Changes

==United States Senate==

==United States Senate==

It was McCarthy's charges of Communist infiltration of the State Department that shot him into prominence in 1950. On February 9th speech in Wheeling, [[West Virginia]] at the Colonnade Room of the McClure Hotel he stated:  

It was McCarthy's charges of Communist, security, and loyalty risk infiltration of the State Department that shot him into prominence in 1950. On February 9th speech in Wheeling, [[West Virginia]] at the Colonnade Room of the McClure Hotel he stated:  

{{Cquote|I have in my hand 57 cases of individuals who would appear to be either card carrying members or certainly loyal to the Communist Party, but who nevertheless are still helping to shape our foreign policy.'' <ref>McCarthy, Joseph (February 9, 1950) "[http://us.history.wisc.edu/hist102/pdocs/mccarthy_wheeling.pdf Speech at Wheeling], West Virginia, 9 February 1950," in Michael P. Johnson, ed., Reading the American Past, Vol. II (Boston: Bedford Books, 1998), pgs. 191-195.</ref><ref>Vernon, Wes (January 13, 2006). [http://www.aim.org/aim_report/A4297_0_4_0_C/|''AIM Report: Looney Clooney Smears Senator McCarthy'']. Accuracy In Media</ref><ref>Irvine, Reed and Kincaid, Cliff (September 13, 2000). [http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/A2958_0_2_0_C/|''Joe McCarthy, a Victimizer or Victim'']. Accuracy In Media</ref><ref>Buckley, Jr., William F. and Bozell, L. Brent (1954, 1995 Printing). ''McCarthy & His Enemies, The Record And It's Meaning''. Regnery Publishing Inc., pgs. 41-61. ISBN 0-89526-472-2</ref>}}

{{Cquote|I have in my hand 57 cases of individuals who would appear to be either card carrying members or certainly loyal to the Communist Party, but who nevertheless are still helping to shape our foreign policy.'' <ref>McCarthy, Joseph (February 9, 1950) "[http://us.history.wisc.edu/hist102/pdocs/mccarthy_wheeling.pdf Speech at Wheeling], West Virginia, 9 February 1950," in Michael P. Johnson, ed., Reading the American Past, Vol. II (Boston: Bedford Books, 1998), pgs. 191-195.</ref><ref>Vernon, Wes (January 13, 2006). [http://www.aim.org/aim_report/A4297_0_4_0_C/|''AIM Report: Looney Clooney Smears Senator McCarthy'']. Accuracy In Media</ref><ref>Irvine, Reed and Kincaid, Cliff (September 13, 2000). [http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/A2958_0_2_0_C/|''Joe McCarthy, a Victimizer or Victim'']. Accuracy In Media</ref><ref>Buckley, Jr., William F. and Bozell, L. Brent (1954, 1995 Printing). ''McCarthy & His Enemies, The Record And It's Meaning''. Regnery Publishing Inc., pgs. 41-61. ISBN 0-89526-472-2.</ref>}}

McCarthy compiled a list of 57 security risks and publicly named Robert Service, Gustavo Duran, [[Mary Jane Keeney]] and Harlow Shapley as being on the list. <ref>The Life and Times of Joe McCarthy: A Biography, Thomas C. Reeves, pgs 222-238. </ref>  These names came from the "Lee List" of unresolved State Department security cases compiled by the earlier investigators for the House Appropriates 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 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 Appropriates 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 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). Democrats insisted McCarthy name names.  McCarthy responded,

In a six hour speech on the Senate floor on February 20, 1950 in which McCarthy was constantly interrupted by hostile 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). Democrats insisted McCarthy name names.  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. . . .}}

McCarthy is said by some to have made the claim, "I have here in my hand a list of 205—a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party." <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> This alleged statement was made only about his speech in Wheeling, WV and not in the other cities where he made a speech addressing the issue of subversion in government.  The 205 number 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:

 

McCarthy is said by some to have made the claim, "I have here in my hand a list of 205—a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party."<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> This alleged statement was made only about his speech in Wheeling, WV and not in the other cities where he made a speech addressing the issue of subversion in government.  The 205 number 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.

