In her own words, Dina Matos McGreevey, the former wife of the former governor of New Jersey, Jim McGreevey, tells what it was like to live in the spotlight: when things were good and they were an ideal couple, committed to each other and their values; and when everything fell apart, especially their marriage, after Governor McGreevey, in a resignation speech following a political scandal, revealed to the world that he was "a gay American." Dina stood stoically silent at his side then, but in SILENT PARTNER she reveals the details of their life together, and her personal response to the revelation that their marriage was based on a broken trust. Candidly critical at times, but without recrimination, Dina Matos McGreevey tells a tale that other women have experienced, though not so publicly.

In her own words, Dina Matos McGreevey, the former wife of the former governor of New Jersey, Jim McGreevey, tells what it was like to live in the spotlight: when things were good and they were an ideal couple, committed to each other and their values; and when everything fell apart, especially their marriage, after Governor McGreevey, in a resignation speech following a political scandal, revealed to the world that he was "a gay American." Dina stood stoically silent at his side then, but in SILENT PARTNER she reveals the details of their life together, and her personal response to the revelation that their marriage was based on a broken trust. Candidly critical at times, but without recrimination, Dina Matos McGreevey tells a tale that other women have experienced, though not so publicly.

While there remains doubt in the minds of historians and the American public on whether Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were truly guilty of the charges for which they were convicted and executed in 1927, there is no doubt that their case represents a flashpoint in politics of their time and offers a window into many issues that are still relevant today. Historian Bruce Watson, without ever being hagiographic, is nevertheless revisionist in his account of the arrest and, especially, of the trial of the two anarchists. He provides a thorough, and fascinating, context as he explains the political tensions caused by a fear of anarchists, immigrants, or anything "foreign." He provides a compelling portraits of key personalities who drove the events, including a judge who, in this reading, seems less than fair. And he asks questions about the motives and actions of Sacco and Vanzetti that provide much grist for both the amateur and professional reader of American history.

While there remains doubt in the minds of historians and the American public on whether Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were truly guilty of the charges for which they were convicted and executed in 1927, there is no doubt that their case represents a flashpoint in politics of their time and offers a window into many issues that are still relevant today. Historian Bruce Watson, without ever being hagiographic, is nevertheless revisionist in his account of the arrest and, especially, of the trial of the two anarchists. He provides a thorough, and fascinating, context as he explains the political tensions caused by a fear of anarchists, immigrants, or anything "foreign." He provides a compelling portraits of key personalities who drove the events, including a judge who, in this reading, seems less than fair. And he asks questions about the motives and actions of Sacco and Vanzetti that provide much grist for both the amateur and professional reader of American history.