The Danger of Getting Too Close to a Source

Woodward, Darman,” he said. It was how every phone call from him began over two decades. Richard G. Darman was what I call a “hide in plain sight” source, because it was widely known that we were close friends. Not known, but perhaps suspected, was that he was a pipeline for me into the White House during the Presidencies of Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush.

I first met Darman in 1973, during the Watergate affair, which I was covering for the Washington Post with my reporting partner Carl Bernstein. Darman and I were both thirty, and both obsessed with work and with the dramatic political history we were witnessing. At that time, Darman was a top aide to the Attorney General, Elliot Richardson, who had refused to carry out Richard Nixon’s order to fire Archibald Cox, the Watergate special prosecutor. Richardson resigned and Nixon fired Cox. This was the firestorm called the Saturday Night Massacre, a crucial event that helped lead to Nixon’s resignation, on August 9, 1974. Darman regularly filled me in on the behind-the-scenes story, its color and meaning.

Mô tả ảnh

Darman was a Harvard graduate, an overachiever, clearly driven, cerebral, witty, and tenacious. He believed in the good that both he and the government could do for the country. He was an idealist and a cynic. He once told the New York Times that his only hobby was work.

We had countless long lunches together—Saturday or Sunday—at the Madison Hotel, across the street from the Post, discussing government, journalism, and ourselves. I felt like I was getting a master class in how government really operated. Plus, many scoops. In later years, Darman would drive out on weekends to our country house near Annapolis, Maryland, to spend large parts of the day with me and my wife, the journalist Elsa Walsh, who was particularly fond of him. Some people found him arrogant, but I loved his comfortable confidence as a friend and a source. It was part of what made him so extraordinary and valuable. He knew how to turn on the charm, and he did for both Elsa and me.

Mô tả ảnh

The most celebrated source of my career was Mark Felt, the No. 2 man at the F.B.I. during the Nixon years, who died in 2008. I referred to him as Deep Throat. But if Felt was on one end of the source spectrum—a secret source for thirty-three years, who operated entirely in the shadows, deeply paranoid and careful about what information he provided me and how he did it—Darman was his opposite. Flagrant and out in the open, he casually spoke to me about the most sensitive and high-level decision-making inside the Reagan and Bush White Houses.

Is the Military Low-T?

Last week, a research letter published in the Journal of the American Medical Association—using data from a sample of nearly five hundred military members—reported that approximately twenty-five per cent of participants had at least one measured testosterone level that could qualify them as deficient. The letter is something of a Rorschach test, offering new information that could either bolster or undermine Pete Hegseth’s effort to establish a “high-T Department of War.” Universal screening for testosterone deficiency among men thirty and older has become one of Hegseth’s signature policies: “No fatties, no trannies, no beardos, no weirdos,” he crankily told a crowd of mid-level military members last month, during his “State of the Force” speech. “The patriotic cowboys are in—with testosterone testing on top.”
Mô tả ảnh
Every relevant medical society recommends against screening asymptomatic men for testosterone deficiency, because it is akin to scouring a hotel room with a black light: you’re going to find a lot of stuff of indeterminate significance that you wish you hadn’t seen. The data in the JAMA letter, collected across five U.S. military sites between August, 2024, and January, 2026, suggest that more than a hundred thousand men in current service could qualify for testosterone-replacement therapy (TRT) if their screening results are treated as diagnostic. Other military data collected between 2018 and 2025 had estimated the prevalence of diagnosed testosterone deficiency in male military members at less than one per cent.

This variation reflects that a diagnosis of testosterone deficiency can be made rigorously, with a desire to rule out, or capaciously, with a desire to rule in. Decreased testosterone is often cited as an explanation for an array of nonspecific symptoms, including depressed mood, poor libido, fatigue, and spotty memory. Serum testosterone levels vary with stress, sleep, body shape, and time of day; borderline low levels are common and are hard to interpret outside the context of a careful clinical evaluation. Different organizations even use different thresholds to determine what a “low” value is: the Centers for Disease Control uses two hundred and sixty-four nanograms per decilitre, whereas the American Urological Association and the military use three hundred.

These ambiguities make the condition a perfect container for all manner of dysphoria and shame, and set patients and doctors up for conflict. Before prescribing TRT, evidence-based doctors will require multiple confirmatory tests, disregard symptoms that are vague and easily attributed to other causes, and recommend other interventions to boost testosterone production. Patients who are intent on starting injections may then flee to wellness influencers and direct-to-consumer prescribers. “I’ve been experiencing lack of energy, motivation, and 0 sex drive,” an aspiring T user lamented on Reddit’s r/Testosterone forum, dismayed that his physician would not offer him a prescription because his blood work looked fine.