It's now been announced that Princess Beatrice will marry her fiancé Edo Mozzi on Friday, May 29 at the Chapel Royal in St. James' palace.
The small chapel was the site of Queen Victoria's wedding, and the physical resemblance between Bea and her great-great-great-great grandmother is often remarked upon. (Bea even had a cameo in the movie "Young Victoria.")
The Chapel Royal was also the site of Prince George's christening - and Bea's own christening. Bea's wedding ceremony will be followed by a private party at Buckingham Palace.
Duchess Meghan ruined Beatrice sister's Eugenie's wedding with an awkwardly-timed pregnancy announcement.
What can we expect from Meg on May 29?
The small chapel was the site of Queen Victoria's wedding, and the physical resemblance between Bea and her great-great-great-great grandmother is often remarked upon. (Bea even had a cameo in the movie "Young Victoria.")
The Chapel Royal was also the site of Prince George's christening - and Bea's own christening. Bea's wedding ceremony will be followed by a private party at Buckingham Palace.
Duchess Meghan ruined Beatrice sister's Eugenie's wedding with an awkwardly-timed pregnancy announcement.
What can we expect from Meg on May 29?
Comments
@Charade
I wonder how the news got out about the Sussexes.
I know who I'm putting my money on lol
@Lighthealer Astrid @Louise
There were similar "guidelines" released regarding Frogmore. I'm of the opinion that the Canadian "guidelines" were their doing as it sounds very similar to what happened with Frogmore, it was rumoured at that time that those ones had come from H&M themselves. BP denied it, but because it's happened in a second place they've moved to, it seems to be too much of a co-incidence.
-----
The royal family doesn’t usually engage with gossip, at least not publicly. But Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, seem to have drawn the line at reports claiming they provided “guidelines” to their future neighbors before moving into Frogmore Cottage in Windsor.
The controversy stemmed from an article published by British tabloid The Sun on July 26. “Warnings were made at a recent residents’ meeting [when] the issue of the Sussexes’ move to the private Home Park estate was raised,” the newspaper claimed. “Don’t approach or instigate conversation if you see the Royal couple,” “Don’t pet or stroke their dogs, even if they come over to you” and “Don’t ask to see baby Archie” were among the alleged orders given to local residents.
“The Duke and Duchess had no knowledge of this briefing and no involvement in the concept or the content,” a Buckingham Palace spokesperson said in a statement sent to the Daily Mail. “This was a well-intentioned briefing to help a small local community know how to welcome two new residents and help them with any potential encounter.” The Duke and Duchess’ press office did not immediately respond to TIME’s request for comment.
Dispelling the gossip, the spokesperson asserted that no “handouts” were given to residents, and that the meeting was run by a “local manager,” rather than a representative from the palace. A Buckingham Palace spokesperson said “an overly protective” official must have issued some kind of rules without the knowledge or approval of the Duke and Duchess, The Sun claimed. Crown Estates, which runs Home Park, the estate which houses Frogmore, did not immediately return TIME’s request for comment.
https://time.com/5637788/prince-harry-meghan-markle-neighbor-rules-rumors/
Yes, thank you. Churchill informed & then spurred the country on. The country responded. They stood up, with our allies, & fought to the bitter end. They defeated Hitler & made the world a better, safer place for many, for a while.
As for Meghan, the RF could cut her off now, discredit & humiliate her. But, there’s Harrys mental health to consider & Archie, whoever he is. Also the optics of such a move. I believe in the Queens long game, she just needs to hustle it along quicker than normal. Make no mistake, the RF will not go down to this hussy.
`surrogate' ? That's snide, at the very least. Once, one would have said something like `almost like a second mum and dad' or similar.
re Paul McCartney - and then he married Heather Mills...
Rules for neighbours? Pure Blind Coincidence, of course...
I agree with you. Those residents are used to the Royals in Windsor, know the protocol. For “someone” to address the residents with these ridiculous demands it smacks of H & M’s delusions of grandeur. If it spouts like Meg, struts like Meg ... it is Meg.
Re: The JPM Conference and how word got out...
A guy called Ramsey Simon, (Lawyer) posted this on Twitter.
"Seems there’s a famous someone someone here tonight. A couple who are (presumably) former members, recently detached, of a UK family whose role should be abolished and is a few hundred years past its excuse for even being."
https://twitter.com/rksimonlaw/status/1225614794675322880
I was just going to raise that!
What, pray, entitles Ramsey Simon to pontificate thus?
He was dining at Habitat, (one of the hotel restaurants) and tweeted it to his followers.
I guess he thought they'd be interested...
I didn't appreciate his comment either.
Sorry, a bit slow today. On meds that make me sleepy.
Exclusive..... M M walks Polar Bear in Hyde Park. Archie remains in Canada.
Some of the rest of the comments are pretty brutal. Someone actually called her "Shamima Markle" (referencing that Isis bride who's just been stripped of her British citizenship, in case people outside the UK aren't familiar with it). Comments currently numbering 61 and I can only spot one even vaguely in her defence and that's only saying "let's forgive and forget" with no names mentioned; nobody has upvoted it yet.
Link to the article if anyone wants a nosey, although I'm not sure whether some comments will get deleted or not.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1239469/meghan-markle-news-will-meghan-prince-harry-return-UK-Princess-Beatrice-wedding
Why would an obscure loud mouthed lawyer be having a go at the RF? May be a Sailor 😉
The cynic in me suspects he has some sort of connection with MM or people she associates with, and tweeted what she wanted him to tweet. I could be totally wrong and my dislike of her behaviour is showing itself in bias, but we've already seen that she's not above "leaking" stuff via other people. When I read that it was a private function my first thought was "she won't like that if she can't get her name in the media".
I was so despondent when I read about the loved-up Sussexes at a Goldman Sachs speaking engagement (leaked on the day that Bea announced her wedding plans via BP, so of course Meghan,supported by zombie Harry, is going to upstage Bea's wedding in some way), and then was gobsmacked that a bunch of super wealthy and entitled folk flew the trashy couple in a private jet, put them up in a swanky hotel and paid the a huge amount of money for them to stand up and talk during dinner (probably as starters were being served) so that she could say she loved her husband and he could talk about being in therapy and the trauma of his Mom's death (to himself not to her, the person who actually died). History will not be kind to the duo ...
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/page-2843#post-54613073
Understood what you said perfectly. :)
I'm quite the cynic too (where MM is concerned) but on this occasion I think the lawyer may simply have been wanting to brag. (loud-mouthed indeed @Magatha Mistie) lol
The Lawyer was also at a *private* dinner where the chef was trying out new dishes.
Apparently!
Cheers, the new dishes were probably over done burgers with a side slide of greasy tossed salad.
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he own up to being 'depressed' after he left the army?
Cheers, the new dishes were probably over done burgers with a side slide of greasy tossed salad.
Served by a MM doppelgänger?
He posted the menu.
Not a burger in sight. :(
The DM article about the JPM Conference has now reached 17k comments!
I don't know about breaking the internet but she's certainly breaking records in the DM comment section! LOL
He left the Army in June 2015, just under 5 years ago.
How far in advance would Bea's wedding date announcement be known about within the RF? Would H&M have had time to set up their attendance of this particular event to coincide with the announcement?
It seems a long shot, but what are the chances they just so happened to be doing something like this that could be leaked on the day of the announcement? Even if the attendance was an honest coincidence unrelated to the date of the announcement, I think that at the very least the leak was orchestrated by H&M.
@Miggy,
Yes, that's also a valid option and I'll keep it in mind, although I think it's a highly ironic random coincidence if that's what did happen - it must be the first time she's overshadowed another royal announcement/event completely by accident and I don't think I fully buy that from past behaviour. I get quite suspicious of any coincidences relating to this entire thing as we've seen time and time again that what appear to be coincidences turn out to be anything but that when time has passed and more details emerge.
(not sure if ironic is the right word, but it's as close as I can think up right now)
Of course we know the rules don't apply to him.
