Skip to main content

Bye Jessica

Jessica Mulroney was one of the earliest players in the Meghan Markle fame drama.

She met Meghan sometime between 2011 and 2015, when Markle was in Mulroney's native Canada playing a role on Suits; by 2016, the two women were pictured vacationing together in Italy.

Jessica was right by Meghan's side during the romance with Prince Harry, even present during the couple's first public outing at the Invictus games in September 2017.

She was a visible presence at the Royal Wedding in May 2018, and even made a brief appearance during the Sussexes' Royal Tour of Australia, for reasons that have never been fully explained. There was also gossip about the Sussexes giving the Mulroneys an expensive Jaguar car - why is also unclear.

There was great speculation that Jessica might be chosen as one of Archie Windsor-Mountbatten's godmothers, although as a follower of the Jewish faith, she would not ordinarily be eligible.

And when the Sussexes returned to the UK for their last appearance as Their Royal Highnesses, they reportedly left Archie - such as he is - in the care of Jessica Mulroney, even though she was living in Toronto at the time and they were based in Western Canada.

From shoe sales to celebrity

Born to a Canadian family that had made its fortune in retail shoe sales, Jessica Brownstein was married in October 2008 the son of former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, whom she had known since her teenage years.

She and Mulroney started their family quickly - their twin boys were born in summer 2010, along with a daughter in 2013.

And they leveraged their family for publicity from the beginning, regularly sharing images on social media. Mulroney even served as a spokeswoman for Pampers diapers, along with a side business distributing high-end lingerie.

In November 2015, Jessica had her big breakthrough as a stylist, choosing a range of ensembles by Canadian designers for Justin Trudeau's wife Sophie to wear on the world stage.

After hitching her star to Meghan's, she won a regular spot on "Good Morning America" and her own reality show featuring re-dos for brides whose first wedding had been botched.

Jessica is cancelled

Now, at a time of heightened sensitivity about racial matters, Jessica has been "cancelled" after a feud with a Black Canadian influencer.

I don't have any special insight on their disagreement, which was explained in greater detail by Meghan's longtime supporter (and Jessica's friend, I thought) Lainy Liu.

But I do think it's a sign of the thinness of her celebrity that Jessica could be washed away so quickly and easily; she seems to have lost all of her gigs and sponsorships in a matter of days.

Is there anyone at all who stood up for Jessica? Anyone who was sorry to see her go?

Transactional friends

Celebrities with deep support are people who have been around for many years, people who fans can see themselves reflected in: Jennifer Lopez, Reese Witherspoon, even Harry Styles. 

Were one of those celebrities to make a serious misstep, they would probably be able to work their way back again. (Witherspoon did, actually; she was caught driving drunk in 2013 and told the arresting officer, "Don't you know who I am?")

Jessica, maybe, not so much. Did anyone ever really like Jessica?

Did Meghan? Or were they only transactional friends?

It will be interesting to see if the Duchess of Sussex, eternally polishing her woke credentials, says anything about her supposed good friend's sudden fall from grace. 




Comments

Mel said…
So many good comments today!

 It was assumed that someone who'd bragged about her top education, her polyglotism, her acting abilities, innate style and diplomatic and humanitarian experience would sail through the demands of her royal role. They took her at her word, and that's when things began to go wrong.

Kinda makes you wonder just how much vetting they actually did of her, doesn't it.

A really top-grade one could charm the pants off everyone in the room 

Exactly. Mine could charm anyone in public. At home a whole 'nother story.
I think she is narcissistic, but has some other disorder(s) which override the narcissism. Which brings us to extremely short attention span....

Maybe that's why she showed up to so many events looking like she'd stumbled out of an all-night party in somebody else's clothes.

You're probably onto something there.

a lot of time on set would be spent getting her hair and make up done, fitting clothes choosing jewellery, and interfering with stuff like catering.

I so wish we had a like button....:-)

Having been trotted it out for the wedding, was Doria not deemed good enough to mingle with Meg's glitterati Hollywood friends in a more casual setting

In a casual setting, far too easy for mom to accidentally/inadvertently spill the beans a put whatever lie mm has told everyone?


Yes! My dear spouse has asked me later a few times where I know that lady (or gentleman) in line at a grocery store checkout because they were telling me their life's story. I would shrug and say I had never met them before. "THEN WHY ARE THEY TELLING YOU ALL THESE THINGS?" "Maybe because I'm the only person they met this year that was interested in them."


Yes! I can't tell you how many times this has happened to me. People often say to me how do you find out so many things about people? Uh, because I listen/ask questions. You wouldn't believe all the things people tell me about their personal lives.

I can't fathom being at a royal garden party and being bored. You'd have to drag me away to the next part; I wouldn't want to leave.

And for a true narc...so many connections to be made. All kinds of opportunities for people to fawn over you. And who knows which one will invite you to be part of their circle so that they can fawn some more.
Maneki Neko said…
Swamp Woman said 'While I would like to *think* I would act with demure decorum,' and then 'I probably wouldn't have lasted the 20 minutes before being escorted out.'.

I'm sure you would have behaved impeccably, do not compare yourself to MM who must be an ill-mannered ignoramus of the highest order if she said out aloud that she was bored. What an ungrateful, uncouth, obnoxious boor if that story is true.
Fairy Crocodile said…
@The Tide, Indy, Swamp Woman, Wild boar Battle Maid

I can believe she complained about being bored or accused people of being boring and was overheard.

First she is lacking basic manners and training to politely interact with people keeping a nice smile.

Second as a narcissist she would be totally incapable of taking interest in anything but herself. Personally I believe you can always find a subject to talk about with anybody - if you invite the person to tell you about him/herself and then elaborate on the subject. "And you say you are a baker? I respect you so much, making a good bread is an art. And what is your favorite bread? And why?" "Are you a farmer? Do you breed rare pigs? How interesting. And what is your favorite breed? Why?"

I believe if many people heard she was complaining about being bored the Harkles would indeed be instructed to leave.
Jenx said…
https://www.laineygossip.com/how-jessica-mulroney-used-white-privilege-and-white-fragility-against-sasha-exeter/66442

Lainy's latest. Long and convoluted and the lady doth protest too much. She is trying real hard to distance herself from this. Wonder why?
@Fairy Croc, I agree. I think she/they were overheard and then were told to leave. They got kicked out. Would explain the photograph of her in the car leaving.
Jenx said…
Think about her Africa photo shoot. No doubt she was in and out and back to a 5-star hotel within an hour. If she stuck around, to work, to listen, to do meetings, to share a meal, there would photos.

She seriously miscalculated the royal job description and doesn't quite understand the word duty. And now, here she is, nothing. Tough lesson to learn in front of the whole world.
Hikari said…
@Constant,

Yes, the body language of both in the pair seems very tense/downcast. Meg is staring at her lap with head down and Harry's glaring straight ahead like he wants to punch the windows out.

If Meg had whined audibly that she was bored and wanted to leave, having gotten her wish, she should have looked happier, no? She should have been preening herself in the rearview mirror and smiling, particularly if they were 'heading off to their fabulous honeymoon which they had postponed especially to be there.' Maybe Hazza had told her off in the car just before the photo was snapped, if he was embarrassed that she'd caused a scene at Pa's birthday party. It really doesn't seem like an offhand cutting remark by anyone else as they exited would have had that effect. Meg is generally deaf to the approbations of others, but maybe because her precarious security depends on keeping Harry on-side, when he tells her off, he can sometimes ellicit the teary-eyed bride look (cf. Trooping the Colour 2019)

When this pair does not think the cameras are watching, the facade drops instantly . . and in Harry's case, often when the cameras *are* watching and he knows it, he cannot bring himself to fake the look of transported newlywed bliss that according to Meg's PR we should be seeing. Harry has looked utterly whipped and miserable in at least 90% of the photos of him since 2016, whether he's attached to Meg or not. I think it's a complete show marriage. How long before this tawdy show is cancelled?
TheTide said…
Why would this be labeled Prince Charles' birthday garden party in May, when his birthday is in November?
@Hikari, yep, reckon someone tore her a new one, either JH or someone else. It wouldn't have been just an offhand cutting remark, it would've been a paint-peeling episode-especially to get a reaction like that from her. She looked completely shamed, and we all know how rare that is for her.

You can fake a happy marriage to the outside world but eventually it gets too tiring(or the 2 involved just stop caring anymore) to keep up the facade. Am watching this in happening in real time to a couple I know. It's been fascinating to observe over time. Expecting filing any day now.
At that garden party, MM was also photographed sticking her tongue out. Loudly stating that you're bored, sticking your tongue out - those are the actions of a bratty 5-year-old, not a mature adult. And while I've read that she can be extremely charming to people she thinks are useful to her in some way, I'll bet she thought the other guests at the garden party were of no use to her and therefore not worth talking to.
Maneki Neko said…
@The Tide

Good question. In fact, it was held 'to celebrate the work of The Prince's Charities in the year of His Royal Highness's 70th Birthday.' (www.royal.uk)
@TheTide

Royal events are often held during better weather months as opposed to the actual month the event occurred. The Queen's birthday for example. Its in April (I think???) but celebrated in June when the weather is better.
TheTide said…
https://pagesix.com/2020/06/15/meghan-markle-described-as-a-fame-addict-in-new-royals-book/

Cindy Adams:

I first met Britannia’s Jamaica-born Lady Colin Campbell long before they built London Bridge. We’ve also visited one another when she did books on Princess Diana.

“Georgie,” we call her, lives in assorted castles, knows everyone who’s someone in London and writes about no one who’s just anyone.

On June 25, Simon & Schuster publishes her “Meghan and Harry: The Real Story.”

She says Meghan wants to run for president of the US someday and that “England doesn’t do it for her.” She describes her as “an operator… a fame addict”… who’s “had a series of men.”

Page 261 states “Meghan’s whole life is an act.” Harry? “was desperate to meet someone”… “he’s not the swiftest”… “he’s a prop.” Page 217 calls him “pathetic.”

I know that this book’s been through more layers of lawyers than Harvey Weinstein. Still, you should hold it wearing gloves.

Lady Colin Campbell knows from scandals. She’s bounced through a few in her colorful life. She told me on the phone: “I know the lot. The royals. The courtiers. They’re friends. I’ve attended their parties. Been to their homes. And I’ve taken care to be positive and even handed, although Meghan’s thrown the whole British family under the bus.”

Also from Her Ladyship’s mouth, which is as tart as her pen: “This person is no more suited to royal life than Angelina Jolie would be to competitive boxing. She has inflated herself beyond natural entitlement. Since she always wanted to be a star, she has this propensity for exaggeration.

“As for Harry, he should have been instructive. This nonsense that she didn’t at first know so much about him… I mean, please. She’d looked him up in books. And she pats him like, ‘good boy.’ She even answers for him.”

Campbell also writes that Mrs. Harry planned financial deals for herself from the beginning. “She went into the marriage intending to embark on commercial enterprises. That’s something forbidden to the royals.”
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Maneki Neko, Jenx, Constant Gardener, Hikari

If this is true she always wanted to be royal on her own terms and intended to use it for commercial activity, her garden party fiasco would have infuriated her. The logic would be:

You think I am not good enough? I will bloody show you!

Hence her activism and political agenda she had been advised against. She would have seen any attempt to direct her to more traditional royal route as a personal insult. Come her leaks about "modernizing the monarchy" "hitting the ground running" "feminism", queue nonsensical speeches and magazines.

Brought up in America with it's heavy emphasis on personal success and lacking understanding about the British history and the monarchy's role and place within it, she would have tried what always worked in the States: Hollywood style PR campaign. Everything she did and said really fitted neatly into this concept. But it would be totally alien to the British who are accustomed to certain ways and certain standards of behavior from the the royals.

She would have seen herself as a valiant fighter against a moldy system, a bright star in the obsolete hierarchical order led by a geriatric woman. This explains a lot in her behavior.
TheTide said…
I'm thinking the "I want to leave, I'm bored" after 20 minutes gossip is spot on.

https://twitter.com/sage1411/status/1272534537948413952
TheTide said…
That's the same thing she did in Fiji at the market -- spend a few minutes then make an excuse to leave because of "security issues" -- so she and Jessica could go to their spa treatments. That's probably why the female RPO quit, she saw what Meghan was going to be like in the future and noped right out of there. And nothing like utterly offending the women at the market who waited who knows how long to meet her.

lizzie said…
I can believe M complained about being bored at the garden party and wanted to leave. We've seen her drag Harry away from events when he or the person he was talking to was practically in mid-sentence before. (Like after the Commonwealth Day service in 2019 and during some tour events.)

And if it's not all about her, it's boring. After all, at the visit to the retired actors care home in December 2018 (wearing that bizarre white/lavender print tight summer dress) she felt the need to tell everyone she felt "very pregnant" that day (when she was barely 5 months along). Obviously she could have talked about acting to them! And at the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the investiture of Charles as PoW two full months before Archie was born, she felt the need to tell Welsh Secretary Cuirns that she looked very different than she had when they last met, and that they were "almost there" all while clutching and caressing her pregnant belly. I'm pretty sure that wasn't necessary and if I had been him, I would have found it quite awkward.
Hikari said…
Constant said:

You can fake a happy marriage to the outside world but eventually it gets too tiring(or the 2 involved just stop caring anymore) to keep up the facade. Am watching this in happening in real time to a couple I know. It's been fascinating to observe over time. Expecting filing any day now

Most couples give it the old college try for a while, even if the union is for show and they both know it. The Sussexes looked like this together barely, what, 72 hours after their glittering televised wedding. After Meg was heard to blurt 'F*cK!' in the wedding carriage, I was like . . 'That it? You made it as a Royal Duchess for all of . . 20 minutes (!) tops before you couldn't help showing your true colors?

