Meghan was a BULLY to Palace Staff Part III: NOBODY WOULD TREAT KATE LIKE THIS

Link to the previous thread. It went off a cliff before we could catch it.

Whoops! Wrong link above. Here's the one to the previous thread.

What gossip? Every thread on these grifters is identical.

Interesting take on matters by Charles Moore in The Telegraph:

In the circumstances, it would be understandable for most British people to turn on the Sussexes for what they are doing. The Queen will be 95 next month and her husband, who will be 100 in June, is in his third week in hospital.

She has given adult royal service to country and Commonwealth since 1947, and so has he (the couple married in that year). He also served in the Second World War. The couple’s combined years of service add up to more than twice the entire amount of time Harry and Meghan have spent on this earth.

Besides, the country is still suffering from Covid-19 and all adult generations of the Royal family have been here, helping. The Sussexes, by contrast, have been living outside Britain throughout the plague. We don’t need them being rude across the globe about the place and people they have left behind. Speaking as a resident of Sussex, I feel irritated that the couple take their title from my county but have so far spent only six hours in it. The whole nation is entitled to feel a bit like that about their carry-on. For many, that sentiment of “good luck” has turned to “good riddance”.

continued

But it does not do to take refuge in anger and relieve our feelings by cursing. The fact is that the estrangement of the Sussexes from the rest of the Royal family does represent some sort of failure, and not only on their side.

I doubt if it has much to do with racial, national or class prejudice from courtiers. It is more likely to spring from the point made above – that in a hereditary monarchy, the succession is key. This may have led the royal system instinctively to underpower the Sussexes, not seeing their fame and popularity as resources to exploit but as a burden to the system of support for more senior family members.

When they took up their public role as a couple, their staff was tiny, and they may have lacked guidance. A good opportunity for what the BBC often calls “reaching new audiences” was missed. Now we are told that both the Duke and Duchess were rude and bullying to employees. This may be true, but rudeness and bullying often arise from stress. Had the system been adequately stress-tested?

continued

This week newspaper reports carried what looked like a planned leak to anticipate the Oprah Winfrey attack. Those allegations of bullying, garnished with stories about how the Duchess had worn, against advice, expensive earrings given by the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, were clumsily pushed into the public gaze. The people who did this may have sought to benefit the Prince of Wales or the Duke of Cambridge, but it looks petty. Silence would have been better.

Now Buckingham Palace has felt forced to call an inquiry into the processes that were followed. Can any good come of HR and HRHs clashing, semi-publicly? It could go wider than just the Sussexes. Someone will probably try to drag the Duke of York in. There is a dispiriting feeling that the case of Harry is starting to replicate that of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales. He is wilful, as she was, but that does not mean that he is always wrong. To put it brutally, if there had to be a “War of the Waleses” it was necessary for the monarchy that Diana should not win; but how much better if the whole thing could have been avoided. One feels that her tragedy is now being repeated as Harry and Meghan’s farce.

Do you remember that preacher at Harry and Meghan’s wedding? “There’s a power in love,” he said. “Don’t underestimate it.” It is sad that those words now sound more like a threat than an inspiration.

end

Moore seems to ignore they behave like spoilt children. They didn't want to be helped. They simply wanted to do as she pleased. You don't start at a new company telling them how to do business.

"... may have lacked guidance"???

Would either one of them have listened to "guidance"? Harry was fed up with being a royal by the time he got married, and Meg wanted to enjoy the fame and fortune on her own terms. Plus, her fed-up husband was probably happy to see her ignore advice and defy protocol, and she'd have wanted to please her husband 100000x more than she wanted to please anyone else at the Palace.

Still, it's a bit rich if they start complaining about a "lack of guidance" after that.

Any comments on the royal experts that agreed to do a pre recorded review of the unseen Oprah interview. "We prove royal experts lie about Harry and Meghan" is the title of the vid. Yashar Ali has the link can also be going on twitter etc. These are top experts used by the UK tabloids you link. They were paid. This was done two days before the interview has even been seen. They pretended they had viewed it. Then opined on the interview they pretended to have watched.

We KNOW, R9. You posted that shit obsessively in one of the other Markle threads.

I still don't know if I can bear to watch this thing but I suppose I'll have to.

R8 I think you’ve got it right, but I’d place the emphasis in slightly different way: they both want to live their life on their own terms but everyone around them expected them to live for benefit of the institution. I can’t begrudge them wanting to GTFO

I am living for the tidbit that staff called Harry “The Hostage.”

Harry and Meghan might have been treated more equally if Meghan hadn't started melting down even before the wedding. The drama cost them the big apartment at KP and the country house at Sandringham, and it also made the Queen slam the Royal jewel vault shut. Sure, the transition was stressful, but you'd have thought a woman of 35 could have handled things a bit better. She wasn't teenage Diana.

A cunt is always a cunt, and with a ring on her finger, her cuntiness could just ooze out naturally.

I plan on reading about it, r11. No way will I waste 2 hours on this.

I’m not watching it either. Who the fuck wants to waste 2 hour on those 3. Oprah has become insufferable

The best clips will be online by the next day. You know this thing will be 80% filler.

Did Meghan take a dump in her ballgown and hide it behind her chamber pot?

I KNEW I shouldn't have let that girl into my dressing room!

It seems to me that Harry as an adult, "royal" blood or not, is still going through some hard unresolved psychological stuff about not only his mother's 1997 passing, but the circumstances of it, the resulting Royal Family response dynamic, the time and place in his adolescent development when this all occurred, etc. And Meghan in her own different way just gives off this psychologically-damaged-goods vibe to me, personally. I wish them the healthiest and the best, including that they can work through all their possibly existing inner emotional demons.

Being forced to walk behind your mother's coffin while billions looked on and took pictures would be enough to ruin anyone's mental health, especially a thirteen-year-old's.

What's amazing is that William isn't totally fucked up as well. If he is, he hides it well.

Hell no. I will not be watching.

I'm sure it will be endlessly played and dissected afterwards.

I would wish the Sussexes well if they would just do some work instead of whining on TV all the time about how badly treated they were by the BRF. Whatever happened during those 2 years Meghan was a working Royal, it's over now. If nothing else, those two years left them with the fame, the money, and the time to do something worthwhile in their lives. This endless victim tour does nobody any good, least of all them. Let the Royals get on with their business, and let the Sussexes get on with theirs.

In the clip released today: Markle was brutally silenced by the BRF because they advised her not to do the Oprah interview two months before the £30M wedding. She has been stewing about it ever since. Oh the inhumanity.

They will never work through demons as long as they cosplay Diana the Second. Twisted.

R14 Megan is also, I presume, confident in her husband’s love for her. Something poor, young Diana never could be.

That article at R4-R6, is unintended comedy. Most people have to go through their entire lives without "staff" or "guidance."

What Meghan seemed to want was all the perks that Kate got, but none of the necessary rules that Kate lives by. Kate was never defended by the Palace when the press went after her, and she never complained about that. Even when she and William were broken up, she refused to give interviews or publish a tell-all, though they'd have paid her millions for one. Kate wore a tiara to her wedding though she'd have preferred simple flowers because tiaras are what Royal brides wear. After the wedding, Kate never tried to get designer freebies or schedule a big TV interview with Oprah. Kate didn't keep the names of her children's godparents secret or keep the circumstances of their births a mystery. Kate never sued the press. What she did was provide 3 healthy children for the family (despite the tortures her pregnancies were), create a lovely family life for William, and quietly, cheerfully, do the engagements they asked her to do.

If Meghan had followed all of those rules, right now she'd be dividing her time between Kensington Palace Apt. 1 and Adelaide Cottage on the Sandringham estate. She'd have access to lovely jewels and her children would be HRHs. She'd have world-wide perma-fame and wouldn't have to do much to keep it. Within a few years, definitely as soon as Charles ascends the throne, she'd have access to even better jewels and even better tours and engagements.

The fact that she has none of these things is entirely due to impatience, selfishness, and inability to see anyone's point of view but her own. She had the chance of a lifetime, and she blew it. I think deep down she knows that, and it's why she can't quit whining, even though her new luxurious life in California looks pretty damn good. She'll never, ever be happy.

"[R8] I think you’ve got it right, but I’d place the emphasis in slightly different way: they both want to live their life on their own terms but everyone around them expected them to live for benefit of the institution"

Then why did they spend two royal years absorbing up royal freebies and whining? If they wanted out, they were acting in bad faith to stay on, complaining constantly, and doing a shit job of being Royal.

But no, I think Harry liked seeing Meg do a bad job of being a royal duchess, and at least for the first part of their marriage she'd do a lot to please him. Although at some point it became him trying to please her and not the other way around.

The recent articles in the press imply that Meghan went in with a pre-determined narrative, and it's the one she played out: She was never accepted or appreciated, undermined at every turn, and eventually forced to flee the Palace (clutching her title, jewels, and million-dollar wardrobe) for the sake of her mental health.

What this means is she never intended to be a working Royal; she was on the grift from the start. Harry was either in on it or too dumb to see her agenda.

She's still playing out the victim narrative, and she'll whip that dead horse until it brings her what she desires, independent fame and fortune. Once she's secure of her own brand, she'll dump Harry and the title, keep his children, and re-establish herself as a brave single mother. You just wait and see.

R30, well you don't think she really loves Harry do you? Men are so gullible.

Anyone else feel a little uncomfortable with all the attacks on Meghan? The woman is disabled, with real issues she needs to face and resolve. Gawking at her car crash of a life seems wrong.

If anyone deserves an attack, it's Oprah and others exploiting her vulnerabilities. These folks are the vultures here.

NPD is a disability now, R32??? What is a reasonable accommodation for that kind of disability? Only allowing a narc to kinda sorta make everyone’s life hell just a little bit?

Charles' nickname for her is "Tungsten." She's not disabled, she's on the grift.

You could make a case that Harry has real mental issues: low IQ and complex PTSD, but not his wife.

Agreed, Oprah doesn't get dragged nearly enough. She invested a LOT in this interview: begging for it since before they were married, playing therapist for the entire 17 months the Harkles pretended to be royals, and if rumors are true, she has them living at her properties in Los Angeles and Santa Barbara (unsure about cash money, but I'd believe that, too). Papers today said she is getting $7-9Mil for this interview, plus all the wonderful prestige and admiration of being Harkle adjacent. What a gal, a national treasure.

Oh look, Messica comes groveling back defending her “friend.” Strange how the Fuckess was radio silent when she had her race scandal. Wonder how much money or promises changed hands?

May I add, that little Archie looks adorable and cuddly. May he have a happy life somehow out of all this and grow up to be strong and educated. It was nice to see how he's coming along. I hope his parents and grandma treat him well.

R36 Jessica Mulroney is desperate to get back in with Meghan despite Meghan having ghosted her for months now. The sheer fucking hubris of that post is hilarious though.

Diana would later admit to friends that her Panorama interview was her biggest mistake. Harry idolizes his mother and his blind to her flaws. Don't get me wrong, I loved Diana and she is leagues ahead of Meghan in terms or personality and actual sincerity of emotions, but she made numerous mistakes in her attempts to try and manipulate the media and seize the narrative. William has faired better than Harry because he has reconciled his mother's flaws with her strengths.

Thank you, R28, your elucidation is clear and very impartial.

The Daily Telegraph today has just printed all the dirt.

It's a scorched earth take down. They ain't never coming back from this. Not in the UK.

One of the funniest things in the article: the Archibishop of Canterbury at the wedding reception, not knowing who Oprah was, asked what she did. Oh to be a fly on the wall.

[quote]She'll never, ever be happy.

[quote]"She wanted drama"

Megs is a pathological narcissist. Drama is what provides her attention and the rush of being the only star in the galaxy. She will never, ever be happy because she is an empty husk, devoid of human emotion/feeling for anything or anyone but HERSELF.

The Telegraph article in R40 is behind a paywall. Could someone kindly cut/paste it here. Ta!

Also, so far all the manufactured drama is a way of appealing to Harry - of making him want to protect her from the big, bag... whoever it is this time. So there is a practical point to it all, it's her way of controlling him and isolating him from everyone in his old life, and he's a dimwit so it'll probably be a long time before he realizes he's being played.

And R40, your "scorched earth" article is paywalled.

[quote]R44 it's her way of controlling him and isolating him from everyone in his old life

What made you fear women so much?

Was it Mommie?

For r43

There was something distinctly familiar about the Oprah Winfrey teaser in which Prince Harry declared: "My biggest concern was history repeating itself."

The words, due to be aired during the Duke and Duchess of Sussexes' tell-all interview on Sunday night, bore an uncanny resemblance to the statement released by Harry's communications secretary, Jason Knauf, in November 2016 after the Sunday Express had revealed that the Prince was dating the American actress.

Confirming that "his girlfriend Meghan Markle" had been "subject to a wave of abuse and harassment", the statement criticised the "racial undertones" of newspaper coverage, adding: "Prince Harry is worried about Ms Markle's safety and is deeply disappointed that he has not been able to protect her. This is not a game – it is her life and his."

The unprecedented salvo created two important narratives around the former Suits star – it formally confirmed her status as the woman in Harry's life but also positioned her, in the eyes of the palace and the public, as the victim at the heart of a media "storm". As the statement suggested, a line had been "crossed".

But the tirade "by the Communications Secretary to Prince Harry" also put Mr Knauf in a compromising position. How was the former director of corporate affairs for the Royal Bank of Scotland going to be able to handle media relations for a couple when the Prince had so publicly made plain their deep hostility towards the press?

Almost exactly two years later, the 39-year-old spin doctor would submit a a bullying claim accusing Meghan of driving two personal assistants out of the household and undermining the confidence of a third staff member.

The Sussexes have denied that Harry pleaded with Mr Knauf not to pursue it, claiming the couple are the victims of a calculated smear campaign based on harmful misinformation. They said the Duchess was "saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma".

Those highlighting the "outrageous bullying" say they want to "tell the other side of the story" to the picture expected to be painted by the Duchess on the Oprah special of her "almost unsurvivable" time in the Royal family. "Anyone who is a victim can't bear to watch it," said one.

Meghan comes across as your classic sociopath narcissist (aka Donald Trump) and Harry, maybe hopelessly a co-dependent partner.

Toward the end of his time in England, Harry started looking like an unhappy hostage, dreaming of an escape to Africa maybe. At some point, maybe soon , he will start looking like an unhappy hostage again with Meghan, dreaming of being rescued again - back to - England?

All speculation, of course, R45, but if I'm right... wouldn't that shit totally work on a guy like Harry?

I mean, at the bottom of all his issues is the loss of his mother when he was a kid, there's likely to be strong guilt there because he couldn't protect her from everything that happened, and resentment towards his father and The Palace for their role in it all. And if a pretty girl were to wear the same perfume his mother did, and after she'd met his people she'd confide in him that they were racists and being mean to her and he needed to protect her like the big strong military guy he is... it'd play right into all his old resentments, his desire to chuck all the Royal crap, and his male ego.

All pure speculation, of course.

Continued by r46

The couple's lawyers insist Buckingham Palace is manipulating the press to peddle a "wholly false narrative" –notwithstanding the fact that the complainants no longer work in the royal household and the lack of palace action has now prompted an internal inquiry.

The Telegraph has spoken to a number of well-placed insiders who witnessed first-hand the turmoil within the royal household from Meghan's arrival as Prince Harry's girlfriend to the couple's decision to stand down as working royals last year.

All spoke on the condition of anonymity amid claims they had been operating in a "climate of fear", where employees were routinely "humiliated" in front of their peers and repeatedly subjected to "unreasonable demands" by both Meghan and Harry.

Unwilling to play a supporting role

It was not until October 2017, a year after Mr Knauf's unprecedented statement that Meghan gave an interview to Vanity Fair in which she declared of her relationship with Harry: "We're in love. I'm sure there will be a time when we will have to come forward and present ourselves and have stories to tell, but what I hope people will understand is that this is our time."

The public did not have to wait long. Just a month later, the couple announced their engagement with a photocall in the sunken garden at Kensington Palace and an interview with the BBC's Mishal Husain in which Harry described his fiancee as "another team player as part of the bigger team".

Yet behind palace gates, it was quickly becoming apparent that Meghan had no intention of she and Harry being seen as the "supporting act" to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, despite their seniority in the royal pecking order.

That Christmas, determined to walk side by side with William and Kate to Sandringham's St Mary Magdalene Church, rather than several steps behind, they were pictured together as the so-called "Fab Four".

My prediction is that the interview will make her more disliked in the UK but more popular in the US.

In the US, among the masses, the story is that a beautiful mixed-race woman married a prince, and then the BRF been nice enough or appreciative enough of her. The BRF are already understood in the US as being fatally stodgy and as having been to blame for Diana being unhappy, and Americans don't understand Meghan will never be queen nor that by the time she married him Prince Harry was a minor royal (since he is so far down the line of succession now). There's also this ridiculous thing in the US where if you're a youngish woman and cry about how you've been victimized, the press automatically rallies rabidly to your side (look at how Dylan Farrow's claims have been reverentially treated these last few weeks). This may bring Meghan the guru-status she has long sought, and will almost certainly help her profile here.

But in the UK I think they're not going to like it. They see her there as a young woman who got the chance to have everything and then but the hand that fed her with ridiculous expectations of high expense trips and perks. The Guardian will still plug her, since like the US press they obsessively push that all non-white celebrities must be saints and can never be criticized; but otherwise the press there will mostly stay against her.

