Just a note to check in. The Sussexes have been so inactive recently that they've given me very little material, which isn't an entirely bad thing.
I've always said that my hopes and dreams for the Sussexes were not some kind of macabre violent end, but for a quiet fading away, so it would be hypocritcal of me to complain when they take some long-overdue time out of the spotlight.
A few Sussex notes from the past week:
➯ It's not clear where the Sussexes are currently located, and nobody seems particularly concerned where they are. The Sunshine Sachs PR money tap appears to have been turned off for the moment, so there are fewer articles about Meghan and even fewer commenters defending her in the Daily Mail.
➯ Talk about the upcoming Sussex "move to the US" has vanished entirely after Prince Andrew's defenestration.
Apparently it has dawned on the Sussexes that they are very likely candidates for the slimming down of the monarchy which Prince Charles has reportedly been discussing with Prince Philip at Sandringham.
Instead, Meghan supporters like Lainey Gossip are pushing the concept that the British Royal Family needs the Sussexes more than the Sussexes need the BRF in order to keep in touch with younger British citizens. This sounds....improbable.
➯ DripDrop, the Twitter account which along with TorontoPaper offers maybe-you-believe-it, maybe-you-don't inside info on Meghan Markle, is reporting that Prince Philip wrote a letter to be delivered to Prince Harry, but the letter was intercepted by Meghan.
Philip does like to write letters, particularly when angry - he wrote many of them to Diana, and some were published after her death - so that part of the story rings true. What was in the letter? DripDrop doesn't seem to know.
➯ Whomever is doing Prince William's PR deserves a knighthood. Casually showing off of his ability to speak Swahili while greeting a teenage Afro-British prizewinner made William look much more in touch with the continent and its people than Harry with his elephant patting and random moaning.
(It's also a nice change to see Black British citizens presented as heroes and movers and shakers --
instead of the charity cases they are often depicted as in Sussex projects.)
William (and his PR team) is also making good use of his time with the East Anglia Air Ambulance by announcing yet another initiative to address the mental health of first responders - news that dropped on the same day as yet another terror attack in London. (I don't believe that the two were timed to coincide, however - Royalty just doesn't move that fast.)
Meanwhile, the Cambridge PR team made sure everyone knew how Duchess Kate spent two days working in a maternity ward and joined a community midwife visit as part of her background research for her early childhood initiative.
Folks, this is how good publicity is done. If only the Sussexes would watch and learn - wherever they are.
I've always said that my hopes and dreams for the Sussexes were not some kind of macabre violent end, but for a quiet fading away, so it would be hypocritcal of me to complain when they take some long-overdue time out of the spotlight.
A few Sussex notes from the past week:
➯ It's not clear where the Sussexes are currently located, and nobody seems particularly concerned where they are. The Sunshine Sachs PR money tap appears to have been turned off for the moment, so there are fewer articles about Meghan and even fewer commenters defending her in the Daily Mail.
➯ Talk about the upcoming Sussex "move to the US" has vanished entirely after Prince Andrew's defenestration.
Apparently it has dawned on the Sussexes that they are very likely candidates for the slimming down of the monarchy which Prince Charles has reportedly been discussing with Prince Philip at Sandringham.
Instead, Meghan supporters like Lainey Gossip are pushing the concept that the British Royal Family needs the Sussexes more than the Sussexes need the BRF in order to keep in touch with younger British citizens. This sounds....improbable.
➯ DripDrop, the Twitter account which along with TorontoPaper offers maybe-you-believe-it, maybe-you-don't inside info on Meghan Markle, is reporting that Prince Philip wrote a letter to be delivered to Prince Harry, but the letter was intercepted by Meghan.
Philip does like to write letters, particularly when angry - he wrote many of them to Diana, and some were published after her death - so that part of the story rings true. What was in the letter? DripDrop doesn't seem to know.
➯ Whomever is doing Prince William's PR deserves a knighthood. Casually showing off of his ability to speak Swahili while greeting a teenage Afro-British prizewinner made William look much more in touch with the continent and its people than Harry with his elephant patting and random moaning.
(It's also a nice change to see Black British citizens presented as heroes and movers and shakers --
instead of the charity cases they are often depicted as in Sussex projects.)
William (and his PR team) is also making good use of his time with the East Anglia Air Ambulance by announcing yet another initiative to address the mental health of first responders - news that dropped on the same day as yet another terror attack in London. (I don't believe that the two were timed to coincide, however - Royalty just doesn't move that fast.)
Meanwhile, the Cambridge PR team made sure everyone knew how Duchess Kate spent two days working in a maternity ward and joined a community midwife visit as part of her background research for her early childhood initiative.
Folks, this is how good publicity is done. If only the Sussexes would watch and learn - wherever they are.
Comments
@CatEyes, Hahaha! Two few reasons we like her! Hahaha! What a tea-spitter!
This could be my favorite blog of them all, I seriously think someone should compile these and try to get it published as an article in one of the rags = Nutty??? You're the writer/editor extraordinaire... If for no other reason than in rebuttal to those who cry bully and in defense of so many people calling her out for being such a major twat. Might be worth a buck or two too, which we could then donate to the "lonely, hungry and homeless" in Meghan's name since apparently she forgot to.
Want to share one of my other handles with you all, the one that isn't fully banned yet on DM, because they've posted three of my comments today (to my utter shock). It is "braindrops". Here are two of the three of my replies to a top-ish comment on the Twelve Days of Markle article, thought some of you might get a chuckle.
In other news, where is Archie? They've marched out the Corgis at Frogmore Cottage to search for the ever-elusive 'seven-month old' baby who hasn't been seen in the UK for nearly five months when he appeared to be four months old. Speculation that they've all fallen victim to carnivorous toads abounds, because his parents haven't ever been seen living there and there are no photos of them coming or going. "It is quite a mystery," said an unnamed royal source holding Harry's empty collar and leash, "but we believe cloaks of invisibility could be involved." Meanwhile, as their spirits continue to boast and tell us all how we should act, the Corgis have located Meghan's humility which had been hiding under a lily pad for nearly three years."
Then right under it: "Correction: We meant croaks of invisibility, not cloaks. We apologize if this error has caused any undue ribbiting."
Can't believe they posted!
I’m really sorry if I’ve upset you, it wasn’t my intention to do that. I’m from the U.K. and have read a lot about the Royals too, and from what I’ve recently read it seems to have been just speculation that the government were considering skipping over Bertie, he definitely didn’t want The job himself.
Wiki says this
Across Britain gossip spread that Albert was physically and psychologically incapable of handling the kingship. He worried about that himself. No evidence has been found to support the rumour that the government considered bypassing him in favour of his scandal-ridden younger brother George.
Anyway sorry for the derailment, back on topic now!
Just remembered another Markle blunder for the list: "They don't make it easy".
Can’t forget her yucky fake eyelash glue picture! Ewwwww, yuk!!!!!
I'm kind of thinking the Yak got mange! Or else her 'crotch rot' problem migrated up (if you have seen photos of her scratching her privates in public..YUK!!)
@Mimi and @Lemonfrog, moth eaten Himalayan yak hair! Hahahaha!
Thank you for remembering and giving me credit...lol I'm feeling a bit feisty, maybe I should drop in at Lipstick Alley and throw that phrase out and cause some post-thanksgiving heartburn among the Meganmaniacs. I might break the internet with their sure-to-be 'downvotes. LOL
You ARE BRAVE!!!! ! !!😅
Crabs...that IS Exactly what I thought. There are at least two photos of her scratching her pubic region. What woman does that? One pic was her at the Jamaican wedding and another was after her marriage to Harry.
My Dad was a physician and he came home one day and griped (and I overheard it) that all he saw was people with 'the drip' or 'crotch rot'. I was horrified! Later I met a man who claimed his case of crabs was due to him borrowing a coworker's jacket at work. Right!
With her history she might of had both maladies. lol
I survived 40 years of being married to a malignant narcissist. He died 3 years ago. At first I thought after an episode he'd change, and I didn't know anything about NPD for years and years. He would change for awhile, but out of nowhere have an episode and over the years they became more frequent. So if you want to leave, fine, but do NOT ever ever let him know you're plans to leave. Do not confront or threaten that you're leaving. That can get you killed. For real! Confronting an NPD directly is as nuts as trying to argue with a drunk or like bringing a knife to a gunfight. Don't do it. Get some real help on how to leave from a professional who has experience with helping women ghost an NPD. In the meantime, watch Sleeping With the Enemy over and over along with learning how to cope/act without raising any suspicion. When an NPD finds out they've lost their control over you, that's when things get violent and very ugly for you, your kids and all of your friends, if you have any left. Usually wives of NPD's have given up on having any friends. So many people believe that an NPD just needs counseling or therapy, but sorry. No. There is no therapy for NPD. It's an incurable disorder. Period! And yes, Tudor's blog is very helpful.
Megs is an obvious NPD and the royals are finally understanding what NPD is. With all of the education that William and Kate are getting about mental health, it's obvious they are both onto her and are taking direction on how to handle her sick behavior. Unfortunately, it's clearly taking a toll on Harry and over time it will adversely affect the baby. Harry has low self esteem and isn't very emotionally mature to begin with, so he is already suffering and will continue to until he makes a clean break from this hydra wife.
