C R T C S M

A COURT OF NO APPEAL How one obscure sentence upset By Renata Adler

In January of this Grath, the editor of year, Simon & Schus- The New York Times ter published my book Book Review, wrote to Gone: The Last Days of Simon & Schuster. The New Yorker. I had McGrath had for been at The New York- many years been an er since 1963-with editor at The New an absence of about Yorker. 1had described fourteen months, dur- his tenure there in less ing which I wasBosley than admiring terms. I Crowther's successor had also raised ques- as the film critic of the tions about what New York Times. Al- seemed to me an in- though I had written herent conflict of in- for other publications, terest in his having as- I thought I knew the signed to himself, magazine pretty well. when he became edi- The New Yorker, I tor of the Book Review, wrote, is dead. I did the review of another not expect everyone to book in which he fig- agree or to welcome ured. "The other day," my account of what McGrath now wrote, happened to the "I received the galleys magazine. Perhaps not surprisingly,the Shawn, the great editor, who, over a of Renata Adler's forthcoming book. colleagues whom I had loved and ad- period of more than thirty years, nat- As is my custom, I read through it pri- mired through the years tended to urally grew old, declined, and lost con- or to assigning [id for review." He de- share my views. Those of whom 1 trol of his magazine. A young editor scribed as a "complete fabrication" an thought less highly, and whom I por- whom I met in January said he thought account of a lunch at which he had trayed less admiringly, did not. I had treated The New Yorker as speculated to his cousin Laura ("who Throughout the book, I referred to though it were the proverbial canary isnot my cousin but, rather, my cousin- matters in the outside world, politics, in a mine shaft. Its death meant some- in-law") that he was, at that very mo- travels, issues, assignments taken and thing about the capacity of any liv- ment, being designated successor to not taken, discussions with William ing creative enterprise to survive with- the editorship of the magazine. The in the culture. The thought had not lunch had, in fact, been described to Renata Adler is a graduate of the Yale Law crossed my mind. It has crossed my me by several people. My account of it School and the author of seven books. A mind now. was harmless; it certainly had no legal newcollection, Politics,will be published in On November 11, 1999, when my implications. (McGrath's letter had the spring. book was still in galleys, Charles Me- ended with "cc" to an attorney.) But I

Illustrations by Gerard Dubois CRITICISM 65 had also written that "no one, at least 1979, by Norton) of Judge John J. If I did not wish to "disclose" my no writer in his right mind, [wants] to Sirica, Jack Sirica's father. The sen- "sources" to her in an interview, Bar- antagonize the Book Revie'l,(;." I tence in question said I had found ringer said, "Why don't you post it on thought, What the hell. I wasn't at the that "contrary to his reputation as a the Internet?" "You post a lot of your lunch. I had written, several times, hero, Sirica was in fact a corrupt, in- own pieces on the Internet, do you, about my distrust of journalism that competent, and dishonest figure, Felicity?" relies, in quite this way, on "sources." with a close connection to Senator It must be said that, although I was So I replaced the passage with an ac- Joseph McCarthy and clear ties to not, as far as I know, discourteous, I was count of a conversation in which Me- organized crime." Jack Sirica chal- not particularly deferential or Grath spoke directly to me. I framed lenged me "to produce any evidence awestruck either. This was, it was true, his letter, and hung it on my wall, as whatsoever" that his father was a the Times. It was also an unusually a little distillation of what I thought an "'corrupt, incompetent and dishon- repetitive and mindless interrogation. editor of a major publication ought est figure'" or "had' clear ties to orga- The game and its rituals, anyway, are never to do. nized crime.''' He demanded that Si- fairly set. The reporter will write what The New York Times subsequently mon & Schuster "issue a public & she chooses-not infrequently re- published no fewer than eight, ar- written retraction" and "remove the gardless of what is said. It is one of the guably nine, pieces about my book. references" from all future editions of many reasons I have always preferred The first four (on January 12, January the book. He distributed his letter to work with documents. Barringer 16,February 6, and February 13, 20(0) widely to his colleagues in the press. had a final question: was my source G. appeared in four sections: Arts, the A reporter from the Associated Press Gordon Liddy? No. Sunday Magazine, Sunday Letters, and called me and asked, in highly pro- The followingMonday, April 3, Bar- the Sunday Book Review. They were fessional and neutral terms, whether ringer's piece appeared on the front unfriendly but, apart from their sheer I planned to document my remarks page of the Business section. On quantity, not particularly striking. The in any way. I said I did. The reporter Wednesday, AprilS, a piece, by Eleanor Arts piece, by Dinitia Smith, did men- asked when. I said soon. The re- Randolph, but unsigned (I had men- tion McGrath's letter in approving porter asked where. I said in any tioned Randolph unfavorably in my terms ("The material" to which he place that seemed appropriate. book), appeared as an Editorial. On objected, Smith wrote, "was re- Some days later, I had a call from Fe- Thursday, April 6, there was an Op Ed moved") but added that McGrath said licity Barringer, a Media correspon- piece, written by, of all people,John W. "he had decided to distance himself dent of the New York Times. Barringer, Dean. On Sunday, April 9, the Times from reviews about the current New I knew, is married to Philip Taubman, published the last (at least so far) of Yorker books." What form that dis- a member of the Times editorial board these pieces in its Week in Review. tancing would take, Smith did not and an assistant editor of the editori- Barringer's article was, in its way, say. al page. From the outset, the conver- exemplary. In my "offhanded eviscer- The next four pieces (April 3, April sation had nothing of the tenor of an ation of various literati," she report- 5, April 6, and April 9, 2000) were dis- "interview." Barringer did not even ed, not many people had noticed "Ms. persed among four more sections (Busi- pretend to any interest in Sirica, only Adler's drive-by assault on the late ness/Financial, Editorial, Op Ed, and in "ethics in book publishing." Would Judge Sirica." She deplored the lack the Week in Review), treated as seri- I give her my "sources"! "Come on. of "any evidence" and managed to con- ous news, in other words,from Monday Yes or no) Up or down!" Her dead- vey her conviction that none existed. through Sunday of an entire week. It line: forty-eight hours. No. Why would Barringer's own "sources," on the oth- might have been, even as an episode of I not disclose my evidence, if any, to er hand, were the following: Jack Sir- institutional carpet bombing, almost her? Because, as the A.P. reported, I ica (whom she did not identify as a flattering. It seemed unlikely that the was writing a piece of my own. Why Newsday reporter); John F. Stacks, who Times had ever devoted four, let alone wait? I was not waiting; I was writing. co-wrote Judge Sirica's autobiography eight, polemical pieces to a single book Had I no concern meanwhile, she (and who said Sirica "didn't have the before. There is perhaps an explana- asked several times, about what I had imagination to be anything other than tion and a story here for both sets of done to Judge Sirica's reputation' I absolutely straight all his life"); "those pieces. Let me begin with the said I didn't think most people relied who have read just about all the books second set. for their information about Judge Sir- on \Vatergate" and "those most steeped ica on a sentence in a book about The in Watergate lore" (whether these In mid-February, Jack Sirica, a re- Ne'l,(;Yorker. In fact, none of the re- "those" were co-extensive was not porter at Newsday, wrote a letter to views, in the Times or elsewhere, had clear); two lawyers, who confirmed Simon & Schuster, calling attention so much as mentioned the passage that "the dead cannot sue for libel"; an to a sentence, at the end of a passage about Judge Sirica. Before Jack Siri- editor, who did not claim to know ei- on page 125 of my book, in which I ca's letter, no one had apparently no- ther me or anything about Sirica, who wrote about having been assigned, ticed it. "Well, that raises the old ques- "explained" (not, for Barringer, "said"), by William Shawn, and deciding not tion, if a tree falls in the forest and no in four paragraphs of a bizarre fantasy, to review, To Set the Record Stmight, one is there to notice," Barringer said. what I must have said to my editor the autobiography (published in A think piece, evidently. and he to me ("It is,'Love me, love my

