All the President's Men

( 49 )


The full account of the Watergate scandal from the two Washington Post reporters who broke the story. This is “the work that brought down a presidency…perhaps the most influential piece of journalism in history” (Time, All-Time 100 Best Nonfiction Books).

This is the book that changed America. Published just two months before President Nixon’s resignation, All the President’s Men revealed the full scope of the Watergate scandal and introduced for the first time the mysterious ...

See more details below
Available through our Marketplace sellers and in stores.

Pick Up In Store Near You

Reserve and pick up in 60 minutes at your local store

Other sellers (Paperback)
  • All (179) from $1.99   
  • New (3) from $5.24   
  • Used (176) from $1.99   
Sort by
Page 1 of 1
Showing All
Note: Marketplace items are not eligible for any coupons and promotions
Seller since 2008

Feedback rating:



New — never opened or used in original packaging.

Like New — packaging may have been opened. A "Like New" item is suitable to give as a gift.

Very Good — may have minor signs of wear on packaging but item works perfectly and has no damage.

Good — item is in good condition but packaging may have signs of shelf wear/aging or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Acceptable — item is in working order but may show signs of wear such as scratches or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Used — An item that has been opened and may show signs of wear. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Refurbished — A used item that has been renewed or updated and verified to be in proper working condition. Not necessarily completed by the original manufacturer.

Publisher's Return - may have a remainder mark. Multiple copies are available.

Ships from: Westlake, OH

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
Seller since 2010

Feedback rating:


Condition: New
1994 Trade paperback 2nd ed. New. No dust jacket as issued. bright shiny brand new Trade paperback (US). Glued binding. 352 p. Contains: Illustrations. Audience: General/trade.

Ships from: Sloansville, NY

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Canadian
  • International
  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
  • Express, 48 States
  • Express (AK, HI)
Seller since 2009

Feedback rating:


Condition: New
Paper Back New

Ships from: Wichita, KS

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Canadian
  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
  • Express, 48 States
  • Express (AK, HI)
Page 1 of 1
Showing All
Sort by
All the President's Men

Available on NOOK devices and apps  
  • NOOK Devices
  • Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 NOOK 7.0
  • Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 NOOK 10.1
  • NOOK HD Tablet
  • NOOK HD+ Tablet
  • NOOK eReaders
  • NOOK Color
  • NOOK Tablet
  • Tablet/Phone
  • NOOK for Windows 8 Tablet
  • NOOK for iOS
  • NOOK for Android
  • NOOK Kids for iPad
  • PC/Mac
  • NOOK for Windows 8
  • NOOK for PC
  • NOOK for Mac
  • NOOK for Web

Want a NOOK? Explore Now

NOOK Book (eBook - Reissue)
$12.99 price

All Available Formats & Editions


The full account of the Watergate scandal from the two Washington Post reporters who broke the story. This is “the work that brought down a presidency…perhaps the most influential piece of journalism in history” (Time, All-Time 100 Best Nonfiction Books).

This is the book that changed America. Published just two months before President Nixon’s resignation, All the President’s Men revealed the full scope of the Watergate scandal and introduced for the first time the mysterious “Deep Throat.” Beginning with the story of a simple burglary at Democratic headquarters and then continuing through headline after headline, Bernstein and Woodward deliver the stunning revelations and pieces in the Watergate puzzle that brought about Nixon's shocking downfall. Their explosive reports won a Pulitzer Prize for The Washington Post, toppled the president, and have since inspired generations of reporters.

All the President’s Men is a riveting detective story, capturing the exhilarating rush of the biggest presidential scandal in U.S. history as it unfolded in real time. It is, as former New York Times managing editor Gene Roberts has called it, “maybe the single greatest reporting effort of all time.”

Described as "absolutely mesmerizing" by the Chicago Sun-Times, The Final Days is a portrayal of Nixon's dramatic last days in the White House.

Read More Show Less

Editorial Reviews

All-Time 100 Best Non-Fiction Books Time
"The work that brought down a presidency . . . perhaps the most influential piece of journalism in history."
Gene Roberts
"Maybe the single greatest reporting effort of all time."
The Denver Post
"One of the greatest detective stories ever told."
The New York Times
"A fast-moving mystery, a whodunit written with ease. . . . A remarkable book."
Dan Rather
"An authentic thriller."
The New Republic
"Much more than a 'hot book.' It is splendid reading . . . of enormous value. . . . A very human story."
Many lines cross here: the 25th anniversary of the investigative reporters' account of revealing the Watergate affair, the 75th anniversary of Simon and Schuster, and the publication of Woodward's new . Can it be just coincidence that the turns 100 this year? The reissue, without new material, launches the S & S Classic Edition series. Annotation c. Book News, Inc., Portland, OR
Brills Content
The legendary book that brought down the Nixon White House and , more than 25 years after its publication, reminds us of the importance of journalists' serving as the watchdogs of government.
From the Publisher
The Denver Post

Fascinating, stimulating....One of the greatest detective stories ever told.

