REVENGE Part 9-Tell All Books, Funerals, Scandals, and Royals

Wonder if they will Scoobie a globe before he writes the next book? And maybe hire a tutor as well to help him with the globe, so he will know what countries are in the UK.

^ get Scoobie a globe. Hard typing on this phone!!

Harry and Meghan have parted ways with her longtime PR firm Sunshine Sacks. This is the firm who advised the Sussexes when they left the RF and helped them land their Netflix and Spotify deals. According to the anonymous Reddit source who first released the story into the media universe, the firm kicked out the Sussexes because their other clients didn’t want to work with them.

WHOAH. They're no longer with Sunshine sucks? That's a huge development for them. I wonder what happened.

The rest of SS's clients didn't want to be guests on MM's podcast.

I've posted this on many a thread about celebrities. Long ago when he was funny, Howard Stern made an observation that stuck with me. He said whenever a celebrity's career is going badly, they never think it could possibly be their own fault. They start looking around themselves for blame. Sometimes as a result, they dump their spouses or their management. I guess SS had to go. It will be interesting to see if the new image is a kinder, gentler, more upbeat Harry and Meghan. It should be. My advice is, go full lifestyle and ditch the dreary "humanitarianism."

I say do that sex tape!!

I would love to believe this is true but Radar and Reddit doenst inspire a lot of confidence

Getting rid of their PR firm is a clear acknowledgement that things are not going well.

There were several months between Philip’s funeral and the Jubilee when they were surprisingly quiet. I suspected they were told by their PR team to knock off the drama and focus on charitable stuff. But they just couldn’t stick with that plan…and the charitable efforts did not play well (Uvadale, UN, etc.) because of their need for constant chaos and drama coupled with outlandish self importance.

They have lost countless staff and now this. Meghan should be thanking her lucky stars that the Queen died and the family welcomed(ish) them and allowed the prominent visibility. That walkabout was masterful in putting the elephants in the room front and center to shut down speculation if William and Harry would appear together. (And Kate is a true queen for icing Meghan out at that event.)

The walkabout gave H/M much more cover than they deserve.

If they had any sense (they don’t) they make a public apology to his family (we were under a lot of stress; we lashed out and misdirected our anger; it happens in families but so does forgiveness..blah, blah, blah.) I suspect Dumb-Dumb would do that but no way will Meghan act as anything but the victim.

In spite of the fact that they Royal Family covered her ass this week, Miss “I never signed an NDA” will not keep quiet.

I have no horse in the Who's the Most Famous Man in the World race. I think the Pope might be the guy. There are 300M more Muslims, but they don't have a central spiritual figure. The Pope also travels the world, or at least used to before he became frail, so non-Christians are exposed to him. Even stupid-ass right wing fundamentalist Christians know who he is to deride him (because they think Catholics aren't Christian and he's a false prophet).

Speaking of losing countless staff... Remember how the anonymous podcast producer in the Telegraph said it's unheard of to have a staff of 28 to put out a once a week product, that it should take 10 people max? (He said he's only aware of one podcast that has such a large production team -- a daily politics show). Turnover, but the lost personnel still need to be credited for their work hence the bloated list.

They probably got sick of her self-centered and incompetent attempts at micromanaging a team of experienced professionals with a collective experience in the field that dwarfs any experience Meghan has had across her scanty acting roles.

Remember her yelling at the Windsor chefs because she was convinced she tasted eggs in a vegan dish? Or the Reddit poster who discussed the troubled production of her cartoon Pearl? She apparently sent them, the animation experts, a 28 page document with feedback and requests including a helpful suggestions about what Pearl should look like, sending along childhood pictures of herself. I recall she also said something about wanting a Little Mermaid look to it.

People do get sick of her "Meghan knows best" or "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets" approach to living.

Did H&M drop Sunshine Sachs or did Sunshine Sachs drop H&M?

If Obama died, nobody here would really care. It would be a curiousity but nothing more really. It's not because people don't like his politics, it's because he is not relevant to our daily lives. There seems to be a poster who has an issue with this and keeps insisting that it's not true, but they're wrong (and probably American). The reason nobody has posted and alternative is because there isn't one. King Charles probably will be but people just aren't that invested in politicans or famous people from countries other than their own. The world isn't American-centric. A lot of people know who Obama is but it doesn't mean anyone would care when he eventually dies. He doesn't matter outside the USA.

I'm not sure you can count somebody as the world's most famous man if people overseas know the name and that he was a politician but know absolutely nothing else about him. That's like saying Justin Bieber is the most famous man in the world.

^^ or that Boris Johnson is the most famous man. It's the same as saying Obama is.

R13… are you seriously saying that Obama’s death wouldn’t be much of a big deal? Really?? Where are you from, Siberia? Yes it would be a big deal. Don’t even argue the point, you’re totally, absolutely wrong. Of course, Americans would be affected most but seeing as that counts for a lot of people—and probably the majority of people on DL—your point is, well, pointless.

Sure, r15, the first black president of the most powerful country in the free world is equivalent to Boris Johnson. Sure. 🙄🙄🙄.

As an American, I can't imagine Obama's death creating a reaction anywhere near the scale of what we're seeing in the UK for the Queen.

As for whether he's the most famous man in the world, wouldn't you say someone like Bill Gates or Tom Cruise or the Dalai Lama (I know, quite an assortment) would be a better comparison? And with Queen Elizabeth comparisons, I'm not sure that fame is the right point of comparison. Popularity is more like it, but you would also have to factor in authority. I don't think there's anyone who's comparable.

I'm in New Zealand and no it wouldn't be a big deal over here. I am kind of surprised you think a president in America dying would be a big deal in other countries.

Oh lord - you Americans are so lacking in self awareness that you can’t see how ridiculous you are! Getting defensive because someone suggested that someone other than an American is the most famous person in the world? Really?

Māori Gay I salute you from across the Tasman - these people are an embarrassment to themselves.

Who’s Māori Gay?

It would be in the newspaper for one or two days max and that would be it. The person who said it would be like Tom Cruise dying is pretty much correct. It's not a moral judgement on who he is, it's just that he is not relevant to us.

These angry posts about Obama remind me of when I (and others) said not everyone in the world knows who Oprah is and some American posters went mental.

When Obama was elected it wasn't a big deal over here either - in the paper for a couple of days and that's it. Nobody here would be able name any of his policies or even how long he was president for.

Sorry if it hurts, but people don't really care about America as much as you'd think.

[quote]Māori Gay I salute you from across the Tasman - these people are an embarrassment to themselves.

Thanks. Our papers are full of articles about NZ and Australian politics, not American politics but it seems that fact is unappealing to these American posters.

Perhaps for their own sake, we should pretend that American things are far more important to us than any country's politicians.

[quote]… are you seriously saying that Obama’s death wouldn’t be much of a big deal? Really?? Where are you from, Siberia? Yes it would be a big deal. Don’t even argue the point, you’re totally, absolutely wrong. Of course, Americans would be affected most but seeing as that counts for a lot of people—and probably the majority of people on DL—your point is, well, pointless.

How many British Prime Ministers can you name and how many years was each one in for? What were their policies? What impact did they have? How many Chinese ones? Which were the most important? What about Australia? How about leaders in the Middle East? What can you tell me about them? Which country had the first ever female president/Prime Minister? What was her name? Who was the second one?

If you asked a room of random people, how many could answer these questions?

Do you get it yet?

Please do not blame all American posters for some of the ill informed who have posted,

I don't R27 - I'm just incredulous at those who did post. I'm aware that most Americans are not insanely patriotic to the point of being delusional - it's just shocking and weird when they come out of the woodwork.

[quote] Did H&M drop Sunshine Sachs or did Sunshine Sachs drop H&M?

H&M would have dropped them, rather than the other way around. PR firms need clients.

The couple undoubtedly got a big cheque from Charles, who asked that the couple get representation from an agency more to his liking. He’ll even pay the fees. Fresh starts and all that.

Prince Charles is trying desperately to rehab the family image and there isn’t a moment to lose.

R10, the Pope is currently or has just been on the road (Kazakhstan). As to the most famous man in the world: I'd throw Cristiano Ronaldo into the mix.

Back on topic--I'm fascinated by the people viewing the Queen. Have those who are there right now really been queuing all night long? I just can't imagine standing for 10+ hours, through the night.

My bet would be that they just can't afford to pay SS anymore.

I foresee an imminent property downsize as well - for "environmental reasons" of course!!

[quote]R30 I'm fascinated by the people viewing the queen… I just can't imagine standing for 10+ hours, through the night.

Would you go if it were open casket? Because that could be interesting.

The people who show up are a varietal of star struck fame whores - this is the closest to royalty they’ll get.

It's FAR more than "star struckness".

MANY people in Britain absolutely, positively and completely ADORE the Queen. As in really, truly, LOVE. Many people feel like she WAS one of their grandmothers and that she was a member of their own families. It might be a hard to understand this phenomenon if you are from a country without this particular history, and there are pockets who hated her (The Guardian) but by and large, Britons absolutely LOVED the Queen. More than they've loved a monarch in a long time and probably more than they will love any future monarch. She, as an individual, really holds a special place in peoples' hearts.

Obama was famous when he was US president just because US presidents are known all over the world because the US likes to interfere all over the world. He hasn't been president for 6 years and is not much in the news. He isn't the most famous man in the world anymore. If he ever was.

[QUOTE]I'm aware that most Americans are not insanely patriotic to the point of being delusional

Why does your sort keep trying to lump us in to the same category then? Perhaps you should make more of an effort to qualify your condemnations of Americans and try to demonstrate the subtly you accuse us of lacking?

If SS dumped Harry and Meghan and not the other way around I'm sure they will leak little tit-bits about what horrific people Harry and Meghan were to work with should any criticism of SS come out from Scobie.

As far as I can tell, all of the unhinged "Obama is the most famous man in the world" posts are coming from one person. Block him and I think you'll find yourself relieved of the maniacal rantings of "those crazy Americans."

You are right, R38

A very good explanation of why the Queen in particular was so beloved from historian Simon Heffer

Are British Chavs like MAGAts who relish viewing foreigners as dimwitted or subhuman as much as you do, r28?

The royal family represent fun and community events to my mum. Magazines had glamorous pictures of the Queen and Princess Margaret alongside pictures of movie stars when she was growing up. Royal anniversaries meant street parties. For a lot of older people, the Royal Family were a bright spot in bleak times.

So sick of the twaddle inflating the supposed greatness of Big Liz. She was a figurehead, no more, no less.

Say what you will, Meghan’s the only one in the immediate BRF who ever went out and won a job on her own merits, succeeding in a highly competitive field. The rest had riches almost beyond measure shoved up their asses from birth.

There is absolutely nothing special about the BRF without their titles.

There is a program currently on the joint French/German Arte channel showing all of the queen's home movies and family photos all the way from her childhood. The queen released these in the last year, and the show said they were mostly previously unseen. It was quite a long program, about 1.5 hours, narrated by the queen herself. I have to say, I was rather put off by it. She had an exceptionally carefree life, from the look of it, spent in one gorgeous locale after another. I do not suffer from schadenfreude at all, I do not relish others' suffering, but seeing along, long life of such luxury contrasted with the poverty and difficulties of her subjects - there was food rationing until 1952; the NHS is in a shambles now, there is much knife crime - made me see her differently.

None of that was any of her fault, r44. If you seek to place blame, The Labour party and the Conservative party are who you are looking for.

I know, R45. But she certainly knew about it and didn't do anything about it and so cannot have any claim to empathy or compassion.

R44, life is unfair.

R44. You just realised in watching that programme that the Queen came from a wealthy family?

You do realise that childhoods for many people are rather carefree and not indicative of what adult life is like? Perhaps you consider a life with almost no privacy, constant public comment and criticism, making speeches in front of millions, never being able to retire, and the constant threat of assassination an enviable life. I personally don’t.

[quote]Meghan’s the only one in the immediate BRF who ever went out and won a job on her own merits

So what, R43? Don't most of us get jobs on our own merits? And what does having a job say about anyone that signals their high value to you? Meghan is very pretty, and that will be most of the reason she got the role on Suits. Does that make her better than uglier people? Does it mean she's a good person? What if the Queen was simply a much better person, morally, then Meghan Markle - does the Queen being born rich and Meghan being born average change that?

In my own life I've never found that goodness related to employment or salary.

[quote]r44 There is a program currently on the joint French/German Arte channel showing all of the queen's home movies and family photos all the way from her childhood.

R43. Yeah, Meghan’s current fame is merit-based. Thank god she married into the royal family so that it could share in her fame and wealth. I admire Meghan for not partaking in any of the fake and wealth of the royal family and standing on her own two feet. When she dies, the queues will be 15 miles long to file past her coffin.

She was not just a figurehead, r43. Ask any of the PMs who met with her regularly.

MM didn’t get her position on Suits based on her own merits. Someone involved in the show owed MM’s then husband a favour.

I think I saw that program too, R44. And it did strike me how very lucky the Queen was throughout her life. Her childhood did indeed seem idyllic - including the parts that were unrelated to wealth (she seems to be one of the few people who comes from a truly loving and adoring family). But she never had power. There was never anything the Queen could have done to make changes to policy in the UK and it's simply incorrect to hold her or the royal family responsible for the shambles the NHS is in, knife crime etc. Why let scumbag politicians off the hook?

R53. You would have liked to live the life the Queen had to live?

I think BO possibly is the most famous man on the planet and is well liked by very many but wile people will be sad when he dies he doesn’t evoke the same feeling of love or history making that the Queen did. In Britain the death of David Attenborough will have a huge effect but it won’t be anything to what is happening now.

If I could skip the being Queen part, yes, R54. I don't think her idyllic childhood and enormous wealth somehow nullifies her decades of extremely hard work, not at all. In fact I think I can definitively say that I wouldn't be capable of even half of it.

R43 So I guess they just gave William a helicopter license and let him take flight for dangerous rescues with absolutely no merit behind that at all.

And I suppose Catherine's art degree was just given to her and has zero impact on her patronage work with The Foundling Museum, the UK’s first children’s charity and public art gallery. Or the National Portrait Gallery with whom she collaborated on a Lockdown book and a memorial to Holocaust survivors, or the Royal Photographic society, or...You get the point. But maybe because she didn't use her higher education to make money but to support charities, its worthless?

These arguments are old and stale and no one falls for them anymore. The dying breath of a dragon.

r44 Aren't home movies always rather idyllic? Even those of the poor tend to look happy and jolly and carefree, when the reality of their daily lives were anything but. People film home movies at happy times, not sad ones. I would hesitate to judge anyone's life by "home movies".

The Queen's family of origin has been universally reported to have been very loving and close.

[quote]The crazy thing is the Palace is more concerned with how the footage was leaked rather than what the footage shows.

Crazy isn’t it? A family who has almost no privacy to begin with is concerned that what happens in their private time is leaked. They are so bizarre.

But, fortunately, we learned through the leak that the family are all Nazi true believers, including young Elizabeth. This is a very important issue!

she was what, 6 years old?

[quote]R61 we learned through [bold]the leak [/bold] that the family are all Nazi true believers

What’s so funny is, the footage likely wasn’t “leaked” but instead unwittingly handed over. Garden shots of the sisters from the same day were made available to documentary filmmakers, and whoever supplied it from the Palace likely didn’t closely review the whole spool of film. They were just like, “God, these are dusty! Okay, ‘Family in Garden1933’… that’s fine. Ship it. Next box!”

(Though I do like the idea of an underpaid royal archivist in a basement seeing the complete footage and musing, “I do hate these people. Let’s not trim this, send it out, and see what happens.”)

No one who worked in the Palace archives hated the BRF. Not even the Communist who curated the Queen's Pictures hated the family. He loved them, like everyone who worked there.

Oh sure. Employees never hate their bosses. They’re sacred cows.

The press are making themselves look fools and trying to shift blame.

So Scooby tweets that H and M are invited to the state diplomatic reception. All the papers like sheep repeat this, even though the palace has said no such thing. Now the papers are all saying they were " uninvited". What a load of crap to either gain aninvite or get attention and victimhood again.

All this "grandchildren vigil" stuff seems like more of the same fakery to me. I guess we will see tonight.

How exactly do people queue for more than 4 hours without needing food or the toilet?

They shit in each other’s mouths.

R38 Obama did have his rabid worshippers, that’s what you’re seeing.

The most famous man on the planet, if we’re really talking planet, is probably some soccer player.

R43 Exactly! My Scottish mommy was a commie, but adored the Queen. “They’re like family,” she would say, meaning it.

These people are exhausting. But here I am...

I guess Harry's book is next on the chopping block. Or will it be Bower's revised edition of REVENGE?

Oh wait, did I miss "Courtiers"?

R43 Would you have preferred that the Queen had fucked her way to the top?

The Duchess of Sussex’s own merits: yacht girl, suitcase girl, couldn’t pass the foreign service exam, Fedexed the wedding ring back to her husband, fucked around on her live-in BF, was “the worst person” the Reitman’s crew ever dealt with (and stole the shoes.)

She worked hard, all right. In every sense of the word.

R4 I assume they can't afford the fees and need a less pricey agency

Was Scobie part of SS? Or is he a freelancer? Still working for Meghan?

R29 has the correct cynical take imo.

Just turned on the BBC, Charles is doing a walkabout, getting a rapturous reception. That's nice for him, he must be very happy about that.

I don't believe any of the Charles wrote them or will write them a check to keep quiet or that Charles is looking to make peace or personally negotiating their children's titles during his mourning period. I doubt he has personally exchanged ten words with them during this time. If he's wise he will wait until after Judas Harry's book comes out to make any decisions involving this malignant duo.

Charles is a Scorpio and possibly also a narcissist. He won't easily forgive. I await the derision regarding astrology in true DL style.

My guess is Sunshine Sachs did the dumping. Too many unpaid invoices and disgruntled employees threatening to quit because of Medusa. Think about that, the unscrupulous firm that had no problem representing Harvey Weinstein dumped HER.

One can imagine that SS gave H&M plenty of good advice which they just didn't follow. One can also imagine that H&M were the first ex-royals SS had ever dealt with (how many are there?) and struggled to know how to represent them. In any event, their image certainly was getting worse not better, so the divorce makes sense, regardless of who instigated it.

Honestly, how do you wait in line for 14 hours without getting tired?

Here is the home movie film that r44 found so scandalous. Watch to see how genuinely insane r44 is:

[quote] How exactly do people queue for more than 4 hours without needing food or the toilet?

Obviously, they do need to do those things. Since it's England, when nature calls people simply leave the queue, attend to whatever needs doing, then come back and take their same place. No fights, shouting, or gunplay. Civilized.

No, r68, dear. That's you and the people you hire.

Why is Scoobie Dope so in the pocket of the Harkles? It's difficult to see what he gains by being their mouthpiece.

They're the only ones who will pay someone like him, r84.

The BRF just want the Sussexes to GO AWAY.

Charles continues to win over with the public with his pen frustrations.

If Sunshine Sachs dumped them, imagine who's working for them now.

Charles and William have met with police and ambulance services and spent time greeting crowds today. Camilla and Kate have held a reception for Commonwealth governers general at BP. Harry is practicing his grimace and Meg her sad face in Frog Cott.

Imagine how the champagne corks popped in the Sunshine Sachs offices once they finally severed ties.

