The Daily Mail - you know, one of those tabloids the Sussexes promised never to co-operate with again - has released the "exclusive" news that Meg and Harry are now couchsurfing at the Los Angeles home of Tyler Perry.
Perry, for our non-US Nutties who may not be familiar with him, is a great American success story, Once so poor he had to live in his car, he parlayed a single theater play into a media empire based in Atlanta, Georgia.
Perry's best-known works tend toward the popular side, mostly (very) lowbrow film comedies. But he's put thousands of people to work, the majority of them African-American, and helped many Black people become behind-the-camera professionals.
What does Tyler Perry want with Meg?
Being Duchess of Sussex and all, Meg probably thinks herself too good for one of Perry's C-list productions.
There's also the small matter of her not being able to act, particularly in the highly dramatic style Perry favors.
I would not like to see thespian Meg trying to escape from a fictional religious cult.
This is a woman who fluffed a standard "baby on her lap" scene.
There are multiple reasons for this - wildfires, the large homeless population, the fact that the film industry itself has dispersed. In addition, California income taxes have zoomed upward now that state taxes are no longer deductible from Federal income taxes.
I think the reason Perry loaned his house - which is by all accounts little-used, since he's based in Atlanta - was to garner it publicity for a possible sale.
High-end foreign buyers, particularly Middle Eastern and Asian, might be impressed by a (sort of) Royal tenancy.
Those types of buyers read the Mail Online, which is why the Daily Mail got the "exclusive" scoop about the Sussexes' current location.
(They also read the Mail Online as a kind of catalogue of half-dressed yachting ladies in the right column, but that's a story for another day.)
What do you think?
Perry, for our non-US Nutties who may not be familiar with him, is a great American success story, Once so poor he had to live in his car, he parlayed a single theater play into a media empire based in Atlanta, Georgia.
Perry's best-known works tend toward the popular side, mostly (very) lowbrow film comedies. But he's put thousands of people to work, the majority of them African-American, and helped many Black people become behind-the-camera professionals.
What does Tyler Perry want with Meg?
Casting Meg in a production?
Technically, Perry could give Meg an acting job. He's almost constantly working on television series that need a variety of types. (I see his latest is a horror series about a Black woman in a religious cult.)Being Duchess of Sussex and all, Meg probably thinks herself too good for one of Perry's C-list productions.
There's also the small matter of her not being able to act, particularly in the highly dramatic style Perry favors.
I would not like to see thespian Meg trying to escape from a fictional religious cult.
This is a woman who fluffed a standard "baby on her lap" scene.
Can't sell the house
More likely, this is a real estate play. Big houses in California have been difficult to sell recently, not only because there are too many big houses and not enough big house buyers in the market at the moment, but because California in general is losing population.There are multiple reasons for this - wildfires, the large homeless population, the fact that the film industry itself has dispersed. In addition, California income taxes have zoomed upward now that state taxes are no longer deductible from Federal income taxes.
I think the reason Perry loaned his house - which is by all accounts little-used, since he's based in Atlanta - was to garner it publicity for a possible sale.
High-end foreign buyers, particularly Middle Eastern and Asian, might be impressed by a (sort of) Royal tenancy.
Those types of buyers read the Mail Online, which is why the Daily Mail got the "exclusive" scoop about the Sussexes' current location.
(They also read the Mail Online as a kind of catalogue of half-dressed yachting ladies in the right column, but that's a story for another day.)
What do you think?
Comments
Yes, thanks. I knew there was a way to gift without tax implications and I knew multi-year gifting was sometimes employed in estate planning although I wasn't sure what the current annual limit was.
But someone who does that can't also deduct the gift to avoid income taxes in the year the gift was made. So I still don't see how lending his LA house to H&M benefits Tyler tax-wise. I can see how it might help him sell that monstrosity if he's planning to. And I can see how it might help him PR-wise with certain "woke" sectors of the public. And I can see that Oprah might have "encouraged" him to do it and he may feel beholden to her. And as @abbyh wrote there may be reasons not to be in a landlord situation with rent charged. But I don't see the IRS benefit as I don't see how not charging rent means a tax deduction.
_________
Harry did look awful in the video. He looked high to me. Just a step away from grinding his jaw.
Allowing a person to pay no rent on a non-primary residence= a gift.
This lowers Tyler's overall income because he is not charging rent. Therefore, he pays fewer taxes. Because he is gifting the rent to two people, the Harkles, he can gift them $30,000 each year. This doesn't mean that he isn't trying to sell it, but he might as well take advantage of this while the place is not being lived in as a primary residence.
From the DM: “ Last night neighbour Steve Frankel, who owns a house a stone’s-throw from the lavish 22-acre compound where the Duke and Duchess of Sussex celebrated baby Archie’s first birthday last Wednesday, told The Mail on Sunday the enclave’s peace and quiet has been shattered by the new arrivals.
‘We’ve had helicopters over the house since 5.30am. If this goes on for much longer Harry and Meghan may have some angry neighbours,’ Frankel, an estate agent, said. ‘We’re hoping the paparazzi will give up after a few days.’
Where's Ozmanda? If I were questioning him, I wouldn't believe a word he said. She absolutely needs to speak on this.
He looked evasive to me. He looked as if he absolutely did not want to be there and was under duress. Who blinks that often? Was it Morse code? What was it with the two separate eye rolls? Granted, I haven't paid a lot of attention to him before, so maybe he always has eye rolls when he is giving a speech, some sort of nervous tic.
I understand what you are saying. But I don't think it's correct. From https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc506
"To be deductible, you must make charitable contributions to qualified organizations. Contributions to individuals are never deductible..."
So while non-charitable gifts can reduce estate taxes by reducing the size of the estate, I don't believe they reduce income taxes the year they are made.
From https://www.wegnercpas.com/how-to-take-advantage-of-tax-free-non-charitable-gifts/
"Making a gift or leaving your estate to your heirs does NOT ordinarily affect your federal income tax. You cannot deduct the value of gifts you make to friends and family members."
By your logic, a couple with a loser 30-year old daughter and deadbeat son-in-law could claim allowing the couple to live with them (or in another property they owned) was worth $30K. Thus their $75K income would be reduced to the point of owing hardly any income tax. The deadbeats wouldn't owe tax either. I don't think it works that way. Think the IRS is on to that game.
Those helicopters aren't going to stop. Not with the Harkles trying to suppress the press with their lawsuits.
Lawsuits may happen (could Tyler Perry be Markled?), or they may have to find a new place to squat. It will become more difficult for them to find a place in LA, as most neighbors would complain about 24-hour helicopters flying over their homes. Not to mention the paps waiting at the gates and possible drone footage.
Being a royal, living under the protection of the BRF, has it's advantages, doesn't it, Harry? I guess Megs didn't think this one through, either.
It would be interesting to know how many of the Meg Mansions that have been promoted in the past month--that HAMS were supposedly going to purchase, actually have sold or have these houses [real estate agents and kickbacks] been Markled too?
I swear,my level of trust is so low with these two that I feel like every article is planted (as well as written) by her in order to showcase the frenzy their presence creates.
The Beatles at Shea Stadium were nothin' compared to the Harkles.
Did anyone read somewhere (maybe commented on here?) That the Perry estate comes with security? So if they are saving the Harkles a huge amount every month:
1. They will never leave
2. The level of security for an often empty house has got to be vastly different than what a "high risk" royal couple would require. Have they realized that what they "must have" and what they will get in the real world are very different things?
3. Are the British public still paying for security? Are the Harkles claiming this as an expense and diverting the funds to attorneys and Sunshine Sachs?
4. And are they spending money that could go to repaying Frogmore?
I sure would like to turn a forensic accounting team and the tax people lose on their books. One, or both of them is going to end up in prison for fraud.
Between the hole-in-the-wall gang and Uncle Andy, HMTQ must feel like she has been betrayed by some of her family members. And, she has been, sadly.
I'm not explaining this properly.
A gift is different than a charitable contribution. You can gift to a private person. Tyler would forego the rent and gift the rent to them, so as to not generate income. Less income = lower taxes.
I hope this helps. Now, off to get some dinner. I'll be back later. :)
Kath and Kim? Loved it!
MM? So much in common with Kath:
`Look at Moyee! Look at Moyee! Look at Moyee!'
`That's noyis, that's unyoozhoeall!'
Yikes - that Cinderella coach!!!
- but with the attitude of Kim, although may well end up like Sharon - `I could've been anything if only I'd had the talent',
To say nothing of Kel's questionable sexuality...
Thanks to Nutties for the nice comments about my post - much appreciated.
The Daily Mail, now the Sun .. who next?!
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11586401/harry-meghan-david-victoria-beckham-hollywood-advisor/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-8304039/TALK-TOWN-Lady-Colin-Campbell-takes-aim-Prince-Harry-new-tell-book.html#comments
Just as Harry and Meghan were hoping a new biography – Finding Freedom – would make us love them again when it’s published in August, I can reveal that aristocrat Lady Colin Campbell is ready to rain on their parade with her own tell-all book at the same time.
She tells me: ‘It’s called Meghan And Harry: The Real Story. There are plenty of revelations. I’ve had members of the Markle family to stay, but I’m not saying anything until closer to the book launch.’
Lady C, whose previous controversial works include volumes on Princess Diana, turned to unusual methods of research this time.
The 70-year-old enlisted the help of her two adopted sons, Dimitri and Michael, who appeared on an MTV reality show with Meghan’s nephew – cannabis entrepreneur Tyler Dooley.
https://youtu.be/b6LOQnO6lyo
Rachel at her best, at her height. She is so obviously not cut out for royalty here, and so obviously shallow, but she comes across as confident and loving herself and her life. That's what Megsy needs - to find another show that allows her to work part-time but gives her maximum exposure and attention (now she won't have to work so hard for that attention as she did when she was in Suits).
May 1, 2020
As I predicted, the alliterate former actress was going to have a tough time proving her claims even in a non press friendly country. Why? Because the press did nothing wrong. It is a case she would never win here. Watch as this all goes away with a quiet settlement that she will later triumph as a win and something she did to protect her family. No, it is because she will get her butt kicked in a very public way.
