According to a settlement with the British Royal Family, Harry and Meghan will no longer use their HRH titles and will repay 2.4 million pounds of public cash spent on Frogmore Cottage. They will no longer formally represent the Queen, and receive no more public money in return for Royal duties.
The Queen's Statement was as follows:
Statement from HM The Queen
Following many months of conversations and more recent discussions, I am pleased that together we have found a constructive and supportive way forward for my grandson and his family.
Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved members of my family.
I recognise the challenges they have experienced as a result of intense scrutiny over the last two years and support their wish for a more independent life.
I want to thank them for all their dedicated work across this country, the Commonwealth and beyond, and am particularly proud of how Meghan has so quickly become one of the family.
It is my whole family’s hope that today’s agreement allows them to start building a happy and peaceful new life.
What do you think of the statement, and of the settlement?
The Queen's Statement was as follows:
Statement from HM The Queen
Following many months of conversations and more recent discussions, I am pleased that together we have found a constructive and supportive way forward for my grandson and his family.
Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved members of my family.
I recognise the challenges they have experienced as a result of intense scrutiny over the last two years and support their wish for a more independent life.
I want to thank them for all their dedicated work across this country, the Commonwealth and beyond, and am particularly proud of how Meghan has so quickly become one of the family.
It is my whole family’s hope that today’s agreement allows them to start building a happy and peaceful new life.
What do you think of the statement, and of the settlement?
Comments
I 100% agree with all your comments but this one especially:
"Since he has been 'born' she's been teasing the world about her great little bubs, her wonderful breast feeding and their family bonding. A venerable world leader has met a baby called Archie. How does she retract any of this now and admit that she's faked it all? She has got to know that she'd be the most vilified woman in the world, much more so than now, if that got out. She still has a lot of supporters with her 'Racist-Meanie Britain' umbrella. But you don't mess with motherhood. Even the sugars would turn on her if it comes to light that she and Harry concocted 'Archie' for money and attention and have been laughing at the world at their con . . or Meg's con which has become Harry's through default, so utterly brainwashed by her that he laughs in a roomful of parents of desperately sick kids at his own fraudulence."
I think most of the world genuinely wanted Harry to be happy because so many still saw him mostly as Diana's son but he and Megs just totally played everyone as fools for their own selfish ends, money and fame for her, for him, outdoing William. I hope neither of them ever move past it if the truth, out but shameless narcs usually just keep right on going, unfortunately.
Translation: Obama is getting paid now, and so can Megs if she can make introductions and deals. Put something together. I will admit the fame points come later when "the product" is released.
Netflix obviously spending like drunken sailors because they are running scared of Disney and Apple streaming services gearing up and I believe already streaming but not a full menu yet. I am not into that stuff and have only streamed a few movies/TV series via Amazon which had some original series I like. Such as Bosch.
Megs going to busy with Netflix, no doubt readying herself for season 7 of the Crown, playing Kate...
Just laughed so loudly at that, the budgies started yelling at me LOL
---
Will this be a "hold my beer" moment? Will she be able to resist? Imagine if these two really got into a slanging match - I can't see either backing down, so I think if it starts, it has the potential to go just about anywhere.
From the Express:
A White House source said last night: “I guess we’re all expecting the Duchess of Sussex to become much more vocal on political issues after they begin to formally live in Canada.
“That no doubt means resuming her vitriol against President Trump. He isn’t naive enough to believe Prime Minister Boris Johnson can do anything about that. And he wouldn’t ask.”
The insider added: “President Trump has a genuine deep-felt respect and admiration for the Queen.
“This is something he inherited from his mother, who came from Scotland.
“But Markle has now effectively abandoned the Royal Family that embraced her. Frankly, she will be fair game in the President’s eyes.
“If she criticises him openly, you’d better get ready, because he will respond in kind.”
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1230376/Meghan-Markle-donald-trump-warning-royal-split-latest
I don't know what you feel about all this but I am greatly disappointed at the Queen. Her rushed badly worded statement shows her as weak. She could have sent the same message without kissing Meg's a**s because it is blindingly obvious Megsy never really became a member and she really never worked hard for UK. I took it as hypocrisy.
Harry Markle's new post confirms I am not the only one to see it like that.
Royal commentators praise the Queen but I see an old tired woman who has no desire or energy to fight the battles. Harkles will not stop in their shameless grab for money and she can't stop them with this weak slap on the wrist. The damage is done already
This back and forth about people we don't personally know (Megs+H+BRF) actually is good for your psychology, because it makes you think (reflect) (meditate) about how you live your own life. It's a bit like a Rorschach test. It is a mirror.
Do we all have some Megs, Harry, Charles, Andrew in us? Yes. Same for the Queen. We have met and have family who are older and who are as solid and persevering as The Queen.
The most she can complain of would be that felt restricted and couldn't use her voice to shine a light on her humanitarian issues. Hopefully Oprah and the rest of the US public would be aware that the only thing she wants to shine a light on is the big number on the last page of her bank statement.The Queen really has taken the wind out of her yacht sails.
Does this mean there's a chance the decision to remove it has just been put "on hold" temporarily until the point HMTQ can legitimately say "sorry, you can't retain it as you didn't complete your citizenship, nothing to do with me, as much as I'd like to decide otherwise, it's a matter of law"? I know it's been discussed back and forth here quite a bit so apologies if this has already been suggested and I've missed it.
God Save the Queen
If I were Harry, I would thank my stars that HM the Queen were my grandmother. She has run interference for him all his life.
He does not deserve any of what she has given him.
Also, I saw an article where they name 2 of "archie's" godparents. One is the longtime nanny he and William had. The other is his "minder". This man is photographed with Harry as a youngster and an adult. What exactly is a "minder", I wonder.
William is known to be rather intractable with an impressive temper of his own.
I think it is a wait and see with Harry. With MM, expect more of the same. The one thing I suspect may be more difficult for her as a "private" citizen is using people and their images without permission. Mostly to construct her false narrative.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/21/prince-harry-afghanistan
In his own personal conscience, he may be wanting to leave that behind. In which case, release from military participation may be a relief. How does one reconcile saving the planet and warmongering?
Harry suggests in this article that he's compartmentalized 3 identities: army, private/social, family/Firm/Prince. All of these are constructs. Who is he, really? What kind of man is he for/with Meghan?
I think he'll decamp to Africa after the divorce, and he'll be resurrected. Hopefully he'll have custody of Archie for months at a time - we know Meghan isn't terribly maternal.
Meghan's future is a descent into lasting cringe, I'm afraid.
Very last sentence of the DM article is how little the Queen has seen of Archie.
Looks like Info is being dripped. Read every word of what cones out. They may bury the tidbits. 😁
But now, I don’t think so. Pictures of him show a smirking, smiling, cat that ate the canary since this drama has been going on. He’s a willing participant and sucker. The DM just had a new clip of Harry saying to Iger at the LionKing premiere, that The Harkles had rearranged their schedule so they could beg for voice over jobs at Disney. Iger of course looks a little uncomfortable during the conversation.
Harry blew off a military patronage evening to shill for a job for himself and his wife. He had/has no respect for the BRF/ HM and duty to the country. He’ll probably pimp out himself and his wife to the next Weinstein that comes along for staring role.
They’re both repulsive.
PC should invite Thomas Markle for tea when he’s in England testifying. They’ve never met and Should have met prior to the wedding!
How I wish I had thought of it. 🤣
Honorable mention goes to Ron for “The Queen took the wind out of her yachting sails”.
*******
I feel tremendous pity for the Queen in all of this. For all of an incredibly long lifetime, she has dedicated herself to country and her lonely, singular job which she would have preferred not to have pass to her. Her personal conduct has been impeccable, but we could hardly say the same for any of her family members... her spouse and children, her children’s children, and even her beloved sister and mother have all at one time or another badly let her down. Harry’s betrayal, and Andrew’s, Are the latest in a long line of family miss behavior, but may end up being the most egregious of all. The scandal with Diana and Charles was bad, and the fallout from the week of seemingly callous indifference by the Queen to Diana’s death taught a lesson about the dangers of misjudging the public mood. 22 years on, I’m sure the queen believed that never again in her reign would she have a scandal of similar proportions. Yet here she is, in the twilight of her rein, once again humiliated by the actions of her family members.
