Revenge Part 4 - The Tom Bower book discussion thread

Well, bitches?

Link to previous thread

SA, you could also have entitled the thread "Revenge IV - Hook it into my veins"

r3 I guess so!!

The book needed a better writer and much better editors. It's not gonna sway anyone who didn't already think Meghan and Harry are assholes.

I would like to thank the kind soul who posted the pdf on the previous Revenge threads. I am now treated to this gem:

[Quote]Meghan was so besotted by the romance that she could barely keep her hands off Trevor. In public she hugged and kissed him, and adopting a babyish voice cooed, "Trevity-Trev-Trev".

Imagine her calling Trevor "Trevity-Trev-Trev" in bed . . .

It that what she's doing with Harry, too? "Harrity-Haz-Haz"

More likely calls Harry "son" in bed while wearing a short blonde wig.

We should become good friendsies Megsykins.

When will the book be released in the United States?

Per Tina Brown's book, Harry enjoyed the high-life (yachts and trips and the like) by sponging off his wealthy friends. From the sound of Bower's book, his friends have all headed for the hills. It must be torture for Harry to be constantly in close quarters with Meghan - never going to hunting parties, never partying with his friends in swanky locales, no hitting the London clubs. I bet he spends most of his days with his substances and his video games.

Meg, Pa Markle and Doria all had Thanksgiving dinner together in 2016 at some fancy mansion that Haz arranged for them to use. Pa Markle talked to Haz on the phone. Haz was in St. Lucia. Pa Markle brought pecan pies.

Do all Brits pronounce pecan "peekin"?

I think lots of people who suffered under the lash of The Duchesss of Whoresides(Love it, love it!) are watching. Like Weinstein that trickle, trickle became a torrent ,then a tsunami. Wonder how Fatty Harv is doin' in the Big House? Maybe he is getting some ass lovin'..hopefully with a splintery chair leg.

Mamma always said, watch out who you shit on, on the way up that greasy pole. They will evacuate their bowels in a torrential shit storm on you as you slide down.(Mom loved a graphic image). Took a while with Hav. Unfortunately for The Duchesssss of Whoresides, no Meryl or anyone else important ever called her a God or gave her a standing ovation.

And please don't bring up that old pathetic wanna be a starfucker Steinem. Feminist my ass! Waiting for her great defense of Women & Trans. violating their rights & safety.Wait what's that I hear..Oh never mind, its just crickets.

R552 From the previous thread: thanks for posting the excerpts.

[QUOTE] After every trip, he (Cory) cursed her ego as ‘out-of-control star-fucking’.

This pretty much sums up her personality. Star-fucking. Ruthless social climber. Restless. Never happy. Thinks she deserves it all. She severely overestimates her value if she thinks a celebrated chef or TV producer are beneath her. I would love to see her cut down to size in a gloriously public way.

I believe Meghan pulled the "danger/death" card early on to get a fast marriage and again threatening to kill herself when pregnant. The palace released a statement about the press hounding her and Harry being concerned for her safety. No one in Toronto was bothering her or gave a shit.

R5 I agree. But the truth is, nothing, no matter how well written, would have changed minds. The people who like her will always like her.

R16 true but a well written book could've swayed people in the middle. It's about as well written as Finding Freedumb.

R15 Rhe real purpose of Meghan pushing Harry to make that statement on virtually no evidence of physical intrusion whatsoever was to establish herself as The One. And, in doing so, make it that much harder for Harry to back off.

It wasn't dissimilar to how it became increasingly difficult for Charles NOT to marry Diana after the press frenzy made her the darling of the people.

The cases do have differences, but in each case the prospective wannabe royal bride used the press to help secure her prize.

[Quote]Prince Harry is worried about Ms. Markle’s safety and is deeply disappointed that he has not been able to protect her.

She used this to rope him in. Harry will never ever leave her because of this. It would mean failure to him, that he failed to protect her. Their whole relationship is based around Harry's guilt that he didnt somehow save his mother, so he has to protect Meghan now. Funny that he never released a statement about online or press bullying for Chelsy or Cressida.

r15, there is The Palace, as in the Queen's offices. Then there is Hary's comms officer based at Kensington Palace.

Hardly anyone had heard of her when he sent out that overblown letter of accusation against the press. There had been stories of a new girlfriend ,big whoop, most people skip past royal stuff. They set up the narrative of press bullying and racism from the get go in order to get only glowing reports. Greedy entitled bastards the pair of them.

Haven’t really been keeping up but what’s the most damaging revelations? Do we have a list somewhere ? TIA!

I've never read any of Bower's other books. Is the writing of similar quality? It seems this book is more eagerly anticipated and needed to be released surrounding the Jubilee so perhaps the writing was rushed? This and a small publisher not having editorial resources. I refuse to believe this is more poorly written than Finding Freedom. At least Bowers isn't flowery and OTT like the breathless Scobie.

r16 I think there is a group in the middle who are persuade bless and don't currently have a strong opinion or feeling. Just as in politics there are people who float between either sides and are malleable based on argument, evidence etc

R22, he's like Kitty Kelley. Bower does a lot of similar books on famous people. Apparently does his research, but it's not as though his work is filled with analysis or insight. It's basic good reporting and not so great writing. It doesn't sound like he makes anything up.

I did notice his quoting an American as having used the British "rubbing someone up the wrong way," as opposed to the American "rubbing someone the wrong way," and similar slips as mentioned in previous threads (Woodward Hills instead of Woodland Hills, e.g.), so he's not 100% meticulous.

Long story short, his work seems reliable and it's a few cuts above a trash quickie biography, but nothing to rival literary works.

B U M P

We love Meggity sMEGs sMEGs!

I don't really care that there aren't many new revelations - it's more that I know Bower wouldn't put anything in a book unless it's 100% verifiable, so basically these things are now unquestionably true rather than online specualtion.

R26 there are a few errors in the book that the Sewage Squad have glommed onto to call the whole thing trash

^They would never change their minds anyway, so not surprising

[quote] ... nothing, no matter how well written, would have changed minds. The people who like her will always like her.

It's true, but why? Her fans are so crazy. A few DL posters seem to think her "Squad" (ugh) is made up of only Black women and that's so not the case, all you have to do is go to Twitter to see plenty of white women furiously defending her.

What all her fans do seem to have in common is a deep gullibility. They'll believe absolutely anything that comes from their idol or those who are obviously speaking for her, like Scobie. She's really going for the basic millennial / zoomer audience and I have to admit, she seems to have anchored them to her side.

R28 true, but a well-written, fact-checked book could have persuaded people in the middle. Revenge is as persuasive as Finding Freedom...not at all.

I'd like an ENTIRE book about the bridesmaid fitting. Written from the multiple viewpoints: Kate, Meghan, that terrible Mulroney person, the dressmakers, the servants, Mulroney's kids and, of course, Charolette. I would gladly read it. I might have to write it myself. It would be titled: The FITting

R30, what facts does he get wrong?

R30 while there are errors which a half-decent sub-editor would have picked up - “Woodward Hills” jumped out at me and I’m not even from LA - I would be surprised if there was anything presented as fact that couldn’t be strenuously defended.

Bower is known for that, which is why he’s been sued multiple times but has never lost. That also explains the curious and careful wording such as “Meghan allegedly threw a cup of a tea into the air”. “Allegedly”, “into the air” not “at” someone.

The sloppy editing can be attributed to the small publishing house that took the book on - I am sure that those errors have already been worked on for the next edition.

The writing is fine and the sources are excellent. I've read only some excerpts, and it"s not true that there's nothing "new. Never heard of Barrack and didn't know that the Harkles are legally not allowed to use SussexRoyal, for instance. I am kind of waiting for the US edition to purchase.

R32 he repeats Thomas' claim that Meghan never worked in school. The ice cream shop she claims she worked at in high school congratulated her on the wedding day and called her a former employee.

He says Emma Watson refused to meet her when she was desperate for UN press, pre-Harry. The Sewage Squad pulled up a photo of the two of them that looks accurate to the time.

Plus, it's just not very well-written. There's very few "revelations" that haven't been discussed on DL for years. At least Finding Freedumb was hilariously bad.

This bitch deserves a trophy for being the nastiest nasty that ever nastied.

It's been mentioned before but HG Tudor is reading the book and giving his analysis on YouTube. (He does that thing that all these behavior guys do: slips in a lot of jargon that seems unnecessary to me. Yes, she's a narcissist. Just say, she's using Person X or sucking up to Person Y.) What I liked is that he gives a fuller picture, points out her manipulations, whereas Bower leaves gaps in the story because it's just reportage. If you didn't perceive how Situation Z was really messed up when you read the text, he helpfully points it out so you understand that a "normal" person would've acted or reacted differently.

The gist is she's the type of narcissist who agrees to do [whatever] in the moment but then blithely forgets about it when the time comes and does what she wants and doesn't care.

The chapter s are broken up into 8 minute segments and he's on Chapter 8 now, still pre-Harry.

I do agree that the book has a rushed quality and too many small errors. But Brown's book also seemed rushed and also didn't reveal anything that we hadn't surmised before it came out, AND she was way too soft on the Sussexes, actually calling them a loss for the BRF because Harry was "such an asset".

Harry was a loose cannon waiting for someone to light his fuse, and Meghan's horrible personality should have been obvious to a blind man, let alone to the family she began to antagonise before she was even a day past the wedding.

I think we're still waiting for the kind of book on the Sussexes that Sally Bedell-Smith did on Diana, "Diana In Search of Herself", which was honest, measured, and sympathetic whilst not glossing over Diana's mental issues or the role she played in her own destruction.

Bowers isn't really a writer's writer, he's an investigative journo/writer.

Another error I noticed was the reason given that Meghan didn't sue over the bullying investigation report: "her lawyers reviewed the evidence and realised there was too much . . ."

In point of fact, neither Meghan nor her lawyers ever saw "the evidence". They made a show of demanding to see it, but as they well knew, as a private internal investigation into HR practices that had been personally paid for by the Queen, no one else had the remotest legal right to see it. They loudly demanded to see the texts and emails . . . and the Queen's lawyers politely told Jenny Afia and Schillings to fuck off, which they did. But Meghan and her legal counsel never laid eyes on "the evidence"

It IS likely that Meghan knew the report would be damning and decided for once that discretion was the better part of valour.

But not because she'd seen it.

That's the kind of small error that a good editor/fact checker would have caught.

R38 I think Brown was harsh on the Harkles, but tried to be balanced, unlike Scobie or Bowers. She undercut them a lot, she just didn't hammer the points excessively hard. Her chapter on Meghan's early life makes it clear that her main goal in life was fame.

Meghan lovebombed Harry, and being on her best behavior, did show him some good qualities that he fell in love with. It's that person he's holding onto, that he thinks can come back if he moves to California, yells at the press, disowns his family. Sadly, Meghan has a personality disorder and that person will never be back except in moments few and far between.

r23 Should say there are people in the middle who are persuadable on Harry and Meghan either way and neither strongly like or dislike them nor have strong opinions or feelings.Apologies for the misspell.

I don’t think Meghan had to work very hard to catch Harry. He’s an incredibly needy guy and a master manipulator like MM would have barely had to make an effort.

[quote] When will the book be released in the United States?

It’s on Amazon now but you have to search for the ISBN: 9781788705035

Amazon.ca Kindle version too, but no hardcopies.

r43 I wonder why Amazon in the US is making it that bit more difficult to order the book?

R45, it's possible that the current ebook release is a bit under the counter, not something that was originally contemplated by Amazon or the publisher. It's not officially out in the US until August 21, but copies of at least parts of it immediately started circulating online.

Kindle costs nothing. It's possible the UK publisher has the international e-book rights. Hard copies requires outlays of capital and delivery for distribution. Those rights may not yet have been sold outside the UK, or have been but are delayed, etc. etc. etc.

r46 Arr ok thanks for the detail that actually makes sense.

R35, I'm reading the book (thanks to the original supplier of the link on Google Drive or whatever it's called), and it sounded to me that there were two occasions when MM and Emma Watson's paths crossed in connection with EW's HeForShe movement. Bower does talk about a photo of the two of them plus someone else, another famous woman, I think. He doesn't claim they never met but that there was an occasion when MM attended a HeForShe event and asked to meet her and was refused. I presume that was before the photo event. I can try to check on that if I remember.

Possibly it was after Emma Watson had already met her and decided not to repeat the experience.

I find it weird that anyone would have an obsession with Emma Watson. She's so BLAH. I guess Meghan is too though.

R51 she was a famous actress and activist, everything Megs wanted. Not hard to understand

Didn't Emma Watson also work with Chanel, or was that just Kristen Stewart? They're similar to me.

She has bot farms r29. That's why she won't get a new social media. She can't afford to buy millions of fake followers again.

Whoever referred to Meghan as “stunting and cunting” on one of these threads is my personal hero:

Tbe Watson/Markle picture displayed by the "Sewage Squad was taken 2 years after the instance she refused to meet Markle. That's what you get for believing the SS.

"Stunting and Cunting" was originally from the Dangling Tendrils theads, r55, when DL HAD HER NUMBER before anyone else!

I just moved back to LA from London and I know lots of MM stories most were in the book. One that was not was when she went to Europe with Trevor (or Cory but I think it was T) and another couple she made a huge deal about how she would be recognised and harassed by fans all over Europe. And no one at all did. Not a single fan. Apart from one 15 year old spotty boy at the airport on the way home. When he asked for a photo she flipped out, humiliated him and yelled at Trevor “you didn’t protest me! You should have protected me from tbis!” She has been running this con for a while now. I think possibly she has really convinced herself that she is THAT important

R56 if he was going to put a lot of ink onto Meghan being obsessed with Emma, he should've mentioned that they eventually met.

I wonder how the Squad feels about Meg fangirling over MAGA Princess Ivanka

@R57 has anyone archived or backed up those threads? Would love to revisit them.

R57 EXCUSE ME???

You can find them with a google search, out of order, but click on any one of them will open that one and at the top of the thread it will usually link the previous one, and so forth. Beware, there are something like 75 of them, filled to the brim, starting from before her marriage, when the threads were focussed on whether she needed a style intervention and then proceeding as the drama mounted and all things Harkle began to go haywire. I know they went up as far as the Archie birth debacle and so forth, but I'm not sure when Muriel started banning them in response to Sunshine Sachs/Sewage Squad making mass flagging reports. Fortunately, Muriel doesn't seem to respond to those troll swarms anymore (I think - but who knows?).

Having said all that, I think this is the very first one:

^^^^ That was a response to r60's request for the Dangling Tendrils threads

[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 wonder why Amazon in the US is making it that bit more difficult to order the book?

Isn’t that weird? It’s not like Amazon to pass up a chance to grab a buck.

Amazon is attempting to "suffocate" the book.

Just like Newsweek somehow knew it would do, just as their article published on the subject back on July 19th predicted.

I presume this means that Sunshine Sachs is putting out threats of some kind to Amazon, booksellers, reviewers. Denying future access to celebrities and their future books, etc?

75?!! Those must have juicy goss. Thank you @R62/ R63!

God! Look at Harry in those two pics. He looks miserable and a million miles away.

[quote] when DL HAD HER NUMBER before anyone else

Nothing prescient or psychic about it. Megs character was blantantly obvious both in the CNN engagement interview in 2017 and from her first public duties with Harry before their marriage, where she continually attempted to make herself the center of attention in meet/greets. Her controlling, narcissistic, me! me! behavior was front and center for those that wanted to see.

^^^ those WHO wanted

You're very welcome, r67. Happy reading!

"I don’t think Meghan had to work very hard to catch Harry. He’s an incredibly needy guy and a master manipulator like MM would have barely had to make an effort."

I mostly agree, R42, except I don't think Meg is a *master* manipulater, I think she's a fair-to-middling manipulator. A real master manipulator, or even a high-level gold-digger, would have taken the trouble to win over William and the more important courtiers, but those were the people who were onto Meg from the get-go.

It's just that Harry was not only easy prey, being a dimwitted and angry man, but that she met him at the most vulnerable point in his life. When she went after him he was out of the army and had no career, deeply unhappy to find himself working for a family he resented, and Chelsy Davy had given him the push and taken the hope of a new life in Africa with her. He would have been a sucker for any woman who promised to fix his life and make him happy at that point, and Meg made her plays at a point when he was open to them. If she'd met him five years earlier, she'd have been just another pump-and-dump, no matter what manipulative bullshit she tried.

Of course Meghan is not a "Master manipulator", dear.

The mark of a True Master Manipulator is never, and I mean never, to get caught.....

Two tiny errors I caught: the student musicals Tom did the lighting for at Meghan's school should be The Pajama Game and Damn Yankees, not The Pyjama Game and Damned Yankees.

Angliscisms, r74. This version of the book is for the UK market and both those names were "corrected" by the subeditor to UK spellings. Although i take your point that they are not the correct names.

She's no Wendi Deng, that's for sure.

They were U.S. productions of U.S. shows and they're proper names. They shouldn't be changed.

My point is that the sub at the little tiny publisher didn't realise that, r77, not that it wasn't wrong.

One thing I can't get over is that she lopped her father off without a thought.

I got your point, r78, and you got mine. Peace.

R79 for me its that she didn't neutralize him as a liability.

I suspect that she had told Harry a packet of lies about her background (the Vanity Fair episode attests to her lying about her career to him, so it's a safe bet she lied about other things), and knew she could get Doria to play along (possibly for a price) but that her father was much more opinionated and loose-lipped and that he presented a real threat to the stories she had told in the UK.

But, having said that, from the father's POV she dropped him as soon as she became "famous" on Suits and Doris reappeared in her life.

Who knows the truth, but I sense strongly that her dropping him and refusing to so much as "neutralise" him was part of a fly-by-the-seat effort of hers to keep Harry FAR away from him and the lies of hers her father might rumble.

Does anyone have a link for a pdf or free copy of Tina Brown's book?

R82 I think you're right. She never had any intention of having him even attend her wedding. I can't believe she didn't know her lies would be discovered. I guess that's why she's made a science out the victim role

There's the old Tina Brown book thread, r83. It might be already posted in there.

Kindle version isn't even $9 r83. Stop being cheap and support the author.

Weirdly just saw,a,quote from the second thread saying American press was more "gullible" and almost spit my drink out. The British Press fawned all over Meghan and did many of the British people. The British press is what keeps them in the news today.

The American press isn't more "gullible". The American press is 75% bought and paid for and is rather open about it. They print what they're told to print by PR companies, political strategists, corporations, and nations like China...Take your pick. So long as the publication and the 'journalist" gets something out if it, its often a done deal.

The British press is subject to regulation, so while they suffer from this malady too, they tend to lose their jobs if they're caught doing it. Not so in America. In America they're promoted and put on television.

Revenge is a dish best served cold you guys! Unless it's roast chicken!

"Roast Chicken"

Oh you mean like tossed salad R90? That's another food I totally dig!

Lol! Exactly r91.

Wonder has Markus Anderson used Scobie as a human fleshlight? What's their relationship other than both feeding off Meghan.

Scobie and Anderson went out for a while, r93 - before Omid became a TransAlien

I wonder why MM thought it was a good idea to ghost Piers Morgan. He had/has his own tv show and column. He could have been a big supporter; now he is one of her most vocal enemies.

More fake PR spin, they were never invited by the Queen for Balmoral summer break this year.

Her famous roast chicken was probably a store bought ready made rotisserie chicken she passed off as her cooking.

Piers Morgan was relatively close to Diana for a time when he was editor of the Sun, but he's been party to some really dodgy things that affected William and Harry long after her death, namely the phone hacking scandal, where Piers was presiding over a paper which hacked into a murdered girl's cellphone messages. The parents, not knowing that anyone could or would hack into their missing daughter's phone, fervently believed that because the voice messages had been listened to, their missing daughter was alive. It was a huge case, and Piers' journalists never came forward to mea culpa, allowing the parents to go on in false hope. It was nothing short of dreadful and it took him over a decade after he was fired for it ( so were the other journos) to get over the stench of that scandal.

Once the phone hacking and the paper's role in it became clear, William and Harry were both shocked because they had both been falling out with friends and staff regularly that year since details that they had left in messages somehow showed up in the papers. They had both become very paranoid, with Harry playing a game with everyone around him of telling each friend a different version of some story, to see which leaked. Shame was that he told some in person and others over messages, and it was of course the versions he messaged that got leaked, without any of his friends ever having broken confidence.

The phone hacking scandal led to the Levison Inquiry, which was a huge investigation into media hacking, leading to much stricter media regulations in Britain. Both William and harry felt very angry about the whole thing.

In short, if she had ever let Harry know in the beginning that immediately before she met Harry for the first time, that she was having a drink with Piers Morgan, he would have immediately kicked her to the kerb.

She was delighted to meet the famous Piers Morgan, the wunderkind of the UK newspaper industry and a man who could have got her in any paper, got her on any television show, etc etc. But once she met Harry and snagged him, she knew better than to ever acknowlege Morgan ever again.

That she knew immediately to distance herself from Morgan also tells me that she had indeed researched everything - absolutely everything - about Harry before she met him.

This bit stood out to me:

[quote]“She also excelled in drama classes, not because of obviously exceptional talent but through hard work and professionalism.

[quote]Pertinently, she resisted the invitation from Professor Linda Gates, the head of the voice programme, to study acting in a theatre. ‘You can learn to be a great actress,’ Gates recalled telling Meghan, ‘but I’m not sure she wanted to. Theatre is where you learn to transform yourself and reach an audience – six or seven nights a week. A star actress like Meryl Streep, trained in the theatre, can completely transform herself and go deep into a character. But Meghan was playing herself – a pretty girl who is personable and intelligent. Her strength was empathy. Throughout her life, Meghan never mentioned a theatre performance she had seen or enjoyed. Like many aspiring cinema stars, she thought theatre was dead. But, pertinently, friends could also not recall her gushing about an outstanding screen show.”

Meghan spent most of her life doing something she had no interest in hoping that it would make her famous. That can be soul-crushing, no wonder she is so vicious. On the other hand, that comment about the lack of talent can be applied to anything she’s ever done. She really is a balloon-shaped ambition floating on nothing, dying to be noticed but not having anything of note to offer.

That comment about Meghan thinking theatre was dead, though, to think that someone like her was made the patron of the National Theatre.

Meghan's end goal in life was to be famous and influential. She picked "actress" and "philanthropy" as means to that goal but only in the most cursory way which is why she was a very limited actress and why she has such a scattershot approach to charity and no follow through. If she picked ONE cause and focused her efforts on that, she'd be successful but of course, it has to be a cause that she can lead, not an existing one.

r99, I sense Bower feels the same sentiment about the National Theatre patronage which you have just expressed in your last sentence, which is why he featured the interview with the Drama teacher so prominently.

And yes, that someone like that became anything at, much lest actual patron of, the National Bloody Theatre is extremely rich irony indeed.

No wonder all the actors there LOATHED and resented her immediately (according to a blind at the time published in Private Eye).

R99. It’s a good point. Her drive for fame is overwhelming, but she’s completely agnostic on the path to fame. I think she chose acting because it’s one of the most common paths and does not require a specific technique that has to be acquired over years and years (at least the kind of acting she was doing) and because she had some connections in the industry. I wonder if she even watches films other than a handful of blockbusters. She pursued dozens of other ways to be famous as well, but without success.

You're right, r102. When you said that she was "completely agnostic on her path to fame" an image immediately came to me of her at that agent meeting (somebody Shalit?) saying she wanted to host, of all things, a cooking show.

Before that we have her trying to be a lifestyle influencer with that ridiculously named website, and her trying her hand at designing clothes... on and on.

She just wanted to be famous. But, because she happened to be the recipient of Hollywood nepotism job introductions from both her father and then her husband, at a time when basic cable shows were suddenly multiplying like bacteria, she just happened to become an 'actress'.

A good many people cancelled their subscriptions to the NT when Meghan got that patronage. The idea of that two-bit actress with one decent job on her resume, and that a basic cable show in which she was 6th on the call sheet, was a desperate but inevitable misfire by the Palace.

And, yes, the Sussex PR machine is now spinning the No Sussexes at Balnoral story as Oh, yes, they were invited but they're declining the invite.

Harry and Meghan declined ed to make it up to Balmoral less three months after thevwedding in May 2018.

Harry had spent every summer of his life there except when deployed whilst in the military.

It is a measure of how swiftly he was allowing Meghan to isolate from his past and his family thzt the two skipped a courtesy call that would have lasted a couple of days, that virtually every member of the family make each year. Especially the most visible ones.

It was an immediate red flag.

The following year they also refused to go, but did head off to Ibiza with infant Archie.

Somewhere under all the detritus of the psychodrama that Harry allowed Meghan to engineer so he could act out his toxic rage, is his authentic love for his father, brother, and grandmother.

But it's doubtful Harrybwill ever recover that memory. Balmoral is one of the most beautiful places in the UK, set in a spectacularly forested area of the Highlands. I wonder if he's ever afflicted by sudden memories of his youth up north with his family? August is beautiful up on the Highlands.

Meghan and Harry's demo s have cost him immeasurably, and also his children, who should have been able to form those same memories.

That, though, would mean the kids seeing the Windsor side of things, and Meghan would rather the kids didn't get those memories than risk THAT.

Like Sauron, Meghan doesn't share power.

That failure their first summer married not to see the Queen at Balmoral, and excuse with the conference over her father with Charles and Camilla at the Castle of Mey (which is also in Scotland) showed just how destructive her entry into Harry's life would be.

Diana hated Balmoral too, after she was married of course. Stultifying dinners and tromping around wet hills, not really her or Meghan’s thing. I wonder if Harry misses it? It must remind him of when Diana died and no one knew what to do.

Great post R104

R105. I’m not saying everyone has to enjoy the outdoors, but what precisely would vacuous Diana and vacuous Meghan enjoy? Reading about themselves in the papers?

R66 lies lies lies. SS crap PR in Newsweek repeats the little drumbeat here about NoThInG NeW. I don't believe Amazon is SuFfOcAtInG the book either. It will have a US release next month, and good luck SS in stoppibg people from reading a book aboit the Royals.

R5 - Agree with you completely.

My book is coming from book depository , it has been released from the publisher and on its way to warehouse. I think they underestimated how many copies they would sell and as we speak the printing presses are smoking hot. The bully has an extremely short amount of time left before the world knows what scum she is.

[quote] and knew she could get Doria to play along (possibly for a price)

DEFINITELY for a price. Doria, another failed at every job ne'er-do-well, was/is perfectly happy to smile and exude dignity while keeping her mouth firmly shut because her daughter pays her to do so. Supposedly Megs paid for Doria's university so that she could obtain a social worker degree. And of course, the big payoff for Doria, sole proprietorship of Loving Kindness Senior Care Management, where money can be laundered . . . er . . .deposited for Doria's personal use.

Fraus: if you agree completely or imperiously bless messages with Great Post!, you can simply WW it.

R105 Yes, which is why Diana and Meghan would have been instinctively competitive with each other. It would have been really fun to watch. Kate probably could have handled it, but let's face it, Diana would have been a formidable mother-in-law.

Interesting dynamics in the family as far as Camilla goes. I suspect William and Kate like her for herself, but of course it's complicated.

The Sunshine Sachs / Sewage Squad's core response line to this book seems to be to astroturf threads like this with

"Not at ALL interesting! There's NOTHING at ALL which is NEW here! It won't convince ANYBODY!"

They repost variations on this message roughly every ten replies.

R112 Oh but they do. No other threads exhibit so much mutual affirmation.

I'm just suggesting they stop being so crashingly frauish. Karens try to mold everything to their style, or lack thereof

r112, The term you're looking for is "Frauen".

Not "Fraus"

It's very obvious that many if not most posters on these royals threads are women. Which is fine except when they get silly.

FRAUEN: shut your badly clothed asses up.

R118 Even the Tiara Troll?! Say it ain't so!

ENOUGH with the multi-comment Meta thread-sliding tactics discussing what's 'wrong with the thread'.

Either address the TOPIC of this thread or fuck off out of here.

R121 For the win.

R120 Not sure about the tiara troll. Probably, though. But at least the tiara troll brings something to the discussion besides nicknames.

R111, Bower says that when Doria’s father died, she inherited his house and some money so she enrolled at university. Not sure of the year but it could’ve been before tuition became insane.

They are having a terrible time on Twitter (to the extent Twitter matters, which is next to nothing.) But every day something trends that suggests negative sentiment for them.

[quote] she inherited his house and some money so she enrolled at university.

R124 Doria's father died in 2011. By which time Doria had already earned her Masters from USC. That's why Megs paying for Doria's university may be something that passes for reality.

Take a shot every time the Harkles decline an invitation they never got.

I've read about a third of the book now, and it seems clear from others quoted in it that whatever his personal faults, Meghan's father absolutely doted on her and gave her everything. Imagine being that guy, then she grows up and the apple of your eye disinvites you from her fucking ROYAL wedding. What on earth? Maybe she really did think he deserved it, but I suspect her reasons would not be thought valid by anyone but a narcissist.

Thanks, R127, but I've already got cirrhosis!

Doria's father left that house to one of her siblings and no one knows how she ended up with it while the sibling got nothing.

He died of blows to the head but doria said he fell over the dog leash while walking the dog . Funny bizness

#MeghanMarkleBulliedCharlotte

is trending now on Twitter thanks to the book

Oh you guys, while we welcome being the subject of a bestselling book, we do wish you'd wait until Harry's book was released. There are lots of drawings to colour in and stickers to collect and I've included a number of wholesome anecdotes about life as a duchess!

Her Dad was the original duped man. He doted on her, gave her everything and most importantly did not seem to set any limits or guide her development. He was spun to be a loser, but I see him as a sad sack, working stiff who is left with nothing at this time in his life. Plus, the international scorn of complete strangers.

In order to defend against Meghan's sister (Samantha) lawsuit for defamation, Meghan's legal stated the Oprah interview should not be taken as "objective fact." Fancy way of saying "yeah it was lies."

Objective fact, alternative facts... the fun never ends.

r98. You have your facts confused there. The News of The World hacked murdered Milly Dowling;s phone. Piers Mprgan was editor of The Daily Mirror ( not The Sun) , who hacked Heather Mills and Ulrikka Jonsson.

He was sacked from The Mirror before Leveson. The reason was a front page showing photos of British troops torturing Itaqis, only they were faked pictures.

Truthiness

On my Twitter trending: Meghan bullied Charlotte, Prince Harry is a traitor.

They need new PR.

Ah, I misread. Bower wrote that Doria's father died in 2011 (MM had started work on Suits in mid-2010). "She inherited some money" and the house. "At the same time she began studying for a degree in social work" at USC. So yes, I guess MM could've bankrolled her.

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

I would honestly agree with her stating she's an only child.

Tom Jr and Samantha were both in their teens when she was born and out of the house by the time she started school. While I'm sure she saw them sometimes, I doubt they were ever close. Functionally, she was an only child.

Facts are dusty, and get in the way of word salads.

R143 Words get tossed around, just like salad!

The Spectator: Meghan Markle's Feelings Don't Care About Your Facts

27 July, 2022

Did Meghan Markle grow up as an only child? She said she did, in that famously awful Oprah interview. Yet Samantha Markle, her half-sister, has taken her to court over the claim. She argues that Meghan made her feel ‘humiliation, shame and hatred on a worldwide scale.’

Rather than defending the veracity of their client’s assertion, the Duchess of Sussex’s lawyers have chosen instead to say that Meghan’s claim was ‘obviously not meant to be a statement of objective fact'. In other words, duh, people – Meghan knows she has two half-siblings, Samantha and Thomas. No, her remark was, according to her lawyers, ‘a textbook example of a subjective statement about how a person feels about her childhood'.

Well, there is something objectively hilarious about that use of ‘textbook’. Haven’t you read all those textbooks in which people claim to be only children when they aren’t? The official statements of the Duke and Duchess often deploy this torturously sub-Freudian lingo – as if not really written for public consumption, let alone clarity, but for two pairs of eyes in particular. Harry and Meghan’s apparent addiction to therapy talk – as an outlet for self-pity – overwhelms everything, including, it seems, even the notion of such a thing as truth.

That may be why the Markle story holds such a sway over the public imagination. We are living in the post-truth age, a time of alternative facts, fake news and algorithmic distortions. Meghan Markle is the Grand Duchess of Post-Truthiness, which is why she has gravitated back to Hollywood, the la la land where rich people can buy their reality and blather on endlessly about mental well-being. Their official Instagram, Sussexroyal™ is almost a parody of this feelings-first worldview: ‘Today, I feel …’ declares one post. You – yes, you – fill in the blank.

Maybe this really is the future. Right-wing blowhards like to say that facts don’t care about your feelings. Meghan proves them wrong: her feelings don’t care about your facts. Harry and Meghan represent the ascendant generations of millennials and Zoomers, so many of whom have been trained, almost brainwashed to feel, not think. It doesn’t matter what happens or happened. All that matters is your emotional response. Your precious ego is the sun around which everything else must orbit.

As for the Markles, they prove Tolstoy’s line that each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. Their bitterness towards each other is manna from tabloid hell. The father falls out repeatedly with his daughter. Samantha has already written a book called The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister and attacks her on Twitter.

Then again, in Meghan’s universe, none of that needs to be true. Not objectively, anyway.

Freddy Gray is deputy editor of The Spectator

Much as I hate him at time. Piers really is a first class word smith. Princess Pinocchio. Every time she gets caught in Yet Another Lie....Princess Pinocchio strikes again.

It's such a bizarre claim for Samantha to scream about. She is her mother's only child and her dad's kids are MUCH older.

The Markle DNA has never been big on logic.

Those Twitter hashtags are so childish. Come on, ladies.

R147 That's why I'm adore that Meghan may get legal take-down by another Markle: they're all trashy and deserve each other!

R147 an only child has no siblings.

R150 with a big enough age gap, you're functionally, key word functionally, an only child.

Meghan was the only child in the home and Tom and Sam were off screwing up their own kids. Of all the "my truths" of hers to pick at, this is the weakest one.

She was an “only child” of her parents relationship. I get that she felt that way, Samantha and Thomas are so much older that, even had the relationship not been bad, she would have experienced the aloneness of an only child, especially when her parents split 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.]

Silly thing for Samantha to sue over but the best and most honest way for Meghan to put it would clearly have been along the lines of, "My Dad's kids from his first marriage were so much older than me that I was basically an only child".

Meghan insanely thought she could exaggerate for the public when creating her narrative--as if no one from her past would ever come back to challen/ge what she said.

I think this is the point of Tom Bower's title for "Revenge"--she thought she could step over "the little people" (like her half-siblings and her father) in her rise to the top however she liked, and they would just disappear. Although she never had to see them again, they remembered how they were treated, and were eager to tell their stories.

This is a mistake narcissists often make. "I don't intend ever to see Sam any more, so obviously she has nothing bad to say about me to the people in my new life because she's not here--I've moved past her."

"On my Twitter trending: Meghan bullied Charlotte"

REVENGE is a dish best served cold, bitches!

Remember, “It’s not a lie, ....if you believe it.”

George Costanza

R154 silly lawsuits are a family trait. No DNA test needed

R158 Would you say the same about Harry?

R159 are his family members initiating random lawsuits?

May this bully go far far away

Oh fuck off R142. I actually preferred you people when you were calling us all elderly racists.

It’s so ridiculous that people continue to defend Meghan’s right to an alternative truth. “Well, clearly she meant “My siblings were so much older than me so I was basically an only child.”” If she meant that, too bad she didn’t say that. I suppose if you twist yourself into enough knots, you can argue that her words “I essentially raised myself from virtual poverty” are also somehow true? As are the rest of her claims: that she and Harry were married three days before the actual ceremony, that she didn’t make Kate cry, Kate made her cry, that her children were entitled to the Prince and Princess titles, etc - all true because she feels that way?

^ And functionally she was white in her youth(see her resume)& "blacked-up" when BLM hit. So, guess its' the old she thinks she can really fool some people some of the time.

You know how if you step in dog shit & it gets into the soles of your shoes that smell never really leaves, trails after you, & when the soles get wet they stink super strongly all over again. Well, every time Princess Pinocchio tells another Porky the smell gets strong aagin. Remember the long list from the Oprah interview & now all the ones Bower has receipts for.?She will be remembered as a liar, no matter how they try to spin it. Liar, liar pants on fire.

R162/R163 unclench your holes, fraus. I've shit on Meghan plenty. The whole Markle gene pool is a clusterfuck. But the fact is many people in her situation have called themselves only children and of ALL the many things she says that aren't 100% accurate, it's a weird, stupid and irrelevant one to care about.

But she didn't say she was an only child. She said she "grew up as an only child." I can't believe we're arguing about this and that Samantha Markle is suing over it. "Grew up as an only child" clearly describes what the experience was like for her. She could have thrown in a "virtually" to be clearer, but let's be sensible. I see no reason to rake her over the coals for this statement when it's arguably true. She's outright lied about so many things that this play for sympathy doesn't even rate. I find her odious, but this is, in fact, a description of her subjective experience.

Or what R165 said.

Lie by the lie die by the lie. What about Someone in the RF questioned Harry about skin color? So, now woulda, coulda, maybe she meant, maybe she felt." If wishes were fishes we'd all be throwing nets. If wishes were horses we'd all ride."

I feel/wish... I am 25 years old, with an 11" dick, a 31" waist, & natural wavy blonde hair. It don't make it so.

All of the lawsuits—both the ones filed against the press by Meghan and Harry and the one filed by Samantha against Meghan—are beyond boring. Just a bunch of terrible creatures attacking each other for very low stakes wins.

Instead of that nonsense, want more details on; 1. That bridesmaid dress fitting 2. What Kate said to Meghan the day following the fitting when she arrived with flowers for an apology 3. What drama happened early in the marriage to cause them to stop visiting Balmoral and separate offices 4: Doria: the missing years 5. Do any A-listers have a relationship with the

Sparkles didn't lie about being an only child. It's your lack of understanding that's the problem here.

R169 unless someone releases security footage, those will all remain a mystery. There's more versions of those scenarios than there are remakes of Little Women

Right on, r163.

This is why the whole idea of "her truth" (or "his truth" or "my truth" or "your truth") is so pernicious. You cannot conflate facts with feelings, and Meghan lies repeatedly and tries to excuse her lies as "my truth."

Do people have to keep calling Meghan by these childish nicknames like "Sparkle," "MeGain," "MeAgain," and "Harry's First Wife"?

They all became tired rather than funny months and months ago, and they're actually none of them shorter than her actual name. And "Meghan" is only six letters--it;'s hardly taxing to spell it out.

She's a horrible person, but honestly, it makes you sound creepily and unnaturally obsessed with her when you use childish nicknames instead of her real name.

Samantha lived for a while with Thomas while Meghan was growing up.

R159 Since no DNA tests are needed, wouldn’t you consider Harry part of Meghan’s family? I consider my husband “family.”

[quote]They all became tired rather than funny months and months ago, and they're actually none of them shorter than her actual name. And "Meghan" is only six letters--it;'s hardly taxing to spell it out.

You sound quite normal yourself, Scrabble.

R175 I'm not saying you're the dumbest cunt alive, but you better hope he doesn't die.

[quote]it makes you sound creepily and unnaturally obsessed with her when

Since you like counting, how many times have you been told that tack doesn't work any better than your pal paid to type klan granny? Why do we have to get the stupid interns?

R175 🤡

What continues to surprise me is how Harry fell for all this. Meghan aka Spongebob Backfat is not a stunning beauty, charming or graceful, honest or kind. She bullies and bitches and screams when she doesnt get her way. Discarded former friends, family, husbands and boyfriends when she thought she "made it big" on a cable tv show.

Then you have Harry, who has his flaws and rage issues towards his family (esp. father) over Diana's death. Yet he is an educated man, sort of. Travelled the world. Experienced many other cultures. Should be more adept at reading people. How is he completely blind to a basic, star fucking, social climbing wannabe actress who is only with him for fame and fortune??

He's an intellectual boob and has never and likely will never deal with the pain of his mother's death. He was getting older and understandably tired of being W&K's 3rd wheel. He wanted a wife and every sane woman he ever dated ran for the hills. She's reasonably attractive and played on his many many many many many many mommy issues.

A first year psych major could figure it out.

I would like to know something about the peace-making flower story. In the version favorable to Catherine, Meghan supposedly slammed the door and binned the flowers. My question is, how does anyone know what she did with the flowers? It was after she closed the door.

I read a while ago that someone on the Kensington Palace staff found the fresh flowers in the bin and word spread around the compound, r182

Ohhh, okay. Thanks.

R173 The silly nicknames are a huge part of the enjoyment and sport for the Tumblr frauen. Along with the "narc" armchair psychology, witless jibes about backfat, SpongeBob and Queen Charlotte, and lame repetitive jokes like "has anyone asked if Meghan's okay?" and "her stylist must hate her!" Not to mention the linking to other frauen on Twitter and of course the conspiracies. A little of this was fun for a while, but as noted it just goes on and on and on. All this royal mayhem is tremendously good gossip for us, please retire some of that tired stuff.

It's SpongeTom.

Do keep up.

[quote] I would like to know something about the peace-making flower story. In the version favorable to Catherine, Meghan supposedly slammed the door and binned the flowers. My question is, how does anyone know what she did with the flowers? It was after she closed the door.

Logic or literary license, one ends up with the same end. Megs jealousy, vindictiveness and rage are well publicized and well known. Given this, one can hardly assume or surmise that, after slamming the door in Kate's face, Megs had the flowers placed in her loveliest vase to be a constant reminder of the cunt at whom she seethes with jealous rage.

^^^ one COMES TO the same end.

I would like to know more about the stealth photos Meaghan took of William and Kate’s kids and home. There was something that caused William and Kate to turn against her quite early on.

The story was that while visiting the Cambs, MM went to take a phone call in another room and Charlotte followed her. She took some pics of Charlotte on her phone and William either saw or heard about it. I also recall she took some photos in a private part of one of the royal palaces.

They expected to be given the apartment next to the Cambs, and Harry was very impatient about that. But it was either the photo incident or the bullying report that made William adamant he didn't want them living right next to his family, so the apartment in KP was withdrawn and Frogmore was offered.

They are sending the book to Harry...🤣

Meghan is the only child of her parents’ marriage, and her half siblings are about 15 years older than she is. By the time she was old enough to remember anything, they were adults. In addition, she says she “grew up” as an only child. It’s bizarre that, with the dozens of lies and hundreds of acts of horrible behaviour she has committed that anyone is questioning this completely reasonable statement. It’s actually more a demonstration that her family is as hypersensitive and litigious as she is.

I agree, R192. Strangely neither Sam nor Thomas jr cooperated with Bower, even though in the past they had the most to say. I'd love to know what prompted Tom jr's outrageous letter to Harry warning him not to marry MM.

He really is trash. I don't know much about his mother, but Tom sr strikes me as a hardworking, respected professional who clearly did all he could for MM. He admitted there was a lot of cocaine use on his Hollywood sets, but it didn't interfere with his work. His colleagues praised him, no one has had a bad word to say.

The "Sean" guy on Youtube was saying yesterday that they're planning to release Harry's book just before Michelle Obama's sequel, like a week or two. It will likely be buried but Tom's book may give Harry's some oxygen. Fresh from reading it, some people will probably want to hear what Harry has to say for himself. Ditto a fairly quick turnout of something from Netflix because H&M's stock is crashing - will anybody care in 2023 when the worst of the dirt has faded. What are these two even capable of doing that anyone will care about?

Tom jr sold his dad's address to the press according to TB. That was a shitty trick which didn't help matters,

There’s lots of juicy tidbits in the book, and I’m not even 100 pages in, I don’t know why people try to make it sound like there is nothing new. Bower writes that Meghan decided to dump Trevor as soon as the Suits pilot was picked up. But then they went on vacation to Belize, where Trevor proposed, and Meghan accepted and was quite excited. There is a lot of pink cotton candy crap from Ninaki Priddy, but reading between the lines, Meghan always knew she was going to divorce Trevor, but wanted the wedding of her dreams and was not coy about it. She accepted 20000 from her father, knowing he had to dip into his savings, and run the event by an iron fist micromanaging the guests. None of her maternal family attended the wedding (except Doria) because they could’t afford it - Meghan booked all the rooms in the hotel, but all the guests had to pay for their accommodation.

Bower makes it quite clear that Meghan was embarrassed by Trevor, yet was willing to put up with him while he was useful to her:

[quote] “Some who knew Trevor were not surprised by her decision. They cast him as a ‘brash acquired taste’. Often he acted with self-importance. She had learnt a lot from him, and his financial support had been invaluable, but there was nothing more to absorb, nothing more to gain. He had been an opportunity – a starter marriage. He was no longer her family – or, was the latest family she no longer had.”

It’s an Informative book, but Bower is quite a poor writer. He’s not only unimaginative, he’s often ungrammatical. There is a sentence in one of the first extracts: “ Like any other shooting party weekend, Harry expected….” That kind of error had cropped up several times in subsequent extracts. In the first example, it just sounds silly, but sometimes I have to reread his sentences to understand what he means.

Meghan's tendency to bend language to suit her own agenda is very much from the Bill Clinton handbook of defining 'sexual contact'.

Wouldn’t she be bending language more if she says she grew up in a four-stain household when he half-siblings were actually independent adults?

R197 How many best sellers have you produced?

r200 how many totally irrelevant questions do you ask in your life? How often do you struggle with logic?

R201 It's not an irrelevant question. You complained about Bowers writing style not being good enough. I pointed out that he's made a lot more money than you out of writing.

It's the grammar fascist in you that I dislike. English is a living language, both words and grammar can change over time. Plus he's not writing literature. He's writing a gossip book so it doesn't really matter.

Now feel free to criticise my language and grammar. Much like Tom Bower, I won't give a shit what you think. You have a good day now.

You’re certainly free to debate whether grammar matters or not, but you can still be expected to know how to read and to be logical.

1. As you know, saying something sells well or not is not really a measure of whether it I s good or not. It’s the kind of rude and stupid response a child makes. That’s why I asked how often you pose irrelevant questions.

2. Things can be good even though they have flaws. I said it was an informative book, and that is reason enough for it to sell well. That is not to say it couldn’t be improved I doubt anyone is buying the book because Bower has a way with words. I apologise that I was not more uncritical in my praise of this bestseller. I will do my best not to criticise a best seller again.

3. I made a more general comment about his writing being unimaginative. To me he does not present facts in an interesting way and does not write sentences that are enjoyable to read. Based on some other comments I have read,, some others agree with me. Is it okay if I like books to be a pleasure to read? Is it okay to comment on that? Or is that a no-go area as well? Please let me know.

3. The particular grammatical error I pointed out as an example occurs frequently in the book and is not the breach of an arbitrary rule like split infinitives. It js an Illogical sentence construction where the beginning of the sentence doesn’t match the subject of the sentence. Arbitrary grammar rules do evolve, but there is still a general expectation for sentences to be put together logically. As I said, sometimes I had to read twice to understand what he was saying. I apologise for criticising it. It’s really the reader’s responsibility upon reflection

I would never criticise a post here for grammatical errors. I make many myself, along with typos . I do usually expect published books not to have them. Maybe you don’t care but it’s not really bizarre to expect a book to be largely free of severe grammatical errors l.

Any grammatical mistakes you might make don’t bother me at all and it wouldn’t criticise them. You are not publishing a book. I am disturbed by by the vileness and stupidity of your posts. I don’t know what happened to you with a respect to grammar (perhaps a teacher criticised you?) bit you might with to get help with it.

Sam isn't suing only on the "only cbild" basis. Meghan made other, far less open to "well, if you look at it this way" interpretation. I don't know the history of this woman, so I can't evaluate the claims, but Meghan said her sister had lost custody of her children, oy hot a GED, really rather cruel, embarrassing stuff that Meghan should, if she had an ounce of discretion, should have had the sense to leave out.

I think there is a reasonable argument that Meghan was treated like an only child by her father, which is one reason she is the way she is. But there are family photos of Meghan and Sam together, so there is also an argument that her statement was not entirely the case.

But for argument's sake cutting some slack there, the other claims were far more defamatory, and I believe, unless what I saw wasn't complete, that Meghan's lawyers haveumped them all under the Oh, what she said on Oprah was never meant to be taken as objective fact.

If that's the case, then Sam's lawsuit has already done what all Meghan's other lawsuits have done: regardless of whether she wins or loses the case, the process itself has pointed Meghan as a habitual liar, and further damaged her public image.

She filed for dismissal, the court refused. That means the.court thinks Sam's case is "arguable", which doesn't mean "winnable".

If I were a betting man, I'd take a flutter on an out of court settlement, and a hefty one in the low to mid-six figures. The case goes away, Sam gets a nice payout for having had to be eclipsed in her father's heart all these years by Princess Meghan, and Meghan finally gets Sam to close her cake-hole.

I think that amongst the many circumstances that created the lying, cruel, pompous, self-regarding bitch Meghan is, is that no one has ever bothered to stop her.

But in the fierce light that beats upon a throne, even if not directly, Meghan came up against a force she couldn't control. The tabloids AND the broadsheets are not cowed by herband are still taking the piss out of her.

Her lawsuits and threats have only, as barrister Mark Howard predicted they would, left her with technical wins but a damaged public image.

The BRF may not have done everything it could have, and many think should have, but they still came out of it all right. The Cambridges, especially, looked golden in Britain compared to the lying, whingeing golddigger.

People like Meghan are partly born and partly made.

Her father's doring did her no favours over the longer term in terms of likability, softness, actual as opposed to faux compassion, and instead in located a ruthless assumption that the world should treat her as her father did. But it did give her the moxie to get where she is.

Dorian's come and go presence is, in my opinion, evidence of a kind of narcissism, as well. I don't think Doria does now or ever has given much of a damn about Meghan, but she's now willing to put in the occasional appearance on behalf of her now rich and famous kid. But I doubt those have anything to do with genuine affection for her daughter.

Between those two parental extremes, what we see today is a callous, ruthless woman trained in her early life to expect adoration, and to ser that putting self first and the kids second, so to speak, is perfectly acceptable.

But it's the adoring father whose heart has been broken. The mother who blithely distanced herself from Meghan is doing just fine.

Harry is the future Thomas Markke, Sr., nursing in bewilderment a broken heart.

But the BRF has taken a leaf out of Doria's book, and is blithely distancing itself from the malign bloom that is Meghan Markle.

R203. Did you really spend that amount of time and thought on my post? I'm not willing to waste the time it will take to read it. LOL. Honestly life is too short and this is a gossip thread.

Spend an afternoon finding all the spelling mistakes that Jane Austen made in her books. You'll love it and you'll have great fun going through them.

^*inculcated (not in located)

Fucking autocorrect.

R203. We je. Somebody is ride and stupid I do.

Another fun fact that Bower revealed which I never read before. Half-sister Samantha's given name is Yvonne. She renamed herself, but no idea when.

Bower has advised he will release the paperback version of this book and include new information. Hopefully, he held back on some truly, juicy info in the hardback in order to boost sales with the paperback and the added information is not superfluous. Of course, it may just end up being added chapters on anything that has occurred with Meghan since the publication.

I identified as an Yvonne briefly but then I wore pantyhose in August and now I'm back to Joe,

The bitch is goin down , who would ever give this skank gold digger the time of day , let alone have their name attached to this desperate liar. She is an embarrassment to herself.

DL's crazy Meghan fanbitch has created yet another thread, now dealing with William. Some homophobic crap, as per usual.

Those Meghan fanloons must be scared shitless of their heroine to get exposed by that Tom Bower book.

Apparently, the fucking scumbags have started a rumor that William and Kate are in an open relationship and William likes to get pegged. This was exactly the rumor that was following Harry a la the 'roast chicken' comments. #princeofpegging is trending. I guess they are trying to deflect from the conversation around the Bower book.

Yes, her real name is Yvonne and her surname is Grant. She changed it back to Markle after MM married Harry.

