To recap, Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein were BFFs, and Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell would often arrange for Andrew to be provided with trafficked teenagers to abuse and rape. Andrew and Epstein were still close even after Epstein made a sweetheart deal with the DOJ. When Epstein died in jail last year, the spotlight on Andrew grew even brighter. He thought he could “manage” the scandal by simply giving an interview to the BBC. It was a catastrophe. It was so bad, it arguably did irreparable harm to the monarchy. The Queen spent days covering for Andrew and circling the wagons before Prince Charles ordered his mother to fire Andrew. Andrew still has his ducal title and his HRH title, but he does not have any official or public duties.
Before and after Andrew was sh-tcanned, the Queen has done the most to protect Andrew, her “favorite,” and insulate him from criticism or worse. She clearly wants him “rehabilitated” in the eyes of the British public, and the Queen and Andrew seem to be in agreement that Andrew’s image should be rehabbed in the wake of Sussexit. Her Maj tried it, over and over. And now I think Charles has had enough, because he and his mum are doing an “emergency meeting” about the state of Andrew.
The Queen and Prince Charles held an emergency meeting to discuss scandal-hit Prince Andrew. They took time out from royal estate business at Sandringham to chat about “family matters”.
A royal source said: “Both had hoped the Duke of York could perhaps be rehabilitated back into public life in time but that is now looking increasingly unlikely.”
The news came 24 hours after a US law chief shamed the Duke by revealing the FBI tried to quiz him over Epstein but got “zero co-operation”. Andrew denied that the FBI had approached him, telling friends he was “bewildered” at claims he has refused to co-operate.
A source reportedly close to the Duke said: “The Duke is more than happy to talk to the FBI but he hasn’t been approached by them yet. He is angry about the way this is being portrayed.”
Buckingham Palace declined to comment.
“Both had hoped the Duke of York could perhaps be rehabilitated…” No. The Queen hoped. Charles shut it down. Charles never wanted Andrew rehabilitated. Charles had been pushing Andrew out of public life for years before the Epstein drama reached critical mass last year. My guess is that this “emergency meeting” was Charles once again going to his mother and telling her that she can’t continue to behave this way, that her actions are seriously – and perhaps irreparably – damaging the monarchy.
Something else I’ve been thinking about… the Queen has made THREE huge errors over the course of about five months. The first was the Queen going all-in with Boris Johnson’s fascistic plot. Then the protection of Andrew. Then Sussexit. The palace has tried to argue that Boris Johnson lied to the Queen, that Andrew lied to the Queen, and that the Sussexes surprised the Queen with their announcement. Except none of that was true. So… is anyone in the UK asking the larger questions about the Queen and her merry band of liars, fascists, pedophiles and racists?
Photos courtesy of WENN, Avalon Red.
No, they are not. Because she is a little old lady. A sweet grammy.
Wouldn’t hurt a fly. Right?!?
🙁
Your observation is extremely precise.
But she is very far from that fairy tale image. For crying out loud, she’s the queen for more than 50 years. She dealt with all kind of people. She’s far from being an innocent old lady baking muffins and doing small plates for the family.
Yesterday (or the day before) DM gave us an article about his zero cooperation. And I said, repeat, confirm and even bet anything: the comments smelled strongly of BP/KP/Clarence House trying to make Andrew an innocent scapegoat for the bad FBI. The arguments they used were beyond plain stupidity. For you guys to think about.
Someday Lizzie will have to own her part in all this… But of course that would be asking too much
I just cant get over how red his face is. I can think of at least three dermatologic procedures to help with that! Why! And andrew’s teeth! Get some dental help. These royals, man. Theyre in rough shape.
LOl, his face jumped right out. The royals do look rough. Queenie looks good for her age as did her mum. But the next generation are not aging well at all. I guess they feel they don’t need to look good. Only us peasants care about such things.
None of TQ’s children have aged well. I guess Edward looks okay. Andrew looks like what he is, a dissipated loser.
Edward looks decent compared to the rest of his siblings. He looks like an older William, but he’s got more hair on his head than William does! There was a photo recently of the two of them side by side.
Really like what? I assume it’s rosacea. I also often have very red sensitive skin, so I feel for him.
The treatment for his face doesn’t need any dermatogist dear. A simple change of his habits will do the trick.
TeamAwesome: No. It’s not rosacea at all. Don’t even think about it. The symptoms and the shape of the red is totally completely different. Even a resident student of a hospital wouldn’t buy it.
No she won’t. She’s going to be an awful person for the last few years she has left, and then she’s going to die and the nation will mourn and forget about who she actually was as a human.
This! Her legacy will be so whitewashed she will qualify for sainthood.
If Her Majesty, the Queen is that taken in by people and if she was that shielded by Sussexit/Megxit then she needs to step down. It’s very clear the old girl isn’t running the show anymore or understands how the show works.