In many ways the house of Windsor had recovered from the tragedy of Diana, which made the toe-sucking peccadilloes Of Fergie the stuff of late night comedians. In Camilla, Charles found a workhorse for the Firm who supports it without trying to burnish her own star. He has carried on with his duty and had a measure of success in rebuilding his reputation. Nobody will ever forget Diana, but time has provided my perspective that the Wales marriage was a mutual failure, not his alone. The difference between Charles and Andrew and their respective sanctions for their misbehavior is, in public at least, they have taken their medicine and never whined about being unfairly persecuted/too harshly dealt by the Queen’s terms. Harry seems to have made a career out of whining and found someone aces at exploiting his grievances against his family. The queen’s statement, as peace-making as it sounds is “Taken to the woodshed” language. I expect the whining to continue despite it. Manning up at this stage seems unlikely for Harry, with or without Meg. He has forced his grandmother‘s hand in this odious task, and his betrayal now seems worst of all. Not only because of such breathtaking disrespect to his 93-year-old grandmother who is also his sovereign, but because of the forever damaged relationship with his father and brother going forward for decades to come. In the short term, the spoiled boy got what he wanted: Set free from Royal duties to party full time on Dad’s money. That is what this bid for freedom has always been about for Harry. Only, now that he’s no longer 25, he has to gloss it up with this free range global ambassador of woke causes activism to justify his frat boy behavior to himself. In the process, he must have broken his grandmother’s heart. Future remembrances of her reign are always going to include “Haz-it” as its coda. That’s really what this is, for all that Meg has appropriated the optics yet again.
Memoirs of a Grifter
The Lion the Bitch and the Wardrobe
The Desolation of Smug
The Duke of Burgundy, and the House blend
The Duke of Sussex, the ballad of Hazza and Meagain
The Prince and Me, and NDA make three
Crazy Rich Anglo-Saxons
Three Weddings and an Abdication
The reality is almost as good so I'll be satisfied with that.
1) We, the public, now have a clear track record of MM alienating family. When she first appeared on the scene and we were told how awful her blood family was, we had no reason not to believe her. And Samantha's behavior was off-putting, to be sure (parking herself in front of Buck Pal and demanding to "see" MM?) and her poor dad Thomas was played like a chump by the British press.
The public does have a better understanding of the BRF. Of course we don't truly know these people, but we've been exposed to years of their relationships and I for one believe the BRF did everything they could to welcome MM and include her in the family fold, if only out of love for Harry. It is clear to me MM is the toxic element, based on her track record. The Markle family situation was one dot point, and we can't do anything with one dot point. The BRF is a second dot point, and now the public can connect the two and see that that line isn't going anywhere good.
2) I (jokingly) think we should form a GoFundMe page and buy every single domain name we think MM could possibly want, just out of spite and to annoy the hell out of her. Sussex House, Sussex Tig, The Tiganello of Sussex...let's make these unavailable to her!
3) I do think she's going to earn her money through social media promotion, much like Kim K does. Kim gets paid $1MM to wear, say, or endorse something. I can't believe an organization will pay MM anywhere near that amount, because she is so allienating, but I can see her getting six-figures, at least initially, to merch.
4) As an American woman who's parents were only children, I have one brother, and he has only one child, I feel bad for Archie. I have no first cousins. ALL my other family is in England, second cousins to me, but siblings/first cousins to them. They are not all close, but they are all THERE, and it's very isolating for us to be so far away. Archie isn't going to grow up with extended family around him, and that isn't fun. It's a BIG loss for him, especially as he will see (in the press) his cousins together. I'm not explaining it well, but Archie is going to be very isolated and it's a loss he won't know he has until adulthood. I can only hope Harry grows a pair and insists on taking Archie to family get-togethers at least twice a year, so there is some hope of a connection for the kid.
I've got 100 more posts to go to reach the end, but those are my thoughts so far this morning.
Great title ideas… I would amend one to “The Lyin’, the Bitch and the Wardrobe.”
The Duke of Hazard
A Whinge Too Far
A Tale of Two Pities
A Clockwork Orangerie
The Prince and the Yachter
Harry in La La Land
******
This is fun!
Why hide that? Seems like safe choices.
Also, no one from Meg’s circle of friends?
Such doings! I have just a couple of remarks to make:
Is anyone else aware that Beatrice has attended that 5m wedding which has just been held in, I think, St Moritz and are you aware that one of the other guests was Gayle King? I would love to be a fly on the wall when those two get together - I'd like to bet that Bea put the plate in front of the fan re MM.
Also, MM and Haz have already said that they will not go to the US as long as DT is president. Let's hope he wins another term as it would be worth it just to spike MM's guns.
Tumbler search: Anonymoushouseplantfan
Title of blog is actually Tiaras and Houseplants.
I’ve got news for Harry: If you felt your brother was overshadowing you when you were HRH Henry, Second son of the prince of Wales, let’s see how overshadowed you feel when William is the King of England and you are the private citizen ex husband of an over the hill Instagram celebrity, trying to scrounge up a polo game.
Terminal immaturity is such a very sad thing to watch.
This is originally from The Sun (UK), but I copied it from news.au. It is long, so to fit it in here, it is posed here in three parts.
The Article:
Meghan’s dad says she’s ‘not the girl I raised’ and ‘cheapened’ royals
JANUARY 19, 2020 10:06PM
Michael Hamilton, The Sun
news.com.au
Meghan’s heartbroken father Thomas Markle has revealed his distress over her royal exit and said: “This is not the girl I raised.”
Retired Hollywood lighting director Thomas is also said to believe Meghan has “let down” the Royal Family over his daughter and Harry’s abdication plan, The Sun has reported.
And in a TV documentary set to air soon, Thomas, 75, branded Harry and Meghan “embarrassing”.
He also told the Channel 5 doc Thomas Markle: My Story that his daughter was “cheapening” the Royal Family and “throwing away every girl’s dream for money.”
In a reference to the discount American supermarket giant he said: “They are turning it [the Royal Family] into a Walmart with a crown on.”
It comes after the Queen last night put her foot down as she revealed the Royal Family’s ‘hard Megxit’ deal, agreeing that Harry and
Meghan will no longer use their HRH titles and demanding they repay £2.4million of taxpayer’s money spent on renovating Frogmore Cottage.
Meanwhile devastated Thomas has also told relatives he longs to place a photo of himself with his daughter, Harry and grandson baby Archie on to a special picture wall at his home in Mexico.
Meghan’s half-brother Tom Markle, 53, said: “If he can do that he will die a happy man.”
And – referring to Megxit - Tom Junior added: “My dad said to me, ‘This is not the girl I raised.’
“He cannot believe what has happened. He is very disappointed in her actions.
“He thinks she’s let down the Royal family.
“He’s still got a lot of pics of Meg on one big wall and Archie is up there also. What he wants though is a picture of all three of them or even the four of them up there together.
“If that happens he would die a happy man. I personally think there should be a picture of all of us on that wall.
“For months, years, he held out hope she would reach out but there’s too much turmoil now for that to ever happen.”
Well ...back to the Royal mess then. Pretty sure we'll see another pap walk soon. This time maybe with a dog and the baby?! *Fingers crossed*
If we do see her, we'll know something went wrong and she did not infact get everything she wanted. (Or maybe Harry postponed the trip back yet again).
The HRH doesn't really matter to her practically, noone outside of the UK gets the sentimental value of it. So the latest statement seems more like a crackdown on Harry than in Meghan. He loses most of what he held dear. The stupid house was always unoccupied so they dont care about those optics.
Now, obviously the BRF won't tell us all the details of the negotiations nor will they be out right rude about her. We all know she won't be seen with anyone from the family ever again. Not her loss, but definitely Harry's.
Thomas Junior added: “She would not be anywhere without him. He paid for her education, car, clothes, rent, bills, spending money at uni. A small fortune and that’s what put her on her way.
“It’s great that Meg goes to women’s centres and so on, that’s brilliant.
