It hit The Sun late Wednesday evening, UK time: Meghan and Harry won't be visiting the Queen at Balmoral this year.
The story was framed as the Sussexes' own decision, because they felt their son Archificial is "too young" to enjoy the experience of salmon fishing and grouse shoting on the vast Scottish estate.
(Archificial is apparently not too young to enjoy the infinity pool at their rented villa on Ibiza, or a private jet flight to visit Elton John's costume collection in the South of France, or an upcoming journey to South Africa. But, you know. Scotland is cold and the wifi is really bad at the castle. All those thick walls!)
And in early August, the Express - one of Meghan's favorite newspapers - reported that the Queen would be staging a special birthday party for Meghan at Balmoral.
The Sun went so far to describe it as a "birthday tea party."
Now Meg's August 4 birthday has come and gone, and she has yet to set foot in the Balmoral estate.
Did Prince Philip put his foot down about the increasingly shady Sussex Foundation and refuse to open the castle doors to them while he is present, as he has done with Sarah Ferguson for decades?
Did someone tell them they were not allowed to bring their plastic dolly?
Or could it be true that the Sussexes turned down an actual good-faith invitation from the Queen? Perhaps they were worried about receiving a right royal dressing down from Philip or Princess Anne.
If they did turn down an invitation from the Queen, that would be an insult that would be hard to forgive. Even Diana used to drag herself up to Balmoral, although she wasn't keen on the place.
What do you think?
The story was framed as the Sussexes' own decision, because they felt their son Archificial is "too young" to enjoy the experience of salmon fishing and grouse shoting on the vast Scottish estate.
(Archificial is apparently not too young to enjoy the infinity pool at their rented villa on Ibiza, or a private jet flight to visit Elton John's costume collection in the South of France, or an upcoming journey to South Africa. But, you know. Scotland is cold and the wifi is really bad at the castle. All those thick walls!)
Surprising change of plans
This was a surprising change of plans, since as recently as last week well-connected Royal correspondent Richard Eden was reporting that Meghan and Harry had solid plans to visit Balmoral for an end-of-season trip after all the other royal children and grandchildren had returned to England.And in early August, the Express - one of Meghan's favorite newspapers - reported that the Queen would be staging a special birthday party for Meghan at Balmoral.
The Sun went so far to describe it as a "birthday tea party."
It is testament to Meghan that she has been given this invite. It’s a huge honour.
They will celebrate Meghan’s birthday, and the catering team will bake a cake to mark the occasion.
Meghan may be a Duchess who can have anything she wants but the Queen is giving her a thoughtful present.
It’s no secret Balmoral is Her Majesty’s favourite home and that’s why this invite is so special and heartfelt.
Now Meg's August 4 birthday has come and gone, and she has yet to set foot in the Balmoral estate.
What happened?
What happened? Did Meg's invitation get lost in the Royal Mail?Did Prince Philip put his foot down about the increasingly shady Sussex Foundation and refuse to open the castle doors to them while he is present, as he has done with Sarah Ferguson for decades?
Did someone tell them they were not allowed to bring their plastic dolly?
Or could it be true that the Sussexes turned down an actual good-faith invitation from the Queen? Perhaps they were worried about receiving a right royal dressing down from Philip or Princess Anne.
If they did turn down an invitation from the Queen, that would be an insult that would be hard to forgive. Even Diana used to drag herself up to Balmoral, although she wasn't keen on the place.
What do you think?
Comments
it’s written by someone who’s not all the ticket. Far too silly and syrupy for words, it comes across like an unintentional comedic piece. PR piece for certain; the Sussex’s are waning by the hour now. Please let the press suck them into oblivion.
2. MM may have planted the story knowing that it is fake to discredit The Sun of they eventually go to Bamoral.
3. If BP wants a story out, they usually use the times. So again, the source (Emily) is doubtful.
4. If it is true, then it may be that the queen may be using this to get back at Meghan because of the hit pieces she used the US media to write against her over the Andrew/Epstein case. Meghan's US PR went into overdrive accusing the Palace of throwing her under the bus to protect Andrew.
Speaking of which, there are reports that they're not going to let anyone photograph Archificial during the diplomatic trip to South Africa.
Sorry, but the plastic doll conspiracy theorists are looking more and more credible.
Lots of talk online now about the South Africa trip coming at a very bad time for South Africa, which is experiencing some truly awful anti-immigrant violence. (Really, stay off Twitter if you are a sensitive soul.)
It's not really a good time to "shine a light" on South Africa, to use one of Meghan's favorite terms. I wonder if the trip will be cancelled.
The tea party story was a PR piece by the Sussex’s in hope they’d get an invite. It didn’t happen so they’ve had to issue another PR plant to try and offset their fluffy PR piece.
Or, BP is fed up with the Sussex’s PR nonsense, moreover the tea party article, and the Sun/DM article (by BP) is to shoot the Sussex’s down.
it would be fantastic if the tour was cancelled, but what reason would they give? Would they truly go for the ‘it’s not a suitable time right now’? Not particularly diplomatic though. Or give some other reason?
Kate looked great, but she's getting too skinny. Maybe her and the family should eat at the pubs more often.
Hard to argue that you can't get on a budget commercial flight because you're so worried about safety, but you can go to a country that's suffering violent civil unrest.
If there's some diplomatic purpose that has to be fulfilled in South Africa (doubtful), Harry could always go on his own.
