| Line 112: |
Line 112: |
| | {{cquote|The newly unearthed evidence demolished Senator Benton’s charges in all their material respects and thoroughly proved Senator McCarthy’s account of the facts to be truthful.<ref>Statement by Daniel Buckley, December 13, 1951, McCarthy papers, cited in M. Stanton Evans, ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=xCaDcYsr0sgC Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies]'' (Crown Forum 2007) ISBN 1400081068, pp. 438-439.</ref>}} | | {{cquote|The newly unearthed evidence demolished Senator Benton’s charges in all their material respects and thoroughly proved Senator McCarthy’s account of the facts to be truthful.<ref>Statement by Daniel Buckley, December 13, 1951, McCarthy papers, cited in M. Stanton Evans, ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=xCaDcYsr0sgC Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America's Enemies]'' (Crown Forum 2007) ISBN 1400081068, pp. 438-439.</ref>}} |
| | Senate Democrats quietly buried the 44-page staff memo summarizing these findings, but the charge that McCarthy had said “205” was likewise dropped. Thus the Congressional Record to this day records that McCarthy said "57," not "205." Nevertheless, many on the left continue to promote Benton's discredited claim as gospel.<ref>Washington Post (February 12, 1950).''Washington Post, February 12, 1950; McCarthy's speech in Wheeling & letter to President Truman are cited in the article titled "Security Risks" to the lower left of the photo''. Washington Post[http://www.conservapedia.com/images/thumb/4/49/Washpost1950.jpg/250px-Washpost1950.jpg]</ref> | | Senate Democrats quietly buried the 44-page staff memo summarizing these findings, but the charge that McCarthy had said “205” was likewise dropped. Thus the Congressional Record to this day records that McCarthy said "57," not "205." Nevertheless, many on the left continue to promote Benton's discredited claim as gospel.<ref>Washington Post (February 12, 1950).''Washington Post, February 12, 1950; McCarthy's speech in Wheeling & letter to President Truman are cited in the article titled "Security Risks" to the lower left of the photo''. Washington Post[http://www.conservapedia.com/images/thumb/4/49/Washpost1950.jpg/250px-Washpost1950.jpg]</ref> |
| − | Benton made this allegation only about McCarthy's speech in Wheeling, WV and not in the other cities where he made the speech. The 205 number actually came in another part of his speech; on February 20, 1950, in a speech made on the floor of the Senate, McCarthy officially clarified the issue: | + | Benton made this allegation only about McCarthy's speech in Wheeling, West Virginia and not in the other cities where he made the speech. The 205 number actually came in another part of his speech; on February 20, 1950, in a speech made on the floor of the Senate, McCarthy officially clarified the issue: |
| | | | |
| | {{Cquote|I have before me a letter which was reproduced in the Congressional Record on August 1, 1946, at page A4892. It is a letter from James F. Byrnes, former Secretary of State. It deals with the screening of the first group, of about 3,000. There were a great number of subsequent screenings. This was the beginning. | | {{Cquote|I have before me a letter which was reproduced in the Congressional Record on August 1, 1946, at page A4892. It is a letter from James F. Byrnes, former Secretary of State. It deals with the screening of the first group, of about 3,000. There were a great number of subsequent screenings. This was the beginning. |
| | | | |
| − | The letter deals with the first group of 3,000 which was screened. The President--and I think wisely so--set up a board to screen the employees who were coming to the State Department from the various war agencies of the War Department. There were thousands of unusual characters in some of those war agencies. Former Secretary Byrnes in his letter, which is reproduced in the Congressional Record, says this: | + | The letter deals with the first group of 3,000 which was screened. The President—and I think wisely so—set up a board to screen the employees who were coming to the State Department from the various war agencies of the War Department. There were thousands of unusual characters in some of those war agencies. Former Secretary Byrnes in his letter, which is reproduced in the ''Congressional Record'', says this: |
| | | | |
| − | ''Pursuant to Executive order, approximately 4,000 employees have been transferred to the Department of state from various war agencies such as the OSS, FEA, OWI, OIAA, and so forth. Of these 4,000 employees, the case histories of approximately 3,000 have been subjected to a preliminary examination, as a result of which a recommendation against permanent employment has been made in 285 cases by the screening committee to which you refer in your letter.'' | + | ''Pursuant to Executive order, approximately 4,000 employees have been transferred to the Department of State from various war agencies such as the OSS, FEA, OWI, OIAA, and so forth. Of these 4,000 employees, the case histories of approximately 3,000 have been subjected to a preliminary examination, as a result of which a recommendation against permanent employment has been made in 285 cases by the screening committee to which you refer in your letter.'' |
| | | | |
| | In other words, former Secretary Byrnes said that 285 of those men are unsafe risks. He goes on to say that of this number only 79 have been removed. Of the 57 I mentioned some are from this group of 205, and some are from subsequent groups which have been screened but not discharged. | | In other words, former Secretary Byrnes said that 285 of those men are unsafe risks. He goes on to say that of this number only 79 have been removed. Of the 57 I mentioned some are from this group of 205, and some are from subsequent groups which have been screened but not discharged. |