Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy

[Dante]

and JFK, LBJ, and Nixon, and Ford, Carter, and Reagan favored a space race and moon landing and a space station with the Soviets... OMG!

Once you've viewed the fourteen items I've provided, I'd be interested in your informed opinion.

You have provided garbage. Less than garbage. Most of the stuff you have provided proves your dishonest crap to be the exact oppisite of what you claim if the source is viewed beyond your cherry picked fragmented qoutes. You know that if you tried to use your sources for a college thesis you would be laughed at and failed. At this point your efforts are deserving of little more than mockery, which seems to be what you are now getting for responses. So much effort to bare false witness. So proud to bare false witness. Like McCarthy, you deserve to be asked the question he was asked. Have you no shame?
OK, now let the foul spewing of names and insults proceed. Make it entertaining, because your history writing and opinions have become beyond boring.

for the longest time she does nothing but link to weird and unsupported drivel

 

[PoliticalChic]

Once you've viewed the fourteen items I've provided, I'd be interested in your informed opinion.

You have provided garbage. Less than garbage. Most of the stuff you have provided proves your dishonest crap to be the exact oppisite of what you claim if the source is viewed beyond your cherry picked fragmented qoutes. You know that if you tried to use your sources for a college thesis you would be laughed at and failed. At this point your efforts are deserving of little more than mockery, which seems to be what you are now getting for responses. So much effort to bare false witness. So proud to bare false witness. Like McCarthy, you deserve to be asked the question he was asked. Have you no shame?
OK, now let the foul spewing of names and insults proceed. Make it entertaining, because your history writing and opinions have become beyond boring.

for the longest time she does nothing but link to weird and unsupported drivel

That's an outright lie.

 

[Dante]

You have provided garbage. Less than garbage. Most of the stuff you have provided proves your dishonest crap to be the exact oppisite of what you claim if the source is viewed beyond your cherry picked fragmented qoutes. You know that if you tried to use your sources for a college thesis you would be laughed at and failed. At this point your efforts are deserving of little more than mockery, which seems to be what you are now getting for responses. So much effort to bare false witness. So proud to bare false witness. Like McCarthy, you deserve to be asked the question he was asked. Have you no shame?
OK, now let the foul spewing of names and insults proceed. Make it entertaining, because your history writing and opinions have become beyond boring.

for the longest time she does nothing but link to weird and unsupported drivel

That's an outright lie.

okay, you win. Supported by nefarious and unreliable sources at best

 

[Camp]

for the longest time she does nothing but link to weird and unsupported drivel

That's an outright lie.

okay, you win. Supported by nefarious and unreliable sources at best

It's a "Buyer Beware" kiind of thing. You better read the label of ingredients before you injest the product. If you wait until you have already injested the product you will be very upset that you just injested a bunch of junk that has no nutritional or redeeming value and may in fact be harmful.

 

[HenryBHough]

Brussel Sprouts are your friend!

Especially if you view flatulence as a sport.

 

[Dante]

Lots of gas

 

[Camp]

Somebody should write a historical narrative on Reagan or one of the Bush President's and use the writings of Dennis Kucinich, Chris Mattews, Rachel Maddow and Barney Frank as the main sources for the basis of the narrative.

 

[Dante]

Somebody should write a historical narrative on Reagan or one of the Bush President's and use the writings of Dennis Kucinich, Chris Mattews, Rachel Maddow and Barney Frank as the main sources for the basis of the narrative.

stereotypes and bullshit from FOX News

 

[HenryBHough]

Somebody should write a historical narrative on Reagan or one of the Bush President's and use the writings of Dennis Kucinich, Chris Mattews, Rachel Maddow and Barney Frank as the main sources for the basis of the narrative.

stereotypes and bullshit from FOX News

Wow, they're almost caught up with you!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Somebody should write a historical narrative on Reagan or one of the Bush President's and use the writings of Dennis Kucinich, Chris Mattews, Rachel Maddow and Barney Frank as the main sources for the basis of the narrative.

President Reagan?


Interestingly, today is an anniversary of sorts.


March 30th, 1981, John Hinckley,Jr. attempted to kill President Ronald Reagan.


Wielding a .22 caliber "Saturday-night special," John Warnock Hinckley shot President Reagan in the chest outside the Washington Hilton Hotel. The 25-year-old drifter with a history of psychological problems also shot the president's press secretary, James Brady, in the incident.


Reagan was the only US President to survive being shot while in office (just 69 days into his presidency).


Afterwards, he wrote in his diary:
“Whatever happens now, I owe my life to God and will try to serve him in every way I can.”



The finest President in the last 100 years.

Don't you agree?

 

[Mushroom]

I find it interesting that so many people are just flinging poop, instead of actually looking at some of the evidence presented.

Whenever I hear about somebody possibly being involved in Soviet espionage in the middle part of the 20th Century, my immediate reaction is to look at the Venona Papers. And Harry Hopkins appears in it many times.

Initially under reports by "18" and "19", then from "Diana". And as a source he was deemed important enough to gain the code name of "Deputy". Of course, it has also been pointed out that "19" may be Hopkins.

Now, is this proof that he himself is a spy? No, but at the least it shows that he as a minimum spoke to freely among people he should not have.

But then we continue. In 1941, he was sent to the Soviet Union to negotiate Lend-Lease. He was instructed to press hard for democratic reforms in the Soviet Union, for Americans to inspect distribution of food and medical supplies, as well as to allow American military advisors to serve in Soviet military units (this is common between allies). In the end, the Soviets agreed to none of these, but got the aid anyways. However, he added an interesting request, that a large shipment of uranium be added to Lend-Lease supplies to the Soviets.

Then in 1945 he returned to help negotiate the end of the war. He was instructed to push for a free democratic Poland, but instead he told Stalin that the US felt he should do with Poland whatever he wanted.

Then there is the 1943 incident where Hopkins notified the Soviet Ambassador that the FBI had tapes of a Soviet spy meeting with the CPUSA supervisor in San Francisco.

But what I find most interesting is that there is no direct evidence that Hopkins was a spy in either Venona, the KGB archives, nor from any defectors. However, there are statements that he supported the Soviets, and was an "unconscious source of information".

So in the end, I can not say yes or no on this. However, he certainly fought harder for the Soviets then he did for his own country when negotiating with them, turned over intelligence and suggested that captured spies be returned to them, and spoke openly to people who were actually spies.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A People’s History of Koch Industries: How Stalin Funded the Tea Party Movement

The Roots of Stalin in the Tea Party Movement | Alternet

Democrat Founding Father Funds Tea Party?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I find it interesting that so many people are just flinging poop, instead of actually looking at some of the evidence presented.

Whenever I hear about somebody possibly being involved in Soviet espionage in the middle part of the 20th Century, my immediate reaction is to look at the Venona Papers. And Harry Hopkins appears in it many times.

Initially under reports by "18" and "19", then from "Diana". And as a source he was deemed important enough to gain the code name of "Deputy". Of course, it has also been pointed out that "19" may be Hopkins.

Now, is this proof that he himself is a spy? No, but at the least it shows that he as a minimum spoke to freely among people he should not have.

But then we continue. In 1941, he was sent to the Soviet Union to negotiate Lend-Lease. He was instructed to press hard for democratic reforms in the Soviet Union, for Americans to inspect distribution of food and medical supplies, as well as to allow American military advisors to serve in Soviet military units (this is common between allies). In the end, the Soviets agreed to none of these, but got the aid anyways. However, he added an interesting request, that a large shipment of uranium be added to Lend-Lease supplies to the Soviets.

Then in 1945 he returned to help negotiate the end of the war. He was instructed to push for a free democratic Poland, but instead he told Stalin that the US felt he should do with Poland whatever he wanted.

Then there is the 1943 incident where Hopkins notified the Soviet Ambassador that the FBI had tapes of a Soviet spy meeting with the CPUSA supervisor in San Francisco.

But what I find most interesting is that there is no direct evidence that Hopkins was a spy in either Venona, the KGB archives, nor from any defectors. However, there are statements that he supported the Soviets, and was an "unconscious source of information".

