Prince Andrew Accused of Underage Sex Acts

The repercussions of this affair are endless.

In the case of the UK, it might be the final straw that breaks the back of the monarchy.

The British monarchy can hardly be said to be at the apex of its popularity at the moment; Prince Charles' interferences in the political process, the DoE's driving record, Megxit and now the continuing Epstein saga and Andrew's involvement in that circle.

The Royal machine have done their best to mitigate the effects on them of the Epstein saga by effectively locking Andrew away in a broom cupboard. This tactic does not appear to be having the desired effect and things are not going away.

There has been a steady drip, drip of unwelcome publicity for the Royal Family. The effects are cumulative and there must come a point where the British public will say, 'Enough is enough, they're just an anachronistic embarrassment'.

No matter whether or not you believe that Prince Andrew is guilty of anything criminal, he has shown himself to be a rather unpleasant individual with little conception of propiety or honour, but with a highly-developed sense of self-interest and entitlement. Whether or not they wish to acknowledge it, he is still very much a part of the firm as far as the public are concerned.
Hold the front page.
Rich bloke does what he wants shocker!!!
 
US news is reporting she is cutting a deal and will name names.

Both the Reps and Dems are licking their lips at the thought of their opponents being fingered in the investigation.

It's not every day a high class prostitution ring (with element's of child prostitution) gets blown open.

I will be getting a sack of popcorn in for this.
It's a long shot but I'm hoping Biden is in the frame. The Democrats will shit their pants.
 
I watched the interview with Andrew and Emily Maitliss, it was cringeworthy, the guy was lying through his teeth. He's stood in a kitchen with his arm around some fit 17 year old and swears he has no recollection of ever meeting her.

As Mrs Club Swinger reminded me, 17 is above the age of consent.
 

Bob65

War Hero
I don't have much knowledge of how it works beyond a bit of perving at Hawaii Five-Nil but my impression is that you deal 'up', and drop others in it for more serious offences than yours.

As she sits at the top of this particular tree I can't see her gaining much by offering to trade 'down' .
There are multiple directions of "up", she might have been 2IC of this particular criminal enterprise, but lower down in that, were people definitely higher in terms of being public personas, or being politically connected.

Epstein is said to have recorded everything but none of those recording have come to light. Perhaps they are encrypted and she has the key, that would definitely be a powerful bargaining chip.
 

Bob65

War Hero
In today's Telegraph. I don't think Andrew's mother is going to be too impressed by the photo:

“All these people thinking he is evil are just wrong. He is just the kind of entitled person who sees everyone as a servant.”

What a strange thing to say.
 
Biden and Trump. Just to make November 2020 properly interesting
It will be a lot funnier though if it's just Biden.
 
I watched the interview with Andrew and Emily Maitliss, it was cringeworthy, the guy was lying through his teeth. He's stood in a kitchen with his arm around some fit 17 year old and swears he has no recollection of ever meeting her.
You can "tell" he was lying based in one interview? Do the police know of your amazing power?
I often see photos with me in them, that my mates put on Facebook with other people who I do not recognise, I cant see it being any different from anyone else.
 
Last edited:
Which apparently has left him with a condition where he is unable to sweat. I'm willing to bet he is breaking out in a cold sweat this morning if he's been keeping up with the news
I think his interview was just him giving bonkers answers in the hope people would stop asking him questions if they knew they would only get bonkers answers off him.
 
if you are wondering why it took so long for Maxwell to be 'found' and arrested then you must consider the following:
1. She was alledgedly in France for quite a period before returning to the USA, a country who does not extradite under any circumstances - why return to the USA?
2. The new york southern district acting prosecutor GeoffreyBerman was recently sacked - why, and so what?

In regard to the first, it doesnt make any sense at all for a highly wanted women to return to a country where prosecution and sentencing are absolutely savage and hugely inflenced by politics - unless certain deals were made!

in regard to the second, AG Barr asked the President to sack him 2 weeks ago for basically not doing his job and for insurbordination (refusing to stand down when requested by his boss) - prosecutors are normally appointed by the President but the 2 New York Senators who by convention have to approve the choice of the incumbent in their district have continually blocked Trump for nearly 4 years in getting his appointee into post , hence why he was only acting - Berman is a Democrat Stooge who mysteriously did not seem to be putting much effort into the epstein/Maxwell case and also has repeatedly failed to respond to investigators in the Ukraine actively investigating Joe Bidens son who was a board member of the highly corrupt oil company Barisma, getting paid millions, despite being a failed military officer, smack head who cant speak the lingo, has no experience in business at that level and knows nothing whatsoever about oil! - mind you his dad was the Vice President who basically ran Ukraine on behalf of Obama and publically announced on stage that he threatened the ukranians to withold 1Bn dollars in aid unless the proseutor investigating his son was fired - which, 'son of a bitch' to quote Biden, is what happened. Nothing to see here in an election year move on!