66 HARPERS MAGAZINE / AUGUST 2000 book.' If that's what she wants to say gency" and "establishing ... accuracy." Times, or, as far as I know, any other ... it's either do the book or don't do Otherwise, in spite of that lamentable publication, made any effort to inves- it"); and Bob Woodward, co-author of "legal impunity," a retraction. An in- tigate the nature of the connection AU the President's Men, who "absolutely teresting position, from a reporting, a with Senator McCarthy-let alone never heard, smelled, saw or found any First Amendment, or even a censor- the basis for an assertion of "clear ties remote suggestion"that Sirica had ever ship point of view. I will return to to organized crime." This lack of cu- had "any connection" to organized that, and even get to the evidence riosity seemed to me extraordinary. crime. about Judge Sirica. But first a bit The sole preoccupation was with a An impressive roster, in a way. I more about conditions in the kind of meta-journalistic question- had once, as it happened, unfavorably rJ"' mine shaft. not what happened but what were my reviewed, on the front page of The sources and my obligations. As to what New York Times Book Review itself, a ~he Editorial, two days later, en- was, however, "for some unfathomable book by Woodward, but he was cer- titled "A Question of Literary reason, omitted," the Times had only tainly the most impressive of Bar- Ethics," ran immediately below a to look at its own Op Ed piece the fol- ringer's sources in this piece. Wood- slightly shorter piece, "The Pursuit of lowing day. ward could, of course, have crept into Justice in Bosnia." "In an irritable lit- That piece, entitled "A Source on Judge Sirica's hospital room and elicit- tle book published late last year Sirica?" consisted ofJohn Dean's spec- ed from him on his deathbed the same about The New Yorker," it began. ulation about something the Times sort of "nod" he claimed to have elicit- Why the Times would address an en- had reason to know not to be the case: ed from CIA director William Casey tire editorial to a "little book," "irri- that my "source" was Dean's old ene- on his deathbed, and then claimed, as table" or not, was not entirely clear. my and current adversary in an em- he did with Casey, that to divulge even One might have thought that, almost bittered lawsuit, G. Gordon Liddy. the time of this alleged hospital visit thirty years after Watergate and more What was remarkable, however, was would jeopardizehis source. And when than sixty years after some of the less the content of the piece than the asked, as he was in an interview, what events in question, the country really words with which the Times identi- color pajamas the patient was wear- does turn for its information about fied its author. The caption, in its en- ing, he could, as he did in the instance Judge Sirica to a passage in a book tirety, read as follows: of Casey, express a degree of outrage about The New Yorker magazine. worthy of the threat such a question "Since Judge Sirica is dead," the Edi- John W. Dean, an investment banker, is former counsel to President Richard M. poses to the journalist's entire voca- torial again pointed out, "he is un- Nixon and the author of "Blind Ambition." tion. That is evidently not a kind of able to sue for libel." True enough. sourcing that raises questions for a "But that does not lift the ethical If this is the way Dean will enter his- Media correspondent at the Times. burden from Ms. Adler to support tory, then all the Times pieces in this Barringer, in any case, did not con- her charges with evidence she says peculiar episode have value. ceal her views or quite limit her ac- exists" but "that she and her editors That Sunday, April 9, there was the count to a single issue."The attack on at Simon & Schuster, for some un- Week in Review section. A single sen- the basic honesty and decency of the fathomable reason, omitted from her tence, in a book published months be- judge," she wrote, "is of a piece with book." Then, a new standard, not fore, had now become part of the news, the whole work." Then came a mem- just "evidence" but a cognate of perhaps more accurately the meta- orable line. "What she writes and when proof, crept in. "If Ms. Adler is rais- news, of that week. The word "evi- she writes it, she said," Barringer ac- ing a long-simmering allegation dence" was abandoned, replaced en- tually wrote, with all the severity of [about] Judge Sirica's father ... she tirely by "proof." My book had the bureaucrat deep in a politburo, "is will need to document that unproven "announced without proof";"Ms.Adler for her to decide." Who else, I won- contention and show how it relates told a New York Times reporter that dered, at least in our society, could to the judge himself." she would publish proof ... when she possibly decide it? Her essential for- It was interesting to learn what I pleased," and so on. I had said nothing mulation, however, was this: needed to document and show. I found of the kind. In repeating what had long it difficult, however, to see in what been a Times characterization ofJudge As it stands,Ms.Adlerand Simon& sense my "burden" was (as the anony- Sirica as " a scrupulouslyhonesr jurist," Schuster. a unit ofViacom, are either mous Randolph put it) "ethical"-or the piece surpassed even the Op Ed cheaply smearingJudge Sirica-with how the passagein my book could have page in the brevity of its identification legalimpuniry-or rheyhaveevidence. raised an issue of "ethics," "literary" or ... Butneither the publishernor the au- of John Dean as "former Nixon coun- thor showsanyurgencyaboutresolving other. Professional issues, perhaps. Is- sel." The laconic formulation was ap- the issue,either by retracting the ac- sues of fact, history, judgment. Ethics, parently designed to lend him credi- cusationor establishingits accuracy. no. I was either right or I wasn't, and bility, in contrast to G. Gordon Liddy, I either had evidence or I hadn't. (The "whom Judge Siricasentenced to prison Jack Sirica merely demanded "any ev- questions were, by no means, the for his role in Watergate." Under any idence whatsoever." Barringer wanted same.) The Times, as it turned out, circumstances, this would have been a evidence (to her standards, presum- had not the slightest interest in Sirica howler. (Dean, of course,wasalso "sen- ably, and Woodward's), with "ur- or his history. No reporter for the tenced to prison for his role in

CRITICISM 67 Watergate" by Judge Sirica. One tions, in particular, always seem to I read Sirica's book, I noticed what might, as readily, characterize Liddy consist of rectifications of middle ini- seemed to me astonishing discrepancies as an "author, attorney, and talk show tials, photo captions, and remote dates and revelations. I did some research, host.") By now, however, these de- in history. (In one recent week, the gave the matter thought, and decided scriptions of Dean had gone beyond Corrections column pointed out that not to review the book. I was sure inadequacy. They relied upon, and ac- the correct spelling of Secretary of newspaper or magazine journalists tively perpetuated, the ignorance of State Madeleine Albright's "given would pick up these anomalies and readers. The Times, for some reason, name" is "Madeleine K. Albright, not write about them. By the time I pub- was publishing disinformation. Madeline," and that the middle name lished my book about The New York- I have always read the Times. In a of William D. Fugazy,"the chairman of er, I assumed other journalists had day of perhaps more distinguished and the National Ethnic Coalition of Or- found and written about them. It exigent editing, I even worked for it. ganizations" is "Denis," "not Dennis.") turned out they had not-had, it On the day Barringer's piece appeared, There are, as a rule, no genuine cor- seemed, no interest in these matters, I wrote a letter objecting to certain er- rections. These departments are cos- apart from the recent questioning of rors. I said I hoped Barringer had made metic, a pretense that the paper has my right to address them, even now. a tape of our conversation, so that my any real concern, any mechanism even claim of inaccuracies could be veri- to consider, whether what it has pub- Contrary to his reputation as a hero, Siri- fied. No dice. No acknowledgement, lished is, in some important or, for that ca was in fact a corrupt, incompetent, and dishonest figure, with a close connection to Senator Joseph McCarthy and clear ties to organized crime. THE NEW YORK TIMES , CLEARLY, WAS CROSS There can scarcely be any question ABOUT SOMETHING. BUT THERE ARE ETHICAL ISSUES, that this sentence is true. One major source for almost every element of my I THINK, RAISED EVEN BY THIS SORT OF PILING ON characterization is Sirica's own story, as told in interviews and in his book. That Sirica had a "close connection to even, of the question of a tape. On matter, unimportant way, false. Senator Joseph McCarthy" is not in April 6, I received a phone call from This, I would say, raises issues, fun- dispute-although, as far as I know, I the secretary to the deputy editor of the damentally, of ethics. So does cover- was the first reporter to call attention Editorial page. "They have decided ing up conflicts of interest: unsigned to it. Certainly no major piece, book, not to run your letter," she said, in a editorials by writers mentioned unfa- newspaper, or magazine article-about very cheery voice. They have? I said. vorably in books the editorials dis- Sirica, or Watergate, or Senator Me- Did they give any reason? "No. They parage; quotations, without any ac- Carthy for that matter-even men- just asked me to call and tell you they knowledgment of conflict, from tioned the connection. Certainly not have decided not to run your letter." "sources" whose work, whose very (until its recent reaction to Jack Siri- April 6 was the day they ran the Op Ed methods, has been attacked by the ca's reaction to my book) the New piece by John Dean. On April 7, Jared person under discussion, in the pages York Times. Stem, of the New York Post, ran a piece of the Times itself. So does the con- Sirica's own account is as follows. In quoting from my letter (which had cealment of undeniably relevant in- 1952, been given to him by Blake Fleetwood, formation: the fact that Jack Sirica a friend of mine and for years a Times was not just the son of Judge Sirica while in Chicago, 1 ran into Senator reporter). A spokesman for the Times but a reporter at Newsday, a journal- Joe McCarthy. We had been friends for told Stem what was plainly untrue, ist, a colleague (imagine the Times several years, double-dating once in a while and going to the racetrack to- that my letter was still "being consid- coming to the defense, against a sin- gether from time to time. 1liked Joe a lot ered for publication." That very after- gle passage, of the father of anyone in those days.... noon, an editor called to ask whether who was not a fellow journalist); even Then in 1953, Joe McCarthy offered I would like to submit another, "re- the omission of virtually defining facts me the job of chief counsel to his Sen- vised," letter. One of my adventures in about John Dean. And, finally, the ate subcommittee which was investi- this mine shaft had already been to bullying, the disproportion, in pub- gating Communist influence in gov- learn that, as a matter of policy, the lishing eight disparaging pieces (sev- ernment. Times does not publish letters that en in non-reviewing sections) about 1must say that 1found the offer very question, or criticize in any way, the what was, after all, one little book. attractive .... 1wasn't especially excited work of its reporters. Any claim of in- The Times, clearly, was cross about by McCarthy's charges about Commu- nist infiltration, but it seemed at the accuracy or unfairness must be made to something. But there are ethical time to be an important matter that the department of Corrections or the issues,I think, raised even by needed further examination. Bythe time Editor's Note. In these departments, rr' this sort of piling on. McCarthy made his offer, I had moved however, the reporter, in consultation over to Hogan and Hartson and was fi- with her editor, decides the issue- ~o tum, then, at last, to Judge Sir- nally earning a decent living. But 1was which, I suppose, is why the Correc- ica. More than twenty years ago, when still intrigued by his proposal.

68 HARPER'S MAGAZINE f AUGUST lOCO Lucy [Sirica'swife,whom he had mar- time to be an important matter that his living with one kind of business or another. Each time, he would fail. In ried the year before, at the age of forty- needed further examination") is not several cities he purchased small enter- seven] ... was strongly opposed, feeling just inherently equivocal and inane. that since I was now a partner in a good prises, only to discover that the income It is also irreconcilable with the in- firm, I would be foolish to leave. Joe they produced was much less than had temperate, opinionated man Sirica and stopped by our apartment one evening been promised by the seller. and I told him I felt I had better stay his admirers have always admitted him where I was. He agreed that it would to be. Leaving aside his lack of pro- In 1918, "uprooted again," they be a mistake to leave a good firm like fessional qualifications, Sirica has en- move to Washington, D.C., where they Hogan and Hartson. He told me that tirely omitted from this account any are so poor they can hardly find a place since I wasn't going to take the job, he ideological basis for McCarthy's offer to live. Somehow, in this "uphill fight was probably going to hire a young New of this job to him. Roy Cohn, after all, against poverty," Sirica manages to at- York lawyer named Roy Cohn .... I had credentials of a sort: his agenda, his tend two non-parochial private high would never have become a federal methods, and his ideology were clear. schools, Emerson Preparatory, "for a judge if I had taken that job with Joe year or so," and then Co- McCarthy. I'm sure, look- lumbia Preparatory. In 1921, ing back, that had I still been single, I would have he enters George Washing- done so. Thank God for ton University Law School, Lucy Camalier Sirica. where, within a month, he finds himself out of his There is something al- depth ("I couldn't begin to most stunningly preposter- understand what the pro- ous about this story. Sirica fessors were talking about") devotes less than a page to and quits. The following it. The friendship between year, he goes to a better law Sirica, by his own account school, Georgetown Uni- an obscure, impoverished, versity, but again, within a unsuccessful lawyer who month, fails to understand had, for the "several years" his courses and quits again. in question, not even man- It is not clear why Sirica aged to earn a living, and went to private schools, or Senator Joseph R. Me- what "small enterprises" his Carthv, one of the most father "purchased" in all powerful and feared sena- those cities, or how, having tors in Washingron, makes failed "each time," his fa- no sense. How did they ther managed to purchase meet? What views, inter- any enterprises, let alone ests, or other friends did "one kind of business or an- they have in common? other." Sirica does not ac- How did they come to dou- count for any of these ble-date? McCarthy had discrepancies. made his first famous speech ("I have In Sirica's account, nothing-neither He starts boxing professionally. "I here in my hand a list of 205 names the politics that produced the offer was pretty good, or at least I thought known to the Secretary of State as be- nor the social circumstance that fos- so." As early as 1921, between his first ing members of the Communist Party") tered the friendship-is revealed. law school and his second, on February 9, 1950, to the Women's The rest of his story, as he describes Republican Club of Wheeling, West it, and as his legend would have it, I boxed almost every day with local pro- Virginia. In the intervening years, he turns out to make no sense either. Born fessional welterweights and mid- had attacked, as virtual or outright in 1904, in Waterbury, Connecticut, dleweights. By the next spring I ... had traitors, not just the secretary of state, Sirica is the impecunious, poorly edu- begun boxing at localclubs in exhibition bouts with the professionals. I thor- Dean Acheson, and General George cated, and for many years unsuccessful oughly enjoyed my new life as an athlete C. Marshall but countless others, at son of Ferdinand (Fred) Sirica, an Ital- and felt I had finally found something at every level of public and private life. By ian-American barber, who also seems which I could excel. 