Clearly, a child with an ear infection cannot fly (including fly private) and should stay h ome and recover under medical attention.
Of course, to know about common childhood maladies you have to have an actual child around the house.
Meg is trying to strike a pose as the patron saint of the "new" multicultural Britain, but her disregard for her father puts her in direct opposition to the values of many of these communities.
Particularly since Thomas Markle was a diligent if imperfect father. He cared for her when she was growing up, paid for her education, etc. He's not perfect, but he was no deadbeat dad.
My secret suspicion is that Meg lied to Harry and told him that Thomas Markle abused her.
(While even outwardly "good" parents can be abusers, Meg's close relationship with Thomas through 2017 and her proven pattern of lying in other circumstances would suggest this is plausible scenario.)
That's why he wasn't asked to the wedding, and that's why Meg cannot reconcile with Thomas now. It's also why she made sure Harry and Thomas never met.
She was selling a "little lost lamb" story to Harry and didn't want her father to get in the way.
If she comes out holding Pop's hand, as Veena suggests, she's going to sacrifice a little of Harry's trust.
I think there could well have been a series of attempts to force the hand of the Queen which then have given rise to the follow up vaguely timed to the first day of school. I can't think of anyone who has royal protocol savvy who would even think that trying to force her hand would be a good play (short or long term).
Too many people will make the same connections about too young versus sick kid. It is too unbelievable to pass as truth. If they had said: "You know, we tried this for my birthday but it wasn't good so we aren't going to try again.", it might make some sense. But that wasn't.
Although, could they take a train there?
It still leaves the tour unresolved and asking people to think this through (logic). And more and more will join the banner: This does not make sense.
There may be a Come-to-Jesus-and Lord Geidt moment coming very soon . . but I think HM would postpone such until she returns to London. She may be now, in conference with Charles and her advisors, having meetings revolving around the Suxxits' exit from the RF, either together or just the Deceitful Duchess. It would be madness to send them to Africa now, where Smegs has plans to continue merching and charging for appearances. A Royal tour on behalf of the Queen is also a privilege which these two should NEVER be granted again.
Harry will always be Charles' son, and a prince. If the people of Sussex get their way, he will not be Duke of Sussex much longer. Perhaps they can be appeased if the title of Duchess is revoked from his dastardly consort, though technically that title isn't official until she becomes a British subject. Which she never will, we can all see that writing on the wall. Revoking their titles and their status as working royals is the next step if the money's already been cut off. BP needs to release a brief and straightforward statement to the effect that "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have decided to retire from royal duties entirely in order to focus on their family life. Due to their expressed desire to live as private citizens, the ducal title of Sussex will be vacated and they will no longer be supported by the Crown." Any reference to Fauxchie would probably be excluded since BP has never officially recognized him.
I think the world would applaud. Beatrice and Eugenie were denied any extra titles or status as working royals; Harry used to be an important figure, before William had children and he was #3 to the Crown. Now he's slipped to #6, and is bringing very little, if any, value on investment for his position. His cousins, #9 and #10 respectively, do far more on their own initiative as semi-private citizens to further the aims of charity and philanthropy. Harry's shown his true colors and sentimentality toward him needs to go out the window. He's ridden the coattails of sentimentality for his dead mother for the last 22 years and it's time to look at him clearly and do the needful thing.
George is a cutie with old-soul eyes, but he seems to be easily overwhelmed and have a lot of meltdowns. He was crying during the regatta outing and being comforted by Grandpa Middleton. Maybe now that he's 6 these will lessen. William got a lot more mature once he went to school.
Contrast those stories with the fact that PH and MM have taken 4 (or is it 5?) private jet trips and stayed at Elton John's house in France. That is a fact. There's far too much stuff out there that states things like "Elizabeth was unhappy with this and Harry thinks this and..." It's pure speculation passed off as fact. Nothing more.
I say let the Duke of Suxxit be sent to the Bahamas to assist in the rebuilding/cleanup efforts, along with his American divorcee ball and chain. Make him Governor-General at Her Majesty's pleasure. Alas the accomodations at present are far less luxurious than during the Duke and Duchess of Windsor's tenure on the island . . . but in all seriousness, if Harry really wanted to rehabilitate his reputation, he'd go without complaint, work hard alongside the people to help rebuild and offer comfort to the homeless, and would stay off social media apart from posts about how the rebuilding efforts are going.
She'd never do it, so we're stuck with them both.
Meghan and Harry together have never been to Balmoral, because if they had it would have been reported with photos, just like the rest of the family when they visit.
MM so wants for us to believe that she is favored over Kate, that Harry is favored over William, yet everything she attempts shows just how that isn't so.
I no longer have the least bit of doubt that the Suxxits would decline an invite to Balmoral and thumb their noses at the Queen. Of course that would be foolhardy in the extreme, and unbelievably rude, unless one of them were demonstrably seriously ill, or the 'baby' was. Harry should know better, throwing away what had been 33 years of ingrained court protocol and family custom until he took up with this woman. Smegs cares nothing at all for the faux pas in refusing the Queen . . she's been taking a dump all over protocols, traditions and common decency ever since she got her hooks into Harry.