My brother doesn’t believe she’ll last 6 months once Phillip kicks off. I can’t say I disagree but I fear the damage it will do to the UK if it ends up being this year or the next. I don’t think the monarchy will survive Charles and William.
@Lurker, I agree with you that QEII no longer understands how the show works.
What I cannot understand is why the future Charles III did nothing to try and “manage” all the negative publicity against Meghan because 80% was false and blatantly made-up for no other reason than to sell newspapers. I always thought Charles was closer to Harry than William.
The kindest explanation I can think of is that Charles didn’t see just how much worse the coverage was for Meghan than it had been for Kate, and/or that he thought that after a few months it would die down.
Also, while it wouldn’t surprise me to discover that some of the negative media was driven by William, it’s honestly unclear to me how much control Charles really has over William (despite holding the purse strings), and it seems to me that William/William’s staff leaking would have been the most logical thing to “manage”. i.e. tell them look, ANY “concerned” or even slightly negative comments about H&M will not be tolerated…if the whole BRF had fallen into that line then the media might not have thought they could get away with as much as they have. Recall that Charles basically had to publicly shame William into more access to the grandkids? I suspect and overt effort to manage the press directly would have been viewed as potentially blowing the situation up even further. This family is all about keeping a stiff upper lip and riding things out. Which, if they were actually a united family and all toeing the same party line (of “Meghan is one of us now, we are happy to welcome her into our family, we are so pleased to be seen with her and spending time with her”) probably would have worked.
I suspect also the fact that not one but two members of the BRF have some strong motivation to deflect attention from their own scandals (William and Rose Hanbury, Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein) would make it even harder to truly clamp down on internal leaks and gossip. If neither of those stories had broken, there might have been less internal interest in smearing Meghan. I’m guessing Charles did not anticipate that angle until it was off and running.
Charles’ interest is in not having the press turn on him. That’s why he did nothing. In his thinking, he cannot step in and chastise them, he needs them on his side as he becomes “King Charles”.
And should he cross them, we only need look at his history for the plethora of rotten press that could be rehashed on him. Camilla, doing Diana goddess of England wrong, the atrocious funeral using his children, etc.
@Beatles nails it. I’m more than sure Charles has his own dirty laundry that he doesn’t want out there that the press has on him, and doesn’t want to get on their bad side over it.
That said, I do think he tried a *slight* bit to push back (Charles noting that he was going to do a male version of Meghan’s Smart Works collection and give her full credit for his idea to do so), but by then it was probably too little too late. The UK tabs started bringing up Charles being friends with that pedophile clergy guy (I don’t know his name) and that was seemingly that.
I’m pretty sure the press has all the dirt on Charles, Andrew & Fergie and William (and likely the Middletons too), and that each of those people also know about the dirt on each other, and will forever go back and forth sending signals via the press about it all. No one in that family was ever going to stick up for Harry & Meghan is it meant covering their own asses and messes.
The Queen should have stepped down when prince Philip did.
Exactly. The idea that she’s determined to spend her whole life as Queen is merely a deep hunger for power and the ultimate privilege, masquerading as duty. I imagine “duty and sacrifice” must be intoxicating, when it involves extreme levels of luxury, being in direct control of the lives of so many people, having a (nominal) say in the affairs of how a country is being run, without the ensuing responsibility, etc. Again, Privilege masquerading as duty.
If she were really thinking selflessly, she would have handed over the mantle to her Son years ago. A man who has clearly spent his whole life preparing for the position and seems perfectly competent to fill the role. My suspicion is that she just can’t imagine herself submitting to anyone else, even if he IS her son.
To be fair, it is pretty difficult to imagine her curtsying to Charles at the Christmas church walk.
Never forget the Windsors genuinely believe that as royalty, they are chosen by God for their roles.
Did the Queen Mother curtsy to Elizabeth?
You know Bella, I trully believe that, in the beginning, she really believed the monarchy was her God’s call because she was raised like that. After, I don’t know. I know for own experience the power (never mind if it’s a kingdom or the direction of a firm) is intoxicating; like any drug it’s hard to let go and damages the judgedment.
At 93 years old, it’s difficult to say if she still believes the crown is her life duty, if she doesn’t want to let go because it’s something her body needs to go on, or all above.
@Ali, Agreed. More and more it looks like Phillip is the one who kept this dreadful family afloat. He might have been a racist, philanderer, but wouldn’t it be ironic if it turned out that he was really the BEST of this sorry lot?
Probably he was the only person who she listens to, and probably the only one who is not afraid to talk to her.
I think, seen how fast he has disappeared, probably mentally he is not here anymore.
