October 21, 2011, - 5:00 pm

Clint Eastwood & DiCrapio v. J. Edgar Hoover: No Evidence He Was Gay

By Debbie Schlussel

Whenever people tell me, “It’s only a movie,” I wish they were right.  Sadly, when Hollywood takes on real people and events in history, it lies about them, and the stupid “E! True Hollywood Story” generation (and their idiotic parents) believe it to be fact.  Whether it’s “JFK” spouting conspiracy theories not based in fact, or “Munich” showing us guilt-ridden Mossad agents who killed Islamic terrorists behind the Munich Olympic massacre, these movies put out blatant myths as fact.  And it’s dangerous.  And so it goes with the new Clint Eastwood movie, “J. Edgar,” which debuts November 9th and shows Hoover (played by Leonardo DiCrapio–no typo) making out with his top aide, Clyde Tolson (played by Armand Hammer heir, Armie Hammer).  Many retired FBI agents are rightfully upset about this.

Despite decades of rumors that he was gay and/or had a predilection for wearing women’s lingerie, there isn’t a single shred of evidence to back either allegation often made about former FBI director, J. Edgar Hoover.  I, myself, have been guilty of joking about this on this site.  When I’ve noted that the FBI was a much better agency under Hoover, I’ve often joked, “While he might have worn a dress . . .” in beginning my praise.  And I guess that’s unfair, so I probably won’t do it again.  I’ve thought about this a lot, as I’ve noted and ridiculed Tim Gunn’s absurd memoir claim that his FBI agent father had an affair with Hoover, something for which he admittedly had no evidence or knowledge, just a “hunch.”

Then, there are the former FBI agents, who served under or with Hoover in a time before the FBI became known as “Famous But Incompetent” to every other branch of federal, state, and local law enforcement.  The agents note, as I have, that there just isn’t any proof Hoover was gay.  And, yet, Eastwood, after being contacted by them and consulting the agency, chose to take license with it and make the movie anyway.  He and the Hollywood liberal elite know that, without the salacious but unproven gay story, there’s no movie.  And, sadly, Hoover isn’t around to defend himself against it. If he were, he might file a defamation lawsuit, and that’s why they usually make this fictional crap after the subject is gone.

The director and star of the upcoming Hollywood film on J. Edgar Hoover sought information from officials at FBI headquarters about disputed aspects of the iconic former FBI director’s sexual life while preparing the movie.

Assistant FBI Director Mike Kortan said that in separate meetings this year with director Clint Eastwood and actor Leonardo DiCaprio, who plays Hoover in the film scheduled for release next month, both men broached the issue of Hoover’s sexuality. They were told, “Vague rumors and fabrications have cropped up from time to time, but there is no evidence in the historical record on this issue.”

Kortan said the Hollywood film titans requested the meetings. He said the bureau did not attempt to shape the outcome of the movie, titled J. Edgar.

“We provided information so that their story could be accurate,” he said. “What they did with it, as with any production, has been entirely in their hands,” he said.

Groups of former agents have campaigned forcefully against any depiction of the long-rumored sexual relationship between Hoover and former top aide Clyde Tolson.

“There is no basis in fact for such a portrayal of Mr. Hoover,” William Branon, chairman of The J. Edgar Hoover Foundation, wrote to Eastwood this year. “It would be a grave injustice and monumental distortion to proceed with such a depiction based on a completely unfounded and spurious assertion.”

The Society of Former Special Agents of the FBI fired off a similar missive, saying a “rumored kissing scene,” reported in early media accounts involving the actors portraying Hoover and Tolson, “caused us to reassess our tacit approval of your film.”

Eastwood and DiCaprio were not available for comment. Eastwood and producer Robert Lorenz responded to the foundation in a letter in April, saying they gave no “credence to cross-dressing allegations” that also have shadowed Hoover and did not intend to portray “an open homosexual relationship” between Hoover and Tolson.

Uh, clearly they intended to portray it. There’s a make-out scene. Hellooo . . .?

William Baker, a former agent and Hoover foundation vice president, characterized Eastwood’s letter as “polite, but non-committal.”