The New Republic

Much more than a 'hot book.' It is splendid reading...of enormous value....A very human story.

Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9780671894412
  • Publisher: Simon & Schuster
  • Publication date: 6/16/1994
  • Edition description: 30th Anniversary Edition
  • Edition number: 2
  • Pages: 352
  • Lexile: 1010L (what's this?)
  • Product dimensions: 5.50 (w) x 8.40 (h) x 1.00 (d)

Meet the Author

Carl Bernstein

Bob Woodward is an associate editor at The Washington Post, where he has worked for forty-one years. He has shared in two Pulitzer Prizes, first for The Washington Post’s coverage of the Watergate scandal, and later for coverage of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. He has authored or coauthored twelve #1 national nonfiction bestsellers. He has two daughters, Tali and Diana, and lives in Washington, DC, with his wife, writer Elsa Walsh.

Carl Bernstein is a contributing editor for Vanity Fair magazine and has written for a variety of publications. He is the author of Loyalties: A Son’s Memoir, and has coauthored His Holiness: John Paul II and the History of Our Time with Marco Politi, as well as All the President's Men and The Final Days with Bob Woodward.

Read More Show Less

Read an Excerpt

Chapter 1

June 17, 1972. Nine o'clock Saturday morning. Early for the telephone. Woodward fumbled for the receiver and snapped awake. The city editor of the Washington Post was on the line. Five men had been arrested earlier that morning in a burglary at Democratic headquarters, carrying photographic equipment and electronic gear. Could he come in?

Woodward had worked for the Post for only nine months and was always looking for a good Saturday assignment, but this didn't sound like one. A burglary at the local Democratic headquarters was too much like most of what he had been doing — investigative pieces on unsanitary restaurants and small-time police corruption. Woodward had hoped he had broken out of that; he had just finished a series of stories on the attempted assassination of Alabama Governor George Wallace. Now, it seemed, he was back in the same old slot.

Woodward left his one-room apartment in downtown Washington and walked the six blocks to the Post. The newspaper's mammoth newsroom — over 150 feet square with rows of brightly colored desks set on an acre of sound-absorbing carpet — is usually quiet on Saturday morning. Saturday is a day for long lunches, catching up on work, reading the Sunday supplements. As Woodward stopped to pick up his mail and telephone messages at the front of the newsroom, he noticed unusual activity around the city desk. He checked in with the city editor and learned with surprise that the burglars had not broken into the small local Democratic Party office but the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in the Watergate office-apartment-hotel complex.

It was an odd place to find the Democrats. The opulent Watergate, on the banks of the Potomac in downtown Washington, was as Republican as the Union League Club. Its tenants included the former Attorney General of the United States John N. Mitchell, now director of the Committee for the Re-election of the President; the former Secretary of Commerce Maurice H. Stans, finance chairman of the President's campaign; the Republican national chairman, Senator Robert Dole of Kansas; President Nixon's secretary, Rose Mary Woods; and Anna Chennault, who was the widow of Flying Tiger ace Claire Chennault and a celebrated Republican hostess; plus many other prominent figures of the Nixon administration.

The futuristic complex, with its serpent's-teeth concrete balustrades and equally menacing prices ($100,000 for many of its two-bedroom cooperative apartments), had become the symbol of the ruling class in Richard Nixon's Washington. Two years earlier, it had been the target of 1000 anti-Nixon demonstrators who had shouted "Pigs," "Fascists" and "Sieg Heil" as they tried to storm the citadel of Republican power. They had run into a solid wall of riot-equipped Washington policemen who had pushed them back onto the campus of George Washington University with tear gas and billy clubs. From their balconies, anxious tenants of the Watergate had watched the confrontation, and some had cheered and toasted when the protesters were driven back and the westerly winds off the Potomac chased the tear gas away from the fortress. Among those who had been knocked to the ground was Washington Post reporter Carl Bernstein. The policeman who had sent him sprawling had probably not seen the press cards hanging from his neck, and had perhaps focused on his longish hair.

As Woodward began making phone calls, he noticed that Bernstein, one of the paper's two Virginia political reporters, was working on the burglary story, too.

Oh God, not Bernstein, Woodward thought, recalling several office tales about Bernstein's ability to push his way into a good story and get his byline on it.

That morning, Bernstein had Xeroxed copies of notes from reporters at the scene and informed the city editor that he would make some more checks. The city editor had shrugged his acceptance, and Bernstein had begun a series of phone calls to everybody at the Watergate he could reach — desk clerks, bellmen, maids in the housekeeping department, waiters in the restaurant.

Bernstein looked across the newsroom. There was a pillar between his desk and Woodward's, about 25 feet away. He stepped back several paces. It appeared that Woodward was also working on the story. That figured, Bernstein thought. Bob Woodward was a prima donna who played heavily at office politics. Yale. A veteran of the Navy officer corps. Lawns, greensward, staterooms and grass tennis courts, Bernstein guessed, but probably not enough pavement for him to be good at investigative reporting. Bernstein knew that Woodward couldn't write very well. One office rumor had it that English was not Woodward's native language.