Oh I know, you can buy over-the-conter meds to treat it all except maybe 'the clap'as my Dad would say.
Now you did it...your challenge was taken and acted upon. I might be tracked down and have my old farmhouse firebombed by sugars. I specifically wrote that Megs crossing her legs in that short dress could make us "see all the way to South Central LA". lol
This could have been an opportunity for Meg, who is championed by Archbishop Welby and her unnamed friends as being deeply religious and connected to God, to encourage people to use Advent leading up to Christmas as a quiet time to reflect and think of others in the spirit of the CoE, and then to celebrate the Twelve Days of Christmas.
Welcome back, Nutty, and thanks again for the post, particularly the point with William celebrating the achievement of blacks, instead of as victims to be great photo op props. I agree quite a bit that the Cambridges are turning their talk on mental health into real actions based on their actual expertise they are trying to build, instead of these fluffy, nebulous Instagrammable thoughts that jump on the hottest bandwagon. Early childhood care and first responder mental health may not be as sexy as climate change talks with billionaires on yachts or rubbing elbows with Oprah on a platform like Apple, but I wonder at the end of the day, who has the most concrete positive impact over the next decades?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.yahoo.com/amphtml/lifestyle/look-back-meghan-markles-best-172253479.html
Tacky, tacky, tacky every time she steps put.
@Marie
My poem had nothing to do with the Epiphany. Clearly it was a spoof on the '12 days of Christmas'.a poster referenced.
And 'anyone with a brain' can see both of us were joking.
I am a Catholic in the US and I do reverentially celebrate the Epiphany.
- Merching Archie's outfit when he met Bishop Tutu on the H&M website
- Talking through the national anthem on the Buckingham Palace balcony
Don't feel sorry, as I am a tough Texan!
Oh I just checked and unbelievably I have gotten 'two laugh votes' already but I am bracing for the hate that is sure to come my way. *smirk*
I also threw in the Yak hair comment as a question; why doesn't she wear her hair natural instead of YH? I don't think it will take long, maybe tomorrow, I don't know how I will see the CB posters comment on my remark. I am not used to that site.
Of course there was never any choice in the matter. It's the succession (which is why I worry so much about the Cambridges travelling together). But those letters and diaries reflect this ongoing assessment of all the brothers, I think simply because everyone was focusing on the qualities needed for a good king. Edward VIII had worried them so much as Prince of Wales and then King. While they were busy identifying his failings and character traits, it was natural to consider all the brothers in this way.
They also didn't know Bertie would be able to continue to be king. He could have collapsed and not been able to cope. Very easily. Then they may have needed some kind of regency. My father remembers discussions at the time, among his own family and community, where people actually believed he had a mental disability because of his stutter. That he was simply unfit and couldn't be king.
George VI is my favourite monarch. When I was suffering daily panic attacks many years ago and struggling to commute to London as crowded trains set me off, I relied on reading about him. He kept going despite feeling the pressures so much and always did his best. This is why I think he was the ideal king for WWII. People had to cope with nightly raids but go to work every day. They had to learn new skills whether they wanted to or not. He was a wonderful example of a man pushing himself beyond his boundaries and thinking of other people and his country rather than himself. A lesson there for some modern royals.
And another cre\ass move was given sick hoa]spitilized kids the leftover flowers from her NYC baby shower. I can't believe how awful it is that with all her money she has to give second'hand items or things that would be thrown in the trash (such as the flowers).
Here's one that may not be true, Her and Harry giving out instructions to Frogmore neighbors a list of rules to follow in case they encounter the anointed ones!.
Allowing the Black Clergyman to hijack the sermon at her wedding to discuss slavery. I know some might find it admirable but from the looks of the attendees, they seemed in shock or about to laugh. It reminded me of the to time when my husband turned and looked at me when some people started speaking in tongues at a Christian service some friends invited us to. He nudged me to 'get out of there'..and I sussed him and explained what was going on, thereby preventing a massive 6'4" man torpedoing thru a huge throng for the exit.
Agreed she should not have married him (because she has proved to be totally unSUITED to the job), however, if smarmy Meg had not married him she would not be THE Duchess married to THE Duke who she calls H!
I am positive part of her plan is to retain the Duchess title even if the marriage does not last.
The aspect that I just don't understand is how she has bucked protocol and dissed the British public and BRF from the beginning. She could have made life so much easier for herself if she had played along.
Thank you for the info on George VI who rose to the occasion and make such a profound commitment despite the challenges. Kudos to you to tap into that inspiration for yourself. If only more people had your gumption instead of making excuses for themselves.
Your info on the King has sparked an interest in reading more on him and as an American, I do not have any depth of knowledge and only have come lately to have a fervent interest in the BRF and royalty in general (I find the Swedish.& Norwegian family of interest also)
Meg also asked the hosts to give the leftover cakes from a tea party to the children waiting outside the venue. This was either on tour or a walkabout.
Yes, I remember that, how sad! She couldn't even fork over a little change to buy them cupcakes. Oh wait, she could have baked some of her delicious banana bread she brags about.
It really rankles me that we do not see any tangible evidence of Harry/Meghan parting with some of their money toward the poor, the disenfranchised the oppressed. Look at the needs in Africa where Harry supposedly has his heart. Meghan goes down there and acts like an ugly American, the fauxmanitarian that she is. Supposedly charging $50,000 per person to meet with her in private and making the AIDS mothers sit on the floor (I would have been insulted and it is not even my culture).
Diana had a genuine friendship with Mother Teresa (now canonized) and visited the communities of the Sisters of Poor founded by the saint. She corresponded with MT. Meghan friends just blow smoke to inflate the vapid celebrity status of Megs.
I believe the undoing of Harry/Megs will be the Sussex Foundation and how monies are handled (or I should say mishandled). I'm thinking that it was registered in the US to escape British law and oversight.
Using vulnerable people to show what a "humanitarian" she is is what Megs does best. Not giving from the heart rather she gives for the camera.
The proferred gift of the 10,000-acre estate was an absolute once in a lifetime treasure that would probably have no equal ever. It could of been a stunning unparalleled success if handled right. Heck, they could have hired many talented people to create and manage such a wonderful acquisition, but no, the Harkles couldn't be bothered; I suspect they are lazy or impotent due to problems whether marital discord or substance abuse. They would rather chase after a Hollweird style lifestyle flitting here and there hobnobbing with celebrities for fun and pontificating for mere minutes at events with no cohesive purpose, just throwing out plagiarized quotes and 'do as I say not as I do' platitudes.
If I was William I would have been envious to hear Charles was going to gift his brother and the newly married wife an estate worthy of a King. I know about Charles's interest in heritage breed sheep etc. and the Harkles could have raised the wildly expensive Valais Blacknose sheep (in America 1 sells for approx. $8,000 each). They are so cute they look like a child's cuddly stuffed toy. Like the Nutty poster here wrote there could have been so many opportunities to make their mark on the world by having such a grand start to build one's dreams on. They truly are DUMBartons,; the Queen got that right.
I use the date and time stamp of where I left off.
I think it is the Queen I feel sorriest for this year. I have always admired and respected her. After a lifetime of impeccable service, she has to put up with the Harkles' disrespectful shenanigans and all the revelation of PA's awful behavior. She must be heartsick.
Am I missing something (it has been known to happen and I can admit it).
So I'm casually looking at the 12 days of charity giving.
Um, are any of these supposed to be charities they are chairs for or does protocol say that the work done for them during the rest of the year is enough and now shine a light on others? I can admit that I don't know how it is done over there?
My other um, is ... aren't the charities supposed to be supporting UK needs?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=662&v=5e7ZKNcEx90&feature=emb_logo
Really makes me give a lot of thought to the PA connection to her. I warn you - it's a bit of a fall down the rabbit hole but that woman and her family (father/2 sisters) are really in to a lot of things. They are a group i would want to stay far away from.
Maybe @lizzie said it best >>To me, the shower flower donation might not have been so bad had the company paid to distribute the used flowers not published photographs of some of the recipients with the flowers. (I believe bouquets given to royals at events and on walk-abouts are typically donated too but have we EVER seen a photo of a recipient? I sincerely doubt it.) And if it hadn't been reported by Gayle King (I think) the shower donation came about quite spontaneously when M said "I have an idea...." <<
The events you mentioned probably had nice professionally designed arrangements, and most likely more abundant in quantity. While I understood that this handful of women just got some flowers and were using it as a craft project at the party, like Meghan saying "Hey girls since we can't do gender reveal games since its going to be a boy and we can't smoke weed as the RPO's will report it to the Firm, we gotta kill time since you and I really aren't all good enough friends to talk for more than 15 minutes so I have an idea, let's play around and do some flower arrangements", I bet they were a few amateurist bougets Just like Meghan, probably a half-ass effort that she thinks will have a WoW o WoW
effect on the world(since she announced it for maximum attention.
