Read Game of Thorns: The Inside Story of Hillary Clinton's Failed Campaign and Donald Trump's Winning Strategy by Doug Wead Online

game-of-thorns-the-inside-story-of-hillary-clinton-s-failed-campaign-and-donald-trump-s-winning-strategy

Here is the first, insider, account of the precipitous fall of Hillary Clinton. How the scandals of a lifetime finally reached critical mass. How, in the last few days of the campaign, some on her staff saw the ghostly shroud of defeat creeping over them but were helpless to act, frozen by the self-denial of the group.Here is an explanation of why the national media and thHere is the first, insider, account of the precipitous fall of Hillary Clinton. How the scandals of a lifetime finally reached critical mass. How, in the last few days of the campaign, some on her staff saw the ghostly shroud of defeat creeping over them but were helpless to act, frozen by the self-denial of the group.Here is an explanation of why the national media and their corporate owners kept Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren out of the race. Why they wanted their investment in the Clinton's to work and how they were willing to go to great lengths to make that happen.Don't have time to read the thousands of leaked emails from inside the Clinton machine?The author has done it for you and has come back from the experience with a stunning peak into the world of a political leader who privately declared that she wanted a hemisphere "with open trade and open borders."Finally, here is the story of the rise of Donald Trump.How his opponents sought to derail him.This is the story of how Donald Trump's message and brand transcended the traps laid by his enemies. How, against all odds, he won the presidency. And here are the details of his plan to make American great again....

Title : Game of Thorns: The Inside Story of Hillary Clinton's Failed Campaign and Donald Trump's Winning Strategy
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 9781478921424
Format Type : Hardcover
Number of Pages : 416 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

Game of Thorns: The Inside Story of Hillary Clinton's Failed Campaign and Donald Trump's Winning Strategy Reviews

  • mr michael j woods
    2018-11-25 15:50

    For a better, less biased understanding of why the democrats where abandoned by the rust belt working class read hillbilly elegy. This book lacks any insight that could not be found by screaming I hate Hilary into a mirror.

  • Randal White
    2018-11-16 11:43

    Utter Hogwash! From the cover of the book, I expected it to be somewhat partisan. "The inside story of Hillary Clinton's failed campaign and Donald Trump's winning strategy". However, I was unprepared for what lay inside. Wead not only completely and utterly lays the fault of everything from the fall of America to the crucifying of Christ at the hands of Clinton, he totally absolves Trump as the second coming of Christ himself. While utilizing great journalistic prose such as "the first lady ALLEGEDLY answered. The story was APPARENTLY corroborated by others". Granted, Clinton was a deeply flawed candidate, with a huge trunk of baggage and an apparent dislike of the truth, but to have to embellish her story with the use of allegedly and apparently is the work of a jealous high schooler who has been thrown over for a prom date. It would have been so much more effective to just lay out the facts, and let the reader make up their own mind. Wead takes just the opposite tack with Trump. Not a word of dissent was spoken against him. Instead, readers learn of Trump's conquering of his military school, his unquestionable belief in God, and his single-handed saving of New York City in the 1970's. Not satisfied with merely trashing Clinton, Wead turns his eye on the "evil media". Such as "CNN covered the quote, but then added its own commentary; it couldn't trust the viewers to hear Trump without a filter". And, "But the major American media had already picked the winner and they weren't interested in narratives that might confuse their audience". I honestly could not stomach the entire book. I made it through the first 40%, by holding my nose and trying to give it a fair read. Perhaps it is too soon to objectively look at the election as the battle between two deeply flawed candidates. Hopefully we will learn from this round and improve in the future. I received this book from NetGalley in exchange for a honest review. I only wish it was possible to assign a negative number of stars.

  • Brendan Crowley
    2018-11-28 09:44

    Poorly written rushed book with gushing sycophantic praise of Trump and his team. The collection of the Clinton scandals was eye opening but the repeated use of alt right language like "corporate media" and the references to Kushner, Ivanka, Bannon etc as geniuses was ridiculous. The chapter on how Trump almost single handedly saved New York City is so ridiculous even Trump wouldn't make such claims. Clearly written by someone looking to praise trump at all costs with zero objectivity. The response to media bias is not to be even more biased in the other direction.

