REVENGE Part 14 - Tell All Books, Scandals and Royal Gossip

Living with Meghan is what's causing Harry to lose his hair.

Maybe she loaned him some straightener?

I refuse to believe that Harry even knew what the attack on Pearl Harbor was. Someone else had to plan his attendance and explain to him why he was going.

I’m somewhat sceptical Meghan would know either, but wasn’t there a movie about it back in her halcyon 1990 years?

I think Harry most likely looked up "famous American war memorials" on google, and picked Peal Harbor, because who doesn't like a nice Hawaiian vacation?

^Pearl Harbor

I still want to know why Meghan isn't there - giving a speech to explain that Pearl actually means Meghan, so it's always been near and dear to her heart.

I wouldn't be surprised if they are mostly living separately lately even if they have no plans to make it official.

Apparently, a photo from April was shared in People as if it was current ? (maybe Meghan's jealous of Harry's Pearl Harbor event) And I noticed this among the comments:

Someone said this in another group….people are led to believe that this happened today . It didn’t, it happened in April at Invictus. Is she trying to give the appearance that her and Harry are still together??

RFK Jr. 'baffled' by Harry and Meghan winning humanitarian award.

R9 Me too Rob. They're as irrelevant as you are, antivax loon

She’s still such an asshole.

Harry! Get your act together! You came from these royal balls!

Another way to push shit uphill: not mentioning CIII's birthday...way to go!

Wouldn't MM have taken some units on diplomacy whilst studying, um, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS?

If it's not about them or they can't benefit from it, they're not interested, R13.

Of course they didn't wish Papa a Happy Birthday. Narcissists always demand courtesies they don't extend.

In keeping with their never ending double-standards, if Papa or anyone else in the BRF doesn't wish their children a Happy Birthday they will be grousing to any media outlet that will listen and of course racism, racism, racism.

Their children have many birthdays ahead of them and Papa has far fewer birthdays left.

According to that article, only William and Kate posted a birthday photo. Not anyone else in the BRF.

Thanks, OP!

R16 It's uncommon for the rest of the family to do birthday postings, there is a "royal" account that does so on behalf of the family, and then only the most senior royals make personal ones. It was always only Charles and Camilla, the Queen, and the (former) Cambridges who posted personal messages as a general thing. It's not as if the Yorks or Anne or the Wessexes posted Happy Birthday Charles! Queen! William!

The Sussexes did it for awhile to keep their We're Members of the Royal Family! aura clean, but as the relationships between the Sussexes and the family became clearer, it became idiotic to keep it up. The Sussexes stopped altogether. I believe the royal family account and/or the Cambridges posted Happy Birthdays to Meghan in August, just before The CUT interview came out and, of course, before they further pissed everyone off by how they behaved at the Queen's funerary events.

Now, William and Kate are Prince and Princess of Wales and they don't have two fucks to give any longer about what the Sussexes think or what the morons who adore the Sussexes think. I'd be surprised if they kept up the birthday shit now.

He chose Pearl Harbor because it fits in with his victim narrative.

I had the misfortune to hear her voice today. It was like nails on a chalkboard.

Hasn't Charles scheduled his coronation on Archie's birthday?

Well, over on Reddit they are absolutely livid. He usurped an American holiday for a British one. Or something. I never gave much thought about the difference between Veterans Day and Memorial Day except that the latter was connected to the Civil War and the former was about the WWI armistice. But apparently when I wasn’t paying attention, the US one *evolved* to honor living veterans while the British one is still associated with WWI. And visiting the Arizona Memorial was wrong because 1) dead veterans and 2) it has its own day, December 7th and 3) why is he play acting a royal visit?

It’s like when the band plays the Star Spangled Banner and everyone puts their hand over their heart. Stand and take off your ever-present baseball cap, sure, but when did people start with the hand over heart business?

It’s not as offensive as attending the funeral of someone you have no connection with, but it’s in the same vein.

"Redfit" can suck it. Who the fuck cares.

The British one covers all wars. There is a 2-minute silence on Armistice Day (11 Nov), for WWI, but the big event is Remembrance Sunday

The latest podcast seems to have given up the "archetype" premise, but not the bellyaching. Apparently women are maligned for doing activism.

Oh, and by the way, Meghan calls up women who are at their lowest point to offer succor. And someone Very Important entreated Meghan to continue her work for women after she got married.

To get the full absurdity of it all, you have to read the DM report; the woman at the Times has been bested by the nonsense and just barely managed a recap this week.

Ouch: ?Meghan says that a few days before she got married, a “very influential and inspiring woman” told her, “Please don’t give up your activism, because it means so much for women and girls,” and a million pounds says it wasn’t Princess Anne. It’s possible that she doesn’t name the person, because the last time she got too specific, it turned out she’d never met the man (the South African Lion King cast member who “told” her that they’d celebrated in the streets the day she got married, just like when Mandela was released)."

R25, who doesn’t dream of receiving an inspirational phone call from a “real life princess”? What could possibly be more helpful?

If she had actually studied IR perhaps r13. Alas, her major as communications. Her school didn't even have a degree in IR while she was there.

I’m really curious about the release date for book. Why January? Surely that’s the worst time for book sales, post Christmas?

It's to leverage buzz and mo' for Meghan's announcement of her candidacy for President of the United States, under the new "Princess Power" ticket, ostensibly within the Democrats.

"Unite With Me, Because You See How I Can Divide!"

Was she that prominent of an activist? Prior to Harry, most people had never heard of her.

She wasn't an activist at all r31. She started all of that in early 2016. She did a couple one time appearances and photo ops, all charged to the charity. Then she quit. She had to hire an agency to get her those appearances too.

Oh. So yet another telling of something that never happened.

Thanks for the new thread, OP.

Thanks for the link, r25.

Another lie, r28, this one about her degree? What was her basis for the internship (was it in Argentina?), the one where she failed the exam and to learn Spanish? Anyway, don't they have advisors/staff to suggest it's a good idea to wish Papa, the fount of all honours, a nice birthday, if they want those titles? Maybe too busy sucking up to Americans.

She doesn't really think she can be POTUS, does she? How do you go from discussing the best crayons with your husband (he hasn't graduated to pencils yet) to laying the groundwork for a POTUS run? Was the Uvalde morbid leaching of victims' deaths all part of an aim for the White House? Um, wouldn't all that be undone by her husband failing to understand the constitution, yet bitching about the Second Amendment anyway. And not because he's concerned it impacts badly on the general population, just because he can't control the press coverage HE receives.

Harry looking super ugly and ferret-like at r13...is it a special skill or a consequence of his railing against the press that they always publish the least flattering pics of him? Although even the shot of him on his book cover is pretty bad. And any footage of him at events about the death of HMTQ showed him looking angry and bitter, not grief-stricken or sad. Failing to sing God Save the King was a childish move for second row Dimbo.

Meghan married into the ultimate life of public service. I think whoever told her not to give up on her activism was giving her a polite reminder of that but Meghan is too far up her own ass to see it as anything but a compliment of her own superiority over the BRF.

From the brilliant take-down of today's Archetypes podcast by Hilary Rose of The TIMES:

“I am processing feelings that I think might be rage or depression, but definitely confusion,” I tell my editor. “Meghan has spoken for more than an hour, and it was in English, but I didn’t understand a word. Help.” “Don’t worry,” she reassures me. “It’s your dimensionality. You haven’t got any.”

And then Meghan breaks my heart with three short words. “Until next week . . .” There’s more. It isn’t over. They promised me this was the last. My editor shrugs. “Recollections may vary.”

I absolutely love the way the royal family have handled these two. From "recollections may vary" to the present request to amend the Regency Act and thereby make Harry constitutionally irrelevant, the Firm has played their cards brilliantly. The fact that Harry and Meghan continue to reveal themselves with every ill-judged action they take is merely icing on the cake (the cake Meghan and Harry wanted to both have and eat it too).

Meghan should rename her podcasts "Story Time."

The Mirror EXCLUSIVE: Harry and Meghan plan to build their own world in new virtual universe to reach more fans. [They] are in talks with an award-winning technology company, with it offering immersive, life-like experiences in a 3D world... will have an even greater ability to spread their message... where they could appear as "digital avatars" of themselves.

Spread their message of what?

Who is she to tell us anything?

Who is he to have any message?

r39 Immersive experiences of what??? They sound dangerously self obessed and taking themselves way too seriously. A pair of hollow vessels for sure.

Us Magazine: “Crisis of Confidence” Has Meghan Markle lost her sparkle? The DoS, 41, had high hopes for her podcast, Archetypes, but nearly three months after its debut, she’s in panic mode. “Meghan thought it would be getting much more traction and that people would be talking nonstop about her guests and revelation,” an insider tells “Us”, adding that Meghan is very unhappy.

“She assumed this podcast would open up a lot of conversations and that she would be asked by news networks for more in-depth answers,” explains the insider. Instead, “her quotes about Deal or No Deal are what stuck out to people the most.” “Meghan is rethinking future guests so that she can make a bigger splash.”

They already live in their own world in their own virtual universe where they are the royalty and stars of their own imaginations.

"Hello everyone, I'm Harry. Welcome to Harry World, where I, the King, will tell you what it's like being the only person in the world to tragically lose a parent at a young age"

And, r44, how bad freedom of speech, etc is because it means the press can't be muzzled and prevented from speaking actually true things as opposed to Sussex Truth

American elections on Tuesday last, and Russian missiles cross Polish borders today, along with amendment to the Regency Act.

She just can't get a break.

Even if Meghan’s podcast was electrifying and absorbing, there is so much content available on so many platforms, it wouldn’t make that much of a splash. The news cycle moves so rapidly, no one can take center stage indefinitely or for very long.

But, of course, her podcast is tedious.

R37??? They've done NOTHING but enable them! It's horrific.

Meghan and Harry are indeed a special kind of stupid.

The message they're spreading is probably not the one they intended

I see a video game coming where they let us play hide-and-seek in the royal palaces. Win and you get dinner with Harry and Meghan. Lose and you get breakfast, lunch and dinner with them.

R48, I disagree. If the royal family were to be perceived as condemning Harry and Meghan or in any way oppressing them, they would be accused of being heartless, racist, and vindictive. Instead, the royal family are coming off as patient, puzzled by H&M's behavior, and loving -- from a healthy distance. The royal family's moves have put H&M on the backfoot -- on the defensive -- and have revealed H&M's cupidity and pretentiousness. I give the royal family much credit for how they have dealt with a very tricky situation. They profess their "love" for H&M and the don't make any moves to take away their titles, while they quietly do not give titles to the children and amend the Regency Act. I would love to know how much Charles has amended his will!

R52. I agree. Emotionally satisfying as it would be for the family to denounce them and reveal all the horrible things I’m sure they know about them, that would have been a disaster in the end.

H & M never recovered from "recollections may vary," because they had no response for it.

Does she need a wet wipe? She is standing in her knowing.

They were mean self, serving assholes on the crisp

Her podcast isn't making a big splash because no one is interested in her fake, mediocre ass. She wasn't happening as a d-list actress, she isn't happening now.

Over here, it looks cowardly. Especially after all they have done. You give them way more power than they have. The family, until very recently looked very weak. There's been improvement, but again, Charles won't remove Andrew or Harry as CoS. William will not have these problems.

Could one of the reasons Meg isn't keen to show her children is because they are basic? May Pa Markle's genes be strong in them.

The little girl looks like Samantha. Archie looks like Pa Markle.

Yep - and they aren't absolutely perfect, she'd be ashamed of them. We already know about his eyes - hers too? They'll never be good enough.

She won't - but it would I think it would be wonderful if she set her sites on some man who didn't want the kids and she happily bundled them off with Harry back to Blighty. He wouldn't raise them, of course, but some sweet nanny would be found.

The only really good looking one was William for a few of his teen years.

I hate to talk badly of children, but my I feel like Lilibet is going to grow up to be a porker. I predict weight will be an issue for her.

Neither child is photogenic and they are both cross-eyed.

My predictions - Charlotte and Louis are going to be a stunners, Lena Tindall will be gorgeous. Can't tell about Lucas Tindall; Mia is likely to have a weight problem. The Phillips girls will not be pretty at all, too soon to tell about the York girls' kids, though Edo is injecting some good genes into that family. August Brooksbank is unlikely to be good-looking, considering the parents. Lady Louise is unfortunate looking, her brother will be ok. Sussex kids - as both are cross-eyed, they are off to a bad start.

Archie is pretty much nailed on to do a Rocco Ritchie across to the UK as soon as. Lilibet may become more of an accessory and stick/be kept around.

I've seen no photos of Archie's face as a toddler, but I hope he grew out of his baby looks. He was a very unfortunate looking baby, to put it mildly. Poor thing.

William is considered attractive to a lot of people. A man doesn't need a full head of hair to be hot - that's a Hollywood thing.

Mothers always think their children are beautiful.

R48 You have to remember that the BRF were dealing with a delicate situation due to Markle's mixed race card. In the Year of Our Lord 2018 the Queen could not refuse a grown man permission to marry the woman of his choice, especially as she was mixed race. They had no choice but to allow the marriage, try to support it and guide it, and unsurprisingly failed. There was only so much the BRF could do as the disaster unfolded.

Once out, the BRF, which is to say the late Queen, simply gave them enough rope to hang themselves, which is what you are calling "enabling".

The trick was to strike a balance between tacit negative response and fuelling outright screams of racism, which, in the end, Meghan herself had to do because the BRF refused to take the bait she offered "just be existing".

Add to this that the Queen was coping with what she knew was Philip's last few months on earth and her own likely demise in a short time, the necessity for ensuring a reasonably friction-free transition to her heir's reign, the Jubilee, et al., and hitting the Sussexes hard with the axe just wasn't the right thing at the right time.

Charles is slowly making the situation clear: he simply withheld the HRHs for the Sussex children; then came the amendment re Counsellors of State and the Regency Act (which probably weakened Harry's case for armed security in Britain against the Home Office), his clear "overseas) remark the moment he became King . . . they are OUT, and whatever they try to do won't polish their royal credentials because the stuff that actually would polish that aura is being withheld. And then there's the Titles Removal bill moving steadily through Parliament.

I think we will know more when Harry's memoir, with its strange timing, is published. But, all in all, the BRF, forced to pick its way through a very thorny path, indeed, surmised, correctly, I think, that in this case, discretion was the better part of valour.

r69, good synopsis. May I add KC IMMEDIATELY making William Prince of Wales and blowing Catherine kisses were also clear messages.

If Meghan thought the media were going to take note of her “celebrity” interview, it’s yet another sign she’s still living mentally in the 1990s. The three broadcast networks don’t rule the country anymore (and she’s not working for one) and hearing a celebrity celebrity spill his or her guys in public isn’t exceptional anymore; it’s just tedious. The world doesn’t stand still for a celebrity interview in 2022.

Smeg doesn't understand why no one wants to listen to Jameela Jamil tell about the 5 times she had to run away from swarms of killer bees, and how two of those times resulted in her being hit by a car.

Smeg also seems to suffer the delusion that by marrying Haz, she herself has become interesting. She did nothing before marrying him to gain any kind of public notoriety. She had no "brand." After marriage, all she's done is whine, lecture, and tell lie after lie.

[quote]And then there's the Titles Removal bill moving steadily through Parliament.

This is a fantasy. If the solution to Counsellors of State was simply to add more, without explicitly shaming anybody, you really imagine the quiet words that go on behind the scenes are going to let this thing proceed? It was a publicity stunt by a Labour MP. The Counsellor of State solution tells you all you need to know.

In the Daily Mail today, there's a story about journalist Allison Yarrow who appeared on Meghan's Archetypes podcast. Yarrow thanked a production company employee for being a great interviewer.

So, Meghan doesn't speak to all of her guests on her podcast but she sure loves to take credit. Meghan is a sham.

Meghan is so much like Trump. Both live in a land of delusion where they are so wonderful and they can't wait to tell you how wonderful they are. Both are surrounded by people who are afraid to tell them no. What they haven't figured out is as much as they have the right to speak their truth, others have the right to not listen to it.

I was thinking how she gets called on her bullshit so much but she keeps doing the same things. I wonder if the thrill of her podcast isn't the reaction but being the star during production? Because if how people reacted mattered, you'd think she'd be doing differently. The Times is brutal to her, but brutal with truth. Strip away the snark and every point is tied to the content of Archegripes.

I tried to listen to her podcast, but only made it thru the first 15 minutes. It's not even interesting enough to hate-listen. Other than Serena Williams and Mariah Carey, has she had any guests of note?

Do we have any intel on when the Netflix reality show on them is debuting? Any guesses on whether it will be anything other than a hagiography of these two hags?

R75...she doesn't interview her own guests?!? How much does she get paid for this?

