Prince Andrew 'let the side down'

[Gingerkittykat]

Here's a clip from Prince Andrew's interview where he regrets remaining friends with Epstein after his conviction because he let the royal family down. Not a single mention of Epstein's victims and how they were let down.

He also does not recall meeting Virginia Giuffre, despite the photos saying otherwise.

I can't believe he did any interview in the first place, but surely he is digging an even bigger hole for himself here.

Once HM goes we should have a referendum on whether we want to keep maintaining the ever growing Windsor family from the public purse.

I don't think we do pay for him, do we?

Andrew is not on the Civil List and not funded directly by the UK taxpayer. He receives funding from the Queen's "Private" sources of income which are in practice public property protected by layers and layers and layers of smoke and mirrors.

The word is Charles is after having a cull, perhaps not literally, but at any rate a reduction in the number of HRHs.

Slimmed down monarchy; it's the only way forward. Just Charles and direct descendents. The rest can get jobs and stop Lording it over us.

I too thought he chose his words carefully, and the I've no recollection of it indicates that it might be true. Why would you not just categorically say no if you 100% knew it wasn't true?
And how is taking your daughter to a pizza party at "4 or 5pm" proof that you weren't at a night club. I dont suppose anyone is in tramps at 4pm! What's to say he didn't wait till the girls were in bed thinking dad was at home and then go out?
It's like saying I couldn't have been in the cinema at 8pm because my work mates remember that I was at work from 9-5... .

And the absolute refusal to condemn any of Epsteins behaviour. Did he regret any of it? No because done good things came out of those trips and it was good networking.FFS.

Andrew is not on the Civil List and not funded directly by the UK taxpayer.

However, it's pretty clear that he and Sarah Ferguson have been selling their royal status for years.

He didn't go to see Epstein to say goodbye, he went to see Epstein to get money to pay his ex-wife's debts. Whether or not Andrew was involved in abuse himself, I don't think it's possible for him to deny that he sold the cover of royal respectability to a known child abuser in return for cash.

It's also difficult for him to argue that he was penniless and had no other choice, because 4 years later he was somehow able to buy a £13 million ski chalet.

And the Queen is not innocent in all of this. Andrew spent the 2000's doing dodgy deals with dictators, and the Queen's response was to give him more titles.

He was always pretty creepy. But I am not sure why he did the interview, he really didn't come off well.

I'm actually pleased with the public response to this scandal. It wouldn't be that long ago that this would be completely ignored and he would be able to do what he wanted without question.

The last thing I saw was Inverness campaigning to have his title Earl (or whatever) of there removed.

I do think the queen is totally wrong in appearing publicly with him twice after major revelations (church a few weeks ago and horseriding yesterday) since it shows she is standing by her boy but people are even questioning her choices too.

If only she would take his HRH title away, but that will never happen.