“Concern still persists,” Baker said. None of the agents interviewed has seen the film. What alarms them is what Baker has heard from people familiar with the movie and a suggestive image in the movie’s trailer: Hoover’s character clutching the hand of Tolson, played by Armie Hammer.

“We’re caught in a dilemma here,” Baker said. “We don’t want to support something not based in fact, but we’re not against the new FBI and diverse workplace.”

Cartha “Deke” DeLoach, a former top aide to the FBI director, said he and DiCaprio discussed Hoover’s private life as part of the actor’s three-hour visit to DeLoach’s South Carolina home.

When the subject of homosexuality came up, I made it very clear that I never saw any evidence of it whatsoever,” said DeLoach, 91, who served as Hoover’s deputy director for more than five years. “I traveled with him, I ate in his home and he in mine. I knew Clyde Tolson to be Mr. Hoover’s companion and best friend. When you are somebody like Mr. Hoover, I guess you need somebody to talk to.”

I haven’t seen “J. Edgar” yet, but I will definitely look at it with a critical eye when I do. As longtime readers know, I don’t like movies that take on real life and portray fiction as fact. Without actual proof that J. Edgar Hoover had relationships with men beyond the platonic and professional, this movie is a disservice and a fraud.

And, frankly, I’m not sure how it’s relevant. In the case of Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, it’s different. A wannabe-closeted lesbian, Napolitano appointed her girlfriend, Dora Schriro–an uber-liberal and a joke who attacked prison guards and gave prisoners birthday parties in Arizona prisons, to set immigration policy at the Department of Homeland Security, and now the agency is spending gazillions more to entertain illegal aliens, while refusing to arrest any aliens but for those with violent criminal records. Then, she got her girlfriend Schriro the plum job of running the New York Bureau of Prisons, where Schriro let an Islamic imam smuggle box-cutters into the prison.

That’s a clear-cut case in which a relationship is noteworthy and detrimental. But in the case of J. Edgar Hoover, even if he was gay (which we don’t know for sure), where is the evidence that it had anything to do with the success or failure of the agency?

To me, it’s just another Hollywood attempt to take down a respected law enforcement authority figure who isn’t around to dispute the cinematic low blow. And it goes hand in hand with Hollywood’s consistent promotion of criminals and terrorists as the wrongly accused and the victims.

That’s what J. Edgar is really all about. Bet on it.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly



Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

47 Responses

Somewhere along the line, with all the troubles in this world, such as recessions, wars, oil embargoes, oil spills, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, nuclear meltdowns, banking scandals, the destruction of the middle class, outsourcing, unemployment, illegal immigration, terrorism, crime, new deadly diseases, to name a few, topics like whether or not J. Edgar Hoover was a pole smoker seems like the mother of all non issues. Even though I have heard rumors for years that J. Edgar was queer, when I hear the name J. Edgar Hoover, I think FBI, not faggot. For some reason, I just don’t give a shit whether or not J.Edgar Hoover was a homo or not.

RT on October 21, 2011 at 5:58 pm

I’ve never been a fan of the “outing” of dead historical figures, especially based on shakey “evidence”, like Eleanor Roosevelt, Leonardo Da Vinci or President James Buchanan or Suleiman the Magnificent (a man who fathered 8 children by two wives!).

I can’t buy DiCaprio as Hoover (or Howard Hughes). Even now, DiCaprio seems like a teenager pretending to be a grown-up to me.

Shebert Shoover on October 21, 2011 at 6:11 pm

There’s no proof Janet Napolitano is lesbian even though she’s quite butch. It wouldn’t be surprising if she is.

Matthew on October 21, 2011 at 6:13 pm

In the 1950s, people like Rock Hudson, Liberace and Roy Cohen would sue anyone who accused them of leaning “that way.” J. Edgar Hoover was a bit older than them, and died in 1972. If he had been about 20 years younger and had lasted into the 1980s, who knows whether or not he would have expired in the same manner that those three did.

Anyhow, sometimes one just has to acknowledge the elephant in the room. Like the fact that Michelle Bachmann is completely unelectable because her husband is a walking sight-gag.

