Changes

McCarthy had his name entered in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate in 1944, opposing a well-entrenched incumbent Republican, Alexander Wiley.  The absentee war hero ran a strong second, making a name for himself statewide and making himself available for the 1946 Senate contest.  

McCarthy had his name entered in the Republican primary for U.S. Senate in 1944, opposing a well-entrenched incumbent Republican, Alexander Wiley.  The absentee war hero ran a strong second, making a name for himself statewide and making himself available for the 1946 Senate contest.  

Why McCarthy suddenly changed parties was never explained, but prospects for ambitious Wisconsin politicians were dim inside the poorly organized Democratic party, for most [[New Deal]]ers supported the state’s [[Progressive party#LaFollete creates a third party in 1924|Progressive party]].  During the war, however, that party collapsed, torn apart between its [[New Deal]] domestic liberalism, and its intensely isolationist opposition to Roosevelt’s foreign policy.  Increasingly out of touch with Wisconsin, its leader [[Robert LaFollette Jr.]] looked to his family’s past glories and made the blunder of trying for reelection to the Senate in 1946 as a Republican.   

Why McCarthy suddenly changed parties was never explained, but prospects for ambitious Wisconsin politicians were dim inside the poorly organized Democratic party, for most [[New Deal]]ers supported the state's [[Progressive party#LaFollete creates a third party in 1924|Progressive party]].  During the war, however, that party collapsed, torn apart between its [[New Deal]] domestic liberalism, and its intensely isolationist opposition to Roosevelt's foreign policy.  Increasingly out of touch with Wisconsin, its leader [[Robert LaFollette Jr.]] looked to his family's past glories and made the blunder of trying for reelection to the Senate in 1946 as a Republican.   

"Tail Gunner Joe," as his posters called him, endlessly crisscrossed Wisconsin while LaFollette remained in Washington, offered an alternative in the Republican primary to old guard Republicans who had opposed the Lafollettes for a half century.  McCarthy brilliantly captured the frustrations citizens felt about massive strikes, unstable economy, price controls, severe shortages of housing and meat, and the growing threat of from the far left in the [[Congress of Industrial Organizations|CIO]].  He nipped LaFollette in the primary. The slogan “Had Enough?—Vote Republican” gave the Republicans a landslide all across the North, electing a new junior senator from Wisconsin.

"Tail Gunner Joe," as his posters called him, endlessly crisscrossed Wisconsin while LaFollette remained in Washington, offered an alternative in the Republican primary to old guard Republicans who had opposed the Lafollettes for a half century.  McCarthy brilliantly captured the frustrations citizens felt about massive strikes, unstable economy, price controls, severe shortages of housing and meat, and the growing threat of from the far left in the [[Congress of Industrial Organizations|CIO]].  He nipped LaFollette in the primary. The slogan “Had Enough?—Vote Republican” gave the Republicans a landslide all across the North, electing a new junior senator from Wisconsin.

This document was repeatedly cited by McCarthy as the basis for his accusations; unfortunately, there was no list at that time.

This document was repeatedly cited by McCarthy as the basis for his accusations; unfortunately, there was no list at that time.

McCarthy now became one of the dominant leaders in American politics, with strong support among both Republicans and Catholic Democrats, as he alleged that Truman’s top people had betrayed America.  He singled out Secretary of State [[Dean Acheson]] and Secretary of Defense [[George Marshall]].  Liberals were aghast; Truman had picked General Marshall to head the State and Defense departments precisely because he thought the elderly statesman would always be above criticism, no matter that China turned from a staunch ally to a bitter enemy on his watch.  McCarthy’s blistering attacks on Marshall as “part of a conspiracy so immense, an infamy so black, as to dwarf any in the history of man” fueled the belief he was a wild-man, a pathological liar who overstepped the bounds of political discourse.  

McCarthy now became one of the dominant leaders in American politics, with strong support among both Republicans and Catholic Democrats, as he alleged that Truman's top people had betrayed America.  He singled out Secretary of State [[Dean Acheson]] and Secretary of Defense [[George Marshall]].  Liberals were aghast; Truman had picked General Marshall to head the State and Defense departments precisely because he thought the elderly statesman would always be above criticism, no matter that China turned from a staunch ally to a bitter enemy on his watch.  McCarthy's blistering attacks on Marshall as “part of a conspiracy so immense, an infamy so black, as to dwarf any in the history of man” fueled the belief he was a wild-man, a pathological liar who overstepped the bounds of political discourse.  

With [[Dwight D. Eisenhower]] crusading against “Korea, Communism and Corruption” in 1952, Republican victory was assured.  As a senior member of  the majority party McCarthy for the first time became a committee chairman, with control of staffing and agenda. He used his Government Operations Committee to open highly publicized hearings in 1953-54 alleging disloyalty in the State Department, the United States [[Central Intelligence Agency]] (CIA), the U.S. Information Agency, and finally the Army.  His furious attacks on the Army led to the televised “Army-McCarthy” hearings in spring 1954, which exposed his bullying tactics to a national audience.  As McCarthy’s poll rating plunged, his enemies finally pulled together to introduce a censure resolution focused on charging McCarthy with contempt for the federal government, and especially for his fellow senators.

