"The defenestration of Prince Andrew, now to be known only as Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, and the removal of his cherished privilege of royal status is an act of utmost ruthlessness by a king. Ascending the throne at 73, Charles always knew he would play a caretaker role for the monarchy and so could not allow rot to set into an institution that lives and dies by public consent."
"The damage that Andrew's association with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell continued to inflict on the reputation of the royal family was simply too much for the king not to act as he did on Thursday evening. Charles has been described by his biographer Catherine Mayer as loyal to a fault. Sometimes to the point of fault, but this was too much."
"The queen's longevity always meant that Charles's reign would be relatively short and therefore one of his most important tasks would be to bequeath the institution to Prince William in reasonable repair. William is relatively popular with the public and for Charles to leave him with a festering crisis for the sake of the feelings of his younger brother, recently caught lying about his continued association with Epstein, made no sense."
King Charles stripped Prince Andrew of his titles and evicted him from his home, designating him Andrew Mountbatten Windsor. The king acted to prevent further damage to the monarchy's public standing arising from Andrew's association with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Ascending the throne at 73, Charles positioned himself as a caretaker focused on leaving a stable institution to Prince William. William's relative popularity made it politically untenable to hand over a festering crisis caused by Andrew's alleged dishonesty about continued contact with Epstein. Email evidence from 2011 and a garden photograph including Epstein, Maxwell and Harvey Weinstein intensified reputational concerns.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]