U.S. Politics

[Royell Storing]

A World disaster of epic proportion
Trump owns every bit of it

   This is Not about Trump. It is about regular people, scrounging out a living, being hung in the public square. What is going on there is no different than a Nazi Death Camp. Terrorism is a Terrorism. Whatever the decade may be.

[Michael Capasse]

   This is Not about Trump. It is about regular people, scrounging out a living, being hung in the public square. What is going on there is no different than a Nazi Death Camp. Terrorism is a Terrorism. Whatever the decade may be.

  drop bombs on civilians.
 

[Royell Storing]

drop bombs.

   Nothing funny about it. What do you think happened in France during WW 2? And the French celebrated their freedom. People such as yourself are bankrupt when it comes to history.

[Michael Capasse]

   Nothing funny about it. What do you think happened in France during WW 2? And the French celebrated their freedom. People such as yourself are bankrupt when it comes to history.

  bombs away !
you're in a f-n cult !

[Mark Ulrik]

  These TERRORISTS have already been given plenty of time. What did they do during this current negotiation time period? They HUNG people in the public square. They should be given absolutely no quarter. Their punishment should be in line with those running the Nazi Death Camps during WW 2.

Spare us your fake outrage. Your madman-in-chief severely miscalculated and now desperately seeks to save face by any means imaginable. If he does follow through on his vile threats against the Iranian people, men, women and children, a war crime tribunal might be too good for him and his henchmen.

[Michael Capasse]

Before the Iran war:

1) Iran didn't control Strait Of Hormuz, now it does.
2) Iran oil was sanctioned, now it's not.
3) Iran was not building a nuke, now they will.
4) US bases in Gulf were assets, are now liabilities

NYT reported many of the 13 US bases are inhabitable.
Reuters is reporting as many as 150 US soldiers wounded.

[Tom Graves]

You're as nutty as any JFKA conspiracy hobbyist I've ever come across. Did you come up with this on your own or did you read it in some libtard rag like The Atlantic or The Nation.

Didn't Trump marry Ivana Marie Zelníčková from Gottwaldov, Czechoslovak Republic (present-day Zlín, Czech Republic), in NYC in 1977?

Hadn't Ivana previously gotten a "marriage of convenience" to her alleged Austrian ski-team instructor so that she could acquire an Austrian passport?

During the Cold War, didn't Czechoslovak citizens, like Soviet citizens (e.g., Marina Prusakova) have to get permission from the authorities (i.e., the StB / KGB) to marry someone from the West, be it a "marriage of convenience" or otherwise?

ME: In addition to Ivana Marie Zelníčková, how many other Czechoslovak citizens were permitted in the 1970s to have a "Cold War marriage" / "marriage of convenience" so that they could obtain a Western passport?

GROK: No specific number is documented or publicly known.

Historical sources, biographical accounts of Ivana Trump (née Zelníčková), and studies of Czechoslovak emigration during the 1970s “normalization” era (post-1968 Prague Spring) do not provide any quantified figure—such as dozens, hundreds, or any exact count—for how many other Czechoslovak citizens used “Cold War marriages” (or marriages of convenience) with Westerners (often Austrians) to legally obtain a foreign passport and emigrate without formally defecting.

This tactic was a known loophole: marrying a foreigner could secure a Western passport (e.g., Austrian), allowing legal exit while preserving the right to return and visit family—unlike outright defection, which triggered permanent exile and loss of citizenship rights. Ivana’s 1971 marriage to Austrian ski instructor Alfred Winklmayr is the most famous and thoroughly documented example; it is frequently described in popular retellings as “a common method” or something “thousands trapped behind the Iron Curtain could only dream about.” However, these phrases appear to stem from viral summaries of her memoir and life story rather than archival data, and no independent historical evidence, emigration statistics, or declassified records cite multiple verified cases or a tally from the 1970s.

Under the strict communist regime of the 1970s, legal emigration was extremely limited overall. Most who left did so by defecting during authorized travel (e.g., athletes, artists, or tourists) or through riskier illegal means. The marriage-of-convenience route required:

A willing foreign spouse (rare, as it involved paperwork, potential scrutiny, and no actual cohabitation).

Approval from Czechoslovak authorities.

Contacts in the West (Ivana benefited from her junior national ski team travels).

No academic papers, Czech archival emigration data, or contemporary reports quantify its use beyond anecdotal references to Ivana’s case. Broader Cold War-era Czechoslovak emigration waves (e.g., the 1968 Prague Spring refugee exodus of ~162,000 to Austria and elsewhere) involved defection or asylum, not sham marriages. Later Western “green card marriage” phenomena (e.g., in the U.S.) are unrelated and post-date this context.

