Recently I had a long conversation with Simona Pipko, who worked as a Soviet lawyer in the 1950s to early 80s. She said that Stalin devised the Soviet political and legal systems. “He told the communists to never admit any crime,” she explained. “Always put the crime on the enemies of communism.”
What happens when the traitors are calling “treason” and pointing fingers at the innocent? This is the political theater of our day; where traitors pretend to be against treason; where they prosecute — as traitors — anyone who stands in their way. And it is all in accordance with methods developed under J.V. Stalin, the infamous Soviet dictator.
If you are guilty of treason, accuse your political opponents of treason. If you are corrupt, say that they are corrupt. “I have heard Stalin speak in person. He was very clear, very logical,” Pipko added. And obviously, Stalin’s methods were effective, and were used at the famous show trials of the 1930s. Time and again Stalin’s minions accused his political rivals of crimes. But who was the real criminal?
Simona said that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Adam Schiff were obviously cast in Stalin’s mold. They are using Stalin’s methods, she noted. One might say that homage to the method is homage to the end. For some of us, Pelosi’s ideological agenda has been obvious for many years. After all, when you constantly support harmful policies, subversive agendas and narratives, then you are a subversive.
Last week House Speaker Nancy Pelosi accused Trump of working for Putin. During a meeting with the President she said, “With your foreign policy, all roads lead to Putin.” She has previously called the president a traitor. Did Trump walk out? No, he hit back. Trump scandalized Pelosi and congressional Democratic leaders by saying Pelosi was a third-rate politician. But the real reason they stormed out may have been due to a more telling remark. It seems that Trump implied the Democratic leaders were communist sympathizers. He said there were communists involved in Syria “and you might like that.”
Trump gave the Democrats a strong dose of their own medicine. How did they take it? Strange to say, they feigned outrage about unrelated slights. The New York Times even omitted any mention of Trump’s insinuation of Pelosi’s communist sympathies. This strikes me as calculated.
Why should Trump’s communist insinuation be glossed over by the Times? Given the advance of communism in the country, given the Democratic Party’s subservience to the communist agenda, they didn’t dare underscore the President’s prescient observation.
Related to this, there is another point to be made — which few have dared to make. The defeat of communism in 1991 was neither final nor complete. Moscow’s special services have advanced their agents into many U.S. leadership positions. Over the last three decades the communist penetration of the United States went from an epidemic to a pandemic after the election of Barack Obama. And this is why we are in the mess we see today.
Many will disagree with this analysis. But the reader should stop and think. Given their own past collusion with communist powers, why should Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi accuse Donald Trump of collusion with Moscow? And why would The New York Times refrain from printing Trump’s suggestion about Pelosi’s ideological sympathies?
Because the remark was too close to the truth.
If Pelosi pretends to eschew Moscow and Beijing, we should not trust her. Her ideological record tells a very different story. Therefore, we must reiterate our question: What happens when the traitors are calling “treason” and pointing fingers at the innocent?
Watch carefully what happens next….