Nixon staffer Geoff Shepard has a convincing case that the wrongdoing of these history-making trials was actually a bigger scandal than the Watergate scandal itself.
Hardcover
First published August 3, 2015
90 people are currently reading
315 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews
May 18, 2017
Please give my Amazon review a helpful vote - https://www.amazon.com/review/R1M3GLR...
This book has two goals. One goal is to take a step in toward the rehabilitation of the reputation of President Richard Nixon. The second is to document the political corruption on the part of Nixon's enemies in taking him down.
Geoff Shepard advances the first goal by reminding us of the signal achievements in domestic and foreign policy made by President Nixon and his administration. Certainly, compared to the feckless administration of the presidency after 1992 - approximately the end of the Cold War when it seems that the nation has become silly and immature - Nixon and his administration come across like adults compared to the children who have been in charge for the last decade.
Concerning the second goal, Mr. Shepard extensively documents the shocking ex parte contacts between the prosecutors and the judiciary in the pursuit of the cover-up. Judge Sirica's unjudicial stacking of the deck, including pretending to sentence John Dean to four years imprisonment, while secretly planning to sentence him to time served, as part of which he never spent a night in jail, constitute a political corruption that far exceeded anything that Nixon did.
The mindset of the anti-Nixon forces that Mr. Shepard describes is corroborated in [[ASIN:1425717918 Hillary's Pursuit of Power]] by Jerry Zeifman, who was Hillary Clinton's former supervisor on the Watergate Impeachment Commission. As I observed in my review of Mr. Zeifman's book:
"Zeifman was in charge of the impeachment committee during Watergate. He was nominally Hillary's supervisor, but she was quickly walled off into a thoroughly partisan group committed to denying Nixon basic civil rights and due process. For example, it was her brainchild to attempt to deny Nixon any legal counsel in the proceeding despite precedent to the contrary. This and other partisan innovations were shot down by the Democrats (and Republicans supported the impeachment committee vote.) Things were done differently then, more democratically, with more of an eye to the past and the possibility that one might be out of power some day, things that the heirs of the Fire-eating New Left Democrats, who were willing to play the nuclear option and make judicial nominations subject to a simple minority, lost sight of."
And we have seen how that decision to change the filibuster for judicial nominees has played out, when, in 2017, the Republicans returned the favor by eliminating the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations with respect to the Gorsuch nomination.
The point, though, is that there was something fundamentally cancerous about the partisan behavior in response to the Watergate break-in, followed by a decade's-long wallow in promoting the myth of their virtuous salvation of the Republic from a threat that never existed. It was perhaps the first time that we saw the press enlist as virtually an arm of the Democrat party, a role to which it has become accustomed. The hypocritical partisanship of Watergate stands out in relief now after we have seen the media and Democrats defend a president who committed perjury, on the grounds that lying about sex is hunky-dory, and a presidential contender who put national security secrets on an unsecured server because, "Hey! No big deal."
In light of the serious scandals of the Obama administration, which the press never showed an interest in pursuing, which have resulted in the deaths of Americans and the persecution of the president's opposition, things which Nixon never dreamt of achieving, the political crimes of President Nixon seem mundane.
I came to political maturity in the immediate aftermath of Watergate. I, therefore, absorbed the media's portrait of Nixon and his aides without critical thought, since no one was providing an alternative. Mr. Shepard, however, is proud of his work in the Nixon administration and is the first person I recall who describes Haldeman and Ehrlichman as loyal and decent public servants, rather than as corrupt enforcers of crypto-fascism. Reading that was definitely a different experience for me, as I'm sure it would be for most Americans who have never heard any dissent to the media created and maintained myth.
This book is quite timely and worth a read.
This book has two goals. One goal is to take a step in toward the rehabilitation of the reputation of President Richard Nixon. The second is to document the political corruption on the part of Nixon's enemies in taking him down.
Geoff Shepard advances the first goal by reminding us of the signal achievements in domestic and foreign policy made by President Nixon and his administration. Certainly, compared to the feckless administration of the presidency after 1992 - approximately the end of the Cold War when it seems that the nation has become silly and immature - Nixon and his administration come across like adults compared to the children who have been in charge for the last decade.
Concerning the second goal, Mr. Shepard extensively documents the shocking ex parte contacts between the prosecutors and the judiciary in the pursuit of the cover-up. Judge Sirica's unjudicial stacking of the deck, including pretending to sentence John Dean to four years imprisonment, while secretly planning to sentence him to time served, as part of which he never spent a night in jail, constitute a political corruption that far exceeded anything that Nixon did.
The mindset of the anti-Nixon forces that Mr. Shepard describes is corroborated in [[ASIN:1425717918 Hillary's Pursuit of Power]] by Jerry Zeifman, who was Hillary Clinton's former supervisor on the Watergate Impeachment Commission. As I observed in my review of Mr. Zeifman's book:
"Zeifman was in charge of the impeachment committee during Watergate. He was nominally Hillary's supervisor, but she was quickly walled off into a thoroughly partisan group committed to denying Nixon basic civil rights and due process. For example, it was her brainchild to attempt to deny Nixon any legal counsel in the proceeding despite precedent to the contrary. This and other partisan innovations were shot down by the Democrats (and Republicans supported the impeachment committee vote.) Things were done differently then, more democratically, with more of an eye to the past and the possibility that one might be out of power some day, things that the heirs of the Fire-eating New Left Democrats, who were willing to play the nuclear option and make judicial nominations subject to a simple minority, lost sight of."
And we have seen how that decision to change the filibuster for judicial nominees has played out, when, in 2017, the Republicans returned the favor by eliminating the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations with respect to the Gorsuch nomination.
The point, though, is that there was something fundamentally cancerous about the partisan behavior in response to the Watergate break-in, followed by a decade's-long wallow in promoting the myth of their virtuous salvation of the Republic from a threat that never existed. It was perhaps the first time that we saw the press enlist as virtually an arm of the Democrat party, a role to which it has become accustomed. The hypocritical partisanship of Watergate stands out in relief now after we have seen the media and Democrats defend a president who committed perjury, on the grounds that lying about sex is hunky-dory, and a presidential contender who put national security secrets on an unsecured server because, "Hey! No big deal."
In light of the serious scandals of the Obama administration, which the press never showed an interest in pursuing, which have resulted in the deaths of Americans and the persecution of the president's opposition, things which Nixon never dreamt of achieving, the political crimes of President Nixon seem mundane.
I came to political maturity in the immediate aftermath of Watergate. I, therefore, absorbed the media's portrait of Nixon and his aides without critical thought, since no one was providing an alternative. Mr. Shepard, however, is proud of his work in the Nixon administration and is the first person I recall who describes Haldeman and Ehrlichman as loyal and decent public servants, rather than as corrupt enforcers of crypto-fascism. Reading that was definitely a different experience for me, as I'm sure it would be for most Americans who have never heard any dissent to the media created and maintained myth.
This book is quite timely and worth a read.
July 3, 2025
A compelling contrarian view of history via a firsthand source. Somewhere between sincere, good hearted revisionism, and possible counter factual. I prefer the later edition “the Nixon conspiracy”. I am not in the business of exonerating Richard Nixon but I find the conduct of John Dean and John Siricia deplorable.
December 2, 2020
Crazy how easy it is to over turn an election where a president wins 49 states with a single judge in the DC.
September 2, 2019
This is a hard book to review on many levels. Geoff Shepard was a young lawyer in the Nixon Administration and has made it a quest to detail the many excesses that both the Watergate Special Counsel's office and the judges involved in ruling on the various cases committed. Shepard has waited for the files from the various participants to be released through FOIA actions and then has spent a lot of time building a case Cox and Jaworski and their teams of lawyers were out to prosecute Nixon and his senior people regardless of rules of procedure. If the Special Prosecutors were on a mission they were amateurs compared to the blatant disregard which Judge Sirica showed. Sirica wanted to be in the headlines and wanted as a partisan to get the entire Nixon team. Those are serious charges but I think the case that Shepard builds is incontrovertible. Sirica engaged in multiple ex parte conferences with the prosecutors and with members of the staff for the Ervin Committee. They seem to have withheld exculpatory evidence from the defendants. Had either of those allegations been known at the time - at least some of the convictions would not have been accomplished.
One clear understanding you get from the book is how much of a weasel John Dean is. Although Dean is a convicted felon he never served any jail time. Contrast that with people like Bud Krogh who fessed up to his errors and served his time and has lead an exemplary life since then. The revelations confirm the impression I had of Dean at the time. It makes you wonder why media outlets still solicit his opinion.
I had a hard time with the book on two bases. First, because it is presented like evidence - the narrative can be a bit dry. More importantly, some of the crimes of Watergate were buffoonish but many were as serious as those alleged against the intelligence services in the Russia investigation. The whole sordid accounts of the conduct of the people who organized the break-in and subsequent crimes belies a contempt of our system almost as deep as Comey's - many of the players thought they were above the law. That was true of many on Nixon's team as well as many on the prosecutor's side.
I guess the most instructive part of the book is the caution of the potential for excesses that the Special Counsel idea presents in the administration of justice. We have seen almost every use of the special counsel idea result in almost star chamber like proceedings.
Shepard continues to dig on the subject - one good result from all his hard work could be the discrediting of the idea of the efficacy of special counsels.
One clear understanding you get from the book is how much of a weasel John Dean is. Although Dean is a convicted felon he never served any jail time. Contrast that with people like Bud Krogh who fessed up to his errors and served his time and has lead an exemplary life since then. The revelations confirm the impression I had of Dean at the time. It makes you wonder why media outlets still solicit his opinion.