Nobody wants them at Balmoral. Balmoral is seen within the family as a reward. The Queen gifted it to Charles and Diana for the second part of their honeymoon; the groom was happy to be there; the bride was not. Smeg wants it put about in the press that she's the Queen's favorite and was going to be feted and 'special' for her birthday invite to Balmoral. She doesn't actually want to *go* there--the rain, the damp, the midges . . the rooms festooned with stuffed animal heads; lots of damp plaid; the kilts, the haggis, the poor to non-existent Wi-Fi reception . . the general lack of photo/merching ops, apart from the snaps of the family going to and from from church. Smeg would be just as bored and bad-tempered at Balmoral as Diana was . . worse.
Along with the fantastical stories of birthday parties and baby showers and pilgrimages to Diana's grave that manifestly never occurred, Smegs also has a history of framing negative things that *did* happen as being all the Suxxits' own idea. Cf. Frogmore . . the Empty House where no one is living or when the trip to Africa was initially floated in the New Year. I don't know what's up with Fraudmore (does anyone?) but their move there would have been a directive from HM, likewise the tour. If Smegs does not like something and/or is striving to get out of doing it, she nevertheless frames it as personal choice to sound more 'empowered' . . and then she can be 'empowered' again when 'exercising her personal choice' NOT to do it.
Along with the Existence of Fauxchie, I am very keen to know what happened to the 2.4 million pounds that were allegedly spent on a property that has never been inhabited by the Sussexes. A super-injunction may extend to the press, but it does not extend to the anecdotal evidence on social media posted by a number of Windsor residents that swear that place is dark. I've come to the conclusion that HM never really expected the Dum-Dums to actually *live* at Frogmore. The dilapidated former servants' quarters were slated for some renovation; at least there are some planning permits on file so stating . . . but those renovations were never completed within four months' time, so all the stories about Smeg awaiting her joyful delivery there, and practicing yoga and cooking for Harry and taking restful walks with Archie in the pram down to Windsor Home Farm to select locally-sourced produce . . and the best one, watching lawn bowls from her window as she breastfeeds Archie . . .all lies. By announcing publicly that their new home was going to be Frogmore Cottage, ER was issuing a bald-faced rebuke, as bald as she gets, that would be apparent to anyone within the family, or anyone with any familiarity with Windsor. The cottage might have some potential for other uses, but is not a suitable residence for a royal heir with a young baby.
Of course ER was no doubt aware that there is no young baby at Frogmore and never would be . . the traipsing dutifully to FC by Herself and Chas and Camilla and the Cambridge family is yet more lies from Smegs' PR machine. That she's in some apartment in Knightsbridge sans Harry or Archie, I can believe.
I'd go a step further and express the opinion that Doria has been to London exactly twice--once for the wedding and one other time for the cookbook launch while Smeggy was newly 'pregnant'. Her daughter no doubt felt that the optics would be great--her mom, a biracial woman, mingling with other women of color made for some on-brand type photos.
If you look closely at the presentation photo with Fauxchie and the Queen, Doria is wearing the identical outfit, down to the accessories, which she wore to the cookbook launch. Now, if you were meeting your first grandchild for a photo op with the Queen of England and the Duke of Edinburgh, wouldn't you want to upgrade your wardrobe slightly to 'nice church clothes' at least?
The other appearance of Doria, in the salmon pink suit at the 'christening' could have easily been photo-shopped in from another time she wore that outfit at church at home or, seeing as I don't really peg any of the clan as church-going (maybe the aunts who were not invited to the wedding are) . . Doria could have donned that outfit at home and emailed the photos off to her daughter.
I think now that the only persons in either of the alleged 'group shots' with the baby were Meg, Harry and the Child Known as Archie. If I'm correct, then Doria has not been back to London for nearly a year. Funny, isn't it, how she is NEVER snapped at LAX or at Heathrow or anywhere in between? When she was supposedly in town for Archie's birth, that stretched from before Easter to May 8th . . some 6, 7 weeks . . and nobody saw her, not once, not anywhere.
Fishiness.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/princess-charlotte-arrives-for-her-first-day-of-school-with-prince-george-william-and-kate/
The story wasn't about Kate not giving Meghan a lift, but not inviting her to go shopping with her friends when they were all in the Caribbean for a wedding. Meghan mentioned some shop when they were all together, only to learn later that Kate had gone with her friends, but had not invited Meghan. This was a terrible affront, apparently, rather than just a sign that Kate wanted to keep some barriers between them. Perhaps she didn't know Meghan very well or something of the sort.
Lainey is indeed in with that crowd. I find them all repulsive. Lainey writes about her own life from time to time, and you catch a glimpse of a woman who has the same set of morals as Meghan - disrespectful to parents, and a fan of everything woke, without a good understanding of the world. This understanding requires serious reading and reflection, not just travel magazines and Instagram, non? Au moins moi, je peux me servir de cette expression car je parle français.
Oh, and I've heard that Jessica Mulroney was as vulgar as Meghan to staff while in Australia.
Finally, what is the story with the Jaguar that was given to Jessica in Australia?
https://twitter.com/i/events/1169508638907490304
I have long wanted to see the beauties of Scotland with my own eyes . . .Balmoral is decidedly rustic. Royal rustic will still have plenty of amenities, but I get the feeling that the aesthetic is much more 'hunting lodge' than any of the gilded splendor of Buckingham Palace or the other London residences. There are a number of cottages on the estate as well.
If somebody is into the bracing open air and loves rambling, fishing and killing small animals with bullets, Balmoral would be like the best summer camp going. I suppose they ride, too, if the terrain permits. Dressing in black tie for dinner might be suspended, but it sounds like quite a full programme up there.