Admittedly she had another epic "Annus horribilus' what with what you mentioned and the fallout isn't over yet. Also, PP had his car accident earlier in the year. Some trusted staff left and her adoring public is very vocally upset.
I admire and respect her very much even tho I'm an American. I hope she continues to reign (for many more years) until her death as she vowed to do. There is no reason for Charles to become regent at this point. No one in a position of authority has said she should relinquish the throne. May her health remain good, and God Save the Queen!
What is laughable is thinking we have anyone in America we can tolerate as President even 8 years much less 63+ years!
@Mimi, re: why the brothers grew up that way - I would say they had very remote parents but that was the norm for their class then. George VI had a sadistic nanny who used to hurt him just before he saw his parents each day so he would be upset and annoy them. She also deliberately ruined his digestive system, permanently.
In a wider sense, I think the entire BRF was and remains completely dysfunctional. The Cambridge and Wessex children seem fine, but they will be exposed to all kinds of things that could be a problem later on. Look what it did to a weak, indulged character like Prince Andrew. You'd need to be pretty exceptional to withstand that fatal softness and privilege. I think William is beginning to do that now.
Despite William, I'm also wondering if it's going to be possible to keep the BRF far into this century. Things like Kate going to be on a Christmas programme with Mary Berry. I know they need to do stuff like that now, but each time it happens something is lost. Yet they can't be remote and inaccessible like traditional royals. There's no solution. Apart from perhaps keeping up with bread-and-butter charity work and walkabouts but no more. Charles II did wonders for his popularity by strolling through St James' Park among his subjects. He was seen, but he preserved that psychological separation that's necessary for monarchy. If they're just like us, why should we give them our money to live better than we do?
Thank you for the reading tip.
Correct me if I'm wrong but in times past (centuries ago) the subjects also frequently had their livelihood dependent on the Kings and Lords and moving forward wasn't there still a physiological connection. Now the people are lords of their own manor so-to-speak for good or ill. People dependent on the state for welfare benefits are tied to the bigger authority, the Government. In fact, the optics of a select few by birth to live such extravagant lives must be hard for many to stomach especially when the likes of Harry/Megs whine and complain.
One large exception is the leaseholders of lands belonging to the Duchy which Charles manages. That seems to be a success from what I saw in its recent documentary, but still it is fairly modern, a landlord/tenant relationship more 21 century rather than 16th century.
>>In a wider sense, I think the entire BRF was and remains completely dysfunctional. The Cambridge and Wessex children seem fine, but they will be exposed to all kinds of things that could be a problem later on. Look what it did to a weak, indulged character like Prince Andrew. You'd need to be pretty exceptional to withstand that fatal softness and privilege. I think William is beginning to do that now.<,
Wasn't Charles also very indulged by the Queen Mother and some write that it had its untoward effect too? I wonder if that didn't play into him thinking he 'could have his cake and eat it too' with respect to marrying poor Diana for a proper propagation of his lineage and then turning to Camilla for his hedonistic love needs.
What do you mean about 'William is beginning to do that now'? You mean spoiling his children?
https://blindgossip.com/siccing-the-legal-hounds/#more-99614
So yes, I was only referring to Meghan. There I am considerably less polite. I myself am not particularly religious, so her Intagram post shouldn't be so annoying but yet it is.
Ok, thanks for the explantion, Your comment had quite unfortunate timing and relevancy to ours.
Part of it, however, is not completely the actions of the rogue family members. Part of it is really due to public tastes, this need to imagine how one can be chummy with a public figure. This is part of why Harry is/was? more popular than William, despite clearly lacking in leadership skills. This is not showing my support for Boris Johnson, or wanting to say anything political, but I did find myself nodding in agreement when he recently mentioned how preposterous he thought asking about relatability for the role of PM was. Relatability is separate from being kind or empathetic.
The notion of 'working' royals taking extended 'family time' during what is traditionally one of the busier (again, relatively speaking!) times of the year for royals was odd from the start. Did they choose it themselves or was it forced upon them? At first I thought the former. However, given that 2 weeks in and we've had no pap walks and only a few fairly inoffensive Instagram posts, I'm starting to wonder. Thanksgiving has been and gone and just one low key post - no soup kitchens, no happy family pics with Doria, no dangling baby Archie limbs. I wonder if, esp after the Prince Andrew fiasco, they have basically been put on notice? The public is tired of useless royals and while these two aren't on the Andrew level for sheer awfulness, their shenanigans are hardly a good advertisement for the royal family at this delicate time.
But I guess only time will tell. Maybe they have taken the advice any of us could have given them for free - no need for pricey SS - and decided to aly low before coming back and accepting the often rather unexciting life of mid-level royals. Or... could be the calm before the storm, and we'll soon see the 'build-up' to the long-promised Oprah 'documentary' or some other silliness. We shall see!
"Did they choose it themselves or was it forced upon them? At first I thought the former. However, given that 2 weeks in and we've had no pap walks and only a few fairly inoffensive Instagram posts, I'm starting to wonder"
I agree. It is just too quiet for my liking...(well, so to speak!) As you say, Thanksgiving has come and gone without a whiff of self promotion.
I find it odd.
“With the festive holiday season upon us, it’s also a reminder to reflect on those in need – those who may feel lonely, hungry, homeless, or may be experiencing the holidays for the first time without loved ones. It’s an important time of year to help those around you who may be less fortunate, or who would appreciate even the smallest act of kindness."
The hypocrisy of this pair is astounding. I wonder how Markle's father and two very elderly and frail uncles feel about that.
As an aside, it's obvious Meghan herself wrote that post. Not only is it characteristically word saladish, nobody in Britain refers to Christmas as 'the holidays'.
From the Harkle's latest Instagram offering...
“With the festive holiday season upon us, it’s also a reminder to reflect on those in need – those who may feel lonely, hungry, homeless, or may be experiencing the holidays for the first time without loved ones. It’s an important time of year to help those around you who may be less fortunate, or who would appreciate even the smallest act of kindness."
The hypocrisy of this pair is astounding. I wonder how Markle's father and two very elderly and frail uncles feel about that.
Yeah, what have they done for anybody lately! How about ghosting their very elderly ahd ill grandparents? (Although I'm pretty sure grandparents told the butler to have security firmly escort them out if they did show.)
On Dec 25, Google US goes a bit further and wishes everyone “happy winter global festivals.”
On Dec 25, Google US goes a bit further and wishes everyone “happy winter global festivals.”
Which in the US is seen as highly offensive by the vast majority. I really, really hate Google.
Because heaven forbid we offend anyone. :) With the work that I do, I come in to contact with a lot of different cultures. The vast majority are Muslim, and they have never shied away from wishing me a Merry Christmas. I know their holidays, and wish them good tidings during Ramadan, Eid-ul-Adha or Eid ul-Fitr (Hope I got those right). I think we are so concerned about offending people, we lose sight of the fact that we do have different beliefs, but can all still live in harmony (and not be offended!)
@Swampwoman, I am not a big fan of Google either. Sadly, I have to use them.
I really wish the DM had not ran this piece - as a day without MM is a day of sunshine.
That said - happy Monday everyone!
On another note, when is anyone going to give MM the absolute top drawer rinsing she deserves for blatantly stealing other people's quotes?
I find "Winter Global Festivals" ridiculous!
"CB has an article today raking Kate over the coals, as usual, for "secretly" working on a project. In Kate's case they have a coronary but MM works in secret all the time and they fawn over her for it"
Plus it wasn't really 'secret'. It's on the CC. It just wasn't announced to the press at the time, for obvious reasons.
And did you see the piece about Will and Kate's upcoming Xmas special with Mary Berry? Tons of sniping about how it's so 'boring', 'why aren't they supporting 'woke' causes', 'if Meghan did this....', ' 'they're so lazy and unoriginal' etc. In fact, the Mary Berry thing is a genius idea for these troubled times for the royals - very Christmassy, very upbeat,very English, a little bit twee but hey, who cares when it's Christmas and you've got national treasure Mary Berry? They really have it in for Kate big time. And that demented 'notasugarhere' of course had to pitch in with her nasty comments. I have no problem gossipping about any public figure, incl the Cambridges, but she is just deeply unpleasant.
https://fullbananabouquet-posts.tumblr.com/
scroll down and look at new info on Soho House and photo's i haven't seen before from "those days".
Can't stand her and her special brand of hypocrisy. Disgusted at Harry he goes along with that.
Interesting r.e. the Xmas special with Mary Berry.
Again it's hard to know who is who but to the Brits that seems like a great idea as they know just the right level (well, roughly!) that the Royals should be pitched at.
To those who aren't Brits the idea of Mary Berry probably would sound 'boring' but that's because they just don't get the rather delicate and nuanced position that the RF hold in our society. Which is why a criticism of MM for getting involved in things beyond her remit is seen as racism or anti-American. They just don't get that difference between celebs and the RF. And to be honest, after the experience I had on another chat room then I very much want MM out of the RF sharpish as it appears that we have to toe the line on American sensibilities and cultural norms when British people discuss her using British terms whilst in Britain!