I had a hard time with the book on two bases. First, because it is presented like evidence - the narrative can be a bit dry. More importantly, some of the crimes of Watergate were buffoonish but many were as serious as those alleged against the intelligence services in the Russia investigation. The whole sordid accounts of the conduct of the people who organized the break-in and subsequent crimes belies a contempt of our system almost as deep as Comey's - many of the players thought they were above the law. That was true of many on Nixon's team as well as many on the prosecutor's side.
I guess the most instructive part of the book is the caution of the potential for excesses that the Special Counsel idea presents in the administration of justice. We have seen almost every use of the special counsel idea result in almost star chamber like proceedings.
Shepard continues to dig on the subject - one good result from all his hard work could be the discrediting of the idea of the efficacy of special counsels.
August 19, 2022
The author met Richard Nixon when he was in college. Years later he went to work in the Nixon White House as a member of the legal staff.
There are several claims made in this book based on evidence that has only recently come to light.
1. Archibald Cox met several times with Judge John Sirica and with Judge Bazelon. Also, his replacement, Leon Jaworski had similar meetings with Sirica. He claims that that in itself tainted the trials.
2. The so-called “smoking gun” tape from June 1972, which came to light in July 1974 was not really about Watergate, but it seems that Dean, Haldeman, Ehrlichman and Nixon could not recall the exact context of the meeting.
3. Sirica should have never been allowed to preside over the cover-up trial. He was already tainted by the fact that he had presided over the burglary trial.
4. Also, the appeals, which, would inevitably come, were short-circuited by Justice Bazelon, the head of the D.C. Circuit who would hear those appeals.
The villains in this book are the same ones I decided on back when I read all of the Watergate books, I could get my hands on as a teenager: John Sirica, John Dean and Jeb Stuart Magruder. Dean and Magruder changed their stories many times during the investigation simply to get a better plea deal for themselves. Sirica was a partisan, grandstanding hack whose claim to be the only bulwark against injustice was a lie.
There are several claims made in this book based on evidence that has only recently come to light.
1. Archibald Cox met several times with Judge John Sirica and with Judge Bazelon. Also, his replacement, Leon Jaworski had similar meetings with Sirica. He claims that that in itself tainted the trials.
2. The so-called “smoking gun” tape from June 1972, which came to light in July 1974 was not really about Watergate, but it seems that Dean, Haldeman, Ehrlichman and Nixon could not recall the exact context of the meeting.
3. Sirica should have never been allowed to preside over the cover-up trial. He was already tainted by the fact that he had presided over the burglary trial.
4. Also, the appeals, which, would inevitably come, were short-circuited by Justice Bazelon, the head of the D.C. Circuit who would hear those appeals.
The villains in this book are the same ones I decided on back when I read all of the Watergate books, I could get my hands on as a teenager: John Sirica, John Dean and Jeb Stuart Magruder. Dean and Magruder changed their stories many times during the investigation simply to get a better plea deal for themselves. Sirica was a partisan, grandstanding hack whose claim to be the only bulwark against injustice was a lie.
April 24, 2019
It is becoming painfully obvious that the law-both its codification and enforcement-is decided on an informal, social basis, rather than in keeping with some set of higher principles. People don't scratch each other's eyes out to get into the Ivies or claw their way into key positions in various cabinets for no reason. They do it because, if and when the time comes, they can get out of jams or call in favors based on a comment that can seem as offhand as "I went to school with your father").
Add to that sad fact that history is written by the victors, and what you end up with is certain injustices and abuses of power not only encouraged, but brazenly celebrated as bravery or virtue after the fact. Whatever one thinks of Richard Nixon's behavior in the Oval Office, his words were far tamer and less fundamentally a violation of legal principle than the acts that either George W. Bush or Barack Obama undertook on a daily basis under the rubric of the Patriotic Act and PRISM respectively.
Geoff Shepard is an open and unabashed partisan, and he does nothing to conceal that fact, but he also buttresses his suppositions in key graphs and documents released through the Freedom of Information Act to show that the axis of D.C.-Massachusetts, enraged by the populist victory of Richard Nixon, marshaled all their resources in media, the intelligence community, and (most importantly) from the judges' banks, to pull off a literal coup.
The reason for my mixed rating is that this info, while available in the book, just isn't well-integrated into the larger narrative. I understand there were a lot of moving parts in this investigation, and in Shepard's investigation of the investigation, but when you have appendices A through Q, you've failed in part to present a coherent argument.
Still, one shouldn't be tempted to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and as our current president Blonald Blumpf has quite a bit in common with Nixon (popular with the unwashed in flyover country, despised by people in Massachusetts and DC who have near-unlimited resources, power, and control over the official narrative), Mr. Shepard's document of prosecutorial overreach and misconduct is a nice curative to the kinds of hagiographies of Woodward and Bernstein we've been fed over the years, as well as the out-of-proportion demonization of Nixon.
