A (2:49)

Yeah. So, I mean, look, it has been the most extraordinary couple of weeks for the Royal Family. I, I suppose big picture, the way I am thinking about this, I, I don't know if you, you know your physics, Hugh, but there's a term in physics called stable equilibrium versus unstable equilibrium. And a very good example of something in stable equilibrium is like a Newton's cradle, right? You know, the things that bang like that and you lift up one and they go like that and they revert their original shape. A typical example of something in unstable equilibrium is a pile of snooker balls, right? And you tip one and they all collapse and they can't come back to their original shape. And I think we've always assumed that the Royal Family is in a stable equilibrium, that when these things happen, when Princess Diana dies or Charles gets divorced or even, you know, these huge things like the abdication in 1936, we sort of assume that ultimately it'll come back to the shape that it originally was. But I think the feeling now is that this crisis around Prince Andrew, ex Prince Andrew, as I suppose we really should call him, has metastasized to such a level, has become so extreme that it feels like it's going to be very hard for, for the Royal Family just to come back to its original shape and pretend that nothing has happened. I mean, this week alone, we've had a former Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, calling for a police investigation into Andrew, saying that 90 Jeffrey Epstein flights landed and unloaded and reloaded sex trafficking victims at a London airport, some of whom appear to have been destined for Andrew. That. That's just one of the things that's happened this week. But when former Prime Ministers are accusing you of being a member of the Royal Family, of being involved in sex trafficking, I mean, as you will know, Hugh, usually you mention the Royal Family to any politician serving or former or whatever, and they very quickly find a reason to run away from you at high speed because they don't want to talk about the Royal Family. Everybody wants to talk about the Royal Family now. And I, we, we are way past the point of never complain, never explain. Like, there is clearly going to have to be a massive apology from the Royal Family at some point, because this all happened on Charles's watch. You know, the, the whole thing going back to 2010 and there's been this, I think, really disgraceful attempt to blame everything on Queen Elizabeth. I don't think Queen Elizabeth was clearly, she wasn't blameless. Clearly Andrew was her favorite child and he was indulged and she had a blind spot and people tried to warn her about what he was up to. But the simple fact of the matter is that for the last several years of her reign, she was dying of bone cancer, she couldn't get out of bed, she couldn't really see, she was very confused a lot of the time. And they had a co monarchy and Charles was running it together. And the idea that Charles wasn't across what was happening with Virginia Giuffre when, you know, and this report in the sun saying that he contributed £1.5 million, about $2 million towards the settlement. Now the palace are pushing back on that a bit, saying that's not the case. In a briefing to the Times, I noticed the sun still have the up, which is really interesting. The sun clearly not in the mood to issue a correction. They have a very good royal correspondent in a guy called Matt Wilkinson, very, very competent, experienced reporter. But the point is that in a sense, the whole strategy of Charles's office throughout this seems to have been either first of all to say nothing's happening, then to say when something was happening, oh, there's nothing we can do. And then finally to say, well, it's all my mother's fault, it's all mummy's fault, and to hide behind the skirts of a dead woman, you know, who frankly, you know, has a lot of respect in the United Kingdom.

B (7:14)

And not just the United Kingdom, Tom. I mean, this is. Queen Elizabeth was a woman who, successive presidents who agree about nothing else, who hate each other. Donald Trump is known to be a massive royal fan and there's a whole lot I want to unpack later about that. But he has. One of the only people that he has ever said nothing but positive things about was Queen Elizabeth and Barack Obama. Somebody who Donald Trump agrees with on Nothing says has so many positive things to say about the Queen. A huge level of personal affection from him and Michelle Obama. So Queen Elizabeth is like a figure that people understand to be one of, we thought, unimpeachable virtue. But let's just unpack for people. What has Prince Andrew done? Because the list is extraordinary. We all knew that he had been pictured with at the time, a 17 year old girl who had been trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein. And they were pictured together in London in Ghislaine Maxwell's flat or apartment in a very exclusive address. And he had his arm around her. And that picture of course was Virginia Giuffre. And that set off this explosive series of slow running car crash. So what has happened in the last week we have come to learn a lot more. Right. About. About everything that he was doing and everything he was alleged to be doing.

A (8:49)

Yeah. So everything of course stems really from. Or the story, the uncovering of this story stems from that photograph taken in Glenn Maxwell's townhouse in Belgravia, a very nice street in Belgravia, opposite a lovely pub which you will know, Hugh, called the Nag's Head.

B (9:10)

I have indeed been in that publishing.

A (9:13)

Exactly. Very well known, you know, many, I.

B (9:16)

Mean, loads of people I think who are watching this will visited London, maybe they're in London. This all happens in places that people, people you know, are. We've. Everybody has walked past Buckingham palace and seen the changing of the guard. That, that pub in Belgravia is one that people who, people who live in London all know, people who come to London, many of them go. It's been one of those like, where to go in London guides. So all of this is happening in plain sight almost.

A (9:42)

Right, right, exactly, exactly. So Ghislaine and Andrew and all those characters were always seen by all the people drinking at the Nag's Head, which is literally opposite. Which is, you know, it's a detail, but it is quite an interesting one. But, but fundamentally what has happened is that we. We've had this drip, drip, drip of documents beginning originally with the stuff that was released by the Democrats on the House Oversight Committee, that was from the epst. Then the successive two drops by the Department of Justice. And they're so huge, there is so much paperwork and so much stuff to search to that literally journalists on every publication in the United Kingdom are just going through them. And more and more stuff is emerging every day, limited really only by the bandwidth of the number of journalists able to search through it. So it's gone incredibly quickly from the allegations against Virginia Giuffre, the lies that Andrew told in his BBC Newsnight interview, for example, where he said that he was so honorable that he just went to say goodbye to Andrew in 2020. I mean, this was one of the first things that was knocked down. But more and more stuff has come out now, interestingly. Although of course the thing that I think will revolt most people the most are the allegations of sexual abuse against Andrew. I suspect that in the end it might be a slightly Al Capone situation. And I think if they actually get him in the end, they might get him on this sharing of confidential information because obviously, as we all know, proving sexual abuse is really, really hard. There's so many people involved. It was transnational, it was happening all over the world. As I said earlier, there were all these flights coming in and out of Stansted Airport. We don't exactly know who these people are. And of course, these files. Just because someone sends an email saying something doesn't stand up in a court of law. What probably does stand up in a court of law is if you send an email to someone sending them confidential information that you have as a consequence of your role as a public official. And this is what this politician called Peter Mandelson was doing. And he has been fully investigated by the police. We've had the photographs of the police turning up with the plastic boxes, dragging out the files and all of that. And this is what Andrew was doing. We can see it there in black and white. He writes to Epstein, he says, I've got an amazing opportunity in Helmland in Afghanistan. You know, well, people are literally soldiers literally dying out there. He's figuring out, is this a way to get in and curry favor with Epstein and make a bit of money.

B (12:35)

And should say the British Royal family. This is a crazy feature of British life. The British Royal family actually have access to the government's most closely held secrets just because they are the royal family.

A (12:49)

Yes. And one of the extraordinary emails that was uncovered was by Newsweek by a very, very competent reporter there called Jack Royston, well known, quite well known British reporter who's worked on all the tabloids, literally shows this extraordinary email chain of Andrew saying to his secretary, Amanda Thirsk, can you get me the reports about, you know, what's going on in this country? And her hassling literally a senior secretary in the government to be sent the report. She finally gets them, sends them to Andrew, he just sends them on to Epstein. I mean, it is absolutely extraordinary.

B (13:31)

Tom, I just want to give you some color that Devin, our excellent producer, is in the corner and I can see him. And unfortunately we don't have the camera set up on him. He is reacting in real time to this with absolute astonishment because I know you, you know, you live this every day. Your substack, the Royalist is reporting on this every day. And this, you know, what we are talking about, he's literally, his jaw is dropping.

