If you're a student of recent New York history, you know the name "Tawana Brawley".
In 1987 Ms Brawley, age 15, stayed out past curfew while visiting a jailed boyfriend and was justifiably afraid of how her violent stepfather, Ralph King, might react.
To protect themselves from the stepfather's wrath, Brawley and her mother (allegedly) concocted a story of a brutal attack by four white men, naming specific persons.
A grand jury ultimately decided there was not enough evidence that the crime occurred. One of the men sued for defamation of character and won, and Brawley's mother was ultimately held in contempt of court for refusing to testify to a grand jury.
I suppose I'm not revealing too much about myself to say that I happened to walk by one of the rallies in New York City and saw white envelopes being distributed to protesters.
Of course, I don't know what was inside the white envelopes, but I can guess.
In 1987 Ms Brawley, age 15, stayed out past curfew while visiting a jailed boyfriend and was justifiably afraid of how her violent stepfather, Ralph King, might react.
To protect themselves from the stepfather's wrath, Brawley and her mother (allegedly) concocted a story of a brutal attack by four white men, naming specific persons.
A grand jury ultimately decided there was not enough evidence that the crime occurred. One of the men sued for defamation of character and won, and Brawley's mother was ultimately held in contempt of court for refusing to testify to a grand jury.
Rallies in support
At the time, there were extensive public rallies supporting Ms Brawley, who is Black, lead by current CNN commentator Al Sharpton.I suppose I'm not revealing too much about myself to say that I happened to walk by one of the rallies in New York City and saw white envelopes being distributed to protesters.
Of course, I don't know what was inside the white envelopes, but I can guess.
Meghan enters the picture
Fast forward to June 2020, when another teenage girl has reported a hate crime, this time in Madison, Wisconsin, a very left-wing city in a state with wide political diversity.
(Wisconsin sent the first openly lesbian Senator to Washington - Tammy Baldwin - and has a Democratic governor, but went for Trump in the 2016 election.)
Althea Bernstein, age 18, is a light-skinned biracial girl. She says she was attacked early in the morning of June 24, near the end of a harrowing night for Madison, when protesters smashed the windows of several buildings and attacked a state senator as well as tearing down two statues.
Ms Bernstein reports that she was stopped at a traffic light when she "saw four men, all white. One used a spray bottle to deploy a liquid on her face and neck, then threw a flaming lighter at her, causing the liquid to ignite," according to the police report.
"She drove forward, patted out the flames, and eventually drove home," according to the report.
Ms Bernstein's mother then encouraged her to go to a hospital, according to the police report.
Lighter fluid used for arson
Not far from the intersection where Ms Bernstein reported that the crime occurred, lighter fluid was being used in another context.
Just 20 minutes before Ms Bernstein reported being attacked, the City County Building, where the 911 center is located as well as various other public services, was set on fire by someone using lighter fluid.
This building is just a 3-minute drive from where Ms Bernstein says the attack occurred.
(A Twitter user has plotted it on a map, and also raises some interesting questions about how one might react when dealing with severe burns.)
Wouldn't you rather punch a man?
While things were clearly crazy in Madison that evening, it seems unlikely that four right-wing guys would have appeared among the mostly left-wing crowd and chose as their target a light-skinned young woman in a car.
As a general rule, angry young men tend to like to mix it up with other angry young men, and there were plenty of left-wing guys out there that night to have a punch-up with. Why attack a girl in a vehicle?
What seems more likely is that Ms Bernstein was one of the protesters/rioters herself, and perhaps went to the demonstration without her parents' permission.
Perhaps she got injured during the City County Building arson attack, or some other violent event that evening, and needed a way to explain this at home.
There's an investigation going on, so one can only hope the truth will come out.
Meghan gets involved
Which leads us back to Meghan Markle, who is apparently in touch with the Bernstein family and trying to position herself as Ms Bernstein's protector.
"Prince Harry shared that young people's voices matter, and Meghan has agreed to talk with girls in Wisconsin" says the representative of a local Boys and Girls Club.
Has Meghan ever been to Wisconsin? Perhaps as a student at Northwestern University in nearby Illinois she went up to party in Milwaukee, or at some wealthy student's Wisconsin lake house.
South Africa redux
The whole thing reminds me of Meg's attempts to parachute in and address the very real issue of female murder victims in South Africa. What did she really know about the situation? How could she really help?
In addition, her suggested work with the Boys and Girls club sounds like the exact sort of thing she would have been doing in the UK if she and Harry had remained in their royal positions.
Visiting charities, speaking to people, trying to inspire...it's the job she quit.
And that job had a salary and a wardrobe allowance and a nice place to live.
Has she given all that up to do basically the same thing, only unpaid, from the tenuous comfort of a borrowed home?
Comments
No wonder he looks like an abduction victim in his "videos".
I have a hard time believing she could give birth only a few hours into labor, especially if this is her "first" pregnancy and at her age.
I had a kid in four hours, but it was my second and they were only 18 months apart and I was under 30.
It just doesn't line up.
How do we know Markle had no kids before? Because she told so?
Well, yeah, I guess. Even if she had one in her teens as has been rumored, that would have been a long time ago.
OT: I don't know why my little picture icon thingy isn't working. I'm not using my regular business or personal account, but it doesn't want to pop up anyway.
I strongly suspect she is a narc. Live Abuse Free is a great channel on YouTube and she talks a lot about narcs. I think M's need to be perfect explains why they couldn't announce they were using a surrogate, why she couldn't just have her father come to the wedding, and why there is such a need for relentless, daily PR about what a caring humanitarian she is when her actions show the opposite.
There also seems to be some defiance at work as well. The day after Lady C's video in which she advised H&M to "zip it," there were reports they had signed with the new speaking agency. Perfect timing or were they sitting on this deal, waiting to release it at an opportune moment?
Finally, I can't think of any public figure who has saturated the media as much as they do, not with actual news but with stories about what they plan to do or how they are such amazing humanitarians/philanthropists. The most bizarre element of it all is that they cite privacy constantly, but are also in the media every day.
Yes it is fucking weird. Their strategy doesn’t make a lot of sense.
If you think about it though, they are just paying a PR company to come up with on the fly lists of ideas. They are paying a lot of money. I’m excited to see the German produced documentary on it later this year. Since they have little organic interest, they are paying for someone to plan out all the Pr ‘spots’ and articles. Most of the dailymail (and news in general) is run by PR placements. They just seem to have an enormous budget (Charles pocketbook). Eventually she will have to show a return on all of this money spend. She can only kick that can down the road for so long.
The reason it looks last minute and half hazard is because there is no ‘end goal’ plan with their company they are presenting the PR company. So the PR company is doing the best they can on the fly (with an Arsenal of stories).
Also, it’s clear to me they are trying to copy the Royal strategists in the UK PR team, although now in America, where it costs a lot of money.
1) they don’t talk to the press
2) they pop up at random charity or foundation small time things
3) they have stories written about ‘their work’
4)they piggyback off of real royal work, by copying exactly what they do in the UK RF a day or week later, to get the news permeation (cheaper) and continue to look ‘Royal’
They are trying to become paid American Royals. The Queen is allowing this, so she can see if other working Royals can just copy their process in other countries (or maybe even in the UK as well) to make their own income.
I personally think it’s a disservice to the Crown to allow this to occur.
I also think this was the backup plan to Meghan being the A-list actress with huge movie roles she thought she’d get. She’s having to rely on the popularity of being Royal, and thus rely on Harry for far longer than she assumed would happen. This is also why taking away SussexRoyal was such a huge problem for her as it was her ‘corporation’ and ‘backup plan’ for if acting and entertainment didn’t work out.
