• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Donald Trumps comes to London

Stacyhs said:
In all fairness, what he said was taken out of context. He said "I didn't know she was nasty," in response to being asked if he knew she had made some nasty remarks about him during the campaign.
Click to expand...

Except the interviewer didn't use the word "nasty". That was pure Trump. Here's the link.


In other news, I VERY belatedly realized last night that the reason Trump wanted to meet the Irish PM at his golf course was to avoid protesters. That didn't fly, so they're doing it in a secure area of the airport for the same reason.
 
Foolmewunz said:
Not sure about that. She's not a fixture on Fox or Breitbart or The White Power Hour, so he legitimately may not know who she is. Hell, he probably has trouble separating Harry and William. It's quite likely he thought they were talking about Merkel and was confused as to how the German leader had married into the Royal Family.
Click to expand...

His boys will certainly get on well with our boys. They all like shooting for sport dear cuddly lovable animals and showing them off as trophies.

The grouse and foxes around England's green and pleasant land need to be afraid, very afraid, of the forthcoming days when Eric and thingy meet up with William and Harry.
 
Foolmewunz said:
Not sure about that. She's not a fixture on Fox or Breitbart or The White Power Hour, so he legitimately may not know who she is. Hell, he probably has trouble separating Harry and William. It's quite likely he thought they were talking about Merkel and was confused as to how the German leader had married into the Royal Family.
Click to expand...

I was a bit frightened by how reasonable an explanation that is.

But then I read the entire transcript and it is obvious that he understands that she was an American citizen that moved to the UK.
 
GlennB said:
I'm with Lurch on this. He was informed about her comments - with which he was unaware - and it was made clear that Markle's comments were quite strong. At that point 'nasty' can relate to her as a person ('she's nasty'), or to her comments ('she was nasty about me').

That said, even a wet-behind-the-ears politician knows how to avoid making awkward responses at times like this, and at the very least his denial should have made clear the context of the denial. If he's suggesting he didn't even use the word then ... it's just Trump and he just spews whatever drivel is in his head in the moment.
Click to expand...

And I am against Lurch for the very same reason.

If he meant that her comments were nasty, then he should have said he was misquoted or that he was taken out of context. Forbthe President to say that the whole thing was completely fabricated with a malicious intent is BS of the first water. This is not a simple case of his saying one thing and meaning another.
 
Ladewig said:
And I am against Lurch for the very same reason.

If he meant that her comments were nasty, then he should have said he was misquoted or that he was taken out of context. Forbthe President to say that the whole thing was completely fabricated with a malicious intent is BS of the first water. This is not a simple case of his saying one thing and meaning another.
Click to expand...

As I also mentioned. But I think you're giving him far too much credit for clear thinking. I suspect he's been advised to deny it and fall back on one particular meaning of 'nasty'.
 
Trebuchet said:
Except the interviewer didn't use the word "nasty". That was pure Trump. Here's the link.

(snip)
Click to expand...

True, the interviewer didn't use the word 'nasty' but he said she made some remarks that 'weren't very nice' and that she would move to Canada if he got elected. I can see how those can be interpreted as being 'nasty'. I abhor Trump with every fiber of my being but, in this case, he was not calling Markle herself 'nasty' but was referring to her remarks.
 
Ladewig said:
And I am against Lurch for the very same reason.

If he meant that her comments were nasty, then he should have said he was misquoted or that he was taken out of context. Forbthe President to say that the whole thing was completely fabricated with a malicious intent is BS of the first water. This is not a simple case of his saying one thing and meaning another.
Click to expand...

No, I didn't know that she was nasty.
Click to expand...

I think this is a case of what he said being reasonably interpreted in two different ways. Grammatically, he could be referring to her personally or to her remarks. In context, it makes more sense to me that he was referring to her remarks, especially in light of what he said next:

The Sun: "Is it good having an American princess though, Mr. President?"

Trump: "I think it's nice. I think it's nice. I'm sure she'll do excellently. She'll be very good. She'll be very good. I hope she does."
Click to expand...


I never called Meghan Markle 'nasty.'
Click to expand...

He is not saying the whole thing was fabricated; he is saying that he didn't call Markle 'nasty' in the way it was being reported by some media. It pains me to say anything to defend him and we have a lot to rightly criticize this POS for, but I don't think this is one of them.
 
Stacyhs said:
True, the interviewer didn't use the word 'nasty' but he said she made some remarks that 'weren't very nice' and that she would move to Canada if he got elected. I can see how those can be interpreted as being 'nasty'. I abhor Trump with every fiber of my being but, in this case, he was not calling Markle herself 'nasty' but was referring to her remarks.
Click to expand...

His exact words: "I didn't know she was nasty". Nothing about her words.
 
I trust Trump plugged his bottom up so he would not gag the queen, etc. with his constant trumping!!!!!
 
Trebuchet said:
His exact words: "I didn't know she was nasty". Nothing about her words.
Click to expand...

I know what his exact words were. I can read. I can also read things in context. I can also acknowledge that his words can be correctly interpreted in two ways: 1) SHE is nasty or 2) her REMARKS were nasty. However, it is more logical that he was referring to her remarks because that is what he was being asked about.
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.”
Click to expand...
(The Sun)

Donald Trump has revealed his shock at Meghan Markle’s “nasty” comments about him
Click to expand...

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).”
Click to expand...

Not even that rag tabloid is claiming Trump called Meghan herself "nasty". I despise Trump as much as you do, but I also refuse to attack him for something it's clear to me he did not do just because of my personal disgust for him. That would make me no better than him.
 
You know, I'm still not sure if Trump was elected in spite of the universal and strenuous efforts of the MSM to prevent it, or if he was installed as a hate figure, as a further wedge to accelerate fragmenting US (and perhaps Western) society. In my lifetime I've never seen anything like 'Trump derangment syndrome' - even the Idiot Prince, GWB, with his neocon cronies and their coopting of the US and UK military into utterly destroying Iraq, never generated anything like this hysteria among the left and self-styled "intelligentsia".
 
Over a million anti-Trump protesters are expected in London over the next couple of days. GO, LONDON!

More than one million Londoners are ready to demonstrate against Donald Trump’s visit to the UK next month, a survey suggests.

A staggering 13 per cent of the city’s 8 million residents say they are “likely” to join the protest, which would make it among the biggest in the country’s history.

An even higher proportion of 18- to 24-year-olds – one in five – said they expect to march on the streets during the state visit, which will take place on 3-6 June.
Click to expand...
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...isit-when-london-protests-blimp-a8915331.html
 
If he can be put straight in his darkened, armoured car that he can't see out of, driven through some city he doesn't know, and arrive to talk with a bunch of white people he wouldn't recognise...why can't all that be done in the USA? Why send the sack-of-crap all the way to the UK? Save all that money and send him to Birmingham, AL instead.
 
I was just listening to BBC news when they pointed out that part of the etiquette of dining with Her Maj. is to be sure to allow her to finish first. I wonder if the orange Piggy McPigface will manage that?
 
GlennB said:
I was just listening to BBC news when they pointed out that part of the etiquette of dining with Her Maj. is to be sure to allow her to finish first. I wonder if the orange Piggy McPigface will manage that?
Click to expand...

Sure, just serve vegetables. No way is he going to touch mushy peas...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom