REVENGE Part 5 - The Tom Bower Book discussion thread

Link to part 4 here

Thank you for starting the new thread, SA. The link went to general DL for me, so I'm adding another link to Part 4 here in case anyone else has the same problem:

r2 Thank you! Much appreciated 👍

Never forget how sexy Meghan can be when she's grillin, y'all.

I don't know how to assess this Instagram account or the stuff they report - but sometimes it's from reputable magazines like The Spectator.

I don't think this is -- but they're saying Mohammed al Fayed or whatever his name is (Diana's boyfriend killed in the same car) has been interviewed and is somehow involved with a Markle endeavor --maybe the book, or the documentary, ??

If true, they may go 'there' (accuse the royal family or its security or lack thereof of being involved in Diana's death -- seems the old man won't give that up and what else have the Markles got to peddle?)

Hope this is just made up trash.

* I meant the father of Diana's boyfriend who was killed in the same car has been interviewed in connection with some Markle production

I'm not clicking on a stupid insta ir twat link. Make an ss plz

Mohammad al Fayed is a known trouble maker. I'd take anything he said with a grain of salt. He's has nothing to lose, because he already has a bad reputation, Harry on the other hand does. Not that Mohammad gives a damn about any repercussions, he just likes attention.

Would even straight men think that whatever Megsie was trying to do in that grilling segment was sexy?

For R7 (it's cut off at the end - I retyped it) @Nookienooo – Ohhhhhh what if this is true? Is Mohammad funding freedom???

QUOTE: January 26, 2022. The interview was filmed, but I do not know if it is for a documentary or the book that is being written. My guess is it is going to be used for both. The other question is whether this is going to be a documentary released at the same time as the book. That would seem unlikely as the book has a definitive release date, and would seemingly take longer to get the documentary ready. In any event, the interview, or at least the subject of the interview, tells the rest of the world what direction the book is going to take.

The interviewee who is very much in the latter stages of life very much supports the theory that his son and A list girlfriend were murdered. He spent a great deal of money at the time proving his theory and it is very much a valid theory. He explains it very well and has documents to support his theory. There doesn’t seem to be any point in interviewing im if you are also not going to subscribe to the theory yourself in writing the book.

If so, there will be no building any bridges back every again. How can you when you would be accusing someone of murder who is on the other side of that bridge.

Mohammed Al-Fayed / Dodi Fayed / Princess Diana / Prince Philip / Book Being Written by Prince...

Al Fayed? Not a good idea.

[Quote]Al-Fayed has been accused by multiple women of sexual harassment and assault.[74][75]

[QUOTE] Young women applying for employment at Harrods were often submitted to HIV tests and gynecological examinations.[76] These women were then selected to spend the weekend with Al-Fayed in Paris.[76] In her profile of Al-Fayed for Vanity Fair, Maureen Orth described how according to former employees "Fayed regularly walked the store on the lookout for young, attractive women to work in his office. Those who rebuffed him would often be subjected to crude, humiliating comments about their appearance or dress...A dozen ex-employees I spoke with said that Fayed would chase secretaries around the office and sometimes try to stuff money down women's blouses".[77]

[QUOTE]A December 2017 episode of Channel 4's Dispatches programme alleged that Al-Fayed had sexually harassed three Harrods employees, and attempted to "groom" them. One of the women was aged 17 at the time. Cheska Hill-Wood waived her right to anonymity to be interviewed for the programme.[79] The programme alleged Al-Fayed targeted young employees over a 13-year period.[80]

I would LOVE for a Fayed/Harkle unholy alliance as yet another example of the couple's hypocrisy, but it's probably not true.

If there is a collaboration between Harry and Fayed, then I want to see it. At the time, Harry couldn't stand either Fayad. Next we know he's saying his mother died whilst dating a dark skinned man. What a pile of crap. Considering his stupidity, I'm amazed that Harry can dress himself.

Even if they interviewed him, it could just be background stuff for the book -- like Dodi's father still believes.... (without Harry saying he goes along with it).

I mean he's got to fill pages with something and that's pretty decent gossip to put in there.

Read a rumor that they fired the ghost/co-writer though because Meghan interfered so much. Also that the draft(s) had been rejected by Penguin, at some point. It'll be a relief when this limbo is over, no matter how it turns out. This is the rumor, probably got it on here lol - I can't keep up:

"Did Moehringer quit or get fired? Does anyone have the dirt on this (this was the ghost/co-writer of Harry’s book. Ppl say Meghan wanted to run things. ??? Doesn’t Penguin Random-House get any say so?"

Well, there IS NOT a definite date for the book’s publication. If there were, we’d know about it. The memoir was announced how long ago? And when it was announced, Harry had been writing it for a year and a half. It was supposed to be published last fall, for Pete’s sake.

A Pulitzer Prize winning author (with experience writing these things) can’t take an existing work and whip it into a memoir in a year’s time? Moehringer is no hack. The Sussexes are fucking it up, as per usual.

Did Meghan's new BFF Delfina the Polo Pwife wish her a Happy Birthday on social media?

Didn't Delfina the fellow Pwife recently gush on social media about how Meghan was the second coming of Christ where friends are concerned?

Was Tyler Perry the only one Sunshine Sacks was able to strong arm? I'm surprised Sunshine wasn't able to intimidate more celebs into getting into the celebratory mood. Sunshine is known for their heavy weight "Fixers".

R15, maybe SS has the goods on Perry. Maybe Harry called and reminded him that snooping Meghan found something blackmail-worthy in his mansion while they were couch-surfing there.

Tyler Perry's tweet was pure shade, imho.

Ick. In that video in R4 Meghan looks like every common whore in Las Vegas who waves at you from a street corner as you're driving around the corner.

The shade in Tyler's post goes right by Americans, apparently.

Please enlighten us

R19, it’s a like a Rorschach test. Some see the shade, Meghan’s fans see it as a slavering tribute to their Nubian Queen.

@OmidScobie: Princess Dianne fought for much of her royal life to tell her story and be heard. For Panorama, she put everything on the line and her braveness has inspired millions. But sadly now, her voice has been silenced once again.

My latest @YahooNewsUK column: “Princess Diana has been silenced by the Firm again – this time at William’s request’ by Omid Scobie, Wed, 3 August 2022, 10:10am, 5 minute read

(quoted by marklenews1 who commented, “This reeks of Markle. Omid, how much did she pay you to write this drivel?”)

*sorry for the typos - Princess DIANA

With all these little tidbits and scoops - Fayed and the Panorama etc. - I think Harry's book is going to center on Diana's latter life and death.

And Scobie saying that William's trying to hush it all up ???

Oh dear.

They grade school tactics expose them time and time again. Rather than fools of the century i do believe they are the biggest Fools of all time.

SS must have summer temps running their PR!

One interesting part from TB’s book is that as a young adult, William sought to better understand his mother so he sought out her friends and members of the Spencer family to ask questions. Harry had no interest in a more well-rounded view, so he’s kept Diana firmly on a pedestal.

It is omitted Diana had been deceived and lied to and did that interview fuelled the by lies of others. There's no way to know she would have said the same things or different things had she not been manipulated. I'm not whitewashimg Diana, she was emotional and impulsive and classic woman scorned. But she was exploited in that interview and from everything I've read that's why William wants it shelved. It is his mother at her worst, manipulated by the worst. Was it courage or vengeance fuelled by lies and greed? A vulnerable woman taken advantage of. Diana was not afraid to her corner but she went about it all the wrong ways and that's what Panorama used against her. It was cruel, to everyone affected.

Who wore it better?

Play cruel games get cruel prizes.

#MeghanMarkleisToxic

is trending on Twitter now.

[quote]Narcissist Meghan Markle, former yacht girl is trending as #PrincessMeghan 🤡

r31 It's been trending in the UK for over 24 hours

R29, is that a fair comparison? The waists.... they're.... so different.

Read the book, she is a psycopath , liar,bully , and a whore.

Wallis was always incredibly stylish and waspish thin.

For Meghan to try to ape her style as a means to send the BRF a threatening message is a HUGE mistake - in more ways than one.

How so? Seems more like another stupid game.

Simpson was "incredibly stylish?" Ehh, born before the turn of the century, her style was stuck somewhere in the '30s, and by her wedding in 1972 was looking very dated. When she finally did try to step it up a bit, the marcelled hair exploded into a bad blowsy bouffant. A whole mess from beginning to end.

I'd love to know how she came to acquire that dress. Did Chanel troll her with a "suggested" garment? Or did she research the DoW's fashion choices and think she was trolling the RF?

She's done the outfit copying quite a bit.

Fake philanthropist.

BLASPHEMY, r38

Wallis was the most impossibly chic person of the 20th century and don't you forget it!

IMPOSSIBLY!!!!

Can't see your pic.

R38 She was married in 1937 (for the third time). Not sure where you got 1972 from but it discredits the rest of your post.

Oh fuck you Mister Credibke. She married Edward in nineeteen seventy two, in a blue extremely 1930s style frock.

Like Princess Sparkles, Wallis was loathe to let go of her salad days.

Wallis Simpson came to a very dismal end.

Edward died in 1972 - that was a funeral, not a wedding, R44.

just clicking around and found Edward in shades, don't know why it amuses me so much

Has any royal wedding resulted in a really great marriage?

Depends on what you think a great marriage is. Edward VII and Alexandra were said to be very compatible and fond of each other, but Edward had numerous mistresses over the years, even as Prince of Wales. He's the Edward who had a custom built sex chair in a Paris brothel. Since he had an enormous girth, it was supposed to ease the act for the royal and prostitute alike.

R48. I find it hard to believe that photo is correctly attributed. They did not look that old in 1940. They also wouldn’t be dressed as they are to visit a hospital.

Despite all the rumors, which I don't believe, I'd say William, and Kate. I don't think he would cheat after seeing the mess his parents made. I also think Kate wears the pants in that family behind the scenes. Edward, and Sophie seem to be doing ok.

I'd love to know what Sophie Wessex thinks. I recall she was given the job of helping Meghan adjust to royal life. I imagine after two days she realized that Meghan was not interested in learning anything and was determined to make the royal court conform to her, rather than the other way around. And Sophie is close to the Queen, so one just imagines what she reported back to the monarch.

R49. Actually, in recent generations of the British royal family, the bad marriages are really more the exception. Since 1700, only George I, George IV, and Prince Charles among the kings and princes of Wales have had disastrous marriage

And George I's marriage ended before 1700. That's when George had his wife's lover knocked off and probably buried under the floorboards. Years later he became King of Great Britain.

William and Catherine r49.

R48, it’s funny because they look like they’re going to a costume party as James Bond and Pussy Galore.

Camilla took Kate under wing and helped her assimilate into the BRF. Camilla certainly had experience being an unwanted outsider marrying in. She tried to do the same for Meghan and was rudely rebuffed.

Alexandra and Edward VII truly did love each other but by the turn of the last century she was quite grateful to be relieved of certain duties and received his mistresses regularly as friends at afternoon tea. She even received some of them, such as Lillie Langtry, at court. No wonder Edward VIII was so furious at his mother for not receiving Mrs. Simpson.

I'm on page 22.

Now I'm on page 23.

This isn't much of a party, in my experience.

R49 George V and Queen Mary. George VI and Queen Elizabeth. Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip. William and Catherine.

There is a report in the UK that Prince William has been invited to address the UN Assembly (when it's actually in session), next month in connection with Earthshot.

Are you on page 24 yet, R61? Please keep us updated on your progress.

R48 Kinda looks like future Harry and Meg.

Tyler Perry only tweeted about her birthday (a day late) to promote his new Netflix movie. SS instructed him on the photo and message. Smeg really wants to make "Princess Meghan" happen after the Sewage Squad failed with "Duchess Meghan."

The book is still open in Google drive. I'm closing the public shared link at the end of the month.

Ive often wondered if Harry was going to spill the beans on shenanigans he and Will got up to as teens. Teen boys are stupid creatures and often do things they would never want to get out. Ive no doubt Harry would betray a brothers trust to make that elderly black hag hes married to happy. Hell,he might have told her family secrets (every family has them) and maybe hes worried sick because he sees now what a mistake that was and that she will spill them .

The Princess Henry. No Princess Meghan.

It depends on how you define bad. Edward Vll and Queen Alexandra were happy enough but that happiness came at a high price for Queen Alexandra due to the king’s many affairs. His nickname was “Edward the Caresser”.

Valentine Low’s book is due out September 29.

R69 I wonder if she'll manage to make it a thing, even though it's not correct.

We kept calling Diana, Princess Di. After the divorce, were we supposed to?

Is Meghan already - The Princess Henry ? or will that only be ok when Charles is king? or will it never be ok?

I really don't understand title protocols. So Beatrice and Eugenie are princesses - but Zara, Anne's daughter, isn't? Why the fuck not?

Of course, you could say, why is anybody a 'princess' in 2022. Or worse, a king or queen? Do we have any emperors around? Pharoahs? Will there be another Dalai Lama proclaimed the reincarnated Buddha or whatever he's supposed to be?

[quote] I really don't understand title protocols. So Beatrice and Eugenie are princesses - but Zara, Anne's daughter, isn't? Why the fuck not?

Anne declined titles for her children. Smart girl.

Elderly black hag? LMFAO!

My favourite video of them. Watch after 3:15 to see how she holds onto Harry like a dog on a leash while he is trying to shake some guy's hand:

Ah yes, she was wearing her sad little butt pad underneath her Victoria B. dress. ^^

As the daughter of the monarch, there were no titles for Anne to decline. What she and her then husband allegedly did do was to decline a title for him (Mark Phillips) but there was never a chance of a Princess Zara or Prince Peter, as titles in Britain are passed through the male line.

R72 There never was a “Princess Diana”, let alone a “Princess Di”. She was “HRH The Princess of Wales” until her divorce when her style and title became “Diana, Princess of Wales”.

R69 just “Princess Henry” - no “The”, which is reserved for children of a monarch, which Harry is not - yet.

Princess Poo Stain is more accurate.

Princess Henry itself is so deliciously mundane. Which rhymes with poo stain, r80!

R76 - that video has everything. The hand holding to the bitter end. The butt pad. Sad strapless bra again at 1:55. The extreme closeups of that weird thing she is doing with her mouth/jaw at 1:58. The startled expression on her face when she gets interrupted after that.

There are some videos exposing Megs control jones taken at the time of their public duties either just after their engagement or marriage. One at a meet/greet in a hall where Megs, standing behind Harry, shoves in front of him, and, with a decidedly peeved look on her face, introduces herself/shakes hands with three people who had been chatting with Harry. Another at an outdoor do where Megs plows ahead of Harry, then stops and uses her arm to indicate the direction in which she wants him to go in an "after you" gesture. Can't seem to find either of them. Scrubbed? Perhaps?

Body language guy has a few examples of her doing that so the clips might be in his videos:

There was a whole scene on the makeshift "red carpet" where she wore the backfat dress. Harry is speaking to a vet and she keeps trying to pull on his arm. He angrily pulls out of her grasp and keeps chatting away. She starts talking and laughing to herself to cover it up.

I love it when she's ignored and starts talking to herself as if she's in a real conversation with someone. Many videos of that out there.

There are rumours that HMTQ may be lining up to present Kate with a Princess title of her own (rather than relying on that of her husband).

It’s thought The Harkles have gotten wind of this and why the SS is NOW pushing “Princess Meghan” (which is entirely INCORRECT) into the public sphere.

R84 Thanx for that. Unfortunately, neither clip mentioned in R83 is there.

I wish the queen could live forever, but I do look forward to Kate becoming Princess of Wales. That’s a yummy title right there, sure to stoke some sister-in-law jealousy. Although the daily mail will probably go on calling her Kate Middleton.

[quote]Tyler Perry only tweeted about her birthday (a day late) to promote his new Netflix movie. SS instructed him on the photo and message. Smeg really wants to make "Princess Meghan" happen after the Sewage Squad failed with "Duchess Meghan."

If SS instructed Tyler to use a disingenuous photo of Princess Doritos kissing her own thumb instead of the child's hand she is holding then they are really bad at their job.

Eh, the photo of her “kissing her own thumb” is just a split second before her mouth makes contact with the child’s hand. Her lips aren’t touching anything in that photo. Let’s not be extreme. There are plenty of other things we can criticize legitimately.

She was able to overcome her distaste enough to kneel down to this child and take her hand. She’s got guts enough to kiss it. Lord knows she’s had infinitely worse jammed in there.

Diana fan art is always so bad.

R87 Can the Queen do that? Catherine isn't a princess of the blood; would she be Princess of...whatever part of England she's from? What would be the point if she's going to be Princess of Wales in 5 years, tops? Would the title pass on to Charlotte?

In 1957 she created Philip Prince of the United Kingdom, just for the lulz.

Why not just get to the point and dub Meghan The Princess Petty?

Baroness of Kilkeel and don’t you forget it.

Seriously. Don’t forget. It’s one of Meghan’s many titles.

Duchess of Sussex

Countess of DUMBarton

Baroness Kilkeel ('of' not required)

They never should have given her any titles or made her a working royal until she became a citizen of the UK, which she clearly never was going to do. Millions of problems avoided at the outset.

