Category: EDITORIAL

Editorial comment from Matthew Steeples.

Our editor tells it like it is and he rarely minces his words

  • Arrest Abbott! Bigoted Banshee MP Diane Abbott Should Be Arrested

    Arrest Abbott! Bigoted Banshee MP Diane Abbott Should Be Arrested

    Matthew Steeples suggests Diane Abbott MP should not just be sanctioned but should instead be arrested after her repugnant racist remarks

    If the far-left fanatic Diane Abbott MP were an ordinary citizen, she would not get away with the disgraceful words she used against Irish, Jewish, Traveller and reheaded people in a recent letter to The Observer.

     

    Widely condemned and called out by everyone from the frankly as much use as a damp squib that is Sir Keir Starmer to the equally useless damp squib that is the Tory party chairman Greg Hands, motormouthed moron Abbott’s decision to spout bigoted bile was beyond outrageous.

     

    Responding on Twitter on Sunday, the buccaneering businesswoman Gina Miller sensibly observed:

     

    “Politicians, our leaders, must be held to the highest standards of responsibility which is I agree that Diane Abbott should be suspended. But that should also apply to Suella Braverman for her racist rhetoric/racially charged language.”

     

    It is now time for both the imbecile Abbott and the imbecile Braverman to go; it is time also that Abbott be dragged into a Metropolitan Police station and questioned over remarks deservedly condemned as “deeply offensive and deeply depressing” by even her fellow Labour MP, Dame Margaret Hodge.

     

    Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.

     

    Pictured Top – Previously, after drinking alcohol on a tube train, this wack job woman declared: “A photo of me drinking from a can of M&S mojito on the Overground has been circulated. I’m sincerely sorry for drinking on TFL.”

     

    This morning on Twitter, Matthew Steeples asked: “Should Diane Abbott be forced to stand down as an MP after her clearly disgraceful remarks about redheads, Irish, Jewish and Traveller people?” By 11am on Monday 24th April 2023, the majority of respondents favoured the answer: “Yes; get her out of the House of Commons” whilst less than 2% voted: “Yes; she was right.”
    ‘Britain’s Got Talent’ finalist and comedian Danny Posthill took to Twitter on Sunday to mercilessly mock Abbott and pretended to be her apologising to redheads such as Mick Hucknall and Ed Sheeran.
    The Observer racist letter
    Diane Abbott’s recent letter to ‘The Observer’ quite rightly resulted in condemnation from figures on both the left and right. This shameless woman should be arrested for her racist bigotry; an apology is simply not enough.
    Apology
    Responding after being slammed, the MP for Hackney stated: “I wish to wholly and unreservedly withdraw my remarks and disassociate myself from them. The errors arose in an initial draft being sent. But there is no excuse, and I wish to apologise for any anguish caused. Racism takes many forms, and it is completely undeniable that Jewish people have suffered its monstrous effects, as have Irish people, Travellers and many others. Once again, I would like to apologise publicly for the remarks and any distress caused as a result of them.”
    Gina Miller
    Responding on Twitter, crusading campaigner and business titan Gina Miller quite rightly remarked: “Politicians, our leaders, must be held to the highest standards of responsibility which is I agree that Diane Abbott should be suspended. But that should also apply to Suella Braverman for her racist rhetoric/racially charged language.”
    Diane Abbott James Thompson-Abbott
    “Like mother, like son” – The two left shoe wearing MP and her son are two utterly shameless disgraces. The pair of them are amongst those in Britain who well and truly deserve to be cancelled. In March 2020, privately educated James Abbott-Thompson admitted “spitting at a police officer and biting his colleague” via video link to Westminster Magistrates’ Court after being refused entry to the Foreign Office. As we said at the time: “Wayward Abbott-Thompson – who also appeared in court in January in regard to another eleven alleged offences (including one of most inappropriately exposing himself on a hospital ward) – plainly has anger management and most likely mental health issues, his loopy mother must now realise enough is enough: Diane Abbott must get her own house in order before she hectors a single other.”

    The weird, weird words of the Labour Member of Parliament for Hackney North and Stoke Newington

    On the ex-Labour leader, who she used to ‘enjoy’ sexual relations with, Jeremy Corbyn:

    “Jeremy is always right.”

     

    On his replacement as Labour leader (but not as her lover, clearly) Sir Keir Starmer MP:

    “Talks nonsense… Is quite strange.”

     

    “On the question of Keir Starmer, I think we have to look at some of his advisors. It now seems that Peter Mandelson is a top advisor to Keir Starmer.”

     

    “We only have to look at Peter Mandelson’s life and times to understand where he stands in relation to the wealthy and the powerful.”

     

    “I think Keir Starmer’s problems are his advisors and he needs to be listening to his own party and grass roots party members more.”

     

    “Keir Starmer’s people are spinning it, but in 2017, people forget you know, Jeremy got more votes than any other Labour leader and, you know, if he hadn’t had most of the PLP attacking him night and day, he might possibly have won in 2017.”

     

    Responding to be accused of not being able to add up:

    “I do know my figures.”

     

    “Of course, I think things through.”

     

    “I’m here, of course I’m here. I’m doing a media interview, I’m going on to do another media interview. There’s no truth that I’m not in the media talking about what happened.”

     

    “I think I’m Shadow Home Secretary.”

     

    Diane Abbott on the cost of recruiting 10,000 police officers:

    “If we recruit 10,000 police officers, men and women, over a four year period, we believe it will be about £300,000… Sorry, I mean, they will cost, it will cost, erm, about £80 million.”

     

    “We will be paying them the average, it’s been thought through. Of course it’s been thought through.”

     

    “What we said is, of course, we’ll find the money to recruit the 10,000 police people by cutting the, cutting the money… I think that would give us 170, erm, sorry… We would find the money by restoring levels of capital gains tax.”

     

    On racism:

    “The British invented racism.”

     

    “White people love playing divide and rule. We should not play their game… I don’t think saying that is racist… It was part of a sequenced debate that I said that.”

     

    “We need unity between black, Asian, minority ethnic and Muslim people – we need the maximum public show of unity. Because time after time, in the past 32 years, I’ve seen efforts of people to organise disrupted by white people.”

     

    On her weird views that racism is “black and white”:

    “Tomiwa Owolalde claims that Irish, Jewish and Traveller people all suffer from ‘racism’ (‘Racism is Britain is not a black and white issue. It’s far more complicated,’ Comment). They undoubtedly experience prejudice. This is similar to racism and the two words are often used as if they are interchangeable.”

     

    “It is true that many types of white people with points of difference, such as redheads, can experience this prejudice. But they are not all their lives subject to racism. But they are not all their lives subject to racism. In pre-civil rights America, Irish people, Jewish people and Travellers were not required to sit at the back of bus. In apartheid South Africa, these groups were allowed to vote. And at the height of slavery, there no white-seeming people manacled on the slave ships.”

     

    On dogs:

    “I was a postman one Christmas and I developed a morbid fear of dogs.”

     

    On her own marriage:

    “I wanted my marriage to work, but it didn’t.”

     

    On “outsiders” and “insiders”:

    “Outsiders often have an insight than an insider doesn’t quite have.”

     

    On being an MP:

    “Being an MP is a good job, the sort of job all working-class parents want for their children – clean, indoors and no heavy lifting. What could be nicer?”

     

    “I want power. I suppose that’s the story of my life – seeking power.”

     

    “I’m in politics to be a voice for people who don’t have a voice.”

     

    On the Kurdistan Workers’ Party:

    “There is no difference between the PKK and ISIS.”

     

    On the vile piece of toerag and one-time friend of Ghislaine Maxwell and the late croaked paedophile Jeffrey Epstein that is Naomi Campbell:

    “I am a fangirl of Naomi Campbell.”

     

    On why she wanted to be Labour’s candidate to be Mayor of London:

    “One of my advantages, if I was Labour’s candidate, is that loads of people know me. I’m not just talking about politics – they’ve seen me on Come Dine With Me, they’ve seen me on Pointless.”

     

    “I am not associated with the past.”

     

    On women in Northern Ireland:

    “Women in Northern Ireland are second class citizens.”

     

    Diane Abbott on supporting the IRA:

    “Defeat for the British state would be a great liberation. A defeat in Northern Ireland would be a defeat indeed.”

     

    On supposedly changing her views on supporting the IRA:

    “It was 34 years ago, I had a rather splendid afro at the time. I don’t have the same hairstyle, I don’t’ have the same views. It was 34 years on. The hairstyle is gone, some of the views are gone.”

     

    On supposedly changing her views about MI5:

    “At that time, I and a lot of people felt MI5 needed reforming. It has since been reformed and, of course, I would not call for its abolition now. That MI5 has gone. It’s been reformed, it’s a different MI5 and that’s why so many of us are able to support it now.”

     

    Diane Abbott on Mao Zedong:

    “I suppose some people will judge that on balance Mao did more good than harm… He led his country from feudalism, he helped to defeat the Japanese and he left his country on the verge of the great economic success they are having now. I was just putting the case for Mao.”

     

    Insulting white mothers:

    “West Indian mums will go to the wall for their children.”

     

    On being a mother:

    “I put being a mother ahead of being a politician.”

     

    On James Abbott-Thompson, the wayward son she sent to a private school, who went on to commit various criminal offences:

    “I knew what could happen to my son if he was sent to the wrong school and got in with the wrong crowd.”

     

    On abortion:

    “Abortion is an issue of conscience for the Labour party.”

     

    “I believe every abortion is a tragedy.”

     

    Diane Abbott on sex:

    “Of course, sex is great. We don’t have to pretend otherwise.”

     

    On masculinity:

    “There is a crisis of masculinity in Britain because of the pressures rapid economic and social change have placed on masculine identity. A generation of men are in transit and unclear of their social role. They are also under pressure to live up to pornified ideals.”

     

    Diane Abbott on her decision to send her criminal son to a private school:

    “[It was] indefensible and intellectually incoherent.”

     

    “I’m not the only Labour MP who sent their child to public school, but I’m the only one who’s questioned about it.”

     

    On parenting:

    “When fast food is not a treat but a dietary staple, the children surf the Internet all day in dark corners of the room and are bombarded with the latest gadgets. Things replace parental standards.”

     

    “Tackling obesity is key… Families are struggling against a tide of junk information on junk food.”

     

    On being demoted to the backbenches:

    “I was a backbencher for a few years and there is an awful lot to do on the backbenches.”

     

    On her political strategy:

    “[I am going to stop Labour going into a] dead end.”

     

    “In politics, the people I most despise are those who have no values.”

     

    On defending the indefensible:

    “You can’t defend the indefensible. Anything you say sounds self-serving and hypocritical.”

     

    On her many mistakes:

    “You learn from your mistakes.”

     

    On her future plans:

    “I want to write a best-selling book.”

     

    On being intensely disliked:

    “[I am the] most abused of any Labour MP ever.”

     

    And a final word from Diane Abbott herself:

    “This is going round in circles… I’ve got nothing more to say, I’ve got nothing more to say.”

     

  • ‘Nasty Nad’ Nails ‘Pugnacious Phil’ – Nadine Dorries Slaughters Phillip Schofield

    ‘Nasty Nad’ Nails ‘Pugnacious Phil’ – Nadine Dorries Slaughters Phillip Schofield

    As the pugnacious prat returns to the screens, Matthew Steeples is amazed he finds himself suggesting Nadine Dorries MP surprisingly was bang on the nail in slaughtering “rather up himself” Phillip Schofield

    Phillip Schofield returned to presenting ITV1’s This Morning yesterday and with this came reminder of how utterly dislikable this dual British and New Zealand citizen truly is.

     

    Appearing on the show for the first time in weeks after his brother was convicted and sent down for sexual offences, queue jumping peddler of plonk Schofield – who himself had to pay in excess of £125,000 for child sex smears against Lord McAlpine in 2012 along with ITV – tried to sweep aside what had gone on and bleated:

     

    “I wanted to say that it is really lovely to be back. I have missed the show, everyone here, and also to you [the viewers] and I wanted to say thank you for all your kind messages and support, which were really appreciated, so thank you very much indeed. On with the show.”

     

    Schofield – who most curiously “doesn’t tweet anymore of check my @’s sorry, thanks for all the fun originally though” – previously issued a statement through his lawyer after his brother’s conviction on 3rd April 2023 at Exeter Crown Court.

     

    The self-centred and ever smug self-preservation focused presenter’s prepared piece read:

     

    “My overwhelming concern is and has always been for the wellbeing of the victim and his family. I hope that their privacy will now be respected.”

     

    “If any crime had ever been confessed to me by my brother, I would have acted immediately to protect the victim and their family.”

     

    “These are despicable crimes and I welcome the guilty verdicts. As far as I am concerned, I no longer have a brother.”

     

    Responding to Schofield’s return to the telly box ‘Nasty Nad’ Nadine Dorries MP penned in the Daily Mail this morning of her views on him. In a comment piece she shared:

     

    “I’ve been interviewed by Holly [Willoughby] and Phillip several times, and off-camera found Holly an absolute delight and Mr Schofield rather up himself.”

     

    “On one occasion, I witnessed what appeared to be somewhat intimidating behaviour. Holly was away, and as her stand-in looked down at her script – obviously wanting to see who or what was coming up next – Phillip glared at her and began to jab at her script with his finger. I don’t know about her, but he scared me.”

     

    Further illustrating the dislike towards that came about as a result of him and Holly Willoughby’s actions as they pushed-in to parade past the late Queen Elizabeth II, in October 2022, Grocery Gazette reported that Waitrose had dropped Schofield’s wine range after “the retailers customers branded it undrinkable.” On the retailer’s website, the wines “rated at less than two and a half stars out of five with customer reviews describing the product as “very disappointing” and “not pleasant.” For once also, similarly of its ‘creator,’ maybe the usually anything but bang on the nail Nadine Dorries has a point.

     

    Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.

     

    This morning on Twitter, Matthew Steeples asked: “Should Phillip Schofield @Schofe have been so easily welcomed back by @ITV @thismorning after his recent “leave of absence” (that occured at the same time his paedophile brother was sent down)?” and added the hashtags: #PhillipSchofield #Schofield #Queuegate #rudeness #disrespectful #pompous #television. By 11:00am on Tuesday 18th April 2022, the majority of respondents favoured the answer: “No; he’s rude and pompous.”
    Twitter
    Twitter reacts to the poll conducted by Matthew Steeples. Clearly, the public do NOT like this rotten piece of toerag.
    Phillip-Schofield-brother-Tim-Schofield
    Phillip Schofield with his now convicted criminal 54-year-old paedophile brother Timothy Schofield in happier times. After the verdict earlier this month – in a case where the television presenter’s civilian police officer sibling was convicted of three counts of causing a child to watch sexual activity and three counts of engaging in sexual activity in the presence of a child – in a statement released by his lawyer, Phillip Schofield remarked: “My overwhelming concern is and has always been for the wellbeing of the victim and his family. I hope that their privacy will now be respected. If any crime had ever been confessed to me by my brother, I would have acted immediately to protect the victim and their family. These are despicable crimes and I welcome the guilty verdicts. As far as I am concerned, I no longer have a brother.” Timothy Schofield was also found guilty of three counts of causing a child to engage in sexual activity and two of sexual activity with a child at Exter Crown Court and had told the television presenter that he’d “had time together” (including watching porn and masturbating) with a child whilst the ‘This Morning’ host was doing the washing up in his very own kitchen.
    David Cameron Phillip Shcofield This Morning abuse
    On 8th November 2012, Schofield handed the then Prime Minister David Cameron a list of names of alleged sex offenders in the Conservative Party which he had found through research on the Internet. That list was partially visible to ‘This Morning’s’ millions of viewers and as a result one person on it, Lord McAlpine, sued. Subsequently, the broadcaster was quite rightly forced to issue and unreserved apology and a statement that read: “ITV and Phillip Schofield have now reached agreement with Lord McAlpine to settle his libel claim, made in relation to the This Morning programme broadcast… ITV and Phillip Schofield apologise unreservedly to Lord McAlpine, have agreed the terms of a statement to be made in open court, and have agreed to pay him damages of £125,000 and his legal costs.” According to ‘International Business,’ “the ITV settlement [was] reportedly less than McAlpine was seeking. However, the peer’s lawyer, Andrew Reid, said he was ‘pleased’ with ITV’s admission that it was wrong and called the settlement ‘pragmatic.’ … Reid told the BBC: ‘The Schofield stunt added fuel to the fire that was already there and we had to take that into account.”
    Phillip-Schofield-wine-plonker-Matthew-McGreevy
    Instead of skipping queues and upsetting the nation on multiple occasions, the all-round-angry man and ‘This Morning’ host and ex-sidekick of Gordon the Gopher should quit his ITV job and focus on improving his deservedly slammed boxed wines (right). He thought his red “perfect with olives” whilst the public decided it “better poured down the plughole.” Alternatively, he could put some effort into ‘making up’ with his missing from our screens for quite some time now former close friend, Matthew McGreevy.
    Phillip-Schofield-Matthew-McGreevy
    What a Plonker – The television presenter with his supposed ‘former friend’ Matt McGreevy on another occasion.
    Phillip-Schofield-Ferne-McCann
    The ‘This Morning’ host is known for being a very angry and bitter man. Like Ferne McCann (pictured right), a fellow presenter on ITV1 with a reputation for being an utter rotter, he is also known for being incapable of owning his own mistakes.
  • Coronation Chaos – Who’ll Attend King Charles III’s Coronation (And Who Won’t)?

    Coronation Chaos – Who’ll Attend King Charles III’s Coronation (And Who Won’t)?

    Matthew Steeples makes suggestions as to who’ll attend the coronation of King Charles III and who won’t; an interview follows tonight on Shaun Attwood’s ever popular YouTube channel

    Last week, Sarah, Duchess of York yet again shoved her cloven hooves in the proverbial by appearing on Loose Women. Anything but surprising given her clearly being beyond a bit of a dimwit, the dastardly duchess also shared that she wouldn’t be attending the coronation of her ex-brother-in-law King Charles III at Westminster Abbey at 11am on Saturday 6th May 2023.

     

    Tonight at 7pm GMT on Shaun Attwood’s popular YouTube channel, editor of The Steeple Times Matthew Steeples will be live to answer questions about who will and who will not be attending that service and will also be discussing the ongoing scandals and surprises of the stories about the clearly beyond broken relationship between Prince Harry, his meddling menace wife and other members of the royal family.

     

    Seeking to assess – in an admittedly anything but scientific poll on Twitter this morning – Steeples asked: “Which one of the following would you least like to see attend King Charles III’s coronation?”

     

    By 12 noon, 4.4% of the 343 respondents favoured Sarah, Duchess of York, 9.3% favoured Prince Harry, 19.5% favoured Prince Andrew and an astounding 66.8% favoured the Duchess of Sussex.