The problem is, America doesn’t care about these wannabe Ex-Royal ‘influencers.’
Influencers don’t make a lot of money.
Meghan Markle, Charity Start-up Barbie
MM wouldn't know true charity if it bit her in the butt pads. The only charity she's interested in is SparkleMarkle, LTD.
And how a private phone call can bring somebody to compliment Meg's counselling capabilities? Did Megs bring a recorder or a full PR team with her?
Oh, I'm sure. I had to stretch my mind all the way back to March, when MM announced that she thought everyone could make excellent use of COVID-19 lockdown time by becoming a certified counselor over the Internet. Maybe this is how she's been utilizing her time, in between crashing private Zoom meetings, feeding the vulnerable and reading books to Archie?
Doria probably got her associates' degree in SW through a similar scheme. Meg should look into becoming an ordained minister with an Internet course and that'd be another Internet stream for her.
I'd like to amend it - she thinks she's the Feminist Messiah.
This makes me howl with laughter. The Feminist Messiah who sponged off her Daddy, her first husband, her second husband, her live-in boyfriend, various wealthy guys on yachts, worked on her knees for tips (my speculation only @tatty, but it fits into a theme with Meg. Nice princesses do not flaunt their bras and crotches in the vicinity of married men with cash. We've seen MM do this on numerous occasions . . I glean it as a leftover habit from her hustling starlet days) . . .her third husband's dad and grandmother, and who is now sponging off Tyler Perry, having previously sponged off a Russian billionaire via David Foster? The one who has fake hair, fake teeth, fake boobs, fake butt checks, fake pigment via makeup and an indeterminate number of nose jobs and facial procedures? That Feminist Messiah? I guess MM believes that the ultimate in feminism is marrying up as high as you can, turning herself into a plastic doll and and never paying her own bills. I was raised with a different definition.
I want to know if a surrogate was used? I also want to know how much money Charles is currently forking over to the hapless duo?
Another good example is Eartha Kitt and her daughter:
https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/jessica-groun-eartha-kitt-and-daughter-kitt-shapiro-news-photo/111569799
From Yahoo News, right now:
Prince Harry Is Reportedly "Overwhelmed With Guilt" About Moving Away from the Royal Family
Kayleigh Roberts
Marie Claireyesterday"
Is this setting up the inevitable divorce? They can't come to terms w/ where they want to live. Harry misses his family, blah, blah, blah...If so, this is definitely an article straight out of MM's camp bc it certainly doesn't do Hapless Harry any favors.
It is a very generous offer, thank you. Would you ask if it is true the press holds on to some unsavory details from her past?
All my instincts tell me she was involved with pornography and possibly with escort service.
How embarrassing for the RF if true
https://www.cityofmadison.com/police/newsroom/incidentreports/incident.cfm?id=26640
Seems like a rather small reward for a hate crimes case that has received international attention.
The police release also suggests that Althea “believes” she was at a certain intersection when the incident occurred, but apparently isn’t sure.
Meg’s involvement in the case profiled in Elle today, so the PR machine grinds on.
Another question...how did Markle connect with Althea?
......
How do we know it's true that Markle connected with Michael Johnson?
She lies about everything.
It's entirely possible that he contacted her, thinking that she and Harry had money and popularity and could shine a light on this girl's cause, being as Mm is biracial and all.
Except he guessed wrong. Markle is only about herself and what the publicity can do for her.
No money is going to be going that guy's way, or to the GoFundMe for the girl.
https://www.elle.com/culture/career-politics/a32998089/althea-bernstein-prince-harry-meghan-markle-hate-crime/
Town and Country piece today too
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a32993093/meghan-markle-althea-bernstein-hate-crime-phone-conversation/
Two outlets where we have seen Meg’s PR placements in the past.
She "believes" but not sure? Well it happened in the city at the intersection and I bet most of them are equipped with cameras. Just makes it longer for police to check.
It is possible to track the car all the way using street cameras.
- Surrogacy information but that would be hard if not impossible to get.
- Who doxxed all those women critical of Meg on DM? Nutty mentioned EU laws and how those doxxed were Americans for a reason.
- Meg's U.S. tax situation and/or her merching empire
- Details about the Archie H&M sales advert and why it wasn't called out by Harry, Meg, BRF, or the British press
@Nutty, that sounds as if they have looked at CCTV and no there's no sign of her?
Portland and her birth team was not announced. Both the Christening photo & the PP, HM, DR photo were photoshopped. I don’t know what the BRF will do in the future regarding this ‘baby’. I always thought that Lord Geigt (sp?) was brought in to handle this situation. In any case, I wonder if MM’s Mental Health issues will eventually be addressed. ‘She was pretending she was pregnant, Harry tried to help her, etc...’ That could be a way out. Depends though if there is a real baby ‘somewhere’, and if so, where he or she really is.
If there was something on the cameras, they would know where the reported incident had actually occurred.
Pardon my ignorance but what does CYA stand for?
@Jessica
I would want an honest investigative journalist to detail MM's yachting past. Ties to Epstein/Prince Andrew? I understand how narcs and grifters work, but this is the BRF. They have numerous ways to get rid of people, so how has this low rent been able to hang on so long unless she's got some "dead man's switch" type deal going on.
2nd: evidence of the surrogate? I paid only a passing attention to the BRF before seeing the pics from the Australia tour right after she announced the "pregnancy" and it was the sudden 4-5 month bump appearance/disappearance that raised my eyebrows and started questioning what was going on. I started paying more attention to CDAN blinds and started following Nutty's commentary, then found Harry Markle, etc. I've gone back to the timeline and I'm of the opinion based on photographic evidence, timeline, interviews that Harry was never "head over heels in love" w/ MM. She was supposed to be a weekend fun tryst and that's it. His expression at the Invictus Games w/ Trudeau on top of others indicate that he was mortified and wanted her gone!. So what gives?
Still confused about the animal rescue GFM.
Feel free to post comments and I will put them through in the morning.
See you then!
I went straight to video to see if I could get a scene of area. Extremely volatile. Not a place to drive during the day and certainly not at night. Think I heard the F word couple times, be forewarned
https://youtu.be/W9_Njhx7HNI
She very well could have randomly been attacked but then i searched for her specifically and up came GMA appearance, btw nice fumble by George at the start..
https://youtu.be/or2mOyfth4c
I am sorry and I will eat crow if proven wrong but I do not believe her. I know nothing of burns , and was it tatty with doctor husband? I would like his opinion of her burns
To me they do not coincide with her story. They look like they are not even fresh and odd she would not be coated in some sort of salve. Her hair appears unscathed, not even baby hairs framing her face appear singed
Barring the burns, could be entirely wrong. But she does not come off as credible to me. Maybe it is nerves but she keeps smiling and I saw not one tear in her cries
Coupling with what I have seen and nothing I have read, aside from here. IMO she fabricated entire story and should be held accountable to fullest extent of the law
Apologies in advance if I offended anyone.
I eagerly await the outcome of the investigation as I want to see just how this is handled.
-lucy
I am going to wait until I read my copy of Lady C's book before I comment too much on what her take on the provenance of Archie Mountbatten-Windsor might be. I'd need to see the entire chapter before I understand where exactly she stands on the Archie question, but I find the snippet of hers you provided tantalizing for not so much what is said but what could be implied between the lines if one is reading with a more cynical view than yours toward this pregnancy. I'm going to insert my thoughts of how a person who doubts Meg's natural motherhood (and she has provided plenty of room for doubt) reads Lady C's words. I'd need to see more before I know how she feels on the matter.
