Great timing Trump...I'm sure the Brits will welcome you with open arms now.... **nononono*
I'd be surprised to hear he cares. :shrug:
Who cares? As an American citizen, she's not supposed to have a title of nobility anyway, and as a divorced socialite, she wasn't supposed to be allowed to marry royalty.
It's a State visit and he is to meet with the Royal Family...my guess most will snub him as he deserves....
It's hard to know what was said and in what context from reading that story.
Is that a Brit thing?It's in our Constitution.
Officially she will miss next week’s functions while on maternity with three-week-old son Archie.
But it is thought she and Trump are being kept apart to avoid an embarrassing confrontation.
LA—born Meghan, 37, accused him of being “misogynistic†and “divisive†during his 2016 presidential campaign.
The ex-Suits actress also pledged to vote for his rival Hillary Clinton.
Told of Meghan’s barbs by The Sun, Mr Trump insisted it was the first time he’d heard them.
He said: “I didn’t know that. What can I say? I didn’t know that she was nasty.â€
Told Meghan had threatened to leave for Canada if he won in 2016, he countered: “A lot of people are moving here (to the US).â€
He also revealed that he had no idea that he wouldn’t be meeting Meghan on his three-day state visit.
He said: “I didn’t know that. I hope she is OK.â€
Rather than hit back at Meghan in his customary fashion, the President seemed willing to mend fences — while saying she can flourish in her new role.
He predicted she will make “a very good†American princess.
On her joining the Royal Family, he added: “It is nice, and I am sure she will do excellently.
“She will be very good. I hope she does (succeed).â€
For what purpose does he say these things? He's pretty nasty himself. What a low life.
Did you read the post by Ed James right above yours?
No, I didn't because I think I was posting at the same time. True it isn't as big of a deal.
Did you read the post by Ed James right above yours?
No, I didn't because I think I was posting at the same time. True it isn't as big of a deal.
It's in our Constitution.
Great timing Trump...I'm sure the Brits will welcome you with open arms now.... **nononono*
I don’t care if he dislikes her,
I like her!
I'd be surprised to hear he cares. :shrug:
I know it won't be a popular opinion here, but the whole British monarachy is worthless waste of UK taxpayer money.
I know it won't be a popular opinion here, but the whole British monarachy is worthless waste of UK taxpayer money.
Is that a Brit thing?
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
It's a Constitution thing.(Article I, Section 9, Clause 8)
Doesn't that apply only to office holders?You may be correct. After further digging:
In 1810, Democratic–Republican Senator Philip Reed of Maryland[14] introduced a Constitutional amendment modifying the Title of Nobility Clause. Under the terms of this amendment any United States citizen who accepted, claimed, received or retained any title of nobility from a foreign government would be stripped of their U. S. citizenship. After being approved by the Senate on April 27, 1810, by a vote of 19–5[15] and the House of Representatives on May 1, 1810, by a vote of 87–3,[16] the amendment, titled "Article Thirteen", was sent to the state legislatures for ratification. On two occasions between 1812 and 1816 it was within two states of the number needed to become a valid part of the Constitution.[17] As Congress did not set a time limit for its ratification, the amendment is still technically pending before the states. Currently, ratification by an additional 26 states would be necessary for this amendment to be adopted.
Under interpretations of the Emoluments Clause elaborated by the Comptroller General of the United States and the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel which have never been tested in court, retired military personnel are forbidden from receiving employment, consulting fees, gifts, travel expenses, honoraria, or salary from foreign governments without prior consent from Congress, which as per section 908 of title 37 of the United States Code 908 requires advance approval from the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the relevant branch of the Armed Services.[34] Retired military officers have voiced concerns through the Retired Officers Association that applying the clause to them but not to retired civil service members is not an equal application of the clause, and therefore illegal.[citation needed]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_of_Nobility_Clause (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_of_Nobility_Clause)
In 1942, Congress authorized members of the armed forces to accept any "decorations, orders, medals and emblems" offered by allied nations during the course of World War II or up to one year following its conclusion.[35] Notably, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower accepted a number of titles and awards pursuant to this authorization after the fall of Nazi Germany, including a knighthood in Denmark's highest order of chivalry, the Order of the Elephant.[36]
Congress has also consented in advance to the receipt from foreign governments by officials of the United States government (including military personnel) of a variety of gifts, subject to a variety of conditions, in the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act[37] and section 108A of the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act, otherwise known as the Fulbright–Hays Act of 1961.[38]
Great timing Trump...I'm sure the Brits will welcome you with open arms now.... **nononono*
Class and dignity on parade in advance of a visit to Great Britain.
You're right; the Brits aren't looking very good with this.
You're right; the Brits aren't looking very good with this.
They are not. Just saw the story they won't let him address Parliament as they did Obastard in '11. They think he'll "be rude." *****rollingeyes*****
They know POTUS will make an excellent, bulletproof case and strategy for Brexit. 888blackhat
I know it won't be a popular opinion here, but the whole British monarachy is worthless waste of UK taxpayer money.
They are not. Just saw the story they won't let him address Parliament as they did Obastard in '11. They think he'll "be rude." *****rollingeyes*****
They know POTUS will make an excellent, bulletproof case and strategy for Brexit. 888blackhat
He might, but I doubt it. In a prepared speech to Parliament I would expect nothing controversial like that, they just don't want to give him a chance to appear "civil."
Who cares? As an American citizen, she's not supposed to have a title of nobility anyway, and as a divorced socialite, she wasn't supposed to be allowed to marry royalty.
I have a hard time reading Examiner stories in the first place. I open the story, and BAM! At least two pop-up videos blaring at the same time. Without fail.@Cyber Liberty
Doesn't that apply only to office holders?
Military personnel have received decorations from foreign governments in the past, so I'm not sure if those rules are made on a conflict by conflict basis, or are a standing approval of acceptance from our allies. Perhaps @sneakypete or @txradioguy knows the details on that.
https://specialoperations.com/32280/franklin-d-miller-mac-v-sog-awarded-medal-honor-january-5-1970/
He might, but I doubt it. In a prepared speech to Parliament I would expect nothing controversial like that, they just don't want to give him a chance to appear "civil."
@Smokin JoeThanks, Pete!
Depends on the political environment,and their mission. I personally knew people that had been wounded in Laos or Cambodia in the "early days" who didn't even get the Purple Heart they earned because "we weren't in Laos or Cambodia". They also didn't get the Bronze Stars or Silver Stars they would have otherwise been awarded. What usually happened is that if there was a US unit operating nearby in VN at the time,the PH or valor award would be written up as if they were attached to the US unit in VN. There were at least 3 people in recon company who were awarded a MoH for actions in Laos or Cambodia,and one that comes to mind is the MoH awarded to Franklin D.Miller,that claims the action took place in VN right on the MoH award. It's didn't. He was in Laos.
There are lots of foreign awards given to US troops that they can't wear because of political problems and the questions that might be asked. The awards go into their personnel records,but they can't wear them or start talking in public about having been awarded them. Off the top of my head,I am thinking (what you are forced to do when you no longer have a memory) this mostly applies to officers and senior NCO's attached to an embassy that go out in the field with the locals as observers. They are not SUPPOSED to be armed or taking part in combat,but we all know how that really goes when things get tight. They get the awards put in their records and there can be no doubt it helps them with promotions,but they still can't wear them. Kinda sucks,but when you take the Man's money,you play by the Man's rules.
Then again,there are awards that are considered to be routine,and if the troops involved are there operating in the open and not covertly there is no problem. I am talking about awards for valor or wounds up to the Silver Star level. Most people don't really know what they are for when they see them,and don't really care,so no big deal.
Trump calls Meghan Markle ‘nasty’ ahead of London visit
by Caitlin Yilek
| May 31, 2019 09:05 PM
President Trump said Meghan, the duchess of Sussex, was “nasty†ahead of his state visit to the United Kingdom.
“I didn’t know that she was nasty,†Trump told The Sun.
The American actress called Trump “misogynistic†and said she would consider remaining in Canada where she was filming if he won the 2016 presidential election. She married Prince Harry in May 2018 and gave birth to their first child earlier this month.
Trump, however, said “it’s nice†to have an American as part of the British royal family.
“I am sure she will do excellently,†he said. “She’ll be very good. She will be very good. I hope she does [succeed].â€
Prince Charles and his wife Camilla, the duchess of Cornwall, will host Trump and first lady Melania Trump for tea at Clarence House, their official residence in London. The couples are slated to attend Queen Elizabeth II’s state banquet. Prince William and his wife, Kate, the duke and duchess of Cambridge, are also expected to attend the banquet
Meghan, who is still on maternity leave, is not expected to meet with Trump during his visit.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/trump-calls-meghan-markle-nasty-ahead-of-london-visit (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/trump-calls-meghan-markle-nasty-ahead-of-london-visit)
Well ........ that's our president, he does have a way with words doesn't he, but you're right "Great timing" /s
I wholeheartedly agree. The notion of royalty is repulsive. Markle is a liberal Hillary fan and of no interest to me.
