The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPeter Lee Archive
Yes, the Press Might Do a Joe McCarthy on Trump; Just Not the Way You Think
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I am not particularly impressed with protestations that the Fourth Estate is going to solve our Donald Trump problem by speaking truth to power, exposing his low, dishonest, and inflammatory rhetoric, and the filthy bigotry in which he traffics.

There’s a lot of people—a lot of voters—down in the sewer with Donald Trump. Apparently the smell doesn’t bother them.

Nor do I hold out hope that elite opinion-makers like Thomas Friedman will lead the stampede of asses that will trample Trump into well-deserved oblivion.

And I do not have much patience with the trope that all the media needs to do is put on its big-boy pants and stick it to Donald Trump in the name of decency just like the press did to Joe McCarthy in the glorious days of Ed Murrow in 1954.

This hagiography is enshrined in George Clooney’s biopic of Murrow, Good Night and Good Luck (excellent film, by the way), which characterizes Murrow as having the courage to step forth and confront McCarthy with a scathing series of televised exposes in March 1954 when nobody else would.

Indeed, Murrow took up the cudgels in 1953 when few others were willing. Murrow’s producer, Fred Friendly openly characterized the famous See It Now reports as pre-planned advocacy, not reporting. As quoted in Ralph Engelman’s biography, Friendlyvision: Fred Friendly and the Rise and Fall of Television Journalism, Friendly declared:

I think we were balancing how what we knew how to do well against what he did superbly well, which is to be a demagogue. And I’m sorry we had to do it that way. But it was the challenge of a lifetime, a desperate moment for the country, and not to have used it because of a series of rules that we would apply to ourselves and that Senator McCarthy would abuse to the ultimate would have made history judge us very harshly. [Engelman, pg. 125]

McCarthy was a world-class creep and demagogue. He was also an eager bottom-feeder in the murky waters of the American security state, which were lavishly chummed by J. Edgar Hoover with real and faux evidence to ensnare real, faux, potential, and imagined Communists. Eventually McCarthy got big and intimidating enough to upset a lot of people. Declaring the Democratic Party the “party of treason” and questioning the patriotism of two-time Democratic presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson was a start. But I think just the start.

We can take it as a given that certain media outlets were determined to stick it to McCarthy. But in deciding whether the media today has the mission and chops to properly identify an existential demagogic threat to the nation and righteously sh*tcan it, it would help to explore the assertion that CBS and prestige media were able to reach beyond its core audience of disgruntled Democrats and liberals to bring down Tailgunner Joe.

For a more plausible alternative, try President Eisenhower and his anger at McCarthy’s attack on the Army, which started with a gaudy search for Communists in the Army Signal Corps laboratory at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey.

Ike apparently no like.

President Eisenhower initiated a secret campaign to nail McCarthy in the beginning of 1954. The story was first told in the 1980s by Eisenhower staffer William Bragg Ewald in his book Who Killed Joe McCarthy? It will be told in greater detail in 2016 by David Nichols of Southwestern College, Kansas, in an as yet untitled book based on the Eisenhower archives and other declassified sources.

Here’s what Nichols had to say in an excerpt posted by the National Archives:

Eisenhower carried off his anti-McCarthy operation by means of rigorous delegation to a handful of trusted subordinates; these included Chief of Staff Sherman Adams; Vice President Richard Nixon; Press Secretary James Hagerty; Attorney General Herbert Brownell, Jr., and his deputy, William Rogers; Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., the administration’s representative to the United Nations; and Assistant Secretary of Defense Fred A. Seaton, who collaborated with H. Struve Hensel, the Pentagon’s general counsel. While less intimate with the President, Secretary of the Army Robert Stevens and Army counsel John G. Adams played critical roles. These men were expected, like foot soldiers in war, to put their lives and reputations on the line to protect the President and extinguish the political influence of Joe McCarthy.

Yup, even that devoted anti-Communist Richard Nixon saw which way the wind was blowing and signed on to ratf*ck McCarthy. And it looks like J. Edgar Hoover helped cut off McCarthy at the knees by repudiating a document McCarthy brandished during the Army hearings.

In January 1954 Eisenhower’s Chief of Staff, Sherman Adams instructed the Army’s Chief Counsel to write up a report describing the harassment of the Army instigated by McCarthy’s pit bull, Roy Cohn, in the matter of fellow staffer David Schine, with whom Cohn appears to have been infatuated. By February, the job of preparing the report is in the hands of the Assistant Secretary of Defense and the General Counsel of the Army.

And then in early March, per Nichols…

Sherman Adams’s good friend, Vermont’s Republican Senator Ralph W. Flanders, ridiculed McCarthy in a speech on the Senate floor. Flanders words dripped with sarcasm: “He dons his war paint. He goes into his war dance. He emits his war whoops…”

Murrow quoted Flanders’ speech in his famous See It Now broadcast the same night.

Murrow’s legendary program makes for interesting viewing.

It was immediately recognized as a high-minded hit piece designed to show McCarthy at his least attractive. One of the more ham-fisted segments shows an apparently juiced Tailgunner Joe, his comb-over sagging into a bedraggled spitcurl on his forehead, engaged in some dinner-speech blather. As McCarthy struggles to keep his wits about him and finish his speech, the camera portentously pans to a rather naff mural behind him depicting George Washington in a heroic pose. Compare and contrast, the message here.

I was struck by a clip he showed of Eisenhower energetically asserting his prerogative to handle executive branch loyalty issues without congressional committees (i.e. McCarthy) butting in. Incongruously, the famously placid Eisenhower in his physical appearance and temperament strikingly resembled that famous shoe-banger Nikita Khrushchev.

The worst thing Murrow comes up with is catching McCarthy lying (or as we’d say today, “perhaps intentionally misrepresenting”) the ACLU as a proscribed Communist organization while he bullyrags a State Department boffin for a book he wrote in the 1930s.

The program concludes with Murrow’s justly famous peroration.

Then, per Nichols:

Those events set the stage for March 11, 1954. That day, on Eisenhower’s secret orders, Seaton released a 34-page, carefully edited account of the privileges sought for David Schine to key senators, representatives, and the press. The document ignited such a fire-storm of negative publicity that, on March 16, the McCarthy subcommittee agreed to hold televised hearings. McCarthy would temporarily step down as chair…

The hearings were broadcast by the fledgling ABC and DuMont networks with gavel-to-gavel coverage for 36 eye-glazing days. It will be very interesting if Nichols’ book addresses the hows and whys of the collapse of McCarthy’s poll standing (from the 50s to the 30s) during the hearings for the understanding of modern onlookers.

Here is a clip of the apparently cathartic “have you no decency?” slam from Judge Welch to the applause of the gallery. The indecency in question was McCarthy hounding Welch over the issue of a member of his team that Welch had to send packing back to Boston because he had belonged to the National Lawyers Guild, an organization HUAC deemed a Communist front. After the decency jab, Welch still had to deploy a hissy fit and end his examination in order to deflect McCarthy’s determined efforts to make hay out of the embarrassing incident, so it’s difficult for me to grasp how this was a decisive high-five moment for the anti-McCarthy team. But apparently so.

Much more effective in my opinion are the cutaways to the mesmerizingly sinister apparition of Roy Cohn, who looks and writhes like a hagfish impatient to swim off and burrow into a welcoming corpse.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1eA5bUzVjA

On December 2, 1954, McCarthy was condemned by the Senate by a vote of 67 to 22. This is usually reported as “censure” but it wasn’t, as the contemporary account in the New York Times made clear. Richard Nixon presided over the session and finessed the adoption of the resolution. It took a lot of finessing and some low comedy to deliver a satisfactory outcome in the evenly-split (44 Rs, 44 Ds, 1 Independent) Senate.

The only transgression cited in the resolution was McCarthy acting like an insulting, high-handed jerk toward a number of senators who were investigating him. Apparently the investigation itself hadn’t produced anything deemed suitably awesome—or maybe it was always intended as just a waystation in the road to Senate condemnation. In any case, the anti-McCarthy forces simply nailed him for his demeanor.

People who remember Clarence Thomas’ “high tech lynching” stunt before the Senate Judiciary Committee will be amused to learn that one of McCarthy’s main transgressions was characterizing the proceeding against him as “a lynch-party” or “lynch bee.”