So in the end, I can not say yes or no on this. However, he certainly fought harder for the Soviets then he did for his own country when negotiating with them, turned over intelligence and suggested that captured spies be returned to them, and spoke openly to people who were actually spies.

Uh huh. Using that logic there's no such a thing as the Mafia either

 

[JakeStarkey]

Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy What follows is a cautionary tale for those who would seek to heighten their own careers by making explosive statements about major figures in US history in order to sell books. I am reproducing the entire article from Frontpage because it is important for our readers to understand the difference between responsible historians like John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr and irresponsible journalists like Diana West whose assertion that Harry Hopkins was a traitor was reckless and self-serving in the extreme. Was Harry Hopkins A Soviet Spy? > New English Review

 

[Mushroom]

Uh huh. Using that logic there's no such a thing as the Mafia either

You are misreading my conclusion.

I actually do not think he was a "spy". I think he was much more open then that actually, and actually working for them. One can be a "fellow traveler", and actually try to help the Soviets without actually being a "spy".

From everything I have read on the guy, he had never tried to hide his admiration or affection for the Soviets. This is very un-sly like behavior. I think he was an actual supporter, so "spy" does not even apply.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Uh huh. Using that logic there's no such a thing as the Mafia either

You are misreading my conclusion.

I actually do not think he was a "spy". I think he was much more open then that actually, and actually working for them. One can be a "fellow traveler", and actually try to help the Soviets without actually being a "spy".

From everything I have read on the guy, he had never tried to hide his admiration or affection for the Soviets. This is very un-sly like behavior. I think he was an actual supporter, so "spy" does not even apply.

During Franklin Roosevelt's administration there was not only no reason to hide his admiration for Stalin and the Soviets, it was a resume enhancer.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Uh huh. Using that logic there's no such a thing as the Mafia either

You are misreading my conclusion.

I actually do not think he was a "spy". I think he was much more open then that actually, and actually working for them. One can be a "fellow traveler", and actually try to help the Soviets without actually being a "spy".

From everything I have read on the guy, he had never tried to hide his admiration or affection for the Soviets. This is very un-sly like behavior. I think he was an actual supporter, so "spy" does not even apply.

If you have read how Hopkins influenced Roosevelt to knuckle under to the wishes of Stalin, perhaps you can answer the query at the bottom.


Hopkins apparently served his Soviet masters almost to the end of his days. The following passage is from pp. 118-119 of "Stalin’s Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt’s Government," by M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein (2012):

a. Hopkins’s pro-Soviet leanings would be on further display in the Yalta records, where his handwritten comments are available for viewing. Though seriously ill at the time of the meeting, he continued to ply his influence with FDR, who himself was mortally sick and susceptible to suggestion in ways that we can only guess at.

After FDR had made innumerable concessions to Stalin, there occurred a deadlock on the issue of “reparations.” At this point, Hopkins passed a note to Roosevelt that summed up the American attitude at Yalta. “Mr. President,” this said, “the Russians have given in so much at this conference I don’t think we should let them down. Let the British disagree if they want—and continue their disagreement at Moscow [in subsequent diplomatic meetings]” (Emphasis added by Evans and Romerstein).

b. One may search the Yalta records at length and have trouble finding an issue of substance on which the Soviets had “given in” to FDR—the entire thrust of the conference, as Roosevelt loyalist [Robert] Sherwood acknowledged, being in the reverse direction. http://www.dcdave.com/article5/110211.htm




How were Hopkin's efforts different from these folks?

April 5, 1951 ....Julius & Ethel Rosenberg sentenced to death

 

[Camp]

Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy What follows is a cautionary tale for those who would seek to heighten their own careers by making explosive statements about major figures in US history in order to sell books. I am reproducing the entire article from Frontpage because it is important for our readers to understand the difference between responsible historians like John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr and irresponsible journalists like Diana West whose assertion that Harry Hopkins was a traitor was reckless and self-serving in the extreme. Was Harry Hopkins A Soviet Spy? > New English Review

Harry Hopkins was the greatest source of intelligence for the United States during World War II and perhaps the greatest intelligence asset for the USA in history. Not only did he gather information from Stalin and his inner circle, he was able to manipulate decisions made by Stalin and his inner circle with the use of carefully selected misinformation.