With [[Dwight D. Eisenhower]] crusading against “Korea, Communism and Corruption” in 1952, Republican victory was assured.  As a senior member of  the majority party McCarthy for the first time became a committee chairman, with control of staffing and agenda. He used his Government Operations Committee to open highly publicized hearings in 1953-54 alleging disloyalty in the State Department, the United States [[Central Intelligence Agency]] (CIA), the U.S. Information Agency, and finally the Army.  His furious attacks on the Army led to the televised “Army-McCarthy” hearings in spring 1954, which exposed his bullying tactics to a national audience.  As McCarthy's poll rating plunged, his enemies finally pulled together to introduce a censure resolution focused on charging McCarthy with contempt for the federal government, and especially for his fellow senators.

==Backlash==

==Backlash==

McCarthy’s charges that over-educated liberals tolerated Communism at home and abroad had stung the liberals.  He alleged that they had corruptly sold out the national interest to protect their upper class privileges, and were so idealistic about world affairs that they radically underestimated the threat posed by Soviet dictator [[Joseph Stalin|Stalin]], his spies, and the worldwide Communist movement.  Instead of refuting the allegations, Liberals tried one of two approaches.  Some became intensely anti-Communist and claimed they were more effective than McCarthy and the Republicans in eliminating Communism in the unions and Democratic party, and in containing the Stalinist menace in Europe.  The other approach was to counterattack, to charge that “McCarthyism” never found a single spy but hurt innocent people in hunting for nonexistent witches; thus it represented an evil betrayal of American values.  In an appeal to upscale conservatives and liberal intellectuals, critics ignored the Communist infiltration of labor unions and liberal causes and focused on stereotyping anticommunists as ill-mannered ignorant troglodytes, oblivious to American traditions of free speech and free association.  McCarthy’s exaggerations and false charges encouraged opponents to stress the second approach, but it escalated the controversy to a pitch of hatreds and fears unprecedented since the days of [[Reconstruction]].

McCarthy's charges that over-educated liberals tolerated Communism at home and abroad had stung the liberals.  He alleged that they had corruptly sold out the national interest to protect their upper class privileges, and were so idealistic about world affairs that they radically underestimated the threat posed by Soviet dictator [[Joseph Stalin|Stalin]], his spies, and the worldwide Communist movement.  Instead of refuting the allegations, Liberals tried one of two approaches.  Some became intensely anti-Communist and claimed they were more effective than McCarthy and the Republicans in eliminating Communism in the unions and Democratic party, and in containing the Stalinist menace in Europe.  The other approach was to counterattack, to charge that “McCarthyism” never found a single spy but hurt innocent people in hunting for nonexistent witches; thus it represented an evil betrayal of American values.  In an appeal to upscale conservatives and liberal intellectuals, critics ignored the Communist infiltration of labor unions and liberal causes and focused on stereotyping anticommunists as ill-mannered ignorant troglodytes, oblivious to American traditions of free speech and free association.  McCarthy's exaggerations and false charges encouraged opponents to stress the second approach, but it escalated the controversy to a pitch of hatreds and fears unprecedented since the days of [[Reconstruction]].

==Loss of influence==

==Loss of influence==

McCarthy’s superb sense of timing and his media instincts kept his partisan attacks on the front page every day; his willingness to do battle in the hustings with Democratic opponents across the country strengthened his base in the Republican party. His religion and ethnicity, refreshed with highly visible friendships with leading Irish Catholics, especially the Kennedy family, bolstered his standing among Democrats.  According to Gallup, McCarthy’s popularity crested in January 1954, when he was endorsed by all voters 50-29 (with 21 having no opinion).  His core support came from Republicans and Catholics who had not attended college.  

McCarthy's superb sense of timing and his media instincts kept his partisan attacks on the front page every day; his willingness to do battle in the hustings with Democratic opponents across the country strengthened his base in the Republican party. His religion and ethnicity, refreshed with highly visible friendships with leading Irish Catholics, especially the Kennedy family, bolstered his standing among Democrats.  According to Gallup, McCarthy's popularity crested in January 1954, when he was endorsed by all voters 50-29 (with 21 having no opinion).  His core support came from Republicans and Catholics who had not attended college.  

McCarthy, however, failed to create any sort of grass roots organization.  He had no organizational skills; he did not effectively use his talented staffers (such as [[Robert Kennedy]]).  He was a loner who lurched from issue to issue, misled by the enormous media publicity into believing that a one-man crusade was possible in an increasingly well-educated complex society honeycombed with local, regional and national organizations.  By operating within the Republican party apparatus he lost the opportunity to create an independent grass roots political crusade in the style of [[Theodore Roosevelt|Teddy Roosevelt]], [[Huey Long]], or [[Ross Perot]]. He never launched his own magazine or radio show or formed alliances with publishers who agreed with him.   