All 44 Democrats voted for the resolution. Twenty-two Republicans also voted in favor and twenty-two against, leading one to believe that Eisenhower-inflected party politics rather than good old small d/Large D/Murrow-fueled democratic indignation was in play. Senator Flanders, the good buddy of Eisenhower’s Chief of Staff Sherman Adams, introduced the resolution.

Afterwards, McCarthy faded away and died from hepatitis. Again, it will be interesting to see what Nichols has to say about any Eisenhower-related maneuverings that may have prevented McCarthy from bouncing back.

Murrow’s producer, Fred Friendly, became very close to Eisenhower, describing Ike after he left office as “a part-time correspondent for CBS News” because of all the TV specials the ex-President did with CBS Reports. I leave it to the inquisitive to explore when those close relations began, and whether the well-connected Murrow et. al. had any inkling that Eisenhower and his team were maneuvering to drop the hammer on McCarthy as the famous See It Now broadcast was assembled.

One of my favorite journo stories concerns the carefully choreographed leaking of the vital Army report to the press on March 11, two days after Murrow’s famous broadcast. Press coverage of the allegations created the outrage boomlet that midwived the fatal Army hearings. The anecdote comes courtesy of Art Spivak, then working for International News Service:

… the Army’s counsel, John G. Adams slipped to some senators and to the Baltimore Sun’s reporter Phil Potter a 34-page single-spaced “chronology” of efforts by Cohn, with McCarthy’s backing, to force the Army to give Roy’s recently-drafted buddy G. David Schine a direct promotion to lieutenant, assign him to serve his military term on the staff of the subcommittee, and enjoy sundry other favors. The bottom line was a charge that Cohn threatened to “wreck the Army” if his wishes were rejected.

Adams, a fellow South Dakotan and long-time friend of Potter’s, knew Potter would make use of the anti-Cohn, anti-McCarthy chronology, Potter, in turn, knew that the chronology was potential dynamite and his unsyndicated story would get nowhere unless other news outlets had it too.

The way Potter told it to me later, he therefore offered a copy of the Adams chronology to Arkansas Democratic Sen. John L. McClellan, ranking minority member of McCarthy’s subcommittee. McClellan was an arch-conservative and at first didn’t oppose McCarthy, but he grew to despise the Wisconsin Republican’s tactics. And so, with Potter’s guidance, McClellan invited a small group of reporters to his Fairfax Hotel apartment in Washington and leaked the chronology to them. I was one of those invited. Others included reporters for AP, UP, the New York Times and the Washington Post.

There was only one copy of the chronology available at McClellan’s suite, so the four other reporters and I laboriously hand-copied each of the 34 single-spaced pages of the document, passing each page to the other reporter until all were finished copying. We didn’t finish until close to midnight. From the hotel, I phoned a “bulletin” and brief story to the INS news desk in Washington, to catch the wire at the end of what we called the “A.M. cycle” for morning papers.

At the time, and for years afterward, I thought Adams had prepared and leaked his chronology on his own, in retribution for his and his Army colleagues’ treatment by McCarthy and Cohn.

Thirty years later, the full story came out in Ewald’s deceptively titled “Who Killed Joe McCarthy” book. Ewald provided chapter and verse on how Adams was only one player in a broadly mounted but confidential assault on McCarthy and Cohn by the Eisenhower White House, Department of Defense, and Department of the Army. The President himself was described as publicly silent but vitally active in orchestrating the developments that spawned the Army- McCarthy hearings.

Yes. Faithful steno work and an inability to see the big picture and the guy behind the curtain—Eisenhower. That’s how the press helped bring down Tailgunner Joe.

And I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s how Donald Trump meets his political end, perhaps for some legal or tax entanglement. That is, if there’s anybody in the political establishment adept as Eisenhower who wants to remove a disruptive, independent-minded demagogue. If there is, I don’t doubt that the journalists will be ready to hold up their end.

(Republished from China Matters by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 93 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Does the left really still not know that Joe McCarthy was fully vindicated when the FBI released the VENONA transcripts after the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990’s? C’mon guys! Wake up! The left originally claimed that the transcripts were forged or mistranslations, but this argument was obliterated when the KGB released their own internal docs, which fully vindicated both VENONA and McCarthy.

    I generally like the idea that Unz publishes people across the political spectrum, and I hope that this promotes dialog, but for this to happen those on the left have to be honest and well-informed.

  2. fnn says:

    McCarthy had to choose Cohn over Bobby Kennedy in order to keep the professional anti-anti-Semites from destroying the committee before it even got stated. But, essentially, it was the old, now dead, Eastern WASP Establishment that killed McCarthy:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird#Directorate_for_Plans

    McCarthy, as part of his campaign against government, began accusing other senior members of the CIA as being security risks. McCarthy claimed that the CIA was a “sinkhole of communists”, and said he would root out a hundred of them. One of his first targets was Cord Meyer, who was still working for Operation Mockingbird. In August 1953, Richard Helms, Wisner’s deputy at the OPC, told Meyer that McCarthy had accused him of being a communist. The Federal Bureau of Investigation said it was unwilling to give Meyer “security clearance”, without referring to any evidence against him. Allen W. Dulles and Frank Wisner both came to his defense and refused to permit an FBI interrogation of Meyer.[13]

    With the network in authority in the CIA threatened, Wisner was directed to unleash Mockingbird on McCarthy. Drew Pearson, Joe Alsop, Jack Anderson, Walter Lippmann and Ed Murrow all engaged in intensely negative coverage of McCarthy. According to Jack Anderson, his political reputation was permanently damaged by the press coverage orchestrated by Wisner.[14]

  3. This piece provides an interesting discussion of the McCarthy era. But it has nothing to do with Donald Trump and the corporate media of today. Trump = McCarthy? A truly silly premise for a hit piece on Trump.

    There’s a lot of people—a lot of voters—down in the sewer with Donald Trump. Apparently the smell doesn’t bother them.

    Silly but not subtle. What say you Trump supporters? How is the smell down there?

  4. Wally says: • Website

    Problem is that McCarthy was absolutely correct.
    This was and is a Jews & communism thing.

    When they stop lying about us we will stop telling the truth about them.

    http://www.revisionisthistory.org/communist.html

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  5. There’s a lot of people—a lot of voters—down in the sewer with Donald Trump. Apparently the smell doesn’t bother them.

    I’m one of those voters that supports Trump. I’d say it’s all the other bought-and-paid-for candidates who are in the sewer overflowing with the filthy lucre of Adelson, Sana, Soros, the Koch Bros., the Chamber of Commerce, etc. These are the candidates who have been paid to support massive immigration at any cost; immigration that undercuts American wages, destroys the American working and middle classes, introduces whole new racial underclasses into our country, and has had a devestating effect on internal security. Despite Trump’s rhetorical excesses there is not one of his policy positions that is not more rationale, humane, and beneficial for his fellow countrymen than any opposing position by any other candidate, Democrat or Republican. That is why there has been a total unwillingness on the part of any of Trump’s opponents — whether the political establishment, the financial elites who have bought the servile obeissance of that establishment or the MSM echco chamber megaphoning the message of this coalition — to actually engage him on the issues.

    • Replies: @par4
  6. tbraton says:
    @WorkingClass

    I am somewhat puzzled about what Peter Lee finds so objectionable about Donald Trump. Is it Trump’s promise to get rid of birth citizenship which Chinese are increasingly trying to take advantage of in California? Is it Trump’s blustery call to get tough with China on trade and jobs? Or is it Trump’s pledge to build the wall to protect our southern border from illegal aliens coming from Mexico? It certainly can’t be Trump’s position on foreign affairs since he and Rand Paul came across as the most sane and sensible and least warlike candidates among the Republicans debating in Las Vegas the other night. I think Mr. Lee’s comparison of Trump to Joe McCarthy is way over the top. What is the connection between Trump’s wanting to evict all illegal aliens living in the U.S. and McCarthy’s wanting to rid the federal government of communists? Has Trump ever stated that he has a list of 57 illegal aliens living in the U.S.? Does Mr. Lee deny all the reports that there are at least 11 million illegals living in the U.S., does he not care or does he think it would be “inhumane” to evict such people who came here illegally and have no legal right to remain here? I think Joe McCarthy was truly excessive and reckless in conducting his campaign against Communists in the 50’s (accusing Eisenhower and Gen. George C. Marshall of being “fellow travelers” was totally foolish), but it is now undeniable that there were real Communists at all levels of the federal government, not fantasies of a mentally ill man like the great mathematician and game theorist John Nash as falsely portrayed in the movie “A Beautiful Mind” (in reality, as made clear in the book upon which the movie was based, Nash’s delusions and fantasies had to do with communications with aliens from outer space, not imaginary Communists).

