Not much news on the Sussex front this week, except for a "remember when" post on @SussexRoyal Instagram. (Remember when Meg helped the women from Hubb Kitchen publicize their cookbook in 2018? @SussexRoyal does!)
I'd like to share an excellent post from another blogger, however - Robert Hazell, a professor at University College London, who offers us "Prince Andrew: Six Lessons for the Modern Monarchy".
While he doesn't mention the Sussexes by name, a couple of his "lessons" have relevance for them.
For example, Lesson Three, Be Wary About Fundraising...and Lesson Four, Keep Tight Control of Royal PR.
And, in particular, Lesson Five: Understand the plight of minor royals, and allow them a means of escape.
You can read Hazell's full blog post here.
Comments
It originally sold years ago for 420K pounds and was expected to sell for 250K to 350K pounds. The reserve was 200K (not met).
Two others of hers sold for the modest prices of 28K and 48K.
Is the cult of Diana fading a little? was it the drama about the BRF? is it just people aren't spending money like they used to? and, if the cult of Diana is fading, what does this mean for MM's strategy to be Diana 2.0?
I read that it was initially purchased by a lady in New York who then went bankrupt. It was subsequently sold to a British gentleman who presumably has run into financial difficulties of his own.
Surprised MM didn't buy them....
So, the dresses are cursed (I mean, we all know what happened to Diana....)
No, @mimi is isn’t a big deal to get letters from the IRS about mistakes. You do pay a fine and prorated taxes (what is the word I’m trying to think of? Penalty I guess) and then you go on with your life. Same with her. She went to court, paid her taxes and penalty and that was that.
I believe we also has a tax attorney come on here and explain how her tax issue wasn’t a big deal.(not like how people have decided she is a tax evader and is embezzling money. Huge leap)
If I see Andy and Markle among royals at some official do I will become a Republican. Well, after I confirm for myself Charles and Wills refuse to put them into place too.
As everyone else has already acknowledged! I greatly appreciate your blog, Nutty! Thank you for the forum to discuss the mind F that is Megan Markel.
For some reason on my lunch break today (I guess I wanted to get irked), I took a peek at the “Meghan’s Mirror” blog.. the shock and horror at blatenet merching!
This may have already been posted, but in the case that it hasn’t, please enjoy this little gem:
https://www.etsy.com/ca/listing/741530231/mirrormeg-hrh-collection-sweatshirt-in
Heh. Well, it certainly isn't something that you should toss into the circular file and forget about (grin), but I just handed the letter over to the accounting firm because filing the taxes in a timely manner and keeping me out of court was their job. In fact, he was the one that took the records in for the audit most of the time.
Anyway, here is something to discuss: does she have to become British? I know it would be an affront to the Brits If she didn’t. Is there anything that says she has to, I mean with Harry being 7th in line and all.
that when she got back to LA she got an agent and immediately got work.
I suggest she never went back to school. And that somehow she figured out how to earn credits in LA to satisfy her degree requirements at Northwestern. Doing this part time would take some time resulting in the added benefit that her graduation year makes her look younger than she is. Markle is certainly conniving enough to see and use the benefit of this.
Now, we have a special PIN number we have to use to file because IRS did catch an imposter trying to file a return with money back under my husband’s name. The IRS isn’t out to get us.
Yes I would classify being taken to court by the IRS as being “in trouble” with them. Receiving a notice is bad enough but refusing to pay and going to court over less than $1000 is just not done. You’re going to pay more in fees and penalties than the original tax so it makes me question her IQ and level of sanity. Really it’s more evidence of her narcissistically— rules don’t apply to me, I’m special etc
My favorite quote of hers is from her documentary on SA:
“If I’d done something wrong, I’d be the first one to go ‘Oh my gosh, I’m so sorry. I would never do that,’
So basically if she did something wrong she’d just deny it. Notice most of the better written articles from more high brow sources have dropped this portion of her statement because it really looks bad for her but I think she genuinely doesn’t understand. She really doesn’t see her behavior as abnormal. Classic NPD!!!
Harry isn't 7th in line, but that's not really the point. The point is that Meghan is a 'working' royal who - in theory - carries out engagements representing the British monarchy. So yes, she should be a British citizen, even if she doesn't HAVE to be. However, I suspect the marriage will be over before she gets to the point - 5 years of continual residency in Britain - where she can even start her application.
Blogger SwampWoman said...
KC said I can't believe that they are setting up a foundation in the US like the Clintons.</i>
That is lass's expression of disbelief, I quoted Lass's words but said the Cs' foundation might have given MM the idea.
SwampWoman said...(in part):
"The Clinton Foundation sold actual commodities (US Uranium to the Russians) as well as state secrets (classified documents on an unsecured server) and "influence". ...
"I wouldn't think that H&M have the influence or the knowledge of state secrets to pass on to people making 'charitable' contributions. I think that she might know some Hollywood secrets that she is not averse to keeping quiet about if there are contributions made through their 'charity'."
To which, I say, I completely agree she might be keeping Hollywood/LA secrets, since I dont know what British access she could offer (shades of Sophie and Fergie who were both very embarassed when caught in the attempt). To Harry? Would he be that be a big enough "get"?
Then again some are very impressed by royalty, esp. British. Fayed is only one example, long before summer of 1997 he hosted and gave gifts to, other members of BRF as well as Diana and her sons. (Too long, next time i'll use two comments).
I still feel like maybe she never started the application 🤷🏼♀️
Totally agree! I doubt she ever even started her citizenship application.
Yes that was my point about Meghan she was earning good income on Suits and refuses to pay $900 for The Tig blog. Just should not have been done. No surprise that she represented herself. No self respecting tax attorney would fight over less $1000 when the person is earning supposedly earned $3 mill on Suits.
You can meet *Prince Harry* and MM will bring him to your party if you pay enough. To the foundation, of course! ;)
And I cannot let misinformation stand.
(1) The Clinton Foundation does NOT have access to the U.S. uranium deposits that the U.S. The issue was Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State and the sale of uranium to Russia (approved and not questioned by anyone in the State Department), and the potential conflict of interest here regarding donations to the foundation. There are numerous articles on this uranium issue that debunk the whole notion of "quid pro quo" and the Clinton Foundation. Snopes is one of them, but there are many others. Two charity non-profit watch groups, Charity Watch and Charity Navigator, have given the Clinton Foundation its highest ratings.
(2) The Clinton Foundation continues to operate. The Trump Foundation was forced to close because its egregious abuse of donations by its officers (Trump and his children). Quote from the AG of New York: "...detailed a shocking pattern of illegality involving the Trump Foundation – including unlawful coordination with the Trump presidential campaign, repeated and willful self-dealing, and much more. This amounted to the Trump Foundation functioning as little more than a checkbook to serve Mr Trump’s business and political interests."
(3) After two FBI investigations, Clinton was cleared of sending ANY unclassified information from her private server. The Trump administration classified heretofore unclassified information sent from her server as a means of trying to condemn her use of a private server for sending classified information.
(4) Jared Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, both advisers to the president, have used either personal email accounts or the messaging application WhatsApp to conduct official U.S. government business. These messages are encrypted between users, meaning that unless Kushner and Ivanka Trump stored copies of their messages or the recipients turned the messages over to the government, there’s no way to record what was said.
(5) Mr. Trump's conversation with various government officials in the Ukraine regarding foreign aid are being housed on a private server that Congress cannot access, and Trump still uses his private, UNSECURED, cell phone to conduct government business.
I'm not a Clinton lover, but I am a fact lover. If Bill Clinton is caught up in this Epstein scandal, he needs to go to jail. Merely being on an airplane's flight log doesn't cut it for me. I would like to focus on the issues surrounding Ms. Markle and the abuse of her position within the BRF. So much of what occurs around Ms. Markle is, naturally, speculative, and what we can call "fact" is limited largely to her visual missteps: the constant merching (loving the jewelry debacle and, OMG, it's about time the BRF shut that shit down), acting inappropriately and wearing completely inappropriate garments at BRF events. But much of what is being spun here beyond her issues is NOT speculative but specious and, IMO, libelous.
Have been scratching my head about the date because I think Markle is older than she says.
So I was sharing my theory of how Markle could have a 2003 grad year and be older than 22.
A) She left school at twenty and probably did not go back.
B) She somehow earned the credits to finish in LA which takes time if you are working.