Irving on October 21, 2011 at 6:43 pm

    So, if I think you are an armed robber or child molester, it must be true? When did you last demand money from a store clerk? Have you been hanging around schools and parks again? Also, your elephant fantasies do not concern us here. Save it for the chatrooms. It is probably the most decent of your many fetishes Does your probation officer know you are online now? Have you filed your weekly report with their office?

    Worry01 on October 21, 2011 at 9:02 pm

I guess if Irving is going to try to convince people he has an IQ higher than 80, perhaps he can learn how to spell Roy Cohn’s name correctly. His comments about ‘pale sight-gags’ reek with his stupidity.

Little Al on October 21, 2011 at 6:55 pm

    “pale” is your word, not mine. Furthermore, I have nothing against proud gay people. It’s the ones who are ashamed of what they are, and think that nobody is wise to them that I find insufferable. This would include Kevin Spacey, Oprah Windbag, and yes, Marcus Bachmann.

    Irving on October 21, 2011 at 10:59 pm

Clint Eastwood is just another hollywood liberal despite his fake conservative image.

Laura on October 21, 2011 at 7:18 pm

If you watch Clint’s movies that he directed, there is a clear liberal/progressive agenda that he keeps trying to assert.

As far as they gaiety issue, it’s possible. After all, who better to keep a secret and construct a cover-up than the FBI for its former chief?

DS_ROCKS! on October 21, 2011 at 7:37 pm

    DS_Rocks, you rock too.

    I rarely go to movies anymore, as the politics in them tends to stink, even the ones that are strictly supposed to be “entertainment.”

    Occam's Tool on October 21, 2011 at 9:02 pm

As for someone’s personal sexual life, who the heck cares?

But it goes to show up the hypocrisy of the Left, which attacked people on personal privacy grounds when Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky came to light.

Why isn’t J. Edgar Hoover is as deserving of privacy as Clinton? To use the liberals’ argument, who one slept with has nothing to do with the job at hand. There’s a line we shouldn’t cross.

But they’ll cross it for this movie simply b/c Hoover wasn’t one of them. Every one is guilty of it but the Hollywood crowd’s treatment of history is like looking in a fun house mirror.

That said, no matter what becomes of this movie, Hoover’s reputation is safe for the ages.

NormanF on October 21, 2011 at 8:16 pm

Isn’t this typical liberal hypocracy.If you get on there safe hit list they can call you a fag w/ no proof while claiming there’s nothing wrong w/ being gay but they just don’t call you gay if they don’t like they call you a fag.

Hollywood has no problem w/ repeating smears that they have made up but if they make the Richard Gere Story some of these same people would be outraged.

Gordito on October 21, 2011 at 8:23 pm

It is an accusation that no one has ever really backed up. One might as well assume that a bunch of guys who have been going out bowling together for years are actually doing “Broke Back” things at a Motel 6 down the road. No, it is a way to attack someone who can no longer defend themselves. Also,as someone else noted in here,it is great that you are gay, unless of course I do not like your belief system or ideology. We can see this little game being played by trial lawyers time and again in cases that in the past would have been decades past any statute of limitation. As in the Case of Mr. Hoover, the alleged perpetrator is dead, and can no longer defend themselves. Whether it is a movie or a court case, money seems to trump veracity and even the most basic fairness. Beware of the bowling league.

Worry01 on October 21, 2011 at 9:15 pm

Debbie, There was plenty of circumstantial evidence he and Clive Tolson were lovers. Both men were confirmed bachelors. They purchased homes next door to each other. They rode to work together in the same car every day. They dined together for lunch and dinner. They took vacations together. Perhaps more telling, Hoover left his estate to Tolson when he died. The American Flag draped over Hoover’s casket at his funeral was given to Tolson. After Hoover’s death, Tolson moved into Hoover’s home. When Tolson died, he was buried next to Hoover at Congressional Cemetary. I just think neither could have ever come to terms publicly with their sexual orientation in the day and age they lived without destroying their careers. One of the funniest audio recordings of LBJ in the White House was a conversation he had with Hoover about rumors of someone in his cabinet being a closeted homosexual following the arrest of Johnson’s long-time friend and top White House aide, Walter Jenkins, for having sex with another man at a YMCA not far from the White House. Johnson asks Hoover how you can tell another man is queer. You have to wonder if there was a motive behind Johnson, who was quite devious, asking the question of Hoover. Here’s the transcript of the conversation:

