Two foundations, two office spaces, two sets of administrators, two sets of accountants, two sets of expenses. This week the Royal Foundation, the charity project that Prince William and Prince Harry founded together in 2009, was split into two.
Harry and his wife Meghan will run a separate charity that has not yet been named, although some fun-seeker set up a Royal Sussex Foundation account on Instagram.
Meghan apparently got what she wanted: her own version of the type of celebrity foundation run by Jennifer Lopez, John Mayer, Lady Gaga and others she sees as big stars like herself. (Not to mention the foundations of Meghan buddies like George Clooney and Oprah Winfrey.)
Celebrity foundations aren't popular just because famous people want to "give back". They are popular because they can make you look charitable without having to actually be charitable.
If The Nutty Flavor Foundation sponsors, say, an all-star tennis tournament to fight morning caffeine addiction, I could look like a very caring and supportive person while lending nothing but my name and presence. Sponsors pick up all the real bills.
In fact, sponsors will pick up the bills for my first-class travel to the event (held someplace nice, so the tennis stars will also want to attend) plus my first-class accommodation and meals during the event.
I'll also need something nice to wear every day to sit in the stands, plus something extra-nice to hand out the trophies, and sponsors will pay for that too - dresses, shoes, purses.
No wonder Meghan wants her own foundation.
Of course, Royals cannot be paid for their appearances, but one could certainly ask for a "donation to the Royal Sussex Foundation" to "support all the good work they do." Who could object to that?
That money would go to the foundation's general fund, where it could pay for Meghan's real passion in life - PR to make herself look good. Since her days on Suits, Meghan has put a large part of her income into paying PR agencies to boost her profile, get her invited to events, help her access sponsorships and freebies, and put her in touch with powerful people.
Wouldn't it be wonderful to have someone else pay for PR? All under the auspices of the foundation, of course.
It could be written off under the Foundation's "educational" mission; many charities classify their fundraising pitches this way, since the plea for cash usually comes after they have "educated" you about how pressing the issue at hand is.
But high-end brands only want to be around high-end people, or at least popular people. Harry still has some pull, of course, which is why he is the one linked to the Apple series instead of Meghan.
Meghan has very limited popularity on her own; the "one million Instagram followers she had before marrying Harry" were mostly fake - someone traced them to a bot farm in Kazakhstan - and the Harry Markle blog makes a good argument as many as 75% of followers on the current @SussexRoyal Instagram account are fake too.
If I know that, the marketing people at Apple, Audi, and other high-end brands know that too.
So - who might be interested in giving money to a not-to-bright second son and his ostentatious, publicity-seeking wife?
There's US property tycoon/child molester Jeffrey Epstein, Libyan Col. Gaddafi's son Saif and his buddy, the Libyan gun smuggler Tarek Kaitun, corrupt Tunesian regime member Sakher al-Materi, plus Timor Kulibayev, the son-in-law of the President of Kazakhstan, whom Andrew sold the house the Queen gave him as a wedding present for £3m over the asking price. (The house, less than 20 years old, was quickly torn down)
These are the kind of people who have lots of money and are willing to use it to get close to the British Royal Family, even its lesser members. Their present-day equivalents will swarm to the new Foundation.
Meg doesn't care where the money comes from, and dim, addled Harry (perhaps substance-addled Harry) doesn't care where it comes from either. As long as it comes.
The person who probably cares is William.
The Queen was born just eight years after Russia's entire Royal Family was stood up against a wall and shot (and is probably acutely aware of how her grandfather, George V, refused to give them refuge in Britain.) Prince Philip escaped the overthrow of the Greek Monarchy as a toddler by being smuggled out in a trunk.
Both of them know how even an established monarchy can disappear very quickly, something they have no doubt communicated to William.
Meanwhile, he's watched Andrew cast a shadow over the entire family with the association to Epstein (and all the rumors about precisely what that association might include).
William certainly doesn't want his brother to turn into another "Air Miles Andy", palling around with and accepting money from an international cast of bad actors, besmirching the monarchy and humiliating himself in the process.
After their mother's death, he protected Harry for decades from the consequences of Harry's own bad decisions. Now that Markle is in the picture, William isn't able to do that any more.
It's clearly William vs. Meghan. Both want to be in charge, but for very different reasons.
Meghan acknowledged this with some PR plants surrounding her departure this week. "William's quite controlling, and he was in control when it was just the three of them, but now he's not," said a 'Royal insider' to the Sunday Times.
Of course he's controlling.
William is going to be the King. It's his job to run things. Does anyone call the Queen - or for that matter, Angela Merkel, controlling? The word is a negative way to express simple leadership, spoken by someone who doesn't want to be led.
(Controlling is quite an American expression, by the way, the California therapy-speak so beloved by Meghan. The person speaking to the Times is described as a 'he', but it seems likely that words came by proxy from Meg.)
Anyway, the source to the Times went on to say that Meg "understands the power of social media, and Harry's getting into all that because he doesn't much like traditional media either. So they're maxing up their standalone brand. William's going to have to get used to it."
To regular PR plants suggesting that he's cheating on his wife with the wife of a friend? (Even Enty is promoting this dumb idea, although several insider toffs have come out saying it is nonsense.)
To constant jabs at his sweet-tempered wife in the media? This week's version, in the Sun, had one of those rent-a-Royal-commenters saying, "Who would Kate be without Prince William? She certainly wouldn't be well-known. Meghan without Harry would have been well-known."
Or should he get used to embarrassing proximity to a foundation that takes cash and favors from anyone willing to pay?
At least it's not his own foundation anymore.
Scandals surrounding the Royal Sussex Foundation, or whatever it chooses to call itself, seem inevitable. William is just trying to get out of the way.
Harry and his wife Meghan will run a separate charity that has not yet been named, although some fun-seeker set up a Royal Sussex Foundation account on Instagram.
 |
| A digital squatter has taken @Royal SussexFoundation |
Celebrity foundations aren't popular just because famous people want to "give back". They are popular because they can make you look charitable without having to actually be charitable.
If The Nutty Flavor Foundation sponsors, say, an all-star tennis tournament to fight morning caffeine addiction, I could look like a very caring and supportive person while lending nothing but my name and presence. Sponsors pick up all the real bills.
In fact, sponsors will pick up the bills for my first-class travel to the event (held someplace nice, so the tennis stars will also want to attend) plus my first-class accommodation and meals during the event.
I'll also need something nice to wear every day to sit in the stands, plus something extra-nice to hand out the trophies, and sponsors will pay for that too - dresses, shoes, purses.