     

    Elsewhere this week, it was reported that Prince Harry had demanded that seven members of his own family be forced to be subjected to equality training as a condition of attending his own father’s elevation. It must be remembered instead that in February 2009, the pugnacious pillock himself was sent on an equality and diversity course after proving himself a racist by calling an army colleague: “Our little P*ki friend.”

     

    Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.

     

    Pictured Top (left to right) – The disgraced Duke of York clinging to a bar during last weekend’s Easter service at Windsor (ironic really given his former ‘besties’ Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell being put behind bars); a photo of the guffawing goon that is Sarah, Duchess of York looking especially ghastly; an especially angry looking Duchess of Sussex with an especially miserable Duke of Sussex (top right) and an especially cheerful King Charles III with his especially cheerful Queen Consort wife.

     

    This morning on Twitter, Matthew Steeples asked: “Which one of the following would you least like to see attend King Charles III’s coronation?” By 11:30am on Tuesday 11th April 2023, the majority of respondents (60.2%) favoured the answer: “‘Menace’ Meghan Markle” with “‘Randy’ Prince Andrew” (22.7%) coming in second. Several comments followed including: “Can we have a fifth option? ‘All of the above.’”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S62lqHB7A7U
    The seventh installment of ‘Meghan Markle Expose’ will air tonight at 7pm GMT on Shaun Attwood’s official YouTube channel and features an interview with Matthew Steeples of ‘The Steeple Times.’ Attwood has shared over 3,900 videos on it since June 2007, achieved 147 million views and has 767,000 subscribers. Follow Shaun Attwood on Twitter at @shaunattwood.
    Duke and Duchess of Sussex
    “Will the Duke and Duchess of Sussex turn up on 6th May?” is a question that is currently being discussed in public houses across the land. Matthew Steeples will discuss this with Shaun Attwood at 7pm GMT tonight, Tuesday 11th April 2023 in a YouTube video filmed on Monday 10th April 2023.
    Robert Jobson
    Last week, royal author Robert Jobson featured in the ‘Daily Record’ after he suggested the late Queen Elizabeth II was left “surprised” after the Duchess of Sussex told her: “I’ve got Harry” when “she advised her to turn to Sophie, Countess of Wessex for support.” In tonight’s YouTube programme Matthew Steeples will discuss whether the Duke of Sussex is a victim of Stockholm Syndrome in the style of Patti Hearst (AKA ‘Tania’ – as she became known when she joined the Symbiose Liberation Army) by his wife. Quoted in an article by Ellie Muir in the ‘Independent’ last week, Jobson observed: “Some blame Meghan Markle for the fallout, ignoring the fact that Harry to be the driving force in everything that happened [that destroyed his own relationship with his own family].”
    Duke of York Sarah Ferguson
    “Will the preposterous non-sweating pillock that is the Duke of York and his dimwitted dunce, live-in ex-wife be turning up on 6th May?” is another question Matthew Steeples will discuss with Shaun Attwood this evening. This shameless duo do not deserve inviting to any party, anywhere, Steeples will suggest.
  • Lose Loose Fergie – Disgraceful Sarah, Duchess of York Should NOT Have Appeared on ITV1’s ‘Loose Women’

    Lose Loose Fergie – Disgraceful Sarah, Duchess of York Should NOT Have Appeared on ITV1’s ‘Loose Women’

    Matthew Steeples slams tawdry and tacky Sarah, Duchess of York for appearing on ITV1’s tawdry and tacky ‘Loose Women;’ she should be ashamed of herself

    Loose Women, as I pointed out back in September 2018, is an ITV1 programme that “celebrates all that is toxic about womankind.” If a male equivalent existed and was called Misogynist Men, there would be public uproar, but that a collection of hideous harpies including the likes of Tamara Ecclestone, Judy Finnigan and Katie Price are allowed to behave like braying banshees during family viewing hours is frankly scandalous.

     

    Yesterday, in deciding to appear on this programme that has previously allowed brazen blabbermouths to ogle younger men whilst sharing tawdry tales of sexual antics with them, the childish yet continually chirpy Sarah, Duchess of York sank to a new low.

     

    Aside from gossiping about the royal family and crowing about having inherited the late Queen Elizabeth II’s corgis, this batshit bonkers binbag attempted to again herself as an author of note. Clearly not content with having last month attempted to ludicrously claim herself to be in the same league as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, this chatty rat simply instead brought further embarrassment for a family preparing to celebrate the coronation of King Charles III; shame on her.

     

    Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.

     

    To sign our Change.org petition calling for the axing of the ITV1 show ‘Loose Women,’ click here.

     

    Petition to axe Loose Women
    Of ‘Loose Women,’ in a Change.org petition in September 2018, Matthew Steeples observed: “ITV1’s ‘Loose Women’ celebrates all that is toxic about womankind. Their latest debacle, involving Coleen Nolan making Kim Woodburn cry on air, is indicative of how low this show stoops. On another occasion Judy Finnigan suggested the convicted rapist Ched Evans deserved to be allowed to return to playing football. There have been plenty of other examples involving Katie Price, Gloria Hunniford, Linda Robson and Tamara Ecclestone that simply provide illustration of how tawdry this programme – screened when mothers are surely watching with young children – is. ITV – Do the decent thing. Axe ‘Loose Women.’” The petition remains live; please sign it.
    This morning on Twitter, Matthew Steeples asked: “Was it appropriate for Sarah, Duchess of York to appear on tacky, tawdry and tasteless ITV show ‘Loose Women’ in the run-up to King Charles III’s coronation?” By 11:30am on Thursday 6th April 2023, the majority of respondents favoured the answer: “No; she should be shut-up.” Not one single respondent answered: “Yes; she’s brilliant fun.”

    Twitter reacts to our poll about the latest telly box appearance by the ever ‘Feckless Fergie’ on ITV’s ‘Loose Women’…

    Twitter 1
    Twitter 2

    The Weird Words of “Greedy” and “Needy” Freeloader Wannabe Sherlock Holmes Sarah, Duchess of York… They Get Weirder By The Week…

    Given the live-in ex-wife at Royal Lodge, Windsor of supposedly skint ‘Randy Andy’ – a non-sweating nuisance who got his long-suffering relatives to pay a supposed sum of circa £12 million to Virginia Roberts Giuffre, a woman he has previously claimed to have met – is in on a world tour to prattle on to anyone who pays to listen, perhaps she should be reminded of her own weird and even weirder warblings. The Loose Women occasional guest’s worst number:

     

    Of sex, her and goats: “One of the worst headlines said 82% [of the population] would rather sleep with a goat than Fergie. It’s never left me.”

     

    Of her writing novels and her style: “Sherlock Holmes meets Peaky Blinders.”

     

    Of the royal family: “They tried to put the little redhead in a cage.”

     

    Of her own family: “I do believe in family unity. I think forgiveness is key.”

     

    Of the Duke of York: “A good man… In 1986, I married a very good man. Zip.”

     

    Of whether she might remarry Prince Andrew: “Oh bless your heart, no. I think we’re great as we are.”

     

    Of supporting her disgraced ex-husband financially: “I will always be there [for Prince Andrew].”

     

    “When Andrew went through a hard time, I used to be able to throw it to ‘The Boss.’”

     

    “Since he stepped back [from royal duties] he doesn’t actually take taxpayers’ money and I’m in a position where I can support him and the rest of the family through my work. And I’m really pleased and proud to do that.”

     

    “All I will say is that for many years now – it started with Budgie the Little Helicopter – I’ve really pushed to look after my girls and to contribute to the York family life.”

     

    Of where she and the Duke of York will end up living in the future: “Honestly, I operate from living in the present. You never get complacent and it makes for a better day because you never get disappointed, then. You look at life and you go, we can adapt, we can be flexible.”

     

    Of whether she might remarry someone else: “I think I’ve got too much baggage. I look at today and if suddenly I find love again, well, that’s another bonus, isn’t it?”

     

    Of her daughters Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie: “Exceptional… I love my girlies, I’m so proud of them. They are exceptional children… If mum’s OK, they’re OK.”

     

    “My daughters come first in my life, they always have. Because I lost my mum so early, I’m subconsciously very present with them. When I brought them up, I always left my problems at the door. Your problem is not their problem – it’s not their fault. We laugh together a lot. We are just very close.”

     

    Of her grandchildren: “I’m ‘Super Gran’… When my grandchildren see me, they immediately laugh because they know I’m going to be up to something, up to no good somewhere.”

     

    “Every time I think about about co-parenting and co-grandparenting and about divorce, marriage and all these different things, I still come back to the principle that the sun will come up tomorrow, and be grateful, just get on with it.”

     

    “It really annoys me though that [people say]: ‘Oh, you’re a granny now, you’re a mummy now.’ I say: ‘No, I’m a woman, I’m strong, I’ve got a voice and I’m an author, I’m. starting a new job and also I am a new grandma and I am a mum… But actually, they call me Gigi, like the film. They hear me coming. Gigi coming, Gigi coming.”

     

    Of the late Queen Elizabeth II: “For me, she was more a mother than my own mother. Aren’t I the luckiest person alive to have had that great honour? When I was with her, I used to say: ‘I can’t believe it. People wait and put on their best dress to have an audience with you, and I’m wandering around the garden in wellies!’”

     

    “For the whole nation, for the world. Steadfast, consistent, iconic. [She had an] extraordinary ability to put someone at ease. I still now think it was such an honour [to have known her].”

     

    “During the last three years, her poor son [was] going through such a tumultuous time… And I think HM was very relieved I could help her with him, so we became even closer, then.”

     

    “I’m so lucky. All my life, I was lucky enough to know ‘The Boss,’ HM. Like the nation and the world, she was always there. It was like having a hand at your back. It just made you always strive for being better and trying to be better, learning from her, whenever you were with her just taking everything she said as a memory. She was such an incredible legend for us all.”

     

    Of the late Queen’s corgis: “They’re very good boys, they’re very gentle. I think they knew that they weren’t to jump up and be naughty. They used to sit and watch the racing with her. And when you give them a biscuit, they don’t snatch. They’re very special, they’re national treasures.”

     

    “They really make me laugh and the follow me around. Sometimes I break a little ‘biccie’ – a digestive biscuit – in the same way the Queen broke it into little pieces, and give it to them and tell them to remember their boss.”

     

    “I went to a dog whisperer and said: ‘Now tell me about grief’ and he said: ‘Just at night, just make sure they have their own space.’ Yeah, so I do because I think they were grieving… Their little tails went down and I wanted to make them have waggy tails.”

     

    Of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex: “I have been judged all my life, and I have no judgment on the Sussexes.”

     

    “It must be hard for Meghan and can I relate to her. I believe she is modern and fabulous. She was famous before. She is great. Why can’t Meghan be great? Why can’t she be celebrated? I have been in Meghan’s shoes, and I still am. There’s always a twist of negativity and it just gets so sad and tiring… I abhor bullying and I feel desperately sorry for the pain they must be going through.”

     

    “I believe very strongly that I have absolutely no judgment on any other person’s life, and I look at how much she [Meghan] loves him [Harry] and loves the children and gives him a love that he’s never had before. That’s how I look at it… The most important thing is, Diana would be so very proud of Archie and Lili. She would have adored every moment of it.”

     

    “[They] chose to leave, now go and live it… Well, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t sit on the fence and keep one foot in and one foot out. You’re either in or out.”

     

    Of herself and her life: “I have been in the gutter.”

     

    “I’m a brilliant mother. The best mother.”

     

    “I don’t believe that any single person has the right to judge another person. I’m not in a position myself to make any judgments.”

     

    “I’m very steadfast and stoic… I won’t let anyone down. I’m very loyal.”

     

    Being rather wishy-washy: “The most important thing is that the sun will come up tomorrow and the day will move on.”

     

    Of food, family and dining: “As long as it is hot, wet and goes down the right way, it’s fine with me.”

     

    “With every smell, I smell food. With every sight, I see food. I can almost hear food. I want to spade the whole lot through my mouth at Mach 2. Basta!”

     

    “We all sit round the table and eat together. Andrew and I believe in total parent unity. We’re best friends.”

     

    Of King Charles III: “It’s incredible what he’s done for the environment. He was a trailblazer and many years ago, everybody said: ‘What’s he talking about?’ But he’s right. I’m a great believer and supporter of him, as I am of the Queen Consort.”

     

    “He’s going to be an amazing king and lovely Camilla by his side.”

     

    On the coronation of King Charles III: “Well I’ve decided the best thing about British around a coronation – although I’ve never been to one – I think we should, I should set up a tea room at the bottom of the drive with bunting and cakes.”

     

    “Never presume, never assume. I don’t know. But I’ll be there at the end of the drive with a cup of tea if I’m not there.”

     

    “[I’ll] watch it on the telly… [‘ll enjoy it in] a little tea room and [have] a coronation chicken sandwich… I always love to watch it on the telly because you hear a lot on the telly… The commentator’s always good and then all the family come back… Because, remember, I am divorced from [Prince Andrew] so I don’t expect… You can’t have it both ways. You can’t be divorced and say: ‘I want this.’ I think it’s really great to be supportive… Also when the family come home I know all the ins and outs and commentating on television.”

     

    Of wanting to be a television star: “I would quite like to go on Dancing With The Stars. I would like somebody to teach me to tango. I do know the show and my children would be so proud of me.”

     

    On Americans: “I divorced, went to America, wrote a book, went on Oprah and did 12 years as the longest running spokesperson of Weight Watchers. I looked to America to support me and to help me and I really can’t thank the American people enough for what they gave me and what they did for me.”

     

    Of when she decided she wanted to bag a royal: “I met [Prince Andrew] when I was 12, and I said: ‘I’m going to marry him.’”

     

    Of marriage, divorce and work: “I left my marriage knowing I’d have to work. I have.”

     

    “I didn’t want a divorce, but had to because of circumstance.”

     

    “I wish we’d never got divorced. He and I both wish we’d never divorced, but we did. I wish I could go back and be the bride again, but I can’t.”

     

    Of her many, many mistakes: “I felt that I ostracised myself by my behaviour, by the past, by living with all the regrets of my mistakes, that I sort of wore a hair shirt and beat myself up most of the day thinking and regretting why did I make such a mistake. Why have I made so many mistakes?”

     

    “You look at the devil in the face, which you do. Then you forgive, and you say: ‘OK, I’ve made almost a mistake that will never be forgotten,’ and forgive.”

     

    “I think the obstacles are the way, as opposed to in the way. I feel very strongly that I completely and utterly own my very naïve self and made endless different wrong decisions, whatever they may be, but in the end, it’s got me to today as an author. I’m a person in my own right, I’m Sarah.”

     

    “I was so out of control with desperation… I was looking for quick fixes in the places I wouldn’t normally look… I’ve been a huge overtrusting, idiotic, stupid woman that went to look for the perfect situation, and that’s all I can say really.”

     

    “I’ve done the work to get to myself. I’ve done masses of mental therapy. I probably reached to the wrong places and the wrong people and made, as you call it, mistakes. I don’t call them mistakes. I call them enormous learning curves.”

     

  • DumbPrince – Dimwitted Dunce Prince Harry Makes A Prized Pillock Of Himself (Yet Again) With ‘Oily Elton’ And ‘Titleless David’ In Tow

    DumbPrince – Dimwitted Dunce Prince Harry Makes A Prized Pillock Of Himself (Yet Again) With ‘Oily Elton’ And ‘Titleless David’ In Tow

    As Prince Harry slithers like an unwelcome oil slick back into Britain, it seems that even his own family don’t want to see this #DumbPrince; couldn’t he have just attended court via video link?

    Like the olive oil slick in a paddling pool that the three of them truly are, yesterday, Prince Harry unexpectedly slithered into the Royal Courts of Justice with his private jet provider Sir Elton John and his husband David Furnish in tow. There was expectedly a no-show, however, in the form of Mr ‘Call Me Lady’ Furnish’s ‘nightclub hunk friend,’ Danny Williams, however.

     

    Seeking damages against Associated Newspapers Limited – the publishers of amongst other things the Daily Mail and The Mail on Sunday – this tedious trio had no need to actually turn up and could have appeared by video link even. Though ‘privacy seekers,’ they did not follow a course of action of slipping in the back door though and stormed through the assembled paparazzi at the Fleet Street entrance to ‘have their day in court.’

     

    No doubt forced into bringing a case in which most rational people would rather neither side wins by the moaning, mendacious menace ‘MeGain’ – a woman herself once forced to apologise to a court for her own misleading statements during her own legal actions against Associated Newspapers – the decided drip that is the Duke of Sussex got his lawyer David Sherborne to whine on his behalf. He alleged that the renegade royal was “deprived of important aspects of his teenage years” by the “alleged unlawful activities of the publisher of the Daily Mail.”

     

    Today, we ask Prince Harry, Sir Elton John and titleless David Furnish: “You’re after a payout from Associated Newspapers for infringing your privacy… Now, man-up and tell the real truth: Do you want a bottle of olive oil and a tub of Elizabeth Arden ‘todger cream’ each to go with that?”

     

    Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.

     

