Skip to main content

Are the Cambridges behind Meghan's run of bad press?

In Prince William and Catherine Middleton's engagement interview, William famously said that while the pair appeared calm, "We're like sort of ducks, very calm on the surface with little feet going under the water."

The phrase occurred to me again the other day when I saw yet another anti-Meghan screed from the Sun's Royal reporter, the New Zealand-born Dan Wootton.

Wootton, who is openly gay, is what Popbitch in its recent issue called "such good pals" with the Cambridge's press secretary, Christian Jones.

What role might Jones and the Cambridges be playing in the recent run of negative press about the Sussexes?


Keeping the kids away

William and Kate may not be the smartest people in the world, but they're also not the dumbest. 

Along with Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, they seem to have had Meg's number early on, and William famously encouraged Harry not to marry her, or at least wait until he got to know her better.

They've done a good job of keeping their children away from Meg as well; apart from Meg's surprise appearance at last month's polo match, the only time they have been photographed with her is at formal family events and at Meghan's own wedding.

(There was a rumor at the time that the Cambridge kids had been kept so insulated that George asked at the wedding "Who's that lady with Harry?" I have never seen this rumor confirmed; as I recall, it came from a lipreader who had been watching the footage.)

The birthday greeting

Will and Kate have also done their very best not to be photographed with Archificial, the Sussexes' mysterious son.

While they were not able to avoid appearing in Archie's baptism photo - the one with metadata showing it was taken on May 8, only two dates after Archie was supposedly born - they look stiff and uncomfortable. 

(Internet sleuths have since taken the photo apart, suggesting it was Photoshopped. I'm neutral about that myself, but the odd metadata suggests something is off.)

One image that is certainly not Photoshopped is the footage of the Cambridges and the Sussexes together on Christmas Day 2018. 

This was the day that William "scarfed" Meghan, doggedly directing his attention towards rearranging with his scarf to avoid interacting with her. The insult was obvious enough to create a new entry on the Urban Dictionary.

How telling that the Cambridges (or their press secretary) would choose images from that day for Meghan's birthday greeting on August 4.  

Even in chilly Britain, celebrating a summer birthday with a photo of everyone in thick winter coats is unusual. 

(The always-bitchy Duke of York Instagram account saluted Meghan's birthday with an unflattering photo of Meghan looking heavy. It's a bad photo of Harry as well - the angle makes it look like he has an extra bone sticking out of his skull. And it's the wrong size for Instagram, but apparently Andrew's people didn't care.)

Feet beneath the water

Anyway, it sounds like the Cambridge duck feet may again be swimming rapidly beneath the water when it comes to removing Meghan from the Royal Family. 

Along with Charles, they have the most to lose from Meghan's devaluation and commercialization of the monarchy. 

Unlike Charles, they may still have enough energy to do something about it. 

It's also interesting that Christian Jones appears to be the weapon of choice. Jones was originally hired to work for both the Cambridges and the Sussexes; Meghan famously paraded him around a restaurant in Notting Hill shortly after he came on board, having called the paparazzi in advance. 

Jones seems to have gotten to know Meghan well enough to be resistant to her charms; when the courts of Cambridge and Sussex split, he went with the Cambridges. 

Will he be an active participant in Meghan's defenestration? He's one to watch, at least. 

If nothing else, silent approval

Royal reporters are careerists; most stay in the job for a decade or more. 

The last thing they want is to be on the palace's bad side, because that can mean a withdrawal of access to even the simple stories and events they need to please their editors (and readers, but of course it's the editors who sign the paycheques.)

It seems extremely unlikely to me that longtime Royal reporters like Camilla Long of the Sunday Times, whose article this Sunday was brutal, would be going as far as they do without at least tacit approval from the palace. 

Charles may or may not be offering that approval, but William almost certainly is.


-----------
Edited on August 10 to add:


In a video interview on August 9, Wootton says:

"(Harry) will sit in that publicly funded mansion - because it’s not a cottage, it’s a £2.4million mansion refurbished by us on taxpayers money - he’ll watch the TV coverage and he’ll flick through the newspapers and look at all of those articles online about him, cursing his staff. 

"Rather than actually addressing the fact that much of the negativity towards the couple is coming from within the Royal Family.

“The Royal Family and staff of the Royal Family are the ones that are very often leaking these stories to the press.”


Top candidates from my point of view: Prince Andrew plus Williams press secretary Christian Jones and Lord Geidt's BP team.

Longshot candidate: Camilla. 


Comments

Anonymous said…
Sure, but first, it's "Wheel of Fortune!"

Punkinseed, here's your clue:

Meghan Markle and an aunt in an Oscar winning film share this character description:

_____ ________ _____



punkinseed said…
Elle, my mind is totally blanking on it! Darn. Guess someone else needs to spin the wheel.
Hikari said…
@Jen
It saddens me that the fallout of the Meghan Madness is that it has leached away respect for the power of the Queen. I have always admired HM as a formidable person, and she is interwoven into the fabric of two centuries--she was Queen before so many seminal events of the 20th century happened. She's been a fixture in the universe since long before I was born. But post-Markle, Elizabeth Regina, the All-Seeing and All-Knowing, she of the quiet but steely indomitable spirit that has outlasted 13 Prime Ministers (and is now on her 14th) . . is reduced to a little doddering old woman who doesn't know where her grandson or her grandson's grifting American wife are living?

Brittania doesn't rule the waves any more that's for sure, if she can't keep track of her own family members--whom she pays for.

I so wish Sir Winston Churchill could come back and have an audience with Her Wokeness. I don't think Meghan is capable of genuine feeling, but I bet Winston could have made her cry, all right and repent of her sins . . or at least flee Britain, never to return.

As for treading discreetly, I'm sure that's their game plan. Her Majesty so far has been so very discreet, she's invisible in all of this. That's as discreet as it gets, and Elizabeth is a mistress of discretion.

Last I heard, Jack and Eugenie had moved into Nott Cott after their wedding, since the Suxxit duo was banished to Frogmore. Gene had been sharing an apartment with her sister at St. James Palace, where Andrew resides, but now Edo, her fiance is in there.

If Her Maj has no clue where Meg and Harry live, then we sure know sod all! So much for being head of MI-5. If the Suxxits have eluded MI-5, the world is screwed. Markle could be anywhere. :p
Hikari said…
So her ace card for forcing him to marry her is . . that he beat her? She could have gotten a really juicy settlement from the family if she could prove that Harry caused her injury through violence without marrying her abuser. Narcissists are sadists, not masochists. Marrying an abusive partner isn't going to make the abuse stop, only escalate. Meg's a Dom, not a Sub.

I don't doubt that Harry has a temper and poor impulse control, and that Markle has used these traits to her advantage. Someone who was rational and thought before he acted would never have gotten entrapped in her scheme. She could have made up a whole tapestry of lies about the abuse, of course, documented with faked-up pics of bruises and bandages. She is very chummy with at least one makeup artist and one photographer who will do what she wants.

If you ask me, Harry is the abused partner in this relationship. All the clutching and the clawing signifies her control over him. Her emotional dominance over him is plain to see. Harry is the weaker personality; if he weren't an easy mark, she would have picked another target. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that she hurts him physically, too, if staffers have things thrown at them, imagine what she could do to him at home. Harry is a strapping 6'1" or thereabouts, which would make admitted he were an abused husband shameful. She's half his size but size doesn't have anything to do with capacity for violence.

H. and M. were drawn together because they share a lot of the same darkness . . but MM has, and always has had the upper hand. Harry's a hot head, immature and has impulse issues . . but his wife is ruthless. Harry is misguided and self-centered but he's more thoughtless than ruthless. That's why he's got his wife directing everything he does.
Hikari said…
Tweey,
My Archie is actually a ginger tom cat (neutered). He is not technically at residence at my house; I seem to share custody of him with another neighbor . . a totally non-official arrangement. He seems to sleep at hers and eat at mine. At least, he turns up like clockwork at least once a day looking for a meal. I have a bigger yard and he and some of the neighborhood denizens hang out there. Big stray cat problem in my neighborhood.

I hadn't had a name for him for quite a while, but after May 8th, I decided I would name him "Archie Harrison", with a nod to the famous red-haired Archie from the comic books. Also, my cat is 100% real. :)
Hikari said…
@Elle and punkin, to earlier comment re. DV . . .seeing if this one goes through . .

n agreement that Harry is the abused partner here. All the clutching, clawing, overt symptoms of control. Emotional manipulation. She says jump, he looks to her to see how high.

She used his temper and impulsivity to her advantage in sucking him into a quickie wedding and turning his rage against his family into twisted devotion to her. She is a skillful manipulator. If Harry were a strong personality, she would have looked for an easier target. He was perfect.

