Political Insider

By Duke

January 8, 2008 2:14 PM | Link to this

Aaron Burr V Mexico, McCarthy did produce the lists of names. The Senate appointed a committeee to investigate McCarthy’s charges, but the chairman of the committee- I think it was Tydings- was appointed for the specific purpose of discrediting McCarthy. He simply lied. He said there was no evidence, when in fact there was abundant evidence. M. Stanton Evans has now confirmed that from FBI files in his recent book, “Blacklisted by History”. There were different lists of names- some cases conclusively proven, others merely suspected, etc.- so Tydings made a big deal out of discrepancies in the number McCarthy cited. McCarthy denied under oath that he said a certain thing at a certain speech. Tydings stood before the Senate with a phonograph player, and said he had a recording of McCarthy making the alleged statement. So McCarthy was charged with perjury. Under oath in a libel suit, Tydings was forced to admit that there was no recording of the speech. Everything that modern Americans think about McCarthy is based on lies like that. Read the book before you shoot off your mouth and make a fool of yourself.

By WTF?

January 8, 2008 3:38 PM | Link to this

What the fvck are you talking about? This blog has nothing to do with McCarthy!!!!!!

By Duke

January 8, 2008 3:51 PM | Link to this

Aaron Burr V Mexico, if you don’t have time to read the book, just read my post that you commented on, which you obviously did not read. It is posted under the blog about Nunn-Boren. The section about Elizabeth Bentley explains what McCarthy was talking about. She was a Soviet spy who gave names to the FBI. The FBI proved the cases against these people through extensive surveillance, and turned the lists over to the State Department. State was so thoroughly controlled by communist sympathizers that no action was taken. So the FBI notified a Congressional Committee, which issued subpoenas. The Truman Administration refused to honor the subpoenas. That is what McCarthy was exposing. The evidence which the FBI had gathered never did receive a hearing. McCarthy was simply counter-investigated, over and over and over again.

After Sam Nunn was in Washington for awhile, he began to refer to anyone who expresses these concerns as “a nut case”. But that characterization is not based on any examination of the evidence. It is merely a cultural prejudice, and that is all that the condemnation of McCarthy amounted to. His critics were playing to the news media, controlling the public image. They also had control of the levers of power behind the scenes. What they did not have was the truth.