King Charles has been called out for the way he handles his brother’s daughters Princess Beatrice and Eugenie and it’s all from a royal writer on his Substack, Andrew Lowney reports.
In it he explains how confusing the restrictions appear when put together. because no. 1 There are restrictions in place over Easter, meaning the sisters cannot make public appearances, however, this matches the news that they are indeed going to attend Royal Ascot, with previous reports stating otherwise.
The expert also pointed to this lack of clear follow-through, citing fellow commentator Tom Sykes as the first to point out that the Easter ban reflected “the king’s waning power in the face of the increasingly dominant William.” To Mr. Looney “That may be the case, but if so, isn’t he repeating the mistakes of his father and grandmother?”
In her view, if an HRH is engaged to someone “she must owe herself a duty of integrity,” and “if evidence emerges that that royal position has been abused for financial gain, appropriate action must be taken.”
But he didn’t stop there and instead repeated the reference to their ban and reinstatement at Royal Ascot, saying, “And why the mixed signals of recent weeks? They’ve been banned from Royal Ascot, they’ve been banned from Easter, then suddenly they’re now coming to Ascot.”
He also concluded, “The contempt implicit in the notion that any of this matters to a public fed up with royal impunity shows how little has changed since the abdication, despite the biggest royal scandal.”
But what it did do was prompt a wave of questions that asked the following, “Have the Kings or Prince William’s advisers asked whether the York sisters ever received any money from Andrew’s Epstein point man, David Stern? Have they asked why they received such extravagant gifts of jewelery and cash from individuals they claim not to know?”
Overall “If such questions are not asked, then clearly Beatrice and Eugenie, like their parents, will believe that there are no consequences for their actions.”
