Queen Elizabeth doesn’t believe Charles will ‘live up to her sense of duty’

Trooping the Colour Ceremony, London, UK - 8 Jun 2019

Prince Harry’s disappointment with his father was palpable during the Oprah interview. In my interpretation of it, Harry thought that when the chips were down and he needed Prince Charles the most, that Charles would be there for him. But Charles wasn’t. So Charles is on Harry’s sh-tlist at the moment and Charles is also still dealing with a decline in popularity because of The Crown’s Season 4. As it turns out, Charles’ careful, twenty-year PR campaign to rebrand himself and Camilla was a mile wide and an inch deep. And now, to add insult to all of those injuries, royal experts are comparing Charles and Andrew and… Charles is coming up short? What in the world.

The Queen is ‘constantly frustrated’ with Prince Charles as will never live up to her sense of duty, a royal expert has claimed. In a Channel 4 documentary, Queen Elizabeth: Love, Honour and Crown, royal biographer Clive Irving said that none of the Royal Family have measured up to the monarch’s dedication to the job. The author of ‘The Last Queen’ said Elizabeth ‘never really understood’ her eldest son and is ‘puzzled’ by him.

“To this day, she’s more openly affectionate to Andrew and more forgiving toward Andrew than she is towards Charles,” he added.

Charles was described as ‘the polar opposite’ to younger brother Andrew by Ingrid Seward, editor-in-chief of Majesty magazine. She said: “He’s [Andrew] noisy, bumptious, very charming, when he wants to be. He can be arrogant and rude; he has some characteristics of his own father.”

She said that as first and second in line to the throne at that time, Charles and Andrew represented everything the monarchy could be.

Irving believes that Charles “will never live up to the queen’s sense of duty.”

His eldest son Prince William, however, is the only member of the royal family who appreciates the queen’s “very dedicated sense of duty,” according to Irving. “All those around the queen never measure up to that at any point. Her own family has not measured up to that. Charles never measures up to that,” Irving said.

[From The Mirror & Page Six]

I think Liz has never liked or been affectionate with Charles, for sure. Charles was also closer to his grandmother (the Queen Mum) and Lord Mountbatten. They were his surrogate parents. But one thing you really can’t fault Charles for is how much he works and his dedication to “duty.” He’s dry and kind of boring but he works a lot and he’s not some throwback Victorian or Edwardian. William doesn’t actually have much of a sense of duty. William wants power, he does not want to fulfill any “duty.” There’s a difference. As for the Queen’s favorite, human-trafficker and rapist Andrew… ugh, let’s not get into it.

Princess Eugenie wedding

Gabriella Windsor wedding

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid and WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

165 Responses to “Queen Elizabeth doesn’t believe Charles will ‘live up to her sense of duty’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Snuffles says:

    Another Prince Incandescent hit job.

    • Sunday says:

      Yup, his fingerprints are all over this.

      • Gruey says:

        He is doing himself no favors. Charles is going to be King and he needs the full vote of confidence from petty Betty if the monarchy is going to survive in anything like it’s current form.

        I’m don’t foresee the end of the monarchy per se but it could be vastly stripped down in the next few decades.

      • (The OG) Jan90067 says:

        But this is a Channel 4 documentary, “Queen Elizabeth: Love, Honour and Crown”, with a royal biographer, Clive Irving. Could William actually *get* a tv station to make a documentary like this??? Would he even *have* the clout/connections to pull something like this off.

        This one… I don’t think William is behind. I think this is Old Brenda, giving a kick in the butt to the entire family. And yeah…I don’t think she cares for Charles at all, except as “duty”, even behind the scenes. She’s the Marie Barrone of Windsor (Everbody loves Raymond mom): All her affection is saved for Pedo.

      • Couch potato says:

        I doubt it’s the queen, more like the men in grey hitting back at Chuck for interfering in their cushy life with TQ as their marionett.

      • Sunday says:

        @The OG not ITV necessarily, but these “royal experts” and biographers all have their own agendas and loyalties and fancy themselves part of the royal story; it’s part of their delusion of insider condescension and imagined superiority. So, while ITV may not have its own agenda, Clive Irving most definitely does, as do most other royal reporters, and they’re happy to push said agendas whenever they get the chance, either of their own volition or perhaps through coordination with or suggestion from their favorite royal faction.

    • Betsy says:

      I was literally just wondering from whose camp this would have come. William seems as likely as anyone, pretty much since no one else is left. Although does Andy still leak?

    • Maliksmama says:

      Christ!? Not just his dad. He threw ALL of the workhorses of his family under the bus. All of the unsung heros of his family got a boot in the ass.

      I would love to know how Willie’s family really feel about him? If he’s this horrible to his dad and brother, what’s he like to the rest of them?

      • Sandra says:

        Definitely fits my vision of William living isolated in his grandmother’s big house at Sandringham with only Jason to rage to.

    • Myra says:

      Definitely. Imagine using your media buddies to throw your own dad under the bus. He knows that he could never measure up to Charles in terms of duty, so the work-shy prince is now going to character assassinate Charles to prop himself up. After all, he did a successful number on Meghan.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Spent this weekend re-reading Sally Bedell Smith’s “Prince Charles: The Passions and Paradoxes of an Improbable Life”. Based on what Ms. Smith has written, Charles’ approach to his charity work is much more like the Sussexes than Baldingham and Kant’s.

        I would recommend this book to all royal watchers as it is very balanced and does not dwell on Diana as many books on Charles do but really focuses on his achievements and failures. It always explains very nicely about Baldingham’s aversion to Royal work.

      • Myra says:

        I think Harry takes after his parents’ best traits. A passionate speaker like his mother, but also brave for tackling challenging issues and conversations. Like his father, he is engaged in the process and sees it until its fruition. Harry is very much a product of his environment but also someone open to learning and changing. Despite Charles’ many many faults, no one can deny his work and its a good legacy he will leave behind.

      • Tessa says:

        Sally Bedell Smith does not like Diana and has “diagnosed” her with BPD which I don’t like.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Tessa – Which is why I stated that the book does not dwell on Diana. Like Sally Bedell Smith or not, the books gives a VERY good 30 year overview of Charles’ royal work which is what I was researching.

    • Lemons says:

      I wish he would just stop. It’s so obvious at this point. Just inserting himself into every royal story and leak.

    • swirlmamad says:

      We all saw this coming a mile away. Obvious William is obvious.

      • Lorelei says:

        It’s just such obvious horsesh!t. I don’t like Charles, never have, don’t think he’s likable, think the way he treated the Sussexes was indefensible, and his personal life is generally in some sort of shambles — but FGS no one can say he doesn’t understand duty! His track record, professionally, as POW, is unimpeachable, and what he’s done with the Prince’s Trust is incredibly impressive. It’s sad that William didn’t want to take the reins, but not surprising.

        For some reason, as I was reading this, what struck me is that — while I don’t think *any* of the royals are particularly bright — Charles is probably the smartest, smarter than both his mother and certainly much more intelligent than Andrew, so maybe that’s why she gets along better with Andrew.

        This is obviously just my speculation, but while they describe Andrew here as “noisy” and “charming,” we know full well he’s dumber than dirt. Especially after seeing him on full display in his trainwreck of an interview last year.
        Charles is a lot of things, but I personally don’t think stupid is one of them. He’s always come across (to me, at least) to be the most intellectual of the bunch, and the Queen might just find spending time with Andrew to be more fun and relaxing; idk. But to attack him in terms of duty is just so far off the mark, imo.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I believe that Philip is intelligent as all the Battenbergs (Mountbattens) were/are intelligent.

  2. Darla says:

    When I see Andrew, I see someone who, first, has a lot of gas. And also is a rapist of young girls.

    Charming? I don’t see it.

    • MsIam says:

      That has got to be very hurtful to Charles, even at age 72. To think your mother prefers your douche bag brother to you.

      • Betsy says:

        It’s got to sting. To do so much for that job and then to find out that the rapist will always be the favored, no matter what you do…

      • Millennial says:

        I think it hurts worse because a lot of Charles personality is the Queens fault. Sure, you are born with certain genes, but being ignored by your parents and raised by nannies will mess just about anyone up.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I put no faith in what is said by Page Six or The Mirror. I doubt Charles does either.

        Who knows what any of the Royals “true” feelings are? Look at the supposed feud between the Sussexes and Eugenie. I doubt this supposed feud ever existed except in the pages of the British tabloids.

      • swirlmamad says:

        @BayTampaBay, I agree Charles has been around the block long enough to know that the majority of what these rags say is garbage, but I’m sure it’s still hurtful to see this in print for the world to see and swallow, no matter how much of a f*ck up he is. I bet logically, all of them know to at least TRY to let a lot of it roll of their backs, but as we saw with Meghan if they keep hammering, there will be a breaking point.

      • MsIam says:

        @BTB that is from the documentary though, not just Page Six gossip. The person who said it is a royal biographer, so I think that is a pretty bold thing to say about the queen’s oldest son and heir. Pretty hurtful too.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @MsIam – I thought all of this crap was from Page Six and The Mirror. SORRY!

    • Fawsia says:

      Loool If Andrew is the charmer, Houston, they got problems!

      • Robin says:

        You’re right. There was a Times article some years ago saying friends from years ago, plus staff, knew Andrew as the Duke of Hazard. An absolute fool with a reputation for trying to barter UK weapon deals abroad as part of his portfolio and buggering up international relations in the process. He is the perfect example of someone who thinks he has the rights to anything, and anyone disgustingly, by virtue of birth. (Please moderate my swearing if need be!)

    • Lauren says:

      I think he was charming when he was younger and more handsome.

      But on older, shlubbier men, it’s becomes gross.

  3. Watson says:

    How much did William pay Irving to slam Charles in this piece? Lol. These people are so dysfunctional it hurts.

    • JT says:

      For real. William is so devoted to duty, he’s spent a decade trying to avoid it. Even now, as the firm is down two people, William has not stepped up and buckled down. But I guess saying you are dutiful is worth more than being dutiful.

      • Elizabeth Regina says:

        Yup! Just like saying you are not racist is more meaningful than not actually being racist.

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        Willileaks has all the willfulness, petulance, and jealousy of his father and grandmother, and all of the laziness and self-entitlement of Edward VIII.

        It’s so not a good look.

        From the outside, it principally looks like a father-son quarrel with Lillibet Cabbage largely checked out. When she goes, the King vs. heir battle is going to hot up.

        And that’s the point at which Charles will finally regret having run off the actual dutiful son with the solid work ethic. He’s now stuck with Willcandescent as the only son he can name Prince of Wales (I remembered that it’s not a title the heir automatically succeeds to, has to be appointed/installed by the Monarch) – only thing Workshy gets automatically is the Duchy of Cornwall with its 30M/yr profits.

        Which has to unsettle Charles more than a little bit, knowing that what he built up over a lifetime is about to be squandered and destroyed by his arrogant, do-nothing son. Oh well! Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

    • TQ says:

      “Charles and William are now closer than ever since Harry’s departure” was post-interview PR. Hahaha. Clearly. William wants it all ways. And he just keeps PR failing.

      • MsIam says:

        Obviously, William is closer so he can better stab Charles in the back, lol! This is pretty damning stuff, I wonder if this will set off a new round of “crisis talks” like the Oprah interview did?

  4. Elizabeth Regina says:

    Another hit job from William. I thought he and his dad are now reconciled? What a thoroughly dysfunctional family. Charles for all his many, many faults, at least has a legacy. What in the world does Baldimort have? Being a rage monster? A briefer in chief? A toxic house divided against itself.

    • Seraphina says:

      I think it’s their game: to constantly keep shuffling the blame and throw people under the bus to keep people constantly distracted.

