Prince Charles is trying to whitewash his extremely shady foundation records

With the British media solely focused on their sustained Sussex freakout, Prince Charles can basically do anything he wants. That’s been happening for more than a year – the slow drip-drip of flat-out terrible stories about Prince Charles, all of which are forgotten as soon as a new Sussex storyline is introduced. Prince Charles has blatantly engaged in cash-for-honours and cash-for-access schemes for years, if not decades. He’s accepted suitcases full of cash from a billionaire Qatari. He accepted more than $1 million from Osama bin Laden’s half-brothers. He accepted money from Vladimir Putin’s close oligarch associates. And nothing is going to happen – Scotland Yard is actively burying the investigation into Charles’s schemes and financial improprieties. Charles is now trying to whitewash his foundation records too.

Panicked courtiers have wiped the names of all charity donors from the Castle of Mey’s website to deal with the royal ‘cash for favours’ storm. The name of the Saudi tycoon at the centre of the controversy, Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz, has been deleted from the castle’s website.

A major donor to Prince Charles’s charities, he had been listed as the top honorary patron, complete with a biography. But Mahfouz has now been removed from the ‘friends and patrons’ section, along with broadcasters Alan Titchmarsh and Ken Bruce, as well as actress Susan Hampshire. The list of honorary patrons had been displayed on the site for many years.

In 2015, it was revealed that an area near the castle had been renamed Mahfouz Wood in his honour after he reportedly donated £370,000 to the castle’s restoration. The names of Mahfouz, his father and four brothers were also to be placed around the castle’s gardens.

It’s unlikely such a move would have taken place without Charles’s approval, given the level of his personal interest in the castle. Last November Mahfouz was dropped as an honorary patron, but later reinstated.

A spokesman for the Prince’s Foundation, a group for Charles’s charitable interests including the Castle of Mey, blamed ‘human error involving a junior member of staff at the Castle of Mey updating the website’. Charles’s aide, Michael Fawcett, stepped down as chief executive of the Foundation amid allegations he’d used his influence to help secure a gong for Mahfouz, who received an honorary CBE in 2016. The foundation said it was investigating. Last night a spokesman declined to comment.

[From The Daily Mail]

“The foundation said it was investigating. Last night a spokesman declined to comment.” More like the spokesman said “oh wait, you noticed that we did that? Nevermind, no comment.” They would have gotten away with erasing the evidence of Charles’s cash-for-honours crimes if only the Mail had just been cool about it. Again, Prince Charles has one ass cheek on the throne – part of the release (over the past 18 months) has been a strategic effort to get everything out before Charles’s coronation. He doesn’t even need to bother with this amateurish coverup though? Literally nothing is going to happen to him. He doesn’t even need to bother with the whitewash – no one cares as long as all of the focus is on the Sussexes.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

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

13 Responses to “Prince Charles is trying to whitewash his extremely shady foundation records”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Jane says:

    Crucially, there isn’t an obvious human victim. Charities want cash desperately. Bad people SHOULD give money to charities. Money laundering for CHARITY…just makes people shrug. Especially in a poverty crisis, as we are in the UK now.

    • Dee says:

      Yes, there is. Some of that money was gotten through illegitimate or unethical means, which means there ARE actual victims. Also, international money laundering empowers criminal syndicates, and their lackeys often DO end up hurting people, so there are really victims all around. And that’s
      before you add in the negative effects uncontrolled inflows and outflows will have on vulnerable economies. Money laundering, for any reason, is a very serious criminal and moral offence.

  2. Scorpion says:

    A crook, a bum, a POS, a class A narcissist, a cheat and one of the worst fathers of our time.

  3. Amy Bee says:

    Charles should be investigated for money laundering.

  4. Lizzie Bathory says:

    It’s not just trying to get it all out before the coronation. I think a crucial part of the timing is that his grifting operation will have to stop when he becomes king. The monarch cannot accept bags of cash in exchange for honors, but other family members can.

    Andrew accepted all manner of favors in the past, in addition to skimming off Pitch@Palace. I’ve come to think that Philip might have amassed his improbable fortune by doing some sort of cash for access scheme. And William’s odd, not particularly publicized trip to the UAE this year made me think they’re trying to set him up to continue what Charles has done for years. I have my doubts as to whether William can be counted on not to bungle the whole thing.

  5. Sunday says:

    I said it on another post, but I just watched The Princess and wow, I didn’t think I could hate Charles any more than I already did, but here we are. What a corrupt, morally bankrupt cheat. It’s really infuriating that his myriad financial crimes are getting a collective shrug from the media while Meghan gets wall-to-wall abuse for daring to speak on her own podcast.

    • Becks1 says:

      We watched the Princess last week as well and it was chilling. So well done.

      And yes, its infuriating that the press seems to just sort of shrug about all of this with Charles while Meghan is being torn apart for every little thing she says.

  6. tuille says:

    Why wouldn’t Scotland Yard investigate this? Isn’t the Yard, unlike the MIs 5 & 6, a-political?

  7. ClaireB says:

    I always wondered why Harry refused to take over The Prince’s Trust, because it seemed like such a good fit for him. Now I’m thinking he knew how dirty it actually was and didn’t want to get involved at all, even if he could clean it up.

    And obviously that kind of grifting is too much work for William and wouldn’t benefit him directly, so there’s no way he’d do it.

  8. Louise177 says:

    Doesn’t seem a big deal to remove people from a website. It’s hardly evidence. It’s more about paperwork, actions, etc to prove wrongdoing. The website is more about optics.