Continued from r49

The Cambridges invited the Sussexes to spend the festive period at their nearby bolthole, Anmer Hall, an experience Meghan spoke of fondly afterwards. "Meghan was very positive about it," said a former aide.

Two months later, the quartet appeared at their first official event together at the inaugural forum of their Royal Foundation – a highly choreographed event described by one royal insider as "designed to send a message that they would be working as a team. It was all very carefully rehearsed beforehand.”

After Meghan showcased her years of previous work with "larger NGOs and smaller grassroots organisations", both William and Harry acknowledged that working so closely with loved ones had led to "healthy disagreements" over how to best guide the foundation's work.

"Working as a family does have its challenges, of course it does," Harry said. "But we're stuck together for the rest of our lives."

By now, Kensington Palace staff had already become familiar with a mantra that would come to characterise the run-up to the Sussexes' wedding in May 2018.

"What Meghan wants, Meghan gets" may have been shouted by Prince Harry to Angela Kelly, the Queen's personal assistant, following a row over a tiara – but royal aides were already well acquainted with the importance of meeting the Duchess's exacting standards.

"Everyone wanted her to be happy because they knew that would make him happy," said one. "Do whatever it takes to make it work for Meghan was the mantra. We all cared deeply about Harry. Contrary to this idea that they weren't supported, we were going to great lengths to accommodate their needs."

So much so that there was an extraordinary incident during the couple's first tour of Scotland when members of the palace PR team "body blocked" Meghan's former adviser Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne during a visit to an Edinburgh cafe in what one former aide described as "the most embarrassing moment of my professional career".

The Duchess had apparently expressed "a reluctance to make eye contact" with Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne, who was reduced to having to post an Instagram shot of her former close friend and client visiting the Social Bites cafe from a considerable distance. "Anyone from the past was a problem," observed the former aide.

Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne's name would later reappear in court documents accusing Meghan's close friend and stylist Jessica Mulroney of "putting pressure on her [Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne] to withdraw or change statements" she had made in an April 2018 interview with the Mail on Sunday.

The defence documents claimed the Sunday newspaper's features editor complained about the intervention to Mr Knauf, who allegedly responded by saying he would ensure "this does not happen again". In the piece, Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne described Meghan as: "Picky, not only when it comes to her clothes but also her colleagues, instantly dismissing those who didn’t share her 'vision'."

Describing how the Duchess had "given me a bit of a difficult time" after meeting Harry, she added: "Meghan likes to move on".

When contacted by The Telegraph, Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne declined to comment on the incident.

'Email bombardments'

As the world was gearing up for what the LA Times had billed as "a royal wedding for the 21st century", behind palace gates the atmosphere was becoming fraught.

Staff had grown used to "email bombardments" by Meghan and Harry, with one describing how "the last thing we'd do before going to sleep is reply to their messages and the first thing we'd do in the morning is reply to their messages. Weekends, holidays – there were no boundaries. They live on their phones all the time".

Despite publicly claiming they largely ignored the press coverage, in reality the couple were often consumed by it. "They're both very thin-skinned," said one former employee.

Meghan's supporters say staff members "who preferred a more genteel pace" could not keep up with the Duchess's "American work ethic" – with one close friend now suggesting the criticism was racially motivated. "Find me a woman of colour in a senior position who has not been accused of being too angry, too scary, too whatever in the workplace," the friend said.

Yet it was not just palace employees who found themselves on the receiving end of "inescapable screaming and shouting".

Much has been written about the bridesmaids' dress fitting, first revealed in The Telegraph in November 2018, that left the Duchess of Cambridge in tears.

Contrary to subsequent reports that the row concerned Princess Charlotte's tights, what actually happened was that the dress itself did not fit Kate's then nearly three-year-old daughter. According to a well-placed source, "demands were made about when subsequent fittings would be, and Kate left sobbing".

While Meghan's allies suggest that Kate did not make enough of an effort to welcome her future sister-in-law into the royal fold, allies of the Cambridges suggest she "tried to arrange social things" and invited her to watch tennis together but "there was a sense that Meghan never really wanted to be friends".

Thank you R46!

Meghan's lawyer has just tweeted. She has seen the UK royal experts lying vid.

Not done but having problems copying from my phone r43.

Those inside the palace concede, however, that the Cambridges can "appear standoffish" and are "often out of contact for extended periods".

Another former royal aide claimed the Duke, particularly, appreciated the "deflection" from his own occasionally demanding behaviour. "Bullying is endemic across all the households," the former aide added.

"The Meghan thing is a disgrace, but it's not in isolation. They cut you out, undermine you, talk down to you. One minute you're in – the next you're persona non grata. Some staff have special protection. I've never witnessed behaviour like it before. I wish I'd never seen behind the curtain."

One member of staff afforded "special protection" is Angela Kelly, who has served as the Queen's closest aide since 2002. Rumours of Meghan being dubbed "Duchess Difficult" began to surface around the time it emerged that the Liverpudlian docker's daughter had been given a tongue-lashing by Harry.

Yet what was never accurately reported around the time of "Tiaragate" was that far from being denied the item from the Crown Jewels she wanted, Meghan was in fact given her first choice.

The argument erupted after the Duchess demanded that Queen Mary's Diamond Bandeau Tiara be produced for an unscheduled hairdressing appointment.

"Angela told Harry it was priceless and couldn't suddenly be handed over at short notice. He was furious and shouted: 'What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.' Suffice to say it didn't go down too well." So badly, in fact, that the no-nonsense 53-year-old, who has her own fearsome reputation among colleagues, reported the incident to the Queen, prompting a grandmotherly telling off for Harry.

Little did the Prince know at the time that staff had also given him a nickname: "The hostage".

According to one person with first-hand knowledge of the events: "They insisted that they had the same inflation-adjusted budget for the wedding as William and Kate – she got the choir she wanted, the dress, the carriage procession, the tiara – she got everything she wanted but it still wasn't enough.

"She was constantly looking for reasons to say she had been deprived. Also, she wanted drama from the very beginning."

According to one person with first-hand knowledge, the couple 'insisted that they had the same inflation-adjusted budget for the wedding as William and Kate's.

Although the couple wanted their spokespeople to deny it, a story about Meghan requesting air freshener to be sprayed around the "musty" St George's Chapel was true, according to multiple sources.

Even The Kingdom Choir did not get off lightly after the couple changed their song 12 times before they were happy with the arrangement of "Stand By Me". As choir member Karen Gibson revealed: "Gospel music is all about the cherries on top and it's not about stinting on anything. But we got word back that they wanted something a little less, so we did a second version which had an Etta James arrangement but again we had word back that it wasn't right."

The group was then asked to meet Harry and Meghan face to face, before the couple finally settled on an arrangement after 11 previous attempts.

"The wedding was hugely stressful for everyone involved in it," said one former aide. "Staff were spending most of their time having smooth things over with suppliers."

The "Markle Debacle", when Meghan's father Thomas pulled out of the wedding at the last minute, only added to the tension as royal aides scrambled to "rescue" the narrative around the "big day" by having the Prince of Wales step in to walk Meghan down the aisle.

Despite Meghan later claiming to ITV's Tom Bradby that "not many people have asked if I'm ok", royal insiders insist they "rallied around" the couple – who were both in tears at times.

The Most Rev Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who officiated the ceremony, is also understood to have given "psychological as well as spiritual" support. The principle leader of the Church of England caused hilarity among his staff by failing to recognise Ms Winfrey at the lunchtime reception at Windsor Castle, asking the US chat show host what she did for a living.

By the time the couple had returned from their honeymoon, relations between the Sussexes, the Cambridges and their staff became so bad that Harry and Meghan appeared reluctant to engage with anyone at the June 2018 leaving party for Miguel Head, William's former private secretary.

According to two separate sources, the couple "remained aloof" throughout the bash in the private garden at Kensington Palace. "It was a really convivial atmosphere with William giving a touching speech about Mig, but Harry and Meghan just remained on the outskirts and didn't mingle with anyone. They were the last to arrive and the first to leave."

Eyebrows were similarly raised when, having shared the news of her pregnancy at the Champagne reception following Princess Eugenie's wedding to Jack Brooksbank in October 2018, Meghan declined to attend the evening do. The bride was said to have been "upset" that Harry only "popped along for a drink without Meghan" – although they were due to fly to Australia for their first Commonwealth tour the day after.

During the 16-day tour, which also took in Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand, the couple appeared reluctant to engage with the press. Although Harry managed to be persuaded at one point to speak to reporters at the back of the plane, he told them: "Thanks for coming, even though you weren't invited."

Bullying claims emerge

On the same trip, it was claimed that Meghan had cut short a visit to a market in Fiji because she was concerned about the presence of a UN organisation promoting women, with which she had previously worked but now was no longer associated.

At the time, officials suggested that it was because it was humid and the crowd was oppressive in the market. After Meghan had been ushered away, a female member of her entourage was spotted sitting in an official car, looking extremely upset. Meghan's female personal protection officer left her post shortly afterwards.

Lawyers for the Duchess said she met other leaders from UN Women later on the tour and denied she left for the reason alleged.

DL is the only place on the internet that takes side with that ancient racist, homophobic, incestuous institution and constantly shits on this young woman, calling her all kinds of sexist slurs. Which should tell you something about this place. Well, maybe not the only. There's 4chan and Stormfront.

There's one issue that's gotten no attention, yet grates on me, and grates on me a great deal.

We don't have royalty in America. We don't have dukes or duchesses. And we certainly don't have princes or princesses.

Yet there they are, living in California parading themselves as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. There's Oprah, Queen of Equality, promoting her very special chat with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. She'll no doubt be calling him Prince Harry.

This is plain un-American. And disgusting coming from those who consider themselves the wokest of the woke.

The truth of the matter is that American’s just have a very different standard as to what they consider good service than the British.

(continued article). Although Mr Knauf had not gone on the tour, he is thought to have been "deeply concerned" by reports of the couple's behaviour overseas.

"There was a sense that they were just refusing to take advice, and insisting on doing everything their way," said one royal source. "No one, from the most senior to the most junior employee, wasn't under constant attack," said another.

Matters came to a head in October 2018 following the departure of a second member of the Duchess's private office.

Mr Knauf emailed Simon Case, then William's private secretary and now the Cabinet Secretary, after conversations with Samantha Carruthers, the head of HR. Mr Case then forwarded it to Ms Carruthers, who is based at Clarence House.

The email read: "I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X* was totally unacceptable. The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence. We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y."

The email, which also expressed concern about the stress being experienced by Samantha Cohen, the couple's private secretary, concluded: "I questioned if the household's policy on harassment and bullying applies to principals."

While Mr Case was "very personally supportive" of the individual members of staff, Mr Knauf expressed his concern in the email that "nothing will be done". The palace is now holding an investigation, having been criticised for failing to act sooner.

It was not until a month later that it was reported that Melissa Toubati, the Duchess's former PA, had "quit suddenly", just six months into the job. The following month, it was announced that Ms Cohen would not stay in post after the Sussexes' baby was born.

The couple were apparently "furious" about reports of their high staff turnover, piling more pressure on their PR team to "try to turn negative headlines into positive ones".

According to one former employee: "What people fail to understand is Harry's hatred of the media is probably one of the most important things in his life. It is defining for him. So the narrative is always – it’s the press's fault, never theirs."

That Christmas, the Sussexes were once again photographed alongside the Cambridges on Dec 25 but opted to stay with the Queen at the "main house" rather than Anmer Hall.

It came after an awkward staff Christmas party in which "all mention of Melissa's name was banned", according to one royal insider. "It was as if she never existed." Some employees found it hard to reconcile the couple's erratic conduct with moments of genuine kindness, such as when Meghan would buy female staff members flowers or even jewellery.

By the New Year, relations within Kensington Palace had "irretrievably broken down," with Prince Harry no longer on speaking terms with Mr Knauf after he had failed to persuade him to drop the complaint against his wife. The Sussexes' lawyers deny any such conversation took place.

Sources close to the couple say Ms Toubati, who was asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement, was sacked for misconduct, pointing out neither staff member made complaints of their own to HR. Ms Toubati's friends deny she was sacked for misconduct.

With Harry and Meghan already operating in a silo – and increasingly consulting the Duchess's US team of advisers rather than palace officials – a split of the two households at Kensington Palace appeared an inevitability.

It was around the time that the couple moved to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor in March 2019 that Amy Pickerill became the third of the Duchess's staff to leave her role, having served as her assistant private secretary since November 2017.

Mr Knauf also stepped down to work as senior adviser to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. He is now chief executive of the Cambridges' Royal Foundation. Friends say he "bitterly regrets" not warning Sara Latham, who was appointed as the Sussexes' director of communications in April 2019, how difficult working for the couple could be.

The American PR supremo, who used to advise the Clintons, quickly worked this out for herself when the couple insisted on secrecy around son Archie's birth on May 6, while trying to maximise global coverage.

Around the same time it was falsely claimed that the Duchess had been prevented from doing an interview with CBS anchor Gayle King, Ms Winfrey's close friend. In fact, insiders say "the Duchess was calling shots throughout."

It came after Meghan had attended a high-profile baby shower in New York with Serena Williams and Amal Clooney, without being accompanied by any palace press officers. Concerns were raised behind palace gates when freebies started arriving at New York's Mark Hotel, causing consternation for staff back in the UK having to wrestle with the Royal family's strict rules on gifting.

Having courted controversy throughout the summer of 2019 for snubbing the Queen's invitation to Balmoral and taking four private jets in 11 days instead, relations with the media were at rock bottom at the start of the Sussexes' September tour to Africa.

Royal aides were then left dumbfounded when what had been a surprisingly successful 10-day trip with Archie was overshadowed by Meghan's interview with Mr Bradby, in which she revealed the "struggles" she had faced adapting to life in the Royal family.

It came as Harry released an attack on the tabloid press as the couple announced they would be suing the Mail on Sunday over the publication of a letter Meghan had written to her father.

In a highly personal and scathing statement, Harry said some newspapers had "vilified her almost daily for the past nine months" and claimed they had published "lie after lie" at Meghan's expense simply because she was out of public view on maternity leave.

Referencing his mother Diana, Princess of Wales, who died in a car crash in Paris while being pursued by the paparazzi, the Duke said: "Though this action may not be the safe one, it is the right one. Because my deepest fear is history repeating itself. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces."

The interview set the tone for their January 2020 announcement that they would be "stepping back as senior royals" to become "financially independent".

As the world gathers to watch the most highly anticipated royal television event since Diana's Panorama interview in 1995, it will be left to the viewers to decide which version of history represents the truth.

Thanx again R46.

[quote] DL is the only place on the internet that takes side with that ancient racist, homophobic, incestuous institution and constantly shits on this young woman, calling her all kinds of sexist slurs. Which should tell you something about this place.

And yet, here YOU are... actively participating in "this place," with no sign of leaving.

Which should tell us something about [italic]you.[/italic]

I don't get that Harry is trying to act like a prince; he just wants a break from royal work. Meghan, however, seems to be acting very much like Her Majesty, Queen Meghan of California. If she could get people to refer to her as Duchess Meghan, she could probably learn to live with it. And that, is un-American.

They're really trying to spin this as "Meghan is as hounded/popular/beloved as Diana"....in other words, trying to say that Meghan is at the same level as Diana at her height.

Which is ridiculous.

Bitch WANTS that level of fame but she ain't never gonna get it.

Nobody was ever going to treat Meghan with the deference they would show Kate, OP.

The reason has nothing to do with race, but with rank. Meghan (or any other Duchess of Sussex, no matter how white) is supposed to curtsy to her, FFS.

There's also the fact that she's pleasant to people, but that's secondary.

If Diana was still alive, she would've seen right through the bitch right away, given her the smackdown she so desperately deserves and sent her packing.

To do such an interview about how horrible your in-laws are while your grandfather-in-law is undergoing heart surgery is tacky and tactless.

Rachel needs to take Negan's baseball bat and shove it right up her anus. It would probably go up without a hitch.

R67 - nah Diana would've liked the drama that Meghan brought and gotten right on board with it. Diana was also pretty unstable and hated the Firm.

Team R67. Diana was a Grade A narcissist: they don't like to see another one coming along, especially a younger one with even better excuses for presenting herself as a victim.

PS I don't endorse R67's descent into mayhem at the end there.

I was being sarcastic. It was my way of telling Rachel to fuck off. Sorry if I got a little graphic.

If Diana was an unstable drama queen, then there's nothing an unstable drama queen hates more than another unstable drama queen drawing the focus away from them!

Diana would have HATED Meghan, but if she'd lived, I doubt Meghan would have been a threat. As I said Harry s personality has been shaped by the loss of a young mother, if Diana had lived Harry might well hate her too.

The BRF may find they are victims of the Law of Unintended Consequences if this Telegraph report is true, that bullying is endemic across all royal households. A whole new royal #metoo movement could start.

"Another former royal aide claimed the Duke, particularly, appreciated the "deflection" from his own occasionally demanding behaviour. "Bullying is endemic across all the households," the former aide added. "The Meghan thing is a disgrace, but it's not in isolation. They cut you out, undermine you, talk down to you. One minute you're in – the next you're persona non grata. Some staff have special protection. I've never witnessed behaviour like it before. I wish I'd never seen behind the curtain."