    • LaraW” says:

      Well I mean now we know why he was so keen to be portrayed in fascist dictator uniform on the cover of the magazine: he is clearly aspiring to be counted among certain infamous European historical figures, starting a war on two fronts.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Elizabeth Regina, imo the stories about how Charles and William had become so much closer since Sussexit were more about William trying to hurt Harry even more than he already had than about any genuine improvement in his relationship with Charles.

      William probably *did* have to be working & spending more time with his father in meetings, etc. as all of that was going down. But I don’t think the reconciliation or closeness we kept hearing about was real or lasting, just a convenient narrative for William at the time. And I really think he wanted to hurt Harry as much as he could from every angle. Now that Harry’s gone and thriving, he needs someone else to direct his ire at.

      I’ve always thought Charles was unlikable, but jfc, William ended up beating him by a mile.

  5. Mac says:

    Charles has a great many accomplishments when it comes to serving the UK and the commonwealth. Not sure how he fails to measure up to the queen’s standards. Maybe because he refuses to stand by his pedo brother?

  6. Naomi says:

    this is a total hit job from william/kp

  7. Feebee says:

    The last paragraph about William tells you all you need to know about this doco and none of it’s good.

  8. Becks1 says:

    I feel like this is not going to go over well at Clarence House. Literally the only consistent good thing about Charles over the past few decades is his sense of duty and his work ethic. This seems like a very strange criticism to make.

    • MsIam says:

      Good, let Charles and William fight it out and leave Harry and Meghan alone. Isn’t this what the Rota rats should be covering anyway? Intrigue at the palace! I’m guessing Harry must have always been a type of buffer between these two; now that he’s hustled on out of there its commence firing!

      • bamaborn says:

        Exactly!! Wish they’d use muskets at dawn. Lol

      • Becks1 says:

        Oh to be clear, I am here for the infighting. There was a truce of sorts while they had a common goal, now they are turning on each other.

    • Nic919 says:

      Charles needs to shakeout the rose bush. Charles has made a huge ton of mistakes in raising his sons and how he treated Diana, but the one thing he has done is work, at least in the Royal sense and the in the way the Queen understands. He has even protected Billy from being exposed to the world to the detriment of Harry.

      The gloves need to come off.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Nic ITA. This bs has gone on for far too long already and done untold damage— they have got to stop coddling William and giving in to his every demand. He’s a long way off from the throne and idk who he thinks he is, but his behavior recently has been out of control. He might have finally pissed Charles off enough that he’ll take some sort of action to rein him in.

    • JanetDR says:

      I am amusing myself by thinking of Charles at 100 years old working to abolish the monarchy so William never gets to be king.

      • Lorelei says:

        @JanetDR I know people joke about the Queen being determined to outlive Charles, but it seems like it’s not completely out of the realm of possibility that it could happen! It’s extremely unlikely, but not impossible. How wild would that be.

      • Dollycoa says:

        A large part of the Queen and Phil’s job in a monarchy is to bring up some decent children, because we will have to take them as Heads of state with no choice. The Queen has failed in a huge part of her duty because she was such a cold and uncaring mother. She then spoilt Andrew, so played favourites, playing one child against the other. I bet she wants to outlive Charles, but what mother wants to outlive her child? One who has a dead heart.

    • Celia456 says:

      @Becks1 “This seems like a very strange criticism to make.”
      Maybe further proof of William being so unfamiliar with work that he doesn’t know it when he sees it?

  9. Harper says:

    Prince Other Brother is the only member of the family that appreciates the Queen’s sense of duty? What an absurd sentence. Everyone knows that Prince Charles has a resume and Prince William does not.

    • Becks1 says:

      But you notice it doesnt go as far as saying that William has inherited his grandmother’s sense of duty. Just that he “appreciates” it. Even this article recognizes that going any further would be laughable.

      • Zappy says:

        Apparently they still have some brain cells left lol

      • Harper says:

        @Becks1that is a good point because, on first read, I definitely took it as they were putting the Queen at number one for duty, followed by Prince Other Brother. Upon rereading, I realized that they were just saying he appreciates her more than others, which is nonsense. Obviously, the whole family appreciates her dedication but William is the only one who needs to put his sense of appreciation on his resume to fill in the big holes on it.

    • Charlie says:

      Prince Other Brother. Haha.
      Prince Nutter Butter!

    • Amy Too says:

      I have some kind of theory that what’s being talked about here is the Queen’s duty to keeping the monarchy alive for the next generation. That always seems to be what “duty” means in these types of articles. If duty referred to charitable work, then we wouldn’t be getting all these stories about how William knows his duty but Harry doesn’t: William is obsessed with keeping the monarchy going for himself even though he hardly works, Harry works a lot but is showing that work doesn’t have to be tied to the monarchy. Or in this case the Queen knows her duty but Charles doesn’t. I think the Queen is incredibly pissed at Charles right now for screwing things up so badly with sussexit and with both of his sons. She let him step in more and run things for the past 5 years or so and look what’s happened. The monarchy’s most popular member left and now lives in America. An extremely modern charismatic woman was bullied out and is talking out loud about the racism, sexism, anti-American sentiment, colorism, classism, and toxicity of the royal family. William is all over the place trying to run his own PR in direct opposition to what the Queen has commanded: everyone shut up for awhile so we can deal with this privately as a family.

      And that’s just recently. Charles did a lot of damage to himself and the monarchy with Diana. Sussexit has a ton of parallels and has brought the Diana thing forward again for a whole new generation to be outraged about.

      The Queen has spent 70+ years keeping this monarchy together and running. People like and revere and respect her. Her number one goal is to maintain the monarchy. Charles has been nominally in charge for a few years and look at what’s happened? There are articles all over the world in trusted and credible newspapers asking if the monarchy should be abolished. People respected and likes the monarchy a lot until recently. William, while a crappy worker and a horrible person, is at least very much into keeping the monarchy going and perpetuating the institution. His PR is horrible and he treated his brother abominably, but maybe the Queen thinks that’s on Charles for “letting him” act that way or listening to William too much? Maybe she thinks William is at least aggressive about protecting the family and the monarchy and yelling words like “my kingly duty!” and “respect the Queen!” in public. He seems to “appreciate” the way the Queen has run things for the family, while Charles is a wishy washy coward who refuses to say anything to anyone privately or publicly and is just plodding along trying to make Charles look good. It’s about him and his legacy. It’s not about the monarchy as a whole or the royal family as an institution for him. It’s all about making himself look great. William is also trying to make himself look good all the time, but maybe he honestly thinks that he and Kate are “the monarchy,” (like maybe that’s why he’s always getting articles about him being the future king) so if they look good, then the monarchy survives and looks good. Whereas I think Charles really doesn’t care if he’s the last king or not, he just wants to have a good personal legacy as Charles, as opposed to the guy that was King from 2025-2035. There aren’t any articles about how Charles is the next king and so excited and ready to be king.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Amy Too, you make good points. This all is quite confusing to me. When I finished ready what all of the royal “experts” said, I came away with 1) TQ doesn’t like Charles or what he does, so she’s dismissive; 2) she loves Andrew and therefore it’s implied she approves of her pedo son (there’s a good look); and 3) William is a nonentity other than appreciating TQ’s duty (they got that one right). I don’t think any of them, including TQ, look really good here. Obviously, I don’t know much about the brf, but this whole thing is confusing.

      • June-o says:

        @AmyToo I agree that Charles as unofficial regent has overseen a huge mess of things, if he’s really in charge. But, I think the real blame for the mess lies at William’s feet. A lot of what we’ve seen in the past few years, and even the enormous p.r. blunders of the past couple of weeks can be attributed directly to William’s actions and influence on Royal staff. Charles’ mistake has been his cowardly inaction and inability to control his heir, which certainly doesn’t inspire confidence, but William is the future head of state who monarchists should be worried about. His temper and selfishness is taking everything apart before our eyes.

  10. Cecilia says:

    LOL KP working hard i see. This is the media war between KP and clarence house ive been waiting for!

  11. KinChicago says:


  12. Shahad says:

    What a family of treacherous Empty vessels!

  13. Sid says:

    Charles needs to metaphorically box William’s ears one good time.

    • Chrissy (The Original) says:

      Maybe it’s time to drop the Rose bomb, Charles.

      • Sid says:

        Chrissy, if it could be done in a way that avoided hurting the Cambridge kids I would cheer it on. Because William is just too much.

  14. Pétulia says:

    I don’t know if they realize that beating down Charles constantly to prop up William is actually counterproductive. If the monarchy survive after Liz’s death Charles will be king for sure nothing can stop that. Then they better hope he has a long reign. Because Will is nowhere ready to be king he lacks the sense of duty of his grandmother and the work ethic of his father. And this current generation won’t tolerate that.

    • Robin says:

      I know, Petulia, people seem to leap frog over Charles as the next in line. There is no way Charles won’t finally get his hand on that crown for possibly a decade or more, by which time William will inherit at roughly the age he looks now, ie in his late 50s/60s!

    • Watson says:

      Nah. Pretty sure it’s established none of these Fools and carnival of experts have any foresight. They smeared H&M to prop themselves up, and they continue to smear Charles who will one day hold the purse strings and the keys to the kingdom. No foresight whatsoever.

      • Pétulia says:

        William thinks he is going to be a powerful prince of Wales but he is fooling himself. Charles was able to become powerful thanks to his work ethic( Prince’s trust, The business around the duchy) and William has none if that.

    • Merricat says:

      The idea that William could supersede Charles is a Middleton pipe dream. Lol.

    • Maida says:

      That’s a really good point, Petulia. Charles is unlikely to be as popular as his mother as a monarch no matter what, but driving down his public image like this is more likely to bring the whole “Firm” down than to help any of its younger members.

      I wonder how the whole coronation pageant would be seen today, with the Church of England formally recognizing a new monarch as chosen by God, a la the Pope. It was popular in the 1950s, but today . . .?

      • Lorelei says:

        @Maida, someone here commented a while back that a coronation has no place in our current society and will not go over well, and I agreed. I don’t remember who it was, but given everything the world is facing right now, I think it would be viewed with derision. It’s not 1950 anymore and imo it will just come across as laughable.

        Maybe if it was scaled waaaaaaay down it might be more tolerable, but after waiting for more than 70 years, I have a feeling Charles wants all of the pomp & circumstance.

      • Elizabeth says:

        I despise the monarchy, but people would tune in across the globe to watch a coronation. Look how many watched Will and Harry’s weddings.

    • Sid says:

      Petulia, I want Charles to take after his parents and grandma and live into his 90s and hopefully to 100. Not because I like him, but because anything that keeps the Cambridges (and the insufferable MiddletonJenner person) away from the throne is something to cheer on.

      • booboocita says:

        Which would probably give us a good 15-20 years of news stories about, “Poor Charles, he’s so old and tired and out of touch, he needs to abdicate and let the young’uns issue in a new era of modern monarchy.”

        I want Charles to be king just because he wants it so desperately and I sort of feel for him as someone who’s waited a long time for what he thinks is his just reward. But I’m convinced that KP will start the campaign for King Willnot the very instant the ermine circlet sits on Charles’s head. That’s going to be fun to watch …

  15. Chrissy (The Original) says:

    Wow, what a sick family. Let’s hope it implodes.

  16. Lauren says:

    William is really out to get his family.

    • Cessily says:

      Why though? I don’t understand the cruelty of all these tabloid leaks, or the goal?

      • Lauren says:

        He wants to jump over Chuck. He is ffk, not fk. He wants to skip an f.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Lauren: but he must know that just is NOT how it works, right? I mean, could he be that delusional? It isn’t a popularity contest; Charles is next in the line of succession, the end. I have no idea what William’s endgame is here…?

        As it is, I don’t see Charles living as long as his parents for some reason (I could be totally wrong) so William will have plenty of time on the throne. Wouldn’t he want to enjoy his time as POW for as long as possible? It’s a lot less work yet there will still be an enormous amount of money under his control.

        He just seems to be on a very destructive path right now, and I can’t see it ending well for him.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Lorelei – I think its more what @Sunday says right below – that this is a way of crippling Charles as king from the get go. As soon as the queen dies, all eyes turn to William as the shining light that will save the monarchy! Ignore that old man with the crown in the corner, keep your eye on the prize Britain, its all about WILLIAM.

        I think that’s the bigger goal here.

      • Lauren says:

        @Lorelei this is the consequence of having allowed Bill to do whatever he wanted for all his live, covering for him and never holding him accountable. He thinks that he is more important than he is. As Becks1 is saying this is him painting himself as the perfect heir for his grandmother. Meaning that the institution will take more queues from Bill rather than Chuck. But they made their bed and they can lie on it.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Becks I definitely see what you’re saying, I guess I just don’t fully understand how William benefits much from it? He is going to be king after Charles, no matter what, it’s a done deal. It’s not as if he needs to win a popularity contest.

        In the meantime, if he gets into a tabloid war with his father, he may damage Charles, but he’s not going to come out looking good either…Charles has A LOT on Will that he’s kept silent about, but if William keeps pushing him like this, he might snap and retaliate. In fact I think William could end up looking far worse than Charles ever could at this point. And he has more years left to live it down. While he could just as easily choose to enjoy his powerful new position and control of the Duchy instead of getting into a pissing match with his father.

        I think I will just never get William’s mindset. As it is, Charles has been waiting for 75 freaking years; his reign is not going to be long. I don’t understand how William doesn’t see that making Charles look bad will reflect poorly on the entire monarchy.

        William might just be an angry, miserable POS who wants to make everyone around him as miserable as he is; it might be as simple as that?

        But as Lauren said, they’re the ones who created this monster, and now they’re facing the consequences.

  17. Sunday says:

    I know people get frustrated with the suggestion that william wants to skip his father and assume the throne because it’s impossible, naive, idiotic, a total misunderstanding of British law, etc, and I get that… however, I think it’s hard to deny there is a faction within the palace and Tory establishment that would infinitely prefer William to Charles and are happy to continue these hit jobs to further tank Charles’ popularity. Whether they could actually do it is inconsequential in the court of public opinion. They can make Charles’ reign as miserable as possible to make people yearn for king will (gag), they can put public and private pressure on Charles to avoid the situation the queen has created and not stay on the throne for the rest of his life thereby making his reign as short as possible. As we’ve unfortunately seen with Harry & Meghan, whatever spin is presented by the british media is greedily devoured and evangelized by royalists; instigating this shift would not be beyond the pale and is something that at least some within (and without) the royal machine are hungry for.

    …and now over to Clarence House for a response! *eats popcorn*

    • June-O says:

      And when Charles is finally on the throne, I expect non-stop insinuation that he’s addled, senile, overwhelmed, etc, and how William is really running things. His entire reign will be constantly undermined by KP. This family sucks. Well, mostly William, but they all play their part.

      • nutella toast says:

        I’m not part of this family and I’m over here having anxiety and planning how to get out of it. I think as time goes on, more and more people will affirm Harry’s decision to leave. This makes my dysfunctional family Thanksgiving seem desirable.

      • swirlmamad says:

        Oh, they’re totally going to give him the Joe Biden hit job.

      • Merricat says:

        Hmm, I would be very much surprised if Charles didn’t find a sneaky way to deal with Prince Incandescent. Charles has some intellect, whereas William hasn’t used that organ in years.

      • Lorelei says:

        @June-O: this family is so demented, my god

    • SUNDAY….that last line of yours

      “…and now over to Clarence House for a response! *eats popcorn*”


      • Lorelei says:

        @Merricat, I hope you’re right. And I don’t even like Charles! But William needs to be taken down a few thousand notches.

  18. Alexandria says:

    Sick sick Other Brother. First you compare him to Andrew who is already unpopular so that your father can look worse. Then you sneak into the last paragraph. Carry on…

  19. Jessie says:

    I’m wondering if the reason Andrew is so well protected is actually because of Charles instead of the queen. A quick Google search will shed light on his close relationships with confirmed paedophiles Jimmy Savile, Peter Ball and Thomas Hamilton – who went on to commit the Dunblane massacre. Birds of a feather stick together and it’s no coincidence that both brothers willingly chose to associate themselves with sex offenders time after time. Charles even wanted Savile to be Harry’s godfather back in the day. Makes me think if this is the leverage William has over his father? It’d make a lot of sense, that’s for sure.

    • Amy Bee says:

      I wouldn’t doubt this.

    • Alexandria says:

      If this is true, Britain is absolutely screwed paying for these two future Kings.

    • Maria says:

      I wouldn’t put it past him.
      But prosecuting Andrew puts everyone in the Firm at risk in a lot of ways.
      I do wonder why Andrew still gets that handsome allowance if Charles is calling the shots since he’s wanted to cut him off financially for years. This tells me the Queen is involved.

  20. Detnow359 says:

    William will send everyone down the river. His only loyalty is to himself. Like Kaiser said he wants power.

    Charles has been many things through the years but to question his sense of duty is absurd. And frankly it wouldn’t surprise me that the queen favors Andrew because of the same traits she liked in her husband. And we know he was her band-aid baby so there’s that too. But Charles has understood his duty, unlike his spoiled, blow a gasket at the wind blowing son. Charles helped create this monster though, as the queen did with Andrew, and he will continue to have to deal with the results of that. Charles better have someone testing his food. I put nothing past William at this point.

    • Mila says:

      He wants the power the influence and the difference that Elizabeth has but he’ll never have it and he’ll always be throwing a tantrum because of it. He thinks he deserves to be loved because of where he I was born what he brings to the table and that’s also where his jealousy of Harry comes from. It’s going to be interesting to watch how William plans to usurp Charles!

    • LaraW” says:

      I say this in good faith that no offense was intended; I want to express my own discomfort saying that William “will send everyone down the river.” The phrase has a very different history than “throw under the bus” or “sell out” — in the States it originated from the slave trade, where it was understood that selling/sending someone down the river was selling them to masters in the Deep South, which had a reputation for treating their slaves much, much worse than the northern slave owning states.

      William’s treatment of Charles isn’t like this, it’s not at all comparable. Please don’t use the phrase, since it comes from a very specific time period of US history and is directly related to the horrors and crimes that took place in the slave trade. It has egregious origins and associations, much like Dixie Land or Antebellum.

      • Carmen-JamRock says:

        With all due respect, that ship has sailed. I:e the attempt to protect what has long become an idiomatic phrase used in many part of the world to explain a most egregious betrayal: “to sell/send someone down the river.”

        Youre correct that it originated in the US south in the 18th century but even soon thereafter, it began to be used to denote egregious human betrayal, in general.

        While those of my ancestors who were enslaved, did not live in the US and therefore did not have the experience of slaves being sold from north to south down the mississippi river, nevertheless, the notion of betrayal and monumental wickedness thats embedded in the phrase, transcends many cultures and is used all over the world to denote same.

        So yes, Willie-di Amin/WillieLeaks/Will-Jung-Un sold out his brother and family/sold them down the river; and is actively going after his father in a similar manner.

      • LaraW” says:

        Thanks Carmen— I had not realized it had entered the vernacular in other parts of the world. From a US standpoint, I think I object to the phrase deeply precisely because it originated in the States.

        I’m not sure what strength the phrase carries in other countries, but for me, this situation still isn’t comparable— I don’t see William’s actions as egregious or even a betrayal given the long history of petty feuds and jealousy between different factions of the monarchy. In my perspective, it’s business as usual for the royal family and so doesn’t warrant the comparison. But I’m aware that different phrases and words carry different weight to different people.

        Again, thanks for your response, I very much appreciate it.

      • Detnow359 says:

        @LaraW, I am from the states and I’m also black and stand by my statement. I’m not going to get into my family history of enslavement nor am I here for your history lesson. You made an assumption about me and where I live, my background and knowledge of a term I chose to use so perhaps you may want to approach your discomfort differently next time.

        Back to the post. As Carmen said whatever phrase we choose here it comes back to William’s betrayal of his family in general. All of them at whatever cost. Dad, granny, his wife, bro, sister-in-law, uncle. Everyone. Whatever he needs to do to give the appearance of smelling of roses he uses. Heck they made granny Diana cards just a week ago. He is working whatever means to move forward his agenda.

      • LaraW" says:

        Detnow: I respectfully disagree that I should “approach my discomfort differently next time.” First, I stated clearly at the beginning of my comment that I read your comment in good faith. Second, I have a right to express my discomfort in a manner that is polite and does not break the rules of this website. Third, I discussed the history of the phrase to state that I don’t consider that historical situation as comparable to William’s actions, and that this was the reason for my discomfort. Through the dialog with Carmen, I’ve learned that I give the phrase more weight than others who might use it; going forward, I can take this into account.

        Everyone has been polite throughout this conversation and I have gained knowledge I did not previously possess: that the phrase has since been adopted into the vernacular of other countries, and that its meaning today is more along the lines of general betrayal, as you stated above. We all have different experiences and understandings of words; I do not believe expressing my discomfort and explaining the source of my discomfort here was out of bounds.

        I am glad this discussion happened, and I wish you all the best going forward.

  21. Eleonor says:

    The truth is: she is a ride or die for Andrew who is a reknown pedo rapist, but her favourite son.
    Charles can be critized for everything, but you can’t say he is not a hard working royal. He was talking about environment before it was a thing, he created the Prince trust…once again all we can see is how she hates Charles.

  22. Mila says:

    Welp! We did say Charles make your pick carefully because the daggers will be out for you too! Harry was the ONLY one. I think actually cared for him and would’ve supported him in his reign to William he’s just another name on his hit list!

    • Nao says:

      One of the reasons why William had to get rid of Harry and Meghan. He and Kate want it all for themselves

    • Betsy says:

      In all seriousness, that’s not really a choice someone in a hereditary hierarchy gets to make. That’s why William has gotten away with so much of his bullcrap; there are not many ways to bring him to heel, though I think they had better start pressing some of the levers if they don’t want the entire thing to explode.

      • Lorelei says:

        I wrote a comment about this in a post a few weeks ago, but I do *not* understand why both Charles and the Queen seem so afraid of antagonizing William?

        Yes, I’m sure he has dirt on them, but I’d bet they have just as much on him, if not more, since they’ve been protecting him and his reputation by hiding & covering up his misbehavior for more than 25 years now.

        The most common reason usually given is that Charles gives in to him because he threatens to withhold access to the Cambridge kids, but idk how realistic that is. Charles constantly has a jam-packed schedule with lots of traveling, so how often does he just pop by to see the children anyway? He sees them at all family events, holidays, etc., and William can’t prevent that. I just don’t see that as a strong enough reason for Charles to cower like this. And that doesn’t explain why the Queen lets him go rogue with (as for as we know) no ramifications.

        Both Charles and the Queen seem intimidated by him— maybe “intimidated” isn’t the right word, but they clearly let him do whateverTF he wants without facing consequences. And I can’t fathom why that is. He’s still years if not decades away from the throne. Why does he seem to have so much power over those two?

        We know his team is a mess; it’s not as if KP is smoothly, stealthy taking over BtS. They wouldn’t be able to find their own heads if they weren’t attached. And KP has done so much damage in the past month alone. I’m just so curious about why this dynamic seems to have not only persisted but gotten worse; William went fully rogue last week! Where are their spines?