Bernstein was a college dropout. He had started as a copy boy at the Washington Star when he was 16, become a full-time reporter at 19, and had worked at the Post since 1966. He occasionally did investigative series, had covered the courts and city hall, and liked to do long, discursive pieces about the capital's people and neighborhoods.

Woodward knew that Bernstein occasionally wrote about rock music for the Post. That figured. When he learned that Bernstein sometimes reviewed classical music, he choked that down with difficulty. Bernstein looked like one of those counterculture journalists that Woodward despised. Bernstein thought that Woodward's rapid rise at the Post had less to do with his ability than his Establishment credentials.

They had never worked on a story together. Woodward was 29, Bernstein 28.

The first details of the story had been phoned from inside the Watergate by Alfred E. Lewis, a veteran of 35 years of police reporting for the Post. Lewis was something of a legend in Washington journalism — half cop, half reporter, a man who often dressed in a blue regulation Metropolitan Police sweater buttoned at the bottom over a brass Star-of-David buckle. In 35 years, Lewis had never really "written" a story; he phoned the details in to a rewrite man, and for years the Washington Post did not even have a typewriter at police headquarters.

The five men arrested at 2:30 A.M. had been dressed in business suits and all had worn Playtex rubber surgical gloves. Police had seized a walkie-talkie, 40 rolls of unexposed film, two 35-millimeter cameras, lock picks, pen-size tear-gas guns, and bugging devices that apparently were capable of picking up both telephone and room conversations.

"One of the men had $814, one $800, one $215, one $234, one $230," Lewis had dictated. "Most of it was in $100 bills, in sequence....They seemed to know their way around; at least one of them must have been familiar with the layout. They had rooms on the second and third floors of the hotel? The men ate lobster in the restaurant there, all at the same table that night. One wore a suit bought in Raleigh's. Somebody got a look at the breast pocket."

Woodward learned from Lewis that the suspects were going to appear in court that afternoon for a preliminary hearing? He decided to go.

Woodward had been to the courthouse before. The heating procedure was an institutionalized fixture of the local court's turnstile system of justice: A quick appearance before a judge who set bond for accused pimps, prostitutes, muggers — and, on this day, the five men who had been arrested at the Watergate.

A group of attorneys — known as the "Fifth Street Lawyers" because of the location of the courthouse and their storefront offices — were hanging around the corridors as usual, waiting for appointments as government-paid counsel to indigent defendants. Two of the regulars — a tall, thin attorney in a frayed sharkskin suit and an obese, middle-aged lawyer who had once been disciplined for soliciting cases in the basement cellblock — were muttering their distress. They had been tentatively appointed to represent the five accused Watergate burglars and had then been informed that the men had retained their own counsel, which is unusual.

Woodward went inside the courtroom. One person stood out. In a middle row sat a young man with fashionably long hair and an expensive suit with slightly flared lapels, his chin high, his eyes searching the room as if he were in unfamiliar surroundings.

Woodward sat down next to him and asked if he was in court because of the Watergate arrests.

"Perhaps," the man said. "I'm not the attorney of record. I'm acting as an individual."

He said his name was Douglas Caddy and he introduced a small, anemic-looking man next to him as the attorney of record, Joseph Rafferty, Jr. Rafferty appeared to have been routed out of bed; he was unshaven and squinted as if the light hurt his eyes. The two lawyers wandered in and out of the courtroom. Woodward finally cornered Rafferty in a hallway and got the names and addresses of the five suspects. Four of them were from Miami, three of them Cuban-Americans.

Caddy didn't want to talk. "Please don't take it personally," he told Woodward. "It would be a mistake to do that. I just don't have anything to say."

Woodward asked Caddy about his clients.

"They are not my clients," he said.

But you are a lawyer? Woodward asked.

"I'm not going to talk to you."

Caddy walked back into the courtroom. Woodward followed.

"Please, I have nothing to say."

Would the five men be able to post bond? Woodward asked.

After politely refusing to answer several more times, Caddy replied quickly that the men were all employed and had families — factors that would be taken into consideration by the judge in setting bond. He walked back into the corridor.

Woodward followed: Just tell me about yourself, how you got into the case.

"I'm not in the case."

Why are you here?

"Look," Caddy said, "I met one of the defendants, Bernard Barker, at a social occasion.


"In D.C. It was cocktails at the Army-Navy Club. We had a sympathetic conversation...that's all I'm going to say.

"How did you get into the case?

Caddy pivoted and walked back in. After half an hour, he went out again.

Woodward asked how he got into the case.

This time Caddy said he'd gotten a call shortly after 3:00 A.M. from Barker's wife. "She said her husband had told her to call me if he hadn't called her by three, that it might mean he was in trouble."

Caddy said he was probably the only attorney Barker knew in Washington, and brushed off more questions, adding that he had probably said too much.