Edward and Sophie are outside Buckingham Palaces just now on a walk about. Sophie is shaking hands with everyone but Edward doesn’t even offer his hand. I wonder why that is?

I don’t see how any PR agency could do any more for the odious pair than SS has been doing.

There is NOTHING I could see or read that will make me like them. Although I would have a more favorable opinion of them if they would disappear from public view.

I like the Markles when I don't see or hear them.

I thought they were doing uncharacteristically well this week until this latest flap about the diplomatic reception. Whenever there's drama....

R92 that's because they are immune to any advice , it's a thankless job , you develop a strategy , come up with ways to spin something and the gruesome twosome blows up all your plans by being their obnoxious selves, incapable of following a script .

I'm watching Elizabeth at 90 and it's genuinely shicking how Harry's face ONLY lights up at the sight of jewels.

"Everyone is just sparkling" That's a LOT of jewelry"

I'm trying to put this diplomatically... it is my impression if you want hardball, you go to Sunshine Sachs, which is about the last stop before you play hardball with the political consulting firms. So if SS wasn't getting the results they wanted, whoever takes this file is taking it in the full expectation they too will get fired in due course.

[quote] it's genuinely shicking

I'm SHICKED, I tell ya! Just SHICKED!

Yes, r98, I am Shicked.

WHAT OF IT?

"Look at those jewels, sparkling... [sharp intake of breath]"

Is Harry gay?

I predict Scobie will be gone as their mouthpiece. Fresh start.

Oh no, r102 She'll hang to Scobie for dear life now that Sunshine Sachs had dumped her.

Obama is definitely NOT the most famous man in the world nor will be grieved the world over like QEII. I think a lot of people who voted for him twice, myself included, look back at how he set in motion how divisive this country has become. People will mourn for a couple of days and then move on with the exception of his die hard fans, maybe POC where his election held a more personal significance.

Though not in my lifetime, it would seem that if we are looking at American Presidents who gained even a fraction of world wide outpouring to QEII, it would be President Kennedy. I believe even the Queen herself payed homage to him as did many world figures. Certainly my parents, boomers in their early 70's, reflect on his death it was one of the big, shocking moments in American history that they will always remember. They to seemed to really love him as did many people their age.

A shame. Sunshine Sachs so deserve the Harkles, and vice versa. I hope some stories leak..

I was thinking about this and I believe Charles is going to have to tread lightly as the King. Unfortunately, he is the dreaded cis white man and is going to have to be very careful of optics. What was OK for the Queen, the last woman standing from a completely bygone era that the majority of the world was not around for, will not fly for Charles. The Queen, especially the last 20 years or so was an elderly women who took on the role of essentially being the world's grandmother. She has seen and experienced periods in history that few of us have. With social media, the 24 hour news cycle, and the Queen gone, all eyes are going to be on everything Charles does. Though I get the pen/table incident, it looked horrible and he has got to be mindful that though he might want to be a King and act like a King, he can't really be the King of yesteryear. I hope he does well, I hope the monarchy thrives, but I have this sense that the next 20 years could be a make or break in terms of public opinion. Long live the King, but it would be better if Will & Kate get to the throne sooner than later. I think Camilla will lay low. She prefers to spend most of her time at her own, relatively "modest" house she purchased for 850K, about 10 minutes down the road from Charles. She's our first Queen Consort who did her own grocery shopping, ran errands like a normal person, etc.

Well said, r105

If all you want is yes people, who do you hire after that lot? Will it get uglier?

Was the pen thing "horrible" or relatable, humanizing? Were there a lot of "Prince Charles is all of us" tweets?

r106. Paragraphs might help, just a suggestion. Hit return twice.

Charles is very mindful of the change in demographic since his mother took the throne. If people have a problem with a European country having a white HoS then that is the craziness of current times and will pass I am sure.

[quote]Long live the King, but it would be better if Will & Kate get to the throne sooner than later.

I am starting to think that we are seeing William and Kate already being expected to be the 'co-monarch' by King Charles. BP is shrewd enough to know that William and Kate will be extraordinary, and somewhat needed, 'added value' to the Charles & Camilla reign.

I expect that it'll be a one more spin around the realms and territories for Chuck & Cam, and then it's only undeniable necessity that will take them any distance from the UK.

William & Katherine will be equally revered as The King, if not more, and will play a large role in projecting the complexion of Charles reign.

r111, Makes sense. It was somewhere around her 70's that Charles started taking on the Queen's duties like investitures. Anne and lately William took those on too.

I think they are likely to turn the Wales gang into a road show. There's talk of a family royal visit to Australia next summer. Canada can't be far behind? Powerful images.

Shrewd of Charles and the Queen together ( I think), to plan a new Wales family. Only those of us over 55 I think remember Charles and Diana on tour with William, but I don't watch the Crown so maybe young people know a fiction version.

I don't watch the Crown either; why bother with fiction when the reality is better!

I'm slowly getting through the book. It is not an easy reas. People with personality disorders seldom make the world a better place.

One of the best aspects of the book is the quotes Bowers includes. Harry and Meghan come off like babbling, hypocritical idiots.

[QUOTE]I think a lot of people who voted for him twice, myself included, look back at how he set in motion how divisive this country has become.

"He set in motion"?!?! You mean he willfully did things to help splinter our nation and actively stoked racism, xenophobia, and undisguised, unapologetic greed and lawlessness?

Or he was guilty of robbing two white men of what was believed to be "rightfully theirs" by some who yearn for the old world order where a respectable Negro like Obama would have been the WH butler?

JFC.

Enough with Obama! Start your own thread if you want to keep going on about him in a thread that has nothing to do with him.

No, this is the video, especially for know-nothing R81.

R44

Well we see the harkles new strategy is to try to shut down the thread babbling about obama, funny how obama has entet their sphere. Hey ! Megains PR , We see you.

What can Harry and Meghan do today and tomorrow, that will help rehabilitate their reputation in Britain?

R120, yeah sure, talking about Obama is going to derail this—one of about 50–threads.

121. Leave and never come back? Fall off the face of the Earth? Die in a grease fire?

It's a long road. They had been managing OK. Now there's a leak says they learned anout not going to the reception tomorrow in the papers. If it was them dignified silence would have really served them. If t was them they can't seem to resist stirring the pot. Even the discarded York girls, whose relative exile in country has similarities, are stoking the fires. Everybody else seems to have accepted their decision, why haven't they?

[italic][bold] aren't [/italic][/bold] stoking the fires.

Sorry, I have the covid.

Oy Megs, If you were invited to the heads of state function, show us the receipts!!

[quote] What can Harry and Meghan do today and tomorrow, that will help rehabilitate their reputation in Britain?

Nothing. As the saying goes, "When someone shows you who they are, believe them.". They've shown the BRF, the Brits and the world who they are. As a matter of fact, they've gone to great lengths to show who they are. Most people believe them. They have shown themselves to be delusional, dishonest, disloyal, devious and malicious. There is no cure for these type of ingrained character flaws.

As soon as he sent out that "letter" before I had a clue who she was, I knew she was bringing american racial politics with her. We have racial tensions, we have situations, but they are not the same. I get racial abuse off asian taxi drivers like you wouldn't believe. We didn't build segregated schools or housing . All the working class mix. Working class people , the poorest people, are not black, they are mainly white if you hHAVE to catergorise

That's one thing that pisses me off the most about this, R128 - the projection of specifically American racial angst onto the UK. The situations between the races (esp. between black and white) is not the same in the UK as it is in the US for many mostly obvious reasons. The underclass in the UK, as you say, is not racialized in the UK the way it is in the US. A few years ago there were study results showing that the lowest performing group in schools in the UK were working class white boys, and I believe the highest performing was Asian (British version of Asian) girls?

I wonder if the Daily Mail rues the day it allowed the Straight Out of Compton headline (apparently written by an L.A. based American). If they hadn't provided the bait, she wouldn't have had that to grab onto.

It is believed that the King recognises the incongruity of having a trio of non-working Royals able to step into his shoes if he is abroad or incapacitated.

He is thought likely to take the relevant steps to have the law changed as soon as he can, raising the prospect that the Earl of Wessex and the Princess Royal could be elevated to the position.

Such a move may form part of a wider redefinition of working and non-working royals.

As such, if not determined solely by the line of succession as is currently the case, the Princess of Wales may also be included.

It is rare for counsellors of state to be called upon but not unprecedented.

In May, the then Prince Charles and Prince William attended the State Opening of Parliament on behalf of the late Queen, opening the new session after being deployed to deputise for her.

Any change in legislation would have to be enacted by the Houses of Parliament.

Charles has allegedly advised the Prime Minister the law pertaining to who can act as a Councillor of State should be amended so that only working royals (including Camilla, Catherine, Anne, Sophie and Edward) can be used cutting out Harry, Andrew and Beatrice.

That makes sense, r132. Did I just see something that mentioned Beatrice was now a Councillor? It should be Camilla, William, Anne and Edward.

R128 Same. I immediately thought uh ooohhhh….

r132, That shit is not priority because it has been discusses for years,and all the newspapers are dragging any story from any decade at this point, Ghost of

????

Does the Daily Mail also consider Serena Williams, Kevin Costner and former Presidents George W. Bush and George H.W. Bush to be "straight outta Compton?" All of them lived in Compton at some point, while Meghan never has, nor has Doria.

So Britons will never accept Harry and Meghan into their culture?

R138, it seems to be the reverse: they don’t accept the Brits and their crazy desire not to be Americans.

R138, I think r139 has something of a point. I do think the Duchess of Sussex struggled enormously with how things worked and perhaps thought she could change things to suit her. I think her main problem is impatience and a little intransigence. I think a little flexibility and deference for a couple of years would get her a long way and she might then be able to suggest other ways of doing things.

It's too late to turn back now.

Yes, it's

"What was OK for the Queen, the last woman standing from a completely bygone era that the majority of the world was not around for, will not fly for Charles."

That is SO TRUE. Grandmotherly ittle old ladies are forgiven anything and everything, so the Queen was personally off limits for the last 20-odd years, and the same will not hold true for Charles. Even though Charles is over 70 and she was untouchable by then, Charles's age isn't going to be seen as the Nation's Granddad, he's more like the Nation's Annoying Uncle Who Won't Shut Up.

He's going to need to treat very carefully, and he seems to have absolutely no gift for treading carefully, or inclination to try. Frankly, I suspect he'll take the current cries of "God Save the King" as proof that he doesn't need to, which would be a massive mistake.

We heard you the tenth time, dear.

Beatrice is currently a Counsellor of State. She became one upon the death of the Queen, replacing Charles. There are five Counsellors of State when the monarch as a consort. At the present moment, they are: Camilla (as the monarch's consort) and William, Harry, Andrew, and Beatrice, as the first four in the line of succession who are adults. Of course, it's an absurdity inasmuch as Harry doesn't live in the UK and Andrew is banished from royal life. If Charles is interested in modernizing the monarchy, this would be a good place to start, i.e., to ask the Prime Minister to write a new law that identifies the set of individuals who are working royals as Counsellors of State. That would place Camilla, William, Catherine, Edward, Sophie, and Anne as Counsellors. Of course, he may not choose to include Catherine and Sophie (because they are in-laws), but both are so popular that the public might welcome their inclusion.

Anne should definitely be one. Edward, William, Beatrice and Camilla the others.

The Yorks are history.

"What can Harry and Meghan do today and tomorrow, that will help rehabilitate their reputation in Britain?"

Their image as a couple is beyond repair, the only thing they can do right now is be quiet, dutiful, and correct, and thereby fail to dig themselves in deeper.

I don't think the British public will ever accept Meg, and Harry is going to be considered to be the royal equivalent of damaged goods for the rest of his life. I really don't think he's capable of doing what he would need to do to be accepted as a royal again, and that would keeping on a calm, dutiful and thoughtful public face for many patient years, in the hopes that he would forgiven. And he's just not a calm, dutiful, thoughtful, and patient human being.

I predict the Act will allow for the sovereign to appoint at his discretion, by Letters Patent.

Yeah, Meghan and Harry are never coming back as working royals. Not after the memoirs and reality shows. That life is closed to them forever.

What they have now is the most they'll ever have, because they're only going to get older and more irrelevant.

Megsy should reactivate the Tig, although her ditzy single girl persona is not relevant. The trials of a middle-aged mother, maybe? Continue on the same low level merry-go-round of pretend humanitarianism? Speeches at colleges to the gender studies people? Continue to invest their money and shut the fuck up? They are not good at re-inventing themselves, that's for sure.

I think that was a big part of the reason they bought that huge place in Montecito they couldn't afford, it has so much potential for Lifestyle blogging and showing off on social media.

I really don't know why they never did that, but they don't seem to understand that you don't build celebrity through being public "philanthropists". Philanthathy is how you social climb, but to be social media famous you need to show off your lifestyle, your love life, and your children, and they've never done any of that. I wonder if they held back from that because they wanted to avoid pissing of the Bank of Charles, or if Harry wasn't willing. I mean that would be just like him, expecting Meg to make millions out of social media popularity, while refusing to do any of the things that would make their brand popular.

Ah...

People are allowed to step of line for a bathroom break, a bite to eat or just to sit. They are given a voucher to regain their place.

I'll bet none of you pushing William for the throne is familiar with The Voice, Britain's only Black newspaper. It just celebrated its 40th anniversary this month. In honor of the occasion, KCIII as PC guest edited the anniversary edition. He got some great interviews including the Prime Minister of Barbados, a recent republic that remains part of the commonwealth and Idris Elba, who wrote about how the Prince's Trust provided a scholarship that allowed him to pursue his acting, among others. It was a controversial move by the newspaper, and the issue just came out at the first of the month, coincidentally days before QE's death. He will be remembered for this as well as his good relations with some Commonwealth members. His mother was instrumental in creating change in the Commonwealth, allowing members to become independent republics no longer having the monarch as head of state, while remaining members if they chose. Huge change for these countries, allowing them to become self governing and then remaining in the Commonwealth. I can only guess that she was so young when she took office, that she had the open mind of the young. She saw India and realized Great Britain must allow these countries to be independent. Charles learned her values and agrees with a number of her positions.

He was way ahead on the environment, working on these issues decades ago. He understands the tie in with colonial countries and how they have had to pay the price first as slaves and now suffering the catastrophes of climate change. He is very forward looking and those who think William should take charge have very little understanding of his years of work and how many actually working on these policy matters respect him.

[quote] I really don't know why they never did that, but they don't seem to understand that you don't build celebrity through being public "philanthropists".

My take is that Meghan would've done that (it was the gig she was striving for pre-Harry), but during her spectacular climb she positioned herself as a humanitarian, and Harry's whole deal is "I hate public life, I hated growing up in a fishbowl, I hate the media." So they were stuck with the pseudo-royal, philanthropist angle.

It does sound like real life money concerns and/or Meghan's wearing down Harry's objections is leading to some kind of "our love story" reality show.

[quote]R150 What they have now is the most they'll ever have

You mean, more than what 95% of people on the planet have, with a huge future inheritance from Daddy Charles still to roll in?

They’re fine. They send their love.

Unlike Europe, UK parents are under no legal requirement to bequeath anything to their children. If I were Charles, I'd leave Harry a gift certificate for the services of a top divorce lawyer.

R157 To hear them tell it, they're pretty miserable.

[quote]R158 UK parents are under no legal requirement to bequeath anything to their children. If I were Charles, I'd leave Harry a gift certificate for the services of a top divorce lawyer.

He’s not doing that. It would be an embarrassment, and a blot on Charles’ name forever.

Honestly, some here love speculating on the DYNASTY style intrigue they imagine within the palace walls, but I’m quite sure it’s not actually as ramped up in real life as the drama queens desire.

Harry is Charles’ son. He will always look out for him.

Really, R160? Because Charles has never been known to be petty or peevish? Because sovereigns' wills are published the moment the ink has dried? Because Harry has been Charles' pride and joy, bringing much honour to Charles, his grandmother and the BRF? Because Charles has such a warm, close relationship with Harry's children? Because Harry has been a consistent presence in Charles' life, bringing comfort to him in his old age?

Indeed for all these reasons and many more, Harry will be showered with riches beyond belief following Charles' demise.

Well Charles get’s 40+ million a year after household/travel deductions, right? He’s not going to leave one son with a crown and the other with a cast off leaky fountain pen. Please.

Just to be realistic. Would you expect to get an inheritance if you did what Harry did to his family? In most normal families, you would only do what Harry did in the expectation that you were writing yourself out of the will. If Harry gets anything, it’s because Charles seems to be a bit of a soft touch and because there would be a fear of negative press

[quote]r163 In most normal families…

They are not a normal family.

The rich are different than you and I. One of the primary olde money tenets is you look after your own financially. For one thing, you don’t want the family name and it’s legacy cheapened by a poor offspring.

Often the money is a replacement for real love, as well.

ITS legacy… Not it’s

Oh dear

R137, the Daily Mail article was written by an American "journalist" for the American online edition of the US Daily Mail. It was for Americans, by Americans and is mild compared to what Kate, Fergie, Sophie, Edward, Andrew's daughters and many others got. Most British readers wouldn't even know what it means.

For reasons that are well known to him....

When my dad's mum died, she left his share between me and my sisters. My older sister used it for a deposit on her house. I got wild maternal pressure about what a shit he was,how she deserved it blah blah,, I gave her the fucking money . Families eh? Fuck 'em.

Queenie would have made trusts a long time ago. The rest goes Monarch to Monarch.

Well, just as nobody expected the Spanish Inquisition, nobody expected the son of the sovereign to go rogue as thoroughly as he has...

Except he hasn’t, really. What Harry’s said is rather circumspect, considering what he COULD say.

What is the direct quote of his you most object to, r169?

Dianamaniacs like Richard Kay will always adore him though. I wish they would publish the unvarnished truth of this prick.

R145, Counsellors of State rarely do anything and, if they do, it's rarely beyond the first two (currently Camilla and William). The law should stay as it is rather than being tinkered about with. George is 9 now but in no time he will be 21.

The monarchy works precisely because it's not being tinkered about with all the time, especially deliberate changes so it can be made to seem more "popular". The result would actually be the opposite, the royal family would be less popular.

One of the main duties of a Counsellor of State is to receive new ambassadors if the monarch cannot. The Queen was doing this right up until the end, on Zoom if the ambassadors couldn't get down to Windsor. Being a Counsellor really isn't a big role in practice and only on rare occasions will it be needed.

That said, it is the law that the Counsellors of State are appointed, aside from the spouse, from the next four adults over the age of 21. No, Charles should not try to force a change in the law on the government and parliament for this.

[quote]By law, Counsellors of State include the Sovereign's spouse and the next four people in the line of succession who are over the age of 21.

Do Dianamaniacs also love Diana's elder son, r171?

[quote]R171 I wish they would publish the unvarnished truth of this prick.

You mean Charles? He’s not THAT bad.

From what I see r173, Dianamaniacs are all about " the boys". They hate Kate because she is common. Their only wish is to see these "children" of Diana together and joined at the hip. Nobody is good for them- maybe a European princess.

Now, having spent 20 years hating Kate, some of them have spun off into a weird loving of Meg as the anti kate.

These are my observations and not facts

The Diana loons can’t accept the fact that her “boys” are both middle-aged men.

[quote]r71 These are my observations and not facts.

[italic]“Just a reminder I’m not diagnosing anybody in this video, only speculating on what could be happening in a situation like this.”

[quote]Except he hasn’t, really. What Harry’s said is rather circumspect, considering what he COULD say.

You can't possibly know, R170, what Harry "could" say that he hasn't already. In actual fact Harry and Meghan have never provided a single ounce of proof for their very serious accusations (racism, driving a pregnant woman to want to end her life and then preventing her from getting care, withholding titles from their children because they aren't 100% white etc.). Their racism stories didn't even match in the Oprah interview! And they have no reason to withhold proof if they do have it, not after making the accusations so publicly.

What we do have proof of is things like the tens of millions of pounds spent on their wedding, on Meghan's wardrobe, on the lengths the Queen personally went to see to it that Meghan was well-advised and welcomed. We have named sources in Tom Bower's book describing Meghan as the "worst" person they've ever had to deal with etc.

The weird, extremely angry pro-Sussex trolls are back on the DL with their accusations of racism, mental illness etc. for anyone who happens to dislike a woman with a proven track record of treating the people around her - especially the little people - like shit. The anger is a tactic meant to shame people and shut them up.

[quote]r178 We have named sources in Tom Bower's book describing Meghan as the "worst" person they've ever had to deal with

And Charles is easy to deal with?

Yet here we are.

I think replacing Beatrice as counselor of state is short sighted , I would actually bring her into the fold as a working royal . Why ? Because William is running out of "running mates" in his generation . Charles has one of his sons , a (formerly two) brother and sister in law and his sister . The Queen when younger used her cousins because obviously her children were too small . Charles really has to hope he lives long enough for George , Charlotte and Louis to be out of university .

The thing is, even if there aren't any good reasons to hate Meghan, there really aren't any good reasons to like her either. Being a victim of racism isnt a personality trait or a character strength or a working resume. It's just is.

[quote]R180 William is running out of "running mates" in his generation

I’m sure Andrew’s ready and willing to pitch in. Many monarchists here point out he wasn’t found guilty of any crime (?)

r176, Adults can't be adults in the Diana world,forever the " boys". Like peter Pan or some shit. The sad thing is I think Harry actually believes it.

Harry seems like the more sensitive of the two brothers. Of course he was affected by having a cold, adulterous father and anorexic, suicidal mother (who died young, no less.)

Anorexic, adulterous suicidal mother

Did Charles encourage Diana to have affairs because he never stopped fucking Camilla and it made him feel better?

Good point. And sleeping with multiple married men made her feel extra good.

Charles probably made her do all that because he liked to WATCH.

I have a feeling.

[I posted this in the other WKHM thread but meant to post it here]

Leaks coming out that Harry was very upset about the uniform he was given to wear. They stripped it of it's ER initials on the shoulders. He is now "very upset" and "heartbroken" by this:

"However, the Duke of Sussex is understood to have been devastated to find his grandmother's initials had been stripped from the shoulder of his uniform, The Sunday Times reports. The initials were not removed from Prince William's uniform.

Harry's despair is understood to largely centre around Prince Andrew, who is also no longer a working royal, having retained the initials on his vice-admiral’s uniform as the Queen's children held a vigil on Friday night.

The Duke of Sussex was a Personal Aide de Camp of the Queen and, as a result, had previously worn the cypher. But it was among the posts he resigned when he stepped down from royal duties and moved to California.

The 'ER' initials are traditionally only worn by those 'in service' of the monarch, and so the absence of the cypher is thought to be down to dress regulations as opposed to a direct snub of the prince.

But such was his despair, Harry is said to have considered wearing a morning suit as they were leaving in order to avoid the embarrassment last night.

A friend told the newspaper: 'He is heartbroken. To remove his grandmother’s initials feels very intentional.'"

He bitched all week long about (titles and) uniforms, finally GOT the uniform, and even having got it what he wanted, he can't stop bitching and complaining and pretendig to be a victim.

Good God he must be exhausting.

[quote] And Charles is easy to deal with? Yet here we are.

You know Tom Bower actually wrote an extremely critical book about Charles, right R179? And that none of Charles' negative character traits magically transforms Meghan Markle, an entirely different person, into an angel of goodness, or absolves her of her own terrible behaviour? I'm not here to defend Charles, he sounds like an uptight arsehole. And Meghan sounds like a domineering bitch. Fuck off with your weird whataboutism.

Do you think Beatrice actually wants to be a full-time "working royal", r180? Do you know what that means? Why on earth should the king's niece represent him at official events? If she ever - and that's a big "if" - needs to be used as a Counsellor of State, then fine. But why should she dedicate her life to meeting foreign dignitaries on behalf of the state or represent the head of stat on royal tours abroad?

Because she'll get paid what Harry got paid, r191, 5 years ago that was somewhere around half a million pounds with all expenses, including housing, clothes, etc paid for. It's not a bad gig.

She doesn't need the money, r192, and if she were only to do it for the money and not to represent the king or the state then she shouldn't be doing it. Besides, she's the king's niece and ninth in line to the throne - how the heck does that make her a stand-in for him/the state?

She’d be excellent at events. Those big bug eyes miss NOTHING!

Meanwhile, at the grandchildren's vigil, Harry allowed to wear uniform, still finds reasons to bitch about it.

The world is being run by geriatrics...Biden, Trump, TQ, KCll, Putin, (wannabe) Hillary, Merkel, Berlusconi, Pope Francis, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong-Il....no wonder we're in such a sad state.

Yes, let's let Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, Kanye West, Kim Kardashian, and that Jenner-thing run the world. It would be in such a better state.

Hillary, Angela Merkel and Berlusconi aren’t running anything.

It still boggles my mind that after so many years some people here can't grasp that being part of the monarchy isn't first and foremost an ATM opportunity.

From your own link r172:

“History of Counsellors of State

The position of Counsellor of State was provided for in 1937 under the terms of the Regency Act. Prior to 1937, Regency Acts were drafted and passed only in necessity. As such, there had been nine separate Regency Acts to cover various eventualities since 1728. Shortly after George VI came to the throne in 1936, a new Regency Act was passed which provided a rule for all future reigns. It was at this time that the new office of Counsellor of State was created to cover short term absences where a regency would be unnecessary.”

I understand your concern about too much tinkering but it seems that it has been amended over the centuries. Andrew is so loathed that it makes sense to take this honor away. He hasn’t been convicted of a crime but he is too closely associated with Epstein. Anne deserves it and it could be a nod to the unfair (and now discarded) primogeniture rules that prevented her from being second-in-line behind an absolute wastrel of a brother.

Harry as a non-working member doesn’t make sense either especially as he lives in the US. My concern is that he’d use this position as leverage since he feels very hard done by.

R270, I get that you're American but you obviously don't understand what a Counsellor of state is or does. They don't do much and it's really not a big deal.

Andrew isn't "loathed" in the UK. He's barely thought about.

I doubt very much that Anne would want her brother the King to ask parliament to change the law just so she can occasionally turn up to something and represent the state. She's already done certain of the things Counsellors of State do, e.g. bestow knighthoods.

Harry and his thing did all the damage to themselves.

At this point, their only way to keep relevant is to move back to the UK, and constantly leak grievances anytime there's an event in the royal calendar. "Will they, won't they" during functions is all they have.

Kim Jong-Il, R196? What year are you writing from?

So, BP has confirmed in the last hour (after being asked by several royal reporters), H&M were never issued an invitation to the tonight's reception. They are quote "puzzled" why reports suggest they were....

R205 Oh dear, that should be never issues an invitation to tonight's reception.

Link, please?

With the right advisors (the great vent stitch triumph) she actually probably could make at least a small fortune in lifestyle. The problem is she seems to want to be everything: royal, humanitarian, politician, royalty, you name it. But she'd have to give up aspirations she can't reach and keep her mouth shut about things that damage her appeal. She's got to decide what she wants: political influence, money, fame, luxury, acclaim, respect, affection. She can't have it all, though she could have some, in degrees.) I don't think it's too late for her (though it would take a lot longer now to climb back to respectability and she'd need a strong team and ability to yes to advice.)

But Martha proved you don't have to be nice to sell lifestyle. Her template shouldn't be Diana - LOL - it should be Wallis.

R208, that’s a good observation—Gwyneth Paltrow is further proof that having no contact with reality works in the lifestyle world. I actually think people enjoy hearing about this stuff from women who are totally unmotherly.

[quote]Kim Jong-Il, [R196]? What year are you writing from?

And KCII died in 1685.

"Leaks coming out that Harry was very upset about the uniform he was given to wear. They stripped it of it's ER initials on the shoulders. He is now "very upset" and "heartbroken" by this:"

Betcha the uniform was borrowed, borrowed from some real officer who wasn't entitled to the "ER" on the shoulders. And Harry is throwing a shitfit because nobody took the trouble to embroider someone else's clothes.

"With the right advisors (the great vent stitch triumph) she actually probably could make at least a small fortune in lifestyle."

I bet the reason she hasn't is Harry. As I've said before, you don't get social media popular by being "philanthropists", to be popular on social media you have to show off your lifestyle and your whole life. Your house, your gardens, your kitchen, your meals, your kids, your supposed love story. I bet Harry won't let her, because he's spent his whole life in the royal fishbowl and is sick of it, and doesn't want his kids to be public figures as children, the way he was.

But of course, he still expects Meg to make millions out of social media anyway, to support his lifestyle.

Monty Python could have a field day writing a skit about Harry being "in despair" about what he's allowed to wear - and missing initials - and the other boys DO get the initials and the fancier clothes yada yada.

Am I the only one who finds this hilariously petty?

Typical of H&M that in a week that should 100% be about the Queen, they are moaning about invites and titles and uniforms. Grow the fuck up! For a couple that claims they wanted to set their own course, they are certainly stuck in the past!

Seriously , how craven are they to make this about themselves? Please, H&M, do shut up.

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

Bonkers, you say? Hmmm, where have we heard that word before? Oh yes, Harry when he said the First Amendment was bonkers. So he’s leaking directly to the press again. Such an amateur, the least he could do was watch his diction.

Bonkers is a word used frequently by Brits in the aforementioned contexts. Basically it's indicating that a Brit made the statement, but it wouldn't have had to be Harry necessarily as it's a pretty common word to use. Having said all that, it probably was him.

"Leaking" the above is an untrue characterization of the situation; he was never invited to the reception and is just having a moan.

So terribly and completely tone deaf are our H+M. All they had to do this week was shut their goddamn mouths and do everything they were told,then MAYBE in time they could have salvaged something.But oh no,not the Dud duo. Like someone else mentioned,I really am beginning to think the sabotage is more Harry than Meghan.She has to know after being in acting that sometimes you just have to suck up to the right people for a part or whatever ,yet she doesnt seem to be doing that.

I wonder if Megz made guttural noises when she learned she wasn't invited.

I suspect many of us have had people like this in our own families.

Perpetual drama.

Moan, moan, moan.

On, and on, and on...

In our family, it would be met with "GIVE IT A REST!".

^Especially at funerals and weddings.

I would imagine Meghan really really wanted to be at that reception. There would’ve been pictures of her with world leaders, extreme elevation and validation, excellent fodder for her ambitions. Oh well.

I’ve noticed “bonkers” is a word women in media and publishing like to use on Twitter.

My husband and I baked a Harry & Meghan cake for today's festivities. The cake is half-white, half-chocolate and the frosting is Orange Ginger.

And because women use it, somehow that is a bad thing? What is your meaning? Is there something wrong with women? Are you a fucker or a bigot?

Can I be both, R227?

R227 ooooh touched nerve did I? Tee hee.

"Bonkers" is a good word, to use on those occasions when you can't use "batshit".

No, you offended, you sexist lardass.

R231 How dare you call me a lardass!

Clip, clop. Clip, Clock -- the maddening sound of hooves that oppressed him since 12 years old when forced to walk behind Diana. Yet, now, he's tender to the touch about his absences despite previously having been traumatized for decades...

Australian senator doesn’t hold back:

Prince Harry made an “awful mistake” by marrying Meghan Markle and leaving the royal family behind, says Liberal Senator Hollie Hughes.

“I think she’s had a terrible influence over him,” she said.

“She’s just a horrible human. They’re awful, revolting people.”

Wow. ^

It’s true though, R235. Aussies tell it like it is.

It is weird to see Meghan Markle smack dab in the middle of all this. As always, the commentary I'd most like to hear is Trevor Engelson's. It must blow his mind every time.

I wonder what MeMe Markle is thinking, after having threatened that she still hadn't told everything and that she was silent but she didn't know for how long. To see this magnificent funeral and the importance of the queen and how the British people loved her. The interview with The cut, is the worst PR nightmare that happened to her. Nothing is better than to see a narcissist lose in their spiteful games, tricks and manipulations.

Meghan is horrible and so is Harry. So they fit together perfectly.

I am thinking there is either a rapprochement (considering their place in the hierarchy vs the jubilee) or everyone has promised to play nice until this is over.

Imagine, a scant two weeks ago Meghan was staring daggers under the words THE CUT. An iconic image.

For all those wondering if Charles and Camilla can make it, of course they can. He just lost his mother, who was also his leader and boss and has been around for his 73 years. Then he's had to handle all this pageantry the likes of which has not been seen in our lifetimes, or his. Camilla is well-read, good-natured, good-humored and cheers him up typically, but she has a broken toe, so she is a bit stressed, having to spend a lot of time on her feet in the past 10 days. This wasn't a case of HM dwindling and spending several days dying. She actually had been working the day she died. That would have given them both some time to adjust, which her quick death did not. Despite being aware that something is going to happen eventually, when it actually happens in a day, it's still a shock. Part of the period of mourning which lasts another week, I believe, will give them a chance to recuperate, and spend some time together. He has a very good relationship with William and Catherine, so he will likely see them during this period. Catherine is very good at providing support and will likely step up here. She did that successfully when his father died and their relationship got stronger.

He has some good instincts as he has shown with his interests. I think he's got some good staff and Camilla is getting some of the Queen's ladies-in-waiting that are excellent advisors with lots of contacts. I understand her staff has been with her quite awhile and they are very close as well. With the strong support system he's got, he has every chance to do well.

So long as he's not fighting California wildfires all the time...

Let Will put out the fires -- he is familiar with the inferno

[quote]R237 It is weird to see Meghan Markle smack dab in the middle of all this.

She’s married to one of the king’s only sons. I guess you missed that?

But r208, Wallis had style, taste (in clothes, furnishings and accessories- not people as some of her friends supported and even funded Hitler) and was built like a social Xray. At her wedding to the Duke, she wore an exquisitely immaculate gown (Mainbocher?). Looking like W required fitting after fitting, season after season. And she rarely made public statements. Much less a bunch of lies the tabs eagerly disproved.

MM, marrying H, couldn't even get her Alexander McQueen gown to fit properly as she was too busy bullying stylists, being cruel to Charlotte and making Kate cry.

Ostentatiously spending GBP1M on gowns when a royal and not repurposing ANY of them. Who spends 100K on a maternity ball gown?

Then there was the red gala gown accessorised with backfat to a sober veterans' ceremony in NY.

Then all her ridiculous statements, speeches, fake awards, wreath merching, Time cover, transparently publicity-seeking Uvalde pitstop...don't even get me started on the podcasts and whatever produced with Netflix will be tasteless and phony dreck.

She’s of a new generation.

Boomers don’t like that.

Surely someone here knows the answer to this:

Diana left her jewels to her sons, Harry got some or all of them. So why the hell isn't Meg wearing Diana's jewels? Why has she never worn them in public?

Did Harry sell them all or something?

Look, let's give her credit where credit is due.

No BACKFAT today!

R248, never thought of that. There is always so much made of H choosing the engagement ring, W choosing the Cartier tank watch (and then swapping when W proposed to C).

Maybe some of it went to her nieces and female godchildren, but surely she must have had future descendants in mind for the bulk of it.

I wonder if Diana really had a lot of jewels that were her own. She wore a ton of stuff that belonged to the royal family, but do we even know what stuff she had on her own? Maybe she had very little. Charles wasn't the type to buy her jewelry I don't think, and maybe she just didn't buy any for herself. Dodi bought a few things for her, but I can't imagine William or Harry interested in them.

R251, Diana really did have her own jewelry; there’s a whole Wikipedia page, I believe, on the subject. I can’t cite chapter and verse on this, but she’s said to have left them to her sons for them to divide as they saw fit. Harry must have some of the famous pieces, and it’s odd that he’s never handed over any of them to Meghan.

I thought the signature sapphires at least were Diana's personal property, they were a wedding gift from the King of Saudi Arabia.

Were they declared property of the Crown or the Duchy of Cornwall, and I was misinformed? Because seriously, if they were Dianas, why the hell isn't Meg or Kate wearing them! They'd both look great in sapphires, at least Meg would if she let her real skin color show.

If the jewelry was a gift to a working royal, it belongs to the Crown.

Interesting r254... so that means that only gifts from Charles and her family (or bought by her) were hers to keep?

R245 Your scathing wit notwithstanding, you make the very point. How the hell did she pull that off? A most unlikely woman.

This is the run-down of all of the jewelry Diana wore; it sorts out which ones belonged to the Crown and which ones were hers.

She hates the king and the whole royal family, r245. I guess you missed that.

R246, Kate wore Alexander McQueen, not Meghan.

Thanks r246, I stand corrected. but looking like that in Givenchy could be considered catastrophic

Meghan's wedding gown was designed by Claire Waight Keller of Givenchy. She was appointed artistic director of Givenchy in 2017.

The Duchess of Overseas has requested a private one-on-one meeting with His Majesty The King as per the Daily Mail.

Will she receive a note informing her His Majesty's calendar is full for the foreseeable future or does what Meghan wants, Meghan gets?

I'm not convinced the Maul actually believes that... they basically buried the story. The "expert" is a Youtuber near as I can tell. The Maul's just stirring the pot.

I could actually see Meghan writing one of her meticulously calligraphed letters to Charles begging for an audience - so she can then either report exactly what was said, giving it her usual "I'm such a victim" spin, or sadly shake her head as she describes her loving rapprochement being met with indifference. No doubt a copy of the letter itself will somehow be mysteriously published so we can see for ourselves just how saintly and nurturing Meghan really is.

She's so transparent. Every move is out of the same old worn playbook.

Charles is 75, has just had the worst ten days of his life and now faces taking on an enormously demanding job at a time when most people have been retired for a decade. And Meghan wants him to make room in his schedule for her, hours after he's planted his mother. Typical.

That said, who knows whether there's any truth to this at all. But I wouldn't dismiss it offhand, because the whole debacle is very on-brand.

Granted, R264, but the source is so obscure.

I wonder how H&M's standing with A-listers will be now in the US. I thought they were finished after all the blabbing interviews throwing family under the bus, the me-me-me podcast and the devastating Cut piece (and their general unremarkableness).

But now she's been right in the middle of a cinematic, historic, televised-to-billiions spectacle, dressed like a soap diva, and he's the son of a king. Maybe that'll score them a few better invites, or nah?

No one is going to allow Meghan to meet with Charles, or with anyone else in the family alone. Same goes for Harry. They cannot be trusted. That's why there's truly no way back for them.

WTF could she possibly have to say to Charles without Harry present? That she's worried about his state of mind? An offer to leave Harry for $$$?

R266... they seem to me diminished... appealing only to the type of climbers who also make up the Republican donor class. Their many enterprises have the smell of modest failure and half-finished or barely started and there's the real risk what happens in anywhere doesn't stay in anywhere. Look at who supports them here? The lowest of the low, vulgarians. Who's their constituency?

Who can stand her? She's such a shallow creep.

Charles and Camilla are now in Scotland, where they can rest (and duck calls from the Sussexes).

[quote]An offer to leave Harry for $$$?

Charles should have paid her to bugger off before the wedding. Now he's stuck with tungsten for the rest of his life and as is next in line William. The phantom children will also be a problem. There hasn't been nor will there ever be any bonding with the American grandchildren. It will be ingrained in the American grandchildren to make a career out of grievances with the BRF. They will demand and then threaten if their demands aren't met just like Mommy Dearest.

Charles screwed up by not pulling out his checkbook back in 2016/17. BRF could have weathered "racism" claims for a year or so made by just a girlfriend of halfwit Harry's. They also could have leaked the unsavory info they had on just a girlfriend to counter her attacks. Now they have to keep quiet about what they know about her because she is not just a girlfriend, she's "wife and mother".

So I guess there's not to be a one-on-one meeting with Charles and Meghan - if it's even true she wrote to ask for one.

And lucky us - I'm sure H&M will shortly be gracing our shores (disgracefully as always)

In my experience, a funeral occurring in the middle of a family estrangement heals the anger of the rift but also makes the separation permanent. The anger burns out but there's also the realization that familial bonds have been irrevocably broken. After that people tend to move on and drift away until they eventually become strangers to one another.

R274 Absolutely concur. I, too, have seen this in other families. It also happened to my family of origin.

It would be fitting if the hand written letter requesting a one on one meeting was simply ignored…

I posted R269... I'm doubling down on it in the context of R275. It all does feel spent, done.

The monarchy will pursue its work. The Sussexes will go back to California. They will probably act up again, perhaps really badly. And it will all feel like more of the same and there may be a day or two shock value, then most people will shrug and their constituency of freaks will shriek away on Twitter and that will be that. Each time the impact of their behaviour will become less and less.

Usually after both parents die, the family drifts apart. There's very little to hold the surviving siblings together, unless they happened to form strong bonds on their own. Their principal bond - having the common parents - is lost. The siblings tend to go their separate ways.

I can't see them all gathering at Balmoral in the summer or at Sandringham for Christmas, because The Queen's absence would hang over the whole thing.

Who will wave from the balcony any more? Just Charles, Camilla, William, Kate, George, Charlotte and Louis?

Rumor started by Neil Sean, so it never happened. There was no "letter and Charles left early today for Scotland. Relatedly, the Queen's private secretary, Edward Young, moved over to assist Charles. Megan and Haz are on particularly bad terms with him -- Harry accused him and other staff of manipulating the Queen to the point of needing "protection from them, something only Harry could apparently provide. How you like them apples, Harklez?

R278, in this family, I'd argue the opposite is still possible. They are steeped in tradition and routine and there is evident closeness despite everything between various generations (William and the Philipses, for example.) It depends in some part probably on how Charles treats his role as head of the family and what gets done with Balmoral and certainly what slimmed down means. Is it the appearance of assets and lifestyle or is it worker bees?

He's got a lot to figure out. He is riding on a lot of goodwill (more than I thought he'd get but I never thought he'd get as little as people like to believe, either.) Still, he's got a couple major opportunities to blow it up. What he does with the Edinburgh title is one of them. If he shafts the Wessexes, that will dog him for a long time. Then what to do about the whole empire thing, The Commonwealth, the scale of the Coronation, the many problems with the Sussexes. There are many opportunities to go wrong, complicated by an uneven economy and perhaps even real hardship this winter.

FWIW The Times said Young's only here to assist in transition... Clive Alderton (sp?) from Clarence House will take on the job solely after that's done.

Ha, R272 missed his calling as a coldly pragmatic palace advisor.

I didn't know thst R281, thanks. Makes sense.

The point isn't why she might have asked for such an audience, but why such a deeply personal fact, if true, would have reached the DM?

Charles wouldn't have leaked it, and neither would his Personal Secretary. That only leaves Meghan herself, which would betray a level of mental illness beyond that previously supposed.

Or the DM made it up.

If true, my own guess is that Meghan wants to make apologies for what she's done, especially three weeks before the Queen died, and strike someb sort of bargain about dialing it back in return for periodic inclusion in important family events, retaining the titles, Frogmore Cottage, and HRHs for the kiddies, and bringing those kids into the family fold before it's too late.

What, in other words, would it take to bring about a Pax Brittania?

I also think Harry is on the verge of a breakdown. We all know they got the free freeze from the family again, and that the Wales are curious with them.

The other possibility is attempted blackmail of some kind.

If so, Meghan is barking up the wrong oak tree. He has resources that she doesn't. And quite a bit of dirt on her.

But, offhand, I'd guess this story to be a decoy of sorts to see who's talking. Or plain old DM bullshit.

^*furious (not curious)

It's hard to come back together after a funeral. There's always the sense that healing should've been done before, not after and the regret is hard to face. There's also the sense that by returning, your presence is attempting to replace the person lost. F'ex: We lost Elizabeth, but gained Harry back. That's a strange dynamic. Normally people just accept that what's done is done and there's no going back.

Having experienced this, it's partly why I've been so critical of H&M. They're very naive and shortsighted and self absorbed. With Harry it's understandable considering he's lived a sheltered man-baby life as a prince. But Meghan is a 41 year old woman who has worked and hustled in the real world. It's hard to watch her making the mistakes of a 20 yr old.

Support for the monarchy is now higher than it was at the time of the jubilee with nearly 70% wanting the monarchy to continue and 20% (the lowest number in some time) wanting to abolish. Young people (18-24) are the least supportive but still a small majority prefer retaining the monarchy. William is now the most popular royal, with Kate in second and Charles in third. Charles' numbers have gone up a great deal (he was about 37% at the time of the jubilee and now is hovering at 70%).

[Quote]Charles wouldn't have leaked it, and neither would his Personal Secretary. That only leaves Meghan herself, which would betray a level of mental illness beyond that previously supposed.

Maybe she was afraid the letter never reached him so she leaked it. Her and Harry seem to be very suspicious of the grey men. But in fact, Charles just ignored her.

It was some Youtube expert. The Mail just scalped it. They ran it low. They're just stirring the pot.

Narcissists never give up and they never given in.

She would never apologize.

Ventriloquist Meghan and her ginger dummy will go to their graves demanding the BRF apologize to them.

Are they still in the UK or did they fly back "overseas"?

I can't think of why they'd stay in the UK.

R289, it could be just fantasy, but Neil Sean is regular talking head and writer in the world of Royal gossip; it is possible that “source” would tell him something if they wanted to publicize something but retain plausible deniability.

I've followed Neil Sean a while - and I think it's just because his videos are so short and I assume that some of the time, there's some truth to it -- like he picks something up from a tabloid that has it right. He misspells words in the titles of his videos quite often - and he's like the old man yelling at yoofs on the lawn with his war against "wokism." It's a rare video that he doesn't slip in a rant about the woke - and his videos are usually 3 minutes, including a minute or so about some old building or park or whatever in London or Manchester - it's part travelogue, part rightwing rant, and 30 seconds of "scoop"

I should break the habit because he's pissed me off quite a lot with his political claptrap. Oh and he also goes on and on about ancient performers from the 1950s and 60s.

After all the services and ceremonies are over then the real mourning begins. All the business and loose ends taken care of, one day there's nothing left to do about it, that is the day when it really hits you. She's truly gone for real, and you have to just go on with your own life.

It appears that the DM got its info from Neal Sean's video. I wonder if Meghan even knew the King and QC were flying back to Balmoral. It seems unlikely that he will see her but I believe that she requested a private meeting.

I think the exchange with the aide when she was out with William and Catherine greeting people showed that she was near hysteria. She has been in way over her head from the beginning. I'm guessing that she thought capturing Harry meant she knew exactly what she was doing and needed no advice. She never understood that what the RF does is real work supporting the head of state for the country. It's not clear that Harry ever understood that either. She likely still thinks that shaking hands with the public after QEII's death was no different than greeting Hollywood fans.

R294: so he's on DL anyway then.

A very telling (and subtle) revelation in the new Spectator:

[Quote]When the actress moved to a palace, she brought with her a showbiz appetite for drama. Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace briefly hosted something akin to a Real Housewives spin-off: the starlet and her team dreamed up personality clashes and confected plotlines and fed them to the London newspapers.

And yet she reportedly harbors ideas about becoming a politician?

IMHO, William considers Harry dead to him and he is at peace with that decision. That was why he was seemingly unbothered by including Harry in the walkabout - it was all business for him. In fact, William did not display any emotion towards Harry during this entire mourning period. He's made a decision and, mentally, he's moved on.

He may have been able to make that decision because Charles has assured them that Harry is permanently out. I thought Charles was the weak one in the bunch with regards to Harry but, given how quickly Charles has dealt with Harry over the last few days, I am wondering if the Queen who was Harry's last savior. Whatever the case, Harry and Andrew are being erased.

Many think of this as a family saga but the working royals are government employees. The government was probably aware the Queen's days were numbered and decided to wait until she died to 'clean house'. They have probably made it quite clear to Charles that it is a priority to dissociate any remnants of Harry and Andrew from the royal brand. Once the mourning period ends, I think we'll see a lot of movement. They've already started with the Counselor of State role. Next will be finagling Andrew out of the Royal Lodge and Harry out of Frogmore. They'll remove them from the royal website and reassign any remaining open patronages/military roles. It'll be as if they don't exist. I bet neither are invited to coronation, either.

R299 -- that behavior is right out of the GQP play book. She's as demented as they are.

[QUOTE]Next will be finagling Andrew out of the Royal Lodge

There's a small matter of a legally binding 99 year lease. An where is Charles going to deposit Andrew, Sarah, and (presumably) their daughters and families?

R300 I can't remember where I read/heard it, but someone who knows William socially said that W has confessed to friends that increasingly he views Harry as someone from his past. William has, with the help of Kate and that maturity that often comes with becoming a parent, clearly embarrassed his fate & inherited his grandparents motto that whatever happens in private, the monarchy must always come first. Harry is a liability and he cannot trust him. I think W has grieved that and now moved on. Unlike his younger brother, he has a role and increasing importance within the country.

Meghan should have followed Grace Kelly's example. Princess Grace became a beloved member of the Monaco royal family and the people there loved her. But she earned that right, lived there and gave up being an actress. Alas, Markle is no Grace Kelly.

I mean, has anyone seen Andrew out and about? Except for Philip and the queen's funeral. He wasn't even included in Bea's corona wedding photos. Seems like keeping him corralled at Windsor is better than exiling him to a condo in Monaco. Sure, take him out of the line of succession, whatever but he has a lease and he paid for the renovation. Random tabloid reporters can't reach him there.

Tina Brown, in her latest book, said that William was dead set against Diana's Bashir interview and was deeply affected by it. He saw it by himself at Eton in the private rooms of the head master and was mortified. That must have deeply marked him and reinforced the whole notion of "never explain" and the value of privacy when it comes to family matters.

Harry can't figure that out even in hindsight and he's made himself more public to make a living while claiming he didn't want to live in a fishbowl. Has he gotten it yet ? He's truly thick. He could have led that private life quietly at Frogmore, putting in three or four staged "public" appearances in a week that require no soul baring disclosures or drama. Fifteen to 20 hours a week of no-brainer work without having to hustle. Plenty of downtime for leisurely pursuits. I guess this kind of a life isn't tempting if there's a shrew constantly screaming in his face and spinning conspiracies to push his numerous and easily identifiable buttons. Anything to shut her up. Maybe, maybe Harry will realize she ain't ever going to shut up.

I saw fat Andrew at the funeral events, preening and pushing ahead. The Yorks can't help themselves.

R288 We will likely never know.

Another possibility is that he refused to speak with her and she wants to proclaim again that her refused an opportunity to speak with her and thus it isn't her fault that the breaches remain unhealed.

Does anyone have a link to the story? I looked quickly at the DM but didn't find it.

Ah, I see it was Neil Sean who leaked that story, insisting it was from a "very good" source.

Either the very good source was Omid Scobie, or someone no longer in the employ KCIII who would have thrown said source off the turrets of Windsor Castle for letting something like that out to the press.

No source close to the King's office would have given Neil Sean that information.

Which means, someone close to Meghan was given a green light to leak that story - which, of course, the Palace would know.

If Meghan's camp leaked this at her request, it means she's still on the warpath, because it could only be used as a weapon to beat Britain's new Head of State over the head with: "See, it's not my fault the rift won't heal; he won't even talk to me when I have it at heart to help things get better!"

I read this as an opening salvo of the Harkles' revenge for being frozen out by the family during the funerary observances; for not being invited to the reception; for Harry sobbing about not wearing EIIR on his uniform because he's no longer an ADC but still wants to look like one; and for Kate's unconcealed coolness toward her.

If I'm correct, it may also mean that Charles hasn't budged from his refusal to make their kids HRHs.

Meghan has no interest whatsoever in clearing the air.

She's still like the scorpion on the fox's back in the old fable. She can't help it: it's her nature.

But now she's fucking with the King, not the frail old Queen. And one grieving for his mother and under tremendous pressure as he assumes all the shit his mother did: the dispatch boxes, the weekly meetings with the PM; planning for the coronation; rearranging schedules and patronages amongst the remaining five working royals; figuring out whether he should bring in Bea, at least; handing the Duchy of Cornwall over to William; meeting with new staff . . .

The wager is on Omid Scobie, Meghan's go-to tool.

I give it a week or so before whatever regrets H&M had during the mourning period start to simmer and boil into resentments and then the narc rage will be the worst yet.

I trust Neil Sean less than Lady C so I don't believe this story about Megz.

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

Well, last call: I think Sean is either full of shit, or was had by a source he should never trust again.

It’s feasible Markle planted the rumour herself, just to generate headlines.

True, R302. A few interesting things, though. Charles helped to pay Andrew's settlement with Virginia Giuffre, Fergie recently 'purchased' a 5m home in Mayfair, there is a bill in Parliament to authorize the Monarch to strip title without the consent of Parliament. Eugenie now lives in Portugal and Bea and Edo purchased a home in the Cotswolds. All happened within the last year. It may point toward Charles and Andrew already having struck a deal to move Andrew out of the Lodge and off royal property altogether. Andrew would probably prefer to lose the Lodge rather than lose his title. (Admittedly, the bill probably does not appear to have a chance. But, Charles could threaten to raise the issue again if Andrew acts up).

All that being said, Andrew is Andrew. He may have no intention of budging without severe consequences being applied.

However they do it, they need to make him disappear. No more riding Mummy's horses on palace grounds and all that nonsense.

Will add, the upkeep on the Lodge must be staggering. Especially for someone who is limited in bringing in income, regardless of how much the Queen might have left him before or after her death. Andrew may decide it is advantageous to move out for that reason alone.

This article from The Spectator (UK) nails it all, and includes some juicy tea in HOLLYWOOD from named celebrities on what went wrong, and why.

[quote]R264 Charles is 75, has just had the worst ten days of his life and now faces taking on an enormously demanding job at a time when most people have been retired for a decade.

Again, Charlie may STEP DOWN from the position if he has neither the brains nor wherewithal to fulfill it.

Of course, then he doesn’t get as much money… so we know which way the worm will turn.

[quote]R287 Charles' numbers have gone up a great deal (he was about 37% at the time of the jubilee and now is hovering at 70%).

So, he’s exploiting his own mother’s death. Sickening.

R307, Andrew is a child of the Queen - he was meant to be in the front row and walking right behind her coffin. He didn't "push" his way there.

[quote]Whatever the case, Harry and Andrew are being erased.

If Andrew lays low, does exactly what is asked of him by his brother the King and BP and behaves, he will at least stay in the BRF's good graces and be able to participate in private, family events and affairs. It's been said that Charles despises Andrew's mistakes but otherwise feels brotherly toward him, and might be willing to be kind to him privately.

Harry is another matter entirely, only because of the wild card that his his wife and the constant stream of media leaks. Their leaking of grievances endlessly over the last week - when the Queen wasn't even cold in the ground, and Charles was having to deal with so much - was inexcusable and had to be the final straw.

[quote]I bet neither are invited to coronation, either.

I wouldn't go that far. They are still both family. Andrew will definitely be present, if in a non-working-royal way like many of the family-at-large. Harry will be invited too, and his family, whether he attends is another matter.

R321 I think in the days before the Queen died, there was talk in the press that Charles was perhaps eyeing something behind the scenes for Andrew. He wouldn't ever return to public life but maybe he could do something on one of the estates. I think with H&M taking shots at the monarchy, the can't risk the Yorks (well at least the daughters) doing the same.

That might work out r322, if both sides are willing to make it work. Andrew would have to give up all pretensions to being a working royal, ever again.

I believe that Charles is fond of Bea and Eugenie, but they just don't fit into his view of a slimmed-down BRF. With Anne still very active, and Edward and Sophie looking like they're going to be front and center, right behind William and Kate, for a while (Edward is only 58 I think, Sophie even younger), they have enough hands "on deck" to get the basic work done. Just enough, but enough.

If something unexpected were to happen to Anne or the Wessexes, that could change things.

R323 I actually really like Beatrice and it's kind of sad there's not role for her in Charles' monarchy. I get that slimming it down is important but with the Queen gone, Anne is the only blood royal princess left and William & Catherine at 40 are the youngest working royals. I think having a younger woman with a good-looking hubby would be a good look that could help give the monarchy a little bit more younger appeal given that it's going to be another 20 years or so before George and Charlotte are working royals.

It's a quandary. Ideally, Andrew would disappear into thin air but Charles will always have to be mindful of Andrew selling stories or associating with nefarious types. The Queen got the benefit of the public's doubt as she was his mother and her overall grandmotherly image. No one will have much patience with Charles if he appears to be benefitting Andrew in anyway or Andrew is seen anywhere near the working royal establishment. Do they have an estate on the Shetland Islands?

[quote]R304 Meghan should have followed Grace Kelly's example. Princess Grace became a beloved member of the Monaco royal family and the people there loved her. But she earned that right, lived there and gave up being an actress.

Kelly was quite unhappy in her pink palace - her husband was a serial cheater and their children were disasters (during her lifetime) who embarrassed her. The staff that surrounded her mostly disliked her, as she was an American and didn’t speak French. She began to drink, gained weight, and died young.

Her happiest times were when old friends were visiting from America or she was traveling to them.

Andrew did behave himself during the most recent proceedings. Perhaps he will be allowed as part of the general family audience and to certain parties. Harry and Meghan have been nightmares the past two weeks. They have repeatedly leaked to and riled up the press and their supporters. They are rumored to have been constantly been pestering Charles in what has been the busiest time of his life all while he is grieving the loss of his mother. They will do the same if invited to the coronation. Harry had to be included in the funeral lest he play the 'grieving grandson' card. But, he has been exceedingly vocal about his displeasure with his father and the royal institution. I think Harry could be excluded with minimal fuss from the public But, who knows? I was shocked some of the royal reporters ran to Harry's defense on issues such as wearing his uniform, etc.

R320 I never said Andrew pushed his way onto the front row, it was other less formal times I noticed, and I stand by my appraisal that Andrew, his odious enabler Fergie, and to a lesser extent his Yorkie puppies, are leeches.

R324 Eugenie and Beatrice are also blood royal princesses.

R303 that rings true. I’m sure we’ve all had a similar experience—you are incredibly close to someone and something happens to that connection. Could be just life getting in the way or a big drama like this. Whatever the case, with some distance you don’t miss that person any longer and feel no need to reconnect. I suspect that’s where William is at, which was why he was able to deal with Harry with no emotion.

I don’t think that’s where Harry is at. He wants to be missed. He’s not happy that everyone’s life has moved on without him.

I highly doubt H/M’s marriage will survive, particularly since the only money card left in the deck is sellling family secrets and there are only so many of those. After the divorce, his family will probably support him as long as his autobiography isn’t a complete hatchet job. But he’ll always be lost and sad

Meghan, though, is done. I once thought she’d figure out a way to make $$as an influencer or some other made up profession. But who’s going to buy what she’s selling? The fact that she’s not lazy is the most she’s got going for her. She’ll make a living but it will nit be the one she was given on a silver platter by a long shot.

I like Meghan - but even I would like to see her play herself in a Lifetime Original Movie.

“If These Palace Walls Could Talk”

Meghan is testing the waters. It was The Queen who requested that Harry & Meghan not use their HRH titles. Now Meghan wants to see if the new Monarch will perpetuate that decision, or make a different decision. Likewise, she awaits the decision on her children's titles. She knew there was no hope of changing The Queen's mind, but she probably thinks she can charm Charles to think differently.

Inside Meghan Markle’s Royal Flop, an interesting article

R332 The "decision on the children's titles has long been made, as revealed by Markle herself in the famous Oprah interview. Why would Charles rescind the Queen's decision in which he played a big part in the first place? If anything Mr. Streamlined Monarchy would be even more forceful.

[QUOTE]Meghan, who, a source reports, “is still angry about Katy Perry’s interview,” where the singer said that Meghan would have been well-served by another wedding-dress fitting.... ... It can’t help that Perry added in the interview that “Kate won” the wedding dress sweepstakes.

Ha, ha, ha!😅

I cant stand Katy Perry but she just went up a few notches ! Thats a hilarious piece of shade,and oh so brutally correct !

R335, “Meghan is still angry.” That’s the story of her life, isn’t it?

Any word on whether Spotify is going to let her re-record her festival of lies or are they going to hang her out to dry?

I wouldn't see the point in getting Andrew out of Royal Lodge. It's been his home for decades and his spent more than five million of his own money refurbishing it, in exchange for the 99-year lease. He has two grandchildren already, and as it is, Windsor Castle is now uninhabited. What sense would it make to have only the Wales' living most of the school year in Adelaide Cottage, with the occasional Sussex visit at Frogmore Cottage?

Windsor is symbolically important.

The Wales' don't want the castle: the whole point of moving to Adelaide Cottage was to have a cosier family life. The optics of moving to the Castle with young children aren't good.

For better or worse, Windsor remains the Sovereign's other official home, for weekends and the long Easter hols. I don't see how the Windsor scene is improved by moving Andrew out of Royal Lodge. He's over sixty, too.

The real problem at Windsor is Frogmore Cottage and the Sussexes. I think it more likely that Charles will boot them out of there than he will boot Andrew out of Royal Lodge.

It won't do to turn Windsor into a royal desert with only the Wales' holding the line.

The Wessexes have one daughter of uni age and a son who will be off to uni in several years. Bagshot Row is mostly shut up, anyway, due to the cost; the Wessexes only use part of it. Frogmore Cottage would be a quite nice place for their down-sized life with its proximity to the Wales', and the other official seat of the Sovereign, especially if they rise in importance with the Edinburgh title.

Eugenie and her husband aren't going to stay in Portugal for the rest of their lives. They both sent chilly vibes toward the Sussexes over the last ten days. Eugenie probably realises that however much she resented her Uncle Charles for his contempt for her parents, he IS the King now. He did help Andrew pay his legal settlement. Backing the Sussexes was a mistake.

It's pointless to keep Frogmore for the Sussexes. It's absurd to think they really consider it a home. And with the Wales' nearby, why would they want to?

If Charles wants to rearrange the pieces on the board, he'd leave Andrew where he is, refuse to renew Harry's lease on Frogmore, and bring the Wessexes to Windsor - Bagshot row isn't too far away, but why use that big place with most of it soon to be holding only two empty-nesters?

[QUOTE]They both sent chilly vibes toward the Sussexes over the last ten days.

I didn't watch any of the ceremonies. How were they chilly? Interesting if Uge turns on the Sussexes

[quote] I didn't watch any of the ceremonies. How were they chilly?

Don’t worry, Meghan will tell ya ALL ABOUT IT when she sits down on Oprah’s lap again, for “They Done Me Wrong: Redux”.

R360 Euge's husband Jack turned away from Harry when Harry tried to talk to him. There's a photo of the family on the grass waiting for something, and Harry is at the back of the crowd, who are chatting with each other and ignoring him. And Bea, who yet again was seated next to Meghan at the Abbey, at one point shot her a very annoyed look. Harry and Zara used to be close. But in June, the Tindalls refused to give the Sussexes cover when they left the Cathedral to the boos outside.

Look, these people aren't stupid. In the end, for those whose home England still is and always will be, Charles is the new King and now controls a big purse: the revenues of the Duchy of Lancaster (yes, he has added a fourth royal dukedom to his CV, or, rather traded it for the Cornwall title). The Queen used this personal income to dole out financial support to varied relatives each year, and each year they all waited to see what they would get.

They aren't going to back the Sussexes. The Sussexes have no leverage left except threats to try to embarrass the family further. But they already tried that and to the Sussex's shock, the monarchy not only survived, but thrived. The outpouring of love, the warmth of Charles' reception, the huge crowds (Thames Valley Police said there were 100,000 just at Windsor thronging the sides of the roads), the soaring polls . . . The Sussexes made another mistake; they inadvertently showed the monarchy that the Sussexes could sling all the mud they liked, and the monarchy could sail over it.

So the Sussexes will try that again, but how long can they go on like that? The sting will be less each time as the monarchy shrugs and says, Well, there they are again, doing what they do.

The Sussexes miscalculated so badly that it would have an epic feel to it, if they weren't such paltry little people.

[quote] [R287] Charles' numbers have gone up a great deal (he was about 37% at the time of the jubilee and now is hovering at 70%).

[quote]So, he’s exploiting his own mother’s death. Sickening.

What an outlandish and unfounded conclusion.

I’ve met Eugenia’s husband re Casamigos. He’s dim but very straightforward. Genuine and seems kind. I missed all that dissing. I thought Euge was the one still on their side ?

Did I read correctly that Eugenia’s husband is selling timeshares in Portugal?

^ stupid autocorrect is changing her name, it’s Eugenie.

The only way to get Andrew out of his Lodge would be with a carrot rather than a stick, that is, offer him a home of greater value somewhere he'd rather be. Because as long as the Queen was alive he wanted to be close so he could keep playing on her sympathies, but now that neither Charles nor William will have anything to do with him there's no point in staying that close to the Palace.

So Andrew has a passable negotiating position. He can't work his way back into royal public life, but he can negotiate the terms of his "retirement". A nice home for himself, having the money he spent on renovating that money sink repaid, remarriage to Fergie, and something for the girls - either nice homes of their own, or roles in public royal life.

"So, he’s exploiting his own mother’s death. Sickening."

Riiggghhhttt . . . she died, he ascended the throne, gave an absolutely beautiful ascension speech, spent ten days doing what he was supposed to do, reaching out immediately to as many points in the kingdom as he could manage, upheld a schedule that would crush and elephant . . .

Yeah, that connecting with all those people: sheer exploitation of his mother's death. He should have locked himself away where no one could see him, not made any speeches, forget all that leading the country in dignified mourning bullshit . . .

Do people who say shit like that ever listen to themselves?

R344 Not anymore, she isn't.

As said before, it's one thing to sling mud at a future King in Waiting, or irritate him, and quite another to sling mud at the Actual King with his hands on the purse strings of the Duchy of Lancaster.

The worm has turned. It's Charles in Charge. You want favours, a Grace and Favour residence, invitations to important gatherings . . . you don't piss him off.

Hm I wonder. Where did Mister Trade Ambassador get the "money he spent" on renovations; everyone is aware that his whole setup is shady. And why would be need anyone's permission to remarry his embarrassing hag anyway? He can move into one of the two flats she just bought, coincidentally for $5Million. Dream all day about free houses and royal jobs for the yorkies, and thanks for stopping in again, Andrew PR.

In one of those picture in the Mail, it looked like Anne was talking to Harry. Can't imagine what she would say to him though.

[quote]r347 as long as the Queen was alive Andrew wanted to be close so he could keep playing on her sympathies, but now there's no point in staying that close to the Palace.

How does prison sound?

Oh god give it a rest R352 ! She wasnt some innocent virgin.She had been turning tricks for years before she met Andrew.She kept turnming them AFTER she fucked Andrew.What are you,female ?

Gayle King promised CBS she would get the inside scoop so she is waiting to broadcast gossip from Harry and Meghan.

Anne could have asked Harry when he was leaving to go home. Oh and the Corgis! Andrew can't uproot the Corgis, who just lost their mommy!

R326 And yet Grace still did her princess job, and did it well.

Anyone remember her funeral? It was the saddest I’ve ever seen. Rainier and Caroline looked absolutely shattered.

^^ Awwww, look at the serial cheater bawling. Touching.

I’m sure Grace spent many nights crying the same way.

Please R357.Grace was a Hollywood veteran when she met him. She knew how the game was played. She didnt have to stay,after all.

[quote]Some progress was made, however, when Harry and Meghan stopped off in Britain on their way to The Hague for the Invictus Games just weeks later. Charles insisted on meeting Harry and Meghan before their audience with the queen. According to one insider, he wanted to make sure Harry wouldn’t be able to sweet-talk her the way Andrew had and get her to agree to anything without Charles’s say-so.

The meeting with Charles and Camilla was more awkward than their cordial tea with the queen. The Sussexes were late, and Charles had just 15 minutes with his son and daughter-in-law before he had to leave for the Royal Maundy Service at Windsor Castle, where he was standing in for the queen for the very first time. While father and son are said to have greeted each other warmly, there were moments of tension. “Harry went in with hugs and the best of intentions and said he wanted to clear the air,” according to a family friend. “He actually suggested that they use a mediator to try and sort things out, which had Charles somewhat bemused and Camilla spluttering into her tea. She told Harry it was ridiculous and that they were a family and would sort it out between themselves.” William and Kate were reportedly skiing with the children, and William pointedly did not change his holiday plans.

There were raised eyebrows at the palace when, days after the meeting with the queen, Harry spoke about their reunion on NBC’s Today program. He revealed his grandmother was “on great form” and added he wanted to make sure she was being “protected” and had the right people around her. It wasn’t clear whether Harry was referring to his father and William or the aides who were closest to the queen—such as her private secretary Sir Edward Young, her personal adviser and in-house dress designer Angela Kelly, and trusted courtier Paul Whybrew.

It seemed Harry’s drive to win back some of the trust that had been shattered post-Oprah was dashed. There was also still the matter of what Harry plans to disclose in his forthcoming memoir.

R352 You sound like a retarded loon clutching your pearls. Just what are you doing on here you fucking idiot?

R317 That article in The Spectator is brilliant, it’s the best thing that I’ve ever read on the Harkles, it sums them up perfectly. Thank you for posting it.

R319 What are you doing on here? This is no place for a 12 year old, come back in a few years time when you are able to hold an adult conversation. Good luck with you new term year at school.

All other reports say the Queen invited Harry to speak with Charles, not that Charles requested the meeting.

R364 Before the Jubly as he was on the way to the Games? Yes, that's what all the reports said. And it wasn't an "invitation" but a condition of the Queen meeting Harry; she refused to meet him unless he also met his father - a meeting for which Harry was late, at which Camilla was present, and that reportedly lasted fifteen minutes and didn't go well.

I'm over the Body Language Guy. Occasionally he has some insight but for the most part he just provides common sense observations. He's constantly doing "Live Chats" with quite a few idiots paying him up to $40 a pop for a "Super Chat" which is basically him answering a commenter's basic question or just acknowledging them by name. His Ricky Ricardo schtick has also worn thin, I think he exaggerates the accent like Sofia Vergara does.

I've never been able to tolerate Lady C.'s voice or the yapping dogs plus her videos are way too long. She may be the only one who has a tiny bit of insider info. I'll have to rely on DL to relay any info she may have.

River is just a fashion critic begging people to buy him a coffee. He has no insider info despite his claims.

^Keep us posted on yr brave discoveries, dear. Thx

Camilla "sputtering into her tea," what a great visual.

^ that was my favourite part as well, I look forward to more Camilla anecdotes now Charles is King.

From a year ago - Michelle Obama summed the whole mess up masterfully, said it all without saying it, like a true politician

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

Here's your peace deal: live the values you yap about (like kindness) and get on with making the difference and acquiring the privacy you sought when you bolted.

"left without a peace deal"

Translation: The extortionists' demands were not met.

In that article, Tina Brown essentially claims that Harry will be restored to working royal status so long as he agrees to ditch the memoir and no longer give interviews. He will also get his desired half-in, half-out status. She claims this will be so because the royals have too much on their shoulders and need Harry to lighten their load. Frankly, it sounds like the tail wagging the dog. These 'journalists' seem desperate to get Harry back in the fold to have something about which to write. The Waleses bring no tittle to sell papers, just dutiful service. I completely get now why William and the rest of the family despise 'journalists'. They drive the narrative rather than reporting facts.

Why on earth would they want Harry back ‘half in half out’ status? After all the damage he’s done? I don’t see that happening.

Me either. Just more desperation on the part of the duo and their hacks in the media trying to negotiate a return to the family. I think Charles and William are done and have been for much longer than most suspect.

Overwhelmingly, the people of the UK LOATHE both Harry and Meghan. Knowing that, the BRF would never take them back as even quasi-working royals. They've made it consistently clear that Ginger and the Whinger are "much-loved family members" who are "building a life overseas." PERIOD.

It's a diplomatic way of saying they are OUT of the family business. Permanently.

Tina Brown is just doubling down on her assertion in her last, and far inferior to the first, boon on the Windsors in which she insisted that Harry was too valuable an asset for the monarchy to lose. It doesn't seem to dawn on these writers that what IS true is that the monarchy not only sailed on without Harry and Meghan, it's more popular now than it was before, and that is especially true of William and Kate.

The monarchy does not NEED Harry, that's the sorry truth. Tina Brown has no more inside information than Neil Sean of Gayle King. What they have is leaks from the Sussex camp.

If Harry thought he had a real shot at that half-in position, his father wouldn't have made Harry's position clear with that "overseas" remark, and the Harkles would be on their best behaviour.

Instead, they're still making it obvious how unable they are to control their mouths, how lacking in discretion, and how untrustworthy are.

The slimmed down monarchy will also mean slimmed down work. The whole patronage thing was bloated beyond belief. The new model is the Nordic one.

And, William is now the power behind the throne, and he will not let the Sussexes, especially Meghan, anywhere near his wife and children. As it is, when Meghan came up behind Kate and her kids, Camilla suddenly moved to one side and put the Wales children on her other side.

Tina Brown is full of shit. Like everyone else feeding on the Queen's corpse, she'd peddling shit that will get her name in the papers again.

Harry and Meghan, in ten days, made ample demonstration of their inability to stop stage managing things to their own advantage (anyone who thinks it was just accidental that when the Queen's coffin arrived at BP that night, the other and more senior royals managed to stay out of the frame, but the Sussexes suddenly appeared behind Charles on that staircase, should think again). They behaved just as badly as always whilst the family went into shock, mourning, and a crushing schedule.

The Sussexes and the fucking walkabout, her insistence initially of thinking she belonged up at Balmoral with a family that loathes her as their matriarch dies, the sob stories about his fucking uniform . . . and, of course, trying to extract a promise of HRHs for their kids from a man grieving and under immense pressure.

They are just as loathed behind the scenes as they ever were. Anyone who believes that shit about the Sussexes coming back as working royals need only look at Kate's freezing aura around them. She's in a position now to state that under no circumstances will she tolerate them again as part of the Firm, and will be backed by William.

Meanwhile, they're still leaking shit to Gayle King.

Ain't happening. Brown needs a reality check.

^*book (not boon)

I find it hard to believe they are going to allow them to adopt the hybrid.

First, the public polling doesn't support it and while I am first to argue the monarchy can't be operated by focus group, on the flip side, you don't reanimate your worst enemy. This isn't the same thing as trying to get some mileage out of the York girls (which I also think wouldn't work, though it wouldn't be as troublesome as trying to front the Sussexes.) Further, their restoration would only add to Andrew's Norma Desmond Complex, so they'd be dealing with that comeback demand.

More, they only left in 2020 and the Queen, PoW and W were all in on the decision at that time. Why would they undo it now, when things have gone from bad to worse?

They have two choices: bring them back and take the risk it plays badly or leave them there and endure the pain of the incoming. At least with the latter they enjoy being the victims of the Sussexes claims. It isn't like either of them has a lot credibility.

The BRF would be much safer with Beatrice and husband to take Harry and Meghan's place imo. Seems the idea has already been mooted, somewhat.

Beatrice has inherited the York grifting gene. Edo is a self-serving social climber. Hard pass to let those two mooch further off the taxpayers.

Lady Louise seems a better choice.

George and Lottie can handle duties better than H&M.

Brown is a corpse feeder as the poster above stated. Gayle is trying to re-establish the royal bonafides she touted to CBS that never truly existed. Per the Bower book, the palace kiboshed Meghan and Oprah's planned special after Archie was born. Oprah, hoping to profit on her investment on Meghan and probably more than a bit peeved she had been denied once again by the palace, moved forward with the notorious interview shortly before Philip's death. Oprah and Gayle helped Meghan to burn bridges and now they are swimming furiously backward to help the two re-establish some sort of royal connection over which they can profit. Oprah and Gayle are truly bottom feeders. Hopefully, CBS will reconsider their employment of Gayle.

LOL they just couldn't help themselves from blabbing to pretend journalist Gayle King. Obviously trying to pressure KC into some "deal." Does make me wonder what they asked for in exchange for dropping the book.

R385, “sources” have explained that no rapprochement is possible as long as Harry and Meghan keep threatening the RF with “ revelations.” And, no, that wasn’t your imagination, Catherine and Meghan did not exchange a word, civil or otherwise, while the Sussexes were in the UK.

[quote]Camilla spluttering into her tea

There's a Best Suppoering Actress Oscar just waiting there for ya, Jane Seymour!

I would love to know why William directed Harry where to sit when they got to Windsor. Weird to see a seating snafu when everything ran so smooth.

Harry can't pull his book. He got a seven-figure advance and would have to return it, and is counting on an eight figure return on sales.

No one seems to take timing as a factor. The book is due out soon. The relationships within the family are still rotten. Neil Sean and Gayle King are talking like the Sussexes are talking to them. The Queen was buried two days ago. The King is still finding his feet.

Does this indicate a good time to bring back the Sussexes? Do the Sean and King stories indicate best behaviour for upcoming rewards?

The story doesn't make sense. Absolutely nothing we've seen or heard supports any other conclusion.

Will directed Markle to sit on the end because she would be completely obscured by the coffin. I kind of think Elizabeth R had a hand in the decision..

What Michelle Obama said at R370 is what the saner people have been saying here all along, without the gleeful snark.

Contrast that with George W's daughter's dumb take.

Jenna Bush more nepotism because she is awful

Isn't it time that the rest of the media woke up to the fact that everyone whose career Oprah made has turned out to be either a moron or a snake-oil salesman -- and finally just let them all go? Her judgment is now "mud."

R393, that is one thing that has pissed me off for years now. She's palmed these creatures off on a capitalist system that makes them rich and suckers almost everybody else. I wish Oprah would agree to an interview with a tough interviewer, because that force for ego has some explaining to do.

r391 What did George Ws daughter say?

While Charles and William are clearly done with them as a pair, I think there's an element of worry about Harry. He's clearly not well in that marriage and he gave hints that he has some regrets. It probably became clear to everyone last week that the marriage is all but done for, especially since they are broke. I think allowing Harry to participate in some funeral things was a possible lifeline for him, letting him know he can come back, do some minor royaling and they'll protect him, but he has to come back alone. It also gives him cover to ditch the book. Tina Brown's article makes sense in this context.

I'd like to know what signs people think indicate that that marriage is all but done for.

What am I missing? Harry refusing to cooperate in their shameful photo op when the coffin came back to BP?

Telling Meghan no, she can't go bbn on the walkabout, it's bros only, no wives?

Refusing to hold hands leaving the Palace of Westminster?

Looks to me like everything is status quo.

The big story today is Ben Goldsmith coming out and saying Meghan's not disliked because of racism, but because she's a ma ipulative bully who got caught.

That is High Socety throwing major shade at her.

DM has the story up, rerunning the whole bullying saga, with Jason Knauf's famous email up in large type to BP HR.

What bothers me is that I'll probably be dead long before the Harkle Saga ends.

[QUOTE]I wish Oprah would agree to an interview with a tough interviewer, because that force for ego has some explaining to do.

She would NEVER, EVER, EVER do that. Her ego is too fragile. Remember her decades-long refusal to go on the Letterman show? Too chicken shit to be minimally exposed through humor. Very thin-skinned to have made it to the top, but collected enough power and prestige through actual talent to buffer herself from critics.

R397, you're right, for now I'd guess.

He's now going back to California with a mix of emotion - positive and negative. He returns to his kids (major positive) but to a role without much stature. He's seen his old life on highest octane and comes back to the Hotel California McMansion, playing polo to kill time. He'll be very stirred up. I don't envy her the tightrope she's gotta walk.

In the end you've got two people living with a lot of pressure. In the States, about 40% of first marriages end in divorce. The rates are higher for people with divorced parents and for second and third marriages. It's a lot for them to get through.

I'd wager he's the one who has to walk the tight rope. I think she's a rage machine. Look how she pushes him around and manages every detail of their lives, just about.

I had a bit of hope when he took off alone and went to Africa (and somewhere else I can't remember now.) I had a fleeting hope that it was a sign he was about to bolt.

I could be wrong, I know - but I think she's the abuser in this particular relationship. Maybe he was the lout in others, with a less toxic partner.

Fair enough, R401... you can imagine each trying not to tip the other at this point. One thing I'd be surprised about if is this thing makes five years.

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

^Here's the Goldsmith story, and the DM also has another one up in huge headlines about how "exhausted and hurt" the Queen was by the Sussex decision to leave.

They didn't wait long, did they?

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

^And here's the How They Hurt The Queen story.

Poor Queen, all why she was protecting her grotesque son and paying off his victims.

Madiba, R407.

It appears that the pathetic Katie Nicholl has released her late entry into Let's Make Money Writing About the Royals! sweepstakes. She's never been a reliable source, and she's been partial to the Sussexes. It repeats all the inane bits about how Charles is keen to heal the rift . . .

Only he left for Scotland the day after the funeral rather than spend some time with them before they went back to America. They're already leaking stories to Sean and King. They grabbed a photo op when the coffin returned to BP. And they shoved Meghan into the walkabout, making it necessary for Kate to come, as well.

What Charles is likely keen to do is get on with the job.

I thought her content at Vanity Fair today was pretty uninteresting. The Telegraph has some bang up stuff from Angela Levin... don't know how accurate but about Camilla and everybody's relationship to her. Claims Prince Andrew, conspiring with Diana, tried to get the Queen to bypass Charles and let Andrew be regent to William... claims Camilla tried to help Meghan but M had no interest... claims Anne still doesn't like her ton but more than she did at the beginning... I take all this stuff with a huge grain of salt because tomorrow there'll be a book claiming the exact opposite. What I'd like is a book about how the hell these people write their books and who (not by name but by some description) their "sources" actually are. You never know what to believe.

This is the excerpt R410 summarized:

Here is what I am waiting for in this whole mess.

Charles is very insecure about his image. When "his boys" became popular, especially when they got older, Charles would leak information about them to the press.

It will happen again, and I want to see what William will do about it.

Tom Bower has their number and ain't letting go.

R411 Wow, that was quite an interesting article, and supports quite a few things that have been circulated, not least that Meghan was given help and advice, but chose to ignore it. The mention that the advice and offers of help "bored" her is quite damning. The article also supports why Kate is so liked in the family and beyond it. The personae of the two women were perfectly obvious, and the public responded in kind.

The only bit I'd take issue with is the importance to Britain of America's opinion of either the Sussexes or the Wales'. as they are now. It is true that the Sussexes are better liked in America than in Britain, but they aren't as well liked as The Queen and William and Kate. In terms of the monarchy, what Americans like or don't like is immaterial.

And, note that the source also says that it looks as if the Sussexes have written themselves out of the script, and that the BRF is basically counting on people getting tired of the Sussex's endless retreads of the same nasty mantra, something that has been mentioned here.

If this is on the money in terms of source material, I'd say people expecting the Harkles back into the fold as working royals are living on Saturn. Ditto their divorce.

Everything most of us thought is borne out here: Camilla took a lot of shit and persevered with grace and tact. William marrying Kate was a fantastic decision. Meghan is a self-regarding bitch. Harry is a mental case.

And both of them should have known better than to disrespect the woman who is the love of their father's life.

The bits about Andrew and Diana trying to get Charles set aside so Andrew could serve as Regent for William tells you just how fucking batshit crazy Diana was, and what a puffed up bellend Andrew is.

You couldn't make it up.

And, as it happens, we didn't have to.

"Harry can't pull his book. He got a seven-figure advance and would have to return it, and is counting on an eight figure return on sales."

Charles can afford to reimburse the publisher for expected losses, hell, Charles can afford to buy the publishing company just to shut down the book! Of course if he does, he'll resent Harry even more, for making him waste that kind of money cleaning up his idiot son's mistakes, although it probably isn't the first time.

Harry isn't coming back as a working royal during Charles's reign, or William's. Charles knows he can't trust someone who regards him with irrational anger, and William and Kate seem to be fed up. It was a massive mistake for Meghan to make an enemy of Kate, but then, I suspect that Meghan makes enemies of most women.

I don't think Harry and merkle are especially liked in America either. I don't see the evidence except on LSA and even there plenty of folks see right through them.

"Look how she pushes him around and manages every detail of their lives, just about."

R401, to a certain extent, Harry is okay with being pushed around and managed, it's what he's used to. He grew up having things managed by staff, and having his public appearances micromanaged, and then he went into the army where he received orders and obeyed them. So now Meg has taken over the job of managing his daily life, finances, and public appearances, and he probably tells himself that he isn't being bossed around, that he's very much in charge and has just delegated tasks.

Never had he been his own man, or tried to be his own man. If he'd done what he originally wanted to do and left royal life to manage a wildlife preserve in Botswana, maybe he would have grown up and learned some personal responsibility. But probably not, he'd probably have delegated all the real work to some underpaid do-gooders, and spent his days drinking and playing video games at his African country house.

[quote]But probably not, he'd probably have delegated all the real work to some underpaid do-gooders, and spent his days drinking and playing video games at his African country house.

Not gonna lie, sounds like a dream lifestyle.

I get the sense that Charles, Camilla, William, and Kate (and Sophie) all feel, "You wanted to leave, so just go. And stay gone."

r419 And Anne.

Imagine how tiresome if not downright exhausting Harry would be if he came back with or without her, as a working royal or not. A veritable cornucopia of mental health and possibly addiction issues spilling over post-split (she ain't never coming back) And he wouldn't be as easily corralled as Andrew.

Andrew conspiring with Diana to bypass Charles, well I guess we’ll soon see him evicted from his house at Windsor. What a moron.

I was disappointed to read that Anne isn’t particularly fond of Camilla. You’d think she’d appreciate her tactful handling of mopey Charles and all the work she’s put in. It’s not like Anne had any use for Diana either.

I really hope that Camilla’s gaunt look at the funeral was just due to the stress of the events and her broken toe. She’s had what seemed to be a couple health scares in recent years.

"Imagine how tiresome if not downright exhausting Harry would be if he came back with or without her, as a working royal or not."

If he comes crawling back after an ugly divorce, he won't have let go of any of his anger against his family, it will have grown tenfold! Meg spent the length of their marriage nursing his sense of injury, and even when she's turned against him he'll still be holding onto his anger, and adding the divorce-related anger onto it. Because everything wrong in his life is someone else's fault, right?

"I was disappointed to read that Anne isn’t particularly fond of Camilla"

Maybe Anne thinks that Camilla should be giving Charles a clip around the ear and telling him to buck up and stop whinging, instead of managing and codding him the way she does!

Seriously, I can't imagine that Anne would ever become besties with any woman who makes her man the center of her universe, and that would include both Cam and Kate. She undoubtedly recognizes their value to the royal family, but that doesn't mean that they're inviting each other over to kick off the wellies and have a lager.

A senario:

King Charles spends the greater part of his reign as a widower in seclusion much in the same manner as Victoria. William and Kate are the defacto King and Queen by the time all three of their children are teenagers. William is crowned King much earlier than anyone would have anticipated. Harry is a thrice married drunken wastrel in fast-declining health. Meghan is remarried to a closeted soapstar, but is but rarely heard from. The children have a revolving door on the 'Sussex Suite' at the Palm springs rehab facility.

R422 It did say that Anne warmed to Camilla when she saw how diligently she supported the monarchy and Charles.

[quote]Meghan is remarried to a closeted soapstar, but is but rarely heard from.

If only....

I do believe that if something serious (health issues) happened to Cam or if she dies before he does (I hope not), I don't think Charles will be able to go on and perform his duties. I think that is the only scenario when he would abdicate in favor of William.

Friends of Harry say that while the brotherly bond is not yet healing, “he could not be happier or more fulfilled by his family dynamic now” with Meghan and their children, Archie and Lilibet. But those close to him concede that his return to the UK and the royal family fold, however complicated, brings a twinge of “regret over a missed opportunity of what could have been” and a feeling that “it didn’t have to be this ugly”. When i read the above in the times “he could not be happier or more fulfilled by his family dynamic now” with Meghan” there was zero doubt in my mind who was briefing.

On Vogue.com a few hours ago: Let’s Call the Endless Meghan Markle Scrutiny What It Is - racism.

And the gaslighting continues.

Anne has the best looking grandkids and they seem somewhat normal (obviously I am only seeing their public faces).

I can see Harry not being able to make friends easily in California. He has no sense of reality being raised how he was, yet he wants to advise others about mental health and how to live. I can't imagine what he does all day.

^^^ I meant Anne has the best looking children

Harry may love his children but you can't build your whole life around them, he must be so bored in his new life.

Oh R433 you must not know ANY parents. Most of them (the good ones) devote their every waking moment to their children. Im sure Harry spent much of his young life going stretches where he didnt see his parents. Youd think the pain of that would stop him from doing the same to his.But there again,narcissist.

r434 you are right. I just think that he is not going to get all his fulfillment from his children and Meghan, he needs to find his own vocation he would have been better off moving to Africa like he had wanted to years ago. I think spending too much time alone in California is not going to help his mental health.

Oh FFS. He is not "alone," he has 2 kids and a wifey. Not what I would do, but some people like it.

But we weren't raised like him, his life used to be pretty regimented.

Harry was very loved and supported by many in his immediate family radiating outwards amongst tens of thousands in the UK.

He is now an untrusted and loathed man by millions

Wow R 430, Vogue needs to learn how to read a room. Guess they don't need the UK & loads of other people.

Have they taken the temp yet, that people are tired of everything being Racissst all day, all the time.

Silly, silly Vogue, get off Twitter, try Tik Tok, its more trendy folks.

These vicious nitwits are not going to be recruited back into the fold. Even I. The very unlikely event that they were, they’d fuck it up and be kicked out again.

How many of you have gotten entangled in a relationship with a person who is loathed by your friends and family? And how has that played out? Do your friends and family ever make any effort beyond pleasantries with that person? Do they distance themselves from you because they don’t know how to navigate around the loathsome partner?

That’s what’s happening here—only with more intensity because what’s usually done in private—griping about familial slights—was done on international broadcast.

They are never returning to the family—Harry might but THEY never will.

Did we see any meaningful interaction between Meghan and any member of the royal family during the funeral events? The only acknowledgment of her that I saw was when William introduced her to someone before the walkabout.

Did anyone even acknowledge her with a look or a smile. I certainly didn’t see that and she was on camera a lot. Now, of course, maybe there were pleasantries behind the scenes, but no one made any effort to give her cover in public.

Kate knew damn well what she was doing. All she needed to do was look directly at Meghan and smile and pretend to chat for a moment and the media would be screaming about a reconciliation. She didn’t have to be sincere—just make a show of it to shut up speculation.

But she refused to play and completely iced Meghan out. And I love her for it! She gave that malicious insect nothing! Not a glance! She’s going to make one hell of a queen.

R442, and to think Meghan mocked her—not by name, of course—as a “Stepford Wife.” Well, no more Princess Nice Girl now!

Well, to be fair there really wasn’t a lot of eye contact or interaction between anybody during the events. Link if I’m wrong.

when was this r443? r442, and if Kate had, it would have been interpreted as vindication by all the people who bought into the Oprah interview, and racialization of everything - she really had no choice - the only way any of this is if the Sussexes issue a formal apology/statement clarifying things.

the only way any of this *can be resolved

"if something serious (health issues) happened to Cam or if she dies before he does (I hope not), I don't think Charles will be able to go on and perform his duties. "

Probably not, but that doesn't mean he'll abdicate or let William become regent, if he's just unable to function he might do what Queen Victoria did and keep the title without doing the job. William can open Parliament and meet the PM indefinitely, that doesn't make him regent!

No, the only real scenarios for a real abdication or regency involve either incurable health issues (like dementia), or becoming so unpopular that it's clear that it's the only way to save the monarchy.

R422 Anne is admirable, but I wonder if she has many women friends.

And what if she doesn’t, R448? So?

I want Anne to be King.

"Anne is admirable, but I wonder if she has many women friends."

You don't know any horse people, do you R448! FYI the majority of horse people are female, they're something between a hobby-based community and a subculture, and it's a good bet that she's got lots of horsey female friends who are as no-nonsense as she is.

I've heard that Charlotte is horse-mad, which is common enough for girls her age, and I hope she stays horse-mad. Getting involved in the horse competition world is a good option for rich kids, they're involved in a hobby where money and status aren't everything, and horsey rich kids are more likely to grow up sane than kids who get involved with, say, drugs or fashion.

She just seems like a man's woman, that's all.

[quote]r431 I can't imagine what he does all day.

Mmmmm… he enjoys time with his wife and their children? His son is 3 and daughter 1. Most parents don’t tire of their children till they’re hellish teenagers.

Just because Harry’s father and grandmother were absentee, crap parents doesn’t mean he wants to be.

[quote]r433 Harry may love his children but you can't build your whole life around them, he must be so bored in his new life.

See above.

You're quite the know-it-all, aren't you, R451?

[quote]r451 horsey rich kids are more likely to grow up sane than kids who get involved with, say, drugs or fashion.

Because no rich kids indulge in horses, drugs AND fashion.

Glamour popped up on my Facebook with theM same thing Vogue had that the reason people don't like Markle is racism. Must be the Condé Nast party line.

Conde Nast needs to smell the coffee.

Maybe they don't need the UK & loads of other people..

Or maybe they are being led by someone trained at the Don Lemon School of Journalism.

R451 is correct. Look at Athina Onassis - her horse world has provided her with an intense hobby that has kept her away from drugs, etc and provided socialization.

She did have to ditch her cheating horsey husband, though.

R455 And do you have any photos of Charlotte on a horse to support that? Because I haven't seen one.

And exactly where did you "hear" that?

After a lengthy internet search, I could not find a single image amongst those galore of the little girl in the country, in riding gear atop a pony.

So either you're making it up, or you've been had by a troll.

The US is finally realizing that Ginger and the Whinger's "truth" is more fiction than not. More importantly, their brand is a totally negative one. "We're victims" gets love on Twitter, but not in the real world. Superhero movies make billions, while introspective, "poor me" Frau movies flop.

Most people like winners.

[quote] Most people like winners.

just a quick detour, worth watching!

As mentioned at other times, Harry's trashing of his father and brother, and intimating that the Queen had been a bad parent, qualify as High Treason according to laws still on the books.

If the story about Andrew plotting to get his brother, the Prince of Wales and the first in line for the throne, set aside so that Andrew could reign through William's minority as Regent, means that Andrew is guilty of High Treason, as well.

Many people kept saying that yeah, Andrew's behaviour was bad but he didn't deliberately trash or try to undermine the monarchy itself, so he should keep his title and all that . . . now turn out to be wrong.

What Andrew tried to do, using Camilla as the basis for it, along with his brother's wife, is worse than what Harry did.

And it makes Charles' feelings toward his brother far more understandable. In fact, that Charles still agreed to help Andrew out with that legal settlement shows Charles is in a far better light - he could just have left it to his mother to do so.

I wonder if the York girls knew that their father had tried to unseat Charles until now. And, if William and Harry knew before now. If the York girls knew, Eugenie making a show of allying herself with the Sussex's was more than foolish.

It really is like the Wars of the Roses.

Remember, although he's descended from the Lancaster side that in the end won and brought in the Tudors, Andrew is Duke of York - it's the white rose of York that is his emblem.

Charles, upon inheriting the throne, also inherited the Duchy of Lancaster - red rose.

It's not completely historically aligned, but it will do. I wonder if Charles will now exact full retribution for his brother's treason all those years ago.

The Duke of York was the highest ranking man to die at the battle of Agincourt. It's too bad Andrew sullied this old title with his greedy nasty character.

[quote]kids who get involved with, say, drugs or fashion.

"Just say NO" to fashion.

The Queen's former press secretary weighs.

R463, great fan fic, but it's 2022.

Why do you assert that Chas paid Andrew's bill? It was initially said to be $15M, but I later read in the maul that the amount was less than $5M, undertaken by Elizabeth R.

In any event the Yorks are bad news and I have little doubt Chaz will stick to his guns

^^no wonder the mighty House of Sussex won't say a word against the Yorks

First of all, the Andrew-Camilla story comes from Angela Levin, hardly a serious journalist or bastion of the truth. Her new book is a shambolic hodge-podge of gossip and 2nd-hand anecdotes.

She states that Andrew disdained Camilla because he found her 'insufficiently aristocratic'. Huh? And what exactly was Sarah Ferguson? Camilla's roots are similar if not richer than Fergie's.

Several sources reported Charles would help pay for Andrew's settlement. This wasn't disputed by the palace (but I don't know if it was confirmed, either). Who knows what the truth really is, but I could see Charles contributing if only to make the story go away.

Charles would probably do what his mother told him to do. But now?? It may be a different story when it comes to coddling Andy.

[quote]r463 intimating that the Queen had been a bad parent, qualify as High Treason according to laws still on the books.

Maybe it’s time for England to put on its Big Girl panties?

I don't know why Charles would. The Queen held the family purse strings. But anything's possible

The Yorks are done and need to reconcile themselves with that. There is no one for Andrew to run to and beg. Maybe they should all head to Huge's Portugal timeshare.

R473, the Prince of Wales actually has a bigger purse (Duchy of Cornwall) than the Monarch (Duchy of Lancaster), if you can believe it. Plus, the POW only spends their $$$ on themselves (including their children) and costs of the Duchy. The Monarch has to use their $$$ to support not only themselves but all of the royal household and any working royals who are not the POW and other assorted costs.

All this talk of reconciliation between William and Harry strikes me as preposterous.

As far as any outsider can tell, it appeared that Harry got along very well with Catherine. She welcomed him as the "third wheel" many times, both official and not, with her husband. There are other wives, certainly royal wives, who would have not been so openhearted. I can't see Harry's wife behaving in a similar way if Harry were the older brother.

The first shot across the bow that M fired was while she was living with H at KP. I don't recall if it was before the engagement. It was the nasty blind item (Kate didn't offer M a ride to the shops) attacking Kate. Given the story involved only 2 players, it doesn't require much to conclude the source of the story. That blind item actually appeared.

Then there is the story floating around (not proven) of M supposedly photographing the Cambridge home as well as Charlotte.

The story that M did not want William's kids in her wedding party.

The bullying (witnesses seem to confirm this) of Charlotte during the bridesmaid fittings.

Making the very pregnant Kate cry also at the fittings. (No one seriously believes M's story about these events.)

Kate's attempt (rejected by M) to let M know that her (M's) treatment of staff was not acceptable.

The rejection of Kate's attempt to smooth things with a visit and flowers only to be met with rejection.

M's rude interruption and talking over pregnant Kate at that "Fab Four" (I hate that term used to describe these people.) stage appearance.

How many such encounters would anyone expect Kate to ignore? Not to mention William who would know about all this rude, disrespectful, condescending, nasty behavior to his wife and daughter.

He wouldn't.

Particularly when you remember the odd removal of both Charlotte and George from the group of attendants after the procession at H&M's wedding.

Given that the story about M's behavior at the dress fitting was supposedly told to William by Charlotte.

And those who think that children don't remember such nastiness even from a young age are fooling themselves.

Years ago, working on a family history, I asked my cousin (our mothers were sisters) about his paternal grandmother, about whom I knew little. I received a long look from my cousin and a 5 word reply, "SHE MADE MY MOTHER CRY." That was his only comment on one of his grandmothers and he was her only grandchild, the child of her only son. That was his memory and all he had to say about her.

I thought, when I first heard the bullying of Charlotte and Kate's crying story, remembering my own cousin's remarks, that M had another enemy during her brief time in the RF.

I would not be surprised if Charlotte remembers Harry's wife and her behavior. Quite well, in fact.

Another of M's mistakes.

You name a couple of interesting incidents I never heard of before. Do you have sources for George and Charlotte disappearing from the wedding entourage (I know it's public record, but someplace where it's discussed?) and that Charlotte told her father about the dress-fitting incident?

[quote]r476 How many such encounters would anyone expect Kate to ignore?

It is not to be borne! Kate is a SENSITIVE gurl.

I saw the George and Charlotte bit... come the recessional, they walked with their parents, not with the wedding party.

See from :40

Tatler says the Narcles left via Heathrow yesterday. No particular content beyond that but it didn't run the solo tear photo among several others it didi.

Regarding Charlotte supposedly being the one who told William about the bridesmaid fitting events - I can't give you a source but remember clearly seeing that posted at the time.

Mainly because it reminded me so much of my cousin's reaction to his grandmother that I mentioned in my post.

It's true, the worst thing about the Harkles is that they whine about an unearned personal fortune and worldwide fame, because it's NOT ENOUGH! I shall mock them for that as long as I remember their existence, the twats!

R475 You are misinformed. Each year, the PoW has made a voluntary contribution to the Exchequer from the Cornwall revenues. It adds up to nearly half. The rest the PoW can spend as he likes. When he had two married working royals as sons, they each got a stipend of about two million pounds each to supplement the revenues from their trust funds and keep up their households.

The Duchy of Lancaster's revenues, like that of the Cornwall, is almost entirely in land management.

Duchy of Cornwall:

" . . . from 1993 to his accession to the throne in 2022, Prince Charles, the Duke of Cornwall, voluntarily paid income tax on the duchy income, less amounts that he considered to be official expenditure."

The Treasury supervises the accounts of both Duchies and their annual reports to Parliament.

Duchy of Lancaster:

"As the Duchy is an inalienable asset of the Crown held in trust for future sovereigns, the sovereign is not entitled to the portfolio's capital or capital profits.[2][6] The Duchy of Lancaster is not subject to tax,[7] although the Sovereign has voluntarily paid both income and capital gains tax since 1993.[8] As such, the income received by the Privy Purse, of which income from the Duchy forms a significant part, is taxed once official expenditures have been deducted.[7]"

Re the Ben Goldsmith story, which disappeared mysteriously quickly, in one of his further tweets, challenged by someone who said "I don't know anything about Meghan's character and neither do you Ben" . . .

Goldsmith replied, 'Maybe I know some of the people she bullied?"

With Goldsmith's connections in high society, it's hardly a stretch.

You can see more on his connections to the circles Meghan tried to get into, and the Rochschilds in screenshots of those Tweets in harrymarkle wordpress.

[quote] do you have any photos of Charlotte on a horse to support that? Because I haven't seen one.

Not every minute of her life is documented by paparazzi.

The queen probably gave her a horseshoe pin for a reason.

The Daily Mail's "Palace Confidential" starts off saying that Charles has got to do something about Harry. And people around Charles are talking and saying he's been a big source of trouble for Charles - and the book and podcast loom large. It's covered in the first 3 or 4 minutes.

But there's a lot later on about what to do about Andrew - kick him out of his lavish lodge - did he and Sarah give the Queen those Corgi puppies so that they 'have' to stay in the much bigger accommodation than William despite his family with three children, etc.

I don't remember these people being as blunt about the issues as this episode!

[quote]r486 The queen probably gave her a horseshoe pin for a reason.

Agreed. Big Liz probably gave Charlotte the pin for good luck - knowing that with a philandering, strap-on chasing dad, anorexic mum, and creepy Uncle Pedrew lurking around she’ll need it.

Oh look it’s the Pedrew troll! Still trying to make “Pedrew” happen, R488? It’s not going to happen.

I’m just the messenger, r489. I didn’t invent that moniker but it does seem to describe him (?)

R487, just so you know, what the Daily Mail's gossip columnists are demanding is entirely irrelevant.

No, it doesn't, r490.

How can Charles just kick Andrew out, R487? I thought he gad a lifetime lease on his lavish Windsor house.

Of course I'm sure tge weasel could be bribed into giving up the lease, and might be willing to now that the house no longer gives him the advantage of being close to a monarch who'll forgive him absolutely anything. God knows what he'd want in return, though.

I seem to remember another part of the bullying Charlotte story where Charlotte told M "You're to be my Aunt Meghan. Just like Aunt Pippa."

Only to have M replay "I'm NOTHING like your Aunt Pippa."

Break the lease and pay him out. Remember, Mummu's gone and now he's got to pay to run a 30 room house.

I bet the Queen was chipping in quite a bit for Andrew to continue to live in style (servants, maintenance, etc.). If so, that all ended when Charles ascended. Andrew may want to leave rather than spend his dime on those expenses.

The problem is that Andrew did pour more than five million of his own money on the renovations to Royal Lodge, which was far from up to modern building codes. In return, he got the 99-year lease.

In fairness, if they want to boot him out, they should reimburse him the five million - this would give him enough back in his coffers to hang on in a smaller place.

What I find so staggering about Andrew, Fergie, Eugenie, Harry, and Meghan, is their assumption that nothing would ever change and after the Queen wasn't there to restrain Charles when the inevitable day arrived.

Diana plotting with Andrew to overthrow Charles, and actually taking this idea to the Queen is simply mind-boggling. The sheer stupidity, the assumption that because the Queen found her heir irritating, she would invite Parliament to start a constitutional crisis so that Andrew could be Charles, makes one alarmed not at hints of genetic pain, but of genetic mental deficiency.

In the 16th century, Andrew would have gone to the block, and Diana packed off to a nunnery.

I am having trouble believing it.

And once the plot had failed, did they not realise that somewhere down the line . . . Charles would be King and remember?

Andrew: "Congratulations, bro, I know you'll make a wonderful King. Oh, and let me know if there's anything I can do to help, you know, just behind the scenes, as it were. You know you have my undying loyalty and support."

Charles: "Guards!"

As I said on another thread, if Andrew and Di were trying to overthrow Charles and the Queen knew, that would NOT have been made public. HM would have protected her darling dirtbag as long as she was alive, and Charles wouldn't have wanted to make his feud with the mother of his heir public. So it'd be known among aristos and courtiers, but never printed.

But Charles wouldn't have forgotten, and wouldn't have been able to do much to Andrew as long as his mother was alive. He'd have had to hold off on revenge until now.

Perhaps William knew, too (along with other things). He has kept a wide berth from Andrew for a long time.

I've never been a big fan of Charles - one of the leaked items was that he was jealous when his sons would get a lot of attention and he'd leak negative stuff about them to the press!

Nevertheless, he's cute with the grandchildren, I'm glad he has Camilla, and I'm very glad Diana and Andrew did not succeed in their plot.

If this alleged plot to maneuver Andrew into a position as regent for William is true, it only speaks to their collective stupidity. Actually, if those two got together to plot, their intelligence would drop as a function of time spent discussing it. Jesus, how on earth would they pull it off? Poisoning Charles? Playing recordings in his private rooms to convince him he's hearing voices angling for psychosis diagnosis? Beyond stupid.

The Queen died and Charles is the new monarch but all People magazine cares about is the rift between the two camps (Wales vs. Sussex).

I really wonder how much mud Harry can sling with his book and podcasts. Just as his aristo pals and army colleagues have warned him that dishing dirt is a two-way street, I am sure the Palace has loads of unsavoury details of both Harry's and MM's past. So let the chips fall where they may...they left, they're gone, goodbye and good luck.

I devoutly hope theres a shit throwing fest R503 ! Ive been vastly entertained by the whole affair.

R501 They planned to persuade the Queen to ask Parliament to set Charles aside on the basis of his affair with Camilla, because they knew how much the Queen disapproved of Camilla and of Charles' adultery. This was before the divorce.

Imagine their shock upon finding out that as much as the Queen may have disapproved personally, she also happened to retain full command of her mental faculties.

She must have been picturing raising the topic at her next meeting with the PM.

HM: Oh, by the way, Mr Blair, I do know bow much you have on your plate what with New Labour and all that, but I was wondering if you'd mind doing a bit of early reconnaissance, as it were, about removing the Prince of Wales as heir to Our throne and instituting Our younger son as Regent until dear little William comes of age?

Mr Blair? Mr Blair?"

(Camera pulls back to show Blair vaulting down the long spiral staircase three steps at a time, tie flapping over his shoulder.)

Blair: Open the gates! I said open the goddamn gates!!!!!!!"

[quote]Re the Ben Goldsmith story, which disappeared mysteriously quickly, in one of his further tweets, challenged by someone who said "I don't know anything about Meghan's character and neither do you Ben" . . .

I saw that reply, R485, and thought it was nonsensical. Perhaps Ben G personally knows some of the bullying victims but even if he doesn't, if we accept that the public cannot know anything about the character of public figures, that also means we can't know anything about the character of Trump or Queen Elizabeth or Prince Andrew etc. It's absurd on its face. You don't need to personally know someone to observe their public actions and statements.

Thanks, r505. Adultery? Of all things, a time honored tradition among British Kings. Well, not George VI and maybe not his father. If Philip did play around as rumored and the Queen knew, that might have come as a slap in the face to her.

Where the hell did "broke" Fergie get £5Mil to buy the two flats in Mayfair from Grosvenor? I think the deal is already done.

^Of course the response was absurd. People vote in government leaders knowing less about them than Meghan Markle told us about herself.

The Oprah interview, the bullying accusations, the revolving staff door, the really terrible speeches in which she talks more about herself than anything else; the truly ghastly Uvalde visit with her film crew in tow; the grandstanding; the lies to an English Appeals Court under oath for which she had to issue a grovelling apology to fend off a possible perjury charge . . . but no, we don't know a thing about her!

Goldsmith's reply can't have escaped the notice of Meghan's PR machine. It's the first time someone outside the Palace has stated openly that he'd gotten the story on Meghan's bullying from prima facie sources. I wonder if there's been a frisson of anxiety in Montecito since he said it?

R504 Something tells me you will not be disappointed.

Why does Fergie need two flats? That sounds shady right there.

Harry missed the flight and saying goodbye to his Grannie bc of fighting with his dad about whether or not he could bring Meghan. Not a huge surprise but still.... Furious Prince Harry snubbed dinner with King Charles III and his brother the Prince of Wales at Balmoral after a row with his father when the new monarch banned Meghan Markle from joining the grieving Royal Family on the day the Queen died, sources have claimed. The Duke of Sussex reportedly wanted his wife to join him as royals raced to the Scottish estate to say their final goodbyes to their beloved mother and grandmother on September 8. However, Britain's new King phoned his youngest son and told him it was 'not appropriate' for the former Suits actress to be there, according to reports. It is claimed that in the ensuing row, during which Harry fought to persuade his father to allow Meghan to come with him, he missed a flight carrying William and their uncles Andrew and Edward to Scotland - and with it the chance to bid farewell. The prince - who plunged the monarchy into crisis after he and the duchess sensationally quit royal duties and left the UK for California two years ago, before making a series of stunning allegations against The Firm - was so angry that his wife had been banned, and that he had missed his first flight, that he refused to have dinner that evening with Charles, William and Queen Consort Camilla. Instead, he ate with the Duke of York and the Earl and Countess of Wessex before leaving early the next morning, The Sun reports.

[quote]r498 If Andrew and Di were trying to overthrow Charles and the Queen knew… HM would have protected her [bold]darling dirtbag [/bold]as long as she was alive

: o

I may have found the name for my new garage band!

^Giant headlines in the DM.

You can tell how mentally ill Harry is that he really thought that at a time like this it was appropriate to include a woman loathed by the family, with whom they'd had no relationship for three years, and who had three weeks earlier given an interview threatening the family with more "dirt".

The only reason Sophie was there is that everyone knows how the Queen loved her: as a daughter. To bring Meghan would have been the height of insensitivity.

Only Harry would be blind to this. The man is obsessed, stupid, and dangerous.

I hope Charles and William behind the scenes realise how important it is to keep the Sussexes away.

Me too R514

I can see Fergie living in one flat and renting the other at some outrageously inflated price because she's royalty adjacent. Some strivers might actually think it would be worthwhile though she has no cachet.

What I don't get is how she came up with the cash for a down payment. Her most recent money problems weren't that long ago. Does she have any steady employment bringing in an income stream? What does she do for money? Weight Watchers and the kids books were a while ago.

She must not be on Weight Watchers anymore. She looked heavy at the funeral.

I read the RAF plane waited on the the tarmac for Dimwit 45 minutes to an hour, with W, Andrew and the Wessexes on board, finally taking off without Dimwit. When they finally got to Balmoral, TQ had already passed away. If they'd missed seeing her by 45 minutes they have every reason to be furious with Dimwit.

[quote]r518 If they'd missed seeing her by 45 minutes they have every reason to be furious with Dimwit.

But it’s Charles who put up the childish stink and wasted time by banning Harry’s wife. It’s not Harry’s fault he’s loyal - especially after the crap he saw his family put her through.

^Boo fuckin hoo. That story is BS right off the bat when it assets that Haz "snubbed Chaz and Will's dinner. He was not invited and is still butt hurt

Please Mobtecito liars, in future just stay home.

R519 "It's Charles' fault for having boundaries and then suffering the consequences of having those boundaries disrespected. He should have just given the Sussexes their way."

Replace Charles with any one in the BRF and its the whole saga in a nutshell.

During the funeral a DLer said Fergie was morphing into Mrs. Patmore and I was once again reminded why I love DL.

I think “the plan to overthrow Charles and have Andrew be the regent for William” was nothing more than Diana and Fergie giggling together over a bottle of chardonnay: “Imagine how FUN it would be! My son is King, your husband is Regent! Our parties would be legendary!”

The Framing of Kate Middleton

Wow ! If looks could kill Meghans head would have exploded !

Yeah right, “physically abusive”!

Meghan and Harry are just spectacular failures.

Meghan treated Kate like shit for years, and now her stans are trying to turn it around and make it out like Kate is the abuser. Typical narcissistic horseshit.

Now that the Queen is dead, Meghan and Harry have no more reason to ever return to England if they are treated so badly there. Nobody will miss them.

Wow, R524! Welcome to the stage, Princess of Wales. Kate is not fucking around anymore and I love her seeing her flex her new power.

Speaking of, didn't Harry get the memo that Kate (probably to be fair to Harry and Meghan) stayed home at Windsor as well? None of the wives came, not even Kate, so I don't know why H&M are offended.

Offense is their business. They'll dine off the "horrible" treatment they got at the Queen's funeral for another couple of years. There's also the torture they'll undergo at the Coronation by being seated IN THE SECOND ROW. And the Prince of Wales investiture? How DARE William not make Harry and Meghan part of the ceremony?

What they'll do once all of those events are over next year and there's nothing to do but wait around for Charles to die (which could very well be 20 years from now) is anybody's guess.

The actions in that video show a calculated framing, the whispering of the "stans" are secondary.

Those executing a prior, preconceived agenda must also undertake the arduous task of perpetuating their false narrative. At issue is not only remembering all the lies and exaggerations they've told along the way, but also ensuring that those falsehoods fit together cohesively supporting the agenda, itself. This is not a task for the simple-minded. In the end, however, the light will have found a way to shine through the darkness.

"But it’s Charles who put up the childish stink and wasted time by banning Harry’s wife."

It's appropriate to ban someone from the bedside of a dying person, if the dying person loathes that person. It's also appropriate to ban a person from a family gathering at a deathbed, if the entire family loathes that person.

The only reason to allow her to come to Balmoral would be because Harry wanted her emotional support and/or stage direction, and what can one say to that but "GROW THE FUCK UP. HARRY. Not everything is about you.".

r519 His family didnt put her through any shit.She however along with her husband abused his two elderly grandparents.

I'm sure the BRF also couldn't bear the idea that Meghan would leak the entire story of the Queen's final hours. I wouldn't have let her near Balmoral either.

"Oh god give it a rest [R352] ! She wasnt some innocent virgin.She had been turning tricks for years before she met Andrew."

She'd been turning trucks "for years" by the age of 17? You do realize, don't you R353, that that makes her the victim of sexual abuse and human trafficking?

That said, I'm sure that Andrew has done worse things than fuck a trafficked teenager. That's just what he's been caught at, and I DO look forward to leaks and rumors about the other sleazy things he's done! Leaks and rumors that cannot, of course, be traced directly to Charles's palace, but which are still all over the media.

Death is the ultimate private moment. Only a self-important narcissist would think of going up there as grandchild-in-law #4. Sit the fuck down, Meg.

As for Sophie, she’s a daughter-in-law. Huge difference. Anyone in a normal family can attest a good DIL can be even closer and nearer to a person than their own child, especially if she is a caring, loving person.

[quote] Wow! If looks could kill Meghans head would have exploded !

Kate indulges in the death stare quite often. It’s not something to be proud of.

See video below:

[quote]R533 It's appropriate to ban someone from the bedside of a dying person

Except Balmoral is quite a large house, in case you haven’t noticed. Obviously M didn’t want to hold the olde bitch’s hand while she died, she just wanted to travel with her husband as most wives would.

Can you imagine being called away for such an emergency, and your spouse just glancing up from a magazine to say, “Well, tell me how it all turns out.”

He wanted her there and she wanted to support him there. Like any normal married couple.

She wanted to be there out of self aggrandizement. HMQ’s children didn’t want her there. That’s all that matters.

R539 How about they join the adult world and have mature conversations?

H: My grandmother is dying. I have to go to Balmoral.

M: Oh no. Do you want me to go with?

H: I wish you could, but the family is keeping the last visit small.

M: Okay. I'm a phone call away if you need anything. I love you.

See how simple that is?

Often described as the “Queen’s favourite”, Sophie’s relationship with her flourished over the years with both women helping each other through periods of personal loss.

When the Countess’s own beloved mother died in 2005, the Queen provided her with much needed support and solace.

Last year, following the death of the Duke of Edinburgh, it was Sophie to whom the Queen turned - with royal insiders describing her daughter-in-law as being like “a rock”.

Living just 10 miles away from Windsor Castle at Bagshot Park, the Countess would visit the Queen regularly, becoming the closest of confidants.

When her busy diary did not allow her to visit in person, she made sure she spoke to the Queen by phone daily.

Once coronavirus restrictions were eased, it was the Countess who would often join the Queen for walks around the Windsor estate.

Their relationship became so close that the Countess began referring to the Queen as “mama”.

Meg works night and day at being a Professional Victim.

I have in-laws that I like, but it's different visiting with your family one on one without their SOs. If I were dying, I would want those last moments just to ourselves. Nothing against the in-laws, it's just more intimate and special. I also will totally understand if my in-laws didn't want me at their death bed. Meghan and Harry just haven't lived enough to know this, surprisingly. They're like 20yr olds in 40yr old bodies. Meghan is disadvantaged anyways because her family is so dysfunctional.

(I would have a lot more sympathy for them if they actually were 20.)

"Except Balmoral is quite a large house, in case you haven’t noticed. Obviously M didn’t want to hold the olde bitch’s hand while she died, she just wanted to travel with her husband as most wives would."

Yes, dear, but do you think she'd stay away from the rest of the family, who would have been both stunned and bereaved? And who couldn't stand the thought of having to deal with someone they hate, and who is probably wearing a microphone under her clothes? No, if she'd gone to Balmoral to support Harry, she wouldn't have stayed away from the rest of the family. She wouldn't pass up the opportunity for that degree of drama, and Harry would want her there to protect him from any relatives who might take the opportunity to call him on his shit.

Because Harry doesn't seem to be able to deal with those "It's not about you" moments.

Does anyone really believe Tyler Perry was complimenting H&M. "I've seen their relationship and it makes me want to stay single...uh, cuz they're so in love, I mean."

Harry was probably wired, too -- inability to trust those two lying weasals must have played a part in keeping them away. Suck it Sussexes

r546 Tyler Perry said what?!

[quote]R541 See how simple that is?

It’s not simple at all when we’d have to include:

[italic]M: Oh no. Do you want me to go with?

H: I wish you could, but the family is keeping the last visit small.

M: I understand, luv - spouses not included.

H: Oh no, my father and brother are bringing their wives. It’s just YOU being exiled. They don’t even want you in a guest room. Or a car outside. Nothing personal, of course. Well, ta! [/italic]

Ah yes, the kind of simple conversation we all have every day.

If you seriously think that Meghan Markle would ever say this "M: I understand, luv - spouses not included."

YOU ARE OUT OF YOUR MIND.

R549 Spouses of HM’s children were included, yes (not sure about Tim but Camilla and Sophie were there and Andrew doesn’t have a spouse, just poor old drunk Fergie, who wasn’t included).

Spouses of grandchildren weren’t included - only two of the grandchildren were there: Kate stayed away and was pictured doing the school run that afternoon. Meghan wanted to insert herself into the whole scene, no doubt for more material for books, podcasts etc and was rightfully told “no”.

The delay over her participation meant that the plane with William, the Wessexes and Andrew was delayed by 45 minutes, which meant that they missed being there when HM died, 45 minutes after their arrival at Balmoral.

Of course not an ounce of self-awareness from the Sussexes re their part in causing that!

But R549, it WAS personal!

A grownup has to be able to say "Yes, it's personal, it's payback for the Oprah interview and all our other attempts to blackmail money and titles out of them. And I resent them even more than ever, but I want to see my Grandmother one last time more than anything. Damn, I hate the thought of dealing with those assholes without your support, but that's the way it has to be".

But of course Harry would never say that, because Harry isn't a grownup.

Fergie has bought a house that was at some point split into two apartments, a common thing in London. She bought both of the flats and they will be restored once again into a single dwelling.

I don’t know where the money came from. I’m guessing it could be Andrew’s money and is being shielded in case of a possible law suit or whatever further down the line.

R549, it’s also possible that Meghan had truly worn out her welcome with the Queen, who was the actual dying person and who might not have wanted Meghan to exploit her death in any way.

Why is Meghan's presence at the Queen's death even a question when Harry himself was not wanted nor invited? He imposed himself upon the family knowing they would not be in a position to deny him entry.

R524 what does “framing” mean here?

you know, like being framed for a crime you didn't commit

Have you heard of the concept of a mortgage, r553? Or having an income through investments?

The story about Harry insisting on bringing Meghan with him at that moment is a particularly damning one. The comments below in each paper that picked up the story are just about 100% appalled.

Because everyone has a family, everyone who has experienced loss of a close relative, let alone a mother knows how devastating the shock is, and you add on that they also knew what the next ten days would look like . . . The idea of inserting someone into those last private moments who has been the family adversary for years is beyond insulting, it's lunatic.

There is no one anywhere who doesn't see arguing with the bereaved son now also in the kingly botcseat as beyond the pale.

The rumour is that the BP staff used to call him "Stockholm Harry".

I thought once it might have been an exaggeration.

I don't think so any longer.

^*kingly hotseat

The Times is running the Sun story about furious Harry refusing to eat with the new King and his brother the night The Queen died. I'm not sure what the standards are for running with someone else's reporting (and attributing) but I gotta imagine the Times is so up itself it figures a) we don't need royal content at all costs but b) there is some satisfaction the Sun is right about this and so they ran it.

I look forward to the Valentine Low book in the hope we get a sense of who leaks (by some category... i.e. yes, there's a press office, but the footmen can't keep their mouths shut (no hidden meaning) or extended family gossips of their own free will or at the behest of a senior member.) This may be an optimistic hope. I'd just love to know where all this content comes from on an almost daily basis and have some measure about what to believe.

As above, if the Times is reporting on other publication's reporting I'm inclined to think they must be satisfied it is true. It's certainly interesting but not must-have in my view so it's still a bit peculiar to me the Times would bow to the Sun and run its stuff.

First, human nature makes you strive to find every excuse you can for someone you love even if you're furious with them, so the blame has to fall on MM more than Harry.

Second, in Oprah she was the one who said the most damaging stuff the most plainly, so she wears that. He contradicted her, slightly.

Third, The Cut came out August 29th (with content that again fired a shot or two "disrupting the hierachy" (which I argue was about the staff but also the Wales) and what could reasonably be construed as a veiled threat and the Queen was dead September 8. So eleven days between not again and the Duchess proposes to wait in the drawing room.

Whatever the truth of it, you gotta figure Meghan is RF Enemy #1 now based on what she's done and so there would be no appetite to have her around in the immediate aftermath of having lost your mother of fifty-odd years. You want the comfort of the family you know best and who you trust. That's just not her. Is there an etiquette imperative in circumstances like this? Probably there may be some political choices about how much bad feeling you're willing to cause in your most high maintenance relationships. Isn't it that the RF seems to open the door on their terms and the Harkles get upset when it's not good enough on their terms?

It seems there was a real aversion to having her present at Balmoral. It sucks if you're him and I get his reaction but again, he appears to have chosen which battles to fight. Is he so convinced of his rightness he cannot perceive anyone else's pov? (In fairness, in emotion, not many of us can) but after the fact can't he think it through? I'm minded this Capulet and Montague bullshit is what he's substituted for meaningful work. He can't cut ribbons and he can't run a business, so he stirs the pot, which given her track record is probably not a source of unhappiness elsewhere at Castillo Prefabricada.

[quote]As above, if the Times is reporting on other publication's reporting I'm inclined to think they must be satisfied it is true. It's certainly interesting but not must-have in my view so it's still a bit peculiar to me the Times would bow to the Sun and run its stuff.

R561, you're aware that both the Times and the Sun are owned by Rupert Murdoch and that they're "sister" newspapers at News UK (formerly News International), right?

Prince Philip hated Murdoch's rags, as he called them.

All snark aside, Meghan and Harry's maniacal clawing at the sad little UN appearance was highly disturbing and speaks to massive dysfunction and grave illness. This will end in a tragedy of epic proportions not just in a messy divorce and him high tailing it back to the U.K.

R524 I usually have no time for "body language experts," but that was a serious recoil by Meghan.

Markle's a coward, and when the target of her many lies looks her in the eyes, she runs.

[quote] ...that was a serious recoil by Meghan.

Because Meghan shoots from ambush. From afar. Her attacks on Kate through her pals in the gossip world started even before she and Harry were married. With the knowledge that the RF does not respond to that kind of thing.

To face someone, now in a significantly stronger position of power, who you have insulted and attacked and lied about - whenever did M face those she attacks?

Kate's cold attitude, I don't even see you, response was a delight to anyone who has been in a position similar to Kate.

Remember, Kate knows all about mean girls since she was bullied at school, resulting in her parents changing her to a new school where she thrived.

And M is a mean girl.

Back when they were both duchesses, MM thought she could take pot shots at Kate. Now Kate could be QUEEN within five years, commanding a vast amount of wealth and considerable power. MM is seriously, permanently outgunned and better duck for cover.

R564 If he was trying to get her up to Balmoral with him at that time, I wouldn't count on a divorce.

He's nowhere near it. He is totally controlled by her.

That will never change, any more than it did for his great-great uncle, the Duke of Windsor.

again, I think you are all misreading what happened in the video, she didn't recoil and make that face out of fear or whatever else, it was a deliberate performance, an act of sabotage

I'm sure Markle was terrified. She was in public, with the one person she named and that woman's husband, and an emotional crowd. But it wasn't fear of Kate, it was Scrooge, in the company of the ghost of Christmas future. Markle is the one person who knows exactly what she's done. Does anyone with a brain imagine she's misunderstood?

Harry was invited in August to visit his father and grandmother at Balmoral and refused. He had something better to do.

Harry argued with his father on the phone on the day of his grandmother's death, instead of just saying, "OK, dad, no problem." Harry caused a delay which resulted in the other members of the family arriving after their mother's death.

Harry then continued to whine about this and that and the other thing, all through the mourning period.

We now have newly released footage of the effet Harry had on his reputation.

r569

Oh I don't mean divorce, that wouldn't be tragic just messy. I mean a horrible tragedy. It appears to be a very volatile situation and I wouldn't be surprised at DV on either part. Someone, likely him, will end up dead or in jail. Or he takes out the whole family along with himself. He's not just some milquetoast guy being controlled; he is quite ill and may respond in a drastic way some day when provoked or prodded once too often.

That's rather excessive.

[quote]r572 Harry was invited in August to visit his father and grandmother at Balmoral and refused. He had something better to do.

Like stand up to racism. If his mixed race wife wasn’t welcome, he wasn’t going.

I find it hard to believe gays don’t understand this. You would all attend family events without your same sex spouse upon demand? Ick.

[quote]That's rather excessive.

I know but I don't think this situation is just your garden variety narcissists acting out. That "PDA", if that's what you want to call it, at the UN gave me the creeps. And what were all those police calls to their mcmansion about?

In my opinion, his volatility and mental health problems are the reason TQ and Charles didn't take a more severe stance with him, they are concerned what he might do and it would be on their conscience.

One other thing that would have Markle off her game - this was out of her control. It happened unexpectedly, she hadn't had time to make a plan (granted, most of her plans turn to shit, but the choreography is still evident.) They were stuck in the machine again, if isolated at Frogless, taking orders, he'd get much of what was going on, she wouldn't. Not a space she'd be comfortable with.

R575 What a manipulative oversimplification. No wonder you're a fan of Markle.

His mixed race wife was welcome when they threw her a 35mil dollar wedding, bestowed titles upon her, gave her patronages and a role within the Commonwealth, attended a solo outing with TQ, and became neighbors and foundation partners with the Cambridges.

Harry's mixed race wife only became unwelcome when she refused to work well with others and put her own individual interests ahead of the interests of the monarchy. At which point she threatened suicide, called them all racists, and flounced off to Hollywood where she signed multimillion dollar deals capitalizing on the royal brand.

Exactly r578

It was reported all summer they were invited and declined. R535 isn't worth the time of day. I always marvel at how they give themselves away by dropping like a ton of bricks, forcing in racism and mix-raced and all that tedious malarky when things have moved well beyond that, to the extent it was ever true. Anyway, keeps them off the streets.

The Times has started a serialisation of Valentine Low's new book.

Sorry, R580 erroneously references R535. I meant R575. I'm usually pretty good at wheat and chaff.

Low book: Faced with hordes of journalists intent on trawling through every aspect of Meghan’s life, Harry became determined to protect his girlfriend. Meghan, meanwhile, told him that if he did not do something about it, she would break off the relationship. A source said: “She was saying, ‘If you don’t put out a statement confirming I’m your girlfriend, I’m going to break up with you.’ ” Harry was in a panic. Another source said: “He was freaking out, saying, ‘She’s going to dump me.’ ”

Low book: Meghan wanted public validation that this was a serious relationship. She was convinced that the palace was unwilling to protect her from media intrusion. She told Harry’s staff: “I know how the palace works. I know how this is going to play out. You don’t care about the girlfriend.”

This, however, was just the beginning. Keeping Meghan happy – and, by extension, keeping Harry happy – was an ongoing challenge. Harry’s staff knew that Meghan was different from other royal girlfriends. She had her own opinions and would let people know what they were. In the spring of 2017, more than six months before the couple were engaged, she told one of Harry’s advisers: “I think we both know I’m going to be one of your bosses soon.”

Low book: At this time, at the Queen’s request, the Lord Chamberlain, Earl Peel – the most senior figure in the household – went to see the couple to explain to Meghan how the palace worked. He recalled, “I liked her, actually. She was very forthright. Very, very polite. Very understanding. She wanted to learn.”

I'm convinced Low has seen a copy of the bullying report: At around the same time, Meghan spoke particularly harshly at a meeting to a young female member of the team in front of her colleagues. After Meghan had pulled to shreds a plan she had drawn up, the woman told Meghan how hard it would be to implement a new one. “Don’t worry,” Meghan told her. “If there was literally anyone else I could ask to do this, I would be asking them instead of you.”

Low's going to finish her off in spectacular fashion.

Low book: Since then, palace sources have said that the clashes between Meghan and Touabti centred on the free gifts that some companies would send to Meghan. Deliveries were constantly arriving at Kensington Palace. “Clothes, jewellery, candles… It was absolutely nonstop,” said a source. Touabti was apparently punctilious in following the household rule that members of the royal family cannot accept freebies from commercial organisations. Her approach did not go down well with Meghan.

[Quote]After Meghan had pulled to shreds a plan she had drawn up, the woman told Meghan how hard it would be to implement a new one. “Don’t worry,” Meghan told her. “If there was literally anyone else I could ask to do this, I would be asking them instead of you.”

Wow. That's harsh.

There's no way he hasn't seen the report:

After they missed a call from her, they rang back, but she did not pick up. They said: “She hasn’t called back. I feel terrified.” A short time later, they added: “This is so ridiculous. I can’t stop shaking.”

Low is very fair: It can be hard to define exactly when a particular behaviour amounts to bullying. As Jenny Afia, the solicitor who later represented the duchess in her action against The Mail on Sunday put it: “What bullying actually means is improperly using power repeatedly and deliberately to hurt someone physically or emotionally. The Duchess of Sussex absolutely denies ever doing that. Knowing her as I do, I can’t believe she would ever do that. It just doesn’t match my experience of her at all.”

Low, Australia tour: According to several members of staff, she was heard to say on at least one occasion, “I can’t believe I’m not getting paid for this.”

r575 Are you a factory twister or have you misunderstood that poster? Harry and Meghan were BOTH invited to Balmoral in the summer. It was on the Queens deathbed that neither Meghan or any of the other grandchildren except William were invited. The only reason this is ab issue is because Harry just happened to be visiting the UK when she died otherwise neither of them would have seen her in time or at all fullstop.

[Quote]Low, Australia tour: According to several members of staff, she was heard to say on at least one occasion, “I can’t believe I’m not getting paid for this.”

Bingo. I'm the poster who says Meghan wanted out the minute the Grenfell cookbook hit the bestsellers list netting a tremendous profit and she didn't get a dime.

r575 r593 Should say fact twister !

Low book: By August 2019, things were “awful and tense” within the Sussex household. There were also clues that Harry and Meghan did not see their long-term future as working members of the royal family. Their Africa tour was coming up, but there was nothing in the diary after that. Meanwhile, staff were increasingly aware of the presence in the background of Meghan’s business manager, Andrew Meyer, and her lawyer, Rick Genow, as well as her agent, Nick Collins, and Keleigh Thomas Morgan of Sunshine Sachs. The US team had been very busy, working on deals not only with Netflix but also a deal for Harry’s mental health series for Apple+ with Oprah Winfrey and Meghan’s voiceover for a Disney film about elephants.

While preparing for the Africa tour, the team was trying to persuade the couple that it would be appropriate to do an interview with the British media. Sam Cohen suggested Tom Bradby of ITV, who already had a relationship with Harry. Meghan was reluctant at first. Her attention was focused on the prospect of doing an interview with Oprah Winfrey. After thinking about it, however, Harry said they would agree. There was one proviso: he and Meghan could not do interviews together or be in the same shot. That would go against their deal with Oprah, which at that point was slated for the autumn of that year. (It eventually went ahead more than a year later, in March 2021.)

So my one sentence take: She behaves like a badly behaved actress and thinks all life is a film set.

I am gonna buy this book but it isn't available until June of next year in North America. Out Oct. 6 in the UK.

You can order if from amazon.uk and pay shipping to the us.

^ Thx. Right. Should have thought.