The royal Family is thriving without Harry and Meghan- Newsweek Column

Isn't Newsweek most interested in clicks than being on any side, now?

r1 I honestly dont know but even that point means they think there is more popularity in critiquing these two than praising and defending them whereas they had clearly thought the opposite until now?

The piece is correct. Harry and Meghan are now over for good in the UK unless Harry divorces and renounces her and returns.

Meghan just never understood that as soon as she and Harry broke with the royal family by denouncing them on Oprah, almost no one was interested anymore. Their former connection to the BRF, and their possibility then of reforming it from within, was the only thing that made them interesting. Now they don't have that.

When were they ever supposed to be essential to TRF anyway? He’s not going to be king.

I wonder if DL will ever have a single day again without some mental Meghan-hater thread.

It’s written by the former showbiz editor of the Daily Fail of you want to know where the author’s allegiances lie.

There are rumors that his book has been rejected several times now. Don't know if it's true but damn.

Why would anyone ever need them? They were never beloved.

People were suspicious of her from day one, and rightfully so.

That bloody woman is just a whore, darlin'.

Newsweek is very much on the right now. And right-wing media is heavily invested in bashing this couple.

No one can stand them, doesn't matter what side they are on.

You know the entire family envies their life in California, though. So much nicer than foggy Olde London.

I don't think anyone envies the sussexes right now.

The thought is laughable.

I was skeptical, but I everyone is saying that they were wearing a wire and now I am seeing memes. I am also starting to feel doubtful about whether the kids were even there or not. There was no mention of Archie and now there are rumors leaking that the Queen didn't even meet the Lilibet b/c H&M were using that as leverage for a photograph. Whispers are also coming out the Meghan's outfit to the church service was meant to conceal wires with the very high collar neck. This is also not the first time the Sussexes have recorded and taken photographs at gatherings, aside from the Charlotte/Amner Hall photos pre-wedding:

[quote] There already exists photos and video of them with the whole family from prior years. More would have been nice but not necessary. They need the photo w/ Lilibet and the Queen.

I think it is funny that they got booed and booted out of England. These two are insufferable opportunists. They are not as important as they thought and it killing them.

I think Andrew is the one really suffering. He doesn't think he has done anything wrong; 20 years ago he had vanilla sex with a seasoned pro who has succeeded in strong-arming him thanks to a changed moral climate. And he knows the axe is ready to fall on him the minute TQ dies.

[quote]Other than mentally retarded morons like you and OP, who gives a rats ass. Right wing media outlets are the real insufferable opportunist. They’re making a fortune off of retards like you.

Apparently your retarded ass cares. If you didn’t then you would not get so worked up as to insult a complete stranger over two rich assholes who son’t care that you exist.

Your little head is going to explode clean off, r17. It's not that serious.

Why the need to say this, Newsweek? Palace PR machinery got to you? Lol

You can’t have been to London, then, R12.

Newsweek is turning right-wing. They're now employing that Batya Sargon person in a senior position, and she's very anti-identity politics (except for her and fellow Jews who love Israel).

R19 couldn’t do better than “I know you are but what am I.”

R20 it’s not all serious and as I pointed out. Who gives a rats ass, other than morons like you. You and OP have devoted your lives to this nonsense. Every time those two breathe your heads “explode.”

R24 YOU CARE. As we have pointed out, you would not be here using such salty language and lashing out at strangers to defend the honor of these grifters if you didn’t “give a rat’s ass”.

Honestly no, the royal family is so much more uninteresting since they left.

Newsweek also published an opinion piece that says the exact opposite - H&M are great and the Royal Family fucked up - that is linked in the middle of this piece as well as at its conclusion.

Newsweek isn't right or left wing. It's a clickbait aggregator.

It’s not a column. It’s an opinion piece.

I assume you’re American, r26.

Children, as big a whore as Meghan is and Harry became, they sre pickers next to today's media.

The DM hatrs Meghan's guts bit has no problem gushing when the story makes it the thing to do. The UK media published all that hogwash about olive branches and healed rifts and the brothers talling weekly and United At Last! until it became clear that it WAS poppycock, and swiftly turned reversed gears.

Meghan and Harry seem unable to learn from their mistakes and so keep making really bad calls and missteps.

Given that, it's not possible for media NOT to pick up the obvious and tin with it.

The BRF was always going to thrive without the Suusexes. They said the same thing in 1936, because Edward VIII was an nnternational glamour figure. His own brother who had to take over frdpaired of his ability to replace him. "Andbthis is the man we ate going to lose!" poor Prince Albert , soon to be King George VI, exclaimed atva last family dinner.

And we know how that went: Albert and his charming wife. Elizabeth, :full" by vlcompariso (are you listening. Omid?), went on to repair the damage, earn the country's love and respect, and led it through WWII.

That's the mistake everyone makes, including the Sussexes. It's never about one person.

Newsweek may or may not be leaning right these days.

But in this case, it is citing the glaringly obvious, so its rightbor left bias is a moot point.

William and Kate are following in the footsteps of King George VI and Queen Elizabeth.

Meghan and Harry are following in the footsteps of Edward and Wallis.

The polls released in May show support for the institution itself, not any one person. Young people get old and more conservative as they age.

Remember, the age group now most supportive of the monarchy . . . are the Swingin' Sixties generation.

Harry is the 6th in line, and will end his life around 12th-13th. The idea that the monarchy "needs" him and his hugely unpopular, posturing wife, was always a figment of popular imagination.

It survived the loss of Edward VIII and Diana, both of whom tanked far higher and had 100 times the candle power of the two-bit Sussexes.

The monarchy will do fine without Meghan and Harry.

Meghan and Harry, however, as happened both to Diana and Edward, will not be so fine without the monarchy.

^*they are pikers (not pickers)

Fucking autocorrect.

^^*dull by comparison

Is that photo @OP photoshopped - two separate images spliced to look like they’re occurring next to each other?

Because if it’s not, and she’s standing there grinning while he’s obviously fuming, she’s a fucking sociopath.

The moment the Queen dies, the monarchy is over. They’re not “thriving” at all. They’re desperately attempting to reorganize deck chairs on the Titanic seconds before it slams into the iceberg that is modernity.

It's nice that Newsweek offered the "alternate" opinion after the article, because, in fact, it's abundantly clear which of the two opinions is most closely aligned with the truth.

It's impossible to assert that the BRF made a "colossal mistake" with the Sussexes when the polls and the response to the Platinum Jubilee make it quite clear that the BRF simply don't need the Sussexes. William and Kate are golden, even Camilla's polls are better than the Sussexes, Britain detests the two, and calling the mistake the BRF's after the lies and attacks in the Oprah interview make it clear that the mistakes were all made by the Sussexes, just won't fly.

FWIW: The comments under the article by Tom Sykes for the Daily Beast more or less laying the blame for it all on the BRF for the miserable time the Sussexes had of it at the Jubly (and which is full of inaccuracies, leaves out the Sussex's posturing with the late arrival so they could come in a single car, and suggests that the Queen was wrong to refuse to allow herself to be photographed for use by the Sussexes for their Netflix show or for marketing themselves - Oh Bad Queenie!), are running 99% against Sykes' piece and reminding him of what the Sussexes did to the family. Overwhelmingly, that the Sussexes have no one to blame but themselves, and why should they be treated like A-listers after bailing and then attacking the family?!

The efforts to spin this against the BRF and for the Sussexes is failing. Sykes and the rest need to read the room.

r36 Tom Skyes must be very stupid and ignorant or lacking in intergrity. People are not victims because they had to sit in the second rotation a family event.. for gods sake!! The Netflix contract and Oprah interview inevitably change the nature of their interactions and conversations with the rest of their family . They have every right to guard and protect themselves against being recorded covertly or having any interaction made part of a television show. Why is that so hard to understand?? Literally the question with a million sighs of exasperation what the hell did they expect??

Harry and Meghan understand their own rights ,privacy and wants and wishes but expect other people not to have any of their own.

Harry was irrelevant as soon as William had children, he said it himself in an interview after George was born. Meghan must have missed that.

[quote]I wonder if DL will ever have a single day again without some mental Meghan-hater thread.

No. In fact, earlier today I posted a reply elsewhere, saying it had gotten really out of hand, and within 5 minutes, the entire thread was removed.

[quote]Newsweek is turning right-wing.

Newsweek was sold a couple of years ago and is now specifically used to "launder" right-wing talking points.

DL used to have dedicated royal threads but the Markle fans would have them shut down as they could not handle criticism of Meghan. Thus the proliferation of threads on the topic. I don't understand why you all cannot just pass these threads by if you don't enjoy the topic. You seem to follow the same tactics as Harry and Meghan, i.e., you think limiting criticism of the pair will raise their fortunes. Yet, they continue to spiral into further derision and, ultimately, oblivion. And, tomorrow they will be another thread and they will be just as big of failures.

In the past 200 years The Royal Family has survived the death of two heirs (Princess Charlotte of Wales and Prince Albert Victor) and the abdication of a King. I think they'll probably be OK.

Does anyone know why the thread about the Daily Beast's article on House Harkle's "feud" with the Royal Family was deleted?

"House Harkle?" Maybe it was deleted for racism, r43.

"Thriving"? Charles and Camilla will run it into the ground. Then there's Andrew and Fergie floating about. And churlish Prince William won't do the institution many favors.

I think the piece got it right. I don’t see how any of it has much to do with politics. Their fame and value is related only to the family connection they spurned. Their actions to achieve “privacy” are what? Just the opposite, Netflix and interviews with Oprah. One thing about a lot of the Windsors- they’re not real bright. Harry joins Andrew and his great great uncle. Markel is sort of a dingbat- she is very pretty though.

This article could have been written by a Datalounger. It’s brilliant and a beautifully vicious and righteous takedown. Brava!

it doesn't matter what the US think of the RF. The Markles are now toast in England. Each time they do their inevitably stupid, petulant stuff the RF just go up in the polls. They are too old, & now too unattractive physically to be media influencers, The only hope is to jump on the trans bandwagon. Race & BLM is now becoming tainted, big Yawn topics in the US now. Heard a hipster call BLM. Black Lies Matter, with a eye roll at a Starbucks last week.

Some guy who works at Farnborough airport where their private jet landed and then departed from, said they were accompanied by several people but not any kids and there were no kids mentioned on the flight manifest. So either they left their kids in California or they flew in on another flight.

They probably had the kids on a different flight, seeing as how important they are to the crown.

Nobody actually saw those kids. The photo they put out of Lilibucks was taken by a photographer who works for Netflix and followed them around in the US and at Invictus. Photo was probably taken in California.

I bet they didn't bring them. Too embarrassed about the fact they're both cross-eyed.

Those kids eyes don't look terrible, Meghan herself managed (once) to look attractive with it. It's a sort of Streisand effect. Siamese cat style. It can become part of a charming look.

What is more relevant is did they not bring the kids because the Queen refused to allow photographs that the Harkles could publicise?

Or not allow the Queen to meet the kids for the same reason?

I find both difficult to believe, as I cannot believe the Palace would let the Lilibet Meets the Queen! story to stand if it weren't true.

I think the likely story is that the ultra-paranoid Harry put the kids on a different plane. After all, only he was seen deplaning in Santa Barbara.

I think that Meghan and the kids flew home on an entirely separate flight

MM totally seems the type who would make her kids travel coach while she takes a private jet.

I wish I had never seen that woman's face.

R18, she wasn't a seasoned pro. She was trafficked like Epstein did with all those young girls. The seasoned pro Ghislaine Maxwell is now appropriately behind bars. Andrew is just pissed off that he got caught and embarrassed the RF. No one cares that this point what he thinks. Charles, who will soon enough be in charge, has had it with him. The Firm exists as a nonpolitical representation of the UK and reputation is everything. Andrew needs to be cut loose and HM did the right thing.

Like Andrew, this was Harry's to lose and he's done it. The rest of the Firm understands the stakes and responsibilities.

I read on Daily Beast Netflix is furious because they wanted pics of the Queen with her namesake and it didn't happen. There are pics now showing Harry as well as Meghan was micced up to go to the church service where it didn't seem like they had to pass through a metal detector. Maybe there were metal detectors at the other venues and that's why they didn't show.

The Jubilee certainly showed how popular the Queen and the senior royals are, so that fucked the Harkles.

What PR stunt will they pull in the next few days? Can't imagine that they are letting Netflix advise them at this point.

I think they should jump on the Rebel Wilson is gay & in love train. They were able to rope her in for the Phony Polo Gig. Rebel's obviously up for anything that might give her some elevation. Acting an ass hasn't done it. Losing weight hasn't done it. Now, I'm a les & in love. Could be a win win for her & the Markles. A Kardashian style wedding at he the Monteshitto Castle. Meghan featured in every phase, in every shot. From shower, dresses, food, hen night, wedding. I think this could be a total vibe for them.

I never understood the tiff - though admittedly I've done very little research. Harry is never going to be King; he'd have it easy no matter. I don't get why they broke with the Royal Family when all they needed to do was play along a couple times a year and then do whatever the hell they wanted the rest of the time.

She had to engineer the rift with the family to get full control of Harry. If he was still on good terms with them the books, interviews etc wouldn't have any value. It would destroy her narrative.

Harry and Meghan really should have expected the treatment they received during the Jubilee, imo. They betrayed a close knit family. You're not supposed to talk about your family to OPRAH WINFREY. Even Princess Di didn't go that far. Did she?

I'm conflicted about them. They are hated so thoroughly, it doesn't feel fair to me. The damage they did was small compared to all of the harm beloved Princess Diana accomplished. On the other hand, it is a family. The way the royals feel can't be dismissed. DIana is gone. Harry not only tells on his family, he keeps trying to use them to "earn" a living in Cali. That's not right. He and his wife weren't treated that badly years ago or now.

Also, I do think the BRF, esp. the higher-ups, were genuinely busy during the Jubilee. Taking care of Harry and Meghan's tender feelings and "needs" would be very stressful and overwhelming when added to all the other appearances of the week.

The British Royal Family are just a family, in spite of all the notoriety and wealth. When you hurt your whole family, leaving them feeling exposed and betrayed simultaneously, your personal desires during a huge week-long celebration will not be prioritized and shouldn't be, really.

I still pity them, though. It's irrational, the degree of hate people feel for them, especially Meghan. Watching the BRF your whole life is not enough to really know what to expect when you marry into it. Harry knew she'd suffer, to an extent forever, but pulled her in nonetheless. He's the one who has really EARNED British hate, not her. His family will never truly be her own, just as hers will never truly be his family. He was supposed to protect her, the babies, and the BRF, too. He picked a side, and reaffirms his decision with each new media scheme. He betrayed his own family, not Meghan. I think people should realize it. She wanted to be a royal, so she must have been pretty damn miserable to actually leave it. Dontcha think? Maybe she was too touchy, but she was not welcomed wholeheartedly. They , the royals, coulda tried harder to make her feel wanted. I think she still wants to be a part of it, so how can she hate it? Harry is the one who wants to hurt them. He's the problem. Focus on him, at least more than you've been focusing on his wife. That's all I'm saying.

Sorry. I always go too far. I live alone, so I rarely get to mouth off. It really shows!

What’s the over/under on Meghan wearing a mic to the church. She’s a complete piece of work, but I can’t imagine she’d be that stupid. Plus, what would she record? A church service.

Here are the rumors I do believe:

1. They were intentionally late for the 3rd tier royal bus to the church, so got a private car instead 2. Were surprised at when they were seated in church (bravo for the passive aggressive gut punch, RF!) 3. Were invited to reception, post church, but relegated to the “kids table” room far from where the notables were mingling 4. Invited to concert but not to sit in the Royal box; same for pageant 5. Never met with the queen (this might have happened…but, if so, only in passing. Not a meaningful solo meeting.) 6. Didn’t watch the concert with the queen at Windsor

These two are so done! Even outcast Fergie, who has buddied up to them in the past, didn’t drop by Lili’s birthday for a pr photo.

I also believe that: 1. Harry’s book has been rejected repeatedly. My guess is he force the writer to focus on new age touchy feely crap instead of gossip, because he’s finally smartened up about the consequences of ripping apart his family. And publisher is insisting on a tell all. (FYI: same thing happened with Ashley Judd. She wrote a book about her humanitarian efforts and no publisher would touch it unless she included Judd family gossip. So she crammed some in. If you’ve read the book, it’s clear it was just randomly mixed in with the boring Ashley is Mother Theresa nonsense to keep readers’ attention.) 2. Netflix at their wit’s end with these blithering idiots. Suspect they’re making some financial threats to get them to stir up dirt. Strongly suspect the Invictus Games doc will be scraped because—come on!—realistically, who will buy a Netflix subscription to watch that. At this point, might force them to do an interview with someone who will not ask them fluff questions on what’s happen since their post-Oprah expose.

I don’t believe the rumor that the kids were left in the US. Those kids are their bargaining chips and their shields. They would have never left them at home.

I don’t care if this is true. It’s true enough and it’s hilarious!

I was surprised that I ended up feeling sorry for Meghan. There she was in her little white gloves and jaunty little white hat with the upturned brim, like a hopeful smile, being booed by the public.

I don't blame the BRF, but it just seemed cruel.

[quote]Does anyone know why the thread about the Daily Beast's article on House Harkle's "feud" with the Royal Family was deleted?

It happens when there are too many threads on one particular topic - it counts as spamming and Muriel starts deleting them. If people continue to make new threads every day about the Royal Family, then Muriel will start deleting them more frequently until eventually the topic becomes banned. I like this topic and wish people would keep it to one or two threads, because i will miss it if it goes forever.

Been here for over 20 years and I've seen it happen before many times.

I wonder if Netflix has received blowback for Meghan's venal attempt to get attention for herself in Uvalde. That was truly shocking. She takes a private jet to fly in and out of Uvalde to get herself photographed. She goes to a blood bank to give them some Fritos and get her picture taken and doesn't even give blood. She's an attention whore and a sociopath.

She reminds me of Ted Cruz. After Hurricane Harvey, Cruz showed up in Houston for a photo op (for non-Texans: Cruz rarely if ever sets foot in Texas. He lives in DC.) He waited in an air-conditioned trailer while the cameras were set up. He emerged - like a movie star - from the trailer to pretend he was doing something. Then, pics taken, he left. He had dressed up in camouflage like a soldier and he needed to hide from the hurricane. Unfortunately, people pointed out he look like Castro in his outfit.

R46, I think you got this wrong. Andrew had gotten away with inappropriate and even illegal conduct, i.e. selling influence, for years. And it is not clear that even the Epstein-related sex scandal would have resulted in the outcome it did, had the Harry/Meghan crises not created such a potential blot on the image of the royal family. Most who get away with things make the reasonable assumption that they will continue to do so. I don't see Markle as a dingbat either. She has a degree from Northwestern. She did a good job in her role on Suits as well. She just seems to be unwilling to accept her weaknesses and work with them. She's dug herself a huge hole and is now stuck in it with two children and a very immature husband. She could likely go back to acting but she seems to make poor choices and her husband will never be able to make a living.

For those feeling a bit of sympathy for them, remember that their now-shuttered U.K. co., MWX, registered all sorts of commercial trademarks (think 'SussexBaby') and political domains (e.g. 'Meghan for President') three days after their wedding. In other words, it was a scam from the get go.

I never thought Markle had any intention of staying in the UK. Overnight she got world-famous after getting nowhere in her acting career for years. She was reaching her sell-by date and must have been terrified of what future she'd have. I think when she suddenly got so famous she figured she could go back to Hollywood and leverage her fame to get A list movie roles. Didn't happen.

R17 you use the expression “off of” and you’re calling other people retards?

R67, from the linked article:

[quote] On the 27 November, the day that Clarence House announced the engagement, an application was made for the mark MEGHAN to cover clothing, footwear, bags and perfume.

She’d been planning this shit since she met him.

I'm amazed that Harry and Meg were amazed at being treated like 3rd-tier royals, because apparently they don't get that they weren't attending a family get-together, they were attending a working event!

Seriously, for the royal family this was business, they're in the tradition-and-pageantry business, and they were there to put on a show for the nation, not to hold a family backyard BBQ. If Harry wanted to be treated like a family member he should have come to a purely family event, because when he attends working events he's isn't in the position of a beloved family member, he's attending as an ex-employee. One who is no longer trusted, and who has to be excluded from inner circles in the interests of company security. He really is a dolt.

""Thriving"? Charles and Camilla will run it into the ground. "

That's why if Charles takes the throne at all, I expect a regency, an abdication, or a "stepping back" within 5 years.

And I expect Camilla to cooperate with the process! She's all about Charles, her unofficial job with the family firm is as Charles' manager, he's her job as well as her husband, and she won't want to see him crash and burn, either professionally or personally. So if she has to drag him out of the public eye to save him, and let William and Kate take center stage, then I think she will.

C’mon, copywriting trademarks is just sensible; it’s to prevent other companies from putting out products using their name. Since they’ve proved to be unpopular, it looks like it wasn’t actually necessary. I wonder if Lilibet is a registered trademark…and if the holder is the queen.

They're not doing great. Nobody wants Charles the adulterer s king and his wife is still hated. All this has been going on for decades and hasn't been affected by Meghan and Harry.

Meg makes it difficult to feel sorry for her. Exploiting dead kids was bad enough. But to drag it out by forcing Buzzfeed to update the story several times so that people know:

She donated very large crates (example photo included) of food and not the bags that were initially reported. The crates were large, ya'll.

She donated not just chips, but sandwiches, drinks, and dessert.

And like a good neighbor, Smeg was there anonymously. (It later came out that her security crew did a sweep of the donation center and staff was informed of her royal presence.)

Not satisfied that this was enough, she had the community center director offer statements defending Meghan and advising people not to believe the bad stories about the duke and duchess. Let that sink in. She was worried and complaining about being treated unfairly by the press while a community was still in shock over the massacre of their children.

Nope, I'm out. I will not feel sorry for this disgusting creature.

R73 It's normal for the Royal Household to copyright trademarks (and object to others attempting to), not for individuals within the family.

LMAO! At least they used a photo of her when she was thin.

r76 Exactly and trademarking Meghan for President is just bizarre and not routine and understandable at all.

R74 is the KGT peddling its usual bullshit.

Have a little rest, KGT - you must know that we can see you and your rubbish.

I thought this is quite funny

Big Issue Wills

[quote] it doesn't matter what the US think of the RF.

That isn't entirely true. It isn't of the utmost importance but it isn't important either. For one thing the US media is very important so they pay attention to how the US media covers them. A large amount of the tourism money it is reported that the Royal Family brings to the UK, comes from US fans of the RF. And, a large part of the royals value to charities comes from their ability to raise huge amounts of money on the occasional visit to the States.

One of the things that made Charles very jealous of Diana is how popular she was in the USA compared to him.

I know that many of you think otherwise but you have to realise that what the citizens of the USA think of the royal family of the UK means absolutely nothing.

Like everyone. Who needs 'em?

To be honest, when it comes down to it, what the citizens of the USA think about any other country doesn't really matter either and vice versa.

Nobody sits around worrying about the USA thinks of them.

[quote] as soon as she and Harry broke with the royal family by denouncing them on Oprah, almost no one was interested anymore.

Best proof yet of irony’s extinction.

You know, as time passes none of this matters. Harry and Meghan will be semi famous over the years. They will sell themselves, albeit perhaps at a higher level, in much the same way the Duke & Duchess of Windsor did, and will be famous for being famous. Meanwhile things will also settle down in the UK. Charles will enjoy a short reign and then it will be William's turn and there will be huge changes. Some of the palaces will be opened to the public, and aside from offices, they will no longe be residences. I suspect Claence House and St. James will remain residences as will Kensington. But Windsor and Buckingham Palace will not. Sandringham and Balmoral will be for pesonal use. As soon as Kent and Gloucester die their offspring will be out on their asses. No more gace & favor shit. Charles will see to all of that, so William will not be the villain.I suspect there will be fewer ceremonies too. So maybe the Order of the Garter thing. And then Remeberance Day. But the Trooping of the Color will be different and there will be very few balcony waves. Opening Parliament will still happen. Highgrove pays for itself and generates income.

R87 None of the Kent and Gloucester offspring will be “out on their asses” as you put it. All of the children of the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester are long ago married (and in the case of Lady Davina Lewis, married and divorced). They have their own lives, homes, families and children and have never been funded by the taxpayer. Their is no “grace & favor shit” as you put it.

Sandringham and Balmoral are the personal property of the sovereign and s/he can dispose of them as s/he sees fit.

And it’s “Trooping the Colour” not “Trooping of the Color” but there’s obviously no use in trying to educate you, given the rest of your post.

Why do you Americans think that your opinion of the British monarchy matters?

Was Princess Harriet ever vital to the family?

R89 Before George was born he was because if William had died he would've inherited. But, he was excess to purposes as soon as his nephew was born.

What it boils down to is that Meghan didn't want to have to curtsy to Kate

R91 which she wouldn’t have had to do until Kate’s husband succeeded to the Monarchy, if at all.

Rod?

[R54] Rod?

R73, it wasn't a broad swath of trademarks. They were trademarks specifically targeted towards 1) a Sussex Royal lifestyle brand; and, 2) Meghan's "political career".

You could tell from the trademarks they were planning to hawk homegoods, baby crap, etc. and Meghan intended to have a political career.

Harry was going to fade out either way. He was aging and not as exciting to follow anymore. Married with kids even less so. The lead up and early days of the marriage was interesting for a minute especially because he chose a biracial, American, divorcee. If this whole megxit thing and all the fall out didn’t happen, they would’ve become like William and Kate. Trot out for occasional appearances/duties, but largely living life unseen. He’s the former spare, so it wouldn’t matter much.

I do think once the Queen goes and 70 years of continuity and history, it won’t be the same. Charles doesn’t have it, William is ok. Neither comes close to QE. William kids will stir things up, but should have married and had children earlier. If George was say 15 now, the press would start circling in earnest. The family kind of needs new blood that generates some gossip. The two younger kids, Charlotte and Louis, will definitely generate headlines, but it’s so far into the future.

R87 What's wrong with you?

“Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.”

Or in this case, post.

Sure r85

^^^ hate to break it to you, but it's true.

R72 Past time for night meds.

The same people who say that the Queen saw Lillibet and refused a photo with her, making Netflix livid at Meghan and Harry for failing to deliver, are also saying the kids were never even in the UK. They post criticism of the birthday party being thrown "while everyone is at work" and gloat that supposedly few attended, but then say the manifest proves neither baby was even with Meghan and Harry in the first place.

These threads are a lot of sock puppets posting nonsense mixed in with incomprehensible, unfocused, petty spew.

R60 I like your post, Pungey. I think your point about Meghan being 'too touchy' is a good one. Brits (and the RF) have an expectation that you'll suck it up and get on with it. They're not into effusive praise. This is obviously at odds with Meghan's American sensibility of checking in, seeing how you're doing, and giving you encouragement and a pat on the head.

I think she was welcomed by the RF, just not in the way she expected.

(Side note: I know people who work for German companies. You're doing well if they DON'T say anything to you at all. It's a cultural thing.)

I've said this before....SOME of the BRF were welcoming, and others were not. William had her number from Day One. Harry's best friend Tom Inskip was said to have met MM through yachting and he thought Harry wanted the same thing. He was subsequently banished. If Kate, future queen, could never get a toehold among William's aristo friends, MM didn't have a chance. Prince Philip's attitude is well-known. The mostly gay courtiers undoubtedly despised her on sight and even more so when she treated staff like dirt. I think Charles, Camilla, the York girls, Zara Tindall, possibly the Wessexes, and the queen were willing to give her a chance.

reply 83

What the people of the UK think of any of the US presidents or political parties matters NOT AT ALL. You knew that, right? Our beef consumption, gas usage, shootings--it's all none of your fucking business. You get that much about Americans, do you not?

So I don't CARE what you think of Democrats, Republicans, Trump, the federal deficit, immigration issues, gun "culture" does not count even a tiny bit. Just so we're clear. Now, I'll go. I know when I'm not wanted.

To paraphrase Scripture, the tin foil hatters we have always with us.

The failure of the Sussexes to obtain photos of themselves and their kid with the Queen and the other senior royals, was widely reported by the media. That their royal creds are their only real marketing value isn't a tin hat idea: it's obvious. That's why the media carried it widely.

Most of us who subscribe to that idea also DON'T subscribe to the The Kids Weren't There theory.

I distinctly posted, for one, and that I believe they gkew on separate planes.

The attempt to discredit those of us pointing out what the Sussexes themselves can't hide (such as their desperate need to come up with compelling material before Netflix axes them) by tarring us with the tin hatters is transparent and spurious.

It isn't "the same people" asserting both, unless you want to count the TIMES TELEGRAPH MIRROR SUN DM EVENING STANDARD amongst the tin hatters noting that the couple didn't get what they wanted in the way of royal connection dust sprinkled on them.

The BBC, in its reporting of the LILIVET MEETS THE QUEEN story, added a disclaimer that "This meeting has not been confirmed".

The Palace has remained deafening silent on this.

Meghan and Harry, of course, feed these theories by always opting for the most opaque approach possible.

But it's always amusing watching desperate attempts to discredit critiques of the truly astonishingly bad tactics of the Sussexes.

Such as thinking they could cajole Britain's Hesd of State to agree to help them further commercialise the title that they "agreed" not to commercialise or politicise when they bailed.

If they'd gotten a photo, we all know it would have been sold the next day.

Nice try, though.

^*flew on separate planes

Why would they fly the children on a separate plane?

The 'rule' (it isn't law) is that The Monarch and their direct heir should not travel on the same aircraft. Prince William frequently accompanied Prince Charles when he was younger and Prince George always travels with William & Catherine.

Even in the widest possible interpretation of this family rule it doesn't apply to The Duke & Duchess of Sussex or their children.

Meghan is not an attractive woman. She never has been. Quite the opposite in fact. Although to be fair Harry is butt ugly too. No one expected the "children" to be lookers.

Meghan is infamous not famous. There will be nothing in her future but obscurity and a lower standard of living.

I'm at the place in Tina Bown's book, where she is starting to talk about Meghan. Good stuff.

There are so many conflicting reports about what transpired last weekend. It's up to DL to crack the case! This is exactly the type of investigative journalism I expect from DataLounge.

Here is what we have to work with:

a. H/M return to UK for the Jubilee under a cloud of suspicion based on their awful behavior and terrible life choices. (Note: We have no evidence to support that they have brought their children. But, at this point, we assume the kids are in tow.)

b. They attend Trouping of Color but are relegated to the "kids' table" room--far from where the main players are gathered to appear on the balcony. They are seen shoving their faces into a window and preening with small children to ensure their presence is captured by the media.

c. The Trouping event is followed by a private family lunch. We can not confirm that H/M were invited to the lunch or if they attended.

d. H/M were invited to the Thanksgiving Service. They arrive by private car while other third-tier royals arrive by bus. There are reports that H/M arrived late intentionally for bus departure so that they would have a private car provided. We have not confirmed this.

e. They arrive at church and are greeted mainly with cheers. Meghan employees her whore sashay up the steps. They are escorted to their seats in the second row--far from Charles/William--and Harry seems to question the usher and his cousins about the seating. But they take the seats with no incident other than Harry's sour expression.

f. H/M get booed as they leave the service. No one in the family seems to interact with them as they depart. Mike Tindall seems to be deliberately avoiding eye contact on church steps.

g. There is a reception following the service. H/M don't attend. We have conflicting info on why they weren't there: a.) they weren't invited; b.) they were invited but so rattled by the booing they skipped it; c.) invited but skipped because of the church seating snub; d.) invited but discovered they'd be cordoned off in a room away from the main reception area so they skipped it.

h. They throw a birthday party for Lilibet. No confirmation on who attended. There is no conclusive photographic proof of the event (see below on release of Lilibet birthday photo).

i. H/M do not attend the Party at the Palace. We don't know if they were invited. If they were invited, we don't know why they skipped it. Speculation ranges from they discovered they wouldn't be in the royal box to they went to Windsor at the Queen's invitation to watch it on television with her.

j. H/M do not attend the Pageant. We don't know if they were invited. We do know that they departed by private jet about an hour before the pageant began, ensuring they would not be in the UK for the final balcony appearance.

k. Photos show only Harry disembarking in the U.S. No photos of Meghan or the kids leaving the airfield. But no info that they weren't on the plane.

l. H/M release pic of 1 year old Lilibet. The photo offers no evidence of where or when it was taken. It shows Lilibet sitting in the grass with the background of part of a building blurred. The photos released that day on Twitter and Instagram by Meghan's acquaintance, Misan Harriman, show Megan with Lilibet Harriman, her husband/photographer, and their children celebrating Lilibet's 1st birthday. But there are no specifics on when these images were captured and where the event took place. There is speculation based on the vagaries of the language of the post that the photos were taken before the UK trip and posted as suggested evidence of a birthday party in the UK.

DL: We've got a lot of questions to answer here. Let's get to it!

I'm R111: Forgot to include this essential question to our investigation: Did Lilibet meet the Queen? If so, when, where and under what circumstances?

[quote]Prince George always travels with William & Catherine.

Mm. I think it's better that way, don't you?

I think William and George travel separately now. I believe this started after Meghan was overheard telling a friend that she was one plane crash away from being Queen of England.

hmmm....I guess this isn't surprising but I don't think I've seen this info before: The H/M website still lists them as official patronages of several organizations. There is nothing on the site that says they were stripped of all these patronages in early 2021.

Apologies, but the weather is nasty and I'm bored so I've fallen into the Sussex wormhole deeply enough to stumble upon their ridiculous website. I can report that the site is as empty, pointless and superficial as they are.

As an American who lived in the UK for several years, I've always been amused by American denialism of our obsession with the British Royal Family. "We fought a war to get rid of them!" while every week - and sometimes every day - Good Morning America and the Today Show feature stories about the Royals. We're xenophobic assholes (USA! USA!) with a chip on our shoulder that this damn Royal family commands so much of our attention. We're obsessed with them. We've tried to create our own royal families: the Roosevelts, the Kennedys, the Bushes but we can't quite pull it off.

R116 Not to mention all the tabloid/magazine covers you see when checking out at the grocery store. They put them on the cover because they are the people who sale copies.

^Sorry sell not sale.

R107 The rule I was referring to was what "royal" means.

R115 They were stripped of ROYAL PATRONAGES gifted by the Queen, like the National Theatre. They were allowed to maintain personal patronages that they had chosen to engage in.

Camilla has replaced Meghan as the royal patron of the National Theatre. The couple were both stripped any royal patronages gifted by the Queen, and Harry of his honorary military appointments.

As I have said so many times before, when the Heir produces an Heir of its own, the Spare should be humanely euthanized. Harry and Andrew, welcome to the Rainbow Bridge.

R120 giving Meghan the National was actually a poison pen letter to her. Actors at the National are the creme de la creme of British acting royalty: trained at RADA, Central School, etc. earned their spurs in repertory, stints at the Royal Shakespeare... and their patron was supposed to be the Suitcase Girl from Deal or No Deal?

R111 For starters, it's Trooping, not Trouping, the Colour.

One mystery solved.

Netflix has got to be kicking themselves. When they hired the Markles, they weren't on bad terms with the royals - at least openly - Harry must have promised Netflix he'd give them access to the Queen herself and all the senior royals, as a reality show companion piece to their hit The Crown.

Then they fucked that up for free with Oprah.

They're fucked. I expect an announcement coming soon that Netflix has terminated their contract. And the fact galleys of Harry's supposed autobiography haven't leaked yet means the publisher hasn't accepted the manuscript. Probably worried that it's boring and that Harry's attacks on the royal family will be met with lawsuits. Is Harry worth it? No.

Have they delivered on any of their deals?

Maybe the Oprah one.

[quote] giving Meghan the National was actually a poison pen letter to her. Actors at the National are the creme de la creme of British acting royalty: trained at RADA, Central School, etc. earned their spurs in repertory, stints at the Royal Shakespeare... and their patron was supposed to be the Suitcase Girl from Deal or No Deal?[/quote]

That is really an elitist comment. Should someone be denied something prestigious because of their past work experience? What makes Anne or anyone else more qualified? Meghan might be a scheming social climber with a c-list acting career, but she actually worked to get some acting/tv gigs on her own rather than being handed it.

R125 you think a classically trained British actor is going to respect the D lister who was only 6th on the Call Sheet on a cable soap?

R126, at that point she was no longer a D-list actress from a cable show, but a part of the RF. She had good will and was mostly respected. At least she worked in the acting profession. I bet a few of those actors would have gladly accepted a role on an American cable tv show. Besides it was a patronage, she was not directing their shows. Bringing up her employment background to disparage her is the same as what was done to Kate’s mother being mocked by snobs for being an airline flight attendant and having a party planning business. Just because one comes from humbled beginnings doesn’t mean they’re are unworthy.

Wow, reading back over the Sussex Royal website after all this time is quite hilarious. It's obvious MM wrote the whole thing herself and had (has) quite a high opinion about herself and their status. The linked page below is the page for their "funding" where she reiterates over and over their intention to "transition to become members of The Royal Family with financial independence". The balls on those two to announce to the Queen how they intend to be half-in/half-out is jaw-dropping to say the least.

It is really sad to see someone so sucked in by a headline.

Thank you, R111, for your succinct summary.

A weekend visit over to the LSA MMUO thread, revealed possible other additions.

Just possibilities, of course.

There was one suggestion that the little one in the B&W "Lilibet" picture did not look like the little girl in the color shot.

There was also analysis of the B&W picture, with posters showing a very similar earlier picture of MM, which, with minor photo shopping, could have looked like M in the B&W shot.

Given the frequency of the tall tales coming from the M&H camp, who knows?

Who the fuck cares? Why do you fat cunts care so much about these people?

R131, I don't think that many people find Meghan Markle interesting per se (I certainly don't): what's interesting to me is watching a fully-fledged narcissist functioning in public view, and also seeing how that's covered by the media.

How do you know she's a narcissist though? I don't pay attention to anyone in that family. DULLSVILLE.

Now, Trump is a narcissist. This chick, meh.

Well, if you don't pay attention to anyone in that family, then I'm hardly going to waste my time explaining it, am I?

I don't like to diagnose people with mental illness, but after reading excerpts from Finding Freedom, it's easy to make a case MM is a narcissist.

Are they serious? The BRF was seemingly beginning to thrive after the last few years.... Can one of our U.K. peeps advise how this latest news will be taken?

How is Meghan’s idea going of renting their house for film shoots and swank parties?

Enough income generated for them to live independently?

[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.]

R120 the website still lists the Royal Patronages. It has Meghan as patron of the National Theatre and Harry of the Marines. They haven't removed any of them from the site.

In truth, the NT is better off with a royal patron without a theatrical background than one with a laughable theatrical background.

Many people cancelled their NT subscriptions when Meghan was announced as Royal Patron.

You can't erase the past.

It was one of those ideas that read better on paper than actual execution.

And when it became obvious that the Sussexes had been planning to leave all along, and that Meghan had met with NT exec's as Megxit was about to burst into the headlines, well . . .

Meghan is out of her depth with the heavyweights. I don't see her being good at chatting with people like Judi Dench and Mark Rylance.

I mean . . She couldn't even master the role of a Duchess married to the 6th in line.

R139 But there is no mention of Meghan on the NT web site when last I looked.

In March 2021 the Queen announced the rescension of the royal patronages and Harry's military appointments.

So, I don't know why the web site hasn't been changed. And Canilla getting the NT patronage was also announced recently.

The Queen did not meet Lilibet; Her Majesty instead chose to honour a previously scheduled engagement, and lunched with Paddington Bear.

Just remember, there were no pictures of the kids whatsoever during Jubilee weekend, however there were pictures of 'toys' being unloaded on arrival back in California. Such toys (scooter, etc.) might just have been birthday gifts given by some RF members to have the parents bring back to the children. All Sussex-related pictures through the Jubilee weekend seemed very curated...

"I've said for a long time to H—that's what I call him—it's not enough to just survive something, right? That's not the point of life. You've got to thrive, you've got to feel happy."

Yes, the BRF is surviving and thriving.

Has nobody here ever flown on the same flight as a baby or small children? If the option existed for a child-free flight, I would pay extra.

They probably stuck their brats in cattle car on a red eye to London.

Just a reminder, the 'sport' of Polo is straight-up animal abuse, regardless of what its aficionados with champagne flutes in hand may whisper into your ears

Animal abuse for billionaires. This appears to be all Harry does now. Such a man of the people! Meanwhile his bro is out selling Big Issue with homeless people.

OP surprise, surprise!

R141 I was referring to the Sussexes personal website. It still lists their patronages as current. Either they have a very lazy webmaster who never updates the site or H/M don't want people to believe they weren't stripped of them.

r138 How much polo does he actually play a week now? It seems to be the only thing he does anymore. He's gone from depressed prince because he doesn't a fulfilling job to depressed country club drunk.

Seriously, what DOES Harry do all day long?

He doesn't have a job, he doesn't do anything for social media, he doesn't' have any friends in California that we know of, he doesn't work in the gardens on his massive estate, and he sure as hell doesn't work out much.

But he hadn’t been playing polo. He gave it up after his MM enthrallment and hadn’t played in the states until just recently. Now, he’s back to his old ways. So I wonder why?

[quote] But he hadn’t been playing polo. He gave it up after his MM enthrallment

Wasn't it shooting that he gave up?

Yes, he gave up shooting and he gave up polo, too.

r155 I actually feel sorry for the poor fuck then. Those 2 and social drinking were pretty much the only leisure activities he's had since childhood. He must have been climbing the walls before he was allowed to play again.

What does she do? Nothing. Ideal setting for non-stop bickering. They'll be divorced before the year is over.

What does Meghan do all day? She hustles for money and she shouts at the staff! And shouts at publishers, and publicists, and film producers, and lawyers involved in her various lawsuits, etc. I'm sure her days are full from dawn to late at night, trying to yell herself into the kind of wealth and fame she wants.

But Harry doesn't do any of that, he just expects the money to be there when he wants to spend it. He doesn't work and he doesn't seem to play much, so what DOES he do all day?

I expect there is a lot of weeding to do down in the chicken coop.

R153 Prince Charles coined the best phrase for Harry's enthrallment. He said Harry was 'Cuntstruck'

MM's acting gigs on Suits and Deal or No Deal were both handed to her.

What about the 90210 one where she was 'blow job girl' ?

She has to have a talent at something?

Despite Omid Scobie clamming the Queen saw H&M twice and even watched some of the Party at the Palace with here, sources have confirmed to the Sun that the Queen spent just 15 minutes with Harry, Meghan, and their kids during their visit to the UK.

Tina Bown says that even before Harry met Meghan for years he was unhappy. Once WIlliam married, the two brothers began to deliberately move apat. This was done by the Palace because Willliam's future was inevitable and so was Harry's. When he was in his late 20's he was terrified of becoming Andrew. And the Queen worried about him, because she was remembering Margaret. So Harry was going to do something. He is a qualified Apache fighter pilot, and he LOVED being in the military. Loved it. And they loved him. It was the perfect world for him. But as he got promoted he would have been destined for a desk job and that was something he couldn't deal with. The tragic thng was because of threats they has to pull him out of Afghanistan, too early. it broke his heart. He was at loose ends. His work with his African AIDS charity, and his work with the Invictus Games were huge successes. But internally he was a mess.So in a way, marrying, and dropping out of the working side of the RF was a good thing for him. But then the betayals and whoring after publicity caused a lot of bridges to be burned.

r164 They should have encouraged him join the Navy or RAF over the army. He could have had the structure and sense of achievement from service he needed without putting the entirety of Camp Bastion at danger from jihadists looking for a ginger scalp once they found out he was there.

R164 It actually wasn't the prospect of desk job that stopped Harry for continuing in the military, he couldn't continue on in the Army because he lacked the education prerequisite for the additional training required. Basically he was unable to pass the required testing. Also it was a Palace PR fallacy that Harry was loved in the military, he was not. Many of his fellow soldiers found him to be a spoiled brat, and when he was in Afghanistan he was actually not put in significant danger and had army appointed body guards because there was a serious risk of him being kidnapped.

The reason Harry enjoyed the military is because he's basically the type of person who needs to be told what to do and be praised for it. This is why I think he's enthralled with Meghan. She has him under her thumb, but likely always makes him feel like "the man" of the family.

Yes, his nickname while in the 'combat zone' was 'Archie Bunker' because he spent his days in the bunker playing video games.

[quote] I'm sure her days are full from dawn to late at night, trying to yell herself into the kind of wealth and fame she wants.

This is exactly how I imagine it. Your sentence describes it beautifully.

So now we know where little Archie's name came from!

And I still say that Meghan is the best thing that ever happened to the BRF in decades. She’s an excellent foil, making them look regal by comparison.

[quote] And I still say that Meghan is the best thing that ever happened to the BRF in decades. She’s an excellent foil, making them look regal by comparison.

As has been said many times, the real winner in all of this is Kate. I've always liked Kate, but never gave her too much thought pre-Meghan. I watched the wedding, was excited about the kids births, and that's about it. When "Hurricane Meghan" (a DM fave headline) came into the mix, it really forced us to compare the two women, and who doesn't love a royal cat right as it was being presented. Kate's star wattage shot to the top and she went complete next level to Queen in waiting w/ the iconic photo at Prince Philip's funeral. Kate looks like a trojan horse next to Meghan and must thank her lucky stars Meghan is such a fuck up.

The Queen is now the SECOND longest reigning monach EVER! Next up is French King Louis XIV' s record of 72 years and 110 days. He had the advantage of becoming King when he was a child.

R172 She is now the longest non-regented monarch in world history. The Queen just has a little over two years to go to beat King Louis' record, hope she makes it!

It's interesting to note that Neither WIlliam or George have a shot of breaking her record. Let's say that in a year, Charles becomes King. He will serve maybe 10-15 years. By then William will be either 50-55. How old will George be when his Papa becomes king? Maybe 19-20? William will probably last about 30-40 years. So George won't be King until he's in his 50's.

more footage of Harry and Meghan being booed has come to light. Also Meghan is walking like she just holding in a fart.

She's walking like a hooker hawking her wares down a back-alley.

R175 LMAOOOOOOOOOO. Omg I love the people yelling "we don't want you here!" Meghan's walk is ridiculous.

OMFG, that walk! Why am I still continually surprised by her insanity?

Who R176? Lizzie, Kate or Charlotte?

If it's Lizzie, no one would pay for that old snatch.

It's true, Harry's idiocy has been the best thing that ever happened to William and Kate! Or at least their standing with the public!

They look so very respectable and responsible by comparison, so professional and polished, so poised and royal! And if their marriage has had problems then Harry's probably unintentionally helped there too, nothing brings people together like a common enemy.

Early on, I didn’t have a high opinion of Kate (I’m sure she was devastated). Sure at university they were “living together “ in a house with a bunch of other students but at the end of each term, he’d basically say, see ya and take off for Africa. When they broke up after graduation, she got busy and took on several projects. One was with an all-woman crew training to row across the English Channel. A spot was found for her, she started training and then William came calling again. They became engaged and she dropped that crew like a hot potato. That really bugged me, breaking her commitment to the crew. It was like she was entering a convent, forsaking all else. I’ve never read anything to dispute this story.

R164 Harry repeatedly failed his pilot’s exam. The public was told that he was a helicopter gunner. He was actually guarded and put his fellow soldiers in danger by his presence. Harry left the military because he could not pass his promotional exam.

Flying a helicopter is like rubbing your tummy and patting your head at the same time, I'm not sure that Harry could achieve either one singularly?

R111 Who is “Lilibet Harriman?”

Harriman is a twist on Archie's middle name Harrison (Harry's Son).

Though in truth Meghan may as well adopt it as a surname so that she could be associated with the World Class Hooker Pamela Harriman.

No, it is the last name of the photographer who took Lillibet's picture.

Maybe I over thought it?

My reason is better though?

Markle is such an asshole and always will be. Watching her fail over and over is what makes it all so entertaining.

Very true. She's such an asshole.

After the reception they received, I don't think MM will be in the UK ever again. Some questions remain...will their coffers be replenished when the queen dies or will it be 'for reasons well know to him'?

Will Harry's book be the final nail in the coffin of their relationship with the BRF? Or will it not be published?

Clearly their humanitarian posturing and efforts are not being well received. What next?

At this point, I just feel sorry for them.

Harry could have stayed in the military, but he found it humiliating not to be promoted.

I don't feel sorry for them at all after the way they've treated people. They deserve everything they are getting.

Meghan as again caught plagiarising. A women's organisation she "supports" posted a quote attributed to Meghan on its web site. The quote turned out to be, except for two words, completely the work of poet e.e. cummings. The organisation, when it was spotted, was forced to put the full quote up as cummings' wrote it, and apologising.

So, are the apologists who keep insisting that Meghan and Harry are some sort of "loss" to the BRF convinced yet that, in fact, the couple cannot even manage to do themselves any favours, are functionally amoral, and seem NEVER to learn from their mistakes?!

^*The correction was made on 12 June, and has since vanished from the TWO's web site. But here is a link to the screen shots someone on LSA put up.

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

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

The Queen has a large fortune of her own. I would be surprised if Harry and possibly the children don't inherit something from her. That could likely be substantially less if he puts the RF in an uproar with Sussex continued antics. If he has half a brain, which may be too hopeful, he will understand that the best option is periodic cheery missives to HM with photos of their children while making no public comments. The Queen liked him and may decide to leave him pretty well off if Sussex causes no more trouble.

R198 - I wouldn't bet on it. The Queen turned out to be quite a bit less of a softie where the Sussexes are concerned over the Jubly, didn't she?

It would be Charles' responsbility to settle something on the Sussexes, and it is likely that he would skip over his son and leave the foundations of a modest trust fund to each of Harry's children. It's customary in those circles to skip the children and focus on the grandchildren, anyway.

The Queen is much more likely to reward the Wessexes for their long years of service, and perhaps Andrew's daughters, whose father isn't going to be able to leave them much, now.

I think much will depend on what happens with Harry's memoir. If he goes on the attack again, targeting Charles, Camilla, and William, I don't think the Queen will be leaving Harry much. He has tried to damage the one thing she cares intensely about in her old age: the institution she has striven to maintain for seven decades.

Harry is her grandson. Charles is Harry's father. Any inheritance will be primarily up to Charles. And Charles has three other grandchildren with whom he has real relationships. He's never held Archie or Lilibet on his lap with his arm affectionately around them, as he did Prince Louis.

Harry and Meghan have been incredibly foolish, simply incredibly foolish.

As I said on the other thread, Meg and Harry are fools not to use the kids to suck up to Charles! The queen has many other grandchildren and great-grandchildren, all merrily sponging away, so the competition there is fierce. But Charles only has two sons and five grandchildren, and Harry is a damn fool to keep his own kids away and let Charles get much more attached to Will's little sprogs.

Harry and Meg are also fools to keep the kids away from their royal cousins, if they had any sense they'd make damn sure that the kids were part of the royal "cousins club", with all their fantastic social connections. But then, we knew they were both fools, and we only watch them to get a good laugh every time they break new ground in foolishness.

"Prince William 'made "him or me" ultimatum' over Andrew’s aborted comeback at Order of the Garter"

Good on Will! He's not striking a blow for freedom and justice or anything, but these days displays of common sense are so incredibly welcome that I always take a moment to appreciate them.

And yes, keeping Andrew out of public royal events is common fucking sense. Wanna sink the whole institution? Parade around with Andrew! Let it be known that he's only going to make one more royal appearance in his life, and that' will be at his mother's funeral.

It's hilarious watching them fail so badly. I can't wait for Bower's book!

World laughingstocks harry and meg

The Cambridges are leaving Kensington Palace and moving to Windsor Park in order to be close to Her Majesty. They will live in historic Adelaide Cottage which is about a six or seven minute walk from the Castle. The house has only four bedrooms, so there will be no live in help. The kids have already been enrolled in nearby schools and the move is expected to take place later this summer.

I've read speculation earlier that when HM passes, the Cambridges may move into the Castle. Charles allegedly doesn't like it and doesn't care about living there. He and Camilla will remain living at Clarence House and Highgrove (and Camilla has her own country estate) and Charles will have his offices in Buckingham Palace.

I don't have a link but it's all over the British papers.

[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.]

Adelaide Cottage is gorgeous and it's a good size, being neither too big or too small. The fact it's in the stunning Windsor grounds is the icing on the cake.

The children are switching schools, hence the move.

They are being a tiny bit deceitful as to the true size of Adelaide Cottage. It has a second house on the plot that was constructed from parts of the old Royal Lodge and cannot be seen from the road.

The second house on the right (white and black one) is also part of the package. That is why they don't need 'live-in' staff.

Aerial photo of the whole plot.

Four bedrooms? Da fuq? Where’s Charlotte gonna sleep?

KP hasn't at all confirmed it, but I suppose if they haven't denied it, given the time frame so close, it's likely true.

It's a nice move and the Cottage [sic] is very pretty.

Strategically, it cleverly distributes each of the top tier royal couples. The Wales' take the capital and BP, where the Cambridges will still have a base, anyway, as they wait out Charles' reign. The Cambridges take Windsor, the other hugely symbolic royal region.

Charles retains Highgrove for his personal country retreat, but he will inherit Balmoral and Sandringham, where the Cambridges also retain Anmer Hall.

Charles is deeply attached to Balmoral, but I don't think to Sandringham.

The Queen will be far morexsupported in these waning days, William will cement his growing power, and the Sussexes will have ever less trason to "visit".

It's well thought out in terms of distribution of resources and divvying up of influence and visible symbols of the future.

Adelaide Cottage was once tout

Why are the Cambridge children switching schools?

^*once touted as a possibility for the Sussexes. I don't know if it was true that it was on offer, but if it was, I wonder if they turned it down.

It's closeness to the Castle leads me to suspect it was never on offer, or they'd have leapt at it, given its proximity to the Big House.

I didn’t believe the rumors of Will and Kate moving to Windsor. Their Kensington Palace apt renovations were massive and they famously converted the adjacent apt to their staff offices. It was “understood” that that was where they’d live until he became king to justify the millions spent.

Moving to Windsor, okay it’s near the queen, nearer to school if they are changing schools (esp if George is destined for Eton) , has more grounds for the kids to run around (horses too), nearer Kate’s parents. But their office staff is still at Kensington P? I can’t believe Adelaide Cottage is move in ready aside from a bit of repainting. Also it’s interesting that this house was not offered to Megs and Harry. There were enough rumors about it.

R214 - they will still use Kensington Palace as their London residence and for their offices.

The Queen with Charles and Camilla. She's getting smaller and frailer.

Kate and Sophie added a little color to the occasion.

[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 hate to say it, but I think the Cambridges moving to within a few minutes' walk of Windsor means they've been told the Queen's time on Earth is limited. And they want/need to be close at hand in the meantime.

I hope I'm wrong.

"...they've been told the Queen's time on Eath is limited." LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!

Ya' think?

[quote]Kate looks like a trojan horse next to Meghan

There now. She can't help being tall.

I saw a doco recently about the history of the Windsors, and when it got to the Wills/Kate wedding the voiceover said, "At the time people wondered whether a girl from such an ordinary background could live up to a Royal life. Now, the same people wonder whether the Royal Family could survive without her."

[quote]Four bedrooms? Da fuq? Where’s Charlotte gonna sleep? —Louie

Wherever I please, punk.

R220 Obviously I meant that they've been given a time frame, and it doesn't stretch into years.

The Cambridge children are switching schools because none of them are the sharpest tools in the shed and they can’t be seen to fail in more competitive schools. Those Windsor genes are deadly.

Kate is so boring though. I get that they need that, but she is really snoozeville. Her coat dresses seem from another time, even the way they sometimes dress the kids up. She’s just very robotic in general. Diana was nuts, but she had way more charisma and her fashion sense was great towards the end of her life. It’s actually very sad seeing Camilla living the life Diana was intended to, especially being a grandmother to William’s kids. While Diana was dead by 36. I was younger when she died, so 36 didn’t seem as young as it does now. Her life was really a short blip in the grand scheme of things.

What's going to happen to Kensington Palace if they move out? Government housing for BoJo's pals?

R225 what Meghan never understood because her only points of reference were being a failing actress in Hollywood pushing 40, you don't have to make your mark in the Royal family NOW and be a MAJOR STAR! You're supposed to last a lifetime and can wear out your welcome pretty damn quick. Had Di survived, she would have been considered the world's biggest attention whore and pain in the ass at 40.

Adelaide Cottage being offered to Harry and Meg was just wishful PR. They also put out similar 'manifestation' PR about other properties. The Cambridges will keep KP as a London base, so technically they are still maintaining their original promise. I didn't see any negative PR as a result of yesterday's announcement. It may have been a trial balloon. If so, it seems the public is fine with the decision.

The stated reason for the move is the children's schools. But it feels like they are moving pieces into place for the next transition. The Queen is noticeably frail and if she suffers from any ailments beyond 'mobility issues' we won't be told until after the fact. People were wondering earlier this year why the Queen made a point to express that Camilla should be Queen - why now? why not wait until after Jubilee, etc? All their actions of late seem to point to getting everything in place so that when the Queen dies, particularly if it is soon, everything can smoothly transition with no strings left untied.

Can you imagine how needy and annoying Diana would be today on Instagram and Twitter? The endless stream of selfies...

I agree, R219. She has noticeably declined since Philip died. She looks now like all of my elderly relatives looked in their last year. It's like a flip switches and general decline suddenly turns into a steep fall.

I agree R225. I've always said KM is boring. No other words for it. Every young woman who joins that family is immediately turned into a matronly frump with ugly hats (what's the deal with English and fucking hats?). Basically, they are dressed like QE.

These two look comfy.

R230 Kate's hats, on the whole are not ugly, they're quite beautiful. They don't remotely look like the Queen's hats.

And, as keeps being pointed out, BORING is what monarchy's thrive on. Celebrities are supposed to be exciting; hereditary monarchs are suppose to exude dignity and stability.

It's the shooting star celebrity types that fall to earth so quickly. It's the Kate Middletons who win in the end.

The Prince's Trust is one of the most successful youth help organisations in the world. It recently opened a chapter in New York. If the Sussexes had been able to discern the difference between celebrity and royalty, they might well have been in line to head that up.

That's why the Clooney's dumped them so quickly. Amal got a plum position with The Prince's Trust. They all know which side of the bread the really classy butter is on.

And it's not the flashy side.

One of Kate's ugly hats. Yes, she looks JUST like the Queen here!

And here, she looks just like the Queen here, too!

And here! Look how old and ugly she looks in the shadows thrown by the straw in this hat, which looks EXACTLY like something the Queen would wear.

Moron, Kate's gift is to realise that all she needs to do is look feminine, beautifully put together, and appropriate.

It's something flashy Meghan never grasped.

And by the way, that Dog Poo hat Meghan wore for her first appearance with the family at the Sandringham Christmas services?

Here's Kate wearing it appropriately much, much earlier.

No one here has the slightest idea whether Catherine is boring or not. She is drama-free, which is not the same thing….and she wears beautiful hats beautifully…

Perhaps it’s time to start a royal hats thread to celebrate or diss.

“ Her coat dresses seem from another time, even the way they sometimes dress the kids up.”

In other words, *timeless*. Jeez, have you not understood that? Same with the European royals. They don’t chase trends.

Whatever you think about Kate, she forever guaranteed her place with that photo from Philip’s funeral. That, my friends, is style.

Disagree R236. They have hats for everything. Funny little hats for cops, funny hats on palace guards, vicars used to wear big wide-brimmed hats, lawyers have those ridiculous wigs...they are very into identifying occupations. I imagine it has to do with the class system.

I know in the middle ages a law was put into effect that peasants could not wear certain colors and fabrics in case someone didn't know they were peasants....LOL.

Yes, r239.

I wonder what Meghan would have worn, had she been there.

Love hats on everyone..full stop. Maybe cause an auntie worked for Betmar, so I'm susceptible.. Every holiday seconds from the factory for all the gals in the family. A few little tweaks & we were all set. Best seats in the house at church & restaurants. Wished they made men's at Betmar, but no luck. Sad big head JFK ended hats for men in America, for so long. Love that some hipsters are bringing back hats on white me. Hispanics & AA have stayed on trend all along, Keep going young'ns..you got style!! & you look hot!

R241 I have R239 blocked but might I suggest you old hags quit letting MM live in your head rent free, 24-7?

Speaking of hats...today was the 1st day of Royal Ascot.

[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.]

R237 for the win!

And not just the Brits. Maxima of The Netherlands and Mary of Denmark have worn some great hats.

And leave us not forget the Queen Mother's contributions in the 1930s with those beautiful cloches that really need to be resurrected.

And those highwaymen style hats with jeweled brooches!

Crown Princess Mary of Denmark has a slew of beautiful coat dresses. They are the be plus ultra, when properly tailored and accessorised, of simply daytime elegance.

^*ne plus ultra

The Queen Mother as Duchess of York with some of her early 1920s-1930s hats (following in separate posts).

1920s Garden Party hat.

Another 1920s summer garden party hat on the future Queen Mother.

The Queen Mother was only about 5'2". She wore very high heels and these sorts of heights to give herself some height.

^*these sorts of hats (not heights)

R246 Royal thread hat just created to discuss hats and avoid derailing this thread any further.

R230 Spoken like a true American. What do you suggest she wear? Athleisure? A Yeezy unisex sweatsuit? A dress with cutouts that so de rigueur these days? For those of us that appreciate luxurious textiles, skillful design and fine tailoring, Kate (and many of her contemporaries in the royal strata), dress gloriously well. She has great style. It may be too conservative for someone who cut their teeth on Madonna or the Kardashians, but for the rest of the world, it’s wonderful, hats and all.

No R255 but you can be stylish and not boring like Lizzie especially a young woman. FYI, KK and Madonna are tacky as hell. Yeezy? Does anyone wear that shit?

I appreciate all those things you mentioned but she's boring but I'm not a royal ass-kisser either and won't lie for their sake. Compared to the two horsey, bug-eyed grand-daughters, she looks good though.

The horsey granddaughters are what happens when you try to be too avant-garde or follow too many passing trends as a royal. It’s utterly hideous.

And yes, unfortunately people wear Yeezy. It grossed $1.7 B in sales for Adidas in 2020 alone. Go into any upper end department store. What used to be racks of dresses are now tacky athleisure. Even a designer like Balenciaga, who used to be known for fashion forward dresses, has racks and racks of beige sweatshirts now at places like Saks and Neiman.

R254 Ta!

R257 I don't know if they are too avant-garde or follow trends but they are lumpy and ugly so nothing is going to help much.

R256, agreed. And there is there is an in between from Kate and Madonna/KK. The BRF is losing its global appeal with younger generations and part of the reason is because Kate is boring and hasn’t become a trendsetter or style icon. No one is running out to purchase one of her coat dresses. I’m not a huge international Royal watcher, but I’ve seen the Spanish Queen and she is an amazing dresser. She has style AND dresses classy. The Spanish RF have it all over the BRF in looks and style. Sorry to the biddies that are still living in the 1940s.

[quote]The BRF is losing its global appeal with younger generations and part of the reason is because Kate is boring and hasn’t become a trendsetter or style icon.

Jesus Christ - the global appeal of the BRF is of absolutely no consequence to the government of the United Kingdom. The monarchy does not exist to provide the world with trendsetters or style icons. It will continue as it has for centuries, thank you very much.

Still pissed off that you're irrelevant now, Meghan @ R260? Move on, hun.

Omg, why does everything have to do with Meghan Markle. I can’t stand Meghan, doesn’t mean Kate's exempt from criticism. That’s why most think MM haters are crazy.

R261, Don’t be too sure. The younger generations are becoming more pro republic.

The Spanish royal family is really attractive. I'd never seen them before and they look far more down to earth and "normal" then the UK slags.

You will tell us that in every thread dealing with the BRF now, won't you, R263? Zzz ...

[quote] That’s why most think MM haters are crazy.

Sorry for breaking it to you, hun, but that's what YOU think. You only.

Btw, you gave yourself away again using the idiotic term 'haters' again. Bye bitch.

R264 They’re attractive in their current iteration. It took a ton of plastic surgery to make Letizia beautiful. Felipe, though, is hot AF. Thankfully, their daughters are pretty. Felipe’s sisters, though…WOOF! I mean, really WOOF!

Letizia dresses mostly well but she’s had a few missteps when she tries to be cool.

R267 do you have any pre-surgery pics? I love that little white shift she's wearing.

R260 the Spanish RF may be attractive and well-dressed etc but they are hanging on for dear life after the debacle of Juan-Carlos and also his daughter and her ex-husband.

Systems of government based on looks and clothes? How very silly.

Wasn't it the Spanish royal family that had the unfortunate Hapsburg jaw from inbreeding? The Brits have their horse teeth they need to overcome.

R270

R264, they are a beautiful family. If they spoke English I think they would be more widely known.

I think you just proved my point, R266. Bwah

"Boring" and stable is what we want in our Royal Family though. Stability is the appeal. They're not celebrities.

R273, I get what you’re saying, but they are boring and stable in all the wrong ways. They don’t seem relatable in any way to the average person. They give off an aloofness and don’t really show their personality. At the same time they lack glamour. So then what are you left with? This isn’t going to play with younger generations and I think they know that. Hence William selling newspapers on the street.

An FYI, I wouldn’t be surprised if their kids marry aristos. They seem very opposite of Diana.

[R263}, that poll was taken more than a year ago, and in any case, simplistic opinion polls do not address the constitutional issues that would arise from the abolition of the monarchy. UK voters did such a phenomenal job with Brexit, I can only imagine how they would f*** up a vote on becoming a republic.

What are the right ways, r274?

The people who suppprt the monarchy most were once the kids from the Swingin' Sixties and the Angry Young Man bibe from the late 50s.

Ringo Star, after meeting the Queen Mother at the Palladium, said it was the first time he felt really British. I remember the photo - his hair and her furs, his rings and her tiara . . . At least, I think it was the Palladium, might have been the Albert Hall after the Royal Variety Show. It was such a funny, charming photo.

People become more conservative as they age.

Kate and William and the Queen are the country's most popular royals.

If the Jubly was anything to go by, and the roars and cheers that greeted the Queen and the Cambridges, reports of the death of the British monarchy have been greatly exaggerated.

^*vibe not bibe

R268 Here are some photos

Another highlighting her profile. I suspect she’s had two rhinoplasties. Her nose got even smaller about five years back.

A last one to highlight facial work. It was great work and it really improved her appearance. Went from average to one of the beauties of the world.

She isn’t the only one. Kate Middleton had a subtle nose job too.

Wow that is a bad picture of KM. Yikes.

Wow, Letizia completely changed her whole face.

She sure did! Queen Rania of Jordan is another one who changed her face for the better. Currently, she is one step away from officially overdoing it.

It doesn’t look to me as if Kate had a nose job. It looks like she lost a fair bit of weight.

It’s common knowledge she had a nose job. The tip was subtly refined a few years before her marriage. She lost weight too, but trust me, the nose was done.

Meg hasn't had any work done.

Even I can see MM’s nose job.

Yes r239, *that* photo is iconic. It will be classed with Diana’s revenge dress photo.

Meghan's iconic photo is a still from her sexy barbecue shoot. Hamburger in one hand, finger-licking with the other. Take that, Kate.

nah this one is better. If the price is right

R276, if you are honestly asking... not really sure there is a right way. She is pretty cemented in her persona and plays perfect perfectly. I would say maybe be a little more spontaneity in public would be nice to see. I liked when her demeanor briefly slipped when her kid was acting up. It was normal and human. Even her biggest cheerleaders can’t say that there is much known about her beyond the public facade.

Pretty much any public figure would murder one of their own children to have Kate's favorability ratings.

We're not meant to know who Kate is beyond her public persona. She is not a celebrity. She is royalty. She supports the Crown.

Well there isn’t much competition as far as popularity. Harry, who def had more personality than William or Kate, reigned supreme until you know who. It would’ve been interesting how H&M would’ve done had they stayed.

How H&M would have done? They already 'did' and it ended badly.

It’s a system of government not a popularity or beauty contest.

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

[Quote]It’s a system of government not a popularity or beauty contest.

They are figureheads with no power.

R299 you’re American, aren’t you? “They” doesn’t matter - the one role that does is the Monarch, who reigns but doesn’t rule. The Monarch is the monarch through an accident of birth. Beauty and glamour have nothing to do with it.

But if you think that the Monarch has no power then you’re mistaken.

The BRF is like the English Premier League, providing us plebs plenty of entertainment values which people all over the world can enjoy without having to depend on Google Translate to understand. End of. The other r0yal families are just La Liga or no-name leagues.

R294 Nailed it. But no matter how many times you point out the connection between Kate's huge popularity ratings and how she handles her role, they just keep whingeing about how boring she is.

"Boring" Kate ran rings around Meghan Markle in the Princess game.

Meghan did her worst and as the title of this thread puts it, Kate not only survived but thrived.