The same nut jobs who promote the ridiculous FDR was a commie and controled by Stalin nonsense theory are more than likely the same idiots that think Gen. Patton's idea to continue the war after the German surrender and attack the Soviet Union was a good idea. Hell, some of them will claim the refusal to follow Patton's idea is proof that the FDR administration was so corrupted by the commie's they allowed Stalin to take over eastern Europe just because they loved communism. And this isn't even the McCarthy thread.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Uh huh. Using that logic there's no such a thing as the Mafia either

You are misreading my conclusion.

I actually do not think he was a "spy". I think he was much more open then that actually, and actually working for them. One can be a "fellow traveler", and actually try to help the Soviets without actually being a "spy".

From everything I have read on the guy, he had never tried to hide his admiration or affection for the Soviets. This is very un-sly like behavior. I think he was an actual supporter, so "spy" does not even apply.

If you have read how Hopkins influenced Roosevelt to knuckle under to the wishes of Stalin, perhaps you can answer the query at the bottom.


Hopkins apparently served his Soviet masters almost to the end of his days. The following passage is from pp. 118-119 of "Stalin’s Secret Agents: The Subversion of Roosevelt’s Government," by M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein (2012):

a. Hopkins’s pro-Soviet leanings would be on further display in the Yalta records, where his handwritten comments are available for viewing. Though seriously ill at the time of the meeting, he continued to ply his influence with FDR, who himself was mortally sick and susceptible to suggestion in ways that we can only guess at.

After FDR had made innumerable concessions to Stalin, there occurred a deadlock on the issue of “reparations.” At this point, Hopkins passed a note to Roosevelt that summed up the American attitude at Yalta. “Mr. President,” this said, “the Russians have given in so much at this conference I don’t think we should let them down. Let the British disagree if they want—and continue their disagreement at Moscow [in subsequent diplomatic meetings]” (Emphasis added by Evans and Romerstein).

b. One may search the Yalta records at length and have trouble finding an issue of substance on which the Soviets had “given in” to FDR—the entire thrust of the conference, as Roosevelt loyalist [Robert] Sherwood acknowledged, being in the reverse direction. http://www.dcdave.com/article5/110211.htm


How were Hopkin's efforts different from these folks?

April 5, 1951 ....Julius & Ethel Rosenberg sentenced to death

Hopkins efforts were far worse which is why modern Progressives defend him and try to smear McCarthy. Many Democrat heroes should have been tried for treason along with the Rosenbergs

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Harry Hopkins....Soviet Spy What follows is a cautionary tale for those who would seek to heighten their own careers by making explosive statements about major figures in US history in order to sell books. I am reproducing the entire article from Frontpage because it is important for our readers to understand the difference between responsible historians like John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr and irresponsible journalists like Diana West whose assertion that Harry Hopkins was a traitor was reckless and self-serving in the extreme. Was Harry Hopkins A Soviet Spy? > New English Review

Harry Hopkins was the greatest source of intelligence for the United States during World War II and perhaps the greatest intelligence asset for the USA in history. Not only did he gather information from Stalin and his inner circle, he was able to manipulate decisions made by Stalin and his inner circle with the use of carefully selected misinformation.

The same nut jobs who promote the ridiculous FDR was a commie and controled by Stalin nonsense theory are more than likely the same idiots that think Gen. Patton's idea to continue the war after the German surrender and attack the Soviet Union was a good idea. Hell, some of them will claim the refusal to follow Patton's idea is proof that the FDR administration was so corrupted by the commie's they allowed Stalin to take over eastern Europe just because they loved communism. And this isn't even the McCarthy thread.

FDR was Stalin's sock puppet and is rightfully in Hell along with Brutus, Judas and the other traitors. Read Dante's Inferno and see where he puts traitorous scum like FDR