R98, that would have been prudent, but Baroness Kilkeel would have screamed “RACIST!!!”

It’s how she’s gotten everything.

Have the Harkles ever explained how the RF went from "the family Meghan never had," to being horrible, suicide-ignoring racist meanies?

The blue dress in the video at r75, it's so tight on her. You can see the wrinkles where it rides up when she moves. She must have seen photos of herself after these events, how can she look at them and not realize all the times she looked like a stuffed sausage. It's not about gaining/losing weight, it's about working with the weight you are now.

Then there's the hair. She seems to have three default styles: the messy yoga bun, the scraped tight Croydon facelift bun/ponytail and "down". It's not her fault that she doesn't have perfect hair, most of us don't, but it's her bad luck to be compared to Kate who does. She could've completely changed it up by cutting her hair very short. She had the face for it. But then, long hair is so sexxxxxy. It's essential for her identity as the hot chick. I wonder if Harry likes the run his fingers through her sexxxxy hair, getting them snagged in her extensions.

I doubt Meghan allows Harry to touch her hair.

How was Elizabeth’s mother styled when her husband became King? Was she Queen? She was the one that created the unofficial Queen Mother title. Why was Philip styled Prince rather than King Consort?

[quote]Eh, the photo of her “kissing her own thumb” is just a split second before her mouth makes contact with the child’s hand. Her lips aren’t touching anything in that photo. Let’s not be extreme. There are plenty of other things we can criticize legitimately.

She complains and whines to the extreme and plays victim to the extreme. She and her bot army smear people to the extreme in addition to all her lawsuits. I shall critique her to the extreme. She set the tone!

R101 I completely agree about the hair. In today's sea of women with long Morticia hair (and I think Kate's length is ridiculous but I know the young gals like it) Meghan could have created a distinctive, trendsetting look for herself. I'm the "revive the Natalie Wood 1964 hairdo" troll – although Ana de Armas has kind of done that.

R103, From his accession to the throne in 1936 until his death in 1952, King George VI's wife was a queen-consort and was addressed as HM The Queen, informally as Queen Elizabeth. When her husband died, she became a queen-dowager but preferred to be styled HM Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother, informally as The Queen Mother or simply as Queen Elizabeth (her daughter being referred to as The Queen). Prince Philip was born HRH Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark. Just before marrying, he gave up his princely titles and became Lt. Philip Mountbatten, using the anglicization of his mother's dynastic name Battenberg. After marriage he was styled "HRH The Duke of Edinburgh" until 1957, when the Queen made him a Prince of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and he was styled "HRH The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh." There was never any discussion of his being a king-consort as there has been no such title since 1558. The husband of England's first female monarch Queen Mary I, Philip of Spain, was referred to as King, but only during her lifetime, as were the first two husbands of Mary, Queen of Scots. The husbands of subsequent queens-regnant were styled in an idiosyncratic way: Queen Anne's husband was referred to as Prince George of Denmark. Queen Victoria's husband had the unique style of The Prince Consort. The husband of Queen Mary II was a king in his own right (William III) because in 1689 Parliament offered the throne to William and Mary as joint monarchs.

I think George VI made Philip a royal duke the day before the wedding so that his daughter, the future monarch, wouldn't be marrying a commoner.

R101 - agree. Tom Bower made an interesting comment in his book about how Meghan essentially has no real personal identity of her own. She morphed into her "sexy sassy outspoken" character from Suits.

Markle has no talent, no originality, no creativity. Everything is copied. She's as fake as fake can be.

[quote]she was quite grateful to be relieved of certain duties and received his mistresses regularly as friends at afternoon tea

Before or after they received him?

R110, during.

The whole saga of Meghan and Harry would make a superb 12-part docudrama series. Netflix, you finally got your material!

More excerpts for you lovely people:

[Quote]In reality Meghan’s day-to-day life, was utterly conventional. There was no danger, no risk, no threat to her survival. She was not part of a notable set. Her life was a performance to a limited audience on a tiny stage. Part of the crowd, she passed through air terminals, taxis and hotels in almost complete anonymity. Her problems were familiar to all unknown, unmarried actors in their mid-thirties – fear of loneliness and personal and financial insecurity. Professionally, she could not complain about unfulfilled potential. She had never struck out to be different, or to rebel, or judge herself against spectacular theatrical performances. The impression was of a person satisfied with herself. She rarely confessed to a lack of self-confidence.

[Quote]Her self-criticism was limited to cosmetic superficialities. The Tig never hinted at an intellectual curiosity or a hinterland. She was never heard to suffer any restlessness to beat a new challenge. The biggest influence on her life so far appears to have been the character Aaron Korsh created, Rachel Zane, an ambitious, fluent, sexy, shallow fashionista with a passion for food.

Suits launch:

[Quote]‘I’m part of the horse-and-pony show this year,’ she wrote in her anonymous blog about American Network’s launch of Suits to prospective advertisers in New York. ‘They’ll roll out the red carpet in a major way because they want me on show – “the talent”, they call us.’ Clearly excited by her introduction to first-class flights, chauffeurs and luxury hotels, she continued, ‘This is part of the job and it’s fucking awesome. If you are pursuing television, then realise that you have already sold out and take your big, fancy pay-check because you can now. Flashing those pearly whites (ahem, veneers) and working the carpet with your sexy little body (ahem, Spanx) is part of the job description you jumped on board for when you signed on that dotted line.’

On dumping Trevor. Are we taking bets on how she will ditch Harry?

[Quote]Thomas did not tell Trevor a more hurtful truth: ‘Meghan has outgrown you, just as she outgrew me.’ Thomas called Doria. It hurt that she already knew. ‘Trevor was mean to her,’ said Doria without further explanation. ‘He did bad things.’ Thomas was puzzled. Meghan, he thought, had possibly invented something. Or he had misjudged Trevor.

[Quote]Although Trevor resisted invitations to explain, he did tell a friend that domestic life with Meghan bore no relationship to the demure young woman who fluttered her eyelids on TV screens. Marrying a ‘mercurial, dramatic, shouty and difficult’ actress who demanded a role in his films had been a challenge.

[Quote]In retaliation, Meghan’s friends portrayed Trevor as envious and resentful of her success in Suits. Until then, Trevor had enjoyed Meghan’s dependence on him. Thereafter, speculated Omid Scobie, repeating what her friends had said, Trevor had refused to ‘support her acting career’. She was not invited to the Oscars because he ‘didn’t want to share the spotlight.’

[quote]There are rumours that HMTQ may be lining up to present Kate with a Princess title of her own (rather than relying on that of her husband).

Can you point to any source? This has never happened before. To goad Meghan? Why would they antagonize trouble enough?

^ That's rubbish, absolute bullshit. Notwithstanding there are senior honours that could yet be granted to Kate, most notably Order of Garter, lets consider this for a minute:

The Queen makes Kate a Princess in her own right. Does anyone imagine Prince Charles, slavishly devoted to his own wife, smiling in contentment?

Never going to happen. Complete fiction.

The Duchess of Cambridge knows how to play the waiting game and can play nice in the sandbox in the mean time . All will be hers-and those who don’t want to show her proper respect do so at their own risk.

[quote] In retaliation, Meghan’s friends portrayed Trevor as envious and resentful of her success in Suits.

That's hilarious they would think anyone would buy that.

"Ooh, I'm just so envious Meghan has a medium-sized role on a cable show no one watches! "

An interaction with the Sussexes - Does Camilla actually say "help" after her encounter?

Looks that way. She seems pretty funny ….

This is not quite the same thing, but when the Duchess of Gloucester became a widow, the Queen gave permission for her to be known as "HRH Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester," to distinguish her from her daughter-in-law, "HRH The Duchess of Gloucester" and a way to avoid the undesirable status of "Dowager Duchess." While Alice's sister-in-law, Marina, as a widow, was known as "HRH Princess Marina, Duchess of Kent," Marina was in fact born a Princess of Greece and Denmark, so it made sense. However, bestowing that honor on Alice (who was born Lady Alice, as the daughter of an earl) was a surprise. But that suggests that it is conceivable the Queen could make Kate a Princess in her own right, as she made Philip a Prince in his own right. A few questions emerge: if Kate were ever get divorced, could she keep the title of Princess? When would she actually use the title, since she is officially known as HRH The Duchess of Cambridge and, in the future, is likely to be known as HRH The Duchess of Cornwall and Cambridge and HRH The Princess of Wales.

"I think George VI made Philip a royal duke the day before the wedding so that his daughter, the future monarch, wouldn't be marrying a commoner."

I thought Phillip was born a prince? How the hell is a foreign prince a "commoner"?

R87 Kate already is a princess. I cannot fucking believe we have to go through this again.

There are two kinds of ducal titles: royal and ordinary. An ordinary is addressed as Your Grace.

A royal ducal title Carrie's the RANK AND STYLE HRH, His Royal Highness.

Kate and Meghan married Princes of the Blood. They are therefore, by courtesy, also HRHs. The custom of granting royal ducal titles to blood Princes is an add-on, a gift of the Sovereign.

Without the additional ducal title, Kate would be HRH Princess William. Meghan would be Princess Henry. Only people BORN HRHs can use the style and title followed by their first name: Princess Anne, Princess Beateice, Princess Eugenie.

Kate occupation is listed as Princess of the United Kingdom.

When William becomes not just Prince William but Prince of Wales, he and Kate will begin using Prince and Princess if Wales instead of Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.

The HRH rank of Princess is already carried by Kate. Only the title's name will change; she already Carrie's the rank and style of Princess/HRH.

The media will call her Princess Kate, but it's inaccurate. It is accurately HRH Catherine The Princess of Wales.

The Sovereign grants the Wales title to the male heir. That's the only other Princess title coming Kate's way, and the only way it does is if Charles dies before the Queen does and she gives William the Wales title, or Charles when he becomes King creates William Prince of Wales.

The Wales title carries a trail of subsidiary ones, including Duke of Cornwall. It is this ducal title that brings with it the land and revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall.

None of the other current royal ducal titles are attached to land and revenues, except the Sovereign's, the Duchy of Lamcaster.

Harry's, Andrew's, Philip's carry only the honorary title.

Frankly, I'd rather be the ordinary Duke of Northumberland with his ancient castle and land, than Harry's empty and not too distinguished royal ducal title of Sussex.

R123, he had to give up his foreign titles when he became a British citizen.

"Tom Bower made an interesting comment in his book about how Meghan essentially has no real personal identity of her own."

I thought the Datalounge consensus was that her real personality was that of a grasping little viper.

Maybe Bower meant to say that when she's trying to be nice she comes off as having no real personality, because she's just trying to disguise her real self?

Scobie the scumbag. William objects to the airing of an interview obtained by methods disgraceful to the name of journalism field which the BBC had to grovel, that fed Diana's paranoia and might be considered to have played a role in her early death, and that BOTH her sons have repeatedly castigated,

And Scobie calls William getting it stopped from airing "silencing her voice.again".

That turd wipe really has not got a moral corpuscle in his body.

He definitely portrays her as a viper and user. He seemed to gather from her blog, "no intellectual curiosity", that she was basically a vapid conniving ruthless cunt who only wanted to be famous.

[Quote]On reflection, some decided that Meghan was reinventing herself. ‘I love my character,’ Meghan told Larry King in a TV interview broadcast on a digital channel to promote the third season of Suits. ‘Rachel Zane is ambitious and sassy.’ Unintentionally, Aaron Korsh, the series’ creator, was remoulding the actress’s own character. ‘I see Rachel,’ said Meghan, ‘as such a good friend. I root for her; I’m almost like a fan. Rachel is like the ultimate best friend – who has a closet that I always borrow things from in my personal life.’ As she said later, ‘ambition’ was what she and Rachel Zane had in common.‘

[Quote]Meghan began to identify with the character: ‘I happen to really love Rachel, I love how ambitious she is, always trying to take the bull by its horns, and savvy. She’s sort of become someone that I could see as a friend, which makes it a lot sweeter to play.” In particular, Meghan liked the fact Rachel had ‘encyclopaedic knowledge of the law’, and that she was to many viewers’ ‘love interest’ or ‘eye candy’.

The only way I could see Kate being made a princess in her own right is if William died while she was princess of Wales and George was going to be made prince of Wales.

I was looking at Philip's WP article for other reasons but noted that was given his HRH the day before the wedding but not made Duke of Edinburgh until the next morning, before the ceremony. So for one day only he carried the unusual style "Lieutenant His Royal Highness Sir Philip Mountbatten."

[quote]A royal ducal title Carrie's the RANK AND STYLE HRH, His Royal Highness.

Oh, dear.

[quote]It is accurately HRH Catherine The Princess of Wales.

You're wrong,

The style if HRH. The title is Princess of Wales. Her name is Catherine.

Diana was wrongly referred to as Princess Diana throughout her marriage and life. Her titles were HRH The Princess of Wales and Diana, Princess of Wales, after the divorce, reflecting the convention for divorced wives who held titles through their husband.

Look at the source. The Prince of Wales own website refers only to the title. Where he is called Prince Charles is as a boy, when it was the only title he held.

Here's the biography for the Princess Royal. She is not referred to as Princes Anne.

Here's the Court circular... all references to title, save Princess Alexandra, who has no other title and was born with it.

She will not be HRH Catherine... it's not used.

She'll commonly be referred to as "Princess Kate".

That's why the Sussex Squad idiots are trying to make "Princess Meghan" happen.

Pity the queen won't take all the titles away leaving just the Countess of Dumbarton. Then we'll see how often Meghan uses her title.

Is "Prince of Greece and Denmark" one title or two?

R124, you are almost right. The title Prince of Wales is not given to the male heir; it is given to the monarch's eldest son. When Edward VIII was king, his brother Albert, Duke of York, was the male heir; he could not have been made Prince of Wales. Also, the title Duke of Cornwall is not a subsidiary title of the title Prince of Wales. William will become Duke of Cornwall the moment Charles becomes king, and he will be addressed as HRH The Duke of Cambridge and Cornwall. This was the case when Queen Victoria died and Edward, Prince of Wales, became king. Edward's son, George, Duke of York, became HRH The Duke of York and Cornwall. He was made Prince of Wales at a later date. There are many such instances in history of the monarch's son being Duke of Cornwall; these sons sometimes did and sometimes did not subsequently become Prince of Wales.

Baroness Kilkeel is a common tramp.

Isn't Prince of Wales a title given at the Monarch's discretion to his/her oldest son? I don't think you automatically become PoW just by being the Monarch's male heir. I think it has to be granted by the Sovereign at his/her discretion.

r114 if she knew what was required of her to be part of a show then she should have known what was required of her to be part of the Royal family.

^ In other words, when HM dies, Charles automatically becomes King by right and by law. But William doesn't automatically become PoW. When and if is at Charles' discretion, although I have no doubt it will happen and fairly quickly.

I don't think that the Wales title is necessarily limited to male heirs, I have read that Elizabeth could have been made Princess of Wales or named "heir apparent", but never was, because her parents kept hoping for a son. So during her youth, she never benefitted from the massive income that comes with the title.

That's changed, hasn't it? It's the eldest child regardless of sex now, isn't it?

The BRF needs to strip harry of everything including prince. Remember he just wanted to be called Harry, they should give him what the little rat wanted. And ya know when he was lityle and now he does look like a rat, little beady eyed small minded Rat.

They must have a lot of dirt on Harry, doesn't he worry they will bring it out if he keeps poking the bear? I agree r145 they need to strip Harry and his family of any titles and money. Let him come crawling back after the divorce.

The PoW is a title reserved for the heir. Now that they've eliminated primogeniture it will have to be addressed. Though it will likely be George's problem to solve.

First William was the hot prince, and then William lost his hair and Harry still had his looks, and Harry was the hot one for quite a long time.

Now the tables have turned again, and Harry looks angry and bloated, while Williams looks like a healthy and self-confident middle-aged man. Even though William wouldn't be handsome if he had hair, he's now considerably more attractive than Harry.

Harry's hair makes him look like a clown. He only looks okay from straight on otherwise that bald spot with the frizz combed over it is so bad.

[quote]The PoW is a title reserved for the heir.

Yes, but not guarantied or automatically granted to the Heir. It's at the discretion of the Monarch if and when.

[quote]then realise that you have already sold out

I don't believe that Maghan would have typed "realise." If she actually typed that at all, she would have typed "realize."

Mike Tindall is the hot one.

But William is fit and trim has the confidence that purpose gives you. He’s got a reason to wake up every morning. People need him. They are waiting for him to show up.

Harry has no purpose at all, although he has busywork. His purpose seems to be keeping the missus from flying into a rage. Sisyphean task, it is.

[quote]Keep the HRH. I'll take the Castle, land, and money.

That's what I said a couple of years ago, but nobody listened.

Interesting observation from another thread, I'd love to read your opinions on it.

[quote] Interesting tidbit: apparently you cannot sue people who are IPP. And Harry's brand-new lawsuit against the Met is to get his IPP status renewed. So he can trash anybody he wants in his book and not get sued. He's costing the UK taxpayer a pile with all his lawsuits and this is going to backfire badly against him.