Take Meg's expensive PR froth away and what you have is a primitive, basic AF grasping woman who even by the standards of self-promotional Hollywood is gauche beyond belief. To be nearly 40 years old and have supposedly been 'a career woman' and have not the slightest clue about interpersonal relations. She attended some of the very best schools, but when in public, frankly acts like she doesn't even know how to use silverware.

If Meg and I didn't share a nationality, I could probably just laugh her off as an entertaining freak show, but as an American woman, I am insulted on behalf of my nation. After Britain's last horrible experience with an American divorcee in the House of Windsor, if Meg had had any couth or any modicum of intention to represent her home nation admirably in her new role, she could have been someone both nations could respect as a good addition to the royal family and to Anglo-American relations. Unless one has a personal friend who is American, most Britons' conception of America and Americans is going to come from popular entertainment--movies, TV, Internet gossip. I get twisted in the guts to think what Meg has done for the reputation of American women abroad. She's arguably the highest-profile female figure who is not British born connected with the UK, and *this* is how she represents American womanhood to our British cousins.

I have to go with the explanation that her behavior at least in part is attributable to mental illness of a profound order because it is inconceivable that someone would *choose* on purpose to behave in such disgusting, shameful ways on the world stage. I really think she is not in full command of her faculties and does not fully grasp what her behavior looks like to the observers.

I hope Lady Colin Campbell has connections in Australia and spills the tea over what transpired at Australia House. We've heard the rumors . . we've seen the tweets from AH staff about the nightmare horror she was to serve, and the fact that she and Harry were having screaming rows every day about 'the baby' and sleeping in separate rooms and the smiles and hand-holding only came out when they were on walkabout for cameras. But I'd like another confirmation of these. This was 5 months into the marriage, but in truth I don't think this marriage has been genuine for even 5 minutes.
xxxxx said…
If Meghan's behavior was that childish and awful at the garden party, my guess is the Duo got high on marijuana before going. Perhaps it was obvious to others that they were stoned. So they got the bum's rush.
Hikari said…
If Meghan's behavior was that childish and awful at the garden party, my guess is the Duo got high on marijuana before going. Perhaps it was obvious to others that they were stoned. So they got the bum's rush.

Seems like MJ would chill her out and make her more amenable? Unless she was slurring her words or reeked of cannabis? That sashay walk seemed overly exaggerated like she was either overcompensating to keep her balance, possibly being high, or else a big FU, kiss my a$$ signal.

It's not a stretch to believe that she or the both of them might have been on something, but unless she was jonesin' for a bag of Doritos, seems like the ganja would make her more content to stay, not less. I'm not familiar with the effects of controlled substances to say.

It was one of the few times that her outfit and hair were entirely appropriate to the occasion. I really thought she was making an effort here, and only learned about the fracas sometime later. If Meg thought that playing Duchess dress up for half an hour was going to be sufficient effort, though, she was completely wrong.
Maneki Neko said…
Hikari, I understand your embarrassment but I'd like to think that most people wouldn't judge American women based on MM's behaviour. I have relatives in the US and wouldn't associate MM with them.

If she couldn't hack it for more than 20 minutes (15 max + the time to inform Charles and arrange a car), and couldn't as an 'actress' even pretend, then she didn't even try and made zero effort. And this just a few days after getting the ring on her finger. Shows just how interested in her new family and new role she was.
HappyDays said…
Somewhat OT, but upon reading Doria has moved in with the Harkles as an “unofficial nanny” has second baby on the way or on the way soon written all over it.
Glowworm said…
@ConstantGardener...exactly. When have we seen her NOT have her rictus smile plastered on her face? I can only think of two times...her raging look in the car after the March event with Harry (when she wore the bright red dress) and this shamed look after the garden party. IMO, she was upset, very upset.

For those who say they see no time when she could have said anything, the entire event was NOT videoed. She may have made the remarks after the speeches and before the video began. What we see on the video is she was on a roll, chatting up her fangirls, being filmed just like she wanted....then PC lowered the boom. Lol. Perfect.
Miz Malaprop said…
@Hikari re: Controlled Substances. A bit of marijuana wouldn't have someone desperate for Doritos or behaving poorly, especially if they were regular consumers. It would be more like the effect of a glass of wine ... a bit more relaxed, chatty, not out of control. Sometimes people will get reddish eyes, or droopy eyes. Cocaine might have made her chattier, more upbeat and awake, but neither of these drugs is really very strong unless used in large quantities, especially by experienced users.

@ Wild Boar Battle-maid re:Seattle. I live a few blocks away from the Seattle area known as CHAZ/CHOP or the Police-Free zone. In spite of the media representing Seattle or the Capitol Hill area as a lawless enclave of communists, actually it's quite calm here. Yes, there are some hippie kids, a few revolutionaries, but that's not unusual for Seattle. The area they've "overtaken" is mostly a city park.

Take what you hear from the news media with a very large grain of salt. Remember when MM was a wonderful addition to the royal family?
Sandie said…
@Indy:

Thanks or that info. So, that is what Lady C was told - Meghan was overheard telling Harry that she found this kind of royal event (meet and greet the public and socialise with charity people) boring. I reckon she was not on camera when she was overheard saying this to Harry.

I can kind of believe this because:

* We now know that Megxit was being planned before the wedding (Meghan had already realised the gig where she was not top dog and where she couldn't do things her way was not for her, and, yes, she did find the public boring because she has no interest in other people unless they can do something for her).

* Harry was completely enthralled by her and was very easily manipulated by her. You can see this by his behaviour at the garden party.

So, do you think someone at the garden party told Charles (discreetly spoke in his ear, but unfortunately that is not on camera) what she had said and how Harry reacted (I guess that part would have been very hurtful for Charles) and Charles, being hurt and furious (and I have no doubt there had been a build up of Meghan shenanigans) reacted, called for Harry, and told them to leave, but in a polite way?

That is the only way I can join the dots, and it is quite a shocking picture.
TheTide said…
@Sandie, you can bet whoever heard this made sure it traveled fast and far. Couldn't have taken more than a few moments for Prince Charles to hear of it from a staffer and oust them. Staffers surely were hyper aware of everything going on.
Sandie said…
@Jenx said...
https://www.laineygossip.com/how-jessica-mulroney-used-white-privilege-and-white-fragility-against-sasha-exeter/66442

Lainy's latest. Long and convoluted and the lady doth protest too much. She is trying real hard to distance herself from this. Wonder why?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lainey wants to avoid what happened to Jessica and so is desperately trying to stay on the right side of the BLM protests, as is Meghan.

It is quite instructive to see how these three, who were as thick as thieves and who collaborated to get Meghan the royal gig, are now scrambling around in such an unseemly manner. It is not classy at all, and it is certainly shallow self-serving cynicism to the extreme.

Lainey was the one who started the rumour about Catherine not taking Meghan shopping with her and was there to spread Meghan's story from the beginning; Jessica helped Meghan up the ladder and was with her for every key moment in the capture of Harry, plus threatened people on behalf of Meghan to change stories, and Meghan did not seem to have a problem with that, but now ...

The real story in all of this is the one of these three women!
SwampWoman said…
HappyDays said...
Somewhat OT, but upon reading Doria has moved in with the Harkles as an “unofficial nanny” has second baby on the way or on the way soon written all over it.


Poor child if true.
SwampWoman said…
I would like to go to the same hair salon as the wives of the drivers that carry the Harkles around.
Sooz said…
I hesitate to post as I don't want to interrupt the flow of this topic - I'm really enjoying all the comments, but there's a new Harry Markle up - more info on the Archewell fiasco ...

https://twitter.com/sage1411/status/1272534537948413952
TheTide said…
Yesterday I posted something from Twitter about the profits from the Grenfell cookbook. Today on CDAN:

Monday, June 15, 2020
Blind Item #12

Apparently there have been several questions raised about the profits and the copyright of a cookbook organized by the alliterate former actress turned royal for charity.

Posted by ent lawyer at 11:30 AM 0 Comments
CookieShark said…
I think on Twitter I read that MM may have made a political remark that was overheard and deemed inappropriate, or used vulgar language.

Liza Minelli tweeted today, I believe, that she hasn't been in contact with the Harkles. Why did she feel the need to set the record straight? Why not let it just go the way of "Tom Cruise Conversations with Dolphins" - type of tabloid fodder?

Liza is a talented, accomplished Hollywood star. For some reason she felt it necessary to go on the record and distance herself from them. Omid's tweet "Oh" in response is disrespectful and unprofessional. But what's new?

I wonder if this story was planted with the hopes that Liza would be flattered and call them: "You'll never believe what I just read, ha ha!"
Indy said…
@Sandie, wow, I didn't know Lainey was a Stan all the way back from the beginning before they were married or that she was the source of so many rumors. I've never read her stiff. But you're right , it's hysterical to see the three of them scramble . They should just lie low and they no straight for awhile but then again it's fun to see. And my guess is another camera has that footage of Meghan saying she was noted and the RF probably squashed that . It's in the garbage bin.
TheTide said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Can't see Doria moving in--it was said before about FrogCot. She seems to be intensely private so why join a circus? Also, what about her partner? This smacks of showing how woke the Harkles are. But calling your mother a "nanny" is really offensive. She's the grandmother, granny, etc. The nanny is hired, the granny is free.
TheTide said…
https://twitter.com/LouLouLa10/status/1272604766024216580

Well the word is out now on the garden party scandal. And yes I am gobsmacked too! It wasn’t the tongue or the taking of gifts. Meghan told Harry she was bored and wanted to leave! And an attendee at the event overheard this. She apparently badgered Harry to go and he told her
1/2

they had to stay on longer to do their bit. This whole conversation was overheard! Well can you believe that. The fantastic Murky Meg has finally updated us on this . Just hilarious! You could not write it,its so carcrash. Though I am glad Lady Campbell has done just that! 2/2
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Aquagirl said…
@Hikari: I agree with you. I don’t think that Doria has been in the UK since the cookbook launch. I think that the ‘Archie Introduction’ photo
with Doria, HM, and PP was photoshopped, and we know that, not only was the Christening photo photoshopped, but the photo was taken on the same day as the ‘Archie Introduction’ photo. This has been proven.

As far as when Doria’s involvement began, we know that she complicit at the Invictus Games along with JM & MA. Those photos are so sad. It was like leading the lamb to the slaughter.
Aquagirl said…
*she was complicit
Aquagirl said…
@Wullie’sBucket: Yep. Supposedly Priyanka gifted sterling silver items from Tiffany’s.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
xxxxx said…
fwiw -- Call her Narc but I was always thinking bi-polar and after that ADD. Megsy having her bi-polar up days and weeks where she is the genius conqueror of the world. Yeah, let's defy the Queen/BRF, make these stiffs look like the clowns they really are, and merch out our Royal titles for millions, the sky's the limit!! Maybe a little coke sniffs to enhance. But really. I think Megs has enough chem disorders with no need for upper drugs.

I can see Megs and Harry smoking pot and consuming otherwise, the legal marijuana boutiques have tres expensive candies and edibles in California. I never touch the stuff.
xxxxx said…
What really happened at the garden party?
12,026 views•Jun 15, 2020
Murkey Meg -12 minutes long-- posted today at you tube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAME4MWXv5c
Wullie'sBucket said...

"I know that this book’s been through more layers of lawyers than Harvey Weinstein. Still, you should hold it wearing gloves."

I read this as "Although it has been through more lawyers than HW, it is still too hot to handle."
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Somewhat OT, but interesting. I just received this from the Canadian Taxpayers' Federation:

Dear Supporter,

You took a stand against taxpayers paying the bills for Meghan and Harry when they moved to Canada. It turns out that stand saved taxpayers a lot of money.

We have to documents to prove it.

Remember when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau refused to say whether or not Canadian taxpayers were footing the bills for Meghan and Harry?

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has discovered that taxpayers paid more than $50,000 for Meghan and Harry’s brief stay in Canada.

You and more than 80,000 Canadians signed our petition telling Trudeau that taxpayers shouldn’t be on the hook for the famous couple’s bills and we delivered those signatures to Parliament Hill.

Taxpayers emailed and phoned the prime minister’s office to make sure he got the message.

On Feb. 27, 2020, the feds finally said that taxpayers wouldn’t be paying for the royal couple’s security bills anymore.

But, what about before that? We’ve got the exclusive answer.

The RCMP spent $56,384 from Nov. 18, 2019, to Jan. 19, 2020, according to documents we obtained through access to information requests.

And that money was just for overtime and expenses. The bill doesn’t include the regular salaries for the Mounties who were working security for Meghan and Harry. We’re still pushing to get those bills.

Here’s the bottom line: if taxpayers hadn’t said no to paying the bills for Meghan and Harry, it could have cost us hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.

Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
xxxxx said…
"I know that this book’s been through more layers of lawyers than Harvey Weinstein. Still, you should hold it wearing gloves."