“There was serious concern that the Royal Family’s reputation for integrity would be damaged. There was also a real fear that the monarchy would suffer IF (emphasis mine) it became accepted and generalized belief that Archie had been born by surrogate.
The RF's concern over their reputation for integrity being damaged has turned out to be very justified, considered Meg's effect on their institution, not just with Archie, but he is the most mysterious piece. Archie's birth via surrogate and potentially bungled adoption subsequent has become a major talking point in communities such as ours. Certainly not everybody agrees, and the larger public seems to not really give AF either way. We here and others of our blogger sisters may be outliers, but that doesn't mean we are wrong, either. I read this as the RF's frantic wish to avoid Archie's convoluted, unauthorized birth becoming widely accepted belief That is not the same as categorically denying, with proofs, that it did not happen that way.
No monarchist wanted a situation in which a member of the Royal Family was believed to have practiced a deception upon the public by pretending to be pregnant when she was not.
Again with the rather Clintonian parsing of words. I believe this is Lady C. being very careful here. She has absolute deniability that she ever claimed outright that Archie was the product of a surrogacy or that the Family either wanted this or was intentionally deceitful to the public when the surrogacy was undertaken. What she actually says here is: No loyal supporters of the Queen wanted the honesty of any member of the RF questioned over their active pretense in Meg's pregnancy. Of course, such an outcome is not wanted. Feared, even. But the question is left open as to whether it did in fact happen that way.
It was felt that the honor and integrity of the monarchy could be called into question IF the public believed that the Royal Family and its courtiers had colluded by faking a pregnancy when they had done no such thing.”
Notice once again here Lady C. is not speaking directly about the feelings of the Royals. She is alluding again to the public perception of the Royals. These are separate things.
Not one of us Team Pillow supporters here, including me, believed for one moment that the Royal Family and its courtiers in any way colluded with Meghan in faking her pregnancy. Not at all. That is entirely on Meghan. I think she snowed them all, including perhaps Harry in the early stages, until the time got close for her delivery and she had refused all of the royal doctors and any of the protocols of a Royal birth. It has always been my contention that Meg's extraordinarily long confinement (from March 19th to May 6)--more than seven weeks--was when the s*** hit the fan and the plot may have been discovered. Perhaps they were trying to hammer out the formal adoption agreement with the surrogate, or the Harkles had been trying to adopt another baby who looked enough like both of them to be plausibly theirs.
Yes! It explains the downhill descent we've seen of Harry since that engagement, the haphazard wedding, on up to now. Nothing in his demeanor has suggested he was ever "enamored" by MM and thus fooled. Hapless is like a caught bird in a cage of his own making. So again, what did/does MM have on him to make the coercion a success!?! *It certainly isn't her charm bc MEagain is so off-putting.
I believe that deception was in play, but not on the part of the RF. After Meg had gone into her 'confinement' it was then both too late and too early to issue any sort of statement--was there definitely a baby on the way from somewhere(one) not Meghan during those almost 2 months?
As to what the RF's level of involvement was in managing the ensuing fallout from the birth announcement on down might never be known, by Lady C. or anyone else. The Queen's actions subsequent to the shambolic birth announcement are pretty telling by their omissions.
1. No gun salute
2. No title, not even his father's minimal secondary ones
3. No signatories on the bare signboard that appeared outside BP. I'm surprised the Queen even allowed this, but it's tradition, and she does cling to her traditions. The gun salute, titles and signatures are also traditional but as we see, completely omitted for Archie.
HM and PP did appear in one photograph with Meghan, holding a swaddled bundle that may have been a live baby, an image that was later disseminated by the Queen & the Cambridges in their Christmas messages. If *this* was deceptive, an act of after-the-fact image management to protect itself from scandal, I believe absolutely that the RF did not collude *in advance* of Archie's supposed birth. Perhaps the collusion came later, out of necessity for survival. Nobody does want to believe that the Queen and her heirs would have been compelled to lie for Meghan in a coverup, to protect the reputation of their house, but maybe it has happened this way and Meg drove them to it.
We have two images of Archie with Royal family members, and it is telling to me that both images are the property of the now-defunct SussexRoyal. Meg hired and used her own photographer on both occasions, not the official Palace photographers who have been documenting Royal weddings and christenings since photography was invented. Meg's versions of Archie are therefore her sole property and nothing whatsoever to do with Buckingham Palace, who has thereby disavowed any involvement in the creation of images of the child called Archie. She showed a picture which Meg had taken, and by mentioning it, is allowing that she agreed to be in a picture with Meg holding something . . that is the extent of her involvement. Acknowledging Archie as her seventh great-grand (without any reference to his parentage in the same statement) is separate from the image that purports to show her with Archie. It appears that a baby has been born and the House of Windsor is accepting him into the succession, but that does not definitively answer his parentage. The Palace has not acknowledged any witnesses to this birth. That in itself says to me that they were not involved in anything to do with it except in cleaning up Meg's mess as best they could.
Their survival is tantamount and means more than even their integrity. Of course they wish for the *image* of their integrity to remain sacrosanct. This same RF covered up the extent of the active sympathies the then King Edward VII gave to the Nazi cause . . obscuring the origins of an infant should be patty-cake. I think they were hoping at the time that the speculation would die down after a few months. After all, HAMS were still popular at the time of Archie's birth--except in outlier fringes like here. But of course with Megxit and this hare-brained lawsuit 'Archie' has brought against Splash, Meg seems determined to keep the point of her greatest vulnerability smack in the center of the public eye. Just when we are tempted to forget about Archie, she makes sure to plant PR stories or 'never before seen' photos and the speculation about him starts all over again.
This is Narc fuel but it's the exact opposite of what the Royal family wants. No doubt 50 years hence, King William will still be rueing the day 'that woman' was ever allowed to join.
There are just too many other hinky things, as have been rehashed here.
Daniel Martin, from New York, spoke to Entertainment Tonight via a video call
Spoke about Meghan Markle and how she's changed beauty industry for better
Added he now feels a certain 'responsibility' to associate himself with the royal
Said goal with Meghan's wedding makeup was to make sure his friend 'felt good'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8470015/Meghan-Markle-globally-resonates-levels-says-BFF-makeup-artist-Daniel-Martin.html
Please name a few of these ways
Wow! You are nice!
My top few have been overwhelmingly covered. The surrogacy, if anyone knows it. How they really met, and the real courtship for sure. But I would love to see an expose of her PR from the earliest days of the courtship. I didn't have a CLUE as to how all that works and I would love for her to be called out, plus how much she is spending of Britain's money in order to be loathed. Without her extravagance, the Duchy tenants would be that much safer.
I know we have hopes of a documentary but I've read that the woman who said she was working on it is hard to establish as a real person. After getting my hopes up too!
I just realized how many times I had to use the word "real" in connection with MM. It's so fitting, I didn't have the heart to change a few.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/laurence-fox-s-triumph-against-the-mob
Speaking of which, I read an excerpt from Lady CCs book that laid out how the Sussexes strategy for, well censorship is the only word, relied heavily on a victim narrative, and racism fit the bill. The idea that Megs in particular, would amend her behaviors wasn't even to be suggested, and Harry is such a rabid press hater that neither considers a Free Press to be in any way a desirable thing. But it was the plan from the beginning.
If I can find it, I'll paste it here.
I would hate to be on any police force that has to come out and say anyone lied when reporting an alleged hate crime.