It’s somewhat strange that Charles, a man who actually married a teenager, looks like the moral authority here. The British monarchy should just pack up for a year. Stay in their castles and shut up. (I mean, Andy’s vile beyond measure, but “better than Andrew” is a very low bar)
Marrying a teenager who is a legal adult is not in any way comparable to raping a trafficked teenager. And even so, she was 20 when they got married.
I have a 19 year old daughter. She is no more ready to marry a 31 year old play boy now than she was when she was 17. The difference between 17 and 19 is negligible as far as maturity goes. Especially for Diana who was still a virgin with no relationship experience. Yes, Andrew was worse and he deserves to loose his titles because the girl was trafficked but let’s not pretend that Charles and firm didn’t also ruin the life of a young girl.
The whole system where she lived a life of aristocracy and didn’t understand the world helped ruin her. There really isn’t a good age to arbitrarily decide someone is an adult, yet one has been set. In the US, it is 18. Other countries, it is 16. Once you are an adult, it is on you to make decisions. Hopefully, you will receive good advice from those around you.
@Aang
I suspect Charles figured it out, eventually. He and Diana were miserable together, and Charles always was the queen’s most sensitive and introspective child. I think he did have admit to himself that marrying a 20-year-old was stupid of him and cruel to her.
Andrew, meanwhile, is still trying to argue he’s completely blameless for tripping and falling penis-first into a trafficked child.
@Jen, there is no magic threshold you cross where you suddenly become an adult. Adulthood is a process that you *begin* when you first turn 18 or whatever the age is. It is not the end point, the firm delineation that people see it as. It is the start of something that takes the better part of the next decade or so for you to fully figure out and establish yourself in. You learn crucial, life changing things in that time that set the course for the rest of your life.
Bread and Circus, I don’t think Charles ever figured it out. I also don’t see the man as sensitive since he decided it was OK to bed his friends’ wives (Mrs Parker Bowles and Lady Tryon respectively. A sensitive man would not have courted a besotted 19 year old that he knew he did not love and that he would keep the mistress around as a “friend” the whole time. Lady Diana could have found someone who would adore her and not have her make nice with the Other Woman. Charles did an awful thing and he always thought of himself not others.
Well Charles wanted to marry Camilla first.
But once again the Royal forces him to change.
Hmmm…Camilla didn’t really want to marry Charles back then. She married the man she set her cap for and then became the mistress to the POW – while Charles carried on affairs concurrently with other women. If the affair hadn’t been made public, Camilla would probably still be with Parker-Bowles.
I think Camilla would still now prefer to be Mrs. Parker-Bowles AND mistress of the Prince of Wales.
Agree with GuessWho. Camilla’s major love was Andrew Parker-Bowles. Andrew was a player who slept with anyone and Camilla spent years trying to make him jealous and nailing him to a marriage according to most biographers. Charles had multiple mistresses — including Camilla. Let’s not rewrite history into another fractured fairytale. Camilla liked the power that came with being a royal mistress and Andrew is an old fashioned Aristo who was fine with his wife being a royal mistress. Charles always knew he was expected to marry a virgin — but, as always, he dithered until he was of an age in our modern society that the only virgins available were women (girls) much younger than him. He thought he could marry a young, naive, Aristo broodmare and carry on in the life he had. Diana was an aristo, but unfortunately for Charles, she had a deep psychological need for fidelity and refused to play by Aristo rules (heir and a spare and then both partners get a pass to play). Fidelity was never something Charles could give her. Ive always hated how Charles continues to throw his father under the bus for his decision to marry Diana. Even Charles’ friends have gone on record in biographies to say that Phillips letter to Charles did not try to force him to marry Diana. Phillips’ letter pointed out to Charles that it wasn’t fair to Diana — given the press intrusion and her young age —- to keep stringing her along. Phillip supposedly told Charles (according to friends to whom he showed the letter) that he needed to make a decision as to whether he was definitely moving towards marriage or cut her loose for her sake. Over the years, Charles has twisted that advice to make him the victim of his father forcing him to marry Diana. Charles is ALWAYS the victim. He never seems to able to own his own choices if they go wrong.
Also, in that photo above he looks exactly like his mother only taller and redder.
Charles did not want to marry Camilla in the early seventies. CHeck out CHarles 1994 authorized biography he clearly said he was not pursuing Camilla as wife since he felt himself then too young to marry. He gave no indication to Camilla to wait for him or that they had a future together. The Crown presented a fictional account of Charles and Camilla. Charles made the call not to pursue Camilla as wife material. And as far as Camilla wanting to be mistress and not wife, I think that is bogus. IF she wanted to stay mistress she would not have continuously undermined Diana and derided her to Charles.
No, he didn’t. I don’t think Charles wanted to marry anyone at the time. He had a relationship with Camilla, but both of them knew there was a time limit on it as he had to go join the navy and she wanted to get back with Andrew Parker-Bowles.
