Why don't British journalists reveal what they know about Meghan? Probably because most royal reporters are middle-aged careerists with mortgages and school fees to pay; why throw it all away for a few quick scoops about a woman most hope will soon be forgotten?
So instead, they write passive-aggressive pieces about costly dresses and overpriced home renovations and the lack of baby pictures, carefully edging their way around the fact that is slowly becoming clear to all: Meghan, Duchess of Sussex is taking shameless advantage of the Royal family. And the future king Charles doesn't have the spine to stop it.
While they don't publish pieces about Meg's merching or Harry's drug habit in their own outlets, the reporters do talk to Popb*tch.
Written by two people in an office somewhere in London, it has collected a mailing list of tens of thousands, including celebrities like Madonna.
Sometimes the celebrities even respond directly to Popb*tch's stories - Elton John's husband David Furnish, for example, wrote a direct and humorous denial to the suggestion that he was stepping out on the 1970s superstar, which Popb*tch published in the next week's newsletter.
Due to its location and connections, Popb*tch has the inside track on a large number of British celebrities you've probably never heard of, as well as some you have.
And the newsletter has been dishing the dirt about Harry and Meghan for quite some time.
Is Popb*tch telling the truth? Who knows. But this was written at a time long before Meghan and Harry were front page news, and sent to thousands of newsletter subscribers, and it was never retracted, nor was legal action taken, so far as I can see.
(Popb*tch has been forced to retract other, unrelated stories in the past due to lawsuits. The British legal system is notoriously favorable to people who claim they have been libeled.)
It suggested that William was "keeping his distance" from Meg because of concerns about her drug use.
Popb*tich suggested that if William were "truly concerned about his reputation, Meghan's probably the family member he needs to worry about least."
Oddly enough, Popb*tch has been silent about the Archie situation.
But then again, tomorrow is Thursday.
 |
| From the May 11, 2018 newsletter - one week before the wedding |
While they don't publish pieces about Meg's merching or Harry's drug habit in their own outlets, the reporters do talk to Popb*tch.
Two people in an office in London
If you're not familiar with Popb*tch, it's a low-tech weekly email newsletter that has been distributed on Thursdays since the early 2000s.Written by two people in an office somewhere in London, it has collected a mailing list of tens of thousands, including celebrities like Madonna.
Sometimes the celebrities even respond directly to Popb*tch's stories - Elton John's husband David Furnish, for example, wrote a direct and humorous denial to the suggestion that he was stepping out on the 1970s superstar, which Popb*tch published in the next week's newsletter.
Due to its location and connections, Popb*tch has the inside track on a large number of British celebrities you've probably never heard of, as well as some you have.
And the newsletter has been dishing the dirt about Harry and Meghan for quite some time.
Drug use and palace security?
There have been whispers about Prince Harry's drug use for nearly a decade. Popb*tch doesn't whisper. On September 7, 2017, it directly stated that Harry was sending palace security out to collect "gear", slang for cocaine. |
| From the September 7, 2017 newsletter |
Is Popb*tch telling the truth? Who knows. But this was written at a time long before Meghan and Harry were front page news, and sent to thousands of newsletter subscribers, and it was never retracted, nor was legal action taken, so far as I can see.
(Popb*tch has been forced to retract other, unrelated stories in the past due to lawsuits. The British legal system is notoriously favorable to people who claim they have been libeled.)
Harry was a tightwad
This week Meghan's PR people released a piece suggesting that the couple was struggling with money, and "have much less than William and Kate."
Meg may want sympathy, but she can hardly say she was unaware of Harry's financial position.
According to an ex of Harry's, he apparently pays for nothing on a date, not even a movie ticket. And certainly not popcorn or a soda.
 |
| From a December 2017 newsletter |
According to an ex of Harry's, he apparently pays for nothing on a date, not even a movie ticket. And certainly not popcorn or a soda.
Making her own way
So, of course, Meghan had to make her own way. Only a few weeks after the wedding, Popb*tch reported that Meghan had hired an assistant who had once worked for Madonna (the quickly-fired Melissa Touabti) and that the assistant was calling around London asking for freebies.
William was worried about drugs
One of the most recent stories to mention Harry and Meghan was in January 2019.It suggested that William was "keeping his distance" from Meg because of concerns about her drug use.
 |
| From a January 2019 newsletter |
Popb*tich suggested that if William were "truly concerned about his reputation, Meghan's probably the family member he needs to worry about least."
Oddly enough, Popb*tch has been silent about the Archie situation.
But then again, tomorrow is Thursday.
Comments
Love your blog Nutty! I've been a CDAN reader for about a decade and I've always enjoyed your observations in the comments section. This post, however, is next level!
And honestly, my favorite theory is that H & M eloped on their second trip to Botswana. To me, it makes all the sense in the world. I'd like to think Wills scarfed Meghan over Christmas because the cat got out of the bag re: how far along she was in her pregnancy. Maybe she had the baby induced prematurely to throw us off her scent?
The Sussex duo may be partaking, but my drug of choice is watching the drama unfold in real time.
I remember watching the wedding and thinking, "This is going to be good!"
There is a part of me which has wondered (like you) if part of the reason for shifting the dates had to do with they didn't have a baby yet (perhaps a trying to force the BRF/LG to save face and accept the surrogate one? maybe?) and or that they are having difficulties finding people she wants who qualify as godparents.
The gown. I thought they had made a reproduction as the original was becoming too frail.
