Skip to main content

A few thoughts on the Sussexes' week ahead

Prince Harry appeared today in Edinburgh, Scotland, to promote his rather formless "Travalyst" project, ahead of a busy week for the Susssex duo. (And perhaps trio - nobody seems to know whether or not Archie will make an appearance.)

Harry is supposed to hit Abbey Road studios tomorrow to record a charity single with Jon Bon Jovi, a single that absolutely no one asked for.  I've got nothing against Bon Jovi, who I think has aged very well, but who wants to hear Harry sing?

Probably not the Invictus soldiers the record will supposedly benefit. These are men and women who have made enormous sacrifices for their country, only to see their founder and patron jack the whole thing in to live in luxury someplace else.

The Invictus chorus will also perform on the song, and Bon Jovi has an eager fan base among ladies in his age group, but really - who else is going to buy this thing? Or stream it?

Probably not patriotic Brits, who have had enough of the Sussexes. And I don't think Bon Jovi is a big draw for the younger generation. If the Invictus people wanted some serious sales, they should have brought in BTS or Post Malone.

Papped in the train station

Harry's showed up last night in Edinburgh after ostentatiously taking a train there to prove he doesn't fly everywhere by private jet, although I had to wonder if he was granted a private train car. No London North Eastern Railway 36 pound specials for him.

He was papped at the train station looking surprised by the photographer, and the mechanics of that interest me.

Did he book the paps? Did Meg?

What about the informal agreement that Royals are not subject to unscheduled paparazzi photos? Harry is, after all, still a Royal for four more weeks.

6 days off

After the Bon Jovi single is recorded, Harry has 6 days off before his next engagement, and it would be interesting to know how he will use it.  Meet with friends? He's cut off most of them. Meet with family? Bea and Eugenie, at least, wouldn't be too pleased to see him, and William is travelling to Ireland with Kate. Maybe pay his respects to Prince Philip?

On March 5, Harry is back (temporarily) supporting the military again, appearing at the Endeavor Awards, given to wounded veterans who have taken on extreme sports challenges like mountain climbing.

Two years ago, this might have been a good fit for Harry. Now, not so much. It'll be interesting to gauge the energy level of these tough, highly-motivated injured soldiers when they meet their runaway leader.

Meg may also attend, although I'm sure they couldn't care less. Vain, self-centered, and certainly not self-sacrificing, she's not really the military type.

Boos at the Royal Albert Hall?

Meg is also supposed to come along to the Mountbatten Music Awards at Royal Albert Hall, the site of her odd appearance in late October, when she did a victory lap through the crowd wearing a giant wig and a Barney-the-Dinosaur-colored purple dress.

This was just hours after her famous quote to CNN about how she and Harry had "single-handedly modernized the monarchy."

It would be hard to top that, although Meg had someone leak to the Daily Mail today that she feels "picked on."

And it's questionable whether Meg will show up at all to the Mountbatten Awards, because this is not a crowd that can be trusted not to "boo" her.

This is Harry's final engagement as Captain General of the Royal Marines, and it would rather spoil it to have to defend his wife from the very British citizens which God supposedly has appointed his family to command.

If I were Meg, I'd limit myself to controllable events like the injured soldiers, who are honorable enough to at least greet her politely while complaining behind her back.

International Women's Day

Meg is also supposed to make an appearance commemorating International Women's Day on March 8, although no details have been announced.

This is interesting only to see how many of Meg's "woke" followers are still interested in having her support their cause.

After the Sussexes' bitchy note released over the weekend, it may be dawning on even the most rabid Meg fans that the problem is not the 'racist' British media or the 'racist' Royal family or the 'racist' British public, but Meg herself.

Edward Enniful of Vogue is still singing Meg's praises, so maybe he can help her find a good feminist place to appear.

Spectacularly inappropriate dress

Finally, on May 9 the Sussexes are scheduled to appear at the Commonwealth Day service at Westminister Abbey with all of the family members they've been leaking poison about for the past six? ten? 24? months.

That'll be a happy group of people.

Let's see if Meg can top her dress from last year, which was a spectacularly inappropriate "chains" pattern, never a good idea when both countries you represent have been involved in the slave trade exploiting many parts of the Commonwealth.



What are you most looking forward to during the week ahead?  What are you dreading?

Comments

NeutralObserver said…
@SDJ, @Lurking With Spoon, I wouldn't put it past Megs to stage a fake attack on herself (with or without Archie & Harry), photograph it , & send the photos to the tabs. Hope she remembers to take her TM off it, whatever that will be after April 1. Wasn't a Kardashian suspected of staging a jewelry robbery in some European hotel several years ago?
SarcasticBimbo said…
@Neutral Observer

It was Kim who staged the robbery in the Paris hotel.
Miggy said…
Lazy Meghan Markle Vice Documentary Pushes False Racism Agenda.

https://www.ccn.com/lazy-meghan-markle-vice-documentary-pushes-false-racism-agenda/
CatEyes said…
If the Harkles think coming to American to live will allow them to automatically receive free security just because Meg was protected at her NYC Baby shower. is not considering the following:
- President Trump may not be so keen in an hotly contested campaign period, to grant such a costly privilege for foreign royalty (ahem, former royalty). This could be a million(s) dollar mistake his opponents could and would jump on to show poor judgement of the POTUS.
- Americans are a vocal populace and we wouldn't be pleased to see millions of our tax dollars to go to two entitled prats when our own communities need increased police protection. We would be calling and writing our Govt representatives, using social media to bitterly complain and our Press would excoriate them to no end.
- Malibu may be a rich community but in California the state and regional governments are suffering economically and can ill afford to spend millions on two individuals who can protect/support themselves. I rather doubt Malibu, part of LA County,could afford to waste millions on their protection 24/7.
- IMO there are no law/regulations requiring the federal Government to protect such individuals and there is surely no law making any subsidiary govt. entity to do so either.
- To do so would set a terrible precedence and allow other high profile foreign (Megsy considered foreign as she is part of the pkg.) individuals to ask for protection. It has not been uncommon the US has been favored by other royalty (European, Middle Eastern, African etc.) to come here to live semi-permanently or for extended visits).
- I strongly believe California residents (of which I was for half my long life) would not support such a situation and would have a legal proposition (against state govt paid protection) put on the ballot box to be voted on with inevitable results. Talk about the power of the people, voter propositions have worked very well for Californians!
- the public also can object on the basis of "waste of resources" which most governmental entities (federal. state and maybe regional) have in their operating codes and a formal complaint can be made and then investigated. That would be priceless to see an investigation launched and have the conclusion that the Harkles are declared a "Waste of Resources".

So all in all, I relish to see the Harkles pay for their own security here in America (or maybe the poor UK public will continue).
SwampWoman said…
Meh. JBJ could have retired and lived the easy life, but he's still working and, as others have pointed out, is working to improve the lives of people that are down and out due to circumstances (or personal choices). He's making a difference in people's lives and I applaud him for that. If he wants to lend a helping hand to Harry due to his respect and affection for Princess Di, good for him.

If Harry has a new life as a singer, wonderful! It will provide us with a lot to talk about when the groupies show up.
none said…
@Liver Bird Good point about the Harkles being in with the young crowd. Explains why the Markle documentary 'Escaping the Crown' will be shown on ViceTV which is geared toward young viewers.
SwampWoman said…
That whole protection detail for PH is such a bucket of snakes. If he's kidnapped, paying to get him back would probably cost more than 10 years' worth of protection details and damn, he's elected to live in an area where cartel members run around free range. I think the RF would be better off paying his protection privately myself.

/Notice I don't mention MM; I'm pretty sure that they wouldn't pay to get her back.
Piroska said…
This is copied from Daily Express comments page

If this pair are to retain any form of taxpayer funded security the officers assigned to them should be reminded that their own allegiance is to the Sovereign and to the elected overnment of the UK. They should be required to report to the Palace and to the Home Secretary ALL of the activities of the duo and to refuse to carry out any tasks not directly related to their function as security officers that is no popping off to the delicatesse to find Madam's favourite snacks no walking dogs etc The ginger one's mother was said not to want official RPOs as she thought that they reported back to the Palace; make this a reality for her son and see how long he wants to keep his RPOs
Liver Bird said…
@Holly

I'd say another reason is that no respectable TV channel wants to be associated with a 'documentary' which is basically slagging off the royal family. They know that if they were to show it, they would never again have access to any of the real royals.

That's another thing which the foolish Harkles failed to anticipate. If asked to choose between them and the actual royals, any sensible business or public figure will choose the latter, without question. Arrogance and stupidity are a dire combination.
Liver Bird said…
@Piroska

I believe that RPOs are indeed required to report back to their employers, ie the Met Police and who knows who else? That's supposedly why Diana turned down the queen's offer of RPOs after her divorce, as she didn't want them 'spying' on her.
CatEyes said…
@Piroska said....

>>>hey should be required to report to the Palace and to the Home Secretary ALL of the activities of the duo and to refuse to carry out any tasks not directly related to their function as security officers<<<

So many here say Harry and maybe Meghan are doing drugs (not weed but cocaine) so why are not the RPO's taking action on that? Surely Harry is not going out to a bar or neighborhood 'trap house' to score a 'rock' but has his dealer come to him (very unlikely a big supply is mailed to him). Are they reporting such activity? Why don't they have Harry's dealer arrested by Canadian Mounties?

How can Harry carry on in such a way (this is not underage drinking in Vegas) to the point it is affecting him. I guess I am clueless but it seems implausible (I am ashamed to admit I had a relative with a long time addiction who later after getting cured! he even dealt drugs hence why I know the lingo). I just wonder how RPO's would allow such a thing (it certainly iisn't running to the deli).
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
@CatEyes,’So many here say Harry and maybe Meghan are doing drugs (not weed but cocaine) so why are not the RPO's taking action on that? Surely Harry is not going out to a bar or neighborhood 'trap house' to score a 'rock' but has his dealer come to him (very unlikely a big supply is mailed to him). Are they reporting such activity? Why don't they have Harry's dealer arrested by Canadian Mounties?’

It’s been bought up on the press, especially when Harry went nuddy in Las Vegas and all the other shenanigans that went on. The official answer is simply they are there to protect him from physical harm from others etc., not to babysit or lecture him. 🤗
Lurking said…
JBJ and Call me Harry crossing Abbey Road ala The Beatles is so cringeworthy. Such a cliche. I'm embarrassed for everyone involved and whoever thought it was a good idea should be sacked.
none said…
@Unknown Appreciate your post. And agree.
Liver Bird said…
@CatEyes

"So many here say Harry and maybe Meghan are doing drugs (not weed but cocaine) so why are not the RPO's taking action on that?"

Because that is not their job.

They are highly trained police officers, not babysitters. As 'raspberry' says, the Las Vegas incident where he was caught with the royal jewels almost on show is a case in point. It's not the RPOs' job to protect their charges from themselves.

That's why I don't believe the stories about the RPOs being asked to go grocery shopping for the Harkles in Canada. Not that I'd put it past the Harkles to expect them to be skivvies for them, but the RPOs would simply refuse. People like this take great pride in their job and aren't going to run errands on behalf of a pair of chancers who don't even pay their wages.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
MustySyphone said…
@Raspberry Ruffle

"’So many here say Harry and maybe Meghan are doing drugs (not weed but cocaine) so why are not the RPO's taking action on that? Surely Harry is not going out to a bar or neighborhood 'trap house' to score a 'rock' but has his dealer come to him (very unlikely a big supply is mailed to him). Are they reporting such activity? Why don't they have Harry's dealer arrested by Canadian Mounties?"

