Police to investigate Prince Charles' charity over honours - Page 2

**Hugh** · 17-02-2022, 13:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Yes, but the charity issue has nothing to do with it. He wasn’t personally involved, we are told.

So he will probably have to apologise on behalf of the charity, like Starmer had to apologise in his role of Director of Public Prosecutions and BJ on behalf of No 10.

Neat.

---------- Post added at 13:39 ---------- Previous post was at 13:31 ----------

Bloody hell, Seth, is that harsh or what? I hope you’ve never done anything in your life others might criticise you for.

I was a Diana fan back in the day, but I suspect she was very needy and manipulative on a personal level. Charles has always wanted Camilla - it was not right that he was practically forced into an arranged marriage.

Except that BJ was personally involved*…

*[/i]birthday cake, cheese & wine, bottle of fizz…[/i]

TheDaddy · 17-02-2022, 14:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianch99

If the "Firm" had any judgement, they would insist that Charles sit this one out.

It doesn't work like that and if they were to suggest it then it would be time to abolish the whole rotten system imo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Also, unlike Queenie, Charlie does not come to the throne with clean hands.
He is indirectly responsible for Diana's death (he was cheating on her big time and famously told Camilla he wished he was a tampon).

Oh yes this is true, he famously forbade her from wearing a seat belt under any circumstances...

**Paul** · 17-02-2022, 18:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

He is indirectly responsible for Diana's death (he was cheating on her big time and famously told Camilla he wished he was a tampon). He is directly responsible for Harry's poor state of mind.

Whatever you are smoking seems to be directly affecting your mind.

OLD BOY · 17-02-2022, 18:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Is what I said the truth, or what? As I said, his eyes are too close together.

Well, I agree with that bit.

---------- Post added at 18:49 ---------- Previous post was at 18:47 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

Except that BJ was personally involved*…

*[/i]birthday cake, cheese & wine, bottle of fizz…[/i]

Well, take Cummings at his word, why don’t you?

Note to self:- I wonder if he believes his story about the trip to Durham Castle as well?

**Hugh** · 17-02-2022, 18:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Well, I agree with that bit.

---------- Post added at 18:49 ---------- Previous post was at 18:47 ----------

Well, takeCummings at his word, why don’t you?

Who mentioned Cummings? Not sure how he took this picture, since he’s in it…

The cake was mentioned by a Johnson loyalist… ("ambush"…. <snigger>)

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-b2000629.html

And the fizz was pictured in December 2020, a month after Cummings had left No. 10…

**Hugh** · 17-02-2022, 19:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Well, I agree with that bit.

---------- Post added at 18:49 ---------- Previous post was at 18:47 ----------

Well, take Cummings at his word, why don’t you?

Note to self:- I wonder if he believes his story about the trip to Durham Castle as well?

Well, you were quite happy with it at the time…

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Not good news for those who take full advantage of the hedging and ditching season!

Seriously, these character assassination tactics are pathetic and I think his interview this afternoon has done him a lot of good with the public.

These vindictive reporters are doing themselves no favours, and frankly, this will show up the BBC to be anti-Conservatives for all to see. That will do their 'politically neutral' argument no good at all!

OLD BOY · 17-02-2022, 19:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

Who mentioned Cummings? Not sure how he took this picture, since he’s in it…

The cake was mentioned by a Johnson loyalist… ("ambush"…. <snigger>)

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-b2000629.html

And the fizz was pictured in December 2020, a month after Cummings had left No. 10…

I didn’t say he took the pictures. And cake or no cake, how do you know the purpose of this get-together? They may just have been discussing Conservative Party policy outside for all you know.

You cannot look at the picture and paint the worst possible scenario and then have that forming an unshakable opinion. You have to consider feasible alternatives if you want to be taken seriously.

ianch99 · 17-02-2022, 19:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

It doesn't work like that and if they were to suggest it then it would be time to abolish the whole rotten system imo

Of course, that is the only rational course of action but since the nation has been groomed for centuries to believe Monarchy is a "good thing", it will be a little while before this happens although they are doing a pretty good demolition job themselves at the moment. Long may that continue.

I mean, having someone who actually believes that she is appointed by God to rule over you and I and demands & expects deference when you are in her presence. I mean, really, it is a sick joke ..

OLD BOY · 17-02-2022, 19:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

Well, you were quite happy with it at the time…

Yes, but you were not, and you are happy enough to believe him this time. What’s changed?

GrimUpNorth · 17-02-2022, 19:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I didn’t say he took the pictures. And cake or no cake, how do you know the purpose of this get-together? They may just have been discussing Conservative Party policy outside for all you know.

You cannot look at the picture and paint the worst possible scenario and then have that forming an unshakable opinion. You have to consider feasible alternatives if you want to be taken seriously.

Right back at ya babe!!

**Maggy** · 17-02-2022, 20:15

We seem to have gotten two threads mixed up.This is the Prince Charles charity thread. Please take the cummings and boris references to the the number 10 lockdown thread.

OLD BOY · 17-02-2022, 20:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

It doesn't work like that and if they were to suggest it then it would be time to abolish the whole rotten system imo
:

…And replace it with what, exactly? A presidential system?

That would work….[not]

**Maggy** · 17-02-2022, 20:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

…And replace it with what, exactly? A presidential system?

That would work….[not]

OLD BOY · 17-02-2022, 20:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

From the 3 clause Act:

This suggests that Charlie would have committed a misdemeanour if he procured dosh for his charity in exchange for bestowing an honour.

Or was it one of his flunkies that did the procurement? Or is he not covered because he is capable of dishing out honours at his discretion, in theory?

It was a flunky.

---------- Post added at 20:24 ---------- Previous post was at 20:20 ----------

I think what the anti-monarchists are missing is the ‘soft power’ that the system of royalty enables us to enjoy. Politicians come and go. The monarchy offers continuity, and the system is cheaper than a presidential system.

So while I’m not a fan of Prince Charles, unless he stands down, he should be allowed his time as king. Given his age, his reign will be comparatively short in any case.

TheDaddy · 17-02-2022, 21:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

…And replace it with what, exactly? A presidential system?

That would work….[not]

Replace it with nothing, we don't need a President and we've neglected the commonwealth so long in favour of the EU that they no longer need us and with the monarchy gone the Lords and outdated class system/ old school tie can sod off with them