1953, the McCarthy era (what Sena- to fail at everything. Between 1910 tor Margaret Chase Smith called the and 1918, for example, Ferdinand takes In 1922, however, his father has an- "Four Horsemen of Calumny: Fear, Ig- the family on "a sad sort of odyssey, other contretemps: norance, Bigotry, and Smear") was al- moving from city to city," Dayton, Bythis time, my father, in another of ready at its height. Judge Sirica's posi- Jacksonville, New Orleans, Jack- his attempts to better himself, had tion ("I wasn't especially excited by sonville again. bought a small poolroom with two bowl- McCarthy's charges about Commu- In each place the story was much the ing alleys and a snack bar. He had spent nist infiltration, but it seemed at the same. My father would attempt to earn all his savings on the business, and soon

CRITICISM 69 realized that he had sunk his money in- having, "as he had so often before," He has already described Cafritz as a to a very rough place. He wasn't making "trusted someone only to be deceived"? "man who advised and encouraged me any profit to speak of and didn't like the What was the deceit? "He knew that a great deal" while he was struggling type of people who frequented the es- a lot of gamblers and bootleggers came tablishment. I used to help out in the through law school, and as "at the time evenings, racking up balls for the pool in"; also "men from the Government becoming one of the most prominent players and setting pins for the bowlers. Printing Office," who bought "soft and successful real-estate developers But my father was again in despair. As drinks" (from the snack bar, presum- in Washington." It is true that Morris he had so often before, he had trusted ably) and then mixed in "a little hard Cafritz went on to become immense- someone only to be deceived. We lived liquor from the pints in their pock- ly successful in real estate in Wash- in rooms above the place. I remember ets." It seems almost unfair to go on. ington-and a highly respected citizen Dad coming upstairs one night after Even the elaborate formulation "one and generous benefactor of charities closing. He poured himself a drink as night ... the city police, aware of the of every kind. At the time he was ad- the tears rolled down his face. He was kinds of people who visited the establish- vising, encouraging, and having break- again facing the fact that his hopes were ment, made a search of the premises." fast with Sirica, however, he was al- being dashed. I guess my father wanted to hold on One can understand not wanting to ready very wealthy. Again, one long enough to sell the place and re- say aware of the nature of the establish- wonders, what can have been the ba- cover his money. But things just got ment, but why put in a qualifying phrase sis of this friendship between the poor worse. One evening a particularly un- at all? Why not just: "One night" "the and unpromising young law student pleasant group came in. Many of them police raided the premises"? Similarly, and this highly influential figure? What had been drinking, even though this why a "small quantity of bootleg liquor, Sirica does not mention is that Cafritz, was during prohibition .... apparently left there by one of my father's too, had owned establishments in- I don't think my father owned the customers"? All these clauses and qual- volved with liquor and, like Sirica's place quite a year. He knew that a lot of ifiers. The next day, when his father, father's, bowling. In his early twen- gamblersand bootleggers came in, but he not having been locked up, "appeared ties, Cafritz had borrowed $1,400 from also knew that if he threw out all the undesirables, he'd be without enough in police court with his lawyer" and his father and, a few years later, ac- customers to make any money at all. "explained that the liquor must have cording to The \vashingconian, "bought Men from the Government Printing Of- belonged to a customer and that he a saloon." fice, just down orth Capitol Street, didn't even know it was there," any would come in from work, order a soft reader of ordinary intelligence and un- But not just any saloon: Cafritz's was drink, and then mix in a little hard liquor derstanding realizes that the object of across from the Washington Navy Yard. from the pints in their pockets. The low the story is-as it was in the McCarthy ... Saloon keeping was a rough business. ... Cafritz washis own bouncer. He slept point in that whole experience came story-not to tell but to conceal some- one night when the city police, aware of over the bar and kept a gun under his thing. How, as the Times Editorial put the kinds of people who visited the es- pillow to protect the profits. Cafritz soon it, this incident "relates to the judge tablishment, made a search of the moved from barkeeping into a safer premises. Stashed in the men's room, himself" is not hard to fathom. Sirica game: bowling. By 1915, he was known they found a small quantity of bootleg was living in his father's apartment as the bowling king of Washington. liquor, apparently left there by one of above the poolroom, and he was em- my father's customers. The police took ployed "racking up balls for the pool In the event, after his breakfast with my dad to the police station and charged players" and also as a bounc- Cafritz, Sirica does take the bar exam him with violation of the Volstead Act. rJ"' er there. and goes on to visit his parents in Mi- He was not locked up, and the next day, ami. While he is down there, he finds when he appeared in police court with ~ a go back, however, to the ca- out, by telegram and to his surprise, his lawyer, he explained that the liquor reer trajectory of John J. Sirica as he that he has passed. He is unable to find must have belonged to a customer and tells it. In 1926, on his third try, Sir- work as a lawyer in Miami. He goes that he didn't even know it was there. No charges were filed, but the incident iea did manage to complete and back to Washington, finds no legal embarrassed the whole family. graduate from law school. By this work, goes back to his family in Miami. time, "I was tempted by the idea of To earlier questions about his story is There is perhaps no need to parse becoming a professional boxer," he added another: where, failing as he this account too thoroughly. How, writes, "since I felt more confident of constantly does to find a job, does he having in the past, as we know, failed my ability as a fighter than as a get the money to keep traveling back "each time," did he have "savings" to lawyer." and forth to Miami? And what was his spend "all" of, or "money" to have family doing there? One source of in- "sunk" into such a place? Why does On the morning the bar exam was come, for Sirica, has always been, al- to be given, 1had breakfast with Mor- Sirica find it necessary to point out though he never quite acknowledges it, ris Cafritz. I had pretty well decided to that many of this unpleasant group professional boxing. In Washington, skip the bar exam and head for Florida "had been drinking, even though this to see my father and mother. ... [Mor- as early as 1921, we know, he has been was during prohibition," when his fa- ris] knew I was thinking about becom- boxing "almost every day" with local ther, just five lines before, had "poured ing a professional boxer. "Don't be fool- professionals, and "at local clubs in ex- himself a drink" (without any com- ish," he told me. "Even if you're not hibition bouts with the professionals." ment from Sirica) in his "despair" over prepared, take the exam." In 1926, in Miami, after "a local pro-

