Meghan and Harry Stir the Pot - Part 6

Link to Part 5

So the Daily Mail and the Mirror are making a stink that Lily still has not been added to the line of succession the royal website. Any ideas what is taking them so long?

There is functionf Part FIVE, numeral written out.

Don't forget Threatening Suicide, r581.

I don't understand why the Lili thing is even a story. She's in the line of succession, she's just not on the website yet.

R2, the marketing/communications team is probably busy putting other fires, most of which were started by the Sussexes.

Updating a website page with an additional name would take 5 minutes, tops. It's stupid that they have neglected to do this and let the Sussex PR machine turn this into another 'woe is us' story.

Perhaps the Palace knows something we don't about the birth of Merchibet. Or maybe they're doing it just to fuck with Dim and Dreadful. God knows they deserve it.

I actually think royal site is woefully out of date. It was updated briefly before Lilli was born but not since I think . They should update it because it looks petty otherwise.

[quote]They should update it because it looks petty otherwise.

They should take their old sweet time, as long as they want. NO ONE on planet Earth at this point today has behaved more jealously and pettily than the Sussex pairing. Let them sweat it out, no one should be catering to their tantrums or childish feelings.

Harry drank champagne out of a prosthetic leg????!!!!

I know it's In Touch but I believe this.

Have we seen any pics of Lili yet?

I bet Meghan and Harry have barely seen her.

I'm not surprised we haven't seen pictures - they're likely going to the highest bidder - but I am surprised we haven't seen paps of "extended parental leave" Harry pushing a baby stroller with The Other One in tow

Let’s be Meghan. What’s the best time and way to debut the first photo of Princess Lilibet? It’s got to have impact, break the Internet. I can’t come up with anything, because I just can’t relate.

One of Harry’s books will be co-authored with Greta Thunberg.

How Global Warming Makes People Cuckoo Bananas

I suspect that the reason the tabs are emphasising the fact that Lilibucks has not been added to the official line of succession yet is because they've heard that the reason is of interest, but don't want to publish that reason, whatever it is.

I am not one of those people who insists Meghan used a surrogate, as I think she is SO grasping and SO ambitious that she would never, ever risk her childrens' place in the BRF (such as she thinks it is) by using a surrogate.

Having said that, I am beginning to think that the palace is waiting on the legitimate documentation necessary for them to agree that Lili's birth has met all the required criteria to be in the Line of Succession.

After all, if they haven't seen the necessary evidence and been satisfied with it, then there is no way - NO WAY - they will state that she is in the Succession, because that is an official government list with potentially wide-reaching Constitutional implications, not just some private family tree.

They have to investigate and verify everything. Tricky business.

Indeed, r19.

Also. I find it interesting that Meghan and Harry have not said a word through their mouthpieces about this. Highly unusual for them.

Something's wrong.

Presumably, this was in vitro fertilization with her harvested eggs and Harry's sperm. At least at her age with a miscarriage behind her, it's a safe bet. I wonder if Buckingham lawyers are trying to determine if an heir's need to be "of the body" also extends to the process of fertilization. Is it OK if it occurred in a laboratory petri dish and the birth was "of the body" or a natural process? Or maybe they want a paternity test? That would be a riot.

R16 She can’t debut “Princess Lilibet” because she won’t be known as such until the death of the Queen (and possibly not even then).

I wonder if a paternity test is standard procedure

Alleged miscarriage, R21.

In addition to primogeniture, isn't this "of the body" requirement become a controversial and touchy subject now? Emma Thynn, Marchioness of Bath almost died giving birth to the couple's first son. They had a second via surrogate in L.A. The couple sued to change that rule so that their second son could inherit in the event something happens to the first. They lost. I imagine palace lawyers are concerned about legal precedents. Is out of body fertilization OK? Does the law really want to require aristocratic women to to risk their health to whelp another legal heir just in case? It looks like the law hasn't caught on to legal medicine.

^r21, not r20

I wish the artifical insemination possibility had been settled much earlier.

Maybe it's unfair, but there's very little about hereditary anything that IS fair.

The least they can do to preserve the whole point of the Succession is to make sure that no impostors make it in, and, unfortunately, being born of someone else's body counts in that regard, no matter where the egg and sperm are from.

We are not the only people who are wondering what is actually going on here

I wonder how many nannies she's fired or have left on their own starting with Archie and now adding in Lilibucks.

A paternity test with witnesses, a chain of evidence, independent tests at more than one lab could weed out imposters. It's not the case anymore that the prime minister (or whoever) has to witness the infant coming out the birth canal.

It's no big mystery why no one has seen the kid yet. the Markles are going out to the highest bidder for photos of the daughter. And it's not just rights for the exclusive, it is syndication rights for reproductions all over the world. Lilibet is just the latest Markles' merch come to life.

On another note, Lady Colin Campbell reports that the newborn hasn't been named in the line of succession yet, because once it's done, it's very difficult if not impossible to undo without an air-tight valid and legal reason.

Well, the Royal family hasn't laid eyes on the kid to begin with. They also probably have to furnish some "born of the body" proof which they don't want to give.

Bet it was a surrogate.

-- Prince James Stuart, Ye Olde Warming Pan Baby

WTF is that record on the link at R29??

"Diana Mary Mountbatten-Windsor"???

I don't get that at all.

R22 I figured we all assumed the air quotes.

It is not just placing the child in the Line of Succession, it is everyone who will be moved further down because of it . This may mean they lose money or security etc . Would you do all of that if there were questions about her birth?

If it was ever found she had lied about the whole thing, there would be a huge outcry. It is not only that she may have used a surrogate and if you are able to do that when so much rides on that, but more importantly she completely lied to the world about it. Did an interview where she tried to rip the Royal Family apart , while she herself was touching a bump that was made up bullshit? She would have a hard time being a victim in that one.

Do you know I haven't thought about them all day today? They are slipping. Sure, they've got things lined up for the future. And if you fling enough mud at the wall, some of it will stick.

But let me suggest something, and see what you think. What will happen when Her Majesty passes on (I'm using a term of general respect because she's a Head of State)? Do you think the public at large (as in the Western World, where most of us live indoors and eat regularly) is going to run to the Archeeto website to ask if Harry and Megs are OK? I forsee an unleashing of virtriol not seen since my sister eventually discovered that my boyfriends were smarter and more intelligent than her husbands.

And it ain't gonna be pretty. The support they get now is spotty. Just think, how are they going to spin the Queen's death? They will become irrelevant overnight. What possible options will be open to them? Groundskeepers for Oprah and Gayle's separate residences? Temporary work as servers at social functions in Montecito, where they can bring their children because they can't afford childcare?

Why would Buck House change the website when they are going to remove Harry shortly? No sense adding the new baby when her dad will soon be off the list.

Looks like Kitty's wedding was a big D&G advert. The dresses were gorgeous and no doubt free for promoting D&G bridal. Bet Megs is jealous of Kitty's merchability! And hey, her dad didn't come to her wedding either!

What is this Diana Mary Mountbatten-Windsor story?

R39 I’m surprised Megan missed the wedding. She must still be seriously fat.

No way in hell were they invited.

[quote] Why would Buck House change the website when they are going to remove Harry shortly? No sense adding the new baby when her dad will soon be off the list.

For a start, who says he’s going to be removed? I hope he will be but I am convinced it’ll happen. And...for the millionth time....taking Harry out of the line of succession WILL NOT remove Archie & Lilibet. It doesn’t work like that.

R12, I believe she was ANGLING for William. I'll never believe Meghan is or ever was in love with anyone but Meghan.

I'm reasonably certain that taking Harry out of the line of succession means all of the line originating with him are automatically removed too.

But I don't think they are readying to take Harry out of the LoS. The Queen would never allow it and neither would Charles.

I'm still curious as to the delay with Lilibucks though. It wouldn't seem so strange if there were no other babies born tight around the time Lili was, but August was born, and he is there. Of course, August's birth was attended by doctors who are known to the BRF and trusted by the officials in charge of verifying successors. The doctors at Lili's birth are not.

BUT it could all just be a mix up to do with paperwork. For example, perhaps the American hospital didn't fill out some form because they didn't recognize it, and the family/Palace are just waiting for the correct paperwork to arrive.

She’s not baptized. That’s likely the reason she’s not in the line of succession.

August isn't baptised yet either, and he is on the line of succession link.

August's baptism was just recently cancelled and there's no set date in sight, but August's name has been up on the official succession list for weeks.

Zara's son Lucas, born a few months ago, is listed too and he has not been baptised yet either.

This is not about baptism. This is probably about verification. It's the UK Parliament, not the Queen, who determines the order of succession. Someone in the UK government is likely waiting on some specific sort of evidence that the baby was born to Meghan "of the body" in order to rule out something disqualifying, such as the use of a surrogate or adoption.

[quote] I'm reasonably certain that taking Harry out of the line of succession means all of the line originating with him are automatically removed too.

Be as “reasonably certain” as you like, R46, you are stiill wrong.

When Prince Michael was kicked out of the line for marrying a catholic (but later reinstated) , his subsequent children stayed in because they were brought up in the CofE faith. Their father being out of the line did nothing to their claims....and they were even born AFTER he was out.

With a hereditary monarchy an individual is born with a claim on the throne and there are very few circumstances where they can be denied it - a parent losing their spot is not one of them.

Do you really think that if the Queen abdicated (which means relinquishing her claim to the throne), Charles, William and George would all be out?

I repeat...Archie & Lilibet were born with a claim to the throne. If Harry dies or is kicked out for treason, their positions are unchanged. And why would they be? They’ve done nothing wrong.

🙄

R49 Did you even fucking read the link you supplied?

[quote] It's the UK Parliament, not the Queen, who determines the order of succession.

Absolutely no one has said or suggested the Queen decides who succeeds, and parliament certainly doesn’t choose who goes on the list. It’s about DESCENT.

UK Parliament has the right to insist that claimants meet certain critera....but it can’t say, “We don’t like Charles, let’s have William”.

The line of succession is decided by birthright...nothing else. The right to veto an individual if they are (for example) catholic exists but UK Pailiament does NOT determine who is in the line of succession.

These threads would be less annoying if people didn’t sally forth on things they know fuck all about.

r51. In the quote of mine that you included, you'll see that I used the word "DETERMINES".

DETERMINES.

I did not say "CHOOSES".

Learn to read before you speak to me, you pointless bumblefuck thundercunt.

Are you for real? If the Queen DETERMINED the line of succession she would be CHOOSING. Obviously.

In any event, you are still wrong...UK Parliament doesn’t DETERMINE who is in the line of succession either.

Fucking moron.

you people who think she used a surrogate are lunatics

Didn't you see how fat her face was on the Oprah special? She had that same fat face during her first pregnancy. You can't fake a fat face

The first thing I thought when I saw her on Oprah was that she should have done the interview months before, when she was thinner

No, imbecile.

To determine is to assess. The assessment Parliament does is within the strictures laid down by the laws surrounding the succession. Descent and LEGITIMACY, both of which must be proven to the satisfaction of the assessor.

Legitimacy must be DETERMINED to be deemed present. This is done via the presentation of PROOF, which Parliament then ASSESSES, leading them to come to a DETERMINATION on the matter.

If descent was the only variable, as you claim, then illegitimate offspring would be in line to the throne along with the legitimate. Then the children born of surrogacy would not be barred from the succession.

No, there is a process of determination that the child is LEGITIMATE. That process is not carried out by the Queen or the palace, but by the institution of Parliament.

Now get out of my mentions, you ignorant cunt.

Nice googling. I bet you don’t understand a word of it.

Who is in the line of succession is determined by descent...which is what a hereditary monarchy means, idiot.

And yes, you can use the term legitimacy if you like...it’s exactly the same as me saying “the person must meet certain criteria”.

Parliament DOES NOT determine/choose who is in line....but the right exists to veto an individual if they don’t meet the criteria. If Prince Charles converted to catholicism tomorrow he could not/would not be crowned.

Your comment “ It's the UK Parliament, not the Queen, who determines the order of succession.” is simply wrong.

Now fuck off.

To be clear...in case you didn’t get it the first three times....Parliament does NOT determine/choose who is in the line of succession, biology does.

Jeez.

*whatever the case*, given Harry's tendencies to nurse grudges & perceive everything as a slight, real or imagined, it's kind of shocking that he's not all over social media wailing that his daughter was kept from the line on succession because she's BLACK! (which she's really not, but still). It is interesting....

She’s not been “kept from the line of succession”. The idea that she needs to be added to a fucking website first is laughable. The monarchy is 1000 years old!

Parental permission is probably needed to add her name to anything...and those two clowns are probably refusing to communicate or something. That’s all.

It's really simple. The succession is determined by birth order, now following only that and not gender, as well, thanks to the Queen.

But only Parliam6can CHANGE that should it become necessary to consider doing so.

They did just that in 1936, when Baldwin's Cabinet considered bypassing Prince Albert, Duke of York, for one if his younger brothers upon Edward's abdication. In the event, they went with Bertie.

But if they'd decided otherwise, there wouldn't have been a thing the Windsors could have done about it.

The law is there to keep too much power out of the Sovereign's hands, and to keep the succession from being used as prize offspring have to jockey for, with potentially disruptive impact on the public.

Bad look for the BRF. Looks like they are going after innocent kids to revenge themselves on their parents.

It's a parliamentary monarchy. Parliament could change the lines of succession any time it wants to. It set it up in the first place in the Acts of Settlement and Succession.

It hardly looks like that. r61. The BRF does not manage the list. Parliament does.

What it looks like is that something is wrong. Likely, given the fact the child was born in another country, it's to do with determining that Lili is legitimately "of the body". As I said upthread, this could be down to a simple piece of paperwork which has been omitted by the Sussexes' doctors, and could be easily remedied.

Provided that the necessary evidence exists to prove that she was born "of the body", I have no doubt that she will be added to the line of Succession as soon as possible.

[They did just that in 1936, when Baldwin's Cabinet considered bypassing Prince Albert, Duke of York, for one if his younger brothers upon Edward's abdication. In the event, they went with Bertie]

Crap. That’s a rumour for which there exists not one shred of evidence. There was no cause whatsoever to bypass Albert...none.

[quote] They did just that in 1936, when Baldwin's Cabinet considered bypassing Prince Albert, Duke of York, for one if his younger brothers upon Edward's abdication. In the event, they went with Bertie.

Crap. That’s a rumour for which there exists not one shred of evidence. There was no cause whatsoever to bypass Albert...none.

I remember when Archie was added. His name on the little dial thingy was directly below the Queen, and even above the Duke of Edinburgh. Later it was changed.

Scobes has posted that the royal website has been updated, with Lilibucks listed now.

Parliament has been determining succession since 1534. The Act of Settlement, 1701. The Succession to the Crown Act, 2013.

I don't suppose Parliament does these things because it can't then give them force.

Updated BRF website

The official website has NOT been updated as of right now (1:13 GMT).

Lilibet is not on there as I post this.

^ And before some obsessive starts parsing, determining succession is not meant to suggest the Parliamentary equivalent of making a new playlist any or every time a member of the royal family goes off piste. Parliament will define the parameters under which hereditary monarchy descends. In 2013 an act of Parliament made Charlotte second in line to the throne rather than waiting to determine her place relative to the birth of subsequent brothers (and gave that right to any future daughters in the line of succession. Parliament also lifted the requirement that someone on in the line of succession would have to forfeit that standing if they married a Catholic.)

As the representative of the people, Parliament could very well pass an act removing Harry and his heirs from the line of succession. That was the effect of His Majesty's Declaration of Abdication Act 1936 - which put into force Edward VIII's announcement of his intention to abdicate. He was still King until Parliament acted to make his declaration binding law. Making law isn't a royal prerogative. Giving royal assent to new law is, upon the advice of parliament.

It's a constitutional monarchy. It acts on the advice of the elected.

Parliament doesn't get to choose who is in the Line of Succession as it is, currently as it stands, determined by birth chronology. They can, however, either create a free-standing Act (see Titles Deprivation Act of 1917) or vote to amend the existing Act of Succession to remove someone, but only in very extreme circumstances.

From the Royal.UK website (where Lili appears when I checked just now):

[quote]The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by Parliamentary statute. The order of succession is the sequence of members of the Royal Family in the order in which they stand in line to the throne.

Just refreshed the page and Lilibucks IS now on the Line of Succession now.

I wonder what the hold up was

And I'm gathering that the delay in Lili's appearance was in fact due to the government requesting proof of bodily birth, from the Sussexes. Which they would in turn obtain from their MDs. And I would be be that both parents, esp Meghan, balked at that request and demanded their newborn be accepted without that proof, claiming it racist and invasive (how much do you want to bet?).

Eventually of course they coughed up what was asked for, no way were they not going to see both of their children on that Power List in all its glory.

I'll bet you are exactly right, r74. Maybe this was Harry and Meghan's bid to drum up an anticipatory news cycle for Lilibucks.

After all, the cloak and dagger approach was very much how they handled Archie's birth, resulting in much more coverage than the average non-heir/spare Royal baby gets.

[quote]4. Princess Charlotte of Cambridge

Still number 4, bitches!

I'm glad the BRF updated the bloody website and squashed this stupid nothing of a story. Lili was in the line of succession from birth and the website not being updated didn't change any of that. Some clerk who keeps up with the website just hadn't gotten around to it.

This is probably the Sussexes trying to drum up anticipation so that they can get more money for the first published baby pictures of Lili.

^^Oh make no mistake, the Markles will be hustling Lilibucks' photos to the highest bidder. In addition to the initial exclusive photo rights (to People Magazine or some such publication), they will be cashing in on all the rights to reproduce the photo in publications all over the world. This is bigtime business.

Besides the financial aspect, they're likely holding out for some kind of guaranteed positive coverage deal: We show you Lilibet, you print only positive stories about us for the next year.

Anyone want to lay money on the possibility of a high-profile adoption by the Sussexes in a couple of years? They could adopt a black child and then throw a fit when that child isn't put in the line of succession, knowing full well that ANY adopted child wouldn't be eligible. But oh, the press coverage . . .

Meghan would never adopt a black child, though. She has no contact with her blood relatives on her mother's side. She wouldn't give herself another black relative by choice.

R61 - Actually, the "bad look", dear, is over. The child has been added to the list as of today.

"Revenge" "innocent children" . . . deah deah deah. Dial it back, Pet.

The only ones using children for revenge purposes are the Sussexes.

you can fake pregnancy bloat on the face by pigging out on Chinese take-out and dousing it with soy sauce, and maybe eating a bag of chips after. The next day you’ll be retaining water all over, she probably did that since her face was thin to start with and would show water quickly.

R64 - Au contraire. The Duchess of York herself, on the long weekend during which the Cabinet debated exactly that (and for reasons that were well outlined in a wide range of reliable biographies: his stammer, his deadly uninspiring manner, and the fact that he only had daughters to succeed him) the Yorks sweated out the time waiting to hear their fate - the Duchess wrote despairingly to a friend who had enquired: "We know nothing! Everyone knows more than we do!"

The idea that all those reputable memoirs of that time were all spreading and unconfirmed rumour is what is crap.

Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester: even duller and more uninspiring than his older brother.

Prince George, Duke of Kent: handsome, charismatic, beautiful wife, sons to succeed him, but . . . a chequered past that included bisexual wanderings and drug addiction, too risky.

They went back to Bertie not least because although uninspiring himself, his pretty, charismatic, charming wife was loved by the the public, and his little fairy tale family with the two pretty little girls as well, and he was after all consideration the best and least disruptive option.

I have not read a single reputable biography of the Yorks and the era that did not include this ominous period when the Yorks had no idea what their fate would be as the Cabinet debated behind closed doors, and the Duchess's own words support this.

Baldwin's Cabinet was rife with other splits, as well, and may not have been serious about bypassing Bertie, but that everything came to a sudden stop for several days during which the Yorks knew that nothing was done and dusted yet is a fact.

Baldwin, by the way, was part of the "appeasement" crowd re Germany and Hitler, something that is usually wholly blamed on his successor, Chamberlain.

being a legitimate non-Catholic descendant of The Electress Sophia used to be all it takes to be in succession…

R85 Of course you also needed the Monarch’s permission to marry if you were one of the heirs, as the Hanoverian’s had a habit of marrying unsuitable people, not excluding George, Prince of Wales who married the Catholic Mrs Fitzherbert, in private, which was ignored when he married what was to be the disastrous Caroline of Brunswick in 1795.

Anyone can see how screwed up this is. Just 3 years ago, Harry was saying the BRF was the family Meghan never had. Now that family is a bunch of racists who treat them horribly. Anyone can see how mental they are.

R2- The courtiers are lazy????

ah, true R86. Forgot about stinky Caroline. How bad must she have smelled by 18th century standards that people even commented lol.

The gap between being born and being added to the website is about the same for August and Lili. No one bothered gossiping that this meant anything in August (or Lucas's) case. This was always a nothing story that both sides started using to prove their case.

R89 - Caroline once told a journalist that she only committed adulatory once in life and it was with Mrs. Maria Fitzherbert's husband.

R38 - because the baby is still the Queen's great-granddaughter and it will seem very mean and petty to revenge yourself on a baby for something the parent has done. Remember Charles said she was a cold parent and his childhood was crap? How Diana accused them of being cold? Yeah, Diana, with the statue with children. The BRF doesn't need more press about how shitty they are to innocent kids or how they use them as weapons. Think for a second. The PR team is absolutely thinking what to do about Lilibet so that the BRF makes the point that while unhappy with H&M, they aren't cold-hearted to babies.

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

R92, first, I feel confident saying the Queen isn't content manager for the website so its laughable to talk as if she or anyone else is purposely keeping little Dividend off the line of succession flow chart.

Second, first flaw in "The BRF doesn't need more press about how shitty they are to innocent kids or how they use them as weapons." As an imagination capturing figure, this kid doesn't exist yet and, given her parents' pattern, it will be hard for most people to get too worked up about an elbow. Second flaw: everyone knows the origins of more press about how shitty they are to innocent kids or how they use them as weapons. It isn't bad press, it's just more Sussex press. All but a few sad and marginal ostriches are onto the game and far from impressed by them. The polls show it.

Although I enjoy their hamfisted schemes and watching them blow up in their faces. They may have more to say, but they don't have anything left.

Caroline of Brunswick was so repulsive to the Prince of Wales that he wept openly during the wedding ceremony.

Oh gurl, take a seat.

Fergie is overplaying her hand, as well.

The Yorks will never stop being tacky. Charles is right to sideline them. Bea and Eug seem nice enough, but their parents are a perpetual embarrassment.

The Queen is in her nineties. She's probably not very good at updating websites.

Fergie like Meghan, is trash. I was surprised about the claim Andrew was banging nubile teenage girls as there were always rumors he was gay. Fergie was way too flagrant in her adulterous activities while married to him. She also continued to have a relationship with Paddy McNally, the old guy she allegedly dumped for Andrew. He'd refused to marry her but was willing to keep fucking her.

[quote]The Queen is in her nineties. She's probably not very good at updating websites.

She does alright on her Only Fans page. She's made almost enough to buy a settee for Balmoral Castle.

Lili being added to the line of succession has set the detangers aka Kate's fans off. The Queen is getting threats of violence online. People wanting to kick the shit out of her etc. The Queen. And these are Royalists.

R102 Welcome Meghan! are you going to sue that US celeb mag that claims you're in love with Prince William and all your problems are plain old jealousy?

^Sure Jan @r102.

R102 Yeah I saw that...it's just a small number but they are idiots. They are no better than the people they claim to hate. Lili was in the line of succession the moment she was born website update or not. That can only be changed by an act of parliament. The royals are playing chess while the Harkles are playing poker. The more the royals play nice (at least in public) the more petulant and bitter H&M look with each of their revelations.

I keep wondering if the State Dept is going to pay a visit to Harry.

Are there people so ignorant that they really think one's place in the line of succession is created when the Palace web guy adds you to the webpage? Seriously?

[quote]I keep wondering if the State Dept is going to pay a visit to Harry.

Of course not. Harry has carte-blanche in the US.

Here's two. The Pippa account is the one that wanted to kick the shit out of the Queen. There is a screenshot. Note the maga links in their profiles.

Second account

R109/r110 is either 12 or very stupid or both.

Those people are exactly the same as the people who think that trending or TV ratings means Meghan will become Queen of the UK and not even Queen consort. And they're a tiny minority even for twitter. They have no better understanding than that.

Anyone with a mite of understanding realised that the effing website was not the line of succession. It's literally the same amount of time they took to add August and Lucas and probably all the other new babies of the past few years. Neither the Queen or Charles can just decide to throw anyone out of the succession if they meet the criteria, that's the whole point of a monarchy. It doesn't mean anyone is planning on handing Harry the keys to Windsor and Buck House because of it.

And if Harry and family are ever out then Andrew moves up which doesn't solve any of the Monarchy's problems.

R100 - first, Fergie is on the People cover and now she appears on Town & Country. WTF is going on with her? Neither mag has had her on their covers for years and all of a sudden - boom - there she is.

Fergie was Meghan Markle Version 1.0.

She's got a new historical novel loosely based on one of her ancestors but also herself hitting the shelves in a few days. She mostly reigned herself in with the wacky comments but the Mandela one was certainly something considering the incident she was referring to was that she was caught by a fake Sheik due to her own greed.

More derangement. They are writing petitions lol.

As there is nothing Harry and Meghan won't do to get publicity, it is odd they haven't already sold their baby's pics to People or Hello.

One more. These people who have been most vocal about Meghan share all the characteristics of qtards. If you look at their profiles you can see it. They are pissed. And Royal Reporters engage with and encourage this mental illness.

R118 Meghan, dear....fuck off back to Lipstick Alley or whatever.

R118 So what? There are a few people who think the website = the line of succession and have no more knowledge of the BRF than most of the sugars do. What's your point? There were Megstans threatening the queen a few days ago because the baby wasn't on there yet. Now there are people upset that she is. It doesn't change anything.

One royal watcher even pointed out that Mia Tindall wasn't added to the website until she was 7. But she was in the line of succession from when she was born.

Both sides are putting way too much stock in a fairly shitty website.

She thinks it's all about apps now anyway, so she spends most of her day developing those.

Only the top 5 in the succession matter, anyway. They are the only ones with a snowball's chance of inheriting.

Please don't talk to R102 / R108 & R109 / R118.

Just FF them and block these lunatics.

Sorry, of course it's R109 & R110, not R108.

Sorry, R108.

Here's the kick the queen's ass comment for the Sure Jan poster. Note the same profile pic as the Pippa account. It is being shared around. Media is now notified that the derangers are making serious threats.

They represent such a tiny minority, they mean nothing r125. Same with the sussexstans. .

Beatrice's soon-to-be newborn later this year will bump everyone else behind her down a peg including Eugenie's son, August.

Why are the rabid MegStans posting on the DL? It defies belief. I do hope they're being paid because otherwise they are out of their element on here.

I personally want to kick the Queen’s geriatric ass for allowing the high yellow grandchildren to be in succession. At least William’s bloodline is pure.

Oh my sides! A notorious Meghan troll wants us to believe that Kate fans (hired by the same people who pay our Klan Grannie Troll) want to kill the Queen for adding a "black" baby to the line of succession on the website.

Real Kate fans know that whether the kid appears on the website or not, she's still in the line of succession, and that the Queen has no power over the line of succession.

Royalists tend to know these things, see, Pet? So it was really clumsy. You should tell the handlers they need to up their game.

Hey, Pet, has Meghan called out that psycho fan of hers yet who actually did threaten to stab Camilla Tominey and her three kids to death? You know, the one who really is under investigation?

Kate's fans my arse. This comes transparently out of the Sussex Squad playbook.

You can't even write coherent English.

Take or back to the Squad and tell them we aren't buying. Better luck next time.

And that baby is about as black as new fallen snow. 75% Caucasian at a minimum.

God, you're so predictable, so pathetic, and so mental.

R120 The only people putting stock in that website are paid trolls. This is a trumped up charade.

The royal website itself explains the line of succession up top INCLUDING that its rules and order are SET BY FUCKING PARLIAMENT right BEFORE THE FUCKING LIST OF NAMES BEGINS

You'd have to be blind to miss it.

These - are - TROLLS sent in to stir up trouble.

Isn't that right, Pet?

Do I get a lolly for guessing right?

Can you imagine being desperate enough to resort to paid trolls? I was a member of the British Royal Family and now I pay trolls for my sins. Wow. So much winning.

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

R132 they're taking a page out of Lis Smith's handbook. In political campaigns they learned in 2019 and 2020 how you could effectively use a troll farm to give the appearance of support on social media. I imagine Meghan's troll farm used to belong to some failed Dem candidate.

The Queen has named Mary Simon, a native Canadian, to be Governor General of Canada. BBC showed the Queen and Simon zooming. I love old ladies who zoom!

^^^ That’s Lady Governess to you, peasant

[quote] The royal website itself explains the line of succession up top INCLUDING that its rules and order are SET BY FUCKING PARLIAMENT right BEFORE THE FUCKING LIST OF NAMES BEGINS

Fuck me....that’s NOT what it says, you illiterate fucking moron.

The line of succession is decided by biology...that’s what HEREDITARY means. Every single cunting name on the list arrived there because of who their GODDAMN FUCKING PARENTS WERE.

[quote] It therefore came to be established not only that the Sovereign rules through Parliament, but that the succession to the throne can be regulated by Parliament, and that a Sovereign can be deprived of his/her title through misgovernment. The Act of Settlement confirmed that it was for Parliament to determine the title to the throne.

This means, you thick shitheads, that parliament has a veto (ESSENTIAL WITH A CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY) if the monarch -or claimant - doesn’t satisfy certain conditions.

Parliament has a veto about EVERYTHING...but it cannot, does not, could not and will not decide WHO IS IN THE LINE OF SUCCESSION BECAUSE DNA DOES THAT.

YOU PIG IGNORANT, CLUELESS, ARROGANT YANKS.

lol @ r137; a wee bit overly invested me-thinks...

[quote] you can fake pregnancy bloat on the face by pigging out on Chinese take-out and dousing it with soy sauce, and maybe eating a bag of chips after. The next day you’ll be retaining water all over, she probably did that since her face was thin to start with and would show water quickly.

That's ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT. Pure Bullshit. A lie

No amount of soy sauce is going to make someone's face fat enough to look like they gained 40 pounds. Stop wasting bandwidth with your ridiculousness

R93, but all those servants signed non-disclosure agreements.

If they let them all talk, it might set a precedence for letting all the employees, current and former to be able to tell everything about working for the entire royal family

This "investigation" will probably turn out like the paul burrell trial

R137, take some herbal tea and calm oneself! There, there, don’t be a yobo. Bet you’re fun at parties. Or in relationships. One could benefit from reading articles like, “Do You Want to Be Right, Or Do You Want a Relationship?”

[quote]In 2013 an act of Parliament made Charlotte second in line to the throne

Why, thank you, R71! Papa will be annoyed, but I shall try to rise to my calling.

[quote] That's ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT. Pure Bullshit. A lie

Not the poster you are replying to, but I agree with that poster and disagree with you, R139.

[quote] No amount of soy sauce is going to make someone's face fat enough to look like they gained 40 pounds. Stop wasting bandwidth with your ridiculousness.

Perhaps you could learn a thing or two before making accusations as you do.

Try going to medical school.

I'm so sorry everyone - we keep six nurses a day on r137, but it still seems not to be enough.

We'll try to keep her from the staff computer from now on.

R137 speaks the truth about the succession though.

No, r145.

137 seems never to have heard of the concept of 'legitimacy'.

Descent is not the only variable in the Order of Succession.

Baby Lili hasn’t been proved to be illegitimate though, why would a married couple fake that? Insemination, maybe. But just outright plucking a baby from some third party and faking a pregnancy is crazy 17th century Stuart intrigue.

That's not what "illegitimacy" means in terms of the Order of Succession, r147.

A child can be deemed illegitimate for the purposes of Succession if, say, the child is the genetic product of the legitimate parents, but is carried by a surrogate mother.

Just like the Catholic church, the BRF has not kept up with modern technology.

The BRF's staff does not update that website, r149. Some bureaucratic flunky from Parliament does.

The Sussex succession is a really moot point though. Charles, William, and William’s THREE kids would have to tragically die. An awful tragedy no one wants, rest assured the Sussex clan and their spawn will never sit on thrones.

R132 We've been through this before. Try reading comprehension. Nowhere do I state that it isn't set by birth order.

BUT FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME IT WAS PARLIAMENT THAT WRESTED THE POWER OF THE SOVEREIGN TO CHANGE THE SUCCESSION AT WILL AND ENSURE THAT ONLY PARLIAMENT CAN CHNAGE ORDER OF SUCCESSIONS e.g., BOOT SOMEONE OUT. THE QUEEN HAS ZERO POWER TO DO SO. WHICH IS MADE PERFECTLY CCLEAR UP TO.

HOW DOES THAT FUCKING CONTRADICT BIRTH ORDER AS THE RULE?!!

BECSUSE IT WASN'T ALWAYS. AN ABSOLUTE AND THE SOVEREIGN COULD NAME HIS HEIR AT WILL CAUSING WAR AND HAVOC.

GUESS WHAT ENTITY PUT INTO LAW THAT IT WAS BIRTH ORDER AND BIRTH ORDER ONLY AND WHO IS STILL THE ONLY ENTITY THAT REMOVE SOMEONE FROM THE LINE ...

THEREFORE CHANGING THE ORDER OF PEOPLE IN THE LINE?

THAT'S RIGHT. IT PUT BIRTH ORDER IN AS THE LAW AND ONLY IT CAN BOOT SOMEONE OUT OF THE LINE.

IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH?

OR ARE YOU STILL INSISTING THAT MOSES HANDED DOWN BIRTH ORDER FROM MOUNT ARARAT?

R137 You need a fucking sedative. The issue at hand was Harry bring booted out of the line of succession. The answer is although you seem hopelessly unable to comprehend it, is that HARRYS PLACE IN THE LINE WAS DETERMINED BY BIRTH ORDER BUT KNOCKING HIM OUT OF THAT LINE CAN ONLY BE ACCOMPLISHED BY AN ACT OF PARLIAMENT.

His Gran has the power to out the request to Parliament. She has zero power beyond that.

This concept seems to be beyond the reach of your tiny brain.

But you're in good company, don't worry.

We understand that Harry and Meghan and their rabid fan base have trouble with that pesky Birth Order + Parliament nugget, too.

(quietly placing an electrolyte mixture at r152's bedside.

^^^ will feel better within minutes.

Indeed, r191.

If Harry ever comes within 100 miles of the throne, the entirety of Royalist Britain will do their utmost to 'cancel' the Monarchy that they once loved.

But we'll still need a head of state r156, and let's not pretend Harry is suitable for that job.

Exhibit A,M'Lud:

Harry and Meghan are taped planning a coup to kill Charles and exile the Cambridges and place themselves on the throne.

HM drafts a petition to Parliament requesting that on the basis of treason, Prince Harry be stripped of his peerage, his HRH, and that he be removed from the line of succession

Parliamentary committee is drafted to examine the matter and draft a Bill. Bill is given first read in the House. A vote is taken, very likely passing eith huge majority viven the evidence. Bill goes to Kords for review, sending it back hastily as they see the potential ramifications. Bill goes back to Housr for second reading, passes with huge majority.

HMTQ issues Letters Patent confirming that the erstwhile HRH Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex is, with Parliamentary approval, now Henry Mountbatten Windsor, everone behind him in the line of succession has moved up one place, and a warrant for the former ducal couple's arrest has been issued via Interpol, as he and his wife appear to have vanished, along with their two young children and half a dozen rescue chickens.

A televised plea for the safe return of the chickens is broadcast at the same time.

They turned up in St.. Petersburg, where Pitin warmly welcomed them, suavely reminding Harry that he was related to the Romanovs (wink wink).

Alas, Chicken Kiev for 20 special guests is already being prepared with ... yes.

Animal rights activists are already gathering to protest outside the Russian embassy in London.

^*Lords, not Kords.

Why can't we get an edit function?

^^*Putin. not Pitin

[quote]A televised plea for the safe return of the chickens is broadcast at the same time.

This is the kind of quality cuntery I come to DL for. Bravo, R158.

R137, go away. Whether you're right or wrong, your hysterics are ugly and meaningless. You don't need to be on DL you need to be under the care of a good psychiatrist.

No one needs to get worked up like you about something as arcane as this subject matter.

You are really unwell.

If this is true, Meghan is so delusional it's scary.

Come on, guys, just one more button pushing for R152, and we’ll push the loon RIGHT over the edge. We can DO this!!

Harry's flagrantly mentally ill and it would appear Meghan is too. I knew a straight couple who married - they were both alcoholics with mental problems. Disaster after disaster. When both people in a couple are crazy, nobody is minding the store. The Harkles will disintegrate.

R164 What's the matter, sugar, a little impatience with bullshit upset you?

After years on DL, I assure you, no button you or anyone else can push is sending me anywhere.

See you around.

R152

The headline at R162 wouldn't surprise me one bit if it's true. MM seems to have an unhealthy need to he "heard and understood" and will keep talking until she feels that she has been heard and understood. It's clearly based on her being an only child and her father lavishing all his attention on her - hearing and understanding her all the way (until she dumped him, that is). She cannot wrap her head around someone not thinking she's the bestest greatest thing ever. She literally cannot compute it.

True R167. She's a spoiled brat. And jealous when somebody else gets more attention than her. She will not be ignored! Nothing more complicated than that.

There is a rumor going around that Megz people reached out to Anna Wintour to be on the cover of Vogue and Wintour allegedly said not without Harry because no one wants Meghan.

Sugar, R152/166. Lol. By the way, you’re wrong. It WASN’T Parliament that wrested the power of the Sovereign to change the succession at will and ensure that only Parliament can change order of successions. The Queen REALLY has all the power. Sorry.

I wonder if Charles will call himself Charles III as Charles I got his head chopped off and Charles II was a reprobate. Seems unlucky.

He's been known as Prince Charles his entire life. It would be weird to suddenly call him George or something as he ascends the throne in his late 70s or early 80s.

R171, Charles II was just what England needed at the time and was much-loved.

R172 true but Edward VII was a David and George VI was a Bertie. It seems odd to have named him Charles to begin with given the history of Charles as Kings. Charles II was known as 'Old Rowley' because he spent most of his time fucking everything that moved. Princess Margaret named her Cavalier King Charles 'Rowley', possibly as a dig at her nephew?

Earl of Rochester on Old Rowley: “Here lies our sovereign lord the king, Whose word no man relies on: He never says a foolish thing, Nor ever does a wise one.”

Yes, R174, but Edward VIII and George VI lived in different, less media-saturated times. Branding is the name of the game these days, and it's far too late for Charles to change his brand.

IDK where Charles came from either, though. It does have a rather dodgy history in the BRF. I'm surprised he wasn't named George after his mother's beloved father.

R174, Edward VII's first name was Edward, not David. Prior to being king, he had been Prince Edward. He did not change his name. George VI, formerly Prince Albert, apparently changed his name to emphasise continuity after the abdication of his brother. It was also one of his middle names. There is nothing typical about what he did, though, especially since one of his brothers was also called George.

R170 - QEII does NOT have the power to change the line of succession to the throne.

Wills and Kate have been together for 20 years. Above all, they are a working team both as parents of three young children and king and queen of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the not too distant future. I have a strong hunch that Wills would like to have a string of mistresses as his father, grandfather and the rest of his royal forbears had but has been prevented from doing so by his non-complaisant wife and the ubiquity of the intrusive media. Kate has many sterling qualities but even I, a gay man, can tell she's not too exciting between the sheets.

Word is, the people are crying out for a King HARRY!!!

Wasn’t it revealed in a sudden updraft that Kate wore thong panties? That’s kind of sexy, for an otherwise staid individual.

I read that William was very bitter about not only Charles carrying on with Camilla, but Diana's lovers. She tried to use him as her confidant which must have been horrifying for a teenage boy, talking about her lovers. A friend of William's claimed he waited so long to marry Kate because he didn't want to make a mistake and wind up with an adulterous marriage. He'd been too burned by his parents' infidelities. When he discovered that Hewitt wasn't just his riding teacher, he was furious.

Both the brothers preferred the company of their nanny Tiggy Legge-Bourke to being with their parents which enraged Diana.

Didn't the phone hacking scandal reveal that William and Kate were really hot for each other? She also used to be really athletic and one of her best friends used to host kinky sex parties and design vibrators or something. I actually think there's more to her than you might imagine sex wise, at least at one point.

R177, although his name was Edward, his family had always called him David. Probably because his grandfather was called Edward

Kate, like most public people, probably has her public persona and her private one. She is probably very happy with her very predictable public persona as it gives almost nothing of her real self away.

[quote] Perhaps you could learn a thing or two before making accusations as you do. Try going to medical school. —Physician

I'm a pharmacist. And I've seen lots of CHF pts in on 80 or more mgs of lasix and despite retaining 10 lbs of fluid, their faces didn't look like a pregnant woman

drinking a bottle of soy sauce will not make your face look like you've gained 40 lbs. And you are ridiculous for believing that. Your "med school" (google) owes you a refund

R186- Has obviously never eaten Salt & Vinegar Chips, lol. Blow you up like a pufferfish.

R186 gaining 30 lbs stuffing yourself with goodies while you're supposed to be pregnant, even if you aren't, will also make your face fat

Women have been known to use steroids when pretending to be pregnant. Puffs you up in all the convincing places.

I'm not so sure, r179.

It's always the quiet ones, you know.

I agree with R190, and patently disagree with R179, a gay man.

About 95% of you posters are entirely insane.

I wonder if Nutmeg hasn't been seen recently because she's been putting on the pounds? Didn't drop that pregnancy weight.

Join us, R192, it’s more fun this way.

I'd love to see a timeline.

r195 That actual introduction shows its bias and ignorance by describing people annoyed at the harkles scheming , double dealing breaking of the rules and disingenuous all round behaviour as embittered. There's no room for justifiable anger it's just the childlike polarising mindset of if you don't agree with how they go about things you are jealous and or embittered.

In terms of a timeline of their fuckery, the crucial period to look at is from October 2018 through that autumn, when they theoretically move to Frogmore, in (I think) December or in January 2019.

Everything is apparently going ok up until early/mid Oct, at least in terms of news reports, with the exception of their losing multiple Staff. The news reports up until end of October are generally still saying that Meghan is a great success, that everyone still loves her, and that they were moving into the palatial 21-room Apartment 1 at Kensington Palace once the refurbishment in anticipation of their arrival was completed in January, and were going to be given the huge 10-bedroom York Cottage on the Sandringham estate, where King George and Queen Mary lived until 1925, and where the Harkles were housed every time they went to Sandringham. At the end of October there began to be murmurings of a "rift " between the Harkles and the Cambridges.

November 24 it's announced that the Harkles are suddenly leaving Kensington altogether, instead of moving to Apt 1 which had been being refurbished for them, and were being given Frogmore Cottage at Windsor, a run-down staff dormitory that would need a complete overhaul, and not the large, glamourous York Cottage at Sandringham, Reports from that period claim that they "chose" Frogmore over Apt 1 because they wanted to "get away from the fishbowl" of raising their kids in London. I sincerely doubt that is true.

Something happened in between the beginning of October and the end of November to change everything for the Harkles in terms of family relations:

On Oct 12th, we know that Meghan pissed Andrew and Fergie off when she showed up in maternity wear at Eugenie's wedding when she was less than 8 weeks pregnant and in no need of maternity wear except to signal to the world that she was pregnant and overtake Eugenie's big day.

Oct 15th or so they go to Australia, where, we now know, Meghan's assistant was seen bawling in a car during Meghan's market event by Rebecca English, and we now know that said assistant quit during that trip. End of October, while the Harkles are still in Australia, the Harkles' communication director Jason Knauf writes formally to Buckingham Palace HR detailing how abusive Meghan was, how many people she drove out of their jobs in her short tenure, and asking why Buck house was not doing more to protect her employees.

November 1st, back in London again, Meghan's assistant officially resigns.

We now know that, beginning almost the moment they returned in November, the Harkles began meeting with Quibi, and forming business relationships that were forbidden by their Royal status, implying that November was when they decided to Megxit.

January 19th - Meghan claims she was suicidal at this point, and had written to HR, of all people, to request help, which she claims was refused. I think in reality she was not suicidal at all - her makeup artist posted to instagram that same week showing her avocado toast set up and saying what fun he had with her while staying with her that week. I think she did write an email to HR claiming that she was, and was sure to write to the same person to whom Jason Knauf had complained about her bullying. I believe all this was an act to counteract the official bullying complaints, as well as to manipulate Harry.

February 2019: "Suicidal" Meghan, who "had her passport taken by the palace" still somehow manages to attend her half-million pound baby shower in NYC. She's not supposed to have any baby shower or to accept presents, but she doesn't care at this point because she decided to leave the BRF the moment they found out they weren't getting Apt 1 and York Cottage.

March 2019 William's household announces it will split from Harry's household. We know now that this was William's response to learning of Meghan's bullying of staff. Harry and Meghan's offices are moved to Buck House, which apparently enrages them.

Megs deciding to leave the BRF in November 2019 fits her pattern of bouncing on any project that's not suiting her needs within two years. Harry and Meghan announced their engagement in November 2017.

Megxit was announced in January 2020. Where will she be in January 2022?

R197 Very interesting to see the timeline. It seems like being booted from KP to Frogmore Cottage was a key factor. I wonder why they - or at least Harry - didn’t push back on that?

[quote]He's been known as Prince Charles his entire life. It would be weird to suddenly call him George or something as he ascends the throne in his late 70s or early 80s.

Also, at that age they'd run the risk that he'd hear his new name and think, "What, have I been usurped already?"

Excellent post, R197! Bravo!

It seems that bullying staff was a bridge too far for the BRF and those whose livelihoods depend on them. Their future is uncertain, to say the least, once TQ is raptured and Charles and Camilla take over. Their continued existence depends on the goodwill of the public and that could be lost in a (long) heartbeat if it became known that the royal family treated their staff, who are people just like the public, with contempt. No wonder the alarm bells went off in William's head. I can imagine the rows behind the scenes.

I also think losing the grand apartment at KP and being shunted off to miserable Frogmore absolutely embittered PH. He had made a thing that apt 1A had one more room than the Cambs' apt. Being exiled to Frogmore - even the name is ugly - would have hit him like a kick in the balls.

For MM, it was different. She had had various jobs since leaving university and this one was like any other. If it isn't working out, move on.

I think it's obvious that it was William who put his foot down, as future Prince of Wales and future King and said to Charles, Liz and the Crown, that he did not want the Sussexes anywhere near him, his wife or his kids.

The only ones with that kind of power to kibosh the Sussexes getting Kensington and York House would be the Queen, Charles and William. The Queen and Charles might have been bothered by reports of Sussex bad behavior but William was the one having to actively deal with it so he's the one who had to have made that request for them to get the heave ho.

Although the rumors have died almost completely, for years and years it was alleged that Charles intended to chose Arthur as his regnal name.

That’s a nice throwback to his distant relative Prince Arthur, Duke of Connaught, son of Queen Victoria. A hard working and loyal royal family member whose line lives on in the Swedish royal family.

[quote]It seems that bullying staff was a bridge too far for the BRF and those whose livelihoods depend on them. Their future is uncertain, to say the least, once TQ is raptured and Charles and Camilla take over. Their continued existence depends on the goodwill of the public and that could be lost in a (long) heartbeat if it became known that the royal family treated their staff, who are people just like the public, with contempt. No wonder the alarm bells went off in William's head. I can imagine the rows behind the scenes.

I don't know; I remember reading some article that William could be prickly to deal with too - indicating that the BRF have a high tolerance for diva behavior and aren't particularly nice to any of their employees. I can also see them counseling the targeted employees that "we love you, your job is safe...she's just very insecure, an actress, you know" - to pacify the employees until they can get her on Team BRF. It makes you think that something happened to Wills personally making him think it was a bridge too far & he didn't want his family living around those two.

Perhaps. But it sounds more like the newspapers were speculating that he wanted to appear equal to the mythical King Arthur, r205. Which, to be honest, I don't believe.

Although I have read that William can be very grand, the Cambs are said to treat their staff like family to compensate for the low pay. Apparently there is little turnover.

Wrong, r206,

The BRF are FAMOUSLY nice to their employees. It's something that is always mentioned in royal books. That's why they keep staff for decades with minimum turnover.

The only ones who were ever reported to have been "prickly" were occasionally Princess Margaret and, on at least one occasion, Prince Andrew. Margaret was told off by the Queen and Prince Charles kicked up a hell of a ruckus when Andrew shouted at one of his (Andrew's) aides. Charles confronted him and they barely spoke to one another for a long time afterward.

The level of turnover within the Sussex household, in under a year, was 13. I doubt if that many people had quit palace jobs in all the previous 20 years put together. Maybe even longer.

Until Meghan came along, Andrew was notorious for being the worst behaved to staff and having high turnover. William is said to have the ocassional tantrum but is generally quite well liked. Supposedly he will even apologize when he realizes he's gone off the deep end. Philip was said to have been the best liked of all despite his occasional prickliness. Margaret was a prick like Andrew.

Lilibet is the least merched royal baby alive. Not a single photograph of her exists in the public realm, and barely any of Archie either.

Wasn’t it in Kitty Kelly’s book about Andrew, that he would be woken by his valet each morning and each morning Andrew would roar back “go fuck off!!!”

Nice way to start the day. I’ve also read that he has framed photos of Sarah in his rooms and if any of the staff moves them he freaks out.

"hat they were moving into the palatial 21-room Apartment 1 at Kensington Palace once the refurbishment in anticipation of their arrival was completed in January, and were going to be given the huge 10-bedroom York Cottage on the Sandringham estate,"

R197 - I do not think the above statement is true. I think it was just tabloid gossip.

I never heard they were being given York Cottage, but they were due to move into Princess Margaret's former apartment adjoining the Cambridges'.

Great post at r197, but I think the stink was in the well long before the Fall of 2018. You'll recall all the drama leading up to the Sussex wedding, all the in-fighting and tantrums. They were already nightmares to deal with before marrying.

I think the pinnacle of exasperation with them, vis-a-vis the Cambridges at least, happened in Oct/Nov 2018. Enough was enough by then. But the behind-the-scene spectacle - hidden largely from public view then - had been ongoing. The decision to boot them from KP wasn't undertaken in a few weeks, it was achieved over at least a few months.

Agreed, r215. I was only attempting to show that the timeline of late 2018 demonstrates that there was a definite turning point during that autumn - a crossing of the Rubicon, so to speak.

The bullying of Charlotte prior to the Sussex wedding was probably a major factor. It's clear something wasn't right there: In the pictures of the Sussex wedding, William and Kate are hovering protectively over their kids. You don't see that body language in pictures of any of the other weddings Charlotte and George were in that year.

R214, Princess Margaret's former place is the home to the Cambridge's. I recall they were getting the apartment occupied by the Gloucesters, who downsized.

The pics of the wedding tell it all! Every single guest except MM's mother looks like they are at a funeral and TQ looks like thunder.

Sorry, that should read 'Every single family member at the wedding..'

I'm sure the celebrity invitees were pleased to be there.

R219

Harry couldn’t be that beloved of a grandchild if he was, as a working royal, consigned to that dump Frogmore Cottage by HM. It seemed very much her way of putting him in his place after bad behavior. You can see the mildew on the stonework, it’s hideous. At best it’s servants quarters.

York Cottage would have been lovely, it’s a very nice house. But not grand enough for Meghan, I think.

If it's all true, William's maneuvers sound like someone who snapped after reaching his limit - a right, that's it! moment. Not impulse but unwillingness to indulge anything any further. It's all speculation but if you had to choose between William and Harry's first wife, considering even just the generally accepted track records of how they deal with other people, of the two, who would you suppose is more likely to bully staff?

York Cottage is now the estate office at Sandringham and has no privacy whatsoever. The public can walk within feet of it. The other places on Sandringham that are occupied - Anmer Hall, Wood Farm - they offer privacy. You can see the exposure of York Cottage from it's position upper right of the photo.

R170 - What is it about this sentence above the list on the royal family's website that you do not understand:

"The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by Parliamentary statute. The order of succession is the sequence of members of the Royal Family in the order in which they stand in line to the throne."

Or the paragraphs following:

"The basis for the succession was determined in the constitutional developments of the seventeenth century, which culminated in the Bill of Rights (1689) and the Act of Settlement (1701).

When James II fled the country in 1688, Parliament held that he had 'abdicated the government' and that the throne was vacant. The throne was then offered, not to James's young son, but to his daughter Mary and her husband William of Orange, as joint rulers.

. . . It therefore came to be established not only that the Sovereign rules through Parliament, but that the succession to the throne can be regulated by Parliament, and that a Sovereign can be deprived of his/her title through misgovernment. The Act of Settlement confirmed that it was for Parliament to determine the title to the throne."

And that last sentence - are there any words there that you would like us to look up and explain to your retarded little mind?

Like: " . . . CONFIRMED THAT IT WAS FOR PARLIAMENT TO DETERMINE TITLE TO THE THRONE" . . . ?

The Queen has zero power to reorder the succession on her own. Not only not ALL, but NONE.

Not to be a broken record, but following the wedding, there was a series of articles in Harper’s Bazaar and Town and Country, speculating about which property the Queen was going to give the newlyweds.

First it was York Cottage, per Harper’s. Then Adelaide Cottage, per People.

What we didn’t know then, of course, was how Meghan presented her desires as “fait accompli” in the tabloids. Just like her tiara moment, she assumed that she’d be able to make her desires happen just by declaring it.

And just like her tiara moment, the Queen slapped it down.

Froggy Cottage was a rebuke, and that’s why they never lived there.

I offered her a very grand and historic place.

On the Outer Hebrides.

I remember an article that talked about how H&M were decorating Frogmore Cottage. One thing was the nursery was going to be painted in a neutral color so as not to negatively influence the child (ie pink for girls, blue for boys).

R220 - not sure the celebrities were that thrilled to be there either. Tom Hardy always looked bored or annoyed in all his photos with Haz

Of course MM bullied staff. They voted with their feet and left. The Cambridges have kept the same nanny for 8 years, adding 2 more kids along the way.

I can’t wait for the tell-all books. You know they’re coming.

Meghan will write one once she and Haz separate.

It will be full of lies, and will prompt others (Haz? Estranged family? Estranged friends? Former staff?) to write responses.

I just can’t wrap my brain around someone as utterly nuts and trashy as Markle somehow infiltrating the BRF.

Harry seems quite stupid, so maybe he doesn’t see it. More likely, however, he (consciously or not) uses Markle as his wrecking ball.

I have a family member like this. He was always a psychopathic asshole. Hated his two small kids, hated being a father.

When the kids were quite young, psychos wife died in a car accident. Psycho flipped out, basically abandoned the kids to live by themselves, and took up with this crazy bitch who had just married her THIRD husband.

Crazy bitch absolutely hated one of psychos kids, and immediately set about cutting that kid out of the family.

We, the extended family , could see what was going on and couldn’t understand why psycho would have anything to do with crazy bitch (who, let’s not forget, was also still married to someone else.)

Years later, it seems obvious Psycho had a deep hatred of his children all along, and was using Crazy Bitch to finish obliterating his family.

Nowadays he’d be one of those family annihilators. Who knows, maybe those kids would be dead if the car accident had never happened. I’ve ever seen a man so delighted to have a dead wife.

Anyway, that’s the level of pathology we’re dealing with Haz and Markle. Real next level, so-crazy-you -can’t-quite-believe-your-eyes shit.

Meghan attacking Charlotte was creepy as hell. She probably sees the Cambridge kids as standing in the way of her world domination.

Bullying kids (particularly kids the bully hardly knows) is a huge red flag.

I’m not quite sure exactly what it means, but I’ve come across a few people in my life who almost reflexively upon meeting a child will start to ruthlessly bully the child.

These people have, without fail, gone on to show themselves to be crazier than shithouse rats.

Not just unpleasant, bad-with-kids types. But people so crazy, erratic, and destructive you can’t be in the same room with them.

Markle sounds like one of those.

I remember that MM's brother warned the RF to keep her away from children and pets.

R231, what happened to the children from your extended family?

There is a certain type of (very skanky) woman who has a viscerally negative reaction to other females who have any level of self-confidence. It’s as if they view the other person’s happiness as a threat to their own.

But they only react this way to females.

Inexplicably, the rather homely MM seems to have oozed her way through life with her cunt. So she’s probably one of these woman haters. Would explain why she has such a hard on for Kate and Charlotte.

BRF really is in a tough spot. If they come down too hard on him and he offs himself down the road when she discards him, then they have that on their conscience.

If they do nothing, then they have this viper he married constantly thrashing them.

At the very least, I hope they have Dr. Ramani of YT fame on speed dial.

Harry is a grown man and father of two. If he refuses to get help for his serious issues and ends his life, that's on him, not his family. They have a right to draw boundaries to protect themselves from his and his wife's dysfunction.

I’m not so sure MM will leave Harry. These desperate types often reach the end of the line after burning bridges their whole lives and then cling obsessively to each other. They’re often happy as clams together. Sometimes one of them sees this as proof of the other’s devotion— he gave up his whole family for me! Of course this isn’t a healthy motivation or lifestyle, but there are a lot of very low functioning people in this world.

If Harry wants to be with Meghan, fine. He's proven through his actions that he was toxic long before he married her--Palace PR just covered it up. Birds of a feather.

That said, if they'd quit with the attacks on his family, I'd wish them well with all of their publicity chasing in Cali. Of course, without the attacks on the family, there would be no publicity, so I guess those aren't going away.

R214 - The Cambridges moved into Margret's old Kensington Palace Apartment. The Apartment you are talking about is the Duke of Gloucester's former Kensington Palace Apartment. I do not believe that that this apartment was ever intended for the Sussexes. The "Gloucester'" apartment at Kensington Palace has been taken over by the Cambridges for offices and staff.

These are huge apartments, now many offices do they need?

"Meghan attacking Charlotte was creepy as hell."

R232 - You do not know for a fact that Meghan attacked anyone, let alone Charlotte.

You are repeating " Sussex haters" fan-fiction made-up by and published by the British Tabloids.

Being snarky about someone clothes, body or make-up is pointless bitchery. Accusing someone of attacking a child with no evidence is another matter.

R241 - I am sure the Cambridges are like everyone else: they do not want to live over the "shop" and do not want employees traipsing through their private home.

Taking overt he adjoining apartment provided office space outside of their private home and accommodations for staff who are provided housing as part of their employment compensation.

My favorite vintage "Meghan Manifestation" was when she put out that she "could wear" the Spencer tiara. Not even registering it belongs to a different family.

R242 the seamstresses at Givenchy who witnessed Meghan bullying Charlotte have leaked what happened along with the fact Meghan was impossible and she wouldn't let them finish up her wedding dress which is why it didn't fit.

Apparently Charlotte was having a meltdown during the dress fitting and Meghan was like “will you keep her quiet?” or something mean like that. Meghan also wanted the bridesmaids barelegged, Sex and The City Style. She was told that’s not how royal bridesmaids are dressed and she flipped out on Kate.

Or at least that’s what I heard.

R227, I remember that, as well. Organic, low-fume gray paint. I also remember that Victoria Beckham was said to have helped with the interior decorating (after the previous rumor that Beckham’s own interior designer would be doing so!). They also hired Beckham’s former household manager, Rebecca Mostow, to run their CA home.

Borrowing heavily from Posh, haha.

Harry and Meg ought to have Simone Biles on their podcast. When they get around to that podcast, that is. They can all talk about mental health, the need to quit high-pressure situations, the challenges of being a team player, being the greatest, and cashing in.

R246 Meghan pushed her Canadian friend Horseface and Horseface's daughter to also bully Charlotte according to the seamstresses at Givenchy.

Yeah, Simone Biles can list all her accomplishments and then Harry and Meghan can list their non-accomplishments.

[quote]Taking overt he adjoining apartment provided office space outside of their private home and accommodations for staff who are provided housing as part of their employment compensation.

I am intrigued by the idea of who & why takes a job with the BRF; is it the UK equivalent of rich kids who work in DC that have parents that can afford to pay their rent all so that they can put it on their resume? It sounds like a terrible job unless you're some 60 year old die hard monarchist

MM really is trash if she thinks you can comment to a mother about her child’s behavior. That’s the number one rule of upper middle class motherhood— NEVER comment on a child’s behavior unless to ask if you can help or offer support.

I live in a town that’s about half (relatively poor) hillbilly deplorables and half highly educated types. It can sometimes be hard to tell who is who at first glance.

So it’s amusing to see / hear the deplorables saying things like “if that was my kid, I’d CONTROL her!” They have no clue they have immediately identified themselves as a hillbilly with one foot in the trailer when they start talking this way.

R178, I was just yanking angry loon R152’s chain, flipping his words JUST TO PUSH THEIR LOON BUTTON.

R224, see above.

^Made you pontificate more, R152/R166/R224.

R251, from what I understand, Royal service does indeed look fantastic on a resume.

R257 I assume it's an excellent springboard for ambitious people.

Aren't there pretty good perks with Royal service? Job security, interesting travel, even free accommodations in some cases. That might balance out the low pay.

R170 - No, you weren't. You're just dumb enough to have believed your own uninformed bullshit until you got caught. Then you played clown.

It's probably a matter of hours before Meghan, Osaka, and Biles all hold hands and praise each other for speaking their truth and putting mental health before everything else (after they've gotten their hands on the money, of course).

R260, if you’ll check your own text, I copied and pasted that part TO A T, then I changed just a few words to flip the script. Your voice, your syntax, your words, my few changes. Na na na na boo boo! Boo!

^R270/R254/R256/R255

^Oops, I’m a time traveler! S/B R170.

And R170 - in case you're still playing Klass Klown - I blocked you.

R261 - my prediction: we'll soon hear that Meghan contacted Simone Biles in support. 3, 2, 1...

Osaka is a lot richer than Harry - just sayin'.

R267 You mean...Meghan will become Osaka's lover!? This soap opera needs that kind of drama.

I know this is CDAN, and about as reliable as a Ford Pinto, but if true, I have to tip my hat to ol' Megs.

Meghan is Harry's "manager"? LOLLLLLL. That's perfect. He's such a gimp.

He should be called the Cuck of Sussex

Honestly I like that she is such a money hungry little tramp. Harry deserves it.

Does Harry know?

The only thing Harry knows, is that he know better than to question her!

Kelly Clarkson just had a divorce in which she's left paying her husband 2 million a year. This is partly because he was her manager, so the court took into account how much Clarkson paid him every year.

So if it's true that Smugs is Harry's manager, she's setting herself up for a MASSIVE divorce payout.

Guess this means that Haz was getting paid for his little series with Oprah.

R275, oh ho HO! Brilliant.

I hope that’s what she’s doing. That little fuck deserves every bit of what she’s going to dish out.

R275, If MM is the manager, wouldn't it be she who gets additional payout from Haz? In the Clarkson case you cite, apparently it was Kelly had to pay her husband the $2million because he was the manager.

Yeah but Clarkson is minting money. Harry has not managed to make any significant dough yet. Let him produce something for Netflix and Spotify before they pay him for the content

He hasn't received the 20M advance from Random House? If the ghost writer already has a first draft...

R280 you believe that bullshit? They announce their fabulous 'contracts' and produce nothing.

I agree r281, false-flag contracts arranged by their PR firm and signed for benefits of a press release.

All they've done since they left the UK is give interviews trashing his relatives and publish press releases about something they're going to be earning billions of dollars for which will never materialize.

I mean this sincerely, I feel for Prince Charles, he must be so worried about his son.

Agree r284

If Harry has suicidal tendencies, he’s eventually gonna blow his brains out

Have they posted pics of the new brat yet?

[quote]" . . . CONFIRMED THAT IT WAS FOR PARLIAMENT TO DETERMINE TITLE TO THE THRONE"

Making a mental note always to be super-charming to the Prime Minister of the day.

R209, quite a few staff disappeared during the early reign of Princess Diana, mostly by decree rather than by resignation. Among them there was one particular long-term valet of Charles's whom she fascinatingly considered to be "too close" to Charles, who exited in the first year. She also fired the children's nanny (not Tiggy, she was after the separation) because she was "too close" to William and Harry.

They are not anywhere in Kelly's atmosphere when it comes to making money.

R285 - no worries, he sold the vintage Purdy guns his grandfather gave him to pay the first round of legal bills for the Mail that she lost.

And as the Mail was granted leave to appeal the ultimate decision in .Meghan's favour, they never got their damages money, it's on hold till the outcome of the appeal and more massive legal bills are accruing.

No one anywhere gets a $20 million advance. Finding Freedom was a flash on the pan, The Bench was a total flop, do you think these people are blind?

It was probably a mid-seven figure advance, another upon delivery, and a piece of the sales that could if it sold like wildfire cap out at $20 million. But a upfront advance of $20 million? They wouldn't give that to Jackie O's ghost returning and promising a tell-all on the Kennedys and Ari.

All right, maybe $20 million for that.

But for Harry to bore us all to death about his miserable parents, his mistakes, his lessons learned, and how his d-list actress opportunist grifter wife saved him from himself and the Windsors (although happily keeping the title the Windsors gave her)?

I doubt it.

Still no black and white blurry pic of the baby’s hand. I guess they’re holding out for a huge offer from a magazine.

[quote] I guess they’re holding out for a huge offer from a magazine.

I wonder if the tabloids are refusing to pay? That would really set the Harkles on edge. Not getting money they’ve already spent.

Did we ever get to the bottom of the “Diana Mary Mountbatten-Windsor” birth certificate mystery?

This is just like the Netflix deal, purported to be paying them $150 million. But when you looked hard at it, you realized that was for the entire production budget of any series they produced. The Sussexes probably only got a few million up front. It's always smoke and puffery with these two.

Are they really living in Montecito? Weren’t there rumors the aren’t actually living in the house they supposedly bought? (Shades of Frogmore, where they supposedly never actually moved in.)

Isn’t Montecito a bit out-of-the-action for Megs? She likes skanking around in the grime.

Montecito was just a stage set for the Oprah interview. God only knows where they are really living. It must be such a shock for Harry after a lifetime of living in historical palaces to be suddenly ricocheting around the world living in borrowed mansions.

Then again, technically the historical palaces are borrowed too, so perhaps it feels normal to him.

When is INS going to pay Harry a visit?

The Oprah interview didn't even take place at their house. It was at a "friend's."

Someone posted the real estate listing for the Montecito house before on here. Its been up for sale for a while now and apparently records show it was purchased in 2020? Not sure whats up with the house. Maybe theyre renting it.

One thing about Harry I am guessing is he has no concept of money and so couldn't recognize a good decision or a bad one if he tripped over drunk in the middle of the night (when he presumably makes most of his decisions.) But he wouldn't know if renting a mansion is a waste of money, vs. buying it. Etc. Etc.

R288 - The nanny was Barbra Barnes.

It makes no sense for them to rent. They had the trust from Diana, two million from Daddums, plus money from their deals and his salary from whatever that app is.

What makes sense for them is to live within the revenue generated from their capital, so as to preserve that capital for the long term.

That does not constitute keeping up with the Oprahs, whose capital they do not have.

I remember the show “Episodes”, the British couple moves to California to work on a TV show as writers. They get an amazing mansion but when they touch the ‘marble’ columns and walls they discover they’re just flimsy plaster. Eventually the wife freaks out and says she misses rain, curry, and cups of tea. That’s how I always think of LA for Harry.

The Montecito house is owned by a company or trust, I can't remember which, set up under Meghan's name. A down payment of something like $3 million was put down, leaving a $9 million or so mortgage.

This is like the surrogacy rumours: they undercut the already reliably shady aspects of the Harkles with absurd fantasies.

The house was purchased in spring 2020. It is available apparently for film work at a very high hourly rate.

The Oprah interview took place elsewhere.

The only other living arrangement that seems to have legs is the recent removal of all Harry's possessions from Frogmore Cottage. If it were untrue, Scobie would have scoffed at it by now, and so would the Palace, as both have in the past repeatedly stated that the FrogCott would continue to be the Harkles' UK home.

My guess is the Queen told the Harkles their lease would not be renewed as of next 1 April after the book revelations.

They are being frozen out.

Any one want to work for Megs and report back to us?

If the BRF set up that trust and made the down payment on the Montecito place, Harry and Meghan are probably pissed that Charles didn't shell out for the entire purchase price and give them a slush fund for maintenance as well. Harry thinks he's entitled to be treated like a King by his family even though he's just a non-working Duke, and Meghan thinks she's entitled to everything under the sun.

[quote]I’m not so sure MM will leave Harry. These desperate types often reach the end of the line after burning bridges their whole lives and then cling obsessively to each other.

Ironically, Meghan was a bigger deal as part of the BRF: The first biracial working Royal Duchess. Now that they are back on her native turf, she's just another former actress trying to establish a lifestyle brand/media empire. She's only worth anything as the Duchess of Sussex, as Harry is the true novelty and celebrity as far as Hollywood goes. Remember, as a non-British citizen, in case of a divorce she couldn't even keep a courtesy title. If they divorce and she goes back to being Meghan Markle or even Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor, nobody will give a damn about her.

I'm sure she's realized, if she didn't before, that she needs Harry's cache desperately. The only way she'll leave him is if she finds a better prospect: Her own A-list career apart from him (unlikely given her age and talents), or an even higher-status husband (the fabled tech billionaire everybody keeps bringing up). Absent those events, she'll cling to him forever.

If anybody initiates divorce, it will be Harry. Which isn't totally unlikely given his documented roving eye. Lots of climbers in LA who would love to climb on top of the Duke of Sussex.

*cachet

R12 I always thought MM was after Charles.

R307 - I highly doubt that the BRF set up that trust and made the down payment on the Montecito place. This just makes no sense to me.

Any gossip about Harry's sexual proclivities?

R312 there were always rumors he beat up prostitutes

[quote]Harry is the true novelty and celebrity as far as Hollywood goes.

And once he's told all, in volumes one through possible three and a posthumous four, what is that novelty? What don't-tell-anybody-but at a party is left of any value? They'll be consorting with C List after that.

I'm confused by the Netflix job ad at r306. Wouldn't a production company hire it's own staff? I thought they were making programmes as Arsewell productions. Maybe I misunderstand how these things work.

R312 - rumour around here is that he is bi. Markus Anderson from Soho House and Megtard had threeways with him. Allegedly.

Yay, more crazy BS with no basis in fact

R315 I suspect Netflix is assisting Meghan and Harry on the production end until (if) they get up and running. They have to see some ROI on them. It just confirms, they didn't get paid that $150 million, or whatever amount that was.

Even if he isn't a BI he strikes me as stupid enough that if he's told fuck Marcus, he fucks Marcus.

Dunno if he's bi but he's got sub written all over him.

That crazy bitch looks more intimate with Markus than with Dim in every photo I have seen of them.

Who da fuq is Markus? A pimp?

Her poodle.

Toothpick legs

The rumours about Harry beating up prostitutes when he was serving in Afghanistan sound so random that it's more likely that they have a grain of salt to them than being made up.

Harry himself has said that he abused drugs and alcohol. His naked romp with several blondes in a Las Vegas hotel episode was written off as just a cheeky chappy goofing around, but it reveals something far more reckless even sinister about Harry. This is just the episode we managed to hear about. Can you imagine what else he's got up to? He should be thankful to the royal minders who cleaned up after him and made sure nothing became public.

[quote]She said when she entered the room, Prince Harry was already naked and everyone was drinking. Other people got naked throughout the course of the evening.

[quote]"It was just crazy. (Prince Harry) looked actually delirious. There was a pool table and he was playing air guitar with pool sticks," she said in the interview.

[quote]"He would just randomly walk up to you and hug you. He was just really friendly and there were just really random naked hugs. It was funny."

To be fair, r309, MM needs Harry's cache as well as his cachet.

Drug dealer and hooker at Prince Harry’s party: report

By PageSix.com Staff August 31, 2012 | 1:33pm

Amid allegations of cocaine use and whispers of “something gigantic” to come from the party at the Wynn suite, Prince Harry’s Las Vegas scandal still has legs.

RadarOnline writes that an alleged hooker and an alleged cocaine dealer were in Harry’s hotel room during his now infamous “strip billiards” romp.

“A really good friend of mine is a cocaine dealer and texted me from the hotel room while the party was happening and said, ‘Guess where I am?!?’” a source told the gossip site. “Turns out he was in the Wynn suite with Harry, his pals and all those girls.”

The gossip site claims that at least one of the women partying in Harry’s suite has been known to prostitute and accept money and gifts for sexual favors.

In the same report, the third in line to the British throne was reportedly planning to issue an apology for his Las Vegas escapades but his dad Prince Charles told him to keep his mouth shut.

According to RadarOnline’s insider, Charles told Harry to act more responsibly but was understanding that boys will be boys.

“Of all the royal family, Charles was the most accepting of Harry’s behavior,” the source told the site. “In his younger years he was just as much a playboy as Harry is now, so he’s more understanding when it comes to this sort of thing.”

Charles reportedly believes that the sooner Harry joins his military unit the scandal will “blow over.”

“Charles doesn’t believe there’s any need for a public apology and instead said to Harry he should go to Afghanistan as soon as he makes an appearance at the Paralympics and join his rank,” the source said. “The quicker he goes out there, the sooner this will all blow over.”

With Harry running around naked at his father's birthday party, some of these other stories don't sound far-fetched.

R326 - Charles made a big blunder. Harry should have been made to apologize for his behavior. He represents the Queen and Britain when he travels so his antics were appalling. Charles' handling of the situation is one of the reasons Harry is the way he is. He was never asked to be responsible for his behavior so why would he need to mature and become an adult.

The rumour is in your head, R316. You float the “Harry is bi” alleged rumour every couple of threads.

Wish fulfilment? Manifestation?

I'm not sure it's a blunder r328. It's more in line with the just ignore it and it'll blow over philosophy - and it did blow over in the public eye. If he'd made a public apology there would have been responses to that, his every word would have been picked apart, the speculation about what really went on in that suite would have increased.

The issue isn't that Harry didn't apologise to the public when no one really expected him to, the issue is how exactly was he being dealt with in private. Sounds like he was creating a lot of trouble for a number of years for the palace staff, who had to clean up for him after this and no doubt many similar incidents. Then he goes and turns on the staff. I suspect part of his grievance with the palace staff is because they were trying to stop him getting too out of control in his wilder days.

Harry is obviously a deeply troubled and very angry man. He needs to be careful that he doesn't shit on too many people because I can imagine there are plenty of disturbing stories that can be told about him.

I am no Harry fan but he was on a private trip, in a private place and someone chose to take advantage of him. Yes, he was an idiot to have created the circumstances that allowed it, but the blame lies majority with the person who took advantage of him.

The Duke and Duchess of Windsor got to live in a great mansion outside Paris for a peppercorn rent, surely Haz and Megs could come up with a similar arrangement with the American government?

Maybe Trump will 'give' them an apartment in Trump Tower, since those have so little market value these days. Then Haz and Smeg can be closer to the Russian oligarchs who live there. Though I can't imagine what use they would be to Trump, and M is the wrong color anyway.

Am sure Rawshaw heppy to hez Zoozzexes in America. Velly heppy.

Trump wouldn't give anybody the bed to piss on him in. He's cheap.

R332 I rather imagine the US government wants Harry out. He's creating problems with the UK and the US is not going to offend our closest ally to indulge a 40 year old spoiled brat wannabe celebrity. Harry and Meghan are massively stupid.

[Quote]The rumours about Harry beating up prostitutes when he was serving in Afghanistan sound so random

Not in Afghanistan. It allegedly occurred in El Cajon, California near the Mexican border in the Sonora desert where he was for Apache helicopter training. It was on the same trip as the Vegas bacchanal. A sleepy nowheresville with an economy reliant on the military base and agricultural. It wouldn't happen in Afghanistan where he was guarded 24/7 and women are virtual prisoners in their homes. But El Cajon where there are a lot of women without means who want to get out... A lot would've happy to receive a payment and sign an NDA.

R328 Harry was hardly representing the Queen in Vegas unless Her Majesty was invited to get trashed in the Wynn Suite but sent her grandson instead.

R338 we had a prior engagement in Miami

I thought it was Burning Man, Ma'am.

Harry's naked Vegas party did blow over. He did go to Afghanistan and we were treated to more "Hero Harry" tales. For many people in the UK it was seen as boys will be boys. The girl who was interviewed basically backs that up despite the coke.

If the alleged beating up of prostitutes had ever made the front pages then that would most certainly have needed a response. Funny how Harry openly saying how "out of control" and "angry" he was during those exact years whilst abusing drink and drugs as actually made those old BIs more plausible.

I didn't realize that his out of control and angry years and heavy drug and alcohol abuse coincided with the helicopter training time. I thought it was when he was post Army adrift. Makes you go hmm 😒.

A story like beating up sex workers would never make publication in in the UK. Despite Harry's hatred of journalists, the Royal Rota knows so much more about the royal family that they do not publish in order to maintain the relationship they have with the royals and get better access and information. That's what's so ironic. Harry was to dim and blinded by anger to realize that he was being protected by them. He's lost that now. I don't think that TMZ or the Enquirer would let him off easily. It wouldn't surprise me if they have teams working on the Sussexes right now. Sunshine Sachs has prestige clients but I don't think they'd deign to give interviews to trashy news outlets as a preemptive favor to keep the from publishing unsavory information.

I find it hard to believe these rumours about the sex workers. The royal rota might not print them, but what's to stop an American journalist? Or any royal biography writer? I just don't see this one being true because it's well enough known it wouldn't be staying under wraps.

Worth noting, probably done elsewhere, but you know the search... anyway, 40 years ago today that this whole retrospectively mesalliance circus got started... July 29, 1981, Charles and Diana married.

Harry is a total cuck. He'll take Marcus's cock up his ass if Megz tells him to.

R338 That legit made me LOL

R338 - when you're a member of the BRF, you represent them wherever you go. You have to be careful about what you say, what you do, who you hang around with etc...so you don't embarrass the Queen. Obviously Harry (and Andrew & Margaret in her day) thought otherwise.

Harry should take a long, hard look at the stories of Uncle David, Aunt Margaret, and Uncle Andrew. This is what happens to Royals who think it's about them as individuals rather than about the institution they serve.

R347, he’s a little asshole.

We were absolute nobodies (less than nobodies, really) but we behaved ourselves because we didn’t want to make our mother look bad. She was a divorced lady trying to make it and we didn’t want to add to her troubles or make her look like a bad mother.

But maybe that’s his problem.

R348, and he unironically says he doesn’t want to be like Andrew? Hahahaha. It’s like that saying “what I fear, I create.”

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

Yes, maybe they're trying to keep Harry mum about certain things.

[quote] This is what happens to Royals who think it's about them as individuals rather than about the institution they serve.

This point was made in the last episode of season 4 of The Crown. Philip is talking to Diana, and in my opinion, was one of the best scenes in the entire show so far. Well written and superbly acted. Tobias Menzies needs to be awarded for that scene.

Fergie's always been a greedy slapper,she got caught trying to sell access to Andrew for £500k.People think she is some daft fun loving puppy,a bit like people who support Harry do with him I guess.

[quote]I wish people who gave Fergie the benefit of doubt would realize what an opportunistic ho she was/ is. Instead of trolling for dick and money

This line made me laugh; Fergie should use as her social media moniker. Sarah Ferguson: A former HRH now just trolling for dick and cash.

Andrew would have been better marrying the porn actress. Cutty Sark or whatever her name was.

R351- Very observant post. It's not just that Fergie is a money-grubbing ho, either - her ostracisation by top tier royals, Andrew's exile from the royal stage, and the resentment of Eugenie, particularly, of Kate, were also all festering in the background.

Eugenie and Fergie have nothing to lose at this point (I doubt Bea is remotely involved in this). No one is going to kick Fergie out of Royal Lodge where she's been living as a freebie for years, keeping Andrew company as they end up growing old together, after all. Eugenie has a trust fund and is married to a very comfortably off man, and the Queen is said to be quite fond of both girls.

The worst that would happen is that Eugenie, too, would end up frozen out, perhaps have to give up the leases on Frogmore Cottage, as that is in the hands of the Queen, as is the lease on Ivy Cottage, the Brooksbank's London home on the grounds of Kensington Palace - both are part of the Crown Estates and are Grace and Favour residences, and only the Queen can decide who gets to live in these and who doesn't, even if they are paying market rent.

Perhaps Eugenie's feeling that her parents were ill done by is stronger than any distaste the Sussexes arouse. Eugenie isn't stupid: she can't not know that in Britain, the feeling is on the side of the Windsors. Perhaps it's just a bit of Mean Girl payback whilst still retaining her place in the Queen's affections. Fergie, of course, is out of the Queen's control - as, apparently, is so much else.

It's all gotten very GoT. I think Charles and Camilla are not much more "popular" inside the family than amongst the public. There was never any love lost between Charles and Andrew, Charles and Anne, and if the press is true, now between the Wessexes and Charles as Charles makes a fuss about the Edinburgh title for Edward - surely the least of all the problems facing Charles now. Really? Another breach with another family member who fill his loyalty and service and that of his wife are meaningless? Brilliant!

Someone should remind Fergie and Eugenie of that old saying, "If you lie down with dogs, you shall get up with fleas."

Fergie stating that Diana would be so proud of Meghan and Harry is tantamount to sticking a knife in the back of the Queen, whose tolerance and affection for Fergie and allowing her to live for free with Andrew at Royal Lodge without making a fuss about it are well known. It's also a knife in the back of Charles and William, neither of whom will forget it.

When the Queen dies, and Charles and William become the powers in the BRF, Fergie may find she's made a couple of really bad enemies in high places.

The tensions in the BRF show that the heir really shouldn't have more than 2 children. It cuts down on the number of disgruntled future royals.

^Charles had only two. Lot of good that did. It's not how many he had, but who he had them with.

With a stronger head who was willing to take a stronger line early on, some of this was a avoidable.

In the end, these are the Queen's failures.

Yes, we'd still have Harry, but if the Queen had sensibly stopped after Anne, we wouldn't be bothered with the York dramas.

The Queen has a fondness for Fergie so of course she’s going to have more than fondness for Harry. It doesn’t matter that both have stabbed the family and institution in the back. They’re both still being rewarded for it.

R361 There is no way to know that. Meanwhile, it appears that what Fergie actually said was that Diana would have been very proud of both her sons and their wives.

For Fergie, that counts as diplomatically tactful.

I say it still goes back to the Queen's character flaws. She could easily have reined Andrew in. She could have had a frank discussion with Charles about Diana's unsuitability for anything but a brood mate. Ffs, Diana's grandmother and the Archbishop of Canterbury could see it! And she could have told Harry he was welcome to pursue a private life when he expressed doubts about royal life. Instead, she persuaded him to stay in - and then he found Meghan, whom the Queen also indulged.

No, these were the Queen's failures all the way down the line: always the path of least resistance and a smoothing of the surface of the roiled waters.

Just my view.

[quote] Just my view.

Beefeaters will be at your door in a few minutes to escort you to the Tower of London.

In hindsight they should’ve just let both Charles and Andrew marry their first choices. Camilla has more in common with the RF and the Queen than Diana, and she’s much more stable psychologically than Diana ever was. Fergie was a greedy shit show from the beginning and hasn’t let up.

That said, the RF wouldn’t have become an entertaining real life soap opera had Charles married down to earth, saucy Camilla. Andrew and Koo Stark would’ve (maybe) been the sideshow. But Koo Stark has kept dignified throughout the years and she didn’t seem to be the thirsty, destructive type unlike Fergie.

Apparently the Queen was fine with Andrew marrying an American actress because she liked her discrete personality. But that was a no-go when the topless photos from when Stark was 17-18 showed up in the newspapers.

How in the world did they not think that Meghan’s history of lies, ghosting people, sheer opportunism, etc…is not worse than old topless photos?

According to CDAN, it was Andrew and Fergie who leaked all the nasty gossip about the Sussexes due to their anger at MM upstaging Eugenie at her wedding.

Sometimes the enemy of your enemy becomes your friend……especially when Fergie sees $$$$ associated with Harry and Meghan in the US. If there’s cash to be made then Fergie is all in board, doesn’t matter if it trashes the RF. Similarly, when the York princesses see merit in settling old scores for mom and for being the only trusted family confidantes of (in their eyes) influential and wealthy Sussexe$.

Anyone with a knowledge of history and court life would have to be a total moron to make an enemy of the Reversionary Interest (as it used to be called) in the last years of an aging monarch. If Eugenie is doing this she's a total birdbrain and deserves to lose her nice houses.

It's a big mistake if the York sisters ally themselves with the Sussexes. Charles is going to need ribbon cutters and the queen's cousins are ageing out of that role and the Camb kids are too young. Bea and Euge might have been seconded into the job if they didn't rock the royal boat. If they aren't careful, they'll end up in the bio-hazard bin with Haz and Meg.

I think Harry and Fergie share the same extent of brain damage. They're both daft. Fergie's current headline in the Telegraph (she too is selling a book):

I am Proud of My Mistakes

She's such a moron.

Sorry, she's proud of her failings... which are many... and questionably a source of pride.

She's such a moron.

[quote] I find it hard to believe these rumours about the sex workers. The royal rota might not print them, but what's to stop an American journalist? Or any royal biography writer? I just don't see this one being true because it's well enough known it wouldn't be staying under wraps.

Ah, the naïveté of R343. Would like to believe that all the dirty deeds of those powerful and rich are exposed by eager journalists. If only that were the case....

Think of how long it took the likes of Cosby, Weinstein, Spacey and Weinstein to be exposed. (Hint: years and threats to well-known journalists. Yes, Catch and Kill is a real thing.)

There have been clean-ups for Harry all his adult life. Edward Lane Fox comes to mind off-hand. And apparently Charles had a real soft spot for Harry...as did the Queen.

However, there has been much smoke surrounding Harry’s physical abuse of “women of the evening”. Apparently it has occurred in California, England and Arizona, at the very least.

Look up the mayor’s statement to Harry regarding his behaviour: the mayor of Gila Bend, Arizona where Harry was stationed for military training. He reportedly abused so many women that the US MP became involved....this led to the mayor making the public warning to Harry regarding “girls” there. But the deets of all the activities were quickly “caught and killed”.

Recently, someone (Brit vet who served with Haz in Afghanistan) made a public statement that Harry had “people” in London to clean up abuses of women there.

I’m on my phone atm and can’t dig the receipts for the above two examples, but may be able to at a later date if no one comes up with them in the meantime.

I was interested to see that Lady C confirmed in her last video that Harry was NOT a helicopter pilot. He was a gunner.

I never believed that the RAF would let a dim wit like Harry fly off with a multi million pound aircraft, and putting other serving soldiers at risk.

She also confirmed something that has been obvious, namely that William actually CAN fly a helicopter.

….these dumbass redhead royals Harry and Fergie, not an ounce of self-awareness whatsoever.

R375 gingers seem to be the crazies.

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

I assume you go to work for Meghan Markle because being a cutter pays crap, right?

It’s interesting to see the praise for Fergie. It reminds me of our discussions about Lindsay Lohan. Some people project qualities onto her that she doesn’t possess, and view her as a fun, plucky heroine with a heart of gold. They forget her selling access to royalness and the York connections to all sorts of shady international characters. She is shady and mercenary.

It shouldn’t be costly to do these nonfiction programs for Archewell. After all, the idiots who agree to be featured in these inspirational stories basically sign away their own rights.

And stupid.

R379 Fergie has always come across as willing to compromise integrity for money. She hides behind her gregarious personality that many read as openness. Her sliminess is swathed in a cheerful, plucky exterior. That’s what she has going for her.

Fergie's Markle's role model.

I'd meant to reply to r343 yesterday, but it seems my post didn't take. But here it is:

[Quote]They would have to provide some evidence of the alleged abuse in order to avoid a libel suit.  And they know how litigious the Sussexes are.  Back then Harry really wasn't on the American media's radar.  And there wasn't enough interest to send reporters to snoop around.  The interest came after Vegas and then the marriage.

r351 Fergie was also revealed to be the royal who texted Piers Morgan saying it was wrong he lost his job over his comments about Meghan. So seems she is being two faced with everyone. She apparently sees herself as being close to the Queen yet sides with people who are blackmailing her an elderly woman? Something isn't right there. Fergie is trying to add to stay on super good terms with everyone and every player in this situation and is ending up looking like a two faced moral vacuum.

r374 I also found Lady C using a literary quote that Meghan and Harry would prefer to rule in hell rather than serve in any way in heaven a brilliant perfect illustration of their characters. If they can't be exempt from serving and be the top dog served by others then they'd rather rule as top dogs in the most despicable and selfish circumstances than have to relinquish being top dog and serving others as part of a team and teamwork for the greater good. The literature it is based on is very deep and layered but it's application to the Harkles is spot on. They are all about self, their virtue is fake and self serving and vice dressed as virtue, they are not team players and the greater good is not what their about.

Lady C is surely giving Meghan and Harry too much power by comparing them to Milton's Satan in Paradise Lost.

It's hilarious how you Klanners think that cutting ribbons is the pinnacle of anybody's ambitions, and that Beatroll and Huge-enie would drop their own jobs in order to comply. It's fucking boring, you twats! Something William, Kate, Charles and Camilla will do every day until they die, and something H and M were very happy to skip.

Wealthy people often retire at 50. No chance of even retiring at 90 for Charles et al.

Hahaha, I understand the Meghan fancunt who always posts two of her dumb posts in a row is back at R387 and R388.

Hi Megcunt, back at large from the nut house?

Maybe, R388, because they see their role in work and life as about more than money. But a trash, flah cretin like you wouldn't see that either. Ironically.

r388 But strangely not happy to skip their titles from that same boring and terrible royal system. Their clinging to their titles will always illustrate their hypocrisy and immaturity.

Just as the incessant use of klanners, et al illustrates R388's. If it ever worked, it now is an irritant about the writer not anyting that makes a point about us. These leftovers so like shit on your shoe. And, really, who aspires to be shit on a shoe?

[quote]It's hilarious how you Klanners think that cutting ribbons is the pinnacle of anybody's ambitions, and that Beatroll and Huge-enie would drop their own jobs in order to comply. It's fucking boring, you twats!

"Beatroll" and Eugenie WOULD drop their own jobs in a heartbeat to be allowed to join the working BRF and get to 'cut ribbons'. You're once again proving yourself a dipshit of the highest order.

The Yorks and their father have angled for YEARS to get them working royal status, even if only on part-time basis. There was deep disappointment for them that it was made clear they'd have to fend for themselves. Being a working royal isn't about 'boredom', its also about power, profile and prestige. There is a power to being a Senior Royal, and working for the Queen, that no other high-profile job or cheaper celebrity status can confer.

The antipathy towards Meghan would decrease enormously if she dropped her title. Meghan Markle Windsor has a nice ring to it. I think they can drop the Mountbatten since Philip is dead.

Meghan Markle Windsor sounds like a soap opera character, which is appropriate as that's basically what she is.

Meghan Markle Windsor sounds like a true star of the silver screen!

Meghan's actual name is Rachel.

R394 - The Mountbatten doesn't go away because Philip died. His wife ensured that it would become enshrined by formally adopting the double name as her family's surname decades ago. Thus, Archie's and Lili's last name, the Wessex kids' last name, and the last name that Pss. Anne used on her marriage certificate: Anne Elizabeth Alice Louis Mountbatten-Windsor.

It's not a pleasant nod: it's the family name now.

The American Constitution does not recognise foreign titles. If Harry applied for American citizenship, he would have to renounce both his titles (Prince and Duke).

Meghan Markle would rather die as Duchess of Sussex than live as Mrs Windsor, even it's in the White House.

^*Alice Louise (not Louis - although some people might think it perfectly suitable for the redoubtable Anne)

They can call themselves anything they like but the family name is Mountbatten-Windsor whether Philip is dead or not.

R374 I can't remember the details but Harry wanted to learn how to fly helicopters (like William) but wasn't able to for some reason....I can't remember the whole backstory there.

He didn't have maths or some technical subject at his A-levels, that's why he wasn't admitted, I think.

R401 he couldn't qualify and couldn't pass exams. Harry's dumb.

Harry only got 2 A levels in art and geography. His art tutor admitted she took the A level exam for him. Big scandal.

Or was it because of his VERY poor A-level results in general?

He had to cheat in ART??

Love this!

At least Fergie seems to be more genial and pleasant. I’ve never heard about her being nasty to staff, and she seems to be able to laugh at herself. That goes a long time way when you’re trying to win people over. She’s not imperious.

And I don’t think she has a strong ethical or moral code, but I don’t think she is malicious or vengeful.

R408 Fergie is a money grubbing fame whore, BUT she will not publicly trash any members of the royal family nor attack the institution. She knows (unlike her nephew and niece-in-laws) that she is only "relevant" so long as she is seen being connected to the royal family.

She's just stupid and emotionally needy. Not to get all Freudian but I wondered what happened in her childhood to make so desperate for... pretty much everything it seems.

R410 her mother abandoned the family when she was a kid and she's unattractive. People weren't expecting a Prince to marry an ugly redhead.

Fergie will never set foot in another palace once the queen dies. It baffles me how many people suck up to the queen and completely ignore her heirs.

If the BRF had let Harry fail more often and see the consequences of his laziness and entitlement, he might not be such an arrogant, useless human being.

But don't you see, R413, they can't - as soon as the majority of the public realises the emperor has no clothes...it's all over, Rover.

He should have been told, stay in the army or get another career.Royal family need a grip on this, it's one thing having a Monarchy, quite another to have all these fuckers with no brain or education leeching on. Now it's worse with the fucking American slag leech and she is calling us in the UK because she didn't get enough of our money for her lazy life as we need to pay her security. What a pair of cunts.

I don't think making Harry face consequences would have endangered the institution as a whole. He's not the direct heir, after all. It might have made it less likely he'd be accepted as a working royal, but they lost him for that anyway.

He should never have been given that option at such a young age, that is where they fucked up. Andrew and the Queen's cousins were career military.Harry was just tossing it off because he didn't give a shit. He should have been made to choose a career of some kind and not go straight to the public purse.Well that is why I dislike him most.I really dislike him.

True, without the working Royal gig to fall back on, he might have tried harder to pass the major's exam. OTOH, his trust fund from Diana gave him the option to just sit on his ass, and maybe the family wanted to prevent that. Andrew, who had no private fortune as a young man (no idea why he's so wealthy now), had to have a career.

Weird that Charles and Andrew both married women whose mothers abandoned their families, in a time when that was very rare (it still isn't exactly common).

R419, that could explain why there was no one looking out for them, advising them, at least not in the way a mother would do.

I just looked Diana's mother up - she married at 18, in Westminster Abbey, to a man 12 years older than her. There's obviously a pattern there.

The public don't want to be paying for a large group of royals, but harry ,mags and his stupid cousins keep sticking their paws out

Diana's mother went through a lot. Her mother shoved teenage Frances towards Earl Spencer, who was already informally engaged to Lady Anne Coke. Frances was prettier, younger, and had some money of her own, so Spencer threw over Anne and married Frances. She had the first two kids quickly and without an issue, but they were both girls. Then she gave birth to a boy who was severely deformed and died soon after birth. The baby was taken away and buried quietly, and Frances said later that she never even got to hold him. Her husband then made her endure painful medical tests to try to figure out why she couldn't have a healthy boy. After that, she had Diana, and then, finally, the long-awaited male heir.

She went through 5 pregnancies in 9 years to give Spencer his heir, and it's long been rumored that he was physically abusive to her as well. No wonder she was ready to be done with Spencer and his crap by the time she hit 30. When she told her husband she was leaving him for Shand-Kydd, she thought she'd get joint custody. She didn't count on Spencer's influence and the prejudices of the time against women who left their titled mates. She lost custody of the children entirely. This didn't affect the older girls as much, as they were teenagers away at boarding school. It devastated Charles and Diana and led to a lot of their emotional issues later on.

r422, you are fucking loon if you think this is an "aristo" thing. This happened all the time, still does.It's a "church" thing, a social thing.

r408 To give Fergie her dues apparently staff at Balmoral like her and speak warmly of her. She is polite, undemanding and leaves them thank you notes or little gifts when she stays there. The staff don't feel so positive about all royal family members or annual guests at Balmoral but they like Fergie. She's a bloody greedy fool in other ways but she's not malicious and does not treat people like dirt. She is very well mannered.

So when you look at the trail of dysfunction, maybe Kate Middleton is the best thing to happen to the monarchy in a long time. Stable person, from all accounts, stable, loving family. Maybe a dose of normal is what they needed. If the Queen buggered it up raising children in the aristocratic tradition, Charles wasn't far behind in that approach and threw in emotional abuse of a nutty wife and then divorce. I don't know how William came through half normal but he seems to have done, by all accounts, and he's built a strong family, by all accounts, with a stable wife. The new monarchy may start with William and Kate.

Never breed with narcissists.

Yea, someone should have told Alec Baldwin that too r426

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

Eugenie's gonna be starring in the tabs for long time.

I thought Harry was given the choice to stay in the Army and work, or go work with grandma and he chose the royals. So why didnt he go back to the Army if he wanted out? Also I believe Meghan was given the choice to continue working as an actress and lead a normal life when they met. But of course her Suits salary wouldnt have paid for a mansion with 13 shitters.

Does Harry know that if he becomes an American citizen and when Megtard divorces him, he will have to pay American taxes on his salary (i.e. allowance from daddy), no matter where he lives?

R430 he has to pay US and California taxes anyway. He has resided non-stop in the US for over a year.

The IRS considers you a U.S. resident if you were physically present in the U.S. on at least 31 days of the current year and 183 days during a three-year period. The three-year period consists of the current year and the prior two years.

R418 Andrew is wealthy because of his friendship with dodgy Kazakhstan billionaires, one of them bought his house for £3m more than it was worth.

[QUOTE] There is a power to being a Senior Royal, and working for the Queen, that no other high-profile job or cheaper celebrity status can confer.

In your dreams, Klan cunt.

[quote]Uh-oh. He seemed like too much of a sap for this kind of thing. Poor Eugenie.

This doesn't look good; the pictures of him touching her back & embracing her close to her tits & not around her waist appears to indicate at the very least they're on intimate terms & more likely that he's fucking her. No guy touches their colleague like that or even a friend when the guy is married.

Ironically, this is just the kind of thing Andrew would've done back in the day, so I suppose this shouldn't be too surprising. And you know it's only a matter of time before Bea's husband gets papped in some kind of compromising position

Lol, those photos are fine and they're part of a Casamigos promotional thing. There's nothing particularly "intimate" about them - they publicly posted them.

[quote] This doesn't look good; the pictures of him touching her back & embracing her close to her tits & not around her waist appears to indicate at the very least they're on intimate terms & more likely that he's fucking her. No guy touches their colleague like that or even a friend when the guy is married.

Right...and every married guy fucking around immediately posts a picture of him and his tart on IG for the whole world (including his wife) to see.

🙄

Right R433. A supporting role on a barely seen cable show is far more prestigious than being a senior member of the BRF.

William seems to have inherited his paternal grandfather's steely spine and ability to endure drama without it breaking him. Thank God he took after Philip.

Wow, Meghan's fans are getting desperate, combining the K word with vulgarisms.

Well, must be hard to when she's gone to ground and left that pile of shit behind.

I would much rather be one of the leads on a popular, internationally syndicated TV drama (all episodes currently on Netflix UK) than cutting ribbons in the rain until I'm 90.

Why would anyone want to be a member of the British Royal Klan, infested with pedos, racists and adulterers?

Jack BrookSKANK.

Why can't these dreary Windsor women stop their men from cheating?

Perhaps it's payback for Eugenie being widely rumoured to have acted as an ally of and even a spy for Harry and Meghan. That "dear cousins" bit on the arrival of Lilibucks might have rankled with more people than just the BRF.

Not that it takes much for the tabs to turn on anyone. It probably means nothing but a well-heeled, well connected male with a dumpy wife and teething infant at home letting off a little steam, but I'm sure it's not enjoyable.

Perhaps the Brooksbanks still needed to be friendly to the Sussexes whilst being seen as subletting Frogmore Cottage. I suspect that is over. No one has contradicted the story that the last of the Sussex's possessions have been removed from the FrogCott, and Eugenie and Jack have apparently been making renovations of their own. The rent by the Sussexes was paid up, according to rumour, till 31 March 2022. That is less than a year away. The Sussexes may have been told the lease would not be renewed, and this leaves Eugenie and her family in full possession.

If the Sussexes really are all returning in September for the next Diana Do (God help us, will they please let that bloody woman rest in peace at last?!) and to try to see that Lili gets a quasi-royal christening like her brother, where would they be staying if their last possessions have been removed?

That's really the next interesting bit coming up.

[QUOTE] Thank God he took after Philip.

Major adulterer like Philip too. He doesn't have a 'steely spine', though. Far too afraid to serve in a war zone. Philip and Harry had their military service in common. Even Pedrew had that. Cowardly Charles and Wills? Nope.

The Harkles will hate Kate even more now.

Good to see that Kate is going to have work even harder!

I'm sure the Royal Marines would much prefer one of their own heroes, like Ant Middleton or Bear Grylls, rather than Anne who's never seen a war zone, let alone fought in one.

Anne doesn't deserve a military title. She's a showjumper, not a soldier.

I love how Megtard fans are calling us ignorant but yet actually think that the only thing the BRF does is cut ribbons 🙄

Why dont her fans actually address the cheating on Cory, messaging Matt Cardle and other rich UK men while she was dating him, keeping clothes here in Toronto after the marriage, retaining her US PR team before they supposedly thought of leaving, making movie and book deals before Megxit, not having any family members at the wedding besides mum, having celebrities she doesnt know at the wedding, private lavish baby shower and trips all over Europe while claiming they took her passport and wouldnt let her fly (difference between taking a passport and holding it for security), throwing tea at staff in Australia, yelling at the Gov Generals wife when asked to stop, wearing a pregnancy coat in Auz when she was only 3 months and not showing, going to the BAFTAs holding her stomach while claiming to be suicidal, telling palace HR she is suicidal (instead of her OBGYN and maybe calling an actual psychiatrist) and abruptly leaving a lovely home in Canada which would have provided more privacy than paparazzi choked LA.

r440 Good questions so ask Meghan because she still wants royal titles for her and her children, public association with the royals, money and paid security from this very same family.

r443 You might want to read up on the stuff said by some of the lower ranking guys in the armed forces who's job it was to be Harrys bodyguards whilst Harry actually did very little military wise despite public perception. So he was basically more of a liability and they risked their lives to protect him as a VIP whilst he wasn't allowed to really do any duties that were dangerous. Basically his military service is full of public myths to create an image of the soldier prince when the truth was much different. I recall one soldier saying online that the Harry we see now as a 'twat' was the Harry he and Lower down soldiers saw years ago in the army.

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

MM wasn’t a “lead” on Suits, a third rate cable show. She was very much a secondary character.

But out of a cast of no hopers she certainly gained the most. If you don't mind being one of the most disliked people on earth.

I hope the sparks don't cause a brushfire after heads explode in Montecito over the article at R444.

Meghan is no longer in the cast of any TV show. She doesn't seem to do much except instruct her people to send out press releases for projects that rarely materialize. She sure was eager to be part of that 'terrible' Royal family, even wanting a half-in, half-out role so she could still do glamorous royal gigs while living in LA and merching to her heart's content.

And does the dumbshit at R443 understand that Charles and William, as the direct heirs, would NEVER be allowed in a war zone? Even useless spare Harry was just playacting there, fiercely protected and doing fuck-all. He was far more of a liability than any sort of useful service member.

As princesses, Eugenie and Bea will always get more attention and scrutiny of their personal lives than, say, Peter Phillips, who went through a divorce with little fanfare. Lady Louise Wessex and Viscount Severn, though titled, will also enjoy more privacy unless they are foolish enough to convince Grandma to re-style them HRH Prince/Princess.

However, being an HRH Princess does have its perks: The York girls were never more than moderately attractive even at their thinnest and prettiest, and their ability to catch two attractive, rich husbands is mainly due to their high profiles and ability to bring those husbands beaucoup connections. The relationships are business arrangements as much as anything else, and I'm sure fidelity on the parts of the husbands was never expected.

Discretion WAS expected, however, and Jack should have known better.

[quote] Discretion WAS expected, however, and Jack should have known better.

Others have noted that Jack looks “dorky” on the yacht amidst all the models (topless included).

Unsure what this is all about, but it is a bit of smoke that adds to the blind that he has been cheating on his wife, Eugenie.

Isn't he supposed to wait until after the birth of the second baby to start cheating so blatantly? I thought that was expected in those circles.

Edo may end up being the better husband, after all. Those Italian aristos know how to keep a mistress and still keep the wife happy.

r450 If she can afford to hire Oprahs party planners then she and dumb hubby have no business expecting the lowly little people who pay taxes in the to pay for their security and thus subsidise their extravagant lifestyle.

They were totally tonedeaf to think that would ever be acceptable.

Once the Frogmore lease is up next March, they should be completely severed from all Royal perks except the titles. We'll see how long those last after Harry's autobio comes out.

Crazy that they just don't understand that UK taxpayers will never pay for security for ex pat ex royals.No matter how much they cry not fair on US television.

Discretion about what r455? The whole point of Jack's Capri trip is publicity - it's a promo event for Casamigos.

[quote] unless they are foolish enough to convince Grandma to re-style them HRH Prince/Princess.

Here we go again.

They don’t need to be “re-styled” - they have the right to style themselves any way they like.

Please stop fucking talking about things you know nothing about. Although the cretins on these threads know as little as you do, tbh, which is why you’re not pulled up more often.

Louise is ALREADY HRH Princess Louise - she’s just not known (styled) that way. Any discussions about stylings will involve the Queen but she doesn’t have to do anything or issue any declarations.

🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

From Tatler:

Ultimately, when Louise turns 18, she can decide to style herself as HRH Princess Louise if she wants to, as per the King George V 1917 letters patent. This means that as the granddaughter of the monarch through the male line and the daughter of a prince, she is a princess.

Euge, Bea and their husbands need to be on their best behavior along with their mother. DM will not forget the "dear cousins" or Fergie's recent defense of the Malicious Montashitto Markles.

Camilla's also coming in for attacks from the tabs. Her nephew had been selling access to Prince Charles.

Oh fuck off, R463. If I had said "choose to style themselves" when they turn 18, you would have gone off on a rant about how they'd have to have the Queen's permission, she is the font of all honors, etc. I've seen your little game before.

*fount of all honors

^ Megastans can't afford reality. Living off the state really isn't very lucrative.

This is scathing!!!!!!! I can't wait till the book comes out!!!

'Please stop fucking talking about things you know nothing about. Although the cretins on these threads know as little as you do, tbh, which is why you’re not pulled up more often.'

The revolting Titles Troll is losing its shit yet again. Always so angry and unhappy.

[quote]They don’t need to be “re-styled” - they have the right to style themselves any way they like.

You'll be schooled here over and over again, as needed. No royal has 'any right' to style themselves any which way they like. FFS they'd all be calling themselves everything under the sun, it would be a free-for-all if that were the case. The monarch has sole discretion to make final decisions on stylings, honorifics and even titles. Yes they are the Fount of all Honor and hold that power.

Previously issued LPs don't confer final legal right for the fucking umpteenth time. Jesus. They lay out current default settings, and function as an open statement of monarchial power, but can be overruled anytime by... monarchs themselves. And are often overriden, many times, by them.

R470 R471

Harry would be dumb to attack Camilla in his book if his intentions are to make her look saintly and not crazy. This is because all of Diana’s certifiably insane behavior would be rehashed. Camilla was herself stalked by BSC Diana who used to phone her to say that she’d hired killers to murder her in her home, with her children in the home. Diana would tell Camilla that the killers were outside her home and ask her if she could see them. This tidbit came out in Penny Junor’s book on Charles which although Charles’s camp disavowed the portrayal of Diana as supremely BSC, this bit of information was never pointedly denied by both Charles and Camilla.

R469 is right... that was truly scathing.

BSC?

I found this post from Lipstick Alley amusing:

[Quote]Is no one going to acknowledge that the 6’s have actually managed to modernise TRF by leaving and therefore allowing TQ to give their traditionally very male associated patronage’s ( rugby and marines) to women instead. Mrs 6 has achieved her goal of feminism by just f@king off.

I hope William and Kate have quintuplets to push Harry down the line of succession.

I'd love Kate to be pregnant again!! r476

Earlier this year Harry told Oprah Winfrey that he had never planned to create content for streaming services such as Netflix and Spotify but his family had been short on funds. “That was suggested by somebody else by the point of where my family literally cut me off financially, and I had to afford security for us … From my perspective all I needed was enough money to be able to pay for security to keep my family safe.”

"Suggested by somebody else" to make multi-million dollar deals - gee Harry, who might that have been?

R478 According to Tom Bower who is writing the warts and all book on Meghan, the couple allegedly planned their LA escape within six months of their marriage.

Meghan is a WHORE who stole my boyfriend Prince Harry. She will be judged by the highest court d' Karen!

If the article in R469 is anything to go by, Tom Bower's book will blow the Sussexes right out of the water.

BSC = Bat Shit Crazy, R475.

Thank you, r482. How could I not figure it out? Lol.

[quote] [R478] According to Tom Bower who is writing the warts and all book on Meghan, the couple allegedly planned their LA escape within six months of their marriage.

The timing tracks for this as this was around the time of Haz and Meg’s disastrous tour Down Under.

Remember that M announced her pregnancy at Euge’s wedding just before setting off for Australia. It became clear during this time that the Sussexes were really problematic then, and it was announced while they were coming back from this tour that The Cambridges were distancing themselves from H & M in a BIG way.

So, in all their misguided hubris, can see Haz and Meg stealthily planning a return to the US whilst maintaining the “half in/out” BRF duty thing or AKA, British taxpayers footing their lives whilst living abroad.

Did not work out so well for the Disastrous Sussex Duo.

(Also, Caitlin Jenner let it slip in an interview that they were LA house hunting early on..... there were many blinds/rumors they were doing so in late 2017.)

R473 Camilla the Whore desevered everything she got, she was after all fucking Diana's husband.

Six months is around the time the announcements about separating their offices and the Frogmore as their future residence.

The grim faces of the BRF and the missing friends at the wedding told the whole story.

And how many women's husbands did Diana fuck, R485? Into the dozens, wasn't it?

R476 R477 - Kate needs another pregnancy like she needs to fall out a tenth story window. Her husband is likely still deeply upset about his brother and taking every ounce of emotional support from Kate she can spare, they have three kids between 3 and 8, her first trimesters range from brutal to hard, she's going to be 40 in five months, she just got handed two of Harry's royal patronages, she and William are now urgently needed to fill the gap left by the Harkles and to be increasingly visible as the pandemic ends, and the shadow of the Wales title and the throne is coming ever closer as the Queen AND Charles age. There are no guarantees about Charles' longevity, only assumptions that aren't necessarily going to prove sound.

That's not even factoring in the incessant media shit including yet more "disclosures" by the Harkles, the strain Charles is probably also under, and the Queen's obvious unwillingness to hold the Sussexes fully accountable for their hate-filled vendetta against the family, something she should have done earlier and that at 95 she hasn't the stomach for now, and will leave as a burden to Charles and William.

Kate can't afford another long maternity leave and another cutback schedule because she has infants at home.

Pushing Harry and his kids one spot more down the line accomplishes nothing. The Windsors and the government will make bloody sure Harry never comes anywhere near the throne. If William goes before Charles and the Queen, there won't be any need for a Regent. If William goes after the Queen and before Charles, there won't be any need for a Regent. If William dies after becoming King but whilst George is still underage, a Regency will be constructed that includes Kate but excludes Harry. No one, anywhere in the UK, will put up with the Harkles coming anywhere near the throne.

And, it is also likely that William and George will now stop travelling together. George will be 18 in just ten years, and there are two other children in line.

The Cambridges don't need another baby. They need Harry to be stripped of this ducal title and removed from the line of succession. Yes, we know the latter is unlikely unless Harry finally makes his Grand Egalitarian Gesture by requesting that his Gran put the matter before Parliament, or makes attacks on the institution so gratuitous that she has enough materiel to do so without his cooperation.

The mistakes made by the Queen, particularly, go back 25 years here. It's a bit late for remediation as it is. No fourth kid for the Cambridges is going to solve the Harkle problem.

Did the Sussexes think the BRF had no way of figuring out their plans? If they were house-hunting in LA in 21017 and Caitlyn bloody Jenner knew it, of course the BRF knew it. I'm sure they also knew that Meghan had held on to her LA publicity people and was keeping most of her things in storage there. This knowledge, on top of the Sussexes terrible behavior from the engagement period onwards, is why they got downgraded to Frogmore and were kicked out of the Cambridge offices.

I don't think they were planning to leave six months in. They were always planning to leave. The short-term residence as working royals was just to polish their credentials for the Hollywood set and grift a million-pound wardrobe for Meghan.

*2017

The short-term residence, which coincided with Meghan's first pregnancy, was also a (deceptive) show of good faith to the Queen in hopes that their first child would be HRH Prince Archie. He'd keep that highly publicity-friendly title even after they left, and the BRF would also have to grant it to their second baby lest it be seen as vindictive and playing favorites. It's obvious Meghan hit the roof once HM put her foot down and denied Archie the princely title--that was the only real emotion you saw from her in the Oprah interview.

[quote]The Windsors and the government will make bloody sure Harry never comes anywhere near the throne.

I got this.

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

Barak Obama is throwing a big 375 guest party next weekend to mark his 60th.

If she isn't invited, she's ruined.

This show is not only stupid (I watched the pilot and didn't laugh once), but really unfair to George and Charlotte. It's one thing to satirize the adult Royals on something like The Windsors, quite another to pick on kids. It's shitty when people say nasty things about Archie and Lili, and it's even more shitty to create an entire series built around picking on George and, to a lesser extent, Charlotte.

Remember when the media agreed to leave William and Harry alone until they were 21? There should be the same rule in place for all children of famous people unless those kids are actively pursuing a media career (acting, social media influencing) as minors.

Is the Obama bash going to be like the social-celebrity litmus test the same way that Truman Capote's Black and White Ball was back in the '60s to the NYC elites? If the Sussexes are overlooked then they're fucked socially within the A-list circle they wish to belong.

This is one instance where I really think the Cambridges should sue. George is a minor and this show is potentially harmful to his reputation and his mental well-being.

R495 They share a birthday I think, which is kind of amazing. He’s had a much bigger showbiz career.

Obama is way more important that Megz which is why she is having her "small intimate" 40th birthday party. The Obamas way more important in the elite Hollywood circles.

Yeah, R485, while Diana, who started outside curricula first, was sampling many goods on the side.

The one thing I found particularly uncomfortable was in all the media coverage of this show, every major outlet ignored the fact Jenetti has chosen to play the child like a caftan and earrings mincing queen. Now there's nothing wrong with that, except is it fair to put it on an eight year old kid?

If she wanted an HRH, she shouldn't have given her son such a stupid name.

Archie Harrison was definitely NOT a royal name. Archie's plebeian. She could have called him Archibald but I guess as he'll wind up bald like his Daddy, she figured that was OTT. And Harrison? Royal Brits don't give their kids last names as middle names. That's an American deal.

Meghan and Harry knew long before Archie was born that the Queen wouldn't be issuing Letters Patent making their kid an HRH. Those LPs are typically issued once the first trimester is safely past, as TQ did with Kate's first pregnancy.

If that LP hadn't appeared by the time they were finalising names, the Harkles knew it wasn't happening, and they'd have to wait for the Queen to die and Charles to become King.

Clearly, they decided not to wait for that and gave the kid that clowny name.

And since then, they haven't exactly continued to ingratiate themselves with Charles.

Maybe they no longer care that much. The longer their family roots take hold in America, the less the title and HRH will mean, anyway.

It honestly boggles the mind the way they talk out of both sides of their mouth: "Fuck the royal family! We're glad to be free! Also please never forget that WE ARE ROYAL!"

They'll always care about the titles and the HRH. Who are they without them? Just another pair of Hollywood climbers.

'Archie Harrison' = 'Archie Harry's Son'

I'm sure those two named him when they were high as kites. They likely thought they were genius to dream up such a cunning name!

They probably didn't even like "Archie" but just wanted to yank something away from Prince George who was using it as his play name.

I agree with R496. It should be completely beyond the pale to be making fun of little kids like that in a forum where their peers can see it and make fun of them and adults can use it as an excuse to look down on them. (We've already seen that people can't distinguish The Crown from pure fact.)

I am often the voice of "Princess Charlotte" on here, but that's only because I figure it's unlikely anyone who knows her is reading a fairly obscure, very adult gay website: and if they are, they are certainly not going to make it known in Royal circles. We have many in-jokes here on the DL, and we can be pretty confident they stay here. I would never do that schtick on social media, let alone in the regular media.

I'll bet Meghan tried every grift she could to get invited to the Obama party and is now having her party the same weekend to try and save face about not being invited.

If this is true, then I’m done with the monarchy and the Queen. Extending the grifters a warm invitation to the ceremony makes the Monarchy look weak and spineless.

It looks like SS is in damage control mode now, there will be no party due to concerns about the rising COVID numbers! It’s evident that they realised that most of the guest list will be over at Martha’s Vineyard. It looks like they didn’t get invited too, just one throwaway line about H & M not attending Obama’s party.

Why would she get invited? Has she even met Obama?

She faked having lunch with Michelle but Harry has met them. I think they have seriously up-played their "friendship" with the Obamas' and it probably was not appreciated.

MeAgain crashed the backstage of Michelle's London book tour and was able to exchange a few words with her before being ordered out. She described it as their "scheduled meeting." Later she conducted a short email interview with Michelle while MeAgain was eating lunch. When she wrote about it, she described what she was eating and made it sound as if she was conducting a live interview while the two were meeting for lunch.

Maybe she cancelled her own party because she's planning to fly to Massachusetts and try to crash Obama's. She's the only person in the world I could suggest such a thing about and not be kidding.

The Obamas seemed to have a genuinely cordial relationship with the Queen and the Cambridges on their tour to London. Remember the picture of Obama watching on as George rides his rocking-horse in his jarmies? Someone like Trump would never have been given a photo op like that. Lord knows, Meghan wasn't.

So they would be as polite to the Harkles as people of their classiness are, but it's unlikely they'd put them above their personal regard for the big players at the Palace unless MeAgain really convinced them that, contrary to their [short] experience, those players are racist. Evidently she didn't.

r514 I don't think its true but rather kite flying to test reaction or mischief making. Lady Colin Campbell who is well sourced says it would be customary that invitations to these big events won't be sent out until December ish at the earliest.

r518 What on earth would she hope to achieve by trying that?? It certainly won't enhance her reputation in those elite High society type circles Quite the opposite.

If you can access this - I don't know if the Torygraph is paywall from get go - it's interesting. Not game changing or earth shattering, but interesting.

Love this: The Sussexes are not planning to attend Obama’s party.

Which means the Sussexes were not invited. No force on earth would keep that creature from that party if she were invited.

Pity, because it would have been another wardrobe disaster. Maybe she could have trotted out the contrasting sheet set to the bedspread.

R523 - Why would the Sussexes be invited to Obama's birthday party?

No reason they should. However, they no doubt think they should. That is exactly the crowd The Duke and Duchess of Discord imagine themselves to be part of.

i imagine the Sussexes are now considered radioactive to anyone who aspires to hobnob with the BRF. They might as well have 'bio-hazard' stamped across their foreheads.

Not being invited to Obama's party shows you where the Sussexes really stand: They are not part of the A-list or possibly even the B-list. They gave up all chance of an A-list life when they left the BRF.

Not necessarily when they left the BRF. I think their indiscretion and their baseless attacks on the RF made them toxic.

There are 375 guests at that party. They have a relationship with Harry through some of the Invictus stuff. 375 is a pretty big guest list, though perhaps not for the Obamas, but I guess the point I was making was if the Sussexes had actual cachet you might imagine the Obamas leveraging that - like entertaining like - big parties by big people usually involve some level of bragging rights. So my main point was they weren't invited. They do not count. And I imagine that's making for a very sad, potentially impulsive day in Montecito.

It’s hilarious how the Harkle PR is framing as they don’t “plan” to attend.

But they're on maternity leave!

r527 Exactly.

Which makes the claims in this article by someone described as a pr expert as delusionally stupid.

Meghan and Harry are apparently going to be bigger than all their Hollywood A list peers and bigger than Oprah within 5 years!!! Has the word expert become so demeaned because this sounds crazy mad and totally detached from any facts or substance. . Why would any self respecting person push such a bul***it line?

They were probably invited and just didn't fancy leaving the children. William and Kate aren't going either.

r533 Your being paid too much!!

Surviving Demon, when will you learn the your/you're rules? You come across as semi literate.

So they wanted to live private lives, hence “escaping” from BRF for the quiet Hollywood life of award shows, tell-all interviews and books, production company, Netflix deals, publicizing own birthday party, etc….

Indeed r536

When they originally put forward their plan to leave they said they were keen to remove the medias public interest defence in reporting about them. They wanted an arrangement in place were the media couldn't have reasonable justification for reporting on them because they weren't doing anything publicly but were sort of ex public figures. Well clearly that was never true as we can see . People who want to remove the public interest defence away from the media giving them attention don't pay a public relations company to keep them in the press and media.

I miss Harry and Meghan! I want them to make some big splashy appearance.

That Emmy thing looks like a 'talk about it to make it happen' PR plant.

Exactly. I'd love to know exactly which "TV execs" are so keen to have them there.

Manifesting. PR plants. Utterly transparent motives.

Their laughable attempts to be relevant, their self-righteous proclamations, are a both a train-wreck and a comedy.

Do these two clowns have an ounce of integrity? No, not one drop.

Its mind-boggling that they have absolutely zero self-awareness, and yet think themselves savvy enough to be running the show.

Is Bea now fully on their side publicly? She must be desperate for money like her mom.

We definitely need to resume the "Dangling Tendrils" discussions... what new idiocy is this? Another Meghan video to brighten everyone's day. And, of course, it's about Meghan's birthday.

Yes, yes... I am sure she sits around in 4 in. heels all day. Don't we all? And suede ones no less... Made from a rescue calf?

Does she still cook roast chicken now that she has rescue chickens as pets? I’m a vegetarian for ethical reasons and one of the things that bugged me about her is her old claim of being vegan or whatnot. Just another fake woke shit she pulled to virtue signal.

Well, she’s vegan…. Unless a MAN! Is involved.

If MAN! wants chicken, MM makes him chicken.

r542 Why what has Bea done?

Where’d everybody go? Have the dastardly duo frightened folks?

It’s getting a bit dull, R548.

They've been... if not behaving, uncharacteristically not putting their foot in it. What's left to say about her character? I loathe her. I've enjoyed not having anything to react to lately. The only thing to chew on is if they make another self-serving, ham fisted blunder.

Sorry, when.

I suspect that during Harry's recent flop trip to the UK a few home truths were told and the grifters have had to reassess a few things.

Well, can we at least judge his juggling skills, clown ability, or whatever is in his sorry, unprincely bag of tricks?

Was that his continued flop sweat that I detected on Haz’s brow during his juggling attempts, R551.

The Telegraph wonders: Is the Sussexes’ love affair with the Obamas over?

As hundreds of A-listers gathered to celebrate the former President's 60th birthday, one celebrity couple were conspicuous by their absence

“The Obamas didn’t like Harry attacking his family. They value family and certainly aren’t the type of people who would want their children talking to the press,” says one insider.

But perhaps the greatest clue to the Obamas’ feelings was given by Michelle when she was asked to respond to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s recent outpourings on Oprah. “I just pray that there is forgiveness and there is clarity and love and resolve at some point in time because there’s nothing more important than family,” she said.

I’m kinda bored with their antics now, which bums me out because I was really into this nighttime soap of theirs. It’s getting tired like any other show.

Meghan doesn't understand that among the many advantages Diana had over her, a key one was always being spectacularly well dressed. Photographers always wanted a piece of her because she was nearly always wearing something new and well worth seeing. Meghan cannot compete on that front.

Diana, like Kate, also had a great sense of strategic timing. She knew when to expose the kids, when to appear as a devoted mother, when to appear as a professional, when to appear concerned and caring. This also keeps the public and press on their toes: you're getting some variety even though they're not really doing anything. (She nearly tipped over the edge when she got really into the Wronged Wife bit, but the Queen fortunately put a dead stop to that.)

Meghan and Harry just whinge about their terrible lives the whole time, except on the rare occasions they are ostentatiously doing good works in exchange for a bucket of publicity. They haven't got a single clue about marketing themselves, and if anyone they employ has they're not paying attention. That's why they're ultimately boring.

^ One thing to add, their good deeds tend to involve 90 per cent talking. Diana didn't talk often. She was more seen than heard. These two, all they've got to offer is their corny platitudes.

Plus most people felt that Diana genuinely did have some legitimate grievances. Harry and Med, not so much.