C) This is just the sort of thing Markle would work to her advantage—the grad date making her seem 22 that year
https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/news/a7733/meghan-markle-interview/
There is also an interview from 2013 which clearly states she is 35, but ai don’t have it in my dossier LOL
I am with you. Had some male buddies obsessed with the book Clinton Cash, which was financed by Breitbart so
propoganda and not fact checked.
It took me 15 minutes on the Internet while waiting for parking to break apart that dumb Uranium story.
That company that was sold to the Russians was a total dog. The US has as much uranium as it could ever use. Putin was pissed about the US unloading a lemon on him (Ha Ha). HC had zero to do with the deal, which was approved by the Secretary of the Treasury Geitner and a board.
Better post this fast before it is removed, but meanwhile as an animal lover, Vegan and non drinker I have suffer innumerable pork recipes and proposals of drink fests. LOL
"I still feel like maybe she never started the application"
Considering that you have to be resident in Britain for 5 years before being eligible to apply for citizenship, then no, of course she hasn't started her application.
I can't imaagine that businessmen and celebrities are going to shell out millions for the dubious honour of having a royal manchild get drunk at their party. Plus the royal brand is tarnished with all the Andrew shenanigans and Harry seems to be on the outs with them in any case, so what really is the point?
I am old enough to remember the pressure for Charles to settle down. And then from out of nowhere voila, the announcement of his engagement, Diana the blushing ingenue and the grand wedding; subsequently followed by years of marital discord that baited our appetite for gossip through glimpses.
It is my perspective the world remembers Diana much like it once remembered Princess Grace. Women who captivated the world with dazzling charm and beauty yet never grew old nor irrelevant, filtered through nostalgia and the most IG worthy of pics and splendour. The Monaco wedding was before my time, however I remember Grace's sudden death and the pall it cast. Tragedy is an essential element of poignancy in cult devotion. The residual allure of Grace the starlet, compounded with her premature death, was enough to plague her children beyond her grave for nearly 20 years under harsh media glare. But now the Grimaldis are no more interesting to the world than any of the other garden variety royal houses that abide within the confines of Europe. Grace put Monaco on the map.
Lingering affection for Diana largely is from those who were around when she lived, much like it had been for Grace. Diana is the larger star but Grace is no inferior when it comes to being a symbol of royal glamour.
You hardly hear of Grace anymore though. Diana's presence is still felt but even that sentiment won't withstand the wages of time. Even now I have to wonder whether the subject of Diana would ever even chance to cross the mind of somebody Gen Z? I hazard most would have little to no idea who she was, much less care.
Another thank you for this!
While I'm not one to police what people say here, like asking them not to use clever constructions like "Archificial" (as someone did) or to go "off-topic" (what exactly IS a topic--how narrowly do we define that?), what you said has long needed to be said.
There are so many clever and expressive women writing on here, who have expertise in a variety of topics. But you're right, Wizard--let's stick to the truth.
"You can meet *Prince Harry* and MM will bring him to your party if you pay enough. To the foundation, of course! ;)"
I can't imaagine that businessmen and celebrities are going to shell out millions for the dubious honour of having a royal manchild get drunk at their party. Plus the royal brand is tarnished with all the Andrew shenanigans and Harry seems to be on the outs with them in any case, so what really is the point.
Good points But celebrities collect appearance fees all the time, even some for so-called charity appearances where the ppeople donating are the ones who buy a table at the venue (not the celebrity!) Businessmen, well maybe not or maybe yes if you want the party boy prince to come liven your party in the VIP section.
Meg's time at Northwestern is one of the less interesting parts of her rise to her current position. At the time of the engagement, I was much more ready and willing to accept published/released information about Meg as factual because I did not have sufficient (or any, really) cause to doubt her veracity.
Let's just say that is no longer true. I think Meg lies even when there is absolutely no necessity for it--she will lie about what she ate for breakfast--just for the secret (so she thinks) thrill of getting away with a deception which is both fuel and catnip to the narcissist. Most of us who have been raised with some form of moral grounding or who have absorbed ethics from parents and teachers find lying to be unnatural and uncomfortable. We all engage in it from time to time for a myriad of reasons, but a normally-adjusted person generally defaults to a truthful setting most of the time. For people who are wired like Meghan, they are as uncomfortable with unvarnished truth as other people are with lying as it makes them feel too exposed and out of control.
Meghan would have some motivations to obfuscate her career at Northwestern if:
1. She did not in fact complete the requirements for graduation
2. Her transcripts are lackluster/barely passing, which would not burnish her self-assessment of being 'whip-smart'
3. Her time at the university was marred by take your pick: academic scandal (cheating); sexual scandal (maybe sleeping with professors in exchange for better grades); her behavior with her peers made her a social pariah, she was put on probation for drug use, underage drinking, loose behavior with male students in the dorms or other forms of non-compliance with those pesky rules which she so abhors
So what we seem to know for facts are: Meg matriculated and spent 1-2 years in residence at the university, where she joined a sorority, then left at the age of 20 (junior year for someone with a summer birthday) to do the internship in Argentina. After that her movement and whereabouts are hazy. Northwestern has not publicly denounced her claims of being a graduate and seems to include her among the alumnae, though as it has been pointed out, attendance for a partial degree and completing the degree all the way to commencement can both be classed as alumnae. Meg would certainly not be the first actor who dabbled a bit in higher education before deciding to focus on show biz, but again, her narrative of being an academic genius is not supported if she bailed on her degree halfway through in favor of opening suitcases in her negligee on Deal or No Deal.
“...details of Markle's time as a Northwestern student have MOSTLY REMAINED PRIVATE (Ed. note: Interesting that privacy cloaks Meg's undergraduate years, since this kind of information is readily available about most other celebrities, as well as cap and gown photos of them. Not her, though.) The "Suits" star, who is set to marry Prince Harry at Windsor Castle on May 19, graduated in 2003 with a double major in international studies and theater. In magazine interviews, she has talked of being a "theater nerd" at Northwestern and exploring her biracial identity through an African-American studies class. She also served as the Kappa Kappa Gamma recruitment chairwoman and lived in the sorority house off Orrington Avenue some time after her freshman year.
The Tribune REACHED OUT TO MORE THAN 140 of Markle's sorority sisters, from her class and two classes before and after her, to get more insight into her college life. MOST OF THE WOMEN DID NOT RESPOND TO THE REQUEST FOR COMMENT. SOME OF THOSE WHO POLITELY DECLINED TO BE INTERVIEWED OFFERED THAT MARKLE ALWAYS SEEMED *LOVELY*, "*WAS ALWAYS ***VERY KIND***; DELIGHTFUL, LOVELY, TRULY WONDERFUL PERSON, YADAYADA . . "
Oooh, needed a sickie bag after that last bit. Does it not read but exactly like one of Meggy's own press releases? Presuming these women are all her own age . . who talks like this? "Lovely, very kind, delightful, truly wonderful . . ?" This is not the parlance of genuine (American)friends in their 30s speaking of someone they like and know well, knew in college as young women in their early 20s. I feel like I'm reading an excerpt of a script from Downton Abbey. Stilted, nearly Victorian language to describe how very lovely and kind Markle is . . where are the specifics? The anecdotal stories from women she shared a sorority house with for at least a year . . whom they entrusted with the job as their recruitmnent chairwoman? That job goes to charismatic friendly, bubbly people who can attract new students to joining the sorority--which is why I think this particular tidbit is another of Meg's lies.
What is missing from the early Markle years is a complete dearth of long time friends willing to go on record with authentic praise for Meghan. Don't you find it weird that after 12 years of public education and allegedly, four years of university, apart from the 2 women she dragged with her to Wimbledon this year, no one who has known Meggy for more than 5 years or so has stepped forward with chummy reminisces about her old pal from school? Out of 140+ women from college who would have known Meg in their shared sorority, nearly all of them refused (politely declined) to speak about her and those that did offered only $2 platitudes we've heard ad naseum from Meghan's own mouth already?
Meghan's one genuine friend from her childhood, Ninaki Priddy, has been exorcised from her life. I don't think there's been anyone else willing to claim her as an actual friend (as opposed to a 'bought' friend), even this Lindsay Roth Jordan and the other woman.
