Former National Security Council Senior Director Dr. Fiona Hill – testifying Thursday – called the 2016 Trump election the “contemporary American version of a Bolshevik revolution.”

The piece – published on the website of the establishment Brookings Institution website on November 8th 2016 – proceeds to recount Vladimir Putin’s rise to power, relating many aspects of his base, messaging, and campaign to President Trump:

“From the Kremlin perspective, the frustration and public dissatisfaction of a large segment of the American public, in the wake of a great recession and industrial dislocation, looked a lot like the frustration and public dissatisfaction in the USSR of the 1980s and Russia of the 1990s. The economic and societal ills of small American cities and rural areas, were familiar to the Kremlin. U.S. grassroots grievances resonated with Russian resentments. Donald Trump’s 2016 slogans had shades of Putin’s 2012 campaign: bashing out-of-touch elites, championing the little guy, projecting the image of the strong leader who could get the people what they wanted, making his country great again, and teaching everyone else a lesson in the process.”

How exactly did Dr. Hill, the former director at the Brookings Institution’s Center on the United States and Europe, a think tank diametrically opposed to President Trump’s America First agenda, end up as the Deputy Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Europe and Russia on the National Security Council staff under President Trump?

How can Dr. Hill, who considers the President’s election to be predicated entirely on “play[ing] with emotions” and “manipulat[ing] people,” be entrusted to implement that agenda?

And in relation to impeachment, how can her impending testimony be viewed as devoid of political motivation when the she equates the president she’s conspiring to impeach with Putin?

Let’s hope that the ‘killers’ like Rep. Jordan and Rep. Nunes come out tomorrow to press Dr. Hill on why her testimony should be viewed as anything more than a bureaucrat driven by policy differences and wild desire to undermine President Trump’s America First agenda.