A man rendered incapable by privilege of normal processes of discernment, moral judgment and empathy.
The Guardian (11/17/19)
There was a moment towards the end of Emily Maitlis’s extraordinary interview with Prince Andrew when she was unable to conceal her astonishment at what she was hearing. Did he, Ms Maitlis had asked, feel any sense of shame at his association with the convicted child sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein? “Do I regret that he [Epstein] has quite obviously conducted himself in a manner unbecoming? Yes,” was the prince’s reply. “Unbecoming?” said Ms Maitlis incredulously. “He was a sex offender.”
It was an exchange that summed up a grotesque mismatch between the Duke of York’s language and demeanour, and the gravity of the allegations which continue to surround him; between the obtuse self-absorption of a prince and what we know of the appalling sexual exploitation of teenage girls by his friend. Not once did Prince Andrew’s thoughts turn to the sex trafficking victims who found themselves forced to perform sexual acts with Epstein and others. No sympathy was expressed on their behalf; no sense of outrage. This lack of empathy revealed a man focused only on his own exculpation. It gave a damning insight into a sense of entitlement that hardly helped his cause.
The single mistake Prince Andrew admitted to was his decision to visit Epstein in New York in December 2010, following the financier’s release from prison. This was, he claimed, to break off relations face to face, though he was unable to convincingly explain why he stayed for four days at Epstein’s home, even attending a dinner party held in his honour. Again, the sense of entitlement came through. It was just, he said, “a convenient place to stay”. Even the mistake of visiting Epstein was down to an excess of virtue. The desire to speak directly to Epstein was attributable to his “tendency to be too honourable”. …
Arrogant Prince Andrew Revealed What True Power Is: Turning Cold, Blind Eye To Abuse
What did we expect from a man with the self-awareness of a whelk?
By Suzanne Moore
The Guardian (11/17/19)
f Prince Andrew thought being grilled by Emily Maitlis was a good idea, God only knows what he thinks might be a bad one. Sadly I think I know. Still, as we now all realise, there are lots of things that the prince simply does not notice. Hordes of available teenage girls. Are they staff? Is it a railway station? Who are these people? The interview had been widely trailed, but the nation was not prepared for this level of monstrous self-pity and frankly astonishing stupidity.
Andrew is the way he is because of his huge sense of entitlement, money, women, the lifestyle he was bred into. Playboy? War hero? No, actually besties with a pimp rapist.
Lying is the new normal for leaders: Donald Trump, another former friend of Jeffrey Epstein, lies non-stop; the current British prime minister lies and dissembles daily. So I guess we just thought Andrew would make more of an effort to at least come across as genuine and competent. We his disrespectful subjects gathered, strangely united, to see how he would justify the photographs of himself with a man who plea-bargained his way out of statutory rape charges, never mind the allegations made by Virginia Giuffre (and strongly denied by Andrew), that she was forced to have sex with the prince when she was aged 17.
The Queen’s favourite son was presumably coached into this shambolic mess of extreme nodding as he tried to justify hanging out with a sex offender, and staying in his house for days in order to end his relationship with him. He was just “too honourable”. And loyal. All of it was totally unbelievable. Something went badly wrong with the prep – he seemed unable to believe himself what was coming out of his mouth. …
- Saagar Enjeti: American Corporate Media CAUGHT Covering Up For Epstein Again: Link To 8-Minute Video