In short, while the strategy existed as a clever workaround for a privileged few with international ties, it was not a widespread or statistically tracked phenomenon. Ivana’s successful use of it stands out precisely because it was exceptional. No reliable sources allow for a precise “how many other” answer.

[...]

In 1988, Ivana told journalists she had been selected as a substitute on the Czechoslovak ski team during the 1972 Winter Olympics, specializing in downhill and slalom.[11][7] However, Czechoslovakia only sent four female athletes to the 1972 Winter Olympics and none were alpine skiers. In 1989, Petr Pomezný, Secretary General of the Czechoslovak Olympic Committee, denied Ivana's claim and stated that despite searching extensively, no record could be found of her involvement.[8] In 2021, Snopes confirmed that Czechoslovakia had not sent female alpine skiers to the 1972 Winter Olympics.[12]

-- Wikipedia


Wasn't Ivana's father an informant for the StB?

Didn't Ivana tell her father a few years later that Trump was thinking about getting into politics?


Fast-forward to 2014, and "former" KGB counterintelligence officer Vladimir Putin has his professional trolls in St. Petersburg set up fake American personas and social media accounts to sow general discord on social issues and to undermine trust in the U.S. system. By early 2016, these operations are explicitly favoring Trump and Bernie Sanders while criticizing Clinton.

By mid-2015, Putin's GRU and FSB hackers had penetrated the DNC's computer systems, and by mid 2016 they had stolen thousands of the DNC's and the Clinton Campaign's emails, and his trolls had started, in conjunction with sketchy people like Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, Steve Bannon and Robert Mercer, to actively help Trump get "elected."

And it worked, unfortunately.


ME: Is it possible that the Russian hackers achieved penetrations of the Republicans' and/or the Trump's Campaign's computer systems but decided to not exploit them?

GROK: Yes, it is possible—and U.S. intelligence officials explicitly assessed that Russian hackers (primarily GRU) achieved some access to Republican systems but deliberately chose not to exploit or publicly release the material.

What Officials Confirmed

RNC access: FBI Director James Comey testified in January 2017 that Russian hackers penetrated old, inactive RNC email domains (no longer in use) and some state-level Republican targets. Information was harvested, but none of it was released. Comey emphasized: “We did not develop any evidence that the Trump campaign or the current RNC was successfully hacked.”

Intelligence community view: U.S. officials told reporters they had high confidence that Russia hacked both the DNC and RNC but “conspicuously released no documents” from the Republican side. This asymmetry was one reason intelligence agencies concluded the operation was intended to help Trump.

Why They Might Not Have Exploited It

Strategic intent: Releasing damaging Republican material would have undermined Russia’s goal of weakening Clinton and boosting Trump. By holding back, they avoided harming their preferred candidate. Some analysts speculated they may have obtained more than the limited old emails but chose restraint.

No Trump campaign breach: Multiple investigations (FBI, Mueller Report, Senate Intelligence Committee) found no successful hack of the active Trump campaign’s systems. Attempts likely occurred (as they targeted both sides), but none yielded usable stolen material that was exploited or leaked.

Limits of the Evidence

Access to Republican systems was described as limited compared to the deep, sustained breaches of Democratic networks (DNC, DCCC, Podesta).

No public evidence or indictments show large-scale theft of current Republican/Trump campaign emails. The 12 GRU officers indicted by Mueller were charged only for Democratic hacks.

Later reports (e.g., Senate Intelligence Committee) reinforced that Russia’s efforts were one-sided in execution and release.

In short: Yes, it is not only possible but consistent with official statements that Russia gained some (mostly outdated) access to Republican systems and withheld it for strategic reasons aligned with helping Trump. However, there is no indication of significant penetration into the Trump campaign’s active systems—unlike the Democrats. This remains the consensus from declassified intelligence, Comey’s testimony, and congressional investigations.

ME: Did the Russians target the computer systems of the then-current RNC and the Trump Campaign?

GROK: Yes, Russian hackers (primarily GRU) did target the computer systems of the then-current RNC and the Trump campaign in 2016, but the efforts were limited in scope, far less aggressive than against Democrats, and unsuccessful in achieving meaningful breaches or data theft from active systems.

[Tom Graves]

Before the Iran war:

1) Iran didn't control Strait Of Hormuz, now it does.
2) Iran oil was sanctioned, now it's not.
3) Iran was not building a nuke, now they will.
4) US bases in Gulf were assets, are now liabilities

NYT reported many of the 13 US bases are inhabitable.
Reuters is reporting as many as 150 US soldiers wounded.

Inhabitable, or uninhabitable?