It’s time for the ‘MeGain & Randy Show’… As dopey dipstick Diane Abbott MP sticks her gumboots into the fallout of the Duchess of Sussex’s car crash interview, the scandalous Prince Andrew should again be called to answer questions
Bombastic blabbermouth Diane Abbott MP has been unusually quiet for months. Yes, she’s had to deal with the fallout of her beastlike son biting police officers, but since she was turfed off the front benches when her one-time motorbiking sexual partner Jeremy Corbyn fell, we’ve not even heard of any conundrums with calculators or mojito can slurping calamities on a train by her even.
This morning, however, seizing on an opportunity to shove her gibberish filled gumboots back into the fray in the wake of the Duchess of Sussex’s Prince Andrew-esque interview, Abbott decided to chuck a hand grenade into the mix and told the Guardian:
“One of the most upsetting things is when people, meaning well, will say: ‘Oh, but Diane, you’re so strong.’ Nobody is that strong. Nobody can take the sort of abuse that Meghan had to take and that I’ve had to take. And by dismissing it by saying: ‘Oh, black women are strong,’ that’s denying our humanity.”
“For a lot of black and mixed-race women, when they can look at what we’re now hearing, what’s happening to Meghan, they can realise: if this can happen to her and if it could be so crushing and humiliating to her, I can face up to how that sort of thing makes me feel.”
“We shouldn’t internalise the idea that we’re not supposed to feel vulnerable, we’re not supposed to get upset, and we should have people around us that we can confide in, or we can be open with. Otherwise, it’s incredibly corrosive.”
Going further, on Radio 4 later, Abbott added:
“[Palace officials] clearly very soon did not welcome a mixed race woman marrying into the Royal Family… There has got to be very serious reflection. They need to look at some of the people that work at Buckingham Palace.”
“I don’t think they necessarily need to get into a tit for tat publicly but they do need to think hard about some of the attitudes of the courtiers, the aides the advisers who are in Buckingham Palace because it is clear that on that level they didn’t adjust well to having a mixed-race woman marry into the Royal Family.”
“[The media want to] tear down a woman for no apparent reason.”
Whilst the brain of Britain that isn’t Miss Abbott’s influence in this matter will likely not go far, elsewhere in the Guardian this morning, the paper’s Ben Quinn reported that Gloria Allred, a lawyer for some of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims, “has suggested that Buckingham Palace’s plans to examine bullying allegations against the Duchess of Sussex are a “calculated decision” to take the focus off Prince Andrew.”
Speaking of alleged bullying by the Duchess of Sussex specifically, Allred told the paper:
“Allegations about him are far worse than the allegations about Meghan Markle. Prince Andrew was a working royal when he became a friend of Jeffrey Epstein, who was a sexual predator… Prince Andrew is accused of much more than bullying or harassment in the workplace.”
“Why does Buckingham Palace not conduct an investigation and make a public statement condemning Prince Andrew for failing to provide what is requested to those who are seeking the whole truth and justice for the victims of crimes against children?”
“Why has Prince Andrew not been stripped of the royal titles that he enjoys, as has been the case for Meghan and Harry? He has certainly not brought dignity and respect to his work as a royal.”
“The investigation into Meghan Markle is a distraction, and it appears hypocritical under the circumstances. I have to wonder if it reflects a calculated decision to take the focus off of Prince Andrew.
“It is long overdue for the palace to change its priorities and announce that it is conducting its own investigation of Prince Andrew. In addition, it should immediately issue a statement condemning Prince Andrew for failing to provide full in-person cooperation in the ongoing criminal investigation by the United States justice department.”
Now, today, we join those calling for ‘Randy Andy’ to finally do the decent thing: Be a good boy and go to America and answer the FBI’s perfectly reasonable questions about your involvement with the mucky madam Ghislaine Maxwell and your conveniently croaked ‘bestie’ Jeffrey Epstein.
The confusion of the woman formerly known as Meghan Markle
Whilst the Duchess of Sussex’s outlandish claims have been widely drilled into this morning by the international media, here are a few other questions she and her ‘drip’ of a husband could do with addressing:
- What was the then Meghan Markle’s association with Prince Andrew prior to meeting Prince Harry? Are there any truths to allegations that she was caught cavorting with ‘Randy Andy’ on a yacht many years ago?
- Given ‘MeGain’ banged on about her friendship with Prince Andrew’s daughters prior to meeting Prince Harry in the Oprah interview, is there really any truth to her having never Googled the royal family or researched them with a view to seeking them out?
- Did the then Meghan Markle really “ghost” her supposed chums Lizzie Cundy and Piers Morgan or are they both just getting rather carried away with their own attention seeking agendas?
- Prior to marrying into the royal family and since, has ‘MeGain’ “organised pap shots” of herself?
- Why did the Duchess of Sussex lie and claim she hadn’t met her half-sister in over 20 years when photographic evidence shows quite to the contrary 13 years ago?
- Why didn’t the Duchess of Sussex simply show herself to be a bigger person and make amends with her own father instead of going to war on him? If she had simply behaved with dignity and made one less enemy, wouldn’t she have been perceived as a far better person?
- Why is the Duchess of Sussex claiming that the royal family “silenced” her at the same time as repeatedly giving interviews to the international media and taking the dime of the hardly quiet Netflix and Spotify?
- Why are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex now suggesting they were “cut of financially” by the royal family when they previously stated they “wanted to be financially independent”?
- Why do ‘MeGain’ and her drip husband think they should be entitled to have the public pay for their security when they turned their backs on public duty for first “privacy” and then personal profit?
- If ‘MeGain’ wanted such a “simple life,” why did she seek out a career first in acting and then get herself into a relationship with a member of the royal family?
- Why, subsequently, did this woman with a desire for “ordinariness” then return to Los Angeles and sign deals with the likes of Disney, Netflix and Spotify?
- Has ‘MeGain’ ever used body doubles of herself and her son, Archie?
- Did the Duchess of Sussex make up that she had already been married to Prince Harry for three days when she walked down the aisle on 19th May 2018?
- How many times has ‘MeGain’ actually been married? Twice or three times?