There was a book written by one of Diana's bodyguards (can't remember the name of the book now). Anyway, he gives insight into what a bodyguard can and cannot do. Also some of the leeway they take to accommodate the Royal. I'd draw the line at drugs, drugs around an infant. But that's just me.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Liver Bird said…
@Unknown

They did get criticised, not so much for Harry's actions, but for allowing a bunch of people to take photos of him semi-naked.

Not sure if that criticism is warranted, however. As I've mentioned above, RPOs are part of the Met Police and as such have no powers in the US or indeed anywhere else outside the UK. So they may very well have asked the other party guests to hand over their phones, but the guests could simply have refused and there would have been very little the RPOs could do about it. Which just highlights the bind the Harkles are in regarding security if the 'host' country won't pay up.
hunter said…
@Lurking - (duck version) - that's wild, who is Lady Banksy???

Ha ha haha she is reading this site. How funny.

We don't like you Meghan.
hunter said…
Also, as an American and New Yorker and person over 40 who still knows some youtes, Jon Bon Jovi is NOT a has-been AT ALL, he is a National Treasure.

I would say Bruce Springsteen (another National Treasure) is more of a "has been" than Bon Jovi and Bruce remains quite popular too.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
hunter said…
@Liver Bird, "Most people Harry's age would only vaugely know who he is."

Totally disagree - Harry is 35? Bon Jovi had a HUGE hit - massive - like in the 2000s? that song "It's My Life" remember?

That song was huuuuge and played all the time for young people - great party song.
Jen said…
@Liver Bird, I don't mean for this to sound snarky but as highly trained police officer's shouldn't they be concerned with the laws that their charge is breaking (drugs are still illegal in most countries). Or is their job really to make sure they don't get caught by the locals? While marijuana is legal in some US states, cocaine certainly isn't. I would imagine this is the case in a lot of countries.
hunter said…
@Unknown - that's right! He's a pretty good actor too!

I also think it's nice he's still married to his high school sweetheart and has a reputation as a Good Christian Man but I understand through the gossip underground he is not exactly faithful but he is discreet.
hunter said…
@Jen - no they are not obligated to do all that, their job is Protection Officer.

Also when it comes to cocaine it's not a very big deal, you go to a "friend's" house or a "friend" swings by for a visit, it's not exactly Scarface.
Liver Bird said…
@Jen

"I don't mean for this to sound snarky but as highly trained police officer's shouldn't they be concerned with the laws that their charge is breaking (drugs are still illegal in most countries)."

Firstly, I'm not convinced Harry is taking illegal drugs. Secondly, no, that is definitely not their job. They are there to guard their charge from external threats, not to monitor their behaviour, nor to be experts on the laws of foreign countries.

Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lurking said…
@ Hunter:

"who is Lady Banksy???"

I have no idea. I posted late for me last night about admin@www.theduchessofsussex.com and then questioned myself, so googled. The internet is forever and I'm not delusional.

WE DON'T LIKE YOU MEGHAN!
Jen said…
@Hunter

Also when it comes to cocaine it's not a very big deal, you go to a "friend's" house or a "friend" swings by for a visit, it's not exactly Scarface.

Well, I never didn't think Harry sat around with coke all over his face...but if they are protecting their charge, going to a "friends" house wouldn't be any easy thing for Harry to do without an RPO along and unless they're completely incompetent, they'd know what he's doing. But if that's not their job, then it's not their job.

@Liver Bird

I am not sure if he is doing illegal drugs either, I just see it mentioned here a bit, so I thought I'd ask the question.
Liver Bird said…
"It seems like a very difficult fine line for RPOs when their subject could be suicidal!"

I don't think it is. The line is very clear. RPOs are police officers. They are not qualified to do anything other than guard their charges. I remember around the time ARchie was born there was talk of Meghan getting driven to hospital by RPOs but that was immediately denied as RPOs are forbidden from getting involved in anything other than security and would simply have told her to call an ambulance. They are in fact contractually bound not to make themselves responsible for their charges' health or medical needs.
Lurking said…
>Also when it comes to cocaine it's not a very big deal

Actually, it is. https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/frontpage/drug-trafficking-and-the-financing-of-terrorism.html

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/obama-hezbollah-drug-trafficking-investigation/
YankeeDoodle said…
I am sorry, I have not read all the comments yet, but I had a sudden thought, and it is quite trivial. Did H borrow the black puffy jacket from his “security” police guy who was inexplicably talking on his cell phone during the walk with the dogs and something called Archie in Canada? Was the pic taken in Canada? It was very bizarre, and I think the “security” guy was talking to It’s hired paps for better pictures. Another thing- while the American It, who mistakenly thinks she is a British Royal, without being a citizen of any Commonwealth country or GB and No. Ireland, but an American who is not allowed by federal law to call herself royal anything - why should this secondary cable show actress need royal police protection? Or her sonish Archie Bunker? Too many questions.
Jen said…
I honestly don't understand why they can't hire personal body guards. There are actual companies that specialize in that sort of thing and they are ex-military or police. They tailor it to your needs; if you just need guards for specific events, they can provide that. If you need people at your home 24-7, along with monitored home security, they can provide that too. I am sure it's not cheap, but I'm sure it's cheaper then the numbers they've thrown around for the RPO costs. At the end of the day, as non-royals, they should NOT be entitled to RPO security after March 31.
SirStinxAlot said…
I agree with Jen. Paying for airfare so RPOs can rotate, hotel accommodations, vehicles, etc for the British RPO is skyrocketing the expenses. If they hired a local top notch service most of the excess expense would disappear. Security would have their own homes, families, vehicles to drive. I am sure the RF would let the Sussex's keep the Range Rover. It would be more cost effective all the way around. But would M$H need 15 or more security gaurds?? Would the hired security put up with M$H disrespecting them? Would a security service keep and renew contracts with them if they are intentionally putting themselves in danger for publicity?
CatEyes said…
@Rasberry Ruffle said...
>>> The official answer is simply they are there to protect him from physical harm from others etc., not to babysit or lecture him.<<<

Precisely, they are there to protect him from physical harm from others. There are few worse things than being harmed by drugs supplied by a dealer. I know..as I once went to a infamous car wash known to have drug activity and jumped out of my car confronting a drug dealer standing in front of my relative doing a deal. If a 54 yr. old lady can do that, then a RPO should be able to jump on a drug dealer (BTW the look on that rough looking dealer was priceless and backed down and left. Of course my relative was PO'd)

@Liver Bird
>>> It's not the RPOs' job to protect their charges from themselves.<<<

So if Harry was shooting up Heroin the RPO would stand there and watch? Don't think so; cocaine is just as bad. They are officers of the law and have to abide by the law. Standing by while the law is being broken is not lawful for them. They also swear allegiance to the Queen. They have a duty to protect. Who's heads would roll if Harry OD's while under their watch. Or maybe Harry whips out a gun and points it at his head, so they just watch him do it>

I don't see the relevancy of a youthful drunk nude poker game on the same legal level as cocaine use. I know firsthand the devastating consequences of drug addiction. My relative thanked me later for my efforts and they have been clean for 8 yrs. I thankfully also survived not one episode but several when I confronted his dealers. I wish I would had an RPO, an officer of the law watching over my brother!

If RPO's were protecting Diana's mother it is unlikely she would been in the hands of a drunk driver and IMO she would be alive today. We can agree to disagree. Good Luck Harry!!!

Liver Bird said…
@Jen

The argument is that because Harry is ex-military and the son of a future king, he and his family need official security which is tied in with international police and intelligence networks. Whether this argument is justified or not is up to the Home Office to decide. However, what I can say is that the Harkles' choice to live abroad in order to make money as private citizens makes provision of taxpayer funded security highly controversial and extremely complicated. I just don't see how this can be succesfully resolved.
none said…
While hiring their own security would solve the problem, the Harkles won't do it because they can't afford it.
DuchessOfCray said…
While reading all of this talk about cocaine use, something occurred to me. Maybe this is why Marcus Anderson is purported to be living with them. With his worldwide Soho party connections, maybe he’s their contact for worldwide drug contacts. If Harry is addicted, and she is using this as part of her methods to control Harry, he would be important to whatever Machiavellian (in her own mind) nonsense that she has going.

Quite honestly, the best part of her machinations, is the entertainment value when everything starts going sideways.
Liver Bird said…
@CatEyes

"So if Harry was shooting up Heroin the RPO would stand there and watch?"

Well, they wouldn't be 'standing there and watching' because, as stated, their job is to guard for external dangers, not sit in the room while their charge does his thing.

Anyway, I think the hypothetical discussion of Harry doing drugs while the RPOs sit and watch is kind of beside the point. The real issue is who is going to pay for these people and how is it going to be arranged when the Harkles are schmoozing around outside of the UK. This was always going to be the real spanner in the works and it seems the idiot Harkles just assumed they'd get what they wanted. So now what?
none said…
@Liver Bird

"The real issue is who is going to pay for these people and how is it going to be arranged when the Harkles are schmoozing around outside of the UK."

Yes, and when the schmoozing involves making huge amounts of money to line their own pockets.
Jen said…
@Liver Bird

The argument is that because Harry is ex-military and the son of a future king, he and his family need official security which is tied in with international police and intelligence networks. Whether this argument is justified or not is up to the Home Office to decide. However, what I can say is that the Harkles' choice to live abroad in order to make money as private citizens makes provision of taxpayer funded security highly controversial and extremely complicated. I just don't see how this can be succesfully resolved.

Understood. I am also aware of a few firms (especially here in the US) that provide private security and many of the company leadership hold high level government clearances so that they can provide high level protection to people just like Harry (or in our case, government officials). I guess these folks would have to get cleared by UK intelligence, but if they truly want to go private and not have the UK citizens pay, they will make it work.
Mimi said…
At the rate these two are going they will NEVER become financially independent!
YankeeDoodle said…
I will never forget, or other Americans for that matter, the 27-year old Harry in California and Las Vegas. I do not know if the British people have access to all the videos, photos, and quite frankly, disgusting, law-breaking and anarchy of just call me “‘Arry”. His RPOs allowed thousands of drunks and high on drugs people in and out of his penthouse (UK taxpayer -paid) without any I.d. His highly trained and paid RPOs (they earn twice as much, if not more, than regular police in UK) were in the pool and hot tubs with him, allowed everybody to take pics of a naked H, and allowed all hard drugs to be sold and used in front of them.

Why should HAMS have any taxpayer-paid funding of any kind? I know there was much anger in the States when we found out that American taxpayers paid and pay for the internationally protected nobody, M, when she flies (and the American paps are starting to feel the contempt and change in attitude towards the twits) back and forth, more than is reported, all over the USA, mainly New York and California. Many millions were found to be paid out by anybody who does ten minute research, how much money was paid for her and Harry. They are not American present or past politicians, and they are not representing H’s country as diplomats for the Queen. M had and has no right for any USA taxpayer protection. Believe me, I am in a position to know about the HAMS, as it pertains to them. The USA was asked by the Queen, who knew M was going to her Bew York baby shower, her other private tris, her Wimbledon debacle, for protection. Outrageous for U.S.A. Taxpayers to pay for a unknown z cable actress who married a secondary, if not thirdly royal, while she flings around. Taxpayers spent millions upon millions of dollars on these losers.

none said…
@YankeeDoodle

I'm curious. When you say American taxpayers paid for Markle's protection here, do you know if if the funds were federal or state?
Miggy said…
Why won't Trump follow Canada's lead in Prince Harry's and Meghan's security costs?

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/why-wont-trump-follow-canadas-lead-in-prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-security-costs
DuchessOfCray said…

Blogger Mimi said...
At the rate these two are going they will NEVER become financially independent

@Mimi, That is my assessment as well. They will never have the resources to pay for all the things that the wee madam seems to think that she is entitled.
Jen said…
@Miggy....that article was amusing. Rogan clearly didn't do his homework.

Canada has paid for them throughout their stay in Canada and will only stop once they are no longer Royal. How is that putting Canada first? I would agree if they had NOT paid for their security this entire time. US had to do the same, because they are still Royal. Once they are no longer royal, I doubt they will get ANYTHING from Trump's administration.

Fairy Crocodile said…
What did you think of harry's wooden "dance" on the street?
My first thought was "clown".

This was not cool, it was awkward and totally unnecessary.

Now, singing with Bon Jovi. If Harry was still his "created" cool royal, full working member of the RF family it would have probably worked for many people. Now it looks like he is desperately trying to draw attention and prove he is still relevant. And the whole thing rings false and forced somehow.
Unfortunately, I don't have time yet to read all the great comments on here, but has anyone mentioned that this doesn't seem like a great time to launch any kind of travel-based business? What with a pandemic and many travel bans, have they markled themselves with the timing of this launch?
lizzie said…
@Holly asked

>>>I'm curious. When you say American taxpayers paid for Markle's protection here, do you know if if the funds were federal or state?<<<

I'm not @Yankee Doodle but a FOI request revealed taxpayer funds spent on Meghan's dumb shower were federal, state, and local (NYC)
xxxxx said…
Thanks to all here who brought up Harry's trusts that are his inheritance from his mother. From what I read here it seems that Harry gets interest/income/dividends from these trusts but can never touch the principal. That his children will inherit this principal. I was not aware of such trusts but I can see the ultra wealthy and aristocracy handing inheritances this way.

I thought Harry had a situation similar to a young relative of mine. His aunt died and he inherited 3 million dollars which was held in trust for him. But half this sum was released to him at age 25 and he gets the other half when he turns 30. His aunt was smart enough to not let him get all three million upon her death.
Fairy Crocodile said…
@ Miggy

Don't you think Trump will enjoy making them dependent on his generosity after they snubbed him and she publicly said they would not move in when he is the President?

PPOs are a very good source of information too. I am sure Trump will make sure if he pays there will be American officers, not British (Why Shall We Enrich Another State Organisation With American Taxpayers' Money?) I am also sure Trump will enjoy reading reports of their fights, substance abuse and ties with celebs and politicians. He is a devious seasoned player and he will find a way to play these two clowns to his advantage.
Miggy said…
@Jen,

Once they are no longer royal, I doubt they will get ANYTHING from Trump's administration.

I hope you're right about that. Trump has great admiration and respect for our Queen, so it worries me that he may feel obliged to look after the spoiled brat and his side-kick as a favour to Her Maj!

xxxxx said…
(5.5k Comments)

By RORY TINGLE FOR MAILONLINE
28 February 2020 | UPDATED: 10:46 EST, 28 February 2020

'THEY should pay!' British taxpayers' fury as £20m bill for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's security bill falls entirely on UK after Canada refuses to pay it after Megxit

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police has been protecting the couple and Archie
Protection will cease in weeks as the pair officially step back from royal duties
Comes after weeks of speculations that Canadian taxpayers would pay for them

It is estimated their security costs had rocketed to £20 million after the move
The prospect of UK taxpayer funding for private citizens prompted anger today
It came as Prince Harry joined Jon Bon Jovi for a session at Abbey Road studios


Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were facing an angry backlash today as their £20million security bill looks set to fall squarely on British taxpayers after Canada refused to keep paying.

Canadian police confirmed last night it would stop assisting with security for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex when they step down as working royals and become private citizens after Megxit on March 31.

This means the cost of round-the-clock protection for the couple and baby Archie will fall solely to the taxpayer-funded Metropolitan Police, despite the couple leaving the UK for North America.

The force, which currently protects the couple at home and abroad - today refused to comment on whether they would continue to do so after Megxit. Buckingham Palace declined to say if Harry and Meghan would contribute any their own money for their protection.

Royal expert Phil Dampier today said the couple should not receive public money for security when they become private citizens with their own income, which is set to be millions of pounds a year.

'It was only a matter of time before the Canadians stopped paying for their security because they're no longer working royals and now obviously the burden will fall on British taxpayers,' he told MailOnline.

It comes as Prince Harry met Jon Bon Jovi at Abbey Road studios to record a duet for a new charity album for the Duke's Invictus Games Foundation. It is not known whether Meghan is yet in the UK, but she is due to attend the Endeavour Fund Awards with Harry next Thursday, March 5
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8055521/Anger-mounts-Prince-Harry-Megan-Markles-security-bill.html
none said…
@lizzie
Thanks for the info. And if the Harkles plan to live here, even part-time, or visit frequently, U.S. taxpayers would be expected to pay. That's not going to happen for a foreign prince and his spouse.
Mimi said…
So how does that work.......Harry will no longer be an HRH, Not be a working royal representing the queen but he will still be a “prince”. are prince’s and princesses not “royal”. or is Hairy royal but not Meghan? Or is she royal only when she is with him, or are they prince and princess only in the U.K? This debacle is mind blowing!!!!!!!!!!!
Miggy said…
@Fairy Crocodile,

Don't you think Trump will enjoy making them dependent on his generosity after they snubbed him and she publicly said they would not move in when he is the President?

I'm sure he would but I would really prefer that he didn't offer them security. I want them to pay for it themselves.
YankeeDoodle said…
@ holly

The beginning of the end of the HAMS, and the few Americans who actually care about H, was the New York baby shower. The British news outlets were allowed to finally publish one of H’s massive waste of money for securiy. I believe they printed the waste of police protection because it was American taxpayer millions spent on a baby shower, and not British money. Plus, the details and written comments of American protection people were published (security for presidents, their families (although one Trump son opted out of Secret Service protection, for privacy), Supreme Court judges, Cabinet members, high-ranking Congressmen and Senators, Chief of Staff of our military, and several others, plus all pat presidents and their opuses and children - which ended for past president children at age 16, now seemingly forever). American State Department officials especially were furious that the taxpayer paid more than two million dollars for them to follow, what one person wrote, somebody who calls herself “her Royal Highness” all the time. The written statements of these people were published. The Secret Service, which I a federal police agent, like the State Department, used up more millions of American taxpayer money. Finally, the city of New York, and the state of New York (NYC is one of many cities in the state of New York) paid for police protection. You can NYPD officials hanging out around the ‘barriers” put up for the protection of M and Amal Clooney, Serena, and Markus 𝐀𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐧. Meanwhile, Natalie Portman and other “real” celebrities came and went without any fuss from the same hotel that day. Celebrities in New York and Los Angelos are as common as bread. It is like all the politicians and journalists living in the D.C. area. One of my neighbors, until he died, was Senator John Glenn, who was also a famous astronaut. George Bush’s sister and his cousins, Marriott family, and many other politicians I meet walking my dog in the neighborhood. None have protection.
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Glinda

Trvelyst appears to be just another search engine. Nobody seems to be able to say how exactly it is eco-friendly and encourages green travel, aside from assigning useless points. What criteria is going to be used for points, who decides which communities should benefit from our travel - covered by darkness.

Whatever Arry thought he launched is not a well thought through initiative. I doubt it will result in noticeable increase in travel.
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Miggy

I full-heartily share your sentiments about paying their security costs. Nobody wants to pay for them, nobody cares for what they think they are entitled to. People are facing real life serious problems. For instance my village is severely flooded after two hurricanes and we are facing another one. I can guarantee Harry and Markle are not going to find sympathy for their "predicament" in my community.
KCM1212 said…
@lizzie thanks for the FOI info.

Any idea of how much that cost the US?
Miggy said…
@Fairy Crocodile,

I don't think the Harkles have much sympathy from anyone and the longer this farce goes on, even the little they do have is fast dissipating. The pair of entitled twits just make me so angry!

I'm really sorry to hear about what your village is going through due to the floods and I hope you don't experience any more damage. The weather's been dreadful, so stay safe!
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Miggy

Thank you! It is great to talk to somebody in another country who wishes us well. It makes me feel..not alone.

Floods have been really bad, in some areas rivers have never been as high as during this February. Britain is severely overpopulated and people build in flood zones which makes it all so much worse.
Hikari said…
LB,

>>"So Jon Bon Jovi doesn't 'need' Harry for profile"

It doesn't hurt though, does it?<<

Well, that remains to be seen. Every celebrity that has associated themselves with the Harkles recently has had some (or a lot) negative blowback. I'd hate to see that happen to Jon, who has been supportive of the Harkles' exit from the Royals. After the last six or so months that have just passed, commencing with the South Africa disaster and up to the current fracas involving the bullying of his grandmother & complete dissing of his ailing grandfather, the shine is off 'Just Call Me 'arry'. The celebrities still coming to his banner and throwing him a bone of attention are doing him the favor, not the other way 'round. He doesn't have anything to give anyone anymore. He and his wife are scroungers on the international stage, and that's going to get old very fast.

>>>JBJ is hardly a major star these days. Most people Harry's age would only vaguely know who he is. I thought the Harkles were meant to be movers and shakers, in with the young crowd? Also, all celebrities want to be associated with 'royalty' (poor ol' JBJ probably didn't know that Harry isn't really royal anymore) and to be seen to do good. And the SS connection, if mere coincidence, is a pretty fortuituous one. <<<<

You seem determined to run JBJ down, including not crediting him with the intelligence enough to know that Harry has electively left the Royal family . . Jon is a smart guy, and believe me when I say that in America, which is the Harkles' target market, having turned their backs on Britain, Jon Bon Jovi is still a big deal. He still sells out concert venues. The people buying tickets are not for the most part 23 years old any more, no. JBJ's pinnacle was probably 1986 with the release of their biggest album. But Harry and Megs (especially Megs) are on the elderly-most end of 'Millennial'. JBJ in fact had several big records circa 1997 when Meg says she graduated from high school. Jon also has kept himself relevant by writing music for feature films & TV, including some stints as an actor, and licensing most of his biggest hits for use in soundtracks and commercials. (Jon appeared as a Carrie Bradshaw love interest in an episode of Sex and the City, so I am sure Meg knows who he is, even if he was less well-known to Haz.) So, yeah, 'the kids' (which do not include M&H anymore) know who he is. He may be their dads' age, but they know who he is. As we have discussed here ad nauseum, Woke 'n Joke are both arrested development cases who, despite moving into middle age (particularly Woke) still operate in their own minds as if they are 25 years old. They aren't. And the saddest part of their delusion is that the target audience they are going for (Kylie Jenner's peer group) think they're old and dumpy and lacking in style or anything fresh or aspirational.

>>>Agree that JBJ seems like a genuinely good guy, as his years of work in grass roots, unglamorous, 'unsexy' charity work shows. But that's not to say he's above a PR stunt now and again. He IS an SS client, after all.<<<

It's possible that it's a PR stunt. Or perhaps this genuinely good grass roots charity type guy is being charitable toward Harry and trying to help something good come out of this unprecedented mess that Harry has created in concert with Woko Ono.
Miggy said…
Apologies for going off topic...