And yet again, Sussex PR turns out to have been floating bullshit. The GQ Men of the YearcAwards tonight and not only isnt Meghan there, she isn't listed amongst the honorees.

Another story floated without any basis in reality.

And, on Reddit, another insider reports that when she did that voiceover for Disney, theyvwanted to donate her fee directly to the elephant organisation. She demanded that she do it through Archewell for tax purposes. Disney agreed, but when it asked for proof that it had been donated, Disney's request was ignored and no proof was ever found. So Disney donated the amount on its own.

Meghan couldn't even play fair with the elephants.

And thatscwhycDianey said publicly that she needed Disney more than Disney needed her, and privately said it would never work with her again.

And, one of her former podcast guests, Allison Yarrow, just let the cat out of the bag by publicly thanking one of the Spotify producers on the project for being such a great interviewer.

Meghan isn't even doing all her own work on this sham.

Harry and Meghan are fucking con artists. But they're lousy ones because the first rule of the con game is not to let it show.

Harry has completed the narration for the Audiobook version of “Spare”.

She must have told Harry so many lies while also convincing him she was the smartest, most adored, most connected celebrity ever. Not that she has any shame about that. She got what she wanted. But God, can you imagine being stuck with her day after day? Listening to her lies, self-congratulatory delusions, and refusal of any criticism? No wonder Haz looks like a shell of himself. He thought he could weaponize her against his family and he's the one suffering.

At some point, somebody's going to write a book on these two that's Bowers only without such an evident axe to grind. There is a trail of rolling eyes at best, burned at worst, that really would make an interesting story because these two seem really dreadful.

I just got my Valentine Low book! Excited to read it.

Hot mess

CNN Senior National Correspondent Sara Sidner moderates a timely discussion with former First Lady and Founder of the Girls Opportunity Alliance Michelle Obama, co-founder of the Clooney Foundation for Justice Amal Clooney and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation co-chair Melinda French Gates about their shared mission to empower girls through greater educational opportunities across the globe. The event will air exclusively on CNN on Sunday, November 20th at 8pmET/PT.

Did Meg's invitation get lost?

^ That CNN thing has standing in your knowing written all over it.

RACISTS!

I'm getting a fucking Ripple of Hope Award! Ha! Ha! Suck it LOSERS!!!

Ripple of Hope sounds like a new Ben and Jerry’s flavor.

[quote]R75...she doesn't interview her own guests?!? How much does she get paid for this?

[quote]So, Meghan doesn't speak to all of her guests on her podcast but she sure loves to take credit. Meghan is a sham.

Look at her skin color above and then when she has to dial up her blackness she spray tans and uses dark face. Is it still wearing black face if you are part black?

So then... who actually ate the tacos?

She is sex on legs, y'all.

I'm baffled as to why she wants to go through all this work just to look like a complete twat instead of just kicking back and enjoy being a vapid rich wife.

[QUOTE]Ripple of Hope sounds like a new Ben and Jerry’s flavor.

It sounds like a new flavor of fortified wine for skid row drunks. Maybe Meghan can shill for Bucky's...

When I see Revenge I keep hearing that song "Are you reading for the sex girls?" from Revenge of the Nerds

How sad that their kids' Christmas will just be their scowling father, seething mother, stoned Doria and resentful nannies forced to work the holiday without overtime pay.

Wow, she looks so ugly and cross-eyed at r94. WTF would pay for her to promote anything? She looks too intellectually deficient to even resemble a female Zoolander in that video.

[quote] I'm baffled as to why she wants to go through all this work just to look like a complete twat instead of just kicking back and enjoy being a vapid rich wife.

Ego. She thinks she’s SMARTER than those women. And she wants to be the most famous supreme ruler of the galaxy with every pair of eyeballs fixed on HER and every tongue speaking of her beauty and genius and superiority. She is a void of abject need. Money alone - regardless of how much - won’t begin to fill that hole.

And Harry doesn’t have enough money for her to actually sit back and relax.

The Ripple of Hope awards also have a backstory: the War of the Kennedys. William's Esrthshot Prize that he's coming to Boston to search ccx and celebrate, is tied up with the JFK side. The RFK side (speaking of Spares) is headed up by none other than anti-vax crusader, wife beater, [former?] drunk, RFK Jr.

He's so scandalous even his sister, Kerry, also involved with the RoH awards, had to issue public statements distancing herself from his lunatic crusades.

So, in a massive irony that will probably be lost on many, the scion of the younger bro is trying to compete with the far more prestigious work and foundation/awards of the run by the children of the Camelot president.

RFK Jr can't compete with Caroline & Co.

So the Spare from one side of the Pond is showing solidarity with the Spare from the other side.

As usual, the Spares will lose the glitter and prestige battle, not least because there are already criticism out there about RFK's corruption, not to mention his sanity, and why people who have done so little substantive humanitarian work compared to others on the list r are getting awards.

Odd that both awards ceremonies are taking place in early December, innit?

Which ticket do you want, DLers: the Prince and Princess of Wales at the Earthshot awards, or the Sussexes at the RoH awards?

Show of hands, please!

^*. . .coming to Boston to award and celebrate

Can't believe the Sussexes are being paid $100,000,000 for their Netflix doc. That is an insane amount of money.

R103, no one thinks that’s what they are actually getting. The Sussexes announced that their overall deal with Netflix “could be worth” up to that amount, typical fantasy language from them. No other source ever confirmed that number.

Recollections may vary

R104 In fairness, it's the figure the media pushed. But all these things work the same way: a retainer (probably in the low, at best mid) seven figures, for production, writing, etc. Then the publisher/streamer/company either accepts or doesn't the finished product; if it accepts it, the product must then make enough money to cover the retainer, and then the writer/producer gets a percentage of how much money the product makes. No one gets paid $100 million up front, no one.

As it is, Netflix dropped "Pearl", Meghan's pet self-promotion product. The Invictus Games, which were supposed to be their own documentary, was so weak in appeal that it got folded into the reality show about the SUSSEXES AND THEIR LIVES, and we don't know whether or when or in what form that's going to take, either.

Spotify, as the anonymous columnist who explained how all that works in the Telegraph over the summer (it was posted here well back), has absolutely lost money on Archewell and its incorrectly named Archetypes series, because it wasn't hooked up to any marketing, for starters; and, interest has declined with every successive boring, whingeing, self-justifying one. On the day of the last one, it came in at 16.

So what's left is Harry's "bombshell" memoir, a sprinkling of frantic PR efforts like the Indiana Women's Foundation speech and the RFK Ripple of Hope awards . . . and what do they do after that?

Notably, Kerry Kennedy has, with the stupidity that characterises the later generation of Kennedys, said that Meghan is getting the award for "challenging the BRF on racisim, and that makes her heroic".

This kind of statement is, of course, the last thing the Harkles want right now, because they're still clinging on to hopes of HRHs from the King for their kids, Harry's lawsuit against the Home Office is still pending, and their titles could be in very real danger if that bill passes next year.

Even that sleazy creep Omid Scobie acknowledged that Meghan might have "misinterpreted" why her kids didn't, like Kate's ger HRHs at birth.

So Kerry Kennedy looks like she did no research, doesn't know or doesn't care about the bullying evidence, ignores the fact that she's giving an award to someone who told verifiable lies on Oprah, and told them about the family of the man who is now Britain's Head of State.

And then the moronic Sussexes wonder why it never quite goes to plan.

If Netfix edit it to reveal all, then it could be an accidental hit and make them money as producers. The story of their love and all around worthiness sounds like a total flop.

The Netflix documentary on the Sussex Clowns will supposedly be released next month.

I don't have netflix, 10 hours or whatever of that pair would not entice me.

R107 It's a safe bet that one or both of the Harkles will be listed as "executive producers", the industry code for subjects getting an extra cut of the profits. If they are, and I'd wager a month's pension they will be so listed, they'll have had to have been given some control in order to ensure the thing makes them look as good as possible. So, any ironies (cf, The CUT interview) will be, er, accidental.

It will be hagiographic, or attempt to be. And even in that respect, will make the Harkles look silly.

It always comes back to the same thing with them: they're trying too hard, and one can see the wheels going round.

That's why the Sussexes should have stayed in: the Waleses don't have to try so hard, because presence and attention are built into their roles. The Sussexes ditched the one arena in which it all would have been cut to hand, would have come naturally.

They totally miscalculated their innate appeal outside that arena, fucked up incredibly badly with the Oprah interview, which made them notorious, not heroic,; ditto Scobie's silly and clearly written by them book; and have been trying to backpedal to where they once were ever since.

They've made one mistake after another starting with the Tom Brady No One Asks If I'm Okay interview in Bostwana, and they haven't ever gotten ahead of it.

Tom Bradby was one of the journos both Will and H trusted. It was said that Will cut him off after that programme. TB did the interview for William's engagement to Kate, which was a world away from the H engagement one.

[quote]She is sex on legs, y'all.

On its LAST legs.

R106, Kerry Kennedy, who popped an Ambien and then took to the highway where she sideswiped a tractor trailer truck

Kerry Kennedy, who recklessly fucked her tennis pro lover in her own bed and husband Andrew Cuomo walked in on them.

On chicken legs, you mean

The same Andrew Cuomo, former governor of NY who screwed Congress out of a Dem majority by messing up the redistricting in order to appear bi-partisan for an intended future WH run.

R115, And the same Andrew Cuomo who banished the State Trooper on his private detail to the Canadian border after he learned the trooper was banging his adult daughter.

Oh, we’re fucked.

Wait, so the Invictus documentary has been scrapped? What a nice thing to do to the servicemen and women!

The Invictus documentary was deemed to boring and folded into the broader docuseries. And of course, Meghan fell out with the Oscar-nominated director they first assigned to her.

I'm expecting the Meg and Harry doc to come across exactly like Jon and Kate +8. The loser, pothead husband and his narcisstic, shrew of a wife.

Another one of the Archetypes podcast producers, Rebecca Sananes, has just said she did most of the "heavy lifting" for it.

Man, everything Meghan touches turns to shit.

If The Crown was that bad, I cannot wait for this! This will transcend mere hate watching... that's plain old so bad it's entertaining. This will be deluded absurdity not seen since Sextette. The reviews alone will represent a deployment of the English language that will be neoChurchillian.

[italic]She's gonna break Netflix![/italic]

R121, link please. Be delighted to see it!

The Netflix documentary could be a ratings bonanza if it showed the reality of their relationship and likely breakdown of their marriage. If H&M own a % of it they could make a pretty penny off of it. Just saying.

Unless the Netflix doc shows what self-important, short-sighted, vengeful nitwits they are, it will fail as badly as H/M have failed.

No one want to watch a story of their great love.

For the record, they’ll be separated by end of 2024.

If the Titles Deprivation Act of 2023 takes his title away, can he get it back if he divorces her?

Watching the dissolution of the marriage these two truly despicable people would be a show millions would love to watch.

Technically, Charles is the font of all honor and could give Harry a dozen titles if he wanted.

Don't hold your breath until that happens.

It was this:

^fount

"The fount of honour (Latin: fons honorum) is a person, who, by virtue of his or her official position, has the exclusive right of conferring legitimate titles of nobility and orders of chivalry on other persons."

Font is a form of print or a poster on LSA.

Oh, DEAR!

R125 I suspect both storylines will be inadvertently evident in the finished product.

Because, as with the scorpion in the fable, the Sussexes can't help it: it's their nature.

They need to up the ante on their failures. They fail at everything,so its getting boring.Thye need to fail spectacularly at something,I mean really go all out.

By the way, the director of the Netflix reality show, Liz Garbus, is a business partner of . . . Rory Kennedy, RFK's posthumous daughter (cf. that Ripple of Hope Award).

And now, children, you know how the little bunny rabbit got its fluffy white tail.

^Anent that, RFK Jr himself said he couldn't figure out why the Sussexes were getting this award. Although, rabid anti-vaxxer that he is, he added, they were an "encouraging stet up from Anthony Fauci" who got the award a couple of years ago . . .

A comic blend of truth and insanity.

You couldn't make it up.

Link to the Daily Beast article with RFK's remarks on the "bewildering choice".

Lessee, the podcast is a bust, which gives them two more chances to make a big splash and save their dwindling fame: the Netflix doc and Harry's book. If those tank, they are toast.

R76 is OBSESSED with Trump. He lives rent free in your head. How exhausting for you.

They can have another baby with a name that will be embarrassing by age 10

Yes, we already know r134. That's already made the rounds on other sites.

R101 is an illiterate moron who needs to Google "Kerry Kennedy"

But wait! There's more!

Arrested after leaving the scene.

Actually, it sounds like Kerry and Meghan have a great deal in common.

I may have jumped the gun on the RFK/Haz connection, but I'm damned if I'm illiterate.

R134

R142, Ethel may have arrived in a wheelchair, but when the jury acquitted Kerry, Ethel miraculously walked out of the courtroom without requiring it.

r142 Ethel looks frail.Sadly I dont think shes long for this world.

Don't know if it's true but it is interesting

How humiliating.

There's also this tweet from a Canadian podcast producer shining a light on another lie. Sophie Trudeau was nowhere near Meghan's pool for that podcast interview. She was in a studio in Canada. Good lord this women, she does make me laugh!

I like this take, and the gorgeous photo they used.

I'm not sure if we got last week's article , so i'll add it. Really they are just a comedy act at this point in time

Speaking of books, this one I got a preview (work in media were sent them all day, everyday) and it is actually hysterical. Very DL sarcastic and spot on. It is a book of Rants from a comedian (I have since checked her out and she’s original and hysterical, the Anti Amy Joke Stealing Shumer) it’s called 100 Things To Hate Before You Die and her name is Claudia Comedy on socials. I think she’s a DJ as well. But she’s done stand up for years and wrote this book while dealing with a rare form of cancer during the pandemic. I was impressed since the majority of books we get are worse than trash, even the covers aren’t good enough to display as door stops! DLers will love this.

I don't find the separate studios thing particularly shocking but the separate interviewers is bonkers.

When is somebody going to write the definitive take down of this lady's game?

And, word out now (the TIMES carried it) is that the first director on the Netflix reality show left over "creative differences", that wonderfully vague catch-all phrase that is a code word, especially where Meghan Markle is concerned, for an impossible working relationship.

Meanwhile, so far, Netflix itself has yet to confirm publicly that the first installment of a 13-part "docu-series" on the Sussexes will drop next month - which is two weeks away. No advance PR with the date, no trailers, no no marketing tie-ins . . . and, yet, Meghan herself insists it's been done ("if not quite the way we would tell it"), and every day another "insider" insists it will begin next month, despite the Sussex's pleas to move it back into 2023.

The comments btl on the TIMES article are brutal, one of which said that with 13 episodes, the series could cover almost all the loos in their Montecito mansion.

So, what gives, who knows?

Usually, if something is "hotly anticipated", the producer of a project gets lots of PR into the pipeline well in advance of the drop.

That nothing, absolutely nothing, about the Sussexes ever runs on the rails that everyone else's choo-choo runs on remains the hallmark of their fatal characterological flaws.

R153. The separate studio is shocking since Meghan implied they were together.

R153, Drew Barrymore was interviewing guests her first season from a separate location and then “split screening” them so it looked as though she was sitting across from them.

R155, Meghan's constant fabrications must be routine in the entertainment world, and if she were just an actress no one would notice or care. The problem is that she claims to have special status as a victim-humanitarian-Princess. Her lying up a storm matters because of that.

In the next interview I hope they have a time delay like this:

I don't understand her rather bizarre need to lie constantly. Is she just crazy? Lazy? Think everyone else is stupid? Does it for fun?

R159, The guy on Youtube who talks about narcissists, calls this behavior "Revision of History".

13 episodes?? That can’t be right. It really would be more like a reality show than a documentary.

Thanks for the very funny articles at R150 & R151. Some media really have her number and are enjoying mocking her. The Cut interview was first, then they hysterical Vogue (I think) cover, now this guy. Everyone is enjoying watching these two sink!

Just read a rumor that she's chasing Tyler Perry. LOL. Bearding for him would be much more lucrative than Duchessing for the Spare. Tyler is worth 1 billion and she could have a straight guy on the side. I can just see her at Tyler Perry Studios telling the hundreds or thousands of employees "You KNOW I'll be your boss soon..."

MEG-Dea!!! Dawn of terror!!

Is Miss Perry dumb enough to get involved with a noted Blabber mouth like Meg?

And by the way I'm now a billionaire and single.

R165 that closeted bitch will drops Megs like yesterdays news the second she splits with Harry. Aint nobody got time for that Sponge Bob square bodied bitch without Harry attached to her. bet she realizes it too. I still love that clip where Kate froze the shit out of her at that funeral.

Tyler Perry is not out?