Add to that sad fact that history is written by the victors, and what you end up with is certain injustices and abuses of power not only encouraged, but brazenly celebrated as bravery or virtue after the fact. Whatever one thinks of Richard Nixon's behavior in the Oval Office, his words were far tamer and less fundamentally a violation of legal principle than the acts that either George W. Bush or Barack Obama undertook on a daily basis under the rubric of the Patriotic Act and PRISM respectively.
Geoff Shepard is an open and unabashed partisan, and he does nothing to conceal that fact, but he also buttresses his suppositions in key graphs and documents released through the Freedom of Information Act to show that the axis of D.C.-Massachusetts, enraged by the populist victory of Richard Nixon, marshaled all their resources in media, the intelligence community, and (most importantly) from the judges' banks, to pull off a literal coup.
The reason for my mixed rating is that this info, while available in the book, just isn't well-integrated into the larger narrative. I understand there were a lot of moving parts in this investigation, and in Shepard's investigation of the investigation, but when you have appendices A through Q, you've failed in part to present a coherent argument.
Still, one shouldn't be tempted to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and as our current president Blonald Blumpf has quite a bit in common with Nixon (popular with the unwashed in flyover country, despised by people in Massachusetts and DC who have near-unlimited resources, power, and control over the official narrative), Mr. Shepard's document of prosecutorial overreach and misconduct is a nice curative to the kinds of hagiographies of Woodward and Bernstein we've been fed over the years, as well as the out-of-proportion demonization of Nixon.
January 1, 2020
Listening to this book in light of the latest presidential impeachment made it seem far less abstract than might otherwise have been the case.
Partisan overreach, "get him at all costs", and vitriolic contempt for your opponents are with us today as much as they were in the time of Nixon.
This book methodically and carefully constructs a case that the judge, jury, and courtroom for the Watergate cover-up trial might all have been invalidated had Americans known then what this author has uncovered today. Furthermore, he shows that a hanging judge pursued his prey without care for the Constitution, procedural conventions, or the law.
It's time to completely reevaluate the legacy of Richard Nixon, and the conventional narrative of Watergate.
The book also contains some inconvenient truths for some. Like this one: "When it comes to presidential abuses of power, Obama makes Nixon look like an amateur".
Partisan overreach, "get him at all costs", and vitriolic contempt for your opponents are with us today as much as they were in the time of Nixon.
This book methodically and carefully constructs a case that the judge, jury, and courtroom for the Watergate cover-up trial might all have been invalidated had Americans known then what this author has uncovered today. Furthermore, he shows that a hanging judge pursued his prey without care for the Constitution, procedural conventions, or the law.
It's time to completely reevaluate the legacy of Richard Nixon, and the conventional narrative of Watergate.
The book also contains some inconvenient truths for some. Like this one: "When it comes to presidential abuses of power, Obama makes Nixon look like an amateur".
October 6, 2024
Not too impressed. See I told you verses setting up the details and letting them reveal the truth. This happened this happened these people did this, knew this decided this and this was the timeline and outcome. Most people have no idea what even happened so laying out all the details it’s important verses see I told you he was innocent. I was there so he is innocent.
Because Nixon was a very smart man and back then you had to be smart and able to hold a conversation no just have everything written for you and stand up and smile but not to big at the camera or make sure your podium is small enough so you don’t look like a midget next to your opponent because surely that gives them more points because this country is known for EQUAL OPPORTUNITY right…. How about the same size, same color, same distance same everything podium because if it’s just a podium what big things will be ‘adjusted’ to make sure they ‘appear’ equal.
So why was that long list of world changing things that Nixon did do… War on Drugs being the number 1 which made the USA the largest openly visible drug organization on the planet.
So let me ask who is the Drug Lord?
1. President
2. Epstein
3. DEA Secretary
4. Homeland Security Secretary
5. CIA Director
6. PDitty
Well you get the idea…. How many drug people were killed last year by the USA? How to all those drugs really get in the country and why did it take so long to ‘legalize’ marijuana and how many states and business were set up before that vote? How much tax money was that every year?
And some people went into a building looking for files? Didn’t the DNC servers recently get hacked…. No President stepped down so what really happened?
One thing Trump can be credited with that has changed the landscape of the planet is thee “News Cycle” and who controls the SUBJECT.
So who really has the power. Have you heard that the stock market now has a PAUSE!
I’ll read this again of course but there are reason certain people are brought in to lend their names to actions. How long has the border and fence really been an issue? How about how many years or let’s not even say local let’s say FEDERAL ELECTIONS have had a serious problem can you say CHAD… but of course it’s only TRUMP!
Tell me was Nixon pardoned? Didn’t Trump plan to pardon Ms Ole “LOCK HER UP”. Wake up people! Where are all the refugees’ going… swing states with drivers licenses… tell does it really matter or just fodder…. You probably believe there is such thing as random on a computer….
Read Read Read More!
