Duke of York BBC Interview

ohnonotgmail

Harvey Weinstein wrote: »

Ok, what we can say was that it was made up but it was just a fantastic coincidence that Epstein, Maxwell and the Duke were heavily implicated in it.

you can say what you like. the whole thing was made up. That doesnt mean that epstein, maxwell and possibly andrew were not involved in paedophilia. but said paedophilia did not take place in a non-existant basement.

skimpydoo

Twister2 wrote: »

saw something saying the pizza place wasn't open at the time?

I posted earlier that it only opened in 2004 with Pizza Express singing a 25 year lease.

skimpydoo

This is funny.

Purple Mountain

skimpydoo wrote: »

The Pizza Express in Woking only opened in 2004 with a 25-year lease for the restaurant.

Woking is a bit of a sh*t hole town.
Big comedown for a London boy or even compared to Windsor.

Twister2

He claims to be shot at during the Forklands

Has this been verifiably proven?

James Brown

Either way I'd say he's out next election...oh, wait...

bmc58

FTA69 wrote: »

Anyone thinking that this man isn’t a f*cking nonce case who’s as guilty as sin is utterly delusional; just watched the whole interview there and it’s absolutely mad. Couldn’t happen to a nicer c*nt either.

I hope he is exposed and utterly ruined, and that it helps bring down the wider family of horrible parasites.

Andrew is as arrogant(for a sponger) as they come.The aura of "entitlement" was mind blowing for ant ordinary person.I hope the FBI get on his case now.He has let his guard down by giving an interview to the BBC.Now nothing is private.He is open to be questioned by all Law Enforcement agencies.

Twister2

bmc58 wrote: »

Andrew is as arrogant(for a sponger) as they come.The aura of "entitlement" was mind blowing for ant ordinary person.I hope the FBI get on his case now.He has let his guard down by giving an interview to the BBC.Now nothing is private.He is open to be questioned by all Law Enforcement agencies.

Can't see it happening

IAMAMORON

What an absolute shambles.

" No sweat " , put that on your Pizza and eat it.

If he turned around and said he had been pals with Epstein for the last 20 years, and that he was only being loyal to a close friend all these years, I would have a lot more respect for him. We all have friends who are not perfect.

Mervyn Skidmore

IAMAMORON wrote: »

What an absolute shambles.

" No sweat " , put that on your Pizza and eat it.

If he turned around and said he had been pals with Epstein for the last 20 years, and that he was only being loyal to a close friend all these years, I would have a lot more respect for him. We all have friends who are not perfect.

But that is pretty much what he did say. What he should have done was disown him because he was a child trafficker.

IAMAMORON

Mervyn Skidmore wrote: »

But that is pretty much what he did say. What he should have done was disown him because he was a child trafficker.

No he didn't. He denied being close to him at all. He said he met him through Maxwell and that he might have met him up to 3 times a year at dinner parties etc. He has tried to distance himself from him. However he has stooged himself by not prepping correctly for such a leading question. It is obvious that he has received poor PR advice prior to attending the interview.

What he " should have done " and what he did are massively irrelevant. At the time he was friends with Epstein, probably quite a close one in his eyes. Basically he has taken a risk on it never reaching the public domain and got on with things. It must have been nice to be able to travel over to New York and stay with a pal and get out of the limelight of London and just live normally. You can be sure that behind all the media crap they were probably quite close pals, that is why he didn't end their friendship after his conviction.

riclad

Its nice to have a rich friend with a mansion in new york,
you can stay with free .Who knows why there,s always young women hanging around ,
the house of a person convicted of having sex with underage women?
Andrew continued to be friends with epstein ,
he did not know epstein would be brought to court again for having sex with young women in new york in a few years .
Because a few reporters did not give up and continued to investigate
epsteins crimes .
Its hard not to be arrogant with his lifestyle , andrew is a rich royal ,he has spent his life going to partys and hanging around with rich people .
He thought he was safe and would not get caught hanging around with a
known sex criminal .
You do not get to stay in someone ,s house for days without being a close friend .

