Last week, Prince Andrew made headlines not for his friendship with the dead rapist pedophile Jeffrey Epstein but because he and Sarah Ferguson are being sued for getting behind on payments on an £18 million Swiss holiday chalet they bought back in 2014. The Yorks reportedly owe £6.7 million and, as I asked in my post about the situation, how were they even in for that kind of money in the first place? How was Andrew making money – and THAT kind of money – when his job used to be that he represented the royal family, and supposedly there’s not to be a profit from that kind of work?
Finally people are asking questions and the Financial Times published an article this weekend about how the money was being managed at the Prince Andrew Charitable Trust (PACT). Basically Amanda Thirsk, a trustee of the charity, and Andrew’s private secretary until late last year after that interview he did with BBC Newsnight necessitated his exit from public life, received £355,297 in payments from the organisation for no apparent reason which, obviously, suggests a gross misuse of funds. The Charity Commission makes sure that charities aren’t behaving irresponsibility and after going through PACT’s annual report became suspicious of that line item in the budget so Andrew had to pay it back through his own household. But how did it come up in the first place? According to the Financial Times:
“The matter was raised by PACT’s trustees in correspondence to the Charity Commission.”
Am I reading that right? Did members on the board of his own foundation narc him out?! If that’s how it went down, that’s the stink that’s wafting off Prince Andrew right now. Nobody wants to be anywhere near that sh-t because, at some point, they must think there’s going to be a reckoning.
Here’s a dude who was hosting parties at the Buckingham Palace with investors and wealth management firms so that he could, ostensibly, hook them up with aspiring entrepreneurs. Was that really the only motivation though? Or was it also a way to get some kickbacks? How convinced are you that this payment made to Amanda Thirsk was the one and only time he stepped offside where financials are concerned?
To bring it back to Jeffrey Epstein – this was the lure, non? Prince Andrew has always had the reputation to be the member of the royal family who wanted to throw it back to old times, when any title meant that it came with a gilded life, a life of excess and terrifying privilege. But he wasn’t firstborn, or even second born, so he had to go get that life somewhere else, through his rich contacts, and it would seem like, allegedly, he didn’t give a f-ck how they made their money or what they did with their money, so long as he was able to share in it.
So the true story behind Andrew’s relationship with the dead rapist pedophile Jeffrey Epstein might just be ONE of countless examples of corruption and abuse power and while not all of it may come to light, there could be a paper trail leading to some of it.
Another embarrassment to the British royal family, then, courtesy of the Queen’s beloved middle son, for whom those viper courtiers have bent over backwards to try to rehabilitate and reintroduce into public life. How protective they are of someone who continues to f-ck sh-t up and maybe even break laws. And all the while they kept selling out Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to the tabloids. Is there any wonder why the Sussexes wanted to get the f-ck out of there?
Prince Andrew is trash, we already knew that. My issue here is with the palace aides, the people who make work choices every day about what the royal brand is and how to best present it. For years, during this Epstein mess, they used every resource they had so that he wouldn’t have to wear his own mistakes. For years, quite obviously, they’ve allowed him to mess around with money and sketchy financial deals. This is what they’ve enabled, believing that no one would be held accountable. And in making these choices, it means they stand for a certain kind of entitlement and inequality. How is this a good look in 2020?