Rehash of In the President's Secret Service
347092
The First Family Detail is a mix of personal anecdotes about Presidential families and their relationships with their protective details, operational Secret Service specifics, and tales of mismanagement at the Executive level. Though I am interested in all these topics and much of the information in this book is pretty fascinating, I did find it to be mostly a rehash of In the Presidents Secret Service (which I read and liked).

Secret Service agents are uniquely positioned to collect a plethora of dirt on their protectees, expose hypocrisies in their private versus public personnas, and really see into their characters. Im definitely a sucker for some scandalous stories about politicians personal lives and The First Family Detail did give me a good dose of these. The problem is that I was having deja vu while reading most of them. Many of the older stories were included in In the Presidents Secret Service and many of the juicy new anecdotes had already been reported by the media (i.e. Bill Clinton has a mistress in Chappaqua who doesnt have to be screened by the Secret Service).

The operational details of how the Secret Service does their job made for some tedious reading at times. And, I wonder how Kessler was able to divulge so many of these details to the public. I felt like a would-be assassin could learn a lot about Secret Service tactics and weak spots from reading this book. Isnt that dangerous?!

Kessler is extremely critical of Secret Service upper management and I was interested in the sections about the recent slide in standards. He tells of many instances of management ordering agents to cut corners in their protection details and in providing security for events. He also tells of Secret Service upper management catering to political aides at the expense of the Presidents and other top politicians safety. On the flip side, Kessler praises the rank and file agents as people who are highly ethical and dedicated to their mission of keeping the President and his family safe. He indicates they are mostly disgusted with upper management and that morale among agents is at historic lows. This piece became especially intriguing upon the Head of the Secret Service, Julia Piersons, resignation after an armed intruder waltzed unimpeded through the White House front door.

If you're interested in how the Secret Service works and behind the scenes stories about high ranking politiciansand, if you haven't already read In the Presidents Secret Service, then I do recommend you read this book. Otherwise, its probably not for you.

For more review, check out my blog, Sarah's Book Shelves.
4265192
There is no doubt Buddy Cianci is an interesting figure worth reading about. However, this book seems at many times to be not much more than the rehashing of newspaper articles written by the writer or his colleagues. All the chapters have snappy introductions, or "ledes," as journalists say, and tend thereafter to be very repetitive in their descriptions of the mayor.

I did not mind purchasing the book, as Cianci is an interesting figure to know about, but I found myself skimming over sentences and sections much more often than I like. Not recommended.
4857046
The only thing new is the confirmation that Woodward revels in taking cheap personal shots at Nixon, using Butterfield's notes and memories.  According to the book, it was wrong (even sick) for Nixon to want to control who attended Whitehouse events, and it was abnormal for Nixon to have an interest in young secretaries wearing mini-skirts (two chapters on this alone).  I was surprised that Butterfield admits lying to the Watergate investigators about how he got his job, by saying Halderman recruited him.  He also admits he hated Nixon--perhaps the most interesting revelation. Are Butterfield's possibly biased recollections actually worthy of a Woodward book?
I highly recommend John Dean's recent book that summarizes the tapes.  It is a masterpiece.  Perhaps Woodward turned this out quickly to compete with Dean.
3354560
I actually agree that the Clintons are crooks.  But there are plenty of good anti-Clinton broadsides coming out now. A lot of this book is Dinesh trying to explain away his legal problems and deny that he did anything wrong. It's really unconvincing and makes him look weak, like he's unable to either admit he was wrong, as the courts claim, or really say that he doesn't regret a thing and would do it all again. Instead it's a lukewarm inconsistent mix of bragging about certain parts of the exploit where he thinks he stood up for himself, like he's about to start belting out "My Way", and other parts he's just whining about the cops and the judge picking on him, like any small time crook.
2417485
For a short book, I found this very repetitive.  If you only have time to read the conclusion, that does sum up the prior 170 pages pretty well - if you are curious, go back and read the rest.  While author does make some very good points, the book predictably turns into another Bush-bash, so reader beware.  In all fairness, he does state that America's political and military problems stem back from the time that unrealistic expectations were first set going back several presidencies, but the his focus of blame rests primarily with the military policies of George W. Bush.  The revised Afterward of the book spoke of Obama's "inteligence, vigor, eloquence, cool persona, and compelling personal story."  Will he be the one who is able to change the course?  Time will tell, but I think his inexperience, coupled with the fact that he has appointed what the author describes as "establishment figures, utterly conventional in their outlook" makes the prognosis rather bleak.  Over a year since this book has been written, it appears that they are more focused on their global celebrity, scrambling to getting re-elected, printing money, hiding their heads in the sand, and not on fixing the problems that are escalating at warp speed in their own backyard.  The author himself states that "Obama will run the risk of seeing his presidency hijacked ... Obama will face the prospect of Bush's wars, especially the war in Afghanistan, becoming his own.  And the likelihood of his making good on his promise of change will diminish accordingly."  Interesting that the author was already excusing Obama's lack of success only 4 days into his presidency.  Wonder what the author would say at this point in time.  Has Obama broken with the traditional blame game and stepped up to the plate to take fiscal, military and political responsiblility for the course of this country?  I have my own opinion, which I will not share here, but that is the real crux of the question, and what I believe was the author's call to action.
2476530
In addition to providing some objective insight into how the Secret Service works, the author has opted to create a polemic about the failures of organizational culture and management in the USSS, which is fine--these are important issues that need to be addressed. Yet Kessler ends up repeating same issues again and again to the point where the book suffers as a whole. The author understandably wants to take a position and make a stand, to create a thesis for the reader to follow. As a reader I would have preferred less of the author's personal opinion and more in the way of facts. On the plus side, it is a surprisingly quick read. Too quick, really, as the author's lack of hard material leads to a book that suffers from repetition and diatribe.  Grammatical problems like misplaced modifiers are annoying too. But worse than that is the racism at the end of Chapter 29. Here, the author jumps to a fallacious conclusion, assuming that because there are a large proportion of African Americans in management positions that "reverse discrimination" is taking place. The cringe-worthy term "reverse discrimination" highlights the author's complete lack of awareness of what discrimination actually is--or even that the author has a problem with large numbers of minorities in positions of power. The presence of large numbers of minorities in positions of power is a good thing. So why does the author frame this as being problematic? When the wrong people receive promotions, it is indicative of cronyism, yes, but "reverse discrimination"? Hardly. It is deeply disturbing the the author and editors failed to question their assumptions or have any awareness that what they are saying does harm. I would rate the book more harshly on this account, but I did enjoy the way the author mingles gossip about the protectees with information about how protective services work. I only wish that the book was less of a personal rant and more about what a protective detail entails.
3644066
Well this book as has been said before has grammer and typing mistakes but thats not very important. The content is and to be honest this book practillay links eveyything in history to secret groups and societies. I believe that there is a secret group who run the show but this is taking it to a rediculious level for example he says that Jmaludin Afghani was a British agent which is rubbish because he did a hell of alot agains the British and Ghandi even said that Jamaludin Afghani was like an inspiration becase he preached freedom from imperialists. And unbelievably he links Jamaludin Afghani with the Nazis which is rediculios. Jamaludin even went to Paris and made his own newspaper which had an anti imprialist anti British agenda and then he says that he was an secret British agent.
Im verys surprised he didn't mention Lawerence of Arabi who actually was a British agent and was responsible for the defeat of the Ottoman empire by the British.
There is a bibliography in the back and half of his sources are Wikipedia which any real historion would not use as it is unreliable information. I personally have found errors init when i have be serching it for other things. I know about the Rokkefelers and JP Morgan and these issues but he manages to say that the big financial and political names of today have secret knowledge which has been passed down from 3000 years ago and every king and empire has been related to them somehow.
My advice is to believe what ever it says in the book because there are innacuracies, thank you.
4107080
This is a book about the creation, by renegade government employees, of a unit of secret police in the US. Unfortunately, while the secret police manufacture evidence, and kill people without trial, the forces of good turn around and do the same damned thing.  I admit it might seem incredible, but I think the best way to take down renegade units of the government would be to do it with loyal units. If anyone just covers it up, by whatever means, justice is not served properly.

