Trump Hails New King, Queen, Says Biden 'Insulted' UK Skipping Coronation

NewsMax ^ | Saturday, 06 May 2023 | Eric Mack

[rod5591]

Former President Donald Trump says President Joe Biden has "greatly insulted" the U.K. people by skipping King Charles III's coronation Saturday.

"Good Luck and Best Wishes to the wonderful new King and Queen of The United Kingdom," Trump posted to Truth Social. "You are two very Special People. May your Reign be a Long and Glorious One. GOD BLESS YOU BOTH!!!"

But the praise was not effusive for Trump's political rival.

"Joe Biden should have been at the Coronation of King Charles III," Trump wrote in another Truth Social post. "Is that really so much to ask? The people of the U.K. are greatly insulted. No wonder we are losing support all over the World. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!"

[rod5591]

Trump embarrasses me sometimes. Biden didn't attend because the coronation of Charles III because no US President has ever attended the crowning of a British king, ever! it has something to do with how the 13 Colonies had to fight for independence against George III. Does Trump have an aid to vet his internet posts? Hard to imagine DeSantis making such a bonehead play.

[Beowulf9]

He sure knows how to use public relations.

Just as good as the rest of the dems policies.

[Jonty30]

First, Charles is only the head of state of Great Britain in ceremonial position, so it would be inappropriate for the President to show up and recognize King Charles ceremony. At best, you might send a cabinet position to represent the US, if it is called for to be recognize.

Second, I think Trump is just getting his name out there to remind us that he is still around.

Third, the culture of the US has been lost on this point. Almost all the politicians would have heeded the Coronation, because very nearly none of them understand the US does not pay heed to the coronation of kings or queens.

[Sacajaweau]

But Ike didn’t send Mamie...He sent a military contingent.

[MinorityRepublican]

Biden didn't attend because the coronation of Charles III because no US President has ever attended the crowning of a British king, ever! it has something to do with how the 13 Colonies had to fight for independence against George III.

Good point but the next President will probably attend future King William's coronation. Assuming their monarchy survives. And there's a chance that it may be dismantled by then. Charles suck.

[skr]

They’re special alright. Adulterers now in charge of defending the faith.

[Olog-hai]

No, has nothing to do with 1776.

[devere]

Be grateful that Trump is criticizing a Democrat for a change, even if he’s wrong!

[Fledermaus]

That’s only because Elizabeth II was queen for 200 years! /sarc

[dangus]

I’m half surprised Chump didn’t claim DeSantis killed Princess Di.

[FlingWingFlyer]

I thought Bidenskyyy would send some of his real carnival type freaks like Brinson, Levine, Jean-Pierre, Mayorkas, Blinken or Del Toro across the pond to entertain our cousins across the pond. Instead, the idiot sent Dr. Jill and Finnegan dressed up like the Zelenskyy Ukranian Flag. Thankfully, they didn’t refer to the new King and Queen as being “unique” as a couple of English Muffins.

[nickcarraway]

No president should attend a coronation. Just because he’s Scottish, the U.S. doesn’t need to kneel.

[Eleutheria5]

His Majesty is good. No need for Brandon to show up and fart to the tune of G-d Save the King.

[dynachrome]

It’s ok. Bidet would only pass gas or worse and Presidents do not attend coronations of British royalty.

[NeverTyranny]

Any dig at the biden loser is fine by me!

[Kartographer]

To my thinking no President should ever attend a coronation, a state visit is ok but never ever a coronation there is a Blood Debt that will never be wholly paid.

[nickcarraway]

Trump or Charles?

[hanamizu]

They’re special alright. Adulterers now in charge of defending the faith.

---

The title Defender of the Faith was bestowed by the Pope on Henry VIII because the latter wrote an essay denouncing Luther. This was, of course, before Henry took England out the Catholic church but Henry and his heirs have kept the title.

So the founder of the Anglican faith was an adulterer, at least in the eyes of the Catholic church.

[Dr. Sivana]

First, Charles is only the head of state of Great Britain in ceremonial position, so it would be inappropriate for the President to show up and recognize King Charles ceremony.

You make it sound like it is the UK equivalent of the Miss America Pageant. While the King may not rule, it is more than merely ceremonial. Just as Americans do not identify with the whole monarchy thing, we have to understand that the monarch to a British subject is not merely ceremonial. Every week, the Monarch meets with the Prime Minister, we don't know what they talk about, but you can bet that even a non-political Monarch has influence over aspects of the government. In the case of QE II, she learned a whole lot over 70 years that has been useful to any UK Prime Minister wise enough to hear her out.

Even in a ceremonial role, a King or Queen helps set a steady cultural tone for the country, blunting the effects of a cad like Clinton or a saboteur like Obama or a puppet like Biden on these fronts.

The people of England can have a Monarchy if they choose, and our head of State paying respects to a special ally in no way undermines our own preference for a Republican form of government. I would leave the proselytizing to the Communists who demand everyone conform to their way.

[ealgeone]

We did have a President attend: Jill.