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @tbraton
  7. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website
    @tbraton

    “I am somewhat puzzled about what Peter Lee finds so objectionable about Donald Trump.”

    Why you not know how yellow folks think and act?

    Peter Flea is yellow, and he just follow whatever prevailing orthodoxy in school and media.

    Yellow follow. They not think for self. Since Flea grow up hearing from Jewish professor that McCarthy bad guy, he just go along. He not think for self. He just watch Hollywood movie made by cuckeral favored by Jew mogul, and he think he know so much.

    Flea just yellow dog who spout same thing he hear from Jewish professor and media.

    Chinee not think original. They not see truth. They just open fortune cookie of powerful folks, and they just read what in there.

    If fortune cookie say, ‘Mccarthy no good’, Flea say he no good.

    No other reason.

    To be fair to Flea, it true that Trump sort of coward in bashing Chiner but not Jew. Trump act so big on Chiner, Mooooslim, and Mexico, but he total quiet on real power and sacred cow: Jew, homo, and Negro.

    McCarthy same way. He act so tough on commie but he never talk about Jew. He too chicken. He never say the truth that many commie were Jew.

    • Replies: @geokat62
  8. J1234 says:
    @WorkingClass

    Trump = McCarthy? A truly silly premise for a hit piece on Trump.

    Absolutely correct. This article appeals to emotion rather than logic, an emotion that overtakes journalists and those on the left who are convinced that outspoken politicians who aren’t social justice warriors are all part of some Nazi cabal…or something. I actually can’t quite figure it out, to be honest.

    All I know is that Trump and McCarthy have very little in common with regards to their respective missions. Trump probably has more in common with Eisenhower, who came down hard on immigrants. He has more in common with Truman, who required a loyalty oath among federal employees. http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/loyal.html

    McCarthy, who was undoubtedly flawed, also had (at first glance) more in common with that other state supreme court justice who was in congress(and co-founded the House unAmerican Activities committee), Samuel Dickstein. Oh, except that Dickstein was an actual spy for the Soviets who would testify at hearings against McCarthy’s “red-baiting” at the insistence of his Soviet connections. Venona uncovered Dickstein for the traitorous rat that he was…but that was long after his death, so nobody cares about Dickstein’s vile personality or horrible transgressions. He still has a street named for him in New York. And he will go unmentioned by the likes of Peter Lee.

    This article, true to form, is the same old journalistic “style over substance”. The pretext of the article is to compare the political machinations that will end Trump’s political career with those that brought down McCarthy. The real purpose of the article, however, is to portray Trump as another McCarthy, which – as I said before – is nonsensical.

    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond
    , @Curle
  9. tbraton says:

    Well, I didn’t realize YOU were Chinese. You sound exactly like Charlie Chan’s No. 1 Son. I guess you pronounce your name as “The Pliss Factory.”

    And here I thought that Peter Lee was a descendant of Robert E. Lee and all the other Lees of Virginia. Learn something new every day.

    “McCarthy same way. He act so tough on commie but he never talk about Jew. He too chicken. He never say the truth that many commie were Jew.”

    I was in elementary school when the Army-McCarthy hearings were televised, so I didn’t know what was going on in any real sense. When I got older and started reading about that period, I was fascinated to learn about McCarthy and Roy Cohn. Cohn was a brilliant lawyer (one of the prosecutors of the Rosenbergs) and had quite a career in NYC after leaving McCarthy. (I lived on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. from the mid 70’s until late 80’s and heard from several people that Cohn had a house at 5th and Seward Square, S.E., north of Pennsylvania Avenue, which he apparently retained after moving to NYC. The reason he bought that house, apparently, was because it was one of the few on Capitol Hill (a 19th century neighborhood consisting of brick row houses) at the time to have a swimming pool in the backyard.) The interesting thing about Cohn is that it was generally known he was homosexual (I believe he ultimately died of AIDS), but nobody wrote anything about it when he was living because he had vociferously denied the rumors and threatened to sue anybody who dared to write about it. I guess his reputation as a ferocious litigator scared a lot of people away from the subject. Under the circumstances, I guess it made sense for McCarthy to use Cohn, not only because he was a brilliant lawyer but because the fact that he was Jewish helped insulate McCarthy to an extent from charges of anti-Semitism.

    (BTW in Googling Cohn, I came across this bit of information which was new to me:

    “Lavender scare[edit]

    See also: Lavender scare

    Cohn and McCarthy targeted many government officials and cultural figures not only for suspected Communist sympathies, but also for alleged homosexuality.[25] McCarthy and Cohn were responsible for the firing of scores of gay men from government employment, and strong-armed many opponents into silence using rumors of their homosexuality.[26][27] Former U.S. Senator Alan K. Simpson has written: “The so-called ‘Red Scare’ has been the main focus of most historians of that period of time. A lesser-known element … and one that harmed far more people was the witch-hunt McCarthy and others conducted against homosexuals.”[28] ” )

    When I was in college, I worked for several years in the summer at one of the Marriott’s first hotels. One of the men who came aboard as a checkout clerk was an older Jewish man named Sheldon something-or-other who had lost his job working for the Department of Labor as a result of the Red Scare in the 50’s. I would occasionally read letters to the editor of the Washington Post that he would write concerning Social Security or some similar topic, which was the area he worked in at the DOL. He was a very nice man, and we would occasionally get into discussions about philosophy. He had majored in philosophy at Wayne State (in Detroit, I believe). His favorite philosopher, as I recall, was Spinoza. But he was an absolute klutz when it came to performing his duties as a checkout clerk. We never discussed politics or his dismissal from the government because of his Communist affiliation.

  10. Yet another point-&-splutter hit piece against Donald Trump. The degree of its vehemence demonstrates yet again the panic into which Donald Trump’s common sense has thrown the Invade The World/Import The World NAFTA-GATT-TPP-Globalist Establishment tyrants.

    Not even a nice try there, my dear Mr. Lee. Those flecks of foam round the lips of your hit piece gave your game away.

    And, yes, Senator McCarthy was right about Communists in Government – his only error was in missing the many other Communists he didn’t expose.

    There is no “smell” on, from or around Donald Trump or on, from or around us fed up Americans who are grateful to Donald Trump for giving America’s increasingly odious political discourse of the last fifty years its first breath of FRESH AIR.

  11. Svigor says:

    Speaking of smells, there’s got to be some explanation as to why poor Peter Lee can’t get a job in the legitimate media. Halitosis? Acne? Can’t meet deadlines?

  12. @J1234

    The article apparently gets something right. If Trump and McCarthy are so distant, why do almost all the pro-Trump commenters (retrospectively) support McCarthy?

  13. Hibernian says:
    @Stephen R. Diamond

    If liberalism and Communism are so distant, why are liberals obsessed with the alcoholic, possibly bisexual, clumsy, tragic Mc Carthy, who died at about 50 give or take a year or two, almost 60 years after his death? Could it be because of his anti-communism? Mc Carthy had very few truly innocent victims; Eisenhower and Marshall may have been the only ones. Mc Carthy was far less evil than his enemies. Trump supporters, a category which doesn’t include me, for all of their fault (and those of their hero) are at least smart enough to know that the Establishment does not have their interests at heart.

  14. @Hibernian

    Guilty of what? Of being communists. Which isn’t a crime.

    And my question is serious. You don’t support someone politically distant. {But if you’re a principled person, you may well defend someone against antidemocratic attacks who is politically distant.)

  15. Trump is surely not McCarthy, but Peter has a point that there is going to be an organized attempt to take him down from behind the oligarchical curtain. They no like, just as Ike no liked. What happened to McCarthy behind the scenes now revealed, shows us how it’s done.