You'd suppose that if someone had been a good friend to Meghan in their school days and could attest to her genuine goodness as a friend and person that we'd be hearing many of these anecdotes. Where are the glowing recommendations from former teachers? Neighbors? People she worked with on her alleged charities? The silence is deafening. Question being--have these people been threatened if they talk, by legal goons hired by Meg? Some may simply opt to say nothing or respond in the vaguest terms rather than be forced to tell full-blown lies about how great a person Meghan was, when their experiences with her were anything but great.
H&M, setting themselves up to be the modern royal couple who, wait for it, care about "charity for others" and raising money ostensibly for the betterment of OTHERS! Few who read this board accept that presentation of the Sussexes. BUT we are not the wider world and all she needs is a few marks who care about social status and publicity. Billionaires preferred. Get drunk/high with a real ENGLISH prince!
Charity Navigator will need financial info and a track record for the SF to rate it. If it remains a private "effort"...no numbers given out...BUT people may not be warned off. People are impressed by that royal stuff, or why would they ever invite any one of them to speak, to tour a factory, to grace a charity ball with their presence?
1. According to the Trib article referred to previously, she spent her fall semester in Spain on an student exchange program and returned to NU Spring semester 2003. I think the most likely explanation for her not walking in the ceremony (and thus no pictures) is that she received an "incomplete" in a class or was short credits due to her time abroad. She probably finished up the credits during the summer and was conferred a degree later in 2003.
2. One of the two sorority sisters who was willing to speak on record for the Trib article has her own PR agency in Chicago. Commenting for this article was a great way for cheap advertising.
3. Diana made a well-publicized trip to NU in 1996 at the behest of the school president for a gala to raise money for pediatric cancer. Is it a coincidence that Meghan decided to go there just 3 years later????
I suspect Meghans pals have their own stories. It's not just that they will f**k with you...it's that they lOVE to f**k with anyone they see as a threat.
It's as close to psychosis as I ever want to be.
Meg's performance as a Royal Duchess so far surely qualifies her for the Golden Razzie award for the next decade in perpetuity. I can understand the attraction for somebody like her who really has no foundational personality of her own for acting, but the irony is that no one without a strong sense of herself as separate from the various roles she plays will ever be a *good* actress. Good acting has to come from a core of authenticity within oneself, and this is what Rachel Meghan lacks. Therefore her every move and utterance is calculated and fake, because apart from a rapacious hunger for attention and material things, there's no There there. Harry must be likewise pretty empty in himself to have fallen for this act for more than a couple of dates. Meg works very hard at projecting a self she thinks others will find impressive, but the sad cracks show all the time. It's part of her personality disorder to live in a constructed reality of her own making where in her own mind she is constantly Nailing It! I believe she really believes that nobody sees through her fraudulent self, which is why when she's confronted with evidence to the contrary, like the caustic reaction to the 'Poor Me' documentary, or the fact that her flim-flam attempts to paint herself as mother of the year are transparent to everyone, she is genuinely shocked.
At the start of this too-windy post, I meant to say that just based on her laughably sub-par acting which would be considered over the top for even a pantomime, she is not a shining product of the Northwestern drama department. NW is a top school, and I would assume that students wishing to be accepted into the drama program must have to, at minimum, audition for a spot within that department, and demonstrate what could charitably be called a modicum of natural ability for the thespian arts. I can't say as I've seen any evidence of a natural ability in her chosen discipline. She's relied exclusively on her niche as 'the hot n easy girl', which was effective in her 20s, but she's long in the tooth for it now; to our great embarrassment, she has not acknowledged that what she got away with when she was 25 looks more than a bit hootchie and desperate on a 38 year old mother who is supposed to be representing the Queen of England.
I find it rather easy to believe that Meghan bailed on her drama degree because she's just so bad at acting. What kind of grades would she have received if this is the best she can do . . fish lip faces and mugging? An acting background would have been a valuable asset in her current role, provided that she was in any way adept at performing. She is not, but seems to be delusional enough to think she's the next Meryl Streep. Perhaps she quit the university after being informed that her skills were not up to par to retain her spot in the drama major. All conjecture on my part . . but are there any programs or anything that prove that Meg had roles in college productions? Or are they as subject to 'privacy' as her cap and gown pictures, transcripts and/or pictures of Archie?
Of course all Of her patronages have been similarly neglected. The Queen must be delighted that she awarded them to MM. She Odd The fabulous work ethic.
@JL her birth dates are online, etc, she is as old as she says she is. Birth indexes, ancestry etc,
MM's blog the Tig celebrated luxury travel, fashion, food and drink. It is possible that her salary alone couldn't pay her lavish lifestyle bills, and she managed her money poorly. However, we have seen from the interview where she calls herself "a fraud" that she did not feel badly about misrepresenting herself as a member of the actor's union. She displayed utter contempt in that interview for the directors who would not cast her because she lied. I can understand how she would have a similar cavalier attitude about her taxes. It may have been a surprise to her when she did not win her court case.
I believe she has been rather blatant with merching for companies. Another poster suggested this is why her outfits appear out of season or not tailored properly. She appears often in photographs to position herself just right as to show off rings or earrings. One need look no further than the H&M debacle after the Tutu meeting to at least entertain the thought that she *might* be merching.
"You can meet *Prince Harry* and MM will bring him to your party if you pay enough. To the foundation, of course! ;)"
I can't imaagine that businessmen and celebrities are going to shell out millions for the dubious honour of having a royal manchild get drunk at their party. Plus the royal brand is tarnished with all the Andrew shenanigans and Harry seems to be on the outs with them in any case, so what really is the point?
Megzy z-list must be kicking herself, that she did not get over to California and her SunSacks publicity consultant two months ago, and hustled up some of the Hollywood millions her Sussex Foundation is rightfully due. Pr. Andrew imploding ruins this all. The flop rating has risen for Megzy's foundation. Wealthy people kick in a million or two because there is something in it for them. Glomming off the prestige of the British Royal Family and Meg's + Harry's image as social justice warriors. These two reasons are now tarnished.
Megs - "Dang! I traveled all the way to Africa for my amazing Archie photo-ops reveal, done SJW style with Bishop Tutu. When I should have doing the Hollywood $$$ hustle for MY Sussex Foundation!"
"Dang, dang, dang you stale pale male Prince Andrew. You are more useless than my father"
I don't fault Ms. Markle for this. It would be inconsequential and not worthy of our scrutiny IF it didn't fit a pattern of her obscuring, aggrandizing, and flat out lying about her accomplishments. I think my favorite is her recounting of some big speech she gave where she claimed later that she was given a standing ovation. And there are pictures of the entire audience clapping politely but no one was standing except her.
She never seems to grasp that the truth is so much more powerful than lying. Had she said, "You know, I never finished my degree at Northwestern because I was dying to start my career in acting. It was a mistake. I was only four credits short. I should have buckled down and just finished given that my father so heavily invested in my education, and I let him down. I would have been the first person in my family to graduate from college, and I blew it. So I'm telling all of you who are thinking of quitting school, don't. Get that GED. Get that degree. Show the world that you are committed and focused, and that education matters. Education means that you have more choice in this world. I often speak of girl power, and it's spelled E.D.U.C.A.T.I.O.N." This line of spin would have silenced all of us who are, like, where's your frigging degree, you liar.
By presenting herself as some superwoman, instead of some ambitious young woman with Hollywood stars in her eyes and so shortsighted that she couldn't take four months out of the years she spent trying to make it in acting, actually deflects from the persona that she's trying to create. The royal who is accessible. Like you and me. Well, not like me because I did get a diploma and I did walk, but you all know what I mean.
>> keep thinking I will just stop posting or even stop reading this blog because while I love Nutty's analysis, etc., the political bias on all the Markle blogs is staggering, much of it being anti-Clinton.<<
Well. I simply disagree as I usually am sickened by the ProClinton (both of them) comments on this blog. I hold back my opinion. Then you mention Trump that doesn't have anything to do with going to Eppstein's island etc....Can't people respect the Office of the Presidency if you are a US citizen and refrain from attacking him and his family on this site?!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_Eg_brJuZE
>>While some object to rankings, it is ranked #9 in National Universities the US News and World Reports rankings, the main ranking service. https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/northwestern-university-1739 <<
I went to the link and I could not find any explanation for this ranking. Persona;;y I do not think of it as a school say higher than a Harvard or Yale or even as good as my alma mater UCLA. Sorry Northwestern alums. But if people can talk glowingly about the Clintons I can state my opinion on this.
@JL Your comment on pork recipes and drinking made me want to go to my barn and get a chicken for dinner along with some moonshine. lol @SwampWoman, do you want to join me if you're here tonight?
Oh yes, indeedy I will pass you a mason jar full of 180 proof moonshine from deep in the heart of Texas! it will go well with Porkchops; of, course I can't ask for the recipe or it might offend some here.
1. They pay a market-related rent for living at Frogmore (and the monarch can pay for that or subsidise that from own wealth).
2. No RPO funding just as Beatrice and Eugenie do not get protection paid for by taxpayers.
3. Transport costs (and accommodation costs when an overnight stay is required) when on official duties can be recovered from the SG and will be scrutinised by the public.
4. All official royal appearances and official announcements will be handled by the Monarch's office in BP (no separate staff funded by the SG). Their official royal appearances are performance managed and evaluated.
5. So, all their Foundation work must be funded by themselves, as must security, transport, clothing, jewellery, staff, entertainment, bringing up children and all the costs associated with that, and so on.
Harry is very wealthy compared with most of the population. If the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, and Princess Anne, can get by with such an arrangement (and they are always well presented and do royal duties without controversies, plus seem to manage to support a family, household and a good, but not extravagant, life), so can M&H. If Charles wants to use his income to subsidise them (for protection and rent and whatever else), then he can do so, as did Andrew with his daughters.
It is time for Harry to grow up, and Meghan has shown to not be suitable as a representative for the British Royal Family (and the Queen's idea that they will do for the Commonwealth will become more controversial and less workable as Commonwealth countries say no to the couple). If Meghan can stick to the rules in such a carefully managed arrangement, she can use the BRF connection to raise her profile and keep it at a high level so she can to enrich herself through their Foundation, but at no cost to the taxpayer or the monarch (and controversy puts an end to official royal appearances).
This is the lesson that should have been learned from the Andrew debacle.
I know what you mean!
Your suggestions are very good. It seems something has to be done before things get worse with these two.
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges
As can be seen, Princeton, Harvard, Yale and 5 others are ranked above Northwestern. NW is #9. (Sorry, UCLA is not in the top #10 but Stanford is.)
Here is some info about how the rankings are derived.
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/ how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings
The 15 weighted factors used related to academic quality include ACT/SAT entering scores, student/faculty ratios, selectivity, 1st year retention, % faculty with terminal degrees, etc.
Many people object to rank ordering universities. And I'm sure many people think their school is ranked incorrectly. But for those who don't object to rankings, US News is THE company people look at. They've been doing it for 35 years.
My reason for citing the rank for NW was not to say the rank is absolutely correct. But some people posting were acting like NW is a podunk school nobody ever heard of. That's really not true. We can debate all day whether it should be #9 but it's not a podunk school.
Back when we were talking about Archie's birth, some said Portland Hospital wouldn't have covered for M&H if Meghan hadn't given birth there on May 6. I said I wasn't sure because it's not as though *the hospital* announced she had given birth. Harry and their team said she gave birth to Archie there as did a certified copy of a form that looked nothing like what we saw when the Cambridge kids were born. So if Archie wasn't born there or wasn't born there on May 6, the hospital would have had to deny the reporting---IMO that would have been an odd thing to do for a hospital known for protecting privacy.
But NW published a story in 2017 (after the engagement) that is still on its website saying M graduated in 2003. So it's not merely a matter of not speaking up about wrong information reported by someone else. And it's not merely a matter of the commencement program (which could be wrong. Many are. People either thought they would graduate and didn't or they were allowed to walk early.)
A piece of Princess Diana history didn’t find a buyer at auction.
The blue velvet gown that the late royal wore during her instantly iconic dance with John Travolta at a 1985 White House state dinner recently went up for sale with Kerry Taylor Auctions. Despite estimates that the dress would fetch between $330,000 and $450,000, bids failed to reach the reserve price of around $265,000.
However, the dress was sold post-auction to a British institution for about $290,000. The seller was “delighted as he hoped it would stay in the UK,” according to the auction house.
Those kinds of apologies are terrible and say quite a bit about a person's inability to be wrong. People often do things unintentionally, but that's not the point of the apology. The point of an apology is NOT to use the opportunity to prove or remind everyone you're a good person who would never do something wrong. The point of an apology is to acknowledge that you hurt someone's feelings with your actions and that you're regretful or remorseful for hurting their feelings, regardless if your action was unintentional because we all know that good intentions do not exclude questionable or thoughtless actions and words. Nobody is omniscient enough to foresee how someone is going to react or know every possible consequence of our words and actions, except Meghan of course. Another poster here mentioned how Meghan is on a quest to convince everyone how perfect she is, a superwoman who is more humanitarian, more educated, more kind, more thoughtful, more hardworking, more caring, etc. than anyone who has ever walked this planet, rather than just acknowledge her mistakes in judgment and be human.
An apology with the lines of "I would never do such a terrible thing" is kind of like the apology "I'm sorry you were hurt by anything that I might have done or said" or the typical corporate and political PR line "mistakes were made". They are unsincere and not willing to take individual responsibility that YOU made a mistake or a bad call that, despite good intentions, had a deleterious effect on someone else.
It is rather telling, that she cannot even allow the thought to have done something wrong when apologising.
I keep thinking I will just stop posting or even stop reading this blog because while I love Nutty's analysis, etc., the political bias on all the Markle blogs is staggering, much of it being anti-Clinton<...a few have made a very brief comment about Clinton but wizardwench goes on and on. I find Democrats are like that, rules do not apply to them if THEY perceive they are right.
The end always justifies the means to them hence I can break the rules because I am right....like Antifa. Andrew has caused Clinton to be mentioned on the Lolita express but it is not right to throw Trump into it. Another poster said something about putting a post up before it gets taken down by Nutty. Nutty should not have to spend time rooting out comments known to be not allowed but posted anyway by immature people who think their opinion is that important (it's not) wizardwenchs political 'truths' can be disputed but this is not the place, I will say that her claim the Clinton foundation is still around is very misleading. The foundation donations have plummeted to a small fraction of what they were. (They dropped from $216 million in 2016 to just $26.5 million in 2017 — a stunning 88% fall) Throughout Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, the foundation pulled in an average of $254 million a year. https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/clinton-foundation-donations..it was clearly pay to play, CLEARLY.....Emails turned up showing how the foundation intervened to arrange a meeting between Clinton and the Crown Prince of Bahrain, a country that had been a major foundation donor. A Chicago commodities trader who donated $100,000 to the foundation got a top job on a State Department arms control panel, despite having no experience in the area. On and on it went. This blog has changed too much and why has Nutty not removed the long political post? Maybe mine will be. In that case MAGA 2020
Yes that is exactly it!! It’s so very telling about her personality! It speaks volumes!! Especially considering she was also complaining about how bad her life was going and how no one checked in on her a few sentences later!! And in the context of the struggles going on in South Africa? I was gobsmacked to say the least!!
>>As can be seen, Princeton, Harvard, Yale and 5 others are ranked above Northwestern. NW is #9. (Sorry, UCLA is not in the top #10 but Stanford is.)<<
I read the criteria and I can now see why Northwestern is ranked pitifully at #9 precisely because of factors I would not consider of stronger academic importance. Over a third of the score (35%) was based on outcomes such as retaining and graduating students within 150% of normal time: even including social mobility/how well the school graduated students who received a Pell Grant (Say what??? I think its the student's responsibility to work hard and graduate.)
Faculty Resources (20%) To summarize faculty salaries, class size, student/faculty ratio.
Student Excellence (10%) Student's ACT/SAT scores (I hardly think Northwestern students excel so much better than hundreds of other universities ranked)
Financial Resources (10%) How much is spent per student, (Money spent does not always equate to good results, Money spent could be on recreation such as football stadiums, Rec centers not academics perse),
Alumni Support (5%) How much Alums give; again a 'soft' criteria,Where does the money go,,,to building fancy edifices?)
Expert Opinions (20%) The opinions of school presidents, provost and deans of admission. This is a wildly subjective criterion, Wonder what Northwestern's in house experts think and rate their own school?! 'Harrumph'!!