Because Nixon was a very smart man and back then you had to be smart and able to hold a conversation no just have everything written for you and stand up and smile but not to big at the camera or make sure your podium is small enough so you don’t look like a midget next to your opponent because surely that gives them more points because this country is known for EQUAL OPPORTUNITY right…. How about the same size, same color, same distance same everything podium because if it’s just a podium what big things will be ‘adjusted’ to make sure they ‘appear’ equal.
So why was that long list of world changing things that Nixon did do… War on Drugs being the number 1 which made the USA the largest openly visible drug organization on the planet.
So let me ask who is the Drug Lord?
1. President
2. Epstein
3. DEA Secretary
4. Homeland Security Secretary
5. CIA Director
6. PDitty
Well you get the idea…. How many drug people were killed last year by the USA? How to all those drugs really get in the country and why did it take so long to ‘legalize’ marijuana and how many states and business were set up before that vote? How much tax money was that every year?
And some people went into a building looking for files? Didn’t the DNC servers recently get hacked…. No President stepped down so what really happened?
One thing Trump can be credited with that has changed the landscape of the planet is thee “News Cycle” and who controls the SUBJECT.
So who really has the power. Have you heard that the stock market now has a PAUSE!
I’ll read this again of course but there are reason certain people are brought in to lend their names to actions. How long has the border and fence really been an issue? How about how many years or let’s not even say local let’s say FEDERAL ELECTIONS have had a serious problem can you say CHAD… but of course it’s only TRUMP!
Tell me was Nixon pardoned? Didn’t Trump plan to pardon Ms Ole “LOCK HER UP”. Wake up people! Where are all the refugees’ going… swing states with drivers licenses… tell does it really matter or just fodder…. You probably believe there is such thing as random on a computer….
Read Read Read More!
March 3, 2020
There was much I struggled with in this book. The writing was engaging, and for that I almost gave it two stars. But...
The book talks very little about what actually happened at Watergate and focuses mostly on the trial dramas that come after. Which I suppose is fine, but I know very little about the facts of Watergate, and found myself struggling to sense all the depths and consequences in the fallout over something that I have no base knowledge for. Perhaps the author presumed that such a historical event would be well known, and forgot that by now many in America did not live through the events, and the details of it are therefore not imprinted on our memory like they no doubt are for older generations.
More importantly I very much struggled with the overall tone of the book. This is very Pro-Nixon, and doesn't even try to hide it behind a screen of impartiality. This author literally ends the book saying he's going to devote his life to improving Nixon's image. In this narrative, Nixon can do no wrong, and therefore this book is a short detail of the ways the author believes that the opposition twisted, used, and manipulated all the facts and systems to take Nixon down.
I think it is the heavy bias that really makes this book rough for me. Were politics being played by Nixon's enemies? I'm sure. Does that mean Nixon's party was entirely in the right? That is the logic which the author, though he doesn't outright state it, seems to use. And that is what I'm very wary of. Perhaps I'm extra wary due to the recent impeachment proceedings which just went down with Trump, with each side claiming the high ground while both so obviously played as many political moves as possible in the process. Seeing any sort of proceeding like this try to be passed off as a good versus evil, black and white issue sends major red flags running in my mind and I simply can't believe the issue and process that simple.
I wish this book had let itself try to remain neutral as it explored the rights and wrongs both sides might have done, but I'm not sure this author could accomplish that with his blatant hero worship of Nixon.
The book talks very little about what actually happened at Watergate and focuses mostly on the trial dramas that come after. Which I suppose is fine, but I know very little about the facts of Watergate, and found myself struggling to sense all the depths and consequences in the fallout over something that I have no base knowledge for. Perhaps the author presumed that such a historical event would be well known, and forgot that by now many in America did not live through the events, and the details of it are therefore not imprinted on our memory like they no doubt are for older generations.
More importantly I very much struggled with the overall tone of the book. This is very Pro-Nixon, and doesn't even try to hide it behind a screen of impartiality. This author literally ends the book saying he's going to devote his life to improving Nixon's image. In this narrative, Nixon can do no wrong, and therefore this book is a short detail of the ways the author believes that the opposition twisted, used, and manipulated all the facts and systems to take Nixon down.
I think it is the heavy bias that really makes this book rough for me. Were politics being played by Nixon's enemies? I'm sure. Does that mean Nixon's party was entirely in the right? That is the logic which the author, though he doesn't outright state it, seems to use. And that is what I'm very wary of. Perhaps I'm extra wary due to the recent impeachment proceedings which just went down with Trump, with each side claiming the high ground while both so obviously played as many political moves as possible in the process. Seeing any sort of proceeding like this try to be passed off as a good versus evil, black and white issue sends major red flags running in my mind and I simply can't believe the issue and process that simple.
I wish this book had let itself try to remain neutral as it explored the rights and wrongs both sides might have done, but I'm not sure this author could accomplish that with his blatant hero worship of Nixon.