At 3:30 P.M., the five suspects, still dressed in dark business suits but stripped of their belts and ties, were led into the courtroom by a marshal. They seated themselves silently in a row and stared blankly toward the bench, kneading their hands. They looked nervous, respectful and tough.

Earl Silbert, the government prosecutor, rose as their case was called by the clerk. Slight, intent and owlish with his horn-rimmed glasses, he was known as "Earl the Pearl" to Fifth Streeters familiar with his fondness for dramatic courtroom gestures and flowery speech. He argued that the five men should not be released on bond. They had given false names, had not cooperated with the police, possessed "$2300 in cold cash, and had a tendency to travel abroad." They had been arrested in a "professional burglary" with a "clandestine" purpose. Silbert drew out the word "clandestine."

Judge James A. Belsen asked the men their professions. One spoke up, answering that they were "anti-communists," and the others nodded their agreement. The Judge, accustomed to hearing unconventional job descriptions, nonetheless appeared perplexed. The tallest of the suspects, who had given his name as James W. McCord, Jr., was asked to step forward. He was balding, with a large, flat nose, a square jaw, perfect teeth and a benign expression that seemed incongruous with his hard-edged features.

The Judge asked his occupation.

"Security consultant," he replied.

The Judge asked where.

McCord, in a soft drawl, said that he had recently retired from government service. Woodward moved to the front row and leaned forward.

"Where in government?" asked the Judge.

"CIA," McCord whispered.

The Judge flinched slightly.

Holy shit, Woodward said half aloud, the CIA.

He got a cab back to the office and reported McCord's statement. Eight reporters were involved in putting together the story under the byline of Alfred E. Lewis. As the 6:30 P.M. deadline approached, Howard Simons, the Post's managing editor, came into the city editor's office at the south side of the newsroom. "That's a hell of a story," he told the city editor, Barry Sussman, and ordered it onto Sunday's front page.

The first paragraph of the story read: "Five men, one of whom said he is a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency, were arrested at 2:30 A.M. yesterday in what authorities described as an elaborate plot to bug the offices of the Democratic National Committee here."

A federal grand jury investigation had already been announced, but even so it was Simons' opinion that there still were too many unknown factors about the break-in to make it the lead story. "It could be crazy Cubans," he said.

Indeed, the thought that the break-in might somehow be the work of the Republicans seemed implausible. On June 17, 1972, less than a month before the Democratic convention, the President stood ahead of all announced Democratic candidates in the polls by no less than 19 points. Richard Nixon's vision of an emerging Republican majority that would dominate the last quarter of the century, much as the Democrats had dominated two previous generations, appeared possible. The Democratic Party was in disarray as a brutal primary season approached its end. Senator George McGovern of South Dakota, considered by the White House and Democratic Party professionals alike to be Nixon's weakest opponent, was emerging as the clear favorite to win the Democrats' nomination for President.

The story noted: "There was no immediate explanation as to why the five suspects would want to bug the Democratic National Committee offices, or whether or not they were working for any other individuals or organizations."

Bernstein had written another story for the Sunday paper on the suspects. Four were from Miami: Bernard L. Barker, Frank A. Sturgis, Virgilio R. Gonzalez and Eugenio R. Martinez. He had called a Miami Herald reporter and obtained a long list of Cuban exile leaders. A Post reporter had been sent from the President's press party in Key Biscayne to make checks in Miami's Cuban community. All four of the Miami suspects had been involved in anti-Castro activities and were also said to have CIA connections. ("I've never known if he works for the CIA or not," Mrs. Barker told Bernstein. "The men never tell the women anything about that.") Sturgis, an American soldier-of-fortune and the only non-Cuban among them, had been recruiting militant Cubans to demonstrate at the Democratic national convention, according to several persons. One Cuban leader told Bernstein that Sturgis and others whom he described as "former CIA types" intended to use paid provocateurs to fight anti-war demonstrators in the streets during the national political conventions.

Woodward left the office about eight o'clock that Saturday night. He knew he should have stayed later to track down James McCord. He had not even checked the local telephone directory to see if there was a James McCord listed in Washington or its suburbs.

The national staff of the Washington Post rarely covers police stories. So, at Sussman's request, both Bernstein and Woodward returned to the office the next morning, a bright Sunday, June 18, to follow up. An item moving on the Associated Press wire made it embarrassingly clear why McCord had deserved further checking. According to campaign spending reports filed with the government, James McCord was the security coordinator of the Committee for the Reelection of the President (CRP).

The two reporters stood in the middle of the newsroom and looked at each other. What the hell do you think it means? Woodward asked. Bernstein didn't know.

In Los Angeles, John Mitchell, the former U.S. Attorney General and the President's campaign manager, issued a statement: "The person involved is the proprietor of a private security agency who was employed by our committee months ago to assist with the installation of our security system. He has, as we understand it, a number of business clients and interests, and we have no knowledge of these relationships. We want to emphasize that this man and the other people involved were not operating on either our behalf or with our consent. There is no place in our campaign or in the electoral process for this type of activity, and we will not permit or condone it."

In Washington, the Democratic national chairman, Lawrence F. O'Brien, said the break-in "raised the ugliest question about the integrity of the political process that I have encountered in a quarter-century of political activity. No mere statement of innocence by Mr. Nixon's campaign manager, John Mitchell, will dispel these questions."

The wire services, which had carried the Mitchell and O'Brien statements, could be relied upon to gather official pronouncements from the national politicians. The reporters turned their attention to the burglars.

The telephone book listed the private security consulting agency run by McCord. There was no answer. They checked the local "crisscross" directories which list phone numbers by street addresses. There was no answer at either McCord's home or his business. The address of McCord Associates, 414 Hungerford Drive, Rockville, Maryland, is a large office building, and the cross-reference directory for Rockville lists the tenants. The reporters divided the names and began calling them at home. One attorney recalled that a teenage girl who had worked part-time for him the previous summer knew McCord, or perhaps it was the girl's father who knew him. The attorney could only remember vaguely the girl's last name — Westall or something like that. They contacted five persons with similar last names before Woodward finally reached Harlan A. Westrell, who said he knew McCord.

Westrell, who obviously had not read the papers, wondered why Woodward wanted to know about McCord. Woodward said simply that he was seeking information for a possible story. Westrell seemed flattered and provided some information about McCord, his friends and his background. He gave Woodward some other names to call.

Gradually, a spare profile of McCord began to emerge: a native of the Texas Panhandle; deeply religious, active in the First Baptist Church of Washington; father of an Air Force Academy cadet and a retarded daughter; ex-FBI agent; military reservist; former chief of physical security for the CIA; teacher of a security course at Montgomery Junior College; a family man; extremely conscientious; quiet; reliable. John Mitchell's description of McCord notwithstanding, those who knew him agreed that he worked full-time for the President's re-election committee.

Several persons referred to McCord's integrity, his "rocklike" character, but there was something else. Westrell and three others described McCord as the consummate "government man" — reluctant to act on his own initiative, respectful of the chain of command, unquestioning in following orders.

Woodward typed out the first three paragraphs of a story identifying one of the Watergate burglars as a salaried security coordinator of the President's re-election committee and handed it to an editor on the city desk. A minute later, Bernstein was looking over the editor's shoulder, Woodward noticed. Then Bernstein was walking back to his desk with the first page of the story; soon he was typing. Woodward finished the second page and passed it to the editor. Bernstein had soon relieved him of it and was back at his typewriter. Woodward decided to walk over and find out what was happening.

Bernstein was rewriting the story. Woodward read the rewritten version. It was better.

That night, Woodward drove to McCord's home, a large two-story brick house, classically suburban, set in a cul-de-sac not far from Route 70-S, the main highway through Rockville. The lights were on, but no one answered the door.

After midnight, Woodward received a call at home from Eugene Bachinski, the Post's regular night police reporter. The night police beat is generally considered the worst assignment at the paper. The hours are bad — from about 6:30 P.M. to 2:30 A.M. But Bachinski-tall, goateed and quiet — seemed to like his job, or at least he seemed to like the cops. He had come to know many of them quite well, saw a few socially and moved easily on his nightly rounds through the various squads at police headquarters: homicide, vice (grandly called the Morals Division), traffic, intelligence, sex, fraud, robbery — the catalogue of city life as viewed by the policeman.

Bachinski had something from one of his police sources. Two address books, belonging to two of the Miami men arrested inside the Watergate, contained the name and phone number of a Howard E. Hunt, with the small notations "W. House" and "W.H." Woodward sat down in a hard chair by his phone and checked the telephone directory. He found a listing for E. Howard Hunt, Jr., in Potomac, Maryland, the affluent horse-country suburb in Montgomery County. No answer.

At the office next morning, Woodward made a list of the leads. One of McCord's neighbors had said that he had seen McCord in an Air Force officer's uniform, and another had said that McCord was a lieutenant colonel in the Air Force Reserve. Half a dozen calls to the Pentagon later, a personnel officer told him that James McCord was a lieutenant colonel in a special Washington-based reserve unit attached to the Office of Emergency Preparedness. The officer read him the unit roster, which contained only 15 names. Woodward started calling. On the fourth try, Philip Jones, an enlisted man, mentioned casually that the unit's assignment was to draw up lists of radicals and to help develop contingency plans for censorship of the news media and U.S. mail in time of war.

Woodward placed a call to a James Grimm, whose name and Miami telephone number Bachinski had said was in the address book of Eugenio Martinez. Mr. Grimm identified himself as a housing officer for the University of Miami, and said that Martinez had contacted him about two weeks earlier to ask if the university could find accommodations for about 3000 Young Republicans during the GOP national convention in August. Woodward called CRP, the Republican National Committee headquarters and several party officials who were working on convention planning in Washington and Miami. All said they had never heard of Martinez or of plans to use the university for housing Young Republicans.