The first 50 pages of the book don't draw you in very well, and the last 50 are very disappointing; the pretexts are moderately unbelievable, and we are being set up the whole book to care for a character, who never does seem to have a good plan, only to see him die toward the end.
1301856
More Clinton fawning  drivel. It's the fault of Bill/Robby Mook/Jim Comey/sexists/ blah blah blah. The wikileaks are glossed over as Russian driven, the contents which offended just about every demographic in the country- "rednecks" "white trash" "backwards Evangelicals" are completely omitted, as are the promises to "raise taxes on the middle class" and "put coal miners out of work". No word of the millions taken in the Clinton Foundation pay to play scheme, or getting the debate questions in advance. The Benghazi hearings? Just a slight bump in the road, never mind she and Susan Rice lied through their teeth at the time.  Don't waste your money- you can get the same tripe from the spin Hilliary and Company and their friends in the "news" media put out after the election.
4796112
introduced to people who work/worked in white house......otherwise mainly a re-hash of previously told stories of the families....save your/go to library
3909493
I'm somewhat puzzled by both the 5 star reviews and the 1 star reviews.  As others have noted, this is pretty much a gossipy narrative that provides details on how the First Families behaved "off camera", as well as some general info on Service history and agent training.  The book did not, as some have implied, reveal any secrets that would endanger current protective measures.  What the author did do was repeat throughout the book his complaint (the same complaint) on how the Secret Service is currently managed.  A chapter covering the current short comings of how agents are treated and lapses in security measures would have been fine; however, Kessler kept repeating his issues with the management over and over to the point of distraction.
4896735
I have read and enjoyed every one of Stephe Coonts'es Jake Grafton novels, as well as others such as Saucer.  I bought this one anticipating another enjoyable thriller.  What I got instead was a barely-disguised ultra-right wing political fantasy.  Coonts places his story in the present.  The President is the first black man elected to the Presidency, and his name is Barry Soetero (which was what Barack Obama went by for a time as a young child).  The President's wife is named Mickey.  The leading candidate for the Democratic nomination for the Presidency is named Claire Hinton.  This is all less subtle than the 1960s satirical play MacBird.  The plot is that, using as an excuse some terrorist attacks by Islamic radicals allowed into the country as refugees by the President's order, he declares martial law, suspends habeas corpus, dismisses Congress, and rules as a dictator.  Of course one of his initial acts is to arrest all of his political opponents, or perceived opponents, including named real people such as Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly, a lot of the Congress, and of course hero Jake Grafton, at the outset head of the CIA but shortly thereafter a prisoner in a concentration camp in West Virginia.  The Obama figure, who of course has a signature healthcare law named after him, next orders that all guns in private hands must be confiscated.  Was there any ultra-right wing paranoid fantasy claim that I missed mentioning?  Let's see--the President likely wasn't born in the US; he might have been a gay prostitute to pay for drugs when he was young (yes, both of those are in the plot).

Part of the novel involves Grafton's favorite criminal-turned-CIA agent Tommy Carmellini breaking him and others out of the concentration camp.  Another part involves the secession of multiple states, started (of course) by Texas, and the breakdown of law and order across the country as what amounts to a race war erupts in the cities (riots, looting, and fires all done by people of color) and as brave Texas patriots fight the US military to preserve free Texas.

I was distressed to learn that a favorite author harbors such crazy fantasies.  I am distressed to read here on Amazon a favorable review from an up-to-now respected historian (Barrett Tillman).  It should distress all reasonable people to see how many comments here on Amazon not only applaud the book, and seemingly regard it as prophecy and a true account of the Obama administration, but who do so with intemperate language.

