Earlier this year, in response to a blind item on Crazy Days and Nights, I predicted that Duchess Meghan would be out of the Royal Family by the end of the year. This prediction was received with a great deal of mockery - you're delusional! you're a racist!, etc.
Now it is December 31. Was I correct? It's hard to tell.
"Family in the US" would presumably be Meg's mother in California, since she has cut off everyone else.
But there's no evidence that Doria ever spent time with the Sussexes during the period, or that the Sussexes were in California at all.
Locals supposedly saw Harry hiking nearby; a local restaurant claimed to have denied the Sussexes a reservation because their security team would have been too disruptive. In fact, one account suggested that the compound had been putting up additional security fencing as early as December 19, roughly two weeks ago.
Here's the thing: do Meg and Harry really need that much security, particularly since nobody supposedly knew where they were?
When Boris Johnson and his latest squeeze can fly economy class on their Christmas holidays, and wealthy megacelebrities like Paul McCartney can stand in line with his wife to buy tickets to a movie (something a friend of mine experienced; Paul turned down offers to let him skip ahead), how much security do the sixth and perhaps the seventh in line to the throne really need?
One of the best security tactics is surprise; if no one knows Duchess Kate is going to be in a particular Waitrose at a particular time, she can pop in with a single bodyguard and do her shopping, as long as she doesn't dilly-dally.
It's hard to believe that Meg and Harry in an unexpected location would need extensive security planning, although they might think they do. As Enty often says, the more insecure and status-obsessed the celebrity, the bigger the entourage.
Personally, I'm not entirely convinced they were ever in Canada. The evidence is all second-hand, and there have been no smartphone photos from ordinary polite Canadians (or boorish tourists.)
Now it is December 31. Was I correct? It's hard to tell.
The visit to California
Meghan is clearly not in the UK at writing, although it is difficult to puzzle out where she is and who she is with. Originally, the "six week break", now in its seventh week and counting, was supposed to give Meg and Harry a chance to relax and reconnect with family in the US."Family in the US" would presumably be Meg's mother in California, since she has cut off everyone else.
But there's no evidence that Doria ever spent time with the Sussexes during the period, or that the Sussexes were in California at all.
The Canada stay
Several items have been leaked suggesting that the Sussexes are staying at a private compound near Vancouver, Canada.Locals supposedly saw Harry hiking nearby; a local restaurant claimed to have denied the Sussexes a reservation because their security team would have been too disruptive. In fact, one account suggested that the compound had been putting up additional security fencing as early as December 19, roughly two weeks ago.
Here's the thing: do Meg and Harry really need that much security, particularly since nobody supposedly knew where they were?
When Boris Johnson and his latest squeeze can fly economy class on their Christmas holidays, and wealthy megacelebrities like Paul McCartney can stand in line with his wife to buy tickets to a movie (something a friend of mine experienced; Paul turned down offers to let him skip ahead), how much security do the sixth and perhaps the seventh in line to the throne really need?
One of the best security tactics is surprise; if no one knows Duchess Kate is going to be in a particular Waitrose at a particular time, she can pop in with a single bodyguard and do her shopping, as long as she doesn't dilly-dally.
It's hard to believe that Meg and Harry in an unexpected location would need extensive security planning, although they might think they do. As Enty often says, the more insecure and status-obsessed the celebrity, the bigger the entourage.
Personally, I'm not entirely convinced they were ever in Canada. The evidence is all second-hand, and there have been no smartphone photos from ordinary polite Canadians (or boorish tourists.)
Unconfirmed rumors
Ann, a regular poster on CDAN, suggested the other day that Harry was in a combined rehab/mental health facility in the UK. Meg was in North America by herself, she said.
To quote Ann: I'm hearing the Harkle divorce is in process. Markle got herself thrown out of the BRF in record time. Harry's in inpatient treatment in England. The BRF have custody of Archie. The DNA test didn't lie. Unfortunately Markle did and her settlement is going to be considerably much less since Archie isn't Harry's biological son. The whole sad tale should be over sometime in the second quarter of 2020.
(The inpatient treatment was) originally for treating his depression but they discovered he had developed some addiction issues trying to medicate his depression. I'm glad he's getting some help.
This is the very definition of an unconfirmed rumor, but it fits the British Royal Family's proven pattern of never leaving one of its own behind on the battlefield. (See: Prince Andrew.)
It would also explain the ludicrous photoshopped Christmas card, and the lack of other Sussex material during November and December.
And the timing - the second quarter of 2020 - would allow the BRF to say that the marriage lasted for two full years, making the extravagant Sussex wedding look slightly less silly.
It may just be a guess, but it's an interesting guess.
And the timing - the second quarter of 2020 - would allow the BRF to say that the marriage lasted for two full years, making the extravagant Sussex wedding look slightly less silly.
It may just be a guess, but it's an interesting guess.
No respect from the press
Finally, the lack of respect the British press is showing for the Harkles is notable. An article in the Telegraph, often nicknamed "The Palacegraph" because it is used as an outlet for the Royal family and its courtiers, said earlier this week
While for a time it seemed that the idea of Harry and Meghan joining forces with William and Kate as the “fab four” was one of the most positive royal PR stories of the last ten years, we start the new decade with the two couples running two separate courts, the Cambridges’ conventionally Royal, the Sussexes’ increasingly like a Hollywood entourage.
The way they have conducted themselves since their marriage, and the birth of their son earlier this year, has caused considerable consternation among courtiers. The decision to absent themselves from some family gatherings and the secrecy that surrounded their son’s christening, have gone down badly among sticklers for protocol.
The Sussexes have attracted public criticism given they receive money from the Sovereign Grant and are, as such, effectively public servants. Some courtiers fully expect the Duchess to want to go to live in California, not least because she apparently complains about the weather and other aspects of life in Britain; and it is assumed that if she went, her husband and child would go with her.
Emphasis mine. Anyway, that doesn't sound like a Royal Family that is looking to make nice or include the Duchess in its activities in the future, or one that is encouraging the press to show her respect.
Meghan's lawsuit against the Mail on Sunday is still in progress - suggesting that she won't get the generous settlement she was hoping for - and its sister publication the Daily Mail is being hard on Meghan as well.
It openly suggested that the Sussex Christmas card was a fake, and then mocked her branding exercise, in which Sussex Royal applied for copyright on "more than 100 items, from teaching materials and emotional support groups to clothing and even newspapers."
The DM didn't seem too worried about the possible competition from Meg.
At any rate, the UK newspapers that play a game of be-nice-so-you-can-get-access with the Royal Family now seem to understand that they are no longer required to be nice to Meghan.
We will punish your family
In an earlier blog post, I mentioned that a harsh story in the New York Post about the high administrative costs of the Royals' charities ("Why Americans are wasting their money donating to British Royal charities") was probably retaliation for Prince Harry's lawsuit against its sister paper The Sun.
Murdoch and his team were saying: get Harry to drop the lawsuit, or we will go after the rest of the Royal Family.
The Mail seems to be playing the same game. It ran an extremely unflattering story about the Queen this week, suggesting that she encouraged the UK government not to close an immigration loophole since it might affect her access to horse groomers.
Today there was another unflattering story about how the Queen wants to build a massive storehouse for her art collection in Windsor, but that the local council was opposed because of the risk of flooding.
Both stories made the monarch look arrogant and self-serving, and both could have easily been sent to the circular file in a time when relations between the Royals and the media were more friendly.
The Mail would like to see the lawsuit targeting its organization dropped as well.
Is Meghan finished in the Royal Family?