McCarthy, however, failed to create any sort of grass roots organization.  He had no organizational skills; he did not effectively use his talented staffers (such as [[Robert Kennedy]]).  He was a loner who lurched from issue to issue, misled by the enormous media publicity into believing that a one-man crusade was possible in an increasingly well-educated complex society honeycombed with local, regional and national organizations.  By operating within the Republican party apparatus he lost the opportunity to create an independent grass roots political crusade in the style of [[Theodore Roosevelt|Teddy Roosevelt]], [[Huey Long]], or [[Ross Perot]]. He never launched his own magazine or radio show or formed alliances with publishers who agreed with him.   

McCarthy’s strained relations with Senate colleagues created a trapdoor. It was sprung after many Republicans realized that he had shifted the attack away from the Democrats.  What use was his slogan “20 Years of Treason” once Eisenhower was in office? McCarthy’s answer was “21 Years of Treason!”  Eisenhower’s supporters could no longer tolerate such a loose cannon, and as McCarthy unwisely shifted his attacks to Eisenhower’s beloved Army, his cause was doomed.  While many Americans distrusted [[Ivy League]], striped pants diplomats, soldiers were held in high regard; McCarthy’s charges of subversion were flimsy (one Communist dentist had been automatically promoted); he sabotaged his own reputation by finagling favors for an aide who had been drafted.  The televised hearings proved fatal to an ill-prepared bully. After the Democrats regained control of Congress in the 1954 elections, the censure motion carried, 67-22.  McCarthy’s appeal, so widespread yet superficial, evaporated overnight and the Senator faded into the shadows.

McCarthy's strained relations with Senate colleagues created a trapdoor. It was sprung after many Republicans realized that he had shifted the attack away from the Democrats.  What use was his slogan “20 Years of Treason” once Eisenhower was in office? McCarthy's answer was “21 Years of Treason!”  Eisenhower's supporters could no longer tolerate such a loose cannon, and as McCarthy unwisely shifted his attacks to Eisenhower's beloved Army, his cause was doomed.  While many Americans distrusted [[Ivy League]], striped pants diplomats, soldiers were held in high regard; McCarthy's charges of subversion were flimsy (one Communist dentist had been automatically promoted); he sabotaged his own reputation by finagling favors for an aide who had been drafted.  The televised hearings proved fatal to an ill-prepared bully. After the Democrats regained control of Congress in the 1954 elections, the censure motion carried, 67–22.  McCarthy's appeal, so widespread yet superficial, evaporated overnight and the Senator faded into the shadows.

==The term "McCarthyism"==

==The term "McCarthyism"==

*Buckley, Jr., William F. and Bozell, L. Brent (1954, 1995 Printing). ''McCarthy & His Enemies, The Record And Its Meaning''. Regnery Publishing Inc., pgs. 41-61. ISBN 0-89526-472-2.</ref>}}

*Buckley, Jr., William F. and Bozell, L. Brent (1954, 1995 Printing). ''McCarthy & His Enemies, The Record And Its Meaning''. Regnery Publishing Inc., pgs. 41-61. ISBN 0-89526-472-2.</ref>}}

McCarthy compiled a list of 57 security risks and publicly named [[John S. Service]], Gustavo Duran, [[Mary Jane Keeney]], Harlow Shapley, and [[H. Julian Wadleigh]]<ref>Alexander Vassiliev, Notes on A. Gorsky’s Report to Savchenko S.R., 23 December 1949.</ref> as being on the list.<ref>Reeves, Thomas C. (1997). ''The life and Times of Joe McCarthy: A Biography''. Madison Books. pgs. 222-238. ISBN 1-56833-101-0.</ref>  These names came from the "Lee List" of unresolved State Department security cases compiled by the earlier investigators for the House Appropriation Committee in 1947.  Robert E. Lee was the committee’s lead investigator and supervised preparation of the list.<ref>U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, State Department Employee Loyalty Investigations (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1950).</ref>

McCarthy compiled a list of 57 security risks and publicly named [[John S. Service]], Gustavo Duran, [[Mary Jane Keeney]], Harlow Shapley, and [[H. Julian Wadleigh]]<ref>Alexander Vassiliev, Notes on A. Gorsky’s Report to Savchenko S.R., 23 December 1949.</ref> as being on the list.<ref>Reeves, Thomas C. (1997). ''The life and Times of Joe McCarthy: A Biography''. Madison Books. pgs. 222-238. ISBN 1-56833-101-0.</ref>  These names came from the "Lee List" of unresolved State Department security cases compiled by the earlier investigators for the House Appropriation Committee in 1947.  Robert E. Lee was the committee's lead investigator and supervised preparation of the list.<ref>U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, State Department Employee Loyalty Investigations (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1950).</ref>

In a six-hour speech on the Senate floor on February 20, 1950 in which McCarthy was constantly interrupted by hostile Democrat senators; four of whom — Scott Lucas (61 times), Brien McMahon (27 times), Garrett Withers (22 times), and Herbert Lehman (13 times) — interrupted him a total of 123 times, McCarthy raised the issue of some eighty individuals who had worked in the [[State Department]], or wartime agencies such as the [[Office of War Information]] (OWI) and the [[Board of Economic Warfare]] (BEW).