A Foie gras goose has had more feed stuffed down its throat,
Jenx said…
@lighthealefastrid. I saw that! She really thought she could fleece us nice, polite Canadians. Ha!
Another of her MOs... She says and does stuff and counts on people to stay quiet. Lisa said nope. Priyanka said nope. Canada said nope.
Piroska said…
@Hikari said There are those recurring rumors that Meg has been padding her mother's bank account with the merching proceeds in order to hide them from the BRF and possibly Uncle Sam.
I used to be one of HM Inspectors of Taxes and can assure that any rumours of a sudden increase in wealth would result in an investigation into the last submitted tax return at the very least. I would assume that the IRS follows a similar procedure.
Sorry for the delay in responding to this topic but it has taken me quite some time to catch up with this blog- I do try to read all of the comments
Getting an error message and having to retype the whole thing has not helped
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Lighthealer Astrid

This made me proud for the Canadian taxpayers who took a stand and saved themselves hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments for two worthless individuals and their child. 56K for just overtime from November to January! I imagine how huge the total cost is.

It also tells us how much they actually cost. It makes me angry and sad. There are so much more deserving cases than Harry and his shameless wife.

Aquagirl said…
O/T: Tyler Perry is paying for the funeral of Rayshard Brooks. Wonder what he thinks about all of MM’s BLM faux outrage?
Maybe she didn't just say she was `bored' - would `Bl**dy well f*cking bored with all these dumbasses' be more like it?

We were told ages ago (before wedding? about time of engagement?) that she couldn't be bothered with those who didn't measure up to her standards of `beauty'? (that narc thing about being entitled to associate with only `special people'.) No way would she chat to guests who were plain or `homely'.

HM's opening gambit with strangers is often `Have you come far?' That too is a good opener, - I'm sure she has such a good grasp of UK and world geography she could say something appropriate like `I remember when we were there some years ago that ...' wherever they were from.

I doubt if MM's concept of London geography extends to Admiralty Arch at the far end of the Mall, let alone Constitution Hill or Birdcage Walk, or the rest of the UK.

She is shallower than a stableyard puddle.
Hikari said…
@Aquagirl,

Doria was part of the coterie that ambushed Harry at the Invictus Games in Toronto, but what we don’t know is her level of foreknowledge or knowing collusion with Meg’s schemes. Personally, I never bought the Saint Doria narrative any more than I but the Saint Meg one. Doria is 1/2 creator of this corrupt human being, and her own personal conduct over the years has been in a word, dodgy. However, I don’t assume That Meg is close to her mother these days, if she ever was. Meg bent over backwards to deny the African-American side of herself, Including her black family members, who as we see we’re not invited to her wedding. Doria may have schooled young Meg in how to pursue transactional relationships, but Meg may have not read her completely into her plans. Knowledge can be dangerous. I don’t rule out that Meg could have all seven playing her mother along with the rest of the world and Harry. If her gambit was to coerce hairy into marriage with the tale of a false pregnancy, who better to have along to help apply the pressure to make an honest woman out of her (such a laugh) than her mother? Was she kept from visiting Meg during the “pregnancy” after the wedding, or attending the baby shower because she knew too much? Or, equally likely, because she thought the pregnancy was genuine? Meg could fend off ordinary people wanting to touch her bump or get too close… But her own mother was gonna want to touch her stomach, and expect to, if she thought the pregnancy was real. Presumably at some point after that, if her image was employed in doctored pictures with a baby that isn’t really Meg’s, Doria would have to be told the truth. If a great deal of money has somehow found it into her bank account over the last two years...She may know where it came from, or she might have been told that they were gifts from the extremely wealthy British royal family. Meg had very little conception of how the royal family works, so with her mother have cause to disbelieve it!

Doria does not really sit right with me, considering what we know about Meg’s dysfunctional childhood. But I am willing to give her the benefit of the doubt until we know otherwise for certain that she didn’t necessarily know everything her daughter was up to, and attended the wedding in good faith. Oh this recycled nonsense about Doria being imported to wherever Megan’s living to be “the nanny” Shows a blatant disrespect to her mom in my book. Even if Doria is cooperating in this con, wouldn’t she object strenuously to be in continually labeled as the help, not the loving grandma? It’s a throwback to megs earlier story about Doria being mistaken for the nanny in Meg’s predominately white neighborhood. The 1940s actress Merle Oberon had a mother who was Indian, from India, and introduced her to people as her maid. It was a real life Imitation of Life. Is this how a proud woke feminist woman treats the mother who taught her to be a proud biracial light bearer? My eye.

.
Aquagirl said…
@Hikari: I agree with your overview of Doria, and I do not believe that she and MM are close. She’s just another pawn in the game. However, the marriage couldn’t have been coerced through claims of a false pregnancy. At the time of the Invictus Games, they had been broken up for approximately nine months. So the question is, on what basis did they ambush him? Because they clearly did. I tend to think that it had to do with videos of Harry. Something that he did (either related to sex and/or drugs) or something that he said (regarding the BRF.) That would also explain the participation of Markus, because I’d imagine that any videos would’ve originated from SoHo House.
Este said…
I lost interest in Lainey Gossip when she traded out her celebrity snark for SJW credentials. Her analyses are predictable word vomit. For someone who I'm sure likes to think of herself as a good writer, she sure needs to use a lot of words to make her point and it's the same ones over and over. So I stopped reading her blog awhile ago but just had to return when Jessica Mulroney just dropped a stink bomb on Meghan's world. It's delicious karma with lots of potential for a nuclear fall out, tho not right away, no not too soon. But to get back to Lainey's word vomit of a desperate defense of her SJW credentials posing as response to the "Jessica situation," and seeing ahead to Meghan's inevitable ghosting of her BFF she makes the claim that Jessica benefited from Meghan and Meghan got nothing from her. Well, if the rumor mill is correct, Jessica's been trying to influence the media for Meghan, is one of her friends that supposedly will come to her defense at her trial and whose been helping her merch the firm and her short stint with them, that's a ridiculously false claim coming from Lainey. But if that argument that "she's nothing without me" is true from Jessica vis a vis Meghan it's doubly true for Meghan vis a vis the Royal Family. Meghan would be nothing but a made for TV actress who would likely have faded into utter irrelevancy when Suits ended had it not been for marrying a Prince and joining the Royal Family, if only for months. But of course, Lainey spins it the complete opposite. Meghan was going to remake The Firm and was the best thing that ever happened to the Firm, yadda yadda yadda.

While I'm sympathetic to BLM and racism we continue to have to address in America, ID politics is a crock because the truth and the complexity of the matter with people never comes into play. If you're white you have privilege regardless of whether you're poor or sick or homeless. If you're black, you're oppressed regardless of whether you're rich or healthy or famous.

The truth of the matter, as I see it, Jessica Mulroney and Meghan Markle are 2 peas in a pod. They are both highly ambitious and were helping and using each other. And they're both wicked narcissists and elitists.
Jdubya said…
As part of Meg's racism speel - she said when her mom Doria took her for a walk in the neighborhood, people saw then and thought she was the nanny. (because of the color difference). She she is saying, yup, she's gonna be my son's nanny.
Snippy said…
@Este, I used to read Lainey religiously too, from way back, but had to drop it when she started the fawning over Megsy. I too read her lengthy post on the JM situation, and though she wrote an essay she didn't really say much other than "I don't know her".

However, she also slipped in a little nugget about how the British press were so horribly racist to Meghan, without offering any actual examples. Other than a comment about Meghan bringing "exotic blood" to the RF or something similar, I can't think of one instance where anything with a whiff of racism was written about her. Even in the DM comments, which have been scathing, I can't recall anything racist. She and JH have been judged fairly, on their behaviour, not the colour of her skin. Why would Lainey still be trotting out this unfounded allegation if she didn't have a dog in the hunt?
Sandie said…
If anyone has not seen this:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8422339/Edited-photos-imagine-royals-look-like-opposite-sex.html

Brilliant!
CatEyes said…
Wowser! I think it proves one thing, definitely William and Catherine look attractive no matter what. Poor Harry loses in the looks department and poor thing he is just average looking as a woman as he is as a man. I don't find the mannish Meg much better really. I was shocked that Diana didn't fare better but she still looked more attractive than either of the HAMS.

What a skillful job the artist did and very convincing. Meghan would probably think she comes across as a reformulated hunk a la Cary Grant or Clark Cable. I really never thought she was some great beauty but did have pretty eyes.
Margery said…
@Este,
Two things really boil my blood, as far as the Markle situation stands.
1) Foremost, the horrible smears against the Cambridges, esp. Catherine, that Markle puts out, and which mostly go unchallenged, and
2) The narrative that she has been a victim of racism from the royal family and the British people. This has been repeated so often that it is accepted as fact, even though, as you say, there is scant evidence to support it.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sandie said…
There is a new Harry Markle post:

https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2020/06/15/is-archewell-a-hoax/

lucy said…
@sandie ha! Thanks for the share! All that work and left Diana's earings on? Was fun to look at. Meghans teeth look more appropriate in male mouth

@wullie I saw same pic! had around 600 "likes" lmao disgraceful for "cool kids" table. I wonder who paid for the meal? Maybe a pair of the girls earrings and anothers bracelet

These ladies really bring out my inner jerk.

Have enjoyed reading everyone's comments. I have a feeling once book is released this place will be ghost town for 8 hours then explode! Who is the speed reader?

@Nutty have you ordered a copy?
@Margery, yes I would like to see one of these "racist" articles. Possibly, by just saying something along the lines of "Isn't it great that a biracial woman is joining the RF" a news outlet is being racist in some people's eyes. IIRC Lainey has said a number of nasty things about the Royals, HMTQ included. All three of them, LL, MM and JM, have hit out at Catherine. All nasty pieces of work IMO. Reading LL's latest comments makes me cringe. These women have no loyalty, no sense of duty, no ethics. It's all ME ME ME.
lucy said…
First and only article I ever read of Laineys was link posted few days back regarding her BLM summit. I didnt even tune in for her JM manifesto. Whoever said earlier lots of words saying nothing was spot on. I knew she would read that way. I do not appreciate that crowd nor the influencer mentality and that article did zero to sway me

@swampwoman I hear you.
xxxxx said…
Thanks Swampy-W! I am pushing the vastly agree button on your comment.
As far as Lainy goes her latest comment is a leftist garbage dump. I never go there but I read all of her latest post as she dumps JM and Megs for her own salvation.

Bottom line: Lainy is still on TV and JM been ousted from all her shows.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
xxxxx said…
Yeah this from Swampy-W. Truth!

"SERIOUSLY? He's paying for a fancy funeral for another POS woman beater and child abuser that was so drunk that he passed out in the Wendy's drive thru lane, then beat up the policeman that was called, took his taser, and was trying to taze the police when he was shot?"
Anonymous said…
Should the story about her demanding to leave the party because it was so boring be true, I don’t think it strange that she should look so downcast and Harry furious as they drove away. At one point Charles whispers something in Harry’s ear, and I can imagine what it was: Harry, your wife is clearly unable to handle herself at formal events. Please get her out of here before she makes more egregious faux pas. She is disgracing us.” I do not et the impression that many people call Meghan on her shit, and if they do, she just internally flips them off. I think that sashay out the door was a fuck you, Charles, but I also think the face in the car is one of shame. Narcs cannot stand to be criticized, and not even Markle at that point could ignore the criticism of the Prince of Wales. She had the same reaction when Harry called on her to stop talking and turn around at Trooping of the Color. Shame, which I am sure was followed by rage when they got home. Where ever that was. If she had/has this exalted opinion of herself as a royal princess, then to be called on her shit by the Prince of Wales must have been initially galling. At some point thought, she’s been able to consume her own PR that they aren’t worthy of them. It’s obvious that only three days into their marriage that she considered these meet and greets as only an excuse to dress up and play “princess” for 20 minutes. The concept of duty is so foreign to her that I’m sure to this day she is completely baffled as to what she did wrong. That doesn’t give Harry a pass. To be the only royal child in attendance must have been a honor and a chance to shine without being in William’s shadow. At what point is he going to realize that she is exactly the LAST person to help him do that?
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Natalier said…
Now that we have a possible idea on why they left the garden party early, it also informs on my suspicion abt the cancelled visit to the market in Tonga. I'd always said Meghan faked a security threat to get out of the visit. She knew there were no important or famous people there, no glamorous photoshoot and in her opinion, unimportant locals waiting to meet her. She did not want to do the job and got her security to fake a security threat.
Rut said…
Maybe Harry and Meghan told someone about Liza Minelli just to see who is leaking to the press?
Indy said…
I can't believe this. Remember that CRISIS HOTLINE Meg's and Harry zoom crashed???? They just fired the CEO , effective immediately for abusive and offensive racism , racist remarks . So are they Markled? Seriously every single thing they touch turns into turd pies. I mean, geez. I just can't believe this . It makes about 1% of me feel sorry for them . KARMA just keeps ticking after it gives these two a licking. And now questions about the money from that cookbook???
That Doria is amazing! She can teleport just like StarTrek!

She flew in for the wedding and we actually got a pap picture at the airport.

She flew in for the birth, Christening, and who knows what else and....crickets. No pictures whatsoever. Nobody seems to have seen her. Now she moves into TPs house and not one pap picture, not one? LA isn't as locked down as people think so there are paps around. No pictures of Doria moving in? And who's living in her house if she moved in to TP?
Leela said…
aHikari wrote: “ Meg’s narrative that the BRF are unrelenting racists is contradicted by the warm welcome her mother was given by the father of the groom. Not only did Charles step in to perform father of the bride duties—highly irregular to say the least, both he and Camilla tried to include Doria in the pictures so she wasn’t standing alone.”

