Joseph R. McCarthy – Communism and the Candidacy of Adlai Stevenson
Joseph R. McCarthy Address on Communism and the Candidacy of Adlai Stevenson delivered 27 October 1952, Palmer House, Chicago Thank — Thank you, fellow Americans. I am deeply grateful, very deeply grateful to all of you who have made this night possible. We are at war tonight — a war which started decades ago, a war which we did not start, a war which we cannot stop except by either victory or death. Now the Korean war is only one phase of this war between international atheistic communism and our free civilization. Now we have been losing — we’ve been losing that war since the shooting part of World War II — two ended; losing it at an incredibly fantastic rate of speed, losing that war at the rate one hundred million people a year. Now for the past two and a half years I have been trying to expose and force out of high positions in government those who are in charge of our deliberate, planned retreat from victory. Now this fight — this fight against international communism should not be a contest between America’s two great political parties. Certainly, after all, the millions of Americans who have long voted the Democrat ticket are just as loyal. They love America just as much. They hate communism just as much as the average Republican. Unfortunately, the millions of loyal Democrats no longer have a party in Washington. And tonight — tonight I shall give you the history of the Democrat candidate for the presidency — who endorses and would continue the suicidal, Kremlin-directed policies of this nation. Now I’m not going to give you speech tonight. Tonight I am a lawyer giving you the facts and the evidence in the case of Stevenson versus Stevenson. Now let me make it clear that I am only covering his history in so far as it deals with his aid to the communist cause and the extent — the extent to which he is part and parcel the Acheson-Hiss-Lattimore group. Now I perform this unpleasant task because the American people are entitled to have the coldly documented history of this man who says, “I want to be your President.” Now the issue which faces a hundred and fifty million American people tonight, very simply stated is: Will communism win or will America win? And you the people — you the people who are listening to me tonight on radio, television, here in the hall, will decide that issue on November 4th because we shall win or lose depending upon the leadership which we choose on that day. I shall now try to put together — I shall now try to put together the jigsaw puzzle of the man who wants to be President on the Truman-Acheson ticket. And I don’t call the Democrat ticket because it would be a great insult to all the good democrats in this nation. That which I present to you tonight is only that part of his history on which I have complete, unchallengeable documentation. Now Stevenson has not yet heard the speech but already he and his camp are denouncing it as a pack of lies. Tonight — Tonight I give you the cold record a full week — a week and a day — before election so that he may have a chance to explain this record if he can. Now these facts, my good friends, can — can not be answered — can not be answered by streams of smears and lies. These facts can only be answered by facts. And we call upon Adlai of Illinois to so answer those facts. But time is short so let me get about the task of looking at his record. The Democrat candidate has said, and I quote him verbatim, he said “As evidence of my direction I have established my headquarters here in Springfield with people of my own choosing.” In other words he says, judge me — “…judge me by the advisors whom I’ve selected.” Good, let’s do that. Let’s examine — Let’s examine a few of those advisors first. First is Wilson Wyatt, his personal manager. Now Wilson Wyatt is the former head of the left wing ADA, the Americans for Democratic Action. The ADA has five majors points in its program. Listen to these and remember them if you will. Point number one: Repeal the Smith Act, which makes it a crime to conspire to overthrow this government. Number two: Recognition of Red China. Number three: Opposition to loyalty oaths. Number four: Condemnation of the FBI for exposing traitors like Coplon and Gubitchev. And number five: Continuous all out opposition of the House Committee on Un-American Activities. Nothing secret about that platform; they publish it day after day. Now according to an article in New York Times — may I have that — which I hold in my hand, the Democrat candidate’s campaign manager, Wyatt, condemned the government’s loyalty program and here’s the proof; it condemned the loyalty program in the most vicious terms. Strangely, Alger I mean Adlai — Adlai in 1952, now that he’s running for President says, “I will dig out the communists using as my weapon the loyalty program which my campaign manager damns and condemns.” Next, and perhaps the key figure in the Stevenson camp, is his speech writer, Arthur Schlesinger Jr., former vice-chairman of the same ADA. Now Schlesinger has been a writer, incidentally, for the New York Post — New York Post whose editor and his wife admit — admit that they were members the Young Communist League. Now in 1946, Stevenson’s speech writer wrote that the present system in the United States makes, and I