All in all, it seems that like most things with the media, it so eastric-centered with a higher ponderance of schools ranked higher based on being closer to the east coast,
I k ow when I graduated from UCLA it was rated in the top ten schools in the nation. US News Report ranks it 31st in the world. And a blogger here is a grad from UC Berkley and that is a phenomenal school in the west also (Highly intelligent students and faculty).
If Meghan is any indicator of a typical Northwestern-educated student that tells me everything about the quality of the school. LOL
>> I am tired of wizardwench throwing digs at PRESIDENT Trump. There is a long post defending that evil shrew Clinton, that is bad enough but she had to throw up (her) facts about Trump and his family. She has wormed in an anti Trump statement several times though politics is not to be discussed.<<
I Applaud You for stating this!!
>>While some object to rankings, it is ranked #9 in National Universities the US News and World Reports rankings, the main ranking service. https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/northwestern-university-1739 <<
I went to the link and I could not find any explanation for this ranking. Persona;;y I do not think of it as a school say higher than a Harvard or Yale or even as good as my alma mater UCLA. Sorry Northwestern alums. But if people can talk glowingly about the Clintons I can state my opinion on this.
@JL Your comment on pork recipes and drinking made me want to go to my barn and get a chicken for dinner along with some moonshine. lol @SwampWoman, do you want to join me if you're here tonight?
Well, my gracious. So sorry to have missed y'all last night. I was busily polishing, dusting, and taking 100-year-old toys that came from the great-grandparents out of storage (as decorations now as they're too fragile to play with). I took out my grandmother's aprons for when I'm making holiday goodies. SwampMan was a bit concerned about my reverence for the past and said that he hoped that I wasn't planning on cremating him and putting his ashes into the ornaments so that he can be hung on the tree every year like Epstein, who didn't hang himself.
After I heard about the (terrorist, IMO) situation in New Jersey, I kept updating my favored information sites for details which, of course, were not forthcoming. 'Tis the season for crazies and terrorists, y'all. Be careful.
Now, back to Markle. I had a friend in drama at the local college. They put on musicals, comedies, dramatic plays. (My friend was quite talented in both comedy and voice.) There were a lot of photos of the plays and musicals that were put on at the time. I would think that MM would be found there if she were in any of the school productions (she should have been).
I started thinking how strange it was that she didn't follow her dad into his behind the camera work of lighting or other support functions. He could have taught her so much more than finding the camera. It would seem to be a more secure paycheck that wouldn't depend on sex with a nasty producer (or aging out of roles). She may have not have had the intelligence for a technical career, though, and she definitely craves the public adulation.
Is there anybody here that can shed some light on the behind the scenes work?
Those photos (and reviews) may be able to be found, but it may involve going to the local cities and/or searching through the back copies of newspapers for old play information. I wonder if they are still kept on microfiche somewhere but they have probably all been scanned electronically. Maybe.
p.s. I notice my ipad loves periods. It puts periods after some words for no reason!
Here is what @JL said: "Better post this fast before it is removed, but meanwhile as an animal lover, Vegan and non drinker I have suffer innumerable pork recipes and proposals of drink fests. LOL"
So I'm thinking we need another pork recipe and some drinking here to run out the 'spoil sports'. Ha! Ha! Ha!
Since you were missed last night @Mimi was so nice to join in!! LOL
And it wasn't to argue that the ranking system US News uses is the best although the ranking system has been honed for many many years (35, to be exact.)
And it certainly wasn't to argue about the academic rigor of schools not in the top 10 according to this company (such as UCLA) My only point was that it is not accurate to pretend that NW is a no-name school of dubious reputation. It's not.
I have no affiliation with NW. But I don't think it makes sense to decide it must be a bad school if MM went there. No school (including Harvard, Yale, and UCLA) can be judged solely on the mental health of one graduate nor on what one graduate does with his/her life. For example, the Unabomber graduated from Harvard, Bradford Bishop graduated from Yale (foreign service officer on FBI's Most Wanted list for allegedly killing his mother, wife, and 3 sons) and convicted Watergate participants Ehrlichman and Haldeman graduated from UCLA.
Oh, I am so sorry for you feeling bad, I have Fibro too but usually, my attacks are very brief, Thank the Lord.
Ham sounds good! I got adventuresome and bought a frozen duck two days ago, I don't know if I want to wait till Christmas to cook it.
Well, maybe I need a glass of egg nog. I haven't had it in years. Sounds good!
Whew, take a breath and calm down. Guess you didn't catch my humor about MM and Northwestern! I won't reply as it would seem to you may be that I am trying to argue or defend UCLA and simply it is ludicrous to defend a top University such that it is. Its like intelligence, if you have it, you don't have to prove it. Go Bruins!!
It seems like emotions have been running high among a number of posters here. As they say in the South, 'they got their stinger out'.
Maybe @Mimi and @SwampWoman some people need a drink, like a mellow wine.LOL
Anyway, a goose? My! you are adventuresome!!!!!! I don’t know why I bother wearing my. Christmas apron as I don’t really cook. I do make huge messes....I mean “ Christmas Cookies” with the grands but that’s about it, everything else is store bought or Mr. Mimi. cooks!
When I come back in a few weeks you will have to let me know how your goose turned out as I am getting pretty tired of the same ol’ ham year after year!!! Take Care! 🤗
p.s. To the gruesome twosome wherever you are. Please stay there! It has been so nice not to see your nasty faces everyday!
@Mimi
Don't lose hope as my initial bout in 1999 was a week-long awful ordeal but now I just have a Fibro attack for a day or part of a day weeks and months apart. I think stress brings on my F-attacks.
'
BTW I am cooking a duck, not a goose. I didn't want you to think I'm rich and can afford a huge goose and would have to practically have a 6 burner range with a massive oven to cook it in (slightly exaggerating as I am wont to do. tee, hee) I better say something about MM or I will be criticized for being OFF TOPIC, Let's see, I don't think Markle is a good enough chef on her nonvegan days to be able to master cooking a duck much less a goose. Has anyone seen any solid evidence she is in America with Doria?
>>My original post was in direct response to all the political shade being thrown at the Clintons by others on this site, and pointing out that the issues that they are alleged to have committed have a parallel in the current administration. ALL of my comments, were in response to other comments made on this site.<<
My response: You admit making political comments, I was offended by you dragging our President and his family into the discussion as another few posters directly pointed out. I took the high road and did not point out the foibles and misdeeds of the Clintons (ie. Bill: "I did not have sex with that woman" referring to Monica, a young vulnerable girl in an unbalanced power situation. Hillary: Standing by Bill;s lies about said sex and all his unfaithfulness; As a woman I abhor seeing Killary lie to protect Bill and his sexual shenanigans).
>>>So I would appreciate your plea to eliminate politics from this discussion not be directed at me<<<
So you can comment but I can't...hmmm, sounds like the word another poster used today (starts with an 'H'). 'If you can't take the heat stay out of the kitchen' *perhaps*.
I will always believe the media was courted from the beginning. If you are truly trying to keep a relationship under wraps, you do not go shopping mid-day as she did and walk past the Daily Mail offices. Surely Harry had staff that could have picked up anything that they needed.
All of this MM college talk reminds me of my college boyfriend who truly broke my heart. I think about how I was so in love with him but he moved to Germany. TCD on Tumblr has a great photo series of H&M at the island wedding where she is clawing at him. Again her pathology appears to be on display.
I might have to watch that movie Christmas Carol, but I got a funny duck story on my 1st attempt at cooking one.
I used to raise ducks and one time my dog inadvertently killed a beautiful plump Rouen duck so I decided to immediately cook it. I spent an hour or more carefully plucking every last feather (which seemed to fly all over the kitchen) got a wonderful recipe and marinaded it for hours. Put it in the oven and babysat the roasting by basting it every so often, After a few hours I opened the oven door and slide the shelf halfway out to let it rest. I come down the stairs after a while only to see my 'Outside Cat' had gotten in and wrestled it off the oven shelf onto the floor and was attempting to pick out that first delicious bite. Well, being the germaphobe that I am, I did not even taste it and the dogs and cats that day had a meal of a lifetime.
I think you are fortunate to put on an apron and bake cookies with grandkids. And I can only imagine how wonderful it must be to have your Military hero, Mr. Mimi cook and cater to you. Have a blest Christmas and New Year. I have been saying prayers for my brothers recovery and will say a prayer for you to have relief from your current Fibro flare,
Now to On Topic, I wonder why we didn't see Megs serving Turkey at the famous Inion Rescue Mission in LA? Or np photos with best bud Ophra?
