Amanda Knox DGAF that Donald Trump is ‘very upset’ with her

Amanda Knox at Good Morning America to promote her new book 'Amanda Knox: Waiting to be Heard' in Manhattan

Several weeks ago, one of Donald Trump’s friends spoke to the New York Times. I didn’t pay any attention to it, because it’s honestly profoundly upsetting to me to pay attention to what Trump says and does and I don’t have the energy to care about the sh-t his friends say. But Trump does have one friend, an Italian named George Guido Lombardi. He was profiled in the NYT and amongst other details, Lombardi said that Trump was “‘very upset’ with the ingratitude of Amanda Knox, who supported Hillary Clinton.” I had totally forgotten about this, but back when Amanda Knox was in Italy, on trial, Trump tweeted and gave interviews about Knox’s innocence. He donated to her defense fund and called for America to boycott Italy because of the trial. Well, Knox did support Hillary Clinton. And now she’s written an op-ed about how she doesn’t owe Trump a g–damn thing. You can read the full piece here. Some highlights:

Donald Trump supported me during the worst crisis and most vulnerable moment in my life, defending my innocence when I was on trial in Italy for murder. He is now the president of the United States and reportedly “very upset” with me because I didn’t vote for him. Do I owe him my loyalty? Trump’s remarks were reported by the New York Times in a profile of his neighbor George Guido Lombardi. Yet I received negative backlash from his supporters even before Lombardi’s comments were published. They felt that I owed Trump my allegiance and were outraged at columns I wrote in which I criticized his policies and explained my reasons for endorsing Hillary Clinton.

The message was clear: Trump defended me in the past; how dare I not defend him now? Never mind that Trump doesn’t share my values. If I won’t endorse him, at the very least I should keep my “left-wing lunacies” to myself. This conviction is both undemocratic and dangerous. Just as a person’s support of me should not be based upon my politics or identity, hinging instead on the fact of my innocence, so should my politics hinge on the merits of policy, not personal loyalty.

Yes, Trump donated to my defense. And yes, Trump defended my innocence, recognizing that coercive interrogations produce false testimony authored by the interrogators themselves, a well-studied and documented fact. But Trump claimed the exact opposite in the Central Park Five case, calling for the death penalty even though the accused teens’ rape convictions rested solely on coerced false confessions. Even now he views them as guilty, years after they were exonerated based on DNA evidence.

Trump recognized me as a fellow American who deserved to be assumed innocent until proven guilty, but he condemned the Central Park Five as “other” — guilty until proven innocent. Loyalty motivated Trump to call for all Americans to boycott Italy, even though, ironically, it only served to amplify anti-American sentiment in the courtroom, stacking the deck against me.

There is a kind of loyalty I wholeheartedly support: loyalty to our ideals of due process, equal protection under the law, the freedom to speak one’s mind and to vote according to one’s principles. Only in banana republics do political leaders dole out favors to citizens in exchange for their silence and their vote. By holding personal loyalty above all else, Trump and some of his supporters create a political environment where reason and justice hold little sway. He was probably right when he said he could “stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody” and not “lose voters” — that’s what happens when personal loyalty is paramount.

What do I owe Trump? A thank you for his well-intentioned, if undiplomatic, support. So for the record: Thank you, Mr. President. But the more important question is, what do I owe my country? Civic engagement, careful consideration of issues that affect my fellow citizens, and support for policies that deserve support, even if it makes the president “very upset.”

[From The LA Times]

The entire piece is worth a read – Knox is actually a really good writer, even if this op-ed seems a little bit like a college essay assignment. I think Knox might be one of those people who seem rather cold and self-contained in person, but inside there’s a lot going on. And obviously, I agree with her – she appreciates Trump’s support in her hour of need, but Jesus Christ, Bigly is an unhinged mess. I love that she name-checked the Central Park Five and Trump’s statements about that case. The sad fact is that Trump supported Knox because she was a pretty, young white woman. He never would have given a sh-t (nor would the media have given a sh-t) if it was a African-American man (or woman) accused of murder in Italy.

Donald Trump votes on Election Day 2016

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

37 Responses to “Amanda Knox DGAF that Donald Trump is ‘very upset’ with her”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Aiobhan Targaryen says:

    The only think she got wrong in this is that she owes him a thank you. I don’t think she owes him anything, but I can see why she is choosing to be the bigger person in this article.

    This is a well-executed op-ed. I appreciate her calling out Trump and his supporters racism and hypocrisy all in one article.

  2. Idky says:

    I’m still on the fence about her.

    • Doodle says:

      I used to be, but I’ve read a lot about the case and I don’t think she did it. I don’t like her much as a person but there’s some evidence of someone else having done it that I think got squashed – I’m going from memory. The whole case is a bit weird when you really dig into it.

      • Ramona says:

        Even after reading about that case I remain on the fence about her. And the day will never ever come when I forgive her for setting up the African immigrant. Lots of people are subjected to even worse interrogations around the world but refuse to pin it on the most vulnerable person in the equation. But my discomfort with that case was also caused by many of her American supporters. There was a distinct “Murica” vibe from them. Very similar to the Ryan Lochte supporters. So not surprised that there was an overlap between them and Trump and his diplorables. “Must defend pure white American womanhood from those filthy (insert racist epithet here)”. She is distancing herself from them now that she no longer needs them which is good but like I said, there is no forgiveness for trying to set someone up.

      • Crumpet says:

        Ramona, it was the Italian police that led her down the path of thinking somehow he was involved. They kept her up for days on end, physically abusing her until she gave them a story they could act on.

        The entire debacle was the fault of Giuliano Mignini – a misogynistic neanderthal.

      • Grant says:

        Ramona, how exactly did Amanda Knox set up Rudy Guede? Evidence pretty clearly establishes that Guede was the one who murdered Meredith Kercher, likely in a robbery gone wrong. His DNA is all over the place, he was dumb enough to drop a dookie in the bathroom of the girls’ apartment and leave it there, and he fled right after the murder was reported.

      • Lipreng says:

        Grant, Patrick Lumumba is the immigrant Ramona is referring to. Knox admitted that she falsely implicated Lumumba in the crime.

      • Merritt says:

        @Ramona and Lipreng

        But Amanda did not come up with Patrick’s name on her own. The police repeatedly insisted that Amanda met up with Patrick because they had texted each other. Eventually Amanda cracked and went along with what the police said.

    • L84Tea says:

      You should watch the Netflix documentary about her and the case. There’s no way she did it. DNA doesn’t lie.

    • WeAreAllMadeOfStars says:

      My God, still this?

      And Ramona, when a young girl is being railroaded by a foreign government in a most unbelievable way, why should she not be supported? So sorry that you’re yet another person who is intimidated by your strange personal visage of America. Also, see all the English people who wanted to railroad Knox as gitback for the apparent sins of America. That’s logic and jurisprudence for you right there.

    • Nancy says:

      I’ve never been 100% sure that she is 100% innocent. She didn’t kill Meredith, that was proven by the DNA. I still find her behavior, as well as that of her bf’s extremely odd and inappropriate. I have the picture of her doing cartwheels in my mind and such obscure things before incarceration. I know we all react differently, but if her roommate was butchered, and she didn’t know who did it, wouldn’t she be scared sh-tless. I remember Jodi Arias standing on her head in the corner and applying makeup during a break while being interrogated for the death of her bf, in which she was found guilty. These are two separate cases and woman, but both acted so bizarrely. I think in my heart of hearts Amanda knows something we don’t know, but am just as sure she will take her secrets to the grave.

      • tback says:

        If you want more info about the Knox case, may I suggest listening to the podcast episodes the “Real Crime Profile” team did about the case. Behavior analysts/profilers from the FBI and Scotland Yard delve into the evidence. @Nancy…it’s actually not that unusual for people being interrogated to do things that seem bizarre–like cartwheels, standing on head, etc. There is a basis for the behavior–the adrenaline, etc. that floods your brain/body under the circumstances can cause strange behavior. It’s akin to “fight or flight” response but when you’re being interrogated you can’t actually fight or flee…there’s a lot a pent up energy/anxiety.

      • K says:

        I believe that both Jodi and Amanda have Asperger’s. It’s uncommon in women but they both have a lot of tell-tale signs. However, I know that Jodi did commit that murder and I highly highly doubt that Amanda killed her roommate.

    • Katrine Troelsen says:

      Idky and Ramona > You are on the fence because you bought into the medias version of this case which was based SOLELY on misogyny.

  3. Brittney B. says:

    Yeah, the Central Park Five reference made me cheer. We all know what you’re really saying, Amanda, and you’re right.

    Expecting her “loyalty” is yet another example of the way he views women. He does something to help them financially, they owe him for the rest of their lives and shouldn’t dare be anything but submissive.

  4. Doodle says:

    I love what she’s written here and am interested in checking out the entire piece. I agree with what she’s said, that she doesn’t owe him any more than a thank you. And if her case hadn’t received so much media attention Agent Marmalade wouldn’t have gotten involved. He’s a media whore.

  5. JFresh says:

    I’m glad she mentions the CP5. People need to remember that. Good write up, Kaiser.

  6. Patricia says:

    I didn’t pay any attention to this case when it came out. I saw at as sensational crazyness and I wasn’t into it.
    I watched a documentary about it recently. It seems like she was tried for being a socially inept weirdo. We all have the right to be a socially inept weirdo! And it seems she was also on trial for having a sex life. There didn’t seem to be any real evidence against her so I’m glad she walked free in the end.
    Here she seems very intelligent. She reminds me of my cousin who is very smart, very talented, but sometimes having a conversation with her is just so awkward and strange.
    I’m really glad she laid her feelings and thoughts out like this. It’s way above Trump’s head to comprehend what she’s saying here, but I like it.

  7. TQB says:

    I’ve always been a bit up in the air on her, but it’s wonderful to see her take her spotlight here and use it to bring attention to a case of great injustice in our own country. She could have just railed about how she was mistreated, but instead she chose to make it about someone else. I really respect that.

  8. tw says:

    Of course he finds her ungrateful. He surrounds himself with the few people he considers loyal. Since he has no principles, beliefs or convictions (yet, pun intended), he can’t imagine someone else voting based on on anything other than loyalty.

  9. isabelle says:

    Lets face it and the real truth is he probably supported her because of her looks. A pretty young white girl being held by those nasty Italians. He is that shallow we know this and his previous remarks on other cases show when it doesn’t involve a pretty white girl reveal his true self. He words and actions on other cases have been judgmental, harsh and vindictive. Donald doesn’t do one thing for good reasons, he only does them based on shallow ones or when he pushed by someone else.

  10. Sharon says:

    Please read all evidence, translations of court records and Italian news articles, and in-depth thoughtful and educated articles by people with first hand knowledge of the Meredith Kercher murder. Many long nights of reading this material have convinced me of the guilt of Amanda Knox and Rafaele, her boyfriend (and yes Rudy Guede was involved but not alone). If you do research and not just watch TV docs designed for sensationalism and ad dollars, the motive, the method and details of the violent murder will be clear. Amanda was NOT abused and was only officially interrogated one night and voluntarily wrote a confession after only a few hours and only because her boyfriend would not give her an alibi. I wish I was as eloquent as the many writers and researchers at True Justice for Meredith Kercher, but I am not so I can only direct you there (Google website). Celebitchy is an extraordinarily compassionate and intelligent group of women and men, and as I read your comments saying “I am undecided about Amanda…” I would love to encourage some of you to get the true *documented* facts.

    Dedicated lurker here, with best regards for all. Only my sadness at the cruel murder of the beautiful and accomplished young woman Meredith Kercher being misconstrued here on TV and in Murican press has drawn me out. Please read and be well informed. The details are many and confusing but the conclusion is obvious if you have the patience and curiosity to read and decide for yourself.

    I receive so much pleasure and good information from reading here. Thank you!

    • Kali says:

      Thanks Sharon, I happen to agree with you. What I don’t understand is why people have to say ‘ dedicated, long time ect lurker here’. I mean, what is a lurker? This is in the public domain! Don’t apologise!

    • Intel says:

      “Amanda was NOT abused and was only officially interrogated one night and voluntarily wrote a confession after only a few hours and only because her boyfriend would not give her an alibi.”

      Great point, Sharon. Her false accusation came after an hour or so of gentle questioning, with an interpreter present. Her interview was not admissible anyway for her murder trial, as the Italians do follow strict evidence rules. However, she spontaneously wrote up a statement in English that continued the accusation against her boss. This was after rest and time alone. That statement was admissible for her murder trial. Look up the murder of meredith kercher dot com for the timeline of her interview.

      Her parents lied on TV about the 40 hours of abuse because they knew the truth looked bad.

  11. Mare says:

    I still think she’s guilty. And please don’t tell me to read about the case, I have been following it since the beginning, I’ve read the court documents and followed the trial and appeals. I see no scenario in which she had nothing to do with it. DNA is not the only evidence, there are so many things that point to all three of them and the scenario of Guede doing it alone is like fiction. Just my opinion.

    • Intel says:

      I agree. I totally believe she did it with the bf’s help, and Guede was an opportunistic criminal on the sexual assault charge but not murderer. Know this case inside out and read all the major books, including John Follain’s balanced one, along with Knox’s own account, which answers none of the questions.

      The physical evidence used to convict Rudy Guede was collected by the same team on the same day as the evidence claimed to be “contaminated.” A separate team collected the double-DNA knife.

      Jail-visiting recordings show she knew her dad was talking about Guede (she actually named him) when he’d only mentioned a fourth man, when the police didn’t even know who he was.

      Mobile phone records demonstrate numerous inconsistencies. They lied and changed their alibis many times.

      The demonised prosecutor had a coprosecutor of equal power and she certainly wasn’t crazy. besides, they had to answer to literally dozens of judges who looked at the evidence for pretrials matters (stay in jail during trial, enough evidence to go to trial)

      People say she was railroaded by the police. If you’ve followed the case, you’ll know the police and the prosecutors refused to believe these two were involved up until Knox accused her boss. Which by the way was not a false confession but an accusation. The police thought they were covering for someone until Knox placed herself at the scene.

      The circumstantial and physical evidence demonstrates she was drunk and off her head high with Sollecito (ITA bf) and the roommate tensions surfaced.

      An innocent person does not need a multi-million-dollar PR campaign. Her parents drip fed outright lies to non-Italian-speaking US journalists such as Nina Burleigh, who repeated lies like only rye bread was found on the double-DNA knife.

      Look up John Follain, Barbie Nadeau, and Andrea Vogt for accurate reporting – they speak Italian and attended the trial hearings.

      The ITA supreme court only let her off because of diplomatic considerations. In its final judgment, it noted the DNA evidence proves she’d been washing her hands of Kercher’s blood at some stage. It said she was present at the cottage that night and so was her bf. Look up the translated judgment at 9.4.1.

      Better to let a murderer off than to jeopardize the US-ITA extradition treaty. Read Massei and Nencini’s judgement reports for an overview of the evidence. English versions available online.

  12. Shannon says:

    I watched the Netflix documentary about her case and came away completely convinced she didn’t do it and my heart broke for her. What a terrifying ordeal. Also, good op-ed; I completely agree with her.

    • Intel says:

      I love how she’s an advocate for falsely accused peeps but still hasn’t paid her ex-boss (Patrik) the tens of grands of euros he was awarded for the callunia finding. Her prolonged accusation against him ruined his business and reputation. Also, she happily took money from Trump for her legal defense and is now using his name to get her writing noticed. She’s awful all round. I’ve never seen the Netflix documentary but heard it’s biased and thin on evidence. I recommend the murder of meredith kercher dot com website for a summary of the extensive evidence against her.