It is cold in Scotland, cool enough for sweaters in August, and it rains a lot, making waterproofs and wellies mandatory. I suppose if the weather is too poor for stalking or hiking or fishing, there are games of bridge or reading. Maybe cranking up the gramophone . . lol. I think the 21st century is kept as much at bay at Balmoral as possible.
Smeghan is not a nature girl and would hate every minute of this.
Lord G: QE, that markle woman is desperately trying to claw, beg, and lie her way into Balmoral. She even says that you've invited her.
HMTQ: GTFO! That's merde of the bat cray-cray! You know how I feel about that skank.
And with that, Lord G allowed the dumbartons to lie that they'd snubbed The Queen. The dumbartons get to save their pride (and also make it harder to play the race card later, at least on this point.)
I really have begun to consider that *all* of this crazy-making diversion by the dumbartons, these ill-timed moves and outrageous statements, are nothing more than deflection from the Fauxrchie. As they become more and more afraid of being outed for whatever (because we know what would happen if they had been defrauding the public all along with the bebe) and clamor to solve their Fauxrchie problem (whatever it is), they engage in these insane machinations to draw attention elsewhere.
Meghan has shown us that as soon as she was first seen in public with Harry, that she wasn’t ever going to charge her ways or was in any serious way going to adopt any new ones. Yes, taking an almighty dump over expected protocol’s and traditions was no accident and very deliberate on her part. Her way of saying ‘I’ll do what I want and I don’t care what you think ’. I have an endless list of things I’ve cringed at seeing her do and say. Stealing the moment from someone else (all too many times), so the attention was on her. It doesn’t get anymore graceless and rude as that.
The Frogmore move was a sideways shuffle, they were well and truly downgraded. Ex servants quarters was hardly fitting for either of the Sussex’s. I don’t do social media so I don’t see all the chatter and stuff about no one living there. I first read about it here. Like so many have stated on this blog, if no one is truly living there, why don’t the press report it as so? Then it begs the next question, why did BP and KP even say they were moving from Nottingham cottage in the first place? Hmm...perhaps just to say they were nowhere near KP or no longer have a real royal residence? I don’t know, or perhaps I both KP and BP just preferred to keep it quiet and hush-hush. The fact the Sussex’s then spun the narrative they wanted to privacy and be away from London and the press, when they’ve proven over and over at that point just how much they love attention. Frogmore is hardly private either! Lol Don’t get me started in how much they’ve cost us...far too much and more!
Please excuse any typos etc., my phone is chronic for changing words etc., tis why I tend to keep my posts short! Lol
I do wonder at times if Kate doesn't have Issues with Food. She seems to have tons of energy and lustrous hair and seems healthy, but when I read that she was 125 pounds at 5'10", that gave me pause. That was at her wedding and she seems, if anything, thinner now after three babies. William is so robust, it just highlights even more how tiny Kate is when they are side by side.
I'm 5'5" with a medium frame and consider 125 pounds to be on the thin side for me. Not that I've actually been that weight since the 7th grade, but supposing that I could get down that low, I wouldn't want to go any lower. I think Kate would look best with another 15 pounds on her, but that would be anathema.
When she was younger, in college and pre-engagement she seemed a little heavier with a rounder face--goes along with youth--but I have concerns that being so thin now might cause osteoporosis and other issues as she gets older.
That said, Meg is never snapped going about her business around London, which I also find strange.
Maybe Londoners know to leave royalty alone, but wouldn't a stray Italian, Taiwainese, or Canadian tourist point a cell phone her way?
Something has to come to a head within the next year. I hope to God and Lord G. that it's not a whole more year of this. If HM is careless enough to send them to represent her to the Commonwealth nations in Africa, there should be plenty of hot tea emanating from there. The Australian staff from Admiralty House are not holding back anymore about the Suxxits' post-newlywed tour last fall. They'd been married for 5 months and were not even making the barest effort to present the facade of a happy, loving couple whenever cameras weren't rolling.
I guess there's always the change that their private jet will go down in the ocean. Then Markle would really get her wish to be the Diana 2.0.
I have the utmost respect for Kate and for her health. I've never had any personal experience with having a body frame and metabolism like hers . . I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum. Endomorph all the way and I can gain weight simply by looking at a donut. If she's feeling her best at her current weight, then it's working for her. Her height to weight ratio is quite uncommon but that doesn't mean that it's not her normal.
Will the doll be accidentally dropped in their trip to SA? Will a child accidentally grab the doll and comment that it's fake ala’ The Emperor’s New Clothes?
At that point, how will they possibly explain this? Mental illness? Which is very much is, is their only out.
Listen I have not been on the fake baby train until very recently, but the constant secrecy and hiding of Archie is just plain weird.
We shall see.
I would be very surprised if Archie is on the South Africa tour. I guess it depends on whether or not they have been able to score an actual baby. I never thought that I would be thinking along these lines but something just does not add up and I have a morbid fascination with this story and how it will end.
My gut instinct tells me something very different and I can't shut it up.
