Just know that I believe this is one of the most asinine stories I’ve ever covered, and I’ve covered a lot of asinine stories. The revisionist history within the royal family has gotten SO bad. Okay, so last November, Prince Andrew decided to sit down with BBC’s Newsnight to “clear the air” around his relationship with pedophile and human trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. There was a lot of confusion in real time around the interview, whether the Queen’s people knew the extent of it, and whether palace courtiers had advised against it. I always believed that Andrew had worked with his own staff, and he didn’t let his mother’s staffers know exactly what he was going to do, but he did tell his mother and she signed off on it. The interview was an utter disaster, of course, and over the next week, Prince Charles finally managed to coax the Queen into firing Andrew, but of course the Queen allowed Andrew to “withdraw” from public life on his own accord.
The revisionist history being offered up in the new book about Andrew (Prince Andrew, Epstein and the Palace) is that instead of merely believing that Andrew is a stupid rapist oaf who managed this catastrophe all by himself (with the Queen’s approval), we’re now supposed to believe that this whole thing was some next-level plot by Prince Charles and Prince William. And it also involved pushing Prince Harry out.
Prince Charles and Prince William’s factions within Buckingham Palace used Prince Andrew’s disastrous Newsnight interview as cover to orchestrate a ‘silent coup’ against Prince Harry, a royal expert has claimed. In November 2019 the Duke of York, 60, filmed the ‘car crash’ interview about his friendship with the late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, which led to his effective retirement from public life. Soon after the interview, rumours of Megxit began to circulate, with speculation that the couple could soon resign themselves from royal life following their struggles in the spotlight.
In his upcoming book Prince Andrew, Epstein and the Palace, author Nigel Cawthorne will claim that both heirs’ teams at the palace saw the interview as an opportunity for a ‘well-timed leak’ to remove both Andrew and ‘independently-minded’ Harry. Buckingham Palace declined to comment, but FEMAIL understands that some of the central claims in Cawthorne’s forthcoming book are disputed. Cawthorne alleges the interview was the ‘starting shot’ in a bid to ‘prune the unwieldy monarchy’ and remove both Prince Harry and Prince Andrew by sharing news of Harry’s plans to ‘quit’ royal life.
‘The Charles-William faction at the palace is in seemingly unstoppable ascendant’, said Nigel. ‘The two heirs found common cause that the unwieldy monarchy has to pruned, starting with their independently-minded brothers Andrew and Harry. The starting shot was Andrew’s BBC Newsnight interview. The Charles faction at the palace clearly saw that it created the opportunity of removing not only Andrew, but also Harry from royal engagements. The first rumours of Harry “quitting” the royal family started circulating around the day of the interview, even before the backlash to Prince Andrew’s performance.’
The royal expert called Harry’s retirement from royal life ‘irrevocable’ and claimed that in the history of the monarchy, there had never been a ‘more stunning’ defenestration of Firm members.
He said: ‘Harry and Meghan had been discussing their leaving the UK for months in secrecy, but the well-timed leak on the day of the interview would remove two senior princes from The Firm in one move as the headlines forced the palace to respond. Harry’s retirement is irrevocable and it is unclear when Prince Andrew will return from his sabbatical. In the modern history of Buckingham Palace it was probably one of the most stunning silent coups. ‘
Imagine thinking that strategic leaks about Prince Harry during Andrew’s disastrous newscycle was an effort to prune the royal family of both princes. Here’s an alternate theory, more based in fact: the leaks about Harry and Meghan from the palace(s) were being done for MONTHS as a way to deflect from Andrew’s mess. Harry and Meghan were the big, flashy “controversial” royals behind which all of the other royal shenanigans could hide. And while William wanted Harry and Meghan gone, Charles didn’t. Not at that point. The only thing that’s sort of interesting here – I guess? – is the sort-of admission that Prince Willileaks was the source of a lot of this drama by leaking against Harry and pushing Harry out.
Photos courtesy of WENN, Avalon Red.