The impression I always got from Charles is that he never thought marriage was for love. It was another part of his job as the heir. And he had to find someone “suitable” for the job, who would have his children and be able to deal with being a public figure. He was having a set of flings with people who he knew wouldn’t fit that bill so they were strictly that–flings. And Camilla, at the time, was one of them. I think it was only later on that they started back up again, and they genuinely developed an affection for each other, only they were both married.
I think for Diana, what hurt the most wasn’t the infidelity itself. It was the lack of respect and kindness that he and others in the RF treated her with. She wanted a husband who was faithful, yes, but she also wanted a husband who at least listened to her and had some consideration for her feelings. And the rest of the RF did not support her either. They all expected her to just ignore everything and get on with it, and treated her like she was some kind of idiot in the process.
I never thought Charles was be the star of this show…
Charles was not a lurking manipulator bent on seducing a teenager, Diana went after him like a heat-seeking missile. She’d worshiped him since she was an adolescent and insinuated herself into his life by pretending to love the things he did (horseback riding, shooting, fox hunting, Balmoral, etc.). It wasn’t until they married that the real Diana came out and he gradually realized he’d been had but by then they’d had William.
Oh lord. Don’t get me started. Put down the Penny Junor St Charles book. Diana was an aristo. The hunting crap was part of her upbringing her whole life. She didn’t “insinuate herself into his life.” She was born at Sandringham, and he was dating her sister before he dated her. She gave him a tour of Althorp when she was 16 and he noticed her there. She didn’t love the hunting and shooting, but it was familiar to her, and no one at the time really gave a damn what a teenaged girl thought about anything. Diana herself said she had seen him 15 times before he proposed. Diana was in no position to use her “feminine wiles” or some shit to seduce poor Charles. She was an awkward, naive teenager who was pretty enough to be a broadmare. The person who insinuated herself into royal life was Kate. Kate was the one who pretended to be into shooting and hunting and crap. She changed universities to go to St Andrews, took a gap year when she found out William was taking a gap year. I wonder what shenanegans the Middletons pulled to get Kate into St Salvatore, William’s freshman dorm. That’s too much of a coincidence when we’ve seen how mercenary they were about landing William. For Carole Middleton, it was an achievement of a lifetime.
Jaded,
You forget that Diana was sought after by Charles. She was not some little gold digger. She can from an old established family, had Stuart blood, and was related to Winston CHurchill She was a “catch.” Even the Queen Mum said Charles should make up his mind about Lady DIana lest someone else court her and marry her. CHarles was the pretender. He took Lady Diana on weekends to the Parker Bowleses and presented Camilla as the country wife and safe married friend who could advise the teenager about Charles and royal life. Diana found out later Camilla was the married mistress. DIana thought Charles would give Camilla up being old fashioned thought that the wedding would mean Camilla was history. THen came the little gifts Camilla sent to the HOneymoon yacht like those C and C cufflinks. Charles also said later he did not love DIana and preferred Camilla. This is inthe DImbleby book. A really mean thing for CHarles to have done to the young woman whom he chose to have his heirs. I agree about Kate, she was picking up dead birds to “impress” William but it took 8 years for him to decide, after a major breakup in 2007 and several cooling off periods. Diana also was criticized for “not liking” Balmoral but some forget she was experiencing morning sickness during the Fall of 1981 at Balmoral. I am so tired of DIana being disparaged that way.
@lanne in retrospect I always found it kinda hilarious that Kate did the exact same trip to Chili to work with kids during that gap year that William took. She only missed him by a month too – she either was a month too early or a month too late to be in the same group as him.
And it’s been said that Kate and William had already met and knew each other in massing while he was at Eton and she was at her school. Of course, that little fact got whitewashed out of the official narrative.
Charles was not an outright manipulator, but to act as if he had no culpability in the fact that this was an unequal marriage from the get go and he likely preferred to keep it that way is rather ignorant. He expected her to adapt unconditionally to him, and the family’s way of life, while he didn’t have to lift a finger for her in return. Plenty of teenagers swoon over people who are 10 years older than them, and would jump at the chance at that age to marry them without fully realizing that the ten year age gap spanning the length of your 20s is no joke, and that any 30 yr old who willingly enters into a romantic relationship with a 20 yr old is not someone who should ever be in an relationship to begin with.
And while Charles wasn’t a predator in that sense, he married a 19 year old for the same reason every other man in their 30s prefer people that young–because they’re young, they’re largely unaware of the ways the world works, haven’t had much experience forming relationships with others to know what they want, but more crucially, they don’t what being treated with respect in a relationship actually looks like. Charles and the RF wanted someone who wouldn’t be too opinionated and ask too many questions or stick up for herself when the family leaves her out in the cold, who would have an implicit “understanding” of how the RF functions (bc of their aristocratic background) and just shrug her shoulders at the goings on. They wanted a stiff-upper lipped, stoic work horse, cut from the same cloth as the Queen.