Just want to say my father was a true racist, used the N word, made sure we lived in towns that did not allow people if other races, etc. but worked for a major corporation and was able to get along with all. Once when a young black handsome friend of mine had done me a large favor, I watched my father shake the friend ‘s hand, smile and make very friendly conversation.

Racists can hide it well.
Nutty Flavor said…
Good morning, all.

This is not the place to debate current events regarding policing, and I would kindly ask you not to do so.
Doris, the Magic Granny! Possessor of an Invisibility Cloak.

I'll buy `boredom' as the reason for her daughter exiting that market pdq - it'd also explain why she demonstrated complete lack of interest in the famine memorial on the Quayside in Dublin. She was probably thinking something like `It's bad enough being expected to chat to lousy, ugly peasants but, what the f***, this is just metal!'

There was something to be said for that Dior bell tent she wore in Morocco - it covered her up! At least, for once, her knees, armpits and side boobs weren't on display, to say nothing of bra straps, cleavage and bump, even if the effect was spoiled when she cradled her `abdomen'.
Piroska said…
@Wullie'sbucket -Harry;s girl straight out of Compton - headline Daily Mail 20 November 2016
Fairy Crocodile said…
Piroska
I come from a deprived area with high level of crime. Social bottom. I managed to leave it because I worked bloody hard. When people told about me "she is right out of the "forsaken mile" I just shrugged it off. Because it is true. But it doesnt matter.

Somebody who is determined to take offense will find an opportunity to do so. That article's headline is a non issue. They simply turned it into one.
Teasmade said…
@Fairy: I've always agreed--so what? ONE time, just to make a clever headline. Headlines are hard to write, and sometimes you just grab at a weak but seemingly clever phrase that fits the space you have. Compare this to the air hostess jibes about Carole Middleton.

Plus--and I've read this only one time: a suggestion that the idea to say that was planted by MM herself.

She's made a whole career, and no doubt several million dollars for herself and her mother's bank account, on claiming a racial status that she has done everything to disavow and cover up.
lucy said…
When first hearing of quick exit from garden party I thought perhaps Meg told Harry she was bored out of neediness and to seek his attention. Someone overheard and granted her wish but she didnt really want to leave and now she had no choice, hence her demeanor in car.

But she clearly shows same pattern of behavior at future events .So stands to reason she really did want to leave after 20 minutes and frankly I am dumbfounded

First royal engagement. She looked fantastic and prior to that strut on the way out, appeared to be charming and engaging

How can she form any sort of opinion let alone be bored in span of 20 minutes? Especially at first engagement! Only thing I can think to is perhaps she was coming down from some drugs and needed more.

Sorry I know you all have been all over this past couple days but I had my own thought and obviously wrong. I haven't been around, I did read every comment but when I fall behind I fail to comprehend as well. I am going to have to go back and reread

She did not even try. Hit the ground running straight out of her first royal engagement. Not sure why I am so amazed by that but at the time didnt have benefit of knowing what we know now and it shocks me and screams selfish. Even if she wasnt having great time turn on a smile for your husband and show respect to family but again it was literally 20 minutes

Also to add I never felt RF showed any sort of discrimination to Meg whatsoever and from my view over here they really went out of their way to welcome her into the fold.

I remember feeling Doria looked alone at wedding but frankly I think that falls soley on Meghan and it is shame she put her in that position.

I remember the Straight out of Compton but I did not feel it as insulting as when she was referred to as two steps up from trailer park but Compton comment got far more coverage

@swampwoman I apologize my comment upset you and would welcome opportunity to discuss and clear the air and we can do so where you referenced reading the Uber comments if it is comment board or I will offer you my email when I see you posting. It is proton account so I don't fear sharing it I would just rather delete once I know you received it
Piroska said…
@Fairy and @Teasmade I agree with both of you; all of the comments criticised the content an tone of the article
CatEyes said…
@lucy said...

>>>How can she form any sort of opinion let alone be bored in span of 20 minutes? Especially at first engagement! Only thing I can think to is perhaps she was coming down from some drugs and needed more.<<<<

It is a plausible reason but as a poster wrote, marijuana would not be a likely drug to make her act that way nor powder cocaine which might have her be quite chatty and relish the party. But crack cocaine has an insidious effect on the user that they want it urgently when the drug wears off and it surely would have in the time of getting to the engagement and 20 minutes in. A regular crack user generally is insatiable and wants another hit after another. She could easily functioned on crack making small talk but the urge to do more would have her fleeing the scene and back home in private relishing more. It is easier to be a crack use (none of that white powder lingering on your nose sometimes. LOL) than many people would imagine; plus little rocks of crack and a tiny glass pipe are easy enough to hide than a a big pile of powdered cocaine.

I say this only as an explanation not that I believe it. I think it may as many posters explained so well, that Meghan was overheard complaining and was told to leave and perhaps Harry still holding onto to one testicle had the nerve to tell her off in the car right before the photo of shame was taken. There wasn't any hard feelings though with Charles as he went on to pay for hundreds of thousands of money on Meg's clothes.
Este said…
@Wully's Bucket:
"Lainey who is Asian, feels she has been treated unfairly in life, has a major prejudice against white people, and deep anger over white-privilege."

She may well feel this way but I think she sees an opportunity to advance her own agenda and career (aka financial interests) by aligning herself with the hardcore woke celebrity agenda. Professionally speaking, Lainey's done well for herself and has succeed in life so the "poor me" or resentment play doesn't hold water with me. In fact it smacks of ingratitude which is never a good look and makes celebs and their coterie of hangers on and professional promoters look hypocritical and ridiculous.

I agree that Meghan has used her race as cover for some sketchy and divisive actions on her part. I'm reminded of her demanding and getting rows to herself at Wimbleton because she didn't want to see hobnobbing with the sweaty masses who pay big bucks for those seats. See, even that crowd is beneath her, never mind a poor Black bloke. But that's small fry compared to the PR nightmare she's been to a family who made her famous and made her fortune. It sounds more and more like Prince Harry had his own agenda too and a fair amount of sibling jealousy and driftlessness at play here too. I think that book "Finding Freedom" will shed some like on his part in this sordid mess. He sure doesn't seem to care the damage he's done to his own family and that is on him and can't really be blamed on Meghan. I think it's funny that Lady Campbell has her own book coming out and one that will balance out the Saint narrative you know you're gonna get in Scobie's account. And with the Jessica bomb that just exploded, who knows what added egg will be thrown on Harry and Meghan's faces. Jessica won't go down quietly not after all she's done behind the scene for her celebrity BFF. Like I said b4, 2 peas in a pod there. Meghan's played hard ball with TRF and Jessica will have her revenge too on the BFF who ghosted her but revenge is dish best served cold and underhandedly.
Magatha Mistie said…
@Este

Megs platform is due to her marriage into a “white privileged”
Royal family.

Oxymeghan?
TheTide said…
What appears to be the excerpt from Lady C's book -- which I'm buying anyway -- thank You Lady C! Happy to put some $$$ in your pocket :)

https://hunnymae.tumblr.com/post/621011039606259712/formerlyroyal-razziegirl
Magatha Mistie said...
@Este

Megs platform is due to her marriage into a “white privileged”
Royal family.

Oxymeghan?

------

Or DoxyMoron?
Princess Mrs. B said…
I think that the RF, particularly the Queen and Prince Charles have learned from past mistakes and know how difficult it is for an outsider to adapt to life as a working Royal. I never thought they were actually kicked out of the Garden Party. Perhaps it got back to Charles that MM wanted to leave and he was sympathetic and thought it was all too much for her on her first time out with the family, so he whispered to Harry that they could leave to start their honeymoon. Granted, 20 minutes at an event is a total joke for someone used to being in the spotlight but Charles likely hasn't forgotten Diana breaking down in tears in public. MM still had Charles fooled at this time and under her evil spell. I don't think he wanted to do anything to jeopardize Harry's very recent marriage by having MM unhappy. Camilla, of course was not fooled and probably thought Charles was silly for being taken in by "the actress."

Lady CC's "scion of the aristocracy with impeccable Palace connections" most likely saw through the whole farce and recognized this episode for what it was; a big red flag that MM would never conform to the Royal way of doing things and would insist on getting her own way every time. She was happy for the privileges but wanted none of the responsibilities.
Whoa. Why is CCN posting negative Kate stories and rah-rah ing MM? The latest against Kate is just plain nasty.
Magatha Mistie said…
@WildBoar

Doxymoron hahaha!
Grisham said…
Well, that is hardly a scandalous shocking revelation. I hope lady C has more salacious tid bits to tell. Harry hates cameras, they were supposed to be on a honeymoon, and she was bored. Supposedly, they had already decided before the wedding that Harry wanted out.

The guestion is does this prove they weren’t asked to leave?

Maybe her book will fill in some puzzle pieces. Was the publishing date also pushed back in the UK to July?
tatty said, Maybe her book will fill in some puzzle pieces. Was the publishing date also pushed back in the UK to July?

No, according to Amazon my order will be arriving on the 30th June. ;o)
Unknown said…
Magatha Mistie...
"Megs platform is due to her marriage into a “white privileged” Royal family."

Yes, the Royal Family is rich and privileged and white but Meghan wouldn't have any platform without them and I don't see her and her husband staying rogue celebrities that maintain our fascination for much longer.

People love conflict and that's what's driving the ink here, not social justice causes that most of us are tired of hearing about ad nauseaum among celebs. When you know they are all parroting the same woke line and that those who step out of line like JK Rowling are attacked, it gets old quick. That's my 2 cents anyway.
Magatha Mistie said…
@tatty

In, or out, they should have had the manners, decency,
to greet the public, with manners and decency.
re Jessica:

Don't they say `Be nice to people on the way up because you may meet them again on your way down...'
Sandie said…
The royals were out in person today:

* Charles and Camilla went to visit health care workers and thank them.
* William went to visit ambulance workers and thank them.
* Anne went to visit soldiers involved in Covid-19 operations and thank them.

Meghan arranging a pap walk and her and Harry having a huge fight about it? Meghan pushing the time line of the big spectacle planned for the BLM movement (bound to be not only controversial but non-effective)?

I think that perhaps Meghan really believes her intentions are to help others and she is totally unaware of how self-serving she is and how it trips her up every time (plus her grandiose sense of her own worth and capabilities).
I know that Omid Scobie and Co. are pushing the idea that Megxit was JH's idea because he had wanted to leave the BRF for a long time. It's true that he often complained about being royal - I read an article by Rebecca English, who often accompanied him on his tours, and she said he never missed an opportunity to whine about being royal and often said he wished he were an "ordinary bloke". Here's the thing, though: Rebecca English says it was obvious that his idea of an ordinary bloke was someone with the same wealth and privileges as he enjoyed, but without the scrutiny by the public and the press. His idea of an ordinary bloke was certainly not someone who works for a living at a job he may not enjoy, has to budget and pay the rent or mortgage, pay the bills, and worry about being laid off at some point. She wrote that she liked him but he was obviously not bright at all. It didn't seem to occur to him that his royal lifestyle and the restrictions and responsibilities of being royal were inextricably linked.
Tatty -

It was a mighty gaffe - after all, isn't she supposed to be an actress? Can she really not stay in role for more than 20mins?
CookieShark said…
The picture in the car, with her face cast downward, says it all for me.

That is not the expression of someone who left when they wanted to.

Caniche said…
@Wild Boar @Magatha

Poxymoron ? ?
Grisham said…
I think we have seen they don’t have manners, especially Harry.

Good to know the book comes out soon in the UK.
TheTide said…
@CookieShark said...
The picture in the car, with her face cast downward, says it all for me.

That is not the expression of someone who left when they wanted to.


She embarrassed Prince Charles and Camilla immensely which is unforgivable. It wasn't some junior mistake. That was the face of someone who knew they let the mask slip and all eyes were now suspicious.
Sandie said…
https://66.media.tumblr.com/2a355063eb686d8228a22e36665dfdb3/tumblr_qbtfyuKjgZ1xpehvfo1_1280.png

An Anon claiming that Jessica used to get the free stuff for Meghan to merch and that it was still going on as early as January this year. (Despite claiming they were experts in COVID-19 and setting up a platform for all things COVID-19 on a soon-to-be defunct IG account, I think Harry and Meghan were clueless about it and what the effects would be. Maybe Meghan thought she could still use Zoom calls for merching.)

An Anon can claim anything and hide behind the Ann and that several Anons have said the same thing does not necessarily make it true, but gosh, it would be an interesting scandal if named people can provide proof of this from the time that Meghan became 'royal'. Even if it was just to get freebies and not payment, it really would put Meghan in the dustbin of royalty and she would not be able to climb out of that. The BRF courtiers would know that Meghan knew she could not do this and why because they would have briefed her ...

(In her scandal, Sophie was saved because she immediately acted to fix the mistake, kept a low profile and acted according to requirements from then on. Sarah was already out the royal fold when her scandal erupted. Could Meghan get way with faking a mea culpa and reformation and make her way back into the royal fold? Just a thought ...)
Hikari said…
Found this absolutely gormless photo of Harry attached to an article about his hair loss since relocating to L.A.

It’s the stress, innit, Bruv.

Haz Seems to have been snapped midway through making a raspberry to the apparent vast entertainment of his wife. In addition to incomprehensible word salad, what the Harkles seem to offer the world is their Super special talent of being two middle-aged people Who stick their tongues out all the time to show how hip and cheeky they are. They just look rude, and in the case of Harry, Mentally deficient.