  • Emely
    2018-11-20 09:50

    Maybe instead of reading "thousands of leaked emails from inside the Clinton machine" the author Wead should read history books. A lot of them. Just to make this clear, I am not a Clinton supporter, but this "her emails" is getting really, really damn old. Unfortunately "her emails" was one of the reasons why Americans are now facing and witnessing the fall of an empire. Their own country.Besides, absolving an extremely dangerous, destructive, narcissistic, and obsessively ill informed and un-/under-educated dictator named Trump is not worth a single star (but alas, in order to rate this horrific book I'm forced to give one).I will not even pass on this book to others, neither will I drop it off it at a thrift shop. No, I will simply rip it up and then burn it. But that's probably already too much attention I would give its destruction.

  • Tara Brabazon
    2018-12-13 11:52

    This book is hard on Hillary Clinton and gently apologist of Donald Trump. However, I now understand much more clearly the relationship between the FBI and the Clintons, and the role of Bill Clinton's earlier presidency and indiscretions on the Hillary campaign.What is clear from this book - and we do know this - is that the Clintons had to play hard ball for a long time to claim the White House for Bill's presidency. This book shows there was too much baggage, too many enemies, and too many bad deals for Hillary to claim any moral high ground. Even in response to the ethics-vacuum that is Donald Trump, Hillary could not claim ascendancy because of the deals that had been done with, by and for Bill Clinton.Disturbing reading.

  • Edd
    2018-11-14 12:41

    Not a Trump supporter.Not a Clinton supporter.This was really just a fluff piece about Trump; hit piece on Clinton. If you had paid just a little attention to the the news during the primary and general election reading most of this book is unnecessary; just a rehash. Wead goes into great detail revisiting the Clinton's scandals going back to Whitewater. If you're old enough to remember Bill Clinton's presidency there isn't much more here.

  • Jason Long
    2018-11-20 08:39

    There's no inside story here. It's equal parts 1) thorough cataloging of the 90s Clinton scandals (told in a scornful tone), 2) Trump's family and history, (told in a glowing tone) and 3) a chronological retelling of the primaries and election.

  • Bob Mehlhoff
    2018-12-03 08:31

    Since I was very surprised by the election of Donald Trump, I wanted to read about the "why?"Probably too much baggage for Hillary. From this account, it appears her hubris knew no bounds and her key campaign people missed numerous signals that her campaign was in trouble. In this book, her husband, former President Bill Clinton, senses the race is closer in the final months and tries to push her to reach out more to disaffected blue collar workers in the upper Midwest - the very states which cost her the Electoral College majority in the end.I thought Trump is fairly portrayed in the book - many of his faults are shown. Yet, this book shows that Trump tapped into a serious anger that many Americans had, and may continue to have, toward the elitist Washington establishment and how he used a very innovative strategy to turn the tables on both the Republican and Democrat political parties to win the Presidency. To underestimate the calculatedness of his strategy, perhaps going forward into his Presidency, seems to me to underestimate the man's intellect and vision.Excellent read!. Highly recommended.

  • Daniel Hewitt
    2018-11-27 08:36

    This is no inside story. It’s a trawl through the best and worst of the Clinton scandals of yesteryear: part factual, part rehashed conspiracy theory. What follows is a superficial overview of the primaries with no inside knowledge or first account information. It’s vaguely useful if you want a very general understanding of why conservatives hate Hilary Clinton So much, but this book is the one of the worst you will ever read on the 2016 election. Do not bother.

  • Robin Case
    2018-11-29 11:54

    Well written account of both the Donald Trump phenomenon and the Hillary Clinton campaign. As a former Bill Clinton apologist, I had to rethink some of my previous beliefs. Most of the book is rehash if you are interested in politics, but this book has the first intelligent reason for the Hillary Clinton campaign for President that I have encountered. There are a few interesting new interpretations, evidence and critics. I would call it 95% well written account and 5% new stuff.

  • Csparrenberger
    2018-11-22 12:57

    Wow. Where did this book come from? I had not heard about it when I picked it up. What a great book about the2016 election. Very well written and so much information between the covers. I especially liked the historical look at the candidates and their pasts. There is a lot of interesting material here. A+

  • Matthew
    2018-12-13 07:49

    Just garbage. I can't believe I read the whole thing. I didn't know Doug Wead at the outset, but now I know he's a Clinton-hating hack and Trump sycophant. Six months into the abomination administration, I hope he's working on a sequel. How do you like your record-setting disapproval polling, justice obstructing dumpster fire now, Wead? But her emails(!), right?