Screw that, I'm done with it all and I'm done with MM and her ignorant American followers who sadly conform to the stereotype of trying to bulldoze everyone in their path to conform to their way of thinking.
Of course, my apologies to the people on here who are American and who do understand how and why the RF fits into our society over here. This is in no way aimed at you and I am a huge fan of the USA, have lived there for a few years and visit a lot. Great country and great people. Mostly!
He accomplished nothing good this past year. He needs to think hard about everything that’s gone on that has added greatly to her majesty’s
troubles. I would like to see him repent for the harm he has caused, repair his relationships with his family and rethink spending Christmas at Sandringham.
How he will accomplish this remains to be seen as he seems to not be thinking clearly due to the influence of his wife and/or drugs, alcohol, abuse of prescription meds, his own mental issues, or a combination of these. He would have to adopt a very firm stance with his wife as she would not want any part of his plan to change and reconcile with his family, in which case he will have to go it alone and then of course all hell would break loose between him and her.
I predict he is in this hell he has created with her and does not know how to get out of it so he will do nothing. Just continue with business as usual. Too bad, because I am sure his family would forgive him and support any and everything he does to make positive changes in his life even if that includes admitting he made a mistake in his choice of wife.
Exactly. Royals aren't meant to be movers and shakers. They're MEANT to be a little bit dull and a little bit bland. They are a link with tradition and symbols of national unity - at least in theory. Now more than ever, with the country so divided and the reputation of the royal family at its lowest ebb since the death of Diana, it's even more crucial that the royals are perceived (whatever the reality) as being humble, decent and representing the country with dignity and respect. William and Kate are basically doing this pretty much all by themselves right now, and while I've been critical of them in the past, they - and/or whoever is handing their PR - are doing a fine job of it. The Mary Berry Xmas special fits into all of this quite perfectly. The CB and other woke American numpties simply do not get this.
Also makes me laugh when they bang on about how little W&K 'work'. Never mind the hypocrisy over their golden couple taking an extended 'family time' from their paltry duties, nobody I know in Britain knows or cares about how much individual royals 'work'. They don't know what the Court Circular is, nor do they care. They only care that the royals go about their duties respectfully when they're in public, and other than that we don't much care to see OR hear from them. The Cambridges manage that. The Harkles? Not so much.
Yes, I found "winter global festivals" enraging as well. I also have Muslim friends and they tell me that "Merry Christmas" doesn't offend them at all, just like "Happy Eid" wouldn't offend me. It's, again, the woke white types who work at Google who go waaaaay too far.
I see that someone has gone through the charities named in the Sussex Instagram post and noted that only two are based in the UK. Is Meg out of her mind? She's really got to start thinking about who pays her bills.
It would be fascinating to know how Charles' plans for slimming the monarchy are going.
There are some great Nutty contributors, may it continue! ;o)
That is one of the things I dislike most about her,the implication that we all had to learn about race relations from her. I think it is widely acknowledged that the UK (and England in particular) is decades ahead of the rest of Europe in its integration of various groups. I believe this still holds true even in the face of Brexit and dealing with terrorist atrocities.
:)
@bootsy
I would love to see a Christmas special with Will/Kate and especially because of the probable UK spin on it. As an American, I long for traditional Christmas programming which is getting harder to find here, unless it is sappy Hallmark Holiday romance stories. I just hope I can tune in but maybe it will be on YouTube
It took reading about the Meghan debacle that has awakened my interest in all things UK (with half of my heritage arising from Wales, Scotland and Great Britain It took something bad to turn it into something good for me, and I am very grateful for all that you Nutties write and often I pursue reading historical articles about the Royal family and England. I knew of Prince Charles's efforts at raising heritage breeds and in particular, the sheep raised on Duchy lands. I'm so inspired that when I start up a sheep flock again I want to raise one of the UK wool breeds this time.
@Liver bird
Your criticism of Meghan regarding her so-called conversion to COE is spot-on; I find it worse than laughable (as a Christian I hate to be negative about another's faith). In all these many, many weeks since her alleged baptism, we have only seen Meghan at the obligatory Christmas attendance with the family last season and maybe 1 other time (for relative's christening I believe). I don't know if she even had her son's christening since photos weren't taken at Church. Prince Andrew can say he goes to Christian services more than she; maybe he should be 'horrified' of her behavior. The Queen regularly,perhaps even weekly, attends Church. So Meghan has a worse record than a 'Convenience Christian', one who only goes when it is convenient
Since Meghan loves to plagiarize quotes, it would be nice if she would take some inspiring and uplifting quotes from the Bible. But I think her brand of *wokeness* does not allow her to show her Christianity. Her friends (and Welby has jumped on the bandwagon) talk about how devout she is, but is it being'spiritual' with yoga and not really being religious? I wonder if she just became a baptized COE to seal the deal with Harry?. To be a hypocrite with your professed religion is the worse kind hypocrisy, worse than say, her 'vegan hypocrisy' IMO.
As for Andrew, I think one of the most sickening images was him heading to church with the Queen just after JE's demise. If I had been the minister at Crathie Kirk that day, l would have turned him away at the door. I don't know how eitherof them has the audacity to set foot in any place of worship.
Absolutely. It comes to something when you feel the need to have to defend your own culture etc to other foreign nationals when you’re in your own country. We haven’t committed any crimes for wanting to preserve what we have left of our language and culture, it doesn’t imply anything else.
Reading some of the DM comments regarding the Americanisms used on the Sussex’s IG was illuminating and mind boggling to say the least. Whilst most commenters understood the insult in using ‘holidays’ instead of Christmas, others said ‘Get a life, she’s American so she can use Americanisms!’ In that case they need to employ someone British to write their stupid pointless IG posts!
I’m surprised that the Sussex’s IG account hasn’t been shut down, or in the very least curtailed.
Yes. I found her very convincing. She did have some inconsistencies in her story but that's to be expected, given the passage of time and the traumatic nature of the events. Nothing as bad as saying she couldn't have been there because she was enjoying the famed dough balls at Pizza Express in Woking however.
I’m sure it will uploaded to YouTube, or you might be able to download/stream it from another source online. I’m a huge fan of Mary Berry and so will watch the special when it’s on.
I saw most of it, that hole just gets bigger and deeper for Prince Andrew doesn’t it?
I have to say that I am somewhat conflicted about all of this stuff. As the main victim said in the program, and it's a fair point, she may have got some of the exact dates wrong but you don't forget what was done to you. As I said, fair enough.
What is shaky is what the levels of coercion/forced slavery actually were. As I believe someone else has pointed out, these girls were flying all over the world and attending glamorous parties (there were photos of Victoria Roberts with Epstein at Naomi Campbell's bday published in the DM a few months ago).
What I did see which looks bad for PA once again is that Ghislaine Maxwell was described as being the madam who ran the girls. And that she was extremely cruel. And after all that it cuts to PA saying how he had seen her recently (June/July?) and when pressend by the interviewer, claimed that they had not even discussed Epstein when they had last met. Because 'he was no longer in the news' or something ridiculous like that.
So he's good mates with a potential monster(s) and then talks blatant rubbish/lies about their last meeting. An awful man with no moral compass who at the very best has taken advantage of willing young women. And that's the best case scenario.
The 'sweating' thing was just asking to be mocked. Is he really that stupid? Yes he is. Intelligence doesn't run in that family, does it? His nephew Harry is also thick as two short planks.
@Raspberry
Yes, I didn't think it could get much worse after the fiasco which was the Newsnight interview, but it just has. And with stories coming out about his financial skullduggery I don't think we've seen the worst yet. Not near.
They were teenagers - often from very damaged backgrounds - being sexually abused. Who cares about the 'glamorous parties' where they were passed around among disgusting men?
It was extremely cringeworthy. I could barely sit through it, I watched in bite sized pieces. He’s a pompous arrogant man, and that interview will haunt him (and the RF) for the rest of his life.
I know this is where I think there's a real grey area. 17/18 year olds are not kids and they're not adults, although by law (in many cases) they are adults. I think my unease is around the language being used to convey a complete lack of agency on their part as if they are being held in a dungeon/in a jail against their will. I worry that this is where their legal claims will run into some trouble.
And in many cases they weren't 'in jail', they were physically free to go when they wanted. I should add that some have said they were practically prisoners on his island and that is of course totally different.
The way that Virginia Roberts describes things is using the language and imagery of being captive and that just isn't the case 'technically.' Of course there would be the issue of mental coercion and that is fair enough. But they weren't being physically held against their will in jail cells. I suppose it's the same sort of mind control used on people who are in cults. Some people are easily programmed but as legal adults (in some cases) this is where all of this gets very murky.
And to get technical and off topic, can a 50 year old man legally have sex with an 18 year old? Or a 17 year old? Is that punishable with a jail sentence?
Using Virginia Roberts at Naomi Campbell's party, she can't say she was being held captive. She can say she's been mentally coerced. But then how do you go about showing what form of coercion isn't acceptable?
How about this scenario, she's at the party with a wealthy and handsome 35 year old multimillionaire who takes her all over the world. Is that disgusting if she's 17? What about if she's 18? Or if he's 40?