President Johnson: No, I read that. What they said was that—they raised the question of the way he [an unidentified cabinet aide] combed his hair, or the way he did something else, but they had no act of his, or he had done nothing—

J. Edgar Hoover: No. It was just the suspicion that his mannerisms and so forth were such that they were suspicious.

President Johnson: Yeah. He [Jenkins] worked for me for four or five years, but he wasn’t even suspicious to me.

But I guess you’re going to have to teach me something about this stuff!

Hoover: Well, you know, I often wonder what the next crisis is going to be. [An awkward pause ensues.]

President Johnson: I’ll swear I can’t recognize them. I don’t know anything about it.

Hoover: It’s a thing that you just can’t tell. Sometimes, just like in the case of this poor fellow Jenkins . . .

President Johnson: Yes.

Hoover: [continuing] There was no indication in any way.

President Johnson: No.

Hoover: [continuing] And I knew him pretty well, and [FBI White House liaison Deke] DeLoach did also, and there was no suspicion, no indication.

There are some people who walk kind of funny and so forth, that you might kind of think are little bit off, or maybe queer. But there was no indication of that in Jenkins’ case.

President Johnson: That’s right.

[Break.]

Hoover: So far, I haven’t been able to get any more detail than was given to me yesterday, namely that this man [the alleged closeted homosexual] was a cabinet officer, and will be exposed today.

Now, I thought of all the cabinet officers that we have—and whom I don’t know personally—but there are none of them that raise any suspicion in my mind.

President Johnson: None in mine.

Gary Welsh on October 21, 2011 at 9:18 pm

What I find most interesting is that during his time with the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover crossed the Pacific on a raft. Is that in Eastwood’s movie?

Raft Dodger on October 21, 2011 at 9:19 pm

Yet no one objects when DS calls all WNBA players lesbians, all NBA players “baby mommas’, all NFL players spoiled brats. Yet there are legitimate questions about Hoover and that’s ridiculous.

PS DS you should really check you Google ad sense account, some of the ads (against Int 1183) don’t really seem to fall in line with your thinking.

petebone on October 22, 2011 at 2:15 am

One example of the difference between Hoover and the current – er, crop (almost said the other word) in Washington, pertained to the issue of the internment of Japanese-Americans in World War II. After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, when Roosevelt gave the order to round them up, Hoover initially expressed reservations over such a policy on legal grounds, but was promptly overruled by FDR and ended up implementing the internment policy anyway. Contrast this with the clowns at (In)Justice, ICE, et al., not only refusing to enforce laws but in fact persecuting states and localities that seek to enforce same. (Not to mention Obama’s arrogant refusal to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, Holder’s DOJ’s refusal to prosecute the New Black Panthers over their blatant voter intimidation in ’08, and so on.) There’s the difference: Even if Hoover took issue with a certain law, for whatever reason, he upheld it regardless.

As has been said in many different ways by many different people in many different venues (including here, i.e. by the likes of ‘Gordito’ and ‘Worry01′), the liberal elites (whether Hollywood or elsewhere) believe that the only “authentic” gays are those who slavishly follow the far-left party line and especially the radical homosexual agenda (not to mention their “We’re Here and…” stance), and anyone who strays from same is a traitor to their “orientation.” Only they use different euphemisms such as “hypocrites.” Which has been partly behind these smears against Hoover.

ConcernedPatriot on October 22, 2011 at 3:32 am

I read somewhere that diCrapio’s next role would be one about Alan Turing, who’s sometimes thought of as the ‘father of computing’. And one can bet that Turing’s sexuality would be a major part of that story, including his estrogen injections

Infidel on October 22, 2011 at 4:57 am

Threads like this give me a headache. Was J. gay or not? Was he carnivorous, omnivorous or vegan? Was he good or evil? Blah blah, waah waah…

Simple explanation for all this debate: read Orwell’s “Animal Farm”. Word for word.