Moreover, let’s not forget who Charles was getting his relationship advice from–Lord Mountbatten, who famously wrote to Charles and told him to “sow his wild oats” but then settle down with a “nice girl” who didn’t have a past or know too much about the world so that he can have a stable family life with someone who won’t ask too many questions when he’s off doing what he wants to do with whoever he wants to do it with. Diana fit that bill perfectly.
Hope said meeting involved discussions about HIM no longer using his HRH
But I suppose I’m asking too much from mummy’s favourite
I’ve been really disappointed in her. She can support her son in private all she wants but these pap walks with Andrew just tell me that she doesn’t think what he did was that bad. And that is horrible judgement on her part. I never thought I’d say this but bring on King Charles!
Agree. I would expect her to support him in private, that’s who she is. But this public display is offensive.
I agree, so disappointed in the bunch of them, really!
I agree. I used to admire her so much, but this past year has completely changed my view on her. I’ve lost all respect for her. She is clearly incapable of handling these situations and should have retired years ago.
I love HRH and have followed & loved the BRF for years. This is not the first time, in my opinion, that she’s made questionable choices.
I remember when Diana died that the palace did not from my memory give her the proper respect. It took days for them to do anything and I really feel they only changed their attitude when they say public opinion coming out against them all. It still irritates me and this doesn’t help.
Hopefully Charles talked a lot of sense into her regarding Andrew.
And isn’t it interesting that the press got wind of this emergency meeting at Sandringham. This is Charles’ first rate PR team at work.
It certainly is, JA. Just as interesting as RRs being at a briefing at KP for something unrelated, and somehow, coincidentally, strangely, the location of the Sussexes on their break at the holidays hit the front pages less than 24 hours later. AFTER they had spent five and a half weeks being undetected, and out of the limelight. William’s PR staff is as cutthroat as his father’s, and Charles would do well to take that seriously. There is a coming war between Charles and William, and first shots have been fired. Dueling PR staffs at dawn is no small thing. Harry and Meghan and sweet Archie are well out out of this debacle.
People just don’t want to accept that someone who looks like a sweet little old lady is evil. They need to get over it. It’s the whole “fragile white woman” scenario that we see with Kate as well.
I have thought she was a vile person for years.
She has done her job as queen,but she’s doing so not out of integrity or love for her country or as a humanitarian.I never bought this about her.
She is ridiculously wealthy and believes she and her family are truly,truly above everyone else.I don’t think she cares one bit about what Andrew has been doing,she doesn’t care how H and M were treated,actually I think she’s fine with them being treated despicably-hoped it would take the heat off her favorite child.
I don’t think Diana’s death phased her a bit,she only spoke /acted due to enormous public pressure.
Firmly,I believe that she will do anything to protect her image (its crumbling now), but all I see is a mean old lady who only now listens to Charles because the RF look so bad and she doesn’t want her reign to end and be known as the one whose actions brought on the beginning of the end of the monarchy as we know it.
Well said Jen!
Let’s not make Charles sound like a hero in all of this. He stood by as Andrew ran around with Epstein for YEARS – it was only when his pedo ways started to make the RF look bad that Charles stepped in.
I don’t think it’s entirely fair to blame Charles for his brother’s horrible choices and actions, any more than it’s fair to blame his daughters (Eugenie’s and Beatrice)
Not blaming Charles, just saying he’s no hero just because NOW he’s ousting his pedo brother, when you know he knew about it for years. If he truly was this great guy, he would’ve stepped in years ago.
Fair enough.
I don’t think anyone really sees Charles as the hero. Charles has hated Andrew for years for much more personal reasons probably but mommy dearest has always protected him. Now that Andrew has screwed the pooch and is making the RF look terrible Charles sees a chance to finally be rid of him. I personally don’t care why Charles does what he does as long as he succeeds and strips Andrew of everything. Let’s see that pompous rapist survive without mommy, his titles and his money.
He also walked with Andrew to church at Christmas knowing they would be photographed. So, like the Queen, he has allowed himself to be seen with Andrew.
@Lobstah, That seems to be the default position of this family – do exactly nothing while various forms of stuff hit the fan, and then only act when there is no other way out of it. They are never proactive, preferring to be os-so-above-it-all, until forced to respond or react to whatever thing they are trying to avoid. The results are nearly always a disaster, while always complicating or worsening the situation. They are so disconnected and out of touch, and the courtiers are then free to manipulate the RF to forward the agendas they want forwarded. They had handed to them the most media savvy, problem solving, forward thinking person anyone could wish for, and they threw her away. And in the process, brought the world down on their heads, and possibly the ruination of the monarchy. They simply can’t seem to see that they are completely incapable of getting out ahead of problems, and will continue to stumble unless drastic changes of attitude take place.