Also . . the more the HAMS get out and speak to larger, diverse, worldwide audiences, they are going to run into more and more people (like me) who lost a mother young and have "survived" AND "thrived." Surely such has happened to many at that banker's party, whatever it's called? And after saying he barely remembers her?
And I'm sorry . . . yes, the walking behind the coffin made for a pathetic picture, but 1. that's how it's often done in Europe and 2. all cultures have some heartbreaking customs connected with funerals.
He left the Army in June 2015, just under 5 years ago.
Yep, true. So either he had therapy on the quiet or someone is bending the truth.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/16/prince-harry-sought-counselling-death-mother-led-two-years-total/
How does that fit the timeline as we know it? Is he incapable of joining the dots?
Just for a giggle - about 30 years ago, someone, most likely a disgruntled and about-to-depart employee, hacked the till at the Windsor branch of Burger King (very close to the Castle) so that the receipts read `Bu*ger King'.
Mind you, in the days when Stokes the greengrocers were still in business, the `p' on their receipts was replaced by a very faint semi-colon, so I read that I'd bought `500g William's ears'
"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex earned more than $500,000 for appearing at the JP Morgan banking conference Alternative Investment Summit held at Miami's South Beach’s 1 Hotel, where rooms cost up to $5,000 a night. Held in December, the appearance marked the couple's first public appearance since a fallout with the royal family after they announced their intentions to "step back" from royal duties."
Bit of both I reckon?
Diana said in those last tapes to emerge that when she was suffering depression/bulimmia in the early days BP arranged counselling/psychologist who she visited weekly. I’m sure BP would have supplied counselling to the boys after her death, & onwards.
"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex earned more than $500,000 for appearing at the JP Morgan banking conference Alternative Investment Summit held at Miami's South Beach’s 1 Hotel, where rooms cost up to $5,000 a night. Held in December, the appearance marked the couple's first public appearance since a fallout with the royal family after they announced their intentions to "step back" from royal duties."
Oh wow! 😁 Then it really looks like the nasty duo are trying to upstage Bea’s wedding announcement! 😖 Will these two stop at nothing ?! ☹️
I have a feeling that may be a misprint in the Washington Examiner.
If you go to the article and click on the blue print that says "banking conference" it takes you to an article in Harpers Bazaar dated 7th Feb, which states as most do...
Sources confirm to BAZAAR.com that the couple did attend an exclusive event hosted by JPMorgan in Miami's South Beach last night. Page Six originally broke the news that the royal couple were present at the private soirée.
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a30811835/prince-harry-meghan-markle-secret-appearance-miami/
Then there are the stories that the Harkles were at this event with Gayle King to explain why she wasn't on her morning show. She wasn't on her show because of the backlash from her Kobe rape question and her lashing out at CBS for the clip. Now her "friend" Oprah claims Gayle's getting death threats. Yet she flies to Miami for this event. This is typical of what goes on with the media. Lies and obfuscations.
I just noticed the Washington Examiner says the conference took place in December! Before they officially left the royal duties.
It raises a serious question for me about the "leaking" tweet - why was it posted on 7th Feb implying he'd seen them that night? O.o
I'm clueless when it comes to Twitter, have an account but haven't used it in years, is there a possibility this is a retweet? I can't see anything that says it's a repost but if so, why would a stranger wait and retweet that on the day of Bea's announcement?
Also, if they attended in December before the whole Megxit thing officially kicked off, does that mean they shouldn't have been paid for it?
Right, back to the grindstone. Unless any of you lovely ladies (and gents?) want to come and help me with the housework? I can hear you all running away, I understand lol
I agree. I'm sure the RF would have provided the boys with some grief counselling.
'The Duke and Duchess of Sussex earned more than $500,000 for appearing at the JP Morgan banking conference Alternative Investment Summit held at Miami's South Beach’s 1 Hotel, where rooms cost up to $5,000 a night. Held in December, the appearance marked the couple's first public appearance since a fallout with the royal family after they announced their intentions to "step back" from royal duties.'
I thought the Washington Examiner was a credible source but the error in this paragraph is very clear:
1. They announced their intention to 'step back' from royal duties in January.
2. The announcement was made after a public appearance together at Canada House in January.
How could the conference have been held in December, a date that preceded the two listed events?
Nope, the Washington Examiner published an article that contained a major and easily spotted error. (It also seems that they are simply copying other sources rather than having a first-hand source for this appearance at the conference.)
The fact that it may be a misprint is simply my opinion. I may be wrong. ;-)
Didn't both of her parents file for bankruptcy, and she went to court over IRS taxes?
My father in law lecturing at the kitchen table knows more!
"Meghan Markle and Prince Harry could have earned up to $1MILLION."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7981295/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-paid-775-000-speak-JP-Morgan-summit-Miami.html
Disgusted, and my concern for Harry has evaporated. He is full of shit. Agree HM has to play a long game but pray it’s nearing its conclusion.
I do not understand where the global journalists of integrity are—well, I hope they are covering the world’s more pressing issues, but can they take a 10-minute break to end this pair’s game? All they have to do begin to ask a few basic questions, backed with the facts that prompted them.
And when she is ready to dump him, she has a "damaged beyond words" husband she HAS to leave, with Archie, for her own sanity and the babies. She's already done this with the "toxic" RF.
And Harry will spend the next year setting up how he will lose custody of his son.
And in this age where everything is caught on camera, there are no pictures to verify these stories. It's insulting to expect us to believe any of it.
Now that is an intriguing thought. Clearly they are headed somewhere with all this Harry's mental health business. Takes care of the Archie problem.
The fact that it may be a misprint is simply my opinion. I may be wrong. ;-)
It makes a lot of sense for it to be a misprint considering the date of the tweet, I think your opinion is right. Plus, Sandie's post backs you up on the idea of it being a misprint so I'm happy to go with misprint unless we find out differently.
The last few months feel like I've been sitting a never-ending exam that I haven't studied for with the amount of puzzling out I've been doing over it and I'm sure I'm not alone lol to steal a Megism and turn it back on them... "they don't make it easy"
I feel sure I saw the May 29 date last week.
Wow. I just got chills.
I would put almost nothing beyond them. Especially, if Archie is 90% doll.
How are they going to explain that childs absence when school/talking/walking comes around? Does Harry really think being raised by nannies in LA is different from being raised by nannies in KP?
Yes! Especially since, let's face it, the point of the thing was so their well-heeled clients could get a snap with them.
Nobody cares about the speech. They wanted to meet a "royal"
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/financially-independent-meghan-and-prince-harry-bank-515k-speaking-at-jp-morgan-banking-summit
It's dated February 7. I don't believe December is a typo. If the event was in February, the article would have said "spoke on Thursday" or "on February 6", not "in February". I say this as a former journalist.
It doesn't have to be a direct line for "access".
Pay this unrelated politician's son's girlfriend...and we'll see what we can do about getting you into that unrelated "meeting" you wanted to go to.
"Pay our fecking prince and his whorey bride $1M (so we don't have to) and we'll try to help you out later"...or "because of that favor we already did"
Not kidding.
$1 million is a handkerchief, a taco, a pair of socks to these people.
Nothing.
'The Metropolitan Police and the Home Office are at loggerheads over who will foot the bill for policing the royal wedding in central London, which could cost several hundred thousand.'
Bea and Edo are going to be endlessly and ruthlessly criticised for everything, yet most were 'oh gosh, isn't this exciting and groundbreaking' happy about the millions spent on security alone for the Harry and Meghan show.
Changing subject ... two folk on LSA have shared experiences of seeing Beatrice out and about.
1. Seen browsing in a clothing shop in New York (and I don't think it was one of the high-end glitzy shops). She had one security person with her and was very low key.