      • Betsy says:

        @Lorelei – I don’t know. I don’t know if he threatened to take himself out of succession? I don’t know if he threatened to kill the line of succession. I don’t think that’s probable or that it happened, but they seem cowed by him in a way that, you’re right, is way out of line with the limited power and skills that William has. I really do not get it, but it seems to be a real thing that governs how they treat him.

      • Kkat says:

        We’ll if the bald asshole takes himself out of the line, that removes him and his kids.
        Then Harry and his kids would be first in line.

        I doubt very much william will ever take himself out because he would NEVER want his brother to be King

  23. Rapunzel says:

    Wills projecting again… KP is so Trumpian in their MO– it’s always accuse others of what you are guilty of.

    Meg and Harry leak? No, that is KP.
    Meg and Harry terrorize staff? No, that’s William the anger lamp.
    Meg and Harry lie? No, that’s KP.
    Meg made Kate cry? Nope, that was Kate made Meg cry.
    Meg and Harry are lazy fame chasers? No, that’s the Cambridge

    TQ thinks Charles has no sense of duty? Nope. It’s probably TQ thinks Wills has no sense of duty.

    • Shahad says:

      Lol , none of them have any sense of duty ! I think they are both pretty awful so William and Charles can lock horns for ever and may the winner send the other to the Tower of London 😂😂

  24. Shahad says:

    What is this commonwealth dedication that people speak of with Charles? I live in Australia the most beloved of their colonies and I never hear of anything this bloke does.

    Does his love of organic farming make him any more revolutionary than thousands of farmers who do it even better without access to the resources and expertise he clearly has due to his position as the future monarch?

    Why should he be given credit for doing the bare minimum considering all the advantages he has had in life ?

    Lastly he can’t be that dedicated to the commonwealth when his daughter in law is torn to shreds by a uk press and says nothing, then removes their security even though Harry did not choose who his parents and family are . He has been an appalling husband and an even worse father and someone that lacking in basic decency has no right to be my head of state . This has actually made me want to join the republican movement in Australia.

  25. PEARL GREY says:

    Another flop release from the Incandescent Productions™️ studio. Bulliam isn’t even trying to be subtle at this point.

    Charles’ “pain” is a tumultuous arranged marriage to a woman he never loved and treated abhorrently, a mother who clearly never showed him any real affection and still favours her abuser son over him, and a life spent waiting for his destiny to fully come to fruition, so he took it out on Harry, who did what he could not do and fought for the life he wants with the woman he loves. No wonder they all tried so hard to stop him. Way to try to carry on the cycle. They’ve learned nothing.

  26. Lizzie says:

    I don’t know how they are defining this ‘sense of duty’ but the yearly numbers show Charles is a hard worker and his son and daughter in law are the LAZIEST in three generations.

    • Merricat says:

      I think Camp Kambridge is completely underestimating Charles’ ability to pull off some fancy footwork. Lol. The Middletons have convinced Other Brother that he is Most Worthy, and now we’ll see what happens.

      • Betsy says:

        I give Carole Middleton credit for being craven and conniving enough to get her daughter the ring (I don’t think it’s a laudable goal, but I have to respect the dedication that took to ruin your daughter’s life like that), but she does not understand that the Royals will still cut you. They can cut Kate loose if William’s redemption arc means he gets to be with his true lady love. They can do a lot and it’s absurd that she thinks she’s in the stronger position here.

      • Nic919 says:

        Does Carole forget how Diana was treated until she died? She was attacked a great deal in the media and only received sainthood after he death. And Diana came from a family of aristos who didn’t go to the media to promote shady businesses nor were they seen as craven social climbers and clout chasers.
        It won’t be hard to cut off the Middletons if William decides he wants someone else.

  27. Zip says:

    If they want people to lose respect for the Queen, they should keep mentioning her enduring affection for Andrew.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Zip – You hit the nail on the head without even lifting the hammer.

    • 😈➕💯, ZIP

      Not sure this is William though. After that television special, I’m also thinking that Charles probably regrets not giving Clive Irving more access when Irving was writing his bio on the Queen. 😂. Sounds like payback from Irving to Clarence House to me.

  28. Phoenix says:

    Now when leakings about Sussex are probably drying up and even if William releases something shady about them it will be suspicious and Harry doesn’t have to take the heat anymore and now it seems that William is turning on everyone except the Queen lol.
    And I am here to enjoy it. Charles doesn’t have a very high reputation, but I think he is smarter than the rage monster that his heir is.
    I really want to see how this will backfire in Williams face at some point.

  29. Lowrider says:

    Sense of duty for royals is over used.

    All they do take photos, play dress up and repeat what someone else’s writes.

  30. TheOriginalMia says:

    William, William, William…this hit job has his fingerprints all over it. William doesn’t measure up to his grandmother or father. He has no signature project he can hang his hat on. He doesn’t work as much as his elders. Charles may be a coward, but he’s defined what the Prince of Wales should do before taking the thrown. I hope Charles denies William the investiture of PoW. Make him wait and wait and wait.

  31. Tiffany says:

    Andrew’s conception was the result of Philip returning to the marriage and leaving his mistress. Betty considers that the ‘restart’ of things and good times.

    The fact that she considers her husband leaving his mistress at the time only to do it again later as a bright spot. Well.

  32. Noor says:

    Prince Charles has actually redefined the role of heir to the throne and will be a good king. Nobody deserves the job more than Prince Charles after such an extraordinary long years spend as heir to the throne.

    • Maria says:

      Actually, he’s highlighted why this institution needs to go. He may be the most successful prince of Wales in history as far as philanthropy and initiatives go. But he still treats the Duchy of Cornwall as his own adjustable revenue stream/tax write off as he sees fit. His efforts are the reason the royal family does not have to disclose information about their financials.
      And more concerningly, he cut off security and assistance to one of his own sons and therefore helped endanger a Counsellor of State. Among other things.

      • Nedsdag says:

        Not to mention being silent when his OWN GRANDSON was being compared to a chimpanzee in a Tweet. He gets no sympathy nor respect from me.

  33. Kyliegirl says:

    The RR are turning this “sense of duty” into a joke. Their definition of sense of duty is all over the page. The hardest working royal now doesn’t have a sense of duty? Only William has the Queen’s sense of duty? Charles has many faults, but he has always worked hard and created a role for himself. It’s William that is floundering. They really are making a mockery of the institution they are said to to revere.

  34. Well Wisher says:

    He is briefing against his father, now that Prince Harry is no longer there. There will be no end to this, I can assume that all these appearances is to prop up ‘a dead horse ‘ even before its arrival.
    What is interesting is would the monarchy survive William – the Rage Monster?

    The two biggest problems in the UK are the BTM and their enablers like William.

  35. Amy Bee says:

    Oh, Charles has as much sense of duty as the Queen. He married someone was not in love with to produce heirs, he has remained loyal to the Queen and has never sought to protect his sons from media attacks. Apparently, he’s also a stickler for traditions just like the Queen. So I think the royal experts in the piece are off base and in the tank for William.

  36. MsIam says:

    I wonder if by sense of duty they mean the Queen is upset Charles didn’t try and fix his marriage to Diana. Maybe the Queen, as unbelievable as it may sound, understood Diana’s fragility and neediness and felt Charles should have “done his job” as a husband? Who knows, but yeah in terms of projects and the like, Charles has done a lot and he can be proud of his work too. This is an necessary dig at him at this point.

  37. ennie says:

    Wait until she sees the Cambridges.

  38. Merricat says:

    I think that William has been petted and wooed by his mother-in-law into thinking that he is the rightful heir RIGHT NOW. I think Mrs. Middleton believes herself to be quite a media master. And I think they’ve all incredibly underestimated what Charles is capable of doing. Lol.

  39. Ariel says:

    I get all my information from the Crown- but it seems she had the first two children out of duty. She was required to provide an heir and a spare.

    Then a decade later she had another two “for fun”.
    Again, my information is from the Crown.

    But considering how petty she seems, the kid was born to literally replace her.
    She’s 95 and won’t abdicate- god complex much?
    She kind of hates him and it is not in any way his fault.

    Though she stayed married through her husband’s cheating scandal, and Charles did not, and she considers that a failure to the crown.

    • Betsy says:

      It’s not really a god complex. She swore an oath. An oath and role of debatable utility, but that’s the role she took on.

      • Ariel says:

        A god complex, in that she can’t give it up for the next person on the list, who will be taking the exact same oath- who has always been destined to replace her, as she replaced her dad. He died young. She did not.

      • tcbc says:

        It’s literally a God complex. She thinks she was chosen by god to sit on that stolen chair, wearing stolen jewels, and reign. Oaths are really easy to keep when they give you the moral license to boss everyone else around because God Said So.

  40. Mina_Esq says:

    I’m LOLing at that last paragraph. This is clearly coming from William. If any of this is true, then the Queen is an even worse mother than we all thought.

  41. Lizzie says:

    As the Sussex smears seem to keep backfiring I guess Incandescent Bill has turned on his father.
    We are laughing at this but most of the world continures to ignore Bill and Cathy.

  42. Betsy says:

    Who else reads this and thinks Charles and William had very strong words with Charles finally exploding that William and Kate don’t do their damn jobs? Because that’s what I read this as about.

  43. Liz version 700 says:

    Oh Will, this was short sighted. You can bet Charles has as much dirt on Will as Will has on him. This will get ugly and I am here for it. I hope they rip the monarchy apart and George, Charlottevand Louis never have to deal with this mess.

  44. Izzy says:

    So I guess the Duke of Keenbridge has begun his PR campaign against his father.

  45. Harla says:

    William’s throwing his father and grandmother under the bus, the queen is throwing her son and grandson under the bus and Charles is throwing his mother and his son under the bus, gosh this is fun to watch.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      I hope the Sussexes are selling hot buttered popcorn and donating 100% of the proceeds to charity!

    • Emily_C says:

      They’ve always been this way, no matter what family they technically are. From William the Bastard, through Tudors to Windsors and everything in between, they’ve always been like this. Thoroughly rotten people, but (therefore) they do bring the drama.

  46. Mel says:

    This is all so weird, everyone blabs and mean girls each other. Frankly, he shouldn’t have her sense of “duty” her sense of duty above all else is why they’re all emotionally stunted and have not clue as to how the world works. Oh well.. carry on with your batsh** crazy.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Mel: Seriously! They’re acting a lot like the members of the Trump administration did.

  47. Sarcasm101 says:

    He needs to abdicate. Bye asshole. Cannot stand this man.

  48. Emily_C says:

    Andrew is like Philip? That makes me think even worse of Philip than I already did, and I didn’t think that was possible. Philip was a serial cheater, but I never thought he raped teenage girls. Elizabeth is really bad at figuring out which people are worthwhile and which aren’t. Not that Charles is worthwhile — he’s a scumbag — but Andrew is worse. Apparently superficial charm is all Liz II cares about in men.

  49. Kim says:

    Well it’s obvious that she has no faith in him or she would have stepped aside decades ago. What a sad family, it’s obvious they William is campaigning against him .

  50. Gorgonia says:

    I’m not a fan of Charles, for how he treated Diana and Harry, but in this case I feel for him. It’s terrible to know your parents never were really fond of you ( Betty’s favourite is Pedo, Philip’s favourite is Anne), no matter what you accomplish in your life. I think with different parents he could have been a better man, though I don’t condone his behavior with Diana and his son.

  51. Fredegunda says:

    In my opinion, the queen has failed in her duty — to provide the nation with future monarchs who are emotionally stable, well-adjusted, intellectually curious and kind. Such people would have ensured that the crown continued not only to survive but also to thrive. Instead, family members are waging wars against each other in the tabloids. They might have to learn the hard way that a house divided against itself cannot stand.

  52. Shannon says:

    The pettiness of this family is on a whole another level.