A few readers will know that among the works of the once-famous American novelist Jack London, there is a novel called "The Iron Heel", which is an account of a fictional class war in the United States culminating in a successful socialist revolution.  Except among a few historians of the period, this left-wing fantasy novel (which was not well written, in my view) has deservedly been forgotten.  Perhaps we as a nation, and Mr Coonts as an author, can hope that Liberty's Last Stand suffers a rapid and equally thorough disappearance into oblivion.  I advise any reader not looking to confirm all of his or her anti-Obama fantasies to avoid this mess.
1145945
The content was very interesting, especially the revelations about the treatment of the Secret Service agents by President Johnson and the abysmal treatment of those agents and military personnel by Hillary Clinton. It was interesting to note, in contrast, how well they were treated by President Reagan. Class tells. The downside of this book, as other reviewers have noted, is that it is poorly organized. Overall, for me, the content far outweighed the poor organization and occasional repetition.
304597
Four outcasts form The Camel Club, a team that keeps an eye on the government so that it can discover the "truth". The club is led by Oliver Stone - not the director but a former CIA assassin who has taken the movie director's name. Stone literally stakes out the White House and watches who comes and goes. Reuben Rhodes is a former soldier and DIA member who works in a warehouse. Caleb Shaw works for the Library of Congress and often dresses like he was in the 19th century. The last member is Milton Farb, a computer genius with obsessive compulsive disorder.

These four witness a murder of a government agent on Theodore Roosevelt Island, D.C. area national park. When it looks like the murder is going to be treated as a suicide, the club swings into action with the support of a friendly Secret Service agent and discovers a conspiracy that was even larger than they could have imagined that extends all of the way into the White House itself.

I listened to this book as an abridged audiobook. The unabridged audiobook (read by a different reader) lasted 16 hours and 10 minutes. My abridged version, read by two-time Tony Award-winning actor James Naughton lasted a mere 5 hours and 39 minutes, making it almost exactly one-third the length of the unabridged version. Taking into account that different readers can read at different paces, this abridged version is still missing about two-thirds of the book - and it shows.

The abridged version introduces characters with little or no explanation (the Reuben Rhodes character gets the short shrift, for sure) and the plot sometimes jumps forward in a herky-jerky fashion. At first, I thought it was because the book was poorly written but then I finally realized that it was abridged after I read the fine print on the back of the box (it is not disclosed anywhere else). Naughton did a solid job as the reader, but I cannot recommend his abridged version. I have not listened to the unabridged version, but it has to be better than the abridged version.
4355960
Even if only half of this book is truthful, it is very scary that such an incompetent person is in the White House. Hiring only the best people has become such a joke, most of the people spoken about in the book are no longer in the White House, that says a lot about the Pres.
2952535
An easy read, the book containing many enlightening stories about Presidents & Vice Presidents. During the Reagan years we had the theory of "trickle down economics", I have asked the question, what trickles up? We see it portrayed here. Arrogance, greed, entitlement. Although certain individuals are portrayed as being "nice" Laura Bush for example, and her husband was thoughtful, this doesn't naturally correlate to competence in the position. (I think of the Clintons and Dick  Cheney)  I was appalled at the portrayal of Joe Biden and his disregard for frugality knowing some of his mandates were to do just that.

All in all I'm glad I read this book, also glad he's not running for President. Kessler did a fine job and outlined quite clearly the classic ailment within the body politic whereby the Secret Service Management are but a symptom of a greater malaise. The malaise being one of lack of accountability and proper management. The political system has been subjugated by the monied vested interest groups and hence politicians have lost integrity and their moral compass. I'd love to know what the Secret Service think of Bernie Sanders?
2194419
This is a bit of a rehash of many things I am familiar with including some basics in current thinking about what motivates people to do things against their own personal interest  like support policies that feed money to the top one percent at the expense of everyone else. The theme is that policy since at least Reagans administration has loosened up restrictions and created new ones that all support those with the capital to make still more capital. Thinking that the trickledown theory would raise all boats this process actually allowed rent seekers to take money from others instead of grow the economy. So the top one percent are gaining wealth at the expense of the 99 percent. As usual, I am thinking Piketty here, the book is long on the deplorable reasons we are in the situation we are now and short on the possible solutions. Two possibilities are offered. The first the same as Piketty (Capital), and that is assuming people wise up, realize they have been duped and vote to change things. Recognizing this is not likely, the other possibility is that the top one percent realize their best interest is not being served by the divide we have now and once enlightened they use their economic power to change things  but taxing themselves more and changing the rules so they cant keep taking money from others. So, on the whole, a depressing read.