    • Replies: @WorkingClass
  16. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Wally

    Problem is that McCarthy was absolutely correct.

    He wasn’t absolutely correct. He actually underestimated the scale of communist infiltration.

  17. @Stephen R. Diamond

    I’m a Trump supporter and I know McCarthy to be a pandering self serving ass hole. Your point is well taken but your generalization is in error.

  18. @Fran Macadam

    With respect Fran this is a hit piece. Mr. Lee’s point is Trump stinks and so do his supporters.

  19. @Hibernian

    George Marshall was no innocent victim of McCarthy. Read McCarthy’s speech to the Senate about Marshall sometime. The speech is well reasoned and supported. I don’t think Marshall was a Commie, but he did not serve the US well as Secretary of State. He, more than any other man, was responsible for Mao winning in China.

    • Replies: @fnn
    , @5371
    , @CK
  20. fnn says:
    @Quartermaster

    An expanded version of McCarthy’s speech was later published as a book. Here’s a review of the book by a Moldbug follower:
    https://foseti.wordpress.com/2012/08/19/review-of-americas-retreat-from-victory-by-joseph-r-mccarthy/

  21. 5371 says:
    @Quartermaster

    McCarthy would have needed several thousand successful incarnations to accumulate sufficient karma to be worthy of shining Marshall’s shoes with his tongue. You are a fool.

  22. CK says:
    @Quartermaster

    Mao had a bit to do with that victory, Chiang had a lot to do with the defeat, and the Russian Manchurian offensive in August of 45 had the most to do with the shape of post war Asia of any of them.

    • Replies: @fnn
  23. J1234 says:
    @Stephen R. Diamond

    Wow. Really poor logic. First, you presumed (I presume) that I’m a McCarthy supporter. As I said in my comment, McCarthy was flawed. The message was righteous, but the messenger had serious problems. McCarthy was best friends with the Kennedy family, and that should tell you something. At times, he had problems with the truth. Almost inexplicably, at other times, his honesty was spot on and his assessment of Soviet espionage in the US was clear,concise and accurate. The problem is that many people on the left follow the ancient falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus line of reasoning when it comes to historical figures. That way, they can define those they don’t like only by their worst traits while ignoring their positive contributions.

    On the other hand, some people, like conservative writer Stan Evans, try to resurrect the historical McCarthy, but they miss the point, too. Simplistic historical narrative is not the answer to simplistic historical narrative. McCarthy was the wrong man for the right job. It wasn’t the man I admire, but his mission. Like Eisenhower, I also wish somebody else had taken on the task of exposing espionage in the US, because it WAS THERE, just like McCarthy said it was.

    As to your poor logic, Trump supporters probably also support preacher Billy Graham more than leftists and Democrats. Does that that mean that Trump and Graham have the same mission or parallel paths?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  24. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says:

    Peter Lee, you nut, why you not understand that so much talk from elites just hooey to justify destroying Middle East?

    They say ‘we love muslims here’ so they can destroy muslims over there.

    It like all the apology about japanese internment over here.
    It just a way to justify all the killing of Japanese over there with tons of bombs.

    Sure, Japanese no good in WWII. They crazy. But american overkill in germany and japan sort of crazy too and go overboard.

    But americans no wanna face that, so they make big deal of contrite decency about interned japaneses. “we good and sorry to interned japanese so that we never need say sorry to japanese in hiroshimer.” “reparation for internment means never having to say sorry(about hiroshimer).”

    likewise, ‘we good to muslims here so we never need say sorry what we did in iraq, libya, syria, and etc.’

  25. fnn says:
    @CK

    Like maybe it would have been better to keep the Soviets out of the war against Japan. The deal between FDR and Stalin was for USSR to enter the Japanese war three months after the defeat of Germany.

    • Replies: @CJ
  26. Hibernian says:
    @Stephen R. Diamond

    Many were guilty of espionage, as the Venona intercepts, backed up by archives released after the fall of the USSR, showed. As for your second paragraph, there’s a Sydney J. Harris antics with semantics factor at work here. I defend politically distant persons from antidemocratic attacks, you defend your political soulmates. Try to tone down the self righteousness.

  27. tbraton says:
    @tbraton

    This something the Canadian Conrad Black had to say about comparisons of Trump to Adolph Hitler (according to a piece by the NY Times’ Roger Cohen which was reprinted in the Canadian newspaper “National Post”), Joe McCarthy and your drunk Uncle Billy:

    “I wrote about the Trump candidacy in my column in the National Review Online (New York) last week and it was widely reposted, including by Donald himself. He is not my preferred candidate but I denounced the Cohen piece, as well as the comparison of Trump with Senator Joseph R. McCarthy by Max Boot, a distinguished guerrilla war and Middle East expert. Now that the Cohen comments have migrated to Canada, I say that that column, and reflections like it, including these local echoes, are ignorant, false, and grossly misleading. There is no comparison to be drawn between any of these individuals, except in contrasts, and the outrages committed by this sort of Trump-accuser are far more egregious than even Donald’s clumsiest sallies. . .

    “As for Max Boot, Senator McCarthy accused Presidents Roosevelt, Truman, and Eisenhower and General George C. Marshall, of being Communist dupes, and incited pathological fears that the U.S. government was a vast infestation of Soviet agents and traitors, and that communists arose as if infected by a virus, all over America, and had to be exterminated like termites. Where Max Boot imagines Donald Trump fits into any such nightmare escapes my comprehension. . . .”
    http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/conrad-black-in-defence-of-donald-trump

    I couldn’t have said it better myself.

  28. Some people don’t get it. When ‘cuckservatives’ like Romney or Bush are called racists and white supremacists by the liberal MSM (remember Bush-Hitler?) its almost axiomatic that Trump would be called McCarthy, Hitler, Putin, Fascist, and even worse.

    Anyone who disputes the left-wing narrative must be destroyed. Sadly, name calling works because people are stupid.

    As for McCarthy, he had his flaws but he was no more flawed then LBJ or a dozen other Left-wing heroes who get a pass because they push the narrative.

  29. TG says:

    Interesting.

    But for one thing: Eisenhower was a patriot. Period. The people wanting to bring down Donald Trump, are not.

    Eisenhower didn’t think we should bankrupt the nation fighting stupid wars that meant nothing. Eisenhower didn’t think we should gut social security in order to bail out the big Wall Street banks. Eisenhower didn’t think that we should open the borders to overpopulated third-world cesspits like Mexico so the rich could get even richer. Eisenhower didn’t sign off on trade agreements that would make the US ruled by unaccountable foreign lawyers meeting in secret.

    If Eisenhower were alive today, it is certain that he would be focused on destroying… Hillary Clinton and Marco Rubio.

    Because Eisenhower was a patriot.

    • Replies: @Gordo
  30. Stogumber says:
    @Stephen R. Diamond

    Being an active communist in an Eastern European Country meant that you were indeed involved in criminal activities.
    Merely admiring and propagizing Eastern European Communism from the U.S. soil was not a crime, but it signified a deep-sitting moral flaw.
    Mr. Diamond obviously feels that he has to defend the honour of his forefathers. But this is not the right way to do it.

  31. Ivan says:
    @Priss Factor

    Your comments on this and other posts show deep insight into history and psychology.

    • Replies: @tbraton
  32. Stogumber says:

    The interesting fact is that a lot of Jews could have openly told, that yes, they had supported communism in the 1930s, but now they had converted from it.

    That’s what the gentile Elia Kazan did, as well as a small number of Jews. Most Jews pretended innocence, secretized their past, simply lied or used bathos: How CAN you be so mean to nail me on something I did fifteen years ago???

    It was a stupid thing to do; it aroused much more suspicion than necessary. So why did they do it?

    Mr. Diamond may know the explanation from family experience. I only can deliver three possibilities:

    1. They still believed in the essence of communim and wanted to continue supporting it as far as possible.
    2. They had no convictions at all and took it for granted that every smart man adapts the zeitgeist of the actual decade: communism in the Thirties, anti-communism in the Fifties (in this case it would have been really unfair to nail them on something they did in the past).
    3. They were crippled by a tradition of general fear and dishonesty against gentiles: “we poor Jews have always to deceive the white man in order to survive”, so deceit was simply the first idea which came to their mind..

