It’s interesting how positive headlines about Harry coming in from the cold are being used to mask negative ones about Sarah Ferguson

[Inotherwordspleasebetrue]

This is blatant speculation but I’m beginning to think that Harry was right all along and that the Buckingham Palace press machine uses stories about the lower ranking royals royals to protect the core of the monarchy.

So, on this occasion, to distract from damaging stories about Sarah Ferguson’s e-mails and back-tracking with Epstein, especially given the Yorks recent prominent appearance at the Duchess of Kent’s funeral, my theory is that the Palace has given a tacit nod to a story about Harry coming back in from the cold, knowing that any story about Harry or Meghan will immediately hit the top slot and overshadow anything else?

Buckingham Palace must think people are very dim, or rely on the fact that they swallow this propaganda whole without questioning it?

Of course this time Harry will be happy because the headlines are favourable to him. And on a human level everyone loves a story about a reconciliation between father and son. But generally I think the British public are being played by all of this spin to cover up the type of story about financial murkiness that Andrew Lownie uncovered and wrote about in his latest book?

All of which leads me to wondering why the Royal Family and the men in grey suits are once again protecting Andrew and Sarah? Is it simply because Andrew is the King’s brother, and therefore close to the Crown, or is it because Andrew’s financial dealings are not much different to what most of them do in the RF, but just a bit more blatant and extreme?

Who knows what the truth is any more?

I think a much more interesting conversation would be why David Boies, the lawyer for Virginia Guiffre believed that M could be a material witness

I wasn't aware of this and it is indeed interesting, @My2cents1975 - though I realise he indicated it was her connection with Andrew which might give rise to information and that there's no suggestion she associated with Epstein herself

His assertion that "she can be relied on to tell the truth" seems misguided to say the least, but since the case was settled and Virginia's now dead I wouldn't expect any more to come of it unless there are more emails to come out there too

It'll probably be grist to the mill of "why haven't they criticised Andrew?" though ...

As far as I can judge from that article, the reasons Boies is talking about calling M to testify is that 1. she is American so he can,
2. she spent some time as a member of the RF and therefore may have heard whispers of insider information about Andrew 3. having left the RF how and when she did, she is unlikely to be too deferential or biaised towards the RF when giving evidence.

I don’t see anything particularly damning about any of that?

I suspect that the RF may be quite worried about the possibility of MM testifying for fear of what else might come out!

Also, I think there is a fourth reason, which is that Boies is a wily operator and he knows he will get more publicity for his case and possibly gain momentum, if he publicises Meghan’s potential involvement, in other words, it could be a bluff or a case of simply dropping a pebble in to a pond on the off chance that ripples spread … .

I disagree with this. I am no fan of the relentless malicious bully that is MM - but if there was even a sniff she was a ‘yacht girl’ it would have been outed by now. Also are we not considering these girls were vulnerable, trafficked, coerced - which requires us to see the victims that they were to rich powerful men.

Apologies! Quoted wrong post!

Sources please? Proof?

I think this would have come to light years ago if there were any truth in it.

I agree that it makes Charles look either weak or complicit in a cover up.

Who knows why he hasn’t acted more decisively?

I suspect that the RF may be quite worried about the possibility of MM testifying for fear of what else might come out!

What, another Paul Burrell situation?
I'd say they could always "remember a conversation" in an attempt to stop things, except I doubt that would carry as much weight in a US court (and wouldn't it look like a job lot?)

You could well have a point about Boies dropping names to publicise any future actions though ...

‘In 2000 he brought Epstein, Harvey Weinstein and Maxwell to QE2s birthday party’

are you sure about that ?

I thought it was Andrew’s birthday, not the Queens birthday party.

Yes, it was not the late Queen's party!

@DelightedDelicious

I did not say that she was a yacht girl.

I thought the comment about Harry and Meghan being divisive referred to the many differences of opinion about their actions people hold. Few people disagree about the Yorks.

Meghan being a yacht girl seems to be a lie that gained traction on twitter, that bastion of truth and balance.

I hope that Charles bans Andrew (and Sarah) from cameras at family events but I'm not sure how he can actually do it. He certainly couldn't tell the Kent family who to invite to their event. The problem I believe Charles has is that it's actually pretty difficult stopping an adult doing anything they want unless you have leverage. Charles tried withdrawing money and security but Andrew just went elsewhere. If we had an absolute monarch it would be different, and I would love to see Andrew forced into a plane to face trial but we live in a democracy where he has rights and contracts.

OK. Would you care to expand on what you are inferring then?

What are you trying to imply then? Which circles specifically are you saying MM moved in? As its an open secret that's being ignored I assume it's something damaging?

Ooh- tell us more!

Have just been reading this BBC article about Epstein which is fascinating.

He started out as a teacher 😮

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48913377

Rosa Monckton’s comment about him being “enigmatic” and that you didn’t know what lay under the onions skins of his personality was more accurate than she realised!

Little did she know! 🙁

You can see how he hid in plain site by hob-knobbing with Presidents, film stars, and scientists, giving €30 million dollar donations to Harvard!

What I hadn’t realised though is that his first conviction was serious enough to put him away for a very long time but the Federal Prosecutor and a member of Trump’s administration, made “a deal of the century” and got it reduced to eighteen months of which he served thirteen. He could even work from home! When apparently there was was enough indisputable concrete evidence to bang him up for life 😲
What an opportunity missed!

This is also a very interesting profile as to how and why he got away with what he did:

https://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/n7912/

Not QE2s birthday, she was present, but it was Beatrice's 18th. Got it wrong. I believe Maxwell and Epstein did go to a QE2 party of some sort

Surely Charles could have sent a couple of men in grey suits to talk to the Yorks very firmly about slipping in to the back of the cathedral and leaving the same way?

As you say, maybe he did and the Yorks did not comply?

I can’t imagine that the late Duchess of Kent would want that pair at the funeral? One word from Charles to the Duke of Kent via intermediaries would have wiped Andrew and Fergie from the guest list I am certain.

But instead of that, it was reported that Andrew and Fergie had a police escort from Royal Lodge to the funeral, which must have been signed off by someone higher up?

Charles needs to try much harder!

Did anyone listen to James O’Brien today on LBC? I only caught the tail end but A caller telephoned in, who put the Andrew issue in a sporting analogy. As James said, it’s like Andrew’s been benched but he keeps coming back on the pitch, imo to the annoyance of the referee and manager as extra analogy.

What's worse?

1. A senior royal and his wife who have undeniable and proven links to Jeffrey Epstein, his paedophile friends and their victims- who may or may not be victims of said royal couple too.

1. A couple who may or may not have experienced poor treatment from their family, and are annoying and attention seeking about it, and at most are CFers after cash and fame.

Hmm decisions decisions!

We don't know how hard Charles is trying, we only know it isn't working. From the way Andrew grand centre stage the moment Charles and William aren't around it strikes me that getting him to do anything is an uphill struggle.

Anyone who wangs on about being a "blood royal" is not someone who is going to listen to advice. Ironically if only Charles could behave like a blood royal absolute monarch Andrew would probable never be seen again. But Charles can't.

I’ve just noticed that among my FB memories for today 5 years ago was this “Isn’t it extraordinary how Meghan Markel is considered to have done more damage to the Monarchy than Andrew has. Women, eh?” If I’d known then what I know now……!

I hear what you are saying and have some sympathy for Charles who is ill after all and must have limited energy and time.

It’s odd though that someone signed off on a a police escort for the Yorks without question, so Prince Andrew is still availing himself of tax-payers’ money!

Also, Lownie mentioned on a podcast that Charles was seen kissing Fergie’s hand at Ascot this summer. Possibly he wasn’t aware of the full e-mail situation then?

Lownie also said that, technically speaking, Andrew is still a Counsellor of State, although in reality the role only applies to working royals. Prince Andrew could be removed from the list immediately though.

And sorry to keep mentioning it, but as Head of State, Charles has an obligation to the public to find out if PA did indeed break the bribery act of 2010 while working as a UK trade envoy, and if he did, to ensure that he is charged with that offence. Charles also has to launch a review in to how these financial misdemeanours were covered up and by whom. The royal family can’t just ignore illegality when it suits them! They should be subject to the same corruption laws as anyone else! In fact, with their great privilege, they should be held to an exemplary standard of behaviour.

Why are so few people calling for this?

My point is that Charles could do better. He does have choices. It’s beginning to look as though the will isn’t there.

I would have thought the first thing to do would be to banish PA and SF to where the rest of the RF are not. Somewhere in the Scilly isles perhaps or Transylvania? Or the Falkland Islands? Or France? I’m sure a platoon of fit looking Scots Guards could “help” them to evacuate Royal Lodge!

Or Princess Anne? 😬

Seriously though, whatever happens now, the public require some response and explanation from King Charles.

Won't happen!

I sort of understand it given his health situation but it is kicking the can down the road for William to deal with, isn't it?

They have no shame, those two, and will not give up anything - unless forced. I bet Andrew with his ideas of grandeur still imagines he can wheedle himself back into royal life. He needs to come and read MN threads about him and Sarah 😀. I have no idea how two people cannot realise how despised unpopular they are. If it were me I would be hiding away (in splendid luxury)

Security and what Andrew did on behalf of the government are not within Charles' remit. Is lived politicians to do some investigating though.

If you read Lownie's book. Andrew is a terrible driver. He has run over a person in Windsor Park, speeds, and the Queen even received a petition asking that Andrew not drive. He also had some device that allowed him to change red lights to green.

The police escort may have been to protect ordinary people from Andrew in a car. If you remember, William did drive Andrew to church recently.