“But she does need to look out for her family, too.
“We’re just out here surviving as best we can. We don’t have millions in the bank like her and Harry.
“She’s pretending we don’t exist but it’s strange and selfish.”
‘SHE’S PRETENDING WE DON’T EXIST’
Thomas Senior told Channel 5: “When they got married they took on an obligation, and the obligation is to be part of the Royals and to represent the Royals. And it would be foolish for them not to.
“This is one of the greatest long-living institutions ever. They are destroying it, they are cheapening it, making it shabby… they shouldn’t be doing this.”
He went on: “With Meghan and Harry separating from the Royals… it’s disappointing because she actually got every girl’s dream.
“Every young girl wants to become a princess and she got that and now she’s tossing that away… it looks like she’s tossing that away for money.”
It was revealed this week that Thomas Senior could be the star witness for the Mail on Sunday in its legal fight with Meghan, 38.
The Duchess of Sussex is suing the paper for privacy and copyright over a letter it published that she had written to her father in 2018.
The paper’s defence will reveal Thomas was left ‘deeply hurt’ by a message sent by his daughter and Prince Harry in the run-up to their wedding in 2018.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7904327/Royal-pundits-react-Queens-statement-Harry-Meghans-future-outside-Firm.html
He also claims, in the defence that he paid tens of thousands of dollars for his daughter’s school fees and was paying off her student loan as her acting career took off.
But Mr Markle - who says he helped fund her first wedding, in 2011, to producer Trevor Engelson - claims Meghan has not offered him recent support.
The documents state: “Since May 2018 (Meghan) has not supported him in any way, despite the fact that, as she knows, he has been ill and therefore has medical expenses, not all of which are covered by his insurance.”
Tom Junior also revealed that Meghan’s first husband told him after they split: “If you mention her name to me we’ll never speak again.”
And he issued a warning to Prince Harry that he could end up ‘dumped’ like other people Meghan has left behind.
He explained: “When I met Trevor a few times he was a really nice, professional Hollywood producer.
“He was very well known and on his way to being a big name.
“I think he was involved in the ‘Saw’ films so was a big deal. He’d done well for himself. Very financially secure and did everything for Meg.
“He took her under his wing and really showed her how Hollywood works and important people. She’d had a taste of that via my dad but she wanted to know more of course.
“They seemed really solid pair, very in love.
“I met him at a holiday dinner, birthdays and things. I think a Thanksgiving or a Christmas.
“Meghan was all giddy and happy like she was showing him off and he was happy and into her, They were very hands-on and lovey-dovey.”
He said that last time he saw Trevor with Meghan was at their grandmother Doris’s funeral in Glendale, CA, in 2011.
He said: “The funeral was at my grandmother Doris’s care home called Broadview in Glendale in which we all attended.
“Trevor and Meg were there.
“Meghan was close to Doris, she really opened up to Meghan. They would watch TV and Meghan helped nurse her through dementia.
“They were close. Meghan was really kind and caring with her, to her immense credit.”
‘HARRY — DON’T END UP LIKE THE OTHER GUYS’
He added: “I didn’t go to Meghan and Trevor’s wedding.
It was dad, Doria and a bunch of her friends. Not long afterwards, a year or something, she goes to Canada to film Suits.
“When Meghan moved to Toronto I did hear that at first Trevor paid for her rent there in Toronto while he stayed in Hollywood.
“He couldn’t relocate because of his business but he would fly out twice a month.
“But it started to be a problem for Meg and then they had a trial separation and she eventually completely dumped Trevor.
“Then it came out that Meg was having a thing with a celebrity chef there.
“It was really sad. I can’t believe she did that to him.
“I reached out to him after a couple of times and he said, ‘If you mention her name I’ll never speak to you again.’
“She did a number on him and he’s happy now, thankfully. Newly married.
“It’s very devastating for a man and especially for a man who put his heart and soul into it. It shows there was no real love there at all.
“I think looking back it’s just typical behaviour by Meg. She did the same thing with the chef in Toronto.
“Before long, she was with Prince Harry.
“I’d warn Prince Harry, ‘Don’t end up like the other guys.’
This story first appeared in The Sun and is reproduced here with permission.
https://douglasreynoldsgallery.com/artwork/cultural-group/haisla/whale-tail-with-diamond/
and there she is, smiling, wearing the gifted necklace.
Nutty - delete if already posted.
Future movie titles for the Meghan saga;
Memoirs of a Grifter
The Lion the Bitch and the Wardrobe
The Desolation of Smug
The Duke of Burgundy, and the House blend
The Duke of Sussex, the ballad of Hazza and Meagain
The Prince and Me, and NDA make three
Crazy Rich Anglo-Saxons
Three Weddings and an Abdication
@HushHush:
Add to your list:
Me, Myself, and I — The autobiography of Meghan Markle.
The BP and Queens statement say the deliberations have been going on for months. Also that the transition period will last up to spring 2020, so that would be April. Back in October right after their whinomentary, when they announced they would be taking a break it was mentioned I'm some articles and in one of the BP statements that the Sussexes would be on a break for 6 months. (This was later backtracked and a 6 WEEK break was announced as a Thanksgiving/family holiday/US trip.) So going by that Oct statement they were anyway expecting/expected to step back and be on a break till March/April while the negotiations were going on behind closed doors.
Which makes it seem that this chaos was intended as a bargaining chip by the couple???
Also the blinds that they were house hunting in LA/Toronto/New York were right?? So can we expect New York to be the next pit stop??
I see another article today names another one of A's godparents. So we can expect more and more details of the British/pregnancy/christening to come out over the next few days. It could be the RRs releasing info. But could it also be Mm slowly drip feeding info about him to drum up more interest in him till the big bang of Archie merchie golden moment???
Re. Archie’s godparents
Using the term “Meghan’s circle of friends” loosely, I suppose that none of them were deemed suitable, because don’t godparents have to be baptized members of the Church of England? They may bend the rules at a regular parish for a regular couple, but for an allegedly royal baby being christened in the queen’s Chapel By the Archbishop of Canterbury, I suppose they would be sticklers. So why not invite Diana’s sisters to be godmothers? The Diana Ty would have been very desirable, and I assumed that was the whole purpose of having them, since they have not been apart of Harry’s life for years. There was some flap in the papers at the time that Earl Spencer was hurt that he was not invited, But I think that’s more bogus Meg PR to make what I still consider to be a fictitious event more important.
Seems like royal godparents are all entirely for show anyway. Godparents should be adults who are placed to be in a meaningful relationship with the child as he grows up, to advise and help, to be a spiritual mentor. Royal godparents seem to be mostly a social perk And appointment in name only. And there are so many of them! In my church tradition, godparents are most often a married couple who are very close to the parents. My aunt and uncle were godparents to my sisters and me, And we also appointed our legal guardians if something happened to our parents.
I am in the “christening was bogus” camp, So for a fantasy christening, Meg & Harry could have asked the members of his favorite rugby club to be godfathers, as far as I am concerned.
Also, Harry being stripped of his military honorary titles is just right. As a military, you have to put God and country over family. But clearly, Harry’s mantra is wife, wife and wife.
No. Godparents in a COE baptism need to have been baptized in a Christian church. That let out Jessica M who is Jewish. But what about the two female friends she attended Wimbledon with? Wasn't that at about the same time?
Harry blew off a military patronage evening to shill for a job for himself and his wife. He had/has no respect for the BRF/ HM and duty to the country.
Indeed. It turns out Canada offered him several different military patronages as well and he turned them all down. If he will miss anything I think, it will be the uniforms. Basically Harry has been defrocked.
What I meant was that in Meghan's very calculating mind the HRH is still expendable because all the branding has been done as Sussex royals - their Ig, their website, their foundation and any joint venture they undertake. So when push comes to shove, they (she) would give in and let the HRH go. It's the "sussex royal" part that's no negotiable.
While the wording makes it seem polite, I feel it has been cruelly yanked away. Of the queen wouldn't say so.
So is Harry moving the ponies to horsey Malibu environs? How horsey are Vancouver and Toronto?
Also, stable staff had to have partially facilitated Harry’s bizarre post-birth stable (oh my god, the Christian allegory just hit me - how slow am I?) video in praise of his wife. It was the only real enthusiasm Harry ever showed about Archie. Does that figure in somehow?
Anyway - Interesting thing for Enty’s source to be miffed about, IMO.
The Guardian article linked in my previous post has Harry admitting to killing in Afghanistan. Is it true, or him posing? Impossible to know.
We know he's sought psychological treatment, but it seems he's still unsure of himself and feeling triggered.
And one for Archie: "M'Arche" as in Bon Marche (gosh I miss that store)
The videos of Harry asking both Bob Iger and Jon Faveau are cringe worthy.
It seems M has H's balls in her pocket.
Re private patronages
I assume that Sentebale (Which my phone translated as “center valet” ha ha) and Invictus are considered non Royal patronages, but The question is, would either of them still want to be associated with Harry? Both organizations were basically crafted for Harry, And apart from his military charities, were an integral part of his Royal profile. This was a great benefit to the charities when Harry was a popular royal, and he worked hard on them because they were a great fit for his specific strengths. I should say working hard Harry style… I think he was more enthusiastic figurehead than actual day to day participation. Since getting engaged to Meg, it sounds Like he’s been sloughing off both organizations, except for high profile launches. Maybe they are too sad to see the back of him… Particularly Invictus Games. The queen has just stripped him of his military ranks; that isn’t going to go over too well with the wounded warrior athletes.
Sentebale May still want his involvement, even tarnished. The African children who are directly benefiting from organized sport through the program don’t read tabloids. It won’t matter to them that Harry is no longer HRH. Work in Africa is going to be his only means of Rehabilitation after this.
As for Meg, I read the queen’s reference to private charities as a dig at Meg’s pathetic photo op in Vancouver Which had come out just before. This is the queen saying “I know that you do not have a charitable bone in your body.” It could also be interpreted as her majesty’s acknowledgment that the Sussex foundation will be going forward. Whether the Sussex foundation will actually succeed to be around in the future is completely up in the air. It hasn’t even been properly organized yet. People who say the Queen wilted and gave them everything they wanted are not correct. What her Majesty has given them is, in the words of our Declaration of Independence,”Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Not everyone who pursues happiness will get it, the freedom isn’t being allowed to try. If all that constitutes happiness for Meg and H is money, She is setting them free to chase after it… Within parameters which pretty much guarantee they will fail. Her Majesty has in this matter, been able to have her cake and eat it. It’s not ideal, but she is counting on the inevitable flame out of the Sussex delusions to empire. Meanwhile, She appears magnanimous for allowing them to keep Duke and Duchess of Sussex. I think they are going to find out quickly that in America, they will not even be Duke and Duchess of Disneyland. Megan will always get to be the number one super woke Duchess in Her Own Mind so that’s something.
Meg has traded a constrained but incredibly unique life as the American Princess to go back to merching on the Internet as an upgraded. version of the Tig. This was the sum of the ambition for such a wicked smart woman given unprecedented opportunities? Her vision is so lacking, she needs eyes checked. I could see if she left an Oscar-winning acting career behind, she might message. But look what she gave up for what she went back to ... Pathetic doesn’t even cover it.
"Royal bombshell: Crisis-hit Palace fears 'Luxembourg' model seeing members SACKED."
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1230387/Royal-news-buckingham-palace-queen-sacked
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1230415/royal-family-news-meghan-markle-latest-prince-harry-queen-elizabeth-II-sack-luxembourg
I think I've picked up a couple of overtures by Kim K to Meghan, comments of support, an invitation to some party?.
Meghan blew her off, of course.
She may regret that now. Ole Kim has contacts Meg could use.
“Freedom is”. And “miss it”
Philosophy is wasted on an iPhone.
Harry Markle's new post confirms I am not the only one to see it like that.
Royal commentators praise the Queen but I see an old tired woman who has no desire or energy to fight the battles. Harkles will not stop in their shameless grab for money and she can't stop them with this weak slap on the wrist. The damage is done already.’
My feelings are echoed with a lot of posters here, namely Ava C, Liver Bird and Vince to name a few. I’m looking at the bigger picture.
They have no royal status and with that goes protection of their imagine , prestige and so much more. They have no home (abroad) and no income only what Charles May pay. They are on their own. How long do you think they will last on the celebrity circuit? It’s fleeting.
If they as much put a foot wrong, it’s likely they’ll lose any income Prince Charles is paying , they could lose the HRH completely and more.
The Queen couldn’t completely cut them off, her statement is measured and not out to apportion any blame. Can you imagine the outcry if she had included sentiments like, that awful manipulative Meghan and my ungrateful grandson?
I’m happy that they no longer represent my country, or the royal family. I’m not happy if they get paid security though (unless Charles or they are paying). They are gone...and the press are coming out with not so nice stories about the pair (especially the one where Meghan had her belongings put into storage when she moved here..it looks bad as it appears she never intended to stay in the UK). The stories won’t stop, but they think they will and/or have control over what’s written about them. They are deluded!
Sorry my post is shortish. I’m hopeless typing on my phone in every way. I’m ever grateful to those who contribute and write so well!
Meg is waiting by the phone for Beyoncé’s call. She’s also starting to wonder why her BFFs Oprah, George, Amal, Ellen and Serena have been so quiet. Ah, well, everyone is so busy ....
Maybe Whoopi will get her in The View. Then there’s always “Live with Kelly and Ryan”.
I nominate Meg for the next edition of Celebrity Survivor. The million dollar purse would be very attractive and she would easily prevail by eating all her competition.
Now with this dormant HRH how does this protocol work? She is not required to curtsy? The whole mess will only work if she never sets foot into UK again and never meets any royals again. Because if she does it will lead to a total undignified spectacle and nobody will know how to behave.
Does the Queen realize what sort of precedent she created? Almost like be "a bit pregnant" it doesn't make sense.
MM is not eligible to truly hold the HRH designation until her British citizenship is granted.
MM will not be eligible for British citizenship until she has been a UK resident for five years.
This is obviously never gonna happen, therefor:
HA HA CHECKMATE BIYOTCH -
Love,
HMTQ
On the contrary - it makes excellent sense.
By not removing the HRH and pretending that the pair agreed to not use the style (yeah sure!) the queen a) avoids reminders of 'stipping' Diana of her HRH and all the upset it caused her and b) will make it easier for Harry to slip back into his role after the divorce.
It's actually a genius move. I'm so impressed by the deftness of it all.
" When Megsy meets Kate she is required to curtsy without HRH,"
I suspect Meghan will never again be in Kate's presence, so it's academic only.
See my above comment about the HRH title to answer your question. :D
This way Harry retains it and she never receives it ever.
MM will not be eligible for British citizenship until she has been a UK resident for five years."
The latter is mostly true (although if you are married to a British citizen the waiting period is 3 rather than 5 years) but the former is false. You don't have to be a British citizen to be an HRH - it comes by virtue of her marriage to a man with that style.
I just did a quick search of international news, and headlines in no uncertain terms summarise their leave as being out of the RF. For those who don't have focus to bother with nuance and details of the story, it's still perfectly clear that they are officialy no longer part of the Firm. This is international loss for their brand and certain road to Fergiedom. They may spin Megxit as The Great Love Story of our times, but Megs is no heroine and very few people would buy it.
Harry may always have a certain clout as Diana's son and closest relation to future kings, but he'll also be forever mark(le)d as a traitor to his family and his country, a weakling and hot-headed buffoon. First impressions count the most and the Harkles have painted themselves as overgrown selfish teenagers, perpetual victims and dishonest employees. Their business ventures might be embraced for money laundering and all sorts of sketchy tax-evading schemes by semi-criminal gnomes of the elite, and thus may get truly rich, but that only if they stay together. Meghan on her own is worth nothing.
As politically minded and woke as they both are I can't wait to see who and where they will begin the virtue signaling non sense.
The HRH won’t mean much to people who do not understand titles, but it will mean alot to Harry and Meghan because it means they lose a layer of perks that elevated them beyond everybody with exception of the Queen.
