There's an old joke among journalists that the world's dullest headline is "Worthwhile Canadian Initiative".
Nobody wants to read about charity and good deeds. Our brains are hard-wired to seek out news about conflict, and we particularly enjoy conflict that includes the 7 Deadly Sins: lust, greed, envy, gluttony, pride, wrath and sloth.
The Meghan Markle saga contains most of the seven deadly sins, with the possible exception of sloth, although Harry might be able to take over that one.
But Meghan's proposed column for Vogue - both US and UK Vogue - would not. It is supposed to be about her "charity work."
In other words, Worthwhile Canadian Initiative.
I can see why she would be interested in writing it, but I can't imagine who would be interested in reading it.
-----------------
Edit: The Sun reports today that Meghan has "turned down the offer to become a Vogue columnist"in order to focus on her Royal duties.
That, dear readers, is the sound of a trial balloon being launched - and crashing.
----------
The Meg story of Tuesday, July 9 has been focused on her behavior while watching her supposed friend Serena Williams play at Wimbledon last week.
Meg showed up in a hat (not allowed) and stained blue jeans (not technically prohibited, because no one ever imagined anyone would be slothful enough to wear them to Wimbledon.)
Her eyes were covered in giant sunglasses, and she appeared to need assistance from two frumpy friends, university sorority sisters apparently auditioning for the role of secret godmother.
For some reason, Meg was allowed to leave a good dozen seats around her empty, even though people were waiting outside in line to get in.
This couldn't have been purely a security concern: Duchess Kate was at Wimbledon earlier in the week and happily sat with a crowd around her.
The fellow spectators were told that Markle was there in a "private capacity" and did not want to be photographed, although she was clearly visible to the television cameras broadcasting the match all over the world.
The blowback was so severe that Markle's PR had to tell the Daily Mail that she wanted to interact with "people, not phones."
But she wasn't really interacting with any people behind her hat giant sunglasses, which made her look a bit like late-in-life Michael Jackson on a day without a surgical mask.
-----------
Finally, today's media suggested that in 2021 the Queen will officially hand over power to Charles, a transition which has been taking place in the background for several years.
One of Charles' first big tests has been the care and feeding of Meghan Markle, from the wedding through the funding of her fashion choices to the management of Archie's entry into the Royal Family.
He's done such a lovely job.
I can't wait to see how he'll handle a United Kingdom dealing with the roller-coaster ride of Brexit.
Nobody wants to read about charity and good deeds. Our brains are hard-wired to seek out news about conflict, and we particularly enjoy conflict that includes the 7 Deadly Sins: lust, greed, envy, gluttony, pride, wrath and sloth.
The Meghan Markle saga contains most of the seven deadly sins, with the possible exception of sloth, although Harry might be able to take over that one.
But Meghan's proposed column for Vogue - both US and UK Vogue - would not. It is supposed to be about her "charity work."
In other words, Worthwhile Canadian Initiative.
I can see why she would be interested in writing it, but I can't imagine who would be interested in reading it.
-----------------
Edit: The Sun reports today that Meghan has "turned down the offer to become a Vogue columnist"in order to focus on her Royal duties.
That, dear readers, is the sound of a trial balloon being launched - and crashing.
----------
The Meg story of Tuesday, July 9 has been focused on her behavior while watching her supposed friend Serena Williams play at Wimbledon last week.
Meg showed up in a hat (not allowed) and stained blue jeans (not technically prohibited, because no one ever imagined anyone would be slothful enough to wear them to Wimbledon.)
Her eyes were covered in giant sunglasses, and she appeared to need assistance from two frumpy friends, university sorority sisters apparently auditioning for the role of secret godmother.
For some reason, Meg was allowed to leave a good dozen seats around her empty, even though people were waiting outside in line to get in.
This couldn't have been purely a security concern: Duchess Kate was at Wimbledon earlier in the week and happily sat with a crowd around her.
No photos, please!
Markle also had her security detail confront anyone she thought might be taking a photo of her, including a guy taking a selfie with the court (not Markle) in the background and a lady journalist taking action photos of Serena in action.The fellow spectators were told that Markle was there in a "private capacity" and did not want to be photographed, although she was clearly visible to the television cameras broadcasting the match all over the world.
The blowback was so severe that Markle's PR had to tell the Daily Mail that she wanted to interact with "people, not phones."
But she wasn't really interacting with any people behind her hat giant sunglasses, which made her look a bit like late-in-life Michael Jackson on a day without a surgical mask.
-----------
Finally, today's media suggested that in 2021 the Queen will officially hand over power to Charles, a transition which has been taking place in the background for several years.
One of Charles' first big tests has been the care and feeding of Meghan Markle, from the wedding through the funding of her fashion choices to the management of Archie's entry into the Royal Family.
He's done such a lovely job.
I can't wait to see how he'll handle a United Kingdom dealing with the roller-coaster ride of Brexit.
Comments
I am so over Smeagle. I love that name for her because it fits so perfectly. They need to figure out a way to make her go away!
Markle can indeed look very pretty when she is styled well. I'm guessing Vogue will do that for her upcoming photo layout, in which she will finally be pictured wearing up-and-coming designers. It would be great if they were young designers from the UK or Commonweath, but I suppose we shouldn't get our hopes up.
Enty said in his podcast today that Epstein would pass on his abused young girls to the Bronfman sisters at NXIVM.
Meghan has posted publicly about her friendship with Hannah Bronfman.
Well, I have a proposal for ER: Retire now, Your Majesty, really, as soon as is possible, and pass over Charles, your disappointing firstborn, in favor of anointing William as your successor. The future of your house depends on this transition, but the transition to Charles is not the right one. I know he's been waiting 70 years for the job that is his by birthright, and until this year, I was supportive of him having his rightful turn at the Crown. William no doubt would like another 10 or 15 years with his growing family before he has to shoulder the Crown.
But recent events have altered my view. If the monarchy is to survive under the current conditions, it needs to break with the moribund This is the Way We Have Always Done Things which is bringing them down. William is young, vigorous, has a wonderful partner in Kate--the Cambridges are the future; Charles is the past.
I look for the Queen to hold with tradition and go with her heir apparent, but I also hope that William will be an assertive second for his father and essentially become Chas's proxy. As Prince of Wales and in control of the Duchy funds, he will have more power to thwart the Harkles.
If William had been King already, the Smarkle Debacle would not have occurred, I'm pretty sure about that.
Robin Williams used to have a bit in his act about the United States and her northern neighbor:
"Canada is like a nice young couple living above a biker bar." (at this point he'd look down at the floor and tap his foot), "Settle down down there . . .eh."
It was all in the delivery . . .:)
There's also the chance that the Epstein affair may touch Charles - not as a direct participant, but because of his involvement with Jimmy Saville.
An argument could be created that Charles and Andrew's generation should just be skipped.
On a practical level, however, Charles has been taught all sorts of day-to-day things about being on the throne that William has not yet learned. I don't even know if William is in the security briefings.
Besides, who would run the Duchy of Cornwall until George, Charlotte, or Louis was ready to do so? Certainly not Harry, and probably not Bea or Eugenie either.
I actually like to read real biographies* because they are of people who have struggled to get some place or do something worthwhile. I may only learn my own troubles are miniscule but I have learned about someone worth being written about.
I am not certain I could handle a monthly column about someone's own humanitarian works. I fear it would be a lot of I, I, I in every sentence. A column about greater good others are doing that I might not know of (elephant protectors and rescue orphan baby elephants) in far flung places in the Commonwealth would be ... useful, educational and might get them some money.
*not the ones one finds in grade school levels which can make the struggle sound equal (for a kid) to a cell phone which has gone through the washer.
Posting a photo of a pair of mismatched, awkwardly-angled non-newborn feet on SussexRoyal just a few days after Archie's birth? Meghan isn't that stupid. And I don't believe she is that crazy.
Now, we all know Meghan couldn't really afford Sara Latham. And, remember, shortly after Latham was hired BP hired a new social media wiz? I think that Latham and the social media wiz guy may be working together to make Megs look progressively crazier and more defiant than she was to begin with. And I think Meghan is playing along, under the direction of Lord Geidt. They are all playing along.
It will culminate in a stay at a mental health facility for Meghan, which she can parlay into a triumphant recovery narrative. Then the divorce and a big payout for Megs. Archie will remain in Britain with the Queen and Prince Harry. Right now he's probably at the Cambridges or perhaps the Wessexes. At least I hope so. I don't think Meghan has him, and I hope he isn't just being looked after by nannies.
Abby, I also enjoy biographies - but not always autobiographies. They're only enjoyable if the writer is willing to take a frank look at himself or herself. (Slash's autobiography chronicling his drug addiction is very good.)
I imagine that there will be many biographies written of Meg one day, but I'm not sure I'd like to read her autobiography. Hundreds of pages of Word Salad.
I want to give Charles a shout-out for creating The Prince's Trust in 1976, while he was still in his 20s. I have always thought that this was true humanitarianism and is genuine.
Should circumstances transpire that would propel William to the throne before George is of age; Charles is 70 years old, after all, arrangements would have to be made for the Duchy. There must be someone trusted who could be appointed as regent over those lands, given that Harry is a non-starter. Might Anne be able to take over, given that she is next after Charles? I'm sure they have somebody in place for that potentiality.
Nutty, if you start another blog of good books, I'm in.
@Veena, hear hear! I missed so many exciting discussions yesterday and have so many thoughts (you bet I read every damn comment/discussion! :)) but it's almost too much work to go back and post through, the work & kids were on overload yesterday (to pay those bills, single mom here!)
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2019/07/09/the-secret-sussex-christening/
She discusses the time stamp discrepancy . . and also provides a photograph of Charles and Camilla leaving Louis's christening last year.
Both are wearing *identical* outfits to the ones in Smarkle's picture, down to the tilt of Cam's hat and the flower in Chas's buttonhole.
Smeg is so busted!
Also she provides a photograph of Harry's christening, including all of his godparents, among whom are his cousin, Lady Sarah Chatto and Uncle Andrew. So apparently family members can serve as godparents for each other.
The way she acted at Wimbledon is beyond comprehension. I will say, she does look like someone who has had a child though. If you look at pictures of her from when they first got married, she is super slim. She has gained weight in her face, her arms and her legs. And if you look at the photo of the backside of her from the baseball game, she's gained it in her caboose as well. So why is it that she didn't seem to gain any of this weight until after the supposed birth? Most pregnant women gain during the pregnancy, most of it during the last trimester. Its odd.
I'm reading what a lot of you guys are saying about the christening photo, and what I'm reading on other sites, and I'm just flabbergasted. I don't understand why this is being allowed to continue. I am an American, but I have always been a big fan of the monarchy. I am a few years older then the Princes, but I grew up reading everything I could about Diana. She was so lovely, and I always felt so sorry for what she went through. It saddens me to see so much unrest within that family, and so much craziness. The requests for "privacy" are ridiculous! You are a ROYAL! When Kate married William, I was so happy for them and she was such a beautiful bride on her wedding day. I honestly felt nothing but disgust for my fellow American on her wedding day to Prince Harry. I honestly felt guilty for feeling that way about her, but I couldn't help it. She just rubs me the wrong way, and I can't get over it.
Please don't play America for this woman. We may be to blame for a lot.... but we didn't create that monster.
I love this blog I lap it up as a cat does cream,I am new at posting as I’ve never been brave enough but I can assure you I’ve been watching this carnage happening since it started( I cannot post on @ KensingtonRoyal) for telling Harry to run the night before the wedding Oops.
I come to this blog as I enjoy the interesting intelligent posts and the fair points made(if that makes sense)
I have met MM pre Harry days and she is what people think and loves the sound of her own voice.
I often have discussions with other let’s say scholarly friends to which one goes as far to say the MM has a NPD
If anyone knows this does not make for good bedfellows.
I would love to hear others thoughts on this and once again thank you for bringing frank discussions to the fore.
It really is a strange photo and does look fake. But how could the BRF let her photoshop this photo? This is insanity?? Also, her fave looks very slim compared to her face on her last 3 outings, incl Wimbledon, just 2 days before!
Savile's reputation was known in the media at least 15 years before he died in 2011 though as I was a temp at a tabloid in the late 1990's including the same week Diana died in fact and one of the editors told me that Savile was a 'kiddie fiddler' - I remember that as I had not heard that term before.
Re: Epstein I see Andrew implicated heavily in the goings on during their friendship. I recall an article where a girl who was pictured with Prince Andrew confirmed they'd had some kind of relations when she was 16-18 years old. I think Andrew's involvement will be swept under the carpet, but boy do I wish he would see serious consequences for his actions like anyone else would.
Does anyone know who the female was sitting behind Meghan and her two friends at the tennis? I wondered if she was a member of her security team, although there were suited men sitting to her right that fitted that description ...
I've read several comments suggesting Meghan was 'on something' at the tennis ... the things that stood out to me were her sloppy dress style and ratty hair (again).
This fool is digging her own grave at this point.
Anne is my choice to take over - and yes, I know it would never happen. But out of them all, she seems the most down-to-earth and normal of them all. And I really like Zara and Mike. Not so much Peter and Autumn, but never mind.
Andrew, Eugenie and Beatrice (and Fergie), are in my 'go away' list. I really hope Andrew is made an example of in this whole Epstein carry-on, but I'm doubtful that will ever happen.
I'm convinced Meghan saw what Blake Lively was doing with 'Preserve' (now defunct), Reese Witherspoon was doing with 'Draper James' and of course Gwyneth Paltrow was doing with 'Goop' and thought people would flock to her, what with her being the same calibre as these ladies 🤣😜 ...
The thought has crossed my mind that maybe Sara was brought on to make Meghan look crazy ... but if that is the case, then Meghan is unwittingly trusting her as she's not very smart ...
I can say, hand on heart, that Meghan does have NPD. When Harry issued those, "leave my girlfriend alone" statements early into their relationship, he would have done so because she made a big drama (lies) about being targeted. We mustn't forget it was she who drew attention to the relationship in the first place with the bananas post on Instagram. Then there was the speculation that she made up how she was being followed / her house was broken into, in Toronto. This is how Narcs operate. I could go on and on with many examples ... she's bad news.
We watched the ladies and gents in fancy frocks and had a fun morning.
Never expected so much crazy drama! It gets crazier by the day.
Everytime I think this MM and PH situation can't get any worse, something even crazier happens! I am just flabbergasted by this whole thing. The question I keep coming back to is "Why is the RF letting this continue?" There MUST be a really GOOD reason for letting these shenanigans continue. There are so many theories right now:
1. That she's done something illegal, and they are building a case against her (to send her to jail).
2. That they already know the marriage is doomed, and they are behind the recent build up of negative stories being put out about her to tarnish her image/reputation and decrease her negotiating power when H and M finally do divorce.
3. That there is something going on with the baby (either they don't have him yet from the surrogate for some reason OR that he is sick with some illness), and that RF is going along with all this to protect the surrogacy secret AND the baby.
4. That she and Harry are a diversion for the people from the bigger scandal about how the Epstein story might affect both Andrew and Charles (and who knows it may even affect H and M).
I suppose there could be some truth to all of these theories. What do you think?
As to Megs being too vain to let herself appear crazy, well I think she's fighting it, but then they keep dangling that payout. And she sees the possibilities for future post-divorce, post-recovery PR. I'm sure you can imagine the line she'll take. But much as I dislike Meghan I hope this scene doesn't really send her over the edge.
Sell, sell, sell!
I may be wrong, but that's my theory--for now, anyway.
Lady Muck, strangely enough those commenters on the DM blew my mind. I couldn’t get over the how mean they were. It seemed it started out as a few haters and just grew and grew. Now when a story gets posted there’s thousands of comments that are hateful. Every new story gets like 10 to 12,000 nasty comments. Unbelievable. It’s shocking. I’m glad I’m not in her shoes. 😱
The Sun is reporting today that Meghan has "turned down the offer to become a Vogue columnist" in order to focus on her Royal duties.
That, friends, is the sound of a trial balloon being launched - and crashing.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/9474468/meghan-markle-vogue-turned-down/
She let her sister Margaret's situation spin out of control for years, and let Charles and Diana's marriage disintegrate in the public eye.
And that when she was much younger and presumably more energetic!
There's also the theory that because Markle is biracial, they have to demolish any basis of support she might have before giving her the gate, so that they will not be accused of racism.
A bunch of factors came together - Harry's desperation and fecklessness, the transition and Charles' desire to seem to be in charge, probably some shared drug usage between Meg and Harry, plus a media environment that was both excited for a biracial princess but also financially strapped and open to her PR machinations and paid articles.
It's really sad for Serena, because all those empty seats makes it look like no one wanted to turn up for her match.
I've met Harry pre-Meghan (when he was in these parts on a visit by himself), and he was nothing but charming ... just wonderful. Genuinely interested in what people were saying, and everyone who met him came away gushing (no exaggeration). I don't recognise him from the Harry we see and hear about today ... it's like his evil twin has come out to play.
https://www.laineygossip.com/wimbledon-fans-reportedly-asked-to-not-take-photos-in-meghan-markles-direction/56050
https://www.laineygossip.com/wimbledon-fans-reportedly-asked-to-not-take-photos-in-meghan-markles-direction/56050
It's on twitter and Harry Markle (Not sure if LSA knows yet). There is no way they can hush it up and people are asking questions.
The implications that C&C and K&W knowingly partook in this charade could cause uproar. I'm starting to think that they're going to oust her by saying she's had some sort of psychotic break because she couldn't get pregnant and retreated into a fantasy world.(hence the moonbumps), The family will say that they were told to play along with her delusions to avoid her deteriorating any further until they could get her to the correct care. This would also be an explanation for how many times she has appeared drunk or stoned ('She's on medication')
The only problem is that it's all flannel and the public will ask why she wasn't institutionalised from the start and the truth admitted. It wouldn't have been so bad if she'd not splashed money about on her maternity clothes and froggy cottage like she did. I've no doubt people will want to know why we've been paying to indulge this tart's fantasies instead of being told the truth. The UK public aren't monsters, we'd have been sympathetic. The backlash really started because of her announcing she was up the duff at PE's wedding and bizarre pregnancy/behaviour.
There are too many lies for The Firm to come out unscathed now.
I certainly do appreciate your input Nutty. That's why I have moved over here....and I will parrot others on here when I say, I would LOVE to see more. I do understand this is a hobby and you have a REAL job...but I was SO excited when I saw two posts within as many days.
Sadly, I do think you are right that nothing can save them. All they can do now is lessen the blow back. They've had scandal before and survived....I mean, people for years (and some still do) believe that the Queen had Diana killed. If they can survive that, they will survive this.
I'm no digital media expert, but that christening photo does not stand up to close scrutiny, even if you didn't know about the time stamp discrepancy. It just doesn't. The composition is wonky.
Charles & Camilla wore the *exact same outfits* to Louis's christening, both of them: shoes, hat, pocket square, boutonniere . . Charles *may* wear the same suit from time to time, but surely he would have changed the flower in his lapel? Given their odd placement in the photo, I say they were both cut and pasted into this shot, using images from Louis's christening.
W&K likewise look very odd, though I will love William's RBF forever. Seated Kate is out of proportion to her husband standing . .there's a huge gap between her chair and the sofa, and, perhaps most tellingly, the ensemble she's wearing, from headband to shoes has been worn on a number of other occasions. Wouldn't have been hard to find a shot of her in it. Compared to the other faces, I find hers strangely out of focus. The shadows and the line edges don't feel right, particularly with the two men in blue.
What I think is totally possible in the Meg-verse, though it really sounds bizarre: That H&M and the baby were photographed by Chris Allerton in the Green Drawing Room on the same day he took the 'presentation with HM & PP' shot (also faked, but M. would have been photographed in position with 'the baby') and Doria. Then she and Doria changed clothes, (she ditched the Moonbump) and they did their hair and makeup . . and posed for the 'christening photo'. If there actually was a private christening of Archie at Windsor, it appears to have happened 2 months ago, and not actually been attended by anyone in the royal family. I suspect that the Cornwalls and Cambridges were Photoshopped in. I think Diana's sisters must have been present, potentially as the godparents, since there would be fewer appropriate images of them to manipulate into this occasion. I did feel that Lady Jane's attire was a quizzical choice for a christening. Looks more like a day at the races to me. So perhaps she was unaware that she'd be attending a christening when she arrived at Windsor. Perhaps both ladies were told they were being invited to 'meet the baby', and shanghai'd into doing this. Look at their faces--are those the expressions of two joyful great-aunts celebrating another grandchild for their late, beloved sister? They do not look happy at all.
This would account for the secrecy regarding the announcement of the godparents, if the christening had taken place in top secret two months ago.
For being such a pervasive and pathological liar, MM's lies are incredibly inept. Has she ever spent any time around babies or small children before now . . .that is, if one actually buys that she's got custody of 'Archie', which I doubt? She seems to have no clue at all about normal childhood development. Not that her development was exactly 'normal'.
For as infuriating as she is, she's actually a very sick woman, sick in the head. What she's got is resistant to therapy or modification . . .she's never going to change. The more she's sanctioned or confronted, the worse and more brazen she's going to be.
Where is Harry? It's not like he has a day job.
As a side note, if she hasn't noticed already, taking care of a baby, even if it is for a short time, is a handful where you have to keep your eyes and attention on the baby and baby needs. She may learn it isn't worth the hassle (better to leave with the nanny) so this might be the big show and not to be seen much again unless it is quite short.
and for someone who is said to have a two month (or up to four month) old baby, you are correct about her hand placement. It comes off as almost but not quite the first time she's ever held him. Almost as if she is remembering everything people have said about how to hold a baby, without them being there to remind her but not remembering how much the baby has grown and changed.
I really am afraid for this little baby. They can sense when their adults are erratic and emotionally withholding and they get scared and neurotic as a result. She's getting the picture that a living child is not like a handbag to accessorize with . .he has needs . . all the time. I hope she doesn't hurt him.
I was indifferent to her. I even didn't bother to watch the wedding but i did think she was a lucky girl and I was glad that she had brown eyes and dark hair and was not the typical blonde with blue eyes. But besides this, I thought there was something wrong with her, I smelled that she was not being authentic.
And then she started to behave like a diva, like she was the big thing and she wore that hideous Oscar de la Renta dress to that wedding and that was all to me. "I don't like her", I said to me.
And then I started to follow some accounts on Instagram (The Charlatan Duchess, Megsy, and others of that kind) I encountered a big community that did think she was fake and had the proofs. And the Harry Markle site was a shed of light to me. Then it all started to make sense. She was as fake as a three dollar note and a narcissist and Harry didn't have balls. And I was so glad to find a community that thought like me.
And this blog is as good as Harry Markle, but with the plus of having hundreds of comments.
I have had adopted both puppies and kittens and was far, far more concerned about holding them appropriately and cuddling them. Even when doing animal rescue, I was far more focused on the puppy or kitten that I was holding than anything else (plus, who can resist the inevitable petting and puppy love, right?) So, I do think I can transfer that level of emotion and compare it to Ms. Army Tent and I see none of it. I had hoped to see some. I see a woman in a spendy tent dress in a horrible color and she's trying to get a photo op using a baby (that could be a sack of potatoes for all she cares) in to turn her image around and it isn't working at all. Even the kiss was for the cameras. Tender and sweet and loving did not show up.
There *may* have been a family christening more recently than last summer, for Louis. But if there was, I think the family members *refused* to pose for an official commemoration photo as 'proof' that they condone and are happy about this whole situation. I think the photo was cobbled together with pieces of other photos, and perhaps the Spencer sisters and Doria were actually in the shot with the Harkles and Archie.
But I was pointing out it's interesting Camilla wore that very same dress today! Of all days! She just "wore" it on Saturday. I believe it was altered for the "official photo" from the "christening."
This whole debacle has made me feel that Charles is not fit to rule - if he can't keep his own back yard in order, then there's no hope of being a strong role model for anywhere else. If I were him I'd read MM the riot act, give her a £40k per year clothes and jewellery budget, no flitting off to the USA for shopping/parties/merching and bring in Sophie Wessex for minor royal boot camp. The ultimatum of any more shenanigans and you both relinquish your titles and go live in Africa (effectively in exile as per the Duke & Duchess of Windsor).
The good thing is if it did go so far as that then Meghan would NEVER be allowed to leave Harry. A prince gives up his title and place in succession for love, that woman is tied to him forever, or else be the most hated woman on the planet. According to some, the exact scenario of Wallis & Edward. And that's what they call karma.
Sorry I’m a bit late to the table but I’ve had a busy few days.
You asked me if MM was pretty in real life or just photogenic I will get to that point for you.
I would like to explain that I have to be careful what I say as my partner works in the security world
(He’s ex special forces)he also walks in Harry’s world.
As with his job he works all over the world and gets good perks,or gifts from grateful companies and clients
That is how I met MM in a social setting by pure accident( she was there so was I) I can remember thinking wow she has a potty mouth when someone pointed out that’s MM from suits(I’ve never watched it.)
I can remember she is quite short and at the time terribly thin,she had a dirty look to her and a dress on that was quite short,she made it it quite clear who was the star in the room which raised a few eyebrows.
She would cut in on conversations(yes yes I’ve done that),also I noticed she kept hanging off the guy she was with.
The answer to your question nutty is I think she’s been cleaned up as she’s not particularly pretty I guess she just photographs well! I do know my partner recently said to me that Harry’s pals have said he’s changed he become very precocious and haughty which is a shame as he’s a lovely guy,his beloved Pa is a affable man I met him in a army sitcu also his motherDiana who was Tall lol.
I hope this answers questions as I said I have to be careful also please can I ask that my comments just stay that way as there are only observations as I only met her once.
I was at Wimbledon with friends and she was tutted I’m surprised the crowds didn’t boo as the atmosphere did change when she plonked herself down surrounded by security it was like who is she ...����
Thank you nutty for your welcome and I love your blog because it asked difficult questions with fair debates
I do think something is terribly amiss with the whole debarkel..lol
Narracists like to set and keep to their on narrative and god forbid you try to change that.