>>2143873 l/b

No. She is required strictly to be apolitical, I think a lot of the animus concering our Queen is becaue US anons simply do not undrstand our constitution and realise that the Queen's powers are invested in her Ministers, i.e. the elected government. She cannot act apart from through the democcratically elected government. It is my observation that many US anons mistekenly believe that our Queen has powers similar to your Presidents. That is just not th case. As I said before, the best thing she does ist o prevent upstarts like Obama occupying a position that is available to fraudsters in a \repulblic but not in our Constitutional Monarchy.

Btw, thank you for your civil reply ad genuine enquiry. I wish that more anons were cut from the same cloth. Many of them sound exactly like the Dems in the Judiciary Oversight Committee hearing - irrationally blind and stupid.

>>2144094

True. The Queen is captive to the government of the day and she is constitutionally bound to accept the will of the electorate as expressed by the Government of the day.

At least under our Constitutional Monarchy it is not possible for the government of the day to capture the Monarchy or, in the case of the US, the Presidency, which is what has occurred until Trump. "They thought she would ever lose"

>>2144140

If a government is about to collapse, a general election is called. The Queen can onlt rubberstamp the will of the electorate. Again, I thank you for your honest enquiry because I think that ther is a huge amount of ignorance on this board concerning our Monarchy and its powers.

>>2144290

Indeed. True, freedom loving Brits like me embrace DJT. But I also love our constitutional monarchy and, if US anons really understood how it works, I think they may love it, too. What I don't like is that our government (nothing to d with the queen) has been overtaken by liberal lefties in the mould of Commie. Jeremy Corbyn. And even Theresa May who is head of an ostensibly Conservative government, is a Socialist/Globalist.

>>2144394

And you, Sir, should go back to Antifa since you share the same capacity for reasoned debate.

>>2144390

Interesting - had never thought of that. Multiple meanings…

Will hold that possibility at the back of my mind as I keep tabs on the news. Thanks for pointing it out.

>>2144517

The Queen is Protestant, C of E and until very recently it wa not permitted or a Monarch to even marray a Roman Catholic, never mind become Sovereign. Again, I see a huge anmount of ignorance from US anons concerning the British Monarchy. And, to be honest, until lasy October when through some weird, circuituous route I landed on the cans just as Q started to post, I knew very little about he US Constitution. But I have since learned a lot and now hope that I don't speak about it from total ignirance as sone anons speak about our British Monarchy and unwritten Constitution.

Peace, friends We're all on the same side.

>>2144630

Lol! Well, if you have been captivated b yDavid Icke's lizard fantasy, there's little hope for you in the land of reason and realty that I inhabit. Good luck to you, sire, but I'll leave the reptilian fantasy to the more gullible US anons. Brits are a sceptical lot, on the whole.

>>2144621

TY. I appreciate that.

>>2144679

>he British are by far the most ignorant about the Queen, because they are brainwashed by their own families from birth.

And your authority for that statement is…??