I agree with posters who think it will be the Sussex Foundation that will get the gruesome duo in trouble. T did not comment on IRS problem Megsy had but it is not something to sniff at if you are going to court, over owed taxes. I sympathized with your $3,000 tax bill, There is actually an IRS Dept that will advocate on a taxpayer's behalf. They can serve as a calm go-between and assist in working out filing arrangements and tax settlement agreements. I talked with some associated with IRS problems and one can conceivably pay only ten cents on the dollar for owed taxes. I had a dust-up with an aggressive tax agent who came to my home over a return not filed, It was a blessing in disguise because the IRS tax advocate really went to bat for me and got all the business forms I needed, got an extension etc. I ended up owning nothing, liked I told the young aggressive agent to begin with.
P.S. A Christmas Carol is a movie based on one of Charles Dickens books. I NEVER tire of watching that movie...especially the one with Alistair Sim’s.
Funny you mentioned missing the giblets. lol. This last Thanksgiving I had a young college student helping me cook and she almost did the same thing, I told those giblets are hiding but they're in there! She found them and laughed.
Thanks for appreciating my looooooooooong duck story. Maybe it will save me from criticism for being OT. Better we laugh than lob written hand grenades over political rivals.
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2019/12/meghan-markle-sussex-royal-us-meeting?utm_source=twitter&utm_social-type=owned&utm_brand=vf&mbid=social_twitter&utm_medium=social
https://dresslikeaduke.com/
It is so tacky and disgusting, and cheapens all of the Royal Families.
How is this permitted???
I've been enjoying Nutty's blog for months (although I rarely post) and the bickering seems to be increasing with every new thread, which decreases my enjoyment and I'm sure that of many others.
Nutty has repeatedly asked people to remain polite and on-topic and explicitly mentioned that the Andrew thread would remain open for those wanting to discuss Andrew and his ties to Epstein and certain American politicians. So, please, refrain from delving into it and other American politics in the other threads.
Pretty sure it would help the atmosphere tremendously.
FWIW, one of their (retired) SS agents told me that she was far worse than he was.
I gave her the benefit of the doubt until the Monica Lewinsky scandal. I thought maybe she really didn't know. Maybe she would leave him now. That didn't happen. It demonstrated that she was there merely for the power and she was in every illegal dealing as deeply as he was (or maybe even deeper). I would despise them regardless of their political designation. You assume that anybody that opposes the Clintons because of what they must be the hated Republicans. Perhaps you need to examine yourself and your beliefs.
I'm not sure about the Epstein/Bill/Hillary pedophile connection; I personally think it was a financial money-hiding connection. BC always seemed to prefer a more mature woman for sex whether consensual or forcible (that we know of).
I don't know if we can or should separate Epstein and the Clintons and Prince Andrew from Meghan Markle given the salacious yachting rumors and PA's seeming contempt for her as though they had crossed paths in the past. BC and HC were very active in soliciting funds from and visiting Hollywood for fundraisers. While it may ultimately be a meaningless data point, it is interesting to me nonetheless, particularly when MM has some of the Clinton people around her and HC 'defending' her.
Apologies for posting it here and not on the Andrew article that Nutty posted but for some reason it won't allow my comment through on that thread! ( I tried 3 times)
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:6BH761BxHugJ:https://www.mintpressnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/ANDREW_S-FIXER_SHE_S-THE-DAUGHTER-OF-ROBERT-MAXWELL-AND.pdf+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-b-1-d
I came across this blind gossip post and it seemed like it might refer to Meghan’s merching. Anyone aware of the royals taken legal action against any designers?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7774667/Palace-orders-Meghan-Markles-jewelry-designer-friend-remove-damaging-photos-Duchess.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7781543/Kate-Middleton-dons-glittering-headpiece-Queens-Diplomatic-Reception.html
Thanks for the article. I do think this blind is referring to Meg and it explains why the jewelry designer didn’t take the images down. She’s isn’t obligated to take down images of Meg is merching for her!
Apparently she breached a non-disclosure agreement.
I suppose we will have to wait and see if she removes the remaining photographs.
Then we'll know.... ;-)
Just a thought, but if she is in the USA and she has tax debt there, is there a possibility that the American government will prevent her from leaving because of that tax debt. The IRS cannot be blind to how much her income has rocketed over the past 2 years, given the photographs and reporting of her excess (Baby Shower, Frogmore renovations, multiple private jet flights, etc).
I understand that the IRS has the power to revoke a USA passport if the passport holder owes them money, to prevent that person leaving before the debt is paid or settled.
Do any of our American friends think that this is a possibility?
It would be too wonderful if HM's Government had this up its sleeve all along as the endgame, Archie still in the UK, Harry still in the UK, and MM prevented from getting on a plane in the USA to come back to the UK.
On a side note, I find myself thinking Meghan can’t get any worse or stoop any lower, then she does! She’s an absolute disgrace, no shame, no sense of loyalty to the family she married into....just nothing , it’s all about her and her and always her. She must be devoid of all feeling to behave the way she does.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/fortune.com/2019/08/14/irs-back-taxes-lose-passport/amp/
The current administration has spoken openly about cracking down on people and corperations who have unpaid taxes.
I’m aware of the typical arrangements with royalty but I was referring to what the blind suggests. It says the jewelry designer had her pictures up because the designer paid Meg to merch for her. It will be interesting to see what happens. The designer is in the USA not the U.K. just to be clear. If the designer paid Meg to merch for her, she may produce some other documentation to that effect. Interesting that the designer still has her pictures up. We shall see how this plays out!
Keller is still doing interviews about designing her ill-fitting wedding dress. Can somebody explain what I'm missing? Is there always an NDA in place when a royal makes a purchase? (That somehow doesn't apply to people like Keller or crying guy?) Whether M is being paid to merch the jewelry or not, I doubt there'd be an NDA if the jewelry was a freebie (which royals aren't supposed to take I know.)
Whichever way, it can’t possibly play out well for Meghan, because what she did wasn’t permitted - anywhere.
Diana knew how to showcase all that expensive bling as well (can't be gathering dust in the vault - either wear it or sell it!). I must admit, I want to see royalty wearing all that fabulous jewellery and I find Meghan's growing collection to be forgettable and, well, not royal. She does not understand the power of jewellery (the REAL power), or maybe she does and just does not have the pieces to wear (banned from the collections in the vault and Harry does not seem to have given her anything, well, royal, but he may just be hopeless with such stuff, rather than mean, or is simply giving Meghan what she wants).
Anyway, check out how royalty do bling (you will find many photos of Diana doing the same, and it looked fabulous) ...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7781543/Kate-Middleton-dons-glittering-headpiece-Queens-Diplomatic-Reception.html
Agreed that Meghan can’t accept payments! It looks like Meg got caught with her hand in the cookie jar!
I can see Angela Kelly signing an NDA. Its my understanding she's an employee of the Queen. And I can understand there might be NDAs preventing non-employee dress designers from revealing prices of bespoke items or revealing them early. But this seems different.
Right now on the designer's webpage there is still a pic of M that connects to the page to purchase the necklace with 3 tiny dangling turquoise bits. (And it's dated December 2018.)
Also note that Wills has a twinkle in his eye and looks relaxed and in a good mood. Some commenter on DM said he looked pensive,but I don't see that at all. Very nice to see.
If I was a merchant who had worked very hard to acquire and maintain a Royal Warrant, some of whom have been serving the royals for decades, if not centuries, I'd be furious if someone in the royal family went rogue and started his or her own sideline merchandising with a non royal warrant purveyor.
The jewelers holding royal warrants can be seen here
https://www.royalwarrant.org/directory?f%5B0%5D=field_warrants%253Afield_trade_category%3A3987
I'd not think Jennifer is competition :)
@ swampwoman I do not know the Clintons, nor do I know people who do know them. I have read numerous instances of people who work for Ms. Clinton who have reported the exact opposite. That she sends birthday cards and calls staffers who are having a crisis, etc., asks about their kids. So stalemate. When there is actual proof that Ms. Clinton is involved in some sort of clandestine operation regarding Epstein or any other criminal activity, I'd be happy to acknowledge her guilt. Until that day, I suggest we lay off the innuendo.