Replace all 4-legged creatures in the book with the word “liberal” (for a lack of a more apt, yet short, portable and easier-to-spell term) and you’ll get the current social-political Zeitgeist.

The Reverend Jacques on October 22, 2011 at 8:07 am

Gary Welsh,
That’s all you got.That’s pretty weak.Life long bachelors that frequently broke bread together=broke back mountain.OK.

I don’t even know if I like J. Edgar Hoover. Anyone hated and ridiculed w/ this much passion was either really a great man or far from it. I haven’t figured it out yet.

Gordito on October 22, 2011 at 8:16 am

@Occam’s Tool: Thanks!

DS_ROCKS! on October 22, 2011 at 8:46 am

Rumors of Hoover’s homosexuality pervaded Washington, DC circles for many years, well before he died. His relationship with Tolson is more than suspect. I remember, even as a young child, that people at parties would talk about Hoover’s private life. Ironic, given how he would spread innuendo about other people’s sex lives to destroy them.

There is also evidence that the mob blackmailed Hoover. Hoover, when questioned, always denied or downplayed the existence of organized crime.

Jonathan E. Grant on October 22, 2011 at 8:55 am

…And no, Davinci, James Dean, Benny Hill, Lawrence of Arabia – were not homosexuals. Billy the Kid only killed four guys, and his name wasn’t William H. Bonnie. Paul Revere never made a ‘Midnight Ride’. Goliath was about 6’6″. John was Jesus’ real brother, and Moby Dick is based on a true story about Mocha Dick, a real whale. Also, there’s no such thing as an omnivore. Cigarette smoking, while being a disgusting habit, isn’t doing near the damage that we’re told – the second-hand smoke bit being a total ruse. Oh, and yes, homosexuality is a very correctable disorder (and no, born again nimrods, gay people are not evil beause they’re gay; screwed up, but not evil.) These and many other handed down standards of info I’ve researched in depth over the years. It’s one of my extracurricular passions. It does well to be careful about what’s said about men who either are or have been (now deceased) single and haven’t had children. They’re easy and constant fodder for the rumor mill. And lastly, Rosie O’donnell did not precede Homo Erectus (I know that’s a tough one to swallow), Michael Moore does not blow his nose into his ball cap, (and he isn’t gay, either. He doesn’t have any women – well – because – who’s kidding who?) and Barack O’bama does have a brain – however tiny it may be.

shegundala on October 22, 2011 at 10:33 am

This is why movie attendance is down. Hollywood just doesn’t get it. Do family oriented movies and honest historical portrayals and they’ll see audiences return. Until then, they’ll continue to make movies that most people don’t want to see.

JeffT on October 22, 2011 at 12:03 pm

    Oh, really? Then, pray tell, how did the liberal “Avatar” do worldwide box office of $2.8 triilion — not even including the billions worth sales via TV, PPV, DVDs and web downloands? The truth is, Hollywood does pack them in. Any of the “X-Men” flicks has done more business than 100 conservative culture war agitprop documentaries shown at the (now-defunct) Liberty Film Festival put together. And at any rate, box office and content are two separate things.

    Seek on October 24, 2011 at 3:35 pm

If Hoover was indeed not gay, he certainly lived his life consistent with that of a closeted homosexual in his era. But who gives a shit?

#1 Vato on October 22, 2011 at 1:25 pm

Had J. Edgar been a lousy FBI director, then his supposed queerness would enable the left to elevate him into victim-hero status. As J. Edgar was correctly pursuing the bad guys (commies and other subversives)and we now know he was fully on the right track, now the gay charges suddenly become
a blot on his image.

I will avoid Eastwood’s films from now on. He should remake his Dirthy harry and change the plot so he can becomes a hero
for scumbags and perpetrators. The reds love perpetrators, perverts and terrorists — as long as they do not mess with commies!