My initial theory, then, is that the presentation photo and christening group shot included Doria to make a group of four. The other members of the Royal family in both photos appear stilted in the extreme, almost as though they are all in different photos altogether, if you get me. The Queen and Philip were beaming at their new great-grand . .beaming. That show of happiness and inclusivity does not jibe with the 'official' welcome at his birth two days earlier (allegedly) or the Sussexes' continued non-invitation to various family events. No amount of glowing press from Smeaghan's camp about how thrilled the Queen is with Archie and her favorite granddaughter-in-law can disguise the fact that something is very rotten in Windsor (or wherever the Sussexes are laying their, or Archie's potentially latex head these days.)
I subscribe to there being a 'Creative Photoshoot Day' in May which encompassed both photos and included no members of the Royal family as such, apart from Harry, if we can still consider him a royal.
I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering how Archie had a head full of blond peach fuzz hair at his christening and was completely bald and with an entirely different shaped head two months later at the polo ground. At least we're sure the Cambridge family was actually there that day. The presence of a live baby on that occasion is somewhat in dispute.
I can also see where she might have done the abuse narrative to Harry, because at this point, I'm willing to believe just about anything. But it would explain why there's no attempt at making amends there.
All out and about photos we have of Meg have been shown to be pap calls. But you can't tell me that she sits alone all day in Frogpond with a baby and isn't going crazy. So where is she? Where is the baby?
Oh, as for the disparity on the baby's hair, that one I don't question. Some babies lose all their hair after birth.
While I was not the person who initially brought up Kate's weight on this, or any thread, nor will I be the last, I am sure, I see that this talk has touched a nerve with you so I concur that we should wrap up this particular talking point. I don't want to attack Kate and nor do I want to make you feel bad. Societal expectations make it all too easy for women of any size to become self-conscious about their weight. I feel that you are filtering a tone of disrespect from me toward Kate through the lens of your own personal experience . . I think Catherine is a marvel and a positive role model on so many levels. My hat's off to her. My expression of concern was, I assure you, just hoping that she's taking care of herself and not depriving herself of needed nutrition in order to conform to an ultra-slim figure. For all the trouble she has early in her pregnancies with the HG, she sails through the rest and her children are all beautiful and healthy.
Are you equally uncomfortable with discussions of Meghan's mysteriously waning and waxing figure? Are trigger warnings something we need to institute here? I have joined in in bashing Meg with gusto for her physical appearance because she provides us with so many temptations to fall into not being nice. And this is an anti-Meghan forum, for the most part. But for absolute fairness, if Catherine's appearance is hands-off except only in glowing terms, then maybe we all need to reexamine our glee in mocking Meg's looks--hair, weight, teeth, complexion, etc.
It's a fun hobby (too fun to give up) . . . but her actions alone give us plenty of ammo.
I wonder what the royals use to properly describer her:
Her Royal Skankness?
Duchess Skank?
The Skank born on this day in 1978ish-1981ish?
I'd love to know. I'll ask Kate over Crack Babies.
I'm unsure whether Doria was in London/Windsor during April-May. I assumed that she did come over, if only to lend credence to the story that she was helping Meg get ready for the birth and to be on hand during the first few weeks of Archie's life. As the story went, she arrived in England before Easter . . .supposedly the birth was imminent. If Doria was really there as long as was claimed, it was 4 or 5 weeks before she returned home--a very long leave of absence from work for a new grandma, but then, I take the story that she's a licensed social worker with a full time job with a grain of salt. I do believe that she teaches yoga at a senior center and she'd gotten those classes covered.
Having allegedly just left the happy family in mid-May(ish), would she really have turned around less than 8 weeks later for another transatlantic flight, for a visit that was, what, a weekend? There was Granny Doria, in her pink dress and hat standing next to Charles in the christening photo . . . but never again was any mention made of her second visit to England in the space of 2 months, that she stayed again with the new family, etc. The times and movements of her visits across the Pond are, apart from the wedding, kept as top-secret as anything else to do with the Dum-Dums. I saw a photo of the 'security' Doria has supposedly hired due to her new celebrity status--most likely another staged PR plant--still, it is true that everyone would be interested in the travel plans of Meghan's mom. Her appearance is known . . not a single cell phone anywhere snapped a photo of her in an airport or being greeted by anyone on her arrival?
If she was there in May, I think both she and Meg changed their dresses after 'showing the baby to Her Majesty' and did the christening photo. Study D.'s face in that christening picture . . it doesn't say 'happy grandma, and look at me in a portrait at Windsor Castle!' to me.
Pleasing that Wills and Kate played a blinder today - cute children going to school, well-groomed parents beaming and supportive. Lovely photo op, perfectly executed.
And that's how it's done.
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2019/09/05/the-curse-of-the-shady-sussex-duo/
**********
Apparently the referendum under discussion by the voters of Sussex would only grant them the right of refusal to acknowledge the Sussex title within the county. That is to say, the title is bestowed at the pleasure of Her Majesty and would remain in force elsewhere, but in Sussex, the people could refuse to address them thusly. One wonders if they'd be so bold as to use "Half-wit" and "Murkletroid" instead, but maybe just drawing the line in the sand re. the title is bold enough for them.
Harry Markle found a real doofus looking photo of the two of them to illustrate her latest treatise. It's hard to recall auld lang syne but there was a time, as recently as 2011, when I thought Haz was cute. William was always the more handsome one, in more conventional terms, owing his looks to his mother's side and thank God for that . . .Harry looks more like his father and grandfather with a ginge je ne sais quoi all his own. The red hair has been a big part of the charm, but until about 18 months ago I would have called it a good-natured, life-affirming type of face. When I look at Harry now, I feel sick. I'd say a pod person has taken over his body, except maybe the genial, likeable Haz was the pod person and what we are seeing now is the real self?
Or the veddy posh version which might go something like,
"My husband and I declare GTF Away from Ourselves; We are not amused."
You know it's got to be bad when adult film star Koo Stark looks like she would have been an exemplary daughter-in-law compared to HRH . . I like 'Her Royal Ho-ness'. Fits better with the initials than Skank. Perhaps the people of Sussex wouldn't mind using HRHo-ness.
Leak that she is using 'Hollywood' sorts to manager 'her career', instead of all the courtiers and advisers that the taxpayer funds.
I too can't understand why the press hasn't snapped literally and figuratively yet. No photos of Farcechy, no leaks. Why? Is it out of respect for the Queen? When they travel the paps won't be as kind. If they travel anywhere except to a celebs compound that is.
So much bothers me about all of this and my respect for the firm is diminishing daily. I guess I thought they had more resources and power than they do. It's sad that the Queen, who has always had a spine and a deep commitment to crown and country, has not put a stop to this.
And yes, I know, they could be letting dumb and dumber hang themselves, but it truly will color the entire firm with some of the same brush.
I am going to agree with you both and hope this helps. My legs are just like MM's and I have been called "chicken legs" since HS. Doesn't bother me, but every time I saw a DM comment that called her that, I would think, oh lord I am so glad that I am not famous because that's what they'd call me too. Plus, it doesn't bother me that her legs are thin. For Kate, she should not be "off-limits" either, as I have hated some of her fashion choices, and I always thought she wore too much eyeliner (she has toned that down and looks so much better). I had terrible hyperemesis gravidarum with my third and fourth pregnancies and had to completely change my diet after pregnancy in order to prevent gall bladder issues. Could be the same with Kate, and I always get the, "you too skinny," from my relatives.
I will however comment on hair, clothes, make-up, anything that a person chooses (whether I like it or not) to do with their appearance that they have control over or have decided to alter (breast/butt/face implants, etc). The only time I think any of us have discussed MM's weight is that she looked more pregnant after birth, which we can all admit is very odd.
There’s yet another article in the DM... a throw under a bus type for Murky, Lime Sorbet mentioned it. 😛
I agree that they can't do the Fauxrchie died thing. I do not think that the BRF silence is covering for the dumbartons. I think it's led by plausible deniability and the BRFs knowledge that the dumbartons are cornered. There is a difference between letting the dumb-and-dumberbartons hang themselves and leaving the rest of the BRF with a safe escape, but I do believe the time is building. I don't think that this situation can be allowed to linger much longer. I want Prince Wills to be King Wills and I do think this is putting them all at risk. BUT I also know that they're a savvy and ruthless firm and Lord G pulls strings, so I keep the faith. For now.
They're lining her up to be Fergie mk.2, god knows she is making all the same mistakes.
Also, WHERE ON EARTH IS THIS KID? Where is he????
There's nothing we love more than a cute royal kid photo, it humanises the RF and cheers up everyone's mum/gran. William and Kate have done this well, releasing just enough that it isn't overkill, and keeping their kids lives relatively normal.
Either the child is not photogenic enough for Megz liking, or there isn't a kid. I can't believe I'm saying this, but if there really was a Ginger Jesus, this bird would be practically dangling him off a balcony like Michael Jackson to get her mug in the papers.
Word up: Those are notoriously unreliable and sourced from public records.
The good stuff requires deep background databases and while online is a good place to start, I would not hang my hat on any net worth numbers found that way. Some of them are laughably incorrect. Ditto with age and political parties. So the idea that one can pay $9.99 to find out Doria's net worth is absurd, sorry to say.
I don't for a second believe MeAgain snubbed the invite - there is no way she would refuse any chance to further the "The Queen is my BFF" narrative. I don't think they have been invited. MM tried to get around it by doing what she does - making the announcements through the media which then forces action - and maybe is now realizing she is on the fasttrack out of there.
I see the following happening _ MM and Haz will spin the line "Due to the need to give the fake baby a normal life,. we have decided to relocate to a bespoke LA mansion and renounce titles"
The will-she-wont-she articles were just articles commissioned to keep her in the news since she was on mat leave.
If you think about it, when this Balmoral discussion originally started back in June/July there wasn't actual news about her for a while. She had been on a leave for a while, noone knew what she had been up to, and the baby debacle was giving her a lot of negative press. So back then this was probably intended to be a positive bit inserted to make people think she was actually still very much the Queen's favorite, and the RF doesn't care about all the rumours and public sentiment about the christening etc. Most of us then we're of the opinion that it was leaked for that reason. She stayed in the news that way till Vogue happened. Meanwhile, since it was never true anyway, they didn't have to worry about it.
The latest might have been the palace at play. Everyday now an article is out with new eyerolling info given palace sources. Even BP is now officially making statements andsweri h questions re the SS, how new PR is being paid for and now this latest one about MM still consulting her old agent/lawyer to get her new gigs.
So the palace is now ready to play ball, it seems. And to be honest, they don't even have to make up stuff. They just have to give a little bit of truth away. Most of these things are turning out to be true anyway.
Also,Kate!! My my , the tan. And the hair! She is glowing since their Mustique holiday.
Quite believable that HnM tried to steal the spotlight. It was so predictable that most of us waiting to see what they would do.
A special pat on the back to BP for making the statement that MM has been engaging her old PR, agent , lawyer for future work prospects. And that she has already written the children's book but is looking for the right way to release it.
I think MM may have wanted to releasing an article alluding to that fact around Charlottes big day, but BP beat her to it and is now letting them roll in the shitpile of their own making.
Just imagine....
Hiding behind the doorway.
Joining her for breakfast.
Offering to wash the corgies.
Delivering her laundry.
The queen going for walk and Harry shows up and says Granny here's an avocado for you, we just got a Louis Vuitton bag full flown in from Florida, you'd love it, it's so divine.
Here Granny , Meg just made organic banana smushy for Archie wanna taste a bite?
...
(And by extension, Harry is her 'lanky hanky')
No, I think that they were not invited and the "markle is still hollywood" drop is the first of much to come. My two biggest questions: 1) Does Harry see what's about to happen to him? He's been used. He's the equivalent of yesterday's toilet paper to his skank of a (soon to be ex-) wife. 2) How the hell does that skank think her book will be 'such a success' after she abandoned one of her dogs, killed the other, and has just conned an entire family? I wish I could be that delusional.
Not sure how Meg and Archificial would fit into the concept, and the parallels with the Duke of Windsor's exile to the Bahamas would be heavy and obvious.
Might work if Meg had already flounced off to the US with Archificial, however.
https://www.marieclaire.com/culture/a28917351/royal-correspondents/
Only have time to scan it before work. Lacks structure and direction but Marie Claire have given a lot of space to it so worthy of note. Yet more M&H as a modern young couple who want to shape their own narrative stuff, but at the same time it's clear how royal reporters have been messed around. One thing - mentions some royal reporters have proper journalistic backgrounds. If that's the case, for God's sake start using them.
I don’t know who this Katie Hopkins person is but sounds like she is not well liked in Britain. Is that because she speaks the truth as she sees it (ie has unpopular opinions) or she’s just an attention seeker?
I think it’s sort of obvious. If it’s the Sussex’s, they would want to try sweeten and buffer negative stories about them. As for BP leaking stories, I would suggest it’s to discredit the Sussex’s, because if they have fallen foul of the men in grey suites, BP’s PR machine and even PoW office could be out to get them, but in a rather passive aggressive way.
That’s too big of an opportunity for her to miss out on.
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2019/09/05/the-curse-of-the-shady-sussex-duo/
Looks as if he's totally closed off, tremendously entitled, but at the same time dead inside. As if a light's been extinguished. Haven't been looking that closely recently (increasingly uninviting) so takes me aback, but I guess it's only what we're all seeing day by day, hour by hour. At this rate we'll be talking about his sinister personality change like his great namesake Henry VIII, only Harry hasn't got the excuse of a fully-armoured horse falling on top of him.
Wow. Just....wow.
This is the reason why Harry and MM might get away with all of their cr*p. And it is cr*p. He is clearly not very bright and most certainly complicit in all the shenanigans, whilst MM is clearly an actress/social climber who is out for all she can get.
But just because I don't go to the extremes that you do, and don't post loooong messages stating that you know this and that and that, and that this is the reason that MM wants this and Harry is thinking that, or you you hope this or that happens, then you think I'm some sort of spy. Wow. And you say MM is paranoid!
All I'm trying to do is introduce a bit more common sense into all this. Maybe don't attack them at length for every perceived slight. And the key word here is 'perceived.' E.g. Some on here seem to think Harry's suit and shoes were some sort of grave insult to the RF/the Nation/who knows.
Don't believe everything you hear as true. Case in point knowing for certain that MM was invited to Balmoral. How do we REALLY know. Or that we REALLY know that she turned it down. Or someone mentioning in the comments that Doria had $9million or some similar figure without stating your sources (in this case it was a youtube video. Great source).
Because if you keep doing stuff like that then it's very easy to be accused of spreading fake news and you will lose credibility whilst at the same time appearing a bit unhinged and very catty (I'm being polite). And that gives HH and MM all the excuse they need to say they are being bullied/hounded.
As I stated before, try and save it for the big stuff and for, you know, actual facts like taking lots of private flights whilst preaching at us to...stop flying. That's where you'll get them, not the bitchy trains of thought that these pages are full of.
They are clearly a rather unpleasant couple. Whether it's her who is driving it and him being a bit dim, or actually fully on board with it all then who knows.
And if you don't like what I'm saying then I'll refer you to Dirty Harry and his philosophy about opinions. Have a lovely weekend.
Speaking of which, I think it's odd that Meg hasn't been merching more recently. I realize she doesn't have many Royal events at the moment, but it seems like she could have called her pap friends to "spot" her wearing the up-and-coming (and paying) Canadian designer of the moment.
Hope MM doesn't have the Markle effect on Serena, because this looks like a final she might be able to win. Her opponent, Bianca Andreescu, is a 19-year-old Canadian who has never been ranked higher than 14th worldwide.
The writer of the Marie Claire story, K.J. Yossman, tweeted this a couple of days ago:
@KJYossman
Sep 3
I honestly just feel embarrassed for Prince Harry at this point. What is he thinking?
Oprah Magazine, for example, would certainly review the book without mentioning the dog story.
But writing about Meg in publications with a long lead time (Oprah's must be about 3 months from editorial approval to newsstand) is a tricky business.
I think a lot about those people making the third season of "The Windsors" TV series. When they started filming a month or two ago, they were still going with a positive view of Meg.
Not sure when it'll air, but a lot will have changed by then.
People can chitter chatter over what they like it, they can speculate, use their perception and knowledge and have opinions. People have conversations offline and online, and as long as it’s not causing anyone any harm, that’s fine.
The truth is out there somewhere, and maybe one day we’ll know what the truth is. This is a light hearted blog about the royals, and nothing more as I see it.
They thought the Vogue issue she guest edited would be a big success too.
This is a nice blog. We like Nutty, the topics and (the people who bring nice diversity of knowledge).
So, no one here is trying to find how close to the edge of how close can we come without getting it shut down on some legal plank. We aren't going for blood or how provocative can I be. That just isn't why any of us read this.
Not every blog is everyone's cup of tea. I don't read certain ones because they are so unpleasant about how they speak about person X or person Y.
@HappyDays I'll be cheering for Bianca as well
If the Sussexes were co-ordinating with Palace PR, they would have known that this was the perfect reason not to go to Balmoral.
HMTQ is busy, she'll be consulting with BoJo, we wanted to let her concentrate on state business, etc.
IMO it could have worked better for her had she donated some of her wardrobe from the past year to smartworks and just be done with it.
I also have a twisted theory about this collection :- A few months ago her Suits wardrobe was put on display at a museum/exhibition in US/Canada (the whole of Suits cast's wardrobe). Maybe she got to know about that and got jealous that they did it without her knowledge, or bringing her in on the idea. So she just thought she'll do her own collection.
Maybe his wife sat on him, with the makeup and hair extensions, post a roast chicken.
Really, Meg, do you think killing animals is just fine as long as the servants do it?
I wonder that she doesn't wear false teeth? Because she makes such odd, troglodyte movements with her jaw. I don't understand her. But she does fit my theory, based on quite a bit of firsthand observation, that persons with mental disorders often externalize their chaotic minds with uncoordination of their physical selves. Everything Megs does is awkward. It's a miracle that she does snap a good picture every once in a while. She's putting out one of herself taken over a year ago (the one seated in the blue dress) to 'thank fans for their birthday wishes'. Probably because she hasn't taken a flattering photograph since last June.
Her 14th PM is a doozy.
Seriously, though. Major filed a lawsuit against Brexit, and he's always been close to the Queen.
The gruesome violence against African immigrants there is really out of hand, and South African embassies in other African countries have been attacked. South Africa even had to close down its embassy in Nigeria for safety reasons.
So far the Western media has largely avoided writing about the violence, but if Meg and Harry show up it will be unavoidable.
That's bad, because South Africa gets a lot of income from US, European, and Asian tourism, and if it becomes known as an unsafe place, a lot of innocent South Africans could lose their livelihood.
Meg and Harry really need to stay h ome. This is a bigger issue than just the Sussex drama.
I think Meg's collection will feature the kind of fabric that gets little balls all over it the first time you wear it.
There will also be some basic black trousers that will stretch out in the rear end every time you sit down, and make you look like a saggy-pants comedian when you stand up again.
It's like they are deliberately doing thngs that are going to make them look bad. She is supposedly very keen on optics right, and she just keeps on sabotaging her own self with decisions like these.
I can understand taking care of a wee babe is tiring work (if there is one). I understand that for a woman who has spent the past 20 years building a career it's hard to sit at home taking care of a child. I also get that it's very very important to support your friends and celebrate their wins. But when the whole world is out to get you, when everyone is scrutinizing every breath you take, then it's essential to be as low key and non-scandalous no matter how much of a blessed woke feminist you are.
I have always thought they had a real baby. maybe via a surrogate, maybe a little earlier than they let on, but real nonetbeless. And today I am scratching my brain thinking maybe there is some credence to the rumours that there isn't a real live child.
This debacle makes me think of 'Winston' the doll that Jack Whitehall's dad, Michael, got in Thailand and now carries with him everywhere like his own son. That of course is hilarious. But we do have some Netflix precedence of an actual celebrity having a doll-baby. Lmao
I read an article about how millenials don't care if the marketing campaign is true, i.e. that the company follows through with their promises, just that it ticks off the right checkboxes of their values - sustainability, diversity, etc.
I'm in FL. We were glued to the TV watching hurricane Dorian. We were relieved the storm didn't hit Florida and horrified at the damage in the Bahamas.
If they did genuine work helping the people there, it could improve their images. She could wear jeans or her horrific fashion collection and leave her gowns and heels at home - unless she returned them already.
We have not seen Archie because Archie is not real. There is a real baby somewhere . . the one they borrowed for the photos at the christening and the presentation, but he doesn't live with them. Whether or not he is their genetic issue, they do not have him and will not. If they turn up at some point in the future showing off an entirely different baby, I would hope there would be an investigation. There's no birth certificate for Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor; leastways that public document has mysteriously never turned up. The baby we saw is real but he's got another legal name and lives with his birth mother. The Dumbartons are like modern day Macbeths--attempting to cover up their heinous fraud at the core of their marriage is destroying them, or rather they are destroying themselves.
Meg's swanning off to the tennis in another country with no thought to the optics of leaving her bebe because she's bored with the entire thing. Playing Mummy isn't as fun as she thought it would be after she got done playing on Instagram. This woman should never, never NEVER have a real baby. Sociopaths make terrible mothers.