Give veteran commentator Jacob Weisberg (early-60s) this much credit: he sticks to a subject, mostly the failings of George W. Bush, and doesn’t let go. I’d assume it’s a fairly lucrative corner, starting with the popular, if often inane “Bushisms” that he penned for Slate in the early-21st century (later collected in a short book), skipping along in 2008 with The Tragedy of George W. Bush. (He also wrote a book with Bill Clinton’s Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, whose policies helped lead to the 2008 financial crisis.) I doubt he thought it was a “tragedy,” but rather a fun, if slim, book to write. He’s now Executive Chair of Puskin Industries, an “audio content” company he founded with the insufferable Malcolm Gladwell in 2018. It goes without saying that Weisberg despises Donald Trump, but unlike so many in his social circles, at least in print, he’s not overly obnoxious about it. Maybe that’s because unlike former Republicans and neocons such as Bill Kristol, David Frum, Joe Walsh and David Brooks, Weisberg never made it a secret that he was a very partisan Democrat.
The New Yorker published a long story about Bush by Weisberg on September 1st—drawn from “Profiles in Cowardice: A Study of Collaboration in the Trump Era” (an unsubtle reference to JFK’s Profiles In Courage from 1956—that wasn’t uninteresting, probably because I hadn’t seen, or sought out, the author’s byline recently). “George W. Bush’s Code Of Silence” is Weisberg’s update on his cash cow (or one of them), and although mostly very critical, he does slip in a few positive notes about the still-unpopular 43rd U.S. President.
Weisberg begins with Jeb Bush’s short campaign for the GOP presidential nomination in 2016—the mainstream media anointed Jeb the front-runner because of his financial advantage over his rivals and name recognition; “horserace” journalists are such suckers—and Trump’s constant hectoring of the two-term Florida governor. It was an odd, if short campaign: I never thought Jeb had a shot because it was apparent he was going through the motions—the family business—and never presented a compelling rationale for his candidacy (not unlike Teddy Kennedy in 1980). What really struck me was that Jeb never excoriated Trump after the latter’s insults in advertisements and debates, and as I wrote at the time, had Jeb walked over to Trump on the debate stage and punched him in the kisser, the 2016 election might’ve been different. Although unprecedented behavior—politics was marginally different then—I think it would’ve instantly saved his sagging campaign, seen as a righteous action taken against an unpopular bully. And it would’ve been classic television. Meanwhile, has anyone heard a word about Jeb Bush recently? Not me.
Weisberg makes an argument about why George W. Bush has mostly kept his own counsel about Trump’s tumultuous two terms, debunking the former president’s stated belief that White House successors shouldn’t be criticized, for the sake of integrity. The author notes that Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama haven’t been shy about speaking out, but Bush can’t be bothered, preferring to paint portraits in Texas and not seeking media attention.
Weisberg includes a dig at the media’s “best ex-president” Jimmy Carter: “Carter kept up a more or less running commentary on his successors, including Bill Clinton, whom he accused of ‘not being truthful’ to a grand jury in in the Paula Jones case, and… Bush, whom he continually denounced… and in 2007, said that ‘as far as the adverse impact on the nation around the world, this administration has been the worst in history.’” Carter, unlike John Kerry, Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton and Weisberg, didn’t support the Iraq War in 2003.
According to anonymous “friends and advisers,” Bush won’t criticize Trump because he fears the President’s vindictiveness, adding that Bush is worried that “Trump-inspired fanatics” could threaten his two daughters Jenna and Barbara, twins who are 44. That’s fishy, since they’re grown women, and Barack and Michelle Obama haven’t expressed similar concerns. Weisberg says, “Bush has become paralyzed by concern for his historical reputation”—despite Bush’s insistence that he “doesn’t worry about how history might judge him”—citing his paintings championing immigration, a memoir and setting up “institutions that would promote his legacy.” Doesn’t every ex-president seek wealth, concentrate on their library and release self-serving memoirs?
Bush is now 80: although I haven’t spoken to anonymous “friends and advisers,” my guess is that he doesn’t worry about his historical standing too much; he left an unpopular leader, is still unpopular (although last week’s 25th anniversary of 9/11 softened his image a touch) and maybe thinks a more conservative league of historians will emerge in the next decade or so.
It could be that Weisberg’s inclusion of Bush in Profiles In Cowardice is, he feels, his last opportunity to milk his disdain (and amusement) for the former president. He complains that had Bush urged Republicans to vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016, and Kamala Harris eight years later, it might’ve helped spare the country from Trump. He concludes: “This post-Presidential abdication stands as the final, damning failure of the Bush presidency. A leader who framed politics around a straightforward, Christian morality of right and wrong and saw evil and failed to call it out.
That’s too hyperbolic (but it is Weisberg’s “brand”) for me. The author lauds Dick Cheney and his daughter Liz for their post-J6 denunciations of Trump—although he disparages Cheney’s vice-presidency—who “called out evil.” Some also say that Obama was evil, but that’s not Weisberg’s beat.
—Follow Russ Smith on Twitter: @MUGGER2023