But the first priority on that Monday was Hunt. The Miami suspects' belongings were listed in a confidential police inventory that Bachinski had obtained. There were "two pieces of yellow-lined paper, one addressed to 'Dear Friend Mr. Howard,' and another to 'Dear Mr. H.H.,'" and an unmailed envelope containing Hunt's personal check for $6.36 made out to the Lakewood Country Club in Rockville, along with a bill for the same amount.

Woodward called an old friend and sometimes source who worked for the federal government and did not like to be called at his office. His friend said hurriedly that the break-in case was going to "heat up," but he couldn't explain and hung up.

It was approaching 3:00 P.M., the hour when the Post's editors list in a "news budget" the stories they expect for the next day's paper. Woodward, who had been assigned to write Tuesday's Watergate story, picked up the telephone and dialed 456-1414 — the White House. He asked for Howard Hunt. The switchboard operator rang an extension. There was no answer. Woodward was about to hang up when the operator came back on the line. "There is one other place he might be," she said. "In Mr. Colson's office."

"Mr. Hunt is not here now," Colson's secretary told Woodward, and gave him the number of a Washington public-relations firm, Robert R. Mullen and Company, where she said Hunt worked as a writer.

Woodward walked across to the national desk at the east end of the newsroom and asked one of the assistant national editors, J. D. Alexander, who Colson was. Alexander, a heavy-set man in his mid-thirties with a thick beard, laughed. Charles W. Colson, special counsel to the President of the United States, was the White House "hatchet man," he said.

Woodward called the White House back and asked a clerk in the personnel office if Howard Hunt was on the payroll. She said she would check the records. A few moments later, she told Woodward that Howard Hunt was a consultant working for Colson.

Woodward called the Mullen public-relations firm and asked for Howard Hunt.

"Howard Hunt here," the voice said.

Woodward identified himself.

"Yes? What is it?" Hunt sounded impatient.

Woodward asked Hunt why his name and phone number were in the address books of two of the men arrested at the Watergate.

"Good God!" Howard Hunt said. Then he quickly added, "In view that the matter is under adjudication, I have no comment," and slammed down the phone.

Woodward thought he had a story. Still, anyone's name and phone number could be in an address book. The country-club bill seemed to be additional evidence of Hunt's connection with the burglars. But what connection? A story headlined "White House Consultant Linked to Bugging Suspects" could be a grievous mistake, misleading, unfair to Hunt.

Woodward called Ken W. Clawson, the deputy director of White House communications, who had been a Post reporter until the previous January. He told Clawson what was in the address books and police inventory, then asked what Hunt's duties at the White House were. Clawson said that he would check.

An hour later, Clawson called back to say that Hunt had worked as a White House consultant on declassification of the Pentagon Papers and, more recently, on a narcotics intelligence project. Hunt had last been paid as a consultant on March 29, he said, and had not done any work for the White House since.

"I've looked into the matter very thoroughly, and I am convinced that neither Mr. Colson nor anyone else at the White House had any knowledge of, or participation in, this deplorable incident at the Democratic National Committee," Clawson said.

The comment was unsolicited.

Woodward phoned Robert F. Bennett, president of the Mullen public-relations firm, and asked about Hunt. Bennett, the son of Republican Senator Wallace F. Bennett of Utah, said, "I guess it's no secret that Howard was with the CIA."

It had been a secret to Woodward. He called the CIA, where a spokesman said that Hunt had been with the agency from 1949 to 1970.

Woodward didn't know what to think. He placed another call to his government friend and asked for advice. His friend sounded nervous. On an off-the-record basis he told Woodward that the FBI regarded Hunt as a prime suspect in the Watergate investigation for many reasons aside from the address-book entries and the unmailed check. Woodward was bound not to use the information in a story because it was off the record. But his friend assured him that there would be nothing unfair about a story which reported the address-book and country-club connections. That assurance could not be used in print either.

Barry Sussman, the city editor, was intrigued. He dug into the Post library's clippings on Colson and found a February 1971 story in which an anonymous source described Colson as one of the "original back room boys...the brokers, the guys who fix things when they break down and do the dirty work when it's necessary." Woodward's story about Hunt, which identified him as a consultant who had worked in the White House for Colson, included the quotation and noted that it came from a profile written by "Ken W. Clawson, a current White House aide who until recently was a [Washington Post] reporter."

The story was headlined "White House Consultant Linked to Bugging Suspects."

That morning at the Florida White House in Key Biscayne, presidential press secretary Ronald L. Ziegler briefly answered a question about the break-in at the Watergate by observing: "Certain elements may try to stretch this beyond what it is." Ziegler described the incident as "a third-rate burglary attempt" not worthy of further White House comment.

The next day, Democratic Party chairman O'Brien filed a $1 million civil damage suit against the Committee for the Re-election of the President. Citing the "potential involvement" of Colson in the break-in, O'Brien charged that the facts were "developing a clear line to the White House" and added: "We learned of this bugging attempt only because it was bungled. How many other attempts have there been and just who was involved? I believe we are about to witness the ultimate test of this administration that so piously committed itself to a new era of law and order just four years ago."