    This morning on Twitter, Matthew Steeples asked: “Was it necessary for #DumbPrince Prince Harry to turn up at the Royal Courts of Justice yesterday for a hearing he could have attended via video link? (“Who paid for his private jet?” is another question; Sir Elton John?)” By 11:30am on Tuesday 28th March 2023, the majority of respondents favoured the answer: “No; private jet disgrace.”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoNQaCgyiMA
    Last night, an interview with Matthew Steeples by Shaun Attwood aired for its premiere on YouTube about the mendacious menace formerly known as Meghan Markle and her drip of a husband Prince Harry. It was filmed on Saturday 25th March 2023 (prior to the Duke of Sussex turning up in London unexpectedly) and covers topics numbering the forthcoming coronation of King Charles III and issues regarding Frogmore Cottage, Prince Andrew and his feckless live-in ex-wife Sarah, Duchess of York and whether the modern monarchy is “fit for purpose.” The matter of Prince William’s younger brother’s drug taking was also discussed as was whether this should affect his residency in the United States of America.
    Todger Royal Courts of Justice
    As he arrived at court yesterday, the Duke of Sussex bumped into a member of the assembled paparazzi. Whether intentional or not, it attracted much mockery on social media and amongst comments came one from a Twitter user going by the name of ‘Baeyes.’ She amusingly declared: “#DumbPrince caught rubbing his blue todger on unsuspecting cameraman.”
    Prince Harry Hair Royal Courts of Justice
    King Charles III and the late Diana, Princess of Wales’s son was mocked widely over his decision to jet into London for the court hearing. One Twitter user shared a photo of his arrival at the Royal Courts of Justice and captioned it: “If you can read this, my fake hair fell off.”
    Daily Mail Kind Charles
    Amusingly, turning to whether the Duke of Sussex will get to meet his “estranged family” during his “whirlwind visit to the UK,” a reporter for the ‘Daily Mail’ suggested “KIND Charles” [sic] “is working from Highgrove before flying to Germany for [a] state visit.” They added: “The Prince of Wales is away with his family as children are off school for Easter.” Perhaps, given he’s free of the Duchess of Sussex, ‘HazBeen’ could head off to the newly reopened Boujis and down a few Crack Baby shots with the chums he ditched when he went off to America for his “worldwide privacy tour.” It might do the wretched wreck some actual, real good.
    David-Furnish-Alan-Clark-Michael-Heseltine-Evgeny-Lebedev-Danny-Williams-Sir-Elton-John
    The late Alan Clark once said of Michael Heseltine: “An arriviste, certainly, who can’t shoot straight and in Jopling’s damning phrase ‘bought all his own furniture,’ but who at any rate seeks the cachet. All the nouves in the party think he is the real thing.” David Furnish would love a title, but like his wealthy chum The Right Honourable The Lord Lebedev of Hampton in the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames and of Siberia in the Russian Federation (or ‘Evgeny ‘Two Beards’ to his mates and a man who got a title courtesy of another of their chummy ‘club,’ Boris Johnson), he is able to buy rather a lot of furnishings courtesy of his husband’s estimated £375 million fortune.
    Sir-Elton-John-David-Furnish-Duke-and-Duchess-of-Sussex
    Sir Elton John and his titleless husband – whom, if you’d believe his April 2016 whining to the ‘Daily Mail’s’ Sebastian Shakespeare, would like to be called ‘Lady John’ – like to spend as much time as possible with Prince Charles’ second son and his avaricious wife. The non-working royals like to sponge off the very, very, very rich popstar and his hubby and, let’s be honest, they wouldn’t be clinging to their coattails if they the 75-year-old old geezer and his 16-year-younger sidekick were living in a council house in Peckham.
  • Mucky Madam Morphs Into Liar Lawyer – Ghislaine Maxwell Serves As Her Own Legal Representative

    Mucky Madam Morphs Into Liar Lawyer – Ghislaine Maxwell Serves As Her Own Legal Representative

    Matthew Steeples suggests that ‘liar wannabe lawyer’ Ghislaine Maxwell’s decision to continue to sue Jeffrey Epstein’s estate in spite of already having gotten over £16 million from the since croaked paedo is proof that she is utterly lacking in a moral compass

    Whilst Ian Maxwell – a brother of the noxious nonce Ghislaine Maxwell – was last week appearing on an obscure television San Franciso based television station to claim that he and his siblings “love her” and “miss her,” the grubby groper herself has taken up swerving as her own lawyer.

     

    Appearing virtually at a status conference on 17th March, Miss Maxwell – whose now ex-husband Scott Borgerson is now free of the ropey ratbag after finalising their divorce recently – Miss Maxwell represented herself at a hearing that lasted just 4 minutes.

     

    According to Inside Edition’s Chris Spargo:

     

    “The conference began promptly at 10am, with the court inquiring if Maxwell wished to proceed with her lawsuit against [Jeffrey] Epstein’s estate or squash it, according to the clerk’s notes obtained by Inside Edition Digital.”

     

    “Maxwell expressed her desire to continue with the suit and then asked the court if there could be a 60-day stay in the proceedings as she attempts to hire a new lawyer.”

     

    “She has been without representation since last year, when her lawyers withdrew from the case and filed a lawsuit in Colorado seeking £719,283.33 ($878,302.66, €817,431.89 or درهم3.25 million) from the socialite-turned-sex-offender in unpaid legal bills.”

     

    “Maxwell filed her lawsuit back in March 2020, saying in her complaint that the estate failed to provide her with funds despite the deceased pedophile promising to bankroll her for life.”

     

    “At the time, Maxwell demanded that the estate cover all her legal and security costs now and moving forward.”

     

    “‘Maxwell receives regular threats to her life and safety, which have required her to hire personal security services and find safe accommodation,’ reads the complaint.”

     

    “That expense should now be significantly reduced given her new residence at an FCI.”

     

    “The complaint claims that Maxwell worked for Epstein until 2004, but really started to transition out of the job three years prior.”

     

    “When she did leave, Maxwell claims in her complaint that Epstein promised to provide for her moving forward, and alleged that he did just that when she was later sued by two of his victims, Sarah Ransome and Virginia Roberts.”

     

    “‘In approximately 2004, Maxwell received a typewritten letter from Epstein with a handwritten note asking Maxwell to remain in Epstein’s employ and promising that no matter what Maxwell chose to do, Epstein would always support Maxwell financially,’ reads the complaint.”

     

    “In the filing, Maxwell states that these lawsuits began to pile up after Epstein’s 2007 plea deal in Palm Beach.”

     

    “‘Maxwell has incurred and will continue to incur significant legal fees, personal security costs, and other costs in connection with legal suits, proceedings and investigations relating to Epstein, his affiliated businesses, and his alleged victims,’ states the complaint.

     

    “Maxwell writes that the impetus for all this was an invoice she sent the estate in November 2019 that got no response.”

     

    “She also names the estate’s executors – Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn – as co-defendants in her filing.”

     

    “The estate and executors moved to have the case dismissed on the grounds that it was without merit soon after the complaint was filed in 2020.”

     

    “Since then, the case has largely been stayed, and three years in the defense and prosecution have yet to even begin the discovery process according to court documents.”

     

    Clearly illustrative yet again that here is a wicked woman incapable of accepting that taking at least £16.4 million ($20 million, €18.6 million or درهم73.5 million) from the since croaked paedophile Jeffrey Epstein was a totally unacceptable thing to do; that she now wants even more is proof further that this mendacious menace is 100% lacking in a moral compass even.

     

    Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.

     

    This morning on Twitter, Matthew Steeples asked: “Is Ghislaine Maxwell’s decision to continue to sue Jeffrey Epstein’s estate in spite of already having gotten over £16m from the since croaked paedo proof that she is utterly lacking in a moral compass?” As of 11:45am on Friday 24th March 2023, the overwhelming response to the two options was: “Yes: Proof she’s unhinged.”
    Scott Borgerson
    Scott Borgerson is now free of the ex-wife he aided funnel money given their divorce has been finalised.
    My Dear Andrew Ghislaine Maxwell Pricne Andrew The Sun
    Further illustration of what a wack job woman Ghislaine Maxwell truly is came in the form of her recent prison ‘interviews’ with her PR peddler chum Daphne Barak and Jeremy Kyle.
    Ghislaine Maxwell Jeffrey Epstein Jean-Luc Brunel
    Ghislaine Maxwell was happy to jet around the world with two known paedophiles – Jeffrey Epstein and Jean-Luc Brunel – and she was happy to take as much money as she could for her ‘services’ assisting them to sexually abuse and traffic young girls and boys allegedly also even. Shame on this evil piece of toerag.
    Wheel of Death
    The daughter of the pension pot plundering crook Robert Maxwell’s alleged affair with President Clinton is another piece of evidence of her being just as deviant as her late daddy.
  • Freeloader Fergie… Sarah, Duchess Of York Back Out Grifting

    Freeloader Fergie… Sarah, Duchess Of York Back Out Grifting

    As Isabel Oakeshott offers to write Prince Andrew’s memoirs, Matthew Steeples asks: “Why is the freeloader Sarah, Duchess of York back out grifting once again?”

    Last night a “suited and booted” Sarah, Duchess of York was once again out and about in London. After dining at the rather ritzy Harry’s Bar on Wednesday, the live-in ex-wife of he-who-doesn’t-sweat ‘Randy Andy’ attended the premiere of the new Liam Neeson “thriller” Marlowe on Thursday evening.

     

    Whilst the MailOnline’s Claire Toureille predictably arselicked and suggested the dimwitted dunce formerly known as Sarah Ferguson “put on a very stylish display” and “added extra glamour with a leopard detail at the cuffs of her blazer,” what this non-journalist didn’t enquire about was what has been on the minds of anyone with half-a-brain and that is: “Why is ‘Freeloader Fergie’ back out there grifting again?”

     

    Called out by the Daily Mail’s ‘Ephraim Harcastle’ in a snippet that asked: “What is Sarah Ferguson playing at?” and featured in an article elsewhere titled: “Duchess Dishes The Dirt,” the grubby grifter that is the constant companion of Prince Andrew, it must be remembered, has still failed to answer the most important question of all.

     

    That question? Again, today, we’ll remind Sarah, Duchess of York of it. Did she ever repay the loans and other benefits she took from the since croaked paedophile Jeffrey Epstein? “Curious how recollections vary.”

     

    Elsewhere this week on Twitter, the “poison pen” (most definitely not a journalist) Isabel Oakeshott took to declare her desire for a new project. Presumably struggling to find work after breaching the code of never burning a source, the lover of the chlorinated chicken loving Richard Tice stated: “Dear Prince Andrew – I’ll happily ghostwrite your book. If you have no dark secrets, an NDA won’t be required…”

     

    Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.

     

    Pictured Top (left to right) – A spoof mocking ‘Freeloader Fergie’s’ attempts at novel writing; the decidedly dimwitted dunce duchess and the grubby gym kit loving Isabel Oakeshott.

