By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Donald Trump expressed sympathy for the royal family while aboard Air Force One, regarding the situation surrounding former Prince Andrew. Trump commented on the situation after Buckingham Palace announced Andrew would be known as Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, marking a significant change. Trump’s remarks follow the increased scrutiny of Andrew’s association with Jeffrey Epstein and the stripping of his royal titles and military titles. The former president has a history with both Epstein and Andrew, having previously described both men in positive terms despite growing controversy.
Read the original article here
Donald Trump says he feels “badly” for the royal family after the former Prince Andrew was stripped of his titles, a statement that has sparked a wave of reactions, and it’s a statement that, frankly, invites a lot of examination. It’s a phrase, “I feel very badly,” that seems to roll off the tongue of a man who, at least in the public eye, often appears to lack the capacity for genuine empathy. It’s hard to ignore the implications when the only people he seems to express sympathy for are those embroiled in situations that echo the darkest corners of human behavior.
This isn’t the first time Trump’s words have drawn scrutiny in relation to the Epstein scandal. Remember his comments about Ghislaine Maxwell, where he expressed a wish for her well-being? It’s a pattern, a recurring theme of showing apparent understanding and even sympathy for individuals accused of, or connected to, actions that most would consider reprehensible. The juxtaposition is stark: an apparent lack of compassion for victims, and a readiness to express “badly” to those facing the consequences of potentially terrible actions.
The phrase itself, “I feel badly,” is particularly noteworthy. It underscores a fundamental misunderstanding of the English language, a common occurrence. But it also highlights, perhaps unintentionally, a deeper issue. It’s not just a grammatical error; it’s almost symbolic. It’s like the entire world is on the leaderboard, and he is on top. His focus seems consistently, almost exclusively, on those who, in his view, are experiencing something similar: powerful individuals who, like him, are facing public scrutiny and potential repercussions.
One can’t help but wonder: does he truly feel badly for the royal family, or does this situation resonate with some internal fear? Is he seeing a reflection of his own potential future, where consequences may eventually catch up? The former president’s response invites a whole new set of questions. Does this response not just track, but also reflect a consistent pattern of behavior? It’s a pattern where empathy, at least publicly expressed, seems reserved for those who share a certain profile: wealthy, connected, and potentially facing the consequences of their actions.
The idea of Trump “feeling badly” for Prince Andrew, while seemingly ignoring the victims of Epstein’s actions, is, to many, a glaring red flag. The lack of acknowledgement for those who suffered is jarring, especially when contrasted with the apparent concern for someone accused of enabling such abuse. The fact that the UK’s royal family handled the situation so swiftly, compared to how similar situations are handled in America, is another point to consider.
It’s easy to dismiss these expressions as simply a reflection of shared social circles, the mutual support that often exists among the wealthy and powerful. But the frequency of these pronouncements, combined with the lack of expressed concern for victims, paints a very different picture. It’s a picture of an individual who may have difficulty connecting with the suffering of others, particularly when it doesn’t directly impact him. It underscores, perhaps unintentionally, the very qualities that make him an object of both fascination and condemnation.
One can’t help but also note the irony. Here is a man facing numerous allegations and investigations, expressing sympathy for another. It’s almost as if he’s projecting his own fears onto others, imagining himself in their shoes, facing the fallout of actions that he may, or may not, understand. He has a habit of saying the exact opposite of what a normal person would say, which makes it even more difficult to decipher his true motives.
The overall sentiment is one of discomfort, a feeling that something is profoundly wrong. It is a sentiment that, for many, confirms a long-held suspicion: that his empathy, when it exists, is highly selective, reserved for those who occupy the same rarefied air of wealth, privilege, and the potential for public disgrace.