R49 The lofty grandeur of that statement “this is our time.” Well, la di dah!

A bull is a male cow. Does that mean Megan is a man?

R52 I just peeked at Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne’s Instagram. She’s quite pretty.

Diana and Meghan going head to head.

R56 The couple were “both in tears at times.” Christ, Harry.

History will make her out to be the gold digger she always was. I mean look at the family she comes from!

That was a JUICY article - big thanks to the person who posted it (R46?)!

The staff surrounding the BRF are often portrayed as petty & political, but my god what a nightmare they had to contend with. The bit about the choir - the choir at the wedding! - being micromanaged by Harry & Smegs is particularly ridiculous, though I'd bet that was 100% Markle.

While "bullying" is now used as an all purpose term, if you've ever worked for someone who just micromanaged the hell out of you - and screamed at you when you did what they asked (but of course didn't do it to their exacting standards) - you can appreciate how these people just felt at their breaking points. And that's not throwing in the constant barrage of emails & texts, which makes you wonder why newlyweds aren't spending quality time *with each other* rather than haranguing some poor PA on her day off or Christmas morning.

After reading that article, I can completely understand why these people wanted to torpedo their big Kiss & Cry session with Oprah. For her part, I hope Oprah gets absolutely roasted for allowing them a forum to criticize others without fully investigating their accusations.

Oprah will never speak to Meghan again after this.

What FINALLY pushed me onto the "Meghan is cunt" bandwagon is when the brothers stopped talking. The ONLY thing that could come between brothers who were THAT close is a wife the other brother HATES. It doesn't help that Markle has the crew of a canceled show writing dissertations about how wonderful she is. GTFOH

I was hoping the article would touch on the "Rose Gate" portion of the drama; whether the Harkles allies planted it to get back at Wills & Kate for if the story had legs of it's own. But I guess it's understandable that the authors of this article didn't want to touch that one with a 10 foot pole.

I was kind if disappointed (though not surprised) to hear that Wills is a kind of a demanding asshole, though maybe the fallout of this debacle will force him to clean up his act (much like the reckoning Charles had after Diana)

Please F & F all posts by Klan leaders:

Dex

SurvivingAngel

Della

The poster who calls everyone 'pet'

"The ONLY thing that could come between brothers who were THAT close is a wife the other brother HATES."

Let's add to that: ". . . or a wife the other brother's wife hates."

That’s bullying behavior, R84.

[quote]During the 16-day tour, which also took in Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand, the couple appeared reluctant to engage with the press. Although Harry managed to be persuaded at one point to speak to reporters at the back of the plane, he told them: "Thanks for coming, even though you weren't invited."

This is a big reason why they're being slammed, they didn't care for the media and didn't fall for the media's trick of publishing nasty stories about them in retaliation for not giving interviews and being easily available.

What gets me about all this is that they didn't like having to deal with the press, they were clearly told they HAD to, so they left. I mean, they did what they had to do. "Okay, we won't get the perks of being a royal in exchange for being able to talk to the press we want to talk to, and not be forced to talk to the tabloids or play their games."

That made the tabs and the media even angrier. I think it's hilarious.

I'm finding it difficult to believe that Andrew, Margaret, Philip, Fergie, Diana, and assorted others in the Royal Family weren't also demanding, aloof, picky, and insistent that they always got what they wanted.

[quote]This is a big reason why they're being slammed, they didn't care for the media and didn't fall for the media's trick of publishing nasty stories about them in retaliation for not giving interviews and being easily available.

Wait a minute - the press is like oxygen to the BRF; can you imagine the rage of the Harkles if the press said "you're the 6th in line to the throne. It's not worth our time & cost to cover this PR boondoggle. Get back to us when you actually do something important."

Not unlike US politicians (people like John McCain were masterful at this), it seems to me you need to engage the press in a positive, if mutually beneficial relationship. I think any person or institution met with outright, misplaced hostility would respond in kind.

Aw, is poor spazzy weak R86 triggered? DL Klan members deserve to be bullied off the board.

[quote]I'm finding it difficult to believe that Andrew, Margaret, Philip, Fergie, Diana, and assorted others in the Royal Family weren't

Whatever they were, they were most certainly NOT pathological narcissists.

The racists at the Mail said that Meghan was 'straight outta Compton' yet expected to still be included in the Royal Rota!

[QUOTE] Whatever they were, they were most certainly NOT pathological narcissists.

Will you FUCK OFF, Narc Troll! You're dumb as mud, saying the same thing on every thread you find.

R93 = Graduate of Meg Markle Pathological Narcissist School of Childish Tantrums and Bullying

R94 = Narc Troll and Klan Granny. His only contribution to any thread is to declare that the subject of the thread and/or other posters are narcissists. One of the least intelligent people I've ever encountered.

Harry the hostage, sad but true. I wonder did any of the staff secretly manage to film any tantrums on their phones?

R95 = Staunch Defender of pathological narcissists being one herself.

R97 - I rest my case. You just proved yet again that all your feeble brain is capable of is calling someone a narcissist.

Harry is bisexual and enjoys MMF threesomes. Megs is holding that over his head. If he came out as bi it would allow him to get out of that abusive marriage and would get him, perhaps, some sympathy.

Try to be a little kind to my rents, I’ve come to the conclusion that they’re not the brightest bulbs💡

If she was treated badly by the senior members of the BRF, it’s all the MORE reason to not treat staff badly. You know how it feels. But some people feel the need to “punch down”.

Be kind.

I think you can work out how abusive an employer is by the rate of staff turnover, specifically staff quitting for reasons other than advancing their career, or quitting shortly after being hired.

It's one of the first lessons you learn as a professional of any sort when you enter the workforce: treat the non-professional staff well because they're the ones who really run the show and can flush your career right down the toilet if you're a jerk. Whether in Britain or the U.S.

But maybe Hollywood is different.

I don't blame them for wanting to GTFO as poster upthread put it.

I do blame them for wanting to GTFO because they wanted to be much richer, not do the boring slog work in return for privileges, and shoot their mouths off whenever, but also wanting to retain those privileges AND using a victim narrative to cover up the truth:

They wanted lots more money and the name without the game.

But that wouldn't have gotten them nearly as much PR and attention, would it?

It's their glaring hypocrisy that is so disgusting.

If he'd just said, Hey, my brother has 3 kids, I'm 6th in line, I think we'd be happier making our way on our own. Looking forward to family get togethers. God bless, and God save the Queen!

It would all have been fine.

It was Meghan's and Harry's choice to frame it as a war.

But character is destiny and that's why we always end up back at the same place.

Harry was an angry 14 kid filled with unresolved resentment blended with entitlement, and Meghan was his perfect instrument.

The real question is why were the BRF, as they have done in the past, too lax, frightened of confrontation, and unwilling to take risks, stupid enough to let Meghan in when anyone who wasn't blind could see this marriage was a train wreck waiting to happen?

If Meghan a actually states in that interview, naming names, that Kate and Camilla leaked nasty stories about her (never mind that Megjan started leaking nasty stories about Kate within ten minutes of the wedding), I would not be surprised if William leaps at the opening and files a very expensive slander suit against Meghan.

As for Meghan's friends circling the wagons: when all those witness accounts are published, including Melissa Tabouti's, they are going to be left with egg all over their faces.

It's getting rather sickening, and far less fun than it promised. It's like watching Greek tragedy but without the grandeur.

This is just another palace royale smear campaign because the actress hasn’t learned the lines they want to hear.

Will you be making fancy snacks or having zoom viewing parties for the Sunday night interview? I might.

R105 - Spare us. Meghan was manifestly unsuited to a life of royal service, which, actually, DOES require learning some lines, and learning which lines to avoid, because it's a fucking CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY which means it has to be above politics because it represents AN ENTIRE COUNTRY not just the woke London luvvies that Meghan adores.

Yeah: in return for free homes, millions in designer clothes, servants, jewels, limos, nannies, chauffeurs, and your face on magazine covers every time you step out the door, you owe something back.

Meghan's view was that she could take the bennies and then get indignant when a 1,000 year old and highly successful institution wouldn't let her play it her way.

She was developing that victim narrative a year before the engagement, and Harry's been nourishing his infantile rage and sense of being ill done by because he was second, not first for 20+ years, long before he met Meghan.

There were rumours about Meghan's behaviour long before this interview, and Meliisa Tabouti and the other staff that got out as fast as they could WILL be telling their truths, too.

Meghan's is a brass-plated opportunist lying grifter. She was on the hunt for a "high profile British husband" before she met Harry. She's been climbing greasy poles for 20 years.

She screamed at the wedding chef and had to be taken aside by the Queen; she threw a cup of hot tea at a staffer at Admiralty House during that first tour; and stood up in the poorest county in the world bemoaning her lot.

She's trash, honey. You spin it any way you like: she's trash.

R105 This is breach of contract because the actress did not perform the role she was engaged for. Even though it should have been patently obvious at her tryout performances that her acting abilities were atrocious.

r47 But will England, indeed the UK welcome him?

R108 - Spot on.

R109 - No, it won't. That's part of Meghan's strategy with this interview: to make sure all bridges are thoroughly burnt so he's left entirely dependent on her and only her.

Private relationships with his father and brother, after a divorce, might be partially healed, but only privately; Harry will never again be able to show his face as representing the nation or the monarchy as long as he lives - just like his Uncle Andy. He is, from 7 March on, a pariah in terms of publicly appearing as part of the family.

Meghan's made sure of that.

If Philip doesn't make it past the current health crisis either before or shortly after the interview broadcast, I wouldn't be surprised if the family bar him from the funeral.

They pair have gone way too far down the road even to be able to pull off a pretence of family obligation.

[quote]Harry will never again be able to show his face as representing the nation or the monarchy as long as he lives - just like his Uncle Andy.

Just like his great-great-Uncle David.

The biggest grifters and gold diggers in the world are the Windsors and they always have been. It’s hilarious to see such self-righteous “I stand with” histrionics in favor of them over Meghan when they’ve been living on the royal dole for centuries.

R112. Yes. And we know how *that* ended.

Oh come on, MM is no Wallis Simpson, trash like that knows no depth.

[quote] The biggest grifters and gold diggers in the world are the Windsors and they always have been. It’s hilarious to see such self-righteous “I stand with” histrionics in favor of them over Meghan when they’ve been living on the royal dole for centuries.

This argument is equivalent to saying you can't protest Trump because of America's history of slavery, genocide and god knows what else.

The Royal Family are ruthless power brokers, but it doesn't mean we have to sit back and let some transparent manipulator insult them and the British people. I'm not even British and their actions feel like an insult to my intelligence.

MM is just the right one that the BRF needs in the 21st century to shake some the dust off. I think she’s doing an excellent job. She is the AOC of the BRF.

[quote]Oprah has become insufferable

She has. And curiously kind of a left over. She got the interview but anybody who did would get this kind of fuss. Meagain would have wanted or thought she was getting something by selling herself to Oprah. Then again, Meagain probably grew up on a diet of Oprah, back in the days when she was more than just rich and obese.

[quote]She is the AOC of the BRF.

She could have been, if she'd been at all savvy and interested in anything other than her own glorification.

By Monday morning, she'll be "I don't recall the name" status.

There is no way she's back on the balcony ever again. She has done to the most famous family in the world the same thing she's done to her own scummy relations. She is one fucked up piece of work. What's wrong with her?

R104, there's no way in hell, the heir to the heir of the British throne is going to sue his sister in law. Only way it happens is if this debacle torpedoes the throne and then, maybe, William Windsor, private citizen, sues his sister in law.

[QUOTE] He is, from 7 March on, a pariah in terms of publicly appearing as part of the family.Meghan's made sure of that

This is a racist analysis which blames the ordinary black woman instead of the aristocratic white male. Harry hates England and the dreary rounds of engagements. He even ran off to Afghanistan to get away from it. He was probably the one who suggested living somewhere idyllic like Montecito year round instead of rainy Windsor.

[QUOTE] Only way it happens is if this debacle torpedoes the throne and then, maybe, William Windsor, private citizen, sues his sister in law.

This plus The Crown could easily torpedo the throne. Charles hasn't been this unpopular since his affair with Camilla was revealed. William is a sour, dour type who has none of Harry's easy charisma.

You'd reckon that great sucking sound is the drain of her personality, always wanting more from the people around her. How does she keep friends to defend her? Or are they the same damaged class? That Mulroney babe you only need to look at. Small wonder she came slithering back. The actor from Suits I guess has all the disorders of most actors. It's interesting Serena Williams hasn't spoken up. Or George Clooney. He seldom lets a moment pass where he doesn't feel the world needs to know what he thinks.

Seriously, and I personally am fascinated by this, what do you think is wrong with her? Even by the standards of the ambitious she's whack. Look at the number of people she's discarded. Look at the relentlessness with which she moves. (Never mind the cluelessness.) She was in and out of the UK in record time. Married in May of 2018 and ran away to Canada by November 2019. Is she mentally ill? That fucked up by divorce? So poorly raised she doesn't have a sense of common sense, every day values? She seems to lack any sense of shame. It's as if the more she is criticized and shunned, the worse she gets, holed up in her compound.

[quote]This is a racist analysis which blames the ordinary black woman instead of the aristocratic white male.

R122 This is a racist response which seeks to treat Black women as irresponsible children who must be protected and defended.

R124 "Is she mentally ill?"

If Oprah is really upset with Meghan and Harry, she'll wheel out Dr. Phil for a post-mortem discussing this. Even Dr. Phil should know the answer.

The WSJ says they were paid $7 million for the Oprah interview. (I can't link but my husband saw it this morning).

Trump should have made MM ambassador to GB while he had the chance.

I chuckle at the definitive assessment of racist analysis, underpinned by 'he was probably the one...'

I would say to all the people who come here believing this is all about race or we're nothing but Klan Grannies... Meghan Markle has shown herself to be an operator. It is possible to think her a crap person based on her behaviour, not her race. I know that won't change your behaviour or beliefs but it's worth saying from time to time.

All this armchair psychological diagnosis is dull. She's a social climber who quickly got what she wanted (royal wedding, global fame, royal baby) and then got out so that she could have what she really wanted (LA celeb life, huge mansion in wealthy enclave, no BRF restrictions on her actions). Harry was likely an easy mark, but she saw her chance and executed it spectacularly. It'll make a good Netflix series and a juicy role some day when things no longer have to be viewed exclusively through a racial lens.

R7, the WSJ says CBS paid $7M for the broadcast rights.

The Whiners appeared for free.

Yeah, but R130, where does that come from? Because most people aren't that ambitious or cold enough to execute the plan the way she did. It takes intense desire to be under the pressure she's under (and I don't mean victim pressure I mean consequences of your choices pressure.) There's got to be some condition drives that kind of carelessness or indifference. Not to get psychological but most normal people couldn't or wouldn't choose to do what she's done.

Dr. Phil, do you think Meghan is OK?

Pass the ribs.

If they bring Dr Philth into this, they lose any chance of recovery.

The Daily Express claims Orca is furious about Harry and Corden. Orca will do as she pleases. Orca will have her revenge. No one plays Orca.

R105 She won't help the hungry once a month at their tómbolas?

I've been following this debacle before the Dangling Tendrils threads, since the Engagement Interview when my Bullshit Meter went into the red zone. It's still there.

But, I seem to recall that at the beginning, Harry used to, if not apologize, at least recognize that her behavior was wrong.

Among the stories coming about the Australia tour, besides the (1) she was pissed because she thought she and Harry should have ALL of Admiralty House while in Australia, not just their quarters (2) hot tea throwing and (3) late night Sparkle ordered multiple redos of "her" banana bread by the Admiralty House kitchen staff, were stories of Harry apologizing for her behavior. Even an overheard conversation of Harry telling Sparkle that they should not have announced the pregnancy at Eugenie's wedding.

When did he become completely lobotomized? Or is it Stockholm Syndrome?

But no, I used to think Harry was just a victim, but no more. It's clear he's been jealous of William for years and is letting his rage show through and putting it into action.

That's sad.

That and that little boy who is living in that house with them.

Really, too bad.

[quote]The Queen will be 95 next month and her husband, who will be 100 in June, is in his third week in hospital. She has given adult royal service to country and Commonwealth since 1947.

And she is also a selfish cunt who should have abdicated years ago and let her son become King. Probably a lot of family resentment for that.

If they want to live in a mansion in California and rub shoulders with famous people, there's nothing wrong with that. But it's weird that they're acting like they had no other choice, and they were forced to pursue that life. And it's weird that they want to stay famous as the heads of a charitable foundation. Most heads of charitable foundations aren't household names, and they don't try to be. They just do their work quietly, without taking cameras everywhere.

R137.... even when you're raised with the idea, it must be hard to be second, always, and have to confront it regularly. Nonetheless it didn't seem to be a problem... he was contentedly part of the trio - until....

It seems not unreasonable to assume his marriage tapped into, magnified and exploited all of his emotions. Who do you spend the most time with? Your wife.

Not sure if this was covered in other threads but the Twitter account for the TV show Suits has this as their bio

This firm is family, forever.

I'm not watching the interview, I'll just read whatever selected quotes hit the news.

Because those two are MASSIVE BORES, they have nothing to say that isn't self-serving, rehearsed, and fake. That's the irritating thing about their posing as charitable and caring, they don't actually give a rat's ass about anything but their lifestyle and controlling the press, and neither of them has a triple-digit IQ, so everything they say is as boring as fuck. Even if they decide to really rip Harry's family to shreds, they'll do it slowly and act reluctant and fake, and it'll be both boring and annoying.

You bitches can tell me all about it.

What if this turns out to be a ratings failure in the U.S.? It's up against stiff competition.

Thinking about it, who honestly cares what she's got to say? She's a B-list actress with a history of use and discard.

If she doesn't really go for the throat, what's the point? But if she goes for the throat, she deals with that.

Bad idea, lady. Like most of your ideas.

R143, what will be interesting if it opens strong is the hold over the whole two hours. They often rate the first and second hour separately.

Two hours... Jesus.

Outside of the UK, I think most people are indifferent to the Harkles & aren't surprised by the frostiness of the BRF after Diana & now The Crown. In general, most people have a low tolerance for whining from rich people, so I'm guessing that except for a some "inside baseball" types, the interview will be met with a collective shrug

Here's the preview so you can skip the shitting thing:

Meghan: Me (cradles "bump") me me me me holistic me me me forced me me fled me service me me love me me me me so-called royal me me me me me me me me outdmoded me me me me me me me cruel me me me me me me me me us me me me me me me me miscarriage me me me me holistic me me me me me me me me service me me me me me me me so-called royal me me (cradles bump noticeable increasing in size) me me me me me me outdmoded me me me me me me me cruel me me me me ("fights back" tears) me me me me us me me me purpose me me me baby me me me me me me wisdom me me me me common people me me me me me me media me me (cradles enormous bump) me me me me me me palace me me me me me me career me me love backs turned me me me me me campaign me me media me me me power me me me me baby me me me pain me loss me [bold]pain[/bold] (tears) me loss me pain me me me me triumph me me me 21st century me me me me future me me me me educate the family me me me me me me me me me proud black woman me me me me me me me me me [bold]people's princess[/bold] me me me me me me me (cradles bump while doing in-labor breathing) me me me me me me me me me me inspiration me strength me me me me me me me me triumph give love peace power (big brave smile) me me (cradles bump back to original size) me me me me me me....

Harry: Duh (nod nod nod nod nod nod) my family (nod nod nod nod) duh (shart) (nod nod nod nod nod nod nod) history repeating (nod nod nod nod nod nod nod nod nod) duh....

O: Me proud me black me woman me me me me (interrupts) me me me me (fart) me me me me bias me me (interrupts) me me family me me me (fart) me me me racism me (interrupts) me bigotry me me Hermès me me me me (interrupts) me me (fart) me me me me triumph give love peace power me me (fart) me (ad infinitum)....

CBS: KA-CHING!

UK: TO THE TOWER!

USA: Purr, purr Francine.

I'll be watching the NBA All Star game. I'll weigh in purely reliant on DL providing the worthy quotes.

I'd give R147 a thousand W&Ws if I could. Both.

Well I for one am ordering pizza and making it a night of scandal and gossip, first with this and then with a new episode of Woody versus Mia. Ready to root for my teams!

William dealt with it by losing his hair at an early age through stress.

[quote]The lofty grandeur of that statement “this is our time.” Well, la di dah!

"THIS is a time for Angela Arden! This time it's for me... for Me! For ME!"

--Charles Busch as Angela Arden, "Die Mommie Die!"

R87 The quote you posted really illustrates the difference between Harry and William. While I have no doubt William is bossy and imperious behind the scenes, there is also a sense of duty and magnanimity in him.

It’s telling that Harry had to be “persuaded” to talk to the press on board but then he pulled the whole bratty “you weren’t invited.” Contrast that to William. On the tour to Pakistan, plans had to be changed last minute due to inclement weather. The press entourage was left scrambling to find hotel rooms. It was reported that William made sure they all had proper accomodations and stayed in contact with them to confirm. On the plane ride back to the UK, they hit a patch of really rough turbulence. William went back to check on the reporters and joked with them to ease the tension. A balance is there, which is why he is now the most liked royal.

How about this for a musical interlude on the show, with slow-mo frolicking under the oaks and on the beach....

R143 If it's not the ratings runaway that they are hoping, Oprah will drop them like a bag of potatoes (well an empty bag of potatoes because Oprah would have already made chips out of them). I think it'll play well on the coasts but the rest of the US won't give two shits. Most of middle America are prone to avoiding Oprah these days, hence why she sold most of OWN off to the Discovery Channel.

The Australians aren't having H&M either it appears.

R139 - It's not weird if you remember two things: 1) Harry and Meghan didn't think it wise to admit publicly that they wanted lots more money and a Hollywood lifestyle complete with rubbing shoulders with Hollywood stars, so they had to nurture the "We were pushed out!" narrative to cover their greedy shallow desires, and 2) sliding out amicably would have left Harry on good terms with his family, and the persecution narrative helped Meghan burn those bridges so that Harry could never go back, leaving him entirely dependent on her.

When you look at it through those lenses, the strategy makes perfect sense.

It's whether it will still make perfect sense to Harry over the longer term about which the jury will be out for a long time.

People tend to change with age. It wouldn't be the first time the rage of youth against perceived slights didn't burn out as youth departed and nostalgia and a longing for healing and closure set in.

That would of course apply to William, as well. The Queen and Charles will be well out of it by then. I've seen it happen between bitterly divided siblings.

But there has to be a will toward healing on both sides and frank talks.

By the time Meghan is finished slandering Kate, I'm not sure the will toward healing will exist.

But it's possible - especially if Harry and Meghan get divorced.

[quote] (well an empty bag of potatoes because Oprah would have already made chips out of them).

LOL.

And racist Klan Granny.

And but Kate's skirt.

[quote]People tend to change with age. It wouldn't be the first time the rage of youth against perceived slights didn't burn out as youth departed and nostalgia and a longing for healing and closure set in.

But they are both nearly FORTY YEARS OLD ffs. Youth? Long departed my friend. They can't use that as an excuse for their nonsense.

If this had all occurred when H&M (and W&K) were still in their twenties, sure there might be a chance for healing later. But at this juncture? No way.

"Harry and Meghan didn't think it wise to admit publicly that they wanted lots more money and a Hollywood lifestyle complete with rubbing shoulders with Hollywood stars, so they had to nurture the "We were pushed out!" narrative to cover their greedy shallow desires..."

That's why they have to pretend to be primarily interested in charity, not living the Hollywood high life.. Which is all transparent bullshit as they obviously ARE primarily interested in being rich and famous, and controlling the press narrative rather than being private.

As I said above, it's what makes them so painfully false and boring to listen to, nothing they say is honest, it's all calculated to push this bullshit narrative. I mean if Oprah could get them to talk about their real desire to merch and party with the A-list and live like billionaires she might get a fun interview, but that won't happen. It'll be 100% fake and dull.

I can imagine there will be one or two racy segments where she bitches about the royal family in a vague way full of innuendoes but no real allegations, lots of bitching about the media, Harry doing his protecting his wife thing, a few attempts to exploit Diana's memory, some stuff about babies as though they're the only people who've ever had kids, and lots about how they want to "spread compassion". Some buzzwords about mental health and racism. The Markles will attempt to be dignified and above mundane things, but their bitchiness will get the better of them. Oprah will probably ask a few probing questions about how they get on with the royals but she won't let it get too out of hand. Although, if she really had sense, she wouldn't be doing this interview at all.

The overall impression will be that they are bitchy, over-privileged whiners, who are unfairly attacking his old grandma. But, there aren't going to be any major revelations, because there is nothing to reveal. Her stans will be fuming at the outrageous way they will believe she's been treated, the British people will shift to full-on hate for Harry, and no one else will give a shit. They will make fools of themselves and become a red flag that Hollywood, etc. will want to keep away from.

This is intended for UK people but anyone else find it ironic that the people who were crufixing Priti Patel after allegations of bullying came forward are the same ones who are saying Meghan is being smeared.

This has been reported on before, but it's finally breaking in US tabloids.....Meghan was engaged to Toronto based Chef Cory Vitiello while dating Harry.

It says dating, not engaged, though. Did you hear that somewhere else?

R162 - RADAR Online is not exactly the TIMES and I'd take with a grain of salt anything they print about anyone, but his bit has been bandied about before, not least because the dating timeframe of When Harry Met Meghan was changed in The Vanity Fair "Wild About Harry" cover article to disguise the fact that Meghan was stepping out on the chef the minute she spotted a bigger fish. So this has been out there before RO got to it.

^*and, no, I don't think Meghan and the hot chef were ever engaged formally. But it was a serious relationship.

Vitello, like Engelson, has refused to comment on his relationship with Meghan, fair play to both men, who have both also moved on with their lives.

Engelson married a billionaire heiress and they already have at least one, if not two children.

I doubt that either man is doing anything but thanking God on bended knee for dodging this bullet, whilst grinning away and Hapless Harry and the mess that Meghan made of being royal.

Somehow, R50, most of us can see Megs and the Woodster both as victimizers, nice try though. His movies and writings speak volumes, Dylan aside.

Who's NOT going to watch the interview tomorrow night?

I'm not. I like reading about them but have no interest in spending my time listening to their boring, fake blather.

Why was Harry’s bride not required to pass the virgin test, and it sounds like MM would not have?

Like I said, no. They're bores.

R167 - Raises hand.

I won't give Oprah and Meghan ratings support. CBS paid SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS for the interview. The amount of money changing hands is sickening.

I don't think they need any help from me, and you have to know that the only worthwhile bits will be all over the tabloids the next day, with video. It will be a week of screaming headlines, back and forth recriminatins.

DL will probably collapse as 20 more Meghan threads open. The Klan Grannie Troll will be out in full force.

I will either watch the Commonwealth programme just to stand up for Queen and Country, or if that's unwatchable, I'll put on something very English - maybe watch the last filming of Agatha Christie's "And Then There Were None" again with Aidan Turner so I can see him in that towel again. The title of the piece seems oddly apt to the very large pyre atop which rests everyone in this fiasco.

Then I'll catch up with you lot in the wee hours of Monday morn.

R166 I’m Team Dylan and Team Queen. Rah rah sis boom bah!

^*recriminations (corrected sp.)

Reading my own post over, I'm not sure that a better plan is a week of heavy drinking.

Years of DL hath made most of us able to stand the heat in pretty hot kitchens, but OMG! The fallout all over the tabs for days and days and days . . . the countless threads . . . the opinion pieces, the analyses . . .

I'm really not sure I can go through with it this time.

R169 - You get today's award either for Best Irony or Most Ignorant, it's hard to tell in print.

I was surprised to read that Meghan doesn't read or follow the news unless it is about her of Harry. She also has no interest in history which explains her ignorance of events like the David-Wallis affair and marriage which might have prepared her for the current situation she is in.

What happens when they realize dishing on the royal family is their price of admission to the circles they seek? She'll do it, of course. Him I give some hope of reticence. But she'll do it and then it will spread and then it will be published and then does he finally look at her and realize?

They'll be king and queen there.

Hollywood goes in for shrews and dopes.

R175 - LOL. Her knowledge of the Wallis-Edward affair was probably better than her grasp of the basics of a constitutional monarchy, which would have prepared her far better.

Can you imagine Meghan being asked to sit down with Charles' P.A. to go over a few precepts laid down by Walter Bagehot? And a bit of what passes for constitutional law in a country that doesn't have a constitution?

You know, they tried it on with Diana so she would have some background. Exit Edward Adeane, Charles' P.A. at the time, who had given up a promising diplomatic career in Charles' service. Diana's distaste for him basically cost Adeane a decent career. I think he died recently.

Diana's term for people like Adeane was "heavy furniture". A good many people exited Charles' staff in the year after their marriage.

I can just see Meghan telling the person deputised to fill her in on the parameters of constitutional monarchy: "Hey, asshole, I went to Northwestern! Who do you think you're talking to?!?"

I never heard of Megan Markle, the show Suits, or the Network of USA, which sounds like government propaganda, before she married the prince. This just all seems so ridiculous to me, I think there is a very, very small percentage of people who knew or care about her beyond her coworkers and their extended family and friends who watched their little no name show. By the way, how did I they write her character out, did they leave it open ended so she could come back if it didn’t work out?

I live in Toronto and the gossip here has long been that Meghan and Cory Vitiello were unofficially engaged for at least a year, five or six months of that Meghan was quietly seeing Harry on the side. Meghan allegedly broke it up with Cory by text when she was informed a photo of her and Harry was about to be published the UK tabloids.

[quote] Who's NOT going to watch the interview tomorrow night?

I absolutely will not. Two hours of this narcissist blathering? Forget it.

I'll watch the highlights on youtube the next day.

^* I was right, Adeane did die a few years ago, and he was a barrister not a diplomat.

He was a very distinguished barrister, and educated at Eton and Cambridge. The link about his life provides an interesting look at the ins and outs of his relationship with Charles, particularly that, as Max Hastings also pointed out in his Airmail opinion piece last year, Charles always did the opposite of whatever he was advised to do.

Which is probably why Charles' son and son's life is so mental now.

Oh, and Adeane was One of Us.

A surprisingly sober and cogent editorial in the Daily Mail, under the headline: The Queen deserves better than this soap opera

However much the Sussexes may complain, the monarchy is more than some stuffy, antediluvian 'construct'. In these days of national crisis it has never seemed more relevant – a comforting symbol of constancy.

Meghan could have played a huge part in its continuing evolution. Sadly it wasn't to be. But then she has a long track record of falling out with people – her father, siblings, first husband, personal staff, the Press (which was once so rapturous about her) and now the Palace.

In asking why she has now fallen out so catastrophically yet again, perhaps she should look inwardly rather than seeking to saddle others with all the blame.

The Mail's also got big Chrissy Teigen vowing 'the media won't stop until she miscarries!'

Now I didn't read any further so it's possible it was more of a complaint and turf protection than support.

I don't really care but do you not find it telling that it's only former cast mates that are coming forward to defend Meghan. Not a single former employee, crew person, family member.............

r161 Very ironic but unsurprising. It seems that people who bang the drum with the most self righteous zeal in politics tend to be the biggest hypocrites. Identity politics added into the mix just both amplifies and magnifies the hypocrisy as it gives another avenue for people to excuse behaviour in some whilst condemning the exact same behaviour in others.

[quote]I can just see Meghan telling the person deputised to fill her in on the parameters of constitutional monarchy: "Hey, asshole, I went to Northwestern! Who do you think you're talking to?!?"

Kudos! I literally spit my coffee out when reading this I laughed so hard. So true.

Re Chef Cory in Toronto: to be fair, word on the street was that he was cheating on her as well, and wouldn't commit the way she wanted. Harry did. Fair game, but of course it's always the dishonesty in the covering up that makes the juicier story.

r159 A superb post. You can clearly see through their phoney act and describe it perfectly!

Not surprised. Meghan the gold digger has always struck me as an asshole.

r155 Would you say in the US that Oprah is no longer as powerful, popular and influential as she once was?

R180 & R187 From Toronto here too and yes I've heard the same stories. I heard Cory's and Megs' relationship was in trouble for a while before Harry entered the picture. Allegedly Megs wanted to move back to LA when her contract with Suits was up, but Cory didn't want to move because he had just started a resutrant in Toronto and didn't want to move to America. Either way, Cory/Harry she ended up back in LA.

Well you know, I saw it on the internet, so it MUST BE TRUE !

What do you mean, do I actually have first hand knowledge or proof ?

Megan and Harry now live in a level of luxury and independence that they never could have achieved had they stayed in Britain. They can have anything they want and are surrounded by a staff that will do or say anything to satisfy them. I am convinced they have been completely detached from reality and are living in a bubble. Megan really believes the flattery they shower her with. They tell her she is a stunning beauty with a kind and gentle heart who has been misunderstood and bullied by her enemies (whoever they are). Their Santa Barbara villa is much nicer (more posh) than anything Charles or William lives in.

Huh r193? Have you seen photos of Highgrove, the lavish country estate Charles has in Gloucestershire- ?

Or Balmoral, which will soon belong to Charles - it's something like 50,000 acres. Are you kidding?

I can't stand vocal fry and uptalking, so I will not watch The Interview Of The Century, but will monitor the forums.

Yes, I have. I have never been to Highgrove but I have seen Balmoral. It's horrible end uncomfortable. There are a couple of cottages that are OK. Sandringham is absolutely dreadful, too. I have seen the private rooms at Buckingham Palace - terribly cold and hard - you would never want to live there by choice. Highgrove is pretty and comfortable because it's Charles's home and he has incredibly good taste. Santa Barbara is in California and it is recently built, all the bathrooms are new along with great kitchens. BIG PLUS - it is near the ocean and is in California. Balmoral is near the Arctic Circle!

Let's face it, Meghan and Harry are limited.

Well, it certainly sounds like they should be happy, content and enjoying life in Santa Barbara.

How can you have so much and be so miserable?. And not just the material things. They supposedly have love and a growing family.

What the fuck are wrong with these two?

R198 - for borderlines and NPDs, there is no such concept as enough. And if they have the material and financial side of things locked down securely, they then require all sorts of demonstrations of love, loyalty, obedience, etc. that will never be enough.

With the exception of her mother, Meghan has ghosted all of her birth family as well as "the family she never had". Even Helen Keller can "see" a pattern there.

Is this Archie? Every time I see him, he looks different.

[quote] Huh [R193]? Have you seen photos of Highgrove, the lavish country estate Charles has in Gloucestershire- ?

[quote] Or Balmoral, which will soon belong to Charles - it's something like 50,000 acres. Are you kidding?

Harry has not lived at Highgrove in years and years and years. Meghan never did.

Harry has also never lived at Balmoral (nor at Sandringham nor at Windsor nor at Buck House). Even when his father ascends to the throne he will not live at those palaces, nor would he have had he stayed in the UK.

Had they stayed, they would likely have received a much bigger and nicer house than Frogmore Cottage when the Queen dies and Charles ascends the throne (that's always how it is--when your parent becomes a monarch, you get to upgrade your home). But that's still likely years away. Plus they've ruined it for themselves now. No British palaces are in the future for Harry or Meghan.

He's got the same lazy eye or whatever the condition is called.

What will happen if these two ever get divorced? Harry's pretty much burned his bridges with his family, no?

R88, Andrew is alleged to be horrid to staff. I have never read anything negative about Fergie. Diana had much of Charles’ staff replaced, and was allegedly difficult. Margaret’s lady in waiting adored Margaret. Charles is allegedly petulant but not bullying or rude. HMQ and Phillip are both allegedly polite to staff, although HMQ forbids them from eating from random candy/nut dishes around Windsor Palace. Anne also is allegedly polite.

R138, being monarch is not the same as being a politician. HMQ comes from a different generation. She swore to devote her entire life to serve the British public. She won’t break that promise.

Edward is also said to be rude to staff, although his wife Sophie is said to be the nicest member of the royal family to everyone. she's the one everyone likes and the one everyone gets along with (Lady Sarah Chatto is supposedly like that too, but she's pretty distant from the rest of the family since her mother died).

Princess Michael of Kent is said to be very difficult (of course).

Archie is a cute kid, but man, those close-set Mountbatten eyes are sure dominant. He's the fourth generation with them (Harry, Charles, Philip).

Thank you for the article, R60. This completely tracks with not only everything reported on DL from the beginning but also the rumors that were reported in every news outlet.

I was originally a Meghan fan and I suppose I still am, but for the drama she brings, not for her personally. I think this was such a tremendously dumb move on her part. She really could have brought change, created a historical legacy for herself that went down in the history books, and perhaps become internationally beloved if she had charted the course as a working royal. Though I don't like AOC, as someone mentioned upthread, perhaps she really could have been the AOC of the royal family through duty and slowly bringing her causes to light, which she most likely would have more freedom to do once Charles becomes King. He clearly wants to please Harry and Meghan, as divorced parents often do to overcompensate, especially with the loss of Diana.

Also being from LA, I think Meghan will internally regret throwing away such a unique and special opportunity as she gets older. I do think we al do soften with age and she will be forty this year. This is when I've become more reflective. Just like The Crown always wins, in the US, Hollywood always wins. Even aging icons who have worked their way up to the top with true talent get shoved to the side for the next hot thing. It's fleeting and ultimately unsatisfying. I believe if Meghan had used her powers for good vs. evil, I think she could have had it all. A revered working royal, a summer get away in Montecito, lifelong fame, and the opportunity to truly make change.

Just an aside, but I am really disappointed in Jessica Mulroney. I've always hated her, but Meghan through her most devoted friend under the bus in a devastating fashion. I would have popped the champagne and made some popcorn while I watched this bitch's life slowly unravel. Maybe I would have even leaked something to add gravitas to the palace's allegations. I can't believe she is defending her. Jessica lost absolutely everything due to the ridiculous scandal that was ultimately a nothing burger, but came during the summer of unrest. Anyway, you deserve a friend like Meghan, Jessica.

Talk about pouring gasoline over a fire:

[Quote]Sources close to the couple say Ms Toubati, who was asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement, was sacked for misconduct, pointing out neither staff member made complaints of their own to HR.

Talk about pouring gasoline over a fire. Misconduct?

[quote]Also being from LA, I think Meghan will internally regret throwing away such a unique and special opportunity as she gets older.

I don't think she understood what she was throwing away.

[quote]Just an aside, but I am really disappointed in Jessica Mulroney.

Why? Packed to the rim with fillers, shallow, petty, full of herself... being a disappointment would a step up for that shallow creature. When she dies the undertaker will find Mattel stamped on her ass. Or where her would have been if she'd eaten in the last fifty years.

I don’t even know, does Oprah still have her own network, is this on it, what is it? How’s about the magazine “O” that can’t possibly still be going on? And Weight Watchers, is she still the main weigher in, does she make people wear the piggy mask when they gain?

I am lost at the passion for this "story"...

I dug Princess Diana, but these two dipshits bore me.

And based on what I have seen in my own office, I am also lost at the allegations against the dipshit chick who married little Prince Harry.

She sounds like a typical cunt.

The entire thing seems like a big nothing- especially the couple.

And fuck Oprah too. What a bore with a God Complex.

The interview was filmed at Gail's!

Do Gail and Oprah have neighboring mansions in Montecito? I'm imagining something like those adjoining rooms in hotels..

OP: "No one would treat Kate like this"

Well, except for Meghan.

Meghan would treat Kate to a burning at the stake if she could.

Headlines from the UK papers the night before:

The Daily Maul: Palace officials give withering dismissal of Harry and Meghan's interview that will be 'lost in the mists of time' as most Britons 'will be thinking about schools going back, their vaccines and Prince Philip getting better' - the only winner will be Oprah

The Times: How Meghan became the unmerry wife of Windsor / The honeymoon was over for Meghan even before the wedding according to royal watchers who looked on aghast as the duchess’s dreams met reality at the palace

The Telegraph: Meghan 'called all the PR shots', say royal sources despite Oprah interview claims she was gagged

+ Prince William and Kate 'still hopeful they can repair relations' with Duke and Duchess of Sussex / The Duchess of Cambridge is said to have told friends she does not believe it is too late to 'pull them back in'

[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.]

R196, Thanks for those tidbits! Can you give us any more color about what you mean by 'dreadful' and 'cold and hard' in these personal spaces? I've googled to no avail.. I would imagine that if you have so many properties with so many rooms, you cannot update them often...

Yes, R196... amazing you made it into the East wing @ BP because I always thought only family went there.

The Telegraph says the Oprah stuff is not true:

But far from being gagged, it appears the Duchess was cultivating her own personal relationships with media figures like Ms Winfrey while in “constant consultation” with a team of US advisers as well as palace PR staff.

Two separate royal sources have confirmed to The Telegraph that the two women also met privately at Kensington Palace shortly after their phone call, with no palace PR staff present.

Every picture I've seen of Clarence House is lovely. No wonder everybody in the family covets it.

the Telegraph:

Meghan saw red over blanket colour, claim palace aides

Meghan, 39, is said to have had “unattainably high demands” causing untold tensions with her Kensington Palace staff By Victoria Ward 6 March 2021 • 9:30pm

The Duchess of Sussex “went mental” at her personal assistant for ordering blankets that were the wrong shade of red, it has been claimed.

Meghan, 39, is said to have had “unattainably high demands” causing untold tensions with her Kensington Palace staff.

When she hosted a shooting party at Sandringham for Prince Harry’s friends, shortly after their engagement, she allegedly told her PA, Melissa Touabti, to order red, personally embroidered blankets for each of the guests.

A source told the Sunday Times: “When they arrived, they weren’t the right shade of red for Meghan and she went mental at Melissa.”

Ms Toubati is said to have left “traumatised” by the Duchess’s alleged behaviour and left the Royal Household six months after the Sussexes’ wedding, amid claims she had been reduced to tears.

The Duke’s first PA, who was working for him when Meghan arrived, is also said to have left within months.

“Half of the staff threatened to quit,” one former aide told the newspaper, while another claimed: “the entire household was on the verge of quitting... it was drama, drama, drama with those two.”

Even the Sussexes’ engagement interview was said to have failed to meet Meghan’s standards.

“She complained it hadn’t gone well, that Mishal [Husain] wasn’t empathetic enough, wasn’t warm enough,” a source is reported to have said. The Duchess declined to comment on the claims.

Buckingham Palace last week launched an HR review into allegations that the couple’s staff were bullied. The Sussexes have denied the claims, calling them a ‘calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation’ .

The Sun: Meghan Markle wanted to be Queen

R209 - Tabouti didn't make a formal complaint. But she did try to quit midway through the tour. The Palace asked her not to so as to avoid embarrassment for Meghan. Tabouti agreed, stayed for the rest of the tour, and resigned when it ended. There wasn't a hint of misconduct - unless it was that she didn't cower and quake when Meghan behaved unreasonably. There was not the slightest hint of misconduct in her past or subsequent employments, either.

Notice that Meghan didn't say Tabouti was "sacked"; Tabouti tried to quit and the Palace prevented her.

The "misconduct" term used by the Harkles is another fig leaf. "Misconduct" wouldn't have required an NDA.

Tabouti was experienced with working with egos, royals, stress, and temperament.

If she tried to quit mid-tour, it had to be well beyond those. If Tabouti's NDA has been lifted, Meghan should be careful about what her lawyers suggest that could be defamatory and harm Tabouti's employment record.

She'll be off to Mishcon in a flash.

R193 - So, you've seen the 21-room apartments, recently renovated, that William and Kate live in, in the heart of a historic palace a few blocks from Buckingham Palace?

And the Grade II listed Georgian 10-bedroom home on the Queen's Norfolk estate?

And have you seen Highgrove, Charles' gorgeous home in Gloucestershire? See below.

Anmer Hall.

Yeah, it has no class, no charm, no room - really nothing compared to that oh so classy pile in Montecito, right?

It has been a long time since I was there in the 70's and 80's. I don't know anything current.

Some stuff from the Times article, which is very fair. Leaving aside money, she really had no clue what she was getting into and the system wasn't ready for the kind of behaviour she provided:

“Why is Meghan the way she is?” asked a senior royal source. “A very weird childhood is definitely part of it. She raised herself for much of it, living with her father for a long time and looking after him. The no friends at the wedding was quite a telltale sign. She’s really smart, if she could have seen the use of that inside the institution. She wanted to be ‘A’ list — the royal family is beyond ‘A’ list — but she wanted it the Beyoncé way, without restrictions. She was never up for royal life. Right from the start, she courted rejection.”

--- The problem, another source suggested, was that “Meghan didn’t understand what she was letting herself in for, and why should she?”

Even the outpouring of affection for the monarchy occasionally bemused her. During the Sussexes’ tour of Australia and the South Pacific in 2018, hundreds of people turned out to wait outside the Sydney Opera House to welcome the couple. A source claimed that Meghan said to the team: “What are they all doing here? It’s silly.” “They were like, ‘They’re here because they admire and support a monarch and an institution that you’re representing,’ ” the source said. “She didn’t get it.”

--

Another royal insider suggested that Meghan had joined the family full of excitement and expectation but had not realised “the rigidity of the hierarchy”. As a successful, self-made professional, she may well have been disturbed to find herself “quite far down the list in protocol terms”.

Relations between Meghan and Kate became the object of intense scrutiny, and it may have been difficult for Meghan to find herself the junior partner, despite what she may have regarded as her greater professional accomplishments. “Kate made a success of her role because she came from a solid middle-class background and was prepared to play the game,” said the insider. Another Palace source said: “Some people were very snobby about Kate when she arrived, but she kept her head down and got on with it.”

----

After the wedding, early sympathy for Meghan gave way to alarm. “The family have tried to be welcoming,” a former aide insisted at the time. “All the staff and principals have genuinely tried to be kind, but she is genuinely unkind back, pitting Harry against them.” A lifelong friend of Harry’s observed: “She’s changed him. He’s disappeared, he’s a caged lion.”

-- Yet behind all the allegations of the Sussexes behaving shoddily lie awkward questions for an institution that seems to have had a shrewd idea of the reasons for Meghan’s misery, yet appears to have been unable to address them. “She has no idea about the institution she has married into ... she thinks she should be on a level playing field with the Queen and the Duchess [of Cambridge], that the world revolves around her,” a royal aide said when the wheels started to fall off. “What she doesn’t understand or accept at all is the pecking order.”

Actually, comparing that beautiful 21-room apartment in Kensington Palace and the beautiful, stately Anmer Hall to the five-bedroom totally undistinguished pile that they gave Harry and Meghan, one can understand Meghan's resentment.

Of course, by the time all this stuff came around, it was already clear to the BRF that Meghan was a loose cannon and unlikely to stay the course.

And then there was the little matter of Meghan being married to the sixth in line, whilst Kate was married to the future King.

The heart bleeds, does it not?

But Bob you actually saw the East Wing back then, where they live? How amazing.

R217 - Decent people don't treat their husband's family the way Meghan did, and get in for the goodies whilst knowing all the time that she was going to bail with them and head back to L.A.

R205 - Andrew is and always has been a pompous, self-entitled, rude, oblivious twat.

His mother spoilt him the way the Queen's father spoilt Margaret - who also became a pompous, self-entitled, rude, oblivious twat.

And Charles spoilt Harry - who also became a pompous, self-entitled, rude, oblivious twat.

Margaret and Andrew finally came to grief when they were no longer young and attractive.

I suspect the same thing will happen to Harry. Like his Uncle and Great-Aunt, however, his undoing will come much later in life.

It's funny that her Suits co stars are coming to her defense, when she supposedly had them sitting all the way in the back of the chapel, while the A list stars she barely knew were given front row seats.

I try to defend her, but she makes it difficult. She's clearly trying to take a page from Diana's book, but the press came to Diana, not the other way around. And Diana was a master at making the press work for her. AKA The Revenge Dress.

Everything about that infamous Diana interview was understated because she wanted you to concentrate on what she was saying. There were no opulent mansion shots every few seconds, or stories being placed in the media about what each party stood to profit off of this. This whole Meg/Harry interview is coming off as one big grift for everyone involved. Her story is taking a backseat to everything else. She's an amateur trying to pull off professional moves.

And why Hollywood? They could have moved to another part of Europe, and maintained their elusiveness while building up their profile. In Hollywood, they're just another celebrity couple who will wear out their welcome once they have exhausted what little they have to offer.

The story at R222 is indicative of what's to come. We're finally starting to get details, and they make Megs look like a crazy person. This is only the beginning, too.

I'm guessing her Suits co-stars are coming to her aid because it raises their profiles, not because they have an abiding love for the Duchess.

[quote]Even the Sussexes’ engagement interview was said to have failed to meet Meghan’s standards. “She complained it hadn’t gone well, that Mishal [Husain] wasn’t empathetic enough, wasn’t warm enough,” a source is reported to have said. The Duchess declined to comment on the claims.

How much 'warmth' and 'empathy' does she need? Christ.

My god, but Oprah looks terrible in the stills accompanying the article at R223.

R233 Don't forget the H&M first moved to Canada and expected the Canadian government to pay for their security because the Queen is Canada's head of state and therefore when royals visit Canada they are entitled to state protection. Allegedly, in their minds living in a Commonwealth country where the Queen is monarch would allow them to continue the appearance of performing royal duties (half in/half out). But Canadians were not having any of it (I think a poll show 70% of the county preferred if they didn't live in Canada), and Justin Trudeau had to call the Queen up and tell her that it was not acceptable to the government for them to live in Canada. Then they moved to the US, although I think LA was always the end game for Meghan.

Page Six: How Meghan and Harry lost Black Britain

R211 OWN still exists but Oprah sold something like 70% of her share in it to the Discovery Channel. O Magazine went out of publication last year due to low circulation. Oprah also "left" a 60 Minutes special contributor in 2019 after her segments we're the runaway ratings CBS had hoped.

R240 Jesus sorry....Oprah "left" 60 minutes as a special contributor back in 2019 due to low ratings.

Oprah gave up most of her cultural influence when she gave up her TV show. She may not have realized what was going to happen at the time, but perhaps she should have. That kind of influence takes daily maintenance to keep going, especially in the age of Instagram, when other influencers update multiple times per day.

That Meghan still thinks Oprah is a cultural juggernaut signals (once again) how perpetually stuck in the '90s Megs is.

from the article at R239: “I won’t watch. It’s blatant disrespect to the monarchy and, as Meghan has just confirmed, it’s always been in the cards for her,” one mixed-race woman from Manchester, England, told The Post. (She asked to withhold her name for fear of being trolled online by Meghan supporters.) “It’s pre-planned from years ago and it’s her end game.”

Good job, stans. You're really nice people in your crusades against klan grannies and racists and just people who don't think they way you demand.

Exactly rr243. Nobody under 45 gives a fuck about Oprah. I’m an old fart, and I don’t care what she has to say.

The Harkles' timing really has been awful.

Tomorrow, the Queen & family go on tv to praise the Commonwealth peoples and in particular, their response to Covid. It will be an hour full of praise, gratitude and positive stories, featuring people who have overcome a truly nightmarish year, and everyone involved will come out looking very well.

Hours later, the Harkles will go on tv to complain for two hours how hard their life has been, and how it's everyone's fault but theirs.

Meanwhile, Prince Philip is going on day 20 in the hospital, having just had heart surgery. Meghan has just announced that the Palace is "using" Philip's illness, heavily implying that they are making it sound more serious than it is, in order to head her off at the pass, and that even if she could change the air dates, she wouldn't. She sounds very much like the bully that the 10 palace staffers accuse her of being.

There is no way the Harkles come out of this looking well. The best they can do is not come out of it looking worse than they already do.

^ That's a high bar given their cluelessness.

What's Doria Ragland about do you suppose? Just along for the ride?

I'm currently watching, "The Crown" S3 now, and it seems Meghan is very much like a mix of Lord Snowden (wanting status) and Margaret (has the status but doesn't want the obligations). All the protocols surrounding the crown are very interesting.

Doria Ragland is the svengali behind all of this, I can just sense it.

Maybe now that The Palace has released the hounds, her heavily-scrubbed background will start to emerge.

It is easy to get caught up in trashing her, she is so ridiculous and awful but he has been quite off for a long time too. I never got the sense that he was close to William's kids, despite his pr image of being great with kids. That event where he knocked the heads of 2 little boys together was so manic and disturbing. They seem well suited to me. Exhausting though. I will not watch, doubt much will come out and it will all be on line. She is going to try to move on and dump him, and his options then seem so few. There was that story of her being married at Northwestern too, she has her pattern. One of my fav Megs stories is her uncle getting her the embassy internship and her taking off with some older man. Never change, Megs. Her kids will probably thrive at boarding school.

She will get custody in the divorce and then, quietly, the children will be sent to live with their father in the UK.

R251 can you expound on the event where he knocked the heads together of the two kids?

Never heard that story

New tea from the Times... and this is worth reading! The Dukedom has been discussed...

The Queen will not watch the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s interview with Oprah Winfrey, which courtiers have branded a “circus”. They warned that they are prepared to retaliate with fresh disclosures about the couple’s behaviour if they attack the monarchy.

The Queen will ignore the interview — to be aired in the US today and tomorrow in the UK — and go on a charm offensive this week to show the royal family is “focusing on the big issues” rather than the increasingly toxic PR battle with Meghan and Harry.

Palace officials accused the couple of being “at war” with the royal household and warned that courtiers “will come out swinging” if Meghan and Harry attack individuals in the interview.

A senior source accused the Sussexes of undermining the work of the monarchy and said: “The mood in the family is: can everyone just shut the hell up and can we just get on with the day job.”

“What should Monday really be about? Children going back to school, the effectiveness of the vaccine programme — these are the big issues the royal family wants to focus on, not news about the circus that is Oprah and all things Sussex.”

The royal family is bracing for bombshells from Meghan, 39, and Harry, 36, who are expected to go into detail about their grievances about the departure from royal life last year, race in the UK and strained relationships in the royal family. One friend of the couple warned that Meghan would use the broadcast to accuse senior courtiers of ignoring signs that she was suffering poor mental health.

“Meghan was sometimes difficult to work for,” the ally said. “She was also in a very poor state of mental health for a lot of it, which is why I think it is incredibly dangerous for the palace to attack in this way.”

But in a sign of how febrile the situation is, courtiers last week discussed whether to strip Harry and Meghan of their titles, on the grounds that the dukedom was given by the Queen on the understanding that Harry would be a senior working member of the family.

Such a move was described as “a big step” that would tear up the “Sandringham summit” agreement, which drew up the terms of the couple’s departure from royal life. But one source in the royal household described the Queen as “cheesed off” by the broadcast, adding: “I don’t think that after this interview anything is off the table, to be honest.”

Another source close to the Queen did not deny there had been discussions but said “the titles are not up for debate”.

Several senior royal sources even raised concerns that Harry might be booed during his next public appearance in the UK. It is understood he is considering attending the royal family’s private celebrations for the Duke of Edinburgh’s 100th birthday on June 10, followed by the Queen’s birthday parade, Trooping the Colour, on June 12.

R209 - Notice that it says, "sources close to the couple" are stating that Tabouti was sacked for misconduct - and we know what "sources close to the couple" means: nothing.

Why would they be begging someone to stay on who wanted to quit, if she'd been sacked, and why beg her to sign an NDA and issue a glowing press release about her as she exited?

I suspect "the couple" are Meghan and Harry using their PR to leak a falsehood that can't be traced back to them so that Tabouti doesn't sue them.

It's like saying that since a woman was too afraid to report a rape for fear of testifying in court, she really couldn't have been raped.

I would imagine filing a complaint about Meghan and Harry with HR would give anyone pause, and it is obvious that eventually, Jason Knauf had to take matters in hand.

While we're waiting to hear back from R251 about the time Harry conked two kids heads together like he was Moe from the Three Stooges, let's all enjoy the time Harry tweaked some guys nipples at the Invictus games. He looks very, uh.. speedy, doesn't he?

R256 - Let us face facts: Harry is an idiot.

It's not only unsurprising that he ended up with that phony bitch, it's surprising that he ever attracted girls of the calibre of Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas.

And, in all three cases, none of them probably would have given him a tumble without his royal status.

No way no how will Harry be on the balcony during Trooping the Color. His balcony days are over.

[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.]

R191 - Back to L.A. in splendour like a conquering Cleopatra was always her goal. The BRF were never anything but a stepping-stone.

They were probably planning it out on that African vac. they took a few months before the engagement was announced.

I predict we're going to hear next week that Meghan and Harry are "Shocked" by the negative reaction to their telling "their truth". Meaning that Harry will be (genuinely) shocked to finally understand that he has truly burnt almost every bridge he had with his former life, and will phone up his friends to say the interview has been misconstrued and that they meant no harm to the family, that he really loves his family, blah blah blah.

I strongly suspect that Harry doesn't grasp what a serious step this is for him to take. And God Forbid if Philip dies or even just takes a turn for the worse in the next few days. People will draw a direct line between the interview and Philip's deteriorating condition.

R259 - I'm loopy and elderly. Why can't I live there?!

You can't live there without an HRH I'm afraid, but there are lots of lovely cottages on the Sandringham Estate that you can rent. Some of them are even Airbnbs, like this one:

Can you imagine how happy Fergie is that these two idiots are doing this? Prior to this, she was the most embarrassing member of the family, and the only one who gave Oprah an interview. Now, she looks positively dignified next to the Harkles.

I don't think Philip will be with us by summer. Harry will attend the funeral alone, of course. For a preview of what his trip will be like, he should watch the Duke of Windsor episodes from Season 1 of The Crown.

They are both simpering and cringeworthy. The world will be laughing at them next week. And Oprah could be in for a big shock to her credibility, if it becomes apparent that she didn't ask unbiased or relevant questions.

Meghan's PR has let it be known that she only has "kind words" for Kate in the interview.

What will Meghan's stans make of that? They hate Kate so much, call for her murder and that of her kids regularly, and then they find that Meghan herself has nothing negative to say about her?

“Why is Meghan the way she is?” asked a senior royal source. “A very weird childhood is definitely part of it. She raised herself for much of it, living with her father for a long time and looking after him. The no friends at the wedding was quite a telltale sign. She’s really smart, if she could have seen the use of that inside the institution. She wanted to be ‘A’ list — the royal family is beyond ‘A’ list — but she wanted it the Beyoncé way, without restrictions. She was never up for royal life. Right from the start, she courted rejection.”

That does not sound like a Brit speaking. Sara Latham, perhaps, who is American? Or Jason Knauf?

[quote]Meghan's PR has let it be known that she only has "kind words" for Kate in the interview.

Well, she's got to save something for the book doesn't she? After that, she's out of tricks.

My hunch is that she'll come out guns'a-blazin' for 'the Firm', who in her mind are the grey suits of Buckingham Palace. She'll be smugly patronizing to the Family Members but say lukewarm polite comments because she knows anything otherwise is bad optics. She'll go on and on about 'having her voice back, and having it heard'. But you what? We've been listening to that voice since she high-tailed it to Canada and beyond, and so far, there's no compelling reason to listen to her rambling platitudes on the issue du jour.

[quote] Actually, comparing that beautiful 21-room apartment in Kensington Palace and the beautiful, stately Anmer Hall to the five-bedroom totally undistinguished pile that they gave Harry and Meghan, one can understand Meghan's resentment.

Only if one were somehow stupid enough to think that the second in line to the throne (who will almost certainly inherit it one day) and the sixth in line to the throne (who will almost certainly never inherit it) would and should for some reason receive the same perks.

But who would be so stupid as to think that?

Isn't is interesting that THE dear dear friends that Meghan invited to her most recent wedding haven't been trotting out the testimonials. Remember that literal parade of well connected celebrities in to the church when they were married? Gosh, don't they all have clout to sway public opinion? But no, we get two or three testimonials from her Suite co-workers, which is suspicious in itself that all the testimonials came at once and from one specific group .... golly-gee-willikers, wonder what could have been the motivation there?

um, I meant Suits coworkers...

Tomorrow's Daily Star's cover offers a cut-out-and-keep vomit bag for anyone who gets nauseous while watching the interview

Telegraph: Palace staff say 'Meghan called the shots' with regard to interviews, directly contradicting her statement in the Oprah clip.

^ Oh, that's fabulous.

This is well-observed

Meghan's interview dress looks like jizz splat on her shoulder. Wonder if she's sending a message to someone. Interesting choice of attire nonetheless.

If she is consciously mimicking Wallis, she's more insane than we thought...

She probably loves Wallis and "relates to her"

Y'all know Oprah's brand is decline right?

Oprah (allegedly) is facing leaner times (in terms of her bank account not her dress size clearly). In the last year she has closed O Magazine and sold off most of her stake in OWN. H&M are not just depending on Oprah to launch their American brand, Oprah needs them to try and keep her relevance and earn some cash. She sold the rights of the interview to CBS for $8 million. Oprah's base was largely black women and white fraus. Most of the white fraus have abandoned her now because they are Trumpists.

This is why Oprah has been courting Meghan for years. Has given her connections to people like Tyler Perry (whose house H&M lived in for some time) and is doing the interview at Gayle's house. I've heard a number of people say that Oprah is there to interview and will be tough. Nope, she's there (as she has been for years now) for money. She is riding their coat tails as much as they are riding hers.

The Aussies are rolling their eyes too - even their Women of Color:

Has George Clooney or Serena Williams commented yet? What about Reese, who got invited to the wedding but declined to go because she’d never met Meghan?

Wendy Williams warned the world about Meghan and no one listened to her!

Is that true about Reese, R282? She stated she didn't go because she didn't know Meghan? Reese is EVERYTHING that Meghan wishes should could be: Oscar winner, Emmy winner, producer of her own content in vehicles hand picked for her. Multi streaming platform development deals.

That pose in the white shirt with the sunglasses suggests...research?

OH SHIT! The story about Meghan throwing tea at a staff member while on tour in Australia is finally being discussed in the British press!

The British press will never stop now. If Meghan thought she was treated badly in 2018, she hasn't seen anything yet.

R271, Harry and Meghan were initially offered many of the same perks: the big KP apartment, a country estate at Sandringham (probably York Cottage). They behaved so badly that the perks were yanked, along with access to the Royal jewels and an HRH for Archie. While they might never have gotten everything Will and Kate got, they were being set up as part of the Fab Four. Even after these initial losses, if they'd settled down and done the work, made things up with Kate and William, lots of perks would have come their way once Charles became King. They just couldn't work and couldn't wait.

Good Morning America had an interview with the author of The Times bullying piece this morning. The video was available on Twitter but in the last hour has suddenly been deleted.

Not even a word of support from SourSpice? Can we get a kind word from Catherine McPhee? David Foster? Anybody?

All their bigshot Hollywood 'friends' are waiting to see how the general public in America responds to the interview. If it's a triumph for the Sussexes, congratulations and support will pour in. If it's a shitshow or even a snoozefest, all you'll hear from Hollywood is a pointed silence.

The Mail cover....

So anyone else think Meghan started the rumour that William had an affair thinking that maybe it would force William out of the line of succession or at the very least boost her profile.....right???????

R285 I think I’d read somewhere that Reese said she didn’t go because she didn’t know Meghan and wasn’t sure why she was invited.

The truth is royal working life is not glamourous. You have to spend time being (or at least appearing) interested in some pretty run of the mill things and run of the mill people. Yes, it's a personal life filled with staff and great homes but doing it well is not glamorous and it is not conducive to self-expression.

I can't believe she couldn't work that out before she went in and ruined so much. Personally, I don't believe it. She knew.

[quote] The allegations also include Meghan becoming upset at being given only a wing of the Australian Governor’s mansion to stay in, rather than the entire property.

WTF? Who did she think she was? Even the Queen probably wouldn't have done that. Meghan is the typical nouveau riche climber who has no idea how to behave with grace and decency. People who defend have issues and they're just starry eyed celeb chasers.

Tina Brown said in her Diana bio that if you want to know what Royal duties are like, picture all of the most boring parts of your job, never leavened by the good parts. In exchange, the working members of the BRF get infinite security and luxury. It would be a good deal if you could focus on the perks AND on the good you are doing through highlighting worthy causes.

[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 Sun's lawyers have allowed them to talk about throwing the hot tea on an staffer....hmmmm.

That is Not Good for Meghan.

Let's see if she sues - she won't, I guarantee it.

The article doesn't say that or describe the incident. It just says a hot drink was spilled at some point.

What's interesting is I am pretty sure she is friends with either the DofE or Prince Charles, or both. She was invited to Charles and Camilla's blessing service after their marriage. Which is only to say her opinion would be considered.... she wouldn't spout off anything she wouldn't want to live with.

Not cool, Oprah.

Someone put the Valentine Low interview with GMA, which GMA put up and then deleted, onto streamable.

Here's the streamable link. He is very direct, serious and plausible. He makes it clear that the Times triple checked every detail in anticipation of the couple's litigiousness, and are absolutely confident that the facts in the story are well corroborated by reliable sources.

He also makes it clear that this was not done by Buckingham Palace, but by former staffers, and that "Meghan is wrong to say that Buckingham Palace was behind this".

Considering all this hoopla...they’ve been nothing but drama since the engagement. They don’t seem to have anything in common but entitlement. Their personal relationship and conversations with each other must only be about the feud with the BRF. What will they talk about when the world moves on? It’s frankly a little pathetic that they have allowed this to engulf the earliest years of their marriage.

The next few weeks will be very hard for them. They've treated people badly and if the interview goes badly, those people will feel safe taking their revenge... in the context of finding their own voices, of course. Which Meg will support, naturally, because... um... Kate's skirts.

I just surprised the tub of lard that is Boprah hasn’t filmed a third hour after these allegations came out

The Telegraph is saying the worst accusations are yet to come:

"Last night, a royal source with close knowledge of the allegations said: “The actual worst incidences haven’t come out. There are some harrowing stories to tell. I’ve had some teary conversations with people this week.” Another palace source said: “They are playing with fire, it’s very high stakes because there’s a lot that could come out in the wash that hasn’t been told.”

All they had to do was leave and be quiet about the BRF. That's all. They had the house, the fame, the deals with Netflix and Spotify, but they just couldn't help themselves. And now all that poison the BRF had agreed to keep bottled is about to come gushing out. And that will be the end of everything.

Proof that GMA tweeted -then deleted!!!!- the long clip of Valentine Low describing in some detail the way the story came out, who was responsible for it, and generally what the accusations are, and how seriously the victims have been affected by Meghan's bullying.

Here is Richard Palmer retweeting it, and now, below his, it says: "Tweet unavailable"

GMA has some explaining to do. That was a fabulous interview.

New YouGov poll shows that while Meghan and Harry's popularity has increased slightly (47% approve to 44% against) the majority of people still support the Royal Family over the Harkles. The Queen remains at 80% support throughout the UK

Can someone link the latest reporting on the cunty and violent behavior in Australia, including throwing hot tea at staff?

It's linked at R287, but the Sun pulled its punches. It simply says 'a hot drink was knocked over,' not 'the crazy bitch threw a cup of hot tea at her assistant.'

Here, r313. It's been doing the rounds for years, but this is the first newspaper to make any reference to it.

r314, I know - they did pull their punches.

But the question still remains - why would "A hot drink knocked over" be included at all in an article about bullying claims?

Either the assistant knocked over the drink and Meghan screamed at her, OR

Meghan threw it on her, as the original rumour - now three years old - said she did.

Oh, I'm sure that's what the Sun is referring to. They just don't have enough sourcing to make the hot tea claim. It would be the headline if they did, as that's REALLY over-the-line behavior. One can only imagine the money being thrown at the assistant to really spill the details.

A telling quote from Valentine Low's GMA interview - now pulled by GMA:

"A lot of people talked about, how can you tell the difference between a bully and a demanding boss? It's obviously a legitimate question. But the point is, these people who felt they were bullied, who left their jobs, are still in an emotionally fragile and fraught state today. I mean, literally today. And that speaks not of being spoken [to] harshly by a demanding boss, it speaks of bullying and the psychological effects of that bullying".

So GMA deleting it's interview with the Time about the bullying probe sums up why they wanted to move to American. Unlike in the UK where the press will print dirt on royals and celebrities, the US media can always be bought.

Thanks for the link.

Maybe they’re being vague about it in anticipation of full story coming out in the staff’s own words. That’s where the maximum impact would be, not letting secondary telling of the full truth.

The Sun now reporting that The Palace investigators is bracing themselves for an entirely new string of bullying accusations against Meghan

There has got to be a recording or video out there of Meghan losing her shit right.......and come on Sun dig around Toronto there's got to be dirt there too.

Yeah, I can't believe that during all those months of bad behavior no pissed-off assistant ever secretly recorded her. If they did, that recording is worth big bucks.

I'm absolutely certain that no one recorded her at the Palace. It would have been written in FLAME across the top of their employment contract that if they ever recorded anything, anywhere, they'd be fired, sued into oblivion, and would never work again.

Maybe not at the Palace. The Australian tour would have been a perfect time, though. More chaos and less supervision.

R325 Someone in Australia who isn't silenced by a royal NDA probably could verify this story

Not even there. I am certain that none of these people filmed or recorded her in any way. There is a chance that a reporter caught film of something during that tour, such as the hissing and the weeping assistant Emily Andrews said she witnessed first hand.

Meanwhile, there's a new story that Meghan went insane over the shade of red gift blankets ordered by an assistant. They were red, but the shade was wrong. This episode apparently left the entire household staff on the verge of quitting.

There have been rumors in the past fews years that at least one tirade was, in fact, caught on video by a Palace staffer. That was never confirmed, of course, but the possibility is out there.

This and the choir rehearsals at the wedding make it sound like Meghan has a raging case of OCD. Which doesn't pair up at all with her own sloppy, ill-fitting clothing. Shouldn't she be immaculate?

If the Miz Winfrey was truly the showman she claims to be, truly the Queen of Drama and the Biz of Show in the tradition of P T Barnum . . .

. . . after Megs finished her whinge/bitch segment, and Oprah introduced Ginger and invited him to come on down . . .

. . . Ginger should walk out with his arms around the shoulders of Thomas Markle.

After spending the first part of the program bitching woe is me, they're out to get me and I'm misquoted and the victim of falsehoods, the look on Megs face and the rest of the program would be both the apex of Oprah's career and showmanship that people will remember into the 22nd century.

I wish someone had taped Meghan's meltdown when she realized the Archewell web address had been forwarded to Kanye's "Gold Digger." Cause you know THAT shit was epic.

Here, Lee Marvin as Meghan and Glioria Grahame as a Kensington palace staffer helpfully reenact Meghan's trip to Australia!

Royal Reporters in the UK are calling GMA out

GMA were very stupid to do that.

r335 What motivated them to do it I wonder?

Or when Megan sashayed along the red carpet with a TAG hanging from the hem of her dress. You know her meltdown over that was one for the ages!

GMA either:

1. Was threatened with legal action.

2. Was offered a sweetener to censor.

If it was just some crappy tabloid person, they could just about get away with it, but that was a quality interview wit the original reporter who broke the story in the Times. Very sober and informed. Here's the streamable recording of it. It's long, but worth it.

He's right, the Twitter mob probably made GMA delete it....it appears to still be on FB.

That's the same Royal Rota reporter who was threatened with murder via sniper by the Sussex squad on twitter last year and referred the posters to the UK police.

The Duchess of Sucksass can go suck a double headed dildo on a hovercraft.

R340 The Facebook comments are almost universally negative about Harry and Meghan, but Twitter more positive.

Here's pre-Meghan Harry casually making racist remarks:

Can Twitter comments and such be taken seriously? Don't H&M have a PR team active on social media?

Twitter is all about standing up against attacks on a Black woman, even though race has never been a "cause" of Meghan's. There's lifelong evidence that she's a feminist and promoted women and girls, but zip that she ever cared about race relations until it became a popular cause and a shield for her.

I don't doubt the stories about her and how she treated staff.I wonder though if this was power trip bullying or more a case of Meghan kind of falling apart herself and not managing her mood well and that frustration, anger etc landing on other people.

There are witnesses, r347. Many, many witnesses.

And she knows that, and that's why she won't sue.

IKR! Whenever I'm having an off day, I just can't help throwing a cup of hot tea at my associates!

I don't mean an off day. I mean the build up of hating being in the royal family, wanting to leave and go back to LA, hating being told what to do and expected to follow all the rules of the monarchy etc. I would be curious if they felt the poor treatment was over her whole time there or if it was concentrated into a certain time frame. It is still wrong either way but I think there is a difference between people who are bullies and people who are so stressed / emotional that they become emotional dysregulated and they lash out.

Except that the bullying by all reports started even before the wedding!

The replies on the Chrissy Teigan tweet are not all positive. People are reminding her that Meghan chose to do the interview. People are also commenting that it's very odd to do an Oprah interview while demanding privacy. Teigan hasn't replied.

I'm going to go out on a crazy limb here. I wouldn't be shocked if the miscarriage and current pregnancy were fabricated to help with her court case. She had already made herself look bad by changing her story several times, lying about her part in finding freedom, and was being forced to hand over her cell records, The 5 friends would have been revealed at trial, which I am sure they were not happy about. A good investigation into her texts, etc. would likely reveal if she had been the one behind the 5 friends People story. She was about to be exposed when the miscarriage story appeared. All of a sudden, here comes a high risk pregnancy to turn things around. Warby caves, the media start covering her again for something other than "Meghan's friend agonized on what hat to wear at her wedding" type nonsense. Now she has celebrities tweeting that "They'll make her miscarry!!" If the interview doesn't manage to save her "brand", she will "miscarry" and blame everyone under the sun, especially the BRF. She strikes me as someone who will not give up until she destroys her "enemies."

Yeah, pizza-gatish, but this pregnancy came right when she needed 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.]

Halle Berry tweeted "protect black women always."

Wow

So Halle Berry is ok with workplace bullying, so long as the perpetrator is black.

Does she realize that two of the bullied employees were WOC?

I think we can be absolutely certain that at some point during the interview Oprah will cut to a picture of PMoK's brooch then cut back to a pained reaction shot of Meghan, asking "How did that make you feel?"

So...you'll make her wear her seatbelt?

Harry is such a fool. Now he's making money for one of the women who explicitly exploited and profited off his mother's death, and I'll bet he doesn't even know it.

What a fucking imbecile.

I'm sure that tribesman with spears is just what MM has always wanted as RPOs.

Can you imagine how William will feel when he reads the papers tomorrow and realizes that one of the few people who published photos of his mother taking her dying breath is going to profit - again - but this time from Harry's tell-all? Fucking hell.

Did that really happen? They published photos of Diana as she was dying?

[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'm not a girly girl. I'm a hard news harlot at heart.' - old quote from the lovely lady who showed the Diana pictures. Yuck.

Same surgeon

There was an interview they did with a British journalist--I believe--after they had the baby and the staff turnover etc. The interviewer asked Meghan how she was doing and she said "Thank you for asking." *SIGH *"No one's asked me that."

It came across egotistical and whiney. It spoke volumes to me.

French and Italian papers did, R361, maybe Hong Kong tabloids as well. Then they showed up again on the 10 year anniversary, and again a couple of years 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.]

r366, you see how no one shows her face in those pictures?

Well Harry's interview producer was one of the only people to actually show her dying face.

R354 Love how the SJW bleat about protecting a princess in a mansion decked out in designer clothes and jewels when there are thousands of black women who truly do need protection.

Her face was not mangled but pretty ugly. I will never forget what her death-face looked like.

This just keeps getting worse for them.

Saw a video today of William visiting and speaking with an elderly lady. He was extremely sweet and really seemed engaged, talking about George and Charlotte. When he departed, the elderly lady commented, "He is his mother's son." Why is Harry so different from William?

Valentine Low gave a more detailed statement, I think Richard Kay put it up on his Twiiter feed, and there is a link to it that was later taken down. Low makes it abundantly clear that the TIMES researched the sources and claims very thoroughly before going to print. He said everyone knew the Duchess was difficult from the beginning. But his most telling comment was that it was also clear that Meghan was setting up a victim narrative early on so she could justify going to live in America.

She planned the whole thing from the and it played out exactly as she planned. It's worth listening to. This is no tabloid hack. He also mentioned that her lawyers are "very aggressive" but the TIMES made sure it did its homework on this one, and that BP had some serious questions to answer.

The hot tea incident and her antics at Admiralty House are now up on The SUN.

I think, this time, threatening to sue or filing a suit is not going to work for Meghan. If she does, the testimony of the many people coming forward will do to her what the ANL trial's record would have.

Far from being a victim, as Low pointed out, so far Meghan has had everything her own way.

If these witnesses are willing to go to court and prove harm, it may be the first time she doesn't.

She is truly a loathsome sick bitch. Tje Medusa hair is perhaps e well-chosen personal hallmark.

Longtime BBC editor:

Robin Aitkin: Oprah Winfrey is more Flatterer than Interrogator - yet Harry and Meghan will regret this interview

^*planned it this way from the beginning.

The link to Lowe's video statement is on the LSA Meghan Markle Unpopular Opinions Part 2 thread, start at the back, it's nearly 7'000 pages, but just a couple of pages from the back.

Let's see if the Plastic Bitch sues.

I'll bet my life that she won't.

Here is Low's statement, in full, r374

[quote] "He is his mother's son." Why is Harry so different from William?

R371 William will one day be Prince of Wales and then King, a gig he's been groomed for since birth. Harry could have set up a role for himself, a la the Wessexes or the Princess Royal or the Duke of Edinburgh, until such time as William's kids are old enough to take on public duties, if they so choose.

But because Ginger's a petulant, lazy, insecure child with serious mental issues, he instead went out and found himself a partner in mentally instability who assured him "Stick with me, toots. I'll guarantee you'll get revenge for all of the hurt and slights heaped on you by your nasty family."

The Revolt of the Palace Staffers will echo through time.

So Meghan really DID make a difference!!

R350 nice try, but Meghan has been this way all her life.

An article about the designers Ralph and Russo in The Times today conveniently links to a 2017 article by Valentine Low on Meghan's arrival in Harry's life, the royal family and the UK. It is nothing but polite and respectful about Meghan - proof that, rather than be attacked by the nasty racist media, Meghan was warmly welcomed right from the start in a way few other royal brides have been.

Meghan Markle’s glamour in Prince Harry engagement pictures marries Hollywood to House of Windsor

Valentine Low

Thursday December 21 2017, 5.00pm GMT,

The Times

They are undoubtedly some of the most romantic royal engagement photographs yet — and the ones with the biggest price tag.

The pictures show Meghan Markle cuddling up against her fiancé, Prince Harry, at Frogmore House, Windsor. However, in concentrating on how much the couple are clearly in love, the casual viewer may miss the fact that Ms Markle, 36, is wearing a dress that originally cost an estimated £56,000.

It is by the London-based couture label Ralph & Russo, and is from their autumn-winter 2016 collection. The gown, which features a tiered tulle skirt with a decorated sheer bodice, is said to have been priced at £46,650 before VAT, although Ralph & Russo, the only couture house in London, would not confirm the figure. It was purchased rather than loaned, although given the publicity that the fashion house has gained as a result of the picture, it is unlikely the couple paid anything like that.

Either way, it says much about the glamorous Ms Markle and her desire to create a bold fashion statement: the House of Windsor meets Hollywood.

It also prompts speculation that the label, whose dresses have been worn by Naomi Campbell, Beyoncé and Jennifer Lopez, may be in line to create her wedding dress.

When Kate Middleton posed for her engagement picture with Prince William, she wore a cream dress by the high-street brand Reiss.

The images of Harry and Ms Markle, taken this week and released yesterday, were taken by Alexi Lubomirski, a fashion and celebrity photographer descended from Polish royalty. They show the couple smiling, embracing, clearly happy in each other’s company: they are, without a question, completely crazy about each other.

One picture, in colour, shows them sitting on the steps outside Frogmore House. They are holding hands, with her engagement ring on view.

However, it is the other photograph, in black and white, that speaks so powerfully of their relationship. It shows them embracing as she nestles up close to him, her hand resting on his face. They are both smiling, eyes closed as if lost in the moment. His coat appears to be wrapped around her for warmth. A third, more informal picture was released later on Instagram, showing them walking by the side of the lake as Ms Markle clings to Harry’s arm.

A caption with the picture said: “The couple are so grateful for the warm and generous messages they have received during such a happy time in their lives.

“As a way to say thank you, they have decided to share this candid photograph from the day of their portrait sittings directly with all of you.”

Mr Lubomirski said: “It was an incredible honour to be asked to document this wonderful event, but also a great privilege to be invited to share and be a witness to this young couple’s love for one another.

“I cannot help but smile when I look at the photos that we took of them, such was their happiness together.”

In the black and white picture Ms Markle is wearing a sweater by Victoria Beckham, while Harry, 33, is wearing a Burberry coat.

Mr Lubomirski, who is based in New York, used to work as assistant to Mario Testino, who took some of the most celebrated photographs of the late Diana, Princess of Wales, as well as William and Kate’s engagement picture.

The Telegraph: ORCA will be the only winner tonight

William will have just found out that one of Harry's producers was also one of the rare people to publish his mother's death pictures.

Fucking hell. There is no depth to which Harry will not go for his flash wife.

[quote]There is no depth to which Harry will not go for his flash wife.

Ginger is not doing anything for his "flash wife". His goal is to make everyone pay big-time for the fact that he's the ne'er do well second son whose Mummy was killed. It's all about him.

Supposedly, rr383.

But now that he's actually paid one of the people who made money off his mother's dead 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.]

The great thing about the dying Diana Mail story is Harry will read it.

Apparently, no surprise, they read nothing but the coverage of themselves. So between that and "When he (William) departed, the elderly lady commented, "He is his mother's son." Haz will have an upset tummy today.

Does he ever wander around Jonestown, with nothing to do and nowhere to go, and wonder just a little WTF he's done? Or is he still The Hostage?

Harry will read "The Hostage" story and his Mistress will give him one side eye and tell him "See, Harry? They thought of you as a Hostage."

Harry is beyond help.

Their engagement picture with her in Ralph & Russo couture gown and Harry in his casual “beach wedding” blue suit was so weird.

r205 Fergie is known for being lovely and wonderful with staff and very kind. I think I recall reading that even now when she goes to Balmoral briefly in the summer she leaves staff thank you notes and maybe small gifts as well as being thankful in business. She has her faults but she is unfailingly polite and liked by the royal familys domestic staff.

You're right, Surviving Angel.

Fergie deserves a re-look.

I wonder how much communication there has been between H&M & Oprah in the last week. Are edits being demanded? I can picture Oprah finally putting her foot down.

R246 She didn’t care when her father had heart surgery, why would she care about Prince Philip’s?

Orca doesn't care. The Harkles can phone her all they want. She's made her 9 million and that is that.

I don’t think this interview does Oprah‘s legacy any favors.

[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.]

r355 This is an illustration of why identity politics eats itself and generates hypocrisy and political splits amongst its bigfest proponents in politics and secondly why people increasingly hold Hollywood and celebrity culture in contempt.

Bethenny Frankel's tweet.

Didn’t Bethenny briefly date Trevor?

“MARRY!”

Oh dear.

Poor Bethany Frankel doesn't realize she's about to be subject to multiple death threats...

Courtesy of Meghan's "anti-bullying" twitter bot/army....

So was this man and he was celebrated for it. Sexism maybe?

So Meghan's bullying fans are supposedly "anti-bullying, yes?

Thank you r391

I did make a little mistake typing too quickly. I meant to say thankful in person not thankful in business but I think I managed to convey the jist.

Named Klan Posters: Please F&F all posts

SurvivingAngel

Dex

UKGuy

Zemen-wanbuis

Dutchie

Edvard

Della

Though a recent Morning Consult poll found that the Queen remains the favorite royal among Americans, with Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, second, Harry and Meghan rank highly, coming third and fourth respectively. But whether they will draw audiences to rival those of the Netflix drama The Crown (seen by 78 million households worldwide, according to the streaming service) remains to be seen.

The Guardian

Well, I am wondering if Lady C's most recent video, in which she states (and I'm willing to take anything she says with a spadeful of salt) that there has been behind the scenes a campaign of pressure on Harry to relinquish his HRH and titles, as well as his place in the line of succession, voluntarily.

She probably does have some good sources, but even assuming the statement is true, there is no indication of whether or not it's been successful.

That said, I am wondering if they've saved the really HUGE story for the actual broadcast, and Harry announces that he IS giving it all up, and has asked his grandmother to put the things in motion. The mistaken idea that only Parliament can take his title and HRH was demolished when the government, presented recently with such a petition, stated unequivocally that "this is a matter for the Queen". Government punted back to the Queen faster than you can say Jack Robinson. She CAN take their HRHs, it is within her power to grant it (she didn't have to ask Parliament whether she could make William's kids HRHs, did she?) and to take it away. Likewise the ducal title: if she had the power to gift it unilaterally, she has the power to rescind it. Harry's title of "Prince" however is another matter. She didn't give him that, he was born with it. If he decides to ditch the whole package, she can formalise that. But she can take the HRH and ducal title, just as she could take the royal patronages and military appointments.

The order of succession is another matter. Only Parliament can change that.

The Oprah interview, in my view, is the Alpha and Omega of their campaign to monetise their royal connections for the fucking brand in America. At this point, announcing on that interview that they're giving up those "archaic" and "undemocratic" titles would be a coup for them, nailing their "egalitarian" brand to the mast.

They've got Netflix and Spotify. They're toast inside the family and Britain. They don't need the titles any longer, the royal stamp has done its work.

Now, they've got a lot to gain from dumping them on that interview. The story would overshadow the bullying story for days.

I wouldn't put money on it, but I also wouldn't be surprised, especially as that little hint Meghan gave in one of the trailers, "Well, a lot has been lost already."

You can imagine the Palace's relief. They'd be turning cartwheels down the corridors of Buck House. It would signal a real closing off of the mess. Meghan and Harry could go on shooting their mouths off, and the Palace could just ignore them.

It would all be over.

We on the DataLounge have been suffering the slander and libel all this time for merely QUESTIONING Meghan Markle.

And here she goes. Doing all we predicted and more.

The fat heifertiti frauen who insist that their hatred of Meghan Markle has nothing to do with racism are full of shit. These cunts bend over backwards to make excuses for even the most vile members of the BRF but God forbid Meghan should do an Oprah interview. And the Klan granny cunt who called Meghan's mom a grifter will be the first one to have a hysterical meltdown if you point out that the BRF are even bigger grifters and welfare queens.

R365 - That was the Tom Bradby interview, filmed during the African tour, in which Meghan, standing in the midst of the poorest country in the world where women are still out gathering firewood to feed the family, looked up at the camera with tear-filled doe eyes and complained about her lot in life, and how no one ever asked if she was Okay.

Meghan allegedly muttered, Yeah, the grass is always greener, when this was pointed out to her.

You couldn't make it up.

In impoverished South Africa: Not many people have asked me if I'm OK

Oprah certainly does make money interviewing the mentally ill.

R406, because we are racist Klan Grannies who ignore Kate's skirt!

[quote]the Palace could just ignore them.

The biggest mistake the Queen and courtiers made was getting into a slanging match with Megs. Once she left the UK, they should have ignored her, repeated "the Duchess has made her decision and we will honor that decision" or whatever PR spin equates "she left, good riddance, there's nothing further to comment about".

The worst thing you can do to a narcissist is ignore them.

My God, if I had frail elderly relatives with bags of money, the last thing I'd do is antagonise them.

Yes if you block r411, you will block all the insanity on this thread.

The palace has lost control of its staff. If they're allowing historical bullying accusations, it won't be long before courtiers are coming forward bitching about William, Kate, Charles, Camilla and the rest of them.

Unless you were hyptnotised by a genuine, real-life witch, r414

Andrew is already in the firing line.

Well, Armie Hammer must be happy that this has taken over as the gossip du jour and refocused the spotlight.

I LOVE that these two are dumb enough to put their lives on the firing line.

I'd almost respect them, if they didn't do it during Philip's death.

I love watching the pair of them go DOWN

In the interview tonight I'll be looking for her self-reflection, questioning if she could in some way be responsible for all this heartache and hubris. If there's none of this self-analysis, then as Valentine Low says in his piece, SHE CRAVES REJECTION.

Having lived in London and Malibu, there's no comparison. The endless cloudy days in London wear down your soul, plus in summer nowhere has aircon. Nothing beats living by the ocean in a warm climate, but still close to a big first world city with all its amenities.

Some clever person is going to grasp on to duchess Markle's craving for rejection in the face of Good Fortune and write a wonderful book.

R350 good, respectful people don’t lose their integrity even under stressful circumstances. They don’t attack, belittle, and antagonize others especially those who are helping them. It’s just how the human condition works. When I worked in the ICUs we frequently dealt with families undergoing immense amount of emotional distress. Everyone had own way of releasing stress yet most did not antagonize ICU staff aside from few exceptions. These exceptions were so horrible that staff still remember their names and behavior sometimes 10 years later. So I totally believe how Meghan’s staff were left traumatized given only 2 short years have passed. But no, a person’s core character e.g. how they treat others don’t magically turn horrible under emotional duress.

It appears that unlike Meghan’s claims of being unsupported, she was actually protected from consequences of her poor behavior against staff. She was protected because of her royal status, her perceived emotional instability and manipulative nature, and her new self-identify as a black woman.

Ms Junor added the Duke of Sussex has served the country and the Crown both as a soldier on active duty and as a working royal.

Therefore, this interview "looks like being a gross betrayal", the expert said.

She explained: "As a former soldier, committed to putting duty and loyalty to Queen and country above all else, this looks like being a gross betrayal.

"A betrayal that will feed straight into the hands of those who would like to see the Monarchy abolished.

Someone should start a thread called "Harry and Meghan think what they said on the interview was taken out of context", you know damn well that's exactly what's next in this saga.

The FBI has opened an investigation into pedo Andrew's conduct and the corrupt queen continues to protect him by allowing him to live in crown owned property and awarding him a hefty yearly allowance. She has actually further rewarded him by allowing him to retire from tedious public life at the usual age, while Anne battles on into her 70s.

Let's hope Harry questions why a man who raped a sex slave is still allowed such largesse and liberties.

[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 haven’t caught up on the newest drama, but let me get this right. One of the producers of Oprah’s interview was one of the few scums who published photo of Diana’s dying face? The same type of scum that Harry is forever haranguing about? The same ones whom he accuses of killing his mother (notwithstanding she wore no seat belts in a car driven by a drunk) and he’s now trying to avoid because he wants to protect his family?

I guess Harry is not known for being the family dolt for nothing.

I couldn't care less for that pervert, but assuming an investigation in the US affect how a mothers in the UK treat his son make you sound like a lunatic r426, plus this is a thread about Meghan and Harry.

r428 has it exact.

Here is what a decent and honourable man looks like.

Someone who stands up and who WILL NOT APOLOGIZE.

[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] She CAN take their HRHs, it is within her power to grant it (she didn't have to ask Parliament whether she could make William's kids HRHs, did she?) and to take it away. Likewise the ducal title: if she had the power to gift it unilaterally, she has the power to rescind it. Harry's title of "Prince" however is another matter. She didn't give him that, he was born with it. If he decides to ditch the whole package, she can formalise that.

Close but not quite r405. The Queen CAN ABSLOUTELY remove the Princely title along with the HRH. It's in her power as "Font of all Honour" we keep bleating on about here - look it up. That title is covered by the 1917 Letters Patent issued by George V, that stands today as the order governing current royal honorifics and titles (that can of course be altered by QEII anytime).

I agree with your take on the Sussex ducal title. There has been lots of debate here and elsewhere as to whether or not the Queen can rescind that. I agree that as it's still a royal dukedom, gifted by the current living monarch, she can take it back without Parliamentary input. This remains to be tested....of course imo it's highly unlikely she will do this to Harry, since it would be expected she'd do it to Andrew as well and I'm fairly certain she won't go there.

My Favorite thing about this:

Meghan is a BULLY

Her followers are also, somehow: BULLIES

[quote]So Halle Berry is ok with workplace bullying, so long as the perpetrator is black. Does she realize that two of the bullied employees were WOC?

Halle Berry in the past was well known as one of the most demanding divas in all of Hollywood, so she should talk.

Not many smart Hollywood celebs are speaking out because it’s better to have a wait and see attitude. Also, half of them treat staff the same or even worse, so they’re scared of speaking out for fear of shit coming out about themselves. So it’s going to be talk show hosts, clueless/ dumb celebs, and famewhore influencers who are coming to Meghan’s defense without known facts from other side of the story. The woke Twittertards who are going on about how criticism and scrutiny against a black/ self-identified black woman is always racist, they form the base of her support. The more they do that the more they turn off the white, Chrissy Tiegen-loving fraus. They ain’t going along with that shit.

R253, it was at an event, there is video. If I come across it again I will link but you might be able to find it in a search. The boys were maybe 5 or 6 and Harry crouched down to speak with them and then knocked their heads together. Looked like it hurt. Really made me wonder how much puff had gone into his "image" - look what they did with Johnny Depp for years to max the Pirates take, after all. Image could not have been farther from reality. I think before Megs Harry's image was more tightly controlled but I am not sure he was all that different. Think of Tom Cruise, too, he had one image, fired his publicist and in short order he was jumping on Oprah's couch. When there is such a gap between image and reality the mask can slip...

I had no idea she met Mulroney through the chef and was only dating Harry for a year before the engagement and married less than a year after that. She's phenomenal. They were LONG DISTANCE dating. Harry probably didn't even know her.

Players gonna play. She is a player.

That woman must be very talented in bed, R438.

My guess is that Meghan had/has the ego the size of Texas. She probably was very confident, aggressive, and (acted very effectively) she couldn’t give a fig about his title, the royal family, or his money. Probably suggested she was gonna leave him multiple times. Which in turn, made him want her enough to marry her.

It probably was like catnip for dimwit Harry.

R440 she threatened to leave? Please. She came to Jamaica and his polo matches uninvited. Which means he didn't want her there. I still don't get how it went from him dumping her and her following him around the world like a deranged fan to them becoming a couple.

So today is the day. Some final thoughts:

I have a feeling that some of the rumors about what H&M will actually discuss is being overblown. I actually don't think they'll go hard on the BRF or name names in any negative way. They will probably praise the Queen. I think most of Meghan's direct ire will be towards her own family (Markles), as we know Oprah's production team hunted down a lot of footage of Tom and Yosemite Sam talking to the media to use tonight. She can spend much time complaining and painting herself as a victim that way, without stirring up the ire of BP and the entire UK.

The problem with that of course is that people aren't tuning in for a re-hash of the Markle family saga. No one cares about that - they want to see dirt flung at the Windsors. As much as that would make news, I can't see H&M going scorched earth like that. It hurts the brand and might make LA power players wary of working with them.

Both H&M will of course go hard on the British media. The much-ballyhooed phrase "it was nearly unsurvivable" was likely about their perceived stress at the hands of the UK press. I'd bet that Oprah brings up the 'murder avocados' articles and contrasts the coverage Meghan received vs what Kate got for same situations - similar to the Buzzfeed article that went around last year...they may touch on troubles with "the Firm" but not as much as is hinted by the teaser drops last week.

One hopes they will be forward-thinking, in that they use the time to promote their new ventures and not gripe about past situations. That would certainly serve their future interests, but wouldn't be as ratings-friendly so I'm not sure how much we'll see of it. A gripe-fest would please Oprah and the network, but not future Sussex business partners.

It also might not go over well with the American public, given that many in the past year have barely survived COVID or lost family, friends of jobs to it. "Unsurvivable" indeed. We'll see how it all plays over the coming week.

R439, plain women often have to be.

R442 What you're saying is all very reasonable.

But when in the past year has Meghan acted all very reasonably?

[quote]Meghan is a BULLY

{quote]Her followers are also, somehow: BULLIES

Her followers: bwhahahaha - bought by the pallet and paid for as I recall, as many celebrities do.

Oh yea, talk about her awful father who raised her when her mom left home. sent her to private schools, paid for her college education so she wouldn't be burdened with loans for decades and probably helped her survive financially befofre she made money acting. Yea that monster.

What more do you need to know what she is like? That she couldn't handle a father who clearly loved her and admittedly spoiled her in a more loving way and with the kind of chagrined, eye rolling tolerance many people have to employ with their patents tells you a lot about her. She is really an awful person.

R446 I’m no Megan fan but she did want him at the wedding. He had a suit waiting for him in London and his name was printed in the wedding program. Even after he was busted cooperating with paps for $$$, she and Harry did try to get him to come, saying “Don’t worry about it, just please come.” He seems to have kind of unraveled and gone off the deep end after that. My guess is he has some kind of substance abuse issues combined with an overbearing, manipulative daughter Samantha that he can’t shake. I’ve always had the sense that it is Samantha’s influence over their mutual father, a kind but weak man, that Megan doesn’t trust. If Sam was out of the picture, I’ve always thought she would find a way back to a relationship with him.

You go easy on Tom Sr., r447. He seems to be somewhat narcissistic: wants to control every narrative and when he can't, deflects and blames everyone else. Sound familiar?

Honestly, she got all upset because her father took a backhander to pose in a tux for the paps?

When she was marrying a man who was photographed bare naked playing strip billiards in Vegas?

Puh-lease!

Can anyone prove Harry and her father never met? You can't marry someone without meeting their parents- when millions or an inheritance are on the line. My family background checks everyone who comes in and we have a sliver of their wealth.

Meghan most definitely didn’t want her father at her wedding, R447. If she did, she would introduce Harry to him a lot earlier. Who leaves meeting the parent for the wedding day? She was probably praying every day for any excuse to uninvite him from the wedding, and jumped up at the opportunity when it presented itself. From then on, it was radio silence and Meghan in the victim mode.

[quote] When she was marrying a man who was photographed bare naked playing strip billiards in Vegas?

And was photographed dressed as a Nazi at a costume party?

Lady Colin Campbell is under the impression that it was Meghan herself who hired the photographer to take photos of her father before the wedding. Voila, that's one way to get rid of the old man who may embarrass her.

Yeah, I always thought it was a set-up, too. Somebody just felt he wouldn't fit in. Suspicious that such a great fuss was made about something so trivial.

But MM couldn't have done much more herself than say to Haz, "Gee, wouldn't it be nice if there were a way . . ." Then phone calls would be made. What Meghan wants Meghan gets.

If her overweight father had made it to the wedding, Meghan wouldn't have needed the future King Charles to walk her half way down the aisle. Optics are everything.

Lady Colin Campbell is extremely vocal about her distaste for Megan and Harry and gets secret tips from insiders. She gets very emotional discussing them. You can watch her videos on YouTube. The tabloids go to her, even just yesterday.

The issue in a nut's shell:

Meghan believed she was to be THE new Royal super-star.

The RF/Palace, simply not impressed, said "No, we have sufficient."

I don't care what the circumstances might be. It's just plain tacky when the father or the bride doesn't walk his daughter down the aisle on her wedding day. There can be no substitutions, EVER!

Harry never met Thomas Markle.

The photographer who took photos of Thomas Markle is a paparazzo known to have worked with MM in the past.

Of course she set him up. No way in hell was Meghan ever going to let her podgy, working-class father walk her down the aisle in front of a billion people.

Lady Colin Campbell has been on a roll for the last couple weeks as Sparkle and Dim have turned up the heat. She's had lots of videos

Another video today with Lady C.. She said that today's video is late because one of the papers asked her to hold off so that they could get their story out first. She also answered that yes, she knew about the bullying of aides and she wrote about it in her book.

One aide compared Sparkle to the "Bunny Boiler" from "Fatal Attraction". Nice at the start, but then, awful.

Now there's an image for you.

I read somewhere that the Australia tour shit show would be the bombshell confirmation of Meghan’s bullying and entitled behavior. Something about her going into a rage that she didn’t get the entire guest house but only a part of it? Then something about her cursing out some admiral or high officials?

Please please let there be recordings audio or video, it would make this soap opera next level.

[quote] didn’t get the entire guest house

No.

Story was that apparently she thought they should have all of Admiralty House which is the residence of the Governor General of Australia.

Did Will and Kate get Admiralty House to themselves when they visited?

For R464, the various Royal Visitors to Australia and where they visited.

I think what MM didn't understand is that she is only the wife of the spare-heir. Kate is more important than she is, like it or not, it's the truth. Sort of a Di vs Fergie situation.

Admiralty House is not exactly shabby. It’s a beautiful large mansion set right on Sydney Harbour.

Staying in the guest wing was good enough for The Queen and Duke of Edinburgh when ever they visited Sydney.

Sparkle is ridiculous.

[quote] Can anyone prove Harry and her father never met?

You cannot ask other people to prove a negative. That's a ridiculous question.

r466 sort of although I dont think rivalry between Fergie and Di even escalated to be this bad.

Thomas Markle stated he’s never met Harry in person. He has no reason to lie.

Now the palace has brought in an independent law firm (to conduct the investigation into claims Meghan bullied staff), I can't help but feel this step was only taken if they were reasonably sure she is guilty of abuse. Having a third party point the finger at the Duchess of Sussex is far more damaging to Meghan than if the palace does it themselves.

[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.]

These whistle-blowing ex-employees better be careful. We know what happens to people who trash MM.

Is that right, R473? When did that happen?

This can't be true.

I believe Meghan subscribes to the "speak it into existence" philosophy. It's certainly worked for her so far.

Maybe Matthew McConaughey can be her veep.

Trust you Klan whores to defend Danja Zone, a lunatic who had videos about Harry and William morphing into lizards.

One of the requirements for President is that you should have held an elected office at the national level at least once before being eligible for President. It wouldn't filter out all the loonies, but it would help.

Outside investigators are usually brought in, R471, if the complaint involves upper management (check), the allegations have been made public (check), or the company wants zero question of their impartiality (check). This is in the US at least, I can't imagine it is much different over there but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

If the allegations are true and the investigators can find proof, the palace HR team will take a public hit for allowing the bullying to occur but I think that will not matter much at all if Meghan is in fact found at fault.

Outside investigators are being brought in because part of the complaint is how the BRF handled it when they were told of the bullying back when it happened. They can't investigate their own handling of the complaints.

I think that falls under being impartial, R481. Palace HR clearly dropped the ball and can't be trusted to do a thorough investigation of one of the principals, who are higher on the food chain than they are.

I cannot wait to see how this all shakes out.

The other aspect is that there might be legal fallout from this if, for example, one or more incidents of bullying falls foul of employment law or even of criminal law (assault). Buckingham Palace, having already shown itself to have let these employees down in their bid to protect Meghan, cannot now be seen to be doing anything that is not entirely thorough, above board and fair to all parties, no matter where the investigation may lead. That requires a third party, and also requires lawyers, so it makes sense to hand it over to a legal team.