It's hard to convey what I'm trying to say, I do think that Epstein/PA and Maxwell are total sickos. There's just elements of the language being used that I think is being a bit loose and I wonder whether it will hold up in a strictly legal sense. And even that doesn't sound like what I'm trying to get across because I know that the people involved are horrible people!
>>They were teenagers - often from very damaged backgrounds - being sexually abused.<<
That may be true or they may not be. Both girls and boys from all backgrounds are having sex at quite ever-increasing younger ages, even preteens!! It isn't uncommon for them to have sex for frivolous reasons. I can see how some would trade sex exotic trips, a-lister parties, fabulous spending money and even just a pair of expensive shoes or clothes. I think as a society we have failed young people in more ways than just being condemning of Andrew allegedly having sex with a 17-year-old. Why isn't there outrage at the parents who created the supposed abusive homes or in the case where the parents didn't care or maybe even profit from their daughter's escapades (much like young men selling drugs and breaking off some profit to granny or mama)? People are giving their teenagers a 'high five' if they remember to use a condom.
I am in no way condoning what happened here. In my eyes, there can't be any crime worse than sexual assault, especially of the young (as a young adult rape victim I know) except maybe murder, Without sounding like the morality police, I think as adults we should do a better job of instilling worthy values in our homes and schools and society at large. With cases like Andrew, it should start a conversation about not just him but how sexual assault rates have skyrocketed. Look at the filth on TV, the movies and how pornography addiction has risen (esp. among women)
This shouldn't just be a focus on Andrew when worldwide the incidence of sex trafficking is astronomical. There are actually more slaves in existence now than at any time in the 16th-19th century, and the majority of the victims are girls and young women. Yet by and large no one talks about it and even less care. Remarkably Andrew's daughter, Eugenie is involved with efforts to focus on this scourge (I wonder if that is twisting a knife in his back, *grin). But maybe Andrew's predicament will jump-start a dialogue among people about the bigger problem not just in the US, but in probably most every country on earth, big cities, small towns and I dare say it will get worse before if, a big if, it ever gets better. Look at the millions of Chinese men who do not have a potential marriage partner due to decades of 1 child policy and sex selection (including infanticide) and now women are being smuggled in (head smack!), and yet many Chinese illegally emigrate out for commercial sex purposes. So much needs to be done to stop the victimization and if it takes stating with talking about Andrew good, even better is if G. Maxwell is found and prosecuted.
What is missing in our cultures is morality though. Our children are being taught that there are no reasons to have morals anymore, along with being raised to seldom if ever suffer any consequences for bad or criminal behavior until it's too late and they find themselves with STD's or locked up in juvenile detention. Very sad. I'm at a loss to know what can be done to prevent.
What's sick about China is they knew, they knew from their population projections that there would be a terrible shortage of girls. But they did it anyway.
Virginia is certainly getting a lot of uncritical attention, but even if her and PA did have one to three sexual encounters, she just does not have enough evidence that can be tested in court to accuse him of doing anything illegal. Maybe that is why she is using the media. Now that she has, since you have jury trials in the UK and USA, a trial has been compromised.
What I also find sad is that women like Virginia are getting so much attention and words like paedophile and sex trafficking are being thrown about. There is real horrific trafficking of human beings going on in the world, and if you do manage to escape, you run!
There was an article about another woman who was used sexually by Epstein, and her story sounds a lot more real and believable than Virginia's. I would be much more likely to believe Virginia if she said that she found this billionaire and his wealthy and royal friends very exciting and was too young and immature to realise at the time that she was being used and abused, and yes she felt uncomfortable with some stuff but was too inexperienced at the time to now what to do about that or even how she was supposed to feel (to say now that she felt so afraid and was captive is not honest).
I am afraid that this is becoming another Nick story where lives are ruined with no one ever being charged and tried for anything but condemned by the court of public opinion. Unfortunately, I don't think Andrew or Virginia are ever going to tell the truth; Andrew has been disgraced and lost his working life whereas Virginia has become famous (does anyone know if she is being paid for the interviews and who is funding all the travel for her?) Maybe she is just relieved to talk about it after all the years, but the attention is seductive and so she is embellishing to feed it.
Meghan: she has been posting a lot of old, really old, photos on IG ... of the pinnacle of her triumph, i.e. the engagement and wedding. I suspect that she is working on a new project and the success of it (financial) will determine if and when she leaves the marriage and the BRF. However, she does not want anyone to ever forget that she had a royal wedding!
Think about this. Do you honestly believe that HRM would humiliate her favorite son ON THE WORLD STAGE if the truth against him was merely consorting with young women? The BRF has been able to successfully spin Harry's Nazi cosplay, Philip's philandering, Diana's mental issues, and a host of other scandals.
>>Also, frankly, to say that parents should do a better job? That to me seems rather naive. Sorry. What is needed is that predators like Epstein and PA have the effing book thrown at them, and they rot in jail for years.<,
You misunderstood the totality of what I wrote. I made it clear that I was referring not to Virginia Roberts but to young people in general. I definitely can't be accused of being naive due to my personal history of being a young rape victim and also the mother of three daughters who did not indulge in premarital sex much less promiscuous sex (guess I did something right in raising them although ultimately they made their good choices).
I never said EppSTAIN (as I like to refer to the nasty man) and others who have committed crimes of sex trafficking and rapes should not face justice. It would be insulting to me if one read my comments as absolving the adult men/women of their wrongdoing. The punishment should fit the crime and the circumstances. How many parents have complained because their young boys are labeled 'sex offenders' when having sex with young women their own age?
Some question why the young women did not walk out when they had a chance or cry for help when they could. I never said anything like that.
It seems many parents don't care if their children are having sex. Many parents are having promiscuous sex and the children know it (is that the opposite of naive?). Who is responsible for the sexualization of our children (via the Internet, media, movies, maybe role models, etc...?)
I know if my child ended up in a situation as Virginia Roberts found herself, I would view it as a failure of me as a parent.
I am positive part of her plan is to retain the Duchess title even if the marriage does not last.
The title means EVERYTHING to her. It’s why she stalked Harry in the first place. She wants the title for the status and to be able to market herself as a royal for the rest of her life. “Brand Meghan,” which is how she referred to herself before Harry, is now “Brand Sussex,” and unfortunately, there will always be fools who will open doors for a narcissist with even the slightest attachment to royalty.
Okay, re the vanished comments about responsible parenting: I agree 100%. I knew where my kids were, who they were with, and did not shelter them from the consequences of bad decisions. I had early curfews for them and no dating before the age of 16. I was a very strict parent because I had no curfew at all. I hitchhiked to Mexico. I went to the casinos in Vegas. I could very easily have ended up dead in the desert but very nice people that I met along the way watched over me. When I graduated high school and joined the Army, Uncle Sam became my parent, and a very strict parent he was! Similarly, SwampMan graduated high school at 17 and joined the Army.
The thing is, though, there are a lot of people that are really terrible at parenting. I've lost track of the kids that have been thrown out of their houses and survived by couch surfing. My son used to bring them home and they stayed with us for as long as they needed. (Daughter brought home stray animals. Son brought home stray people.) It hasn't gotten any better over time that I can see. Children are routinely killed by the mother's boyfriend or the daddy's girlfriend. The foster care system isn't much safer for children. And the foster kids who have been abused sexually and physically are often so damaged that they can be a danger to their foster parents and any children (or pets) in the home.
*sigh* The thing is, though, that drug and alcohol addiction and child molestation and abuse isn't new. It just used to be better hidden. What is new is that under the guise of protecting children from dangers in the workplace, it is impossible for throw-away kids or runaway kids to support themselves without resorting to prostitution, drug dealing, or other criminal behavior because the legal avenues for earning funds have been cut off.
Virginia is certainly getting a lot of uncritical attention, but even if her and PA did have one to three sexual encounters, she just does not have enough evidence that can be tested in court to accuse him of doing anything illegal. Maybe that is why she is using the media. Now that she has, since you have jury trials in the UK and USA, a trial has been compromised.
What I also find sad is that women like Virginia are getting so much attention and words like paedophile and sex trafficking are being thrown about. There is real horrific trafficking of human beings going on in the world, and if you do manage to escape, you run!
I've read newspaper accounts that she has gotten six figures for interviews for her Prince Andrew accusations alone. She is apparently collecting lots of money from people that do not want to have their names all over the papers because it is very difficult to refute a sexual relationship that allegedly occurred 20 years prior.
I think she's a common grifter myself. Her dad got her out of the whore life with a legit job when she was 16. She immediately left that to go "work" for Epstein. I'm interested in whether she recruited others that may have been underage to work for Epstein (which would make her a sexual trafficker as well).
I don't *think* that sex is PA's downfall so much as the financial shenanigans.
You said, "There will always be fools who will open doors for a narcissist with even the slightest attachment to royalty."
ROTFL...So very true
Any one who would open a door to "Duchess" Meghan is opening a door to TROUBLE!
She will never be "Royal." She can't even fake being royal with all the advisors she has at her disposal.
