Top Anti-Russia Journalist Presents a Dossier Suggesting Trump May Be a Russian Agent

Anti-Russia activists had a powerful argument 30 years ago. There was the Soviet Union, ruled by ruthless communist dictators, and there was a democratic America ruled by conservative evangelical Ronald Reagan, who prized freedom and Christian values. While the Soviet Union praised atheism, Reagan did exactly the contrary by proclaiming 1983 as the “Year of the Bible.”

Could Donald Trump, pictured, be a Russian agent? Not likely, but he is what Lenin would have called a 'useful idiot'

Reagan, who said that the Soviet Union was an Evil Empire, defeated it through the Bible and strategic and intelligent diplomacy.

Today, the Soviet Union does not exist anymore, Russia is more conservative and prizes its Orthodox Christianity and America, which is the largest Protestant nation in the world, is less conservative and less Christian. Today, America has no Reagan, but just a Kenyan-born, crypto-Islamic and open homosexualist president, who cannot be exposed by his deceptions and socialism because any criticism of him is treated as “racism.”

Trending: Kids Tutored in “Pleasure” Despite STD Epidemic

So 30 years ago are gone and Russia and America have changed. But anti-Russia activists have not followed these changes. They remain tucked in the Cold War mentality.

In a recent report titled “Is Trump a Russian agent? Top Kremlinologist presents a tantalising and disturbing dossier on why the presidential hopeful could have closer links to the Kremlin than it may appear,” DailyMail listed a number of reasons why top anti-Russia journalist Edward Lucas thinks that Russia is the biggest threat and why U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump might be a “Russian agent.”

Months ago, I was wondering why anti-Russia activists in Brazil were not accusing Trump of being a KGB agent. I addressed their inconsistency in my article “Is Trump a KGB Agent?

I do not need to wonder anymore. Lucas asked and answered, “‘Is Donald Trump a Russian agent?’ While the answer may be no, he is certainly what the original Soviet leader Lenin called a ‘useful idiot’ — referring to those in the West who ignored mass murder and chose to support the great Communist project.”

By this question and answer, a reader would understand that Lucas sees Russia as communist and he wants an anticommunist American candidate to fight Russia. Of course, Trump is not his candidate.

Then he complains, “Russian spies have also broken into computers related to the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton four times, stealing a trove of documents that cast an unflattering light on the party’s internal machinations. They have also gained access to the emails of Mrs Clinton…”

So “communists” (in his Cold War mentality) gained access to the emails of Mrs Clinton. So is she an anticommunist? Is she against the progressive and socialist ideology? Is she against abortion and sodomy, which are a top priority of the progressive and socialist ideology?

In his book “God and Hillary Clinton,” published by HarperCollins, conservative author Paul Kengor portrays Clinton as a progressive Methodist. Progressive is another term for socialist.

Why then does Lucas see “communism” in Russia, but he does not see it in Clinton?

To confirm his anti-Russia bias, Lucas mentions that “former CIA boss Michael Morell said that he had ‘no doubt’ Putin viewed Trump as an ‘unwitting agent.’” Yet, he does not mention that Morell praises Muslims in CIA, especially a Muslim who for ten years, under Bush and Obama, was director of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center. He does not also mention that Morell is endorsing Hillary.

So to fight “communism” in Russia anti-Russia activists are supposed to praise Muslims in CIA and endorse socialist Hillary, who is actively pro-abortion and pro-sodomy?

To prove Trump’s “Soviet” ties, Edward Lucas presents a list of economic ventures between Russians and Trump over the years. He points how Trump is receiving Russian money. He does not seem to care that these were capitalist ventures — highly hated by real communists. He does not seem to care about the reality. Trump is not poor. He is a billionaire. He does not need money from anyone. If he is receiving money from Russian for capitalist ventures, he is just showing that he is a capitalist, and Russians are equally showing that they are also capitalists!