Copyright © 1974 by Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward

Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Average Rating 4
( 49 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star


4 Star


3 Star


2 Star


1 Star


Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation


  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously
See All Sort by: Showing 1 – 20 of 49 Customer Reviews
  • Anonymous

    Posted September 6, 2012

    Intriguing! So interesting, it kept me on the edge of my seat. T

    Intriguing! So interesting, it kept me on the edge of my seat. The story line is incredible, starting with just a minor break-in, that later lead to scandal Nixon started against the Democratic party. I also loved the way it was written, with intimate detail and description. The reason why I'm only rating it four stars though, is because new people were constantly being introduced, and often they'd only appear once. Minus one star for the confusion, but in the end it all comes together. I find it amazing how this duo of reporters kept on this story for so long until piece by piece they solved the puzzle. I also would often hear about Watergate and never knew what it was, and I'm glad I now know! It is also played a big role in my decision to try out journalism and see what it's like. Also saw the movie, and it certainly lived up to its standards - and cleared things up a bit! I would recommend this to anyone who likes a good mystery or likes journalism!

    1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted June 27, 2005


    This book is wonderful. Although at first it may seem confusing since there are many names thrown around of the people involved with Watergate, this book was truly a thriller. Very good reporting, descriptions of people (such as Sloane, Bradlee, Deep Throat),and anecdotes. I loved the tone - at times hilarious. This was a fast read I couldn't put it down. Very informative too.

    1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted January 18, 2001

    reccomended, but hard to stay with

    i also chose to read all the president's men because of a school book report. i found it very hard to stay with, especially since i was reading it little bits at a time. it took some time to understand, but in the end, i had it figured out. if you enjoy the background of historical events, this book is for you. it reviews two writer's views on the Watergate trials, and their first-hand look into what the journalism world thought of the Watergate trials.i strongly reccomend this book if you enjoy suspense and truth.

    1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted November 28, 2014

    Really good read

    It's a very interesting story and it's nice to read about real journalists

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted September 5, 2014

    Excellent book by excellent reporters

    I am old enough to remember the Nixon years. This book is an excellent history, but written at the time the matters took place. As far as I know nothing in the book was subsequently proven wrong.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted November 29, 2011

    Good for journos

    A good read for any reporter.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Posted September 14, 2010

    The complicated, but worthy novel

    The presidents men is primarily about the Watergate scandal. Two 'Washington Post' reporters, Carl Bernstein, and Bob Woodward went through arduous months of investigation, and blew the story out of the water and into the public. This story is not full of themes seeing as it is about investigation, and a never ending chain of questions.One of the things about this book i actually enjoyed, was how attentive the two reporters were. They used their sharp minds to investigate, and plow through deep wells of information. I did not like the fact that it seems there were two new characters every 10 pages. The amount of people connected with the scandal was very large and made the story a lot more complicated. However, this book is my recommendation to some one looking to get the facts and storyline of the Watergate scandal. I haven't read any of the author's other works, therefor i have no other recommendations. I give this real-life detective story a "4 1/2 Stars" rating due to the intellectual capacity one needs to read it, and the challenge of full comprehension.

    0 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Posted September 13, 2010

    A Remarkable Story of one of America's Biggest Lies

    Through out The President's Men, Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward show an interesting and intriguing look on how they cracked the Nixon scandal wide open. The book starts out on June 17th, 1972 when the burglaries at Watergate/ The National Democratic headquarters happened. Once one of the burglars confessed to being a former CIA security consultant, Woodward and Bernstein knew that something was different about this case. As the case unfolded in front of theses two amazing detectives, a clear path leads to President Nixon and they lay their jobs on the line so then the public can know the truth about the scandal.
    I highly recommend this book to anyone who is at all interested in the Nixon and Watergate scandal. This book goes in depth about their investigation and how they cracked the case wide open. Although it is a little confusing at first and it may seem to drag on in the first few chapters, the read and the confusion is worth it. This book is the perfect example of how government can be corrupt and how the American people are always able to rise to the occasion and uncover the truth.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Posted September 12, 2010

