REVENGE Part 13 - Tell All Books, Scandals and Royal Gossip

Prince Harry's eyes are so close-set he should have called his bio Cyclops.

SPARE A DIME I'M BROKE

SPARE TIRED OF THIS BITCH I MARRIED

That title of his book just makes him look like a weak whiner pussy man.

Can't wait for the reviews from Julie Burchill, Camilla Tominey, Dan Wootton, Jan Moir, Tom Bower, et al.

As I warned, Tina Brown is no longer a reliable insider with good contacts. She predicted a .o th ago the mempor would never see the light of day.

^* a month ago

The removal of titles bill doesn't get second reading until Dec. 9th. (First reading is a formality, it basically creates the bill and starts the process. There is no parliamentary debate.). Here's what happens:

"The Government minister, spokesperson or MP responsible for the Bill opens the second reading debate.

The official Opposition spokesperson responds with their views on the Bill.

The debate continues with other Opposition parties and backbench MPs giving their opinions.

At the end of the debate, the Commons decides whether the Bill should be given its second reading by voting, meaning it can proceed to the next stage.

It is possible for a Bill to have a second reading with no debate - as long as MPs agree to its progress."

[italic]At the end of the debate, the Commons decides whether the Bill should be given its second reading by voting, meaning it can proceed to the next stage.[/italic]

And this is where it dies, when the Conservative majority votes it down. Nobody wants this except the headline grabbing Labour MP for York. It will get second reading in a night sitting with enough Conservatives in the chamber to do it in.

Sheesh what a title. I'll think of it as a synonym for 'LOSER'

The title should have been: Bitter Party of 1 (or maybe 2 including his dear wife)

He has lived and shall die a bitter, jealous, vengeful embarrassment to Britons.

I am the youngest and have been happy to sit back and watch my older brother be the trail blazer. I personally would rather be the spare, you still have money, fame, and perks but less duty and responsibility.

He recorded the audio book HIMSELF.

So, you can actually hear him tell his tale.

Oh, dear.

Dare we hope he includes how he started drinking at an early age (as he has said) after his dear mother took him along visiting some of her less than desirable pals?

My take is the Harry's book was published because there was a contract to do so, regardless of whether Harry had a change of heart. What the publisher probably allowed for was a toning down of some aspects. As well, perhaps to appease Harry, the early January publishing date (low sales potential) was agreed to by the publisher (who likely think its sales will be low, given the watered-down content). The publisher just wants to fulfill the terms of the contract and be done with it. Why would Harry & Meghan agree to all of the aforementioned? Because reality is staring them in the eye, and they want to carefully inch their way back in to the Royal fold in any way possible. Suddenly all they threw away is all that they want back. I would foresee, over a period of years, the Palace allowing the Harkle's return to live at Frogmore (however preferably without the wife) in a non-working Royal status way (ie, hidden away like Andrew).

Whats up with these two and their victimhood! ? That title screams inferiority complex. It’s a zero uplifting title. They keep digging their own PR graves. He was one of the most popular and beloved royal before Meghan. She really pushed his self view with the victim narrative.

Meghan has elbowed Harry off the front cover of the book. Harry's photo will now appear on the back cover, and this is the new front cover:

The fact that Andrew and Harry are so messed up and loathsome has led some people to believe being a spare is an affliction worse than the plague. George V and George VI were both spares into adulthood, and in the latter case into middle age . Anne was a spare for ten years and then a spare spare after that, as was Edward from birth. Charles, no matter how long he can reasonably be expected to live, will have spent the vast majority of his life as a spare to the Queen and easily could have died as such. Somehow all these people came to terms with it.

Charles wasn't a spare. He was heir the moment his mother acceded. Heir and spare means a child to inherit and a back up in case he conks it.

^ To add, the phrase is an heir and a spare. There's only ever one heir and only one spare: it is a phrase to reflect succession. Charles was heir to his mother, Anne spare to him until the birth of her brothers, which pushed her down the line. At which point Andrew became the spare. Edward would never have been a spare unless Andrew became heir. This applies to all people in position to inherit any title. First and second born, usually most important they are born.

You know if Andrew and Edward hadn’t been born, Anne, as spare, would’ve led EXACTLY the same life that she has. Opening hospitals and schools and being a competitive rider.

Yes. What Harry whining about is the usual none of us got enough love in our childhoods schtick. And they question his paternity.

Hell, I was a spare and I had a good time.

R16. Like virtually everyone, I know the meaning of spare and heir. The point is that Charles was effectively a spare his entire life—-waiting in the wings to fill a role in the event someone else dies. Given the young age at which his mother had him and the longer life expectancy of women, he had no confidence he would ever be anything more than a backup and will have spent the vast majority of his life as a backup.

His book should have been titled "Failure to Launch".

Foreword written by fellow whiner Joachim of Denmark.

If Charles had died before Queen Elizabeth II died, what then would have happened after QEII's death?

Charles was a spare until age three and then an heir the rest of his life. It isn't subject to your vast knowledge.

Apparently you don't know the meaning of heir and spare which is a point I press because there's one thing worse than snide, it's when snide is wrong. So try that crown on for size, your grandeur.

[quote] The publisher just wants to fulfill the terms of the contract and be done with it.

Reports vary, but it was initially reported that the Harkles were contracted to write four books for PRH: Harry’s memoir, another book by Harry TBD, a wellness book by Meghan and a book about “leadership” with both Harkles as co-authors. “The Bench” was Meghan’s sole contract, and separate.

Now they’re calling it three books? Regardless of how many, PRH still gets to work with these difficult idiots on two more books. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

I'm impressed he narrated his own audio version. I didn't think he could read.

Unless of course they just miked him up and let him wander free range around the rescue coop. I can't imagine there's much difference between the book and his stream of conscious. Poor me, woe is me, fucking reporters, mummy.

The book should have been called SPARE ME. Jaysus, what a limp rag title.

The title should have been "Recollections may Harry."

LOL, R28.... you know that's the title of a column in the Maul once it is released.

So I am reading Courtiers and I raved about it initially but then the bottom kind of fell out. It's sort of all over the map. Sometimes Low even uses the first person. The opening is fascinating... the old school courtiers from the start of the reign, lots of stuff you didn't know. The middle part gets a little boring, sort of superficial and unfocused. He's all over the map with the flow of the book and glosses over a lot of stuff you wish he'd go deeper on. You get the feeling he had really, really great sources but they would only go so far as to tell you the very least they could, i.e. Samantha Cohen got yelled at on the plane to Australia, but not which one of them did it or what was the reason. The end isn't thrilling because so much of it was serialized.

Couple things that stand out: Low makes a convincing case MM decided very early on she was getting out and had a plan to justify it. The royals are all referenced but there's only detail about the Harkles and that's not much that's new. It is a book about courtiers but he doesn't present much of a portrait of the courtiers as people, or even the details of their lives in the job (like, they always seem to be around, so if you get dragged to Sandringham for Christmas, where do stay? Where is your family? The kind of colour that makes a rich portrait.) It's a good book but I am sorry I paid UK funds to get it shipped over. It wasn't worth the money. Still, the impression I get is that Low has good sources and what he writes or opines is probably as close to true as you're gonna get.

Doubtful that Markle even purchased anything in that store. The bag is a prop, just like the "friend" is a prop. The sole purpose of her going out was to be papped. Now why she chose that dreadful outfit for the event is the real mystery.

R25. When you believe you need to educate someone on the difference between two very simple terms, chances are you are the simple-minded one in the exchange.

R32, you're self-evident.

R26 what book would anyone buy from these nitwits other than a royal expose. Whoever made a book deal for health and leadership books from these imbeciles should be drummed out of publishing.

I suspect Harry’s book will sell well if it has a lot of explosive claims. It will bomb if he watered it down to focus on a bunch of new age bullshit that no one cares about—in other words, same preachy, self important nonsense as Meghan’s podcast.

I certainly hope it’s filled with the filthiest dirt, but it won’t be. He’ll say Charles was an absent father and difficult to accept Camilla as step mother but that will be the extent of it. Otherwise it will focus on the aftermath of Diana’s death and his “forced” rudderless existence as the spare. And, of course, how Meghan saved him.

Highly doubt it will be anymore dishy than that.

I actually like the title of the book because the substance of the book will be spare.

One thing I disagree with DLers about on selling in Jan rather than December: wouldn’t publishers prefer releasing at Xmas if it’s indeed watered down crap—knowing people would buy anyway as a gift and improve sales?

I suspect it’s in January because last minute edits made impossible to ready for Xmas release.

Plus, there's no mystery about these two. We could all recite their moans and whines and grievances from memory. So unless he goes for the throat, who'd care? What could be new?

R23 - If Charles had died BEFORE his mother, William would be King now and George would be Prince of Wales.

George wouldn't necessarily be Prince of Wales. He would be heir to the throne, but Princes of Wales are created by the new monarch. Charles just took everybody by surprise when he did it the very next day.

Note to Harry and his mummy wife: You are never ever coming back to the BRF, by your own choice. Accept it, or not, we are too busy to care do sid off.

Jealousy really is the green eyed monster. Harry is like a walking lyric either Frankie lane or Chris Rain. Both the same...eats him alive & makes him stuck.stuck & more stuck.

He should calls his whinge fest..memoir Jealousy

Supposedly some of the proceeds are going to two charities.

If they were looking for a punchy one-word title for the book, I propose that GELDED would be far more apropos

Think they are their charities. '.Member when Harry told the fake Greta Thunberg on the phone that he heard you could make a lot of money through charities. Plus he lives in the US, so they got to see how much BLM pulled in for a few folk. How much will the 'Administrative Costs' be to administer any said monies to their Charities. And remember. Charity begins at home, as in Monteshitto. Wigs & weaves ain't cheap, nor is bronzer!!

[quote] I'm impressed he narrated his own audio version. I didn't think he could read.

It must be written in very small words indeed.

Wonder if we’ll get to hear Harry try to pronounce “guttural.”

Ah Harry .To think I found you rather hot at one point. Now look at you. Crazy ugly elderly wife and loathed by all those who once adored you. If he wasnt crazy before he must be now.

R18 There they go again, opening hospitals and schools . . .

The fact ribbon cutting now represents a bygone era and a tiny fraction of what today's royals do just doesn't seem to matter.

Anne has been patron of the Save the Children for decades and raised huge amounts of money for it through her patronage.

"The Princess Royal performs official duties and engagements on behalf of her older brother, Charles.[8] She holds patronage in over 300 organisations, including WISE, Riders for Health, and Carers Trust.[8] Her charity work revolves around sport, sciences, people with disabilities, and health in developing countries. She has been associated with Save the Children for over fifty years and has visited a number of their projects."

Do you see an openings of hospitals and schools there?

Poor poor little rich prince . Shameless

I really don't understand Harry's problem. So what if he was The Spare? Isn't that position a better one than The Heir?

He gets the privilege but not the responsibility. He doesn't have to worry about paying the rent. You can pick and choose your patronages. You can work when you want to. You have more privacy that the older child. You can create your own "niche" within The Royal Family and get the respect for doing your duty in your own way. Geez, it's a better position as far as I can see. Of course, I'm not a jealous, envious, greedy, stunted, entitled little fame whore so that may be the difference between Harry and I.

I’d love to compare initial draft to what’s being published after Meghan got her claws into it.

Well there's no going back now. That saying " you've made your bed, so lay in it", ( or something like that) , certainly applies here. He's burning bridges.good God Harry.

Now we are going to have to merge thread titles to reflect this update. "THE SPARE'S REVENGE-Tell All Books, Scandals, and Royal Gossip"! That book cover just drives home his potato nose, and beady rodent eyes. He should never be photographed from the front. At least they airbrushed out those weird forehead lumps he has.

"Choose your patronages". Wasn't that one of his grievances? Both he and William wanted to focus on environmental work but he was told that William had first dibs on it because he was #1.

I can't help wondering if H wanted environmental work because William had first choice for it.

I'm counting on the juicy bits to be leaked, I hope people will just read those and not actually buy the book. I want it to flop hard and see how they try to spin that.

Wonder if O will do a sit-down with Harry to discuss the book

[quote] That title sounds like he is playing the victim. Not a good look.

I think this may be the best that could be done for Penguin/RH. It automatically suggests there's a story worth telling - always in the shadow of a future king and drifting further down the line with his nephews and niece. And the rumor about his father.

It's pretty mainstream, isn't it? I was watching Craig Ferguson's American late-night talk show years ago, and he made a joke: William got his father a nice tie for Father's Day; Harry got his father a nice gift as well.

I was kind of shocked he did that, but he did. I know everybody gets upset when it's brought up - but it's one of the few interesting things about this dunce. (and the henpecker wife, a la great uncle Edward)

I love this bit, all in her own voice. It shows her humour, her sincerity and at the end a sincere, almost wistful humility.

^ How grateful I am to have lived in a time when Elizabeth II was Queen. What an amazing woman. Talk about being a female Icon.

Can someone please link a pdf to Courtiers?

The Kindle was less than $10.

According to the sewage squad, Archie and Lili are now Nigerian and need to be protected as they are vulnerable black kids.

I'll admit it: I blamed Megxit on Meghan. I thought she was driving this whole thing and manipulated him.

This book though...I see it now. This is what Harry wanted. He was never satisfied with his role, never satisfied with the military, never satisfied with his life. He wanted to break out. He never cared much for his family or country. I don't even think he cares much for his wife or kids. Remember how great and supportive we thought Harry was of William and what a shock it is to see his real feelings? I think he's a manipulative narcissist who is now playing the devoted man baby husband to Meghan but the truth is far different and he's gonna drop her when the next starlet catches his eye and makes him feel special.

R61 In fact, I was just remembering how poorly W&K came across while Harry charmed everyone during their trip days. But now that Harry has left them, they're actually shining and thriving. And we learned Harry actually hated it all. And here were are again, and Meghan is the big baddie while Harry is the better of the two, but I bet a million bucks when Harry moves on from Meghan, her personality improves and we'll find out he felt trapped with her and resented her as well. He's malignant. Absolutely creepy.

I wish people would stop trying to STILL protect the feelings and reputation of Prince Harry. He has richly earned the opposite treatment.

Harry Apologists--every day, Harry decides anew to stay away from the royals and WITH his wife and kids. He isn't being lured by a serpent, for God's sake! Maybe if y'all expect adult behavior from the man, then you'll start to receive it. He's no prisoner. He's no slave. He's a typical prodigal son. He walked away from his family and duty: he wasn't dragged away. Is he a man or not? Respect his choices, shitty as they are. Stop treating him like an orphaned child. He isn't an orphan and never was.

Harry is the conductor of his train. He, in fact, CAN LEAVE MEGHAN AND AMERICA at any time. Try to bear these simple facts.

Nope r62. Meghan has been a vile cretin since childhood, just like Harry. He tagged along with William and Catherine because he knew they were a popular couple. He wanted A Catherine of his own, but he married a dud.

I rather doubt that he’s a manipulative narcissist - all of the narcissists who I’ve encountered have been quite intelligent, and I’ve not once heard poor Harry described as anything but thick.

His wife, on the other hand…

Harry and Meghan are certain a misguided tragic pair, who can't seem to do anything right and unfailingly snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory, but the way some of you Mme. Dufarges pathologise and demonise them makes you sound positively unhinged.

This just in: King Charles himself is taking on the role of Captain-General of the Royal Marines that Philip held for decades and then passed on to Harry in 2017, until the Queen stripped Harry of it one year after Megxit.

Talk of a perfect response timed perfectly to the announcement of the memoir! The monarchy has raised the triumph of the rapier over the bludgeon to an art form.

I see a couple of jerks. He's emotionally damaged and stuck in his anger. She's under the delusion things will make up for not being born to a life filled with things. They are toxic together.

They are both colossal assholes.

I see Harry, and Meghan as two very messy petty bitches, and I love that for us, and them!

So true!

He is really an ugly ugly manboy, both outside and especially inside. May he reap what he has sown. But God bless those innocent kids of his.

We're 21.5% Nigerian?

R65 - well, there's Donald Trump, Sarah Palin, Kanye, Amber Heard, OJ Simpson... - I think there are plenty stupid narcissists (all psychopaths are extremely narcissistic as well)

I'd rather be the spare than the heir but then again, I'd spend my time studying and doing things I'd love to, but can't afford - not whingeing.

Ungrateful prat.

Harry's lucky as shit and incapable of seeing it. Basically, he's like Andrew: arrogant, jealous, vindictive and stupid. Marrying an attention whore like Markle who was desperate to finally be a Leading Lady after years of being a bit player, obviously made things worse.

Prince Harry's memoir 'is critical of everyone and everything'

SPARE ME ! You big baby

If he'd been born in a regular family, his career would probably consist of stacking shelves in supermarkets, never to be promoted, seeing all his fellow workers move on to better things. He's not smart enough to be a delivery driver or to operate machinery and he certainly doesn't have enough good grace to work behind a counter or answer a phone in a call centre

I like the Polish, and Greek titles of Harry's book.

The Brazilian one is great, R79.

In these times of greater economic disparity dumb ass Harry didnt read the room and realize that 99.9% of people would have gladly traded places with him in a nano second. Yet more evidence as if we needed any that hes too stupid to be believed.

FFS, that scary, ugly mug is enough to put anyone off. He's disgusting.

I want to know if the Variety story was an in person interview or were the questions emailed to her and she wrote back with the answers.

R79, the German translation is weird. It does mean "back-up", but isn't really used for individuals and lacks any negative connotation. I think Germans seeing just that cover will read it as an English word, which is then nonsensical.

I like “what’s leftover.” Lol.

R84 I think "Ersatz" would be better.

[quote]The Brazilian one is great, [R79].

What's Portuguese for spunk?

R71, that’s it in a nutshell…

He'd better hope this makes him a ton of money because after it's published, he's truly shot his wad. Any future books would be chewing over the same old thing because you know his family isn't going to let him have any future access that would result in more juicy tales.

She's going to write a "lifestyle" book?

Who is looking for advice from a sloppily dressed and poorly groomed woman unfamiliar with the services of a tailor? Not to mention her inability to cultivate lasting relationships with anyone.

