Tuesday, 3 January 2023

Average Extra Special of: Prince Andrew & the Epstein Scandal: BBC's NewsNight with Emily Maitlis on 16/11/2019: Part 1 by AverageMansReviews

Average Extra Special of: Prince Andrew & the Epstein Scandal: BBC's NewsNight with Emily Maitlis on 16/11/2019: Part 1 by AverageMansReviews

A friendly heads up/Disclaimer: at one point or another there are going to be references to criminal/adult content, so you have been warned. Disclaimer: everything in these series of blogs/content everything at minimum is in the right ballpark, I have done this so it gives me a little coverage, not to control the narrative but so I can focus on the important details as you will understand momentarily and to continue with the disclaimer I did set up a family member watching an body language content on this interview, but I quickly left the room because I didn't want my judgement to be tainted, but because I sure in interest in this individual was life we have spoken about it I can't make this anymore clearer for people that have been doing my content for long enough now, you should know I can clearly make up my own mind, even though I can still hear it I can make up my own mind and content, of these highly trained individuals which obviously I mean no disrespect and one final thing in the interest of fairness and balance on reflection I couldn't go on about the Harry and Megan situation without separately shining a light on Prince Andrew.

Real Talking Time:

I chose to do this as a series of blogs/content because and this is honestly true I watched it once the whole way through and on this time; the second time around I am roughly 4 minutes in all of this slightly over 49 minutes interview I already have a lot to work with.

1. Prince Andrew: makes reference to Mr. Epstein and all things associated with him, we have been talking to NewsNight for about six months about the things I have been doing and unfortunately we're just not been able to fit it either into your schedule or mine schedule until now and actually it is a very good opportunity and I'm delighted to be talking with you today.

The first red flag for me is: the words "Actually, it is a very good opportunity and I'm delighted to be able to See you today."[this is said as an opening statement with the tone to match.] But I mean we are here to discuss these very dark allegations which Prince Andrew is in the middle of at this point in history. [Yes I am deliberately choosing my words very carefully here to protect myself, so at minimum I can say he is in the middle of] so it isn't like we are here to discuss this new hospital unveiling/opening. I should point out that now and again I will be using this level of comedy with a serious nature of course to point out these things, because if this wasn't real it would be very funny, like watching a car crash, you dare not look, but at the same time you can't look away. But it is real and I will be saying that again it is real and we are just 48 seconds into this interview, so you can see why and how I have many points.

2. Emily Maitlis: her question; in a nutshell how did you first meet Jeffrey Epstein? Prince Andrew: well I met through his girlfriend [Ghislaine Maxwell] back in 1999 who and I'd known her since she was at university in the UK and it would be to some extent a stretch to say that, that we were we were close friends, we were friends because of people and I had a lot of opportunity to go to the United States, I didn't have much time with him [Jeffrey Epstein] I suppose I saw him once or twice a year, may be maximum three times a year and quite often if I was in the United States doing things and if he wasn't he would say well why don't you come and use my houses and I would say that's very  kind thank you very much indeed.

Another red flag for me is: this Prince is that naive? I don't know this man meaning Jeffrey Epstein yet he is being so kind to me, my question even in the back of my head going why, what's his motive?

3. Continuation of interview: Prince Andrew: but it would be, it would be a considerable stretch to say that he [Jeffrey Epstein] was a very, very close friend that he had the most extraordinary ability to bring extraordinary people together and that's the bit that I remember going to the dinner parties where you would meet academics, politicians people from the United Nations I mean it was a, it was a cosmopolitan group of what I would describe as US eminence. Emily Maitlis questions Prince Andrew was that his appeal then? Prince Andrew responds with an indication of no, but I should really point out I have no idea what he says including the subtitles which I have switched on between us two we have no idea what he said, but all I know is he declines. They talk about his Party Prince label he in a nutshell debunks this label and at the time he was happily married, but he also goes on to say certainly going to Jeffrey's was not about partying absolutely not.

