Changes

McCarthy sought to avoid naming names publicly when possible, using numbered cases instead of names in public session. He preferred to name his suspects only in executive session, in order to protect those who might have been erroneously identified by the FBI, State Department Security, Army counterintelligence, etc. "[I]t would be improper to make the names public until the appropriate Senate committee can meet in executive session and get them," explained McCarthy. "If we should label one man a Communist when he is not a Communist I think it would be too bad."

McCarthy sought to avoid naming names publicly when possible, using numbered cases instead of names in public session. He preferred to name his suspects only in executive session, in order to protect those who might have been erroneously identified by the FBI, State Department Security, Army counterintelligence, etc. "[I]t would be improper to make the names public until the appropriate Senate committee can meet in executive session and get them," explained McCarthy. "If we should label one man a Communist when he is not a Communist I think it would be too bad."

   

   

But when McCarthy began reading his numbered cases to the Senate, the Majority Leader, Senator Scott Lucas (D-IL), interrupted, "I want him to name those Communists." In response to McCarthy's desire not to name names publicly in order to protect the innocent, Lucas bizarrely referred to the fact that statements in Congress are privileged against defamation suits, saying, "if those people are not Communists the senator will be protected."<ref>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, p. 202.</ref> (This was hardly germane: McCarthy's expressed concern was not about protecting ''himself'', but protecting ''suspects who might be innocent''.) McCarthy responded:

But when McCarthy began reading his numbered cases to the Senate, the Democrat Majority Leader, [[Illinois]] Senator Scott Lucas, interrupted, "I want him to name those Communists." In response to McCarthy's desire not to name names publicly in order to protect the innocent, Lucas bizarrely referred to the fact that statements in Congress are privileged against defamation suits, saying, "if those people are not Communists the senator will be protected."<ref>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, p. 202.</ref> (This was hardly germane: McCarthy's expressed concern was not about protecting ''himself'', but protecting ''suspects who might be innocent''.) McCarthy responded:

{{Cquote|The Senator from Illinois demanded, loudly, that I furnish all the names. I told him at that time that so far as I was concerned, I thought that would be improper; that I did not have all the information about these individuals ... I have enough to convince me that either they are members of the Communist Party or they have given great aid to the Communists: I may be wrong. That is why I said that unless the Senate demanded that I do so, I would not submit this publicly, but I would submit it to any committee — and would let the committee go over these in executive session. It is possible that some of these persons will get a clean bill of health...}}

{{Cquote|The Senator from Illinois demanded, loudly, that I furnish all the names. I told him at that time that so far as I was concerned, I thought that would be improper; that I did not have all the information about these individuals ... I have enough to convince me that either they are members of the Communist Party or they have given great aid to the Communists: I may be wrong. That is why I said that unless the Senate demanded that I do so, I would not submit this publicly, but I would submit it to any committee — and would let the committee go over these in executive session. It is possible that some of these persons will get a clean bill of health...}}

Sen. William Benton (D-CT) introduced a bill to eject McCarthy from the Senate. His first charge was that at Wheeling, McCarthy had said that he had a list of 205 names, rather than 57 names. The Senate (then under Democrat control) sent staff investigators to Wheeling to try to substantiate Benton's charges. The investigation found no evidence to support Benton's charge. According to one investigator:

Democratic Senator William Benton of [[Connecticut]] introduced a bill to eject McCarthy from the Senate. His first charge was that at Wheeling, McCarthy had said that he had a list of 205 names, rather than 57 names. The Senate (then under Democrat control) sent staff investigators to Wheeling to try to substantiate Benton's charges. The investigation found no evidence to support Benton's charge. According to one investigator:

{{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>