Otto Schaden on October 22, 2011 at 2:00 pm

Debbie thank you for this article. I have friends who think Clint Eastwood movies are factual & well researched. When I saw the trailer for this crappy movie & knew where it was going. I have attempted to convince those I know not to go see it. But, as you say they are part of the E generation, loons really. Why do I think this movie is coming out right after the Jackie O tapes were released to discount her Kennedy view of MLK? Caroline discounted her own mothers comments as influenced by Hoover. Another reason not to support Hollyweird.

A_Zion_State_0'mind on October 22, 2011 at 2:38 pm

dicrappio received the electric car al gore’s company in finland made as obama the muslim slime posing as president gave $500 million to the company who made the car in finland. money the nuslim half-bred got from US TAXPAYERS!

As for that movie “moneyball” weeks ago. billy beane the .200 hitting “phenom” when he was a player. watch the world series now. nelson cruz hit 6 home runs in the previous serious. he played for the a’s in the minors for 2 and a half years in their farm system yet this genius beane traded him for nothing.

texas pitcher ogunso too. ogudo the genius beane used as a HITTER for 5 years in the minors traded him away then for nothing and he is one of texas best PITCHERS now. a real genius this moneyball fraud is.

btw – 2 jewish players on texas rangers – ian kinsler and scott feldman.

Bill C. on October 22, 2011 at 2:38 pm

What the hell happened to Eastwood anyway? He used to be blowing away bad guys, protecting the public in his movies. Now he’s just another stupid old lib making stupid movies. Not unlike Woody Allen.

samurai on October 22, 2011 at 4:30 pm

To answer Honourable Samurai’s question:

Clint Eastwood is an actor.

Actors are, by nature, mercenaries.

If he were given a role which involves doing cartwheels and standing on his head, and it paid good bank, he’d do it.

Never confuse the actor with the character. Dirty Harry is as real and as credible as the Eater Bunny.

The only difference is that the latter actually delivers (as far as I can remember from my childhood).

The Reverend Jacques on October 22, 2011 at 4:39 pm

You know what they say: A lie told often enough becomes truth.
The Gay community wants to paint certain figures as homosexuals so that their behaviour becomes normal. I’ve seen Alexander the Great, Frederic Chopin, George Elliot and others painted as homosexuals without evidence.

On ocasion Eastwood gets it right, as seen in the movie Grand Torino, but it’s far and few between. The bad outweigh the good movies he’s done.

Gino on October 22, 2011 at 4:58 pm

    Eastwood didn’t get Gran Torino right. Ask someone who grew up in a Detroit neighborhood, they’ll probably tell you that a bunch of local witnesses talking to the cops, even after a murder, is total b.s.

    It might have been more relistic if Eastwood’s character wasted the punks and none of the witnesses would cooperate with the authorities against him.

    Code of Silence on October 23, 2011 at 11:58 pm

Make America and its iconic figures tarnished, so that after the water cooler arguments are settled no one knows the real story of how great they were.

Lars on October 22, 2011 at 6:41 pm

Hey Rev, I was being sarcastic. Thanks anyway. I think he got soft as he got old. I lived in California. I remember hearing about stuff he did at the Hogsbreath Inn in his home town there. He was actually kind of cool. He tapped into a frustration with the lib courts and out of control crime back in the 70′s. Then he got called a bunch of names since his movies portrayed a good, tough old fashioned cop. Like the ones Guilianni put on the streets of N.Y. to clean the crap up. You’re right, though, for the most part, actors are prostitutes that lie for a living. He used to be different.

samurai on October 22, 2011 at 8:58 pm

I cannot remember the source where this was first mentioned to me, but I seem to remember being told the reason that Hoover never went after the Mafia was that Meyer Lansky had a picture of Hoover in a dress (Which also explains why the Italians welcomed Lansky).

I_AM_ME on October 22, 2011 at 11:37 pm

“An American Requiem:
God, My Father and the War that Came Between Us”

by James Carroll

is an enlightening book regarding RC and relationship
with American military from WW 2 through Vietnam.