Regarding Ms. Clinton's endorsement of Ms. Markle. There are many anti-Markle sites (I read a number of them) endorsing theories that strain credulity (this is why Nutty's blog is so refreshing because it avoids the really out there spectulation). But other sites? Harry is merely playing a role. They aren't really married. Really? 32 million pounds for a sham marriage? She has backers and she's doing their bidding to bring down the BRF because the BRF wouldn't be blackmailed into doing, well, we don't quite know what, but it was catastrophic. I could go on and on. When, IMO, she's an epic grifter and narc who found her perfect mark: an immature man-baby with a substance abuse problem and not a whole lot of smarts. She was the first person to tell him that he didn't need to put on his big boy pants and grow up. Oh no, his tantrums, jealousies, and rages were entirely appropriate. (I do think that a surrogate was used for their child because there are just too many pictures of her "bump" moving and deflating, and the lack of any transparency regarding the birth and the documentation, and the inept attempts at photoshopped pictures, etc.) Anyone who read these sites for five minutes would encounter a mountain of conspiracy theories regarding Ms. Markle, and thus assume all the "shade" against her is racist and class-based. I doubt the BRF were thrilled to have an ex-divorcee who passed out joints as party favors at her LAST wedding and whose acting career seemed largely based her ability to simulate sex scenes as a daughter-in-law, but I don't think it was racist in nature. I do think their reservations were class-based. Look at the shade hurled toward Kate Middleton for not having the proper royal credentials?
What does Ms. Clinton get out of this? I have no idea. I don't think she went to Britain to beg William on behalf of the evil cabal. I think she went to Britain to collaborate with him on climate change. Why is this so out of the realm of reality? It makes a lot more sense to me than believing that she's one of Ms. Markle's handlers.
And if you have a problem with Bill Clinton getting "serviced" by Ms. Lewinsky, which I believe was consensual--not ethical given his marriage vows but not illegal--I have a real problem listening to Mr. Trump on camera gloat on how he regularly assaults women and grabs their genitals without any ramifications what so ever because of who he is, which is NOT consensual.
I don't have different standards for different people. I don't care WHO you are. That's my point.
1. Meghan can be spiteful and ruthless and acquire a grudge (which she will hold onto) for the slightest thing (typical narc behaviour, which is often covered with charming behaviour and seemingly intelligent and rational talk, which is actually just word salad). On the other hand, perhaps she has taken on board that she has to clean up her act in some way in order to hold onto all the perks. She has rationalised to herself why she has thrown Jen Meyer under the bus but not others. Even if there was an NDA (a typical M&H behaviour), she did nothing to enforce it for a long time ...
2. BP are starting to clean up after the Markles and the instruction came directly from them (Megsy is paddling furiously under water to not let it affect her money-making schemes in the USA and to distance herself from/explain away merching behaviour, which will earn her sanctions from BP). After all, she does not have any Hollywood credentials (despite being referred to as a Hollywood actress) and thus needs the royal connection and all its perks to have credentials among the wealthy and influential movie crowd.
This is like a complicated movie plot, perhaps even a mini series!
Of course the Clintons have lots to hide. You don't get to have that political power without compromises and some shady/questionable stuff. Trump is like Megsy - messy with details that come back and bite him. The great thing about politicians is that they can be replaced so I think it is more useful to focus on the new generation and try and influence. support the best of that bunch because one way or another time is almost up for the Clintons and Trump.
Glowworm
🐛
That was rude!
"I cannot afford to sit on my butt! I have to go out and earn and merch and earn, while the trust funded Royal lazy bones can afford to amble along aimlessly though their Royal lives. You will be amazed when My Sussex Foundation makes its big debut in Los Angeles. I already have Arnold Schwarzenegger lined up, he wants to show off some of your jewelry for freebies. His girl friend too!"
You clearly not only can't remember what you wrote you contradict yourself immediately by spewing more political comments!!!! Is it civil of you to keep doing what is annoying to many, especially us who plea for you to stop?!! It is a rhetorical question so please don't twist it to spew more offensive political diatribe. I see you pick on me (and not the others who asked for an end of your political comments) and don;t have the temerity to address the very stinging reply of one poster that really put you in your place. I resent you using your soapbox against our President, his family and now the Republican Party (who you so crudely refer in the most horrific terms using a poor dead man to make a stupid and grosteque point....whew, that is the lowest thing I have read in years). You are so disingenuous (like MM perhaps) to do try to say you are only responding to comments. I was not part of the Clinton discussion when I along with others (including a self described 'foreigner') asked for an end of political comments.
For the record Quit Singling Me Out just because I stood up for civility and respect!! PS, the Killary typo shouldn't have seemingly set you off (I had no clue you were referring to Vince Foster) but another poster had a nice response to that and other dead people associated with Clintons' (maybe reread that for edification in case you missed it).
Again, leave me alone!!.
I’m not sure if any staff at BP would be checking a blog etc ., like Meghan’s Mirror (sorry I’m vague, but I’ve never seen the site). I do however think they are watching and monitoring Meghan closely. Surely this will make life uncomfortable for her now.
....is Meghan is a dear in headlights now? I’m hoping it’s near popcorn time for the Sussex duo, and they’ve been finally rumbled.
The Royal warrant thing you’ve already looked into, so I won’t delve into that. ;o)
I find Glowworm's comment about scrolling past you and @Wizardwench comments a very civil way to express their view, unlike the sometimes rabid comments of a political nature or a very infamous poster (name rhymes with 'batty') who hurls insults and call names. Why shouldn't we applaud civility which lately seems in short supply? Was your assessment accurate that it was "rude"...no, and I dare say it wasn't even accurate. Just a comment to express what one poster intends to do (back away from being affected by other's comments). Seems honorable to me!
I would be impressed if Megs brings in the millions for charitable purposes, but even more so if they 'Actually' spend 90% on direct funding of projects.
So would I, and I would'nt be the only one here to agree I guess.
I agree with Sandie about the bling and who wears it well. Wooza.
And what clearly isn't bling (and won't ever be bling on the level of royal bling).
There is something about this (wearing jewelry which looks like a lot of stuff they sell in stores at the mall) which I can't quite put my finger on about how much of it is her personal likes the look of, how much is this is someone I could make a deal with/fits the price range of my target audience? or is this one of her throwback or family values of what is "pricey" when you go through bad financial times (meaning: a whole bunch of little and less expensive is more impressive than self sacrifice but gets a statement piece)?
I don't think there is an underlying well thought out plan of if they aren't going to let me wear real royal bling so let me define myself as the Princess who doesn't get to dress myself as a princess of today "should be".
Politics: People, I get American politics from coworkers, friends and in my family. I'm sick to my stomach at watching the finger pointing and loud screaming of I'm right/you're wrong/bad/evil for thinking anything less than good things about my side and now you must agree with me or else... I can't escape it. I don't want to read it here if I can avoid it. Thank you for allowing me not to join in/take sides. (hops off the soapbox).
A phone call is all it would have taken. Instead, the alliterate royal decided to humiliate someone she would have begged for friendship a few years back. To make it worse, she then leaked what she had done to the media.
If this blind is at all accurate, Meghan’s narcissistic personality disorder must be off the charts so much that she thinks she can throw her weight around Hollywood like this when she’s trying to cultivate these same people to fund her lavish lifestyle and enhance her fauxmanitarian facade with their money.
Jennifer’s father is Ronald Meyer, a Vice President at NBC Universal. He was also a founding member of Creative Artists Agency, which represents many top entertainers and professional athletes. In other words, Jennifer’s father is a Hollywood heavy hitter. Jennifer is the ex-wife of actor Tobey McGuire (Spiderman), so Jen is very well connected.
Whether this blind is accurate or not, Meghan’s OTT narcissistic behavior to this point displays that she has probably never heard the adage, “Don’t shit where you eat.”
Long time royal watcher here, and IMO all that bling was brought out last night on purpose!
Kaye: As soon as I saw HMTQ wearing the emeralds, I thought she was sending a message to Mayhem. Then she followed it up with Kate dripping the necklace and earrings plus the topper of Kate wearing the pearl tiara favored by Diana.
The message: THESE jewels are worn by royalty and NOT by imposters like you, Meghan.
All of this aside, why leak the story to the press? In order to get "ahead" of it?
Or perhaps she is so spiteful, since she couldn't get a proper job in Hollywood?