Charles hoping to rehabilitate Andrew? This is pure science fiction.
No way.
This meeting is about Charles having enough with his brother bs.
I don’t think there is anyone that thinks that the Boris/parliament issue was her fault, or that she should have dealt with it differently. Constitutionally there wasn’t anything she could really do about it and the issue was resolved where it ought to be resolved – in the English Courts – not in the back room of Buck Pal as if it’s 1850.
Correct.
I disagree Sarah. Everyone in the know — former advisors, government people, historians — have said that she could have and should have asked for time to consider this major parliamentary issue. The fact that she did not do this, indicated to many that she was either very pro Boris’ request or did not seek or get good advise from those around her.
The Canadian GG faced a similar request and took more time to consult.
@Nic919, sort of unrelated, but gosh was it ever entertaining to see British people lose their sh-t at the idea of proroguing parliament. It was so funny to see the fact that they genuinely didn’t know what that entailed. And they INVENTED this system! Meanwhile, every Canadian who suffered through Harper had major flashbacks. The irony that a former colony had a better understanding of the system of government that was foisted on them than the people who originally did the foisting was kind of funny.
“My guess is that this “emergency meeting” was Charles once again going to his mother and telling her that she can’t continue to behave this way, that her actions are seriously – and perhaps irreparably – damaging the monarchy.”
I’m not entirely sure I buy this. Charles did the pap stroll at Christmas with Andy when he didn’t have to. He might be all in on protecting Andy if he thinks this protection will help the family and protect his ability to become King Charles III.
Also, is it possible these meetings were about dealing with legal fallout from Andrew? The FBI was grumbling about lack of cooperation. I wonder if that’s because they have new evidence?
Or maybe the meeting was about bringing in the York girls instead of Andy?
bringing yorks girls from this time is very bad and many ppl complain about sussex wasting their money , i dont think they will willing give the yorks girls the money as sussex. plus yorks doesnt have a good public imgage and by this scandal no charity wants to associate with the yorks. if any charity associates with then then its very laugable.
The public better welcome them with open arms and hearts. This is what they wanted after all.
i live in the UK and ‘the bigger question’ is I guess ‘can we abolish the monarchy?’ …but genuinely how would that be done? A petition? They don’t get anyone anywhere, people marching in the streets and civil disruption? -those get shut down by police. The XR protests were good for raising the profile but nothing changed after that. I remember the marches against the War in 2003, something like a million people took to the streets and it didn’t change anything either.
I don’t think it’s going anywhere. Trust in politicians’ ability to do anything properly is at an all time low (everywhere, not just in the UK) and besides, no political party or prime minister would want to “own” abolishing the monarchy. It’s 1000 years old, has survived a variety of upheavals, including a civil war, abolishment, re-establishment, and periodic reforms. It’ll continue to be diminished and end up along the lines of a Scandinavian monarchy is my guess.
I think you are reading it right PrarieGirl. The monarchy in GB is too deeply intrenched it to be cancelled. It will just continue diminishing.
Oh, and thank you Kaiser for stating in your post that Epstein died instead of saying something about his suicide. Either the universe really aligned everything perfectly to allow for him to commit suicide in a maximum security cell while on suicide watch or he was silenced. I’m voting history will prove he was silenced.
@OriginalRose, let’s also not forget that the Queen is not just the monarch of the UK, she’s also the head of state for a bunch of other countries as well. There are some really huge questions to ask about what type of legal role the monarchy (“the Crown” in legal terms I guess?) occupied and what would be done about it when it’s abolished.
There are some really gnarly issues here and I do not trust that this is something that can be decided by a simple referendum by the British people. We all saw how the last one went. If this is a serious consideration, it’ll involve all the other countries where the Queen is head of state. People, especially First Nations and indigenous people in Canada who have negotiated land treaties with the Crown and not with the Cdn govt will want a say. The monarchy is not just people, it’s also a legal issue, and I frankly do not have much trust in people highlighting the details about something like this in an honest way.
I had been operating under the assumption that the Queen was the only one who was not distancing herself from Andrew and the rest of the fam were outright disgusted and appalled, not wanting anything to do with him.
Until I read about Andy attending Kate’s birthday celebration! So Meghan & Harry are essentially chased out due to the lack of support from the rf and pedo Andy is celebrating Kate’s bday. Very f’ed up indeed.
