As strange as it might sound, there is a certain freedom in being totally screwed, in knowing you will be attacked no matter what you do. Half the co
As strange as it might sound, there is a certain freedom in being totally screwed, in knowing you will be attacked no matter what you do. Half the country will howl either way, so tune out the critics and let only the facts and the law dictate which half. At the time, of course, it never occurred to me that our decisions could outrage both halves.
For the truth that of, look no farther than these reviews. "I'm completely unbiased, but this is sanctimonious drivel," from both sides (slightly paraphrased amalgamation). Lord, help us all.
You already have an opinion on Comey, so let's not even really talk about the content specifics. There are two main concerns when reading an autobiography. One is "Can this person (or their ghostwriter) actually write?" and two is "Is this person's life interesting enough to spend time learning about?"
Yes to both.
Comey has a career as a lawyer, which both assuaged the worries that the writing might be poor, but also increased my worry that the writing would be bland and toneless. I needn't be concerned though. Comey is actually a really good writer (for a non-fiction book by a non-author.. work with me here).
Evil has an ordinary face. It laughs, it cries, it deflects, it rationalizes, it makes great pasta.
As to the question of if his life is interesting enough for a book, obviously it is. Just his last two years of life are good enough for a book. Add in his work against the mafia, his dead child, and his conflicts with the Bush administration over the Stellar Wind project, and there is a very compelling narrative to be told even without the recent disaster. I imagine almost anyone who has worked with three different Presidents has a compelling story.
Lest you be one of those reviewers who complains that this autobiography/memoir is actually an autobiography/memoir... let me point out to you that this is an autobiography/memoir. The book doesn't even hit 2016 until over half way through. This isn't (just) a book about Trump, though it does go in hard on that the last portion. We get to learn about his career path and family before getting to all of that. At its core, this is a book about ethics and leadership.
As the opening quote suggests, there is a lot in here for Republicans to point at and revile. And there is a good amount for Democrats to hate. But we knew that going in, right?
That distracted me slightly because I immediately began wondering why his wife would think there was any chance, even a small one, that he had been with prostitutes urinating on each other in Moscow. For all my flaws, there is a zero percent chance—literally absolute zero—that Patrice would credit an allegation that I was with hookers peeing on each other in Moscow. She would laugh at the very suggestion.
The primary issue I have with this book, which isn't a real issue, is that the later portion of the book speaks of events that feel very fresh. There are events in this book up to June 2017, so by the end, we are very much into a realm where the reader remembers all of this happening and is being told a story they feel they already know, at least in part. It's not a problem, but it necessarily causes later portions of the book to feel as if they are a different tone than the first half. I don't think the tone actually changes at all, but there is a good chance that anyone reading this book during 2018 has strong opinions one way or the other about the political events of 2016-17, which causes an interesting disconnect between how the reader approaches the later half of the book verses the opening when it's all cool stories about mafia hitmen....more