Trump account mocked over pushback to Meghan Markle 'nasty' reports
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/446481-trump-campaign-mocked-for-trying-to-disprove-reports-that-trump
I know it won't be a popular opinion here, but the whole British monarachy is worthless waste of UK taxpayer money.
I wholeheartedly agree. The notion of royalty is repulsive. Markle is a liberal Hillary fan and of no interest to me.
Mountain out of a molehill again.
But Trump needs to finally understand that when dealing with the children in the press he needs to stop taking their bait.
As a TrumpRealist, I try to analyze his actions and words fairly.
I call this one:
- 90% on the media twisting his words to make them sound much worse than they actually were.
- 10% on Trump for not being a careful speaker.
He said: “I didn’t know that. What can I say? I didn’t know that she was nasty.â€
By using this very clipped manner of speaking, he opens his words up for misinterpretation.
"I didn’t know that she was nasty." can be misinterpreted as meaning: "I didn’t know that she was a nasty skank." "I didn’t know that she was a nasty like a skank." and so forth.
What I believe he was trying to say (and could have with a bit more effort) was: "I didn’t know that she said nasty things about me.†or, even more simply, "I didn’t know that she was being nasty.â€
It is pretty clear to me that Trump intended to convey that Markle was being nasty (or more accurately, had been nasty in the past).
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7-mQkHX4AAhmLF?format=png&name=900x900)
The President's answers were very gracious.:silly:
Who cares? As an American citizen, she's not supposed to have a title of nobility anyway, and as a divorced socialite, she wasn't supposed to be allowed to marry royalty.
Which begs the question; IS HARRY really Charles son? If not. that is why it was allowed. Maybe.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7-mQkHX4AAhmLF?format=png&name=900x900)
Mountain out of a molehill again.
But Trump needs to finally understand that when dealing with the children in the press he needs to stop taking their bait.
Great timing Trump...I'm sure the Brits will welcome you with open arms now.... **nononono*
@LegalAmerican
I personally don't give a Hillary what the Brits do with their nation. None of my business as long as it doesn't affect America. If it makes them happy to have a Royal Family,I am happy for them.
All this would have been avoided if Trump and @LegalAmerican would just learn two simple English words~ NO COMMENT.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7-mQkHX4AAhmLF?format=png&name=900x900)
All this would have been avoided if Trump and @LegalAmerican would just learn two simple English words~ NO COMMENT.
Clearly @corbe is frightened by your eloquence and effectiveness. Never let him silence you. :patriot:
NO, DOES NOT MATTER. LEFT, LYING MEDIA....WILL ALWAYS TWIST & LIE ABOUT HIS WORDS.
IF HE SAYS NO COMMENT...THEY WILL TWIST THAT, INTO "SOMETHING".. like you do. I already know the game & how LEFTS, N.T.'s think. :2popcorn:
It is I, @Once-Ler that is silenced more than I care to remember around here, usually right after I allow one of these Trumpers to wind me up.Seriously? I needed a sarcasm tag with my last post? :D
Seriously? I needed a sarcasm tag with my last post? :D
No, Corbe needs a s/ tag. I thought your comment was sort of cute.
All this would have been avoided if Trump and @LegalAmerican would just learn two simple English words~ NO COMMENT.
All this would have been avoided if Trump and @LegalAmerican would just learn two simple English words~ NO COMMENT.-------------------------------------
@Cyber Liberty
According to son who has lived in London over twenty years, the Brits think Trump is a joke; they would never use the words he does. Son's fiance, Amy, totally a Brit, can't stand him, either. She works at an international agency that tracks and finds people who exploit others, human traffickers, so she is with many employees and says they think as she does - Trump is a nothing to them.
I allow one of these Trumpers to wind me up.
@corbe
HorseHillary! It would have been 100 times worse as every leftist on the planet started screaming "he's hiding something!"
I expect your son and his fiance hang with a different crowd than I did when I was living in London. My friends, from there, quite like Trump. They belong to the Brexit crowd and are tired of their own swamp of politicians. It’s the same over there as it is here with media and celebrities touting liberal crap and the liberals there think everyone that is anyone thinks the same as they do, while the common Joe Brit thinks more conservatively.