For those of you who were around for Charles and Diana’s wedding in 1981, do you remember how relentlessly mocked Charles was as a fuddy duddy who was going bald? Charles did lose a patch on the back of his head, but to this day it appears that he has more hair than any other man in the house of Windsor including his father, his two brothers, and his two sons. Charles was 32 on his wedding day, the Rite Aid has an old goat next to his 20-year-old bride. Harry was a year in a bit older than his dad was when he tied the knot 4 months shy of his 34th birthday. But he’s still calling himself the young royal. Not really that young anymore; just acts like a big baby.

https://apple.news/AB9D139Z-QgSovf3GZjFwbw
Hikari said…
Rite Aid??

Honestly. That should read “derided”.
Have to wonder if apple news is the only outlet for said picture, are they getting paid for said picture?
Fairy Crocodile said…
I wonder who leaked to the Sun that Liza befriended Harry? Sun would not have run the article without a source they deemed reliable.

If the Sun had been deliberately set up to discredit UK's press I don't expect the newspaper will simply drop the matter.

They know where the information came from and Sun will use it later to its advantage.

We may expect some response from the media in retaliation. Interesting what it would be.
Unknown said…
Hey guys! apologies if somebody has already posted this- I am SWAMPED at work and did a quick skim here and couldn't see a mention. Lainey has written a huge takedown of Jessica, with an interesting insight into her relationship with Meghan. I couldn't NOT drop this here, it is fascinating.
https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&cx=013605867031112037315:rizvvhxexxt&q=https://www.laineygossip.com/how-jessica-mulroney-used-white-privilege-and-white-fragility-against-sasha-exeter/66442&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwikxq_g8IbqAhUbVTABHU9mAvAQFjAAegQIABAC&usg=AOvVaw3V5RzQkGktx82ZsPZpuDxJ
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Blogger Caniche said...
@Wild Boar @Magatha

Poxymoron ? ?


Even better! I suppose we should say `allegedly'.
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Unknown

I am sorry but that "article" is dreadful. She is bleating about "white privilege" and "white institutions" and I do not buy it for a minute.

What is the white privilege exactly? I don't have it whatever it is. Was born in a modest family. When I was a kid my father left us with no money and no place to live. Had to study when there was no food. Had to work hard. Had a dreadful first marriage. Got kicked out of the job when I was at my lowest ebb because someone else wanted the position. Never had any state benefits paid to me. Everything I have I have earned or saved. Where is the privilege they are talking about supposedly due to me because I happen to be white? My only privilege is meeting really good people who helped me to get through all this.

Mulroney comes across like a nasty person. There are nasty people in all races. There are excellent people in all races. There white people who help others and people of color who rob other people of color. There are black people who stand to shield white policemen from the crowds.

I wish they stopped this "white privilege" crap. In Mulroney's case this is just a nasty woman who married the son of a former Canadian PM and decided she is untouchable. Glad she had been proved wrong.
lizzie said…
@Princess Mrs B wrote:

"I never thought they were actually kicked out of the Garden Party. Perhaps it got back to Charles that MM wanted to leave and he was sympathetic and thought it was all too much for her on her first time out with the family, so he whispered to Harry that they could leave to start their honeymoon. Granted, 20 minutes at an event is a total joke for someone used to being in the spotlight but Charles likely hasn't forgotten Diana breaking down in tears in public."

I guess Charles could be that naive.

But when Diana began doing royal events she was 20 years old and had worked only as a maid and as a kindergarten assistant before she married. Meghan was nearly 17 years older than Diana had been when she married into the RF, she was purportedly an actress, she had been performing on stage since middle school, she had been on camera one way or the other for over a decade and she had done several events with Harry and other RF members during the engagement period (Anzac Day, Republic of Ireland, "Fab Four" interview, Christmas at Sandringham, and so on) so it wasn't really even her first time out.

Any mid-30s woman with over a decade+ of professional work experience has had to handle more demanding "social" situations at work than 20 minutes at a garden party with her husband.
Sandie said…
@Fairy Crocodile said...
I wonder who leaked to the Sun that Liza befriended Harry? Sun would not have run the article without a source they deemed reliable.

If the Sun had been deliberately set up to discredit UK's press I don't expect the newspaper will simply drop the matter.

They know where the information came from and Sun will use it later to its advantage.

We may expect some response from the media in retaliation. Interesting what it would be.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree. I did some research on the journalist (forget her name now) and she has credentials, both academic and in terms of experience. I can think of two scenarios:

1. As you say, she was set up. It is the kind of 'stick it to the media' spiteful thing the Harkles may do (and for no other reason because that part of Meghan's submission in the lawsuit has been struck out so she gains nothing for that in proving that the media make up stories about them). Perhaps they are too foolish to realize that if they are exposed they are going to look very bad?

2. In times of the virus, the journalist is under huge pressure to deliver and thus, under extreme pressure and weird times, she made up the story. (Media may have lost sales of their printed versions, but I reckon their online versions would have become hugely more popular in times of the virus.) There may be another personal reason why she, under unusual pressure, was foolish enough to have made up a story.

It is a pity. As Richard Palmer says, evidence has emerged that most of what the media published about the Harkles turned out to be true.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

@Wullie'sBucket said...

Although I usually agree with all your thoughtful posts, I have to say I don't think our Megs thinks of anyone but herself. I believe all that she does is for her alone...me, myself and I is old Megs motto.
IMHO it's very sick to latch onto a fauxmatarian facade as a means to earn a living and elevate oneself...perhaps something a hollow narcissist might be drawn to!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you. I have personal experience of a narcissist who has ruined me and my life and I suppose I always try to find a rational explanation that will somehow make everything all right again. Occasionally I remember my own humanity even though I have found that it can actually be dangerous when dealing with a narc because you get blind and get attacked out of the blue without any defences.

Harry must have been complicit in all of this, and even the instigator of at least some of it. I hope that he can break free and be with the right people who can help him recover and work on being a decent person. For his family's sake and the sake of Archie, I hope so (although the kid I saw in the latest video came across to me as 'I've got your number and I am not one of your victims, now where is nanny .. oh, hello Papa!' with his mother!).
xxxxx said…
Many literate comments today. My simple add-on to Hikari is that I think Harry's hair loss has made him less confident. Giving Megs more entry points (vulnerabilities) to exploit. Living in Los Angeles you are supposed to gain hair. Just a guess but due to Hollywood this city must have more hair transplant specialists and more hair loss specialists than any other. Matthew McConaughey has been seeing very competent Docs through the years. Hapless can do the same

Photo of a very happy and hairy Harry at maybe 18 or 20. A happy and care free creature that is not affected in the least by his mother's death. There are many similar photos out there. Even up to age 32 or so. Megs has nurtured his negatives and made Harry into a complainer.
https://abcnews.go.com/International/photos/prince-harry-years-17238675/image-51123640
I'm sure I read somewhere, close to the start of this whole business, that H had assured HM that he wanted to marry MM so he could `help' her. Does anybody else recall that?

Assuming I'm recalling it correctly, do you think he meant `helping her in practical ways so she could make a fortune'?

Or was he implying that he knew she had `issues' and that he hoped to straighten out her mind, using all his experience of counselling, as an amateur shrink - another kind of narcissism, an inversion of the usual `all he needs is the love of a good woman'? Not a good idea.
Sandie said…
What kind of person takes issues like COVID-19 and BLM and uses them for self-publicity and self-promotion?

I really not impressed at how some very wealthy and famous people have jumped on the wagon for self gain or self protection.

If you really cared about the impact that COVID -19 is having, have you donated anything at all in significant quantities to help those in need? Have you donated or used your connections to assist organisations that are fighting the virus? Have you used the qualifications you have or quickly got the qualifications you need to volunteer and help (in hospitals and care facilities, delivering care parcels, phoning and visiting to check upon the vulnerable ...).

And don't use any of the above as a means to do pap walks.

If you really care about BLM issues here are three things you could have been doing:
1. Handed over your money and raised more money from your connections to uplift black communities (housing, schools, community facilities, bursaries ...), and then extended that to all poor or deprived or challenged communities.
2. Used influence and money campaigning for laws to change or human rights organisations to be more effective so that police brutality stops (most police are good but it is a profession that attracts bad people and one rotten apple can do a lot of harm, plus stress can turn a good apple into a bad apple).
3. Actively used money and fame to find ways to accelerate and broaden racial integration. People who live in separate silos have little opportunity to get to know each other and bond over shared experiences.

But, Meghan and Harry do not have the kind of connections, power or influence to actually get anything like the above done, and they are too mean with their money to fund someone else more effective to do so.
xxxxx said…
And thanks Fairy Crocodile for your personal testimonies (just want to acknowledge) which ties into the current political situations in America and England-UK. Apropos of nothing I have held a baby alligator in my hands at a Florida flea market (might have been in Daytona) a while back. He/she was 18 inches long. They are very primitive beasts and I got this vibe from this scaly, bumpy little one
Mel said…
@Sandie... Occasionally I remember my own humanity even though I have found that it can actually be dangerous when dealing with a narc because you get blind and get attacked out of the blue without any defences.

Me, too. I have decided when dealing with my narc..grey rock 100% of the time. I no longer give them the benefit of the doubt, no longer try to be kind.

It doesn't pay. They will always, ALWAYS, come back and burn you.

I used to feel bad about that, like I was a bad person for not being 'nice' to them. But that's a falsity. Why should I be nice to someone who treats me badly?

I don't have to be evil, but I don't have to be nice either. I can be nothing.

I have had so much more peace in my soul since I went no contact if possible, grey rock if I have to be in their vicinity.
CatEyes said…
@Sandie said...

>>>I have personal experience of a narcissist who has ruined me and my life....<<<

Based on reading your posts for well over a year makes me think you are anything but ruined (I hate to even repeat that nasty word in the same sentence as you)! You have thoughtful kind commentary and that can only from someone of value! No need to reply.
Himmy said…
I just received an email from my kid's school. The headmaster of the school will be renamed to the head of the school. I was wondering what the "fans" of Harkles are going to call Master Archie since they are so woke. Comrade Archie?
I read Lainey's very lengthy post and the phrase "the lady doth protest too much" comes to mind. She seems to be trying to distance herself as fast as she can from the Mulroneys and MM. Ben? "Just a work colleague, not a friend". Jessica? "Met her a couple of times, never a friend". Meghan? "Barely know her, may have met her once or twice in a group setting".

I remember back in the fall of 2016 there was a nasty item about Kate in Lainey's gossip blog. It seems that while MM was visiting JH and staying at Kensington Palace, she ran into Kate one day and told her about a shop she was about to go to. She went there on foot and was astonished to see Kate shopping there. Kate had obviously planned to go there but did not invite MM to go with her. MM saw this as a huge snub - and a day or two later, Lainey wrote about it. Now how would Lainey know about this shopping trip? As far as I can tell, only two people knew - Kate and MM. So either MM contacted Lainey directly or she had her friend JM do it.
SDJ said…
Princess Mrs. B - maybe you are on to something!

I never thought they were actually kicked out of the Garden Party. Perhaps it got back to Charles that MM wanted to leave and he was sympathetic and thought it was all too much for her on her first time out with the family, so he whispered to Harry that they could leave to start their honeymoon.

Maybe it did get back to Charles, and like a patient and wise parent, he simply said "okay, off you go now". If you look at the conversation btwn he and Harry, it is VERY short and Harry doesn't look like he's just gotten into trouble. He looks more like "OK, Pa says we can go now". I've even wondered if Charles said something like "security issues" and H knew that meant too much hubbub, time to go! It just seemed too smooth, Harry wasn't surprised.

Words, if there were any, came later.

Which makes me wonder. When MM committed faux pas, would the BRF speak to her directly about it, or would they go to Harry "about your wife"? One method would make H mad, the other would make MM mad. Just curious though.
TheTide said…
I'm proof positive that stress causes hair loss and early graying, and I'm also proof positive that losing stress will revert gray hair :) Dumped a toxic ex, now living near the ocean and in love with a really good Marine and I no longer need to color my hair.

That being said, I can't imagine the stress of living with a narc and what it does to one's body. I keep thinking this fiasco can't get any worse, yet here we are. I think HMTQ has intel as always from MI5 / MI6, and the 12 month "review" was designed to give Harry an out. MM has to be stabbing her claws into him, because what in the world will she do after he has fled back to England? No career, she's ghosted everyone and burnt all bridges.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Hikari said…
Leela,

Just want to say my father was a true racist, used the N word, made sure we lived in towns that did not allow people if other races, etc. but worked for a major corporation and was able to get along with all. Once when a young black handsome friend of mine had done me a large favor, I watched my father shake the friend ‘s hand, smile and make very friendly conversation.

Racists can hide it well.


I don't doubt they can. Without a window into someone's heart and mind, we can only observe their words and their behavior to determine what their values are. To make the presupposition that someone *must* fit into a certain category based on the color of their skin or other outward factors is at the very heart of racism. If it is automatically assumed that any white person is incapable of being anything other than condescending to non-white people, that's racism, too. Just not the kind that gets acknowledged as widely.

It is certainly true that we can't glean Charles's feelings toward race entirely based off his courtly behavior toward Meghan and her mother on the wedding day. But neither does it follow that, since Charles is at the top of the pile for white male privilege that his gestures toward Meg and Doria were for ceremonial show only and didn't reflect his true intentions. But we have had the benefit of another two years in between to see how the BRF treated its newest recruit. None of us can know what went on behind closed doors, but publicly, the Firm has been nothing but supportive of Meghan from what I can see. The Queen lavished her with titles and a wedding that all told, cost as much if not more than William and Catherine's, largely due to security costs. So they endeavoured to keep Meghan safe, and continue to pay for her protection. Charles lavished her with designer clothing. She got no fewer than four Royal tours in less than two years. She was given a home. THe statements from BP on her behalf were nothing but supportive, and no Royal bride or girlfriend has generated so many of these as has Meg. Her racial heritage has only been an issue infofar as she obviously believes that being a part black means that she can never be criticized at all for any reason without it being a racist attack upon her.