Kate will end a revered, beloved figure like the Queen Mother.

Meghan's nor boring. But she became a bad joke within two years.

Kate isn't here to entertain DL. She's here to serve the monarchy and the country. She's already lasted longer than Diana, her marriage has succeeded where oh so entertaining Diana's didn't.

It's precisely Kate's unseizable persona, which is the alpha and omega of "privacy" - a space created psychically by cloaking the self whilst emanating warmth and approachability publicly - that is fascinating about Kate.

Only fools take this for "boring". Successfully managing this mental high wire act takes skill and shrewdness and enormous self-discipline.

Kate, in fact, is 100 times the actress Meghan is. Meghan is a player in the annual secondary school play compared to Kate.

Meghan wasn't boring because she was totally unsuited to the part. Kate was perfect for the part. A Home Counties girl who understood her country, its traditions, and what the role of the monarchy was and was not.

Actors get sent up for parts based on how suitable they are for a role.

They had to give Meghan the part because they had to. But after that Vanity Fair cover article, you can imagine the writer and director pacing the lobby in dread as the curtain went up on opening night.

And they were proved right.

Call it a failure of nontraditional casting.

But it was certainly wasn't boring. Still entertaining us, as Meghan, like Amber Heard, keeps laying the blame for how she played her part on everyone else.

Whilst Kate moves serenely on to collect her Oscar.

We know Kate is drama-free. Whether she is boring, no one here knows. Meghan is drenched in drama, and to listen to her hypocritically drone on about how we should live is most definitely boring…

R299 But a great deal of soft power.

The UK & all of Europe are beset having to watch what is happening with Russia right now on their back door.. Another crazed leader, ala Hitler, Stalin. Meet the new boss same as the old boss, crazy war making land grabber.

When in the Uk what always struck me was how everyone read, read, read. A good friend's brother was a roofer, didn't finish school & knew so much more than anyone I know about Tibetan & Zen Buddhism & could quote Thich Nhat Hanh for days, among all his other knowledge. Another friend, a lorry driver at Heathrow schooled me about our Civil War as well as theirs. When you went on the Underground there were people handing out free broadsheets & folded newspapers for you to read on your journey, Well, read. Even if not formally educated.

You think they want to change to a half dressed celebrity driven monarchy ,with the midst of a war looming again for them. Boring, well, dressed, no T&A flashing got them through other bad times. They have a sense of the past & the toll wars in Europe have had on them. In the US, its will Kimme marry again or not?

They must look at us & shake their heads.

Here is a distraction from all this silly "boring" talk.

[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.]

Who caught the garter?

Sorry R300 as an American I don't see it. The PM seems to be the power.

I always found it interesting that the PM the Queen got along with best was socialist Harold Wilson.

Re Ascot, Bea really is getting style advice from her husband.

Edo is a dreamboat in his Ascot attire.

Both York husbands are very cute and seem sweet. Those girls got pretty lucky; they could have done a lot worse.

If the royal family was "thriving" without Harry & Meghan, there wouldn't be a need for an article saying that the royal family is thriving without Harry & Meghan. I think this is what a lot of people don't understand, there is now a whole industry and money making opportunities all based in the cult of hating Harry & Meghan. If they would have stayed home for the jubilee, it would have been a snub to the queen. Because they showed up for the jubilee, now all the stories are about how they were unwanted and out of place and shunned. This entire hate H&M industry is set up so that no matter what choice they make it will be spun as the wrong one, which incites more hate and more clicks and more dollars.

Personally, I don't care who anyone loves or hates. But, I do have a problem with people being sold a bill of goods to hate someone just to put money in someone else's pocket. Because essentially that is what this all about, to stir up the rage machine so that a lot of shady people can make money.

As the old saying goes, the opposite of love is not hate, but indifference.

There's also a fake cult run by H&M's publicists Sunshine Sachs to keep them in the news when nothing they do is vaguely newsworthy. As The Spectator pointed out, when Meghan went for her photo op to Uvalde, various media outlets received photos of her to publish. Whether that was Netflix's doing or Markle's is up for grabs.

Bingo R31 but the old fraus need and thrive on hating someone.

Mike Tindall allegedly called Prince Harry a "ball end" to friends while discussing Harry and Meghan's absence form the Jubilee Concert. For those of you who don't know, ballend is slang in the UK a much more vulgar version of the gentler American "dick head."

R314, you actually made me think of an interesting point. The echo chamber that are Royal DL posters say Kate and William should be boring, stable and basically dress matronly for sake of the monarchy. That they don’t need to be very interesting domestically or have global appeal. Yet, the very same people are the ones that post all day, every day about all things Harry and Meghan. What would these people talk about everyday if not for them, Kate’s latest coat dress? I honestly don’t have a horse in this race, but it’s the height of hypocrisy when you really think about it. William and Kate don’t have to do much to keep the BRF talked about because the two idiots in CA give the public plenty of fodder.

You mean bellend r317. I don't know what your balls are like .

"I think this is what a lot of people don't understand, there is now a whole industry and money making opportunities all based in the cult of hating Harry & Meghan."

The "Real Housewives" franchise proved that there's a lot of money to be made in giving Haters what they want!

That's why we keep saying that after the divorce, it's the obvious next move for Meghan...

A divorce could be the best career move available to her!

R314 Pure sophistry. The article wasn't written by the Palace, it was an opinion piece in the media.

The Harkles made open efforts to damage the monarchy. The monarchy is one of the most famous institutions in the world. Ot is ludicrous to assume that the only proof of how well or not the Harkles succeeded is not mentioning thei issue at all.

The Palace, in fact, avoided doing exactly what you are criticising. It grey-rocked the Harkles. It shrugged its shoulders and got on with the job, despite numerous attempts by the Harkles to bait the Palace further onto open warfare.

The Platinum Jubilee was a world event. It demonstrated how little impact the Harkles had had except to make themselves look bad. The column in question simply acknowledged the success of the Palace's strategy.

Your argument is baseless. The article just summarises what the world saw: the monarchy moved on without the troublemakers. The handling of the troublemakers for the Platinum Jubilee was brilliant.

Game, set, and match to the monarchy.

Yeah, even if some journo wrote it up.

Seriously, whether the royal family is thriving or not has diddly-squat to do with Harry, it's the queen's advanced age and declining health that's their real problem!

Harry and Meg are just a couple of mosquitos, annoying as fuck but unable to do real harm, but every time the queen misses an engagement or is seen to struggle in public, AND every time Charles opens his idiot mouth, the foundations of the monarchy tremble!

There were two Newsweek columns by two opinion writers. One said the BRF was thriving without H&M and one said H&M were thriving without the BRF. Which column got more traction?

Take a good guess. Read the comments too. Harry won't like them.

he Duchess of Cambridge and the Royal Foundation Centre for Early Childhood host a roundtable at the Royal Institution, attended by representatives from the early years sector alongside the Health Secretary Sajid Javid, on 16th June 2022.

I like her pink suit.

^ The

R323, when the Queen goes, there will definitely be a huge change in sentiment. Charles is so blah and not really that likable. William would be better, though probably uninspiring, but he’s an improvement over Charles. By the time William comes in I bet there will be a lot of apathy towards the BRF and more calls for a republic.

[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.]

R328 the biggest Republicans were Labour. Let's talk about what they turned out to be. Labour struggling even in the North right now. I know many who no longer vote Labour. Yet the RF just keeps keeping on.

R330, but it’s been through the continuous presence of the Queen. Charles is dull and he shoots his mouth off when he shouldn’t. That will turn a lot of people off. RF will continue on, but things will change. No way will he be as beloved as his mother, who was on the throne since she was 25 and has charm, which Charles lacks.

Being American, I don’t really know, but it could be that the British regard the royal role of king/queen without the personality obsession that is so prevalent here. So whoever takes on the role gets the respect accorded the role and not necessarily the person…

Newsweek isn't Newsweek anymore. It's now a website where you pay to post any old shit. It's currently veering rightwing.

R332, I have to respectfully disagree. I think the role requires charisma, especially if your are dependent on your subjects for continued survival. The Queen is in a league of her own. Harry had a lot more personality than William and he topped the polls as far as popularity. Even Meghan, before all that drama went down, was mostly liked. Diana was crazy, but relatable. These have been the most popular Royals. Charles is older, boring and he offers polarizing opinions at times. I think his reign will be at best met with apathy, at worst lead to more calls for abolishment.

Not a Brit, but I can see the value of having a Head of State who does not get into the rough and tumble (to put it mildly) world of politics.

There is a lot to be said for having a unifying figurehead whose job (along with other working Royals) is to focus on the positive actions of citizens and organizations of a country without the cynical taint of politics which is increasingly driven by an "Us Against Them" dynamic.

I don't expect members of the RF to not have their own private opinions on issues. They are human after all, and probably exposed more to what must be some ugly facts about society. And, the sovereign, in particular, must walk the path laid out for whoever takes on that role.

For those eager to eliminate the Sovereign and their family, I would suggest that removing that steadying force would be far, far more disruptive than the eager ones imagine. What some of us outside the UK saw with the Jubilee was a strong unity of Brits focused not only on the Queen, but the heirs as well.

The vacuum left if that is removed will be an ugly thing to see.

Be careful what you wish for. You might just get it.

Charisma is a bonus, but not necessarily a prerequisite, for a reigning monarch. It could be argued that Elizabeth, while charming I am sure, is not particularly charismatic.

r334 Harry had an image created for him that he had a lot more personality as a cheeky chappie. Not quite the same thing. Harry unfiltered which is what we see now is entitled and as thick as pigshit.

And completely fucked himself over in the wife department. He knows it, too.

I think the posters who are saying the monarchy will fall apart when the queen dies don't really understand what we feel is important in the monarchy. The same as when they complain that Kate is a problem because she's boring. The royal family aren't "celebrities" and people want stable, sensible royal family members. Maybe it's hard to understand if you are not from the UK/Commonwealth and that is what is causing those observations.

10 years ago I would have said that Charles will be an unpopular monarch, but now he is a lot more popular. Taking care of the Queen's more arduous duties will also slowly ease him in for an accepted kingship as well. The only people who will have a problem with it are people who already have a problem with the Royals in general.

Meghan was never popular r334. Harry was but that changed drastically when he got together with her.

[quote]Actors get sent up for parts based on how suitable they are for a role. They had to give Meghan the part because they had to.

Meghan is the Beanie Feldstein of the monarchy!

Blind item that Scobie might Markled and is slowly getting freezed out. Speculation he might talk or turn agains the Sussexes in retaliation. It's Enty, so grain of salt but still not totally out of the realm of possibility.

The BRF are celebrities. They are a tourist attraction, they are the Disneyland of the UK. The UK looks the other way as they horde wealth and live on the citizen's dime, but they bring tourism and are keeping several industries afloat. As such, they keep the public engaged, but to do this they always need a storyline and each generation has a storyline. When I was a kid it was crazy Diana and trashy Fergie. Now it's Meghan's turn. I don't understand why people can't see the game for what it is. Harry and Meghan are still a thing because the British press and you all won't let them not be a thing.

When granny dies, all hell is going to break loose. Charles is going come in and clean house and turn shit upside down, you can already see hints of what he's up to. But he's not going to fuck up the business, but I think a lot of people who are comfortable and going to no longer be so comfortable.

Kate wore Diana's earrings at Ascot today.

r343 So nowt to do with the paid PR pieces Harry and Meghan have contracted Sunshine Sachs to put out for them so they appear in news stories several times a week?

Kate at Ascot today . . . Yes, the BRF certainly are thriving without the Harkles.

She looks divine, comfortable, regal, and simply gorgeous. Future Princess of Wales and Queen Consort up the wazuli.

William knew what he was doing when he decided in Kate's favour.

Wasn't Meghan's podcast supposed to be released this month? Maybe she is saving it for William's birthday, or perhaps Spotify have quietly trashed it.

R347 given the fact Meghan plagiarized a poem by e.e. cummings, I think we can assume much of what she would say on a podcast would have been plagiarized, probably from Brene Brown.

R347 Wasn't there a report or rumour or something going around a month or two ago that said Meghan's podcast was delayed because of plagiarism concerns raised by Spotify's legal department?

R348, I thought that was a visual that one of her fans created and the organization reposted it without checking.

R350 It was signed, "Meghan Markle". And it's not the first time that Meghan has been caught brazenly using other people's phrases and ideas and claiming them as her own. The 40x40 Initiative was Barack Obama's. "The Bench", although the author declined to admit it in order to avoid a legal fight, was taken directly from another children's book.

If it had been a fan's work, Meghan would have spoken up and asked her fans not to make statements and attribute them to her. She didn't.

No matter how many times she's caught, Meghan just keeps blithely assuming no one will notice when she lies. She's been lying for her entire adult life. I don't doubt she lied to Harry about her father and mother, she lied to the BRF about wanting to do the whole Royal Thing, then she and Harry lied about agreeing not to commercialise the title the Queen gave Harry, she lied on Oprah about half a dozen things at a minimum, and most pertinently of all, she liked to the High Court in England about her collusion with the authors of "Finding Freedom" and had to apologise to the Court - these "lapses in memory" were part of sworn written testimony.

Meghan has lied too many times to be given the benefit of the doubt here.

Meghan is a liar, Diana was famous for her "rewrites" of histoy when her marriage went south, and Harry has also inherited from his mother a penchant for lying to the public whilst screaming about misinformation in the media.

"I'm protecting the Queen, making sure she has the right kind of people around her."

Right, Harry. Next you'll be telling us you know what happened to the lost continent of Atlantis.

Neither of these two people can be believed at any time.

^*lied (not liked) to the HIgh Court in England

R351, Meghan lied about 17 different things in the Oprah interview. They're listed in the link.

Obviously, there have been further lies since then - the court case you mentioned, is another - very public - example.

R346, Vogue pointed out that Kate's dress at Ascot this week referred to Diana's 1988 white Ascot dress with black polka-dots.

R343, someone who gets it. If the claim is that they attract UK tourism, then they are in fact celebrities. Especially turning up at events wearing 2,400 dresses for media/public consumption. Of course there has to be some drama to keep them relevant, ribbon cutting at the local pantry isn’t going to keep them relevant. Royal posters don’t get that there’s a whole other world out there who don’t support the monarch. I was reading an article about W&K moving and the comments were shockingly negative and this was the DM. The H&M union is what has kept them talked about for the past 4 years, but how much can you write or comment the same things over and over? When the Queen goes and H&M news fades there is going to be a major turning of the tide. It’s naive to think otherwise.

When Charles succeeds to the throne there will be all the pageantry of the Queen's funeral and then the Coronation, and then William's installation as Prince of Wales (together with our new Princess of Wales). After that it will be all about Who is Really Running the Show? for a while, and by that time George will be interesting, at least I hope he will. If not, our girl will be ready for the limelight shortly after.

There will be a large gap of quietness, which I think the RF likes, but it doesn’t really sell. Unfortunately, I think George will be a very dull adolescent/adult. He seems like a serious child, who is already being groomed for his role. Which is good, but rather unexciting, much like Charles. The two younger ones will be more interesting to follow I’m sure. Whether most will still care by then is another story. Could go either way, depending on what happens in intervening years and the way media operates by then.

r355 Haa anybody claimed the only role of monarchy is to attract tourism? Just that one thing and it's no more complicated than that? Has anybody claimed that public support for the monarchy is mainly based on its members being dramatic and not boring?? This is all way too simplistic. It's a theory not backed up by strong evidence. The boring danish and Belgian royal families look set to have a greater chance of enduring than the scandal ridden Spanish monarchy. I don't think your theory stacks up to be honest.

R355 Actually, the BRF was doing exceptionally well before Meghan arrived. They need to seen and present, not talked about I the dire terms the Sussexes brought on. Camilla was gaining increased acceptance, the attractive young Cambridges became increasingly popular. The ship had righted after the dangerous period after Diana.

They were in the news constantly before Meghan arrived, and they'll be in the news afterward.

No outside seems to grasp the difference between imporyancecand notoriety. But the royals do.

You don't need scandal to be newsworthy.

You have the cart before the horse: it's the Sussexes who are scrambling desperately for relevance and news space.

It comes ready to hand to the BRF.

Of course they're celebrities. The anti-monarchy DM keeps underlining that point by showcasing their numerous lavish dwellings and listing the obscene prices of their clothes and jewellery and of course people respond by mentioning how they can't afford to feed their family or heat their home.

The only one who escapes that is Pss Anne, because no one is interested in the price of her nondescript outfits, some of which are 30 years old. Now there's a gal who really knows how to recycle her clothes!

r360 The DM is not anti monarchy

Disagree, R361...they're just shady as fuck about it. Like when they describe some obese cow's 'luscious curves', or poor Fergie as a 'goddess in emerald green', etc. they slant their reportage to generate the most anti-monarchy comments.

Camilla in British Vogue.

The DM had a really pointed caption under a photo of Prince Edward wearing a mask at Ascot. The mask had an illustration of a cruise ? ship (definitely not a military ship) and DM said it was a nod to his time in the Marines.

Yes, the DM lives off the monarchy, definitely not anti. That’s why some comments are surprising.

R362, DM is snarky on everyone. That’s how they generate comments. Why should public figures like Royals be exempt? Should they fall at their feet like the posters here do?

Bea wore polka dots today at Ascot.

r366 Smaller dots and a reversal of the colors would've been a better choice.

The Royals aren't doing themselves any favors by burying Meghan's bullying report. It's not a good look.

Au contraire, it's brilliant. It leaves the mud of suspicion clinging to Meghan without releasing it and attacking her openly and pouring more fuel on the feud fire.

And the Palace can hold release of the report as weapon should the Suxxesxes try more attacks.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Palace made a deal with the two re holding back the report as long as the Sussexes move on the way the Palace is clearly moving on.

The message is: this is over.

And, of course, there is nothing stopping Bower from revealing in his book what people inside told him.

In other words, the Palace knows it doesn't have to lift a finger, and whatever gets leaked by others is not their responsibility. They're off the hook.

It's a brilliant tactic.

Honestly the Meghan/Harry talk is too much already. The Jubilee should’ve been the end of a lot of it. The DM is endless with their Royal Family coverage overall and much of it tied to H/M. It’s all starting to get a bit obsessive. It’s time for everyone to move on.

As I've said before, there is an entire industry around hating Harry and Meghan. As long as people are getting paid, it's never going to stop, r370.

As long as there are jealous bitter old British cunts invading DL Harry and Meghan will never go away on this board. The only way this will stop is if Muriel starts banishing.

The Sussexes, most likely Meghan will do something ridiculous and that will spawn another bunch of threads. Meghan is addicted to media attention so this will go on for awhile.

As Muriel will never banish Meghan, these threads will never disappear.

Yes,dear, those headlines Meghan keeps deliberately generating are not why there are threads about her here.

It's really us jealous old cunts. Those giant headlines in Uvalde and the booing at St Paul's . . . Why, those have nothing to do with it!

I mean, this jealous old cunt was never interested in polo. But I open the paper and there are Harry and his horse at the top of the page, and Meghan trying to look like Audrey Hepburn (again) . . .

In the face of these headlines, what's a jealous old cunt supposed to do?!

Meghan & Harry will wither without attention. That is their ultimate drug. They will continue to generate clicks even if its negative ones. The racissst stuff has peaked. BLM graft has killed its own goose. She can say how mean everyone is to her. Then the steady drip, drip of her nasty secrets of all kinds will leak & she will be even more damaged. Lawsuits again? More SS PR & bots? Costa da $$$$. Doesn't happen for free.

Unless Soros is funding them, I can't see them able to go on any major tirades that cost big money. Russian rich guys aren't splashing out on anyone while things are so volatile & they are under the microscope. Daddy Charles isn't going to fund their nonsense, nor is the Queen. So, they better hope a Saudi or old George might make them a loan. It it's based on the condition of Harry's hole, they may have a shot. Meghan..umm not so much.

[quote] Meghan & Harry will wither without attention. That is their ultimate drug.

Honestly I think that's much more Megan's thing than Harry's. He led a pretty quiet life before he met her. She's the one who has consistently wanted to be a major influencer and to cultivate an Oprah / Angelina Jolie / Princess Diana image as Someone Who Cares and Is Beloved.

What Harry really wanted--which Megan more than enabled--was to lash out against his family and let them know how angry he was at growing up without his mother and in William's shadow. Now he's done that, so I'm not sure what he wants now.

I really see the two of them at a big turning point right now. Megan must finally realize she's never going to be Oprah or Princess Diana, and Harry must at some level miss his father and his brother. The Platinum Jubilee showed them how angry the rest of the family (except for their York cousins) are with them, and how unwilling the family members are to reward them any longer for continued bad behavior.

^Then why did Harry also have to stick his mug in the window for the money shot with Meghan at the Balcony window? He loves attention, as long as its ass licking. I also think he relies on her for what will fly in the US esp. California. He is an immigrant to U.S. shores. He doesn't know US culture. Of course, she has been totally wrong about how things would work out.. She made the big grift then blew it. Now it's eroding like beach sand.

R369 - I think your post is interesting but I don't know if I agree.

TheRoyalFamilyLied is now trending on Twitter (this social media forum is my least favorite but I happened to notice it when I checked). The Sussex Squaddie people are alleging that the Royal Family aren't releasing the report because they couldn't find any bullying by Meghan.

I happen to take the side of the victims - If it was me, I certainly wouldn't be happy if her horrible treatment of me was swept all under the rug. I would want it out in the open.

So what they've done by NOT releasing is ... a barrage of abuse, suspicion and anger. Both sides now want the report released. They can't seem to win any points whatever they do.

I think the facts will come out.

Harry and Meghan have gotten their fingers burnt playing with the Big Girls. They have to regroup, and it may be that they'll lay off their attention-seeking via the BRF. But they'll never lay off completely, because, firstly, they haven't changed a bit. They're still who they always were, and they have to earn money. Secondly, they need money, lots of it. They won't get it retiring into dignified private life.

So, whether it's Harry falling off his horse, or Meghan showing up in a Hispanic community with a mysterious spray tan making her several shades darker than she was a few days earlier on the tony polo field, they will continue to make headlines.

Old bitter cunt Pet up there really wants you to believe that without us bitter old British cunts, why, no one on DL would be playing the slightest attention to the Sussex antics!

^Right! People will get fed up & leak what she did. The RF won't have to sully their hands with this. It will a slow constant drip of poison. It will come appropriately from the victims, not from the RF trying to vilify her.

Trending on Twitter needs the worst kind of death. Beyond grease fires.

I wonder if there's any truth to the rumor that Harry is broke? Obviously none of their moneymaking ventures are panning out the way they hoped, but could they have already run through Harry's trust fund? And BTW does Harry control his own trust fund, or does he have to get permission from trustees to withdraw funds?

They really do seem to be dumb enough to spend everything they have, and think that force Charles to open his wallet.

Do any of you ever base any of your posts on anything real and tangible? Jesus Christ.

R378 - Fair enough.

The truth is, no matter what the Palace does, the Squad will scream UNFAIR! If they release the report and it DOES support the story that HR ignored staff complaints with a basis in reality, it smears Meghan. If the Palace don't release the report, the Squad screams that it's because the investigation didn't find that Meghan bullied anyone, and the withholding of the report smears Meghan.

The Squad won't accept that the LEAST likely scenario is that all those staffers were lying wimps whose whingeing HR was perfectly right to ignore, and that Jason Knauf's published email of concern to HR was an assassination attempt.

The one outcome the Squad insists on believing is the least likely one, especially given Knauf's email as part of a court record, and the ongoing turnover in staff at Archewell. Fuck, they lost a prize like Catherine Saint Laurent in less than a year - it's been a revolving door.

The most likely scenario is that the report shows that the Palace didn't stand up for its staff because Meghan was now family/royal and they didn't want to upset the volatile nutcase that Harry is, which means that Meghan, indeed, made her staff's lives miserable.

The Squad, with its collective IQ of 70, doesn't seem to understand what the significance of Knauf's email, and that revolving door at their "foundation" really say: the Palace has done Meghan a favour.

But it can always change its mind and mislay the report so that, for example, it hits the desk of Valentine Low, of the TIMES (UK), who broke the bullying story, has stood by it, and whose paper also stood by it and refused to withdraw it. Low is a respected journalist for the nation's paper of record. As the TIMES asserted with the Lilibet name and Fiji Food Market fiasco stories, it triple checks all its royal material.

The Squad should be laying flowers at the gates of BP for doing Meghan a favour - because, in this instance, it's done itself a favour as well.

None of those people can think their way out of a paper bag. They probably worship at the Flat Earth Church.

What Knauf Knew.

Someone inform R383 that "real and tangible" on a gossip site are counter-inutitive.

That said - Wasn't the Oprah interview "real"? Weren't the lies told therein and shortly afterward exposed "real"? Was Jason Knauf's email of concern to HR about the conditions in Meghan's office for staffers "real"? Is the revolving door of staffers at Archewell "real"?

Wasn't Meghan's "lapse of memory" about the email exchanges that showed she and Harry indeed colluded with the authors of "Finding Freedom", for which she had to apologise to the Court, real?

I mean, it's not as if there isn't a good deal of actual fire, in addition to the smoke, here.

One additional issue in the bullying report is that the Queen paid for it personally; in fact, she owns it, so she is not obligated in any way to do anything with it that doesn't suit her views.

The other issue is that although the victims may be upset that the vindication of their complaints isn't being published, it is also true that if their names are discovered, they would come in for persecution not just by Meghan, but by her minions (who lately picked up the story of the elephant who crushed a woman to death and then stampeded her funeral and crushed what was left of her - Meghan's wonderful fans stated online that this is what should happen to Kate).

The fact is, the victims can leak bits and pieces of their story to outside channels (such as Valentine Low or Tom Bower) either directly or through third parties.

If you release a report like this, and people come in for vicious persecution, you make it difficult for employees ever again to participate in such an investigation with confidence in its confidentiality.

Either way, the truth of what the report found will, inevitably, eventually find its way into the public sphere.

But the report was always announced as strictly internal, it was paid for by the Queen, and the fact that HR policies and procedures are going to be "changed" alone suggests that the report was unfavourable both to the Palace and to Meghan.

In Knauf's testimony about the email he sent HR about the way one particular staffer was being treated, Knauf relayed that Harry had begged him not to pursue the bullying investigation.

These are the little edges that are sticking out that the "Squad" - people who hope an elephant will crush the mother of three young children in honour of their idol - pretends aren't there.

The Palace is right not to let the report out, and the overwhelming odds are, that Meghan is the beneficiary of that decision, even if it means that suspicion will always cling to her on this.

But suspicion is better than confirmation.

r384 I think I would love to give you a big hot kiss! That post is brilliant! I dont think although I may be wrong that her lapdog Omid is demanding the report be released ,,why? Because in truth the reality is the report would damage her reputation severely.

This is a veiled threat to the Harkles and they know it. If they keep up their shit-stirring, running to Oprah to whine, release a book full of lies, BP will release the report.

Were the bullied employees given a generous settlement in return for signing an NDA?

I can’t imagine an Employee NDA would be enforceable if it prevented someone from reporting abuse. If, for example, Meghan Markle called someone a cunty fag, could they be sued for telling the Daily Mail what happened?

It will be again the slow dripping of venom. It won't be an explosion with names of staff. The Sussex squad has threatened journalists & their families. They have more of a safety net than a staff at the palace. But it will get leaked when most judicious.

The Jubly complete with the future King turning his head away from Harry & Meghan & then blowing a kiss to Kate. Master shade. The mask got lifted & they were shown as the feckless, clueless children they are, so, they huffed off. This made it even more obvious that they have no clue as to how to navigate this. Anyone with any desire to ascend will be avoiding them like they are smelly, pissy bums on the street. No one wants that stank on them. Nacho must be desperate to have to use Harry. Now having to try to shill his private plane company.

"The Jubly"?

Oh, [italic]dear.[/italic]

If Harry and Meghan are people you envy, then you have a few screws loose. The fun is in watching them fail at every turn. Her awful style is fun to laugh at too. The memes just write themselves.

It's an interesting point, does reporting abuse constitute violating a signed NDA? Does someone who signs an NDA regarding their employment relinquish their basic rights?

r394: No.

r392, I know. jubly, jubbly and bloody platty jubes need to die right now.

The comments here are really off base. I don’t think Meghan has awful style, I liked the casual wear she dressed in before Harry and she’s now returning to that. She is also not fat or square shaped.

She definitely is square shaped. I agree, she isn’t fat.

Her clothing choices have largely been a disaster. Either too tight or too big on her, and the styles generally are unflattering to her figure. She looked best when Suits was dressing her in pencil skirts, or when she wore fitted, slim pants with a jacket.

R398 her worst features are her chicken legs and lack of any ass.

Physical features really can't be changed; behavior and character can be changed with effort. Criticism of the former is childish. Criticism of the latter can be justified.

I wasn’t criticizing her physical features, merely pointing to reality.

MM could choose to dress for her body type and size. If she doesn’t care, people will continue to comment.

Hi Meghan @ R397

No one, absolutely no one on God's green earth has a perfect body. Clothes, makeup, hair styling with great advice & help minimize issues & highlight strengths. See Hollywood stars of yesteryear & some models. Meghan has in the past while on suits looked damn good. Now ? No & no.

She could avail herself of expert help. She's Hollywood Industry born & bred. She was in Industry on the small screen, FFS. But obviously won't. allow any real help. No faults for her for not having a perfect body or face. She is routinely called out for having the ego to think she knows it all & then gets upset when it is shown in photos that she looks like a frig with weaves that are so bad she look like she bought them Dollar General...

She's a shit person who treats others like garbage. NOTHING is off limits. She reaps what she has sown. Square shaped flat assed wheelchair legs and all. Let's not even get started on that fug face or weave.

Omg, where is this from?

Surely, it's a parody.

Er, meanwhile, back on topic, William turns 40 today.

Riding high in the polls, second only to the Queen, he's as good a bet for thriving as the monarchy could possibly hope for.

His choice of wife (coming 3rd in the polls behind her husband and the Queen) is turning out to have been inspired.

The event is low-key for today, and according to the media, the Cambridges will hold a joint Turning Forty" celebration this summer at Windsor Castle, as Kate's 40th celebrations in January were cancelled due to COVID.

You want to speak of the monarchy thriving?

All you need to do is look at the stark contrast between the heir and his hot mess of a brother.

And between their wives

Kate is the rock undergirding William's increasung strength publicly and privately. If the monarchy survives Charles's probable lacklustre reign, it will be in large part down to William's wisdom in choosing Kate.

Meghan is the siren call that led Harry onto the rocks of an existence little better than that of his great-great Uncle, the Duke of Windsor.

Small wonder Charles blew a kiss toward Kate in St Paul's at the Thanksgiving Service for the Platinum Jubilee.

Royals at work - Charles and Camilla will arrive in Kigali today for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting and Edward and Sophie are in Cyprus.

I want to celebrate William's 40th by running my tongue under his foreskin!

The Queen received a cross from the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Too bad HM didn't tell His Nibs to keep his cake-hole shut more often.

"Thanks for this deeply meaningful gift, and, oh, by the way, next time you collude with my idiot son in uttering shallow, one-sided views of government policy that grandly disregards the many nuances to this problem JUST as Mr and Mrs Meddler head off to Rwanda on a state visit, We are going to add another chapter to Murder in the Cathedral".

She's looking much better in those photos taken today than she did at the Garter ceremony last week.

R411 - yes, the Queen stood without a cane today which is good.

In the background of the first picture--that little stand of the guard holding a plate! :D

Charles and Camilla are in Rwanda. Today they laid a wreath at the Kigali Genocide Memorial.

William and Kate were at Waterloo Station unveiling the National Windrush Monument.

I find it amusing that a bunch of fat old cunts are criticizing anyone else's body.

This is just idle gossip, but there is a rumour going around SM today that Spotify is set to announce it's parting ways with the Sussexes in the coming days. The only reason why I think there might be something to this is that Meghan's podcast was supposed to debut in the summer with the rumour being in late June, but we are now in late June and crickets. Even if they podcast were debuting in July, there would be promotion by now. This is on top of the rumour that came out the launch was being delayed because Spotify was not happy with the podcast as there were legal concerns over possibly plagiarism.

CDAN posted that same rumor a few days ago, r417.

R417 I've seen that rumour, along with a few others on the same topic. One of the sources is Friends of Theresa Longo, a site that has a so-so track record in "predictions". CDAN also has a BI up suggesting the same with Netflix. Sometimes I think they all just read each other's guesses and "adapt" them and regurgitate them.

You know, as in "adapted from the novel by . . ."

It's not a bad guess, but . . . no one in the entertainment industry does particularly well out of a total under the bus approach. It's bad business.

All right, R417 beat me to it in just seconds re the CDAN blind.

R418

R417, R418 & R419 I think there is something to it. Omid Scobie posted this article on Friday. It's a re-edit of an article he posted months ago. Seems like they are setting the groundwork for a "we weren't fired, we quit" approach.

^Fuck, I mean R418 beat me to it in seconds re the CDAN BI.

R419 R420

The lack of promotion surrounding the podcast says to me either Spotify has zero faith in and will just launch it quietly OR it's been shelved.

R421 The Harkles and Sunshine Sachs and Omid Scobie have to spend more time staying in front of bad PR and adjusting "spin" than in reporting actual substantial news about the feckless two.

A week or two ago a British organization for women's rights had to take down a quote Meghan had given them for its web site. It turned out to have been copied nearly word for word from American poet e e cummings.

R425 - Yes, saw that, too. They reposted the poem in its entirely with e.e. cummings below and apologised, and then had to make their Instagram private. Initially it appeared, with only two words changed, and the attribution to Meghan Markle.

It is not the first time she's been caught "adapting" something said by others for self-attribution.

Meghan is the poster illustration of the story about the thief who's not sorry he stole, only that he got caught and is going to gaol.

She and Harry regret nothing, are ashamed of nothing, and admit internally no shred of guilt or self-questioning.

The blame for why things didn't go their way is strictly externalised. And this is the heart of the narc personality, and it is why it is expedient to the continued thriving of the monarchy that the Sussexes be kept far, far away.

Megxit may have been difficult but, frankly, in hindsight, the Sussexes were morphing into a boil on the arse of the Windsors that had to be lanced, cauterised, and allowed to heal.

The treatment may have been painful, but as long as the Windsors keep up the prophylactic separation, eventually the body will be in permanent remission.

Thrive away.

Spotify and Netflix and Penguin Random House are all getting screwed without lube by these two. Whatever these media honchos paid them is money lost. They’ll never recoup that money.

Not that I believe they were paid hundreds of millions, but whatever it was…

There's a rumor that the Spotify deal is kaput and will be announced shortly.

R425, not really.

[quote]It wasn’t clear from the organization’s apology how the mistake occurred — whether someone running the organization’s social media found the quote and wrongly gave credit to Meghan, or whether she or someone on her behalf had taken credit at some point.

[quote]The quote doesn’t show up in any initial online search of stories about Meghan’s writings or public statements. The Women’s Organization didn’t immediately respond to an email requesting comment. People have noted that the quote attributed to Meghan is slightly different than Cummings’ quote, switching the words “night and day.”

R429 - See discussion above.

At any rate, I think the bigger story is the one developing around Harry's intention to use the footage a former IG participant got with a body camera leant by Netflix, to record atrocities by Russia in Mariupol, Ukraine.

Quite a bit of consternation (which may turn out to be unnecessary) is stirring that Harry and Netflix may try to use the footage, because of the woman's participation in IG, to somehow incorporate the footage into the "Heart of Invictus" documentary Harry is allegedly "producing" for Netflix. In other words, use horrifying footage to lend gravitas to a work that, rumour has it, is also so unlikely to bring in huge viewing numbers for Netflix that they are desperate.

Below is a link to the basic story. There are other stories that actually state that the footage was recorded specifically for Harry, but I do not think that is the case, I think the body camera was provided by Netflix.

At any rate, attempts to attach footage such as this to a documentary of Harry's pet project would, I think, bring howls of condemnation.

Waiting with interest on this story and also wondering when the Harry v. ANL judgement will be rendered, as well as where his case against the Home Office is.

I think the Mariupol Body Camera Footage for Harry and Netflix story will eclipse most others if it gains traction.

"I find it amusing that a bunch of fat old cunts are criticizing anyone else's body."

I will never criticize someone else's body, just whether or not they dress to flatter the body they have.

Seriously, that's why my friends will let me give them fashion advice, I limit my comments to whether or not an outfit is flattering.

Eugenie and Jack's son August at the Jubilee. He resembles Eugenie when she was a toddler.

A new official portrait of William and Kate has been released.

r434 A fantastic picture

Edo and Bea appear at a National Portrait Gallery Gala this evening. She looks ten times better than I've ever seen her, and this is another pointed appearance at a quasi-royal event supporting a major organisation with a royal patron (Kate).

Anyone still doubt that Bea and Edo are being given a shot at replaced the Harkles, and backing up the Wessexes?

@SurvivingAngel - We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. It's disappointing, and pedestrian in the way royal portraits and statues so often are.

Her dress is awful. Sorry, SA, I'm Team Cambridge, but the eyes do not lie.

She has closets full of more attractive dresses than this.

I like the painting. Don’t like the dress except for the color. William looks very debonair. Having both of them looking off to the side is intriguing, like they are contemplating the future coming at them.

[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.]

She’s incapable of not gurning and waving frantically - possibly at nobody - when in public.

Mad or drunk? Both, more likely.

R436 - Good for Bea.

I have this picture in my head of her husband, after they married, opening Bea's closets and throwing out most of her clothes and seeing that she has a much better wardrobe.

Whatever the reason, Bea's been looking much, much better since her marriage.

I like the new Cambridge portrait, but what the artist did with Kate's bust is a little too much. Did it need to be highlighted so prominently?

I like Kate and i normally like her clothing choices, but that green dress is really ugly.

William’s pose is off/off putting. Kate’s lips are too full…

I'm sorry, but the dress looks like it was made out of Miz Ellen's poteers.

Edo was most definitely a catch for Bea. Such cheeky chappie confidence for photographers too, as seen in link at r439. When did Fergie buy her chipmunk face: too disturbing after close examination of pretty Edo.

Bea has definitely had some kind of work done, either to her face or to her teeth, but she now looks different and better. She's no longer overweight and is dressed very well. Somebody has taken her in hand.

“Better”, R447? You’re starting from a very low bar.

The dress was painted beautifully. Love the color. Bea looks magnificent.

I couldn't understand why Edo would ditch the beautiful, accomplished mother of his child and hitch his wagon to the dull, plain Bea and her disreputable family, but it is increasingly clear that he saw a vacancy created by the Sussexes' departure and the ageing out of the older BRF members. He is ready to go - he fits in well already; looks and behaviour at royal events are impeccable.

Beautiful?? She's OK but nothing to get excited about. She got pregnant when they were not planning to stay together. It was an accident, they were never really together as a "family" and were already broken up when he started seeing Bea.

I like that new Cambridges painting.

Please note the pillars in the background. In paintings, pillars are a symbol of power.

The Cambridges play to win.

R453 True as far as it goes, but the fact is that absent the abolishment of the monarchy, the Cambridges were always going to win. The long game here was always going to them. The issue for the Cambridges was how to play that game to maximum public popularity.

The long game was always going to Charles, as well, but he hasn't played it well. Or, let us put it this way, a couple of huge mistakes, beginning with his choice of a first wife, overshadowed what might otherwise have been a far more well-received ascension to the throne. But that won't stop him from finally taking his place upon it.

The Cambridges also had a few good cards fall their way, though: one was the savvy approach the Queen took, refusing to allow Charles and William to be baited into a back and forth public feud with the Sussexes, thus allowing H&M plenty of rope with which to hang themselves; another was acquiring high quality advisors whose advice the Cambridges actually took, a break with royal tradition of ignoring advice from the people they hire to advise them; and, another was timing: the pandemic stopped the Sussex from striking whilst the iron was hot, so to speak; and, the timing of the Oprah interview, as Philip was dying, was catastrophic. Another good card was ANL appealing the privacy judgement in the High Court - although ANL lost the appeal, the appeal process revealed that Meghan had lied to the court, and that she and Harry had lied to the public about their collusion with the authors of "Finding Freedom".

So, the Cambridge's very good pole position right now is somewhat good luck, and somewhat wise decisions.

And the Sussex's bad position is somewhat bad luck, and somewhat really bad decisions.

Good news - the Queen is horse riding again.

R454 “Cambridges’” and “Sussexes’”.

Will Smeg call a press conference to let us know her opinion on SCOTUS decision?

Snacks for every unwanted foetus!

Last day of Charles and Camilla's visit to Rwanda.

They look perfectly regal. I will enjoy their reign, although I expect it won't be a cakewalk for them.

William handed out CBE to the legendary Bond film producers today, Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson.

When the two left, they told the enquring journos outside that yes, they were still on the hunt for the next Bond, and how too bad it was that William wasn't available, as he'd be perfect.

Take that, Harry.

Regarding the Cambridge painting, I don’t like the fact that Kate was wearing the most typical, recognizable designs of both the dress designer and shoe designer. You really want to be immortalized wearing a The Vampire’s Wife dress and those instagrammed-to-high-hell Manolo Blahnik shoes like a common “influencer?” There should have been some mystique in her outfit. To be frank, it’s a rather gauche style choice.

[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 agree that the green dress is wrong for an official portrait, it's too on trend.

Wear something classic for your official portrait, not something that will make future generations say "OMG, the awful fashions of the 2020s! Remember those awful necklines?".

"William handed out CBE to the legendary Bond film producers today, Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson."

Has the queen been delegating the job of handing out honors for years, or is it just this year?

I'm absolutely sure someone here will know!

For several years now, r465.

Imagine if William decided for a lark to play the 007 in the next bond film! I agree, he is one suave dude and I think would carry it off perfectly. I find him sexy. He should do one film, and one only, so that he could get back to his Royal duties again. And; imagine how the Harkles would react, bwahahahahahahahahahaha !!!!

Hey, the Queen herself has been a Bond Girl, why the hell not!

He would make a great Bond, or Q.

Friar Tuck couldn't be Bond. He would demand that ridiculous wife of his be in the movie.

They would insist Meg be a Bond girl because she's just so damned hot.

Looks like Megs forced Delfina (Nacho's wife) to post a juvenile PSA on how awesome Meg is on her social media. Delfina calls Meg a genius for coming up with "pwife" and writes about how she wishes people would see M as she does.

I hope Delfina got a basket of snacks for this.

Not at all r454. I completely disagree. The Cambridges got on the right track from the start, no "good luck" needed. They put in the work. The other two were never going to make an impact here in the states. They are basic, without charisma or talent, and despite the desperate PR, the interest was never there. Nothing to do with "bad luck" they've always been unlikable. Unlikable doesn't sell.

“Pwife”, I know. It’s not even clever. This is after the woman posted that unflattering broadside photo.

Delfina who posted the photo of The Fridge AND her son? Delfina who posted a photo of polo ponies, calling them the Real Stars after Meghan’s stunt? That Delfina?

I’ll bet you a million dollars I don’t have that Meghan threatened to sue her for posting a photo of Archie without her consent. That’s why she’s being nice now. We’ll never see D near Harry again.

The American YouGov did a poll about 3rd week in May in Anerica: less than half of Americans had a positive view of Meghan, about 45%.

The irony is, if she'd stayed happily in her lane and proved that you didn't have to be a nice whiteEnglisg girl to succeed in the royalty sphere, Americans would be idolising her now.

Everything they did was a miscalculation.

That Oprah interview was the mother of all mistakes.

Americans no more than Brits liked what they saw, not least because Americans are quite fond of the Queen.

Note that the Sussexes have not uttered one word personally on the bullying report, despite calls by her delusional cult followers that she should demand its publication so she can "clear her name".

r476 A big mistake and miscalculation by Oprah too in my opinion.

Fergie is fucking uglier than ever.

If this is true, dude needs help

Ghost Diana sure is handing out bad advice.

doobie, doobie, doooo

Does he use a Ouija board? Or just that tapping, arms crossed, eyes closed we saw on the Oprah Apple MI thingie?

Harry with the Friar Tuck Do is a few bricks short of a load, isn't he?

There’s always some “royal expert” saying some nonsense thing. I can’t stand those two, but the “royal experts” are just stupid clickbait generators.

Right now, those two are generating one story per day. Today/yesterday was Delfina’s surprising about-face. Although I think her “ I wish everyone new [sic] you the way you are” was subtle shade.

Someone elsewhere said it might be that Delfina wants to be on the polo wives show for Netflix, and that would certainly be an explanation. Delfina got rid of all the passive-aggressive posts on her IG and added one of “Pretty Woman” Meg on the tractor stage. She’s playing nice all of a sudden. Maybe Meghan promised to bring them in on a pitch to Netflix.

Delphina will get Markled! And get no sympathy.

There’s a polo wives show on Netflix? Or is it wishful thinking.

Oh ..Please Yes, Polo Wives. Please let it be a spin off from the Trashy, Chavy, English Series, Footballers Wives. Sooo Funny. Megs annoying voice would be so perfect. Around the house hubby & I often do, "Ets Youar Baybee, Jaysen" in that high pitched falsetto.

[quote]Ghost Diana sure is handing out bad advice.

That's how he knows it's really her.

Yikes

R485, there isn’t a Polo Wives show on Netflix… yet.

I’m just speculating. They don’t have much left to offer, this might be their Hail Mary.

Delfina praises Meghan “genius” for “pwives” (I guess that’s a moniker for P(olo) wives. Stupid.

And if they built their nonscripted show around polo, they wouldn’t have to divulge too much of their own dirt. It can be about the toils and troubles of building a team and how everyone is envious of their exclusive million-dollar hobby. Delfina and Nacho can promote their products and influencer lifestyle (Delfina is a shameless mercher).

THAT’s why Nacho was helping them hoist a trophy they didn’t win. And that’s why Delfina changed the tune from passive-aggressive IG posts to syrupy-sweet praise. She wants to be on Meghan’s reality show.

However, I’m not sure the club will allow much filming on premises.

Netflix needs its corporate head examined if spend a penny on a Polo Series. Unless it is Delphina & Megs having an octagon cat fight. Or some quasi porn of Harry munching on Nacho. Polo has about as much appeal in the US as turtle racing.

When Netflix dumps them, some cable network will pick up the idea, you bet. The only sticking point will be who gets control, Megs or the network. If they need the money, the network will get final say.

Is anyone interested in polo wives? The majority of the population can relate to football and football players, but polo?

So MM's lofty ambitions of being the next Angelina have degenerated into being a polo wife on a reality show? HSN would be more dignified..at least it's an honest living.

If Meghan has ANY say it will tank after the first episode. Without hair pulling & scratching by the gals & homo tinged glances & brushes by the lads FAIL, FAIL, FAIL. See Orca & Friar Harry's Apple series, Better Up, The Bench.

It would have to be as messy as the Real Housewives franchise. Certainly, these two women are the right personality type: attention-seeking, chaos-creating, self-promoting.

Polo is NOT of general interest, but it would just be a pretext, anyway. People might want to see more champagne wishes and caviar dreams.

I could see the pitch being successful, but the execution failing.

Interesting to ponder.

Is pwives pronounced "pee-wives?"

That would be brilliant.

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

The Queen is only doing now what she wants to do. Fuck the rest.

^She's probably afraid to die after Charles got caught yet again displaying what terrible judgement he has.

"After I am gone, the boy will ruin himself in twelve months. I pray nothing will come between Bertie and Lilibet and the Throne." George V, shortly before his death early in 1936, on his heir, Prince Edward.

The rest, as they say, is history. Prince Edward abdicated to marry Mrs Simpson 11 months later, and Bertie became King George VI and Lilibet the Heir Presumptive.

I can just hear the Queen muttering in her sleep, "After I am gone, the boy will ruin himself in 12 months. I pray nothing comes between William and George and the Throne."

R498 The Charles story is barely getting any traction in the UK. It's absolutely bad optics but not illegal and the money was accounted for by his charities. Frankly, better that blood money go to helping people than lining some murderer's pocket. Interestingly, a lot of people think it was leaked by someone in government after Charles called out Boris' racist Rwanda deportation policies.

R499 I agree. Outside of the media, no one cares about this. I'm not a Charles fan nor a royalist but this is clearly an attempt to smear him after he made it clear he hates Boris in private conversations. Rupert Murdoch, who owns the Times, hates the monarchy and Charles in particular and is a big Boris and Trump cock sucker. They probably hoped the story would damage Charles because most people don't understand how large charitable organizations actually work.

These kind of shady dealing with foreign leaders happen all the fucking time. Often times this money is funnelled to foundations in which important political figures are deeply involved in and the money goes mysteriously unaccounted for. At least Charles had this money documented and we know that it went to the Princes Trust and one of his Charities in Scotland.

The Charity Commission is aware of the claims involving Prince Charles, and will “review the information” to decide whether to take any further action. However, they did state that large cash donations are fully legal so long as they are properly documented which appears to be the case with Prince Charles.

Reading between the lines, nothing illegal happened and they aren't going to investigate.

r499 Or leaked by Prince Harry like the other donation story months ago was based on his emails.

R502 I was also thinking that maybe Harry leaked it.

Harry is too stupid and/or uninterested about such things to be the leaker.

[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.]

That Mandana goes everywhere with them, doesn’t she? I’d assume it’s for business.

And, what, are paps just hanging around Oprah’s house, waiting to see who her latest visitors might be?

Neither Oprah nor Gayle have given these two the time of day in forever.

Pics were taken by BackGrid - i.e., hired by Meghan. "Spotted on their way" and "turning into" - Any pics of them actually making it up Oprah's drive? "Sources told DailyMail.com the trio spent an hour at the palatial estate" - You mean Meghan told the DM?

I would not put it past these two freaks to hire paps to take pictures turning into Oprah's estate to give the appearance they still have some sort of relationship with her. They probably made a u-turn once the photos were taken. The question is, why? Just to make headlines? A subtle threat to the royals they'll do another tell all?

Oprah has no one but herself to blame for this sort of parasitic behavior but it must be creepy as hell having these two repeatedly use your name and remind people of your location.

Also, Meghan looks like she just vaped weed. Glassy eyes, even from a distance.

What the fuck is a Delfina and why does anyone care about it or these other two people the fat fraus are constantly obsessing about? This is so bizarre. These fat cunts can't actually believe all this manufactured drama about these two, can they?

Look, it is true that this is an attempted smear job on Charles. The money was legally and fully documented. No one, ANYWHERE is suggesting he took the money for himself.

But what they ARE trying to do is make it LOOK as if that COULD have been the case because it looks so fucking STUPID to be carrying around bags of cash like that. It LOOKS like there's something to hide.

And whilst understanding that Charles didn't want to 1) offend a donor who can buy and sell the entire BRF 100 times over, and 2) lose the donation to his charity - Charles should have known better and politely requested a cheque.

The fact is, there isn't any story here at all, except the story of Charles having really bad judgement, which this story does nicely, piggy-backing as it does onto the recent story of him leaking an opinion about a government policy. It doesn't matter whether you personally agree or don't with the Rwanda policy.

The fact is, it is a government policy and Charles' constitutional boundaries are extremely clear.

Needless to say, not a thing will be found legally or financially amiss here, the charities oversight folk will have to waste good time assuring people that nothing was financially or legally amiss, but . . .

The aura of fecklessness. bad judgement, and toadying to men much richer than he will ever be that clings to Charles will have have been reinforced.

And I'm not at all sure that that aura isn't justified.

He has got to accept that adding political influence to his already rather large package of birth privilege is just not on.

And he has to stop stumbling into absurd situations that make him look like a bumbling fool.

I am not holding my breath.

R505 they have bodyguards following them in a car like they think they're Presidents? FFS, they're pathetic. Nobody gives a shit about them.

According to the story, the Sussex and Winfrey homes are five minutes apart.

But Harry the great travel environmentalist drives five minutes in a huge gas guzzler followed by another gas guzzler filled with armed security guards.

They stay an hour? Ah, they must be working out details of another interview. What else?

This is another mystery announcement of Something, because otherwise Backgrid, Meghan's longtime go-to paps when she wants to be papped wouldn't have been on hand.

It is true that Oprah has more or less ignored the Harkles since The Interview.

But, hey, $7 million is $7 million (that's what Oprah was paid for the first interview).

You need a large staff and lots of water to take care of 100 acres.

You heard it here first: this is to warn the BRF that another interview is in the works and the Harkles are keen to pay the BRF back for treating them like second-class non-working royals . . .

Oh, wait!

r512 If the royal family were scared at such possibilities ie them giving interviews with real dirt to damage them then I think they would have been friendlier to them at the jubilee in order to protect themselves from the possibility.Yet they werent which tells me the royals know the harkles dont have any sh*t of substance to throw.

Why aren’t they asking this Sheik Al-Thani why he likes to carry around a million pounds in cash in a paper bag?

If all Oprah wanted was $$$$$, she could have sold rights to air the earlier interview with the Sussex pair. She could have added much to her fortune by doing that.

Instead, Oprah pulled it quickly, presumably after all the lies she was told (and which she let the Harkles get away with) were exposed.

Why, for instance, didn't she call out MM about her multiple foreign trips after she and H were married for which MM would have, of course, needed her passport?

I doubt if Oprah is capable of being embarrassed or she would have said something about Oz, but when the Archbishop of Canterbury has to point out the interviewee Oprah was fawning over, lied.

Last gasps of BLM-ish stuff... BET awards.Jesse there & Mr Slapper Smith honored. Meghan not the black woman you should hitch your wagon to if you want to increase cred. America not interested in Haz & Meg. Stop trying to ram the unlikeable down people's throats.

All the Oxygen for the summer outrage is for Roe, followed by trans. Too late BLM. you may have shot your load. But you can try &get in line. Quick disclaimer, The gravy ladle is getting empty. You might need to fill it yourself. .Gasp,, Hand to forehead as you stumble backwards, flailing wildly in fainting pose..fade out..

Oh, I doubt the BRF are scared of the Harkles. It’s such a feeble attempt at a threat, coming days after the bullying report was buried—a slick move by the Palace to let them know they were keeping it for a rainy day. Is this the best the Sussexes can do, “Oh, yeah?? We’re going back to Oprah, harumph!” They prematurely ejaculated their load last year. We saw the treatment at the Jubilee…perfectly civil and in line with their status.

R512 The Range Rover is too much! For a fucking five minute drive in a gated community? Doesn’t he have an electric car for local jaunts? And an armada of bodyguards? I’m embarrassed for them.

R519 can't they ride there on their bikes?

Why not walk?

Correct me please if I'm wrong, but check out the last picture in the link at 505. What's going on? I see their Range Rover off to the left but to me? It looks like it is outside the gate, not inside the grounds. Did they just hire people to photograph them driving up? But no pictures of them, even from afar, inside Oprah's estate? hahahah please let that be true...

Exactly, R522. This is all just smoke and mirrors. They had been careful not to use their (former) Oprah association since she tried to scrub their existence from her media and never mentioned them again. This is yet more evidence for everyone in Hollywood or other circles that Meghan and Harry are a couple of two-bit grifters that they would do well to stay far from.

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

[quote]"...I pray nothing comes between William and George and the Throne."

Pray harder.

The Queen is going to go down in the saddle. She really is a trooper. She ain't retiring to her rooms. I mean, so would I. Live life until it stops.

[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.]

More is emerging about the wannabe paparazzo who filmed William and his family riding their bikes. He was trying to entrap them back during the Lockdown by getting proof they were breaking their bubble. They weren't. It was just the family unit together not even any bodyguards. Whereas the wannabe pap (who isn't actually a photographer or anything else) was actually breaking the lockdown by harassing and confronting them.

Happy Pride from William and Catherine!

The Queen presents her Medal for Music.

r530 I still say she has a decent shot at outliving her mother. People need to understand that elderly people can live for years with significant mobility issues.

^The Queen is a bit more than "elderly". I'm over 65: I'm "elderly".

Ninety-six is standing at the rim of a precipice whose edge is crumbling visibly.

It's possible she could make it to 100, of course; the problem is, will she be fit for purpose at 100?

Remember, her mother was Queen Consort, not Queen Regnant. Once her daughter became Queen, there was little for the Queen Mother to do except continue to charm.

But QEII has a great deal more on her plate, technically, than her mother did at the same age.

The Queen also had two more children than her Mother, her last when she was 37 (almost 38). You can't really compare them directly in terms of longevity.

And Meghan has jumped in on the Roe V Wade ruling. I'm adamantly pro-choice, but a member of the British Royal family should not be commenting on a hot potato political debate like this.

She’s no longer a member of the BRF, R534. That said, she’s insufferable and I’m staunchly pro-choice.

R535 So long as she uses her titles, she is a member of the BRF just not a working one.

R356, irregardless of the titles, they left so the could have a platform. They’ve talked about other political issues before, that was the whole point of them leaving. For Gd’s sake they went on Oprah! I don’t think anything is off the table with them at this point.

Irregardless

That's crazy r536.

Feminist Harry had a guttural response to the supreme court decision said MM. Oh dear, did he howl at the moon again?

The Queen met with Nicola Sturgeon today in Scotland.

Scottish independence endorsers have always made clear they want Scotland to remain within the Commonwealth if the county gets independent. I guess the Queen and Sturgeon had a chat about this stuff, too.

The bit about Vogue adding her title belatedly speaks volumes.

Just what the world needs...another Diana documentary.

Charles always learns a lesson the hard way.

Dispassionately, Markle is a C list cable TV supporting actress. A nobody. She only got famous marrying a very rich and very famous man. How is that feminist?

It's feminist because Meghan says it is. If you disagree with her, you're probably a racist!

(Not really, but that's how Meghan fans think.)

r546 After the way she tried to smear her sister for her sexual history in the book Finding Freedom I don't know how she can be regarded as a feminist.

Literally everything La Markle achieved in life she did by spreading her legs and presenting her holes.

How feminist indeed, LOL.

Charles is naive beyond belief. He truly is the last of the isolated royals growing up in institutionalized luxury. William is obviously Diana's son and not seduced by the nonsense.

Charles, Anne and Wessexes attended the garden party at the Palace of Holyroodhouse in Scotland.

R550: [quote] William is obviously Diana's son and not seduced by the nonsense.

Not that Charles is especially sensible, but are you saying Diana was? She was a practical and perceptive person? Not likely to be fooled or hoodwinked?

R552 nah, she was hoodwinked plenty and got all her life advice from psychics, astrologers and fortune tellers. I meant Diana didn't grow up in the cloistered environment of the royal family and did have some contact with how people actually live, the ones who don't have a valet to put toothpaste on their toothbrush. And I think William marrying into a pretty ordinary middle-class family also gave him some common sense the isolated Ivory Tower royals like Charles don't.

R553, thanks for explaining what you meant. Cheers!

William is PHILIP'S grandson: nobody's fool and unlikely to suffer fools.

I looked at twitter today and once again Meghan Markle is trending. Who is getting this woman who is basically a nonentity trending and why? WTF? It must be a troll farm.

"Charles is naive beyond belief. He truly is the last of the isolated royals growing up in institutionalized luxury"

It's true, the Cambridges are having to make more concessions to the real world than his ancestors did, but they seems to be willing to do what they have to do to keep the job. Intelligent monarchs have always known they need to do whatever will keep them popular, and if that means wearing diamonds when they feel like wearing rubber farm boots, or vice versa, then that's what they'll do.

If Charles doesn't predecease his mother, he'll have a short reign. He won't be popular, so in 5-10 years there will be a surrendering of important duties or an abdication in favor of William. Or less.

My guess is Charles won't ever abdicate.

I don't understand why Liz won't abdicate. She could quite possibly outlive Charles at this rate. Not very fair.

Abdication is incredibly rare and almost always forced, no Monarch wants that on their headstone.

I wouldn’t abdicate either if I knew Charles was next in line. He’s going to lose a lot of good will when he ascends to the throne. I think he might’ve been more successful if he ascended years ago and was still married to Diana. Now he’s old, dull and shady.

R559, she swore an oath to serve as long as she lives. She’s not going anywhere unless it’s feet first.

And I’m not sure he wants all that trouble at his age. Heavy is the head that wears the crown and all that.

If Liz outlives Charles, that would solve a lot of problems.

Oh, come now, Charles isn't shady, not in any real sense.

But he is alarmingly feckless, and worse, arrogant in assuming that he can skirt the constitutional boundaries of his position because, after all, all he ever suffers for it is a bit of short-lived finger-waggling. That's the really shady aspect of Charles, in this Englishman's view, and I don't like it.

^I agree. It is painfully obvious that the monarchy's chances would be vastly improved if the Queen were to outlive Charles by some shocking turn of events.

The Queen was out with Charles today.

Charles and Anne attended the Order of the Thistle today at St Giles Cathedral in Edinburgh.

Charles - like Andrew - shares the cluelessness of having been raised in an ivory tower with everybody at their beck and call reinforcing their belief in their own superiority. Anne and Edward appear to have avoided this probably because they married people totally out of the Royal family's sway. Fergie was a Royal wannabe since forever and Camilla's also Royal family-adjacent. Charles isn't inherently evil like Andrew is but he's hopelessly out of touch with reality.

Camilla's family were rich but not quite Royal adjacent, her family (Cubitt) were in trade and earned their money.

R567 Sarah Ferguson is descended fron royalty and aristocracy. I wouldn’t exactly call her a royal wannabe, she didn’t come into the royal circle by magic. She’s related to them. And there are pictures out there with a young Sarah with Andrew and the Queen.

Her paternal grandmother was first cousins with the previous Duchess of Gloucester, meaning that her father’s first cousin was the Queen’s actual aunt. And there are several dukes and viscounts in her family line, as well as King Charles II. She may be shameless as stated above, but she sure as hell is a monarchist and does truly respect the Queen.

The point is both Camilla and Fergie ran in Royal social circles. Sophie Wessex and Mark Phillips did not and no doubt helped their spouses realize Royal life was incompatible with real life. Anne refused titles for both Phillips and their kids. Edward was content with an Earldom. In contrast, look at Harry who appears to be every bit as deluded as Andrew demanding that his kids who live in the US be princes. Harry actually appears to be very much Charles' kid with a Royal sense of entitlement and William Diana's.

t567 I think you are on the right track but lost on the map a little bit. I think it's not because they married not aristocratic types why they are more sane less pompous but rather the fact that they already had the sense to be open to choosing outside their 'social set'

Their choice of partners are the good symptom or sign their personalities are more rounded and balanced not the cause of their roundedness.

In which case, R569, drunk old Sarah the monarchist should have known better.

I see the bullying report is in the news again, as the BRF changed course and refused to discuss the report's outcome (not it's findings re Meghan, but what changes had been instituted as a result of the report) in the Sovereign Grant Report published yesterday. It is said, although I don't know how anyone could know, that even those who participated in the investigation don't know what changes have been implemented at HR, which is absurd. All they'd have to do is compare the old HR Employee Handbook with the new one issued to new employees.

The media have taken and run with it, characterising it as an "olive branch" to the Sussexes, and Dan Wootton is bawling that it's tantamount to stabbing the staffers who suffered Meghan's bitchery to appease the Harkles . . .

But I think they're all wrong. I think that backpedalling on the promise to discuss the findings in the SG Report simply increases the public assumption that the material is too damaging to Meghan even to discuss at a remove. It looks like it's doing Meghan a favour, but in fact, it's throwing more fuel onto the fire.

It's certainly possible some deal was struck: you keep your memoir civil and we'll see that the report doesn't fall into the wrong hands.

But, in fact, I remain, probably in the minority, in thinking it really is best to move on for all concerned, especially the employees in question.

The cloud remains over Meghan, the threat of accidentally losing the report from under lock and key, are there.

And whilst some of those involved are still working for the Palace and don't want their boats rocked, I believe that at some point both Jason Knauf and Melissa Touabit will talk . . . much later and possibly to third parties like Valentine Low and Tom Bower.

Melissa Touabti

HR works differently in the UK. There was a woman on Reddit who explained it. She even worked in HR herself. She made a complaint about someone she worked with. Everyone involved was interviewed by a higher-up but they never heard the outcome. There is never a public report. She was told that she would need to observe for herself if/when there were changes. Crazy! But yes, within a couple months, the person she complained about left the company and they learned about a new policy to handle [whatever it was she complained about]. It’s very opaque but that’s how they do it in the UK.

If so r575, , then a very civilized approach.

I imagine the upcoming books will have the interviews.

R577 No, they won't. The Queen, who paid personally for the repory, owns it. She is the client of the law firm who carried out the investigation, and it is therefore also protected by attorney-client privilege.

The people who participated are under NDAs.

What might appear in the upcoming book are, perhaps, conversations with people who were witnesses to the whole saga, but who no longer work for the Palace.

As Knauf's emails are now part of the public record, and he has already made public his sense of guilt st not coming forward until too late in the initial phase of the ANL privacy/copyright trial, he might potentially have agreed to talk to Bower. Knauf, I would think, does not belueve justice was served where Meghan is concerned.

That shit will only Ppear in upcoming books through third parties or people.who no longer have to care what the Palace thinks, and whose opinions are already on record.

But the interviews themselves are legally ring-fenced unless the Queen chooses to release them, and she won't.

Here are two former employees who seem to get along with the Sussexes and have landed on their feet after a departure…

Per a 5/30/22 article in the Telegraph:

[quote] Intriguingly, it appears the couple will not be accompanied to the UK by any of their own public relations representatives after Toya Holness, their former spokesman, left Archewell earlier this month.

[quote] Liaison between the Sussexes and the Palace is being handled by Herlihy Loughran, an “advisory partnership” comprised of Clara Loughran and Beth Herlihy, former palace aides. The duo handled the communications for the Invictus Games and are said to be the Duke’s “eyes and ears” back in Britain.

Clara Loughran was a valued aide, according to reports. She seems to have worked well with everyone, both Sussexes and Cambridges. I’d love to hear HER gossip. Beth Herlihy is a mini-Meghan; ambitious Z-list actress who landed a job in a palace. I think these women are good at massaging egos and maneuvering office politics, soft skills which landed them big fat juicy plums. They probably earned it.

My bad r578. Both Valentine Low and Tom Bower will cover this. The Queen doesn't own other's experiences.

William met with the PM of New Zealand today.

R580 She does, however, own the contents of that report AND their public silence if they signed NDAs, especially if, as was likely the case with Melissa Touabti, they also received handsome payoffs.

Because Touabti hasn't spoken to anyone, has she?

These waters.can be quite tricky, and people who work for rich, privileged people take risks when they tell tales out of school. Even if they are wholly justified.

You can say Bower and Low MAY cover "this", but you can't say they WILL, unless you have seen drafts or galleys of their upcoming books.

I don't doubt Bower will cover the topic. But that doesn't mean he's included first-hand descriptions of the "experiences" of Meghan's behaviour that you refer to.

Bower also has to step carefully around the legal pitfalls. So does Low.

We really can't assume those people are going to spill the beans to either writer.

That is especially true of those still working for the Palace.

So, yes, Bower will "cover" it. But we don't know how.

Is the Bower book still coming out in July? I've been keeping an eye out but so far there's no release info.

Bower's book was supposed to come out in July but it's been postponed. I've read August and I've read December for the Christmas season so I have no idea what's true beyond not this month.

Yes, Bowers book has been delayed I think because more stuff keeps happening...I'm sure he's going to want to include Jubilee gossip. I've heard it will likely hit the market for the Christmas season.

For our Sunday viewing pleasure...River posts a tribute to Major Jonny Thompson. Enjoy!

R586 - the ending is priceless...thank you for your service to the Queen and if you want to service another Queen, I'm available. Classic from River.

Isn't The Queen just spectacular? I mean really, she is da bomb!

Bower's book is available for preorder November 1st and is out on November 25th. I'll bet good money we get the dirt on her behavior, and yes insider info on her palace years. I'll definitely say "I told you so" to naysayers. Low's book comes out in September. It also should be quite interesting.

Prince Michael of Kent is 80 years old today.

It is too bad about the delay in publishing Bower's book. It would have made for the best summer reading EVAH.

I'm curious as to whether the delay in Harry's memoir played into that decision. Initially, the Bower book was due out in July and Harry's in late September.

But with Harry's memoir now due out in early 2023, suddenly Bower's book is pushed back to within a couple of months of Harry's.

It's almost as if the plan is to ensure that Bower's book is still fresh in mind when Harry's book comes out, and undermines the picture that Harry will undoubtedly paint about himself, his parent's marriage, and his wife.

Kate took the photos of Camilla as she becomes the guest editor of Country Life magazine.

Zara's husband Mike Tindall is raising funds for Parkinson's.

Sorry here is Mike Tindall.

[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.]

Ahh..Mike was quite emotional talking about his dad. Nice chap & what a bod. Lucky Zara!!

[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.]

Raddled old hag Camilla is disgusting.

What does/did Camilla do to keep a hold on Charles?

New thread