Dear
Milton: As you know, I have always considered the writer of the article that you sent to me to be both incompetent and untrustworthy. I think it would be fair to say that my opinion of him is equalled almost exactly by the opinion I have of the magazine that published his curiously distorted story.1
I note that toward the middle of his article he states "This `explanation' completely satisfied the White House, Eisenhower's press secretary, James Hagerty, said the next day." This is untrue. What Hagerty said was that I had concurred in the appointment of Wes Roberts to the position of Chairman of the Republican National Committee, and that until there was some evidence brought forward that indicated his unworthiness for the job, I would have no cause to express dissatisfaction.
Now this alleged writer has the effrontery to say that his unsupported prejudices constitute evidence on which some official action should be taken. Moreover, he leaps to the conclusion that I have available to me evidence to convict and authority to remove. If he does not know better than this, he is, in my opinion, even more ignorant than I had supposed.
I have no doubt that he is one of those who has berated McCarthy-ism day in and day out. He probably has fairly foamed at the mouth in crying out against guilt by association and the besmirching of reputations in the absence of proof. I had the same kind of person flood me with telegrams on the day after the Nixon case broke--insisting that I "repudiate him within twenty-four hours or lose the election." I have held out against the McCarthy type of accusation against individuals who have not been proved guilty of anything. I shall continue to do so--even against anyone I know.
So far as his challenging my mental and moral fitness for this job, I have never claimed to be equal to its limitless demands. But certainly I feel no less worthy because of the accusation by innuendo of such an individual.
I note also that he got to use his favorite word of "pragmatism" in the article.2 Maybe that is the reason that he could not sell it to any of the respectable Eastern newspapers and had to be satisfied with the one cheap magazine whose code more nearly fit his intentions.3
After all this, I am not going to remind you that you are the individual who originally commended the man to me.4 As you know, I always make it a rule to allow one mistake a year to anyone associated with me. I certainly should be able to allow you one in a lifetime.
Give my love to Helen and the youngsters, and, of course, all the best to yourself. As ever
P.S. Please note the attached, which I submit as my best defense against your "friend."5