To return to the initial question: is Meghan finished in the Royal Family?
The indications are strong that she has not only burned off any goodwill she may have had with the British public, but that the chaos she has created is (along with the Andrew scandal) damaging the popularity of the entire Royal Family.
I think her days are numbered. I wonder if she will ever return to Britain at all.
Comments
I think there is some truth to the Saanich rumours. Just not that the Family Sussex is there in its whole.
Maybe the RF just doesn’t want another Diana situation, where if anything should go wrong on the security front, a conspiracy would be alleged.
I agree with Nutty that the RF will support and defend their own. Which family wouldn't after all? As I said before, I do hope that PH is getting help with his problems and sees the light. Madam has played havoc with the feelings of the British people. Tradition plays a massive part of the British psyche. True, times have changed but nobody accepts a little, unknown, young woman with no substance - narcissist or not - to kick up a fuss in the midst of the mighty RF just because she fancies herself oh so influential. Does she think that her ego is more significant than that of others?
If we are going to entertain that idea, then the 'elaborate additional security measures' at the mansion and the flap over the 'denied restaurant reservation' could easily have been smokescreens to give the impression they were there and get people talking about them. Her whole act is like the Wizard of Oz . . pretend to be a super important Big Noise over *there* while your small insignificant self is somewhere else entirely. The additional security might have been ordered by the current owner in order to make the property more attractive to potential VIP buyers. Meg got some kind of kickback for her name usage of course . . funding a sunny holiday somewhere else, I reckon.
Archie was her most audacious fraud, and I always figured he would be her downfall, when his provenance was discovered. HM has just welcomed him into the family through her Christmas speech, so that's a bit of a head scratcher. If he's got Meg's DNA but not Harry's, and Harry hadn't even signed off on this plan to deceive his family until it was too late to go public, the RF really doesn't have any responsibility for this baby. I've been assuming all along that he is in the care of his birth mother, or another adoptive family who has been compensated for his care. Then HM reasserts his place in the succession in her biggest speech of the year. So--don't know what's going on there.
If Harry's in rehab and his assets have been frozen so she can't get her claws on any of it . . oh, dear. I guess she could list her pilfered gladrags on Ebay and see what they go for. Based on the less-than-half-arsed electronic GIF 'card', her remaining resources are very slim.
Gee, if Harry divorces Meghan and it's already been disproven that the child she's claiming as hers has no ties to the RF . . would she be entitled to security detail at all? I think they are still putting the finishing touches on a case for fraud which will annul the marriage, her rights to use the title Duchess of Sussex, Sussex Royal or in any way profit from her extremely brief and fraudulent time in the RF. They could put injunctions in place against her merching on the Sussex Royal name or the Duchess title and make every instance a criminal offense. She could be ultimately stripped of every perk and every farthing she thought she had and walk away with nothing but her Jennifer Meyer trinkets and the ratty jeans and white Panama and bathrobe coat she entered into marriage with.
I think this is what is in store for her eventually. But as the saying goes, even a fatally wounded animal is still dangerous. Unpicking her web of deceit and lies is going to take more time yet. She's not going to go quietly, but eventually she will go--the BRF has vastly more resources than she does and her remaining friends are few. I don't think we'll be seeing any more public engagements from this pair, or from her, but she will continue to be Duchess of Sussex in name for at least the better part of this year. She may be desperately stupid enough to try the fauxgancy gambit again. If she does, I hope the RF has learned from the last experience and does not allow her to hide behind 'privacy'. I hope that plans are underway this minute to draw up a conservatorship for Harry's money and personal affairs to protect his assets from her in the event of divorce. Harry likely needs oversight on his money and affairs and might have to have this help for the rest of his life, particularly if Charles strips him of full-time working status. Granny may have already done so.
Pass the popcorn; I think 2020 will see big changes coming. Not immediately, though. Officially, she is not done yet, but it's only a matter of time. I think we will see her ouster before 2021 dawns. But I'm hedging my bets. This wounded viper is likely going to take some people down with her. It's going to be protracted and ugly, because Meg's on the mat, and she fights dirty.
There has been talk of Harry potentially being infertile. He was operated on for an undescended testicle at the age of 7. His parents were advised of a potential risk to fertility at the time. Maybe something happened to the other healthy one--sports injury or military injury . . or maybe this was always going to be an issue for Harry. This is speculative on my part, but it would explain a lot about the weird lack of bonding between Harry and the baby if he wasn't involved in the production side at all. Particularly if Meg arranged a surrogacy with a donor without his knowledge.
At the time of their engagement, they talked about wanting to adopt children, and I think that was potentially a testing of the waters to see how alternative ways of having children was received . . if either or both parties knew they would have great trouble having kids the natural way or had already had that confirmed.
Most couples don't find out they are infertile until they spend a significant amount of time trying for children. Meg announced her pregnancy a scant 5 months after her wedding, so it's not like she gave nature much time, at the advanced age of 37. If Harry knew going into this that he couldn't have kids without clinical help, then pretending to be pregnant to snare him wouldn't have been a winning strategy. If that's how she did it, though, then he didn't know.
It's all a big mess. Having publicly supported the pregnancy and the birth, however tepidly, and having officially acknowledged Archie as a great-grandson in the line of succession, I'm not sure how the Queen is going to backpedal from it now. It will be interesting to watch her try . . if she does.
Having had fertility issues of my own at the same age, I can tell you my doc said try for a year before alternate measures. But I'm clearly not as special as M.
Torontopapers is absolutely roasting M on Twitter - nearly a post a day. And they are scathing. I feel like they must know something to be that bold, knowing how litigious that duo is.
All in all, great post to address the current happenings...or lack thereof.
Yes, there is a Soho House Vancouver: https://www.sohohouse.com/cwh/vancouver
But my guess is Rach would want to be at Soho House Malibu if she were choosing. It's the most exclusive, not open to regular members, only special A-list members. A few years ago (2015, during the launch, for example), she wouldn't have even been allowed unless she were there to "work" and "entertain". So, my guess is that is where she'd be if holed up in a Soho property.
And WTH would Oprah need a world tour? Have we not seen enough of O already?
As for Archie's DNA, is there any chance the rumor could have it backwards and the baby is Harry's but not Rach's?
And @Nutty, maybe it's not protection so much as it is monitoring that Rach needs?
I also think they are apart and figuring strategies. They’ll pretend to be together and happy for as long as they can. I agree with @Nutty that they want to make that 2-year mark for the marriage. Meghan won’t be able to stand being out if site doesn’t shell pull a stunt or leak the separation news, IMO and blow the arranged plans.
Spenderella doesn’t hold a good hand beyond being a loose canon who will leak secrets about the BRF for money or pity as she tries to start new ventures. Oprah can do her documentary with just Harry but use the divorce/separation to Jack ratings, as content. Megs might get a Weight Watchers contract out of Oprah but I think that is all.
The House Of Sussex has imploded and I think Harry is ready to divorce her.
I have a dog (11 years old now) and moved from the US to Europe this year. I did not bring him with me because of his age and potential health concerns; he was adopted by my parents and is doing great in the US. I came back to the home for the holidays, and my main focus has been to see my sweet dog and have family time. If Meghan is such a dog advocate and loved her dogs so much, then why wouldn’t she want to see her dog and introduce him to Archie?
If that’s not the case and I’m not remembering the story correctly, then disregard this point :)
I struggle believing this, she isn't stupid and that a DNA test would be a given. The rest, yeppers, pretty much what has been predicted. It is sad the amazing opportunities afforded being a member of the BRF has been totally squandered.
I don't think we were told the dog Bogart is with Doria. Frankly if he was "too old" to travel to the UK, I'm not sure he'd have been able to travel from Toronto to LA either. He supposedly "stayed with friends" in Toronto.
But he wasn't old anyway. Unless people think of a lab mix as old at barely *five.* We know how old he was because MM said he was 3 in an interview done in early 2016 and we saw pics of him as a puppy on her blog. The dog, Guy, whose legs got broken was older than Bogart. In the magazine interview M said the two dogs were "thick as thieves." Guy was adopted as an adult as a companion for Bogart.
For the discerning and intelligent lovelies who post here. You have to make your New Years resolutions not just for a year but for a new decade. I have made mine that are good for at least two years.
— -- Just hours after Prince Harry's engagement to Meghan Markle was announced, the royal reflected on what his late mother would think of his new fiancée.
In an interview with the BBC on Monday, Harry gushed that Princess Diana and the former "Suits" actress would be "thick as thieves, without question."
https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/prince-harry-princess-diana-meghan-markle-thick-thieves/story?id=51411556
With regard to the absence of a picture on the desk meaning an imminent divorce, I think she treated the Harkle situation similar to PA. HM made sure the press saw PA/PC going to the earlier service as a show of family support, but she did not antagonize the public with his attendance in the Christmas walk. With Haz/Rach, she knows the public wants them out of the RF, so no picture that would make people assume their position in the RF is unchangeable, but still a mention of little Archie and her delight at welcoming him so the public knows she supports them (well, at least Archie).
I think Rach convinced Haz to make a deposit in a Toronto fertility bank the second she grabbed the engagement ring from his finger. The RF was forced to go along with the wedding due to the "baby" in a petrie dish. Haz thought she (Rach) would do the IVF treatment, but then he gets to Oz and finds out that maybe this plan isn't going along like he thought.
I’m with you on this one! Whatever Archie’s DNA, it’s clear from the Queen that she’s welcoming him into the family. Straight from the horses mouth as we like to say here in the states. Does this mean he’s really Harry’s? Certainly supports it but she’s also been backed into a corner and who wants to do that to an innocent baby who’s unlikely to ascend the throne? She’s either adopting him or she’s know his parentage.
I have thought from the beginning that Meghan is in Canada with the only people who can still stand her. Harry is either with the family in secret, in rehab/psych treatment, or actually potentially doing both with a heavy outpatient treatment program while staying with family. Archie is likely at Frogmore with the nanny where I believe he always lives so they claim this is their “official residence”. Harry is probably making some visits to Archie from wherever he’s getting treatment from and perhaps Archie flew to meet Meg for a couple days but I don’t think she does much baby care on a regular basis personally. Neither one of them are really in a mental place to parent much so the little guy probably spends most of his time with a nanny.
Here's the link to the May 2016 mag interview. Somewhere else it said the interview was done in late 2015/early 2016 but if it was actually closer to May 2016, then Bogart was more like 4 1/2 when MM moved. The dog stuff is near the end.
https://www.besthealthmag.ca/best-you/wellness/how-ellen-degeneres-convinced-meghan-markle-to-adopt-a-dog-and-more-from-our-may-cover-star/
I'd say he was discarded. He was useful for awhile though to talk about the Ellen connection.
MM and Harry were so odd about the dog's fate other than mentioning Canadian friends that lots of stories circulated. I never saw the Doria one but I'm sure it was out there. (But we've only seen Doria walking the same 2 dogs---a pit bull and a white dog that looks like it might be part small poodle or terrier.)
I do believe that at least Smirkle was in Canada, in the greater Victoria area for part of that time. I believe it because I can't imagine the Prime Minister of Canada and the Mayor of Victoria going along with a lie.
I did wonder about the lack of photos, but with her obsession for faux privacy it is possible that no one could get anywhere near them. Also, Canadians are indeed very polite and respectful of people's privacy. I know that actors who film in Canada often remark on how they are left alone at restaurants, etc., compared to the U.S.
I think the Q is a sly old gal - and said way more than she actually said. She used the words, "SMALL STEP(S)" a lot and how they bring about the most lasting CHANGE, and she also said, "MOON" and used "BUMPY" more than once. Odd words to find in a Christmas speech to the nation/world. She failed to mention Archie by name, she only mentioned her eighth great-grandchild, because she pretty much had to, but omitting his name was huge to me, these speeches are history and he's not in it.
She talked about how her father had to keep the D-day PLAN SECRET and how he could share the BURDEN with no one, as well as how it was DELAYED due to bad weather (Hurricane Andrew?). Was she trying to tell us something? D-day = Divorce?
Of course the missing photo spoke volumes, too. And she was in the green room, not sure but I think it was the same room as the Christening fiasco/mystery and photoshopping frenzy. Emerald Green, as in tiara?
Just read in a yt comment the photo circulating today of Meg hiking was taken in New Zealand when they were on tour, and that the owner of the restaurant denies everything being reported, much like the pub owner did. I think she finagled a deal with the owner of the BC house - free advertising for saying they were there since most of the photos were real estate listing photos. DM also has a story today about how 1/4 of people have lied about where they went on vacation. Wow, what timing! Murdoch I think is telling Meg to bring it!
She probably spent her last dime on paying her PR to pay to DM publish the story about them being there, so I think she's alone in a Toronto 2-bed holiday rental, with noisy pipes and 70s decor, with one bodyguard named Axel who has gas and BO, because she's been cut-off financially. I even doubt Doria is there, or she would have exploited her with photos, too. She's not in BC as she would probably rather die than be seen alone at Christmas, and no one wants to be seen with only her with no Duke b/c that makes them equally toxic.
No Christmas card/photo proving the three of them are in the same location together for the holidays, another photoshopped baby, this time a gif, with four eyebrows and that massive forehead which looked like it would be a $20 cab ride. I wouldn't make fun of any real baby, but this one even had false eyelashes on. If they were together, she'd have hired a professional for the card and it would have been published before the other royals with her stupid non-calligraphy for lasting profit, me-signaling, and PR exposure.
I hope Harry is getting some much needed rest in nice, warm weather somewhere where he can be outside and breathe fresh, Meghan-free ill wind. Happy New Year to you all!
For those of us who have to make hard choices about money, her statements about "not thriving" are offensive. We have to make choices about childcare, work, savings, pets, etc...she does not know these pressures anymore. If she is so disgusted with the RF, why does she let them pay her way?
I think this would seem to show you are wrong, Nutty.
https://twitter.com/kensingtonroyal/status/1211791266163445760
I can hope, anyway. I am LOVING not seeing vainglorious articles on a daily basis about how woke and fabulous they are.
By July we should know more of the story, and the progress of the divorce. Markle is not clever nor intelligent, so her strategy going forward should be more fodder for on-lookers. The Xmas card was an awful mess. Harry wasn't Santa. Markle must be like the duck that is swimming furiously under the surface to stay afloat.
And, Hikari, your posts are enjoyable.
I’m not a long time follower of the Royals so maybe it’s not unusual but I was surprised that the Cambridge’s didn’t officially release their Christmas card. I was wondering if it was an attempt to protect Harry. Perhaps they weren’t expecting H&M to have a Christmas card because they’re separated? on different continents? rehab? If Cambridge’s didn’t officially post theirs it would be less obvious when the Sussex’s didn’t either. Of course Megsy did her thing and maybe that’s why we ended up with the black and white Will and kids pic. Cute but a strange choice for a Christmas photo why have Kate missing after the year she’s had? I guess like most mums she’s always the one taking the photos.
I agree MM's wardrobe has looked worse as time has passed but I didn't find it all that great early on either. For example, I found the off-the-shoulders outfit at the Trooping to be quite odd. And they'd been married about 3 weeks then. I know the Queen wore strapless evening gowns when she was younger but this wasn't a ball or even a cocktail party. It was a morning parade in honor of HMTQ. And plenty of pictures of past Troopings exist for MM to have known that outfit wasn't the type anyone ever wore.
It was a very nice touch for them to include Archie. I think they didn’t have to do it at all and/or they could have shown the pic of Charles, Harry and Archie and left her out. I do think the inclusion of the Christening photo shows it wasn’t photoshopped. The queen may not have attended but two future kings did.
I see them including (more than once) photos of Harry and his family plus the greater family at Harry’s child’s event is sending a message that the brothers are not fractured. Nor is Harry’a family.
Some people don’t like that idea. Oh well. Take it out on the queen and the Cambridge’s for including Archie in their things when they didn’t have to. It’s not my issue to defend.
Elle, a correction, if I may. Vancouver is certainly a wealthy city and could probably support one, but Vancouver doesn’t have a Soho House. Vancouverites would have to apply for a Cities Without Houses Membership.
I think Meg is by herself and is staying hidden from view (why we don't see her at her mother's) so as to not let the public know of the couple's predicament. No doubt Archie is probably being cared for by nannies and safeguarded from Meghan snatching him and running to California to attempt to use the easy legal system there to maintain custody.
The Queen really had no choice but to acknowledge Archie's birth and it was telling she did not even speak his name. Who knows maybe after a divorce he may be renamed something more regal. The Cambridge showed their support of Harry and his legal son (but not necessarily his biological son) and in the event of a divorce, Harry would likely get full custody (after Meggan may be brought to utter shame and possible justice).
@Drabred, I think it is possible to interpret it both ways, and you may well be right. I personally think it is just good manners. I have worked with people whom I've absolutely loathed, and I was still polite to them, greeted them, and offered invitations to "group" gatherings, not because I wanted them there, and not because I wanted to signal my endorsement of their behavior, but because I did not want to stoop to their petty, petty levels... the inclusion of the photos after what PH & Rach have dropped makes W&K look gracious and above it all, and it makes the Dumbartons' tackiness look even worse. And that's the way Will esp throws shade. Like the Cambridge B&W photo after the Sussex card.
@DesignDoctor, I am sure we're right on that. I take great delight in showing good manners to someone being awful to me. It makes them look so much worse. That W&K even included a Wimbledon photo (albeit a tiny one at the bottom) is proof positive to show "we tried, we really, really tried", and ditto with the Christening.
I think she is on the way out. I don't think they have been together on the family break. IMO the BRF has had enough and is now in close the ranks, minimize damage, and protect the monarchy mode.
I hope Harry is getting the help he needs and Archie is in safe, loving arms.
I've said all along that the BRF has plausible deniability here. It's not likely she was bottoms up for any of the family after she announced, no royal doctors in attendance, how would they have known? Of course, they would have known, but how could anyone prove it? So I can see them unleashing hell if it was a surrogate birth, showing that rach played them and the rest of the world.
and yes, @Jen, excellent point: Including the christening photo tells me that "this is the only photo that we have that includes Archie and us at the same time."
Speaking of subtle digs...That is what I have decided Meghan’s patronage’s bestowed by her Maj are, in hindsight. When they were announced, it looked for all the world like the BRF was bending Over backwards to tailor Meg’s charities expressly to her self expressed interests and “gifts”. The message was “Look how seriously we are taking Meghan and how much we welcome her with important organizations selected especially for her. We were listening, And we want her to enjoy hitting the ground running in areas in which she should excel.” I thought it was incredibly decent, though risky, of her Maj to entrust institutions like the National Theatre, a plum appointment, to an untested greenhorn like MM. Then I learned that Wills spent time training with MI:6, Where he certainly would’ve learned things about His future sister-in-law. A number of things which Meghan had humble bragged about for months turned up as a patronage. There was quite a bit of murkiness over the fate of animal lover Meg’s two dogs. One abandoned in America; One sustaining fatal injuries in s vague accident on KP grounds. Give her the Mayhew animal charity!
She gave an Emmy winning performance as a paralegal getting banged up against the file cabinet? Give her one of friends most venerable theaters! If there were any doubts that she could handle being the patron of the NT, There was always the burger grilling video for a convincer, not to mention her career as a suitcase girl. She claims to be a polyglot with a dual degree from Northwestern, despite no evidence of Having actually graduated? Give her the Association of University women(. After all someone so whip smart Can inspire women everywhere. Finally, given her status as a global fashion icon, and her innate kindness towards the underprivileged, SmartWorks is the ultimate venue to combine those talent
Dedicated hard-working Rachel has visited her patronages once apiece in the last 18 months; Slightly more if you count the secret videotaped excursions to SmartWorks.
I think William helped his grandmother and pick these charities.With the express purpose of letting Rach know they saw right through her fraudulent self. It seems to have worked too Because she hasn’t been back. Narcs’ fragile egos cannot stand it when their Inferiorityhem. This is my friends is glorious shade!
As for the warm welcome to Canada from the prime minister and the mayor of Victoria, it’s very likely that they were Markled. Without a face-to-face meeting with the Harkles in their offices or pictures of the couple in front of recognizable landmarks, what prove beyond Megan’s word, via phone call or even my personal A text or email would they have that the Harkles were actually in the country? They wouldn’t demand proofs but take Meg’s at her word. If it comes out later that Harry was in rehab in the UK and Mag was actually yachting off Catalina When she called to describe the glories of Canadian nature from her rental in Saanich, Aren’t they going to feel silly?
More important to me (moving forward), can they stop her merching the Sussex name? This is key. And the only way to stop this is to threaten her into accepting some sort of payoff with some fairly graphic dirt on her previous lifestyle choices. Or just release the information that she WASN'T pregnant and all that coat flicking and belly cupping was merely an act. That would cut her off at the knees and lose her any support (excepting the sugars, who seem clinically insane to me).
@Jen--perfect point. And how odd all the interactions have been with Archie. I thought MM showing up at the polo match in her olive drab dress clutching Archie was just so strange in that there was no interaction with the Cambridge cousins. What children have you ever seen who are not interested in a baby?
@Hikari I agree that the Queen and William are masters at throwing subtle, but effective shade. I have also heard that Her Majesty is very witty and has a wicked sense of humor. The awarding of those patronages to MM is just brilliant!
@wizardwench As I posted earlier today on a different thread. I believe it is key to stop her from merching under Sussex Royal.
“Narcs fragile egos cannot take it when their inferiority is held up to them”
I’ve noticed a quirk of my phone; anyone else experience this? I can enunciate slowly and clearly Into the microphone with the articulation of an Olivier. Yes I dictate my messages because typing is too slow. My phone acts like a Polish contractor and seems to understand one word in five. But should I whisper something to myself or Forget I’m recording and make some random comment to someone in the room, it transcribes every word perfectly. One of the reasons technology is so grand…
@CatEyes, Trial separation or (in Harry's case) The Great Escape, you might be right :) I don't think Rach even wants Archie, but if she does, she'd have to scramble to CA and wait 6 months, minimum, and I'm sure the BRF probably knows a guy who knows a guy who could squash that anyway. I wonder if the "security" is less about keeping her safe and more about keeping her under thumb. They've gotta know by now that she's merde of the bat crackers.