  • Mike He
    2018-11-27 15:48

    It's fair to say that Donald Trump didn't win the 2016 presidential election simply by chance or out of luck. "Game of Thorns," though superficial and written by a partisan author, does reveal some of the tit-for-tat, sometimes trial-and-error political campaign strategies that really worked and eventually sent Trump to the White House.

  • Sharon
    2018-11-29 12:28

    I was hoping for an unbiased depiction of what happened in November 2016, but instead the author chose to denigrate Hillary Clinton and sing the praises of Donald Trump. I'll continue to look for something less partisan.

  • Rebecca
    2018-11-22 11:41

    I really enjoyed this book. It was interesting to see what happened behind the scenes. Regardless of whose side your on, this is going to be a fascinating part of history and I enjoyed learning about it.

  • Ken Hamner
    2018-12-02 11:43

    Excellent book that should be read by anyone interested in that election. Great background research.

  • Debbie
    2018-11-14 11:53

    This book should be required reading for all registered voters.

  • Dgoll
    2018-11-30 13:53

    Superficial look

  • Mike Hohrath
    2018-12-05 09:54

    Pretty decent book on the two candidates running. He spent about half the book bashing Clinton, a quarter chronicling the meteoric rise of President Trump, and a quarter going over the actual election. I think he went a bit too far bashing Hillary, although the scandals are definitely a big reason why she wasn't elected, the author went into detail into each and everyone of them, even the one's that weren't as relevant to the election. This book did get me fired up though & glad to have Trump as victor of the election, although I admittedly had been a supporter since the early days of the Republican Primaries. Still a good read, if you still don't understand why Trump won and Hillary lost, this is a good book for you.

  • Christy
    2018-11-21 13:40

    I completely tuned out of the 2016 presidential campaign because I was sure Hillary was going to win, and I didn’t want to watch it happen. But then, I wasn’t excited about Trump, either--he didn't seem like presidential material. And, like everybody else, I was shocked to wake up on the morning of November 9th to find out that he had won. How did it happen? This unabashedly pro-Trump retelling of the campaign is a page turner. And there’s lots of cool inside information. On election night, Hillary screamed obscenities and threw things at her staff. Donald Trump’s supporters gave each other high fives and sang“God Bless America.” Now, with 20-20 hindsight, I wish I had followed the whole thing. I doubt we'll ever see a campaign like this again!

  • Vnunez-Ms_luv2read
    2018-11-24 12:40

    Very good book with an in-depth look at the Republican and Democratic nominee of the 2016 presidential election. Very good analysis on who Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are and very interesting background on both. Although there are things that are written about in this publication, the way it is presented may have you looking at things a bit differently than you already may have/be. Very good writing, holds your interest and actually have you wanting to go back as soon as you can to pick up where you left off. Yes, we know how the election turned out, but still read this book. Thanks to NetGalley, the author and the publisher for the ARC of this book in return for my honest review. I will be purchasing this book to pass along to family/friends.

  • Judy
    2018-11-19 10:57

    Well written but certainly favoring the Republican party. Lots of dirt on the Clinton camp and this was a down and dirty run for the presidency. OK Trump you won. However, the leadership is poor and it's encouraging extremists to think they can do anything. Now it's high noon in Portland this Sunday. Looks like the USA is going back to the wild west.

