Tina Brown: The courts would never go against what the royal family wanted

Here are more photos from today’s military procession in London for the 80th anniversary of VE Day. The Wales kids looked especially over it, but the photos of King Charles and Queen Camilla came across as particularly grumpy as well. Maybe they were aiming for solemn. The Princess of Wales was not – she smiled and laughed as the various military units were on parade. Meanwhile, it was especially interesting to see just how many stenographers to power were called upon to scream about Prince Harry. I don’t think Tina Brown was contacted by Buckingham Palace to speak though – Tina just loves to scream about the Sussexes in general, and she’s made her own little cottage industry out of it. But what was interesting about Brown’s TV interview over the weekend was that… she ended confirming some of Harry’s points, she just did it in the most sycophantic, monarchist way possible.

Tina Brown, British former editor of Vanity Fair magazine, has added to criticism for the Duke of Sussex after his latest barbs at his family – which included claiming his father King Charles was refusing to speak to him.

When asked for her reaction [to Harry’s interview] by the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg, she said: ‘Well, what I thought was, after five years Harry is still at war with his original mistake. And every time he goes on the air, he makes another one – so it’s like he is now trapped in this terrible cycle of doubling down on the original mistake. He was told so clearly when he was considering leaving, by the Palace at that time, the security won’t be paid for anymore. He was told it again and again. He didn’t want to hear it – he didn’t want to listen to it. ‘I think he thought he could just blow it off and in his reckless, sort of hot-headed Harry Hotspur way charged out of the Royal Family with all of these issues completely unresolved.

‘There was no way that this court was going to go against the findings of the security, the police. They’re not going to go against that and they’re not going to go up against the police, against the Royal Family or the police.’

And she was critical of an apparent lack of contrition from the Prince, adding: ‘I didn’t hear two very crucial words in that entire sort of jeremiad about, you know, “I’d like to reconcile, I’m sorry.” I mean, he never said, “I’m sorry, I’m sorry I caused my family all of this pain”. That is really what they’re upset about, not the security.’

[From The Daily Mail]

Tina Brown is lying about “they were always told that they wouldn’t have security.” The original plan was for a one-year space where they would have security, and that plan was changed in February or March 2020. That was a fundamental part of Harry’s case, and he learned that his security was yanked at the behest of Buckingham Palace and Clarence House. But this is important: “There was no way that this court was going to go against the findings of the security, the police. They’re not going to go against that and they’re not going to go up against the police, against the Royal Family…” A bit of an admission that it was always an establishment stitch-up, in Harry’s words. The police follow the orders of Ravec, and Ravec has refused to do a threat assessment for the Sussexes since 2019. Ravec is controlled partially by the royal households. So, an admission that the courts would never go up against what the Windsors wanted and what the Windsors ordered, which was no security for the Sussexes. And yet Charles spent years lying and telling everyone that he had no say in any of it.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.