Talk:Harry Hopkins

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
! Part of this article was copied from Citizendium and Wikipedia but the copied text was originally written by me, RJJensen (under the name Richard Jensen and rjensen) and does not include alterations made by others on that site. Conservlogo.png
RJJensen 07:50, 16 March 2009 (EDT)
Let's try to be serious about a very important person who made a lot of critical decisions esp in WW2. RJJensen 20:41, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
The alimony story is false (McJimsey p 43). RJJensen 21:03, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
The Flynn book is full of false gossip--he did not have access top the secret records that historians have access to now. RJJensen 21:08, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
Flynn has a pretty good record; I'll invite you to read this book (While You Slept) and tell me where he's in error given what we now know. Rob Smith 19:12, 6 September 2009 (EDT)
Let's begin with the issue of Hopkins compensation. How was he paid? Rob Smith 21:12, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
the issue is antique gossip that detracts from serious history--hard to see what the gossip has to do with history. What an encyclopedia must do is sift through huge amnount of material to get to the main core issues. I recommend using serious research sources (like the 400+ page bio by McJimsey) rather than 70-year-old rumors. RJJensen 21:29, 2 September 2009 (EDT)
This is a core issue on the charater of the man, what of this is not true (and it is all cited) :
His second wife had died and his daughter by this marriage lived with him in the White House. When Hopkins and his third wife later moved to Georgetown, his daughter, after remaining with them a while, went back to the White House. Mrs. Roosevelt writes how she fretted about the lonely life of this child and spoke to Hopkins about it. He said to her: "That's totally unimportant. The only thing that is important is to win the war." He found plenty of time, however, to pursue at intervals his favorite forms of diversions in the night clubs of New York and Washington. Rob Smith 21:38, 2 September 2009 (EDT)

The only issue here is, why he is not in Category:KGB Agents and Sources (at least yet). Rob Smith 21:43, 2 September 2009 (EDT)


This article does more to approach WP's standards of NPOV than WP could even be expected of. The section on his personal life counterbalances the section on his social work, were we are led to beleive he was a selfless humanitataruion, etc., repeated again in thousands and thousandso of articles on his leadership of WPA, whereas we know is was driven by a lust for power.

So, the sole remaining issue in this man's life, was he a traitor or not? The Trident conference was a summit of the head of government of Great Britain and its Commonwealth allies, Winston Churchill, accompanied by his chief aid, Lord Beaverbrook, and the U.S. head of government Franklin Roosevelt accompanied by his chief aid, Harry Hopkins. Because of the nature of the discussions, a Soviet and Comintern representative was not invited. Yet the substance of the discussions is found in KGB hands.

So, one member of that group is guilty of violating the trust of the several others. Was it Churchill? Beaverbrook? FDR? or Hopkins? As is the president's perogative, Hopkins could have been used as a backchannel diplomatic channel to the Kremlin. In that plausible scenario the onus is then placed on FDR for betraying the trust and confidence Churchill put in him, not knowing his private comments would end up on Stalin's desk. Whatever the case, either FDR, or Hopkins credibility is severely damaged by this decrypt. Rob Smith 16:39, 5 September 2009 (EDT) As is the president's perrogative

traitor? nope. Backchannel? no. Everyone knew at he time he had been apponted as the #1 go-between from FDR to Stalin and Churchill. His job was hundreds of conversations with top Reds covering top secret war strategy. He met hundreweds of times with Soviet generals, ministers, diplomats, Molotov, Stalin, etc etc. The goal was to coordinate the war against Germany and strngthen the Soviet army so it could kill more Germans. Now the Soviets typically gave briefings to the secret police on their contacts with Americans, including HH. So his name should turn up many times in the Soviet records. No one has ever found ANY unauthorized release of information--what secret did he give away? None. RJJensen 16:53, 5 September 2009 (EDT)
That's the issue. That's why he's not listed in KGB Agents and Sources. That he was a KGB source is pretty well established, whether or not an agent is in question. We only have the single decrypt. And Akhmerov says "agent."
On another point, I've been reading your denials of Soviet infiltration since early 2005 at Citizendium (I assume you authored the article that said commies who infiltrated the Ag Dept were all fired by 1935, because that article was cut and pasted from there to CP); then we have this tidbit:
  • Upon being “purged” from AAA, Communist lawyer Lee Pressman was immediately hired back into the government by Hopkins, who apparently had little regard for the law: According to Pressman, Hopkins told him, “The first time you tell me I can’t do what I want to do, you’re fired. I’m going to decide what I think has to be done and it’s up to you to see to it that it’s legal.” (Gilbert J. Gall, Pursuing Justice: Lee Pressman, the New Deal, and the CIO (New York: SUNY Press, 1999) ISBN 079144103, p. 32)
This doesn't look good. Rob Smith 18:58, 6 September 2009 (EDT)