Andrew faces pressure as new emails to Epstein are published and Democrats call on him to testify

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: NBC News

Nov. 1, 2025, 8:29 AM EDT


Democrats investigating Jeffrey Epstein have intensified their calls for Britain’s former Prince Andrew to answer questions about his links to the disgraced financier, days after King Charles stripped his younger brother of his title.

The calls for testimony from Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, as he is now known, came as new emails emerged showing he suggested a “catch-up” with Epstein just months after the notorious pedophile was released from prison.

Several Democratic members of the House Oversight Committee told the BBC that Andrew should voluntarily testify before Congress. Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Va., said Saturday that if the former prince “wants to do right by the victims, he will come forward,” noting that his name had been mentioned “many times” in survivors’ accounts.

Fellow committee member Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., urged Andrew to “come and testify and tell us what you know” during a Friday interview, while Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., said Andrew’s testimony might be “helpful in getting justice” for survivors.

Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/world/united-kingdom/andrew-faces-pressure-new-emails-epstein-published-rcna241264

---

Link to BBC article - Andrew should answer Epstein questions in US, Democrats say

[Bernardo de La Paz]

1. The Pedophile Rapist formerly known as Prince

(bearing in mind that the real Prince was a truly accomplished musician/composer)

[AZJonnie]

2. Not at all saying what (we are pretty sure) he did is just dandy but "Pedophile Rapist" is a little over the top

Curious what your basis is for making such an extreme assertion?

[niyad]

3. "A little over the top"???? Have you NOT heard ANY of the survivors?

Once again, you should read Virginia Giuffre's memoir.

[AZJonnie]

5. If the subject was Epstein, I wouldn't have questioned the categorization.

And yes, I've paid very close attention ever since the Herald story. Probably a lot closer than I should have.

I don't think the known facts (at this point) support calling Andrew a "pedophile rapist". I don't mean he did nothing wrong, just that this is over the top. If for no other reason, sex with one 17 year old is really not what the word "pedophile" means, so I think it's a little extreme to use it in that way

[Bernardo de La Paz]

4. Giuffre was a minor when she first had sex w him. She accused him of rape. I believe her.

Wikipedia, emphasis added:

On 30 December 2014, a Florida court filing by lawyers Bradley J. Edwards and Paul G. Cassell alleged that Andrew was one of several prominent figures to have participated in sexual activities with a minor later identified as Virginia Giuffre,[6] who was allegedly trafficked for sex by Epstein.[7] Giuffre (then known by her maiden name Virginia Roberts) asserted that she was raped by Andrew on three occasions, including a trip to London in 2001 when she was 17,[8] and later in New York and on Little Saint James, U.S. Virgin Islands.[9] She alleged Epstein paid her $15,000 to have sex with Andrew in London.[8] Flight logs show Andrew and Giuffre were in the places she alleges the sex happened.[10][11]

[Aussie105]

6. Royalty gets a free pass.

Beyond being demoted, Andrew won't face any further consequences.
Well, that and being persona non gratis at any social function for the British royals and public appearances.
People now know who he is. The Black Sheep of the family.

Don't expect him to get an onrush of empathy now, and come to the US to tell all.
Not part of his character.