2. Seen in a very nice but not flashy and hugely expensive eatery in Kensington having lunch with a pal. Low key (no visible sign of security) so went unnoticed for a while even though she was sitting at the table next to the poster. Up close, she is fine boned and petite, her eyes don't look pop-eyed as in photos, her colouring (very blue eyes and red hair and fair skin) is amazing, and she spent most of the lunch listening intently and with engaged interest to her friend talking (not a me person).
That is very odd wording. Did a journalist's 10-year-old write the article? Or, someone who is not informed about the Markle story and thus had no clue about the actual time line and did not see the significance of a speaking engagement that did take place in December? Because if the speaking engagement did take place in December then THAT is the story (not what they said or how much they were paid) and is very revealing about how duplicitous and untrustworthy the duo are (BP take note - they cannot be trusted and will NOT upheld the values of Her Maj).
It's funny cuz it's true. :)
Blogger on not my duchess blog pointed out the article said "..left before the desert". It suggests Harry was speaking to the bunch of people chewing on their expensive dinner.
A 35 years old man who ran away from his royal duties, betrayed his army patronages, insulted people who payed for his carefree life speaks about losing his mommy 22 years ago to the group of wealthy bankers who don't care. The moment he left they forgot about him and went to enjoy their desert. Harry the dinner entertainer. Bought by bankers for an hour.
The one I feel sorry for is Wills. Seeing this humiliating spectacle must hurt.
I totally agree, they aren’t having a carriage ride as far as I know either. I’ve not found the article on the DM’s site, but it seems like a pot stirring click bait piece to me. 😕
One of the posters here (and I am sorry I forgot who) called her "Woko Ono"
I love the clever comments!
Thank you for posting the article. The most striking fact that jumps at you when reading is that both Cameron and May can be not very successful politicians but they have something to say. They fought serious election battles, had to negotiate with really tough people, had to make alliances and navigate through turbulent times. They have something to share and lessons to teach. Q&As with them could be very interesting.
What does harry have to offer in comparison? Preaching about mental heath because he lost his mother nearly a quarter of the century ago? Ever since he started whining publicly this seems to be the only subject he can talk about.
I can’t see how there would be any notable extra costs with security for family or otherwise, it’s taking place in royal residence’s with security already in situ. The royal family are heading to BP which is within walking distance, unless some are walking to the reception and that’s where some extra costs lie.😉
Then there's the NY Times article which headlined UK's Prince Harry Speaks at JP Morgan Event in Miami: Royal Source, but then it goes on to say "A Buckingham Palace spokeswoman had no immediate comment" and "A spokesman for JP Morgan declined to comment".
Where is The Proof? I'm not saying it didn't happen but why is there no official statement, no blurry cell phone pics. Nothing except for "sources".
https://www.forbes.com/sites/guymartin/2020/02/07/the-dinner-speeches-heres-how-prince-harrys-new-financial-independence-from-the-crown-will-be-won/
In the first few paragraphs, his speech is praised and details are given as if the journalist was there in person.
"Any ordinary mortals wondering whether Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could actually become, in their own words, financially independent had to look no further than Miami Beach’s 1 Hotel on Thursday, where, before a reported audience of some 400-plus attendees and guests of JP Morgan’s Alternative Investment Summit, Harry spoke volubly and well, after being introduced by his wife, who had been introduced by CBS presenter and official friend-of-the-couple Gayle King. For now it seems that this is what it’s going to look like, this striving to become independent, a large and respected entity hosting things, and down front, the oratory for a cause. It makes sense: He’s not just “good” at it. He brings an innate, unmatched polish to the podium. [ROFL] He’s been through the toughest finishing school for this kind of work that there is in the world, namely, that of his own intensely public and intensely formal family."
Etc. etc. Then he goes to say that Harry's presence and speech is yet, "hilariously", unconfirmed.
"Despite the early, detailed reports of the engagement, Harry’s presence at the event remains, hilariously, unconfirmed at the moment, with no less a reporter than CBS’ own Gayle King covering mightily for the couple by casting heavy nets of doubt at their appearance to other reporters, and doing that despite, or arguably because of, the anecdotal reporting that she introduced them on stage. Such are the vagaries of friendship and/or paid speaking engagements over reportage. No working journalist, aside from Ms. King — who was clearly not working in the classic sense so much as she was madly networking the billionaires and the non-royal royals — actually saw any of it happen. As Ms. King left the hotel Friday, she was quoted in a very Wavian, gaslighting twist that could have been taken straight from the pages of Scoop as saying to a British reporter, “Why do you think they were here?”
No journalist actually saw them there. I'm not saying they weren't there, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were not. The publicity suggests there was definitely some cash changing hands between the HAMS and JP Morgan.
There seems to be a theme going on here: both Meghan and Harry grew up without their mothers in their teenage years. Doria was not in Meghan's life during that time, either because she was incarcerated or because she was in a cult, as some have speculated in earlier posts. Harry was also without a mother's influence from the age of 12. Both Meghan and Harry were raised by indulgent and weak single fathers. It reminds me of Madonna and Prince, who were also motherless children, Madonna because her mother died of cancer, Prince because his mother threw him out of the house at age 12. Often these motherless children become very famous later in life, because they seek the adulation of fans as a replacement for the love they did not receive as a child. Could something similar be the case with Meghan and/or Harry?
In my former life, before I moved onto health care, I worked for an international consulting firm. My particular office arranged for Henry Kissinger to come to an office meeting and he spoke extemporaneously for 10 minutes or so before it began. You've never seen so many high-powered MBA types, sure they were ALL the second coming of Christ, manage their hard-ons while standing in a large circle around Hank, who at this point in his career was simply whoring himself out to the highest bidder. I assure you Kissinger didn't show up out of the goodness of his heart.
So the Harkles talking to JPMorgan? Same thing. JPM had a bucket of cash lying around that they tossed over to these celebritrons, rather than give a bonus to the support staff who work their tails off to ensure the bigger fish can succeed, simply for bragging rights. "We got the first gig!" "I was standing right next to him!"
And this will be their life, unless the Harkles Goop-out and sell pretentious crap at exorbitant cost, with plenty of psychobabble word salad describing each offering.
They have officially become the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, 2.0.
A Nutty commentor a few threads ago made the very astute and correct comment you can't just off a baby. You have to produce a body for paperwork. So the Harkles can't simply retire the dolls and hand the rental child back to the person who's actually raising it.
Actually, I do believe Archie is the result of both MM and Harry's DNA. The whole Markus Anderson story is too ludicrous for words, IMO.
I feel terrible for this child, but I don't think anything physically bad is going to happen to him.
I disagree. Henry Kissenger is absolutely not the same thing as the Harkles. Kissenger, whatever you think of him, was a major world figure - one of the top 5 most powerful people on earth at one stage - and a Nobel prize winner. Harry Windsor is a man-child ex-royal. No comparison.
"JPM had a bucket of cash lying around that they tossed over to these celebritrons, rather than give a bonus to the support staff who work their tails off to ensure the bigger fish can succeed, simply for bragging rights. "We got the first gig!" "I was standing right next to him!"
But not even Bill Clinton or Obama get a million. They get half that at most. And that would be for a proper keynote speech, not some muddled 'after dinner' talk where he was introduced by his wife saying how much she loved him. And if they wanted bragging rights, why no photos? Why no mention on any of their social media? Why no actual evidence that the speech even happened (though I believe it did)? Surely if you were going to shell out a million for 'bragging rights' you'd want to well, brag?
"They have officially become the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, 2.0."
I agree with that. Except that David was once an actual King, not the spare to the spare to the spare. And he and his wife had impeccable style, which certainly cannot be said for the Harkles!
Security for The Wedding, MM has a few crazed fans, who target (twitter in the main, plus pro blogs) the Cambridge children every single day, can anyone say with certainty that these persons are not in the UK. Another possible Tate type incident in the making. Also as @Nutty does not want political comment, you must have a fair idea of what goes on in London on a regular basis. Another martyr for the cause?? and what better occasion. That is why the there is the need.