  • Lee Humphrey
    2018-12-13 13:28

    Another book explaining (or trying to explain) the 2016 election contest between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Early on, Wead reports the most astounding statistics and examples about pundit prognostications which turned out wrong: the New York Times gives Hillary the win at 91% to Trumps 9%; Larry Sabato (Center for Politics, U/VA) with his "crystal ball" had Clinton winning 322 electoral votes to 216 for Trump. The New York magazine had a cover all ready to go showing Trump with an angry, contorted face and "Loser" stamped across the page. Also astounding is that Hillary outspent Trump by millions and millions, and she had almost 1 million volunteers across the country compared to ... well ... nobody knows/knew how many Trump volunteers were out there, or where they were. Wead spends an entire chapter on the "Clintons' War with the FBI" in which he covers all the gory details from Travelgate (Hillary enlists the FBI in her goal to fire all the White House travel people to install her own, and destroys people's reputations and careers in the process) to Filegate (a scandal that involved Clintons getting personnel information about Republican politicians from the FBI), Chinagate, etc etc and then of course Monika Lewinsky (who was only one of Bill's girls against whom the FBI found that both the Clintons orchestrated personal attacks). Then there was the foreign money flooding into the DNC and Clinton's campaign. And on and on, including the (Puerto Rican) FALN pardons granted by Bill just as he left office, and Whitewater and the various Chinagates. The upshot of most of this chapter is that the FBI often felt used by the Clintons and then burned. All of which precedes the story of the FBI Comey's decision to announce, just a few days before the election, that the FBI was once again investigated Hillary. Wead's conclusion is that Comey did what he (Comey) thought was the right thing to do, and did not make a political move or statement.Hillary lost the election, so says Wead, largely because she ignored the wide berth of voters in rural areas. As did her husband, Bill Clinton, who knew from his own presidential campaign (and intuitively) that these were a group of people not to ignore (or ignore at your own peril). The wikileaked emails from campaign staff, like Podesta, making fun of Catholics and evangelicals didn't help her any either. He also makes the argument (or states) that Trump cashed in on media attention without having to pay a dime. According to Wead, Trump had earned close to $2 billion in free media coverage (page 350). But the TV (especially) networks had a vested interest in keeping a good story going, and milking it for all it was worth. Trump was always good for an ear catching, outrageous statement of some kind that gave the news a big kick each day. The media must have wakened up every morning saying: "thank you god for sending me this guy." Wead covers some of Trumps foilbles, missteps and crassness ... and of course the Entertainment tape with the crude, crass language and language that sounds misognynist (depending on the soundbite). If Wead's a little weak on the Trump problems, maybe giving him a pass, it's probably because Trump doesn't come with the huge amount of baggage as the Clintons carry around, and have for decades. Wead also points out that compared to other presidential (or political) scandals, the Clintons have ongoing, uninterrupted scandals, of the ethical as well as the financial ones.Trump tapped into the real concerns, economic concerns and woes, of real people which apparently overrode Trump's awfulness. He was able to connect with the "flyover" voters in middle America, many of whom had voted for Obama, not once but twice.The foul language of Hillary supporters that Wead reports in the book are truly off the charts, and wondrous to think that these are the kinds of people that anyone would want backing them. I mean, it's way beyond, any kind of decent, civil language. Pages 344, Miley Cyrus had a photo of her standing puts her face between her legs with a caption saying ... Kiss my Ass if you aren't voting @Hillary ... and this is one of the least foul. Other celebrities of course comparing Trump to Hitler with unrepeatable language. Some of the people who I'd kind of thought of as decent human beings no longer fit in that category for me ... like Neil Young. Other foul-mouth Hillary supporters are not surprising .. like rapper Jay-Z. Ironically Wead feels it's ok to spell out every f-word (and there are many) but not the n-word. So he has n--! Isn't there something really out of sync here?My final thought on finishing this book is not "how did this happen" but "can we possibly be surprised" that we ended up with two candidates who personify the uncivil, crass, crude, foul mouthed culture that's taken over our world, or at least our media world. Whether it's a Hillary who lied for, supported the husband who lied, cheated, and sexually assaulted young and old women, or the Donald Trump of Access Hollywood, these two embody the civilization in which we live (to use a word that's certainly an oxymoron). And as someone said, in a democracy, voters get exactly the representation they deserve.