Meghan Markle
Oh, Kel! You sexy hunk of man beast!
Oh, Kim! I don't think you can handle he fact that while your marriage is on the rocks, Kel and I are getting ours off!
But the best is Kath and Kel's coordinated dance routines, with Kel and his, shall we say, unusual dance moves. I loved the blue tasselled dance pants.
Then there's Kel in his tiny, tiny shorts doing power walking. That's one of the best bits of physical comedy ever.
@Swampwoman,
Thanks! It's hard to explain, but once you've gone through it with an attorney, it's easy to understand. I just didn't explain it well.
But ordinary gifts are not tax-deductible. Only charitable gifts are.
Gifts to individuals that fall under a certain limit (currently 15K/year per individual you said and I don't doubt that amount is correct) don't trigger an additional federal gift tax above and beyond federal income tax. It doesn't mean federal income taxes can be reduced by deducting the amount of the gift (as the second link in my last post indicated.) I am 100% sure I'm right about this (as you may be too :-) Gifts to charity can reduce income taxes but not gifts to individuals.
But when you say "less income less tax" maybe what you mean is Tyler doesn't want to earn more money because he's in such a high bracket? So he's not charging rent? If so, that has nothing to do with getting a "tax deduction." It's essentially the same as deciding to not take on another job because the extra income would be a problem. So I'm still confused by the claim he did this to get a deduction. I'm also not sure IF the issue of gift taxes were to arise he could claim his gift was worth only 15K each to H&M. I've seen some accounts saying the fair market rent of his house would be between 20K and 40K per month. So if they have been there since mid-March even at 20K/month, that's almost $40K by today. And they probably aren't leaving today. Plus the value of the private jet.
Hope a lawyer or accountant does weigh in. I wonder too about H&M's tax situation.
Enjoy your dinner!
So ... I started watching the DM Harry clip and the first thing I noticed was the gap between his two front top teeth. Don't recall that at all.
This: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8303991/Harry-says-life-changed-dramatically-video-message-Invictus-Games.html
versus that (2018): https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/18/31-things-didnt-know-prince-harry/
Anyone? comment and let me know an easy explanation? I've been wrong before and can admit it.
Giving $15,000 per year to each child (up to some lifetime maximum) is a gift that has NO tax consequences to the person giving the gift and there are also NO tax consequences to the recipient of the gift. So, this kind of transaction has nothing to do with the IRS. — info from a US lawyer (not me).
@lizzie @Joyce
Ok,I'll try this one more time while I'm eating my dinner.
1. Tyler will do whatever Oprah wants. He has said he owes his career to her, and has been a friend since at least the 90s.
2. Oprah says, "Can you rent out your LA place to The Harkles at a reduced rate? They're broke.
3 Tyler says ,"Yes, but I don't want to generate any income in California, where the taxes are very high, and besides, they could never afford the true rent on this behemoth of a mansion.
4. Tyler and Oprah's accountants tell Tyler to gift the amount of what he would rent it for, up to $30,000 a year, to avoid generating income and having to pay taxes on that income.
5. Tyler is not using the gift as a tax deduction. He is using it as way to not generate income.
I think this is the best that I can do as an explanation.
I really admired the work he did for HIV/AIDS awareness and remember when he took an HIV test on camera. He does not need to be taught by Meghan how to see "LA through the eyes of philanthropy" or whatever she means by that - is she donating large amounts of money to anyone?
Before this mess he would pop up here and there in the press and it was usually fun or for a good cause. I never saw a clip of him snapping at a reporter like he did in SA. I know he did say disparaging remarks in the past and of course the Nazi uniform, so he is not perfect.
But he definitely seems meaner and the daily Harry stories in the press (even though he states he hates them, which I still believe he does) seems to be all MM.
Thanks.
I think the confusion is over what is meant by "tax consequences." I agree a gift below a certain limit (the limit now is 15K apparently) doesn't trigger a "gift tax" for the donor. And the gift is not considered taxable income to the recipient no matter what. BUT I don't think the donor can deduct a gift of 15K to an individual from his/her taxable income to reduce his/her income taxes. It would be great if you could ask your US lawyer about that. I think the answer would settle the question. It would for me anyway.
Haven't had time to go through more than 1 video - it's 1.50 am and my bed calls.
Has he just discovered interdental brushes? Has his dentist chipped away at the plaque? Have the teeth moved? Are we seeing teeth belonging to different people?(I don't mean he's wearing borrowed dentures!) Has he ever lost his front teeth playing rugger and relied on a plate (very common among blokes of my vintage, only discovered at very close quarters!)
More research is needed, as they say.
@KCM1212: “I sure would like to turn a forensic accounting team and the tax people lose on their books. One, or both of them is going to end up in prison for fraud.”
The lack of transparency due to the fact that they are members of the Royal Family is not tenable IMO. At some point one would hope the Harkles’ finances would be gone over with a fine tooth comb. I understand that their “foundation” has been moved to Delaware, which will keep prying eyes away. Let’s hope not.
@Sandie: Three cheers for Lady Colin Campbell. I’ll definitely be in the queue to pre-order her book.
@wizardwench: “When the Queen rapped him across the knuckles, his “money tree” —composed of bankers, his Saudi chums, and a cadre of others he has used over the years to enrich himself beyond what his own private income as a prince provides—shed all its “leaves.” This is why he is defaulting on his loan on the chalet.” Good observation. I just hope that the Queen doesn’t swoop in and clear his debts. He is in desperate need of some tough love. Like being sent to some far corner of India to help build schools or to teach. Fat chance of that happening, but it might be the only way of ever resurrecting his public image to the point where he is no longer shunned.
I am a U.S. citizen and gave my niece a $15,000 gift the past two years, to cover part of her PHD tuition at USC. There is no tax advantage to making such a gift; likewise, there is no penalty (tax) paid. Anything over that amount (as of 2018) is subject to a tax anywhere from 18-40%.
This has nothing do to with taxable income. If The Harkles paid Tyler rent, it would be taxable income. He doesn't want taxable income from that property. So, rather than accepting rent, he gives them a gift of up to $30,000 (that's a night out with a couple of friends for him) to prevent him from gaining income as a rental property. If had accepted rent from them, that would be taxable, and he doesn't want that.
Gifting to your children or to others *as a part of estate planning* is a different thing, although the same amounts apply per person, per year.
There is likely a rider on the insurance that covers damages caused by anyone on the premises at any given time, not limited to renters. HAMS would be considered tenants in California, regardless of paying rent. A tenant is someone who has been given permission to inhabit the property, regardless of whether rent is required.
Renter's insurance is generally acquired by the lessee, not the lessor. I doubt they have considered taking out insurance on their belongings. Which brings up the question, what do they have to insure? I doubt they have pot to piss in.
Thanks. I think you've explained it well. We've both explained that gifting doesn't have to do with taxable income if it's within the required amounts.
My mother was a USC grad. That was so nice of you to gift money to your niece for her tuition.
Gifts for the purpose of education (among other categories) are excluded from gift taxes and the lifetime limit. Fair market value on a rental property is not. The IRS doesn't overlook much and I'm sure they will require a disclosure by Tyler, considering fair market value of the property is likely in excess of $10k per month.
Thanks! Makes sense. I think what you are saying is exactly what I thought (and was trying to say repeatedly.) Giving $15K/yr to your niece didn't trigger an gift tax for you (partly because it was for education) but it also didn't reduce your income tax. Right?
--------
@JocelynsBellinis,
I don't think we are looking at the issue in the same way. I will drop it after this post because I suspect other people are bored by this discussion :) But I will say if Tyler did #4 in the list that's in your next to the last post that may be fraud.
It sounds like he would be deliberately understating the value of the gift (by about 12-fold) to avoid triggering gift tax that he'd have to pay if it was a true gift. (Since the annual limit for H&M would be $30K) IF the true rent on the house was only 30K per year, or $2500 per month, certainly H&M could afford that. I could even afford that. It's more likely 30K per month.
But where this discussion all started was with your mention of free rent to H&M would serve as a gift "offsetting" Tyler's taxes. If he's choosing to not earn money from rent to avoid having to pay taxes on the extra income, fine. That's not an offset. And that's no different from TP choosing to not make a guest appearance somewhere because he doesn't want the extra income. Why would either involve accountants? Much less a claim of making a gift? Still not getting it but I don't think I will. Whatever benefit Tyler is getting clearly isn't a tax offset or a tax deduction. Perhaps an income reduction but not a tax deduction.
-----
@Lurking,
Pretty much agree with everything you said but you said:
"Renter's insurance is generally acquired by the lessee, not the lessor. I doubt they have considered taking out insurance on their belongings. Which brings up the question, what do they have to insure? I doubt they have pot to piss in."
In my state, renters insurance also may cover some kinds of damage to a "landlord's" property done by the tenant. But maybe not in California? Still doubt H&M would care if they did do damage. And Tyler would be a racist if he did ;-)
Thanks for your explanation, which coincides with Rebecca's and mine.
Yes, just what contents would they have to insure? I doubt they have much of anything, besides their clothes, jewelry and Archie's things. Most of it isn't worth insuring, except for the engagement ring. Was Diana's aquamarine ring a loaner?
I don't believe that Harry sold those guns? rifles? because MM wanted him to stop hunting. I think they needed the money.
OT: a kid threw a rock at my car from a school playground during recess, and dented it. The parents' homeowner's insurance paid for the damage.
My husband was ambivalent toward Smeg until he heard this, in his words, he, "now hates the bitch."
the-charlatan-duchess
This will be my last post
Our MMTCD Facebook group, and this account by association, were conned.
The two (and most definitely more) individuals who started this group were frauds.
Why did they do it? What was it for?
Can’t say, we are still scratching the surface.
I will tell you that what we are finding is they scammed good people out of money posing it as a charity.
MANY of us has been victim of these frauds, so I get that current and former members are angry.
To the former members HERE and elsewhere who are doxxing my real name, showing pictures of my children and pointing everyone in my direction- SHAME ON YOU. Karma is real and I she acts swiftly.
To those here who are gloating about our groups demise; I hope you are enjoying yourselves.
Because the reality is by doing so you are saying you are happy that many good people were conned. You are happy they were lied to. You are happy that their money was stolen.
Because of these frauds and the bullies here I can’t stay here or anywhere on social media, I even have to delete my personal accounts.
Any idea why? Because those frauds data mined us. They used us to gain personal and identifying information about each individual to hack into our finances to continue to steal money from us. And God knows what else.
To those that are gloating I hope you know that you are gloating about hundreds of innocent people who have had more than just money stolen from them.
I hope your bullying and gloating of myself and those who have always been innocent makes you feel bad one day.
All because of what? To feed some type of sick narrative that’s opposite to what 99% of the world thinks.
Karma doesn’t forget those who bully, or those whose intentions to bully and gloat are for your own twisted reasons.
Those who hide behind religion aren’t exempt. And if your religious then “Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord” should make you sweat.
Imagine thinking that your narrative is so fucking important that being happy enough to gloat and bully victims is important somehow...
I’m washing my hands clean of all of this.
Please Reblog the fuck out of this post as I’m deleting everything in the next few hours.
I feel like apologizing, but how can I apologize if I’m a victim just like all the others?
I’m just sorry I didn’t know earlier.
Stay safe tumblr friends. Be kind to each other
The support you have shown me here will never be forgotten 💕
ladygreyhound93
Reblog. We are losing a good tumblr.
Harry needs to man up. She is leading him around like he's a little boy, not a husband, who should be mature enough to make his own decisions. what kind of example is he making for Archie?
Can you or anyone else please explain what the MMTCD Facebook group was, exactly? What charity it supposedly promoted? And what exactly happened to Charlatan Duchess (the blogger) and others? I get that their identity was stolen and financial fraud was committed against them, but any further information/clarification would be welcome.
"lizzie... homeowner's insurance covers a lot of stuff you'd never think was covered.. including damage done by guests in the home. Renter's insurance generally covers damage to personal belongings, not property damage."
True. But in my state, if a homeowner rents out or doesn't live in the home and allows others to live there, the insurance coverage is different. The landlord will need a different policy from the usual homeowners policy. And a renter's policy may protect not only the renters' stuff (the usual reason people buy it), but the tenant's personal liability if someone gets hurt in the dwelling. And a renter's policy can sometimes help if the renter causes accidental damage to the dwelling. (Not wear and tear stuff or intentional damage)
Prince Charles is covering Frogmore Cottage. The Harkles aren't paying a cent. They never planned to pay for it, and they will never be held accountable for the costs in Charles' lifetime.
HMTQ has seen enough damage from people not being allowed to marry the person they want to marry; and, the damage from people having to marry someone supposedly proper. HMTQ has had a long life and has earned some wisdom. She's allowing Harry to make all his mistakes. Learning the hard way is the only way some people get lessons pounded in their heads permanently. Harry will take a pounding emotionally in about 1.5 to 2 years. He will not leave Megs. No, he will get royally dumped. Past behavior predicts future behavior. Harry is on his way to former ex-husband #4.
Rustiee
I really doubt the Malibu Dumbartons are staying very long at Tyler Perry's. In fact, I suspect they released the info they were living in Tyler Perry's home after they packed up and left. They are probably somewhere else ready to "depend on the kindness of strangers."
How klassy with a capital 'K'!
The teeth! (in the latest video)
That's exactly what I was coming here to say.
That's not Harry. Or if it is Harry his teeth have changed somehow?
This needs further digging.
What.the.heck.
Few observations:
- I think Harry looked reasonably groomed but his hair seemed wet. (Maybe my standards are getting lower?)
- Lighting was awful and looked like it was filmed in the evening/night or a badly lit room.
- Harry looked like he was standing when recording his message.
- He kept reading cue cards that were significantly below his eye level. (Maybe Meg was holding the cards?)
- There were two loud sounds in the background that seemed to come from another person in the room.
As far as I can tell, the dated aesthetic matches the Malibu Dumbarton's other videos. Who knows when they were filmed?
The Malibu Dumbartons have no credibility at this point. If they were less privacy-obsessed, the small minority of people interested in watching them wouldn't care to figure out where they are. They lie too much to ever be trusted again. Another PR fail.
" A 35-year-old mum-of-one whose home backs on to the exclusive gated community said: “To be honest, it’s annoying that they’re near here.
"It means there’ll be more tourist buses coming by than before to see where celebrities live.
"We do get a lot of fans driving through and blocking the roads, now it will be worse.
But we wish them well."
She wishes them well, but says it's annoying that they're here? Between the tour buses and the helicopter complaints, it doesn't seem like the neighbors are very happy about the Harkles couch surfing at the Perry house.
They're going to end up like nomads.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11581135/meghan-harrys-beverly-hills-estate-bling-ring-burglars/
The comments in the DM are interesting, with many comparing it to an Al Queda or Isis hostage video. One person writes that he met Harry a few years ago at an event for the Invictus Games, back when the games were in their infancy. Harry arrived very late; he smiled for the photo ops but as soon as they were over, his face went blank. He did not seem to be emotionally invested in the Games but did appear enthusiastic when the athletes present praised him or paid him compliments.
Based on everything I've seen or read about him recently, I've concluded that the Harry people loved and admired was a carefully crafted creation of top PR advisers, and the sullen, petulant man-child we have seen in the last two years is the real Harry.
Here's a pic that shows the irregularity: https://www.biography.com/royalty/prince-harry
That video is really alarming. Look at his eyes. They're half closed, and he seems to be struggling to stay awake. His voice is flat. He looks very sick and like he's lost a lot of weight.
I noticed that the wall behind him has the same sponged-on paint job that Tyler Perry's house has. We've commented on that paint job here before.
It's so sad to watch somebody go physically and emotionally downhill so quickly.
The sweet baby Archie is a big guy and Meghan kept trying to keep him close to her to distract from the fact that the baby can talk and wanted down so he could run off. She covered his leg and feet with her arm. What mother does that?
The kid probably had an ear ache and was not feeling well but she went on and on with her horrid acting voice. So who was behind the camera? The real dada or the duck? How stupid do they continue to think we are?
From the DM: “ Last night neighbour Steve Frankel, who owns a house a stone’s-throw from the lavish 22-acre compound where the Duke and Duchess of Sussex celebrated baby Archie’s first birthday last Wednesday, told The Mail on Sunday the enclave’s peace and quiet has been shattered by the new arrivals.
@Rebecca B: So why, other than to get themselves into the media, did these two twits have to get into a vehicle with at least one more vehicle for security along, to take their dogs out for a walk or a hike when the whole world is shut down and they have 22 acres to explore?
SMH. This is just sad that they, meaning Meghan, is so needy for attention that she continually concocts ridiculous excuses to have her photo taken by Coleman Rayner?
His property upkeep devalues enough YoY for the potential taxable income to basically be written off. I believe they are paying full market rent. Or have it subsidized as long as the tabloids are made aware they are staying there for exposure to sell it to a foreign buyer. Charles is still paying them $3MM from his private funds for the year to ease the transition for them to pay-their-way. They can afford a subsidized version of the standard rent this house would command. I’d go as far as speculating this deal was arranged Pre-Megxit, and for 6 months with intent for exposure during the summer months when real estate market is hot. Meghan is always doing deals. Or WAS doing deals. Remember? Preemptively trademarking Sussex Royal? This made Harry a lot more comfortable (seeing how Kensington Palace has been his place of residence most of his life) and made it easier for him to pull one over on Granny. His wife had a plan, and Oprah and Tyler (whom have a lot of Hollywood power) backed them. Now, Tyler didn’t know the fallout would be this grand. But he owes his career to Oprah and worked the deal for her, for them all to benefit. This isn’t a newly agreed arrangement. It’s also apparent as apart of the deal, they cannot photograph the interior (like the Vancouver home). Which is why we are seeing hostage like settings for self-promotion. They assumed it would come across fine. ‘We will look laid back, and like the people.’ She said. Now, I don’t think Tyler cares at all that Meghan is getting terrible press to this day. He’s trying to sell his home and it is getting publicity. People are always curious as to why he is helping Meghan. And they are all of the same ethnicity. Tyler isn’t focused on Meghan. He won’t be condemned. He looks like a good guy doing a nice thing while profiting from it on the backend. He’s not stupid- look how successful he is. When their rental agreement is up in several months, I’m sure she assumed (pre-granny slapdown and Pre-Covid) she would have already had $$$ from merching deals, $$$ from a settlement of the lawsuit, and $$$ from a documentary, movie, or TV show, and more importantly enough $$$ that established themselves in the US to do loan and banking deals (A mortgage in her name)....
Continued below
The wild card in this situation is Oprah. And she was a friend of Harry’s, not a pseudo ‘mother’ she’s not been thrust into as their ‘carer’. Why do you think Serena just STFU? She is probably scared of looking bad towards their cabal, disagreeing with the cabal, or involving herself and PR in anyway. Regardless of if their friendship is over or not, So it’s best to say nothing. I think she is involved in the lawsuit and it’s caused a real headache for her, look at the powerhouses involved.
Many cards being played behind the scenes, but the front players have no real ability to save themselves.
I still don’t understand why Harry leaving the RF is what is best for his family. As stated by Oprah. How she defines their actions is so interesting to me. Did Meghan threaten divorce? Surely staying in the secure, financially solvent, and safe perimeters of the RF and their property is far better for his family. Who cares that the public didn’t like his fake wife? But moving every 6 months, being unstable, lacking in income opportunities because they mapped the road ahead incorrectly. I wonder if Oprah would still agree with her initial statement and I wonder what the players behind the scenes are thinking now that nothing worked out that they were promised.
I don’t believe that Oprah or anyone is privy to the Harkles financial difficulties. Charles is still funding them. It’s not appropriate to talk about wealth in general and especially not in those circles.
I think the extreme security Meghan offered Harry to get him to jump ship and the fall out of nothing going as planned, is why Harry complains to his friends, why he looks awful and concerning, and why he doesn’t actually know what to do. He listened to someone he loved, and it didn’t work out. But because of this, he is now more hated than ever before. I don’t think it’s lost on him. I just think he’s having trouble (because of loving Meghan) to see the root causes. It’s good that he’s trying to figure it out. But that will have to wait until he can figure out a better, more stable life. And in this situation, the odds are extremely against them.
That’s why Harry is a mess.
Perhaps Meghan saw herself in Andrew And Fergie, in terms Of their status and her potential to be sued because she doesn’t seem ethical and according to her previous business partners, goes back on deals. Once she saw that the Queen was willing to go all the way to protect the Crown and the family wealth with Andrews Risk level, I think she realized she would be gone one day when she became too expensive. So she decided to leave on her own accord, while the iron was hot (or she thought).
I could be way off base but I recall a few people being interviewed on the tv on their webcams mentioning that they have to set the webcam up "in front of a plain wall/background" - I personally like the ones who have something in the background to look at, but that's just me being a nosey mare wanting to see "how the other half lives". One, Sandra Oh, said yesterday (at least I think it was yesterday lol) she'd removed art from the wall behind her but apologised because she didn't want to cover/move the brightly patterend sofa she was sat on. I'm wondering whether this is a more widespread thing for online communications or something? I never webcam (got mine covered with black tape just in case I accidentally start it haha) so I'm not at all up to speed on the etiquette behind it, just going by what I've seen on tv in recent weeks. Having said that, I do agree that H&M's videos seem cheap and tacky, I think it's mainly down to a combination of the previously discussed broom closet/cheap hotel vibe and also them not coming across as particularly genuine. I've seen a lot of webcam interviews on tv over the last few weeks and I haven't had the same sense of cheapness from any of them even if they're sat on a plain sofa in front of a plain wall.
@Aviendha, apologies for not replying in my last post, I had a brainfart and only realised I'd missed adding it after I hit post. I've been reading about the series but I'm a bit on the fence, some tv series'/films based on books just don't capture the essence of the books; I saw that "pilot" that was done a while back with Billy Zane and cringed the entire way through it. I really hope the upcoming series is done well as hubby's not a reader and I'm looking forward to us watching it together so he can finally understand why I spend months of every year with my nose stuck in the books.
The gift tax only applies to gifts of money, property, or other assets, so MM & JH do not have to pay taxes on what the ‘actual rent’ would be for staying at Tyler Perry’s house (if they are really there.) He is neither gifting them the property nor adding them to the deed, he’s just letting them stay there for free. Many people let their friends stay at their houses (we all know that they’re not really ‘friends’ but that doesn’t matter.) With that being said, if I were MM, I would STFU, because everything she does is an invitation to the IRS to audit her.
Re: ‘education gifts’, thought I’d explain that as well since there seems to be questions. @RebeccaB. graciously gifted her niece with money towards her education and she explained the tax implications of doing that (there are none.) What might be confusing people about the ‘education gift’ is this: if someone wanted to gift more than $15,000 for education (or medical expenses), they could give the person $15,000, PLUS pay another $15,000 directly to the university (or hospital/medical provider.) In either of these cases, the entire $30,000 is not taxable.
In terms of what the Markles need to insure? Archie’s book collection from Oprah, of course, as that seems to be their most valuable asset at this point. (And no, MM doesn’t have Diana’s aquamarine ring. Never did, even on her wedding day. That was a fake. Just like her.)
From the article.."Having squabbles with people who are never going to change their mind in a million years about stuff that no longer seems remotely important.'"
If this is the case, I apologise.
My own accent is perceived as `posh' despite my lower-middle class origins. In one teaching job, the kids used to go `Wah, wah, wah' and `My husband and I...' behind my back.
For a while, I'd lived in Islington, a very poor part of London (but very much family territory). It was then undergoing `gentrification', much resented by the locals and I almost got drawn into a pub argument with a bloke who was moaning about it.
I could only expostulate, `'Ere, wodja mean? My farver (father) when 'e woz a nipper lived in Barf'd Street, woz't Ritchie Stree' skoo' an'did evenin' clarsses at Forn'ill Stree' Skoo (Thornhill St School)...'
End of criticism - but I then had to keep it up all evening, a real effort.
Immediately before he moved into No 10, Tony Blair lived in my street. I has long left in search of cheaper accommodation.
She said: "I'm well aware it's a stigmatized name today, so that's why I have agreed to using a short form.
"The name is Gaylord. I get it, trust me, I know most people hate it. That is why I've been able to discuss with my parents and grandparents that he will go by Gail in daily life so that he doesn't have to deal with bullies.
https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/family-torn-apart-expectant-mums-18227249
As for piers Morgan, the man has received very good commendations for his cornona virus coverage and as someone who knows how to read the room, he is trying to rebrand himself as a serious journalist. His comment means that he now considers discussing the Sussexes as being beneath him. He wants to discuss more serious issues.
Thanks for the tax info. Two questions that you didn't seem to address that I believe were part of the earlier confusion.
1. I think you are saying that IF it was a "free rent" situation, that wouldn't be taxable to M (a US taxpayer) but it's also not an income tax benefit to Tyler, right? (Except to the extent that not earning extra money means no income tax owed on extra money not earned. My income tax bill could be 0 with 0 income but....)
Free rent, use of a private plane, and so forth could be income tax-deductible for the giver if given to a charity. Right? And could be an in-kind contribution to a political campaign. Right? Seems those are situations that cause trouble. And I wonder if the charity aspect is the hope of H&M for the future and maybe the political for M.
2. I understand money gifts under $15K to an individual don't trigger gift tax. I also get that education gifts are different. But are non-educational monetary gifts also deductible from the donor's current income to reduce income tax? I thought not. In other words, saying there are no tax implications if giving a gift under $15K doesn't mean that gift is sheltered from the donor's income. No tax implications just means the donor pays the same amount of tax with or without making the gift. Correct? Thanks so much.
Childhood photos of Harry show gap in front teeth.
1a) Yes to both
1b) Yes to both (I really Hope we don’t need to watch MM trying to get into politics!)
2). Correct. Many wealthy people do it to pay down their estate before death so that the inheritance taxes will be lower. But anybody can do it. Some random person could decide to gift all of us Nutties $15,000 each! (But I only know about the US tax implications.)
You’re welcome!
No they are not. It's bad enough the sugars want to ascribe blackness to MM. MM is a biracial woman with one white parent and one black parent. That is NOT the same thing as being black - two black parents. For most of her life she has identified as biracial. She is very light skinned and can pass as a 100% white woman. She seems to have lived her life as a white woman - joined a white sorority, only has white friends, only dated and married white men. She is only interested in black people as props or if they are famous. Only the mentally ill or woke types keep referring to her as black.
I agree with most of what you say but I don't feel that Perry & Winfrey have any loyalty to MM because they think she is "black". I believe it is more the Royal adjacent. As with Lohan it looks like Winfrey has backed the wrong horse.
Thus last May 2019 the Sussex Two were worthy adversaries as they were riding high with their PC hypocrisy, but not this May, as they have fallen far from grace. The UK is gripped with serious Wu Flu problems, Piers beating up on them looks petty.
The gap in his front teeth clearly shows in pics 1, 15, 20, and 24. Think it doesn't show except in full frontal shots. Even a slight angle obscures it.
_____
@Wut wrote about M's ethnicity
I agree. I believe M described herself as Caucasian/white on her acting resume at one point. And I'll never find it (assuming it still exists which it may not) but there was an interview before the wedding with a high school classmate of M's who said she always thought M was of Italian descent. She also said she thought M's mother was dead because only Thomas attended school events and helped with theater productions.
_____
Thanks @Aquagirl !
It's not as classy, though, after all `bi' is from Greek.
Is `biracial' the usual term in US, even though it seems to assume parents each of unmixed heritage?
During Megsy's younger years she lived with Doria and grew up in the Los Angeles black community. Megsy grew up culturally black for a while.
Not sure why some Nutties think Harry’s top tooth gap is new, it isn’t. It’s been around since he got his second set of teeth, so many photos show it old and new. 😀
Waiting for new supposed mansion they are living in to be announced, there seems to be a different one every week or so. Nothing can be as ugly as the one they are in now, still beggars can’t choosers eh Harry ‘n’ Megsy?! 😂
Happy Sunday Nutties! 🤩
...beggars can’t be choosers eh Harry ‘n’ Megsy?! 😂
Frankly, talking them down in media at this point just gives more ammunition to their claims and boosts their image of importance.
I hope discussion of their stupid actions will continue but their stars are dimming fast. Unless they manage to find a respectable niche for themselves they are a former minor actress and a former working royal living off the friends charity and daddy's handouts.
I have no idea what he plans to do in LA. He has no education, no skills, no training, and his royal status on its own won't take him far. He will probably go back to being a party animal.
I suspect Harry is not in control of his decisions any more. Megsy's extreme left agenda would exclude any public expression of gratitude to people who gave their lives fighting for the - shock and horror! - nations with distinct borders.
I also suspect Harry is either drinking heavily or on drugs. He looked bad on the video.
His altered appearance also suggests he is losing his identity fast under her manipulation.
Her group on FB had been hacked and information including financial stolen. Appears two founders of the group were frauds. She is caught in the aftermath and has to stay away from the social media. Not her own fault.
@Barbara from Montreal,
I don’t think many if any people believe Harry had any hand or direct participation with setting or handling the Invictus Games, he’s only ever been a public figurehead for it, and that can be said for all the other senior royals roles too. Few if any get involved in the day-to-day running and organising of the organisations/charities etc., they support.
I agree that as a respected Royal, Harry performed well for "his" Invictus Games. Harry did well as figurehead and spokesman. And of course every participant wanted his/her photo with Harry.