    • Agree: Travis
  33. Stogumber says:

    Even if Mr. Lee obviously hates McCarthy, he comes up here with no more than with what Murrow came up: that McCarthy lied over the ACLU as a “proscribed Communist organization”.

    Now, i don’t know what exactly he (or Murrow or McCarthy) meant with “proscribed”. As for the ACLU, the “1943 California Senate Fact-Finding Committee on Un-American Activities reported that the ACLU “may be definitely classed as a communist front.” The committee added that “at least 90 percent of its [the ACLU’s] efforts are expended on behalf of communists who come into conflict with the law.” That 90-percent figure was consistent with a major report produced by Congress a decade earlier, January 17, 1931.” (Paul Kegan, http://www.westernjournalism.com/the-aclus-communist-atheist-roots/)

    Roger Baldwin, ACLU founder and one of those honest people who really converted from Communism, found it necessary to install into the ACLU a kind of personal declaration that the member was no Communist. Perhaps he knew more about the matter than Murrow or Lee?)

    (N.B. I am grateful to Mr. Lee who this way got me knowing about Paul Kegan and his book “Dupes” about US Americans infatuated with the Soviet system and wanting to install it in the US, from sources in Russian archives.)

    • Replies: @Difference Maker
  34. Mark Green says: • Website

    Likening any political figure to Joseph McCarthy is itself a smear. Lee obviously understands this. This is why McCarthy (the memory) is kept alive. It’s a useful political weapon.

    Indeed, most people today associate Sen. Joe McCarthy with making ‘recklessly false charges’ involving non-existent communists. But that perception is wrong.

    McCarthy’s charges were not false as much as they were (at times) exaggerated and unsubstantiated. This distinction is critical.

    In fact, McCarthy got a lot of things right.

    It’s been proven that countless communists were indeed operating within US government, throughout elite media, and in America’s labor movement during the so-called ‘McCarthy Era’. Millions of Americans however remain confused about this fact. This is no accident. And we can thank ‘journalists’ like Peter Lee for this confusion.

    Of note: JFK and the entire Kennedy clan never stopped defending Sen. Joe McCarthy.

    Indeed, Sen. McCarthy has also been vindicated (in part) due to archives released after the fall of the USSR. Other historians have made similar findings. Recommended reading: ‘Hollywood Party’ (this book offers vast documentation concerning communists in Hollywood).

    So there were indeed countless communist operatives at work in America during the ‘McCarthy Era’. We should give some thanks then to ‘tail-gunner’ Joe McCarthy for blowing the whistle on these people.

    After all, the communist movement slaughtered far more people and consumed far more countries than the Nazis ever even imagined. The scale of communist destruction and despotism is unrivaled. Over 70 years, the movement the promised ‘equality’ consumed tens of millions of lives.

    Even the ‘falsely accused’ Rosenbergs (so-claimed the ACLU) turned out to be commie traitors. This disputed fact however wasn’t known until the ’90s.

    So what’s Peter Lee’s stale rehash of ‘McCarthyism’ really about?

    After all, communism is dead and buried. And in the end, McCarthy was at least partly right.

    Furthermore, ‘anti-communism’ (and Joe McCarthy) have nothing to do with the political platform of Donald Trump–despite Lee’s insinuations.

    Indeed, Lee’s ‘news’ is mostly bogus and out-of-date.

    Clearly then, Lee’s smear-by-association is designed for one purpose: to undermine the candidacy of Donald Trump by 1) impugning his character and 2) shaming Trump’s base.

    ‘Guilt and shame’. It’s what the Left does.

    Pat Buchanan received similar treatment when he ran for the Presidency. Unfortunately for Pat, the unscrupulous opposition continuously tarred him as a ‘Nazi’, a ‘racist’, and an ‘antisemite’ since it was Buchanan–and only Buchanan–who dared to criticize Israel’s ‘special relationship’ with the US Congress and the American taxpayer.

    Buchanan also didn’t go gently on taboos involving the description of black-run neighborhoods and cities. Sadly, the truth did not set Buchanan free. It made him a target.

    Indeed, for violating American taboos, Buchanan was hounded relentlessly.

    I witnessed disruptive verbal attacks on Buchanan at both of the two Buchanan rallies I attended in California. One was a Jewish protest. Another was a ‘gay’ protest. These professional victims never rest and they seldom play fair.

    Even neocon cuckservatives like George Will attacked Buchanan during the campaign. Pitiful. Countless good men are kept down in America. Their crime?–speaking truth to privileged minorities.

    Ironically, Buchanan’s brilliance, his daring rhetoric, and his invaluable honesty made his candidacy politically non-viable. The Venal Empire would not permit a Buchanan presidency.

    This lesson has surely not escaped the attention of candidate Trump. So watch Trump never criticize you-know-who or tread where trailblazer Pat Buchanan dared to go.

    Sadly, Trump is scheduled to meet with billionaire, casino-mogul and crypto-Israeli, Sheldon Adelson, next week. Deals will be made. Fortunes will be pledged. And the oligarchs will soon be writing some very big checks. Trump may likely tone down his rhetoric over time. Eventually, he’ll go a bit more ‘mainstream’. This is how America operates.

    Bear in mind however that only the media moguls and media professionals can shape the news. This explains why Zionist billionaires such as Michael Bloomberg, Hiam Sabin, Mort Zuckerman, and Rupert Merdoch have more political power than even the mega-rich (and non-Jewish) Koch brothers. It’s their mass media holdings. The Koch brothers don’t even own so much as one TV station in all of Kansas.

    Media moguls on the other hand, can not only give money but they can also shape voter attitudes via their news and entertainment conglomerates. That’s where the extra power lies.

    So expect more junk journalism going forward involving Trump and, for that matter, any candidate that strays too far from the mainstream script.

    • Replies: @geokat62
  35. Stogumber says:

    Mr.Lee’s attacks on Trump would be much less galling if they were substantiated by arguments. In fact, I have not understood either his reasons or his motives. So, regrettably, we can only speculate.

    Mr. Lee may be inflamed by tribal/clannish interests: the “danger” for well-doing Chinese no more to acquire American citizenship by birth tourism.
    But in a civilized country nobody can expect any more than he is prepared to give. So “What can Chinese expect from the United States?” must be confronted with “How is citizenship handled by the Chinese itself? Could an American woman go to China in order to give birth to a child and acquire citizenship there, first for the child and afterwards for herself as a family member?” Or, more generally “How are matters of immigration and citizenship handled in the Chinese homeland? And, if at all, WHY are the U.S. Americans obliged to be more gratuitious tha the Chinese?” Wouldn’t that be an interesting subject for this blog here?

    • Replies: @kev
  36. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    What a load of fresh, green manure. It’s really too bad, Pee Wee Lee, that McCarthy doesn’t fit on your shelf with the other plaster saints, but the truth is he was mostly correct. He wasn’t a replacement for Mother Teresa and I know that’s heartbreaking for you, but purveying truth has got to be good for something.

  37. Leftist conservative [AKA "the preacher who will freeze you to make you immortal"] says: • Website

    of course the entire anti-communist propaganda campaign waged on american minds was largely based on a false boogeyman of fabricated soviet military might…the soviets were never as powerful as we were told….

    mccarthy just hitched a ride on the anti-communist propaganda campaign waged by Big Money starting at around 1917 or so. This anti-communist propaganda campaign was the major factor in the creation of the immigration moratorium of the early 1920s. When the nuclear era began, this propaganda campaign got a big boost, and the military industrial complex got in on the fun, too.

    • Replies: @fnn
  38. eah says:
    @WorkingClass

    I say Peter Lee is a little cretin who needs to grow up.

  39. JSM says:
    @WorkingClass

    There’s a lot of people—a lot of voters—down in the sewer with Donald Trump. Apparently the smell doesn’t bother them.

    Us blue-collar White Americans, we are the ones that deal with the shit that happens in society. We are the “sewer workers” so to speak, because without us and all the myriad ways we do the maintenance around here, the whole society stinks up pretty bad, pretty quick. We provide a useful service. We are heroes, in fact. It stinks down here — ok, so be it. We are just tired of people, like Lee here, crapping UPON us.

