Fergie Epstein email

[elprup]

Yet more damaging revelations for the Yorks. How did the Daily Mail manage to get hold of the email I wonder?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15118055/Fergie-Epstein-lies-exposed-bombshell-email-Andrew.html

Princess Margaret was so right when she wrote to her and stated, ‘You have done more to bring shame on this family than could ever have been imagined.’

Can't help thinking that's rather a case of the pot calling the kettle black!

It's hard to believe C with the benefit of an army of advisors looking after his interests wouldn't have been briefed about unsavoury characters such as Savile.

Sir Roger Jones felt Savile had a creepy vibe and banned him from Children in Need.

So there were clearly rumours.

There were a couple more numbers listed for her than for Charmless but both had an astonishing amount of numbers listed - into the mid to late teens.

Totally agree with every bit of that

I had no idea until recent reports that Prince Philip and Fergie's mother Susan had a thing. Makes it all the more baffling that the Queen was possibly the jolliest we've ever seen her at the York's wedding.
It's a different earth they live in to the rest of us.

I believe the quote was that he'd "fold the thing completely rather than allow Savile anywhere near it" - and we can be pretty certain he'd have wanted to be involved with something like this

Which all underlines the point that people at this level have access to far better information than the rest of us (looking at you, RF ...)

Yip and I think would have publicly resigned and made it clear why.

Maybe so but one thing PM never did was be best friends with a sex trafficker. The same goes for Harry as well, despite the vilification he gets from monarchists who try to equate him with Andrew as a comparable wrongdoer... in reality there is no comparison.

'Fergie' and A were happy to be in Epstein's back pocket as long as it was lucrative for them.

Also odd that Phil came down so hard on Fergie after the toe sucking incident.

You’d think he might be a bit more understanding given that he was in a similar situation with her mother.

The reason Andrew is an absolutely entitled arse is that for his entire life he has been indulged, allowed to get away with being a lazy entitled arse, never told he is a lazy entitled arse, etc. he has never had to struggle for anything and he has been able to lie through his teeth over everything to do with the Epstein scandal.

as the saying goes You can tell he's lying because his lips are moving.

so when it comes the KC saying anything, he probably cannot bring himself to break the habit of a lifetime, and also thinks what would Mama do? Well obviously Mama would have indulged him and let him carry on behaving the way he always has.

utterly depressing. Let's hope when William finally ascends the throne he will break this ridiculous deadlock, because he absolutely loathes his uncle.

Also odd that Phil came down so hard on Fergie after the toe sucking incident.
You’d think he might be a bit more understanding given that he was in a similar situation with her mother.

That didn't make the papers though did it?

No she didn't, but at the time that wasn't known about was it?

She partied, spent extravagantly & had lovers.

Didn't that also apply to PM?

Sometimes when people have seen at first hand the damage done by adultery and have experienced the trauma of living with an emotionally unstable parent they crave stability and strong moral boundaries.
I wonder if this is how Prince William feels?
I think we are very lucky he was the elder child.

The Queen was too old to deal with it. The can gets kicked.

K Charles is now too old to deal with it. So the can gets kicked.

The chances are that by the time William succeeds to the throne, it’ll be old news. People will be saying that it was so long ago in the past there’s no point in digging it up now.

Nevertheless the avoidance by each of the monarchs in their turn tends to eat into their credibility.

If Charles dies in a year or two then yes, William will maybe have to deal with it. He can thank his father and grandmother for that.

Also Phillip lived in the age when men cheated and it wasn’t a scandal. A woman cheating however -absolutely scandalous. And it was the woman’s reputation that suffered, not that of the men.

And atm that’s somewhere between an unsupported allegation and gossip.

My point is you might think Phil would cut her some slack or even just feel some kindness towards Fergie seeing as he was so close to her mum. Instead he seemed to hate her.

They are a different breed I guess.

I agree - Charles doesn’t see it as an issue.

Why would he? As a 32 year old, sexually experienced man he married an 18 year old virgin who had led a very sheltered life. It was practically an arranged marriage when you look at the circumstances - she was regarded as ‘a good brood mare’. There was no ‘history’ that could embarrass the monarchy.

Diana at 18 was only 12 months - maximum - older than Virginia Guiffre was when she met Prince Andrew.

18, inexperienced, unblemished and a virgin chosen for her breeding to provide an heir and little else, whilst he continued his affair with a married woman and mother of 3.

The answer to your question - ‘why?’ is because it’s his brother, I guess. Maybe he feels a bit of guilt because he got the throne and Andrew’s just the spare.

But I bet William will give the Yorks short shrift when he takes over.

The problem is that like with so many of these situations, people only saw what they wanted to see until the press got wind. She went to nice events, wined and dined, private jet use perhaps and may not have personally seen anything illegal, or perhaps she didn’t ask questions about the plethora of younger women??? Who knows, do I think all of these caught up in the Epstein scandal knew about everything, no they didn’t, were they flattered to be invited and turned a blind eye perhaps subconsciously, yes. Whereas Andrew was definitely involved more, these others were more on the fringe i suspect. Fergie also needed money don’t forget

I think King Charles is very much keep your friends closer and your enemies (well not quite) even closer when it comes to the Yorks. If he expelled them from Windsor grounds or wherever they live. Then who knows who they would mix with and get up to. ok they wouldn’t be royals but as far as press and lot of the public would be concerned they wouldn’t still be but without the control and that would be more dangerous. At least they can be kept an eye on and told to toe the line.

Some of the names in the book surprised me - John Cleese for example

I forgot to post the link www.documentcloud.org/documents/1508273-jeffrey-epsteins-little-black-book-redacted/

I personally informed the BBC about Savile ( I had come across a child victim in a professional capacity ) in 1991 . As did many , many others . The police knew about Savile from complaints going back to the 1950s .He was protected . Why ?