John W. Dean - Worse Than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush

Copyright 2004 by John W. Dean

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages in a review.

Little, Brown and Company

Hachette Book Group

237 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10017

Visit our website at www.HachetteBookGroup.com www.twbookmark.com

www.twitter.com/littlebrown

First eBook Edition: March 2010

ISBN: 978-0-7595-1038-8

Warren G. Harding

Unmasking Deep Throat Historys Most Elusive News Source

The Rehnquist Choice: The Untold Story of the Nixon Appointment That Redefined the Supreme Court

Lost Honor

Blind Ambition: The White House Years

Secrecy the first refuge of incompetents must be at bare minimum in a democratic society, for a fully informed public is the basis of self-government. Those elected or appointed to positions of executive authority must recognize that government, in a democracy, cannot be wiser than the people.

House Committee on Government Operations, 1960 Report

George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney have created the most secretive presidency of my lifetime. Their secrecy is far worse than during Watergate, and it bodes even more serious consequences. Their secrecy is extreme not merely unjustified and excessive but obsessive. It has created a White House that hides its presidents weaknesses as well as its vice presidents strengths. It has given us a presidency that operates on hidden agendas. To protect their secrets, Bush and Cheney dissemble as a matter of policy. In fact, the Bush-Cheney presidency is strikingly Nixonian, only with regard to secrecy far worse (and no one will ever successfully accuse me of being a Nixon apologist). Dick Cheney, who runs his own secret governmental operations, openly declares that he wants to turn the clock back to the pre-Watergate years a time of an unaccountable and extraconstitutional imperial presidency. To say that their secret presidency is undemocratic is an understatement.

Im anything but skittish about government, but I must say this administration is truly scary and, given the times we live in, frighteningly dangerous. This conclusion is not that of a political partisan, for those days are long behind me; rather, it is the finding of a concerned observer, with something of a distinct understanding and appreciation of the modern presidency.

I was initially astonished watching the Bush-Cheney presidency, So while I cant claim original authorship for the title, when my editor suggested it for this book, I could not deny that it describes perfectly what I have to say in more ways than I had anticipated.

This book began as an admonition, an approach both beware of Bush and Bush beware. Only ignorance or bliss, I figured at the time, could lead another president and White House to make the same kind of mistakes we made during Nixons presidency. As I proceeded, however, and the post-9/11 activities and operations of Bush and Cheney unfolded, it was evident that these were carefully calculated policies and plans. No longer was I writing a warning, but rather an indictment, for I could not write and publish fast enough to get in front of the abuses of power and the emerging ends-justify-the-means mentality, and even if I could have, it would not have made any difference, for they understood exactly what they were doing and why. Stated a bit differently, Ive been watching all the elements fall into place for two possible political catastrophes, one that will take the air out of the Bush-Cheney balloon and the other, far more disquieting, will take the air out of democracy. Allow me to explain.

To compare the Bush-Cheney presidency with Nixons tenure and Watergate and assert that it is worse than Watergate is not a charge to be made lightly. Nor do I. Watergate symbolizes totally unacceptable presidential behavior. Dictionary definitions of the term Watergate typically describe this unacceptable conduct as the abuse of presidential power, or high office, for political purposes. Watergate, of course, was a very messy presidential scandal and a political disaster for Nixon. Certainly no comparable scandal has occurred during the Bush-Cheney tenure at least not yet. Scandals have a way of smoldering before erupting, as has occurred with every major presidential scandal Teapot Dome, Watergate, Iran-Contra, and Laffaire Lewinsky. There are simply too many problems rumbling just below the surface of the Bush-Cheney presidency to avoid making the comparison.

Former attorney general (and later secretary of state) William Rogers once advised that the public should view excessive secrecy among government officials as parents view sudden quiet where youngsters are playing. It is a sign of trouble. Thus, undue secrecy not only is undemocratic, denying the public its right to know, but also schools scandal by concealing and protecting errors, excesses, and all manner of impropriety. And we have a presidency that seeks to control, if not suppress, everything.

Political pollster John Zogby tells us that Democrats are from Venus and Republicans are from Mars, and based on my examination of the Bush II White House vis--vis his predecessor, Im inclined to agree. On the other hand, the potential for a serious financial and/or power scandal, as I discovered, is quite real.

In addition, there is another state of affairs with the Bush-Cheney presidency that is worse than any scandal and far worse than Watergate. In General Tommy Frankss first interview as a civilian shortly after he departed as four-star head of Central Command, when discussing what he thought Americans should be thinking about concerning terrorism, he asked rhetorically, What is the worst thing that can happen? His answer is chilling. Franks has no doubt whatsoever that upon obtaining a weapon of mass destruction, a terrorist organization will use it. If that should happen, Franks believes the Western world may lose what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty weve seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment

I agree with General Franks, but I suspect for very different reasons. Watching the responses of Bush and Cheney to 9/11, their obsessive secrecy, their endless political manipulation and exploitation of 9/11, their blatant suppression of rights and liberties of foreigners, their taking our nation to its first preventive war as aggressors in Iraq, their distortion of intelligence gathering, their Nixon-like rationalizations, I realized that with the near certainty of a catastrophic terrorist attack against America one day we have the wrong leaders. Not because they are not able or well motivated or real Americans, as President Lyndon Johnson used to say for they are all those things. But they are also zealots who are convinced of their own wisdom, oblivious to not only what Americans think but the opinions of the entire world. Former Supreme Court justice Louis Brandeis once spoke of this problem: The greatest danger to liberty lurks in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. If the dreaded event that General Franks has raised occurs (and as I explain, this presidency may actually attract such an event), there is good reason to fear for the fabric of our Constitution.

It goes without saying that it would be best to have neither a scandal nor something far worse. There is, however, only one antidote: an end to the obsessive, unjustified, and disproportionate secrecy that defines the Bush-Cheney White House. In addressing these matters, I seek only to make the prima facie case, to show that these potential problems are very real, not fanciful concerns, and should not be ignored. In thinking about how best to set forth the disquieting circumstances, I selected the only form of discourse that seems fitting, a polemic.