Prince Andrew announces he is stepping back from public duties

Fergie very cryptically commented while a guest on Oprah in 1997 that the toe-sucking "scandal" she was embroiled in a few years earlier was a tradeoff for much worse things that were happening behind the scenes. I still wonder if she has known all along what was happening.

He has access to the best PR people in the world.

How he could screw up the interview so badly is a testament to how incredibly not clever and insulated he must truly be.

Given the severity of the situation, normal people (read: less arrogant people who actually understood that actions have consequences) would have prepped day and night and been grilled with every answer practiced and delivered flawlessly.

I am trying to copy and paste the article but DL won't me. Good details in there. His statement contradicted his previous statements as to when he met Epstein. Also, charities were dumping him.

Andrew's statement.

What do you mean "his goose is cooked"? He's still Duke of York and a Prince of the United Kingdom. He's still rich. He's still out of prison.

From Wash Post -

LONDON — Britain’s Prince Andrew announced Wednesday that he is stepping back from public duties following controversy over his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender who committed suicide in August.

“It has become clear to me over the last few days that the circumstances relating to my former association with Jeffrey Epstein have become a major disruption to my family’s work and the valuable work going on in the many organizations and charities that I am proud to support,” he said in a statement. “Therefore, I have asked Her Majesty if I may step back from public duties for the foreseeable future, and she has given her permission.”

He added: “I continue to unequivocally regret my ill-judged association with Jeffrey Epstein. His suicide has left many unanswered questions, particularly for his victims, and I deeply sympathize with everyone who has been affected and wants some form of closure.”

The statement struck a different tone than Andrew’s widely panned interview with the BBC on Saturday when he defended his friendship with Epstein and didn’t show sympathy for the victims.

Andrew’s ties to Epstein have dominated the news in Britain for days — even amid a pivotal election campaign.

KPMG, Standard Chartered, Aon, the University of Huddersfield and Outward Bound were among the organizations that suggested they were distancing themselves from the prince or reviewing their relationship with him.

On Tuesday, the “supporters” page on the prince’s flagship initiative brought up “page not found.”

Andrew’s ties with Epstein already cost him one job years ago. Andrew quit as a trade envoy for the United Kingdom in 2011, after a photo of him strolling with Epstein in Central Park caused a media furor and raised questions about his judgment.

Prince Andrew says he let down the royal family by associating with Jeffrey Epstein

Wow. Even more time on his hands now.

[quote]What do you mean "his goose is cooked"? He's still Duke of York and a Prince of the United Kingdom. He's still rich. He's still out of prison.

He's still HRH and rich but as far as further legal or criminal issues all bets are off. He's still protected to an extent, but don't look to his elder bro to put up any resistance to having him grilled by the US Feds or other LE orgs if they ask. He is clearly hanging him out to dry, at last. And I'm guessing somewhat ok with that, no love was ever lost there.

And today is Pince Philip and the Queen's wedding anniversary. Yikes.

His mother will still slip him money, and now he doesn't have have to put on the pretense that he is working or doing something. But after Mama is gone, he might have to scramble for money. I believe Charles will keep him at a great distance without any money.

Wasn't he Elizabeth's favorite kid? This must hurt for her to realize the shit he has done.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R10 he already has amassed a large fortune worth millions. He won't hurt for cash if he can be conservative about his spending.

r11 yes he was the favorite. It's sad this had to happen when she's 93 and Philip is failing at 98. But it is what it is. Spare the rod, spoil the child.

So, basically he gets to retire early. What a price to pay!

I'll say this, Liz raised some really out of touch children. All of them come across as privileged brats. Diana did a way better job.

Anne is privileged but has a great work ethic and is no nonsense. Edward also snobbish, but had the common sense to marry Sophie who's been a huge asset. They both have acquitted themselves well. Charles has righted his ship since Diana's death, love or hate her Camilla's done fine in her role. Andrew was the big sore problem for years, now he's gone.

I bet his siblings are breathing a "thank god" sigh of relief tonight.

Will he retain his position as "Buffer" between HM and Meghan during photo ops? Or will Anne have to do all the blocking herself.

Anne would cut a bitch in a heartbeat if she thought he/she was harming her mother.

(Not that I believe the DoS was harming anyone.)

He could always get a job at Pizza Express.

Are any of the Queen's children close? It doesn't seem so.

The idiot was told years ago that he needed to stop having any association whatsoever with both Epstein and Maxwell.

A royal advisor who was close to the Queen ( I can’t remember his name ) tried to force the issue and apparently the imbecile had a massive tantrum and point blank refused - It was shortly afterwards that Epstein was invited with Ghislaine to Balmoral. He was then warned once again by members of the royal protection squad and the arrogant halfwit told them to mind their own business, while nonchalantly jetting off to New York in order to stay at Epstein’s townhouse.

He’s only got himself to blame for the mess he’s ended up in. However, I don’t buy the theory that his ex-wife talked him into the interview. I think there’s been some kind of pressure put on him of some kind, or, the idiot genuinely thought he could talk himself out of the situation.

Maybe there has also been widespread anger from the Queen and the rest of the BRF behind the scenes over Epstein, and not realising that it was the worst thing that he could have done he tried to deal with it by agreeing to the interview.

He wanted to do a second interview when he saw the reaction to the first one. (Even though he had told the Queen that it went great.) But I don't think another interview will happen now. Just how clueless is he?

He should never agree to talk to any law enforcement agency at all ever! Is he out of his mind? I'm still shocked he agreed to this interview. It was insane. Follow the queen's rule: "Never complain, never explain."

And Sarah should not be blamed for this interview. Say what you will, she still has a way about her that is more grounded, more in touch and with a sense of humor and more media-savvy given her challenges along the way. Andrew pompously thought he could talk his way out and quell the situation. With all the various media outlets nowadays, everyone has an opinion about everything and those in positions of power and authority are not immune to deep and harsh criticism. For a man of the world--and he does get around--he seems terribly naive about how people would react.

[quote] but don't look to his elder bro to put up any resistance to having him grilled by the US Feds or other LE orgs if they ask.

He couldn't even if he wanted to. As Prince of Wales, Charles has no real constitutional position yet with respect to the government. When his mother dies, or if she retires from public duties & lets him take over as Prince Regent (as is eventually expected), he will, and might have some sway; but right now Charles has no pull with government or with the law.

[quote] I'll say this, Liz raised some really out of touch children. All of them come across as privileged brats. Diana did a way better job.

[quote] Are any of the Queen's children close? It doesn't seem so.

Edward and his wife supposedly are now. They have dinner and watch TV with her once a week.

Now he has time to learn how the internet works.

I think if Charles does eventually take over from the Queen then he’ll probably distance himself from Andrew and that will make him more vulnerable.

The Queen can obviously exert some kind of limited pressure on the Government ( whether implied or otherwise ) and to avoid embarrassing the BRF as a whole they’ll protect Andrew due to that reason alone.

He is still isn't as bad as his Nazi loving great uncle and aunt.

Some of the other members of the BRF should take a cue from Andrew and step down. Other than Charles and William and their wives, do we really need all of the useless adult leeches. Seriously, can't they find a purpose in life? The chances of Harry and Meghan ever being on the throne are extremely remote now that William has 3 children. Isn't there an adult in the room who talks sense to these people?

What a useless piece of shit--where are Negan & Lucille when you need them . . . ?

What exactly do you mean when you say Anne has a great work ethic? She puts her own riding boots on and tightens her own saddle rather than having a groom do it?

They don’t do ANYTHING. Their “duties” are showing up at mall openings and cutting ribbons. They get dressed and go to concerts that they yawn through in the royal box. That is not work, not even close.

r32 that 'work' you deride: showing up at community centers and small hospitals, or senior centers, to 'cut ribbons' - means A LOT to many average UK citizens. Especially those living far flung from the south/London who don't see the Royal Fam that often or live near UK centers of power/commerce.

Its a big boost to have a member of the Royal Fam, even a junior member, show up at your event or charity org to show support, even if its brief. They also bring much needed media attention with them, esp to smaller centers/schools/orgs. You obviously don't live in the UK.

Sure its work r32, a different type of work than sitting in a cubicle but being present at those type of events are the work of the Royal Family.

William was famously lazy about doing those events, not all of them have a great work ethic.

Dan Wooten of the Sun weighs in ahead of his column tomorrow. Charles "heavily involved" in this decision (I bet he was); lessons and gentle warnings to "younger royals" also re importance of listening to the royal advisors, towing the line and staying within given boundaries of royal work and life. Wonder who that is directed at?

Great thread, OP.

There's something wrong with him if he thought a second interview would fix it. I wonder if the Queen even raised her voice with him?

The Queen summoned him and told him her decision. Both were devastated. Wow.

Former BBC broadcaster Peter Hunt weighs in, re the increasing shift in power from the Queen over to Charles:

[quote]Don't drink, don't smoke, what do you do?

[quote]Don't drink, don't smoke, what do you do?

[quote]Subtle innuends follow

[quote]There must be something inside…

That Atom and the Ants song was literally about Prince Andrew. Well, I guess now we know what his vice is.

^^^ innuendos

Buckingham Palace is understood to be braced for US authorities to issue the Duke with a subpoena, requesting he gives testimony under oath over his friendship with Epstein. Sources have suggested the summons is “imminent”.

You in danger, gurl

So he probably knew something was coming when he did the interview?

Charles went along with the interview knowing that it would be a disaster and then be possible to force him out. I do not believe for a minute the Queen is making any substantive decisions anymore.

R547 - Prior thread apparently closed suddenly, so this is in response your comment that the succession is laid down in law, re either Andrew or Harry losing places in the succession:

The government can bypass that law of succession if it feels it necessary. Any change in the succession has to be agreed to by Parliament. During the 1936 Abdication Crisis, over a few days the government debated whether to bypass Prince Albert in favour of one of his younger brothers, both of whom already had male heirs to succeed them. The Duke of Kent, the youngest, was handsome and far charismatic than shy, diffident, stammering Bertie. But Kent had skeletons in his closet (drugs, bisexuality), and the middle brother, Gloucester, had the personality of paint drying on a wall.

So, they went back to Bertie, not least because they knew his wife's charisma and professional skill at being royal, and popularity with the public, and their photogenic young princesses, would make it work. But for several days during the Abdication Crisis, everything came to a halt whilst the Cabinet debated whether or not to bypass Bertie, something that rankled bitterly with the then Duchess of York, Elizabeth. They were kept in the dark despite pleading for information about their fate, although everyone else knew what was being discussed. In fact, Elizabeth wrote bitterly to a friend, "Everyone knows more than we do! Everyone!"

So Parliament can do as it pleases although naturally it is not anxious to do so unless absolutely necessary.

And unlike everyone else, this entitled moron will continue to enjoy the millionaire lifestyle. He owes you Liz.

Sounds as though he made our like a bandit. He doesn’t have to do anything now. He can sit on his fat old ass and jerk off to barely legal porn all day long.

While they're at it, how about doing the same for Sparkle and Dim?

Perhaps this news about Andrew might be a wake up call for the Sussex duo.

I doubt it, but you never know.

Unless Charles is a complete fool, he'll throw Andrew to the wolves. Anti-royalist sentiment is strong and this will make it stronger, he has to know that the anti-royalists are holding off on trying to end the monarchy until Elizabeth dies or steps down. Charles is going to have to fight to become king, or to have anything meaningful left of the office if he does, and he can't afford to have an Andrew dragging him down.

As for Sparkle and Dimmy, all they seem interested in is money and fame. They won't see a connection between their behavior and Andrew's, or at least Harry won't.

r49, see r35. Commenters are already noting just that.

Is there still a Governor Generalship of the Bahamas? I'm sure he'll get in no trouble there.

[R46], there was no middle brother Gloucester. What are you talking about? David, Prince of Wales, Bertie, Duke of York, Prince George, Princess Mary, and Prince John [who died when he was 20].

I think you're leaving out Henry, the Duke of Gloucester r53. I think he's in the middle there.

R50 - "Anti-royalist sentiment is strong and this will make it stronger,"

Actually, pro-monarchist sentiment is well into the positive column. Try looking up the polls.

If the republican movement had much traction, we'd all know it by now. It doesn't.have much.

That said, the behaviour of Andrew and the Sussexes hasn't helped keep that generally positive support for the monarchy as an institution where it needs to be if it is to survive the 21st century.

Andrew has just been thrown to the wolves. There really isn't anything left for Charles to do. He can't undo his brother's royal status, Andrew holds the least on Royal Lodge, he has his own fairly substantial trust fund, and there are his daughters. the two Princesses of York, for Charles to consider.

Andrew is done and dusted.

Unless Charles is a fool, he'll tell the Sussexes that they're next if they don't cut the crap.

This is from Who Runs Britain:

"Public opinion and the future of the monarchy Posted on October 14, 2017 by Andrew Defty

"Public support for the monarchy

There is little doubt that the British public are strongly committed to the monarchy. Opinion polls consistently indicate that less than one in five would like Britain to become a republic while around three quarters favour Britain remaining a monarchy. Moreover, support for the monarchy remains extraordinarily stable. Even at the time of the death of Princess Diana in 1997, when polls indicated some dissatisfaction with the Palace’s response, support for Britain remaining a monarchy held steady. As shown in the graph above, there is even some evidence that support for the monarchy has increased in recent years."

Shocking.

What I want to know is if he's still on the taxpayer's payroll now even if he's no longer "working" for them. Who pays his rent, vacations and partying with underage girls now?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

He will no longer be paid by the Sovereign Grant r57. That was fixed today; the official royal website had that changed within minutes of the announcement. He no longer will undertake travels for the Crown, no public payments or funds.

His mother will likely continue to pay his bills and support things for him via her 'private purse', ie. funds she received for her use from the Duchy of Lancaster revenues. That's at her discretion - for now. If negative stories keep snowballing then BP needs to consider that the media and public attention may well fall on Crown funds and how they're obtained and spent. Something the Royals really try to avoid at all costs.

Sarah put Andrew up to the interview? And he complied? Good grief, those two!

R60. Andrew and Sarah are not who you would want on your team. When did they ever have a good idea?

What do you guys think would have happened without the interview? Looks like he shoveled his own grave and money supply.

R57 - Andrew's living situation has been done to death here, but here it is. He lives at Royal Lodge, and no, the taxpayer doesn't pay his rent:

"In August 2003, The Duke of York was granted a lease agreement by the Crown Estate for 75 years. The property leased included the Royal Lodge, a Gardener's Cottage, the Chapel Lodge, six Lodge Cottages, and Police security accommodation in addition to 40 hectares of land. The lease agreement required Prince Andrew to carry out, at his own expense, extensive refurbishing work estimated at £7.5 million at September 2002 prices, excluding VAT (this sum was in fact exceeded). It also provided for a premium payment of £1 million. The National Audit Office (NAO) report into the lease agreement states that the Crown Estate's independent advisors had advised that the refurbishment work would cost at least £5 million and that the Prince should be given the option to buy out the notional annual rental payment (set at £260,000) for £2.5 million. Once the Prince committed to spending £7.5 million on refurbishment, it was decided that no rental would be required as he would be treated as having effectively bought out the notional annual rental payment because he exceeded the minimum £5 million required for refurbishment. As a result, only the £1 million premium was paid to the Crown Estate. There is no provision for any further rent review over the life of the 75-year lease agreement (unlike the rent reviews provided in the case of Bagshot Park, residence of Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex, also leased from the Crown Estate).

The lease agreement provides that the prince may not benefit financially from any increase in the value of the property as the freehold belongs to the Crown Estate. The leasehold may be assigned only to his widow or his two daughters, Princess Beatrice of York and Princess Eugenie of York (or a trust established solely for their benefit)."

He has a large trust fund, on paper worth about £60 million.

His mother undoubtedly will leave him more when she's raptured.

No public duties, means no public monies, with the possible exception of security.

He isn't living on a naval pension. He's wealthy in his own right, and no one is kicking him out of Royal Lodge.

[quote] there was no middle brother Gloucester.

For R53

The children (in order of birth) of King George V and Queen Mary

1. Edward VIII (The Duke of Windsor) 2. Albert, Duke of York (George VI) 3. Mary, The Princess Royal 4. Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester 5. Prince George, Duke of Kent 6. Prince John

R53 - R54 is correct. The middle brother was Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester. He married Lady Alice Montague Douglas-Scott. His son, Richard, is now Duke of Gloucester, who married a Danish commoner. His elder brother, William, was killed in an accident, thus making Richard, who wanted to be an architect, heir ro the dukedom.

His daughter, Lady Rose, was the first member of the BRF to marry a non-white. Her ex-husband, Gary Gilman, was a Maori. The marriage lasted about 14 years.

And was he a dish. . . .!

Off topic, but is this the Prince Henry, R65?

Yes, that is Prince Henry. He eventually grew into a rather rotund bald fellow with big whiskers. I always think of that song from "Carousel", "When I Marry Mr Snow" when I see pictures of him in middle age. It's how I imagine Mr Snow to look.

His wife's full name was Alice Christabel Montagu Douglas Scott. I've always thought it the MOST wonderful of all the aristo names out there.

She was elegant, discreet, and a favourite of the Queen and the Queen's parents. However, she and the Duke never really got over the death of their eldest son, William, in that accident.

She lived to be 100 and after narrowly escaping death by drowning in her younger years in Solway Firth, prayed that if she was saved, she would dedicate her life to public service, which, as the Duchess of Gloucester, she did.

She was one of those quietly remarkable women that the BRF seem to be short on these days.

The Queen Mother said of Princess Alice that "she has the courage of a lion" referring to her strength in meeting a series of tragedies that followed one another.

Today we have Meghan Markle whingeing about some bad PR making her life not worth living, and Andrew disgracing the family by some of the lowest calibre character seen since Edward VIII.

I'm not defending Andrew, but this is what you get when you have second son syndrome: a grown adult with not a whole lot to do...and then you have to start carving out a role for yourself with little experience to do much at all. Much is expected of the second son but with no experience to offer. Add that to Andrew's naivete, stupidity and arrogance. For a good part of his life, he was "the spare." And even when he wasn't the spare, he was always a senior royal with no chance of assuming the throne, but again with not much to do after leaving the military and no experience to do much of anything. He's a grown adult, got married and divorced, had kids, so he carves out some sort of business role for himself representing the monarchy. But he has a sex drive as do most men, and his veered toward the more mysterious, darker side. He shouldn't have done what he did, but this is what you get when you have a grown man who is supposed to be responsible with nothing to do and all the money in the world to do pretty much nothing.

The royal family is all about rank and order of succession. They toss senior royals aside unless you are heir apparent or first in line. And someone prone to get into trouble cannot be tossed aside. The family needs to keep people like Andrew (and to a degree, Harry) in check at all times. Give them something to do. make them feel useful and be useful from an early age. If you don't, you end up with an irresponsible adult.

"Is there still a Governor Generalship of the Bahamas?"

I'm sure he'll be encouraged to go live someplace obscure and media-deficient like the Bahamas, but he's not getting a salary in the process.

R68 He could learn how to clean toilets now that the doesn't have a "job". I wonder if he ever asked himself how they're always clean since he doesn't notice or care about "little people".

I would guess that Philip, Charles, and Anne made up the jury on this decision, and to a lesser extent, HM and William.

Good stuff, r21.

Goes with my limited understanding of the situation.

After Epstein completed his sentence (early 2010s), he returned to NYC, to reenter society and continue his business. He did so by throwing money around, donating to Harvard and MIT, getting himself invited to high-profile parties, etc. During this time, even someone as clueless as Donald Trump stayed away from him. Epstein found reestablishing him hard going.

But Andrew was willing to help Epstein by making made paid appearances at Epstein establishments unlike no-name billionaires who paid to participate. He was a draw, Ghislaine's line was often "Let's go to Epstein's, Prince Andrew is going to be there."

The photo in Central Park was also compensated.

In the early 2000s, Andrew fronted many Epstein deals for oligarchs in the stans. It went w/his trade envoy post and Epstein's "sweeteners." Money laundering... to be expected.

Here's the thing - Epstein was on every intelligence service's radar and MI-5 has Andrew in Britain doing sordid stuff. The Aussies have him in Thailand. I suppose the US has evidence of his activities somewhere. I understand the Brits & Aussies are holding back to protect the Royal Family. Andrew's peril is the unpredictability of the US right now.

He's complete idiot, who's greed and dissipation made him putty in the hands of Epstein and Ghislaine.

R71 - I would guess that the jury was HM, Charles, and William, and that Anne s tayed out of it completely. Ditto Edward.

Anne has little meaning any longer to the monarchy, if any. It would only be the people who hold the real influence and increasing importance. Anne isn't any of those.