70 HARPER'S MAGAZINE! AUGUST 2000 motet needed someone to box in a se- throughout the years he was boxing mi-windup at Douglas Stadium," Siri- there-until 1934, when Congress fi- ca prepares for the fight not just by nally legalized it in the District. Pro- weeks of sparring but by running every fessional boxing in Washington, in day at "a golf course in Miami Beach"- other words, was a violation of the under whose sponsorship he does not criminal statute. That Sirica knew this say. Perhaps, in those days, Miami is beyond doubt. All the years he boxed Beach had a public golf course. Siri- professionally in the District before ca's opponent at Douglas Stadium is 1934 he used, although he does not "a six-foot-tall welterweight who was mention this either, fictitious names. known for having fought one of the It is, of course, possible to be a crimi- roughest bouts ever staged in Miami." nal without ties to organized crime- Sirica beats him. a pickpocket, say, or a burglar. Illegal boxing, however, requires payoffs: for The write-ups in the newspapers the the arena, the police, the referee, the next day were all good, even though promoters, and so on. You simply can- they didn't spell my name correctly .... not do it freelance or on your own. It I was on my way as a professional boxer. requires a syndicate-notoriously hos- His mother, he says, "heard about tile to encroachments on its turf. So the fight" and objected. He had, of that's two sets of "clear ties to orga- course, as he has already told us (and nized crime": through professional box- as his mother must have known), been ing-as an organizer, boxer, and pro- fighting professionally for years. He moter in various cities at a time when would also organize and promote pro- mob control of the sport was essen- fessional boxing matches. What he tially complete-and for more than does not mention, does not perhaps thirteen years in the District, boxing remember or think important, is that professionally when it was professional boxing in this country was still illegal there. at the time, and had been since at least 1903, controlled by organized crime. Is that all? Well, no, it isn't. But it That professional boxers, and par- is all I said: "clear ties." It was not my ticularly organizers and promoters of little book but the Times and its professional boxing, had such ties was acolytes who made a sensation of ATHENA: THE SCIENCE OF ATTRACnON established, for example, in the Ke- this. I wrote a sentence, in a specific CNN ONLINE6/25/99 "In 1986 Dr. Winnifred fauver hearings (U.S. Senate Special context, which is all I meant to Cutler,a biologist and behavioral endocrinolo' Committee to Investigate Organized write. The documentation for it is gist, codiscovered pheromones.*** Seventy- four percent of the people who tested a Crime in Interstate Commerce, May ample. Barringer, her "sources," and commercial prodUct called Athena 1950 through May 1951). As Bob her colleagues could have found it if [Pheromone 10Xj, developed by Or. Cutler, experienced an increase in hugging, kiss- Kravitz, a syndicated sportswriter, put her agenda had really been journal- ing and [intimacy]." News Article by Deb it as recently as 1999, ism: the gathering, that is, and pub- Levine,as publishedon WebMD.com lishing of first-hand information. Created by Winnifred In me mid-1950's, a politician named Judge Sir ica, as Barringer and the Cutler, Ph.D. in biology Estes Kefauver chaired hearings on the Times kept pointing out, is dead. But from U. of Penn, post-doc sad state of the game, hoping to reform at Stanford. Co-discovered if he were alive and he sued for libel, the span and get it out of the hands of human pheromones in as the in all its pieces seemed 1986 (Time 1211/86; and the Mob. When it was over, he realized Times Newsweek 1/12/87). the corruption was too deeply imbed- to suggest-imagine the preposter- ded, too systemic. ... ousness of a federal judge, even Judge Vialsof 1/6 oz.addedto 2 to 4 oz.of yourfragrance Sirica, suing for libel-he would lose. should last 4 to 6 monlhs. Containhumansyn, The only wayyou get rid of corruption thesized pheromones. Not guaranlBed to wOO<.for in boxing is to get rid of boxing .... And that is not all. To resume his all; body chemistriesdiffer; will work for most At a meeting of Mob bossesand box- own story as Sirica tells it. In 1926, af- Ct!Sl)1~ticpro.~~ notaph':Jldisiac.Pale.i]lSPending. ing managers in 1957, Mafia operative ter being turned down by law firms www.Athenainstitute.CDm Blinky Palermo worried about his boys everywhere, he does get a job as a "sort Not in stores Call (610)827-2200 losing their grip on the game, and that of messenger" at a small criminal law of- Athena Institute, Dept HPpn, "legitimate businessmen are starting to ~~!!.S!. fice on Fifth Street. "It wasn't much, _~2]! !l~a.!l~t!.lqBQ'~gh_e§~e~ ~A_]~2..5_ horn in on it." Palermo had nothing to Send me vials of lOX for men @$99.50 worry about. there was no regular pay, but it was a and/or_ vials of 10:13 for women @$98.50 start." Meanwhile, he has made an- for a *total _ by: 0 money order, n check As for the boxers themselves, in other early, implausible friendship with lWisa, M/C__ ,__ ,__ ' __ exp__ signature _ Washington, D.C., as it happens, all a rich and powerful man, Milton Kron- to: Name _ professional boxing was illegal-not heim, a wonderfully interesting fig- Address _ just in 1921, when Sirica began, but ure-andlater (like Cafritz) an extra- City/State zip _ Daytime Phone _ iPA add6%~ax,CanadaaddUSS7.50each) riPpn ordinary citizen and a generous bene- ney, however, was Morris Ernst. property in Miami. Hard to account factor of every sort. Kronheim became, According to Sirica, this period, for, in the heart of the Depression, even through several administrations, one when "I would have had to quit the law with fourteen chairs, on the proceeds of the most influential and beloved fig- altogether," lasted "essentially until of haircuts at 25 cents per customer. ures in Washington. In 1903, at the 1949, when I joined the firm of Hogan According to William R. Emmons, age of fifteen, Kronheim (whose father and Hartson." He was not a success the son of Fred Sirica's partner in the owned a tavern) started his own liquor there either. On April 2, 1957 (again, Empire Barber Shop, the barbers were store. By 1985, he had the largest it is unclear on what professional salesmen, selling liquor to customers wholesale liquor distributorship in basis), he became a federal judge. By who could afford it. Packages were Washington and one of the largest in 1970,he had become the most reversed stored in both the back room and the the country. During his three years at federal judge in Washington. In 1971, basement, and Fred Sirica himself han- the Fifth Street criminal office, Sirica on the basis of seniority, he became dIed the whiskey, splitting the pro- lost thirteen of fourteen felony cases chief judge of the circuit. In june of ceeds with his partner, William E. Em- assigned him by the court. The first 1972, he read about the Watergate mons. Sirica, living in his father's case he wasallowed to handle involved break-in and assigned himself the case. house and working in the U.S. Attor- "violation of the prohibition laws." In He ultimately tried the cases both of ney's Office, can hardly have been en- 1930, however, Sirica was appointed the break-in and the cover-up, with tirely unaware of his father's business. (on what professional basis is unclear) the resu 1ts we know. Or Ninth Street in the 1930shad five mo- to the U.S. Attorney's Office-whose thought we knew. tion picture houses within a block and major responsibilities, in those years, a half of the barbershop, The Gayety included prosecutions under the Vol- But wait a minute. To return for Theatre was only a few doors away. stead Act. Sirica sayshe got "valuable just a moment to 1930 and Sirica's There was bookmaking in the back of trial experience" as an assistant U.S. at- situation, at the time of his appoint- the shoestore at 5191{2Ninth Street. torney. He mentions no specific pros- ment to the U.S. Attorney's Office. The whole neighborhood, in other ecutions, certainly none of bootleg- In 1930, Sirica writes, words, was not so far removed, in its gers--or of professional