RF covering for Andrew?

[flippantlydone]

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/28/dubious-use-of-the-freedom-of-information-act-stopping-access-to-files-on-prince-andrew-researchers-say

Why is Andrew allowed to be making off the fact he is a royal and has royal connections. Isnt this half in half bs that wasnt allowed elsewhere but is seemingly allowed to continue with him.

I've always thought that Andrew, and the difficulty Sophie got into years ago, is why the Queen said no to half in half out for Harry.

Of course he (Andrew) should have been reigned in or removed from the ranks of working royals years ago but hindsight is 20/20.

Well...yes ..in the words of Shakespeare..therein lies the rub.

They all do varying degrees of half in half out. York sisters ... unofficial faces of the Monarchy in the Middle East, taking over where dear Daddy left off and I'm sure making money from oligarchs and anyone they can over there
Zara and Mike and their Australian connections, she is an ambassador for a Racing festival along with all her endorsements here
Those do the occasional royal engagement so I have no idea why certain royals can fly under the radar doing exactly what they want but those that leave are criticised day in day out.

And then of course Andrew who will make any sort of dodgy deal with anyone given half the chance

I'm so glad that no-one is defending Andrew. What an odious character.

Here’s another interesting article I just saw today, with more Epstein-related scandal about to be discussed in a courtroom.

Many documents and records, including emails and phone messages, will be openly scrutinised as the FCA attempts to justify its ban on Jes Staley. Could be dynamite.

‘The FCA will also try to prove that Epstein worked behind the scenes to help Staley’s career, liaising with UK government officials, including Lord Mandelson, as well as business leaders and royalty to support the banker.’

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/mar/01/former-barclays-boss-gambles-on-courtroom-battle-over-ties-to-epstein

Its because they toe the line. That was Harry's mistake. They do what they like, take advantage of their Royal connections all over the place, make private money out of them, but at the end of the day, the worst crime that can possibly be committed is criticising the workings of the Royal Family. Andrew may have had sex with a 17 year old and humiliated himself on National TV, but at least he has never said anything bad about Prince Charles in public. That's why Harry and Andrew are spoken about in the same breath, as if there is a moral equivalence between associating with sex traffickers, taking taxpayers money to do shady deals but he's loyal to his family, and that's all that counts. With the Royal Family and also many of their fans.

FFS. Andrew gets more despicable by the day 😡

Pitch@Palace was soft sold to us littles as a charitable endeavor and now he's looking to line his pockets shilling his little black book?

How many of those contacts were made via his publicly funded trade envoy role?

And yes. The whole damn lot are out there hustling. The only difference I can think of with Harold is that he was upfront and explicit about wanting to cash in leaving the palace positive publicity machine melting.

You can read some stuff about Prince Andrew on wikileaks

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08BISHKEK1095_a.html

Qwll let's see if I saw my family members being allowed to but then grt told no i can't I'd be pretty pissed off myself. I think anyone would. So okay for others but not okay for us.

I also see why the Queen would say no after seeing consequences but should of stopped them all from doing it.

Tbh they may as well be doing something more than all of them purely living off the Monarch forever, even just for their sakes. If other people want to pay them to do it, then that's up to them. They should have let Harry go to do the same as Zara, etc. At least they would have them under their control. The issue with Andrew is that he was using Buckingham Palace ( which belongs to us) to fake charity work to skim money for himself, was apparently a ' trade envoy' but was useless and actively damaging when he again wasn't trying to grift money for himself. If they could all just be happy with their enormous privilege and behave in a decent manner, a bit of using Royal connections to get some extra work would be fine. They can't seem to do that, though. They have to desperately sell secrets, ingratiate themselves with shady characters, and get themselves into trouble. You would think that the advantage of having a hereditary system would be that you know exactly the skills they would need from birth. But instead, we have ended up with none too bright people who still think they deserve even more than they have.

Andrew, Fergie, Harry, Meghan, Zara, etc are on the make.

Probably the whole lot of them.

The difference is... all but Meghan live within the royal family and are protected.. Bizarre to think that a divorced for 30 years woman is living on a Royal Estate, but yes, Sarah.. Harry & Meghan are doing what they do good or bad, under the glare of the world's media ready to criticise.
But Sarah can do what she wants and there's never much publicity about it. She's just hooked up with a meditation app and is on IG enthusiastically telling viewers to sign up three friends and get a year for free! And is crowning someone with a plastic tiara for World Kindness Day at her book signing (imagine Meghan doing that?!) and going round advertising the Diana awards... why? She isn't part of the royal family any more She's also droning on about early education for children, isn't that Kate's remit? She must be very grateful for all the flack harry and meghan get... it keeps any spotlight off her, she's probably coining it in.

Oh I don’t disagree @Extiainoiapeial
thats why I included her as being on the make.

I suspect her and Andrew have never actually split despite the divorce, which may explain why there is never much digging about her.

About time there was.

She must be very grateful for all the flack harry and meghan get... it keeps any spotlight off her, she's probably coining it in.

She’s also in her 60s and is not known for being stylish. I think it’s mostly the perennial invisibility of women as they age out of being seen by society as attractive (and so having a value 🙄 ) that is the prime reason that she’s under the radar.

Yes there was cringe video that popped up on my instagram of Sarah emoting how sad she was about the fires in California and how ' we must all do something' I just thought it's got fuck all to do with you love.

Oh I’ve definitely become more invisible as I’ve aged, I have been for years as I’m disabled just more now.

I agree Serenster about the invisibility of older women, been there done it, got the T shirt!
But I also think she is protected within the royal family because for some reason she gets no criticism for what she does at all. I think Andrew protects her because after all, he doesn't get the flack he deserves either. That's why Sarah stays attached to him. Charles doesn't know what to do with Andrew and by default that includes Sarah too, despite being divorced from him for decades.

Imagine meghan talking of early education of children and how important it is like Sarah just has, or crowning someone at a book signing with a plastic tiara! The internet, media and MN would explode, it's quite funny to think of actually 😂

Yes they would definitely go to town on that! There are 4 threads here that filled up in a few days on Meghan name changing her business! I don't know what on earth they were taking about or want to know, but they have comprehensively and very publicly cut themselves off from the Royal Family, so what does it matter if she has a failing business? Zara is young and attractive but all her doing whatever she is doing in Australia is all ' Zara and Mike put on a loved up display...'

If 65 year old Meghan was crowning someone at a book signing with a plastic tiara while the press is focused on George, Charlotte and Louis, who would by then in their early 30s and late 20s, I suspect she’d get exactly the same response as Sarah now - not very much, in other words.

Call me dense, but I don't understand why Andrew's trying to sell Pitch@Palace in the first place. I'm aware the original one was mothballed, but wasn't there an international version he was taking a % from?

I'd have thought he'd need whatever that % was bringing in - unless of course he's found some new funding stream from someone even more disgusting than him

Lol, she would get a ton of threads on here with plenty of comments about hownshe is now stealing the spotlight off Louis etc.

She left and moved country and on thei board people still drag and comment on stuff from over 5yrs+ ago.

There is no way it will die down. You could go away for 5yrs come back to this board and there will still be the same meghan threads probably still dragging up her wedding, her baby bump and God knows what else.

I think you nailed it.

Fair enough comment, given Sarah still gets her book about life in the Royal family and her monetising her title brought up 25 years later. Bad behaviour does tend to follow you when you’re a former royal and in the public eye.

Exactly. If the people who didnt want to hear from her didnt drive traffic to every single article she is mentioned and didnt obsessively look up every little piece of information about her, they would already be irrelevant!