In a six-hour speech on the Senate floor on February 20, 1950 in which McCarthy was constantly interrupted by hostile Democrat senators; four of whom — Scott Lucas (61 times), Brien McMahon (27 times), Garrett Withers (22 times), and Herbert Lehman (13 times) — interrupted him a total of 123 times, McCarthy raised the issue of some eighty individuals who had worked in the [[State Department]], or wartime agencies such as the [[Office of War Information]] (OWI) and the [[Board of Economic Warfare]] (BEW).

McCarthy was able to characterize President Truman and the Democrat Party as soft on or even in league with the Communists.  McCarthy's allegations were rejected by Truman who was unaware of [[Venona project]] decrypts which corroborated [[Elizabeth Bentley]]'s debriefing after her defection from the Communists.

McCarthy was able to characterize President Truman and the Democrat Party as soft on or even in league with the Communists.  McCarthy's allegations were rejected by Truman who was unaware of [[Venona project]] decrypts which corroborated [[Elizabeth Bentley]]'s debriefing after her defection from the Communists.

According to Gallup, McCarthy’s popularity crested in January 1954, when he was endorsed by all voters 50-29 (with 21 having no opinion).  His core support came from Republicans and Catholics who had not attended college.<ref>50 percent of the respondents had a generally "favorable opinion" of him.

According to Gallup, McCarthy's popularity crested in January 1954, when he was endorsed by all voters 50-29 (with 21 having no opinion).  His core support came from Republicans and Catholics who had not attended college.<ref>50 percent of the respondents had a generally "favorable opinion" of him.

{{cite book

{{cite book

  | last = Kazin, Michael

  | last = Kazin, Michael

===Venona files===

===Venona files===

In 1995, when the [[Venona files|Venona]] transcripts were declassified, further detailed information was revealed about Soviet espionage in the United States.  FBI Director [[J. Edgar Hoover]] was among only a handful of people in the U.S. Government who was aware of the Venona project, and there is no indication whatsoever Hoover shared Venona information with McCarthy.  In fact, Hoover may have actually fed McCarthy [[disinformation]], or dead end files, in an effort to put pressure on relatives, friends, or close associates of real Venona suspects by threatening to reveal embarrassing information about them in a public forum if they failed to cooperate and reveal what they might have known about someone's else’s activities and associations.<ref>Multiple references:

In 1995, when the [[Venona files|Venona]] transcripts were declassified, further detailed information was revealed about Soviet espionage in the United States.  FBI Director [[J. Edgar Hoover]] was among only a handful of people in the U.S. Government who was aware of the Venona project, and there is no indication whatsoever Hoover shared Venona information with McCarthy.  In fact, Hoover may have actually fed McCarthy [[disinformation]], or dead end files, in an effort to put pressure on relatives, friends, or close associates of real Venona suspects by threatening to reveal embarrassing information about them in a public forum if they failed to cooperate and reveal what they might have known about someone's else's activities and associations.<ref>Multiple references:

* FBI Silvermaster file, Vol. 150, [http://education-research.org/PDFs/Silvermaster150.pdf pgs. 50-64] pdf. Excerpts from memorandum by FBI agent Edward Morgan asserting that there was no possible legal case against the Bentley suspects and that investigation should be discontinued, with possible exception of trying to get one of the weaker suspects to break.

* FBI Silvermaster file, Vol. 150, [http://education-research.org/PDFs/Silvermaster150.pdf pgs. 50-64] pdf. Excerpts from memorandum by FBI agent Edward Morgan asserting that there was no possible legal case against the Bentley suspects and that investigation should be discontinued, with possible exception of trying to get one of the weaker suspects to break.

* FBI Silvermaster file, Vol. 93, [http://education-research.org/PDFs/Silvermaster093.pdf pgs. 166 - 170] pdf.  Original Edward Morgan memo 1/14/47, "The only reasonable hope of salvaging a successful prosecution is (a) to endeavor to make an informant of one of the subjects and/or (b) interview the subjects in the hope that at least one will break...Failing to successfully develop one of the subjects as an informant, I doubt if any more can be accomplished of probative value through further investigation...This case will stand or fall dependent upon the extent to which the subjects may break and in breaking corroborate [Elizabeth Bentley].  I personally am of the opinion that the Bureau would be derelict in its responsibility in this instance if the various subjects were not thoroughly and exhaustively interviewed.  The odds are not too good that such interviews would terminate successfully; however, it is quite possible that some lesser lights among the subjects would crack during the course of a careful and pointed interview....one of the subjects, probably the weakest sister, be contacted with a view to making him an informant.  This is an outside chance but offers the only reasonable prospect of making a case with respect to contemporaneous and future events.  Failing in this respect, that immediately the other subjects be exhaustively interviewed.  Since an interview with one would virtually amount to putting all of them on notice, it would seem logical to conduct such interviews as nearly simultaneously as possible....That failing to break any of the subjects, serious consideration be given to exposing this lousy outfit and at least hounding them from Federal service.  Several possibilities exist in this regard but this would seem to be a bridge to cross when we get to it."</ref>  And there is no indication McCarthy might have known he was being used by Hoover in this way.