Even so, citing the Washington Post, Lucas said, “Since the 1980s, Trump and his family members have made numerous trips to Moscow in search of business opportunities, and they have relied on Russian investors to buy their properties around the world.”

He also said, “Trump’s son, Donald Jnr, boasted to a property industry conference in 2008: ‘Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets.’ In the same speech, he said that he had visited Russia six times in the previous 18 months.”

His anti-Trump criticism is laced with a number of mentions of “Soviets,” “KGB” and other Cold War adjectives.

His profoundly negative dossier, as mentioned in DailyMail to denounce Trump and his “Soviet” ties, was written to torpedo Trump’s presidential campaign and help Hillary.

Lucas is bitterly critical of Trump because, as he said, “Trump is friendly to Russia.”

He complains, “Another damning factor in Trump’s relations with Russia is the composition of his inner circle. Paul Manafort, his election campaign chairman, has benefited from multi-million-dollar business deals with pro-Russian oligarchs. He was a close adviser to Viktor Yanukovych, the disgraced Ukrainian president who was toppled in 2014.”

Lucas fails to mention that the democratically-elect Yanukovych was overthrown by a revolution backed by the leftist billionaire George Soros, Obama and his leftist administration and many prominent neocons. U.S. conservatives denounced this coup. So if Manafort, the Trump campaign chairman, was on Yanukovych’ side, he was against Obama and his neocons. Is this so bad for Lucas?

Obama, Soros and neocons wanted a Ukraine open to the sodomy agenda. Does Lucas think that this is ok? I do not know Manafort’s reasons to be against the Ukrainian coup, but he was right.

Lucas also complains about other members of Trump’s inner circle, “Even more startling is the behaviour of one of America’s top spymasters, General Michael Flynn, who now advises Donald Trump. A former head of the Pentagon’s in-house intelligence service, the Defence Intelligence Agency, the wiry, crop-haired spy chief stunned his former colleagues by visiting Moscow in December 2015, where he sat close to Mr Putin at a dinner… Another foreign policy adviser in the Trump campaign is Carter Page, who has spent much of his career in Russia… He justifies Russia’s invasion and occupation of Ukraine, dismissing that country’s pro-democracy revolution and pro-Western leadership.”

According to Lucas, Trump is qualified to be a “Russian agent,” not a U.S. president. He said,

When Mr Putin wrote an article lambasting America’s role as the world’s policeman, Trump called it a masterpiece.

In 2007, he praised Putin for rebuilding Russia.

A year later he added, in a reference to the then President: “He does his work well; much better than our [President George W.] Bush.”

Trump praises the taciturn former KGB man who runs Russia for his leadership.

Then Lucas says, “What the Russian leader wants to do is to help him — notably by undermining Mrs Clinton, the only person who can keep Trump out of the White House.”

Hillary is the only person also who can keep homosexuality as top priority in the U.S. foreign policy, which she, under Obama, had been doing as State Secretary.

There were also many dealings between Hillary, when she was the U.S. State Secretary, and Russia. But perhaps Lucas favors Hillary because after the Obama administration began its sanctions against Russia over a Russian law banning homosexual propaganda to children and adolescents, the dealings stopped. But Trump has never stopped his efforts of friendship with Russia.

What is worrying and enraging Lucas is not the U.S. and its recent socialist administration, which has put homosexuality as top priority in their foreign policies, including imposing the homosexual doctrine on other nations. They even tried to force Russia to submit to it.

What is worrying and enraging Lucas is the prospect of a Trump administration seeking friendlier relations with the current conservative and Orthodox Christian Russia.

I do not know if Trump will survive the onslaught of criticism and pressure from neocons, left-wing Hillary Clinton and other anti-Russia activists as Edward Lucas, but if the times have changed, and Russia and America have changed, Trump is a fresh air away from the moldy Cold War atmosphere.

I would like Trump to get also a fresh air away from the moldy gay ideology atmosphere. In this point, he could learn a lot from Russia.

Weak-minded simple people could equate anti-Russian views with anti-communism, but this is far away from reality.