@Fairy Crocodile,

I'm British. 😉

Mimi said…
Fairy Crocodile, So very sorry to hear about your pain and suffering. You are in my thoughts as well as are the posters (we all know who we are) who are experiencing devastating crisis(s) in our lives. Poster who recently suffered a stroke. Oh that shocked me to hear that and made me want to say something to make you feel better but because we have been told others do not appreciate having to derail the conversation or train of thought currently being discussed I didn’t.

I didn’t want to start anything.....we’d were just getting over the Gollum thing. But please know that there are many on here who think about you and wish with all our heart and soul that you recover! 😰
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Mimi

Thank you so much. A little human warmth is a great thing, whatever the subject of the blog. I don't think Nutty will be angry with us.

@Miggy

You are British and it makes us even closer to each other, because we both know our country doesn't deserve the catastrophe Meghan Markle brought. You remember huge crowds of well wishers at her wedding? All racists and sexists no doubts.
pi said…
Harry looks like hell. Emotional vampires have that effect- she's sucking the life out of him. Does he do drugs? Who knows? But I believe he is still addicted to her, still feels euphoria around her and is not psychologically sophisticated to see what she's doing to him.

However, the choices this playboy makes are not because he is in thrall to her- but because he's venal and stupid just like Meghan even though he fancies himself a romantic figure.
Nutty Flavor said…
Hi all. A bit late on the discussion of RPOs watching/condoning drug use by their charges, but just wanted to say that bodyguards don’t want to put themselves in a position where their charges are hiding from them or otherwise trying to evade them.

If Harry or Meghan had to “slip away” whenever they want to do something illicit, they would be very difficult to protect.

I know the Secret Service has had similar situations while protecting misbehaving Presidents or presidential children. Their job is to protect, not supervise.
Nutty Flavor said…
@Hunter, hard to believe that Bon Jovi’s “It’s My Life” came out in 2000, but it did, before today’s teens were born.

I ran the Bon Jovi name past some European teens, and they did know “Livin’ on a Prayer”, perhaps from a soundtrack or TV show.
Hikari said…
@pi,

I think the 'besotted' narrative is so much PR spin to make this epic disaster seem like the 'Love Story of the Century'. I think Megs was a bit o'fun for 'arry for about 6 months' worth of transatlantic booty calls . . then he tired of her and tried to break away, after which she stalked him 'round the globe for the better part of a year and gave interviews to high profile magazines about a relationship that had fizzled. He was done with her by Christmas 2016, so how he wound up getting engaged to her less than a year later is anybody's guess . . mine is that Twue Wuve had nothing to do with it. I don't think Archie is their biological kid and she certainly wasn't his gestational mom either because I think that the physical stuff was over for this pair long ago. Narcs use sex for control, so Megsie would have poured it on as long as Haz was still a free agent. After the ring was on her finger, she had no more incentive to give him good lovin' any more. I think she's been able to plot and launch her schemes without his involvement or knowledge most of the time because they weren't living together or arriving for events together.

They may be forced to be together now, in self-imposed exile, but I'd bet a million donuts that they are not sharing a room. There's no more thrall, just mutual venality, as you say. Both are doubling down on their terrible behavior out of ego. I think they will stay married on paper for a while yet, but their union is the furthest thing from domestic bliss imaginable.

Harry looks like hell because he's likely doing drugs again hardcore . . there aren't any family mediators around any more. No friends. Only him alone with his thoughts, which means, he's manifestly alone. Haz doesn't have the inner resources to cope as an independent entity. He left it to Meg to arrange everything because he's lazy and witless and everything's fallen to sh*t, all her plans. Haz looks like hell because he's living the 'be careful what you wish for . . you just may get it' scenario. But he's never had to be resilient and manage his own affairs . . he's floundering because he hasn't got any survival skills and I don't think he's going to last super long out in the cold.
@Mimi,’So how does that work.......Harry will no longer be an HRH, Not be a working royal representing the queen but he will still be a “prince”. are prince’s and princesses not “royal”. or is Hairy royal but not Meghan? Or is she royal only when she is with him, or are they prince and princess only in the U.K? This debacle is mind blowing!!!!!!!!!!!’

At the moment Harry and Meghan are still Duke and Duchess, but can’t use the style of HRH.

Harry was born a Prince, so if the style of HRH and the Ducal was revoked completely, he’d still be a Prince (unlikely that would ever be taken). So with that in mind, Meghan would I believe become Princess Henry of Wales, because she isn’t a birth Princess like Beatrice and Eugenie are. 🤗
Animal Lover said…
@Vince

I read the NY Times article you reference. The overwhelming majority of commentators were not on H&M's side.
Animal Lover said…
Nutties:

A sarcastic comment from a Datalounge blogger below:


No one has even ASKED me how I feel about the coronavirus, or if I'm okay with it!!!

—Meghan Sussex
Lemon Tea said…
Lemon Tea here

Great comments by everyone. So much to discuss.

@Nutty

In your previous post about Travalyst, I mentioned my complaint with Booking.com Car rental. In the next few days ,I saw DM articles about travellers complaints with Booking.com accommodation division. No car rental articles.

I reported my complaint to our domestic AA...the Automobile Association. I was factual and politely asked for a refund.

Just to keep everyone informed, they replied, stating that in all their years of business, they have never had such a complaint before, and that they will take this matter up directly with the AA internationaly, meaning, that we were treated horribly and hopefully we should be refunded.

So Booking.com and all these travel magicians, magicians who can wipe out carbon footprints, and magically charge unsuspecting customers exorbitant cancellation fees by twisting terms and agreements, should be aware, not everyone can be swindled.

So hopefully some progress here.
pi said…
@Hikari,

Really interesting analysis.

I believe they used a surrogate. I hope that comes out.

I don't know about the hardcore drug use as I haven't seen any clear evidence although I wouldn't rule it out given his shamelessness.

Although there's no doubt that this is a marriage of convenience, it doesn't mean that he's not still influenced by her, is tripping on euphoria. She knows what to say to hook him, whispering in his ear. He is weak-minded.

I believe he is a romantic. Hence I don't believe that he is pragmatic enough to simply agree to a hard headed marriage of convenience like her. The euphoria keeps him sticking to her. I do believe true love still informs his actions.

ITA Harry has no inner resources. His isolation is pivotal. He's basically a squishy sponge with little to no resistance. He has never had to fight for anything, he has never had to fight for survival, a glorious attribute which would give him a clue. Harry is the holy grail for all sociopathic grifters. More so than than the good, kind, strong people usually taken in by the likes of her.

This is the difference: You are so right. Unlike them, Harry met his rapacious, childish, narcissistic, amoral, petulant self. Oh the glory!
MustySyphone said…
@Nutty

The MM version of that song is "Livin' Off A Spare"
Hikari said…
Couple things from the interwebs, as posted by our sister blogger Charlatan Duchess

Journalist calls "Just Call Me Harry" 'another finger up at the Queen'. I concur. That's the first thing I thought . ."That petty little passive aggressive sh*t!":

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1248755/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-Queen-Megxit-royal-family-news

*************

Apropos of the charity single of 'Unbroken' with Jon Bon Jovi, of which a great hullabaloo has been made as part of Harry's triumphal return to the UK . . um, not so much. While Haz turned up for the photo ops with Jon Bon Jovi at Abbey Road studios and donned a pair of headphones in the studio for the promo clip, sources say 'The Duke was unable to sing, leaving the vocals to the professionals.'

Pretending to lose his voice, I wager, to get out of it. Because he's a tosser and a coward, to boot. Empty show, that's all either of this couple does.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1248845/prince-harry-jon-bon-jovi-invictus-games-sing-sussex-royal-abbey-road-studios
Tamhsn said…
@musty: that made me laugh so hard! If I was drinking coffee I would have choked!
none said…
@hikari

Wow, so Just Harry didn't even sing a note. So this was just another attention grab. March's events shall be interesting to watch.
Alex said…
Hello. Long time lurker. Opinions on the article in today's New York Time
A Royal Instagram Mystery https://nyti.ms/2TjpTwu ?
PrettyPaws said…
Hi, Nutties

I've just been reading through this thread, skimming really, and I have decided which thing I would like to see and what I would not like to see during the Harkles "tour of shame".

I would really like to see MM dress herself in something completely inappropriate and looking like a sack of potatoes tied in the middle. I am thinking mainly of the Commonwealth service at Westminster Abbey. I can see it now - MM showing a remarkable acreage of flesh during the service, much as she did at the last Remembrance Service. If she could trip over those awful feet of hers at the same time, so much the better - we could all do with a good laugh at her expense.

What I really do not want to see is poor W & C being delegated to "babysit" the Harkles to mitigate any booing. This is what happened last year at the TOTC - the Harkles were put in a carriage with Catherine and Camilla so that the public wouldn't boo them, having too much respect for the two Cs. However, HMTQ has already expressed a wish for W & H to show unity so I am unlikely to get my wish.

W
@Yankee Doodle,
Bill Gates has no bodyguards around him while he is driving himself around his hometown of Bellevue/Seattle. He's been known to drive around in an older car. People see him regularly driving around town by himself, and he stands in line at the local burger joints just like everybody else. Nobody bothers him out of respect, although he is very friendly and low-key, and chats with the other people waiting in line. If one of the richest men in the world can do this, so can The Harkles.

"Bill Gates, the billionaire burger lover who has been known to grab a bite at Burgermaster in Bellevue, changed course over the weekend and was captured standing in line at a Dick's Drive-In in Seattle. ... But seeing him at Dick's is a bit of a surprise, because Burgermaster has long been a favorite of his.Jan 16, 2019"

https://www.google.com/search?q=bill+gates+stand+in+line+for+burger&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS698US698&oq=bill+gates+stand+in+line+for+burger&aqs=chrome..69i57.15047j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

PS Burgermaster is far better than Dick's, but both are Seattle area institutions. Burgermaster was a regular stop for us when we lived in Bellevue.
Hikari said…
I actually do not want to see Woko show her face in the U.K. Remember the incredible strain on the faces of Kate and William in last year’s Commonwealth service photos...This year would be even worse. They should not be made to be babysitters for the toxic duo who will not hear anything said to them, nor should William and Kate be compelled to make nice for the cameras in the face of such blatant disrespect and vitriol. Most of all, the queen should not have to tolerate the smug and nasty looks and remarks of the dastardly duo. They have shown by their behavior over the last month that they are not interested in reconciliation; they are only interested in petrol bombing. The stress and strain of having to appear with them publicly and speak to them privately would likely not be good for the Queen’s house, and fill it might have a conniption fit. Harry is already in the UK so I expect him to show up, but I do not expect any warm fuzzies from William. There’s no incentive, either financial or emotional, for Meg to show herself. The fact that she is expected will make her all more unwilling to come. She will release a statement that due to the coronavirus fears, out of concern for Archie’s welfare, she isn’t traveling so as to take care of him.

I just want this over.
Hikari said…
My phone can spell coronavirus, but just to mess with me it changed health to house and Philip to fill it. Let’s see what happens this time…
hunter said…
@DuchessOfCray - cocaine is NOT that hard to get among the social elite, I hardly think Harry needs her for such a hookup though she may have cut off his other avenues
hunter said…
@Nutty "hard to believe that Bon Jovi’s “It’s My Life” came out in 2000, but it did, before today’s teens were born."

Omg how could you say such a cruel thing to me ha ha ha - MY YOUTH!!!
hunter said…
Trump seems like such a petty, egomaniacal assh*le that I can't see him allowing to pay for their protection UNLESS he agreed to cover Harry's protection as a favor to The Queen.

Now this I can see. Say what you want but Prince Harry is one of the only two born princes of the British Royal Family. He is much loved and inclined toward risk taking.

In addition, it occurred to me today (perhaps by someone else's comment) that DUCHESS WIDOW OF SUSSEX might have a ring to it and the BRF may consider her equally if not possibly more dangerous than outside forces. Something to consider.
CookieShark said…
Does anyone think the NYTimes story is lies fed by MM? Or accusing them of what they're actually doing themselves?
hunter said…
Also - clearly I am in the minority and I never speak up about this, but I think Harry looks fine and aside from all the speculation I don't really understand all the allegations of drug use.

I assume it is likely true, given their history and his own private history with substance abuse, so from that measure I consider it entirely likely, but I don't see any visible evidence.

Example of visible evidence? Justin Bieber is an example, Chris Brown (now looks like roadkill, google him!), Butthole Eyes - these people all have visible markers of drug addicts; meth for the first two and opiates for the third. Granted coke takes a slower toll on the appearance than meth.

To me, Harry looks quite healthy. Perhaps a bit slim but fit.
hunter said…
@CookieShark - I wonder if the NYTimes story was published to illustrate the insane and unbelievable rise in her social media following but that's just me.
Sandie said…
My knowledge abut American media is limited and is restricted to the biggies (CNN, Fox, New Yorker ...), so I don't know what kind of outlet the Washington Examiner is ... However, I stumbled across this article and find it interesting in that it pretty much describes a narc without saying so.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/prince-harry-fell-in-love-with-the-wrong-woman
@hunter,
Your last two sentences are something that has been on my mind for awhile. I really don't want to verbalize it, but it's been something I've been thinking about lately.

I also agree that in The Harkles circles, cocaine is available everywhere. Just Harry doesn't need a hookup for that. It's probably available by the bowl full at any private club or party he attends. These people party hard.



@ Sandie,
The Washington Times is owned by the religious cult, the Moonies (Sun Myung Moon, Unification Church), through one of their corporations, Operations Holdings.

"The Times was founded on May 17, 1982, by Unification movement leader Sun Myung Moon and owned until 2010 by News World Communications, an international media conglomerate founded by Moon. It is currently owned by Operations Holdings, which is owned by the Unification movement.

The Washington Times - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org › wiki › The_Washington_Times."
@Sandie,

Oops again. I guess I need sleep, but coughing and blowing my nose constantly has been keeping me awake all night for several nights in a row. I've been fighting the flu, but not coronavirus, thank God.

The Washington Examiner is owned by Philip Anschultz through his Clarity Media Group, and is considered an extremely conservative news outlet.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-examiner/
Sandie said…
This obsession with number of followers and likes and comments for IG is actually quite sad.

William and Kate:

1. The monarchy, contrary to what people think or say, does not need popularity to survive. Monarchies that have been abolished (and, sometimes, royals losing their lives) are mostly those who have been brought down by a political revolution (France, Russia, Greece, and even the British monarchy in America).
2. Most of the work William and Kate do is face-to-face meeting with people in public and in private meetings. That is where they have the most influence and serve the people most effectively. Through their IG account they are simply using modern means to communicate with and inform the public, whom they serve.
3. William and Kate are not trying to sell anything because the monarchy is not a brand to sell. People get confused about this because it is similar to a corporation and a brand in many ways. This is from the Royal Website:

'The Sovereign acts as a focus for national identity, unity and pride; gives a sense of stability and continuity; officially recognises success and excellence; and supports the ideal of voluntary service.'

The monarchy serves the United Kingdom and Commonwealth and the people living in those realms. It exists to preserve and serve.

Meghan and Harry

1. They need popularity and branding for income, a lot of income. Their IG followers, likes and comments need to increase tenfold for them to become a popular and lucrative brand that will bring in the many millions they need for their lifestyle. So, don't compare them to William and Kate (it is like comparing apples with chocolate) but measure them against where they need to be to be a success (this comparison story is to try and increase their popularity).

2. They also need lots of IG followers, likes and comments for their 'philanthropic' and charity work as this will increase the worth of the brand they are selling. If they are genuinely passionate about and committed to this philanthropic/charity work then it will make them happier and increase the value of their brand (win-win).

3. As royals, they did not serve loyally and thus were a failure (geez Louise, they have been on holiday for 5 months now ... mostly in another country ... and so on). Being more popular than William and Kate is meaningless. Being loyal and committed and well-informed and wise and capable are some of the traits they are going to have to prove they have as they build a brand and influence and wealth.

A final thought: Andrew was always more popular than Edward, and, for a long time, Anne as well ... the one who did not serve the monarchy (as described above) is the one who got booted.
Mimi said…
I agree with hunter that Harry looks fine. He is slender but not shockingly thin. He wasn’t acting erratic and bouncing off the walls or had a drunk look or a wild eyed look. As far as I know he didn’t have a crying/laughing meltdown. I don’t know why or who decided he would not sing...I was kind of hoping to see if he really had a fine singing voice. If he does/did, have a good singing voice, it could get him some gigs in Las Vegas as a singer/entertainer.
CatEyes said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mimi said…
Cat Eyes, any news on your missing brother? 😰
Sandie said…
Since they released a video with him singing with JBJ it is clear that the intention was for him to sing and be recorded doing so.

Maybe Harry's singing was not used for the song because Megsy demanded a share of the royalties! Joking!

Maybe Harry felt unsure abut himself or perhaps his voice did not blend well with that of JBJ (a technical decision).
Platypus said…
There is a new Harry Markle that was just put up!
Sandie said…
@JocelynsBellinis:

Thanks for the feedback.

I am a supporter of alternative health remedies. Vitamin C (huge doses) and echinacea are two good remedies to help you get over the flu. Otherwise rest and be kind to yourself.
Anonymous said…
Swampwoman I'd imagine the BRF would pay to have kidnappers keep her! And re the job, six months seems like eternity in this spot. I just cannot.

____________________________________


Also, I do think Rach reads here. The time is fixed: "Meghan Online Store will be opening in March 2020."

I wonder if I'm her favorite Nuttier? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
CatEyes said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sandie said…
Trump and the Queen: Although there were protests and mishaps in the two visits, it seems that there is a warm rapport between Trump and the Queen. It would be completely wrong of her to ask the USA to cover security for the Harkles, but maybe she could personally reach out to Trump for advice (and he may pass her on to the right person) on what the best form of private security they could get. (I still believe that Charles or/and the Queen are going to end up paying for this.) To me, it seems like the sensible way for her to use her power, influence and connections.

Will the Harkles continue couch surfing (probably); will California be their next stop; will they head for New York (in the next lifetime I am definitely going to head for New York for a prolonged visit, as I wanted to do in this lifetime!)?
abbyh said…


Mimi and DuchessOfCray - inclined to side with you about how difficult they have made it for them to become financially independent for themselves.

Animal Lover - funny catch.

Someone commented about how they believe she has made about the inroads she will make in Hollywood. I am suspecting so too and moving there is unlikely to change people's minds about her. If someone really wanted her for a part, she could come in from anywhere to audition or work. Sure, something might pop up out that none of us knew about but by and large unlikely to happen to as frequently as they will need to pay for their lifestyle. Moving to CA in hopes it will pay off I think of as the odds of success for that 7 or more figure lottery ticket being a win. It just doesn't pay for most people who move there thinking they will be a big star.


Sandie, nice about the purpose/needs of how different they use/see the purpose of their IG accounts. Sad is true. So you have this number and it does what for you? And then what? Someone else will come along sooner or later and leave you eating their dust. Then what? What's your encore?

I think of having a high IG number kind of like being labeled the most beautiful model or having this enviable body. If all your identity is tied up in being the most beautiful or fantastic this or that, you can become very lost once someone else takes what you think of as your spot or corner of adoration. And eventually you become a "what ever happened to ...".
Anonymous said…
Fairy Crocodile I hope that all is well, and if someone has a problem with that, well, too bad, because you are a most appreciated Nuttier and I'm sure many of us do care and send prayers your way.

And now, I gotta ask: Gollum?
Mimi said…
I don’t care if people on here do not like it that myself and others care about our fellow human beings who are in pain and suffering. We’re all in this together. You don’t need to go into detail as I have a sinking feeling things in your brothers case have not changed, therefore YOU are in pain and are suffering heart ache! Am I right? 😰
Magatha Mistie said…
H&M could garner a billion likes/followers on IG, that won’t change the fact that H is currently sixth in line to the throne.
Four princes & a princess before him, he will become even more irrelevant in the pecking order as time goes by.
The fact H&M fans think this is a SM popularity contest, who wins rules, proves their fans are as ignorant & deluded as H&M.

I think Harry looks awful, skinny body & puffy face, eyes like p...holes in the snow.
He looks like a dementor has sucked the life out of him...

I doubt The Hooded Claw aka Meggy Pitstains the Hound of the Marklesvilles, will show up in the UK, too cowardly.
Mimi said…
Elle, as for “G”, the dark one. It seems to me that it appears in tandem with another blogger here and they have not been around today.
CatEyes said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mimi said…
She’s opening a Wal-Markle store online?
Anonymous said…
@Magatha At least we know the name of the dementor!

@Mimi Gollum must have descended while I was on break. I hope that one and their partner in crime stay gone.
Mimi said…
Cat Eyes, you are super intelligent and will figure out what to do with the information you got. Best of luck!!!!
Unknown said…
Regarding President Trump’s potential stance on H&M’s security costs in America, I tend to believe he will okay it.

He reportedly tried to court Diana. He has gone on record multiple times saying he wanted his children to co-mingle with the Cambridges and Harry FKAP. Then there are his projects he pushed in the UK to get into the royal inner circles. I don’t see him burning any bridges with the BRF whatever the cost. As long as Harry is married to Meg and the BRF “support” them, he’s going to play extra nice. Should H&M split, I see him still protecting Harry. I think he’d defer to BRF’s wishes on Meg’s protection.

OT personal comments (Please skip if not interested; messages are in alphabetical order):
@Elle Welcome back! I hope the unhappy job situation gets resolved soon. Good luck!
@Fairy Crocodile My thoughts and best wishes for your safety and everyone in your community from the flooding and hurricanes.
@Janet at Corporate Angels I send you my best wishes for better health and a speedy recovery from the stroke.
@JocelynsBellinis Get well soon! Please stay safe and make sure to get enough electrolytes.

If I missed anyone, please know I send my kind regards to everyone here. I’m still trying to catch up with posts so have resorted to skimming.
Unknown said…
@CatEyes Can’t help it after the subject has been broached, I always send my thoughts and best wishes for you and your brother. May you get good health, happiness, and peace soon.
Magatha Mistie said…
@Elle
She could start online tutoring, De’mentors Inc, sponsored by Demented Ltd?
CatEyes said…
Here is an article which detailed tha Meghan was treated as a diplomat since she was a member of the BRF when she came to NYC for her baby shower.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6725997/Meghan-Markle-flanked-U-S-special-agents-New-York-visit.html
""Meghan Markle is being chauffeured around New York City in a State Department SUV and has U.S. special agents for protection due to her diplomatic status.

The Duchess of Sussex has been flanked by security ever since she arrived in New York on Friday for a five-day whirlwind trip that includes a swanky baby shower being thrown by her celebrity friends.

The 37-year-old former actress, who is seven months pregnant with Prince Harry's baby, has been photographed in public several times since she arrived.
Each time she has stepped out, Meghan has been surrounded by multiple security personnel who have ushered her from five-star hotels and restaurants into a waiting black SUV with State Department license plates marked 'for official use only'.

But given she is a member of the royal family, the Duchess has also been assigned protection from the U.S. State Department and NYPD because she is considered a diplomat.
No less than three special agents, including one female, from the Dignitary Protective Division of the State Department have been tailing Meghan in New York whenever she steps out in the public eye.""

So there is this precedence but I have a hard time believing the Federal Government will pick up millions in dollars for their security if they decide to decamp to live in Malibu. I'll become an anarchist in that event.

CatEyes said…
@Mimi
@Charade

Thanks for the positive sentiments. It really means a lot!!!!!
CookieShark said…
Sorry but this is exhibit A of the Royal sell-out. MM is showing her age here. Bon Jovi is not popular with the 20 somethings, and Harry dueting with him is an utter joke. Notice she's not subjecting herself to this garbage.

Her mistake is drumming up hype and it's grostesque. Just do the good work with dignity and class. I don't think Cressy or Chelsy would ever encourage Harry to embarrass himself this way.
@Sandie, thanks for the tip on echinachia. I'll give that a try. I've been chugging orange juice, but maybe I need more Vitamin C. Just getting up to get more OJ is exhausting!

@ CatEyes. Good luck and hoping for the best for you and your brother. What a terrible time for you.

@ Hunter, Nutty will tell you what's appropriate to post here. It's her blog and nobody else should tell you what to do here. That's Nutty's responsibility. Her blog is growing at a fast pace, and maybe it's time for her to appoint a second moderator to cover the times whenshe is not available, if she wishes to keep such tight restrictions on personal talk.
It does get quiet here at night, and that's when most of the personal chat happens- in the dead hours and between news cycles. That's where I've seen the uptick in personal chat. We seem to be laser focused on The Harkles when news is breaking.

@Elle, Welcome back, and sorry the job didn't work out, but hopefully something better will come along soon.

@charade, Thanks! You are a very kind person!

I hope I haven't missed anybody.

Now back to our regular programming.
@Cookie Shark,

Yes, at Just Harry and MM's ages, by partnering with JBJ, it gives them the appearance trying to be the cool parents, which never works. It just makes them appear foolish, and kids hate that. Most of them will be wondering who JBJ is, anyway. It seems that they've never grown up and refuse to realize that they are nearing middle age. Their entire persona is trying to be teenagers or in their early 20s.
KnitWit said…
Red Bank is an expensive town near " the Shore" in NJ. Some very pricey homes of CEOs and the like there. Went to a BBQ of a Sr VP in Red Bank in the 90s.

Harry should show up at the soup kitchen. Preferably without MM. Although the Jersey Girls wouldn't take her bs.
YankeeDoodle said…
I know, no matter what is said otherwise, that H will have Royal Protection Officers assigned to him until taken away, because of one word: Diana.

If Harry is injured or dies from lack of RPO protection, the Monarchy will not survive. Like mother, like son. Both stupid, using others for their money, and both liars. Diana refused RPOs, and ended up in a car, owned by Fayed, not belting her seatbelts, and driven by a highly drunk and substance taker driver, who drove the Mercedes into a tunnel. The security officer, a private person assigned to Diana, was the only person to survive, because he saw that he was seat belted, but not Diana.

Diana was someone special, though, and was divorced from the Prince of Wales. She was young, beautiful, and looked better than ever as she divorced and aged, unlike her weird son H; she was a leader with acceptance of AIDS and leprosy victims, and though all the land mines were cleared, she brought attention to the deaths and horrific amputations of children and other innocents by stepping on corrupt, communist and dictators land mines.

H is a Zero. He is, unofficially, an addict and alcoholic, as is M. H is famous for only one reason - his mother gave birth to an idiot, and nobody can report on what his ex RPOs, friends and people who know him well, but cannot speak out for fear of the BRFs screwing them, or loss of any contacts with the BRF - Harry has already been through what in the English language would call near death from taking too much substances at one time. Harry is close to gone, and if the BRF and the Queen gives a damn about him, they will stop him now. H is not well, and he is seriously ill. He needs help. He is a jerk, but doesn’t someone love him enough to keep him from his crazy wife?

HAMS are clearly a crazy bunch of weird H, M and the strangest of all, Archie Bunker. Why are the British press giving the three of them free passes on substance abuse and baby surrogacy?
hunter said…
@JocylynsBellinis, "@ Hunter, Nutty will tell you what's appropriate to post here. "

I have no idea why you are @'ing me in that comment, but my posts are always appropriate. :)
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
@hunter.
I think that you may have misunderstood what I was saying. Another person was trying to be the moderator of your statements, and I was backing you up in terms of who is the boss here. It's not another poster. It is Nutty, and only Nutty. It's her blog.
Ian's Girl said…
I had no idea Harry got so little from his trust. I could live pretty comfortably on that, but I can certainly see why they want someone else to pickup the security tab. ( I personally don't think they even need security 24/7, but it probably makes her feel very important.)

Nutmeg must have been staggered when she realized how little he was actually worth, and that he didn't have free access to his inheritance from Diana.

I cannot believe this new website of hers. Surely it's a joke.
Back to Helen Mirren and her praise of MM for a moment. Although she is a fantastic actress, "Dame" Helen had quite a spicy past. I don't even know how to write this in accordance with the rules, but her first onscreen role was in a movie where she sings and gyrates in a very skimpy costume, sexily singing the song, "I Want To F**k."
It is on YouTube.

It seems that MM and Mirren have more in common than we may think. She could teach MM quite a few things, though, like how to be a great French maid or how to grill burgers, if you get my drift.
Sorry, it's even worse, the name of the song is "Too Drunk to F**ck."
Magatha Mistie said…
@Ian’s Girl
Yes, I reckon old Megs was shocked senseless when she finally realised her prince wasn’t worth that much.
Details, she always lacks attention to detail whether it’s clothes/scams etc, or understanding that she married a prince but his “wealth” comes from, and is, the “Firm”
Unknown said…
I don’t so much consider H&M lame for mingling with old pop stars/cultural icons. Most people (including me) would do whatever they could to meet stars old or new they like. Pop culture whatever generation is supposed to be fun and sometimes is food for the soul. I mean humanities is basically the study of pop culture over the centuries.

Do you know how many parents and grandparents love BTS? How about all the teens and 20-somethings who love Audrey Hepburn and Cleopatra? Vintage and even ancient Beauty Icons are a a thing this generation. Fashion and music is cyclical and always draws inspiration from the past and often the “ancient.”

I just get queasy seeing H&M trying to “be cool” by rubbing against icons so hard. It’s not happening! Ever! Meg should stop because the static electricity is bad for the hair. Their collabs are all: ‘look at US, these GENUINELY accomplished and/or interesting people are “friends” with us, ergo WE’RE COOL.” Instead, H&M are first-class POSERS that have been empty and boring their entire lives and are getting lamer with age.

A lot of oldies are goldies. H&M: Nope. Just... thank you, NEXT.
Hikari said…
In a break from Smeg news, I just saw this tidbit on the DM… Wolfie Mozzi will be the best man at his father’s wedding to Princess Beatrice. At age 3, he is the youngest person to fill this role at a royal wedding or probably any wedding, ever. The couple wishes to show that Bea fully embraces her stepson, but I’m wondering if this will even be permitted, or if there will be a grown-up best man in addition. As a legal and ecclesiastical witness to the marriage, the role of Best man does carry with it responsibilities beyond just looking cute in the pictures...A three-year-old cannot sign the wedding register, And they are going to entrust a toddler to carry the wedding rings?
Hikari said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8057959/RICHARD-EDEN-Princess-Beatrice-fiance-pick-three-year-old-son-Wolfie-best-man.html
Nahanni said…
1: Helen Mirren's statement is not surprising. Look into her background for insight into her republcanism and her attitude towards the Dumpster Fire of Sussex. If you know history you will see it, if you don't you won't.

2: The Douchebag and Dumpster Fire of Sussex are coke addicts. Their behavior is pure coke head. I've known far too many of their kind and ALL the signs are there. As many have pointed out it isn't that difficult for people like them to obtain drugs easily. It's the equivalent of ordering from GrubHub.
Anonymous said…
@JocelynsBellinis lol on that song, though. IIRC, there's a line about a retainer (of the dental as opposed to legal variety, and a funny story about why I know this, but I'll skip that). Now I'll have to go look for the video, however. And yes, @Nutty's blog, so Nutty's rules. Thx re the job. I'll figure it out. I won't be the first person in the history of the world to have a less-than-stellar professional situation.

____________________-

I don't have a strong opinion re Harry FKAP's drug use, but he looks haggard to me, like the light in his eyes has gone. He has no twinkle left. Also, his clothes just hang. Wills looks fit and healthy IMO, buff and strong, and I think he carries himself well. Harry looks thin and unhealthy and like he needs to summon his patronus but again, just my opinion. Regardless, at least he is Her Maj's fav (lololohellno now) and H&Rach had more popular IGs. Nanny-nanny-boo-boo wins the day:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8056811/10-posts-Sussexes-Cambridges-Instagram-accounts-contain-Harry-Meghan.html

Now we know how Rach has been spending her time while FKAP is away. She will never be royal, but she reigns as queen of petty. Seriously, PR money went to this dribble.

And @Magatha Sussex Dementors, Ltd. has a nice ring to it. She could be a Life Coach and, for the right amount of money from each lucky sucker, teach them to take something nice and turn it into something monstrous while hurting as many other people and causing as much chaos as possible.
Magatha Mistie said…
@Charade
My kids, 22 & 20, know JBJ living on a prayer, but they wouldn’t go to his concert.
They both love music from the 60’s onwards, very eclectic mix!
My son favours Rap overall, argh, & my daughter the Beatles!
I recently went to an Elton John concert, fabulous, & bumped into a couple of my sons friends!

As for Just Harry ( I prefer to call him aitch ) I thought he looked a bit of a pratt, especially in the photo with the guitar.

Anonymous said…
PS @JocelynsBellinis I found the video, and that was way before the Dead Kennedys did it. I guess there's was a cover, who knew, but the retainer line is def in there.
Rainy Day said…
@Hikari And they are going to entrust a toddler to carry the wedding rings?

That, at least, is not a problem. You either put the ring on a pillow or in their pocket, and stitch it in place with a loop of thread. When the time comes for the ring, a quick yank does the trick.

@Mimi If he does/did, have a good singing voice, it could get him some gigs in Las Vegas as a singer/entertainer.

I think Harry’s already entertained us on one of his previous visits to Las Vegas! 🤣😂

Magatha Mistie said…
@Elle
While the FKAPS away, the rat will play...
Magatha Mistie said…
@JocelynsBellinis
The aitch & .itch version would be too F..... to drink!
SwampWoman said…
OFF TOPIC @ELLE

Heh, we do NOT have the bureaucracy personality. That being said, I think the economy is about to STB due to COVID-19 and you may be better off to stay there for the moment with that sweet government insurance.
Nutty Flavor said…
Good morning, all.

Interesting comment earlier about Bill Gates going around town without a bodyguard; I've written on other posts about Paul McCartney doing the same thing.

Both of these men are relatively old (Gates is 64, McCartney 77) and generally beloved. Perhaps they feel that the ability to be free to live their lives as they want weighs more heavily on the scale than the worries about some random attack.

Harry is younger, less popular, and more recently in the military. (In fact, it's not hard to imagine some disgruntled member of the British military confronting him.)

I'm sure Charles is thinking about his beloved "Uncle Dickie", Louis Mountbatten - the man who brought his parents together, later murdered by the IRA - when he thinks about Harry's security. I'm not sure a bodyguard alone would have saved Uncle Dickie, however. The bomb was planted overnight in Mountbatten's fishing boat - would a bodyguard have caught that?
Mimi said…
Rainy Day, ewwwwwww, had forgotten that he got all stupid and nekked and danced around showing off his stuff!!! 🤮
@Magatha Mistie, Hahahahaha!

@Rainy Day, I've got a mental picture of Just Harry wearing Elvis' Las Vegas white jumpsuit crooning, "Love Me Tender." I'm going to wake up the neighbors laughing.

@Elle, The best part of the video for me is when she puts on the orange rubber gloves!
Sandie said…
The best man does not have to serve as a witness at a CoE wedding - anyone over the age of 18 can do so (and Beatrice and Edo, unlike Harry and Meghan, will have plenty present to fulfil that role), irrespective of religion.

The duties of a best man are social rather than religious. You can get married without a best man (or any of the others in the wedding party).
Mimi said…
Jocelyns Bellinis, Oh Goodness you really made me laugh with that visual of Hairy dressed as Elvis singing “Hunk a hunk a burning love”😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Magatha Mistie said…
@Nutty
The assassination of Lord Mountbatten was horrific. Four people, including his grandson, were blown up by the IRA.
Such an awful end to the life of such a distinguished gentleman.
I don’t know if RPO’s at the time, even if he had them, would have checked/detected the bomb under the boat.
They certainly checked under cars etc afterwards, as did all military personnel & government officials.

The Queen is very aware of security threats to herself & her family, rightly so. H&M know this, & will use it to their advantage.
The RF will end up paying security for these two!
Nutty Flavor said…
I do think that the use of Wolfie as best man for the wedding is a bit much.

I understand the point they were trying to make - that Beatrice accepts Wolfie as an integral part of their future family - but he still could have been the ring bearer or something more suitable for a three-year-old.
@Nutty,
Yes, Bill Gates is beloved in Seattle, and that's because he acts like just an ordinary guy. Some people will just give him a wave and say, "Hi, Bill," and walk on. The reason people love him is because he is unpretentious.

I understand that The Harkles do need some security, but I don't think it's right for other countries to pay for security wherever in the world they decide to live next. It's also unfair to the British people that The Harkles want to do no work for the country, but wish for their security to be paid for them. With all of the traveling they do, it's too costly to protect them when Harry is in one country, MM in another, and Archie in a third.

If they wish to work for the BR, of course, their security should be paid, but why pay when they will do nothing for the country? They should pay for themselves or Charles should pay.
Nutty Flavor said…
@Magatha, I fear you're right about the RF having to pay for Harry's security.

The only question is, how much security? Will it be 24/7, or just for public appearances? Will it be for all 3 of the Sussexes, or just for Harry?


FWIW, when an ageing IRA man was interviewed - I cannot remember who - and asked if he regretted anything about the organization's activities, he said the only thing he regretted was the death of the two children in the Mountbatten attacks.

Nutty Flavor said…
@jocelynsbellinis


Yes, Bill Gates is beloved in Seattle, and that's because he acts like just an ordinary guy. Some people will just give him a wave and say, "Hi, Bill," and walk on. The reason people love him is because he is unpretentious.


I would also imagine that people admire the work he and Melinda are doing with their foundation.

Which appears to be a real foundation, not a Sussex-style tax dodge.
@Magatha Mistie,

I'm sure that Mountbatten is on the RF's minds, too, and that's why I always thought that the house on Vancouver Island was a horrible choice for security. The waters in front of that house is full of boats passing by, and any one of them could have had a bomb and launcher on them. This is an area of the world that has the most boats per capita. There is no way that their RPOs could protect them from that.

A Malibu waterfront house will have the same problem.
Nutty Flavor said…
I suppose we civilians don't realize how much celebrities have to worry about security.

Plant had an interesting discussion the other day focusing on Margot Robbie, the Australian actress. The jist of it is that once she did big-ticket movies, such as "Suicide Squad" and the recent "Birds of Prey", she would have to keep doing big-ticket movies in order to pay for security costs. Being shown to so many viewers brought out the usual quotient of stalkers and wackos.

Robbie said she wished she would have known that she would no longer be able to do independent films, since the budgets would not support her security costs.
Magatha Mistie said…
If true, little Wolfie playing best man, ridiculous.

@JocelynsBellinis
I agree. Paying for working RF members security is fine.
aitch & .itch aren’t Royal, nor working, They should pay for themselves, oh, they can’t afford it!
The Queen, & Charles will have to bale them out.
I can’t see Boris acquiescing to their demands.
The UK is flooded, literally, money should be spent on the people who have lost everything,
not those that have everything & chose to lose it.
@ Nutty, Agreed. They do great work with their foundation, but don't preach to others or flaunt their wealth.
This man is so rich that he has an art acquisitions department, and still he drives himself to stand in line for his burgers- without security. Even when he was young and extremely wealthy in the 1980s-90s, he was low-key and never gave the impression of entitlement. To the people of Seattle, he really is Just Bill, and that's a compliment.

As for Just Harry, that's a joke.
Ava C said…
There's a new Harry Markle post out.
Magatha Mistie said…
I’m wondering why they have to come back to the UK?
Do they really need to farewell/promote certain causes/institutions seeing as they dumped others?

People would be happier if they just stayed left!

I find the whole return distasteful, aitch, & .itch have disrespected the Queen, & Countries.
No grace nor gravitas.
Be gone for good.

hunter said…
AWWWWWWWW thanks @JocelynsBellinis!!
Jenx said…
@nutty. That Margot Robbie tidbit is kind of sad. Sheds a new light on the movie star life.
On the security issue, I think they chose Canada thinking that tab woukd be covered. Surprise! I would never have expected this turn of events where they just might not be able to afford the financially independent lifestyle of the rich and famous.
The train car thing made me think of Wimbledon. How many paying customers were booted from their trip so his nibs could travel in comfort and privacy.
My imaginary scenario for the duo to be back in the UK Is so they can arrest her for fraud and treason. :) Thus freeing that poor child Archie, if he does exist, from the lies and deception and hopefully having a safe and healthy life in obscurity.
Miggy said…
I missed this yesterday but did wonder how long before the press caught wind of it.

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry fans have been duped by a fake "official" website cashing in on Megxit by offering Sussex merchandise and trips to Windsor Castle.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11062498/meghan-markle-fans-fooled-website-sussex-merchandise/
Jenx said…
@miggy They are on it (website) and it is shady AF. Whoever it is, MM peeps or no, it is not a good look at all. I like to imagine it is the shadow folk within the BRF trolling big time. Hehehe
Magatha Mistie said…
Their problem is they don’t have the money.
How embarrassing.
They may well make millions in the future, but for now they are desperate.
Desperate & dangerous!!
none said…
If the safety of Harry's family is his previously-stated top concern, the solution to this whole security issue is simple. Move the family back to the UK.
Superfly said…
As much as I love the Yenta in Trump, he's anything but stupid. He enjoys an amicable and cordial relationship with The Queen, and will do nothing to jeopardise it.
The only way I see him paying for these 2 parasites who have insulted him and his family in recent times, is to work as an agent for The Queen. Which I doubt she needs. She's got her own agents and she knows about every fart and every snort that happens amongst the markles.

Magatha Mistie said…
@Holly
I don’t think the UK wants them!
Megs is home alone, expect another unfiltered rant tomorrow?
Superfly said…
Hikari, I enjoyed reading your take on their relationship. I found myself agreeing with a lot.

So what do you think did she do to hook him? Blackmail him with information he spilled while drunk/stoned/high? This is what I always thought.

Still wouldn't explain his loyal devotion to this snake though....most other men would have told her a long time ago where to go. Instead right now he's a collaborator and enabler to her shameless schemings.
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Magatha Mistie
I think very few Brits will object to the Queen paying for their security out of her own fortune or her state allowance.
If she is so concerned for Harry.
xxxxx said…
Superfly said...
Hikari, I enjoyed reading your take on their relationship. I found myself agreeing with a lot.

So what do you think did she do to hook him? Blackmail him with information he spilled while drunk/stoned/high? This is what I always thought.


Blackmail, threat of blackmail, implying blackmail, undercurrents of blackmail but not said out loud, all are a near certainty for Megsy Wegsy. Of course threatening not just H (he's a hapless sap) but Charles, The Queen, the BRF which is on to her.

As you said, all derived from when H was weak and high on whatever, and he made the reveals to his love of a lifetime. (sic) For sure H has whined to Megsy about his mental health, once he did this the rest spills out too. Now how much has the Dumped Duchess of Dubiousness spilled out to Hapless? Only phony, made up and inconsequential stuff but that felt "intimate" to Hapless of Dumbarton.
Superfly said…
You can't insult the people you are sponging off by smearing them as racists, accuse them of making your life unliveable amongst them, and then expect them to pay exuberant amounts of money for you to galavant around on the other side of the globe.

Same way, you can't insult the President of the United States, calling his sephallitic, smear him, denigrate his accomplishments (while you yourself have achieved what exactly?) and then expect he'll roll out the red carpet for you.

What on earth is wrong with people who do not understand this very simple equation?

The only country that really was left to pay for them was Canada. But Canadians don't want to, even though they were neither insulted, nor smeared, nor was their leader attacked.
So go be mad at them.
none said…
@Magatha

Nobody wants them. It's because The Markle is black right? Everyone's so mean. lol.

Though I do wonder where is left for them. Even if the security issue is resolved via Charles' wallet, there are citizenship and immigration issues to sort out.

Harry could apply for a work visa in the US. Doesn't get any more Just Harry than that.
Fairy Crocodile said…
My sincere thanks to Charade, Elle and everybody for your warm words towards our little community in the Midlands. They are greatly appreciated. So many great people on this blog!
Sorry for off the topic, Nutty. I just wanted to express my gratitude.

Now, when thousands of people lost their possessions in floods is the worst time for the Markles to demand anything from the taxpayers.
xxxxx said…
Margot Robbie has more wacko male followers because her role in movies is to exude sex. Take a Natlalie Portman, who to my knowledge plays more demure/serious roles, probably does not have this problem. Bringing us back to Megsy who played a sex object in Suits, and in real life. It sure worked on Hapless's mind.
Magatha Mistie said…
@Fairy Crocodile
I’m sure the Brits would be very pleased if the Queen, rather than the taxpayers, paid for their security.
I’m British, ex Army.
Miggy said…
@Jenx

They are on it (website) and it is shady AF. Whoever it is, MM peeps or no, it is not a good look at all. I like to imagine it is the shadow folk within the BRF trolling big time. Hehehe

They've approached BP for comment, so it will be interesting to see if they get a reply.
I won't hold my breath... lol
A very long and detailed look at W&K vs. H&M Instagram accounts..."A Royal Instagram Mystery" from Yahoo News. Commenters are not impressed.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/royal-instagram-mystery-131647351.html
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Magatha.
My respect to you. As an ex Army, what do you think the feelings are towards Harry in the Forces?
PaisleyGirl said…
In recent days the situation regarding the Harkles' security has become so complicated and caused so much anger amongst Canadians, Americans and British citizens alike that I think in the end they will have no choice but to move back to Britain. They cannot afford 20 million per year security (even if the amount turns out to be half that amount, they cannot afford it), the mega deals which would afford them 'financial independence' do nog seem to be materialising and it would be cheapest and easiest and safest for everyone if they just moved to Frogmore Cottage as private citizens and made use of the security which is already in place there for the Queen.

Megs must be tearing her yak wig out at this prospect - the humiliation would just be too great for her. Also, she would be stuck in a cottage in the middle of a swamp with a view of a cemetery with her dimwit husband, a fake/real child she never wanted and nothing to do and nowhere to go all day...
Sandie said…
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/page-3013#post-55279241

"I just tortured myself by looking at videos of pre-Duchess Meghan merching it up for Reitman's, Holt Renfrew, Shape Magazine, Splash Magazine,Good Housekeeping and I can't remember the rest.

Conclusions: This woman has internalized every woman's magazine she has ever read and bought into the lifestyles they purvey far more than probably the people who edit them. It's the perfect wardrobe, the perfect home, the perfect meal, the perfect floral arrangement. Everything that came out of her mouth was a cliche without a glimmer of irony. Major Gwyneth worship: In one interview, she professed her love for Goop's favorite quack doctor and personal trainer. Somehow you're supposed to think of her as a humanitarian when she shows up in Rwanda to build wells except she's wearing dresses and false eyelashes. And no interest in wanting to do quality theater or movies. No sign of any intellectual life whatever. Just branding, partnerships and media exposure. Guest editing British Vogue must have been the dream of a lifetime. (Remembering that Goop did something similar eons ago.)

My uneducated guesses: I think she's basically hollow inside and has a cash register for a brain. I think she has always wanted to be Gwyneth Paltrow and never intended to do the royal thing for more than a year just as she was happy to exit show biz. I'm guessing there was a lot of long-range planning in roping in Harry and posing as a humanitarian was part of it. This is a seriously shallow woman whose whole life is about smiling for the camera.

I think what unhinged her about being a royal was not the exposure, which she lives for, but digging into her past and publicizing how much she was spending on herself and how calculating she was. No one was supposed to notice that.

I just wonder what happened to make a very ordinary pre-teen decide to turn herself into a Barbie doll, which is essentially what she was before Harry. The merching we're going to see in coming months is about convincing young women that if they buy her stuff, they too can become Barbie dolls like Meghan."
none said…
@PaisleyGirl

And leaving them no other option than to divorce with Harry and "Archie" living in the UK for safety reasons and The Markle back in the States because she can't live in the "they don't make it easy" UK.

I really think that's where this is all headed. Absolves the Harkles of any personal blame and wrongdoing. "It's not our fault the marriage disintegrated. It's all of you that caused this. We tried."

Harry resumes his royal position and The Markle resumes her hustle with a padded bank account and a much higher profile.
PaisleyGirl said…
@Holly, I agree with you.
Perhaps this has already happened. Harry may not leave the UK after his Commonwealth duties in March and there have been no sightings of Megs in the UK so far. She may not show up at all. I think she is terrified of public reaction if she makes an appearance
Magatha Mistie said…
Thanks @Fairy Crocodile
My feelings, & also my Army mates, is disgust & anger.
Harry has disrespected the whole forces family, & especially our Commander in Chief, the Queen.
We all, as did Harry, pledged our allegiance to the Queen/Crown.
This still stands even though I left years ago.
His behaviour is traitorous, I can only imagine the feelings in his old Regiment.

A huge betrayal, & an extreme embarrassment, for all concerned.
Fairy Crocodile said…
Magatha, you have just made a very important point we have mostly missed. Harry pledged his allegiance to the Crown and to the Queen. Although many would question if his behavior constitutes treason, he did reneged on his duties.

Perhaps this explains the humiliating spectacle of "let's just let him step away for a year and keep his honorary medals". Stripping him right away as he deserves would essentially constitute dishonorable discharge. The Queen who is too soft towards him didn't want this to happen, hence the mumbling.

It would be much more honest to admit his deserting of duty and appoint Anne straight away. She has the nation's full support unlike him.
none said…
@Sandie

Appreciate the LA post.

"My uneducated guesses: I think she's basically hollow inside and has a cash register for a brain....This is a seriously shallow woman whose whole life is about smiling for the camera."

The home video of 18-year-old Markle shows who she really is. Always looking for the next hustle. Her brand was never going to work in the UK, nor globally. Once things have settled down, she will use her "royal experience" as her platform in the US.


@Mimi, @Miggy, @Fairy crocodile, @ Charade and anyone else I have missed. Thank you for your kind words about my recent stroke. I'm also caught up in the flooding situation in the UK which is affecting hospital visits.

Back on topic, when the Harkles stepped back, they stated that they would no longer take tax payer money, most probably meaning the 5% allowance. However, the taxpayer also funds the police so surely that should apply as well. They have chosen to be independent and not live in the UK. Should security be required, it should only apply to when they are in the UK and I'm being generous. In the current flooding climate, the money could be used on sorting out the flood defences and helping those who have really been adversely affected, not on 2 nobodies who turned their backs on us.
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
@Magatha Mistie -- I, too, am an Army veteran (from the U.S.). While we don't have the equivalent of an honorary Captain General for our Marines, when Harry ditched the remembrance ceremony for fallen Marines for the Lion King, it left a very, very bad taste in my and many of my military buddies' mouths.

To me, that was unconscionable. No matter what he does from now on, I can't see the British military having any respect for him anymore.

Furthermore, from what I read, on his tours in Afghanistan, he was cosseted and protected from actual combat, behaved like a petulant jerk, and only flew a helicopter (in safe areas) for photo ops. Perhaps you can confirm this, or dispel it.

Many thanks for your service, fellow "dogface" (our Army's slang for soldiers) :)

Nutty Flavor said…
Really, if they'd taken the time to just negotiate things before announcing their exit, it would have been better for them and better for the Royal Family.

Where were they going to live? Which titles and brand names could they use? What level of security did they need and who would pay for it?

Meg and Harry lost all their bargaining power when they got frosty about that image of the "four heirs" and flounced out of the Royal Family without taking the time to set up a comprehensive and balanced plan. Bad idea.
none said…
@Nutty

Good point. And what was the mad rush I wonder. What Meghan wants Meghan gets"?
Yankee Wally says a Go Fund Me has been set up to pay for security, Beggin' for Meghan. LOL, she probably did it herself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7&v=jJFVTi-KZYg&feature=emb_logo
PaisleyGirl said…
@Holly, I wonder if something else happened around that time to make them rush out the door so fast. A photo of the four heirs seems like such a petty thing to risk yourfuture plans on.
Liver Bird said…
@Nutty

I agree.

I'm still trying to get my head around just how incredibly badly they have gone about this whole thing. Kind of puts paid to the notion that Meghan is 'whip smart'. We've always known Harry is thick as two short planks but on current evidence it would seem she's not much better. Add in arrogance and ignorance, and you have got one hell of a lethal combination.

If they'd kept their mouths shut and kept up appearances as normal, they could likely have negotiated a 'Mexit' that was face saving and reasonably acceptable to all sides. But no, she - and I do think the initiative is coming mostly from her - had to publish that asinine 'manifesto' and try to play hard ball with the queen. With the queen! They forgot that the crown must always win. Idiots.
Liver Bird said…
I also find it interesting that so little attention is being paid to their living arrangements in Canada, and into who is offering them such great hospitality - and why.

Billionaires don't generally lend out their luxury homes to strangers for months on end - even if the homes are otherwise unoccupied - unless there is some kind of pay-back. What exactly is this shady tycoon expecting in return for his generosity to two (ex) members of the royal family? Because there must be something. There is always something.
none said…
@PaisleyGirl

My tin foil hat theory is the rush out the door is related to the circumstances of "Archie's" birth, which are suspicious even if his birth and lineage are legitimate. I can't imagine what else would have caused such a panic to leave.

Although, I do think she is a common hustler and when there is "no more juice to squeeze from the lemon" it's on to the next.
CatEyes said…
@JocelynsBellinis said…

>>>I understand that The Harkles do need some security, but I don't think it's right for other countries to pay for security wherever in the world they decide to live next.<<<

Precisely. If they move to American I will find it abhorrent to pay for an ex-royal's (heck even a royal who wants to live here). security. We threw off the obligations of the British Monarchy at a cost of many lives centuries ago. And for protecting Meghan a citizen, well she can use those *cough millions she made filming a cable show just like any other two bit celebrity who requires security. She is constitutionally irrelevant here. Can you imagine if the reverse was true, would the Queen or even Londoners be put in the position of paying for Donald Trump Jr.'s security if he decided to live there. Wouldn't happen.
Unknown said…
In my book, H&M being miffed about the Four Heirs portrait was pure spin. I think Meg was facing hard deadlines on projects she wanted but was stymied by the BRF and most likely the British government.

My guess is H&M going to America for certain projects entailed a level of coordination that the put the BRF in a position to stop them from happening. Meg retaliated but didn’t realize how much of a compromised position she was in. She probably believes her own hype and/or was going the blackmail route.

Meg has always come off as someone who lacks any self-awareness and never does her homework. Details make and break everything. I consider Harry complicit but as a passive participant who never vetoes Meg’s decisions/actions.
Animal Lover said…
@Hikari

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8057959/RICHARD-EDEN-Princess-Beatrice-fiance-pick-three-year-old-son-Wolfie-best-man.html

Using Wolfie as best man would be cuteness overload in the best way.

I wonder what M will do to overshadow this event?
Miggy said…
Meghan Markle and Harry face petition to remove £20million taxpayer funded security.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1249127/meghan-markle-prince-harry-security-canada-uk-taxpayers-petition-royal-news

Popular posts from this blog

A Quiet Interlude

 Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event?   Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th?  Oscar's - March 10th?   In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US.  The IRS just never goes away.  Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on).  There's always another one.  Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California.   That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales.   Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere.  But.  The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.  

As Time Passes and We Get Older

 I started thinking about how time passes when reading some of the articles about the birthday.  It was interesting to think about it from the different points of view.  Besides, it kind of fits as a follow up the last post (the whole saga of can the two brothers reunite). So there is the requisite article about how he will be getting all kinds of money willed to him from his great-grandmother.  There were stories about Princess Anne as trustee (and not allowing earliest access to it all).  Whether or not any or all of this is true (there was money for him and/or other kids) has been debated with claims she actually died owing money with the Queen paying the debts to avoid scandal.  Don't know but I seem to remember that royal estates are shrouded from the public so we may not (ever) know. However, strange things like assisting in a book after repeated denials have popped up in legal papers so nothing is ever really predicable.   We are also seein...

Gosh It Is Quiet In Here

 There just hasn't been a lot from really either of them together or individually lately, has there? But why? Have they blown all their bridges, connections and are down to toss the proverbial kitchen sink for attention? I don't know.  We've heard that moving vans showed up at the house.  And nothing more like pictures from a neighbor happy to see the back of them. We've heard they bought a house on Portugal.   But the wording was kind of funny.  Multiple sources of the same thing - yes but that isn't a guarantee of proof as it could all be from the same source.  It was more along the lines of "We've been told that...".  It came off as a we really don't know if we believe this to be true or not so we are putting it out there but hedging our bets.  Or at least it did to me. And nothing more like exactly when, where or for how much or when they might visit it again.  Or pictures of the awesome inside.  Or outside.  Or requisite ...