quote — listen to this, here is his speech writer. He says, “The present system in the United states makes even freedom loving Americans look wistfully at Russia.” I wonder if there’s anyone in this audience tonight who is looking wistfully at Russia. And I wonder also if some calamity would happen and Stevenson would be elected, what job this man would have. But perhaps the most revealing article written by Stevenson’s speech writer appeared in the New York Times on December 11, 1949, on page three. And listen to this if you will, and I quote, he says, I happen to believe — “I happen to believe that the Communist Party should be granted the freedom of political action and that communists should be allowed to teach in universities.” Nothing secret, right — right, nothing secret about it. It’s in the New York Times December 11, 1949. Stevenson’s speech writer saying, “I think that communists should be allowed to teach your children,” my good friends. And he says, Oh, but judge me — “judge me by the advisors whom I select.” Now let’s see how Stevenson’s speech writer feels on the subject of religion. The answer is given in his review of the book of Whittaker Chambers, Whittaker Chambers, the man whose testimony convicted Alger Hiss. Chambers, in his book, as you know, maintain that a belief in God was the hope of the free world, a feeling which most Americans have regardless whether Protestant, Jewish, or Catholic. Well, Schlesinger wrote about that. What did he say? He says this, let me quote him verbatim, he says, the whole record — “the whole record of history indeed gives proof that a belief in God has created human vanity as overweening, and human arrogance as intolerable as the vanity and arrogance of the communists. And I say all of these documents are available for my good friends of the press to examine, each and every one — every one of them. Now, Stevenson says judge me by the people I choose as my advisors. Here you have the philosophy of his chief advisor; the philosophy of his speech writer laid bare. This idea, of course — that religion should be ridiculed — is one of the basic principles of the Communist Party. Now if you couple — couple this ridicule of religion with his statement that communists should be allowed to teach your children, and you have a fairly clear portrait of the man. Another of Stevenson’s assistants, Richard DeVoto. Now DeVoto has violently attacked our strongest defense against communism — the FBI. In Harper’s Magazine, as reported in the Daily Worker of December 29, 1949, page seven, his man DeVoto denounces the FBI as, quote, “nothing but college trained flat-feet.” Then he says this, “and I would refuse to cooperate with the FBI.” Now the Communist Daily Worker of February 13, 1947, reports that Stevenson’s man, DeVoto, headed a group seeking a permit for a meeting for the wife of Gerhart Eisler, the communist who had disappeared behind the iron curtain and who, as of tonight, is heading up the anti-communist group in east Berlin. So much for that. The next one of the men selected by Stevenson as one of his ghost writers is a man, Jim — James Wechsler. Now Wechsler and his wife both admit — both admit having been members of the Young Communist League. And I hold in my hand an article from the New York Times which states that Wechsler’s the man who helped Stevenson write the speech — here it is — helped Stevenson write the speech in which Stevenson ridiculed anti-communists, as “men who hunt for communists in the bureau of wildlife and fisheries.” That’s the speech also in which he condemned — condemned my exposure of communists as “low comedy.” Well I just doubt whether the mothers and wives of the hundred and twenty thousand Korean casualties consider it low comedy. I think they may possibly consider it a high tragedy. I’d like to call Mr. Stevenson’s attention to that. Some light — Some light is shed upon the importance of this man in the Stevenson camp; but a list of long distance phone calls between the Governor’s office in Springfield and this man who says, “I belong to the Young Communist League,” Wechsler. Here’s a list of the phone calls between Wechsler and the Governor’s mansion. I will not read it over, but it’s available to the press. One of these calls particularly is important. I think this might be called a “trigger call” — a “trigger phone call,” made just — made just before Wechsler and two others unleashed the smear attack upon Richard Nixon. Well, another of the men on the democrat candidate’s camp is Archibald Macleish. Stevenson’s biography on page 77 states that Macleish was the man who brought him into the State Department. It’s his own biography. Now Stevenson has him as an advisor. How about this man Macleish? He’s got perhaps the longest record of affiliation with communist fronts of any man that I have ever named in Washington. And Adlai says, “Judge me by the friends I select.’ To that I say, amen, Adlai, amen. The time — time is running out — time is running out and I would like to give you more about the people who are guiding Stevenson, but let’s go on to other things. In Stevenson’s biography — and here’s something which I especially call to your attention — in Stevenson’s biography, on page 73, we find that in the summer of 1943 — this is his own biography — the summer of 1943, after Mussolini’s government had fallen, Stevenson was given the task of formulating America’s post-war policy in Italy. On page 75 we find the statement that his recommendations were followed in Italy. When Truman was before a crowd in — in New York — thank you — New York on Columbus day, and he confirmed the fact that Stevenson’s the man who, as he said, sowed the seeds for the immediate postwar policy in Italy. Well, General Bedell Smith, a fine American, in his testimony and in his book, has told what that foreign policy established by Stevenson was. And listen to this if you will, he says that foreign policy, here’s his testimony, page 35 and 37, he says that foreign policy was, to connive — “to connive to bring communists into the Italian government and to bring the Italian communist leader, Togliatti, back from Moscow.” You get the picture of that my friends? Stevenson says, “I was the man who formulated the policy.” Truman says, yes he did. And the head of the Central Intelligence Agency says the policy then was “to connive to put communists into the Italian government” — connive, and to bring [Toggliatti], the communist leader, back from Moscow, which they did. Keep in mind that Bedall Smith had nothing to do with this program; he was just testifying as to what it was. Now I know — I know that one of the defense — defenses of this will be raised by the Stevenson camp tomorrow will be that, well, Eisenhower was in charge of the European military forces of that time. But Stevenson knows; his camp followers know; you know and I know that Eisenhower had nothing to do with formulating State Department policy. He had the task — He had the task of winning the war in Europe with the loss of the smallest amount of bloodshed and lives and he did that job very well. Now let — let us pick– let us pick another piece of the jigsaw puzzle of Stevenson’s history. On September 23rd of this year, Admiral Staton, who was a holder of the Medal of Honor, signed a statement for us; signed a statement covering his experience with Stevenson after he, Staton, had been assigned to the task of enforcing public law 151 and order — and removing the communists from the radios aboard our ships. Well Stevenson was a special assistant at that time, in the Navy Department. He called Admiral Staton to his office and here’s the affidavit given to us by Staton about that meeting. Hasn’t been used until tonight. Let me read just one paragraph from it. He says, “On arrival, Stevenson told me that he had received six or eight of the communist cases which my board had recommended for removal, and that he wanted to discuss them with me.” Still quoting the admiral, “Stevenson said that he could not see that we had anything against them and stated that we should not be hard on the communists. The conference ended with Stevenson disagreeing with our recommendations to fire the communists.” This was in 1943, my good friends, and two or three days ago Stevenson went on the air and said, but he said, “Oh, in 1943, I was warning about the dangers of communism in the Mediterranean.” Well — Well immediately — immediately after Staton appeared at Stevenson’s office and said, “Mr. Stevenson, get rid of those communists; the law provides you must.” But he said no. What happened to Staton, he was retired to inactive duty. And now another part of the jigsaw puzzle of Stevenson’s history is his membership over many years on the central committee of the World Citizen’s Association. Now I know that you may find some good people on that organization; you may even find some good Republicans. But Stevenson was not merely a member of the group. Stevenson was one of the twelve-man, policy-forming committee. Now this is quite enough, really quite enough. But time is so short I’ll only cover plank five in their platform. I hold their platform in my hands. Keep in mind that the twelve men, including Stevenson, drafted this platform. Let me read plank number five: “National states must be subordinate to world civilization; their jurisdiction must be limited by world law; and any local legislation contrary to world law must be null and void.” Now what does this mean my good friends? What does this mean to the hundred and fifty million American people? It means that a world organization, such as the United Nations, could veto — veto any state or federal law or any part of our Constitution. This becomes doubly significant in view of the recent revelations that twelve — twelve of the men who were recommended by the State Department to the United Nations have been dropped because they refused to say under oath whether or not they were — had been members of the Communist Party; twelve of the men in this world organization which should have the power to veto your laws. Well — Well Stevenson’s own office has been stating that he was a member of this unusual organization for only — only — 1941. I have here a copy of Who’s Who, which he gives them a signed statement admitting he was a member up until 1945. I have a copy of the letterhead of this organization, February 1948, carrying Stevenson, not as a member but as part of the central committee, twelve man governing body. Well, why is this significant? Simply my friends, simply because you’re asked to elect a presidential candidate who proposed to fly the flag of a super-world government over