The Royals hanging on to Andrew while at the same time Boris capitulates to Huawei’s 5G scam is just shocking. Epstein’s deep mob ties were to the most nefarious Saudi and Russian cartels. That must be where the money came from that he “loaned” Fergie. Now China moves in to corrupt Five Eyes intelligence alliance with a corrupt 5G network. If Charles gives a damn about the UK, Commonwealth and NATO he better make his move soon.
I was under the impression that the monarchy has no teeth. They are just puppet heads. Power lies in the parliament.
I think part of it is that everything with Sussexit just makes the Andrew situation look that much worse. He’s still HRH, but H&M aren’t using their HRHs anymore? He’s still keeping his space/flat at BP, but H&M reimbursed the gov for the money for the Frogmore renovations? He’s still going to church with the Queen, who did nothing to protect H&M?
At this point there’s really no way to bring Andrew back into the public fold bc it just makes the royal family look like out of touch racists.
QE is 93 years old. I find it interesting that no one is questioning her ability to make sound decisions. She seems to be “easily manipulated” if both Boris and Andrew can pull the wool over her eyes so easily perhaps Queen Granny needs to step aside.
And has anyone told Pedo Andy that the phone works both ways and he could in fact reach out to the FBI himself?? Not that I buy that he hasn’t already been contacted by them. He’s actively dodging their calls.
Yeah that excuse is on a par with his inability to sweat, his Woking pizza date, and his lack of fat fingers excuses.
I live In the UK at the moment and here, everyone from cashiers to TV presenters, all take the “I feel so sorry for the queen” stance. As if all her misfortunes are thrown at her and not actually product of the attitudes within her own “court”. I have asked but no one can explain why a woman who has been previously know as uncaring, cold and calculated (Aberfan disaster, the Lady Diana incidents), whose family was rumored in the past to have nazi-friendly views (Edward and Wallis were said to be sympathisers and who knows what the rest of the family were inclined to), is suddenly touted as a frail and pious individual? (Also, the -allegedly- pedofile son has diplomatic immunity apparantly, she, as monarch, could put a stop to that of she wanted? -anyone with legal/royal knowledge, please explain this to me as I am not entirely sure this info is correct) The usual fallback answer is the “the queen doesn’t explain”…well, The Queen knows what she aligns with, she knows what she is doing, and I do NOT believe she as oblivious and delicate as her royal reporters ( who rely on her and her “court” to be relevant and get paid) paint her to be. She has every right to try to preserve the monarchy at all costs (if I had that level of priviledge, wealth and impunity, would I be any better than her?) but frail/clueless/little granny, she is not.
If she wants to preserve the monarchy, she should step back while there is something left to be preserved.
@Mona, thank you. The Queen is much more shrewd and intelligent in certain respects than people give her credit for. The whole, “shes just a quaint little granny” attitude is a clever front for her. It gives her the veneer of respectability and harmlessness that she definitely has not earned in the slightest. The RF that we see today is built in her image. It projects her values. It is the culmination of decades of her being the monarch and setting the course. To argue that she is without blame or responsibility in this situation is to lose the plot entirely.
Emergency meeting????? But…but, I thought the House of Windsor was ‘just fine’. I thought they were surging ahead, led by Keen Katie and her child army of ‘Strategically Placed Black/Brown Children’. They got rid of the Harry and the ‘Black One’ and the child that the royal family did it’s best to pretend didn’t exist and things were great. Okay, they couldn’t break the Queen’s death grip on her sex offender son, but what’s a little child rape compared to the evils of avocado toast and being born bi-racial?
@Kerwood, I do love me some well-placed snark that just happens to tell the truth!!!
I had avocado toast just yesterday. I will never again enjoy avocado toast without thinking of The People’s Duchess Meghan!
Abolish the monarchy. It is time this ends.
I used to really like the queen but the mask has slipped.
She was beloved because she was always the queen. And that’s it. We are all used to having her be the queen.
But her actions during all these decades and especially now … it must end with her. Best before she dies, it will only get worse …
What are the odds that Charles was discussing Andrew’s fate in light of the Feds saying he wasn’t cooperating with their investigation?
I think I would ask whether a 93-year-old woman with maybe a high school education (hard to say as she was home schooled) is experiencing cognitive loss (both education and gender make her at a higher risk of developing dementia). Should she still be making decisions about whether or not her (alleged) pedophile son continues in his role?
This.
My grandmother was such a different woman in her 90’s than her 50’s or even 60’s.
Not saying the queeny was a loveable open minded person then, just that there is a reason people retire at a certain age, she should have taken Philps lead.
Maybe Elizabeth is holding on so tightly to the crown, is so unwilling to give it up, maybe she’ll get her wish to always be queen. Maybe she will have run the outdated, racist institution into the ground by the time she dies.
It’s a little late for any kinds of talks about Andrew. The damage is done, from a PR standpoint.