1) Samantha got a massive payoff
2) Various legal teams came down on her like a ton of bricks :)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7208391/Meghan-love-English-countryside-dubbed-earth.html
It seems her PR machine has now hit crazy level - how this story can not be compared to every single thing she does contradicting it? This reeks a bit of desperation to me
Ultimately, Meghan will be exposed or sidelined and she will fade into obscurity. Harry will have to fade into the background for some time, perhaps to get treatment for drug addiction and to allow the family to forgive him.
I looked up some British expressions, and these all seem to apply: Barmy. Bollocks. Bugger off! Chav. Daft Cow. Gormless. Lost the Plot and On the Pull. Ponce. Shambolic. Skive. Slapper. Snookered. Tosh. Those all seemed appropriate. Bits ‘n Bobs, however? This is shite from the daft cow.
The family wouldn't have much choice, and as him supposedly being the "favorite" and already getting special treatment as one of Diana's boys, he just knew that they would go along with the sham.
Also, it could explain her ill-fitting wedding gown. Perhaps she was meant to be a little *ahem* bigger on the big day.
There are so many I stances of things just not adding up with these two. It is quite entertaining !
We saw that recently with the "William and Rose" rumors - the Royal lawyers went into action. Mainstream media outlets stopped writing about it and the Twitter blogger who admitted to starting the rumors confessed that they were based only on "personal fantasy" went on a sudden hiatus.
No one's bothered to do that with reports of Harry's drug use, or Meghan's merching.
Maybe she hasn't figured out the right way to make money off her information yet.
I think whomever wrote the article might have been making fun of Meg for picking up what is basically granny slang.
Would our British commenters kindly weigh in?
Cocaine is rough on the body, and "coke stroke" is a real thing that is very difficult to recover from.
Whenever I hear of fairly young celebrities having strokes, I can't help but wonder if cocaine was involved.
It could be the basis for an opera as well. Hope it doesn't have an operatic ending - those are usually very dramatic and violent.
Note to anyone subscribing to Popb*tch: as you might get from it's name, it's a bit NC-17. Not for the super-sensitive. Just a heads up.
Her belly hugging & coat flicking while pregnant was totally insane.
I personally have never seen a pregnant woman behave like she did....i found it not only 'exasperating' but also 'disturbing'
Which is why the privacy demands she wants around Archie is in total juxtaposition with her whole persona.
In a nutshell it all just doesn't fit....it is odd...strange...weird
And i don't get that real protective motherly vibe from her either, she is too narcissistic
Something is seriously wrong and the more cloak and dagger games she is playing with the British people and the press the harder the backlash will be.
It actually shows how arrogant MM is, that she thinks as a D-list actor with a conceited, contrived Blog, where she was desperately trying promote herself as an influencer, that she can out-smart & out-game the British press
And to be so unaware and unworldly to the controversy she is brewing
If there was a simple family photo with the newest Royal it would have diffused the situation, somewhat.
Instead her antics have turned the media & the public into a silent rage, that may not remain silent for much longer....hence all of the recent negative press being released.
I think the gloves are coming off and the British press won't hold back much longer
Since and before the day she was heralded as PH's girlfriend there has been games and a complete lack of honesty & transparency.
I am sure they bonded over drugs and good times.
MM is a good time girl
There is widespread gossip that MM was a well known on the yacht circuit.
I feel for William and Kate, they don't deserve the stress that Harry constantly brings to their lives....and well before MM came into his life
My questions are:
Why was Eugenie's wedding postponed so that Harry and Megan could marry in such a hurry?
What was the rush?
Even if she was pregnant she would have been at least 3 months on the wedding day....which clearly wasn't the case
Why hasn't the Queen or anyone in the Royal family stepped in and done something to curb her behaviour which is detrimental to the Monarchy, surely they know and have been advised that the public opinion polls have turned against MM and now more importantly PH's popularity is also on a steady decline
This is my use of both these words
Bits and bobs = something not complete / a bit of this & a bit of that
* I can't complete my work as i only have bits and bobs of tools left after the fire
* All we have so far are a few bits and bobs of donations, we are hoping for some more
'Bits and bobs is rather old fashioned, but still commonly used'
Thingamajiig = something you can't remember the name of
* Oh, you know thingamajig...what's is it called?
*something that is hard to classify or whose name is unknown or forgotten
If anyone is considering doxxing me, they should know that I live in a country (and am a citizen of that country) covered by the European Union's GDPR (General Data Protection Regulations). I know a lot about GDPR via my work and would have no problem using you as a test case to see how much money I can get from you, your employer, your parents, or your balding husband and wimpy father-in-law. (That last one is for a specific reader).
Anyway, Dorothy, glad you are enjoying the blog and the drama.
Maybe there is a baby. Maybe there's something wrong with Archie. If Meglet does drugs, perhaps he was born addicted? Or, given her advanced age, with Downs or another birth defect? A child she's now less anxious to push onto the merch stroll because it's not the image she wants to project?
May also explain why she's still clinging to Harry for dear life. A special needs child needs lifelong care and Megs with her extreme lack of maternal feeling isn't going to want to do that all by herself back in L.A.
Thank you for replying. What is a civil libel case? Can an ordinary , fed up , international or UK citizen report their concerns to the Authorities/police/parliament .....whomever, and expect to get justice? Or is this far too far fetched?
Secondly with so much advancement in technological surveillance, surely those layers or levels that you mention , can be done away with , in order to prosecute a famous person? Especially after there is so much speculation , innuendos , reports , hearsay , evidence floating around.
Thirdly , having read Princess Margarets autobiography or biography,( which ever) , from being a beautiful person , she quickly turned into a sad looking hedonist , same as the Woolworths heiress ....Barbara...plagued by so many illnesses and ravages. The end was ugly and painful. I can see the same thing happening with the Harkles , but in slow motion.
Apologies to all , no idea how to set up a name here as yet.
No-one is asking them to showcase the baby on a daily basis or divulge how many times it has shit its nappy. This secrecy is maddening because it is obvious they are doing it only for the publicity it brings.
I'd bet that if they just laid low and kept their mouths shut, no-one would give a hoot.
As for Harried being into drugs ... mmm, I'm not so sure. Sparkless maid him give up smoking and drinking heavily, so I don't think she'd allow him to be involved in the hard core stuff.
I do think that, in the past, he's had an issue with something like a dependency on pills (for example, anti-depressants) and/or alcohol.
Kids with disabilities are born to mothers of every age, of course.
And some disabilities are more visible than others. Ironically, some of the most visible ones can be the least serious/most treatable - cleft palates, for example, are very common but fairly easy to fix. (Joachim Phoenix was born with one; so was Jesse Jackson.)
They're not Instagrammable, however, which is what probably matters most to Meghan.
- Lex
My favorite "lie" is the standing ovation she humblebrags about even though there are pictures of absolutely no one standing (except maybe to leave). Everything about the woman is fake. "Thanks, Pa," said the doe-eyed-tender teenage-virgin-bride-who-is-actually-a-37-yo-married-at-least-once-prior former yachter. "Can you see, my love?," said the Duchess-to-be-who-could-really-give-AFF but there are cameras, so phony expression and glistening tear of love and happiness in left eye in three.
If Archie is a special needs child, I could see MM milking it for sympathy and attention.
All that said if that’s the reason we don’t see Master Archie.
Meghan and Harry’s home at Frogmore is like a “private oasis and sanctuary,” with very few staff members due to the couple’s financial restrictions. A source tells Nicholl they “won’t be hiring anything like what the Cambridges have” and “the Sussexes don’t have the same financial resources as the Cambridges, for starters.”
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a28293679/meghan-markle-wimbledon-2019-serena-williams-photos/
I hope it works! You can feel the crazy through the screen.
Her vegan, earth mother, bullsh*t is so obvious. So they smoke, so what I actually thought Kate was a smoker too, but I don't think I have ever heard her comment on it. I could be wrong.....my point is the more she says, the more lies come out. Just don't say anything......never complain, never explain. Course that went out the door the minute Harry made that bs girlfriend media statement.....
And jeans at Wimbledon. My poor mother about DIED when Sam, the "it girl" teen when I was pre-teen, wore pants - yes, pants - to church. Pants, I tell you. Nice ones, but pants to Episcopal Church (High Mass, no less) and now MM wears jeans (she was poured into, I must add) at Wimbledon. Well, at least Sam is bumped down the list of Hall of Shamers lol.
The outfit today would have been more appropriate for the baseball game that she attended.
We all remember that gigantic backside that caused her dress at the baseball game to ride up in the back. Can someone explain to me how she fit that butt into skinny jeans? I am convinced that she was wearing a butt pad the other day. Why would she do that? Why does she do anything?
I am sure it is no coincidence that the christening was scheduled to coincide with Wimbledon.
“She came in and people started tutting. Too polite to boo! The woman behind her started muttering and said something to the man next to her. She created an uncomfortable atmosphere… I do know because I was there. Saw it all"
The situation did look frosty from photos.
But at least it was expensive (this too from Charlatan Duchess): "Based on my research atm, that ring Meghan wore on her pinkie today was worth almost as much as Catherine's entire Wimbledon outfit the other day. ... Jessica McCormick Signature Sapphire Heart Button Back Ring, it cost £3000"
I think that the women today were there to "fool" the public into thinking that they're here b/c they are godmothers. Maybe one is, but I think they're just MMs idea of clever distraction.
Somehow i dont see that happening.
Yes, there has been that 'colour' landmine that has been planted by MM and her PR team, which will become a convenient weapon for MM to use.
From what i have read though, on her dating sites and job applications she mostly identifies as white....and her dating partners are also white
The British press will hopefully release some information they have on her...soon
@SwishyFishy
Definitely there is a war brewing with the public and also the press
after reading some of the English comment sections...they are scathing and rightly so.
The American comments are of course, somewhat more supportive & kinder
I think the Queen will step in, hopefully sooner rather than later.
Forget Charles, he is out with the Pixies, which is why he will most likely never be King
And i dare say that if William could get rid of MM he would...in a flash.
William doesn't seem to tolerate too much nonsense and takes his role seriously
I like your theory to 'set her up and bring this anger to a resolution' & of the "Affair of the Diamond Necklace" and Marie Antoinette
I suspect in her case it will be because of all of the merching, gifting and self promoting....it eventually be her undoing
Because the Sussex's responses and actions to the British press & public are so "so off the wall"....it's become very entertaining
What will they do next?
'She has the consideration, self awareness and insight of a gnat'
That made me laugh!...i love the word 'gnat'
And it's so true
Harry cannot divorce this woman soon enough.
It's astounding how they have been the master architects of their own downfall. It's actually quite disturbing to watch.
At any rate, the Cambridges and the Waleses (Charles and Camilla) have not been photographed with Artifichie yet, and apparently they don't want to be.
Charles is always quite eager to seem "woke", so it would seem that he would be very eager to be photographed with the first mixed-race baby in the Royal Family for quite some time. Odd that he hasn't been.
It could also be that Meghan is embarrassed that Doria will not be there, for whatever reason. Kind of embarrassing to have *nobody* from your family at the baptism.
All pure speculation.
With all due respect to Judaism, raising a child as a Christian has a lot to do with the principles of the Gospels.