    Donald Trump came down here to tell us he intends to make the freeloaders who crap freely and then insult those of us who clean up the messes they make, to stop it.

    So, we cheer him.

  40. geokat62 says:
    @Priss Factor

    Very entertaining, TPF.

    Might I suggest one minor modification, though? Try replacing the term “folks” with “peepoe” in the following sentence:

    They just open fortune cookie of powerful folks…

    vs.

    They just open fortune cookie of powerful peepoe…

    What do you think, is it an improvement?

  41. @Priss Factor

    you left a participle dangling, Priss:

    But american overkill in germany

    two points:

    1. why does the First Amendment not apply to speaking the truth about US crimes against Germany in WWII (hint: it starts with a h and ends in fraud) Robert McNamara understood that US behavior in WWII could have been subjected to Nuremberg prosecution had the victor-conquered labels been reversed.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KSqnK_9WRA

    2. Germany is still being punished.
    Americans who killed Germans deliberately, intentionally and criminally, still celebrate their victory in that good war, so much so that USA keeps repeating the scheme of killing people from the air in order to force civilians to bring about a capitulation of a government US doesn’t like.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  42. @J1234

    . As I said in my comment, McCarthy was flawed. The message was righteous, but the messenger had serious problems.

    Ronald Reagan put it best: McCarthy used a shotgun when he should have used a rifle.

  43. geokat62 says:
    @Mark Green

    Mark, I’m “Green” with envy… another excellent comment.

  44. Next month, Mr Lee will will give us the soy sauce on how ultrarightist claims that China was Communist-controlled in the 1950s and 1960s was nothing but long-discredited paranoia.

  45. @SolontoCroesus

    Robert McNamara understood that US behavior in WWII could have been subjected to Nuremberg prosecution had the victor-conquered labels been reversed.

    Curtis LeMay said the same about Japan.

    America should certainly confess to God for her crimes, but to Germany? They freely elected some deranged faggot eager to invade other countries. Or perhaps you can tell us why Norway, Belgium, etc, were rightful German property.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  46. Eustace Tilley (not) [AKA "Schiller/Nietzsche"] says:

    Fee-fi-faux-fum,
    I smell the blood of a Chinaman.
    Arrogant be sons of Han;
    Not have clue of what go on.
    Copy West by make machine,
    Middle Kingdom never clean.
    Follow White Man into space,
    More polluting China place.
    Fire missile off L.A.,
    Karma come to you one day.

  47. @WorkingClass

    It smells like both Democrats and Republicans have been crapping on us for 50 years. I’m happy to give them a whiff of their waste.

  48. fnn says:
    @Leftist conservative

    Western capitalists built the Soviet industrial base:

    • Replies: @JackOH
  49. par4 says:
    @Jus' Sayin'...

    I’ll vote for Jill Stein again, but I think better Trump than Hillary.

  50. @Tim Howells

    I was just opening up to say more or less the same thing.

    McCarthy was right! The country was lousy with communists and actual soviet agents at all levels of bureacracy and leadership, on up to the top. That guy was treatly harshly by the victor-historians. It’s high time to rehabilitate him.

    Another primary source to read Malcom Muggeridge’s autobio – Chronicles of Wasted of Time.

  51. Hibernian says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    The Nazis never achieved a parliamentary majority and Hitler didn’t get elected President. They seized power through a combination of legal and illegal means, their near majority in the legislative branch and violence along with the threat of more violence.

  52. Oh, I hear the foorish Tlump wish to put up wall to keep out barbarian hordes! (Wonder where he got that idea from?)

    Meanwhile, the Ruling Party is winning by a landslide:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/22/world/asia/china-landslide-shenzhen.html

  53. We can argue about McCarthy but a far more important pair of manipulators were Allen and Foster Dulles. They architected (coalesced) out of the agencies set up to fight WW2 the MIC/Surveillance/Warfare State that is spreading chaos, death and destruction across the world.

    McCarthy was just the visual tip to frighten the public. The Republicans and Democrats each still play their part in the ‘scare the public’ campaign; the former use a harder touch, the latter a softer touch.

    • Replies: @Stogumber
  54. Ragno says:

    Amazing how an article like this expects to be taken seriously without even mentioning the documents that put all of the shouting, pro and con, into uncomfortable perspective: the Venona decrypts.

    Not that I much blame the media as they are not merely incapable of subtlety or restraint – Caitlyn GOOD!, Trump BAD!, and so forth – but they begin to melt down when forced by reality to admit their own corruption or culpability or dangerous naivete….in this case, the troubling truth that McCarthy was far more right than wrong.

  55. Gordo says:
    @TG

    “But for one thing: Eisenhower was a patriot. Period. The people wanting to bring down Donald Trump, are not.”

    They are patriots, just not for America.

  56. AndrewR says:

    I’m not at all convinced that McCarthy, Pat Buchanan and Ted Cruz are not all closely related.

  57. JackOH says:
    @fnn

    “Gene, you still don’t get it. The USSR and the United States . . . they’re one country.”

    Interlocutor Andy Walters, an American defector to the Soviet Union and Occupation official, to dissident outdoorsman and crank Eugene Vandenberg, title character of Oliver Lange’s 1970ish novel, “Vandenberg”, set in a Soviet-occupied America. Lange, pseudonym of John Warren Wadleigh, has as one of his themes whether Americans will really notice or care about their loss of freedoms under a Soviet administration, because they’d already become accustomed to ignoring how government and big business chipped away their individual capacity for moral judgment and action.

    I agree with the commenters above who say McCarthy was a deeply flawed messenger, but I can’t fault him for trying to say that the Norman Rockwell-Saturday Evening Post America of individual liberty had been hijacked.

  58. TG says:

    Interesting, but Trump = McCarthy? No.

    It’s more like Trump = Eisenhower.

    Eisenhower deported illegal immigrants and enforced the law, and kept legal immigration at very low levels. Eisenhower didn’t bankrupt the nation mindlessly attacking nations that didn’t threaten us. Eisenhower didn’t sign away our industries with ‘free’ trade agreements. Eisenhower didn’t try to gut social security so the rich could get even richer. Kind of like what Trump is saying.

    So how are things in the sewer with Trump and Ike? They’re just fine thank you very much. How are things up on Mt. Olympus, with blood-soaked establishment types like Hillary Clinton?

  59. geokat62 says:

    How are things up on Mt. Olympus, with blood-soaked establishment types like Hillary Clinton?

    Please, TG, do not insult the Olympian gods with the suggestion that Killary would be a welcome resident. Why, Zeus would have struck her down with a thunderbolt had she dared coming anywhere near his hallowed abode.

    If you have to refer to Ancient Greek dwellings, I would think Hades would be the more appropriate residence.

  60. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Groovy Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:

    Peter Lee will be voting for Hillary Clinton on Nov 3 2016…as will Noam Chomsky. Talk about being down in the sewer.

  61. WJ says:

    Quite curious that this hit piece came from a PRC apologist. If you deal with Red China much then you will be well versed in the smell of the sewer.

    Just another liberal unhinged by Trump. It makes me like him even more.

  62. “There’s a lot of people—a lot of voters—down in the sewer with Donald Trump. Apparently the smell doesn’t bother them.”

    This could be said about every candidate, ESPECIALLY Hillary.

    Peter Lee is blinded by the narrative.
    Anyone who speaks the truth is “racist”.
    A simple man in a simple world.

  63. @WorkingClass

    I think we just got an interesting history lesson that was tied into Trump as clickbait. But heck, I’ve done that sort of tie-in myself ;’)

  64. My biggest worry with Trump isn’t what the media is going to do to him, but whether or not he will get bored of politics if he isn’t elected.

    His considerable financial resources and media presense can do an enormous amount for the revivial of populist (majoritarian as opposed to ideological liberal/socialist) politics in the Anglosphere but I suspect he may quickly loss interest in politics if he isn’t elected. I hope I’m wrong.

    Also while we’re on the topic of destructive American politicians, LBJ takes the award by a country mile. Master of the dark arts and pioneer of government welfare and immigration policy as tools for left-liberal social engineering.

