Before Trump there was Spiro Agnew


Book Review: Bag Man: The Wild Crimes, Audacious Cover-Up & Spectacular Downfall of a Brazen Crook in the White House by Rachel Maddow and Michael Yarvitz


The scorched-earth battle plan for any corrupt officeholder:

Attack the investigation as a witch hunt.

Obstruct it behind the scenes.

Attack individual investigators in personal terms.

Attack the credibility of the Justice Department itself. 

Attack the media informing Americans about the case. 

Carlos Lozada, non-fiction book critic for the Washington Post and author of What Were We Thinking: A Brief Intellectual History of the Trump Era, has written about Trump books that aren’t really Trump books. These are the books that help us understand the Trump era, but aren’t directly about Trump or his administration. Bag Man can be added to the list of non-Trump books because it helps us understand two things about Trump by telling the overlooked story of former Vice President Spiro Agnew’s fall from grace: 1) The origins of the recurrent Trump legal question: Can a sitting president be indicted? 2) The tactics Trump has used to discredit investigations into his potential criminal behavior. 

Much comparison has been drawn between Richard Nixon and Trump. But as Rachel Maddow and Michael Yarvitz show in Bag Man, it’s well-worth a look at the striking similarities between Agnew and Trump. And while Trump’s name is not mentioned in Bag Man until the very last chapter, there are innuendos throughout. It turns out the entire Nixon era was like the pre-game show to the Trump presidency. And Agnew, who has been cast as a bit player in the larger story of Nixon’s time in office, actually played an important part. 

In 1973, at the beginning of Nixon’s second term, three young Assistant U.S. Attorneys in Baltimore County were tasked with sniffing out and prosecuting the corruption that was rampant in Maryland in the early 1970s. The three ambitious prosecutors, Barney Skolnik, Tim Baker, and Ron Liebman, along with IRS agents, were looking at architecture and engineering firm executives who made suspiciously large cash withdrawals from their banks. By following the money trail they uncovered that the cash “was finding its way into pockets of local elected officials who awarded construction contracts.” 

The investigation unexpectedly led the prosecutors directly to Vice President Spiro Agnew who had been involved in bribery schemes not only during his days as Baltimore County Executive and Maryland Governor, but Agnew was still actively breaking the law from his position inside the White House. 

What started out as a quiet investigation into Agnew quickly found its way into the national news media — one of Agnew’s favorite enemies. Agnew had risen in national politics while disparaging and provoking skepticism of the media. 

“[H]e pitted average Americans against the “elite” newsmen in New York and Washington who, he ominously noted, ‘wield a free hand in selecting, presenting, and interpreting the great issues of our nation.’” 

“These newsmen, Agnew asserted, were subtly injecting their own bias into each report: “A raised eyebrow, an inflection of the voice, a caustic remark dropped in the middle of a broadcast can raise doubts in a million minds about the veracity of a public official or the wisdom of a government policy.”

So when the media had a damaging story about Agnew’s alleged criminal activity, he had already greased the wheels of distrust of the media in the minds of his supporters. 

Sound familiar? 

Agnew’s legal drama played out at the same time Watergate was heating up, so it makes sense that the Agnew scandal has been overlooked. And it’s obvious why Maddow and Yarvitz wanted to draw attention to Agnew’s downfall now. The parallels between Agnew and Trump are staggering. Reading about Agnew was eerily similar to reading about Trump. 

“He had created his own made-for-television moment to publicly browbeat his opposition. This guy knew how to use television, and without breaking a sweat.”

“His default setting was attack mode. He cheerfully derided liberals, the establishment, ivory-tower professors, and the press.”

One more…

“He portrayed the press itself as one of his chief adversaries, encouraging crowds at his events to shows of open hostility toward journalists. He threatened reporters covering his case with subpoenas and even jail time.” 

It was striking how Agnew had spent his years in national politics lambasting the media, and then used the media as the reason he shouldn’t be held accountable for his crimes. In court Agnew said, “I am concerned that intense media interest in the case would distract public attention from important national problems to the country’s detriment.” So in essence he was blaming the media for exposing his corruption and "distracting" (versus informing) Americans by putting a spotlight on a criminal VP. 

Agnew made a plea bargain with the feds that sheltered him from jail time and the American public from him ascending to the presidency after Nixon’s resignation. It was interesting (and infuriating) to read how the plea deal came about; how a man federal prosecutors believed they had a strong case against evaded real justice. It was also enlightening to learn about the origins of that now infamous Department of Justice rule that says you can’t indict a sitting president. 

I’m not sure if it’s more comforting or disturbing to know that we’ve had a criminal in the White House before and the country survived it without much damage to our institutions. Oddly comforting, definitely disturbing, and ultimately disgusting how those select few who serve in the highest offices of the U.S. Government receive a “get-out-of-jail-free-card” when they betray the public trust. And their bad behavior is often excused by the very people they were entrusted to serve. 

My Rating: 5/5

Bag Man: The Wild Crimes, Audacious Cover-Up & Spectacular Downfall of a Brazen Crook in the White House By Rachel Maddow and Michael Yarvitz, Crown. 304 pp. Published December 8, 2020. (Book Link)



Comments

Popular Posts