the stars and stripes. But let’s move on to another part of the jigsaw puzzle. Now, while you would think — while you may think there can be no connection between the debonair Democrat candidate and a dilapidated Massachusetts barn, I want to show you a picture of this barn and explain the connection. Here’s the outside of a barn. Give me the picture showing the inside, if you will. Here is the outside of the barn up at Lee, Massachusetts. It looks it couldn’t house a farmer’s cow or goat — the outside. Here’s the inside: a beautifully paneled conference room with maps of the Soviet Union. Well, in what way does Stevenson tie up with this? My — My investigators went up and took pictures of this barn after we had been tipped off what was in it — tipped off that there was in this barn all the missing documents from the communist front — IPR — the IPR which has been named by the McCarran Committee — named before the McCarran Committee as a cover shop for communist espionage. When we went up and we found in the room adjoining this conference room, 200,000 — 200,000 of the missing IPR documents. The hidden files showing the vouchers, among other things; showing money from Moscow; and the entire interlocking group of communists. And, Senator McCarran — Senator McCarran — Senator McCaran’s committee unanimously — a committee of four democrats and three republicans — a committee of four democrats, three republicans — unanimously found that the IPR was communist controlled, communist dominated, and shaping our foreign policy. Now let’s take a look at a photostat of a document taken from that Massachusetts barn. One of those documents was never supposed to have seen the light of day. Rather interesting, it is. This is the document which shows that Alger Hiss and Frank Coe recommended Adlai Stevenson to the Mount Tremblant Conference which was called for the purpose of establishing foreign policy — postwar foreign policy — in Asia. Now, as you know, Alger Hiss is a convicted traitor. Frank Coe has been named under oath before congressional committees seven times as a member of the Communist Party. Why? Why do Hiss and Coe find that Adlai Stevenson is the man they want representing them at this conference? I don’t know. Perhaps Adlai knows. We now come to the much discussed testimony by Adlai Stevenson in the trial of Alger Hiss. Now, my good friends, I haven’t considered — I have not considered this fact standing alone as overly important in the Stevenson record. It is only a link in the chain of events which prove the case in Stevenson versus Stevenson. Now what does impress me, however, is the deathly fear that Governor Stevenson displays when additional links tying him to Alger Hiss are brought forth. We find that he very cleverly attempts to imply that his knowledge of Hiss was casual, remote, and that he was not vouching for Hiss’s character at the trail. I hold in my hand a petition which has never been made public before either in — in the New York courts, a petition by the Hiss lawyers when they asked the court to admit Stevenson’s statement. You recall Stevenson said, “I will sign a statement but I will not go to New York and under cross-examination.” Let me read this one small section of this affidavit to you — and the entire affidavit is available to the press. Here’s the affidavit of Hiss’ lawyer: “Governor Adlai Stevenson of Illinois has been closely associated with Alger Hiss in the course of certain international diplomatic undertakings. They were together at the San Francisco conference, at the United Nations at which the charter of the UN was adopted. And they were also together at the London conference which preceded and prepared the agenda for the San Francisco conference.” They say this, “The testimony of Governor Stevenson would be of great importance to Alger Hiss.” Now I want you to examine closely the statement Governor Stevenson made at Cleveland Ohio, about two days ago, the 23rd, which he attempted to defend his support of the reputation of Hiss — Hiss the arch-traitor of our time. Stevenson said this last Thursday, and I quote him. He said, “I said his reputation was good. I did not say that his reputation was very good.” Now here — here we have — here we have a man that says, “I want to be your President,” claiming that Hiss’s reputation was good but not very good. Now I say, my good friends, that if he had such misgivings, he should not have vouched for Hiss at all. There are — There are no degrees of loyalty in the United States; a man is either loyal or he’s disloyal. There — There is — There is — There is no such thing — There is no such thing as being a little bit disloyal or being partly a traitor. Now I note that the television man is holding up a sign saying 30 seconds to go. I have much, much more of the documentation here. I’m sorry we can’t give it to our television audience and I want our audience to know it is not the fault of the television stations. We’ve only arranged for half an hour, and that half an hour is about up. But with your permission, my good friends, when we go off the air I would like to complete for this audience, the documentation…. [broadcast cut off] U.S. Copyright Status: Text = Public domain (delivered by sitting U.S. Senator in the performance of his official duties). Audio = Uncertain. Image = Public domain.