No wonder Meghan wants her own foundation.
Donations can be used for so many things
Perhaps another group - a corporation or NGO - would like Meghan to bring her word salad to their event as a featured speaker.Of course, Royals cannot be paid for their appearances, but one could certainly ask for a "donation to the Royal Sussex Foundation" to "support all the good work they do." Who could object to that?
That money would go to the foundation's general fund, where it could pay for Meghan's real passion in life - PR to make herself look good. Since her days on Suits, Meghan has put a large part of her income into paying PR agencies to boost her profile, get her invited to events, help her access sponsorships and freebies, and put her in touch with powerful people.
Wouldn't it be wonderful to have someone else pay for PR? All under the auspices of the foundation, of course.
It could be written off under the Foundation's "educational" mission; many charities classify their fundraising pitches this way, since the plea for cash usually comes after they have "educated" you about how pressing the issue at hand is.
Where will the donations come from?
The supporters of the future Sussex foundation probably see its donors as high-end corporations, such as Audi, the former sponsor of a polo event in which Harry participated for many years, or Apple, for which he is reportedly working on a show about mental health with Oprah Winfrey.But high-end brands only want to be around high-end people, or at least popular people. Harry still has some pull, of course, which is why he is the one linked to the Apple series instead of Meghan.
Meghan has very limited popularity on her own; the "one million Instagram followers she had before marrying Harry" were mostly fake - someone traced them to a bot farm in Kazakhstan - and the Harry Markle blog makes a good argument as many as 75% of followers on the current @SussexRoyal Instagram account are fake too.
If I know that, the marketing people at Apple, Audi, and other high-end brands know that too.
So - who might be interested in giving money to a not-to-bright second son and his ostentatious, publicity-seeking wife?
This has happened before
Let's look at the people who gave money to the last not-to-bright second son and his ostentatious, publicity-seeking wife - Prince Andrew and Fergie.There's US property tycoon/child molester Jeffrey Epstein, Libyan Col. Gaddafi's son Saif and his buddy, the Libyan gun smuggler Tarek Kaitun, corrupt Tunesian regime member Sakher al-Materi, plus Timor Kulibayev, the son-in-law of the President of Kazakhstan, whom Andrew sold the house the Queen gave him as a wedding present for £3m over the asking price. (The house, less than 20 years old, was quickly torn down)
These are the kind of people who have lots of money and are willing to use it to get close to the British Royal Family, even its lesser members. Their present-day equivalents will swarm to the new Foundation.
Meg doesn't care where the money comes from, and dim, addled Harry (perhaps substance-addled Harry) doesn't care where it comes from either. As long as it comes.
The person who probably cares is William.
The fragile monarchy
Having been trained since childhood to take over the monarchy, William probably has a good sense of how fragile it is.The Queen was born just eight years after Russia's entire Royal Family was stood up against a wall and shot (and is probably acutely aware of how her grandfather, George V, refused to give them refuge in Britain.) Prince Philip escaped the overthrow of the Greek Monarchy as a toddler by being smuggled out in a trunk.
Both of them know how even an established monarchy can disappear very quickly, something they have no doubt communicated to William.
Meanwhile, he's watched Andrew cast a shadow over the entire family with the association to Epstein (and all the rumors about precisely what that association might include).
William certainly doesn't want his brother to turn into another "Air Miles Andy", palling around with and accepting money from an international cast of bad actors, besmirching the monarchy and humiliating himself in the process.
After their mother's death, he protected Harry for decades from the consequences of Harry's own bad decisions. Now that Markle is in the picture, William isn't able to do that any more.
The real feud
I always think it's odd that the "feud" in the British Royal Family is painted as Kate vs Meghan or William vs. Harry.It's clearly William vs. Meghan. Both want to be in charge, but for very different reasons.
Meghan acknowledged this with some PR plants surrounding her departure this week. "William's quite controlling, and he was in control when it was just the three of them, but now he's not," said a 'Royal insider' to the Sunday Times.
Of course he's controlling.
William is going to be the King. It's his job to run things. Does anyone call the Queen - or for that matter, Angela Merkel, controlling? The word is a negative way to express simple leadership, spoken by someone who doesn't want to be led.
(Controlling is quite an American expression, by the way, the California therapy-speak so beloved by Meghan. The person speaking to the Times is described as a 'he', but it seems likely that words came by proxy from Meg.)
Anyway, the source to the Times went on to say that Meg "understands the power of social media, and Harry's getting into all that because he doesn't much like traditional media either. So they're maxing up their standalone brand. William's going to have to get used to it."
Scandals seem inevitable
What is William supposed to get used to?To regular PR plants suggesting that he's cheating on his wife with the wife of a friend? (Even Enty is promoting this dumb idea, although several insider toffs have come out saying it is nonsense.)
To constant jabs at his sweet-tempered wife in the media? This week's version, in the Sun, had one of those rent-a-Royal-commenters saying, "Who would Kate be without Prince William? She certainly wouldn't be well-known. Meghan without Harry would have been well-known."
Or should he get used to embarrassing proximity to a foundation that takes cash and favors from anyone willing to pay?
At least it's not his own foundation anymore.
Scandals surrounding the Royal Sussex Foundation, or whatever it chooses to call itself, seem inevitable. William is just trying to get out of the way.
Comments
I know that even the Queen can't tell another adult what he's allowed to do if he's hell bent on doing it, but I think they kind of made a mistake. She could have said, fine, you can marry this woman, but I won't allow you to make Eugenie change her wedding date, you will just have to pick another date, and wait. Maybe in the interim she'd have slipped up and Harry would have had a chance to dump her again and we'd be spared her crap.
Then again, I wouldn't have this blog to entertain me during morning coffee either, lol.
https://countesscuriosity.tumblr.com/post/185752951381/1-million-foundation-deficit
Thanks Nutty for blog. Enjoy this tremendously.
And i think it was appropriate that the Sussex's were asked to leave the foundation initially set up by Harry & William
Kate was invited to join after her wedding and then eventually Meghan was invited to join (prematurely in my opinion being only the fiance at the time)
Which is exactly when the seams began to come undone
firstly, I found Meghan's fawning over Harry on stage inappropriate
Her answers had absolutely nothing to do with the mental health issues being discussed, it was just all of the same rhetoric she always sprouts about women having a voice...(yeah we get it)
Also the she statement she made "Her and Harry will hit the ground running' came across as so arrogant, that she and only she, knows how to get things done because she is so dynamic and an 'influencer blogger' with her orchestrated, pretentious & chronicled charade of a blog
I think if she said ' i have a lot to learn with this foundation' taking a back seat and showing a small amount of humbleness would have gone a long way with William, Kate and the general public, instead she came across more as hijacking the foundation and wanting to appear way too important
Slightly off topic - if you don't mind?
I think in the Sussex's position, showing transparency is vital but that it way too late, the damage has been done
Instead they want to play this cloak and dagger game with the public and the media, which is thnakfully backfiring big time
I personally think there are major problems with the Sussex's and i am not exactly sure what it is as yet, but my gut feeling says, that drugs are involved
One thing that bothers me though, is why hasn't Harry ever met with Meghan's father, it is a very normal protocol for family to meet parents before a wedding...even for us normal folk...and even if you don't get on....he is your father for crying out load
And why weren't Harry and Meghan advised by the Palace advisers before the wedding about a possible fallout with her having no family there but all of the 'stars'?
I would think that having her family there regardless of their status would be a sign of good will....isn't it better to keep your friends close but your enemies closer
It was ridiculous having Doria sitting there a a lone token of family, when it is clear Meghan has an extensive family
It's a very strange way for adults to behave
Unfortunately Meghan has absolutely no clue or self awareness on how to conduct herself as a 'Royal'
Many thanks Nutty for a fab blog and a platform for us to express our skepticism ; )
A big thank you to Nutty, too! This blog is wonderful. I learned so much reading this post.
I also agree about the language used in some of these articles and IG post. I always, ALWAYS love reading British words, sayings and phrases that are different than in the US. It is obvious when an American (MM or hired hand) has written a post or quote in an article.
One last thing, I have never in all my years heard people question the mental state of the Queen like they have recently. And I never thought I'd see the monarchy end, but it seems that the longer this goes on, the louder the cries for a republic will become after she passes. Charles, William, someone has to do something, for the slow approach is not a good strategy when time is short.
I first read of it from something by Oliver Sacks I believe. He was talking about people in the mental facility watching presidential debates, no sound, and laughing at the candidates.
I tried to be open minded too, but let's face it, from the beginning there have been red flags. The first one was doing an interview as the 'girlfriend'. before this was established by the RF...which is a big no, no
It showed a lack of discretion
And i still want to see a family photo with 'Archie'!!
Ok, you're the Dad to two kids who have supported each other for years, now they are barely speaking to each other, and there seems to be a lot of money missing from the Royal Foundation.
Don't you think it would be a good time to do something?
I suppose Charles is not "controlling" as Meghan would say, but he's also not a very exciting future monarch. Take a decision, man. William would.
After the twin debacles of the whole shambolic baby reveal and her appearance at TOTC (coupled with this rather delicious report that she was escorted home in a police car last weekend in some kind of altered mental state) . . I hoped this meant that the wheels were well and truly coming off this sham of a marriage and she was on her way out . . .way, way out. I'm hoping that this new foundation business is just more desperate Farkle spin, because if it's *true* . . . then the BRF has caved into her demand for a separate 'Sussex brand' after all. And why?? This would be utterly devoid of merit on her part, by way of a reward for a demonstrated gift for fund-raising and impeccable representation of the Firm. She has waged a calculated campaign to be as difficult and divisive as possible . . she's ruined a formerly smooth-running operation and a formerly warm bond between brothers. Isn't it instructive that nobody .. *nobody* within the Royal family, or her own birth family, or any of the people that knew her at school or in Hollywood have had a single warm, positive thing to say about her? Only her hand-selected and paid-for sycophants. The fact that Doria alone represented anyone from Meghan's side at the wedding speaks volumes. She has no friends . . and she's got no redeeming features. None. You can't 'give back' in a meaningful way to others when your soul is a vapid hollow pit of greed and delusions of grandeur.
When Edward VIII set his heart obstinately upon his wretchedly unsuitable American divorcee, he at least had the decency to renounce his place in the family and leave the country. Something extreme is going to have to be done to force Harry to either renounce Farkle or do as his great-great uncle did and renounce his place as a royal. How fast would Farkle leave him if he is no longer a Prince of the United Kingdom? If they go off to America, they will have nothing but empty titles if they are cut off from the support of the Crown. How many A-list moneyed celebrity donors will be willing to donate to Meg's charitable foundation then? The only charity she cares about is herself, and that's got to be blatantly obvious to everyone.
Do you think the Royal Sussex Foundation (or whatever it ends up being called) will be able to pull in many grants?
And Sarah was likeable; it's basically that likeability that she used to earn a living.
Meghan doesn't have that.
I suspect there will be a lot more commercial partnerships that with the RF. Probably some organisations that someone in the BRF should not be getting involved with.
And I agree with Mischi about Elin Nordegrin. Elin never wanted the spotlight for herself; she was a nanny when Tiger met her, then his wife and companion, and now she's someone else's wife and companion. She's a very different personality type than Meg.
Except for Trevor, Meg doesn't seem to have stuck with anyone for more than two years at a time.
That could have been one of the reasons for the tension with William; Meghan wanted XYZ Oligarch to co-sponsor some event, and William said that partnership was not suitable.
I wonder if Harry will revive his interest in Invictus. If I recall, at the last games, he and Meg only showed up for the opening and closing ceremonies, and the Australians were not too pleased. Also, the wounded military people were not thrilled with Meghan giving a speech, as I recall.
@Hikari:
"You can't 'give back' in a meaningful way to others when your soul is a vapid hollow pit of greed and delusions of grandeur."
Contestant Elle, Reine des Abeilles
"Why is Meghan Markle's grandiose 'foundation' scheme a spectacle de merde from the get-go?"
I'm thinking PH/MM will get in to the drug scene, & PH is going to start partying again. "the powers that be" will get some real dirt on him and his mental state will deteriorate more and more. When he breaks, it's going to be epic.
Unfortunately, i think he is completely under her spell. Reading the comments on the earlier blog post, so many have pegged it with the way she reeled him in and is keeping him hooked. Moving to the US will ultimately be the downfall, but i think PH is going to crash/burn in a serious way.
As for donations, their restricted donations and legacies are down £1.2m there could be a number of reasons for that. Donations go up and down, it's a fact of life. Their income would need to have reduced significantly more for me to agree they're having problems getting donations.
@Nutty_Flavor I doubt he will. I think Invictus was more ELF than Harry. He managed to get Harry to fall in line and Harry liked the adulation. However Harry is not the sharpest knife in the draw and has stopped listening to those who have his best interests at heart and listening to his greedy, grasping social climbing wife.
didn't enty have blinds about MM getting resupplied with drugs in her KP home?
However, I disagree that her absence of home ownership and car is any indication of her financial state. She was only in Toronto to film suits; it wasn't a permanent move. Given that these shows are renewed year to year, I would think that there was no point investing in a house when her show could end at any time. Same thing for a car. The production would have arranged transport to and from her film set .
Business relationships are different, and her connection to William is as much business as personal. When she chose to enter the Royal family, it was no secret that William was ahead of her in the management ranks.
She probably figured she could charm him and get her way as she often does. It didn't work, and she's taking her displeasure out on William but also on Kate, who doesn't deserve it.
That said, it would be fun to watch Markle change her religious affiliation for the third or fourth time. I believe she was raised Catholic, and perhaps became Jewish for Trevor, and is now officially a member of the Church of England.
If she someday converts to Islam, perhaps representatives of all four religions will be waiting for her in the afterlife. That would be an interesting conversation to observe.
Harry's run-down appearance, wrinkled clothes, and lack of a fresh haircut could also reflect someone who prioritizes substances over good grooming.
That said, I've never seen any evidence of Markle building any wealth at all - investing in stocks or bonds or art or anything else.
She seems to spend her money as soon as she gets it, either on clothes or on PR or personal entertainment.
They might enjoy renting Meg's services, but I think a marriage is unlikely.
Her future might be a bit like Wendy Deng Murdoch's present: living off the divorce settlement and getting played herself by a handsome toyboy.
No wonder Meghan wants her own foundation.[...]"
From your lips to God's ears! I remember reading (or watching a video?) about PH and MM's supposed last-minute visit to Morocco. My impression. was that their visit was "reviewed"/critiqued by someone who actually knows something about how a royal visit is coordinated. The first thing that piqued their interest was that the visit hadn't been scheduled for very long, that the Moroccan's were caught off-guard and everything appeared slap-dashed, i.e., PH's "inspection" at night, that and it was whirlwind. Their summation was essentially they had to find a *means* to pay for MM's clothes she went ahead and "bought" for the BAFTA's -- which they did not attend. In hind-sight, if true, and I have to say in hind-sight the critic looks spot on, PW probably put his foot down and *forbid* MM (the actress!) from attending/trying to upstage the D&D. I could see MM ASSuming she would be there.
Look at the time line:
BAFTAs January 9, 2019
http://www.bafta.org/film/awards/ee-british-academy-film-awards-nominees-winners-2019
Visit February 25th
Supposedly last minute trip to Morocco
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/g26364847/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-morocco-2019-visit-photos/
Houses of Valentino, Dior, Carolina Herrera most likely wanted to reconcile their accounts!
Household split announcement March 14th
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a26826699/prince-harry-meghan-markle-royal-household-split-buckingham-palace/
Note also the Commonwealth service was March 11th and the pregnant lady outside the Abbey (settling of debt!). Both Household split (trust/mean$) and golden goose.
All speculation on my part.
Also, it's one thing to announce a split and go off, "globally" on your own. Note "globally". Goes with MM's ever expanding delusions of grandeur. It's another to have the means to do so. So do [they] split the balance in the first place and fund the second place? How long will that last given that MM has to look "so good" parlaying her new working-mum gig?
Also, tonight, the BBC is spoofing MM "trailer trash" and angry!
My guess is that Meg was supposed to take the stage with her friend Serena Williams to present one of the Best Picture nominees.
Someone said no - hard to know who it was.
Wasn't this just before Lord Geidt was called out of retirement? Perhaps HM and PP realized that Charles was never going to be able to take control of the situation, and hired someone who would.
Lord Geidt is going to be a character in a future series of "The Crown", I'm sure.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2019/06/blind-item-13_14.html
that might be why she was escorted out early,
re: Meghan being escorted in a police car - there is a blind at CDAN
"Apparently the alliterate former actress turned A+ list celebrity was drunk or at least heavily buzzed during a recent very public appearance. Her alcohol intake was severely restricted for nearly a year so she has been indulging. Looks like she over indulged."
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2019/06/blind-item-13_14.html
It seems a bit dodgy, since the CGI character is much darker than Meghan in skin tone and seems to have a stereotypical "ghetto" way of talking, which Meghan does not have.
This plays into Meghan's narrative that she is being vilified by a racist British media, even though the actress voicing the CGI character (and improvising answers to audience questions) is of African descent. Afro-British and biracial American are two very different cultures, however. It's like getting a Russian actress to play Kate Middleton just because they both have light skin.
As the Lipstick Alley commenters pointed out, "The Windsors" on Channel 4 in Britain did an excellent job of satirizing Meghan without racial stereotypes.
MM is American who identifies as black. Black Americans have their way of talking/expressions, etc.
There is so much truth that goes unsaid with this character.
Only hit dogs howl. :-)
At any rate, what is wrong with Meghan Markle has nothing to do with her skin color or her ethnic heritage.
Her dreadful behavior is more than worthy of satire, and that's what the show should have focused on.
And, as an American myself, I have to disagree with your statement that "Black Americans have a way of talking."
Black accents vary by region - someone from Chicago does not talk like someone from Alabama or someone from California - and by social class.
I have never heard Meghan use a stereotypical "street" accent.
According to the FINRA Investor Education Foundation, 55% percent of Americans live from paycheck to paycheck and 35% of Americans have less than $2,000 in the bank.
If Meghan Markle had a net worth of $3,000,000 I would be very surprised.
Respectfully, (because this is such a touchy subject,) I think colour has always been a societal issue for her because she is neither black nor white. (Too white for the black community and too homogeneous for The Establishment.) This instance is probably the first time in her life that she has embraced just one side. Since arriving on the royal scene, everyone, including her (white) best friend of 30+ years, have been tossed in favour of one person: Her black mother. [You] can't be seen rejecting somebody when they are persecuting you for rejecting them on the basis of colour. It's all the audience will ever "hear" (racist!!!). It couldn't be because they see her for the grifter she is/denial is a river in Egypt. So she must play the colour card. The only way to do that is to pick a side/strategize. IMO [this] fits with her manipulative way$. I would say she has no friends, except for JM. But I question the validity of even this friendship because JM is married to someone who has "reach", even if it is just in Canada. Lots of entertainers love Toronto/its scene, including .... Oprah! Personally, I think JM and MM use each other. JM now ranks higher than her husband in the search engines, and she is struggling to make a name of "her own"/get out from under the Mulroney family name shadow. In short, MM has provided her with the opportunity to do this, even if the coattails are sullied.
Talking about the elephant in the room does make [it] about colour, but we can't discount the truth that MM excommunicated her white family and "friendship base" in exchange for the "support" of a church she probably never belonged to and pretend entertainment friends to be at her wedding. To me, it came off as a transaction of sorts. She gave them the PR/rating #'s, in exchange for a concocted image and whatever else she wants at a later date. (A couch to sleep on, maybe?)
I wonder if it is past reporting like this, that drives the PH/MM moving to the USA narrative/PR machine:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-william/8613826/Prince-William-and-Kate-Middletons-royal-tour-day-11-as-it-happened.html
To clarify, my statement was based on how the BBC is framing their satirical character. They are being very specific, so hearing the character's speaking style would be expected. I love that they made the dispute about hair -- PK's tresses are always commented upon more so than anything else she does or what she wears. For instance, when she "went" bangs, it's all anyone could talk about. If you think about it, it's actually the only thing those two have in common.
Most charities have challenges.
I've sat on the Board of Directors of some well known international charities.
One being founded by a very famous Hollywood Celebrity,
much much more famous than Meghan and Harry.
I've also worked on a charity fundraising along side the wealthiest man in the world.
Bottom line is that I was surrounded and partnered with some of the most famous and wealthy individuals on the planet AND.. it was very difficult to fundraise.
My point is that all of the connections and PR in the world do not guarantee success.
Charity is 99% of the time Quid Pro Quo.
95% of rich people don't give to charity because they are solely committed to a cause.
They often and usually expect something in return.
This is how it rolls.
The problem for Meghan and Harry is what is their Quid Pro Quo?
With all of the bridges Meghan has burned with the Royals,
it would seem selling access to the Royals is limited and/or impossible.
So what are Meghan and Harry offering?
A tax write off?
Those only go so far.
They are also now competing for funds with the Royal Foundation.
Who would you give to?
Will and Kate?
Meghan and Harry?
Money laundering?
That's always possible.
I no longer work with large charities.
I've found that most people involved use it as a mechanism for PR as Nutty Flavor mentioned.
I spend my time with local animal charities. I know where the money and support is going and find it makes me really happy.
Could he have done something like this on his own though in the past and mentioned it? or would it be more like teasing/taunting/daring him once and then dropping the boom of blackmail?
Also, as to the foundation split it's for the best since there are obviously different paths for the brothers. The wedding would have been expensive for Harry and his wife has expensive taste. He may not have contributed to their joint foundation because of those expenses. He probably needs a more commercial route ongoing to maintain the lifestyle he & his wife enjoy.
[...]"Along with inclusion, which we definitely want to embrace, the big theme of the show is about movies connecting us," lead producer Donna Gigliotti said, "not in this theater but in a big, sweeping, cultural way."
Seven other non–cinema-centric stars will address the seven other movies up for best picture, [...]"
SW is MM's friend ... SW had a platform at the Oscars....MM is an actor (!) ... sounds like it would have been the perfect coattail to me. I'm thinking if an invitation had been extended there would have been nothing stopping MM from going. Nothing. I actually think she would have become rabid had they tried.
I think what we're witnessing is the RF's unleashing (from keeping bad press at bay). Ejection by proxy and they get to keep their powder dry.
I am all for the BRF unleashing. What I'd hate to see is sympathy for mm in the process. I know in the US it would be an issue.
Being satire, it's as if they purposely decided to visually illustrate MM's satirical character's *satirical* biracial status both in colour and how it lives. They describe the satirical character as trailer trash. Does black trailer trash exist? I've never heard of it, hence my white version above with the valley girl accent (b/c MM is from California). I know not everyone who lives in Cali speak like valley girls/surfer boys, so please don't attack me.
I actually looked up the word satire because the BBC is being very specific in every manner they are "showcasing" this character.
Satire - is a genre of literature, and sometimes graphic and performing arts, in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, corporations, government, or society itself into improvement.[1] Although satire is usually meant to be humorous, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit to draw attention to both particular and wider issues in society.
A feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant"[2][3]—but parody, burlesque, exaggeration,[4] juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve of (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack.
...
Do each member of the RF have poll numbers? How does her popularity poll look?
I grew up in the ways of the class-conscious, and I never heard of black trailer trash. It's generally not even called "trailer trash" (in my limited experience/exposure), but just "white trash", and I know that in certain caste systems in the Deep South (where old money/family is still totally a thing), that's the worst you can be is "white trash". But I am not an expert, and I no longer live there.
On the PNW/WC, we're not obsessed with the old money class structure anyway. So, no argument intended, and now I'm totally going to go like eat some eggs baked in avocados (and yes, I'm making fun of myself, but I totally AM going to do just that :) because somedays I am totally a walking cliche and it's only when I'm around normal people (not coasters) that I realize I'm doing the totally thing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCutyg9pGzY
There was a bookmark feature where we could leave off
A like button
Please domt take it the wrong way i love this blog and spend far too much time on this blog in the past 2 weeks than I can admit. Although I did refer it to my 2 friends. Let's see if they lurk and leave comments.
Ok so can someone tell me where they heard about MM being crazed in an altered state last week? I read this on skippy blog but i cant verify it on written print only those YouTube gossip things. I dont watch bc their not that reliable.
I'm personally fascinated by MM bc I woke up early last year to watch the wedding and was taken in by her beauty and how lucky she was. No maids no problems security wealth glamour prestige. BRF. She did it. How did she do it? A clear success story in my mind. But that fake interview and the holding hands everywhere was too much for me. I hated that sasheyed walk at that garden party too.
Keep posting people!
Meghan's income was grossly overstated. One of the reasons her show was filmed in Canada was to keep costs down. That said, there is absolutely no way a minor player (and in the scheme of things she was exactly that), would be pulling in the reported $50k per episode and she is not worth anything like the $5 million that keeps getting bounced about ... I say this as someone who knows the industry very well.
Meghan's house was likely rented for her by the studio, as was her car lease ... this is how studios offer sweeteners / perks without having to front up with so much cash (that they don't have). So, she would have been doing "fine" in that she had a steady job paying okay money, and her house and car (Audi lease) paid for, but she was never a superstar making bank ... she missed that opportunity.
Meghan's previous designer threads were likely loaned or gifted to her in return for social media (and blog) posts ... people in the public eye are always getting free stuff sent to them to promote (you wouldn't believe how much stuff they get).
But ... I would say it was more a case of Harry fell in love with Meghan's Suits character. She was absolutely gorgeous! And her make-up and hair was always flawless. I suspect Harry fell in lust with Meghan very quickly and her lifestyle was so different to anything he'd ever experienced before that he was well and truly caught up in the love bubble ... and before he knew it, he couldn't escape.
I think when she announced she was moving to the UK, the grey men told Harry to man up and make a commitment ... here was this woman, uprooting her life and leaving all that she had worked for, behind (even though she was leaving the show anyway) ... he needed to do his bit. And then they got engaged ... and it was too late to back out. This is all *allegedly*, *in my opinion*, etc.
Interestingly, before their Australia, Tonga and New Zealand holitour, psychics were already predicting the marriage was over and Meghan would be looking for an Australian billionaire. James Packer's name was tossed about, as was Justin Hemmes' (I doubt she'd have a chance with either).
A few articles appeared - and quickly disappeared - last week saying that they're moving to the US ... it's a 'definite' ... I could see that happening, and marking the end of the marriage. Harry would be even further ostracized from his family and I think after a few years we'd be asking, "Whatever happened to ...?"
And no, "trailer trash" is def a thing in the US, but slurs re "trailer trash" are different from "ghetto" and on it goes... Sad, really.
As nutty said they will need to run it like the clinton foundation and charge for speeches/ access. didn’t Fergie and Andrew get into some trouble when they got caught up in some pay for access stuff?
My point: the BRF should come up with a better plan for dealing with her soon, as she's not leaving for ages and ages.
BTW: I also think that it will take a LOT for Harry to divorce her, WAY more than the shambolic baby show and TOTC, and for the same reason. He knows, that the whole world knows, that he was warned and warned again against marrying her. Therefore he also knows if he ever admits the marriage is a failure, he will be the laughingstock of the world.
From my not-very-extensive reading, such was also the case with Edward VIII & Wallis. Ultimately, that marriage was unhappy, but Edward VIII did not want the world to know he threw away his birthright for nothing, and Wallis did not want to be remembered as the woman who destroyed the British monarchy for nothing - so appearances were maintained.
I seem to remember PC being quite upset about drug usage (pot?) with the kids. I could see him taking a zero tolerance if she were using or bringing drugs into the family.
I actually think that if it comes out that the baby was born by surrogate, it's not enough to force her out; for a variety of reasons, but two of which are that a) Harry would also be complicit, and b) the BRF will be seen to be punishing Archie for the sins of his parents.
However, I agree that if she's found to have a full blown drug problem (not just dabbling) that might work.
Meghan, on the other hand. is a whole different kettle of fish. A lot of commentators on social media like to play armchair psychologist and label her with some unfortunate diagnoses that I'm not seeing. Is she a narcissist? Absolutely. Does she have Narcissistic Personality Disorder? It's possible, but narcissism is a trait found in pretty much all Cluster B PDs. Is she a psychopath? She's would need a brain scan and/or a psych eval to determine that as one is born a psychopath and there is clear indication in the brain of what is "missing" in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Is she a sociopath? I'm not seeing it, but then I've never met her. It's pretty harsh to label someone with Antisocial Personality Disorder when you've never met them. Most sociopaths are diagnosed with Conduct Disorder in childhood and we have zero reports of Meghan consistently breaking the law and engaging in things like theft, arson and the torture of animals. Histrionic Personality Disorder could fit, but I think it more likely that she has Borderline Personality Disorder. Some call her "bipolar" as well, but one really can't make such a judgement without a psych eval and extensive history of her emotions, thoughts and behaviors. It would not surprise me though. Bipolars are also known to have a narcissistic streak. Narcissism and it's attention seeking, manipulative qualities seems to be the one set of symptoms she has the hardest time masking for the public. I think that, given enough time and rope by the RF, she will eventually hang herself. However, I'm not sure the swathe of emotional, financial and public destruction she would cause is worth waiting that long.
Sometimes people try to see flaws in others, but really they are only pointing out their own character flaws. So I think the "Prince William is controlling" narrative serves two purposes: mm needs to play victim, and being controlling is really her own character.
Just as you say, Prince William isn't controlling, it's his job to lead as a future monarch. Anyone with even half a brain in his position would distance themself (and the monarchy) from mm. Mm is so controlling, she won't even allow an employee to run Instagram.
This will be the end of the monarchy in time, I'm sorry to say to those who want it to survive. The scandals will be just too much - this time involving money. The royals have commercialised themselves way beyond their constitutional role.
Meghan also believes she knows best when it comes to clothes and hairstyling, and we’ve seen how that turns out.
This is the beginning of the end ... they are fools for allowing this. William must be crushed. He's really stepped up with Kate and they are working hard, but it will all end before he becomes King. This is way too scandalous.
Also, Miss_C: the Queen had every power over Harry, at law and by discretion. Harry needed her legal permission to marry. Harry doesn't have serious money of his own. It is the Queen who allowed them to marry at Windsor estate and to live at FC. Harry would never have carried out his threats of leaving the BRF because then he would have been adrift with no money for his "charities", no home, no security and on and on ... he would have had to dip into this trust fund and that would not have lasted long, nor would Meg.
I think it's time to face the fact that the BRF don't really give a damn about what the public think. William does, I'll give him that.
I'm not blaming Meg for the deficit, but I haven't read any text that can be relied upon, but that's probably just me and what passes as "evidence" in my world.
I think the British taxpayers will not tolerate having to fund Harry & Meg in the USA and why should they? It appears that the BRF are promoting themselves these days and forgetting who pays the bills ...
I've read that the seeds of narcissism are sown from childhood and if not corrected, result in a narcissistic adult. I've seen it in my own family, but of course, I don't have an expert diagnosis.
It's water under the bridge now, but I think William takes time to make decisions and that is not a bad thing for a future King. Although, being indecisive is not a good trait.
It's obvious through her history that Meg only wanted very rich, white males to provide her with a lifestyle ... all this babble about being a feminist and "not a lady who lunches" was nonsense. She wasn't a saver, she had zero investments (or we would have known). I live in the most expensive city in the world for property and even I held real estate at the age she was when she met Harry.
Harry will divorce her, agreed, she will never leave.
The only time her story will be released is after the divorce and the BRF want to crush her.
Thank you Nutty. But I will say that rich, ME men tend to like conservative women or at least women with classic beauty. Meg is cheap and average looking, she's not going to marry a rich Arab.
Are you from the Commonwealth? With respect, if you aren't, you probably view this quite differently. It's a matter of constitutional law. The Queen understands, or ought to understand, that the child cannot be in the line of succession. And yet, he is. When it comes to the law, the Queen must accept responsibility. She is head of state.
This is not a self-regulating system and the Queen has let it be so.
This is the constitutional mandate and why it is so important. The BRF have pulled a fast one on the Commonwealth and when it is revealed, it will end the monarchy. There will be no formal charges because it will all be swept away and covered up by politicians, bureaucrats and lawyers. But that is another thing altogether.
HM has done everything she should have. She can't poke Meghan's belly to see if it's a prosthesis.
Again, legally she hasn't done 'everything she should have'. You are just not understanding the legal submission, with respect. You have offered nothing to rebut what I've posted, other than to restate your position (which has no legal validity).
>>>>"The Queen committed fraud over Archie. She knew, she had to have known, and she's head of state. If she didn't know, then it was her responsibility to know and ensure the public are not played. The public has no legal right to demand royal doctors sign off, but the Queen does.
Harry will divorce her, agreed, she will never leave."
*********
Sadly, Aus, I must concur with you, and that is what is the very saddest fact to be revealed out of this whole entire mess. When we consider the emotionally vulnerable, impulsive & volatile mess that Harry was, and is, it's no shock that he got embroiled with this disastrous woman who was unsuitable in every conceivable way to be his bride. I think perhaps a great ape would have shown more discernment than Harry has in his choice of mate. But it's no surprise, either that an actress, even a mediocre one, was able to look good enough and be charming enough in the short term to disarm him into marriage. Harry is not a bright man, and the buttons MM pushes are the most primitive kind upon which the masculine ego operates. In that sphere, I'm sure she's Oscar-caliber.
It's not impossible to fathom, either, why Harry's family would throw their public support at least behind the lavish wedding and his new bride . . because he is one of them, they love him, and like us all, I imagine, they accepted her into the fold hoping for the best, ie. that maybe she really would be good for Harry as hoped, and increase their shine with the general public for their inclusivity in embracing a biracial, divorced non-Briton.
What defies comprehension is the Queen's utter inaction/silence about the disaster the Sussex Show has become. Sly references to past family dirty linen via titles, or by traditional aristocratic ploys like cutting Smarkle dead at public events isn't going to work with this one. Rolls completely off. When BP presided over the farce that was the whole handling of the Baby Archie Matter from soup to nuts . . .PR snafus to bizarre easel birth announcement to that staged photo call at Windsor, I began to question Her Majesty's mental faculties. It's understandable that her courtiers might wish to shelter the nonagenarian monarch from the sordid details, but She must demand to know what is going on, and take appropriate action.
I figured that Smarkle was getting away with the Pillow Show to a certain extent because she was far enough removed from the Queen that they weren't spending time together to have 'proofs' demanded of her stomach. But the Queen certainly should have been apprised of the expectant mother's medical progress via her physicians and if that was not forthcoming, she should have found out why not. And if she *did* find out, then why allow that ridiculous charade to be carried out in front of the public for so long? And it may *still* be ongoing . . . HMTQ will not be attending the christening, citing conflict with her Balmoral holidays, though it is supposed to take place in early July, when She normally does not depart for Balmoral until closer to August.
Is Elizabeth distancing herself because she knows it's all a charade? She attended the christenings of both of William's first two children. Even though I am not her subject, I have always admired this Queen as a resolute and extraordinarily dedicated leader. Marklegate has caused my respect to slip, because I just can't understand why ER permits the ongoing destructive behavior of her grandson's wife to put into jeopardy everything she has dedicated her life to for all these years.
"Even though I am not her subject, I have always admired this Queen as a resolute and extraordinarily dedicated leader. Marklegate has caused my respect to slip, because I just can't understand why ER permits the ongoing destructive behavior of her grandson's wife to put into jeopardy everything she has dedicated her life to for all these years."
Back to the Queen and what she knows or doesn't know. I'm trying to think if QEII and MM were even seen/photographed together at all during her pregnancy once it was announced. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe they were. Was any member of the RF, aside from PH, photographed with/at the same event as MM? Definitely not at the BAFTA's/snark.
What I did see was that the Sussex's were booted out of their comfy digs and cut off from the Royal Trust ($$). Now MM is trying to copyright everything about 'themselves'. To what end? To earn a living/live the dream? Why go so far outside of the box, to generate a "steady" revenue stream? Isn't what the public is paying them enough?
So, many events and unanswered questions left open for interpretation. Suffice to say we truly don't know what has been going on behind the scenes in regards to how the BRF are trying to distance/extricate themselves from this, imo, gong show. Just because we see MM off on her own tangent as a "duchess", doesn't mean that there haven't been on-going meetings taking place, lawyers drawing up documents, and PR strategies being struck.
I have never understood the urgency to fast track $mirkle into the family, why they allow her to spend endless money on clothes and jewels and why they allow her to merchandise the family.
There is something missing from the story as we know it thus far.
Emphasis mine. I'm not a lawyer, but I would argue she has done everything she should have considering Henry is "irrelevant". As you point out, PH and his heir have had zero impact on the Constitutional Monarchy, except to embarrass them. Sure what's being played out is, in my eyes, a charade/fake and personally, I would like to see MM escorted out of the country. But that's not going to happen. However, seeing SR severed from the public coffer -- i.e., ousted from KP (public) to Frogmore Cottage (Cowne/owned by the monarchy), and simultaneously severed from the Royal Trust, ergo having to generate their own revenue stream, makes me think QEII did what was required of her to protect the tax payer. No title was granted means she has not recognized Archie and therefore there is no public obligation to provide support to this "non" entity via PH, either.
No "live" photoshoot happened (pic was photoshopped/not credited/not declared "official", ergo it didn't happen). Same re "visiting" the Sussex's. (As if, SR would have to go to the Queen.)
IMO, QEII and the rest of the BRF have gone out of their way to distance themselves and avoid the charade so as to at least appear not part of [it]. Given that PH is "irrelevant", please educate me about what is it specifically she should be doing? tia
William will continue to grow in his kingly abilities, probably hastened by this whole situation with his daft little brother and his daft brother's crazy wife. As he is only heir-in-waiting after Charles, I suppose there is only a limited sphere in which he can act against Markle. I'm sure if it were up to *him* alone, Markle would have her marching papers, a restraining order and a one-way ticket to LAX by now. And be permanently banned from entering the U.K. ever again. But ultimately it's Granny's call, and She is being as passive as Charles in this. I don't understand.
@Nutty_Flavor Really nice job on the blog. Interesting to share theories with women willing to hear out another possibility very civilly. CDAN is experiencing futuremassshooter vibes from a "dontq..". Did Tricia pee on his cornflakes wayback?
But of course that would not have been what Meg wanted, lol.
She was supposed to be staying at their Lake Como place but must have been gone before the Obama's arrived, as there was no sight of her. She must have really wanted to be there to mingle with the Obama's but she is starting to be poison. I think she probably sits bitching about the royals and it gets old.
Spouting "women need to be heard" and other unoriginal statements she thinks makes her appear progressive. I think she would be an annoying, overbearing guest.
>>>>The only time her story will be released is after the divorce and the BRF want to crush her.<<<<
I am so keen to know what Lord G. might possibly have on her by way of compromising information. The time to crush her is *now*, in my opinion, and not wait. Harkle may be irrelevant to the succession, but they are still living off the Royal teat and have been allowed to embarrass the British monarchy in a number of countries across the globe, and spend lavishly and have wild parties all night every night and otherwise besmirch the dignity of Harry's grandmother's house. It looks very bad; it makes Elizabeth look like she can't control this irrelevant member and his personality-disordered wife.
Thinking back to those long-ago days (circa November 2017), I remember being so happy for Harry that he had finally found a woman willing to take him on. She was an unconventional choice (understatement of the century) . . but that's why I thought it might work. Silly me, back then I figured she'd recognize that she had a great situation for an aging starlet who'd never achieved her dream of becoming the next Julia Roberts, and would plow her ambition into serving her new family. That she had well and truly retired from acting and emulate Her Serene Highness Princess Grace of Monaco in dedicating herself to charities and showcasing British designers. This rose-colored fantasy lasted about the length of their engagement announcement . . and then I got a gander at their post-engagement interview. Discordant alarm bells began clanging . . . but I never dreamed how ridiculous it would get.
Clearly, ER should have compelled Harry to wait to announce their engagement until after the birth of Louis, and presented him with the option of waiting a full six months after that to have the big church wedding (ie, October 2018), declining to make Eugenie change her plans . . . or getting married at a registry office in Scotland if they insisted upon sooner. This would have given the addled bridegroom nearly another year to be absolutely sure that this was the woman for him. Clearly, he had felt sure she wasn't circa December 2016, but she somehow bamboozled her way back in.
The best way for the RF to save face now is to find irrefutable evidence that the Smarkle marriage is fraudulent--that Harry was in some way compelled though blackmail, or that Smarkle is a bigamist or something. We know she's been involved in criminality, but is there anything that can be *proven* in court? Surely Her Majesty has access to all the best lawyers in the United Kingdom to find something which will allow Harry to apply for an annulment. Then Smarkle is presented with the option of taking a cash settlement and leaving England, after signing an ironclad NDA which will see her jailed if she breaks it . . or she can attempt to fight this and all her filthy little skeletons will be revealed, including matters which would result in her indictment in the United States on a number of criminal charges.
Only then can the healing begin.
I refuse to believe that one lone unhinged wannabe with delusions of grandiosity can bring down the British Royal Family by herself. Incredibly, it appears that they are allowing just that to happen. I thought Her Majesty had learnt this lesson in the aftermath of Diana's death: One cannot bury one's head in the sand and pray that the need for distasteful actions will just go away according to One's own inclinations.
So this is what I believe needs to be put to Harry now: Renounce her, when we find the damning evidence, and issue a statement of apology to the British public. Maybe go back into rehab because he probably needs it again, and the family will work to rebuild the trust it has squandered. Or--if Hazza insists that Meghan is what he wants, he gets to keep her . . on a stipend of say, 50,000 pounds per annum, or what a regular middle class bloke might earn. They will move out of London to some undisclosed location. He will renounce his title and see if he can support his wife in the manner to which he has accustomed her on his own toil, maybe working as a checkout clerk at Sainsbury's. After she leaves him (only question being . . how many weeks might that take? As much as one?) he may come back and be reinstated, but not before.
When Princess Margaret had her heart set on a divorced man far below her station (Group Capt. Peter Townsend), the Queen offered her just this sort of deal. True love OR the tiaras and deference, darling, not both. Margo thought for about two nanoseconds before renouncing her unsuitable lover and staying within the fold. Harry has to make his choice or the whole house of cards folds.
Let's say she decides she has had enough of Markle's spending. What does she do about it? Cut them both off from the privy purse? What would be the possible blow back from that? Or on another take, what would it take for Markle and/or Harry to do something so terrible that she'd have no other choice but to strip them of their titles? Even after Diana and Sarah got divorced, the queen didn't fully strip their titles. They both lost their HRH, but both of them retained Diana Princess of Wales and Sarah Duchess of York.
Yes, the Archie Situation is very serious indeed. So many of us don't even know for sure if the poor tyke is even real.
My scenario above of Banishment for Farkle did not take Archie into account because I am stymied about where he fits in. They are making noises about christening him in just a couple of weeks' time . . what exactly will be going on there? Are they going to sprinkle water on a dolly baby . .? Borrow yet another baby for the occasion? Baptize the surrogate's real child?
I actually hope and pray for the sake of this baby, if he exists, that he does *not* share any of H or M.'s genetic material. Best case scenario would be . .they attempted to purchase a baby through a private adoption and were found out, and that the baby is at home with his mother--his natural and biological mother--and will be looked after by a person who is not mentally deranged. If Archie is the product of a surrogate but has Harry's DNA, it's going to be problematic to pry Smarkle out of this family because she will always have this leverage.
This woman doesn't have a nurturing bone in her body. I wouldn't allow her to take care of my houseplants, let alone any other living creature. Harry looks adorable when playing with kids during appearances . . but it that enough of a skill set to be a good father . . when he potentially has substance issues and a chaotic home/financial outlook?
Diana's youngest has really c*cked things up.
It will be interesting to see if there are any christening photos forthcoming--actual photos, taken outside St. George's Chapel, in daylight, with other human beings around . . or just more of Markle's adventures in digital manipulation on the IG account. I read somewhere recently that the Obamas are slated to be godparents. I'm sure $markle put that out herself. More of her super-grandiose thinking. George and Amal Clooney aren't enough any more . . she's really reaching into the firmament now.
Meghan displays all the traits of a Casey Anthony--the ability to coolly tell the most outrageous lies and maintain them in the face of all proof to the contrary. Witness the whole Pregnancy/Baby Archie scam. This is why it would really, really be for the best if Archie is only a figment of her imagination.