Someone raised Jewish (or Buddhist or atheist or Taoist) is poorly placed to do that.
I confess, when I first read your comment about MM's self-awareness, I thought it said 'goat'. In my defense, I was reading it on my phone. I enjoy thinking of S'Meagaol as a giant goat head . . though a gnat has an even smaller brain. To call MM a goat is an insult to goats, who are actually quite intelligent.
This goat is accompanied by a giant Horse's a$$ called Harry.
Neither the Queen nor Charles seem willing to make any decisions so no one is in charge. (I believe that until her death, the Queen Mother also made some of the tough decisions.)
I think for the time being that the Royal Family is like a self driving car.. works most of the time, but then...oops.... crash
I believe nothing issued in print about this couple any more. Even statements from BP looking all 'official' are suspect. Do we really think the Archbishop of Canterbury is going to leave his hugely important ecclesiastical summit in York and travel 200 miles to be at this farce which will be unattended by the Queen and just about everyone else? Apparently William is being forced to attend.
How disrespectful it all is. Someone, perhaps CharlatanDuchess posted a comment to the effect that the Cambridges' integrity is being exploited to try and make the Harkles more palatable. It's very distressing to me that the Queen and her advisors seem to have learned little from the Diana debacle. Whenever a situation gets too unpleasant or hot to deal with, Her Majesty retreats to Balmoral. She's 93 and I have compassion for that, but some honesty from her would not go amiss at this time. I know it's not her generation's way to air dirty laundry but it's got to be done. This is potentially much more damaging than the Diana situation in 1997--HM rectified that after a week and was forgiven by her people. This toxic farce has been aided and abetted by the Palace for now at least 18 months, if the facts behind the rushed marriage were known.
I'm sorry to see things come to this low ebb in the twilight of Elizabeth's reign. It's undoing much of what she's spent 70 years working for.
"I enjoy thinking of S'Meagaol as a giant goat head "
I had a good laugh. Gonna go with that name from now on :)
The Lipstick Alley ladies have noticed that Meg has been using a lot of bronzer recently to make herself look darker.
Me-Gain (upgraded to S'MeGain)
Farkle (for the biggest farce of all time)
Harkle (of course, for the shambolic duo)
Smeagan . . .or Smeagol, sometimes because that's her inner self)
Sparkle when I'm being ironic. Variations: Smarkle (because she makes everyone around her smart, as in, a blow to the cranium); Smirkle (so apt)
Lately, considering how her skin looks these days, 'Spackle' is getting a lot of air time.
I had no issues with the name 'Meghan' before now, but it will be toxic to me forevermore. I also blame her for making me lose all my good feelings toward Harry. (aka Halfbaked/Halfwit/Harried/Haze . . take your pick.) He was my favorite, as he was many people's but I see now that that goodwill was probably unjustified for most of his life. He and William will always have my compassion for losing their mother so young and in such a public fashion. It has indelibly damaged Harry, but I get the feeling that there were a lot of issues of behavior and lack of appropriate maturity even before Diana died. William was expected to cope and get on with things owing to his future role and it seems that Haze was allowed to run wild and do whatever he pleased with no expectations put on him. Haze and Smeaghan have in common being the overindulged youngest and favorite child of their parents and it shows. Together they have created the Perfect Storm . . . both families have to own responsibility for raising such children, but in Harry's case especially, he really should have been made to do better and be better.
If the Palace will not step in and say 'NO' to this, then the Church must. With such vagaries surrounding the origin of this child (if there is a child) . . with no proper birth certificate & absolutely no evidence of Christian values emanating from either of the parents . . with a collection of dodgy spotlight-seeking friends around this circus (if in fact there are any friends present) . .potential godparents of which nothing is known of their spiritual life/background . . like the wedding and the pregnancy, all of this a rush job . . nothing smells right about this. Is some junior priest going to go through the charade of performing this rite, on orders from Above (that is, the Archbishop and the Queen? God Himself isn't anywhere near this . . .)? If so, he and those who gave him the order are violating their most sacred charge and oaths which they made before God.
In my church tradition, as in many, I think also including the Catholic Church, in the absence of ordained clergy to do it, any Christian layperson, acting in faith and sincerity may perform a baptism. God does not need a dressed-up ceremonial show to extend Himself to people. But since the person(s) performing the sacrament are answering for the baby, who cannot make vows for himself yet, their intentions must be sincere. Not perfect, for that is not possible, but truly intending to do their best toward this child and raise/him her to know Christ. To stand before God with deceit in one's heart and on one's lips may superficially fool *people* but it does not fool God. For those of us who believe in Heaven and Hell, it's pretty clear where the architect of this 'event' is going. Harry will be complicit, too.
Harry has a lot of his own mess to answer for, but I think he can still be redeemed. Severing him from Smeg isn't just for the good of the family or of his social reputation . . we are talking in terms of a rescue mission for his soul now. It's one thing to be disgusted with her for wasting money and swanning around like a demented diva . . but she is hardcore evil, and there's no toning that down. Haz might be starting to get a clue what he's done, the full enormity of it . .if he's not too far gone. No sign of him at Wimbledon yesterday. No sign of him anywhere. Meanwhile, William was looking the part of the compassionate royal by visiting and embracing ill women at a hospital. I'm sure he is not looking forward to his engagement tomorrow. I suppose Kate will have to be there too, and I bet she's thrilled--but at least she didn't have to endure Smirkle tete a tete at the tennis this year.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/royals/meghan-and-harrys-christening-for-archie-causes-almighty-storm/ar-AADTysq?li=BBnb7Kz
***********
(Excerpt)
This type of critique infuriates the #SussexSquad -- a vociferous army of online supporters, particularly of Meghan. On stories like the christening, those devoted to the duchess enlist the help of an unlikely defender: a US law professor.
Goldburn P. Maynard Jr at the University of Louisville describes himself as an "ally" of the squad who steps in online to "amplify" the voices of #SussexSquad and call out cases of what he calls "misogynoir."
"I don't see any kind of contradiction between there being taxpayer funding or public funding and the royals asking for some privacy," he told CNN. "Here, in the United States, we very much have a lot of public servants but we very well know their children are off limits and are able to have a private life and we are OK with that."
For Maynard, it's interesting how the christening plays into a wider narrative about the duchess.
"The default when it comes to Meghan -- because she is a foreigner and she's not royal, from this society, etc. -- is that when she does something, she is doing something that's wrong. Women of color are actually really used to that narrative," he explained. "What a lot of us are seeing is that she is being held to a higher standard despite the fact that, in many ways, she's hit the ground running."
He continued: "She put out the book and she's made all of this money for charity and she's brought all of this attention. And yet there are all of these critiques on these niggling things that shouldn't matter very much."
Maynard views criticism of Meghan through the prism of criticism of women of color generally.
"So, women of color are uncouth, women of color are undeserving, women of color are angry, etc. And so, what all this coverage has done is to reinforce all those kinds of narratives and biases when it comes to who is today the most prominent woman in the world. So, it is reinforcing those narratives on a worldwide scale, so that's why I think it's really harmful."
***********************
What woman, no matter her race, wants S'Meagan as her standard bearer? Misogynoir my patatootie. For a woman who worked so hard to obliterate her 'blackness' .. listing herself as Caucausian on casting forms, styling herself as white as she could manage, dating, marrying and servicing exclusively white men gets to trot out the 'They hate me 'cause I'm black' card now?
What a slap in the face to all women and particularly black women who have been treated unfairly/marginalized/demeaned due to their gender and race. Smeg will never take any responsibility for her misbehavior/mistreatment of people. In her world, she will always be blameless--it's the rest of the world being racist and picking on her because and *only* because, she's a black woman.
Black women of achievement or just plain moral character should absolutely revile her. She is beyond disgusting.
Here is the rest from Richard Palmer about how this works:
Richard Palmer
Verified account @RoyalReporter
10h10 hours ago
"Details of christenings, including the names of godparents, are normally recorded in parish registers available for inspection on request. It had initially looked like private chapels such as the one at Windsor Castle were not covered by the requirement. In fact, they are."
"But christenings of royal babies are recorded in a special royal register held privately by the Queen. Normally this wouldn’t matter so much because the palace would announce the names of the godparents. On this occasion, however, Harry and Meghan are breaking with precedent."
"A spokesperson for the Church of England told the Daily Express: “Under the Parochial Registers and Records Measure 1978 all baptisms must be registered and the record made is normally publicly available for searches and for the making of certified copies."
“However the register to be used in this case is held privately by the Royal Household on behalf of the Crown and we understand that it has never complied with the usual requirement.”
"So essentially, according to the Church of England’s lawyers, the Royal Family has been flouting this requirement. The UK Parliament says Church of England measures are laws with the same force and effect as Acts of Parliament."
"So Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor appears to be one of a tiny number of royal children for whom it is not possible to obtain christening details because the family ignores the law. His great-grandmother is Supreme Governor of the Church and @JustinWelby is christening him."
"In the past the palace has announced the godparents, as far as I can tell, for senior royals. eg When Princess Margaret’s daughter, Lady Sarah Chatto, was born she was seventh in line to the throne, like Archie. The godparents, none of them public figures, were named."
All from Richard Palmer thread @RoyalReporter
I don't think the hockey player was serious about Meghan, either.
Meg also wearing a white top - an unusual choice for a breastfeeding mother who knows she will be photographed.
Remember when he and Kate "visited the baby" at Frogmore Cottage? There was no one living at the cottage, probably no visit, and quite possibly no baby.
"Here, in the United States, we very much have a lot of public servants but we very well know their children are off limits and are able to have a private life and we are OK with that."
Barron Trump or Sasha Obama aren't born into public service. They're not in the line of succession for anything.
Their parents leave office at some point, at which point they'll only be private citizens unless they choose to seek the spotlight as adults, like Jenna Bush or Chelsea Clinton.
If the publicity-seeking Mr. Goldburn P. Maynard Jr (which really does sound like a made-up comedy name) can't get a basic fact like this correct, whatever else he has to say doesn't have much value.
To your list of Britishisms, let's add 'on the game', which is synonymous with prostitute . . but BarmyMeg's upped the ante . . the semi-successful yacht girl hooked herself a big dumb fish and now she is playing a Game like none before seen, or likely to be seen since. Women have been selling their bodies and faking pregnancies for self-advancement since the dawn of time, but I don't think any have ever taken it as far as she has . . a 24/7 news cycle and literally thousands of photographs documenting a Moonbump over a 7-month span . . she was 'pregnant' for what, 44 weeks, a human gestational record! . . but we didn't actually see Moonbump until mid-October.
BarmyMeg didn't seemingly have an end game to her con . . but the RF and various and sundry municipal and ecclesiastical figures are falling docilely in line with her ongoing con. On its own official letterhead and released to the world, Buckingham Palace wishes the world to accept that the #1 Church man in the United Kingdom is going to abandon his spiritual summit at the other end of the country and rush to be at BarmyMeg's and her Halfwitted Prince's side to sprinkle water from the River Jordan on . . .who or what? A doll? A mockup lifesized cardboard baby with the Instagram face? A child actor hired for the occasion? Did some other woman actually let this delusional pair anywhere near her baby? They are dangerous--mentally compromised and certainly, high.
I hate to say this, but the Queen is a crushing disappointment. She's hiding up there in Balmoral, when she has let this entire charade exist, really.
Suppose that HM got wind of the fact that her grandson, Wild Harry, had gotten himself into a mess again, and this time a real doozy that made the strip poker photos in Vegas look like a Sunday School picnic . . .he'd fallen into the clutches of a foreign prostitute who coerced him into a secret wedding after she convinced him that he'd made her pregnant, perhaps also holding over his head proof of his involvement in the drugs trade as a convincer.
1. Even under those conditions, and there certainly was no baby, but if Harry thought there was, that is coercion, fraud and blackmail . . .three juicy, jailable offenses. Therefore the shotgun elopement is void.
a) If a secret wedding ceremony was performed in Africa or some other jurisdiction between a British Royal and a non-British citizen, the marriage was most likely voided due to any number of technicalities with the paperwork--were the license and the witnesses in order? Was the officiant qualified? Is an African marriage recognized in the UK without being registered on British soil? On these grounds, the shotgun wedding would have been void.
b) Since the groom was at the time 5th in line to the British throne, he required the sovereign's permission to marry. If it was not granted, then I think she could declare the union void.
If ER declined to nullify Harry's quickie marriage, She certainly did NOT have to offer him a gigantic televised wedding in her favorite chapel. If presented with a fait accompli, she could have deactivated Harry as a working royal, declined to make him a Duke, and perhaps given them a gameskeeper's cottage on one of her estates. That's it. Harry had made his reckless choice but they didn't have to go to such lengths to gild a turd and attempt to turn it into a storybook romance. A straightforward statement that Prince Harry had married Ms. Meghan Markle and was retiring from royal duties to concentrate on family life would have gotten the message through loud and clear. Would Smeghan have received so many magazine covers and Hollywood Insta-friends if the story loud and clear between the lines was that Harry had gone and gotten some trollop in trouble and no fuss was being made over the bride owing to the delicacy of her situation? Then Meg could have had a real baby or not . .few people would have cared at all.
Apparently HM was talked into allowing the big show wedding to give the RF a boost in popularity, particularly among younger people. They probably thought they could 'manage' Meghan. How wrong they were.
I hope you enjoy the read ; )
JAN MOIR: When WILL the Sussexes realise they can’t have it both ways?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7215185/JAN-MOIR-Sussexes-realise-ways.html
PH is the afterthought accessory, but even then, if he is the sperm donor, wouldn't a mention of him re the "royal baby" be appropriate?
IMO, PHs anger towards her is coming from somewhere and based on something. He might just be a spoiled man used to having his own way, but that level of anger/contempt, IDK, seems like it took something for him to get to that point with her.
That was such a strange video to watch....she looks like she is 'off her trolley'
Speaking of cartoonish names . . I was scrolling through CharlatanDuchess last night because the fireworks were keeping me up into the wee hours. Lo and behold, what do I see? That "Harrison" is the name of Smegsy's most favorite SoHo House line of upscale household linens: sheets, towels, bathrobes and slippers, all of that spa quality. Apparently SoHOuse (emPHAsis mine) Toronto is where she and Haz used to hook up when he was in town.
We feared that she'd merch the kid mercilessly . . .well, it started when he was newborn, with this joke of a name. Everytime his name is mentioned, she's merching. Well . . I don't think he's a real kid, so does that merching income count, or will her partners want their money back? "Archie" is probably their pet name for Haz's scepter or a code name for their favorite drug that they do together or something. Did 'Archie Harrison' ever have the ring of authenticity as a carefully and lovingly selected name for a firstborn child? Hell, no, not to me.
Both of them are laughing off their asses at the world at their ongoing con. Smeagol because she is dastardly and evil. Harry needs help, serious help. It's like he's been possessed by her, to go along with this.
He (according to UoL) "... teaches courses on taxation, gratuitous transfers, and elder law at the University of Louisville Brandeis School of Law. His research focuses on issues of wealth distribution and inequality, tax policy, and America’s aging population. His most recent essay, They’re Watching You: How the NCAA Infringes on the Freedom of Families, was published in The Wisconsin Law Review Forward. It underscores the inherently unjust nature of NCAA rules that disproportionately disadvantage poor individuals of color."
He appears to be a person of color and started at Skadden, Arps (not a small two person firm in the middle of nowhere).
Also, these commentators must be new royal watchers, because if they had been paying attention, Diana, Kate, Camilla, Sophie, Sarah F, all did things "wrong", as he states, and they were called out in the press and by the public on numerous occasions.
I absolutely believe that Frogmore Cottage is a hoax. Your excellent piece on the topic was echoed by HarryMarkle, and there are enough of your respective followers residing in the UK and near Windsor to see for themselves that there's nothing going on there.
Which begs the question, then . . since the $3 million dollar 'renovations at Frogmore' have the British taxpayers howling for blood and is three times as much as MM has billed the Duchy of Cornwall for her horrendous outfits . . actually, when you think about it, if those renovations had actually been carried out on a house that old (18th century) and out of code, not to mention the magnitude of the conversion from staff cottages into one family residence, $3 million is getting off quite cheap, since Meg's ghastly 'designer' schmattes cost nearly 30% of that. That is a another piece of 'evidence' that these renovations are fraudulent as well. That's a lot of money, but one would think it would have taken more in terms of money and time (say, $5 million dollars at least, and a year) to convert uninhabitable staff housing into the luxe 'retreat' the Harkles claim they have.
Seriously, Meghan should try her hand at smutty romance novels. Even though I hate her, I concede that she's got a more imaginative vocabulary than E.L. James.
Defending her is the last thing I feel like doing, but if that massive amount of money has not been spent at Frogmore . . where's it gone to? I suspect more of Meghan's creative bookkeeping, of course, as my default position, but why would Harry's wife, a junior member in the family for less than a year be able to have carte blanche for spending on those home renovations . . or anything else for that matter, ie, diverting those funds instead into her private off-shore account? FC isn't a royal property, as I understand it, but a public trust building--was it even the Queen's to 'gift' to the Sussexes? If so, who is ultimately responsible for its upkeep and costs? Can private monies be spent on a public building or vice versa? Everything we were told was that the Harkles were 'banished' to Frogmore, with its undesirable location, but with so much work required to make it habitable, even for the family screw-up and his new 'baby' . . it seems like a quizzical choice by the Queen. Surely there are other modest but more move-in ready properties she could have chosen for Harry. All of this reno work and overspend is being attributed to MM, when she shouldn't have any access to that money whatsoever. Regardless of how she's trying to spin it, she did not choose that property to live in. If it were truly in such bad shape . . black mold potentially, dodgy wiring, animal infestation, it'd be irresponsible in the extreme for the Queen to force them to move in there without allocating substantial renovation monies, for health and safety, if not sheer aesthetics. She needn't have 'sent' (note quotes) them there, necessitating all this negative press about renovations gone amok.
Did MM somehow, quizzically, abscond with $3 million of privy purse funds? How? Is Frogmore being used as some sort of front for money-laundering, but not necessarily by Meghan? She's devious and amoral and would do anything if given the opportunity, but can a newlywed immigrant very low down on the pecking order chain of her marriage family command those kinds of sums on her own recognizance? She's spent extravagantly on clothing for herself, but this is a whole other level that shouldn't be possible without collusion from more than one senior member of the family. Why these fictions of the Queen and the rest of the family all trooping in there to take tea and visit Archie?
I feel like something is going on that is even more sinister than we have thought so far. We've been concentrating on Meghan (aided by her PR machine and her 'stans') as the sole catalyst of the mayhem, along with her dim-witted, addled spouse. Could someone more highly placed than they within the Family be using them as patsies for an even larger scam . . say, like, a coup d'etat? Is Andrew behind this somehow? If there's a coup brewing, he's the guy. His dislike of MM is probably genuine, but what if he's playing up the frostiness for appearances and he's somehow colluding with the Sussexes to make HM and Charles so unpopular that he can force ER to retire, and depose Charles and by extension, William? If that happens, whose head does the crown land on? Did Andy not say once that he thought that his daughter Bea would one day be Queen, following in the footsteps of Elizabeth, herself the firstborn daughter of York, propelled to the throne by extraordinarily circumstances?
This is fanciful thinking, but it goes some way toward explaining MM's seemingly unfettered power to do and spend as she pleases. The theory is out there that such an inept, brazen, polarizing, ungainly, common, classless, artless figure has a powerful backer to be continuing with her flagrant behavior. Andrew is generally disliked by the public, but in recent years, he's been ingratiating himself in the public perception as his mother's right hand as he takes over more and more duties from Philip. Do we have elder abuse going on here, for the Queen to be so checked out with what's happening?
Perhaps Uncle Andrew has made promises to his addled nephew about how a regime change would benefit Harry, if William were 'demoted'. Andy and Charles have never gotten on, so derailing Charles's ascension would delight Andrew no end.
I know, it's nuts. But it is an explanation. Court intrigue is still real in the 21st century and the Windsors are proof.
I'd be interested in your and anyone's thoughts on my reply to Nutty above (July 5 1:15 and 1:21pm) . . I apologize for the length but I warmed up to my theme. This was sort of a spur of the moment inspiration, not something I have been formulating until just now. Pondering the Mystery of the Missing Frogmore Millions--millions of pounds spent on a house that no one is living in and appears to be an empty shell--the ire is directed at Meghan as a the cause of the overspending, but a more sinister theory hit me just now like a lightning bolt. If that money's not invested in vegan paint and eco-friendly kitchen appliances and a yoga studio . . where the hell is it? Megs is dastardly, but presumably she, an immigrant newlywed, and low-ranking member of the clan could not have unfettered access to Crown funds and just siphon off $3 million into an offshore account. She'd do it if she had the opportunity, but who'd give her that much proximity to the funds? A kindergarten lemonade stand would have more rigorous accounting practices.
Having decreed the Sussexes were to move to Frogmore, a dilapidated health hazard of a building in an undesirable location, the Queen would and should allocate funds to make it habitable. But if reports from the ground are true, Frogmore is abandoned and hasn't had a cent invested in it. So who is responsible for the ongoing fiction that that's where the Sussex family is living in rural luxury and where Meghan has already allegedly hosted a Vogue photo shoot? More quizzical still, where has that $3 mil gone? This thing might be way bigger than than even the mayhem Megxit can cause on her own. She needs some collusion and aid from somebody higher up the chain. How much higher? is the question.
I'm stopping for now as I'm scaring myself but I don't steep myself in espionage thrillers and historical court intrigue for nuthin'.
Well, there is probably a photo of someone else doing that first. She is fond of knock offs.
Given the problems we are seeing about the lack of baby pics (never thought it might have been born with a disability as a potential reason), high levels of secrecy which have only increased interest for anything baby related from the birth announcement, certificate and up to the christening ... we can all agree that this whole saga does not meet usual protocol (at best).
I am wondering if the LG/BRF needed to give her enough rope that she would commit enough crime (from fraud, drugs, blackmail if that did happen, potential treason if the baby is not legal) that they would have a wrapped up air tight case that claims of racism would fall by the wayside as unbelievable/unsustainable on a global scale.
Maybe no one thought the numbers or the daily "oops didn't follow the rules" would be this big or bad but once you start something like this, you might have to stay the course.
And who knows, maybe there is more to this than we can see? I would not be shocked if there was.
Are PH/MM living there? Don't know. Wouldn't be surprised if they are living in some place provided by the Clooney's or some other connection they have.
Is Archie real? I think there is a baby. I'm leaning towards surrogate personally. If so, i hope she does not sign him over.
I really feel that MM is doing an "in your face" routine to the RF now. Intentionally breaking the rules/flaunting it. I think she felt she could slide in and con the family and it isn't working.
For some reason, she has Harry all wrapped up. He obviously has issues and i don't feel it is all based on "poor Harry, lost his mother young". I think he has been given free reign most of his life. Hasn't had to truly work for anything. He's the party boy and spoiled and used to doing what he wants and getting the messes cleaned up by the family. His history with drugs/alcohol.
Was he jealous of William for the favoritism? Yes. But he also was cut much more slack than William with his antics. Was he jealous of William/Kate, their relationship/marriage/kids? Yes, he wanted to find his love. And MM walked in and she played him. Does she have enough to blackmail him directly? Hell yes. And by having that, she can threaten the RF too. I'll expose PH if you mess with me.
But PH could pull the plug anytime. Expose the crap going on and ask for forgiveness. Are they having problems? Obviously. I think PH wants her to play by the rules more because he knows the RF's power. He knows their influence. They are making his life miserable and excluding him in front of the public. He is being pulled 2 directions. MM is enjoying every minute of this.
and that's my opinion............. :)
There is always a paper trail with money , more so , if its pubic funds or taxpayers money. I seriously doubt that there is no explanation , with accountants , bookkeepers , auditors , international accounting standards and so on. It is just that , to someone who did not have access to this kind of money before , and now suddenly does , well it is like having your " fingers in the till " every day. Which is what we see here.
If you look at her jeans, it also looks like she spilled down the front, from the knee down. Nice.
I also believe Harry got played. It happens to good people. Though he may or may not use drugs, I don't happen to think he's addicted, skid-row user waiting to happen. I may be wrong. Regardless, drug addiction doesn't make him a bad person. It makes him an addict. Those two things are separate.
Lots of good people get played by narcissists/sociopaths. Happens all of the time. It happened to Anne Hathaway. It happened to all of Madoff's victims. It happens every day. And lots of suckers are still succumbing to her charms (don't believe me, google "flying monkeys" and read about the narcissists power). MM is an obvious narcissist, a shell with a giant suck hole that will eventually suck in and pull the life out of anything that comes near her. And it has happened here to PH and the BRF and because it's humiliating and embarrassing and public and has cost a whole lot of money and there's no easy way out, it's been dragging on.
IMO the BRF saw it much sooner (William and Kate, oh how I adore them, saw it right away) and Harry is finally seeing it, I think . I think it is because something drastic happened that shattered the illusion in such dramatic way that he now feels contempt and loathing, but he spent millions of pounds on a wedding and now has a baby. It's not like he can just take his ID bracelet back and not show at the 8th grade dance.
For anyone who has ever been involved in a public relations mess on a grander scale - like with a politician or a non-profit organization - we understand how precarious the choices and how carefully things must be handled. It's not as simple as just going outside and dumping the dirty laundry on the ground and picking thru it in front of the neighbors. I wish it were that simple. But it's not.
Nutty, you are going to need a new post before morning PST.
Per the Us Magazine article ( https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-moms/news/meghan-harrys-son-archie-met-his-cousins-at-trooping-the-colour/ ), regarding Meghan breastfeeding at Trooping the Colour.:
“ “The insider went on to say, “The reason Harry and Meghan didn’t appear on the balcony when the Queen returned back to Buckingham Palace was because she was breast-feeding.” ”
For that matter, supposedly Archie met his cousins there, as well:
“ “Archie was at Trooping the Colour,” a source told Us Weekly exclusively of the Saturday, June 8, parade in this week’s issue. “[It] was a chance for him to meet some of his cousins.” “
And I'm not sure that anyone is judging MM for breastfeeding or not. I believe the issue is that articles have been claiming that MM is and that is even why she was late for TTC. It just seems like one lie on top of the next.
Her heritage?? Is Archie going to sport one of Thomas' stained undershirts?
Or is just the polite way of saying HMTQ not want them using the gown for Archie?
What madness is this?
.Thomas stained wifebeaters lmao 😂😂😂😂😂
I, myself, have worn sheer tops. But I was looking for attention, and I’m not of importance. I am a single mom who was out & about for some drinks with my gals which I hardly get to do.
For her, place & time & title, this shouldn’t happen. So, tacky. Yes. I’d say this about anyone, Royal or not. Hell, even about myself! It IS a tacky!
But, for what it’s worth Rut, this is gossip site. We all love & champion women’s right here, I’m sure of it (not to put words in anybody’s mouth!). Try & chill though. You might have more fun.
I’m the lucky one and I’m very, very aware of it.
If anyone needs support with a cleft experience, or any “defect” with our little bubbas please email me. sillybubbles@usa.com
Please don’t troll me privately, this is in the spirit of support and coming together. Nutty, if this isn’t allowed please remove this comment and I understand, it won’t hurt my feelings :)
@Unknown, totally agree with you.
@Mrs., taking anti-depressants is not an addiction. They save lives.