Another red flag for me is: so Prince Andrew couldn't work out why these highly ranked people are at this party? Yes this is me speculating here, mixed in with my street smarts of something could be going on shady here? You know the red light would be off " Danger, danger Will Robinson!" On a note he is absolutely clueless in what he is saying or he should be absolutely clueless to what he is saying, because he is just throwing these highly ranked people such as the United Nations under the bus, yes I know he isn't mentioning any names here, but for the fact he has just thrown shade onto the United Nations that is what I mean and I don't know about everyone else, but the fact that Prince Andrew keeps making reference to Jeffrey, when he should be saying Mr. Epstein or just Epstein like he did at the beginning, [so basically from a verbal standpoint at the very least it tries to distance Prince Andrew from Epstein and not as friends.]

4. Continuation of interview Emily Maitlis: “You say you weren't very good friends, but would you describe him as a good friend, did you trust him?” Prince Andrew: “Yes, I think I probably did, but again I don't go into a friendship looking for the wrong thing if you understand what I mean I'm and I'm an engaging person I want to be able to engage, I want to find out, I want to learn and so but you have to remember that I was transitioning out of the Navy at the time and in the transition I wanted to find out more about what was going on because in the Navy it's a pretty isolated business, because you're out at sea the whole time and I was going to become the special representative for international trade and investment so wanted to know more about what was going on in the international business world and so that was another reason for going there and the opportunities that I had to go to Wall Street and other places to learn whilst I was there were, were absolutely vital.”

Another red flag or red flags for me is: wow, wow there is a lot to impact here. As soon as Prince Andrew says yes to the question, he hopefully unknowingly or I would like to think unknowingly, because if he is knowingly just said yes to this question he is really stupid. Because you don't trust someone that you aren't close with even though you have just tried to debunk this earlier that you weren't close. Even though as soon as Prince Andrew said yes, it is clear to see that there is backtracking of a little description as he goes on to talk about friendship and so on and so forth.

Which brings me onto my next point looking for the wrong thing if you understand what I mean. Well this is most definitely a stupid thing to say, Prince Andrew is expecting Emily Maitlis to indicate something to almost indicate reassurance to the viewers that he is a good person. But she doesn't; she gives him a very tiny nod of acknowledgement, but other than that completely stonefaces him [as she is giving him very little to work with] this seems like a good point to bring this up; Emily Maitlis takes the approach of basically giving Prince Andrew and of rope to hang in self with which can be indicated by her silence or questioning or a very slight nudging, or pushing from time to time. I don't know her personally, but this was the best approach to take with this interview yes she does push him a little generally speaking, but if she pushes too hard and too often there is always a risk of the interview being terminated by the individual in question and there is always a possibility that he could say "Anything I said in this interview was down to stress or being in a stressful situation, I am going to sue." Which is not how we want things to go down, so she waited to for the right moment to joust attack him to get the point and wait for another opportunity to go after him, in a subtle way or sometimes he would realise that he has made an error, but by then it is too late. But the fact he says if you understand what I mean, that is to open ended, he is basically relying on Maitlis and us to make up our own minds and in hindsight this is just lazy, I am not on his side I am not biased, I just don't like this man, but I have to remain professional. But even I would go " Prince Andrew you have this opportunity to try and defend yourself, so defend yourself even though I know you don't have a leg to stand on."

So he talks about transitioning out of the Navy and essentially wanting to learn more, well here is a novel idea, how about you [meaning the Prince Andrew] go away and learn and make your own networks away from Mr. Epstein I mean you could have used your title in a good way of I am Prince Andrew, is it possible I could watch or undertake or be a part of your business in a learning capacity. I mean I am of average intelligence including I have brain damage, but I don't like to be in anyone's back pocket and I'm not saying that is the case here, but my warning lights would be most definitely on about this entire situation.

But Prince Andrew completely shoots himself in the foot when he makes references to the positives of being connected to Mr. Epstein as it relates to Wall Street and saw on, as he tries and even this early stage to justify the positives of this relationship between these two individuals and himself.

That is all I have to say just after about 4 minutes of this interview, I will do another part at some point.

 

No comments:

Post a Comment