     

    This morning on Twitter, Matthew Steeples asked: “What is Sarah, Duchess of York – a grifting grabber who has never confirmed whether she ever repaid loans taken from the late paedo Jeffrey Epstein – upto with all these media interviews and appearances?” His four options were: A) “Has a £5m crib to pay for”, B) “Trying to clear [Prince] Andrew”, C) “Just a media tart” and D) “Needy and greedy, ££ grab.” As of 11:30am on Friday 17th March 2023, 65.6% of respondents believed the final option to be the most likely reason for the current worldwide profiteering tour being conducted by ‘Feckless Fergie.’
    Hello Corgis
    Desperate, as ever, for attention, there appears to be no opportunity that Sarah, Duchess of York will miss in her quest for constant publicity. Even the late Queen’s dogs have to be dragged out for a bit of personal profiteering courtesy of ‘Hello!’ magazine.
    Isabel Oakeshott Prince Andrew book NDA
    Never afraid to leap to attention when seeking out an opportunity to grift, Isabel Oakeshott – the grubby gym kit clad lover of the Reform UK ratbag Richard Tice – stated this week: “Dear Prince Andrew – I’ll happily ghostwrite your book. If you have no dark secrets, an NDA won’t be required…” Given what she did to, like-or-loathe the bastard, Matt Hancock MP and David Cameron also, nobody in their right mind would ever trust her – be it to communicate with via WhatsApp or there otherwise.
    Duchess Dishes The Dirt
    The decidedly dodgy duchess appeared in another article that was shared on social media. It was titled: “Duchess dishes the dirt!” and is indeed representative of how tawdry and tacky and tastleless this tittle-tattler truly is. Shame on Sarah, Duchess of York.
    Ephraim Hardcastle Fergie on Meghan
    “What is Sarah Ferguson playing at?” asked ‘Ephraim Hardcastle’ in the ‘Daily Mail.’ Bringing up the equally wicked wench formerly known as Meghan Markle, the columnist concluded: “Curious how recollections vary.”
    Omid Scobie NFT Fergie
    In January, the PR peddler for the Duchess of Sussex revealed that the ‘Duchess of Deviancy’ had moved into the world of NFTs and would be selling digital works “by established and emerging artists.” Is there any medium that will escape “the new world” of this tedious toerag?
    Daily Mirror toe sucking
    On Thursday 20th August 1992, the ‘Daily Mirror’ shared what they called “the pictures they didn’t want you to see.” In them, a topless Duchess of York was shown having her toes sucked in the South of France by a Texan millionaire named John Bryan. Of the incident, the ‘Mirror’ later reported: “Royal writer Richard Kay claimed in the ‘Daily Mail’ that he received a message via pager from Princess Diana the night before the photos hit the newspaper stands. Diana’s message was simple: ‘The redhead’s in trouble.’”
    Freeloader Fergie
    Social media users showed little respect for the live-in ex-wife of the non-sweater who allegedly paid a sum as high as £12 million to a woman he supposedly never met after she is being seen “back exploiting Diana and the Queen’s dogs.”

    The Weird Words of “Greedy” and “Needy” Freeloader Sarah, Duchess of York

    Given the live-in ex-wife at Royal Lodge, Windsor of supposedly skint ‘Randy Andy’ – a non-sweating man who got his long-suffering relatives to pay a supposed sum of circa £12 million to Virginia Roberts Giuffre, a woman he has previously claimed to have met – is in on a world tour to prattle on to anyone who pays to listen, perhaps she should be reminded of her own weird and even weirder warblings. They number:

     

    Of sex, her and goats: “One of the worst headlines said 82% [of the population] would rather sleep with a goat than Fergie. It’s never left me.”

     

    Of the royal family: “They tried to put the little redhead in a cage.”

     

    Of her own family: “I do believe in family unity. I think forgiveness is key.”

     

    Of the Duke of York: “A good man… In 1986, I married a very good man. Zip.”

     

    Of supporting her disgraced ex-husband financially: “I will always be there [for Prince Andrew].”

     

    “When Andrew went through a hard time, I used to be able to throw it to ‘The Boss.’”

     

    “Since he stepped back [from royal duties] he doesn’t actually take taxpayers’ money and I’m in a position where I can support him and the rest of the family through my work. And I’m really pleased and proud to do that.”

     

    “All I will say is that for many years now – it started with Budgie the Little Helicopter – I’ve really pushed to look after my girls and to contribute to the York family life.”

     

    Of her daughters Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie: “Exceptional… I love my girlies, I’m so proud of them. They are exceptional children… If mum’s OK, they’re OK.”

     

    Of the late Queen Elizabeth II: “More my mother than my mother… The Queen was like a hand of support behind your back without being there.”

     

    “For the whole nation, for the world. Steadfast, consistent, iconic. [She had an] extraordinary ability to put someone at ease. I still now think it was such an honour [to have known her].”

     

    “During the last three years, her poor son [was] going through such a tumultuous time… And I think HM was very relieved I could help her with him, so we became even closer, then.”

     

    Of the late Queen’s corgis: “They’re very good boys, they’re very gentle. I think they knew that they weren’t to jump up and be naughty. They used to sit and watch the racing with her. And when you give them a biscuit, they don’t snatch. They’re very special, they’re national treasures.”

     

    Of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex: “I have been judged all my life, and I have no judgment on the Sussexes.”

     

    “It must be hard for Meghan and can I relate to her. I believe she is modern and fabulous. She was famous before. She is great. Why can’t Meghan be great? Why can’t she be celebrated? I have been in Meghan’s shoes, and I still am. There’s always a twist of negativity and it just gets so sad and tiring… I abhor bullying and I feel desperately sorry for the pain they must be going through.”

     

    Of herself and her life: “I have been in the gutter.”

     

    “I’m a brilliant mother. The best mother.”

     

    “I don’t believe that any single person has the right to judge another person. I’m not in a position myself to make any judgments.”

     

    Of food, family and dining: “As long as it is hot, wet and goes down the right way, it’s fine with me.”

     

    “With every smell, I smell food. With every sight, I see food. I can almost hear food. I want to spade the whole lot through my mouth at Mach 2. Basta!”

     

    “We all sit round the table and eat together. Andrew and I believe in total parent unity. We’re best friends.”

     

    On the coronation of King Charles III: “Well I’ve decided the best thing about British around a coronation – although I’ve never been to one – I think we should, I should set up a tea room at the bottom of the drive with bunting and cakes.”

     

    Of wanting to be a television star: “I would quite like to go on Dancing With The Stars. I would like somebody to teach me to tango. I do know the show and my children would be so proud of me.”

     

    Of when she decided she wanted to bag a royal: “I met [Prince Andrew] when I was 12, and I said: ‘I’m going to marry him.’”

     

    Of marriage, divorce and work: “I left my marriage knowing I’d have to work. I have.”

     

    “I didn’t want a divorce, but had to because of circumstance.”

     

    “I wish we’d never got divorced. He and I both wish we’d never divorced, but we did. I wish I could go back and be the bride again, but I can’t.”

     

    Of her many, many mistakes: “I felt that I ostracised myself by my behaviour, by the past, by living with all the regrets of my mistakes, that I sort of wore a hair shirt and beat myself up most of the day thinking and regretting why did I make such a mistake. Why have I made so many mistakes?”

     

    “You look at the devil in the face, which you do. Then you forgive, and you say: ‘OK, I’ve made almost a mistake that will never be forgotten,’ and forgive.”

     

    “I was so out of control with desperation… I was looking for quick fixes in the places I wouldn’t normally look… I’ve been a huge overtrusting, idiotic, stupid woman that went to look for the perfect situation, and that’s all I can say really.”

     

  • Oakeshott’s Career Is Shot – Poison Pen Isabel Oakeshott Is Headed To Nowhere But A Slurry Pit

    Oakeshott’s Career Is Shot – Poison Pen Isabel Oakeshott Is Headed To Nowhere But A Slurry Pit

    Matthew Steeples suggests “poison pen” Isabel Oakeshott’s career prospects now belong in nowhere but a slurry pit; he highlights an encounter with her and argues she has disgraced the journalistic profession

    In September 2019, I called out Isabel Oakeshott as “a woman who is best known not (as she claims) as a ‘journalist’ but instead as a ‘lobbyist who carries a poison pen.’” Now, in the wake of this mouthy menace breaking an NDA and releasing Matt Hancock’s Whatsapp messages, I again repeat this suggestion.

     

    TalkTV tittle-tattler Oakeshott, who just happens to be in a relationship with the man who’d have the nation eating chlorinated chicken that is the Waitrose Belgravia shopper, fellow TalkTV host and Reform Party leader Richard Tice, is someone I’ve only ever encountered once and that was back in September 2019.

     

    On the evening in question, I found myself invited by the charming folk at Quiller Publishing – a house whose owner once told me his firm was more used to publishing books on ferrets and fox hunting than pomposity and politicians – to a rather ritzy party at Carlton House Terrace for the publication of the now late Stuart Wheeler’s excellent autobiography, Winning Against The Odds: My Life in Gambling and Politics.

     

    Gathered for the occasion, aside from the tycoon’s glamorous daughters, were, amongst others, members of the Aspinall family and the ever vivacious Neil and Christine Hamilton. I was perhaps a ‘rarity’ in being a Remainer in a room crammed to the brim with Brexiteers and on arrival I found the then Sky News presenter Lewis Goodall outside and not even allowed in.