Elle is right, though, about southern manners. The more we hate somebody, the more polite we are. Maybe it is just because we put such a premium on good manners (people have been stabbed to death for cutting in line here which I perfectly understand and hope I won't be ever called to jury duty for).
After reading through nutty’s post and all the comments, three things popped to mind that would fit with this storyline.
A) Due to his undescended testicle, (I remember when he had that surgery to retrieve it as a young child), Harry could very well be infertile, which is something he probably already knew. It could even be the reason for his past breakups, but Meghan was so determined that she figured she could fool everyone.
B) The next thing that came to mind was a comment from Harry during the Oceania tour when he jokingly brought up the possibility that the child Meghan was carrying wasn’t his. That was in poor taste, but it might have been true and a passive-aggressive statement that slipped out. Supposedly H&M were having loud arguments about the pregnancy during the tour that were overheard by security and service people.
It makes me wonder if Meghan decided to take matters into her own hands and get inseminated or IVF with her egg and donor sperm from someone who supposedly looked like Harry. After she was preggers, she sprung it on Harry and talked him into the scheme by saying nobody would ever find out. This would be a typical narc behavior because narcs think they are smarter than everyone and can fool anyone. Hence the secrecy surrounding the birth and lack of signatures.
C) One of torontopaper1’s recent tweets fits right in with the Harry-is-not-the-biological-father storyline.
The torontopaper1 tweet from Dec. 22, 2019:
Darling, your meal ticket is no longer valid. They have the proof now.
“ ITV REPORT 31 December 2019 at 2:48am
Baby Archie brought joy during a difficult year for Harry and Meghan”
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-12-31/baby-archie-brought-joy-during-a-difficult-year-for-harry-and-meghan/
I have also said, and now firmly believe, that plausible deniability is key and letting Rach blow herself up is the plan. Best way, I think.
Not sure where they were for Thanksgiving. I just feel she would’ve posted a pic with Doria if they were together. I can’t see D welcoming them in to her home for several weeks. Maybe were in LA working their contacts, Turkey Day somewhere private. Wouldn’t surprise me if they spent time in Canada with her contacts there.
A gal commented on DM? that her Aunt works Canadian Airlines and they flew to San Francisco on Xmas. Why would they fly on xmas day? And I think they are flying private.
But, I honestly don’t know. None of us do but the speculation can be interesting. I do wish people would stop making negative remarks about Archie and his appearance. Of everyone involved, he is the innocent one.
This blind appears to be about Meghan and suggests she still thinks she is more popular than W&K. Did she hire more boys to surpass their numbers? How petty can she be?
If this marriage also ends around the two-year mark, it seems a bit ironic that the marriage to the woman who, according to Harry, “just happened to fall into my life” is already on the rocks, but par for the course for a person with narcissistic personality disorder. Some narcissists are able to keep a marriage going for years, but for most of them, their marriages crash and burn in a relatively short time, often five to seven years. Marriages to narcissists tend to fall into the “match-made-in-hell” category.
If it turns out that Harry isn’t Archie’s biological father and it is one big lie, then giving Archie the middle name Harrison for “Harry’s son” shows how narcissists will go to any length to attempt to sell a falsehood and keep the carefully-crafted facade they have created from crumbling down.
Also could someone tell me how to get a screen name so I’m not always unknown unknown. Thanks
I have hear that photo story, too, but it's pretty sad that they still don't trust her now that she's married in and taken the train with HMTQ (which I thought at the time was all for "see we like her, we really really do, and we're trying, we really, really are). Could it really only be because of the photos?
Re Harry's fertility: he could just have low fertility but MM being such a money-grubber, she wasn't going to bide her time and see if they could conceive together naturally or via IVF so she went ahead with the surrogate and possibly someone else besides Harry's DNA (trying to say it the nice way). I've also read several places that they had been overheard fighting in Australia and he asked her if she was really pregnant. I'm just assuming the surrogate was all her idea because he had no need to rush having a baby.
I read somewhere that one of the agreements the Dumbartons made with the BRF in order to push the wedding through quickly was that the Dumbartons would not procreate right away. Maybe that was one reason for the fighting. Rachel also promised a bunch of other things. I wish I could remember where I read that. Has anyone else seen this?
Do I need to list all the things that are peculiar about Meghan and Harry (including disappearing for more than 6 weeks now and not even turning up for the Queen's Christmas lunch at Buckingham Palace)? Meghan, why was it so important for Archie to Meet Tutu, and be photographed doing so, but not important for Archie to attend his first Christmas lunch at Buckingham Palace with the Queen of the United Kingdom and Commonwealth realms, plus her consort and direct and indirect heirs .. they who have given you the status you are so smug about and given you access to the wealth you love so much? This to me is major and shows her as either mentally in a very bad place and thus has been sent off for treatment, or so rude, greedy, disrespectful, stupid and arrogant that it is mind boggling.
However, the Cambridges should not be painted with the same brush. William may be annoyed with his brother (even furious) and may not like his sister-in-law at all, but Harry IS his brother and William is not going to throw him under the bus, nor Archie. Kate may not like Meghan nor want to be friends with her or work with her, but Kate does not ghost inconvenient family members and she seems to prefer everyone to just get along and behave. Of course they are going to feature the Sussexes in their annual review (although Pippa's son has never been featured, nor have any of them been photographed with him, so this is about royalty and duty). Harry and Archie are heirs and close members of the BRF (in terms of how they are related) and I think both William and Kate would want cousins to grow up together and for everyone to get together happily at family occasions. The Cambridges were not sending secret messages via their annual review but continuing as normal (a staff member probably chose what they thought were the best photographs featuring the Sussexes as part of the BRF) and treating Harry not only as a beloved brother but one who is close to the throne (and thus important in the BRF) and who has an awful wife that they are going to put up with (the BRF do not ghost family members, no matter what they do).
Meghan seems to not want to fit in, and she so obviously does not. Her initial attempts were actually quite sad (and, yes, the media did pick over every detail, much of which was unimportant and Meghan should have just let go and done what she said she does, but obviously does not, accept valid criticism and make changes). William was right ... they should have waited to get married, for at least a few years, instead of subjecting everyone to the shell shock of 'hit the ground running to achieve my goals and don't care how much destruction I cause' Meghan joining the family. Harry may have married Meghan because he was in love and believed he loved her, but marrying her so quickly was a very unloving thing to do to his family.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breaking-prince-william-kates-big-21189560.amp
William and Kate are not superficial in the work they do and they take the time and do the research to find the right partners, for the project and not publicity. I think this will make a difference.
I like the positive approach and the lack of superficial word salad (and is this why the Queen focused on the moon landing in her Christmas speech ... maybe senior royals are working closely together, ah Megsy, you have missed the boat entirely and Harry is left behind with you!)
She is asked if she reads Twitter.
Very rudely she replies, "Sorry! No," but she is bobbing her head up and down as she responds. Then she follows up with a ride "I read the Economist, I'll give you that."
I cannot imagine speaking with such contempt as a guest at an event, especially in her capacity. This was the first time I saw this clip. It would be rude in any social situation, but is even more so in a professional one. She reacts with such disdain at the question. One is left with the impression that she does read Twitter and she doesn't like what sees.
What an interesting read.
I have some comments.
Perhaps the mention in the HM's speech is an extension of "see how we have made efforts to include". It would make the reveal of not of the body (if true) more cutting. This would be in line with how HM plays ball.