So, within 2 weeks of Berman being sacked, the Epstein/Maxwell case suddenly springs to life and she is taken into custody - pure co-incidence? I think not!!!

unlike Bill Clinton and a host of other Democrat tych tyrants, politicians and celebs Trump is actually thought to be not involved in the Epstein sex scandal - he is on record kicking him out of Mar a lago years ago for trying to pick up the female staff and Trump disowned him thereafter. Therefore, it is more likely than not that the Democrats have much more to fear from secret video recordings on pedo island than the republicans and the trump DOJ has finally, after 3.5 years managed to at long last purge Obamas resistance from many of the DOJ top jobs, so its now full speed ahead on the investigations the democrats dont want you to see and highly motivated to get some 'kills' in before November.

Just as an aside, it is highly believed that Maxwells dad, Robert Maxwell, was Mossad and their are rumours his daughter may actually also be and the leader of Epstein, rather than merely being Epsteins fixer - just consider the black mail opportunities (vids/recordings etc) that certain politicians are now shitting bricks may be in the hands of foreign govts and certain favours may already have been paid by those individuals to those govts.

We'll have to wait and see, she may jus be a simple criminal or a masterspy who now needs US govt protection from assisination and a lighter sentence in return for all that juicy evidence :)
 

sirbhp

LE
Book Reviewer
I watched the interview with Andrew and Emily Maitliss, it was cringeworthy, the guy was lying through his teeth. He's stood in a kitchen with his arm around some fit 17 year old and swears he has no recollection of ever meeting her.

As Mrs Club Swinger reminded me, 17 is above the age of consent.
i dont think that it was in thaT Particular state of the USA. though i could be wrong , i was once but i was wrong as i was right.
 
Charles could nominally assume the throne for a day or two, then abdicate on grounds of infirmity or some such to the next in line?

All tradition is made up after all. This would maintain the same line of succession
A bit of a fanciful scenario, if you'll permit me saying so and I cannot see why the Royal Family (or the supporting establishment) would consider anything like it for a moment, even were it possible.

But for the sake of argument, were anything of the like employed, do you really think that such a manipulation of the constitution of the monarchy would endear the institution to the nation or enhance the credibility of the Royal Family?
 
D

Deleted 72187

Guest
A bit of a fanciful scenario, if you'll permit me saying so and I cannot see why the Royal Family (or the supporting establishment) would consider anything like it for a moment, even were it possible.

But for the sake of argument, were anything of the like employed, do you really think that such a manipulation of the constitution of the monarchy would endear the institution to the nation or enhance the credibility of the Royal Family?
No, but it could be the lesser of two evils if Charles is unable to refrain being an (in public) apolitical monarch
 

Bodenplatte

War Hero
You can "tell" he was lying based in one interview? Do the police know of your amazing power?
I often see photos with me in them, that my mates put on Facebook with other people who I do not recognise, I cant see it being any different from anyone else.
It is not an "amazing power." Most people recognise many of the subliminal indications that are sent out when somebody is lying. Somehow, we just "know," without quite knowing how or why we know. (Come back Mr Rumsfeld, all is forgiven.) We don't fully trust our feelings, and tend to give the benefit of the doubt unless there is clear evidence.
Clever or trained liars can adeptly mask many of these indications. Politicians gradually get better at it as they get older. By the same token, trained interrogators will spot them.

Andy isn't a clever man. The indications of lying came tumbling out of him in clusters in that Maitlis interview, choice of words, inflections, movements, tones and volume. Most of the world picked up on them, whether they realised what they were doing, or not.
 
A bit of a fanciful scenario, if you'll permit me saying so and I cannot see why the Royal Family (or the supporting establishment) would consider anything like it for a moment, even were it possible.

But for the sake of argument, were anything of the like employed, do you really think that such a manipulation of the constitution of the monarchy would endear the institution to the nation or enhance the credibility of the Royal Family?
Most people would support them or wouldnt care like they do now.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top