Venom

IAMAMORON wrote: »

No he didn't. He denied being close to him at all. He said he met him through Maxwell and that he might have met him up to 3 times a year at dinner parties etc. He has tried to distance himself from him. However he has stooged himself by not prepping correctly for such a leading question. It is obvious that he has received poor PR advice prior to attending the interview.

His PR advisor quit 2 weeks ago when Andrew decided to do the BBC interview. The guy only had the job 4 weeks and must have seen this train wreck coming!



https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/17/prince-andrews-pr-adviser-quit-telling-not-tv-interview-11170702/

IAMAMORON

Venom wrote: »

His PR advisor quit 2 weeks ago when Andrew decided to do the BBC interview. The guy only had the job 4 weeks and must have seen this train wreck coming!



https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/17/prince-andrews-pr-adviser-quit-telling-not-tv-interview-11170702/

It is a total car crash. I find it hard to believe that the British Royal family did not prepare for a much better interview. Very complacent. They have known about this scandal for years.

Had he come out and said that he was personal friend of Epstein for 20 years, he would have at least generated some sort of support for himself. He could have said that he couldn't turn his back on a good friend. People would still disapprove of what he was involved in, but they might have given him some credence for being loyal to a friend. Now they just think he is a liar who is quite possibly guilty of sex crimes. No one trusts a liar, especially one who doesn't stand by their friends.

peddlelies

Comical interview, comes across as a proper arrogant twat too.

TCM

peddlelies wrote:

Comical interview, comes across as a proper arrogant twat too.

Comes across as person with below average IQ.

IAMAMORON

IAMAMORON wrote: »

It is a total car crash. I find it hard to believe that the British Royal family did not prepare for a much better interview. Very complacent. They have known about this scandal for years.

Had he come out and said that he was personal friend of Epstein for 20 years, he would have at least generated some sort of support for himself. He could have said that he couldn't turn his back on a good friend. People would still disapprove of what he was involved in, but they might have given him some credence for being loyal to a friend. Now they just think he is a liar who is quite possibly guilty of sex crimes. No one trusts a liar, especially one who doesn't stand by their friends.

He clearly lied about his level of friendship with Epstein - first half of interview was “Epstein was the +1 of Maxwell”- this approach was reiterated a number of times.
2nd half of interview- all of a sudden Epstein was a friend that he couldn’t just cold shoulder over the phone and had to meet him face to face. I’d say he was scared sh1tless wondering what exactly Epstein might have on him, and wanted to keep him as sweet as possible.

He certainly lied about Epstein just to protect himself- question is, did he lie about anything else?

His buffoonery can make you think that he didn’t, but his self centred arrogance points to the opposite.

Alrigghtythen

He was pictured in la and fergie in india at the time,
Breaking his rule of one always been at home with the children defense

Now Jane Doe15 is saying Prince Andrew used as bait to lure her to Epstein’s island: (she didn’t go but was allegedly molested by both Epstein and female Epstein assistant)


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7699303/Jeffrey-Epstein-victim-urges-Prince-Andrew-speak-FBI-help-survivors.html

Time to check your diary again Andrew!!! McDonalds in Surrey was it this time?

His career as a royal is completely over- and good riddance to him- he’ll never be a public representative again- there’s too much sh1t following him around at this stage.

STB.

Its like something out of a Little Britain sketch.



https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2u8q4f

simongurnick

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Now Jane Doe15 is saying Prince Andrew used as bait to lure her to Epstein’s island: (she didn’t go but was allegedly molested by both Epstein and female Epstein assistant)


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7699303/Jeffrey-Epstein-victim-urges-Prince-Andrew-speak-FBI-help-survivors.html

Time to check your diary again Andrew!!! McDonalds in Surrey was it this time?

