What about Beatrice & Eugenie?

[olderandnonthewiser]

I’m not sure what to think tbh. On one hand they must be so so mortified; on the other they enjoy all the perks of Royalty and their position in the RF despite their revolting father.

How do you see it?

That was on Andrew. Not his daughters. Not any other members of the RF.

It’s my opinion he wanted to discredit her to undermine her accusations. That has no bearing on whether he was or wasn’t guilty.

John Bryan was very clearly pissed when he made those statements.

But. In vino veritas and all that...

Didn’t say it was. But if you’re looking for a starting point for lack of concern for VG, this is it. And the Queen clearly didn’t want the truth to come out - that was why VG was paid off. No concern for her, or for the truth or justice of it - just throw money at it and make it go away.

Toe-sucking John???

What a nasty thing to say

Yep. The very same !!

Yep,

That one.

Exactly. He maintained that he regretted saying it, so it could be inferred that drink led to loose talk.

FGS that was the logical, pragmatic way to deal with it. Doesn’t mean the Queen was foaming at the mouth calling her a slapper!! What good was “concern”?

When the alternative was a megabucks case and Motormouth in the dock, I would have settled too!

Alternative is to say “ok, he’s innocent. Happy to be interviewed by the police and FBI. Have at it”

Also the PP never said the Queen said those things. You’ve a habit of hyperbole and !!!!! and conflating issues which derails the thread and makes you look like PA’s PR.

Rosscameasdoody · Today 20:35
I wouldn’t be so sure. In May of this year, a former aide of Andrew’s - John Bryan - was secretly filmed telling a journalist that despite him working very hard to improve Andrews’ PR, the prince actually admitted to him that he had knowingly slept with underage girls. He referred to it as ‘bedding baby beauties’. If that’s true, it’s revolting. Only time will tell if we can add the charge of paedophilia to the accusations.
..........
Yeah like we all believe 'sources close to'.
Honestly.

I didn’t say the Queen was foaming at the mouth or calling her a slapper. The question was whether any concern was shown on the part of the royals for VG, and what she had suffered at the hands of Epstein. As far as I can see there was none. Their only interest was in protecting Andrew, regardless of whether or not he was guilty of the accusations.

I dismissed it too at first. Until a later interview in which he admitted he regretted saying it - it smacked of him letting it slip because he was drunk.

If that’s in reference to me, all I can say is, I miss the laughing emoji.

I guess you think hyperbole is somewhere in
Greece!

Even if he was as pure as the driven snow, it would never have been a good call to put him on the stand. You did see what Maitless did with him!

If you think I sound like his PR. well that comprehension failure is on you. Setting happens daily in employment situations and it’s not built on right/wrong, It’s mostly about damage limitation and economics. But feel free to mock all you like. It’s you who doesn’t understand!!!

I literally don’t see anything inherently wrong in that. It’s how the law works.

Please tell me you didn’t actually interpret my comment literally..,!

It is nasty. She can look really quite beautiful at times.

Both she and Andrew are very like Queen Victoria aren’t they.

Beatrice has much prettier open eyes than Queen Victoria, who had the heavily hooded eyes.

Yes they are. William with his beard reminds me of a Romanov. B has got that DNA.

Maybe she is a nice, fun person but neither of them actually "do" much so they?
I would love to have their funds and make a difference.Instead they choose, yes choose to waste it.

Apparently Andrew Lownie will be releasing new information about the Princess’s shady deals in the ME. I have no doubt they are up to their necks in it as well.

Just a reminder - these are actual people you are talking about, not puppets in your (anti) fan fiction.

i don’t know Beatrice and Eugenie. I do however know people who, as adults, have had to grapple with the fact that the loving parents they have know their whole lives have different sides to them that their children have never seen. It’s not a nice place to be in. It’s very easy for an onlooker to cry “cut them off, never see them again or you’re complicit”. In reality life is never that simple or uncomplicated.

Beatrice and Eugenie have probably lived in the public eye long enough to know that everything they do will be criticised, so they may as well just do what they need to, and tell the commentators to comment and be damned…

Well there’s nothing more complicit in being involved in the negotiations and execution of the News Night interview - unless you are suggesting that this was a cunning plan to actually expose her father, the multiple rapist of a vulnerable sex trafficked teenager, in order to give credence to his victims claims?

At the risk of sounding like an 8 year old , I can't undertand why these people don't look outwards. Look at their wealth and look at others with nothing. They could do so much. I think the Windsors had them off to a tee.

I don't need reminding that they are real people and my opinion is not "(anti) fan fiction). I've said previously that of course they'll be upset about their parents and I've never said they should cut them off and never see them again or accused them of being complicit.

My point is that Beatrice made a public gesture that will be construed by many as supportive of her parents, which in my opinion is not a smart move. Her sister Eugenie might be more aware of the optics, particularly as she founded an anti-slavery collective.

It has taken the UK a very very long time to get to this point constitutionally. Thank god we don’t have the set up of the USA and the powers of a president. Or for that matter, France or Russia. Getting rid of royal family or a constitutional monarchy doesn’t always lead a country to the utopian government set up. I quite like the compromise we have. The RF can bring in millions in tourism and soft diplomacy - which we do need as the UK is so small now and fairly irrelevant.

If we dismantled the monarchy - I guess that would mean no tax payers support - but they would still have their estates and inherited wealth generally - just as other titled families do. We can’t just destroy their wealth and properties etc because we are either jealous or don’t like them. For the most part they do an excellent public duty and benefit the coffers of the uk substantially. I don’t think it infantilises someone who sees the economics and the benefits.
.