A (14:00)

I mean, it is really interesting. The Amanda Thirsk one is particularly interesting. So, yeah, one of my, one of my colleagues in These trenches. Jack Royston, as I said, he is the one who surfaced this email about Amanda Thirsk trying to get all these documents off the government. He's also got another really interesting story that he did yesterday, I think, saying that when Andrew leaked this trade report to Epstein, that was in the context of him trying to get a payoff for Sarah Ferguson to sort out her debt problems, which was something that Epstein, you know, made a bit of a speciality with paying off Andrew and Sarah Ferguson's debts. So it is, it feels to me that these sex trafficking allegations feel to me like they're going to be really complicated to prove many years later. I think any normal person reading through those files would conclude that Andrew was involved in it. But I feel that the sharing of confidential information in violation of the Official Secrets act is really easy to prove because it's happening there in front of our eyes.

B (15:25)

Tom, has Andrew offered any response to this? Because we've had days and days of this and normally you would expect somebody in this position to offer a public response.

A (15:39)

Andrew said nothing. He no longer even has a press spokesperson. There are various people who used to work for him who you have to email for comment. They very rarely respond, but it does at least give him a right of reply when you're writing about him. What we have had, however, is statements from the Prince of Wales and the King. And there's another whole story in this because the Prince of Wales made a statement on Monday morning saying that they were terribly disgusted at the revelations from the Epstein files that Prince of Wales, meaning William and Kate, obviously that they were discussed because he was off on a tour of Saudi Arabia and he didn't want it to sort of overshadow them to be heckled on the tour, which in fact, in the end they.

B (16:24)

Were just as a complete aside. Also in the Epstein files is the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, its de facto ruler, Mohammed bin Salman, basically body hugging Jeffrey Epstein. So it seems it's very hard to go around the world and not just bump into Epstein's friends if you're a member of the Royal family.

A (16:45)

Yeah. And this is even coming back to touch William because William's Earthshot Prize has now been reported to the Charity Commission over one of its founding. So William's Earthshot Prize gives million pounds a year to five different incubator businesses that are trying to save the world through tech. It's like a VC approach to saving the world. It's kind of brilliant idea. It was kind of brilliant charity. They've done great stuff and he always.

B (17:13)

He's repeatedly come to the US and done the prizes here. I think he lasted them in New York and in Boston before that. I might be the wrong way around, but he's absolutely put, you know, it's been a big thing here. He's done segments on television talking about it, and it has begun to engage some of the big tech companies and figures as well. So.

A (17:34)

Right, sure. And it's a brilliant prize. But guess What? Giving away 5 million quid a year is quite expensive. And then it's peanuts by American standards. But in our poultry, I'd have helped. It's quite a lot of money. And it turns out that one of the first founding members was this guy, Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, who was, until Friday, the chief executive of DP World, which is one of those extraordinary kind of logistics businesses that touches sort of every part of our lives without realizing that's a Emirati business. And it turns out that Epstein and him were emailing while he was in jail, including one particularly disturbing email in. In which Epstein wrote. Where are you? Are you okay? I loved the torture video. Well, I mean, you know, it. So as a charity in the United Kingdom, you're subject to this thing called the Charity Commission. And you have to make sure that the people giving money to your charity, that it's coming from, like, legitimate sources, that it's not people trying to, you know, wash their dirty money basically through the charity. So Charity Commissioner said, we are aware of concerns about sources of funding to their short prize, assessing the information to determine any next steps. So, you know, we should just say.

B (18:57)

That that email was itself a scandal in the United States, because when the Epstein files came out at the end of January, the reference to torture video was. You could. You could read. And the fact that it was an email involving Jeffrey Epstein, but Sultan Ahmed bin Salaym's name had, in fact, been redacted. And the two representatives in the House of. The House of Representatives who have pushed this so hard, Thomas Massie, the Republican, Ro Khanna, the Democrat, both highlighted what on earth was this name redacted for? And the Department of Justice was basically shamed into revealing it. And while that name itself, you know, should never have been redacted, but here we have. It's created this whole new episode, I guess, of this scandal. Tom, hold that thought. And we will take a word from our sponsors. And we are back talking about the Royal's biggest scandal maybe ever.

A (20:02)

And of course, so much of this scandal, Hugh, isn't it is about accountability I mean, certainly over here, like, that's the way that this is the word that you keep hearing now among people saying that, you know, not enough is being done. The King's argument up to now has always been, well, I've done all I can. There's nothing more I can do. We saw a shift in that on Monday when the King, in this statement that blew, frankly blew, William's long planned tour of Saudi Arabia out of the water. The King, literally, as William and the entire press corps arrived in Riyadh, Charles made a statement saying that he would cooperate with the police, that he would help the police if requested. I'm told there were frantic scenes at Riyadh Airport with some journalists actually choosing to come back, to literally turn around at the airport and come home terrified that Andrew was about to be arrested. So really, really, really bad karma for royals to steal each other's thunder. But to blow your son out of the water when he's on a massive diplomatic mission. I mean, the idea that that couldn't have waited 24 hours or 48 hours is just crazy. And that really gets to the heart of this conflict between William and Charles, which is tearing the royal family apart. I mean, the anger that William's camp and William's side have towards Charles about the way that he's dealt with Andrew. And it's very, very striking, the similarities to how they feel about how he's dealt with Harry, Andrew himself. No, he hasn't apologized. He won't speak to the media. He's hiding away at Wood Farm in Sandringham and seems completely unwilling to engage in any public form at all with this. The King has said that he will cooperate with the police, but the way he made that statement just as his son was arriving on diplomatic tour in Saudi Arabia, which then completely stole all the thunder from that tour, and I'm told, ended up with frantic scenes at Riyadh Airport of journalists wondering whether they needed to pack up and come home in case Andrew was going to be lifted by the cops.

B (22:27)

So let's just talk about the idea of a member of the Royal family being investigated by the police. It just doesn't happen, right? I mean, there have been times in the past, Princess Anne famouslyin Britain, not famously here, but famously in Britain. Princess Anne kept getting pulled over for speeding and she would be taken to court and she would pay a fine, and that was kind of it. And that's. But the Royal family. The royal family are above crime, really, aren't they, Tom?

A (22:58)

Yeah, they are. And that's why it's very interesting, this report, that Charles potentially paid off some of Virginia Giuffre's settlement. Now, as I say, this was a report in the sun saying that he gave one and a half million pounds towards the settlement. They panic, are now trying to distance themselves from it, saying to the Times that it's not accurate. But I note that the sun have not corrected the story, have not taken it down.

B (23:24)

It's worth saying that settlement at the time, Andrew's then spokespeople said that there was no admission of liability and this was basically to, you know, make it go away. Obviously, what we've learned from the files is that there was much more damaging material. And he may, you know, he may well continue to deny that he had sex with Virginia Giuffre, but there was all sorts of other damaging material in the files that we did not know about at the time that color our understanding of that settlement.

A (23:56)

But I think the thing is, Hugh, isn't it, is that so many of these files are emails.

B (24:01)

Yes.

A (24:01)

So is it conceivable to say that the palace didn't say, do you know what, pal, before we hand out, before we sign a check for $15 million, we're just going to have a quick run through the servers and see what messages you were sending to Jeffrey Epson. It just doesn't seem credible to me. And this raises a really, really interesting constitutional issue, right, which is that if the king, in whose name justice is performed, if the king knew about what you were doing, is it still really a crime that you can be prosecuted for? And we saw this, of course, very famously with Paul Burrell, who was Princess Diana's butler, who kept thousands of items of Princess Diana, I mean, literally including pieces of her underwear, and was prosecuted by the police and managed to get out of it because he said that he told the Queen, and then the queen mysteriously, at the very last moment remembered that indeed he had told her that he was keeping several thousand items of hers for safekeeping.

B (25:06)

And in his 200 miles from London.

A (25:10)

Yes. Well, hey, he wanted to look after them. Yeah. And I think that Andrew, I think part of the reason why, if this never gets anywhere near a courtroom, I think that will be part of the reason why, because of the whole constitutional difficulties. But I also think that if it doesn't end up in court at this stage, and if it doesn't end up with a proper investigation, I think it's extremely damaging for the royal family. So they're kind of caught if they do and they're Caught if they don't like. I was talking to friends of William and Charles last week and William's friends were saying, when William becomes King, if this was happening under his watch, there'd be a proper investigation, a proper police investigation and blah, blah, blah. You know, he'd be. He'd be, you know, down the station answering questions with PC Plot. And Charles's side was saying, it's really easy to say that when you're not actually the King, because it's like being an opposition politician going, I'm going to, you know, lower taxes and give you free childcare, but if you're actually King and Andrew comes into court and starts testifying, you know, who knows what happened, what might happen? And then we saw this very other sinister development in the Sunday Times at the weekend where Andrew was starting to be described as unstable by the palace. There's starting to be suggestions that he's suicidal. Some of it, some suspicious minds are suggesting feels like a softening up exercise for him to be committed to a psychiatric hospital, which, frankly, would solve a lot of the Royal Family's problems.

B (26:54)

And this is a slight, you know, kind of back down into history. But that would not be the first time that the Royal family or member or their relatives have found themselves committed to psychiatric hospitals to get them out of. Get them out of sight. It's very bizarre feature of royal history.

A (27:16)

Well, interestingly, where Andrew is living now, Wood Farm on the Sandringham estate was of course, famously the home of Prince John, who was this, you know, mentally.

B (27:28)

Troubled, mentally disabled and obviously should say Prince John. We're talking about the early 1900s here. We kind of understand, you know, words were used at the time that we wouldn't use now. We think he was probably in some way mentally disabled.

A (27:44)

But, yeah, I think, I think he had down syndrome.

B (27:47)

Yeah.

A (27:48)

Actually, so even by the standards today, obviously he would have been completely part of society. But in those days, yeah, it was keep him out, keep him out of sight. And Prince John and I believe he died very young. I think he died at the age of 12 or 13, but, yeah, so they don't have. But, you know, look, that's a long time ago. Obviously, you know, look, if Andrew does get locked up in a mental asylum, it will be a extraordinary development. But there's definitely a feeling we've had these kind of reports that he's had his guns taken off him, you know, the hint being that he could kill himself or somebody else, you know, Allah. King Dipendra of Nepal, who famously murdered his entire family Do I actually went to school?

B (28:36)

I was about to say.

A (28:37)

Very nice.

B (28:38)

They were all at Eton, I believe, Tom. So.

A (28:41)

Yes.

B (28:41)

Yes, that's the elite British school, the home, or not the home, but the school that's produced prime ministers and members of the royal family, including William and Harry, including the royalist Tom himself, and murdering Nepali royals.

A (29:00)

Yes. Well, not since I was back in my dorm with nanny tucking me in, have I been so worried about the state of the British, as it says, for members of the royal family and his love of firearms. Yes. But, you know, there's definitely the reunions.

B (29:16)

Must be amazing.

A (29:17)

Yeah, yeah. But this is definitely. There's definitely a attempt to paint Andrew now as mentally unstable.

B (29:28)

So just.

A (29:29)

And it's really notable. And the language is really similar to what was used around Diana.

B (29:33)

Yes.

A (29:34)

Where Diana was painted as. As unstable, emotional lashing out, suicidal, all this kind of stuff.

B (29:41)

So the other big thing that's hanging over this for people in the United States is is he going to tell the truth to Congress? Because all of this, all of this scandal has come out because of the actions of Congress, not the actions of Donald Trump. He was forced into signing the law that released the Epstein files. But the votes of members of Congress have forced open these 3 million files. And by the way, 3 million are unpublished. 3 million are being kept secret. So who knows what is hiding in there. But one of the key demands that Rokhanna, who I mentioned had exploded the files open and got redactions removed, which have already toppled this sultan from the Emirates. But one of the demands that Ro Khanna has been making is that Andrew must come to Congress and tell the truth. Is that going to happen in a million years?