Mr Carroll writes that his father was within a day or so of graduating from RC seminary, and about to be made a priest,…
when his father was tapped by a RC cardinal for special duty. His father was not made a priest,… rather he was made a FBI agent.

Hi level enough to get to know J.Edgar Hoover himself.

After seven years with the FBI, about the time WW2 started,
his father was released from the FBI and inducted into the US Air Force.

Without so much as going through OCS, he was made a GENERAL in the USAF. At least a part of his work was examining the records of candidates for promotion.

Think about it. check it out

John Prewett on October 23, 2011 at 12:49 am

I guess part of the emphasis on Hoover’s supposed ‘sexuality’ is that our society has been so dumbed down and so radicalized that there aren’t too many other topics that would hold the interest of viewers today. They have dropped almost to the level of animals, and thus are not interested in too much other than instinctual drives.

Little Al on October 23, 2011 at 3:05 am

Forget it. It’s Hollywood’s upteenth slandering of Hoover. And DiCaprio? Forget it;1) One of the very first “Go Green” Eco-fascists,2)no matter how older he gets, he still has his teenager voice, 3) overrated as an actor,or even movie star,his main acting tic is squinting very hard.

Phineas on October 23, 2011 at 2:57 pm

—A full decade of skilfully demoralizing,
POST American fare from Eastwood (Mystic River/
Million Dollar Baby/ IWO rilogy etc). And so
with this Hoover retread.

Meanwhile, Korea era vet (—who NEVER saw Korea)
Eastwood has BALKED the –20th –30th —40th —50th
and NOW 60th Anniversaries of the awesomely relevant,
RED China Halocaust ‘unfriendly’

——————–KOREAN WAR———————-

One and ALL, steer clear of this, and ALL,
whispery, stylized,cowboys…

Ymus ANon on October 23, 2011 at 11:52 pm

This man deserves NO sympathy for whatever inuendo is occuring about him.

He spent DECADES gathering and collecting gossip and rumors about people he didn’t like, and then proceeded to blackmail politicians including presidents.

He displayed contempt for our Constitution and avoided going after organized crime.

One of the most evil things he did was getting 2 innocent men convicted of a murder that he knew they didn’t commit.

Congressman Dan Burton was so outraged by that miscarriage of justice that he called for Hoover’s name to be removed from the FBI building.

One of the 2 men wrongly convicted died in prison, while the other, Joe Salvati was finally freed after spending more than 30 years in prison.

Scott on October 24, 2011 at 1:57 am

I don’t buy the BS that Hoover was gay, however, DiCaprio is the perfect person to play any gay role in any movie.

texag57 on October 24, 2011 at 10:28 am

I haven’t posted here in a long time but I would like to add a little bit to the reocrd. The cross-dressing J. Edger was part of a KGB disinformation campaign aimed at discrediting the FBI’s counterintelligence efforts. My source for this is former KGB Major General Oleg Kalugin. I had a short conversation with him about at a 1997 Pentagon event.

tdiinva on October 25, 2011 at 12:35 pm

—FORGET this decades stale Hoover bio-pic.

—-TAKE UP the banner of our disintegrating
republic.

Eastwood’s a SELLOUT, and far worse, for the Globalist
TREASON and EUGENICS OP.

———————–REMEMBERING—————————–
—————the hundreds of thousands———————–
———————–who SERVED——————————

—————–the 50 thousand who died———————-
——————the 5000 STILL MISSING———————–

—————-and tens of millions of KOREANS——————————-who suffered or have been killed—————-
————————–on this——————————

——————–the 60th ANNIVERSARY————————————————–of the——————————
———————cosmically relevant———————–

————————–KOREAN WAR—————————

AMEN

Ymus Anon on October 26, 2011 at 4:18 am

The Federal Bueau of Intimidation was/is a bad joke. The Russians are still laughing about it. J. Edgar and his boyfriend liked to play the horses. Betting was his weakness. If he won, the mob paid off. If he lost a bet, it was forgotten. For 30 years J. Edgar pretended the mafia did not exist. Shall we talk about Whitey Bulger and the FBI?

burt on October 26, 2011 at 10:51 am

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field