I agree the Queen is playing the long game as well. Very shrewd lady. However, very unfortunately, time is not on her side. MM and PH turned off half the world with their woke bs racist climate change virtue signaling greed etc and I don't see them bouncing back from this. My hope is that PC and PW will take notice. I understand because of the "racist" MM they have to overcompensate concerning racism, but everyone is really sick of this as evidenced. This is going to be tricky. My hope is that they will just continue their good works (many) behind the scenes and with their various charities and let that speak for itself. I despise MM and PH for putting the entire island on the defensive concerning racism. In my mind, they will always be remembered as the two people who very purposely tried to destroy the Monarch and Harry tried to destroy his own family as well.
If he was ever in a `good’ place, he hadn’t the wit to avoid walking straight back into a bad one, thinking he could get one over on his family. Wrong! She’s gaslighted him so badly he doesn’t know which way is up any more. I almost, but not quite, feel sorry for the poor sod.
I imagine him being kept in some sort of barely-conscious state, by means of suggestion and psychoactive substances, in which he’s oblivious of what’s going on.
Occasionally, she allows him to surface - but only to a carefully-staged scenario with a real child who she says is Archie (`You see, Honey, how much he’s changed in the last 2 weeks?) and with hired paps clamouring at the door.
I expect quite a few of us remember `The Ipcress File’ – better not go too far down that rabbit hole as it gets rather sinister https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_IPCRESS_File
As you can see, I'm not yet convinced that Archie exists as the product of the HAMS.
We know she only thinks short-term. Would it have occurred to her that there would come a time when she would have to produce a child? Just continue the charade until she can take the money and run?
Or would she simply think, if it came to it, that it would be one of those problems that money could solve? Hire different Archies of ever-increasing size? Get custody of whoever/whatever represented the current Archie, disappear into the sunset, no further questions asked? Refuse access on grounds of `privacy' until `child' is of full age, then assert that he's changed his name and run away, left no forwarding address and/or joined the circus?
This is their first step into the heavenly kingdom of financial Independence, they will surely want to brag about it, after all.
Remember they bragged about the disney donation by casual mentioning it in some post about elephant charity. They also babe dropped Ellen the same way. They won't be able to resist saying that are now "collaborating" with JP Morgan!
I still feel there is something crucial we don't know.
In spite of the arrogance overflow in their original set of demands, I could smell fear behind it, because, to be honest, and not proud of it - that's exactly how I react when frightened - I pretend to have the upper hand and am more verbally aggressive than usual. I'd say they fled everything before making a proper agreement with the RF because they felt they had to. The fact that they fled straight into a Russian billionaire's lair is not a coincidence. They're searching for allies at the moment, and there's still a whiff of fear left in their footprints. Was the JP Morgan event
just flexing?
I pretty much think the DM (I never saw the article on their site) is trying to spin a story from nothing. 🤔Much was made of Eugenie’s wedding and security costs, but that was very public with a carriage ride etc., so it was expected. 🤗
People asked him if it was Harry & Meghan and he replied with "Bingo!"
I think the more public gigs they do, the more difficult it will be to control their narrative. I was also thinking the other day how much of what comes out of Camp Sussex sounds like a cult. Harry Markle has an excellent post about this. It sounds like brainwashing. "Your family is toxic, you have to get away, cut them off, etc." Notice how they were all for having a "progressive new role" in the institution, but they didn't get exactly what they wanted. Did the family become toxic overnight? No. MM would probably have been fine with staying in the RF if she could also merch on the side, but they said no because of course she couldn't do that. Shortly after, the family was toxic and omg she can finally breathe in Canada!
After this they were quick to float stories that MM wasn't "that close" to Doria. Why float that story now? I think it's because they need to create distance between MM & Doria, for some reason.
It could also be a way to legitimize as another poster stated "pay for play". Funneling money to the Harkles for some future favors. Whatever the reason it's shady, though they think they are fooling everyone. Nope. We know something is wrong here.
I agree completely with everything you said. There is NO comparison between Kissinger and the Harkles.
What I meant to compare was that they were/are both selling themselves to the highest bidder. Kissinger had a real impact on the world before he hit reached that point, whereas the Harkles...not so much. But the Harkles are selling themselves to whomever will pay.
As for a million, $500k, I have no idea. Any monetary amounts I suggest I'm getting from posts here. I haven't researched anything about their Florida event for myself.
With the bragging, yes, I can see where I'd want to post their photos on social media and the company's web page. But there is a LOT of bragging that goes on in the conference room among the self-described elite. Whether or not they could or would publicly brag about having the Harkles around, within their group it would reinforce the rare air in which they live. (Do we see a lot of photos from inside Davos with the World Economic Forum? I don't know, I've never looked for them.)
The arrogance of many of these high-level execs can be breath-taking (and delusional).
I had 14 years of being a fly on the wall in these meetings. I was a nobody to these executives, simply the low-level hired help, but I was in the meetings, taking notes, distributing papers, setting the agenda, whatever scut work they needed done, I did it. I went to a not-very-impressive college, whereas they all went through elite, exclusive, and expensive undergraduate and graduate programs. It was a real education, sitting in on these meetings but being so unimportant that I was only noticed when they needed something.
It's easy to get sucked into the atmosphere. I remember one Friday, at the end of a week-long meeting, I complained to myself about the Ritz-Carlton lunch provided: "Good grief, lobster salad AGAIN?" From someone who'd otherwise make a ham and cheese sandwich and call it good.
And my corporate experience was with a "normal" level of elitism. I can't even imagine the exclusivity the Royals take for granted or that MM aspires to.
True, he could have stated it in the original tweet but he obviously wanted people to play the 'guessing' game.
I've seen many people do this sort of thing over the years but it doesn't necessarily make them narcs, surely?
"Theresa May recently declared a payment of £75,000 from JP Morgan Chase, the parent company, for a speech."
"The event on Thursday in Miami’s South Beach was about 3,000 miles from where Harry and Meghan have been staying on Vancouver Island with their nine-month-old son, Archie. A source told the New York Post: “It was all very hush-hush, with a lot of security.”<<<
This development depresses me no end. Because if major corporations and institutions are going to be willing to throw $500,000 or $1 million at either one of the Harkles just for the dubious privilege of hearing Harry whinge about his dead mum over their ice cream, then this freak show is going to run and run and run. The only way to shut them down is to dry up any sources of income. Then Meg will leave H.'s pale ginger arse and H. might go crawling back to his family to try and make amends.
I know a million dollars, even several million, is basically pocket money to a giant corporation. It's the principle. Theresa May, a former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, with a long career in government & leadership was paid a relative fraction which Harry received to remind the assembly that his Mum died 23 years ago and he's screwed up as a result. *This* really is Harry's only selling point--Dead Di--since he's got nothing else to offer despite 35 years of living in inestimable privilege and opportunity. Why not tell the assembled execs about Sentebale or Invictus and how much work and fundraising it takes behind the scenes to make these charities run? That would be of interest to bankers--but of course, Haz most likely does not grasp anything that level, and just shows up to collect the high fives and maybe kick a ball around.
The point isn't that they have the money to spend on him--it's that that money was wasted on a couple of ignorant tw*ts--more money for 15 minutes of whinging about Diana and taking off before dessert than I will ever see, even in 30+ years of toil as a civil servant.
I would not begrudge Theresa May her $75K. Once one has reached the very pinnacle of one's milieu (leader of government, whether PM or former POTUS) one has few options for earning income outside of publishing memoirs, public speaking and maybe taking an overpaid 'consultancy' sinecure with a big corporation. Mrs. May or Henry Kissinger or a former President could pack more value in 10 minutes than the Harkles ahve managed to do in 2 years as a couple. They know nothing. They have no knoweledge or expertise to share, nor do they have any interest in learning any. They want money and adulation just for being their dim, grasping, negative selves. Any company who'd hire either one of them to speak deserves to be boycotted, frankly, because from whence does their money come, but their investors, their clients & the customers? If you're a JP Morgan customer, you have indirectly financed H's half a million dollar whingefest, and you should be angry.
12 years married to a narc and years of therapy afterward have jaded me i guess. he wants people to play the guessing game because he wants the attention on himself, not who he saw. it makes him the big man. one tweet with names and its over. a criptic tweet and he can be in control and the center of attention until finally revewaled
If you're wondering why a high profile investment bank would bring in the Harkles to give a speech, the reason is two words -- woke capitalism.
What is woke capitalism? Woke capitalism is either the voluntary or coerced virtue signaling by large corporations that they care about things like diversity, helping undeserved communities and so forth. Woke capitalism really gained a foothold in the USA in the last decade or so. A good example of it is Nike and protester Colin Kaepernick.
The way that you know that the JP Morgan event was woke capitalism is this passage from the Daily Mail article:
"The conference is all about building wealth for future generations, and making the world better for future generations, a topic close to Harry’s heart."
"Making the world better for future generations"
Typically, in the past, corporations only cared about their shareholders. But with woke capitalism, that focus has instead turned to "stakeholders." Stakeholders do not own shares in the company, but may, for example, rely on it to provide services (like banking, for example).
Woke capitalism has encouraged stakeholders to 'hold companies accountable.' An example of this kind of thing is, for example, a group of stakeholders (or an activist group) publicly shaming a company for providing loans to other companies who build prisons or migrant detention centers. Part of the goal of woke capitalism is to achieve through public pressure what cannot be achieved through government. If you don't want people held in migrant detention centers and the government isn't accomplishing that goal, you simply try to pressure the money lenders and money takers involved and freeze the money.
This is why woke capitalism is often coercive. It sounds nice -- heal the world, leave the world a better place for future generations -- but it's often just a racket. Basically an extortion-and-protection racket.
As many large corporations don't want to be publicly hassled, they pro-actively start to address these social justice kind of issues in other ways. One way to do so is to have something like an alternative investment summit. Then the company throws money at causes (and speakers) which show that the company 'cares' about social justice causes.
A good example of this kind of thing is the National Football League (American football) partnering with Jay Z, the rapper. After their issues with former player Kaepernick (mentioned above), the league needed a face-saving solution. Answer - hire a prominent black man to partner with who will give you credibility and shield you from cries of racism.
Every extortion-and-protection racket needs a money source and a protector. In the instance of woke capitalism, mostly persons of color (poc) are the protectors. They are the shields; they are the laundering agents to make the corporation look progressive and just. They are the front persons to pitch the public on how noble and good the company is now.
Well-positioned POC's can thus make a nice grift off of woke capitalism. Jay Z is getting paid good money to help the NFL. Colin Kaepernick is getting paid good money by Nike. And so forth.
The type of individuals who would be able to grift off woke capitalism would be Oprah and her buddy Gayle King. My guess is it is they who got the Harkles this gig. And Meg fits perfectly, as she is a POC. And Harry is married to Meg, and so forth.
Great grift if you can get it.
Woke capitalism is not going to die off soon. Thus, there will be chances for the Harkles to make money off this kind of thing. You don't get famous from these outings (unless you leak the information to the press), but you can get rich.
>>A Nutty commentor a few threads ago made the very astute and correct comment you can't just off a baby. You have to produce a body for paperwork. So the Harkles can't simply retire the dolls and hand the rental child back to the person who's actually raising it.<<
That was me, friend.
The Royals enjoy extreme privacy when they want it, and so it was possible to fake a pregnancy, float some guff about a homeopathic home birth, be coy about her 'doctors/midwife/birth plan', arrange for PR about a midnight hospital visit to 'give birth' and present the world with an insufficient-looking form downloaded from the Internet as 'proof we had a baby', and then proceed to release various tweaked or entirely concocted images on Instagram, and a couple of gatherings with royal personages, and a short video clip of a baby 'meeting Desmond Tutu'. Insulated with security teams and entourages of staff, including gatekeepers, plus literal gatekeepers wherever they stay, it has been possible to get this far. But she's kind of backed herself into a corner by producing a baby as an accessory, because babies grow . . and learn to walk and then run and talk and then they go to school and are seen in society by more than their nanny and Ellen deGeneres and Hillary Clinton. (that last bit is me being facetious)
Now that Rachel has made her escape from the confines of the Royal Family, cute photo spreads of Archie should be forthcoming. She could get a ton of money from magazine articles and photo albums of "Archie". Harry might not be keen on such projects, but I don't believe he's got any power whatsoever to stop Rachel from doing precisely as she pleases. Harry sits in the corner in a catatonic stupor until she activates him and then he hits his marks and says his lines like a good boy.
Staging a 'kidnapping for ransom' of Archie would be a way to garner her the kind of breathless worldwide attention that she's been lacking so far in her 'retirement' from the RF. If she tries that stunt, whether to recoup a 'living baby' or whether she tries to inform the world via Instagram that regretfully, Archie has come to some (fatal) harm, then I sincerely hope that police from the MET, the Royal Mounted Police, MI6 and Interpol, and the FBI, should Rachel stage a 'snatching' or 'misadventure' for Archie in the United States, converge on her and strip her to the bone in all her lies.
I think she's crazy enough to try it . . after all, she thinks she succeeded in convincing everyone she was 'pregnant' for the longest & most bizarre gestation in human history. She probably thinks that nobody is any the wiser when she chooses to gambol outside with dolls. Because Rachel is wicked, whip, super-smart and all the rest of us mere mortals are blind, stupid or both.
As for their appearance at the JPMorgan seminar, BP originally said no comment, then released another statement confirming that they were there. Does that mean BP had to find out if it was true?
I really hope Beatrice doesnt invite them. If they're seen at the wedding, that's all that would be reported and the wedding would be overshadowed. Though I dont think Fergie would allow that to happen.
Can you imagine if they did go to the Oscars. The walk down the red carpet, being interviewed and maybe being asked to present an award. The smile would never leave Meghans face. If they did present an award, would they be booed the way Kim Kardashian and Kendall Jenner were? Harry would be mortified and Meghan would just smile and carry on.
She would try this, especially in a couple years' time, I could totally see it. At the moment it seems incredibly difficult to pin down where the Harkles were just this past week, so any such 'plot' could unfold and we plebes out here would be the last to know it was fake.
The new People Magazine is out, features Haz and Mess holding hands and looking woodsy . . .it's a photo from their 2018 tour of New Zealand, which is off to the side in small print, but the obvious intent is for casual readers who glance at it to assume that the lovey-dovey love birds are having a romantic stroll on Vancouver Island, having once again left their (plastic) son at home.
In the top corner above Mess's maniacally smiling mug in a year and a half old photo, there's a tiny picture and blurb about Kobe Bryant's widow trying to cope with the loss of her husband and child. We can see where People's priorities are at. It makes me physically ill, it does.
Morgan most likely spent a few million dollars on the Miami do. The cost would be a rounding error to a bank worth trillions, as Morgan is. If they get a few people to invest a few million, it's all gravy for Morgan, because they can deduct the entire cost of the event from their taxes. The Harkles most likely put any payment they received into their foundation, so they avoided taxes as well. I assume after they pay their pr hacks & flacks, they can pocket the rest. My guess is that this appearance was set up many months ago. It ties into the 'survive & thrive' SA interview. Perhaps Harry's personal pity party speech was tied to investments that are related to mental health in some way. Could be pharmaceutical companies, medical facilities, research etc.
This particular group of Morgan guests may have been susceptible to the allure of even slightly shopworn royalty like the Harkles. American financial companies have long liked to keep inhouse European royals or aristocrats as door openers to very rich people in their respective countries. It used to be a matter of discreet introductions. I don't know if any other titled
Europeans have gone the celebrity speech route or not. Financial institutions like to throw big parties for themselves. They used to keep the guest list confined to investors with a track record or other financial professionals. Parties like this put the once vaunted & exclusive Morgan brand on a level of some retail Merrill Lynch office back in the 70s & 80s.
I just hope Dimon's arrogance isn't driving Morgan & a big piece of American banking into the ditch.
The Harkles may or may not be able to make $$$ this way, but eventually, they'll have to demonstrate their value but putting $$$ in the pockets of the people who pay them in some way. Maybe the mental illness thing will get them offers. Heaven knows, there is enough mental illness in the world. Look at the news from Thailand. People are concerned & willing to open their wallets. However, even the most well meaning have their limits if the speaker isn't up to scratch. An old friend of mine who almost lost one of her daughters to anorexia many years ago was on the organizing committee for a charity which dealt with eating disorders. I went with her to her big dinner at the Waldorf Astoria. The speaker was Paula Abdul at the height of her American Idol fame. She was a terrible speaker, disorganized & incoherent. My sweet & gracious friend was not amused. The speaker's bureau which supplied her got a polite earful.
"Torossian's aggressive PR tactics have won him both praise and criticism. Business Week called him "loud, crass, buzz-obsessed," the "Bad Boy of Buzz," and the self-anointed "brash new face of PR."[22] Atlantic Monthly writer Jeffrey Goldberg called him "the most disreputable flack in New York", particularly criticizing his representation of what Goldberg called the "lunatic fringe" of right-wing Israeli politics.[23] Gawker's Hamilton Nolan wrote that Torossian "embodies the public's worst ideas about what a PR person is: loud, brash, more flash than substance, dirty, manipulative, amoral, and, in the end, not particularly bright."[24] The editor of the Jerusalem Post wrote that Torossian and his colleagues were "nuts."[25]
The other, Simon Huck, said that he was "inundated with offers" for Meghan although he isn't representing her????? From the DM:
"Speaking to The Morning Toast Simon, 36, from Canada, owner of the public relations firm Command Entertainment Group, claims his agency was 'flooded' with 'huge' offers of work for the former actress in the wake of Megxit.
Simon, who is a close friend of Kim Kardashian (Me: who is also involved with the Millions of Milkshakes guy), is not believed to be representing Meghan, but has been inundated regardless.
'Obviously, our agency was flooded with inquiries for Meghan,' he said, adding they were 'huge equity offers' when quizzed by co-host Claudia Oshry if they were seven figures."
I wouldn't trust either one of them.
You're welcome. Glad to help out! I have been to an event similar to this in the past. It's mostly a networking thing, and good press (protection) for the company.
It is disappointing to see the grifters able to make money off these events. One of the attendees at the JP Morgan summit was Alex Rodriquez, another POC. Rodriquez left professional baseball in disgrace after admitting to using steroids. But here he is again, all cleaned up and 'laundered' of his past sins, working the woke capitalism grift circuit. It is a circuit. Here is another conference in 2019 Rodriquez attended where he gave the keynote address:
https://www.eisneramper.com/alex-rodriguez-keynote-eisneramper-news-0519/
To be honest, it's not a huge deal that the Harkles keynoted the conference. If it wasn't them it would have been Rodriquez, Gayle King, Oprah or someone else. These entities are very replaceable. Here is another, similar summit. The celebrity hired for this job was Will Smith:
https://dart.ky/news/dart-news/five-years-on-the-cayman-alternative-investment-summit-looks-to-the-future
But, to be fair, the JP Morgan conference has some very heavy hitters at it. Big money. So you can network there and further your grift.
As people have already said here, the amount of money paid to these 'shields' or protectors are rounding errors for these companies. Nothing. So it's an easy choice to make for all involved to participate in the racket.
The royal reporters will be on the task. Notice they tracked down the private jet activity. Meg wants to hide all this, but it won't stay hidden. People will find out, and out the Harkles.
Oprah and Gayle King are grifter masters. Many here know of the issues Gayle is having as regards her bringing up Kobe Bryant's rape accusations in a recent interview. How did she handle it? By blaming her network (CBS), and having Oprah go crying on TV that Gayle is receiving death threats.
Turning your own poor choices into a victim situation instead? Anyone else we know who does that kind of thing? Oprah, Gayle and Meg were made for each others. Scammers all.
Sure . . in incredulity that a venerable *banking institution* would hire the likes of Harry, who most likely can't even make change, since he's never had to carry money before. Still doesn't . . still has the POs doing all his errands for him. Wonder what the 'gak' is like on Vancouver Island?
Googling J.P. Morgan does not translate to investing with them or increasing their wealth. If this is how they choose to waste several million dollars (private jets and luxury accommodation probably cost 3x what they paid Harry to 'speak' . . I'd never give J.P. Morgan a single cent of my money, or after today, not a skerrick of my time, either. Because the clients are the ones financing this waste, not to mention all the other exorbitant salaries and perks for the bigwigs. It really reflects poorly on the judgement of the booking committee. There weren't any other public figures available who could have given a more relevant speech at a banking/investment event than . . .Harry? That's like inviting a trained dog to give a presentation on quantum physics.
I think you are spot on about the woke capitalism. How many mortgages for people who fell on difficult times could have these 500K or 1000 000 paid to Harry for his public soul searching cover? Bankers don't even see their particular brand of hypocrisy, do they?
We all tend to see a speck in the eye of the others but honestly. This would be an equivalent of me spending several thousand pounds to invite very well off neighbors to my house for luxury dinner, bring several wealthy cousins from afar, pay all their expenses, have a good time and then brag online how much good I have done for the benefit of all in my street, including future generations.
I still don't buy this for the simple reason that while Harry remained at loggerheads with his soon-to-be-ex-family in the UK, we had all those sightings of Meghan. Yet once Harry got off that plane in Canada it all stopped. Archie went back in his box. No more shots of Meghan communing with nature or bestowing her presence here there and everywhere. I don't know how Harry does it, but he's still managing to have a semblance of control. In a very limited area. Probably because he's still needed financially, as the conduit to his father.
Oh how I would love Prince Charles to cut them off COMPLETELY. NOW. Not long ago I would have thought that unwise, as H&M would be forced to take unsavoury routes to the riches they need. Now I think the royal family has little to lose. H&M will humiliate them anyway. Maybe the quicker they're revealed as the jackals they are the better for everybody.
Yes, Oprah, Gayle and Meg are cut from the same cloth. You can't believe a word they say.
Anyone?
"This would be an equivalent of me spending several thousand pounds to invite very well off neighbors to my house for luxury dinner, bring several wealthy cousins from afar, pay all their expenses, have a good time and then brag online how much good I have done for the benefit of all in my street, including future generations. "
You got it. That's woke capitalism 101 there. You encapsulated it perfectly. Everyone gets to pretend they are saving the world, when all they did was get paid, network and pretend to care about the little people.
What @Neutral Observer said above is true, however -- if woke capitalism gets out of hand (you put agendas before actual business success and sound investing) then you can crash an economy or economy. So there is danger. But for the most part, this stuff is fluff and noise with little actual heft behind it. So that the company can go on with business as usual and not be harassed by the wokesters.
I agree with you, @JocelynsBellinis, about the two PR people cited in the article. Just trying to get the Harkles to hire them by making outrageous claims about how much the Harkles can make.
And yeah, isn't it odd that the "afraid for her life" Gayle seemed pretty happy and safe there at the conference. That's probably why she was not happy to be interviewed. Like the Harkles, her scam was called out indirectly.
Oprah and Gayle are the worst. They are totally ruthless. At least as ruthless as Meg, and maybe even more so. The people calling out Gayle had a point (even if poorly stated). She knows it, Oprah knows it, and hence the "poor Gayle is getting death threats" turnaround we saw.
Grifter city.
I hate to say this, but Harry is a bit of a loser. And Meg has accelerated that descent. This is who he is now. Hopefully he can pull out of it at some point.
As far as not posing for photos, not sure. We do know that Meg is nutso about photos. SHE wants to profit off the photos, not anyone else. So maybe she gave the orders and said 'no photos.'