A (30:40)

Andrew would never have legal advice telling him to do that. He's never going to come and voluntarily give evidence again. I mean, Andrew's. Now, admittedly, it's now harder to find people who will identify themselves as Andrew's friends. But before this most recent dump, when Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie were saying, you know, he had to come to the us, people who knew Andrew said to me that he just felt that this was like them just jumping on the bandwagon. They knew he was never going to come. This was just them trying to aggrandize themselves, you know, and they were. They were literally saying, you know what? Maybe they need to focus on people in their own country. Because, let's be honest, Andrew has not yet faced any legal ramifications. It looks like those are coming. But he's faced a hell of a lot more than anyone in the United States. I mean, I can't even think of anybody in the United States even being fired from their job. Barely. Well, I think the idea.

B (31:41)

I think we've had one casualty, Thomas.

A (31:43)

Massie and the US Congress, to say how appalling it is that Andrew doesn't give evidence. Look, I'm not saying that Andrew Mountbatten Windsor shouldn't give evidence to U.S. congress. Of course he should. I'm just saying that it's like, never going to happen. And so I think that, frankly, I think that what I want to see is Andrew face a criminal investigation in the United Kingdom that I think amazingly, actually could happen. And we could end up in a situation, Hugh, where his Magister's brother is at leisure in His Majesty's prison. And wouldn't that be an extraordinary turn of events to the British Royal family?

B (32:19)

Well, I think it's probably like, I don't know, 500 or 600 years since one member of the Royal family locked up another one. But one of the things that's kind of reverberating around this scandal, Tom, is that more and more details come out that paint a really a picture of extraordinary, I suppose moral turpitude is one very highbrow way of putting it. We learned, for example, that Andrew appealed to circumvent security regulations at Buckingham Palace. And now a word from our sponsors and we are back with the royalist Tom Sykes himself.

A (33:01)

A report in the sun today saying that Andrew would call down to the gate when he had young women coming up using the phrase, Mrs. Windsor will arrive shortly. Please let her in and show her up. Now, this isn't from the Epstein files, but it's obviously triggered by the revelations. And very interestingly, a character who I'm sure you'll remember from your days on the British tableaus, who Paul Page, the.

B (33:26)

Notorious Everybody Comes Round Again.

A (33:31)

Every royal security story ends up with. So Paul Page was an enormously Corrupt member of SA 19, the Royal Protection Squad, who was. I mean, all kinds. I mean, I think in the end, there were drugs and there were women, and ultimately, I think it was a kind of pyramid scheme that he was running for other cops that finally brought him down. And. But he is a fascinating source. Despite obviously being a compromised witness, he is a fascinating source of insight because he hates the Royal family so much for what they did to him. And he actually has contacted Thames Valley Police just literally today. We're recording this on Friday to say that he's very willing to cooperate and that he also saw all these women Going up to Andrew with absolutely no checks. And to the extent that the joke in the palace was that Andrew should have a revolving door fitted to his bedroom.

B (34:28)

And of course, Andrew Loney, who is a friend of this podcast and a regular guest, I should say, Tom, on your Royalist channel, revealed just the extraordinary scale of Andrew's sexual activities around the world. And one of the things that this comes back to, and I know you quite rightly say that it's very likely to be an Al Capone scenario of a prosecution, that it's about the money and about the secrets, that clearly Prince Andrew, when he was Prince Andrew was known to be rich, he was known to be a womanizer. But now we have questions over the origin of that. We have no statement from Andrew about where those have come from. But the sexual side of this is obviously a big part of this, of the picture of what was happening, that that raises this big question for the King. If the Buckingham palace policeman knew that things were bad, how can the person at the top not know?

A (35:33)

Yes. And of course that's exactly where I think inevitably this is going to end up, because these revelations are not going to stop coming. I imagine that pretty soon people are going to come forward. There's already a lot of suggestion in the UK newspapers that they know who a lot of these women are. They're just choosing not to name them. I imagine they are being phoned up on a regular basis and being asked if they want to break their anonymity and, you know, potentially be the nail in the coffin. And I think that what we are going to see at some point fairly soon is a statement from the police, you know, that will say in this very familiar language that a, a 66 year old man has attended voluntarily to a station at so and so because it just can't go on. It can't go on. The sense of outrage in the United Kingdom is extraordinary. I mean, there's even a story in the Telegraph today. You know, traditionally a very loyal newspaper would traditionally always say the palace line, saying that, you know, that something really has to be done, that just these plaintiff declarations that one is terribly upset and one is terribly shocked and disgusted, are not enough action is required. And that action involves Andrew being investigated by the police.

B (36:56)

And just to put that in context, royals don't get investigated by the police. And public opinion in the UK has rarely been anything other than positive about the Royal family.

A (37:12)

So the royal family is as unpopular now as it's been in my time doing this job. And I would say a Long time before that. The latest polls have them at about 45% saying we should keep the monarchy, which is traditionally very bad. I mean, obviously a lot of politicians would kill for those kinds of ratings. But famously, you know, Queen Elizabeth had stratospheric ratings. Individual members of the family are still quite popular. You know, William and Catherine particularly very popular. Charles suffering, obviously, Catherine suffering. But overall, for under, by the time, less than half of the population think it's a good idea to have a monarchy. You know, you start to, it starts to present questions about how this institution, which, to be totally honest, can't really very easily be got rid of. I mean, if you thought Brexit was divisive, wait till you try and get rid of the British royal family. So realistically, they can't actually be got rid of, but what they do need to do is be reformulated and restructured in a very significant way. I think.

B (38:17)

And I know that one of the things that you've reported on repeatedly on the royal list is that William himself has some views on this that are, you know, might be pretty radical for some of the royal, for some of his family members.

A (38:35)

Yes. Well, I don't think he's going to go as far as Richard the Third did, who drowned his brother in a barrel of Malmsy wine. But I do think that he is going to make decisive moves. And I've reported a lot about this and the last time that I spoke to somebody who was informed about what William's plans were, they said to me, it's very simple. If you're a working royal and you're going around doing the boring jobs like we saw Catherine today at a school in London with her place to be, charity, reading stories to school aged children and shaking hands and opening gyms. You will get your hrh, your Prince or your Princess title, your place to live, your car and your police security. If you're not a working royal, you won't get that and your title and your HRH will be taken off you. And it's obviously an incredible opportunity now for William to say, look, I'm right, you are wrong and I'm right. And we cannot have Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet wandering around the globe ruining my kid's reign when my kid comes to the throne. So I think there is a huge opportunity for William in this. And I think that power has been bleeding to William's camp ever since Charles announced he had cancer, which, if you know the nerds among us will recall, it wasn't entirely intentional. He Meant to announce that he was having treatment for a benign enlarged prostate and then they found the cancer while they were doing it and they announced it. And of course by that it was too late to keep it secret. Ever since that ill advised announcement that he had cancer, frankly, if you're a courtier working in the palace or you have a job in the palace in the civil service of those kinds of things, and you're wondering about how you're going to pay your kids school fees and college fees, you're looking to what Prince William wants to do. So the power has all been bleeding over to William. Everyone's jockeying for position, everyone knows what's coming in the next five years, you know, so William is in this very, very significant, controlling, commanding situation and I think now is the time for him to push and say, do you know what? We need a co monarchy. The same as your mother gave you, a co monarchy in the last 10 years of her reign. You are now in the last 10 years of your reign and you need to start sharing power with me. And I think at that stage, if Charles can do the right thing, really apologize for what's happened with this debacle with Andrew and what Andrew has done on his watch, on his watch, you know, properly apologize for it, become a kind of king emeritus and hand over control to William, I think there's a chance they could salvage it.

