Skip to main content

Thoughts on Meghan Markle's delivery: A White Dress?


It was the white dress - just two days after the delivery of Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor - that was the real head-scratcher.

Who wears a white dress right after giving birth to a baby?

Every woman who has given birth knows how incredibly messy it is, not just during birth itself (sweat, blood, urine, poo), but afterwards. 

The first few days after a routine vaginal delivery, most women experience a bright red flow that gradually turns pinkish to brownish, as the body rids itself of uterine tissue that is no longer needed. Diarrhoea and urinary leakage are common too.  Most women wear thick speciality garments when they leave the hospital. 



Caesarian deliveries are also bloody: a C-section is major surgery, which is why many doctors avoid them unless medically necessary. Bleeding or discharge around the wound is always a risk. 

Up top, leakage of breast milk is a worry, as a new mother's milk comes in so she can nourish her child.

A white dress? 

Men, if you find this hard to wrap your head around, picture yourself in white trousers two days after hernia or prostate surgery. 

In white trousers on television.

.

A few more oddities

Of course, this wasn't the only odd aspect of Archie's delivery. A few other notes:
  • No place of birth was disclosed, and there were contradictory reports about where and when the baby might have been born.

  • No one was seen leaving Harry and Meghan's home at Frogmore Cottage in the hours before the birth, even though press was camped out waiting for the overdue baby. 

  • No members of the medical team were named on the birth announcement placed on an easel outside Buckingham Palace. Traditionally, the announcement includes the name and signature of all of the doctors who helped deliver the baby.

  • The announcement stated that the Queen and the Royal Family were "delighted at the news" that Meghan had given birth. It suggests that they had been told about a birth, but could not confirm that it had happened. When the Duchess of Cambridge gave birth in the Royal-approved Lindo Wing, the announcement said simply that "The Duchess of Cambridge has been safely delivered" of a son and daughter, followed by a specific time of birth.

  • The baby received no title, not even the "Earl" title he could not be denied as the son of a Duke.

  • Archie was not given the 21-gun salute customary for newborn Royal babies, and bells were not run at Westminster Abbey.

  • No official merchandise was issued to commemorate Archie's birth, as it was for all three Cambridge babies. 

  • The press arrangements around the birth were chaotic; the press was told the duchess had gone into labor about 8 hours after she had supposedly already given birth. The first interview with Harry was given to a reporter who had run into him in a car park a few minutes earlier, and it was held, for some reason, in front of the Queen's stables. 

  • When Harry and Meghan gave their first joint interview at Windsor two days after the announced birth of the child, Harry made an offhand remark that "they change so much in the first two weeks." Was the baby he was holding not a newborn? The line was later cut from online versions of the video. 

  • During the interview, Meghan reached over to pat the baby on the top of his head. Most parents avoid touching the soft spot on the top of a newborn's head - the fontanelle, where the skull has not yet hardened. 

  • The child's name was unusual and unexpected. "Archie" was variously described as a tribute to Meghan's dead cat, a tribute to a military commander Harry served with in Afghanistan, and an anagram of Meghan or Charles' names. It was also the name of a character within the sad life of the first Duke of Sussex, a redhead who married against his parents' wishes. Archibald was the name of his wife's lover, the man who was probably the real father of the Duke's children.

  • Six days after the reported birth, Meghan showed off what she called the baby's feet in an Instagram post. They were not the crumpled feet of a newborn, but the feet of a slightly older baby. 

The rumor mill in overdrive

Understandably, the rumor mill went into overdrive. Various sources suggested that the "Archie" who Harry and Meghan had shown off on TV was a realistic doll, and that a photo taken with Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip admiring the baby was a Photoshop creation.

There was also some suggestion that the pair had been forced into announcing a birth after reaching what would have been the 42nd week of pregnancy, assuming Meghan was at 12 weeks when she upstaged Eugenie's wedding in October with her pregnancy announcement.

Some theorists suggested that the surrogate had not yet delivered the baby, so a fill-in was being used; others suggested that Meghan herself was still pregnant. (Although the bump she showed during her post-baby interview veered alarmingly to the left, suggesting she had put it on incorrectly, again.

Other observers noticed that Meg was back in her high heels only a couple of days after supposedly giving birth.

On Lipstick Alley, a poster who said she was a labor and delivery nurse said that seeing Meghan in her heels was what brought her over to #TeamPillow.

The poster wrote. "That baby has a C-section head (no cone shape, not squished especially from a first-time mother, no bruising or redness) however Meghan is wearing heels. You shouldn't wear heels immediately after a C-section due to heels altering your alignment in a way that stretches your abdomen. It would potentially rupture the incision."


Do the rumors bother the Sussexes?

Do these rumors bother Harry and Meghan? Perhaps they do, but they are the inevitable results of their constant "bending of the rules." "She likes to bend the rules," Thomas Markle recently said of his daughter. 

I have no answers, but it is all very strange. And nothing is stranger than that white dress. 


Comments

Jennifer said…
Omg, the white dress was my first thought too! I had a c section, but everywhere I went, for a long time, was like a crime scene!! It was terrible!!
hardyboys said…
Hmmm I had a vaginal birth and I dont recall bleeding much. What stood out for me was how low key and shy she pretended to be which is not her personality at all. She acted coy and demure. It was wierd how she was in labour all a sudden and then the IG announcement pops up which she controls. How would you be able to do the graphics and that blue page so fast? I also agree about her touching the soft spot alot. I remember being too scared to touch it. No doctor's signatures on the announcement is quite suspicious. It's probably a surrogate and shes too embarrassed to admit it. Shes such a fraud. I wonder if shes 41 slot like everyone says.
OzManda said…
The photo op was weird for a number of reasons that i noticed:
1) Under her white dress she had a weird bump(but not bump) thing going on. I have never given birth so i am no expert on whether this is normal? It just looked weird and like she was wearing a few extra layers.
2) She only really started fussing over the baby once the cameras started - if you notice there was a quick moment a lot may have missed when she glanced over to make sure they were starting before putting her hand on the child's head.
3) While harry seemed genuine in his emotions, hers came out forced and not believable. Maybe it is my suspicious mind but something about her whole mannerisms just seemed off.
Jdubya said…
No clue why she chose that dress. Looks horrible. The whole outing seems so very off . And Harrys 2 weeks comment is something to think about. Seemed very bizarre. I think baby was born 2 weeks ago. She was supposedly way overdue but baby was 7lbs 3ozs?

Keep feeling the only reason the marriage happened is Harry went rogue ,insisted or he'd do it anyway and family caved.

She has Harry wrapped up. And family should be very worried about her upcoming moves.
Anonymous said…
The baby will turn into an accessory for her to use for merching. I hope she feels genuine maternal love towards Archie. The bump look too big for post-delivery and she and harry had no chemistry whatsoever. Maybe they wanted photos in front of Queen's stable to appeal more royal to the US crowd.
Now! said…
Yes, the dress was an odd choice. There was a reason Kate and Di wore the equivalent of colorful tent dresses when they left the hospital. They also just posed for a few minutes on the hospital steps and hopped in the car - less time for disaster to strike.
Now! said…
Yes, the shy and demure act comes out every once in awhile. We saw it at her first Christmas with the Royal Family - sweet, doe-eyed me - then briefly at the wedding ceremony, and finally when she was pushed off the "main" balcony at the Rememberence Day ceremony and forced to stand with the wife of the prime minister of Germany instead.
Now! said…
Some people have argued that this might be Post-Pregnancy Depression, or a lack of bonding with the baby. It's certainly possible, but it's certain that Meghan is a professional actress who knows how to turn emotions on and off when required.
Now! said…
I agree that the dress is unflattering, in addition to its impractical color. Meg seems to like to do things her way, which includes disregarding the advice of stylists.

Not only does Kate dress better than Meg does, but 54-year-old Sophie Wessex dresses better than she does. Even the 93-year-old Queen has flattering outfits. Not Meg.
Now! said…
I think Meg might have gone a bit too far by merching this yoga class run by Taryn Toomey, a former employee of her PR agency, Sunshine Sachs. Packaging a profit-making luxury class as a mental health initiative was really too much, and several journalists called her out on it.
d.c. said…
The wording of the official announcement, and even Harry’s initial interview... even the Mother’s Day Instagram post, all seen to be an attempt to covertly thank/acknowledge the surrogate without outright lying. Yes, tin foil hat is firmly on atilt.
Regarding the photo op, it seemed very odd to me that Harry held the baby, while Meghan looked sort of like the third wheel, idk. It looked like the baby was Harry’s, not Meghan’s, just from the body language, but yes, as yo7 graciously say, it could be post-part up depression, presuming she gave birth. I also thought she looked more pregnant afterwards, than prior, and strangely asymmetrical. I was shocked to not be back to pre-pregnancy shape, three days after delivery, but I was at least much less pregnant looking (& symmetric)... not sure what’s going on there.
Anyway, thanks again for your posts. I enjoy them here and your comments on CDAN immensely. Please continue.
Now! said…
Thank you, d.c.! I'm glad you enjoy my posts.
Now! said…
I should add that I think a lot of the accusations of "you're a tin hat! or you're a conspiracy theorist!" is because the evidence is so overwhelming that there is something wrong, and no one is able to rebut individual points, so they just attack anyone who sews them together.
Aus Unknown said…
It's not about embarrassment - the child could not be in the line of succession. It opens up all sorts of legal ramifications for a royal or aristocratic child. It must be born "of the body". Surrogacy is not recognised under UK Law. That means, no contracts, no payoffs, the woman who gives birth is its legal mother.

The royals can't take the good without the not-so-good. Those old laws exist to benefit them, but they can't have it all ... mere mortals can use surrogacy because they are not on guaranteed public funding or office for life. It bears repeating because many seem to forget this and consider that Harry and Meg can do whatever they want. Not while they take public money they can't. If they don't like the rules, they are free to walk and live the lifestyle they so pretend to covet - using their own money.
Aus Unknown said…
Nutty: the first royal appearance after engagement was the worst acting performance for the innocent ingenue! This was a woman pushing 40 then, had been around the block more than a few times, and she was gesturing as "I can't believe all you lovely people are here to see little me, I'm so touched and overwhelmed!".
Amzz Naylor said…
My mum also commented that her bump was way to weird to be real and I think she is coming around to the idea that things are not what they seem. Did you read they are not going to release archives birth certificate to the public??? they are just making it too easy for the people who believe the surrogate theory. Wondering how none of the major news outlets haven't questioned the lack of signatures on the announcement. Although I am sensing a change in attitude towards her some of them are questioning her decisions and her motives aloud now. Be interesting to see if they grow enough balls to call out this one as well.
Unknown said…
I reloaded your homepage for a week to have this subject treated. Something sounds fishy and I have a question relating to one of your earlier articles about the pregnancy :
You talked about a mandatory DNA test to certify Archie's lineage. Said DNA test would be necessary before giving an official title for the kid.

If none of this comes, as you're mentioning here, should we deduct that, indeed, that child is not theirs? Or maybe is it still early?
Aus Unknown said…
What mandatory DNA test? The public isn't entitled to one ... more's the pity. The BRF will regret this blatant disdain of the public. Something is amiss, clearly. There is no reason to hide exactly where and when he was born and to ensure that he is legitimate. They ought to be grateful and humble to provide such details to the tax paying public. Of course, Archie won't ever be King, but what about the financial benefits that are par for the course for Harry's child and the future King's grandson?
Now! said…
I wanted to take a little time to think things over before posting!

I'm sorry, but I don't remember writing anything about a mandatory DNA test. For centuries after the "Warming Pan Scandal" of the late 17th century, when a fake baby was supposedly smuggled into the birth chamber in a warming pan, the birth of Royal children in the line of succession have been witnessed by government officials, most recently the Home Secretary.

That stopped with the birth of Prince Charles. Instead, esteemed physicians put their reputations on the line with their signatures on the birth announcement.

The announcement of Archie's birth, of course, had no signatures.

This baby may be "theirs", either genetically or affectionately, but it seems likely that the baby was born with the assistance of a surrogate. Since royal heirs have to be born "of the body" of a royal or royal wife, this would disqualify Archie from the line of succession if it were openly acknowledged.
Now! said…
The British media is angry about the favoritism shown to US media outlets; supposedly the announcement was timed to hit the US breakfast shows, one of which is hosted by Oprah's buddy Gayle King.

They have already slowly begun leaking information in a snarky, British kind of way.

That said, British tabloids' ability to maneuver has been limited since the hacking scandals of the early 2000s, in which William's phone was hacked among many others.

UK law contains a category of law called a "super-injunction" which not only bars the discussion of a subject but prohibits the mention of the injunction itself.

The Royal Family might have a super-injunction prohibiting the discussion of Meg's yachting past, for example, or about the surrogate relationship.

But foreign press isn't covered by a super-injunction. The Australian press hates Meg, for example, and they can publish what they want.
Charlie said…
When you're pregnant, your uterus increases three times in general, and after giving birth (vaginal or c-section) it takes month or 6 weeks to shrink to normal size. Uterus is actually pretty small, 5,5 centimetres in diameter, and right after giving birth it's 13 centimetres in diameter.

But I think her stomach was weird, because it is pretty high. After giving birth stomach goes down, because uterus goes down to it's place, and it should've happen before she went to cameras.
Lex said…
The no title is a smoking gun to me... There's no way they wouldn't want a title for their son. The whole privacy argument doesn't hold water as long as Meghan is posting pictures of the kid on Instagram, even if it's just a foot here and a hand there.
Now! said…
William should be king by the time Archie is old enough to be a working Royal. It will be interesting to see how he handles the situation. If Archie somehow magically turns out to have some smarts (unlikely, based on his heritage, but you never know) perhaps he could have a consigliere role like Tom Hagen in the godfather.
Now! said…
They could have used Earl with no approval from anyone, but turned it down so they could pretend that they had refused all titles.

Also, who wants to see the disembodied foot of somebody else's baby?
Teasmade said…
I too have been clicking and refreshing the screen for DAYS. Thank you so much for this--was afraid you'd been stifled somehow. Keep up the good work! (I had an actual 42-week pregnancy; that baby weighed 9'1" and yet was not as long as the doll Harry was holding.)
Aus Unknown said…
And the Australian press does, often ... the royals won't go after anyone in Australia, never have, never will. They know the score. Australians will go after the monarchy with a baseball bat, no kidding ... it's one way they stay as head of state - know their places and all that. Other celebrities have sued in Australia for much less, though, admittedly, we don't have any law on privacy. Learned persons have tried, but to no avail. Privacy is virtually non-existent in Australia (save statutory protections under various legislation) ... I won't bother with more details because it is irrelevant. However, the royals can still sue for defamation, if they so wanted. But they wouldn't dare.
Aus Unknown said…
And all the unearned financial perks that come with being royal ... no grace and favour housing, no public role, no security and on and on ...
Aus Unknown said…
I know, it's creepy ... but then, so is royal fandom. I don't get it. I respect certain royals, but that's it.
Aus Unknown said…
You reckon? Royals live to very old ages because they live a life of unvarnished luxury with the very best of everything, food, health, housing, comforts, etc. Charles could live well into his 90s.
hardyboys said…
There is something very simple and amazing about your writing and this blog I love it
OzManda said…
All that makes sense, i think i pay close attention to the nuances of behaviour as it is my job to profile people. But Charlie is right - her belly looked really high
OzManda said…
Unknown i agree - there is no way Megs would be ok with no title. She seems to be all about getting all she can.
OzManda said…
You would think with all the theories out there, they would want to make extra effort to combat them - eg. gives the medical team signatures on the announcement, but it seems they are either not caring or blatantly not doing anything to combat the rumours - which may be significant.
Now! said…
Thank you, Veena!
Now! said…
Glad to be here. I see @Skippyisheretostay, one of the leading Meghan-critical blogs on Tumblr, disappeared overnight. Supposedly Meghan's lawyers went after her.

Skippy's last post before her disappearance suggested that the surrogate had refused to give up the baby and there was no Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.

Who knows - Skippy was wrong much more than she was right - but the fact that someone made the effort to get rid of her seems significant.
Now! said…
You're right, and I see that even rabid Meg supporters like Kaiser at Celebitchy are saying "Why not just release the birth certificate?"

It's a public document by definition - particularly when the baby is within the line of succession - so to talk about "privacy" makes no sense.

There are roughly 2000 babies born in the UK every day and their birth certificates are public record. Why not this one?
Unknown said…
To reiterate d.c.: why was Harry holding the baby? That was very strange, yet nobody seems to comment on it.

The heels. I did not believe that she wasn't really pregnant, until I saw that famous video of Sparkles in the black&white dress, where her belly sways from side to side, like a balloon. And squatting at 8 months pregnant with your legs together and getting up with ease? Anyone who believes that this is actually doable, has never carried a baby.
Wearing high stiletto heels a couple of days after giving birth? Ludicrous.

And finally, Harry's comment about the 2 weeks. What on earth was that? And the insecure side glance she gave him immediately after his comment and his uncomfortable grin as if he knew he had messed up....it did not get lost on me. Watch it.
Now! said…
Actually, when you look at the men in the Windsor family, most died in their early 70s. Philip is not a Windsor, and he has always been a health nut, so I think he's an outlier.

Diana had a premonition that Charles would never be king.
Aus Unknown said…
Maybe ... but all the immediate ancestors on the Queen's side (King George, Duke of Windsor) where smokers. Charles is fairly health conscious I believe.

I think Diana was very spiritual but it was wishful thinking on her part that Charles would never be King and that William would be King to restore Diana's dignity. She knew William would be loyal to her.
Aus Unknown said…
That is suppression of her rights at law. Those of us in the Commonwealth have a constitutional right to criticise the monarchy as a system of government. I know skippy takes that to a new level, but still, shutting her down is wrong. Agree that it valides her theories or at least gives pause to ponder.
SueT said…
My first thought was that she chose the dress to accent her so called after birth bump. Why pick a dress that has a belt under the boobs to accent your stomach? Not normal IMO. The whole thing is contrived and phoney.
katdandevon said…
Another critical blog has gone in the last few days too. Harrymarkle @ wordpress. You make some interesting and well reasoned posts here and on CDAN so I hope you can keep up the good work. There is definitely something odd going on with this baby and I see no logical reason to withold the birth certificate which can only fuel speculation. Maybe she will take any attention over none?
Lurking said…
Nutty... https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/ is now private. Thoughts?
Unknown said…
Excuse me but all of this phony's bs about being proud of her black heritage - does anyone else think it's is such poor taste that he's Master? Not American but isn't that what the slaves called their owners? And Ms. Black Pride - when it suits her of course - is ok with this?
50 and counting said…
Prince Edward (Harry's Uncle) was photographed carrying one of his children when Sophie Wessex left the hospital.

I've given birth, right after birth your abdomen feels like a bowl of wobbly jello or mushy oatmeal. It doesn't magically shrink. It's just there and you try and hide it the best you can.

Her feet are swollen in those heels. Her bust looks well padded to protect from leaks.

I worked postpartum for a few years and the strange things women do before leaving hospital are that strange. Some go out with a full face of makeup and heels, others limp out in sweats and sneakers.

Master is a common UK form of address for young men. Technically speaking young Archie will become a Prince when Granda Charles becomes King. Why make a fuss, if you know it's going to happen.

What I find strange is there is no pap shots of Granny Doria out and about in Windsor. Is she being kept in the Cottage as some sort of house serf/nanny?
hunter said…
Have you seen Charles' face or swollen fingers? He's definitely an avid drinker and that can cause its own host of health issues.
hunter said…
Jessica Simpson just ejected an almost ELEVEN POUND baby like bloop!!

Eleven goddamn pounds (10 lbs, 11 oz?) - the baby is a butterball and none of it looks fake.
hunter said…
Presumably because it takes 12 weeks to change the parents on a birth certificate when surrogates are used. Where did I read that? On JerseyDeanne I think.
hunter said…
The fact that one SINGLE comment is deleted from other online versions is its own proof they regret the comment. Otherwise one could brush it off but you can't brush it off AND delete it.
hunter said…
Your comment is an American's perspective but Master is the juvenile form of Mister in the English language and is used for all young men under 18 for railway tickets and many travel arrangements according to zillions of kind Europeans who keep mentioning it. It's the same as Miss for a young lady.
OzManda said…
I am willing to bet that Doria is put on staff as a nanny of some kind (otherwise known as giving her money to not talk to the media). The whole Markle family seem pretty focussed on the next hustle.
Aus Unknown said…
Sue: contrived and phoney describes Meg accurately! She identifies as caucasian, as evidenced by one of her acting bios. And she only dates/marries wealthy white men who can boast her profile and provide her with the lifestyle she thinks she so richly desires. She ought to be offensive to WOC.
Aus Unknown said…
She looked more pregnant post-birth than during pregnancy. She was never pregnant. She was getting botox and fillers to fill out her face. She would know all the tricks to give her a swollen face and feet.

Eating lots of salt, taking sodium tablets, for one. Swollen feet can be caused from thyroid disease. I know, I've got it and my feet swell like balloons, especially when it's hot.

If she was pregnant, there would be no need for the cloak and dagger games.
Aus Unknown said…
Yes, but we don't know that his red face and swollen fingers are the result of excessive drinking. He has the very best medical care and that can make all the difference between living a long life and dying younger - even in countries like the UK and Australia, where essential medical care is free.

I have noticed that Charles has aged horribly in the last year or two. Camilla looks far more robust than he does - and she has been a long-time smoker.
Wolpertinger said…
How can the PR-Team of Frogmore get the critical accounts on social media closed? Are they treating with legal action? I hope your blog remains...!
Now! said…
I agree, Hunter.
Now! said…
The blog may have had copyright concerns. Didn't it cut and paste the entire Forbes article - the one that was deleted - to preserve it for posterity? The copyright on that article probably still belongs to Forbes or to the original writer.

Supposedly Skippy was chased off of Tumblr by a copyright complaint, although I see she's now restarted her Tumblr blog under a new name.
Now! said…
I agree with Hunter that "Master" is a default address, but I also agree with you that it is an unfortunate one in this instance.

Earl would have been fine, and so would Viscount, which is what the Earl of Wessex's son James uses.

But either Meg and Harry wanted to refuse all titles, á la Zara and Peter Phillips, or they wanted *to be seen to* refuse all titles because the Queen would not allow the baby to have one.

"Master" is the default for a boy with no title. It does have a bit of a Jane Austin ring to it.
Now! said…
Doria appears to have a lovely home in Los Angeles and a long-term partner, a white female.

I'm sure she wouldn't say no to money, but I doubt she wants to live in the UK.
Aus Unknown said…
She'd be under too much scrutiny as well. Why give up her freedom, her private life, lovely Cal weather for gloomy weather in the UK? She'd have to be really desperate.

From what I see, I think Doria has acted with dignity.
Lurking said…
Copyright issue could be cleared up by removing the article. Quoting the article and commenting on the content are ok, but not the entire article with or without discussion.

I don't have a Tumblr... I thought that was for dating.
Now! said…
I think you may be confusing Tinder with Tumblr.

I think the HM site was quite proud of offering the Forbes article, so I doubt she would want to remove it.

I have also heard conflicting info that the Harry Markle writer was going on a personal vacation and didn't want the site messed with while she was gone, so she put it on private.
Harry Markled should be back within a couple days. She said she was taking a quick vacation.
The white dress bothered me as well. Also the belt. Mm is very image conscious. You dont tie a bow directly over something unless you're purposely drawing attention to it. And what woman wants to draw attention to her post-partum belly?

Her boobs appear to be in a push-up bra. Should someone who's just given birth be squishing milk-filled breasts?

The whole unveiling wreaks of false information and cover-up.
Jdubya said…
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-prince-harry-archie-birth-certificate

Aus Unknown said…
The birth certificate is worthless and doesn't answer adequately the questions people want answered. Cf: birth certificates of the Cambridge children.
Now! said…
It did seem strange, and it was clearly an unofficial, unsigned document. Why is this so hard for them?

I've referred previously to a similar mysterious pregnancy story surrounding Louis Tomlinson, one of the members of the boy band One Direction. Tomlinson - who is gay, and was at one point involved with the flamboyantly gay Harry Styles - was given a fake baby for publicity reasons. That shady baby had a "birth certificate" too.
Maddie said…
I’m so glad to hear that. I like the HM blog and Nuttys. These are my favorites.


Jdubya said…
I bet she loves how she is listed. Her royal highness
Jdubya said…
What's the deal with the other house they had leased for 2 yrs and had to move out due to some pics being taken? Has anyone seen the pics? I read somewhere pics of bedroom. Alot of secrets involving those 2.
OzManda said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-7051727/Lizzie-Cundy-says-Meghan-Markle-asked-famous-British-man.html -> interesting. Piers Morgan seems to be acting like a pissed off ex lover, was he one of her yachting clients?
drchristna said…
I'm not sure what her point was in wearing another outfit that doesn't fit. Maybe Earth Mother for wearing white? All I know is money spent on another tasteless outfit.
dunnoreally said…
If I may speculate, the red face thing is an advanced case of rosacea, I believe. Not necessarily a drink related problem though 'everyone' think it is, eyes roll....though alcohol can trigger a flare as can sunshine and stress. And the hands look 'vascular'.
Anonymous said…
How in hell is this kind, or right? Why on earth would you write this about anyone? I found you from Crazy Days and Nights. You seem unhinged and unwell. This is also incredibly slanderous. It is appalling to write about anyone this way. I hope you are sued. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Aus Unknown said…
I'm one of the "regular" unknowns ... how brave of you to come onto a blog anonymously and defame anyone! It is YOU who are making defamatory imputations and yes, I have a law degree. You must be one of Meg's sugary fans because you don't understand either the law or the monarchy.
Avery said…
The fact that the baby didn't move once - not even a dreaming mouth suckle is what stuns me. Not a twitch. Not a startle. Not an eyelash batted.
Smart_Margauz said…
I love these two couple. Meghan and Harry is a wonderful couple. I love their fashion styleas well. Happy to see this article.
hardyboys said…
I have a law degree too. We have rights. It's called freedom of speech.
The only genetic test that truly gives a yes or no answer is whether or not someone is a parent of the individual taking the test. Perhaps the Queen should slip Archie's nanny an Ancestry autosomal DNA test?
Kent said…
Hi this blog is really worth to read, I highly recommend it. I enjoy reading these kinds of blogs which include a lot of helpful information, I adore the author who come up on this kind of topics. And i also suggest if you are in need in laundry delivery services we can help you on that. Just visit our sites to look more our other services. Thank You and have a Good Day.
hardyboys said…
That's really interesting I did not know that. God is great. Evolution like that. Amazing
Clarissa said…
Apparently she wanted Archie to have the title Prince. You can only have that title if a parent is going to be Blood King / Queen.
Clarissa said…
Two weeks before announcement of Baby Archie an ambulance and private ambulance turned up at another cottage on the Frogmore Estate. Gossip has it that it was the actual birth by the surrogate. You should look up the pictures of the Baby Bump slipping down to just above her knees. It’s hilarious!

Popular posts from this blog

A Quiet Interlude

 Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event?   Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th?  Oscar's - March 10th?   In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US.  The IRS just never goes away.  Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on).  There's always another one.  Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California.   That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales.   Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere.  But.  The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.  

As Time Passes and We Get Older

 I started thinking about how time passes when reading some of the articles about the birthday.  It was interesting to think about it from the different points of view.  Besides, it kind of fits as a follow up the last post (the whole saga of can the two brothers reunite). So there is the requisite article about how he will be getting all kinds of money willed to him from his great-grandmother.  There were stories about Princess Anne as trustee (and not allowing earliest access to it all).  Whether or not any or all of this is true (there was money for him and/or other kids) has been debated with claims she actually died owing money with the Queen paying the debts to avoid scandal.  Don't know but I seem to remember that royal estates are shrouded from the public so we may not (ever) know. However, strange things like assisting in a book after repeated denials have popped up in legal papers so nothing is ever really predicable.   We are also seein...

The Opening Act of New Adventures in Retail

 I keep thinking things will settle down to the lazy days of spring where the weather is gorgeous and there is a certain sense of peacefulness.  New flowers are coming out. increasing daylight so people can be outside/play and thinking gardening thoughts.  And life is quiet.  Calm. And then something happens like a comet shooting across the sky.  (Out of nowhere it arrives and then leaves almost as quickly.)   An update to a law suit.  Video of the website is released (but doesn't actually promote any specific product which can be purchased from the website).  A delay and then jam is given out (but to whom and possible more importantly - who did not make the list?).  Trophies almost fall (oops).  Information slips out like when the official date of beginning USA residency.  (now, isn't that interesting?) With them, it's always something in play or simmering just below the surface.  The diversity of the endeavors is really ...