The King is interfering in the Democratic process in the USA

I agree he shouldn’t go. Surely they could pretend his health isn’t good enough. Trump is a maniac and I don’t know why we are pretending he isn’t . Besides all the things that went before he went into Iran with no plan for getting out. Utter madness!

He should go. The King has to show he is above politics. Trump will not be there forever .
It would be a grave insult to the USA not to go.
His personal feelings do not come into it and he probably has a low opinion of Trump but duty above all is his motto.

I think he shouldn’t go as well but because he obviously has consulted the PM on this I imagine Starmer has endorsed his visit. But imho is the wrong call, it will make Trump feel the monarchy supports his decision to wage an illegal war and pump up his ego no end. Expecting Trump not to capitalise on this is as naive as it is risible.

Um - Trump says one thing then does another.

The King is a figurehead- albeit a very important one - so I can't see why his visit would be seen as an endorsement of Trump by anyone but hardcode MAGA.

But if HRH has accepted an invitation, given that the Royal family are supposed to be above politics, if he feels an obligation to stand by his word, that could be in pointed opposition to Trump's practice of saying one thing & doing the opposite.

HM, not HRH.

He's hardly interfering in usa democratic process. He was invited by the president and is going. Much as I feel he shouldn't go, diplomatically it is probably the correct action to take.

I don't think he should go however, it's my understanding that he's doing so at the wishes of the Government. If this is the case I think this is another mistake from KS as was the decision to allow the US military to use our bases.

He is going to mark 250 years of Independence, it’s been planned for a long time. He was invited by Trump, and for him not to go would be very controversial in the current circumstances. I’d rather he didn’t, and I’m sure he and the government would both rather he didn’t too, but not going would be a diplomatic disaster.

What utter nonsense. The King has been invited by Trump, and does his duty to his country as best he may; doubtless his diplomatic skills and good manners will go some way to alleviate the very poor impression Starmer has created.

If Charles doesn't go William would have to go. The monarchy is surely above lying their way out of attending unsavoury events.

TwiceAsNice

I agree he shouldn’t go. Surely they could pretend his health isn’t good enough. Trump is a maniac and I don’t know why we are pretending he isn’t . Besides all the things that went before he went into Iran with no plan for getting out. Utter madness!

Starmers announcement today about "closer ties with Europe " is the first step towards the Butterandjam prediction;;

that the royal visit will be cancelled at the last possible minute.

" So sorry, King is indisposed"

Boz

He should go. The King has to show he is above politics. Trump will not be there forever .
It would be a grave insult to the USA not to go.
His personal feelings do not come into it and he probably has a low opinion of Trump but duty above all is his motto.

I doubt very much that a nation founded on the very principle of being emphatically anti-monarchy will be insulted by not getting a visit from a king.

This same nation last week— a couple hundred years-plus after fighting to separate completely and permanently from the monarchy—had thousands across their vast nation rally in a demonstration they called ‘No Kings’. All because of Trump somewhat behaving like a king.

Americans won’t be insulted if the king doesn’t visit, but their wannabe king in the White House would be. I suppose it all comes down to how Charles wants the wannabe king to perceive him, but Trump is not the ‘USA’ itself.

Casdon

He is going to mark 250 years of Independence, it’s been planned for a long time. He was invited by Trump, and for him not to go would be very controversial in the current circumstances. I’d rather he didn’t, and I’m sure he and the government would both rather he didn’t too, but not going would be a diplomatic disaster.

Agree with this. Poor King and poor Queen. The King will have to lay on all his diplomatic talents and as usual rise to the occasion and benefit of the Nation.

eazybee

What utter nonsense. The King has been invited by Trump, and does his duty to his country as best he may; doubtless his diplomatic skills and good manners will go some way to alleviate the very poor impression Starmer has created.

I don’t think it is utter nonsense at all. And I don’t think Starmer has given a poor impression. I do believe that Trump has given a very poor impression as a president of a super power by waging an illegal war and then insulting every European leader who finds his behaviour highly damaging and increasingly erratic and so want no part of the chaos he is presently creating in the ME.
I was previously no fan of Starmer but his stance with regard to Trump has elevated him substantially in my opinion, and national pollls show I am not alone.

Our late Queen and present King must have meet every kind of dictator, tyrant and n’er do well, I am sure he will cope. Of course we don’t know what the present President will have in mind

Calendargirl

HM, not HRH.

You are right, Calendargirl He is "His Majesty King Charles III" not His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales.

He is no longer a prince, he is a king. He was automatically promoted on the death of his mother.

He is there because it is a big anniversary for the United States.
I am sure he would prefer to skip the celebrations, and the inevitable whinges by Trump, but this is nothing to do with the orange peril. To boycott this anniversary would be to make the personality of a temporary head of state more important than the justifiable pride of the nation, despite the man making such a hash of Making America Great Again.

I don't have much of an opinion on the visit, but I can 100% say the Kings visit will not interfere with Democracy on the United States. He actually does not wield that much power here. I wish he did because that would solve so many problems in the US.

I think some people in the US will see it as him legitimizing Trump, but I believe that most of us will see it for what it is, the King doing his job.

I do hope that he doesn't have to stand in a puddle in a tent because the ballroom was stopped by the judge.

(Sarcasm because Trump's argument was he needed the ballroom for the King. As of the thing would have been done in a month. )

One way out of this deplorable situation would be to say the King is unwell and send a very lowly Royal. There’s plenty of them after all - maybe one of the Kent grandchildren.

It would be wrong to use the Kings health as an excuse to postpone or cancel this long planned visit. I’m unhappy about the visit given Trunp’s extraordinarily rude comments about the uk, its PM, its armed services etc. still it’s no more than we expect from the horror in the Whitehouse.

To cancel would be to make Trump more important than the office he holds

The King has had a lifetime of avoiding politics and diplomatic endeavour
I’m sorry but I conclude the visit stands

very poor impression Starmer has created

Please, really how would you wish him to behave?

Using cancer as a cop-out is so wrong, the children and grandchildren of Duke of Kent have never worked as working royals.
Refusing to visit America would make Trump important

To cancel would be to make Trump more important than the office he holds

Spot on, Iam
The King is the ‘better person’ in all this and he knows how to prove it.

I think the general concensus is that we would prefer His Majesty not to go, but like his mother before him, duty will always come first. He will have had exhaustive discussions with the Foreign Office and our Ambassador in Washington and will be well armed diplomatically to avoid any pitfalls. His grace, presence and gravitas will, I’m sure, put his host in the shade.