We here know that Harry's best aid and advisor was the loyal Edward Lane Fox. He left after the wedding due to Megsy lying about her father coming.... It was ELF who invented the Invictus Games and organized them.
ELF saw that Harry was under the spell of his new chief advisor. That he could nothing about it, so he got out while the getting was good. I bet ELF and William had a few discussions about Harry and Megs.
Does anyone else think that they are most likely squatting at another place?
Staying with another benefactor?
Nothing is ever what it seems with those two. As the window of (merching) opportunity continue to diminish I wonder if MM will do something out of desperation.
If Megsy has any brains she is trying to talk to the best lawyers in LA. To see if they are beyond the reach of the BRF lawyers if they want to merch here as Sussex Royal and same for Sussex Royal foundations. But I think nothing major until the one year trial year separation expires. As they most probably get to milk Charles for 2 million pounds this year as Covid has put a freeze on things anyway. So Bank of Charles money is coming in very handy as the Sussex schemers hatch their next Sussex schemes!
My guess on Tyler Perry--- They will stay at least a year and no rent is being charged. A private and secure location!
@ Raspberry Ruffle
I suspect Harry is not in control of his decisions any more. Megsy's extreme left agenda would exclude any public expression of gratitude to people who gave their lives fighting for the - shock and horror! - nations with distinct borders.
This☝. I wondered if anyone would mention it. Did one celeb come out and clap? I think I saw Rod Stewart and he is a Patriot. Harry is well entrenched with the far left agenda which Ive noticed is creeping back up to the top spots in the media again. I knew they would both come over and be two more
big mouths to push this narrative that is pervasive in our media over here. It is only a matter of time before they get involved politically in some form or fashion. They already have on some key platforms such as abortion, climate change and feminists' agenda. As if we need two more empty headed conceited celebs telling us all what to think and feel.
So is it possible that there are far fewer sugars than it appears?
Btw, is it OK still to say `Afro-American'or have I made a faux pas just by typing it? That was the OK term current in the '60s. Up to then, in the UK, `black' was considered the derogatory term - and covered anyone from what used to be `India', ie pre-1947, and various other groups that are now called `Asian'.
Does `native American' cover the Inuit people as well?
Funny old world.
My vague understanding as a Black Brit is that African American is a term used to describe black Americans who can trace their ancestry back to the slave ships and plantations. Black American is the term used for everyone else particularly recent immigrants. Technically Black American will capture everyone.
Are you trolling me?
She's the ultimate feminist in every way. No one is bigger than the Queen. She does her duty to her Country selflessly. She rules the world. And yeah I would say using every form of social media is modern. MM stated she and H were going to modernize the Monarchy. Their book is even titled as such. Name a few ways that you think they are going to achieve
this in the US. I believe you are anti Monarchy, and I don't know where you live, but I would rather have the Queen rule over me who is for God, country, people than our global career agenda loving self seeking politicians who care nothing about their constituents or nation, only what is going into their back pockets from global corporations via their lobbyists.
Is this what you prefer? If there is no Monarchy there will be a big vacuum to fill and exactly who will fill this? The US has certainly found out who.
I refuse to click on it.
Would you agree? Or should it be `...to fall flat on her face'?
Also noticed that he has an underbite now, that hasn't been noticeable before, also odd. Why would someone do that?
It kind of looks like he's trying to mimic mm's teeth, the way she's always jutting her lower jaw out and running her tongue along her upper teeth.
Back in the day when we used Afro-American, it was assumed that nobody would be able to trace their ancestry back to the days of slavery.
Sadly, my ability to trace a line back to a suspected 18th century black ancestor will have to stay on circumstantial evidence as the records of the white poor in the London parish my ancestors lived in is thin.
Thank you too - I like to get things right!
Harry has always had much gappier teeth compared to most in his family. He has differently shaped ones as well. I don’t know, maybe I notice things more, but his teeth haven’t changed, just look back at old photos and telly footage. I’m not sure why people think it matters anyhow. ��♀️
My name comes up as both and I'm too lazy to worry with it.
I think my last comment explained how I feel and sorry for the snark. Hard to tell sometimes.
I honestly now think she had him in that onesie to make him appear younger.
Before they were junior members of a prestigious family who had to tolerate them. I think MM wanted to trade this to be in a Hollywood family, but they never welcomed her in the first place. I think this is the root of her need to "make it" in LA.
I suspect MM is having fits realizing no one will find them important enough to cover. They make news for their bad behavior.
https://ae01.alicdn.com/kf/H45edd31cbe5347f48375483dbb680163t/One-Size-Cotton-Baby-Boy-Rompers-Costume-Kids-Letter-Jumpsuits-1st-Birthday-Outfits-Newborn-Boys-Roupas.jpg_q50.jpg
We have tribes in the US NorthEast that are primarily made from Indian blood and African blood. With some white thrown in by now. Oklahoma also has similar mixes. Indians and blacks had a shared oppression by whites so it is natural they would mix
Archie does look large, but perhaps it is because Markle is very small, she is 5f 2.
But I agree the baby just doesn't look one year old.
As for talking we should be careful here. My family jokes about me that i can't shut up now because I started talking at 8 months old, with complete sentences. We are all different at that.
I am more interested about Markle's remark a while ago Archie already had two teeth. Now, that is peculiar if he is just one year today.
https://twitter.com/meggiefoster/status/1259060586165526528?s=20
(The soundtrack, of course, is Meghan's own voice.)
Thanks for that link. I especially loved the violin and wiping the eyes with the cash stashed in her bra.
I needed a giggle today!
Happy Mothers Day, all
From Best Soap Ever Tumblr
Anonymous asked:
Saw in Twitter: According to a source there was no glitch with the ordering when the publishers cancelled book orders. The Palace requested to see the manuscript.Harry and Meghan refused.Then Attorneys to the Palace then demanded to see a copy or there would be trouble. The Palace needed to okay the book to check the contents before release.The publishers conceded.Not suprisingly the book has had to be revised.So do not expect to see any dirty laundry on our wonderful Royal family.
Go BRF!
Yes I think also some posters here forget or do not know in the USA we have property taxes (unlike landowners in the UK). Nearby homes adjacent to me, $3MM value is around 65k per year in property taxes. Not sure how much for Perry’s home. Also, property is a lucrative ‘tax write off’ haven for people with money, so they can recoup the costs and principle during a sale. In the US if you use that money to purchase another property, you don’t pay capital gains on the transaction. Much different rules than in the UK. They don’t have property tax, which allows for Lower income individuals to buy a nicer home due to lower monthly costs, but then they pay stamp duty on the sell.
Wow, that would explain it, wouldn't it? When cancelled book orders info appeared I assumed it was something to do with the content and the royal lawyers had their say. No publisher wants trouble with royals, they make huge money on books.
Royal lawyers may not be glossy and loud but they have really long arms and have been in business forever. They know all entrances and exists.
If true, I love this
From Best Soap Ever Tumblr
Anonymous asked:
Saw in Twitter: According to a source there was no glitch with the ordering when the publishers cancelled book orders. The Palace requested to see the manuscript.Harry and Meghan refused.Then Attorneys to the Palace then demanded to see a copy or there would be trouble. The Palace needed to okay the book to check the contents before release.The publishers conceded.Not suprisingly the book has had to be revised.So do not expect to see any dirty laundry on our wonderful Royal family.
Go BRF!
Nope, this is 100% made up gossip. What the Anon wrote just does not make sense.
* Who would 'attorneys at the Palace' be, and which Palace would that be? The BRF use legal firms and do not employ legal people on their staff (not for legal work anyway).
* In the UK, the term 'lawyer'(solicitors or barristers) is used, not attorney. An American who does not understand the BRF, the UK and publishing (see below) has started this story.
* On what legal basis would the BRF demand to see a manuscript? There is none. One cannot demand to see an MS and make threats on the assumption that something libellous is said about you in the MS. Until published, nothing is legally classified as libel.
* A publisher could show a manuscript to interested parties in advance of publication to avoid legal problems after publication, but this is not usual practice. It does happen though (you saw the MS and did not object ... so you can't sue). Unless there is co-operation, the BRF do not check manuscripts or collaborate with authors at all.
* There are hundreds of books that have been written about the BRF, past and present, and it is not common practice for the BRF to sue publishers (there are exceptions).
* An experienced and professional publisher would have the MS checked before publication and edit accordingly if the lawyers pick up any potential problems. Sometimes a publisher will publish regardless if they can guarantee that they can make enough sales before the offended party can sue and get the book shut down.
I speculate that the publication of the book could have been delayed for any of the following reasons (and we know there was an earlier date announced by Scobie and then a later one announced by the publisher):
1. It needs heavy editing because the style of the two authors is very different, or one or both of the authors has written a really bad MS, or it is so boring that the publisher is looking for some spice to add ...
2. The publisher is indeed worried about libel and so on, and so the MS is being carefully checked by lawyers and heavy editing is required in some places (or sources have to be followed up). How many times do Meghan and Harry have to 'lose' before they stop suing the media and anyone else who writes anything about them they do not like (and since their story keeps changing ...)?
3. The publisher really wants to hype the publication of the book with a tour, book signings, interviews (with a live audience ... think Ellen), all sorts of publicity stunts ... they are hoping lockdown will be done and dusted by August and everyone will be desperate for some familiar entertainment.
PS Scobie and his co-author (and the publisher) would love to spread the rumours that the book reveals 'dirt' or embarrassing details about the BRF as it will boost sales tremendously. I think the BRF are in a much stronger position to survive a smear than they were when the War of the Wales erupted!
I finally watched Harry's Invictus speech. he is clearly on drugs and explains so much. he obviously has serious problem if he can't even record a video without being completely loaded. that is not depression that is dope
I realize babies have different milestones but I swear he seems at least a month older than stated age
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iw5ZzNLAmVg
Why is he lisping/talking as if he has a mouth full of teeth? He has always slurred his words somewhat, but it is really bad in this video?