Lol the Markle haters are already out in this thread trying to make her sound as bad as Andrew. It’s so transparent. Any excuse to attack her.

While exiled as whatever in the Bahamas, Edward and Wallace laundered money for the Nazi's. They were vile.

R74: You noticed that too, huh?

R69: Convention dictates that all Governors-General, as representatives of Her Majesty, must now be from the country itself. No more parachuting Brits in to the15 Commonwealth Realms, you choose from your own.

[R46] & [R54] I don't fucking believe it! I mean, I do fucking believe it! I forgot all about Prince Hal. It's been awhile since I did the kids they made, but I know he must've been one dull horn for me not to have remembered him. David - we all know what a butch hetero he wuz. Bertie - the Reluctant King, Georgie - the reluctant Queen, John - poor boy, Mary - never smiled after having to marry that Lascelles creature. I must do penance! Thank you for pointing this out. What an oaf I am!

Perhaps there's a role in the Shetland Isles, then.

The institution of Royalty creates fucked up family dynamics. While I don't like Andrew, can you imagine spending your entire life being number 2 and knowing that you have no function, no reason to get up in the morning, and being controlled by your mother your entire life? Granted, he's a buffoon - poorly educated, aimless, etc. But that's the way they raised him. Harry is going through the same thing. A dim bulb who married someone who has delusions of grandeur. What Andrew is going through is Harry's sorry-assed future if he doesn't watch his step.

R79: You're psychotic. You have a problem and you need help. Get help.

No family is perfect - but MOG these people are some kind of F'd up morons. Is it inbreeding? Too insulated? Too many years being told their s* doesn't stink? They all really need to be ashamed of themselves and Andrew should face charges.

[quote] I would guess that Philip, Charles, and Anne made up the jury on this decision, and to a lesser extent, HM and William.

You would be very wrong.

The Queen still has all authority in everything to do with the royal family, until she dies or relinquishes regency to Charles. Charles can only advise (and has the last three years or so), although he undoubtedly advised his mother heavily this time.

Philip used to advise, but he has retired and stays out of this business; he doesn't even live in the same house as the queen most of the time. William and Anne do not get a say in anything: Anne never did, and William will one day, but not yet.

r82 update yourself: Charles is nearly Regent in all but name these days. And on this day, he showed his power, fully. This was NOT the Queen's decision, to banish her favorite son.

Charles has well moved past "advisor only" stage, many years ago. The past 5 to 7 years have seen his ever-increasing control of the BRF. Is he fully in charge? No not yet, not while TQ still has her full wits about her, and is active. But he's making many of the family decisions previously done by Philip. See the message at r39 from people in the know.

Anne is still respected and active, and listened to. Her counsel has always mattered to Charles and I'd say after Camilla, she's the main family member he turns to re family issues. She absolutely was consulted about today's events.

William is the heir's heir and in the past few years has accepted his job and fate. He no doubt also weighed in. He's still behind his father and has to wait to take heavier part, but if you think people are ignoring him and his opinions when he's nearing 40 yrs old and is future king, your mistaken.

The Royal bloodline hasn't had a lot of smart kings. Add that they think they are God appointed and you've got trouble. Right there in Buckingham Palace.

r74 the DoS is not ever going to be as bad as Andrew, and anyone who says she is or will be is not to be taken seriously. Andrew represents the largest existential threat to the UK monarchy in decades. Meghan is at best a know-it-all PITA with adjustment issues.

However if you think that means no one on DL is allowed to discuss her and her foibles, or that discussion is "attacking" her, gtfo. She's a full member of the BRF now, and a currently controversial one for better or worse. She garners a lot of media attention also. We will talk about her. We're still talking about her. You've whined for months about what others discuss here, to no avail. Take a pill, and deal.

Prince John died when he was 13, not 20.

R85: I am not R74 but there are 1000 Sussex threads. You need to go to those threads and whine about her and Harry over there. This thread is about Andrew. Stay. On. Topic. DEAR.

The best comment on here is R29. Edward was a vile human being. The Simpson bitch even more.

Interesting point about Harry being on Andrew's trajectory. They do share some character traits - that little Vegas episode? The Nazi armband? His Gran making himy an honorary Major because he couldn't py ass the exam? Sticking it to the Foreign Office at the last part of that second-tier Africa tour? Dropping the Woe Is Me documentary while William and Kate were out on British governent business in Pakistan, a cardinal no-no in the world of the BRF?

Harry is dumb, self-righteous, entitled, and doesn't listen, and picked a sleazy silly wife totally unsuited to royal life.

Change Harry to Andrew, and all those terms would still fit. Even the serving military background fits.

If Diana hadn't died and been canonised, and Harry didn't have that image of the sad little ginge walking behind Mum's coffin, he would never have gotten away with as much as he has.

Bye, racist cunt.

Gtfo r87. It's a royal thread and tangential discussions happen about other BRF issues and members. You don't like topics of certain posts, SCROLL ON BY.

Andrew is Harry's cautionary tale. There but for the grace of God goes he.

[quote]He is still isn't as bad as his Nazi loving great uncle and aunt.

Why is it a contest? And if Andrew actually raped young women against their will, that is worse than merely being some idiot supporting the Nazis. Being a Nazi who MURDERS or financially supports the murders, would make him worst. Did he actually murder anyone? He was some rich, supremacist shithead - that isn't the same as actually raping or killing someone.

Oh and r87: I was responding to another poster who posted upthread about that topic. You know, it's called having a -discussion-, what one does on a message board. Or perhaps you think no one has a right to respond to anyone else, since it violates YOUR vaunted standards.

[quote] He should never agree to talk to any law enforcement agency at all ever! Is he out of his mind? I'm still shocked he agreed to this interview. It was insane.

Well, here's the thing. Andrew has lied so damned much that he actually thinks that U.S law enforcement just wants to talk to him about epstein. He seems to forget that he is also the subject of a criminal investigation for the rape of an underage sex slave who was internationally trafficked

That BBC reporter allowed him to put forth the imaginative bullshit story that andrew was just an innocent bystander. He wasn't. He was just like epstein

[quote]He seems to forget that he is also the subject of a criminal investigation for the rape of an underage sex slave who was internationally trafficked

I'm not as well read as I should be about all the specifics of Andrew's issues. Is he in trouble for actual statutory rape of a minor, or just abetting someone who trafficked minors for sex. I know some of the girls were flown from one country to another for sexual purposes, and what was legal age in one spot wasn't in another. Where does Andrew fall in with this - was Virginia Roberts underage when she was with him, or was she underage and then flown to him where she wasn't - ?

[quote] He seems to forget that he is also the subject of a criminal investigation for the rape of an underage sex slave who was internationally trafficked

No, he's absolutely not.

Even if Andrew did have sex with a minor in the US through Epstein's pimping, it was more than seven years ago, and the statute of limitations (which is seven years for rape, which is what he would be accused of doing) has made it impossible for him to be arrested for that.

His behavior may not have been criminal, but the video of Andrew waving from the door of Epstein's Manhattan told me everything I need to know about him. Just gross.

And remember Epstein had weird pornography photos and art all over his house. There is no way a person who goes into it shouldn't figure out he was a nasty human being. Clinton ignored it as well.

Trump is going to London again. Last time his buddy Andrew was his escort to several sites. I'm guessing that won't happen again.

[quote]Well, here's the thing. Andrew has lied so damned much that he actually thinks that U.S law enforcement just wants to talk to him about epstein.

True. Andrew believes he is so insulated, so protected that he thinks chatting with Feds is a mere formality, that they'll accept any story.

[quote]He seems to forget that he is also the subject of a criminal investigation for the rape of an underage sex slave who was internationally trafficked

His own government and Australia have evidence against him. It is unreasonable to assume the Queen and her Royal Household did not know.

[quote]That BBC reporter allowed him to put forth the imaginative bullshit story that andrew was just an innocent bystander. He wasn't. He was just like epstein

Maybe the BBC interview was a good thing. The Palace was treating this as a PR problem. Maybe now, regardless of statute of limitations, they realized there is no fixing this. They need to negotiate an exit for him, pay off some women, and bury this incident. They can't fix this by trotting out Will, Kate and their wonder children, or by have Eugienie & Meghan get pregnant or by having Will and Harry publicly pretend to bury their ridiculous hatchet.

Serious, serious stuff. Because there are younger girls and possibly boys, because Andrew participated to an extent, because the government and Palace knew.

There were a load child p—— found in Epstein’s home. Loads of pictures. Enough to put Epstein away for decades. Let’s just ponder that some of those pictures may have been compromot on prominent people like Andrew. 15-16- and -17 year olds are what is on public record. Possibly there’s more disgusting and damaging information out there. They may not ever arrest Andrew but it would take a huge amount of might from the Royal family to protect him. Possibly the last gasp of a dying institution.

I think he’s mostly just very very dim. Doesn’t know when he’s being used and doesn’t know the optics of his position. This is above and apart from his alleged sexual with the girl. His interests would have been best served by cutting all ties with Epstein and keeping quiet. Too dumb to realize.

Shady dude, and Fergie too. Very shady.

Yeah you watch that interview and you can tell the guy is pretty dumb.

The Royal Family doesn't really have much in the way of intellect in their genes though.

I have to disagree with those who think Anne has no influence.

I would love to see her take on the "ENFORCER" role previous held by her father.

Because she is no threat to Charles in any way and because she asked for no titles or formal paid roles in the RF for her children and because she has shown herself to be dedicated to supporting The Queen and the BRF, I believe her input would certainly be respected.

Anyone who saw Anne's speedy body block to keep You Know Who from positioning herself so close to TQ to assure lots of photographs at 2019 Trooping the Colour should recognize that Anne is dedicated and protective.

(Sorry, I couldn't find that great video.)

Dumb and entitled is such an attractive combo. Then add a creepy predatory personality, glad he's not my father.

[QUOTE] would guess that the jury was HM, Charles, and William...

People here are obsessed with William. He won't be on the throne for at least 20 years, so why should he be consulted? Charles, TQ and high level royal advisers will have made the decision.

Now the googly-eyed daughters have to go. They are tainted by association, and for having protected him all this time.

#ZeroTolerance

"he is stepping back from public duties"

More like Pubic duties.

They were very careful with Andrew to not make the same mistake as they had done with Margaret. Andrew did have duties. He not only had his charities, he was a Trade Representative for the UK. But he fucked that up and had to drop it a few years ago...after he and Fergy got caught in a "pay to play"scheme. Fergy was selling access to Andrew. They were both implicated in a lot of ridiculous, embarrassing shit.

I don't understand the people on her feeling bad for any member of the Royal family. They were born rich and powerful. They can do anything they want besides get a normal job (which sucks anyway) and get involved in politics (which also sucks anyway). Servants handle all of the boring day-to-day stuff that people don't like, and drivers are on hand to take them anywhere they want to go.

If they decide to just sleep in and watch Netflix, while wearing a million dollar tiara, they can. Once in awhile they are required to get dressed (with the help of staff), are driven to some local event, treated like king (even if they are a low ranking prince/princess), make small talk for 20 min, open a plaque, stand for pictures, shake hands, look at stupid drawings/art/activities/kids, then get back into their car to talk mad shit about those commoners as they head back to a palace. If they do that maybe 3 times a week it's considered "work".

Meanwhile, the rest of us get out of bed 5 days a week. Must do all of the mundane tasks on our own, and pretend to like our coworkers for 8-12 hours straight. Get home for 2-3 hours of free time before going to bed and starting over.

I will never feel bad for those lucky fucks. They are basically living out my childhood summer vacations for their entire adult lives. Next some of you will start feeling bad for the Kardashians, Trumps, and Bezos.

If they are bored, then maybe they should take up a hobby or read a book. No need to molest kids. One of the main Johnson and Johnson heirs took up painting. That's a start.

While I was alive I tried to warn Lilibet about the possibility of this sort of shit happening, but everyone thought I was just a doddering old fool and never paid attention to my concerns.

Yes r103, Andrew is that stupid. Not only was that interview disastrous in terms of tone, but it was filled messy unnecessary detail. Highlights-

--After the interview Andrew fell triumphant and invited the BBC interviewer and staff to a quick tour of Buck Palace

--On night the Virginia claimed Andrew had sex her, he claims he was not even at Epstein's, he was the NYC British Consulate. Not so, per Consul present at the time.

-- Despite claiming to know Epstein from 1999, his personal secretary claimed in a letter to the London Times he knew Epstein from early 1990s.

--Pictures found current to his encounter with Virginia show him sweating profusely.

Blowback

--200 charities are now looking for Royal patrons, including one founded by Phillip in the 50s.

--Will not attend any of the NATO festivities (Trump: Never knew the man /s)

--Commonwealth military divisions where he is honorary leader have asked for a replacement.

--Some flood victims expecting a comforting visit from him said he wouldn't be helpful.

Still Keeps

--Royal security

--Navy Pension (I think he's like Vice-Admiral now)

--Residency and office in Buck Palace

--Royal travel through Sovereign Grant

And Richard Kay writes

[quote}]To the influential rich in many parts of the world, being able to introduce Andrew as a friend guaranteed their own acceptance. One is entitled to wonder just how Jeffrey Epstein made use of his friendship with the Queen’s son.

Prince Andrew met Ghislaine Maxwell two weeks after prosecutors announced plan to reopen Epstein prosecution

Looks like another one of them Annus Horribilis for Lizzie

Daily Telegraph

[quote]Buckingham Palace is understood to be braced for US authorities to issue the Duke with a subpoena, requesting he gives testimony under oath over his friendship with Epstein. Sources have suggested the summons is “imminent”.'

[quote]Buckingham Palace declined to comment on suggestions a subpoena was imminent.

R1 revenge then truly must be a dish served cold. And stale.

R11 Why us it assumed that Prince Andrew is the Queens favourite?I'd have thought it much more likely that Prince Edward is especially given how close she is to his wife Sophie.

R119. Andrew is the queen’s favorite that goes back long before Edward’s wife, Sophie. While it has been widely reported that the queen was not all that close and nurturing a mother to her two eldest, Charles and Anne. It was the sign of the times and the British aristocracy that kids were raised largely by nannies and staff.

On the other hand, times had changed enough by the time Andrew came along and Elizabeth was more comfortable being both mother and queen. Andrew benefitted by having a close relationship with his mother while he was a young boy. This carried into his adulthood. Charles and Anne simply didn’t have that kind of closeness with their mother when they were children. And that’s why it’s always been reported that Andrew was/is her favorite. Sophie doesn’t even factor into the feelings the queen has toward Andrew.

What I don’t understand about Andrew deciding to do this stupid interview is why didn’t he think of his daughter Beatrice? The girl is getting married next year. Come on! Why the hell didn’t it occur to Andrew NOT to embarrass his daughter when he will be walking her down the aisle for all the world to see. Just STFU and don’t embarrass your kids when in less than a year it will be her day to shine. And now you’ve gone and put a damper on her wedding. Good gawd. This is humiliating, and Beatrice had nothing to do with any of this bullshit.

r121 I get that. but many posters on here were almost gleeful whenever Meghan's family decided to act like vicious Walmart trash up to and after her wedding day. Few cared about her feelings and somehow Meghan was blamed for their actions. Maybe B will just have to get over it since she happily accepts the allowances Andrew gives her. She knows who her daddy is and how he acts, his baggage is a part of the packaged deal. None of this is new information for the Royals.

[QUOTE] Come on! Why the hell didn’t it occur to Andrew NOT to embarrass his daughter when he will be walking her down the aisle for all the world to see.

She's having a private wedding which isn't being televised.

R122. I’m not talking about “Whataboutism.” This isn’t about Markle and her crazy family. The are not part of the royal family. Besides, she ghosted them long before her wedding, so they were pissed at her. This is about Andrew and not thinking about the embarrassment this dumb, stupid implicating interview would cost his daughter as she’s probably in the midst of planning her wedding. He’s really messed it up.

And Beatrice’s wedding will be international news even if it’s not televised as Eugenie’s wedding was. And now her wedding or photos of the day will be global news of overwhelming proportions. Give the girl a break...and he’s ruined it. I hope she’s able to forgive him for it.

[quote]And now her wedding or photos of the day will be global news of overwhelming proportions.

Thus we can sit back and watch as B's parents try to monetize that in the most blundering venal way possible.

R3, the text allowed in a given post is limited, you need to post the article in 2 or 3 pieces/parts.

As a side bar I'd like to address this whole "Queen's favorite" thing. I always thought my younger brother was mother's favorite. But years later, she explained that she loved both of us equally, but he had so many problems and was so fragile, that she gave him more attention because she was trying to keep him together. She said I Seemed more self reliant, but he was definitely not. I guess I wanted to be coddled a little more. he did a stint in jail for stealing cars,married and has two of the nicest kids you'll ever meet. But now his wife "parents" him. Bottom line is that it's the problem child who gets the most attention, but that doesn't mean he's a favorite. I agree, I believe it's Sophie and Edward the queen feels most comfortable with. And she is reportedly very close to Anne and Zara Phillips.

[quote]Unless Charles is a fool, he'll tell the Sussexes that they're next if they don't cut the crap.

It's insanity to compare what Andrew has done with anything Harry and Meghan have done. Much of the "crap" you refer to were actually lies about money spent, or criticisms for things that previous royals had been praised for. The rest has been some justified criticism of the type that all royals get about one topic or another, and is in no way comparable to Andrew being friends with a sex trafficking pedo and being photographed with one of the underaged girls.

The only thing Charles might demand they do is quietly drop their lawsuits, but that's about it.

You are all so thirsty for Meghan to get "kicked out of the royal family" that even when you say otherwise normal things, the crazy hatred of her sprinkled throughout your posts just jumps out.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R129 - First, link, please.

Second, If true, someone should ask through PEOPLE if the Harkles have checked in with the Queen to see how she's doing in light of what has to be a devastating emotional blow to her at the turn her favourite child's life has taken, how it reflects on her as a parent?

R29 has a link to the relevant article in their post.

And I wholeheartedly agree with you R130. Can you imagine that they think they should be checked in on during this major turmoil for the Queen and the rest of the family? Perhaps they should be checking in themselves. The mind boggles.

r130 I listened to it live in the background - no link but it will doubtless be up later. The second expert was on Julia somebody's show.

To your second point, People is widely acknowledged to be Meghan's direct PR outlet. They don't care about how The Queen is doing. Only how their basic Duchess is doing.

Still racist people here are ranting on about Meghan and H feeling 'uneasy' when they have done nothing comparable to Pedrew. They spent money renovating their house, flew on private jets and sued the press. There are royal precedents for all of that.

The sweating issue is what got me.

Harry was kind of a playboy who was mostly dating upper class party girls. He's now married to an older, normal woman and has a little son. This constant (negative) media attention must be horrible. I can see them following Andrew's route and retiring and moving to the US eventually. Harry inherited most of Diana's estate so I don't think they really need this "job". I mostly don't care about them or royals in general, but some of the criticism is just ridiculous. The woman is 38yo and has opened her own car doors the past 37, but suddenly they criticize her for opening a friggin' car door. Also it is absolutely normal that someone who never had any contact with royals or the British upper class would find all these new rules challenging and would need time to adjust.

r120 and r127 posts reminded me of what another DLer once posted which, to me anyway, had the ring credibility.

That is that Andrew was conceived in the midst of "make-up" sex after a prolonged rough patch between Q E II and the DoE (I can't believe I just typed those words, but in the interest of gossip, some things must be done.)

Anyway, that poster surmised that Andrew, to the Queen, is a reminder happier times in the marriage, which would explain, in addition to what r120 and r127 wrote, her "favoritism" of Andrew.

On what r129 posted, that bemuses me about the reported dismay of the Sussexes and not being "checked- on" in the midst of the Andrew scandal. I can readily believe that the Duchess of Sussex wants it both ways.

I mean how I am when I'm invited to an extended family or friends wedding, party, fund-raiser, what-have-you. That is, I'm annoyed if I'm invited because I feel obligated to go and will go, with, on the other hand, if I'm not invited and learn that after the fact, my feelings are hurt that I wasn't invited.

The Sussexes don't want to left out by the BRF, but, if they're included, they're annoyed by that, too, and perceive it negatively.

Article in the Mail suggests Beagenie will be stripped of some of the privileges that Pedrew has insisted on and Charles has always been iffy about. Hilarious that the Klan here still think Charles would consider doing anything to curtail his own sons' privileges, or that he would consult idle William about major crises.

Here's an extract from the article:

Charles, who is in New Zealand with his wife Camilla until Saturday, is said to have stepped in and made it clear his younger brother must be stripped of all royal duties without delay.