    An Intellectually Simulating Piece Of Work About The True Story Of Watergate

    For anyone wanting to really know what Watergate was all about, this is a must read. Bernstein and Woodward credibly write and retell a true story that is remarkable unbiased. When was the last time you truly could trust reporters with their stories, sources, and words? The reporters make it clear throughout the entire book that they are about finding the truth and the story, not about promoting any political party or campaign, specifically McGovern who tried to use the reporters to his campaigns advantaged, but was slapped down by them in an angry call explaining they are not part of the McGovern campaign. From the early hours after the break-in up to Nixon's final state of the union, Bernstein and Woodward remake their remarkable detective journey. Their ability to contact numerous sources under enormous pressure to speak the truth and have enough information to write story after storing on Watergate to the extent that it brought down the Nixon Presidency, is astonishing and worthy of a read. This book is clearly written for those who care about the subject and can use critical thinking. If you are looking for a quick, thoughtless read, this is not your book. All The President's Men requires critical thinking and a good memory that can map out the year of Watergate. If you don't already annotate your books, I suggest you do for this one as you will most likely have to flip back through the pages and to the "Cast of Characters" to connect and analysis pieces of information. The entire book is full of thrilling stories, conversations and events that never before was heard of or seen in the public's eye. The reporters risked their lives and the entire Washington Post to uncover the cover-up and on their quest, uncovered more espionage and scandals than one could imagine. It seems almost unrealistic a Presidential campaign team could get away for so much dirt for so long without a word breathed about it. Had Woodward and Bernstein not took on the story, our entire nation would surely be drastically different. There is a unique writing style involved with this non-fiction book that is often not seen. Woodward and Bernstein literally get to the point, use the details that matter and leave out anything that is useless and still they have a 350 page book packed with information. One often confusion part of the novel is trying to remember anonymous sources without confusing them. They are often mentioned and contribute much to the story, but the minor sources that are not given a title like "Deep Throat" or "The Book-keeper" can be often confused with one another. Overall, the entire book is a thrilling and simulating mystery that gives you a front row seat to Watergate.

    0 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Posted March 29, 2010

    A Great, Entertaining, Non-Fiction Book About an Important Point in American History

    I thought the book was highly entertaining, and I came away with a much better understanding of not only Watergate, but of journalism and investigative reporting. The details are incredible, and it was fascinating to read the development of the public knowledge of Watergate and what was going on behind closed doors at the White House. I would recommend the book to anyone interested in the topic, or in investigative reporting.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Posted October 25, 2008

    Things you didn't know

    I love history and this book lets me dive back in time to something that changed our country. It is written superbly by the two men who wrote about it and investigated it for the Washington Post. The risked their lives and the lives of their sources to tell the country what they needed to know, but didn't. Great story, when done with the book definitely watch the movie.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted June 25, 2007

    Worth Reading

    This book is worth reading although it is a bit jumpy at times and sometimes hard to follow.

    0 out of 2 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted September 18, 2004

    this book is so boring

    i was forced to read it for a summer reading program for school. this book is too long and too confusing to actully be interested in it. there is too much useless information jammed into so many pages. i don't understand this book and the only joy i get from it is the feeling of never having to read it again.

    0 out of 8 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted July 8, 2004


    If I could, I would give this book 4 1/2 stars. It is absolutely worth reading to gain a perspective on Nixon and Watergate, a very important period of American history. My only knock on the book is that I wish it hadn't ended as quickly and open-ended as it did. Towards the end, it almost seemed like the writers were trying to meet a deadline and hurried through some of the most important material such as the tapes and their impact. I also didn't like how the book was written so as to put Woodward and Bernstein in the 3rd person, although I think that was done so that it wouldn't seem like a monotone narrative. All that being said, this is good book to read about Nixon and Watergate.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted February 12, 2004

    Never was interested in 'watergate'

    I caught a discovery tv special on watergate and it finally made me want to search in more. This book is absolutely amazing. So amazing I had to search for the DVD for quite some time... now I'm wondering if 'The Final Days' is worth the same effort I put into both this book and movie.. a little help please..

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted November 25, 2002

    awsome book

    i started off reading this book as a source for my research paper on watergate, but the i got caught up in it, before i knew it, i was reading it whenever i got chance to. i would definatly recomend this book to people who are trying to find the truth about the watergate scandal

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted August 9, 2002

    An Authentic Tale Essential to the Understanding of American Politics

    Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein offer a unique look at the men who tainted American politics with the indelible mark of corruption. These two reporters were able to unearth the incomprehensible path of dirty politics that Richard Nixon and his administration blazed throughout his tenure as President of the United States. The book is truly gripping, and is worthwhile for any American, or any individual studying America. This massive scandal began a wave of cynicism whose crest has yet to break and recede. Since these events, the American people have been reluctant, if at all willing, to trust their elected representatives, for fear of being manipulated as were the voters who cast their ballots for Richard M Nixon in 1968 and again in 1972. Unfortunately, lessons were not learned from the Watergate debacle. Still, corruption and green is prevalent in the American political system, particularly within the Republican Party, though not entirely absent from the other parties, as seen through such individuals as former Rep. James Traficant (D-OH). Whatever your party affiliation or political beliefs, 'All the President's Men' is an invaluable read, containing lessons to be learned for those who would be President.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted September 28, 2001

    An excellent book

    This is one of the best nonfiction books I have ever read. The book is as good as the movie and I would highly reccomend it.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted January 13, 2010

    No text was provided for this review.

  • Anonymous

    Posted January 10, 2010

    No text was provided for this review.

See All Sort by: Showing 1 – 20 of 49 Customer Reviews

If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
Why is this product inappropriate?
Comments (optional)