B (41:26)

And Tom, what's next? Because we have been watching from this side of the Atlantic, we've been watching this exploding scandal and as you see, perhaps it's taken some attention away from the exploding scandal here, but there just seems to be an endless explosion of this from the uk. Is there going to be more coming?

A (41:47)

Well, I think there is, because I think we're only limited at the moment by how many reporters an editor wants to assign to search through those files. You know, and every reporter is now very familiar with that interface and typing those names in and trying different things and trying different pseudonyms and seeing what comes up. There are 3 million documents in that dump. So, you know, we could, I imagine that probably only a very small percentage of them have been looked at so far. I think that there is inevitably going to be more stuff. I think there's going to be hugely damaging stuff. And I think that ultimately this is going to end up with Andrew being arrested and with Charles making one of those, you know, six o' clock Friday evening videos with the BBC saying I'm terribly sorry and I'm devastated and I apologize fulsomely to the entire Nation for what happened and I take responsibility for it.

B (42:47)

Well, Tom, I will let you get back to scouring those Epstein files. It's as you, as you say, all of us as editors, as reporters are very familiar with that, with that interface and astonished every time that we open it up and find more secrets. There is only one place to get the best, the most fearless reporting. Tom can blush when I say this, but his reporting, your reporting on the British Royal family has been absolutely without parallel and without fear. Go to the Royalist. Tom's on substack, he's on YouTube, and there's just an endless stream of intrigue and scandal and even some good news, Tom. Right, even. Even people getting £5,000 to walk across England.

A (43:35)

Well, exactly. And I mean, if, you know, if that doesn't bring a smile to your face, Hugh, what possibly could? Yep. A chap is set off on a walk across England and he's getting posted on Instagram saying how delighted he is to get £5,000 from the prince of Wales. So I think that really, whatever objections you might have to the Royal family, I think you should shut up and be grateful for what is given to you.

B (44:01)

We'll see when he gets the other side of England if the Royal family is the same royal family or if it's minus a few members. Tom, thank you for joining us and look forward to hearing more about this engulfing scandal from you in the future.

A (44:14)

Thanks very much.

B (44:14)

Yeah, Well, what a scandal. And as Tom says, it is only getting bigger and bigger. We are going to keep covering it and all the Epstein scandal relentlessly. Thank you to everyone who's been watching, especially to everyone who's been commenting. I've been in the comments a lot. I'm so delighted that so many of you are wishing Joanna the best for recovery. It is going well. Yes, she will be back. I'm just going to steal one thing from her while she's not looking, and that is the privilege of reading out another great limerick from Gartfried, which was inspired by Scott Galloway's fascinating interview telling people why he wants them to resist and unsubscribe. Scott says unsubscribe. Take a stand, Hit the Tech Bros Soft tissue. It's grand. But can clicking cancel make billionaires tremble or just give us the illusion we're damned? There's one subscription you must not cancel, and that is to the Daily beast here on YouTube and on our website, thedailybeast.com where we are keeping you up to date with every crazy twist and turn we can't keep you up to date, of course, on those twists without our Beast tier members. There are so many of you, I cannot read all your names out. Thank you for supporting us. If you can also get behind independent journalism, click on the join button on YouTube. Everyone please get in the comments. Share the video with your friends. Share it with your enemies. Reading the comments in our community is one of the best things biggest privilege of being part of this podcast. And with that in mind, I do have a favor to ask is to fill in an audience survey so that we can work out what will happen help the Daily Beast community grow. We're going to pin it in the comments. You will help us out a lot. You will help us, of course, to be Beast finally. Thank you to the people who make this happen. Devin Rogerino, Ryan Murray, Rachel Passer, Heather Passaro and Neil Rosenhaus.

A (45:56)

Want more great listens? Check out our comedy podcast the Last Laugh and our Star Studded the Daily beast podcast@thedailybeast.com podcasts. If you enjoyed this episode, consider becoming.

B (46:06)

A Daily Beast subscriber. Subscribing is the best way to feed the Beast and support all of your podcast as we cover what might become the darkest timeline. Head to thedailybeast.com membership podcast and sign up today.