Andrew - continuing his effort to end the Monarchy

[TheHaplessWit]

Another new story on Andrew today. Photo's have emerged showing that on Epstein's desk, there were emails regarding Epstein paying debts owed by Andrew/Sarah to staff:

https://people.com/epstein-had-emails-staff-ex-prince-andrew-sarah-ferguson-new-photos-show-11880419

Why on Earth was a Prince of England having his staff paid by a sex trafficker?
Doesn't seem "too honourable" to me.

Towels. A tube of some kind of cream and what looks like a small white dildo kind of thing but I could be mistaken about the latter as I’ve never seen one in real life.

Epstein sounds like a cult leader.

He’s trying to cover Labour’s hide.

Drugs paraphernalia I'm guessing.

What I always wonder about Andrew is what does he get out of riding horses?
In any photo I see the horse is just walking. Maybe that's the best time to get a snap rather when he's at full canter. He's supposed to be a bit of an adrenaline junkie or at least appears to have an appetite for risk and yet he sits on a horse while it walks which is the most boring thing ever. I find it most bizarre.

I know Anne and Zara used to do eventing and Harry, William and Charles play or played polo and I'm totally against those sports but I can see the appeal but walking around the estate on a horse. Just why?

Oh, even worse.

😮

Emails and meeting between Mette and JE are dated between 2011 and 2013 , well after his conviction and imprisonment, no-one in their communication office thought nothing of it ? Warned her of the implications of being associated with JE , she stayed at his house with a friend, met with him while with her children , no one warned her that perhaps there are camera planted at his house ?
I just can’t think of one single good thing Mette thought she’d gain from her friendship with JE .

Maybe Kier Starmer will remove the the Title from Mandelson unless he steps up and helps any enquiry or testifies !!

So agree. It's boring and tedious and veers between Trump and a few years ago, Boris Johnson.
The answer is always the same... we can vote them out but posters choose not to get it.

And was it Mette-Marit’s husband’s sister who ran off and married the shaman? And gave up her princess status as a consequence?

It’s all very dysfunctional - it would be laughed at as a Dynasty plot.

I think Saudi crown Prince MBS is also in the documents.

I got slightly fixated with tracking the offspring of ibn Saud (he had at least 22 wives and several hundred edited, dozen children) and the remaining succession a while back. The stuff the house of Saud have been up to is absolute Next Level

It's all so utterly sordid isnt it.

The Monarchy has survived until now, yes. But I wouldn't be as confident that it will survive an asset deprived and Boomer resentful GEN Z, or technocracy beholden Gen Alpha. I think the monarchy relies on Gen X's like me with some retention of post war values and hopes. But it's wearing thin. All the scandals have reached peak lately.

I too was a Constitutional Royalist until I saw with the scandalous emails last year, that there was literally no way to hold these people accountable. Stupid me had imagined there was some way in law to do this. It appears there isn't, and I would hypocritical to think people representing us as MPs can be accountable but members of the Monarchy cannot.

And there's the fact that few of them appear to be very happy. The family existing within an institutional framework, plus heavy press scrutiny may be contributing to mental illness as seen to an extent with Harry. It may be making marriages difficult to navigate privately, as seen with Diana and Charles.

When I stop to think about it, I think it is wrong, unethical and even cruel to have children born into such a system with no choice, born to instant scrutiny. It might have been a necessary and worthy price to pay back in the 16 century, but we do not need a Monarchy now and we do not need to be enforcing that burden on anyone. So why are we still demanding that they suffer for our good?

At best, perhaps if it could be modernised and members rotated maybe that might be acceptable.

But it's not fair to those whom are born into it. They deserve privacy and to make mistakes out of the public eye unless they choose to be a part of government.

We should grow up. Most people only want them for the pomp and the ties to history. They are living national symbols. The people themselves they don't give a toss about.

Open up the palaces, make them fully utilised and functional.

Get an elected head of state.

The honours system is also getting increasingly ridiculous. I roll my eyes so many times now.

Going to totally undo myself by saying I am not necessarily against hereditary peers...

Yes and to think that was considered so scandalous ! Wonder how will they manage MM? Or was her blatant statement means it’s done and dusted ?

So, towels, lube, a dildo, ?butt plugs, and Andrew M-W crouched over a semi-conscious, slightly built girl or young woman.

And Epstein sitting in his leopard print chair, watching. Presumably Maxwell taking the snaps.

Do we really want a Trump-style leader? For 22 years we were one bad polo accident away from having King Andrew now. Is that what you want?

I knew someone who knew him, and they said he made reference to the queen a lot in social situations as a way of keeping everyone in line i.e assuring deference to him. And yet we see by his repeated appalling antics that he actually profoundly disrespected her at every turn. Extraordinary. And Epstein ad Maxwell clearly profoundly disrespected the monarchy and UK too because they indulged him in this way for nefarious gain .

Yeah vile

I too was a Constitutional Royalist until I saw with the scandalous emails last year, that there was literally no way to hold these people accountable. Stupid me had imagined there was some way in law to do this. It appears there isn't, and I would hypocritical to think people representing us as MPs can be accountable but members of the Monarchy cannot.

I think for me, as a constitutional monarchist, @TightlyLacedCorset, the most frustrating thing is that there is a way to do it. The government has simply abdicated its responsibility to do so.

A constitutional monarchy works best when both parts - monarch and government - take their roles seriously. This government has used thet Andrew saga as a helpful distraction from other things.

People make much of 'Erskine May', saying that it prevents discussion about the Royal Family. If you actually read the text, it simply prevents discussing them as a side issue in some other debate - it lays out how RF issues should be discussed, with the government allocating time. This government has simply refused to do so.

it’s what the public would tolerate that matters to both Parliament and the monarchy

While this may be true in theory, @TheAutumnCrow, it's surely obvious by now that protecting their own position is all that really matters to the RF, and Parliament won't act despite Starmer's ridiculous "I'm the good guy" attempts to pretend he wants Andrew to testify

And thought I'm neither, that's really the difference for me between constitutional monarchists and royalists... the former appreciate how it's meant to work (except it's not doing) and the latter sometimes appear only to care about who seems "nice"

He was probably role-playing being a doctor or some such sick nonsense and the girl had to pretend to be comatose so he could do what he liked.

Yes i wonder what he got up to. I cant imagine it was just a holiday. And,as someone else pointed out, it's hard to believe that the architect of the Labour landslide in 1997 was so innocent and unaware as to not have the vaguest clue what Epstein was all about. What an absolute pile of horseshit. Does he think we all came down in the last rainshower. I think further investigation is most definitely in order. And to think this person was until recently potentially going to hold a senior position at Oxford University..You couldn't make it up, could you. Oh my good god.

But AMW presumably is still claiming that he knew/saw/partook in nothing. So how long before he claims the sweating man in the picture isn't really him but a mannequin that just resembles him?!

Mandelson is even claiming the documents mentioning him receiving payments in 2003 and 4 are "unverified"

-

Prince William heckled on a royal visit a few weeks ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/RoyalsGossip/comments/1qsxrfc/man_threatened_with_arrest_for_asking_prince/

People make much of 'Erskine May', saying that it prevents discussion about the Royal Family. If you actually read the text, it simply prevents discussing them as a side issue in some other debate - it lays out how RF issues should be discussed, with the government allocating time. This government has simply refused to do so

I have read it and you're right, @bluegreygreen

However you're also right that Parliament's clearly determined not to act, which is why for some of us the only possible solution is to have an elected HoS who can be got rid of if necessary