Thus Hollywood that blacklisted conservatives, complained that they were being blacklisted by the House Committee, and then they somehow tied it to McCarthy, who wasn’t even in the House as a Senator…

Americans are so stupid they will fall for anything apparently.

People still think similar things about Nixon, exactly as the Left setup.

Well, a lot has happened since the early 1950s, and McCarthy’s list of Communists who had infiltrated the State Department. In a 1950 speech in Wheeling, WV that first brought him to national attention, McCarthy was quoted as giving the number as 205, other times he apparently quoted lower figures.

He started his Hearings on Soviet Subversion and Espionage in 1953 when he became the Chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, and in 1954 the televised Army–McCarthy Hearings started his downfall (“Have you no shame…”,etc.).

According to McCarthy’s very brief bio at the U.S. Senate website, at the time a special subcommittee investigated his charges and called them “a fraud and a hoax.”

In 1957 he was Censured by the Senate, and McCarthy died that same year, apparently a broken man.

Since the collapse of the U.S.S.R. a lot of new, formerly secret information has started to slowly leak out of the former U.S.S.R.’s various secret archives.

Then, there was the NSA’s release of the VENONA Papers beginning in 1995, in total 3,000 encrypted messages, diplomatic communications between Russia and its Embassies and Consulates abroad that dealt with matters of espionage, that the U.S. was able to partially or fully decrypt between 1943 and the end of the VENONA program in 1980; there were a lot more that we were unable to decrypt.

A few years later came M. Stanton Evan’s 2007 very revelatory book, “Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America’s Enemies.” and this same author’s 2012 book, “Stalin’s Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt’s Government.” And there have been other works by other authors on this subject as well.

The bottom line?

Adding up all this new information, it appears that McCarthy’s charge of large scale Communist infiltration of the U.S. government was true and, if this new information is to be believed, McCarthy was low in his estimate of the number of Soviet agents that there were in the U.S. and throughout the U.S. government.

That is what Americans tell themselves, but that is incorrect.

The “press” is the object that allows someone to publish. Thus the freedom of the press didn’t mean “freedom of the elite classes called journalists” but the freedom of anyone that owned or used a press, to be able to publish what they paid to publish without somebody killing or suppressing them from the pro slave government, the jeffersonian government, the Washington gov, or anybody else.

Later on, Americans bought into the Leftist propaganda that the press were this bunch of elites that would do the job for Americans that Americans can’t do: report on the truth.

Americans and humans just keep falling for Leftist deceptions and cons without even realizing it.

We got to the same place as the USSR because good ol’ Tailgunner Joe was thoroughly un-PC but essentially correct: America has been infiltrated by Communists and their leftist cousins since Communism was invented.

Look up Operation Paperclip if you dare, Aesop, for how much the US got infiltrated. If you get more “woke” than me, you might just wake up from this Matrix entirely, which could be dangerous vs the Veil.

So was Hitchinson, Chris, but I don’t remember people claiming he was a religious right winger though.

http://thefederalist.com/2018/04/05/sorry-brian-stelter-wildly-biased-producers-resignation-doesnt-discredit-sinclair/

“The purpose of Stelter’s story was ostensibly to provide further evidence that objective, principled journalists are deeply uncomfortable with Sinclair’s management, but there is a gaping hole in that narrative that CNN ignored entirely: Simmons is neither objective nor principled.
A quick review of Simmons’s Twitter account shows him using the hashtag “#Resist” at a Dulles Airport protest against President Trump’s travel ban, boasting about “When we took over [Paul Ryan’s] podium protesting,” and giving a YouTube interview about his role organizing a Black Lives Matter protest. Simmons was employed by Sinclair while he participated in all of those activities, and these are but a fraction of his social media posts.
The former Sinclair employeewho joined the station nearly four years ago, is heavily involved with a self-described “civil resistance movement” called Democracy Spring.
…
But curiously, despite political behavior from Simmons that would make the average voter blush and offend the professionalism of any self-respecting journalist, Stelter treats him as a righteously neutral whistleblower about Sinclair’s ethical lapses. ”

Make that “alleged lapses” — and this is standard MO for the left; we’ve seen that in all the “neutral” ringers they put online and in print and on the air who turn out to be Dem operatives.