I know that President Obama has done some of these speaking gigs and there have been ground rules of no videos, etc. Perhaps this was the same as regards photos here.
So what though? They're not Instagram influencers living off clicks, but a private investment bank catering to people with serious money to invest. If I were among that elite group, if anything seeing that they waste money on an exceptionally thick ex-royal would make me think twice about letting them anywhere near my cash.
"I don't know how Harry does it, but he's still managing to have a semblance of control. In a very limited area. Probably because he's still needed financially, as the conduit to his father."
I agree. I think it's obvious that if it weren't for Harry, Meghan would be out there pap walking, Archie in tow, every other day. We heard and saw nothing from them during the 7 weeks they were on 'family time', then during the maybe 10 days when Meghan was sans Harry in Canada, we saw her getting 'papped' several times, but nada since then. It can't be a coincidence.
I think this is the one area where Meghan feels she has to concede to Harry because he really does feel strongly about media intrusion, particularly where his son is concerned. She has to keep up the act when he's around, as the whole 'hounded by the media' thing is so central to their public persona. I know you could say that if Harry really wanted to avoid the press why did he marry a woman who needs publicity like she needs oxygen. To which my answer would be, quite simply, that Harry has never been known for his brain power.
"Her Royal Highness Princess Beatrice and (full name and title of her groom) are happy to inform you about their upcoming wedding on (date). Please forward your congratulatory letters to (address). HRH Beatrice and her fiancee kindly request no gifts or flowers from the well-wishers, instead please make a donation to their charity of choice (address) to celebrate the happy occasion of their nuptials".
Engagement photo with autograph attached plus a hand-written message "Dear Harry and Meghan, hope you are doing well and Archie is talking fluently. Looking forward to hearing about your philanthropic projects. We will keep you in our thoughts and prayers. Love".
That should work as a polite indication they are not wanted.
For the life of me I cannot see the appeal of having H&M speak at this event. It sounds like seeing a car crash and not being able to look away. What JP Morgan Chase was attempting to do besides provide entertainment is beyond me. Maybe they think they can manage H's trusts.
H Has other things to talk about like Invictus or Sentebale which would put him in a better light and garner respect.
Secondly regarding "woke capitalism", Nike made a bet that they would sell a lot of sneakers ( and make a lot of money) with a Colin K brand and they did. However as far as I know Nike is still using sweat shops in the Far East.
There really is no such thing as "woke capitalism", it is PR and branding to appeal to specific demographics.
She does not love donating money, she loves money. There, fixed it for you.
Anything sent to this couple will be turned around as one or both of the Harkles will insist on coming and being seen in photographs in London. The potential misfire of publicity could come down on the wrong family - the royal family if this happens. There is already the video of Charles taking the couple to task at a reception for "Senior royals only - you go over there." It is truly cringe worthy for Charles' behavior and the Harkles being put on the spot. Does the RF really want another one of these videos out there?
"A cousin who was there says it was overly emotional, rather immature and the audience embarrassed for them. It rambled like listening to the drunk at the end of the bar was how he put it. This is not an emo crowd as it is a business crowd. Emo and business are not familiar bedfellows."
Thank you, you are very kind. I think your idea with "wedding uninvitations" is brilliant.
I do think Harry is absolutely intent on maintaining privacy as much as possible, so I think it's very possible he insisted on their presence being very private, and that Me-again leaked it after the fact.
The entire gig will likely be referenced at a future date on their IG, and be made to sound as if they were the Keynotes, or gave some deep meaningful contribution to whatever specific cause the event was pushing.
Anything sent to this couple will be turned around as one or both of the Harkles will insist on coming and being seen in photographs in London. The potential misfire of publicity could come down on the wrong family - the royal family if this happens.
Does anyone remember the photos of Samantha sat outside the gates (was it KP?)? I just had a mental image of H&M sulking outside the chapel because they weren't allowed in. It would be delicious karma, but unfortunately it'd cause a massive headache for the RF considering how H&M could use such a situation to their advantage very easily.
I think the RF are going to get a potential misfire of publicity whichever way they turn. There's the potential for drama if they do attend with an invitation, and if they don't invite them I can see them being accused of pettiness/revenge for Harry wanting to leave/whatever else people can think of.
The most logical scenario I can see that would place the onus on H&M's behaviour rather than the RF is if they were officially invited. If they declined - not the RF's fault (although I'm sure there'd be some snarky excuse for declining). If they turn up and cause drama - again harder to blame the RF if it's H&M kicking off and nobody else (although I bet it'll be tried).
It's all such a big mess and I'm so glad I'm just an observer and not actually having to live through it personally as one of the family.
You absolutely nailed it. In the USA, Nike 'cares' about Colin Kaepernick and racial injustice. So they say. But then they are running sweatshops or sweatshops lite in China. Utter hypocrites. Woke capitalism is a sham, just PR gimmicks, as you point out. It's a scam. And grifters now how to work a scam.
@Raspberry Ruffle
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed the comment. Yes, we live in a jaded and cynical world, unfortunately. Particularly when seen through the eyes of grifters like those talked about in this comment section. Not everyone is so heartless, but there are plenty who are exactly that.
@Ian's Girl
Agreed, I would bet good money that Oprah or Gayle set up the Harkles' appearance at the event.
Grifters attract grifters. And grifters need each other to continue to work their mutual con games. Oprah/Gayle/Meg are a perfect fit.
I am with you all the way. If you can copyright your idea of polite "uninvitation" that works to inform but not to invite, and turn it into a business go ahead.
There may be something in it!
It seems he really likes talking, about himself and his deceased mom. Being a professional speaker will tick off all his boxes, 1. make himself financial independent 2. support his “privacy issues”, 3. allow him to continue living in a world in his head where is is on par with other truly famous speakers.
Poor guy, little does he know what he has been reduced to. His WIFE needs to introduce HIM?????????? He is a pitiful laughingstock.
Lemon tea here
The word " woke capitalism " reminds me of other banking jargon. Equities, derivatives, indices, fixed trading, and whatever.
All these fancy terms to confuse the investor / public into thinking that , if you do not know how to make more money from your little pile of money , then leave it to us experts, we experts understand these fancy mathematical words, no need for you to understand, just give us your money !!
When you do give us your money, we will keep it as long as possible, punish you if you cancel, but as long as you stay with us , we will reward you with details of how charitable we are, how we save the earth, how we alleviate poverty, how we spend on education, and so on. In the event that you pass on, well , rest assured your money , if not bequeathed, is going to good use.
Furthest from the truth .
Any bank, plenty all over the world, sole interest is interest and fees for profit only.
After years of working in such an environment, I get astounded how the public have no clue as to how banks function. People, please educate yourself. You are there to serve the bank, not the other way around.
As to the Harkles supposedly last assignment, if it ever happened, the bank is only taking care of itself , not the Harkles nor the millionaires who bank with them.
Lemon tea
You got it. The bank is only taking care of itself in the end.
I look at woke capitalism as like insurance for the corporations. To keep the rabble content and prevent revolt. It's a scam, but an easy one for both sides. The corporations pay chump change of what they make for these causes, and the grifters get the shakedown money and supposed glory of making the companies 'do the right thing.'
In the Daily Mail article, one of the photos is of rapper Meek Mill and American businessman Robert Kraft (Gillette). Kraft got himself in some trouble maybe two years ago with getting some extras at a massage parlor. Big image hit. Well, what a better way to clean up the image than to partner with a rapper on prison reform? Kraft cares, he's a good guy (we're supposed to think). Yada yada.
It is all rather tacky isn't it?
If Meghan and Harry are set on doing anything to make lots of money, the Yorks are going to want to be connected to them (Edo needs the very wealthy for his business, Andrew needs them to keep giving him money and helping him hide it, Sarah always needs money from anyone, and Beatrice loves all of them and is letting herself be used by all of them).