boxers. In fact, look and its patronage, from the pool- he devotes only a single sentence to my parents had moved back to Wash- room that so seriouslydisillusioned the the whole four years. ington from Florida.My dad was bar- impecunious barber and his son the beringagainand his financialsituation In December 1933, Prohibition was lawstudent more than ten yearsbefore. had improvedsomewhat.He had man- repealed. In january 1934, Sirica re- agedto buya littlehouseon Fourteenth Nowhere in his book, To Set the Record signed from the U.S. Attorney's Office, Street, N.W., and I lived there during Straight, does the author so much as "to start my own practice." The prac- myyearsin the U.S. attorney'soffice. mention the name of the barbershop or tice was not a success. He entered the address of the "little house" on what he calls my "starvation period," The years of Fred Sinca's apparently Fourteenth Street. Both can be found from 1934 to 1949, fifteen years, when constant business failures, and Sirica's under "Sirica, Fred" (and also under he says, "I really lived from hand to own inability to find a job, had not "Sirica, John J asst US Atty" and "Em- mouth," it "seemed the phone never been Depression years-only, begin- mons, Wm E") in the city directory rang," and "I would have had to quit ning in 1920 throughout the country for at least the years 1933 and 1934, the law altogether." Sirica traveled, (three years earlier, in 1917 in Wash- There were no embarrassing misun- in those years, not just to Miami but ington, D.C.), years of Prohibition. derstandings, as there had been at the to "l\'ew York for weekends" to visit The 1930s, however, were Depression time of the pool hall, at any police sta- jack Dempsey, whom he had met in years-yer the "financial situation" of tion. The police of the 1st Precinct 1934. He does not explain how he Sirica's farher, "barbering again," had were paid off-and there was whatev- paid for these travels. He says he "improved somewhat," to the degree in er protection was implied by a son who earned a fee by "successfullydefending fact that "he had managed to buy a had become an assistant in the U.S. Walter Winchell against a defama- little house on Fourteenth Street." Attorney's Office. tion suit." What? Walter Winchell? Not such a little house. According to Even 1934, when one thinks about Who brought the suit? He does not the Washington city directory, the it, was not just the year when Prohi- say. The case he means, at least ac- house at 6217 Fourteenth Street, N .W., bition ended and Sirica quit the U.S. cording to his obituary in the New was large enough so that both John j. Attorney's Office-and Congress at York Times, was brought by Eleanor Sirica and his brother, Andrew, had last legalized professional boxing in (Cissy) Patterson, the Chicago pub- apartments there. The place where his Washington. It was also a year deep lisher. But that didn't sound quite father was "barbering again" (called, in the Depression, a particularly odd right. I looked it up. It turned out that according to the directory, the Empire time for a young lawyer to leave a gov- Cissv Patterson was in fact the own- Barber Shop), at 523 inth Street, ernment job and start his "own prac- er of the Times-Herald, which pub- N.W., was not small either. It held tice." It was the year as well when Sir- lished Winchell's column. The lawsuit fourteen chairs. The reason Fred Siri- ica sayshe met Dempsey, and when he was part of a long feud between them. ca and his wifetraveled so often to Mi- tried to start and promote a boxing Sirica may, it seems, have played some ami was that they spent part of their arena with a "local prizefighter," part in the defense. Winchell's attor- winters there. The Siricas were buying Goldie Ahearn. It goes by now almost

72 HARPER'S MAGAZII'E i AUGUST 2000 without saying that Goldie Ahearn a month before the break-in at the why Judge Sirica assigned the cases to could not, any more than Sirica him- Watergate. His friendship with Sirica himself. There is evidence that, far self, legally have been a "local prize- dates from the Fifties-overlapping, from seeking to expedite the Watergate fighter" before 1934. for all one knows, with the friendship investigations, Sirica may have sought There are countless peculiarities in with Senator Joseph McCarthy-when for several crucial months to delay Sirica's story. His professions of patri- Hoover, fighting the Communist men- them. In putting off the first trial un- otism, for example, coupled with his ace, was still denying the very exis- til after the election, he says he was de- lack of military service, in any capac- tence of organized crime. There must termined to have "a fair trial, not a ity whatever, in World War II. He be a true story here somewhere, but quick one." Look at that phrase a mo- was, after all, a bachelor. The whole so far no one has told or apparently ment. The fairness of his conduct in war took place during what he called even looked into it. those trials has always been precisely his "starvation period." The Times, in the matter most in dispute. On ac- Contrary to his reputation as a hero, its obituary of August 15, 1992, which count of "back pain," he postponed Sirica was in fact a corrupt, incompe- described Sirica as "indisputably ... a the trials again, until January. It may tent, and dishonest figure, with a close hero" (and "by seemingly unanimous also be that, in spite of the legend, connection to Senator Joseph McCarthy agreement, an honest man"), particu- and clear ties to organized crime. Judge Sirica was less interested in get- larly stressed that he was "patriotic," ting at, as he put it, "the truth for the "unabashedly patriotic," and added to That is all I said or wanted to say American people" than in some en- its repeated characterizations of Siri- about the subject. If a reader were to tirely other agenda. ca as a "hero" a military dimension. believe that this sentence, at least as It may even be that the real pro- quoted and discussed in the Times, gression in Sirica's life was not as the In World War II, he tried to get a suggests that, as Sirica was presiding legend would have it but rather this: Navy commission but failed for physical over the Watergate cases he was tak- first the man of Prohibition and illegal reasons .... So, during much of the war, he roured the country with Mr. Dempsey ing payoffs from the mob, that is not a boxing, in the U.S. Attorney's Office; on bond-selling drives. plausible reading. I was writing, after then McCarthy's man and even J. all, about Sirica's autobiography. "A Edgar Hoover's, with whatever poli- The "for physical reasons" is unlikely, close connection to Senator Joseph tics that implies; then perhaps just the considering Sirica's accounts of his su- McCarthy"-in the phrase that di- Republican Party's man, its emissary perb physical condition-and of course rectly precedes "clear ties to organized to Italian communities (mostly, in there are other capacities in which a crime"-would necessarily have end- those days, Democratic); then a feder- bachelor lawyer, sitting idly in his of- ed by May 2, 1957, when McCarthy al judge; then Nixon's man; then, in his fice "waiting for the telephone to ring," died. Sirica had not yet assumed his po- unprecedented use of "provisional sen- might serve in the military. In his book, sition on the bench. If I had meant tencing" as a form of coercion, a vain Sirica never mentions the possibility Sirica was taking such payments, on sort of bully, who is concerned not "to of military service. But the Times's the bench or at any other time, I would sit up here like nincompoops" while claim that "during much of the war, he of course have said so. the defendants are "laughing at us." toured with Mr. Dempsey on bond sell- But enough. I do not need and nev- Then a sort of obsessed prosecutor, who ing drives" is beyond description. Here er did intend to investigate the story of does not really discover any important is the relevant passage, from To Set the John J. Sirica, At the time I read his truth. And finally, in his vanity and Record Straight: book, I had already written extensive- posturing, a man, a "hero," for the press. ly about Watergate. I had also worked, A judge, after all, is not meant to be Jack and I had some great times to- until the day of President Nixon's res- a hero. (The