* FBI Silvermaster file, Vol. 93, [http://education-research.org/PDFs/Silvermaster093.pdf pgs. 166 - 170] pdf.  Original Edward Morgan memo 1/14/47, "The only reasonable hope of salvaging a successful prosecution is (a) to endeavor to make an informant of one of the subjects and/or (b) interview the subjects in the hope that at least one will break...Failing to successfully develop one of the subjects as an informant, I doubt if any more can be accomplished of probative value through further investigation...This case will stand or fall dependent upon the extent to which the subjects may break and in breaking corroborate [Elizabeth Bentley].  I personally am of the opinion that the Bureau would be derelict in its responsibility in this instance if the various subjects were not thoroughly and exhaustively interviewed.  The odds are not too good that such interviews would terminate successfully; however, it is quite possible that some lesser lights among the subjects would crack during the course of a careful and pointed interview....one of the subjects, probably the weakest sister, be contacted with a view to making him an informant.  This is an outside chance but offers the only reasonable prospect of making a case with respect to contemporaneous and future events.  Failing in this respect, that immediately the other subjects be exhaustively interviewed.  Since an interview with one would virtually amount to putting all of them on notice, it would seem logical to conduct such interviews as nearly simultaneously as possible....That failing to break any of the subjects, serious consideration be given to exposing this lousy outfit and at least hounding them from Federal service.  Several possibilities exist in this regard but this would seem to be a bridge to cross when we get to it."</ref>  And there is no indication McCarthy might have known he was being used by Hoover in this way.

In June 1947, a Senate Appropriations subcommittee addressed a secret memorandum to Secretary of State George Marshall, calling to his attention a condition that developed and was continuing in the State Department.  The memo stated that  

In June 1947, a Senate Appropriations subcommittee addressed a secret memorandum to Secretary of State George Marshall, calling to his attention a condition that developed and was continuing in the State Department.  The memo stated that  

{{Cquote|it was evident there was a deliberate, calculated program being carried out not only to protect communist personnel in high places, but to reduce security and intelligence protection to a nullity. On file in the department is a copy of a preliminary report of the FBI on Soviet espionage activities in the United States which involved a large number of State Department employees, some in high official positions.}}

{{Cquote|it was evident there was a deliberate, calculated program being carried out not only to protect communist personnel in high places, but to reduce security and intelligence protection to a nullity. On file in the department is a copy of a preliminary report of the FBI on Soviet espionage activities in the United States which involved a large number of State Department employees, some in high official positions.}}

Robert E. Lee was the committee’s lead investigator and supervised preparation of the list.  The Lee list, also using numbers rather than names, was published in the proceeding of the subcommittee.<ref>U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, State Department Employee Loyalty Investigations (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1950).</ref>

Robert E. Lee was the committee's lead investigator and supervised preparation of the list.  The Lee list, also using numbers rather than names, was published in the proceeding of the subcommittee.<ref>U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, State Department Employee Loyalty Investigations (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1950).</ref>

The memorandum listed the names of nine State Department officials and said that they were "only a few of the hundreds now employed in varying capacities who are protected and allowed to remain despite the fact that their presence is an obvious hazard to national security."  Ten persons were removed from the list by June 24.  But from 1947 until McCarthy's Wheeling speech in February 1950, the State Department did not fire one person as a loyalty or security risk.<ref>[http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/jepeurifoy.htm John Emil Peurifoy, Foreign Service Office & United States Ambassador],  Arlington National Cemetery Website, retrieved 21 March 2007.</ref>  In other branches of the government, however, more than 300 persons were discharged for loyalty reasons alone during the period from 1947 to 1951.  

The memorandum listed the names of nine State Department officials and said that they were "only a few of the hundreds now employed in varying capacities who are protected and allowed to remain despite the fact that their presence is an obvious hazard to national security."  Ten persons were removed from the list by June 24.  But from 1947 until McCarthy's Wheeling speech in February 1950, the State Department did not fire one person as a loyalty or security risk.<ref>[http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/jepeurifoy.htm John Emil Peurifoy, Foreign Service Office & United States Ambassador],  Arlington National Cemetery Website, retrieved 21 March 2007.</ref>  In other branches of the government, however, more than 300 persons were discharged for loyalty reasons alone during the period from 1947 to 1951.  

Most but not all of Senator McCarthy’s numbered cases were drawn from the “Lee List” or “108 list” of unresolved Department of State security cases compiled by Lee for the House Appropriations Committee in 1947.<ref>[http://www.johnearlhaynes.org/page62.html  Senator Joseph McCarthy’s Lists and Venona], by John Earl Haynes, April 2007.</ref>  The Tydings subcommittee also obtained this list.  In addition to some of the person involved in espionage identified in the [[Venona project]] listed above, there are other security and loyalty risks identified correctly by Senator McCarthy included in the following list:

Most but not all of Senator McCarthy's numbered cases were drawn from the “Lee List” or “108 list” of unresolved Department of State security cases compiled by Lee for the House Appropriations Committee in 1947.<ref>[http://www.johnearlhaynes.org/page62.html  Senator Joseph McCarthy’s Lists and Venona], by John Earl Haynes, April 2007.</ref>  The Tydings subcommittee also obtained this list.  In addition to some of the person involved in espionage identified in the [[Venona project]] listed above, there are other security and loyalty risks identified correctly by Senator McCarthy included in the following list:

<small>

<small>

While over the previous few years, Senator McCarthy had withstood countless biased and unsubstantiated attacks by [[Liberals]], [[Communists]], etc., who sought to prevent him from damaging their causes any further; the organized and co-ordinated effort between the two groups to remove McCarthy from his Chairmanship and officially condemn him began in March 1954.