They can’t demand governments change laws for them as Harry did in Botswana. They can’t demand their holi-tours are paid by taxpayers simply because they met a government official. Heck they can’t demand any special treatment anywhere anymore. They can’t complain of poor press treatment and IPSO gives them special audience and finds in their favour just because of who they are. Giving up the HRH means giving up the only thing that accorded them a layer of privilege that even multibillionaires can’t buy.
This loss of status won’t be felt for some time because they will initially be around the same yes people they continue to surround themselves.
Once they start moving about as regular people which they are now, it will bite them.
Link: HRH
What if Meghan found dementia granny to be a fascinating mental exercise in how to manipulate and screw with people? Maybe she experimented on her.
Very dark I know, pure speculation on my part. But when somebody has dementia perhaps you can convince them of anything.
From the Express:
A White House source said last night: “I guess we’re all expecting the Duchess of Sussex to become much more vocal on political issues after they begin to formally live in Canada.
@Lurking: Because they will still be technically be associated with the RF, any political commenting or activity will be shut down by the palace.
Having the title but being barred from using it is like having a complimentary membership to a club you can’t actually go in. You can brag to your friends that you are a member, But your membership card is for show only… If you try to use it at the door to get in, you’ll be turned away because you’re not an active member. The royal family is like a very exclusive club, and when you are a full member in good standing of exclusive clubs, you are permitted to Give a certain number of friends access to the privileged club. Harry and Meg Still have the membership card in their wallet in a manner if speaking but their membership has been suspended. Allowing them to keep the HRHs in theory is like a suspension. The Queen’s main objective was to strip Meg of her pretensions to Royalty on her own. Her title and rank it’s only a courtesy piggyback on his; So as long as they stay married the queen had to penalize Harry in this way to bar the title from Meg. Stripping it from her alone would look vindictive and play into her victim narrative, but also would be nonsensical because her title only exists as part of the unit. Since the Archbishop of Canterbury has pronounced them man and wife, As long as Harry retains his titles, his wife has hers. To demote her, the queen had to remove both.
The queen is keeping HRH in reserve for Harry for the inevitable divorce. After divorce, and perhaps having shown some public remorse and reconciliation by then, harry may be reinstated HRH, Once Meg throws him over. We shall wait and see about that. Maybe after a few years go by, Charles and William will be less angry at Harry, But it would probably be best for his future HRH if he gets divorced well granny is still alive.
PC should invite Thomas Markle for tea when he’s in England testifying. They’ve never met and Should have met prior to the wedding!
@JHanoi: Charles should also in invite Samantha and make sure there’s a photo op of everyone laughing it up — with the queen too. It would grind Meghan’s gears to no end.
The Queen has been playing high stakes poker with world leaders almost twice as long as MM has been alive.
Minus the intelligence, education, experience, political success, tact, diplomacy, respect, and the good common sense to STFU sometimes, yes, I can see that (read: not at all lol).
"You don't have to be a British citizen to be an HRH - it comes by virtue of her marriage to a man with that style."
Based on my understanding (I'm open to correction), while it's true she receives it by virtue of marriage, she can only carry it upon her own name independently of Harry once she is truly a British citizen.
I believe only a British citizen can truly be titled HRH, using it by marriage being considered more non-official.
Again, it's a subtle difference and as an American I am open to being corrected on this point.
@Starry. Harry may well have PTSD from killing people, & also from his mother’s death. Has he not had treatment for this? From what I’ve read he was never in the front line & was protected by SAS at all times? There is speculation as to whether he actually held/holds a pilots license.
@Magatha Mistie and Starry:
People who have been involved with a narcissist often also end up with PTSD. In public, their friends, business associates etc. only see the carefully-constructed facade of the narcissist. But in private, they are incredibly emotionally and psychologically abusive to their partner and yes, their children too. Partners who have managed to break free of the steel grip of a narcissist often end up with PTSD from the abuse and years of stress spent walking on glass. This also often happens to the children of a narcissist. They end up with PTSD too. It’s very sad.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stephenmcbride1/2019/11/11/in-24-hours-netflix-could-lose-25-of-its-subscribers/#ef796ee1b399
@Elle, I was thinking of your posts when I wrote my post on the Queen's well played hand. I think a lot of us Americans here are on the same page, although of course the Brits have been reading the RF tea leaves longer. We Americans are experts on how the celebrity gravy train goes choo-choo though, we've seen it go by so many times. LOL.
Harry's pub dinner at his ex-minder's, alleged godparent to Archie's pub is an example of how the Harkles could subtly merch. His friend's pub got a big shout out, & Harry didn't embarrass himself, thankfully. Funnily, Princess Michael gave a trendy restaurant in NYC some publicity several years ago when she was rude & allegedly racist to some other customers ( I think she told them to go back to the colonies or something.) The publicity didn't make Princess Michael look very good, but I'm sure that the restaurant was happy for it to be known that royals dined there. So publicity can work both ways, & it doesn't sound as though under the current plans the queen's minions are going to go around putting out embarrassing fires for the Harkles. They had better be careful.
I agree with many commenters here who have said that the queen handled this extremely well. She couldn't very well make a statement that could come back to bite her in the ass, her statement actually totally ruins everything that Markle tried to say about this toxic family. People are going to start to see that the real toxic person is Meghan Markle. She destroyed her relationship with her family, then joined the royal family and destroyed Harry's relationship with them. The common denominator here is Meghan Markle. The more people are exposed to her and her Antics in the United States the more they are going to realize that the Press was right.
Women who marry into the royal family never hold titles 'independently', regardless of citizenship. They are simply granted the feminine versions of their husband's titles by default, but they are never truly 'their' titles.
And strictly speaking, HRH is not a title but a 'style'.
...friends claim that Harry and Meghan are themselves divided over where in Canada to settle down.
The Duke is believed to be happy to continue living on the west coast near Vancouver, while his ex-actress wife is understood to favour Toronto, where she lived during her time filming Suits.
So is this another sign of the inevitable?
Losing the HRH makes the "Royal" part of SussexRoyal UNTRUE
So ummmmm, she's a bit screwed.
Yup. I'm still looking......
Este made a good post about Harry quitting the family because he was tired of living in his brother’s shadow.
@Hikari: Yes, that’s an accurate comment, but I doubt Harry was subjected to emotional and psychological abuse and spent his private time with William walking on glass as is likely what Harry is or will experience with Meghan. Especially now. Her narcissism will grow exponentially.
If Harry felt like he has been living in William’s shadow, he has been living under a wet blanket with Meghan. He is now just a vehicle for her and she will hog ALL the air in the room from this point forward.
He is essentially now Meghan’s spare who she will keep around long enough to have a second child as a means to generate publicity and get a larger divorce settlement.
Well, MM must be really, really mad and she's got lots of time on her hands for reading and responding to blogs, so we should probably say hi to her. (Wave with finger of your choice.)
~~Waves to Smurkles~~
More than likely they were discussing Bea's upcoming nuptials. At least, my first thought was that since the toxic person has been removed from the RF, perhaps she'll be able to get married now.
OTOH, maybe he was telling her his first grandchild is on the way.
If they want to focus on entertainment, they will need to be in Vancouver near LA and where many shows have their studios.
This whole thing is super astonishing. I'm still waiting to see if PH makes it to Canada and how Skippy handles that moment.
I like your line about membership in the exclusive club.
What I don't understand is what will happen if Megsy returns to UK and has to meet members of the RF (funerals, for instance). I can see a lot of confusion even for the staff in how they should treat her, address her, her place in procession, her seat at the table, dress code, etc.
They will have to ask the Queen for clarification. Lets hope she will never come to UK again. She is persona non grata after this epic mess.
"Meghan and Harry’s wish to “uphold the values of Her Majesty” means they must honour one royal rule.
Members of the royal family, senior or not, are expected to remain politically neutral.
This means Meghan and Harry should not publicly align themselves with a political party if they are to tow the Queen’s line."
What's the betting on her breaking this rule?
But now that they're officially out, I don't see why they would stay in Canada. Neither of them are citizens and it's not a major international celeb hub, so it makes little sense for them. They may hang around a few months for appearance's sake but I fully expect them to have set up shop in Los Angeles by the summer.
I'm looking for all those messages of congratulations to the Suss-exes on their new start in life from Oprah, George, Michelle, Elton, Serena.......
Yup. I'm still looking......
LOL The only support so far (that I have seen) is this:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-7903135/Tiffany-Haddish-gives-shout-Meghan-Markle-Thats-South-Central-LA-baby.html
'That's how we do it in South Central LA, baby'
Megs won't like people reminding her that she comes from the wrong part of LA. By 'wrong' I mean infamous and connected to gang violence as opposed to affluent neighbourhoods.
Haddish sounds just like that DM's headline 'Almost Straight Outta Compton', only she sees it as something positive. I'm always surprised that black Americans embrace her when Meghan spend her whole public life denying her blackness.
I think you're right. They will end up in LA after awhile. Some of the Canadians will be disappointed and hurt when they do because they would have been counting on having them as residents to boost their charity clout and coffers. And yes. How can a charity like the women's shelter be close to her heart if she isn't trusted to put down roots in the region for more than a few weeks?
And contrary to what some may think, Vancouver, BC is FAR from LA and not a very practical location if thinking along the lines of realistic commute. Seattle? yes. Southern Calif.? Not really.
No, no, no, MM needs to go on "I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here!"
How appropriate would THAT be?!?!
HA!
I’ve only ever heard him refer to suffering from PTSD when confronted by flashing camera bulbs, not from being in the army. He was an apache pilot and not on the ground as far as I know. He said in 2014 (I think) that had received help over his Mother’s death.
Meghan has already broken that rule: she has stated she will not move back to the US as long as Trump is president.
It isn't'poorly worded' in the slightest. In fact, it's a masterpiece of its genre. When you've got all the power - as HM does - why bother to put on a stern act in public? Why not take the high road, allow the Hapless Harkles to save face by pretending they 'agreed' not to use the HRH? Why not thank them for their 'work', wish them well and say how much your family welcomed Meghan? What better way to head off the stupid 'racism' charges?
This statement was brilliantly written, down to the very last work. Anyone who expected a harsher statement forgets that the queen has to see the bigger picture and learn the lessons of Diana. I'm sure within palace walls, the conversations were a whole lot less genteel!
Now THAT is funny! Can't you just see it?????
Re: funerals: that Precedence has been established with the Duke and Duchess of Windsor with the funerals of Queen Mary, George VI, and the Duke himself.
The Duke attended the procession as a family member, the funeral and burial. No wake - returned to France (or wherever he was living at the time).
The Duchess only attended her husband's funeral, no wake afterwords. She returned to France.
Long may HMTQ and PP live!
Or how about "Naked and Afraid" or "Alone" if they do any more series on Vancouver Island? Alone would be great because they are already climate ready on Vancouver Island. Downside is up island there's lots more cougars than people. But then, then upside is Hazbeen would finally have a chance to "defend" his wife, like he couldn't do in UK.
I think HarryMarkle is British, but I'm not certain. I agree that their remarks on HM's statement do show a lack of familiarity with the way royalty does things, which is strange as normally the blog is very well-informed.
There's a video in the article. It's mortifying. First association for the way of doing things in gang ridden area is extortion, violence, murder, not something noble and cool and brave as Haddish seems to imply.
Elle, ditto :)
@punkinseed: I did not know that about the cougars!
I lived in Seattle for a decade and I loved the Bon Marche. I think Seattle/VI/Vancouver is a smart and well thought out location for Meg to plot her future. There is a lot of stuff filmed in the area and it's cheaper to live than most places that have that much culture. Does that make sense?
@Liver Bird: I was stunned by Harry Markle's response to QEII.
In contrast, we (Nuttiers, the Public, and others) know IN REALITY how deeply they have embarrassed the Family, the U.K., the U.S., and the world (e.g., “She’s repugnant”), not to mention giving the figurative, two-finger salute frequently, to the Queen and her family. The only reason I can see to justify the statement’s 4th paragraph is some legal effort to try to underscore “she was welcomed as one of the family.” But I don’t see the need for it. Any look at the expenditures, inclusiveness, including at public events of the BRF, the personal invitations made to family events that were rejected, personal correspondence (if brought into court), etc., says so. My disgust for the hustler and brainwasher MeGain is boundless, including because of the “pitching” video now out. Glad that the Doormat has at least been stripped of his titles, he’s unworthy of the uniforms, and I hope Philip had a hand in that.
Yes, do people really expect HM to write a public statement saying "That actress chick has been nothing but trouble ever since she got my dumb grandson in her sights and I hope the both of them fall flat on their faces with their daft merching plans"?
Of course not. It's the queen. You have to read between the lines and look at what is not said. The queen has all the power. She knows it. We know it. The Harkles know it. Why by so uncouth as to shout it from the rooftops?
@Liver Bird
Yes, def re the lack of understanding lol:
The Sussexes are still considered members of the Royal Family, and I don’t think the ‘much loved’ was necessary, because they aren’t loved by the public and it makes The Queen appear weak and sentimental.
I stopped there. Clearly missing the subtext, or in this case, the susstext ;)
Well said....
This statement was brilliantly written, down to the very last work. Anyone who expected a harsher statement forgets that the queen has to see the bigger picture and learn the lessons of Diana.
Completely agree. The statement was tremendously politic, so artful. A thing of beauty. I wonder who wrote it.
The ambiguity sucks for us though.
Yes. Duke of Windsor was clearly HRH and Duchess of Windzor clearly wasn't. Protocol is obvious. What to do with Harkles and their semi-present HRH is much less obvious. Are they HRH or not? When I ask myself this question I can't answer it. It is like I am given a Dr. but not allowed to use it. So, am I a Dr. or not?
HRH is usually associated with the rank of Prince or Princess. So, is Harry still a prince? He was born to a future King, so he can title himself prince. Prince Harry Duke of Sussex. While he is prince the Crown is still invisibly present above him.
So them "dropping" HRH doesn't mean anything at all. They can merch under Harry's Prince. The danger of cheapening and commercializing monarchy is still there. What does this ridiculous step solve?
That is what I can't understand.
Regarding "There is also a wedding photo in there near the bottom of the page, and it is one I'd not seen before. Few eyes on the bride-to-be as she approached Harry at the altar. Looking down/away/straight ahead...."
I've also wondered. Other photos of the family looking down/away and not at Harry/Meghan during the ceremony. One reason is as she approached Harry is that the flower girls/boys were behind her and people were looking at them.An unusual choice as the bride is typically last. My guess is Meghan wanted the focus (and more importantly the photos) to be on her as she walked down the aisle (first portion alone - as she wanted, and then with Charles). I will never be convinced that she ever intended her father to walk her down the aisle.
It's not ridiculous at all. If it were, why was Diana so upset when her HRH were withdrawn?
It's a huge deal. Unprecendented in the British royal family, at least in modern times. They are no longer royal. Hence, no more 'Sussex Royal.'
Harry might prefer Vancouver Island as it is a lot like a mini version of England, especially Victoria, but it's certainly not Meg's style. Vancouver being more cosmopolitan might be easier for her though.
Love your prediction! Watch as Megs starts to marche SussEX Royal Coversluts on her meg's mirror.
So if you're MM you might not meet up with many celebs in Vancouver, or recognize the Production teams that hire. Hunters right that Toronto would be better for merching as that's Canada's corporate HQ, although the west coast is a great place for lifestyle brands like Lululemon that began, and is building there. If converting pounds, or USD to Canadian dollars, there are deals, but Vancouver, and Toronto are more expensive for housing than LA, for the most part.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7905147/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markles-commercial-dealings-assessed-one-year.html
"One reason is as she approached Harry is that the flower girls/boys were behind her and people were looking at them.An unusual choice as the bride is typically last."
In the UK, the bride usually walks first.
I think you're right. There was a post a while back where he/she seemed really very angry and it came across in a rather unpleasant way.
If you ask me, the Harkles aren't worth that kind of emotion. It's great fun, but at the end of the day, it's just tittle tattle. The Harkles simply aren't that important.
This is Britain and nothing unusual here. The Bride is always first and Bridesmaids (we don’t have flower girls/boys) follow behind with pageboys.
Another truly offensive assertion which has no place here.
Is this Intersectionality at work? It is ludicrous to ascribe such a motivation to the Provisional IRA.
What is actual fact is that the Provos killed 18 British soldiers the same day by ambush at Warrenpoint; other innocent British and Irish citizens were killed in the attack on Mountbatten; there was in effect a war in progress.
Mountbatten was Philip’s uncle; he was on holiday in the Republic of Ireland. That was enough.
Whatever he may or may not have done; who or what may have been complicit, if anything did happen, is purely a matter of conjecture and nothing to do with the subject of this blog. If you are implying something nasty about the Royal family, you are simultaneously fingering the Catholic church. Somehow I doubt you are riding both the Nationalist and Loyalist horses – you may of course be completely ignorant about the tragedy of Irish/British relations, in which case you should be ashamed of yourself for presuming to comment on something about which you appear to know nothing.
The nature of that war is not the subject of this blog; the cause of the sorrows of Ireland go deeper into history than most commentators are prepared to acknowledge and there is no point in discussing them here.
It is worth saying, however, that Harry caused profound hurt by ignoring the Royal Marine Memorial Concert, in memory of the 11 RM bandsmen killed in the IRA attack on the RM Music School in Deal in 1989.
Superb!
@Jen
"Since Diana was a lot more popular than Meghan and Harry are, I imagine she would have done very well financially and commercially had she had the same opportunities to merch or be involved in commercial ventures that these two do now. Thoughts?"
Diana was different. Not merely because she was born in the aristocratic class of which the Windsors are the pinnacle(though Diana, who sneeringly referred to them as 'the Germans' would disagree!) but because she had a vested interest in the surival of the monarchy. She wanted her son to be king, and would not have done anything that might put that at risk. By contrast, Meghan has no vested interest in the monarchy at all, and Harry seems to have become so wrapped up in his bitterness over being the 'spare to the spare' that he seems to have developed a 'crash and burn' attitute to his own family, though I suspect he'll bitterly regret that later.
‘Another truly offensive assertion which has no place here.’
Thank you for that and so well said too. I found Ann’s comment truly offensive to say the least.
MB
Doria Ragland is an interesting participant in this saga. I have always thought they aren't that close and she was paid to act as the "soul sister" mother. She sure hasn't spent much time with her daughter. If my daughter had a NYC baby shower and I wasn't invited I would be furious. I also wonder who paid for Doria to go to USC, because it ain't cheap and it's hard to get loans and scholarships for grad school. I also find it interesting that she worked as a social worker for such a short time, only three years at Didi Hirsch. I am very familiar with DH and it has a good reputation, so maybe like her daughter she can't commit, she does seem a little transient.
It seemed as though Thomas Markle was Meg's primary parent during her school years and she saw her mom infrequently. but the narrative has changed so many times it's hard to remember what came first.
I've said it before I"m just so baffled by how Meg managed to get Harry to marry her with her dodgy family and background. It's a little like Princess Caraboo.
I respect you and your level-headed comments a lot. This one I have a difficulty with. May be I am a bit thick. I don't see how removal of HRH makes them not royal.
Harry is and will remain royal, won't he? His place in succession is intact. I did not see anything that suggests he can't style himself prince. People outside UK already call Meghan princess and they are technically correct, because she is married to the prince. What stops them opening an enterprise called, say, Prince Harry's World? Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Recommend?
To my limited opinion this has potential to damage the crown as much as them using HRH for commerce. The fundamental problem will always remain - son and brother of British Kings involved with selling stuff and begging for roles for his wife. So unless the palace can influence their commercial activity "suspending" HRH is practically meaningless.
*******************
Is it cynical of me to wonder if Granny had some cash or jewelry that MeAgain was interested in? Dementia patients are easy marks. Had a similar scenario in my extended family and somehow all the people who knew darn good and well what this classical narc was like, were still shocked when my great uncle died, and his bank account was drained.
Megs eventually runs when things get touchy or too tough. She's going to run out of places to run for it. Maybe Russia. She can open women's shelter franchises there. (I'm furious with her for using abused women and children's shelters as a vehicle to merch and profit. It's up there on the list of bad things for profit like blood diamonds or executing political prisoners for body part transplants.
Gert’s royals: both Harry and Archie are still in the line of succession. Harry has some meetings this week and then he will return to Canada.
Richard Palmer: Prince Andrew accompanied HM to church. Please don’t use foul language if you reply to this.
Peter Hunt: the House of Windsor have lost their two superstars. There’s none left. It’s not a good look for an ancient institution (that relies on hereditary principle) that two of its prominent members were desperate to break free.
Chris Ship: Princess Diana’s friend Rosa Monckron tweets here ‘farewell’ to Prince Harry. ‘Such a loss to the royal family and the nation’ she writes
MaxFosterCNN: still royal highnesses until it all kicks in in the spring
Sky news: spoke to four commentators about Harry and Meghan dropping their HRH titles and what it means for the royals:
https://mobile.twitter.com/skynews/status/1218664861565100035
His place in the succession is intact but that was never going to change. Zara Tindall and Peter Phillips are also in the succession but have no royal titles and are private citizens. I'm certainly no expert and this situaiton is rather unprecedented so I expect even the experts themselves are unsure, but I THINK that the removal of the HRH style means that they are no longer part of the royal family. They are part of the queen's family yes - note the reference to 'MY family' in the statement - but not the ROYAL family. I am of course ope to correction on this.
"What stops them opening an enterprise called, say, Prince Harry's World? Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Recommend?"
Note the little line in the statement about how the Harkles have agreed 'to uphold the values of HM'. Now, obviously this is speculation but to me that sounds like code for 'don't even think about merching or other dodgy activities using any royal titles'. Also, the settlement is supposedly up for review in a year, so my guess is that the Harkles have been warned to toe the line.... or else. I very much doubt we will see the royal name attached to anything the Sussexes do, but I could certainly be wrong.
"Interesting about Meg supporting her grandmother who was suffering from dementia. Certainly a different side of Meg."
Yes, I thought the same thing at first, but MM has made me so cynical when contemplating her motives on anything that she does, that I figure she must have had an ulterior one regarding her grandmother.
"If you are implying something nasty about the Royal family, you are simultaneously fingering the Catholic church."
Please if you condemn another poster do it without also making an offensive comment about the Catholic Church, which HAS NO place in this discussion on the Harkles. You are quick to jump on others so please be respectful also.
Thank you, you explanations make sense.
I am sorry my post to you somehow appeared under your response to it. Don't know how it happened. I am grateful for your patience.
Strange though it sounds, being 'royal' is not incompatible with being a 'commoner' in the British system.
For example, Princess Anne is a 'commoner' since she is neither the sovereign nor a peer. Harry was a commoner until the day he was created Duke of Sussex.
I’ve considered Zara a Royal even though she has no title.
@MB One reason is as she approached Harry is that the flower girls/boys were behind her
It's a possible explanation, but look at Wills... and some of the others, not the delighted looks of guests charmed by the children IMO (but admittedly, I have a bias here lol)
@Liverbird, re this:... 'to uphold the values of HM'.
Exactly. One wrong move and the forensic accountants nail them. But I suspect that much of the brand will be toxic by then after the reveals that are coming.
“Bottom line: Meghan/Harry wanted to have their cake & eat it, but the Queen just took the cake back to the royal kitchens.”
@Nutty I can't find a way to remove my comment that was deemed offensive. Please do so for me. I won't be returning again.
I doubt H & M have any heavy artillery for blackmail. They had the racist card and William bullying them, and both were taken away from them. And Andrew. Of whom we already know too much.
Here is a brief 2019 article that details some info re: Mountbatten and his wife according to FBI files and it does indicate his "attraction" to young boys.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9749352/lord-mountbatten-fbi-claims-ira-murder-anniversary/
This is tame compared to a scathing article I read a year ago. Certainly made Prince Andrew sound like a choir boy by comparison.
