Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Harry finally gone native in California Part Five

A continuation of this succesful thread with youtuber Rivers latest video on the antics of the couple in California

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 54214 hours ago

Link to part four

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 106/09/2021

Link to part 4

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 206/09/2021

It sounds to me like Harry told the Queen they would name their baby Lilibet to which the Queen responded something like, "Oh, I see." He calls that "asking," but it really sounds like telling. If you look carefully at Harry's response, he never uses the word "asked."

by Anonymousreply 306/09/2021

And the two are taking parental leave for 20 weeks. Oh, my sides! They're pretending that they really have jobs!

by Anonymousreply 406/09/2021

Another theory r3 is that he said to the Queen in a general fashion pre Meghan I'm going to name my future daughter if I have one after you and either didn't specify so it was assumed he meant Elizabeth or as you say he really said it as a statement not a question. Lady Colin Campbell anyway has likened it to Meghan enjoying farting in the face of the Queen, the rest of the royal family and the British public!!😲😆

by Anonymousreply 506/09/2021

r4 I can't see them being quiet that long!!

by Anonymousreply 606/09/2021

The more litigious they become, the more they resemble our dear former leader Donald Jennifer Trump.

by Anonymousreply 706/09/2021

Saying, "We're going to name the baby after you" is deceptive and deceitful. If Harry didn't specifically say "Lilibet" then it shows that the Markles continue to be nothing but liars.

by Anonymousreply 806/09/2021

Is it a trademarking issue? They can’t trademark Princess Elizabeth but Lilibet is perhaps a way for Markle to get around the licensing issue?

The name was no doubt a sentimental choice for stupid Harry but for the wife, it was a ruthless & calculated business decision ie. Branding.. She named her daughter after the Q for the same reason she wants to hold onto the titles. It reminds the rest of us of their link to the RF, which is all they have left to sell.

by Anonymousreply 906/09/2021

The legal threats have gone unheeded. The story is not only still up on BBC and ITV, but the Telegraph has jumped on it and put up a long piece on the matter.

Which means that the the threats are empty and everyone knows it.

by Anonymousreply 1006/09/2021

The BBC article has been amended twice since it's been up. The threat to sue is real. The amendments prove that the original article was libel. Allegedly. Those amendments just changed things legally.

by Anonymousreply 1106/09/2021

Can you post The Telegraph piece, pretty pls, R10? Paywalled.

by Anonymousreply 1206/09/2021

Sooooo yeah, they are not suing.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 1306/09/2021

The Queen took a moment this evening to mark Philip's 100th birthday.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 1406/09/2021

I HATE BORIS.

We get it you don’t like Megs because she is 1/2 black, successful, rich and married to a Prince.

by Anonymousreply 1506/09/2021

R13 Royal Reporters are proven to lie for payment. Have you forgotten the prank played on them. Secondly the Queen wasn't the source of this. High ranking staff were. Why would the Sussex say the queen lied. You have leaked info that hasn't been proven true. By sources that have lied before. And the article was amended. That changes everything.

by Anonymousreply 1606/09/2021

Because HMQ never confirms nor denies, r16.

It’s unlikely the Palace would have released an untrue statement.

by Anonymousreply 1706/09/2021

I wonder if the Queen even takes phone calls, video or otherwise, from Harry unless she has a witness in the room? I am continuing to be amazed at the total mess H&M have made of things since they left. At this point, the Duke and Duchess of Windsor are looking like models of discretion.

by Anonymousreply 1806/09/2021

The UK media has now changed the story from Harry lied to The queen is 95 and probably has a hearing impediment so didn't hear the name as Lilibet. Like I said the amendments made changed everything and now the UK media is scrambling. How embarrassing. The Queen is probably part deaf is now their defense.

by Anonymousreply 1906/09/2021

....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 2006/09/2021

Amazon noticed that Klan Grannies who hadn't purchased the book were out in force leaving 1* reviews and now you bitches have to pay 8.99 for the privilege of trashing her.

From theiir website - 'Amazon has noticed unusual reviewing activity on this product. Due to this activity, we have limited this product to verified purchase reviews.'

by Anonymousreply 2106/09/2021

'Prince Harry has upset the Queen. A family row has erupted, sparked by US media reports citing the Sussex camp and claiming Harry sought permission from his grandmother to use her very personal nickname for his and Meghan’s new daughter. '

let's hope so!

by Anonymousreply 2206/09/2021

R20 Thanks for proving that this was the usual media spin cycle. Right a factually incorrect article. Get called out on article. Get threatened with legal action. Write article moaning about person factually incorrect article was written about threatening legal action. It's so obvious now it's embarrassing.

by Anonymousreply 2306/09/2021

R21 insider scoop. Apparently it wasn't just Klan grannies. A group of reviews were flagged after being read because they had bot characteristics. They are being looked into.

by Anonymousreply 2406/09/2021

^ Ouch.

I wonder if the Queen, in her way, is thinking the Queen equivalent of WTF is going on? She's not used to this disruption. She's not used to her privacy being disrespected and bartered off. Who do these two clowns think they are? They seem to have crammed into a bit more than a year more embarrassing shenanigans than Diana managed in a lifetime. I feel so sorry for her. I hope my theory is wrong.

by Anonymousreply 2506/09/2021

What is your theory, R25?

If you know people like this IRL, something like the funeral of a loved one or their birthday is a trigger for acting out and pulling attention back. It is sick. Boundaries and grey rocking is all that works but the Narkles are EXHAUSTING.

by Anonymousreply 2606/09/2021

How do William and Kate - any of them really - maybe not the idiot Yorks - but how do they contemplate rebuilding a bridge with their buffoon Harry so long as that first wife of his in the mix? You can't. You wouldn't have a moment's confidence in your privacy whenever one or both was around.

She is a really awful piece of work and she's playing him beautifully, if that kind of self interest can be called beautiful. What a pig she is.

by Anonymousreply 2706/09/2021

R26, my theory is just that the Queen is privately dismayed by their constant willingness to disrespect the monarch. All the conventions she's known all her life, all her reign, they mock and disregard to suit themselves. No one sensible would countenance if it was just a real world granny and two with bad table manners. This is a whole new level.

by Anonymousreply 2806/09/2021

Narkles are disgusting trash. I genuinely feel sorry for their kids.

by Anonymousreply 2906/09/2021

Harry can settle things once and for all by coming on Zoom and telling us exactly what was said to his grandmum, showing his uncut cock with ginger pubes, turning around and spreading those tight cheeks, and jerking off until he shoots a load all over his first wife's Brazilian blowout.

by Anonymousreply 3006/09/2021

Wow, did Montecito Medusa actually put her title on a childrens book spine? LMAO! Kids don't care who the fuck she is. No one does!

by Anonymousreply 3106/09/2021

What a tantrum they are throwing!

I viewed the naming as a passive-aggressive “fuck you”, but who knows what’s really in their heart? The actions that came after justify it, though. After that, there was the flurry of articles that the name was “an olive branch”. That didn’t seem to elicit whatever it was they wanted, so they did the flurry of “The Queen supported this!”

And THEN they got a reaction.

The Palace should have kept grey-rocking and shouldn’t have dignified that BS with a rebuttal.

by Anonymousreply 3206/09/2021

The idea that they are tight with the Queen has been pretty effectively decimated now. Can't help the branding.

by Anonymousreply 3306/09/2021

R31 well, her royal title was what got her the book deal in the first place so….

by Anonymousreply 3406/09/2021

.....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 3506/09/2021

Remember how Michael Jackson just descended into madness and no one could do anything about it? And he was absolutely bizarre and outrageous and those poor children (his own children, not the ones he molested) were at his mercy? And you’re a normal person looking on at all the dysfunction, thinking “what the fuck am I witnessing?” and “if this is what he’s okay doing in front of people, how much more insane is it in private?!”

That’s the kind of slack-jawed disbelief I’m experiencing.

by Anonymousreply 3606/09/2021

What will happen in July re: the statue now? How can they brand based on "olive branches" and all the other narratives they have been pushing?

by Anonymousreply 3706/09/2021

Also, I’m glad that the BRF isn’t playing along with the “happy families trope”. I was worried they were going to go along with it and let the Sussex vipers back into the bosom of their family. (Although I don’t think they would be trusted or be alone with either of them ever again.)

Honestly, I was worried for Catherine and the Cambridge children.

by Anonymousreply 3806/09/2021

Pretty much, R36. You would think they would be happy with the arrival of a healthy newborn, but, nope, all about pushing and protecting the brand.

Granny had mummy killed is coming. That is why they hired the guy with rights to that film re: same for Archewell. They felt like Sussex Royal was "taken" now the idea that they are anything but OUT is blown up so any RBF based branding is a joke. What will the rage re: THAT lead to?

by Anonymousreply 3906/09/2021

^re: film

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 4006/09/2021

For someone who suffered trauma himself he seems to like dishing it out with all these threats..

by Anonymousreply 4106/09/2021

Victimizers live to play victim, it is deflecting.

Harry is a monster, it was covered up all his life. He and his 1st wife are a dangerous duo.

by Anonymousreply 4206/09/2021

Harry probably doesn't have good anal hygiene.

by Anonymousreply 4306/09/2021

Remember earlier this year when Duchess Pump Pump had the story floated that David Foster was 'like a father" to Haz? That must have been when Charles cut them off.

She really is a viper of epic proportions. Haz is no better.

by Anonymousreply 4406/09/2021

I think he had staked them for a year, R44. But, I imagine that was wounding. As was the hounding of Philip continuing through the funeral and now overshadowing what would have been his birthday tomorrow.

by Anonymousreply 4506/09/2021

Oh dear!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 4606/09/2021

R12 Alas, I am not a subscriber to the Telegraph. I saw the article on another site. I will see if I can cut and paste it tomorrow, if someone else doesn't beat me to it.

R10

by Anonymousreply 4706/09/2021

Thanks, R47. I will also hunt around for a copy.

by Anonymousreply 4806/09/2021

R46, wouldn’t it be funny if the “relative” were Princess Charlotte? Hahaha.

by Anonymousreply 4906/09/2021

Rolls eyes at R15.

by Anonymousreply 5006/09/2021

I'd be more interested to know if it was a Markle or a Ragland relative. The fact that they don't sound insane make it seem like a Ragland

by Anonymousreply 5106/09/2021

.....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 5206/09/2021

Harry and Meghan need to learn to pick their battles. This really isn't worth involving lawyers over.

Anyway, I'm still disappointed they didn't go with DL's suggestion of Ariel Diana Doria Oprah.

by Anonymousreply 5306/09/2021

.....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 5406/09/2021

R51, probably is a Ragland. I don’t think Doria has anything to do with them, either.

by Anonymousreply 5506/09/2021

Well… It’s probably time for them to shift the narrative, will we be seeing a baby picture soon?

by Anonymousreply 5606/09/2021

Rumors they are trying to get People to pay a lot of $$$ for one, R56.

Can you imagine how they are all dreading the statue unveiling in July?

by Anonymousreply 5706/09/2021

I want the surrogate to spill the beans to the Daily Mail, taking Lil' Lilibet right outta the line of succession.

by Anonymousreply 5806/09/2021

When I told them to call her Lilibet I wanted them to say it like they meant it.

by Anonymousreply 5906/09/2021

The BRF are toxic and almost killed them,yet every word they utter has to do with them. How can H+M not see how ludicrous that is ?

by Anonymousreply 6006/09/2021

Their 2 brands are BRF and victims, R60, it is the few stans beyond the paid bots who do not see a contradiction. In fact, they want H&M to REIGN.

by Anonymousreply 6106/09/2021

r10 Ultimately the only way a courtcase could be definitively resolved if the Queen herself comes forward during legal proceedings and says which account is true, that is simply not going to happen.The legal threat is a big misstep.

by Anonymousreply 6206/09/2021

R61. No. Contradicting made up facts by rightwing newspapers doesn't make us sussex stans. You sound like those twats on Dlisted who write epic monologues and when anybody disagrees they squeal "fuck off to Celebitchy" squeal squeal. The UK comes across as a racist cesspit. And that opinion is growing globally. Why? Your tabloids and the Brf.

by Anonymousreply 6306/09/2021

r32 do you agree with Lady Colin Campbells assesement in her latest video that Meghan is more or less metaphorically farting in the Queens face as well as the british publics face ?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 6406/09/2021

R62 That's wrong. If you sue someone for libel then if the party sued can't provide evidence that what they stated was fact they lose. The Sussex don't have to prove the article is incorrect. The tabloid newspaper etc has to prove it is correct.

by Anonymousreply 6506/09/2021

R64. Her assessment is based on what. What she thinks, feels, knows through a handily undisclosed source?. She knows less than my media buddies. Her videos are aimed at gullible middle-aged q adjacent women. Note the surrogacy hint. This ties into the Klan grannies need to make Meghan's children dolls and surrogates.

by Anonymousreply 6606/09/2021

R64 does Lady C actually say that? I wouldn't be surprised cause at least every other video there is some kind of reference to shit or piss or belches.

by Anonymousreply 6706/09/2021

r67 Yes She compared her to somebody who used to be famous who had a rare talent for playing musical instruments etc with the power of their flatulence.

by Anonymousreply 6806/09/2021

[QUOTE] Rumors they are trying to get People to pay a lot of $$$ for one

You said this about Archie too, Sunshine Sachs Troll - and yet they haven't done a single photoshoot with him in the two years he's been on this earth. You're not very interested in reality, are you? Everyone is closeted and bearding or having secret surrogate babies, or working as a paid bot to contradict your racist, misogynist views.

by Anonymousreply 6906/09/2021

Lady C is a charlatan who feeds conspiracy theories about surrogate and her last video with Megain’s supposed criminal arrest was farcical. She feeds the trolls who make it hard for those of us who can’t stand the grifting couple to gossip about them without trolls bringing up “fake baby” and surrogates. The Sussexes are toxic and crazy enough without the surrogacy/ fake baby angle that’s promoted by YT fraus. I’m with River on this one, I’ve always believed that Meghan had birthed poor Thomas look-alike Archie as well as the new Royal Merchness Lilibet Diana.

by Anonymousreply 7006/09/2021

[QUOTE] Her videos are aimed at gullible middle-aged q adjacent women. Note the surrogacy hint. This ties into the Klan grannies need to make Meghan's children dolls and surrogates.

She's stooped so low with that. I hope Meghan and Harry sue her for character defamation. She's broke so any fine would end her.

by Anonymousreply 7106/09/2021

R65 the Harkles are so fucking tacky. Unbelievable.

by Anonymousreply 7206/09/2021

Stop playing hall monitor, R70.

by Anonymousreply 7306/09/2021

This quote from the Kay article is interesting:

[quote]The debate over the naming is likely to continue, just as the mystery continues over the birth of the couple's son in 2019. Then it was the refusal to identify the hospital or the time of the birth and later came the decision not to name the godparents.

Once again, what should have been a happy family event that gave the Sussexes a nice publicity bump has devolved into tantrums and threats. Why can't they just calm the fuck down?

by Anonymousreply 7406/09/2021

[QUOTE] Stop playing hall monitor, [R70].

Fuck you, Klanner. You're in Q territory with your tinhat crap about surrogates and fake babies. Datalounge hates conspiracy whores like you and even has a rule outlawing such behaviour:

[QUOTE] If you try to ride the Prancing Pony, you will be swiftly dismounted.

by Anonymousreply 7506/09/2021

Their child. They can name him/her however and whatever the fuck they want. Those fucking racist royalty in England

by Anonymousreply 7606/09/2021

Why did they name the kid after the head of that fucking racist royal family R76? The mind boggles. The Harkles are such attention whores.

by Anonymousreply 7706/09/2021

Fuck them and the "their child" business. They are GRIFTERS and mooches, to the extreme. Their very existence relies on his ever-tenuous link to his grandmother and the family organization he was born into, the same that provided him with his fame and public identity. Without them, he and his missus would be panhandling on up and down Venice Beach boardwalk.

It's this same elderly, widely respected grandmother he abuses, by co-opting a deeply personal pet nickname that only very few close family members are allowed to use with her. One being her recently departed husband of 73 years. He gave the name to his new baby strictly for commercial reasons, to exploit the familial link, and not because they loved it or its primary holder. Fuck these assholes.

by Anonymousreply 7806/09/2021

They are both extremely disordered and can never get enough drama and attention.

by Anonymousreply 7906/09/2021

I've always thought that Harry believed his grandparents had Diana murdered and that he has been lowkey sabotaging The Firm for many, many years.

by Anonymousreply 8006/09/2021

Preach, R78 and God help those children. THIS is how they spend the first few days of their daughter's life? For everyone who things she is some puppet master, pay attention - he is as bad as she is, it was only palace PR that made anyone think differently. They are human trash.

Narcs see children as extensions of themselves who exist to provide supply. Not even a week old and peace and joy are the opposite of what surrounds the child. A toddler is stressed when getting a new sib. He can't be the focus either. It is all calls with Sunshine Shite and Scoobie Doo and lawyers.

by Anonymousreply 8106/09/2021

R80, he was off long before his mother's death, his mother brought it up to her own psychiatrists. He was not right in the head even before they split. He does not value other people at all, he and his wife are very similar that way.

by Anonymousreply 8206/09/2021

R63, FYI, the BBC is not at a tabloid, and is so woke, it makes the NYT look like Fox on steroids.

by Anonymousreply 8306/09/2021

r70 I thought Lady Colin Campbell made some reasonable AND nuanced points in her latest video about surrogacy and the wording in the statements announcing the birth and the congratulations messages from the royals.

by Anonymousreply 8406/09/2021

r78 I wonder if the Queens beloved cousin Princess Alexandra was one of the few people permitted to call her Lillibet in private?

by Anonymousreply 8506/09/2021

r71 I am not sure that legally partaking in surrogacy is defamation of character.That would imply that is universally or generally accepted in society that surrogacy is an unalloyed bad thing when this is very much not the situation.

Besides Lady Colin Campbell nuanced her argument and did not actually say they had used a surrogate.She knows the limits of language and legality.

by Anonymousreply 8606/09/2021

R73 I’m not playing hall monitor you troll. Merely made my point. How long have you been on DL? Nowhere dud I say to not say fucking inane conspiracy shit. Are you as easily triggered and thin skinned as Harry and Meghan? Those conspiracy posts in these threads seem BSC for sane posters who want to dish and hate on the grifting couple and sometimes turn us off from participating on these threads. I know I’ve had to take breaks from these threads when that happens. Just putting it out there that there are many DL’ers who feel the same.

by Anonymousreply 8706/09/2021

I dont think she used a surrogate. I have several friends late 30s who are having kids. She didnt have kids with Trevor because she wanted to focus on her "career" (lol). Cant be pregnant on a yacht, you see.

The mystery surrounding Archie's birth, location, time, godparents, was more bullshit intentionally done by Harry's wife to string him along with the "we need uber privacy or I will die like your mother!!" diatribe. She already claimed to want to kill herself while pregnant.... Imagine what that would do mentally to a damaged dim-witted soulless ginge.

by Anonymousreply 8806/09/2021

Fack off, R63, you wanker!

by Anonymousreply 8906/09/2021

Surviving Angel, why do you engage in back and forths with the KGT? Most have blocked it. He has posted thousands of times here on behalf of at least 2 clients, it is not as though he job requirements and scripted responses will change in response to anything you type.

by Anonymousreply 9006/09/2021

Feel free to take another break, R87, You post this same shit periodically, but here you still are. No one wants your school marm tone policing.

by Anonymousreply 9106/09/2021

r90 I didnt realise and I havent blocked anyone?

by Anonymousreply 9206/09/2021

Just saw the video of the Queen getting the rose for Philip's birthday and I thought she looks in good form. She is tiny but she always has been. I think it's more noticeable now because she has developed a hunch. But for 95 the fact that she still continues to walk unaided and quite briskly is amazing.

by Anonymousreply 9306/09/2021

The Palace finally comes out swinging . . .

It refused to back up Harry's and his press pals' claims that he told the Queen about what he planned to call his new daughter.

With their usual gift for shooting themselves in the foot, the Sussexes thought they'd get away with one more lie about their relationship with the Queen.

Instead, a clearly angry Queen has had it and authorised the leak to the BBC, and then refused to bail out the Sussexes when they tried to skirt the truth.

She's branded them liars. Their stupidity ended by making the Palace's silence the story rather than their child's birth.

They never play straight and then whinge and play the victim when they're caught.

Anyone hear from Omid Scobie yet today, who yesterday assured the world that the Sussexes would never have used the name if the Queen weren't supportive of it?

And that the leak just showed how far from the Queen and the Sussexes the couriers are?

Well, Omid, dear, apparently the coutiers aren't so far from the Queen and the Sussexes, after all, are they?

Where's your jeers today in the face of the Palace's silent refusal to back up your and your oaymasters' lies?

Scobie keeps getting left with egg all over his face by carrying the Sussex water for them but he doesn't seem to care.

His employer, Harpers Bazaar, however, should reconsider his suitability for their Royal Reporter.

by Anonymousreply 9406/10/2021

Do you have a link R94?

by Anonymousreply 9506/10/2021

R95 The Telegraph is paywalled. I'll see if I can get it later off another site. But the headline is visible on the homepage, or was earlier this afternoon.

R94

by Anonymousreply 9606/10/2021

Noel Gallagher has compared William and Harry to himself and Liam:

[quote] "Prince William. I feel that f---ing lad's pain," he said. "He's got a f---ing younger brother shooting his f---ing mouth off with shit that is just so unnecessary. I'd like to think I was always the William."

[quote] He continued: "Prince Harry is coming across like a typical f---ing woke snowflake, f---ing a--hole. Just don't be f---ing dissing your family because there's no need for it."

[quote] Noel then took specific aim at Meghan Markle, saying: "This is what happens when you get involved with Americans. As simple as that."

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 9706/10/2021

It is always an option, Surviving Angel. Makes the threads much more pleasant and the posts of the KGT are pretty repetitive. Our own Muriel recommends blocking and not engaging with trolls.

by Anonymousreply 9806/10/2021

[quote] Just don't be f---ing dissing your family because there's no need for it."

Lol, pot, kettle. They had one big album and his career since is slagging off his bro. Desperately trying to get that big payday reunion offer as things re-open. No self awareness at all. Nope, you are the Harry figure.

by Anonymousreply 9906/10/2021

R91 You really are thin-skinned. Nowhere in my post was I attacking you, just the crazy conspiracies. But you took it personally and called me hall monitor to silence me. Now you’re telling me to not post anymore on these threads. Who’s the hall monitor now? You don’t see the hypocrisy?

“You post the sane shit periodically”. No I haven’t you cunt. Are you one of the creepy stalkers who track other people’s posts? If you are you’re not very good at it. I will take a break when I see fit snd not be lectured by someone who isn’t gay who’s posting on a gay board. Do not tell gay posters what or when to post, understand? Now fuck off.

by Anonymousreply 10006/10/2021

[Quote]If you sue someone for libel then if the party sued can't provide evidence that what they stated was fact they lose.

You seem to be an expert in British law. Please tell us how the Sussexes have to prove a) significant damage to their reputations; and b) monetary loss due to the words that supposedly substantially damaged their reputations. Or do you think they don't bear this responsibility under British law? Please help clear the confusion.

by Anonymousreply 10106/10/2021

You sound like you skipped your meds, R100.

You are the one posting about how you have to take breaks and how the posts of others are so annoying, if you want complete control, I suggest a Tumblr blog.

by Anonymousreply 10206/10/2021

R100, you sound mentally ill. I have been here for years. Blocking your drivel.

by Anonymousreply 10306/10/2021

R102 and R103 you’re the ones who are mentally not all there if you’re posting fake baby/ surrogate like it’s the truth. Posting on gay board and try to cancel gay posters and block them for pointing out hypocrisy. Sure you’ve been here for years, I totally believe that. Block away.

by Anonymousreply 10406/10/2021

Any "conspiracies" about the Narkles are deliberately created and fed by their PR as a way to drive engagement and chatter, thus the changing sizes of the bump, etc. Can you honestly not SEE that? It is a Sunshine Sucks tactic that has been used re: other clients, including on this board. The same was done with the trumped up intrigue re: the birth of Archie, his godparents, etc. It is all a SHOW. All the contradictory stories are PLACED.

Now you are attempting to police not only the posts on a gossip board but who in your disordered mind is "gay." Loon or cleaner, you must be a real joy IRL.

Taking this farce all so seriously, grow up!

by Anonymousreply 10506/10/2021

I'm changing my name to LaQueesha.

by Anonymousreply 10606/10/2021

This thread is so much fun

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 10706/10/2021

Lady C

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 10806/10/2021

It seems to me that Harry and Meghan want to shape reality. The royal family, on the other hand, want set the record straight and use their roundabout method to do so. I'm hard pressed to imagine that Harry said, "Grandmother, how would you feel about our naming the baby Lilibet and using the diminuitive Lily?" More likely, he said, "We're naming the baby Lilibet" and the queen said, "I see." I imagine she did not object, because that's how she responds to her family, so he took it as an approval.

by Anonymousreply 10906/10/2021

I just skimmed this but so many things are jumping out at me. Are people confusing a Royal surrogate (someone speaking for the Queen) with a surrogate who carries a child in her womb?

I do kind of think it is tacky to give a nick name as a given name.

How could the royal family not like Megan? She is slightly black so she no one could claim that they weren't welcoming diversity, but again, it's slightly black and she's so pretty! (I just said this to my son and he said "what's wrong with you?"

Is 'gone native" a slur? It took me a couple of days to wonder that.

Is the guy on the main video "aggressively gay?" I dig him. His background room is beautiful.

I think I would keep quiet and just go along with things to live as a royal. I think I'm that shallow.

by Anonymousreply 11006/10/2021

It's a stupid name, and I am even stupider for wasting my time commenting on these two un-deservedly privileged navel gazers!

Who names their child a nickname?

They've been "on leave," since before leaving Britain for the USA. These two morons make a mockery of hardworking, working-class and middle-class couples who cannot afford parental leave or do not have the opportunity or right to parental leave.

Has anyone asked how they are able to live in California? She obviously retains her American citizenship and he is able to live in the USA because he is married to an American. But he is a Prince of the United Kingdom! What's her status in GB? Under the constitution, Americans do not recognize or hold allegiance to foreign princes.

Expel them. Or stop using your foreign titles, Mr and Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor.

by Anonymousreply 11106/10/2021

R109, particularly since she was informed 15 min before the end of the press embargo.

by Anonymousreply 11206/10/2021

River, R110? The background is not a real room, but literally a screen background, if you enjoy it you may be able to find it and use it for yourself, quite grand.

by Anonymousreply 11306/10/2021

.....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 11406/10/2021

R113, thank you. I wasn't sure if it was real or not. It is grand. I want to live there.

by Anonymousreply 11506/10/2021

Someone on another forum I was reading came up with the quip "they should have named the new baby Sue, that would have been highly appropriate"!

by Anonymousreply 11606/10/2021

If the BBC said about me what they said about the Sussexes (Harry) regarding naming their daughter, then I would sue too.

by Anonymousreply 11706/10/2021

It’s clear M&H co-opted the names Lilibet and Diana in their search for grifter relevance. They will charge a pretty penny for photoshopped photos.

How anyone can defend these two grifters is just insane.

I live in the USA because my great great great grandfather voted Whig over Tory and thus loss his farm and deaconship. He sent his five sons away - 2 to America and 3 to Australia. I am so anti-monarchy and sometimes delight in seeing the BRF taken down a notch. But not by vile grifters who contribute nothing.

by Anonymousreply 11806/10/2021

Great article here!!!!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 11906/10/2021

This is one of the best yet and goes to the point of the constant blunders.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 12006/10/2021

Harry can't sue the BBC for reporting what a palace official told them, even if what the official said was false. He would have to sue the palace (assuming what the official said was false.) The lawyers' warning letter to the media was simply public grandstanding, just like their letter regarding the bullying allegations.

If Harry and Meghan did ask the Queen if she was comfortable with the name Lilibet, and she responded that she was, then they could have issued a statement saying so. But they didn't do that, instead issuing a statement that left people to infer that the choice of name was presented as a fait accompli.

This is a mess of their own creation. After all, the choice of Lilibet was a loaded one to begin with. They should have anticipated these problems and headed them off at the pass by getting the Queen's explicit consent well ahead of the birth. Why they failed to do so is another question altogether.

by Anonymousreply 12106/10/2021

Narcs thrive on control and drama and victimhood, R121, not peace and harmony. But for the constant drama and contradictions and theories there really is not much to say about the Narkles at all. Thus the $10 "charitable contributions" with press releases, anything to keep the talk going, good or bad, it is indifference they fear.

by Anonymousreply 12206/10/2021

[quote]They should have anticipated these problems and headed them off at the pass by getting the Queen's explicit consent well ahead of the birth. Why they failed to do so is another question altogether.

They didn't ask because they knew she would say no. Every other female in the family named after the Queen 1) uses the full name of Elizabeth and 2) uses it as a middle name. There was no way in hell HM would ever have consented to her private nickname being used as a first name. Nobody else in the family would even have considered asking permission, much less going ahead WITHOUT HM's permission.

by Anonymousreply 12306/10/2021

That is the difference between pro-social and anti-social behavior, in a nutshell, R123.

by Anonymousreply 12406/10/2021

Fuck off, cunt @ R99.

by Anonymousreply 12506/10/2021

He looks like he tears the stinkiest farts.

by Anonymousreply 12606/10/2021

"This is a mess of their own creation"

R121 - Agree! This is a mess of the palaces own creation.

by Anonymousreply 12706/10/2021

As with their withdrawal from their responsibilities as members of the royal family, Meghan and Harry wanted it both ways (they wanted to still be in, but have their freedom to make money, too). They wanted the name Lilibet and to tell the queen the name, and they wanted to present themselves to the world as having asked her. The Queen, to her credit, in both cases said, "well, no." It seems to me that the Queen (1) has Meghan's number, (2) wants to please her grandson Harry, and (3) wants the royal family to appear reasonable and not racist. Meghan and Harry would be wise to realize (1) the staff of Buckingham Palace, put together, are a lot wiser than they are, (2) the Queen is a grandmother but first she is a monarch, and (3) superficial glamour doesn't win over decades of esteem and respect. You can diss the men in grey, you can diss Andrew, you can diss Charles, you can even diss Williams, but if you diss the Queen, you lose.

by Anonymousreply 12806/10/2021

"There was no way in hell HM would ever have consented to her private nickname being used as a first name."

R123 - How do you know this? Did QEII tell you herself?????

by Anonymousreply 12906/10/2021

"Harry can't sue the BBC for reporting what a palace official told them, even if what the official said was false"

R121 - I really do not think you are correct.

by Anonymousreply 13006/10/2021

If they go forth with the lawsuit @ the BBC, watch, they will try to drag the 95 year old Queen in. They of course, kicked this all off right before she hosts the G7 and the DAY before the birthday of her recently deceased husband.

by Anonymousreply 13106/10/2021

Take this with a grain of salt but there is a rumour going around twitter that either Spotify or Netflix is about to drop Megz and Harz for lack of content. I'd say Netflix because isn't Spotify owned by Apple?

by Anonymousreply 13206/10/2021

R129, the Palace would not have bothered telling the BBC that the Queen had not consented to the use of the name if the Queen was, in fact, pleased.

by Anonymousreply 13306/10/2021

I'd say Netflix, too. Netflix doesn't play when it comes to its content. The suits there will even cancel popular shows that are not pulling in enough new subscriptions. If Harry and Meghan aren't producing, Netflix isn't going to give any additional money to these two grifters. Unlike the Palace, they don't have to play nice.

by Anonymousreply 13406/10/2021

I half assumed the Netflix or Spotify (or perhaps both) were a way for them to get money via whoever is funding them; Charles or their Russian buddies.

by Anonymousreply 13506/10/2021

I bet Spotify has already quietly ended their partnership with Harry and Meghan. They probably did not put much (if any) up front money into the deal (no matter the sums were initially reported), so it would be easy enough to send them on their way. Spotify probably hopes people soon forget they ever did business with the two.

Netflix, on the other hand, probably gave these two a not insignificant sum to go towards the production of their endeavors. That deal was probably premised on Harry and Meghan being somewhat in the royal fold. Now that they've blown that to hell and are terrorizing their 95-yr-old grandma to boot, Netflix is realizing they cannot use any of the content they create without looking like their going against the monarchy (particularly given The Crown).

by Anonymousreply 13606/10/2021

Robert Taylor's article in the Telegraph stating the obvious and rather dire news for the Sussexes: the Queen is mad as hell and she isn't going to take it any more.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 13706/10/2021

Apparently "parental leave" is a euphemism for deluge of PR. Wonder who is paying the staggering bills for placed stories?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 13806/10/2021

The desperation is palpable with these two. I would love to know how far they've drained their accounts. All this PR has to cost boatloads of money. It's almost as if they have a gambling addiction, except they are gambling with PR and continually losing.

by Anonymousreply 13906/10/2021

I wonder if they are even paying their PR bills, sub contractors and employees. I picture them pulling a Trump: "I'm not satisfied with your services.".

How long before the first household help lawsuit surfaces with claims of LONG hours, no overtime pay and that oat milk latte she was shilling being lobbed at some poor housekeeper's head.

by Anonymousreply 14006/10/2021

Netflix obviously hired them for a reality show, giving insider info about the Royal family as a companion piece to their ultra-successful The Crown.

Then Dumb and Dumber spill all their juiciest secrets (true or not) to Oprah. What else can they sell to Netflix? Harry's stupid and uneducated and Meghan's a D list actress which are a dime a dozen in Hollywood. They don't know anything. And exploiting them as figureheads for some ambitious producers depends on how popular they are. And every time they open their mouths, they lose popularity. The law of diminishing Hollywood returns.

by Anonymousreply 14106/10/2021

Great analogy, R139.

Re: your point, R140, I think M has reportedly done this in the past, I remember an anecdote from a landlord.

I do wonder about the rumors re: Scientology and Agape, the Scienos have the pockets and industry connections she might seek.

by Anonymousreply 14206/10/2021

R141, I am pitifully uninformed when it comes to these things, but I do wonder. They have some association with a producer who has the rights to some screenplay about the conspiracy theories of Diana’s death.

But couldn’t anyone write that story? Why does it have to be that guy? Do they need Harry to authorize or endorse it?

I suppose they could use the fallout from the DoE’s funeral and the Lilibet and Statue events to make something for Netflix. I’d watch it if it were salacious nonsense. I won’t watch anything they’re “serious” about, all that woke shit. But I’d watch that conspiracy stuff.

by Anonymousreply 14306/10/2021

"Ultra private"

"Details published in People magazine"

PICK ONE

by Anonymousreply 14406/10/2021

"Security and privacy were also priorities," the source adds. "They had a big security team that the hospital needed to accommodate."

Jesus Christ

by Anonymousreply 14506/10/2021

This R143, they hired him

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 14606/10/2021

Considering the death threats made just on blogs alone I think having security is valid. Like nutty from nuttyflavor blog stated. The British royal family needs to Epstein Meghan. And that was a mild threat. The intruders to their estate. The woman who runs Formerly royal who staked out the estate by visiting it. Shared the blueprints and identified access points. The woman who wants to take Archie and give him a proper home. The woman who wanted to Rio off Meghan's moon bump and turned up to an event.

by Anonymousreply 14706/10/2021

What the frig did they need a big security team for?

by Anonymousreply 14806/10/2021

The faux outrage propagated and fuelled by the UK media and the Brf. That's why. There are woman who want to kill Meghan so Harry can go back to his real family. These are genuine real threats flagged and logged.

by Anonymousreply 14906/10/2021

If I was that paranoid, I'd just do a homebirth. Besides, they're trendy

by Anonymousreply 15006/10/2021

R149 how many of the nuts on the internet have the means and ability to get near them? Most famous people deal with psychos. They don't all act like they're 3 seconds away from being murdered 24/7

by Anonymousreply 15106/10/2021

There are woman who in groups laughingly joke about how they would successfully take Archie from the Sussex. Who would raise him. And how they would hide him. They spend hours discussing it. That's what the faux outrage does. It winds up these nutters.

by Anonymousreply 15206/10/2021

R148 Their inflated egos are very delicate.

by Anonymousreply 15306/10/2021

There is a photo of Meghan leaving a venue with security. She gets heckled by a woman. That woman is one of the identified risks I previously mentioned. She is real. And got real close.

by Anonymousreply 15406/10/2021

R154 so post the picture

by Anonymousreply 15506/10/2021

If I were that paranoid, I wouldn't announce my every fart to the press, but...that's just me.

by Anonymousreply 15606/10/2021

Blogs and the unpopular MM thread on Lipstick Alley are very good at pinpointing threats and gauging the level of threat. The threats to Meghan specifically heighten after inflammatory UK tabloid articles. It's the private groups that reveal the true threat level. There are insiders on three major blogs and the mm unpopular thread. They are solely there to log threats and identify people who need further looking into.

by Anonymousreply 15706/10/2021

The only chance they had for purely positive publicity this year was the birth of their daughter, and they fucked it all up with the choice of name. Are they really that stupid or are they just self-destructive?

by Anonymousreply 15806/10/2021

R154 What is this amateur hour. Yes I will post a pic. Hmmm what could the legal ramifications of that be. Ummmm.

by Anonymousreply 15906/10/2021

They fuck up everything, R158, pretty predictable at this point. Her thinking is so disordered that she does not understand the gap between what she WANTS to MANIFEST (she was raised in the Agape cult, ie, The Secret) and how others are likely to perceive her actions. In the case of the spawn, she wanted to use the blessed event to tie their brand to the BRF. So they purportedly announced it to the Queen 15 min before the press embargo was to lift, right before what would have been Philip's 100th bday. The one he might be here for, but for the O1 interview phone call that sent him to the hospital w/in hours. The Queen is done with these 2 and her name always in their mouths.

by Anonymousreply 16006/10/2021

R158. Last time I checked the Brf are globally being discussed as a racist figure head for the UK. William and Kate were getting reamed by Scotland. Andrew is avoiding the FBI. Sophie fucked off half of black twitter by minimising Oprah. The Sussex named their daughter. And most people out of the UK are laughing at the faux outrage.

by Anonymousreply 16106/10/2021

They need a gigantic security team, R148, because they're (not so) secretly terrified they don't actually warrant one.

(lots of blocked comments in this thread, is the KGT here? hey KGT! *waves* How's Smellyabinsk during the summer?)

by Anonymousreply 16206/10/2021

R160. So you talk with the queen directly do you. It's much simpler than your spiel. The UK tabloids and the courtiers found out Meghan had given birth days after the event. Now it's war. Now it's multiple articles, raised trolling and faux concern for the queen. Trouble is online media knows this. And is discussing this.

by Anonymousreply 16306/10/2021

I love the Death Threat Troll. It’s funny because she’s so serious.

Interpol keeping tabs, you say?

by Anonymousreply 16406/10/2021

Whenever the threads about Meghan don't go as planned you target individual posters. Then you target Muriel. Then you squeal Freedom of speech. Why? I love how you don't get that these threads are laughed at online as amateur Brf trolling. People group read and take the piss. But carry on.

by Anonymousreply 16506/10/2021

Megan WANTED to be hunted, like Diana. It never quite happened that way though, so she threw the big fit & all. Now poor Megan has to arrange all the pap walks herself!

by Anonymousreply 16606/10/2021

Every other post is missing ... hi Megaloon! Welcome back - and please don't forget to take your meds in time this time.

by Anonymousreply 16706/10/2021

It may have been worse. The could have named their little half caste CABBAGE.

by Anonymousreply 16806/10/2021

Again with the whining from the lap of luxury. They gave themselves TWENTY WEEKS of parental leave.

Most new parents would use that incredible privilege to bond with the new baby and make their first child feel special.

These two spoiled cunts spend it slapping at his elderly grandmother who is leading a nation out of Covid times, hosting a world leader and was widowed two months ago.

It’s like lighting cigars with $500 bills. How many people would make good use of what they have and they’re just making malice with it.

by Anonymousreply 16906/10/2021

POTUS and FLOTUS will have several engagements with the royals tomorrow. I can feel the rage emanating from Montecito as I type. I hope it gets lots of coverage just to salt those wounds.

by Anonymousreply 17006/10/2021

Great post, R169.

Shows the Agape cult garbage that Megs was raised in (ie, The Secret, you can see the tremendous impact it had on her disordered thinking) as meaningless. No matter how they try, their brand just becomes more and more toxic.

And the rumors they are about to be dropped by a major media player? I believe them.

by Anonymousreply 17106/10/2021

Meghan is going to flip her lip. Get ready for some Kate attacks.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 17206/10/2021

Wow I bet smelly pants and the wife would die for photo ops with the Bidens. Not that Harry or she have anything remotely intelligent to discuss.

by Anonymousreply 17306/10/2021

The Brf always meets the US president. It's the UK tabloids that always try to make it a Kate Meghan war. Nice to know the new narrative being pushed into Meghan by the Brf and UK media.

by Anonymousreply 17406/10/2021

Now we can all sit back and watch how many articles feature Kate and Meghan faux drama and know it's just a false drama pushed by UK media. Thanks trolls. Your very informative.

by Anonymousreply 17506/10/2021

Kate is the future Queen. Meghan's a past her sell-by date starlet.

by Anonymousreply 17606/10/2021

Who's more upset at the royal rollout for the Bidens: Meghan or Diaper Don?

by Anonymousreply 17706/10/2021

None of the presidents, former or current, want anything to do with the treacherous and treasonous Harkles.

by Anonymousreply 17806/10/2021

R178...oh come on. If the Harkles asked for a reception at Mar-A-Lago, 45 would make it his own Trooping the Colour

by Anonymousreply 17906/10/2021

R179, I don’t know. I don’t think he likes Markle. But maybe.

by Anonymousreply 18006/10/2021

Lol the Harkle PR blitz will be working overtime during the summit.

by Anonymousreply 18106/10/2021

R180 Oh I'm sure he doesn't, but he'd do anything for headlines.

"PRINCE AND PRINCESS OF ENGLAND VISIT THE LEGITIMATE AMERICAN PRESIDENT" - From the Desk of DJT

by Anonymousreply 18206/10/2021

Re: Netflix and Spotify, even better would be if they requested the H&M front money be paid back due to not fulfilling the terms of their contract (producing content more than five people want to see). They are probably due for another staff exodus soon.

by Anonymousreply 18306/10/2021

[quote]The desperation is palpable with these two

I'm back to thinking she's the brains behind the operation - and I use that phrase metaphorically. This frantic barrage - it speaks of someone panicking. Is he panicking? No. He's too dumb. He's lost in this hero fantasy where he's protecting his family. She plays him, pushes his buttons, winds him up, sends him out to do the dirty work. While she just sits back and moves on to the next scheme, because God knows you wouldn't want to do a results check or lessons learned.

R140, soon, I'd wager.

R177, tough call. I honestly can't call it. Maybe rising columns of smoke and clouds of bats from both coasts?

by Anonymousreply 18406/10/2021

R163

If what you say is true, its pretty idiotic to purposely piss off the papers and then act the victim when they get pissed.

You'd think someone who just gave birth would've something better to do with her time than play war games with the media like, I don't know, bound with her baby.

Really shows her priorities.

by Anonymousreply 18506/10/2021

Even before she met Harry, Meghan seemed to be jealous as hell of Kate. On her Instagram she was criticizing her .I think that's the whole issue with her - jealousy. She thought she'd be the Queen Bee joining the Royal family and found out she was one of a cast of thousands. She probably was a teenager with a big crush on William and had to settle for ugly little bro.

by Anonymousreply 18606/10/2021

Montecito Medusa doesn't have kids so she can bond with them or even love them. Everything and everyone in her life is self-serving. Archie failed to serve her purpose, I wonder if she resents him.

Can't wait for the inevitable photo shoot with a whole month of details leaked.

by Anonymousreply 18706/10/2021

How might the Narkles continue to act out over the next few days to pull attention from the G7?

by Anonymousreply 18806/10/2021

Agreed R166. I think it is one of Meghan's deepest wishes that one day she will find herself surrounded, as Kate (and Diana) did many times, by a hostile, jostling pack of rabid paps intent on blinding her with camera flashes. She's an empty, personality disordered vampire and the ruckus would be the hardest orgasm of her life. Second hardest? All the media coverage of the poor, besieged, beautiful, vulnerable princess afterwards.

by Anonymousreply 18906/10/2021

R188, well, LilDiana could have a medical event, being rushed to the hospital. Any one of them could have one, too.

by Anonymousreply 19006/10/2021

She only has one big story left....dumping Harry.

I bet she literally fantasises about the media scrum when she “spotted” near her home looking distraught behind dark glasses.

I give it a year. Truly. She’s got all she’ll ever get out of him now.

by Anonymousreply 19106/10/2021

I think the film will come first, then a reality show.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 19206/10/2021

Yeah, I'm picturing a pap walk, wearing sunglasses that can barely hide a bruise on her face. Outfit merched, of course.

by Anonymousreply 19306/10/2021

Ah, good call, R193.

by Anonymousreply 19406/10/2021

R193 Yep. After I posted I thought “and the hint of a bruise”.

We know her so well.

by Anonymousreply 19506/10/2021

.....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 19606/10/2021

R196, this article asserts “clearly nothing is wrong” because Harry and Meghan zoomed with The Queen to introduce her namesake.

Oh, my sides.

Nothing’s wrong at all.

by Anonymousreply 19706/10/2021

Gossip Cop are a fucking joke. Very pro-Meghan.

by Anonymousreply 19806/10/2021

Gossip Cop is a publicist's website. All they do is try to disprove the shit their clients have pulled.

by Anonymousreply 19906/10/2021

.....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 20006/10/2021

Thank God we were spared seeing the birth, at least, thus far. You KNOW they are freaking about the BBC mess and the G7. What WILL they do?

The interviews with the Wessexes have taken a lot of wind out of the Harkle sails. They were very deft at reframing it all. But now Catherine may wear a TIARA. What will they pull, it won't be just one pap walk.

by Anonymousreply 20106/10/2021

"During a life devoted to public service and being on almost permanent display, Lilibet was the one thing the Queen had that was entirely her own. Its use was restricted. It was a tender diminutive spoken only by those who knew and loved her.

Lilibet was as much a part of the Queen’s personal identity as her Sunday hats and buckled shoes, her tweeds in the country and her cornflakes in Tupperware.

And now it is no longer hers, its emotional exclusivity shattered; targeted and then blown apart like a clay pigeon. "

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 20206/10/2021

What will the Harkles do tomorrow when Kate and William are starring at the G7?

by Anonymousreply 20306/10/2021

Was having Diana's sisters at Archie's christening just stunt casting?

Did the Harkles ever interact with them before or after that?

What about Diana's brother Earl whatever, why didn't he rate an invite?

by Anonymousreply 20406/10/2021

Let's imagine the A-list guests who'll be invited to little Lilly's christening!

by Anonymousreply 20506/10/2021

r178 I wonder what Biden makes of the rumours if true that after her Oprah interview Meghan rang senior people in the Democrat party in California and tried to present herself as the partys next Presidential nominee!

by Anonymousreply 20606/10/2021

r186 I wonder how much Meghans fanny aches and throbs with excited twinges for William?

by Anonymousreply 20706/10/2021

r192 Im sure this film has already been released and was a commercial flop.

by Anonymousreply 20806/10/2021

Same topic, different film, R208. This one has not been made, the producer they hired owns the rights to it. Of course, if connected to the Suckses would have much more notoriety.

by Anonymousreply 20906/10/2021

Trooping the Colour is this weekend too. Scaled back, but still a big media draw. Meghan and Harry are now part of the audience like the rest of us.

by Anonymousreply 21006/10/2021

R206 I think it's very telling that after initial messages of support, Biden & Harris have said nothing about the Narkles. Neither have the Obamas (only Michelle addressed it and kind of slapped them on the wrists about scrutiny being part of public life) and Hillary who initially went after the royals a bit backtracked later during at virtual speech at Oxford where she said she had "no comment on the Sussexes and expressed her sympathies to the Queen on the death of Prince Philip." I think they have the Sussexes' number. I think they are going to walk a fine line between being softly supportive publicly (to get the woke vote), privately skeptical and not wanting to damage UK-US relations. Remember they are trying to rebuild international relations that were damaged during the Trump era.

by Anonymousreply 21106/10/2021

r209 Thanks.The producer himself must be obessed if he has been involved in the production of 2 movies about the Diana rumours.

r211 Yes I think President Biden has cooled towards them and I wasnt aware that Hillary had backtracked but I am glad she has as I was a bit dismayed at her original comments.

I wonder what senior politicians in the democrat party especially in California think about the Harkles and whether they have a good giggle about them!!

by Anonymousreply 21206/10/2021

Its telling that all their friends have ditched them. The Clooneys back-tracked too and admitted they didnt know them at the wedding. You dont hear any celebrities where they live talking about being friends or hanging out with them. Imagine living in a place for over a year and not making a single friend, only having your slow witted woke husband walking around the house, EFT tapping himself and muttering about paps chasing him, and a demanding toddler screaming for attention.

by Anonymousreply 21306/11/2021

Kate with the US First Lady Jill Biden visiting a school.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 21406/11/2021

R200 - That Blind Gossip item is complete bullshit.

Even the Sussexes aren't that crazy.

by Anonymousreply 21506/11/2021

Of coursee, R215. But the question is, what will they do for income going forward? If they are dropped by one of their media partners, as is rumored to be imminent, what then? They have created no content but the 1 podcast and supposedly are rehashing some IG stuff that will not be a big draw. Whinging and bad mouthing your family are not actual careers. She wanted to act again or do voice overs but was said by Disney to be "controversial" well before O1. They are indiscrete and vindictive, who would even want to socialize with them? They are no conduit to the BRF, the opposite, in fact. What could a brand manager do to try to get some reliable income generated?

by Anonymousreply 21606/11/2021

course

An edit button would be lovely, pretty pls Muriel!

by Anonymousreply 21706/11/2021

They really played it wrong re: the new kid, it was a chance for + PR. They also thought the BRF would be FOREVER silent. Guess not. They have the worst instincts and even worse timing. To pull the BBC nonsense the day before Philip's bday was cruet.

I do think Megs will cut Haz loose soon.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 21806/11/2021

I think Megs is going to bide her time until Charles is king. With his guilt issues, he'll be far easier to manipulate than HM.

by Anonymousreply 21906/11/2021

R215 It even says on it that it was an April Fools joke.

Some people will believe anything 🙄

by Anonymousreply 22006/11/2021

Kate looks fantastic in that dress. Those severe 40s styles really suit her.

The publicity surrounding G7 shows you where the power truly lies: With HM, Charles & Camilla, and the Cambridges.

As someone said above, Harry and Meghan are just part of the audience now. Their title is looking more and more absurd.

by Anonymousreply 22106/11/2021

How will they generate income now?

by Anonymousreply 22206/11/2021

Haz still has his big important job as a Chief Impact Officer.

by Anonymousreply 22306/11/2021

I bet Megs is green with envy at those pictures of Kate hobnobbing with the Bidens. However, if she had been there instead, it would have been all about her and drama drama. Kate is brilliant at showing up, having it be about who she is there to see, and being an absolute cipher.

Kate's mask slipped ever ever so slightly when asked about the baby. So slightly you can barely tell, but it did. However, the fact that she answered it so smoothly shows what a pro she is.

Scroll down for the video.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 22406/11/2021

R224 Yeah there is a flicker of a second where I think she's probably thinking "of course I haven't met the baby yet you idiot."

by Anonymousreply 22506/11/2021

The sad thing is, Kate loves babies and children. If Meghan hadn't been such a monster and then taken off for the US, Kate would have been thrilled to play indulgent auntie to Harry's kids.

by Anonymousreply 22606/11/2021

Saddest for those kids, R226, isolated from many people who love them and would have been a source of support, as extended families are. Esp important with raging and disordered parents. And all the fun the cousins will not get to share in.

Yet they keep digging deeper.

by Anonymousreply 22706/11/2021

R226 In all honesty I think had Mez and Haz stayed in the UK, Kate and William would have become like second parents to their child in a similar way to how The Queen & Prince Philip were effectively second parents for Princess Margaret's children.

by Anonymousreply 22806/11/2021

And that's why Meghan dragged Harry thousands of miles away. No way would she allow Kate and William to play that kind of role as it interferes with her own dominion over her family.

by Anonymousreply 22906/11/2021

......

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 23006/11/2021

“You can’t call me that”

Oh wow.

by Anonymousreply 23106/11/2021

R131 - The Daily Mail kicked off this scrum right before QEII hosts the Joe Biden at Windsor Castle and the DAY before the birthday of her recently deceased husband.

by Anonymousreply 23206/11/2021

R242 - Harry and Meghan have known the Bidens personally for years.

by Anonymousreply 23306/11/2021

R224 not R242 - Harry and Meghan have known the Bidens personally for years.

by Anonymousreply 23406/11/2021

Has Meghan ever met Joe or Jill Biden?

by Anonymousreply 23506/11/2021

R235 - Yes she has.

by Anonymousreply 23606/11/2021

When, R236?

by Anonymousreply 23706/11/2021

R233 What a load of shit.

Harry has met Biden, Markle never has.

Lying for Meghan is still lying, idiot.

by Anonymousreply 23806/11/2021

I think Harry met the Bidens at the Invictius Games in Toronto back in 2017 (it was during those games that he and Meghan made their first appearance together) but I'm not sure Meghan was with him when he was socializing with the Bidens and Barack Obama.

by Anonymousreply 23906/11/2021

R229 The reason they moved away was for $$$ and an attempt to be bigger than royal family. I feel bad for those two kids. They are going to grow up in near isolation. I'm sure they'll have a few celeb baby friends for photo shoots but never real family. Harry complained about living in a Truman show but ironically he is giving the same kind of shit life to his children possibly even worse.

by Anonymousreply 24006/11/2021

She would sign over all parental rights to those children in a heartbeat if the price was high enough. In a heartbeat and would never think of them again. Someone should check her scalp for the mark of the beast . 666.

by Anonymousreply 24106/11/2021

"The reason they moved away was for $$$"

R240 - I think $$$$ is always the best reason to move or relocate and $$$ probably drives 90% of the moves-relocations in the USA.

by Anonymousreply 24206/11/2021

Oh lord that school rabbit video was so awkward. I like Jill but the teacher must have referred to the rabbit on his lap as Storm 4 times and she still couldnt figure out who Storm was.

Bless that teacher, he was so upbeat and positive but it was absolutely awful. So wooden and false. Loved that little girl just refusing to play along! Bitch, I ain't playing!

Kate looked incredible. She must live on watercress and lemon juice though, she's impossibly tiny and gets tinier as time goes on. Loved her dress.

by Anonymousreply 24306/11/2021

R241 - I think you are over-exaggerating on what Meghan would do regarding her children.

How can you hate someone you have never met that much?

by Anonymousreply 24406/11/2021

R244 -Really easy to hate an abusive, self centered cunt who is such a megalomaniac that she expects everyone to worship her ugly, useless, repulsive self. Easy breezy. Bitch is evil and depraved.

by Anonymousreply 24506/11/2021

R245- ETA- R244 kisses her degenerate ass and is blocked.

by Anonymousreply 24606/11/2021

I think Meghan wanted to move out of the UK for several reasons: she didn't like the nature of royal work, she probably didn't like where she was in the pecking order with no opportunity to move up, and she saw opportunities for more personal freedom and to make more money leaving the royal family. Harry, on the other hand, probably wanted less scrutiny (and lies) from the press. The irony is that he will have even more scrutiny having left the way they did.

by Anonymousreply 24706/11/2021

R247 Meghan hated royal work because it's largely boring, thankless and self-sacrificing (everything Hollywood is not). 100% she saw the earning potential in the titles. Harry was always paranoid (something his ex girlfriends have discussed) about the media. While Meghan probably loves the celebrity lifestyle, I do think Harry will bore of it after a while. The truth is Harry needs structure which is why his happiest times allegedly were when he was in the army.

by Anonymousreply 24806/11/2021

He also claims that time was when his drug and alcohol use was the greatest, R248, you really can't believe anything they say, they talk out of every side of their mouths.

by Anonymousreply 24906/11/2021

R249 I call BS on his drinking and drugs while in the Army, it would not have been allowed. I do think he started drinking more after his stint in the Army was over. I've always wondered why he left the army. Andrew continued to serve for like 20 years in the navy so I don't see why Harry could have continued in the Army.

by Anonymousreply 25006/11/2021

Harry could have continued to serve but he couldn't have been promoted further unless he passed certain qualifying exams. Either he couldn't pass them or didn't want to try. He decided to quit and go back to being a working royal instead.

by Anonymousreply 25106/11/2021

R250- I think one of his PPO's basically confirmed Harry's drinking while in the army. He caused many problems drinking and attacking reporters, sex workers, the local young women, ect. His PPO said they could protect him 24/7, but they couldn't give him a moral compass, I am paraphrasing. Basically he said Harry was an amoral human being who has no conscience. Harry is evil and abusive, just like her.

by Anonymousreply 25206/11/2021

This is golden, perhaps this could be a brand, lol.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 25306/11/2021

I hate Piers but love this. The Boss indeed.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 25406/11/2021

How ageist of him to suggest the Queen is hard of hearing, suggesting she misunderstood him. He is such a degenerate bastard. So woke of him.

by Anonymousreply 25506/11/2021

When did he do that, R255?

by Anonymousreply 25606/11/2021

.....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 25706/11/2021

FuckHarry and Meghan

by Anonymousreply 25806/11/2021

I love how HMs, Camilla's, and Kate's outfits are subtly color coordinated. These women know what they are doing.

by Anonymousreply 25906/11/2021

Shouldn't HM have white shoes and a white bag in the summer? It would coordinate better with her dress.

On topic, Harry and Meghan would KILL to have been included in the G7 summit. But they fucked up all possibility of that before they even said their vows.

by Anonymousreply 26006/11/2021

We have podcasts!!!!

by Anonymousreply 26106/11/2021

Harry and Meghan would never have been included in the G7 summit no matter what there status with their family was.

The Sussexes are too low on the totem pole. If QEII was not 95 years old. I doubt the Cambridges would be their either.

by Anonymousreply 26206/11/2021

The demented MegStans are having a mental breakdown on twitter about Kate getting so much coverage. Mean Girl Meg definitely appeals to mean fangirls.

by Anonymousreply 26306/11/2021

R260 HM is beyond fashion.

by Anonymousreply 26406/11/2021

R263 any highlights?

by Anonymousreply 26506/11/2021

PODCAST, singular. Not so much going on creatively, eh?

by Anonymousreply 26606/11/2021

Wills and Kate are the future. Harry and Meghan could have been part of that future and carved out their own unique role, especially in regards to the Commonwealth. But they chose to leave and be celebrities in California instead.

by Anonymousreply 26706/11/2021

Celebrities known for rescue chickens, whining and lying. Go Harkles!

by Anonymousreply 26806/11/2021

Of course they’re all good friends, the Sussexes and Bidens! Why, over a casual lunch of chicken tacos…

by Anonymousreply 26906/11/2021

Netflix and Spotify are going to have to wait another 20 weeks for their Sussex content. The Sussexes are on parental leave. But “time is money” and honoring contracts is for the little people. Royals are exempt.

by Anonymousreply 27006/11/2021

R269 Allegedly, part of the reason the Queen gave Harry and Meghan that Commonwealth portfolio was to allow H&M the freedom to spend more time away from the UK for their mental health. This whole idea that the royals weren't trying to please the couple is utter BS.

by Anonymousreply 27106/11/2021

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Meghan and Harry adopted a couple more kids. They'd get all kinds of publicity and they could throw a huge tantrum when baby #3 and baby #4 weren't put in the line of succession. The rule about adopted children has long been in place, but just like with Archie's HRH, the Sussexes will pretend that this isn't the case.

by Anonymousreply 27206/11/2021

R272, that’s a great call. All the nutters do that. Markle, Jolie, Farrow, Madonna, Theron…

by Anonymousreply 27306/11/2021

I just gave birth to royalty!! Why is the attention on that family and not me!!! Get me sunshine sucks on the phone NOW!!! Get a black and white photo of Lilibet Diana's foot NOW!!!!

by Anonymousreply 27406/11/2021

Really negative article about the Dynamo Duo in the Daily Beast which used to be so supportive of the Harkles.

by Anonymousreply 27506/11/2021

' Netflix is realizing they cannot use any of the content they create without looking like their going against the monarchy'

Thsi has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever read on here and that's saying something. The Crown has been more offensive to the BRF than any other show ever made.

by Anonymousreply 27606/11/2021

MAJOR EXPOSE OF KLAN GRANNY ACCOUNTS IN REFINERY 29 TODAY

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 27706/11/2021

.....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 27806/11/2021

No one cares about their drama anymore. We are all transfixed by pretty Justin Trudeau in his ugly suit and the astonishing presence of the queen, age 95.

by Anonymousreply 27906/11/2021

Justin flirting with Carrie on the beach was funny and quite on brand. Harkle WHO?

by Anonymousreply 28006/11/2021

I don't waste time on the useless, psychotic sussex squad or anything they "write."

by Anonymousreply 28106/11/2021

Notice how in every. single. picture of her she is looking square at the camera with that fake smirk and dark dead emotionless narc eyes. Always putting on an act. Harry kissing her and she not returning the affection. Fake plastered grin when she knows she is being watched.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 28206/11/2021

r266 I wonder if it's Spotify that is the company rumoured to be about to drop them?

by Anonymousreply 28306/11/2021

Should be Netflix - they've produced nothing and then announce they're taking several months parental leave from their jobs doing nothing.

by Anonymousreply 28406/11/2021

Do you think she realizes that the cameras are on her only because of Harry?

by Anonymousreply 28506/11/2021

I hate these two useless fuckers

by Anonymousreply 28606/11/2021

Shouldn't they be spending this time with their newborn in heavenly bliss?

by Anonymousreply 28706/11/2021

This evening

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 28806/11/2021

In the middle of the night in LA, 1 hour after the BBC reported that they didn't have the Queen's approval for the name, the King and Queen of Montecito were already tweeting, attacking them. Their whole lives revolve around name-checking themselves on twitter and picking fights. I think the Queen has had enough of those 2 nutjobs. They've shot their wad.

by Anonymousreply 28906/11/2021

Even if they were in the UK, you can see how they just were not fit for purpose. No chance they would show up on time, appropriately dressed and groomed and act in a professional and pro-social manner for the G7 Like all the other grownups there manage. They are loose cannons and malicious, like ODD 12 year olds in middle aged bodies, planning to steal the car and set the garage on fire for shits and giggles while everyone else is focused on geo political alliances. They really have shown their true colors.

by Anonymousreply 29006/11/2021

Blissfully, I am so far beyond caring anymore what the crows and the rats say or think about the Sussexes, so these national meltdowns are leaving me completely unaffected. I am, however, very tickled that the Family has been embroiled in one of its worst PR crises in a century and Harry and Meghan keep throwing them these incredible (undeserved, imo) lifelines and the RF just keeps refusing it and only sinking themselves deeper. Like:

Oh no! Everyone is talking about how cold and unfeeling the Royal Family is. Wait, Harry says his grandparents Zoom with Archie and send him cute gifts? Wow, that's lucky for -- oh no, sorry, Dickie Palmer's here to refute that story and Becky English actually has exclusive palace sources confirming that no one in the family has spoken to the Sussexes in months and they're not close at all. Um, okay . . . not sure how that helps your side but okay . . .

Drat! Everyone found out that Kate lost her temper and made Meghan cry! Oh, Meghan is saying that they made up and she forgives her and that she believes Kate is a wonderful person? Thank god! Now we -- oh nevermind, Camilla Tominey's rushing in to say actually that's totally wrong and Kate hates Meghan's guts and they're on awful terms and no longer speak. Uhhh . . . alright . . .

Shit shit shit! People keep saying the Royal Family is racist and they rejected their mixed-race family members! Hold the phone, did the Sussexes just name their only daughter after the Queen's beloved family nickname? Wow, they really adore their grandmother and she clearly has been incredibly supportive and welcoming and -- oh hold on, yeah nope, Emily Andrews and Chris Ship are here just in time to tell us that actually the Queen is very upset that this one specific granddaughter out of all her 32 other ones was named after her, because actually they never asked permission but actually they did but it wasn't really permission it was more of a heads up but actually she didn't feel comfortable saying no but actually she could have said no she just didn't hear them properly you know "Lilibet" kinda sounds like "Leprosy" but actually none of that matters because turns out the Queen has dementia anyways important thing is that the Family is extremely offended by this extraordinarily sweet gesture of honor.

by Anonymousreply 29106/11/2021

'Meghan and Harry are now part of the audience like the rest of us.'

You think they'll stay in to watch that tedious crap when they could be enjoying their pool or the beach?

by Anonymousreply 29206/11/2021

R292, if they were enjoying their lives none of this would be happening. They wouldn’t have had their lawyers sending threatening letters to news organizations in what was, for them, the middle if the night.

by Anonymousreply 29306/11/2021

Have you been living under a rock, r292? They will not only watch, but "leak" some sussex shit to take press attention away. The Narkles are obsessed with the BRF.

by Anonymousreply 29406/11/2021

They are not enjoying anything. That's why they constantly have to start shit.

by Anonymousreply 29506/11/2021

r290 Doesnt sound like Meghans alleged Presidential ambitions are likely to come to fruition with such a bad reputation like that!!

by Anonymousreply 29606/11/2021

We had Trump so can't rule anything out, R296. But, unlikely.

by Anonymousreply 29706/11/2021

r284 Imagine if both of them drop them in fairly quick succession ......

by Anonymousreply 29806/11/2021

Can you imagine the Harkles at the G7? Both acting out constantly to focus attention on themselves.

by Anonymousreply 29906/11/2021

Well, they would be even more pressed for money then, R298. His book is coming in the fall.

by Anonymousreply 30006/11/2021

R299, Meghan trying to get on the stage with all the world leaders, LOL. “Oh, I’m not allowed? How racist!”

by Anonymousreply 30106/11/2021

r297 Maybe a lesson will be learnt by the two main political parties from the Trump era mainly that people who behave like they have a narcisstic personality disorder shouldnt be allowed anywhere near positions of authority and leadership...?

by Anonymousreply 30206/11/2021

It is inconceivable, R299. Harry has ALWAYS been a problem and a concern, they tried to create a very supported role and keep him onside with payments, but now, best they are far away. Harry steaked at his father's 50th bday party. His pushing in at the PoW exhibit, with his 1st wife in tow, was similarly anti-social. The Narkles SUCK. Best if they are far away.

Good one, R301!

by Anonymousreply 30306/11/2021

r300 Book? Self help tips?

by Anonymousreply 30406/11/2021

Harry has some sort of memoir coming out.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 30506/11/2021

A memoir about what it's like having those bird legs wrapped around him?

by Anonymousreply 30606/11/2021

The standard whinge we have heard before, no doubt. Scoobie Doo is also updating Finding Dollars with private convos from Prince Philip's funeral. Fucking jackals and ghouls.

by Anonymousreply 30706/11/2021

Meme will release a book on how to get and keep your man.

by Anonymousreply 30806/11/2021

r305 I cannot see a memoir doing anything other than further estranging him from his family. It also doesnt sound like a long term viable plan.

by Anonymousreply 30906/11/2021

Gotta pay the bills, R309..

This vid explains some of the compulsiveness.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 31006/11/2021

r310 But their tales are a rapidly diminishing asset and of lucrative interest for only a short period whilst the novelty factor is alive,Arguably they are already at or very near that point.

Then what in terms of paying their bills? When will the penny drop that the life they expect and feel entitled too is not going to happen?

by Anonymousreply 31106/11/2021

This is hilarious!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 31206/11/2021

Once the memoir is out, and FF p. 2, and the inevitable reality series, what will be left? At the rate they are going, there will be absolutely nothing left to say within 12 months time.

by Anonymousreply 31306/11/2021

She will claim that William made advances.

by Anonymousreply 31406/11/2021

Or Charles, r314!

by Anonymousreply 31506/11/2021

r314 And only a small tiny hardcore will believe her

by Anonymousreply 31606/11/2021

H&M want to continue to be royals (I mean they allegedly have a bigger staff now than they did in the UK), the problem is the "magic" of being royal fades away the longer you are outside of the institution. Every royal who has tried to build a life outside the British Monarchy has found this out the hard way. The Windsors, Fergie, Diana & even Edward and Sophie when they tried their half-in/half-out method of being royal. Diana was just starting to find this out right before she died as her popularity in the UK was on the wane. Granted, H&M are the first ex-royals to try and take their act to Hollywood so they might be able to milk it for a while but the longer they are out in the wilderness, the less relevant their stories become. Right now the novelty is high, but are people going to want to hear the same stories 2, 5, or even 10 years from now? Nope. Unless they can come up with something unique to themselves, their brand has a limited shelf life.

The Oprah interview was the first in a serious of major blunders, which at the moment might appear to be a success in some quarters, will ultimately prove to be a miscalculation. Had they focused their attacks on the British Media & NOT the royal family they would have given themselves more room to build a brand that still maintained (at least publicly) some degree of royal connection & perhaps even more sympathy in the UK.

by Anonymousreply 31706/11/2021

[quote]Oh no! Everyone is talking about how cold and unfeeling the Royal Family is. Wait, Harry says his grandparents Zoom with Archie and send him cute gifts? Wow, that's lucky for -- oh no, sorry, Dickie Palmer's here to refute that story and Becky English actually has exclusive palace sources confirming that no one in the family has spoken to the Sussexes in months and they're not close at all. Um, okay . . . not sure how that helps your side but okay . . .

It's because the two grifters can't be TRUSTED by their own families anymore. The sell out every conversation they have with them. That's why the lack of interacting. It's not cold in the least, it's protective. The damn Queen is 95 years old.

[quote]Drat! Everyone found out that Kate lost her temper and made Meghan cry!

They found out no such thing because its widely thought the opposite occurred. It was Bridezilla stomping around in the weeks leading up to her wedding who was driving everyone crazy. But, in interest of fairness, it's highly likely the two women irritated each other, equally, in the run-up.

[quote]Shit shit shit! People keep saying the Royal Family is racist and they rejected their mixed-race family members! Hold the phone, did the Sussexes just name their only daughter after the Queen's beloved family nickname?

Yeah they sure did. Weeks after publicly and angrily calling her entire family racist insensitive jerks who didn't give a whit about their spoiled snowflake feelings. And who didn't continue to pay for their exorbitant lifestyles, oops.

[quote]but actually none of that matters because turns out the Queen has dementia anyways important thing is that the Family is extremely offended by this extraordinarily sweet gesture of honor.

'Sweet gesture', please! It was done to later commercially exploit the poor child and her tenuous connection to her royal relatives -you know, the ones she'll never actually meet. Can't merch a "Lindsay" or "Ava" or "Doria" can you.

by Anonymousreply 31806/11/2021

[QUOTE] They will not only watch, but "leak" some sussex shit to take press attention away.

You're hilarious. You think that every single speculative crappy article in the Express or other tabloids is carefully placed by Meghan. You even think she pays the press to post these articles! I can only think you come from some nightmare country with a backhander economy.

by Anonymousreply 31906/11/2021

[QUOTE] ! It was done to later commercially exploit the poor child and her tenuous connection to her royal relatives -you know, the ones she'll never actually meet. Can't merch a "Lindsay" or "Ava" or "Doria" can you.

You have zero evidence that she intends to use photos of the children to advertise products. No instagram, no tagging of brands, no sponsored posts. Kate and William give the Mail details of their kids' outfits. Meghan does not, so stop making up lies about her.

by Anonymousreply 32006/11/2021

[QUOTE] And the inevitable reality series

You've been saying this will happen since they left the UK. It never does, and never will.

by Anonymousreply 32106/11/2021

You don't have a clue what you are talking about, r319. You're just here, for some bizarre reason, to defend these two morons to the death. Knock yourself out, you're not going to convince anyone. Especially not with those piss poor talking points.

by Anonymousreply 32206/11/2021

The Harkles are idiots. They're trying to claim the Queen's staff is doing them dirty. That's the same staff that filed complaints against Bridezilla for bullying and harassment with HR and the family convinced them to keep it quiet - which they recently threatened no longer to do.

Markle's obviously an out of control bitch and Harry's a mental case. They appear to be devoid of anything approaching common sense.

by Anonymousreply 32306/11/2021

[QUOTE] He caused many problems drinking and attacking reporters, sex workers, the local young women

More horseshit from the Who Is Paying For All This PR Troll. Every time you write this post (which has no source) you add another group of people to it that Harry allegedly went round attacking like a rabid dog.

by Anonymousreply 32406/11/2021

Bill Maher said tonight:

"Lilibet joins Archie, Meghan and Harry at their mansion in Santa Barbara. Just what that household needs, more pissing and whining."

LOL

by Anonymousreply 32506/11/2021

Maher is a dipshit, but that's fucking funny.

by Anonymousreply 32606/11/2021

[QUOTE] You don't have a clue what you are talking about, [R319].

Nor do you if you think UK/US media outlets accept financial incentives to write articles about Meghan. What a gullible, pea brained troll you are.

by Anonymousreply 32706/11/2021

R320, who told the press the story about Archie’s Stan Smiths being given to the Cambridge kids and Archie? And who told them about the lovely thank you note from Meghan?

Who told them about the black beanie that Archie was wearing? And that it came from a New Zealand cottage industry entrepreneur? And that the Narkles donated 200 of the same beanie to children in need?

Guess they just made all that up, huh?

by Anonymousreply 32806/11/2021

Just block the megaloon @320. She can't accept that no one likes the sleazy Narkles.

by Anonymousreply 32906/11/2021

R329 that's her job, mate. Sunshine Sucks didn't get to take parental leave.

by Anonymousreply 33006/11/2021

[quote]You have zero evidence that she intends to use photos of the children to advertise products. No instagram, no tagging of brands, no sponsored posts. Kate and William give the Mail details of their kids' outfits. Meghan does not, so stop making up lies about her.

Delusional bitch, please. I can only feel sorry for you. She's been on a non-stop commercial surf since the day she met Haz. She (and he) have also been a non-stop bucket of leaks. Their lives with their poor kids will be no different. She may not consort with the Mail, but her publicist has Page Six on speed dial. That may be worse.

by Anonymousreply 33106/11/2021

LMAO, r330! Good one.

by Anonymousreply 33206/11/2021

Lilibet was cute on the Queen. Otherwise…I’m sorry, it sounds stupid.

by Anonymousreply 33306/11/2021

Can't MERCH Doria.

by Anonymousreply 33406/11/2021

R328 - two items in two years, neither one a luxury brand? Try again. There have been about six pictures of this kid. They present him in sepia, in a cartoon format, running away from the camera, deliberately so that morons like you can't scream MERCHING!

I notice you don't even attempt to defend all the sponsored work Kate does for Zara and Boden and Marks and Spencer. The Mail has all the details of her high street outfits and the children's.

by Anonymousreply 33506/11/2021

R382- He admitted he drank in the army, you fetid pile of shit. Blocking yet ANOTHER account of this idiot.

by Anonymousreply 33606/11/2021

The word merch triggers the megaloon.

by Anonymousreply 33706/11/2021

[QUOTE] Delusional bitch, please. I can only feel sorry for you. She's been on a non-stop commercial surf since the day she met Haz. She (and he) have also been a non-stop bucket of leaks. Their lives with their poor kids will be no different

You dumb fucker - you can't give any examples of this so called merching so you move on to other topics. Do you refer to your own paid job as 'merching'? And every story that the press post isn't a 'leak'. Do you really have no concept of how journalists work? They make shit up. Your favourite source The Express screams every year that the UK will have a polar winter with weeks of snow. Never happens.

by Anonymousreply 33806/11/2021

[QUOTE] He admitted he drank in the army

Everyone drinks in the army, Ku Klux Klanner. What he didn't do was run round attacking local women and reporters.

by Anonymousreply 33906/11/2021

They've provided several examples, idiot. You just hear what you want to hear.

by Anonymousreply 34006/11/2021

Is it Hagitha? It sounds like the deranged duchess of delusion. Either way, they are over. Completelyy over. Anything they release will only disgust and anger people more than they already are. Trolling a 95 year old grandmother is repulsive to everyone, much less a beloved Queen They are depraved and totally disliked.

by Anonymousreply 34106/11/2021

I dont know about "merching" kids, but I do know Meghan was messaging Matt Cardle (UK X-Factor winner) in 2015, while she was dating Cory. You can find articles about this. The magazines changed the date she met Harry from May 2016 to July 2016. You can also find proof of both versions online.

She made Kate cry over Charlotte's dress, was a major bitch to everyone in Australia, intentionally wore her jacket unbuttoned to hint at a pregnancy, announced her pregnancy during someone else's wedding. Pretended like she left for mental health reasons (the "no one asked if im ok" interview), when its coming out now that books and tv/radio deals were being started long before they left.

She has twisted Harry's mind as he is gullible and easily manipulated. Ever paranoid about paparazzi according to his exes. He believes he is actually protecting his wife. He actually said his mom was chased because she was with a dude who wasnt white!! What??

She shows the classic signs of being a user, a manipulative narcissistic individual. She has zero friends. Zero family. Only her mum at the wedding. Where are her cousins, aunts, uncles? Former colleagues from Suits? Childhood friends? Her friends are people like Scoobie Doo or equally vapid J Mulroney who she can get something out of. Narcs dont have real friends. They have people who serve a purpose before they are tossed aside. If you met MM in person you would find her to be a fake insufferable human being.

by Anonymousreply 34206/11/2021

100% true, r342

by Anonymousreply 34306/11/2021

[quote]I notice you don't even attempt to defend all the sponsored work Kate does for Zara and Boden and Marks and Spencer. The Mail has all the details of her high street outfits and the children's.

You're higher than a kite. Kate doesn't merch, she doesn't have to - she's married to the heir to the heir and swims in money, houses, and attendant luxuries provided to her. The Mail covers her clothes and accessories because she's the future QUEEN and the center of a ton of attention, as are her children. All are moderately attractive and photogenic, which increases interest.

As a senior royal she's not allowed to do sponsored work. Neither was Meghan after her wedding, which was a large problem as she continued to do so, undercover, when she really should have had no need to do so.

by Anonymousreply 34406/11/2021

Jill Biden and Kate wrote a joint op ed together that was just published on CNN.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 34506/11/2021

The tacky cunt merched the wreath she sent for Prince Philip’s funeral. WHILE the funeral was happening, actually.

Did the world find out which flowers were in the other wreaths? Did we find out which florist delivered the wreath to the chapel?

I’m only surprised we didn’t find out how much it cost. And that’s probably because it was a freebie in exchange for “promotional consideration”, like the prizes on a game show.

by Anonymousreply 34606/11/2021

r278 are you a paying member because it won’t let me read that article

by Anonymousreply 34706/11/2021

Try again r347 because I’m not and I can read it.

by Anonymousreply 348Last Saturday at 4:15 AM

The Irish Times haven't minced words.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 349Last Saturday at 4:41 AM

Fun review at R349.

Having the confidence to allow something so plainly awful to be published--using "The Duchess of Sussex" rather than one's own surname--is reminiscent of that woman Meryl Streep played who was an awful singer but nevertheless forced herself on the public.

by Anonymousreply 350Last Saturday at 5:21 AM

Have Haz and Megs announced a lawsuit against the Irish Times yet?

by Anonymousreply 351Last Saturday at 5:36 AM

The New York Times couldn't bring itself to honestly review The Bench; two mildly critical paragraphs were buried between praise for the illustrations, the gentle tone, the message, and the backstory.

To quote a from the comments section there, "I'm sure The Firm is relieved she embarrassed only herself this time."

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 352Last Saturday at 5:47 AM

Let's not forget that part of Kate's job is to highlight British brands. I suppose that's a form of merching, but it's on behalf of others. She doesn't see any direct monetary benefit from wearing Catherine Walker, Boden, or Marks & Spencer. Meghan could have done the same thing and no one would have said anything: In fact, she had a golden opportunity to wear up-and-coming UK designers of color and get major points with the press and public. She chose to wear Givenchy instead.

by Anonymousreply 353Last Saturday at 8:14 AM

R353 Givenchy: Megaloon thought everybody would think she was the new Audrey Hepburn!

by Anonymousreply 354Last Saturday at 8:24 AM

Audrey Hepburn wore clothes that fit.

by Anonymousreply 355Last Saturday at 8:25 AM

Also doubtful that Audrey requested samples and then charged full retail to her father-in-law

by Anonymousreply 356Last Saturday at 8:29 AM

Meghan obviously was modelling herself on Audrey and Angelina with her desperate attempts to look like she was more than a 10th string UN spokesmodel they used when nobody anybody had ever heard of showed up.

by Anonymousreply 357Last Saturday at 9:20 AM

She's mastering Angelina.

by Anonymousreply 358Last Saturday at 10:10 AM

R358 - Meghan is not mastering anyone but she is a master at narcissism and pathologically lying. Oh yes, and ghosting people.

by Anonymousreply 359Last Saturday at 10:22 AM

That was the point. Sorry you missed it.

by Anonymousreply 360Last Saturday at 10:23 AM

Angelina at least has a long acting career and an Oscar to her credit, however crazy she is now. Meghan is a D-lister who had a one-time lucky break and has fucked it up so much that it's now clear WHY she was a D-lister all along.

If she and Harry divorce, right back to the D list she will go.

by Anonymousreply 361Last Saturday at 10:25 AM

Harry is practically D-list now.

Anyone with a functioning brain can’t take him seriously. He had the whole world adoring him and now he is a joke

by Anonymousreply 362Last Saturday at 10:29 AM

Well, he's still the Chief Impact Officer at... whatever that app is. You know he's working super hard at that.

by Anonymousreply 363Last Saturday at 10:34 AM

Once he's done paternity leave.

by Anonymousreply 364Last Saturday at 11:04 AM

Or decency, R323.

by Anonymousreply 365Last Saturday at 11:10 AM

The real Lilibet has had enough!!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 366Last Saturday at 2:27 PM

The YouTuber River is amusing and his videos a light gossipy romp. But he has some canny insights, amongst all the camp.

He IMO totally nails, perfectly, the reason why H&M went nuclear on the BRF in the Oprah interview with the racism accusations. Starting in the video at 6:40 and going to around 9:40 - he lays it out perfectly. It's the titles for their kids; I've long thought that Charles had told them that there was a move afoot to limit HRHs and Prince/ss titles to the heir's children only. That would leave their kids without an HRH. They reacted angrily.

I've long believed that Charles has told Harry of this plan long before he met Megan, probably several years previously. He's long wanted to streamline the BRF and the number of HRHs.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 367Last Saturday at 4:13 PM

The New York Times reviewed the Markle's kiddie book and trashed it. But even better are the comments from NYC's intelligentsia attacking her pretensions as a 'writer' and 'poet'. They're finished.

by Anonymousreply 368Last Saturday at 4:38 PM

r367 River is definitely worth a follow on youtube if your a royal watcher or royal gossip fan.

by Anonymousreply 369Last Saturday at 5:04 PM

' River is definitely worth a follow on youtube if your a royal watcher or royal gossip fan.'

Don't you mean 'if YOU'RE a racist', illiterate Klan Granny?

by Anonymousreply 370Last Saturday at 5:10 PM

I’ve been binging River on YT over the last couple of days. Absolutely love him. I don’t disagree with him about anything...including the stupidity of the unsupported rumours about moonbumps and the like. He does insist on a bit of common sense & I’m glad.

He does apparently have some sources...one is the daughter of an Earl that’s a close friend & someone connected to KP (I think). I am VERY iffy about people who claim to have sources but I think he might be on the level.

The nuggets he’s so far shared are:

William and Kate do not want the Sussexes invited the the jubilee. They don’t want them there at all because thsy know they’ll use it to “unveil” their family on the balcony, completely upstaging HMQ. More senior royals think it will look petty if they are not invited (William doesn’t care) so there may be a compromise where they are invited but, as non-working royals, won’t get on to the balcony or play any significant role.

There is a real desire behind palace walls to remove the Sussex title. Ancient documents are being poured over to find a loophole. The last straw was the Dax Shephard interview.

The family/courtiers are very worried about Doria. Apparently both she and Thomas are “paranoid”. Thomas is more of a blusterer but Doria is quite sly. She takes offence at everything and seems to have become quite a malign influence on Harry. They don’t want her invited to any events in the UK because she’s a bit if a stirrer.

All interesting, if true.

by Anonymousreply 371Last Saturday at 5:31 PM

Fuck. Please don’t “Oh dear” all my mistakes. I find this forum very difficult to write on for some reason. I can barely see the charactters I’m writing.

I am reasonably literate, I promise.

by Anonymousreply 372Last Saturday at 5:34 PM

Thomas is doing that interview tomorrow.

Meghan was raised in the Agape cult and the influence of "The Secret" is clear - she genuinely believes in manifesting. Haz is rumored to be receiving therapy "through a church" despite their ire, the family must be worried.

by Anonymousreply 373Last Saturday at 5:36 PM

R371 -Thank you for summarizing.

[Quote]they’ll use it to “unveil” their family on the balcony, completely upstaging HMQ.

I just had a tangential thought relating to the balcony. Recall Anne's electric slide right beside the queen, blocking Meghan from the photo op? Shortly after the Oprah interview, someone "close to" the couple (can't recall who. Gayle or a friend) said the RF member who inquired about skin color was Anne. Was it Meghan's retribution? I'm personally convinced that her antipathy for Catherine had to do with the "snub" of not being invited on the shopping trip. (in addition to envy - a huge narc tip off).

R373 - I assume Agape therapists are not licensed professionals, so I don't think they're bound by HIPAA law or confidentiality expectations of their respective governing bodies like the AMA or APA.

If Harry's stupid enough to reveal family information, oy vey. There's really no legal protection that I'm aware of. Scientology does this with their 'audting' where the person's supposed to reveal their secrets and foibles on the path to becoming "clear." Leader David Miscavige reportedly pulls Tom Cruise's files while having late night, scotch soaked yuk fests with his staff. Also supposedly how Travolta is kept in and quiet.

by Anonymousreply 374Last Saturday at 6:14 PM

Meghan had allegedly set up one of her arranged photographer agencies re: the shopping trip, R374. Catherine must have had a sense and bowed out. Then MeGain trashed her though her Toronto mouthpiece Lainey. She followed up by bullying toddler Princess Charlotte.

The Gruesome Twosome are very vindictive and as they feel cornered who knows what dangerous stunts they may pull? They have acted pressed for money for months.

This is literally elder abuse re: his grandparents, but, what can you expect from an animal abuser and someone who super glued another human's eyes shut, allegedly? Think all she has likely pulled since then. I do hope a vid of her abusing 2 year old Lottie is released, it will end her.

by Anonymousreply 375Last Saturday at 6:23 PM

It's a long time until the Jubilee. Why does anyone have to be invited right now? If Harry and Meghan do come out with his accusatory autobio, and the FF re-release, and probably a reality show, it may be absurd for anyone to think that the two of them should be up there on that balcony. If I were in the BRF's shoes, I would wait at least until early next year before issuing any invitation.

by Anonymousreply 376Last Saturday at 6:29 PM

MeGain Markle makes Chrissy Tiegen look like Mr. Rogers.

Harry is no better, he just had a masterfully crafted PR image cloaking his real self..

by Anonymousreply 377Last Saturday at 6:30 PM

The initial public plans were released, R376, and the Narkles immediately tried to box them selves in. Much like they did with the fake story of Doria being invited to spend Christmas with the royal family. The invite never happened nor did the shared holiday.

MeAgain was caught taking photos of private areas of family homes even before the wedding, she behaves more like a plant or operative than someone who wanted to join a family. She is unlikely to be plotting all of this alone, and WHO is paying many millions to Sunshine Sucks on the reg?

by Anonymousreply 378Last Saturday at 6:32 PM

A reality show and the Granny killed my mummy film that the Archewell guy owns the rights to are the big money makers left after Haz's forthcoming "memoires." Was a time given for the docu full of secret recordings? I imagine that may not be legal given security concerns re: the BRF? I can't imagine watching something like that of someone's family, just gross to be triangulated in by sick people.

The Queen has great support from the people of the UK and from other world leaders. Probably best to rip the bandaid now. It is absolutely disgusting to do this to a 95 year old, one who appeared to love Harry. But, with people like the Narkles, you might as well spit in their face, spaths cannot feel or value human connection unless they are using it to manipulate a mark and no matter how kind and generous, they will always play victim. Some people are like that.

by Anonymousreply 379Last Saturday at 6:37 PM

R371, very interesting speculation about the reserved, quiet and "saintly" Doria. There have been tidbits in many previous DL threads that she quit her social work job early on and received a stipend from the Narkles/ Prince Charles to the tune of $6000 monthly. She apparently did continue teaching yoga.

But now Doria is president of some company that assists families in overseeing senior care for their elderly relations though she personally doesn't have the training or licenses to do this directly herself.

I have never believed Doria was a live-in Nanny or was living with the Narkles on a regular basis. Now she perhaps is the snake in the grass?

Dynasty never had plot twists this devious or complex!

by Anonymousreply 380Last Saturday at 6:43 PM

I never bought the "saintly" Doria yarn.

Something there does not ring true.

And, look at the daughter. Did she learn her tricks from the mother?

by Anonymousreply 381Last Saturday at 6:45 PM

The DM had an article on the health care biz. You are right she does not have the required licenses. The biz targets wealthy seniors and is reportedly cash only. Hopefully it is just a shell company, otherwise, bit sinister and chilling. Esp with the rumors of how she came to own her house.

I thought I remembered an arrangement re: Doria coming to light in Charles' required disclosures (along with quite a sum for the Harkles to have numerology lessons).

Doria reportedly taught Meghan to cut people loose who cannot benefit you. Isn't there a history of her trying to frame Thomas Markle re: tax fraud? Thought I remember reading about that.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 382Last Saturday at 6:48 PM

Didn't Doria screw her brother out of his inheritance?

by Anonymousreply 383Last Saturday at 6:49 PM

The BRF should have heeded Philip's advice and taken the Sussex title in early 2020 when Meghan and Harry left. It was a title given for public service, and it should have been taken once they rejected a life of public service. What could Harry and Meghan have done in response that they haven't done anyway?

by Anonymousreply 384Last Saturday at 6:51 PM

Yes, R383 and a share in their father's house. All very odd. Think he died suddenly after a fall or some such too.

by Anonymousreply 385Last Saturday at 7:08 PM

They'll never take the Sussex title and leave Pedo with his.

by Anonymousreply 386Last Saturday at 7:19 PM

I'm bored waiting for Ubereats to arrive with my Big Mac and Diet Coke (yes, I am typing this comment with a wand attached to my head) and finally watched one of that River character's videos that are always getting linked here. How delightful and listenable is he? I loved it! Now I will delve into his other videos whilst eating my fries alone.

by Anonymousreply 387Last Saturday at 10:26 PM

R348 thanks. First time it blocked me from reading because it said for members only but when I went into it later it let me read the whole thing.

by Anonymousreply 388Last Saturday at 10:37 PM

Lmao! They denied that HM ever met baby sussex via zoom call. It's HM's way of saying "I don't know her."

Megdusa must be raging.

by Anonymousreply 389Last Saturday at 11:15 PM

Harry and Meghan got the message: their titles are in danger and the Palace gloves are off. This article is basically a public apology to the Queen without coming out and using the word "sorry" but foolishly still defending the Oprah interview. It's a flimsy tactic, at best, and it reads like one.

The damage is done.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 390Last Sunday at 4:51 AM

Yes, like all children, we've thrown a tantrum and caused maximum difficulty which we don't understand but we know enough to know we've been really naughty and now we're pretending to be good, like it never happened. The thing is, the grown ups know.

by Anonymousreply 391Last Sunday at 4:59 AM

I think even worse than the Oprah interview was Meghan telling Gayle King about a phone call after it and Gayle proudly leaking the Windsor family business on TV. And then the interview with Dax Shepard. Dax Fucking Shepard, fucking D lister?? FFS

by Anonymousreply 392Last Sunday at 8:55 AM

Wonder why Gayle has been left out of all the name-hoopla. She must feel so insulted that she hasn’t been allowed to inform us of any juicy details re:Lilibet

by Anonymousreply 393Last Sunday at 9:21 AM

River weighs in re: new Thomas Markle interview

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 394Last Sunday at 9:24 AM

River is beautiful. He looks a bit like Jackie on Asisstance, especially because his eyes are far apart.

by Anonymousreply 395Last Sunday at 9:27 AM

They keep trying to kiss up to the Queen, but have no issue shitting on her DIRECT HEIRS. You think all this will be forgotten in the 2-5 years when she's dead and Charles is in Charge?

by Anonymousreply 396Last Sunday at 9:32 AM

Charles still coddles Harry and downplays his dangerousness. He is as bad as his wife, always has been. He is a dark triad just like she is, has been messed up in the head since he was tiny. There are so many stories, the cheeky chappy Haz was a PR mirage.

Granny killed Mummy IS coming, the Archewell guy owns the rights to the film script, literally.

by Anonymousreply 397Last Sunday at 9:41 AM

Joe Biden stated he invited the Queen to the White House (which won't happen cause she no longer travels overseas) but there are rumours that the Cambridges may visit DC next year as there are apparently are plans in place for William & Kate to visit Canada next year as part of the Platinum Jubliee.

by Anonymousreply 398Last Sunday at 10:38 AM

Yes, but William is the heir. That's an advantage.

by Anonymousreply 399Last Sunday at 10:52 AM

Is the new PR going to throw Hazbean under the bus? That does NOT make MeGAIN look better. Always stepping on others, those narcs.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 400Last Sunday at 10:57 AM

^ Good luck with this tactic Meg. Almost no one had ever heard of you before Dim. You are loathesome all on your own and this strategy clinches it. You are birds of a feather and deserve all the karma coming your way from superglued eyes to ghosted loved ones to abused animals and endless elder abuse.

Meghan's not the problem, Harry is! Public told to stop blaming Duchess for joint mistakes MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have caused a number of problems for the Royal Family in recent years, but a commentator has urged the public not to lay all the blame on the Duchess.

by Anonymousreply 401Last Sunday at 11:00 AM

The Markles fucked themselves over. I note their fluffer Obie Scoubidou yesterday was gushing about the Queen, Kate, etc.

by Anonymousreply 402Last Sunday at 11:02 AM

Re R400... sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

by Anonymousreply 403Last Sunday at 11:11 AM

Well, I'm glad that Memorial Day passed without Harry doing another bizarrely contrived photoshoot in a military cemetery. Perhaps he learned his lesson from last time...or he was on standby for the baby's arrival.

There will probably be some cringe-worthy grand gesture next weekend for Father's Day. Maybe she'll gift (unload) another few thousand copies of that shitty book (which seems to have been written more for adults than children anyway).

by Anonymousreply 404Last Sunday at 11:15 AM

It looks like the Queen is coming around to Charles' point of view in regards to rebuttals. He was the one which wanted to rebut the Oprah interview lies but was shot down. Now the Queen has finally seen that staying silent in the face of these two grifters and their endless lies just isn't possible.

by Anonymousreply 405Last Sunday at 11:40 AM

Is there a method here though? She gave Diana and Charles every chance until - and pleaded for coolings off - until she decided this is enough. So Oprah landed and after that it didn't stop. Dual carriage landed and it didn't stop. Now it's gotta stop and enough time has passed the royal family looks more than reasonable. Arguably, in part, she gave them enough rope.

by Anonymousreply 406Last Sunday at 11:49 AM

R395 - I share your view - I've become entranced by River. His flamboyance has the odd quality of seeming more authentic than the lack there of, if you know what I mean, and his molasses voice is mesmerising.

He's much more fun than Lady C.

by Anonymousreply 407Last Sunday at 11:54 AM

^*lack thereof (not there of, before I'm Oh deared)

by Anonymousreply 408Last Sunday at 11:54 AM

The Queen is very patient with her family, but as the Diana/Charles thing proves, her patience has its limits. Harry and Meghan have been indulged far more than they deserve already. It's time to draw a line in the sand.

They know that if she takes their titles and they become Mr. and Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor, they'll be in deep shit.

by Anonymousreply 409Last Sunday at 11:55 AM

Don't feel bad, R407/R408. I misspelled "assistance" at R395.

by Anonymousreply 410Last Sunday at 11:56 AM

They are living well above their means. The family killed mummy movie is the most nuclear option, along with the doc of private vids and convos. Hopefully lawyers can stop that on security grounds if nothing else. Sick and malicious and dangerous people turn caring family into mere marks, the rest of the world does not have to play along and get triangulated in.

Will be interesting to see what Charles' financials show re: the Narkles. In the past there were numerology lessons and payments to Doria. What will more recent spending show?

by Anonymousreply 411Last Sunday at 11:59 AM

Have we known a monarch to remove people's peerages? Parliament "relieved" the Dukes of Cumberland and Albany of their titles in 1917 (because they were German princes fighting for the Kaiser), but those titles were considered in abeyance, allowing an heir to claim them, which hasn't happened. Peers can voluntarily give up their peerages. But has the monarch ever removed a peerage or, more specifically, a royal dukedom?

by Anonymousreply 412Last Sunday at 12:01 PM

Further, if the Queen removed the dukedom of Sussex from Harry, isn't he simply "Prince Harry" and Meghan becomes "Princess Harry"? That sounds more royal than "Duchess of Sussex."

by Anonymousreply 413Last Sunday at 12:03 PM

Meghan would hate being known as Princess Henry. She wants her name front and center always.

Also, Prince Harry is just a title. Duke of Sussex is a hereditary peerage.

The Queen can take all of Harry's titles and leave him as Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor if she wants. She is the font of all honor and Parliament has made clear they will back her on that.

by Anonymousreply 414Last Sunday at 12:13 PM

Harry needs to be stripped of ALL of their titles and Privy Council membership and Parliament needs to update the line of succession to ensure that these two shit stains don't get anywhere near the throne.

by Anonymousreply 415Last Sunday at 12:23 PM

R412, hereditary titles have to be considered a type of property. I doubt that, in the 21st century, they could be taken without some form of legal process. That was what happened after WWI, when a committee was tasked reviewing the cases of peers who had betrayed Britain, and Parliament removed titles as a legislative act.

by Anonymousreply 416Last Sunday at 12:40 PM

I was just thinking...if the Queen took away their titles, would the vindictive Sussexes sue the Crown?

by Anonymousreply 417Last Sunday at 12:44 PM

The Queen is within her full power to remove the HRH and princely titles/honorfics from Harry (and therefore by extension, Meghan) and any member of the BRF at anytime, for whatever reason she chooses. She does not need the assistance of Parliament to do so, as Fount of Honour in the UK she has full solo authority on those matters.

No they can't sue the Crown r417. On what basis? Harry has no right to an HRH or Princely rank without the monarch's approval. It is not like a legal right to a surname, given by one's parents that can't be taken away. All royal titles and rank spring from the will of the Crown.

In the case of the removal of a previously granted Royal Dukedom, the waters are a bit murkier. There is thought that the acquiescence of Parliament would be necessary to make that removal official. It took the co-intervention of Parliament, for example, to remove the titles of the German dukes via the Deprivation Act of 1917, described in r412.

by Anonymousreply 418Last Sunday at 12:46 PM

I don’t know the answer to the legal questions, but I do wonder whether there is not some law/protocol that specifically precludes using their titles in commercial branding.

I know it’s not a perfect analogy, but they were gifted those titles specificallly because they were supoosedly devoting their lives to the service of the monarch. So it’s a bit like a job title & it gives them the authority & credibility to represent HMQ home and abroad.

It’s a bit like the US president. He’s given that title &, as a courtesy, continues to be Mr President after his term (s) is up. But I am bloody sure it’s literally illegal for him to commercialise the title. I doubt Obama could bring out Presidential Chardonnay, Presidential Y-Fronts etc.....because it would be cheapening & trivialising the honour.

Surely to goodness there must be the same law when it comes to a royal dukedom. Maybe that’s what River means whe he says documents are being poured over to find a loophole.

by Anonymousreply 419Last Sunday at 1:00 PM

Parliament wouldn't defend Harry and Meghan on this. They don't have a leg to stand on: They don't even live in the UK anymore and are undertaking no public service on behalf of the monarchy. If the Queen wanted them busted down to Mr. and Mrs., Parliament wouldn't say boo.

by Anonymousreply 420Last Sunday at 1:04 PM

If they release a documentary with stolen footage and photographs from private royal residences, it will give the BRF and Parliament exactly the cover they need to take everything away.

by Anonymousreply 421Last Sunday at 1:05 PM

Someone please tell that scabies creature to fix his fucking face.

by Anonymousreply 422Last Sunday at 1:23 PM

Megaloon's lunatic coven is throwing a hissy fit on twitter about the coverage Kate got. I wonder which ones are Meghan's burner accounts?

by Anonymousreply 423Last Sunday at 1:47 PM

[quote]I don’t know the answer to the legal questions, but I do wonder whether there is not some law/protocol that specifically precludes using their titles in commercial branding.

Why would there be? Until recently, nobody tried to do it on this kind of scale.

Titles, at present, are honours bestowed by the monarch, even when advised by the government. The Queen could take back a royal title - there is precedent when George V stripped German relations of British titles at the time of the First World War. Debrett's says "The creation of peerages is a royal prerogative. In modern times all peerages have been created by letters patent. The patent, which is a parchment bearing the Great Seal but no signature, describes how the title may descend after the death of the person who has been ennobled – this is called the remainder."

Former banking boss Fred Goodwin, who was criticised for his role in the banking crisis, lost his knighthood following advice to the Queen by the Honours Forfeiture Committee but a simple knighthood is not part of the peerage.

So between royal prerogative and Parliament it could be done and there's precedent. It would be hard to deny him his princely status and probably not worth the uproar. Let her live as Princess Henry.

I doubt the government would want to turn titles into actual property... they would then be governed, potentially, by a whole whack of laws governing property... would it void the remainder? Can of worms.

by Anonymousreply 424Last Sunday at 2:42 PM

You know H&M are dying to be invited to the Jubilee not because of the Queen but for the headlines.

by Anonymousreply 425Last Sunday at 2:47 PM

Been awfully quiet in Montecito this weekend. I'd like to think they are spending time bonding with the new baby, but that's doubtful. What could the Gruesome Twosome be cooking up?

by Anonymousreply 426Last Sunday at 2:57 PM

MM is planning her wardrobe for the Diana statue unveiling.

by Anonymousreply 427Last Sunday at 3:12 PM

She'll probably wear a Diana wig and some replica of one of Diana's gowns. She's that tacky.

by Anonymousreply 428Last Sunday at 3:24 PM

Meghan is getting her wish - we've stopped caring about her says ANDRE WALKER MeGain Markle must be starting to panic. With every passing week the British people care less and less about her.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 429Last Sunday at 4:01 PM

Found this GEM on the interwebs

"The Harckles and Merchwell are the Fyre Festival of the humanitarian scene. Anyone thinking they are actually doing something valuable is like: :clown"

by Anonymousreply 430Last Sunday at 4:09 PM

"The Fyre Festival of the humanitarian scene" is brilliant.

Sparkle's little bench book is the equivalent of the sad lettuce/cheese sandwich.

by Anonymousreply 431Last Sunday at 4:27 PM

Did you see that the spine does not have the name of the book, only Duchess of Sussex in big gold letters, for real.

by Anonymousreply 432Last Sunday at 4:32 PM

r426 they appear to be tweeting with their burner accounts trashing Kate Middleton.

by Anonymousreply 433Last Sunday at 4:44 PM

R428 - she wore Diana's perfume on her first few dates with Harry.

I would be surprised if she didnt already wear Diana's outfits and wigs in bed while she pegged Harry & he sucks her thumb and calls her mummy.

by Anonymousreply 434Last Sunday at 5:54 PM

God, I hope not.

by Anonymousreply 435Last Sunday at 5:57 PM

Somebody talked about Celebitchy on here and I checked it out. It's nothing but vicious attacks on Kate Middleton and William by a bunch of demented, illiterate trailer park dwellers I assume. What's their problem? Meghan sure appeals to trashy women.

by Anonymousreply 436Last Sunday at 5:58 PM

Water seeks its own level, R436.

by Anonymousreply 437Last Sunday at 5:59 PM

OK, so I watched the recent River video. Besides talking about Thomas Markle he had an interesting story that Camilla Tominey had once told.

Back before Meghan, she was at some event and Harry was there, along with several reporters. Camilla related that Harry was blaming the reporters for the COMMENTS that he read on the Daily Mail website. Bad enough that he actually read the comments (River sniffed at the idea.) but Harry not only read them, but he was angry at the REPORTERS for what was written in the comment section.

Sounds like more of that stuff that the old girlfriend talked about - how he was obsessed with paparazzi even when they were nowhere around. And this was before Meghan. So, it appears that it is an old story with Haz.

I admit I sometimes read the DM comments, but if I was famous, especially in such a lofty family, I would ignore what was in the comments. I mean, really, why would you bother?

So, this seems to be an early indication of what would be Haz's disdain for the First Amendment.

by Anonymousreply 438Last Sunday at 6:04 PM

Did anybody post the Mail story about Markle's interview? Brutal. He nails Orca, Hapless and Montedusa.

by Anonymousreply 439Last Sunday at 6:18 PM

[quote]if I was famous, especially in such a lofty family, I would ignore what was in the comments. I mean, really, why would you bother

The comments section of anything will destroy your soul, your mood and your faith in humanity. It's a lot like DL except here you know the game.

by Anonymousreply 440Last Sunday at 6:19 PM

Putting things into gay terms:

Harry is that guy who claims to be an amazing fuck. But when you get him home, he hasn't douched, he comes too quickly and he sharts on your fresh linens while he sleeps.

William is the guy at the pub who buys you drink and chats you up casually. Then you get back to his place and he takes his time with you and make you beg to come. When you're done, he cleans you up, holds you till you fall asleep and in the morning he's at it again and then lets you shower while he makes you breakfast.

by Anonymousreply 441Last Sunday at 6:19 PM

And mental illness, R438.

"THEY are not going to STOP until she is DEAD!!!" WTAF?

by Anonymousreply 442Last Sunday at 6:37 PM

If Harry wanted to get away from the press, all he had to do was marry a nice, ordinary woman, give up Royal duties, and retire to a lovely estate in the English countryside or in Africa. He had plenty of money to finance that kind of life, and I'm sure Charles would have given him more if Harry had only behaved himself. After a few years out of the spotlight, the press would have paid him no more attention than they pay other minor royals.

Harry didn't do that because he craves the spotlight but wants it on his terms. Just as he tried to cherry-pick Royal duties, he wants to cherry-pick his fame. He wants all the attention, adulation, and riches without having to deal with intrusions on his privacy or public criticism. As the Queen tried to explain to him ages ago, it doesn't work like that.

by Anonymousreply 443Last Sunday at 6:41 PM

R439, the comments are golden!

I get a spath vibe from Doria and Thomas is a narc = Meghan worst of both parents

Spenceers = rageaholics + unstable Diana treated by psychiatrists from the honeymoon on, making 100s of calls to married men, etc. + self pitying Charles = Haz worst of both parents

The apple does not fall far. With these genes and so much isolation, pity the kids.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 444Last Sunday at 6:41 PM

Ironically, trainwreck parents will sometimes create stable kids. Psychologists call children who become stable, successful adults despite terrible childhoods "indestructibles." It's possible that Archie or Lili will turn out to be a pillar of strength who gets the fuck out of Montecito as soon as they turn 18.

by Anonymousreply 445Last Sunday at 6:43 PM

That is the LAST thing he wanted, R443. Did you see him at the Vax Concert cosplayng Bono? On the merch stroll with the ebike and track suit? Looking for the camera almost as much as his wife? If he is so retiring, WTF is he writing "memoirs?" He could have moved to the country, Charles offered them an estate, or to some remote part of the US, like Kanye. Nope, moved to Cali. And a reality show IS coming, mark my words.

by Anonymousreply 446Last Sunday at 6:44 PM

I thought of that, R445, but the genes are truly terrible as well. Diana fired nannies so the kids did not bond too much, MeMeMe cannot keep staff. Those kids are gonna be played against each other and have no stable attachments with stable adults. Boarding school could save them. For many kids it is an extended family member but they are isolated. One can hope. Maybe they can bond with the dogs.

The way Markle eyes people is creepy AF, she really seems off. That superglue story too. And she has dressed like former sig others with past boyfriends too, the cosplaying Diana is just a mummy twist on her mo. She is scary with that shark stare. Haz is a nasty and reportedly quite violent piece of work himself. I recall a story that one of MeAgain's dogs did not like him so she left it in Canada. Might have been a story to cover it being Corey's, dunno. But, they say animals are good judges of people. Both Narkles are dangerous.

by Anonymousreply 447Last Sunday at 6:49 PM

[QUOTE] They know that if she takes their titles and they become Mr. and Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor, they'll be in deep shit.

Legally, they can still call themselves Duke and Duchess and Prince whatever the silly queen does.

by Anonymousreply 448Last Sunday at 7:41 PM

[QUOTE] attachments with stable adults. Boarding school could save them. For many kids it is an extended family member but they are isolated. One can hope.

You're acting as if they live on an Arctic outpost miles away from other children. They'll make friends the way all children do, at pre school and school. Boarding schools can be hell and I doubt any of the Cambridge or Sussex kids will go.

Do you inhabit in some inbred swamp where cousins live next door to each other? Most people only see their cousins at family events once or twice a year.

I don't blame M and H for removing their kids from the Cambridges' sphere of influence and the constant bitching about their children being inferior to the Eyebags Trio.

by Anonymousreply 449Last Sunday at 7:49 PM

At this point, Harry and Meghan are too depressing to be good gossip.

by Anonymousreply 450Last Sunday at 9:19 PM

Anyone know how many Royal duties Meghan performed between wedding and maternity leave (which she never returned from)

by Anonymousreply 451Last Monday at 12:01 AM

R451 I think it's something like 72 official engagements before Megxit and that includes things like Trooping, the Cenotaph and other things the whole family went to. It also includes the tour of the UK they did when they got engaged.

by Anonymousreply 452Last Monday at 1:08 AM

I suspect it's only a matter of time before this couple are on the [italic]receiving[/italic] end of legal woes either from domestic staff or their business/charitable enterprises. With publicity comes scrutiny and the couple has an now well-established and extensive history of lying. How far will their shady behavior go now that they have so many outlets to express themselves? This is something they wouldn't have had to worry about when they were barely working royals as it is obvious now that the palace covered their bad behavior and did everything possible to burnish Harry's image despite his extensive troubles.

by Anonymousreply 453Last Monday at 2:34 AM

I suspect it's only a matter of time before this couple are on the [italic]receiving[/italic] end of legal woes either from domestic staff or their business/charitable enterprises. With publicity comes scrutiny and the couple has an now well-established and extensive history of lying. How far will their shady behavior go now that they have so many outlets to express themselves? This is something they wouldn't have had to worry about when they were barely working royals as it is obvious now that the palace covered their bad behavior and did everything possible to burnish Harry's image despite his extensive troubles.

by Anonymousreply 454Last Monday at 2:34 AM

R453, that’ll be interesting to see. When they were under the Royal wing, they had the protection of HR and palace PR. Word still got out, and the departures were still noted publicly.

Something I’ve been interested in was the hire of Rebecca Mostow as housekeeper and general handler. She’s been in the entertainment business for a long time, and worked for the Beckhams. Mark my words, there’s something shady there, and it will eventually come out. The fun will come when they try to Markle HER.

by Anonymousreply 455Last Monday at 3:13 AM

I think Meghan was interested in joining the royal family, but after the initial novelty wore off, the actual work was not interesting or stimulating or enough about her.

by Anonymousreply 456Last Monday at 3:25 AM

She wanted to be Diana 2.0, that is all.

by Anonymousreply 457Last Monday at 4:13 AM

She wanted to be a "princess". How very progressive.

by Anonymousreply 458Last Monday at 4:42 AM

R456 - Spot on. Meghan envisioned royal life as turning her into some sort of international star, and became quickly disappointed when she realised the truth of what Diana once said: "The work is 80% slog and 20% fantastic." Harry and Meghan thought they could lick off the 20% and spit out the 80% whilst still enjoying the halo of real royalty, the high-end photo ops, and the other bennies. The Queen understood this and refused to allow it.

You also have to remember that Meghan and Harry picked a fight with the UK press a year before they were even engaged.

Diana, however, understood immediately that seducing the press was as much a priority as seducing her husband, a lesson Meghan overlooked in her haste to make sure everyone knew she was The One. Ironically, Diana succeeded brilliantly with the press, but miserably with her husband. Diana became quickly disappointed in her marriage, which she had expected to fulfill adolescent romantic fantasies and the huge emotional needs resulting from her mental and family issues.

But Diana didn't have the luxury of exiting quickly, and managed to make tremendous success of the job itself even as her marriage quickly disintegrated. Diana also had the benefit of youth, beauty, no small amount of genuine charm, investment in the institution because of her children, and her status as a future Queen Consort.

Meghan had no such benefits. She wasn't really youthful or beautiful, lacked genuine charm, was hard as nails and poor at hiding it, was married to the sixth in line and resented the position, and virtually no understanding of the role of monarch in Britain and only respected would it could for her..

There are interesting parallels between the two women, but interesting divergences. They aren't so much mirror images, but more like each other but turned inside out.

In both women, the shock of royal life and its profound disappointments (one public and one marital) forced their worst character traits to the surface. And, in both women, these traits became all too evident immediately after gaining entry to the Golden Circle.

In contrast, the peculiar demands of royal life brought out Kate Middleton's best qualities - quite qualities, but exactly the ones necessary to succeed at the game.

Years from now, as with the Abdication in 1936, Megxit will be seen to have been a short-term cloud with a long-term silver lining. Britain and the monarchy were much better served by George VI and his wife than they would have been by Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, and Britain and the monarchy will be much better served with the mentally unstable, angry, self-regarding Sussexes far away.

Perhaps the Queen, who was already 10 years old at the time of the Abdication and, thus, has some far-reaching perspective on how this kind of thing plays out eventually, has recognised this all along.

by Anonymousreply 459Last Monday at 4:49 AM

R458 - Meghan is about as progressive as a tarantula.

by Anonymousreply 460Last Monday at 4:50 AM

^^* quiet (not quite) qualities

. . . only respected what it could do for her

by Anonymousreply 461Last Monday at 4:53 AM

Is Meghan okay?

by Anonymousreply 462Last Monday at 6:50 AM

Shit, I keep forgetting to ask!

by Anonymousreply 463Last Monday at 6:51 AM

Agree with R450, they use to be a fun topic, still are at times, but they are getting to Lindsay Lohan or Christy Teigen levels.

by Anonymousreply 464Last Monday at 7:05 AM

R464 A very good point. The question is, are Netflix and Spotify clocking the shift?

by Anonymousreply 465Last Monday at 8:01 AM

I don't know much about Spotify, but from what I've read about Netflix, they data crunch everything. They'll be aware of any shift, however minor, in the Sussexes' image.

by Anonymousreply 466Last Monday at 8:03 AM

I wonder if netflix was asked or informed they would take months of parental leave off from doing nothing

by Anonymousreply 467Last Monday at 8:07 AM

What says DL? Totally made up, or some elements of truth?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 468Last Monday at 8:31 AM

Lorraine Kelly , big name in British television and previously a vocal Harry and Meghan supporter is now getting fed up with them and their antics.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 469Last Monday at 8:42 AM

R468, I can buy it, but not because GossipCop says it. A LOT has happened to Harry (he volunteered for it all, of course) in just the last year.

Many life events that are known to be stressful, even when they don’t occur in a global pandemic. It’s my opinion that he doesn’t have true emotional support to rely on.

Every move they make is reported. He’s away from everything he’s ever known.

I’d be surprised if he didn’t completely break down.

by Anonymousreply 470Last Monday at 8:54 AM

R468 & R470 I think there's a grain of truth to this. I can believe despite it all that fact he may have hurt is Granny might be hitting him.

by Anonymousreply 471Last Monday at 9:00 AM

R469 Here the clip of Lorriane telling THomas Markle & Harry & Meghan to stop giving interviews (it right towards the end).

And, um, Russell Myers is looking really good......

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 472Last Monday at 9:06 AM

Excellent post R459

by Anonymousreply 473Last Monday at 9:14 AM

R468 Gossip Cop is a site for publicists to lie about tabloid gossip and claim their clients are paragons of virtue! The only interesting part of Gossip Cop is it shows what's getting under the publicists' clients' skin.

by Anonymousreply 474Last Monday at 9:20 AM

R470 - I agree. I wouldn't trust gossipcop as far as I could throw them, but given what Harry has exhibited of his mental issues, what he's colluded in re the family that actually protected him, and then experienced severe pushback on, with the addition of another baby and dealing with a histrionic, demanding wife - it would be odd if he weren't experiencing severe mental fallout. It's likely more of a shrewd guess on gossipcop's part than access to real info.

Harry and Meghan and Diana share two outstanding character traits: they act out rather than resolving issues, and they do so by persuading themselves that it can't possibly go tits up. Then, the proverbial hits the fan and they're shocked, SHOCKED! that it didn't, after all, turn out the way they assured themselves it would. Cf. Diana and the Morton book and the Panorama interview.

That said about gossip.com, the Harkles were heard to be fighting constantly on their first tour Down Under by people working at Admiralty House who overheard them through the closed doors.

Harry and Meghan are not only mentally unstable but, I am guessing, extremely isolated, having exchanged a highly structured and protected bubble for another bubble but one with no access to family, friends, advisors, etc., but with the added pressure of making pots of money.

I'm still waiting for some tragic shoe to drop. One hopes not for the sake of two innocent children.

by Anonymousreply 475Last Monday at 9:33 AM

R473 - Ta.

by Anonymousreply 476Last Monday at 9:35 AM

Great post, r475. If Harry were to take a standardized stress / life change inventory (validated and used in legitimate psychological research), he'd be off the charts. He has very poor internal coping resources, too say the least. And his support system? Lacking is an understatement. It's actually probably the single largest stressor in his life and he cannot recognize it.

by Anonymousreply 477Last Monday at 10:19 AM

Harry's current predicament is not that different from what Princess Diana went through in 1981/82. She melted down spectacularly but had the resources of the BRF machine to shield the worst of her freakouts from the public. Harry has spurned that assistance, so his mental tortures are clear for the world to see.

by Anonymousreply 478Last Monday at 10:23 AM

[Quote]the Harkles were heard to be fighting constantly on their first tour Down Under by people working at Admiralty House who overheard them through the closed doors.

☝I guess this is why they expected to have completely separate housing during the visit, not the wing royalty had used on previous visits. Can't have people listening in on them

by Anonymousreply 479Last Monday at 10:23 AM

R470, if its true that 'Every move they make is reported.', it's only because they are reporting or leaking it themselves via their PR. When do we hear anything about what they do that isn't leaked or set up?

by Anonymousreply 480Last Monday at 10:24 AM

R480, oh, she sets it up, I’m sure. It’s her/their fault! I hope it doesn’t sound like I think they’re victims of the media. Not at all. It’s a mutual use job, and I think it’s mostly her doing.

by Anonymousreply 481Last Monday at 2:01 PM

This is an ugly pr tactic, attacking a 95 year old woman while attempting to link MeGAIN and Diana.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 482Last Monday at 2:16 PM

I hope the Village Idiot Haz is resoundingly boo-ed the next time he dares show his face publicly in London.

by Anonymousreply 483Last Monday at 2:20 PM

The fact that cunt has the gall and audacity to compare herself to Diana is the biggest joke of all in this whole scenario.

by Anonymousreply 484Last Monday at 2:30 PM

"THEY won't stop until she is DEAD" also linked them.

by Anonymousreply 485Last Monday at 2:31 PM

[quote]Legally, they can still call themselves Duke and Duchess and Prince whatever the silly queen does.

They can call themselves the Duke and Duchess of Cunt and be taken more seriously. The titles, to be real, need to have the "silly Queen's" stamp of approval, as they emanate from the Crown. Without that, they are just fake royalty, like that guy who married Zsa Zsa Gabor years ago and drove around Bev Hills all day.

by Anonymousreply 486Last Monday at 4:11 PM

I can imagine maybe they are under some strain. Apart from having a new baby and a toddler to look after (of course, with help), they have been publicly rebuffed by the Queen. First, she says "recollections may vary," and then she says "No, they never asked permission...contrary to what they assert." They must have thought the 95 year-old dear old lady would be a pushover. And she's not only his grandmother, she's is "Commander in Chief," as he noted in the Oprah "interview." Maybe he thinks he's gone too far...maybe she thinks he hasn't gone far enough. It's hard for any couple to be on the same page, but given this level of stress I can imagine they are having conflicts.

by Anonymousreply 487Last Monday at 4:20 PM

America does not have royalties, loons. Go away now.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 488Last Monday at 4:41 PM

I absolutely believe that Meghan believes she is the second coming of Diana. But here's the thing, beyond all of her emotional issues and her games with the media, at her core, Diana actually cared about people. Diana was the first member of the royal family to take controversial issues like AIDS and homelessness and should be praised for it. Meghan cares for no one or nothing beyond herself.

I also agree that she went into the royal family with a very Hollywood idea of what it means to be royal. It's nothing like that. Truth is, the royals live off the public dime and as such it's not a very glamorous life. But the real issue was Catherine. Her ego would not allow for the fact that Catherine was always going to be more important than her and it mirrored Harry's own frustrations that William was always going to be more important.

by Anonymousreply 489Last Monday at 6:55 PM

R489 Not to take anything away from Diana (and I do agree with you) HMQ & PP were photographed shaking hands with lepers which was tremedously important & influential.

by Anonymousreply 490Last Monday at 8:02 PM

.....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 491Last Monday at 8:05 PM

^better link

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 492Last Monday at 8:09 PM

[Quote]America does not have royalties

This loon seems to be too stupid and untouched or is it "Rose?"

by Anonymousreply 493Last Monday at 10:23 PM

He didn't move forward using all his Pandemic breath, being the over-privileged asshole his apt, needle-nosed caricatures should have told him not to, but he did anyway.

His mom may have died in a Paris tunnel, but his drunken PCH wreck may not be so easy to discount his very own shenanigans. And the roads around Montecito and wealthy areas are kept purposely dark to keep interlopers and unwanteds away.

by Anonymousreply 494Last Monday at 10:44 PM

PH did not get in a drunken car wreck on PCH? That would be very sad.

by Anonymousreply 495Last Tuesday at 12:09 AM

R492, I was tempted to submit a story. About a prodigal son who gets ditched by his scheming and cunting wife, and the compassionate family who forgives him and lets him come home.

I think we all should submit a story like that. An older brother who find it in his heart to take in his broken addict brother after he’s shit all over their recently-widowed gran.

by Anonymousreply 496Last Tuesday at 2:48 AM

This thread has been great for blocking additional KGT accounts.

by Anonymousreply 497Last Tuesday at 5:20 AM

Happy Pride ! to everyone but Harry.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 498Last Tuesday at 6:29 AM

All Meghan's points of reference come from being a cable TV show D lister. She wants to hobnob with A list veritable MOVIE stars. She's 40 and it's now or never!

by Anonymousreply 499Last Tuesday at 7:35 AM

It's already never. All the A-listers are steering clear of the trainwreck.

by Anonymousreply 500Last Tuesday at 7:39 AM

Harry was so traumatized by his mother's death - that he's killing her all over again....

by Anonymousreply 501Last Tuesday at 7:46 AM

They are making the mistake that misguided royals often make: they believe they are talented, that they actually have something special to offer. The only thing royals have to offer is that they are members of Britain's royal family. Having walked away from that, H&M only have notoriety and nothing else....no particular talents or qualities. Yes, they'd like to believe they're special, but they really aren't. Diana was the exception: she had charm and mystique, and she was rather honest about what she lacked. They are not honest about what they lack and, in the end, the want to have their cake and eat it, too. They are fooling some but fewer by the day.

by Anonymousreply 502Last Tuesday at 9:56 AM

I've often wondered how Diana would have fared in the entertainment industry if she hadn't been an aristocrat. She had all the qualities an actor needs: the looks, charisma bordering on magnetism, a tall arresting presence, the insecurity, and need to be adored. And she really was a performer.

by Anonymousreply 503Last Tuesday at 10:22 AM

Yeah but she was no actor.

by Anonymousreply 504Last Tuesday at 12:21 PM

R503 Hollywood would have made her get a nose job.

by Anonymousreply 505Last Tuesday at 2:11 PM

r505 Her nose had its charm!

by Anonymousreply 506Last Tuesday at 2:21 PM

.....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 507Last Tuesday at 2:40 PM

Whether that blind is true or not, I do believe M would drop H in a heartbeat for Bill Gates.

by Anonymousreply 508Last Tuesday at 3:36 PM

I believe Bill Gates is too smart to be hooked by Montedusa.

For all her ambition and scheming what did she land? Hapless Harry Windsor. More family than fortune, especially at the rate they're spending.

by Anonymousreply 509Last Tuesday at 4:57 PM

Megs wants to make money off stories people submit to Archewell

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 510Last Tuesday at 7:25 PM

“Stories,” barf. It’s one of those annoying things you hear all the time now, people “telling their stories.” Boring!

by Anonymousreply 511Last Tuesday at 8:47 PM

….that said, I’m thinking of joining the Archewell email list, just to see what I get.

by Anonymousreply 512Last Tuesday at 8:49 PM

While I totally believe that MeGAIN would make a play for Bill Gates, would she do it while visibly pregnant? That doesn't make sense.

by Anonymousreply 513Last Wednesday at 4:44 AM

She's always been overly optimistic.

by Anonymousreply 514Last Wednesday at 4:47 AM

The Mail now claiming via Radar she will come to the statue unveiling next month.

'Harry was given the cold shoulder by most of his relatives, with several refusing to talk to him or even make eye contact.

'Since the funeral things have got worse, not better, so you can only imagine how he will be treated at the big event on July 1.'

by Anonymousreply 515Last Wednesday at 4:56 AM

For the sake of spectacle, I hope both show up for the statue. It’s highly possible.

by Anonymousreply 516Last Wednesday at 5:55 AM

It would be such a shame. There will be sideshow enough given the William/Dim tension but with the whole circus in town...

by Anonymousreply 517Last Wednesday at 6:20 AM

R515 Virtually all the British outlets are now saying Meghan isn't coming to the Diana memorial on July 1.

Also another interesting conservation is happening on Twitter. It appears that Oprah and Gayle King have removed all of their previous tweets about Meghan and Harry except for one promoting the "Me You Can't See" series.

by Anonymousreply 518Last Wednesday at 7:11 AM

Wow r518 that is a major shift. I wonder what has changed for them?

by Anonymousreply 519Last Wednesday at 7:25 AM

I would guess that the Palace had leaked that she is NOT invited.

by Anonymousreply 520Last Wednesday at 7:27 AM

"Sources confirm"

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 521Last Wednesday at 7:29 AM

Some people are speculating the "Meghan is coming" stories were just a "feeler" to test public response.

by Anonymousreply 522Last Wednesday at 7:30 AM

Maybe the statement at R521 is a rather more pointed “feeler.” As Princess Charlotte would say, “you’re not coming.“

by Anonymousreply 523Last Wednesday at 7:33 AM

Some interesting comments here

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 524Last Wednesday at 7:35 AM

r520 I was referring to Oprah and Gayle deleting tweets . Sorry for the confusion.

by Anonymousreply 525Last Wednesday at 10:12 AM

Once the never complain, never explain protection was lifted and the Queen received so much support at G7 they read the room.

by Anonymousreply 526Last Wednesday at 10:17 AM

Here's the thing that pisses me off sooooo much about Meghan. She was the first person of colour to marry into the royal family. That is a MASSIVE platform because the BRF is the most famous brand on Earth. Yes, in terms of the future of the monarchy here actual role would never have been as important as Kate's BUT Meghan had the potential to exert a lot of soft power and influence. But simple truth is that wasn't enough for her. Her ego would not allow it. She thought she was bigger than the BRF.

Despite everything, Harry is still the more important one in the marriage and I think this more than anything is why it will end. Companies want Meghan because she is with Harry. Harry is the hot ticket not Meghan. This will piss her off to no end. The Brits hate her, and Americans are responding more to Harry than her.

by Anonymousreply 527Last Wednesday at 10:23 AM

Narcs are fundamentally disordered in how they see things, R527. She wanted to dip in and bounce, she never intended to stay (she kept a team of 4 in LA and clothes stored in Toronto) and she never intended to become part of the family (attempting to set Kate up re: paps, being abusive to toddler Charlotte, etc). Missed opportunity for sure, but defo wrong person for the job. As was Harry, his own comments about trips to areas that suffered natural disasters or among the destitute are extremely callous as well. When the elderly man fell off his horse and landed on his head, Harry and Meghan laughed on the balcony. Catherine looked horrified.

by Anonymousreply 528Last Wednesday at 10:34 AM

R510, those Netflix stories ain’t going to write themselves….OR by the Desperate Duo!

by Anonymousreply 529Last Wednesday at 2:05 PM

It is pretty astonishing, R529, and nervy!

by Anonymousreply 530Last Wednesday at 2:10 PM

Have Oprah and Gayle ghosted H&M?

by Anonymousreply 531Last Wednesday at 2:54 PM

I tink so, R531. Gayle hasn’t jumped; therefore, Oprah’s lying low.

by Anonymousreply 532Last Wednesday at 3:02 PM

Has Gayle King had an independent thought in forty years? She'll follow Orca.

by Anonymousreply 533Last Wednesday at 4:24 PM

Why is there a Part Six already?

by Anonymousreply 534Last Wednesday at 5:03 PM

r531 If they have that is a pretty dramatic turn that hails a major shift.Certainly will be a strong signal to the rest of hollywood.

by Anonymousreply 535Last Wednesday at 5:08 PM

To get your goat, R534. Baaaaaah!!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 536Last Wednesday at 5:57 PM

That goat is super cute!

As career and social prospects diminish, what will be next for the Harkles?

by Anonymousreply 537Last Wednesday at 6:21 PM

D-I-V-O-R-C-E, R537

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 538Last Wednesday at 6:51 PM

This piece from a while ago is very interesting in hindsight and in how it played out

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 539Last Wednesday at 7:25 PM

Enthusiasm appreciated but ita a tad premature to have created a part six!

by Anonymousreply 54019 hours ago

Supposedly this one got paywalled...

by Anonymousreply 54115 hours ago

Oh, I'm tired of these people who won't pay $20 for a subscription and start a new thread every time one gets "paywalled". Thank you for listening.

by Anonymousreply 54214 hours ago
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!