  65. joe webb says:

    Joe Mc Carthy was proved right about everything. A large Jewish attack, Walter Lippmann, Walter Winchell (with crime connections) and the host of jewish shock troops which included Carr, an accomplice of Drew Pearson (not Jewish).

    Never mind the FDR cabal of jews. ( I came up in a pro-communist family and it was surrounded by jews. “The Investigator” was a satire done by the commies on McCarthy. It was funny and well done, at least for an 11 year old sensibility. Up There, as opposed to Down There..another jewish attack on Christianity….with The Investigator sending the innocents Down There of course.

    I knew one of the goy commies who did work in the State Dept., Beverstock by name whom we called Bev. He may have been ultimately purged from State by the McCarthy forces. I also knew a couple communist academics who were run out of the U. of Washington by the Canwell Committee, a state of Washington little HUAC.

    Fact is , you folks have the pleasure of my company cuz, my parents thought they were Next and so we left for Redwood City, CA. 1950. Thank god got me out of the green hell of Seattle.

    Joe Webb

    • Replies: @Curle
  66. kev says:
    @Stogumber

    stogamber:

    that is a good response. I ‘KNOW’ several people from Mexico who get visas, and come over to Texas to give birth, and then return to Mexico. Not only that, but they use the government to pay for the childbirths! I don’t know how they do it, but probably that is what Trump needs to charge to the Mexican government and not that mythical ‘wall’. More likely that is the modus operandi of other several foreigners who take advantage of the anchor baby program and obtain their citizenship that way. I believe that if you are born in this country to foreigners who don’t have American citizenship, should be citizens of their parents’ country, regardless, unless authorized by a court of law. However, no body has challenged this issue in court I believe, or I might be wrong. Also we cannot speak of ‘illigals’ as if they have not soul. The US has a visa program for temporal workers to come and work for up to 9 months, and exit the country, and come back again. That program should be offered to people who voluntarily exit the country and if they want to work here, fine. Not problem that way, I believe.

    I went to walmart and the manager was a recent immigrant from china. she was sarcastic, and when I told her that I was In the AF, she told me ‘oh we do know all your fighters and will be catching up to you’ I was surprised! how in the world was this china woman speaking like that? then she told me that she had worked in the Chinese AF, and was an officer in intel..’ man, what are we getting ourselves into? the enemy inside the gates

    • Replies: @Alfa158
  67. tbraton says:
    @Ivan

    “Your comments on this and other posts show deep insight into history and psychology.”

    Not to mention wildly funny, even though he comes close to violating the tenets of political correctness at times.

  68. Art says:
    @WorkingClass

    “There’s a lot of people—a lot of voters—down in the sewer with Donald Trump. Apparently the smell doesn’t bother them.”

    Sorry but this guy sounds like a whinny pansy pseudo intellectual – a Northeast liberal living off of what other people created.

    In one sentence this nothing trashes the backbone of America’s culture. Those Trump supporters make what is left of America, function.

    Trump is a builder – he is not a legal type (although he has won in the courts), he is not a banker (although he has amassed money), he is not a politician (although he not doing badly) – he is someone with a can do American mentality – who wants to do good for his country – he wants to rebuild America. This is a good thing. There is no close second – period.

    Elect him.

  69. Alfa158 says:
    @kev

    Regarding how alien women get the government to pay for their anchor baby births: it is illegal in the US for a hospital to refuse to provide medical care to anyone requiring it. A woman in labor can show up at an emergency room and demand to be admitted. The hospital, will try to browbeat her for identification, insurance data, credit card, proof of residency etc, but all these women have to do is tell the clerk to go boil their head. They and the newborn will get whatever treatment is needed, and then they can wipe their rear with the bill when it’s presented. The Mexican government and US NGO’s publish brochures describing how to get taken care of for free. The hospital tries to make it up from people like us with insurance by charging $5,000 when we go in with a cut that needs stitches
    Regarding the military technology, because of immigrant tech students, American kids are being increasingly frozen out tech schools and jobs and immigrant engineers including Chinese are a growing percentage of Defense contractor employees. 99% are honest but 1% are plants and transferring everything they learn back home. I used to work with one who subtly mocked his oblivious bosses by sometimes wearing his People’s Liberation Army web belt and red star buckle to work. Try talking about this sort of thing at work and watch what HR does to your intolerant, racist ass.

    • Replies: @JSM
  70. Bill P says:

    It’s funny how Peter Lee gets hot and bothered about “hate” in the US even as he defends China at every opportunity. China, a country where nationalist and xenophobic demagoguery are pillars of state-sponsored propaganda. China, where the state actually foments anti-foreigner riots in order to achieve diplomatic goals, and has done so for at least a century.

    Chinese are not bad people, but in this regard they’re a lot “worse” than white Americans. But is it really wrong to stand up for your own kind? Maybe this is one way in which Chinese are better than Americans — like Peter Lee they see nothing wrong with favoring their own. In fact, the vast majority of the world’s people are that way. Maybe American whites are just becoming more like the Chinese.

    Why is that a problem, Peter? When I was in China, I learned to accept the fact that China is Chinese because that’s how the people want it. Once I accepted that and learned not to resent it, I got along with people fine. I even came to appreciate Chinese more, because I didn’t have to deal with the hypocrisy one finds throughout fashionable American society. Maybe you should drop the hypocrisy yourself and try that here.

    Some of the nicest people I met in China would be considered the most ignorant, racist, prejudiced xenophobic bigots if they were white Americans with similar attitudes. Turned out they were actually pretty decent people when I got to know them. Salt of the earth blue collar/laobaixing types. Good, loyal friends and nice people with a strong sense of right and wrong. Lots of Trump supporters are exactly the same kind of people. In fact, if there were a Chinese Trump, he’d be immensely, yuuuugely popular in China and you know it.

  71. Who in hell is Peter Lee, first to attack McCarthy, who exposed the very real Communist infiltration of our government and society and the liberal (mostly Democrat) dupes who allowed it to happen, and then to attack Trump, whose “bigotry” extends to foreigners who should not be in the country in the first place. Jerks like Lee are the reason Trump will be elected. I hope The Donald sends him to a salt mine to cool off. While there at the mine, read up on the Venona files and the other recent publications that prove beyond any doubt that McCarthy was spot on.

    The American people are sick to death of the mush coming out of the mouths of Lee and his accomplices in Congress, the courts, the media and Hollywood. This is our country and we are taking it back. Don’t like it, Lee? Pack your cardboard suitcase and leave.

  72. CJ says:
    @fnn

    It would indeed have been better not to involve the Russians, but two things: 1. the USSR had already fought the Japanese and had interests in the Far East, so Stalin didn’t want to stay out, and 2. the prospect of invading the Japanese home islands was a grim one before the atom bomb(s) had been tested and dropped.

  73. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    I skimmed this without finding anything interesting, or even uninteresting, about Donald Trump. Did I miss something — beside the usual leftie-liberal hate speech?

  74. bjondo says:

    peter lee is a propagandist, manipulator.

    if i vote, i will vote for trump

  75. MH40 says:

    Why so many commentators automatically assume Peter Lee is Chinese? The ad hominem attacks on him displayed here just prove his point.

    • Replies: @JSM
  76. MarkinLA says:
    @Priss Factor

    But american overkill in germany and japan sort of crazy too and go overboard.

    Not really. The lesson in many wars is that massive destruction and overwhelming force does a better job of convincing the enemy to surrender than a series of small losses.

    The Union didn’t defeat the Confederacy until Grant ignored the butcher’s bill and relentlessly attacked Lee.

    The Japanese wanted to bloody our noses after we invaded Japan in hopes of getting a better deal but the bomb made them change their minds.

  77. WGG [AKA "World\'s Greatest Grandson"] says:

    What the author is advocating is for the blatant subversion of democracy, by means of bogus criminal charges against Trump to derail his campaign. He has no evidence whatsoever that Trump has committed any crime, but is begging someone to abuse their position of power to gin something up.

    Truly. Those who love tyranny hate Trump. Those who want our Banana Republic to continue uninterrupted hate Trump. Those who love demagogues and oligarchs hate Trump.

    It makes it *really* obvious whose side we should choose. And I pity the wretched powerful for the wrath they will incur if they use some underhanded means to eliminate Trump.

