Italy's Meloni Rebukes Trump Over ‘Begged for Photo’ Claim

Europe is done. The globalists are done.

4 hours ago, BritManToo said:

But you didn't worry when Biden couldn't do the job!

If your party is unable to offer suitable candidates, you must be prepared to lose.

And you are suggesting this make the current situation better? Dem or GOP, american or other, this man is a menace to us all. Nonsensical whataboutery, give it up.

4 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Nearly three years and the dems have not yet selected a candidate for the next election, amazing incompetence it's almost as if you want to lose!

You don’t understand the American election process or timelines do you?

The American system of primaries and general elections is over two years long. For too long IMO. And you suggest that it should be three or four years instead?

3 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

Results may not feel right, but that doesn’t mean they’re wrong.

it is tempting to place blame solely on the individuals who supported Trump at the polls, the reality is far more complicated. voter apathy, entrenched inequities, the modern media landscape, and outdated institutional structures, it becomes evident that each American plays some role in the broader public responsibility for enabling Trump’s rise, and for the subsequent damage wrought by his administration.

Actually, the blame is completely on Kamala and the fools that decided she was their best candidate.

1 hour ago, BritManToo said:

Actually, the blame is completely on Kamala and the fools that decided she was their best candidate.

Actually Kamala would have made quite a good president, as would have Hillary; both were well qualified when they ran, and there’s no question they would have been far better for the US (and for the world) than the toddler currently drooling all over the Resolute Desk.

But your point is well made: the Democrats did NOT factor in the ignorance, racism, and/or misogyny of millions of American voters. In the last election, for instance, many Black and Hispanic men who ordinarily vote Democratic could not bring themselves to vote for a woman, so they voted for Trump or stayed at home.

For the 2028 election, I personally think that Pete Buttigieg would be an excellent candidate; AOC, at 38 years (in 2028), may still be a bit young, but I’d also strongly support her. But sadly, factoring in the overall voting bloc, Americans may not be ready for either. So, you’re right, nominating a white, straight, cisgender male might still be safest -- Gavin Newsom, say, or Jon Ossoff (whoops, scratch that last one; his Jewishness might cost the Democrats some serious votes).

7 minutes ago, Cory1848 said:

Actually Kamala would have made quite a good president, as would have Hillary; both were well qualified when they ran, and there’s no question they would have been far better for the US (and for the world) than the toddler currently drooling all over the Resolute Desk.

 

But your point is well made: the Democrats did NOT factor in the ignorance, racism, and/or misogyny of millions of American voters. In the last election, for instance, many Black and Hispanic men who ordinarily vote Democratic could not bring themselves to vote for a woman, so they voted for Trump or stayed at home.

 

For the 2028 election, I personally think that Pete Buttigieg would be an excellent candidate; AOC, at 38 years (in 2028), may still be a bit young, but I’d also strongly support her. But sadly, factoring in the overall voting bloc, Americans may not be ready for either. So, you’re right, nominating a white, straight, cisgender male might still be safest -- Gavin Newsom, say, or Jon Ossoff (whoops, scratch that last one; his Jewishness might cost the Democrats some serious votes).

Well i think you are jumping the gun a bit !! you have to get rid of the one you have now !! he is a narcissist cravers power he will not go !! you have him for life !!

8 hours ago, BritManToo said:

But he still looks much more competant than Biden ever did.

But, but, but.....Biden!😆

Competant, compitent, compitint!

Started as a good thread but then the usual biden harris blah blah.

4 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Started as a good thread but then the usual biden harris blah blah.

Yep people living in the past !!

8 hours ago, wensiensheng said:

The thing about Biden was that he surrounded himself with very capable people. As a result, overall, the administration did a good job.

A good job on what?

2 hours ago, Cory1848 said:

Actually Kamala would have made quite a good president, as would have Hillary; both were well qualified when they ran,

This made me laugh out loud.

5 minutes ago, TedG said:

A good job on what?

Your view is obviously already decided so I don’t think I will waste my time setting out a non partisan objective review.

I have no links to the USA and couldn’t really careless if it enjoys being a laughing stock. Back to back 80 year old presidents says a lot about the sorry state of its politics.

I can remember that during the Cold War Russia was derided for having a series of very elderly leaders, until Gorbachev came along. But I’m not sure that even they were in their 80’s.

