Prince Andrew--Was the Fall Inevitable?

I don't think Fergie was "a bizarre choice for a wife": they seem very well suited to each other temperamentally, in that they both like to laugh and have a good time socially (unlike his brother Edward and Edward's wife Sophie, who are quieter). The problem was that Andrew was very busy with his career as a helicopter pilot for the armed forces after they married, and Fergie did not have enough to do. Also, she was bullied by the palace courtiers--whom she called "the men with the mustaches"--who also bullied Diana, and so both women were miserable and had too much time on their hands. But although she humiliated Andrew by cheating on him very publicly, and having her photo taken while her toes were being sucked by another man while sunbathing right in front of her two young daughters, he forgave her after the divorce and she came back to live with him. They apparently get along very well.

One thing I think the Crown really has to put in place is some sort of life plan and some sort of overseeing office for younger royals who are never going to inherit the throne. Since at least George III's time they've never had anything to do, and have become bored and unhappy although their lives are spent in luxury. They need to be persuaded to seek careers outside of the military, which has been traditionally the outlet for the men, but which only keeps them working while they're young and fit--they get bored when they hit 40 and the military no longer wants them. They need actual jobs in business, the arts, medicine, the law, etc., where they cannot exploit their royal connections.

They also need to make sure the younger people are not 'handled" by older courtiers, who tend to be very conservative and bullying no matter what era they're in. Margaret, Fergie, and Diana all complained strenuously about them--the courtiers are usually military men who do not understand that young people, even if royal, cannot be treated like soldiers in basic training.

Oh, puhlease, he had it easy. He gets to live a life of luxury without doing anything.

There is absolutely no way Harry or Andrew could ever, ever have been hurt or killed while on military "duty." Why do people believe the royals ever really served in the military.

[quote]Prince Andrew was incredibly handsome and dashing in his youth ... He was 21 when Charles married Diana

Yes, he was incredibly handsome. In "The Secret Diary of Adrian Mole, Aged 13-3/4," Adrian watched the wedding of Charles and Diana and said, "Prince Andrew is dead good-looking. It's a pity they couldn't trade heads for the day."

I LOVE that book series r5. Nobody outside of the UK has heard of it. I was sad when Sue Townsend died. She was a rare talent.

Charles has wanted to get rid of Andrew for years. Had Andrew got a proper job and had he raised industrious children, he'd have been able to sleaze away in the background forever. Of course these men cavorted with trash like Epstein. I refuse to believe it's that unusual. But he clashed with his brother, who is Crown Prince after all. No way is the Queen calling the shots on this. Andrew should have secured a living for himself before his mother got too old. That's where he went wrong.

Self Preservation Strategy

Celebrities do all sorts of crazy things in the name of damage control.

Here’s one that we didn’t see coming!

This foreign-born celebrity is in big legal trouble.

His family can circle the wagons around him all they want – and shell out millions to pull all the legal strings – but his reputation is actually getting worse each day.

That’s where reputation repair comes into the picture.

Since his alleged crimes center around young women, one of the things they need to do is convince people that he is not interested in girls half his age.

Setting him up in a “relationship” with a more appropriately-aged woman seems logical.

However, the suddenness of such an arrangement would likely be met with a great deal of skepticism.

The other option? Having him reunite with his ex-wife!

They already live in close proximity and have a good relationship. It would be much easier to “sell” their reconciliation than a new love interest. They have been laying the groundwork with public declarations of closeness and support. She is all for it, including marriage. He is not quite on board with the marriage bit yet but is considering it.

Look, she may not be the smartest or greatest person in the world, and their re-coupling would certainly be weird. On the other hand, she is very loyal and people already believe that they are close.

It just might work.

What would she get out of it?

Self-preservation.

Her fortunes – and that of their children – are tied to his. So it certainly makes sense for her to do what needs to be done to save everyone’s homes and reputation and dignity.

We’ll see what happens!

Similar: Wounded Little Boy

Couple:

[Optional] Do you think they should do this?

R8 is blind gossip

[quote]Look, she may not be the smartest or greatest person in the world, and their re-coupling would certainly be weird. On the other hand, she is very loyal and people already believe that they are close.

That's why she was grinning from ear to ear when she appeared in public yesterday.

If they had wanted to re-marry they would have done it years ago. They divorced in 1996 but have been living in the same house ever since. It is totally bizarre.

[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]One thing I think the Crown really has to put in place is some sort of life plan and some sort of overseeing office for younger royals who are never going to inherit the throne.

Completely agree, r2. There is no reason why they do not follow in the footsteps of the Viscount Linley. He has made a good living as a company director, etc. Minor royals are perfect for the job of empty suit on the boards of corporations. They show up and vote as told. Make sure they don't chair anything sensitive, like the Audit or Compliance subcommittees.

However, r402 on the Andrew Stepping Down thread posted the bald truth --

[quote]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.

There is simply too much money being thrown at them by criminal elements.

Charles and Her Maj have been much more decisive with Andrew than they were with the death of Diana, they obviously see this as an even bigger crisis for the monarchy.

I’ve not gone overboard and read all there is about this, but I am confused about something. The young lady he was with was 17 and he screwed her in England right? The age of consent there is 16, so he may have done something ethically problematic, but other than the prostitution angle, which I don’t know about England’s laws, did he do anything illegal?

[quote]They need actual jobs in business, the arts, medicine, the law, etc., where they cannot exploit their royal connections.

It's more the issue of outsiders managing to exploit them. I don't know how you prevent that. Even the smartest person - and nobody is ascribing that achievement to a member of the royal family - is vulnerable to a con.

R14, I read reporting that suggests the FBI wants to talk to him not because he is regarded as a subject in a criminal investigation but that he can aid in a criminal investigation against others.... most likely the Maxwell woman? Whatever he may or may not have done, it seems likelier to be a social crime rather than a criminal one. But who knows until it's done.

I am so old....I remember when it was announced that Elizabeth was pregnant for the third time--it was shocking. At HER age? The Queen?!?!? She and Philip were still--ugh--making babies???? Followed immediately by ANOTHER pregnancy? I mean...REALLY.

[quote]Followed immediately by ANOTHER pregnancy? I mean...REALLY.

NOT immediately.

She had Kevin or whatever he's called, four years later.

R14, it’s not really a prostitution case. Epstein was a sex trafficker, and the women say that they were forced to have sex with men like Andrew.

[quote] Prince Andrew was incredibly handsome and dashing in his youth

Almost every single member of the BRF looked amazing in their youth and looks gross now. The Windsor horse genes will not be denied. This is what William used to look like.

r14

[quote]The young lady he was with was 17 and he screwed her in England right? The age of consent there is 16, so he may have done something ethically problematic, but other than the prostitution angle, which I don’t know about England’s laws, did he do anything illegal?

The issue is she was trafficked internationally, so it makes it more than garden-variety prostitution in the eyes of the law. Moreover, Epstein's parties featured young girls and boys. The extent of Andrew's participation in Epstein's crimes is unknown. But ask yourself - at a sex party, is one going to demand the girl's ID before the deed is done? How difficult would it be to not participate, given the boozy, druggy atmosphere and peer pressure?

r16

[quote] I read reporting that suggests the FBI wants to talk to him not because he is regarded as a subject in a criminal investigation but that he can aid in a criminal investigation against others.

The FBI does not appear interested in interviewing Andrew. Those pushing for Andrew to cooperate with the FBI are the girls and the British press. Given Epstein's mysterious suicide, Andrew speaking with the FBI is dangerous, naïve and stupid.

Sleeping with trafficked girls is definitely a crime in England.

Interesting Prince Andrew’s Body Language Analysis

R21, I've never heard that Epstein's parties featured young boys. Girls only.

[quote]They also need to make sure the younger people are not 'handled" by older courtiers, who tend to be very conservative and bullying no matter what era they're in. Margaret, Fergie, and Diana all complained strenuously about them--the courtiers are usually military men who do not understand that young people, even if royal, cannot be treated like soldiers in basic training.

This^^. Great post at r2, excellent suggestions.

There are many current examples in other monarchies of the "second son syndrome" or general malaise affecting younger royal members: Laurents in Belgium, Cristina and her husband in Spain. Martha Louise and her 'shaman' lover with their angel speak in Norway. Joachim had a bit of a wobble in Denmark, he's on track now.

R8/R9 How blind can it be when Ray Charles would have been able to see it from the space station were he onboard?

“...Private Eye has reported that during his Dragons’ Den-style Pitch@Palace events, his staff know to make copious notes and hold up recording devices while he holds forth — so he knows they are giving them the adoration he is confident he deserves.”

Ugh, big pointy canines are a weakness of mine. How dare you post a mildly attractive photo of this walking bag of ill, OP?! FOR SHAME!!

Yes, the royal family has been letting its younger "spares" grow up to be useless and aimless for generations now. The Japanese royal family encourages its younger members to become serious classical musicians or scientists (microbiology is popular among them), but the British royal family seem to be the last people in the world sticking to the old English upper-class tradition of keeping their children out of anything but "the professions": Law, medicine, military, and the priesthood.

And, well. Andrew wasn't smart or hard-working enough to study medicine or the law, and let's all have a good laugh at the idea of shoving "Randy Andy" into the Church of England! So, like Harry after him, he spent a few harmless years in the military and has done diddly-squat ever since. He'd have been better off staying home and practicing the piano, like the Japanese princesses.

r2 Excellent post. I agree wholeheartedly. I also think that the lack of a good education prevents them from pursuing actual careers. They don't have advanced degrees, so they can't actually do much in terms of professional careers. I think a lot of them have reached their maximum potential in life, which isn't very high. There's not much difference between the younger royals and the Kardashians or Paris Hilton, except that they are related to the Queen. The younger royals and basically on the public dole. They just have better public relations managers (until now).

You are also spot on r30. All good ideas. It amazes that not only the BRF, but other royal families don't put much thought into this area. Younger siblings are left to their own devices, with money and public attention but nothing to ground them, and everyone wonders why it all goes downside-up.

Unfairly ridiculed as a 'bicycle monarchy', the Dutch have a handle on this. Both Constantine and Friso (king's younger brothers) were well educated and took on full time jobs, in banking and finance. They worked at the World Bank, Booz-Allen and McKinsey; Friso had a mechanical engineering degree and studied at Berkeley. Neither with a hint of scandal, if you subtract issues around Mabel at the time she wed Friso. It can be done, expectations simply have to be laid down early on.

And wasn't medicine considered dangerously close to trade for a long time r29? I thought it was only considered slightly less trashy after the Victorian era when rich people started dabbling and financing all kinds of science and pseudoscience. I am probably wrong, but I thought I read it somewhere.

The reason Royals don't go to school or have educations is not because of lack of direction, it's that they're pytotechnically stupid and monumentally lazy. They are the cream of the population, rich and thick. You think Diana could figure out the calculus behind getting a rocket to Mars? Japan seems to have intelligent royals but the rest of them are dumb dumb dumb. They wear gorgeous clothes, play polo, drink and fuck. That's what they're raised to do, that's what they do. They also occasionally show up at a ribbon cutting ceremony or some royal performance horseshit.

I think the single biggest problem in the Royal Family as we know them was the Queen Mother and her long life. She had an enormous amount of influence even in her old age. She spoke to the Queen daily. (Your Majesty I have her Majesty. Your Majesty, her Majesty...) And she was, as one biography was titled, the last Edwardian lady. So her views on everything were wildly out of date and I think she was aggressive in promoting the importance of precedence with regard to the operation of the monarchy. Would have been good if The Crown had tackled her ruthless, Machiavellian streak.

There is an article in the Maul today about how Prince Charles will give Prince Andrew a bollocking when he returns from New Zealand.... but there was an interesting quote from a royal watcher: 'Charles wants to make it clear that there are clear rules for the royals if you want to remain you have to obey them – and that should not just worry Andrew, that should worry Meghan and Harry too'.

" I also think that the lack of a good education prevents them from pursuing actual careers."

Well, that's not the only thing between the younger Royals and actual careers. There's also a lack of a work ethic, the lack of respect for hard work or dedication, there's the temptations of the luxurious lifestyle all around them, the lure of accepting support for the queen in exchange for the minimal "work" of making public appearances and giving lip service to charity, there's the aristocratic culture of considering hard work optional and "trade" to be beneath one... and then there's the lack of brains.

I don't know how the Japanese royals manage to make their Spares into hard-working microbiologists, but I suspect there's a certain natural advantage in IQ points at work.

Interesting thread; I agree with R2 royal-lites that will never inherit the throne (like baby Louis and Charlotte) should be encouraged towards some type of public service role, rather than limited to military service, which is very much a young man's game. If you have royals like Meghan & Harry that want to flip the bird to the monarchy, there's nothing wrong with setting them loose and expecting to make their own way. Why let those two narcissists sink the whole ship? I'm guessing the Queen's long life has been a blessing and a curse - there's a great deal of public affection for her, but her influence has stunted the growth of the others.

"If you have royals like Meghan & Harry that want to flip the bird to the monarchy, there's nothing wrong with setting them loose and expecting to make their own way."

I presume that's coming up, but it won't happen overnight, in the absence of real scandal. I should think there's hesitation because the Palace is afraid that if those two have to become full-time famewhores their money-grubbing will become as embarrassing as Fergie's, but it'll be harder to disavow... and they're hoping Harry can regain some of his early popularity.

They'll certainly hold off on doing anything to Sparkle and Dimmy until the Andrew scandal has died down, in the absence of real scandal of course, if they act now it might come off as if the two cases are connected.

[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.]

They have access to the best education and tutors but dont care. Andrew and Harry were never going to go the academic route. Even now they could do hobbies that make a difference. They just want to play. I used to think Charles was useless, but his "hobby" of farming and organics is something he has really learned, pursued, and used. He appears to really be knowledgeable and I have to give him credit for that.

I love this scene from The Windsors: Beatrice and Eugenie explaining to Auntie Anne that their work ethic has been bred out of them...

Agree with R29

For example, the former Emperor of Japan was a botanist and produced research studies in his field.

Meagain has just managed to insert herself into the drama.

That leak was no accident.

She will not be repaid well for making matters worse. Fool. What an own goal.

R51 The jokes write themselves:

"The Duke’s explanation is understood to have left the Duchess, who has championed the cause of female victims of violence, and her team feeling uncomfortable, The Telegraph can disclose."

Can't have that...

Part of the problem with the British royal family, too, is that Philip sent all his sons to Gordonstoun where they learned how to climb ropes but where the emphasis was not on academics. And then they keep marrying beauties (Diana, Sophie, Kate & Megan) instead of smart girls, so the children grow up in households where reading and talking about ideas is not valued.

I agree they & the Spaniards could learn from the Dutch and Japanese royal families. Empress Masako was Harvard and Oxford educated educated, and not just a pretty bimbo like Diana or Kate.

I feel vaguely bad for his daughters and the Royal Family and even him, a little and then barely (assuming it turns out his only crime is being an oaf.) The Daily Maul is now treating this like a true crime mystery and won't let it go. The stress of living with it must be draining. Not as bad as being one of Epstein's victims, but still sucks to be around it because Epstein was an evil perv and Andrew a braying ass. And Megantoinette a very bad strategist. As a side story, I am still shaking my head over how badly she just fucked herself. Breaking ranks... that's Diana territory. And we know how that ended.

That's an inaccurate assessment of Gordonstoun.

r24 There were cryptic notes found to that effect in the NY townhouse after his arrest. The notes did not appear to refer to teenagers, but children.

Let's not blame Andrew's high school for how he turned out. He's lazy and stupid, and sending him to a good school wouldn't have made him any smarter. In fact, if you put a lazy and stupid kid in top academic classes, they only get miserable and frustrated, and come to resent academic studies.

I'm trying to imagine what career would have been appropriate for a royal with his intelligence and work ethic, but I don't suppose being a weatherman on the local news would have been allowed.

Golf pro?

I struggle to think what you do with the son of a reigning king or queen that isn't sort of old school aristo stuff. Estate management, horse breeding, creation arts (Princess Margaret's elder son built a good business out of furniture design... be a bit cruel to put a Prince of the Blood on the London stage because the Guardian will savage them even if they give the greatest Hamlet in the history of acting.) Maybe that's the thing... give them each their own big estate and tell 'em to farm.

[quote]"The Duke’s explanation is understood to have left the Duchess, who has championed the cause of female victims of violence, and her team feeling uncomfortable, The Telegraph can disclose."

That's not her. The Telegraph is not her outlet. That's the Royals putting out the feminist perspective in the voice it's most vocal supporter in the family. Smart PR - it wouldn't sound authentic coming from Kate or Sophie, neither of which has shown an interest in feminism.

You don't know that.

r51, no I don't. But does that sound like Meghan? Is the Telegraph one of fave outlets?

Was the Telegraph the first to report this?

Who's she going to go to in the UK, the Mail?

The Telegraph is the only newspaper which has not criticised Meghan. It's the only paper which has done the Sussexes bidding and eliminated all reader comments under stories about them (Yes, they were 99% negative). It's also the newspaper where Harry chose to write his recent eco-oped.

I'd say it's highly likely that Meghan wanted to let her adoring fans know she was simply appalled by Andrew's antics, and chose the friendliest of the UK newspapers, the Telegraph to insert herself into the story.

The Duchess of Sussex has every right to be horrified that her family is harbouring a pedophile, and a particularly pompous and disgusting one , at that.

[quote] Japan seems to have intelligent royals but the rest of them are dumb dumb dumb.

Where did the Japanese royals get this reputation? I lived in Japan and speak Japanese and can say they are seen as useless. The royals are completely controlled by the Imperial Household Agency and little is known about them as individuals. Few people care about them, either. They are not celebrity figures like the British royals.

Thank you for the clip, [R39]!!!!!!

Also: the Japanese royals are not seen as smart or accomplished. They have nature-oriented hobbies like "botany" but that's not a sign of intelligence or work ethic. This is literally the first I've ever heard anyone say they seem intelligent. Masako is an exception but she was an outsider. Also, the Japanese royals are far more inbred than the British royals because they have only married old noble Japanese families for ever. At least the Europeans marry each other.

These comparisons do not work at all.

R56, so typical of the type.

r56, yes, but she doesn't have to tell the newspapers all about it.

She's demonstrated that she is unintelligent by doing this. FINALLY no one in Britain is paying attention to her and commenting on how offensive she has been to the BRF and to the taxpayers for two years running. An ideal situation for her. Yet she simply can't resist making an Andrew story about HER. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

R33,

R23,

Thank you for the link as I was not aware of Bombard’s. Are you familiar with Statement Analysis?

There is also an attitude that the sovereign's children are simply too royal to do ordinary work.

Harry is so cool. Let's hope he becomes king one day instead of that ugly bald William who couldn't hack the military.

The rumor is there where young boys too and Kevin Spacey and Bryan Singer made appearances on the island.

The Statement Analysis is fucking chilling. I mean, absolutely mind-numbing. I can't imagine what the cringe factor of the actual interview was. I haven't drummed up the courage to begin watching it to see how long I last before I can't stand it anymore. But the Statement Analysis is so laser like and spot on... there are so many of us asking, is Prince Andrew really that thick, that he thought going ahead with this interview was the right thing to do?

And the interviewer is skilled. A lot of the credit goes to her for being level headed and not being intimidated.

I watched some of the clip where they were analyzing his body language.

I don't know much about this kind of analysis and I was a little puzzled. The analyst was commenting on how Andrew would go "on script" as if that was an indication of lying.

But if you were going to do a big interview of any kind, wouldn't you prepare for likely questions and prepare how to answer those questions?

How does having a "script" and prepared answers indicate falsehoods?

(R33) Thank you, thank you for posting the video about queen mother. I can't get enough.

R68 Having a script is all about putting yourself in the best light possible it certainly isn't about the truth. The fact that Andrew failed so miserably in this shows how thick he is.

[QUOTE] I'm trying to imagine what career would have been appropriate for a royal with his intelligence and work ethic, but I don't suppose being a weatherman on the local news would have been allowed.

Meghan already has a career as a TV actress, so she should be allowed to pursue that. A role in Call the Midwife or a BBC/ITV drama would suit her, and make her much happier than cutting ribbons. Harry can return to the army and train recruits. William can do Search and Rescue and Kate...what can Kate do? Maybe write an essay about an artist. Shame she has never even attempted to pursue a career. It looks lazy. Even Diana was a nursery nurse briefly.

R68,

In this usage, think of script as fiction. PA is not just putting the best spin possible out but lying. The script is to keep the lies straight and to allow rehearsal prior in an attempt to make it sound natural and truthful.

Proper interview prep would include likely questions, review of key facts and information, dates, sequence of events, etc. Also included would be what not to do and to say. As any good lawyer would advise, don’t open that door unless you are willing to go through it.

There is debate about eye movement when a person is lying, but the basic premise is that different parts of the brain are accessed if it is the truth or a lie. Here is one link. Fascinating stuff....

The story about Meghan on the Telegraph is gone.... it links on a Google search to another story about the scandal.

The Daily Mail still has it which means somebody hasn't woken up yet... I assume, when it does, the Mail will go for the throat about how the Telegraph fucked up or what strings were pulled to claw it back.

I would love to know what happened there in just a matter of hours.

The Telegraph is the Harkles' chosen outlet. If the Torygraph removed a story on them, it was at the Harkles' behest.

Andrew is a classic example of a favored son of wealthy overly permissive parents. He was probably indulged at every turn growing up which meant he never had to mature emotionally like his older and younger siblings did. Charles and Edward may not have always been the perfect examples of mature young men making all the right decisions, but they certainly had sense enough to know who not get too deeply involved with. Andrew surely knew all the rumors around Epstein while he was palling around with him, yet he was stupid enough to go right ahead and do it. I'm just shocked no one at the Palace had done any background checks on Epstein during the years he and Andrew were connected. The Queen has a whole team who seem to overlook what the lesser Royals are up to in private making sure she's kept up to snuff on their private lives. But then, maybe they did and she decided to not confront her favorite son. By the time Charles was in a position to do anything it was probably too late. If it wasn't for the damage this whole thing has done to the Royal Family as a whole I would have said Charles probably hoped Andrew would take a massive fall like this. I've never gotten the feeling Charles had much affection for Andrew.

It's pretty disgraceful... this broke in 2005. Epstein should have been kicked to the curb immediately. I wonder what dirt he had on Andrew. I wonder if Fergie was attached somehow. She's usually about when he's in the middle of a scandal. Dumb and Dumber.

worth watching

R77 blech. She is so dumpy, mainly in character attributes.

Seems like a closet case too.

[R77] I stopped watching at 11:37. I was gagging on the bullshit. She seems wound up tight as a spring. And for someone who's done massive telly interviews, her dress sense, to quote Patsy Stone, is criminal.

And, she's 51? 71, her face and body, if she's a day. Ridden hard and put away wet. There are miracles that can be effected with wardrobe and makeup. Sarah doesn't believe in miracles, I imagine.

I'd be money Meghan had that comment briefed. The story was posted here about 6 pm last night... meaning the Telegraph would have been working on it Friday evening... following an afternoon brief from North America... maybe California? Maybe Toronto?

The blowback within the Royal Family must have been epic, weave/extension melting.

..."not just a pretty bimbo like Diana or Kate". WTF?

Kate went to university and received a degree. Diana did not. Diana herself commented on her lack of intelligence. I wouldn't put Kate in the same category. She's pretty but she's certainly not a bimbo.

But then if you had a brain, you would've known that of course. It would appear that you have something in common with Diana.

..."not just a pretty bimbo like Diana or Kate". WTF?

Kate may have a degree (is husband hunting a degree in the UK?), but I think the point made multiples times is that it you can't exactly expect the royal family to turn out ambitious, intelligent and well-rounded individuals when those don't appear to be qualities which hold value in the BRF based on how they raise their children & choose their mates. Even in her day, once Camilla (never exactly a stunner) was never exactly an accomplished person and by appearances sake, she appears to be one of the most down to earth and emotionally intelligent of the bunch.

Neither Kate or Camilla needed careers because they come from comfortable wealthy backgrounds. It's only those who need to earn money that have no choice but to have careers.

[QUOTE] Neither Kate or Camilla needed careers because they come from comfortable wealthy backgrounds. It's only those who need to earn money that have no choice but to have careers.

Not true. Many very wealthy people revel in the intellectual stimulation a career brings. Obviously not the docile Kate with her History of Art degree, though. London has so many world clas art galleries and she never once thought of working there. Truly a limited woman.

[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, if the surplus Royal offspring don't want careers, whatever. But the public shouldn't pay for them. Let the family dip into its incredibly deep coffers and support these useless assholes, as other wealthy families do for their pointless progeny. Don't give them an HRH and pretend they are in any way helpful to the country, because they aren't.

R66, there are no rumors of Epstein having young boys around him

I don't think it's been said officially, but I have to wonder if Andrew isn't a sex addict.

I think Andrew's found his ideal career late in life: REMITTANCE MAN!

For those of you who don't know, a "remittance man" is a member of a wealthy or aristocratic family, who is given enough money to live on... on the condition that he stay far, far away from his family and don't embarrass them on their home ground. "Remittance men" used to be sent to African, Indian, or Australian colonies, and they got enough money to live on and didn't have to work, and if they kept up the partying it was done thousands of miles away from their respectable families.

Of course the profession died out during the sixties and seventies when everyone gave up on trying to keep the escutcheons blot-free, but I think Andrew is about to revive it. He'll get a home and an income, on the condition that he stay away from the rest of the Royals, and stay out of the media.

R90 He can't revive it because it can't happen any more - the reach of the internet is universal. He might be shunned by the Royal Family but that won't keep him off the front pages or out of the news - if he did something today in the South Georgia Islands and someone nearby had a phone, the story could be in the news tonight.

The only exile now for those who want to go to ground is self-exile (I'm thinking of you, Ghislaine.) Thus far, Andrew has given us no reason to think he wants to disappear.

On youtube there is an author who did a detailed expose on Epstein for Vanity Fair back in 2002 but when Epstein heard about it he met with Graydon Carter showing him pictures. Graydon had the article censored. Therefore all this was known a couple of decades ago but too many vips were involved for honesty in examining Epstein's life. Those pictures Epstein had must have been quite something so that Carter threw any journalistic scruples he might have had right out the window. You don't fuck with the powerful elite.

I believe that Andrew was told a long time ago to stay clear of the man but he famously tells anybody who has news he does not want to hear to 'fuck off!' The type where a simple Good Morning Sir can set him off. A far nastier royal than Princess Margaret whose young lovers were at least legal and not trafficked.

And I'd love to know who the individuals were the Prince got to know through Epstein who were such valuable connections that being an English royal he couldn't have gotten to know on his own but only through a widely known sex offender. I wish the interviewer had nailed him on that. And after the conviction there was still no other nice place to stay in Manhattan? Well maybe not with needy young girls in every room. This is only the tip of the iceberg of the sordidness that goes on with these people.

Don't the Royals own property in NYC and/or have their own apartment?

Looking for more analysis of what happened to the Telegraph piece from last night. There was some discussion about it on the other thread as to who would have placed it, who the source was. Is it now gone?

Also wish the anti-Kate troll would give it a rest. We know you don't like Kate, it's fine not to. But this is specifically an Andrew-related thread.

Andrew's arrogance did him in. As others have said, he's always been a nasty piece of shit who thought he was above everyone else. Well, you reap what you sow.

This next week, and next four weeks, because the holidays are such high visibility photo ops for the RF, will be fascinating. And we can expect more pearls of puerile fuckery to issue forth from the mouth of "Andy 3%". Who says British based entertainment has seen its day?!

I agree Z-W, re the next several weeks and the anticipation of what comes next. Very interesting.

A lot depends on Charles, and how angry he is and how able he is to lower the hammer. He's certainly shown he's willing to do so. Not sure when he's returning to the UK, Camilla is due back Monday. Look for more stories when he returns home.

I feel sorry for the Queen, having to deal with this kind of thing as such a very advanced age.

When Charles becomes king, things are going to be very interesting. It's known that he's basically going to clean house and streamline the Royal Family to just the monarch and the heir. All the other Royals will be in for a rude awakening, except for Princess Anne who saw the writing on the wall years ago and has set herself and her children up very nicely for when that time comes.

[quote] they're pytotechnically stupid

O DEER

Oops, I was going to say “Sorry, I couldn’t resist” but I suffered from premature castigation.

Do you think Andrew will be prosecuted?

Why aren't they getting top-notch educations anymore? I just read an article about the amazing education QE1 received, admittedly in part because she shared tutors with her half-brother. The same with Mary Queen of Scots and the French royal children.

R28, I agree--beautiful canines make me weak too. They are usually part of a great crooked smile.

Cute graphic, from the Sun:

r101 No. Not unless he slept with a minor.

R102, since the only role the royals now have is reading speeches and cutting ribbons, it's considered desirable to keep them dull. Charles's tendency to take an interest in things upset people.

Zemen-Wambuis r96

Completely agree that the next four weeks are critical. If no reason than the situation is very fluid, you can see that with Pitch@Palace, how Andrew tried to keep it. Moreover, it appears that Andrew is staying at his Buck Palace residency and his 'downscaled' office is remaining there. We simply do not know the terms of his leaving.

r98 As for Charles, well. If there ever is a time to come back and strike while the iron is hot, it is now. Charles is risking Andrew's restoration, as the latter harasses the poor 93-yr old Queen with desperate pleas.

r101 Andrew will not be prosecuted, the Brits will not turn him over. They make allude the Ambassador's wife, for instance.

Though it seems that Charles' interest in things at times seems like those of an incompetent and self serving amateur. Somebody flailing about trying to find a purpose in life while availing himself of the privileges of a Bourbon.

[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.]

If they wanted Andrew to live out of the country, where would they put him? The Caribbean?

If Andrew's not careful, he's going to suffer a sudden 'heart attack' that they'll blame on the stress of the situation, rather than the hypo of potassium chloride some MI-5 goon plunged into His Grace's fat neck.

Andrew’s life may have been very different had he married Koo Stark. She seemed to be good for him. Despite being deemed unsuitable in the early 1980s to be a Royal wife, Koo has aged well, produced a beautiful child and has a career as a photographer. Andrew must have been fuming that Harry was allowed to marry Meghan Markle while he was forced to break up with Koo.

R113 = Koo.

[quote]Andrew’s life may have been very different had he married Koo Stark. She seemed to be good for him. Despite being deemed unsuitable in the early 1980s to be a Royal wife, Koo has aged well, produced a beautiful child and has a career as a photographer

Mary, you are so misinformed. She's had dreadful financial problems. Lived in one of the fanciest hotels in London and ran up a bill of £38,000 which she could not pay.

She's basically another Fergie.

[quote]She lost her legal battle against the bankruptcy petition after a brief hearing at London’s High Court. Miss Stark, 54, had first sought a stay of the proceedings, then asked if she could enter an “individual voluntary arrangement” to pay the money back. She had even offered to hand over a £5,000 painting to reduce the bill from the Jumeirah Carlton Tower Hotel.

[quote]It is understood Miss Stark’s debts total £250,000 and that she is considering claiming state benefits. She is currently staying at a property in Belgravia.

FAST FORWARD >> 2019

[quote]Prince Andrew’s ex-girlfriend has won substantial damages from the owner of MTV’s entertainment news website after it wrongly described her as a “porn star”

Gurl done good.

[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.]

^and Fergie helped him do it.

When was the last time anyone heard anything about Edward (& Sophie)?

It seems that the queen allowed her affection for her favourite son to blind her to the damage he was doing to the monarchy.

Does Princess Edward still cruise the docks?

As Prince Andrew stepped out of the trendy Hollywood eatery Catch, accompanied by two blonde women and a clutch of suit-clad men, the paparazzi descended like flies. It was May 2017, and it was the last time the controversial royal was seen in public in the US.

It was actually unclear what Andrew was doing in the States — yet another mystery of the prince’s high-flying, globe-trotting life.

For the disgraced royal, “America was always where the power was,” an Andrew insider told The Post.

At the tail end of a disastrous week — in which he gave the BBC a car crash of an interview about his friendship with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and was then effectively sacked from the royal family by his mother, Queen Elizabeth — the prince is now responsible for his own extravagant life.

It’s difficult to see how he will be able to keep up.

The queen paid her third child an annual, tax-free income of £249,000, and he received £20,000 yearly from his Royal Navy pension — hardly enough to fund his luxury trips around the world and a property portfolio that includes a £13 million Swiss ski chalet.

“Andrew seemed to become quite rich a few years ago and no one knows how he pulled it off,” said the Andrew insider. “He only got £249,000 from the Queen to pay his office salary but he had about seven people working for him.”

“There is a mystery as to where Andrew’s money comes from,” author David McClure told the UK’s Press Association.

According to McClure, whose book “Royal Legacy” examined the wealth of the royal family, “We do know that he is funded by money from the Queen’s Duchy of Lancaster estate but the precise details of that are shrouded in a fog of pea-soup proportions.”

It’s long been suggested that Andrew supplemented his jet-setting lifestyle through his former role as the United Kingdom’s trade envoy — a job for which he did not receive a salary but was wined and dined by heads of state, members of other royal families and leaders of corporations eager to get favorable treatment.

He stepped down from the position in 2011 after criticism over his friendship with Epstein, as well as over his meetings with various autocrats around the Middle East — among them, deposed Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi and former Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev. The latter acquaintance would come in handy when Andrew tried to offload Sunninghill Park, the sprawling house near Ascot, Berks, which the Queen gifted him and Sarah Ferguson as a wedding gift in 1986.

The mansion had been on the market for years, with an asking price of £12 million. In 2007, Nazarbayev’s son-in-law bought it for a whopping £15 million, then left it to rot before demolishing it. In 2015, Andrew arranged for President Nazarbayev to have lunch with the Queen at Buckingham Palace, a rare honor these days given her advanced age.

Between November 2001 and May 2008, Andrew visited the United Arab Emirates on nine occasions, Qatar five times and Kuwait, Bahrain and Egypt four times each. The cost of his travel, usually by private jet, was picked up by the British taxpayers.

He was supposed to be drumming up business for Britain, but when asked in 2005 by then Trade Minister Ian Pearson to list the contracts he had won for the UK, Andrew couldn’t name one.

In his recent BBC interview, Andrew admitted to using convicted pedophile Epstein as a conduit to powerful people.

Asked if he regretted his friendship with Epstein, the prince replied: “Now, still not and the reason being is that the people that I met and the opportunities that I was given to learn either by him or because of him were actually very useful.”

Which all begs the question: Just how much did Epstein help the prince by introducing him to wealthy Americans — including, perhaps, scandalized movie mogul Harvey Weinstein?

“Harvey knew Prince Andrew because he mingled in those circles with notable celebrity names and Andrew relished that,” a source with knowledge of that relationship told The Post. “When you hang out in those circles, everyone uses everyone to a point.”

Asked if the royal had ever used Weinstein to meet people and make deals, the source said: “It’s not inconceivable, and Harvey would have said yes.”

The Weinstein source added that Andrew invited the movie tycoon to Princess Beatrice’s 18th birthday, a lavish Victorian-themed bash at Windsor Castle in July 2006. Although Weinstein did not attend, his ex-wife Georgina Chapman and one of his older daughters did, as did Epstein and his alleged madam, Ghilslaine Maxwell, The Post is told.

Meanwhile, Epstein, who died while in federal custody in Manhattan in August, lent Andrew’s ex-wife, Ferguson, £15,000 — for which she said in 2011: “I am just so contrite I cannot say. Whenever I can I will repay the money and will have nothing ever to do with Jeffrey Epstein ever again.”

“For both Andrew and Fergie, America was always where the power was,” said the Andrew insider. “Fergie came to America to make money from her Weight Watchers and book deals.”

Andrew and Ferguson are now divorced, but still live together at the 30-room Royal Lodge in Windsor Great Park, near the Queen at Windsor Castle. In 2014, they splashed out £13 million on the magnificent Chalet Helora in Switzerland. At the same time, Andrew spent £7.5 million to refurbish Royal Lodge.

Describing how Andrew could afford the luxe chalet, a friend with knowledge of the prince’s finances told the Sunday Times of London it was the “Bank of Mum.”

He cannot, as The Post previously reported, enter the United States without opening himself up to being subpoenaed as a witness in a number of civil lawsuits, including those launched by self-described Epstein “sex slave” Virginia Roberts Giuffre — who has claimed she was forced to sleep with the prince while she was underage.

And it looks like things will only get worse from here.

The BBC is set to air an interview with Giuffre on Dec. 2, and Giuffre’s laywer David Boies told The Post that Andrew could still be prosecuted by American authorities over the allegations that she was ordered to have sex with the prince three times.

Queen Elizabeth may have had her own “annus horribilis” in 1992, when her family was facing a number of affairs and scandals. But for Andrew, the horrors appear to have only just started.

I cannot understand why Andrew was getting £249000 a year tax free from the queen, at that level of income he should have been paying 50% tax. There is something rather pathetic in a 59 year old man still being dependent on his mother for money.

What really will happen now to Prince Andrew other than the loss of his staff and his job as a working royal? Will he no longer be able to live in Royal Lodge? Can he afford to keep it up without his salary? Will he be forced to live abroad?

And what will happen to Fergie and the daughters? I just read that Beatrice's wedding being held in the UK is now up in the air, and that she and her fiance may instead be married in Italy to reduce visibility. I feel sorry for the girls--this is all not their fault, yet they will have to go underground too now.

Koo was still a better match for Andrew. At least his kids would have been better looking. He and Sarah Ferguson are just toxic together. It’s astounding that nobody in the BRF recognised what a grifter Sarah was before the marriage.

The daughters have never worked a day in their lives either, and want to live as if they are senior royals.

It seems not only was he a possible sex addict, he and his ex-wife are clearly spendaholics as well. Can't stop spending money, have an ever insatiable need for it. Hence the associations with all the shady people, the shady deal-making, the "PitchPalace" setup that masqueraded as a charity but essentially let them skim off the top. Fergie in particular as been broke how many times now? It's like she's constantly trolling for cash.

No wonder they still live together and hang out so much. They are both two crazy peas in a pod, with similar issues.

[quote]Koo was still a better match for Andrew. At least his kids would have been better looking.

God, some of you gurls are so deeply superficial it's not true.

[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.]

See what I mean r130? It's all for cash.

Maybe Fergie is hoping to hook herself a rich Arab.

Koo Start played Luke's girlfriend in "Star Wars (A New Hope)", but ended up on the cutting room floor.

From what I've read, the Giuffre interview was set before Andrew decided to go ahead with his own. They must be anticipating the worst with this upcoming interview.

"Why aren't they [royals] getting top-notch educations anymore? I just read an article about the amazing education QE1 received..."

R102, even in the days when the king or queen actually did the ruling, it was highly unusual for monarchs to get much in the way of scholarly education. Elizabeth I was the best-educated woman of her time, but that was her own choice and not a matter of policy, she was very much an anomaly in royal history. For much of her childhood and youth she was declared a bastard and lived away from court, and if she chose to spend her time studying Latin and philosophy instead of sewing and flirting like a normal girl, well, nobody was going to stop her.

Of course for the last few centuries, when British monarchs have done little to no ruling, there's been absolutely no need for them to be well-educated, and nobody's bucked the trend. William is going to be the first one who's even been to a good school, the rest either got indifferent tutors at home, or were sent to schools for upper-class dolts.

[quote] Yes, the royal family has been letting its younger "spares" grow up to be useless and aimless for generations now.

That’s why it’s a mistake for Kate Middleton to have any more than 2 children.

This will be Charlotte and Louis in 25 years.

r135, Charles went to Trinity College Cambridge, so William is not the first.

Maybe William and Kate will do things differently and insist that their children get good educations and actually have professions.

You're right, R136, but that's one subject you just can't talk to people sensibly about.

And if we're right about dear little Georgie then Charlotte will be the heir apparent and possibly queen, so she might have a place of honor in the 21st century royal family. But younger siblings won't.

It seems readily apparent that the Cambridge kids have a much better chance of breaking the cycle of uselessness because their parents are very hands-on and behave sensibly themselves. We'll see.

[quote]the Cambridge kids

LOL

If Andrew still looked like this, would he be forgiven, I wonder?

Well he was quite the handsome asshole.

[quote] And if we're right about dear little Georgie then Charlotte will be the heir apparent and possibly queen,

What total bullshit.

Being gay does not preclude anyone from inheriting the throne even now (there is nothing whatsoever about it in British law), and it certainly won't when William dies in fifty-sixty years) and George inherits the throne.

If George is gay and does not reproduce, then Charlotte will inherit AFTER him.

R142, it looks like his hair was already thinning there

Wow he was semi-hot there. Wtf happened? He really let himself go after he got married and the girls came.

Fergie apparently sucks the life out of her men.

I can't recall where I read it but Andrew has a 75 year lease on Royal Lodge, which can be left to either his widow or daughters.

That's correct r147.

"If George is gay and does not reproduce, then Charlotte will inherit AFTER him. "

That's exactly what I meant.

If George becomes king and does not marry or produce heirs of the body, Charlotte will be next in line. She will not be named Princess of Wales, but be either heir presumptive or heir apparent, I forget the distinction between the two terms. And if that becomes the case then there's a reasonable chance that she'll outlive him and become queen at an advanced age, what with her being younger and female the odds are that she will outlive her big brother.

For the holiday season

This part of the story will never not baffle me. Yeah, I'm going to invite my friend the rapist of teen girls to my teen daughter's birthday. Even if you think he'd never touch your daughter, you're putting her friends at risk and the optics alone. Jesus Christ.

[QUOTE] It's known that he's basically going to clean house and streamline the Royal Family to just the monarch and the heir.

He has never said that he is going to reduce the RF to four adults and three minors, nor would he be advised to. Harry is the most popular royal next to the queen and trimming him and his charismatic, biracial wife would cause an uproar. Same for Anne, Sophie and Edward and the York sisters.

He should, however, stipulate that Charlotte and Louis and Archie train for a career, and take paying jobs once they have finished university. No problem with this for Archie as his mother and father both had thriving careers. Kate Middleton, alas, isn't a good role model in this respect at all. Ten years spent waiting to get engaged and not lifting a finger to earn her own money.

[quote]"The Duke of York intends to make a grand comeback after clearing his name, but this risks putting him on a potential collision course with Prince Charles"

The self-delusion is actually pitiful, though maybe he has to say such things for the sake of his mother and his daughters. Who, like the rest of the world, won't be convinced for one second.

It's actually quite Trumpian, but at least Trump has corrupt Republicans and clueless rally crowds on his side (for now). Andrew has absolutely no-one, save his mother in denial, his gormless ex-wife, and loyal daughters (for now).

Four sad women hardly constitutes a strong base for a grand comeback.

I am no fan of Andrew, but what evidence is there that he raped anyone? And if he had sex with an under-aged girl who was forced to have sex with him, what evidence is there that he was aware of that? Just the assertions of a self-described ex-prostitute, who certainly did not look like she was coerced in the photo of the two of them together. And if Andrew has claimed that he has no recollection of sex with her, it is her word against his. As far as him being prosecuted, the statute of limitations has long run out on this alleged activity of 15 years ago.

Randy Andy was a real looker in the early 1980's during the Falklands war.

Personally couldn’t care less if royals have degrees or “accomplishments.” Just be a decent person, show up, look nice, smile, cut the ribbons and bring good cheer.

r152 it's been written about endlessly that Charles wants to cut back on Royal duties and allowances to just the core members.

R155 That's not Andrew, nor is it the Falklands.

According to the latest poll, Charles would be smart to cut Harry and Meghan loose. Only 38% are in favor of funding them. It would be a mutually beneficial decision, given the Sussex's desire to work on progressive, high-profile initiatives aimed largely at a US audience.

Many countries that continue to have royals have streamlined and are fairly restrictive on who keeps titles.

One problem that some royals would face is that they would stop getting funding, but would also be unable to engage in many business ventures - the worst of both worlds. They'd also still be called upon to perform certain duties and donate time to charitable causes.

As long as QEII is on the throne, all of her children and grandchildren, as well. However, only great grandchildren from the heir (Charles's grandchildren) should remain HRH.

Once she dies, it should be Charles, his children, his grandchildren, but not Charles's siblings anymore. The siblings should just keep whatever ducal or earl titles their mother gave them, and that's it, losing HRH status, along with all of their children. Beatrice and Eugenie would still be Lady, but they wouldn't get courtesy titles from Andy's lesser titles.

Except that if they do aim largely at a US audience, R159, their impact here will fade away before very long. We have short memories and shorter attention spans and we tire of novelty acts like theirs quickly. They will be seen as opportunists out for a quick buck here in the US by accepting handouts from the rich seeking favor ("Welfare for the Wealthy" headlines) and deserters for abandoning the UK when it became clear their act wasn't wowing the audience there.

The BRF is not what it was even a month ago: their stock is falling and will fall further if Brexit impacts the UK economy as forecast. The national mood will be grimmer and money tighter. The sight of the Harkles in LA will not exactly warm the hearts of the British people. Harry's family will be/already is distancing itself from them if they go and those members of the Markle clan here will have more to say, and more opportunities to say it, if she's here in the States regularly and attempting to ignore them.

And we have the First Amendment - no [italic]lese majeste[/italic] laws here - so they will torn to shreds over each and every misstep without the protective cover of deference for royalty as it still exists, if less and less, in the UK. "Progressive, high-profile initiatives" look pretty phony when fronted by members of the elite, something the Daily Mail, US tabs, and the electronic media will be happy if not gleeful to report on.

Side Bar - why is Edward only an Earl, not even a marquess, while Andy is a Duke?

Seems like Edward should have rated at least one notch higher as the son of the reigning sovereign.

[quote]According to the latest poll, Charles would be smart to cut Harry and Meghan loose. Only 38% are in favor of funding them. It would be a mutually beneficial decision, given the Sussex's desire to work on progressive, high-profile initiatives aimed largely at a US audience.

Good idea. The they could say fuck off too all the naysayers and critics and just do their thing.

'And we have the First Amendment - no lese majeste laws here - so they will torn to shreds over each and every misstep without the protective cover of deference for royalty as it still exists, if less and less, in the UK. "

What missteps? Meghan hasn't been seen in public anywhere since Remembrance Day. She isn't coming out to play in LA at all. The shit she is torn to shreds for in the UK - wearing expensive gowns, not posing on the hospital steps - aren't likely to trouble Hollywood. The more expensive the gown, the better.

She has already survived in LA all her life without being savaged. You act as if she's newly hatched from the egg. She was far from hated on Suits. She was popular, The Tig was popular - no racists were baying for her blood.

'Once she dies, it should be Charles, his children, his grandchildren, but not Charles's siblings anymore.'

Charlotte and Louis shouldn't get a penny. They need to go to university and study useful degrees like Maths or engineering or English or Law, and then enter the publishing industry, banking industry, civil engineering consultancy, or something else which is respectable but unrelated to the military.

[quote]She has already survived in LA all her life without being savaged. You act as if she's newly hatched from the egg. She was far from hated on Suits. She was popular, The Tig was popular - no racists were baying for her blood.

99% of the population had ever heard of her before she hooked up with Harry. She's not very popular in the US, just like she isn't very popular in Britain. She was an unknown actress doing D-List shit, and all of a sudden she was everywhere telling everybody how to live their lives. People are put off by that.

Exactly r165. Times have changed, and if the new generation of Royals grow up to be what basically amounts to bon vivants like Andrew it isn't going to be acceptable.

R162, I believe that Edward will become the Duke of Edinburgh when his father dies.

She isn't doing anything public in LA now, nor would she if she returned to live there full time with Harry and Archie. She was content earning her TV salary and wasn't forever trying to pin down rich men or she'd be more known and hated in the US.

"And if Andrew has claimed that he has no recollection of sex with her, it is her word against his."

Watch the Dateline interview, there is another person who corroborates her claims. And I'm not sure why you'd take HIS word, since he's not even a good liar

I'm not saying I think Andrew is credible, just that the allegations against him are thus far unprovable.

However, if photographs and videos surface, that's a different story.

I hope to see the royals finished off in my life time. Family of glass-fanged vampire trash. This is a nice start. Hopes are high for Megan to do something that gives Liz a heart attack. In public.

Holy shit! Virginia Roberts Giuffre is being represented by DAVID BOIES? He represented the government in the case that broke up the Microsoft monopoly and represented the plaintiff in the overturning of Prop, 8. And then some. He's probably the best lawyer money can buy in the U.S.

[quote]The BBC is set to air an interview with Giuffre on Dec. 2, and Giuffre’s laywer David Boies told The Post that Andrew could still be prosecuted by American authorities over the allegations that she was ordered to have sex with the prince three times.

r171, so any sex offender who doesn't photograph or videotape himself in the act of committing a sex offense should automatically be believed?

I am saying that the burden of proof is on Ms Giuffre. PA's name may be smeared, his reputation lost, but he is not guilty of any crimes until proven otherwise.

OJ Simpson was found not guilty but I seriously doubt you'd invite him over to your house for high tea so cut the crap

Considering that Epstein's townhouse was nothing more than an upscale children's bordello Andrew will never recover from staying there.

Fuck off, R176.

That's roight, all this time it was the DUKE of Pork, ya bloody bastards!

r178, you're the one defending him so eat me

Does anyone in the BRF have worse luck than Bea?

She gets strung along for a decade by her sweetheart who quickly marries after they break up, her (much prettier) baby sister gets married first in the HUGE wedding, and now her desperate rebound nuptials are overshadowed by her rapist daddy.

The photo of the 17 year old Virginia Giuffre, Prince Andrew with his arms around her waist and his smarmy smile of possession and the Epstein pimp woman smirking in the background - is pretty much all you need. It's all about sex trafficking a young woman. And a Prince - the son of the Queen - being a part of it. It's beyond disgraceful!

That's not his hand holding her! Despite the fat fingers.

[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.]

That Giselle is redder than a beet on a baking sheet.

"Charlotte and Louis shouldn't get a penny. "

Oh come on, the King of England can't give his children a fucking penny? Or a spare room to live in? Even Charlotte, who (see above) may be queen some day when we're all dead?

Look, I place great value on hard work and education, and despise the growing inequality of wealth in the world, but the fact is, this is a cold cruel world and most humans are wage-slaves who live in fear of displeasing their employers and ending up on the streets. If the few individuals who are lucky enough to escape that take advantage of their luck I can hardly blame them. Although if Wills wants to withhold anything until the kids spend a few years doing social work or nursing in refugee camps, that might be a good idea.

[quote]"Charlotte and Louis shouldn't get a penny. "

As long as their great grandmother, grandfather, or father is King, they should continue to be HRH and undertake duties.

However, when their brother succeeds to the throne, they, like Andrew, Anne, Edward, and their children when Charles becomes king, and Harry and his children when William becomes king, should lose the title and cease to have to perform formal duties on behalf of the crown. However, if they are asked to continue to perform duties, they should continue as they have.

When you look at other countries, like Japan, there are simply not enough royals to perform all the duties they want them to do - ceremonial, charitable, or otherwise. It's easier to reduce the number gradually than make a cut, then try to bring them back.

Anne and Edward won't lose their titles when Charles becomes king.

Princess Anne is fairly popular, so she isn't getting cut out of the royal family or their public presence any time soon. She will undoubtedly cut back or "retire from public duties" when she's older, though, and be less of a presence during the reigns of Charles and William. Is she at all close to Charles?

But yeah, if Charles wants to cut the HRH list and the number of relatives who are on the public payroll and in the public eye, he's wise to do so. The public has no real interest in the offshoots and cousins, other than what the useless Bea and Eug wear at their weddings.

Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie should NOT lose their HRH titles when Charles becomes king. I doubt he would do it, but in case there is any thought, he shouldn't be so mean and vindictive. Just let it be. Bea and Eug are harmless, and there has never been any scandal around them. They don't receive any money from taxpayers anyway.

The easiest thing to do is establish a rule that only the heir and his children should get the HRH. William's children should get it, George's children should get it, but not Charlotte or Louis' children. Same with Harry: He gets the HRH as Charles' son, but since he's not the direct heir, his son shouldn't get it (and didn't). Harry, Anne and Edward were wise enough to volunteer to give up the HRH for their children. Of course sleazy grifter Andrew did not. The rule should be in place for surplus royals out to take the public for all they can get.

Princess Anne was very smart and went about all of it the right way: She refused titles for her children since she knew the chance of them inheriting the throne was practically nonexistent. She insisted they get proper educations and actual jobs once they reached adulthood, and neither one of them are on the civil list. By all accounts they've turned into decent adults. Zara is allegedly the Queen's favorite grandchild.

At least Will's children are highly likely to go to college, both their parents did. Unlikely to major in anything hard, though, because I don't see any many smart people in their gene pool.

Queen Elizabeth herself worked as a mechanic during WWII, which is more than William himself has ever done.

125 years ago the likes of Anne, Beatrice and Eugenie would have been married off to various and assorted German and Russian Grand Dukes and Princes. The monarch's younger sons would have received their acquired upon marriage (to a non-royal aristocrat's daughter or some minor Protestant princess) dukedom and headed off to the country - showing up in London for weddings, coronations, funerals and the occasional state dinner. That would have been the fate of QEII's father had his older brother not abdicated - he had already been married off to a minor Scottish Earl's daughter.

R193 In April 2008, William completed pilot training at Royal Air Force College Cranwell, then underwent helicopter flight training and became a full-time pilot with the RAF Search and Rescue Force in early 2009. His service with the British Armed Forces ended in September 2013.[3][4] He then trained for a civil pilot's licence and worked as a pilot for the East Anglian Air Ambulance until 2017.

[quote]Queen Elizabeth herself worked as a mechanic during WWII, which is more than William himself has ever done.

R193, you;'re wrong. She began training as a mechanic in February, 1945. The war ended in June. Lets not overstate it.

William was a pilot for the East Anglian Air Ambulance for two years. :Prior to that he was a Sea King search and rescue pilot for the RAF for several years. More than a few months service.

[quote]Unlikely to major in anything hard, though, because I don't see any many smart people in their gene pool

Don't you indeed? Hark, the voice of God.

[quote]Harry is the most popular royal next to the queen and trimming him and his charismatic, biracial wife would cause an uproar.

Racist post! describing this woman by her race is an example of racialism and simply will not STAND. Muriel take care of this.

r191 Harry Anne and Edward didn't 'volunteer' to give up anything. Anne's kids were never entitled to titles by law and so receive none. TQ asked her husband if he wanted an earldom and he refused; even if he had relented the children would still not be HRH or royal.

Edwards two kids are only STYLED as Lord/Lady Wessex, they are actually legally ranked HRHs Prince/Princess by current law. TQ dictated an LP at time of Edward & Sophie's wedding that their children would be styled thus. The laws would require change to have their actual rank removed/changed.

Archie wasn't entitled to HRH, since he's a great-grandson of the sitting monarch and not in the direct heir line, as the Cambs kids are. He is entitled to become HRH when TQ dies, but that will depend whether or not she or Charles will issue an LP denying this. It would be strange imo to have him elevated to HRH, only to have his grandfather as King take it away soon after. But who knows what the plan is.

'Virginia Roberts Giuffre is being represented by DAVID BOIES? He represented the government in the case that broke up the Microsoft monopoly and represented the plaintiff in the overturning of Prop, 8. And then some. He's probably the best lawyer money can buy in the U.S.'

Looks like Boies has taken on the case as pro bono and is on a personal mission to bring Pedrew and the stupidly protective Queen down! This is going to be wonderful. Pedrew is going to jail.

'Edwards two kids are only STYLED as Lord/Lady Wessex, they are actually legally ranked HRHs Prince/Princess by current law.'

Nobody cares about your tedious notions of who is STYLED as what. It's clear you are a Harry STYLES fan and like spamming the board with your irrelevant digressions about royal titles. Pedrew will be stripped of his Duke of York title if he's sent to prison.

r199 the Queen would've given Anne's children titles if Anne had wanted them.

I was responding to a statement at r191, but by all means please keep criticizing how others choose to discuss royal topic on a royal-related thread (said dryly). It so adds to things.

"Pedrew" (I assume you mean the Duke of York) is likely not going to prison, despite his ongoing troubles and botched handling of them. And even if theoretically he does, he won't be stripped of his HRH or title.

No she wouldn't have r202. And Anne wouldn't have asked. They were never entitled to HRH or Prince/Princess rank.

The only way they would even have Lord/Lady stylings (much like Margaret's two children) would have been if Mark Philips had accepted the earldom on offer, before the wedding. He declined (with Anne's heavy input) and that was that.

[quote]Looks like Boies has taken on the case as pro bono and is on a personal mission to bring Pedrew and the stupidly protective Queen down! This is going to be wonderful. Pedrew is going to jail.

David Boies has no personal mission to "get" Andrew or go after TQ. Ridiculous. He does care about representing the victims in this mess, and obtaining some justice for them from the rich international traffickers, like Epstein and Maxwell, and the men/johns they procured for, which included the likes of Andrew, Alan Dershowitz, Ron Burkle and dozens of others.

It's a long list, Andrew is one of the bigger names but scarily not even the worst offender in the bunch.

So it seems Prince William doesn't like his uncle either and supported his father's and the Queen's decision. Looks like Andrew is getting payback for being a nasty piece of work his entire life. I mean the Queen has just about survived everything but at 93 could this bring about an obvious rapid decline?

[quote]That Giselle is redder than a beet on a baking sheet.

Wait a sec. Is someone trying to introduce the Bradys into this? Whoo, hoo! And Datalounge has not heard of the golden couple's "issues?"

r204 I wasn't talking about prince/princess rank. I meant that Anne didn't want her kids to have any stylings at all.

[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.]

R205, David Boies represented Harvey Weinstein for years, and appears to have helped shut down some of Harvey’s victims. He is trying to redeem himself.

apologies r202/r208. We were in agreement then.

[quote]That Giselle is redder than a beet on a baking sheet

Gisele is wetter than a fish today after the game today. Pats-Cowboys in driving cold rain.

Wasn't Andrew repeatedly warned by the Palace about Epstein for years, and to break off his association with him immediately? And of course Andrew didn't listen.

[quote] 'Edwards two kids are only STYLED as Lord/Lady Wessex, they are actually legally ranked HRHs Prince/Princess by current law.'

Nobody cares about your tedious notions of who is STYLED as what.

Actually - R190 is correct. Dockside Doris' progeny are, as the grandchildren of the reigning sovereign in the "male" line, technically a prince and a princess, just like the Andrew spawn. Edward and Sophie have chosen to have them identified publicly as the children of an Earl - DD's noble (as opposed to royal) title. Archie is not a technically a prince (or a Royal) until Liz dies (and that gets murky if Charles kicks it before his mother which could happen because QEII apparently refuses to die). Should his parents (or when an an adult, Archie) chose to use the title, he is currently Earl of Dumbarton. When Harry dies he will be the Duke of Sussex, no matter what he chooses to call himself.

Is Dockyard Doris still hooking up with guys?

Yes, the fall was "inevitable." He was always Randy Andy. Couldn't keep it in his pants. It's no surprise he chose a wife like Fergie. They were both immature and enjoyed royal privilege immensely and took full advantage of it.

That photo of him with that girl is so disturbing. She's a teenager, a fresh, blonde, pretty teenage girl...who is there to be used for Randy Andy to have sex with. She's basically a piece of young, blonde meat provided by a pedophile to another sexual predator. Shudder.

R210 is correct.

Yes Andrew was warned a very long time ago. I believe even the Queen was notified that this was big trouble.

Andrew brought royal arrogant stupidity to a new level after 1,000 years of stupid.

I wonder who he's blaming for his own fall from grace? His secretary apparently was gung ho about the interview and is credited for swaying Beatrice who was initially doubtful. The secretary was shifted over to that dubious charity that earmarks 3% for Andrew. At this point it's probably doubtful that Pitch@Palace survives

Prince Andrew doesn't look as good as he did during the Falklands War but still attracts the young chicks.

Attracts the young chicks? He BUYS the young chicks

Is there evidence that he "buys" them, R220? There are plenty of young women willing throw themselves at a British prince, even an aging one, for free.

R221, have you been paying attention? Epstein pimped girls out to him.

You're making a lot of assumptions, R222.

R223, no, I'm not. You think he was hanging out with Epstein and his girls just for shits and giggles?

Is R223 what you call 'poo shoes?'

R224, Has the woman in the photo at R219 has been identified as one of Epstein's girls?

Is this "every royal male must go into the military" bullshit every going to stop? This is the 21st century, not the 19th....

Royal males are shuffled into the military because it teaches them to give and obey orders, and because they aren't smart enough for other fields.

What, you want to send one of them to medical school? YOU wanna be his patient?

It's not just royalty. The military seems to be a dumping ground for "guys that don't know what to do with themselves"

It hardly seems they obey orders. They seem to do the bare minimum in terms of doing nothing more than making an appearance and shaking hands in order to enjoy the life of billionaires.

It probably has more to do with ensuring there won't be leaks about their mishaps, since military officers are not going to spill details about royals.

Johnny Carson was making jokes like this about Andrew in 1984. It seems that the fall was inevitable.

Good spotting, R232. A 35 yr old clip, wow. PA wsa only 24.

What prompted Carson to make those Prince Andrew jokes? Was he rumored to be a creep even back then? I don't remember hearing that about him back then but maybe I was out of the loop

Andrew was known as a playboy and a prankster. Here is a 1985 AP article about him.

'link to the DM's story about William's input into Andrew's retirement. Confirms what was reported here and other threads, as next heir he has consulting privileges. Also obvs not a fan of Uncle A.'

Will the William stans please fuck off. He is a bald bully who makes his wife's life hell. Very jealous of Harry's passionate relationship with Meghan.

Like it or not, R236, William is in the direct line of succession. Talking about his role in the current Andrew debacle doesn't make anyone his "stan." Assuming the monarchy survives, his power and wealth will continue increasing. It doesn't matter how "in love" or passionate you imagine Harry and Meghan to be.

R237, Good luck talking to one of those lunatics. They have almost (probably just the one) no acquaintance with the facts.

The PA scandal directly affects William and his children's future. You better believe he's going to have input. It beggars belief that some people think he shouldn't minimally make his opinions on how to handle this mess known.

R160 - "The siblings should just keep whatever ducal or earl titles their mother gave them, and that's it, losing HRH status, along with all of their children. Beatrice and Eugenie would still be Lady, but they wouldn't get courtesy titles from Andy's lesser titles."

I don't know how many times this has to be said before it sinks in: those people can NOT lose their HRHs as they were born with them. And Bea and Eugenie were never going to get courtesy titles from Andrew's subsidary ones because only sons inherit those.

The ducal titles carry the rank of HRH, but that is different from being BORN an HRH. No one can take the latter variety of HRH away from them.

Bea and Eugenie are not now and never have been on the public payroll. But they are by law and right HRHs, just as Charles's children are. Anne, as a female, couldn't pass hers on and her husband refused a title, so they aren't. Edward declined a royal dukedom to wait for his father's title, but his children are still technically HRHs, they just don't use it.

The problem isn't who is an HRH or not, the problem is who is getting the benefit of taxpayer funding through the Sovereigh Grant and Grants-in-Aid.

That is what should be limited to those in the direct line of succession only - which currently would mean Charles and William. As minors, naturally their father's financial income wherever it is from would support George, Charlotte, and Louis.

Down the line from William, it will eventually mean George and his children. Charlotte and Louis, as long as they carry out programmes officially on behalf of the monarchy and the government, will receive funding from the public coffers. If not, they won't.

But they will, perforce, always be HRHs. So will their children.

The point is to cut off not only Andrew (his daughters, as noted, are NOT on the public payroll), Edward and Sophie (which is unfortunate as they have worked diligently and uncomplainingly), the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent and their wives, and the Sussexes - Harry is way to far down the line to matter any longer and his wife clearly isn't willing to play the royal game unless she can play it her way but still get the perks.

It has to be cut down to the Queen, Charles, and William and his heirs.

Even google can't tell me what an LP is. And don't tell me it's The Queen's Greatest Hits.

Letters Patent

R242 beat me to it. Letters Patent are the instruments by which the Sovereign makes designations regarding "style and title". Viz., to wit: LPs were issued after Edward's abdication that he, but not his wife. would carry the rank and style of HRH; likewise, LPs were issued as soon as Kate passed the first trimester of her first pregnancy, that all children of the Duke of Cambricge would be styled and titled HRHs.

No LP was issued to make Archie an HRH.

[quote]Will the William stans please fuck off. He is a bald bully who makes his wife's life hell. Very jealous of Harry's passionate relationship with Meghan.

lol! oh my sides. So glad you can see inside the workings of the Royal Fam and see that William is 'very' jealous of Harry's 'passionate' relationship. Or that he makes Kate's life hell. Au contraire, she looks mighty comfortable out and about with him. It's fairly hard to consider her life 'hell' given all the money, perks and trimmings she received from being his wife.

The Duke of Bald is spazzing round Kuwait and Oman. Let's hope an IED takes him out and Harry becomes regent when Charles dies in five years' time.

William is definitely a Cluster B. Probably a psychopath.

That's nice r245. This is the only board I know where gossiping re a public figure's murder/assassination or early death is acceptable, but to those same people the merest of insinuation of discussion of someone's ethnic/racial heritage begets screaming meltdowns, accusations of intolerance and extremely violent threats toward other.

other= others

Why do these people who call themselves royals pretend they're better than everyone else? Why do we act like we don't walk the same ground or breathe the same air as these people? We know they're blood isn't blue!

Would you miss it? Would you? Would you miss funding the lifestyle of some pervert like Princess Margaret to go to Mustique and sleep with her employees?

FUCK THE ROYAL FAMILY!

'This is the only board I know where gossiping re a public figure's murder/assassination or early death is acceptable'

You betcha it is, bitch. I've lost count of the number of times you wannabe Meghan assassins have said that there's a pillar in a tunnel in Paris with her name on it. William is not a charismatic or appealing figure. He's dour and bad tempered, often scowling. Why would we want him as king instead of his more genial brother who is more popular with the military and with civilians?

'Would you miss funding the lifestyle of some pervert like Princess Margaret to go to Mustique and sleep with her employees?'

Not at all!I hate the prospect of William of Bald and his surrendered wife being on the throne. They should end the monarchy after Charles and use the funds for the NHS instead.

Andrew had to go, obviously. He wasn't much use before his wick sticking problems. I'm a bit surprised at the suggestion Edward and Sophie and, more, Anne are getting the heave ho. They all work hard and are thought to work hard. (Even Corbyn couldn't argue against Anne.). You would have thought he might have let them die in harness, doing their part. I think it is a mistake, unkind and disrespectful to the three of them. And then what does he do for an understudy if Dim and his duchess keep up their antics? He seems not to understand that 50% of his supporting cast prefers improv.

Agree, R253. It would be nice to able to root for Charles without reserve, but decisions like these underscore the reason for his relative unpopularity.

So Team Charles includes HazBean and Camilla, but excludes the Wessexes and Pss Anne?

What could possibly go wrong?

Princess Anne is 69 years old, retirement age. Nobody who tried to give her the boot now, after a lifetime of dutiful and scandal-free service, could possibly come out of it looking good.

So she won't be anybody's primary target. Edward had better watch his step, though.

So is the problem more with Harry Not Meagan? Interesting comments about Harry and his hatred of the press at link.

Harry has always loathed the press bc he blames them for Di's death.

There's just something about being the spare that makes the males go rogue; Andrew, determined to milk his position for as much as he could get, and Harry, determined to do things his own way and do no more than he wants to.

The women - Sophie, Anne, Kate, either through practicality, docility or gratitude, just get on with the job.

R259, the women, though, aren't or were never the spares. Edward, never a spare, has more or less done just fine, despite some minor hiccups. It will be interesting to see how Charlotte navigates being a spare. With Middleton influence, she has a fighting chance.

Princess Margaret was a "spare". until Charles was born. And we know how that went.

Point well taken, R261.

Is Town and Country the first publication to acknowledge that the Sussexes are indeed Sunshine Sachs clients? I haven't seen it in print elsewhere.

It was reported on MSN, Pagesix, The SUN, and PEOPLE Magazine among others. Below is the 3 September announcement from PEOPLE:

"The royal couple have hired Sunshine Sachs to help with Sussex Royal The Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, the charitable initiative they launched following their split from the foundation they previously shared with Prince William and Kate Middleton.

The New York-based PR firm is helping with Travalyst, the partnership which has the Duke of Sussex teamed up with leaders in the travel industry to promote eco-friendly tourism that the prince announced on Tuesday at an event in Amsterdam. Meanwhile, Sarah Latham, Hillary Clinton‘s former campaign advisor, will continue in her role as head of their communications team and handle Meghan and Harry’s personal matters."

No one believes that Sachs is only helping with Travelyst, of which we have heard next to nothing. If Latham is behindy the "personal matters", she should be sacked without delay, because she is doing for the Sussexes what she did for Hillary Clinton.

If journalists can delve into the contractual clauses of Pitch@Palace then they can certainly look into the specifics of the Sussex contract with Travelyst (and others) for the "3%" or whatever cut they couple will receive. They've continuously raised the ire of the press, so it wouldn't surprise me if they're digging right now.

R265 - I hadn't thought of it before looking up the date of the announcement but it would be nice if the press were digging into that. It would be even nicer if they found something. I've always wondered whether if the Sussexes do get the boot, there turns out to be more to it than just their whingeing and insults to the family, but something financial, including merching because her clothes so often don't seem to fit properly.