Why would such a meeting be publicized? Son meets with mother. So? What is their agenda in letting the public know that they’re talking about what to do with the pedo?
So it looks like they “care” and are “concerned”. About their image that is.
It makes Charles look good (doing damage control, he looks in charge etc.) so I’m sure his team leaked this to the press. His PR is on point as he is the only one of them still looking good.
I think many remember Charles past and to some including myself he will never look good. His being seen with Camilla, the other woman that he got to marry, just brings up past memories.
I’m sure Charles is trying desperately to stamp out a dumpster fire that is threatening to burn down the monarchy. The Queen should at the very least make him Prince Regent and hand over most of the reigns (pun intended) to him. The Queen clearly wants to die on the throne but as one poster mentioned above, things seem to have gone sideways after Prince Philip retired and is clearly in no state of health to be her “rock” any longer.
I think the prospect of King CHarles and Queen Camilla is not the most attractive alternative. I did not see any effort on CHarles’ part to protect his son Harry and his daughter in law Meghan. He appears to have thrown them under a bus, he knows darn well what was going on but did nothing.
Off-topic, but if/when Charles and William eventually ascend the throne, will Camilla and Kate be known as Queen Consort or Princess Consort as Philip is known as Prince? Or did Philip have the title of Prince from before his marriage?
Betty an Chuck talking about Andy? Realizing the drug deal they made with the BM regarding the Sussexes will not stop the press from coming for Andrew. Bea’s wedding date has not been announced, and it’s been three months- and a public wedding for her brings Epstein and Andy back to the headlines . Notice William is NOT part of this conclave? Leaks were going out that Wild Bill was part of the Andy stepback in public life but not inthis phase. Chaz is letting Slick Willy know he’s not pushing him off the line of succession and put himself on the throne. The press has a lot to feast on with the Sussexes gone and the queen and Charles may also be trying to bring back Harry and Meghan and Archie. The Sussexes are a package deal whether they like it or not. The Windsors are getting beaten up for both messes. Can’t wait for the CNN special next month.
I’ll bet there has been some fast and furious editing of the original series by CNN. They have been advertising this thing for weeks, well before the Sussexes departed for Canada. They can’t keep juicy stuff like this out of that show now!
William to me is no longer the GOlden Prince I don’t like how he treated his brother.
Legit question here, how many “Emergency Meetings” are they gonna have before they realize that the way they do everything needs to be re-evaluated? The fish stinks from the head. They need to get themselves in order without leaking every predictable move to the press and get on with it.
Right? 3 months in and a few FBI press conferences later this is no longer an emergency this is the status quo. My opinion of this family was always meh? Now it is 🤮
Let’s remember, nobody in the BRF has done anything to EARN their station in life. They happened to be BORN into it through no effort or control of their own.
If the RF portion of the Brits’ already exorbitant mandatory tax payments became a voluntary donation instead, we’d see just how “necessary” the people really feel the BRF is.
People will always resent being required to spend hard earned wages to support a clan of racists, peodophiles, money grubbers and grifters.
Apparently, it’s less than two quid.
Less than you spend to prop up Boris Brexit!
It is infuriating reading the Andrew and the York news coming out recently. First of all, no Andrew should NOT be rehabilitated. He should be completely barred from having a public life from now until the rest of eternity. That is the punishment he deserves for using his position and status to become friends with Epstein in the first place, and then for using his privilege to squirrel out of the consequences for his nasty and disgusting behaviour.
Second, I think it’s hilARIOUS that he insists he’s “never been contacted by the FBI.” Not only do I not believe this for a single solitary second, I also have to wonder at just how f-cking stupid this man really is. Does he honestly think the FBI would ever just ring him up and tell him that he has to come and speak to them? For years now, the gossip has been that the FBI wanted to speak to Andrew way back in 2011, but the Queen and her staff went all out in making sure that that could not happen. I’m trying to look up the details of this because I’m fairly certain that the Queen did something/spoke to someone about making sure that Andrew (and by extension, the RF) would not have to speak to any law enforcement agencies about his association with Epstein.
It struck me at the time that the Queen had definitely overstepped in some way by doing what she did, preventing a criminal’s associate from being interviewed and setting up something of a roadblock in an ongoing investigation. I have no doubt that when the FBI says they’ve been stonewalled by Andrew all this time, what they mean is that his associates and employers and the enforcers in the BRF and the British govt have been working overtime to make sure that they never get the chance to speak to him at all.
So yeah. F-ck Andrew, and f-ck the Queen for this. The BRF is not an apolitical institution. They use every tool at their disposal to keep themselves beyond the reach of the law. The Queen will do anything she can to protect Andrew from the consequences of his OWN actions, but the Duchess of Sussex’s dress doesn’t fit, so who’s the REAL villain here, right? ???