     

    As the nemesis of Boris and Carrie ‘Princess NutNut’ Johnson that is Dominic Cummings – himself a little less known than he later became after his COVID-19 lockdown breaking Barnard Castle jaunt in March 2020 – interviewed Wheeler on stage, one person caught my eye. There before me, amongst a room of ‘party appropriate’ outfits, stood a little blonde number in her clearly grubby gym kit.

     

    I asked the friend accompanying me: “Did the Lycra-clad woman think she’d been invited to Barry’s Bootcamp?” and after being met with a curt: “She clearly takes style advice from Katie Price” in response, saw the woman concerned turn. Realising it was Isabel Oakeshott, I guess neither of us should have been surprised.

     

    Oakeshott, it has now become incredibly clear, is a woman who doesn’t do ethics as much as she doesn’t do fashion. A journalist is not a journalist if they don’t do all they can to protect their sources and though Matt Hancock is a man truly and very much utterly deservedly loathed, the fact that Oakeshott has betrayed her source is beyond contemptible.

     

    Pompous to her core, as was illustrated when she threw a hissy fit and stormed out of an interview with Cathy Newman for Times Radio yesterday, Oakeshott will now find it very hard to continue in the profession she claims to be a leading figure in. She is, I’d argue, nothing but a traitor and a disgrace.

     

    Why anyone would want to talk to the fake news muckspreader who told porky pies about David Cameron’s sexual shenanigans with a pig was already in question prior to what Oakeshott has been touting as the #lockdownfiles, but today – rather like her boyfriend Tice’s political ambitions – it’s this Gordonstoun educated gobshite who will find her career prospects deservedly headed nowhere but to pigsh*t.

     

    Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.

     

    Pictured Top – The ‘poison pen’ not a ‘journalist’ with the Health Secretary turned ‘I’m A Celebrity’ contestant she opted to so outrageously betray.

     

    Jacqui Smith
    Recently on the BBC’s ‘Daily Politics,’ former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith told Isabel Oakeshott to “shut up” during a discussion. The TalkTV host then banged on about “civility in politics” and raged: “In eleven years of live TV, nobody has told me to ‘shut up’ and you can get worse than that. I get worse online, but it isn’t setting a high standard.” Smith responded: “I apologise, I apologise for telling you to ‘shut up,’ but I don’t think I spat.” Whilst Smith could have been more dignified in her communication, the ultimate ‘shouter-downer’ was most definitely the Brexiteer bore.
    Bad Boys Of Brexit
    Pictured here with the ‘Bad Boys of Brexit’ she has been so enthusiastic about – Aaron Banks, Richard Tice and Nigel Farage – here is a mother of three who has been deservedly called out for her inappropriate antics whilst writing about David Cameron and countless others.
    John Whittingdale
    In September 2019, ‘The Steeple Times’ condemned Oakeshott as a “fake news creator” and shared a reader submitted photograph of her next to the “lapdance loving MP” John Whittingdale.
    Richard Tice Waitrose Belgravia chlorinated chicken yellow sticker
    In August 2019, ‘The Steeple Times’ shared an image of Brexiteer Richard Tice buying yellow stickered salmon at Waitrose in Belgravia. We asked: “What next? Chlorinated American chicken?” and suggested he find another yellow sticker… That yellow sticker? ‘Bollocks to Brexit.’
    David Cameron pig
    Oakeshott’s ‘story’ about David Cameron having “allegedly perfomed a sex act involving a dead pig” unsurprisingly “caused controversy on publication.” She was subsequently forced to concede “her source could have been ‘deranged.’”
  • FROGXIT – “What Meghan Wants, Just Maybe, Meghan No Longer Gets”; Frogmore Cottage Eviction

    FROGXIT – “What Meghan Wants, Just Maybe, Meghan No Longer Gets”; Frogmore Cottage Eviction

    Matthew Steeples argues that the saga of ‘FROGXIT’ – the supposed eviction of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex from Frogmore Cottage – is proof final that this pointless pair should never come back to Britain

    Termed ‘FROGXIT’ on Twitter after the previous ‘MEGXIT’ – which played on Brexit and which was condemned by Prince Harry as “misogynistic” – the story of the supposed forthcoming ‘eviction’ of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex from a house they rarely use has today been gaining traction.

     

    Speaking this morning on Good Morning Britain, Duncan Larcombe, former royal editor at The Sun, shared:

     

    “It’s revenge… So far, the way that the palace – including the Queen when she was still with us and King Charles – they’ve behaved in a way which has risen above all the allegations, all the muck if you like that Harry and Meghan have thrown in their direction. This represents a change of tack. This is, I mean, this is revenge.”

     

    “This is a petty move. They have plenty of palaces and properties and they don’t particularly need this small cottage that was hardly being used until Harry and Meghan were gifted it by the Queen.”

     

    “You could argue that there’s a lot of things that the royals could get revenge for [in the wake of the publication of Spare and the Netflix and Oprah Winfrey interviews] and would want to get revenge for, but since leaving Britain, Harry and Meghan have obviously embarked on this policy of trying to lift up the curtain and show some of the more grizly sides of the royal family.”

     

    “You know, I think that this is an action that King Charles has taken as a king rather than as a father because you don’t want to cut off ties with your children no matter how bad things get. If you love your children, you still want to keep that tie.”

     

    “I think that Prince Charles and King Charles are showing themselves to be two very different people, very different characters.”

     

    Responding to a clip of the interview shared on Twitter, comments numbered: “Hundreds of parents kick [their kids] out of the house if they have disrespected or hurt the family” and “it isn’t revenge [as] King Charles has been cost cutting for the past four years.” Another pointedly added: “Vacated… The name for [Prince Harry’s] next book or documentary maybe” whilst one sympathiser surmised: “No, it’s not fair, it’s nasty.”

     

    Going further in the DailyMail.com late Wednesday, New York Post columnist and Champagne Supernovas author Maureen Callahan looked at the news from a different angle and suggested that the ‘eviction’ is “the greatest gift King Charles can give” to the pair as it provides “more fodder for the ongoing Victimisation Tour.”

     

    Quoting from an article by the pugnacious PR peddler and ‘MeGain’ lapdog Omid Scobie, Callahan continued:

     

    “Naturally, Harry and Meghan’s predictable reaction can be summed up in one word: Waaagh! (Credit to South Park). Favoured mouthpiece Omid Scobie did the honours.”

     

    “’It all feels like a very final and cruel punishment,’ Scobie said, reporting what ‘a friend of the couple [note; the friend was unnamed] – ahem – had to say. It’s like [the family] want to cut them out of the picture for good.’ Well, yes. Exactly. About time.”

     

    “It seems that Harry, now free-range in the real world, is still learning some home truths: Namely, one’s actions tend to have consequences. You can’t write a poison-pen memoir dishing all kinds of private information about your father and brother, take bitter revenge at your stepmother – Harry revealed that he and Prince William begged Charles not to marry Camilla – and undermine the monarchy itself while making millions, then expect the royals to help house you!”

     

    “Oh, and lest we forget: Harry and Meghan renovated Frogmore Cottage, their wedding gift from the late Queen, for $3.2 million in taxpayer money (subsequently re-paid after public outrage). They then went on to mock their other royally-gifted residence, Nottingham Cottage, in their recent Netflix docuseries, saying that Oprah was appalled upon visiting. So small. So snug. Such low ceilings. How could they stand it?”

     

    “Make no mistake: To share that anecdote was to ratify it. Yet another complaint lodged by Harry and Meghan, ever the victims of second-hand treatment, because… well, they weren’t saying the royals were racist, but they never missed a chance to imply it, to raise an eyebrow, to allow a long pause followed by a shoulder shrug and a sad face.”

     

    Meanwhile this morning, the ‘Montecito Moaners’ were further analysed by the DailyMail.com’s Charlie Lankston in an article headlined: “Grin and bear it!” In it, the Femail editor remarked on the duo making one of their first joint appearances of 2023 at “the lavish” San Vicente Bungalows private members’ club last night.

     

    Lankston suggested:

     

    “Meghan, 41, beamed as she made her way out of the couple’s chauffeured SUV, looking chic in a beige $1,610 Carolina Herrera cape coat, which she accessorized with a pair of black $625 Christian Dior high heels, as well as a small black leather clutch bag, also from Dior.”

     

    “She grinned happily while being escorted inside the Bungalows by a burly security guard, who held an umbrella over Meghan’s head as she exited the Sussexes’ vehicle behind her husband, who looked casual in a pair of dark-wash jeans, navy sneakers, a navy sweater and a gray tweed blazer.”

     

    “Their incredibly upbeat demeanor is somewhat at odds with the reports that had surfaced just moments before their arrival in which it was claimed that Meghan and Harry are being evicted from Frogmore Cottage – their only home in the UK – by King Charles.”

     

    Tellingly and also quoting Omid Scobie, Lankston added:

     

    “‘Harry and Meghan have until early summer to vacate. Initially they were given just weeks, but now they have at least until after the coronation.’”

     

    “Incredibly Charles has reportedly offered the keys to Frogmore to Harry’s disgraced uncle Prince Andrew – who is apparently ‘resisting’ because he wants to stay in his larger Windsor Royal Lodge where he pays a reported $300-a-week for a state-subsidised 30-room mansion complete with 98 acres of land and a swimming pool.”

     

    Whilst the installation of yet another ‘non-working’ royal and his shameless live-in ex-wife, Sarah, Duchess of York at Frogmore Cottage will no doubt attract equal public outrage, a poll I began on Twitter this morning has attracted significant interest already.