The mention that MM plays dirty on the mat and wounded is the most dangerous + shade by hand picking her charities> I think as spot on. (snicker, snicker). Very nice.
I wouldn't be shocked if part of why the quiet is a set up for Baby 2? This time not of the surrogate but her for real? It would side step the problem of the body (as long as it was both of them) and firmly tighten her grip into them. IVF is not a guarantee for placement and it tends to be a kind of drawn out process.
Many other thoughts that have crossed my mind including: money laundering via Royal accounts; siphoning money from Royal accounts; republican subversion of the RF; or a campaign in the Murdoch-Maxwell media war.
Thank goodness, then, that MM follows that other cast-iron rule of narcissists: Nobody, Absolutely Nobody, Tells Me What To Do. If there was a deep plot, she's gone rogue on the lot of 'em!
Back to the `pregnancy'- Harry was reported as asking her `Is it it mine?'
If Archie, whoever he is, has been quietly adopted by one of HM's grandchildren, it doesn't matter tuppence who his biological parents are. It's all been rather Gilbert & Sullivan - M has been poncing around like the Duchess of Plaza Toro whereas in Archie's case there could be echoes of Major General Stanley, who described himself as descended from a noble family `by purchase'.
What matters, above all, is that Archie has a truly loving family. Whether harry can recover
is another matter.
Very savvy. Bravo.
No whining, no getting your 'friends' to tell the press how you don't use plastic bags, no telling the plebs what to do, no teaming up with commercial entities, no making it all about you, no 'collaborations' with non-British 'celebrities' and... have I missed anything?
The Cambridges have really been bringing their 'A' game this past year. Only shows up how dismal the Harkles are. Meghan who?
TP is stating in a cheeky and careful way (which I think caused most people to miss the meaning) that Farklepants at one point during her escorting years was the type of prostitute who would happily engage in “golden showers.” Which totally make sense because Kim Kardashian has always been her idol, and Kim only got famous because of a porn tape her mother aggressively marketed during which Kim receives a golden shower from the rapper she is having sex with in the video. This lewd act became popular after Kim’s video sold a gazillion copies, and more and more prostitutes were being asked to do them. Many had too much pride to shame themselves and degrade themselves that way, but wealthy men, especially many Middle Eastern men, were requesting this and paying extra money for it.
Farklepants was also said by CDAN to have been originally wanting to get on a UK reality show ( she wanted this even more than Real Housewives of Beverly Hills, which she was rejected for.) Obscenely wealthy Middle Eastern men literally “shop” for women from watching UK reality shows. The women sometimes have to agree to become “Dubai porta potties” like poor Lindsay Lohan to make the big bucks, but some are lucky enough to be set up as mistresses. This is what Farklepants was ultimately aspiring to. Plans changed along the way when she thought she could be more “legit” marrying Harry but implement a Kardashian marching strategy while with Harry.
She’s not too smart, thinking that that would work.
Torontopaper hints at photos and/or video evidence of her golden shower days.
Stay tuned!
"The Earthshot initiative comes after more than a year of consultations with over 60 organizations and experts."
This is how you do it. Patience, something that the Smirkles don't have.
A channel on youtube belongs to someone who was an editor at one of those gossip mags in the USA, I forget which one. She says that before Meghan arrived in the BRF, there was never any source of gossip about them in the USA. Now, it's a non-stop diluvian flood and she attributes that to Meghan (but has no proof).
Glad you’re back. I doubt the story about Archie:why would the BRF have custody of Archie if he wasn’t Harry’s son? Not to mention Archie looks exactly like Harry with brown eyes. I don’t thin MM would be that stupid - she would know the DNA had better be a match. The kid is her meal ticket. I admit to being fascinated with all the misdirecting information. Classic Harkle. I’m not sure if I believe Harry is in rehab either, although he certainly should be. Cambridge’s continue to shine, did anyone else notice how the DM stated that PW encourages “other members of his family to participate”? Hmm. Olive branch to PH? All very confusing. Just the way the Harkles like it. I’m more curious than I should be! Happy New Year!!
Because you simply could not get a better contrast to the shambolic Harkles.
Take a look at the website. Highly professional with an upbeat 'can do' message. No whining or pointing fingers at the plebs. 4 months on and still nobody has a clue what the "Travalyst" project is meant to be about. But this Earthshot initiative, backed by millions of pounds (and I doubt they'll have trouble getting more backers) and in partnership with one of the most respected men in Britain, Sir David Attenborough, is the real deal. The CB idiots can snipe at the Cambridges for being 'lazy' but this is an initiative with real substance that's going to be around for yers.
Someone please stick a fork in the Harkles. They're done.
https://earthshotprize.org/
The reason that the BRF would have custody of Archie is because she claims that the little one is a member of the BRF, so for optics. They don't want to look like they are the cast of Survivor and that Archie got voted off the island.
Secondly, they may not have known for some time, because they had to get some reliable samples and Markle surely wasn't going to cooperate on this.
Thirdly, they may just feel sorry for the little guy who officially at least, has the world's biggest narcissist as a mother.
Even Meghan herself changed drastically in appearance and behaviour at this point.
We aren't privy to everything that happens and a lot is happening now, we can be sure of that.
I don't know that Harry would have expected to win recognition for Travalyst in W&K's Earthshot campaign. (A bit incestuous if he does.)
I think Travalyst was mostly what it looked like at the time-- an effort to draw attention away from H&M's own travels that have never been especially eco-friendly. (If nothing else, they claimed to have seen each other at least every 2 weeks while living on different continents when dating for 1 1/2 to 2 years.)
It's possible H&M knew about the developing Earthshot project and wanted to beat W&K to the punch as an extra perk. But given how chaotic the Travalyst roll-out was, I think it's what it looked like at the time. And even now, 4 months after the launch, it's unclear exactly how a consumer would use Travalyst. The website looks slick now but it's mostly slogans and stats with a spot enticing people to join their email list.
@lizzie I agree with your assessment n effort to draw attention away from H&M's own travels that have never been especially eco-friendly.
H&M were receiving a lot of bad press at the time for traveling via private jets.
They draw that logo before the page opens. I don't hate it - kinda reminds me of Prince's insignia.
I'm sorry for hijacking, it was just something I've been thinking about a lot since this whole surrogacy discussion was first introduced. I can't imagine ever wanting to use a surrogate in the UK if there is any chance that your biological child would not end up being yours at the end.
I think the big decision for PH & MM and the Queen/ PC in 2020 are whether they continue to live off the Sovereign Grant and basically be government employees with all the benefits and pitfalls or will they decide to forgo the taxpayer money, do their own thing , merching, some charity work, working/ selling themselves, etc for money. The way they are going now they are opening up themselves and the BRF for lots of scandel like PA, and even some of the other minor royals who have sold pictures/ access for money.
Imo, you can’t fault some of the minor royals too much for merching/ endorsing things for money. They need to live too and were brought up in a much different standard of living than the rest of us. It’s not like they were ever really encouraged to be academic and cure cancer or become physicists. Most don’t live off the sovereign grant, and when PC slims down the RF more, some will retire. Unless they marry well, their options to make money are limited or different than the general public.
Sometimes what she says really doesn't make sense. The moderator, at one point, politely says she would be "keeping things moving" (I'm paraphrasing) and I think MM did not like that.
I didn't realize this, but the moderator of this discussion works for the Economist, Anne McElvoy. In light of this, her rude response "I read the Economist, I'll give you that" is much worse. MM's word salad and inarticulate speech is very apparent alongside the rest of these very poised, accomplished women.