On February 7, 1950, three days before McCarthy's acclaimed Wheeling West Virginia speech, Hoover testified before House Appropriations Committee that [[Glossary_of_espionage_terms#Counterintelligence|counterespionage]] requires "an objective different from the handling of criminal cases. It is more important to ascertain his contacts, his objectives, his sources of information and his methods of communication" as "arrest and public disclosure are steps to be taken only as a matter of last resort." He concluded that "we can be secure only when we have a full knowledge of the operations of an espionage network, because then we are in a position to render their efforts ineffective." <ref>[http://www.fbi.gov/libref/historic/history/foxpaper.htm In the Enemy’s House: Venona and the Maturation of American Counterintelligence], John F. Fox, Jr., FBI Historian, Presented at the 2005 Symposium on Cryptologic History, 10/27/2005. </ref>

On February 7, 1950, three days before McCarthy's acclaimed Wheeling West Virginia speech, Hoover testified before House Appropriations Committee that [[Glossary_of_espionage_terms#Counterintelligence|counterespionage]] requires "an objective different from the handling of criminal cases. It is more important to ascertain his contacts, his objectives, his sources of information and his methods of communication" as "arrest and public disclosure are steps to be taken only as a matter of last resort." He concluded that "we can be secure only when we have a full knowledge of the operations of an espionage network, because then we are in a position to render their efforts ineffective." <ref>[http://www.fbi.gov/libref/historic/history/foxpaper.htm In the Enemy’s House: Venona and the Maturation of American Counterintelligence], John F. Fox, Jr., FBI Historian, Presented at the 2005 Symposium on Cryptologic History, 10/27/2005. </ref>

McCarthy is said by some to have made the claim, "I have here in my hand a list of 205—a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party." The famous "List", as it has come to be known, has always engendered much controversy. The figure of 205 appears to have come from an oral briefing McCarthy had with Hoover regarding espionage suspects the FBI was then investigating.  The FBI had discovered on its own five Soviet agents operating in the United States during World War II; defector Elizabeth Bentley further added another 81 known identities of espionage agents; Venona materials had provided the balance, and by the time a full accounting of true name identities was compiled in an FBI memo in 1957, one more subject had been added to the number, now totaling 206. <ref>[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/FBI_Synopsis_on_%22Operations_of_the_MGB_Residency_at_New_York,_1944-45%22 FBI Memo Referencing 206 Communists in Government]</ref>

McCarthy is said to have made the claim, "I have here in my hand a list of 205—a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party." The famous "List", as it has come to be known, has always engendered much controversy. The figure of 205 appears to have come from an oral briefing McCarthy had with Hoover regarding espionage suspects the FBI was then investigating.  The FBI had discovered on its own five Soviet agents operating in the United States during World War II; defector Elizabeth Bentley further added another 81 known identities of espionage agents; Venona materials had provided the balance, and by the time a full accounting of true name identities was compiled in an FBI memo in 1957, one more subject had been added to the number, now totaling 206. <ref>[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/FBI_Synopsis_on_%22Operations_of_the_MGB_Residency_at_New_York,_1944-45%22 FBI Memo Referencing 206 Communists in Government]</ref>

Much confusion has always surrounded the subject.  While the closely guarded FBI/Venona information of identified espionage agents uses the number of 206, McCarthy in his Wheeling speech only referred to Communist Party membership, and not espionage activity.  Being a security risk as a CPUSA member does not necessarily entail or imply that a person was or is actively involved in espionage activity.  Venona materials indicated a very large number of espionage agents remained unidentified by the FBI.  When McCarthy was questioned on the number, he referred to the Lee List of security risks, by which it appears Hoover was attempting to match unidentified code names to known security risks. Hoover kept the identities of persons known to be involved in espionage activity from Venona evidence secret. Hoover in the very early days of the FBI's joint investigation with the [[Army Signals Intelligence Service]] in May of 1946 did precisely the same deception with a confidant of [[President Truman]] using Venona decryptions.  Hoover reported that a reliable source revealed “an enormous Soviet espionage ring in Washington.” Of some fourteen names, [[KGB|Soviet agents]] [[Alger Hiss]] and [[Nathan Gregory Silvermaster]] were listed well down the list. The name at the top was “Undersecretary of State [[Dean Acheson]]” and included others beyond reproach, thus discrediting the Hiss and Silvermaster accusations, which actually were on target. Hence the Truman White House always suspected Hoover and the FBI of playing partisan political games with accusations of various administration members’ complicity in Soviet espionage. <ref>[http://www.fas.org/sgp/library/moynihan/foreword.html Moynihan Commission on Government Secrecy, Chairmans Forward], 1997.</ref>