  • JDR
    2018-11-24 08:39

    Donald Trump and his wife, Melania, had come down the escalator at Trump Tower on June 16, 2015. Less than a year later, it was finally done. His father, Fred Trump, had taught him as a young man to embrace competition. Now he had triumphed over sixteen extraordinary political candidates in the most grueling contest of all. They were nine governors, five senators, a businesswoman, and a brain surgeon. Donald Trump had won the Republican nomination for president of the United States.Game of Thornsis the best narrative of the 2016 election I have read to date. It will be obliterated and panned by members of the left, by ardent Hillary supporters for being too biased and unfair. Notice that the top reviews do not reflect the overall ratings. They hate it. They hate that it speaks the truth that they cannot comprehend from their ivory towers and echo chambers. Trump's rise to presidency is the greatest "against all odds" story in political history. Wead is able to capture the complete and horrid corruption of a single candidate, a lifetime of dishonesty towards a nation in Hillary Clinton. He is able to capture her ruthless and power hungry ambition as she hypocritically runs against every issue she says she champions if it gets in her way. She could be the most anti-women candidate if it harmed Bill Clinton's image or her chances or their foundation of money. Donald Trump beat the greatest political machine in the history of the United States. There has never been anything in American history more Shakespearean than this past election.And Wead does a phenomenal job at it - capturing the history of the abominable Clintons, capturing the rise of Donald Trump, the primaries, and the inevitable general election. He spends way more time on the history of Clinton than I would have thought and maybe even desired, but a lot of it has been so hidden and panned by the media that even I was unaware of some of them. It is amazing how skewed our institutions have become. Trump's victory can even be interpreted in the most marxist sense, and all the supposed marxists are the ones who voted against him! They had been wrong. Almost all of them had been wrong. Entertainers betting on winning the Presidential Medal of Freedom in the East Room. Pundits and journalists who had sacrificed their independence and integrity for a little power. Major corporations and banks that had found ways to give millions to the Clintons over the years, with the Clintons telegraphing back that they would find a way to pay their debts. The Lannisters always pay their debts."I hope you don't do it," Melania Trump had told him two years earlier, "but if you run, you'll win."He had won. Donald Trump had been elected president of the United States. And he had warned anyone who would listen. "I don't lose often," he told them. "I almost never lose." There is not a better thought for a conservative than the knowledge that the worst candidate in election history, the most corrupt politician in the history of the nation, Hillary Rodham Clinton would not attain her prize after a lifetime of ruthlessness and having done nothing for the American People. It keeps me up at night with a smile that justice was done. I wholeheartedly recommend this read for truth and honesty.

  • Jesse Field
    2018-12-12 13:52

    I picked this up thinking it was Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton's Doomed Campaign by Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes. Wead's version of the story is actually quite a counterpoise to Allen and Parnes, it turns out. They are journalists; Wead is a pundit and sometime historian. They are sympathetic to the Democrats issues; Wead toadies to Trump. But the events covered are quite similar, and the reasons for Hillary's loss and Trump's victory do, even in such widely variant perspectives, more or less align. The Hillary camp never expected so many voters apathetic after many election cycles to turn out in force, angry at the establishment. What comes out in Wead's narrative, if obliquely, is that compromising stories of Bill Clinton's sex scandals, along with even less savory stories of pay-for-play politics in the House of Clinton, were mostly ignored in the mainstream American press, but picked up from fringe sources in the USA by the British press, then filtered back into US sources. This machine for cycling bad news helped haunt Hillary Clinton in 2016, with additional scandals as well, such those surrounding her alleged poor leadership on Libya during her in the State department. The biggest substance of Wead's analysis seems to be that the Clintons frightened voters in too many ways by 2016, and Trump offered an alternative the voters knew irritated Washington power circles and big business, not to mention a media and entertainment sector that seems constantly to talk down to them. That's fair enough. The self-righteous tone of Hillary and so many of her supporters kept up did nothing to get her to the finish line. Trump was more relatable, as they say. But Wead makes little case for the idea that voters were right to choose him, with a just downright dishonest and disingenuous account that plays down the man's sexism, his bigoted comments, and the corruption that infuses the Trump Organization. And there is little mention of the Russian campaign of misinformation which played such a big role in this campaign. Chapters on Paul Manafort and Roger Stone await good journalists down the line.