I respectfully disagree. Andrew’s dubious financial shenanigans have been known and reported on for decades, at least in the UK, and that hasn’t sunk him or stopped him. I personally think it’s a combination of the two. Throw in his breath taking arrogance and attitude (shown in that interview), that was the last straw for most.
Don't worry I would have responded to your posts but I was asleep!
I completely agree with your points. It's just such a murky grey area isn't it. I do think that it is similar to being in a cult-you are free to leave at any time but your background that makes you susceptible to being brain washed means that you won't. It's not technically illegal but it sure as hell is immoral.
I also have another concern about Victoria Roberts. Whilst she is not the only accuser, she is most certainly the poster girl/woman for all of the allegations. In the UK we had a recent scandal over a man who claimed to have been abused by politicians over the years. It turns out he was talking rubbish and all the cases were thrown out and nothing more was to come of it.
But here's the thing. There really was an issue with pedophile politicians in the 1970s and all of it went away because of this one fake accuser. Very convenient. I don't think Roberts is complicit, but if her story is shaky and doesn't hold up then it will greatly damage the case against Epstein and PA both on a legal sense and in the court of public opinion.
"I know this is where I think there's a real grey area. 17/18 year olds are not kids and they're not adults, although by law (in many cases) they are adults"
Did you miss the part where it was said that many of the girls were as young as 14 or 15?
“Julia Roberts and Michelle Obama are teaming up to travel to Malaysia and Vietnam as part of an effort to empower and educate girls”.
Ugh. How patronising. I know some rather 'empowered' Malaysian and Vietnamese women. Why do they need an actress and a woman whose real claim to fame is being someone's wife travelling half-way around the world to teach them about 'empowerment'? Last time I checked, America had its own issues with women's rights. Maybe they should look a bit closer to home?
But yes, I agree that this would be right up Meghan's alley. THIS is the sort of thing she saw herself doing as a royal, complete with private jets, designer clothes (plus merching opportunities) and word salad speeches. The reality is not quite so glamarous.
Imagine if Sam Cameron decided to go to a black ghetto in Chicago or New York City to empower and educate the poor people there? Or the King of Bhutan visits rural Appalachia to talk about eco-tourism and the happiness index? I can see the outrage now. Now why is it ok for American celebrities to go abroad and peddle their version of feminism, which is struggling in their own country, to another place in which they have had very little experience or training? Vietnam is a country with largely Confucian ideals still of filial piety inherited from their neighbouring China -- the idea that a woman go off, dump her elderly parents to find her happiness in a career is largely incongruent there. Or even more different is Malaysia, a predominantly Muslim country where feminism takes a completely different form than what is recognisable in the States.
I can imagine Megsy will defo Instagram some support for her new friends (through Michelle Obama, she will befriend Julia) or we will later hear from her how she was involved in a similar secret project.
https://www.instagram.com/p/B5ms1SWlmVT/
Yes I am aware that there are other people of different (and younger) ages involved. As I said, Epstein, PA and Maxwell are sickos.
As I have said above, I'm concerned that the more borderline/young adult cases are not quite as clear cut.
I also hope that her claims will stand up because as she is the poster child for all this, if her claims are blown out of the water then it will affect everyone else. And in the court of public opinion that counts for a lot as I don't think that anyone expects that sicko PA to ever be found guilty in court. If it even gets that far. Great lawyers and being part of a ruling establishment does have it's privileges after all.
There's an article in the DM about Elton John's latest 'diva' outburst in Australia and it goes on to state that whilst once filming a music video for one of his singles he apparently had a foul-mouthed epic rant which included:
"And I tell you this: I am not doing this video," he added before snapping: "People who take flower-arranging classes should be shot."
It reminded me of Meghan's NY baby shower.
Gosh, I hope he didn't mean it. :)
Yep, that was printed in the article too but I decided to bring a 'sanitised' version here in case any were offended by his language. LOL
Personally, I can't stand the man and never could.
His music may be great but his behaviour has always struck me as gross.
The flower arranging quote made my morning though... ha ha!
While I want to believe her, I have a very hard time with all the inconsistencies in her story. I think she was like MM and loved the attention and the money that came along with it. I imagine that she's now ashamed of her past and the things that she allowed to happen to her, and she's lashing out at the man who "in her mind" did this to her. PA is a sick, sick person...but is she completely innocent in all of this?
I'm with Bootsy, I fear that if anyone were to ACTUALLY look in to her allegations and do some serious journalism, they may find her story doesn't hold a lot of water. That will be truly damaging to this whole situation and the true victims will never get justice (not that I think they will any way, Epstein is dead).
@Miggy and everyone else. Hope my not-really-sanitized post about EJ didn't offend.
Not me :-)
_______________________________________________________________________-
I'm reading comments in the DM on the latest fluff piece and so many people are saying that she spent Thanksgiving at Soho House in Toronto with Markus Anderson but without Harry and Archie.
Does anyone know from where this rumour originated?
I'm with you, I think she might be the equivalent of that alleged pedophile who lied about being abused by politicians. Most of the accusations about PA come from her and she doesn't seem overly reliable. If her claims are shown to be bogus or shaky then it will act as a reason to say "you see it was all a hoax."
It's happened before in other cases involving powerful people and it will happen again.
I know a bit about law and even though I'm sure PA is guilty of something morally I think they'll struggle to prove anything.
He doesn't have to prove that nothing happened. He just has to show that her story contains an element of reasonable doubt. Even if new evidence comes out that ties him to her, who is to say what happened between the two of them was illegal when alone if she was technically an adult. It's her word against his, and that is not enough to be convicted of anything.
Although you can infer that he likes young impressionable LEGAL teens, and that he uses his power and privilege to seduce them which is where we are at now. And that he might have done the same to even younger girls. Either way it shows his lack of morals and that he is at best a sleazebag who operates on the very edge of the law. But on 'just' the right side as things stand now.
I do think that Virginia Roberts' situation back then was similar to being in a cult in terms of control. But then that's not exactly illegal either if she was legally an adult.
Eurgh what a mess. Nice one Andrew you privileged but most likely legally safe sicko perv.
As such Thllthere will be many here who won't see a problem with the Oprah/MM tie in. Let alone if they harp on about all manner of things pertaining to US culture that people think also pertains to our own but is actually very different. Or maybe we are all coming under the culture of the US thanks to it's dominance in the English speaking world.
Just had a look. What's making me laugh even more is the idea that the Harkles took a 'break' so as to avoid Trump, and that Trump had even 'demanded' to meet with them because they're SO popular and it would boost his election chances! Eh? Harry is the spare to the spare to the spare. There was never going to be any question of him or his wife being involved in any of the events. They're just not important enough.
As to the idea that American voters love the Harkles so much and that a foreign head of state can just 'demand' to publically meet certain royals? Delusional. As always. They really are insane on that site.
Not to mention the hypocrisy - they've been going on about Kate's 'laziness' for as long as I can remember, yet it's fine for the Harkles to take a 'break' at a busy time in the royal calendar?
I also detest the Americanisation of this election - identity politics, leaders' debates, dirty campaigning etc. But I guess that's an issue for a different venue.
"As such Thllthere will be many here who won't see a problem with the Oprah/MM tie in"
Hmmmmmm.... I'm not sure. As I've said many times, most Brits don't much care about the royals one way or another, except for major events like weddings or scandals like Prince Andrew. But I think those who do keep up with royal affairs would not welcome a 'working' royal collaborating with a privately run American TV channel. Particularly in the current climate where there are so many calls for funding to be stopped to those royals not in the direct line.
The whole point of the royals is that they represent British interests. If they don't do that, then why bother with them at all?
If anyone else has seen it (its a 70s movie) you know what I mean.
I agree that most people here don't care about the RF.
I think an Oprah tie-in might actually sway some people who aren't overly interested as Oprah is a huge figure in popular culture. The fact that we even know her over here shows just how much American culture permeates because she really has nothing to do with anything over here.
I hope I'm wrong but Oprah will start opining about things over here in the same way as MM as they both think everywhere is the same as the US. It isn't but as I have used our upcoming election as an example, most people don't know the difference.
Not anymore. I suspect many if not most Brits under the age of 40 or so don't know who she is. She's more or less irrelevant now.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on that one:)
This is why I just cannot fathom what MM is thinking. She has had a tremendous opportunity to embark on a great adventure in the UK, and she has squandered this because of greed. As many here have said, she could have done so many interesting things while learning about her adopted country. I would give anything to have had her opportunities...
I'm with Bootsy, I fear that if anyone were to ACTUALLY look in to her allegations and do some serious journalism, they may find her story doesn't hold a lot of water. That will be truly damaging to this whole situation and the true victims will never get justice (not that I think they will any way, Epstein is dead).
Her role seems to be profiting from attacking the royal family; i.e., Prince Andrew. I do not know (or care) whether or not she had sex with him. She alleges that she was paid $10,000 to do so. Again, there are written reports that she has profited quite nicely from selling her interviews.
There's the proven liar aspect, too. She has accused Al and Tipper Gore of being on Epstein's island, but secret service records prove otherwise. Dershowitz said that he has proof that he was never present when she claims they had sex and, in fact, was included in the accusations when her attorneys suggested his name because it would be a bigger name for her book. Then there's her ever-changing age when these events occurred. Apparently she did not meet Epstein until she was 17 (and her alleged sexual trysts with Andrew would not have happened until she was 18). She also claimed that she was on a helicopter piloted by Ghislaine with BC and his secret service protection. Secret service says nope, never happened.
TL/DR? If Virginia Rogers says it is raining, I would need to get third-party confirmation.
Dershowitz was interviewed in the bit that I saw and he seemed indignant about being accused and if I remember correctly came up with some proof to show that he didn't meet her when she said he did. This prompted the edit where it cut to VR where she stated she couldn't remember exact dates etc but it DID happen.
I say bring on the pictures!
I have seen far too many comments from people saying they believe Virginia/she sounds credible and gleefully attacking and bringing down a dimwit, probably very shady, prince.
I can believe that Virginia was sexually exploited/taken advantage of/sexually used by Epstein and Andrew. Many men do prey on teenage girls, and in many cultures, including my own, they are admired for that. However, I doubt that Andrew did anything illegal.
There are dozens of reasons why she would be tearful in the interview and why her body language would be so believable. Telling the truth is just one of them. Her telling of details was just tacky. From 2008 she was flimsy on verifiable details and her story could not be corroborated or evidence contradicted what she stated in an affidavit. What is she trying to achieve? Epstein paid off more than a dozen women. How did Virginia miss out on that? Is she trying to get money from his estate? Is she going after Andrew because Epstein is dead and thus untouchable? Or does she just want the attention? If she wants justice for wrong that was done, how about devoting herself to education and shelters for vulnerable teenagers who are susceptible to older predators?
I have remembered the believable woman who has spoken up about Epstein and Andrew: Johanna Sjoberg. She talks about the excitement and glamour of being caught up in Epstein's world, and how she needed the money, as a struggling student.
"What about other famous people involved? Was Andrew the only one she was forced to have sex with? Perhaps Andrew didn't know she was trafficked. Perhaps she was presented to him as an escort. Perhaps he was told she was older and had no reason to believe otherwise as she was drinking and at nightclubs with them. Why would he have his picture taken with her if he believed her to be a victim of sex trafficking? How was she capable of having a boyfriend in 2001 when the picture was taken, presumably she wasn't held hostage and wasn't afraid to be close to another man. Andrew was bloody awful in that interview but I'm not sure if I believe he was privy to illegal activity. As cold as I know I sound in this comment, none of this is straight forward."
They raise some interesting points. The bit about the ex boyfriend is with regard to him confirming the photo of her and Andrew was genuine.
Heh. The US is 50 countries (51 if you count Puerto Rico) all smooshed together more or less amicably into a union. The food, cultures, and traditions of Florida are different than those of Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi, our nearest neighbors. Florida is slightly larger in land area than England.
There are so many cultures and traditions within our own country that many people seem to be unaware of, for example, the vanishing Geechee and Gullah communities in my area.
Our fave couple spent Thanksgiving in the States after all that hubbub, and MM has an article in the DM about holiday etiquette and table setting (ha)! In the past few days I have read she is a humanitarian and a chef.
I just don't believe the 6 week break was their idea. If you're good at your job, you don't get 6 weeks off; you get more duties. Kate was photographed in the nude, and she and William were on tour when the story broke (I believe) and she pressed on. They didn't demand 6 weeks off.
I think the final straw was MM's "No one asked if I was OK" interview. What a slap in the face to a family that has broken its own rules to welcome her. I think they were supposed to lie low during the 6 weeks, but they have managed to churn out as many stories as ever.
Virginia Roberts was probably more worldly than a sheltered kid like I was. I would have found it creepy to even be interested in giving Epstein a massage. much less sex, yikes! Did she not think she could walk out of one of those parties or borrow a phone and call 911. Brainwashed perhaps, but no mention has been made that JE/GM had a cult brainwashing these young women.
For the record I want you to know I find it abhorrent what has happened all the way around and I am not making excuses. But it is a bit dangerous to gloss over the choices these girls made, as that could encourage other young women to not consider the gravity of getting involved with creepy older men.
I'm inclined to agree. I think the 'break' was probably forced upon them. I didn't at first, but the absence of happy families pics and pap walks in Los Angeles has made me reconsider. I also agree that the 'noone asked me if I was OK' faux tears interview, followed up by 'sources' slagging off the 'hysterical' royal family in the press, was probably the last straw.
The royal family don't actually need them. Yes, I'm sure Charles would like his son to play an active role in public life, but if he's only going to whine about it and turn up looking like a tourist wearing the same clothes from an overnight flight, well, maybe best he not bother. He and Meghan are only going to become more and more irrelevant with the passage of time, so maybe best they learn how to make their own way sooner rather than later.
Yup it's in no way black and white. They preyed on young women who were only just legal and manipulated them. Not illegal.
They preyed on young women who weren't legal and manipulated them. Illegal.
Both of which are absolutely morally shameful but only one breaks any laws as far as I'm aware.
(It's The Sun newspaper, commonly known as The Scum in the UK, so make of this what you will.)
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10414087/ghislaine-maxwell-epstein-mossad-agents-politicians-sex-blackmail/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
Yes, we need to see those photos! ;-)
It doesn't sound too crazy to me. People having sex and videoing it would be blackmail material normally.
Powerful and/or well known wealthy people being video'd having sex with borderline legal teens, or plain illegal girls, is even more powerful blackmail material.
Considering that he was operating in plain sight for years does suggest a level of immunity.
And his sudden death that most people predicted does seem to show a level of skulduggery associated with criminal behaviour .
I often wonder just how stupid many of these "rich and powerful" men are if they thought for even a second that Epstein was a stand-up guy who would "never" resort to blackmail. *EYEROLL* Are they SO rich and SO powerful that they never thought someone COULD do something to them? PA and BC are two very rich and very powerful people....they HAD to have had some inkling that it could all go south if Epstein was ever convicted. I am just waiting for the BC shoe to drop...I believe what he's done is FAR worse than PA.
I'm going with self enrichment on this one. Epstein may be dead, but his estate is alive.
I understand the people that have said "Well, she might have gotten the dates wrong, but she is right about who did what, and that abuse happened to her!" Well, maybe. If a person has set out to ruin a person's reputation by trying him (or her) in the press while accusing him or her of crimes of moral turpitude, they should have actual proof as to the dates and times that the offense took place. They should not be able to say "Oh, you have proof you were at another location far away on this date?" Well, I was wrong, it happened on THIS date!" "Oh, you were out of town on that date, too? Well, it was actually a month later!" until such time as the person did not have an event scheduled that would directly refute the timeline.
With Prince Andrew, the point is moot as her complaint was already investigated by Scotland Yard and it was dismissed.
Is she being paid? My opinion is that she has financial backers for whatever reason, FWIW. I do not think that she has the monetary resources to engage big-name law firms on her own for something that, given her age, was not a crime.
I don't mean to hurt the feelings of those that think she is telling the truth. Perhaps she is. You are completely entitled to your opinions. Something about her pings my "liar, liar, pants on fire" meter, much like MM.
Is she being paid? My opinion is that she has financial backers for whatever reason, FWIW. I do not think that she has the monetary resources to engage big-name law firms on her own for something that, given her age, was not a crime.
I don't mean to hurt the feelings of those that think she is telling the truth. Perhaps she is. You are completely entitled to your opinions. Something about her pings my "liar, liar, pants on fire" meter, much like MM.’
The case was dropped by Met Police, and I believe they’ve said again quite recently they aren’t going to re-open the case.
I hear what you have to say, and others who have said similar things, I’m not wholly in disagreement, infact I find myself nodding and agreeing with a lot. It’s just impossible to gauge what is the truth, part truth or just lies. I most certainly don’t agree with paying an accuser/alleged victim money for interviews etc.
For me, I’ve never think or believe trial by media or social media is good or fair. It’s for the police etc., to take up the matter and the law courts to decide.
None of these accusations thrown at Andrew make him guilty of any crimes. It’s the almighty stink around Andrew that’s going to stick like mud for the rest of his life. His long association with Epstein is the issue, he still remained in contact with a convicted sex offender after his release from prison. Andrew flocks to dodgy people with money like flies around rotting food. This is his weakness and his downfall.
The close family bit had me laughing, she has what appears to be a rather distant relationship with her Mum, and no relationship whatsoever with any other family member. A very warped notion of ‘close family’!
>>It's her word against his, and that is not enough to be convicted of anything.<<
It depends on who the District Attorney is and how they want to view the case. One of the problems of the judicial system is how subjective the DA can be about elements of a case, whether they accept a victim's story or they need corroborating evidence. For example, a DA most likely will accept the story of a robbery victim if they can identify the perpetrator yet some DA's may not believe a sexual assault victim's account unless there is sufficient evidence.
All she’s got is her Instagram and her cell phone...probably sitting alone in an apartment in London.
Or, at least I hope....
I agree with you - it's not crazy at all. (blackmail via sex & videotape)
I was multitasking when I noticed the headline and I rushed to post before reading the full text of the article - which turned out to be not as nonsensical as I thought it would be - hence the reference to The Sun/Scum. Mea culpa!
@SwampWoman, "With Prince Andrew, the point is moot as her complaint was already investigated by Scotland Yard and it was dismissed."
I read that Scotland Yard didn't actually investigate the claims and that the reason they dropped the case was because the accusations came from overseas. Isn't that why it has been referred to the IOPC?
The story was presented by OS not as speculation but as fact. And it could be true although I'm not sure where any family members but Doria could be found. But the story also could be a response to the "Meghan is in Canada with Markus without Harry and Archie" story that has circulated.
The accusations were that he had sex with her at Maxwell's London apartment. I believe the MPS did a preliminary investigation and did not find enough evidence to do a full investigation.
It's not a British holiday, they could have truly just made the trip released a statement afterwards. But it appears MM can't resist a big buildup. In this case it looks worse that the "soup kitchen" story was floated and then they didn't do it. I think that was put out without much thought. Wouldn't it be most unusual for a homeless shelter in the UK to have a Thanksgiving meal? Or perhaps she wanted to go somewhere and they said "Ok, but no cameras." Or "Ok, but you can't make a speech."
Over at CB they are praising H&M for their "genius" move of leaving the UK so they didn't have to deal with Trump's visit. That viewpoint is incredibly immature and speaks volumes about the folks of CB. It is part of H&M's job, if they are invited, to meet politicians from other countries. I don't believe they were invited to be part of Trump's visit, because MM can't be trusted to behave even for a few hours at official events. This way they are "in the USA" and don't have to admit they weren't invited.
But I don't know that there would be pictures if they'd gone to LA. Flying first-class, boarding last, and VIP treatment upon arrival/exit could have kept them from sight. (I think someone wrote about the ways to slip in and out of LA airport on a thread here not too long ago.) And, for example, I may be wrong but I believe Doria has visited the UK 4 times that we know of (wedding, cookbook promo, Archie's birth, and Archie's christening. We didn't actually see her during the Archie's birth visit but I'm assuming she probably was there.) Has she ever been papped at an airport on either end during those 8 crossings of the Atlantic? Maybe once, but I don't think more than once.
I don't know that M would want to slip into LA sight unseen... doesn't fit her usual MO, but I think they could have done it if they wanted to. She wasn't papped arriving in NYC to watch Serena play either (but her team put out the iffy claim she flew commercial, after deciding to go at the last minute, with a team of RPOs, right) And she wasn't papped at the airport arriving or leaving NYC the baby shower week. And yeah, I do think they'd be dense enough to fly privately. They'd claim it was private time, and time off the clock.
I agree. They could easily have flown commercial into LA without there being photos - stars manage this all the time. Which makes a mockery of the ridiculous product placement 'baby shower' in New York, and the claims that they were caught unawares by the paps. Please. Even the biggest stars - which these two are not -manage to maintain their privacy IF they want it.
All that being said, I also doubt they're in America right now.
". I don't believe they were invited to be part of Trump's visit, because MM can't be trusted to behave even for a few hours at official events. This way they are "in the USA" and don't have to admit they weren't invited."
Exactly. And we all know that despite what the fools over at CB might believe, she would have LOVED to be at the Buck palace do tonight, mingling with world leaders, including Trump, boring them with her inane word salads. That's what she considers the appropriate stage for her. But in reality she and Harry, even if they had been on their best behaviour, are too insignificant to be invited to such an event.
Meanwhile 'lazy', 'boring' Kate is there looking great in a dress by a British designer and holding her own with world leaders while her husband is away in the Gulf. Could you imagine the Sussexes there giggling and holding hands like a pair of love sick teens?
Twice this week Markle has tried to overshadow William's state visit and Kate's day today with the Queen greeting world leaders by posting her usual crud to Instagram.
In between the Instagram rubbish, the Scoobie character has been doing his usual paid-for sycophantic podcast. Though why he calls it "The Heir" I don't know. Doesn't he realise that Harry will never be king? He's not too hot on facts anyway because according to Harry, Markle doesn't have a family. The RF according to him, are "the family she never had".
Meghan says things that aren’t true. She doesn’t care, as long as it fits her narrative, friends, supporters can say what they like, as long as they are ‘supporting her’.
This is a whole other topic. IMO It’s been going on probably since people were aware of propaganda and what it can achieve, and the ability to get away with lying To the masses. Some are paid PR pieces, other articles/stories are economical with the truth, etc. That’s why there’s so much fake news etc, out there, especially on social media, it’s rife via that medium.
Interesting points about that situation (what was really happening, how much was legal or not, how much was left out because it doesn't fit the story. Sad and impacts all the way around - for everyone and the people around them. Ripples like a rock dropped in a pond.
I was looking for the article about PA emailing GM about her but didn't see it. I will say that I don't generally believe emails as proof (unless you have it coming from the source and the sent email then be traced from from the full headers to that source) after seeing an email supposedly coming from me (my name and my email clear as day) selling drugs from Canada or something equally dubious. Spoofing can look really good.
Portcitygirl, you have something there. Really a lot of stuff flying in the direction of the BRF.
And yet, no one is asking the same kinds of questions about Bill Clinton who did a lot of fly time with Epstein.
I had to back away from this whole markle drama for a few days - I recently learnt another colleague had committed suicide. In almost three years this makes 5 in my industry. I still don't really know how to process and also deal with the markle duo's fake "crusade" about defence and law enforcement personnel and mental health issues.
And something a little lighter - I have noted a media report that froggy house has had a bunch of security upgrades? A bit weird since they clearly don't live there and are apparently now in the US on exil-errrr...a break. Anyone have any goss on that?
Dershowitz keeps an engagement calendar. According to “Dersh,” his diary shows he wasn’t with Epstein/VRG when she says he was having sex with her. The diary is being held by the court or the lawyers. I can’t remember which. It hasn’t been made public. He wife also strongly agrees, as she says he was home at the times he was accused of being with.VRG. Dersh vehemently denies he ever had sex with VRG. He is suing her for defamation.
I’ve followed him for 40 years and I would be surprised and disappointed if he is lying. I also remember when she made the original complaints. I thought the cases were not prosecuted because the prosecutors didn’t think they had evidence to make a case. So, why has it come up again? Between tabloids and social media, one is convicted by the mob before charges are even bought. If charged, how could an impartial jury be found? I think that is scary. I feel great compassion for all of the girls abused and trafficked by Epstein and his cronies. I also feel sorry that people who haven’t been charged with crimes are having their reputations destroyed. I’m sorry Epstein is dead; he needed to be tried in court so the evidence could be presented.
Excuse typos because I’m writing on my phone and can’t see the small print very well.
I don't think she was photographed arriving for the shower week though. As I recall, she was in NYC for at least a day before she was discovered by the press (in other words, before her team alerted the press she was there.) And last summer with all the private jet trips, I think they were only photographed the one time. And before the wedding (but after the engagement was announced) I believe it was reliably reported they flew to Monaco at least once to party (maybe New Year's Eve?) But no photos that I know of. Anyway, I still maintain they can move around without being photographed if they want to.
Even thought the LOSS program is funded by Catholic Charities, it is nondenominational. I'm not Catholic, and still found this link extremely helpful and comforting.
Also, there is a book I read "Night Falls Fast: Understanding Suicide" by Kay Redfield. It really helped me because I struggled with "Why" and "What were they thinking?!"
Nutties, I know this post was off topic but it's important!
The photos of Markle getting on the jet after her baby shower were published in the Mail Online. There is even a video of her getting on the plane.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6728545/Meghan-Markle-lands-Britain-200-000-private-jet-New-York-baby-shower.html
If Archie was carried like a normal child instead of smushed to Meghan/Harry's chest with his legs left dangling limply, I doubt anyone would recognize them! ��
I also doubt the nanny is recognizable to many photographers. She could have traveled semi-separately with Archie whose face certainly isn't recognizable.
They may have gone to LA as Omid reported. I doubt it, but whatever they've been doing, it's not unbelievable to me they could fly without photos emerging. They've done it before. But if the rule to go by is absence of photographic evidence of flying = proof of the absence of flying, they've not left the UK. Heck, they've not gone shopping in brick and mortar stores more than a handful of times since they got married 18 months ago and have been out to dinner maybe twice.
@Madge
As I said in response to @HappyDays, since M's team admitted she flew home on Amal's private jet, I wasn't surprised to hear pictures existed although I'd not seen them. (Thanks for the link.) But where are the pictures of her arrival in NYC? How did she escape detection then? Pack her baby bump in a suitcase and don a blonde yak wig? And where are the pictures showing her arrival or departure in NYC the weekend of Serena's match? Her team claimed she flew commercial. I have my doubts but the team likely wouldn't have claimed she flew commercial unless she did OR they were confident there were no photographs showing she didn't. But months later, I don't believe a single photo of Meghan has emerged from that trip except the ones taken at the match. Otherwise, Serena recently seeming to say she brought Archie with her wouldn't have caused such a hullabaloo.