Skip to comments.
McCarthy Transcripts Point to Cover-up by Justice Department
NewsMax.com ^
| 5/7/2003
| Wes Vernon
Posted on 05/07/2003 6:08:37 PM PDT by ConservativeVoice
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40 last
To: marktwain
yeah, i agree. this area needs more investigation.
there was a brit who used to do editorials for the orange county register when it was still libertarian.
he said that he had worked on the east coast as a journalist when younger, and gave time magazine as an example, and was told over and over: use "tricky dick" as often as possible to describe nixon.
many american institutions were infiltrated: the public school system, the universities--which instituted tenure to protect the political freedom of faculty, i.e., commies, the u.s. state department, the united nations,...
nixon had lots of problems, as have all republican presidents with the state department. nixon tried to shut them out. too bad dick was a megamaniac.
the united nations did us in during the korean war. they passed on american military planning to the chicoms. and they did the same in vietnam.
notice how well this last war went--without the united nations!
21
posted on
05/07/2003 8:47:15 PM PDT
by
liberalnot
(what dems fear the most is real democracy.)
To: Numbers Guy
Oh, I don't dispute that McCarthy became quite popular with the general public after making the communist issue his. But his support on the hill and in the WH was lukewarm. And when he stepped on fellow Senators' toes, broke the unwritten Senate rules and embarassed Ike, everybody turned against him, including Republicans. And that started even before his censure.
You're right that Ike didn't want to touch the issue. He had no idea how many cans of worms this was going to open up. He had already seen what Truman went through. And that is the sort of thing I was referring to as a "third rail." It's certainly no coincidence that McCarthy made the issue of communists in government his personal property -- nobody else wanted it. Even Nixon only took the Hiss matter so far. It was somebody else who sent Hiss away to Lewisburg.
To: Bonaparte
McCarthy's subcommittee was in the Senate and only investigated security risks in the federal government. True but that cast a wide net. A fascinating account of the Federal government's purchase of $30 million worth of goose down from Communist China is in Volume One of the transcripts. The committee was also concerned that the $130 million a year the government was spending on books, films and cultural events to fight communism overseas was going to writers who were working for the Soviets. That is why Daschle Hammett, Helen Goldfrank (Vol.2) and other writers were called to testify.
23
posted on
05/07/2003 9:48:33 PM PDT
by
DPB101
To: DPB101
That is fascinating -- especially in light of Cohn's trip to Europe with his young lawyer "friend," ostensibly to clear up just this sort of problem. Gee, I wonder who convinced Joe that printed matter in Europe required such urgent attention.
To: Bonaparte
Tragic that Robert Kennedy was not McCarthy's lead lawyer.
25
posted on
05/07/2003 10:26:42 PM PDT
by
DPB101
To: DPB101
Hehe. Well, yes and no, as they say. Kennedy's anti-communist credentials were in order and he had no skeletons in his closet at that time, but he lacked Cohn's legal brilliance and he had almost as much trouble governing his temper as McCarthy did. Did you see him questioning Giancana on the McClellan committee?
To: Bonaparte
No...I would like to see the transcript and pass it around. Kids today don't realize there were once Democrats who fought both organized crime and communism. I try to tell them but they don't believe me.
27
posted on
05/07/2003 10:57:00 PM PDT
by
DPB101
To: ConservativeVoice
bump
28
posted on
05/08/2003 12:10:12 AM PDT
by
rwfromkansas
(Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel!)
To: ConservativeVoice
I can't believed they lied.
29
posted on
05/08/2003 2:09:20 AM PDT
by
Jimbaugh
(Dont pick up the soap ! ! !)
To: Numbers Guy
Getting out my 250 watt interrogators light, may we start over:
En zo Noombers Gai, you haf not answered zee ques-tion vich vas "Can you name anyone who was not guilty"?
Pushing the light aside, I note:
Another poster listed some folks involved in the Army-McCarthy Hearings who were guilty - it should seem to be a simple matter to begin naming the innocent.
Just one name, eh?!
30
posted on
05/08/2003 7:24:31 AM PDT
by
muawiyah
To: muawiyah
In fairness to NG, it should be acknowledged that McCarthy called George Marshall a
Kremlin collaborator as early as 1951. When Ike came into office, he continued to foolishly attack the President's friend.
To: Numbers Guy
Don't blame McCarthy, it was Edward R. Morrow, a communist sympathizer, and a whole enterprise of fellow-travellers which did the smear. He was actually blameless and fully justified in almost every case. Under what circumstances with national security on the line is it EVER proper to refuse to cooperate and testify to a legitimate question, particularly when the offer of closed hearings is available? I can't think of any. Do you always believe democRAT and CP-USSR spin?
32
posted on
05/09/2003 6:54:06 AM PDT
by
Paul Ross
(From the State Looking Forward to Global Warming! Let's Drown France!)
To: marktwain
33
posted on
05/09/2003 6:54:36 AM PDT
by
Paul Ross
(From the State Looking Forward to Global Warming! Let's Drown France!)
To: DPB101; Alamo-Girl; kattracks; Travis McGee; TLBSHOW; Inspector Harry Callahan; ALOHA RONNIE
34
posted on
05/09/2003 6:55:58 AM PDT
by
Paul Ross
(From the State Looking Forward to Global Warming! Let's Drown France!)
To: viaveritasvita; buffyt; lawgirl; Victoria Delsoul
Yes, indeed. What he could have done with Venona...he would have blown apart the smear campaign against him.
35
posted on
05/09/2003 6:57:59 AM PDT
by
Paul Ross
(From the State Looking Forward to Global Warming! Let's Drown France!)
To: Paul Ross
Thanks for the heads up!
To: Paul Ross
Under what circumstances with national security on the line is it EVER proper to refuse to cooperate and testify to a legitimate question, particularly when the offer of closed hearings is available? I can't think of any. Orwellian isn't it? Traitors are seen by the left as people of principle defending the constitution. It it chilling to read the transcripts and see the contempt and arrogance the Soviet agents and supporters showed to congress.
Has anyone one left ever expressed concern about the actions of the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC) between 1934 and 1937? That is when a Soviet agent ran the committee and went after German Americans.
37
posted on
05/09/2003 9:09:58 AM PDT
by
DPB101
To: Numbers Guy
Please list the innocent people you referred to. Just list them.
Taking the 5th when you ARE a communist agent does NOT make you "innocent."
38
posted on
05/09/2003 11:12:08 AM PDT
by
Travis McGee
(----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
To: BushCountry
You forgot Henry Wallace, Roosevelt's Commie VP nominee, endorsed by CPUSA for President in 1948
To: Numbers Guy
Say what you will about McCarthy/Army, but by the time of the hearings, the Army's and State Department's involvement in allowing the Soviets to capture territory while we sat at the Elbe in 1945 was already a sore spot, aka Roosevelt's Potsdam betrayal (courtesy of Henry Wallace, maybe?).
Add to that the betrayal of Chaing Kai Shek and the Nationalist Chinese by sabotaging-by-dumping-at-sea his much needed military shipments from us to combat ChiComs easily leads one to believe that Communist infiltration at the highest levels, including the military, was something seriously at issue and in need of exposure/investigation. And we still ask, "Who lost China?" I'll bet McCarthy knew.
In time we may find that McCarthy's information was more accurate than the media once thought -- or was willing to admit. When one Senator takes on Hollywood AND commie sympathizers in the US military, it's a bigger fish than he or anyone alone would be capable of frying.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson