Donna -— if you make a mistake or a judgment which exceeds available evidence, should I conclude that you “LIED”?
No serious student of the McCarthy era believes that every critic of McCarthy “lied”. Instead, honorable, intelligent, thoughtful people disagreed about what the evidence showed.
Furthermore, as Dr. Haynes pointed out in the email which I copied into one of my previous messages here -— there is a time-line which must be considered.
Space limitations here prevent an in-depth discussion but, again, I suggest that you review the FBI investigative file entitled “Alleged Communists in the State Department” (HQ 121-23278).
Some of McCarthy’s accusations were about people did not even work in the State Department. Other accusations regarding “security risks” had nothing whatsoever to do with alleged communist sympathies by the suspects. Instead, there were concerns expressed regarding such matters as homosexuality, financial problems, marital problems, etc.
Lastly, there is the matter of whether you respect independent judgments or, instead, you insist that your personal opinions must be accepted by everyone. You might consider evidence to be compelling for concluding that a particular person represents a “security risk” whereas another analyst might make a different conclusion — based upon the exact same evidence.
McCarthy made no such distinctions. Instead, he referred to names listed on an outdated years-old State Department document as if there was nothing to analyze or interpret or decide, i.e. just the fact that a name appeared on a list of suspects was (in his mind) equivalent to confirming that a listed person was a security risk.
Again, I refer you to the conclusion made by the former Assistant Director of the FBI (William Sullivan) who headed the Bureau’s Domestic Intelligence Division. He observed:
“We didn’t have enough evidence to show there was a single Communist in the State Department, let alone fifty-seven cases.”
I have no idea why you are posting to me. My comments were limited to what the article said on the topic, not the content of the book.
Please read my first post - I provided a link to a FR post from 2003. That’s all.
Then I posted, in response to your eruption:
The article says “...shattering revision of half a century of lies about Joseph McCarthy and “McCarthyism”...”
The point is, M. Stanton Evans didn’t just discover this truth. Somehow, Coulter already sold 396,600 hardcover copies on the topic.
I’m sure her’s is not as scholarly, LOL.