I can't think of a time where Meg accused the Royal family as such of being racists . . she seems to reserve that for 'The British Press'. To me, the fact that Meg was freely allowed to marry into the British Royal family is proof of how racist they are *not*. If the family truly did not want a partially-black American to join their ranks, more obstacles would have been put in Meg's way. Harry would have been forced to choose, as his great-Aunt Margaret had to, between his titles and princely perks OR a bride who was deemed unacceptable. If the BRF were racists, Harry and Meg would have eloped to Las Vegas and they could have started their life free of any Royal demands that much sooner.
Hikari said…
@Musty

Have to wonder if apple news is the only outlet for said picture, are they getting paid for said picture?

The outlet is 'Business Times', which, despite the title, never seems to have any articles about business--just tabloid-quality articles about the Royal family. Meghan is a very popular subject--one wonders what this publication did for content before she came on the scene. I got that article off my phone, but I suppose it can also be found by Googling "Prince Harry Has Reportedly Lost More Hair Since Relocating to the United States." Dateline is 6/16/20 and byline is by Camille Heimbrod.

I'm not sure how payment works for photos . . I would assume the photographer was paid by BT. BT articles are usually sycophantic about Meghan, but occasionally a less flattering one will slip in. This one is in that latter category, so I don't think MM's Sunshine Sucks will have been involved. Very slow news day on the Harkle front if this is all they can dredge up. It's to the point where I never read the Business Times any more because it's all drivel--they have obviously given their tawdry publication a dignified sounding name to give legitimacy to their stories and attract readers who are, I dunno, business types. But they never print anything worth reading. This particular very unflattering photo of Harry caught my eye, though and I had to share.

We can judge the substantiveness of the Harkles' impact on the world by the quality of their press coverage. Basically, they generate nothing worthwhile to cover, just a lot of empty promises that go nowhere, boneheaded decisions and bad photos. So Meg can relocate to L.A. and tell everyone she's in talks to be in a film with Brad Pitt, but the international tabloid press is still covering Hazza's rapid balding. So much for Megsy's triumphal return to Hollywood. They are both poison, and they have Markled themselves. We can thank Covid for at least muzzling Meg to a large degree. Otherwise the papp shots of her in L.A. would be tedious.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
CookieShark said…
Isn't what JM (allegedly) did far worse than any transgression by Thomas Markle?

Isn't it strange Harry didn't insist on meeting him before the wedding?

Didn't he ask why MM, so close to her father at the time, didn't bring him around? Wouldn't that bother you if your fiancée seemed to be hiding family members?
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
I'm reading Lady C's book about Diana. Don't expect Lady C to come out with guns blasting against MM. That's not her way. You have to read between the lines, which is easy to do with the way she writes. She will write one negative comment, alongside a positive comment to give balance. She gives good insight into Diana's mental health issues, and says that she may have had more serious issues than we had realized, some that we've discussed about MM and Harry.

Another thing that I noticed is that MM seems to have taken a lot from Diana's playbook. Lady C tells about how Diana manipulated the media, put out false info through her friends in the press, blasted Charles in the press in the days of their separation, wanted to become an international roving royal (sound familiar?), pouted when she didn't get her way, was very vindictive, wanted to be an international superstar, then wanted to be an international humanitarian, it reads as if Diana could have been MM. I think this is also how MM is able to handle Harry because MM and Diana were so much alike, but MM hasn't realized that Diana was beloved by the world, and MM has never been able to achieve that. Quite the opposite.

I believe that MM has read Lady C's book about Diana and made her plans for world domination with the info she read in that book.


It's well worth reading the Diana book before we get our copies of the book about MM. There are far too many correlations between Diana and MM. Harry truly did marry his mother.
@Hikari

Thanks for the information. The International Business Times has only been around since 2006 . If they ever intended to be a legit news source, they were probably swept up in the movement from factual, unbiased news to celebrity news. Hence so many gossip Royal articles.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Hikari said…
Jocelyn's Bellinis,

I'm reading Lady C's book about Diana. Don't expect Lady C to come out with guns blasting against MM. That's not her way. You have to read between the lines, which is easy to do with the way she writes. She will write one negative comment, alongside a positive comment to give balance. She gives good insight into Diana's mental health issues, and says that she may have had more serious issues than we had realized, some that we've discussed about MM and Harry.

I am looking forward to Lady C.'s take on Meghan, and I don't expect it to be a muckraking job. Georgia was raised in the kind of aristocratic circles the Royals travel in and is well-versed in that code. If she has a barb to deliver, it will be encased in silk. Aristocratic put-downs can be devastating while remaining elegant, but the target audience knows exactly what's been said. It's like a game of fencing . .a touch, a touch!

I think she will endeavor to mention whatever favorable toward Meg she can find also, in the interests of balance. I am sure that she's got a top team of lawyers advising her as to what exactly can be put in. She and her team will have made certain that Meg has no grounds for another of her slap-happy lawsuits.

I watched an interview with Lady C. recently talking about her forthcoming book and she is very well-spoken and circumspect in her answers. The interviewer, a young man, got on well with her, but he prodded her a number of times to answer a question posed by a viewer about her ex-husband. She deflected and finally said, I don't feel comfortable answering that. Georgia is not going to publish anything that will compromise her integrity in any way. I think as a person with a unique heritage . . .white Jamaican, living for 21 years as a boy before she was accepted as her true self--if Meg thinks being part black is hard, she ought to try navigating society as a hermaphrodite--these things would predispose Lady C. to be compassionate toward another woman who didn't fit into her prevailing culture . .at first we all felt that way towards Meg, or most of us did, even me. But she bollixed that up Royally in only a few days, so as far as I'm concerned Lady C. can take off the velvet gloves.

Whatever she writes, it won't be coarse. That's better than Meg deserves since she's the epitome of coarse.
just sayin' said…
In case you are curious (as I was), I finally found the article about Harry’s hair loss on my Apple News feed and....

It’s an old picture. Pre-megxit. He is wearing a grey jacket and a white suit shirt.

I don’t know why, but I was hoping for something recent. The article is basically a nothingburger (I’ve seen that expression used here). The author concludes: “Prince Harry is starting to get that enthusiastic, American, teenager vibe that the public didn’t get to see while he was still a senior working royal in the United Kingdom.”

Gag me!
just sayin' said…
Harry cruelly teased William about losing his hair, so I’m glad that karma once again has the last laugh!
Sandie said…
@Wullie'sBucket:

Thanks so much for taking one for the team and reading that long post by Launiy.

Here's the thing ... what was her close connection that got her to that dinner that night?

She claims to only have met Meghan that once, at that dinner (or did she say twice and when was the other time?). So, it was not her connection to Meghan that got her the invite nor her connection to Corey (if she was that close to Corey, she would have met Meghan). Ditto if the connection to Meghan or Corey was through her husband.

She distances herself from Jessica in the same way (I hardly know her), so the invite did not come from Jessica and why would Ben invite her? If she was that close to him, she would know Jessica. Ditto if the connection to Jessica or Ben was through her husband.

Were her or her husband close to Christina and Trevor? There is a connection between Trevor and Michael Buble, and Christine and Trevor were probably Soho House socialites, which creates the connection between Meghan and Jessica and their respective partners and Christina and Trevor. (Christina, the owner of Basquiat, a Vancouver boutique, would have been someone Jessica and Meghan would have wanted in their social circle.)

Lainey's husband is a house husband, so he did not get her that dinner invite.

Nope, Lainey was there because of her connection to Jessica and Ben and through them, she got to know Meghan.
Indy said…
@ Wild Boar , "mighty gaffe" indeed. I still think they were asked to leave for two reasons. If Meghan had said let's go, I'm bored and Harry said no, we have to stay, I can see just a little rolling of the eyes. But the fact she said it AGAIN is the locker and would them look 10 x worse. Remember this was a high falutin event . The second reason is who exactly overheard it? If it was a very high up in society or someone very important to Charles , it could make all the difference to the situation. They were leaving early anyway so I can see Charles getting rid of them right them to avoid any further embarrassment. All those that ngs out together would make it highly insulting to all. I heard a RUMOR that Meghan was introduced and by giggled and said "I'm the new star of the family ". Haha. Wonder if that's true.


As far as the SUN wasn't there just a hullabaloo again about Harry suing because they paid someone working for the RF? I'm thinking the SUN will lie low for now and plan the right time to give the info as to who told them about Liza .


Lainey needs to be careful ( not that I care lol) because she's calling H&M game whores, and disavowing knowing Meghan to prove she's not biased . I can picture meghsn getting pissed and throwing receipts out that prove differently. It's amazing , as Harry would say,to consider what the three of them may to do to / about each other .
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sharon said…
Aquagirl, I agree with your thesis that Harry was coerced -- at first. Remember him in the "control" booth in Canada at the closing of the Invictus games, when he was surrounded by Doria, Marcus, her and perhaps Jessica Mulroney? Flash back to the photos of him at the opening of the games, sitting next to Melania Trump, when she made an unexpected entrance with Marcus Anderson, and he and Justin Trudeau, sitting with his wife one row below Harry, turned at the same moment to look at her with shocked expressions on their faces?

Something happened in those couple of intervening days that entrapped him, and they surrounded him in that booth. But -- big but -- at some point after that, he joined the conspiracy against his family as perhaps she detailed how they would leave the BRF in a blaze of glory and be "bigger" than the BRF, making millions, perhaps billions. If Harry couldn't be king, he could be something more than even a king. Dim bulb Harry fell in. But as you point out, it seems highly unlikely they ever lived together anywhere; at least there's no visual proof that they did. As for Arkie, there seems to be some child that either does or does not answer to that name, but who knows who he really is, or where he is. However, HM has acknowledged some baby as a great-grandchild, so...so I really don't know what that might mean. Perhaps it's a warning to them not to abuse him by merching him to within an inch of his life.

What we do know now is that the master plan for their jailbreak out of GB has been met with multiple blunt traumas. Absolutely NOTHING has worked out and they seem more and more, with each passing debacle (the latest being the JM disaster), to be reaching a nearly pariah status in Hollywood as elsewhere. If not pariahs at least laughingstocks.
And the Archewell gambit proves them inept as well.

But I can't look away! In a world gone mad, the entertainment the duo provides is priceless. If only they could bottle themselves and sell it to Comedy Central. That will never happen because they take themselves so seriously -- which is what makes them so funny (once you get over the outrageous conning of the BRF and the world, that is, which is infuriating). So the beat goes on, and I cannot wait to see what they've gotten up to each day.
Sharon said…
Sharon aka Poodle 12 above
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Hikari said…
Re. LaineyGate

I have never wasted my time on Liu’s blog due to its rah rah Meg bias, And the nasty vindictive way she has relentlessly smeared Catherine and other members of the family in her zealous promotion of Meg. I have seen a photo of the Queen of Meg Stans.

I assumed all along that she and Markle were friends, having travelled in the same circles in Toronto. She has certainly written on her blog these last 2+ years like she was defending a friend. Now I find it hilarious that she is so eager to disassociate herself From any deep acquaintance with either Meg or Jessica Mulroney. She’s made Singing the praises of Meg the centerpiece of her blog and basically her entire livelihood, But now she can’t tell us fast enough that she barely knows Meg and only spoke to her for 15 minutes on one occasion? If Meg were her good friend, I could understand the investment in her success. If Lainey were a delusional obsessive fan, a wanna be
projecting her own desires as a WOC in the world of entertainment onto another such woman in the royal family, I could understand that. But now she’s backtracking and wanting us to believe that our main topic of conversation and income over these last years has been a woman she met once at a dinner party and barely spoke to. This makes no sense whatsoever, but she and Megan have that in common. Believe absolutely what I’m insisting is true and not the evidence of your own eyes,

LL Shouldn’t even have to justify the biases in her blog. A blog is personal opinion, an entertainment platform, not journalism. As a blogger who’d devoted herself to one chief subject—Meghan—her cachet and credibility depended on a perceived ‘in’ to the world of Meg. Without a personal connection to Meg, LL is nothing more then yet another fan blogger on the fringe. Can anyone here who has followed LL Speak to whether she has promoted herself as a friend of Meg’s? If so, then she’s a fraud as well as a coward. Will she lose readership in a huge way now that she has disavowed any sort of relationship with either Meg or Jessica? I would hope so because the assumption of that relationship was the entire appeal of her viewpoint. Maybe it’s time for LL to rebrand her blog ... aren’t there any admirable Asian Canadian women she could highlight instead? She whines about the discrimination she’s faced as a non-Caucasian woman, but spends all her time writing about Another woman of color who complains about racism while pretending to be white for most of her life, and who uses sex to advance herself. Maggie is not an admirable role model for anyone, unless she’s a baby grifter.
@Hikari,

Yes, that young man who is doing the interviews with Lady C is Prince Leo of Croatia (his princely title is explained in one episode). He's been on COVID lockdown with Lady C in her mansion/event space.