His career as a royal is completely over- and good riddance to him- he’ll never be a public representative again- there’s too much sh1t following him around at this stage.

No, it was a subway in staines.

Foggy Jew

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EJhYbrhX0AY6mNj?format=jpg&name=small

So Virginia has been interviewed by panorama - not ready to be broadcast at present apparently


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7700529/Jeffrey-Epsteins-sex-slave-Virginia-Giuffre-spotted-Prince-Andrew-denied-sex.html

SaintLeibowitz

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I'm under no obligation to offer proof, especially to you.

There's stupid.. Then there's pizza gate stupid.

FTA69

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Now that you’ve got your rant out of the way, can you be specific in terms of your Allegation?

He willingly stayed four days at the house of a sexual predator he’d been mates with for years, with whom he attended a variety of hedonistic parties in which young girls were in attendance. This happening AFTER he’d been convicted of said offences.

So you can make po-faced snide remarks about my “rant” (eg pointing out the obvious) all you want but the reality that Andrew is coming out with preposterous arse-covering nonsense remains the same.

Absolute vile nonce behaviour.

holyhead

Andrew post this interview is now a toxic brand. You only get one chance to be credible and the interview was it. I can’t bring myself to feel sorry for him. He came across as aloof, lacking in credibility and immature. The interview was clearly a mistake from the get go and the apparent fact that he though it went well is just bizarre.
A well conducted interview from his point of view would have rendered it an opportunity to clear up loose ends. Instead he merely put the noose around his neck.
He will always be a son, father, brother, uncle etc but as a public figure of respect he is finished.
If Charles does indeed slim down the monarchy as is expected then I would expect Andrew and his family along with Edward’s to be completely sidelined in favor of Harry and William.

FTA69

Provide just one link where it says he attended hedonistic parties with young girls in 2010- just one link will do nicely.
The only story I know of is that he is alleged to have attended an “orgy” on Epstein’s Island in the early 2000s of which he denies. But you seem to have the inside track on this story.

FTA69 wrote: »

He willingly stayed four days at the house of a sexual predator he’d been mates with for years, with whom he attended a variety of hedonistic parties in which young girls were in attendance. This happening AFTER he’d been convicted of said offences.
.

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

Provide just one link where it says he attended hedonistic parties with young girls in 2010- just one link will do nicely.
The only story I know of is that he is alleged to have attended an “orgy” on Epstein’s Island in the early 2000s of which he denies. But you seem to have the inside track on this story.

He willingly stayed with a known and convicted pedophile on more than one occasion. They were friends. These are facts.
He's being accused of having sex with underage girls. One has come out There is a picture of them together. He claims it might be faked.

So we know he's cool about staying with a pedophile in a house where underage girls are used for sex. I think that's enough for me.

sbsquarepants

Matt Barrett wrote: »

So we know he's cool about staying with a pedophile in a house where underage girls are used for sex. I think that's enough for me.

Put down that pitchfork, the mans only fault is he is too honorable. And honor demands that when you are ending a friendship with a convicted pedo, you must stay for 4 days in his house full of underage girls.

Jesus Matt, what way where you brought up!!

riclad

Prince andrew was well known to go to many partys when he was younger,
he is not known for being shy or to be one to avoid the company of pretty women .
He is so honorable he had to stay with epstein for 4 days to make him
understand that i have to break off contact w because its no longer
safe to hang out with a convicted man who had sex with young women.
did he think the many young women hanging around the house were there
to do house work or clean the house .
If he wants to clear his name he should appear in a us court
or else withdraw from all official royal duty,s .
The interview he did on tv only raise,s more questions and makes him
look arrogant and evasive .
I think he is not used to being questioned or criticised by anyone,
he is probably used to being only in contact with rich people
or people in high society who are polite to anyone from the royal family .
The reaction to this interview has been negative ,it has made his friendship with epstein more widely known around the world.