The brother have had high-profile rows over whether Andrew's daughters Beatrice and Eugenie should enjoy the perks given to Charles' children William and Harry - and now the sisters' public roles and income are likely to fall after their father's demise. Beatrice's wedding plans for next year are also up in the air and may even be scaled back.

The Duke of York is today being urged to fly to America to speak to the FBI with lawyers for Jeffrey Epstein's victims warning him 'any delay' must lead to US agents heading to London to interview him before Christmas.

Buckingham Palace is 'braced' for the 'imminent' arrival of a subpoena summoning Andrew to give evidence under oath in the US, according to the Telegraph, but leading QC Baroness Helena Kennedy, said if he was her client she'd advise him never to go to America again in case he is arrested and can never leave.

"William was famously lazy about doing those events, not all of them have a great work ethic."

R34 - William has stated repeatedly that he is not going to do the "Bread and Butter" engagement and only focus on a few patronages of charities which he is very keen on.

Cathy & Bill Cambridge are the Duke and Duchess of Doolittle and their perfect marriage is a sham.

Some of today's Andrew-related headlines:

"The Banned Old Duke of York"

"I'm sorry Mummy: Prince grovels as he quits royal life and and loses his £249,000 a year handout"

"Outcast"

[QUOTE] Cathy & Bill Cambridge are the Duke and Duchess of Doolittle and their perfect marriage is a sham.

Yep. Cathy only likes the high profile engagements like Wimbledon or the Chelsea Flower Show. They both take half a dozen very costly vacations a year, taking staff and security and flying by private jet or First Class BA to Mustique, the Maldives and Corsica.

Idle Bill is praying Charles lives to be 100 years old, as he dreads the increase in workload that comes with being monarch.

Thanks for the link, and I see the Express and others have picked up the story.

It's another really unfortunate bit of timing for the Sussexes, and makes them look like the oblivious twats they are - the Queen and Charles are addressing a far more important family crisis, and the Sussex PR machine, through Meghan's eternal mouthpiece, PEOPLE Magazine, releases a story about how they are being neglected in a crisis that doesn't remotley involve them.

Someone under the article in the Express said, "Does this woman ever wake up and realise that she isn't the centre of the Universe?"

The article was probably written before Andrew stepped back, and there wasn't time to pull it or adjust it. So all it has done is make the Sussexes look even more like the petulant, whingeing, self-absorbed nutcases they both clearly are.

With unerring instinct, Meghan has managed to put her foot in it again.

This wasn't about YOU, Meghan.

And if you hadn't aired a documentary publicly criticising the institution that put you where you are (PEOPLE Magazine wouldn't have returned your calls, let alone put you on its cover, without the Windsors), the British and their mythical stiff upper lip, and how unfair it all is, just as William and Kate were out on the governnment's business in Pakistan . . . you wouldn't have turned yourself into the family pariah.

Oddly, just as Harry's Mum did with the Morton book. It's the deja vu all over again, as the man said. A woman who got exactlh what she wanted, and living a life of immense privilege through marriage to a high-profile man, publicly playing a massive victim card accusing everything wrong with her lie as being someone else's fault, and then shocked to find that the accused isn't coming to heel . . .

It's incredible to see history repeating itself this way in the next generation.

If Meghan's PR leaked this story with her OK, then she's absolutely a sociopath.

I really do not see how the Harkles can return to the family fold after this, nor do I see how they can continue to be "senior working royals" completely outside the family from which they get their "work".

This looks to me like ongoing preparation for leaving the BRF after the New Year, laying the foundation for blaming the BRF rather than themselves.

I feel a bit sorry for Beatrice. I know it's silly to feel sorry for a literal princess, and obviously nothing she's going through comes close to what Epstein's victims have suffered. But it sounds like she was strung along by her ex-boyfriend for ten years (and he married someone else two years after they split up) and she rebounded with this rather shady Edo bloke. She had probably expected to marry before Eugenie did. The press have always mocked her appearance and dress sense. Her sister and cousins all had straightforward weddings that went off without a hitch (with the exception of the Thomas Markle drama, which was quickly forgotten). Now her upcoming wedding has this shadow hanging over it. I get the impression that the York girls are very close to their parents, so the whole scenario must be very unpleasant for them. They must want to believe he's innocent.

^* everything wrong with her life . . .

I didn't even make it past the first paragraph of your rant r141 bc you're so dumb and annoying.

R142 - I agree. Bea has had her longed-for happy wedding marred. Certainly, there are literally billions more in worse case on the planet, but one can acknowledge on a human level that we all live in our respective little worlds, and the York girls seem quite nice given their family drama.

My correction above was meant for my post at 141, not you, by the way. You simply beat me to it before I could post the correction.

r124 but in a way your statement does highlight the double standard between the princess and the duchess. It doesn't matter if the bride's family is royal or common. Having them embarrass you on your wedding day has to hurt. It's not you personally, but the DL hive mind that hates Meghan.

Back to Andrew, given the accusations, B should consider cutting him out of her life.

R144 - Well, I really don't know how I'm going to sleep tonight knowing you didn't make it past the first paragraph of a post referring to something someone else put up first.

I'll make sure to have a couple of brandies after supper so I can live through the disappointment.

I'm sure you'll be lapping up the entire PEOPLE Magazine piece, though, in all its sycophantic fawning . . .

And you're blocked.

r141, People would never, ever risk their profitable and close relationship with Meghan by publishing anything about her without her approval. It definitely was ok'd by her - in fact the direct qote contains an Americanism ("checking in" to mean "check on") implies the source is an American. Most likely Meghan.

Other than that I agree with everything you said.

R146 - The difrerence is, Bea actually loves her father, and Meghan ditched hers the moment she started dating royalty.

Andrew may, I suppose, volunteer to withdraw, but I doubt it. This will be an even more private wedding than originally planned, and I'm guessing that Bea loves her father too much to cast him out of her life. She will stoutly have him walk her down the aisle, and frankly, I rather like her for it.

[QUOTE] With unerring instinct, Meghan has managed to put her foot in it again. This wasn't about YOU, Meghan.

Are you one of those deluded tinhats who think that every piece that appears in People or the Flail has been 'placed' by PR? Those papers publish purely speculative articles every day. This was clearly one of them. You're an imbecile if you think Meghan had anything to do with it.

R132 - Too right. PEOPLE Magazine has been Meghan's mouthpiece since the beginning.

But the timing on this one was really bad. It makes them look preposterously self-absorbed. Does anyone really suppose Harry is unable to sleep because his Uncle Andy is in trouble? They wanted six weeks off for "family time", they got it. What the fuck is their problem?!

[QUOTE] The difrerence is, Bea actually loves her father, and Meghan ditched hers the moment she started dating royalty.

Meghan only ditched her dad when he sold sit down interviews to the Sun and Mail. If Bea wants to hang on to her perks and patronages, she would be advised to publicly disown her pedo papa.

R149 Meghans father is garbage.

[QUOTE] right. PEOPLE Magazine has been Meghan's mouthpiece since the beginning.

YOU say it's been her 'mouthpiece' but you have zero evidence of this. The People journos wrote a gossipy article speculating that M and H felt neglected. If you think M and H actually gave a foolish, damaging story like that to People, you have a brain the size of a grain of rice.

i personally believe the release of the People Magazine article was jut bad timing on the part of People Magazine. People Magazine has probably had this cover and article ready to go for three weeks.

I do not believe, nor was it stated in the People article, that Meghan is trying to make Andrew's and the BRF's current problems all about her.

If the Daily Fail had printed the lies about me they printed about Meghan & Harry I would sue their lying Hater and fan fiction writing asses too!

Disclaimer: I do not believe that Cathy is as great as the commentariat make her out to be. Cathy is just lazy in a rich man's wife type of way. I do not believe that Meghan is as bad as the commentariat make her out to be. Meghan is just ambitious and likes to be busy. Both Duchesses spend way to much money on their custom bespoke haute couture designer clothes and their crown funded homes.

Could you motherfucker please take your Meghan obsession somewhere else please? People here would like to discuss Andrew and NOT Meghan.

[QUOTE] I really do not see how the Harkles can return to the family fold after this, nor do I see how they can continue to be "senior working royals" completely outside the family from which they get their "work". This looks to me like ongoing preparation for leaving the BRF after the New Year, laying the foundation for blaming the BRF rather than themselves

You are certifiable if you think Charles would let them go. Harry is one of only two sons, and he is much loved by the British public. Charles will and has made concessions (like this six week break) in order to keep Harry happy. The optics of both Harry and Andrew stepping down from royal duties would be dire, and it would look like the brf was shattering.

Harry is the third in line, and hugely valued by Charles. Expect him (and Meghan) to be more visible in 2020, not less.

"Could you motherfucker please take your Meghan obsession somewhere else please? People here would like to discuss Andrew and NOT Meghan."

R156 - Ok, I get your point and agree with it to some degree.. However, based on links posted above to several 'news" sources, the Sussexes and Andrew are being tied together in the ongoing saga of the British Royal Family.

"Harry is the third in line, and hugely valued by Charles. Expect him (and Meghan) to be more visible in 2020, not less."

R157 - Harry is fifth in line of the succession to the throne. I make mistakes counting all the time as I usually do not count Charles as he seems to be 85% in charge nowadays.

[QUOTE] Harry is fifth in line of the succession to the throne. I make mistakes counting all the time as I usually do not count Charles as he seems to be 85% in charge nowadays.

Nope. George is six, Charlotte 4 and Louis one. Until George is 18, Harry is third in line.

The reason Meghans had such a big target on her back is to hide Andrew. Its classic deflection. Don't look at this dumpster fire here, let me cook you up something to rage at over there. It's just very lucky for the palace that Meghan has liberal politics, is biracial and is American. The perfect trifecta for Brexit Britain to froth over. The fact that these Palace connected commentators like Dickie "The Cock" Arbiter tried to invoke Meghan at the beginning of the week just gives it away. As the days have passed, it's become impossible to draw a parallel and royalists have had to just focus on Andrew. Looks like People was a puppet in this strategy but went to print before the tide had fully turned on Andrew.

[QUOTE] the Sussexes and Andrew are being tied together in the ongoing saga of the British Royal Family.

The press is writing gossipy articles about numerous royals and their reaction to Andrew. None of it has been planted by PR and People has run plenty of unpleasant articles about Meghan through the years. It isn't her mouthpiece.

No, r160. Wrong. If you must comment on these things at least learn the basics. George would have a Regent until he comes of age, should Charles and William both die. After him, Charlotte, then Louis, and then only if they all die, THEN the ginger disaster.

Harry is nowhere near the crown, thank god, and never will be.

[QUOTE] George would have a Regent until he comes of age, should Charles and William both die.

The Regent would be Harry. Nobody wants grumpy gay George on the throne.

Why these Meghan lunatics insist to hijack every thread about the RF and not just stay in their own threads is beyond me. I would ask everyone here to ignore and block these 3-4 motherfuckers and return to the topic.

Fun fact;- Harry is extremely popular, second only to the queen. However, he doesnt need all that popularity. He can live with half the subjects support. William and Charles as future Kings don't have that luxury. At the very least, it would be beyond stupid to aggravate the groups that Harry and Meghan add to the table - younger, left leaning, non white. If they think they backlash from Dianas death was bad, wait until they push out the first visible person of colour. They spend so much time cutting ribbons athe retirement homes, they've forgotten what Britain looks like today.

Prince George is only six years old and it's already DL canon that he's gay.

How many millions does PA have? The royal lodge sounds like it would cost hundreds of thousands to maintain. He probably can’t fly commercial without people spitting on him now. Even at a fantastic resort, I can’t see him hanging out at the infinity pool or the beach bar. Who bankrolls his daughter? Neither of them makes much money from “real” jobs.

I’m just curious as to what type of lifestyle he has to look forward to. For most of us, getting fired doesn’t mean getting fired from our families. I’m going to thanksgiving at my brothers next week. It would feel shitty if I’d just been fired from a family business.

NOT feeling sorry for him, just curious.

Harry is always, correctly, stated to bee sixth in the line of succession. It has nothing to do with how old anyone above him in the line is or who would be Regent in the event of an untimely death. The line is: Charles, the Heir Apparent; Prince William; Prince George; Princess Charlotte; Prince Louis; Prince Harry.

When the Queen dies, Charles becomes King; William goes from second in line to Heir Apparent and Prince of Wales; George goes from third to second, Charlotte goes from fourth to third, Louis goues from fifth to fourth, and Harry gets bumped up from sixth to fifth.

Their actual positions, however, are somewhat meaningless given the liklihood of William's children, down the line, having children themselves, each birth moving the one behind down a notch, and pushing Harry and his children ever further down the line, just like Charles's siblings' children.

In addition, when William goes from second in line to Heir Apparent and Prince of Wales, that "second" turns into a position of immensely enhanced influence and wealth, especially given that his father's reign is likely to be much, much shorter than the Queen's, and the shadow of the throne quite a bit more strongly evident on William and Kate.

Harry is, absent some major catastrophe, virtually meaningless to the succession now. In twenty years, with George 26, Charlotte 24, and Louis 22, no one will be paying the slightest attention to the nearing 60 year old Meghan and the late 50s Harry.

It's the long game that counts in this arena.

R160 - George could ascend the throne at age 2 months if both Charles and William died but someone would have to be regent. acting for George, until George was 18 years of age. Harry is line to be REGENT until George (or other Cambridge children) reaches the age of 18

Looks like People was a puppet in this strategy but went to print before the tide had fully turned on Andrew.

R161 - You statement makes perfect sense. The Sussexes are just being used in this particular circumstance.

Does this mean one does not get to cut ribbons at the new girls school? Drat!

Amazing how invested (and knowledgeable) some of you are in this family. Not a criticism, just an observation.

Someone said £60 million r168.

Hunny, according to Lainey, and some Royal Expert, Peter Hunt, Andrew is truly fucked with The Queen. They're saying we may see him from time to time going to church with Mummy, ( so she can show support) but he will never be waving on a balcony again nor placing wreaths on anything, nor will he be able to promote the interests of his daughters anymore. They'll have to rely on their other "jobs" because part time work on behalf of the BRF won't be happening. IMO, it all comes down to Fergie. Left to his own devices, Andrew is an arrogant fuck up. But then you add Fergie,and suddenly he's a fuck up on steroids. Think about it. She gives him PR advice...and he listens to her! I also believe Fergie is a corrupting influence. She's the one who got a loan from Epstein. She's the one who got busted for soliciting money, for literally selling access to Andrew...and Andrew facilitated her loan, and cooperated with her schemes for access. She never misses an opportunity to piggyback on publicity and public attention when Andrew is on the spotlight, and she has shamelessly pushed both her daughters to raise their profile, and Daddy always insisting the get their "due" for the work they do on behalf of the family which is laughable. Fergie is also a known leaker. She has a relationship with the tabloids feeding them rumors and dirt on other members of the RF for $$$ starting with Diana, and stirring up acrimony and forcing a sort of media competition between her girls and William & Harry, all while and insuring favorable coverage for herself.

She's always been envious of the coverage Charles' sons got even though they're the sons of the future king and they were both close to her daughters for a while. So that's the sidebar to the Andrew saga. Fergie is even now discussing Andrew with the Press. it will be interesting to watch her scramble to find relevance now that Andrew has been sidelined. Andrew and Fergie need to believe this is temporary. It isn't. As far as Charles is concerned, Andrew is over.

Wait, Beatrice and Eugenie will be stripped of some of their royal perks because of this?

If Beatrice gets dumped by her fiance because of this, Andrew can kiss any good will he has left with the public goodbye.

Town and Country, Harper’s Bazaar and People Magazine are all obvious Meghan mouthpieces.

I doubt that Beatrice and Eugenie will be stripped of their few royal perks. They're close to the Queen (relatively speaking) and not to blame for Andrew's misdeeds.

if Andrew had visited the flood victims in South Yorks the press would have had a field day making spurious connections to the child trafficking scandals around Rotherham. plus BoJo got a ton of abuse when he went.

r176 Charles made it very clear that he wanted to cut the fat, which includes Andrew's children. Anne and Edward's children got along just fine without being working members of the RF. In Charle's view I think the older members, like his aunts and uncles can continue their work, along with the brothers and sisters of the monarch. But when you are 2 generations from the throne it makes sense to just enjoy life as a British noble rather than royal, unless you are in the direct line of success. They will still get invited to the fun parties and family gatherings.

If William continues this trend, his uncles and aunt would continue their work, after Charles dies and Harry/Meghan would be is other middle-aged assets. His children will be the only ones that can step into royal duties. And down the line you go. Makes perfect sense from a structural standpoint.

What I don't get is Andrew's stupid beef with Charles same for Harry and William (which I understand). You don't bite the hand that feed you. My brother and I share very few interests, but if my financial future relied on his good graces you'd bet your ass I'd put on a show of support and love.

I hope Charles has a chance to take the throne before he dies simply because Harry and Meghan's children get to be styled as Prince or Princess!

[quote]Second, If true, someone should ask through PEOPLE if the Harkles have checked in with the Queen to see how she's doing in light of what has to be a devastating emotional blow to her at the turn her favourite child's life has taken, how it reflects on her as a parent?

She fucked up as a parent. Chose the wrong staff to raise that pedo. And BTW, who the fuck cares how she feels? She has a track record of raising dysfunctional kids.

Her reaction after Di's death showed she has no feelings. Just a typical, WASP, cold fish. The only reason she ever came forward to show respect after the death of her grandkids' mother was public perception. William and Harry were children and she essentially had to be forced to show respect after the death of Diana. You people and your obsession with these rich weirdos is so mental.

[quote][R160] - George could ascend the throne at age 2 months if both Charles and William died but someone would have to be regent. acting for George, until George was 18 years of age. Harry is line to be REGENT until George (or other Cambridge children) reaches the age of 18

This has been discussed a million times. Harry is in line to be potential Regent for a minor George, but if she's around Kate will most likely be appointed by William for that role, by amending the Regency acts.

William will not leave it to chance that Harry is Regent, at least not the way their relationship currently stands. The precedent is already set for the consort/surviving parent to be Regent.

Marie at r114: its already been stated that Andrew will lose funding from the Sovereign grant. No more travel for him, on behalf of TQ. That's over.

His residency and office in BP are also up in the air at the moment. Don't be surprised if those are pulled as well. If he does maintain a small staff, it will be paid out of his own or his mother's private funds.

Well that would be a shit deal. Make more sense for Harry to take on the role of Regent while Kate worries about the emotion health of her fatherless children, not to mention her own grief. I don't doubt that the girl could do a great job, but she is not a blood royal. I hope those families are able to move past their issues and start supporting each other.

Charles certainly intends to cut them out, R180. I meant that if HM stripped Beatrice and Eugenie of their perks right now, at the same time Andrew is being forced to step down, it would look like they were being punished for their father's misdeeds.

What perks do they currently have? All I know is that one lives in a cottage at Kensington Palace(?).

[quote]What perks do they currently have?

The fact that they don't live on the streets considering they have no real jobs.

I believe the taxpayer footed the security bill for Eugenie's wedding, and Beatrice has an apartment at SJP.

[quote]I believe the taxpayer footed the security bill for Eugenie's wedding,

Well the entire RF was in attendance...

[quote]r121 Why the hell didn’t it occur to Andrew NOT to embarrass his daughter when he will be walking her down the aisle for all the world to see? Just STFU and don’t embarrass your kids when in less than a year it will be her day to shine.

Actually, it's best to start moderating your behavior as soon as you have kids. A quick attempt at a cleanup right before their wedding decades later doesn't tend to work.

See, this is why I'd ask for an apartment at St. Jame's Palace next to Anne. People seem to forget about that place and I would survive in quiet royal bliss.

Kensington is obviously going to be for William and Kate's crotch fruit. Better to settle at the down market palace early then battle it out for a spot at Kensington. All of this has nothing to do with Andrew, who was never important enough to have KP address. Had to settle for BP.

[quote]r137 now the sisters' public roles and income are likely to fall after their father's demise.

At least some good can come from all this. The whole grifty clan needs a good cleaning and thinning out, from top to bottom.

R180, I should think Charles would take the throne ‘before he dies.’ I mean, they don’t give those things out to dead people.

Eugenie and Jack currently live at Ivy Cottage on the grounds at KP. Bea is at SJP but no word on if she keeps that after her wedding. These are their primary residential perks.

[quote]Hilarious that the Klan here still think Charles would consider doing anything to curtail his own sons' privileges, or that he would consult idle William about major crises.

Of course he consulted William, he's his heir and the mess affects his legacy as well. "Consulted" doesn't mean he let him participate in the final decision, it means he took in his input and thoughts. And I'm sure he had plenty about this topic.

And I'd watch what you call fellow posters. Throwing around insults at everyone collectively nearly always results in a red tag.

[quote]All of this has nothing to do with Andrew, who was never important enough to have KP address. Had to settle for BP.

Buck Palace is the preferred address actually. It's the HQ for the monarch and main operation. Seat of power.

Why can't Beatrice have a private wedding? Scale the guest list down and don't have it televised. Later put out some photo's - none with Andrew in them. Just enjoy the day.

I believe that's what's going to happen, re her wedding. Smaller scale, no tv.

There will have to be security, because the Queen, Charles and other royals will be present. Windsor would be the best place for this, since St. George's is already on the castle grounds.

[quote]r197 Why can't Beatrice have a private wedding? Scale the guest list down and don't have it televised. Later put out some photo's - none with Andrew in them. Just enjoy the day.

Because these attention whores are incapable of modesty like that, that's why.

So Andrew will soon be questioned by the FBI either in London or he will travel to the U.S. He's not being charged with anything so my guess is that he's a material witness about activity in the house, not just his own.

I wonder if PA realizes that the FBI likely has tapes of him engaging in sex acts or receiving massages. His girlfriend at the time left the Epstein residence because she thought she was being spied on via hidden cameras. It's speculated that's how Epstein made his wealth - blackmailing wealthy people starting with the Victoria's Secret CEO.

Bea's wedding was always going to be small and private. It wasn't going to be televised.

[quote]r201 Bea's wedding was always going to be small and private.

Unlike her pussy.

R182 Oh please. WIlliam has nothing to do with amending of an Act of Parliament. If Parliament sees fit to leave Harry as regent and Kate as ordinary guardian, that's exactly what will happen. And frankly that's the better arrangement. Kate would already has exceptional influence over George, it's wise to let him learn to govern from his uncle who was actually being prepped for it at one stage in his life and has spent his entire life watching it.

As it is, Kate would be in training as much as George himself. And God knows thats not a working girl. She excels in 1950s wifery but not much else.

[quote]Unlike her pussy.

Thanks for the misogyny. It's been sorely missing here.

Kate did very well at the Edinburg college. She actually tutored William who was flunking. She's probably the smartest of the lot. I'm glad she is George's mother. Some intelligent DNA hopefully got passed to George, Charlotte and Louis.

Dumbass at 203, scoot out of here if you don't read what's been posted a million times before. William can see to amend the Regency Act if he wants, just like TQ did in the early 50s when she put Philip in that role. It was readily amended, it's been amended several times to suit current needs. Wtf are you on get a clue before posting.

You repeat the same drivel over and over with nothing new, about Kate and anything else. William has shown he'll do what he wants, if he wants Kate for that role he'll decide.

I doubt Prince William was anywhere near this decision. What for? This was the only course correction once businesses and charities started distancing themselves. And it helped that Charles has openly been gunning for Andrew for years. Williams office probably got a "heads up" before the announcement as did the rest of the family. Also, insecure Prince Charles will certainly not be wanting William to grow even bigger boots.

You're arguing over what would happen if both Charles and William died and a young George were next in line, right?

How could William decide Harry would be regent if William is dead in that scenario?

r196 nope, no one in the family even likes BP. Anyway, it's a drafty old place that's expensive to maintain. Getting an apartment at Mommy's house is not ideal. KP offers more freedom. If BP was the ideal setting then William and Kate would be there. Maybe even Charles.

Clarence House will likely be the official London residence for the monarch, with BP as an office and KP for the most senior royals.

R112 - you are correct, sir!!

r207 Charles doesn't seem so much as insecure but finally moving out of his arrested development. Monarchs all around Europe are abdicating for their heirs. I'm glad QEII stayed on, but it has to be annoying waiting around like that.

I maintain a soft spot for Charles. he doesn't seem vindictive and he has done great work for environmental causes.

I bet that after The Queen dies, the BRF will be comprised of Charles, Camilla, William, Kate, George, Charlotte, Louis, and possibly Anne (because she seems to take it seriously). The rest of the lot need to be cut loose. This Andrew/Fergie mess may be the final straw. The BRF has adapted to changing times many times in the past. They will do so again in order to keep the game afloat. And if it requires shoving out a few of them, they will do it.

R206 Go back and take civics class. Prince William cannot even propose an amendment much less pass anything in Parliament. He is at the mercy of the members and ultimately the people. The Queen has never passed anything other than literal shit out of her anus horribilis. The best they can do is request the PM to consider an amendment. Await a favourable cabinet vote which would then allow the AG to draft an amendment and the wait for the Commons to decide. And like I said, he would need a damn compelling reason why regent should be a woman who has never witnessed governing and would herself require tutoring when his more popular brother was raised as a spare. Your GSCEs didn't go too well, did they? Poor baby.

R212, Edward and Sophie won’t be “cut-off”, they do a lot of ribbon cutting too and haven’t had a scandal in decades.

Charles will not cut out his son Harry, easily one of the most popular royals. There is no reason to even do that given the number of responsibilities. William and Kate are rather lazy, Charles' can't expect them to pick up a lot more of the ribbon cutting slack. That will fall to Harry and Meghan. As the official head of the family, Charles can exert more control over that rift and hopefully find a solution.

Under his Majesty Charles I believe a slimmed down Monarchy would include the following:

Anne and Edward (spouses included)

William & Harry (Spouses Included)

Charles Royal Aunts and older cousins currently putting in the work. They will be dead in about a deacde so might as well let them bumble around for a little while longer.

If he lasts long enough, William and Kate's children.

The trick is to curtail the number of younger members that hold the HRH title and expectation of being a working member of the family.

Charles environmental activism is cancelled out by his activism for homeopathy - a pseudoscience that literally kills people who substitute real medicine for that bullshit. And the fact that he spent years using his office to influence government policy WHICH BREAKS PROTOCOL and then used up millions in public money to block freedom of information requests over those letters, makes him either stupid or arrogant. I'm just glad no PM was awed enough to put homeopathy on the NHS.

With 200 charities scrambling for Royal patrons now that Andrew is out of the game, Charles needs to think about how much he can realistically trim once he ascends to the throne. His grandchildren won't be ready for public duties for another 20 years. He may very well need to keep Bea and Eugenie around. He'd also appear as a magnanimous uncle

[quote]How could William decide Harry would be regent if William is dead in that scenario?

He would set this up soon after becoming monarch, if he chooses to do so. The current Queen had her amendment completed the year after she ascended.

I'm not going to debate the unhinged dummy at r213 etc who is clearly all over here talking to himself. They can research the Regency Act of 1953 when they get around. If they can read that is.

I mean charities around the world work just fine without royal patrons.I mean 200 charities for just one royal? That's overkill. Perhaps a less is more approach will be more impactful. Sounds like the UK is the charity capital of the world.

[quote]I doubt Prince William was anywhere near this decision. What for?

umm, well....

[quote]She's probably the smartest of the lot

Markle went to Northwestern which is a pretty good university. St. Andrew's is like Pepperdine. Rich kids get in.

I think all of the commoner spouses tend to be smarter than the royals. Life experience and an expectation of getting a job tends to motivate the brain cells.

@DanWootren tweets that Fergie arrived at Buck Palace. Looks like she's going to a party, smiling like she's won the lotto. Jeesh.

[QUOTE] after he and Fergy got caught in a "pay to play"scheme. Fergy was selling access to Andrew. They were both implicated in a lot of ridiculous, embarrassing shit.

Don’t forget they also managed to sell their marital home (a veritable tear-down) for many many times its actual value to some shady oligarch, most likely some kind of scheme. Sarah profited off that probably, because it was around the time of one of her bail-outs by Andrew.

"Oh please. William has nothing to do with amending of an Act of Parliament. If Parliament sees fit to leave Harry as regent and Kate as ordinary guardian,"

R203 - The only problem with Kate being regent is that she is NOT a blood royal and is NOT in the line of succession to the UK trone.

Prince Philip IS a blood royal and IS in the line of succession to the UK throne through his Great-grandmother, Alice, Grand Duchess of Hesse-Darmstadt and Princess of the United Kingdom.

"Andrew won’t have embraced his fallen destiny. He’ll have clung to the balustrades as he resisted. While the Queen handed him his P45, it will have been filled in by her heir, Prince Charles." Good column from Peter Hunt, late of the BBC. He also traces back current woes to the 2017 departure of Lord Geidt from Buck Palace. No one strong enough to hold the center there, once he was out.

"Kate did very well at the Edinburgh college."

R205 - Kate went to Saint Andrews University and Pippa went to the University of Edinburgh.

[quote]He would set this up soon after becoming monarch, if he chooses to do so. The current Queen had her amendment completed the year after she ascended.

Okay, thank you, I didn't realize they set this up in advance.

[quote][R203] - The only problem with Kate being regent is that she is NOT a blood royal and is NOT in the line of succession to the UK trone.

IT DOESN'T MATTER. She will also be a Counsellor of State as consort, as well. If William wants it, it happens.

CP Mary of Denmark is acting as Regent for Margrethe in Denmark AS I TYPE as she was recently made Regent there by the Queen herself. And she's not even Queen Consort yet! and born a commoner. AND born outside Denmark no less.

R112 - YES!! And again a huge YES!!!

If I had been born into that family (low level) I would love to have access to all the historical records and paraphernalia. What a treasure trove to have access to. What research I could do!

Wonderful.

I do know that Prince Edward did a video about the Duke of Windsor (I think it was called "Edward on Edward") where he accessed old letters that the family had stashed in (I think) Windsor Castle.

Sigh.

What wasteful lives some of these jokers live. What lost opportunities.

"William and Kate are rather lazy,"

R215 - No Schitt Sherlock!

I was trying to be delicate. I know this place can become a hornets nest when it comes the Cambridges and Sussexes.

Is it just me or has anybody else figured out that Ghislaine Maxwell is an operative? I mean, how long can somebody 'hide out'? Surely the intelligence services would have found her by now. I strongly believe her photo op at the burger place was telling us that. C'mon, she co-opted Epstein, she abandoned him as far back as 2016 (more than likely distancing herself from him), and moved on. She is on the radar, communicating with anybody she needs to.

There was a picture of a house in New England that she was purported to occupy with some bloke. If you look at that house, it looks totally empty. My guess is it's filled with all things electronic surveillance. If not, it's just one fugly white box.

Interesting theory, R234. I've been wondering why no one seems to know where this woman is. It seems she should be in jail awaiting trial for human trafficking.

"I was trying to be delicate. I know this place can become a hornets nest when it comes the Cambridges and Sussexes."

R233 - Do not waste good space and posting energy trying to to be delicate.

It my personal opinion that 70% of the posters on the British Royal threads feel the whole Windsor BRF lot are benefit scroungers and bunch of losers. I did not use to feel that way but I do feel that way now even though I do prefer some British Royals over others. Makes one glad to a Yank!

We're ALL glad to a yank, R236.

Geez, what year is it, 1992? If you told me back then that almost 30 years later we'd still be seeing screaming headlines like "FERGIE CRISIS SUMMIT" ....

I'm glad Andrew is getting some small measure of what he deserves. Glad Charles "fired" him. This is bigger than Andrew. This is about all the formal relationships with important charities and guilds and trade boards, etc. tied directly to the UK's economy and the very fabric of their social services networks. Charities are a key element of the modern monarch since back in the days of George VI. Service is the motto, and the monarchy's support of the state is critical to the monarchy's survival. With all the patronages withdrawing from Andrew, saying he is not wanted, it threatens the fragile relationships the monarchy has, goes to the heart of their usefulness. So drastic measures were definitely in order.

But long term it might be a "Be careful what you wish for" situation. The key to the monarchy's successful functioning, is its visibility. Getting all of the RF out into the community doing things. That means the Kents, the Glouchesters, the Cambridges, Princess Anne, the Essex contingent, and the Sussexes, are all deployed to events all over the UK to support, to be present, to bind the communities together as part of the national trust.

They assist with trade and tourism and support the economic health of the UK by serving on a lot of boards and commissions. So William may not have the luxury of just focusing on "meaningful things he cares about." He may have to sit in on meetings and do meet & greets with all kinds of special interests to support the British economy.

But here's the thing. A "slimmed down" monarchy might not be able to honor all the commitments they need to honor to survive and appear "necessary." instead of superfluous. Having extended family around to cut a few ribbons, dance a jig, and drink stout at a street festival comes in handy since the A- listers aren't going to confer that level of importance to it.

The Kents and other lesser titled nobles make a lot of appearances. Sophie and Edward do too. If Beatrice and Eugenie want to be taken seriously, they need to act serious and cut mom loose. Fergie keeps pushing those girls and defining what their role ought to be and it's not her place. They're grown-assed women and they have to earn a place on their own steam. And Charles may want to think twice before he streamlines the monarchy right out of existence.

[R205] - Kate went to Saint Andrews University and Pippa went to the University of Edinburgh.

Thanks. Is Saint Andrews a decent school?

R233 R234 Ghislaine Maxwell is an expert at hiding, her Father Capt 'Fat' Bob Maxwell was the biggest crook in UK history and swindled tens of thousands of pensioners. The family has form.

Rubbish, r239. Most people don’t give a shit about seeing one of these parasitic leeches turning up to cut the ribbon of a supermarket opening. I’ve always felt that the majority of the Polls stating that the the British Public support the keeping of the monarchy as complete bullshit.

It seems similar to the Brexit Polls: nothing but wishful thinking by the powers that be.

"Thanks. Is Saint Andrews a decent school?"

R240 - As one poster stated, the undergraduate school is probably equivalent to Pepperdine University or maybe almost Notre Dame.

Huh? St. Andrew's is a much better school than Pepperdine

[quote] If Beatrice and Eugenie want to be taken seriously, they need to act serious and cut mom loose.

It will NEVER happen. Fergie has leeched off her daughters their entire lives. The only way to cut her loose is through death.

I agree r242. If Prince Andrew has 200 charities under his patronage, then how are they able to really fundraise off his name. Seems like any decent charity can snatch up a royal patronage. No one can even effectively focus on 200 causes. Maybe the younger royals should use their influence to encouraging some of these organizations to merge. Sounds like an excuse just to be busy, like ladies who lunch taking on a local event without ever getting their hands dirty.

Andrews met with Ghislaine Maxwell as recently as June.

“Klan,” R137?! Go back to Lipstick Alley, you racist twit.

"Huh? St. Andrew's is a much better school than Pepperdine"

R244 - Probably up there with Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia.

Maxwell's dad was Mossad and she no doubt is or works with them. Same with how Weinstein intimidated young actresses. That's how they have all of these powerful people by the balls.

People talking about Regent Queen Kate are forgetting a few obvious things. Although their marriage seems stable now a separation or divorce is always possible. No way an ex wife or exiled wife can be the ceremonial Head of State. Kate doesn’t like public events or speaking. She just did her first interview since her engagement years ago. She would have to do things like give a yearly address to the public meet Parliament etc. It’s just not in her wheelhouse. All a Regency means is ceremonial. Harry wouldn’t take custody of children or have any meaningful say in their upbringing just do the ribbon cutting on yachts.

Why hasn't Ghislaine Maxwell been charged?

Re St. Andrew's: a cousin recently graduated, he's from the states. He also was accepted at UVA, Duke, Northwestern, Tufts and I can't recall else. So its at least as good as those institutions. (one of his majors was international relations, if that matters).

Ghislaine Maxwell will be lucky if she doesn't end up dead like her buddy. Maybe that's why she's in hiding.

Harry and Meghan like their woke, high-profile projects, so I doubt they'll pick up any slack on the "bread and butter" engagements. Beatrice and Eugenie seem well-suited for that type of work and would probably be grateful for it.

Good grief r251 GIVE IT UP. If Will & Kate ever divorce they'll change things so she's not potential Regent. For Chrissake!

They're the Windsors, not the Al Sauds, they have some flexibility you know.

[quote]Harry wouldn’t take custody of children or have any meaningful say in their upbringing just do the ribbon cutting on yachts.

Well that's a relief at least :P We wouldn't want George harming himself from cutting any ribbons.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R242 - Hilarious post. If the polls say something you don't agree with, they're bullshit. If they predict an outcome you agree with, then they're valid.

You keep telling yourself that.

R180 - Harry's kids will never get that HRH even through Charles. He will issue Letters Patent stating that they will contyinue to be "styled" as they were at birth.

They did it to Wallis, and they can do it again.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R240 - Yes. It's one of the most prestigious schools in Europe.

R216 - Charles I was beheaded in 1649.

"He nothing common did or mean/upon that memorable scene."

You mean Charles III. (Unless any Scots in attendance here want to count Charles Stuart, the Jacobite Pretender.

Randy Andy and his fat, greedy wife Fergie are two of the most reprehensible royals in existence. Utterly worthless, both of them. I kind of got the impression from that interview that Randy Andy is, well, rather mentally challenged. All that inbreeding certainly would account for that. He needs to go away forever, and I guess that's what's going to happen. They're going to keep him out of sight as much as possible.

R256 Princess George was born for ribbon cutting.

If Prince Andrew is withdrawing from public duties, why is he flying to Dubai for a PitchPalace event?

He is doing that under his own steam, he'll get no support from the palace.

There was a time when he was very suckable

He should hook up Jizzie, she seems to be Teflon.

They all know that Harry is both foolish and not very bright and his wife is not trusted.

Should the need arise for someone to become Regent, it will not be Harry.

Odds are that this has already been discussed and decided, but will never be announced until and if the need arises.

He’s lost his grant of £250000/ year. Mom will have to pick up the tab s as nd Charles going to sideline him permanently. Daughters going on the local authority housing list.

^ Perhaps it was the Regent decision that caused the break up with William and Harry.

Andrew isn't "stepping back" from public duties. Mummy "fired" him from The Firm as per advice from the new CEO Charles Mountbatten Windsor.

R271 OP here. That was the headline from the Washington Post - one of the first to break the news. Maybe you should offer to write headlines for them.

The palace courtiers handed Andrew a statement and told him to sign it. That's the kind of "stepping down" it was.

Funny, I consider being fired from the Firm to be like Edward's exile. Getting an early retirement, complete with a mansion and apartments in Buckingham Palace is hardly a demotion. He will serve no jail time, keep his titles, get his allowance from mummy, then live off his accumulated wealth and an inheritance from the Queen. HIs life will be fine.

r234 I think it's pretty common knowledge that Jizzface Maxwell is an operative. She's got those tapes from Epstein's pedo island cameras and all his other pervert lodges. She's arguably the most powerful person on Earth right now, behind Pootrain. She's like a female Lex Luthor. She better buy an evil island (aside from Pedo Island) and live there because no country on earth wants her living there. I begrudgingly admire her Evil Empress ethos.

She's probably the one who is bringing down Andrew, but wow! THe ability to fuck with the BRF is

Lol R259, looks like the adrenal glands are on the fritz again.

is frighteningly inpressive.

Hit enter too soon.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I watched the video, and I assumed she was drunk.

I love Sarah, Duchess of York. Something about her; she irresistable. Wonder what she's doing at Buckingham Palace today. She was out of the country last week and was shocked to come home and learn Andrew wend ahead with the interview. For all of her faults and challenges, Sarah is more media savvy than most of the bunch, much more than Andrew.

She's NOT drunk and she was looking like that early this morning before she boarded her flight from Aberdeen. I've never seen her looking so happy.

[quote] If Beatrice and Eugenie want to be taken seriously, they need to act serious and cut mom loose.

I've been saying that for years on DataLounge. People always talk about how the girls should be working royals. I always said, NO, because wherever the sisters go, their drunken fool of a mother can't be far behind.

Look at her dumb ass showing up at Buckingham Palace today, looking like absolute hell, making weird faces and waving

I have to laugh my ass off at R280. "sarah was shocked to come home and find out Andrew did an interview". Talk about just plain out making shit up. She knew he was going to do it. She tweeted about it. And where ever she was, they have news and internet

[quote] Sarah is more media savvy

Looking hysterically happy when her husband going through the greatest crisis of his life?

Why is there no news about getting Ghislaine Maxwell to talk. Whatever Andrew's association, he is not at the very heart of this scandal, but Ghislaine Maxwell is. How come no one is talking with her? Why aren't Gloria Allred, her lawyer daughter Lisa and the victims accusing Ghislaine Maxwell of running a sex ring?

Sarah looks.....foolish and detached from reality.

They're a REAL MATCH those two. My God!

Meanwhile The Queen had fucked off apparently, before she arrived.

