Andrew - continuing his effort to end the Monarchy, part 2

[AnnunciataM]

I am not the OP of the previous thread but we are nearly at 1000 posts and there's been some very good discussion on there.

Previous thread https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/the_royal_family/5473274-andrew-continuing-his-effort-to-end-the-monarchy

I can only imagine the mood in the Palace this morning https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2026/02/13/andrew-leaked-confidential-treasury-briefing-banker-iceland/

Hopefully means all this dodgy dealings when trade envoy will start to come out now.

https://apple.news/ARe0YxH7dRNO__nEg-FB-ng

It must rankle to think it's suggested he did contribute. IF he didn't, I think we have the right to know who were the other members of the family that did

This isn't going away any time soon, is it?

Amanda Thirsk again? What on earth is wrong with that woman? Was she lobotomised as part of the job? Even by the apparent low standards of most Royal staff, she has been particularly supine.

What is with the assumption it was the Queen passing the hat round? Why not the way more likely option of Andrew. So it went something like this, £3million he used from money left to him by Prince Philip, £1.5m came from Beatrice/Eugenie and The Queen then lent him the shortfall of £7.5m to be repaid from the sale of the ski chalet.

@IAmATorturedPoet

Your speculation tries to hive Andrew off away from the rest of them - is that the royalist line now ? Can you show that Andrew had money from the sale of the chalet because I have read that it was so heavily mortgaged that there was nothing left. There was no loan. It was all gifted . ‘Loan’ is another distancing trick .

My speculation implicates more of them than Andrew and Elizabeth .

The point is we have every right to know the truth. This is only a small part of the picture and the fax payer funded cess pit that is the monarchy is still playing us .

It is unacceptable that the so called head of state and head of church is now publicly infighting over who paid what to Andrew’s accuser .

This involves sex trafficking and links to the horrors in the Epstein files .Just speak live to the nation Charles .

I heard an commentator say the ‘convention’ is that the Windsors files are not to be touched . ‘Convention’ says it all about why our system needs reform . Covering up links to Epstein is what it has led to .

I am equally as concerned by the donation to Earthshot.

Still no response ? Is the infighting distraction to help us ‘forget’ such details ?

The charity will have been completely unaware but we have a right to know exactly what happened when.

Two charities now linked to William with donations from Epstein and the Epstein class

"Mrs Windsor". Sickening.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15556521/Andrew-flew-girl-UK-Epsteins-Lolita-jet-took-Buckingham-Palace-Pressure-mounts-launch-sex-trafficking-probe-ex-prince-90-flights-carrying-girls-world.html

Your speculation tries to hive Andrew off away from the rest of them - is that the royalist line now ? Can you show that Andrew had money from the sale of the chalet because I have read that it was so heavily mortgaged that there was nothing left. There was no loan. It was all gifted . ‘Loan’ is another distancing trick .

@Ukisgaslit Christ on a bike, give over with the royalist crap. I’m just offering up an alternative because the discussion here is asking/speculating on who may have paid what. Am I not allowed to offer up something alternative? Is it beyond the realms of possibility that Beatrice, who helped her father arrange the Maitlis interview, might not have helped him out with his settlement?

Just because you read something somewhere doesn’t necessarily make it so.

No it doesn’t . Which is why we deserve the truth

And people are speculating based on published articles

I haven’t seen mention of E or B anywhere

I haven’t seen mention of E or B anywhere

And your point is what? It can’t possibly be them?

I repeat, my point is :
why are we being given leaked new information now
why can’t we simply be told the truth

We paid for it . We should know .

I think this has gone way beyond the money now and who paid what.
Gordon Brown is calling for a full scale police investigation into the trafficking of women and girls into the UK.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1w5jeq7r2no

Asking you daughters for money to stop the trafficked woman you had sex with from taking you to court would be the lowest for the low. The trafficked woman being not much older than your daughters

Ugh

So the queen paid for Andrew from the Duchy of Lancaster
Charles paid for Andrew from the Duchy of Cornwall
Charles now leaking that he did not pay anything. How undignified. Just do a live speech Charles you are supposed to be head of state.

A wider point is - take the Duchys properly into the crown estate . They are run like fiefdoms , the Windsors self regulate . They are not to be trusted to self regulate
Now us the time for parliament to make these changes . It’s a vote winner

I can’t imagine Anne, for example, putting her hands in her pocket for this. I can imagine her saying no fucking way.

I think it's entirely possible she contributed to the whip-round.

Both she and Ed went shooting with him shortly after Newsnight IIRC and she's reported to think he's been treated 'harshly' and be worried for his mental health.

As an aside HTH did the whining Phil amass enough cash for his estate to cough up a quarter of the payoff?

I am really looking forward to Andrew Lownie's take on the matter.

Good for Gordon. He's absolutely right.

I read a report yesterday saying that Epstein's jet was able to land at an RAF base/s.

I think we knew from the moment the Palace was making its ineffectual attempts to get ahead of events in October there was so much more to come out

Astounding and sickening.

I agree about Amanda's hopelessness, but surely we should be asking why government staff provided Andrew with this information at all?

No doubt his lackeys created good story about him "helping" in his trade envoy role, but anyone with sense could see it was merely an attempt to give him some sort of job and that he was totaally unsuitable for it, so what was the point?

Good for Gordon Brown. And as he says in an interview with the New Statesman....
British girls were on 90 Epstein flights from UK airports. 15 of these flights after his 2008 conviction
And Stansted airport was used for Epstein flights transferring young girls from one plane to another.

And why the fuck was Epstein allowed to use RAF bases to land his Lolita Express private jet? Who allowed this? This was after his conviction. It beggars belief.

And women were shipped in for Andrew to Buckingham Palace, bypassing security, with the codename Mrs. Windsor.

I hope to god something comes of all of this, and it isn't just brushed under the carpet like it always is.

And why the fuck was Epstein allowed to use RAF bases to land his Lolita Express private jet? Who allowed this? This was after his conviction. It beggars belief.

If that is true there are many, many potential witnesses the police could be talking to. If they gave a shit about women and girls.

The Ministry of Defence seemingly claimed at the time that it was routine for civilian aircraft to land at RAF Marham (20 miles from Sandringham). It wasn't - particularly because it was at the time a base for a Tornado squadron.

Yes that is true. But then you go back to the issue of him having a job, him getting his staff to ask for classified information and the onus being put on someone to refuse to give information to the son of The Queen because he cant be trusted. He should never have been given that job in the first place.

The Times are really going to town on this. There is another story questioning why the trade envoy files were hidden, and one of the reasons ( another being because it was Royal correspondence?!) was this:
These were refused, in part because it was claimed that disclosure could “endanger the physical or mental health, or the safety, of individuals involved in these arrangements.”

Surely this reason is there to protect people who have given evidence against criminals or dangerous individuals, or people who may be at risk from hostile states within the security services- not to protect people who are doing shady things! What a crock!

Wasn't there something about Epstein putting Sandringham down as his UK address?

This latest reveal in the Telegraph of Andrew leaking info to his pal Rowland is insider trading.

How the hell is KC & co. going to get away with hiding this crook in Sandringham? Which thanks to this and the prior thread, I’ve learned, was bought from money taken from the state so it isn’t even legally private. But I digress.

Andrew has to be investigated on multiple counts but the easiest one to get him on would be the leaking of material private (non-public information) to buddies before it was publicly disseminated (if it ever was). Mandelson is being investigated for that and so should Andrew. It’s so disgustingly unfair that he gets away with it because of him being part of this atrocious “Royal” family. Others have gone to jail for less.