While over the previous few years, Senator McCarthy had withstood countless biased and unsubstantiated attacks by [[Liberals]], [[Communists]], etc., who sought to prevent him from damaging their causes any further; the organized and co-ordinated effort between the two groups to remove McCarthy from his Chairmanship and officially condemn him began in March 1954.

===Senate opposition===

===Senate opposition===

On March 9, 1954 a fellow conservative and anti-communist [[Republican]] Senator, [[Ralph E. Flanders]] of [[Vermont]], gave a speech criticizing what he felt was Senator McCarthy’s "misdirection of our efforts at fighting communism” and his role in “the loss of respect for us in the world at large.” Flanders felt the nation should pay more attention looking outwards at the “alarming world-wide advance of Communist power” that would leave the United States and Canada as “the last remnants of the free world.” <ref>Multiple refereeces:

On March 9, 1954 a fellow conservative and anti-communist [[Republican]] Senator, [[Ralph E. Flanders]] of [[Vermont]], gave a speech criticizing what he felt was Senator McCarthy's "misdirection of our efforts at fighting communism” and his role in “the loss of respect for us in the world at large.” Flanders felt the nation should pay more attention looking outwards at the “alarming world-wide advance of Communist power” that would leave the United States and Canada as “the last remnants of the free world.” <ref>Multiple refereeces:

* Flanders, Ralph E. (March 9, 1954).  "Activities of Senator McCarthy&mdash;The world crisis".  ''Proceedings and Debates of the 83rd Congress, Second Session&mdash;Congressional Record'' (Washington, D.C.:  Government Printing Office).

* Flanders, Ralph E. (March 9, 1954).  "Activities of Senator McCarthy&mdash;The world crisis".  ''Proceedings and Debates of the 83rd Congress, Second Session&mdash;Congressional Record'' (Washington, D.C.:  Government Printing Office).

* Flanders, Ralph E. (1961).  ''Senator from Vermont'' (Boston: Little, Brown), pp. 255-257.

* Flanders, Ralph E. (1961).  ''Senator from Vermont'' (Boston: Little, Brown), pp. 255-257.

Ultimately, McCarthy was accused of 46 different counts of allegedly improper conduct and another special committee was set up, under the chairmanship of Senator [[Arthur Watkins]], to study and evaluate the charges. This was to be the fifth investigation of Senator McCarthy in five years. This committee opened hearings on August 31, 1954. After two months of hearings and deliberations, the Watkins Committee recommended that McCarthy be censured on only two of the original 46 counts. The committee exonerated McCarthy on all substantive charges.<ref>[http://www.xmission.com/~nccs/newsletter/nov05nl.html 44 of the 46 charges were dropped]</ref>

Ultimately, McCarthy was accused of 46 different counts of allegedly improper conduct and another special committee was set up, under the chairmanship of Senator [[Arthur Watkins]], to study and evaluate the charges. This was to be the fifth investigation of Senator McCarthy in five years. This committee opened hearings on August 31, 1954. After two months of hearings and deliberations, the Watkins Committee recommended that McCarthy be censured on only two of the original 46 counts. The committee exonerated McCarthy on all substantive charges.<ref>[http://www.xmission.com/~nccs/newsletter/nov05nl.html 44 of the 46 charges were dropped]</ref>

On November 8, 1954, a special session of the Senate convened to debate the two charges. The charges to be debated and voted on were: 1) That Senator McCarthy had "failed to cooperate" in 1952 with the Senate Subcommitee on Privileges and Elections that was looking into certain aspects of his private and political life in connection with a resolution for his expulsion from the Senate; and 2) That in conducting a senatorial inquiry, Senator McCarthy had "intemperately abused" General Ralph Zwicker.

On November 8, 1954, a special session of the Senate convened to debate the two charges. The charges to be debated and voted on were: 1) That Senator McCarthy had "failed to cooperate" in 1952 with the Senate Subcommittee on Privileges and Elections that was looking into certain aspects of his private and political life in connection with a resolution for his expulsion from the Senate; and 2) That in conducting a senatorial inquiry, Senator McCarthy had "intemperately abused" General Ralph Zwicker.

The Zwicker count was dropped by the full Senate on the grounds that McCarthy's conduct was arguably "induced" by Zwicker's own behavior. Many senators felt that the Army had shown contempt for committee chairman McCarthy by disregarding his letter of February 1, 1954 and honorably discharging Irving Peress the next day. So, for this reason, the Senate concluded that McCarthy's conduct toward Zwicker on February 18 was justified.