I feel like they have their answers already and are now trying to frame a response.
They will have to form a very diverse, very independent-thinking committee, give them the evidence and hope for the best.
I used to follow @strongwrite on Twitter when I thought it might be Meghan. It might be, or not...hard to tell - initially it sounded like here, but it's a locked account now so I don't know.
However, it's definitely someone the sugars worship and follow. I learned a twitter trick whereby one can see replies etc. to tweets of locked accounts, so once in a while I'll check in especially when there's stuff happening with the Harkles. (trick: add a colon before the twitter handle in the search box).
As a preface, I've often wondered if part of what Megs has on Harry is existence of an illegitimate bebe of his somewhere...there have been rumours.
BUT, based on what I could gather from replies only, this strongwrite accounts seems to suggest that William has illegitimate children, and that he may reveal them in order to add them to the line of succession thus pushing Harry and Archie down the line.
Whether it's true or not, it has Meghan shit-stirring all over it.
Meghan and Harry: The Real Story" by Lady Colin Campbell -
"Harry and Meghan now availed themselves of the opportunity to demean their opponents and present themselves as victims. They accused reputable organs of the British press of being hypocritical liars and cheats who were maliciously twisting and turning their actions. They declared that it was ‘their wish to reshape and broaden access to their work’ and that they would ‘invite specialist media to specific events/engagements to give greater access to their cause-driven activities, widening the spectrum of news coverage.’ To the British press this was hypocritical cant, for they were restricting access, banning all mainstream reporters, choosing instead only tame journalists who would report their activities in ways that pleased them. Or, as Harry and Meghan put it, ‘credible media outlets focused on objective news reporting to cover key moments and events.’ Which really meant, North American style coverage, in which we inform you, you faithfully repeat our words, puff us up, or you’re out on your ear. It is hardly surprising that the mainstream press were incensed by this ploy to deny them the access which till then they had had as a right by long-established practice. But Meghan is bright, and she had come up with a way of thwarting her opponents such as no other royal had ever done. To people who want to control their publicity, she had turned herself into something of a heroine overnight. I am reliably informed that Meghan and Harry feared, with good reason, that the British press could otherwise sabotage their well thought-out strategies for boosting themselves financially as well as reputationally. They were worried that the media might point out the potentially adverse effects their commercial activities could have upon the welfare of the monarchy. This might lessen their prestige in the US, weaken their brand, and scupper business opportunities. They therefore needed to defuse the power of such comments before they were even made. The most effective way would be if they could present themselves as victims of a vicious and unjust media. They also needed to take total control of the narrative. Stories must not emanate from independent and uncontrollable sources, but from themselves solely. Only then could they control the outflow of information while creating a hiatus between the breaking of news and commentary on their initiatives."
Ms. Bernstein says she was at W. Gorham and State street. I looked it up and it is 1 1/2 blks from fire station, 2 blks from the University campus, across from a restaurant and a few blocks from the State Capitol bldg, near a Museum, the list goes on and on. There would no doubt be cameras absolutely everywhere!!
The City offered reward may seem small but there should be companies/organizations chipping in big time anytime soon. I think the FBI & police should be able to get to the bottom of this fairly quickly.
She was only a few weeks pregnant at Eugenie's wedding, not 12 weeks along, which I read somewhere that she was intimating.
This theory doesn't allow for her bending over in heels, so there is that problem, for which I don't have an answer!
PBS is having a show on POV which is titled And She Could Be Next: Building the Movement - During the historic 2018 midterm elections, defiant women of color transform politics from the ground up by fighting to create a truly reflective democracy.
I was thinking about if M does decide to move into politics, she might take a look at their playbooks.
There is a part of me which thinks that perhaps the part of her which may have her rethink the idea of running as getting into politics might not be as easy as I'm thinking. There is a loss of privacy (you can't run into the drugstore looking badly incase a constituent stops to ask you a question) or your opponent will be looking for anything to use to make you look bad. It is a lot of work as work and then you are, to a certain degree, always planning for your next election run. For all their sakes, I'm hoping it was just a passing thought of maybe I'll go into politics if this or that doesn't play out the way I want.
If you enjoy Taibbi's writing, you might want to check out his podcast "Useful Idiots" (it's on Itunes, YouTube, etc.)
He's one of the few real journalists left, and has a great book called Hate Inc @ the devolution of the media.
My politics don't really align with Matt's, but I suppose that's a good thing. You can learn a lot more from someone you don't always agree with!
I also don't think Archie "resembling" H&M, and Tom Markle per some users is proof that he is their child. A lot of people look like each other but they are certainly not relatives. Many of us including me have counterexamples for such a posture to be accepted at face value.
Look at Doria and Samantha Markle. They are completely unrelated but in this pic, I see a strong resemblance to one another: https://www.closerweekly.com/posts/samantha-markle-slams-doria-ragland-for-oprah-interview-160606/
Sexual selection is a powerful factor in how progeny turn out. Then we have people often picking mates that resemble relatives. IMHO, Meg chooses men that are skinnier versions of her father. Although harder to see for some, I see a resemblance between Doria and Tom Markle the same way some see a resemblance between Harry and Meg. I just don't think it hard to find unrelated people that look like H&M that could produce "their" Archie.
Too many strange things surrounding the pregnancy for it to be legit.
I'm also not convinced that the baby, assuming one exists, is with Meg and Harry at the moment. There are never any images of them pushing a stroller/pram, struggling with diaper bags, having colorful toys strewn around everywhere, or any of the other usual signs of new parents.
Even if a nanny is doing the heavy lifting, you think we'd see them taking walks with Archie, or see Archie out in the yard at Tyler Perry's. Where are those plastic outdoor toys that every child under the age of 4 seems to own?
"Meghan reportedly also raced to support charities without considering the details of her patronage, according to the book, with the author being told: 'It was all too rushed, without proper research.'"
Hello, Althea Bernstein.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8471507/Meghan-Markles-Hollywood-gung-ho-attitude-odds-staff.html
We’ve heard the rumors of political aspirations, with lofty dreams of becoming the president of the United States being touted by some.
What if Meghan somehow managed to combine Hollywood and politics in an attempt to announce her arrival?
https://www.ccn.com/maverick-meghan-markle-this-could-be-her-election-year/
`She's not the Feminist Messiah - she's just a Very Naughty Girl.'
All together now: `Always look on the bright si-ide of life...'
I do believe members of the BRF are complicit in a surrogacy coverup to varying degrees. I tend to believe H&M went rogue often and Meg's penchant for pushing dangerous boundaries forced the BRF's hands *after* the fact.
How much the BRF know and don't know about Archie is interesting to speculate on. As much as I admire some of the members of the BRF, they have shown how laissez-faire they are in their dealings with the Sussexes. What gets decisive action from the BRF is quashing any public dissent and scrutiny. The doxxing, scrubbing the web, and shutdowns of Meg critics was already suggestive. Some Royal reporters hinting at discussing Archie as a "legal minefield" is even more so.
No doubt, the entire Firm will have left no stone unturned to ensure plausible deniability. I see the BRF united in covering up Archie's "delivery" from any public fallout whatever the cost. Unfortunately, duty and integrity are sometimes mutually exclusive.
I am fully with you. I have lost a huge deal of respect for the royals because of two issues. Harry's PR painting him a hero while he wasn't and shutting up people who were calling Meg's behavior what it was.
So the turmoil they are now in is a payback for their hypocrisy.
I also believe this will not go away and damage them further if they continue scheming instead of honestly admitting Harry is the lost cause and should be cut loose.
The BRF may have suspected surrogacy but they wouldn't have wanted any documentation of guilty knowledge. Outside doctors that would neither deny nor confirm anything to them about Meg and her "pregnancy" saved the Firm from serious danger.
CNN https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/27/us/wisconsin-hate-crime-investigation/index.html
(published Saturday, June 27):
Police are working on obtaining permission to access Bernstein's hospital records, according to Madison police spokesperson Joel DeSpain. Investigators are also looking at surveillance images to see if the incident was captured on camera.
"Our department believes victims, and we take their statement and then thoroughly investigate what they said happened to them," DeSpain told CNN Friday. "We believe this victim, and we are going to work with her and review all the video we can find."
From the mayor of Madison:
"I immediately reached out to the police when I learned of the incident, asking them to use all available resources to pursue the perpetrators as quickly as possible."
The photo in the article showing the injury is an "undated photo provided by the family."
I believe the photo was taken at the hospital because 1) she is wearing a hospital gown although she could also wear one of those at a doctor's office for follow up 2) the stuff in the background on the right looks like hospital stuff, not doctor's office stuff to me.
I wonder who took the photo? Is it a selfie she took when she was "high as a kite?" (It appears to be an "after" picture to me as the wounds look clean. And if so, she'd have been medicated.)
Or did the nurse(s) who told her not to call the police take the picture? The nurse (s) had to think a crime was committed to take a picture wouldn't they? (I don't think I've ever had an injury photographed in the ER.)
And I do wonder why the police didn't have her medical records by Sat if she was interviewed Thurs as I'd think that would move quickly in a victim-reported case. Finally, IF this is a hoax and no one is caught, that could look like the cops didn't try because she's biracial and Jewish. I guess IF
it seems like a hoax, the cops would have to tell the mayor? So she won't keep pushing publicly for the perps to be caught?
I can attest to the journalistic prowess of Matt Taibbi. He is certainly to the Left of the political spectrum but he is not partisan in the slightest (strange but true). He was on a poscast a while ago calling out the mass media on the ridiculous accusations against Trump and the 'Russian issues', stating that there was no basis for the accusations. So he's a rare breed-a real journalist.
I'll try to find the podcast as he talks about his parents who were also journalists and how he is steeped in the old school traditions.
Aha found it https://samharris.org/podcasts/140-burning-fourth-estate/
And to get back on topic, MM getting involved in all this stuff shows that she is absolutely delusional in regards to her status. She marries someone for a few years and now thinks she's Nelson Mandela who people will listen to with respect? Wow.
It also shows that she never had any intention if being a royal. They can't get involved in this stuff as they will be hated by those who don't agree with their views, and in a parliamentary democracy if they get involved in politics it looks similar to why they had to be cut down in the first place.
Am not a fan of the RF so part of me thinks 'bring it on.'
@Charade: Since she ‘announced’ so early, I would think they’d want her to see the Royal Doctors. If they said she wasn’t pregnant, announce that she had a miscarriage or something else. Much better than letting this lie go on forever. Not to mention the embarrassment that she brought to the family with the bump clutching and coat flicking. They had to have known. Were they afraid to stand up to her & JH?
Another "real journalist", in my opinion, is Lee Fang, who is also left of center but does some excellent work. He's Chinese-American, younger than Taibbi.
Here's an excellent piece he just published on how much US protective gear was shipped *to* China in early 2020.
https://theintercept.com/2020/06/29/ppe-china-export-airlifts/
As the son of the late John Lennon and Yoko Ono, with more than enough money to last him a lifetime, Lennon is one of those few people who has the position and security to speak out about the recent madness.
He's got a sense of humor, too.
https://twitter.com/seanonolennon/status/1277677573749854208?s=20
I can stand her ill-conceived charity PR strategy. But any serious foray into US politics would rile my blood. As I see this as a quasi attempt by a foreign gov't to influence US political affairs.
What do others think about her political activities?
@Lizzie, I think the local politicians have to make a show of taking Althea's case very seriously.
If the report is false (which I think it was) but she wasn't involved in the arson attack on the 911 Building, I'm guessing she will be allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor that will allow her to pursue her career goal of being a firefighter/paramedic.
If, however, she turns out to be one of the people involved in the arson attack, I would imagine she might be arrested as part of a group, and the false report to the cops would be an additional charge.
Also, there was tons of cellphone footage that night from Madison, as everyone photographed themselves taking down statues and such. Let's see if any frat boys in flowered shirts turn up on any of that footage.
I have watched a program called See No Evil in which investigators disclosed how much information municipal and private security cameras can provide during the crime investigation. A real eye opener.
If the girl's memory fails to pinpoint the location of the crime it is possible to trace her car from point A where she started to the point B where she ended.
She must remember where she left from and how long she was driving. It would be a matter of technology to build all possible routes and check the video evidence.
Four guys at least two of which were wearing Hawayan shirts will stand out too. If they are real, of course.
HIPAA doesn't apply when a crime has been committed. Law enforcement should not have to 'work' to obtain her records. As Nutty said, making a show of taking Althea's case very seriously.
"I wonder if the investigation has started yet. Wouldn’t it be fairly easy to review the camera footage from 1am at that specific intersection to find two men in Hawaiian shirts?"
You'd think! And you'd think the flames would stand out on video too since the road she said she was on wasn't where fires were being set.
Of course, some sources are now reporting she "thinks" it was that particular intersection...sounds a bit like waffling. But it might not be. I don't live in a big city now but I have briefly in the past. If I was driving on a main road with lots of cross streets and something very upsetting happened near one intersection, I can see not remembering 100% whether it was intersection A or B or maybe even C. But I'm pretty sure if it was my hometown I'd remember the street I was on, and I'd know for sure it was intersection A, B, or C. So you'd think they could find video pretty easily. Unless a few days delay (Wed 1 am and they talked to her Thurs daytime in the morning I believe) meant tape had been recorded over by the time they looked for video. These days though since most video is digital, that likely doesn't happen often.
-----
@Nutty wrote:
"I think the local politicians have to make a show of taking Althea's case very seriously."
I agree. But that's why I think the case can't just die quietly IF the facts don't add up. If it doesn't add up and the politicians don't know that, they'll still be pushing to catch the perps. And if that doesn't happen given it's being investigated as a hate crime, that will cause more unrest unless the politicians stop pushing. And maybe it still would cause unrest if the perps aren't caught even if they DO stop pushing.
I am not in the legal field nor am I a career counselor but I think any kind of false report charge, misdemeanor or not, might stop her from being a firefighter/paramedic. Maybe not permanently, but for a period of time. https://work.chron.com/disqualifies-being-fireman-5400.html
I love "See No Evil“, always get goosebumps when they start showing the surveillance camera footage.
@lizzie ~ perhaps a false report charge won't stop her from pursuing her professional goals, but an arson charge could. Wonder if Althea is shown in any of the protest footage.
Yeah, I don't think I'd want an arsonist to be a firefighter here, but maybe Madison is okay with that. Since her hair and eyebrows look to be okay, she must have been covered up pretty well.
You are right about HIPPA not being a complete bar to getting Ms. Bernstein's health records. As another poster wrote, Wisconsin has a law whereby the Health care facility should 'report' the crime. 'Reporting' a crime is not necessarily the same as providing all the records. A mandatory reporter fullfills their obligation sometimes by merely alerting the police to a possible crime without even knowing if a crime actually took place or having all the info.
