The Michele Bachmann/Hillary Clinton story might grow serious legs if enough people ask Jeffrey Lord's fabulous question:
I deliberately said Hillary Clinton rather than Huma Abedin. Hillary is the person establishment “Republicans” must shield while Abedin can be written off as another victim of a vast right-wing conspiracy because of her long service to the Clintons:
Why must Hillary Clinton be shielded?
Democrats never got over Alger Hiss going to jail for perjury. Big shots go to jail all of the time, but Hiss singlehandedly exposed Democrats for what they are. Six decades have passed since Hiss went to jail and he still personifies the Washington Establishment who have to be sweating bullets over the possibility of another top insider being nailed for the one crime Americans will never forgive: TREASON.
There is far too much good stuff in Jeffrey Lord’s piece for me to cover. Nevertheless, I want to address what I consider the most important part:
As I’ve said many times, the Washington Establishment never makes a decision that adversely affects the United Nations. That’s been true since the day the United Nations succeeded the League of Nations. The New Deal lawyer referred to in the above excerpt makes my case:
Clearly, Michele Bachmann exposed a wound that has been festering since Alger Hiss’ betrayal in spite of everything the media has done to hide the open sore. Here is why:
Alger Hiss began LEGALLY betraying this country before the United Nations opened for business. As executive secretary of the Dumbarton Oaks Conference he helped drew up plans for the United Nations while WWII was still being fought. In 1945 he was secretary-general of the United Nations Conference on International Organization held in San Francisco.
The last thing the government media wants to see is another six decades of covering up a Hiss-type betrayal “. . . writing off the dangers of a foreign enemy whose goal is to infiltrate the U.S. government . . .”. The fact that Hillary Clinton is a perfect fit for Hiss’ role must be driving media decision-makers crazy. In short: Clinton must be shielded by the Beltway Establishment in order to protect the United Nations.
Finally, Jeffrey Lord’s astonishing article offers three reasons why everyone should read it; 1) a must-read analysis of the Michele Bachman/Hillary Clinton story; 2) a reminder of what Alger Hiss did to this country; 3) a guide to identifying the people governing this country who are following in Hiss’ footsteps.
Is Huma Abedin the New Alger Hiss?
By Jeffrey Lord on 7.24.12 @ 6:09AM
Washington GOP Establishment hits Bachmann for fighting Muslim Brotherhood.
The American Spectator : Is Huma Abedin the New Alger Hiss?
Is Huma Abedin to the Muslim Brotherhood what Alger Hiss was to the Soviet Union?
I deliberately said Hillary Clinton rather than Huma Abedin. Hillary is the person establishment “Republicans” must shield while Abedin can be written off as another victim of a vast right-wing conspiracy because of her long service to the Clintons:
But as Bachmann and company point out, Ms. Abedin plays a much more serious role in her own job as a senior aide to Secretary Clinton. (Abedin also worked in the Clinton White House as well.)
Why must Hillary Clinton be shielded?
Democrats never got over Alger Hiss going to jail for perjury. Big shots go to jail all of the time, but Hiss singlehandedly exposed Democrats for what they are. Six decades have passed since Hiss went to jail and he still personifies the Washington Establishment who have to be sweating bullets over the possibility of another top insider being nailed for the one crime Americans will never forgive: TREASON.
There is far too much good stuff in Jeffrey Lord’s piece for me to cover. Nevertheless, I want to address what I consider the most important part:
Why are Republican Senator John McCain, Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rodgers (R-MI) acting in the growing Abedin controversy as Washington Establishment Democrats of the 1940s did in the Hiss episode? Which is to say, writing off the dangers of a foreign enemy whose goal is to infiltrate the U.S. government -- because, well, the people in question are part of the Washington Establishment?
In his 1962 book Six Crises Nixon discussed how and why he was so furiously disdained. The how?
As soon as the Hiss case broke and well before a full bill of particulars was even available, much less open to close critical analysis, they [Hiss defenders] leaped to the defense of Alger Hiss -- and to a counterattack of unparalleled venom and irrational fury on his accusers."
The why? Nixon recounts being at one Washington dinner party after it became clear that Hiss had been stealing State Department documents and giving them to Chambers in the form of microfilm -- the famous "Pumpkin Papers" (so-named because Chambers had hidden them in a pumpkin on his Maryland farm).
A New Deal lawyer at the dinner party was so angry with Nixon for outing Hiss he shouted:
"I don't give a damn what the facts are. Even if Hiss admits he's guilty, these investigations are dangerous and will have a terrible and disastrous effect on the country -- because the net result is to cast reflection on the United Nations and all the other progressive aspects of the Roosevelt-Truman foreign policy."
As I’ve said many times, the Washington Establishment never makes a decision that adversely affects the United Nations. That’s been true since the day the United Nations succeeded the League of Nations. The New Deal lawyer referred to in the above excerpt makes my case:
In addition to the United States International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945, the sneaks who got this country into the UN knew what they were doing when they designed a foundation that was a masterpiece of betrayal. A foundation that would withstand every challenge when their descendants carried on. Treason became legal the minute the US became a member of an underhanded organization that was, and is, determined to tear down America. Membership in the UN meant that no American official betraying this country on the UN’s behalf could be prosecuted for treason. Only lawyers could design something like that.
Designer Treason
Clearly, Michele Bachmann exposed a wound that has been festering since Alger Hiss’ betrayal in spite of everything the media has done to hide the open sore. Here is why:
Alger Hiss began LEGALLY betraying this country before the United Nations opened for business. As executive secretary of the Dumbarton Oaks Conference he helped drew up plans for the United Nations while WWII was still being fought. In 1945 he was secretary-general of the United Nations Conference on International Organization held in San Francisco.
The last thing the government media wants to see is another six decades of covering up a Hiss-type betrayal “. . . writing off the dangers of a foreign enemy whose goal is to infiltrate the U.S. government . . .”. The fact that Hillary Clinton is a perfect fit for Hiss’ role must be driving media decision-makers crazy. In short: Clinton must be shielded by the Beltway Establishment in order to protect the United Nations.
Finally, Jeffrey Lord’s astonishing article offers three reasons why everyone should read it; 1) a must-read analysis of the Michele Bachman/Hillary Clinton story; 2) a reminder of what Alger Hiss did to this country; 3) a guide to identifying the people governing this country who are following in Hiss’ footsteps.
Is Huma Abedin the New Alger Hiss?
By Jeffrey Lord on 7.24.12 @ 6:09AM
Washington GOP Establishment hits Bachmann for fighting Muslim Brotherhood.
The American Spectator : Is Huma Abedin the New Alger Hiss?
Last edited: