British Royal Family Gossip Part 88

Where are all my trolls?

Grifter Troll

Photographs Troll

Narc Troll

Welp Troll

Della Troll

Good Idea. I wish the Treason OP would close the current thread early and see how long it takes over there.

Elliott is OUTRAGED!

What happened to the threads?

The Queen will have a little sit down with the Duchess of Sussex during the summer holiday in Scotland.

They should enjoy Scotland while they do not need passports or visas...

Lord Geidt has had enough with babysitting Harry and Meghan, he may have a new job on his radar: British Ambassador to the US.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Princess Margaret.

Boris will get his divorce and marry Carrie soon enough now.

R6, I always think it's strange to hear the British mentioning their 'special relationship' with the US, when they're the only country that has invaded the US and even burned down the White House.

Didn’t Pancho Villa “invade” the southwestern US back in the day?

Or was it considered more of an raid?

Princess Anne doesn't take any shit from anyone.

R11, Yes, thank you for that. I had to look that up, since it was never clear to me. Also, Morgan's Raiders (Confederates) conduced a raid into the North (even through my part of Ohio), but I'm not sure the US would consider the Confederacy a foreign power: probably just traitors.

Fergie out and about. She's looking rough.

Love Sarah. She stays busy and probably fulfills more duties and outreach to charities than most of the working royals.

Palace Denies Meghan Markle And Prince Harry Banned Neighbors From Approaching Them

“The Duke and Duchess didn’t request this, didn’t know about it, and had nothing to do with the content or guidance offered,” a spokesperson said in a statement obtained Saturday by HELLO! magazine.

The supposed guidelines barred anyone from approaching the couple or striking up a conversation, also stipulating that their dogs were not to be touched. In addition, neighbors were reportedly warned not to ask to see newborn baby Archie.

According to the paper, Buckingham Palace said the demands were the work of one of its “overly protective” officials, though no name is given.

R16, I'm sure that the "overly protective" official has been cashiered by now.

Aww, Archie is cute as a button!

Trying again.

Meghan The Vogue Guest Editor. SO NOT ROYAL.

Vogue's Forces For Change.

Doesn't it seem like the vitriol has simmered down?

R22, The British Royal Family Gossip threads were begun as a respite from the endless discussions about Meghan on the 'Dangling Tendrils' threads. Many of us just aren't invested in talking about her. I used to post on the 'Dangling Tendrils' threads, but stopped because I got tired of posting the same criticisms: "not tailored, not a British designer, drab colors", etc. It just became redundant. And my criticisms were pretty much based on the (lack) of style. But we were (many times) painted with the same brush, as racists. I actually had high hopes for Meghan (as a fellow American) and was generally positive in my remarks towards her, but her gaffes were too constant to ignore. I don't like her one little bit, now. But I think she's boring, so I don't have much to say about her now. I can't speak for others. I think it would be hard to work up much vitriol towards the other members of the BRF: I think Prince Andrew is being addressed in the Epstein threads (which I don't enter).

R19, How clever.

Rumors are that PH & MM are not spending the night nor the morning in the same locale on a consistent basis.

^^^You mean together in same locale as in they're living together in different abodes or they're not in the same place on nightly basis?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

' I always think it's strange to hear the British mentioning their 'special relationship' with the US, when they're the only country that has invaded the US and even burned down the White House.'

Not only did we invade the US, we OWNED the US for centuries, bitches. That's why you speak the ENGLISH language, not the Spanish one.

'Rumors are that PH & MM are not spending the night nor the morning in the same locale on a consistent basis. '

Because someone like you living in the US really gets to hear the Windsor gossip, you crazy old fool.

R27, and we defeated you and have been independent for a long time. Winston Churchill was born to an American mother. We are connected, and that's true. And I believe we should always remain polite and civil to each other.

After Brexit we plan to reinvade America and take back the colonies.

World War II connected us.

'And I believe we should always remain polite and civil to each other. '

Meghan is another huge link in the special relationship and you American hoes should be cherishing that, not making her out to be some kind of evil destructive force. She's editing UK Vogue, not US Vogue. She knows that at the end of the day, the UK is a cooler place to live.

R28, I don't need to call other posters very childish names. Just observe their extremely uncomfortable body language when papped together as opposed to photos of PH with other people. There are countless examples online for those who don't have their heads buried in the sand.

'Just observe their extremely uncomfortable body language when papped together as opposed to photos of PH with other people. '

Oh, I'm dealing with the Welp Troll, okay. Body language expert extraordinaire, especially when looking at still pictures. Are you still trying to push the Meghan is Gay for Jessica/PH is gay for his army friends narrative?

You are truly tragic. You said ALL this on the thousands of posts you made about Louis and Harry from One Direction, when you spent four hours a day on here trying to prove they were together.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Meghan and Harry refuse a visit to Dumbarton even though they were made Earl and Countess of the town

R34, Wrong. I am not the Welp Troll. I've never read anything on the Harry T thread let alone posted on it.

They don't seem uncomfortable together to me. Sometimes, in structured appearances with the rest of the family, things seem a bit strained but that's the case with many families.

I predict that in a few years Harry, not the brightest bulb, will figure out that his wife never actually loved him and married him for his title/money/fame. After that happens, he will divorce Markle and marry some suitable English lady he's known all his life, which is what he should have done in the first place.

Meghan wants nothing to do with spazzy Dumbarton and who can blame her.

'After that happens, he will divorce Markle and marry some suitable English lady he's known all his life, which is what he should have done in the first place. '

So he'll ditch Meghan and marry someone else who only wants him for his title? NOBODY is going to marry him for his red hair and double chin, are they? He knows that. He had 15 years to find a suitable English lady and none of them interested him. It's not as if he married young in life. He knew what he wanted and the polite English aristos were not it.

No, R40, they were not it for him as a younger man. Shrinks tell us that most marry either their mother or their father in terms of personality type. He married his dramatic mother and will fight to make everything come out all right in that relationship, and fight hard at least for a few years.

When he figures out that she doesn't really love him and never did, he'll divorce her. And of course he'll marry some suitable English lady then. What one wants at 40 is not necessarily what one wanted at 30 or 20 (and Harry's a very young 30-something). He's not his uncle Andrew, he needs a mother figure and he'll find a more suitable one after the first unsuitable wife is sent packing.

It's not as if he's the first person to ever go through this. It's quite common. He's just got a higher public profile.

[quote]He knew what he wanted and the polite English aristos were not it.

R40. I believe the polite English aristos were not into him and life in a fish bowl.

R36, oof that’s a bad look. Even if Meghan doesn’t (somehow) understand the duty of a visit to Dumbarton, Harry certainly does. I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt that the proposed date isn’t a good one. But I’m sure if they don’t visit within the next six months, there will be rumblings.

During a partial blackout here in NYC, Mayor DiBlasio was campaigning in Iowa. Many people were angry that he was off promoting himself. And it’s true that he himself couldn’t have done anything even if he were here. But he is a figurehead and people look to them during significant times.

Meghan and Harry need to be careful with their image. It’s precarious enough as it is.

Ooh that's juicy. l predict they are mirroring Di and Chuck's troubles. Problems cropping up immediately, rumors floating to the surface consistently, then the breakdown is finally announced and the weird puzzle pieces finally fit together..

You are projecting. They are fine.

Yes, R45, they're fine right now, at least they seem so to me. He is definitely on board with defending her and protecting her from any and all who criticize or find her behavior lacking in any way. That will probably continue for a while but it won't last forever. There are red flags all over this relationship and there have been from the beginning. But yes, they are fine right now. Those who say they aren't living together and so on are wrong, they are very much together. The two of them against the world and baby makes three.

Poor Harry, it's going to break his heart when he realizes that she never loved him.

Eh, he never really loved her, he just had middle aged panic-lust. He'll be fine.

I hope William and Harry can work out their differences for Diana's sake.

'Poor Harry, it's going to break his heart when he realizes that she never loved him.'

She did love him. Her life in Toronto was a lot easier than this.

[QUOTE] Oof that’s a bad look.

Stupid Welp Troll.

Listen you two moody pieces of shit, Me-Again and Duke Dumb...get yourself to Dumbarton and say hello to the people. What the hell else could you be doing?

Finally the papers are noticing Harry's spectacularly rapid hair loss

Hmmm. Meghan has come after Mike Tindall!

The Express headlined it as if the whole BRF is remonstrating him for being indiscreet, but when you read on, the only examples cited in the article are where Tindall said something briefly about not yet meeting Archie...

So that's why Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie is on the cover.

Dangerous game, Meg, dangerous game.

She's an idiot.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Okay! The UK beacon of political light copied the cover art for Vogue, specifically the cloying Meghan's Mirror, originally a Time cover, and praises the rich, suspect and Americans. What's next, an award for her stupendous fashion style?

A convict got too close to Prince George.

Fergie: Princess Eugenie is NOT pregnant. Everytime this woman opens her mouth, she puts her foot in it.

R35 - Surprise! Meghan is wearing GUCCI in the Vogue photo on the left.

Ahhh I see, Salma the racist can funnel clothes to Sparkles. This humanitarianing is hard work, people!

[QUOTE] So that's why Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie is on the cover.

Dangerous game, Meg, dangerous game.

One could imagine a terrible traffic accident,

What's Salma's contribution, other than being married to a billionaire with whom Megs would like to be more closely acquainted? Salma probably is a role model for Meghan, but not for the reasons provided in Vogue.

An announcement of guest editing wasn't enough for The Sussex Royal Instagram website. A Vogue video is also needed for the occasion.

Meghan looks very mannish in that photo of her “editing.” I notice she didn’t forget her duck lips!

Can her Megafans NOT see the difference in the kinds of royal editing that have occurred over the years?

Did the MM haters go away yet?

Peter Lindbergh, the Vogue photographer, was also the same man who took photos of Meghan in Vanity Fair before her engagement to Harry. Here is a video.

Someone has to say it: Fergie is an ASS.

And now for something completely different...swipe for photos of Royal Gloves. It's a dying fashion accessory.

He is NOT amused.

It's all too much.

Fergie can’t wait for Philip to die so she can move back into the palace and rest her gravy train.

She never can get it right.

I see furs everywhere.

It's National Lipstick Day! WTF?

38 years ago today, this wedding happened.

Today a kilted Charles visited a whiskey distillery because he remembered the date and needed a stiff drink.

Probably celebrating that he's long rid of his troublesome first wife.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The Queen has $2 million worth of fur sitting in a refrigerated room in BP. No longer in fashion to wear fur.

The comments on the R73 link are pretty brutal. Can't tell if they're coming from US or UK, though.

Can someone post Sparkles' introduction to Her Vogue Issue? She talks about her love of writing, her willingness despite the odds to push forward, and her all around awesomeness.

Harry's seemingly accelerated baldness at 34 (35 in Sept) may be due to stress, but it could also mirror William's accelerated baldness at 34, who now is 37.

R83 - It may cause you to go blind but here it is. Hope you can read her word salad.

r85,It was charming; there was no word salad.

Why are you such a hater?

Totally unnecessary.

R86 - I have a different opinion of Meghan and the article than you do. Fine. I think it's a word salad that is all about HER and you think it's charming. So what? She's a fake fame whore to me and an authentic person to you. OK, whatever makes you happy. I don't have to like someone simply because you do. You get it? But next time do try not to shit on the person who posted what you wanted to see. I won't go out of my way again.

Anger Management, table for r87...

Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle interviews 'my former First Lady, and now friend,' Michelle Obama

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, interviews 'my former First Lady, and now friend,' Michelle Obama

There, fixed it.

"Hater" R86?

This is where perceptual differences come into play. No?

You think it "charming"? So be it.

From this perspective, it comes across as pretentious. At. Best.

Unfortunately, an initial hope in Markle has been replaced by repeated actions (e.g. $$$$ spending, obvious hypocrisy, insolent and rude behaviour/body language and paying deference to "power figures" while denigrating those outside such circles) that "charming" language comes across as insincere ploys. Dreck, really. All for the benefit of one individual: Markle, herself.

As multiple persons have clearly recognised, her prose supports her behaviour. It's all wildly throwing about intentions: charities, feminism, empowerment. People pick up on the fact that she doesn't spend long at her royal charities. Doesn't express the same level of enthusiasm as her personal "celebrity engagements". Not to mention, the lack of personal connection at said royal "duty" events. Have you seen her multiple recorded interactions with crowds? With children? At hospitals?

And her claims of feminism? This coming from a woman long supported by men: Father/lovers/husbands. Laughable to hear her prattle on about feminists as she jumped from one man to the other. We would not be reading a guest-edited Vogue issue on Markles' Own Merits.

It does not seem so far-fetched that one day we will hear an interview with her claiming that "there were four of us in our relationship: Harry, Me, Myself and I". And Me-Gain will then live up to her "charming" reputation.

R85, she really has a thing for 90s glossy mag journalism. And she's making sure to wedge Harry into the narrative--as if anyone wants to read a convo between Jane Goodall and Harry, complete with the favourite basic candid from behind.

She’s already guzzled at the udder of royal fame like a starving desert traveller arriving at an over-flowing oasis.

Over a steaming cup of mint tea, we teased through how one can shine light in a world filled with seemingly daily darkness. Lofty? Of course. Worth it? Without question.

r3. Bless little Elliot. Filming himself in the smoking room of his local secure mental facility.

Crapulously turgid, yet ever so platitudinously limpid, R94.

One does feel like a proud parent!

Fergie looks terrible.

She served her own bump for lunch? How rude.

[quote]"So, over a casual lunch of chicken tacos and my ever-burgeoning bump, I asked Michelle if she would help me with this secret project," Markle wrote, calling her "my former First Lady, and now friend, Michelle."

It really irks me to find myself agreeing with pompous gasbag Piers Morgan.

R87! That was me who asked for the intro to be posted. Thank you so much.

Markle's stans are like gnats; just brush them away.

It's so weird that while twitter, the UK paper comment sections from the DM to the Sun to the Express to even the Telegraph, are all on FIRE with snark regarding the Vogue debacle, The DataLounge is strangely quiet.

Straight people do not get snark. We invented it.

There is no Vogue debacle.

It is manufactured outrage.

47 year old out gay editor of British Vogue, Edward Enninful, is a bit of a joke and a party boy. He decided that ridiculous Liam Payne from One Direction was the next big thing in fashion and was seen out with him so often that Edward's own partner unfollowed Liam on Instagram. He is definitely a hoe when it comes to celebs like Markle. Naomi Campbell and the One DIrection boys

' I think it's a word salad that is all about HER and you think it's charming...'

R87 is the Scat Troll, f and f and put on ignore. She uses the word 'salad' at every opportunity because she truly believes that somewhere in deep porn cyberspace, there lurks a 'salad tossing' video featuring Meghan.

Best to block the loon, R37.

The Datalounge is NOT strangely quiet on the Vogue disaster. The thread about it has taken off about 85% of her skin so far. Markke is an idiot!

All roads lead to Soho? Or just to Miss A?

R107, stop recommending idiotic CT-ers.

The Welp Troll is NOT welcome on this thread.

I really have no idea who some of these trolls who are named are, and how they're identified.

R110

Welp Troll- genuinely thinks MM's PR team posts 24/7 on DL and all these threads. Likes to exclaim 'welp', 'oof', 'meh' and 'eh' as she thinks it makes her sound young and cool and cynical. Also tries to push the narrative that MM and PH are both gay.

Grifter Troll - hates MM because she was a working actress. Only approves of unemployed ladies like KM.

Narc Troll - cod psych doctor who attributes all MM does to her NPD

Original Adderall Troll - has anger management issues and believes MM is/was a drug addict.

Scat Troll - the worst of all the BRF trolls. Likes to describe rimming in graphic language by means of a slur. Definitely one to block asap.

Old photos Troll - spams the thread with random BRF pics from decades ago

Tiara Troll - likes to discuss the merits of various dusty coronets which she thinks MM covets

Queen Catherine Troll - fawns over Kate Middleton

Alpha William Troll - keeps saying the Duke of Bald went through a bad patch with his looks but is now handsome

Danja Zone Troll - links to Danja Zone videos as 'a bit of fun'.

R111, Thanks! I'd never be able to keep them all straight without a spreadsheet.

R112

One more Troll: R111 who is the Markle fan and accuses everyone of being a Troll. The Markle Troll.

She denigrates everyone who does not support her views. Name calls. Becomes incited. Believes Markle is fantastic because she is black and "woke". She also dismisses the Cambridges and states Markle will inherit the throne.

Easily identifiable by the way she demeans. And exhibits rabid Markle support with nonsensical logic. Examples: "You're a loser", You're crazy", "unemployed Kate".

Could be manufactured PR.

R110, we can call you the Fan of Harry Styles/Spazz/Markle troll, most others have him blocked.

In her Vogue intro, I wonder why MM makes such a thing about the magazine being a business, and therefore prepare yourselves, dear reader, to have to subject yourselves to regular magazine adverts? Clearly there's something behind it that we don't know about. Like I wonder if she tried to have the magazine be just about her and the women and had an argument about including adverts. Or some such nonsense. There was absolutely no reason for her to include any such thing in her intro. Curious.

Quite likely, R113, he has posted on here thousands of times over the past few years. I think Styles and Markle may share PR, as she seems to do with anyone who is a fan. His tactics are the same, control the narrative, try to drive off other posters and derail threads that are not hagiographies. Th e posts are fairly rote, only the names change by thread. Most just block him. Makes for a much more enjoyable read.

That is curious, R115. It will be interesting to see who the advertisers are? Some of her favorite merching targets, perhaps? Or their competitors, thus the disclaimer?

Thought that they were off to Africa quite soon, no? Any word on that?

R113, Is that the person who keeps insisting that 'Archie will rule, because the people of the UK and US will demand it'?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The advertisers are likely people who wouldn't piss on her gums if her teeth were on fire before she hit the big time with Dimwit. Her intro has two aims: 1. To passive aggressively diminish those big fashion houses and luxury cosmetic brands for snubbing her when she was hustling back in the States; 2. To appeal to the common folk by showing she knows they can't afford the products advertised within the pages of Vogue, and doesn't want to be "boastful" about the fact that she can.

She's such a cunt. She doesn't have a single altruistic bone in her body.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The Harkles will be off to "Africa" in the fall, when the maternity leave is complete. So much to do 'til then, so much glow in which to bask, without being boastful of course.

On this day in 2011, Zara Phillips married Mike Tindall. Here is Zara posing with her grandmother The Queen.

Oh the Sussex pair aren't subtle, are they?

Meghan didn't want to appear on the Vogue cover because she didn't want to appear "boastful" Snort = Shade to Kate who appeared on a Vogue cover.

Harry wants to have only TWO children to help save the planet = dig at the Cambridges who have three children.

I caught that too, R126. I'm dying to know how this whole thing will look in a couple years' time.

Princess Di was also on the cover of Vogue, but that doesn't count as boastful.

R128 - I don't remember if Diana was interviewed and.or was the guest editor (I highly doubt it). I suspect she was on the cover because she sold magazines.

^ and/or

Right. But not boastfully.

The Sussex Royal Instagram shines a beacon on MeMe's Vogue editorship for the THIRD time.

Harry and Jane Goodall are featured but only because..."this special sit-down was requested by The Duchess of Sussex, who has long admired Dr. Goodall and wanted to feature her in the September issue of @BritishVogue, which HRH has guest edited".

Are we all clear on that - what Meghan wants, Meghan gets!

Meghan may not be on the Vogue cover but she's sure "boastful" inside. Swipe for photos.

A blurry photo of Bea and Edo dancing at the wedding in Italy this summer.

Princess Anne waves goodbye to Zara on her wedding day.

That is such an odd photo at r133. What is the thinking behind “let’s release this photo of pregnant ROYAL squatting”?

R118 Yes. You've identified The Markle Troll.

As R114 and R116 have noted, this poster has many (hundreds or thousands?) of posts which are quite recognisable.

Mean. Disruptive. Illogical.

Apparently also a big supporter of Harry Styles. (The Markle Troll accused me of being a Harry Styles Troll in response to a post about Markle's behaviour....I know very little/nor have any interest in Styles. Interesting that others now note that The Markle Troll likes to derail threads. And that Markle and Harry Styles may share some PR connections.)

It's pretty clear from several fronts, The Markle Troll is abusive. And has an agenda.

“Considering the huge wealth and privilege at his disposal, some people might be surprised to hear that George’s favorite things are spending time with his mum, cooking pizzas from scratch and pottering about in the garden,”

Oh dear....

From R133:

[quote]In fact, if it's a cultural reference you're after, forget Cinderella — this is the story of Wonder Woman, ready to take on the world in her metaphorical and literal cape.

So many guessing games to be played with the September issue — does she not understand the meaning of 'literal' or is Smart Works dressing women in capes and sending them off on job interviews? Are they all applying at Hogwarts?

At least, with the above quote, we now know the exact mantra MM recites into the mirror first thing in the morning. Publicly applying it to herself would be boastful so let's all pretend to believe that she's talking about other women, not Meghan, Meghan, Meghan.

Until Dim issues the inevitable "donut call buaetful wive Cindrela call her wondwomen" edict to the press, let's just pretend.

So reaction to the Vogue "guest editing" is not going so well, it seems.

Photos of the Yorks. Bea and Eugenie don't look too bad in the first picture. Mama Fergie is never far away.

Why aren't the BRF stopping this shit show?

R142 They make her a whipping boy(girl). So just wait, smile, and let it happen.

Why is that charity a shit show, r142?

'Easily identifiable by the way she demeans. And exhibits rabid Markle support with nonsensical logic. Examples: "You're a loser", You're crazy", "unemployed Kate".

Could be manufactured PR.'

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnd here's the Welp Troll being predictable.

'Quite likely, [R113], he has posted on here thousands of times over the past few years. I think Styles and Markle may share PR, as she seems to do with anyone who is a fan. His tactics are the same, control the narrative, try to drive off other posters and derail threads that are not hagiographies. Th e posts are fairly rote, only the names change by thread. Most just block him. Makes for a much more enjoyable read. '

Here we have the Welp Troll again. Harry Styles' PR agency is Dawbell PR. They have nothing to do with Markle. Not everything is a PR shill, you absolute imbecile.

'Meghan didn't want to appear on the Vogue cover because she didn't want to appear "boastful" Snort = Shade to Kate who appeared on a Vogue cover.

Harry wants to have only TWO children to help save the planet = dig at the Cambridges who have three children'

Of course. They throw delightful shade at any opportunity, and long may it continue.

How long has Harry felt such animosity towards his family, his brother and sister in law, in particular?

Goodall and Dim chatting about racism? Two of the whitest people in Britain. Not to mention his wife, who listed herself as Caucasian and who has only dated white men.

I do believe that they want to bring down the BRF.

I don't know much about Goodall exceot a brief google visit says she receives between $50,000 and $100,000 for a speech. She has managers, agents and PR firms to support her and her 300-person staff. Who knew humanitarianing paid so well?

Owen Scobie announced on his Twitter that Markle has co designed a capsule collection for Marks and Spencers.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

r151, no it isn't.

When Princess Anne road horses in the Olympics or for whatever god awful reason, nobody clamored about why she wasn't raising money.

Sometimes they do things because they are FUN not because they are a cookbook raising funds for women in crisis.

Gad, you are shallow.

Sarah needs a better colorist, that crayola red hair does her no favors. At her age she should be doing a lighter color. As for her sags and bags, well that’s a lifetime skiing and beaching and smoking.

Harry wasn't preaching about only having 2 children. If you actually read the article you would know that. He was sort of joking when he mentioned the fact that he planned on only having 2 children. No preaching

Discussing his change in perspective about the environment, he told her: 'I view it differently now, without question. 'But I've always wanted to try and ensure that, even before having a child and hoping to have children…'

But when Dr Goodall cut in, saying: 'Not too many...' He replied: 'Two, maximum!', before the pair went on to talk about the other dangers facing the planet

If their next is a girl, they'll stick at two. If a boy, who knows?

Does Jane Goodall tell her African friends not to have "too many" children? I'll bet she doesn't...

The Sun: Lady Colin Campbell says Meghan is "cheap, vulgar and irresponsible"

"She was never an A-lister, so she needs to stop acting like one."

Lady Colin Campbell is a national laughing stock since her stint on Celebrity Jungle. Markle is an A lister NOW. Her marriage to Harry plus her showbiz connections elevated her to that status.

I actually laughed at her along with everyone else until I saw her on the show, r158 - she was refreshingly direct. I had a new respect for her after I saw it.

Megan is to high fashion as Harry is to rocket science

Lady Colin Campbell looks like she is the inspiration for L'air du Formaldéhyde.

She took up where the Duchess of Alba left off.

Agreed she looks odd, physically, r161, but at this particular moment, Lady Colin is speaking the truth that the nation as a whole (poor, rich and just getting by) want heard by Buckingham Palace.

The non-racist majority of Britain all hate Meghan because she's constantly insulting to everything that is still good about Britain: the cultural traditions of grace, dignity, discretion, humility and service. All of these have disintegrated enough in their own communities, and now to see it disintegrate within the Royal Family too is an unforgivable insult to SO many people, of all classes and colours, across Britain and the Commonwealth.

The only people giving Meghan a pass are the "woke" racists who only see her skin colour and nothing else. The non-racists see the person - and loathe her.

Lady Colin was raised as a boy in Jamaica. She had a genital malformation, and was assigned to be raised as a boy, but was always female. She's very direct and outspoken, and has been known to shut Piers Morgan down.

This is the PR person Meghan should hire. If she's got two braincells and a synapse to rub together, she will fire that failure who is working for her now.

Yes r163 I think she's a straightforward, clear-eyed person who's had enough challenges in her life that she won't tolerate the kind of bullshit Meghan and Harry are now shovelling onto the public (and the BRF) by the truckload.

R164 - MM is an educated and conniving person. Don't you think she knows all this but chooses to ignore them all as well?

Yeah, probably, r166.

I suspect she does know all of this, and yet thinks only of herself despite how many other people (and thousand year old institutions) she affects.

She is indeed utterly conniving. But she's also astonishingly stupid. That combination is a key reason why (among many) she's such a disaster.

She is downright stupid when it comes to thinking in the long run. In the short run she's pretty successful - and this is what counts to a narc.

But let's not forget about her companion in crime who forced her upon the BRF and the British taxpayer in the first place. If it weren't for Harry, she'd still be writing her atrocious blog and trying to snatch the next idiot who'd be dumb enough to assist her with money as well as in climbing the social ladder.

I cannot stand Meghan but I wish the British press would back down a bit, even though much of what they say is on point. She probably likes the backlash because it feeds her victim mentality. Better to yawn and barely comment on anything that comes from either Harry or Meghan.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The Duke of Gloucester visited Bristol yesterday where he presented two local organisations with The Queen’s Award for Voluntary Service – an honour given to outstanding volunteer groups across the UK.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R122 Unless you weave and knit your own clothes or buy haute couture, everything you, your family and your friends wear is made in a sweatshop somewhere - China, India, Ethiopia, Vietnam, etc, etc.

R173 and R174 aren't not visible to me ... the Markle loon is back, LOL.

The hardest working royal is Princess Anne.

After "quiet" visits to SmartWorks, the Duchess now has to congratulate herself and post multiple photos of her visits. So much for the "quiet" aspect of her visits.

Forgot to mention that the Sussex Royal post @R177 was a plug for MeMe's future fashion collaboration. She's not even pretending anymore. Meghan is a blatant self-promoter.

R178 Lol, porn troll is here.

Come on, you can do better. Why don't you show us your own asshole?????

R181 Oh a small dick. Is it yours? Because it's not even cute.

Please don't engage the Porn Troll. Just put him on ignore.

R179 - She's patently using the BRF and the position it gave her to give herself the global importance that she couldn't get without their name. Being a royal duchess and a career in duitful patronage as the wife of the sixth in line seems after all to have been a dull prospect.

Oh to be a fly on the wall of wherever it is the Cambridges are and up at Balmoral!

Ah, the pleasures of being lectured on racism and family size by a man whose social status got him through schools. with a $40 million trust fund, a five-bedroom home he paid little to nothing for because of his rich Papa's contributions, whose wife took a private plane across the Atlantic after a $350,000 baby shower at the most expensive hotel in New York City so she could get her loot home undisturbed, and whose wardrobe costs alone could feed for one year at least half a dozen villages in India . . .

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

^Deservedly so.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Why does the BRF let all of this happen?

Kate Spendleton and the Duke of Bald just spent two weeks in a Mustique villa that costs £27k a week, with their security next door in a similar one.

'The question is: what does MeMe get out of this relationship? A cut of the profits? '

Her name is attached to a charity project, probably on an advert in all Marks and Spencer stores, plus you should know that it's an influencers dream to co-design a clothing line! Hilarious that you haters keep saying she wants to be visible and she seeks attention, then you get all amazed when she does what you've predicted.

I know you all hoped the UK would ignore her. Not happening! She's here to stay.

R189 - that's the million dollar question, isn't it? It boggles my mind why they continue to allow her to not only BREAK the "rules" but burn down their house (eg. give them the finger when it comes to royal protocol & tradition).

R191 - no one is amazed that the attention whore is getting attention she craves for her toxic and clueless character and blatant disregard for appropriate royal behavior. That's one of the reasons she married Hapless Harry in the first place. Duh.

The Royal Family allowing it to happen is the REAL AMAZING part of this saga.

;The Royal Family allowing it to happen is the REAL AMAZING part of this saga. ;

Wow, who would think the BRF would be a dynamic institution that changes and adapts to the passing years? You were just sat there hoping and praying they would be the same forever, churning out docile, servile products like Kate, dedicated solely to William Wndsor since her 19th birthday.

R195 = your naivety as well as your hatred for Kate is sadly apparent. Kate knows her job and she does it well.

Some of the best qualities about the Royal Family are its historical longevity, its stability during difficult times, its avoidance of political affiliation and favoritism. Their ability to adapt at a snails pace keeps them current. They do nothing at warp speed. Baby steps is the path they wisely choose.

A flashy, brazen Duchess who is like a bull in a china shop will NOT change how THEY do their jobs.

R190, so one week on Mustique did cost less than Duke Dim and Duchess Spenderella's four-day babymoon for 10,000 pounds per night.

'one week on Mustique did cost less than Duke Dim and Duchess Spenderella's four-day babymoon for 10,000 pounds per night. '

But Kate and Bald were there for TWO WEEKS, with a full security team, which will have cost the taxpayer more than four days anywhere.

So? Going to Mustique is comparatively less costly than spending only a few days in some luxury ressort.

And do you really think Dim and Diva didn't go with their security detail?

Why indeed are the BRF letting this woman do whatever she likes? What are the possibilities?

They're misguided enough to have thought it would be GOOD for their image - that she'd take care of their "progressive" arm whilst Kate and William take care of their "traditional" arm.

They've tried to stop her and failed - either their attempts were tepid and more like "suggestions" than demands, and she's blithely ignored them.

The BRF's remaining and harsher options might make them look equally bad, and she knows it and is willing to call their bluff, having as her own club persuading Harry to leave the BRF and strike out on his own as soon as they 've got three years and two kids ahead.

They have an agreement in place that she and Harry get that three years and two kids to build their "brand" and then announce their exit from the family.

Then, there's the last and most likely correct answer: they loathe her and what she's doing but have their heads buried in the sand and figure Meghan's cachet will run out by the time she's fifty, have washed their hands of the Harkles, and just plan to ignore them as far as possible.

The latter, of course, will only last as long as the Queen and Charles run the show. On the off chance that Charles is unexpectedly raptured sooner rather than later, or even more shockingly, before his Mum, and the spectre of King William and Queen Catherine springs up, my bet is that the the Harkles will exit post haste.

Lord, even the usually pro-Meghan Telegraph has a critical article about the "misguided and patronising " Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Meghan's new venture. British Vogue loves her.

Meghan is stunning.

Meghan's writing is awful. I look forward to more of it.

r203 I mean yes in the sense that she stuns.

As a distraction from the cage-fight, I received my order from the Buckingham Palace gift shop today! A BP baseball cap, a Holyrood Palace tartan umbrella, and a BP commemorative coin. I need a drizzly day to show off the baseball cap and umbrella together! What an ensemble! Oh, BTW, Harry and Meghan memorabilia has been discounted.

R206 LOL I remember your post, happy for you, bro, enjoy! :-))

Lol, he would never!

R204, Kate's writing is non existent. Meghan's prose may be purple and pretentious, but it exists and we have many examples of it. Kate can't write journalistic articles, just undergrad essays. Shame her career didn't work out.

This is actually good stuff.

And after all that, Harry goes to Camp Google in the Mediterranean to give a BAREFOOT (according to the DM) speech to the glitterati who flew in on private jets or floated in on private yachts.

Harry and Meghan have gone completely and defiantly rogue.

So she fibbed about meeting personally with Mrs Obama, and they lied about not knowing the sex of the baby.

Harry loves a good private jet himself. I like the fact that they've gone rogue.

R174 Not all clothes are made in sweatshops moron. Plus even if some of us do wear them we are not going around lauding ourselves as beacons of feminism or the downtrodden like MM.

If MM wants to be a champion for sustainability and women she should be checking the origins of every fucking thing she wears or puts on Archie.

It's interesting how you immediately jump to compare Meghan to Kate when I commented on Meghan's writing. I have no idea if Kate is a good writer or not, and it isn't relevant to the discussion at all. Meghan has an inflated view of her writing abilities and people seem to be egging her on.

^For R209.

Hmmmm...including the Queen as a woman who is a change maker WOULD have been a deft touch...

Box does not like the URL but this is worth a copy & paste, trust.

www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/where-meghan-went-wrong-one-thing-missing-from-royals-vogue-cover/news-story/8d133969db455faa5830b25b54fda3c0

From link:

The release of the issue has also brought a few other niggling issues with Meghan’s royal performance to the fore.

Let’s start with how she chooses to use her time. She has been working on this issue since January, then well into her maternity leave and after their birth of wee baby Archie in May. While Meghan’s dexterous ability to multi-task is impressive, let’s also remember that in the first half of this year, the only person who undertook less official royal engagements was 98-year-old Prince Philip who has technically retired from royal life.

We are left with the awkward conclusion that she could find time to give famed photographer Peter Lindberg direction as to how to shoot but not to attend more dull, dutiful events.

(During the very period that Meghan was on maternity leave but working on her Vogue issue, she did not attend the 75th anniversary of D Day commemorations, the Commonwealth Youth Roundtable or the Diana Award National Youth Mentoring Summit, which Harry did.)

For a woman who is clearly highly intelligent and keenly perceptive, over the last few months Meghan has seemed spectacularly obtuse to she (and husband Harry’s) deteriorating public image in the UK.

From the couple accepting $4.3 million in taxpayers’ dosh to renovate their country home Frogmore Cottage, to churlishly refusing to name Archie’s godparents to demanding privacy while sitting in a 12,000-person arena, there is a certain tone deaf quality to the couple’s approach to royal life.

Meghan’s highly selective approach to royal life (“DON’T LOOK AT ME, okay, now look at my Instagram account!”) is starting to grate. While her intentions with her Vogue issue are commendable (yes! Celebrate smart women trying to make this wretched planet circa 2019 better!) the laboured worthiness and the execution here have instead left to her open to even more criticism.

More broadly, this entire episode has belied her questionable understanding of how being a member of a royal family differs from simply being an A-lister (neither of which she was prior to 2017).

R209 - Kate wasn't aiming for a career as a global activist enlightening the world with fire-powered essays, and apart from that she's far too discreet, not to say clever, to lay herself open to the shit Meghan has with her Worship The Woke Royal nonesense.

The only career Kate was aiming was to be Prince William's wife, and for nearly a decade she kept her mouth shut, her legs open for one man, never gave an interview until they were engaged, and by doing so, her career worked out perfectly.

Meghan's bullshit, which is piling up mightily, is turning her into a joke. That's the problem with her ridiculously jejune self-regarding prose: it exists, and it's going to go on existing in cyberspace till Domesday - whilst Kate's poor career that didn't work out sees her crowned Queen Consort of Great Britain eventually.

R218 - "More broadly, this entire episode has belied her questionable understanding of how being a member of a royal family differs from simply being an A-lister (neither of which she was prior to 2017)."

Nobody seems to grasp the truth about Meghan: she gets it: she's rejecting the information and doing what she wants, anyway. She has put two fingers up to the BRF, the British taxpayer, the future King and Queen of Great Britain, and is clearly aiming for a global profile that she can use to make her and her husband as important as William and Kate, and that she can use in case the marriage goes south.

She isn't confused: she knows where her priorities are and she already got what she came for. She no longer has to worry about the survival of the monarchy. Mentally, she's shrugging and saying, Hey, if it goes in 30 years, it goes, I got mine, that's all that matters.

She lacks grace and gratitude; she's self-serving but stunningly unwilling to serve; self-regarding but not self-aware; cunning but not deep, for all her shallow pretentious twaddle.

Fortunately, she's married to the sixth in line; the amount of damage she can do is limited.

Once Charles is on the throne and William and Kate become Prince and Princess of Wales, the world and especially Britain will be sick and tired of the Sussexes' preening virtue-signalling - no one will give a tinker's curse what they think or say or write. All eyes will be on the future of the monarchy: the Cambridge, now the Wales.

And if Charles shuffles off this mortal coil sooner than expected, and the Cambridges step up sooner than expected, the Sussexes will probably pack their bags and leave in a hurry - otherwise, the preening L.A. grifter will find herself having to curtsy to King William and Queen Catherine - something I don't think the erstwhile Suitcase Girl will relish.

You make a lot of excellent points, R220.

The Daily Beast notes that not everyone is a fan, oh dear.

While the unprecedented marketing blitz has been greeted with rapturous public applause by vested interests in the fashion biz, the magazine was privately described as “cringey,” “embarrassing,” and “ill-considered” in private conversations with fashion insiders.

The foundation seems to be a slush fund out of the gate. They are ballsy for sure.

Anyone else having trouble posting links in the box? I keep getting bad URL messages.

www.thedailybeast.com/meghans-vogue-issue-goes-down-in-flames

[QUOTE] As a distraction from the cage-fight, I received my order from the Buckingham Palace gift shop today! A BP baseball cap, a Holyrood Palace tartan umbrella, and a BP commemorative coin.

This must be the most tragic post I have ever read on here.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[QUOTE] And if Charles shuffles off this mortal coil sooner than expected, and the Cambridges step up sooner than expected, the Sussexes will probably pack their bags and leave in a hurry - otherwise, the preening L.A. grifter will find herself having to curtsy to King William and Queen Catherine - something I don't think the erstwhile Suitcase Girl will relish

This is so funny. Harry will be more powerful as the monarch's only sibling - why would he wants to head for the Hollywood Hills? I doubt 60 yr old Kate will expect 60 year old Meghan to do any curtseying at all. Will horse faced Princess Anne curtsey to decrepit Camilla? I doubt it.

The mermaid at R223 has no fear of the shallow. It must not be a turtle?

Won't you look sharp in your tartan umbrella R206.

[quote]Harry will be more powerful as the monarch's only sibling

Uh, no. Princess Margaret was Queen Elizabeth's only sibling. She was not powerful.

R222, Why? I spent my own money on trivial stuff, which will give me a laugh, but which no one else will 'get'. That's a talent I learned in my dotage. Ease up, buttercup. We don't all take this that seriously. Back to the cage-fight.......

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Block the energy vampire at R222. Sucking out the air is another attempt to derail the thread.

Enjoy your new things, R228!

She would not listen, R229. She has no desire to fit in. The more chaos she causes the more likely they will be to pay them off to leave, no? And if in true narc fashion they bring down the family business as they hit the door, more the better in their eyes. She has a different goal then they do, which is to extract and destroy.

The constant swipes at his brother, his wife and their kids are telling. It should be clear why we have never seen photos of Unca H, or seen any interactions or body language that suggests any closeness with the kiddies (which do exist with Mike, Zara, etc.) The polo, where they were in close proximity with no interaction was quite telling, as was the tense drama between H and M. Adam was still there for H tho. Hmmm. I will not be surprised if his schedule coincides with their Out of Africa excursion. That should be coming up soon, no?

It's Yorkshire Day and Andrew posts about the Dukes of York through the years.

Swipe for some cute photos of Charles and Anne as children.

Videos of Lord Mountbatten's daughter Lady Pamela marrying designer David Hicks in 1960.

The more I see of this the more convincedc I am that it is time for the BRF and Parliament to cut the family's "workforce" down, limit the amount of "patronage" they can hand out to their second sons, cousins, brothers and sisters in law, etc., etc., etc., ad nauseam ad infinitum.

It's time to limit the Sovereign Grant and all tax benefits outside the norm to the Sovereign, the Prince of Wales and family, and the next Heir and his family in the direct line of succession. No one gives fuck all about Sophie and the Duchess of Kent and Andrew and Anne showing up. No one can even remember what it is they support from one year to the next unless the papers trumpet it.

Harry and Meghan are making the case for this: it's time to impose limitations on people like these making careers out of their privilege.

Limit the royal's official "team" and any access to government or taxpayer funding, whether for clothes or homes or staff, to those heirs (and their families when their children are not of age) in the direct line of succession and cut the rest loose.

Then Meghan can have all the privacy she wants, and if she chooses to do a bit of work for her title and her free home and her access to her rich husband's and rich father-in-law's money, find.

And if not, that's fine, too.

Why are they having Duke Dimwit and Duchess Diva let their merry little ways? Is that so they can show them the door more insistently when finally the time is not just right but perfect to do so?

Lady Kitty Spencer on the cover of Town & Country magazine.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[quote]Is that so they can show them the door

The only way a royal is shown the door is by death.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussexy will be with us for some time.

I’ve never been on celebitchy website but I’ve heard that it’s a pro-Meghan site. However this morning when I was searching for reactions to Harry’s barefoot eco speech, I saw a link for celebitchy so I clicked on it out of curiosity. Man, are people there pissed off at Harry and also the Sussexes for going there in 2017. Going there once and seeing firsthand the sanctimonious hypocrisy is one thing but now going a second time? That’s what people there are mad at he couple especially Harry. Then I read some comments criticizing Meghan wearing a $4k dress to homeless women’s charity

I think the tide is starting to turn like I’ve said they’ve jumped the shark and the public even their biggest supporters are starting to realize the horribleness of the Sussexes both as a brand and as individuals

The Hicks marriage was an interesting one. At age 30, Lady Pamela was an awkward almost-spinster, and David Hicks was broke and living with his mother. He zeroed in on the heiress despite being openly gay, and she was game. Her father Dickie Mountbatten wasn't keen on the match, but he assented since it was better than Pamela not marrying at all. And the marriage did work! Pamela accepted David's boyfriends with equanimity, because, in her words, Hicks was "a good father, very nice to me, runs the house, orders the food, and picks out all my clothes."

R239 - "The only way a royal is shown the door is by death."

Not quite.

R237 - Quite the jawline on Lady Kitty - it's the spit of her father's. Lucky for her she's got those big eyes to balance it out.

R242 - Tell me about it . . .

R234, Thank you! That was so evocative!

r234, Lady Pamela Hicks' mother a was quite the 'goer', as they say.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R231 is the infamous Larrie Welp Troll, block and f and f. Always talks about burning/destroying things as people leave and always addresses another poster and puts 'no' at the end of one of her sentences, as if translating from the French.

Poor silly Welp Troll, Meghan is not about to bring down the BRF after ten centuries whatever she does, are you nuts? How much power do you credit her with? This isn't One Direction, you crazy woman.

'She would not listen, [R229]. She has no desire to fit in. The more chaos she causes the more likely they will be to pay them off to leave, no? And if in true narc fashion they bring down the family business as they hit the door, more the better in their eyes. She has a different goal then they do, which is to extract and destroy'

R246, That was a really fascinating read! Thanks!

'The polo, where they were in close proximity with no interaction was quite telling, as was the tense drama between H and M. Adam was still there for H tho. Hmmm. I will not be surprised if his schedule coincides with their Out of Africa excursion. That should be coming up soon, no? '

Welp Troll, just fuck off with your ridiculous attempts to make out that Harry and Adam are having a gay relationship. This is not Larrie, you imbecile. Meghan and Kate were talking to each other all through the Wimbledon match and there was no drama at the polo. If there's any bad feeling, it's between Harry and William. William is probably fuming that Harry was invited to the billionaires' hangout, Google Camp, instead of him. But William isn't know for being woke at all, so they missed him off the invitation list.

'It's time to limit the Sovereign Grant and all tax benefits outside the norm to the Sovereign, the Prince of Wales and family, and the next Heir and his family in the direct line of succession.'

GOOD IDEA! Except that would leave your precious Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis having to seek employment, with no maternal example at all. What will they do?

Oh, NO!

Not another famewhore magazine cover!!!

I normally try to stay out of some of the battles that seem to erupt on these threads. I think they're sort of funny, but I'm not very invested. Unfortunately, most of the mainstream articles about the British Royal Family are about Meghan. I remember that these threads were originally begun to separate the conversation about Meghan (the Dangling Tendrils threads) from other Royals.

But, there you go. I was shocked to find in my YouTube feed, this trailer, that seems bizarre, but strangely prescient.

R248 R250 and here they are right on cue the MM fans who come on here and call anyone, who doesn't adore their plumpy duchess, a troll. Sad little losers who think they are being funny calling people tiara, welp etc etc trolls.

Stop wasting your time and go back to Sussex Instagram and leave your adoring messages on there.

So touching,

The Dalai Lama and air freshner, how woke and klassy!

So much for her claim to religioius piety and closeness to the Archbishop.

The conversion really took, eh?

This was SUCH a mistake. They should have told him to renounce his role if he wanted her. She would likely have bailed before the wedding. H may have spiraled, but what else is new? It has only been a bit over a year, it really is extraordinary.

From the DM, linked above. To see the article, go to settings (wheel) and uncheck previews.

In her former life as an actress, yoga-loving Meghan was fond of quoting the Dalai Lama’s injunction: ‘Don’t let the behaviour of others destroy your inner peace.’ Her Vogue issue celebrates ‘the power of breathing and meditation’ and, in January, Prince Harry revealed that he meditates ‘every day’.

It is thought the Archbishop vetoed the Dalai Lama because he isn’t a Christian.

It would also have infuriated China, which has long been angered by Prince Charles’s close friendship with the Tibetan holy man, who has been in exile since an uprising against Chinese rule in 1959.

Alexander Norman, author of The Dalai Lama: An Extraordinary Life, believes that the Lama undoubtedly would have accepted the invitation. ‘The Tibetans like high-profile events,’ he tells me.

A spokesperson for the Archbishop says: ‘As with any wedding, preparations are pastoral and personal. Therefore any details are private.’

The Duchess of Sussex’s office declines to comment.

Royal sources insist the Duchess did not initiate the idea, but that it originated from Clarence House, the home of the Prince of Wales.

Sources at Clarence House say this is incorrect.

Camilla is on the cover of Saga, the travel magazine for the over 50s! Hopefully, Meghan will do a cover for Vogue or Marie Claire, maybe Elle, once she is down to her fighting weight.

Camilla is on the cover of Saga, the travel magazine for the over 50s! Hopefully, Meghan will do a cover for Vogue or Marie Claire, maybe Elle, once she is down to her fighting weight.

[quote] Royal sources insist the Duchess did not initiate the idea, but that it originated from Clarence House, the home of the Prince of Wales.

[quote] Sources at Clarence House say this is incorrect.

This is NOT Prince Charles' first rodeo - hence the response by Clarence House.

Now, I wonder who the "Royal Sources" were?

The "Royal Sources" were Meg's PR, r260

At this point, Prince Charles is glad that he likes to talk to plants and his partner(s) have always been age-appropriate.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Harry's just an asshole.

A hazzhole, that is.

I wonder if it would be possible to start a Vintage BRF Gossip thread (say, pre-2000). That would leave room for discussing the juicy Diana/Fergie years (not to mention the shenanigans of earlier decades), while neatly cutting out all things William, Kate, Meghan, and Harry-related. Or would such a thread be closed because there's already this series of threads?

Is it possible to reprogramme the navigation system of a private jet to make it fly directly into the sun?

Asking for a friend ......

R247 - I doubt religion per se had anything to do with it - the political ramifications with China, whose insistence that Tibet is ethically, morally, historically, legally part of China, is blandly accepted by western powers, who need China far more than they need Tibet or its exiled leader. Tibet is the poster illustration of why all the bullshit thrown about re morality and integrity in geopolitics is meaningless.

I doubt the Archbishop would have objected personally to a touch of ecumenism in the sixth in line's wedding; but he probably told Charles or Meghan in no uncertain terms what the government would have to say about sticking two fingers up to China by inviting the Dalai Lama.

And I find it difficult to believe that Charles wouldn't have known this without being told. He's savvy enough by this time to know that inviting the Dalai Lama would have thrown Parliament and Downing Street into fifty fits. Meghan, on the other hand, would likely been oblivious to the political ramifications.

That's assuming the story is true.

R264 - In a word, and it is his wife;s doing - her obvious influence in pushing him to make gestures like the disastrous optics of the Google Camp event is making him look more ridiculous by the day.

I keep wondering what the BRF is doing behind the scenes - the woman is on maternity leave and has managed to create one negative and controversial story after another in a matter of weeks. The VOGUE issue, undoubtedly encouraging her husband to attend the Google Camp party with the rest of the glitterati, the "They do make it hard" comment at the Lion King premiere, the Wimbledon story, the Mystery Godparent Christening bullshit, the We're Only Having Two Kids Unlike My Selfish Bro And His Too Fertile Wife story . . .

It's nearly ceaseless. What are they thinking? What are they saying to each other? Are they really planning to sit on their hands, grimace, tighten their lips, and just let the Harkles keep making the family look either tone-dear or helpless?

^*tone-deaf

Harry has been to Google Camp at LEAST once before.

When the intellectuals begin weighing in, things might be getting to be serious

Douglas Murray:

"All eras have their hierarchies, just as all eras have their intellectual games. Often the two coincide, so that the people who play the game with skill emerge at the top of the hierarchy, while those who do not find themselves at the bottom. Among the prevailing intellectual games of our own time is the issue of bias, both conscious and unconscious.

This week the game got an unwitting boost thanks to news that Meghan Markle, otherwise known as the Duchess of Sussex, has guest-edited the September edition of Vogue. The contents of the issue are perhaps unsurprising. As well as inevitably celebrating prominent women, such as the teenaged school truant Greta Thunberg, the Duchess has also set out to prove that women don’t need men to give them status. Something she has done by including an interview with her husband, Prince Harry."

"This in itself has drawn a certain amount of comment, and will not have calmed fears some people had that a highly political figure marrying into the nation’s most necessarily non-politically opinionated family might cause problems down the line. The fact that Meghan Markle’s pre-Harry politics might be best described as ‘woke’ is in some ways unimportant – a prominent Donald Trump-supporting Republican marrying into the Royal Family would raise similar concerns, to say the least.

The worry was that Prince Harry’s marriage to Ms Markle would end up tipping him towards her political path, fears that will not have been calmed by his appearance in the high-end fashion magazine. In the royally-guest-edited issue, Prince Harry talks about a number of things, the headline-grabber being his claim that he and his wife would not have more than two children because of its impact on the environment and climate change."

"It isn’t at all clear how many people in developing countries with a population boom look to the House of Windsor for guidance on child-production, but in a way this is at least familiar, soft, Royal-environmental boilerplate. The sort of thing which is allowed to be voiced by non-monarch members of the Royal Family because it is hard to object too strenuously and it causes no serious harm.

It is the Prince’s follow-up comments, however, that dish up the problem, less for his audience than for the Prince himself. Watching Prince Harry beginning to play the game of identifying ‘unconscious bias’ is like gazing at a hapless amateur juggling with loaded pistols; it is enough to make any well-disposed person want to scream “Stop” and seize the guns from his unsuspecting hands."

"The comments appear in a conversation between the Prince and primatologist Dr Jane Goodall, on the subject of what humans can learn from chimpanzees. At one point Dr Goodall says that children do not notice skin colour, to which Harry adds: “But again, just as stigma is handed down from generation to generation, your perspective on the world and on life and on people is something that is taught to you. It’s learned from your family, learned from the older generation, or from advertising, from your environment.” Well perhaps."

"And then Prince Harry goes further: “It’s the same as an unconscious bias. Something which so many people don’t understand. If you go up to someone and say ‘what you’ve just said, or the way that you’ve behaved, is racist’ – they’ll turn around and say, ‘I’m not a racist’. I’m not saying that you’re a racist. I’m just saying that your unconscious bias is proving that, because of the way that you’ve been brought up, the environment you’ve been brought up in, suggests that you have this point of view – unconscious point of view – where naturally you will look at someone in a different way.”

Of course, in some ways this is no more than a statement of the obvious. People acquire things from life as they go through it. We pick up ideas from our families, friends and the world around us (although we also shed as we pick up)."

"Perhaps we all have some ‘unconscious biases’: the interesting thing is which ones become acceptable to recognise (and to politically weaponise) and which do not. It may be, for instance, that Prince Harry suffers from a number of unconscious biases of his own, as may his wife, but then there are some biases that people are happy to highlight and politicise, and others thought best to skip over.

One of the most extreme forms of – generally unconscious – bias that people demonstrate throughout their lives is towards attractive people, and not only in the selection of partners. Study after study shows that good-looking men and women stand a better chance of promotion in their chosen field of work than people who are average-looking or actively unattractive.

"For instance, it may be carefully suggested that the editor of September’s issue of Vogue would not be editing September’s edition of Vogue if, rather than the acclaimed beauty she is, she looked rather more like a member of the Addams family. Or indeed an average-looking member of the general public. There may be many reasons why Prince Harry requested Meghan Markle’s hand in marriage, but her looks must have – consciously or otherwise – at least counted in her favour on the way to the altar.

Another form of bias that people express throughout their lives – again, consciously or otherwise – might be an inclination towards someone who is financially or socially secure. I should never want to accuse a Duchess – or any other member of the Royal Family – of any variety of bias. And yet it seems possible that in her search for a husband Ms Markle may have demonstrated some form of bias (unconscious or otherwise) towards thrones and their heirs. I will put the point no stronger. But in her search for love, Ms Markle must have met many people. Perhaps she met many princes and mingled with many a duke. But it is striking, at the very least, that of all the people who appeared across her path, the one she ended up marrying in a low-key ceremony at Windsor Castle happened to be the second son of the Prince of Wales."

"Did either of these (potential) expressions of unconscious bias affect anyone else? Perhaps not as badly as some expressions of bias towards people because of their race. And yet a large number of perfectly charming women never made it to the Duke’s side, at the altar or anywhere else. And a large number of slightly plain women have still not been invited to edit major fashion magazines, even fashion magazines which have become rather boringly preachy.

But this is simply an inconsistency, and we all live with inconsistencies. The problem with the Prince’s comments is more that they are part of a particular political and intellectual conveyor belt, and that belt goes only in one direction. After ‘unconscious bias’, in this pseudo-intellectual game of our time, comes the whole concept of ‘privilege’ and the earning or un-earning thereof. The privilege discussion decides – once the bias has been worked out – who has the right to speak, where, when and how often. It works out who might have benefited from ‘privilege’ and who might not. It then dictates the hierarchical order in which people may or may not speak and listen. It demotes people with privilege while aspiring to elevate those without.

People may play whatever games they think they need to play in order to achieve or retain the position they desire. I simply say – by way of warning – that though the Sussexs may think that they are playing this one with deftness and aplomb, come the next round – the discussion about unearned privilege – it is possible that Harry of Wales, and his Duchess, may find a snake where they had imagined only to find a ladder."

-Douglas Murray

And that, Ladies, is what's known at Eton as an old fashioned, proper Bitchslap.

[quote] Another form of bias that people express throughout their lives – again, consciously or otherwise – might be an inclination towards someone who is financially or socially secure. I should never want to accuse a Duchess – or any other member of the Royal Family – of any variety of bias. And yet it seems possible that in her search for a husband Ms Markle may have demonstrated some form of bias (unconscious or otherwise) towards thrones and their heirs. I will put the point no stronger. But in her search for love, Ms Markle must have met many people. Perhaps she met many princes and mingled with many a duke. But it is striking, at the very least, that of all the people who appeared across her path, the one she ended up marrying in a low-key ceremony at Windsor Castle happened to be the second son of the Prince of Wales."

Hahahahahaha, excellent!

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The nice thing about that article detailed above, I should add, is that Douglas Murray has the ear of the Queen.

r280 I love the "I will put the point no stronger"

So acid.

Lena Tindall is finally seen and she's a strawberry blonde! Zara's children Mia and Lena have a day out. Swipe for photos.

The Queen as a wartime princess in uniform.

R287 I see William's resemblance especially now in his 30s, to his grandmother in that photo. Mainly shape of the head and face, and the distance between the eyes.

Thanks to the poster who up Douglas Murray's article in full. Much appreciated.

R284 - Does he? I hadn't heard that - what is the scuttlebutt on that?

Meghan and Salma have stuff in common, both sexay actresses who married very well.

'One of the most extreme forms of – generally unconscious – bias that people demonstrate throughout their lives is towards attractive people, and not only in the selection of partners. '

Yep, and this was William's number one criteria for picking Kate. Number two was proximity and number 3, docility. He definitely didn't select her for her sparkling wit or personality.

Google camp, yuck. It’s like “nerd prom,” which seems to be on its way out as a cool event.

R263 indeed they are pissed.

So must William be, I would imagine. This is his heritage that Harry is damaging with these antics.

Reading the supposed guest list for this fancy party - just ugh. Wonder what they really get up to?

R291 - Except that Salma really could act, and Meghan couldn't. Meghan couldn't have played Frida Kahlo if her life depended upon it. As for sexy - please. Hayek has more sex in her thumbnail than Meghan has in her entire body. And whilst Hayek had class, Meghan has none. And whilst Meghan did marry "very well", Hayek married off the charts spectacularly.

Pinault could buy and sell Harry and probably Charles and William, all together, fifty times over.

Calling snagging Pinault marrying "very well" is like calling Cary Grant "reasonably attractive".

Pinault would never have looked twice at Meghan Markle. He isn't that dumb.

Pi

Douglas Murray, such subtle yet authoritative cuntery.

Careful how you criticise our Douglas here.

My comment at R297 was aimed at R296.

Salma has a beautiful face and body. MM has neither.

I misread r293 as "nerd porn", now I am thinking of scrawny guys in glasses who refuse to take off their socks,yuk

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

So the book is going to be based upon her rescue dogs' view of their beautiful savior, how saintly and selfless she is? I'm guessing the book will end before the dogs are abandoned by their beloved savior-master when she dumps them to marry her dimwit soulmate.

Doggies throw confetti and then leap joyfully into the van taking them to needletown, xoxoxox

Lena Tindall is a fat little girl.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

RPO's are just london coppers,they don't have international superpowers. If there is any truth in the tale at r305 then it speaks to money.

No r306. They do have special powers of request if they claim there is a risk of assassination. And while these may not be honoured everywhere, they will certainly be honoured in Europe. I don't doubt some google money changed hands on top of and in addition to this, but RPO's can make requests of local police to provide special precautions.

I should add, that most of these trips are well-planned in advance, so what you never have are fee-paying hotel guests being inconvenienced and physically restrained like this. It's usually planned far better than that because the optics of this kind of fuck up are ridiculously bad for all involved.

There are so many stupid rumors going round about Google Camp, like locals being ordered not to look out of their windows. Locals in Sicily spend all evening sitting chatting outside their houses. Same in Greece. And nobody can order guests not to go on their balconies either.

The rubbish some of you American shut ins who have never been to Sicily or the Med believe, honestly. So fucking gullible.

You are the one who sounds gullible and uninformed, r309

R310, just block the loon and ALL the looney posts (including calling people names) in here magically disappear.

Lot of backlash against celebs with private planes lecturing people on climate change.

The wealth of Google is likely sufficient to influence Italian powerbrokers, R305.

Since the original poster of these vids was bullied, I will post this one. The woman in a brown dress is tied to RLand is a childhood friend of H. She is married to someone tied to Soho, named Archie of all funny details. Dunno if any of you knew all that, I did not. Oh, and she just had a baby, too.

R310, R309 is the Harry Styles/Spazz troll trying to police and derail the thread, as always. A large number of people on this thread (and any he posts on) have him blocked.

As far as tales of hotel guests being told not to look out their windows, it almost doesn't matter what's true or not. There's a larger perception at play, and it ain't good.

A Vogue guest editor, a fashion designer and now a children's book author.

My, My, Ms. Sparkle sure has been busy during her maternity leave but unfortunately not with her REAL JOB of being a royal duchess. Is she getting paid for all of these careers and if so, does Charles need to allocate her any more money? Actually, does she really need to be a member of the Royal Family at all when she doesn't appear interested in playing the part? When does she ever get time to spend with her newborn and hubby? What's next, acting in a Hollywood film. Oh, so many questions.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

George is picking up some bad habits...smelling his cousin Savannah Phillips is one of them! LOL.

Those perky Markle breasts are standouts - literally!

R316 I posted similar thoughts somewhere. It doesn’t seem like this is about mad love for a man, and a desire to nest with him or whatever. It’s about career opportunities, “hit the ground running.”

R316 I posted similar thoughts somewhere. It doesn’t seem like this is about mad love for a man, and a desire to nest with him or whatever. It’s about career opportunities, “hit the ground running.”

Sorry for the double post, hate that. Anyway, I am feeling ready for fall and some new royal engagements. Wonder how things are going on up in Balmoral. Do we know if the Sussex family are definitely going to be there? I suppose they have to put in an appearance.

That's because she used to have implants back then, R320, simple as that. I don't think her natural tits (which remained small due to starving herself down into a Hollywood actress frame) were able to get enlarged THAT much by using a push-up bra and the like.

R323 - a Balmoral visit is by invitation only - either by the Queen herself or Prince Charles (who has a house Birkhall on the estate).

Have they ever been there, R325? As a couple I mean of course. Any word of an invitation?

R326 - As far as I'm aware, the Sussexes have not been to Balmoral. Of course, they love to do things "privately" so it's possible they were there last summer and they were not photographed. The rumor is that the Queen will have a "quiet word" with Meghan about her behavior on her birthday Sunday, Aug 4. If there are no photos coming and going to church with the Queen, the chances are that the rumors are false. We shall see.

Personally, with all of the mistakes Harry and Meghan are making and the PR nightmare they've become, I can't see any invitation forthcoming. That would only be a sign to encourage them to continue on the same path. I could be wrong.

George adores his cousin Savannah, that much is clear. If he eventually marries a tall, imperious blonde, we'll know the reason why.

I love the color of Princess Margaret's gown and jewels.

Swipe for photos of Princess Anne and her four granddaughters. She has her hands full!

I think finally the transparently self-serving and self-aggrandizing behavior of Harry and Meghan has finally turned many against them. People who were formerly fond of the couple and thought Meghan to be a breath of fresh air, now they're tired of their antics or worse, hate them for their preachy yet self-indulgent ways. I go on Dlised for its funny celeb posts, and last years most of the comments on Harry/ Meghan articles were positive but I look at the latest post and it's decidedly anti-Sussexes for the reasons listed above.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

I'd have to look twice if I passed this lady on the street.

R331.🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡

Tomorrow's Meghan's birthday (and mine!), plus the 119th anniversary of the Queen Mother's birth.

Here's an article from Fiona Phillips about how appallingly Meghan is being treated by the press, and how she should turn to Sophie Wessex for advice. I thought she was being sarcastic at first, but apparently not.

[quote] Imagine if she’d turned down the invitation then? No doubt she’d have been considered “too snooty even to appear in upmarket Vogue”. Who Does she think she is? The poor girl can’t do anything right.

[quote] Meghan chose not to appear on the front cover of the fashion bible for fear of appearing “boastful”.

[quote] How sweet. How intuitive. How reflective of her modest upbringing.

R335, Happy Birthday!

Thank you, R336

Be funny if R335 was Meghan.

R314 is the Welp Troll who can't spell 'spaz'. She absolutely loathes Harry Styles because he broke up 1d and deprived her of Larry moments. One of the most despicable posters on DL.

Hmmm.

Does anyone have a Daily Beast membership - would love to read the article if someone will copy and paste. Pretty please ....

She just does what she wants. Who gonna check her, boo?

Per R331's link, their August instagram schtick (tying in conveniently with Meg's Vogue) is to have their followers suggest "forces for change" from which they'll choose 15 to follow for the rest of the month. This reeks so much of marketing strategy--user engagement and all. She really doesn't have a clue about how crass she's been coming off lately.

Funnily enough, a lot of people are suggesting the Duchess of Cambridge as their "force for change" on the Sussex instagram.

R333, I'm American, but I would bow down to her, Not because it's expected, but it's what I'd expect of myself. I was raised as a polite person.

I like Kate but the idea of her as a "force for change" is laughable. She's a force for things staying as they are or even regressing.

I think they were just trolling Meghan by suggesting Kate - no-one would actually mean that. Hilarious though.

[QUOTE] Funnily enough, a lot of people are suggesting the Duchess of Cambridge as their "force for change" on the Sussex instagram.

That is funny, considering that Kate is as conventional as it gets...as people here keep pointing out.

[QUOTE] Funnily enough, a lot of people are suggesting the Duchess of Cambridge as their "force for change" on the Sussex instagram.

That is funny, considering that Kate is as conventional as it gets...as people here keep pointing out.

Oh, the Meghan loon (R348 & R349) is back.

Hi Meghan loon! Nice NOT to see your ludicrous messages!

Wow, no insults, no calling people names from the Meg-obsessed one this time? Everything ok with you?

Or is this the other Meg fan I've got on block (but who at least is comparatively polite and less of a lunatic)?

R347, it would be funny to spam it with anti-monarchist groups, left-wing Brexiters, etc ....

Or corporations which accelerate climate change

Or Piers Morgan HAHAHA

R350, you swore you'd blocked me back on thread 30! Thanks for the love, hoe. You always see and read my posts. Meg is doing what she wants, regardless of the spazzy old queen or the spazzy Datalounge queens.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Maybe Kate will slowly change the image and behavior of the BRF back to quiet dignity?

Not so long as Smug and Mug are hellbent on making it a circus sideshow in order to make a profit for themselves, r537

The two of them have to leave the country entirely, and possibly the BRF entirely, for the image of the BRF to be returned to one of quiet dignity.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The Queen Mum was born on this day in 1900.

A different cousin on the Spencer side. Alexander Fellowes is the son of Diana’s sister, Jane.

What an absolutely lovely, demure gown at R364.

R364 - this is the type of dress that Meghan of The Second Wedding should have worn if she didn't have such delusions of grandeur. Lovely bride.

R360, those girls seem to be having a fun and familly filled childhood, poor Archibald - not so much.

So, were the Sparkles with the Queen when she attended church today? Thought she was throwing Me-Again a birthday party in the country?

" You see that country pile over there, it's all mine".

Alexander Fellowes has Diana's height, nose and upward gaze. Looks more like her son than William or Harry. Good looking "fellow," heh.

Swipe for Diana's nieces and nephews from her three siblings - Spencers, Fellowes and McCorquodale families.

Hmmm...closer to being openly acknowledged?

After the gambit of leaking re: Doria and Christmas failed, they still tried it re: Liz throwing a bday party for Me-Gain? Lol. She never does seem to learn. They do not make it easy - strikes again! (They being the haters or the BRF, you choose, lol).

To think it was only a year ago they spent her bday at the wedding where she showed up looking utterly ridiculous in a poorly tailored Ikea bedsheet. At least she did not flash her lingerie in the churchyard, thank God for small favors.

That IS a lovely wedding gown at R364, and I agree it would have been a much better choice for Meghan in terms of style and appropriateness.

My mistake, the dress, glorious and ill fitting as it was, was worn in June 2018, not on her birthday. The toilet paper hat and profile deserve their own shout outs.

The flashing of her black lace bra in the churchyard WAS on her birthday last year. So klassy, our Rach.

Who could forget Daisy carrying daisies and the earth loving departure on a vintage bicycle? THIS is what a happy couple and their celebrating friends and family look like.

Who could forget Daisy carrying daisies and the earth loving departure on a vintage bicycle? THIS is what a happy couple and their celebrating friends and family look like.

The Atlantic weighs in on that Vogue cover.

Sales are said to be down, they should not have put it all on the internet.

Act Up seems so long ago.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Me-Gain wishes herself a happy birthday from her favorite account. She looks a weird combo of smug and anxious, odd snap to choose.

Go to settings and check link preview if you want to see it here and do not wish to give her clicks. Took one for the team.

Of course she picked a pic of herself where she doesn't look what she looks like these days.

R381, That picture makes her look like a suburban housewife.

She's ugly no matter what facial expression and/or hideous outfit she dons. Plus, she's a shitty person.

[quote]As for the babies, she has sent her husband, Prince Harry, out to declare that the couple will have only two.

Ouch. Not too emasculating.

Luckily Harry can't read.

The fun part of each initiative is 1) tracing the Soho connections, 2) figuring out her selfish narc agenda, and 3) figuring out how it benefits Me-Gain finanacially.

That Disney contribuition was pretty slick. Latham looks plain and straightforward but she is also an expert at foundations as slush funds.

R384, Harry can't or doesn't read? Seriously?

Ffs, R386 - it’s a joke. Obviously. Satire? Heard of that?

Dear me.

I actually think Meghan looked perfect in that last picture upthread. The blue dress, neat hair, warm smile....she actually looks like a Duchess. Makes you long for the elegant figure she could be.

[quote] She actually looks like a Duchess

What a stupid thing to say. A “duchess” is just someone a duke wants to fuck. And what does that look like?

People like you really this “royal” thing is real, don’t you? It’s not.

[quote] Makes you long for the elegant figure she could be

Puke.

Isn’t Piers Morgan a big Trumpie?

That’s her favorite housecoat, r380.

[QUOTE] A “duchess” is just someone a duke wants to fuck. And what does that look like?

Camilla has a ‘duchess’ look, with the grand hats. She looks the part, no matter her features and hair.

Is this Lainey? After all she did for Me-Gain!

R394 NO! It's not. It said FORMER ROYAL.! Lainey still writes glowing reviews about Meghan.

R1 I think Muriel did some housecleaning and got rid of some trolls.

I think Enty fucked up here. He usually uses the phase "alliterate former actress" but he put in Royal.

And I think it's Kaiser - I went over to CB the other day and was shocked to see a negative article about Smugs' writing style. The cultists in the comments were predictably enraged.

The former royal could be former Countess Luann Lesseps? And Perez Hilton maybe her blogger.

Was this discussed? The photos are interesting in the way the series from the IG in Toronto was interesting.

So it is partly the fault of Skippy! No, not THAT Skippy.

R390 I’m actually a hater, but decided to say something nice about Meghan on her birthday.

You, on the other hand, come off like someone foaming at the mouth. You’re way too emotionally invested in this soap opera. Simmer.

Think this was speculated about when they all went radio silent. Interesting how they were part of her PR pitch to agencies before she decided to stay at SS. They have been a key part of creating a narrative of Me-Gain as a victim/waif. No wonder they were so all in.

Crazy Days and Nights: Blind Item #1

SUNDAY, JULY 28, 2019 Blind Item #1

This alliterate matriarch/former actress has been cutting family members off financially so there are a lot of stories in tabloids trying to make her look bad from those spurned family members.

R394, Those Comments are priceless.

Poor Lainey got Markled. Many former journalists who liked MM are now publicly trashing her. The Vogue issue has been cut in price down to 2 BP. So poor sales and more bad news for Spenderella. Google just destroyed what little was left of Harry's reputation.

Why was MM not invited to "Wankstock?"

Comments from CDAN for those who don't want to click on the link:

And where was Sparkles while Handbag Harry was impressing billionaires and sub educated celebrities with his bare footed speech about the environment at Wankstock? Right after he descended his private plane and they all got there by a fleet of Maseratis? Wonder what this public and obvious snub is all about. As if she wouldn't have killed to be there.

Isn't it wonderful when private jet-setting actors and singers, get together to pat themselves on their back about what great people they all are?

I always wanted to know Nick Jonas' and Naomi Campbell's opinions on important matters.. Lainey’s last thing about her was less glowing than usual. It’s also surprising that Tom Sykes of The Daily Beast (a mega fan up till now) is also becoming more critical. The scales are falling from people’s eyes quite quickly. Some of us had her pegged from the beginning.

Poor Lainey got Markled. Many former journalists who liked MM are now publicly trashing her. The Vogue issue has been cut in price down to 2 BP. So poor sales and more bad news for Spenderella. Google just destroyed what little was left of Harry's reputation.

Hahahahaha karma for Lainey who’s been completely up Sparkles ass!!! 😂😂

If Harry's giving a barefoot speech it's because someone paid millions to see those feet.

Its Lainey. And interesting, I think Mulroney is getting a little cold shoulder as well. Too much attention to all her friends being rumored beards- Amal, Serena, Gayle, Jessica, - people were speculating on the real reason Harry married her. The questions about him and Adam Bidwell as well. I am betting he is The Godfather they wanted to keep secret. Also more attention on Soho house.And what goes on there, It’s all starting to leak and the Palace has probably cautioned her to distance these PR friendship. I think they started the leaking to remind her she doesn’t have all the cards- now that “ the pregnancy” is done, the stories and photos will flow

Mulroney seems to be ghosted also. The beard brigade, Amal, Serena, Gayle, Guess now we know why Cressida said no and Meghan yes One wanted true relationship, not a brother Meghan wanted fame and seems to think she married the heir

Lainey and Celebitchy kiss Markle's a$$. They go on and on about people shaming her and how horrible they are and then in turn they shame and ridicule Kate. They are obsessed with her and I can't figure out why. Celebitchy usually has 3 or 4 articles about her a day. you kind of get the feeling that Markle is writing the articles herself!

@everyone... Lainey is still up Smeg's ass. Defended the Vogue stunt, out in front of Smeg's birthday with this about whatever the Sux2bRoyal account releases, "I can’t imagine it won’t be something that feels fresh compared to what we typically see from the royal family. Which means, of course, that the haters will have something to criticise."

Know your drugs, know your doses.

Aw, Meg still has the feminists at The Atlantic on her side.

You know, the mag funded by Steve Jobs’ widow.

They’re very into radical women who get all their money and status from their husbands.

Jessica Mulroney also appears to be missing in action. Ed Enninful, the editor of Vogue UK, is Meg’s new best buddy until he loses his job, which should be any day now. . Lainey deserves it. Once a good writer and celebrity analyst she devolved into a vindictive, power-mad harridan who goes after anyone who offended her in the slightest way and to promote her oh-so-woke agenda. She should be fired.

Yes - totally agree. Especially about Adam. Noticed he was the only one engaging with Meghan and the baby in the polo pics.

Amal, Serena, Gayle, Oprah are not Markle's friends. These are people who use each other to get something.

That's not true.

Lainey wrote an article recently stating that Meghan Markle receives racist backlash for her work on Vogue. She also wrote an article celebrating Meghan's birthday.

R403 Lainey is also not a white racist. She's Chinese Canadian. That's why she's woke and will always sympathize with a POC.

Why would Lainey be fired from her own blog? That doesn't make sense.

Lainey was invited onto ITV with Eamonn Holmes to defend Meghan and now Eamonn says he's going to sue for being called a racist

Every Meghan negative reply on the Vogue Editing thread currently running made it onto Skippy's blog. I've suspected for some time that the DL Welp Troll might also be Skippy and now it is confirmed.

The circus keep delivering....

R401 That blind has been solved and it was Priscilla Presley, as everyone guessed. Not sure why you decided it was Markle. I highly doubt she was very supporting her family, except maybe a few dollars for her father here and there.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

So the removed sixth toe stump must be why she wears shoes two sizes too big. Finally makes sense.

She claimed it was because she wants to "avoid blisters" but that never made any sense, as the Today Show pointed out - extra room in shoes means more friction and so, more blisters, not less.

Anyone have a subscription to The Sunday Times? If so, please post the Camilla Long article re: our Rach. It even includes pearl clutching references, it could be a DL classic. I have seen screen shots of the paper itself, which I cannot seem to post. Anyone? Grammar trolls, you will also be thrilled.

What did the all write about before Duch & Dim?

Finally found an image that posted at R413, enjoy!

I DO love a good pearl clutching reference as I enjoy my morning coffee.

Too much PillowBaby theories over at LSA.

But I do admit to being genuinely SHOCKED at the sixth toe stump. There was a time not too long ago when that would have precluded her from being able to marry into the BRF at all.

Her FEET are AMAZING.

They are insufferable, absolutley insufferable. She's brought nothing but bad PR and bad optics to the family since the word got out that Harry was dating her and it was "serious". She started in a year before they were even engaged with the threats to the British press and false claims that her house had been broken into and abuse that was never proved. Then she moved to the Vanity Fair article, virtually announcing the engagement before the BRF did several months later. And the antics since the engagement are a matter of record.

They are absolutely Wallis and David 2.0 only they're getting to stay in the family and collect their paychecks regularly. It's horrifying. I have lost what little shreds of respect I had for the BRF for at least a commitment to seeing that they kept the line between royal duty and celebrity attention seeking. That's gone. They're letting Meghan and Harry make fools of the Queen, Charles, and the Cambridges.

If they can't find the spine to stop them and kick them out, they deserve the mockery she's bringing on their heads.

R412 Reprinted in The Australian. DL won't accept the URL for some reason. Here it is:

By CAMILLA LONG THE TIMES 8:43AM AUGUST 4, 2019

It is with a heavy heart and a fully clutched pearl that I must issue yet another dire weather warning. Please can Prince Harry and Meghan stop providing us with this absolute gale of nonstop content? It’s getting ridiculous now — it’s getting unroyal now — that last week alone Meghan announced she was launching a weird clothing line, writing a children’s book about dogs, and had guest-edited the September issue of Vogue, in which she offered advice beyond all kombucha-sniffing parody on “how to pivot from a perspective of frustration . . . to optimism” and “the power of the collective”.

Harry, for his part, travelled to Sicily where he gave a “barefoot” speech at a five-star “Google camp” on climate change. No one knows whether he could actually feel the humming of the guests’ 114 gas-guzzling private jets through the soles of his feet as he did this, but hopefully fellow climate messiahs Naomi Campbell and Leonardo DiCaprio clapped so hard they drowned it all out.

It wasn’t so much the things that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex did - it was the frequency and unrelenting madness with which they did them. Day after day of ludicrous coverage in which Meghan was called “vulgar” and “cheap” and Harry a hypocrite. How often do we hear from Kate and Prince William? Once a fortnight, probably, often less. Why do they need this much attention?

Personally, I didn’t even mind that Meghan did Vogue. Royals have always done Vogue - it’s what they do. In the 1930s and 1940s, you could barely stop them licking Vogue’s star photographer Cecil Beaton. In the 1990s, Diana was hardly off the cover. What’s weird isn’t that Meghan did Vogue, it’s that she did it in such a peculiar, grovelling, faux-humble manner, pretending she didn’t want to appear on the cover for fear of being “boastful” - I think she meant “presumptuous” - while coming across as exactly that (why do one page when you can do 300-plus?).

Instead of doing a cover shoot like predictable old Kate, she’d offered what I’ve come to dread - her opinions. These include her thoughts on the “food-sharing app Olio”; and her belief that a magazine is “like a beautiful meal”. In her editor’s letter, she spoke about her “love of writing”, but it turns out that even in this her opinion isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. A favourite poem is a dreary child’s moo by the novelist Matt Haig. Harry’s interview with the ethologist Jane Goodall descends into an amorphous rant on how “kids are taught to hate”.

The duchess herself writes like Conrad Black in full memoir mode, in great, looping, lardy, turdy sentences that are at once embarrassing in their level of gushing homily ("gracious” Michelle Obama) as well as cringe-worthy in their self-regard and pomposity. “Why would we swim in the shallow end . . . when we could go to the deep end?” she warbled.

continued . . .

. . . continued/2

Someone who’s definitely in the deep end is Harry. How did he get here, conducting mad think-ins about fear in Vogue? The interview with Goodall felt more like a therapy session in which he offloaded some of his greatest worries including flooding and earthquakes. “If you don’t think that every day is a learning process,” he said darkly, “then life is going to be tricky for you.”

Where is Harry the soldier, the silent, dutiful hero? Of all the young royals, I always thought he was the one most dedicated to service. He was the only one who actually did the army, the only one, apart from the Queen, I’d class as truly brave. Ten years ago, he would have been nailed on as the next Princess Anne, only charming, visiting charities and hospitals, rather than swanning around and appearing in magazines that extol the virtues of Indonesian breathing retreats (Vogue says breathing is an “essential biological function” that should not be taken “for granted"). He’s gone from Anthony to Cleopatra.

He’s clearly unable to persuade Meghan that there is much enjoyment in being a royal. So far she has appeared at only a few occasions, one of them being her own wedding. Whereas Kate might do five charity visits, followed by one Bafta thing, Meghan’s life is solid parties and premieres. Even her appearance at the The Lion King premiere was less as a royal than as a “friend” of Beyonce. If she were performing a proper public role you could possibly excuse her magazine work, but where are the hours of service put in to justify the use of her position for personal gain? Where is the value in any of this for us - the people who pay her?

Meanwhile, we all have a great laugh, wondering why on earth Harry’s married someone who uses the appalling verb formation “meet with”.

The Sunday Times

Thank you for that r417 - very much appreciated

Especially the Vougue edit as "beyond all kombucha-sniiffing parody" line, which was pure fried gold.

.... and then, this gem on Harry's devolution, under Smug's tutelage, from soldier to snowflake: "He's gone from Anthony to Cleopatra"

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

That's because if he leaves it to his daughter, when she marries it goes to a different family and family name, r421. He wants the estate to stay a Spencer Estate. It's called primogeniture and it's been the tradition in the United Kingdom since before William the Conqueror.

I loathe Earl Spencer but I'm with him on this one. She can marry into another estate.

R422 - Are you living under a rock? An estate/title doesn't have to change names because a woman marries a man. In your little world, it was perfectly OK for the Duke of Norfolk's estate and title to go to a distant male relative rather than any of his four daughters? Yeah, that sounds fair, doesn't it? It's time for the rules to be changed by Parliament. If the Royal Family can change the rules, so can the aristocracy.

I think you are the one living under a rock, r423. There are realities to be dealt with here, and you seem to understand none of them.

The Cambridge's promote the mental health initiative without mentioning themselves. That's the way it should be.

R424 - I understand it quite well. I think the law is wrong and unfair so I'm not going to argue with you. It will be changed eventually.

It will only be changed when landed titles are changed, r426, and, despite the Blair regime's changes to the House of Lords, this is highly unlikely, especially in an era of high death taxes.

But thank you for being so civil. It's nice to have a civil chat on the BRF threads these days.

It's not surprising because that's how _he_ inherited the estate, youngest born after three daughters

That Sunday Times piece is absolutely delicious. DELICIOUS.

It’s so wonderful that this pretentious, posturing pair of prats are finally being called out.

If Kitty Spencer were going to be Countess Spencer some day, inheriting Althorp would make sense for her. But she's not, so Louis-the-future-Earl gets the lot.

It's not fair, but until they change the way titles work to wear the oldest child--male or female--always inherits, it makes sense for land & title to go together.

To hear Charles Spencer tell it, the house is a giant white elephant, anyway. Of course, he'd have more disposable income without the 2 ex-wives and 7 children.

WHERE the oldest child, of course.

Kitty has always known this, which unfortunately makes many of the blinds about her pretty convincing.

Cedric Hampton of Love in a Cold Climate announces this debate is FASCINATING

If Cedic Hampton could have but two minutes upbraiding the Duchess of Suckcess, I think things might work far better.

Is KItty the one who’s engaged to an old rich git? In that case ES is thinking that she’s taken care of financially. That’s another reason I can think of

I see Emma Thynn, Viscountess Weymouth, has signed up for Strictly Come Dancing. Her closest friends include Kitty Spencer and Edward Enninful. Should be interesting!

I'll bet Smug thought this kind of guide was beneath her, and yet think of how much an intelligent person joining the family would have gleaned from it.

I'd bet Jack Brooksbank would read it and retain on first scan,

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

LADY COLIN

Oh this comment, hahahaha......... "You should have read the story, this is the part that your wet dream turns into Charles in all his glory, can't you just imagine him running towards you dripping wet (sweat) in his speedos all red faced and fat fingers with his arms open wide trying to plant a big wet kiss on your lips."

Reminds me of Evita when the singer says (after she’s married Peron).....”Your act hasn’t changed much”.

Markle’s hasn’t either.

What, r440?

Something tickled me in the comments section of the article, R442, but it didn't translate well.....

Ouch.

Markle thinks she's the Evita of Britain, r441

In her case, "My POEple adORE MEEEE" = the racist Celebitchies and the paid PR trolls, but nevermind

Oof, r444.

Harry seems to wear the same clothes practically every time he makes a public appearance.

Sign of a depressed person

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

To the cunt frau who submitted this, I hope you die in a grease fire.

Isn't Datalounge supposed to be a GAY site for gays and the few lezs who can stomach the usual misogyny?

R451 Those cunt Meghan fans who post here are some of the worst racist homophobes. Funny thing is they think they're all woke and shit so they can't be racist or homophobic even as they throw out racism at anyone who dares to criticize Meghan. Found is annoying that they spam with porn links but now they're calling DLers pedophiles again only because we dare to cut the Sussexes down like they deserve to be.

Haha...I saw the link posted to that upthread.....it's, what, 300 plus comments copied and pasted, and the loon was convinced that Rachel herself was here, commenting.

Skippy is everything but a Sugar.

Skippy is cray cray central for all the H&M conspiracy theories from blackmailing to the mafia and illuminaties.

I dont mind the pro or con people so much, as I do the potential for a bunch of mentally impaired loons invading this board. We have plenty of crazy people here. We dont need them imported from tumblr!

Skippy goes to bed each night in a sweat drenched Harry t-shirt from 2002.

Which one of you Data Lounge gays killed Lipstick Alley today? Own up.

It's highly doubtful that we'll ever see all of the Royal Family in kilts again. The younger generation don't wear them.

Camilla got a kick out of little Louis' antics at the Trooping The Colour.

Savannah Phillips has her hands full with Zara's daughter Lena Tindall.

Now it's Isla Phillips' turn to mind baby Lena and she's not finding it easy either.

A dress fit for a Queen.

That's not a sixth toe - that's a tailor's bunion. You can have them surgically removed but that would mean no heels for some time, so that's never going to happen

George was quite a chubby baby who slimmed down once walking. Lena is a cutie but she has the build of her rugby player father. Now that she is toddling she should lean out a bit. The cousins are lucky to grow up together, hope Archie gets to join in.

Archie is a little doll!

[quote]Which one of you Data Lounge gays killed Lipstick Alley today?

I’m lost without it, bitches.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The optics of this article, oh dear.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

^^She has an interesting podcast.

R195 actually - yes, despite what the desperate news rags tell you. While people themselves may want change in other aspects of their life, for some reason, the RF isn’t one of them. It’s a little like going home for Sunday lunch - where everything seems to stay the same. The Royals represent stability in an increasingly unpredictable and unstable world. Who would want them if they were just the same as the rest of us? Read into that what you like, but there are some things best not tampered with.

R466 He has such teeth, dear.

R58.

Dammit. Back to the drawing board.

It's yachting shorts for the Cambridges for the King's Cup today.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R475 Wills looks like he's put on some pud pudge.

I don’t like that striped top in Kate. She is already high waisted, and the top accentuates it. Her arms look like they belong on a man, compared to her tiny torso. And the red and orange colors make her hair seem brassy. She needs a haircut. But even on a bad day, she is a very good looking woman.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Wondering how MM can infringe on the day......rowing boat, Harry and the baby, furiously rowing in camera shot? Joking, btw...

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

A summary of Kate's outfit.

On the boat.

The stripes wouldn't be so bad if the top were longer and didn't have the peplum. Honestly, I'm not sure what kind of body type that top WOULD flatter. It's terribly busy and tricky to wear.

Happy Birthday, Bea! I think Kate looks great! Very jaunty and sporty! Don't suggest any way for Meghan to disrupt Will and Kate's event. We all know what happened to Earl Mountbatten. I wouldn't put it past her smarmy, fat ass.

Are we really at the point where we are comparing Meghan to a violent IRA bomber? She's hard to take at times, but that's one hell of a false equivalency.

Competitive Kate is ready to beat her husband!

Swipe for photos of Leggy Kate.

Kate's top in R482 looks like it's made of 100% acrylic and designed in 1972.

Look who's there, watching, with the silver fox.

Hahaha, too much, this is fab!

And here's mini-Liz.

Kate is in a good mood for coming in 7th. Will's team finished in third place.

George with his Middleton grandfather.

Sporty Kate just ticks all the right boxes, she looks in her element. Fuck being barefoot moaning and droaning with Katy Cocaine Perry and Orca, or trying to convince sheeple that you know all the answers to all the world's problems when everyone knows you are nothing but a ho.

Kate’s team has been disqualified from the second race at the inaugural King’s Cup, how many races are there? Anyone know?

Sadly, my favorite Cambridge wasn't there. No Baby Louis. I guess he's too much to handle. He may have jumped overboard with excitement. LOL.

"Tusk wins overall and William, whose boat came in fifth in the second race, is joint third overall. Kate was seventh in first race and disqualified in the second (so we think last out of eight). William has the bragging rights in the Cambridge household tonight" . From Twitter R496. Other than that, not a clue, lol

CHarlotte’s hair darkened considerably and her eyes more hooded. She’s looking more like Windsor side of the family than Middleton.

George looks more Middleton and Windsor with blond hair and light brown eyes it seems.

C-Middy's face, LMAO! Go on, Charlotte, tell them what you REALLY think, Lol.

Awwww

.....

.......

Yosemite Sam has been suspended from Twitter!

[quote]Have you noticed that Meghan Markle’s always-disgruntled half-sister Samantha Markle has been super...quiet lately? After spending upwards of a year tweeting up a storm, she’s gone radio silent—and that appears to be because Twitter has suspended her account @sammy_markle.

I bet Meghan can't wait for her dad and Sam to die and then she could issue a fake heartfelt statement. Then she'll rewrite history and have interviews where she tells her side of the story as the "truth" without any blowback. You know it's coming.

Charlotte is cheeky! And Kate loves it!

Kate is doing such a good job. It's become so obvious now that Meghan's horrible example throws the entire thing into high relief.