Recollections May Vary: Buckingham Palace Issues a Statement, Part II

Link to previous thread

"Queen missed chance to condemn racism".

Paid racism is illegal. Every single racist comment and threat on these brf troll threads are logged.

I like the hidden snark in Queenie's statement: "If only they'd spoken-up before leaving the country in the middle of the night..."

This has been at the top of the Yahoo home page all day.

Why is it heroic to threaten to kill yourself and your unborn child? She certainly looked quite smug at the gala. If she was crying every time the lights went down, why did her makeup look fine at the end of the night? Nothing ever makes sense with these two.

I not only threatened suicide while pregnant, I actually attempted it! Amateur

None of Meghan's assertions stand up to even cursory examination. She's only believable if you really want to believe her because of your own agenda.

R6, clearly that is where MeAgain gets her script.

Yahoo rarely allows comments, but on this story, few seem to be buying what the gruesome twosome are selling.

They not only burned bridges to the Bank of Dad and bro, they really have made themselves pariahs now. Their entire brand was being royal adjacent, way to go, Megs!

The Daily Mail comments on that article containing the not-so-subtle blackmail threat are not favorable, either. "Narcissist" comes up a lot.

R2 The Queen played a key role in bringing down apartheid in South Africa, by pressuring Commonwealth governments into imposing sanctions, something that Nelson Mandela praised her openly many times. "Recollections may vary" but the truth is the Queen is not racist.

Yes, R10, and the then PM of Canada, Brian Mulroney strongly took up the cause as well. He was a conservative, but an old-school Progressive Conservative.

[quote] One of Mr. Mulroney’s greatest achievements in the anti-apartheid campaign was persuading the defiant former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher that Britain should drop its strident opposition to economic sanctions against South Africa. It was nothing short of a Herculean effort given Britain’s embedded economic interests in South Africa and its dominant position in the Commonwealth.

So, HM helped end apartheid by standing up to Thatcher. Meghan has benefitted people of color by . . . wearing an embroidered veil?

Here is the Queen's reaction to the official end of apartheid in SA.

Wow, that's the happiest I've ever seen HM look.

[quote] Barbados had planned to withdraw from the Commonwealth last year, though. Or can you fire the Queen as head of state but still stay in the Commonwealth? I'm not clear on that.

Barbados as a republic can stay in the Commonwealth. There are lots of republics in the Commonwealth such as India and South Africa.

R13 OMG I love that!!!!

Rwanda and Mozambique are two Commonwealth republics without any former colonial or constitutional links with the United Kingdom.

Who would want to make a business deal with them? Who will ensure their projects if she may become suicidal again?

If she is not just appropriating her dead MIL's life, surely there would be a strong plan in place to safeguard her and the BABY during this time lest she become suicidal again? What is that saying about how when you are pointing 1 finger, 4 are pointing back at you? Oprah also acquitted herself less than well. SO much of what was said was inconsistent or easily proved false, was a bit like a very long commercial for their upcoming project.

We are also in the Commonwealth.

I think Americans (and frankly some people in Commonwealth countries) don't understand that there are 53 countries in the Commonwealth but only about 15 have the Queen as head of state. Having the Queen as Monarch and being a Commonwealth Member are actually two different things.

The one thing that Buckingham Palace is getting better at is responding. Remember when Diana died and Liz had to be shamed into making a statement? I understand that she's always wanted to hold herself above the fray and believe that no response was needed EVER, but she's gotten better at responding to issues that demand a response from her. And this was definitely one of them.

[quote]R4 I like the hidden snark in Queenie's statement: "If only they'd spoken-up before leaving the country in the middle of the night..."

It had been a topic of conversation between all involved for months.

Harry has really fucked himself. He's tied himself to a mentally unstable woman by marrying and procreating with her AND by righteously pissing off his powerful family. If he stays with her, his life will be never-ending chaos. If he leaves her, Meghan will bleed him dry financially and keep his kids. All the people who support Meghan will accuse him of ditching his wife for his 'racist' family. His family will take him back but never reinstate him as a working royal or increase his allowance. He'll be living at Charles' isolated farmhouse in Wales and wondering how the hell this became his life.

I wonder what HRH Princess Michael of Kent's various recollections may be...

For Haz to do this while his grandfather is so ill says he is more like a Markle than many want to admit.

“Recollections May Vary” probably has to do with Kate making Meghan cry... not the whole racism business.

R23, he looked grim on his wedding day and rarely looked up during the interview. I suspect he will not live a long life.

She seems to have believed this would lead to the RF giving them $, at least the pretty blatant blackmail attempts through "friends" seem to still hold out hope on that score. She seems poorly grounded in reality.

[quote]R23 If he stays with her, his life will be never-ending chaos.

What, living on a beautiful estate in Southern California with a lovely wife, children, dogs, social cachet and millions of dollars?

Yes, it sounds utterly frightful!!

If she thinks that interview will get her anything but the boot, Meghan doesn't understand the Royal family and never will.

R29 Trust me....there is going to be a slow drip drip drip of ugly stories about Meghan coming and I think not just from the British media. Allegedly there is dirt on her in Canada too.

If they don't get lots of money soon then they will not be able to afford what they're doing. Didn't Haze already complain to Oprah that he was using Diana's inheritance capital to pay the bills? (I suppose he was hoping for a sub from Oprah; did she really make them do the interview for free?)

Which begs the question of why they aren't working on the Netflix productions instead of whining to Oprah? Maybe they are, but they didn't play them up during the interview and that would have been the perfect opportunity.

I don't know if this is true, but I was flipping past CTV News here in Canada and a globe & mail poll has shown that popular support for the monarchy in Canada may have actually gone up since the interview?! If that's true I"m going to laugh until I piss my pants LOL

I wonder how the Netflix deal is structure. I'm sure Netflix didn't just write them a check for $150,000,000: The shows will be paid for out of that. At the end of the day, how much money will the Sussexes take home and when will they take it home?

Surprised no one has brought this here yet: The Times reports that after the bridesgirl incident before the wedding, Kate did go to Meghan's cottage at KP to apologize and brought her flowers - only to have the door SLAMMED in her face, and Meghan tell her it wasn't good enough for her.

The link is to the Sun who is recapitulating the Times story, which is behind a paywall:

r32 that's an excellent question and the main one I had when watching the whole show. Where the hell is there Netflix project? What's going on with it, why the HELL weren't they using the huge exposure to flog the hell out of it?

I get they were always going to use some of the time with Oprah to bitch, but nary a word about the future and new professional endeavors? I kept waiting for something to be said. CRICKETS. That large advance paid out to them, and nothing to support Netflix?

I believe we talked about this in the previous thread--in one of the previous Markle threads, anyway. It's typical narcissistic behavior to not accept an apology, even though it seems that both were at fault (or neither was): Kate was a week post-partum and Meghan was a stressed-out bride. They should have been able to laugh it off a day or two later, but that's not how the narcissistic mind works. Trust me, I've dealt with one in my own family for years: Nothing is ever their fault.

R28 You forgot the rescue chickens.

Anyone in the biz have more info re: Netfilx? At this point, what is it that they bring that is of value?

Breaking: Piers Morgan is lawyering up...rumours he is going to sue Meghan for slander!!!!!!!!!!!!

I love rescuing things! Like ransoms!

It says a lot that Kate (allegedly) went over to her to apologize for her end of things, and brought flowers as an offering. But to (again, allegedly) be told it wasn't good enough, and slam the door in her face?

Holy shit if true or provable. It really speaks to a high level of narcissim and nastiness. I find it hard to believe that this story is made up, since its so extreme.

R40 Also rumour he's approached former Sussex employees to pay their legal costs if they wish to sue Meghan and Harry.

Yes, R28, life in a heavily mortgaged mansion with an unstable wife, children raised by nannies, dogs and chickens you don't give a fuck about, and neighbors who won't give you the time of day unless you can do something for them, all paid for by millions of dollars from your rapidly depleting trust fund. Sounds like paradise!

I'm not sure that Piers has a case, since Meghan didn't really slander him as much as complain about his rantings to Ofcom. He kind of walked into that one if you ask me.

Word is though that the bullied PA, Melissa Toubati, may be looking at her legal options against Meghan and her pal Janina Gavankar, who bleated out in a Meghan-supportive interview today that she factually knew that Toubati was fired for "gross incompetence". Her source was obviously the Sussexes. Camilla Tominey and other reporters are stating that "fact" is roundly untrue.

Someone is lying and someone is going to end up on their ass over that one. UK libel/slander laws are pretty tight.

[quote]It says a lot that Kate (allegedly) went over to her to apologize for her end of things, and brought flowers as an offering. But to (again, allegedly) be told it wasn't good enough, and slam the door in her face?

And then to have Meghan twist that story for her own purposes years later and use it to throw Kate under the bus in front of the whole world? Yeesh, what an operator.

“If she thinks that interview will get her anything but the boot, Meghan doesn't understand the Royal family and never will”

Well, poor Meghan barely had heard of them, before she was made prisoner by them! She didn’t know.

She had to to learn the National Anthem! And thirty hymns! And scrub the floors! And find freedom!

The Sussexes have lobbed a large first attack that caught a lot of people off guard, but I get a strong feeling those many people (BRF, their staff, former workers, reporters, media) are taking time to gather themselves and create an appropriate response. If its strongly coordinated among those parties, watch for a spectacular shit show to take place.

[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.]

R45 He's not suing her to win, he's suing because the case would likely result in a lot of uncomfortable tea being spilled about Meghan e.g. she would have to back up some of her claims to prove that Morgan was incorrect when he said she was lying.

R5 I noticed she could t even make herself cry when she was doing the Oprah interview. She kept making noises and acting like she was on the verge of tears when she talked about being suicidal. Every time I looked at her there were zero tears! Not even watery eyes. She is phony.

You know what r51, that makes sense and may be why he staged that dramatic walk off the set yesterday. I wonder if that was the plan. He'd get more attention and notoriety for that than doing a UK breakfast show.

It must be nice to know everything about acting, history, mental illness, AND royal protocol.

You don't understand, R5. After every sobbing session in the Royal box, brave Meghan re-applied all of her makeup herself! She didn't even ask Harry to hold her purse! She is that strong.

Here's a question: since the interview was broadcast on CBS, could it be possible that they advised Oprah that no mention of Netflix was to be made? Are CBS and Netflix considered competitors?

Similarly r34 I wonder how the Spotify deal is structured? The podcast market is very large, always expanding, diverse and competitive. I can't see them being consistently standout enough to thrive in that environment long term.

How many podcasts have they even produced? One? I thought those were supposed to be weekly or twice-weekly to build an audience.

R56 Oprah holds the streaming rights to the interview not CBS. I suspect it will end up on Netflix at some point ;)

R58 Allegedly one of the producers quit.

Poor Harkles, forever doomed to hire staff who quit for no reason whatsoever.

[quote]Oprah holds the streaming rights to the interview not CBS. I suspect it will end up on Netflix at some point ;)

Classified under comedy, right next to Benny Hill's programs.

I'd love to see a supercut of Megs and Harry's time as working royals set to "Yakkety Sax."

r60 Intriguing...I wonder why?

As an aside here, I can't help but wonder why Meghan was put under an NDA when she married into the family. A lot of this mess would be avoided. Are NDAs not enforceable in the UK? I know I've read that pre-nups aren't viewed as useful there as they are in the US.

Taking it further, the working members of the BRF should also sign NDAs, outside of the monarch. Once they reach age and begin working for the Firm. Why not? It's a highly visible professional job for a super-powerful, major institutional outfit. Seems reasonable to me.

I've read where some major entertainers (British rock stars, can't recall which ones) have had their offspring sign NDAs and agreements once they come of age and can partake of the financial trusts set up for them as sources of income. No speaking to the press about Mom or Dad unless approved, no books, interviews or the like or else the money goes bye-bye. This kind of thing seems to be in line with the times.

[quote]No speaking to the press about Mom or Dad unless approved, no books, interviews or the like or else the money goes bye-bye. This kind of thing seems to be in line with the times.

It must be strange to make your own kids sign NDAs, but after Mommie Dearest, I understand the purpose.

The RF can always retaliate with its own nuclear weapon.

Just let staff know that since H&M are no longer working royals, staff's relationship with the couple is no longer subject to the NDA.

I can't imagine why, R60! Such delightful, reasonable bosses. The constant word salad and vocal fry would be exhausting too.

R63, surely someone can scrounge up that clip of Haz knocking the heads of the 2 little boys together? That was when his mask really slipped, much as hers did in Jamaica. He had to be on something.

[quote]surely someone can scrounge up that clip of Haz knocking the heads of the 2 little boys together?

I hadn't heard about that. Oh please, someone find that clip. Inquiring minds want to see it.

So I assume if they don't start producing regular Spotify content soon money will not be forthcoming from Spotify?

It was reported that they are on thin ice with Netflix as well...

Really r72 Can you elaborate a little please?

Yes, I'd like to hear more about that. Given how high-pressure Netflix's employment practices are with their workaday employees, I can't imagine them having too much tolerance for producers who don't produce.

New Variety piece

I suspect what is said PRIVATELY may differ a bit from the Variety piece.

[quote]A crucial next step, says one leading agent in the motion picture and series space, is for the couple to define their brand identity through their staff. Archewell Prods. does not yet have a lead internal executive in charge of production and development. Hollywood will intently watch the search for that person.

[quote]“That interview was awesome as far as getting the realness of who she is,” says one agent about Markle. “And they both seem settled into what this decision is and the context. What needs to come next is clarity on their ambition. It seems [Archewell is] a place of entertainment with a message; now it’s a question of staffing up and having a profile of ‘You want to come work for us.’”

[quote]An experienced hire, in the opinion of the agent, would also give the couple more authority in brokering for scripts and talent for their slate — especially after Harry’s stunning admission that beyond the inheritance left to him by his mother, Princess Diana, the deals were essential to the couple’s economic survival.

Translation: These two have no idea what they are doing. They need someone with actual producing experience to get this thing off the ground or nobody is going to buy what they are selling.

The question is, if they found such a person, could they work with him? So far they're not good at working with anybody.

That Variety piece is a must read. A quote:

[quote]Creative direction aside, the ongoing story of the Sussex family — and the embattled royal institution they have left behind — will continue to unfold, providing what numerous sources say is priceless marketing value.

Priceless marketing value, that's the reward for H&M for all of this ongoing drama with his own family. It goes a long way toward explaining the bombshell nature of their interview.

It also supports my assertion upthread that NDAs should be mandatory going forward for the BRF. No dishing, no increase in "marketing value" for those stories being put out there.

Quite true, R77.

If Harry loses all his money, will he have to go to the workhouse?

Is there a huge market for documentaries from these two? Really?

I can understand the interest in the Oprah interview, with grenades being thrown at the palace. It’s thrilling. However, each time they play that card, it will lose some of its novelty. What else of interest will they have to say over the long term? All they have to sell is themselves.

An interesting opinion:

That will be his quickest route to a Markle free existence, I suspect, R80. And when he has lost his remaining $ and his kids and big bro is the Prince of Wales, his jealousy make make hers look like small potatoes.

MAY make

[quote] The confessional sit-down earned almost universal praise for Markle, the former actor who starred on the TV series “Suits.”

From the Variety article. Not exactly the spin that the Klan Grannies are pushing, is it?

[quote]“We’re talking to some amazing people; they’re going to share their memories that have really helped shape this past year, which has been, as we know, a difficult one for everyone,” Meghan said of the audio project upon announcement. Harry said the podcast would acknowledge that “so many people have been through so much pain this year, experiencing loss, a huge amount of uncertainty — but it feels worth acknowledging that 2020 has connected us in ways we could have never imagined, through endless acts of compassion and kindness.”

Yeah, this sounds like fun.

r78 Thats why they craved a bigger reaction to their interview from the royal family.

QE2’s statement was tepid at best and wreaked of guilt. She should’ve condemned racism.

We don't think praise from oleaginous Hollywood suits, the kind that Meghan collaborated with before her time with Harry, is positive spin r85. It's akin to praise from the capo to the hitman after you completing the hit on the mark.

R88 The Queen helped end apartheid in South Africa ffs, she doesn't need to do or say anything about race!

R5 This is the same woman who wrote a grief porn editorial in the NYTimes regarding her miscarriage and the same women who was glad to hear that Ireland legalized abortion.

Suits who are sniffing around for potentially open jobs no less, R89.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, R3!!!!!!!

I'm sure Archie will love growing up learning that Mum almost offed herself when pregnant with him, better to larp as mad Granny. These poor kids have no chance, loaded genes and toxic narc parents.

Her Majesty is not racist.

Charles/Phillip, on the other hand...

Since they named their company after Archie, won't the new kid feel jealous? Will this be like a Kathie Lee Gifford scenario where you hear so much talk about the boy, Cody, and nobody can remember anything about the girl because Kathie Lee was too hung up on the son?

Don't forget they stole Archie's name from George.

Piers Morgan please spill the beans on a few of Meghan's secrets. Why have so many been hushed up? Her first marriage to Joseph Goldman-Guliano the lawyer for example that ended in an annulment after his mother paid her off with a substantial sum due to realising she was totally unsuitable for her son. Her mother abandoning her for a life of crime and serving six years for money fr aud and d rugs. Her uncle the diplomat who pulled a lot of strings to wangle her an internship that she would never have managed on her own merit. And she was in a civil relationship with a chef when she met Harry, who she just walked out on. And why she snubs all family members either her own or Harry's but prefers celebrities. The wedding a prime example. Also, Doria's relative that mysteriously died so she inherit a house, and a hazing incident at Northwestern University that included supergluing students eyes shut and being suspended...interesting rumours/truths.

R98 I think these and many more (remember the tossing the salad video that everyone was looking for) will come back to haunt her now that the RF is not going to knock themselves out protecting them (all those things you mentioned went quiet after they got married so I assumed the RF had put the kibosh on them). Does she think she's going to be able to sue all of the American tabs and other gossip media? I think she's in for a surprise.

R95 has made numerous speeches about racial tolerance. When he becomes King he wants to be known as "Defender of Faiths" rather than "Defender of THE Faith" in order to promote religious tolerance. Sooooo racist. Philip is older than a fossil from a different generation ... the old uncle everyone is embarrassed by.

[quote]When he becomes King he wants to be known as "Defender of Faiths" rather than "Defender of THE Faith" in order to promote religious tolerance.

Technically, is he allowed to do that? Isn't the monarch the head of the Church of England?

ooooo so Meghan has used this story about going to HR because she needed help before......

How long before we start seeing pictures of George playing soccer with one of his black classmates? Or Charlotte wearing a Beyonce t-shirt?

It seems as though the off myself story was to serve 2 purposes - more Diana LARP and to set up her bullying defense, imho anyway. She was trying to create a paper trail.

oh no the British gays are going after Oprah

The Oprah interview proved once again that the ONLY reason anyone is interested in them is their connection to the royal family. The Variety article linked above is delicious. Basically saying they better put up pretty soon or shut up. Apart from being victims of the royal family, what on earth do they have to offer anyone that isn't already out there?? The article makes it clear that they have no structure for their production company and no content that anyone knows about.

I also wonder about their finances. They have clearly bought a property they cannot afford under their current circumstances. I'm sure Meghan convinced Harry to buy it assuring him that the money is going to be rolling in. Having never bought a property or worried/thought about money before in his life, Harry believed her. They are going to burn through whatever money he has very quickly. Maybe Auntie Oprah is paying the gardener for them.

“Word is though that the bullied PA, Melissa Toubati, may be looking at her legal options against Meghan and her pal Janina Gavankar,”

Link?

LMFAOOOOO

“It was reported that they are on thin ice with Netflix as well...”

LINK???????

Somebody is in here making up smears against a Meghan from whole cloth.

This board is specifically designed so you can effortlessly post a link. If you are not posting one to your wild claims then clearly you are a liar.

R105 what is that poster even complaining about.

I feel like Harry may be the one suicidal. He doesn’t look well.

Spot on, R106. They have nothing to offer. Even when she did the lifestyle blogging she was cribbing from the chef she lived with, the one she threw over for HazBean. They had the ONE thing of value and they have set it on fire in front of all of us. Plus revealed what poor judgement they posess and how vindictive they are. Did they not see what Diana LOST after that interview? The Queen of bloody England is not going to be shaken down by leaked stories in the Daily Mail.

Harry does not look well at ALL. The excrutiating pause when asked what he enjoys about his new life said it all.

He wanted to offer her "the family she never had" but she has destroyed everything he DID like about his life.

Bitch better not steal my "Mommy Yoga" bit. I'll cut her with a Spanish knife.

Do they really think people are going to care about their stuffy documentaries? That Americans of all people will? We like salacious which is why anyone cared about the interview.

New The Times podcast with the Valentine Low. There's some good tea in this:

The Times contacted the Sussexes a week before the article was published and they issues a strongly worded denial from their legal team. The Times sent them all the allegations and 1 hour before publication, their lawyers retracted the denial and instead issued a much shorter one about it being a smear on Meghan's character but no longer denied the story.

Samatha Cohen sound like a tough bitch who would not easily be reduced to tears by a boss.

Harry met with Jason Knauf at least twice about what was happening pleading him not to take his concerns about the workplace to BP HR. Harry did try to chastise Meghan for her behaviour but it allegedly caused a huge row and Harry never backed the staff again.

Buckingham Palace will probably not give much information about what its review finds.

Some of the former staff are considering legal action against the Sussexes. They have NDAs with the Crown so they could be counter sued by the Palace however.

The Times has "concrete" evidence (probably the video rumours we've been hearing) to back up the claims and more serious allegations that they cannot publish because it would identify the party involved by them having given low information protected under the NDA. If they were to sue, the Times could publish.

One reason Meghan threw Kate under a bus: plain, cold, hard JEALOUSY!

Wow, super messy, R116. Undoubtedly there may be some coordination between various groups.

When Broadway comes back, Fran & Barry will offer Meghan a limited run in Chicago. If she doesn't get coffee in her limo, like Lauren Bacall had in her High Point commercials, then she will bitch and complain. She may even go the Cynthia Erivo route and have the show shutdown due to racism.

R63 Everything is better to Yakkety Sax!

Yahoo UK poll not looking good for our Megs

I hope the family is strategizing about Harry's well being. The jokes about deprogramming may not be far off.

So all the Palace has to do is release the employees from their NDAs and all hell will break loose for the Sussexes. At this point why WOULDN'T they do that?

R116, that’s a great story. The maddening thing this week is that no-one seems to be listening to anything unfavourable to the “happy” couple!

I find it infuriating that Harry is suddenly seen as this enlightened figure. He’s the only member of the RF to be on record as using words like “rag head” and “Paki”. He dressed as a Nazi. He told a Black British comedian that he “didn’t sound like a black chap”. Yet apparently he is worthy of respect as he trashes everything his grandmother has worked for (i.e the Commonwealth, the thing she really cares about) for 75 years

r76 What do you reckon is said privately?

[quote]that’s a great story. The maddening thing this week is that no-one seems to be listening to anything unfavourable to the “happy” couple!

I don't know...I think execs are saying the "woke" thing they should be saying ("how brave!" "we applaud their honesty") when they are probably thinking: that was the extent of their Big Reveal - the BRF are a bunch of upper class snobs. Who would've guessed?

As it's been noted many many times, being a royal is really the only thing those two have going for them and as they move farther & farther away (and the BRF ceases communication with them), they have nothing to sell. Are entertainment execs really going to buy the 90th rehash of Harry's story about walking behind his mother's coffin?

R116 I listened to that too today and one other thing they pointed out that was interesting was that staff felt that Meghan would deliberately assign them impossible tasks and when they didn't complete them correctly, she would frame herself as being victimized and go complain/crying to Harry who would them come out and try in deal with it. In the early days, he apparently would take the staff's side over Meghan's privately but nothing changes and eventually he would come out and berate them as well.

Old people don’t like Meghan. They are more racist and more accepting of racism.

Young people tend to like Meghan. Luckily the olds will die off before the youngs.

R123 I suspect the palace is concerned that if H&M's staff are released from the NDA there'll be pressure to release Andy's staff as well. And that they do not want.

You seem like a lovely person, R128.

The move from the Palace would be to ensure that some of the staff publicise their wish to be releases from the NDA. The tabloid press will then pressure the Palace, asking why the staff members should be silenced. The Palace will then “reluctantly” give in and rip up the agreement.

Of course, on the other hand Megs and her racist husband will fight tooth and nail to prevent the Palace from doing this, but I suspect their power in the palace has diminished somewhat, unless they do have recordings or records of the “baby colour” comment. That conversation is the only big card they have left to play, as the Queen will put with a lot from them to prevent that racist label from being hung round one of the family’s necks. Unlike Harry, she is extremely loyal.

I think both sides are locked in a game of Mutually Assured Destruction. A stalemate is the best outcome for both, but I don’t think Megan and Harry have the temperament (her) or the intelligence (him) to see that.

[quote]It seems [Archewell is] a place of entertainment with a message; now it’s a question of staffing up and having a profile of ‘You want to come work for us.’”

Oh, top quality talent will be kicking down the door. Definitely.

Too elaborate, R131. If the NDAs are voided, there will just be a quiet word.

R133, the problem is how to get them voided. The easiest way to do that is to get the palace to void them, and the best way to bring that aboit is to get the staff and press to exert pressure on a “reluctant” Queen.

The staff can speak out. It's left up to the Palace to decide if they want to enforce the NDA in court. But as mentioned above, if the Harkles staff talks and isn't prosecuted, then the staff from the other households will want to talk as well.

I wonder what Meghan thought of Pippa? One of the running jokes on "The Windsors" is that Pippa wants to hook up with Harry.

r128 Way too simplistic .lots of young people 25 years ago supported Diana who if you asked them now would have a more nuanced picture and opinion of Diana. Opinions and attitudes change overtime. I don't think calling anyone who doesn't support Meghan racist does anything for the cause of racial justice and reducing prejudice any good or even gets near the truth.

There was a black London based architect on social media today who said he cheered when they married and when Archie was born but after the interview he now has no interest in them. Is that black man also racist or perhaps just perhaps you are being oversimplistic ?

If Meghan were not bi-racial and some of us still didn't like her, what would you psychos screaming racist every five seconds blame our feelings on then? Could it possibly be that some of us simply do not like this woman, and wouldn't like her if she were blue or green or orange? We just don't like her, ok? I don't like Catherine very much, either, and it isn't because she's white. Get a fucking grip or quit reading these threads. They seem to make some of you as crazy as Meghan is.

R135 Exactly. The NDAs are between staff and the Royal Household, not H&M. All the RH has to do is quietly let it be known it won't be taking legal action if there are breaches with respect to the couple in California.

None of this would have happened if the Queen Mother and Dickie Mountbatten were still around. They would have gotten together and scotched this marriage stat! It's true, I saw them do it on The Crown.

The NDAs can be released by the parties.

[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 just re-read the Variety piece at r75 and realized: not one source is on the record for it. It's all "un-named agent" and "screenwriters rep" and "content executive". It's a harmless opinion piece, why not use names?

And no comments section. Most of the pieces I read on Variety have a comments space. Fishy.

Someone asked for a link to Janina Gavankar's comments, it's at r142 if interested.

She boldly claimed she knew about "evidence" that a Sussex staff member was fired for gross incompetence. The one staff member who's been publicly linked to that claim is Melissa Toubati.

At least in a normal business world, nobody puts anything explosive in an email where there is a trail.

I call bullshit that somebody wrote nasty shit to Meghan

Samantha Cohen had worked for the BRF since 2001 and was very trusted by the Queen. She was assigned to support Meghan's transition into the royal family for the first year. It is ludicrous for her to say she had no help- she had one of the most experienced senior aides that knew the BRF inside out. Samantha had been the Queen's own assistant private secretary.

Aldo Meghan has few friends which is a sign of trouble. She usually mentions celebrity acquaintances or other clout chasers. She had no one to stand beside her at her wedding so they cancelled having a maid of honour or bridesmaids and just had children. No aunts, uncles, cousins, long standing friends at her wedding - just her mom. That is not the sign of someone who can form healthy relationships.

All this talk about the cost of their security. I'd be interested in knowing the cost of their PR team.

I seem to recall there was a rumor about her sorority days at Northwestern which led to the Sorority being suspended.

Does anyone else remember this?

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

I’d like to bet the so-called email evidence will be emails where people try to placate her after she has had a tantrum. It will be just like the pre-wedding fight with Kate: they argued, and then Kate tried to mend fences and instead her olive branch was rudely rejected and has now been portrayed as her accepting culpability for upsetting Megain. And, of course, many people will swallow it because they like the narrative she has created for Oprah.

Harry is a piece of shit for putting his grandmother through this shit

Is Meghan still pals with that Mulroney lady?

While his 99 year old grandfather has been so ill and in the hospital for WEEKS. He deserves whatever MeMeMe puts him through, birds of a feather swanning about in their delusions.

Think she was dumped a while ago, R152. Now it is only the one from the DM article.

Canada provided their security during their months in Canada but cut it off at the end of March 2020 when they stopped being official Royals. Canada was required to pay it due to Commonwealth protocols but as soon as whispers of Canada continuing to pay it post March surfaced, an 80,000 signature protest was delivered within days! They should have known far before March that Canada wouldn't keep paying it and made alternate arrangements.

Also it isn't clear when Prince Charles stopped sending them money. 95% of their income came from his office revenue but it was payment for official offices and duties. There is also articles from early 2020 about how he had given them millions over the last year or two from his personal funds.

Meghan’s friend worded her accusations vaguely and to me it sounded like there were emails from Meghan documenting her side of the story. There’s no chance anyone working for the BRF sent Meghan anything derogatory in writing.

The Queen calling Harry to make amends sounds more like grandma reaching out to a grandson she loves. But I imagine things will be different when Charles/William are in charge.

Forget the article, here’s the interview with Z-lister Janina Gavankar. She comes across as cagey and thoroughly unlikeable. And as fake as her friend. Birds of a feather...

It was important for the Queen to acknowledge that Meghan’s claim was made, without pretending that anything that Meghan said was true.

It’ll be easy for the palace to release the NDA’s. All they have to say is they had to do it in order to thoroughly investigate the workplace bullying claims.

Ok....I'm starting to get bored. Anybody else?

Something must be done to remove Harry from the line of succession. Can you imagine, if, God forbid, something happened to Charles and Willam and Harry and Meghan rushed in to serve as Regent while George is a minor? After THIS?

They are doing this while his 99 year old grandfather lies in a hospital. They are doing this to his 94 year old grandmother, rather than supporting her during a difficult and frightening time re: her HUSBAND.

Sociopathic hardly is adequate for trotting your smarmy friend out on the world stage to stir the pot.

Harry appears to be slightly capable of feeling shame, he rarely raised his eyes off the ground the other night. This is SICK behavior. Markle is seekng to leverage the upset re: Phillip to her ADVANTAGE.

[quote]Ok....I'm starting to get bored. Anybody else?

Yep, me too, and that exposes the brilliance of the Palace's plan. Without a strong response from the Queen, the oxygen is sucked out of the narrative. Meghan and Harry will have to act out further to garner attention, but that will chop their images at the roots. OR, they can behave and work on the Netflix programs, and perhaps HM will loosen the purse strings a bit. The personal phone call she's making this week sort of implies that the BRF is willing to sweeten the deal in exchange for good behavior.

Telegraph piece re: security

R90 you jest.

Jessica Mulroney reemerged from her foxhole last week to voice support for Meghan against the bullying allegations.

What a sterling reference - a woman who got cancelled for trying to bully a BLM advocate into silence.

R162 Honestly, if we're all going COVID crazy this wouldn't as big a story than it's being treated.

Have been following threads about the Sussexes. I also viewed the interview, and Oprah's post televised comments. I know Harry is a few years younger, but it is clear from watching the two of them he is overmatched in every way. He appears a bit dim, struggling to give words to his emotions, still grappling with childhood issues. She is a cool customer. It was clear she came to CLEAR THINGS UP! Very hard to believe her initial comment about not knowing anything about how the Royals lived in private. She is no dreamy ingenue. She kept the narrative thread on the track she intended. Whenever she could, she evoked the Diana saga, playing the victim, which really pulls Harry's heartstrings.

Likely there was some truth to her story. Bottom line is she selfishly maneuvered him into burning his bridges, now he is cut off from his family and his world. She has convinced him he is now "free". A few years down the road, there will be a divorce. She will be fine. He will be a sad mess. Alone.

^ The only thing that struck me was where she got wired up about Archie's title. The mask slipped then. That was real. The rest she performed. Somebody asked about the PR bill.... they seem to be most heavily represented by the lawyers. In the flap about gross misconduct, in either the Times or the Telegraph, I read lawyers for them initially issued a strong denial about bullying and then later lawyers issued a statement without any denial.

My gut tells me this dame runs her own PR strategy now or at least overrules her very expensive Sunshine Sucks or whatever they're called.

I would love to the see the bills around that house.

[quote]If Meghan were not bi-racial and some of us still didn't like her, what would you psychos screaming racist every five seconds blame our feelings on then?

The tapeworms wouldn't care then. They've latched on to Meagain as the symbol of their experience (oh, irony but only so many chances come along.)

If she was just some white girl, they wouldn't give a damn. They're so aggrieved they think they're entitled to the same behaviours they hate when they can't direct them. I would almost feel sorry for them. As a white person I understand better now the terrible explicit and implicit discrimination against other people by a majority, particularly black people in America. You'd have to be pretty stupid after the events of last summer not to open your ears and your heart and your mind.

But the klan granny trolls? So obnoxious. I hope the misery that drives them to embarrass themselves and to the hypocrisy of their actions dogs them to the end of their days. No sympathy for them. Useless. Pointless.

Are the Klan Grannie Trolls leaving us alone now? We do seem to be achieving something of a consensus about Meghan's mental illnesses.

"Queen missed chance to condemn racism"

For that matter, she also missed her chances to condemn taking photos of duchesses at Wimbledon, to call for compassion towards mental illness, and to applaud sending cheerful banana-grams to underappreciated sex workers,

[quote]The tapeworms wouldn't care then. They've latched on to Meagain as the symbol of their experience (oh, irony but only so many chances come along.)

Can someone on these threads who is black explain to us how Meghan fits into the mold of Black Excellence? what has she accomplished or achieved to deserve such lofty praise and protection.

She's no Serena Williams, or Katherine Johnson, or Kamala Harris.

[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.]

R172 is a troll from Bratislava posting on a busted vodka factory controlled by Yul Brynner's spiritual heirs in Vladivostok.

The Queen doesn't look like she is taken in by Ginge.

Meghan was photographed partying in Amsterdam in 2019 when she was pregnant with Archie....and the royals had her passport and she was locked inside the palace for months. Drinking well pregnant...super klassy.

R176 sorry that should read 2018.

R173– I sure Megs will record it for her next explosive interview

She is an unfit mother. Through no fault of her own.

Look who is trying to cash in on some of the attention....no way Meghan can hog the suicidal thoughts spotlight.

What happened to Meghan not reading anything about herself or going on Twitter. How did she know about all the bad press to the point it caused it her great distress?

[quote] Drinking while pregnant.

Wow, I did not know that. Is that why Archie looks like he does?

Who is this woman, really?

[quote]R131 ...unless they do have recordings or records of the “baby colour” comment. That conversation is...

It was SEVERAL conversations, not just one stray comment.

I just can't understand why there would be multiple conversations of someone so concerned about the baby's colour when Meghan has very fair coloured skin and so does Harry. Neither of them have colour in their skin that would make skin colour a concern.

Anyone who has even briefly studied royal history would laugh at R161 calling THIS "psychotic" and saying there should be some emergency rules created to prevent H&M from ruling.

Do you have any idea the kind of horrible, actually psychotic people who have ruled Great Britain? A flaky couple who couldn't get along with a bunch of stuffed shirts doesn't even merit a footnote in the list of royal sociopaths.

Honestly, it hardly merits one NOW. There are several serious scandals that far outweigh their leaving the royal family and subsequent interview, it's just that the interview is the shiny thing that gets everyone's attention.

[quote]Neither of them have colour in their skin that would make skin colour a concern.

You guys keep trying the "she doesn't LOOK black, therefore there was never any racism" thing, I guess not realizing that you're being racist yourselves.

The conversation -- once again, for the 9000th time -- took place early in the relationship when someone in the royal family expressed their concern of how dark a baby by Harry and Meghan would be.

You don't ask something like that in such a rhetorical way, so early in the relationship, unless you're being racist.

It happened at the same time royals were telling Harry "well, we won't have money to pay her," so the point was clear: they were trying to discourage him from dating her, in part by trying to scare him by suggesting he'd have dark babies with her.

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

Harry's an idiot. He was using those kids as balance as he stood up, and knocked their heads together. Clearly not on purpose but so, so clueless.

I am not saying there can't be racism. However an obsessive concern about colour in multiple conversations seems unlikely given how fair skinned Meghan is. of all the things to be concerned about, even race related, that isn't likely to be the primary one. I also don't think there was a conversation that we don't have money to pay her because she is half black.

I am not surprised they did try to discourage him at first. A divorced actress who has a history of social climbing, who is half black, who has a messed up family and who doesn't come from a social class aligned with the royal family would set off all kinds of red flags and I have no doubt there may have been some racially motivated criticism. I just don't see the potential colour of future baby's skin as being the main concern that was repeatedly expressed.

I don't think it was multiple conversations with the same person, Harry made it clear it was just one person and he wouldn't reveal who it was.

Apparently, one time, also r191.

Megs is a hustler, a grifter. Find the mark, hustle what she wants from them, and move on. FAST. Disavowing all knowledge of her actions.

The entire Netflix/Spotify deal is a ponzi scheme; rope in a high-profile name and from that, attract more and bigger. Neither Ginger nor Megs have anything to offer, are interested in anything other than what they can hustle from the gullible. When it all falls apart, leave it for the lawyers and move on, blaming others for failures.

The Buck House statement remains brilliant in its simplicity and stark in its message; take your grifting elsewhere, we've had enough.

If I were Ginger, I'd get his kids as far away from Megs as possible. Because when Megs feels that she's going down, when there's no one left to blame, when she's been exposed and excoriated for the narcissist she is, she'll turn on her kids.

It will burn M to see that Michelle O got this week's People cover story (she's launching a Netflix show, etc.) while she and H only got a blurb on the upper right of the cover.

I guess it's a "Special Report," not the regular issue?

Has Michelle O chimed in yet? I think Michelle has so much respect for QEII thar she will not allow herself to be dragged into this sMEG shitshow.

No but Hillary Clinton has r196

The things that the Times are claiming in their reporting and the podcast linked at R116 are nothing compared to "I was pregnant and suicidal while being biracial." You have to be at a Piers Morgan level of not giving a fuck (or an extreme right-winger) to oppose that narrative.

Jameela Jamil coming out as also having been suicidal (R180) is hilarious. Even the very woke deride her for inserting herself into every hot topic.

[quote] You have to be at a Piers Morgan level of not giving a fuck (or an extreme right-winger) to oppose that narrative.

Sure, Jan.

I agree with Piers. It is preposterous to believe that the palace wouldn't respond appropriately if a pregnant duchess said she was suicidal, if only to avert potential damage to themselves..

That interview with Meghan's friend Janina was absolutely cringe inducing to see video of. This 40 year old, injection filled Z lister try to leach on to Meghan's fame. I am surprised Queen M allowed this interview other than to casually threaten blackmailing the queen with texts and emails. I'd say Meghan is pure trash.

I nominate DL fave Rosamund Pike with a spray tan and dark extensions to play Meghan in the screen adaptation.

R201, you want a white woman to play Megain?? That is ACTUAL VIOLENCE!

Jodie Comer to play Megs. Comer could recreate her role of the charming psychopath from Killing Eve.

^^^ charming psychopath Villanelle ^^^

[quote]Look who is trying to cash in on some of the attention....no way Meghan can hog the suicidal thoughts spotlight.

That is hysterical; I feel certain Jameela & the other SJW would find a way insert themselves in the conversation & they did not disappoint. It took her a little while, but it was International Women's Day, so she was probably busy.

You're a nobody in the UK now until Piers Morgan has nearly driven you to suicide.

All we know is how the Sussexes interpreted the alleged remark about the baby's skin colour. We don't know the intent of the person who allegedly asked. We don't even know what happened. What we do know is this is a woman with significant mental health problems, by her own admission. She considered suicide at a point when doing so would have had the effect of killing her unborn child, as well. Clearly, she is not the composed figure she acts as. We should consider whether her illness remains untreated. Look at that other actress, Vivien Leigh, plagued by mental illness all her life. Perhaps Meghan will never truly be well. So you have to think of her as mentally ill when she speaks and it is fair to wonder if any accusations she makes actually even happened? I feel so sorry for her. All this time I thought she was a shady character but by her own admission she is mentally ill. What the fuck was Oprah thinking, allowing her to become a circus? Shame on Oprah.

Oprah was thinking @ the $$$ she could make, R206.

Eventually it will come out how H&M were given a cut.

William said this morning he had not yet spoken to Harry but would.

The exchnage, in that convoluted British way of speaking with elaborate manners:

On a visit to a school in east London on Thursday, he was asked: “Have you spoken to your brother since the interview?”

He replied: “No I haven’t spoken to him yet but I will do.”

He was then asked: “And can you just let me know, is the Royal family a racist family Sir?”

The Duke replied: “We are very much not a racist family."

It might have gone on longer but Kate was busy making the headmistress cry. I may have made that up, but good effect, right?

I don't blame Orca for all the... inaccuracies.... in her Pulitzer Prize winner.... no doubt her glasses are often smudged with cream sauce.

From a column in the Telegraph:

“When Meghan joined the Royal family in 2018,” intoned Oprah, “she became the target of unrelenting, pervasive attacks.” Immediately, the screen flashed up a small selection of headlines from British newspapers – each presented as examples of the cruel and vindictive coverage that had plagued Meghan during her time in Britain and had left her with no option but to quit.

One headline in particular, however, caught my eye. Because it was the headline to a column I’d written myself....

Goodness, I murmured. Could it really be true that my column about poor Meghan had helped drive her out of Britain? What an awful thought.

On the whole, though, I decided that it was unlikely – for a fairly simple reason.

My column was published on December 19 last year, more than 11 months after Meghan announced she was stepping down as a senior royal. So unless Meghan has access to a time machine, I tend to suspect that my influence on her decision was, at most, negligible. Especially as, up to that point, I’d never written a single word against her.

Yet here was my column, being held up to the world as a brutal tirade that had helped make Meghan’s time in Britain unendurable. Perhaps Oprah and her team had been so blinded by horror at what I’d written, they hadn’t noticed the publication date.

They certainly hadn’t shown the date on screen."

I think the Queen and William are doing it precisely right: torturing Harry with the promise that they'll soon be calling for a nice long family chat. Two hours should do.

[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.]

Gee. Maybe one of their peripheral concerns was that there could conceivably one day be an incident/allegation/misunderstanding/dispute (take your pick) that would lead to everyone screaming about racism. I know – crazy, right?!

My comment at R212 responding to R190

From a column in The Telegraph:

Certain claims were instantly uncredible; such as the suggestion Archie was denied the title “Prince” because he was mixed-race, or that the Archbishop of Canterbury performed an official wedding ceremony in their garden, days before the global spectacle of their Windsor nuptials. Many of the headlines used to illustrate the couple’s ‘mistreatment’ by the UK media were at best, taken out of context – at worst, outrageously misappropriated. All told, the Sussexes’ ‘truth’ bears more than a passing resemblance to Trump’s ‘alternative facts’.

Very little of this seems to matter, however, in a world where ‘lived experience’ can, and often does, supersede objective reality. Questioning individuals may expect to be accused of racism, downplaying mental health, or both. “Believe her, no matter what”, seems to be the demand – even when it doesn’t make sense.

“I wasn’t interested in grandeur”, cries the woman in the $4500 dress.

Many viewers will, like me, have believed and been moved by some of the Sussexes’ claims, while doubting others, and becoming so enraged in places it was tempting to take a hammer to the TV set. Piers Morgan didn’t believe a word of it, and said so; now he has been sacked from his job, apparently following a personal intervention from the Sussexes. What is that if not a form of extraordinary privilege?

"All told, the Sussexes’ ‘truth’ bears more than a passing resemblance to Trump’s ‘alternative facts’."

Ouch.

[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't have many unless Jessica gets trotted out and she is not a good fit for this one. So we may get some relief there?

Well, comic relief, anyway.

A point of view on the challenge they face which is that you can't pick fights with the Windsors forever, producing quality, appealing content is hard, even for experienced professionals and there's only so much time to create momentum.

The man who would be Emperor of Austria (aka Archduke Karl Von Habsburg) calls the Oprah interview "gossip and garbage". Oh dear.

The Queen's black Lord Lieutenant is coming out to support the Royal Family.

Another person comes out in support of the Royals.

It's all collapsing around them.

Who have they got of any credibility?

A couple of self entitled malcontents in their California bubble.

Good luck, Hazbeens.

It’s cold and rainy in SoCal. I wonder if it makes Harry feel melancholy, with thoughts of home…

[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 don't usually like pink but I'm digging Kate's bubblegum top and coat at her school appearance today. It's a happy color for the kids.

Reading about the interview and H & M is giving me suicidal thoughts.......

For someone whose passport was taken away, she sure got around a lot.

Lying about things that are so easily disproven - why? Was there nothing true to build a victim narrative out of? So she appropriates the story of Diana and that poor woman in Monaco?

Oh, William is having NONE of this!

Maybe her travels were related to untreated manic depression? In an up phase, people can go, go, go, go. Maybe that was the driver. I hope she gets the help she needs. I worry about how she will cope with just Harry on hand. Face it, he's not the brightest. This is a sad outcome. I never really understood her until the interview... she made a compelling case for how fucked up she is. It all makes sense now. I feel sorry for her and the child.

Has more come out about the history with UN Women? Her abruptly leaving the event, for which people were standing out in the heat, was astonishing behavior.

She said in the interview that when she asked to go for lunch they told her she was already too overexposed - despite her claim that she hadn't left her house in months. I find it highly unlikely that she had been housebound for months at a time.

To me it appears she has a serious personality disorder, R230. Much like character, it is difficult to change. I worry far less about Meg than about the children or dim Harru. The breezy sharing that she almost killed one while pregnant was horrifying. As was the lack of follow up given she is pregnant again. She is deeply disturbed, but has been all her life, from supergluing young womens' eyes together to mailing back her rings to her husband to end a marriage. She is ice cold.

Social media proved that as untrue as the no trips narrative, R233. People like Megs lie all the time, even about things that do not matter. If you cross paths with one, RUN. If they marry into your family or join your employer, ALL will rue the day.

That article on the trips also missed a 3 day secret trip to the Netherlands

That one got a lot of commentary about her drinking and partying in Amsterdam while pregnant, R236.

R228 Funny, the name of Princess Grace – that other "American Princess" – is very seldom brought up in connection with Meghan. You'd think people would constantly draw that parallel. Grace certainly did her princess job well.

Meghhan never intended to do it well, but to create controversy and to amass attention for herself for NOT fitting in, rather "shaking it up."

The tendrils are still a mystery, where did she get the idea that the 2 hanks of hair hanging down is so flattering?

At one point Meghan referred to what she had said as 'her truth' and I think for the most part it is. I do think give her personality disorder traits and her victimhood, she processes everything that happens to her through a very skewed lens. Life was hard for her because it was different, she wasn't in control of everything, she couldn't just make it the way she wanted it, she was part of an institution with policies and practices that she was expected to follow, she was the outsider in a different country and culture, and everything that she knew had changed. I think most of her hurt and distress is her interpretation of how she experienced things and how much she she saw everything as people doing mean things. I don't think she was outright lying for the most part. In her mind, there is truth to all she said. She likely couldn't just come and go the way she did when living in Toronto, she probably felt trapped and controlled in a way she never had before, she pushed back against the change and was met with resistance and saw that as an attack on her. She has a lot of cognitive distortions where she downplays the good and overemphasis the bad, and exaggerates / projects. In her mind everyone is always out to get her, no one understand her, people are unfair etc.

I agree, R240, and I do not think he is too stable or well adjusted either. He is so isolated now, the entire thing is so disturbing, particularly the casual chatter about almost killing her unborn child, while pregnant with another. These kids have very little chance, compounded by their isolation from family on both sides.

But, she has genuine delusions of running for political office. And to talk about watching and identifying with The Little Mermaid is beyond creepy.

[quote] Grace certainly did her princess job well.

Grace was alcoholic, wasn't she?

R242 What’s your impeccable source for such a claim?

[quote] But, she has genuine delusions of running for political office.

She should fit right in.

Deafening silence from Lambeth Palace despite her allegation that the Archbishop broke the law repeatedly.

[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.]

It just seems like the BRF has lost control of the narrative. What is bubbling up to the surface is all the resentments, anger, jealousies, etc that the Queen (as head of the family and firm) never succeeded in fully addressing. Everyone adores her and she deserves that to a certain extent. But quite clearly, whatever is going on internally behind the palace gates reeks of chaos, bitter infighting.

They had better get it together - all of them. Before it's too late. And Charles has a lot to answer for, by the way.

OP's little comment has been greyed out lol. Let me repeat it here for Sunshine Sucks and the Megstans: "That clanging sound the Sussexes hear is the Palace doors being shut . . ."

It was a question, R243, punctuated with a question mark, so my impeccable source would be the Oxford A-Z of Grammar and Punctuation.

What's your source for comprehension, as a matter of the idlest curiosity?

I think it's starting to collapse all around them, r222. Meghan is determined to bring the London crowd down. Hope she's ready for the ensuing gunfire.

R249 Don’t be touchy, it was a question. Punctuated with one of those “question mark” thingys.

It wasn't a question and we both know it. Actual questions don't include snark, do they beautiful?

R252 well it was a serious thing to casually throw out there, that’s all. Simmer.

Well, it's a gossip site and she's been dead for nearly forty years, so as reputation dings go, probably not up there, that's all. Surrender.

R254 I accept your surrender. Back to the topic at hand.

Honey, we all wipe better than you every day. You may go.

Sadly, this has come true for Harry.

Apart from a few lowly CoE clergymen, who were quickly silenced by the Church authorities I assume, commenting earlier this week about the double marriage allegation, what does Justin have to say about all this? And why did MEgg go out of her way to defame him? I wonder what he did to her, according to her truth/lies/alternative facts [also, does Kellyanne work for MEgg these days, because it sounds like it?].

Meghan = DJT + Kellyanne

[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 said in the interview that when she asked to go for lunch they told her she was already too overexposed

Of course KP officials knew she was going to call the paps so they'd be waiting outside the restaurant for her. IIRC correctly, early in the marriage, she was snapped going into and leaving some restaurant with her new, male comms guy, an American. It may have been Jason Knauf. How could the paps have known?

I suspect Kate's not wanting to go shopping with her had to do with the growing knowledge within the family of Meghan's thirst for PR. Paps would be waiting and Meghan would get a cut from the sale Those would have been pretty valuable pictures, the married in and soon to be married in commoners. She was probably already imagining the captions.

[quote] It just seems like the BRF has lost control of the narrative.

Today’s polls suggest otherwise.

They’re playing the long game, and that means years not days or weeks. It’s going to take time for all of this to play out.

The Politico article linked above is the smartest take I've seen so far. By leaving the BRF for Hollywood, they've just exchanged one difficult system for another even more difficult system. Of course, the new system is one Meghan loves, but Harry? He may not find California everything he hoped and dreamed. The article points out, rightly, that they're going to have to keep feeding the public new content and new information, or the public will quickly grow bored with them. I question the Sussexes' ability to do that.

Priceless: "Harry the Nazi" in R260's link.

Regrettably, because MEgg is too powerful now, the target is going to be Harry the Nazi. Once he has been destroyed, it will be Megg's turn. It all sounds hideous and I hope bloodshed can be avoided.

[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.]

Watch out: is it just me or is this site and thread behaving oddly? Is Meghan on the line to Muriel as I type? Let's hope Muriel will be tougher with Meggs than she was with Eggwin.

{quote]She said in the interview that when she asked to go for lunch they told her she was already too overexposed - despite her claim that she hadn't left her house in months. I find it highly unlikely that she had been housebound for months at a time.

She didn't really make a distinction about who "they" were that told her that, did she? Was it the Queen, her staff, or Meghan's own staff of advisors? Either way, she really didn't have to take their advice, she could have just gone out to lunch and had a good day.

She makes out like her own staff or the palace was stopping her from going out or leaving her home. Absolute bullshit. The royals go out and about their business every day, albeit often with their RPOs and guards trailing them. Someone on her team must have spoken up and advised her that a certain lunch date with someone (a celebrity?) would draw a crowd or paps, and warned against possible "over-exposure". As Meghan has never been one to take any advice from others, she would have just flouted that and done her thing.

No one was keeping her imprisoned or locked away. Please. I'd love to see these emails and other "receipts" she supposedly has, because I would bet that they don't tell the story she wants them to tell.

Sorry for the lack of quote marks above. Should read:

[quote]{quote]She said in the interview that when she asked to go for lunch they told her she was already too overexposed - despite her claim that she hadn't left her house in months. I find it highly unlikely that she had been housebound for months at a time.

Also, for someone whose passport was allegedly taken away by the Palace, she sure did a lot of foreign travel. Unreliable, to put it mildly.

And the thing about taking her phone... I'd bet dollars to donuts it was security or a footman either at Clarence House or Anmer that confiscated the phone to make sure the photos were deleted and scrubbed from cloud storage before being returned to her with a stern warning. If they took it permanently what was to stop her from getting a burner phone on those rare occasions she managed to escape? Or getting supportive Harry to pop in to buy one on his way back from polo

This video shows how Meghan was not the first royal family member to be silenced.

Lol R271 Thing is that Orca encouraged Megh with leading questions whipping up the lies. Megh is a self-motivated liar and Orca just made it worse. Orca is exploiting Megh's mental illness. Time for Orca to be canceled. Bye gurl.

[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] By leaving the BRF for Hollywood, they've just exchanged one difficult system for another even more difficult system.

And worse, you know, being a member of the BRF involves largely showing up, shutting up, and acting interested.

Producing value generating (read profitable) content for the Hollywood factory requires a lot more brains, skill and experience than being royal, in all honesty. So good luck to those two. One's prone to cray, by her own admission, and the other's well known as one of the duller knives in the drawer.

R269, it is baffling that she lies about things that are SO easily disproved, even just from knowledge already in the public sphere. What is the end game with this strategy? WHO would want to work with either after that interview?

R275, there are people like this in the world for whom facts don't matter.

She looked to the left so often when speaking that Oprah actually turned around to see what she was looking at. Hmmm.

Harry was kind of chunky when he was younger.

Life is so hard.

Douglas Murray is not my cup of tea but he's not wrong here.

I think Meghan blindsided Harry regarding the "Archie color" issue. She brought it up in the Oprah interview but you could see that Harry was surprised at being questioned about it later on when he joined the conversation and was not comfortable talking about it. She dropped a bomb and didn't care if her husband was in the vicinity.

[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.]

I kinda thought that except he was watching the interview off camera, they said. So maybe he was surprised it was brought up again. Or maybe he didn't know what to say since his description was not hers by a long shot. She made it sound like an ongoing thing, he referenced an awkward one off. Now you never know, he's a dumb as she is sly so one of them botched the telling, could have been either or.

^ don't know why Scobie isn't in the photo as that's what's up on the DM story. Here's the gist of it.

Omid Scobie (right), author of the Finding Freedom biography of the Sussexes, claims that Prince Harry was asked to cosign a statement refuting reports Prince William had 'constantly bullied' the couple ahead of their decision to step back as senior royals. The author alleged Meghan then emailed a royal aide asking if Kensington Palace could 'set the record straight' about claims she made Kate (inset) cry during a children's dress fitting. It is reported she said: 'Well, if we're just throwing any statement out there now, then perhaps KP can finally set the record straight about me [not making Kate cry]'. In an explosive interview with US talk show host Oprah Winfrey, Meghan (left with Prince Harry) claimed that in reality it was her sister-in-law who made her cry ahead of the royal wedding in May 2018. 'I don't say that to be disparaging to anyone because it was a really hard week of the wedding and she was upset about something,' she said. 'A few days before the wedding, she was upset about something. Yes, the issue was correct about flower girl dresses.'

That Janina actress must be so excited to be in the international spotlight, however briefly. Enjoy, honey!

So Scobie's chatter is payback to William for his comment to the press today.

Scobie seems curiously invested in this. His comments are not analytical but personal, defensive, as if he has a personal relationship with the Duchess of Mom Jeans and Harry Wails. I can't imagine why.

Like Rachel Meghan, Janina is an absolutely shit actress and a transparent liar. Her whole performance during that interview was pathetic and the hosts knew it and even called her on it, much to her simmering narcissistic rage. I can see why they’re friends.

[quote] Who cares which ceremony was the "legal" one? Meghan & Harry saw the initial ceremony as meaningful. That is good enough for me.

Jesus that twitter woman is fucking stupid. Can she not think of a reason why it might matter that they had a legal ceremony? I don’t know, begins with an A...

Especially when the public ceremony cost millions of pounds. If Harry and Meghan had wanted something more low-key, I'm sure they could have had it. I'm so sure the BRF MADE them drive up and down the road in that fucking carriage waving to the crowds.

[quote]Jesus that twitter woman is fucking stupid.

And that, folks, is Twitter for ya.

I suspect that if the statement blows up, Charles will throw William under the bus, as he is wont to do at times. Charles seemed the most taken with MeAgain and her "charms" both he and Harry are IDIOTS. Harry looked so uncomfortable during hte Orca chat and compulsively twisted his ring. How many years do we give it? It is even more unlikely that their biz will take off now, she is going to have to scramble to get her claws in someone else. 2 years? Less?

Gayle King is a newsperson like Meghan is a princess......all in her own mind.

Ever since she joined CBS Morning News it's been an African American Festival with the majority of the stories about AA issues.......

Their livelihood depends on the "streamers," as Harry so inelegantly put it. That means producing a stream of quality stuff Netflix and Spotify will buy.

They've no talent to do this themselves. They need first-class professionals. But who would ever work for these two? They must be poison. Reading between the lines, that Variety story hinted they've been unable to attract the kind of help they need, help they need to survive financially. That interview did not make made them look like attractive bosses.

Let's not forget when Megs was floating the idea last year that she was ready to work with an "A-list" director like Ava D., etc. I have the feeling she didn't get one phone call out of that.

Nor do the bullying stories and potential litigation in the UK add to their slim appeal, R295.

HOW did they think this Oprah sit down was going to translate to $$$ for them from the family? I am genuinely starting to believe that they expected a check for their silence. After THAT. They seem pressed financially, that house is way beyond their financial means. Tori & Dean life incoming, but without a Candy to foot the child related bills.

Anyone else baffled by the statement @ Diana's estate? Yeah, your mom knew you would be unable to self support as an adult Hazza and she knew you would bolt and alienate the family so she made sure to die young. WTAF?

Meghan is clearly someone who is not stable nor someone who can be trusted and she is vindictive with poor judgement. HW puts up with that in someone while they are generating $$$, the Joan Crawfords, etc, but the suitcase girl?

So I've always been a republican (for Americans that is the term used for people who want to get rid of the monarchy) but as this week has gone along and the fallout from Meghan and Harry's interview gets more and more ridiculous, I realize if there was a referendum on the monarchy tomorrow, I'd vote to keep it. By going through with this interview, Harry has effectively taken a shit over the entire UK. He has branded the whole country as backwards, racists while he basks in the sunshine of a country that is far more racist than the UK (Trump, GOP, rise in fascism). so he can fuck off!!!!

R297's link says it all. Tis a pity she's a ghetto whore. But there she is, the Ultimate Guys' Girl in Graffititown/Compton WHO PRESSES THE BURGERS FFS. No. Just no. Didn't someone in the BRF call her a showgirl; very understated: they were right?

[quote] If one of the royals had said anything actually racist, then Markle would have used it to get another wheelbarrow of cash in another of her high-profile attempts to avoid the limelight. As it was, she relied on innuendo.

From link. The 'innuendo' really is hearsay.

R298 He is a deserter.

OP's little comment has been greyed out lol. Let me repeat it here for Sunshine Sucks and the Megstans: "That clanging sound the Sussexes hear is the Palace doors being shut . . ."

From a column in the Maul: Prince William also revealed the depth of the royal fault lines when he said that he had not spoken to his brother since the Oprah Winfrey interview. This was honest, not evasive.

Needless to say, social media was soon ablaze. The usual ranks of the perpetually offended were thrilled to take fresh offence. 'How dare Prince William talk about racism!', shrieked the same people who had just been attacking the monarchy for not talking about racism.

Both Buck Palace and Clarence House are now backing William's statements made earlier today, that the royal family is "very much not racist". So that throws out the thought that William was going rogue out there.

I think there is a strategy being formulated on how to answer to the charges and innuendo leveled at them. There's probably a lot of shock and upset right now, which is not the time to retort or respond. But the dust will settle and a clearer plan will come into view.

BTW the racism 'charge', which is the only one which matters, is based on one conversation, one conversation, about Archie's skin tone which Harry allegedly had with royal-X [William] and reported to Meghan.

I say that the racism 'charge' is the only which matters because in 1999 High Court judge Macpherson of Cluny said that racism is subjective not objective. If a person thinks they are the victim of racism, then they are.

Everything else Megg said is subject to objective review such as her claims that she had no passport (while travelling the world) and that she was married twice within three days to the same man (illegal). Reasonable people will find that she is a loony.

[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 assume that at least all DLers in CA, Meghanland, have been neutered as this thread has gone quiet.

We're just bored and spent, R307. I'm watching David Lynch's "Mulholland Drive."

Okay R307 I will quit, nearly midnight here.

From the Variety article

[quote]“The social justice elements of this story as a woman of color profiled by the monarchy, combined with the mental health aspect and the aesthetic of their global celebrity? Forget it. Home run.”

Please say this is satire.

[quote] He was then asked: “And can you just let me know, is the Royal family a racist family Sir?”

What was the interviewer expecting him to say?

"YES! Thank God someone finally asked me! We put on minstrel shows at Sandringham every Christmas, and Grandmama shuffles and sings to 'Darktown Strutters Ball'!"

R310, of course it's not satire. I'd say it was the game plan of the tell-all/brand-launch interview. Just look at the tremendous publicity they've got off it.

William's saying "we're not a racist family" is raw meat to members of the church of White Fragility. I imagine it will trigger many think pieces; Robin DiAngelo herself needs to fly in and re-educate those hopelessly racists royals.

I am so done with this shit. Anyone without a serious personality disorder can see that, albeit on a larger scale than usual, this is a family sadly having to cope with two members that tip the scale toward mental illness. It's frustrating and heartbreaking. I am glad William responded to the paps today, for his own wellbeing. It took a great deal of courage and he did so without any anger, but I could hear the weariness in his voice. Been there...it is not a restful place, but you can't fix family.

And to think the pair have moved onto a property with a history of mental illness. Bad juju. I recommend moving, maybe Malibu.

Google "McCormick".

Royalty is notoriously inbred. A little genetic diversity should be welcomed.

Does Harry believe his mother was murdered? If so, that would explain a lot. Not just his mental issues and the war against his family, but the particular emphasis on racism.

He certainly holds a trump card. Expressing the slightest doubt would be enough.

"Was my mother's death an accident? I don't think we'll ever know."

A trump card of a retard? It must be very useful indeed.

R317 Right or wrong, sensibly or not, his words do have effect.

Otherwise you'd be ignoring the retard yourself and not wasting your time reading and posting here.

Quiet morning in British media... even The Mail subdued (for the Mail.)

I guess this means Megalomaniac will have to launch her next move soon.

Mayday, mayday...Harry's popularity takes a hit.

R314 Oh my

Could someone tell me why you can't get married in your garden in the UK? It's far more baffling to me than the Sussex psychodrama which sadly is a somewhat predictable tale. (Ask the veterans from the Dangling Tendrils threads.)

You missed a salient detail, R320: The majority of ElderBrits (>65) view them negatively, while the majority of young people (<24) view them positively. And Prince Charles has taken a comparable hit.

R320 What's shocking is that he has any support at all in Britain.

R323 Young people are emotional and think they know it all.

Or, ya know, attitudes differ generationally.

It's interesting to block extreme posters and see much of these threads disappear. One posted 76 times in the Black Baby thread, though only 26 in this one (thus far). And there are several other similarly fervent H&M antagonists.

Just a relevant data point, as this is Datalounge

That poll ranks popularity. That moves regularly in response to events. The key question is support to removing monarchy. The significance of polling is always the exact question.

Oh dear, R314!

Crazy-town, CA.

Off topic...FYI - this production may be something that royal watchers may like to view in the future.

Claire Foy playing the scandalous Margaret, Duchess of Argyll.

William in his youth resembled Diana a lot.

I still haven't seen the interview, but from what I've read, the emerald tiara incident wasn't brought up. Presumably there's no way to spin that so that Meghan doesn't look spoilt.

As I predicted, here comes their "proof"

Along with spending a lot of money to drive "opinion" on Twitter, they seem to be in a full court press. If the Queen waits them out, what will they have in the end? Maybe we are wrong and the goal is not money, but the takedown of his family? Because this is unlikely to get them $ from BRF or anyone else with sense.

They got delusions a’ grandeur.

Ginger doesn't want to "take down", destroy his family or the Monarchy, if for no other reason than there will be no one to foot the bill for his extravagent lifestyle. What he wants to do is cause as much embarrassment and uncomfort as he can to his father and brother, both of whom he loathes and feels done wrong by. And he will keep right on behaving like a petulant child throwing the mutha of all tantrums for as long as he can.

That is some extremely weak proof they’re attempting to use.

Not in their minds, R338. And I suspect they are just getting started.

My guess is that Megs was rude to the nanny, Catherine stepped in and Megs played the victim. She has said in the past she can cry on cue. Yet, Catherine was not involved in an incident of superglueing young women's eys shut, so, one must consider context and past actions in weighing up veracity.

Can there be much doubt about the source of the Rose stories?

Don'cha just hate those people who scream, "And this is my final word on the subject!" but then keep coming back again and again for one last word.

I really hate people who say, "oh...we made up...but here's what she did." Passive aggressive cunts.

Most people avoid such people like the plague

My mum and sister watched the interview and said Meghan and Harry both mostly just came across as not being very bright, especially given Meghan's claims that she didn't research the BRF at all when she got involved with Harry. I disagree - I think Meghan's a very intelligent woman. I think the girlish/slightly bimbo-esque manner is all an act. I don't believe she went into the situation with her eyes closed, certainly not to the extent that she insists she did.

Why would Harry and Meghan create such a shitstorm around themselves while she was pregnant? You’d think they would cultivate an environment of peace, calm, and serenity for her, especially given her claims about her mental health struggles. Is that properly “protecting” her, Harry?

One has to wonder what goals are consistent with their choices, do not be distracted by the word salad, just look at the actions, R345. And they turned up the "twitstorm" today too. Remember, his 99 year old grandfather has been hospitalized for weeks, is this timed for max leverage on the 94 year old grandmother at a time of stress? And CBS will re-run the interview today as well.

With each new knife the Harkles throw, I find them repellent and disgusting. (I’m American and female) MM’s best skillset is opportunistic manipulator extraordinaire.

Love this line for the truth: Nobody invades Meghan Markle’s privacy as much as Meghan Markle does.

Come to think of it, was the miscarriage story in the New York Times [italic]really[/italic] about the suffering of... others?

IME people like this lie about almost everything, even about things that do not matter. Huge red flag.

Why lie about this of all things? So easily disproved and could have been a happy memory? If their mouths are moving, well...

The Queen is shown photos of Mars.

Does training the tot to parrot "Drive Safe!" strike anyone else as sick in this context?

He's pretty young in those pics, R349, so he may not remember. However, he shouldn't have said that he "never" got to ride a bike with his father.

He seems to invent new and baseless grounds for victimhood, R352. There were photos of both of his parents playing with the kids as children, doubt it was a one off. With all the wrong that was done one to them in 2018 by their own account, why reach?

Of course, the article in R354 is apparently a joke.

[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.]

Well black Twitter does so neener.

That's Peaches Golding from South Carolina @R356.

The choir did NOT have a good experience working with our Megs.

Exactly r338. It’s merely MM’s narrative. Furthermore, who knows if she is creating or modifying those emails after the fact? We can’t know without access to the accounts and the original email.

Exactly, R361. And the recollections of others present, may, in fact, vary as well.

Another piece in Variety, the DM pushes back on manipulation of headlines

Unstable, vindictive, untrustworthy, hmmm...the world is seeing the Harkles through more objective lenses now. They are clearly on the outs with the BRF, their one bit of cache, and also seem a bit pressed for cache. Radioactive?

Daily Mail Complains to ViacomCBS About ‘Deliberate Distortion’ of Headlines in Meghan Markle Interview

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

The Harkles are hunkered down in their Montecito bunker in shocked disbelief at how badly the Oprah interview is playing. They are HATED in the UK, and largely ignored in the US. It has blown up in their faces.

Esp if something happens to Phillip soon, R366.

I knew someone like Meg, any genuine emergency experienced by another was a cue for her to act out and try to draw all attention to her, even in life threatening situations such as this. There is no empathy, just a voratious need for attention and a laser like focus on moments of life's vulnerabilities. It was quite a lesson but there are many such people in the world. Best to get as far away as possible as quickly as possible. MANY saw her for what she is, from William to Tom Inskip, but Harry thought he could use her as an exit.

Wait until it all blows up in HIS face. No kids, all his money gone, no family or friends left. And we ALL know it is coming.

This is long but interesting.

voratious R367

Oh dear

R364 cachet, and also seem a bit pressed for cachet

Cachet

FIFY

R339 is on to it. Numerous people reported the incident at the bridal fitting where MM shouted at the nanny to get Charlotte under control and Kate told her that was unacceptable; she would speak to her own staff. MM may have shed some tears at being rebuked.

She is such a shallow, basic bitch. This PR is supposed to make her seem like a champion of the common people? Hard to imagine a dumber man exists who will hve her next but we can all see it coming.

At a time when people all over the world have lost income and loved ones and businesses, $$$ is spent to pump out this garbage.

Morrissey would be so proud. LOL.

Meghan twists the knife in Piers.

"ITV shares fell almost five per cent on Wednesday, wiping close to £200 million off its market value, following Morgan's departure. You can picture him grinning like the Cheshire Cat."

"Daily Mail and Mail Online owner Associated Newspapers is reported to have written to ViacomCBS, the makers of the interview, to complain that there was "deliberate distortion and doctoring" in a "misleading" montage of British newspaper headlines that was used in the programme."

It's dog eat dog out there. Meghan (dog) v Morgan (dog); ANL (shaggy dog) v CBS (shaggy dog)...

Meanwhile Meghan's net ratings are minus 27. Lowest evah. That's the You.gov poll just now. She's in a hole; shouldn't she stop digging?

R372 oh gawd, that picture

You like, R377?

"Success is inevitable."

Meghan can have whatever emails and secret diaries she likes. Doesn't make her fiction fact.

The look like two assholes at the photo that r372 posted

Lainey is definitely on the Sussex payroll. She and Kaiser over @ Celebitchy both. Blech!

Hopefully it will not come to this but the traits sure do sound familiar

But of course, Sharon Osbourne: has anyone asked if she's ok?

I said it on one of the earlier H&M threads that the reaction the UK to the interview would ultimately move towards the negative after the dust began to settle the UK reaction would ultimately turn against H&M and the latest polls are suggesting that. Meghan's net popularity in the UK is -22% and Harry's -2%. While Williams has gone up by 7 point to nearly 80% just narrowly lower than the Queen herself according to Yougov. Also 56% of the country want harry to be removed from the line of succession but most thing Archie should remain ... cause you Britain is so fucking racist.

If the British weren't such racists they would be demanding that Meghan be included in the line of succession IN HER OWN RIGHT dammit. They disgust me with their polls.

Are there polls for the rest of the World?

A meme making the rounds of Instagram. Oh dear.

Lol R387 and don't pretend you're the Puritan maid who didn't laugh!

Harry being in the line of succession is a travesty. Trying to shake down his family as his grandfather is so ill? Harry is no better than she is.

What is this about Archie's birth certificate having been changed recently? Sorry if I missed that thread, these 2 move so fast.

This is the original certificate

Sign the petitions (linked)!

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

Why lie so blatantly? One can only wonder if their grasp of reality is so poor and they truly are delusional in their victimhood.

Why should anyone here sign a petition supporting that troglodyte, R392? Should we also sign petitions asking the faux news rejects to be reinstated?

The Maul is going for all three throats:

In the space of almost 90 minutes the reputations of the monarchy and of individual Royal Family members were dismantled.

Yet even the most egregious of the couple's inflammatory remarks, such as those about racism, were allowed to escape serious scrutiny.

It is hard to imagine a Dimbleby, a Paxman or a Humphrys allowing so many damaging statements to pass without drilling down to find context and perspective.

By any stretch of the imagination, the Harry and Meghan claims demanded to be properly and thoroughly investigated.

Here, the Mail lays bare the contradictions and inaccuracies at the heart of their interview, untangling fact from fiction.

And today we appeal to U.S. broadcaster CBS and Oprah Winfrey herself: based on our report, can we now look forward to a follow-up — Harry & Meghan . . . The Other Side Of The Story?

I despise Meghan and Piers equally but Meghsy can't be allowed to keep having it all her own delusional way.

[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 see she is wearing the triple string of pearls she inherited from Margaret Duchess of Argyll...

[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 Orca is a wondrous beast. Look at that hair for a start: unique.

Just finished the DM article at r393. It’s a doozy that thoroughly debunks pretty much every claim made.

Hey R3, I'm sure you consider anyone who doesn't worship Ms. Markle a racist. Are "the police" logging my post? I'm home now, by the way, they can come and arrest me.

[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.]

Oprah should never do an interview again. After she glossed right over the suicide claims, not even a “do you feel that way now” question

What a fucking agenda pushing liar

I agree, R402. The DM article reveals the interview for the hash of lies and half-truths that it was. The part about the finances is especially devastating:

[quote]First: once Harry, a family man who was approaching middle age, decided to opt out of being a 'working royal', there was no obvious reason why his family should have continued to provide him with financial support. Second: he was not exactly 'cut off'. Instead, according to informed sources, he received a lump sum from Prince Charles in late March 2020 (towards the end of the 2019-2020 financial year) after announcing his decision to step aside. This, we are told, was a sum of 'many hundreds of thousands of pounds'. It seems to have been made over to him not as a final pay-off, but to meet the costs of his new life in America going forward. In other words, it was money for the year ahead, until, as a source puts it, 'they sorted themselves out'. Additionally, we are told, it was made clear to the couple there would be more resources — if required — in the next financial year.

The Bank of Dad sure is generous, out of concern for optics or love for damaged Haz, who knows? Charles had been setting up a countryside life for Harry before Meghan struck. He never grew up and will not fit in in LA. He is a means to an end with a fast approaching shelf life. She is gonna have to move to bounce to her next victim. I give it less than 2 years. If that.

Who will she bounce to after Harry?

Padma Lakshmi could certainly give her some pointers. And maybe an introduction to Salman Rushdie.

r254 Bloodshed??!

Bloodshed ??! comment meant for r264 Apologies r254

I was gonna say... I wrote R254 and I can get bit spiked with the Megaloons but I don't think it's come to bloodshed.

Royalty has a very bloody tradition.

[quote]They've no talent to do this themselves. They need first-class professionals. But who would ever work for these two? They must be poison. Reading between the lines, that Variety story hinted they've been unable to attract the kind of help they need, help they need to survive financially. That interview did not make made them look like attractive bosses.

I would never want to work with Meghan, there are so many red flags from her past behavior. I wouldn't trust her at all, and would expect she'd be a screeching banshee half the time.

And nobody high-profile has so far agreed to work with them. Imagine if William wanted to do something in Hollywood. I'm sure every A Lister in town would be calling.

r413 Also if the projects are commercial flops or unsuccesful you can bet she will blame the people she has hired and not any deficit in the creative paths she chose.

They just announced who was hired late this week.

............

It is also a risk to work with someone who you know will air any grievances publicly.

r415 Is much known about this guy? I thought I read that he was excessively botoxed?

Ben Browning will be chewed up and spit out within weeks.

Hopefully they will pay him enough to get his yellow tooth fixed.

^^ spat

R420 the bad tooth in Hollywood looks absolutely desperate. Obviously no one else will work with them.

Here is a short video interview of Ben Browning. I cant tell if he is just very posh or gay?!

I think Meghan is gonna chew him up quick. After the Variety piece earlier in the week, seems they had to move on someone.

r424 Variety hinted their projects were floundering or in danger of losing momentum? Is that a correct reading?

Who would want to work with this pair?

She's shown herself to be poisonous and litigious and vengeful.

Quite a combination for a boss.

[Quote]Here is a short video interview of Ben Browning. I cant tell if he is just very posh or gay?!

R423 He definitely sounds like an American badly affecting an English accent.

He comes by the accent honestly.

He is known for packaging content, who is going to create it? Megs?

R428 What does that mean? I can't place his accent at all.

It's really sad if Charles was that generous and Harry STILL threw him under the bus during the interview.

His background is touched on in the linked article, R429.

"Somewhat surprised Meghan didn’t hire a woman, or a POC. Oh well, long live the patriarchy!"

Far more generous than I would have guessed, Charles is known to be cheap.

What is also sad is that they were urged to slow their exit down so that all of this could be worked out more slowly but they did not want to do that either.

The looks of doom at the wedding were certainly warranted. Bad enough to have someone so thrilled by chaos marry in, add in the family business and her recording in both Charles' home and the Cambridges, no way to salvage things when her "goals" were so different than family harmony and enjoying their mutual great good fortune.

[quote] The looks of doom at the wedding

What looks of doom?

"Recollections May Vary" is going to be the title of my autobiography!

You know a big ole British Queen wrote that line

The responses from William and Kate as mental health champions and the Queen's "recollections may vary" as well as Charles running from reporters is a joke. They look pathetic for people saying they champion mental health and are "VERY much NOT a racist family".

Aw, tough week, R437? Kinda like Trump and the EC. It's always a long game. Better luck next grifter.

Recollections May Vary: Buckingham Palace Issues a Statement, Part II That clanging sound the Sussexes hear is the Palace doors being shut . . .

and infinite compassion natch

Well done to the Daily Mail for doing their public watchdog job!

Oprah's production company has issued a statement a rare statement regarding the interview as the British Media begins to poke serious holes in Harry and Meghan's allegations It does not deny H&M lied during the interview, it says that "it was their personal story." And despite Harpo saying it stands by the broadcast, read between the lines, Big O is basically ready to throw H&M under the bus if it starts getting messy. At a time when Oprah is selling businesses, and (pre-covid) could no longer sell out tickets to her speaking events, she doesn't want her reputation destroyed by these idiot.

The interview in addition to Meghan's complaints against ITV (for Piers Morgan) and the BBC are going to blow up in her face spectacularly. Corners of the media in the UK are seeing red and they are intent on bringing her down. Get your popcorn ready.........

It wasn't just their story that's the issue: It's those doctored headlines. Those were created by Harpo Productions, not by the Sussexes. Oprah didn't question Meghan at points where she was clearly obfuscating or downright lying. Oprah is complicit in this whether she likes it or not.

R443 Yup it appears the documentary contains a headline that appears to be from the Daily Mail but was in fact doctored. DM and the Associated Press have filed a formal complaint with CBS and Harpo (hence the reason from Harpo Productions). I think this going to end up in court.

Here's the full story! The Daily Mail is totally going to sue I think.

What would you suggest? Some kind of a statement?

Oprah is well and truly fucked.

Actually, Oprah did challenge some of Meghan's statements, and got her to clarify, which were met with word salad (i.e., no discernable clarification). I actually think Oprah was very shrewd to give them enough rope to hang themselves. There were points in the interview where Oprah clearly was not buying what Megs (esp.) was saying, but let them have their say and and then calmly continued on and asked another question. Watch again, and I am sure you will see what I mean. This is not Oprah's first rodeo. Arguing with a narc-borderline about "their truth??? That's a no-win for Oprah. Better to have their own words lay there...to crickets - or victory cries - or outrage. The interviewer should be unbiased, which is what I think Oprah achieved. THIS is why it is Oprah's Master Class, not because she sides with the Sussexes.

The interview with Meghan's friend was posted before, but I've only just now watched and it's good fun. The friend is playing the role of surrogate and has been well-briefed on the talking points ("it's a new era" was thrown in several times), but apparently didn't expect any hard questioning from a morning chat show.

The hosts do a very good job of being sympathetic to Meghan's alleged plight while still calling out the contradictions and pointing up the obvious: the interview was a hit job on the BRF.

Time will not be on Meghan's side, I believe.

R449 OMG that was a car crash of cultures there. I don't think she understood how badly she was coming across. She was obviously expecting Oprah-style softball questions. Any American (or perhaps I should say Californian) watching that might begin to realise how insincere they seem to British people.

That's exactly what I was thinking watching it r451. The meaningful looks, the cliches, the "worldly wise" pauses. Such bullshit!

It's also apparent that - as with all Meghan's "celebrity" friends - she and Gavinkar didn't really know each other that well, at least not until after Meghan got together with Harry. Even now, Gavinkar doesn't know anything more than what's already out in the media. Hardly a close friend.

R449, I saw that segment and I thought the friend did very well in that interview without giving away too much information.

She supported Meghan and Harry’s claims without adding to the story.

I can’t believe that some of you cunts are actually cheering for the British trash press, regardless of your Markle hatred.

Those publications are dirt and read by uneducated morons and housewives. That’s what you’re defending?

R454 You do realise a huge chunk of the readership of the British tabloid websites is North American, yes? The Daily Mail website is specifically geared toward an American audience. You think every 'article' on those sites is appearing in British physical newspapers?

[quote]What would you suggest? Some kind of a statement?

I think the moment for a statement has passed.

selections from Trevor Philips in The Times (it's long and wordy)

have too much skin in the game to be neutral about the row sparked this week by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. I am a black divorcee in a mixed-race marriage. Like Harry I have fathered two mixed-race children. Their mother is herself of mixed heritage. One daughter has recently given birth to my first grandson, a gorgeous melange of genes from four different continents, whose skin colouring may not be a million shades off Archie’s.

And though I have thankfully never sunk to the despair described by the duchess, our family has spent more than two decades watching helplessly as my older daughter battled a severe eating disorder. Hours before writing these words she and I bade farewell on a familiar threshold: the specialist unit to which she admits herself periodically when the daily struggle against her demons proves just too exhausting.

By contrast, there are no positives to draw from the duchess’s insinuations of racial prejudice within the royal family. Britain now stands in the dock internationally as a breeding ground for casual racial bigotry. Brits will see some irony here. Most of the finger pointing comes from the United States, a country where young black men are frequently gunned down by white police officers; where black families on average have one tenth of the wealth of white households; and where, outside work, people of different colours seldom mix. As for our European neighbours, aside from tiny Malta, people of colour in every EU country are more likely to report racial harassment than here in Britain; rates are over twice as high in Germany, Italy and Ireland. Add to all this the fact that, like the Sussexes, I have spent more time on the enemy radar of British newspapers than I would have liked, and that legitimate criticism has far too often strayed into racial prejudice that should shame those — on the left and right — who wrote it.

Yet many of the duchess’s supporters have taken her words as confirmation that Britain is an irredeemably and uniquely racist society. The Sussexes told Oprah that there had been “conversations and concern” about the colour of her unborn child’s skin among unnamed royals. Crucially, because Winfrey failed to ask, we have no idea what Harry’s response was. The duchess’s enemies will quibble about the fact that she and Harry differed in their recollections of when and how many times this took place. But I believe what she says. It is almost certain that members of the family speculated about whether the child would look more like his mother or father. Any clan in which that conversation does not take place would be a pretty heartless outfit; even the Addams family were able to lampoon the inevitable cooing over their new baby :

Gomez: “He has my father’s eyes.”

Morticia: “Gomez, take them out of his mouth.”

1/2

But as Sir Ken Olisa, a black businessman who serves as the Queen’s lord lieutenant in London observed, we do not know the context or intent of the remarks, which makes all the difference in the world. His own (white) mother-in-law fretted for days about her first grandchild’s likely skin tone: “I just don’t know what colour wool to buy” she said to her daughter. It is equally possible that what Harry experienced was some antediluvian pearl-clutching from one of the royal family’s less sophisticated members. No tribe is without its embarrassing uncles and aunts: Windsor weddings are rich in such individuals. In such a big family, it’s likely there were conversations of both kinds.

Generally speaking, if both parents are Caucasian, there’s not going to be much doubt about skin tone so the talk is of eye and hair colour. Among black families like mine, we ponder other features — quality of hair, shape of the nose, hue of skin. In mixed families, the range of possibilities can be gloriously infinite. Of course, it can feel like a very different conversation depending on who is speaking. And concern might not be for the image of the family, but for the child herself.

The parent or grandparent of a black or mixed-race child knows that no matter how talented, intelligent or spirited your offspring, he or she will face prejudice of some form or another. One of my daughters carries my dark colouring while the other could easily pass for Spanish or Italian. At various times in their lives they have been treated differently by others. Any family that fails to confront the fact that being non-white in a largely white society will influence the life chances of even the most privileged child is simply delusional.

So from whatever point of view, I watched their interview with Oprah Winfrey with a deep sense of sorrow. I think there is some truth in the Sussexes’ accusations. But it could all have been so different. They, not just the palace, bear some responsibility for the blunders and misjudgments of the past three years.

Could things have been different? Yes, I think so. Meghan had an admirable pair of role models for being a successful “first black”: Barack and Michelle Obama. Obama’s record in office is middling to average: cautious at home, largely invisible abroad. His limited health reforms were stymied by his lousy succession planning. But none of that mattered. His main task, as far as history is concerned, was to be a successful first black president. By his eloquence, personal dignity and intelligence he effectively neutered race as a barrier to high office in America. In fact, it is unthinkable that in future any party could offer Americans a presidential ticket without at least one person of colour on the ballot. Without Obama there would be no Kamala Harris.

2/3

3/3

By contrast, Meghan and Harry blew the chance to normalise diversity within the royal family — an epic fail in a country where we have more people of colour in high ministerial office than the whole of the European Union put together. A Conservative administration counts among its top team Priti Patel and Kwasi Kwarteng. The electorate appears utterly undisturbed that the runaway favourite to be our next prime minister, Rishi Sunak, is the son of East African Asians. Each of these people has had to deal with dreadful treatment by the media, and not just the tabloids; Priti Patel’s portrayal as a bull with a ring through her nose by The Guardian was not only more hurtful personally but, in my view, politically far more offensive than anything levelled at Meghan. The duchess lacked a canny, steadying hand to guide and protect her. As chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality, a job which guaranteed trouble, my inner team was led by a black woman, Colleen Harris, a veteran of both No 10 and the royal household. Like me, Harris is of Guyanese heritage, leading Prince Charles to christen us the Guyanese mafia. In her first big role, in the Downing Street press office, a reporter inquired “So, if you don’t mind my asking, how black are you?”. She replied crisply “black enough” and put down the phone. Meghan could have done with some of that toughness; and, by the way, it was known to the palace that she was available. Instead, Meghan has placed a bet on TV therapy. It is a poor gamble. Oprah offered the facsimile of the analyst’s couch without any of the benefits of self- examination. I cannot believe that the couple had no idea what questions would be asked. Surely their deal with the streaming service Netflix would have clauses requiring consultation on the content of such a high-stakes interview. At the very least, Netflix would have wanted to be sure that they gave away nothing that would be of subsequent value.

So what we witnessed felt more like a performance. Maybe I shouldn’t be surprised. This was an encounter between two accomplished actresses, one of them twice Oscar-nominated, brilliantly scripted to convey a narrative that would exalt the couple and bury the royal family. I don’t think it will work out that way. Viewers who did not come to the programme with minds already made up might have wondered why there was no mention of the duchess’s father and half-siblings, whom the Sussexes have allowed the media to present as trailer trash.

And Oprah missed what should have been the most important question of all. When Meghan met Harry, she claims she knew little about him or the royal family. Even so, two facts that most of the world knew about Harry were that he had once worn a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party and that he had called a fellow army officer “my little Paki friend”. He has apologised profusely for both transgressions. But the issue was never raised by Oprah. In a world where far too many communities are divided, the story of how these young lovers managed to get past that history could have been a true moment of openness, generosity and forgiveness. Those qualities are badly needed in a world where, partly thanks to the cesspits of social media, too much bigotry still flourishes.

Instead we were given the Disneyfication of difference. The duke and duchess have fled the poisoned palace, leaving their relatives trapped by its dark intrigues. The account we heard of the past was a black and white story of heroes and villains, of victims and persecutors. But the reality of our modern world is a struggle for understanding between the past and the present, of failed attempts at reconciliation, of trade-offs between justice and tribal self-interest.

The day that Meghan and Harry wed, I believed that they might bring to life Nelson Mandela’s injunction to “let your choices reflect your hopes, not your fears”. The handsome couple baring their souls in a Californian garden wanted us to believe that they had chosen hope. But the truth told by their actions is that their flight to the west coast is really driven by bitterness, anger and fear.

So less than a week on, the furor has died down. The polls show them at their lowest standing. They've said their last word but surrogates and Omar Scabies continue to blather. And now the mighty Oprah is statementing wiggle room.

[bold]FAIL.[/bold]

R457 Thanks for posting all that. I am always interested in what Trevor Philips has to say.

R452 She actually reminded me as a slightly more annoying version of Kamala Harris, although without Harris's horrible adenoidal voice. The laughter intended to disarm as well as buy her some time, the attempts at false camaraderie, the 'That's such a GREAT question!' Is it something about California?

R453, she did add to the story: she said that one of Meghan's alleged bullying victims was fired for gross misconduct. It was fun when the host then pointed out that she must be speaking for Meghan in that case, despite having said the whole time she only speaks for herself.

That interview was like pulling teeth. Certainly didn't warm you to anybody.

R449, that was amazing. The one interviewer and her sotto voiced, barely audible "riiiiiiiiiiiiight." The hosts did a very good job with her.

"humanitarian work"

"well respected"

The constant nodding was the friend's equivalent of the statements all ending in "right?" She looked like bobble head.

"I'm not sure what you are saying" "I'm not sure what your role is in coming on here today" "practically say nothing" - lol.

"New era" is Owellian.

Thanks for posting R449.

"why would htey want to nuke their family in public?"

I cannot wait until it comes out how money was funneled to the Gruesome Twosome.

If she wanted to KILL her child due to the press why did Oprah not question their continued seeking of a public likfe? Her current mental state.

It is clear that they are unlikely to be able to earn a living in the long term. All of Harry's made up work and HEAVILY crafted public image seemed to offend him as meaningless and to actually be REAL to him. They genuinely seem unmoored. The family was SO generous financially, they really did try to head this off and create a softer landing for them.

they

If we all speak our "truth" perhaps some day there will be an edit button, lol.

Phillip remains in the hospital. I believe they saw this as a time of leverage with his grandmother as her ailing husband was so ill. These 2 are MONSTEROUS people. Who DOES that? Those poor children. Hopefully they will be sent to boarding schools.

Harry used to drink and play polo, wonder if he misses that life? He seems to have a very stunted emotional range and also to be quite depressed. He is quite stuck at the moment.

This clumsy interview was merely a warning shot over the bow. The message is, 'If we don't get everything we are after, the big secrets are coming to light."

My little Paki friend.

I get that Harry likes a strong woman, but has he ever contemplated what it would be like if that steely ferocity were turned on him?

R473, I don’t see that happening. I think they’re 2 people who had bad experiences with their own families and who will hang on to their relationship.

I think they are 2 people whose families had bad experiences with them.

Harry might have been sick of his role in the BRF, but there is nothing to suggest he was sick of his life in the UK - drinking, nightclubs, polo, friends from childhood and Britain itself. I don't seeing him being happy or feeling at home in the US.

I think they both need drama above all.

Wherever you go, there you still are...he is on her turf now. He has lost friends and family and all that was familiar to him. He has the body language of a battered spouse, it was quite something. He used to appear much more masculineand way happier.

R476 It is a very big lifestyle change, almost as big as the one Meghan herself went through when she married in. Boredom, lack of purpose, and disorientation is maybe a risk for Harry. Of course right now there's all the excitement about the new house and baby, and Hollywood, and bringing down the racist patriarchy and whatnot, but what happens when all the mayhem subsides?

The lengthy pause when asked what he likes about his new life suggests, nothing good...

And then another lie about the bike riding, it is so pathological. Charles DID ride bikes with his sons. Why must every single thing be a dig, even if utterly untrue. These 2 are so disordered.

folie de deux

Yes because bike riding is something people never do in the English countryside. Especially when you have hundreds of acres to explore.

[quote]I get that Harry likes a strong woman, but has he ever contemplated what it would be like if that steely ferocity were turned on him?

Hard to say. I'd bet money his brother has contemplated it on his behalf though.

There are photos of Charles riding with Harry on the back of his bike. Another completely untrue dig. If they were so hard done by should not be such a need to create out of wholecloth?

How long until she dumps him?

What wealthy man would want her next? She cannot just prowl at SoHo for one.

Is Banksy married?

Lol, maybe the kiddies could help him paint in their photo ops.

The Daily Mail take-down in R393 is fucking savage. It's so damaging to Harry and Meghan because unlike them, the Daily Mail has actually backed everything up with evidence.

R487 Problem is, we're now in a post-facts era, an Age of Emotion. It's anyone's truth now.

Where do they go from here? There's only one interview they can give to Oprah Winfrey — and we've seen it. They have shot their bolt, discharged their ultimate weapon. Now what?

For all their gushing talk of spreading love, compassion and kindness in their podcasts and documentaries, it hardly strikes me as a durable business model.

"Even their admirers found Harry and Meghan's recent podcast excruciatingly syrupy and lacking in substance.

As for their brand, well, the all-important royal seal of approval is gone for ever.

For all the talk of deals with Netflix et al, they will be yesterday's news before they know it. Hollywood is not exactly renowned for its long memory.

So let's imagine the position in, say, a quarter of a century's time.

In the year 2046, William will probably be king, Kate at his side, leading a popular, slimmed-down, united Royal Family.

George, Prince of Wales, will be 32, perhaps with young children of his own. Charlotte will be 30, Louis 27.

But what of Harry and Meghan, who will be in their mid-60s? Still on the U.S. West Coast? Still churning out the Archewell podcasts?

Surely not still hawking their sob stories around the breakfast shows, complaining that Archie was cheated of his birthright by a vindictive, 'racist' Royal Family.

And what, I wonder, will people think in 2046, when they look back on the scandal of the past week?

Will they see it as a watershed in the history of Britain's relationship with its monarchy, the moment when everything changed?

Or will they see it as merely one furore among so many others: just another brief, eye-catching hullaballoo?

Well, here's my answer. I think the truth is both more mundane and more reassuring. I don't think they will remember it at all."

[quote] Or will they see it as merely one furore among so many others: just another brief, eye-catching hullaballoo?

Well, despite the best efforts of the UK media to keep the story in the spotlight, it seems that it is already firmly in the "yesterday's news" pile for most of the UK population. I think that "another brief, eye-catching hullaballoo" is a generous assessment.

I've just complained to OFCOM about the inaccuracies in the Oprah interview. It was quick and easy, go on Meghan did.

R489 They won't be together. I really don't give their marriage more than 5 years, absolute max. Probably more like 3. Once the all the fuss dies down, and Meghan finds that the Archewell thing doesn't really have a raison d'etre or future, she will soon start imagining herself a so-called Strong Woman ie. single. Harry will be much less interesting to her. The novelty of a British prince in SoCal will have worn off and, given that Harry has no discernible talent, he will not be able to further her career. She'll start to imagine herself as an American heroine single mom, blah de blah blah. Harry will have to head back to England and some sort of minor role in Charles's Firm. And that, as they say, will be that.

[quote]And that, as they say, will be that.

Naw. We've got the whole train-wreck of a divorce to go through. I'm still hoping someone will do the "Harry and Tom: She Done Us Dirty/Wrong" interview. Now THAT would be an hour to watch.

Perhaps Piers Morgan could conduct it, R493.

It would likely be more grounded in reality, of course.

Piers Morgan interviewing me - sorry interviewing Meghan - that would be huge ratings, wouldn't it?

Kate paid her respects to murder victim Sarah Everard.

Another video of Kate honoring the memory of Sarah Everard.

Kate can go freely among the crowds but Meghan wasn't allowed to leave her house???

The contrast between people expressing genuine emotion about real world problems stands in stark contrast to the ravings of delusional grifters and professional victims.

[quote] Kate can go freely among the crowds but Meghan wasn't allowed to leave her house???

—The Eye Roll Troll like a princess in a tower! rapunzel?

I thought she was Ariel!

Harry and Megan are mentally ill and were never fit for purpose. So many trying to make it work was for naught.

I wonder who Meghan will give the divorce interview to? Another two hours with Oprah?

Those are powerful images at R496 & R497. Kate alone, charging ahead by herself, in her street clothes. It had a warrior element to it. If you are going to be Queen (consort), you have to be tough. Queen Mother, QEII, Queen Victoria - high emotion and the crown do not mix. Even at R497 when she is at the memorial, there is such genuine grief for this woman's death that nobody seems at all bothered or care about Kate. I woman next to her with the backpack on was clearly paying her respects/grieve and didn't even move out of the way when Kate left. Not to borrow Meghan's favorite word, but the way Kate did this was very "classy". In every day life, I've always felt the best philanthropy is anonymous and very quiet. Obviously this was for optics, but it was very well executed.

R504 - I couldn't help but think that if it was Meghan, her favorite photographer would have accompanied her and the posed photos would be released for the world to see.

Kate is a very classy woman, and very British. Very understated and thus more meaningful. Meghan is just a mess. Can you imagine what that visit would have been like if Meghan had done it? Just awful.

I was of the opinion that the BRF should come out swinging very hard against the Harkles, but I was wrong. They are doing this exactly right.

Regardless of what team you are on, who you think is right or wrong, the one thing that seems to be tried and true for success is an extremely long courtship prior to getting married. Anyone rushed in to this life with a quick engagement and marriage seems doomed to fail. The Queen knew Phillip since she was a child, William dated Kate for 10 years, lived with her, invited her along to events, spent a lot of time with the Middletons, had a trial break, and gave Kate every chance to back out. Camilla was part of Charles friend circle most of his young adult life and again, right or wrong, she was the one he loved and ultimately she was the one most suited for this life. You can't have an unstable partner in a senior role. They literally will break if they are not rock solid and that includes having a solid, supporting family of their own to be there for those tough times. Although Phillip didn't really have that, he is of a different generation and as an iron will.

I liked Meghan for the silly drama, but loathe her now not just b/c of what she did to the Royals, but how she added gasoline to the fire of our own tensions here in the US.. Meghan is Type A x 1000. I am sure she had binders of research into palace life and protocol after her first date with Harry. My point is that reading about something and living it are two different things. Had Harry dated Meghan for even 3-4 years prior to an engagement, lived together, brought her into the fold with Wills and Kate, maybe things wouldn't be as they are. Meghan couldn't even go with the flow during the engagement process. I'd be scared to even fart during this period if I wanted the title and marriage so badly, even if I knew I was out to change it once I was in. Not everything is meant for everyone and that goes for everything in life. Americans are just simply not meant to be Royals. While Brits and Americans speak the same language, we speak totally different languages. Our values, the things that are instilled in us through schooling, culture, etc is very different. I would never try the American experiment again for a senior royal position if I were the BRF. It doesn't work. The partners of the Cambridge children are not going to be getting into this family easily.

I just thought of old Thomas Markle. He's probably a handful, but I can't help feeling sorry for him. The day another man gave his daughter away at the biggest wedding in front of the entire planet must have been very lonely and sad for him. All that excitement and pageantry and you're sitting home alone, recovering from surgery, embarrassed by your own media misadventures and rejected by your daughter the bride. I know –MARY! But it's true.

He epitomizes how no matter how MUCH you do for such types, it is NEVER enough and they will turn on you in an instant. She had been posting about "Daddy" on SM then within weeks, ghosted him. I think people who act this way have a genetic difference. The coldness, the distain for others no longer useful, the glee in harming relationships and creating chaos, it is not possible for stable social relationships with or around them. I suspect Doria is similar, weren't there stories of her teaching Meghan to ghost people? It is not just Thomas it is Trevor with the mailed back rings, the chef she lived with while dating H, using his recipes for her blog, etc. As a date or co-worker they can be avoided, must be painful if they are your immediate family.

Mr. Markle is a sad reminder how painful having kids can be.

[quote] the one thing that seems to be tried and true for success is an extremely long courtship prior to getting married.... William dated Kate for 10 years, ... had a trial break, and gave Kate every chance to back out. Camilla was part of Charles friend circle most of his young adult life and again, right or wrong, she was the one he loved and ultimately she was the one most suited for this life.

Both of these examples sound miserable, IMO. Waity Katy suffered but she made her choice. Camilla in the wings during the entire marriage to Diana. Sounds miserable.

I agree with R507 that any married in, especially an American one, will have a difficult time, and any person rushed into marriage and family with the BRF will have a doubly rough time. That said, Meghan's narcissism and instability made her particularly unsuited for Royal life. In that, she was like Diana. Had Charles dated Diana for a year or two longer, he'd have seen that she would never work out long term as a royal consort. Had Harry done the same with Meghan, he might have come to a similar conclusion.

I never understood why the BRF rushed Charles like they did. He was only 33, and Diana was only 19. They could have taken another year or so to get to know each other better. Of course, had he done that, Diana would never have become Princess of Wales at all, and he would have had to start over again.

R513, that was in the early 1980s. At that time, maybe 33 seemed "old," even for a man. Who knows what else factored into that marriage. Maybe things with Camilla (who maybe was married to someone else at the time) were heating up too much & they needed to throw Diana in there to stop the fire.

[quote] I couldn't help but think that if it was Meghan, her favorite photographer would have accompanied her and the posed photos would be released for the world to see.

Had it been Meghan her team would’ve leaked that she was wearing an Armani coat and Gucci sunglasses.

Had Charles seemed besotted by Diana, they might have given him more time, secure in the knowledge that a proposal would be forthcoming. But in early 1981 he was still waffling over her, and Philip wrote him a letter telling him to marry her or break up with her. He chose to marry her despite his misgivings.

A lot of people say that Diana didn't know what she was getting into and at 19, I am sure she didn't know what being a princess entailed. But surely all those dreaded Christmases she spoke of at Sandringham with the BRF (her words) as a child, playing with/growing up with Andrew and Edward, growing up in Althrope would have given her an inkling of that world. I remember reading that she commented to Charles in her naiveté why he chose such a small property at Highgrove. Althrope is 100,000 sq ft of living space. She had a view into the BRF from birth that pretty much nobody other than Phillip had when marrying in. The Spencers are more English royalty than the Windors. I think with Diana, it was more about how the marriage would work. I think she was expecting the romance novel, fidelity, love, which are not out of the question to want or expect at her age. The world she had to have known.

She had a very sheltered upbringing, though. The BRF assumed an earl's daughter, for instance, would be used to sophisticated dinner parties with intelligent people. In reality, her father and stepmother rarely entertained in that fashion. Undereducated and inexperienced, she used to freeze up at dinners and be completely unable to speak with the honored guests on either side of her unless they happened to talk about something she knew (usually children). She probably didn't think about the sheer amount of emotional labor she'd need to perform: All those tours and meetings, shaking hands and accepting flowers.

She caught on fast, but like with Meghan, she experienced tremendous life changes in a very short period of time. Give her pre-existing emotional instability, it's not surprising she melted down. One could also sympathize with Meghan in this respect, except for the fact that she was much older, much better educated, and had years of experience playing a public role as an actress. Meghan and Harry also chose to date and marry on a compressed timeline, perhaps out of fertility concerns, but nonetheless, it was their decision.

[quote]I never understood why the BRF rushed Charles like they did. He was only 33

33 was a lot older back then, than it is now. Back in those days many people, of all social classes, got married young and started popping out kids early. Today, this is something only the lower classes do but not then.

A-gays, fraus, Celebitchy/Lainey cunts, if you can do one thing, please just give your children a loving, stable and supportive home. Please love them, support them, listen to them, always stand by their side, and put them first. Terrible, unstable upbringings create monsters and nothing is every enough because there is so much hurt and anger that is boiling beneath the surface with all these tragic stories. All the titles, money, palaces, fame will never replace the love of a solid family that one can always lean upon, come what may. Meghan and Diana were ultimately screaming for the love and affection they never got through various dubious actions. It all starts at home from birth. The anger and hurt never go away.

They wanted Charles married and having children ASAP, to keep Andrew away from the throne. Andrew was next in line of succession according to the rules of that time (male children of the monarch were above female children, regardless of birth order) and they all knew what an absolute disaster Andrew would be. And of course that played out a generation later when William had kids and everybody breathed a sigh of relief that Harry wouldn't be near the throne.

Which is exactly why William and his friend Skippy urged it, R512.

[quote] "Then, by the time I got to the top of the school, all my friends had boyfriends but not me, because I knew somehow that I had to keep myself very tidy for whatever was coming my way."

Diana knew that she might marry Charles some day. Keeping "tidy" means staying a virgin, which was expected at that time (1981). Charles was ambivalent about her and Charles was already a cold person to start.

I read somewhere else that Kate had a poster of William in her bedroom. I think Kate knew, as well, that she might end up in that circle.

Kate's visit to Clapham Common is really significant, since she visited after the police had banned the memorial gathering under Covid restrictions.

A royal of her standing so publicly and defiantly breaking lockdown rules sends a big message to Boris Johnson that the British people have had enough: time to re-open the country, NOW.

Kate's mother encouraged Kate to attend St. Andrews instead of the University of Edinburgh, Kate's first choice, with the hopes that Kate would meet and attract William. Of course, dozens of other mothers were doing the same that year: Female applications to St. Andrews skyrocketed after it was announced that William would go there. Only Kate won the prize.

A jolly, nurturing sort might have broken down Charles' coldness and seen Camilla off. Diana's sympathy towards him after the death of Lord Mountbatten is what first attracted Charles. He wanted a nanny/mother figure as much as he wanted a wife. It's no coincidence that his current wife and the love of his life, Camilla, bears a striking resemblance to Charles' childhood nanny.

Everyone would've been much better off if Charles and Camilla had been allowed to marry back in the 70s. It was not possible back then because Camilla had a reputation as a bit of a party girl and that was considered unsuitable. If only they'd known what was ahead!

Had they had the slightest inkling, they'd have been hustling Camilla down the aisle at Westminster Abbey faster than you can say 'boo.' The Diana dysfunction is at the heart of not only the scandals of the 80s and 90s, but the current blow-up in the BRF.

Poor Kate was asked directly at 5:43 if she had a poster on her wall of Wills growing up. It's horribly embarrassing and I felt bad for her. If you watch this video vs. M&H's engagement video, you would think Meghan was meeting Royals every day of the week. She never looked so comfortable.

So, R529, do you think Kate was lying when she denied having a picture of William on her wall (way before they got married)? It seems like William knew that Kate did have picture(s) of him on her wall.

Yeah, if I were her, I probably would have rolled with it and been like, "what can I say, you saw his photos, he was gorgeous back then," It would have made for an endearing moment, maybe. Kate was VETTED - I am sure William knows everything about her including the poster.

So that's it? We're talking about Kate's posters on a thread billed as, "Recollections May Vary: Buckingham Palace Issues a Statement, Part II"?

You want the conversation to go in another direction? Take the damn wheel, R532.

Oh, do fuck off, R437.

Why was Camilla deemed unsuitable? Was her social standing less than Diana's?

Remember when Harry jokingly asked MeAgain, in public, if the child was his?

Camilla was a party girl back then. She had a suitable enough family, but everyone knew she liked the booze and the boys. She was not "tidy" as Diana would say.

[quote]Why was Camilla deemed unsuitable? Was her social standing less than Diana's?

She was rather whorish and liked to drink and party. Not suitable at all for the Heir To the Throne.

Has this been discussed? Wish it would include succession.

Which is ironic given how much Charles and Diana both slutted around during the marriage.

[quote] The Spencers are more English royalty than the Windors [sic].

Only in the Althorp Chronicles R517.

DM really enjoys stirring the pot. They're now running another "James Hewitt Goes Shopping" set of photos. All that's missing is a "Spot the Likeness?" caption.

r477 for the win.

r479 see r477. When the current round of mayhem subsides, look to them to go about creating another round of mayhem and drama to keep themselves occupied and in the spotlight.

Here's a timeline of Camilla.

1973: married to Andrew Parker Bowles.

1981: Charles & Di wed. (Camilla is married at this point.)

1995: Camilla and Andrew announce they will be divorced.

[quote]I liked Meghan for the silly drama, but loathe her now not just b/c of what she did to the Royals, but how she added gasoline to the fire of our own tensions here in the US

This, 100%. H&M have not just stirred shit with their own relatives, giving us the front row seat while they do so. They've blown up tensions not only within the States, but between the US and UK with all the finger-pointing about race, class snobbery, bullying and the like. During a time when we need to be coming together and working on solutions to issues like the pandemic. They should both be slapped silly.

I thought Camilla had her eyes on Andrew Parker Bowles rather than Prince Charles at the start.

These are the scenes tonight at the illegal vigil for Sarah Everard at Clapham Common bandstand, where Kate visited earlier today. This is incendiary stuff.

I would say Kate has single-handedly rescued the BRF from the Markle business, and has elevated herself into the pantheon of greats.

Markle, on the other hand, sits in a comfortable chair beside Oprah, and blathers on about bullshit.

Harry is delusional or straight up lying. There are many photos of his parents playing with him as a child, including biking. Some are 5+, an age that people remember.

That's not a candid shot.

So r549. Nothing Harry and Meghan does is an unplanned candid shot either. NOTHING. Does that mean their lives aren't what they portray they are?

Meghan is quite a shit stirrer herself. She and the DM deserve each other.

[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.]

[quote] only to have the door slammed on her and the flowers immediately binned.

R552 are you telling us that Meghan had to open her own front door? That, in and of itself, is sheer discrimination.

You have to laugh, that alleged door slam scene is right out of Dynasty. And in the face of the future Queen of England yet! The balls on Meghan if true, haha holy shit. Not very...what’s the word....kind.

It’s always juicy when a paper uses the sly term “can reveal.”

r552 What a petty angry person Meghan is.

Oh just a small correction Camilla Tominey works for the Daily Telegraph not the times but she is excellent on royal stuff and has great sources.

R552 So Melissa Toubati was there. Interesting.

R501, she's an amalgamation of every conceivable Disney princess!

Ariel: lost her voice

Rapunzel: locked in an ivory tower

Snow White: victim of the wicked old Queen

Cinderella: slaved away at Humphrey Yogart, went to the ball (Hollywood), and ultimately landed a prince

Belle: saved an isolated prince who was trapped in his castle by teaching him to LOVE

Jasmine: has an obese, rather slow-witted father; tamed a lovable ne'er-do-well

Elsa: was villainised by the public; had to conceal her true feelings before letting it GOOOOO via the medium of Oprah

Alice: fell into an eccentric English world and had to find her way home (except Alice isn't a princess, but you catch my drift)

That video at R547 is very upsetting. I need to read more about this. I don't think I quite understand the magnitude or scope of the situation. Everything is making me teary today and I'm not a frau. I'm a hot 40 year old who barely looks 25! Kate made THE right appearance today. This is from the gods, the timing of the event and Kate's "non-appearance" to pay tribute.

Meghan just seems like a high-maintenance nightmare who is impossible to please. That's not going to work in her favor in Hollywood. People in the business will avoid working with a person who has that kind of reputation, it's not worth the drama. And potential lawsuits.

I really like Kate (I realize I don't know her). Despite being a princess, her life doesn't seem that easy, but she did make her choices. I would love to see her step into her own personality as she gets older. Would love to see her enjoy her life and find meaning aside from being married to William.

Kate made her choices and she's owned them. Whatever the rules of her marriage to William, whatever issues they may or may not have had, she shows up, does the job, and keeps private business private. It's exactly what's required in a Princess of Wales and a future Queen consort. Anyone who thinks the Cambridge marriage will be anything but till-death-to-they-part has not been paying attention.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Harry married several times. Since he'll never be a working royal again, it won't affect the monarchy one bit.

I'll probably rot in hell for this, but I would not be able to stop laughing in his face if I met that Scobie creature. What the actual fuck.

Hollywood only tolerates assholes if they deliver, and even successful moguls can only get away with kicking down, not up. Meghan seems to ghost or backstab anyone who doesn't worship her, and that's not going to play well in a business that is based so much on connections and personal relationships.

[quote]Everyone would've been much better off if Charles and Camilla had been allowed to marry back in the 70s.

Not to be too gay but can you imagine what the kids would have looked like?

Diana did inject much-needed height and looks into the family (even if both sons hit a wall by 30, at least they had a dozen or so hot years). But she also injected the crazy, unfortunately. Harry seems to have all of his mother's emotional instability and then some.

[quote]I'll probably rot in hell for this, but I would not be able to stop laughing in his face if I met that Scobie creature. What the actual fuck.

He's had so much horrible work done, he looks like an alien.

What's it going to take to get Charlotte talking?

Ok, Charlotte, at your dress fitting did Mummy or Aunt Meghan cry? Tell the truth and I'll give you a whole Cadbury Milk Tray.

I have a strategy, Mike. Back off. And BTW, your ankles suggest heart disease.

Maybe they both cried after the incident, just not in each other’s presence. Boo hoo hoo! God, I wish there was video.

Charlotte was a bridesmaid 4 or 5 times within about a year and a half. (Pippa, her godmother, Harry and Eugenie.

My theory about the dress upset is that Charlotte took one look at the awful dress she was going to have to wear to the Sussex wedding and tried to bolt.

Here are pictures of Charlotte in 4 of the 5 bridesmaid dresses. The dress for the Sussex wedding is the least attractive.

Honestly, they don't look that different to me.

I remember seeing that dress on that day and I was shocked at how badly designed it was.

No tights. Eww

Rumor that she called Charlotte "fat" when the dress did not fit.

.....

[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 many Harkle lawsuits are risky and expensive. No wonder he is dipping into the capital of his trust. Idiots.

Has this been posted?

This person is a lawyer and royal commentator. She has some interesting articles on her page. Opinion but informed opinion.

So what kind of pre-nup do you think they have? Also, being married in the UK- do they have a 1/2 property clause like they do in California. or after 10 years in the rest of the States? She will take all his land and money with 2 kids with a quickness.

R581 It's utterly crazy but allegedly the royal do not have prenups. So if they get divorced, it would likely be under California law.

R579 Thanks - made me smile today!

R579 - That's a truncated version (with different audio) of a nice video/TMobile ad celebrating William and Kate's wedding.

Note how it stops right as the character William points to the back of the "church"? In the original, that is where "Kate" enters.

Here's the original from 2011.

Thanks for that commentary, R580.

I clearly remember that event. What shocked me was that at one point Kate started to say something and Meghan interrupted and just talked right over her. Kate looked shocked and put her head down.

Sparkle's behavior there reinforced my opinion of her after seeing the way she treated Harry in the Engagement Interview. Same kind of pushing the other person out of the way so she could be center stage.

My Bullshit Meter went into the red zone at the Engagement Interview (and it has remained so) and it was obvious right at the start of this ugly saga that Sparkle had no intention of actually joining the team.

That same behavior manifest itself later when you could see her actually push Harry out of the way so she could go first.

She never intended to actually do the job she signed up for.

Personally, I suspect the Royal Family's reaction to hearing that Harry might be leaning towards marrying Meghan was probably something like:

"Oh! She's mixed race! Good! This family could use some new blood!"

Followed by...

"Oh. She's American. Oh, dear....that's worrisome."

and:

"Oh. And, an actress. On basic cable. In Canada. Oh, that can't be good..."

Everyone had MM's number when they saw her in the £54,000 dress in her engagement photo. The future could not have been broadcast more clearly..

Thanks, R580, for that. I also enjoyed her bingo cards for the Oprah interview. She did a good job of predicting the topics that would be discussed.

The Daily Beast is reporting that Kate will be called to give evidence in the bullying investigation.

Implying that it was indeed Kate who was made to cry, and not "Tungsten" Meghan.

This explains why they made so much fuss in the interview about keeping chickens. They were intentionally signalling to Charles that they were interested in his obsession with chickens. Presumably to endear themselves and somehow get more money from him.

YouGov, November 2017

Five charts on Brits' reaction to the Royal Engagement:

1. "Older people, conservatives and women are the most pleased by Prince Harry's engagement to Meghan Markle"

2. "Almost 2 to 1 Britons want Meghan Markle to have a normal job after marrying Prince Harry"

3. "Half of Britons have a positive view of Markle"

4. "Overwhelmingly Brits are not bothered by the fact that Markle is not British, divorced and mixed-race – though they are split over the prospect of a same-sex royal marriage"

5. "Wills and Kate are seen as the best future King and Queen"

2017: The BRF reacted to the engagement with "an outpouring of jubilation", according to the USA's Today Show

"It's marvellous"

The BRF response to Harry and Meghan's engagement

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle: Engagement interview

William and Kate Engagement interview

Prince Harry was "very close" to Kate Middleton before Meghan

The Cambridge children wish Diana a Happy Mother's Day.

And yet Meghan hasn't spoken to Kate in "over a year"

Harry and William were always reputed to have held Mothering Sunday as a kind of holiday where they both would meet and remember.

No longer.

And with that single tweet, r597, the Cambridges have taken full possession of Diana's memory out of the grasping hands of her faking re-liver, Meghan.

Not bad.