The interests of the Tory-controlled British government and the Trump administration have never been so aligned. Both Boris Johnson and President Trump have rightly cast Beijing as the antagonist of the coronavirus pandemic, bringing the United Kingdom on board with the United States’s plan to ice out Huawei from each nation’s 5G infrastructures. Thus, the usually chummy populists have little obvious reason to be at odds.
Yet British law enforcement is suddenly refusing to send the U.S. evidence in criminal cases. Explicitly, the U.K.’s Central Authority told the U.S. that the pause is due to a U.K. Supreme Court ruling that British authorities cannot comply with U.S. terrorist cases without assurance that the suspects would not face the death penalty.
But that ruling came two months ago, and in a bombshell Washington Post report, an anonymous senior Justice Department official is claiming that “some” in law enforcement suspect the about-face is connected to federal prosecutors’ demands that Prince Andrew make himself available for the Jeffrey Epstein investigation.
It’s a serious claim and one that’s only been put on the record by a sole, anonymous authority. Yet it also makes perfect sense given the Palace of Westminster’s recent mobilization to protect the queen’s favorite son.
The prince was forced to step down from his role as a senior royal after his disastrous BBC interview in which he tried to justify his friendship with Epstein even after he was found guilty of soliciting prostitution from a 14-year-old, which, mind you, is statutory rape, on the grounds that he was “too honorable” to cut off ties. The nadir of his stature came with his 60th birthday party, which was demoted from a public gala to a private dinner that all three of his siblings snubbed.
But Prince Andrew seems keen to make a comeback, and evidently, the palace is helping him.
For starters, with former Prince Harry and Meghan Markle across the pond, the palace press leaks have returned to their pre-Sussex norm. So it should come as a telling signal that the Sun reported that Queen Elizabeth intervened to get the Home Office not to suspend Andrew’s taxpayer-funded security, which costs 300,000 pounds per year.
Just as telling is what isn’t said. After the Justice Department filed a formal request to interview Andrew through a mutual legal assistance application, the prince issued his response, introducing the “working group” that’s been planning his comeback for months.
“The Duke of York has on at least three occasions this year offered his assistance as a witness to the DOJ,” Andrew’s official statement read. “Unfortunately, the DOJ has reacted to the first two offers by breaching their own confidentiality rules and claiming that the Duke has offered zero cooperation. In doing so, they are perhaps seeking publicity rather than accepting the assistance proffered.”
Federal prosecutors essentially called Andrew a liar in response, maintaining that he’s remained completely mum on the issue. That the palace let his statement go public — although Andrew’s affairs now come from his personal office, there’s little chance that he would have commented publicly without the consent of the queen — indicates that it will let Andrew refuse to comply.
While seemingly outlandish, it’s not outside of the realm of possibility that the same allies of the crown in the Home Office that salvaged Andrew’s security also found the convenient excuse to retaliate against the Justice Department. After all, even given the extremely difficult nature of prosecuting sexual assault cases, the existing evidence indicating that Andrew knew of and utilized Epstein’s child sex slaves is already rather compelling. If his BBC performance were any indication, he’d likely further incriminate himself under questioning. The buck has to stop at the beginning if the queen wishes to protect her favorite son, so it’s not surprising that law enforcement would bend to protect the prince.