The Zwicker count was dropped by the full Senate on the grounds that McCarthy's conduct was arguably "induced" by Zwicker's own behavior. Many senators felt that the Army had shown contempt for committee chairman McCarthy by disregarding his letter of February 1, 1954 and honorably discharging Irving Peress the next day. So, for this reason, the Senate concluded that McCarthy's conduct toward Zwicker on February 18 was justified.

When Ann Coulter asked [[Fox News]]’ [[Bill O'Reilly]] to identify a McCarthy-tormented innocent, O'Reilly responded with [[Dalton Trumbo]], one of [[House Un-American Activities Committee]]'s (HUAC) “Hollywood Ten”, not realizing [[HUAC]] investigated CPUSA infiltration in Hollywood and called “the Hollywood Ten” of writers, directors and producers to testify in 1947. McCarthy did not start his crusade against Communism until 1950.

When Ann Coulter asked [[Fox News]]’ [[Bill O'Reilly]] to identify a McCarthy-tormented innocent, O'Reilly responded with [[Dalton Trumbo]], one of [[House Un-American Activities Committee]]'s (HUAC) “Hollywood Ten”, not realizing [[HUAC]] investigated CPUSA infiltration in Hollywood and called “the Hollywood Ten” of writers, directors and producers to testify in 1947. McCarthy did not start his crusade against Communism until 1950.

* In 1953-54, McCarthy had been investigating lax security in the top secret facility at [[Ft. Monmouth]], New Jersey.  He was attacked by [[liberals]] and [[Communists]] on the grounds that there were no security problems at Ft. Monmouth. Years later, in addressing the reason why the U.S. Army's top-secret operations at Fort Monmouth were quietly moved to Arizona, Senator [[Barry Goldwater]], in his 1979 book ''With no apologies: The personal and political memoirs of United States Senator Barry M. Goldwater'', Goldwater stated:

* In 1953–54, McCarthy had been investigating lax security in the top secret facility at [[Ft. Monmouth]], New Jersey.  He was attacked by [[liberals]] and [[Communists]] on the grounds that there were no security problems at Ft. Monmouth. Years later, in addressing the reason why the U.S. Army's top-secret operations at Fort Monmouth were quietly moved to Arizona, Senator [[Barry Goldwater]], in his 1979 book ''With no apologies: The personal and political memoirs of United States Senator Barry M. Goldwater'', Goldwater stated:

::"Carl Hayden, who in January 1955 became chairman of the powerful Appropriations Committee of the United States Senate, told me privately Monmouth had been moved because he and other members of the majority Democratic Party were convinced security at Monmouth had been penetrated. They didn't want to admit that McCarthy was right in his accusations. Their only alternative was to move the installation from New Jersey to a new location in Arizona."<ref>Goldwater, Barry M. (1979). ''With no apologies: The personal and political memoirs of United States Senator Barry M. Goldwater''. Morrow. ISBN 0-688-03547-7.</ref>

::"Carl Hayden, who in January 1955 became chairman of the powerful Appropriations Committee of the United States Senate, told me privately Monmouth had been moved because he and other members of the majority Democratic Party were convinced security at Monmouth had been penetrated. They didn't want to admit that McCarthy was right in his accusations. Their only alternative was to move the installation from New Jersey to a new location in Arizona."<ref>Goldwater, Barry M. (1979). ''With no apologies: The personal and political memoirs of United States Senator Barry M. Goldwater''. Morrow. ISBN 0-688-03547-7.</ref>

* Ottanelli, Fraser M. '' The Communist Party of the United States: From the Depression to World War II'' 1991 [https://www.amazon.com/Communist-Party-United-States-Depression/dp/0813516137/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205964802&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]

* Ottanelli, Fraser M. '' The Communist Party of the United States: From the Depression to World War II'' 1991 [https://www.amazon.com/Communist-Party-United-States-Depression/dp/0813516137/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205964802&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]

* Rausch, Scott Alan.  "McCarthyism and Eisenhower's State Department, 1953-1961." PhD dissertation U. of Washington 2000. 231 pp.  DAI 2000 61(6A): 2438-A. DA9976046   

* Rausch, Scott Alan.  "McCarthyism and Eisenhower's State Department, 1953-1961." PhD dissertation U. of Washington 2000. 231 pp.  DAI 2000 61(6A): 2438-A. DA9976046   

* Schrecker, Ellen. "McCarthyism: Political Repression and the Fear of Communism." ''Social Research'' 2004 71(4): 1041-1086. Issn: 0037-783x Fulltext: in Ebsco; summarizes her books on the subject

* Schrecker, Ellen. "McCarthyism: Political Repression and the Fear of Communism." ''Social Research'' 2004 71(4): 1041–1086. Issn: 0037-783x Fulltext: in Ebsco; summarizes her books on the subject

* Schrecker, Ellen. ''Many Are the Crimes: McCarthyism in America'' (1998) [https://www.amazon.com/Many-Are-Crimes-McCarthyism-America/dp/0316774707/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205964838&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]

* Schrecker, Ellen. ''Many Are the Crimes: McCarthyism in America'' (1998) [https://www.amazon.com/Many-Are-Crimes-McCarthyism-America/dp/0316774707/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205964838&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]