Much confusion has always surrounded the subject.  While the closely guarded FBI/Venona information of identified espionage agents uses the number of 206, McCarthy in his Wheeling speech only referred to Communist Party membership and other security risks, and not espionage activity.  Being a security risk as a CPUSA member does not necessarily entail or imply that a person was or is actively involved in espionage activity.  Venona materials indicated a very large number of espionage agents remained unidentified by the FBI.  When McCarthy was questioned on the number, he referred to the Lee List of security risks, by which it appears Hoover was attempting to match unidentified code names to known security risks. Hoover kept the identities of persons known to be involved in espionage activity from Venona evidence secret. Hoover in the very early days of the FBI's joint investigation with the [[Army Signals Intelligence Service]] in May of 1946 did precisely the same deception with a confidant of [[President Truman]] using Venona decryptions.  Hoover reported that a reliable source revealed “an enormous Soviet espionage ring in Washington.” Of some fourteen names, [[KGB|Soviet agents]] [[Alger Hiss]] and [[Nathan Gregory Silvermaster]] were listed well down the list. The name at the top was “Undersecretary of State [[Dean Acheson]]” and included others beyond reproach, thus discrediting the Hiss and Silvermaster accusations, which actually were on target. Hence the Truman White House always suspected Hoover and the FBI of playing partisan political games with accusations of various administration members’ complicity in Soviet espionage. <ref>[http://www.fas.org/sgp/library/moynihan/foreword.html Moynihan Commission on Government Secrecy, Chairmans Forward], 1997.</ref>

The Venona project specifically references at least 349 pseudonyms in the United States&mdash;including citizens, immigrants, and permanent residents&mdash;who cooperated in various ways with Soviet intelligence agencies, however not all were ever identified.  In public hearings before the [[Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations]] (PSI) conducted by McCarthy, 83 persons plead the fifth amendment right against self incrimination. An additional 9 persons refused to testify on constitutional grounds in private hearings, and their names were not made public. <ref>Drummey, James J. (May 11, 1987). [http://www.jbs.org/node/632|''The Real McCarthy Record'']. The New American, Section III. Committee Chairman (1953-54).</ref> Of the 83 persons pleading the fifth amendment, several have been identified by [[NSA]] and [[FBI]] as agents of the Soviet Union in the [[Venona project]] involved in espionage. Several prominent examples are:

The Venona project specifically references at least 349 pseudonyms in the United States&mdash;including citizens, immigrants, and permanent residents&mdash;who cooperated in various ways with Soviet intelligence agencies, however not all were ever identified.  In public hearings before the [[Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations]] (PSI) conducted by McCarthy, 83 persons plead the fifth amendment right against self incrimination. An additional 9 persons refused to testify on constitutional grounds in private hearings, and their names were not made public. <ref>Drummey, James J. (May 11, 1987). [http://www.jbs.org/node/632|''The Real McCarthy Record'']. The New American, Section III. Committee Chairman (1953-54).</ref> Of the 83 persons pleading the fifth amendment, several have been identified by [[NSA]] and [[FBI]] as agents of the Soviet Union in the [[Venona project]] involved in espionage. Several prominent examples are:

  | publisher = The University of North Carolina Press  

  | publisher = The University of North Carolina Press  

  | id = ISBN 0-80782-245-0}})</ref>

  | id = ISBN 0-80782-245-0}})</ref>

* [[William T. Stone]], U.S. State Department; McCarthy's Case #46 and Lee list #54;<ref>

* [[William T. Stone]], U.S. State Department; McCarthy's Case #46 and Lee list #54;<ref>

Accused by McCarthy as a security/loyalty risk, Stone is McCarthy's Case Number 46. As early as 1946, the Bannerman Security Screening Board of the State Department concluded that Stone should be "terminated", that Stone's "continued presence in the Department is embarrassing...that he be given an opportunity to resign" and failing to do so should result in his forced termination "under Civil Service Rule 3." The State Department failed to act on this recommendation and Stone continued working in the State Department. Stone was on the Communist controlled editorial board of ''Amerasia'' magazine, recommended fellow ''Amerasia'' members to jobs with the U.S. State Department, informed Venona identifed Communist and espionage operative, [[Greg Silvermaster|Nathan Gregory Silvermaster]] of an adverse security report concerning Silvermaster, was constantly under investigation as a security/loyalty risk, and was eventually given the opportunity to resign, which he did in 1952.