I never called Meghan Markle “nasty.†Made up by the Fake News Media, and they got caught cold! Will @CNN, @nytimes and others apologize? Doubt it!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 2, 2019
Even though it is on tape, he now denies every saying he called her nasty.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I never called Meghan Markle “nasty.†Made up by the Fake News Media, and they got caught cold! Will @CNN (https://twitter.com/CNN?ref_src=twsrc^tfw), @nytimes (https://twitter.com/nytimes?ref_src=twsrc^tfw) and others apologize? Doubt it!</p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 2, 2019 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1135165268261519361?ref_src=twsrc^tfw)
Where on the 'tape'?
Even though it is on tape, he now denies every saying he called her nasty.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I never called Meghan Markle “nasty.†Made up by the Fake News Media, and they got caught cold! Will @CNN (https://twitter.com/CNN?ref_src=twsrc^tfw), @nytimes (https://twitter.com/nytimes?ref_src=twsrc^tfw) and others apologize? Doubt it!</p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 2, 2019 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1135165268261519361?ref_src=twsrc^tfw)
@ CORBE...see..Look at all the nice things he said. He didn't even KNOW..that she was nasty to him, during his campaign.
So, does not matter what he says, when he says it, how he says it..you N.T.'S will continue the hate to him & apparently to me. NOT EVEN RATIONAL. I am a patriot supporting my president & country. :patriot: :patriot: :patriot:
The HORROR!
As a TrumpRealist, I try to analyze his actions and words fairly.
I call this one:
- 90% on the media twisting his words to make them sound much worse than they actually were.
- 10% on Trump for not being a careful speaker.
He said: “I didn’t know that. What can I say? I didn’t know that she was nasty.â€
By using this very clipped manner of speaking, he opens his words up for misinterpretation.
"I didn’t know that she was nasty." can be misinterpreted as meaning: "I didn’t know that she was a nasty skank." "I didn’t know that she was nasty like a skank." and so forth.
What I believe he was trying to say (and could have with a bit more effort) was: "I didn’t know that she said nasty things about me.†or, even more simply, "I didn’t know that she was being nasty.â€
It is pretty clear to me that Trump intended to convey that Markle was being nasty (or more accurately, had been nasty in the past).
Who cares? As an American citizen, she's not supposed to have a title of nobility anyway, and as a divorced socialite, she wasn't supposed to be allowed to marry royalty.
Wallis Simpson and Grace Kelly would disagree with you.Did Queen Noor lose her American Citizenship? Grace Kelly? Foreign Royalty with an American passport?
So would Queen Noor of Jordan and a host of other Americans.
https://www.insider.com/americans-who-married-royalty-2017-12 (https://www.insider.com/americans-who-married-royalty-2017-12)
Americans who served in the Lafayette Escadrille, the Eagle Squadrons and the Flying Tigers had their citizenship restored by acts of Congress. Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade were threatened with loss of citizenship, but the threats were not carried out.http://old.post-gazette.com/nation/20020515dual0515p4.asp (http://old.post-gazette.com/nation/20020515dual0515p4.asp)
All this would have been avoided if Trump and @LegalAmerican would just learn two simple English words~ NO COMMENT.
It's a State visit and he is to meet with the Royal Family...my guess most will snub him as he deserves....
Did Queen Noor lose her American Citizenship? Grace Kelly? Foreign Royalty with an American passport?
While certainly both were beloved as Americans, and even after the weddings, I'd think they'd be traveling on their adopted country's passport.
Keep in mind, dual citizenship was not allowed until the SCOTUS ruled on Afroyim v. Rusk (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afroyim_v._Rusk) in 1967...
For instance, http://old.post-gazette.com/nation/20020515dual0515p4.asp (http://old.post-gazette.com/nation/20020515dual0515p4.asp)
Most, (although not all) of the marriages between Americans and Royalty have occurred since that ruling, which made it far more difficult to lose American citizenship. As a result, dual citizenship has become more common.
You’re correct, @LegalAmerican.The British and American press twisted his comments. It’s fake news again.
I wonder if Chuck Todd and Don Lemon and ABX sleep with a security blanket at night to keep away the Orange Boogeyman.
The only thing Trump did wrong was not complete the sentence. I get what he meant as do most people.
If he had said "I didn't know she was nasty in her comments about me" it would have taken the wind out of the media's sails on this.
He was actually kinda nice in what he said to her after that.
Hell even the editor of The Sun who did the interview was on CNN saying basically people were making something out of nothing.
He said. "I didn't know she was nasty".Kinda reminds of what Judge Roy Bean reportly said.
If I said "I didn't know you were a whore" you would report me for calling you names (note, I didn't, just using an 'if' example).