Unlike The Atlantic, apparently Sinclair is fine with employees exercising their First Amendment Rights even if they are contrary to the agenda of the company.
Or maybe they just didn’t know — like Stelter?

“The “critics” his article links to? Media Matters. All of this, of course, comes only two weeks after Stelter seemed to express skepticism about the existence of media bias during a CNN interview with Ben Shapiro.
Perhaps Stelter was simply unaware of Simmons’s biases, but he failed to conduct even the most basic diligence on his source before promoting the story to his 576,000 Twitter followers if that is the case. I uncovered Simmons’s background within five minutes–he was not exactly hiding it.

Furthermore, after I called Stelter’s attention multiple times to the glaring credibility problems in his story, he continued to promote it on Twitter under a “In Case You Missed It” headline. He also omitted any of the relevant context in his nightly newsletter, published several hours after I called his attention to Simmons’ history as a left-wing activist. At least one other outlet picked up CNN’s story, providing the same misleading narrative to its readers.

If the whole purpose of Stelter’s story was to highlight pernicious media bias, wouldn’t it have been sensible to disclose the far-left political activities of the story’s subject? Journalism ethics are not a zero-sum game. One can find Sinclair’s scripted promo creepy (if less of a big deal than CNN and others made it out to be) and still believe Stelter’s actions were ethically lacking. To be blunt, Stelter’s reporting was more Hannity than Cronkite.

A charitable description of Stelter’s actions is willful ignorance. A more cynical assessment may be personal animosity. In either event, if Stelter is truly concerned with media bias, perhaps he should start with the log in his own eye.”

Basically, it’s the same reason Hollywood felt safe going after Weinstein now, at the end of his career and power: the old dog couldn’t bite anymore, so the ones who profited from his perfidy knew they could kick him to the curb without negative consequences.

http://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/381872-with-chappaquiddick-the-kennedys-star-finally-falls#.WsajTZq-unM.twitter

“Suffice to say Hollywood feels it’s now safe to address the Kennedys in a more sober fashion. Sure, the family still has current members inside the Beltway but their clout can’t compare to the ’60s Kennedys. They also can’t be blamed for the sins of their predecessors.

This film will damage the Kennedy brand all the same.

Yet Hollywood is wary of bringing the foibles of other Democratic stars to screens of any size. The very same week “Chappaquiddick” hits theaters not one but two TV projects based on President Bill Clinton’s impeachment got shelved.

The Clintons still hold some sway over the Democratic party. Recalling President Clinton’s sexual indiscretions, particularly in light of our evolved #MeToo era, would have put the party which protected him then … and now … in an unflattering light.

Did that play a role in the TV projects getting yanked? Hard to say at the moment. It’s equally hard to discount the theory. Industry players are keenly aware how certain stories impact the way we view and frame issues.

Why else would we see movies like “Truth” and “Confirmation,” which aimed to buoy the legacies of Dan Rather and Anita Hill, respectively? Those projects will live for decades on streaming and cable services, all the while influencing how we recall those figures.

What’s more clear? It took nearly 50 years for Hollywood to properly tell Ted Kennedy’s Chappaquiddick nightmare with all the razzle dazzle the industry can muster. We may have to wait some time until Monica Lewinsky gets her closeup.”

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/kevin-williamson-national-review-response-atlantic-piece/

At lease Williamson will be spared what seems to be the inevitable trajectory of token-conservatives at leftist-media: moving ever more leftward themselves.

Since they operate in a bubble in which none of their own compatriots know any better (or won’t admit it if they do, per huxley), then (a) they never believe they are wrong; and (b) if they think that they might be wrong (Mapes’ superiors, in the Memo case), then
they don’t believe there are any marks who can rebut them, so it’s safe to go ahead anyway.

Despite the fact that they keep getting smacked down by the people who DO know better, they keep it up, because they are playing the same percentages as the scammers who are tying up your phone lines all the time (same for direct mail solicitations).

Sure, 90% (or so) of the people they call don’t bite, but the 10% who DO make the exercise profitable.

I got into an online debate over Rathergate and was amazed at how long many of them clung to the hope the memo was real — even some high-powered Unix programmers who should have known better.

Then after that hope collapsed, then they moved to an even less likely hope that it had been an evil Karl Rove plot all along!

Finally they gave up on that and moved on to attacking me personally.

Standard Operating Procedure.