There are no federal surrogacy laws in the US either. States laws vary widely. In NY, compensated surrogacy is still illegal. First offense carries a fine. (A bill to change that failed recently.) In Indiana, surrogacy contracts are legally "void and unenforceable." In Michigan, compensated surrogacy is a crime. Pennsylvania has few laws but usually if not contested, the baby can be adopted by the genetic parents. Utah permits surrogacy but contracts must receive court approval. Orders to enforce occur post-birth.
So it's complicated many places.
@Cookie she was extremely rude through that entire event. I think that's when we saw the real narcassist at work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2166&v=6GDsdm0uyQg&feature=emb_logo
Please show receipts for your claim as well as documentation that birth was witnessed by royal physicians as is required by Constitutional law in order for the baby to be considered royal (goes back to 1700s). There were no signatures on the posted birth announcement. Again, as is custom.
not trying to pick a fight but you occassionally come across as aggressive towards those who have different opinions than you and are one of two reasons i haven't posted before now.
The queen likely knows who the doctor is. No where in the law does it state the public has the right to know.
@Mischi, I agree with you about the baby looking like Meg or Harry or having the Markle nose, etc. It's easy to see almost anyone in a baby's face, babies all have baby features. My two daughters look nothing alike now but sometimes when I look at their baby pictures I have to look at the date to figure out which one it is.
@SirStinxAlot, there are so many comments that are going to look absolutely psychotic if and when it comes out that she used a surrogate, remember the senior citizens home where she was wearing the square bump and shifting in her seat commenting how she was feeling very pregnant? In another day and age she would have been locked up by now!
I am not 100% convinced it's not their DNA, but I am convinced completely she was never pregnant. And I agree with @Elle and @Swampwoman, killing them with kindness, and showing good manners just exposes how tacky and horrible MM and PH have been to the rest of the family this past year.
But DNA is only half of what determines how you will develop.
Have you ever heard of nature versus nurture? Well, the emphasis on DNA wanted to put nature as the only factor as to how a person turns out. The science of epigenetics, i.e. how the environment, including the environment in the womb, and the latest developments in attachment theory (how attachment affects a person for life), show that DNA can be altered by the environment, the events, and even the feelings a person experiences.
They say that a descendant of a Holocaust survivor has been influenced by the experiences of his/her ancestor.
And, clones of cats look nothing like the original because of environmental factors in the womb. They aren't even the same colour.
Attachment theory shows that the connections we make when we are very young are what most influence our behaviour for the rest of our lives. How does taking a child from the woman who gave birth to him and who gives off the hormones and smells to connect to the child, affect the child for the rest of their lives? I think the child will always feel a sense of loss. The connection through DNA may exist but I don't think it's ever been proven.
The
Skillaty says
December 30, 2019 at 6:15 pm
Couple: Megan and Harry
In Laws: The Cambridge’s, the real heirs to the throne.
[Optional] Which couple in that family is more valuable? The Cambridge’s. Harry and Megan have already been slammed by papers and told they are constitutionally irrelevant and actually the true minor royals. Megan is going to be that insane, aging auntie in a personal battle with George, Charlotte, and Louis trying to be more popular than them on social media too. Megan is unhinged.
Anyone about anything. But the BRF has been on guard against this sort of thing since the beginning of time. I’d still expect her to realize that it would have to be 100% accurate. Too easy to check. And let’s face it, a royal child is exactly the reason she can’t be pitched in the trash. Love comes and goes. PH may tire of her but she can’t be relegated to the trash heap if she’s the mother of a child in the line of succession.
Does anyone recall the CDAN blind that came out just prior to Eugenie's wedding about how the alliterate royal had told her ex husband that she didn’t even know if she could conceive due to medical issues but she had apparently “employed science” to become so and it would be announced just prior to the Australian tour? I’m sure I’ve garbled the words but the message is the same.
Anyway - peace to all. I’m sure 2020 will be interesting.
Meghan speaks French, Spanish and possibly German?
I don't think so... She was in Argentina a few weeks, not even 3 months. And where would she learn to speak French? I know people who have spent years taking courses and still don't speak it. As for German, I see absolutely no information about her even learning the language. The wife of the German President speaks English, so they can converse in the language of Shakespeare.
And, the woman on the balcony was the wife of the German President, as the Chancellor of Germany is Angela Merkel.
I just watched the Earthshot video, and all I can say is WOW. The time, the planning, the coordination, the vision -- it's all there. HMTQ did hint at this in her Christmas speech (she chooses words wisely; they're never random) and I love that Chas & Philip were consulted about this as well.
As we all know, Chas has been concerned about the environment for years, and I see this as not only a brilliant new move forward, but as a culmination of the work and study that was done for many years by Chas. For many years, he was considered a little loony for his love of the planet and concern for the environment, and now, turns out, he was just a visionary. (Also, he lets red squirrels into Highgrove, so he gets wildlife points from me!)
I will give many points to your Chas for managing his Duchy of Cornwall. He is a man of the land and desperately wants Will to follow him in this and so far so good/ You can see this reflected in Katherine getting George involved in outdoors boy scout type of activities. I actually believe your Chas (I am having fun here) has hammered a few nails there and done some grunt labor for exercise if nothing else. I did not see the UK mini documentary on this. If it is on you tube I will watch it. But the image I saw is Prince soon to be King Chas is willing to banter in the best way possible with the "peasants" who rent on his land and get physically involved in fences etc.
Finally, global Greta warming is nonsense. But.
I can believe she could speak Spanish, at least back then. It's not terribly unusual for people growing up in LA to learn Spanish. LA County has the largest population of Spanish speakers of any county in the US. http://www.laalmanac.com/population/po48s.php
But I'm not sure what French "proficiency" means. A few courses in high school? German? I sincerely doubt it.
She may have picked up a few words of Spanish living in L.A. but let's be honest - the word salad she uses in English shows that she's not gifted for language.
1. She served an internship at the American embassy in Buenos Aires (arranged by her uncle, and she did not seem to complete this ... maybe an upcoming biography will uncover the real story), and studied for one semester in Madrid (probably both financed by her father). I doubt that Meghan is fluent in Spanish from that limited experience.
2. French was probably a subject at school. Proficiency is defined as 'a high degree of skill; expertise'. I doubt this. She does not seem to have travelled in France pre-Harry and this CV was compiled before she went to live in Canada (but would she speak French in Toronto anyway?), plus there was a gushing claim in the media that she was going to improve her French as one of her goals when new to the BRF.
3. There is no indication that she can speak or understand German.
If Meghan were to be authentic, she would drop all the hyperbole about her career, accomplishments and expertise (and all the humanitarian stuff) and simply live a life of merching, blogging and influencing. She aims too high. Maybe in 2020 she will get real, leave the BRF and become her version of a Kardashian.
That happens when your language is the international language.
https://bella2491.tumblr.com/post/187100269387/how-do-you-spot-a-bot
I have donated eggs and have a bunch of satellite babies out there. Last year they pulled out a freezer baby and I spoke to the nice woman who would carry it for legal reasons. We had a Skype call. Yes so the parents bought a surrogate egg AND a surrogate, bless them.
That said, when I asked what she got out of the surrogacy, she said she liked being pregnant (already had 2 kids and had one prior surrogacy), that her body handled pregnancy well, her husband didn't mind and yada yada.
She said all of her pregnancy expenses and healthcare were covered by the recipient couple. I was like "... but ...??" and she said this extended to things like massages and other types of pampering (I was looking for ANY perks). She may have mentioned $60,000 fee but I'm not sure if I'm remembering it wrong. Nice lady. She is in California. Agency in Vegas, I live in NYC (satellite office here).
