Amal Lawyer · interview · News · Office wear · Press

New BBC video Amal Clooney: Donald Trump should be challenged on his views about Muslims


In a BBC video, Amal Clooney says she is perplexed by the success of Donald Trump in the race for the White House.
She says the front runner for the Republican presidential nomination should be challenged on his extreme views.


49 thoughts on “New BBC video Amal Clooney: Donald Trump should be challenged on his views about Muslims

  1. I wonder if Amal’s human rights concerns include the rise of Wahhabism (the extremist form of Islam)? Why do I mention this? Well. prior to seeing Amal’s BBC comments on Trump’s extremist views, I happened to see the headlines about a Canadian who was beheaded by Islamic militants in the Philippines. Then there was Jim Foley, a journalist,David Haines, an aid worker, Herve Goudel, a mountain guide, The list is quite long and includes innocent noncombatant women and children. Why isn’t Amal speaking out about this, instead of Donald Trump? I wonder which is worse…for a candidate to suggest that a hold be put on admitting refugees who cannot be properly vetted as their state infrastructure has been destroyed or religious-oriented terrorist groups that murder innocents in the name of their religion?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Why are you still here defending Trump and slamming Amal ? The Islam is not the ISIS. The extremism is a danger for all us. To use people’s fears to create hate it is not the best way to manage a country.


      1. Totally agree nati. I absolutely hate how people try to clean up what he said. The way the person above out it sounds logical. That is NOT ehat donald trump said. He said get rid of all muslims and kill the family members of terrorists. @amelie if ur cousin killed someone and u had nothing to do with it, is it fair to kill u?
        As always i am dumbfounded by people who defens trump. To be frank i think thy are idior and downright evil. It was people like trump that encouraged extremism. All of amals points were completely spot on. While i dont agree with everything she does (i find an issie with her overly extravagant spending) she is a logical sensical caring human being.


    2. I think you have not heard the question the reporter on this interview – the question was about US policy and she answers (there is no question about what you mention)

      your mind is a bit twisted

      Nati thanks for publishing my comment


    3. Amelie: I believe Amal criticised the Maldives for fuelling Islamic extremism. Trump’s comments were not in any way qualified as you suggest, his base level of contempt for the beliefs of others was plain. It is perfectly possible, as Amal has shown, to condemn Islamic extremism and still believe in the basic humanity and peaceful nature of the vast majority of the world’s muslims. Why? Because the vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists and treating ‘Islam’ and Muslims as if it and they really are a warped cult of violence only feeds the terrorist ideology and furthers their cause.

      Of course Amal could have talked in a more nuanced way about Trump’s appeal – there’s a lot to say on the subject. But clearly that was the curveball question for which she hadn’t prepared. Her tone does risk dismissing those who support Trump, when really the issue needs serious consideration.

      Liked by 2 people

    4. Amelie- what in the world does your post have to do with Amal’s interview with the BBC reporter? This sounds like your agenda. I encourage to listen to his questions and her answers.


    5. Ameli:
      She spoke about ISIS and that these people have nothing to do with the 1.5 billion muslims. She already spoke of ISIS followers when she had visited the Maldives. She said, that a lot of Maldivians are recruited by ISIS and that this should be stopped.
      Please explain, what she else should say. That she doesn`t agree to the cruel behaviour or what? Sorry. I am not English and so it is hardly to understand for me what you want her to do or to say.
      I am really happy that she speaks of Donald Trump – I think the whole world does it. Such a mighty state like America cannot be reigned by such a demagogue.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. And how about Amal’s Chanel suit or top? After all, this is Amal Clooney Style Blog and not a blog on U.S. Politics 101…Thanks Nati for your patience!

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Nati, I suggest your not posting stupid/nonsense comments like Amelie’s and co + fans, always the same ones. They are an insult to all the wonderful contributors to this blog, an insult to intelligence.
    The crazy ugly racist clown running for republican presidential nomination doesn’t deserve having his name mentioned here in comments. It is too much ! I think I don’t have any more patience for that, and it doesn’t make our world any better …

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I liked the first part of her interview, she was fluent, coherent and well prepared, though I found her reasons for why she is involved in the case to be juvenile (“she’s inspiring and it makes me angry”). She could’ve given more sophisticated reasoning commensurate with her knowledge base.

    I also liked the second part of the interview in Trump as her reasons were sensible but delivered with so many fillers (“you know” “you know” repeatedly) that it detracted from her message. I find fillers distracting. They drown the message, impair the delivery by diminishing the ability to align pacing, pauses and vocal variation to content. They make ppl seem uncertain, unprepared and unknowledgeable. They take up time and add no value to discussion. When you add sarcasm in intonation, as Amal often does, it comes across as petty, not sophisticsted reasoning as one would expect from a barrister.

    When wearing a suit, the jacket should not be removed especially in interviews. The same applies for men wearing a suit.

    Her make up – awesome again – I love the natural look on her. The garish make up she often uses is very costume-y. This look is professional.

    I feel sorry for her. She puts herself out there in the public eye, which leaves her open to criticism – that is a conscious choice of hers – but I don’t feel her skills are up to it just yet and she comes out looking like an amateur. She is improving however – no more holding props and playing or flipping her hair.

    I want to see her succeed but I find some of what she does so frustrating as she should know better.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I get criticised for calling Amal a junior barrister, but it really does show. She does not have enough courtroom experience to be a fine advocate – and this is why her public speaking is often underwhelming. She will get there in time.

      I agree that her reasoning is often unsophisticated. This may be due to the time constraints of television interviews or an inability to think on her feet. Who knows. As I have said, she is not one of the stars of her call and again this shows in her reasoning. Perhaps her books are more impressive – I get the sense from what her colleagues say that she is much better on paper.

      However, I do credit her for highlighting these individual legal causes which are very much deserving of public support. I am still undecided on whether political lobbying is an effective strategy – I don’t think it helped at all in the Fahmy case.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. ESR: I disagree with everything you criticize her about in your post. You tend to get hung up on YOUR definition of a barrister and what you believe a barrister should say and do and how a barrister should act. There is no one way for any profession to act regarding how they speak unless you are talking about professional integrity. How and what someone says in an interview is different from how and what one says in a court proceeding.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Either one has the gift of speech, the gift ultimately of persuasion through speech, or one does not. Either one has the gift of stunning reason, or one does not. That much is apparent within moments of speaking to anyone – be they addressing a political interview, a courtroom, or indeed a gathering of friends. Amal does not have the gift (of speech), that does not mean she cannot improve with practise. It simply does not come naturally to her.

        As for your suggestion that I typecast a particular type of barrister as the only type – I am simply commenting on Amal with reference to the standard of her own set, and her own area of law. It would be unfair of me to do otherwise. Let me explain. I am speaking in the context of the Bar, because it is one of the few remaining ‘voice’ professions. We are adVOCATEs. It is true that there are areas of law where barristers rarely appear in courts – chancery springs to mind – but Amal’s set is well-known for being court work heavy (what with the public, Crime, immigration etc.), and so it is not at all unfair to comment on Amal’s advocacy abilities by *this* standard. It is her own standard. And, I feel, she falls short – both in this interview, in previous speeches, and in her brief appearance at the ECtHR.

        Having said that, I wholeheartedly agree with the content of her interview.


    2. Anna- You have a choice: to criticize her or to not criticize her. You said she puts herself out there and is thus open for criticism and that is exactly what you chose to do. What exactly is your reason for criticizing her comments, her tone, taking off a suit jacket, etc. other than to tarnish her?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Hi Jackson,

        Thank you for directly commenting on my post so I can reply directly to yours.

        My reasons for “criticising her comments, her tone”, etc etc would probably be exactly the same reasons that have driven you to “criticise my comments, my tone” etc.

        If you look into yourself, you might find the answer.

        We keyboard warriors are, after all, much the same – irrespective of who we choose to “criticise” – if that is indeed what is going on here.

        I tend to think of it as merely voicing an opinion that reflects my values and thoughts and take no offence or umbridge when ppl post different comments.

        Have a great day Jackson. I hope it includes some pleasant thoughts about others in it. Maybe some tolerance too.

        Kind regards,


      2. Also Jackson – she reads this and is amending her public image and behaviours according. I feel im doing her a service as she’s surrounded herself with ‘yes’ ppl 😉. Told you we are alike. Good citizens concerned about others.


      3. Dear all, I really can’t get my head around some things
        Why is that someone who teaches ethics amongs others, criticizing so many others on this blog.
        Why is it that people are telling Nati what to publish and what not. This is a style blog, but style goes so much further than just clothes. In fact it is rather funny that on a blog about a barrister who stands for and is defending freedom of speech, people tell other people to shut up.
        I am glad this blog goes often further than just the exterior, and subjects are discussed which are really important. This mix makes this blog interesting to read.
        And my trust is in Nati to do the right things.


      4. Jackson- I have been reading your comments for the last few months. I don’t understand your need to attach anyone who even casually criticize Amal.

        Life is not all binary. Not all critical or all lauding. I read Anna’s comment as both flattering and not so flattering. But why only see the negative?

        I also find it ‘peculiar’ that you don’t attack our resident legal scholar ESR? I think if ESR wanted, she would tear your emotionally-laiden thin reactive responses and cut them down. Quit the reflective attacking, and allow the rest of us to enjoy Nati’s blog.


  5. Great texture in this Oscar de la Renta suit. Who can ever go wrong in Oscar and she definitely scores in this selection. Pretty top also. Anna makes a good point to keep the jacket on. Her arms “scared” me to see the shoulder bones squared off and her upper arm as skinny as her forearm. No muscle tone & scary thin. Hair and makeup, also pretty.


  6. I do not feel Amelie should be “POUNCED” “ATTACKED” “CRUCIFIED” for her input. She has a particular vision, thought, viewpoint, perspective, ….and that is okay. It doesn’t mean you have to agree/disagree with her.
    How boring life would be if we all thought the exact same way, said the exact same things, and never thought differently, right? 🙂


  7. Amal really does Oscar De La Renta justice wearing this piece…very feminine…she looks lovely. As far as politics is concerned..I say the world could benifit with less Donald Trumps and more Amals in it!


  8. I like the suit when she wears the entire suit- was she on two different shows and took the jacket off for the second one as a change? Re: Trump- I dont think she could have escaped that question if she tried to due to the fact that she hosted Hillary Clinton at her HOME and raised millions for her- OF course she had to chime in about Trump- and if she wasnt prepared THAT is perplexing lol! I do think she needs to proceed with caution at the fact that millions are coming out to vote for Trump- and she pretty much gave a tongue in cheek insult to them. “Them” being AMericans who live in this country and ” them” being the voters. She is not a US citizen nor can she vote.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. The great thing about Amal is that she is using her new found fame to highlight cases and atrocities and affected persons that a lot of people haven’t heard of.

    Even people with a sole interest in fashion are inadvertently receiving new facts and pondering topics that they wouldn’t have otherwise known about. And that is the unique power of Amal.

    For the first time in a long time we have a woman who is empowered, self made, highly educated and articulate who happens to love fashion and married to George.

    Yes, Amal is not a seasoned media speaker but we shouldn’t expect her to be. She will improve with time.

    Nati, it may be a good idea to delete and move the highly political and negative comments (that I scroll and don’t read anyway) to a different tab. That way you don’t have to deal with the negativity and concentrate on your original focus on this blog.

    But I’m also aware that you have a life outside of this and don’t know how you can regulate the content more without delegating.

    Maybe get Amals’ PA? Ha, ha! As it’s obviously can be used as a forum for her now as your audience is big.

    Good luck!


  10. Hmmm, I not sure she should be commenting on American politics at all – although given the fundraiser for Clinton that asked people to give amounts that even her husband described as obscene I guess she’s in the middle of it. Still I can’t help but wonder what the reaction would be if a high profile American went to Britain and publicly involved themselves in their election campaign.

    As to the style issue – the look I like the best is the one on the model for the previous item – the cropped jacket with black bottom – either long full trousers as shown or a short black skirt. I always find these kind of suits a bit too matchy-matchy


    1. I am not sure I understand the argument about commentary on US politics -election year or not. Political leaders can certainly be criticized for public statements related to political choices made by another country – although there are any number of exceptions to this “rule” as well. Private citizens, whether high profile or not, are free to express their opinions in any free and democratic society. There are thankfully limits in some countries on speech which incites hatred. But generally this is not only true but also crucial to democracy. So as a citizen of a country other than the US, I will say publicly that the possibility of either Cruz or Trump being elected to the office of President is terrifying. I am grateful when those with access to the media, from any country in the world, speak out.

      Liked by 1 person

  11. Somebody mentioned here, that Amal did not give any money to support an Intuition, she Visited. How do you know and if you are right, who are we, that we can damm it?
    By the way, what is the value of her work, all the Time she spends on the very important interests? She could lie 24 Hours a day on the beaches of the whole world and go shopping every day, no instead she gives her intellectual Inputs to very important Major questions of time.


  12. I realize that everyone on here except me likes to believe that Amal reads this blog or that her family reads this blog or that her close friends read this blog and tell her based on the criticisms of her what she needs to change but she has made it clear in an interview that she does not read the comments. And why should she? The nature of the criticism is rather bizarre to me. If everyone said, “In my opinion, …” I might think differently but to go on a blog and criticize her every move and her every word is rather astounding to me. Recently someone said “you do not take your jacket off during an interview” as a criticism of her behavior.” It was said so boldly that I decided to go on the Internet to see perhaps it came from some guide on doing interviews with the BBC. People take their jackets on and off during reporting interviews all the time. Who cares? Why is this important to criticize? The attacks on her are adhominem.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I guess ethics professors have nothing better to do than google interviews with ppl wearing suit jackets or not. Go figure. But those that do, do – those that can’t, teach. And criticise I guess.

      Jackson – instead of commenting on others’ comments – why don’t you comment on Amal’s “news and style”?

      With regards to Amal saying she doesn’t read things about herself – don’t believe everything Amal says – she is a barrister and quite familiar with the power of the spoken word and the power of the press and when to retract, modify or misrepresent or accurately present things.

      On her own work website, she went from being “fluent” in Arabic, to only having “conversational skills”. There is a marked difference.

      Some of what she does is deliberately misleading and driven by PR. But most professionals do that. She is no different in that regard.

      George and Amal read lots of different commentary written about them – that’s they they repeatedly ask tabloids for apologies.

      I have no doubt that Amal’s “people” and Amal herself read this blog.

      Ask Nati.

      And I understand there are two of Amal’s aunts who post here, one of whom reports straight back to Amal’s mother, a PR Queen.


      1. Fredisthere- I look at Amal’s clothes and comment on them. I like her choices in wardrobe. Then I read people’s criticisms of her and they are largely petty and I have no idea why you and others criticize her — the size of her arms, her nose, her jaw, her hair, how she is a junior barrister and not sophisticated and on and on. I do not believe she reads this blog or other blogs. As much as you would like to believe it is the case, there is no causal relationship between what you and others say on a blog and changes in her behavior. We may like to think we are powerful influences on people we do not know and who do not know us but the reality is we are not.


    2. Just thought I would put my hand up and say that I don’t think for a moment that she reads comments here (or anywhere). 🙂 Why on earth would she? Why would any public figure want to subject themselves to the crazy nasty commentary that represents a sadly significant part of internet commentary. Why would she care? I am confident that she doesn’t care and is way too smart to subject herself to such nonsense.


      1. Ballycroy, please do not leave this blog. Your Voice is important. We all should raise the voice against haters and rabble rousing (in German volksverhetzung).

        Liked by 2 people

  13. Hum, I prefer the trousers version with blacks buttons on the top than the skirt one without buttons. A little bit boring for Amal. Oh, she is still elegant and feminine, but a bit plain. I miss her quirky and independent side.


  14. Soll,
    I agree agree and agree and agree with you. In fact, I posted a comment about “one particular” person who continues to “attack” (in a mean spirited way) each and every person every single time there is a new post. However, Nati did not post it. It was referencing the person that you speak of in your comment. Nati did not post it, although she should have for the mere fact that this person attacks everyone and for the good of all to STOP! Thank you Soll for pointing it out to everyone. I did too in a polite manner, but Nati did not post it. I suspect others will continue to comment in the future because this person is predictable in her attack sessions. You can almost “see” who she is going to attack next. Too bad Nati didn’t post MY comment for the good of all. THANK YOU SOLL for adressing this person! 🙂


  15. And ANNA and ESR, too. Thank you for adressing this person, as SOLL did also. I agree, agree, agree, and agree with you fully. I addressed this person to Nati also, but she did not post my comment in reference to getting this person to STOP attacking others who enjoy posting on this blog.


  16. Completely different topic : Nati did you see the trailer for the Met Gala movie called ‘First Monday in May’? I think Amal and George will be in some shots from their last Met Gala.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Thanks to many here for your voices of reason re: the lack of free discourse on this site. I join in that editing out benign comments while allowing one poster to make ad hominem attacks on anyone engaging in ‘normal’ biog. behavior is curious. I too have written multiple posts that were not published. I suggest that the person making the personal attack look up the definition of ad hominem!

    To continue on my point about Amal inserting herself into American politics in several ways, I have to ask additional questions: there is ample evidence in Europe and in her own country (Great Britain) that Amal could have commented on…i.e, David Cameron’s supposed statement (Jan 2016) that Britain in the future could deport Muslim women who don’t learn English to a certain level. This was a statement from a sitting head of state, someone from Amal’s home country and yet she made no pubic statement. What about the Pegida movement in Great Britain? What about the foot dragging of most EU countries-especially Great Britain- in admitting any Syrian (refugees)? Why hasn’t she made public statements on this? Donald Trump is only a candidate for the American presidency; he is not in office. Yet, Amal, someone who is frankly admitted on a Visa to the U.S. (she is a guest), made public statements about him (it doesn’t matter if she used his name or not, the message was clear). She is also fund-raising to help elect a particular candidate for the U.S. presidency.

    If someone uses their platform to make public statements, it’s fair game for anyone to comment right back. I have taken philosophy/ethics courses in high school, undergraduate and graduate school. Free discourse was always allowed.


    1. Amelie, you are slamming me and Amal again. Don’t be surprised if some of your comments don’t have been published. There are some rules here. Personally, I don’t agree with every Amal’s decision, but to criticize her everytime . If you don’t like her it is better if you stop to follow her. Free discourse yes but with respect.


      1. Nati, with due respect to your feelings, I don’t think Amelie is “slamming” you or Amal. She makes an observation and backs it with reason. We may not like her thoughts, but they are sound and coherent and not harmful, to my reading.
        In kindness,
        Freda Fannous


      2. It is something of an art to say truly horrible things while using a kind, rationale and sympathetic voice. But there is no doubt in my mind when I hear it or read it. It is slamming. It is often gratuitous and nasty. Dressed up in finery. I can’t count how many times I have thought this when reading through comments on this blog. Then, and again now, I come to the point where I have simply had enough. I stop reading comments. I make a choice not to take on any of this. It is simply not worth it. The blog posts by the owner of this blog are however just great:-)

        Liked by 1 person

    2. Ameli
      How is it possible to compare our European problems – I agree they exist – with an election in the mightiest state of the whole world, which could – the danger ist reality – be reigned by a Person who slums people of other religion or other countries? This person screams for violence.
      E.g.: The Mexicans who are critized as criminals ( I think this is not the worst he said about these poeple) but they are good enough for low-quality and poorly paid employment.

      Furthermore, who told you, that Amal did not speak of the Problems you mentioned above. You and we do not know everything she says and does.

      Sorry, if people who give ethic courses to children with your attitude – opion – my only words are: please help us God.

      Liked by 1 person

  18. Thank you, Nati. I appreciate it and I get it. And thank you for posting it, after all. 🙂
    Thank you to SOLL, FREDISTHERE, ANNA, ESR for naming, calling out, this one particular person, too, who continually attacks people on every new post. Ignore the “elephant in the room” and the “bully”.


  19. Jackson – you really need to read less ethics and get out into the real world.

    Celebrities, the rich and famous etc, ride on public opinion. It is circular and feeds their celebrity-ism (does that word exist??). And the income generated supports their lifestyles.

    The Clooneys depend on PR to achieve their aims. Hence, photo opportunities, meetings with politicians, fundraisers for the monster that is Hilary Clinton (same beast as Trump, just a different face so we can tell them apart) etc etc (I digress)..

    Anyway, yes, the Clooneys are influenced by public opinion and yes, they control public perception as much as they can. Hence suing tabloids. Hence selling wedding photos to tabloids. Circular. All celebrities do this. How else would they derive their income?

    You should give less lectures and speak to the masses you lecture to. Opinion is widespread out there in the real world and Amal knows this – hence, she ensures radio, TV and print coverage of her interviews and just for good measure to get those that less intellectually inclined, also ensures coverage of her fashion choices.

    The real world Jackson. Amal isn’t an idiot. She’s smart. Get out of the ethics classroom.


    1. I agree with you FREDISTHERE. Jackson has attacked….Oh, a dozen or so people. I could be underestimating. Where did this low class, tactless, and pessimistic person come from? I know how ANNA, FREDISTHERE, AMELIE, SOLL, ESR, and, and, and, and…..feels. This person is “2 SCOOPS OF CRAZY”.to say the very least!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s