I can’t help thinking that tbis sort of hue and cry in the press is similar to the rubbish the press stirred up pre-Brexit.
He’s innocent till proved guilty.
I’m also wondering whether there are powers that be in the world that use news and social media to destabilise and pull down institutions that people could largely still trust. Such as our membership of the EU or the monarchy, for example.
Who benefits from tearing down old institutions and sources of authority and support such as governments? Who would step in if these are discredited and society becomes unstable as what people in free democracies trusted has been torn down? Who benefits?
There may be a lot more to this sort of thing than we realise.
In the UK the head of state is separate to the government and their younger siblings are neither.
There won’t be a serious investigation into what Charles and Brenda knew or didn’t know, but does that matter? I don’t think so. It won’t seriously destabilise the UK monarchy, as most of the minor royals have already been taken off the payroll.
Guilty or not, he’s a shit. So why bother defending him?
Democracy in Europe is under attack from Trump and fascist pals, but Charles and his fat cat family are not a bulwark against it. In fact they are grist to the rightwing mill.
Dump the palaces, dump the unearned medals, dump the uniforms, transfer the immense unearned land wealth to the State and get real jobs or just piss off.
This is the big problem with “getting rid of the Royals”.
The usual option is a President - whether elected and executive, or purely ceremonial.
The problem then is that (assuming the UK did not change its Parliamentary system to have an executive President like the US, perish the thought) they are typically superannuated politicians and just as likely to be duffers as any Royal.
And you still need the trappings for state visits and other ceremonial occasions so I’m not sure you save all that much money. Plus you lose the glamour of a thousand year old institution, which is a big tourist draw, and replace it with a bloke or blokess in a suit.
Whenever the idea of having a UK President comes up I just think of Boris Johnson or Tony Blair filling the role and shudder in horror.
I think we could do much worse than Charlie and Co. even if not all their mob is useful.
Lots of naughtiness in Charles’ family tree, but no more so than the average politician I suspect.
I think there are more important things to worry about than replacing the Royals at the moment, TBH.
It’s also notable that folks in many other countries (including France, despite their official republicanism) are more than a bit envious of the UK for having the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha-Windsor-Mountbattens, although some of that may be the soap opera aspect of course!
Simples Tim, as our meerkat friends would say, an elected president with the same powers as Charlie, ie SFA (unlike the catastrophic US model). The Queen was a class act, she did the job very, very well, but this monarchy stuff is well beyond its best before date. Few of them could do a real days work to save their lives.
In the 21st century it is of course bonkers that any country has a hereditary head of state so you’d assume that the general public would be clamouring for change. However, in the UK there is no real push to abolish the monarchy so why would any government go against voters wishes regardless of whether on the face of it it is the right thing to do?
The problem is indeed the alternatives. Royalty is probably an asset for tourism, imagine a President Farrage or Beckham or AN Other who decides they need to do crazy things. Having an institution whose key mission is to survive versus causing chaos is perhaps the least bad alternative. Cannot imagine the public voting for President Fry or President Roberts sadly
Never really understood proposals for an elected President or an elected House of Lords. After all, we already have elections for one government and one House of Commons. So if we have anyyhing else as well, surely it should be differently chosen?
And as it happens we have somw handy Royals and some hereditary peers in the House of Lords.
I hate that he was arrested for leaking state secrets only. But when it was a question of molesting Virginia Gufrie. No arrest made there. It makes me so angry this lack of accountability when it comes to molesting children, girls, or women. Molesting, I am being polite here.
Due to the statute of limitations in the US he couldn’t be charged with a criminal offence in respect of Giuffre’s accusations hence her civil case and the UK police did investigate her claims but decided there was not enough evidence to take things further.
, or President Farage 
