The Terror Presidency: Law and Judgment Inside the Bush Administration

An informative read. If you are interested in how GTMO, CIA black sites, "enhanced interrogations", Abu Ghraib, etc. came to be this a good book to read. While I may not always agree with some of Goldsmith's opinions this is a good look at what went on in the White House and how some of these policies came about and the reasoning behind them.

This guy is full of it. The boogeyman in his book is David Addington, V.P. Cheney's Chief of Staff. The conflict of the two arose out of the legal issues surrounding the war on terror. Tough calls had to be made, and Goldsmith post hoc demonizes the guy for disagreeing with him. Ironically, he also admits periodically that these were tough calls, and that it was reasonable to err on the side of caution to protect American lives.

The bottom line is this book is all about the author patting himself on the back and trying to save face with his liberal colleagues at Harvard Law. Don't waste your time on this transparent book.

Very worthwhile reading, though not always for the reasons Goldsmith may have intended. Goldsmith deserves a great deal of credit for standing up to the worst abuses of the Bush administration. But it seems to me he also shares some of the blame for discrediting the value and authority of international agreements like the Geneva Conventions by popularizing the concept of "lawfare"; much of the book is best read, I think, as a hastily constructed 2d line of defense of executive authority and supremacy, now that the first line has been overrun. Goldsmith also veers back and forth between recognizing the problem -- secretive decisionmaking -- and not recognizing what that means: bad faith, consciousness of guilt, and, frankly, war crimes.

A relatively short book written by the former head of the Office of Lega Counsel. The book aims to inform the public about and provide an understanding about why the White House under this current administration has acted unilaterally giving new meaning to the term "unitary executive." Ultimately, through a comparison to the Lincoln and Roosevelt administrations, Goldsmith seems to disapprove of the Bush administration's refusal to go to Congress for support and work in almost complete secrecy.

This book describes the collision between the author, who was chief counsel to the Justice Department, and the Bush-Cheny White House as they attempted to expand the powers of the presidency during the Iraq war. The author's account begs the question, Did national security require extra-legal presdiental action, or was this attempted expansion of presidential powers based in ideology and opportunity?

Scary to consider the ironies and hypocrisies - indeed, tragedy - of an administration so bound up in defending the rule of law that it ends up being one of the most lawless administrations in the country's history. This is that story from the inside.

just started this today----like it so far--this guy was in the middle of high-jacked constitutional situation going on right now---hopefully I'll learn some more, without making myself puke in disgust of what is happening to our country

Good book for insight into the life of a govt lawyer...

The author was interviewed on Bill Moyer's Journal. Itunes has the podcast of Sept 7,2007. The author relates the shaky legal ground the decisions to torture were based on and the problems that created for him while he was in government.

I haven't read it yet, but I know key parts. The writer is a staunch conservative lawyer who was Head of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department (pre-Gonzales) which pretty much made him the President's Lawyer. There is no one better to depict the ludricous "legal" maneuvering of the Bush Presidency and to explain just how far they were willing to go to suspend "habeas corpus" and legalize torture on this man's watch.