only judges in our life- gether. In 1942, he was touring with ignation, for the impeachment inquiry. times who, I think, could legitimately the Cole Brothers Circus and wanted It only became clear, from the book it- be described as heroes were Frank some company. I met the circus in North Carolina and spent three days self and then in retrospect, that the Johnson, Elbert Tuttle, John Minor with Jack on the circus train. I'll never legend, the accumulation of cliches, Wisdom, and the other judges of the forget Jack charming the ladies.... received ideas, and bromides-the Fifth Circuit, who took genuine risks, "scrupulously honest" man, the "hero," and suffered for them, for justice in In 1942, the Cole Brothers Circus was who rises from humble beginnings to the South.) And judges, under the Clyde Beatty's circus, with no con- confront "the most powerful man on Constitution, are not meant to ascer- nection to war bonds or war efforts of earth" and to find "the truth for the tain, least of all to prosecute or to co- any kind. American people"-had no erce by sentencing, the "truth," "for Among Sirica's unlikely, and in this rr' basis in reality. the American people" or even for the book and his legend unmentioned, jury. They are to preside fairly, under friends and correspondents was FBI di- .1he legend of Sirica as a "scrupu- the adversary system, over cases pre- rector J. Edgar Hoover. Why would a lously honest" man and a "hero" rests, sented by lawyers for the plaintiff and judge of Sirica's renown not have be- of course, on the Watergate trials. The the defendants before them. Anything come friends with the FBI director? conduct of those trials, criticized at else undermines the system. We do Because Sirica was not yet at all the time, raises questions of all kinds. not, under the Constitution, have a renowned. Hoover died in May 1972, It is by no means clear, for example, system where judges are inquisitors. In

CRITICISM 73 any event, though there may be ma- as though one man, the judge himself, almost every other way, to rhe quality terial for a real biography of Judge Sir- were above it. of the newspaper. Now much of the ica, there is also this awkward truth: The outright falsification was as fol- paper is devoted to itself in quite an- Even in Watergate, he sirn- lows. On March 23, 1973, Judge Siri- other sense-as a bureaucracy, a com- ply was not that important. ca said that sentences for the five de- placent, unchallenged, in some ways fendants who had pleaded guilty would totalitarian institution convinced of Eor the moment, almost as a house- depend on their cooperation in impli- its infallibility. keeping matter, just two, relatively mi- cating people higher up. What was it that made the Times nor, instances, from the Watergate tri- so very crossabout my sentence? Noth- Other factors will of course be con- als themselves, of dishonesty, and ing could be clearer than thar it was sidered but I mention this one because incompetence-instances where they it is one over which you have control not concern about Judge Sirica's rep- seem to overlap. During voir dire, in and I mean each one of the five of you. utation. (The most distinguished First the first trial, Judge Sirica promised, Amendment lawyer I know said the at the request of both prosecution and In 1975, to cover up an otherwise Times did more damage to his reputa- defense, to interview prospective jurors inexplicable inequity in sentencing, tion in three days than I could ever individually and in chambers. He did he simply quoted the last sentence of do.) The reputation they were con- not do so. As a result, when one juror the March 23, 1973, transcript, as cerned with was, oddly, mine. Virtually was reported, at a crucial moment in follows: every sentence in Barringer's piece ad- the trial, to have violated the seques- dressed what was her real subject: tration rules and spoken at length by Other factors will, of course, be consid- "'You could say this is a churlish, low- ered but I mention this one because it telephone with his wife, Sirica inter- down thing Renata Adler has done,'" is one over which you have control and viewed that juror to ascertain whether I mean each and everyone of you. for example, and, "'You could take the he had obtained information from the 397 F. Supp. Pp. 949 and 963 position that it says more about the outside world and communicated it to writer than about what she's writing.''' other jurors. it turned out that the ju- There is no doubt that Judge Sirica al- Clear enough. Even the quality of prose ror had in fact obtained such infor- tered this passage deliberately. About in this series of pieces-"smeared," mation. It also turned out that the ju- "you have control," he even notes "em- "cheaply smearing," "offhanded evis- ror neither spoke nor understood English. phasis added." The crucial alteration, ceration of various literati" (imagine, He knew only Spanish. To cover for however, isfrom "I mean eachone of the ifyou will, an offhanded evisceration), this error, Sirica dismissed the juror fitle of you" to "I mean each and every "veers from her literary prey to take a and simply sealed this embarrassing one of you." He includes only the swipe," "cavalier," "even more irre- portion of the record. The incident falsified transcript in his sponsible"-was not, whatever else it involved incompetence, surely, fol- "T book. may have been, the prose of journal- lowed by a substantial lapse of integrity. ism. More serious was his use of "provi- l" l"hy, then, wasthe Times soheav- I have friends who have said jok- sional sentencing" and outright dis- ilycommitted to the received idea that ingly, and some not so jokingly, that honesty in at least one instance of it. Sirica was "an American folk hero," they fear retaliation from the Times. Having imposed temporary sentences "by seemingly unanimous agreement, As well they might. I am not entirely of unprecedented severity on the five an honest man," and so forth. Part of lacking in experience of writing polem- defendants who pleaded guilty, Sirica the reason is that the Times itselfhas al- ical pieces. I have always found that it told them that their actual sentences ready said so, in its obituary-an ac- is not that easy. It requires some might depend on their cooperation cretion of myth, cliches, received ideas, thought, and some familiarity with the with subsequent investigations. This and self-serving fables recounted by material under review. On the other was, in itself, a highly improper use of the subject himself, unusually fulsome hand, honorable polemic, I would have provisional sentencing-widely criti- even for obituaries. Partly because a thought, does not call in reinforce- cized as "extortion," "abuse of ... pow- relatively recent, complacent kind of ments, attacks rather than joins mob er," and "the torture rack" by two pres- sloth on the part of many reporters- journalists. Here we find almost a par- idents of the American Bar Association sitting at a desk,phoning around, either ody-journalists not addressing un- and scholars ranging from Monroe repetitively badgering or, more com- derlying fact but interviewing one an- Freedman to Philip Kurland. Provi- monly, passivelyreceiving, quotes from other about what they "heard" or sional sentencing is a procedure to anonymous, self-interested, possiblyly- "smelled." Even the Times Editorial make sentences contingent on reports ing, or even nonexistent sources- said that my "charges" had "startled about the defendants' character, and tends to welcome, and to perpetuate, some of the nation's best investigative not as a device for judges to coerce tes- every sort of conventional wisdom and journalists who had covered Water- timony when the adversary system cliche. Partly because the Times iscom- gate and found Judge Sirica to be a (which is, after all, the American sys- mitted most profoundly to a certain principled jurist." "Startled" them! The tem) has already run its course. Far notion of itself. In the past, this com- herd, not in single spies but in battal- from demonstrating the bromide that mitment took a highly honorable form. ions, think the real world consistsof the no man, not even the president, is The publisher and his family, one received ideas they share with col- above the law, Judge Sirica proceeded knew, were devoted, financially and in leagues.