  78. AZ says:

    Does this guy know McCarthy has long been vindicated by the evidence of Soviet infiltration into the US? The fact that the public(read:Hollywood) has not caught up yet is a different matter.

  79. guest says:

    “Murrow took up the cudgels in 1953 when few others were willing”

    Nonsense. There was snapback the moment he made his Wheeling, West Virginia speech. The original response to his charges in the Senate were for investigations into him, not the State Department. We may forget, since the waters have been irreversibly muddied by the likes of Murrow and given the fact that McCarthy was on the side of the Warfare State, obviously, and he was doing the bidding of J. Edgar Hoover, I think (how else did he get his dirt?) But McCarthy wasn’t the Powers That Be. He was taking on the White House, for goodness’ sake!

  80. JSM says:
    @Alfa158

    The hospital tries to make it up from people like us with insurance by charging $5,000 when we go in with a cut that needs stitches

    So… I munched my wrist at work from a fall. (Dumb, I know…)

    The next day, while waiting in the office of the orthopod who would be doing my fracture repair surgery, high on morphine and drifting in and out of sleep, I could hear the Senorita next cubicle yabbity yabbity-ing to her husband in Spanish. In pain, I’m thinking, please, please shut up.

    The doc sees them first. She translates. He broke his wrist yesterday on the turntable of a drilling rig. Same exact, bog standard fracture as I have (acquired a bit differently but same munched wrist.) He asks if there’s insurance or is this charity care? Charity care, she says.

    I sit up. What????? This guy got hurt on the job! Halliburton has workers’ comp for this! Unless, of course, he is an illegal Mexican alien, working without a green card, taking a job from some White American guy for whom Halliburton WOULD have to pay worker’s comp.

    … The doc gives him his appointment for surgery, for the next available appointment the following Monday. (I’m thinking, wait all the way til Monday? Ouch. That’s a long time to go untreated in pain. Oh, well, he’s charity care. Naturally, charity care would be asked to wait behind those of us who are citizens and have insurance.)

    Ah, silly me, because then doc comes to see me. *MY* appointment will be next available… (after the one the illegal took)… on WEDNESDAY! Holy moly an ADDITIONAL two days in this miserable splint, waiting in line behind a jerk who ought not to even have been in my country!!! (Note, the doctor did NOT ask me the insurance / charity care question. He knew full well by looking at me that I’m a White American citizen, so I probably have insurance. He knew full well that illegal is scamming us.)

    Surgery went very well.

    Then the bills started coming. (The way my employer does it, I put in for my major medical and they cover the deductible.) So I got a firsthand look at the costs. Upwards of 12 K to fix my wrist. — And note, I didn’t even get to spend the night in the hospital or have a meal prepared for me. Outpatient surgery, out the door. “Good luck to you!! Go home, take good care of yourself. ”

    I used to be a radiology tech. So I happen to know that my bog-standard Colles fracture, the method to fix it is still the exact same as 20 years ago when I was in training. Although, back then, they admitted you to hospital from ER, did your surgery that day or the next, and kept you a day afterward. YET, the cost of my outpatient surgery is 4X what it cost back then.

    WHY? So that the doc could cover the free care he gave that damn illegal alien.

  81. JSM says:
    @MH40

    Because we are Race Realists. We notice all the articles he writes on China. You could even get the idea he’s *fixated* on China. Chinese-sounding last name, plus fixation on China, it’s a smart bet he’s Chinese. See, us Race Realists know how to bet. We go around doing that pesky “noticing” stuff, and draw really good inferences as a result.

    • Replies: @MH40
  82. MH40 says:
    @JSM

    @JSM

    “Because we are Race Realists. We notice all the articles he writes on China. You could even get the idea he’s *fixated* on China. Chinese-sounding last name, plus fixation on China, it’s a smart bet he’s Chinese. See, us Race Realists know how to bet. We go around doing that pesky “noticing” stuff, and draw really good inferences as a result.”

    Watch the video. Does he look Chinese to you? http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=12490

    Some of you are either dumb or lazy or both.

    • Replies: @Ragno
  83. Curle says:
    @J1234

    “This article appeals to emotion rather than logic, an emotion that overtakes journalists and those on the left who are convinced that outspoken politicians who aren’t social justice warriors are all part of some Nazi cabal . . .”

    This is precisely the issue at hand. The Left has had, at their disposal, near complete control over moral indignation and they understand the utility of that tool. Melodramatic moralism, of the BLM type, appeals to far too many Americans and they’ve been exploiting that weakness for years. Along comes a populist like Trump who understands the formula and uses it for his own purposes and they are in an uproar; how dare he steal their techniques! Yes, indeed, how dare he.

  84. Curle says:
    @joe webb

    I also knew a couple communist academics who were run out of the U. of Washington by the Canwell Committee, a state of Washington little HUAC.

    An the UW hasn’t stopped tut-tutting about it since.

  85. Stogumber says:
    @AriusArmenian

    I’m with you about the MIC/Surveillance/Warfare State.
    Notwithstanding, “red scare” wasn’t a simple product of manipulations (“frighten the public”), it was grounded in experience. It was a consequence of “red rise” in the Roosevelt Administration. The Roosevelt Reds had slickly tried to undermine the American tradition – civil liberties, pluralism and democratic control – and they had made good use of intimidation aganst their critics, above all during war time. So there had to be a repercussion, and the huge wave of so-called “McCarthyism” (for most of which McCarthy was not personally responsible) was just this inevitable popular repercussion against the dominance of the Roosevelt Reds.

    • Replies: @fnn
  86. Stogumber says:

    One of the problems which will get Peter Lee into trouble again and again: his lack of openness and his preference for disguise.

    For example, this article is disguised as political expertise. But as such it would be worthless: we all have known before that the Trump may be backstabbed by his party, we wouldn’t need the McCarthy parallel at all.

    So we inevitably ask us what Lee wants to hide behind a smokescreen of political expertise, and the most probable answer is: spite.

    By the way, Eisenhower and Nixon didn’t want to kill McCarthy politically. They wanted him to retreat into an honourable position as an elder statesman. Which, alas, they failed because of his early death.

    After his death, McCarthy was mostly needed as a scapegoat. For example, there was a gap between the blacklisted Jewish Hollywood screenplay writers and the Jewish Hollywood Czars who had blacklisted them, and when bot groups reunited is was reasonable to reunite under the premise that the really guilty person was Irish Catholic McCarthy.

  87. adoll says:
    @Stephen R. Diamond

    He was targeting communists in sensitive areas of government at a time when we were at war with communism. You know, places like the signalcorp in the military. Seems reasonable to me.

  88. Ragno says:
    @MH40

    Don’t know or care whether Lee is Oriental, Occidental or a visiting Martian with eyeballs on stalks.

    But anybody playing Historian with McCarthy who leaves Venona out of the discussion is either a fraud or a propagandist.

  89. iffen says:
    @Stephen R. Diamond

    And my question is serious

    Mine too. Can a principled person be a communist?

  90. @Stogumber

    Proscribed may be viewed as simply a figure of speech

    In McCarthy’s eyes and in the anti communist spirit a communist ACLU is certainly proscribed.

    The seizing on that point merely a technical argument over semantics to deflect from the charge of communism

  91. This is a fascinating article, but not for the reasons Peter Lee thought it would be. His motivation is in seeking to dispatch the blond beast he hates, Donald Trump. So, he revisits the case of Tailgunner Joe, and suggests to powerful Trump-haters, ‘Here’s your playbook.’

    It’s fascinating, thanks to Lee’s recounting of Ike’s alleged role and motivation, in destroying McCarthy. Lee thinks that Ike’s alleged involvement speaks well for the conspiracy, rather than speaking ill for Ike.

    I’ll take Lee’s theory under advisement. However, I find his parallel of Trump-McCarthy unwittingly comical. When I hear, ‘Trump is another McCarthy,’ my heart sings! Both men are American heroes of the first order. Flawed, to be sure, but the only heroes that seem flawless are the ones about whom we know very little.

    As for conspiracies against Trump, at the time of this article’s publication, there had already been so many conspiracies against him, within the Democrat Party (including its media division) and the GOP (including ITS media division), that the conspirators were tripping over each other!

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Peter Lee Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
How America was neoconned into World War IV
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement