Andrew and new Epstein Trial

[Blue Clover]

I don't think Prince Andrew will be able to return to public life after this - this is retirement. It's best for the BRF to move on and let Andrew live a private life someplace.

[sara8150]

I don't think Prince Andrew will be able to return to public life after this - this is retirement. It's best for the BRF to move on and let Andrew live a private life someplace.

I?m agreed with you

[amabel]

I hope the news of the Queen to retire in 18 months is true, she lost the grip and power of her family and Buckingham Palace.  Today I do not believe any longer she was 'hoodwinked' to allow herself and the palace to be used.  There seems to be a number of close people that knew the real intention of the interview, yet these people tried to convince Andrew not to do it, but did not go a step further to warn the Queen.
Double post auto-merged: November 28, 2019, 01:13:49 PM

The girls will be fine despite Andrew loosing his SG allowance, which paid for his office and supported the girls.  His official website still says in FAQ's that he supports financially the girls from his 'private' income.

I find it hard to believe that the queen does not know her son well enough to know that he would NOT come across well on TV.. that he's stupid, and arrogant and SO stupid that he does not know how to hide his lack of interest in "people outside his own circle".. which is what has really damned him with this interview.  Anyone, no matter how foolish, should have known enough to say that he regretted his friendship with Esptein and that he felt for the victims but Andrew didn't do that. Why didn't the queen realise that Andrew would not come across well on an interview and tell him no....

[Curryong]

Playing devil's advocate here and offering a few disparate reasons!

The Queen has moved in rarified circles all her life, herself and has never ever had people questioning her own motives She has never sat down for a face to face TV interview and isn't used to the procedure.

She is 93 and her brain doesn't possess the same foresight it once did.

Andrew may well have told her that he had insisted that the interview consist of prepared questions in which he had the answers ready.

The Queen believes him implicitly and felt that the truth would come shining through in his answers in the interview. She does and did not believe Andrew to be a liar and manipulator of the truth.

Maybe he's never lied to her and Elizabeth in turn has never asked him about his sex life.

Maybe the version of the Epstein friendship Andrew told his mother was entirely different from what we've all read it was.

As his mother she does and did not believe that he is arrogant and entitled, which was how he he came across on TV.

I've met tons  of people who genuinely believe that their grown offspring are completely incapable of doing something dreadfully wrong.

What about those parents who believe in their children's innocence in terrible cases of murder? Not every parent is completely clearheaded about their adult child's faults and failings.

So there's a few reasons, mystifying to us as outsiders but some perhaps playing a part in the Queen's actions in all this.

[Trudie]

I have to agree with you on many points @Curryong. The problem with Andrew is, however, he was born second in line to the throne and after the Queen had been on the throne for around 8 years. Being the son of the monarch Andrew from infancy was bowed and scraped to by Nannies, and the staff not to mention the Queen herself. Andrew was brought up believing in his own importance thereby becoming the arrogant jerk he is today. If he told a fib as a child no one called him out on it. I believe he is extremely jealous of Charles due to his importance as Pow and heir so his behavior IMO is to feed his overinflated sense of himself believing no one will not take him at his word as a Prince and son of the monarch who herself has always been above reproach.

[wannable]

I find it hard to believe that the queen does not know her son well enough to know that he would NOT come across well on TV.. that he's stupid, and arrogant and SO stupid that he does not know how to hide his lack of interest in "people outside his own circle".. which is what has really damned him with this interview.  Anyone, no matter how foolish, should have known enough to say that he regretted his friendship with Esptein and that he felt for the victims but Andrew didn't do that. Why didn't the queen realise that Andrew would not come across well on an interview and tell him no....

And no one in her staff didn't tell her the history of Epstein and Andrew's friendship? She herself didn't read the most sounding alarm bell when convicted, her son went to spend 4 days with him?  It's hard to believe she was clueless.

Now the Express is saying she is allegedly distraught that the media (read her own people told the media as their sources, everyone from serious broadsheets to tabloids) is saying that she 'lost' control, and the article goes on that it was her and only her decision to fire her son. If she had taken measures years ago with the red flags, none of this would have happened.  The entire family must be dreading the Virginia 1 hour BBC Panorama this coming Monday.

[sandy]

The damage was already done. Years ago. The Queen tends to not see a possible problem cropping up or something she was warned about. She thinks it will go away by itself. Her mother was the same and she would be in denial and take to her bed when a crisis came up. I think others in that family have "lost control" at times and used heavy PR or damage control.  I think the family or some of them feel self entitled and Safe from problems of the average person.

[amabel]

And no one in her staff didn't tell her the history of Epstein and Andrew's friendship? She herself didn't read the most sounding alarm bell when convicted, her son went to spend 4 days with him?  It's hard to believe she was clueless.

Now the Express is saying she is allegedly distraught that the media (read her own people told the media as their sources, everyone from serious broadsheets to tabloids) is saying that she 'lost' control, and the article goes on that it was her and only her decision to fire her son. If she had taken measures years ago with the red flags, none of this would have happened.  The entire family must be dreading the Virginia 1 hour BBC Panorama this coming Monday.

Agree.  Even if she thougt Andy was technically innocent of sex with an under age girl.. she must have realised that his sex life was seedy, mixing with a criminal who provided girls for his friends and who did them financial favours.  That alone is reason enough to bench Andrew..

[sara8150]

Playing devil's advocate here and offering a few disparate reasons!

The Queen has moved in rarified circles all her life, herself and has never ever had people questioning her own motives She has never sat down for a face to face TV interview and isn't used to the procedure.

She is 93 and her brain doesn't possess the same foresight it once did.

Andrew may well have told her that he had insisted that the interview consist of prepared questions in which he had the answers ready.

The Queen believes him implicitly and felt that the truth would come shining through in his answers in the interview. She does and did not believe Andrew to be a liar and manipulator of the truth.

Maybe he's never lied to her and Elizabeth in turn has never asked him about his sex life.

Maybe the version of the Epstein friendship Andrew told his mother was entirely different from what we've all read it was.

As his mother she does and did not believe that he is arrogant and entitled, which was how he he came across on TV.

I've met tons  of people who genuinely believe that their grown offspring are completely incapable of doing something dreadfully wrong.

What about those parents who believe in their children's innocence in terrible cases of murder? Not every parent is completely clearheaded about their adult child's faults and failings.

So there's a few reasons, mystifying to us as outsiders but some perhaps playing a part in the Queen's actions in all this.

I have agreed with you!! @Curryong
Double post auto-merged: November 30, 2019, 03:48:28 PM

How Prince Andrew forced me to recognise the hollowness of The Crown | Emma Brockes | Opinion | The Guardian

[amabel]

Playing devil's advocate here and offering a few disparate reasons!

The Queen has moved in rarified circles all her life, herself and has never ever had people questioning her own motives She has never sat down for a face to face TV interview and isn't used to the procedure.

She is 93 and her brain doesn't possess the same foresight it once did.

Andrew may well have told her that he had insisted that the interview consist of prepared questions in which he had the answers ready.

The Queen believes him implicitly and felt that the truth would come shining through in his answers in the interview. She does and did not believe Andrew to be a liar and manipulator of the truth.

Maybe he's never lied to her and Elizabeth in turn has never asked him about his sex life.

Maybe the version of the Epstein friendship Andrew told his mother was entirely different from what we've all read it was.

As his mother she does and did not believe that he is arrogant and entitled, which was how he he came across on TV.

I'v

True she obviously does not believe/want to believe that Andrew could do something really wrong.  She has led a sheltered life.. more so than ANY of her children even Charles. She's never really faced much criticism even, except over the Diana's death issues.   But all the same, she must have realised that her children "talking on TV" has never gone well.  Charles's interview with Dimbleby didn't do him any favours and he was not guilty of a long association with someone convinced of a sex crime.. like Epstein.  So you'd think that she would have said "look if you have not done anything wrong, then there's no case to answer...and the best option for us Royals is "mouth closed"...I can't help thinking that her weakness for Andrew was what made her agree to this being allowed.. She really does not see him at all as he is.. that even if he's not guilty of criminal behaviour, he is mega arrogant and stupid..
And I think it must have been a shcok to her how badly he came across... and she could probably see that the public and I think even the interviewer were going to be shocked alos by his stupidity and arrogance

[sara8150]

Prince Andrew unlikely EVER to return to public life after Epstein scandal and disastrous BBC interview ? The Sun

[Blue Clover]

Playing devil's advocate here and offering a few disparate reasons!

The Queen has moved in rarified circles all her life, herself and has never ever had people questioning her own motives She has never sat down for a face to face TV interview and isn't used to the procedure.

She is 93 and her brain doesn't possess the same foresight it once did.

Andrew may well have told her that he had insisted that the interview consist of prepared questions in which he had the answers ready.

The Queen believes him implicitly and felt that the truth would come shining through in his answers in the interview. She does and did not believe Andrew to be a liar and manipulator of the truth.

Maybe he's never lied to her and Elizabeth in turn has never asked him about his sex life.

Maybe the version of the Epstein friendship Andrew told his mother was entirely different from what we've all read it was.

As his mother she does and did not believe that he is arrogant and entitled, which was how he he came across on TV.

I've met tons  of people who genuinely believe that their grown offspring are completely incapable of doing something dreadfully wrong.

What about those parents who believe in their children's innocence in terrible cases of murder? Not every parent is completely clearheaded about their adult child's faults and failings.

So there's a few reasons, mystifying to us as outsiders but some perhaps playing a part in the Queen's actions in all this.

Great summary!  :goodpost: I like your point about the Queen's age.  I think we all have to remember that the Queen is 93 years-old! The mind works very differently as we age. Also, you are very right, what Andrew told the Queen may be an entirely different version of events and based on what he said to her she did not understand the dangers swirling around him. 

[sara8150]

Update news on Duke of York more trouble

EXPOSED: Prince Andrew's deals with tax haven tycoons | Daily Mail Online

Prince Andrew's most senior aide who was forced out | Daily Mail Online

Prince Andrew used position as Britain's trade envoy to help tycoon plug private bank | Daily Mail Online

Leaked emails reveal how tycoon tried to lure Saudi royal | Daily Mail Online

[Princess Cassandra]

Playing devil's advocate here and offering a few disparate reasons!

The Queen has moved in rarified circles all her life, herself and has never ever had people questioning her own motives She has never sat down for a face to face TV interview and isn't used to the procedure.

She is 93 and her brain doesn't possess the same foresight it once did.

Andrew may well have told her that he had insisted that the interview consist of prepared questions in which he had the answers ready.

The Queen believes him implicitly and felt that the truth would come shining through in his answers in the interview. She does and did not believe Andrew to be a liar and manipulator of the truth.

Maybe he's never lied to her and Elizabeth in turn has never asked him about his sex life.

Maybe the version of the Epstein friendship Andrew told his mother was entirely different from what we've all read it was.

As his mother she does and did not believe that he is arrogant and entitled, which was how he he came across on TV.

I've met tons  of people who genuinely believe that their grown offspring are completely incapable of doing something dreadfully wrong.

What about those parents who believe in their children's innocence in terrible cases of murder? Not every parent is completely clearheaded about their adult child's faults and failings.

So there's a few reasons, mystifying to us as outsiders but some perhaps playing a part in the Queen's actions in all this.

True enough. I am fairly confident that I would support my child if she was in trouble, but I am just as sure that I wouldn?t be an ostrich. You can support but not condone. However, if I were no longer clear-headed I probably would be easily mislead....  I think it is really sad if he has mislead her.

[amabel]

I don't think Andrew has the wits to mislead anyone.  he may have said that he didn't do anything wrong.. but I think it is her weakness for him that made her agree to the interview.  I can't help feeling that if Andrew had tried to convince her that he was quite innocent.. he would have made such a mess of it, just as he did with his clumsy lies in the interview that even an old lady would have realised he was hiding things.

[Trudie]

This entirely Andrews doing that dim bulb should have taken note of the disastrous interviews give in the 90's by his brother via Dimbleby and Diana via Bashir. Though those interviews were not on the scale of Andrew's The Queen stepped in and ordered the divorce and was not seen to publicly support either party. Andrew IMO knows his mother will always support him and loves him and at the age of 93 he knew he could play her.
Each day there is something new and with far more serious consequences to the crown as a whole not only Epstein but his dubious transactions while performing as Trade Ambassador to personally enrich himself.

[sara8150]

More trouble news for Duke of York

Prince Charles wants to hold crisis talks with Prince Andrew amid Jeffrey Epstein scandal | Daily Mail Online

Duke of York passed a Treasury document about the Icelandic financial crisis to business tycoon  | Daily Mail Online

How tycoon David Rowland went from scrap dealer's son to meeting the Queen at Balmoral  | Daily Mail Online

Duke and his close friend Jonathan Rowland discussed secretly continuing business relationship | Daily Mail Online

Prince Charles to cut royal family to just him William Harry wives and children after Andrew scandal | Daily Mail Online

Two top lawyers representing Epstein victims 'were duped into planning to cut deals with famous men' | Daily Mail Online

Prince Andrew 'has been in constant constant with Ghislaine Maxwell by phone and email' | Daily Mail Online

Prince Andrew: why meeting with US authorities would be a 'catch-22' | UK news | The Guardian

Prince Andrew in fresh crisis over exploiting UK trade envoy role amid Epstein scandal | Royal | News | Express.co.uk

New crisis for Prince Andrew as Buckingham Palace are forced to deny new allegations ? Royal Central

Claims Prince Andrew 'exploited trade envoy role to help wealthy pal' - Mirror Online

Prince Charles demands crisis summit with Andrew so he can come clean on 'Epstein issue' - Mirror Online

Prince Charles ?plans to boot several royals out the Royal Family when he becomes King? in wake of Andrew scandal ? The Sun

Leaked emails show Prince Andrew ?repeatedly exploited his role to work for controversial multi-millionaire financier? ? The Sun

Prince Charles ?demands crunch meeting with brother Andrew over the Epstein scandal and urges him to come clean? ? The Sun

[wannable]

Prince Charles wants to hold crisis talks with Prince Andrew amid Jeffrey Epstein scandal | Daily Mail Online

Both Charles and Camilla are at Sandringham Estate since returning from their tour, they were pictured today walking to church.  The past few days Charles has been taking strolls and car driving around the estate with the grandson of Winston Churchill, Nicholas Soames, actual Conservative PM and member of the Privy Council.

[Curryong]

Both Charles and Camilla are at Sandringham Estate since returning from their tour, they were pictured today walking to church.  The past few days Charles has been taking strolls and car driving around the estate with the grandson of Winston Churchill, Nicholas Soames, actual Conservative PM and member of the Privy Council.

Yes, 'Fatty' Soames has been a very close friend of Charles for at least forty years, was in Camilla's circle,  and was a vehement enemy of Diana. She characterised Soames  (as have others) as a pompous bag of wind, so I'm not surprised he's hanging around. There are loads of anecdotes  about Soames and his brown nosing around Charles  in Charles and Diana biographies.

[wannable]

As opposed to, what has he done good?

[Trudie]

Charles really needs to talk to Andrew to see just what else just may come out. Although I doubt Andrew will entirely be truthful Andrew's career as a royal in the distant future is at stake and threatens to become worse than what the Duke of Windsor endured being ostracized by his family. 

[Curryong]

I don't want Andrew to be a Royal in the near or distant future. I've always felt he was corrupt, and if it's true that he is in constant communication with Ghislaine Maxwell right up to the present time that is very very concerning to me.

There may be a question of collusion if Andrew is to be questioned in future by the FBI. And for Andrew to think there is no harm in his continuing a long distance friendship with Ghislaine after all that has happened just speaks to me of the most staggering stupidity or....something else. And what that is may well mean something more disgusting than we already know about.

[Trudie]

I wonder what the Queen Mother would have made of this mess.

[dianab]

i believe the early reports of the queen being ok with this interview... imo yes, she deseves criticism over that

i remember that soames was against to change the law for a born princess keep her place in succession line... i suppose he was following what charles told him and as chalres liked the things
Double post auto-merged: December 01, 2019, 05:54:38 PM

I don't want Andrew to be a Royal in the near or distant future. I've always felt he was corrupt, and if it's true that he is in constant communication with Ghislaine Maxwell right up to the present time that is very very concerning to me.

There may be a question of collusion if Andrew is to be questioned in future by the FBI. And for Andrew to think there is no harm in his continuing a long distance friendship with Ghislaine after all that has happened just speaks to me of the most staggering stupidity or....something else. And what that is may well mean something more disgusting than we already know about.

it's more than staggering stupidity imo. but says all about his lack of character... btw no news to me

[sara8150]

I wonder what the Queen Mother would have made of this mess.

Let me straighten,@Trudie

When HM Queen Mother knew everything on her brother in law the former King Edward they now Duke of Windsor either throne or marry but HM Queen Mother wouldnt pleasure on Wallis Simpson chosen brides for former King Edward VII but in London says back off the King Edward VII but HM Queen Mother dont have good relationships with brother in law the King Edward VII since King George?s death in 1952 but HM Queen Mother didn?t attend funeral of Duke of Windsor

Edward VIII abdication crisis - Wikipedia


Double post auto-merged: December 01, 2019, 09:51:40 PM

BBC to air interview with Prince Andrew accuser | UK news | The Guardian

Prince Andrew: why meeting with US authorities would be a 'catch-22' | UK news | The Guardian


Double post auto-merged: December 01, 2019, 09:59:16 PM

Prince Andrew is allowed to rent vast palace for just ?250 a week - Mirror Online

Claims Prince Andrew 'exploited trade envoy role to help wealthy pal' - Mirror Online

Prince Charles demands crisis summit with Andrew so he can come clean on 'Epstein issue' - Mirror Online

Prince Andrew reported to police for theft and misconduct in public office ? Royal Central