June 13, 2021
Fact or fiction
While it is very possible that an injustice was committed toward the persons first targeted in the Watergate scandal, it is also true that no court had jurisdiction over the president while in office. He can only be impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate. Richard Nixon chose to resign because, according to Senator Barry Goldwater, the President did not have the votes to avoid conviction.
While it is very possible that an injustice was committed toward the persons first targeted in the Watergate scandal, it is also true that no court had jurisdiction over the president while in office. He can only be impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate. Richard Nixon chose to resign because, according to Senator Barry Goldwater, the President did not have the votes to avoid conviction.
December 29, 2015
Not the best writing ever, but still a damning indictment of the prosecutorial and legal misconduct by Judges Gesell and Sirica and the Watergate prosecutors that led to the downfall of Richard Nixon. Much of what happened was in violation of every attorney's ethics code and judicial canons of ethics, but ended up in cheers for the perpetrators rather than disbarment.
October 17, 2021
Geoff whines and complains for over 300 pages that Nixon was brought down for nothing and attempts to rewrite history in a partisan manner. This is a useless crock parading as academic research. Unless you have a penchant for punishment you can skip this rubbish.
April 9, 2016
Good book on the real abuse of power/misconduct by the lawyers and judges involved in the Watergate prosecutions
September 10, 2021
A Republican revisionary re-write of Watergate written by a self confessed Nixon worshipper. Unworthy of publication, frankly.
October 31, 2024
Like many Americans who grew up accepting the Standard Narrative around 20th century American politics, I believed that Watergate was the most egregious abuse of executive power in the history of the republic. It was a meme before the advent of memes as we now know them. The creation of neologisms by attaching the suffix "-gate" to the scandal du jour became a shorthand for any controversy large or small. Watergate was a buzzword that simultaneously eclipsed every aspect of Nixon's administration and bookended the litany of hashtags that summarized the tumult of the 60s cultural revolution and the subsequent transition into the corporate age.
But here's the punchline. What Geoff Shepard's explosive Watergate counter-narrative proves is if the establishment is using Hollywood and the media to prop up an allegedly historically accurate narrative, you're probably not getting the whole story. At worst, you're being completely lied to. In the case of Watergate, the latter is most definitely true.
John Adams is credited as the one who insisted we were a "nation of laws and not men." The implication being that man's corrupted nature would be held in check by the cold dispassion of "the law". It sounds great, but Shepard's book only proves that the underlying premise of the quote is not nullified by having "the law". Just as was the case with the Pharisees, one can follow the law to the letter and prosecute it with malicious intent. In contemporary parlance, the judicial apparatus can be politicized and used as a weapon.
The bottom line is that the real scandal of Watergate was how the deep state colluded with the Democrats to destroy a conservative presidency. It is the very same blueprint that has been injected with steroids in the Trump era and exploited to levels that make the alleged malfeasance of Nixon's administration seem like child's play. Watergate was nothing more than another deep state psyop designed to discredit and delegitimize Nixon and the broader conservative movement in America.
What's obvious to all who are outside the blue bubble, is that the Left are always projecting. When they whine about Trump using the judicial apparatus to persecute enemies, it's because that's exactly what they do. Watergate was simply one of the most well publicized political executions. The media's complicity in Watergate and all subsequent witch hunts cannot be overstated.
Geoff Shepard's book is yet another critical work of liberal narrative busting that is a welcome corrective to the steady diet of disinformation and mythology that has led far too many astray. Most importantly, he's got receipts. The terminally blue pilled won't give it the time of day, but the truth has a funny way of reaching the surface no matter how deeply its deceivers think they've buried it.
But here's the punchline. What Geoff Shepard's explosive Watergate counter-narrative proves is if the establishment is using Hollywood and the media to prop up an allegedly historically accurate narrative, you're probably not getting the whole story. At worst, you're being completely lied to. In the case of Watergate, the latter is most definitely true.
John Adams is credited as the one who insisted we were a "nation of laws and not men." The implication being that man's corrupted nature would be held in check by the cold dispassion of "the law". It sounds great, but Shepard's book only proves that the underlying premise of the quote is not nullified by having "the law". Just as was the case with the Pharisees, one can follow the law to the letter and prosecute it with malicious intent. In contemporary parlance, the judicial apparatus can be politicized and used as a weapon.
The bottom line is that the real scandal of Watergate was how the deep state colluded with the Democrats to destroy a conservative presidency. It is the very same blueprint that has been injected with steroids in the Trump era and exploited to levels that make the alleged malfeasance of Nixon's administration seem like child's play. Watergate was nothing more than another deep state psyop designed to discredit and delegitimize Nixon and the broader conservative movement in America.
What's obvious to all who are outside the blue bubble, is that the Left are always projecting. When they whine about Trump using the judicial apparatus to persecute enemies, it's because that's exactly what they do. Watergate was simply one of the most well publicized political executions. The media's complicity in Watergate and all subsequent witch hunts cannot be overstated.
