No, I didn't. Why would you think I did? I posted a link to my source.
Well golly gee whiz, it does kind of look like Bruce Ramsey is saying she is innocent. I would have read it that way too. Maybe he didn't intend it, but it sure does look that way.
Not if you read the whole review. If you don't want to sit throught the whole thing, then you can check out the excerpt I posted in #28.
Where is the lie again???
As I've said already, it's in portraying the words of a conservative writer who is favorably reviewing a book that exposes a communist spy as "Liberal refusal to accept any evidence that any person ever spied for the Soviet Union..." He flatly asserted that she was a spy. What would you call that, if not a lie?
He didn't accept the evidence. He called it circumstantial. That was the point of Ann's comment. She confronted him about NOT accepting the evidence.
Why can't you see that?
BZZZZZZT! In your OWN quote, Ramsey says he is NOT a liberal.
Therefore, in saying liberals don't accept the evidence, she CAN'T have been talking about him. :-)
Cheers!