HIPPA is a federal law which usually preempts state law. However, Wisconsin's law allows the hospital:
• To report PHI to law enforcement when required by law to do so (such as reporting gunshots or stab wounds https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ocr/privacy/hipaa/understanding/special/emergency/final_hipaa_guide_law_enforceme/index.html).
Therefore, the Madison Police delay in getting ALL the medical records because they are respecting the intent of HIPPA and are seeking the victim's authorization for full disclosure of any pertinent records. The police may even be seeking Althea's records from her primary care physician (if seen after Hosp. visit) and if she has seen a mental health counselor after the incident.
"The nurse (s) had to think a crime was committed to take a picture wouldn't they? (I don't think I've ever had an injury photographed in the ER.)"
Twice I have had ER nurse/physician ask to take a picture of a medical condition. This is done where a photo would add to the completeness of the record. It is not unusual for a patient to return to the ER again and a different physician may be on duty and needs to review what the injury/condition looked like originally.
In the case of a wound from a crime, it could be vital for the investigation to analyze how the wound looked originally, before healing started. If one watches crime shows, you would see how much can be gleaned from wound patterns for instance.
In looking at her injury, I would think a spray of lighter fluid that was ignited would cause a more scattershot burn on her face. For that reason (and others), I think she was at the protest and wearing a bandanna when the burning source was thrown from slightly behind her (no injuries to her hand or forearms). Perhaps her brother was involved (he threw it) so she had to cover for him - he was at home waiting for my visit at 1 am??
You make a very good point. If I know a city or town well I will always register where something happened, even a traumatic event. In my own case I was driving past a bus stop when a man deliberately stepped in front of my car and jumped on it. Thankfully my speed was so low at that point he didn't even sustain serious bruising. I got a severe shock though and couldn't drive after that. The point is I remember extremely well where it happened and what was going on around me (bus at the stop, street lights, people with kids, etc).
People react differently, of course, but I do not buy it when she says she couldnt remember where it happened. Person should be in shock already or under influence in order not to register where he or she drives in the city. It is not a country field that looks the same in the dark.
Her go fund me pages are creeping upward to about 7.5 thousand dollars.
I was the 12th poster on this thread and I called it a "hate hoax" which is what it is. By now police all over America are very wary of these racist hate crime tales. They will put on a neutral and helpful public face (gotta be politically correct or have the twitter mobs descend on you) but internally they operate from a place of skepticism. Why? Because there have been so many hate hoaxes including the noose at NASCAR. I don't see Bubba Wallace apologizing for anything, for any of the chaos he created. Meanwhile the FBI immediately dispatched 16 agents (16!) there to get to the bottom of this alledged noose hate crime. Tens of thousands of dollars wasted on Bubba's hate hoax.
Attack happened June 24. Crickets from the celebrity world. Very telling.
lol..... Seems like everyone in Hollywood got the memo except for Ms Whip Smart and Hapless. And lets be real here. The Gruesome Twosome's current racial justice warrior fad is 99% Megsy's doing. Haps, along for the ride as usual.
This is why I say Sunshine Sachs was pranking them when they told Megsy to get hold of Ms Bernstein STAT! (my scenario anyways) Pranking due to Megs being very late paying her SS bills.
"I am not in the legal field nor am I a career counselor but I think any kind of false report charge, misdemeanor or not, might stop her from being a firefighter/paramedic."
@Nutty said...
"If the report is false (which I think it was) but she wasn't involved in the arson attack on the 911 Building, I'm guessing she will be allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor that will allow her to pursue her career goal of being a firefighter/paramedic."
On a lark in 1979 I applied to be a firefighter (before standards were relaxed for women so they could pass the difficult physical strength and agility tests) in Bakersfield. Calif, and the Fire Dept. was extremely rigorous in their qualifications; investigating your background (seeing if you had criminal convictions even tickets) but I was more shocked that they administered a series of psychological tests, including the whopper 500 question MMPI psych test which for decades was the gold standard in determining if one had psych pathologies of any kind. (PS I passed MMPI but just barely failed physical tests and got complimented by the Fire Chief who had watched applicants go thru the physical trials that day).
Ms. Bernstein, if she has lied about this *crime* may very well find she will not become a firefighter due to her mental state of doing such a thing even if a possible misdemeanor is overlooked. IMO I don't think a false report of a 'hate crime' even during these tumultuous times would be so easily overlooked!
"In the case of a wound from a crime, it could be vital for the investigation to analyze how the wound looked originally, before healing started. If one watches crime shows, you would see how much can be gleaned from wound patterns for instance."
Agree 100%. But it also would be vital to notify the police ASAP. And AS says the nurses told her to delay.
Daniela Elser: Meghan Markle, Prince Harry's 'reckless' spending detailed in new book
Royals At War, out today written by investigative journalists Dylan Howard and Andy Tillett, delves into why the Harry and Meghan fairytale fell apart. One factor that the authors raise which has received little attention in the various post mortems written about the Sussexes' exit: money.
Howard and Tillett report that during Meghan's pregnancy, she had sessions with a celebrity acupuncturist, the parents-to-be had a 12-week course of numerology readings costing $4835 and enjoyed a luxe babymoon which reportedly came with a $63,287 price tag.
Then there were the royal's clothes. Per the authors, "it was Meghan's maternity wardrobe – or wardrobes – that drew gasps of horror from the notoriously frugal royals." They report that Meghan spent $791,354 on clothes in 2018, excluding her wedding dress. By contrast, Kate spent $131,714 on new duds in the same year.
Along with Meghan's fabulous closet, Howard and Tillett report that the Duchess' other expenses were also the subject of palace buzz.
"The jewels, the renovation of Frogmore, the allowance for (her mother) Doria, her private trips (with bodyguards) back to the US and Canada – the lavish extravagance was the gossip of the Palace staff and insiders," a family insider is quoted saying.
"It would not have been a surprise to learn that the Queen was monitoring Meghan's reckless spending with a shrewd eye," the authors write.
Yeah there is no way nurses would delay reporting a crime or they could be accused and found guilty (1) not doing their job (2) not complying with state law (3) even obstructing justice.
What nurse is going to put heir livelihood on the line for some stranger 'who is high as a kite' lol.
I also question, her being 'high as a kite' from the typical pain meds a hospital would give her in these times where getting any pain meds is difficult. How could she drive home if 'high as a kite"? A nurse would routinely ask if she has someone to drive her home if pain meds were administered that would incapacitate her. The hospital has a duty to ensure a patient's safety wherever possible.
As one poster wrote (sorry forgot who), this story has more holes than swiss cheese!
The Desperate Sweaty Stench Of The Sussexes
New at the Harry-Markle blog
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2020/06/29/the-desperate-sweaty-stench-of-the-sussexes/
Is Harry blowing his inheritance on this nonsense?
If it was taxpayers money (in case of bodyguards for Doria I assume it was!) than the royals can go to hell.
They stopped being a good value for money. I like Wills and Kate but if they don't put the end to this train wreck their children are risking to face a revolution.
I don't care what others think about UK. Markles need to get a good kicking and be sent to a free flight. We were all racists anyway according to MM when we spent tens of millions on her and did our best to accommodate her never ending demands and diva behavior, so don't care what she thinks now.
Talk about married to a difficult spouse!!! Oh man!! The things she put up with...
Something tells me there maybe wasn't a lot of oversight on their spending?
You'd think the accounting staff would have brought outrageous spending to someone's attention. If not, why not. Afraid of being accused of racism? Seems like it's a fairly egregious amount to ignore.