R34, she has a degree in communications from Northwestern. I don't know how she got the internship in South America if, as a poster above you claims there was no International Relations major at the time she was a student there. I did look into the Foreign Service exam, however. It turns out that only 20% who take it pass, so her failure doesn't say a lot. As far as any claims that she has any intention of running for president, I won't believe it until she makes a statement. She has enough failures, bad acts and faux pas that have been revealed that people don't need to make things up.

R169 communications at Northwestern is for people who want to work in TV. Supposedly, her uncle was in the Foreign Service and got her a job as a gofer at an embassy for a summer. Not that she bothered to invite him to her wedding.

Her father’s brother is a diplomat and got her the internship…

That was cruel not to invite him and other relatives, r170. I remember hearing about the wedding afterward and thinkinh how bad it looked she had all those celebrities but only one relative. It makes me look at the people who watched her wedding and champion her in a very different way.

With the internship, even if she did pass the exam, could she have made a go of the job without speaking Spanish?

The Democrats will be dead to me if they support her running for any level of political office.

But if she does run for anything, say as a senator (laughable, I know), she will have to drop her titles and the republican claws will really come out. Sections of the Dems, too as they must have many more worthy candidates. Plus she seems to be incapable of work. And how will she handle being part of a political machine when 70 engagements over 18months in the BRF left her suicidal? When she's taken so long to start to fulfil her streaming obligations?

Meghan has repeatedly proven that she can't keep her mouth shut. She'll never be elected to any high political office with that reputation--pols on both sides have too much to hide.

She should run for the border!

You idiots that keep bandying about the utterly ludicrous idea this nit wit is thinking of politics have issues yourselves.Utter rubbish.

If we had Meghan on the left and Trump/DeSatan on the right - I'd be for burning the goddamned country to the ground.

Nihilism baby! Sons of Anarchy!!

The Maul reporting (in an apparent "exclusive") that Prince Edward will not be made Duke of Edinburgh as it interferes with Charles' slimmed down monarchy.

Even the Maul is uniformly unimpressed.

Edward has been very loyal, works consistently on behalf of the crown and is in the embarrassing position of this being his parents' wishes and known. I think this is a mistake and unfair and I don't know - if it's true - why Charles would do this. It's all his purview. The title is a re-creation. He could grant it or proclaim it for life, and James Severn then inherits the earldom. I hope this is the Maul playing silly biscuits. I feel rather badly for Edward if it's true. Course it would be the kind of mistake Charles would make.

The intention of these two airheads was to have Harry be President and Meghan FLOTUS so that they wouldn't ever be seen as 'less than' beside his brother, the future King William and his sister-in-law the future Queen Catherine. I expect this was a 'baked' and 'blazing' revelation with Meghan chiming on about how "anybody can become President of the United States!!!" (And the tRump presidency certainly endorses that idea!). And with his new 'high' and mighty stature, there would never be any expectation of bowing and curtseying. Unfortunately they didn't take in to consideration that they are low-functioning and unlikable.

Charles wants to keep all the goodies for himself, or in this case the royal dukedom to bestow on his grandson. He might find himself with a slimmer monarchy than he envisioned. Anne's a workhorse but she hasn't taken a vow for life, and may wish to spend her sunset years doing something else.

Or that the President has to be a native-born American. It's in the Constitution.

They wouldn't know that.

Charles must have promised Edward something in exchange for keeping the Edinburgh title--probably money.

I kind of don't believe that Charles will withhold the title from Edward. I think Anne would give him an earful if it actually was Prince Philip's or Queen Elizabeth's wish that Edward receive the title. Charles would be a fool to go against the wishes of his parents, and Anne would be all over Charles if he reneged on that. We'll see what comes through time.

That's sad.

But could Charles think it would make it easier to cut Harry off - having done something like this to his brother - all in the firm aim to slim down the monarchy?

He could slim it down some more by stepping aside in favor of William, saying he's unwell or some such. I think William would know how to handle Harry and that b-word wife of his.

I don't see how denying Edward the title Duke of Edinburgh slims down the monarchy. He would be a working royal either way.

One less dukedom - or duchy or whatever - to pass on, in perpetuity. Just get rid of the title?

A nice precedent for getting rid of the Duchy of Sussex.

R178 Harry is legally ineligible to run for President even if he becomes an American citizen. You have to be a native born citizen to run for that office.

What's this about Edward not getting the DoE title? What did I miss?

^All right, just checked the DM. So far as I can tell, the story is still an unconfirmed one, but one Richard Eden insists that a palace source told him.

Why a Palace source would do an end run around the King like that is unthinkable.

What's more, it doesn't "slim down" anything: the Wessexes will still be working royals, and Edward's son carrying the title doesn't remotely mean that James will also be a working royal. And, the title would stop carrying an HRH with James' son or grandson, I forget which.

Something about this doesn't make sense. Charles already carries two ducal titles. If he's holding on to it, it's probably for Louis, because if Andrew is still alive when Louis gets married, the York title, traditionally given to younger sons when they marry, won't be available.

This just doesn't add up, and it doesn't look good, either, if it's true.

^Further, if Charles plans to keep the Edinburgh title, but claims he wants to do so to slim down the monarchy rather than pass it on, that means the title will go into abeyance. Either it's used or it disappears. Of course, he's not going to "use it"! He's the fucking King, he's not going to go occasionally by Your Royal Highness Duke of Rothesay and Edinburgh. And he's also now the Duke of Lancaster.

The slimming down the monarchy bit doesn't make sense at all. What does make sense is that Charles wants this particular title to be passed on through his own line, not Edward's, which is rather mean.

It's a bad look given how much was made, including in writing on their wedding day, of Philip's and the Queen's united wish that Edward have the title.

This isn't where Charles should be fighting battles. In reality it makes no nevermind to the monarchy's business if the Edinburgh title goes through Edward's line. No one is fussed about the Kents and Gloucesters passing on their grandfather's titles to their heirs, who aren't going to be working royals.

[quote]Why a Palace source would do an end run around the King like that is unthinkable.

My only guess is trial balloon.

R185 The Sussex title was in abeyance when the Queen gave it to Harry. They come and go like that, but it doesn't mean they stop existing.

And in fact, when Charles dies, the Edinburgh title WILL be passed on: William as his oldest son will inherit it, along with the Duchy of Lancaster. The oldest son inherits the father's titles when the father dies. It isn't going away by Charles keeping it: it will simply go on through Charles' line instead of Edwards.

And Charles can't give it to George or Louis when they marry. Traditionally, the Sovereign gives the son on his wedding day a different title, not one of his own, the way when they all married, William got Cambridge, Harry got Sussex, Andrew got York, and the Queen's father got York.

The only reason it was expected that Charles would give it to someone else, which is unusual, was because it was made so public that it was destined for Edward, who took the lesser earldom's title in the expectation of inheriting his father's ducal title.

The more I look at this, the nastier it looks.

Is there some reason why Elizabeth didn't just give Edward the title after Philip died?

See the Dukes section. Edinburgh reverts to the crown (meaning no one currently holds it) when Charles succeeded.

^Yes. It wasn't hers to give. Charles inherited it the moment his father died, and it was out of her hands.

Thanks R193 & R194. Reminds me of Robert's Rules of Order.

BTW, John Oliver did quite the take-down of the monarchy this past week. (the most recent one - don't know the date)

OUCH! Something like: the BRF played a huge part in the slave trade, now claim they played a huge part in ending slavery - now both can be true, but he hates the hypocrisy of them ignoring the negatives, never really admitting or apologizing for what they did, etc. Then disputes that they bring in more money than they take away from the people. There's more. He said we'll see if ITV shows this - and if they don't, they'll have Winston Churchill going down a water slide to Benny Hill's theme song, over and over...

It's possible that Charles won't bestow the Edinburgh title on Edward until after his own coronation.

R110 “I’d wager a month’s pension” - what year is this, 1812?

"Princess Anne Deserves to be Closer to Throne"

Might King Charles find the courage to bump the two “non-working” royals and their children from the line? I hope so. Giving Anne the prominent position she deserves would be hugely popular.

R191, it’s been suggested that the source of this rumor/information is the vindictive Duke of York.

Elizabeth couldn't give the title Duke of Edinburgh to Edward because Charles was the 2nd Duke of Edinburgh, having inherited it as Philip's eldest son. Now the title has merged with the crown so, no, Charles doesn't pass it down to William. However, the title is in abeyance right now and Charles (or later William) could give it to whomever he wishes. As for Charles bumping the non-working royals and their children down the line and bringing Anne higher, he does not have the power to alter the succession. The succession is determined by Parliament and has been since 1689 when Parliament offered the throne to William and Mary, skipping the current king James II and his son. Parliament later passed the 1701 Act of Settlement which gave the throne to the Protestant House of Hanover, skipping over the surviving Catholic Stuarts and 51 other Catholics. More recently, Parliament passed the 2013 Succession to the Crown Act, which removed the male-preference system for those born after October 2011.

DM quotes an official BP announcement in 1999 which is as clear as Waterford crystal:

"The Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and the Prince of Wales have also agreed that the Prince Edward should be given the Dukedom of Edinburgh in due course when the present title held now by Prince Philip eventually reverts to the Crown."

Does Tyler Perry have any family that could become the family little Rachel Markle never had?

Won't someone PLEASE give Thomas Markle's little bean the family she never had. So she can then spit in their face when she's through with them.

R192 It's the way it's referred to here. Both the verb and the noun.

We also say "punters" for "bettors".

We also use "s" where you use "z".

We also, especially outside London and farther north, often use the word "folk" for "people".

We have quite a few turns of speech that you don't.

We aren't your mirror image.

Just relax and enjoy our "quaintness".

Oh, we don't say "Cheerio!" for goodbye or Ta Ta! any longer. I know you will be sad to hear it.

I finally got the Bower book from the library. I must be the first person in Los Angeles to check it out. While some of the typos bother me ("Woodward Hills" for "Woodland Hills" right out of the gate, ugh, it's clear Bower is not familiar with LA), it's better written than I'd anticipated, meaning a good, detailed read. So far (about a third in) what comes across is Meg's hustle. She just keeps pushing and trying, you have to admire it.

Duke of Edinburgh is the most recognizable and high-profile Scottish title in the monarch's remit. Having it held by the Queen's consort - good PR. Giving it to Edward, who has nothing to do with Scotland, would be ridiculous, tone deaf and provoke the Scots Nats. Keeping it in the main line of the succession would be by far the best thing to do - e.g. the eldest child of the Prince of Wales is made Duke or Duchess of Edinburgh, so it always reverts to the monarch and doesn't vanish off into the ether, like Kent., Gloucester and Sussex will. There's nothing to stop Charles simply making Wessex a dukedom if Eddie has to be a royal duke. Whatever was agreed in 1999, the world is a different place now.

The Edinburgh story remains unconfirmed by the Palace at the moment.

If it's true, it represents the first serious misstep of Charles's reign. Most people have an instinctive dislike of failing to respect the wishes of the dead, and broken promises look worse than one extra ducal title amongst members who won't be working royals.

And, it raises suspicions that given the gesture's insignificant impact on the institution, it's really down to meanness on Charles' part.

The reason, I think, that the Queen was loved as well as respected, was the curious aura of generosity of spirit she possessed. One of her biographers mentioned that she displayed the quality even in young girlhood.

It was, I believe, a critical component of the deep regard in which she was held.

Cecil Beaton noticed it when he was called in to photograph the new baby, Princess Anne, with her toddler brother. "Meek but not humble" or perhaps the other way round, was his immediate impression when then Princess Elizabeth came in to greet him.

Charles needs to bear this in mind if he Hope's to win more than respect.

Of the rest of the lot, curiously, only Edward resembles the Queen in this respect, and Kate, the only married-in who carries the stamp of knowing it isn't about her.

It's why, no matter how hard she tries, Meghan can't get the public to like her: it's a quality she not only doesn't possess, but inherently despises.

Charles should take note of all this, deny the story, give Edward the title, sack the courtier who spread the story, and stick it to Richard Eden and teach him a lesson.

^*if he hopes (not Hope's) to be .

Fucking autocorrect. . .

Whoever the dowager duchess is at 206 should move into the 21st century. A handful of Welsh independence supporters complaining about the heir to the throne being Prince of Wales is one thing; giving the major Scottish title to the 11th in line is a different thing altogether.

I half wonder if the Mail's trying to provoke a story. In any event, clarity should come soon. This is low level Shakespearean in it's nature... the new king defying the wishes of the dead king at the expense of his own brother. Which is to say all the other major papers are chasing this now like a fox hunt, so if it's rubbish or if it's true, they won't give up until something definitive is said on the record.

Ed is the same age as me and I just like him for his fuck ups and general good nature. I hope Charles makes him DoE because he has been quietly working with the DoE awards for years.If this is all tied in with the Andrew and Harry shite , then it's not really fair.

Not that any of this matters in any way, but it seems like the family row over who gets grans furniture.

FWIW that story has sunk way down in the Mail's online page. It's not hard to find but it's not slapping you in the face either. A walk back?

r211, the pages online go by the clicks, so nobody cares.

I suspect Elizabeth wanted Sophie to become Duchess of Edinburgh because that was Elizabeth's own title before becoming queen ("HRH The Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh"). I agree with R206 that it would be churlish of Charles to not grant his mother's and father's wish and deny Edward and Sophie the titles. We'll see...

Charles would be wise to let it known that he intends to create no more hereditary titles at all. The practice is way out of date and meaningless; there are no non-royal ones created these days and the House of Lords is shifting into something else. He could grant working royals titles for life or even just 'at pleasure', which stops any Andrew/Harry situation ever developing again. So, the heir would be prince/princess of Wales, their eldest the duke/duchess of Edinburgh (reflecting three of the UK's components across the generations; NI is a bit trickier); York and other available titles could go to second and third children as long as they were working royals.

r205 I don't believe that anything other than a tiny fringe element of scotnats will be provoked by Edward becoming Duke of Edinburgh. None of my friends in Scotland who support independence are bothered by this at all. It's like when people claimed there would be uproar if King Charles didn't make Archie and Lilibet HRH and Prince and Princess. He didn't and there was no big uproar.

Your friends may or may not represent Scottish opinion, R215,; making someone who has nothing whatsoever to do with Edinburgh or Scotland DoE is just pointlessly risky to no actual gain. There are no positives in doing it. Making Prince George, say, DoE would be much more easily played as a positive thing, as he will anyway end up as king of Scotland in the normal course of events.

My mother is a malignant narcissist and pathological liar. It's part of the disorder.

[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.]

Oh, we're back to that rushed effort to create a daunting word shame re linking to the Maul.

Anyway, rando post ^ but some good stories about that rake Snowdon and some of his great photos of the gang over the years. I went down a rabbit hole.

I think it's really shitty if Charles isn't going to give him the title. When you look who holds it in the immediate family, he'd elevate the rank. And Edward and Sophie have clearly been counted as part of the moving ahead team. If he really proceeds with this they should just fucking retire and count their money and let him figure it out.

Charles seems to be failing to make a distinction between the costs and bloat of monarchy and the titles, which are just part and parcel. Paring titles isn't going to save any money.

r217, I have one. My dad may or may not have died in 1976, I heard the conversations with the uncles. God help any children .

Charles doesn't hold the Edinburgh title now that he's king. A monarch does not hold a title that he grants. (The Dukedom of Lancaster is a separate and only thing.)

There is precedent for granting Edward Edinburgh for his life, rather than as inherited. Cornwall and Rothesay are titles traditionally held by the heir to the throne that do not pass to his heir. You could hold those without being titled Prince of Wales. Following tradition and precedent PoW is granted by creation by the new sovereign. (Charles literally said "Today, I am proud to create him Prince of Wales, Tywysog Cymru, the country whose title I have been so greatly privileged to bear during so much of my life and duty", having already said earlier in his address to the nation: "As my Heir, William now assumes the Scottish titles which have meant so much to me. He succeeds me as Duke of Cornwall and takes on the responsibilities for the Duchy of Cornwall which I have undertaken for more than five decades."

Charles could simply grant the title with the remainder that it is for life. Edward's got, what, another forty years of life? George gets Cornwall as heir. York could be vacant by the time Louis needs a little. They all hold titles anyway: HRH Prince or Princess.

As the monarchy changes the Victorian (or older) traditions, like granting royal dukedoms upon marriage, could give way or be changed. It was unprecedented to proclaim a new Prince of Wales when the previous sovereign had been dead barely a day, but they did it and the world didn't end. The runaways children are technically HRHs at present but haven't been acknowledged as such. Yet William - or Charles or the Queen - moved very early to establish the Wales (then Cornwall) children as HRH princes and princess. If there's one thing I think you can bet on it's that just because it happened before doesn't mean it's going to happen exactly the same way going forward.

I still think it is really shitty of Charles to withhold that Dukedom with so much awareness of what was meant to happen.

Below at story about the fire at Windsor. Thirty years ago tomorrow.

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

[quote]if King Charles didn't make Archie and Lilibet HRH and Prince and Princess. He didn't and there was no big uproar.

There was in Montecito, believe me.

r216 Edward has just as much to do with Scotland as any other member of the royal family.

I agree with R214. All of these working-royal dukedoms should be life peerages. Their children never become working royals and don't need to inherit those elevated titles. Keep Edinburgh and York for younger sons (as it's likely future royal broods won't have more than a couple of boys), but keep them as life peerages that will always revert back to the crown. They could keep a couple of other dukedoms in reserve for when there is more than one generation of working royals, as there is now.

And for fuck's sake, just make Edward Duke of Wessex already. They should have done that in 1999. No, there is no 1000-year precedent for the Duke of Wessex, but literally nobody cares.

R228 Oh, but some of them have become working royals: the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester and their wives, and Princess Alexandra. The generation before that, Princess Alice of Gloucester and Princess Marina, Duchess of Kent, worked actively for the monarchy despite being married to younger sons who were never, nor their progeny, ever going to come close to the throne once the Yorks took over from Edward VIII. If you make them life peerages, what of the females? And what happens to the line that has to be drawn between, say, peerages awarded to politicians and actors?

The thing is that the article isn't worth anything unless it's different from other articles. That's part of its charm.

Splicing and dicing it doesn't add anything really appealing, and what's taken away wasn't necessarily unappealing.

The Duke of York was the highest ranking man to die at the Battle of Agincourt; it's an old, distinguished title, and Andrew dishonoured it. He deserves to lose it.

One reason Edward chose the Wessex earldom was that it is very distinguished historically and he knew that. Harry's ducal title is far less distinguished.

And, by the way, the first time the Duke of Edinburgh title merged with the Crown was some time in the 1700s. It went in and out several times before the Queen created Philip DoE, Charles is the Second Duke of Edinburgh only in its latest incarnation. The last one before Charles was Prince Alfred, created DoE during Victoria's reign and then became extinct around the time Victoria died, resurrected in a new life by QEII.

There's another problem: the next subsidiary title of a Dukedom is an earldom, and Edward already holds that. He can't be Duke of Wessex and Earl of Wessex - and Edward's son, Viscount Severn, hold the next subsidiary title of his father's earldom. So how does Charles create a Duke of Wessex without creating different subsidiary titles?

If the Edinburgh ducal title went to Edward, then his son, James, would move up and be able to use the title Earl of Wessex, which makes far more sense. And by the time James has a son, the title will cease to carry royal status and the future holder will be Your Grace, not Your Royal Highness, so the monarchy will get whittled down, anyway.

They can't just keep moving the parts around like a Lego structure.

And, last but hardly least, Edward has been working quietly and diligently with the Edinburgh charities and foundation for twenty years plus. Does Charles expect Edward to keep doing that despite being denied the title?! Does anyone suppose the people who have been working with Edward all that time, apparently with admiration, will think it well done of Charles?

Sorry, there is no excuse here. Charles needs to do the right thing by his brother, not just because it's the right thing to do, but for the sake of his own public image.

I had a look at the Royal site's succession page. Archie and Lilibet have still not received those prince and princess titles yet.

Just an FYI: the Titles Removal Act wending its way through Parliament has finally been mentioned by Angela Levin on GB in a discussion about the Sussex titles. Levin mentioned that if/when that goes through, it would not only apply to Andrew's York title, but the Sussex title.

I wondered when someone would put the Titles Removal Act out there.

[quote]before the Queen created Philip DoE,

Thanks, thanks a lot.

The titles act is a publicity stunt, first the Labour MP who presented it and now Levin for conversation fodder.

If they left Edward VIII a dukedom, Andrew and Harry will die with theirs.

R230 If it had happened, it would have been all over the front pages.

The King could be taking one of several approaches:

Waiting to see what the memoir looks like to see whether it makes his case to withhold the titles.

Waiting for his first Christmas speech to announce some cleaning house or setting house in order items.

Waiting for New Years, when new honours are announced

Waiting for the Coronation.

Any of these reasons could be why no HRHs for the Sussex kids have appeared.

We just won't know till, at the earliest, New Years; at the latest, the Coronation.

Not quite, R229 - the next subsidiary title of a Duke can be a Marquess.

Never in the Christmas speech: that event is meant to focus on the nation, not the monarch's family.

But they tend not to use Marquessates. Edward VIII had no subsidiary titles once made Duke of Windsor and the LP expressly prevented the title from being inherited by any of his heirs (which is again precedent for Charles granting it Edward for his lifetime alone.) Dukedoms of Gloucester, Kent, Sussex and York don't have subsidiary marquessates either - straight to earldoms.

Excellent post at R206. Thank you. Would you mind naming the biographer who mentioned that:

[quote]the Queen...displayed the quality even in young girlhood.

I'm interested to read more, and I agree with you fully that none of her children except Edward (perhaps) seem to have inherited that trait. Also that Kate, a married-in, is somewhat amusingly the main one who appears to understand, as the Queen did, that it is not about her. I understand why Tatler and various aristocratic types have been so snobbish about Kate at times: she's more fit for her royal role than any of them and all they can do is try to cut her down for something she can't help (her class).

There's gossip on DeuxMoi that the Harkles are moving to a house in Bel Air. La Markle was way too far from Hollywood!

I think the press is stirring up trouble by creating a non-story. Charles will give Edward the title, he’s just not going to do it as a result of being pressured by the press. Agree with those who think it will happen around the coronation.

R238 I think it was Robert Lacey or Elizabeth Longford but am not sure, I read them so long ago.

True, poster upthread, re the Christmas speech. I forgot that.

Ee Deux Moi - those rumours have been out there for months.

Montecito is quiet and still lots of old money there. Bel Air is action. Wouldn't surprise re her, but I don't see Harry fitting in comfortably there.

Right. Living in Montecito is what's holding her back from being successful.

The Maul reporting some tension.

First, Charles is pissed Anne and Edward attended a shoot at Windsor last weekend where Andrew was present. (Charles seems to think he's head of the family, which I guess titularly he is, but herding siblings isn't like herding children. And he's not that great at herding children, either.)

Also: "Edward has not been awarded with the Duke of Edinburgh title that many expected him to inherit after his father’s death a year and a half ago. At one point in time, the notion that Prince Edward would inherit his father’s title was such a certainty, it was even listed on the official Royal website. Today, however, it is still unknown when – or even if – the King will grant the honour. As one source close to the Royal Family icily remarked: ‘It hasn’t gone unnoticed.’ "

This seems to contradict the Mail's own reporting.

But most of all this whopper:

"RFK's daughter reveals Harry and Meghan will accept honor at NYC gala for their 'heroic' stance against 'structural RACISM' of royal family.... Kennedy, the ex-wife of disgraced New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, told The Telegraph: 'They went to the oldest institution in UK history and told them what they were doing wrong, that they couldn’t have structural racism within the institution; that they could not maintain a misunderstanding about mental health.'"

Does the phrase this is war seem wide of the mark?

Prince Harry would be 'interesting if he told the truth', says Michael Parkinson

Sir Michael Parkinson has revealed his thoughts on Prince Harry after the King's son decided to step back from royal life and sat down for a string of interviews

Thank God Drunken Kerry Kennedy is giving out awards.

Looking ugly again at r244. No amount of PR will ever fix the Sussex rship with the UK Press. They will always have the last laugh.

[quote]Harry and Meghan will accept honor at NYC gala for their 'heroic' stance against 'structural RACISM' of royal family....

It's shocking to me they're getting into this again.

I wouldn't bet on that award. The check may not clear.

r247. Especially as the only actually filmed and documented racist is Harry.

Nobody gets sacked over this leak. It's Charles testing the water, obviously.

I thought it was systemic racism. Is structural racism what we're calling it now?

Racist because ONE PERSON made a comment or asked a question about the appearance of a child born to a mixed race union? If MM spent any time with her OWN family, she'd know this is par for the course and often triggered more by curiosity than racism.

Will she keep paying for a showering of awards after her father dies? He doesn't seem like he'll last long.

What evidence is there that the BRF is racist? Are palace staff ratios reflective of race ratios in the UK? Are POC staff discriminated against in terms of advancement?

I've said it since that stupid letter when nobody even knew who she was, she was determined to drag US racial politics to the UK where the issues are not the same.And that Kennedy woman is probably jealous as she was so close to being the Duchess of Devonshire's niece if it wasn't for that pesky war.

Maybe it was just him (among the BRF members that Meghan would have ever associated with) but there was Prince Philip:

Some comments from the prince strayed undeniably into the realm of casual racism. During a royal visit to China in 1986, for instance, Philip described Beijing as "ghastly" and told British students: "If you stay here much longer you'll all be slitty-eyed." He also quipped: "If it has four legs and is not a chair, has wings and is not an aeroplane, or swims and is not a submarine, the Cantonese will eat it."

During a 1998 conversation with a British student who had been trekking in Papua New Guinea, Prince Philip asked: "You managed not to get eaten, then?" -- an apparent reference to the historic belief that cannibalism had been practiced on the South Pacific islands.

In 2002, he shocked a Bangladeshi teenager at a London youth club by saying the 14-year-old "looks as if he is on drugs." The same year, he is reported to have asked Australian Aborigines: "Do you still throw spears at each other?"

A year later, the Queen and Prince Philip went to open the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Nigeria. It was the Queen's first visit in 47 years. Greeted by Nigeria's then-President, Olusegun Obasanjo, who was wearing traditional robes, Philip quipped: "You look like you're ready for bed." ...

Egyptian-American commentator Mona Eltahawy called the blanket news coverage of Philip's death "ridiculous," saying he belonged to an institution "which colonized and pillaged so extensively."

Other online users, meanwhile, resurfaced a 2017 Al Jazeera opinion piece by Hamid Dabashi, Professor of Iranian studies and comparative literature at Columbia University, which concluded: "There is a beautiful barbarity of truth to Prince Philip's racism, exposing the ugly hypocrisy at the very foundation of 'Western civilisation.'"

The prince himself once noted his expertise in "dontopedalogy -- the science of opening your mouth and putting your foot in it" -- something, he said, he had "practiced for a good many years."

r255, yes absolutely Phil too, but he's dead. You could include Princess Michael but she isn't really part of the institution and she is an old slag now.

I imagine unfiltered Prince Phillip said many offensive things unrelated to race...someone's weight, looks, stature, attire.

R251, structural racism has to do with how laws and policies enforce and enhance racism. I believe, in this context, that it’s a reference to the “racist rules” stopping Meghan’s very white children from instantly being given royal titles.

Phil was retired though when MM joined the family, and I doubt she spent any time with him.Actual high profile living and working royal that MM regularly interacted with and was racist is just Harry.

The point is, everybody has one or two (usually quite old) casual racists in their family. Everybody. You don't accuse the entire family of structural/systemic racism because of it.

r260. Yes you just said it in minimal words.

The so-called racist comment which triggered MM: Dimbo specified to Gayle that it wasn't HMTQ or PP. I guess he had to because a lot of people assumed it was from PP, given his many racist comments listed at r255.

Also, MM tried to frame the remark/question as occurring when she was pregnant with Archie and "in tandem" with discussions about their baby not being made a prince, or having security paid by the state (or whoever). Dimbo alluded to the offensive remark/question being made much earlier in the rship.

The two nutters can't even lie competently, or as MM might put it: in tandem.

"in tandem" with discussion about how tall my niece's baby girl might be there was(shock horror) chat that she might get straight hair like her Indian dad and not the curls of her mother.So we must be racist family.

I've said it from day one, the Sussex kids aren't getting those upgrades. Ever.

I believe it was decided long ago r264. There was a giant conflab after the Windsor fire ( I forget what they called it). There they decided the Queen pay tax, but I also think no princely titles for Ed's and harry's sprogs was part of it, no matter what sophie says. I am convinced H always knew this and that was part of her moan to Oprah

Who has the better life - the York princesses or Anne's non-royal children? I can't see that their royal status has done Beatrice and Eugenie much good. Whereas Zara Tindall has a great life, her brother seems ok as well. Edward's daughter made a choice at 18 not to be called princess, but she might change her mind.

Ed's kids got to grow up privately so yes that princely title is a millstone for children. It does open doors later on, as thicky princesses get well paid jobs. The only time I liked Fergie was when she went on a rampage about Bea getting papped in a bikini when she was a fat teen. it was cruel, and that type of shit leads to eating disorders. ( but nobody suffered pre Megs obviously).

All this titles talk is really tedious. What do they actually mean? Do they confer any power, wealth, influence or responsibility? In many cases they are unearned. The Three Stooges (Harry, Andrew and Meghan) show how hollow these titles are. All three are despicable, incompetent, arrogant, nasty and of no use to anyone, let alone humanity.

There was obviously an understanding between BP and the press that only the most flattering photos of the Queen would ever be published. Amazing actually that someone could be in the public eye so much so long and yet never be caught in an awkward pose, like Ivana eating her spaghetti.

But that agreement seems to have gone out the window with the arrival of Queen Camilla. Just look at DM. Is this the media stepping up or BP stepping down because Camilla really doesn't care. Until she gets caught eating spaghetti.

R268 Since when has privilege of any sort, anywhere, been based on sterling character?

Socially, in the UK, those titles open doors and, when used well, help attract financial support for those actually trying to do something.

Socialist ideology calls thi gs like thiscac"reified concept", and currency is a prima facie example: money means nothing on paper, it only has the value wuthbwhich societies have Invested it.

The same could be said of marriage and is certainly true of royal titles.

But that's an abstract concept. In practical terms, thet do mean something. Exhibit A: they vaulted an unpleasant, dishonest, savvy yer fairly stupid, and staggeringly talentless bitch into a multimillion dollar lifestyle and into the arms of people like Oorah and Kerry Kennedy.

None of them would have given her the time of day six years ago.

I expect, as always, that the RFK award will prove a very awkward triumph for the Sussexes: accepting it on the terms KK was foolish enough to trumpet, will be to nail a flag to the mast that the two have been trying to lower quietly.

It will put paid to any further hope of rapprochement with the family, let alone increase any expectation of favours.

Why would they, after publicly accepting an award for smearing the monarchy, expect an invitation from its titular head to his coronation - an event that will leave their moment at the RFK gala in the dust re importance, glamour, and status?

Harry will have to get up there and look something besides grim whilst imagining the reaction of his father and brother and the rest, not to mention the possible fallout re his case for armed taxpayer supported security based on his membership in that same institution.

Everything the Sussexes do ends up giving them a brief flash of what HG Tudor calls "fuel", and then costs them the noses on their faces.

Charles is probably waiting eagerly for their acceptance speeches and Harry's memoir so he can at last finish them off with only the most delusional screaming Unfair!

I'm surprised unlikable Ellen has teamed up with former infomercial queen and fellow Montecito resident Victoria Jackson for a skincare line.

Shouldn't the Countess of Dumbarton have seized upon that opportunity first? Or is the Countess even more unlikable and difficult than Ellen?

Problem is, the system has vaulted rather untalented corrupt and not very bright Charles as well.

And don't forget, the Removal of Titles bills is still working it's way through Parliament. I believe it's on Fifth Reading. Copies in every bog.

M is another Elizabeth Holmes

R274, and any attempt to warn her marks will be punished. Anyone with half an ounce of street smarts will recognize she’s a grifter.

Anyone who still messes with her is willfully oblivious or thinks they can get the better of her.

R272. Charles is plenty bright and talented enough to be a ceremonial head of state. A brilliant constitutional monarch would be a waste of potential. The main risk with Charles is whether he will respect the limitations of his role. So far as king he has. As Prince of Wales he didn’t always do so.

R276 No he's not. Not Bags o' Cash Charlie he isn't.

He's qualified to be monarch of a country only if that country is Spain.

Before condemning Charles for accepting cash, please note that the cash was accepted for a charity, not for his personal use.

[quote]There was obviously an understanding between BP and the press that only the most flattering photos of the Queen would ever be published.

Might have just become respect that evolved into habit.

These days, all people want to see is lettuce stuck in anybody's teeth and it goes downhill from there.

The fact that the Dreadful Duo are taking an award for "battling" structural racism in the BRF makes me think that they are going scorched earth with Dim's book.

They may as well, and wring as much money out of the project as they can. In his first speech as King, Charles made it clear that Harry and Meghan are Duke and Duchess of Overseas, and who knows what he's said to them about his plans in private?

There is no way back to the BRF for them. They've burned that bridge and stamped on the ashes.

It would take time and effort (and as close to retraction as you can get) but is it actually completely impossible for them to come back? I mean, Camilla Parker Bowles is now Queen.

R278 First, his "charities" aren't supporting widows and orphans. They're used to pay salaries of his team and support his personal conceits, like castle restorations.

Second, the real issue is what the donors expect and get in return.

Charles gets a lot of leeway from the public simply because he doesn't look as slimey as he is.

R283, you may want acquaint yourself with the Prince's Trust, a global charity. BTW, crow pairs nicely with almost all whines.

"Over the last 40 years we have helped change the lives of hundreds of thousands of disadvantaged young people across the UK. Today, three in four young people on our progammes move into work, education or training.

Our 40 Life-Changing Years report, supported by HSBC, reveals the substantial impact created by The Trust: £1.4 billion in value to society over the last ten years alone."

R283 - Oh, spare me. How does it compare to Joe Biden giving immunity to the brutal murder of a journalist because he needs the oil?

Donors always expect something. Remember what Gordon Gecko said, "I just joined the Board of the Natural History Museum: cost me a cool million."

The funds were duly registered and went through all the required legal processes. These kinds of exchanges between wealthy people with pet causes and wealthy donors who want their names on the letterhead are common as dirt.

It's a particular pitfall with the BRF. But it's hardly a betrayal of public trust on the level of, say, Tony Blair dragging us into Bush's Folly in Iraq whilst knowing full well that the intelligence contradicted what Bush/Cheney/Powell were spouting in public.

It's a hereditary monarchy. None of the holders of said office were exactly intellectual giants after QEI, and possibly her father. In those days, they had to speak five languages, including classical Latin and Greek, compose music and poetry, dance well, and outwit court treachery and foreign attack.

Those days are gone. But the institution still works.

And, Charles wasn't King at the time. His poll ratings have risen considerably - he's more liked now than he has been in years.

And he brought Camilla to public acceptance. Seems to me he's quite bright enough.

If a racist comment was made (and is asking who a mixed race kid will favor racist?) it was no doubt Phil the Greek. Everybody knew it was Phil the Greek which is why Harry came out to say it wasn't Phil the Greek as he was dying and the Queen would have cut Harry off for good.

Only 3% of the UK population is black though if you watch British TV shows, you would assume 50% of the population is. So there's no reason there would be a greater percentage working at Buck House than working at Marks and Spencer.

The former - disastrous - UK Chancellor was black. The current Foreign Secretary is black and the PM is Indian. That doesn't reflect the Brit population but shows that class trumps race in the UK. All the black and brown people in government are Tories and very rich.

Receiving an award for fighting against racism in the BRF might be worse than all the media onslaughts, including the Oprah interview.

I think the Prince/Princess titles are helpful, but whether they would benefit Archie and Lilibet in the US or make them stand out even more as tabloid fodder is yet to be seen. If by some miracle they grow up hot, I could see them all over the magazine as "The American Prince" - M&H already tried that route during HMTQ funeral to push Charles into making a public declaration.

If Meghan and Harry did what they were supposed to do, tow the line, stay in the UK, play the game like Wills and Kate, I'm sure Charles would have granted them titles, maybe even the Queen. By the time Archie was born, there had been so much drama that we didn't even know about, but the things we did were already breaking long standing protocols: the post birth photo shoot, showing the baby to the public/press, releasing the names of the godparents. Charles gave titles changes with a day or two of the Queen's death. Those kids are not getting titles and the moment for outrage has passed. Nobody gives a fuck and M&H's popularity has waned in the US.

Even there threads are pretty stale. They are only fun and interesting when then are fighting with the palace and there is only so long you can stretch that out. They've had a good run milking this starting is autumn/early winter 2019-to present date 2022. There is not much tea left in the cup. Meghan has been out now longer than in.

R287 Fair points, especially about the threads.

We should probably take a break till the Earthshot prize in Boston with Wills and Kate and Caroline Kennedy hit the headlins.

Biden has to beg for oil because he stopped oil production in the US. We used to be energy independent under the evil Trump. I guess Biden would rather beg other countries for oil than produce our own. Genius.

WRT mental illness, she was hardly standing on the street corner screaming and spooning yogurt into her mouth with her fingers.

There is a very narrow path back for Harry, assuming his biography isn't scorched-earth. There is no path back for Meghan, ever. If Harry remains with her, his path narrows to non-existence.

R289 I guess they got wifi in the garden shed at Mar A Lago

I always assume the "structural racism" referred to is about colonial history and the idea that reparations are due.

I'm reading the Bower book, am at the point where Harry meets Meghan. Bower writes that their first date, where Harry instantly fell for her at Soho House, took place on July 1, 2016. Bower doesn't note that that day happens to be Diana's birthday. Did anyone else notice that? Kind of interesting. I wonder if Harry read meaning into it.

One fun note Bower slips in: he writes it was Violet von Westenholz who set up their meeting by sending Harry photos of Meg. He writes, "Soon after, in remarkably colourful language, Harry approved von Westenholz's suggestion of meeting Meghan." I wonder what that colorful language was. Maybe something like, "Fuck yeah, she's fuckin hot!"

R283 What on earth does Biden have to do with Charles' skullduggery? You may as well have pointed out that at least he doesn't have pesky journalists sliced to death. Nothing like raising an irrelevancy to detract attention from the issue at hand.

And all that PR blather about the miraculous work of the Prince's Trust. A regular Mother Theresa, ain't he. No doubt there's similar blather around about the miraculous work of Andrew and Pitch-n-Palace.

^ What do you do with towering intellect like that?

I study my Latin. In particular, terms like ad hominem.

R292 Truth hurts, doesn't it?

Why the stuff about oil in my his thread? It’s as breathtakingly stupid as it is irrelevant.

R298, it’s probably someone trying to post on another thread. It happens fairly frequently around here, the site lags sometimes.

[quote] WRT mental illness, she was hardly standing on the street corner screaming and spooning yogurt into her mouth with her fingers.

What a comprehensive and compassionate definition of mental illness we have here.

What happened to the GQ award they were supposed to get?

Apparently Meghan's check bounced so GQ canceled the award.

The Markles are only getting an award from Kerry Kennedy because her sister Rory is the partner of the director of the Markles' magnum opus for Netflix.

Doesn't the fact that the BRF allowed a person of mixed-race ancestry (Meghan) to marry into the family constitute proof that they are NOT racist?

R303 assuming that’s true, it’s hilarious.

How is “getting awards” a career for these people? I wonder if that’s what the Netflix series will be about—just them flying around and collecting awards.

It's not about the awards, it's about getting publicity. What can they get publicity for? They're sort of celeb influencers and they have a lot of competition in the celeb influencer market.

I watched Michelle Obama's special about educating girls with Amal Clooney and Melissa Gates. La Markle must have been dying not to be included. But Michelle avoided the obvious, even bringing up racism as preventing girls from being educated. Which is ridiculous because it's in 3rd world countries in Africa, Asia and South America that girls are denied education by people of their own race.

I wonder a few things: what does the title of prince or princess actually do for a person? Does one get a wad of cash? Or is it just an honorific that gives one nothing concrete other than people bowing here and there? Of course, if Archie and Lilibet stay in the US, no one would bow no matter what so I really don’t understand what the big deal is. If someone would explain I’d appreciate it.

Another thing I wonder, could it be the reason a Kennedy is giving this slightly off-the-wall award to Harry and Meghan a way for the Irish Kennedys to stick their thumbs in the eye of the British monarchy?

The Kennedys are regrettably very trashy people. Ted Kennedy funded the IRA for years.

R304. Yes. And the fact that Harry, who had over 30 years of intimate observation of the family ,and his wife who observed them for a couple of years could only come up with one, relatively innocuous and ambiguous comment, on whose facts the two of them could not agree, despite a strong incentive to extort the royal family demonstrates that the royal family most be surprisingly free of racism. I actually thought that, given the age and background of many of its senior members, they probably said racist things occasionally. But, ironically, Harry has demonstrated pretty conclusively that they must be entirely non-racist

Hm, good point R309. And didn’t the IRA murder Harry’s great uncle Lord Mountbatten, along with some children? I’m surprised Harry would go along with this award business. I mean, if I (an American who’s lived in California all my life) am wondering if this is some sort of Irish revenge move, I’m sure others more worldly and educated than me might wonder also.

R308, someone observed a long time ago that the best title to have in Europe is “cousin.” As a Prince you are always someone’s cousin: you may not have money yourself, but you are related to people with power and influence. As a result, you have endless contacts. You will go to nice schools; some heiress will marry you; if need be, you will have a good job.

Of course, the Sussexes botched that up for their children. They have been cut out of that upper class network.

[quote]The former Meghan Markle may be our new Duchess of Sussex, but that doesn't mean we have to forget all about her previous life as an A-list actress!

What are you talking about R312? Meghan according to this article below is A-LIST HOLLYWOOD! She has contacts! She was on RED CARPETS!!!

Unflattering photos are still quite forbidden, mind you!

I wonder how much that cost them R313 ! LOL ! Delusional bitch !

LOL @ R314 - King Charles looks a bit perplexed by that stein of beer. Our girl, Camilla, looks like she knows exactly how to chug!

[quote]There is not much tea left in the cup.

It's on the floor in Australia.

Meghan tried to wrap Archie not getting an HRH at birth along with no security, her getting no help to learn the ropes, being denied healthcare, and no being allowed to go where she wanted (no passport), as examples of racism.

Paging the Tiara Troll!

The sewage squad will be photoshopping the shit out of Smeg photos with fake tiaras.

From the Guardian yesterday:

"A former aide to the King received a £60,000 payoff when he stepped down from the Prince’s Foundation amid a cash-for-honours scandal, it has emerged. Michael Fawcett received the money after revelations that he offered to help a Saudi donor obtain a knighthood and British citizenship. . . .

"The Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator is also investigating claims that a donation of hundreds of thousands of pounds appeared to go missing after being handed to middle men working with the charity."

Michael Fawcett isn't going anywhere. Charles trusts him more than anyone and he knows where all the bodies are buried.

That's the second story about the Sussexes keeping money earmarked for something else. She never donated her fee for the Disney Elephant voiceover gig as promised, Disney had to pay it in the end, paying twice over; and now the GQ check not clearing.

The Sussexes are buildings record that sooner or later really is going to fall in on them like the ceiling in a Delhi factory.

Their recklessness with facts and with other people can only be kept back for so long

The Kennedys were led by a patriarch so massively corrupt morally and legally that he and Mohamed Fayed were brothers under the skin.

It was only the assassinations of the two older heirs to the family legacy that coated them with teflon for awhile.

Caroline has kept herself and her children away from it, and JFK still commands an aura that his brother doesn't. It is typical of the Sussexes to. E yet again on the wrong side of things in their desperate quest for some sort of public aura that can take the place of being Real Royals.

It's one thing for the Prince of Wales to collaborate with the JFK Foundation on giving out an award for innovative approaches to climate change.

It's quite another to accept an award based on an outright smear of an entire family from the distinctly less aromatic side of the Kennedys.

Their PR team, who floated the GQ Award so fervently - can you imagine their mortification when the Sussexes refused to pay, and left the PR reps with egg all over their faces?!

Somewhere along the line, a feather will float down that breaks the proverbial's back. Any guesses as to what quarter that feather will come from?

I think there are some real nuggets of BRF dirt that will be revealed in Harry's book, despite his current anxious attempts to back pedal. And after that, the dirt on MM the BRF have been withholding will be released. The BRF will recover; the Sussexes will not.

Bob Iger is back at Disney but I hear he changed his phone number.

R324 I'm sure Harry knows all sorts of stuff about the RF that it would like to keep under wraps. But what horrible stuff could the RF have on H and M? Apart from his parentage and her mother's long disappearance, there's not much.

R324 how do you know? Lol. Meghan has been scheming, bullying and shitting on people her entire life. Not to mention all the escort, surrogate rumors. There have been rumors Harry abused prostitues when deployed as well.

R327 You're missing the point. At best they're little people and not much can ruin them at this stage. They're just a couple of gnats buzzing around the RF.

Note that similar rumours about the Duchess of Windsor when she was in Shanghai and the Duke and his German sympathies never did them real harm.

Do we have any intel on the acting roles M tried for after moving back to the States? I remember reading that she told her agents to put her up only for multi-million parts—preferably Marvel movies.

Would be fun to read about those rejections. Assume that’s why she declared she’s giving up acting—as if it were her choice.

Some of those red carpet looks at r313 aren’t bad. Considering that the clothes were probably lent, they fit and flattered her shape. Her hair looked good, especially wearing a side part with fullness on the top. Royal dressing is a different level but at least here on occasion, someone was advising her well.

A family whose prestige is due largely to a number of early deaths grantee an award to two people who try desperately to profiteer off an early death that is delivered by a man who caused an early death.

On DM, there is a video of Harry sending a message to Elton John for his last tour. Meghan is beside him smiling like a fool. Her look reminds me of the way Nancy Reagan used to look at her husband. Still makes my skin crawl.

The video of the Sussex Clowns. Her extreme white teeth are blinding.

^She rests her head on his shoulder at the end of the spiel. They are vomitous.

R332. This is a life of service! Thank you Harry and Meghan!

They are such pompous nobody's

All hat. No cattle.

Elton is a second father? I thought David Foster was? Does Harry just go about collecting father figures? How odd. And yes, that video is ridiculous. Clear evidence of why Meg’s acting career went no where

What has she tried that hasn't gone nowhere?

She's relishing and milking that bit of A-list proximity!

R338. But he has only one Mommy ! Even though she died when he was 13.

Dear god. How bad is Charles that he looks to Elton as a second father (in addition to Major Hewitt)?

How much do you want to bet that Elton and what's-his-name haven't spoken to them since the whole Pearl debacle

Does halfwit Harry really think Charles is stressing over Haz's little digs about all these acquaintances being "like a father" to him? I doubt it.

For 2023 Haz will have to ramp up his juvenile efforts to annoy his family and start referring to acquaintances in their 40s as "like a brother" to him. In which case, Big Willy also be unperturbed.

Wasn't there a story about Meggy Sharp demanding use of Elton's private plane a few years ago and he said no because he was ill and needed it and she kicked up a fuss?

Meg was so pissed about being denied a private plane that she stood on Elton's lawn, making guttural noises.

Is Harry truly "A list?"

Smeg would sell her kids to be A list.

If Harry's book is even slightly a tell all, he'll look like the despicable, traitorous, ungrateful grifting piece of shit that he is. All families have secrets, difficulties, traumas and other unpleasantries. I don't understand what he is trying to accomplish except to make a buck in the name of disparaging his family, who by all accounts, have been, or was, extremely supportive and protective despite or because of his many flaws and inadequacies.

R348. Can you imagine, through no choice of your own, losing a significant degree of your personal privacy, as a result of being born in the line of succession, and a bozo like Harry comes along to deprive you of the little privacy you have left? If Harry exposes misconduct in their public functions, that is one thing, but anything that has gone on in their private lives is nobody’s business

It can only get worse over time for Harry. From the Queen his indulgent grandmother, to Charles his father the wimp, to William who hates him as only one brother can hate another. Then finally'll come Charlotte, who'll have him beheaded in the Tower. "It's my tower and my axe and I'll do with them what I please."

Meg is Becky Sharp on steroids.

MM is nothing like Becky Sharp, who was intelligent, talented, discreet, diplomatic, strategic, and extremely hard-working. MM is none of those things.

Good posts, R348 and R349.

"like a father" to Harry means "gives me money"

You don't consider her career as an A-List actress to be hard work?

For people who claimed to want to live private lives, they sure make a public fuss about everything.

I actually believe Harry did want a private life and to be taken out of the tabloids. Unfortunately he married a D list actress past her sell-by date and desperate for publicity.

They're doing it for the children.

Harry also had some other father figure in England - before Foster. Some other ginger; a football team owner or race car driver.

There was probably a parade of “father figures” in and out of Kensington Palace when Harry was a boy. It gave him a strange perspective.

Meg will be on the Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon on December 8. I'm already looking forward to not watching

R358, it's Mark Dyer.

What on earth does she have to talk about on the Tonight Show?

Someone's getting yelled at. He didn't use her titles

And I was so hoping for something like her Craig Ferguson appearance.

In which she told Ferguson that she was smooth like a dolphin everywhere on her body.

Eww

That "dolphin" line was excruciating. The entire interview was a spectacle, with the usually very polite and kind Ferguson clearly not taken in by her and Meghan manic-level flirting with him throughout.

R263 We are white and my son’s fiancé is Chinese. We have wondered if their baby might have his green eyes and look Asian. We must be racist then.

Blind Item #9

Of course the alliterate one and her husband are going to kiss the butt of the permanent A list singer. He is the one who loans them his private jet for free.

So, it’s Elton’s plane?

It's on! According to Page Six, the Meghan & Harry documentary/reality series will debut on December 8. It is said to focus on the couple's "love story," which Page Six puts in scare quotes.

R278 Charles personal funds are from the Duchy of Cornwall and the civil list. Charitable donations go to his charities.

R369 how much will recollections vary from Finding Freedumb?

IMO the Duchess thought through the idea of appearing on Fallon's show and, given the negative reaction to the Ellen show embarrassment, she thought the better of it. I don't watch Fallon. Does he tease or skewer people or ask minimally difficult questions? Meghan doesn't have a sense of humor and doesn't appear able to go with the flow or improvise. If it's not on the script, forget it, the mask might slip. Not that she would bow out because she had a sudden flash of insight, but rather fear of criticism even if she thinks it's unjust.

R372. All of that makes sense but she really has never learned from experience before.

From the Post article. Could they really be this sloppy?

[QUOTE]Another source later told us that much of the show “contradicted” what the duke wrote in his upcoming memoir, “Spare,” which will be released on Jan. 10, 2023.

R373 - if she adopts the perspective that some people are out to get her, she can still maintain her delusional system. People out to get her vs. insight or learning from one's mistakes.

The “funny” stories she tells on talk shows are so painful, it’s wise she cancelled.

I wonder if having absolutely no sense of humour is a part of being a narcissist? Donald Trump and Meghan are two public figures whom I’ve never once heard say anything intentionally humorous. Really, I can’t recall either of them ever saying anything that intentionally made me even chuckle.

R376 narcissists have NO sense of humor - particularly about themselves - but they love to ridicule anybody they consider a threat to them and think that's humor.

Thin skinned Trump never had a Correspondents Dinner because he couldn't take any kind of ribbing and certainly couldn't tell a joke.

Both he and Meg would seethe if they were teased and would retaliate viciously.

[quote]It is said to focus on the couple's "love story,"

Nobody but the diehard stans is going to watch that bullshit. They may as well not bother airing it.

[quote]It is said to focus on the couple's "love story,"

More like Harry's abduction...

If she doesn't come across well on Fallon's show then that will be very telling. He tries very hard to make his guests look good.

She certainly fucked up her Ellen appearance by being an utterly daft fool and her Oprah appearance by being a poisonous cunt. I have no hope for that shrew.

If she clicks with Fallon maybe she will make more appearances on his show.

I remember JLo was stiff and kind of icy as a guest at first but eventually she warmed up to Fallon and now they are buds. Even wrote a book together!

SHE cancelled r376?? Lmfao. Try again. She'd NEVER do that.

She was never asked to be on the show, is more like it.

What an unfortunate looking family at r361. Why did her neck get so thick during pregnancy? I've heard of pregnant women having other features widen/thicken, but never the neck.

As for the red carpet pictures upthread, some of them clearly show that she has no waist.

I wonder if it’s dawning on her that her preaching and ingratitude are making her very unpopular.

Her every word, her every action says "insincerity." Can any PR firm save her?

R354 No, since there was zero work as an A list actress. She was 6th on the call list at Suits.

What did she cancel, R376?

Will she or won't she? Mystery as NBC announces Meghan Markle will appear on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon - only for her media pal Omid Scobie to DENY the news minutes later: 'Someone didn't get the memo'

See the DM link below.

[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.]

R382, I have high hopes - for more of the same.

Well, if the Netflix documentary is due to air December 8, going on the Tonight Show on December 7 would make sense.

So maybe the Dec 8 debut has been put off and therefore Fallon is canceled?

She won't. She's not invited.

[quote]Another source later told us that much of the show “contradicted” what the duke wrote in his upcoming memoir, “Spare,” which will be released on Jan. 10, 2023.

Once they are done turning themselves into laughing stocks, no one will want to do business with them.

Absolutely everything about Meghan is shrouded in “will she/won’t she?” MYSTERY.

It’s her trademark. She’s so mysterious, keeping us all in thrall. We need to know! Will she? Won’t she?

The tragic story of an interdependent narcissist and an emotionally wounded man-child, tragic for their children and for the family members who lost their much beloved son/brother/brother-in-law.

I'll deal with them, in time.

I know people.

For the record, I DECLINED the offer to appear on the Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon.

I think she is going to be on the show. Maybe she had her friend try to create some interest by saying she wouldn't.

In 10 years Charlotte will be a formidable young lady ! I cant wait !

Of course she's pulling this mystery shit. Who the fuck would pay the boring cunt any attention otherwise?

She will go on the show and tell am incredibly tedious anecdote that will nonetheless be demonstrated to have been fabricated.

The Grifters.

All this talk that The Book contradicts The Documentary makes me think it’s just a ploy to get readers/viewers.

^ Do you think they can keep track of all of their lies?

If smegs mouth is moving she's a lyin.

The Fallon story is a bit like the "Sussexes snub King's Christmas invitation" story.

No one in the Known Galaxy believes they were invited, not after Harry selling his soul to Netflix, Meghan's continued sneers at Kate, the spectacle of petty attention seeking they did during the Queen's funeral observances, the approaching debut of Harry's Woe Are We memoir, and KC3 moving to get Harry removed as Counsellor of State.

Anent which, the new amendment to the Amended CoS bill put forth by the House of Lords makes the removal a more directly pointed disqualification, rather than just a list of extended options.

It's a very clever move. The King asks onky for the extended list, so as not to be seen cutting the two errant Princes' balls off completely. Then the HoL does the rest of the dirty work, which the King will not remotely object to. The HoLgets the blame for the final thrust of the knife, not the King.

In a way, KC3 is giving the Sussexes no reason NOT to respond as spitefully as they wish. Such as, for example, accepting that ludicrous award from the RFK organisation. By taking the bait, they will give the King all the scope he needs to take their titles when that other bill goes through, cancel the lease on Frogmore Cottage, disinvite them to the biggest royal event of the 21st century besides his mother's funeral, abs finish off their ability to market themselves on their connection to the British Rpyal Family.

Anyone out thetecstill believe that tripe about Charles wanting the Edinburgh title for Harry? Or Richard Eden's bullshit about Charles only having asked for an extended list rather than full exclusion as CoS because he's leaving the door open for a Return of Harry?

Eden should have known better. Ditto his story about Charles never giving Edward the Edinburgh title.

Patience is a virtue. Slowly, but surely, the BRF, like the tortoise in the fable, will win the war whilst the Hapless Harkles rail and rant in short skirmishes.

The Queen saw this from far off, canny old bird.

I haven't the least doubt that the King's Private Secretary put a few fleas in the ears of a few peers on the HoL re suggeztingva slightly stronger wording to that CoS amendment.

Not to mention how it will weaken Harry's case with the Home Office.

I agree the royal family will win the war, but not on those terms.

I can believe "Richard Eden's bullshit about Charles only having asked for an extended list rather than full exclusion as CoS because he's leaving the door open for a Return of Harry?" on that basis that if, somehow, Harry did come back, then they'd be in a position of chatter about undoing, it stirring it all up again. The point is, every good plan takes the long view and has an escape clause, just as the best laid plan solves more problems than it creates. It's much the same argument against the idea the monarchy would want the power to strip titles. Once you've got it, everybody's got a opinion about how you should use it and you've got nowhere to hide.

I think it would be a very interesting day indeed that "the King's Private Secretary put a few fleas in the ears of a few peers on the HoL" when you consider it would involve the ear of the amendment proponent, who is a Labour peer who's also the son of Tony Benn, a leading proponent of abolishing the monarchy.

But at least we've still got the Removal of Titles bill, which is working its way through Parliament and on it's 19th reading, I believe.

Most of all, I believe if you understand monarchy you understand increments and that in this day and age it appreciates the argument for anachronism and on that basis is trying to move not toward Real Housewives but farther away from it.

Separately, I am not certain Charles will screw Edward over the Edinburgh title because he just made him a Counsellor of State - seems an odd thing to do with someone you're about to stab in the back and who has been established as a necessary player in a smaller team going forward. (I also think it's really odd none of the newspapers unlike the Daily Mail have pursued anything about it, to either prove or disprove it. It's a good story. Why wouldn't they ask? Why wouldn't they report they'd asked the palace refused to answer? Cue soap opera organ music. This is an odd one and I don't know what it means but it suggests there's something going on - strictest off the record with an acknowledgment it's coming? - that means Eden was wrong on the title angle. No newspaper is going to do the palace a favor on this story. First family squabble of the new reign? Not likely they'll pass on that.)

Kate looked terrific at the welcoming for the state visit from South Africa.

Such a shame Meghan wasn't there. As we all know, they danced in the streets at news of her previously. An ill fitting outfit would surely have caused something akin to national twerking.

The utter delusion of Tungsten believing she could trash the BRF on national tv and then show up at the matriarch's funeral and expect that she could get some solo shot of herself on a walkabout sashaying over to the memorial to place flowers like she is extra special and going the extra mile is absolutely mind blowing. She's one sick puppy.

....and don't get me started on "One tear, left eye, three seconds, Go!" Her very special talent did come in handy at the funeral, didn't it? As well as during her Orca interview.

That video is pretty damning.

Let's recover with a revisit of this, to cheer us all up a bit.

[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.]

^ Text for post above:

KC3's first state visit is underway, with a tiara gowns and orders state banquet tonight.

The fist big jewellery news, however, is that Kate for the first time is wearing the diamond Prince of Wales feathers insignia brooch with a large emerald drop, undoubtedly from one of the Cambridge emerald pieces. She looks quite regal in claret.

Undoubtedly there will be more to discuss re jewels and gowns later on.

Carry on!

^*first (not fist) bit of jewellery news . . .

After dancing in the streets to celebrate MY wedding, South Africa wanted to declare me their queen, but I declined.

R415, out of curiosity, had you seen R412?

Never mind, I've figured out the mystery. R415 has me on block! LOL.

Ah, the gift of timing the Sussexes are heir to strikes again: Meghan's podcast today on slut shaming and double standards is lost in the pomp and circumstance surrounding today's welcome of the South African leader and Kate wearing those Prince of Wales feathers brooch in diamonds with an emerald drop, and a beautiful shot of Kate in a Coach from the side with all those glossy tresses (the hair Meghan wants so badly) streaming down her back . . .

Eat it, Meghan. You could have been on those steps welcoming the South African delegation, too . . . if only you hadn't so completely misread the room.

In fairness, I ride R415 pretty hard about her insistence on the Removal of Titles nonsense. And most other things. We... have widely different perspectives formed around our divergence on the idea of monarchy as Housewives.

Just wait until you see what I show up in to collect my coveted RIPPLE OF HOPE AWARD, you fucking losers! Kate who???

R423, can't wait! I'm sure it will reflect your usual standards.

R423 LOL - let me guess: a dashiki?

More great photos from HELLO.

A gem from the Maul from today's Archegripes: 'As you're getting older, you're exploring and starting to understand your sensuality, your feminine divine,' the duchess says.

Sorry about the cast but my feminine divine puddled in my knowing and I slipped.

LOL, the Maul twists the knife: Yesterday it emerged Archetypes appeared to have dropped in popularity with US listeners, with the last episode at just 77 in the US charts as of 1pm yesterday - behind a collection of lullabies.

Ahem. Not all women have a “feminine divine”. Some are non-binary.

LITERAL VIOLENCE.

[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.]

What a soup they're landing in:

"DUI defendant Kerry Kennedy gets scandal-engulfed Alec Baldwin to give hypocritical beta-royal Meghan Markle... a human rights award? Please make it stop!"

"This is a value system only the ultra-left could abide. It's an episode of 'South Park,' an Onion headline..."

Would love to see a Mad TV style parody of Archetypes with Mary of Teck discussing the archetypes that hold women back. Would be nice get her take on slut-shaming, the b word etc.

The difference between Catherine and Meghan is this:

Catherine conducts herself and dresses like old money.

Meghan conducts herself and dress like new money, specifically like a lottery winner.

I'll go as far as to say that Meghan reminds me of my mafia princess cousins and their mother. Always gaudily and ostentatiously overdressed for every occasion and non-occasion. They are horrific employers to their employees. Also, always on the warpath and seeking revenge on someone they perceived "disrespected" them.

R433, that’s a good observation about “respect”. In my experience, the louder someone is, the less of it they get. They’re always frustrated by that elusive thing.

R433, I think you've nailed it re. "gaudily and ostentatiously overdressed for every occasion and non-occasion." I think of her big occasions like the Commonwealth service and the Queen's funeral... though the lines were comparatively simple and she wore solids, the cut was too much... Nolan Miller reject at the Commonwealth and Darth Vader at the funeral. That's not just bad taste, that's an intention foiled by bad taste.

R433 Complete nonsense. Kate certainly does not dress like she was born into old money. Anne and Camilla are your examples.

The way Catherine dresses is comparable to the way the Queen dressed when she was young, and the Queen was old money. Anne and Camilla are both old and have no particular interest in clothes.

" . . . have no particular interest in clothes.". THAT's old money. Even when young neither of those women was a clothes horse.

You can describe Kate's wardrobe as Queen-in-Waiting perhaps. But old money it ain't. No more than Kate herself. She dresses far too self-consciously.

R438. So the queen was new money? And no old money person dresses well ?

The last 25? years of her life, the queen settled on a uniform: brightly colored narrow A-line coat and matching high top/narrow brim hat with some bit of trim attached. You’d be hard put to guess the year if you saw a photo and it worked for every public occasion.

Kate is doing something similar with her coat dresses. They are well-fitted and are made from some miracle fabric that doesn’t wrinkle, lol. She doesn’t always opt for this look but for serious occasions like meeting a head of state, it’s a good choice that won’t look dated a few years from now.

Too many of the Queen's hats looked like something out of Dr. Seuss or Alice in Wonderland. Is it wrong to speak badly of a deceased person's choice in hats?

The Queen's hats could.. be rather like her mother's hats, for my taste. Don't be fooled... she adopted the coats in plain bright colours to be seen in public, but more often than not underneath was a crazy granny print dress. I always thought her annus horribilis dress and hat were great. She wore so much white in her last years, which worked some of the time, but it always reminded me of the Thorn Birds quote: Mary looks like death in white.

The podcast is becoming so banal that Times' pathologist has trouble making fun of it, but this made me chuckle, one for being funny the second for being telling.

1) Look, I tried. But before you know it she’s saying “I wanted to revisit a large piece of my origin story”, and I mean COME ON. Really? Out loud? Do you mean “I went back to my old school”, or is that just not pompous enough? “Ohmygosh my locker was over there!” she says, pointing to something we can’t see, because this is a podcast."

2) Bushnell is allowed to say interesting things about her inspirations for writing Sex and the City, but adds: “I did not make a ton of money from Sex and the City.” The obvious next question, one which might elicit an interesting answer, would be: “How come?”

“How did that make you feel?’ Meghan asks.

I love how Hilary Rose ends this week’s review with “see you next Tuesday”.

An A-line cut is the opposite of narrow.

R441 They are intended to suggest her Sovereignty, be bright so that people can see her in a crowd, and to carry off a style that the populace instantly identify her with. The Queen Mother did the same thing, but with a bit mroe panache (also, the 1930s were divine for hats in a way the post-war era was not). She was never vain. It was all about the role.

Meanwhile, back at Buck House, Kate looked glaringly regal - her caped gown with diamante screamed Queen In Waiting. I must say that I am tired of seeing her in the Queen Mary Lover's Knot Tiara, magnificent as it is. I'd hoped to see something else.

Camilla is wearing the Queen's sapphire tiara to match her dress, I think the first time someone other than the Queen has worn it - it is one of the least distinguished in the Queen's collection; Sophie Wessex is wearing the Queen's aquamarine bandeau tiara, which is vastly better than the other aquamarine tiara Sophie got as a loan, which is positively ugly; and the Duchess of Gloucester is wearing one of Princess Alice's tiaras.

Is the Tiara Troll anywhere about to enhance the descriptions?

The menu looked decent.

Photos in the DM in next post.

Of course she'll go on Fallon's show. He's the wimpiest interviewer ever and will love sucking up to her. Maybe he'll even mess up her hair like he did with Trump.

R446 - yes, I'm over on the King Charles thread.

Photos from the Express, instead.

R448 Ta!

R446

If that bloody reality show is dropping 8 or 9 December, which is two weeks away, why aren't Netflix publicising the thing and showing trailers?

Don't they want people to watch it?

Camilla's dress looked a little mother of the groom for my tastes.

Since they are MM's attire of choice, I realise I cannot stand caped dresses.

I don't get what ails BP so much they can't live there but they can conduct official business and host state banquets.

I wonder if Charles is playing a fast one. If he intends to live at Clarence House he should just say so. Same with the Edinburgh title. If he's not going to do it, say so. One one hand you could argue he's going softly, softly of some of the more controversial choices. On the other you could argue he's being sneaky. For me, I think Charles has a very a tenuous grasp on all the goodwill showered on him after the Queen's death. I wonder how difficult it would be to tip back to the more disapprove than approve.

R453... you gotta figure Kate factored that into her thinking. Was it a who wore it better slap down?

Oh hoo hoo! Look over Kate's shoulder!

Oh, dear. Camilla is also wearing for the first time the Queen's George VI sapphire necklace, part of a sapphire and diamond suite he gave then Princess Elizabeth as a wedding gift.whwn the Queen wore it, it draped lower. Perhaps a link was removed.

Cammie, dear, you just don't have the neck for that short a necklace.

Shame. The necklace is gorgeous and there is a well known photo of the young Elizabeth wearing it with a beautiful blue gown with a low ruffle neckline.

You can't carry this off now, Camilla. Give it to Kate.

The look doesn't do you or the piece any favours.

R456 quite big sporran.

R449 Susan Hussey (the late Queen’s senior lady in waiting) is old school - curtsies not only for the King and Queen but for William, Kate and Edward as well. She was up and down like the Energiser Bunny.

When is Meghan's big event in Indianapolis?

Queen Camilla has the keys to the jewel vault now, and I suspect she is going to be seen in most of its contents over the next year or two.

R457, Her Majesty's prominent veins and violet gums go beautifully with the sapphire suite. I'm sure they removed a link so it would fit within the frame of the top of her gown, but the photo you saw lacked the brass bell she wore later in the evening hanging from the necklace.

Moo.

Our Princess of Wales this evening at a state banquet hosting South Africa. Notice the beautiful Royal Family order of Queen Elizabeth II.

I wonder what color ribbon Charles is going to use for his order. Im going to guess red.

Ok I guess I can accept a brooch on someone Kate’s age, though I’d rather not, but the yellow ribbon? Is it really necessary? And that sash?

Otherwise I love the dress and upswept hair.

I don’t think anything will ever happen to Meghan & Harry. The Royal family and Parliament will continue letting them hit out at them, and use them to line their pockets. However, I personally love the two events coming up in December.

It's an interesting comparison of brothers. RFK's side of the family are selling tables for millions to watch Alec Baldwin, a sexist, anti gay, well-known bully, and probable murderer host an event giving an award to Meghan and Harry for doing absolutely nothing for anyone but themselves, and claiming they fought racism when they just left so they could get paid. Just the bare minimum to keep the money rolling in. Meanwhile, JFK's side is co-hosting the Earth Shot prize, which gives badly needed money to people who are using their talents to actually make a difference in the world. Prince William and Catherine, Princess of Wales, will be there GIVING the awards to these people, accepting nothing for themselves. Two sets of Brothers (and families because neither RFK or JFK get a say in any of this) and what they value.

A tale of two Brothers indeed.

The Royal Family join King Charles III and Queen Camilla as they host a State Banquet for South African President Cyril Ramaphosa at Buckingham Palace.

[QUOTE]but the yellow ribbon? Is it really necessary?

Are you really asking whether honoring the Queen's memory is a necessary or optional fashion choice? Did you not read or enlarge the picture?

R468, R465 obviously hasn’t availed the British monarch of their style expertise regarding an order that dates back over 200 years.

There’s nothing like an American blundering in with their un-asked-for opinion.

R465 do you seriously think that while she was dressing for the state dinner, as the tiara was placed on her head, that The Princess of Wales said “Oh yeah and let’s go with that yellow ribbon for the order and one of them blue sashes will look great with this frock!”?

There is rather a little more thought that goes into these things than you may be aware of.

Her feminine divine could use some work. I suggest some more time standing in her knowing to reset.

Catherine looks beautiful. Go make guttural noises our by the chicken coop, smeg.

Camilla is everything! Loved the befuddled Aunt Clara routine when she was fussing at the table as the anthem played in the video at r467. And then she catches herself. I actually think that she is quite fabulous.

R465 You type poor. Like trailer park level poor.

Did anyone see Kate's gown from the back?

The ladies and gents looked lovely!

Info on the sash and brooch, the "family orders". The brooch, the late Queen's family order (when the Queen was alive, the family order was a similar one but of her father) was given to Kate after several years of service; the sash, which is part of the Royal Victorian Order paraphernalia, was added after a couple more years. She already had the brooch (that's the one pinned to the sash further down), and then a couple of years ago was awarded the sash, as well.

Diana got both upon her marriage, but that was because she had married the Prince of Wales. Sophie has also gotten both the RVO brooch and sash after about eight years in, as well.

When foreign royals visit, it is customary for the host royals, out of courtesy, to wear the sash of the visitors to the state banquet.

When the Dutch royals visited shortly after Diana and Charles married, no one told Diana that the sash was orange (the House of Orange-Nassau, get it get it?). Diana had a blue gown and accessories ready for the banquet, but when the sash arrived, she realised it would be totally garish with the blue gown, and hastily pulled together a white gown, shoes, clutch, etc., so the orange sash would work better.

I still don't buy Meghan's claims of racism from H&M. Queen Elizabeth II refused to visit South Africa during apartheid. Later she formed a friendship with Nelson Mandela. Later she allowed her grandson Harry to marry a mixed-race woman of his choice. Now her family is welcoming the current president of South Africa. Where is the evidence of racism? One offhand remark from the old geezer Phillip, known for his rude gaffes? I don't think anyone is buying the racism thing.

I'm sure to Meghan, anytime someone doesn't bow to her every whim or tell her how amazing she is, it's due to racism.

I think Meghan realized early on she could never come close to pull off what the BRF does regularly. She then created the narrative of lies making them the problem, using the race card specifically and knowingly. Just as well, the Queen could have spent millions, made everyone do cartwheels to help Meghan acclimate to royalty, It would have been a tremendous waste of time and energy. No, a toad cannot be transformed into a princess or even a half respectable duchess.

R480, some may be grateful the hysteria over racism exists - you can attribute it to everything now. Very convenient.

Markle had no intention whatsoever of staying in the UK and doing her job. She wanted A list status to return to Hollywood and get revenge on all the people who had snubbed her.

Meghan is looking.....refreshed.

Interesting timing for that insta-post. I wonder if this is an amended version after she probably neglected to use "The Duchess".

Does she have botox eye droop ala Simon Cowell?

R484. How wonderful to see a poet use the “beyond thrilled” cliche.

I think Meghan has borrowed “The Duchess” from Fergie, who refers to herself as that even though she’s just the ex wife of The Duke.

Have to see if Scobie starts using it.

Quite a few people have noticed his "refreshed" Meghan looks. And after all those podcasts on the shit woman are judged on . . .

It really shows, too. Her face has that iced over look that has made her look al.ost like someone else.

And, not for nuthin', she looks five shades paler.

The WoC who showed up at Uvalde is gone.

The White Adjacent British Duchess is back.

Tyler Perry calling her Princess Meghan was bizarre.

He's a billionaire, he doesn't need to take orders from Sunshine Sachs so it was of his own free will.

I still say Tyler and the Duchess of Perpetual Victimhood would make a fine bearding arrangement. He obviously isn't too perturbed by her mistreatment of his staff if he's publicly and voluntarily fawning over her. His top priority is staying closeted like his good friend Orca not his staff.

Disappointed that Gorman would involve herself with Meghan and her bullshit.

It looks a little early Brendad Ickson... is she refreshed or filtered? Whatever, she's different.

Her poor dad. I’m sure he wasn’t perfect, but he seems to have done his best for her.

What must it be like for her dad? Working his ass off, sending her to the best schools and a good college, all those tap and dance lessons followed by lunch at that fancy steakhouse. And she writes about Sizzler salad bar and working at 13 in a frozen yoghurt shop in that hilariously ridiculous letter to Pelosi that was supposed to be about parental leave but was really an exercise in making her Duchess Relatable.

He can't have long left and not only does she ignore him, she buys herself all these humanitarian awards. She's as bad as HG Tudor says - no wonder she is the most featured narcissist on his channel. You couldn't write this stuff as fiction because nobody could conceive that such a person would exist.

What problems would MM share with Di? Being chased by hordes of paparazzi? Um, no. Being the most famous woman in the world? Nada. Charisma for days? Nope.

The Duchess' blazing white teeth continue to evolve, now showcasing two central Bucky chiclets surrounded by 100 shorter corn nibs on each side, all topping a super-sized jaw implant. Going downhill fast.

R494, Tudor says Meghan's dad is a narcissist too. (he always says npd is half environmental and half hereditary).

He also said King Charles is a narcissist - and Prince Andrew - and no surprise, Boris Johnson. Also, Piers Morgan, James Corden, Jada Pinkett Smith or whatever her name is - a bunch more. Oh, Trump, of course, but also Biden. And Barack Obama is an "ultra" npd, like himself (the creme de la creme of narcs)

All these Dr. Google's asserting their diagnosis's is ridiculous

Blind Item #12

It took a lot of calls before any organization was willing to let the alliterate one and her husband come help for the holiday. You are not supposed to demand things of the organization when you are doing the volunteering.

Better if Professor English the spelling and grammar teacher had acquainted you with the use of apostrophes to denote, or otherwise, plurals, R498.

R498 Thinks that behaviour is no clue to anyone's mental outlook.

Lied her way in

Lied her way out

Treats staff, especially other women, like shit

Can't control her inability to keep to a conversation without turning it back to her

Wears clothes made for a figure she does not have

Plagiarises words of other famous people

Perjured herself in sworn submissions to the English Court of Appeal to conceal another set of lies

But, hey . . . we have no idea what she's really like . . . who are we to look at the blatant lies, hypocrisy, ill-fitting clothes that clearly belong om the woman she thinks she looks like but doesn't, her clawing at her husband in public constantly (hey, that scene at the UN last summer was hair-raising in its display of malicious control), and put her name and her title in huge letters on the spine of an atrociously written children's book so that there was no room for the title or the publisher's imprint . . .

And suspect a very significant problem with narcissism?

Sweetie: if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck . . .

That whole thing about her name and title filling up the entire spine of the book is hilarious. What's the bet that the publisher had given up entirely by then and just wanted the book out to get rid of her.

Should be:

[quote]All these "Dr. Googles" asserting their diagnoses are ridiculous.

Smeghan becomes more unattractive by the day.

Yikes! Her new look at R484 is scary. She really went overboard with the botox - it almost looks like she has a mask welded on her face. She is much more attractive pre-refresh as seen in R495. Becoming a fillers and botox Hollywood freak show is not going to endear people to The Duchess.

👀 Interesting 👀 finances of charity that's awarded a human rights prize to PrinceHarry and Meghan.

Jeez, Meghan!! More blush than a child beauty queen!

Refreshed? Maybe. But if it’s a photograph, I always put it down to filters.

Been seeing a lot of Red Carpet photos lately (not Meghan) and the subjects are looking very photoshopped.

That long hair with a centre part makes her jaw look massive and really does her no favours. Maybe her staff make her look bad on purpose. I wish someone in her household would leave open a Web browser featuring the Lipstick Alley MMUO threads open for her to find...

Her father may also be a narcissist but this heinous woman and her stupid and ugly husband ignoring him yet paying to be awarded all these dinky awards is severely disturbing. The other week Dimbo got an award for being a hot ginger! So many other actually good looking gingers got "beaten" by Prince Fuggo.

Why are people like Tyler Perry and Elton sticking by them? They must be assholes too? Doesn't Elton still hold a dinner on Oscar night? If so, why didn't the duo attend?

Meghan has gone for a much more severe look like the cover for interview in The Cut or her Archetypes head shot. She was much softer looking in her Suits days and even in her 15 minutes as a royal. I wonder if the harsh look is to show "alpha boss serious philanthroper". She might be one of those women who are pretty/cute under 40 but hits a wall as she ages. I think Doria looks very good. When you aren't raising children and just dancing around, smoking weed, one tends to age better. Children will make you haggard. See Tom Markle.

I always felt Doria looked better in the royal attire she was given when she was trotted out for photo opps with the Queen. She's a prettier woman than Meghan is and she looks like she hasn't had any work done.

Doria doesn't have the box torso that Smeg has or the chicken legs.

You think she's attractive at r495??? Eek!

If Meg were to pose for Playboy (Sussexy!), would it be a big seller?

Harry is a bellend.

No one wants to see Sparkle naked.

No. One.

[QUOTE]Elton still hold a dinner on Oscar night? If so, why didn't the duo attend?

He usually does, but that was pre-pandemic, wasn't it? Did he have one this year? Regardless, we'll see how they stand in March if they're spotted there or not.

Elton is promoting right now. He’s everywhere.

R515, Here she is . . .

Is she trying to make it look like an accident that she willingly exposed her droopy fried egg tit?

Is that top less photo before or after DOND? didn't she have implants in for her run as a hostess? She needed them.

She had the saddest little bolt-ons. The photo was posted on Lipstick Alley long ago.

R520 It was likely after DOND.

Celebrityjihad has to be taken with a grain of salt. They use some real photos (this one is one) and liberally photoshop others to make it look like famous women (including Kate) have posed for salacious photos.

The photoshopped ones are easy to spot. This one is just as easily spotted as not being photoshopped.

Poster upthread is right about the hair making her jaw look massive. It is the worst possible look for someone with her face shape. Her obsession with long, straight (read: Caucasian) hair is a shame. There's nothing wrong with relaxing it, but when it was shorter and nicely shaped it flattered her. Now it has the caricaturish look that everything else about her reeks of.

Her face looks so flat and wide.

Where are her tendrils?

r509 I think they were trying to suck up to Elton in that video.I dont believe he is actually supporting them hence the non-attendance at the oscar parties.

r515 no its not pre pandemic.He and David held their party this year as usual and the Harkles were putting out PR that they were going to present at the oscars so they clearly had no inhibitions about not going to events because of covid.

Sorry above meant for r516

As predicted. Sewage Squad photoshopping tiaras on Smeg.

I said all along they should get Amanda Gorman for the podcast. It’s a no-brainer. And I see the long hair competition with Kate continues. Neither one of them will chop those locks until the other does. Who will be the first to reach their ass?

There are rumors that Meghan's December appearance on Fallon was canceled after he refused to feature her as the only guest that night, and that the mysterious GQ award she and Harry were going to receive was withdrawn after the pair made too many demands (presumably for a private jet, deluxe accommodations, the usual). It tells you where their reputation is that stories like this are even circulating.

Meghan shouldn't have lost the weight. She could have been the 2023 Weight Watchers spokeswoman and made some major coin while having her face splashed all over tv and print thus fulfilling her deepest desires. I'm sure her enabler and accomplice Oprah could have arranged that for her. It would have made her "relatable" to the gullible and naive and also been a nod to her Curtsy Instructor Fergie who was a WW spokeswoman back in the day.

At the very least, she could have de-throned Marie Osmond as a Nutri System spokeswoman and "modernized" the Nutri System firm. Aren't "modernizing" and "de-throning" her objectives?

Once upon a time, there was a lonely prince named Harry...

Once upon a time, there was a lonely prince named Harry...

New book being serialized in the Maul tomorrow and Sunday. Looks good. I ordered it from the UK already.

"A fascinating royal biography sheds new light on Queen Elizabeth's remarkable stoicism in the last months of her life, how she didn't hesitate to 'fire' her own son – and found comfort after her husband's death by watching Line of Duty.

Written by author and broadcaster Gyles Brandreth, Elizabeth: An Intimate Portrait – which is serialised in tomorrow's Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday – is littered with fascinating vignettes about our longest-serving but still so enigmatic sovereign.

Mr Brandreth, who occupies a unique position as a friend and biographer of the Royal Family, reveals how the Queen told a lady-in-waiting that she was determined to keep busy as it helped her cope with the loss in April last year of Philip, her husband of 73 years.

When Prince Philip retired in 2017, he and the Queen would go for weeks without seeing each other, although they spoke regularly on the phone. While odd to some, she understood his wish 'not to be fussed over' and to 'see out his days in his own way';

However the couple discovered a new comfort in each other's company during lockdown and when it was lifted decided to spend more time together, travelling to Scotland and Sandringham, as well as at Windsor;

The Queen had been determined to be with her husband when he died, barely leaving his side in the last few weeks of his life, but Philip slipped away so quickly on April 9 last year that staff were unable to wake her in time to see him;

1/2

The Queen was loyal to her staff and they to her. But her closest aide, Angela Kelly, the ballsy daughter of a Liverpool dock worker, was sometimes viewed as a 'nuisance' by her ladies-in-waiting, who disliked her 'easy familiarity' with the Queen;

The Queen's first three children were born using a now-discredited form of childbirth known as 'Dammerschlaf' during which patients are drugged to put them in an amnesic state during labour known as 'twilight sleep';

A lady-in-waiting reveals that the technique, which allows women to remain semi-conscious but with little pain or recollection of the experience, left her suffering 'post-natal side effects' with Andrew – and Edward was born naturally;

The late monarch was a loving mother but one who was willing to take tough decisions when necessary, none more so than over her 'favourite child' Andrew;

Although she retained her 'confidence' in her second son, she had no hesitation in stripping him of his role following his disastrous Jeffrey Epstein interview in 2019. 'The Queen took a firm grip of things. To use the military jargon, there were only few days between flash and bang. Action was called for it and she took it,' a senior courtier reveals;

However the Queen also deliberately allowed herself to be photographed riding with Andrew in Windsor Great Park the day after she relieved him of his royal duties to show her personal support. She was also in favour of his appearance at her side at Philip's memorial service;

The Queen was always discreet and never said more than absolutely necessary. When Andrew recounted to his mother the whole sorry story of his friendship with convicted paedophile Epstein, she listened carefully and replied with a single word. 'Intriguing';

Even well into her 90s, the late monarch was surprisingly engaged with modern technology, using her own mobile phone and texting her family. But she found 'apps' puzzling and would not allow her grandchildren to bring their devices to the table under any circumstances;

She had a brilliant sense of humour and comic timing, coming up with the idea to keep actor Daniel Craig waiting as she signed off a letter in her memorable 2012 Olympics James Bond skit. But she felt comfortable in taking part in such stunts only after her mother's death in 2002 because she felt she would have deemed them 'a bit undignified', according to a senior aide;

In the latter months of her life, the Queen's health deteriorated rapidly. 'The truth is that Her Majesty always knew that her remaining time was limited,' Mr Brandreth writes. Her reaction to her health woes was typically phlegmatic. 'She accepted this with all the good grace you'd expect,' Mr Brandreth writes, movingly;

Despite her growing frailty, however, she mischievously adored taking part in June's Platinum Jubilee sketch, in which she was filmed taking tea with Paddington Bear at Buckingham Palace and even drawing out a marmalade sandwich from her iconic handbag. She privately described it as 'great fun' and was particularly delighted that 'everyone kept the secret' until it was broadcast at the start of the jubilee concert. 'That was lovely,' she said.

R533, is that the beginning of the tale of a prince who kissed a troll and became a toad?

Gyles Brandreth was a longtime friend of Prince Philip and wrote a biography of the Duke years ago. I have a copy of it.

R537, so you gotta figure he's on the mark with whatever he writes. I am keen to read this.

Yes, the new Brandreth book does seem to draw on a lot of inside palace sources. Bona fide ones, no doubt, given his closeness to the late Duke of Edinburgh and his circle/retinue.

He hypothesizes in the book that the Queen privately suffered from myeloma, or a bone cancer, in the final year of her life. I bet that's on the mark, it's something he knows from his sources but writes out as a theory out of respect. It makes total sense, given her appearance and statements made about her health in those final months.

r539 Gyles is good friends with Lady Colin Campbell and I bet he has been one of her sources.She mentioned the Queen having bone cancer on her youtube channel. Perhaps she doesnt make things up the way some on here claim she does.

[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.]

Wich leads one to wonder...did harry know about his grandmothers cancer ,and if so,how long? If he found out say a year before she died,then that makes his actions even more deplorable.

Well, that's funny. Muriel is so tender to the touch that the archive.ph version of the DM article causes her to recoil. She must not have been touched by human hands in quite some time.

Brandreth says multiple myeloma. That's not bone cancer.

Bone cancer can begin in any bone in the body, but it most commonly affects the pelvis or the long bones in the arms and legs. Bone cancer is rare, making up less than 1 percent of all cancers. In fact, noncancerous bone tumors are much more common than cancerous ones.

Types

Chondrosarcoma Ewing sarcoma Osteosarcoma

Multiple myeloma is a cancer that forms in a type of white blood cell called a plasma cell. Healthy plasma cells help you fight infections by making antibodies that recognize and attack germs.

In multiple myeloma, cancerous plasma cells accumulate in the bone marrow and crowd out healthy blood cells. Rather than produce helpful antibodies, the cancer cells produce abnormal proteins that can cause complications.

Treatment for multiple myeloma isn't always necessary right away. If the multiple myeloma is slow growing and isn't causing signs and symptoms, your doctor may recommend close monitoring instead of immediate treatment. For people with multiple myeloma who require treatment, a number of options are available to help control the disease.

Risk factors

Factors that may increase your risk of multiple myeloma include:

Increasing age. Your risk of multiple myeloma increases as you age, with most people diagnosed in their mid-60s.

Whatever it was The Queen made her choice to live out the remainder of her live without enduring grueling treatments.

It's always presented as an option in the UK and many people decide on quality over quantity of life.

The Queen's acceptance of her condition and decline reminded me of DL fave Bar Bush in her last days. Also in her 90s, she was described as being in a good mood, drinking a bourbon as she planned her funeral with the family pastor. It must be nice having faith to have such an ease with the end . I hope HM enjoyed a Dubonnet cocktail or two.🍸

Better make it a double, Paul, as I've got to meet with Liz Truss in the morning.

Do book sales work like album sales used to where promotional giveaways with purchase count as sale? Harry's publishers are pulling out all the stops to get "units sold" if that's the case.

So, Lady C was correct.

“Queen Elizabeth II fought bone marrow cancer during her final years, claims new book. According to a biography on Queen Elizabeth II, the British monarch battled a form of bone marrow cancer during her final years with bone pain being the most prevalent symptom.”

^ Sorry. It was already posted.

R542 I’m sure Harry knew. Still, he declined invitations to see her.

If HM did indeed have multiple Mylenoma, could Harry and the Montecito team been trusted with the information?

Their leakages to gain sympathy is renowned. Might they have shown up at Sloan-Kettering to offer "comfort" to unwitting, unknowing patients whilst offering trays of Subway sandwiches and chips as a way of ticket to get through the door? "We identify with Cancer and Stay Strong!" might have been their battle cry, as their grandmother and Monarch lay dying. I mean, they pulled it at Uvalde...

My aunt/godmother died of Multiple Myeloma in 1975, when hardly anyone knew what the disease was.

Even with treatment, there is a prolonged period of discomfort and pain and you’re eventually bedridden.

R554 I did consider that. However, I’m sure Eugenie would have told him or the Queen may have told him personally and requested that he not speak to anyone about it. She was 96. I think it would be reasonable to assume she was at the end of her life anyway.

Then she was doing really well to be on her feet two days before she died. I can't imagine Brandreth is likely to tell tales out of school. (And friend or not, you'd be an idiot if you valued your access or had any loyalty to tell anything to Lady Colin Campbell. I will go so far as to say there were more rumours in certain circles than any of us really knew, Brandreth's article establishes that.)

In retrospect, if she did have a diagnosis (of anything) I can see why she kept it quiet since it was terminal vs. chronic (I think she should have disclosed chronic.) I was always bitching about how gross it was people were guesstimating her hour of death on here, so imagine if it was made public she had a fixed amount of time... William Hill would have been in on the action. It would have been a grim and disrespected way to live out your last months or weeks, everybody chattering about your illness.

Sorry, SA (R504), I'd question whether GB would tell LCC anything. The Times describes him as a family friend and biographer of the royal family. Who's going to trade that access (or trade on it) to tell that wheezing old YouTuber anything? Plus (arguably worse) she's written books about the royal family that are not flattering. (This is the lady who perpetuated the Queen Mother as daughter of the cook story.) I can't see him telling her much of anything - if the link was made or suspected that puts his access at risk. William's known for testing loyalty. He can't be the only one. Brandreth is also, if not exactly a social climber, someone with an impressive ascent through the ranks. From son of a minor official to MP, Chancellor of a university and friend of the Duke of Edinburgh et al, is not only reflective of someone with great good luck. What is your source for the notion they're even friends?

Wonder if Harry was told the situation during that private meeting he had on the way to Invictus. He reportedly looked very stricken after the meeting. Of her he and his harridan quickly went on with their whining and bratty behavior.

Haz would have looked "stricken" because his sole family contact was abiut to go tits up.

Recent Lady C comments are that if Harry appears at that Kerry Kennedy award thing, it will be seen as him crossing the Rubicon with no possibility of coming back to the RF.

Did anyone else hear that Harry won't be there for the Kerry Kennedy thing, but, according to his pal, the polo player, Harry will be doing polo stuff instead?

So, are any or all of these stories true or false?

Does Harry see the chasm at his feet with regard to his attendance at the KK thing?

How would she know? Pretty safe speculation.

Hax has no possibility of "coming back to the RF" as a job even now, despite Lady C wishin and hopin for it.

The Maul, second Brandreth serialization:

"The remarkable way the Queen welcomed Meghan Markle into the Royal Family – despite her concerns that Prince Harry was 'perhaps a little over-in-love' with his new partner – is today revealed in an authoritative new biography."

"The ever-pragmatic Monarch was even sanguine about the bombshell interview the couple gave to Oprah Winfrey, expressing more concern about Harry's wellbeing than what she dismissed as 'this television nonsense'."

In the new book, he reveals Prince Philip's belief that Harry and Meghan were not doing the right thing in abandoning royal duty for their new life in California, with the Duke confiding: 'It's a big mistake to think about yourself... If you think it's all about you, you'll never be happy.'

Mr Brandreth believes that King Charles's opinion of his son and daughter-in-law might be closer to Philip's view, than the Queen's more forgiving approach.

The author concludes: 'When we get to the Coronation of Charles III, the issue of Harry and Meghan... will be unavoidable. And, from the new King's point of view, deeply regrettable.'

Does that mean invitations may vary?

[quote]'If you think it's all about you, you'll never be happy.'

[quote]'It's a big mistake to think about yourself... If you think it's all about you, you'll never be happy.'

Podcast revenge coming soon.

R563 Lady C is certainly not wishing or hoping for H to return to the RF. She’s not a Harry and his wife fan.

Even if Harry isn’t present accepting the award the damage will be done.

So the Maul says Charles is withholding the Edinburgh title because he wants it to go to Charlotte in due course and that an elevation to dukedom is still being considered for Prince Edward. (Why they just don't make it Duke of Wessex I don't know. When you consider the two other present royal dukes, the dude's got a claim.)

Best of the Maul serialisation from today:

in 2017 (Paul) Burrell married his new partner, Graham Cooper.

Discreetly, a few months after the marriage, a wedding present arrived from Her Majesty. 'The Queen has always been incredibly broad-minded and accepting and generous,' said Paul.

For example, when the Duke of York (who did himself no favours with his self-justifying interview for Newsnight in 2019) was harrumphing about Harry and Meghan's interview with Oprah Winfrey on American television in 2020, the Queen chipped in gently: 'Didn't Sarah do something similar?'

I can tell you, because I know this, that the Queen was always more concerned for Harry's well-being than about 'this television nonsense', meaning both the Oprah Winfrey interview – which caused so much controversy – and the lucrative deal the Sussexes made with Netflix.

Again, her view differed from that of Prince Philip. I know from someone close to him that he thought Meghan and Harry's interview with Oprah was 'madness' and 'no good would come of it’.

To help Meghan, the Queen suggested that her daughter-in-law, Sophie Wessex, would be an ideal mentor. 'Sophie can help show you the ropes,' said the Queen.

Meghan made it clear that she did not feel she needed Sophie's help. She had Harry. The Queen was a little concerned at that, and concerned, too, when word reached her that Meghan was reportedly occasionally a bit 'high-handed' with staff. The Queen put it down to pre-wedding nerves.

Seventy years on, Harry chose not to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's memorial service at Westminster Abbey. And when he and Meghan came over from California for the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations in June 2022, they were welcomed at some, but by no means all, the family gatherings. Seventy years on, Harry chose not to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's memorial service at Westminster Abbey. And when he and Meghan came over from California for the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations in June 2022, they were welcomed at some, but by no means all, the family gatherings.

The Queen's greatest quality, her husband told me once, was tolerance. 'She is infinitely tolerant,' the Duke of Edinburgh said, 'and forgiving.’ As time went by, the Queen was increasingly able to take the long view. She had lived so long that she did sometimes feel that she had 'seen it all before'.

r558 Lady C said he was a friend in a video summer last year after Prince Philip had died I think and also mentioned attending a party Gyles was at several years ago. That later fact she mentioned before Philip died.

She was praising Gyles as a good reliable biographer .

Ah, so she cites the friendship.... uhuh. Wheeze, cackle, giggle, snort, stroke dog, wheeze.

Gyles Brandreth has had an strange career.

He's been famous in the UK for being a television presenter, theatre producer, journalist, author, publisher and a Member of Parliament for well over 40 years.

It's well known that he is a friend of Charles & Camilla, this book is kind of unofficially authorised. Likely with the aim of discrediting Harry's.

R572 I was thinking that as well. Brandreth’s timing is just perfect. It’s coming out a month before Harry’s and the subject is the beloved queen.

Everything they've attempted has been so mistimed that if they weren't such monumental cunts you'd feel sorry for them.

Depart the Royal Family as the worst pandemic in over 100 years hits.

Give the Orca interview weeks before the death of Prince Phillip.

Release a TV show and a book months after the death of HM The Queen.

It's the unluckiest shitshow ever.

Or karma.

R574 It is. They deserve it.

From a column in The Times (just areference, not a full article on the Ripples.)

"The Queen’s ability to say nothing while speaking volumes was peerless. So why can’t the younger royals learn it? We have Meghan and Harry, who are, obviously, the most literal, transactional people on the planet, with people paying $1 million to sit next to them when they accept their Ripple of Hope award for challenging the royal family’s “power structure” next month, even though they have probably done more than anyone except Wallis Simpson to reinforce it."

Angela Levin is getting in trouble for remarking on how pale Meghan is in a picture. But it's true, without the spray tan and dark face makeup she is light skinned.

[quote] Meghan made it clear that she did not feel she needed Sophie's help. She had Harry. The Queen was a little concerned at that, and concerned, too, when word reached her that Meghan was reportedly occasionally a bit 'high-handed' with staff.

Coming soon on Archetypes, season 2: The archetype of the high-handed woman. She's sitting in her power, effectively managing her staff, and getting help from where SHE wants--but the label "high-handed" (code word for bitch) is applied to drag her down. With special guest Ellen DeGeneres. Stay tuned!

Has Harry agreed to a one-on-one sit down interview with Gayle Winfrey King yet?

LOL as if Harry is allowed to speak without his handler present.

Here's what I don't get - how can Harry stay married to that woman after all the conniving and manipulation by Meghan to marry him, which has been laid out demonstratively and succinctly by the recent books that have been pouring out all the details. Why its as if he cannot read! Or is not allowed to read those books...

Has Netflix announced when the H&M show comes out? I read December 8 but I haven’t seen Netflix actually post anything.

R583, Netflix doesn’t have it listed. As usual, it’s impossible to figure out what’s happening with these two.

Yes, it's impossible to speculate that Netflix might hold off and piggyback off Idiot's book in January.

Maybe they're asking for reshoots since reportedly the stories in the book and the documentary don't match up.

Always a shit show with these two.

r587 Partly a side effect of them being addicted to victimhood and thriving on conflict.

R582 Harry is really stupid and easily manipulated. I imagine it would be very distressing to face the fact that you don’t have a happy family life like William and it’s all based on lies.

These two are just vapid and useless. The Peter Principle writ large.

If only she had ANY sense or self-awareness, she would have realized she'd hit her ceiling (and way beyond) when she married the Spare.

But there's no way that fool could have behaved, so it's a moot point I guess. It's just so confounding. The Queen's grandson couldn't find one English girl who'd have him?

I doubt William has a happy family life. Catherine in particular looks unhappy and unwell. I often wonder why she (apparently an introvert) signed up for all this.

R591, Kate has unpleasant breath from fasting.

Kate is a tour de force

R592 when you make a comment like that, it’s impossible not to form the impression of you as both morbidly obese and sad.

What you as an American see as fasting, most healthier people would see as a standard diet coupled with regular exercise. I doubt that you’re acquainted with either.

R591 From all appearances, William and Kate have happy family lives. They take their children to school each day and have relationships with both sides of the family. The kids spend time with all of their grandparents and cousins. William and Kate have no live in staff, prioritize their family life, are not litigious and allow limited photos of their children. They do not thrive on chaos and drama.

Kate looks fabulous. Her clothing is stylish and fits. Her hair is beautiful. Why do you think a slim woman looks unwell? Are you and/or your family obese?

I'm starting to think Trevor Noah is an asshole. He was on her podcast and had a sympathetic interview with Will Smith.

I agree, R596. Massive chip on his shoulder. I think it's a shame in his position he seems more interested in dividing than uniting.

Now I'm glad Trevor was fired.

r598 I didn't know he was fired. Good.

Trevor Noah, the great defender of people of colour, made a “joke” about Australian Aboriginal women when he toured Australia. He’s a smug little racist who has never apologised for what he said.

Well, he says leaving after 7 years is his decision but they always let you say that. His ratings sucked.