In their interview series, Lady C also refused to discuss whether Doria had served prison time, but if you listen very closely, she does give the answer to that question. That's what is so fascinating about Lady C. and the aristocracy/BRF. They know how to let the word out without appearing to say anything. Behind those serene exteriors lies steely information sharing with a smile and a wink, and the truth is spread within their circles with such cool reserve. It's fascinating to watch, and it is often used in the British press, too. Every word counts because if you miss just one, you'll have missed the whole point.

As for Lainey, she's been covering the Toronto Film Festival for years, and I think she met MM at the 2012 TIFF. MM has always looked for any person to do free PR, and I think she spotted Lainey right away as a mark. In her usual fashion, MM love-bombed Lainey into thinking they were instant good friends.

Here's a rather scathing article asking why the biggest person at the 2012 TIFF was MM, who didn't even have a movie to promote, but was obviously there to promote herself and her connection to Harry.

https://www.thestar.com/entertainment/tiff/2017/09/07/meghan-markle-becomes-tiffs-most-wanted-govani.html

With names such as these attending in 2012, you'd think that MM would have had some luck in finding a Hollywood connection, but it seems she wasn't just good enough to break through into the stratosphere.

https://www.popsugar.com/celebrity/Celebrities-Toronto-Film-Festival-2012-24783100


Lainey is also a member of the SoHo House, so she probably met MM and her cronies there, too. All of them are social climbers- JM, MM and Lainey.

@ Hikari. Never more true words spoken. If LL isn't associated with JM and MM, then she has made a very good effort to appear so. Her constant smearing of Kate and the rest of the royal family has been so appalling that I stopped visiting her site a way back. She seems like a very angry woman. She refers to other women of privileged birth as "Karens" which just shows you where her mind is. I am not privileged but I respect those who are, just as I expect them to respect me. It shouldn't be what you are, in terms of ethnicity, but who you are in terms of a decent human being. I don't think any of these three have a clue. Publicly dissing each other in the guise of being "woke" is just pathetic.

That long dialogue makes LL look like she is protesting too much - at others' expense. There is no loyalty among this crowd.
This comment has been removed by the author.
From a Chatelaine interview with LL:

If you watch Suits, Meghan Markle is a big deal. If you don’t, she’s a “who?” What can you tell us about her?

"We’ve talked to her at eTalk a number of times, and she’s very sweet. She’s not one of those people who walks into a room and is like, ‘Look at me; I’m a celebrity.’ She’s not Mariah Carey. She’s really passionate about her two dogs. She seems pretty low key. And she is stunning."

You’ve mentioned Harry’s overall popularity a number of times and on your blog you make no secret of your love for him. What is it about him?

Harry is one of those rare figures who checks off all the boxes. He’s enough of a hard core —he’s been to the army — he’s a prince, he’s obviously attractive. He’s great with animals and senior citizens, and then he has this bad boy side — there was the time he got caught with his pants down in Vegas. You know that he’s not boring. I love him because I think he’s fun. He’s a guy who knows how to have a good time. Especially in contrast to his brother and sister-in-law. They’re so boring, they’re so stodgy."

They are not "boring" or "stodgy, Lainey. That's class and decency.

June 17, 2020 at 3:20 AM
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Teasmade said…
But, but, it's not the wealth or even the race of the "Karens" -- it's the entitled, tattletaling, the "Let me speak to your manager"-ness of them. A very poor woman could be a Karen, and even a WOC could.

Is this what this Lainey said? Pffft.

@ Wullie's Bucket, she wrote an article on the Tatler debacle and, at the end, referred to Team Cambridge and Tatler as "Karens." The whole article is hostile towards the Royals.
Teasmade said…
@Wullie: I think "game whores" is a typo for "fame whores."
So she didn't specifically call a woman a Karen. My bad.
lizzie said…
I call BS on some of Lady C's stuff. (But the overall context will matter.)

As quoted by The Star (thanks @Wullie'sBucket.)

"Meghan was the only fiancee that was ever asked to Windsor before the wedding and the "only newly-wed who was invited by the Queen to accompany her on a daily engagement."

So what? And neither seems to be exactly true. Where did TQ meet the other fiancees? Walking down the street? And Edward and Sophie lived together for years before marrying. She reportedly spent weekends and holidays at Sandringham, Balmoral, and Windsor.

I know it was supposed to be a big deal M was invited to Sandringham for the Christmas before the wedding. Kate wasn't there the December before she and Will married in April. But neither was Will! He was working in Wales. And before the Sussexes married, how could Harry have gone off for Christmas and left M alone in England without family?

As to the train trip with TQ, I do think it was intended to publicly welcome M. But Kate appeared with TQ and PP when she was still a "newlywed" on a trip to Leicester. I guess Philip being there too made it less of a big deal? How odd. 
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Aquagirl said…
@Sharon/Poodle12: I’ve always thought that HM and the BRF have a game plan for dealing with ‘the Archie situation.’ In my opinion, this fraudulent game cannot go on forever. Are they going to keep hiring child actors for bi-yearly appearances? Are they going to try to adopt a child to ‘replace’ him? What happens when it’s time for him to go to school? Will there never be photos of him? I actually think that the truth about ‘Archie’ will emerge at some point, most likely in connection with the fraudulent activities of MM. By publicly welcoming ‘Archie’ into the family, HM cannot be accused of racism. And given the fact that both the ‘meeting Archie’ and ‘Christening photos’ were photoshopped, I don’t think that anyone in the family (including PC) has ever met ‘Archie’. So they do have plausible deniability. The question is how the whole thing unfolds. I truly think that it has to come out at some point. I know that’s not typical of the BRF, but MM has been getting away with everything for far too long: her claims of racism, her attacks on William & Kate, her merching (and possibly taking money from PC for clothing that she didn’t pay for), her unwillingness to carry out her duties, her lies (including her fake speeches and Zoom calls), and her disrespectful treatment of HM and the Monarchy. It’s unbelievable to me that there are people who still defend her. But the one thing that would universally turn everyone against her and help the BRF get rid of her forever would be to expose the fake pregnancy and the fact that she does not have legal custody of a child. That’s just unforgivable. As I said, I don’t know how they’ll do it (I’m assuming that it will be in conjunction with ‘Saving Harry’,) but I do think it will happen at some point.
Aquagirl said…
@Jocelyn: So I’m assuming that Lady C.’s between the lines answer was ‘yes’?
Aquagirl said…
@Wullie’sBucket: Yes. ‘Karens’ are entitled, middle-aged, white women. Sometimes their interactions involve other races (such as the Central Park Karen) but other times they don’t (such as the Karen in NY who deliberately coughed in another white woman’s face because the woman complained that she wasn’t wearing a mask in a bagel shop.)
@Wullie'sBucket, I think the issue lies with respecting the royal family, in particular HMTQ. This is the case for journalists and why the DM doesn't throw the matter of Archie out there. There is also the sensitive issue of him being a minor child. Then there is the problem of proof/libel, although I don't think it would be difficult to get to the bottom of things and I have read that the UK papers are "sitting on it" until this court case. One of the Royal reporters apparently wrote this in response to the question, although that could have been faked. You would think they would be revealing something though, wouldn't you?
2Wullie's Bucket. Thanks for posting that Lady C interview. I decided a while back not to get the book. I just don't understand how HMTQ could possibly be enamoured of this woman. I also don't think Lady C was accurate about Diana's lack of virginity. The sad thing is that, despite the purported "c**t-struck" comment and the "one doesn't marry an actress" advice, everything the RF has actually done, or NOT done, suggests they have no problem with her behaviour at all.
@Wullie'sBucket,

That's Lady C-speak in it's truest form.

HMTQ and PC aren't going to want a "dominant" person in a very minor role in the BRF, and would not want to have a dominant personality marrying into the BRF. The only dominant person in the BRF is the Queen. Every other person is her subject.

As for her dominance over Harry, that is obvious. That's a very loaded word.

"Vivacious" can be a code word for too over-the-top, too outgoing, too demanding, too loud, too Hollywood. "Vivacious" can be a compliment or very derogatory, depending on who is saying it. Members of the BRF aren't supposed to be vivacious. They are supposed to be poised, measured and dignified.

Lady C then implies that in spite of MM's "dominant" and "vivacious" personality, HMTQ and PC rolled out the red carpet for her, which would be the proper thing to do in the pubic's eye. Behind closed doors, I'm sure that HMTQ and PC had the very same thoughts that PP had- don't marry the showgirl.

I do think that PC had a little twinkle in his eye over MM for a short minute, then quickly saw her for what she was well before the wedding. That's when he said Harry was c*nt-struck.

This is the way I tend to read Lady C's books and listen to her interviews. Every word is very carefully crafted, and many of them have double meanings.
Indy said…
@Wullies , yes that was a typo.LL was mocking them for all the week long headlines about how they spent their anniversary. Called them Kardashians! I can't believe she can get away with disavowing MM or JM. Think of when LL was the first one to report about the time Kate didn't give a ride to Meghan when they were going shopping. There's only two people who knew that. And us wasn't Kate that told a gossip site! This had to be Meghan or JM so who will ask LL to her face how she knew that.

I commented awhile back that the CEO of the Crisis Hotline M&H gatecrashed in their zoom meeting was fired yesterday for abusive and racist behaviour and has been doing so for a long time . Another racist person Meghan knows lol. Also it's coming out about MM stans cyber bullying, threatening people and racism and the queen of her stans is the one they called to thank them for Archie's forest. R. Palmer is telling the media they need to look into this because Meghan is again friends with a racist . Domino after domino.
Rut said…
"I do think Karens can only be white women though - I learned this from the black women of LSA!"

Oh, I thought all humans were the same, I thought there were no colors.
Poodle12 said…
Sharon aka Poodle 12 here

@Fairy Croc, I found your story very moving and inspiring.

“ The sins of the fathers shall not be visited upon their children,” along with the Ten Commandments and every other last vestige of Western Civilization, a 2,000-year-old project of putting the rights of the individual at the center of humanity, is being dismantled wholesale. I am a white woman whose grandparents were gassed in Treblinka, and all of their possessions confiscated by the “woke” of their time, still within living memory. So no, we have not been so “privileged.”

That why I dislike the BLM movement, a Marxist/Antifa movement upon whose bandwagon MM and her dim-bulb hubby are championing now in their desperate effort to remain relevant and cool (what a joke that is). Are these then HM’s values MM and H promised to uphold?

@Aquagirl, I think you’ve hit on a very important point, in that whatever else the dastardly duo get up to, HM and the BRF will have to come clean about Arkie. A child’s life and well-being are you ynot to be sacrificed upon the altar of saving face or covering up their black sheep’s ignominy.

Meanwhile, The Express claims Doria has truly joined her daughter on TP’s sofa, or is perhaps sharing the laundry cupboard with JCMH. Curiouser and curiouser. I wonder what happened to Doria’s partner. Perhaps her partner has had it up to the proverbial “here,” much like the rest of us.

As always, thank you, Nutty for this insanity-free zone. I continue to enjoy all Nuttiers’ contributions, and I still miss Ava C and some others.
Ziggy said…
@Rut
"I do think Karens can only be white women though - I learned this from the black women of LSA!"
Oh, I thought all humans were the same, I thought there were no colors.


I agree with your comments so often.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Poodle12 said…
Sharon aka Poodle 12 here

@Musty S, I don’t have the slightest idea of what might have happened To Dorias house. Perhaps she let her house. Or maybe it’s a temporary arrangement and her partner will remain in Doria’s house. The question in my mind is why the supposedly woke Harkles didn’t invite Doria’s partner to live with their little family in TP’s house. Or maybe the Express article is pure fiction. Who can ever know the truth with the shady Harkles?
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Wullie’s Bucket said, Someone here mentioned recently the story Lainey had about the shopping snub between Kate and Meghan. How did LL get that story if not from MM or JM?

I read it on Blind Gossip ages ago. Maybe LL read it there too. ;o)
@Jocelynsbellines,

I agree with your reply to Wullie’s Bucket about Lady C’s book. You do have to read between the lines, the uttered or written word shouldn’t be taken in the literal form. Yes, many double meanings too.

If people understand and know what’s not acceptable or accepted in the royal family, they’ll understand Lady C’s take.
Shaggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
bootsy said…
R.e. Mulroney I believe we are getting our main info about Markle's views from another 'anonymous source' and that these are being regurgitated everywhere.

The ones that I have read state "Meghan said friends reflect friends and because of what’s at stake, she can no longer be associated with Jessica, at least not in public,” The source continued. “She has to do what she has to do in order to preserve her dignity and her own reputation.”