Let's hope we didn't accidentally breed babies for one of Enty's baby farms. Ha!
I would be so very glad if you are right. Megs presence in the royal family did nothing but divide, exactly the opposite to what had been hoped.
The Queen "welcoming" Archie in her Christmas speech suggests she still accepts him as a great-grandson, so how likely is the DNA opposing he is Harry's child? It would be easy just to avoid mentioning him at all.
Wills and Kate's presentation video on 2019 included Dumbartons, be it a good grace or an olive branch I do not know.
Perhaps the above is what is called "a good face during a bad game". Fingers crossed it is. But I think you are spot on with Harry being in rehab. Hope once his brain is operational again he would be able to look at his partner in life more realistically.
The recent press about MM is priceless. Without openly slaying her they managed to publish an absolute avalanche of unflattering images, stories and allegations. I do not see it stopping. What a stupid thing MM had done
As to your point about taking a child away from the person who gave birth to them and them being affected for the rest of their lives...I can only say the adoptees I know dont seem to be affected. So again, that may go back to the nature/nurture... if they are raised in a loving household, with loving parents, they're going to grow up just fine.
Interesting subject though...but for anither blog. Lol ..sorry again!
Re: Meghan's French language abilities. The only time we've seen her speak French was in Morocco, where she stumbled while speaking to some schoolgirls - I seem to remember that her side of the conversation was rather Google Translate-y. I doubt she is proficient in either Spanish or French. Languages are like plants - you have to constantly maintain them to keep them alive - and there is no evidence she's done any language work since leaving university nearly two decades ago.
Re: Why the Queen would mention Archie in her Christmas speech. The US is a major "market" for the Royals - certainly for Royal charity fundraising - and the Queen and her courtiers know that there is already a media storyline in some US media that Meg is being mistreated in the UK because she is biracial. Not so important right now, since Meg hasn't proved particularly popular in the US despite Sunshine Sachs' best efforts (One of the 10 best-dressed in 2019, according to US Vogue?), but when she eventually gets kicked out of the family, it could take root as part of the departure storyline. Heaven forbid the Royal family be "cancelled" and become embarrassing for the wealthy to be associated with.
The Queen needs to reiterate that she and the family are doing everything possible to make Meghan feel welcome, even if Meg isn't enjoying her Royal experience, as per her statements in the documentary. A brief glimpse of Archie, Meg, and (importantly) Doria in the Christmas speech is the least she can do to show her non-racist bonafides. "Queen excludes Meghan" isn't a good headline.
- The Royal Family thinks that young people care about the environment, and that Earthshot will make the royals relevant to a new generation. The young people I know care about the environment, but they also care about K-pop, Love Island, eSports, high-end sneakers and other topics the Royals are unlikely to start a foundation about. I think journalists and politicians want to believe that young people care about the environment more than they actually do. FWIW I am in touch with teenagers every day.
- Swedish and Norwegian royalty get to preside over the glittering Nobel Prize ceremonies every year. Perhaps the British Royal Family wants its own fancy ceremony to match.
Anybody remembers if she ever mentioned her other great-grandchildren publicly by name?
I believe you are right about the Queen's "including" and "welcoming" Meghan. With her strategy the one who looks ungrateful and petty is Meghan, for refusing Queen's invitations twice, slanting British in general and dragging Harry away from his possibly critically ill grandfather, despite all RF efforts to welcome her.
You nailed it. What a relief, Queen's benevolence was bothering me.
Last year the Queen said
"With two weddings and two babies and another child expected soon..." So no, names weren't mentioned for Louis or Lena.
I think it would have been quite odd not to mention the birth of Harry's son this year. No matter what is going on behind the scenes.
And, the woman on the balcony was the wife of the German President, as the Chancellor of Germany is Angela Merkel.
--------Whoops!
@Nutty, I'd like to believe that more than just teens and young people care about the environment. It seems to be a great concern in the US 2020 election issues as well (some rating it over 40%). I (very idealistically) would like to believe that it's more than just than just an appeal to young people. But you're probably right lol.
With her strategy the one who looks ungrateful and petty is Meghan, for refusing Queen's invitations twice, slanting British in general and dragging Harry away from his possibly critically ill grandfather, despite all RF efforts to welcome her.
Exactly the reason why, when someone treats us abysmally, we cannot respond in kind. (Damn it all!) And that is the reason that I know @Swampwoman might have empathy for the person who stabbed someone for cutting in line, but would not vote to acquit because it's even worse manners to stab someone for having bad manners. (Damn it all again!)
Thank you, how very interesting. I managed to find a reference to the picture of prince Louise on Queen's table during the last Christmas speech "In her Christmas speech, she said: "Closer to home, it’s been a busy year for my family, with two weddings and two babies, and another child expected soon. It helps to keep a grandmother well occupied." She also proudly placed a portrait of Louis on her desk while she made the speech".
So Louise may be placed there because he is what? sixth in the succession? or may be because he is a son of the future heir. No pic of Archie despite mentioning him.
how often I wish I could learn to behave with killing kindness and deathly politeness towards nasty people we all meet from time to time. It is difficult in the short term but much more effective in the long run!
It's the Sussex review of 2019 but it includes a photograph of Harry with Archie. It's a lovely photograph, in colour, and it looks very cold where they are!
Yes, the Queen specifically mentioned the birth and Christening of Prince George by name in her 2013 Christmas speech.
In 2015, Price Charlotte and 2017 Prince Louis Prince Louise But I am researching whether they were mentioned specifically by name. Stiil reading....
More research has to be done on the effect of removing a child from their birth mothers. A lot of adopted children feel they are missing out on something in their lives. Is this because the bond created at birth has been removed? Or is it the DNA that creates this bond?
Again, technology has gone too quickly and we haven't studied the effect it has on our complicated human body and mind.
When Meagain and Harry went to Cirque de Soleil she was greeted in French and asked one of her assistants what was said!
When Meagain and Harry went to Cirque de Soleil she was greeted in French and asked one of her assistants what was said!
https://twitter.com/RoyalReporter/status/1212111336441810944
Both look healthy and wholesome (for a change).
Here is the excerpts from the Queen's Christmas speeches and the relevant passages concerning the new babies;
In 2015, she referenced the birth of Princess Charlotte thus.." And this year my family has a new member to join in the fun."
While in 2017, she had an oblique reference to Louis thus " But I know his support and unique sense of humour will remain as strong as ever as we enjoy spending time this Christmas with our family, and look forward to welcoming new members into it next year."
And in 2018 she said "With two weddings and two babies and another child expected soon it helps to keep a grandmother well occupied."
This year she exclaimed .."Two hundred years on from the birth of my great, great grandmother, Queen Victoria, Prince Philip and I have been delighted to welcome our eighth great grandchild into our family"
@Nutty, I agree about the young and the environment. I have teen sons (and their friends who constantly eat all our food, lol) and nieces, and I cannot think of one time they have mentioned the environment. Shoes, clothes, girls, boys, music, snapchat, who said what about who, what college they will be attending, do they have enough gas to go here or there. That is what they talk about, in my experience.
"Both look healthy and wholesome (for a change)"
Well, now I wonder if this means Harry was not in rehab and it appears he probably is with Meghan in Canada?
What does fellow Nutties think about this? I can't even begin to speculate.
:
I love the comments from the people that say that the timing of the posting is not coincidental,that in typical MM fashion, she is trying to steal the limelight from W&K's announcement.