People are angry about PA being seen smiling with the Queen going to Church today but it was observed that she was smiling even bigger. I bet she is more pleased with her son than her grandson as it would appear. At least PA goes to religious services and isn't Church for sinners after all.
Strange though it sounds, being 'royal' is not incompatible with being a 'commoner' in the British system.
For example, Princess Anne is a 'commoner' since she is neither the sovereign nor a peer. Harry was a commoner until the day he was created Duke of Sussex.’
My understanding of the term ‘commoner’ was anyone other than born blood royal. So a born royal is therefore not a commoner. Incidentally Princess Anne is titled The Princess Royal, and it’s given by the monarch to their eldest daughter.
@Portcitygirl LOL on her and president, just lol. Can you imagine?
January 19, 2020 at 10:33 PM Delete
That's how most people use the term 'commoner' but in the British peerage system there are 3 classes:
- Sovereign
- Peers of the realm
- Commoner
Therefore, every female member of the royal family other than the queen herself is technically a 'commoner' because they do not hold peerages. The Princess Elizabeth was a 'commmoner' until the day of her coronation. Harry and William were 'commoners' until they were created royal dukes.
That's how most people use the term 'commoner' but in the British peerage system there are 3 classes:
- Sovereign
- Peers of the realm
- Commoner
Therefore, every female member of the royal family other than the queen herself is technically a 'commoner' because they do not hold peerages. The Princess Elizabeth was a 'commmoner' until the day of her coronation. Harry and William were 'commoners' until they were created royal dukes.’
Well I’ve never heard or seen this explanation ever. I’ve just looked it up and could only find my take on it, and that was only 3 dictionary’s I checked.
This is from Collins, but the others stated the same:
Word forms: commoners
countable noun
In countries which have a nobility, commoners are the people who are not members of the nobility.
It's only the second time a potential heir to the throne has married a commoner.
From the Cambridge dictionary:
In the UK a person who is not born into a position of high social rank: It is now accepted that a member of the royal family can marry a commoner.
"Well I’ve never heard or seen this explanation ever. I’ve just looked it up and could only find my take on it, and that was only 3 dictionary’s I checked."
I'm not sure a dictionary is really helpful here as they will only give generalised definitions. But what I've written above is correct regarding the British peerage system, odd though it sounds. There are 3 ranks - sovereign, peer and commoner. Simply being born royal does not give you any special status in the nobility. That is why the sons of the sovereign are given peerages. Until this happens, they are indeed considered 'commoners' in the British peerage system.
http://royalmusingsblogspotcom.blogspot.com/2018/03/yes-prince-harry-is-commoner-according.html
'He was joined by his son's godfather Mark Dyer - who donned a blue suit - and a group of minders.'
Minders? Mark Dyer popping out again, third time in the past two days, while we haven't seen him near Harry once in the last year or more. Is this Harry's answer to the articles about him abandoning his friends or something else?
British people are upset about paying for his security and no wordplay is going to change that, I'm afraid.
But really, what's the deal with Dyer now?
I read something by a security company owner who said the more self important and famous the client thinks he or she is, the more they fear for their security and require/demand more coverage. That makes sense to me that their hubris would dictate their wants compared to actual needs.
He could have had an idyllic life on the Hertfordshire estate his father wanted to give him. With the right woman. Someone who loved him, with a straightforward attitude to life. Preferably not that bright but with a gift for routine and contentment.
Hertfordshire feels quieter than pretty much any county I can think of. He'd have had horses, dogs, shooting, friends to stay, kitchen suppers, babies without clouds of suspicion over their innocent little heads.
He could have done a respectable number of traditional royal duties, maybe in blocks so he had enough privacy for his mental health the rest of the time. He'd have had time with his brother's family, their children playing together. Given the BRF is slimming down, his status would have been far higher than it is now, as the Cambridge children have years of private life ahead of them yet.
All thrown away. I'll never understand it. The warning signs and the incompatibility must have been evident from day one. He really needed a minder 24/7.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2020/01/19/prince-charles-fund-prince-harry-meghan-year/
Part I
The Prince of Wales is planning to review the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s “abdication” deal within a year amid fears over the mounting costs of their proposed lifestyle.
While the couple have severed all official ties with the Royal Family, the Prince is to continue to offer "private financial support” to his son and his wife as they embark on a new independent life in Canada.
The substantial cash injection is expected to come from his own private investment income rather than revenue generated by the Duchy of Cornwall estate which has traditionally funded the heir to the throne and his two sons. However, a source close to the Prince of Wales suggested that this was not an inexhaustible source of funds.
As such, the Telegraph understands that any agreement reached concerning the Sussexes' finances is being viewed strictly within the parameters of the initial one-year period before the family reconvenes to review the arrangement next spring. The warning was sounded as grave concerns were expressed over the couple’s security arrangements, which one well-placed source described as a “mess” which could cost millions.
Questions also remained over whether the couple will still be allowed to use the potentially lucrative Sussex Royal branding that features on their social media platforms and new website, amid concern it could be viewed as exploiting the connection with the family.
A well-placed security source told the Telegraph: "You can't expect the Met Police to provide the security. They don't have the powers to operate in Canada. They would not be allowed to be armed. The idea of Met cops arriving and leaving Canadian airports with guns is just not going to happen.
"Security will have to be locally provided. The Canadians will have to pay and then bill it back to the UK Government.”
Staffing costs have been estimated at a minimum of £500,000 per individual but that does not include travel, reconnaissance and home security.
"The security is a complete mess,” they said. “It's a huge mess.”
Another noted that the Met had never had to previously address such a problem, suggesting that the costs might have to be partially met by the couple themselves, and therefore potentially by the Prince of Wales.
One senior former officer said: “If they increase the risk on themselves while doing all sorts of exciting things that make them a large amount of money, should that be part of the security deal or should the costs be borne by them rather than the state.”
The exit deal announced by the Palace this weekend confirmed that the Duke and Duchess had been banned from using their HRH titles and will no longer represent the Queen. However, as a former Apache helicopter pilot, the UK is unlikely ever to be fully free of security costs for the Duke.
The couple will be free to make millions from commercial deals with no oversight from Buckingham Palace who will be reliant on their word that any deals they strike will “uphold the values” of the Queen, granting the Sussexes their wish to be financially independent.
However, how much additional funding they require will be determined by how successfully they forge their new, independent careers, which are likely to be anchored by lucrative commercial deals and public speaking engagements. They will need a substantial new property and will expect to live in the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed.
An aide said that outstanding issues such as the Sussex Royal branding were “in the gift of the family to decide” now that the broader principles of an agreement had been reached.
Prince Harry, 35, will continue to perform royal duties until the spring, which include a private meetings at a summit for African leaders in London on Monday. He is then expected to return to Canada to be reunited with his wife and son on Vancouver Island.
Meanwhile, discussions involving outside stakeholders, such as the Home Office and the Canadian authorities, will continue. While most of the couple’s UK-based staff will be redeployed within the royal estate, the fate of senior advisors such as Sara Latham, their communications secretary, and Fiona Mcilwham, their newly appointed private secretary, hangs in the balance.
Aides were at pains to point out that negotiations over the Sussexes’ future had been friendly and constructive but it is understood that the Queen made it clear from the outset that the Sussexes were not going to get their “cake and eat it” wish by keeping one foot in the royal fold.
The 93-year-old monarch is said to have made her personal disappointment clear. While she acknowledged the Sussexes' feelings, she told them that the deal they wanted was simply not deliverable.
It is understood that the Queen reminded the couple of their royal obligations, reiterating that they served the monarchy and that the monarchy did not serve them.
A source close to the talks acknowledged that there was a clear understanding that circumstances could change, saying "There is some wriggle room. The feeling is, let’s review it, let’s see how it goes... The door is always open.”
Aides last night rowed back on suggestions that the couple would pay a commercial rent on Frogmore Cottage, their Grade II-listed home on the Windsor estate, suggesting they would only pay a peppercorn rent and running costs when they are in the UK.
“The Queen made it clear she wanted to ensure they could keep the home she had given them in her backyard,” a source said.
The best deeds are done quietly. I had hopes for Harry with Invictus. Sadly, he has gone off the rails.