[quote]Rachel is like the ultimate best friend – who has a closet that I always borrow things from in my personal life.’

So THAT'S what happened to the clothes.

[quote]Interesting tidbit: apparently you cannot sue people who are IPP.

[quote]Meghan liked the fact Rachel had ‘encyclopaedic knowledge of the law’,

Meghan also would not have typed "encyclopaedic;" in fact I bet she cannot even spell the American version, "encyclopedic."

W&W, R156. Ymmd.

R157 - See Meghan's article below where that quote came from, although I'm sure it was heavily edited/proofread by the magazine

What if her Majesty (and God Save the Queen, by the way) were to pass away while Harry and Meghan are still married? Is Harry going to receive an inheritance from Her Majesty's estate? Or is it all bound up in trusts?

Will Meghan be able to get her claws on any of that inheritance? California is a community property state, and any income earned by the couple while married is joint income, owned by both. I think inheritances are exempt from that, though.

[quote] [R87] Kate already is a princess. I cannot fucking believe we have to go through this again.

Mary, you are the most put-upon person ALIVE!

[quote] in fact I bet she cannot even spell the American version, "encyclopedic."

As much as I dislike her, i bet she can. The Bowers book says she got extremely high grades in high school, and she was smart enough to get into Northwestern.

And after getting into Northwestern, she did nothing but a degree in 'communications'. LOL.

Guess proper education wasn't that important to her after all.

She got in with affirmative action.

r154 Or cant be prosecuted for misuse of charitable funds...

Interesting question, R154. Obviously, people with the status of top level diplomats can’t be sued or arrested in foreign countries. But it doesn’t make sense for Harry, a British citizen, to have or need any special immunity in Britain, which has more restrictive defamation laws than the U.S.

[quote]And after getting into Northwestern, she did nothing but a degree in 'communications'. LOL. Guess proper education wasn't that important to her after all.

And where were you graduated from? And what was your degree in?

R167,

[quote] And where were you graduated from?

From somewhere better.

[quote] And what was your degree in?

In something better.

Northwestern is a good school, you can't be an academic moron and expect to get in. However, she did pick an easy degree. She went to college around the same time I did, and that was when they really started the diversity push. I'm sure she was instructed by the admissions counselor at her school to really play up the mixed race part for an edge. Anything to help get your application accepted. Back then Asians were still considered fairly desirable, and my admissions counselor told me to make a point of it. I'm not even Asian, Asian, but where my family is from is technically part of Asia.

For the Admissions Troll: I went to Dartmouth, and have a PharmD, so I can rightly judge.

Northwestern was another opportunity she threw away. She could have learned so much there. Instead it sounds like she preferred the party scene.

Northwestern was another opportunity she threw away. She could have learned so much there. Instead it sounds like she preferred the party scene.

She was offered the chance in drama class to study theatre too but turned it down. All she wanted was to be rich and famous like every brainless LA narcissistic twat who wants to be an actress.

Thanks for mentioning that, R172.

I was surprised when I heard way back that although she went to Northwestern, she never appeared in any plays, even though she later became an actress. And now it seems she wasn't really interested in learning about drama at all.

I wonder why she pushed to go to Northwestern. It seems like a strange choice for a California girl. Wasn't there a story that she had scholarships to some California school(s), but wanted Northwestern?

The whole pegging rumor is an obvious lie in an attempt to deflect from the release of Bower's book in the same way it was revealed that Taylor Swift (an enemy of the Kardashian-Jenner family) uses her private jet more than Kylie Jenner does in order to deflect and take the heat off of the latter.

R173 - Bower says she wanted Princeton:

[Quote]Princeton was Meghan’s first choice. ‘It’s a rich kids’ school,’ Thomas thought, but he agreed to ask a friend to help Meghan’s entry. Despite her good grades, she was rejected. ‘She was unhappy,’ Thomas noticed. ‘She didn’t like being turned down.’ Northwestern University in Chicago, ranked among the best for drama, was her next and successful choice.

[Quote]Securing a place to study theatre and international relations at Northwestern was the entry card to the elite. She had chosen a private, highly selective college renowned as a favourite of rich, well-connected white students. She knew no one there. On admission, she joined the Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority, famous for its Midwestern blondes. She pledged to be philanthropic, care about her ‘sisters’ and abide by the motto ‘aspire to be’. Thomas automatically volunteered to pay the annual $45,000 fees.

Is studying theatre and international relations really the entry card to the elite, regardless of the university?

She seems to be seriously stupid—-almost Harry level.

It's inspiring to see the gratitude Meghan has toward her father for funding her expensive, private school education. Oh, wait...

[quote] She got in with affirmative action.

Do you have any proof of that? That seems unlikely, given how strong Bowers (who is not sympathetic to her otherwise) says her grades were in high school..

Or are you just assuming that all students of African-American heritage only ever get into selective colleges and universities because of Affirmative Action?

R178. It could be racism. But people are genuinely perplexed that a woman of such stupidity could attend such an institution. It is hard to fathom.

Meghan did [bold]not[bold] major in Communications. She got a double major at Northwestern in Theater and in International Relations.

Theater is the most famous department at Northwestern (along with Chemistry), so I doubt a major in it it is a walk in the park. International Relations is absolutely not an easy major there.

Just because Harry is dim-witted does not mean Meghan is.

[quote] But people are genuinely perplexed that a woman of such stupidity could attend such an institution.

Uh-huh...

Speaking of Mr Markle's paying all that much for her college, didn't I hear that the "lottery" story was not true.

That her father took out loans (that he is still paying off) to cover her education costs?

Does Bower touch on any of this?

Tom Bower said she had "no intellectual curiosity" which is a nice British way of saying "clueless moron who never opened a book".

[Quote]During her second year, still uncertain whether she would make it as an actress, Meghan asked her uncle Michael Markle, by then a communications expert for the US government, to arrange a five-week internship as a junior press officer at the American embassy in Buenos Aires. ‘I hated the idea of being this cliché, a girl from Los Angeles who decides to be an actress,’ she explained later. ‘I wanted more than that and I had always loved politics, so applied for an internship.’ Thomas paid for the ‘study programme’. Her half-sister Samantha would later claim that Meghan was not actually employed in the embassy, but was actually at a school attached to the embassy that arranged work experience.

[Quote]Towards the end of her stay, Meghan took the Foreign Service Officers Test, the preliminary to judge whether a candidate is sufficiently proficient to take the more demanding exam to enter the State Department. After never showing any interest in maths – a basic requirement to become a diplomat – she failed the three-hour exam.

R182 - yes:

[Quote]The end of 1990 was a good time for the Markles. Through hard work, Thomas was flush with money. Twenty-six years later, to extract a payment from an eager journalist, Tom Junior invented the story that his father had won $750,000 in the California State Lottery. There was no lottery ‘win’ but Thomas did give Tom Junior money to start a flower shop and bought Samantha a car. Meghan’s school fees were easily affordable for him.

R182 - also says Meghan gave him money, $20,000 over a few years as he was now on a fixed income/pension. But at the time of her education he was doing well and paid for everything.

[quote]She got a double major at Northwestern in Theater and in International Relations.

Well, it paid off - because she has made a theater out of international relations.

[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.

This is the "smart" woman who majored in theatre??

R180. I’m not assuming she’s stupid because Harry is. I assume she’s stupid because she seems very stupid. I have begun to think she is less intelligent than Harry, which is shocking.

R187. Bower likes the word pertinently.

Only someone who is not very bright would tell the easily exposed whoppers she told Oprah on that telecast. However, she is very determined and clearly conniving. Just not smart enough to get out of her own way.

She's "street smart," in a wily way, like most narcissistic sociopaths. And she was just enough "book smart" to get into college, though it seems that didn't advance her much. Harry is now her enabler, her meal ticket, her "sponsor" in a way. But what does Harry get from the deal that is actually good for him?

[quote] But what does Harry get from the deal that is actually good for him?

Harry's raison d'etre in this marriage is to cause as much pain and suffering to his grandmother, father and brother as he feels they did to him. His wife provides the perfect instrument for his vegeance. As has been illustrated repeatedly over the past 5 years.

Guess we'll have to wait for Harry's book to learn exactly what his Grans, father and brother did to him that was so terrible. So far all we know is that they covered up all his many fuck-ups. Or must they all pay for the fact that he was born second?

Markle is listed as a "Candidate for Degree" as Bachelor of Science in Communications at Northwestern University.

Here is the link to the program for commencement which lists her name as "Rachel Meghan Markle".

Date June 20, 2003.

See page 21, far right column.

Note this degree was from the "School of Communications", which according the the program's note was previously called the "School of Speech".

R193 It's not if or what they did to Harry. It's what Harry perceives in his juvenile mind. They are the principle causes and catalysts for his discontent and failures.

Should read "...according to the...".

They were incredibly kind and indulgent to Harry, all through his life.

So kind and indulgent that he genuinely cannot understand why he's not his brother's equal in official Royal status.

That's the source of his rage. He hides behind the Diana stuff, which no doubt distresses him no end, but his feeling of "Why HIM? Why not ME?" is at the bottom of everything.

Nope r180. I can!can't seem to share the link, so Google Northwestern University graduation program2003. She has ONE Bachelor of Science in communications. Period.

R198, see link at R194 for graduation program.

A Theater degree would be a Bachelor of Arts, not science. She literally just has a degree in communications.

[Quote]Northwestern University graduation program2003. She has ONE Bachelor of Science in communications. Period.

So was it she who dropped the International Relations bomb?

[quote]But people are genuinely perplexed that a woman of such stupidity could attend such an institution. It is hard to fathom.

They shouldn't be. I went to one of the top 10 universities in the world and not only am I not setting the world on fire with my genius, not many of my peers are either. I don't deny that there is an IQ difference between 100 students at a top uni and 100 non-students of the same age but at that level (undergrad) the wheat really hasn't been sorted from the chaff yet. I knew actual dimwits at university, many of them with extremely status-conscious parents who poured money into private tutoring and test prep etc.

Bower is right about Meghan, she is absolutely incurious. You just need to listen to the things she says to understand that she's not a bright spark. Compared to Harry maybe but my cat is a bright spark compared to Harry.

Does Harry think that if Diana were still alive, he and William would have equal status?

He does think she's alive, remember? He said in an interview she's finished her work with William and is talking to him now.

I've been reading Tom Bower's book in tandem with Tina Brown's and that has been quite interesting. Brown is an enjoyable writer, while Bower is more of a reporter. I learned more about Camilla than I ever knew from Brown's book and see her in a slightly better light.

Brown seems to excuse, or at least explain the charges of bullying against MM as a matter of direct American vs upper class British style. 'Why hasn't that invite gone out' vs 'I wonder if you would mind awfully checking to see if that invitation has been sent'. But reading about the outrageous, atrocious way MM behaved during the Reitman's job, I am skeptical. I think she treats perceived underlings like shit, because she can.

Yes r201. I believe also at that time Northwestern didn't even offer a degree in IR. All the early press about her dating Harry reported the communications degree. Note she always claims what she "majored in" but never says "I have a degree in theater and international relations."

Did she really compare herself to Disney's Little Mermaid Ariel in the Oprah alternative facts interview?

In the words of HG Tudor: Mid-range narcissist, facade management, pity play, character trait acquisition".

Perhaps future threads about her should be titled "Duchess Ariel".

R205, Bower and Brown are both at pains to find positive/mitigating things to say about Meghan because, if they didn't, their books would be more easily painted as hatchet jobs (possibly hatchet jobs with a racial animus).

For example, Brown allows for the possibility that Meghan was somewhat misunderstood by the courtiers, and Bower says he admires the fact that she's a skilled operator who's got what she wanted.

I think that both Brown and Bower are too intelligent to believe either of those things completely.

Meghan must have skipped that geography class at Northwestern if she expected Frogmore Cottage to have an ocean view.

Then again, it may well have one 100 years from now.

Bower is right. Markle is an attractive woman of no particular distinction who maneuvered to meet Harry, after reading up on him, correctly intuited the dynamics of his psychology, inserted herself into the process and voila. Other women who've had that opportunity came to the realization that Harry would not be worth it but aging actress Megs had burned her bridges.

Is Northwestern that impressive? I had no idea; it wasn’t when I was college-age.

Admissions criteria have changed since then. My husband got into a school in 1988 that he would NEVER get into now, with the same grades, SAT score and academic record. As a white male with wealthy parents, he might be…

R182. Are you denying she is profoundly stupid? Because there is a lot of evidence in the public domain.

I don't think she's profoundly stupid, although I think Harry is.

I think she's of average intelligence, thinks she's above-average, and has the mental strengths you see in middle-class climbers (reads people and uses them well, over the short term), and an underlying rage that undercuts her decision-making. Not stupid, just not good at long-term plotting, and totally out of her depth among real power players.

Much more damning to me is that she's "not curious".

Meghan is intellectually lazy. She is probably lazy in almost all aspects, except for habitually trawling social media. Her PR staff and management do all the heavy lifting (when she is not constantly getting in their way). She's also unable to curtail her impulses. This, as R213 states, makes her unable to hold to any long-term plan.

I wonder how she even managed to graduate Northwestern. Writing papers and such requires effort. I just can't see her putting in that effort. Maybe she bought them off other people.

Will add, she is so lazy she cannot seem to maintain basic hygiene. Not much is said anymore as she no longer has many outings, but her grooming at royal events was questionable - dirty shoes, unmanicured feet, dandruff, unmanaged hair, wrinkled clothes, untailored clothes, wrong-sized clothes, etc.

I certainly don't think Harry is intelligent - but I'm still on the fence as to whether he has the kind of severe personality disorder that I think she has (cluster B). So I think he could get by, in life, maybe especially after living through this nightmare. I 'think' I've seen glimpses of empathy and real compassion from him, towards various people. And didn't he manage to get along with William and Kate for a few years - can't remember the details, but something about him seeing her as the sister he never had?

Anyway, he needs to get away from her. And she needs to... well, keep bulldozing over people in SoCal, like she always has -- omg and those poor children. Well, anyway, there's nothing to be done with NPDs except get away and stay away - and I think she's the type who won't be very interested in spending time with her children anyway. Kids are boring. Hopefully some reasonable people will appear in their lives, as nannies, teachers, friends and friends' families, etc.

R213, I agree.

I think she’s of average academic intelligence, but has the skills to manipulate her way to better grades. She was probably a Tracy Flick. Organized, participated, regurgitated, flattered. And if she didn’t like a grade, campaigned ceaselessly until she got what she wanted. That goes a looooong way.

I joke around about Harry being stupid, but I think he's average in intelligence. He comes off as dumb, because like Meghan he isn't intellectually curious, and likely just really, REALLY lazy when it came to school. Being coddled,and cheating didn't help him develop his mind.

If she takes after her mom and bounces, those kids might be better off. I hope they have good nannies. I would think that Harry would insist on the best to recreate the nanny experience that he had as a child. And that class of nanny is not cheap. They like to spend on security (God knows why) and I'll assume that they're also spending a big chunk on childcare.

Back at the beginning of this saga, I seem to remember only one professor from Northwestern reported that he remembered her, with the description "respectful".

Who is worse, though? Meghan seems delusional to the point she denies reality. Harry happily follows her lead even though he seemingly has a better grip on reality. You can tell this is so in how he reacts when she tells her whoppers. I know she winds him up with her woe-is-me tales, but he knows better on some level. But he carries on because he has a victim mentality. He will always act out (just like Andrew).

He may have Stockholm Syndrome right now.

I don't think he's as bad as Andrew (when it comes to arrogance and entitlement). And I've never heard of him having a teddy bear collection that he throws tantrums about when the maid doesn't position them correctly. Time will tell...

As a child-of-narc though, I have some advice for him: he should act like he doesn't care if he sees his kids or not and let some social secretary try to arrange all their visits and holidays together. If she feels like she's "dumping" the kids on him, she'll probably be happy to do it. IF she thinks she can use them to gain leverage and power over him, she will damned sure do it.

There's no other way.

R223, and then she will say “See? He doesn’t care if he sees you or not. He cares more about his precious polo ponies! Remember that birthday when no one showed up? That’s who those people are. And you want to see them? Face the truth, honey. Who’s always been there for you? It’s just us now. We’re all we have.”

She won't pull a Doria and dump the kids. They are her insurance policies. The claw she uses on him will be nothing compared to the claw she will sink into the kids' arms.

I recall Fergie right after her divorce on some American talk show (Oprah?) lamenting the living facilities she had been given after the divorce and why she had to shill to make a living and pay off her debts. She said something to the effect of " Her Majesty the Queen's granddaughters living in a house without proper working plumbing...."

Duchess Ariel Rachel Meghan will be far more dramatic whilst making her post divorce talk show rounds. "His Majesty King Charles' grandchildren living without proper electricity, heat, a/c, plumbing and not even a Sizzler salad bar within a 100 mile radius....".

That makes me chuckle... like whenever The Windsors would super a new scene as Fergie's Bed Sit.

I loved and miss that show. I didn't realize how accurate the Meghan portrayal was in her constant references to her character on "Syutes," as she pronounced it. After reading Bower's book, I see that she did that a lot!

That Vegas stripper photographed with naked Harry is AUCTIONING OFF HIS UNDERWEAR.

Apparently he left them with her in his drunken haze.

This show just gets better and better.

Without having read r228, we can only presume this will get better with the allegedly beaten prostitutes he frequented at El Cajon and left bloodied and bashed.

Only for the local sheriff and State Dept., U.S military carrying out joint operations there on the Mexican border were scrambled to cover at behest of Washington and the most panicked British embassy known in some time.

Prince Harry appeared to be known as Paw Murdaugh type who went black-eyed with sex workers.

Wasn't Harry's unit sent to Arizona for specialized military training and before they even arrived, the local Sheriff gave a news conference and said the young prince better not beat up any of the local girls? The stories about him have been around for a long, long time.

I remember reading that his old army friends told him that if any of their secrets end up in his book, they have plenty of his to disclose to the media.

I hope that happens.

How can Harry save himself?

For the last fucking time: KATE ALREADY IS A PRINCESS BUT USES HER DUCHESS TITLE INSTEAD.

She will never be a Princess "in her own right". If William dies tomorrow, she will still be HRH The Duchess of Cambridge.

Just as when Prince George, Duke of Kent, was killed on an air accident during WWII, his widow went on being HRH The Duchess of Kent.

She gets to be Princess of Wales ONLY by being married to the living, current Prince of Wales.

Prince Philip was created a Prince of the United Kingdom because he surrendered his foreign title when he was naturalised British citizen. He was born a Prince of Greece and Denmark. The ducal title alone made him an HRH. He got them do the future Queen would not be marrying a commoner.

Kate already carries the rank of Princess. She isn't ever going to be created one in her own right. Her situation is totally diffetent.

This is another bullshit story by the Express that makes them up on vintage Singer sewing machines on a daily basis.

Thete is no princess "in her own right" card in that deck.

Can she be called "Princess Henry" only when Harry is present? If Harry is not there, can she still be called "Princess Henry," or only the Duchess of Sussex?

Who fucking cares, frau. It's meaningless. The underwear auction is much more interesting

Agree she got in via affirmative action. I bet 100% she checked black on her admission form. Neither she nor Tom Markle paid for her degree. She went to Northwestern on scholarship due to her race. Schools were, and some still are, desperate to increase their diversity. I’m equally sure she trotted out her soap commercial protest on her admission essay.

You're called by your senior title. She would only ever be DoS so long as Hapless holds the title.

Why is Prince junior to Duke? No idea. Like Violet said, if you want logic I wouldn't look to the British aristocracy.

Found this. No idea where to put it but the most pics of Adelaide Cottage I've ever seen... It is different than you might expect.

[quote]You're called by your senior title.

You're called whatever the Monarch wants you styled as. The Duchess of Cornwall's senior title is Princess of Wales.

R234 No. If that's the title she uses, it's Princess Henry 24/7.

Why wouldn't it be?

She's the Duchess of Sussex 24/7. She'd be Princess Henry 24/7, too.

Jesus fucking Christ R233 ! WE GET IT ! Move on,Bitch !

As style is HRH. A title is Princess of Wales. Custom and precedent drive the usual, R240.

'Prince' always makes me think of an over-indulged little boy, whereas "Duke" makes me think of a manly-man.

More UNDERPANTS

Adelaide cottage looks incredible…

It's so adorable and tiny!

"Duke" makes me think of a dog.

Who cares about Harry's old, dirty underwear?

Me.

Why do they still call her "Kate Middleton?" Neither of those words are part of her name any more, correct?

[quote]Prince William and Kate Middleton leave a service of thanksgiving for the reign of Queen Elizabeth II at St Paul’s Cathedral in London, on June 3, 2022.

Are they in denial that she is married to Prince William?

Actually R233 not that I want to set you off but the then Duchess of Kent was styled and titled as “HRH Princess Marina, Duchess of Kent” when her son, the Duke, married and his wife Katharine Worsley was now “HRH The Duchess of Kent”. But Marina was a Princess in her own right (of Greece and Denmark).

She supposedly wasn’t happy when HRH The Duchess of Gloucester subsequently asked to be styled as “HRH Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester” when her son married but the Queen agreed to it - “common little Scottish girl” or not.

It's nice that William, Kate and the kids will live just a 10-minute walk away from Queen Elizabeth II's residence during her final decades.

R251. Is the Queen going to be a supercentenarian?

Because R249 the average reader of the Daily Mail is too stupid to recognise “The Duchess of Cambridge”. Same reason that the Mail refers to “The Countess of Wessex and Forfar” as “Sophie Wessex” which was her professional name 20 years ago. Or “The Duchess of Cornwall” as “Camilla”. Or “Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor” as “Lady Louise”. Because they are lazy non-journalists catering to mouth breathers who read with their forefinger while mouthing the words.

I'm in shock from reading that Harry was known for beating up prostitutes.

So royals are protected when they commit assault? Can they also commit murder and not get punished?

If true, that little shit-head should have been in jail!

Referring to the DoC as Kate Middleton is the way the press keeping her relatable to their underachieving, pablum-spooning readers. Kate's just like me! So is Sophie Wessex!!

Harry is like one of those opportunistic, beady-eyed little egg-stealing dinosaurs. Meg is like a fucking pterodactyl swooping in and out, shrieking and squawking.

The tricks Meghan turned in order to go places would make a prostitute in a Bangkok brothel look like an elderly nun in comparison.

We are insulted.

R256, marry me.

Whatever happened to those two guys who claimed they had bought a sex tape of MM?

They were probably lying, R260. Markle may be a scheming bitch, but I can't see her letting a sex tape get out of her hands - she's too controlling for that.

I can't see her making one. She's not stupid. She's a lousy strategist, obviously, she's apparently incurious with few interests beyond sensation and reward (then again her generation isn't exactly a triumph in depth or character) but even she'd see the red lights flashing over a sex tape.

There WAS a sex tape on x videos and I even posted the link here once. Seems to have been taken down. It was her on her stomach in a hotel room slowly blowing a guy. Her feet were crossed behind her in the air and it looked like her, guessing by the gnarly long buniony feet. Supposedly the guy was a photographer before she met Harry. I will try to find it but last time I looked around it was gone.

"It looked like her."

R48 Sad resemblance to Princess Margaret who also wore dark glasses in her final appearances.

The September issue of Vogue, will have Serena Williams on the cover, and not Meghan. It's to honor Serena's retirement, which frankly she should have done a few years ago. Looks like another Markle Manifestation™ hits the skids as usual.

I hope I'm not going to be disappointed - [italic][bold] AGAIN [/italic][/bold] - but has anyone asked if Meghan's OK?

Somebody with a podcast should get Serena on to share her thoughts

Why would styleless Markle cover Vogue, particularly the September Issue? Sounds like clueless Sewage Squad chatter.

I bet serwna would like to give her some thoughts ( upside markles head )

Why can't Meghan get Serena in a bland podcast? The DoS must be laying brick if she can't get answers from either side.

Oprah: Serena, after you retire will you be hanging with Meghan Markle?

Serena: I don’t know her.

In a bid sure to excite not just the younger crowd, I reckon Muggins has Hilary Clinton and Gloria Steinem lined up for a pod. Oh, the anticipation.

If Anne Heche can make a podcast, why can’t Markle? I don’t get it.

You'd think Spotify could come up with a script and round somebody up for her.

What about Gloria Steinem?

R275, I’m sure that they’ve tried that.

R275, that’s Meghan’s job. They got a truckload of money to *produce* content, not just star in content.

She rejected all attempts to help her, same as she did with Netflix and the BRF. Netflix finally cracked down somewhat on the two of them and threatened to cancel their contracts. She realized they were serious when they canceled Pearl and has relented a little.

Netflix also canceled the separate Invictus documentary and told them the footage would be rolled into the "docu-series." She wasn't allowed to say no.

What? I didn't know that. Invictus is Harry's fiefdom. That actually has a definite story and a built in--non controversial--audience. Huh.

Maybe they realized, the wider viewing audience does not care about Invictus, and would be more invested in Sussex drama. I'm not sure who is going to watch their "docu-series", but I'm sure it's not going to be a hit.

Invictus was supposed to feature former soldier athletes with life-altering or maiming physical handicaps. They will no doubt be stung that the Sussex shenanigans will always override their commitment to the Crown as soldiers, even after grievous injuries.

Their images on film will not be about veterans struggling with life-long scarring, physical deformities or pain and surviving and thriving despite it all as Meghan suggests. It will be about someone who declared she felt forgotten and uncredited by the British Royal family as she stood in an impoverished country wailing for her poor self after she had just met with children lucky to survive walking a mine field to get water, or worse wailed about her poor self just because she was a Narcissist bereft of attention. "Those black girls were raped trying to walk to school this morning? What about ME?!?!

Someone call SS and make this or anything about ME!!!! I don't care how many Doritos I have to spend!!!!

They'll realize Invictus is most decidedly NOT about maimed former soldiers. It's a showcase to keep Harry, the Duke of Eejit relevant. And even after so much straining to keep Harry, the perpetual ball scratcher and finger sniffer, going, everyone and their granny knows he's long been an emotionally stunted, self-regarding idiot. This AMONG HIS FAMILY.

I think if Harry hadn’t sued everyone in sight and been a jerk in other ways, Netflix would have done the Invictus documentary. But now, nobody is going to believe Harry as a benevolent sponsor of a charity event.

Now poor Harry has some whore selling his underwear . What she really needs to do is sell a blow by blow story of their night of sex. THAT i would pay for !

The auction is on Thursday. Do you think anyone would purchase the Royal Pants?

Liz is letting hen parties rent out Sandringham House to bring in enough money to buy that underwear. She’d be mortified if commoners see Harry’s skid marks. It may cause the end of the monarchy in the UK.

Well, if Harry beats women, then Megan had better watch out. Eventually he'll take her off her pedestal and when that happens, he'll blame her for everything, and take it all out on her.

"I'm in shock from reading that Harry was known for beating up prostitutes. So royals are protected when they commit assault?"

R254, the world is full of places where the justice system tacitly legalizes assaults on sex workers. Since sex work is illegal in most places, and most such assaults take place during an illegal act, police and DAs will not prosecute people who beat the shit out of prostitutes, and most prostitutes won't go to the police if they're attacked. Sex work is an insanely dangerous job, because the sort of people who like to attack prostitutes know this, and we're not just talking people like Harry. If your neighbor down the street likes to take a break from the wife and kiddies, and go into the city and knock the teeth out of some poor girl, he'll have absolutely no fear of being arrested or prosecuted.

That's one of the reason I think serial killers are still out there, silently picking off sex workers and members of the underclass, people who won't go to the police and whose disappearance will not be investigated.

Didn't Chelsy or Cressida or both say or hint that Harry was too rough and it was a reason they wanted out?

R289 Cressida posted a message upon their engagement that no matter who you were yadda yadda yadda, what mattered was how you treat people. Paraphrasing but you get the drift.

But she still got an invite to the wedding.

She and Chelsy both married better men. Chelsy had a baby recently in London and Cressida is pregnant.

Talk of dodged bullets. I'd give a great deal to hear them discuss the Sussex Saga where they couldn't be overheard.

I actually think Harry would never hit Meghan. If he did, he knows she would absolutely destroy him in the press.

He might not know that in the middle of a drunken blackout, r291.

Ohhh I can see the headline now! "Celeb friends rally to Meghan's side: Leave Harry now!!"

We would get all sorts of dramatic pap shots of Meghan, being a brave YOUNG mother soldiering on! It would also give her a new platform to pontificate on.

To refer to back earlier in the thread, I saw that alleged Meghan sextape on one of the tube sites before it got wiped everywhere. It was obviously a "deep fake" with Meghan's head expertly CGI'd onto another woman's body. The body in the video had wide areolas and big nipples. We've seen Meg's topless beach photos and she has small areolas and pencil eraser sized nipples. Plus the woman had a navel ring with a charm hanging from it and we would have heard if Meghan had that. And the body proportions weren't right. The fake had a woman with a normal waist and normal legs, not fat and skinny respectively. It was incredibly convincing CGI, though.

R291 that is true, but I don't think Harry has enough self-control, or enough abillity to understand consequences, to be aware of that.

I've always said that Harry will be the one to leave the marriage, because Megan knows damn well that without him she's nothing but an aging Hollywood ex-wife, one two kids and without much money. Because of that she might actually tolerate abuse for a while, although of course she'd keep a record of any incidents to use against Harry (and the Bank of Charles), if he ever tried to leave.

Frankly, he may be abusing her now, now that it's absolutely clear that their original plan of monetizing their popularity isn't working... because they aren't popular. I'd bet my 401K that they're having screaming fights these days, and who knows if he's using his fists when the fights ramp up and he's on his 14th Glenlivet. And he's twice her size, and still strong even if he's getting doughy.

I can’t see him standing up to her, at all. How credible is the talk of violence against women?

How credible is this speculation about violence?

Let's see, Harry is a big strong man, Meg is a smaller than average woman, he's got a history of anger issues and bad behavior, their dreams of showing up his family by dominating new media are evaporating, and Harry is rumored to like a drink or ten. I'm not saying that any disagreements have turned violent, but I won't say it's impossible.

I've known women like Meghan and it is far more likely she is the one more often physically assaulting him than the the other way around. She eggs him on and I'm sure at this point she knows exactly what she's doing and has it recorded in various ways, video, audio, witnesses, etc. Harry doesn't know what he's doing. She knows exactly what she's doing and eventually, even if it is not for several years, she will go in for the kill.

I'm just not sure what she will do afterwards. An aging ex duchess with a bad reputation? We Know what she wants and how does she expect to get that after Harry?

Agree, she's the dom.

Sometimes if a straight man is dominated by a vicious little wife, he'll strike back physically, because he knows that's the one kind of fight where he's guaranteed to win... at least in the short term. He always pays for it in the end, and some men with domineering wives learn it isn't worth the consequences, but well. Harry doesn't seem to have much in the way of impulse control, so who knows how he'd deal with feelings of anger towards her.

All pure speculation of course... for now.

R298 100% fiction. There are so many legitimate reasons to despise H&M for, and yet people still come up with all kinds of ridiculous bullshit like Harry having a penchant for abusing sex workers (he doesn’t, otherwise the Vegas girl would be selling not her underwear, but a story that would make her much more money), or them using surrogates (when Meghan is in fact a textbook example that women point to when they say things like “I’m not ruining my figure like THAT for the kids”), or yachting rumors (which isn’t impossible, but if you read Bower’s book it’s clear that it’s highly unlikely that she would do anything of the sort, because if she did, her social network and strategies, not to mention her financial situation, would have been completely different).

^ his underwear, obviously.

Jeez, talk about tit-picking, R295.

Please.

I'm kinda with R302 and I think they're both total assholes.

I'm wondering if Meghan's preferred solution is Harry's suicide. She is then enshrined forever as his only wife, no possibility of HIM divorcing HER, gets sympathy as a grieving widow, inherits whatever estate he has, and has lots of opportunities to clasp her hands and look up at the sky, "My dear H is there with Diana looking after us from above." Of course the merching. You too can store your loved one's ashes in the very same style of urn Meghan parked Harry.

She stokes his rage, but I see him seething and not lashing out at his wife...I think he’d be desperate to keep the peace. He has not much real life experience with conflict and interpersonal relationships. He has lived a cloistered existence, even in he military with minders. He probably had bodyguards there too. I don’t think anyone cares enough to attack them. They’re fun to analyze and for a laugh.

R306 I think that’s what causes Harry’s family great concern.

Street smart women like Meghan know exactly which buttons to press to get exactly the response they want. Sometimes I feel sad about their victims and sometimes I don't.

R306, that would be a sought after martyrdom for her. I hope not, he’s really on his own without family.

A mountain lion has been spotted several times outside of their house. I wouldn't be surprised if the Sugars think The Queen trained it to assassinate Meghan.

Oh, is that why the police keep getting called out to the house?

I know what I would do if I were the RF and concerned about Harry and the kids.

I get the impression Tom Jr. is insinuating Meg is older than 41...

Note to Meghan; I’ve been praying for my idiotic, abusive father’s death for 40 years.

Morons live forever, it seems.

You’d best have a Plan B.

Harry isn’t remotely suicidal. He’s way too self-centered and arrogant to believe the world would be better off without him.

All that money and they couldn't make het disappear?

"Street smart women like Meghan...."

WTF "street smart"??? Her background is that of a spoiled, upper-middle-class, sorority-attending mean girl form Los Angeles, not someone who'd ever be caught dead on a mean street! I think the word you're looking for is "manipulative", or "canny".

Cunning. That's the word.

Where I see MM screwing up is that she always seems to underestimate others' discernment and thinks she can just bluff people into believing her. But at this point, I doubt anyone would think she did anything without an ulterior motive.

A few years ago, a Hollywood PR guy on DL was asked what the Sussexes could do to salvage their reputation and he replied 'charity, charity, charity'. I suppose they're trying, but it may be too little, too late.

The Bowers book claims sources told him Harry smokes weed in the garden every morning. Wake and bake. Lady Colin is having fun with this on her latest youtube vid.

“Charity” is bullshit, and no substitute for not being an asshole. Who’s fooled by “charity” when they’ve treated their families the way they have?

Charity begins at home.

[quote] Wake and bake.

How else to cope with it all?

Harry told the Russian pranksters who called him and passed themselves off as Greta what's her name that charities are a great way to make money.

R321, to be fair, plenty of people smoke weed today. It might mellow him out.

Smoking weed the first thing in the morning is a sure sign you don't have any place to be or any job to do..

r326, true! (I wish I could smoke weed in the morning.) I think one of the problems Harry is having (among many), is he has nothing to focus on that makes use of his talents and is something he wants to do. Not sure what his talents are of course...

Apparently he enjoyed being in the military. Frankly, he's not too bright, and the tasks required not a lot of thinking. He could focus and complete them, felt good about that, then got to hang with his buddies.

I think very creative, intricate projects--yes, like producing documentaries--is WAY out of his comfort zone and capabilities. Therefore, he's stuck with not much to do, which for a person like Harry (who needs direction and focus given to him, he can't summon it himself) is not a good thing.

R327, exactly. He needs a purpose. His brother’s preparing to be king, and that chaps his ass.

If Harry had stayed in the RF, his staff (he must have had one) worked to arrange appearances and events that would play into Harry's strengths.

Of course, being self centered, he most likely didn't appreciate all the work that others did to make his life and work easier. Did he just assume that it all just "happened"?

Harry's wife wasn't interested in what her staff proposed because she was focused on California and red carpets.

So, off to California was her goal.

Sure. The underwear-auctioner not selling a violent Harry story right now is legit 100% proof that there haven't been multiple coverups and payoffs of his past behavior by the BRF. Sure, your logic is flawless.

R329, that's the truth and the shame of it. The monarchy is already showing it can live without him but there was a valuable role for him to play had he stayed.

Her... whatever.

I had a job but I quit. It was too easy and the pay was too high. It was all nepotism anyway.

What the fuck is the matter with these two?

Harry has been doing this shit all of his life so why does he look so lost?

It's HER, isn't it?

R333 She brings her bipolar chaos to every situation she enters.

^^ one can see the Queen's Lady move into the frame like WTF?

🚨🚨🚨⬆️⬆️ 𝐅𝐑𝐀𝐔 𝐀𝐋𝐄𝐑𝐓⬆️⬆️🚨🚨🚨

This year is the first time the Queen did not send MM birthday wishes. DEAD TO ME.

What is supposed to be happening at R334? I don't see chaos.

"Harry has been doing this shit all of his life so why does he look so lost?"

Harry has been unhappy and moderately lost all his life, he doesn't like the role he was born into, and the military filled his days but without giving him a real sense of purpose and dedication. He left the military like he left the royal family, they weren't making him feel happy or fulfilled, and weren't offering him the kind of future he wanted, so he was out. I'm not criticizing him for this, he had every right to make those choices, but it's just that he left without carefully considering what he was getting himself into, or carefully and logically examining the kind of life he's have an as ex-royal.

Because what he left his family and career for was not personal fulfillment, but a career as the Duke of Windsor 2.0, and a marriage that brings out the worst in both parties.

What WILL make him happy?

R338. She entered ahead of him because she’s a fame whore, throwing everything into confusion.

The military rightfully refused to elevate him to the next rank without first passing the required exam all candidates must successfully complete. Supposedly, he was upset with the Queen for not exerting pressure on the military to skip the exam, one he knew he could not pass. He was relegated to a desk job and quit in a fit of pique.

For all the 'Hero Harry' bullshit, I would bet good money he was just as much a pain-in-the-ass to deal with then as is evident now. They probably put him on a desk with next to no responsibilities to force him out. Just being put on a desk most likely rankled his ego. You just know he wanted to exceed William in rank or at least get to do something substantial such as fly helicopters*.

*Yeah, I know palace and military PR publicized he was "qualified" to fly Apache helicopters. This guy couldn't pass art class without a tutor doing his work, but I am supposed to believe he passed written, oral and functional exams to pilot a multi-million $$$ piece of equipment? No. I imagine the actual pilot did all the flying and Harry got to go pew-pew-pew with the gun for press purposes. Notice he never piloted a helicopter or otherwise pursued a license after the military.

R334, there is a choreography and order and a hierarchy to all these ceremonial appearances. He knows that if he goes ahead of his wife as he’s supposed to, she will be mad at him because isn’t she just as important as he is? Why does the MAN have to go first?

Everyone else expects him to walk in smoothly and sign the book, because that is what is supposed to happen. He is royal, so he always takes precedence.

Instead of the event going ahaead smoothly, he hesitates and flails, and everyone looks incompetent.

[quote]Of course, being self centered, he most likely didn't appreciate all the work that others did to make his life and work easier. Did he just assume that it all just "happened"?

That's a hilarious point they make in the cartoon "The Prince." Harry is sent out to buy milk and he doesn't know what a grocery store is.

R343 He was probably scared of the berating he would get later from Meg the Raptor ! If not a beating."You Motherfucker,you NEVER go before me!" "slap!Slap!"

He was more "scared" he wouldn't get a delicious beating from Mommy.

He is going to be unhappy his entire life. I have no pity what so ever gor the spoiled brat. He fug really really fug ug

They are not in sync as a couple. He can't seem to grasp what he's supposed to do and she has to continually guide him with a hand on his back or his arm to signal him. It's very strange and awkward because she's so determined to be acknowledged and that throws the whole dance off. At times he forgets her.

Is he, as a prince, supposed to precede her? I understand if it's in the line of succession, Philip, Charles, William but for the 6th in line, is it still protocol?

R298 - Why do you not grasp the difference between cute, white "sex workers" in Las Vegas who have marginally accountable titles and "occupations" in Las Vegas as "VIP bottle girls" pouring shots for men who pay upwards of $750 for their off-the-clock services in penthouses.

Why do you believe these girls are different from the poor Mexican and local sex workers along the airbase in El Cajon, California where Harry et al. we're training? Please tell us more about your vast knowledge of Vegas sex girls vs. desperate women along the CA Mexico border town without an appreciable economy for women beyond local fast food joints or cleaning the messy hotels servicemen from all over leave crusted with various effluvia, theirs' and victims'. A town that doesn't have a budget for big city investigations whenever some poor prostie dies in a hotel room under suspicious circumstances.

Where does someone like Harry get his weed? Does he have a high level dealer that Tyler Perry recommended? How does he know he's getting the "good shit?"

[quote]whenever some poor prostie dies in a hotel room under suspicious circumstances.

It's prozzie, luv.

Uhm he's IN California .Its legal there so he goes to the nearest pot store.Or has a minion do so.

They're not in Blighty anymore, bitch, r351. It's PROSTIES on our sacred shores now.

R334 is referring to a deranged loon on Tumblr who is well known on that site for being a crazy.

EXCUSE me!

It is SEX WORKER, and it is a noble and empowering profession!

Harry can help himself to Orca's stash anytime.

He has it delivered I'm sure r350.

[quote] He can't seem to grasp what he's supposed to do and she has to continually guide him with a hand on his back or his arm to signal him.

This is classic learned helplessness.

Because the Meghan person has to keep her victim walking on eggshells and never on solid ground, psychologically, he never knows whether he’s doing the right thing, according to her. He can’t even anticipate what she wants, so he can smooth the way. If he anticipates what she wants and provides it, that would make him a competent person, and she can’t allow that. So he learns to rely on her instructions of the moment. If she doesn’t instruct him, he flails helplessly. And then she can roll her eyes and say “why are you just standing there like an idiot?”

Watch his body movements. He throws his hands up in confusion.

I think these days royal men prefer their wives to go first when entering or exiting a room, airplane, etc. otherwise they look like total clods. Or worse like Harry and Meghan.

R358, if Harry has "learned helplessness", he had it long before Meg. For his whole life he's been letting his families and their courtiers and handlers direct his movements, and if not them then his military superiors. If Meg is guiding him, it's at partly because he's so used to being guided.

I wouldn't say it's so lucky "learned helplessness", as never having learned competence.

R360, I agree that he’s had a lot done for him throughout his life. And agree he’s not terribly competent.

But I think he used to have a measure of free will. Meghan is the first woman who’s ground him under her heel and the novelty of this has him, as Charles would say, cuntstruck.

But I stand by my statement that he’s got it and he’s not allowed to be competent.

Meghan's pussy smells like a Rosarito sewer.

[quote] The Bowers book claims sources told him Harry smokes weed in the garden every morning

Well, that's one thing that I can support. Getting up, smelling the fragrant air of Montecito while having a coffee and blazing a big fat bowl sounds like a lovely and necessary way to start the day in the Markle household. Did they ever fix the smell problem that was plaguing their property and upsetting the neighbors?

They were just Meghan's cleansing shake farts, R363. She had an engagement coming up, and needed to lose 5 lbs of back fat.

R363, I don’t think the smell from the bird refuge is constant, the way it would be, living downwind from a poultry processing plant. It probably depends on the weather and season.

Wait - when did Netflix cancel the Invictus documentary?

[quote] If Meg is guiding him, it's at partly because he's so used to being guided.

Uh, no. There's being guided by minders and assistants who advise and point the way, allowing one a modicum of personal choice as to how one proceeds. And then there's what Megs does, which is most certainly not guiding, but absolute control, using hands, arms and fingers firmly planted on various parts of Harry's body as well as held up to his sight line where he can't miss them, to indicate precisely in which direction Megs demands he move. It's no different to an angry mum grabbing a kid by the wrist and hauling him along after her.

I can't remember here I read it - but the rumor was that Netflix intends to blend its Invictus footage with other Markle stuff (the docu-series?)

Originally, it was due out this year but it's not looking likely. I think their Jubbly booing and flouncing disaster and now the Bower book has put it in question - and I think Penguin is still planning a November or December Harry-memoir release, despite the ghost writer quitting/being fired.

And then there's Valentine Lowe's book coming up: Courtiers: The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who broke the bullying story Hardcover – 29 Sept. 2022.

Already has a page on the UK version of Amazon

20 quid the ghost writer quit/was fired because of "differences" with Meg-asauras.

^^^Meg-asaurUs

“Valentine Low’s upcoming book will focus on palace staff to include the ‘cloud hanging over Prince Andrew as well as Harry and Meghan’s departure from Royal life.’

[Excerpt from an interview with VL:] He (Low) made light of the potential clash with the Duke’s memoir:

“Think of the publicity opportunities, Harry! We could do the chat shows together, and breakfast telly. We’d make a great double act. You could tell them how awful the media is, and I could tell them what fun you used to be, before it all went wrong."

Harry's book is supposedly finished and the lawyers have vetted the text so the author's job is done. If more changes are made without his input, he can always insist that his name be taken off. The publicity from that will be enough to tank the book.

R123 The Queen was actually a Commoner on the day she married, until she became The Duchess of Edinburgh. She may have been a Princess, and the Heiress Presumptive, but if you aren't The Sovereign or a member of the Peerage or one of a certain number of the clergy - then you are legally a Commoner.

R144 Some of your facts are a bit skewed. That Princess of Wales nonsense has been making the rounds of social media for a while - but there is no truth to either the fact that Elizabeth was ever mooted to be a female Prince of Wales or that that was because her parents wanted a son. Due to male preference primogeniture, Elizabeth was never anything but Heiress Presumptive, because she still had two parents who may have produced a son and he would definitely have been Heir Apparent and could have been Prince of Wales. The situation was a little similar to that of Edward VI who bypassed his two older sisters because old Henry desperately wanted to prove his manhood by having a son. In those days, of course, there was no clear succession as there is now.

R234 A Duchess outranks a Princess. I know what she should be called.

Not to defend Harry unduly, but the Invictus doc isn’t about him; it’s about the athletes preparing for the games. It wouldn’t be fair to the athletes to lose out because Harry’s wife is a cunt. (I know: Life isn’t fair.). As it’s just a rumor, I’m not going to get too worked up about it. It’s not my cup of tea, so I’m not watching, although I think it deserves to be aired. It’s the only bit of enduring goodwill they have left, and if the doc gets shelved at this point, it’s going to reflect poorly on Harry. His name is all over it (on IMDb, he’s credited as the “star” of the doc, not any athletes.)

As far as I’ve seen, the “Duke and duchess at home” program (uh, reality show) hasn’t been officially announced. Has it?

So they have two projects on IMDb that are allegedly dead, and the one that’s supposedly happening doesn’t have a footprint anywhere.

Netflix is soooooo Markled.

Omid Scobie does some more Sussex ass kissing.

He really doesn't have a fucking clue how everything works. He was born in Britain, wasn't he?

Before it's too late...WTF?

[quote]The Queen was actually a Commoner on the day she married

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Too late? Too late for what? Too late to stop attention hog Megsie From rolling down a car window to give a glimpse to non-existent fans?

[quote]A Duchess outranks a Princess.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

R368 let's see a source for "the ghostwriter quit" assertion. And not from Tumblr.

Meghan, just put this on Harry!

R382 I looked and all I could find is this Tumblr-like source (actually, it doesn't say what it is - maybe a Reddit like message-board?) Some of the things on this account are good (like quotes from The Spectator or Amazon.uk) so it confuses me - some of their items look like fan fiction - like I suppose this is.

Hope we'll see the book by the end of the year.

What base exactly was Harry stationed at when he was beating up on the prostitutes? There is no air base in El Cajon, California, and there is no other El Cajon. Could it have been Naval Air Facility El Centro, which is actually in Seeley, just west of El Centro? The Blue Angels practice there, and my Mom and Dad met there during WWII when both were in the Marine Corps and it was a Marine Corps airfield. Seeley is a rather impoverished area (and so is El Centro, really, other than agriculture) and is close to the Mexican border. Is this where Harry was stationed?

I married a Commoner?!!!!!!!!!! Why that little vixen.

The base is in Arizona

And his unit was only there for a few weeks for special training. Most incidences of abuse when he was in the military were in Afghanistan. But he has a history of abuse both before and after his military service.

R374 has a strange idea about what is a commoner. He ignores that there is a category of "Member of The Royal Family." Princess Elizabeth wasn't a commoner; she was a member of the Royal Family (and the Heiress Presumptive). She outranked most other individuals in the country, including all the duchesses, marchionesses, countesses, viscountesses, and baronesses. If R374 is referring to legal status, it is true that the monarch is apart from all other individuals in the country; however, that doesn't make princesses commoners.

When Elizabeth married Philip, wasn't she the King's daughter? How could she have been a commoner?

She wasn't.

To Americans (and I am one), "commoner" = the people in the crowds, the peasants, those not a part of the aristocratic class. To the British, anyone without a legal title or rank is a commoner, i.e., you're an Earl or you're nothing. It's two different ways of looking at the world.

You can be an Earl without being Royal. British nobility has two types: Aristocrats and Royals. Elizabeth was born Royal with an HRH and has been Royal every day of her life. Everyone is a commoner to Royals, including Aristocrats.

There's a famous story about Margaret and The Queen Mother getting into a shouting match in the halls of one of the Palaces, overheard by many servants, which ends with Margaret screaming at her mother "How dare you address me that way. I have Royal blood in my veins and you do not!"

Anyone who isn't HRH is a commoner, whether you are a duchess or a dustman. The Queen was born an HRH and has always been royal. People like Diana and Kate were commoners but were made royal through marriage. That's why it was a big deal when Diana lost her HRH--she went back to being a commoner.

My God, Margaret was such a cunt.

I wonder if Margaret realized that 90% of the British population is descended from royal by-blows and has royal blood in their veins.

I always loved the quote, which was attributed to Margaret, although I think it really belongs to someone else:

I learned it at my mother’s knee, or some other low joint.

🤣🤣🤣 No wonder the Queen Mother drank.

Margaret's comment is documented well enough that it's included in at least one royal biography. No, I don't remember which one.

Meghan is a common guttersnipe.

I’m just finishing Anne Glenconner’s memoir. It depicts Princess Margaret as, yes, demanding and grand on occasion, but a good and loyal friend in tough times.

[quote]Anyone who isn't HRH is a commoner, whether you are a duchess or a dustman.

So we're commoners now?

In all of her travails, of which there were precisely none, how did Meghan who was becoming known as a liar about men's cop arrests come up with such an unfortunate brother?

How many strawberries will Meghan tolerate*

Poster upthread is correct.

Princess Elizabeth, as the Queen was, was born royal. Anyone with an HRH is royal. She was a King's granddaughter and a Prince of the Blood's daughter. Where that moron if a poster above got the idea that she was a commoner is a mystery.

Aristocrats are commoners. The Duke of Borfolk isxa commoner. Sobatecall the parts in the House of Lords.

Only an HRH confers royal status.

Below royal comes the aristocracy, those holding hereditary titles: dukes (ordinary as opposed to royal dukes), earls, marquess', barons . . .).

Then came the landed gentry.

And then everyone else.

But only HRHs and above (and above means the Sovereign) ate considered royal.

The media call every member of the family, frequently and wholly erroneously, royal. People like Zara Tindall and Peter Phillips and assorted ithe minor and/or lowered titled members like Lady Sarah Chatto and her brother and their children, as "royal". They aren't. Neither are the York grandchildren.

Archie won't get that HRH until the Queen dies and he becomes the grandson of the Sovereign rather than the great-grandson. Until then, his father is royal and Archie is a commoner who can use his father's subsidiary title of Earl Dumbarton.

HRH Princess Elizabeth, born a Princess of the Blood, granddaughter of King George V in the male line, and Heir Presumptive to the throne a commoner.

That's the funniest thing I've read on DL in lo these many moons.

^*The Duke of Norfolk is a commoner, so are all the hereditary peers in the House of Lords.

Being royal is so dreadfully common.

Hmmm

Is this Spotify or Netflix?

I think it's fair to say, at this point, that the Sussexes have pretty much destroyed their brand. When they pulled out of the Firm, they had a chance to present themselves as cause-motivated rebels, positioned to speak on behalf of the forgotten. Instead, in their continual efforts to put down others (i.e., their relations), they painted themselves as more important, more entitled, and more victimized that others. In their ill-judged appearances on television -- not just Oprah, but Meghan on Ellen and Harry with James Corden -- they made themselves look petty and peevish -- and, in the case of Oprah, demonstrable liars. I imagine Spotify and Netflix have also found them as difficult to work with as did the staff of the Firm, which wouldn't serve them well as they also proved themselves unable to produce content.

Meghan has probably been making one excuse after another. First it was the miscarriage. Then her pregnancy. Then extended maternity leave. The excuses ran out so she advised Spotify (or, Spotify demanded) she'd have enough content to go live this summer. The summer is now over with no content. Now, Spotify is trying to cut their losses. Shame they feel they might have to pay off Meghan in order to escape whatever accusations she may throw at them.

I don't think they ever could have represented themselves as champions of the downtrodden or cause-motivated rebels. They might talk the talk but would never, ever walk the walk, eg, give up their 16 toilet mansion on numerous pricy acres, fly commercial (coach), wear only affordable High Street clothes and eschew pricy jewellery, give up elite sports like hunting or polo, in short, live like ordinary people.

There may be some wealthy or titled people who can do this, but never the Sussexes. You could smell their hypocrisy from Outer Space.

Netflix and Spotify should prepare themselves for lawsuits from the delusional duo. They will assert they have been done wrong by these big bad companies and are the actual victims.

They will claim they weren't shown the ropes, were discriminated against, expected to deliver up their lives on a silver platter, no one asked about their well being, they leaked info about them, didn't protect and defend them, didn't understand the hallowed Duchess' working style, they cut off payments even though they refused to work, etc. etc.

Actually, anyone stupid enough to work with this duo should expect some version of the Oprah interview to be similarly leveled against them. The Oprah interview is their template.

R411, you’re right. Plenty of rich people are hypocrites who pull of the charitable part more easily. Leonardo DiCaprio comes to mind. What is it about the Sussexes that it’s apparent they can’t pull it off? My feeling is they should have concentrated on one thing that didn’t show their hypocrisy—maybe human trafficking rather than the environment. Also, Leonardo makes his money by working, so I think people don’t begrudge him enjoying the fruits of his work. So far these two haven’t done anything of note.

R412, yes, I agree. They’ve done this already, with Spotify.

They put Spotify to one of their bogus purity tests and failed it. “We don’t want to work with this unprincipled platform until they meet our strict standards”. Maaaaybe if Spotify dances to their fucked-up little tune, they’ll deign to put out a podcast.

I agree they will turn this around and accuse Spotify of something awful.

Harry was working off the BRF “Patron” model. You’re designated “Patron” of a charity and you show up and give your opinion on things but never actually get your hands dirty.

When he moved to the US, he was expecting to be made patron of several organizations. However, in the US it’s a bit different. US organizations choose their Board of Directors and Steering Committees based on what the person brings to the table.

Obviously, lawyers are at the top of the list of types that orgs want on their Boards. Additionally, financial people are highly sought out (I worked as EA for CEO of a bank and he got board offers on a weekly basis. People were begging him to join.) If they can’t get an actual banker, they’ll look for someone with a track record of raising money (usually someone who had done it for a political campaign).

Harry had access to money, but everyone knows rich people don’t spend their own money unless there is something in it for them like a tax break or access to someone they want to know.

Harry’s access to the BRF wasn’t desirable to anyone, especially because everyone saw the conflict that Fergie and Andrew created by granting access.

So Harry really had nothing to offer as Patron or Board of Directors member.

I kind of hope that Netflix and Spotify get burned in their dealings with the Markles. They hired them solely because of Meghan's - or, rather, her mother's - race, so it's fitting that that should be the cudgel that she defends herself with. I don't like to see Meghan have a win but it serves Netflix and Spotify right for trying to shit on the BRF for being "white colonisers", etc.

Agreed R413. DiCaprio might use private jets and hang out on yachts, but... he has also championed the same cause for decades and poured millions into it at this point. He's hypocritical in some aspects, but clearly committed to the cause overall. Meghan and Harry pick the cause du jour and then move on before the paint is dry.

Unfortunately Netflix and Spotify will let them go quietly. I wanted to see wig snatching, name calling, tears and recriminations.

But H&M have leverage with Netflix because subscribers are leaving in droves. Subscribers are getting tired of paying for crap and woke shows and in difficult financial times, Netflix is the first to go.

Not on Twitter so could not read the post re Spotify/Netflix?

I think the Bower book has been pretty much drained - we've all gotten more than enough verification of how awful the Harkles have behaved, before, during, and after.

The upcoming material will be Valentine Low's book "Courtiers", Harry's "memoir", and the next phase of Harry's suit for Judicial Review of the Home Office's decision not to grant Harry automatic full-time 24/7 armed police protection whenever he is in Britain. Anent that, there is an article in The TIMES (UK) today of how that protection for Prince Andrew is still costing the taxpayer an "eye-watering" sum.

I don't think the appearance of that article in the country's paper of record is coincidental. I am guessing the Home Office is lining up its ducks for its defence and making it clear that the taxpayer isn't going to stand for any more of this than it already has. This is a piece of PR that warns the Harkles (and, possibly, the government) that any such favour to two nonworking, nonresident, disloyal rogue royals won't be tolerated by the populace.

I am still interested in the Bill quietly wending its way through Parliament that would give the Sovereign the power to strip hereditary titles without having to go to Parliament for final sign-off - as long as Parliament is in general agreement (privately arrived at. The Bill, I think, has gone through or is going through its second reading, and then heads to the House of Lords.

To me, these disparate dominos seem to indicate preparation for a further dropping of shoes, particularly if Harry's memoir is as destructive as the publishers are leaking it will be.

Harry's book, I believe, will be out before the next phase of his two court cases requesting Judicial Review of RAVEC's decisions.

Imagine the impact on the Home Office's considerations if the book is as vituperative as alleged!

So: Harry's book which yesterday was rumoured to support Harry's wish to "explode the monarchy", in tandem with the Home Office's considerations of his desire to be treated as if he were a Member in Good Standing of the institution he wants to explode, and the Bill offering the Sovereign a swifter, easier channel to strip him of the emblems of such membership.

Watch this space.

Some seem to get something akin to a sexual thrill from the pompous and uncommon phrase "prince of the blood." It has meaning and has been used, but Google it. Mostly in relation to the French monarchy and fantasy novels. The only person I found deploying it recently was Prince Andrew, so what does that say?

Have no idea why Spotify would pay off the Harkles for not fulfilling their contract, but whatever. At this point, what other company would want to have any dealings with them? Harry better hope his book is a huge hit. How else are they going to maintain their lifestyle?

Can't wait for Harry's reaction to the judicial review coming out unfavorably for him. He'll be all "I will never be able to protect my family in the UK, so I will not be back"; and an uproarious cheer will rise up in Britain.

Meghan and Harry’s track record is very public. They signed contracts, announced multimillion dollar deals and didn’t hold up their end of the bargain. These companies aren’t going to get their money back.

They’ve proven to be disastrous for the bottom line, and anyone hiring them at this point is trying to lose money. Or perhaps launder it.

[quote]Meghan is a common guttersnipe.

Excuse me. At the time I married Harry, at least for a while, I became a royal guttersnipe.

The Removal of Titles bill doesn't get second reading until December. At that point the House votes on whether or not to put it the next phase, which is Committee stage where each clause and any amendments to the Bill can be debated. Then it goes back for third reading and a vote and then it goes to the Lords for first and second reading, committee, and on and on and on.

It isn't a bad idea in concept but I wouldn't bet the farm on this happening.

First, it's a bill from the Labour MP for York - it's probably as much grandstanding for her political status as anything else.

Second, it is rare but not unheard for a private member's bill to become law - moreso when the government is the opposite party and holding a majority.

Third, there will be inherent reluctance to adopt this as law and create a platform to pressure the late 90s year old Queen to employ it against her son - who has not been charged with anything anywhere, let alone convicted - and that principle of whatever you want to call it - traditionally innocence, even just as a principle - is fundamental to the fair administration of justice. It is a lot to ask the Queen at her age to act as such even if a majority thinks her son is at least an idiot. Nonetheless, idiocy at this point is all that's been proven, and that's arguable because it wasn't proven in court. A settlement in a civil action, whatever you may believe or wish to believe, is proof only of a desire to make something go away. The nature of that desire is unproven.

Fourth, the country is in a fucking mess, half of it ready to catch fire at any minute, about to change Prime Ministers, and poised for delights like potential energy shortages through the winter. There will be no victory in spending time on something like this any time soon... it would seem the height of detached from reality. The Conservatives and their newspapers can argue all hell is breaking loose and Labour's worried about bloody Prince Andrew. The heat of the anger against Prince Andrew has faded. Now he's just disdained and disregarded. The hunger to banish him vs. the hunger to have the heat on won't compare.

[quote]if deal doesn't materialize the steaming giant is protected

That's an excellent way to describe it.

Harry can create Royal Con.

You know how there’s Comic Con where fans pay to have their picture taken and get an autograph from authors and actors?

And you know how Broadway has that day where you can go get your stuff signed by Broadway people?

Well Harry can rent a room at the Airport Ramada Inn. Set up a table and he and Meghan can sign autographs for a donation to “Archwell” 🤫

There are plenty of money making ideas if Harry would lay down the spliff and think a bit.

Am I right in assuming that the examples given by how the Harkles treated Netflix and Spotify would have been noted by anyone in Hollywood or Show Biz leading to the evaporation of any possibility of work or society in that area?

Also, I can't help but remember that Thomas Markle's work in that same area seems to have been viewed very highly and as very professional. I know that some people who worked with him have spoken up in his defense.

And then there is Trevor who is, apparently, still in the business as well. Since he has kept completely mum about his unfortunate first marriage, it might be that those people who have dealt with him professionally or who are friends will also have ugly opinions about the Harkle torched earth policies.

Talk about burning bridges.

R421, they've witnessed Meghan has no moral scruples. She implied the royals imprisoned her and made her suicidal. She could easily imply Spotify contributed to her mythcarriage or some other vague accusation of 'her truth'.

Although, it may just be that they don't Meghan nor anyone else to speak of the deal at all. The whole ordeal is a stain on their judgment. They probably prefer to shelve the relationship without any formal announcement with hopes interest will fade away.

[quote]positioned to speak on behalf of the forgotten

It won't be much longer until that's true!

R415, I think Harry's connection to the BRF could've been exploited by some charity/nonprofit's Board of Directors but in my experience, boards are mostly about fundraising, hitting up their friends and connections. Who are Harry's friends with deep pockets in the US? Oprah? Adele?

Come to think of it, foundations have boards, don't they? Who's on the board of Archewell?

R431, I thought that. But really all he’s good for is one cocktail reception, as he’s not even an entertaining party guest.

He could me a motivational speaker for a charity, but in this climate, nobody is interested in hearing from rich royals. “I’m here to speak on behalf of sex trafficking. Having 16 bathrooms in my home, I am well aware of the temptation to hire a Czech girl to scrub the bog (pause for laugh).”

I don’t think his being Royal is a selling point in the US in our current economic and social state.

Abso bullsht that the Sussex got their deals because of Markle's 'race, probably asserted by a historical idiot who finally noticed the BRF only recently.

The book will be on-sale in the US on October 4th.

^^List price $29.99? I’ll wait a month and pick it up for $5 at Dollar General.

I think everyone who wanted to read it managed to order it from Book Depository or downloaded it when it was mistakenly put on Amazon for Kindle so if sales are slow, it will be taken as proof!!! that Americans believe in Meghan!!. I do not understand the roll out of this book.

R435 That’s Harry’s book not Bower’s. Lol.

Sadly, duchess @ R402, you're not, but you and your dopey husband still aren't allowed to USE your HRHs. So your fellow "brash Americans" can think of you as commoners if we like.

I was going to buy the book but instead I listened to HG Tudor read it on yootoob.

MM seems to have her info straight out of the Brothers Grimm or J K Rowling.

She actually said, 'We'll always be royal. Harry and Archie have royal blood.'

And she didn't say out loud, '...and we're one plane crash away from ruling Great Britain and Northern Ireland.'

R439 Continue to delude yourself that HG Tudor read aloud 400+ pages. I’ve read the book and listen to HG Tudor. It’s not even close.

I worry about her dogs. She claimed Bogart was too old to go to England so she left him behind in Toronto with a friend, supposedly. (I hope she didn't dump him somewhere.) When she returned to Canada people said, hey, now you can get Bogart back and she said she couldn't, that she got rid of him because he didn't like Harry. (Perceptive dog.) She's a liar and a fake dog lover. Then Guy the beagle broke two legs. How the fuck did that happen?

Harry's wife is a Mid-Range narcissist.

Mid-range? Is that what Trump is? Because they’re practically identical in their delusion and entitlement. Meghan behaves better in public, that’s the only difference.

[quote]Then Guy the beagle broke two legs. How the fuck did that happen?

The story that went around at the time was that she or Harry, I can't remember which, "accidentally" ran over his two back legs in the drive way. I have no idea what the truth is.

[quote]Then Guy the beagle broke two legs. How the fuck did that happen?

Probably Harry had it sleeping in his bed and rolled over on it.

Who wouldn't sleep with a dog if the alternative is Meghan?

This is the first I've heard of the dog with two broken legs! What the hell? I've had dogs for three decades, and this has never happened to me or any other dog owners I know. Seems shady as fuck.

I agree they didn't get their media contracts because of Meghan's racial status. They got a lot of positive media coverage because of it (from outlets run by people who probably a)don't give a shit about race and may even be a bit racist themselves but also b)understand the cultural climate we're in) but they got their media contracts because of Harry and his being a prince. That's it.

R449, I agree. The race is their shield. But Harry’s royalty is their Lance.

Or, was.

^^ autocorrect insisted that “Lance” be capitalized.

That's well put, R450. (I was the poster who initially described the race issue as the engine of their career outside of the Royal Family but your analysis and that of others upthread is better.)

"MM seems to have her info straight out of the Brothers Grimm or J K Rowling."

More like Danielle Steal or Jacqueline Collins.

Seriously, some trash writer needs to write something about a yacht girl and C-list actress marrying royalty!

Oops, misunderstood the post I was quoting!

But seriously, some trash writer does need to take up the story of a yacht girl marrying royalty.

And no, I don't think Meg was a yacht girl, she was too serious about social climbing to go that route. But trash writers always work from the worst rumors an assumptions, so...

All this BS about Harry getting International security. Will you people put a sock in it.

He is not now nor ever will he be a representative of the Head of State or of the government. He will never be entitled to that and he never was.

On Royal tours arangements are made between governments, on holidays there seems to be some co-operation, but not the big motorcade bullshit.

I don't know why he is doing all crap, seems worthless for 2 days a year in the UK,. I think Britain is gettinf a baf version of the Bitch is Baccccccccccccck

Meghan and Harry were on the precipice of success but blew it with their whining and bad manners.

r455 Sorry but He did have IPP status and was told at the 2020 Sandringham summit that he would lose it if they went ahead with Megxit.

r456 Their timing was jinxed also .Covid pandemic complicated and frustrated their plans to make it big.

R457 You have no actual evidence of that. All you know is that his thick-as-shit wife claimed they had that status on her website. Doesn’t mean they did.

It’s pretty clear that you have no actual idea what “IPP status” means in practice or how/when/if it’s conferred.

Shut up going on about it, you dumb frau.

r459 I am not a frau -I am a gay man from the Northwest of England in the UK , I wont shut up especially on the orders of a bad mannered aggressive gobs***e and you are factually wrong. You pose as knowledgeable but reek of being a pretender.

When they first left the UK, did they go to Canada because they could get taxpayer funds? It seems Meghan always had her eye on California. But why did they detour to Canada.

Surviving Angel. Please accept that he had lower level security in the UK and he wa s never an IPP.

Just because Meghan says it is so , doesn't..

r462 I am not talking about their security when they were in the UK.The IPP status is about when you are out of your own country and the Queens relatives who are working royals are covered by that.Meghan and Harry seem to think they can have that when they are abroad despite the fact they quit as working royals!! So when Harry and Meghan visited Australia they were IPPs. Would the Queen have got more and better security if she visited Australia- Yes but any working member of the royal family is an IPP when they visit abroad on business. Meghan and Harry were IPPS but they have embroided in their mind what it means and when it can be applied or applicable. They have a much grander idea of it than the reality. They want that status back and their fantasies around it but its not going to happen.It was appalling the cost they put on Canada and security staff when they were there end of 2019 to early 2020 - not on official business but having a holiday of sorts.That provided protection was because of their IPP status.

SA is correct about their security in Canada. They weren’t here on an official visit, but had round the clock RCMP protection as IPPs.

When they announced their departure from official duties, Canada pulled their protection and they left the country almost immediately. They were going to leave anyway, but apparently were pissed at their taxpayer funded protection being pulled.

Not only did they have IPP status in Canada vis a vis their nebulous status as members of the RF mostly unwilling to perform duties requiring protection. For a time they had BOTH RCMP and Metropolitan police officers on royal protection duty.

Keep in mind that this was during the Holiday season when the Sussexes kept both contingents of highly trained bodyguards and officers from TWO Commonwealth countries on Vancouver Island, ostensibly for their "safety," but they were often seen dispatched around town running errands such as shopping, picking up food, dry cleaning and coffee for the couple.

However they were unable to stop one of Meghan's pap walks with and incredibly huge and heavy Archie uncomfortably dangling from her chest while she walked a dog. All the while acting as though snake charmed by the pap's lens.

Of course, she sued. Apparently won and the agency declared bankruptcy. Various posters on various sites wonder if it was a set up. Which is a high probability supposition knowing the Harkle shiftiness.

They may well have been pissed at losing their RCMP security, but the border was about to close owing to Covid, so I think that had a bit to do with their vamoosing out of there.

Amazing how quickly the Markles shot themselves not only in the foot, but in the head as well. Hope Penguin has good lawyers fact checking. Would be a shame for them to get Markled at the hands of Harry the Dim. Penguin Used to publish really quality books. Many of their translations employed the best of the best translators.

[quote] They’ve proven to be disastrous for the bottom line, and anyone hiring them at this point is trying to lose money. Or perhaps launder it.

Enter Loving Kindness Senior Care Management, Inc. Whose sole proprietor is *drum roll* Doria Ragland.

Boy,she drug dimwit Harry right into the fucking gutter,didnt she ??? He was a PRINCE for gods sake,and very popular all over the world ! Now look at him.A defeated and broken man.There she is the whole time,with that maniacal smile plastered on her face. No wonder his family loathes her.

Does Meghan believe she is a normal person with no personality disorders?

Of course! Just as every sociopath and narcissist believes that the problem is most certainly not them, it's YOU.

She always has this weird glimmer in her eyes.

That whore hasnt looked that young since she spit out those kids.

Doria's senior care center is actually a shell corporation set up by Rachel.

It's interesting, R473, how even with enough money to pay for all the tweaks she wants, Meghan has turned out to be one of those women who is irrevocably made matronly/less beautiful by motherhood. You can't even put your fingers on specifics, usually, a woman somehow just looks older. It's pretty rare in rich women these days, which is why it's surprising in her. She is not helped by the fact that she doesn't carry ANY extra weight well at all, including on her face.

R472 I remember a poster on CDAN refer to Meghan as having “sparkling spider eyes” right around the engagement announcement. That stuck with me for some reason.

R475 - Meghan had Botox injections to the massiter muscles in her jaw area which gave her the appearance of high cheek bones and a sculpted jawline while she appeared on Suits. It was a good vulpine look for her. That treatment was obviously foregone before and during her pregnancies. Now she has a moon face she tries to disguise with arch sweeps of bronzer and blusher.

Her face was always going to catch back up with her. There's no hiding that thing.

She looks like Jodi Arias in that photo at r472.

They went to Canada because David Fostee arranged a free house for them; Russian’s house on the peninsula. I have never heard of someone who’s had so many couchsurfing arrangements.

Doria used the alias “Radlan”. Look it up. I wonder if anyone has used it in a search of the California penal system.

American here and I know I am probably late to the game, but Audible JUST released Revenge with a rather sinister narrator. What I have gleaned from this thus far, 3 chapters in, is that what maybe we all thought was an extraordinary remarkable tale was simply an entitled cunt in the right place and the right time. Meghan is rather unREMARKLEable (I had to) and is just a dumb, greed bitch who has an ego inflated by her family. She is a dime a dozen in LA, where I am also a native and her same age. What I found interesting is that it seemed Tom Markle, based on this book ("recollections may vary") was an overindulgent father who felt guilty about having Tom Jr. and Samantha "at the wrong time" and decided to give everything to Meghan. She is a leach who used any man or woman to get her way and Tom was complicit in giving in to her every whim, whether he could afford it or not. It seems Doria was not around at all, possibly very bi, but a "free spirit" regardless of her sexuality. She wasn't at all interested in being a full time mother and Tom took on the burden. It's a dark day when I am defending Tom Markle. Bottom line, he indulged Meghan in her delusional fantasies, enabling her to be the nasty cunt she is today. I am finding this book somewhat depressing b/c at the end of the day, there is not Markle Sparkle. She is just a nasty bitch with a chip on her shoulder and an inflated ego who decided she was going to make everyone pay on her way up. It's so LA basic, she could literally be any money grubbing, self important whore - she could be any of my thirsty friends. It was all right place, at the right time, but Meghan is as ordinary as they come who somehow landed in extraordinary circumstances and blew the opportunity to smithereens. Talk about "never shine day light on the magic". The daylight has been shown & what we see is botox bumps, bronzer, and a bitch who will never be satisfied. The book is good, but it really takes away the fun of Meghan. She is just a gold digging, slightly better than average LA whore who hit the jackpot. Bummer - I had thought she was actually interesting during the engagement.

Really? R480? From day one it was really obvious what she was. One quick look at her social media told you everything. At least that's what I saw...

She’s no different than any other ambitious golddigger; she just married a more famous man than any of them and has a more severe personality disorder.

Off the top of my head: Katharine McPhee, Louise Linton, Priyanka Chopra

Remember when she set up Sussex Royal but forgot to register the website and somebody bought it and redirected it to the song "Gold Digger" on youtube?

That seems like a million years ago now.

I can't imagine how the British royal family could take them back, should they wish to return. Harry and Meghan have crossed too many lines: accusing the royal family of racism, dissing the Commonwealth as a racist organization, taking positions on political matters. At this point, they would be a serious liability. Further, the royal family have now seen what Meghan is capable of and how easily Harry is manipulated by her. Perhaps, after a divorce and several years of gradually rehabilitating Harry's image, they could make him a working royal again (they did a great job rehabilitating Camilla's image, although it took fifteen years). It will probably depend on who is monarch at the time: Charles could be suckered into it, but I think William as king would say, "Thanks, but no thanks" to any request to come back into the Firm.

Taking her back would be like Trump's oft-told parable about the lady and the snake - this time, it would be, "you knew I was a snake when you took me in."

Except I think they may have known but probably didn't think it would turn out THIS bad. After all, they survived Nazi-lover Edward and Wallis; Andrew and his bestie Epstein; Sarah selling access to Andrew; Diana and Bashir...

r464 Thank you- and yes the way they treated security in Canada as lackeys says a lot about them.

r485 I believe Harry threatened to play the race card if the Queen declined his wish to marry Meghan ASAP. I thunk with hands it would have been better if she stood firm and said in a year when you have known each other longer. Harry could have married without permission if he renounced his place in the line of succession and that would be fine for someone who says how awful he found royal life. But he sees no problem trying to have his cake and eat it.

It was evident from space what Meghan, and her relationship to Harry, was all about if you watched their engagement interview.

I think the Queen has gone too soft on Harry, probably because she feels guilty about the Diana situation.

But the US needs to think up a game plan. Is Harry paying taxes? Is he a US citizen?

I don’t know why this stuff about Doria being in prison for a time persists when it’s so easy to look up criminal dockets.

R488 I brought that up on Twitter. I was respectful and used facts in my tweet.

Several squaddies attacked me & 1 said I was disgusting & they DESPISE (in caps) all women like me.

They said stop being tacky. So I said I was not tacky at all, but if you insist that I am being tacky, can we talk about Harry’s Las Vegas panties? They did not like that.

All I had said was I want 1 of 2 things. That they #1 stop using British Monarchy titles or #2 stop interfering in American politics. I said I was born here paid taxes my entire adult life & still get screwed over left, right and center.

.And the ex-royal and his charlatan ducharse wife want to insert themselves into our politics and government?

I said I not “support” the other British royals since I am American, so don’t come after me with accusations of racism.

Another one said, in reply to that tweet —— Don’t believe it/don’t care.

I mean, don’t believe what exactly???

The squaddies are going to #markle. everything about the sussexes. and every one of their little minions and I cannot wait to see it.

Particularly cannot wait to see scooby dopeface get what he deserves.

Scooby already got what he deserved. Imagine having to look into the mirror & seeing that face you paid loads of dosh to create....Youch!

Is it me or does it seem like consequences for shitty behavior seems to be fast & brutal these days?

Somebody's trying to make "Princess Meghan" a thing - she keeps being called that on social media. But I thought she wanted to run for public office in the US, so they can hardly go with "Vote Princess Meghan for Senator".

That Princess Meghan stuff is so pathetic. Isn't she supposed to be a feminist? There's nothing feminist about being obsessed with being a Princess.

Princess Meghan is going to be her porn handle. You too can have sexy talk with a Real Princess for only $19.99/minute. This will propel her to even greater heights & feats of thrilling while grilling.

Never mind opening a suitcase on a flight of stairs while on camera, whitha big smile with your tits ahnging out!!...Imagine having a Real Princess open your fly. $19.99/minute, call now.

Take a look at the royal snatch for $ 149 now!

Princess Muffin

Why does Harper's Bazaar keep that breathless simpering idiot Scobie on as a "Royal Correspondent?" He's only a Sussex correspondent who is limited to fawning over them. As a result, he won't be able to cultivate any sources at the various palaces and royal residences. The Sussex shelf life is approaching its expiration date; his editors should realize his is, too.

r492 If she couldn't handle being a royal family member for such a short period of time then she certainly cannot handle or do justice to the role of senator. I suspect she has a very immature view of what being a politician involves - a view that is stuck in her teenage years

[quote]I have never heard of someone who’s had so many couchsurfing arrangements.

More like castlesurfing.

R498, I used to think that too. Then AOC came along. If AOC can be in Congress, then anyone can be in Congress.

R438, I think her entire development as a human ended in her teenage years. Her idea of being a senator is being a senator in a 90s movie.

Scene: She waltzes into her senate office, her coat fashionably draped on her shoulders. She turns to her aides, all sitting in a circle waiting for her to arrive and give them orders. “Jane, get me the president on the phone. He’s going to come out in support of my version of the energy bill. He knows he owes me this one after I single handedly saved his Supreme Court nominee. Besides, it’s the right thing for this planet of ours. If we don’t save it, who will?”

Jane nods and scurries off. The remaining aides look up at her in admiration.

“Sam, get the press here at 4:00.”

“Yes, senator duchess. What should I tell them it’s about?”

The Senator Duchess smiles enigmatically. “Tell them they’re in for the surprise of their careers. In fact, you all are.”

Sam nods and scurries off. The remaining aides look respectfully at her.

“Rob, be a darling and get me an oat milk latte? Double shot, please. In fact, get one for everyone. Charge it to expenses.”

An aide who’s just there to fill out the scene picks up the phone. “Senator duchess, your daughter is on the line.”

Jane scurries back in. “Senator duchess, the president is on line 1.”

Meghan turns back to her other nameless scene filler aide. “Tell little what’s her name mommy is busy saving the world right now. She’ll appreciate it one day.” She calls after Rob, who is just heading out for the coffees. “Rob, on second thought, make mine a triple. A working young senator duchess mother needs to keep her energy up.”

SA time to start part THREE

r500 I don't know much about AOC only that she is not a senator but in the house of representatives and she is very vocally rebellious?

r502 You surely mean part 6?

R503, Before Meghan pulled the fake pap shot at the grave, AOC staged a fake pap shot at the border. She had a picture done of her standing in front of Trump’s fence, which had been up before Trump ever took office. At least Meghan brought Cool Ranch Doritos.

R505, Meghan Fucking Markle did her attention whoring at the expense of killed kids and teachers in Uvalde, bitch. And now kindly fuck off.

[quote]If MTG can be in Congress, then anyone can be in Congress.

Fixed.

[quote] If Donald Trump can be in the White House, then anybody can be in the White House.

Fixed it for you, R500.

Meghan is a lying, scheming, hypocritical, narcissistic sociopath - in other words, perfect for the Republican Party.

The Duchess of Doritos is a cheapskate just like Haz. Arrived in Uvalde with gas station convenience store snacks to ingratiate herself.

R506 AOFuckingC did her attention whoring at the expense of dead immigrant children who would have sucked up tax money that the Uvalde children needed for new textbooks. And she did it in Spanish. And she didn’t try to merch that expensive watch on her wrist.

Go create a thread about AOC if you're that obsessed with her. THIS thread here deals with Meghan Markle and her handbag husband.

And now fuck off, cunt.

I really don't think Harry is a handbag, I think he's the driving force behind most of their stupider decisions!

Like bugging out of the BRF, Meghan wouldn't have wanted a hostile relationships with the Bank of Charles and an old Queen who still had enough marbles to change her will, a greedy little climber like her always knows where the money is and she's very nice to it. No, that comes from Harry, and Meg had and has to go along with it as long as she wants to keep the ginger idiot. She probably knows she'd have had a better deal as Charles's mistress, but well. Harry was the one who was desperate enough to marry anyone who'd promise him a life away from his family.

Girls, girls! They’re both stunting whores. Can we all just get along?

R513, I think it’s a classic folie a deux (I don’t know how to do the accents correctly because I’m an uneducated asshole, so sue me). Not that you’re wrong. I think they feed off each other’s issues.

Two nut bars.

I totally agree, R515, that those two bring out the absolute worst in each other.

Apart, they're ordinary. Together, they're a massively entertaining trainwreck!

Whether or not Harry is or was the driving force in Megxit, it's clear that he was not prepared for the universal contempt and rejection that ensued from his family, friends and the British public. MM had nothing to lose and so she can tolerate it better.

[quote]she'd have had a better deal as Charles's mistress,

Taken!

I'm really enjoying this audible version of the book. The narrator, which may be the author, is just evicerating her and it's so snarky, but true. I am on chapter four where she is fucking the Irish golfer Rory Macaroy (sp?) while still seeing the chef and marched her way to flying the chef into Ireland on Rory's dime in a private jet. She is just an absolute total grifter. He also has had a few great swipes as melting wax man(?), Omid Scobie. This author is really going for it and I applaud his balls.

John Fitzpatrick was fucking her at the same time as Cory and Rory. He's the hotelier from New York.

[QUOTE]R506] AOFuckingC did her attention whoring at the expense of dead immigrant children who would have sucked up tax money that the Uvalde children needed for new textbooks.

Let's be serious when you provide a link, even if it's from one of your Brietbart Solace "It ain't me!!!'? One that shows a minimal care for the Uvalde children blown away and who needed DNA testing so their lowly Hispanic parents might identify the correct corpses to put in small coffins .

Small coffins, and, except for all the crushed DNA mess to identify the dead..

Did you have any expertise that could have provided the parents with some solace?

I remember that very clearly. There were several photos of AOC faking it at the border.

R522 "I remember that very clearly"

You put that out of your ass very clearly.

Again, if you're that obsessed with AOC, go and create a thread on her. And again, now please fuck off.

Doesn't Bower also imply that Fitzpatrick is gay? Have no clue who this guy is but according to the book, he's also involved in fundraising for the Democrats which you need to be a US citizen to actually donate. The hotel webpage says the hotels are Irish owned. At any rate, I can readily believe this guy would comp an otherwise empty room to an attractive actress. Even if you don't think Markle was attractive enough, she did hustle and she had that adoring doe-eyed look down pat. Plenty of men, not just Harry, fall for that.

Eh, I still Meghan was the driving force in them "escaping" the RF. Before they were even married she was picking fights with Kate and grifting Charles to pay for clothes she got as freebies. She had zero interest in any kind of relationship. Remember, the biggest whoppers in the Oprah interview came from her. Not exactly someone who wants to smooth things over. Harry may have thought about leaving, but it seems likely she's the one who made it sound plausible. "Harry! We'll be so popular! Harry! We'll make millions." Also recall that upon arriving back, in CA, she announced that she was ready to field offers from A-list directors. She really thought that Duchess title of hers would pave the way to fame and acclaim.

I have this feeling that Meghan is one of those girls who can suck chrome off a tailpipe and will probably do anal...until she gets what she wants and then the bridge goes up. I wouldn't be surprised if in the beginning she and Harry went on drug/sex binges together, b/c that's what he likes and his other girls have also been smart girls who liked to party. Meghan is too much of a control freak to let that be an ongoing thing although I could see her enjoying blow with her Tig. There is a photo in a blind item (not about them) of them leaving Soho House and both have the "eyes" of people who were doing rails.

I didn't know Trevor married a "billionaire heiress" per the book. Good for him. He got Markled, but it seems he might have learned a thing or 2 from the experience. The book also mentioned how anti-children Meghan was and that was of great concern to his wealthy, Jewish parents. Meghan's aspirations were not congruent with being a mother and having family.

I remember that R525! I thought when she said it "dont hold your breath,Granny" . You're 15 years past that expiration date.

Tom Markle hit the nail on the head, "Meghan is married to Hollywood". Meghan wants to be a Hollywood A list star more than anything. One thing that I find curious is how she managed to stay on Suits for 6 years and seemingly get along with everyone. There did seem to be genuine fondness between her and the cast when she was such a raging bitch to everyone else (Reitman's, etc).

Also, I cringe every time I hear excerpts from her anonymous actress blog. With that said, does anyone have the archives to that? I loved the line, "If you are on TV, you've already sold out so collect your paycheck and smile". Talk about a jaded but she grew up on film sets. It's too bad Tom Markle went the bumbling bafoon route. He's an Emmy winner which is not nothing and it would have been interesting to see him mix with the Royals. I think why Meghan iced him out is that at the end of the day, they are 2 of a kind, 2 peas in a pod. She's Tom with Doria's shady grifting tendencies. It does seem Tom loved Meghan very much and really did everything to help her.

It is very inconsistent that MM was hard-working, professional and well-liked during her 7 year tenure on Suits and abused the Reitmans people and BRF staff in such an uncool stupid way.

There are a few inconsistencies the book got wrong which make me question a few things from Tom's recollections. He said that she never worked in high school and denied Meghan working Humphrey Yogarts in BH, but I listened to a pod cast and in the early days of the engagements, Meg's old manager gave an interview and said she was a great employee. It's a small detail, but then opens up more questions.

I don't think her Suits co-stars are being truthful about what a joy she was to work with.

R520 Fitzy is gay. He comped a room to a pretty (and pretty available) girl who drank in his bar entertaining his guests and customers. He was big raising money for the Clintons. He raised more as the head of the American Ireland Fund from 2014 to 2019.

R530, but you’d think there would be more details to question, since the book has been out for awhile.

[quote] I listened to a pod cast and in the early days of the engagements, Meg's old manager gave an interview and said she was a great employee. It's a small detail, but then opens up more questions.

The only question it opens up is why people were so eager to suck up to her when she managed to get the (engagement) ring on her finger.

She's a world-class grifter and Harry's a moron.

r530 - I have a hard time believing she made a 10 mile trek from her high school to schlep frozen treats to people she envied and resented.

R534 that manager probably hoped to get invited to the wedding.

We all know who got those invitations though . . .

R533 - it's pretty on point. I am just nit picking. I wasn't sure if I would enjoy the book because I followed the Revenge threads, DM serials, and all the tea has been seemingly spilled. I think by reading or listening to it first hand, I am picking up things I didn't know before like the Irish golfer and I've been following since the Tangling Tendrils.

The thing that I absolutely to this day can't get over is what a cunt Meghan was during the engagement process. Back during the engagement when I was a Meghan fan and was rooting for her, I was like please don't let anything happen to fuck this up. I was putting myself in her shoes thinking that I would be shitting bricks and desperate to make it down the aisle. I would have licked Kate's snatch and bow to Charlotte to get into that family. She must have felt that she had it in the bag 100% OR maybe she was a bitch b/c subconsciously she was trying to sabotage something she knew deep down wasn't for her, which I have personally done in situations I wanted but knew weren't right.

Didn't he tell the fake Greta that there was a lot of money to make with charities?

Sounds like something he was told by the wife.

Doesn't appear she likes Charlotte. Halfwit Harry also smirked.

Who laughs when a kid falls? I don't have kids or even like kids and I wouldn't laugh if a kid fell.

But then again Medusa and Halfwit laughed when that elderly officer fainted and fell off his horse at one of the Troopings.

Anyone can see that Charlotte is turning into a beauty and is by far the prettiest of the BRF girls. Thus MM hates her.

Bower does mention that her attitude changed towards the end of Suits after she met Harry. If I was an actor on Suits, I would keep my mouth shut and be professional and just say she was nice.

That balcony-fall clip looks to me like the typical over-analysis of tiny moments, body language, and "microexpressions" that people with an axe to grind indulge in. You can see sadistic laughter or you can see momentary amusement that a cute kid slipped and is now OK--Charlotte didn't even fall down, she just slipped and was caught and comforted by her mom. Someone who doesn't dislike Meghan Markle (a category that excludes, me, by the way, but I don't believe in over-analyzing) wouldn't read that much into it. I also don't think Meghan could have seen the fall from where she was standing. She saw that something was happening and raised herself a little to see, then saw Charlotte being held by Catherine.

It's like that clip of Meghan entering a car that was posted in one of these Harkle threads. It was labeled as showing the "chaos" that a borderline personality causes, but it turned out to be negligible, a meaningless moment.

[quote]It's too bad Tom Markle went the bumbling bafoon route.

I think that's pretty hard on Tom Markle. He seems to be fairly uncomplicated guy but from all appearances he was a worthy craftsman in his trade and he was generous to a fault to the serpent's tooth. Yes, he is overweight and lives modestly and isn't very shrewd about managing the pack of hounds that is the tabloid press, but I see a guy dragged into something he never imagined nor sought and is making a poor, if earnest best of it and coping, with mixed results, with being humiliated on an international scale.

And if you're going to insult somebody at least spell the insult right, ya buffoon.

The worst thing she has done, in my opinion, is not inviting her father to either of her weddings. That's gotta hurt. And after all he did for her.

Her father went to her first wedding in the Caribbean.

The manic chaos was MM not allowing the Queen to precede her in entering the car. Awkward!!!

I read that she wanted to be on Made in Chelsea. Isn't that a show about the elite set? How would they even allow her anywhere near that show?

I dedicate this song to Meghan, KGT and all of the Sugars.

"She's a world-class grifter and Harry's a moron."

I disagree, I think she's a small-time grifter! Sure, she can talk some rich people into throwing her a few hotel rooms, private plane rides, and dicks, but 30-odd years of hustling only got her a place on Hollywood's C-list and some middle-class men. A world-class grifter would have gotten Charles and the Queen to buy her a castle by the sea and a 1000-emerald tiara, while Meg got nothing Frogmore cottage and "tiaragate".

But of course, I agree that Harry is an idiot.

Unpopular opinion: This saga will end in tragedy just like Diana.

Not divorce, not discarding but tragedy. All this talk of him being let back into the family after a divorce and sufficient period of penance will not come to pass.

Reckless Haz will accidentally cause his own demise like his mother. Vehicularly or prescription overdose or some other bizarre type of accident. History will repeat itself.

I really don't think it will be a predictable vitriolic divorce. But I'm happy to be wrong.

[quote] I think that's pretty hard on Tom Markle. He seems to be fairly uncomplicated guy but from all appearances he was a worthy craftsman in his trade and he was generous to a fault to the serpent's tooth.

I would agree if Tom didn't live almost all his life in LA working on TV sets, win an Emmy & spend most of his time on Hollywood sets. He knows how he should act. He might be simple, but he doesn't seem dumb. But, if I were Meghan, I might be embarrassed by him too so I guess it's just a wash.

Not only did Thomas Markle attend her first wedding on the beach in Jamaica, he took pics that still exist. Those are the ones you can find online. Meghan destroyed the wedding video and ordered that all pics be destroyed. (The dress she wore was a copy of Kate's second wedding dress, the sleeveless white thing with the thick belt.) She was already anticipating life after Trevor when she married him. She's a really paranoid, secretive person, to a pathological degree. Witness all the obfuscation about her pregnancies, childbirth, and the existence of the kids since then. There's nothing normal about any of it.

She's only paranoid and secretive because she wouldnt know how to tell the truth if you paid her a million dollars. Not because shes mysterious or inscrutable. Shes just a plain ole liar.

Love how dense she is that she is pushing the Princess bit. Once again the moniker Princess Pinocchio will be in common use. I think Princess of Porky/Porkies has a nice ring as well.

R551 Sadly, I believe you’re right. This will end in tragedy for Harry. Nothing good will come from this for him.

Meghan will be just fine.

Mayerlinig

-ling, not -linig

It's already a tragedy for Harry. The question is how can he salvage his life?

He needs get in touch with his family and ask for help with a plan to get out of the situation. His family will have unlimited resources to be able to advise him on next steps.

Maybe the situation won't implode. Maybe the Sussexes will be like the Yorks, blundering from one crisis to the next, involved with shady people on the sidelines. But I agree that a number of stints in rehab are on the cards for Harry and I think that even when Harry gets his various inheritances, they will have to downsize. Their current lifestyle including upkeep on their monstrosity of a house, PR, lawyers and security is not sustainable.

But they need to take stock because clearly their current stance as humanitarians and eco-warriors is not working.

Harry would need two pull a Katie Holmes style escape but he is not motivated to do that.

Has he ever owned a house before? Has she? What was going through their minds when they decided on this huge waste of house?

Din’t think Markle or Harry are the brightest bulbs in the box.

Problem is, they live in such delusions of reality that they convince themselves they ARE the brightest bulbs.

They didn't need a house that size. The energy bills alone must be out of this world.

[quote] ...even when Harry gets his various inheritances

That's assuming anyone will be leaving him any inheritance. Especially if it goes to the wife too.

Question: If Harry is still married when/if he inherits some money, is that money considered community property and therefore half hers?

Of course, money could be left in an iron clad trust for Harry's children, set up so nothing will ever find its way into the kids' parents' hands. The RF knows all about trusts.

Do you think Meg is capable of stealing Archie's money?

R567 Definitely. She'll convince herself that it's hers. So would Prince Harry in fairness. They're both entirely self involved narcissists.

Absolutely r567 no question! Narc mothers are famous for this! Mine cleared me out after a good birthday hall. I found my rusty rooster booster club bank book thrown behind the dryer in the basement. Account closed.

I don't know which laws will apply to H&M, but let's assume California laws apply. California is a community property state. Any income earned be either one during the time they are married is property of both. But not inheritances. An inheritance received by only one of them is not community property, it is separate property. If Harry receives any in his name only, he must take pains to keep it separate. Preferably at a different bank. And he cannot give her access to it. He cannot commingle any money or assets that he expects to keep separate.

What he will do depends on how he views the future of his marriage, how much he trusts her, what he wants her to have and what he wants his children to have. He should not trust Meghan AT ALL. He needs a strong, dependable, reputable advisor and attorney.

[quote] Reckless Haz will accidentally cause his own demise like his mother. Vehicularly or prescription overdose or some other bizarre type of accident.

Meghan the grieving widow will do another Oprah interview stat with fake teary eyes:

"The Royal Family even refuse to make Archie and Lilibet Prince and Princess now that their doting father is dead and I am all alone without security!!!"

I don't think Meg is secretive becsuse she's paranoid. I think she'a secretive because she hopes to sell personal photos and information to the highest-bidding media outlets!

And that none of the media outlets are bidding high enough for her.

R572 None of them are bidding at all.

R572, I can see why you think that’s all it is, but I think there’s more to it.

I think it’s down to a pathological level of need for control. And she thinks it makes her mysterious and therefore special. Though I do agree that money is a factor.

SA, are you making a new thread?

It is reported today that the Sussexes will make a trip to England and Germany during the first week in September. They will visit Dusseldorf for the One Year Out! event for the 2023 Invictus Games, and visit a couple of events of their private charities (i.e.g, not patronages gifted by the Queen, of which they have been stripped). In other words, these will be "private" visits that have nothing to do with the BRF. It will be interesting to see what the "security" arrangements are for those private visits.

This is probably a first: the Sussexes, instead of foaming at the mouth publicly about the Bower book, appear to have ignored it and, instead, are turning the eye in a different direction, a quite sensible approach.

The bit appeared in a variety of papers, but I noted with amusement that CNN, in reporting it, actually printed this about their Jubilee appearance.

"They flew in from the US for the jubilee celebrations and were warmly welcomed by the crowd, arriving to cheers."

A breathtaking piece of misinformation of exactly the type CNN excoriates in Trump. For, as the tens of millions who watched know perfectly well, the Harkles were audibly booed both entering and leaving the cathedral. This was widely reported in the media.

I'll grant that one sort of misinformation is far more damaging than the other, but the principle is the same: the media across the board shamelessly misdirect when it supports the outlet's agenda. And then the media wring its hands about no one trusting news agencies any longer.

The last sentence in the piece more or less announces that there may have been something less than a warm welcome last time, but, of course, doesn't state why. If they weren't going to tell the truth a couple of sentences above, they may as well have left that last bit out.

Just finished reading the book. It’s not a hatchet job, although no doubt the Harkles would say it is. It’s not page after page of sycophantic drivel the way they’d prefer it to be, either. There’s not much there any DLer wouldn’t recognize but by building the narrative story after damning story, all thoroughly sourced (the reason it’s been met with silence from Montecito?), Bower shows the reader both sides of H&M’s many sad tales. Their “truth” and everyone else’s vary greatly. Most of their assertions just plain prove to be untrue but it’s their personalities - entitlement squared - that make it impossible to sympathize with them.

They better keep their itinerary in the UK top secret. With all this heat , the rotting veggies are being assembled as we speak. Boos, will be coupled with well rotted veg. for a proper welcome for the deadly duo.

^Whoops also meant to add. Do these patronages really want them? Can't imagine their phony, self aggrandizing are good for donations. Seem like they repel rather than attract.

R578 Well observed. That was my impression, as well, after reading the book. It's a carefully built portrait that is very hard to counter.

Bower is promising an updated version with "new information" in the paperback edition. With any luck, it will come out just as bottom-feeder Scobie's "new" book with "earthshaking" revelations comes out.

As to those patronages, who knows? If they would rather not have either of the Sussexes, they're unlikely to state that publicly.

I think Mayhew and Meghan parted ways, but don't quote me, I might be misremembering.

About Harry inheriting - didn't Princess Anne delay the age at which Harry was to receive a trust fund payout - from 40 to 45? Read it somewhere.

You'd think Harry would throw a fit, if it's true.

How much do these trips of theirs cost the charity?

Is it really worth it to the charities to foot the bill so this couple can feed their own egos jet setting?

What do they bring to the table at this point? Have the charities done the math?

I think that bit about Princess Anne and the Trust Fund is unfounded rumour. First, no one would have put Anne in charge of Charles' sons' trust funds. The lawyers and financial people overseeing the funds would have been names as Trustees, and/or the executor of Diana's Will. All that would have been set up long before Diana died. And the age at which the funds were accessible would have been 30 at the latest.

Why on earth would Princess Anne, of all people, between whom and Diana no love was ever lost, been made Trustees of Diana's sons' trust funds?!

^^^^The rumor is about Anne being in charge of the Queen Mother's estate not Diana's.

Interestingly, neither Harry nor Meghan are listed as a speaker at the OYW summit, although Markle is listed as an 'influential leader', ahem, on their summit home page and serves as a global ambassador for the organization. Perhaps they have some unannounced rule at the summit or will introduce another speaker. Otherwise, it looks as though they have no reason to attend.

Harry is very prominently featured on the WellChild site, so it is clear that the organization still values his patronage.

I wonder if there are any legal implications of dissolving in California a marriage in the UK, re. the division of property? Probably not. People like to seek California divorces.

I wonder, if when the money gets tight, the RF strategy will be to offer them a home in the UK, rather than buying them off again. By that time the next king will probably be the new king and an offer like that is bound to create conflict between the two. I am reading the Robert Hardman biography of the Queen and he states again and again what an incrementalist she is, which explains DL's frustration with the snail's pace. It's how she's always done business and all things considered, the whole show is still running.

Link to Part 6.

They are two unflushable turds at this point. Go live privately and leave us the fuck alone.

Bower also warned of Meghan’s determination and persistence. She’s not going to give up. I suppose she will eventually Markle enough people at a certain level that she will earn a reputation. But then again it didn’t stop Wendi Deng. People like Meghan are also useful to the quieter powers that be.

We’ll not be rid of her any time soon.

How can Harry stand to look at her beady eyes all day?

Harry has beadier eyes.

Do they stare at each other's beady eyes while their teacups are rattling?

R481, no that was an internet rumor. Both William and Harry got their inheritances from Diana free and clear of any trust a long time ago.

r575 Hi thanks. I was just about to but a kind soul beat me to it.🙂👍

r589 What or who are the quieter powers that be?

Crawling back to the UK and the Continent for some relevance again; invitations on this side of the pond must have dried up.

To what does this ^ refer?

Look at R576

[quote]It is reported today that the Sussexes will make a trip to England and Germany during the first week in September.

I hope she'll dress up like a big red strawberry again like when they deigned to do an 'despite not being working royals, the court of Montecito is doing a royal tour' of NYC!

Funny how these two plan a trip to the UK just after it was announced William would be in the USA next month and then again in November.

Seriously, I thought the UK was too dangerous and racist!

I said it earlier this year and I'll say it again, they are trying to worm their way back into some kind of role with the royals because their life in the US has been a flop.