While in general I agree with most of what you say re the book I would like to bring up the following extract from the "Common Publishing Legal Issues" essay:
"Defamation, Privacy, and Publicity Issues
Another set of challenges to publishers comes from the shifting boundaries of the laws of privacy, publicity, and libel. Publishers can be sued for publishing false and defamatory statements and, sometimes, even just embarrassing private facts about individuals; and in our highly proprietary and litigious age, more and more references to individuals, living or deceased, bring claims of defamation, breach of privacy, or violation of publicity rights."
I can very well see a scenario when either an individual royal or representatives of the RF get information about the contents of the book that may be damaging or false, and instruct their legal team to get in touch with the publisher. This could potentially result in delays in publication. The publisher would be eager to avoid litigation for defamation or libel.
Another issue may be simply contractual, something to do with relations with one or both authors of the book, may be a re-sell rights or something of that nature.
We will probably never know.
I agree Archie looks older. He's big but could take after Thomas Markle. But Archie was a small baby at birth and he was supposedly overdue. He's huge now with awfully long legs for 12 months so that's unusual.
It looks like Archie has at least 8 teeth. M made the comment about Archie having 2 teeth in November, 6 months ago. According to the ADA, the bottom two front teeth usually come in at 6-10 months of age so 6 months is on the edge of normal but on the early side. Those 2 teeth didn't show in the New Year's photo of Archie with Harry but I guess his tongue was over them assuming that really was Archie.
Archie appeared to be speaking in sentences. That typically starts from at 18-24 months with boys slower than girls, perhaps because of prenatal testosterone, but maybe Archie is unusual. Early speakers often have parents who speak to them (not at them) and teach the interactive nature of speech by looking in their faces and waiting for them to respond with babbling. Nothing we've seen suggests that is M's strength but maybe it's the Nanny's or maybe Harry's.
-----
@Sandie,
Generally agree with most of what you wrote about the book. Plus why would the palace demand the manuscript from H&M? They aren't the authors and would have no authority to share it.
Oprah's Hollywood Hills home or guest house is where they are.
The ridiculous birthday video (though for a good cause) I believe was recorded earlier this year at Doria's.
I am so disappointed the TCD has closed down her blog, it was my favorite, because she was strict about who could or could not be bashed (unlike here and other blogs where people jump on the bashing bandwagon if someone slightly smiles at or acknowledges Meghan) and she was always upbeat and up to date on everything Royal. It's really too bad.
If they were indeed at Perry's there would be tons of pap photos of anybody coming and going from the estate whether or not it is gated. Paps in L.A. can be anybody that is why you see so many celeb school run photos and photos of celebs running errands. My husband is always telling me about so and so he saw while playing golf or getting gas and sometimes my kids take photos though not to sell, but they could. Maids, gardeners, drivers, valets, grocery clerks, rubbish men, pizza delivery all make extra cash selling photos. There are only a few people with the clout to keep the Harkles hidden and Oprah is the only one, but for Harry's sake not Meg's. Same with Elton, if he is sheltering them somewhere it's because of Harry, in fact any goodwill from Hollywood is because of Harry. There is a lot of love for Diana's boys. When William and Kate attended the BAFTA reception in 2012 everyone was tripping over themselves to speak with them, it was rather funny to watch serious A-listers shoving people to get to the Cambridges.
Everyone is so focused on Meghan being the bad guy or the instrument driving this couple, but Harry has been doing this kind of thing for awhile, he is a professional free loader and has been doing it since his teens and it's well known, the Palace covered up as much of his bad behavior as they could and put out the "Silly Harry just likes to have fun" PR which fell apart when he married the American B-list cable actress and blatantly neglected in honoring his family and his royal duties.
Has anyone ever seen Harry playing with George, Charlotte, Louis, Mia, Savannah, Isla, Louise or VIscount Severin? There is no photo evidence that I have seen of Good Time Harry with any of the children outside of royal occasions.
I don't like either of them. Meg is so messed up and makes terrible life chooses especially sartorially. Harry seemed to be straightening himself with Invictus, but he couldn't stand the course and now he is barely a figurehead. Those photos of him and First Lady Obama were incredible, but in the end, we see that "as just good PR" because he really does lack integrity. Meghan if she's smart will take a cash payment and divorce that loser and let poor Archie live with his Aunt and Uncle in the UK, it would be the right thing to do and she would truly have the freedom to do what she wants to do without the Palace putting the kibosh on it. To use a metaphor, Harry is like an addict who will do anything for a "fix" and hurt anyone to get his way, he is the true bad guy in this soap opera. It's really amazing all the power placed on Meghan by her critics, you'd think she was omnipotent and I think she's way less powerful than Harry, he is truly diabolical. If he were as good looking as his brother he'd be a force to be reckoned with, but alas he's just an unattractive ginger Prince with nothing but his "royalness" to keep him relevant.
But that is just my opinion.
Where's Elle? Are you off with you're BFF drinking tea and taking photos?
Just went through some gift tax stuff.
Did not look at the non US citizen but that may be worth looking at.
Generally, the giver pays the taxes if it more than the legal per year limit (and there is a lifetime limit or like 11 million - just throw that in there).
This is complicated. To my knowledge, it works like this: I buy a house for 100,000. It appreciates to 300,000 and I give it to boy toy. When it is sold, there are some limit of not having to pay taxes up to a certain amount. If boy toy sells it during the first year, the original cost basis (100K) is used, the excluded amount from taxes = money which is considered income and therefore taxable at my rate. If boy toy sells it after a year, the excluded from taxes amount, the amount above that is taxed at 15%.
That's federal. California does but there are some exclusions like 2 of 5 years need to live there, have not used the property tax exemption and so on https://www.ftb.ca.gov/file/personal/income-types/income-from-the-sale-of-your-home.html
The numbers here are out of date however, note that in the last couple of lines there is the warning about all gifts counting toward reaching the max total. https://homeguides.sfgate.com/avoid-gift-tax-real-estate-54678.html
https://www.thebalance.com/the-gift-of-real-estate-generosity-can-be-taxing-3973972
IF this gift property was given to a non US citizen, it would limit the amount of potential ownership by the US citizen.
As a side note, years ago I read one of the Millionaire Next Door books. In it, there was a story about a set of parents who wanted to gift their married kid a huge fancy home in an upscale neighborhood (ultra mcmansion deluxe). And they were discouraged - not for the tax reasons but the kid and spouse were both teachers and trying to maintain that kind of lifestyle on the teacher salary would not be good long term. Never forgot that when I look at these fancy houses (it's not just the house but all the help needed to maintain it, joining the right clubs, the right artwork on the walls, the right couches and tables, driving the right cars, wearing the right clothes - being able to afford the lifestyle that comes from buying that house).
DM’s latest breathless article is how H&M are hiring a former “aide to the Beckhams.” Rebecca Mostow was a production assistant for Prince and co-manager of Seal and works (worked?) for a talent management company founded by the guy who invented the Spice Girls. She’s not there to “run their day to day lives” as DM seems to think, but they may be working on a large-scale event where H&M are producers or executive producers.
I’m in agreement with you on any so called property the Duo are supposed to be living in. It changes what feels like daily, I said in my first comment on this thread that it’s good revenue for the DM (and media in general), good PR (but I fear all fake) for the Dubious Duo and probably good (overall) for the real home owners.
Unless they are photographed near any said home, I remain very much sceptical. No-one knows where they are, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s less than glamorous hence all the PR stories.
I also don’t think anyone would give them a house for free. Why on earth would they? There’s always a necessary pay-back if that ever happened, I can’t see Megsy forever being in someone’s back pocket so she can live in house. Besides, with next to zero ties with the Royal Family she’s lost her ace card, what other talents could she flog?!
The main one is called Council Tax and is based on the value of the property. We have a dwelling that would qualify for being in one band, that for a 3-bedroomed place, but because we've got a slightly larger garden we're in the next band up - Ouch! The powers that be think there's room for us to knock the house down & build 2 units instead, thereby making a handsome profit. As if.
It goes to the Local Authority rather than central government.
There's also `Stamp Duty', a charge paid to central government by a purchaser buying a house, assuming the property is worth more than a certain, now very small, amount. It can make a very great difference to the purchase cost.
How times have changed since You know Who appeared. The Woke brigade treated the Cambridges appallingly at the last BAFTAs, on a national broadcast.
Jaoquin Phoenix, formerly known as Mr Bottom, may be a brilliant actor but his behaviour was disgraceful in the way he mocked them.
What if wherever they are staying is claimed as the headquarters of their foundation? Could providing them a place to live be considered as a charitable contribution?
So far, nothing hints at what Harry is going to do, except loaf by the pool.
Thanks for the info about the situation in the NE - until today, I had no idea of a black-Native American link. My husband worked with someone who was more or less pure Cherokee when he was on assignment & I've only been to Arizona so know just a bit about the Navajo.
I've often wondered what had happened to the tribes in the East.
“ I'm not familiar with the comedienne Maggie Foster, but she does a very good Meghan impersonation.”
https://twitter.com/meggiefoster/status/1259060586165526528?s=20
I just watched this—thanks for the link! Very funny.
"Back in the day when we used Afro-American, it was assumed that nobody would be able to trace their ancestry back to the days of slavery."
That seems a bit of an odd assumption to make. While there may not be any phsyical records, given black people were property and not people there will be verbal histories. It will be passed down through the family. If your family has been living in the US for more than 100 years and you are black it is highly likely you are the decendent of slaves. There are probably other things like families living an area that had plantations for many generations which point to it as well.
For example my mother and grandmother come from Jamaica, they are decendents of slaves. We don't have a family tree that goes back to the year dot but black people were only in Jamaica to work the plantations. They didn't go there voluntarily. That's what I mean by tracing your ancestry back. It's the complete lack of ancestry after a certain point and not knowing where your family comes from in Africa.
All the celebs are coming out for justice for the young black man shot, but NO ONE has said one word about the biracial one year old girl thrown into the ravine by her black father. Too bad she wasnt thrown in by a white man, there may have been more help for her white mother and biracial unborn sibling. As horrible as it is for anyone to be shot in cold blood while running away, it is blatant hypocrisy to only focus on white on black crime when everyone deserves justice when murdered.