2 hours ago, Cory1848 said:

Actually Kamala would have made quite a good president, as would have Hillary; both were well qualified when they ran, and there’s no question they would have been far better for the US (and for the world) than the toddler currently drooling all over the Resolute Desk.

 

But your point is well made: the Democrats did NOT factor in the ignorance, racism, and/or misogyny of millions of American voters. In the last election, for instance, many Black and Hispanic men who ordinarily vote Democratic could not bring themselves to vote for a woman, so they voted for Trump or stayed at home.

 

For the 2028 election, I personally think that Pete Buttigieg would be an excellent candidate; AOC, at 38 years (in 2028), may still be a bit young, but I’d also strongly support her. But sadly, factoring in the overall voting bloc, Americans may not be ready for either. So, you’re right, nominating a white, straight, cisgender male might still be safest -- Gavin Newsom, say, or Jon Ossoff (whoops, scratch that last one; his Jewishness might cost the Democrats some serious votes).

Unfortunately, it seems to me that qualifications for the job is not a significantly important factor.

I didn’t ever feel that Kamala Harris stood a chance. There is a section of voters who will never vote for a women, so that eroded some support. Then there are some voters that will never vote for a black person, that eroded some more.

She combined both of those factors so was always unlikely to win imho.

23 minutes ago, wensiensheng said:

Your view is obviously already decided so I don’t think I will waste my time setting out a non partisan objective review.

I have no links to the USA and couldn’t really careless if it enjoys being a laughing stock. Back to back 80 year old presidents says a lot about the sorry state of its politics.

I can remember that during the Cold War Russia was derided for having a series of very elderly leaders, until Gorbachev came along. But I’m not sure that even they were in their 80’s.

Since you can't answer the question, I'll accept your surrender.

12 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

It is far more likely that she asked everyone around her to avoid take a photograph of her with the dunce. He is radioactive, at this stage.

I beg to differ she probably wouldn’t mind a photo,that being said I suspect she told him off for causing so much financial pain to the world’s peoples with his Iran fiasco. there was a clip were we weren’t privy to what was said but knowing women as I do he certainly wasent on the receiving end of some pleasant conversation.so his comments was the toddlers way of defending himself from that obiously unpleasant conversation. he is what he is a pretty foul specimen.

At 80, still an attention-seeking child: Look at me, look at me!

It's always fun when somebody tells the nimwit with the emotional development of a 13-year-old how things really are.

She was begging, she was begging, she wanted a picture with the king so bad!

Meloni soon responded, saying in a statement to Trump that “these constant, unprovoked attacks are senseless.”

“As for my popularity, being your friend certainly has not helped it, nor does it depend on my relationship with you. My popularity depends on my ability to defend Italy’s national interest, and that is exactly what I have always done,” Meloni said in a post on Instagram. She added that “in any case, my popularity is none of your concern. I suggest you focus on yours.”

https://apnews.com/article/trump-meloni-nato-italy-g7-photo-ab350c75202462f5da33a1eb0a761dd1

12 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

Well i think you are jumping the gun a bit !! you have to get rid of the one you have now !! he is a narcissist cravers power he will not go !! you have him for life !!

A year ago I was more concerned, as you are, that Trump (himself) would attempt to stay on in power beyond 2028, but seeing his rapid health decline (and mental decline) over the past year, I’d say it’s more likely at this point that he doesn’t even survive until 2028. Take this whole Meloni fiasco -- I’m sure, in his own mind, he conjured the scenario in which she begged him for a photo together, “reenacting” it over and over, to the point where he came to believe it actually happened. (I have personal fantasies, too, but I can generally tell them apart from reality, and I don’t boast about them publicly …)

What’s more concerning at this point are the active efforts on the part of the Republican Party to rig the voting system in its favor, to ensure that Republicans win elections even when they get fewer votes. This is pure authoritarianism, and there are many younger operatives in Trump’s orbit who are fully behind it.

In any event, I think it’s important for the Democratic Party at this point to put forward their best candidates capable of generating the broadest possible support, to attract disaffected Trump voters. Unfortunately, I think this probably limits them to white men. A (former) Trump voter who cannot bring himself to vote for Kamala Harris might in fact vote for Gavin Newsom.

10 hours ago, TedG said:

This made me laugh out loud.