More tidbits:

[Quote]Attempts over the previous year to find a new boyfriend had floundered. On several occasions she had swapped messages with Matt Cardle, a winner of the television show The X Factor, suggesting that they meet.200 Her attempts ended after Cardle met the woman he eventually married. Approaches to other single celebrities while she lived with Cory remained unknown to the chef. Despite his suspicions, Cory tweeted that month, ‘I am so proud of my lady.’ Professionally, she remained on the same spot on the treadmill. World Vision had reappointed her as a global ambassador, and she could also look forward to a second season filming her own Reitmans clothes collection. With her face across city billboards and on social media she would be famous among Canadians. But, as ever, that was not enough.

R114 combines two annoying DL features: using childish nicknames and indulging in conspiracy theory.

R216 Plus foul language, witlessly deployed.

[Quote]To launch the new campaign in Toronto, Reitmans hosted a lunch on 5th April for fashion journalists. Jessica Mulroney’s prospective presence propelled Meghan into a hysterical spin. The table décor, the flowers and the menu, she screamed to her agent Lori Sale in Los Angeles, were all terrible. ‘What will Jessica Mulroney say?’ she wailed. Sale pointed out that her small audience in Los Angeles had never heard of Mulroney.

But what will tits mcgee think of the décor???

R196 I read both Bower's and Brown's books. There's more detail in Bower's, but the meat of the story is much the same. And Brown is a far more interesting writer. She tells a story. Bower is VERY VERY dry.

There's more detail on Meghan being a desperate famewhore, but who is surprised by that? Not me. The only interesting new tidbit that stood out to me is she allegedly treated Trevor's family much like the Windsors. Well, he has his heiress wife now. Must have a huge dick because the face...eh.

R204 Sam and Meghan are both cunts. Sam is estranged from her mother and her children. Tells us plenty. And she has exactly one photo of her and Meg that she constantly reshares. Yeah, they're as close as Kate and Pippa.

Re the bridesmaids dresses and shoes bullying tale, I remember reading at the time this surfaced that it was Charlotte who told William what had gone on.

Not Kate.

If true, then MM has made another enemy in the RF. Kids don't forget people who made their mothers cry.

I think there was also a bit about how, during the fitting, Charlotte told MM that now she would be her "Auntie Meg", just like her "Aunt Pippa". MM's angry reply was that she (MM) was nothing like Pippa.

Anyone else remember reading/hearing about these possible additional details?

R220 there are about 100,000 versions of "the wedding fight debacle"

Take your pick

[Quote]MM's angry reply was that she (MM) was nothing like Pippa.

Given her nonexistent arse, she is right about that.

The idea she showed obeisance to Mulroney is fascinating, particularly given she didn't seem to have much regard for Toronto. That's the weirdest and most unexpected twist in this book.

Mulroney was a big fish in a small pond. Makes sense she'd suck up to the "Queen Bee"

Actually, that makes sense of it R224. Mulroney was later distanced once new footings were found.

Which makes her NOT sucking up to QEII and the future Queens of England all the more mind-boggling. Who better to have on your side??

R226 longterm planning isn't really a Markle family trait.

Notice the occasional sucking up to the Queen but constant bird flipping to Charles and William. Um...who do you think is in charge next?

I think MM was offended that the BRF didn't fall for her act, which may have just been down to British reserve/American fulsomeness. But she chose to interpret it as racism.

"Never go against the family" - apparently Harry hasnt seen that movie

More tidbits:

[Quote]Once settled in her room, Meghan came down for lunch with Nelthorpe Cowne’s co-director and a widely respected literary agent, Adrian Sington, and his assistant. Weeks earlier, Meghan had asked Sington to draft a synopsis for a proposed book to be written by her based on The Tig.

[Quote]On this occasion, Meghan calmly sat down for lunch. Her metabolism required the right amount of food at a precise time. But as she ate, she quietly directed her venom at Sington. His synopsis, said Meghan, contained a proposed chapter called, ‘How to be a better woman’. The chapter focused on a woman’s choices to improve her sexual attraction. Meghan, said Sington, seethed at him. She complained that he had inserted sex into her proposal. He was surprised. Meghan regularly posted messages on The Tig recommending potions and poses to secure a man’s interest. But Meghan was following a now familiar pattern. On this occasion, her anger was directed at the experienced agent. She seemed to delight in humiliating people. Her raison d’etre, concluded Sington, appeared to be manipulating men. Was it, he wondered, a result of her ‘terrible envy’? At the end of the meal, she left for her room. ‘She’s one of the most unpleasant people we’ve ever dealt with,’ Sington later told Nelthorpe-Cowne. By then, Meghan had also told the agency, ‘Forget the book and forget him. I never want to be in the same room as him again.’

About Harry:

[Quote]In 2016, Prince Harry was a damaged, insecure and under-employed 31 year old. Over the previous 15 years he had become notorious in the media as a wild party animal. Yet despite a series of incidents – dressing up as a Nazi for a party, calling a fellow Sandhurst cadet ‘a Paki’, and drunkenly attacking a photographer outside a nightclub – Harry was always forgiven after apologies by a Buckingham Palace spokesman.

[Quote]Unlike his father, Harry was widely adored as a good lad who many men and women wanted to protect. But beyond the public’s gaze Harry had become over recent months lonely and forlorn. Watching William’s happiness with Kate and their two children he had become vulnerable. Meghan Markle’s research of Harry highlighted the reasons for his unhappiness, but even she could not have grasped the depths of his despair before they met.

That's not despair, it's annihilating envy.

[Quote]Further training as an army helicopter pilot led to a second 20 week tour in Helmand. Reluctantly, he left the army in 2015. Contrary to the version propagated by the Sussexes’ self-styled ‘spokesman’ and the royal editor for Harper’s Bazaar, Omid Scobie, that he had taken a ‘tough decision’ to leave, Harry had no choice.231 His lack of academic qualifications barred him from further promotion.

[Quote]Harry at first rekindled his relationship with an aspiring actress, Cressida Bonas, daughter of Lady Mary-Gaye Curzon, who was one of the most beautiful women of her generation. Like Harry, Bonas was interested in mental illness. She too in 2014 left Harry, a man who always feared photographers and demanded protection. Both women (Cressida and Chelsy), like others Harry met, discovered that he lacked class, was unromantic, unserious, short-tempered and imperious. Throughout their relationship, he had behaved without generosity. In a dig at him on his engagement to Meghan, Bonas would post a message alongside a sketch of a boy and girl on swings: ‘No matter how educated, talented, rich or cool you believe you are, how you treat people ultimately tells it all.’ She added the comment, ‘Truth.’

Was it Chelsy or Cressida who ungenerous Haz refused to pay for an airline ticket to a wedding of his friend?

R219, I can see how Bowers might come off as "dry". He actually strikes me as expert in what someone described as the British talent for "polite conversational sadism." Every blandly delivered compliment ("she looked as glamorous as ever") registers as an insult.

r234 Cressida

I think it was H. G. Tudor, the Youtube narcissist guy, who pointed out that the Queen, during her 70 years on the throne, had no doubt encountered many, many narcissists.

He then went on to name several of the Prime Ministers that the Queen had to see regularly. If anyone would be wise to and suspicious of ass kissers, it would be Elizabeth II.

He has a point.

Not really. Liz sure hasn't done a good job in managing "narcissist" Markle. Instead, she gave her millions of dollars in cash, jewelry and clothes, immediately gave her patronages and responsibilities having no idea of her abilities, not to mention intentions, and generally let her run rampant. Liz gets a full F grade. And this is not even pointing out the lousy decades of cover ups of Harry. Double F on that one.

I'm about 1/4 of the way in. I don't think it's as badly written as some are claiming. It's a gossip book, not literature.

[quote]Paul Kagame, a Tutsi army officer, had emerged in 2000 from the bloodbath to become the country’s president, receiving 90 per cent of the popular vote. By 2015, Kagame was widely accused of being complicit in mass murder. Many of his political opponents had been found dead, not only in Rwanda but across Africa, and Hutu refugees in neighbouring Congo were being slaughtered by the Rwandan army.

[quote]Nevertheless, led by Britain’s former prime minister Tony Blair, many in the world community paraded Kagame as a model African democrat. The UN, like Blair, ignored a 2014 report by the US State Department about murderous oppression in Rwanda. Similarly, they discounted the US Congress hearings in 2015 about Kagame’s propensity to murder his opponents.

[quote]As a regular reader of the Economist, Meghan would have been aware of Kagame’s reputation, but if she wanted to ingratiate herself with Nyamayaro she had no choice but to support him. In Nyamayaro’s opinion, Kagame was responsible for making Rwanda an ‘exemplary model of female leadership to every country’. In her admiration for the dictator, Nyamayaro described Rwanda’s women politicians as ‘phenomenal’. She did not acknowledge that the female MPs were merely rubber-stamping “Kagame’s edicts.

[quite]Accordingly, in her first speech in Rwanda, Meghan praised the president: ‘We need more men like that.’ During a week of meeting female Rwandan politicians she was excited that 64 per cent of Rwandan senators were women. She did not mention that one reason for that was the murder of Rwandan men during the tribal genocide. Just as intimidated as the men, the female politicians did not question their leader’s luxurious lifestyle. Travelling across the world in his large private jet, Kagame stayed in $2,000-per-night hotels while his countrymen’s average daily wage was $2.

“My kinda guy,” thought Meghan.

And this:

[quote] Soon afterwards, Meghan urged Elizabeth Nyamayaro to introduce her to Emma Watson. Nyamayaro refused. Never deterred, Meghan asked Elizabeth Nyamayaro to promote her to UN Ambassador. Phumzile Mlambo Ngcuka, the South African director of UN Women, was doubtful. Meghan’s cause could not have been helped by giving the impression to some people that while she did speak about politics, philosophy and ideology, her apparent all-consuming passion for the empowerment of women was in reality focused on self-promotion and the empowerment of Meghan Markle. Whatever the reason, Nyamayaro refused Meghan’s request to be promoted to ambassador. Meghan resigned from HeForShe and cut her ties with UN Women. Yet remarkably, despite the unpublicised split, she continued to cite publicly her UN Women experience as proof of her philanthropy. Outsiders never glimpsed the truth about the rupture or the reasons.

R230's excerpt is VERY interesting. What do we know about Adrian Sington? Wonder why should took a dislike to him? Because he wasn't some guy she could fuck for something in return?

Bower is heavily implying that MM had affairs with Patrick J Adams, Rory McIlroy, John Fitzpatrick, all the while dating Cory Vitiello exclusively.

She went to Rwanda in the name of the UN and while there, praised the genociders?

Jesus Christ.

There’s more:

[quote]“The actress insisted on flying to Rwanda first-class and be accompanied by Gabor Jurina, a Canadian fashion photographer.190 Michael Goyette, an American hair and make-up stylist, was also listed as travelling with Gabor. ‘Only Michael,’ explained Meghan, ‘knows how to work with my Black hair.’ Naturally curly, she had used a treatment called Kerotin to create her hair’s silky straight look. Meghan’s demands sent the costs well above the budget. Surminski, the film’s producer, World Vision decided, could no longer travel to Rwanda.

[quote]In two air-conditioned mini-vans, Meghan and her team of three World Vision marketing executives, a Canadian cameraman plus an advertising account executive, and several suitcases containing a selection of fashion outfits, were driven for 90 minutes from Kigali’s best five-star hotel to Gashora. For generations the village women and children had walked every day several miles to fill their jerry-cans in a dirty river. The result was constant illness. The commissioning of a well, financed by World Vision to deliver fresh water, was a major event – marked by Meghan’s arrival in January 2016.

[quote]To the villagers’ surprise, after Meghan was filmed with the children playing under the clean water bursting from the tap, she disappeared with Gabor Jurina. For hours Jurina photographed the perfectly coiffured actress hugging, squeezing and smiling with the village children. Each pose was followed by a change of clothing. ‘Meghan is a true humanitarian,’ Lara Dewar would say. Speaking of Meghan’s ‘authenticity’, Dewar praised her involvement with the children, letting them sit on her lap for the photographer.

It's really disgusting that she wanted to fly first-class on World Vision's dime for a charity mission.

I find all this global humanitarian stuff very boring. Sorry, can’t help it.

Stick to the yachting and surrogancy dreams, then.

R247, of course it’s boring—it’s performative and empty. “I’m going to travel to world and visit poor people.” It’s nonsense.

[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.]

R248 What’s that supposed to mean?

R251 that's ESSSL = English as a Sussex Shit Squad Language

So did Harry want a wife or mommy? And 1.5 million a year isnt enough for these cunts?

[Quote]By then, Harry had introduced Meghan to Diana’s two sisters, Jane and Sarah, and her best friend Julia Samuel. Harry assumed that Diana’s family and friends would see a similarity between Diana and his fiancée. Both, he said, shared the same problems. He was disappointed. No one agreed that his vulnerable mother had anything in common with his girlfriend. More discomforting for him, they thought Meghan would not fit in with the Royal Family.

[Quote]Their unease was voiced by Charles Spencer, Diana’s brother. At William’s request, Spencer weighed in. Three times married, Spencer cautioned his nephew to reconsider his haste towards marriage. His advice provoked a bitter reaction. ‘This was going to be really hard,’ Harry would later reflect on establishing Meghan’s place in the family. One of his recurring concerns was insufficient money if they married. Although Harry annually received about £1.5 million from Charles, Meghan had been advised to continue acting to supplement their income.

If Cory and Trevor could talk! I wonder if Buckingham Palace paid them off in the period when they were still hoping against hope that they could make the whole Sussex thing work.

[quote] So did Harry want a wife or mommy?

Yes.

No mention of her first husband Joseph Giuliano-Goldberg, attorney-at-law, whose mother bought him a speedy annulment.

[Quote]Meghan’s behaviour was fuelling Palace speculation about Kate’s anger over her treatment of their shared staff. Meghan’s requests, they complained, were delivered as commands rather than inquiries about whether something would be possible. The team of handpicked professional women preparing for the wedding were the target of her complaints. Among the several disputes was the choice of music for the wedding (undecided until the last days), the menu at the reception (constantly changed), the guest-list (not only old friends but many of Harry’s cousins, uncles and aunts were excluded), whether the guest-list should, as usual, be published (Meghan’s veto was final), the seating arrangements in St George’s Chapel, Meghan’s wedding dress (frequently re-cut), whether air-freshener could be used in the chapel (Meghan’s request was rejected), the mounting cost (Charles agreed to increase the budget) and – not least – which tiara Meghan could wear.

Tiaragate. Why was Harry so pissed off about the tiaras? He knows royal protocol and rules. Im wondering if he was afraid of getting his head chewed off by her. A sign of an abusive partner when you need to walk on eggshells.

[Quote]No member of Buckingham Palace’s staff is closer to the Queen than Angela Kelly, the 61-year-old personal advisor of the Queen’s wardrobe. Devoted to the monarch, Kelly’s many duties include caring for the royal collection of tiaras. Invited to the palace’s secure room, Meghan alighted on a tiara sparkling with emeralds. Her choice was approved by Harry. Kelly suggested that its Russian origin made it unsuitable. Harry became angry.

[Quote]‘He had been downright rude,’ The Times was told. Kelly reported the unhappy exchange to the Queen. Harry was summoned by his grandmother to a private meeting. ‘He was put firmly in his place,’ The Times reported. Shortly before the wedding the approved tiara featured in a second tiara dispute. Meghan’s hairdresser flew from New York to rehearse his work around the tiara, Queen Mary’s Diamond Bandeau. Meghan asked that the tiara be delivered to the stylist’s room. Kelly refused. Tiaras, she said, were not released for hairdressing rehearsals. Harry again became irate, accusing Kelly of being unhelpful. ‘What Meghan wants, Meghan gets,’ he shouted.

"Why was Harry so pissed off about the tiaras?"

Just speculating, but perhaps he resented the queen's personal courtiers and the amount of power they have, and absolutely hated all the rules and protocols of palace life. If that's how he felt, and I image he really did, he'd get huffy every time he told an "inferior" to do something and there was a delay or deferral because of standard palace procedures or security precautions, and he'd either get angry because his needs weren't considered to be more important than standard procedures. OR he'd suspect that the courtiers were deliberately delaying to put him in his place, and he's tell himself that those bitches would drop everything if William made the same demand!

And if he got worse at the time of the wedding, well. He was being a Bridezilla.

I think he was worried that if Markle didn’t get everything she wanted, she would bolt, and he would lose his new mummy. By then, they were feeding off each other’s worst traits, taking offence and flying into rages at the smallest things.

found it, well crafted and great acting too, I recommend you guys watch for a few mins first!

‘What Meghan wants, Meghan gets,’ he shouted.

That Harry would say this out loud and mean it is beyond comprehension to me. Why are straight men so proud to declare that they have been emasculated/castrated by their women? You're honestly beaming with pride at your wife owning your balls, H?

The sewage squad surfaces.

It was his wedding, at last. He was a prince all puffed up, defending his maiden fair. Blah blah blah. Rumble. Wretch. Puke.

Behold, the cuntiest wedding speech ever:

[Quote]Meghan’s speech was sentimental, but also a little threatening. Meeting Harry, she said, was ‘love at first sight’. She had ‘at last found my prince’. After thanking the Royal Family for their welcome she pledged to launch campaigns. ‘That’s why I am here,’ she said to applause. ‘Bring it on,’ shouted the American guests.

Surely, feminists don't sit around waiting for their prince?

Harry may have screamed about the Tiara the second time because Meghan was not asking for it to be released just for a "hairdressing rehearsal" (which had always been conducted without the tiaras by all other royal brides) but for CBS footage. I think they both would have wanted to give CBS that added footage of Meghan behind the scenes wearing the tiara while getting ready for the big day (none of the footage ever got released because the Palace later caught wind of the deal and forbade it).

Or, maybe its just as simple as that he's as much of a psycho as she has turned out to be.

r249 also very much a gravy train for certain types of people to get wealthy of pretending to be virtuous.

Meghan aside for a mo, Harry and Tiaragate certainly spotlights his massive entitlement and enormous immaturity. He comes off sounding like a classless oaf.

Harry’s rudeness to Angela Kelly would be a terrible insult to HM. What an idiot he is and ten to one MM hated that Bandeau Tiara.

"What Meghan wants, Meghan gets." If you were an actor, there would be so many different ways to read that line and convey different meaning. You could say it lightheartedly, offhand, matter-of-factly, plaintively...or angrily shout it. I question how Harry really delivered it. There could have been a game of telephone going on and it ends up with him shouting it. I dunno, just wondering.

However he said it, it was a ridiculous thing to say. She was a newcomer of no status marrying into the world's most famous family, being offered a priceless tiara to wear at her very expensive second wedding. A little grace and humility would have taken her far.

If he really said that, he deserves to have his balls cut.

^Somehow, I doubt Harry Prince of Dim has a sense of humor, irony to say it tongue in cheek. Dumb as a box of rocks comes to mind. Even the Sainted Diana called him Dim.

r270, every account has him screaming it at the Queen's closest aide Angela Kelly at the top of his lungs so that all the other Buckingham Palace workers in the vicinity could easily hear it in stunned silence.

One account actually has him racing into Buckingham Palace unannounced and demanding to see Kelley, then screaming at her on the landing over the huge Entrance Hall. I think that was in Robert Lacey's account.

Hahaha holy shit.

[Quote]As Brooksbank handed out Clooney’s tequila brand, James Corden hosted a dancing competition. Charles danced with his sons and waited for the fireworks. Impressed by the display, Charles asked Harry who had paid. ‘You, Pa,’ replied his son. Charles left the party early, uncertain how much of the £32 million bill was down to him. Regardless of this latest burden, he had hosted a memorable celebration on a special day.

I had to cook my own meals, guys. Did anyone ask if I was ok with that? I mean, there's only so many times I can cook fucking roast chicken and prepare avocado toast and green smoothies. Im an philanthropist and activist just like Diana, right Harry?

[Quote]American girlfriends visiting Meghan in Kensington Palace found a troubled woman. Cooped up in Nottingham Cottage she complained that there were no staff to prepare meals – no one treated her as royal. Looking miserable, she mentioned being the ‘most trolled person in the world’. People in the media were telling lies about her. ‘It was so damaging to her mental and emotional health,’ one friend concluded. One cause of the difficulties was her reluctance to take on traditional royal duties.

“But I fucked this guy! Why isn’t everyone bowing down to my trashy pussy! “

Translation: Meg was a lazy harpy who drove the staff away.

R6 Samantha actually lived with Thomas part of the time during Meghan’s childhood. Meghan’s narcissism made her desire to be raised as an only child.

R209 I think I heard Tom Bower in an interview say that there is more. I sure hope so.

Oh please, of all Meghan’s shenanigans, this ‘only child’ business is nothing. I had a similar situation, much older half sister I saw sporadically growing up, and I’ve always felt like an only child. Let it go.

Does anyone know what a special massage of the inner mouth is??

[Quote]In March 2019, Harry crossed a boundary. ‘Wellness’ became his new religion. In the reinvention of himself he adopted Meghan’s passion for organic products and treatments based on holistic meditation, numbers, gongs, crystal bowls, inner calm, chakra balancing, and special massages of the body and the inner mouth. The man who once reeked of tobacco, not least after smoking marijuana, also stopped drinking alcohol.

r282 does the book mention if he smokes pot now?

R283 - not that I read so far. It says social media trolls claim he does but Bower doesnt confirm it. He is portrayed throughout the book as an angry, horribly anxious, depressed train wreck, though. Wouldnt surprise me if he is taking prescription or illicit stuff.

r284 Thank you.

He HAS to be smoking daily. How can he mentally survive in that house, with this diminished life and all this failure, otherwise?

Smeg massages his inner "mouth" with her trusty jumbo dildo.

Failures? No doubt they tell themselves daily what huge successes they are now that the RF is out of the way and not diminishing their magnificent star power.

Putting my recent post on the other thread up here, as well.

In light of all the discussions around Harry's attraction to Meghan, someone on another site found this extremely interesting article on how a great many men, especially those suffering from anxiety, depression, and other issues that make them vulnerable, are highly attracted to women with BPD and other narcissistic tendency IF those women are physically attractive. It is precisely the very high highs, and very low lows, and the incessant excitement, that attracts such men.

This is part of a larger issue around "evolutionary psychology".

It is remarkable how much of this article accurately describes the how and why of the often seemingly incomprehensible decision Harry made.

And, in a rueful blow to the revolution, the study also finds that for women, the "bad boy" attraction is not nearly as strong, regardless of physical attractiveness. It still holds true that women value stability more than excitement in a permanent partner, and are willing to overlook less than a high level of physical attrativeness.

Mind, the men in this study are denizens of HCM, a site that caters to men looking for exciting women who display the same kinds of unpleasant characteristics as Meghan does.

It would appear that Harry and Meghan are, therefore, a match made in Heaven. But that doesn't mean the match is divine by any means, and at some point, and it appears that despite all her efforts to pretend otherwise in public, the relationship is well past its honeymoon phase. That doesn't, ipso facto, indicate an impending divorce.

Look forward to you lot's thoughts on this one vis-a-vis the topic at hand.

R289, not to poop on your contribution, but some of us had worked this out quite early on.

If I recall correctly, Kate's parents paid for her wedding dress. Did Charles foot the entire bill for the wedding including her unfortunate looking gown or did the world famous Suits actress, Reitman's spokesmodel and independent divorcee pay for her own gown?

Charles, the future King of England was not allowed to get married in the church due to his divorce but this divorcee no one ever heard of got special treatment and was able to marry in the church? Oh they were so MEAN to her, poor thing.

R88 thank you for telling the truth about the US media. The scary thing is all the suckers who believe the media.

R291 The situation for Charles, as the future Head of the Church of England, was different from Meghan's. And, although Charles and Camilla were not married in the Church, their union did receive its blessing after the civil ceremony.

It was also 16 years ago, and Camilla was taking the place of Diana. And, had Charles still been merely divorced rather than also widowed, with no former wife living, I'm not sure whether that blessing would have been offered. For the Wales', both partners were divorced, one with an ex-husband still living. The problem with Wallis Simpson had been not just that she was divorced, but that she had two ex-husbands still living AND she was marrying the Head of the Church of England - Defender of the Faith.

For the never-married Harry, sixth in line, the situation was different. That his bride was divorced with one living husband, but with Harry never married, marriage in the now far more liberal CoE on divorce was not an equivalency with Charles' marriage to Camilla.

Also, Charles and Diana, and Camilla and Andrew Parker-Bowles, had been married in the CoE. Meghan had a civil service with a few religious customs incorporated in, as Trevor Engelson was Jewish.

So the cases are not the same.

Charles paid for whatever in the Sussex wedding wasn't covered by the Sovereign Grant, which was mostly security and street decorations. Thus, Charles paid for the gowns, church fees, etc., and for what was likely a very expensive reception at beautiful Frogmore House. He also, of course, would have opened the coffers for Meghan to build a wardrobe appropriate for someone expected to be representing the monarchy at home and abroad.

And you can see how Meghan paid him back.

R289, how many of us in real life have seen a het man marry a bitch on wheels and wonder "what does he see in her"? They seemingly make the man's life miserable along with everyone else. I think some men are lazy and want a woman to run their life and also be the 'bad guy', so to speak. Harry is too dim and/or ego-driven to see he has lost so much in his decision to be with Meghan.

I also figure the fact her earlier marriage wasn't Church of England gave them wiggle room for we don't recognize it anyway... divorced people have been able to remarry in COE since 2002 on a case by case basis. R293 is right about Charles' situation.

R282 So Dimwit essentially made himself the male version of Goop. Wonder if he had any vagina scented candles hanging around?

I seem to remember that the queen (as head of the church) did not attend Charles and Camilla's wedding. She did go to the reception. (Wasn't there a big horse race scheduled that day and she kept nipping out to watch it on tv?)

[quote]Does anyone know what a special massage of the inner mouth is??

Open up and I'll show you.

From what I've read so far, it seems that Harry was absolutely desperate not to lose her, so i think he obviously is one of those guys who loves to be dominated and told what to do 24/7 (i.e. a total eunich).

" I think some men are lazy and want a woman to run their life and also be the 'bad guy', so to speak. Harry is too dim and/or ego-driven to see he has lost so much in his decision to be with Meghan."

Yeah, I've been seeing this dynamic all along. Harry not only wants a woman who'll run his life and theoretically devote herself to making him happy, and who'll bitch out his enemies so he doesn't have to, he wants a woman who'll support him financially! And Meg was the only one willing to give all that a go, and she probably thought she really could support him through capitalizing on their fame, but well. It's not working.

So Harry is probably feeling betrayed that she hasn't been able to make a vast personal fortune out of nothing, and he probably blames her for their current situation. Things are probably seriously ugly in private right now.

My brother always had a stream of domineering women and now a domineering wife who treats him like shit, so I've seen the pattern before.

r300 so whats their plan B? Millionaires who are damaged goods but who are obessed with living the billionaire lifestyle- a prospect furthur out of reach by the day.That is a recipe for pressure cooker level tension.They both sold each other a dream- he royal- she Hollywood that is not going to work out.They probably row about who is the most to blame.

"[R300] so whats their plan B?"

That's going to be a problem, because two people who aren't nearly as bright as they think they are and who won't listen to advice will have a hell of a time deciding on a Plan B!

And while he gave up an unbelievable amount to marry her she didn't give up a thing, she was the one who had nothing to lose. Her career as a pretty actress was going to fade out before her 40th birthday, so for her, the choice was between becoming royalty... or getting a realtor's license when "Suits" ended.

R297 Charles & Camilla were meant to get married and have the blessing at St. George's Chapel the day before (Friday). But Pope John Paul II died and Charles had to attend his funeral instead.

I think The Queen had a horse running on the 9th of April when they finally got married.

Tea from Redditor “SecondhandCoke” via Instagram’s “marklenews1”

Supposedly there’s some dirt on William that Meghan is trying to get in Harry’s book as revenge for Tom Bower’s revenge. The Redditor’s “Big Brother” said, “Word on the street is that she’s supposedly literally screaming mad over this book. Like they said she went outside in her yard and screamed even more than she did over Kate’s golden dress.”

Big Brother added, “She is supposedly DESPERATE to ‘set the story straight’ but she apparently can’t find a journalist to broadcast her response to this book… she has been all but on her knees to Oprah to try to get Oprah to help her ‘get the truth out there’ via another mudslinging interview but Opray, Gayle, and everybody else is pretty much telling her to go pound sand. She must be using the ghostwriter as a last resort.

(more at link about timing of book’s release, Spotify and especially Netflix’s frustrations with H&M - I can bring it over if anybody wants me to - this "Big Brother" supposedly works in SoCal in some capacity and hears things)

r303 A very big problem in my opinion.Very big.They both feel entitled to that lifestyle and keeping the illusion alive that its going to happen one day will only be possible for so long.

R305, I got a blank screen.

They’ll carry on with Plan A, Plan B, Plan C, and Plan D, which is to suck all the money and fame they can out of their royal connection while at the same time trashing the family to which they owe everything, like a pair of howler monkeys flinging their poop. It’s the strangest business model I’ve ever seen.

It must be driving her cray that she can't sue because she knows it's all true.

HA HA HA HA HAAAAA!!!

I wonder if they won't negotiate a gag to shut her up. They will have to put up with some publicity discomfort for awhile but you want her as financially weak as possible.

Reading reddit, I marvel her ass stink trolls waste any time disrupting here. Reddit is baaaaaad about her.

No matter how much you pay her or how many NDAs she signs, nobody would be able to trust her to keep her mouth shut.

R305 - from that link that won't come up for you:

More from SecondhandCoke from: “Big brother is my stepbrother who has a pretty prominent job in the entertainment industry. He occasionally feeds me gossip that I float into this sub.

...I heard today that Penguin wants to release Harry’s book a day or two before or after Michelle Obama’s new book. That’s BAD news for Harry, and in publishing, it’s a sign that they don’t have a lot of confidence in Harry’s book. They would release it alongside hers if they thought it would sell well on its own. Meg’s rescue chickens are coming home to roost, I think.

Sorry. I’m a moron and misunderstood the latest on Harry’s book publication. I thought they were trying to publish it around when they publish hers (Obama’s) and thought that they couldn’t be hoping for big sales, but what is happening is they are up against a fence to even get Harry’s book published this year because it’s not ready, and with Michelle Obama’s book coming out in the fourth quarter, his will totally be drowned out… and they apparently think it will tank anyway, putting them out a lot of money…

I’ve heard and believe that there already are videos of these tantrums going back to the beginning. I’ve heard that Princess Charlotte’s security has video of the bridesmaid bullying, that they have video of the ensuing altercation where Meghan did make Catherine cry. I’ve heard there’s video of hers and Harry’s big fight before the UN speech. The press has it all, but they haven’t published it because a) it’s obtained from private citizens, b) out of respect for the Queen, c) because Sunshine Sachs still pays enough to keep the press positive, d) they have been good and locking people into NDAs, and e) until now, there hasn’t been a market for it. Most people would see videos like that reported in the mainstream press as intrusive and distasteful. Now that the book is out, though, I fully expect leaks to start emerging through social media and youtube. Once people see that they don’t have to be afraid of her NDA, they will start talking, writing, and releasing that videotape.

...Unconfirmed, but if Netflix announced being finished with them in the net few weeks, I would not be surprised. Netflix has its own money troubles, and it does not want to get splashed by her mud [when Meghan finds an interviewer to answer back to Bower’s book – apparently she’s begging Oprah/Gayle to no avail] Plus, people know she’s a liar, and they saw what happened when Oprah just took her at her word. They won’t run the same risk. Same with Spotify who are in a bind already because how do they release a podcast, and a half-assed one at that, with this book ‘shining a light’ on this liar and bully. She could lose everything because of this… They [Netflix?] can’t release a show while this shitstorm is happening around Bower’s book, that is certain. They have to wait, regardless, to see if H&M can recover from this, and the thing is a) no one believes they will rebound and b) Netflix has already been waiting almost three years. Many shows are shot and previewed and then never aired.

I think it’s most likely that they had Perez run that in the wake of the book to see if it generated any excitement or positive talk before they decide what they are going to do. It could be that they are previewing it to select audiences for the same reason. They [Netflix] can’t release a show while this shitstorm is happening around Bower’s book, that is certain. They have to wait, regardless, to see if H&M can recover from this, and the thing is a) no one believes they will rebound and b) Netflix has already been waiting almost three years. Many shows are shot and previewed and then never aired.

The impression I get, especially lately, is that Harry is getting more and more like a whipped dog. He cowers and tries to stay out of her way. I imagine their house to be like Munchkinland when the Wicked Witch is around. Then when she leaves, Harry, Archie, and Lili come peeking up from the lawn with flowers on their heads.

* Sorry for the repeated part in the next to last paragraph

^Fan fic.

[quote] Princess Charlotte’s security has video of the bridesmaid bullying

I hope nobody has video of little girls trying on clothes.

R269 The wedding tiara is not particularly attractive, or maybe it was the badly styled hair. Of course MM hated it. Kate also hates her engagement ring of doom, but sometimes you gotta make sacrifices to ensure smooth sailing.

Some of the last few posts in this thread are the anti-Meghan equivalent of "Black Twitter is blowing up. IP addresses have been collected and sent to the FBI. Watch this space, explosive story tomorrow."

People gossiping about Meghan after Tom Bowers book has become an issue for the FBI? WTF?

Have the Squadettes invaded the Deep State?

Never mind January 6, we have people gossiping about the Duke and Duchess! All hands on the Pentagon deck !!!

[quote]I’ve heard that Princess Charlotte’s security has video of the bridesmaid bullying, that they have video of the ensuing altercation where Meghan did make Catherine cry. I’ve heard there’s video of hers and Harry’s big fight before the UN speech. The press has it all, but they haven’t published it because a) it’s obtained from private citizens, b) out of respect for the Queen, c) because Sunshine Sachs still pays enough to keep the press positive, d) they have been good and locking people into NDAs, and e) until now, there hasn’t been a market for it. Most people would see videos like that reported in the mainstream press as intrusive and distasteful. Now that the book is out, though, I fully expect leaks to start emerging through social media and youtube. Once people see that they don’t have to be afraid of her NDA, they will start talking, writing, and releasing that videotape.

Most of that paragraph speaks for itself as absolute rubbish. Nothing more to say.

[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 stupid and brain deprived " fbi troll" at it again.

I don't see the FBI post. Link? They make me laugh.

See R318 for the person saying our IP addresses are being reported to the FBI!

Or re-reading it, maybe they're joking?

But if you had them blocked, probably a Squadette (same as Klan Grannies? I never figured out which side they're on)

What did the FBI troll say?

I've got that bitch on "ignore".

R326, click on the R318 which is in post R324. Unless you have me blocked too :)

In that case, you can make your own post that has R318 in it and then click on that.

The reading comprehension of the last few posters is abysmal. You've missed the point completely.

Then what is the point?

He said that the level of discourse here is reminiscent of the crazy pro-Meghan troll who writes angry posts claiming that the FBI is collecting IP addresses of the antis and are about to make mass arrests.

The ludicrous "insider" quote posted by r320, who correctly notes that it is rubbish, positively screams nonsense.

First of all Charlotte doesn't have her own security. Secondly, none of the fake insider's reasoning for why videos would not be run in the UK media stands up, but this one stood out as a particular howler: "Sunshine Sachs pays enough to keep the press positive."

At the very least, Sunshine Sachs is clearly very active on the Sussexes behalf, but the idea that SS "pay off" media outlets is absurd. No PR outfit could survive if that were the business model. PR companies don't deal in cash exchanges - they deal in carrot and stick exchanges. They offer stories to media outlets (always hungry for content, but can need persuading to feature b/c/d-clients prominently), and sometimes PR will sweeten the deal with offers that another celeb in their stable will be available to the outlet later on if the story is run.

Or, if they're trying to squash a story, they'll sometimes will implicitly or explicitly threaten to lock said outlet out from ever again getting access to the PR firms entire stable of stars. This is a somewhat extreme tactic, and is usually only effective for large PR firms with a huge client list, but Sunshine Sachs fits that bill, so I imagine they've employed it on many more than a few occasions.

But no, these deals aren't based on cash - they're based on access.

r230 rightly mocked it as rubbish, and I can confirm it was written by someone who has zero idea what they are talking about, and clearly zero "insider access".

R331, R320 here.... what leapt out at me was:

[quote]The press has it all, but they haven’t published it because a) it’s obtained from private citizens, b) out of respect for the Queen, c) because Sunshine Sachs still pays enough to keep the press positive, d) they have been good and locking people into NDAs, and e) until now, there hasn’t been a market for it.

Try to sell one part of that to the Daily Mail. If media had it, it would be out there. If the Rose thing was true and they could prove it, would they sit on it? Not likely. Fun fanfic but total fantasy and, worse, the writer has no idea what she's trying to bullshit. And that's before you get to the idea of security in the room when the child's own mother was present.

Exactly, r320 / r332

Reporter/blogger "Cockburn" of The Spectator:

“...judging from the testimonies of ex-employees, BetterUp seem to be professional in nothing other than virtue-signaling, and while they may talk the talk, by all accounts, they do not walk the walk. On Glassdoor, one employee branded the company a ‘Toxic Boys Club’ claiming they felt discouraged to speak up when something didn’t sit right, and that ‘wartime’ language was used to push people to their limits.

Another claimed that BetterUp was a ‘psychologically unsafe place to work,’ saying, ‘everyone is uncomfortable and living in fear. It’s keep your head down… do your work, don’t get on someone’s bad side. No one will go to HR as HR is close to the leaders.’ …

Another compared it to Theranos, and said that he can’t wait for the Netflix expose. Cockburn can’t help but speculate that a documentary might be the only way that Netflix will recoup any of the $100 million from the deal they struck with Duke and Duchess Dolittle, as the expensive ‘partnership’ declared in 2020 has so far resulted in… nothing...”

R328 perhaps it is the Writer !??? An abysmal and poorly written post.

The Maul: Meghan Markle's mouthpiece Omid Scobie is at it again with book sequel promising 'exclusive revelations' to be released next year

Here we go.

They are not helping the Democrats like they think they are. Harry is a laughing stock with his preachy speeches.

If Harry didn't have the British accent he would really sound like a dumb ass.

R338 Every time he speaks, I find his accent more and more irritating. Posh but stupid. I think it’s the hectoring, superior tone.

r339 it is irritating because he condescendingly tells others how to live when he really is in no position to do so. He was born into wealth and privilege and seemed to live like a fray boy, and that he is not actually an American citizen rubs people the wrong way too.

^^ frat boy

If he'd taken his wife and kid and personal fortune and bought a small house that was a model of efficient use of resources, he might be in a position to lecture people about living Greener. Or if he was using his position to meet captains of industry and talking to them about living wages and the long-term benefits of cutting carbon emissions, then I might be willing to take him a little bit seriously!

But as he's bought a huge mansion surrounded by water-guzzling gardens in a drought-stricken region, and does shit for anyone or the planet he lives on, he can go fuck himself.

Mulroney comes from a very old, rich family.

That's Mr. Mulroney, r363, not the person he married. She's from God knows where.

It's the other way around. Mulroney's family has money now but they were varying degrees of upwardly middle class prior to Mulroney senior's years as PM. Her family owns a shoe business. It's not Ewing Oil but it's not nothing.

R342, before something.... helped him self-actualize to the admirable man we see today.... at worst he privately might have withdrawn from royal life, gone off to Africa, built his eco-house, created a wild life sanctuary and lived out his days living purposefully on his more than enough income, with an Instagram full of magnificent beasts protected under his stewardship and perhaps even finding a level of contentment. But that doesn't sound much like life in Southern California, does it? I don't know how that happened...

I was just thinking before you post that maybe his 'only' way out is to go back to the wildlife sanctuary. And make up for those hunting parties with the homophobic misogynistic frat boys or trust-fund twits or whatever they're called - his Etonian friends. They can fly on their private jets to visit him in Zimbabwe and they can raise all kind of hell, pegging and otherwise. But hopefully help the animals and not enjoy slaughtering them.

Meghan would probably be a huge help on a conservation reserve in Africa and really be able the live the change she wants to make. I definitely think we're on to something here.

Well, that was Harry's mistake, wanting someone else to fix his life instead of fixing his own damn life. If he'd decided he was going to change his own life on his own terms, and go to Africa to make a new life for himself, he'd be a much happier man and infinitely more respected.

But he did what a lot of messed-up straight men do, he relied on a woman to change things for him, and well. If you rely on another person to change your life, they're going to change it to suit themselves, so there he being Oprah's neighbor in So Cal.

I think one of Meghan’s main problems is her complete and utter lack of a sense of humour. She’s so hilariously pompous and smug!

R344 Ben Mulroney is the son of former Canadian prime minister and notorious jerk Brian Mulroney. Jessica (nee Brownstein) is from an extremely wealthy Montreal family. The Brown’s shoe fortune.

r347 The African sanctuary route, done with minimal fanfare and focus on self, is his *only* way out of this in terms of regaining some dignity and respect.

And even then he won't get either unless he diligently plugs away at it in a state of almost monastic-level silent hard work for about ten years. If he does that he'll get a begrudging "Well, at least he's done *some* good with his life" from the British public.

Although there is nothing he can do to regain his family's trust. That's well and truly destroyed and cannot be rebuilt. He'll die with all of them looking at him as nothing more than traitorous filth.

If Harry had gone the sanctuary route of his own volition, instead of counting on a woman to fix his life, it might have been the making of him. But if he takes that path now, after an ugly divorce and a failed attempt to escape his family, then it'll be another disaster. He needs to work on himself and pull his head out of his ass before he'll be able to help others, or do a proper job of anything, if he tries crawling into the bush to forget his sorrows he'll really fall apart. It'll be scotch at breakfast and screaming drunk-dials to William at 3AM, and 200 trips to rehab before he drinks himself to death.

Ironically, this whole marriage has been an attempt to avoid doing the one thing he needed to do all along - fix himself.

Olmec Head even thinks H&M are boring

One wished that Princess Margaret was around for Markle and her friend Mulroney, especially with the bullying of Princess Charlotte . She would have put them firmly in their proper places.

[quote]I think one of Meghan’s main problems is her complete and utter lack of a sense of humour. She’s so hilariously pompous and smug!

True. I can't imagine her ever being able to laugh at herself.

I think that's one of the biggest problems that British people had with her (before she started being a total cunt). She just didn't understand our self-deprecating humour.

r354 He is right.They really did overestimate how popular and successful they would be in the US and how interested people would be in them and and for how long.

Plus they continue to act like jerks. If they'd just done it, buckled down and done something other than misbehave, maybe it might have been different. But they're assholes.

Please let this happen.

Where can I watch the 60 mins Australia ab the book? I think it aired tonight

Here is the segment r361

Australian media really goes after those two.

I see the race card got played immediately

Thank you r362!

Trisha comes off ludicrously. Race card, claims in the US people "really like them" (new polls show not), any criticisms of the two are "Boring!", its everybody elses fault but theirs, blah blah blah.

She did absolutely everything the Sussex Sewage Squad does on here (except for regularly threatening murder and then posting horror/gore porn in order to shut down the thread) - it was almost eerie.

Americans never took to them at all. We knew what she was all along. We invented Hollywood we have thousands of her type here. They aren't even D list..

Uh Oh...

Katie Nicholl, the Vanity fair royal correspondent, who previously was very reluctant ever to say a cross word about Meghan and Harry, has now changed her tune, and is emphasising that Meghan's version of the "Kate made me cry" story is possibly not true. Believe me, this is a massive departure for both Nicholl and for VF. Nicholl is basically now telling OK! mag (the softest gossip mag of all) that yes, Meghan's version is not the truth:

"Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, was left red-faced by Meghan's comments about their alleged feud during her 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey, according to Vanity Fair royal author Katie Nicholl. During the bombshell interview, Meghan levelled several accusations against the Royal Family, including that they were racist towards Meghan and Harry’s son Archie, and that Kate had made Meghan "cry" before her 2018 wedding. Meghan told Oprah: “A few days before the wedding, Kate was upset about something pertaining — yes, the issue was correct — about flower girl dresses, and it made me cry, and it really hurt my feelings.”

Commenting on the impact of this story, Ms Nicholl told OK! Magazine: "Kate has never wanted any suggestion of a rift with Meghan to come out in the press, so for this story to be circulating is very hard. From what I hear, there are different versions of the bridesmaid story, not just the one Meghan discussed. Kate felt it was all sorted, so to have it brought up again was mortifying. Kate is not in a position to respond and Meghan and Harry know that.”

This book didn't add anything new. It really just rehashed everything that was already out in the press

[quote] Kelly suggested that its Russian origin made it unsuitable. Harry became angry.

So based on the previous threads, we know that the BRF got jewels from the Romanovs before their untimely departure, but why would wearing these jewels be considered "unsuitable"?

OK, Meghan, You may need a remedial reading course but as far as I am concerned there is quite a lot that is new.

That VF story, the CBS deal timing, the truth behind the Archie's birth chaos, the Vogue story, the parents' backstory, the Reitmans fiasco, the big literary agents who told Bower she was the worst person they've ever worked with, the attempt to get on Dancing With the Stars right before she went on a date with Harry.

And that's all just off the top of my head as to what's new. Then we get to the confirming of what was merely rumour.

This book is MEATY, MEATY, MEATY - and it will haunt your heroine for the rest of her life. She will never recover from it.

But you already know that, which is why you and your fellow Sewage Squaddies repeatedly post the lie that there's "nothing new here" and how "boring" it all is.

Bitch, PLEASE.

R370, Kelly was probably being diplomatic rather than simply telling Meghan, no, you can't have that one.

Wasn't Eugenie allowed to wear the same tiara that Meghan was denied?

I wonder if her imperious attitude was noted and a decision was taken to resist her domineering ways, in order to get control of the situation?

Or maybe the tiara was intended for royals "of the blood" and not marry-in commoners?

Or maybe it's not even true but I read it at the time - maybe in a tabloid.

I think the leaks surrounding Tiaragate make it extremely clear that it was the imperious attitude, r373.

Was it influenced by when the vault got opened up for choosing? Their engagement was announced November of 2018. Eugenie's in January of 2019. Maybe Eugenie was offered first choice since it's all down to the Queen and Eugenie's wedding was pushed back because of Harry's and the schedule. There are also stories the Queen wondered why Meghan was wearing a veil given it was a second marriage. You can never tell. Robert Lacey, the biographer, claimed Meghan Markle was denied the emerald tiara because questions would have been raised about its provenance. But surely the same questions would have been raised about it when Eugenie wore it, which she did. I think a lot of shit is just made up. It would be fun but painful research to examine all the claims over twenty years of royal biographies and figure out what was true, or at least consistent, and what didn't make sense in retrospect.

R362. Thanks! That segment is delicious. Valentine Low. Clearly has the goods out our Meg. The bridesmaid drama is great fun, but it’s the multiple bullying claims that are damning.

Another wrinkle in tiara-gate is that Finding Freebie (presumably from Meghan, because who else would it be?) provided explicit descriptions of the palace's vault location. (It also provided similar descriptions of Anmer Hall and other locations). Considering details of these locations are sensitive and privileged information for which there are true security concerns, it was a wonder more fuss was not made. I guess that fuss would have to come from the palace and they'd just as soon not direct more attention to the matter for multiple reasons. More evidence that Harry & Meghan moan on about security but could not give a damn about anyone else's safety or privacy.

I think Bower's book demonstrates that Harry and Meghan have no organic support. Had they, their supporters would have been up in arms about the book and disputing what they would consider to be lies. Social media would be awash with their commentary. Instead, nary a peep is heard but they all work in concert to make the #pegging trend (deflection). At best, they have the Squad (some of whom are probably reimbursed in some way) and their paid bot farms.

If they were blabbing about the most private places in royal life, that might be another reason for William's supposed deep enmity.

OK, so help me out. About the tiara...

One of the recent claims was that MM wanted to wear the Vladimir! For you non-tiara watchers, that is the tiara that the Queen frequently still wears. (See link below.)

There were some comments early on, claiming that THAT was the tiara the MM wanted, but I found it hard to take them seriously.

Also, I was reading early on, that the Queen offered a choice of 5 tiaras, not the whole vault.

Does the Bower book specifically mention the Vladimir?

Google Vladimir and it's almost 99% photos of the Queen. I saw one with Diana wearing it and one with Kate wearing, but wonder if they weren't photoshopped? There's bound to be a pecking order of tiaras too. It is hard to imagine someone marrying in would be given the run of the shop.

Bower said she wanted an emerald tiara. Express UK reported years ago that sources had said Meghan wanted the Vladimir.

Meghan was never going to be allowed to wear a tiara mainly worn by HM. Although, HM herself has not worn the tiara since 2014 after which Putin's unsavory behavior became more evident to the broader public. So, the refusal to allow Meghan to wear the tiara based on its provenance may not be untrue, but it is probably not to whole truth nor the main reason for the refusal.

Beatrice is the only bride of late* who has worn a tiara in HM's rotation. *Anne wore the same tiara in her wedding decades ago. It is suspected she was given this honor as she had a spare weeding due to the pandemic. She also wore one of her grandmother's gowns so the tiara fit the theme.

LOL Who does MM think she is to demand a certain tiara?

I love you R371

It's doubtful that Meghan even knew of the existence of the Greville Emerald Kokoshnik tiara that Eugenie wore.

It hadn't been seen in public since Margaret Greville died, never worn once by any member of The Royal Family previously.

If there's one thing I'd trust her to Google, it would be the hardware.

The Greville bequest wasn't very detailed and some of it was disposed of or broken up to form new pieces during the lifetime of The Queen Mother.

The Greville bequest wasn't very detailed and some of it was disposed of or broken up to form new pieces during the lifetime of The Queen Mother.

Note the date of the blog entry: 2017. If tiara-mania could find it, anybody could.

You joke, R386, but I am surprised she didn't demand the crown AND the scepter.

Some poster long ago posited that Meghan wanted a tiara with green jewels because she had designated green as her signature royal color. Who knows?

Who could forget?

This is hilarious... the snub on a loop, set do soapy drama music.

"Some poster long ago posited that Meghan wanted a tiara with green jewels because she had designated green as her signature royal color. Who knows?"

Really? Because green is NOT her color! Horribly unflattering. She'd have to have to have spent the last 30+ year refusing to listen to fashion advice to think that green is anything but her enemy.

Oh, wait...

NEVER wear both green, and bronzer!

[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.]

Is that silk? I thought it was Bemberg lining.

Definite SpongeTom.

I can't stand Megs but I think she looks stunning in green. The anti-Harkles would do better if they focused on the lying and grifting, not dumb made up shit like the supposed back fat problem.

Oh, PLEASE, r398. She looked like a lumpy leprechaun. The cape! And that hat!

Her looks seemed to get worse after they got married. I will say she looked nice for the NAACP awards although the self tanner was a bit much.

[quote]you can see her strapless bra lumping and bumping underneath it

Why did she wear a strapless bra with that green dress? She didn't need to.

Maybe because her stylist hates her as much as the rest of Britain does, r401?

Probably some sort of girdle, tasked with confining SpongeTom while still allowing enough breath that she could speak if the officiant suddenly realized we must hear Meghan's thoughts. Sisyphus had an easier job.

I knew I remembered that the women were supposed to wear blue, white or red (the colours of the flag?) to that Commonwealth service where she wore Kermit green. Saw this comment under the video (way down)

"You can tell that Kate and Sophie and Camilla had a talk about what color they were gonna wear. Then there's that smegs that wore a color that was not suppose to be wore."

Don't know if it's true that it was told to her and she intentionally ignored the advice - or what - but... Well, bright green is the colour of the Republic of Ireland, right?

A dark jewel tone green may be flattering but all that material in that medium green color was no bueno.

The Republic of Ireland is not a member of the Commonwealth, though.

I know - that's why I mentioned that maybe bright green was not appropriate on that particular day. However, in the video, when they walk outside, there's another women in emerald green, greeting them. BUT she's not part of the royal party.

And the bit where Meghan dips between the chairs so she can put herself and Harry in front of Edward and Sophie - that was mentioned either here or in the comments.

The whole thing is just a mess. But isn't this right after they announced they were leaving for Canada and wanted the half-in, half-out status? So bad feelings all around. And only Meghan grinning like a Cheshire cat. Harry looking tantrummy. Weird.

And Meghan smiling right at a camera - then she notices that Sophie is starting at her, so she looks away from the camera at that moment.

* STARING at her - not starting. It didn't get that testy! But Kate looks upset or annoyed? William fed up?

They're lucky to be rid of them.

Kate looks fine. She's just busy attending a religious service, so she's not smiling like an imbecile and seeking out the cameras every moment.

^ LOL.

R410, I think it’s safe to say that by that point that she really didn’t care for Meghan. And that green dress is awful, there’s no way around it. That color on Meghan is a mistake, I don’t understand how she didn’t realize that.

The hat, too, R412. She really shouldn't wear certain shapes for fascinators because they give her acorn head.

This is the stylist Meghan needed.

Thank you. I saw it in the window and I just couldn't resist it.

I don't see confirmation that the green monstrosity is silk; I akways thought it was wool. Ugly either way. Also don't believe it was bespoke, considering the bunching torso, too tight biceps and too long skirt. Taxpayers wasted a bundle on it.

It looks wool to me too. Pity the poor sheep.

Yes, possibly stretch wool, done in lumpen leprechaun prole style.

What amazes me in the Commonwealth video is how fucking childish Haz and Megs are. They know (and revel in the fact) that they are in camera. Yet they cannot refrain from obvious "did you see that??" body language and smirking...like a couple of cunty junior high school girls. For two such entitled people who believe deep down that they belong at the center of the universe, with all eyes trained on them and all pens poised to take down every precious nugget of wisdom, they have no clue how to conduct themselves in the public eye.

Kate and William are no saints, but at least they know how to play their parts while on camera.

Actually, R419, in that clip Meg is doing much better at conducting herself in the public eye than harry. As William cuts them dead she keeps the photogenic smile on while Harry glowers and grumbles in her ear, if there were still photos of just her and Will, it'd look like nothing was wrong.

Harry's had media training since birth, and he still doesn't know how to keep a straight face.

I think at the point of that Commonwealth service, Harry still thought he was beloved and probably wanted to show the public how mean his family was, so he wasn't interested in keeping a straight face. At that time he thought he was the centre of the BRF's public popularity (because the public did love him for a long time), and she thought that via her (mother's) skin colour, she was the BRF's most valuable player in terms of satisfying the media's calls for diversity in all quarters. At this point in time, they both still wholly believed they were indispensible to the Monarchy.

They thought they could do no wrong, which is why they thought they could become billionaires off of their 'popularity', which is, in turn, why they left the BRF. Their firm self-regard also explains why they are so bitterly resentful of the family and (once they found out they actually had minimal public support) of the country itself.

I think to this day, their contant thinking is very much along the lines of "How DARE they??? Don't they know who we ARE?? How incredibly VALUABLE we are? How LUCKY they are to have us??"

Forbes is calling out the Sussexs for having no real brand and no one in positions of power trust them anymore.

You think about it, most of what little has come from them has been completed by him.

Ruh roh and LOL: "First, its as-told-to co-author, JR Mohringer, is a vastly more gifted and nuanced literary craftsman than the publicist/reporters who ginned up the previous pro-Harry-pro-Meghan hagiography, Finding Freedom....If there are passages in this book about events in Harry’s life that may be read as reflecting negatively on Charles, William, their wives or the Queen now, in Mohringer’s hands those passages will be diamond-sharp."

I hadn't thought that the writer the Maul so unkindly calls Meghan's mouthpiece got passed over for this assignment. Perhaps there's a pecking order?

To what do we owe this moment of silence from Montecito? Are they reading the Bower book together? Oh to be a fly on the wall at House of Harkle right now!

Has the big print version come out, R425?

R425 Who knows but lets enjoy it while it lasts.

Revenge has reached number 1 on the Sunday Times Bestsellers List!

Wow - and with almost zero spent on marketing, r428.

The two are toast, burnt toast, beyond redemption. Thanks Tom Bower !!!

Did you see that? I'm #1 on the Sunday Times Bestsellers List!!!!!!

R427, just wanted to confirm as assumed that's what Monticello is reading.

Could it be that FLOWER GIRL DRESSES = ROSE GARDENS?

LOL!

JK!

What are you babbling about NOW, psycho Sussex stinkfish r433

The Body Language Guy on YouTube just posted an analysis of the wedding video. When you watch the part when it’s Charlotte’s turn to pass MM, Bridezilla briefly drops her maniacal Joker grin to glare daggers at the poor kid.

I hope that when William's children grow up and have their positions above Uncle Harry, they will remember how Uncle and his wife treated their family.

They already do have positions above Uncle Harry

According to The Mirror, the book claims that Harry, while he and Meghan were preparing for their official visit to Australia and New Zealand in 2018, told William that Kate should be “friendlier to his wife.”

“Members of their family, said Harry, were not showing her [Meghan] sufficient support, respect, or friendship,” Bower writes. “Meghan, Harry believed, should be just as appreciated as their mother [Princess Diana].”

Not totally shockingly, the conversation did not go over well.

r438 They were offered plenty of support including from sophie to help show her the ropes as she settled in but she rejected all help and support as people trying to tell her what to do.This is all about her wanting a massive shortcut,minimal effort route to mega beloved celebrity status.Basically she had a creepy unhealthy obsession with Princess Diana and wanted to be the next Princess Diana.

She was not after support but unconditional licence to dictate to others what her mode of operation was.She is not a team player.

MM had a staff of 14.

FOURTEEN!!!

That's more than enough support.

[quote]MM had a staff of 14.

For what?

It's obvious that a seamstress was not among them.

[quote]“Meghan, Harry believed, should be just as appreciated as their mother [Princess Diana].”

That is fucking insane. He needs some serious mental health care to sort himself out. His obsession with his late mother and his delusion that his wife is Diana II are ruining him. Well, that a few other things.

[quote] I can't stop thinking if I did anything wrong. I like to improve myself constantly and I like to have feedback, because I really want to pleasure a guy as much as possible. I want him to be fully comfortable and to enjoy himself. If I'm not offering that, I have to know.

Two things, and they are both in defense of the Harkles (which is uncommon for me because I thibnk they're greedy idiots):

1) Just because gay men and women on DL know the rules about wearing tiaras doesn't mean Harry does. I would bet it never interested him much before.

2) When the news about Tiaragate broke, most people here who know those rules were surprised because we all assumed Meghan wanted to wear the Grand Vladimir Tiara (the grandest of all the queen's tiaras) with the gigantic Cambridge emeralds. In reality it now seems more and more like what Meghan really wanted to wear was the Greville Emerald Kokoshnik (pictured), which would not be quite as unreasonable thing for Meghan to want.

When Meghan got married, no one had seen that particular tiara in literally decades, so it would not be like Meghan asking to wear the Grand Vladimir, which only the actual queens of the UK ever, ever wear. It would have surprised everyone (as it did at Eugenie's wedding) because people at that time had forgotten it even existed, and it was never hugely associated with a particular queen (it's not as breathtaking as the GV). It's a blingy tiara, as far as tiaras go, which is why Meghan would have wanted to wear it.

The problem was that Meghan as only a minor royal duchess could not wear something much blingier than what Kate wore to her royal wedding, because the palace wants to make it clear the wife of William, as the future queen, is far more important than the wife of Harry, who will never be queen. Kate chose (as is her style) one of the smallest of all the tiaras in the royal collection, the Cartier Halo Tiara, so Meghan had to have another small all-diamond tiara.

Eugenie, as a Princess of the blood royal, was allowed to have a fancier tiara than Kate. Actually I think the tiara looks far better on Beatrice, with her auburn hair, than it would have on Meghan, who looked lovely in the all-diamond tiara.

The Queen never speaks but with the tiara distribution, she communicated loud and clear that she loves her granddaughters. I don’t think it’s so much about the royal blood exactly just that they are her family and a recognition that with Fergie and Andrew as parents, they deserve some extra love.

"“Members of their family, said Harry, were not showing her [Meghan] sufficient support, respect, or friendship,” Bower writes. “Meghan, Harry believed, should be just as appreciated as their mother [Princess Diana].”"

What Harry probably really meant is that the BRF was offering Meghan the wrong kind of support! They were supporting her in fitting in and learning the how to be a working royal, when she wanted was support in becoming a massively famous and beloved international celebrity! And you don't get there by chatting with diplomats and attending factory openings!

But of course, Harry wasn't going to say that, even if he understood it. And I don't know that he did understand it, I think a lot of the things Meghan said went over his head.

I agree with R444. Another point, both Kate and Sophie evidently got access to a choice of simpler and less familiar/prominent hardware. Because they were outsiders, marrying in.

Kate married in in 2011. Sophie in 1999.

In 2019, Kate got a Dame Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order (GCVO). It's the highest rank in a 5-tier honour personally granted by the sovereign to recognize service to the monarchy. She'd been married at that point for more than eight years and had three children, which was part of the job. Sophie got hers in 2010 - after eleven years of marriage and countless bottom of the barrel engagements. Kate got her Royal Family Order in 2018. Sophie hers in 2010.

If you see tiaras and honours and all the rest of the swag not as gifts but entitlements, if you don't have humility, if you aren't there to muck in and help, if you don't get the purpose of monarchy.... well, you follow.

I'm spinning it but it's attributed to William that he views life in the royal family as a privilege and that in exchange for the obvious you return a life of sincere service. It's probably not that different than how the Queen views it, though probably with less of a belief about God's role in the matter. Humility in service is the dividing line. You don't need me to tell you which ones get it and which ones don't.

[quote] I think a lot of the things Meghan said went over his head.

I think most things go over Harry’s head, except perhaps “Mummy” and “lager.”

and gummie

The cat creeps out of the bag: Palace insiders thought Meghan was the source of the “William is cheating” rumor. She had a “strange obsession” with William and Catherine’s marriage, a “bizarre interest” in Rose Hanbury, and an established relationship with In Touch magazine, which printed the rumor. What a tacky, sadistic thing to do.

If she was the source they need to cut them both off.

If Harry knew and went along with Meghan having the fake story planted that William was having an affair, then there is no way to redeem Harry. He had said that Kate was like a sister to him and then to turn around and hurt her and her children and his brother like that. I get mad at my brothers but I would never make up some rumor like that which would hurt his family even though my sister-in-laws can be bitches.

r451 And to think these two pose publicly so virtuously about being against misinformation.Always the victim but never to blame.

I have nothing to say on this subject.

[quote]“Members of their family, said Harry, were not showing her [Meghan] sufficient support, respect, or friendship,” Bower writes. “Meghan, Harry believed, should be just as appreciated as their mother [Princess Diana].”

This is ridiculous. Diana was the wife of the heir to the throne. Harry was fifth in line to the throne when Meghan married him (and is now sixth).

Harry should have known better, as also should have Meghan. Meghan could never, ever be as loved as Diana was because Meghan will never be queen--only Catherine, as the eventual queen, can be.

r454 Hate to be pedantic but Harry was sixth in line when he married Meghan as Louis was born just before the wedding.

R449

Wowwwwwwwww

It seems that— despite apparently being one herself— Meghan hates entitled white chicks like Catherine and Charlotte.

Catherine and Charlotte are hardly entitled.

[quote]If Harry knew and went along with Meghan having the fake story planted that William was having an affair,

Could be that it wasn't so fake (or plenty of other people were talking about it); not to justify this behavior, but given Harry's obsession to *protect* Meghan, it doesn't really seem out of character to conspire with Megs to show that Wills & Kate were not the Mr & Mrs. Perfect everyone thought they were. If all of that is true, no wonder both of them are completely dead not just to W&K, but the entire BRF

Not sure if any of this is true, but if it is, she's like Trump in that whenever you think there's a line they would not cross - oops, they just did!

Wonder if Meghan is involved in the "pegging" crap that's going around about William.

Consider recent revelations, like her with Matt Lauer etc., she might be 'in the know' when it comes to celebrities and kink - and how they procure it, etc.

I'm NOT suggesting she has any real dirt of William, but she might be involved enough in that world to know how to plant "rumors" when it wouldn't necessarily occur to most people. (i.e. normal people - which Meghan certainly isn't)

Like R459, no bar too low when the gloves are off (like they probably are after Bower's book). I wonder if the BRF is bracing itself (and its lawyers) for Harry's "memoir" - he must know some crap about William's youth. I mean, we all know shit about our siblings' and friends' wild days of sowing seed and indulging in the perks that being rich and famous affords one, like, uh, drugs, yachts, teenaged girls via Epstein, etc.

* poor phrasing - we all know shit about our peeps' wild days -- and rich/aristo people woud know shit about their social circle too, but generally follow the rule of staying shtum... until.....

It’s MM’s birthday!

What goodies will we get from her today?

The “Bully a Three-Year-Old Girl” women’s empowerment initiative? Or will she just drop a few more fictitious blind items?

Would Haz & Meg go so far as to make up dirt on William and Kate out of thin air - that goes beyond the Rose "affair"? And if they did make that up, why not keep going and accuse him of so much toxic behavior that the public turns on him?

I mean, if you'd bully and shove a just-turned 3 year old because you're jealous of her and hate her guts - what's a little slander that can't be disproved to make a fortune in a tell-all book (and get back at the lucky primogeniture benefactor & family)?

History doesn't repeat - but it rhymes. Haven't later born sons killed the heirs just to get the throne? Something about boys in a tower? (sorry - my British history study was 40 years ago)

* oops - I think slander is spoken lies - and libel is written lies. So if it's in Harry's book, it's libel. But people tend to want to believe sleaze. What a fine mess you've got us in, Hazmat!

Huh? These two mentally ill hysterical bitches lie about EVERYTHING. They are irrelevant to the Brits and would do well to develop their own interests and move on.

The baby is throwing their toys out of the pram, again.

I really think poorly of her but if she's involved she surely didn't do it herself, far too dangerous? Because if she did this is exactly the kind of thing that could happen - the story emerges pointing the finger at her. One of her mouthpieces then, if anybody? It pains me to say it but this one feels like somebody making stuff up to sell newspapers.

This quote: “Meghan knew In Touch magazine very well. She had been in the magazine several times when she was trying to be famous and had had drinks with several writers and editors as she worked hard to be noticed,” the insider dishes. “Before she married Harry, Meghan wanted to be in all the weekly magazines and worked with publicists to make that happen. Meghan knows how they system works better than anyone which is why Palace insiders blamed her for the leaks.”

This doesn't sound like a Brit speaking, to me. And more, without invoking PIs and all the tin hattery, how would the Palace know how many times she'd been in In Touch or that she'd had drinks with anybody back in the days she was a D list? It's all a bit neat and tidy. I think this one is more likely made up than not, but that someone would make up a broadside against you of this nature maybe tells you where the herd is going. It's a very ugly, bold allegation. Then again by the look of that website, OK! has sunk from acceptable celebrity gloss to cheap.

R462, Clarence House's birthday posting for Meghan always includes a red balloon emoji. I like to think CH's Comms staff are low-key linking Meghan to Pennywise.

I don't think Sparkles should look for a public Happy 45th Birthday wish this year, from the people she loathes.

R467, all of that information could be collected after the fact, after people became suspicious of her, which they might have been from the very beginning. One of Meghan’s first public acts as Harry’s girlfriend was leaking information about Catherine’s refusal to give her a lift to go shopping.

There hasn't been an Instagram post from Clarence House since July 22, and today's Royal Family account post is about Anne and the Edinburgh Tattoo.

^it's the twitter feed, not Instagram. Whoever does the CH social media updates does not do as good of job as whoever the Cambridges employ. They've definitely stepped up their social media game!

Fair point, R470.

Then I think back to the Oprah interview and.... yeah....

They also put the posting on the Insta 'stories' feature. Those disappear a day after posting.

R467, in addition to being lower than a snake's belly, Markle (like everyone in her own family) had her capacity for good judgment excised at birth.

[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.]

And now OK! Magazine is printing that the Palace openly suspects the Harkles of starting the rumour.

Because, obviously from the above sequence of events, she did exactly that via her Soho house pal, the notoriously drunken and loose-lipped anti-monarchist 'journalist' Giles Coren.

Meanwhile back in 2017, Harry escorted Rosae Hanbury, looking resplendent in a tiara, to a State banquet and sat next to her the entire time looking rather interested.

Cue Meghan's rage and the reason she chose Rose for the lie she wanted to tell about William.

^ Oh, maybe! Makes as much sense as anything else.

Pippa just had a baby daughter in June. Guess what she named it: Rose.

It's inconceivable that Pippa would have named her newborn and Kate's niece "Rose" if the rumour was true.

The affair clearly never happened.

Very good point, R480.

[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.]

^^^ In addition, the Cambridges and the Wales' both posted birthday wishes, but both used photos of Meghan exiting the Jubilee service when she was being loudly booed by the crowd....

R13 posts like the "Your Anonymous Correspondent" columnist in the Enid Stockman newspaper in 1958, breathlessly informing fellow Oklahomans of the latest goings on in highfalutin, sizzling Tulsa.

[quote] the Enid Stockman newspaper

Was there an Enid Stockman? How old are you, if you don’t mind my asking?

R478 one can only imagine how ENRAGED the Duchess of Monteshitshow must have been to see her future meal ticket seated next to a beautiful brunette at a state dinner to which she was not invited. That would explain why the Rose/William affair rumor was invented.

Whether it's true or not, what we know about her character puts her in the unenviable position of people thinking it's true or at best very well could be true...

[post redacted because independent.co.uk thinks that links to their ridiculous rag are a bad thing. Somebody might want to tell them how the internet works. Or not. We don't really care. They do suck though. Our advice is that you should not click on the link and whatever you do, don't read their truly terrible articles.]

R483 — what a delicious little detail. Harry must be red-faced with indignation at that alone.

Being cunts, Harry and Meghan didn't deem it necessary to congratulate William, Kate, and their three kids on their birthdays.

Well played, Clarence House and Kensington Palace. Well played indeed.

Kudos to whoever on their staff came up with the idea of using the photos of her in her flying nun outfit at the Service of Boo-ing to send their birthday greetings. Game, Set, Match.

I suspect those reports of an "intruder" at the Montecito house were actually Harry trying to escape.

Of all the outrageous things M has been accused of, this one of rumor planting to mess with the Cambridge’s marriage is, if true, the most vile and contemptible…

Her birthday reminds me so much of why I loathe the constant birthday celebrations at work. You’re forced to join in even if you don’t know or like the person. And I hate it when it’s my turn.

So the royal social recognition of this miserable fool’s birth are simply forced acknowledgements—and probably media savvy because if they didn’t comment there would be hell to pay.

Did her PR recruit any of their other clients to pretend to be her "friends" and send her birthday greetings?

Surely she got birthday wishes from Gayle, Oprah, Michelle and Victoria, plus various and sundry world leaders who look to Megsie for her sage advice.

Wonder what Harry got her for a birthday gift...

r496 Do I detect sarcasm??!!

Reposting from the Which Royal Is It thread:

Rose's husband is all but openly gay and everyone knows it. For most of the year he lives in a Paris apartment with his boyfriend and she lives in the great house on the Norfolk property, Houghton Hall, and manages the overall estate, including Castle Cholmondeley elsewhere. He is Lord Great Chamberlain of the UK and his presence is formally required at many state occasions. His formal title is David George Philip Cholmondeley, 7th Marquess of Cholmondeley, KCVO, DL (from WP) and his former subsidiary title was Earl of Rocksavage, which I think is a fantastic title.

Yes, dear. Everyone knows that. It's been known since the beginning that Rocksavage married a woman so he could have legitimate heirs for the estate. Private Eye used to make jokes about it before it became woefully unfunny.

And your point is?

Anne has a tattoo?

My point is that a lot of people no longer know that and it happily reveals that you are an old embittered queen, r500.

Everyone knew it, dear.

Except you, apparently.

UK DLers - any intel on HG Tudor? Who is the person behind that voice reading and reviewing the book on YT and giving commentary on narcissism?

If everyone knew it (Rose/William) the story would never have taken off, r503. And anyway, it goes even more to the point that Rose may have needed/wanted a good poke but there was no affair.

At any rate, I have never thought there was anything to the mendacious Sussex woman's outrageous lies.

Sewage Squad members don't know the first thing about David Rocksavage or his unusual arrangements. Come to that, they know nothing about his wife or how she voluntarily agreed to marry him in light of all the facts. The fact that she married a gay aristocrat does not mean she is allowed to have affairs. After all, he has to certain the children are his.

All the Sewage Squad knows is that this who Meghan led them to target for attack, and so they duly attack. They think they are doing something that will please her.

It's as simple as that for that low-IQ crowd.

R499 stop being so lower middle class - he’s gay, she got the title, he got the heir and spares. Everybody’s happy.

You know nothing about the English aristocracy for someone who presents himself as an expert, do you?

Surprised she didn’t celebrate with 41x41 acts of service. Oh wait…

If I were the Cambridge's I would end every bday greeting to Markle with a dolphin emoji. We know you are a slippery cunt, Meg! 🐬

[quote]The fact that she married a gay aristocrat does not mean she is allowed to have affairs. After all, he has to certain the children are his.

This isn't 1637. It's easy to plan a pregnancy, be faithful till you get pregnant (just a few weeks?), and then voila, get back to boinking whoever you want.

These days, they might choose to do IVF to pick the gender and screen out genetic problems. And to avoid the unpleasantness in the bedroom. Just squirt some in this jar, sir -- and we'll do an egg retrieval, a little mixing, and then put the embryo inside her.

-- speaking of... it's been said that Elizabeth and Margaret were made with the help of a turkey baster, but who am I to spread gossip....

Can we pls find an acceptable reason to use the phrase “stunting and cunting” again?

"Would Haz & Meg go so far as to make up dirt on William and Kate out of thin air "

Shits and giggles? Pointless bitchery? Sheer spite?

This is a detail that escaped me. She wore off-the-shoulder in the morning/ middle of the day? Jesus. LOOK AT MEEEEE!

[QUOTE]Meghan Markle wears navy blue off-the-shoulder dress for Platinum Jubilee appearance

(from the Independent article above) I had only seen her through the open window shushing the Tindalls' kids with her ring-merching fingers at Trooping the Colour that day. I didn't see pictures of her attire that sounds more appropriate for cocktail hour or drinks parties at #10.

Meghan scores another OG!!!

R510 I think Archie was conceived naturally. However, the Harkle’s certainly did not want another male child. I think they used sex selection on their 2nd pregnancy to make sure they got a daughter.

Judging by the frequency with which some posters on these threads scold others for being frightfully middle class/ignorant of the ways of the aristocracy, Datalounge must be (per capita) one of the most aristocratic sites on the internet.

Rose sounds fascinating - like a character right out of an Edith Wharton novel. And honestly, who wouldn't make a lavender marriage for a big country house and lifestyle mingling with the British aristocracy.

Meghan said she had a miscarriage between Archie and Lilibet. I think there’s more to that story. She may have made it up or her IVF didn’t take. I’m surprised she hasn’t pushed that more. In fact, where women’s healthcare is concerned, she seems more interested in talking about abortion than in lending support to women who suffer miscarriage.

"We?"

Let's be clear—Meg is more interested in hearing herself talk than in actually doing anything for anyone else. That there is no 41X41 shows what an utter flop 40X40 was and how little she cared.

She’s so similar to Trump. The attention span of a gnat. Expects nothing but unmixed praise. Her failures are always someone else’s fault.

Any news on the podcast? I can't fathom why they can't come up with an episode, after all the fanfare surround the Spotify launch. Of all the relatively easy things...

If MM has done this, spreading the cheating and pegging rumours, especially if untrue, is truly diabolical.

I thought it was part of the code in the aristocracy that once the heir and spare were present and accounted for, you slept where you like. Now, that was probably truer fifty and a hundred years ago.

She's one of those people with a look that can either photograph either really badly or really well.

She certainly gives an interview that makes it all sound awfully conventional.

I love when they say things like the italicised...

"My husband inherited it when he was around 30 [in 1990] but continued to live in London. We decided to make Houghton our home when the children arrived. Moving anywhere feels awkward at first, and it took me a while to adjust and feel at home. We use the ground floor, and the second and third floors, where the bedrooms are. The first floor is mainly occupied by the State Rooms. [italic] I don’t know how many rooms we have in total. [/italic]"

R526 I would imagine they don't really think of the whole of the place as a "home" but rather an historic estate of which they're stewards. Probably home is a wing or corner or it. So I don't hear that as vulgar boasting, although they probably should know the number for accuracy's sake.

Rose is flat chested, she needs to get some decent implants

Rose has huge, if now drooping boobs, what are you talking about? They made her famous and straight men will forgive much for huge boobies.

R521, I agree. Why can’t she invite someone in and have a conversation? Can’t she hire a writer to write her some questions? Why is this so difficult for someone who is supposed to be an actress? She should have started with AOC. Their politics seem to intersect and AOC has no problem running her mouth. The episode produces itself.

R530, especially since there’s a whole arm of Archewell called “Archewell Audio”! What have they been doing for almost TWO YEARS?

Silence is golden.

If that old Lady Colin Campbell can produce a regular YouTube show, why can’t our Meghan come up with something? Even if her podcast was crap, she could play the victim and say her critics were racist. She’s probably embarrassed that she can’t get A-Listers like Oprah. But she could be creative and use her podcast to launch nobodies. When you think that radio launched the careers of people like David Sedaris, Meghan could surely launch a few careers, then reap the attention of “I discovered them.”

They sould have mailed her one of those birthday cards that plays a song when opened - except instead it plays a recording of the "boos" she received.

According to the book Harry "pestered" James Corden wanting to appear on his show. That's hilarious and pathetic although good practice for halfwit Harry as he will likely be begging all kinds of celebrities for work and exposure in the near future.

"Ryan Reynolds, can I please please be in one of your Mint Mobile commercials?" ~Haz

LOL r534, I can see Camilla doing that.

I think they used Joe Rogan as their excuse for not putting out any content. At least that’s what they said when people began questioning. They pointed to an antivaxx guest of Rogan’s, and labeled Spotify as problematic.

Spotify is not getting rid of Joe Rogan, who is a monster hit/draw for the platform.

Of course they couldn’t possibly correct that MISINFORMATION by using the platform that’s ready and willing to give them their VOICE.

It’s not as if Spotify is Fox News; it was liberal enough for the Obamas.

The only thing more shady that using the Boo-day photo is if they had used one of the Duchess of Doritos at her Uvalde photo op.

I hope this thread ends before someone posts a photo of Anne's tattoo.

[quote]once the heir and spare were present and accounted for

In Harry's case, the spare is not present and there's no accounting for him.

R537 And I checked recently, can confirm Neil Young's music is 100% there on Spotify.

R530 I picture too much competition between Meg and AOC. Way back when they made their first big podcast announcement (before their second one), I thought they should get Amanda Gorman, who had just spoken at the inauguration. Would she still be a good get?

Meg should set herself up as the new Maya Angelou.

I know why the caged bird sings because I *was* that caged bird, trapped in Frogmore Cottage, cut off from friends and the world outside. My wings were clipped and I was at a very low point in my life. The BRF wouldn’t even buy me a decent bra to wear.

R528 must be blind. There's a picture of her and her sister in bikinis posing with a sleazy looking Tony Blair on some tropical island. The Hanbury girls' tits jump off the screen!

I know she's crazy, but why would she feel "emboldened" at this point? And, why would she not care about Bower's book or the bullying accusations? I just don't get it, even after all this time.

Rose and herfun bags.

Let’s imagine that AOC or Amanda Gorman would want to do a podcast with Meg. Does anyone really think the Duchess is going to willingly share the spotlight with women who are brighter and better spoken than she is?

I 'think' I kind of get the emboldened now (which might explain Rose and pegging rumors.) Like, the gloves are off, fuck you all, I have nothing to lose, and Harry can't talk me out of anything because of what's been done to me NOW dammit.

Harry just launched another lawsuit, this time against the Met Police because... something or other. Harry certainly has acquired Vexatious Litigant Syndrome. This will ultimately bankrupt him. So his move to the States has resulted in him falling for every California fake therapy, New Agey bullshit and becoming prey for every ambulance chaser.

She may have waited too long - but why didn't Meghan snag some dumb celebrity when she had the cred to do it - somebody who needs publicity. Jada Pinkett Smith or Beyonce or a Kardashian, who bemoans never being taken seriously, or... I don't know, but Hollywood is chock full of dim bulbs who'll show up for the opening of an envelope. And also love dumb questions and give dumb answers and what better interviewer than Meghan for that?

Girl be LAZY. And interviewing somebody else is not about HER, like "Pearl" was.

I know -- Amber Heard !! A match made in heaven.

(I'm talking about the podcast)

[quote] Girl be LAZY. And interviewing somebody else is not about HER, like "Pearl" was.

You mean:

Like "Pearl" would have been.

In her mind she is a serious world leader/feminist/royal and her acting days are way behind her. Only people with power and global influence would be suitable podcast guests for her, not some celeb types!

^ True. Nevertheless, if some Hollywood celeb like, say, Tom Cruise, agreed to doing a podcast with her, her snatch would get about as wet as the Atlantic Ocean.

I think Rose got her titties trimmed back. After a few kids, and over a certain age they sag. Besides perky tits are always in style.

Who fucking cares about Rose Hanbury's tits except for ever-envious Meghan with her sagging dart tits (see the Intrepid Gala red dress disaster) or Harry when he's furiously spanking the ducal monkey due to seeking divertissement from his wife's said sagging dart tits.

has anyone heard the rumor that Meghan and Gloria Steinem are going to be on the cover of the Vogue September issue? I've seen it in a couple of places and if it's true i will scream

Gloria Steinem must be senile.

Nobody gives af about golden child Lilibet and the kid they seem to have already forgotten, so Meghan goes the other way now by publicly taking care of elderly people.

The photo of Meghan leading the frail Gloria Steinam to her waiting car was the coup de grace from her NYC sojourn after clawing and patting Harry before his superficial boilerplate speech at the UN to a nearly empty room.

DoS has hitched her wagon to a woman who is clearly vulnerable due to advancing age and may not have the mental acuity or the staff to suss out intentions or merely do basic background research. Meghan's edging her way into the dubious area of taking advantage of the vulnerable elderly.

R557, that sounds very dubious.

We should hope so, r561, after the debacle and mayhem she caused at British Vogue whe she shoehorned herself into an editorship and wanted the September cover for herself. You'd think Enniful sent alarms across the ocean to Wintour. But isn't Wintour edging into the age where dementia causes severe judgment impairments?

Is the "Meghan will be on the cover of Vogue" rumor another Sunshine Spinz attempt at changing the narrative? Like the much ballyhooed and then debunked "the Queen has invited the Sussexes to Balmoral" rumor?

[quote] The BRF wouldn’t even buy me a decent bra to wear.

Those clothes weren't too tight they were coded cries for help!

Hanbury looks like a horse toothed discount version of Kate.

Any chance Meghan could also get Phil Donahue and Gallagher for the podcast?

R560: "Meghan's edging her way into the dubious area of taking advantage of the vulnerable elderly."

Perhaps she is following in her mother's footsteps and her seemingly shady elder care business?

She'll come up with something like "As a young mother, I have always felt the inner need to take care of the elderly"

r557 Has Anna got her LONGED for Damehood yet?

Because if not, putting Meghan anywhere in the magazine, to say nothing of the September cover, will completely end any possibility of her making that loftiest part of the Honours List.

That's Dame Anna to you, R569. And it has been for five years now.

^ oops

r560 Surely her famous stepson should step in and stop Meghan using Gloria?

I hope Meghan gets the September issue, and they use her title in huge font. Naturally, she will insist upon that. If they really want to cause a sir, they will put her in a tiara. We need some new theatrics from her, maybe we will finally see her styled well. She will insist on showcasing her bird legs, and ruin it somehow. I want this to happen.

If she really longs so much to take care of the elderly, why didn't she offer to help look after the nonagenarian in Windsor Castle/Balmoral/Sandringham/Buckingham Palace?

Meghan don't look after anybody but Meghan.

If she really longs so much to take care of the elderly, why didn't she offer to help look after her own septuagenarian father following his heart surgery or recent stroke?

She demanded to MOVE IN with the Nonagenarian of Windsor Castle, r574

wtf is this fella up to? taking the piss or adoring ms markle? I can't decide because he used the picture where she kisses her own hand rather than that of the black child.

r578, I can't figure out if he's throwing shade or not.

Didn't Bower confirm in the book that Tyler had to ask them to leave his house and that she berated his long time housekeeper? Did she push the housekeeper into the pool or just throw a hissy fit over the wrong towels poolside?

His greeting is a day late and the photo he included shows her kissing her own thumb and not that of the child....

He is also a Sunshine Sux client?

LOL!!!!!

r578 r579 Yes he is a Sunshine Sachs client too I believe. Some of these big PR companies really misuse their power with this level of overeach. That might be less important in terms of showbiz or celebrity stuff-and yes Harry and Meghan you are just celebrities now, but abuse of power by big PR companies like Sunshine Sachs would be or indeed is quite bad for the health of a democracy. I had not heard of this company or appereciated their toxic way of exercising their power until the Sussexes employed them.

She just looks even more of a fool when they call her princess,she is supposed to be the world's greatest feminist and egalitarian.

Tyler Perry is her character witness.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle biographer Tom Bower on his explosive new book 'Revenge':

Did someone call in a favor that Tyler Perry comes in defending Smegs?

Sorry here's the link to Tyler Perry's tweet

A front row seat? Has Miss Perry been wearing a cloak of invisibility?

Of course they have her picture with a dark skinned girl when Meghan has had a nose job and married the whitest man alive.

I love this guy who does impersonations of Meghan, Harry, and this time, Boris Johnson makes a cameo appearance.

That was a lot funnier than I thought it was going to be, R589. Thank you.

Add a fat person of color, a transwoman, and a Kardashian to the mix and the purported Gloria Steinem and MM Vogue cover sounds plausible.

Tyler Perry's tweet is weird indeed. Maybe he was asked to write something congratulatory and he agreed to do so --- but decided to take the piss at the same time.

r592 That would be my reading of the situation too. It is shade but denialable shade.

Look how sexy I am.

The one I feel for in the whole "Rosegate" thing is Rose. Her name, and her family's name have been dragged through the mud because Dimwit and Dumbass were throwing the toys out of their royal pram and had nothing better to do than try to use her to drag William and Kate through the mud.

Can someone make a part 5? It seems Muriel has decided to let us post, but not create new threads. Thank the trolls everyone!

Surviving Angel created it yesterday...

Link to Part 5.

r546, those look like implants and I am guessing she had them removed.

Much thanks to Muriel !!

Old Gloria likes attention as much as any of them do.

That tweet, red meat for the aggrieved fandom.

In R594 Meghan looks like every common whore in Las Vegas who waves at you from the sidewalk while you're driving your car around a corner.