Do you seriously think that the consequences of Khrushchev’s reversal of Stalin’s policies would manifest immediately and not take years to culminate?
Stalin had built a strong industrialized economy that was growing exponentially and on the rise by the 1950s. It would take 30 years after Khrushchev’s policies for the USSR economy to stagnate, and eventually fail.
For example, when the USSR defaulted under Khrushchev in 1957, the seeds that would lead to “no food under communism” stereotype had already been sown, as both industrial and agricultural production were brought to stagnation. Many policies under Stalin that made the USSR the most rapid growing economy in history were reversed en masse by Khrushchev.
Reagan and Clinton’s financial deregulations culminated in the subprime mortgage crisis in 2007 and the global financial crisis in 2008 - 7 years after Clinton had stepped down as president.
Um... I must be missing something clever in this post. Stalin was not in power in 2007. And he absolutely starved people to tighten control and suppress opposition.
Regarding your first point, classified CIA documents don't usually get released to the public until decades after they were made. After all, the Soviet Union also didn't exist in 2007 and the quote is using the present tense.
To your second point, that's a can of worms I'm too tired to go into, but someone else here might take you up on that.
Libs really struggle with this concept. I have no idea why. I guess because it brings their cognitive dissonance to the forefront and they can't ignore it anymore. It's especially sad with "leftist" libs who will understand the US and their alphabet agencies are bad, but will still uncritically accept everything they tell them about socialist countries.