Accused by McCarthy as a security/loyalty risk, Stone is McCarthy's Case Number 46. As early as 1946, the Bannerman Security Screening Board of the State Department concluded that Stone should be "terminated", that Stone's "continued presence in the Department is embarrassing...that he be given an opportunity to resign" and failing to do so should result in his forced termination "under Civil Service Rule 3." The State Department failed to act on this recommendation and Stone continued working in the State Department. Stone was on the Communist controlled editorial board of ''Amerasia'' magazine, recommended fellow ''Amerasia'' members to jobs with the U.S. State Department, informed Venona identifed Communist and espionage operative, [[Greg Silvermaster|Nathan Gregory Silvermaster]] of an adverse security report concerning Silvermaster, was constantly under investigation as a security/loyalty risk, and was eventually given the opportunity to resign, which he did in 1952.

In analyzing the first count, "failure to cooperate with the Subcommittee on Privileges and Elections", the fact is that the subcommittee never subpoenaed McCarthy, but only "invited" him to testify. One senator and two staff members resigned from the subcommittee because of its dishonesty towards McCarthy. In its' final report dated January 2, 1953, the subcommittee, stated that the matters under consideration "have become moot by reason of the 1952 election." Up until this moment in U.S. history, no senator had ever been punished for something that had happened in a previous Congress or for declining an "invitation" to testify. Therefore, the first count was a complete fraud and nothing more than a trumped up charge in order to damage Senator McCarthy.

In analyzing the first count, "failure to cooperate with the Subcommittee on Privileges and Elections", the fact is that the subcommittee never subpoenaed McCarthy, but only "invited" him to testify. One senator and two staff members resigned from the subcommittee because of its dishonesty towards McCarthy. In its' final report dated January 2, 1953, the subcommittee, stated that the matters under consideration "have become moot by reason of the 1952 election." Up until this moment in U.S. history, no senator had ever been punished for something that had happened in a previous Congress or for declining an "invitation" to testify. Therefore, the first count was a complete fraud and nothing more than a trumped up charge in order to damage Senator McCarthy.

The second count was even more flawed than the first. McCarthy was condemned for opinions he had expressed outside the Senate when he criticized the Watkins Committee and the special Senate session. In an editorial by David Lawrence in the June 7, 1957 issue of ''U.S. News & World Report'', other senators had accused McCarthy of lying under oath, accepting influence money, engaging in election fraud, making libelous and false statements, practicing blackmail, doing the work of the communists for them, and engaging in a questionable "personal relationship" with Roy Cohn and David Schine, but they were not censured for acting "contrary to senatorial ethics" or for impairing the "dignity" of the Senate.<ref>Drummey, James J. (May 11, 1987). [http://www.jbs.org/node/632|''The Real McCarthy Record'']. The New American.</ref>

The second count was even more flawed than the first. McCarthy was condemned for opinions he had expressed outside the Senate when he criticized the Watkins Committee and the special Senate session. In an editorial by David Lawrence in the June 7, 1957 issue of ''U.S. News & World Report'', other senators had accused McCarthy of lying under oath, accepting influence money, engaging in election fraud, making libelous and false statements, practicing blackmail, doing the work of the communists for them, and engaging in a questionable "personal relationship" with Roy Cohn and David Schine. However, these other Senators were not censured for acting "contrary to senatorial ethics" or for impairing the "dignity" of the Senate. Only Senator McCarthy would be held responsible for his words. <ref>Drummey, James J. (May 11, 1987). [http://www.jbs.org/node/632|''The Real McCarthy Record'']. The New American.</ref>

==Final years==

==Final years==