74 HARPER'S MAGAZINE / AUGUST 2000 It is true, I had criticized, sometimes directly, sometimes by implication, not just Charles McGrath and the Book Review but the Times. I had written a book, Reckless Disregard, that waslarge- ly a criticism of the press. There may even have been implicit criticism, in pieces I wrote over the years. In recent articles, for example, in Vanity Fair and the , I had found, in writing about the Starr Report and its accompanying volumes, proofthat lin- da Tripp had not required, as the Times kept reporting, a set of "elves," under the direction of the literary agent Lu- cianne Goldberg, to make her way,sur- reptitiously, and at the last minute, to the special prosecutor's office.She had, in fact, been working for that officefor almost four years. But that did not accounr for it ei- ther: the eight pieces, the alternately HARPERS derisive and punitive tone, the pressure MAGAZINE to recant. And the prose itself-there can be no clearer indication than this sort of writing that there is no news, no information, no substance there. I had written a sentence. Someone, offend- Let everyone know you read ed, had asked me to document the sen- tence. I had said I would do so. Not America's oldest continuously much of a story, one would have thought. In the days when there was published monthly magazine. still a standard of reporting, and of editing, "those who have read just Send for your special, limited-edition Harper's Magazine about all the books on Watergate" and 150th Anniversary T-shirt today. This generously sized "those most steeped in Watergate lore," whoever they might be, would have lOO%-cotton white shirt features illustrator Tullio Pericoli's been utterly unacceptable, in the exclusive caricature of famouslv contrarian contributor, Times, as sources. If the reporter had Mark Twain. And with the bold, blue Harper's logo on the any genuine inrerest in the matter, she would have "steeped" herself in "Wa- back, you'll be recognized for your style and good taste- tergate lore" and read the "books on whether you're coming or going! Watergate" herself. But no. Here's what it was. At one point, in answer not, as Felicity Barringer would have ORDER FORM it, to the question "Why wait?"-to Please send this order which I gave, repeatedly, the answer form with a check or money order (L.S. QUANTITY SIZE PRICE AMOUNT that I was not waiting at all-but to a funds onlv) or credit M /L /Xl $12.00 $ _ repetition of yet another ad personam card info;mation to: XXL $14.00 $ --- question, I said, "How can you be a Harpers Magazine, Dept. M, 666 Broadway, Add applicable sales tax for delivery in NY $ --- working journalist and phrase a ques- New York, NY 10012. Postage & Handling (up to $28, add $3.00/ $28.01 to $ --- tion as deeply silly as that?" Please specify quantity This isnot the wayyou are supposed and size. Allow 6 weeks $50, add $4.00/$50.01 to $100, add $5.00) $ --- to talk to the Times. I knew that. But for delivery. TOTAL ENCLOSED $ --- here obviously was the core of the of- SHIP TO: _ fense. So seriously did Barringer take it that she attached it to the wrong STREET: question. So seriously did the Times take it that the Editorial was virtually CITY/STATE/ZIP: PHONE: _ based on this inrimation that a Times CREDIT CARD: (MCMSAlAMEX) EXPDATE:

SIGNATURE: _ 8/00 reporter could phrase a deeply silly ceived ideas are not jusr propagated were apparently under the impression question. "Even more irresponsible," but enforced-and it is an unmistak- that I had used the Sirica passage as a the Editorial went on, was a line, in- ably totalitarian realm. \Vhat "issue," sort of headline, to "hype" my book. accurately quoted, in which I asked after all, could be resolved by a retrac- Why else, after all, would the Times Barringer whether she worried "that tion? Nothing about Sirica, certainly. have devoted so much space and so much about people's reputations." "Of The only issue resolved would be the many pieces to it? Piece after piece, course we do," the editorial actually power of the New York Times, in the in one medium after another, accept- said. (Of course.) "And so should she." person of Barringer and other writers, ed as fact John Dean's speculation that I have alwaysknown, and even writ- to coerce retractions. What this se- my source was Liddy. One spoke of my ten, that the strongest, perhaps sole re- quence amounted to was a show trial, trying "to sell" my book with a libel maining taboo on freedom of expres- with serial accusers, disinformation, that "shames all caring, responsible sion in this country is any criticism of designed to end, as show trials do, with journalists." That sort of thing. A the press. Here I had not only ques- forced confessions. media reporter for the Daily News tioned a received idea cherished by the Well, it nearly worked. It may still wrote, on the basis of the Times edi- Times; I had also been insufficiently work.The Times,ofcourse,isstill draw- torial, that my book had been "plagued deferential to this Timesreporter. And ing on trust and respect well earned by" a series of "forced retractions." (In the whole Times bureaucracy, instinc- some years ago. In the course of this re- a novel use, by a media reporter, of tively totalitarian, needed to stamp out cent episode, Joseph Lelyveld, the ex- the formula, she wrote, "Ms. Adler this disrespect. It would, of course, have ecutive editor, told me as early asApril wasn't available for comment"--on gone without saying, until the Times, 3 that he had no idea the Times had the basis, perhaps, of having made no through Barringer, cited it with indig- published so many disparaging pieces effort whatsoever to reach me.) nation, that a writer does choose what about my book. He would look out for Perhaps the most surprising instance to write and when to write it. Now the this sort of thing. Later, he said he of this herd of indignant Times-in- matter had come to this: if you do not would, if it had been his call, have run spired colleagues occurred on April 8, accept some cliche, bromide, or myth mv letter (revised,ofcourse, to conform on CNN's Capital Gang. Mark Shields, of theirs, and are not sufficiently def- with Times policy), but he had no ju- not usually, I would have thought, so erential to them, this is not just insub- risdiction over the Letters column. I orthodox a member of this guild, said, ordination. It is a Irreachof ethics. knew he had no jurisdiction over the "And now for 'The Outrage of the You must be admonished. You must Editorial page or the Op Ed pieces. (Ei- Week.'" I had "defamed," he said, be taught a lesson. Other people may ther John Dean is inspired, and writes, Judge Sirica, who was (in the by now learn from it. Not only is your own submits his work, and is edited with altogether obligatory mantra) a reputation affected. You must, above extraordinary speed, or his piece wasso- scrupulously honest hero. "Renata all, recant. And this, this last issue- licited right after I told Barringer,to her Adler owes the family retraction-is where the stakes are in- evident disappointment, that my source loved and the nation he served so well escapably, dangerously, raised. And was not G. Gordon Liddy.) The edito- an immediate and public why the whole series of attacks ad- rial board, of which, as we know, Bar- apology." dresses something more serious than ringer'shusband is a member, does have my little book. Look again at Bar- jurisdiction over both pages. On April Owing the nation an immediare ringer's formulation: 7, Lelyveld sent me a fax. "I try to lean and public apology does seem a bit over backwards in matters of correc- much. But the Times's campaign be- As it stands,Ms.AdlerandSimon& gan, I suppose, with that first letter Schuster, a unit of Viacom, are either tions and editor's notes," he wrote. He cheaply smearing Judge Sirica-with and Barringer, however, had consid- from the editor who subsequently said legalimpunity-or theyhave evidence. ered my note. "At this point the only "he had decided to distance himself." ... But neither the publisher nor the solution I can see,"he concluded, "isfor I should have left the galleys as they author shows any urgency about re- us all to give the matter a rest." This were. There followed the whole set of solving the issue,either by retracting waswonderful.The Timeshad attacked pieces, right through the almost laugh- the accusation or establishing its me eight times (only the last four of ably disingenuous characterization of accuracy. them had even the pretext of Judge John Dean. Disinformation. Show tri- This is nothing if not a coercive for- Sirica), citing (perhaps this goes with- al. Confession. Retraction. mulation, pressure not just on a writer out saying) exclusively hostile Not just yet. but on her publisher, and even her pub- "sources." These pieces had directly The Times, financially successful as lisher's owner, "Simon & Schuster, a impugned my "ethics." They would not it may be, is a powerful but, at this unit of Viacom," to retract. Whenev- print a letter, an editor's note, or a cor- moment, not very healthy institution. er-and I think this is true without ex- rection. The only solution "for us all" The issue is not one book or even ception-you find a publication, or a was to let the matter rest. Of course it eight pieces. It is the state of the en- journalist, calling for a retraction by, of did not rest. Two days later, there was tire cultural mine shaft, with the arch- all things, a solitary writer (and actual the news item in the Week in Review. censor, still in some ways the world's pressure on her publisher, "cheaply Other journalists-in solidarity and greatest newspaper, advocating the smearing"), you know what sort of taking their cue from the trusted and most explosive gases and the cutting realm you are in. It is a realm where re- venerated Times-checked in. Some off of air. -

76 HARPER'S MAGAZINE / AUGUST 2000