Often wonder if the Manhattan Project failed and the atomic bomb not worked, would General Groves really have had to live on the hill, testifying to Congresses inquisition or would it have been covered up & classified away unknown forever?
-
-
Replying to @Casillic
Too big to just cover up forever — too much infrastructure, too many Congressmen already curious about it in 1945. I doubt he would have had to testify forever though.
4 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @wellerstein @Casillic
Including, notably, The senator Trumans committee on avoiding waste in the war-enterprise. Truman says in Plain Speaking that he was told to back off by FDR when he got near Manhattan.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Yes. But Truman was only one of several Congressmen who had been snooping around Manhattan work. There were several attempts to audit it, all shut down by personal intervention from Stimson.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wellerstein @bsdphk
Didn’t Groves have special Independent government auditor (IGs) audit the project every month as payments were made on the various contracts? He certainly knew how to play the game so congressional testimony would be uncomfortable but he probably had bases well covered?
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
Not fiscal auditing (they kept very clean books) — but overall auditing as to whether it was worth the money. Several Congressmen and the Office of War Mobilization all wanted to look into where all the Manhattan money was going. Here is Byrne's OWM letter from March '45.pic.twitter.com/SLPPWGtbts
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.