There's so much trouble in the world and so many problems. I'm glad that Harry and Meghan have arrived with the solutions.

R83 def over email and written out. I was a long time interviewer and you can tell there is no writer voice here at all

I'm loving the tabloids' honouring their annual tradition of asserting the Harkles are set to "snub" the King's invitation to spend Christmas with the family.

Right. Two weeks before the memoir comes out, the BRF will warmly welcome the two for some Yuletide togetherness.

"It is said" . . .

R92, thanks. I thought the answers were a little too…too. Words that you use in writing to denote a good vocabulary but not used in speech?

The best expose was her Vogue “chat” with Michelle Obama “over a lunch of fish tacos”. You really had to parse that carefully to understand that she was sitting by herself, reading answers to an email. It was skillfully, if deceptively, written.

I can't believe they are going through the bother and expense of translating this book into Finnish. There are only about 6 million speakers world-wide. Maybe three would want to read it.

I've said it before several times after the Queen's funeral, Meghan is a sociopath, not a narcissist.

I keep thinking about that line in the promo bullshit: after Diana's funeral, billions wondered what would become of the princes.

Billions?

There were less than six billion people on the planet when she died in 1997.... today's population of the G7 (is under a billion...) I'm just not convinced actual billions fretted about the princes.

And, for that matter, I doubt billions are going to buy Spoiled or Sulk or whatever it's called.

r96 why don't you think she's a narcissist? To me that is the most obvious - she keeps saying things that hurt her image - bc of her delusions of grandeur

Delusions? You mean the world isn't clamoring to hear a D-list actress relate her VERY deep and VERY important thoughts on the most pressing topics of the day??

Angela Levin talks about the different titles of Harry's book.

In the UK - "Spare".

Outside the UK - "Left Overs" and "Neglected"

And another one "In The Shadows".

Link below.

Vanity Fair doesn’t do phone interviews or interviews by email. They might ask for backup clarification, but the original content is in person. It’s a thing that magazines of that caliber demand and are granted—or else, no article.

Weren’t we talking about the Variety interview?

R96 All psychopaths are also narcissists (though the reverse isn't true)

But Meghan is both.

"Pathological narcissism is the core of psychopathy"

One could quibble slightly -- psychopaths have all the 'bad' characteristics of narcissism: self-absorption, no empathy, cruelty to others, etc.

One thing that often distinguishes the total psychopath is they don't give a damn what anybody thinks of them. Narcissists Do care.

It's a spectrum. And slightly away from the worst serial killers is the one who does care about others' opinion of him or her -- I think they would be considered slightly less pathological than the extremist of cases.

It's a broad spectrum: of the cluster B's the mildest are needy borderlines, it worsens to narcissistic pd where there are hardening ego defenses and more cruelty, and then you get to psychopathy which continues on a spectrum, from the cruel but not murderous, to the uncaring complete sadistic killer, to the ones who don't care what anyone thinks - to the total predatory lizard-brain type

And all Cluster B's have impaired empathy (borderline) or mostly or completely absent empathy (malignant narcissists, psychopaths)

To get back on track, this is from an article (linked) in The Telegraph about Harry's book. (don't think it's a tabloid)

“While it may not have been his motive, the book is expected to take aim at members of the Royal family by delving into the cycle of ‘genetic pain and suffering’ that he has previously described, for which he appears to blame his father, the King.”

Harry's basically a spoiled brat teenager whose Daddy wouldn't buy him a Porsche.

It is thought that the Duke will participate in some promotion for the book in the UK but it won’t be the all-singing, all-dancing type of tour that celebrities do because they’re still part of the BRF.

What do you think his reception will be? Cheers, jeers or indifference?

They hate him over there now. Can’t imagine him in front of the general book buying public

Wonder if Meghan will barge her way into all the interviews and other publicity?

[quote] It comes after a surprise announcement yesterday, following months of speculation, in which Penguin Random House said: 'SPARE takes readers immediately back to one of the most searing images of the 20th Century: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother's coffin as the world watched in sorrow – and horror.

One of the most searing images of the century? Right up there with photos of concentration camps and that little girl getting napalmed.

Does the sun rise in the East, R111?

R107, that seems the most plausible based on everything he's done in the last few years and the initial promotion of the book as his "journey to the man he is now". I really doubt it's going to be direct accusations, but rather passive-aggressive subtext.

If he goes into great detail about "genetic pain" he's going to lose even more of his audience. People don't enjoy hearing the rich and royal and now very well-situated moan. I suppose Diana got away with it because "there were 3 of us in the marriage." Harry would need to pull out some trump card like that.

I don't think Harry's got a leg to stand on with his disgruntled stance. It's not as if he has been consistently hard-working, serious and loaded with accomplishments, and William a lazy dolt always in trouble. Other royals and royal-adjacents have made the best of a very good lot and used their position to launch successful lives.

I think he'd get more mileage out of the psychological effect of people thinking he was Hewitt's son. Not that I'm sure it's caused him any trauma - but I can imagine that it might. The resemblance is unfortunate.

I’m sure as a kid, he was already traumatized thanks to the wall to wall tabloid coverage of Charles and Camilla, Diana and her boyfriend du jour, especially the married ones. Kids are vicious, and he would’ve hated his parents for their notoriety. Then she died.

If the book makes the gutter press the focus, with a side of repressive, pettifogging courtiers, he could come off as sympathetic.

Then he'd have to acknowlege that his Sainted Mother catted around.

By the time Diana died she had slept with at LEAST 11 different men. That we know of.

Far more men than Charles has had women in his 7+ decades.

A subject Harry never, ever wants to think about EVER.

Harry is a disgruntled former employee who was not fired but quit in a "cut off your nose to spite your face" hissy fit.

His lie-a-thon interviews and books are his version of coming back and shooting up his former workplace.

What were all those police calls about at his Olive Garden mansion? Was his then PR firm trying to get in front of the story by putting out the info before anyone dug too deep into the reasons?

^ Great analogy!

[quote] Far more men than Charles has had women in his 7+ decades.

He married late at 33 and was an extremely eligible bachelor. I’m sure he got around.

He found Camilla in his mid twenties and after that had no other love affairs and was generally uninterested in dating any women who were not 1. High born, and 2. Virgins 3. Who he got along with well.

As in Wife AND Queen Material.

He was happily bonking Camilla and only looking for a well-born virgin to be mother to his heirs. I'm sure he slept with a few at Cambridge, but Queen Camilla has owned his balls since very, very early on.

By the age of 36, he could not have slept with more than 5 or 6 women max. Diana was nearly double that by 36.

Here's a timeline

I will take pleasure in NOT buying the book.

By the time this photo was taken in 2020, Charles and Camilla had been an item for 50 years, with only a break when he went to sea in 1972 and she got married (in 73), and then another break ten years later, when he married Diana and didn't sleep with Camilla for apparently over 7 years until the marriage "broke down".

It seems pretty rich on a gay board to be judging somebody for sleeping with eleven men over a period of sixteen years.

[quote]He found Camilla in his mid twenties and after that had no other love affairs and was generally uninterested in dating any women who were not 1. High born, and 2. Virgins 3. Who he got along with well.

Ahem.

His friends have included Princess Nora of Liechtenstein, beautiful socialites Davina Sheffield and Anna Wallace, Countess Angelika Lazensky who is Czech, Laura Jo Watkins of San Diego, Calif., daughter of an American admiral who was Charles's guest when he made his first speech in the House of Lords in 1964, Lady Leonora Grosvenor, daughter of the enormously rich Duke of Westminster, who finally married Charles' cousin, the Earl of Lichfield.

He got around.

Britain in the 80's for straight people was hardly the open sexual free-for-all we gays experienced (or at least I experienced) r126. For people of rank it could be, but not for Elizabeth's children. Andrew was the main exception, and look at where that got him.

Gay board or not. there are actual realities to be considered.

Tell that to the Edwardians, R130. You're an idiot.

I'm not sure you experienced much if a measure of eleven men in sixteen years seems excessive to you.

You're weird. You speak of "Elizabeth's children" as if you're on intimate terms. You wank to phrases like "people of rank". No one talks like that except small people trying to big themselves up. Go back to your insecurities, R130, you're repellent.

I'm all over the Let's be Edwardians thread, r132. In fact I was an 'early adopter' of that thread.

"Elizabeths' children" is a statement of fact.

"People of rank" is one of several ways in which to refer to several levels of the upper classes at once.

You were denied a decent education, 132, so I do not begrudge you your comment.

Whatever fits the narrative you need. I pity you.

Seven minutes old , blah comment from a Megstan gets three likes.....

r134, I must ask: Are you Meghan? Or are you just one of Christopher Bouzy's (Meghan's cutout) paid Megstan bot army?

[QUOTE]I’m sure as a kid, he was already traumatized thanks to the wall to wall tabloid coverage of Charles and Camilla, Diana and her boyfriend du jour, especially the married ones. Kids are vicious, and he would’ve hated his parents for their notoriety.

r117 - You're describing what happened to William who Diana converted into her confidant and inappropriate substitute for a mate. He knew about her affairs (!) and she reportedly sought his counsel. She brought him along to a meeting with then editor of News of the World Piers Morgan, surprising him. He was even more surprised by William's demand that he too be served wine with lunch. He counseled his mother against the Panorama interview which he watched from his Eton headmaster quarters. The interview was devastating enough. Dealing with classmates' snickers was another matter. He was upset about Diana's association with Al Fayed and his last interaction with her was a fight about it.

I doubt Harry, dim and imperceptive as a child as he is as an adult, was as aware of his mother's foibles as William, let alone traumatized by them. It probably wasn't hard to keep the tabloids away from a 12 year old. How much classmates razed him about it us another matter.

William was carrying a heavy emotional burden dealing with his mother and probably starting to harbor some resentments against her. And then she died. Yet he's the well-adjusted sibling.

[quote]By the time Diana died she had slept with at LEAST 11 different men.

Amateur.

Charles had plenty of girlfriends, and Diana had plenty of boyfriends. Actual numbers are meaningless: They both slept around.

I'm sure that fucked up Harry, but as R136 notes, it would have been as difficult, if not more so, for William. Funny how in Harry's narrative, William is always the fortunate one, when his burdens have been heavier all along. Harry seems to think being King and getting the money makes up for everything, but from an emotional standpoint, that's not true. After all, Harry got enormous privilege and wealth from his birthright too, but it hasn't helped him cope much.

A good question for Harry would be, at what point do money and fame cancel out early trauma? What specific pound amount and number of clicks make up for it all? You must have such numbers in your head, for you don't have any sympathy for your brother at all.

And at what point would Harry feel sufficiently repaid for the terrible misfortune of being born the second son of the Prince and Princess of Wales?

Is there anything his family could do for Harry to make him feel adequately compensated?

I don't think so. He's too entrenched in his victim narrative.

A new title for Harry that I can support.

NAME me the "boyfriends" Diana had before marriage, r138

"Pale virginity" was the way it was in Britain before the fake 'Cool Britannia' bullshit.

People did not sleep around in pre-cultural revolution Britain.

I was there, and you were not.

People have always slept around R141. In the past they were just hypocrites about it.

I never said Diana had boyfriends before marriage, R141. But she had plenty after marriage. The conversation about who was ultimately sluttier, Charles or Diana, is stupid. They both fucked around and it fucked up their kids. End of tale.

I WAS THERE!

What load of rubbish. I lived through the swinging sixties.

Dig a little deeper and I was in diapers for most of them and not because of kink.

Such arrogance. You don't know who was where when, which can also add to the list of things you blow off about in ignorance.

Diana was sluttier, r143, and that is why we loved her

Are we supposed to think 11 is a lot?

[backs out of thread slowly…]

Apparently she's the whore of Buckingham by the saw-it-myself-standards of someone who slept through the 80s (and I'd lay money on sleep in its original meaning.)

r146 Are you a striving virgin straight white daughter of an English Earl who so desperately wanted to be Charles's "queen" way back in the 1980's that you'd fuck over your on sister?

No? I thought not.

Diana cutta bitch.

[quote] who so desperately wanted to be Charles's "queen" way back in the 1980's that you'd fuck over your on sister?

Oh please, Charles and Sarah were over long before he hooked up with Diana.

Charles and Sarah were never real. He was enthusiastically fucking the brains out of Camilla Shand-Kydd for his entire free life.

He loves Camilla like a glutton loves his lunch. No getting around it.

R150 knows so much that he mixed up Camilla's last name with that of Diana's mother.

Prince Harry reportedly asked friends and former girlfriends to contribute to his tell-all memoir, but most of them refused to do so.

Because he probably pulled a Smeg and gave his "friends" scripts on what to say.

Sounds like the ghostwriter was looking for content that would add texture and nuance beyond "I was traumatized and partied a lot and then love and becoming a father and woo woo saved me."

You see? Even my friends abandoned me. You see how I am treated?

Those friends know which way the wind blows, and it isn't coming from California.

A couple of years ago Dr. Ramani on YT did a video about Adult Children Who are Narcissists. Which is an area that needs to be addressed because the focus is usually on Narcissistic parents. A lot of what she said applies to Harry especially the financial manipulation.

She also said the narcissistic adult children are looking for reparations from their parents. Bottom line: the debt can never be repaid, the adult narcissistic child will never be satisfied and it's futile to attempt to make it right. She also said they NEVER stop asking for money.

I won't link because Dr. Ramani has some disclaimer about linking her videos. I believe she added this disclaimer after her videos became too frequently linked on Meghan articles everywhere on the internet at the height of Megxit.

At this point, the tral questions aren't about what's in Harry's book, but how far it takes the BRF toward a complete public break.

Whether it's scathing accisations, or merely petulant self-pity, it's the water flowing in the wrong direction. It's the sequella that will be the interesting bit.

How long can the BRF, i.e., KC3, go on expressing his sorely tried love for a son who sold his soul to Netflix for 30 million pieces of silver at his family's expense? Inviting him and the despised wife to major events as of nothing much had happened?

Grey-rocking has its limits. In the public eye, sooner or later, the image will descend from silent dignity to desperate avoidance. A fine line, really.

Which way will KC3 swing after the memoir?

There's not much left, surely, those two can unload? Their credibility is eroding. They are tiresome. If the assertions of racism were going to bring the thing down, it would have by now. I wonder if Brits are tired of those two picking on the monarchy for profit?

I wonder if the strategy isn't to grit their teeth and ride out the storm so that when it's over, they can still say yes, the Sussexes were invited as members of the family but they declined to attend. With every milestone they seem less a part of it and more whiny and commercial. A couple of hearty boos at the coronation and eventually their thick skin kicks in and they won't want to come either.

Most Brits just think they are constantly lying. After the past few years It'd be impossible for them to become credible again.

We're just quietly knitting at the guillotine.

Well, it will be fun if the book and the Netflix documentary have differing versions as is rumored.

I learn so many things on DL, R160. This one is especially horrifying. The only thing they could do was witness.

Hmmm. The latest podcast, I think (found this on Instagram from something called "Pod Save the King" Royal family news...

"Meanwhile, she also pays tribute to her own mother Doria and how she 'juggled so much' bringing her up at the same time as working. Meghan says, 'With this episode on my brain, it got me thinking about all the ways my mom supported me. How she took care of me and the house and herself and how she just juggled so much. The amount that women carry, that they navigate, it’s immense and it’s often the most thankless unpaid labor there is…'”

marklenews1: But what about the dad that actually raised you, Megs?

He isn't a saint but...

Thomas Markle brought Meghan up. Doria has Distant Mom written all over her

Of the many ruthless manipulations of the truth that Meghan has no compunctions twisting, this one is the most egregious, vicious, and vengeful.

What about the father who took you with him as he worked as a lighting director and giving you an intro to how things work in the entertainmen business, who busted his ass to make sure you got out of an expensive university debt-free, and took care of you whilst your mother flitted in and put of your life getting her own together?

Of all the shit Meghan has pulled, this one is the absolute most despicable.

Who bullied Charles as a child?

Meghan's treatment of her father is alone enough reason to despise her. Same for Harry's treatment of his grandmother Queen Elizabeth II during the last year of her life and especially the last month of it. H & M are both pieces of shit, and neither one deserves to have a happy life.

Is she even literate? She cannot string together a coherent sentence. If she was truly “silenced” by the RF it was the best thing that could’ve happened to her.

R166 Charles was mercilessly bullied at Gordounston, where his father insisted on sending him. The other boys gleefully took advantage of the school's position that Charles couldn't be treated differently from the others, and made his life a misery, including shoving his head down the toilets on occasion.

Philip, very much a man's man to the core, did splendidly there. Cold showers, early morning runs, Spartan quarters, emphasis on athleticism and "character building". On weekends away, Charles usually went to his grandmother, the Queen Mother, where he round some comfort. The Queen had wanted to send him to Eton, but Philip insisted that the diffident and "sensitive" Charles needed toughening.

Charles survived and today speaks warmly of the school publicly, but he never forgave his father for putting him through that to make Charles more "masculine", and swore he wouldn't send his own sons there.

The school has since the 1970s tried to soften its image. The author William Boyd was up at the same times as Charles, and described the school as "penal servitude", where an entrenched culture of older stronger boys bullying weaker younger ones reigned.

The DM has printed lots of quotes from the latest podcast, the point of which seems to be to present herself as a relatable working mom, and includes a now-routine cameo from a family member. How convenient that Doria called just when she was doing a podcast on moms! (Has Meghan ever listened to a podcast? She seems to think they're women's magazine features read aloud.)

Not sure how relatable day-drinking with the first lady of Canada while the nannies watch your kids swim in your mansion's pool is, though.

In her latest video Lady C claims her sources are reporting that the Sussex pair have separated, brought on (supposedly) because M pushed H into doing the book, pushed him too far, and the scales have fallen from his eyes.

They continue to live together until terms are worked out (supposedly).

LC warns and suggests caution to her listeners due to her (LC) suspicion after all the previous shenanigans by the knuckleheaded pair.

We shall see.

The Mail is on a one Mail mission to destroy the next series of The Crown. And if they're not gilding the lily, they went nuts with the fiction.

A fact-checker needed to tell Markle that Canada does not have a ‘First Lady.’ The spouse of the prime minister has no formal role, and in fact Ms. Grégoire Trudeau has been afforded much freedom to raise the Trudeau children outside of the media glare.

Other posters have noted this, but I’m struck yet again by how self-serving this podcast series has been. In name only is it about stereotypes of women. It’s really all about Markle trying to get in front of the story, as they say, to counter the damaging allegations made about her behaviour by Tom Bower, Valentine Low and her own former staff. Same with that Variety interview.

I agree with R165. Her mission to erase her father and all he did for her is disgusting. Yes, she owes everything to Saint Doria and immaculate conception, I guess.

It would have been better for Harry to go to Gordonstoun than to Eton. He was too stupid for Eton and would have fit in - like Andrew did - at Gordonstoun.

Trudeau has teenagers, they aren't going to splash on a pizza float with Markle's little ones. That Markle woman is a fabulist.

Maybe Sophie and her offspring were at home in Canada, splashing in their pool, and the conversation happened by phone. Just like Meghan’s lunch with Michelle Obama.

Sounds more like it r176

The public has spoken 🗳

In total, 24,164 votes were cast with the overwhelming majority, 93 percent (22,553 people) answering “no” against reading Harry’s book.

Not only is Sophie not the “first lady” of Canada, but she and Trudeau aren’t even living together. The Canadian taxpayers are on the hook for maintaining separate residences for the pair of them. He only trots her out for photo ops, and she’s as big a grifter as her good buddy markle to go along with it. His side piece is one of his cabinet ministers melanie joly who he usually totes along on his junkets.

This is a pretty spot-on imitation of our thread pet (Instagram).

God she's such a joke. It's fun to watch people laugh at her.

R171 I saw that LCC video mentioned elsewhere. I find her boring and can't stand her voice, so I stopped paying attention, but I watched this one based on the extraordinary claim she's making.

I don't believe it for a moment. After their parading of their endless love and their love story coming up in that Netflix "docu-series"?

LCC hedged that claim about with enough fences to border England.

Meghan and Harry need each other. She's nothing without him and she knows it. There are two kids involved (all LCC talked about was financial arrangements as if nothing else existed(). Harry would be a laughingstock.

Nothing will get Harry off the hook for that memoir. It's a ludicrous scenario. LLC must be pretty damned desperate for viewers to float something that.

The only caveat to the above is that they've been married 5 years and together for six or sevenm Meghan's pattern is moving on after she thinks it's played out and there's some fantastic greener pasture out there, and five-seven years is her pattern.

But it's a small caveat.

I think LCC is blowing smoke up all our arses.

I didn't hear about Melanie Joly but I heard a couple years ago about the separate lives thing, though I always heard she was living at Harrington Lake so they were at least making use of existing residences anyway. The only reason I doubt it at all - which isn't much because who could be married to that smug fuck - is that the same rumours flew about Harper and his wife, so it could just be a tradition. Still, what I heard I heard from a friend who had a friend who had a relative working security. It sounds feeble as soon as I typed it but at the time it sounded plausible.

LCC isn't exactly unknown in the social media/tabloid arena. Making that sort of claim, one wonders why the tabloids haven't jumped on it if there is anything in it, which their own contacts probably would be able to nose out.

I will say that for quite some time, the tabloids insisted something was deeply wrong in the Charles/Diana marriage, and everyone pooh-poohed the story . . . until it became obvious that something really was wrong and the tabs were right.

I suppose it's possible the same thing could happen with the Sussexes, only this time the BRF wouldn't care fuck all. The Wales marriage collapsing in 1992 was another animal altogether, with potential constitutional issues arising.

The collapse of the Sussex marriage would probably see several people turning cartwheels in the corridors of state, despite knowing that in the shorter-term it would mean more PR headaches.

So bearing that in mind . . . I'm still doubtful, and I wonder at LCC's brass in even trying to float a rumour that gigantic without any real proof except "two very good sources". Like, who? The nanny? A clerk at Schillings (who would now be out of a job)? Someone on the "staff" of Archewell? Someone in the BRF who has been informed of what's going on (like, who? William? Charles? Camilla? PLEASE! - Eugenie or Bea? Sophie Wessex?!).

Whenever these people cite "sources" no one asks what sort of source would leak that kind of deeply private information.

Harry wouldn't - his memoir would have to be rewritten. Meghan wouldn't - she can't parade herself out there as the Duchess of Sussex knowing that a divorce was imminent that would cost her the title.

It is curious to me why people like LCC and Neil Sean and River and the rest of the lost don't ask themselves logical questions before stirring the pot. Or why people eagerly lapping the story up don't ask themselves the same questions.

^*rest of the lot (not lost - although that might work, too)

I don't know about LCC's claims, but I could believe that Harry has distanced himself from Meghan following the funeral and The Cut article. He is so thick-headed, I don't believe he realized until the funeral how unpopular he truly is and how done his family is with him. He has undoubtedly had critical feedback from non-royal sources such as BetterUp, Netflix and Penguin Random House of Meghan's behavior and veracity to which he cannot automatically assign ulterior motives. Add to that, Meghan is probably very unpleasant to be around, alternately being controlling, wheedling and explosive. I could totally see someone with his ingrained entitlement and laziness running from the situation to whatever safe port he can find.

If there is any truth to it, then I see it as a desperate ploy by the financially struggling duo to get Harry and the currently title-less kids back in the fold.

Then Meggy Sharp will slip back in ala Fergie. We are SEPARATED but living together for the benefit of the children because we are great parents. We are SEPARATED and living together but Meggy can still speak her truth. I hope KC can foresee this type of scenario and doesn't fall for the ruse.

King Charles and his advisors are fully aware of the tactics of his younger son and daughter-in-law. They will protect the monarchy and the royal family. I have a friend who defended H&M for rather a long time and we disagreed sharply about them. As of our last conversation, he's very negative about Harry and neutral or somewhat critical of Meghan. The more they display themselves, the more people see through them. His book and the Netflix show, I suspect, will kill what little respect people have left for them.

Apparently Megsie shades her husband in her latest podcast: Meghan, in a new episode of her podcast released Tuesday, did little to burnish his reputation as a polymath. Instead, she risked embarrassing her husband by saying he did not know the answer to some of the questions in the British citizenship test, which she claimed she herself studied for when living in the U.K. (although it is understood she did not complete the process and become a British citizen.)

Hopefully H&M's separation and divorce will play out as episodes of their podcast and/or Netflix show. It would be a "sequel," in a way, to the dissolution of Bill and Pat Loud's marriage during the filming of "An American Family," which also took place in the Santa Barbara area. Netflix should hop on to this possibility - it could be ratings gold.

Had to laugh at the latest claim. Like there was ever any exam-style question Dimwit would be able answer himself.

Could he at least point to the U.K. on a map?

I dont even think Meghan was in the UK long enough to even be eligible to take the citizenship test.

I have to assume that the RF, particularly those who loved Harry and understood his problems well, have probably watched in horror at some of the barely hidden tricks played by the Mrs.

1. The Harry the Hairdresser photo for Time Magazine

2. Harry juggling balls outside the window while the Mrs sits behind the desk.

3. Photos where the predominant image is of the Mrs with him as an afterthought.

4. That superior, rictus grin as the pair walked up the aisle at St. Paul's for the Jubilee service.

5. Now informing the public of his inability to answer questions on the UK citizenship exam.

Ugly stuff.

Wonder what her attitude toward him is like at home.

Or toward their (presumably) equally red headed children.

Haz has been in the 'devaluation" stage of the narc relationship for some time.

"Discard" is next.

Idealize, Devalue, Discard.

Let's do a Lady Colin Campbell challenge... go back a year, pick any video from around a year ago, and let us know what actually came to pass and what was just her moving phlegm out of her chest.

In the whole royal commentariat there's a reason nobody books that lady.

To be fair, people often laugh about born citizens not be able to answer the questions on a citizenship test.

But I would knock Meghan for using that throwaway line when Harry already has a reputation for being thick. It makes for an easy joke at his expense.

Given that Harry was too dumb to pass the officer's test (which is the real reason he left the military), and that he didn't know he was related to the Romanovs, and has the intellectual capacity of am amoeba . . . it is hardly surprising that he couldn't pass the citizenship test for his own country.

Poster upthread is correct, new citizens who have had to study for the test usually no more than natives who have forgotten what they ever knew. I think 40% of American adults when polled on the street couldn't name the year the Civil War started and ended.

I'm quite sure most British adults polled would be hard put to put a date to Cromwell's little adventure here.

But Harry is a member of the BRF, and, as he is always trumpeting, occupies a position of "immediacy" to the throne. For him not to know he's related to the Romanovs is to reveal he knows nothing about the monarchy he is part of from Victoria onward.

^*usually KNOW (not no) more . . .

I rather doubt that Harry knew who the Romanovs were, let alone that he was related to them.

Hahahaha I forgot about that. Fucking moron. Didn’t he go to Eton?

April 1861 to April 1865

If this is true, it is hilarious.

How dare Reese say no to being a guest on a D-lister's podcast!

Smeg will direct her Sewage Squad to cancel Reese.

Oops! Forgot link.

I still don't know her.

R182 There is a photo of joly and Justine at an event holding hands. He’s featured her in pressers where she stands there gazing at him, it’s obvious once you know what you’re looking at. As for Harriman, they built a separate residence for Sophie, taxpayers paid. I don’t blame her for not being able to stand him but I do blame her for playing along with the charade and accepting all the free perks. It shows her lack of character.

Lady C said she heard from two sources that they are separated. Then she cautioned believing this rumor due to the Harkles propensity to floating inaccurate information to the media. I think it’s a ploy.

Fuck Harry hard up his ass with a chainsaw for cursing the world with this fucking thirsty, mediocre nobody.

R206

I had to take the Life in the UK exam for my Indefinite Leave to Remain visa (similar to US Green Card). It's the same exam used for the Citizenship Test. I passed the test pretty easily but only after doing multiple practice exams over and over to get the rhythm of the questions. There were things from the Stone Age to British Olympians through the years to how many members of parliament in Northern Ireland. Definitely not things people would know off the top of their heads, but easily studied for short term retention for the test. I would go to my local village pub to study and it became a fun pub quiz with all the regulars to see who could answer the most questions. When I went to the testing center, it was mainly non-English speaking middle eastern women (I don't know if this is the majority testing demographic or just was on that particular day at my testing center). My assumption was that the test is a way to see if people take the time to learn something about the country they want to live in and can they read and understand English. I am a native English speaker, so I had that going for me.

For once, Meg's description of something (the test) seems accurate based on my experience. And as thick as Harry is, I wouldn't expect that he would know all the answers, they are pretty random questions. And thus completes my one and only defence of those two.

One of my staff (a teacher from Pakistan) did the test, and she passed it. She said you have to revise for it, but it's not tricky or difficult - I think R209 hits the nail on the head: it's about you proving yourself to your future country. Meghan doesn't give a shit about the U.K., which is why she struggled so much.

Ffs, they give you practice booklets that are identical to the actual test, with the same sorts of questions ranging over the same sorts of topics. Neighbours across from my flat from Hungary passed on the first try, and they've still got heavy (and, I must say, rather charming) accents - the husband looks like something out of central casting for a 1940s espionage film).

Still, I agree with the general consensus that most natives would have to practice.

And people of my generation would probably do so, as well. My own grasp of our history is better on the Wars of the Roses than the post-Stuart era, and as I'm only marginally interested in sports, I would also probably be stumped by the Olympians question, never mind the Druids.

Still, Harry's remark about the Romanovs remains shocking. The BRF's failure to get its relatives out before they were slaughtered in that cellar is one of the biggest 20th century scandals around the Windsors, we just don't give it a thought now. George V was Harry great-great-grandfather; Philip's DNA was used to identify the last remains of the family found in the 1990s; the fate of the Romanovs is tied to one of the most historically important political upheavals of the 20th century that turned into the Cold War and all that followed.

I could rather sympathise with throwing up one's hands trying to sort out and remember the twisted family relationships amongst the Yorks and Lancasters and the Plantagenet dynasty. They aren't unimportant: Richard III's failure at Bosworth ushered in the Tudor dynasty, the split from Rome, the Golden Age of Elizabeth I . . . but, all right . . .

But post-Victoria? The Tsarina was Victoria's granddaughter; Philip and Elizabeth were third cousins; his great-aunt Alexandra was Edward VII's Queen; and George V presided over the shame of leaving the Romanovs to their fate. It was mostly down to the government's refusal due to a fear of the Romanov's setting up a new Russian court in Britain, I get the potential headaches.

Still, the slaughter was a stain on both the government and George V.

Not knowing even that given his membership in the family - no excuse for that, in my vkew.

It really is astounding what this monumentally stupid duo driven by jealousy threw away.

They ditched an opulent lifestyle that is uncommon to the rest of the world. A lifestyle that is only available to a privileged few by birthright. A lifestyle that is even unique and more privileged than other royal families. They chose instead to search for Hollywood celebrity and wealth that is very common and accessible even by untalented, lowbrow youtubers, influencers and real housewives. AND they have FAILED epically in their search and are now left grasping for relevancy.

Dumbasses who aren't thriving at all, just surviving

I notice that Meghan's Spotify podcasts are, as predicted, getting increasingly less attention after the first two. Many outlets aren't even bothering with the withering reviews any longer, and they're coming out somewhere around 16th. Spotify is losing lots of money on this. They aren't even worth jeers at this point. The only phrase that emerged from the last one with Sophie Trudeau is inflatable pizza floats in the pool and Meghan talking about her exhausting routine feeding the three dogs and getting lunches ready for the kids . . . with no job she has to run off to, a rich husband, a staff, a swimming pool, and a 9-bedroom, 16-bathroom house.

Ground-breaking programming, this is not.

What happened when the Harkles stepped out from behind the very useful screed of royal discretion, was that the very limited and shallow range of both was exposed.

Their delusions of grandeur, their greed, their hypocrisy, their spiteful natures, their obsessive self-regard: it all got uncovered once they left the protective aura of the BRF.

Bad as some of it was for the BRF, it was over the longer-term a gift for William and Kate, whom the Harkles made look like exemplary royals - a very necessary gift, given the Queen's advanced age, the likelihood that William would soon be Prince of Wales and first in line for the throne after a man in his mid-seventies whose life may or may not last as long as his parents' did.

The Harkles helped to position perfectly William and Kate as the People's Choice.

It will be interesting to see if Harry's memoir doubles down on that massive mistake.

Once the Sussexes have well and truly shot their wad via Harry's book and further interviews, what next? Could the BRF become so angry that they strip them of everything they can - titles, funds, property, inheritances?

It's worth remembering that MM has no problem in making shit up, eg, William the Pegging Prince and Rose Hanbury, royal mistress.

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

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

Reese W. declined the wedding invitation and has now apparently declined participating in the podcast? It’s not like MM to ask again if she was rebuffed the first time, no?

Perhaps Meg was looking for a "collaboration" with Reese? Meg offered to wear/merch some of Reese's frumpy southern Draper James clothing line in exchange for an appearance by Reese on her podcast?

Or Meg is "hoovering" as in commonplace for narcissists when rejected/ignored.

If you believe that Meg spends more than ten minutes a day with those kids, much less fixes their lunches, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

R208 Witherspoon has developed into a powerful producer. Markle is no doubt anxious to get some links to Hollywood A-listers. She's stuck with desperate TV people.

She is. Look who she's booking on Archegripes. No A list. Not one.

Witherspoon sold her production company.

"Archewell" sounds like the brand of cookies sold in clear packages at dollar stores.

R212 & R213 give the most succinct and insightful summary of the Sussex debacle I've ever come across.

I'd love to see Megsie try to go after Witherspoon. Reese will squash her like a bug.

^^^^*useful screen (not screed)

R213

Didn't Reese do that "Do you know who I am?" bit with the police officer?

Are we seeing narc-on-narc action! Woohoo!! Megs is in the right locale for that kind of celebrity pig fights or death matches or whatever. I was wondering about that with Nacho and wife vs the Harkles. With the guys being friends? Harry's only friend? Does anybody know who his friend(s) are? Chubby fellow narc James Corden is moving back to Blighty I think, with his tail between his legs (I predict the same for Hazbeen)

Guys, are we sure Harry is a narc? You can't have empathy - and I think I've seen him exhibit empathy. And even the ability to get along with others - like when he lived in the same building/house whatever with William and Kate, and he said she was like the sister he never had?

I know he's a loser - may have abused prostitutes (if I knew that was true, I'd move him to the sociopath label, but it was just a rumor around a military base? and maybe he was out of his mind on drugs and alcohol) Still... assault puts you in the deep end of the personality-disordered spectrum in my book. Narcissist for sure but on into psycho/sociopath area.

But if that's not true - I think I've seen him be decent. Like to the wounded vets and... oh there's the Nazi uniform but he's so stupid, does he even know about the Holocaust? I think Diana may have dropped him on his head when he was a baby -- or a pissed off nanny...

R11, it was revealed in the 90s by the release of previously unavailable documents that it was actually George V who vetoed the Romanovs coming to the UK. His role in it at the time was covered up for decades and the blame was put on the UK government. An offer had been made to get them out, but IIRC, GV wrote a letter urging his own government to withdraw it.

But really, GV had initially wanted them to come, then as time went on, came to believe that just having them in the country, an autocrat (who had carried out many harsh pogroms targeting the Jews, for instance) and his family would jeopardise the British monarchy and stir up the general population enough to unseat GV himself and possibly the government too.

So the government publicly took the blame for decades. I believe Edvard Radzinsky wrote about it being GV's instigation that they not come in one of his 90s books. It seems that the news of the killing of Tsar Nicholas II and his family appeared to come as a great shock to GV - he may not have realised how perilous their situation had been, but there is nothing on the record that I've read which would indicate GV felt guilt or regret over his own responsibility for the failure to offer them sanctuary.

Why the Tsar and his family couldn't have been secreted away to a part of the Empire such as India is kind of a mystery to me.

I listened to some clips of her latest podcast. She seems determined to cram in as many buzz words as possible in a sentence. Stilted, pretentious, vacuous.

I was surprised at the vocal fry.

I hope there aren't enough airheads who just hear "Duchess" + American actress from a series - and think she's cool and follow her, never listening to how damned stupid she is. It's happened before that vacuous people get big following in this crazy country

R229, I don’t know if there’s any place that the Romanovs could have been hidden. Opposition to the Communist government in Russia might well have coalesced behind them. You could see Nicholas and Alexandria, with their lifelong commitment to awful decision-making, being drawn into that. It would have created no end of diplomatic and security problems for Britain.

France permitted a number of exiled Romanovs. Once the Bolsheviks seized power they were lost. Lenin did not want a Czar in exile.

Once again there is evidence that Markle attempted to deceive.

In her latest podcast with Sophie Trudeau, she goes on about (them) being by her pool, drinking wine and having children on a “pizza float” in her said pool.

Except Sophie wasn’t even in the same COUNTRY with Markle when she recorded the podcast. Trudeau was in Ottawa, Canada speaking with Megs who was in MonteDECEITO.

Markle did the same with Michelle Obama: “Over a lunch of chicken tacos and my ever-burgeoning bump, Michelle and I”........while Markle was all the while e-mailing Michelle.

Markle is a lying, deceptive sociopath.

So Harry never once noticed all the Faberge shit littering the place ? Never once heard "Oh that was Alexandra's boudoir clock" and said "Who was that ?" Charles is mad for antiques and art,did Haz inherit none of his fathers interests ? How could he possibly have not known they were related to the Romanovs ?

Harry's stupid.

Meghan got in her thinly-veiled dig at Catherine in the first 45 seconds of the podcast: not "perfectly coiffed with updos and pearls and demure smiles". She then celebrated her and Sophie having "wild curly hair" on the terrace.

[quote] Meghan got in her thinly-veiled dig at Catherine in the first 45 seconds of the podcast: not "perfectly coiffed with updos and pearls and demure smiles". She then celebrated her and Sophie having "wild curly hair" on the terrace.

But like a boomerang, it all comes back to her. She was NOT “on the terrace” WITH SOPHIE during the podcast. It’s all a façade.

In fact, it is an outright LIE.

Also, she’s never had decent hair. It’s all cheap extensions and Yak-looking. Did you see her hair on her wedding day? It was a complete mess: dry and sticking out everywhere. It was shocking.

If Markle can’t have what someone else has that she wants (aka glorious locks of hair a la someone like Kate), then she resorts to denigrating and denouncing those that possess the object of her desire.

So many choices for homes, yet Kate's living large in Melba's head.

R213 so well said

R237, oh, hush. She’s a “feminist.” And a “humanitarian.”

Meg has "wildly curly hair?" Since when? Childhood? It's been straightened out of existence. She's a fucking loon.

Its so pathologically odd the way she keeps lying over pointless small things, especially when the lies are easily debunked like the Sophie Trudeau came to my home lie.

Markle's a fabulist. She lives in her imagination. She's nuts.

R237 She’s full of shit, as usual. Kate may be coiffed and bejeweled on more formal official duties, but we’ve seen her countless times in jeans, striped t-shirts and plimsoles laughing it up with her family.

There's plenty to laugh about without getting so riled up about fake stuff. The Sophie Trudeau thing was an anecdote about a time when Sophie was visiting her (not during the podcast; podcasts aren't recorded on decks, btw). The updo and pearls was said in the context of that's also something they (Sophie and Meghan) do, but they're also fun wine moms!

This Times columnist manages to find more comedy from these podcasts (that on their own are practically comedy routines).

Meghan is a big fat wino. She’s always talking about wine, like the frau she is.

I want to tell Meghan that it's not a big surprise she swam without pearls and perfectly coiffed hair considering she always looks a mess and has *never* been perfectly put together. It's like she's admitting she breaths air. I truly don't think she has a realistic view of herself at all.

Does Harry have a drop of royal blood in him, is it all the body guard??? Will we live long enough to find out?

Wish we would R249. With every Tom Dick and Harry in the world using saliva swabs and very easily finding out who their parents, even more distant relatives and ancestors were, why not, if he's Charles' son? It would finally put a lid on the whole giggly rumor and late-night chat-show host jokes (Craig Ferguson definitely went there - it's common parlance)

And you'd think Harry would want to clear it up. But hey ho, they'll probably never address it - not even The Crown, though they'll pull every other salacious detail and even rumor out of the closet. Either way, I think it would be a storyline for Harry to make money off of -- growing up with the joke about, if untrue -- ditto and the shock of discovery, if true. Finally something interesting about the ginger buffoon.

Harry is netflix's bitch - if there was any scandal like that, there's no way they'd pull it.

Smeg would rather swallow razor blades than wear her hair natural. She's so full of shit.

Could someone please copy and paste from the article at r233? It's not available in my region. Thanks

[quote] Harry is netflix's bitch - if there was any scandal like that, there's no way they'd pull it.

PREDICTION

Harry will be portrayed favorably in The Crown. Everyone else will come off looking awful.

Here is the archive link r253

Thank you, r255.

R249 oh another stab at the Harry Paternity Conspiracy.

He fucking looks more like Philip as the years go by. He has only the most superficial resemblance to Hewitt, nothing of his nose, mouth, and shape face, onlt6the red hair.

He's going bald like both his grandfathers, the beady eyes set too close to the bony nose - they're all from Philip and Charles.

Diana didn't start her affair with Hewett till after Harry was born.

Harry's face screams Windsor/Mountbatten. You have to be blind not to see it

He bit the red hair from the Spencer's.

Poor Harry. His brother got the heir position, is taller, more stable, eas Mum's favourite, and the unkindest cut of all: looks like the Mum that Harry idolises, whilst Harry hot the worst features of Philip and Charles. No wonder he wants to kill William.

Look, I didn't make the joke on the Late Late Show about Charles not being Harry's father - the Scotsman Craig Ferguson did.

I mentioned Harry and Meghan to my husband who couldn't care less about the BRF, and he said, "He's the one whose father is not his real father, right?" (he didn't even remember his name was Harry)

So... easy peasy to shut them and people like them (and me) up forever. Take the fucking test. Eugenie would probably be good enough for comparison sake since their besties.

R254 I'm not even sure it was anything but a rumour, to date. No mention of it in the DM, which would have picked it up with huge headlines screaming HARRY SELLS SOUL TO NETFLIX FOR 100,000 PIECES OF SILVER!

The cited price is suspicious, for a start. I would imagine that even if Harry were willing to do it, and I'd put nothing past him in that regard, he'd at least insist on a low seven-figure fee. I mean, really, $100,000? After taxes?

And that's not factoring what it would cost Harry in PR - he might as well be put in the stocks in Parliament Square with a plaque lettered TRAITOR around his neck.

I don't know who floated it, but at the moment, it seems very dodgy to me.

The Guardian today seems to think that there’s nothing new in Harry’s memoir.

This is the commentary R260 referred to, and it’s probably correct. We know, or think we know, so many things about the royal family that it’s hard to see what Harry could come up with that’s new.

[QUOTE]The cited price is suspicious, for a start. I would imagine that even if Harry were willing to do it, and I'd put nothing past him in that regard, he'd at least insist on a low seven-figure fee. I mean, really, $100,000? After taxes?

Oh, absolutely r259. Remember the story about Harry's negotiations with BetterUp for his CHIMPO position? He expected to receive some ridiculously large amount of stock options to pose for a few pictures and deliver a speech full of mental health banality a couple of ideas a year. Um, no.

^banalities

Anyone else think Meghan looks like she has Julia Robert's features on another persons face, and it just almost worked, but not quite.

R245 I'm betting Harry hardly gets screen time. This season is largely about Diana and William was the son she actually talked to.

While Harry is providing his saliva to 23 and Me, Ronan Farrow should do the same. Just sayin'...Let's get all this "stuff" cleared up now, dammit!

I am disgusted to learn that Sophie Trudeau is close to the Harkles. Disgusted. I wonder if she'll be Markled when Justin loses his throne.

[quote] [R245] I'm betting Harry hardly gets screen time. This season is largely about Diana and William was the son she actually talked to.

That’s not what folks who have seen it say. Wills comes off as “sulky” and Haz comes off “looking like a rose”..

Haven’t seen it myself, but we will all know next week won’t we?

Sophie's family has big money, so natch ....

I knew nothing about Sophie Trudeau before the Meghan podcast, but now I know she's a big joke, too. Another of Meghan's well-heeled, well-connected, annoying white women!

^ Racist.

What in the HELL is that at R270. I couldn't watch it. Is that real?

[quote]Another of Meghan's well-heeled, well-connected, annoying white women!

Another of Meghan's well-heeled, well-connected, annoying people! No sexism, no racism, point made.

I'd love to know how much their deals with Spotify and Netflix are REALLY worth

[quote]I'd love to know how much their deals with Spotify and Netflix are REALLY worth

R264: Yes, and she has that "Julia Roberts smile" mastered:

Meghan managed a "Sophie Snatch Appt, regardless of Reality?

Yes, Hmm tell US more...

Seems odd that this "woman of color" doesn't seem to spend any time with any other people of color.

Thank God for that!

The sewage squad say that Meg is a BLACK WOMAN!! with BLACK CHILDREN!!!

Does anyone actually believe that her kids were called the N word?

R270 here .... I pointedly said "white" women, as that's who made up Meghan's crowd on her way up the ladder, which makes it so absurd that she is (or was for a while) held up as some black icon. Serena and Oprah are fabulously rich and famous, so they belong, too.

Meghan's a master social climber. I wish she were recognized and acclaimed for that. The victim narrative is insulting to her.

She's the one who keeps trying and trying to sell the victim narrative.

[quote]I want to tell Meghan that it's not a big surprise she swam without pearls and perfectly coiffed hair considering she always looks a mess and has *never* been perfectly put together.

Remember this train wreck....

Harry as "the spare": yes, in royal and aristocratic families there is the notion that couples had to produce the heir and the spare for the dynasty to continue from one generation to the next. But did having been "the spare" define his life? I don't think so. He wouldn't want to be king, which is more confining than being a prince. Was he denied wealth, prestige, protection by the staff? No. I believe his ghostwriter and publishers thought the title would be eye-catching and a little shocking (and lead people to buy the book), and Harry, weak-willed as he is, bought into it. Harry was defined by his slightly crazy mother, her early death, and his distant father. Would he be as troubled if all of this had been true in an ordinary family? Perhaps not -- we'll never know. But by your late 30s, it's time to take responsibility for yourself and your own happiness.

The idea of Harry as king of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is preposterous. He couldn't even get through secondary school with cheating.

R284 The father wasn't as distant as all that, but had no chance next to the image of the touchy-feely maternal exhibitionism his beautiful young wife's headlines captured. I would venture to guess Charles was cut out at home in the same way by Diana's exorbitant neediness.

Diana was the kind of person who sucked all he air out of the room. I rather think Papa wasn't nearly the emotional problem thatvDiana was.

Parents need to be able to free their children as those children mature.

I doubt Diana was capable of that, especially as her problems with men continued after the divorce.

She reminds me of Lady Marchmain in "Brideshead Revisited", about whom the gay character once said that she was a veritable vampire: you can see the marks of her teeth on all her children's necks.

William's Mark's seem to have faded.

Harry's, however, still look fresh.

^*William's marks (not Mark's)

Being second born and not heir apparent is not exclusive to royal families. It also happens in wealthy, upper middle-class and even middle-class families who own businesses.

Usually the oldest is groomed to take over the family business and serves as President or Vice Present while Dad is CEO or President. The younger siblings often take lesser jobs in the company and do as little as possible to collect a nice paycheck and they accept their lesser yet still comfortable lot in life. Or they go out in to the world in totally different careers and carve out their own niche. Or they flounder. Sometimes they flounder and step in and out of the family business. The flounders are bitter and angry and have contentious relationships with their business owner parents.

Haz is a bitter, angry flounderer and actually not unique.

Haz is not good looking enough and not decent and hard working enough to be likened to Bobby Ewing. More of a Gary Ewing and that's still being generous.

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

Is that what she's been doing, R276? It's bugged me since she first appeared how fake her smile seems to be. Jokes on her as her mimicry doesn't convey Roberts but condescension and smugness. Every time I think she cannot go any lower...

Her plastered on smile always reminds me of a beauty contest entrant.

R229 has it correct. What's really horrible, though, is that the Tsar and his wife could have sent their 5 daughters to any number of relatives--due to Russian laws barring female inheritance (put in place by Catherine the Great's son, LOL), the girls were not politically dangerous. Most courts would have welcomed five pretty, well-born girls that could have been potential matches for their sons. The Tsarina could also have gone: Really, only the Tsar and his son were problematic.

But the Tsar and his wife couldn't bear to split up the family, so they all died together.

I really enjoyed the first two seasons of The Crown, but it really bogged down once the original staff left. I didn't bother with Season 4 and it looks like Season 5 will be a shitshow, too. Oh well, the first two seasons tell an interesting story about the young Philip and Elizabeth.

rr286 Interesting post. I think one of Harry's chief problems is he can't bring himself to face the fact he is angry with his mother. Maybe even in denial about it.

Apparently the Crown rewrites the Romanovs demise (and shows it in gory detail) so put the blame on Queen Mary.

I wonder why Peter Morgan hates the monarchy so much? It's made him pretty well off, you'd reckon.

R294, it's nice to see you again. You've been scarce. I don't always agree with you (75% of the time I do) but I enjoy your presence on these threads and noticed you were gone.

No r264. Not at all.

She's black? Bollocks. She's tan.

Their children are black? Bollocks. When do black children have red hair?

She's 43% bullshit.

r296 Thank you so much . That is very kind of you to say ❤️

I'm not a total cunt, R299, just mostly. I hate the asshole who started the recent Crown thread. I think it may be the hissing queen who tries to dominate the Gilded Age threads too. What is it about costume dramas that manages to bring out the worst in a board that's already a PhD in incivility and low self-esteem?

R298 It's possible for black people to have red hair. Rare, but not impossible. Where I grew up there was a black family whose ancestors came from the Caribbean. The father had red hair, and two of his children, as well.

pre South Africa , Megstans used to post pictures of beautiful biracial child models with red afro hair and claim it was "Kang Archie". Then we saw the kid clearly and it stopped.

My guess is that they are saving the kids reveal for the Netflix documentary.

It will be 25% Our True Wuv, 25% escaping the mean ol’ BRF, 10% kids, and the rest is Meghan World Philanthropist And Hands On Mom with Harry making a brief appearance.

Can I juggle?

I don't think you're giving Megsie enough credit. If she has anything to do with the final edit, it will be about 95% HER - her philanthropy, grappling with the meanie racist BRF, her continued grievances, how she tried at every turn to fit in but was foiled by Kate, her rescuing Harry with the greatest love the world has known, her mega successful podcasts, followed by guest appearances by Harry and the kids.

When the heir produces an heir, the spare should be humanely euthanized.

Meghan keeps those kids under wraps because she doesn't want it generally known that they're the whitest gingers who ever lived. She wants people to think they look bi-racial, to push "the press called my kids the n-word" lies.

I think that's Harry ten times more than her, though she did say why would I let the media that causes me so much grief profit off my children or me.

Charles may have been a better father than we give him credit for, but his parenting was still within the confines of the peculiar world of the royal family. I cannot imagine his fathering was like that of William or Mike Tindall.

Remember when Haz was whining he never got to ride bicycles with his father like his kids do with him?

Then the Daily Mail or some outlet promptly ran photos of Charles riding bicycles with his sons?

Ginger brat really is a disturbed individual.

In Meghan, and Samantha's court case, someone is referring to Harry as The Prince of Wales

All the documents can be viewed here.

R311, Prince Henry of Wales. Yes, that was one way to refer to him before Charles became king.

R309 I suspect you're right about the difference between Charles' and William's parenting - but William is also raising his children in the peculiar confines of the royal family. I think the difference is that Charles is, or was, brought up like an Edwardian, despite being born two generations later. Which is somewhat strange, as well, as it was his grandparents, George VI and his wife, who broke the mold of the older tradition. The then-York household was verryyyy different from the one poor Bertie had grown up in.

In another interesting parallel, one of the reasons Prince Albert fell so hard for Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon was visiting her in what many others, as well, described as an enchanting family environment. I think Bertie saw in her the wife who could recreate that for him and their children, which she apparently did.

And William seems to have followed that path, as well, interested in Kate not just because she proved her discretion, devotion, and steadiness, but because he spent so much time with the close Middleton family, so unlike the traumatic one in his own home.

Interesting, no?

Feckless, dimwitted, helpless, hopeless Harry, instead, made every mistake his father made: married a woman who showed him the face he needed to see over a relatively period of time, with whom he hadn't lived with for more than two weeks at a time, and who shared many of his emotionally damaged mother's worst personality traits.

It's too bad Netflix is bent on telling the most salacious story possible, because, psychologically, there's a far more interesting and nuanced one crossing two generations under the Shock and Gore one Netflix is peddling as "art".

^*relatively short period of time

It's pretty amazing that William could muster the insight to make those decisions to do differently. I wonder how he managed it because it would have been much easier and more likely to go down the same path of mistakes as his brother, following his parents' bad example. Did the Queen and Prince Philip see mistakes they made an wisened up? I gather the Queen and William spent time together through her life, starting when he was at Eton? Did his closeness with Peter and Zara Phillips and their relaxed upbringing make an impression? Agree his exposure to the Middletons had a significant influence but I wonder what kept him salvageable through the years prior to meeting them?

Carole Middleton's Part Pieces is expanding to the US. The story makes some interesting contrasts.

“You can get party products in a thousand places in the US - Party City outlets are literally across the street from ShopRite stores,” says Parker. “People won’t necessarily know who Carole is, but there is real power in the Middleton name as Catherine is still referred to as Kate Middleton in most of the American press.”

Still, the family has to tread lightly. Carole and Michael Middleton have always been the masters of discretion, rarely putting a foot wrong and steadfastly refusing to engage in any press questions about their son-in-law. Had they not, those invitations to Balmoral and Sandringham would have quickly dried up...

Clearly determined not to jeopardise this, Carole has so far given no interviews to promote this collaboration with ShopRite - and while she has visited the New Jersey store in person (dressed in a smart Home Counties-approved tweed jacket and slacks), nowhere in the press release or on any of the posters is there a single mention of the Royal family or of her famous daughter.

It is a delicate balancing act - but this subtle approach has won fans on both sides of the Atlantic. Where Meghan has exposed every piece of royal dirty laundry she can find, Carole has never traded on her eldest daughter’s marriage.

“America is obsessed with Kate and her family because of how poised but also how discreet they all are,” says British-based US journalist Helen Kirwan-Taylor. “Meghan has done the opposite and she has blown it in their eyes. I think [the ShopRite collaboration] is a clever move: anything that sniffs of royalty and the Queen will be popular - and especially at a low-cost point. Plus, the more subtle the branding, the better.”

R316, it's also true that after Diana's death, apparently William made a point to speak to those closest to his mother: her siblings, close friends, etc., to get the truest picture possible of who Diana really was.

I remember reading also that at the time of her death, William was already pulling away from her.

It takes courage and insight to acknowledge the flaws of someone you love, while still loving them.

I suspect Harry may not have been that insightful.

The Queen apparently spent a lot more time with William than she ever did with Charles. She acted to some degree as a surrogate mother to both boys but her connection to William was much stronger because she gave him lessons in kingship every week while he was a student at Eton. It seems like his views mirror the Queen's rather than Charles'.

Those babies are both cross-eyed Markle clones (obligatory all babies are cute yada, yada, yada). I bet all she sees when she looks at them is her dad and her sister, not the blond, Gerber, 'cuter than Kate's kids' babies she desperately desired.

Really unlucky that both kids are cross-eyed. It is a genetic thing passed on by harry, as his cousin Louise also has it.

R314. Harry’s failure is all the more inexcusable than Charles’. Charles was very restricted in his choice of bride and was prohibited by propriety from getting to know her very well. Everyone was also telling him Diana was the perfect choice.

Harry could have married anyone he pleased and lived with her as long as he liked. People also were warning him that his chosen partner was bad news.

No, Louise has something different, something I can't remember the name of. I wonder if either Sussex child will end up a rebel - especially a rebel without a cause like daddy - though. Was it in The Cut that the word "unsmiling" was applied to Lilibet? Meghan's bullshit is pretty obvious, I wonder if her toddler has already picked up on it?

[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.]

Louise and the Sussex kids all have strabismus.

Nutmeg is cross eyed?

Who is that white woman in R321?

Forget the white woman, who photoshopped 30 pounds off of Smeg in that picture?

Meghan was cross eyed too r321

Meghan Markle's popularity has, according to one expert, hit an 'embarrassing new low' following a crowd projection from an upcoming event Meghan is set to speak at and a recent Variety interview

R330 The article is fun, and it's true that the numbers for the Sussexes in terms of public popularity and in-person drawing capacity are not nearly what the two fantasise about.

If the two watched video of the huge cheers arising at the Wigan stadium yesterday as the Princess of Wales came out onto the pitch in the rain, they probably weren't too happy. Kate is now the patron of the Rugby Football Union Rugby Football League, once Harry's patronage.

That said, Harry's book is likely to sell very well. And I haven't seen ratings for "The Crown" and its debut season of deliberately offensive, not to say defamatory, material.

I think those things will go on attracting numbers.

But personal appearances are a different animal, and it's where genuine status, as well as genuine likability, play a central role. Neither of the Sussexes possess likability, and their royal status is fading with time. Without either, it's a case of notoriety and curiosity.

But that isn't what Meghan was after.

It's a curious dichotomy.

^*Twickenham stadium IN Wigan

One of the things I find curious about the Sussexes is their ongoing assumptions about their immunity from the alleged skeletons in their closet. There are people out there who claim to have inside information about the two that the holders of same feel it is worth their freedom, to leak.

Personally, I have always suspected such claims as wishful thinking, or delusional sources, or eager, all too willing listeners crediting the delusional sources because they WANT the information to be true.

But some part of me has always wondered if they're right and I'm wrong. In this day and age, when any savvy undercover agent can get to the dirt using sophisticated hacking equipment, if I'm wrong, the Sussex's assumption that they're safe enough to keep poking sticks at a hornet's nest is incredibly foolish.

One wonders . . . especially as KC3 doesn't seem afraid of angering them further by withholding those HRHs for the kiddies.

Just like Andrew, there's no way back for the Sussexes. KClll and William are determined to protect their patch at all costs. MM and Harry have no choice but to peddle their tawdry wares, their experience inside the BRF. No one's buying them as lifestyle gurus or humanitarians.

Eventually, they'll just keep hitting brick walls because they don't really have anything to say (that's new) and the people with the brains to monetize them (i.e. Netflix) will find there's only so much money to be made and, over time, much less of that. So eventually they will have nothing to sell and so nothing to do except shop and play polo and, eventually, snipe at each other.

On the face of it, she's driven by a historic want to be a VIP and he's driven by vengeance and resentment. The market will crash her ambitions, though she may never give up (hello Madonna and Brendad Ickson), and lack of a target will crash his. The monarchy doesn't seem interested in fighting with them. Dignified mostly silence seems to be working for them. Which means they'll have only each other as targets for their frustration and boredom. I predict an unremarkable divorce between 2027 and 2032. Five to ten years and then it sputters to an end, out of steam.

She has earned her place in history and will always be a curiosity as a result. He is easily led and someone will take charge of finding somewhere to put him. It just seems so hard to see them sticking it out with nothing to do all day. Familiarity breeds contempt, all that.

The fact they've trashed everyone EXCEPT Andrew and his spawn and grifter ex Fergie speaks volumes.

Their supporters chalk it up to Fergie taught her how to curtesy and Euge was her friend prior. People being nice to her has never stopped her (and him) from throwing them under the bus. Why the special exemption for the Yorks??

There is something nefarious we don't know. Could be yachting and/or prior acquaintance under some other type of unsavory circumstances.

Or it could be the Harkles and the Yorks forged a secret alliance at the beginning of this Survivor: BRF Edition to take down the presumptive winners and win immunity and the game. Unfortunately, the Harkles overplayed their hand and were eliminated early in the game forcing them to leave the island. Jeff Probst really should be narrating this whole sordid reality show/game.

Yeah, no.

It’s not a “documentary”. Unless you consider it in the broadest terms, as in: it’s documents their version of events. In that case, “Keeping Up With the Kardashians” is a documentary.

It’s a reality show.

R311, Harry refers to himself that way. This past summer, he was listed on the Los Padres polo roster as “Harry Wales”.

But he's not "Harry Wales" any more, is he? He's either Harry Sussex or Harry Windsor or Harry Mountbatten-Windsor, if a surname is required for the team, correct?

^ That's my understanding. The surname is Sussex, based on the dukedom. I suppose his legal name is Mountbatten-Windsor. The Queen's death certificate gave her surname as Windsor, which kind of surprised me. I didn't think surnames would apply to a monarch.

Harry can be Wales if he wants. Meghan can be 43% Nigerian.

I can be a pregnant man or a chick with a dick. Good old America; facts are fluid, truth is personal.

Take this with a grain of salt because it was posted on Quora... but the latest is that they want to make Harry "lustworthy" so they have people posting on Twitter about how sexy he is. BARF

On the tweets saying how hot he is the pictures have the top of his head cropped out to hide his baldness. hahahaaaa

Not just the HRH r333, they're getting no title upgrades either.

Lustworthy

Now this is "Lustworthy"

Maybe they're trying to get Harry named People's Sexiest Man Alive. Delusion.

That would be funny. Yes, I can see that happening.

Meghan Markle 'changed mind over children's titles after talk with Beatrice and Eugenie' Royal commentator Neil Sean has claimed that Meghan Markle has had a "dramatic change of heart regarding titles" and is keen on "clutching" onto them for herself, Prince Harry and their two children.

The most bizarre of Meghan’s many bizarre qualities is what a simpleton she remains. To observe her, you would never imagine she brushed up against the entertainment industry from childhood, attended an elite university, acted on a television show, and spent a few years inside the family of a head of state. You would hope that that background might have given her, if not a shred of intelligence, at least s certain worldliness. But no, at 41, she has the same vision of fame as a 1990s Nebraska teenager eagerly awaiting the latest issue of People magazine and the next broadcast of Entertainment Tonight. She gets herself photographed while shopping, issues unheeded open letters, makes empty and useless charitable donations, and gives interviews about watching cartoons.

Although she would never have been the focus of the royal family, she could nonetheless have expected to spend at least a decade or two In the proximity of world leaders and the luminaries of British society and beyond. Her patronages would have brought her into contact with the leading lights of her former profession.

She gave all that up to interview Margaret Cho and to issue unaccepted invitations to Reese Witherspoon. The mind boggles.

But she’d always have to defer to Kate. Walk behind her, sit behind her, eventually curtsy to her. She couldn’t be in charge of her PR staff, it was being assimilated with the palace PR. The future was a slimmed down monarchy. All the restrictions and none of the benefits. This was Meghan’s chance to SHINE and all she could see were people holding her back.

I kind of get Meghan’s desire to return to California. Being in the BRF sounds awful, frankly. The difference is I would have known that immediately and therefore never pursued Harry. I don’t understand how she thought it would magically all work out.

Maaayg.... screw the tie-tuhls. 'Smuch more 'mportant to get on the sov'rin grahnt.

LOL it's hilarious that she's trying to act like titles were never important to her, when she slaps "Duchess of Sussex" on everything she can. Her proclamations are just becoming more and more weird.

Is Samantha Markle a MAGAT?

R355. Didn’t she even put her title on her purse?

R357, yes. That was particularly tacky.

Nutmeg is like those white trash lotto winners who build a wine cellar and fill it with Pabst Blue Ribbon.

Didn't she flirt with that late show host by telling him she is hairless and smooth all over?

R353. Life in the royal family may be awful if you are monarch or one of the direct heirs (which makes Harry’s complaints about being the spare all the more ridiculous). The Queen had to give up her privacy, along with a considerable amount of her personal autonomy and safety for the nation until death. It might also be unpleasant to grow up as one of the children of a direct heir.

Meghan, on the other hand, swanned in in middle age and could have pursued a moderate work load for a couple decades until retirement. It sounds like a dream position for someone who failed to achieve fame on her own merits.

50 engagements a year in exchange for getting paid $5M and being treated to a GBP1M wardrobe sounds like the sweetest gig ever. That they thought they could do better grifting their titles in the US speaks to delusional thinking and MM's hired agents, lawyers, PR etc thinking they'd inevitably get a share of a very big pie.

However neither H or M are charismatic or down to earth enough to pull it off. Harry is stupid and MM has a very 90s US idea of fame. Starting off making their rship public by antagonising the UK press is one of the dumbest things a celebrity could do. The Oprah whinefest of easily disproved "truths" was another.

The public doesn't like liars, but they like reading about their exploits and watching for more fuck ups. How the Sussexes can actually make money from this current situation is a mystery. Where do they go after revealing all via SPARE, the Netflix production and all the interviews they will be required to do to promote them?

It's called hubris.

People keep saying, why couldn't she just accept her BRF role and enjoy all the benefits of the life she was given? I am of two minds about this...I think people pegged her as a chancer who had preyed on Harry and openly despised her for being shallow, fake and American. The old courtiers and aristo friends would have been relentlessly, permanently contemptuous and dismissive. Why would anyone choose to stay in an environment like that?

On the other hand when you read about MM's outrageous demands and diva behaviour at the Reitman's shoot, you realise that nothing would have ever satisfied her.

R364, she always would have been silently judged, that’s true, but she was proactively annoying. She aggressively alienated his friends, she had no use for them. And she wasn’t at the mercy of “old courtiers”: she was given a younger, almost entirely female staff, who she bullied and humiliated.

And why didn't Harry realize he was setting up a time bomb?

Or does he still not realize.

He'll be watching those two.....

I love that they put Major Johnny right there to keep an eye on those two imps. That moment was when I first noticed him and wondered who he was.

Once he picked her -- things have turned out about as well as they could. The longer she stayed in the UK, trying to be part of the BRF, she would have been more and more of an embarrassment. Can you imagine her at that meeting of the world's leaders? OMG. Kanye would do better. She's such a damned fool. Harry could bumble through, more or less, but she's jaw-droppingly ignorant and arrogant. Imagine doing a podcast with a name she doesn't even understand.

She is indeed a damned fool. Remember the coat flicks? Or when she was on stage holding her abdomen like a fucking basketball while grinning maniacally and tilting her head?

>>>Can you imagine her at that meeting of the world's leaders? OMG. Kanye would do better.

LOL

Camilla vagina has chosen her cypher! Loud guttural noises heard deep in Montecito!

Forgot to add...

What? They didn't ask master calligrapher Meghan of Montecito to design Camilla's cypher?

I've never considered Harry attractive and think he has become very ugly in the last five years or so, but putting him in close proximity to someone as hot as Major Johnny did him NO favours. He looks hideous in contrast to him.

But she WAS a chancer r364. All of those things they thought were true. She was never fit for that role and the marriage should never have been allowed.

Can you imagine the looks on Diana's sisters' faces when halfwit Harry introduced Meghan to them and he gushed about how much she was like Diana?

Like Meghan when photographed next to pretty women r375. Both so cringe.

What confounds me about MM is how she never pulls her horns in. She would be aware of every criticism levelled at her behaviour or appearance, either from her aides or her own reading, and yet she never takes any steps to ensure it will not recur, whether it's bump-cradling, telling lies, ill-fitting clothes, anything.

It never ceases to amaze me how people still don't seem to realize that Harry knew she was a walking talking time bomb and that's why he married her. What a perfect weapon to lob in the midst of the Royal Family!

I don't think he's that clever. He just bumbled into her and the marriage (and fatherhood and moving to California etc....)

Harry has no idea that she's even a narcissist. He's so stupid he thinks she's Diana 2.0, but can't even recognise that Diana didn't want to leave the BRF. He just thinks the two of them together have Diana's starpower and have something meaningful to offer the world. They don't and it's all downhill from here.

Any bets on how soon until they have to sell the house?

Does anyone else get the feeling that if Diana were alive she'd be ashamed of him? Even if he hadn't had to lose his mother and been hooked by a grifter, he was always going to be shithouse. For him to resent the public mourning his mother when they were upset as well as showing her respect...well, what a nasty little bitch.

Today's podcast addresses the term "difficult", which Meghan asserts, in a naked attempt to justify her own miserable treatment of other women, is a code word for "bitch".

It might work if we hadn't all gotten a first-hand description in the Bower book of Meghan's outright bitchery to the women who had the misfortune to work for her, and hadn't seen her publicly lie about and threaten the BRF.

We all saw her head to the Queen's wake at BP with enough makeup on for a Barnum & Bailey routine under the Big Top. We all saw her try to make it look like her husband's team won a polo match that it actually lost. We all saw her try to push her way into the Wales Investiture event. We all saw her deliberately arrive late for the Jubly servicecso she could carrive alone to. Ig herself up rather than with the other second-tier royals - and oh, did she pay for that one!

We see you, Meghan.

You aren't difficult. You're a vicious, spiteful, envious bitch.

The only "gaslighting" in the story is yours on the BRF.

Enjoy it while you. History will move past you. The British monarchy will, too.

I don't accept she always would have been silently judged or was. First, the old class of courtier stereotype of the second son of the Duke of Dull on water is probably entirely dead and if not, pretty close. Courtiers now come from the professional classes - Clive Everton, the king's private secretary, came out of a lifelong career in the foreign office, with no posh relations to speak of. Alan Young, the Queen's private secretary, came from banking, politics and television - again, no especially posh relations to speak of. Samantha Cohen, an Austalian (not exactly drenched in dukedoms) came from the civil service and PR. Sara Latham worked for Hillary Clinton - someone with connections but on merit not DeBrett's.

If you believe Valentine Low's book - and why wouldn't you? - almost everybody bent over backwards for her to make it success. Cohen in particular felt if anything failed, the monarchy had to be able to prove they'd done somersaults for her, to protect the monarchy's reputation from exactly the kind of nonsense being peddled now.

The gap, contends Low, seemed to be culture, not class. She was an American actress to the point of obnoxious and a few key figures just couldn't understand her, but more significantly, couldn't see her inability to see the essential hierarchy that makes the system work. And arguably without hierarchy, it descends quickly into an elegant anarchy, where everyone's running in different directions with no ability to rein in.

I disagree, R380. He looks genuinely shocked, aggrieved and angry at how much he is now disliked. He just thought he was bringing a whole new level of star power to the BRF, not like a dull Home Counties girl. He thought they'd be the Prince and Princess of the People, royal rock stars.

Perhaps the courtiers wouldn't have closed ranks against MM, R384, but the aristocratic circle of lifelong friends certainly would have. Even Kate, with her position, her education, and impeccable manners was or is closed out.

R379, that's her Achilles' Heel or tragic flaw (unlike all the other flaws.) She is not a master schemer. She plainly can't contend with a fuck up - even when understanding and avoiding it would be in her own interest. It's like the assertion she lies. She's said plenty of things that haven't stood a fact check, but she keeps cranking 'em out. There's so little calculation in her want. It all seems impulsive. Maybe she's like Diana in that respect?

If Archegripes is her tool for addressing every wrong ever done her, she'll be podcasting until she's 110. Whether anybody will still be listening is another question, but no doubt her list of grievances is long.

Narcissism is a set of defense mechanisms developed to protect a fragile, almost non-existent sense of self. It's a put-on - kind of Trump announcing he's the greatest genius, the greatest leader, the greatest businessman - well, obviously he sounds ridiculous but he keeps making ridiculous proclamations.

They feel like if they admit any fault, the whole structure of their false self will crumble - maybe it will, since there's nothing real underneath to take its place. So it's double down or die.

Oh something like that. But it makes them behave in the most ostentatiously ridiculous and outrageous fashion that you can hardly believe they have the brass balls to show their faces. But they keep on, because they have to believe in it - they don't have anything else.

* kind of LIKE Trump announcing he's the greatest genius...

What do you think her biggest mistakes were in terms of raising your suspicion? The natural go to is Oprah but for me the first hey, wait a minute was the engagement interview where she dominated. The point of no return was that absurb, extravagant baby shower.

The engagement photo with the couturier gown and the artful pose.

Shallow as it may seem, her manner of dressing, the stupid “calligraphy” and the pretentious blog. I never heard her speak until well after the marriage.

The £56,000 dress and the outrageous publications written by her brother and sister; also the salacious Suitcase Girl photos.

Her cat that ate the canary or as some say the cat that got the cream demeanor in the engagement photo call and interview. I also thought the white coat and too big shoes she wore looked sloppy and I noticed the "sashay walk" even then. Her eyes were cold despite the perpetual smile, just like many narcs I've met.

Her early comment to a royal staffer stating that everyone knows she’ll be their boss soon tells the tale of her, from her insecurity to have so aggressively engaged with an employee on such a personal level (almost like acknowledging they were equals, but not for long), to the level of vitriol she brought from the get-go…

R388 Well said. It was Diana's problem, too: she never once admitted that she had a hand in her failing marriage: marrying a man she knew didn't love her so she could be Princess of Wales; screaming at him to get what she wanted from him; deliberately trying to outshine him in the public eye; trying to make him look like a lousy father; and then, washing the family dirty linin in public and then being indignant when it brought on a divorce, and rewriting history when it suited her.

No wonder Harry went for Meghan. She embodies the essence of Diana. If that includes the shitty parenting that Diana doled out to both boys, but especially to Harry, one trembles for Archie and Lili.

My tell was the engagement interview. She didn't know who he was? Please. She was a D list actress trying to make bank. She didn't just slither out from under a rock.

^^*linen (not linin)

They are a perfect match.

According to Lady C. children did not want young Harry at their birthday parties because he was mean and disruptive. There are videos of Thomas Markle's little "bean" at a birthday party yanking the tiara off the birthday girl's head and putting it on her own.

They are both pariahs shunned for bad behavior in their childhoods and now carrying on the tradition into adulthood. No one of importance invites them to anything of importance.

I think that's an unduly harsh assessment of Diana. If she married a man she knew didn't love her to become Princess of Wales, he married a 19-year he couldn't love to get his parents off his back. Diana was not a saint, but first and foremost a naive 19-year old should never have been put in that position to begin with.

She knew who he was. She asked a friend of his to hook them up.

What do you want to bet that we get yet another version of how they met in the new book?

Why didn't they just go to Africa right after they got married in 2018? He could do his African wildlife reserve stuff or whatever it was, and she could hang out wih her 43% Nigerian relatives.

What makes me laugh is how she was declaring that "this is huge" when she announced her so-called Nigerian roots. As if she is that important that communities should be dancing in the streets to hear that Smeg is one of them.

"I found out I am 3% Chinese! This is huge for the Asian community!" -MM

R401 Over my dead Givencjy-Herrera clad body.

^*Givenchy

[QUOTE]Why didn't they just go to Africa right after they got married in 2018?

Are you kidding, r401? Do you think Meghan would deign to live in some "housing unit" with faulty heating and wiring in the African wilderness just when she captured the royal prize? Africa is about as enticing to her as Balmoral was to Diana. Diana played along as a country lass and "loved" Balmoral during her courtship. Her love of country living evaporated when the newlyweds spent time there following their honeymoon. Yet another parallel.

[quote]she could hang out wih her 43% Nigerian relatives.

They could have done a Green Acres reboot, too.

Meg claimed to be Maltese at one point to grift a trip to Malta. She took these pretentious Vogue-wannabe photos that just emphasized how low class she is.

She is the world... she props the children... she is the one who makes a brighter day... so please start giving....

The Harkles are pissed that Harry didn't get to be People magazine Sexiest Man Alive. Not even a blurb for Sexiest Royal/Sexiest Philanthropist/Sexiest Handbag.

How on earth could she be 43 percent Nigerian? Her father is unlikely to have any Nigerian ancestry. Her mother would therefore need to be almost entirely Nigerian. Since I believe her mother’s family has been in the US for generations, did her ancestors mate by chance almost exclusively with other persons of Nigerian ancestry?

R409 OMG! That could be the source of the rumors that bots or sugars or Scobie or whoever is trying to play up Harry as this incredibly sexy man, great in bed, and all that folderol. And he'll give you the old one-two punch after if you're a naughty girl!

[quote]just when she captured the royal booby prize?

Fixed.

How can a Spotify team of 28 members not have ONE who was able to explain to her what an archetype really is, using a dictionary (I'm assuming she knows that a dictionary is.)

I can see her now - "You don't tell me a goddamned thing (while throwing her tea cup or vodka bottle). I'M the boss around here!"

Prince Dimwit? The Sexiest Man Alive? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Every other male in the world would have to drop dead for that to happen

R413 - remember the anonymous podcast producer who discussed her first episode (either in the Telegraph or the Times) who said it's unheard of for a podcast to have such a huge staff? He could think of only one, a daily cast about politics which necessarily requires a large staff. My theory is that she ran through staff like kleenex due to being who she is and thinking she knows best despite knowing jack shit. They probably still had to be acknowledged in the credits when only a handful were around at any given time.

Can you imagine their eye rolls during the "I'm particular" episode?

^forgot to add that staff turnover is likely one of the reasons Meghan couldn't deliver a product for over a year and a half.

I think Netflix went through the same with Pearl. It HAD to be Meghan, not some random little girl, with HER voice, and probably HER dimwitted ideas defying actual history, time or place. It probably takes a big gulp of pepto to cancel a project the company plowed so much money into.

Queen Elizabeth reportedly faced a multitude of issues during her lifetime with Meghan Markle and once even ‘blew into a rage’ after seeing the way she allegedly treated staffers.

This insight has been made by author Katie Nicholl, in her new book titled, The New Royals: Queen Elizabeth’s Legacy and the Future of the Crown.

She began by saying, “Meghan was at the castle to taste some of the dishes, and told one of the caterers she could taste egg.”

“She got quite upset, saying that the dish was meant to be vegan and macrobiotic.”

Shortly thereafter the Queen allegedly made a sudden entrance to the same room, allegedly after hearing what the Duchess said and is rumored to have given her a ‘great scolding’.

“‘Meghan, in this family we don’t speak to people like that,’” the Queen is reported to have said.

Insight into the entire menu spread has been shared by Hello Magazine and they cite, free-range chicken, a 600-person lunch, a three-course dinner and even a custom made elderflower cake for the evening reception.

However, Meghan wasn’t the only one to receive a talking to by the Queen during the wedding planning, Prince Harry also joined the list after his behavior ‘upset’ the late monarch.

“The run-up to the wedding was really very difficult for the queen,” Ms Nicoll claimed. “She was very upset by how Harry had behaved and some of his demands and the way he went about things his own way.”

“I remember her being rather upset by how beastly Harry was being,” and how their “relationship was quite badly damaged by it all.”

R410, one of Lady Colin Campbell's correspondents claimed that Meghan had revealed the results of an ancestry test on The Tig. At that time, which was prior to her first meeting with Harry, she claimed that the test showed she had 20% African ancestry, with a subset of that being 40% Nigerian. So her reality is in constant flux.

When did I know she was full of shit: I didn't watch the engagement interview but a lot had been made about her rescuing two dogs who were her "family". So dumping the rescue dog Bogart who she'd crapped on and on about how he was her substitute child and continually name-dropped how Ellen had told her to get him when they bumped into each other at the shelter was a red flag.

The excuse for leaving him behind was that a five year old dog was "too old" to travel to the UK, which sounded like BS. There was no way I had ever been planning on watching their wedding, but the ditching of the dog disgusted me. I just knew they were lying about why he'd been left.

I think Bowers was the one who uncovered the fact that Bogart was ditched because he didn't like Harry. I also heard a podcast this year where the person discussing Bogart questioned why there had never been updates on his new life or anything about Meghan visiting him when they went back to Canada, although they were in a different part of Canada. They said there was a possibility that Meghan just had him put down.

The other red flag was hearing after the wedding that she'd invited all those famous people but none of her family except for one person. It sounded completely psycho.

'We don't care. Shut up! Stop talking about yourself... Show some humility and gratitude.' US journalist Megyn Kelly dissects Meghan Markle's latest podcast claims, saying the Duchess of Sussex 'hasn't earned the right to make us listen' to her.

The Times writes hilarious, scathing take downs of this pompous axe grinder. Claws.Are.Out!

"This week’s episode of the Meghan Markle show is billed as “dynamic”. Previously the show has been “raw and enlightening”, “thought-provoking and stirring”, “candid and illuminating” and, my personal favourite, “in-depth and vulnerable”, because nothing says vulnerable like 16 bathrooms and an HRH title you can’t use. As ever, we discuss something that resonates with all women, who are all oppressed, because men are frightened when we do anything except clean the oven, and please can we talk about the patriarchy again, Meghan? Too much is never enough.

My new phrase of the week is “standing in your knowing”, along with “standing in your authority” and “living in your full self”.

Meghan is keen for us to know that she loves etymology and “people with expansive vocabularies”, which must have been what attracted her to Harry. Thanks to this week’s podcast we know that the young Meghan, hungry for new words, loved a TV programme called Jeopardy. When the host died her friends sent her condolence messages. Read that again if you didn’t fully grasp the scale of the narcissism first time round.

As for poor old Meghan — sorry, womankind in general, my bad — the “difficult” label is used to deflect attention from her “awesome qualities: persistence, strength, perseverance”, and I am confident that when a courtier wrote a memo accusing Meghan of “unacceptable” behaviour, the sort of behaviour that led some palace employees to call themselves the Sussex Survivors Club, what he actually meant was: “I want to salute her awesomeness, persistence and strength. She is bedazzling.”

Sentence of the week goes to whoever said this: “If women do it exactly the same way that a man does it, we’re met with a much different sense of perception versus reality.” Possibly it was the zebra. To recap, the next time my editor says I am being difficult, I will say: “No. I am beguiling and you are failing to appreciate my resilience and determination. I will stand in my power and live in my full self.” Then I will do exactly what she says.

Can anyone think of two people so privileged yet so aggrieved (so continuously) ?

Maybe Tatum O’ Neill? Wil Wheaton? Kanye West? The Orthodox of Kiryas Joel?

WTF does "standing in your knowing" even mean??

I don't know, but you're standing in it. Need a peper towel?

Markle is the Mistress of Word Salad,

The whole article from beyond the firewall

I am howling. Thank you Meghan for always being you . I needed this laugh desperately,I live in Fl.

We should lock Meghan and Marlo Thomas in a room together.

without paywall

Thank you, R430. Hilary Rose is such a good writer; her articles on Meghan Markle's ridiculous podcasts are a highlight of my week.

Megyn Kelly can fuck off too

How fug is MM in her cap? You'd think two nosejobs, veneers, a faceful of makeup (ahem, bronzer) and God knows what else she's had done would guarantee good looks. But she just looks like her eyes are too close together and her nose still dominates her face. They're starting to resemble each other. NO THANKS.

She does look like she's lost a fair bit of weight off her face since wore that tomato dress a year ago.

That cap makes her appear positively masculine. Good god, that jaw. She looks like my friend Ron.

R430, I get "Server Error" at your link.

Me too.

No one cares any more whether she makes a political statement any longer

Any more than that they care about her personal woes in a world where she's seen as the bitch she isxas opposed to the strong, successful woman she really is.

Was this the 7th or 8th podcast? How many more have we got to endure?

Well, how many more grievances does she have?

[quote] Well, how many more grievances does she have?

Infinite.

I lasted exactly 51 seconds in my attempt to hate-listen.

Lady C recap:

Was it this thread or one of the Harry's book threads there was mention of the Sussex Squad trying to make out Dimbo is sexy? No matter, the PR firm got him a sexy title, blech. Plenty of redheads sexier than Harry, but look who gets his own version of a crown. Good on the Daily Star for trolling him by posting some of his most unflattering pics.

The prostitutes near his military base allegedly refused to service him due to his violence. His discreet upper class girlfriend is reported to have said Harry was 'rough in bed'.

He does nothing but whinge about his misfortune of being born into the British royal family, and how his father cut off his allowance at age 36.

He's ginger, balding, with beady, close-set eyes.

None of this exactly adds up to SEXY.

Meghan Markle haters helpline

You think Harry is hot, r446?

R446. That clip was ridiculous when it was made, but it’s really simple-minded to post it now. There’s so much documentary evidence by now of how responsible she is for the dislike the public feels for her.

Someone on reddit suggested speeding up playback on Lady C.'s videos to level 2 to make listening to her S L O W talking more tolerable.

I tried speeds of 2, 1.75, 1.5 and 1.25.

Still not tolerable.

I'll just have to rely on DLers to report any somewhat pertinent information she may have.

It'll be a long wait.

Wheeze, cackle, caw.

R78, 😂😂 💯

Throwback to when she was so desperate for media coverage that she walked up and down the street in front of the Daily Mail offices, trying to get them to notice her. After about an hour, and a lot of mocking and laughing, staff finally put her out of her misery by sending someone out to get her picture.

She had been told to take the private entrance to the palace but marched right up to the public entrance. Rumor has it she was pissed because she was unable to join Haznoballs at his event.

I can't figure out what Harry and Meghan hope to do with their lives. They need to make millions to keep up the lifestyle to which Harry was accustomed and Meghan will naturally cling onto, but they are simultaneously claiming to be 'philanthropists'? How? People are philantropists because they have too much money and want to give some away to get respect and social standing. They don't have any money. Or do they want to be influencers? Merching to make a buck like subgroup Kardashians? These are 2 40 year old people who still don't seem to have a clue what they want to do when they grow up.

Oh, my sides!!! It's so obvious that all Megsie wants is to live a private life!

They want to be incredibly rich, beloved, and famous while doing very little. Ironically, they had the perfect jobs for people with that goal set, but gave them up because they'd always be one step behind William and Kate. Boo-freaking-hoo.

I think River has outdone himself with this review of the latest "anti bitch" podcast of our Megs.

I hadn't thought about her sudden revelation that she loved Jeopardy and the etiology of words as being her clap-back at people pointing out that she doesn't know what archetype means.

Anyhow, the first five minutes of this is delicious, if you love parodies of the monster of Montecito - but definitely not a bitch or even difficult - she's way beyond those trifling words.

You're not "difficult" if you bully a three year old, you're a bitch.

It would be hilarious and fitting if by some odd twist of fate Charlotte ends up on the throne and an elderly Meghan needs to beg a pension from her at some point.

Who is that person in R456? Do they actually know anything or just some YouLoser?

R446 Off your meds today, Pet, dear?

"Meghan haters" . . . always the giveaway of the fat middle-aged lady in a halfway house who thinks one day Meghan will be Kween.

Or a psychopath, r457

If you're standing in your knowing clap your hands (clap clap) If you're standing in your knowing clap your hands (clap clap) If you're standing in your knowing then your bitch is surely showing If you're standing in your knowing clap your hands (clap clap)

R459 a fashionista who was/is either a model or a designer who claims to have friends adjacent to the beautiful people, including the daughter of an earl - I think that's right - but it's what he's said. And he's quite pretty and does a killer Diana impression, who he resembles. And such fun!

I liked Kate's khaki outfit yesterday.

Lady C is spreading all kinds of shit rumours with ten thousand caveats about the Sussex relationship being in the doldrums because Harry wanted to publish his book right away (before the Queen died) but Meghan wanted him to publish it in the spring so that it could "poison the pond" for Charles' coronation.

That whingeing bitch is filled with hate, it oozes from her "Kind" pores.

Meghan is what you get when you have a chaotic family of origin.

She was abandoned by her mother, neglected by her father. Father’s neglect was because he was always working, so out of necessity. But still hard on a kid.

She was fat and homely as a kid. Maybe also a bit lonely, to hear her tell it. Teachers and other adults would have wanted to make her feel good about herself, so praised her intelligence. She seems to have really internalized the idea that she is very smart.

Now, she’s no doubt “smart enough.” But in objective terms, certainly no genius. I think she would be shocked to learn this about herself. She has fiercely clung to the “smart” thing as her identity.

Which makes it all the more puzzling that she pursued a bimbo major at Northwestern and seems to have made a conscious decision to trade on her “sexiness” and looks.

Kate's khaki dress under a belted khaki coat visiting a children's centre yesterday.

And Meghan trying to pull off khaki . . . to, er, far different effect.

The whole philanthropy grift with H and M is bizarre. They don't have billions to disperse like the Gates. MM holding a grudge against the UN because they didn't promote her, well that doesn't scream 'humanitarian', does it? The lies to Oprah, the war with the UK press, the hardball tactics against the social media anti-Megxit community by getting someone called Yankee Wallee kicked off YouTube (this person is apparently suffering depression as a result and more youtubers have sprung up in her place out of solidarity) and getting Murky Meg kicked off twitter...be kind?

At the outbreak of war in the Ukraine, H and M were quick to state that they stood with Ukraine - as if them doing so had the weight of politicians or official royals, but what did they actually do for them? Leo donated $10M, Mila Kunis and Ashton Kuthcher started fundraising and donated millions of their own in addition to what they raised. Even several of the British tabloids started fundraising and were successful, given the size of their readership base and how strongly the public felt.

But H and M? IIRC they did something quite modest in comparison to Leo, Mila, Ashton and the UK tabloids, yet still managed to PR an obscure award out of it. Celebrities in Hollywood must consider them an absolute joke. Sean Penn is an asshole but he did actually go there and shoot footage and try to do what he thought was helpful. Zelenskyy seemed to appreciate it, at any rate. He didn't acknowledge either of H and M's hubris-loaded statements.

The insight from Tom Bower that they felt they were "blessed with Diana's magic" explains a lot. Warning, Dimbo looks super ugly in photos at link. Like they just assumed they could take over from where she left off.

I also read somewhere else that he uses a medium to "consult" Diana on important decisions and his own statement that she is "setting his life up" speaks volumes on its own. How could a middle-aged man be so obsessed with his dead mother? And find so many opportunities to exploit her memory and his grief? What a shame that he wasn't bundled into therapy soon after her death.

They're both completely nutso. This is why they're fascinating: what stupid shit will they say or do next? But are they mentally well enough to deal with the public reaction to every misplaced attempt they make to become celebrities rather than the freakshows they are?

And if it's true MM was suicidal during her first pregnancy, how is she coping now that there is a whole cottage industry on social media dedicated to criticising her, Harry and Scobie? It was only to spare the crown that all three weren't charged with perjury over the collaboration that resulted in the atrocious FF. Again, not something you associate with humanitarians. Neither is her treatment of her father.

You just can't make this stuff up. To the press, they are the gift that keeps on giving. But as with Madonna, what happens if reality seeps in? They don't seem equipped to handle it.

Does anyone remember back in 2019 when The Daily Mail doxxed a bunch of "Megxit" blogs? At the time everyone thought it was done by Meghan's people by various means, and released to the press. I always wondered about the story behind that. Yes, The Daily Mail is a rag, who I could see thinking its was a good idea. However, this didn't see like something they would just want to "investigate" out of thin air at the time. I was disappointed there was not more of a back story on this.

R469 Odd, no one minded when Hilary Mantel said all those nasty things about Kate Middleton. where were you then, Pet, dear?

And where were you when Meghan claimed that the BRF was using Philip's hospitalisation to muzzle her?

And I didn't notice you feeling disappointed about Meghan leaving all those peasant women in the Fiji marketplace who'd waited hours in the heat to see her when Meghan realised it was a UN Women's group sponsoring the event, and she still held a grudge against them for not treating the d-list actress she then was with appropriate respect . . .

How about how Meghan encouraged Messica's and Bettina's kids to pully three year old Charlotte at Meghan's wedding? Were you disappointed that more wasn't made of that story?

How about all the vile hate spewed at Charles, William, and Kate in "Finding Freebies"? How about the lies Meghan told on Oprah whilst the Queen was at her husband's deathbed?

No? Thought not.

As for being called a floozy: Sweetie: if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck . . .

Your "disappointments" seem curiously cherry-picked.

^*bully (not pully) Charlotte . . .

Harry has railed against the tabloids, particularly the DM, even calling them out for writing unflattering articles which attract negative comments from their readers. That's where his attempts to muzzle the press and even reader comments work against him.

That is a strange situation at the link at r469. Nobody doxxed haters of Camilla or Kate. Would also love to know the real backstory. Meghan/Harry and Christopher Bouzy have form in this area. Someone the Brad/Angelina thread mentioned MM employing bots.

This woman demands respect and preaches about respect however she did not respect the Queen and her first engagement with the Queen, presented herself in such a state of mess. There was a protocol that Markle did not respect as well did not respect people who advised her.

Good Lord that mess ! Its Weaves Gone Wild !

Maybe she's also 19% Jamaican?

Meghan pre-Harry VS With Harry

🧐🧐🧐🧐

Bouzy's up shit creek without a paddle if twitter disintegrates as it seems to be doing, he'll lose his paycheck from Markle for spinning for her on twitter and attacking her enemies.

We resent her cultural appropriation.

R472 I really wanted at least some resolution to that doxxing spree in one of the many Meghan books. Everyone just glossed it over like it never happened. Yes, I do think Meghan had her finger prints all over that. I'm more surprised no one has come forward to link it back to her. That it never happened tells me they are still being kept around in some capacity. The full scope of all of her fuckery isnt going to be known for a long while. Just the wording of "Kensington Palace, being hard at work dealing with Meghan hate accounts" was enough to signal it was all her doing. I just want to know who she got to doxx all those people. I'd give anything to have been able to hear her screaming for all those women's heads on a platter. I just want the unedited version of how nasty, and power hungry she is in private.

Same, r479.

God, she looks absolutely loaded at r473. I remember pictures of her also talking and gesticulating at that same event while the Queen ignored her.

I've heard the coke rumours about H and M...are they partial to any other illegal substances? Drug use would explain why they're delusional and paranoid.

Also, how stupid to get upset about a photo of HMTQ with her three direct heirs. Queen Victoria posed for a photo with her three direct heirs when David (briefly to be Edward VIII then Duke of Windsor) was born.

Whenever Harry leaves Meghan alone, she sets up a date to be papped. It’s retribution.

Meghan is the JLo of royal media whores.

R482 she wishes ! That bitch aint even the Fred Rogers of social media whores.

Harry has to be one of the most unattractive men ever. Even on a walkabout after the death of HMTQ, he doesn't look morose or sad, just angry and bitter. Put that with the lack of looks and his low intellect and the package isn't good, even taking into account his wealth and fame. MM is actually doing the best acting of her life to try maintain the fiction that she loves him.

Can you imagine the tedium of someone of a lower middle class background, despite her father's salary and her education, who has hustled since the beginning of her working life, listening to the perpetual grievances of a royal prince, raised in palaces?

True, r485, although the reports emanating from her podcasts indicate she has a million grievances of her own. And can't keep track of her own history while settling scores. To bag out Deal or No Deal for objectifying her but then go on to have a teeny role in 90210 as bj girl and not think she'd be outed...in some ways she's as dumb as Harry.

Is R470 ok? That was a strange rant.

R487 I misinterpreted (irony and nuance do sometimes get lost in print) and thought the poster was indignant on Meghan's behalf that those stories of the hate directed at her weren't more fully explored, not who was behind the doxxing.

I didn't realise till after I'd posted. If I now understand it correctly, apologies to the original poster who put up the link.

I am, thanks for asking, quite OK.

R470

So she signed on for Deal or No Deal, thinking she would be performing Ibsen?

I'm not surprised the Queen + heirs picture freaked Harry out. He seems to have been in denial for a while that his role as spare was over, and that brought it into high relief.

Instead of figuring out a less stressful, more private life for himself, he seems determined to prove he is just as famous, beloved, and important as his brother. It must go back to his feeling that Diana loved William more, which she probably did.

The day Harry realizes how much his mother fucked him up is the day he starts to become a better person. As long as he mythologies and tries to please a long-dead woman, he'll be the mess he is right now.

Low would argue the opposite: that picture would have confirmed his conviction that George was a threat to his long term relevance. He seems to have confused immediacy with value. Princess Anne and Prince Edward no longer have immediacy because of the line of succession. They do have value and are respected. That would have been Harry's fate. Idiot.

Joachim of Denmark seems to have ceased his public pity party in Paris parks.

Did mama write him a check or did he realize how pathetic he came off especially with all the comparisons to halfwit Harry?

Or perhaps he is busy writing a book Sussex style or preparing for an interview with the Danish version of Orca.

Harry is not attractive in my opinion, neither is ghoulish looking Joachim. Both crybabies. Prince Carl Philip of Sweden on the other hand is very handsome and never has publicly uttered a word of complaint.

Apparently, the symptoms of Spare-itis are exacerbated by the comorbid conditions of Ugly-itis and My-Brother-Has-A-Better-Looking-Wife-itis.

^Interesting to bring up Denmark and Sweden. Yes, the Joachim/kids' titles fracas faded rapidly. I'm sure C3 was watching carefully, and the rapidity with which the story faded from view, and its total lack of any impact on the Danish monarchy, will be encouraging to C3 re refusing to confirm the Harkle sprogs as HRHs.

The Swedish princeling deprived of the right to male primogeniture by legislation pushed through AFTER, not before, his older sister's birth has a few advantages over Harry: for one thing, he has a really hot wife who likes being royal so much that she's happy to go on playing dress-up, wearing great jewels, living in great homes, and enjoying life as she wouldn't have once past her Hot Babe years even without an HRH or whatever distinction Carl Gustaf made.

For another, being King of Sweden doesn't seem like that much of a deal compared to being King of Great Britain, Northern Ireland, and Her Territories Beyond the Seas. The Swedish monarchy is much richer than the rest of us will ever be, but they are pikers next to the Windsors. The wealth accruing to Prince William is on a scale far greater than that accruing to Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden.

Lastly, Prince Carl Philip seems a laid-back sort of guy who's just as pleased to live off the fat of the land without doing much for it, enjoy his hot wife and three kids, and take life as it comes . . . that is to say, a far less problematic mindset. And he, hasn't got the Mummy trauma, either.

Joachim falls somewhere in the middle. He's also got a very pretty wife who has played ball quietly until this last stroke, very appreciative of where she landed and the bennies her children will still have despite not being HRHs. Probably one reason why they shut up so quickly was a realisation of this and that they could endanger those further if they didn't shut up. In fact, Joachim's "job" as Danish Defence Attache to France is coming to an end soon, and they will be leaving France. Joachim refused to say whether they are returning to Denmark or not.

None of these people will ever know financial insecurity, they will all live beautifully, and most of them appreciate that at bottom.

Except for Harry and Meghan.

Thankfully, Meghan never again allowed herself to be objectified!

I wonder if MI6 doesn't have a lot of dirt on Markle from her misspent youth, chasing money and fame. I suspect they do and with the Queen gone, Charles may let them start leaking. If you look at her IMDb page, she got little work and the work she did get couldn't pay the bills - "hot girl", "delivery girl", etc.

There's nothing more sexy than standing in my knowing

Is a degree in communications from North Western really hard to get? Especially since MM didn't extend herself by taking part in any theatre productions? There was some story in an older thread about her babysitting her lecturers' kids on Friday and Saturday nights but didn't her father state she never had to work while he was providing for her? And some DLer commented she was probably delivering her lecturers blowjobs. In exchange for grades?

She doesn't seem very smart. Not as stupid as Harry, it's only in comparison to him that she appears slightly clever. He probably thinks she's a genius. But there's nothing intellectual about her. She certainly doesn't come across as someone who got everything she could out of a college education. And trying to appear brainy by claiming she was obsessed with the TV show Jeopardy is laughable.

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

That is just desperate PR on their part. If they were not there, those tables would cost just as much. They will do, and say just about anything to have that royal fairy dust still attached to them.

R497 Communications at Northwestern is Showbiz 101. She never appears to have taken any acting classes so I assume she wanted to be a TV anchor or talk show host of some sort.

Meghan was probably somewhT intelligent in high school and also a decent speaker. People probably praised her intelligence at that point and she internalized it. The problem is she never got any smarter than a high school student. She isn’t curious or willing to listen and learn. It’s why her podcast seems to cover things we already figured out in the 90s, that’s when she stopped growing intellectually.

[QUOTE]So she signed on for Deal or No Deal, thinking she would be performing Ibsen?

I tried to post this comment earlier, but it didn't take. To go with r500's comment, one of Meghan's instructors at NW recommended she take theater classes to prepare for an acting career. She was having none of it. I think this was in Bower's book.

I think she is really quite stupid. Really almost as stupid as Harry. Just think of her Uvalde stunt, her interest in cartoons and pathetic maxims, her complete inability in her 40s to take any realistic measure of her own capabilities, and the implausible fantasies she foists in the public (cheering South Africans, nearly incinerated Archie, and the housecall marriage by the Archbishop of Canterbury).

One thing I've noticed about people with personality disorders is that that their enormous, all-consuming character flaws the indulge to "feel good" tend to swamp and diminish the expression of intelligence. The shit they do...🙄 I knew a guy with a graduate degree from the University of Chicago. His speech, vocabulary, and the ridiculous MENSA baseball cap he wore told the world he was intelligent. Despite that had a hard time holding on to jobs. It wasn't surprising to people who knew him.

When she prattles on, she sounds like a pretentious, precocious 16 year old.

Northwesters is a bit of an odd choice for Meghan. Yes, it's a great school and hard to get into, but it's a wonder she didn't end up at USC or UCLA.

There was a wonderful blogger who unfortunately died and her site was taken down, but her name was Joanna Ashmun, and I learned so much about narcissists from her website. Here's an excerpt about why people with NPD can be so dumb:

Lacking empathy is a profound disturbance to the narcissist’s thinking (cognition) and feeling (affectivity).  Even when very intelligent, narcissists can’t reason well.  One I’ve worked with closely does something I characterize as “analysis by eggbeater.”  They don’t understand the meaning of what people say and they don’t grasp the meaning of the written word either – because so much of the meaning of anything we say depends on context and affect, narcissists (lacking empathy and thus lacking both context and affect) hear only the words.   (Discussions with narcissists can be really weird and disconcerting; they seem to think that using some of the same words means that they are following a line of conversation or reasoning.  Thus, they will go off on tangents and irrelevancies, apparently in the blithe delusion that they understand what others are talking about.)  And, frankly, they don’t hear all the words, either.

They can pay attention only to stuff that has them in it.  This is not merely a bad habit – it’s a cognitive deficiency.  Narcissists pay attention only to themselves and stuff that affects them personally.  However, since they don’t know what other people are doing, narcissists can’t judge what will affect them personally and seem never to learn that when they cause trouble they will get trouble back.  They won’t take other people’s feelings into consideration and so they overlook the fact that other people will react with feeling when abused or exploited and that most people get really pissed off by being lied to or lied about.

One more excerpt and I'll try to stop spamming but this especially reminds me of Meghan (and the Donald, for that matter):

Narcissists are grandiose. They live in an artificial self invented from fantasies of absolute or perfect power, genius, beauty, etc.  Normal people’s fantasies of themselves, their wishful thinking, take the form of stories – these stories often come from movies or TV, or from things they’ve read or that were read to them as children.  They involve a plot, heroic activity or great accomplishments or adventure: normal people see themselves in action, however preposterous or even impossible that action may be – they see themselves doing things that earn them honor, glory, love, riches, fame, and they see these fantasy selves as personal potentials, however tenuous, something they’d do if they didn’t have to go to school or go to work, if they had the time and the money.

As Freud said of narcissists, these people act like they’re in love with themselves.  And they are in love with an ideal image of themselves – or they want you to be in love with their pretend self, it’s hard to tell just what’s going on.  Like anyone in love, their attention and energy are drawn to the beloved and away from everyday practicalities.  Narcissists’ fantasies are static – they’ve fallen in love with an image in a mirror or, more accurately, in a pool of water, so that movement causes the image to dissolve into ripples; to see the adored reflection they must remain perfectly still.  Narcissists’ fantasies are tableaux or scenes, stage sets; narcissists are hung up on a particular picture that they think reflects their true selves (as opposed to the real self – warts and all).  Narcissists don’t see themselves doing anything except being adored, and they don’t see anyone else doing anything except adoring them.  Moreover, they don’t see these images as potentials that they may some day be able to live out, if they get lucky or everything goes right:  they see these pictures as the real way they want to be seen right now (which is not the same as saying they think these pictures are the way they really are right now, but that is another story to be discussed elsewhere)... and on, for pages.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

I enjoyed the excerpts, R508, so feel free to keep posting. Both ones you posted do seem to get at something fundamental about Meghan - at this point, and assuming someone is actually following the story of the Sussexes, I slightly question the intelligence (emotional intelligence, perhaps) of anyone who doesn't see something off about her.

There are many, many instances of her/them leaking shock or hurt after some "snub" (imagined or not) that have caused me to question their sanity. How do you massively fuck people over and not understand that they will probably then be less likely to invite you to their get-togethers and make a show of complimenting you in public etc.?

In the immediate aftermath of the Oprah interview there were reliable leaks that the Sussexes hadn't heard from the BRF and were hurt about it and the entire feeling was that they'd explained why they were so hurt and so why weren't the BRF clamouring to apologise and make everything better. I was baffled. You just trashed them - seriously trashed them, including accusations of racism on international TV - and you think they're going to be groveling for your forgiveness? The fuck?

R506 Affirmative action admission and scholarships. The one joint secret she and her father share and have not revealed is how she was admitted to NW and how most of the tuition was actually paid.

[quote]Is a degree in communications from North Western really hard to get?

No. And I'm not sure why people act like it is. I'm not saying they admit everyone, including drooling idiots, but at an undergraduate level your university doesn't say THAT much about you. I went to a top 10 ranked in the world university and there were a lot of perfectly averagely intelligent people there. I know actual idiots who went to Harvard for undergrad. If we're talking about a grad degree it's a little different/more impressive but even at that level some dummies definitely fall through the cracks.

Meghan doesn't seem like a smart person. As you point out, she appears entirely uninterested in anything except herself, and she isn't well-informed on even topics she claims to be interested in. Nothing in that podcast speaks to above-average intelligence.

A little more, especially touching on what those two poor children may have to deal with, from Ashmun's site (it's 35 pages of a text document so I'll try to refrain, but my mother was a narc so this was a life-changing discovery for me and I'm a bit obsessed with her insights - her mother was a narc as well, and she said her Jungian analyst helped her unravel what happened to her in childhood):

If you had a narcissist for a parent, you lived in a world governed by whim enforced without mercy.

Narcissists have normal, even superior, intellectual development while remaining emotionally and morally immature. Dealing with them can give you the sense of trying to have a reasonable discussion with a very clever six-year-old -- this is an age when normal children are grandiose and exhibitionistic, when they are very resistant to taking the blame for their own misbehavior, when they understand what the rules are (e.g., that lying, cheating, and stealing are prohibited) but are still trying to wriggle out of accepting those rules for themselves. This is the year, by the way, when children were traditionally thought to reach the age of reason and when first communions (and first confessions) were made.

Having a narcissist for a mother is a lot like living under the supervision of a six-year-old. Narcissists are always pretending, and with a narcissistic mother it's a lot like, "Let's play house. I'll pretend to be the mother and you pretend to be the baby," though, as the baby, you'll be expected to act like a doll (keep smiling, no matter what) and you'll be treated like a doll -- as an inanimate object, as a toy to be manipulated, dressed and undressed, walked around and have words put in your mouth; something that can be broken but not hurt, something that will be dropped and forgotten when when something more interesting comes along.

Would you mind linking to the site, R513?

As for the Sussex children, I don't think there is much chance that Meghan won't be a nightmare mother and that Harry will choose to keep her placated over protecting his children from her.

Ah, I found a whole lot more (maybe all of it) on Tumblr so I can stop spamming those who aren't interested in Ashmun's deep dive. Sorry I didn't search beforehand:

Diana did the exact same thing. All of the dirt she spilled to the tabs, and she never understood why the Royals failed to appreciate her pain and specialness, instead treating her with increasing distrust and dislike.

I do wonder if Harry has damaged Diana’s reputation, both because she evidently wasn’t such a great mother judging by the results and because Harry displays all her worst traits without any of her supposed charm. You certainly hear much more criticism of her now, but I don’t know how much of that is a result of Harry reminding people of what she was really like and how much is a result of the objectivity that comes with the passage of time.

Very common tactic of narcissists to smear someone and then THEY expect an apology.

They are always the aggrieved party and demanding reparations.

I've experienced this both personally and professionally from narcissists. It is an exercise in futility to try and refute their lies or find common ground.

r490, he married his mother, so don't hold your breath.

Major Johnny was in the royal box at the Festival of Remembrance last night. He has such extraordinarily long fingers.

I’m still calling him Major Johnny even though he was promoted to um, Lieutenant Colonel ? (Oh would he be addressed as Colonel? I dunno, it’s just that Major Johnny rolls off the tongue)

Remembrance Day is all about ME and the loss of my Mummy.

R522. God. He is a creep. Can you imagine if the Queen’s 9-11 message was all about Lord Mountbatten’s death at the hands of terrorists?

Just watched the coverage of the Royals observing Rememberance Day and I wonder what Harry thinks, being here in America, where we don't have any solemn and sacred rituals and consistency like that. Like, people don't really care about Veterans Day here except it's an extra day off work and maybe some sales.

Harry thinks?

Kate's hat and heavy makeup today had her veering into Joan Crawford territory...

The hat really did Catherine no favors.

Today in The Royalist - Harry and Meghan unlikely to visit Sandringham for Christmas. Duh! Was anyone expecting them to come with Dim's book soon to be released?

Look at Northwestern's alumni. Showbiz 101. Alumni who have made their mark on film and television include Ann-Margret, Warren Beatty, Jodie Markell, Paul Lynde, David Schwimmer, Anne Dudek, Zach Braff, Zooey Deschanel, Marg Helgenberger, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Meghan Markle (later known as the Duchess of Sussex), Jerry Orbach, Jennifer Jones, Megan Mullally, John Cameron Mitchell, Dermot Mulroney, Charlton Heston, Richard Kind, Ana Gasteyer, Brad Hall, Shelley Long, William Daniels, Cloris Leachman, Bonnie Bartlett, Paula Prentiss, Richard Benjamin, Laura Innes, Charles Busch, Stephanie March, Tony Roberts, Jeri Ryan, Kimberly Williams-Paisley, McLean Stevenson, Tony Randall, Charlotte Rae, Patricia Neal, Tom Virtue, Nancy Dussault, Robert Reed, Mara Brock Akil, Greg Berlanti, Bill Nuss, Dan Shor, Seth Meyers, Peter Spears, Frank DeCaro, Zach Gilford, Nicole Sullivan, Stephen Colbert, Billy Eichner, Sandra Seacat and Garry Marshall. Directors who were graduated from Northwestern include Gerald Freedman, Stuart Hagmann, Marshall W. Mason, Allison Burnett, Michael Greif, and Mary Zimmerman.

Going to UCLA or USC was too close to home. People would know how low down on the Hollywood Power List her father was.

R522 - Hapless Harry plays "The Diana Card" because that's all he has.

Trying to upstage Remembrance day, Harry is being raked over the coals.

Harry certainly is devoid of anything resembling common sense. He's writing to kids whose parents were lost in battle. His mother died because she got into a car with a drunk driver and didn't put her seatbelt on. My mother died when I was 9 and my father when I was 18. I'm trying to imagine going through life and telling everybody I ever met I was a pitiful orphan. Harry's a whiny little bitch.

Agree, r532. My mother died in a car accident when I was a kid. The people in our small town made a big show of being “supportive,” but it was creepy the way people who barely knew us were always trying to bring up my mother’s death. Grief porn addicts. I quickly developed a distaste for discussing such things publicly. Can’t imagine what Harry is thinking.

He should have been bundled into therapy as a kid. Even as a 12 year old resenting the crowds expressing their grief, that wasn't a normal reaction.

He was troubled before his mother died--she used to tell her friends about his acting out and tantrums. Other children didn't like having him at their parties because he acted like a destructive little dick. His mother dying young gave him the perfect excuse for his antisocial behavior, but it's not the real reason for it.

His revolting wife had no issue using dead kids for PR. This is not a surprising. What an asshole.

Mike Tindall on his TV show today.

I wonder how enraged is seeing Mike on a show and she cant even get voice over work.

I dont know what happened,I know I typed out Meghan ! ^^^

Oh I bet they'd jump at a chance to get Meghan on I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here

She'd be lucky to land Celebrity Big Brother

Meghan reminds me of one of those spoiled brats from the old MTV Show 'My Super 16' whining because she didn't get the exact sports car she wanted.

Old news at link but Christ, is he so fucking ugly!

I'm surprised the trainwreck that is The Talk hasn't snapped up The Duchess of Prattle as a guest co-host or even a permanent one.

She could stand in her fabricated truth daily and eventually push the others out and the show could be re-branded "Dialogue with The Duchess". I believe it's a CBS show so her cheerleader Gayle King should be able to pull a few strings for her.

Harry paid a solo visit to Pearl Harbor as his gesture to Armistice Day and Remembrance Day. His PR posted a couple of snaps of him on the Arizona.

It got so little play you'd miss it of you blinked.

There's something so pathetic about these attempts to look like a royal dignitary. He can't even compete with the interest in Kate's hat on that balcony, let alone the sight of his father and brother leading the service at the Cenotaph yesterday for the first time as King and Prince of Wales.

Speaking of hats, Sophie Wessex looked quite good yesterday, and she was wearing pearls, too. One wonders hopefully if she and Kate will spur a comeback in pearls, and if the pearls Sophie was wearing were a gift from her late Majesty.

Kate looked gorgeous, the hat and coatdress were perfect, but someone please tell her that she has GOT to stop wearing those earrings with daywear.

Totally inappropriate except with full evening dress.

But she looked regally lovely.

Haha, r544, nice idea and I see where you're coming from. But who'd want to be associated with her? Even the women of The Talk have standards. And if she's a host then they can't talk ABOUT her.

True, r545, the attempts to look like a dignitary are beyond lame and easily overshadowed by the real BRF. But with H (&M) I find myself compelled to note the continued PR efforts to make themselves into something they are laughably not. What exactly is it they think they are providing the world with other than being a fast train unrailing?

R546 Refer to the excellent posts above about why narcissists don't read rooms correctly.

For which, by the by, a belated thank-you to the poster.

There are rumours about that Harry is in rehab. And, you will note, that unlike those comical efforts a couple of years ago at the cemetery, this time Harry is seen mingling with other tourists, and it all looks very laid-back - except, of course, for the photographers he brought along.

Here are Kate and Camilla yesterday.

Can't help but picture Meghan in the pictures at R547 grinning like a loon while staring straight into the camera. Yikes.

Did Haz show up at Pearl Harbor as a private citizen, or did he try to spin it into some kind of "official" visit?

Nobosy likes a complainer. H&M should get out of the complaining industry.

Nobody

I wouldn't be surprised if he said his mother's death was his very own personal Pearl Harbor.

Did he wear the Nazi uniform?

R549 quasi official dressed up as private. And it took 2 days for the DM to catch up and put the story up. He used PH to serve as the basis for a letter to children who lost parents to military service.

He lost his mother in a drunk driving accident whilst fucking a sleazy middle aged playboy.

But he's drawing a comparison between himself and those kids.

You couldn't make it up.

Do they have pubs in Hawaii? I bet Harry's photographer was treated to a boozy lunch afterwards where they had to listen to Harry bitch about how The Crown only showed him in one episode paired off with William, while William had time devoted to his relationships with Diana and Elizabeth.

"Hi, I'm Harry. My mum died. Ask me about it"

If you look at R543, you see so much Charles in that face. The eyes. Puts paid to the Hewitt nonsense.

R544 may be on to something. If there's still a View or the like when the divorce is final, it would be a good place for her to land. And one of the few suited to her. On her own show she's too self-obsessed. Is Archegripes still rolling out?

Why did Harry leave the Royal family and then do his best to imitate royal life, in a sad fashion, in California?

R558 he wanted to be a royal but without the drawbacks or hierarchy.

Good fucking luck

You forgot to add responsibility

Because "He always had to be on!" as a senior Royal, the poor dear!!!

Meagain should have Virginia Giuffre on her comedy podcast.

I’m surprised that the world’s most famous woman of colour wasn’t invited to the Black Love Honours brunch in LA.

Harry truly is pathetic. He's a pretend royal now.

From the Maul: "RFK Jr. is 'bewildered' and 'baffled' by Harry and Meghan winning a prestigious human rights award from his family's charity.

Speaking to DailyMail.com exclusively on Monday, he said it was however 'still an encouraging step up' from Anthony Fauci, who won the award two years ago on behalf of his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Alec Baldwin will emcee the event and Hollywood elite including Forest Whitaker, Alfre Woofard, Bradley Whitford, Kate Mulgrew are all listed as special guests this year.

CNN favorites Van Jones and Don Lemon are also expected to attend.

It is awarded by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organization, named after Bobby Kennedy and run predominantly by Kerry Kennedy, RFK Jr.'s sister. "

[quote]Forest Whitaker, Alfre Woofard, Bradley Whitford, Kate Mulgrew

That is...not an A-List list.

And emceed by Baldwin? Let's hope he's not packing.

Why wasn't Meghan at Pearl Harbor with DH (Facebook frauism for Darling Husband)?

"A step up from Dr. Fauci"???!!! What human rights has she campaigned for? Bananas for streetwalkers?

Charles has asked that Anne and Edward be made eligible to act as Counsellors of State. Doesn't boot the "dukes of hazard" but makes them even easier to ignore. An elegant solution.

The Telegraph put the boot in:

From above: The King has formally asked Parliament to create two additional counsellors of state as he moves to ensure the Duke of York and the Duke of Sussex will never be called upon to deputise for him.

The request for an amendment to the Regency Act will allow his siblings, the Earl of Wessex and the Princess Royal, to act as official stand-ins, should the need arise.

By opting to create additional counsellors rather than relieve Prince Harry and Prince Andrew of their duties is thought to have been made to help to keep the family peace.

Could be a case of hiring before firing ... create Anne and Edward as counsellors and, in time, take Andrew and Harry to the trash heap.

Robert Hardman: The new plan, first revealed by the Daily Mail last month, involves adding the names of the Princess Royal and the Earl of Wessex to the current roster. This is much simpler than attempting a major overhaul of the existing Acts, let alone tinkering with the line of succession.

It means that the Duke of Sussex, the Duke of York and Princess Beatrice – who do not undertake royal duties – will not be explicitly excluded from anything. However, they no longer need to be included because the King can call upon others who all happen to be officially involved in public life.

- This is probably the way: leave them out privately without cutting them out publicly.

I'm good with it as long as Harry can't use his Counsellor of State schtick as entitlement to security while in the UK.

The Counsellor or State issue blew Harry's Pearl Harbor off the DM front page, where it had lasted maybe a couple of hours.

The King doesn't need to take Harry and Andrew to the trash heap. The extension of the list of of potential Counsellors of State makes it clear that those two are already on the trash heap - this gesture is just a more polite way of acknowledging it than two fingers up from the balcony of BP.

The change won't be lost on the Home Office. Harry can't use a position to qualify his demands, that his father the King has just made clear is strictly window-dressing.

Everyone knows the score. Harry and Meghan not only bit the hand that fed their royal status, they're still biting it. And they want HRHs for the kids, 24/7 taxpayer funded armed security when in Britain, invites to the Big Dos, trust funds for their kids, ongoing access to a Crown Estate property . . . all whilst Harry's little memoir attacking his father, stepmother, and brother are about to be published.

The two of them are mental. Charles is doing the right thing: pulling up the drawbridge, refusing to engage, withholding those HRHs, and paying the two of them back for their treachery, ingratitude, and cruelty.

Harry's stupid. Markle's crazy.

Next item on the agenda: Amendment to the Regency Act.

And if that memoir lobs any turds into the courtyard of BP, the next agenda item will be an Amendment to the Titles Act stating that retroactive to the current generation of minor children, only children and grandchildren of the Heir Apparent will be entitled to the style and title of HRH/Prince/Princess.

Oh, and your lease on Frogmore Cottage will not be renewed as of 31 March. My equerry, the (newly promoted from Major to Lt Colonel) Johnny Thompson and his family need it.

When the hell is Edward going to get his Duke of Edinburgh upgrade?

^*Actually, that amendment has to be amended . . . that would still include the Harkle kids.

. . . only to children in the immediate succession within four places of the throne.

Charles should just make it so only grandchildren of the king whose parents are working royals get the HRH.

Then refuse them a job if they come back begging.

The granting of styles and titles aren't enacted by Parliament. That's Letters Patent.

I think there's an obvious issue with the fact Harry's kids are US citizens and US residents. Why give titles to kids who live in a country that doesn't have titles? Seems ridiculous. Either they move back to the UK or they stay here as Mr. and Mrs. with their commoner rugrats.

Posting part 14 since we are nearing the end of this thread.

[quote] Harry's kids are US citizens

Archie was born in the UK. Doesn't that make him a UK citizen?

Mike Tindall is only 44, they age like milk over there. I see he told a stupid story about splitting his pants in front of Princess Anne on his reality show.

Presumably both kids have (or are at least eligible for) dual citizenship

Tindall was always rough and ready in the looks department and doesn't look that different from a decade ago.

Tindall has really aged over the last two years.

Tindall doesn’t pretend to be anything other than what he is. He’s not a toff and doesn’t attempt it. That is actually respectable.

Both kids have the option of dual citizenship. Archie was born in England. Harry is still a UK citizen.

And those kids have titles, just nonroyal ones. No HRH, technically yiu are not royal. The Sussexes know this, and that's why they're so pissed off at their kids not getting those HRHs.

And if the King removes the Sussex ducal title, which he'll be able to do with far less trouble next year if the Titles Removal bill passes (it gets its 3rd reading in the House next month, then heads to the Lords), Archie willose his last shot at the HRH, because he is the heir to that title and it comes with an HRH.

Charles is making himself clear: the two ingrates are going to pay heavily for their reckless behaviour. First shot across the bows was Adios Overseas Kids in his first vfx speeches King. Second shot: no immediate HRHs for the kids. Now, Harry is OUT as a CoS. Next, the Regency Act.

And if Harry was so short-sighted as to think his father would never put the boot in re the Sussex title as Harry gleegully wrote that memoir, it may now be dawning on him. Too late, of course.

I think Edeard will get the DoE title either in the New Year honours period, or on the eve of the coronation, which would beca suitable time for it.

Charles isn't the wuss so many thought he was. He's taken a leaf out of his mother's book, isnt bothering to engage, but slowly using the coded symbols the BRF have always used to signify attitude.

The Sussexes should have gotten the message at the Jubly.

Harry could barely get himself to sing Vod Save the King at the Queen's funeral, it's clear on the video footage.

But he wants favourable treatment from that same King.

Their failure to read rooms and poor long-term strategy skills never fail to amaze.

^*God (not Vod) Save the King

As grateful as I am for the well-meaning souls who explain the titles, it all escapes my American brain. If it were somehow necessary to my daily existence to understand it, I might try harder to comprehend the complexities.

But we don’t have a monarchy here. Someone should patiently explain that to Meghan Markle and Just Harry.

[quote]And if the King removes the Sussex ducal title, which he'll be able to do with far less trouble next year if the Titles Removal bill passes (it gets its 3rd reading in the House next month, then heads to the Lords), Archie willose his last shot at the HRH, because he is the heir to that title and it comes with an HRH.

That is a weird figment of your imagination, which is actually only getting second reading on December 9th. It still has committee and report and third reading in the Commons. It hasn't even started the Lords - who all holding titles themselves might look rather skeptically at the notion of the sovereign having the unilateral power to strip titles, but far be it from me to accuse former politicians of self-interest.

Not for the last time, it is an opposition member's bill that would undo a number of constitutional precedents, not the least of which is it puts the sovereign in a position of having a power to act that when last used more than a hundred years ago during war, was exercised by parliament. Does anybody really imagine a Conservative majority in the current circumstances is going to allow for any Private Member's bill to pass, let alone one that would upset as many apple carts as this one would? The capacity to strip titles is in complete defiance of the precedents surrounding royal prerogative. Parliament, the last several hundreds years tells us, is in the business of assuming powers of the crown, not handing them back:

"The most important of these are the power to appoint and dismiss ministers, including the Prime Minister; to summon and prorogue parliament, i.e. end the current parliamentary session; and to give royal assent to bills passed by parliament. Royal assent to bills is automatically granted, once a bill has been passed by both houses of parliament. The other powers are exercised on the advice of ministers, advice which—by convention—the King is normally expected to follow. But as the ultimate guardian of the constitution, the King has power to dismiss a Prime Minister who refuses to resign after losing the confidence of the House of Commons; and in future the King may be expected to refuse an untimely request for prorogation, lest it be declared unlawful."

That's it. The King has two powers, both of which are dynamite: dismissing a PM who has lost the confidence of the House and refusing prorogation of the House if anybody dares try playing another Johnson and using prorogation to run away from Parliament to buy time to save his own ass.

This link will tell you how steep the hill is to pass a Private Member's bill:

"At the end of the debate, the Commons decides whether the Bill should be given its second reading by voting, meaning it can proceed to the next stage." This is where the Conservative majority laughs and laughs and sends this thing to obscurity, either voted down by the majority or sent to committee where the Conservatives control the process.

It's even harder in the Lords: Private Members' bills in the Lords are usually introduced through a ballot held two days after State Opening of a new session of a parliament. In order to enter the ballot, members must submit the short and long title of their bill to the Legislation Office. 25 bills are selected from the ballot. The ballot orders the way in which these 25 bills receive their First Reading in the House but all subsequent legislative debates are scheduled by the Government's Whips Office. Bills not selected in the ballot may be introduced once all ballot bills have been introduced, but members need to re-submit their bill to the Legislation Office. One sitting Friday a month is ordinarily allocated to debating Private Members' bills.

And one final point: Parliament let Edward VIII retain a title. He gave up the throne and bolted. Harry just went where he was told.

Link to new thread for part 14 "

Beware the wrath of the great god Vod, R592.

Sorry I fucked up at R597... someone started a 14 much earlier. It has mass and is linked below

Here's a pic of a monkey who doesn't like Mac.

That didn't kill the thread, so here's Queen Mary looking thinner than ever.

That didn't do it either. So here are some virtual tours of Buckingham Palace.