Comparing résumés, there’s no question that both Clinton and Harris were much better qualified for the presidency than their opponent (and don’t start on his experience as a “businessman”). So why are you laughing? Because they’re women? You don’t like how they “cackle”? Q.E.D.

7 minutes ago, Cory1848 said:

Comparing résumés, there’s no question that both Clinton and Harris were much better qualified for the presidency than their opponent (and don’t start on his experience as a “businessman”). So why are you laughing? Because they’re women? You don’t like how they “cackle”? Q.E.D.

They were both terrible candidates. Harris is especially dumb, she is a product of the California political system that doesn't elect the best and the brightest. Hilary's only accomplishment was marrying Bill Clinton.

10 hours ago, wensiensheng said:

Unfortunately, it seems to me that qualifications for the job is not a significantly important factor.

I didn’t ever feel that Kamala Harris stood a chance. There is a section of voters who will never vote for a women, so that eroded some support. Then there are some voters that will never vote for a black person, that eroded some more.

She combined both of those factors so was always unlikely to win imho.

I actually thought Kamala would win, given the laughable weaknesses of her opponent, but I’m afraid you’re right. This time, it seems, the Democrats would best serve the nation’s interests by putting forward a white, straight male.

The American electorate in general has been a huge disappointment. Women have won elections to become head of government worldwide in Christian-majority countries (Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox), Muslim countries, Buddhist countries, Hindu countries, Jewish countries, Shinto countries. Maybe it’s a superpower thing. Russia hasn’t had a woman leader since Catherine the Great, and for China you’d have to go back to the Zhou Dynasty.

14 minutes ago, TedG said:

Hilary's only accomplishment was marrying Bill Clinton.

In 1974, a 26-year-old Hillary Rodham * (later Clinton) served as a staff attorney for the impeachment inquiry staff advising the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate scandal. Under the supervision of Chief Counsel John Doar, she researched legal precedents and procedures regarding presidential impeachment.

-- and that she was fired is a debunked rumor. * she married ill Clinton 1975.

Yeah, it was sad to see Meloni lose it at the G7 over Trump.

They were on good terms a while back.

I think Trump was going around saying "I'm the boss" at that meeting.

I have to admit he lacks diplomacy and is way too arrogant and condescending towards other leaders and he is p*ssing people off. Of course the US is much more powerful than Italy militarily. But no need to rub it in other leader's faces.

23 minutes ago, TedG said:

They were both terrible candidates. Harris is especially dumb, she is a product of the California political system that doesn't elect the best and the brightest. Hilary's only accomplishment was marrying Bill Clinton.

Clinton was a US senator and also secretary of state. Harris has more than two decades of political experience and is anything but dumb. Trump, on the other hand, is dumb as mud: he lost his father’s money and found success only as a carnival barker and game show host (and grifter, as it turns out; he’s good at that!). We may simply have different definitions of the word “dumb.”

Meloni Tells Trump to Focus on His Own Popularity

Full story: https://aseannow.com/topic/1397178-meloni-tells-trump-to-focus-on-his-own-popularity/

Seems to be good advice she is giving the old pedo !!

18 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

And this will achieve What !!!!! the whole world know trump is a liar !

Never mind the world; with this issue, I'm focused on America and Americans, who have been bombarded by the endless, unchecked, lies of Trump, and, especially his very effective, unchecked, use of the Nazi Big Lie strategy. With Big Lie, you tell a big lie often enough and loud enough and, if not countered strongly, the big lie eventually takes hold with a percentage of the population.

Trump's biggest Big Lie is his lie that the 2020 election was 'stolen' from him. He has been allowed to run amok with this lie, and countless others, by a weak Press and an even weaker Congress. And, after telling it, not challenged strongly enough, so often and so loudly, we now have 28% of Americans believing the lie, with another 19% 'Not Sure'. Those are depressingly big numbers for a big lie. But, apparently not big enough for Trump, who has spouted another whopper of big lie, saying that 82% of Americans think the 2020 election was rigged.

We have 23% of Independent voters believing the lie, and 50% of Republican voters believing it. Independent voters are now the largest single voting bloc in America, at 45% of adults. It's not good for America that 23% of them, plus 9% of Democrats, believe this Big Lie.