It's clear to me, especially when combined with other statements made over this matter (MM doesn't believe JM is racist and she is heart broken etcetc) that MM isn't dropping JM as a friend. She will do so in public and that's all. The anonymous source statements should be read like a lawyer. There's plenty of wiggle room in there which allows MM to still stay friends with JM and to not be called out as a liar. Of course she'll be keeping it very discreet, and they'll probably not see/hear much from each other for a few weeks but no way is that friendship over. As others have said, JM knows too much.
Rut said…
WulliesBucket: I know you quoted someone on LSA. It was the quote about white people ( posted on an afroamerican forum ) I reacted to, not you.
I find it easy to believe that HM was "captivated" by MM. Remember, this was before the engagement, when JH was trying to get his grandmother's approval for the marriage - no approval, no marriage. I've read that MM can be extremely charming and persuasive when she wants to impress somebody important. I can see her having tea with HM, talking about their mutual love of dogs, telling the Queen how important charity work was to her and how she was looking forward to carrying out charitable works as a member of the BRF. MM knew how important this "audition" was and she pulled out all the stops. Just like she knew what to say and do to JH to win him over, she also knew exactly what to say to the Queen.
Jenx said…
Lainy's opus!!! Lolol

https://torontosun.com/news/national/jessica-mulroney-hiding-in-muskoka-as-dumpster-fire-rages

For some local TO flavour.
Piroska said…
@Barbara from Montreal HM has met many people over the years many capable of exhibiting charm; I have no doubt that she can detect any falseness. She did after all have experience of her charming uncle David - I remember reading many years ago that when he got together with Wallis he even refused to accept telephone calls from the York princesses although up to that time he had allegedly been very fond of them. She also had regular meetings with Tony Blair during the 10 years he was Prime Minister and he is said to be an extremely charming man and like Meghan manipulative persuasive and a liar
JL said…
@Aquagirl Would like to point out that both of the examples you mention of New York Karens were not middle aged women but Millennials and Post Millennials. I find Millennials to be some of the most entitled folks on earth and Markle, of course, is one of them. This group are the ones most likely to invoke bad Yelp reviews as take downs and complain to the manager. The regret I feel about the Karen label (it was Becky before that meaning something else) is that women are more honest and more apt to be whistleblowers. Studies have shown that when women work on Wall Street inclusively, the firm is more honest. This is also a big reason why all the Wall St gamblers don’t want women involved in their game. You notice many women working at Hedge Funds? The female dispatcher who viewed the George Floyd murder remotely called in a supervisor, saying “I don’t want to be a snitch, but...”
I do not deny that evil, crazy Karens exist who call the cops on blacks. I worry that the fear of being labeled a Karen will cause normal women to stop using their voices.
Unknown said…
Some more from Lady C:
https://youtu.be/sGslSh3xgu0

Now why exactly is discussing Meg's pregnancy a legal minefield, Lady C? Perhaps an injunction us plebs have no right knowing about?

I love how she talks about how widespread adoptions by non-British royals is and her stance that royals and aristocrats should ensure their children inherit titles if they have that opportunity.

I have a lot of family and friends in the U.K. so I am a little familiar with how polite Brits can be, especially the posh set. Everything is very subtle, extremely diplomatic, and context is critical.

Lady C is not a Brit but she has to play by their rules. By default, she's very informative and never direct. She gives context through history lessons and stories of other people which Brits are better equipped to decipher because of their better grounding in British etiquette, class system, history, and so on...

Like @JocelynsBellinis said, my takeaway was Lady C told us exactly what she knows about Doria. She also told us what she knows about Archie.
Unknown said…
That Central Park lady is in her early 40s and from Canada so not a Millenial.

I agree @JL that "Karen" and "Becky" has misogyny baked in. I'd say it's the sister term of "Diva" which gets levied against black women.

"Karen" and "Becky" gets misused from it's true meaning because of the popularity of the memes. They are call-outs to specific women who go out of their way to make difficult, hurt, or even destroy another person's life for ridiculous things.

The prototype of a "Karen" or a "Becky" has more to do with class, usually upper middle-class and has a "perfect life à la big house with a white picket fence." They cannot tolerate any inconveniences/infractions to their life bubbles so will retaliate disproportionately to things not going their way. Meg is a good example of a "Karen" when she confronted that reporter for looking away while interviewing her:

https://youtu.be/vSkBYXNJA9Q
Unknown said…
@FairyCrocodile Thank you for thinking my posts worthwhile. I feel the same about yours. There are so many amazing writers here and I learn so much. Thank you Nutties for all the fun :)

@Hikari Phenomenal posts!

Just want to point out that Lady C vehemently denies being a hermaphrodite and will sue any press including Americans that print any false stories about her.

Per Lady C, she successfully sued several British newspapers for perpetuating the false claims made by her ex-husband. She says Meg's camp is re-circulating that story to discredit her. She was born with only female genitalia but had a deformity that required corrective surgery. Her parents were adamant about raising her as a boy so she could not have the corrective surgery until 21.
Hikari said…
Jocelyn,

As soon as my eye fell on the word's "Meg's dominant personality", followed by "vivacious", I had a laugh and almost had some coffee come out of my nose. As you point out, *that* is the perfect aristocratic take-down. The subject herself would read this description and be pleased with it, but these words are most decidedly not compliments.

Dominance and vivacity (extroversion) are American virtues for Getting Ahead, but not so in Britain. You can be dominant, you just have to pretend to play the game according to British rules, wherein being too pushy, bragging about one's accomplishments and trying to 'dominate' the room gets one labelled Up Oneself. That is a cardinal sin on that island. That aesthetic would go 100x in the Royal family where there can be only One big cheese and they all defer to her--even, most especially, her lieutenant, second-in-command, designated heir the Prince of Wales. It's hilarious (and pathetic at the same time) that Meg assumed privileges for herself and freedoms of conduct which do not even extend to the Queen's own son and the future King. Meg's self-regard is just really that astronomical. There's a point where ego and arrogance tip over into mental illness when it busts all tethers of reality and I think Meg's been there for some time now.

For 'dominant', insert 'overbearing' and for 'vivacious', 'exhibitionistic' or quite possibly 'high as a kite'.

Charles may have been amused by Harry's choice for a little while. Meg really turned on the goo-goo eyes on Charles & also to William. She knows where the bread is buttered. Charles is widely traveled and counts himself friendly with lots of celebrities, both British and international. I think he likes the United States, as do both of his boys. Meg was an interesting case study at close range, but he and the rest of them must have known very quickly--by the first Christmas at Sandringham, if not before, that she was going to be a handful. To put it mildly. There aren't enough hands to contain the wonder that is Meg.
xxxxx said…
Jenx just posted this>>>>>> Memo to self---- Use the word derailed more often. This all went down in sleepy ol Toronto.
___________________

Embattled socialite Jessica Mulroney is in hiding as the firestorm that derailed her TV career rages on, sources told the Toronto Sun.

Before last week, Mulroney appeared to have it all.

A show on CTV, regular appearances on Good Morning America, and a bustling styling business. Add in membership in two of Canada’s most famous families and a BFF named Meghan Markle and it’s a potent society CV.

But bullying a black fashion blogger, threatening her business and a “liable” [sic] suit coupled with accusations of “white privilege” and disingenuous apologies has left that life in ruins.

In addition, a source said CTV has set up a task force to interview staffers on her axed show, I Do, Redo.

Colleagues at CTV, socialites and people Mulroney allegedly rubbed the wrong way over the years are standing up and being counted.

Longtime city society watcher Shinan Govani said that the affair crosses a number of different worlds, society, fashion, media, politics and royalty.


https://torontosun.com/news/national/jessica-mulroney-hiding-in-muskoka-as-dumpster-fire-rages
Hikari said…
Not forgetting that Charles is the one who came up with "Tungsten". It's another example of that non-confrontational Brit way of dismantling somebody in the guise of something which *could* be construed as a compliment, because it has positive attributes, but in the context in which it is being employed, only the negative attributes are being meant.
JHanoi said…
if MM’s camp is putting out a hermo story on Lady C, isn’t that TOTALLY anti-PC in today enviroment?
a hermo technically would be part of the LGBTQXYZ group, whether they acknowledge they are one or not.
born this way and all that stuff, they can’t help it.
im offended for the that ommunity that a woke, milliniel would attempt to use a ‘hermo’ label as a negative.
@Poodle12

I also wondered about Doria's partner. Perhaps Doria uses relationships as does her daughter? I still don't think she moved in, and to be the nanny no less. Not a lot of child care experience in Doria's past, one child yes but it would seem she doesn't have a close relationship to any nieces and nephews as that would be the family MM never had.

IF, and its a big IF, Doria is living there (temporarily or otherwise) I am inclined to think its because something huge is coming and MM needs Doria as a shield. Maybe Harry took a private jet back to the UK (hopefully with Archie in tow), or maybe what is coming out in LLC's book is so explosive, MM needs her mother for support, or maybe something has happened to MM (rehab, psychotic breakdown) that requires a guardian and Harry isn't there or isn't fit to be one. All speculation of course.
Unknown said…
@JHanoi I am outraged by Meg and Sunshine Sachs too. The story comes from Lady C's nasty ex-husband and SS is resurrecting it.

I think the tactic is more about her being seen as a fraud and someone who can only be an outsider in aristocratic circles. Therefore her access to insiders is nonexistent and the intel she has, has to be shoddy. My guess is they are trying to convince us that Brits are racist so there is no way someone from the LGBTQ community would be embraced either.

What Lady C's identity is has no effect on me but it may on more conservative royal followers.
Hikari said…
I mistakenly labeled Lady Colin Campbell as a hermaphrodite, and I retract this. I had misinterpreted something I read about her birth deformity as she was born with two sets of sexual organs. Her parents were encouraged to raise her as a boy, which they did, for 21 years, giving her the birth name of George William. She does appear, and sound, quite masculine to this day, despite being a biological female and not a transexual on hormone therapy. The hermaphrodite rumors were propagated by her ex-husband, who, like Harry, married an intriguing, vivacious woman he knew very briefly (4 days) when, he readily admits, he was inebriated for most of that time. The newlyweds had a torrid and normal sex life . . until Lord Colin's family found out the truth about Georgia's past. He now calls her 'a monster', says he's angry she still continues to use his name, and has personally apologized to Prince Charles for 'the scribblings of my ex-wife.'

Whatever the state of Lady C.'s internal organs, I don't think they have any bearing on her skills as a journalist or worth as a person, though her aristocratic husband divorced her due to what his family interpreted as 'the scandal'. His ego could not cope with the idea that he had been intimate with someone who was not conventionally gendered. 'Hermaphrodite' is not clinically correct in her case, and it's become pejorative, even though it's just a medical diagnosis, like psoriasis. When a diagnosis touches on gender/sexual identity, that's when it becomes loaded.

Regardless of one's views about Lady C.'s books, it seems like she has done pretty well at building a life for herself despite being dealt some really crappy cards.

Hikari said…
Here's the link to a Sun article from 2015 featuring Lord Colin Campbell's take on his ex-wife. The included picture of Lady C. from "I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here!" does show her looking very masculine, but judging from interviews I have seen with her, her demeanor is very feminine.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/news/48936/lady-c-is-a-monster-crushing-snob-and-a-complete-fake-says-the-man-who-married-her/
Unknown said…
What I don't understand is why no one cares to point out how many of Meg's circle have been called out as racist: JCMH FKAP, Trudeau, and Jessica. There's probably more...

Perhaps, Meg is a racist herself? That's something I truly believe. That comment she made about what color she wears to change her perceived ethnicity is a huge red flag.

Just gross!
abbyh said…

charade - thanks for that video.

I've only gotten 40 seconds into it and noticed that she involuntarily grimaces/frowns/closed or almost closed mouth looking irritated/facial tension for just a fleeting second more times than I might have expected given this was not her first interview.

Kind of cool watching it on slow speed (settings adjustment) and mute it as well.

I believe it would be safe to say that the lovely Reese Witherspoon is cast in uptight, privileged "Karen" roles, which she manages to make extremely funny. Big Little Lies and Little Fires Everywhere for example. Both great shows.
IEschew said…
Just chiming in with a couple thoughts regarding Lady C:

-Rehashing the old hermaphrodite story is one more item for the list of signals that Meg is completely tone deaf. I find it hard to believe Sunshine-Sachs would endorse such a tactic in June 2020. Ken Sunshine, what do you have to say for yourself? Wouldn’t you like to take this chance, the millionth opportunity Meg has provided, to distance yourself from her and Harry? Your reputation is tanking, pal.

-Whatever the case with Lady C, and it’s not our business, the whole affair gives her a unique, if not the impeccable descriptor that she uses, set of contacts among—and likely employed by!—royal circles. Who else has contacts up- and downstairs and the nerve to publish what they know?
@Hikari,

I laughed at the wording, too. Lady C is very cunning with her wording, and each word is very carefully thought out. Take "captivated", for example. People can be captivated by seeing a car accident or a train wreck. They are captivated (or held captive) by the horror. People were captivated (glued to their TVs) by 9/11 and it's aftermath, but it doesn't mean that they were swooning over it. It means that they were held captive by the horror of it.

@charade,

Yes, within her history lesson, Lady C just told us of Archie's parentage. After discussing who is royal within the BRF (the lead up), she moves onto the "birth" of Archie. Within the history lesson concerning people within the aristocracy, she repeats one word again and again. Adopted.

Lady C is a master with words. If you just take her words at face value, you won't get much out of her book, but if you look for the key words or phrases, in this case, "adopted," you'll find lots of great information.

Her extended laugh and a shake of her head is also a clue that something very interesting is about to be said.



Popular posts from this blog

A Quiet Interlude

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

As Time Passes and We Get Older

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

The Opening Act of New Adventures in Retail

 I keep thinking things will settle down to the lazy days of spring where the weather is gorgeous and there is a certain sense of peacefulness.  New flowers are coming out. increasing daylight so people can be outside/play and thinking gardening thoughts.  And life is quiet.  Calm. And then something happens like a comet shooting across the sky.  (Out of nowhere it arrives and then leaves almost as quickly.)   An update to a law suit.  Video of the website is released (but doesn't actually promote any specific product which can be purchased from the website).  A delay and then jam is given out (but to whom and possible more importantly - who did not make the list?).  Trophies almost fall (oops).  Information slips out like when the official date of beginning USA residency.  (now, isn't that interesting?) With them, it's always something in play or simmering just below the surface.  The diversity of the endeavors is really ...