I'll say it one more time for the people in the back (or anyone lurking from CB): Suits is not Law & Order. It's not even Forensic Files. It's a show on the USA network that seems to be on re-run when I travel on the hotel TV or at the gym.
Pass the popcorn, please. Oh, I want butter and parmesan cheese on top, please, and extra napkins. Now I shall sit back in comfort and watch the show.
Btw, I have the flu. Had the flu shot in October and have been taking Sambucol all last week since the flu activity has been getting worse and it’s a bad flu season. Wash your hands and take precautions. It’s bad. Bad bad. H1N3 is the strain I have and I am currently in the hospital for treatment. They pumped me full of steroids and stuff, so I’m a bit up right now. I’m hoping to get discharged today. It happened fast. Felt bad yesterday and then during the night I couldn’t breathe. I have asthma, hence the precautions but I also didn’t wait and went straight to hospital for eval.
What a contrast to Meg's tiny merched trinkets. Wonder if the queen digs out the emeralds as a royal f.u. to you know who?
I have read that Queen Elizabeth has a wicked, witty sense of humor. I hope that is exactly what she was doing!
Whether this blind is accurate or not, Meghan’s OTT narcissistic behavior to this point displays that she has probably never heard the adage, “Don’t shit where you eat.”
Isn't that exactly what Meg has been doing since before she joined the Firm? I cannot imagine squandering such an opportunity to make a real difference due to her acquired position in the manner that she has. Disgraceful!
I think the F.U. from the queen was exactly that. Meghanof-multiple-rings-on-her-hands just cheapens the brand of The Firm just as much as Andrew’s activities. Andrew’s has come full circle or close to it. Meghan’s is still underway. And hopefully, Meghan and her sidekick Harry will be held accountable in a manner similar to Andrew for the mayhem and disrespectful ways that have been brought into the RF and shown to the wonderful people of the UK.
I would LOVE to see Kate in the Vladimir tiara! Kate really rocked the jewels last night. I am not sure I have ever seen her in so much bling at once. All the royal ladies looked magnificent.
*Takes out flashlight, peers around for feelings of outrage, finds feelings instead being all rowdy toasting HRM the Queen, PP, PC and PW in admiration and then toasting Princess Anne for good measure. They would have toasted the Duchess of Cambridge and all the little Cambridges as well but a Baptist feeling in the back with a glass of sweet tea started a temperance lecture.
Okay, looks like I'm good with that scenario, too.
Regarding the Jen Myers thing, I do think this is the palace at work. I also suspect it was timed to precisely coincide with Meghan's alleged fundraising stunts in LA. As I said above, the type of people able and willing to donate serious money to celebrity 'foundations' don't do so out of the goodness of their hearts. They will always want something in return. And if Meghan, as it appears, has no 'in' with senior royals, and if any merching is going to be clamped down upon, then what really would motivate the rich and famous to pay big money to be associated with her - which is what a donation to the 'foundation' would be, in effect? What would be the return on their investment, so to speak?
Btw, I have the flu. Had the flu shot in October and have been taking Sambucol all last week since the flu activity has been getting worse and it’s a bad flu season. Wash your hands and take precautions. It’s bad. Bad bad. H1N3 is the strain I have and I am currently in the hospital for treatment. They pumped me full of steroids and stuff, so I’m a bit up right now. I’m hoping to get discharged today. It happened fast. Felt bad yesterday and then during the night I couldn’t breathe. I have asthma, hence the precautions but I also didn’t wait and went straight to hospital for eval.
Going to the hospital may have saved your life. This flu appears to be a killer.
Sorry, Nutty, for the threadjack, but I wanted to let everyone know how fast and bad it went for me, and I was taking precautions!
(CatEyes, I thank you.)
Glowworm
🐛
I don’t have pneumonia, so I will get discharged today, thank goodness.
Camilla has never worn the Vladimir tiara, photos on Pinterest are photoshopped (that was the only place I saw them). She has a family tiara, the Cubitt tiara, that belonged to her grandmother. She most often wears the Greville tiara, that was previously worn mostly by the Queen Mother. And Kate has worn the Nizam of Hyderbad necklace once, but as I stated, never so much of the Queen's jewelry, (earrings, necklace, tiara, and new ring).
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2019
Blind Item #1
A phone call is all it would have taken. Instead, the alliterate royal decided to humiliate someone she would have begged for friendship a few years back. To make it worse, she then leaked what she had done to the media.
PO
Go and see.
I thought it was the emerald tiara that Princess Eugenie wore on her wedding day, was the one Meghan wanted to wear. Eugenie bagged it first, being a blood royal etc. ;o)
Sorry, Nutty, for the threadjack, but I wanted to let everyone know how fast and bad it went for me, and I was taking precautions!
Thanks for the heads up! I tend to get pneumonia after flu and it doesn't look like that strain that you had is in the vaccine this year. I *think* I remember getting the flu shot this year. I better call and check, I suppose.
May, 2019 seems really long ago, doesn't it? Once upon a time we were all willing to entertain the projected story that Harry was a beaming new dad. Feels pretty bogus now, doesn't it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnetgWd-oyY&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR3kIawOWKpMg0KCRf9uKXiEBJOxwkJe4jvW_jySpidnXI13ZmVj8DdQEgI
I should get back to my snowball drink! ;o)
I agree Kate was quite blingy (as was everyone else.) But I think part of it for Kate was the dark dress made the diamonds pop. At the state dinner for the Spanish royals she was pretty blinged out too in royal jewelry---same tiara, Diana's pearl drop earrings, the Queen's Ruby and Diamond Floral Bandeau Necklace....
Waiting for the RF to put the smackdown on the "Dress like a Duke" website. Even if H&M are OK with blatantly using their images for merching, I can't believe William would be OK with it.
Wondering if the RF also went after H&M (the clothing company) when H&M (the duo) were front and center on the website with pics from the Tutu meeting and ID of Archie's overalls.
That image came down quickly so maybe the palace did intervene.
Here is an article (with photos and videos) of Camilla entertaining very ill children at her home for Christmas.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7785653/Duchess-Christmas-Camilla-invites-children-Clarence-House-home.html
Brought a tear to my eye.
A Royal doing what Royals do best.
@Raspberry Ruffle, I thought it was the Vladimir that MM wanted with the emeralds (which again, is preposterous, it is worn by HMQ) but she was denied because Eugenie had already decided on the Greville Emerald Kokoshnik. Who knows, but Eugenie got the better tiara in the end ; )
It seems there will be a tad more scrutiny with all the royals when it comes to "foundations" and perks in the wake of the PA saga. Hopefully the jewelry promo/deal with MM is the first of many BP smack downs on merching.
And hopefully, Meghan and her sidekick Harry will be held accountable in a manner similar to Andrew for the mayhem and disrespectful ways that have been brought into the RF and shown to the wonderful people of the UK.
We can only hope and pray that the time for them to be held accountable is here at last! I cannot believe the level of disrespect the Harkles have shown the Firm and the British people so far, and have seemingly gotten away with their rotten, slovenly ways. The show of bling last night could not have been more pointed to show at how unimportant Megsy is in the grand scheme of the Firm!
Will we see Megsy hawking her well-tread 'charms' on Hollywood Boulevard as a geriatic hooker ala Pretty Woman's Vivian Ward, only in reverse? Vivian started out as a high-school dropout streetwalker and ended up the princess bride of a business tycoon who was going to send her to college. Meg's trajectory from real royal princess to guttersnipe is going the wrong direction. I can't believe *anybody* would be reckless enough to give her a job or a cent after recent events. She's going to wind up as a sad, bankrupt, drug-addled wreck on a 'Behind the Music' style documentary on VH1. I nominate 'Tarnished Tiara: the Meghan Markle Story' as the title.
What a loser.
If you mean the female Labour MP’s who wrote that open letter to Murky? I don’t personally think anyone voting will be bearing any of that in mind; far bigger issues at stake. ;o) If the MP’s lose their seats (in Parliament) it will be for other reasons I’m sure.
Lol The tarnished Tiara
That’s hilarious
Oh the dream! We can just sit back munch on popcorn, watching the whole thing tumble down like a pack of cards on top of them.
@Liver Bird, ‘I agree that the dazzling display of jewels is at least partly meant as a message towards Meghan - the queen works by way of symbols, and this is one.’
Typically British I dare add too. Symbols and oblique signs are ways we show what we feel/think.