[quote]Why is there no news about getting Ghislaine Maxwell to talk. Whatever Andrew's association, he is not at the very heart of this scandal, but Ghislaine Maxwell is. How come no one is talking with her? Why aren't Gloria Allred, her lawyer daughter Lisa and the victims accusing Ghislaine Maxwell of running a sex ring?

[bold]It's TOTALLY bizarre.[/bold]

Clearly there are many worried folk who are scared she'll spill all those beans.

I heard yesterday that they don't know where Ghislaine is.

I feel sorry for the girls. I can't imagine how embarrassing it would be for the world to know that your father is a royal pedophile

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[quote]I heard yesterday that they don't know where Ghislaine is.

Yeah, right.

[quote]Prince Andrew was last night forced to pull out of a work junket to Bahrain this weekend after being persuaded by his family that it was ‘not a good idea’ in light of this week’s dramatic events. The beleaguered royal had planned to fly to the Middle East to attend an event connected with his Pitch@Palace initiative - less than 72 hours after being forced to step down from royal duties over the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.

[quote]But hours after the Daily Mail contacted Buckingham Palace to say it was about to reveal details of Andrew’s foreign jaunt, sources said he had decided to cancel it.

She was found in LA. How in the world was the FBI not following her?

I predict Andrew will take two deals. First, he will privately implicate others involved with the Epstein crimes without admitting any wrongdoing. The victims can sue Epstein's estate. The second deal will involve splitting his current assets between his daughters and agreeing to be exiled forever with a yearly stipend and modest rented household.

If he fights either option, he may not survive.

I wonder if his daughter's marriage will still go through...or if that guy will back away.

I heard yesterday that they don't know where Ghislaine is.

Tell the IRS she owes five bucks; they will find her!

They could exile him to the island of Malta. Just like Napolean. Which didn't work out well.

I don't agree that HM will be photographed with him again. He's a disgrace. Can't see him going to church or any engagement again with the Queen. The upcoming wedding will be interesting. The plans will be altered for sure.

The RF can send him into exile like Edward VIII.

[quote]I predict Andrew will take two deals. First, he will privately implicate others involved with the Epstein crimes without admitting any wrongdoing. The victims can sue Epstein's estate. The second deal will involve splitting his current assets between his daughters and agreeing to be exiled forever with a yearly stipend and modest rented household.

[quote]If he fights either option, he may not survive.

Survive what? the firing squad? he's already been stripped of his official place in the BRF. They're aren't going to send him to the guillotine, you know. Although it's not a bad idea...

He really doesn't have any assets, although I read he's got $ stashed away. His main home is tied up in a longterm lease that's inheritable; he'll get some funds from Mom's private funds. The rest is tied up in complex trusts for certain. He'll stay put at Royal Lodge out at Windsor, golf all day, and take vacations at expense of his rich foreign pals. Who thinks he's going to end up in a 'modest rented household' -?

Survive - as in heath.

r297/r298: he's still a private member of the BRF. He will attend church with his mother at some point, hopefully not in the coming months if they are smart (yeah I know...) but it's not like they will banish him to the Isle of Elba. He'll be photographed with her again, don't doubt it.

Edward VIII had to leave the country because he was a former king who abdicated. They didn't want him around competing with his younger brother. he was also a Nazi sympathizer, but that's another story....Andrew never had any analogous prominence to warrant him being sent to Canada or whatever. He's a run-of-the-mill, spoiled crooked aristo. They'll actually want to keep him in the UK, probably to keep an eye on him and his actions.

health

I don't get why they said he'd cooperate with any investigation. That would be a very bad idea for the monarchy as well as for Andrew, whether he could be charged or not. I think Charles is behind all this. It's very well executed-- they gave Andrew rope to hang himself and then took him out while Charles was out of the country so it would look like his mother is still calling the shots.

No assets? He sold his home in 2015 for 15mil, 3mil over the ask and stashed the funds in an off-shore trust. It's well documented (and was part of his last scandal).

As Prince and/or former Trade Ambassador, would there be diplomatic immunity? My apologies if this has been addressed.

My correction, just looked it up, sold house 2007.

[quote]r274 Getting an early retirement, complete with a mansion and apartments in Buckingham Palace is hardly a demotion. He will serve no jail time, keep his titles, get his allowance from mummy, then live off his accumulated wealth and an inheritance from the Queen. HIs life will be fine.

He sends his love.

Scotland has close to 800 islands. Andrew should be banished to the least populated one and let him take that fat red-headed disaster he once married with him. No one should ever have to see them again.

R285 so what’s new?

St. Andrews is one of the best Universities in Britain. It's top 'Ivy League' tier. Oxford and Cambridge are Harvard and Yale, and St. Andrews and Edinburgh are Princeton and Georgetown.

R257, that’s her ‘fun loving Fergie’ persona in full gear, still thinking that it’s charming to act like a dope in public at age 60. She looks GHASTLY, it seems like her face lifts don’t last long and it all shrivels up again. Smoking, too much sun, too much booze.

They could banish Andrew to Burntisland! The name is misleading - it's a Scottish burgh, not an island - but it's the single most boring place I've ever been in my life. It would be a fitting punishment for him!

r296, Napoleon was banished to St. Helena, not Malta.

"I love Sarah, Duchess of York. Something about her; she irresistable."

"Irresistable?" She's trash. Which is probably why Randy Andy married her; he likes the vulgar, low class type.

Why didn't PA lend to Fergie money rather than have her turn to a POS like Epstein?

I read somewhere that when Andrew and Fergie first met they bonded over their love of pranks and fart jokes. It might have been in the Kitty Kelley book The Royals.

I held HRH's willie whilst he shagged 14 yr olds. Not bad work if one can get it. What.

They bonded over their mutual love of cocaine and the Hippodrome r316.

St. Andrews is a very good university. In the UK, university admission is more fair and more transparent.

Nonetheless, admission to St Andrews is not as competitive as an Ivy League school. There are US kids getting rejected from Syracuse who would get into St Andrews. In general, the UK schools rely more on objective criteria. So they are MUCH better. But St Andrews just isn’t that hard to get onto.

There are not students getting rejected from Syracuse who then get into St Andrews. Syracuse is a B-list school in the US, and that's generous. A great b-ball team and decent Comms school do not a great university make. It's not even a back up school for Ivy applicants (sorry Orangemen fans).

There are kids who don't get into Georgetown perhaps, or Brown or Columbia, who might get into St Andrews. Those are A- and A- list schools,stateside.

Ghislaine is smart, very, very smart. I believe she's built an Ivory Tower, where she lives and breathes. If anybody comes after her, and she goes down, she has set up a systematic fall of and opening of all she knows. Automatically triggered. Let's delve into fiction. All internet traffic, all television, all radio transmissions are interrupted. Her darling face appears in closeup. The show begins, with video, with names, more video. She's set it up so it's impossible to trace its origin, it's impossible to shut it down. Within an hour, every known name is either dead or running for their phial of kool aid. THAT'S how powerful I think this woman is...

[quote]r301 They didn't want Edward VIII around competing with his younger brother. He was also a Nazi sympathizer, but that's another story

Well, we all know Big Liz had her own Nazi salute down at a very young age, so...

r319 No American graduating even a good high school with great grades could automatically get the 5 A's at A-level required for entrance to St. Andrew's.

I know you want Andrew's to be a middling school because Kate went there and Meghan only went to NorthWestern, But it's not a middling school. It's a top school where straight A students who missed a place at (tiny, with few places to begin with) Oxbridge go.

Although I'm guessing you'll now merely claim that Oxbridge is on par with Northwestern, right, r323?

Your wishing it does not make it so.

What exactly are Andrew's crimes? That an ex-prostitute claims that he had sex with her 20 years ago, when she was 17? This makes him a pedophile? Where is her proof?

Sarah is consistent in that she always acts inappropriately in any given situation. She was either drunk and/or just thrilled to be momentarily back at Buckingham Palace.

I think Andy and Sarah are thrilled to be out of public life and free to live the good life.

I've know some really dumb people to come out of Northwestern with a degree. I ain't all that!

St. Andrews will take a kid out of a US HS if they have good ACT/SAT scores and a couple of good subject SATs and not horrible grades. Syracuse might not. You may disagree, but you probably haven’t visited Syracuse and St Andrews and U of Edinburgh. I have, my kids are in or have graduated from one of the “best” public schools in the US and I am a ACT/SAT tutor. They will actually tell you on the St. Andrews tour, “Oh, yeah, you’ll get in.”

St. Andrews is a good school. Not hard AT ALL for a smart US kid to get into, compared to an Ivy. Maybe harder for a UK kid. Highly suggestive of above average intelligence. But no more than that. The idea that it’s equivalent to Princeton is ludicrous. You might get into Princeton if you are a legacy / minority / athlete, but if you aren’t, you aren’t getting in. But for the average kid very smart kid, no comparison. St. Andrews - do-able. Princeton- talk to Felicity Huffman.

If you have smart kids and won’t qualify for financial aid - send your kids to a UK school. You are insane not to unless your funds are unlimited or they get into an Ivy or MIT/Cal tech/ Chicago/ Berkeley. UK schools are better, admissions are more transparent as easier and fairer, and it costs LESS. St. Andrews is fantastic. As is Edinburgh. And they will accept you if you are not a screw up and you are smart. unlike Princeton who will reject an Asian with a 4.0 GPA and 1600 SAT scores.

Kate is almost certainly of above average intelligence. But possibly not very much more.

For those deluded souls who want to drag St. Andrews because they can't stand it that Kate Middleton got into it, did well, and graduated from it, and are quite hilariously trying to compare it to Syracuse:

"The Times Higher Education World Universities Ranking names St Andrews among the world's Top 50 universities for Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities. St Andrews has consistently held the highest student satisfaction scores amongst all multi-faculty universities in the United Kingdom."

"St. Andrews had the third-highest entry standard of undergraduate admission in the UK, after Oxford and Cambridge, and attained an average UCAS Entry Tariff of 207 points. The Guardian ranks the Schools of Classics, Economics and Finance, Geography and Sustainable Development, History of Art, International Relations and, Physics and Astronomy first whilst The Times and Sunday Times ranks the Schools of English, Anatomy and Physiology and Middle Eastern and African Studies first, and the Complete University Guide ranks Anatomy and Physiology, Management, Middle Eastern and African Studies and, Physics and Astronomy first. . . . St Andrews has consistently held the highest student satisfaction scores amongst all multi-faculty universities in the United Kingdom.

. . . . Six Nobel Laureates are among St Andrews' alumni and former staff: two in Chemistry and Physiology or Medicine, and one each in Peace and Literature."

You were saying?

Yeah, I know, it bites, R319, doesn't it?

You don't need to be a genius to graduate from an Ivy League school or from St Andrews or from OxBridge for that matter (cf. David Cameron).

But you do need to be better than good at schools (unless you're Prince William) and you do need five "A" A-Levels and lots of other things that the Admissions Board at Syracuse can only dream about.

And spare us the "Kate is above average intelligence but not much more than that."

And that statement means . . . what?

Who else in the BRF is "much more than that" - wait, let me guess: Meghan Markle, who flunked the exam for that internship position in Argentina that her Dad's brother pulled strings to get her into despite flunking the exam.

R329, Kate got into St Andrews to study one of the easiest degrees there is - with the lowest entry requirements in terms of A level grades. Had she applied to study a more highly regarded subject like English or Law, she wouldn't have stood a chance of getting in.

So what does it cost for an American to go to St Andrew's?

The equivalent of the Ivy League in the UK is the Russell Group. St Andrews is not amongst the Russell Group universities. Its star has waned.

When Kate and W went to ST A, the government still paid all tuition fees for university students.

R332, it is less than most “good” US universities and you can get a degree In 3, not 4 years. It’s not half, but significantly less. For exact figures, you’ll have to use the Google machine.

Nobel Prize Winners from Syracuse University: zero.

But, they DID develop the technology and software that helped two physicists from MIT and CalTech to win it in 2017.

And by the way, Pippa's school?

"The University of Edinburgh is ranked 20th in the world by the 2020 QS World University Rankings."

How fucking pathetic: an attempt to drag one of the best schools in the world to prove that Prince William's wife just ain't that smart.

So far, Kate's proved herself to be much, much smarter than some people bargained for.

I believe Sarah...and Andrew are clinging to the notion that this is temporary, and they believe they will ride it out. The reality of what his"sentence "is has not yet set in. Andrew was always a pompous,entitled, arrogant party boy. So they are smiling waving, he thinks he can hop on a plane to Bahrain, etc. There is something a bit like Donald Trump jr. about Andrew. Neither Sarah or Andrew can survive too far from money or celebrity.

Meghan's uni North Western is well established, and all students regardless of degree have to have a 3.53 on the 4.0 GPA scale indicating that primarily B+ students are accepted and ultimately attend.

It's a trend amongst the middle class here in the UK to apply for degrees with low grade requirements at good unis esp if you are a grifter like Middleton who was only at uni to find a wealthy husband.

The UK has several outstanding universities. It also has a fraction of the population of the US. Kate getting into and graduating from St Andrew is nice, but it’s not a big deal. St Andrew’s is becoming a safety school for NYC/Westchester kids.

According to the DM, one of the Cambridge kids wasn't feeling well, and there was no one to "step in" at the last moment.

I find this difficult to believe. Isn't that what Nanny Maria is for?! Was it her night off? Is she on holiday?! Doesn't Aung Pippa live in West London?!

This doesn't add up.

Speculation is that Kate wasn't feeling well because there's another one on the way.

Andrew knows this is over. He's retired now. They're not going to banish him. Ill advised association with Epstein. Yeah, no shit. But this has to be be the most ill-advised interview in the history of interviews. It's still shocking to me that he gave the interview. I'm dumbfounded. Why did he do this? It's just insane.

NOw Andrew and Sarah can get remarried. Why should they care now? I read that Philip doesn't even care any longer that they're together. They can live their lives out of the spotlight. Grow old together legally hitched again.

R338 - "Several outstanding universities. . ."

You mean like Oxford, Cambridge, the LSE, University of Edinburgh, St Andrews, University College of London, Imperial College London, Kings College London . . .

So, you're saying the little snots in Scarsdale, NY and Grosse Point, MI, and Brookline, MA aren't interested in Syracuse?

But I thought . . . .

R338 - Hey, George W. Bush went to Yale.

[quote]r341 Why did he do this? It's just insane.

When you've been raised and live in a world of isolated privilege, you don't second guess yourself.

He thought he knew best, and it blew up in his face.

The Russell Group are Redbrick Universities you utter berk. Decent but literally a class below - yes, literally - not just Oxbridge but also well below below Andrew's/Edinburgh. Redbricks are also below Durham.

Hardly "Ivy League" level, more of a decent B level like NorthWestern.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about, so you can stop pretending you do now.

[quote]I've know some really dumb people to come out of Northwestern with a degree. I ain't all that!

The same can be said for Harvard, so what's your point?

[quote]St. Andrews will take a kid out of a US HS if they have good ACT/SAT scores and a couple of good subject SATs and not horrible grades. Syracuse might not. You may disagree, but you probably haven’t visited Syracuse and St Andrews and U of Edinburgh. I have, my kids are in or have graduated from one of the “best” public schools in the US and I am a ACT/SAT tutor. They will actually tell you on the St. Andrews tour, “Oh, yeah, you’ll get in.”

Actually I've been to Syracuse and St Andrews. I stated upthread a younger cousin graduated St A's, which he chose over UVA, Duke and Tufts. All of which are not Ivies, but next-level schools (some might say "A-" grade). He valued the academics at St A's, as well as the 'change of scenery' of living in the UK for four years.

I've no doubt as you stated it's easier for a US student to get into St A's than the TOP Ivies (Harvard, Yale, Princeton). I would wobble my bet on it being easier than Brown or Columbia though, depending on your major. I also would agree it's tougher for UK kids to get in. Top schools today value geographic diversity; it's easier for a good student from S. Dakota to get into an Ivy than someone who came out of Brookline HS with equivalent resume, for ex. It's likely the same in the UK these days.

Since this is a royal post and it's come up: Northwestern is a good school. Not Ivy or close, but competitive. Not a Meghan stan, but to be fair she attended for their drama/theatre program, which is one of the best in the US. Their comms school is very good as well.

That is NOT a statement that M is 'smarter' than Kate though. I'd say they were equally educated, both have BA degrees.

Just because you were admitted to a certain Uni, doesn't mean you did well there. I sometimes worry my doctors barely scraped by. What if your high priced attorney passed with the lowest grade allowable; who would know?

Isn't he one of the laziest Royals, yachts and chasing pussy? He doesn't get out there and cut the new supermarket ribbons, etc. like some. Brits expect them to work for the posh life they enjoy.

GURLS !!! Back to the topic please?

So, now we add Andrew to Sparkle and Dim as members of the RF who have given really, really foolish video interviews in a very short period of time.

One would think that after the disastrous examples of both the Diana and Charles interviews in the distant past, that the RF would as forcefully as possible come down hard on members of the family who choose this path.

From what I read, Sparkle and Dim's interview was done without the knowledge of the RF, while Andrew's was known.

Repeating the same behavior over and over expecting a different result is a definition of crazy.

Well, now Andrew is paying a price.

Did the other duo hear the the warning?

The Russell Group are an association of public research universities, of which Durham is one.

But let's take Imperial College London:

"In 2019–20, Imperial is globally ranked 9th in the Times Higher Education World University Rankings, 9th in the QS World University Rankings, 24th in the Academic Ranking of World Universities, and 8th in Reuters The World's Most Innovative Universities. Student, staff, and researcher affiliations include 14 Nobel laureates, 3 Fields Medalists, 1 Turing Award winner, 74 Fellows of the Royal Society, 87 Fellows of the Royal Academy of Engineering, and 85 Fellows of the Academy of Medical Sciences."

Let's take the London School of Economics:

"The LSE is part of the Golden Triangle" of universities in south-east England. For the subject area of social science, LSE places second in the world in the QS Rankings, tenth in THE Rankings, and eighth in the Academic Ranking of World Universities. LSE is ranked among the top twenty universities nationally by all three UK tables, while internationally LSE is ranked in the top 50 by two of the three major global rankins. In the 2014 Research Excellence Framework, the School had the highest proportion of world-leading research among research submitted of any British non-specialist university.

. . . As of 2017, 26% (or 13 out of 49) of all the Nobel Memorial Prizes in Economics have been awarded or jointly awarded to LSE alumni, current staff or former staff, making up 16% (13 out of 79) of all laureates. LSE alumni and staff have also won 3 Nobel Peace Prizes and 2 Nobel Prizes in Literature."

The Russell Group contains good, very good, and fantastic schools. Calling them all a grade lower than . . . is the height of berkdom.

The LSE is probably harder to get into than St Andrews.

The Duchess of Cambridge has a master’s degree, not a BA.

Well if we must get back on topic - I believe Princess Eugenie went to Durham University.

Sarah Ferguson went to . . . Queen's Secretarial School.

Diana went to a finishing school in Switzerland.

So what are Andrew and Sarah doing tonight? Drunk as skunks and singing "What Do the Common Folk Do?"

I cannot believe a discussion about Andrew has become about the Cambridges and Sussexes!

[quote] Oxford and Cambridge are Harvard and Yale, and St. Andrews and Edinburgh are Princeton and Georgetown.

Princeton is not in any way lesser than Harvard or Yale.

Bushes were Yale men.

Sometimes Sarah's grinning face reminds me uncomfortably of the Bride of Chucky.

Wasn't she a ginge, too?

She can only wish she looked as good as the Bride of Chucky.

I *DEMAND* Muriel delete all posts about universities and colleges so we can focus on the subject at hand!

STOP being racist, r362. Only a member of the Klan would demand such a thing.

[quote]I cannot believe a discussion about Andrew has become about the Cambridges and Sussexes!

You haven't spent much time around these parts, have you hon?

r354 doesn't she have the equivalent of a US undergrad BA. A four year diploma.

A masters in the US is an extra 2 to 3 year degree earned after the BA/BS (undergrad) degree.

[quote]doesn't she have the equivalent of a US undergrad BA. A four year diploma.

Yes. A masters in Scotland isn’t the same as one in the US.

r157

[quote]The optics of both Harry and Andrew stepping down from royal duties would be dire, and it would look like the brf was shattering.

Not to mention that Andrew was coddled and protected, while Harry was pushed because he has a biracial wife. The Royal flacks tying Andrew to the Sussexes earlier in the week and the Palace protecting Andrew as of yesterday morning were unnerving.

[bold]Andrew's Privileges[/bold]

Andrew's remaining privileges keep changing by the hour, with more and more extreme measures called for. Obviously, neither Andrew nor Fergie believe this the end. They expect to ride it out and be restored. The York Restoration. We need to see where they are at in a few weeks, regarding

--Royal travel, have heard yes and no --No more balcony appearances --No royal work for the Yorkies --His residency and office in BP --Charities (I am thinking of - "Mummy, if I find the funding on my own, can I keep Pitch@Palace.")

[bold]Fergie is vile[/bold]

Della, r314 [quote]Why didn't PA lend to Fergie money rather than have her turn to a POS like Epstein?

Very odd, such a small amount.

I don't have the full story. It appears to have been a first payment from Epstein either to Fergie or to Andrew through Fergie. Or, perhaps a public acknowledgement of a smaller amount of what, in reality, was a much larger sum.

I don't know if the money was for services rendered or for some money laundering scheme. I do know that more money flowed in that channel, but not the total amount.

Della, hope this convoluted explanation helps!

r278 - I saw your video, thank you posting. Fergie has no sense of decorum. How the BRF allows her to be near them when Meghan is smeared in the press daily...makes one wonder.

Fergie made paid appearance for Saudi Arabia paid by non-other than MBS (ole bone saw).

"What exactly are Andrew's crimes? That an ex-prostitute claims that he had sex with her 20 years ago, when she was 17? This makes him a pedophile? Where is her proof?"

There are others who back up her claims. Where is the proof that he's telling the truth, since everyone is laughing at him for being such a bad liar

"NOw Andrew and Sarah can get remarried. Why should they care now?": I doubt Andrew wants to remarry Fergie now that he has lost his position. Probably the initial idea was divert from the scandal. Now that he's not on the payroll, we will surely see him fucking around left and right. The oligarchs will still be happy to entertain him.

Regardless of what is right or what the press in clamoring for, Andrew can not speak to anyone, let alone the FBI about the Epstein matter. The mere fact that this is under consideration shows how foolish and unworldly the Royal eco-system is.

Please remember that Epstein was involved in sordid activities involving children trafficked for sexual purposes. Epstein's clients were among the richest, most powerful men in the world.

Donald Trump stayed away from Epstein after he was first exposed. When Epstein's case was reopened, he fired his Sec. of Labor (the DA that gave Epstein that sweet deal) immediately.

Epstein escaped justice "through suicide." -----------

Epstein's world, however it started, is now mostly controlled by the Russian mob. Very bad people, playing for keeps.

Andrew needs to quietly make himself invisible, keeping a low profile in retirement. He can never speak to any police force, even with an attorney present. His wife needs to understand that she cannot continue business as usual, mixing with the MBSs of our world.

It is not a matter of right or wrong anymore. Andrew's role in Epstein's world is an existential threat to the survival of the monarchy. Yes, it is that bad. The exploited children, the sewage of dark money Andrew/Fergie waded in, the criminal associates. It can destroy an already shaky institution b/c that institution protected, shielded and enabled Andrew.

If the BRF let Andrew back in or does not completely throw him out, it would seem that it is compromised.

[quote]Now that he's not on the payroll, we will surely see him fucking around left and right. The oligarchs will still be happy to entertain him.

I think this is interesting speculation. Just exactly what will Andrew be doing with his time, now that his royal duties are over and he doesn't have to play the "fake dutiful son" anymore. Will he golf a lot? hang out with his daughters and Fergie? perhaps spend a lot of getaway time on yachts in the Med with ME sheiks and shady Euro businessmen.

'The devil finds work for idle hands'. Will he get a clue and fly straight, or go completely off the rails now the won't have to give a rats ass anymore?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I find the focus on Fergie as villain to be very telling. You really think that muppet runs anything??? She's always just been the fall guy for a blood royal. Kind of like how when William was being called "workshy" and being accused of sidelining the Windsor side of the family, it was being blamed on Carole Middleton. Or how when it became clear that Charles doesn't resonate with commoners, it was blamed on Diana outshining him.

Fergie is no angel but isn't it obvious that she operates under Andrews aegis????? Those accumulated debts she had were actually shared debt. Its much harder for him to spend outside his income because mummy and the intelligence services will know, so he got around that using Fergie. This is why he cleared her debt when he really started making bank with his Kazakh billionaires. It's his debt too. It's why Epstein was paying off some of that debt. And if you think for one second that the Prince who has made millions from pay to play schemes had no idea his ex wife was selling access to him for 500K, you are mentally retarded. She's just his broker and patsy.

This seems obvious to me too, R374.

[quote]I find the focus on Fergie as villain to be very telling. You really think that muppet runs anything??? She's always just been the fall guy for a blood royal.

Very interesting what you say.

& FINALLY he's been exposed, hence the hysterical grinning all day long in front of the paps. I've never seen her so animated.

Unbelievable.

A friend's son here in Los Angeles recently started at St. Andrews. I was a little surprised, like - what? The family has no connection to the UK. Apparently his private high school pushed him to apply.

The DM is going all in: "What now for Papa's Little Princesses?" - the screaming headline.

The article itself is somewhat sympathetic though. The family is said to be 'rallying round' them. Personally things probably won't change much for them, they weren't working royals and only attended a few public events a year. That's not going to change.

^the link doesn't seem to be working. The Telegraph article is entitled "Prince Andrew refuses to give up Pitch@Palace, as it emerges he can take a cut of every deal."

Yes that poster is clueless r358.

No one who knows anything about universities would put Princeton and Georgetown on the same level.

Georgetown is a good school, but Princeton is far more competitive to get into and "prestigious".

I read the link at r377. Eeek! When will he LEARN. He just doesn't want to get it obviously. Still grifting, even after a public fall from grace that would humble the worst of us.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

From the Telegraph article at R377:

[quote] Aides close to the Duke on Thursday insisted they believed his withdrawal from public duties would be only “for a few months while we sort this mess out”. Other senior palace insiders said he had been “mothballed” and at 59 placed on “early retirement”. Terms and conditions for Pitch@Palace Global Ltd show the company – of which the Duke is the “significant” controller – is entitled to a 2 per cent share of any investment deal for three years.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The rest of us are getting really tired of hearing about how Meghan Markle has been "smeared", as if not a single criticism of her handling of her role was justified; and Harry isn't being "pushed out" let alone because he has a mixed race wife. In fact, he found a wife he could weaponise against a family toward whom he cherished far deeper resentment than anyone guessed, and in that sense, if anyone is using Meghan, it's Harry.

I don't think he really wants to stay in, and to that extent, he's also using her to leverage himself out, because he didn't have the balls to leave on his own; he's hiding behind her skirts.

The two of them threatened the British press a year before they were even engaged, and she's made it perfectly clear she really either doesn't underrstand the purpose of a constitutional monarchy, or doesn't care. She just wants to have it all her own way. Well, she can't. That isn't how this game is played.

They were out on the government's business in Africa, and Kate and William were out on the government's business in Pakistan, when Meghan and Harry stuck two fingers up to the government and the monarchy and made it All About Them.

They are a pair of whingeing, self-absorbed, tone-deaf twats. The bullshit surrounding Archie's birth and grandparents was mind-boggling. That fucking moron Harry tells some kid in Africa that Harry can barely get out of bed in the morning thinking about the world's problems? Really? Well, I'm sure as he lay there agonising, Harry was very comfortable indeed on his 1,000 count Egyptian cotton sheets.

And if they leave, believe me, they'll still be far better cushioned than most of us against the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. Frankly, I think neither of them really wants to stay in. This is a grand panto so they can leave, but blame it on the BRF, Britain, the press and they don't have to admit that they'd rather do whatever they feel like doing, get well paid for it, and not have to show up at the Trooping the Colour.

Meanwhile, the DM has just turned its guns on Andrew's blameless daughters in a fantastically vicious headline: "What now for Papa's Little Princesses?" The cruelty of the headline is breathtaking even for the DM. Andg they're both white and the Queen's granddaughters.

This is who the tabloids are, have always been, and always will be.

Get the fuck over it. Harry's a moron who's his own worst enemy. If he gets pushed out, THAT will be why.

I told you --

1 -- Andrew is going to try and keep Pitch@Palace 2 -- Andrew is involved in "dark money" 3 -- Andrew expects to ride it out.

^*Archie's birth and godparents

r386: I generally speaking agree with your negative assessments of the Sussexes. Whiny and entitled they are.

But if you keep bringing the "R" word into your missives here, you'll get the threads shut down. You keep attracting the unhinged "Klan" loon screaming that we're all racists here, and screaming for the WM to shut it down. I expect to see her here any minute, it's like she sits and waits for you to post so she can swoop in and attack.

Could you just leave rac*and ethnicity out of it? Pretty please. Make our lives easier.

From the link at r487:

[quote]Sources at one backer of the prince’s initiatives with the business community called for clarity. “To put it bluntly, this situation can’t last – the in-out-in-out hokey-cokey can’t last. So I would like to see some clarity on [his continuing involvement].”

what's a hokey-cokey? anyone.

Andrew likes a ginger bush.

[quote]r355 Diana went to a finishing school in Switzerland.

ie, summer camp

[quote]r370 Epstein's world, however it started, is now mostly controlled by the Russian mob. Very bad people, playing for keeps. ... Andrew's role in Epstein's world is an existential threat to the survival of the monarchy. Yes, it is that bad.

Well, I guess we grudgingly have to thank the Reds for [italic]something.

From the Telegraph article.

[quote]The company hosts events at[bold] Buckingham Palace and St James’s Palace, and even uses soldiers from the Household regiment as part of the theatrical staging of Pitch@Palace events.[/bold] One entrepreneur said it was “absurd beyond belief” that the company could take such a cut and [bold]it was “scandalous” that the terms were buried on the final page of the application process.[/bold] Pitch@Palace’s major sponsors – including Barclays – are furious that the Duke declined to resign, while other backers including KPMG, Standard Chartered and Bosch have already pulled out of funding the enterprise.

[quote]r372 Eugenie and Bea in the line of fire.

Which one is this? She looks like a foul little Russian spy, through and through.

Clearly transmitting something with that hat - -

From the DM article

[quote]Meanwhile, friends of Andrew are still wondering about aspects of the disastrous Newsnight interview, especially his bizarre explanation of why he could not sweat for a time.

[quote]He claimed he suffered an overdose of adrenaline during his time as a helicopter pilot in the Falklands War.

[quote]But a former aide to the Prince, now based in the U.S. tells me that during the 1990s the Duke had treatment to stop hair loss which prevented him sweating. 'We often went to Annabel's nightclub and even after ferocious dancing, he hardly ever perspired,' says the source.

[quote]one of the most prestigious schools in Europe.

No European refers to a university as a "school"--only Americans do. "One of the most prestigious schools in Europe" would be Lycée Henri-IV or Eton.

R389 it's so funny watching racists agree on what racist dog whistles they'll use to convey their racism. Everyone with half a brain can see that the attacks on Harry and Meghan began as soon as her racial background was revealed. And since then it's been a game of nitpicking a woman of color because racists detest "miscegenation". I dont want to read up thread to look for whoever left the KKK comment. But I do agree with him that there are heavy hints of the new neo Nazism we see spreading across Europe where anybody that isn't strictly Caucasian is dehumanised and attacked either physically or verbally as you are doing. I'm glad Muriel is taking racism as seriously as you suggest she is. The Royal posts have become a magnet for KKK, Neo Nazis and "civil" racists.

STFU about Markle, Kate, where they went to school and who's lazier. This thread is about Andrew and the scandal.

r374, r375, r376

Add me to the list that believes Fergie is just used as a decoy.

1 -- JMO, the role she played with Epstein was that of a cutout, a front for Andrew, a way for Epstein to pay Andrew w/out it being recognized as income. So Andrew accumulates debts in wife's name, Epstein pays for Fergie's debts, Andrew gets paid. Moreover, we don't know how much of the "debt" was real.

2 -- I also think Fergie substituted for Andrew at paid-appearances. For example, the one in KSA paid by MBS. She takes the heat, MBS works his way in, Andrew gets a cut. In the mid 1990s, before China became rich and accepted, I remember reading about Fergie making paid appearances at Shanghai nightclubs.

3 -- Finally, if someone unknown or unrecommended, like those reporters, showed up offering money. Fergie went to meet them, not Andrew. In this way, Andrew protected himself from the type of sting that ensnared her, but if it was real, he didn't close his options.

It's obvious that Philip Treacy designed Bea's wedding hat to go with her dress. The design reprises the lattice detail .From an artistic point of view, it is successful. But Bea isn't beautiful, original or confident enough to pull it off and the bland colour throws it off. I think it might have worked in black. Also, I think it would have worked on Lady Kitty Spencer.

What a lot of people don't get is that some of the lesser royals live in a world where different morals apply. The level of criminal wealth is almost unimaginable. The money is made though shady deals, arms dealing, drug dealing. Was no one shocked that Zara Philips is on the payroll of Dr Johnny Hon, to the tune of a great deal of money per year? Fergie is on the same gravy train. Epstein was part of that world, both as a supplier and blackmailer. At least the girls he supplied were sexually mature, not actual children.

And that world will continue, no matter what. Andrew may very well come to be seen as a martyr by those shady colleagues.

r402 - Wow. I know that, haven't seen it stated so boldly.

Your point is exactly why Andrew can not redeem himself by talking to the FBI; it goes agst the code and conduct of that criminal world. That talking point needs to be retired -- naïve, dangerous, stupid.

What the transnational crime world wants from royalty is social acceptance and money laundering opportunities. What minor royals need is money. It's a match made in heaven. Invite Prince So-and-so to your party and others will attend. Those crumbling castles present incredible money laundering opportunities.

Andrew's case is different because it intersects with the rising Puritanism of Women's Rights, #MeToo, institutional abuse of minors and the exposure of the world Farrow writes about. Epstein supplied more than teenagers over the age of consent. He procured children, boys and girls, too. There is video. I am not saying that Andrew is pedophile - we do not know that. The girls, so far, were over the age of consent, though still minors.

Yet, I wonder. If there's a sex party with very young girls say 15-19, do you think they'll keep out a 14 yr old? What about a 13 yr old that developed early, a 12 yr old? What do you think is going on in the back room? Want to peek inside?

Yes, R403, if Andrew spills his guts to the FBI, he will end up suicided just like Epstein.

r402, I copied part of your post on the Prince Andrew--Was the Fall Inevitable? thread.

I am surprised at the naiveté of many posters. They attribute louche behavior to aimlessness, lack of structure, etc. One suggested an office dedicated to helping minor royals adjust to non-royal life. Like a Royal outplacement service.

They are unaware of the massive financial incentives offered to the minor royals today.

I must give credit to the Queen and Prince Charles for acting decisively to terminate the relationship. We know that the Queen is pretty hands-off with her family, but she's had to think of the good of the many rather than the few.

If the statute of limitations has passed for Andrew, won't it have passed for Ghislaine too?

[QUOTE] No American graduating even a good high school with great grades could automatically get the 5 A's at A-level required for entrance to St. Andrew's

5 As? Are you insane or just not British? You can get into all the top universities with THREE A levels and the grades are dependent on which subject you go for. History of Art (hardly a desirable degree like English or Law) at St A in the late 90s asked for Bs and even a C.

Barely anyone takes four A levels, let alone five.

[QUOTE] The Russell Group are Redbrick Universities you utter berk. Decent but literally a

You have the brain of Joey Deacon! Oxford and Cambridge are members of the Russell Group. Utter utter spaz.

R390, "hokey cokey" is what Brits call the hokey pokey. Meaning in/out/in/out just like putting your right foot in, you put your right foot out. They don't want Andrew being in/out/in/out like the hokey pokey (cokey).

[quote]Looking hysterically happy when her husband going through the greatest crisis of his life?

She's trying to act like this is no big deal and everything is as normal, which admittedly looks weird when a British royal attempts it, it's really more of an American celebrity thing. But I agree with others that she's been the fall guy for a lot of Andrew's shady dealings and she's probably feeling some pretty complicated emotions over it, and complicated emotions for Fergie always seems to lead to a frantic appearance.

Evidence for the idiotic Yank frau squawking about 'five As at A level' and the Russell Group being 'red bricks' that Oxford, Cambridge and 22 other top unis (but not St Andrews) are part of TRG.

I taught English in London state schools for over 20 years. I had a sixth form tutor group and have written hundreds of UCAS references. Please stop calling unis schools and pretending that History of Art is a respectable degree.

Will the posters about the respective merits of various British and American universities please take their tedious discussion elsewhere?

I got into Durham University with 4 A's at A Level including Latin and Ancient Greek, I was offered a place at King's College, an interview at Oxford and was turned down flat by St Andrew's but I think that was because I'm English.

Oh for fuck sakes!!! Fuck off with your University bullshit. You’ve highjacked this thread with your pointless pissing contest.

Evidence that St Andrews, even now, doesn't require five A levels.

[QUOTE] I was offered a place at King's College, an interview at Oxford and was turned down flat by St Andrew's but I think that was because I'm English.

St Andrew's likes to be put top, or second after Oxford/Cambridge. If you put it as a third or below choice, it gets petty. Same with all the top unis. Durham is a very prestigious university. I read English at King's College, London.

Enough with the university talk, please.

the idiot announced that he was ceasing his Royal duties and then prepares to jet off to Bahrain in essence continuing his Royal duties as part of his Pitch@Palace project for tech entrepreneurs. UNTIL he was told by the family (meaning Prince Charles probably) to cancel the trip at the last minute because of, well you know, YOU'RE NOT INVOLVED IN ROYAL DUTIES ANYMORE YOU STUPID TWIT!

I think Andrew may suffer from some level of neurological deficiency.

R415 got three Ds at A level.

R419, we know that already, hoe! Keep up.

You're too kind, R419. He's just dumb.

Looks like Andrew is de King of de Nile.... Is this just a bad dream?

The TIMES today put up a piece stating that it was Charles who urged the Queen to force Andrew to step down quickly for fear the scandal would overshadow the GE on 12 December. It's the first time that I've seen someone finally bring that up. If true, it demonstrates why the royals are concerned with not allowing personal issues to interfere with their real job: helping to impart a sense of stability in times of national crisis, and not being seen to interfere with political tides, even inadvertently.

Again, if true, it also shows that Charles is quite capable of putting the future of the monarchy above his own personal interests, including Harry.

That said, the Queen was seen out riding with Andrew today. She just cannot seem to withstand her profound affection for him. All right, he's her son, and probably no one else in the family will be seen with him right now.

I think the assertions above re Fergie's role were quite interesting. Perhaps one reason she was summoned to BP was to get dressed down for her role in this and to be told to keep her loose cake-hole shut from now on, or else. They are quite capable of kicking her out of Royal Lodge, where she has been freeloading on Andrew for the last twenty years or so.

They are a hideous pair, no question.

All these fucking initials... WHAT is GE?

[quote]That said, the Queen was seen out riding with Andrew today.

They're great believers in horses being great healers.

[quote]She just cannot seem to withstand her profound affection for him.

That's what's called a LOVING MOTHER. Would you be more impressed if she froze him out?

[quote]All right, he's her son, and probably no one else in the family will be seen with him right now.

I wonder what your mother was like. Cold fish, clearly.

R425 - GE is the UK General Election, you big American spaz.

I'm English and I didn't know WTF GE was either.

Again, if true, it also shows that Charles is quite capable of putting the future of the monarchy above his own personal interests, including Harry.

Not happening. Ever.

[QUOTE] She's his loving mother.

And yet you have repeatedly suggested that Charles disown Harry, haven't you, you pickled egg? That's MOTHERLESS Harry who hasn't been consorting with pedos and swimming in dark money for 40 years.

[quote]And yet you have repeatedly suggested that Charles disown Harry, haven't you, you pickled egg?

No I have not. NOT EVER.

"Big American spaz", "pickled egg"? We're on a roll today!

[QUOTE] I'm English and I didn't know WTF GE was either.

Dreadful. The poster even gave the date - 12 December - as a big fucking clue. You are clearly Alzheimic.

GE - General Election. And I doubt anyone really English wouldn't recognise the initials, it's commonly used throughout the media here.

[quote]"Big American spaz", "pickled egg"? We're on a roll today!

Yes, that Mary is on a sausage roll - a cheap one from Greggs.

R426 - Jesus, get a grip. The point is not whether or not she's privately freezing him out, the point is that she's sending the public mixed messages. On the one hand, she's, apparently grudgingly, kicked him off the public dole, but on the other, sending the message that she really doesn't think he's as bad all that by publicly supporting him. She could, you know, privately comfort him without publicly supporting him five minutes later.

As for my Mum: Andrew would have turned out quite differently.

There's a difference between a loving mother and a mother oblivous to the dangers of letting a child get away with anything and everything.

The "loving mother" raised a son of incredibly low moral fibre, shallow, self-regarding, and stupider than shit.

I wouldn't say her "love" has done him much favours.

I agree that the Queen being seen riding with Andrew today sends the wrong message. She can hold his grubby little hand in private.

R436 - Oh, then, obviously you had a "cold fish" of a Mum, too. :)

R435

The female staffer who encouraged Andrew to do the disastrous interview has been fired. She's worked with him for 15 years.

[quote]I agree that the Queen being seen riding with Andrew today sends the wrong message. She can hold his grubby little hand in private.

They were going for a private early morning ride in Windsor Great Park and were papped.

And he’s the Queen’s favorite son. This has to hurt.

[quote]r438 The female staffer who encouraged Andrew to do the disastrous interview has been fired. She's worked with him for 15 years.

Well, that's too bad. She probably didn't expect him to act like an idiot onair.

[quote] She probably didn't expect him to act like an idiot onair.

He IS an idiot. If she hadn't gathered that, then she should never have had the job. She must be one too.

LOL, R437. I think the Queen believes Andrew is innocent of wrongdoing. She was forced to sack him from his royal duties, but I predict that she'll stubbornly and publicly continue to show her support for him in other ways. Charles must be shaking his head.

they probably went for a ride so she could talk to him without worrying about anyone hearing. You can't trust anything/anyone.

I live in a town of less than 10,000 people with another similar town 6 miles away. On CBS This Morning they show earthcams of different places in the US just before their commercials. They showed the town that is 6 miles from me and I thought jeez, they have cameras everywhere.

You knew that the PH and MM haters woul hi jack this thread. It could be about the king and Queen of Tonga and those twats would find a way to squeeze in some hateful comments about them.

[quote]they probably went for a ride so she could talk to him without worrying about anyone hearing. You can't trust anything/anyone.

I was watching an interview with Fergie and she said when the going got really tough, riding horses saved her. I can imagine this is the family motto.

I fully fucking DIED when I saw this

How did Andrew get so flabby? He looks closer to 65. He was slim and dashing when he was in the navy.

Has Pedrew been stripped of his public titles - Knight of the Garter ( 😆) and Vice Admiral of the Navy?

Sex and booze and drugs and booze, R448. The downfall of many a playboy.

[QUOTE] You knew that the PH and MM haters woul hi jack this thread. It could be about the king and Queen of Tonga and those twats would find a way to squeeze in some hateful comments about them.

Yep, the BRF DL Klan could not resist a few digs about Harry and Meghan being next in line for firing, and Charles feeling more confident about disinheriting his youngest son for spending money on his house now he'd dealt with the lesser evil, Mr Paedrew.

The monomaniacs here have been running their hate threads on Meghan since 2017 or even earlier. So many ugly racist comparisons between 'slender English Rose' Replikate and 'dumpy, coarse haired, Botoxed Meghan with her fat ass'.

Of course she loves her son and I don't expect her to disown him or cast him out. But, by all accounts, Andrew is a reprehensible person. Even if he hasn't done anything criminal, people who know him describe him as crude, boorish, arrogant and dismissive. He has a long history of shady business dealings and acquaintances. He reportedly has few friends. You don't see anyone jumping to defend him. It's sad that he's the Queen's favorite son. What does that say about her, or the other sons?

I would imagine the Queen has seen more than a few reprehensible royals and aristos in her lifetime, and Philip may indeed be one himself, or was decades ago. The tolerance for sleaze in her crowd must be quite high, with discretion valued above morality.

So - Prince Andrew believes he is in a time out! And he has a contract with his main charity to get 3% of what is brought in? Do I have that right?

[quote]Yep, the BRF DL Klan could not resist a few digs about Harry and Meghan

I just scroll past the minute I see one of their names. It's not difficult.

R453-that 3% really stuck out at me, The sheer greed is unfathomable to me.

The Queen clearly has a blind spot where Andrew is concerned, she always has. He is, and by all accounts, always has been a disgusting person. And that is partly her doing. Maybe that's the blind spot: if she acknowledges what a horrible person he is, she then has to ask herself, Why? and come to the inevitable conclusion: she had a hand in it.

Now me, the moment I see the word "Klan" I know it's the Meghanstan trolls who think she's a saint and William the spawn of the devil, and I just block and move merrily on.

[quote]Enough with the university talk, please.

Yes, heaven forbid we take focus off of your unhealthy obsession with this family. Put them on ignore if anything that elevates the conversation offends you

Fuck off, R263. It’s bad enough to try to gay bash an adult. But a child?!

Lots of ANGRY people on this thread even by DL standards...

r438

[quote]The female staffer who encouraged Andrew to do the disastrous interview has been fired. She's worked with him for 15 years.

She been elevated to President of Pitch@Palace, which Andrew is keeping as part of his private portfolio.

r439

[quote]They were going for a private early morning ride in Windsor Great Park and were papped.

...where they knew they would be papped. Assuming Andrew (thru the ever useful Fergie) didn't tip them off in the first place.

r443

[quote]I think the Queen believes Andrew is innocent of wrongdoing.

MI5 knows what Andrew has done. There is video. It is impossible that the Queen did not know. However, she may believe the girls are just prostitutes working a sex party. The kind all men go to. She's 93 and belongs to a different age.

r448

[quote]Has Pedrew been stripped of his public titles - Knight of the Garter ( 😆) and Vice Admiral of the Navy?

No, and the Royal Navy cannot be associated with Andrew behavior.

r450

[quote]Meghan with her fat ass'.

Hey, in her youth, the Queen was not a slouch in that department.

r453

[quote]So - Prince Andrew believes he is in a time out! And he has a contract with his main charity to get 3% of what is brought in? Do I have that right?

Yes, the Pitch@Palace, established not as a charity but as a for-profit Limited Corporation. The sponsors are now claiming they didn't know, that it was all in fine print. 👀

[quote]Yes, heaven forbid we take focus off of your unhealthy obsession with this family.

I don't know who you think I am, but there are literally dozens of posters on this thread who are actually obsessed, and I'm obviously not one of them, nor was I even close to being the first to ask people to please get back on topic. Go whine elsewhere, you tit.

[quote]Pitch@Palace, established not as a charity but as a for-profit Limited Corporation. The sponsors are now claiming they didn't know, that it was all in fine print

Seems unlikely that they had no idea. Are they going to claim they didn't have a lawyer go over it with them?

And if Andrew is a bad egg, his parents are partially to blame. This hurts Betty.

This was predicted a while back when Epstein was still alive.

This and the rift with Harry and Meghan could be the end of the UK royals. Even in Sweden the king has taken his grandchildren off the dole. Princess Martha Louise of Norway volunteered to give up her HRH a couple of years ago so she could earn her own living. Popularity of the Spanish royals continues to wither away. Scandals and issues with Catalonia...maybe by the end of the century there will be no more royals in Europe. Hmmmmmm. Maybe it’s time. I mean, what do royals really do? What purpose do they serve other than figureheads?

r462

[quote]Are they going to claim they didn't have a lawyer go over it with them?

They already are. See r394 for quote from Telegraph.

I wonder if the C-suite of those corporations enjoyed perks from their sponsorship. Remember when Farrow investigating Weinstein could not understand why the networks were killing the story - until it dawned on him that "they were all in it." This is JMO.

R450 point out to them that Meghans "fat ass" is in and Kates "pancake ass" is out.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Bit of goss there r468. It's strange how everyone forgets how Fergie came onto the scene in her early years, as the much younger Sugar Baby gf of Paddy McNally. She's never had a spotless, prim reputation. And she and Andrew met and bonded not over horses lol. They did a lot of partying in London in the 80s; think other types of substances.

[quote]But I do agree with him that there are heavy hints of the new neo Nazism we see spreading across Europe where anybody that isn't strictly Caucasian is dehumanised and attacked either physically or verbally as you are doing.

There are unfortunately new strains of radicalism these days which seek to harm. If you think gossiping on an open board about foibles of wealthy spoiled royals, inc their incredibly spoiled, insanely pampered wives, is ‘dehumanising’ and a part of that trend, well then you’re kind of beyond help.

[quote]I'm glad Muriel is taking racism as seriously as you suggest she is.

What she actually hates is OT flame wars, always has. The racial poster and Unhinged Klan Troll who clash here draw her ire. Also doesn’t like multiple posts on same topics.

[quote]The Royal posts have become a magnet for KKK, Neo Nazis and "civil" racists.

Not going to dignify. Nice way to label fellow posters – used to be a TOS violation here and prime reason for a tag.

I’m glad the multitude of people here choose to ignore these posts and stick to discussion. Good job, keep going.

[quote]They are quite capable of kicking her out of Royal Lodge, where she has been freeloading on Andrew for the last twenty years or so.

Andrew has his own lease on Royal Lodge, it's his home no one else can just decide who to kick out.

Fergs is a freeloader, though, agreed.

It's quite well know that Andrew has been an asshole since childhood. Former staff told many stories over the years about his bad behavior.

Why on earth did no one realize what unwise move it would be to give such a long lease of Royal Lodge Windsor to Andrew? If they had given a shorter lease on the property, Charles could have sent him packing. Andy could have lived out his remaining years in exile at his 13m Swiss chalet and no one would have to look at his mug again.

So the Queen had to tell him a second time - he was toast.

Well, [R427] over heah in The Colonies wot fought against your pinny little island and won, GE means General Electric. And thank you, I've been called a Thick Yank, but never a Big American Spaz. You've made my hour, m8. And whilst we're on the subject, I'm the only person I know who can name the monarchs since Victoria wiv their numbers and everything. Not even my British associates can do that.

Don't forget r472 about the Sunninghill debacle. That was the fancy mansion built for A & F, paid for by TQ, that they inevitably abandoned after their divorce. The eventual disposal of that property was also subject of rumors of kickbacks, laundering and shady foreign influence. It's like no matter what they do or touch, it all turns into a spectacle and scandal.

to focus more time on his pubic duties presumably?

r474, that is the megstan that posts crap about kate, I very much doubt they are british so please ignore them.

r475, as you and others say it is all about money for those two. I personally believe that all their associations have been financially driven, and all these rich men expect prostitutes to just be around for there sexual gratification as wanted. Frigging disgusting. Just so much arrogance and greed and entitlement from many quarters.

While the spotlight is on Andrew, why not turn it to Harry? He had his encounters with prostitutes. Did he ask how old they were or how they got to be in that situation? He is exactly following in his uncles path at the moment , where he pulls rank and acts how he pleases.

Ignoring PH and MM would probably upset their fans more.

r477 there have been comments in much of the commentary this week that all BRF members best be on their guard from here out, re their private lives, associations, and behavior. There have been pointed statements that media interactions by BRF members will be very closely scrutinized and probably centrally controlled going forward, since a big part of this debacle was Andrew's inept decision to do the BBC interview on his own, ignoring advice of BP paid advisors and experts. That's directed at all, but of course includes the Sussexes.

Charles really consolidated his already growing powers this week. IMO he's firmly got the reins now. So whatever his viewpoint is about such things, will be the prevailing rule going forward. TQ was notoriously lax re handling of family members, had a very laissez faire mentality; look for this to change.

re Harry and prostitutes: hadn't heard much about that. Not saying its untrue, but was anything substantiated? Beyond partying in Vegas with n'er-do-wells for a few days, what's the story.

lots of stories about him leaking out now LOL.

....

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I hope the bodyguard doesn't meet with an "accident" soon...he knows too much.

Prince Charles is returning on Monday...Can't wait for the fireworks!

Andrew's secretary fired as well for role in orchestrating the interview. Andrew's offices from BP cleared out. Yet he went riding with the Queen today (and it from the photo, it looks like Fergie joined them). Should a 92 year old woman be horseback riding?

R484 - what else can he say to Andrew? He probably won't be speaking to him anytime soon.

Apparently Charles was furious to see the pics of Fergie arriving at Buckingham Palace smiling and waving yesterday and never wants her going back again. He also said he doesn't want Andrew there.

Why was Fergie summoned to Buckingham Palace? She’s not Andrew’s legal wife, so she’s not a ‘Firm’ member anymore. Did she meet The Queen, and does anyone know what transpired?

Long Live King Charles! Down with Betty!

R386, somehow making the downfall of the York family about Meghan Markle

She's 93, R485

He's stepping back from public doody? Well, I should hope so! I can't believe he's ever done that.

Oh my god Andrew NOOOO!

The Duke and Duchess of York will not be denied. They will return to Buckingham Palace on the rare occasion. Charles can forbid them all he wants now or in the future.

Perhaps Prince Andrew can team with Matt Lauer, Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein, and Bill Cosby and form a meet up group called "Rapists R Us".

Andrew has been dumped by the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, the English National Ballet, and Barclays.

This Prince Andrew unraveling is happening at breakneck speed! I think people associated with his causes have had it. It's hard to feel sorry for the Queen - she enabled so much of it - but this has to have an affect on her. I'd hate to see that this is what causes her demise.

[R496] the English National Ballet is the unkindest cut. All them pretty girls in their tutus. Put the Dook on Soo-ee-side watch! Stat!

Why the fuck was she out riding with him now? She’s a rotten turd and a useless mother. I hope they get rid of the Monarchy BEFORE she dies. Will never happen but nice to think of.

The ride was probably a private talk. Away from listening ears and palace bugs.

R500 yeah, like they’ve cared up until now. Not buying it.

Andrew and the queen are in the center of the photo.

Who is the woman riding to Andrew's left? At first I thought it might be Sarah (maybe it is, but the woman looks to have blonde hair). I'm assuming the person to the queen's right is an assistant of some sort.

Wouldn't it be nice if during the ride Andrew told her he is going to basically disappear and let her finish her reign with dignity. Also, he should give everything he can to his daughters. And then get the hell out of Britain. And stay out of the public eye.

He'd never do it though. I don't think he has an ounce of true nobility in him.

The question ran through my mind if Andrew was hoping to take on a role with the trafficking organization with Epstein gone.

[quote] She’s a rotten turd and a useless mother. I hope they get rid of the Monarchy BEFORE she dies. Will never happen but nice to think of.

I'd much rather her alive than you.

So would everyone.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

You know Andrew as trade Rep, Andrew with his oligarch buddies and business schemes with Fergie, Andrew with the 3% Oitch @Palace, etc. seems like Andrew has always been scheming to get money. Almost as if he has no money, always crying broke,etc. And there's Charles who took High Grove and made it pay off, and they actually sell stuff. So it's a farm, a cash enterprise.

I teach at a private school and very mediocre students have set their sights on St. Andrews for some reason. They must be recruiting among mid-tier rich Americans.

[quote] The question ran through my mind if Andrew was hoping to take on a role with the trafficking organization with Epstein gone.

Andrew (as of now) is keeping Pitch@Palace, renamed Pitch. With serious sponsors like Barclay's and KPMG withdrawing, Pitch needs new patrons, going down market to the sketchier ones. Pitch is a money launderer's dream. Now, w/out the Palace sniffing around.

DM also has photo of Woody and wife visiting Epstein AFTER release from jail. So everyone in these photos knew he was guilty and wanted to hang out with him any way.

^ wonder who took the photos? Epstein? CIA? street surveillance?

I think Epstein really wanted those photos. He probably set the whole thing up. I wonder if he blackmailed Woody Allen?

[quote]r497 It's hard to feel sorry for the Queen - she enabled so much of it

Clearly she's a majorly shitty parent.

I’m pretty sure that was Sarah riding next to Andrew. The Queen never lost her fondness for Sarah, despite her antics and despite Philip’s feelings. Sarah was raised on a horse farm, so she’s got an in with The Queen who lives and breathes horses and country culture. Sarah’s family were country squires, like from a Jane Austen novel.

When Fergie and Andrew split around the time they were discussing settlements, Fergie had a meeting with the Queen, who asked her "What do you want?"

Sarah's reply was "Your friendship, Ma'am".

That's why Fergie has remained close.

That's not Sarah riding next to Andrew. Too slender, too blonde. It's probably a riding groom, they often go out and ride with TQ.

i find granny queen a bit aloof. but i have no experience of sweet gran outside of film and tv.

R490 - no, R346 was responding to another poster who, as the lawyers say, rang the bell first on THIS thread about Harry being pushed out because he got himself a mixed race wife, which is utter bullshit from yet another Meghanstan hysteric who calls everyone a racist who calls the Sussexes out for their own mistakes.

At no point in my post is there the slightest suggestion that the Fall of the House or York is "about" Meghan and Harry.

But I did suggest that if the House of Sussex follows the House of York down the crapper, it won't be because Harry got himself a mixed race wife, but because of their own feckless stupidity.

Just like the Fall of the House of York is down to Andrew's faults, which are also mentioned.

I know you Meghanstans have trouble with reading comprehension, but you might want to talk to the poster above who connected to the two stories by stating that unlike Andrew, "Harry is being pushed out because he got himself a mixed race wife who is smeared daily in the press"

Both of which statements are damnable lies.

Someone else connected to the two stories. I responded.

Can you freaking believe a 93 year old woman can go horseback riding - go Liz!

Are we sure Betty Windsor isn't strapped in within an inch of her life and riding side-saddle. Or did she actually spread her legs and is sitting on that horse? Damn, how does she get on the horse in the first place?

Due to her age, the Queen is relegated to riding a pony at Windsor.

Poor thing (the pony, I mean)

R518 has stated her boundaries

[quote] Why was Fergie summoned to Buckingham Palace? She’s not Andrew’s legal wife, so she’s not a ‘Firm’ member anymore. Did she meet The Queen, and does anyone know what transpired?

She was there because Andrew called her to come to the Palace. No, she didn't meet the Queen. The Queen had left Buckingham Palace, which is probably why Andrew wanted his ex-wife there so she could soothe his hurt feelings.

Does anyone know exactly when Charles is returning home? Camilla is scheduled to fly back to the UK on Mon, but I think I read he's going ahead to visit a few more spots, solo.

R524 And once again, Andrew chooses the absolutely wrong thing to do.

If Andrew is the Queen's "favorite" child, then she must be an idiot. He's the worst of the lot. Maybe she considers his stupidity and dissolute personality part of his "charm." I guess she found his antics amusing. I wonder if she still does.

Or, maybe he has a big dick?

Well consider she's 93 years old in the twilight of life and her husband, never the warmest of men, lives separately from her in poor health. She's clearly substituted her fawning favored 2nd son as her companion in her final years. I bet its a lonely existence and he makes every attempt to fill it for her, "Mummy" this and "mummy" that, etc.

Not saying it's ok but just a general explanation.

Oh, please. it is Andrew who probably insisted on visiting with Mummy. He wanted the photo op. He needs to be seen with her. She goes out almost every day to ride. he was probably over there complaining about Charles, importuning to get a reversal of his sentence. And the Queen, IMO has always know what a scurrilous, wild, irresponsible ne'er do well Andrew is. Sometimes the reason one kid gets more attention that the others is because he NEEDS a more watchful eye. And as her son if he is in trouble and he wants to talk to you, you listen. But she is not going to reverse this. It's not just about Charles and Andrew. It's about all the big firms like Barclays and other s who are withdrawing support. This really is about the future of the monarchy.

And P.S. Anyone who things "Poor Fergie" was duped by Andrew is fooling themselves. Fergie is a willing accomplice. Maybe he does play her because she is so needy. But she is more than willing to play in his yard. She cares a great deal about her status as a celebrity. Hell, in Fergie's mind she is still part of the RF.

Will Edo stick around to marry Bea? The shine of it all is quite scuffed now.

Will Edo stick around to marry Bea? The shine of it all is quite scuffed now.

If she were dumped it would be utterly hysterical!

Andrew reminds HM of the good times she had with Porchey. In his arms she was a simple country lass.

Maybe HM tried to hold him once and dropped him on his head. Guilty conscience.

Stepping back? I heard he was relieved of his duties, fired.

He's sending out resumes for a new job.

Her Maj needs to distance herself from Andrew, being photographed out riding with him is doing her no favours.

R518 The Sussexes have done absolutely nothing besides triggering racists by marrying and having the first openly mixed race royal. Thats why the media spent two years making mountain out of nothing with them while covering up for all the others, especially Andrew. You are fooling nobody with your racist dogwhistles although it's fun seeing you scramble behind your rock like a lizard. Your only comment should have been to apologise for drawing a stupid parallel and promised to seek professional help for your deranged racist mind.

[quote]It's like no matter what they do or touch, it all turns into a spectacle and scandal.

Once your reputation sinks down past a certain point, the only people who will deal with you are either naive or sketchy. That's where Andrew's family come in, because they really should have intervened much earlier and given him an ultimatum: whatever trouble you're in, we can clean it up now, but it never happens again or else. Instead they kept letting him associate with people he shouldn't have been associating with and hoping no one noticed.

Turn the oven to "off". Prince Andrew is done.

QE II knows that.

I adore that old warhorse. By far, she is my favorite celebrity. And for all her wealth and privilege, I wouldn't trade my life among the poor and obscure for hers. Her heart must ache, and at her age that's a shame ; on Prince Andrew.

TQ won't be too harsh on Pedrew. She doesn't want the first ever royal suicide on her hands.

[QUOTE] You are fooling nobody with your racist dogwhistles although it's fun seeing you scramble behind your rock like a lizard. Your only comment should have been to apologise for drawing a stupid parallel and promised to seek professional help for your deranged racist mind.

The resident racists on these threads always give themselves away by using the juvenile nicknames 'Megastan', 'MeAgain', 'Megain', 'Sparkle and Dim' or variations. They also become incandescent with fury if the crusty old Queen is criticised.

[QUOTE] You are fooling nobody with your racist dogwhistles although it's fun seeing you scramble behind your rock like a lizard. Your only comment should have been to apologise for drawing a stupid parallel and promised to seek professional help for your deranged racist mind.

The resident racists on these threads always give themselves away by using the juvenile nicknames 'Megastan', 'MeAgain', 'Megain', 'Sparkle and Dim' or variations. They also become incandescent with fury if the crusty old Queen is criticised.

Since we are nearing 600, I've made a new one for us all to reconvene at

There is very little difference to me between Andrew and Harry. Both suck up to rich people for kick backs and both have used prostitutes. Pair of pigs that need to be cut off.

These rich men are so abhorrent. Always needing more money but why? you can only eat so much or be warm and dry enough. We have a two bedroom house , i would be scared living in a 16 bed home.

They go to parties apparently expecting young men and women to be there as some sort of party favour with no regard to the people involved, then whine that the public want them to be accountable..

This applies to so many of the rich and powerful and it makes me so sad.

[quote]He's sending out resumes for a new job.

We'll take him!, r536

Harry's getting kick backs and partying with underaged girls and prostitutes? Really? IMO it is extremely obvious that Harry and Andrew are a study in contrasts. Harry had girlfriends. Andrew hung out with Koo Stark a porn star. Harry raised hell, often partied until the wee hours, and had few "moments" like the one in Las Vegas.

But Harry's father brought the hammer down, there was an intervention, and his elder brother, worried and embarrassed for him, exerted peer pressure. Harry has a conscience. He was mortified. He apologized. In his public interviews, he owned his misbehavior and insisted he would do better. And he has. He has been very candid about his mental health issues, and he has done a 360 complete turn around.

He's been been very hands on with his charity work. Oh, and Harry was in combat. Served with distinction in the military, and still sees his fellow veterans, wounded warriors, and supports them. As I recall he served two tours. In Afghanistan. Not billeted like a Royal on some Navy ship off the coast of Argentina.

So yes, when you compare Andrew and Harry, it is a study in contrasts. Harry matured, he outgrew his wildassed ways, and he always had a great and generous heart. He shows empathy and compassion in every public outing. He shines when he's around children, while I wouldn't let Andrew anywhere near a child.

Andrew has always been an exhibitionist, arrogant, entitled, self indulgent, and drawn to a degenerate lifestyle. He never takes responsibility, and never matured beyond blaming everyone and everything but himself. To hear him tell it he is completely misunderstood. Fake News! Those on the Extreme Right in the UK hate what Harry stands for. For them, Andrew is "family."

I'm tired of hearing about Randy Andy. There is someone that could mop the floor with Andy and give him lessons on sexcapades. And that person is, you know who, Bill clinton. Don't tell me the press will give this whore hopper a pass. Randy couldn't pass on much info to Epstein, Bill Clinton,plenty. Didn't Epstein help set up the Clinton Foundation? Hey I want the whole nine yards on Bill with pictures. What gives press?

[quote]Since we are nearing 600, I've made a new one for us all to reconvene at

Annoying thread title. What a bore you are.

Currently it is Andrew's ( and Fergie's) mission to convince the public that this is temporary. And at first maybe Charles was thinking it could be reversed down the road if Andrew changed his ways and things quieted down. But when Andrew tried to rush off to Bahrain and attempted to hang on to his "charity" and his 3% profit from it, using the Palace and his royal status even after major patrons pulled out, Andrew's "step back" was permanent. If they ever had any thought of making it temporary, Andrew himself, by his own actions made it permanent. he is over. No more public life for him. And knowing what we know about Charles, if Andrew fucks up there will be consequences. Financial ones. I do believe that an earlier poster was right. If Andrew is too cooperative with the FBI, he is toast. He will get Epsteined.

He needs to be taken completely out of public life, including the "family" events. It was leaked that he would be at the Christmas service (perhaps by Andy)? If they let him show up they deserve to have the monarchy toppled. If I was the rest of them, I would unequivocally refuse to be seen with him either outside the church or during the walk, consequences be damned. Heck, I'd ask Beatrice and Eugenie to sit this year out, too.

Given Christian teaching on forgiveness and the tenor of the Yuletide season, I doubt Andrew appearing at services on Christmas would topple the monarchy. What will be topple it is if he walks in supporting the Queen on his arm, as it will telegraph to the masses that the Queen really has lost her mind and needs to step down, post haste.

My guess is that he will appear but not walk with the rest of the family, perhaps arrive quietly by car and go in through the side door, making it plain that he is there to do his duty by his Christian faith, but without exposing the rest of the family to jeers.

And, with the Sussexes absent as well (hopefully, for good), the pressure on William and Kate to look splendid but cheerful, regal yet approachable, perhaps even bringing Prince George with him holding to both parents' hands to do the Happy Families bit, will be immense. Look for Anne, the Tindalls, the Phillips, Eugenie and Jack, Bea and Edo, perhaps even Margaret's children and grandchildren.

I do hope Kate has a really terrific outfit planned, and doesn't show up again in that short tartan coat and fur hat again.

R551 - On the contrary, the York girls are blameless, and I think the family would look cruel rather than sensible if they didn't make the point that Andrew's sins do not sit on his daughters' head, and they are still loved members of the family.

Lastly, leaving Andrew, who still has the right to worship with his family (discreetly, through the side door, the walk should be out of the question), and his daughters out of the picture minimises the absence of the Sussexes. In my view, the absence of the Sussexes should be the glaring one, making the point about who really are no longer members of the family.

While I lack the credentials to diagnose PA from afar or near, still, I can state to a reasonable degree of observational speculation that PA may be an untreated sex and pornography addict.

And I see that despite Andrew's downfall having absolutely NOTHING [sic] to do with the Sussesxes, Meghan has managed to insert herself into the story by having her "camp" leak that she wanted to curl up under the table at one of his comments. She really cannot stand being out of the limelight for long, can she? No one asked her opinion, naturally, and naturally it doesn't occur to her that she isn't ingratiating herself any further by her big mouth with the family already in difficulties - on the contrary, she seems gleefully willing to take the opportunity to rub their faces in it with another negative story.

Meghan leaking that story seems to me to 1) serve as payback to Andrew for leaking the Tiaragate story to pay her out for announcing her pregnancy at Eugenie's televised wedding, and 2) announce that she isn't interested in supporting the BRF of the institution she was happy to use to get herself what she couldn't get on her own merits before marrying in, which to me also suggests hat the Sussexes really are planning to exit the BRF. If they weren't, she'd have kept her mouth shut.

I can't imagine Charles and the Queen looking at Meghan's insertion of herserlf into this story, its spiteful disregard for any other consideration, and not looking at each other and agreeing that the BRF is far better off without Andrew, Harry, and Meghan.

Swedenise, Charles, that's the way to go, and the fat will melt away like snow in June.

For heaven's sake...all this drama happened 15 years ago. These women are clamoring for their day in court only now that he is dead and they can make a claim on his estate. Cynical old me thinks it's about a big payout.

The York girls are blameless regarding their father's activities but that doesn't change the fact that public sentiment has turned against the Yorks as a whole. Scanning the comments on all these (U.K.) articles about Andrew I was surprised that only a small percentage expressed sympathy for the girls. Andrew does them no favors by continuing to show up (the now-cancelled trip to Bahrain, the horse ride with mummy) nor does Fergie with her idiotic statements and ridiculous hamming at the gates of BP. Nor have the years of press detailing the York sister's unending vacations.

The anger at the royals is not so much at the specific details of Andrew's activities (which are awful), but that these pampered, privileged poodles thumb their nose at the basic civil contract that is their not-at-all difficult role. Agree with the poster above, Swedenise away, Charles. Charles, Camilla, William, Kate (and maybe Anne and Sophie as they do a great job at the bread and butter engagements) can stay and rest need to retire or disappear.

He needs to disappear for a good while. Where should we suggest? Argentina?

r542

[quote]The resident racists on these threads always give themselves away by using the juvenile nicknames 'Megastan', 'MeAgain', 'Megain', 'Sparkle and Dim' or variations. They also become incandescent with fury if the crusty old Queen is criticised.

"Incandescent with fury" is a wonderful turn of phrase.

Therefore my drag name would be. . . Incandescent Fury.

He's fond of the Middle East, so let's rule out all Middle Eastern countries.

r548 I don't think Bill Clinton will enter into the conversation unless Hillary makes a move to run again. If she does they will use Epstein to drag her down. They get no juice out of dragging Bill into this. Who else is he connected to that they would want to take down by targeting Bill?

Yes, it's perfectly all right to call Kate a "Stepford Wife", or "conformist" or "boring" or "anorexic" and label William an adulterer on nothing but tabloid gossip, but we must never EVER call Meghan "me-again" despite her very obvious love of limelight and ability to create drama over absolutely anything, even a mundane christening, or call into question the people who would give her a pass if she was found boiling bunnies for breakfast in front of Archie because her Mum is black . . .

We're really just racists and can't stand the Queen being criticised, despite the fact that most of us who can't stand Meghan's narcissistic compulsions have also criticised HM for her blindered love for her feckless son and for having spoilt him rotten. That includes quite a few posts of yours truly here.

But don't let that stand in the way of insisting that Meghan Markle, alone of everyone in the family, is being "smeared" by nicknames - unlike, for example, Waity Katie, or the Duchess of Pork, or any of the other nasty terms the tabloids have used against member of the BRF since time immemorial.

The poster insisting that only racists call Meghan names should do some research and look up the cartoons of the late 19th century.

Remember when "Private Eye" mocked the Queen by referring to her as "Brenda" and the story of her life as "Corgi and Beth"? (That last was inspired, in my view.)

Oh, but really, we just call Meghan names because she's half-black. Her own behaviour has nothing to do with it at all . . .

Don't be fooled by the link at r544.

It starts off with Meghan bashing and then throws in a little BRF bullshit. It's just another thread for the unhinged and they are trying to disguise it so it doesn't get shut down.

"And tonight's special guest star, MISS... INCANDESCENT FURY! Howze ya, Miz Incan?" Smooch, [R559]. My first grin o'the day.

R562, thanks for the perfect summary! And here I thought you weren’t self aware...

R558 - Actually, Royal Lodge in Windsor Great Park is quite secluded. I think something akin to house arrest is a better statement. Off to some fleshpot in the Mediterranean or the southern hemisphere will look too much like a luxe hol.

Royal Lodge was always thought inconvenient. I think it's perfect for house arrest.

R542 It's funny you should say that because I have always pictured Meghan's fans as white teenage to 20-something immature girls.

R564 - Why, fine, thanks. Nothing so enlivens an afternoon cuppa and biscuits than telling off hypocrites! Wonderful for the digestion.

And you, how are things going there at the offices of Sunshine Sachs? Busy? Ah, well, that's the downside of working with difficult clients . . . but it pays well, I imagine, so one must take the bitter with the sweet.

A link to Part II.

A no Sussex zone.

"Sunshine Sachs" is also part of their special language. To them it's similar to George Soros, who secretly controls everything, somehow. Any comment that isn't nasty towards the Sussexes of course must be from a PR agency that has a staff larger than a small country, blanketing the web with positive comments. The trolls can't imagine anyone doesn't agree with their racist warped views.

Of course these people are insane, but they think they're super smart and are incredibly smug, in their ignorance.

Koo Stark was never a porn star r247.

Who is the idiot going on about Bill Clinton? Did you freepers forget that Trump was friends with him, too?

Was Godfather's Pizza the real location of the kiddie sex dungeon partially owned by Epstein? I'm just asking questions.

"They could exile him to the island of Malta. Just like Napolean. Which didn't work out well."

R 296 Elba Island and then St. Helena.

Andrew would do well on Easter Island. He could befriend the large stone Gods.

He'd probably try to sell the stone heads to make a fast buck.

Andrew is busy crying in the shower, but not because of his utter disgrace. It's that Meghan's comments have cut him to the bone.

If only *something* would cut his bone, [R576].

I want Meghan to do the RIGHT THING as an American, and volunteer to go to the FBI with every word she's overheard him say (even if it's inconsequential.)

T'would be so delicious to see the palace melt down - -

[quote]Andrew needs to quietly make himself invisible, keeping a low profile in retirement...His wife needs to understand that she cannot continue business as usual

And yet we saw her beaming cretin face as she was driven in to The Palace - loving being 'relevant' again, despite unprecedented demotion. Admittedly she's holding hidden aces though.

[quote]I think the Queen believes Andrew is innocent of wrongdoing.

Sheer denial. Too much otherwise to take on board at 93. Let's just enjoy the horses.

[quote]Currently it is Andrew's (and Fergie's) mission to convince the public that this is temporary.

A ship which has sailed so far it's now a dot on the horizon.

The public never wants to see Andrew or Fergie again. Horrible duo. Corrupt, venal, debauched. How anyone can accept the positioning of this family above all others as the pinnacle of society is beyond me.

On one level, he must think this is awesome. The Queen will still fund him but now he doesn't have to do anything!

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

He’s likely thrilled by this. No more “work” but tons of $$$ to waste.

I can't remember but I read that Andrew likes to hang out with shady people. There was a report on it the day. He has many shady friends.

I can't believe the royal family are only "upset" about his Epstein ties. I can't believe nobody told him Epstein's shady background etc. Andrew just doesn't give a shit. He does what he wants and has for all his life, just like Harry.

Harry better take notes.

Harry is too stupid to take notes. His future will be very similar.

[quote]The Sussexes have done absolutely nothing besides triggering racists by marrying and having the first openly mixed race royal.

"Done absolutely nothing besides". Pshaw. Sure some backwards asses were triggered by the DoS marrying in, of course that was to be expected. There's just some people you can never eliminate. But "done nothing" -? The Sussexes have made PLENTY of errors, purely by their own poor judgment.

Opining that a born-blood member of the BRF -who should absolutely know better - and his pampered wife have made missteps in their handling of the media and at many times their roles in general, isn't racist in the least. They are open to criticism as public figures and BRF members. We critique many of the other royals much the same. Stop seeing racists behind every tree; sometimes a tree is just a tree. Seek help.

The Royal family has gotten away with the shenanigans of the surplus heirs for centuries, but in this age of social media and #metoo, that time is over. Someone in the family--probably Charles supported by William--is going to have to put the hammer down on the whole spoiled crew. Threaten their trust funds: They'll shape up.

So we come to the end of another full royal discussion thread. This is 3rd in a row to reach max capacity, nice job. And with relatively little warring or discursive meanderings, with few exceptions (uni/college rankings, klan trolling).

We even kept discussion of the Harkles/Sussexes (this was about Andrew) down to a min. I'm puffed with pride.

We can head out to the other existing Andrew thread below, which has been going for a few day. Some of us have already been over there. Or head over to the two new threads posted upthread (r544 & r569).

No preference for these, but would caution people to use the "Search" feature to seek out already-active threads before starting new ones on same topic,as the WM will delete repeats which only results in lost discussions. Please try to fill up one thread at a time or keep it to one or two active.

R582 - Yes. Generally, the standards are taken down when the senior royal who lives there isn't in residence. Of course, it could be a blind to keep people from believing he's there and encouraging, er, encroachment, but the lowered standard does mean the occupant isn't in residence.

I do think Harry and Meghan are on an oddly parallel trajectory with Andrew and Fergie. Both couples share a refusal to believe that anyone knows anything or can teach them anything. In fact, Diana suffered from a similar conviction.

Meanwhile, there is a video up on billed-bladet, Denmark's daily gossip media outlet, showing Mary and Frederik going in and out of some Jule (Christmas) entertainment with their four children, who seem incredibly poised, attractive, and well brought up. One can only imagine HM looking at it and wondering how she got it so wrong with hers.

Margrethe had some trouble with both her sons when they were younger. Frederik was rebellious and openly disparaged his father and dated plenty of so-called "unsuitable" women. Mary really settled him, it's nice to see.

Joachim also had a wobble, around the time of the break up of his 1st marriage. Was out nightclubbing, drinking a lot. He got with Marie and again, things settled down.

Margrethe and the Danish royal court handled his split from Alexandra very carefully, they took learning from the Charles-Diana debacle the decade earlier and made sure to have everything handled with a min of fuss or rancor.

H&M would appear to be on same path as the Yorks, but M is imo a lot tougher and savvier than hapless wayward Fergie. She's a survivor of sorts, with a much thicker skin, she'll always end up on her feet. Not so certain about Haz. He doesn't appear to have a major spending problem or enjoy palling around with mid-eastern depots or convicts, so that's a plus.

Do you think the Queen will ever publicly speak about it?

The Queen speaks publicly about nothing, and has been like that for 93 years. This won't change.

She may mention something in her Xmas speech about having a troubling year but that’s it. Cold as ice. No wonder the children are a mess.

So Harry> Andrew? I hope so!

So Harry> Andrew? I hope so!

[R593], I wouldn't expect my mum to specifically dredge out my personal fuck up(s) of this year, or any year (she's got lots of material to chose from) if she wrote one of those Christmas year end letters to friends and family. It wouldn't be mentioned at all. Stop with the cavilling about the Queen. Your job as Queen absolutely fucking stinks. Abdicate, you feckless cunt, move the fuck on, and shut your fucking trap already.

It's very likely that Andrew and Fergie used the girls in their money grabbing schemes. Terrible parents do shit like that. So. while probably not their fault (especially if they were minors), they probably know a lot. I'm not blaming them, just stating fact.

Fergie behaves strangely in public, so addiction or Mental Health issues, or both.

I hope the Queen will assist the girls and distance them from the parents before the Princesses are pulled deeper into this huge scandal.

I never thought PA would be the fall guy in all this, but it appears that maybe the case. He may be framed as a ring leader. I think his only involvement was for financial gain and sex with teens. He's not clever enough to be in charge.

[quote] I know the Queen has her flag raised when she's in residence but does the same rule apply to Andrew?

It's an option for all other members of the royal family. Charles and Andrew are the only ones I know of who fly their standard when they are in residence. Andrew probably feels more secure when he asserts his status by flying the flag.

Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother is the only other member of the BRF who always had her personal standard displayed whenever she was in residence. During overnight stays at Glamis Castle, her flag was flown.

Well, she's already used "annis horribilus" so that's not on. Very dicey lines to walk this year - Christian forgiveness? Not with sex trafficking victims out there. Re-dedication of the monarchy to the best represenatation of the British people; family ties . . . er, maybe not.

If the Sussexes exit, they simply cannot keep Frogmore Cottage. They cannot announce their intention to become private citizens but keep real estate paid for by the British taxpayer. Charles and the Queen should each refund half what was spent from the Sovereign Grant to the Crown Estates.

Giving it to one of the York girls is out of the question, too.

FrogCott will be an interesting question if they really resign their places in the family.

Funny graphic:

I wish this had never happened. Andrew should never have given that interview. I'm in the U.S., but I saw the news reports online last week with the voice over saying, "Watch Andrew give an exclusive interview to the BBC." I thought to myself, "Is he out of his goddamn mind?" And I have nothing to do with the royal family other than it's fun to see what they're up to and watch the next royal wedding.

Yes, Andrew is boorish and arrogant, but I prefer my royal scandals to be about marriage, divorce, who may have breached protocol or what Markle is doing to piss off the people. But I prefer not to be witnessing serious criminal stuff like this. I kind of like Sarah Ferguson; she's been relatively quiet the past few years. And I very much feel sorry for Beatrice and Eugenie. Yeah, they probably take too many vacations, but they seem like very nice girls, and there is never any scandal about either of them ever despite all the family ups and downs they have had to endure. They never put a wrong foot forward. They're pleasant and polite, and they don't deserve this.