     

    Of the responses to the question: “Is King Charles right to turf the Duke and Duchess of Sussex out of Frogmore Cottage to make way for Prince Andrew and no doubt his grifting companion Sarah, Duchess of York?” the overwhelming response thus far at 72.1% as of 11:30am has been: “Theree cheers for the King; YES.”

     

    Equally, however, given that the woman who has still to confirm whether she repaid a loan taken from the since croaked paedophile Jeffrey Epstein that is ‘Fergie’ and her ‘paid £10 million to a woman he claimed never to have met’ husband are also persona-non-grata, some 12.9% of respondents have thus far voted for: “YES but give to A.N.Other.”

     

    Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.

     

    Pictured Top – The Duke and Duchess of Sussex looking somewhat over-refreshed exiting a car last night and their former home in Windsor Great Park that will likely become ‘Randy Andy’s’ pensioned-off pad.

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5RMKkC3pkE&list=PLPT_cCpNMvT50d_7cJ55ciKoZEY8q_YPt&index=7
    This morning on Twitter, Matthew Steeples asked: “Is King Charles right to turf the Duke and Duchess of Sussex out of Frogmore Cottage to make way for Prince Andrew and no doubt his grifting companion Sarah, Duchess of York?” The overwhelming response is a most definite “YES” thus far.
    Frogmore Cottage
    Frogmore Cottage received a £2.4 million ‘MeGain makeover.’ At the time, a predictably unnamed “royal source” told the ‘Daily Mail’ of the two orangeries added: “Natural light is important for the Sussexes as Meghan misses the LA sunshine.” A new kitchen at the property was said to have cost in excess of £100,000 whilst the predictably ‘woke’ wench formerly known as Meghan Markle also demanded all paints used must be from the vegan and chemical free £74 a tin Auro range.

    New Twitter account makes a mockery of the ‘Harkles’ and ‘FROGXIT’…

    A new Twitter account using the handle @FrogmoreSpeaks is going viral after being created to tweet about Frogmore Cottage.

     

    Describing its purpose, the account amusingly declares: “I’m just a house that wants some privacy. Deposits are non-refundable if you block the loo with Elizabeth Arden cream like the last lot. No plastic dog bowls.”

     

  • In ‘The Hole’ Ghislaine Maxwell – Grubby Groper Slammed In Solitary Confinement

    In ‘The Hole’ Ghislaine Maxwell – Grubby Groper Slammed In Solitary Confinement

    As it is revealed noxious nonce Ghislaine Maxwell got slammed into “the hole” of solitary confinement after attempting to profit whilst a prisoner, Matthew Steeples again asks why her pugnacious PR peddler Daphne Barak was allowed to ‘interview’ in her in prison in the first place

    Ghislaine Maxwell is one of those annoying sorts that a rather distinguished lady I know sums up as “the kind of girl I’d have pulled the pigtails out of at school.” Going further, this society figure this morning told me: “She’s been to boarding schools. She should know to put up and shut up. Prison isn’t nearly as bad as the schools we both attended after all.”

     

    Mucky madam Maxwell, however, is doing quite to the contrary and predictably for a wicked wench whose poisonous pension pot plundering papa once claimed “I have a beautiful daughter and she’s just like me,” she has purportedly thrown yet another tantrum at FCI Tallahassee, Florida.

     

    According to the DailyMail.com’s Ben Ashford, in an “exclusive article” published late Monday, “Ghislaine Maxwell was thrown in SOLITARY confinement – a tiny, grim cell where inmates are fed through a slit in the door – for 48 hours after being accused of profiting off her jailhouse interview last month.”

     

    Going further, Ashford claimed of Maxwell’s TalkTV interview with Jeremy Kyle via her PR peddling chum of thirty plus years Daphne Barak:

     

    “Insiders say bosses at the low-security Florida lockup launched an investigation to determine whether Maxwell had breached the terms of her 20-year federal sex trafficking sentence by selling her story to a journalist.”

     

    “She protested her innocence but was marched off to the Special Housing Unit (SHU) – a ‘prison within a prison’ comprising tiny, grim cells where inmates are locked up for 23 hours at a time and fed through slits in the door.”

     

    “’About two weeks after the show was on TV, Max was just minding her own business when they came in, turned her around and handcuffed her,’ a source told DailyMail.com.”

     

    “’She got really upset, she was crying, she was yelling that she hadn’t received any money, but nobody saw her again for three days. The SHU is not a nice place. You go in there if you’re suicidal, if you fail a drug test or you get in a fight. It’s like a little box and you’re only allowed out to shower once a day. There’s no contact from anyone, no privileges, they slide your meals through a slot.’”

     

    Meanwhile a new deadline faces the ex-lover of Prince Andrew, President Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein. Newly divorced Maxwell’s also new clearly fame chasing lawyer Arthur L. Aidala – who seems to think it an accolade to have represented her fellow convicted sex fiend friend Harvey Weinstein – faces a deadline of today to submit an appeal on her behalf. God only knows what can of worms this will open for the victims of the grubby groper known best for never behaving appropriately.

     

    Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party. Follow Matthew Steeples on Twitter at @M_Steeples.

     

    Questions for Daphne Barak

    In October 2022, we asked a number of questions of the so-called ‘journalist’ Daphne Barak – a woman who counts amongst other Prince Andrew’s live-in ex-wife Sarah, Duchess of York and Hillary Clinton amongst her chums – after she published prison ‘interviews’ with her chum Ghislaine Maxwell. She failed to answer them then, so we again ask them now:

     

    • Why did the American authorities allow a prisoner to give such interviews so soon after her conviction?
    • Did the authorities not consider the impact such interviews would have on the victims of this convicted sex trafficking nonce and grubby groping abuser?
    • What is the agenda of Daphne Barak and what involvement did Kevin Maxwell and his siblings have in setting up these interviews?
    • Did PR peddlers for the mucky madam – such as Brian Basham, Jay Beecher and Ross Gow – have any involvement in the bringing about of these interviews?
    • Why did this so-called ‘journalist’ not ask anything about what this mucky madam feels about the impact of her actions on her many victims?
    • Why did this so-called ‘journalist’ not ask anything about this mucky madam’s secret marriage to Scott Borgerson in 2015?
    • Why did this so-called ‘journalist’ not ask why Ghislaine Maxwell – someone she’s associated with for at least 30 years – hasn’t paid off her debts to her lawyers?

     

    Ghislaine-Maxwell-Laurene-Powell-Jobs-meltdown
    Ghislaine Maxwell (pictured with major supporter of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris Laurene Powell Jobs.; billionaire Ms Powell Jobs was married to Steve Jobs between 1991 and his death in 2011) has repeatedly proven herself to be nothing but a spoilt brat whilst in prison. Aside from claiming her hair had fallen out (it hadn’t) and that she was malnourished (another lie proven after she was weighed and found not to be much changed in weight), this wicked wastrel also had a temper tantrum and barricaded herself in the video conference room of the Metropolitan Detention Center in August 2021.
    Daphne-Barak-Sarah-Duchess-of-York-Hillary-Clinton
    Daphne Barak pictured in December 2022 with “she who has never confirmed if she repaid the wonga she took from the Ponzi scheming paedophile Jeffrey Epstein” Sarah, Duchess of York and with Hillary Clinton – whom she references her as having “hosted” and “supported the presidential bid” of. Here is a ‘journalist’ whose close connections clearly muddy her mind when it comes to interviewing her subjects. Why didn’t this ‘journalist’ ask mucky madam Maxwell about ‘Killary’s’ husband taking at least 27 flights on Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘Lolita Express’ and his convicted sex trafficker co-collaborator attending Chelsea Clinton’s wedding? Curious that; very curious indeed.
    Alan-Dershowitz-Arthur-L-Aidala
    Maxwell’s current lawyer (until he realises the truth that she doesn’t ever cough up the cash she owes) Arthur L. Aidala is very much of the publicity hungry school of lawyers. Aside from Harvey Weinstein, his firm, Aidala, Bertuna & Kamins, has also represented other mates of Ghislaine Maxwell including Alan Dershowitz (pictured with him above). In documents submitted in January, he claimed: “[Maxwell] was malnourished… And yet she’s supposed to sit for a trial [with her] life on the life… In the United States of America, anyone who’s accused of any crime should not be abused by the US government the way she was abused… She did not get a fair trial… The judge ignored the many claims of malnourishment, living with vermin in her cell, lack of sleep, and overall deplorable conditions. There were also issues regarding lack of access to her lawyers. This is all in violation of her fundamental constitutional rights and will be powerfully brought to the attention of the appellate courts.” Of how he came to be involved with the mucky madam and her family, scions of a pension pot plundering tyrant, Aidala added: “After her sentencing… her trial team was done representing her and her family quite frankly reached out to us. Obviously, we’d been in the headlines with Mr Weinstein’s case.”
    Harvey-Weinstein-Jeffrey-Epstein-Ghislaine-Maxwell
    Birds of a rotten feather… The gruesome trio of paedophiles that was Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell pictured at a party given by he who paid a sum alleged to be as high as £12 million to a woman – Virginia Roberts Giuffre – he claimed he never met, Prince Andrew, at Windsor Castle in 2006.
    Daphne Barak Ian Maxwell
    Daphne Barak filming her ‘Ghislaine Behind Bars’ interview for Jeremy Kyle’s ‘TalkTV’ show with Ian Maxwell most ‘kindly’ helping her along; the public should be told how much the Maxwell family have paid this ‘journalist’ for her ‘services’ spinning on their salacious sex offender sibling’s behalf.