I am a presidential historian. In fact, I am the Founder of the Society of Presidential Historians in Academia (SOPHIA). sophiascholars.com Many historians might thumb their nose at this book, deeming it not "scholarly," but I don’t share that view. Confronting the Presidents is historically accurate, eminently engaging, refreshingly objective, and highly entertaining. Far too many scholarly history books are written to preserve the historical record, and that’s important. But consequently, they contain painstakingly dry and often excruciatingly boring detail. But this book is chock full of information that's easy to digest, so the reader's eyes can easily glide from page to page. Bill O'Reilly (assisted by Martin Dugard) devotes a chapter to each president, from Washington to Obama, understandably omitting Trump and Biden, who at the time of writing were running for president again; O'Reilly focuses only on presidents who were done. O'Reilly engages the reader in dramatic fashion with chapter-openers such as: "George Washington is mad as his mother" (p. 3, describing a longstanding feud between the two), "The Executive Mansion [now the White House] is ablaze" (p. 33, when the British invaded and set fire to Washington, DC during the War of 1812), "Franklin Pierce needs a drink" (p. 108, explaining that president's propensity to consume large amounts of alcohol), and "The President of the United States is stuck" (p. 215, referring to William Howard Taft's large 350-pound body being stuck in the tub during his baths). I knew all of those things ahead of time, as well as most of the numerous other fascinating facts O'Reilly describes, because presidential history is my field. But I learned some new interesting tidbits too, such as: A few years before becoming president and leader of the Confederate Army, respectively, Abraham Lincoln and Robert E. Lee worked together to coordinate incoming President Zachary Taylor's inauguration festivities (p. 98), that Taylor and his running mate Millard Fillmore never met face-to-face until after they won the election (p. 104), that Gerald and Betty Ford were the first president and first lady to sleep in the same bedroom in the White House (p. 333), and that Barack Obama is fluent in Indonesian (p. 383). The book is remarkably objective until the Afterword, when O'Reilly and Dugard show their hand and tell us what they think of Trump and Biden, and we finally learn that Dugard, who's been collaborating with O'Reilly on books for years and years but has mostly remained in the shadows, in contrast to the conservative-minded (but registered independent) O'Reilly, is a liberal! That in my mind adds gravitas to their work, as they can assess matters from varying perspectives. The only disappointment I have with a book this rich in presidential anecdotes is that there aren't any cited sources. Oh, it's not that I doubt the information's veracity (like I said, I already knew most of it and have no doubt to believe that any of it is inaccurate); it's just that footnotes/endnotes are helpful to those interested in further reading. What may seem like frivolous presidential trivia to some is in my view what makes this book so valuable: that George Washington didn't attend his mother's funeral (though, in fairness, it's been said that the news didn't get to him in time) and never had a headstone put on her grave (no excuses for that one). It's important because we tend to vilify our modern-day presidents, yet we all but declare holy those on Mount Rushmore. But here we learn how the "Father of our Country" treated his mother's memory, and hopefully it reminds us that history has a tendency to wash away or galvanize a president's image, and that all of the presidents - every single one of them - had good points and bad points. This is great read in language simple enough for novices but informative enough even for those of us who've made presidential history a life's work.

I wish there was a 10 rating to give this book! Oh, sure, we've all heard the history of these presidents. But! Not like this depiction! I learned so much about them all. The personal color is wonderful. It is a giant history lesson! I bought a second copy and inscribed it for my 16 year old grandson who loves history. I want to keep my own copy for reference. Amazing how the early presidents and their families lived. It gives a glimpse of life in those times that I have never even thought about. The writings is terrific. Reasonable chapter length, humor, factual, and yes it does have some footnotes. The color photos of every president and spouse are beautiful. This book is a real winner! Thank you to both authors for writing it!

I have just completed reading Bill O'Reilly's "Confronting the Presidents: No Spin Assessment." It is an exceptionally well-crafted and impressive book. To fully appreciate its insights, I recommend watching the NewNation special report episode in which Bill O'Reilly discusses his book and outlines his views on the five best and five worst U.S. presidents. This episode serves as a cinematic counterpart to the book. O'Reilly's evaluation of the presidents is refreshingly candid, and while his approach may be subjective, it is grounded in a punctually and righteous objective belief. When asked if he has a bias against Lyndon Johnson, O'Reilly responded affirmatively, noting that Johnson's era coincided with his own. I share the sentiments of Leland Vittert; I rank Johnson among my top 25 presidents due to his remarkable skills as a legislative and executive leader. He set a precedent for future leaders on how to effectively advance policy in Congress while managing relationships with congressional members. To be an effective majority whip, one must be assertive yet not Machiavellian, and geniously pragmatic and meticulously transactional embodying a demeanor that is both strategic and benevolent (harmless as a dove). His Great Society initiative exemplifies his exceptional ability to set a visionary agenda and his presidential aspirations. It is my hope that a Republican will, in the future, endeavor to reinterpret the Great Society with a conservative perspective. O'Reilly indeed took a strong stance against Johnson, particularly regarding the allegations of corruption related to Vietnam, which are largely speculative. While I concur that Johnson's handling of the Vietnam War was disastrous, it was driven by noble intentions. Nonetheless, I admire O'Reilly's intellectual courage in challenging what he perceives as an overly romanticized view of Presidents. I believe the narrative surrounding George Washington Washington romanticized, primarily to uphold the legacy of our first President, especially in the context of the Revolutionary War. I have never maintained a list of individuals I regard unfavorably; however, I have consistently held a negative view of George Washington. Following the Revolutionary War, his aspirations appeared to lean towards establishing a monarchy, as he seemed disinclined to relinquish his position. Alexander Hamilton's role was to astutely implement Washington's agenda, which included dismantling the Articles of Confederation and ensuring compliance among the populace. I contend that Hamilton exerted undue pressure on Congress during Washington's first term and ultimately manipulated the electorate to secure Washington's reelection through coercive tactics, never hesitating to employ intimidation. Furthermore, he perpetuated the former colonial practice of taxation without representation, or at least endeavored to do so. John Adams maintained a position of neutrality, placing his trust in the nascent Republic. Conversely, the faction led by Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe recognized Washington's intentions. Ultimately, Washington miscalculated with his Whiskey Tax in Western Pennsylvania, as the local rebels refused to comply. In a show of authority, Washington traveled to Pittsburgh to assert his presence, only to be met with a humiliating response in Pittsburgh Pirates fashion, who subjected him to tarring and feathering. While I will refrain from speculating about the involvement of Jefferson's camp in this incident, it is worth noting that Washington, despite stepping down in disgrace, established a commendable precedent by serving two terms. Interestingly, the audacity of the Pirates was evident in their decision to name the city where Washington faced this indignity 'Washington.' I mean Pirates figuratively. My assessment of the George Washington and Alexander Hamilton administration is one that is confrontational, righteous, and subjective. Hamilton harbored resentment over this perspective and believed he could form an alliance with John Adams. However, Adams maintained a neutral stance, supporting the new Republic alongside figures such as Benjamin Franklin and Justice John Marshall. In stark contrast, Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson remained fierce adversaries until Hamilton's untimely death. It is indeed unfortunate, as Hamilton was arguably the most brilliant of the founding fathers and would have made an exceptional president. Wow! Confronting The Ps is a heavyweight assessment. I encountered some profound insights from Bill O'Reilly that truly challenged my thinking. Rather than merely shocking my conscience, it profoundly stimulated my intellect. Bill employs what I refer to as the NEUL grading scale, a unique system used by Northeastern Law School. Attending Northeastern was my aspiration, but I was not accepted, while my sister was, which I suspect she did to highlight my own rejection. Regardless, instead of traditional letter or numerical grades, NEUL students receive narrative evaluations, which categorize their performance as Fail, Honors, or High Honors for exemplary academic achievement. O'Reilly employs the NEUl framework to assess the effectiveness of presidential leadership, placing particular emphasis on the following criteria: Equal Justice for All, Moral Authority, Crisis Leadership, and Performance within the context of their respective times. The presidents he identifies as having failed primarily lack moral authority, including Franklin Pierce and Andrew Johnson. There appears to be a potential typographical error in the book, as it lists Trump among the bottom five presidents without providing an explanation. However, in a subsequent interview, he presents a revised bottom five: Franklin Pierce, John Tyler, Lyndon Johnson, and James Buchanan. He critiques Lyndon Johnson for his inadequate international relations. In my assessment using NEUL, I have identified only three presidents who have been ineffective as Commander-in-Chief: George Washington, along with O'Reilly's selections of Andrew Johnson and Joe Biden. Notably, Franklin Pierce and Joe Biden are the only presidents in U.S. history who faced demands from their own parties to resign. It is my hope that O'Reilly remains sufficiently objective to annually update and refine this remarkable project based on the constructive feedback he receives and the new insights he acquires. This practice is similar to that of C-SPAN, as highlighted by Brian Lamb, who noted that historians have elevated Ronald Reagan's ranking by one position in each of C-SPAN's last two surveys, placing him in the top ten for the first time in 2009. His scores have seen the most significant improvement in the areas of crisis leadership and economic management. However, Reagan is ranked 33rd in administrative skills, which is among the lowest rankings for any president in the top ten. My NEUL criteria place significant emphasis on the following aspects: international relations, administrative capabilities, moral authority, crisis leadership, congressional relations, and the ability to set a vision and agenda. Before engaging with "Confronting the Ps," my top-ranked individual was Adams, succeeded by Quincy Adams, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and George H.W. Bush. After my analysis of "Confronting the Ps," I have revised my top choice to James Monroe, whom I regard as the Abraham Lincoln of the Republic of Liberia. Lincoln now occupies the second position, as I greatly admire his bold vision. In his inaugural address, he notably challenged the South with the phrase, "I dare you." Jefferson has moved up to the third position, followed by Reagan and Calvin Coolidge. Excellent work Bill; I pray and look forward to annual updates to this Assessment.

The writing style is far from boring, very interesting, easy to read, and even humorous at times. A great book!

Bill O'Reilly's series of history books are fact-based, no agendas, and in a style that makes learning history enjoyable.

I'm a Brit. I have never been so absorbed in such an epic political thriller! This book is so easy to read. It narrates beautifully in such a human way. I am happy to understand far more about the history of the USA told in such honest and uncompromising ways. Absolutely super book. There is far more depth to the history than I have ever seen before. Fantastic book! 5 stars!!!!

Interesting and insightful analysis from Bill O'rReilly. If you are interested in US history or studying it, this is a useful and readable source.