Maybe since MM is biracial she could bring light to this. I won't hold my breath though as it doesn't fit the narrative.
Many thanks for showing me where to start finding out about the native tribes of the US north east. I think some of the tribes whose names are familiar to me are Canadian rather than US tribes, so I'm looking forward to delving into the subject.
Popular culture of the 1950s gave a very lopsided view of Native Americans.
FINDING FREEDOM is an honest, up-close, and disarming portrait of a confident, influential, and forward-thinking couple who are unafraid to break with tradition, determined to create a new path away from the spotlight, and dedicated to building a humanitarian legacy that will make a profound difference in the world.
Would somebody kindly pass a sick-bag, please?
Another set of challenges to publishers comes from the shifting boundaries of the laws of privacy, publicity, and libel. Publishers can be sued for publishing false and defamatory statements and, sometimes, even just embarrassing private facts about individuals; and in our highly proprietary and litigious age, more and more references to individuals, living or deceased, bring claims of defamation, breach of privacy, or violation of publicity rights."
I can very well see a scenario when either an individual royal or representatives of the RF get information about the contents of the book that may be damaging or false, and instruct their legal team to get in touch with the publisher. This could potentially result in delays in publication. The publisher would be eager to avoid litigation for defamation or libel.
That's why lawyers would be reading the MS. If I was a publisher, I would check the MS for defamation, privacy, libel. I was trained in those areas, but the group of publishers I worked for had a legal department. I am actually still surprised when publishers do cross the line, but as I said originally, the sales may make it worth while to take that risk, or maybe making a lot of money does not necessarily mean a company is competent!
It's not the BRF that I would be worried about. Meghan and Harry are very litigious and have shown to be not reliable, so even if they co-operated with the authors, I would actually be more worried about them (Scobie may think he is being flattering but the Harkles are batsh1t crazy and who knows what could offend them!).
As for the BRF, I doubt that they have access to the MS or the publisher (it is American) and they definitely have no influence, so would not know any better than us what is going to be covered in the book. However, I doubt that they have anything at all to worry about. Meghan (and Harry actually) have already thrown a lot of accusations at the BRF and it has done them no harm other than feed a few troublesome crazy stans, but that is why the BRF have the best protection the UK government can provide. If blatant lies are printed about what any of them said or did, they can issue a denial and they are more likely to be believed than the Harkles, except by some crazy ardent supporters.
Andrew is much more of a worry ... he still lives on Crown property and all his family still live in the UK. A scandal involving Andrew is not something the BRF can look away from.
Remember, after the South African tour and cringeworthy pity party documentary, there was a TV discussion when someone from the media hinted about an injunction, and the guy who made the documentary delivered a threat about what the Harkles could say and do? Well, it has been about 6 months and they have lobbed a lot of grenades at Harry's family, the British media, the British people (racist, old-fashioned, unappreciative of their brilliance, jealous of them, afraid of their popularity, unfair towards them, liars, bullies ...) and the only people who seem to be sustaining damage are the Harkles.
I was thinking of a full documentary trail, leading to the records of specific plantations; but of course knowing that one's ancestors must have originated in Africa and must have been transported involuntarily as slaves doesn't need paperwork.
Back in the 1960s, it was if `only grand people had ancestors' daft as that seems. My grandmother's generation would have seen it as a waste of time to be interested in such things - having enough money for food and rent, that's what mattered.
It wasn't until I looked carefully at old family photos that my connection , presumably, with Africa/the Caribbean became evident. Thinking about how many black people there were in London before, say, 1800 makes a link very likely if one’s ancestors, like mine, were among the teeming unrecorded poor. (I rather imagine my gt, grandfather had an existence like that of the Artful Dodger - he was in the same place, at the same time, and got 3 months inside when he was 18. That much was recorded.)
The publisher is Harper Collins.
Collins was once a respected English Company, now part of News Corp, in turn owned by (can you guess?) - yes! Rupert Murdoch, the Wizard of Oz.
Are we back to the Murdoch-Maxwell War? Murdoch's ulterior, republican, motive?
Does any of this make sense?
I also live in New York State. I live in the heart of Iroquois nation. There were 5 main tribes. (A 6th was added later)
There are reservations all throughout the state. There are not considered part of the NYS and are their own recognized country.
The Iroquois were important in the fight for America between the British and the French. The history is also extremely interesting.
And the Iroquois names for towns, sites and landmarks are still evident in daily life..
Also, if you are into sports, the Iroquois essentially invented Lacrosse and still are the best in the world in the sport.
On a side note, I’ve never really heard the term Afro-American or Native Americans being referred to as Black Americans. Most natives I know don’t look black and might even take offensive to it.
As a society, right or wrong, we have a sensitivity to our labels. Each culture, and almost each region, has names they prefer, names that are offensive, and names that they can call themselves but is offensive if used by other cultures. It’s hard and confusing to navigate.
It makes me so mad when arrogant American celebrities like Oprah & Markle scream "racism" whenever their narcisistic selves don't get the kiss-ass treatment they expect while abroad. Projecting their own country's racism onto places they travel to & well-meaning people they meet. Just ugly behaviour... Throwing the race card anytime you don't get the diva treatment you think you deserve trivialises real DANGEROUS, DEADLY, UNHINGED racism like what happened to that innocent young man.
I think he was 25. RIP.
I'm going back to my Markle-free pandemic hiatus.
Just came to say that because it needed to be said.
Keep the conversation rolling.
Don't stop discussing race, please don't be discouraged just because you've said the wrong thing or used an outdated term or whatever.
These discussions are necessary.
We can't solve anything by keeping our thoughts to ourselves.
Please take good care of yourselves, stay safe, & healthy. 💜💜
Also members of the five civilized tribes [Cherokee, Chocktaw, Chickasaw, Seminole, Creek], originally of the southeastern US and then force marched to Oklahoma, also owned black slaves. Additionally, black slaves who escaped from plantations would often find harbor with tribes as well. History is just a lens used to focus on the past, there are many different lenses with lots of different focus..!
The American Internal Revenue Service is the most feared, efficient part of American government today, yesterday, and tomorrow. The agents literally drool over people like the HAMS, and their probable “Don’t you know who I am!” The IRS agents despise people who think that they are just dumb government workers. I know a few auditors of the IRS, and they love to play ‘possum to the rich, mighty and powerful, and after all the $1,500 an hour plus lawyers meet with their clients at the latter’s homes, he lawyers are sweating bullets. They know one word from their clients will cost them huge fines, ten-times original taxes, up to civil and criminal charges. The IRS is feared. Plus, no -Americans do not understand our crazy, highest taxes in the world, when you include federal, Social Security, Medicare, County, City, State, local, sales, state property, county property, utility, wealth tax if family of 4 earns over $100,000 per year, millionaire tax over $250,000, estate tax, AND if an American works overseas, all income is taxed, no matter if you pay taxes to the country you live in. Oh, some states will tax you the state tax if they find out you have vacationed in their state for more than two weeks (California localities go after tourists, believe it or not.)
I saw the new HarryMarkle blog, and they had Harry shown again in a closet video. I honestly believe, if Harry was a Harriet, would people think that she was being held by an abusive husband, or would race come into it as stupidly as it is today used by a mostly multi racial, majority white woman, M, to fend off all legitimate criticism. If it was Harriet, reading stuff off cards in a dark basement, never seen except scripted, would anybody say poor old Harriet, she’s caught by her breasts by a social climbing, D-list American male actor? She has no friends or family, was held by her husband every time they are in public, pushed off, or grabbed, by her D-list American husband, who only wants her money and her baby?
I haven’t posted in awhile, though I read all your insightful and funny comments religiously, almost as a sanity check during these dark times.
Anyway, I mentioned a long time ago that my brother is a longtime screenwriter in “the business “ in Hollywood. He doesn’t know Megs personally but one of his close friends was a producer of Suits. I reported here during her “duchessing” days that she was known as being a royal bitch on the set of the show. My brother called me for Mother’s Day today and in the course of conversation I asked him what he thought of the Duchess of Sussex and Harry being in town and living chez Tyler. He was very surprised, had heard nothing about it, Btw, his son is a classmate of the Igers’ son. He said he was a bit shocked she’d return to town because her rep in the business is dismal. She’s a known user, nasty bitch, and a diva and no one would seriously want to work with her. In any event, he said, no one.s even thinking about new work at this point because they are still besieged and sheltering in place. I asked him to at least ask my nephew to discreetly pump the younger Iger, but alas! If it’s not about sports the fifteen year old boys won’t be interested.
All the best to all Nutties and i’ll Keep my ear to the ground. Pardon my typos and fingers crossed I can actually post this!
But her actions and intent do scream ‘grifter’ and ‘freeloader’ as much as her current life partner. So yes, perhaps they will both jump ship soon, in opposite directions. I would be astonished if they stayed together for 5 more years. I don’t think they really like each other, at all, otherwise why all the discord and upheaval and escapism.
LOOK AT HIS TEETH IN PIC 28 OF 29 (compared to pic #24)
the same white discolorations are on the bottom of the two front teeth but you CANNOT tell me those are the same teeth!?!?!?
compared to all the other pics of him with the gap - also again this image:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/18/31-things-didnt-know-prince-harry/
teeth in the telegraph image match pic #28 in the CNN overview but look at all the teeth in the CNN overview and pic #28 is like woah nope.
So tell me. WTAF GUYS - you CANNOT look at those pics and say those are the same teeth???
compared to these:https://www.biography.com/royalty/prince-harry
And yes - first thing I noticed in the video was the teeth also but I thought it was just me.
Can we get off the taxes and back onto his TEETH?
see pic 28 compared to pic 24
Thanks for your insight, @Poodle12. I really think the reality show industry is the only place Meg and Harry would be welcome at this point, and they'd better perform well and early. As I recall, the Beckhams had a LA- based reality show that flopped hard.
Of course, a reality show with Archie might be very tricky, depending on what you believe about Archie.
I think you’re right, and that too much is being read into the inconsistent appearance of Harry’s teeth.
MM is clearly a right-royal bitch.
Harry's teeth: the gap certainly does vary between barely perceptible and very conspicuous, and back again. My money would be on the originals being knocked out at some point, whether during sport or by engagement with a fist, and subsequent replacements, whether on a traditional plate or finally as implants, being being inconsistent in their spacing.
I'm sure the RF can afford the best dentistry available but it's taken decades for British dentistry to approach that of N. America. Implants have caught on only in the last 10 years or so.
That being said, my dentist was able to give me a gold crown (amusing in the current context) under the NHS - almost 40 years ago, estimated life 10 years. So far,it's still sound and my current dentist says my teeth are good for another 25 years - I hope the rest of me lasts as well.
The only golden crown that MM could ever have would be in her mouth.
I've just ordered the Philbrick book `Mayflower' (I suspect it's `The First Thanksgiving' under another name. As it's the 400th Anniversary since Mayflower left Harwich, calling at Southampton and Plymouth, all places I know. I've heard nothing yet about the commemoration at Plymouth - whether it's still going ahead or if it has been cancelled.
Cheers, sincere apologies for a red wine raspberry ��
(I can't see your emoji, that happens to me unless I type ion the PC).
Keep up with your poems and posts.
😘
Worrying??
Kath & Kim “Look at me”
Kath & Kells horizontal dance hahaha
I am fascinated by the comments on US taxes on gifts. Assuming that I am an American citizen woild I, if I give someone a gift above the legal limit from income that I have already paid tax on I would have to pay more tax or does the tax only apply to gifts made from capital?
I always loved Kath & Kim!
Nah, it’s his gnarly teeth!!
Here is an easy to understand article on gift taxes. (Easier than reading an IRS page!) It explains when gift tax is owed. Income tax is a separate tax from gift tax.
https://www.policygenius.com/taxes/guide-to-gift-tax/
Rebecca English
@RE_DailyMail
Royal Editor, Daily Mail London
I do hope so.
Can’t do with Piers being muffled!!
Off topic, but you might also enjoy learning about the Mohawks, who appear to have a genetic quirk that leaves them with no fear of heights. Mohawk ironworkers built many of the skyscrapers of Manhattan, including the World Trade Center towers.
@Nutty: A bit of music trivia. They are mentioned in a hauntingly beautiful song titled “Song for Sharon” with an ethereal melody and arrangement by Joni Mitchell from a 70s album titled “Hejira.” I highly recommend this song and album. Her voice was perfect.
Secondary trivia about another of my favorite artists. The musician Prince was a massive fan of Joni Mitchell. As a teenager, he went to her concerts and wrote fan letters to her.
The slice of pertinent lyrics:
Little Indian kids on a bridge up in Canada
They can balance and they can climb
Like their fathers before them
They'll walk the girders of the Manhattan skyline
Shine your light on me Miss Liberty
Because as soon as this ferry boat docks
I'm headed to the church
To play Bingo
Fleece me with the gamblers' flocks
Fully agree with you a RF denial if issued, carries a lot more weight than anything Scobie and Co may allege.
I also agree Andrew is the most sensitive soft spot in the family now, the major weakness point in their armour of respectability.
Anything about Andrew in the book is like a dry gunpowder now.
https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/2020051089423/meghan-markle-celebrates-mothers-day-prince-harry-baby-archie/
*crickets*
Unfortunately, anything written or said about Andrew is easy pickings, but it doesn’t nor shouldn’t equate whether the truth Is being told.
The Royal Family can issue flat denials about anything in the new book about the Dubious Duo. I wouldn’t assume they are above court action either (if something was a downright or even a partial lie). However, they can easily hurt the Duo by removing more of their perks, be it money or otherwise. We still don’t know if they are receiving any money from Charles.
I agree with you. The BRF can easily hurt The Harkles be it quietly withdraw funding or publicly taking back the Sussex titles. Not sure how well thought out this book was in light of Megxit (yes, I realize it was planned long before Megxit) because when your main source of income is Daddy, one really shouldn't threaten to humiliate Daddy and his family.
IF the book comes out, and that is a big if I think, the fallout will be interesting to watch. You don't bite the hand that feeds you.
"The movie details the struggles of the new parents and unique challenges of being part of the royal family, which ultimately led Harry and Meghan to give up their royal ties to forge a new life on their own terms," the news release states.
The TV movie will follow 2018's "Harry and Meghan: A Royal Romance" and 2019's "Harry & Meghan: Becoming Royal."
Goodness, I wonder where she *could* go at this point where people do not think badly of her? How could she be there *without* people knowing about it?
.... He said he was a bit shocked she’d return to town because her rep in the business is dismal. She’s a known user, nasty bitch, and a diva and no one would seriously want to work with her.
@Poodle 12: Thank you for the update. I have worked in a similar business where if someone had a bad reputation, nobody would want to hire or work with them. They’d be avoided like the plague.
It’s no wonder Disney didn’t offer her a development deal or at least one more
project after the narration she did for the elephant documentary. I read that she didn’t show up to the voiceover recording sessions on time, was not prepared, and was a diva, which I guess is why one nameless Disney exec said her public image “was too controversial” and that “she needs Disney more than Disney needs her.”
She is also has very little talent. Hollywood and other businesses are full of male and female a-hole divas, but people will cut them some slack if they are excellent at what they do and can bring in the money. But even that has an expiration date because in any business where connections run wide and deep, there are always young talents coming along and changing tastes and fads in every business.
If she can’t make it in Hollywood, reviving The Tig may make her some money, but I don’t think it will make her anywhere near the amount of cash her lavish taste and grandiosity demand. One way or another, it’s likely Meghan and Harry will end up with deep financial problems, that will make the Yorks look like they missed a car payment on their 2005 Toyota Corolla.
Unfortunately for the Harkles, if it’s 250 pages of fluff, then no one will buy it. If it dishes real dirt, I hope that the money train stops. Like, stops. Like they put out a restraining order on these two.
I agree with Andrew is truly their Achilles heel (ha, a originally typed “hell”). I used to think that Harry was potentially their Achilles’ heel, but they very successful walked him back from being a whore-mongering Nazi-loving playboy. Harry still has the potential to have a “redemption” arc because we can blame Markle for his fall from grace. Andrew has no such arc available. He’s far too old and his arrogance seems to be off the charts.
And I honestly don’t know if they are broke. All these freebies? I think she has used sex to grift through life, and Harry has used (and, worse, expected) his status as a royal to grift as well. We don’t like to think that way of the royal family, but with all the revelations regarding Andrew and his kickbacks and that other royal trying to sell milk products in Japan was it, merching royalty is a dirty family secret. Harry has the reputation of being a skinflint and has traded on his position throughout this entire life. THIS is why I don’t think that he and Markle are that different. They have the same expectations that because of who they are, they deserve all these perks, he by way of his birthright, she by way of her pathology.
I never noticed celebrity PR until Meghan. I can’t imagine any reasonable celebrity thinking that multiple daily stories about them is sane!
She is also has very little talent. Hollywood and other businesses are full of male and female a-hole divas, but people will cut them some slack if they are excellent at what they do and can bring in the money. But even that has an expiration date because in any business where connections run wide and deep, there are always young talents coming along and changing tastes and fads in every business.
I was reading a biography of Frank Sinatra recently, who was undeniably a great singer and a talented actor, but was also frequently a pain in the neck. When it came to acting, he saw himself as a "one take marvel" and got fussy and angry if he had to do subsequent takes. Acting jobs started to fall away, particularly after the "New Hollywood" revolution of the late 1960s/early 1970s. He was both a pain in the neck *and* increasingly out of fashion.
Meg, of course, was never *in* fashion.
I am not hung up on the terms of who is asking to read the MS but it doesn't strike me at all odd that this would throw a spanner in the proof/publishing deadlines and that the BRF is behind it somewhere. From my view, they are a US publisher but it was the UK arm of it which is publishing (because the list price was pounds not dollars. They got the information, more or less, from M as either the primary or secondary source. So, it would make a lot of sense that they would feel the need not to be surprised like the Diana book.
I agree that it is not wise to bite the hand that feeds you. However, I have watched people do all kinds of crazy mental gyrations of justifying some course of action. I don't under estimate the ability of any human to do really stupid things.
Based on other posts about how someone might have thought they would walk gloriously into LA, be feted, line up A list jobs there, splash about at parties, this book could trigger more interest and then an autobiography could appear and so on. So I think the idea this was planned long ago and far away would fit as part of second wave on creating interest and therefore money streams.
Reviving the Tig: yeah, she may technically be able to (unknown as to how that was handled in Megxit so let us suppose it is legal). She's lost ground since it was closed so now she does have the aura of former royalty in her favor. But, she also now has a lot more competition, new people (who have taken up that space which she used to have). Combined with the general downturn economically thanks to covid, can she make up for lost ground and get the deals (which are may/may not stay the same quantity or increase). This all in addition to: did it ever give her the lifestyle she wanted with long term stability (and this was as a single, not 3 person family)? or was it more play money and the big bills were paid another way?
Read the Hello article. Was that planned? big type subheadline with a link to their article/with video of Archie saying DaDa on Mother's Day?
Even though Princess Anne is a `Princess of the Blood' ie born to royal status, she married a commoner, Captain Mark Phillips, and became Mrs Mark Phillips, just as now she is Mrs Timothy Lawrence.
Married women take their husband's status. That's why MM can be a Duchess- she is married to a duke. Had Harry not been given ducal status, she would have been Princess Henry, just as Phillip's mother was Princess Andrew of Greece and `The Valkyrie' is Princess Michael of Kent - it's the equivalent of Mrs Timothy Lawrence.
`Princess Diana' was an anomaly, I don't recall the details but she should have been called Princess Charles. HM may just have given in over that - she was an aristocrat, the daughter of an earl. Big mistake, in retrospect.
MM is never going to be Princess Meghan in her own right, just a Drama Queen.