He's a big guy and it's not easy to admit to being browbeaten and hurt by a woman half his size, but if she throws tea at assistants, I imagine he has been physically assaulted, too. Maybe that's why he is never at home these days . .out of her reach.
punkinseed said…
Hikari, you're probably right. Harry is a milquetoast.
Has anyone notices that Megs isn't love bombing Harry anymore? She hasn't praised him about anything for awhile. Hm. What's the next phase after love bombing stops? Gaslight?
I've been trying to understand and sum up what makes me have such contempt for Megs at this point. It's a long list of reasons of course, but what is the main one? For now I think it's because she is only out for what she can get from others, no matter who it is and her ends justify her means.
Remember when Thomas Markle said that Doria taught Megs from early childhood to never get involved with or befriend anyone unless he or she can do things for her? In other words, "What's in it for ME?" After reading that I cringe every time I read an article singing Doria's praises. ISH! What kind of a mom would teach a kid to think like that?
Anonymous said…
Am I the only person who thinks of this line from The Departed every time I see mm's grasping and greedy claw?
Anonymous said…
There are many things that leave me with contempt for her. We need a list to inspire those who slip in quietly to read here.
Hikari said…
@Nutty,

On the heels of these last comments, I'd like to suggest another Nutty Challenge Topic: Narcissists: Are they Born or Made?

Out of all of Meghan's clan, Doria has received the best press (it's a low bar) but the comments are generally positive. I only found out recently that she'd been in prison for seven years while Meghan was in her school years. Is this confirmed? 7 years is a long sentence for a non-violent crime. Minor drug offenses or prostitution or even a spot of housebreaking wouldn't garner 7 years, unless she was in a third strike situation or guilty of major dealing or GBH or something like that.

I've read that she's a degreed social worker. It's possible to turn one's life around after prison, but I'd say those people are in the definite minority. Not sure I believe she's got a master's degree necessary to become a LSW. She might teach yoga to senior citizens at the community center. I've read also that she's in a longterm relationship with a white female partner and they live in a nice house--the partner's house. Shades of her daughter's pattern of dating higher earners who can provide her with top notch lodging.

If she truly said that to Meghan, then I'm not going to defend her any more. The father who was demonized and who is no longer acknowledged in any way by his princess made some spectacular mistakes while raising his children, but he was there for Meg while her mom was in jail, and gave her everything within his means to give her.

Together, both Thomas and Doria created this monster. Would MM have turned out the same even if Tom and Doria had been a suburban couple with a stable marriage who stayed together and provided needed discipline to MM as well as love? Or would she have been like she is no matter her upbringing or circumstances due to a glitch in her developmental wiring? The place where a conscience should be is missing, and if one does not grow one of those in early childhood, one never does.

Meghan is irretrievably broken, if half of what is said of her is the truth. Who screams and rages like a banshee because she can't get certain avocados or tries to injure staff by throwing crockery with scalding beverages inside? In addition to NPD, she's got Antisocial Behavior Disorder. How could a person like this charm and manipulate and attract friends and lovers even in the short-term? In the short time she's been in our view, we've seen her acting like a maniac--what do the people that actually know her see?

Nobody this self-absorbed and oblivious to others' feelings or needs would even make a satisfactory prostitute--nothing in her is wired up to be capable of giving.

In short, Hazza: WHY???

I haven't got any insights. She reminds me a lot of Hitler . . someone so awkward-looking and relentlessly single-minded and extreme, his level of charismatic persuasiveness over normal citizens should not have been possible . .and yet, he achieved it, and so did Meg.

It really boggles my mind. Because if half the stories attributed to her and about her are true, she belongs in a facility for the criminally insane, not at the top echelons of royal society, ruining weddings and the reputation of a venerable house.

So . . who or what created the Markle? Nature? Nurture? Both? Her whole family is made up of low, shady, morally bankrupt individuals with criminal tendencies, but Meg has a special je ne sais quoi all her own.
MaLissa said…
If it was on Instagram, that would be HRH The Duke of York.
Oldest Older 201 – 211 of 211

Popular posts from this blog

Is This the REAL THING THIS TIME? or is this just stringing people along?

Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce.  And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before?  which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)? There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know.  I'm not a lawyer.  One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away".  That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice.  But does he? He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance.  Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of bei

A Quiet Interlude

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

Christmas is Coming

 The recent post which does mention that the information is speculative and the response got me thinking. It was the one about having them be present at Christmas but must produce the kids. Interesting thought, isn't it? Would they show?  What would we see?  Would there now be photos from the rota?   We often hear of just some rando meeting of rando strangers.  It's odd, isn't it that random strangers just happen to recognize her/them and they have a whole conversation.  Most recently it was from some stranger who raved in some video (link not supplied in the article) that they met and talked and listened to HW talk about her daughter.  There was the requisite comment about HW of how she is/was so kind).  If people are kind, does the world need strangers to tell us (are we that kind of stupid?) or can we come to that conclusion by seeing their kindness in action?  Service. They seem to always be talking about their kids, parenthood and yet, they never seem to have the kids