  • Lois
    2018-12-04 08:28

    The first thing I have to say about the book, is to ask myself why I chose to relive the 2016 election over again. The first time was bad enough, but reading about it again a mere 7 months afterwards? I question my own sanity!The biggest hole in this tale is why. Doug Wead was going to tell me the "inside story" about Donald Trump's winning strategy. Yes, I know Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were both extremely flawed candidates. I was hoping the author would explain how it came to be. Dumb luck is all that I came to conclude.The book is well-written and well-researched. It was jarring in a few places where he inserted himself in third person. These places could have been left out. It seems self-serving to say that most pundits believed Hillary would win the election, except for the author of this book. He alone predicted Trump's victory, or so he would have you believe. Being prone to believe conspiracies to a certain degree, I hoped he would dig up some information on the alleged meeting between Bill Clinton and Donald Trump a few months prior to him announcing he was running for president. I also hoped he would dig into Trump's past political forays. He did talk about his childhood and relationship with his father, but not a peep about the 2000 election when the germaphobe Trump ran as a Reform Party candidate, and dropped out to avoid shaking hands. In addition to him being a member of the Reform Party, a past Democrat, and a financial supporter of the Clinton Foundation, it might have helped this reader (third person identifier) understand why he ran as a Republican.Some other reviewers of this book feel the book is slanted pro-Trump. I honestly don't think it is, but the author clearly supported Trump above Hillary, and missed some opportunities to reveal the plethora of conspiracy theories that abounded throughout the months leading up to the 2016 election.

  • Vincent Ferrari
    2018-12-01 07:49

    So, like any good review should, let's cover the good and the bad.First the goodHearing the 2016 election chronologically and the improbability of Trump winning is stunning when it's told as a narrative. It just, by any measurement, shouldn't have happened. With that said, though, Hillary helped herself with a heaping pile of bad decisions and Donna Brazile could probably be mostly cited as the reason Hillary didn't win.The history of Trump was interesting and it got me thinking no one really did a good "post election puff piece" on him. His background, his family story, etc. Everything written about Trump pre and post election was a hit piece, so it was nice to see his story being told, even if it was a bit glowing, which brings me to the major two negative points of the book...The bad...Wow, this guy loves Trump. I mean really does love Trump. The pictures painted of the two candidates couldn't be more divergent.In fairness, the chronicling of Hillary's history was good, but also too much of the book. The recounting of the numerous Clinton scandals over the decades plus the breaking up of "well-known" narratives was very informative, but I wasn't happy with how much time was spent covering things that happened in 1995. Not at all.I would've liked to see more inside information on 2016 and less on 1996 for sure, even though the context of what a Clinton presidency would've meant is important.OverallA very good book that did hit home on some points I was unaware of, but one Hillary lovers will probably pan without any thought just because of the overall slant. Read it with a grain of salt and you'll be fine.

  • BertHopkins
    2018-12-06 07:48

    A good review of the many, many scandals of both Hillary and Bill Clinton. At age 71 I had forgotten the myriad scandals of the Clintons in the 70's. For example she traded cattle futures where: "Her initial $1,000 investment had generated nearly $100,000 when she stopped trading after ten months." Incidentally : "One analysis performed by Auburn University and published in the Journal of Economics and Finance claimed to find that the odds of a return that large during the period in question were about one in 31 trillion."Her defense of a rapist of a 12 year old girl is especially disturbing after a recording emerged where she laughed about getting her client off. Then we had the 80's, the 90's with the Clinton presidency (many, many scandals), 00's with her time in the Senate and the 10's with her her stint as Secretary of State. All leading up to her monumental loss to President Trump. Let me be very clear. I am convinced that Hillary committed the crimes of espionage and treason against my country to advance own private agenda. She must be brought to justice but only time will tell if she is prosecuted.

  • Shan Bentz
    2018-12-12 09:46

    My hope was that this would be the 'other half' (i.e., the Trump perspective) of the story that Jonathan Allen's "Shattered" tells about the 2016 election. This book did not deliver. "Game of Thorns" does well in reminding the reader of the longstanding blood feud between the Clintons and the FBI, but a shorthand reminder -rather than a scandal-by-scandal recounting- would have sufficed in this regard. It's helpful to remember these insofar as they lend some narrative glue to the Comey chicanery of 2016, but all of it could (*should*) have been expressed in a well-wrought paragraph or two. Whereas Allen's "Shattered" is indeed a sympathetic look at Hillary's campaign, its sympathy is nuanced; Wead's look at Trump lacks any such nuance, and at its lowest points is sophomorically hagiographic.

  • Peter Ackerman
    2018-11-15 12:32

    The definitive book on the election of Donald Trump to the presidency of the United States still has yet to be written. This presentation gets close to what this reader wants to know, but does not deliver a balanced view. Though it does delve more into what Trump delivered and to whom, it does not touch nearly on all of the slip ups by the Clinton campaign.Though I enjoyed the book, it did not reveal much that is not already known through previous reporting or delve deeper into the same.