What I hope would be achieved, with a stronger Press, would be, for once, a not 'business as usual', weak, unchecked approach with Trump's lies, letting them sail by and on to the next question. There should be a concerted effort by the Press to not move on when Trump tells a lie, but to focus on it and call the lie out strongly, tag-teaming if necessary.

No reporter asks another question until the lie is put down for the lie that it is. If Trump gets mad and storms out, so be it--that will work to call attention to the lie--and attention to a lie is what is needed, and what we haven't had. Recently there have been a few, small efforts by one or two members of the Press but it's been way too little, and, perhaps, way too late.

If there was a strong, united effort put forth by the Press, and more also done by Congressional men and women with a conscience, what I also hope would be achieved would be a renewed appreciation in the US for the importance of truth, which has taken a severe, but hopefully not fatal, beating under Trump. While likely too late for Trump, there is always the future to consider, with Trump wannabes, especially Vance, in the wings.

13 minutes ago, newnative said:

Never mind the world; with this issue, I'm focused on America and Americans, who have been bombarded by the endless, unchecked, lies of Trump, and, especially his very effective, unchecked, use of the Nazi Big Lie strategy. With Big Lie, you tell a big lie often enough and loud enough and, if not countered strongly, the big lie eventually takes hold with a percentage of the population.

Trump's biggest Big Lie is his lie that the 2020 election was 'stolen' from him. He has been allowed to run amok with this lie, and countless others, by a weak Press and an even weaker Congress. And, after telling it, not challenged strongly enough, so often and so loudly, we now have 28% of Americans believing the lie, with another 19% 'Not Sure'. Those are depressingly big numbers for a big lie. But, apparently not big enough for Trump, who has spouted another whopper of big lie, saying that 82% of Americans think the 2020 election was rigged.

We have 23% of Independent voters believing the lie, and 50% of Republican voters believing it. Independent voters are now the largest single voting bloc in America, at 45% of adults. It's not good for America that 23% of them, plus 9% of Democrats, believe this Big Lie.

What I hope would be achieved, with a stronger Press, would be, for once, a not 'business as usual', weak, unchecked approach with Trump's lies, letting them sail by and on to the next question. There should be a concerted effort by the Press to not move on when Trump tells a lie, but to focus on it and call the lie out strongly, tag-teaming if necessary.

No reporter asks another question until the lie is put down for the lie that it is. If Trump gets mad and storms out, so be it--that will work to call attention to the lie--and attention to a lie is what is needed, and what we haven't had. Recently there have been a few, small efforts by one or two members of the Press but it's been way too little, and, perhaps, way too late.

If there was a strong, united effort put forth by the Press, and more also done by Congressional men and women with a conscience, what I also hope would be achieved would be a renewed appreciation in the US for the importance of truth, which has taken a severe, but hopefully not fatal, beating under Trump. While likely too late for Trump, there is always the future to consider, with Trump wannabes, especially Vance, in the wings.

While i whole heartily agree i still come back to "And this will achieve What" all i can see is trump getting mad and walking out !! he needs to get out of office ! which i can see is going to be a big problem for you yanks !! he will fight tooth and nail before he leaves if that !! you have him for life!! good post !

21 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

And this will achieve What !!!!! the whole world know trump is a liar !

But his MAGA fans don't want to know so here is his record, put in a MAGA friendly way......

Let's see now......

Donald trump lied about the money his father gave him, he lied about his bone spurs, he lied about where his father was born, he lied about where Barrick Obama was born, he lied to his first wife while sleeping with his second, he lied to his second wife while sleeping with his third, and he lied to his third wife while sleeping with a playmate and porn star, he lied about his fate university, his fake charity and his fake net worth, he lied about helping clear rubble at ground zero, about his businesses, about his taxes, about the size of his inauguration crowd, about his "perfect" phone calls, about hush money he paid, the sexual abuse he committed, the classified documents he stole, the insurrection he incited, and the election he lost.....

So who would you believe, Meloni or trump??

Enough to be going on with at this moment in time, enough for even the dumbest of MAGAs to understand, but then again when you are dumb and part of a cult, what the cult leader says, goes, lies et al.

On 6/20/2026 at 11:59 AM, BritManToo said:

Nearly three years and the dems have not yet selected a candidate for the next election, amazing incompetence it's almost as if you want to lose!

No party has selected a candidate - the presidential candidate selection process hasn't even started for any of them yet.

The first presidential primaries will be in 2028.