Geoff Shepard's book is yet another critical work of liberal narrative busting that is a welcome corrective to the steady diet of disinformation and mythology that has led far too many astray. Most importantly, he's got receipts. The terminally blue pilled won't give it the time of day, but the truth has a funny way of reaching the surface no matter how deeply its deceivers think they've buried it.
July 29, 2025
This is not a book about the guilt or innocence of Richard Nixon, although the author does say that the smoking gun tape was misunderstood for lack of context and Nixon could have remained president had his lawyers better understood what was being said.
The real issue of this book is an understanding of Judge Sirica's overall corruption playing as a member of the prosecution team rather than as a fair arbiter in the court. Sirica began as the judge on the break-in trial where he wasn't satisfied that the burglars acted alone. He maneuvered to be the judge on the later conspiracy case despite defense objections. All throughout Sirica held secret meetings with the prosecutors that were more or less strategy sessions to insure convictions, all unbeknownst to the defense team that had a legal right to be present. Sirica also helped out the congressional investigation without which there wouldn't have been any impeachment investigation. Sirica no doubt thought Nixon guilty or at least wanted to reel in the big fish and the strategy was to ruin everyone around Nixon, mission accomplished. The prosecutors don't get off easy either as they knew better than to meet with the judge like that. And the judge and prosecutors also kept the defense seeing the changing testimonies of John Dean and Jeb MaGruder in depositions so that the defense couldn't properly cross-examine their court testimony. A lot of people received unfair trials in order to bring Nixon down. Classic case of the ends justifying the means, in the eyes of the prosecutors and judge, at least.
The real issue of this book is an understanding of Judge Sirica's overall corruption playing as a member of the prosecution team rather than as a fair arbiter in the court. Sirica began as the judge on the break-in trial where he wasn't satisfied that the burglars acted alone. He maneuvered to be the judge on the later conspiracy case despite defense objections. All throughout Sirica held secret meetings with the prosecutors that were more or less strategy sessions to insure convictions, all unbeknownst to the defense team that had a legal right to be present. Sirica also helped out the congressional investigation without which there wouldn't have been any impeachment investigation. Sirica no doubt thought Nixon guilty or at least wanted to reel in the big fish and the strategy was to ruin everyone around Nixon, mission accomplished. The prosecutors don't get off easy either as they knew better than to meet with the judge like that. And the judge and prosecutors also kept the defense seeing the changing testimonies of John Dean and Jeb MaGruder in depositions so that the defense couldn't properly cross-examine their court testimony. A lot of people received unfair trials in order to bring Nixon down. Classic case of the ends justifying the means, in the eyes of the prosecutors and judge, at least.
February 16, 2023
This book is maddening as it shows just how partisan politics trumps everything else. The main points are understandable in how stacking of a special prosecutor's committee and collusion between judges and prosecutors with the violation of 5th and 6th amendments was able to overturn a 49 state election. Nixon was robbed of his ability to defend himself.
It also points out how things work in DC and just how corrupt our government has become. I think this same play book was used on Trump or at least tried and the difference is that Trump did not give up and go home like Nixon did. Nixon also had terrible advice and advisors who saved their own necks at the presidents expense.
Another huge fact is the "smoking gun" tapes of the president were purposely take out of context and forced him to resign when he should not have. The tape was totally misunderstood as shown in the conclusion of chapter on staffing, chapter 5 the Nixon impeachment.
We also know that the moving force behind the House Judiciary Committee's first article of impeachment was the WSFP prosecutor's payoff of Hunt bribery was unsupportable.
The book is hard to follow, I think in the legal details for non lawyers. It could have been helped by a section defining terms and acronyms for most of us. For example WSPF. While it is spelled out once early in the book I found myself asking over and over again what is this again. So if put up front in a section on definitions I could easily find it again and educate myself.
I have come to believe in my old age that almost nothing at least in USA is what it appears. We get told a narrative by the media that in no respect is close to the truth. BLM, Climate Change, race relations, policing, immigration, etc. etc. we are lied to so much we don't even care anymore.
Another thing that could have helped was to identify the players, which the author does but put a picture of each so we can start to understand them and their roles in all this.
It also points out how things work in DC and just how corrupt our government has become. I think this same play book was used on Trump or at least tried and the difference is that Trump did not give up and go home like Nixon did. Nixon also had terrible advice and advisors who saved their own necks at the presidents expense.
Another huge fact is the "smoking gun" tapes of the president were purposely take out of context and forced him to resign when he should not have. The tape was totally misunderstood as shown in the conclusion of chapter on staffing, chapter 5 the Nixon impeachment.
We also know that the moving force behind the House Judiciary Committee's first article of impeachment was the WSFP prosecutor's payoff of Hunt bribery was unsupportable.
The book is hard to follow, I think in the legal details for non lawyers. It could have been helped by a section defining terms and acronyms for most of us. For example WSPF. While it is spelled out once early in the book I found myself asking over and over again what is this again. So if put up front in a section on definitions I could easily find it again and educate myself.
I have come to believe in my old age that almost nothing at least in USA is what it appears. We get told a narrative by the media that in no respect is close to the truth. BLM, Climate Change, race relations, policing, immigration, etc. etc. we are lied to so much we don't even care anymore.
Another thing that could have helped was to identify the players, which the author does but put a picture of each so we can start to understand them and their roles in all this.
February 26, 2022
The Real Watergate Scandal: Collusion, Conspiracy, and the Plot That Brought Nixon Down is a fascinating and eye-opening look at one of the most pivotal events in American politics. Using memoirs of several of the people involved in the Watergate events and recently disclosed documents, author Geoff Shepard catalogs the gross miscarriage of justice that occurred; from stocking the investigative agencies with anti-Nixon officials from the Kennedy/Johnson administrations, to collusion between the judge and the prosecution, to jury tempering, to withholding key evidence from the defendants, to the distortion of the so called “Smoking Gun” tape. Shepard argues, pretty convincingly, that regardless of whether there was a Watergate cover-up, the defendants were not given a fair trial and that their rights were violated by a prosecution that had already predetermined their guilt. Some of the legal issue and proceedings are rather complex, but Shepard does a good job at making them understandable and at conveying the importance of what happened. Remarkably compelling, The Real Watergate Scandal: Collusion, Conspiracy, and the Plot That Brought Nixon Down exposes how the judicial system was corrupted and abused by political zealots who put themselves above the law.
July 17, 2022
I just wanted a book to develop a better understanding of the Watergate scandal. What I got was a counter to a conspiracy theory that is partisan, biased, and incredibly hard to follow if you did not live through the Nixon Administration. The author received a scholarship from Nixon and worked for Nixon. Nixon resigned rather than face accountability. What really turned me off was that the author starts the analysis by conclusively stating that the “smoking gun” tape was taken out of context. From there he asserts that he has proven there was no smoking gun and proceeds to build his house of cards on that premise. This is only a good read if you lived through the Nixon Administration, you believe Nixon was framed, and you have nothing better to do than re-live events from 50 years ago.
June 18, 2020
Fabulous book about what REALLY happened to President Nixon. A total scandal on how HE was treated in the courts, by the Judge presiding over the case (who just like the publicity.) It's disgusting how this man was treated. He was a good President and very strong and patriotic. Plus anti-communist. Look at the serious Left in the U.S. now and we'll see why Nixon's brand of toughness would have kept the likes of Bernie Saunders and Nancy Pelosi at bay.
February 8, 2022
Interesting Analysis of the Watergate Scandal
The Watergate Scandal that we lived through in the 1970’s still has effects on the political wars to this day. I thoroughly enjoyed reading Geoff Shepard’s analysis of those events as he brings light to many of the back stories that the public was never aware of. Since Shepard was actually part of Nikon’s team at the time, his perspective is most interesting. Parallels to current political wars are there if one looks for them.
The Watergate Scandal that we lived through in the 1970’s still has effects on the political wars to this day. I thoroughly enjoyed reading Geoff Shepard’s analysis of those events as he brings light to many of the back stories that the public was never aware of. Since Shepard was actually part of Nikon’s team at the time, his perspective is most interesting. Parallels to current political wars are there if one looks for them.
October 19, 2024
Fascinating! Even though this is a one-sided perspective, the evidence is compelling and worth considering. It is a reminder that the media cannot be trusted to write history. Americans need to be aware that the weaponizing of courts has become entrenched in modern-day politics. The Watergate Scandal has not been the lesson learned that many think it has. Shephard's book is this needful corrective.
June 30, 2025
I was really disappointed with this read. I went into this hoping for new information on the Watergate scandal, but really read a book about a friend pointing the finger at other players in the game. Corruption is bad, and everyone should have been handed their equal punishment but we can also acknowledge that Nixon had a part as well. Maybe I'm too young 🤷🏾♀️, or I can also hold space for the good he did and see that there was harm with his actions
September 17, 2020
As paranoid as it is partisan, there is clearly no intention to tell the story of watergate. The author spends so much time complaining about the "liberal elites" that he hardly has time to explain what was actually going on.
September 18, 2020
As someone who was born way after Watergate and knows practically nothing about it, I found this book informative about the was the court hearings went. Now it makes more sense why the Trump administration and media compared the Russian collusion hoax to Watergate.
January 26, 2022
One of the most extraordinary books I have ever read. It will change everything you ever thought about the Watergate Scandal and it certainly will reframe who you thought the good guys and bad guys were. I highly recommend this book.
January 15, 2020
A timely testament of a true observer that reveals Lady Justice is a good ol' boy peeking through her blindfold.
January 28, 2021
7 out of 10
Valuable insights but heavy handed in its conservative bias, so keep that in mind and take with a grain of salt.
Valuable insights but heavy handed in its conservative bias, so keep that in mind and take with a grain of salt.
January 29, 2022
If a zero star option was available I’d have given it that.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews