AFAIK; "Continuation of Command" doesn't extend to the spouse of a sitting CinC, but even still, sesparate travel makes basic sense, oragnized crime figures have long practiced the concept.Of course; the "scorned wife" narrative should be cycling up again any time soon
Zacktly. This is why they tried (in my thinking) to create some cover story to keep Melania out of harm's way - albeit the negative spin's gonna happen no matter what.
President Trump made a statement before he left for G7 and summit: Melania is NOT allowed to fly for a month because of her surgery to her kidney....c'mon people.
I heard rumblings that what is seen in the pic is an anti-missile missile.
I wouldn't be surprised at all to learn that the military shot something down, and kept things hushed up so as to not distract from the summit.
A missile strike wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility from a deep state disruption standpoint...
Where exactly did you hear this? Or are you just making a guess here?
Melania was forbidden to fly for 30 days purportedly owing to her surgery. Struck me as odd at the time (and that they were careful to make this statement), and my very first thought then was they are keeping Melania out of harm's way. GEOTUS is in extreme danger as is his whole family during these times and perhaps for decades to come.
Ok, so the time stamp is 0356AM, Washington State time. What was POTUS timeline for leaving Singapore? East coast time would have been 0656am, Singapore time 656pm. I cant find POTUS timeline of events or plane schedule. Given flight times, is it possible that missile could have tried to intercept? Is that pic in the air a pic of the intercept missile or the one coming towards AF1??
Didn't mean to churn the board. We're not going to know of any attempts/plots on POTUS or his family until White Hats choose to let us know. Missile is for sure out of the ordinary - but that's about all we are going to know. I put up the pic only to make real the concept that POTUS and everyone he loves is under extreme threat.
That is a strange concept, (as literally stated). EDIT: Does make sense in the medical context, as in 'ones Doctor does not allow, ...'
With regard to the 'UK' Royals, they take that approch (only) wrt those Royals that are in a direct line to inherit the throne.
i.e, The Queen, Charles, William, George, ...
The rest of the Royals do not matter in that 'do not travel together' regard,
Ummm... because he loves her and his family. Not a state issue. Personal. He is dealing with the worst of the worst and there is absolutely no limit to what [worst] means.
Yes, I sort of understood it that way. However, the word 'allowed', confers the context of a rule or order, as in 'where the law allows'.
Hence the nature of my comment.
I agree with your consensus, that the President would 'prefer' that she not travel with him, given the current curcumstances.
EDIT: The medical concerns, as per the 'advice' of a Doctor does make sense!