This soap opera gets more tacky by the day and the Queen just not see it.
Was the very expensive speaking engagement because JP Morgan wants to 'manage' Harry's trust fund and the Sussexes foundation (banking on it getting a lot of donations)? Maybe they have done the research and found that many of the world's billionaires are actually stupid celebrities and such a big market would be foolish to ignore?
I know a calligrapher in BC, I mean Florida, I mean California who is looking for work.
Very good!
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2020/02/blind-item-4_8.html
Team Harkle has to realize that not only is this stuff non-believable, it looks desperate. The PR adventures of the Harkles continue to be embarrassing and amateurish.
This makes it even clearer to me that the JP Morgan event was leaked by Team Harkle. They know they are fading away post-Megxit. Speaking at a private event is not the stuff of 'breaking the internet.'
On the other hand, not having them at the Oscars will be a relief.
"I read a tweet from someone who was there saying that it was like listening to a drunk at the end of the bar complaining. It was immature and people were embarrassed for them. No one could understand what they were doing at an investment conference."
That sounds about right. Being a professional victim has a short shelf-life, particularly given Harry's background. The truth is, people are not going to listen very long to wealthy or aristocratic "victims." It just doesn't wash.
Most grifters of the philanthropic variety (like the Harkles want to be) realize that you need external victims to parade around, with you as their champion and voice (Meg and the women at the women's shelter, for instance). You are not actually the victim yourself.
It's like watching a fawn learn to walk. Clueless Harkles.
Markle must have begged King for a job, and she got them the gig at JP Morgan.
No way is Harry going to make a living as a sought-after public speaker. He's got so many tics that it is distracting and kind of gross to watch him. Also, he stumbles over his words a lot. There's no charisma there. Just whining about all his bad breaks in life.
But if people have money to throw away on listening to him then they are just as ignorant as he is!
I feel that you are giving Harry far too much credit To believe that he is successful in controlling her Pap exposure either alone or with Archie. Consider how he acts when he is with her in public… I’ve never seen a more pussy whipped man than this. Sometimes he barely seems conscious and she hast to steer him by the arm. This is the guy that’s giving her orders about not exposing their child, and she say “OK honey… I’ll stop.” This does not compute. More likely from my perspective is that she read how negative the price was on each of her haunts for publicity. The commentary about the dolly in the woods was absolutely brutal. Meg would read all the stuff and realize she mention spanwasn’t getting the optics she wanted. The other possibility is that the RPO’s funded by Charles refuse to accompany her on these little tableaux considering how poorly they were received, and they might be in touch with the palace over the ridiculous demands placed on their time. If someone shutting down her public showboating with the doll, I would not look to Harry. Harry is completely out of it. Harry does what mommy tells him to do. There might be some other threat in place making her lie low. Or it may
be something as simple as Meg’s own short attention span. Since Terry joined her, if they are in fact living together at the oligarchs house in Vancouver. Her focus has been on securing an invite to the Oscars and a dress and speaking engagements. She will pick up Archie again when he is useful, so I look for some pap walks and pictures?In the lead up to Bea’s wedding. I’m sure Meg will not fail to live up to expectations there.
Maybe because Harry is the true Royal and thus the draw. MM is nothing without him. If she was all that and a bag of chips before Harry, she'd have been giving these speeches long before she met him.
I simply can't believe SHE introduced him. Talk about elbowing your way into a place you weren't wanted!
Something is not right. We have big stars here and there are always pics in the news when they are here. They usually are nice enough to pose and get it over with but we all cop a few photos when they're not looking. We just had Russel Crow here.
So again, where are the photos? I was at the theatre this week and another star was just standing there and when I did a double take they just winked at me.
>>The other possibility is that the RPO’s funded by Charles refuse to accompany her on these little tableaux considering how poorly they were received, and they might be in touch with the palace over the ridiculous demands placed on their time.<<
Is Charles paying for anything re: security? I thought the UK taxpayers were paying and to the extent RCMP were involved, Canadian taxpayers were paying the bill.
However, my understanding is that a speech given at dinner is still referred to as a keynote speech. There is no rule that states that a keynote speech must be given before dinner, although people are more likely to be heard if not competing with the dinner service.
I don't know about you, but I'm sick of those sweaty pit stained pics.
I agree.
And that's how she will "ruin" Beatrice's wedding. (I hope to God that Bea and Edo have the most loving and blissful day, surrounded by love and good wishes for their future. She deserves it!)
MM will show Archie again in public on May 29th.
Meghan’s extravagant “baby shower” cost U.S. taxpayers MILLIONS but nobody was supposed to know as they NEVER share any of the details with the taxpayers as it is none of our business....I mean.......”for security reasons”. It just burns my arse to be lied to and/or gaslighted. Between the Baby Archie issue and now this lunacy about no they are no longer royals, yes they are/ they are sort of/ we will revisit these issues come spring (of what year, on what planet, we don’t know), practically begging Hairy to come back, allowing them to continue on with whatever the hell their agendas are without question....I am telling you....it just burns my arse!!!!!!!!!! And now this thing with Andrew and the familia acting on behalf of the Queen when meeting with, was it the Japanese ambassador? Folks, I can’t, I JUST CAN’t! sorry for the rant. going back to following only!🤮
In HIkari's post, I think Terry is Harry.
The RPOs complain about being sent for takeaways and coffees.
No one but no one has been seen or complained about buying nappies. An eight month old baby needs 6-8 a day. I don't care how organized you are, every once in a while you have to make the emergency nappy run.
Cloth nappies? Possibly. But she isn't bragging about that and Serena is the spokesperson for Pampers. Heck, she brought some to the baby shower.
But has anyone seen a nanny out and about or just RPOs and housekeepers????
under the circumstances; it is clear why you will not be able to attend our wedding. Although not there physically, we know you will will be with us in spirit! “. 😝
And since an invitation WAS sent....a handsome wedding gift
Is completely appropriate!
https://mobile.twitter.com/sandy49855/status/1226194329087045633
You may not agree with Mischi’s comments but she was always a huge resource for obscure tidbits on the H&M saga floating online. If she didn’t mention it in her CDAN comment, many would not have known about that thread. I certainly wouldn’t have. How true that account is up for debate. Regardless, this tweet is food for some interesting and very fun speculating.
On that same Twitter feed, there Is a picture of Markus Anderson with husband around Jennifer Anniston.
https://mobile.twitter.com/SpringBrad1/status/1224991392520425472/photo/2
It's from 2000 though.
But it may explain why there were no angry denials over Megs "Anniston and Julie are fighting over working with Markle"
Man, I hate even typing that absurdity. She really has zero
Shame.
@Mimi ...what a pretty apology
Because don't we all deserve to cram the most woke, organic, environmentally responsible snack food that we can get into our maws whilst we watch the most broke, narcissistic, fiscally and personally irresponsible duo we've ever seen in our lives simultaneously try to destroy themselves AND a venerable thousand-plus year old institution?
I mean, we need something to sustain us through the addressing the envelopes of your Un-invitations. Something that will help us not just survive addressing the Un-invitations, but THRIVE whilst we address the Un-invitations.
😜😜😜😜😜
As for trademarking Sussex Royal popcorn. Excellent idea and why not. Perhaps we can come up with a special kind of drink (it DOESN’T necessarily have to have a high alcoholic content but for me it would be preferable)...and trademark that too....something that would go perfect with the popcorn. We might even package it as a duo.....cute little boxes of little. (or big) bottles of ???????? with packages of ROYAL popcorn that we can break out and eat and drink to get us through these really nerve wracking daily announcements.
This is a train wreck in the making going on three years now and I know it is really getting to me and making me say mean things! 🤗
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10749574/meghan-markle-best-friend-jessica-mulroney-messages-court/
I love everyone's insightful comments. I just saw this DM article https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7982341/Harry-Meghans-risk-seen-tacky-taking-JP-Morgan-gig.html
talking about the tacky JP Morgan gig!