UK Journo: Insane Megstans harassed, threatened, stalked and abused me for covering the Sussexes

I will post the entire thing here in a bit.

Telegraph Magazine MArch 27, 2021

Harry, Meghan and me: my truth as a royal reporter

By Camilla Tominey

I've covered elections and extremism, but nothing compares to the vitriol I've received since I started writing about the Sussexes

It is probably worth mentioning from the outset that I never, ever, planned to become a royal reporter. I mean, who does? It’s one of those ridiculous jobs most people fall into completely by accident. I certainly wasn’t coveting the position when I first found out how bonkers the beat could be after coveringCharles and Camilla’s wedding in 2005. Desperate for ‘a line’ on what went on at the reception, journalists were reduced to flagging down passing cars in Windsor High Street and interrogating the likes of Stephen Fry about whether they’d had the salmon or the chicken. Watergate, this wasn’t.

Yet when my former editor called me into his office shortly afterwards and offered me the royal job ‘because you’re called Camilla and you dress nicely’, who was I to refuse? Having planned to get married myself that summer, and start a family soon afterwards, I looked to the likes of Jennie Bond and Penny Junor and figured it would be a good patch for a working mother as well as being one I could grow old with. Unlike show business, when celebrities are ‘in’ one minute and ‘out’ the next, the royals would stay the same, making it easier to build – and keep – contacts.

So if you’d told me that 16 years later, I would find myself at the centre of a media storm over a royal interview with Oprah Winfrey, I’d have probably laughed in your face. First of all, only royals like Fergie do interviews with Oprah. And since when did journalists become the story?

[Continued]

Yet as I have experienced since the arrival of Meghan Markle on the royal scene in 2016 – a move that roughly coincided with Twitter doubling its 140-character limitation to 280 – royal reporters like me now find themselves in the line of fire like never before.

We are used to the likes of Kate Adie coming under attack in the Middle East, but now it is the correspondents who write up events like Trooping the Colour and the Royal Windsor Horse Show having to take cover from the keyboard warriors supposedly defending the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s ‘truth’.

Accusations of racism have long been levelled against anyone who has dared to write less than undiluted praise of Harry and Meghan. But even I have been taken aback by the vitriol on social media in the wake of the couple’s televised two-hour talk-a-thon, in which they branded both the Royal family and the British press racist while complaining about their ‘almost unsurvivable’ multimillionaire lives at the hands of the evil monarchy.

And all while the rest of the UK were losing their loved ones and livelihoods in a global pandemic.

Having covered Brexit, general elections and stories about Islamic extremism, I’ve grown used to being sprayed with viral vomit on a fairly regular basis, but when you’ve got complete strangers trolling your best friend’s Instagram feed by association? That’s Britney Spears levels of toxic.

[Continued]

Having a hind thicker than a rhino’s, it wasn’t the repeated references to my being ‘a total c—’ that particularly bothered me, nor even the suggestion that I should have my three children put up for adoption. At one point someone even said it would be a good idea for me to drink myself to death like my mother, about whose chronic alcoholism I have written extensively.

No, what really got me was the appalling spelling and grammar. I mean, if you’re going to hurl insults, at least have the decency to get my name right.

Yet in order to understand just how it has come to pass that so-called #SussexSquaders think nothing of branding all royal correspondents ‘white supremacists’ regardless of who they write for, or sending hate mail to our email addresses, offices – and in some cases, even our homes – it’s worth briefly going to back to when I first broke the story that Prince Harry was dating an American actor in the Sunday Express on 31 October 2016. Headlined: ‘Royal world exclusive: Harry’s secret romance with TV star’, the splash revealed how the popular prince was ‘secretly dating a stunning US actress, model and human rights campaigner’.

Despite my now apparently being on a par with the Ku Klux Klan for failing to acknowledge Meghan as the next messiah, it was actually not until the fifteenth paragraph of that original article that the ‘confident and intelligent’ Northwestern University graduate was described as ‘the daughter of an African-American mother and a father of Dutch and Irish descent’.

Call me superficial, but I was genuinely far more interested in the fact that Harry ‘I-come-with-baggage’ Wales was dating a former ‘briefcase girl’ from the US version of Deal or No Deal than the colour of her skin. A ginger prince punching well above his weight? This was the stuff of tabloid dreams. Little did I know then that covering the trials and tribulations of these two lovebirds would turn into such a nightmare.

[Continued]

The online hostility began bubbling up about eight days after that first story, when Harry’s then communications secretary Jason Knauf issued an ‘unprecedented’ statement accusing the media of ‘crossing a line’.

‘His girlfriend, Meghan Markle, has been subject to a wave of abuse and harassment’, it read, referencing a ‘smear on the front page of a national newspaper; the racial undertones of comment pieces; and the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments’. Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, had apparently been besieged by photographers, while bribes had been offered to Meghan’s ex-boyfriend along with ‘the bombardment of nearly every friend, coworker, and loved one in her life’.

Suffice to say, I did feel a bit guilty. Although I hadn’t written anything remotely racist or sexist, I had started the ball rolling for headlines like the MailOnline’s ‘(Almost) straight outta Compton’ (referencing a song by hip-hop group NWA about gang violence and Meghan’s upbringing in the nearby LA district of Crenshaw), along with her ‘exotic’ DNA (which I subsequently called out, including on This Morning in the wake of ‘Megxit’ in January last year).

Omid Scobie, co-author of Finding Freedom, a highly favourable account of the Sussexes’ departure from the Royal family, written with their cooperation last summer, would later insist that the couple knew the story of their relationship was coming out and were well prepared for it.

I can tell you categorically that they weren’t, since I did not even put a call into Kensington Palace before we went to press for fear of it being leaked. (I did later discuss this with Harry, when I covered his trip to the Caribbean in November 2016, and to be fair he was pretty philosophical, agreeing it would have come out sooner or later. But that was before the former Army Captain decided to well and truly shoot the messenger, latterly telling journalists covering the newly-weds’ tax-payer-funded October 2018 tour of Australia and the south Pacific: ‘Thanks for coming, even though you weren’t invited.’)

[Continued]

The royal press pack is the group of dedicated writers who cover all the official engagements and tours on a rota system, in exchange for not bothering the royals as they go about their private business. It was a shame this ragtag bunch, of which I am an associate member, was never personally introduced to Meghan when the couple got engaged in November 2017.

I still have fond memories of a then Kate Middleton, upon her engagement to Prince William in November 2010, showing me her huge sapphire and diamond ring following a press conference at St James’s Palace with the words, ‘It was William’s mother’s so it is very special.’

I replied that she might want to consider buying ‘one of those expanding accordion style file holders’ to organise all her wedding paperwork. (Reader, I had given birth to my second child less than four months earlier and was still lactating.)

Not meeting Meghan did not stop royal commentators like me writing reams about her being ‘a breath of fresh air’ and telling practically every TV show I appeared on that she was the ‘best thing to have happened to the Royal Family in years’.

As the world followed the joyous news of the Windsors’ resident strip billiards star having finally found ‘the one’, the couple enjoyed overwhelmingly positive press culminating in their fairy-tale wedding in May 2018, which we headlined ‘So in love’ above a picture of the bride and groom kissing. I tweeted the wedding front page, along with the original story breaking the news of their relationship with the words, ‘Job done’. Yet, as Meghan would later point out in a glossy Santa Barbara garden, that was by far the end of the story.

FF Klan Granny...

Are you happy? That's the only reason you posted this was to get that reaction. Now, fuck off

[Continued]

According to the Duchess’s testimony before a global audience of millions, the seeds for their royal departure were actually sown by an article I wrote in November 2018 suggesting she made Kate cry during a bridesmaid’s dress fitting for Princess Charlotte.

Claiming the ‘reverse happened’, the former Suits star railed, ‘A few days before the wedding she was upset about something, pertaining to, yes, the issue was correct, about flower-girl dresses, and it made me cry, and it really hurt my feelings.’

She then went on to criticise the palace for failing to correct the story – suggesting that royal aides had hung her out to dry to protect the Duchess of Cambridge.

All of which left me in a bit of a sticky situation. As I told Phillip Schofield on This Morning the following day, ‘I don’t write things I don’t believe to be true and that haven’t been really well sourced.’

Having seemingly been completely bowled over by Meghan’s version of events, Schofield then went for the jugular: ‘I have to say, though, that’s all addressed in that interview, isn’t it, because she [Meghan] couldn’t understand why nobody stood up for her?’

Yet someone had stood up for her, on that very same This Morning sofa: me.

As I told Phil and Holly on 14 January 2019, as more reports of ‘Duchess Difficult’ started to emerge, ‘I think she [Meghan] is doing really well, she looks amazing, she speaks well. She has played a blinder.’

[Continued]

So you’ll forgive me if I can’t quite understand why Meghan didn’t feel the need to correct this supposedly glaring error once she had her own dedicated head of communications from March 2019 – or indeed when she ‘collaborated’ with Scobie, who concluded in his bestselling hagiography that ‘no one cried’?

Moreover, how did the Duchess know a postnatal Kate wasn’t ‘left in tears’? And if she doesn’t know, what hope has the average troll observing events through the prism of their own deep-rooted insecurities? It appears the actual truth ceases to matter once sides have been taken in the unedifying Team Meghan versus Team Kate battle that has divided the internet.

Make no mistake, there are abject morons at both extremes spewing the sort of bile that, ironically, makes most of the media coverage of Harry and Meghan look like a 1970s edition of Jackie magazine.

It perhaps didn’t help my case that the day before the interview was aired in the US, I had written a lengthy piece carefully weighing up the evidence behind allegations of ‘outrageous bullying’ that had been levelled against Meghan during what proved to be a miserable 20 months in the Royal family for all concerned.

The messages – to my Twitter feed, my email, my website and official Facebook page – ranged from the threatening, to the typical tropes about media ‘scum’ and the downright bizarre. Some accused me of being in cahoots with Carole Middleton, with whom I have never interacted, unless you count a last-minute Party Pieces purchase in a desperate moment of poor parental planning.

[Continued]

[3 Pictured Megstan tweets]

"The world will be a better place without ppl like you"

"Camilla Tominey is the most racist bitch in the UK"

"I hope one day you suffer pain just as much as you cause this family with your lies and half truths"

Another frequent barb was questioning why the press wasn’t writing about that ‘pedo’ [sic] Prince Andrew instead – seemingly oblivious to the fact that no one would know about the Duke of York’s links to Jeffrey Epstein if it wasn’t for the acres of coverage devoted to the story by us royal hacks over recent years.

It didn’t matter that I had repeatedly torn the Queen’s second, and, some say, favourite son to pieces for everything from his propensity to take his golf clubs on foreign tours to that disastrous Newsnight interview.

Contrary to the ‘invisible contract’ Harry claims the palace has with the press, royal coverage works roughly like this: good royal deeds = good publicity. Bad royal deeds = bad publicity. We effectively act as a critical friend, working on behalf of a public that rightly expects the royals to take the work – but not themselves – seriously.

So when a royal couple preaches about climate change before taking four private jets in 11 days, it is par for the course for a royal scribe to point out the inconsistency of that message. None of it is ever personal, as evidenced by the fact that practically every member of the monarchy has come in for flak over the years.

If Oprah wasn’t willing to point out the discrepancies in Harry and Meghan’s testimony, surely it is beholden on royal reporters to question how the Duchess had managed to undertake four foreign holidays in the six months after her wedding, in addition to official tours to Italy, Canada, and Amsterdam, as well as embarking on a lengthy honeymoon, if she had ‘turned over’ her passport?

While no one would wish to undermine the extent of her mental health problems, could it really be true that she only left the house twice in four months when she managed to cram in 73 days’ worth of engagements, according to the Court Circular, in the 17 months between her wedding and the couple’s departure to Canada?

[Continued]

And what of the ‘racist’ headlines flashed up during the interview purporting to be from the British press, when more than a third were actually taken from independent blogs and the foreign media? The UK media abides by the Independent Press Standards Organisation’s Code of Conduct ‘to avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s race’, as well as by rigorous defamation laws. And rightly so – the British press doesn’t always get it right. But social media is the Wild West by comparison, publishing vile slurs on a daily basis with impunity.

Some therefore find it strange that such a litigious couple would claim to have been ‘silenced’ when they have made so many complaints, including resorting to legal action, over stories they claim not to have even read. There is something similarly contradictory about a couple accusing the tabloids of lacking self-reflection while refusing to take any blame at all – for anything.

In any normal world, informed writing on such matters would be classed as fair comment, but not, seemingly, on Twitter where those completely lacking any objectivity whatsoever are only too willing to virtue signal and manoeuvre.

[Continued]

As the trolling reached fever pitch in the aftermath of the interview, veteran royal reporter Robert Jobson of the Evening Standard called me. ‘Don’t respond to these freaks,’ he advised. ‘It’s getting nasty out there. Watch your back!’

Yet despite my general sense of bewilderment at the menacing Megbots, I can’t say it didn’t appal me to discover a close friend had received online abuse, purely by dint of being my mate. After discussing the lengths the troll must have gone to to track her down, she asked me, ‘Do you ever worry someone might do something awful to you?’ Er, not until now, no.

Of course it’s upsetting, even for a cynical old-timer like me. Worse still are people who actually know me casting aspersions on my profession on social media. Often these are the same charlatans who would think nothing of sidling up to me for the latest gossip on the Royal family, while publicly pretending that reading any such coverage is completely beneath them.

Most pernicious of all though – not least after Piers Morgan’s departure from Good Morning Britain following a complaint to ITV and Ofcom from the Duchess – is the corrosive effect this whole hullabaloo is having on freedom of speech. When you’ve got a former actor effectively editing a British breakfast show from an £11 million Montecito mansion, what next?

I cannot help but think we are in danger of setting race relations back 30 years if people are seriously suggesting that any criticism of Meghan is racially motivated. It’s the hypocrisy that gets me. When Priti Patel was accused of bullying, the very same people who willingly hung the Home Secretary out to dry are now the ones defending Meghan against such claims, saying they have been levelled at her simply because she is ‘a strong woman of colour’.

[Continued]

Of course journalists should take responsibility for everything they report and be held to account for it – but Harry and Meghan do not have a monopoly on the truth simply because the close friend and neighbour who interviewed them in return for £7 million from CBS took what they said as gospel.

If she isn’t willing to probe the disparity between Meghan saying someone questioned the colour of Archie’s skin when she was pregnant, and Harry suggesting it happened before they were even married, then someone must. There’s a name for such scrutiny. It’s called journalism.

The public reserves the right to make up its own mind – with the help of the watchful eye of a free and fair press. But that press can never be free or fair if journalists do not feel they can report without fear or favour. I’m lucky that a lot of the criticism I face is more than balanced out by hugely supportive members of the public and online community who either agree – or respect the right to disagree. Along with the hate mail, I have had many thoughtful and eloquent missives, including those that good naturedly challenge what I have written in the paper or said on TV, which have genuinely given me pause for thought.

I am more than happy to enter into constructive discourse with these correspondents, who are frankly sometimes the only people who keep me on Twitter. I mean, let’s face it, I wouldn’t be anywhere near the bloody thing if this wasn’t my day job.

With the National Union of Journalists this month declaring that harassment and abuse had ‘become normalised’ within the industry, never have members of Britain’s press needed more courage. As Winston Churchill famously said, ‘You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.’

Who would have thought that the preservation of the fundamental freedoms that we hold so dear should partially rest on the shoulders of those who follow around a 94-year-old woman and her family for a living?

If I’d known then what I know now, would I still have written the bridesmaid’s dress story?

Yes – doubtlessly reflecting sisterly sobs all round. But after two decades in this business, I am clear-eyed enough to know this for certain: whatever I had written, it would still have ended in tears.

- By Camilla Tominey, Associate Editor, Daily Telegraph

Take your stinky pussy back to the Isle of Misery in the not so great Britain

We see you...

Poor Megstan r14. Are you triggered by the Daily Telegraph telling the truth about your insanity, dear?

Take your sister too...

So, so, so TRIGGERED

Don't forget your daughter...

The thing that's truly astonishing with these Megstans is the fact they don't seem to realize that their nasty behaviour reflects terribly BADLY on their heroine Meghan.

Gee - a journalists gets a small sample of the treatment dished out to Harry and Meg.

I don't have any sympathy. The 'journalists' in the British Press love to tear down people all the time in the most vicious ways.

This woman is complicit and she knows it. She's just like Piers and upset that she's been called out. Fuck her.

... and your bastard son

[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.]

“Royal reporters” and “experts” are some of the biggest hacks in the world. Completely useless, unnecessary and fake.

Pretty much every public figure is receiving “threats”, “harassment”, etc. especially Meghan and Harry. Welcome to the club.

Your boyfriend too with those fabulous British teeth

Just 25 comments in and half of the entire thread is already missing due to me having blocked some truly deranged Mehgain fan. LOL.

You're right, r19. It is amazing that they don't seem to realize how terrible they make Meghan look.

But I also love it when they get so riled up. It's hilarious and so cringe.

The author of the piece said that she got more abuse and harassment from Megstans than she got from internet jihadis when she was covering terror attacks, r23.

Just think on that for a moment.

How long will it be before one of the Megstans makes good on all their many threats and finally physically hurts one of these people?

Your news "source"...

We read that story about you...

Go away with your Megan threads. Just go away.

R27

You’re a biased troll. You’ve never said the same for the people who hate Meghan. Reporters like her were literally riling up extreme hate against Meghan and you didn’t care then.

Regardless of the topic, I am tired to DEATH of journalists like this lady who insert themselves into the stories. She sounds like she saw the attention Piers and Sharon were getting and was desperate to get a slice of that action.

These days, tabloid and political journalists who say they've been harassed usually mean "I got 12 nasty tweets from accounts that weren't even an hour old."

The journalists who REALLY get harassed must absolutely loathe people like this Camilla woman.

Miss Klan Granny 2021

r30, it's up to you to press the block button if you don't like it. Nothing to do with me.

r31, Give me a direct quote from this Telegraph woman in which she "was literally riling up extreme hate" for Meghan. Just one. I know you won't because I'm certain that there isn't one.

Miss Klan Granny runner-up

The Meghan and Harry threads on here wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the unhinged Klan Granny Accusers. They accuse anyone who doesn't particularly like or support Meghan of being British and a member of the Klan, but the Klan doesn't exist in Britain and the vast majority of anti-Meghan posts aren't British.

Klan Granny goes on holiday...

Oh it’s the Telegraph. Bye.

That's exactly what the entire article is about, r36. This woman works for the Telegraph. Not a tabloid. And she's describing what everyone on the DL who wants to talk about the Harkle Debacle is subjected to by these lunatics. It's amazing how similar her experience is to ours. I just wish she had mentioned the phrase "Klan Granny." Then she'd be in the DL hall of fame.

But next time one of these freaks tries to pressure Muriel, as they have been trying extra hard to do these few weeks since the disastrous Oprah interview, I'm going to email Muriel a copy of this article with some screen grabs of the kind of abuse we non-Megstans face on here.

Remember when the Star ran that story on you?

Your Nazi Queen...

So is the entire Isle of Misery

It's pretty easy: Cancel you subscriptions if nothing will be done about these deranged Megstans here.

Haven't you noticed? These loons only post when they can - when it's non-subscriber time, that is. When they can post here, they do so in posting a plethora of their diatribes. At other times (subscriber postings only) there are literally no such new postings for several hours.

Keep going, Megstans.

The fact that one of the top editors at one of the top newspapers in the world has pointed out that you behave disgustingly to anyone who even mildly disagrees with you is very gratifying to see. It's now a matter of permanent record.

I'm also very pleased to see that you are made so upset by it, too. Touched a nerve, did it?

R27 - yes - of course she would get more pushback than reporting Jihadi terrorism. That's a fucking fact - they blow shit up and then they take credit for it. Plus they want the press.

If she was fabricating articles about Jihadi's lifestyles and personal life, then yeah - they may come after her.

What a stupid thing to compare to. She truly is an idiot.

British jihadis are very vocal and very abusive on twitter, especially to reporters who cover terror attacks, r45. (But you're just some American frau who worships Meghan Markle so how could one expect someone like you to know that?)

And STILL, the author says that the Megstans are MORE abusive than the jihad supporters. She doesn't just say that - she says it in the opening blurb. It's the theme of the article.

And here you are saying "So what? Being more abusive than jihadis is not so bad. She's an idiot."

This kind of response merely underscores why I am convinced that one or more of you will one day make good on all those death threats I see you Sussexsquad types leaving all over twitter for British journalists.

Something else to think about...in the past, Meghan has praised the Sussex Squad nut jobs who are the very same people who threaten others who don't think their Goddess is perfect.

All of you seem unhinged and nutso, both Megan supporters and haters.

Only one side is making threats to other people, r48. Read the article.

[quote]Accusations of racism have long been levelled against anyone who has dared to write less than undiluted praise of Harry and Meghan. But even I have been taken aback by the vitriol on social media in the wake of the couple’s televised two-hour talk-a-thon, in which they branded both the Royal family and the British press racist while complaining about their ‘almost unsurvivable’ multimillionaire lives at the hands of the evil monarchy.

And all while the rest of the UK were losing their loved ones and livelihoods in a global pandemic.

Having covered Brexit, general elections and stories about Islamic extremism, I’ve grown used to being sprayed with viral vomit on a fairly regular basis, but when you’ve got complete strangers trolling your best friend’s Instagram feed by association?

This sums them up. This is who they are. Angry vermin.

Love the headlines...

But Pedo Andy! And but Kate's skirt! And RACISM! And rescue chickens!!!!!!

R49 - you truly are stupid. I get that you look for anything to support your unfounded hate of the Sussexes. Nobody here is defending Harry and Meghan to the last breath - it's just that we don't understand all the abuse they've been given and why you keep piling on.

You know nothing about British Jihadis who attack journalists online - you're just making that shit up. Secondly, all we have is this one woman's account of abuse she has received. That's one side of the story.

If journalists want to say they have the right to express their opinion, then the public has the right to express theirs towards journalists who write sensationalized, unfounded articles slamming the Sussexes.

This woman is a petty cry baby bitch who, like the rest of the British media, get outraged when they are on the receiving end of the same vitriol they themselves put out there.

Whatever happened to her?... Oh, yeah

This guy knows...

Watch out, Kate, you're next...

Here's an entire 80-page monograph on online jihadis' interaction with people who they consider their enemies. There's an entire section devoted to British online jihad supporters.

How was I able to find this so quickly? Because this was the subject of my MA, you twat r53. I still have it right on my desktop.

R43, no one posts about Meghan Markle when Primetime is on. It's the Meghan haters who don't pay, and when they're gone, the topic doesn't even come up.

Yes, there are a couple of Meghan fans, but at least one is an obvious troll that you guys just can't figure out; they're not a real fan, they just like saying things about how she's a "literal goddess" because it makes you so mad.

The thing is, you guys call anyone who doesn't hate MM a "Megstan." I posted a link to a Guardian article about Andrew in one thread because some Meghan hater had been mistaken (or lying) about something, and within 5 minutes multiple people were calling me a "Megstan" and "paid PR" and a "Sparkle." I'd said nothing about MM whatsoever. You do that kind of thing to nearly everyone.

Always knew Chuck was one of us...

He sure is...

That's funny, r58, I just troll-blocked you and you have at least 50 posts in the last 2 weeks, all defending Meghan.

You're clearly a rabidly frothing Megstan, however much you may be claiming now that you're merely a 'casual observer who simply doesn't hate'.

Spare us.

ps I have no idea when PrimeTime is. I've been a paying member for over 7 years.

I wish...

R57 - so you actually just did a search on ISIS twitter and linked to an American article that doesn't actually talk about how British journalists are targeted.

Yeah right. I'm so sure this was your MA.

You're fucking insane - get a hobby, get a life.

Wait until Harry blows the lid off this...

Sorry, what? Rand happens to be one of the top resources on my topic. Everyone in this field all over the world uses Rand.

God. You Megstans really are still in high school. You just demonstrated that you don't understand basic research.

Good luck with your SATs, r63, and enjoy Community College, if you manage to get into one.

[quote]That's funny, r58, I just troll-blocked you and you have at least 50 posts in the last 2 weeks, all defending Meghan.

As I was saying on another thread this morning, the trolls lately have been making outlandish claims like this, hoping people will blindly believe their lies.

You don't even know what it's called. There's nothing called "troll-block."

Anyway, quote one defense of Meghan of mine that you say you found. Just one, tell me what the thread is and quote some or all of the "defense." Thanks.

She makes everybody sick

Not a moment too soon..

I'm not wasting my time cutting and pasting your fanatical Megstan drivel, r66.

You're all over the Piers Morgan threads (both of them), the "What do people want from the Royal family" thread, the thread about the British begging the Harkles to delay the interview for Philip, and now you're all over this one. Tons of posts and every single one of your posts is either criticising people who call Meghan out for any reason, or defending her.

Anyone who wants a look at your wibbling can subscribe to those threads and troll block you from here.

Good!

[R53] As a yank I wasn't too interested in royals. The entire British empire was established & prospered on racism. By extension so. does the US empire. Despite this what little foundation we have is in a constitutional decrees NO INHERITED TITLES.

You'll forgive me if I don't consider your precious prince on moral high ground when he comes to this country yet clings to his title. Why would he? And I'm a touch wary of any fellow American in her 30s who thought they'd fit into this rigid, no doubt racist, entitled family. I've yet to meet one.

Then there's the mansions they live in while peons are losing their jobs and the roofs over their heads. And on the subject of racism we have renewed our bombing-the-fuck-out-of-Syria campaign. There are lots of dark folk there. Syria has ever attacked the U.S. To the best of my understanding its an illegal war.

Does Harry know or care? Does Meghan? How about Oprah and the media generally?

Yawn!

Which one of you Klan Grannies gave birth to this?

Kate is such a whore...

re [R71] that should have read: 'Syria has *never* attacked

[quote]I'm not wasting my time cutting and pasting your fanatical Megstan drivel, r66.

You lied and can't find even one post where I defended Meghan Markle, let alone the 50 you claim you found. Might as well just admit it at this point.

[quote]you're all over this one.

I'm not "all over" this thread, I've posted three times, this is the fourth. Anyone who knows how to use ignore can verify this easily, so why you're bothering to lie about it is beyond me.

I don’t think the Megstans even particularly care about Meghan. By being a stan, they have an “excuse” to act out their pent up feelings of anger and frustration on strangers without having to fear for retaliation.

The Megstans are SO angry today. It's hilarious.

Back in early Sussex days, I used to sign "Run, Meghan, Run" on my posts. It wasn't that I was a stan at all, but knew that family would be destructive and racist a long time before the shit hit the fan.

I'm glad they left, but haven't spent a minute worrying about them since. What I'm most interested in is the downfall of that racist institution called the monarchy. Their whole foundation is built upon white supremacy and I'm pleased to see it eroding faster and further the more the fools open their mouths and defend the indefensible.

Return what you have stolen. Admit to the genocidal policies of your past and become the free people you have always wanted to be. You can do it, Britain!

She can't stand baldilocks...

All her ugly is pushing it's way out...

The Queen hates everybody...

all that effort that Ma Middleton made to embiggen her girl and look what happens! The other Duchess says one thing, a few sentences, and all that work in T&C and People goes down the tubes and now she's a liability

William throws her under the bus and remains unmarried to ascend the throne upon Granny's death. Charles has died of whatever is killing him already and Willileaks is so unpopular that when George comes of age, he renounces the throne to dance in the ballet.

r77, I think it's partially that, but there is real racism in the Megstans. They like her purely because her mother is 75% black. That's it. They're, in the main, frothing racists. But there's a subset who especially admire that Meghan is so badly behaved- they especially like her when they see her act out because they themselves would like to act out that way.

The Megh loon usually posts three times in a row.

How do I know?

Because there are always three posts in a row missing due to me having blocked that deranged fuckwit.

OP, we’re fully capable of clicking on a link. Copying and pasting is actually copyright infringement.

I hit block on one poster and nearly the entire thread disappears.

Prince Pedo...

Praying Harry and Meghan die in a grease fire.

“Your truth?? Your little twisted arsewipe truth?!?!”

Hi Mama/R89!

Waiting for the Telegraph to expose Harry as a diaper fetishist.

Markle and Hazbo rang up the megbot who doxed several people for not worshipping at the altar. It's some kind of prestige to them.

They are not royal anymore so have lost most of what was interesting about them; the Harkles are now just another pair of untalented lying hypocrites lurching around Hollywood. Harry is fronting a $400/month mental health subscription plan now....too bad he hadn't signed up when he wife was supposedly "suicidal" and the Palace refused her luxury spa treatment. You couldn't make up the idiocy.

Sorry, I can't be bothered to read all through the thread, but I just wanted to take this opportunity to say how much I very much hate the race-baiting trailer trash psycho Meghan Markle. Thank you.

So true...

Hi Willie!/R94! Mama is already here!

I don't hate Meghan. She's an asshole and a grifter, but hey, she provides tons of gossip.

I do hate her halfwitted retard stans though. I think I've never seen such a dumb bunch of 'fans' before.

Yes. r93. The fact that the Sussexes are on record as having phoned the leading Megstans to signal their approval of the "SussexSquad" and their abusive online tactics will come back to bite Ginge and Cringe when one of those Megstans eventually act on their threats to harm a Harkle critic.

Lying Brits...

Let's not forget the avocado...

Hi Daddy!!!!!/R97 - everyone's here now but Pippa!

Meghan is getting fat.

She's pregnant, Pippa/R102. Get a grip.

The Megstans have been trying to cancel CNN's Max Foster because he's the only US journalist to report on how many disproven lies were told in the interview.

Their lunatic attacks have got so bad that UK journalists are standing up for him on twitter.

Meghan has a face full of fillers, that's why she looks like a chipmunk.

Well, hurry up...

Smart move, he's an idiot...

And now for some humor for those who take themselves so seriously.

Good morning,

Would one of you nice homosexuals repost Part 6 of the article again? It appears to be missing from the thread.

Many thanks

Everybody knows this...

Is that all you can come up with, R101?

How lame.

She killed Baldilocks...

Aunt Bev r109, part 7 is part 6 and part 7b is part 7.

I trust I make myself as clear as mud.

Yea!!

Did Meghan spurn Kate's advances? Is this the reason for the hate?

My take, and it's probably worthless, but whatever: Young people get overly involved with their social networks idols and villains. Death threats and vitriol? I bet that most of them are from crazed teenage girls. Those with huge followings engender some sort of reality in a way that older, pre-Internet people can't quite grasp. Whenever I see the loathing of the Sussexes, I think that these posts are not the results of a mature mind. I've always been interested in British history so I look at royals as adjacent to it, not (for the past 100 years or so) as central to it. Adults who are driven to extremes of hatred and murderous ideation towards famous people are deeply disturbed.

R113 You truly are a sweet boy. I've always liked you despite what people say about you and those other boys.

Love Bev..

Would you just die already...

Thank God...

I like Camilla Tominey's reporting. I imagine she's quite conservative, but she manages to do the royal reporting without fawning, and she brings intelligence and a bit of bite. She admits in the piece that she took the job because she knew it would be a secure and long-term.

Thanks to whoever copy/pasted the article.

This Royal reporter (a very mild, anodyne one at that) founded an anti-harassment organization for UK journalists last year specifically because of the number of threats he was getting from the lunatic Megstans.

One tweeted that she was going to hire a sniper to kill him. Yes really.

Here's the sniper tweet from 2019. Apparently this person was some kind of leader of the Megstan twitter cabal.

Thanks Aunt Bev r117 - Love you too! Must run - love from The Boys!

R116, they're most likely not young people, whether they love or hate M&H; I doubt late-30ish British royal family escapees engender much passion in teenagers or twenty-year-olds. Strangely, people of all ages go down rabbit holes and identify passionately with public figures or causes. I'm fascinated by the phenomenon and sometimes follow random rabid online communities thinking that one day I'll use it in a novel.

Harry & Meghan are happy

Klan Grannies...

and then there are those of us who just hate bullies and enjoy pushing back

Harry & Meghan are rich

Klan Grannies...

R111, a lame reply to a hateful post? YUUP

Klan Grannies are sexy...

The Sussex fans are middle aged mostly white fraus! They, along with their idols Sparkles and Haz, will never ever get over their seething jealousy of Will and Catherine, even though the Harkles have nothing to do with the royal fam. It's weird.

And yet here you are, r126, supporting someone who has been accused of bullying up to 9 people out of their jobs in under 18 months. More if you include the nannies.

Horny Klan Granny...

Judge Judy rules on Klan Grannies...

R128, "a hateful post"?!?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, get a fucking life.

Still waiting...

I hope the bullying episodes become public, icing on the cake of lies. We might get to hear about some aspects during the ANL appeal. Perfect example of the caution to take care in your treatment of others on the way up.

Oh for God's sake, GO!

Your King

Hahahahaha!

No wonder he's Gay...

But mummy, I want to be Queen

^ Has Charles ever thought about suicide? I would. Hahahaha!

The Celebitchy frau at both r139 and r140 is "insulting" Charles by claiming he's gay, and then at r141 says that cunt thinks he ought to 'think about suicide' because cunt would if cunt were gay..........

ON A GAY BOARD???????

Fuck the FUCK right off, you fucking homophobic Megstan cuntfrau.

I feel like Big Liz has really made a mess of this situation and she’s obviously not up to containing or rectifying it.

She should voluntarily stand down and retire to Balmoral with hubs, who needs her attention. Appoint William as monarch and let the younger generation work it out for themselves, rebuilding any credibility for the throne they can.

They can’t do worse than she did.

Someone either her or Sunshine Sachs has paid for bots in the past. I wouldn't doubt if they also paid for trolls as well.

The amount of hate and vitriol I have seen, only comes from one side..

What would you like Her Majesty to do? She took everything from them! The Harkles are mentally ill dimwits who will do themselves in.

Harry & Meghan pay me a $1000 a post. What does Baldilocks and Princess Doormat pay you guys?

Do we still hate this bitch or no? So hard to keep up with you Slimies

I remember the time when I still liked Prince Harry. Who knew he'd completely ruin his image in such a short time.

[quote]No, what really got me was the appalling spelling and grammar. I mean, if you’re going to hurl insults, at least have the decency to get my name right.

She's obviously a DLer. I give her points for this alone.

“Not meeting Meghan did not stop royal commentators like me writing reams about her being ‘a breath of fresh air’ and telling practically every TV show I appeared on that she was the ‘best thing to have happened to the Royal Family in years’.”

Why do hack commentators insist on making these declarations about new people nobody even knows? I get why, but it’s so fake and stupid. Next time let’s wait and see how these “breaths of fresh air” conduct themselves before we anoint them the “best things that ever happened.”

^ Now you Slimies begrudge the woman the ability to breath. You threw her under the bus and she said, "Fuck you" and now the whole Isle of Misery is butthurt. Hahahahaha!

For years the Globe seemed to cover the Camilla beat. Every time I would see it in the checkout line, it would be screaming some hilariously made up nonsense about her. “Queen BLASTS Dying Camilla!”’etc. I would wonder, does that really appeal to their readership? Bizarre.

Translation: the journalist is making things up to play the victim card, which is what you all accuse Meghan of doing. LOL.

All this over a biracial C list actress. I just don't get it.

Not jealous because I got some of that Robin Thicke dick

Harry & Meghan are handing not so great Britain their pasty white ass on a platter by living their best life despite what the Isle of Misery thinks or writes about endlessly in their slimy rags. Harry, Meghan and most Americans are laughing at you. You've been had

[quote]As the world followed the joyous news of the Windsors’ resident strip billiards star having finally found

This is pure gold right here. The hypocrisy of Haz is actually so much worse than anything about Meghan imo.

Thanks to the poster for bringing over the full article. Don't always agree with Tominey but she's in her right to call out the bs around all of this.

Enough with the "Klan Grannies" foolishness.

It has gotten beyond tedious.

It is DL at its most tedious when anonymous posters start relentless arguments over who they think another anonymous poster is. It's so fucking boring.

Wonderful to see Britain standing as one, united in their hatred for Witch Markle.

"Witch Markle." is living better then 95% of you Brits plus she's got your boy Prince. I'd say she won

It's a tactic to halt board discussion and conversation r157. That's all it is. It's probably the work of a teenager, from the tone of the posts.

They may be triggered by some thread deletions here yesterday. One in particular I had on watch had a couple of KGT-types carrying on - poof! bye bye. Warning to all: stay on topic, scroll by posts you dislike and DON'T attack fellow posters.

Meghan for President! lol

@r160, Warning to you, cunt, get off our site

Jesus. Someone on my ignore list posted five times in a row at r137-r141. What kind of a lunatic does that? She must have posted dozens of times on this thread. I wonder if her kids got fed breakfast this morning

^ You fucking Fraus think the sun and the moon revolve around you. This is mostly a Gay men's site, we don't worry about feeding crotch droppings. Go to facebook where you're also not wanted

The kids are long out of the house and she's way past breeding age.

FF for r162, obviously. Whose site is it again lol? We take no warnings or threats. Keep threatening and you'll be banned, just like your threads. Please, keep it up.

^Fuck you, Frau, your pussy stinks all the way from the Isle of Misery

Racist get what racists deserve.

The little selection of mindless garbage dragged in here by the magabot gives you an indication of what Tominey is subjected to. I hope the writers continue to dive into this story.

^ Hahahaha!

Can't speak a word when you're full of 'ludes

Demented as the motives in your head

And I'm just trying to make you seeeeee...

Wind me up! Child, Funk AWAY! Wind me up!

How do you know someone’s sex on an anonymous board?

I always think it’s funny when members start frothing at the mouth about “fraus” when they have no way of knowing who anyone really is.

^^ was for

[quote]R164 You fucking Fraus think the sun and the moon revolve around you. This is mostly a Gay men's site, we don't worry about feeding crotch droppings. Go to facebook where you're also not wanted

Wow, so much disinformation and ill-intent on this thread. For sanity, let's accept a few tidbits about the BRF.

* As long as Andrew has his titles, allowances, etc., hating the Harkles looks petty. Moreover, it looks exactly like it is, [block]a distraction from deeper, more serious scandals the BRF wants to put a lid on.[/block]

* [block]The Harkles are no longer part of the BRF.[/block] It doesn't matter what they say to Oprah or if he keeps using his title. He's living in a country that has never recognized titles. At this point, the title is just affection. The royal reporters [block]can shut this down by refusing to cover them.[block] But how are they going to get views: ask around Norfolk to find out if Kate and Will are living separate lives, investigate what else Andrew is covering up, discuss Charles' bisexuality. So, back the Harkles they go.

* No one in that family is remotely innocent and living the wholesome lives they want to be portrayed as leading. [block]Moreover, most of them are engaging in side hustles for extra dough.[/block]

* Not for one moment do I believe that Members of the Royal Household willingly accepted direction from a biracial woman, especially one that wanted to carve out her own space. Two strikes right there - neither Kate nor Sophie have done so. So, I see it as an event cascade. One thing led to another; there were screaming and tears of frustration.

Sorry - bold instead of block -- I must have been reading all the posters threatening to block. Where is the edit button, the preview button? Here it is, properly formatted. 🤞

[bold]Wow, so much disinformation and ill-intent on this thread. For sanity, let's accept a few tidbits about the BRF.[/bold]

* As long as Andrew has his titles, allowances, etc., hating the Harkles looks petty. Moreover, it looks exactly like it is, [bold]a distraction from deeper, more serious scandals the BRF wants to put a lid on.[/bold]

* [bold]The Harkles are no longer part of the BRF.[/bold] It doesn't matter what they say to Oprah or if he keeps using his title. He's living in a country that has never recognized titles. At this point, the title is just affection. The royal reporters [bold]can shut this down by refusing to cover them.[bold] But how are they going to get views: ask around Norfolk to find out if Kate and Will are living separate lives, investigate what else Andrew is covering up, discuss Charles' bisexuality. So, back the Harkles they go.

* No one in that family is remotely innocent and living the wholesome lives they want to be portrayed as leading. [bold]Moreover, most of them are engaging in side hustles for extra dough.[/bold]

* Not for one moment do I believe that Members of the Royal Household willingly accepted direction from a biracial woman, especially one that wanted to carve out her own space. Two strikes right there - neither Kate nor Sophie have done so. So, I see it as an event cascade. One thing led to another; there were screaming and tears of frustration.

Give up 😢

The levels of delusion in r178 is breathtaking, but typical Megstan fare:

-Andrew has nothing to do with this story. He has never been officially charged with anything. I don't like him, but no one is going to take away his titles because a former sex worker said he slept with her when she was of legal age.

-The media is never going to stop covering the Harkles negatively when, first, it's clear they are attempting to shakedown Harry's family, second, the Harkles have just called the entire country, the BRF and the UK media "racist and third, the journalists covering the Harkles have suffered extreme levels of harassment and death threats from Harkle fans. Read the fucking article.

-Charles has never been reported to be bisexual, but ok, keep making things up, Megstan. I understand you have to in order to distract.

-You forgot But Kate's Skirts! and But "racism"! in your distract away from the Harkles playbook 'defence' of them.

Marie is an insane conspiracy theorist. ignore her.

Oh yeah I keep forgetting kAtE's SkzirTs

Andrew has nothing to do with the Sussex issues, but I'll allow that stricter retribution against them has been stymied by concurrent torrents of bad news re the Duke of York and his activities and associations. IOW, if they try to take the Sussex titles away - which imo wouldn't be overdone at this point - there will be a large bolus of the citizenry wondering why they don't do the same to Andrew. And as TQ's weak spot, he is untouchable for now.

I agree with r180 that he didn't do anything officially criminally wrong, but its the attendant behavior and cover up as they say that matters more in some instances, and this is one of them. Running around with Epstein and Maxwell, even after the former was under investigation, was smug and brash. The Maitlis interview was disastrous and foolhardy.

He's permanently banished, but will that be enough given the sharper spotlight everyone is now under in the current "cancel" climate.

[quote]R180 the journalists covering the Harkles have suffered extreme levels of harassment and death threats from Harkle fans. Read the fucking article.

M&H have received death threats, too. It’s a racially charged issue and brings out unbalanced people.

Did this particular writer, Camilla Tominey, go to the police? (Thought not.)

[quote]R178 Not for one moment do I believe that Members of the Royal Household willingly accepted direction from a biracial woman, especially one that wanted to carve out her own space.

I agree with this, entirely.

You didn't read the article, did you, r184.

I did.

It’s very long and self pitying.

How did you manage to sit through the two-hour Oprah-Sussex spiel then r186.

Because it was revelatory. Your article isn’t.

It revealed nothing, and nothing that wasn't pretty much known. Add in the multiple misstatements and non-factual falsehoods.

A self-pitying victimfest, on all sides.

[quote]Not for one moment do I believe that Members of the Royal Household willingly accepted direction from a biracial woman, especially one that wanted to carve out her own space.

She wasn't there, in that role to "carve out her own space". That wasn't part of the job, doing it her way or to her liking. All working BRF members work to support the CEO, the monarch. That's the job. Most workspaces aren't fair; we all answer to our bosses and most of us non-royals don't have much input either.

The mistake the BRF made was in giving too much leeway to H&M, hoping they'd catch on. It would have been easier if both sides realized it wasn't going to work, and mutually parted company much earlier than they did. And with less hassle. The Queen makes the rules re royalty and attendant perks: she should have laid down firm restrictions re the titles, ongoing funding and security, and given them blessing to do whatever they wanted. Case closed.

R177, M&H are a fun gossip story. I'm here for the Wallis-Simpson-of-our-time aspect of it. I have no illusions about the rest of the BRF; but, for the most part, they are boring. Andrew is obviously a pig and has been rightly sidelined. I don't know what else you expect--the Queen isn't going to write an article on Medium disowning him.

Agree about the likely tensions between Meghan and the institution. To what extent that had to with racism, we can't know. I assume it had a great deal to do with her being an American evening soap actor prone to sappy, new-agey, corporate speak. That someone who (in their archaic view) ranked so much lower than Harry and who did silly stuff (like write messages to whores on bananas) deigned to want to do things differently probably rankled. Also, it is more likely than not that she married Harry for a lot more than love. So not an ideal situation for getting along with them all.

The US is welcome to those two whining grifters. Good riddance.

[quote]As long as Andrew has his titles, allowances, etc., hating the Harkles looks petty. Moreover, it looks exactly like it is, [block]a distraction from deeper, more serious scandals the BRF wants to put a lid on.[/block]

[Quote]* [block]The Harkles are no longer part of the BRF.[/block] It doesn't matter what they say to Oprah or if he keeps using his title. He's living in a country that has never recognized titles. At this point, the title is just affection.

Boy is this ever standing on its head. See how easily the poster waves away one of the strongest points in the American constitution; I'll repeat NO INHERITED TITLES. According to poster hes just hanging onto the title out of "affection". Not bc its a free pass to jobs an unqualified dolt has to to employment of ANY kind.

US is an extension of the racist British empire. We average citizens have no affection for titles. Our own ppl are out of work and losing whatever shelter they had. But poster thinks railing against corporate medias apparent affection for titles is just a distraction.

The distraction is ms medias obsession with a story of entitled millionaires living in fucking mansions when the country is up to its necks in poverty and other minor problems. Like the renewed intense bombing of Syria where dark ppl are KILLED. This story is a distraction from THAT!

Enough of this mindless nonsense from ppl who in fact worship war hawks, murderous empires and rich people who speak on behalf of corporations.

Oh and we have railed against Andrew and his US COUNTERPARTS mightily.

"The US is welcome to those two whining grifters. Good riddance. "

Ok and you keep Baldilocks and Princess Doormat. Deal

r191 I think the problem is that the C-list actress wife of the sixth (?) in line to the throne was supposed to fit in with the RF not vice versa.

[quote]Warning to all: stay on topic, scroll by posts you dislike and DON'T attack fellow posters.

[quote]Keep threatening and you'll be banned, just like your threads. Please, keep it up.

People used to get permabanned for pretending to be moderators like this. I wish they still did.

R194 - and good riddance too to their ugly child.

^ And why is their child ugly? Come on, you're just dying to say it, you're a pig for picking on a little kid

R198 - he is objectively ugly - being the great-grandson of the Queen doesn't automatically make him pretty!

^ and you're objectively a cunt

R200 - but at least I'm objectively an honest cunt.

^ A smelly one too

Leave the kids alone. Merely being born into that family is a genetic disadvantage. But it's usually countered by vast social and economic disproportionate advantage.

And the US is not welcome to the Surplus Prince and his Dithering Duchess. The US is not Britain's dump for any useless trash they need to get rid of and want out of sight... anymore.

In fairness, Britain didn't dump them on the US.... they wandered in on their own. Some might argue it was the plan all along.

Good morning! Pedo Andy! But Kate's skirt! RACISTS! Klan Grannies! Rescue chickens!

There, done and dusty.

^ In case no one asks, are you ok?

Meghan is a raging cunt. She claims to be an advocate against bullying and for mental health yet her supporters are the biggest bullies on the internet these days.

^^ shut the fuck up if you know what’s good for you, trash

I remember reading that when Sparkle "popped in" (MO's term) backstage on Michelle Obama, what Michelle did tell her (Sparkle) was "Do nothing for a year. Learn the job."

But then Sparkle takes advice from no one. So, if this is true, MO's good advice was ignored.

Sparkle was signing up for a job. Her job was not to "carve out her own space".

IMO, Sparkle had no intention of "joining The Firm". It was apparent from her behavior during the engagement interview and from the ridiculous $75,000 engagement photograph dress.

Both of these public incidents were easily recognized signals that Sparkle had absolutely no intention of doing the job. No matter how much instruction she got, how many times it was explained to her. And the RF must have seen other actions of the same ilk offstage.

Add to that the preposterous spectacle of the "we don't know them" celebrities invited to the wedding and the elimination of family members from both sides. Whatever did that mean, one can ask.

No wonder the Queen looked like thunder in those photos taken during the wedding. She saw the handwriting on the wall.

[quote]R209 Sparkle was signing up for a job. Her job was not to "carve out her own space".

Self inflated Britain simply cannot pin this job description on an American’s marriage, especially in this day and age. If it works, it works. If it doesn’t, it doesn’t. If it’s something in between, alright.

Basically, [italic]fuck the fuck off.

^ Especially an American who - in her own words - didn't google her future husband or his family. lmao

^ I totally believe that.

Sparkle is pure American trash.

I'm actually very happy with Black Americans focusing their ire on England. Those Brits are definitely the problem, the root of all racism, and responsible for inequality.

It's the US which has the big problem with racism against blacks, asians, arabs etc, not the UK. Unfortunately the Far Left in Britain is importing all that American Critical Race Theory shit to try to divide and destroy our society.

R215, nope. Ask Twitter. It's the Queen of England. America's hands are clean. Problem solved! Nothing to see here!

Twitter is for cretins.

Smeghan is low-class and embarrassing - thankfully she's back in the US where she belongs.

She's also a whore.

"Sparkle is pure American trash. "

Which beats British Royal Euro-trash any day

I hope Sparkle is forced to eat shit for the rest of her life.

Why do you care?

Because I HATE her.

Well, that seems petty.

Aim higher in life.

I hope she has a long, slow death from cancer.

Why do YOU care, r222?

"Because I HATE her."

Why is that? Is it because the little American colored girl is smarter, friendlier and prettier then any British Frau? Maybe it's the fact that she scored the biggest lottery prize a British girl can score, a royal prince? Not only that she took her prize royal back to California with her, so that none of you can ever have him

R227 - it's because she and her stupid, balding, ugly husband are whiny, lying little bitches.

Spot the seethingly jealous magbots

[quote]Self inflated Britain simply cannot pin this job description on an American’s marriage, especially in this day and age. If it works, it works. If it doesn’t, it doesn’t. If it’s something in between, alright.

'Self-inflated Britain' has every fucking right to pin this exact job description on an American's marriage, now and anytime in the future, when said American is voluntarily living in THEIR COUNTRY AND LIVING LAVISHLY BEYOND WORDS ON THEIR TAXPAYERS contributions, being PAID TO REPRESENT THEIR COUNTRY at home AND abroad. They have a right to pin it, nail it, tack and staple it to their forehead with every expectation of due respect given and return earned on their fucking investment.

If it works eh, if not....how glib re another nation's money, time and values. If this was a foreign-born wife of an American Head of State, swanning around disrespecting US laws, mores, values and commonly held expectations of her role, while living lavishly in the White House, you'd be livid right? Oh wait....

The Cuntess of Montecito.

Prince Albert of Monaco's comments are bad but Archduke Karl, the grandson of the last Emperor of Austria, are even more damning. Knuckles rapped!

R71: “The entire British empire was established & prospered on racism.” The entire history of the African continent and people ( and pretty much anywhere else homo sapiens happened to have been on this planet) was, and is, established and prospered on tribalism (racism). If you ain’t of my tribe, you are less than human and deserve to be killed, captured, or shunned. The SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS of the “who me, I can’t be racist or prejudiced” crowd is STUPEFYING!!!

^ forgot to add “or deserve to be my slave or sold into slavery.”

The Telegraph article nailed the Harkles. And their fans truly are demented. None of them had ever heard of Markle before she married Harry and never knew anything about the British Royal Family.

It's a cult like Trumpsters.

Thanks r209 for reminding me of the (formal) engagement photos. And it wasn’t just the $$$ evening gown. Harry was wearing his everyday blue suit. No one thought how silly that looked? I just checked the one for William and Kate. He’s wearing a v-neck sweater and she’s in an off-white blouse or dress. Perfectly coordinated.

[quote] Add to that the preposterous spectacle of the "we don't know them" celebrities invited to the wedding

That was hilarious. All those American d list TV "stars" representing her glorious Hollywood career. It's like she thought those guys were as big stars as the BRF. That maybe true on some level in the US but anywhere else, and especially the UK, they were total nobodies. I mean no one really believed they were her close friends but only there for show.

The interview thread is paywalled now but someone posted a link to a 60 Minutes Australia story about the interview which addresses the conflicting truths. Most of them have already been covered but Valentine Low did say one thing new which was pretty shocking re flower girl drama. Kate certainly left in tears (whether Meghan cried later, it’s possible, we don’t know...paraphrased). Kate went around later with flowers to Nott Cott to apologize.....and Meghan shut the door in her face.

Now *that* is new.

Meghan may have cried over the bridesmaid dress incident. Fine to believe that. Problem is she was crying over everything and anything else. Over her messy Dad. Over the smelly church. Over the tiara, over the taste of egg in her wedding dinner. She's a non-stop griping nut, despite being in the lap of luxury that 99% of us will never experience.

Even if she did end up in tears as well, after the pre-wedding tiff with Kate - who feels sorry for her? The sympathy, for most, lies with Kate.

I brought the 60 Minutes Australia link over here:

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

[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.]

R241 GREAT article.

From Wooton:

But that's the way Harry, Meghan and their breed of intolerant woketopians operate: Be kind to everyone... unless they say something with which you disagree. At that point, they want you erased from the mainstream media and polite society.

Believing that Meghan isn't a very nice person who told a load of porkie pies to Oprah doesn't make you racist.

So... Pedo Andy! And but Kate's skirts! And RACISM! And rescue chickens! And KLAN GRANNIES!!!

There is information and misinformation. I'm deeply concerned about Trump and celebrities, like the Aspen Institute Harry is hawking (started by the Craigslist founder who has an adversarial relationship with the newspapers) uses the word "disinformation". The Meghan defender upthread used it, and I've seen it in a branch of coopted woke media theory.

The English word disinformation is a loan translation of the Russian dezinformatsiya,[1][2][3] derived from the title of a KGB black propaganda department.

Wooten conveniently omitted Sharon's gross mistreatment of coworkers and hostile homophobic and racist epithets. Really fireable offenses.

Andrew Morton was interviewed this morning on Good Morning America and said Harry was grossly disloyal to Charles and William and needed to apologize to them. Oops. And Morton was Diana's Obie Scidobie so what he says matters. He also brought up the fact that Princess Margaret spent years in psychiatric treatment - so Meghan couldn 't get a therapist? bullshit

Except Andrew Morton was so handsome back in the day, and Amid Scabies doesn't have that problem.

So Dan Wootton has landed at the Mail. Interesting. He will up the heat level there on the Sussexes, and on free speech issues.

He's really positioning himself heavily as a champion of the latter. His Twitter feed is full of cross-tweets and references, all posted today.

Oh yes, I’m sure Big Liz and her crew treated the American interloper JUST like they did their dear Princess Marge.

What's wrong with Obie Kenobi's face? Is it plastic surgery gone wrong or what?

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't r250. The question is, why the bloody Hell didn't HARRY help his wife in her crisis? It isn't his good damn elderly 94-year-old grandmother's job to shimmy down to KP to take her to a doctor and get her help.

Harry is supposed to be a major national Mental Health advocate, with all kinds of connections in that field. What did he do to help her? She ended up traipsing down to the palace HR offices for advice?? Unreal. Where's her stupid husband.

Both H&M are well over 35 years old, nearly middle-aged. If they can't figure out how to seek basic medical help, what else can't they do properly?

I refuse to believe Meghan was ever suicidal. She's a drama queen. She saw the episode of The Crown where Diana throws herself down the stairs while she was pregnant and thought I can do that too! Diana was desperate because she was lonely and being ignored by her husband yet Meghan claims Harry's totally devoted to her.

Pregnant women are almost never suicidal - hormones take over for self-preservation.

Presumably the point of telling Oprah she didn't want to live anymore and that HR refused help was to gain sympathy and slag off the royal family. We're meant to believe Harry, her friends and moving away saved her.

I think she was probably feeling very bad in her pregnancy--hormones, geriatric pregnancy, far away from home and friends, too much time to ruminate about not having been embraced like Diana by the public. This bad patch then got embellished, maybe in her mind or just for the dramatic interview.

Well it was a stupid thing to say because if she winds up in court she'll have some splaining to do - her choices are mad, bad, or a liar.

Meghan's a fantasist drama queen. She invents her story as she goes along.

I’m sure you need something by that, R256, but I don’t know what!

Shit - I meant “mean” something by that. All About Eve quote. Boo, me.

I read somewhere that Meghan was planning on converting to Judaism while she was married to Trevor but then they got divorced - I suppose when she realized the best job Trev could get her was on a trashy cable show. Converting would have been a good career move in Hollywood.

Converting from what? What religion is she?

R260, mind your own business.

[Quote]I’m sure you need something by that, [R256],

Who needs what and tell us about timing...

R262, see R258. Autocorrect error.

[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.]

Poor, uninformed man thinks this is Real Housewives of Frogmore Cottage.

And how does his amazingly strong, don't mess with her woman, get so fragile in the first place?

Do these people ever think anything through?

I’m sure DB Woodside’a remarks will appeal to Twitter. Everybody else, not so sure.

However many weeks on it's been I have come to the view personally that interview was a total production. Over-egged self pity and brand building that backfired.

It's a little concerning that r245 is implying that anyone using the word "disinformation" is a KGB agent.

There is a difference between misinformation and disinformation, R245. They're not synonyms.

Megan is a racist and a homophobe for turning her back on her own race and sex with that heterosexual "marriage."

Well, Meghan is a racist, r269.

You at least got that much right.

I would have thought if she and Harry had a brain, they would have used the Oprah interview to try to build on their 'happy' new life and new careers but all they did was bitch about how mean everybody is to them. I can't believe anybody's buying their bullshit.l

r271, I agree. They have been in Cali for a year so the focus should have been on the now and the future sales pitch. Bitching about the royals got attention but was it appealling to future investors? Doubt it.

That was all they had, the crap they spewed in that interview. Now they are already fading from the news cycle and they turned more people against them even I imagined they would. No one believes them and no one likes them. They came off so very badly in that interview. Spoiled, selfish, entitled liars. That was so self destructive and spectacularly stupid. No one wants to have anything to do with them.

They could have pivoted and pitched themselves as heroes... some growing pains, too much media, took a step back, realized it's not for us, love them all to bits, looking forward to doing what we can on the outside.

But instead, they threw mud.

They don't have history or pageantry or myth or service. So they have nothing, in the end, except themselves. And we've seen what that amounts to.

WHERE are the new Spotify podcasts? Anyone?

They're both dumb and lazy. There won't be any Netflix shows. About what? They know jack shit about anything. Netflix wants a reality show with insider info about the Royal family. That's what they were hired for. The Ex-Royals of Montecito Talk Shit.

I do predict, though, that they'll get Amanda Gorman for the podcast.

They were blackmailing/extorting the BRF, r271.

That's what the interview was for.

The only pertinent line in that whole interview was Daddy cut off Widdle Harry's allowance.

And for that, he will pay.

(Charles is notoriously stingy in general. It’s not becoming.)

r279. That and the fact the evil British taxpayers aren't giving them 24hr security while they toss it off by the pool in Cali.

[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.]

Idris is pandering to Americans.

Well, she did invite him to the wedding. Assume he feels he owes her.

Doesn’t everyone?

Yeah she invited Idris and George Clooney despite never having met them. But she couldn't invited anybody from her mother's family.

R286 Hilariously tacky move

I laughed this morning when one of the UK papers, in an unrelated article about the gardens at Frogmore House, referenced the couple's wedding reception there for 200 of their close friends.

How high she must have been that night, swanning around with famous people she'd barely met, turned out in couture, queen of it all. Had to be the best night of her life.

Oops, wrong thread.

Frogmore is a lovely place btw. Charles and the Queen recently went walking there, very pretty grounds.

[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.]

R290– Oh, please. Bitch will be there with tassels on at Diana’s memorial with Diana Jr.