Impeached: The Trial of President Andrew Johnson and the Fight for Lincoln's Legacy

Impeached- Well done!!

Impeached by David O. Stewart

Impeached is a timely addition to the many books published because of the bicentennial celebration of the birth of President Lincoln. I read several of the Lincoln books and they were very good. Impeached is better because it concentrates on the first few years after Lincoln's death, a period that has been ignored in history books. President Johnson's interpretations of Lincoln's post Civil War policies and the Congress's interpretation form the basis of the political conflict.

The personalities involved, like Thaddeus Stevens, Johnson himself, U.S. Grant, and some of the lesser known political manipulators are fascinating. After reading this book I gained a better understanding and an appreciation for the 'Radical Republicans'. I do not necessarily agree with the impeachment but I do agree that the treatment of the Freedmen in the South immediately following the war was deplorable. Johnson's stance against the political reconstruction of the South and the horrible violence his views allowed or possibly precipitated did justify impeachment. However, the impeachment articles were so poorly written that the senatorial moderates could not vote for them, unfortunately.

I could go on discussing these issues and that is why Impeached is such a good book. Mr. Stewart's book is well written and kept me up late at night reading more and more. Read it!!

1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

Impeachment: Noble civic exercise ... or gutter politics?

[[ASIN:0974478539 To Love Mercy]]

This terrific book shines a light on a dank corner of American history, where sitting senators trade impeachment votes for cold cash, lucrative jobs and other, seamier favors ... members of Congress attack one another with canes in the hallowed halls ... an alluring 19-year-old sculptress turns politicians' heads ...and a leader of the House attempts a power-grab that, by any standard, is stunning in its audacity.

The author, a top Washington lawyer who clerked for Supreme Court Justice Powell and defended the impeachment of a Mississippi judge, has a novelist's way of telling this juicy story. I'm from Chicago so I'm used to dirty politics. Gov. Rod Blagojevich's alleged attempt to auction Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat to the highest bidder was only the most recent example of the towering political chutzpah for which my home state is (in)famous. But even the crookedest West Side alderman might blush at the shenanigans attendant on President Andrew Johnson's impeachment and trial.

They just don't make impeachments like they used to. Talk about chutzpah.

[The reviewer is author of the award-winning novel TO LOVE MERCY]

1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

excellent, well-written book

After reading a book on Texas Reconstruction after Civil War, this book explained to me some of the background for the experience in Texas.

"Impeached"

Very informative, informs the reader of how Andrew Johnson was a "closet pro-slaver" ; and of how he & his administration sought to reverse the gains of the Union in "the Civil War." Also, shows how Andrew Johnson was in the pantheon of ineffective presidents: Tyler; Pierce; Buchanan; Harding; Coolidge; Hoover; Carter & Bushes I & II.

0 out of 3 people found this review helpful.

Why don't I like this book?

David Stewart is an excellent writer, who displays his talent in this book. He has the ability to present what is often nothing more than speeches and meetings in a fresh and readable manner. A lawyer, who has handled impeachment cases, he uses this experience and training to good effect. He makes both the issues and legalize understandable and interesting. This is no small feat, as impeachments can be very political while requiring a legal foundation. The author manages to establish the legal and political reasons behind this impeachment as we move through all the maneuvering by both sides.
The author's sympathies are with Congressional Reconstruction and he clearly favors impeaching President Johnson. For the majority of the book he tries to avoid a "soapbox" approach. This falls apart in the last fifty pages as an agenda emerges. At this point, it makes little difference in the narration but I found the switch unsettling.
In many ways, this is bad guys vs. worse guys, with the reader deciding who is who. Neither the Radicals in congress nor the President tried to avoid a confrontation. The positions of the two sides were not compatible and comprise was all but impossible. The book has a good history of the confrontations between the President, Congress, the defeated South and the victorious North. All of this is plays out in the shadow of U.S. Grant, who everyone is expects to be President in 1868.
Why don't I like this book?
First, the author's sources are questionable. For much of the chapters on bribing senators, he uses the Butler hearings as a source. All of the bribery information is presented as established fact. However, in the chapter on the hearings, the author admits the hearings established nothing, no one admitted anything and Butler seemed unwilling to push the issue. This undercuts several previous chapters in this book and weakens most of his conclusions.
Many of the sources are contemporary works by authors that he agrees with. Many historians rate some of these books questionable, at best.
Second, the author has not properly footnoted. There are no footnote numbers on the pages. At the end of the book is a list of footnotes for each page. I spent as much time trying to determine which statement went with the source as I did reading the book. The author makes a number of assertions about Grant's role, Seward's actions and Sherman's political connections that need detailed primary sources. This lack presents a major problem for me.
Since the author makes statements about Grant, Seward and Ross that are on the edges of accepted history, solid contemporary sources properly footnoted seem required.
Lastly, the combination of questionable sources, lack of footnotes and sympathy for one side brings into question much of his work. I do not wish to imply that the author is lying but I worry he is spinning.
While very well written and persuasive, I have serious reservations about what the author says. However, this will be a very popular book and fits into the Emancipation Tradition School of the American Civil War history.

0 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

No text was provided for this review.

No text was provided for this review.

No text was provided for this review.

No text was provided for this review.

No text was provided for this review.