In 2014 I attended a pro-family meeting at the Kremlin, in Moscow, with several prominent pro-family leaders from the United States.

The Americans were under threat from feminist, homosexualist and left-wing Americans, who wanted the U.S. State Department to investigate them for violating the sanctions the Obama administration was imposing on Russia.

No, these were not anticommunist Americans threatening “communist” Americans visiting “communist” Russians in Moscow. These were socialist Americans threatening pro-family Americans who were visiting pro-family Russians in Moscow.

Edward Lucas and other anti-Russia activists do not stop to think that if their case against Russia is over communism, why support Hillary Clinton, whose policies are more socialist (including a strident abortion and sodomy advocacy) than the modern Russia? If they cared about socialism, they would admit that socialists are in the White House and that these socialists are against Russia.

This is about nationalism, which is strongly anti-Russia among conservative and socialist Americans, but it is not strongly anti-Islam, and Donald Trump is radically changing the ideological nationalistic landscape shared equally by conservative and leftist Americans. Neocons, whose radical nationalism dominates the conservative and socialist camps in America, are avid anti-Russia troublemakers and warmongers.

If anti-Russia activists need a candidate to keep the Obama sanctions against Russia, Trump is not their candidate. Hillary is. But just remember: both Hillary and Obama are socialists!

The simple message seems to be: to be an American communist is OK, but it is not OK to be a capitalist or communist Russian.

Another message seems to be: It is OK to be Muslim, but is not OK to be Russian.

Therefore, the ideological fight against Russia today is about irrational nationalism, not rational anticommunism. I am anti-communism, anti-socialism and anti-leftism, and this is the reason I am against Obama and Hillary. This is the reason I supported Reagan and opposed the Soviet Union. In that time, I contacted the U.S. Embassy in Brazil expressing my support to Reagan, and I sent encouraging letters to Christian prisoners in Soviet camps.

As a pro-family activist, my reason to support Russia today is its incomparable law banning homosexual propaganda to children and adolescents. This reason also includes the fact that Russia has been defending traditional values in the United Nations. But pro-family values do not seem the reason Trump has been the biggest American cheerleader for Russia. Trump’s reason seems exclusively capitalist or economic: Russia has been a very good partner for his capitalist ventures.

If embracing capitalist ventures makes you a capitalist, what is hindering Lucas from seeing Russia as capitalist? And if endorsing an avid supporter (Hillary) of a very socialist gay and abortion agenda makes you a socialist, should Lucas be spared?

So Lucas shares more ideological interests with socialists than Trump does.

The accusation of anti-Russian activists that Trump is receiving Russian money because he needs it to fund his presidential campaign is ridiculous because Trump is not poor. He is a billionaire, and he makes business with anyone, Russian or not.

In the Cold War days, you were a Russian agent if you advocated socialist interests. Now if you do not support socialist Hillary Clinton and her abortion and sodomy agenda, you are a Russian agent too!

If it is important for America to make sodomy a priority and massively impose it on other nations, it is equally important for conservative Christians to support nations resisting this stupid imposition.

The Cold War does not exist anymore, but its moldy mentality is making its adherents crazy and irrational in regard to what is more important for pro-Reagan conservative Christians: conservative and Christian values.

The only thing worrying me is not neocons’ obsessions or anti-Russia concerns. It is the gay agenda and what it does to persecute Christians, deface families, destroy children’s innocence and demolish society. Hillary is sure to aggravate the homosexualist threats against Christians and families. And what about Trump, what is he going to do?

He has allied himself to Peter Thiel, the PayPal owner who has persecuted Christians. In Russia, Thiel could never do it.

Trump is better than Hillary in many respects, but in the homosexualist respect, he needs to listen and imitate Russia exactly as Russia should have listened and imitated Reagan’s America 30 years ago.

Portuguese version of this article: Importante jornalista anti-Rússia apresenta dossiê sugerindo que Trump pode ser um agente russo

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Barb Wire.

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.