* Schrecker, Ellen. ''The Age of McCarthyism: A Brief History with Documents.'' (2d ed. 2002). 308 pp.  [https://www.amazon.com/Age-Mccarthyism-History-Documents-Bedford/dp/0312294255/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205964838&sr=1-2 excerpt and text search]

* Schrecker, Ellen. ''The Age of McCarthyism: A Brief History with Documents.'' (2d ed. 2002). 308 pp.  [https://www.amazon.com/Age-Mccarthyism-History-Documents-Bedford/dp/0312294255/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205964838&sr=1-2 excerpt and text search]

===Media issues===

===Media issues===

*  Doherty, Thomas. ''Cold War, Cool Media: Television, McCarthyism, and American Culture'' (2003) [https://www.amazon.com/Cold-War-Cool-Medium-McCarthyism/dp/0231129521/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205965016&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]

*  Doherty, Thomas. ''Cold War, Cool Media: Television, McCarthyism, and American Culture'' (2003) [https://www.amazon.com/Cold-War-Cool-Medium-McCarthyism/dp/0231129521/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205965016&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]

* Dussere, Erik. "Subversion in the Swamp: Pogo and the Folk in the McCarthy Era." ''Journal of American Culture''2003 26(1): 134-141. Issn: 1542-7331 Fulltext: in Ebsco  

* Dussere, Erik. "Subversion in the Swamp: Pogo and the Folk in the McCarthy Era." ''Journal of American Culture''2003 26(1): 134–141. Issn: 1542-7331 Fulltext: in Ebsco  

* Murphy, Brenda.  ''Congressional Theatre: Dramatizing McCarthyism on Stage, Film, and Television.'' (1999). 310 pp. [https://www.amazon.com/Congressional-Theatre-Dramatizing-McCarthyism-Television/dp/0521891663/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205965050&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]  

* Murphy, Brenda.  ''Congressional Theatre: Dramatizing McCarthyism on Stage, Film, and Television.'' (1999). 310 pp. [https://www.amazon.com/Congressional-Theatre-Dramatizing-McCarthyism-Television/dp/0521891663/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205965050&sr=1-1 excerpt and text search]  

* Sbardellati, John and Shaw, Tony. "Booting a Tramp: Charlie Chaplin, the FBI, and the Construction of the Subversive Image in Red Scare America." ''Pacific Historical Review'' 2003 72(4): 495-530. Issn: 0030-8684 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0030-8684(200311)72%3A4%3C495%3ABATCCT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I in JSTOR]

* Sbardellati, John and Shaw, Tony. "Booting a Tramp: Charlie Chaplin, the FBI, and the Construction of the Subversive Image in Red Scare America." ''Pacific Historical Review'' 2003 72(4): 495–530. Issn: 0030-8684 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0030-8684(200311)72%3A4%3C495%3ABATCCT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I in JSTOR]

* Strout, Lawrence N.  ''Covering McCarthyism: How the Christian Science Monitor Handled Joseph R. McCarthy, 1950-1954.'' 1999. 171 pp.  [http://www.questia.com/library/book/covering-mccarthyism-how-the-christian-science-monitor-handled-joseph-r-mccarthy-1950-1954-by-lawrence-n-strout.jsp online edition]

* Strout, Lawrence N.  ''Covering McCarthyism: How the Christian Science Monitor Handled Joseph R. McCarthy, 1950-1954.'' 1999. 171 pp.  [http://www.questia.com/library/book/covering-mccarthyism-how-the-christian-science-monitor-handled-joseph-r-mccarthy-1950-1954-by-lawrence-n-strout.jsp online edition]

*[http://www.honors.umd.edu/HONR269J/archive/Murrow540309.html ''See It Now, Edward R. Murrow report on Senator McCarthy'']. (March 9, 1954). CBS-TV. Retrieved on 8/21/07.

*[http://www.honors.umd.edu/HONR269J/archive/Murrow540309.html ''See It Now, Edward R. Murrow report on Senator McCarthy'']. (March 9, 1954). CBS-TV. Retrieved on 8/21/07.

*[http://www.honors.umd.edu/HONR269J/archive/Murrow540406.html ''See It Now, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy's Reply to Edward R. Murrow'']. (April 6, 1954). CBS-TV. Retrieved on 8/21/07.

*[http://www.honors.umd.edu/HONR269J/archive/Murrow540406.html ''See It Now, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy's Reply to Edward R. Murrow'']. (April 6, 1954). CBS-TV. Retrieved on 8/21/07.

*[https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/watt_interview_3.pdf Oral Interview with Ruth Young Watt], Chief Clerk, Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, 1948-1979. United States Senate Historical Office.  Retrieved from www.senate.gov 24 June 2007.

*[https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/watt_interview_3.pdf Oral Interview with Ruth Young Watt], Chief Clerk, Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, 1948–1979. United States Senate Historical Office.  Retrieved from www.senate.gov 24 June 2007.

{{DEFAULTSORT:McCarthy, Joseph}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:McCarthy, Joseph}}