Almost $5k for numerology "classes"? Jeez, you can teach yourself tarot or astrology for free, if you're willing to invest the time.
DM article about palace staff saying MM ‘rushig into things’ without the proper research. she jumped into patronages/ charities , willi niily, with no reserach. didn’t want to abide by the on the payroll Royal Rules of not commenting on political issues and not giving her opinion. and her having ‘High standards’ and turnovering staff at a high rate.
I agree with the virtue signaling claim of rushing forward with projects, charities, things, without proper research or ‘due diligence’, it’s her MO.
But. “High Standards’???? I don’t think her standards are high at all. i think they are just different than what the Staff was used to.
She doesn’t present herself as someone with ‘High Standards’. her appearance is often times sloppy, and not well thought out (or researched). Always flyaway hair that constantly needed touching ( a look at me signal), ill fitting clothes, creases, gaps, too much or too little fabric. it was more tacky than ‘high standards’.
treating people and employees with disrespect is not a ‘High Standard’ , again it’s tacky, Noveau riche standards.
At any rate, there was the young woman in Mississippi (I’m sorry I can’t remember her name) who was set on fire by her BF (current or ex I can’t remember) and a few of his friends and she was barely alive when found. I believe she went to the burn unit in Memphis (I think this was N. Mississippi) and she died a few days later.
However, I realize Althea is a stranger crime (if it turns out to be) and the other case is domestic violence homicide, so they aren’t the same.
“High Standards’???? I don’t think her standards are high at all. i think they are just different than what the Staff was used to."
Maybe. Saying someone has "high standards" can also denote a kind of pickiness (with a bit of an eye roll)
Wasn't one of the stories out of Australia about her darn "gifted" banana bread? That she insisted staff keep baking it one night (using her recipe) until it turned out the way she thought it should? And she threw that fit about supposedly tasting egg in some vegan wedding reception dish even though the chef swore there was no egg.
I have started considering the BRF were the ones who made sure Meg did not use the Royal Doctors. Her not using them gives the Firm a lot of plausible deniability. The Royal Doctors are answerable to the British public and so their involvement would have been dangerous.
The BRF may have suspected surrogacy but they wouldn't have wanted any documentation of guilty knowledge. Outside doctors that would neither deny nor confirm anything to them about Meg and her "pregnancy" saved the Firm from serious danger.
This is very well-stated. I think you are absolutely onto something. Meg had 'been pregnant' for many months with her upsy-downsy Bump ballooning to near-due date proportions, only to disappear almost entirely at the next appearance when she wanted to wear something svelte to go out drinking with Marcus Anderson, and she hadn't said a single word about her delivery plans or progession of her pregnancy as one might expect--a first-time mum (officially, a first time mum) having a baby in a foreign country would of course want the very best care available--which would be the Queen's doctors, the very best in the United Kingdom. Why *wouldn't* MM want to avail herself of the very best--one who believes herself to be a queen would want the same team that cares for Catherine & who advises the Queen, wouldn't she? As a fairly short-term immigrant to the country, assembling her own birth team from scratch seems like making undue work for herself. If she refused the Queen's doctors, from whom else would she get recommendations for care?
It was only well after the New York 'baby shower' (at which she arrived and left looking pregnant but mysteriously deflated completely during the middle pub crawl bit of the weekend--she may regard everyone besides herself as stupid, but we are not *blind*, Meghan. Holding a file folder over a flat stomach does not fool us)--that it started in coming in dribs and drabs from the Sussex camp about the their plans. No Lindo Wing, no pictures. It was going to be a home birth, attended by midwives. In a cottage still under renovation. Even if the Queen accepted Meg's use of alternative medical care, this was a ramshackle approach to the birth of an heir to the British throne. From a mum whose thirsty love of luxury was so well known. Sophie Wessex gave birth to her kids at the nearest hospital to Windsor, the one ostensibly rejected by Meg as well as the Lindo Wing. She nearly died with Louise, who was premature. I don't think a Princess of the United Kingdom would be allowed to legitimately drop her first kid in a construction zone attended only by a midwife. The Queen gave birth at home all four times, but she was attended by her team in the comforts of Buckingham Palace--better than being in the hospital.
Mentions of Archie by the rest of the family have been exceedingly sparse. Practically nil. And of course we have zero more casual snaps of Archie with any of his family members on either side to confirm that they have actually met him. On the day Archie's birth was announced, both the Cambridges and the Cornwalls were out on engagements. From Germany, Charles and Cam offered their smiling good wishes. Ambushed at their engagement, William and Catherine gave the most stilted and visibly awkward interview in the history of time, filled with nervous giggles, a verbal gaffe by William in which he seemed to refer to Kate as the baby's uncle. They both make a great show of appearing to welcome Archie . . but if you disregard William's words and look at his face and demeanor, perhaps a different story emerges.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bha77CQoiH8
The sad Meghan-shaped rift between the brothers means that William has barely spoken to his brother since this 'joyous day', so it is natural therefore that this interview marks the first and last time the Duke of Cambridge has verbally acknowledged his brother's son. Harry doesn't talk about William's kids either, or see them, so they have that in common.
The two brothers, it is reported, had a blazing row overheard by spectators on the day of the polo when Meg showed up with her strangely lifeless and unclothed child looking like Homeless Zombie Madonna. To be fair to Haz, it's not clear that he knew she was coming. He certainly did not appear happy in the least to see her or the baby-like object she held when the match finished.
William's got the receipts now, I believe, but has to tread to the party line at present since powers greater than he have chosen to play along with this charade. Perhaps when King William is in charge we may receive more clarity, but I doubt it. If the Royals have been driven into self-preservation mode by the Sussexes, I think their integrity has been compromised, but only as very little as they may allow.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=12344419
Daniela Elser: Meghan Markle, Prince Harry's 'reckless' spending detailed in new book
@Jdubya: It’s interesting that Harry wasn’t known for a particularly lavish lifestyle before Meghan took control of him. From what I read about his lifestyle before Meghan, he was somewhat of a penny pincher and was generally frugal. Even after Meghan, he still wore a pair of hoes with an obvious hole in the sole to a wedding he and Meghan attended.
The uber extravagant spending can, for the most part, be laid at Meghan’s bunionized feet. After all, it’s not HER money she’s spending, is it?
People with narcissistic personality disorder have extreme senses of entitlement and grandiosity. They often target people who have money, which they spend like it’s their personal funds and like there’s no tomorrow. They often get their target into deep debt and other financial problems. Then after they have wiped out the target and created a big mess, they cut and run to look for their next prey.
To paraphrase Margaret Thatcher: The problem with narcissists is that they always run out of other people's money.
If drugs don’t do Harry in, I believe if Harry and Meghan aren’t already having money problems, they eventually will, and it will be sooner than later. Harry married a profoundly narcissistic woman who will bring more woe to his life than he ever thought possible. And because they have a child and will likely have a second one next year, Meghan will always be a deep thorn in his side, even after a divorce if it happens.
BTW: There was a Harry Markle post in the Harry Markle timeline that has been taken down, but I copied it because it contained so much information about Meghan, who apparently was close to broke when she became engaged to Harry. The $5 million number that is bandied about as Meghan’s worth when she married Harry was more likely the amount of her gross income during her entire career. After all her expenses for her P.R. team and all her other overhead, she apparently blew through every dime she made, especially from Suits.
I need to get on an office call, but I will dig the Harry Markle item out and add here later today.
Blind Items Revealed #5
June 22, 2020
The alliterate former actress turned royal has a friend who knows all about the yachting and trolling for rich husbands because she was doing it too. The two are very good friends. Turns out though a divorce is in the works for the friend.
Meghan Markle/Misha Nonoo
yeah, i'm wondering about that. Had a baby too. Of course, he's a billionaire so she'll be set for life.
@Jdubya and Holly:
i second your Wow, Holly. They only got married on Sept. 20, 2019.
Misha plays Meghan's game even better than Meghan.
yeah, i'm wondering about that. Had a baby too. Of course, he's a billionaire so she'll be set for life.
At the time of the wedding I believe I read that it was widely acknowledged in the couple's circles that Mikey Hess was gay, and the wedding and quickie baby was a beard arrangement. All Mikey's assets need an heir, after all. I haven't read any speculation at all that Mischa's anchor baby isn't really hers or carried by her, but I ever do, I certainly won't be surprised. Birds of a feather.
Of course the Harkles were in attendance at that wedding, leaving poor wee mite Archie, just four months old, to fend for himself as they jetted off to Italy for a luxe weekend. Wonder if MM brought the breast pump? Hahahahaha!
@Charade
I have started considering the BRF were the ones who made sure Meg did not use the Royal Doctors. Her not using them gives the Firm a lot of plausible deniability. The Royal Doctors are answerable to the British public and so their involvement would have been dangerous.
But surely this implies that if there was a surrogate, the BRF was in on it right from the start. Furthermore, no doctor attending the Queen and the royal family would have been willing to be involved in MM's shenanigans. To me, IMHO, it makes more sense that MM would have refused the queen's doctors, citing preferences for her own doctors etc and by the time the BRF realise the deception, it was too late and they just had to go along with it.
Prince Harry's Increased Spending
I'm not sure how accurate the book is, since the author's other books tend to hop on to the latest news story.
Does anyone else remember reading that it was Prince Charles rather than the Queen that was in charge of the wedding, the Sussex situation overall (as part of her handing over royal tasks)? Charles seems to have fumbled the entire situation, from researching her past or containing the spending and expectations early on.
Sounds like Megs might have been skimming off the top of all these expenditures. From Frogmore's designs to numerology readings to many other types of consultants, she could easily have arranged "kickbacks" while the Firm kept paying the bills. Call it "Hollywood accounting," where profits are hidden so well that even Star Wars could be made to look like a box office loser. I'm beginning to think they were pushed out when the courtiers FINALLY realized what was going on. (I once worked on a film where the star was able to "expense" his home gym equipment as a rental expense to the film because he had to be in shape).
Her political career might be born of a similar impulse. She gathers up donations and then can spend the money on expenses, like travel, clothes, assistance, because that's all allowed as political expenditures. Perhaps she's getting a cut of Althea's Go Fund Me accounts too!
Why couldn't the Queen played hard ball and said "Meg and Harry you ARE GOING to own up to a surrogacy. If you even have to claim Meghan was mentally ill (poor dear she had pregnancy psychosis or whatever) and Harry's sperm didn't work (his testicle was dead whatever) YOU WILL stop this charade now, or be stripped of your titles.
Couldn't the Queen, Charles and William see at this point the dastardly duo needed to be dealt with. Surely, there were already signs that Meg was rebelling and Harry was "C**t struck". Lord Geidt was on the scene, couldn't he have found out info from even wiretapping their living quarters (oh wait they leased that house in the Cotswold near SOHO maybe to conduct things in complete secrecy), but still?!!.
Why wouldn't the BRF deal with them so early on; they could not have been accused of racism then after a $32 million dollar wedding!
If it is true the BRF went along with it, then they have no integrity in my book. They have assisted in pulling a con on the UK public and actual]y everyone but the poor Brits are paying for it (and will continue to pay so it seems, for security, clothes, Frogmore, tarvel, etc....) I am sick with this revelation; I am hoping it isn't true.
I think this is a good space for discussing the spate of books on the duo that are spilling out of the woodwork. The discussion
of the BLM movement stemmed from one particular case that Megsy, with her usual scant regard for research, rushed in
to support in order to jump on to her latest bandwagon. Next week it will be some other cause.
Has anyone read Royals at War? It's available on Amazon and written by two journalists, one a Hollywood writer whose works have
derailed the career of Mel Gibson among others, and the other a British writer specializing in exposing the rich and famous and
infamous. The extract that I read on Amazon's page, while readable, didnt really say anything new, apart from a few nuggets,
I thought. Would love to know if someone here recommenda it before I fork out $ 17.00 for the Kindle version.
.......
Does seem to be that way, doesn't it. Charles maybe taken in with the cute little thing who is oh so interested in his every word?
I'm thinking there were some major love bombing going on there, too.
Notice how at the Commonwealth service she ignored the queen and then made a huge curtsy with a big smile for Prince Charles.
Doesn't say much for PC's ability to be the king. No wonder they wanted Prince William at the summit, it sounds like he's the one that's got a good head on his shoulders.
No wonder H/mm hate PW so much. He apparently puts up with absolutely nothing from them.
I think he had her number right away.
They don't seem to be able to make any headway bad-mouthing PW, so now they're bad-mouthing his wife to see if they can make some headway there.
Unfortunately for them both PW and Catherine are excellent at ignoring them and letting them take their own hole even deeper
I think, though, I'm going to go with Wullie's suggestion and create a new thread, since this one has a political angle and cannot be left open overnight.
I'll create a new one just to discuss the books.
Feel free to post comments - particularly on the original topic, Meghan's support of Althea Bernstein - and I will publish them in the morning, my time.
Someone mentioned earlier that the e book is available through Hoopla if you have a public library card.
Cops getting the records from the hospital
Possibly if they are worried about any sort of accusation being heaved at them, they are getting court orders to turn over the records rather than what we usually see on tv shows where the cop talks to the people directly. This would allow for a tight control of evidence and not allowing any part to be excluded on some technicality. This would be wrapping the legal net tighter.
As for the CC and now having where this happened - anytime someone starts walking back on a story, I tend to get suspicious. She said that she blew off the remainder of the red light (hoping no one was coming through - so they need to start looking at intersections for just that action - any where, any time. Sure it is a lot look over but it is an easy movement to pick out.
Do nurses give bad advice to people in the hospital? yeah, that happened to me a couple of years ago when I was advised not to be around at a certain time when something was happening in surgery because I would just be sitting and waiting to hear back the results.
HM's doctors - I would doubt that anyone would try to steer her away from them but more of her deciding that she would feel more secure if her doctors were not male, pale and stale. More of woman needing a woman in these times because men can't understand what it's really like, HW feminist logic at work. And, if there was anything hanky panky, fears that they would be more loyal to HM than to some grandkid's wife.
I did almost snort my water I was drinking while reading the part of having a baby in a construction zone though. good line Hikari. And, the video of PW&K, I was watching it without sound. Very telling that something is not on the up and up.
And, if PW may be described as willing to carry a grudge, going after his wife (or even any of their kids) is not a good short or long term play unless you are planning to not need money at any point down the road from him or his holdings. And, my guess is that at some point, a parent will clue in the next generation about not falling for the help me, help me pleas.
Re. the Queen's doctors being either refused by or to Meghan . . .
But surely this implies that if there was a surrogate, the BRF was in on it right from the start. Furthermore, no doctor attending the Queen and the royal family would have been willing to be involved in MM's shenanigans. To me, IMHO, it makes more sense that MM would have refused the queen's doctors, citing preferences for her own doctors etc and by the time the BRF realise the deception, it was too late and they just had to go along with it.
I tend to think this way also, but Charade's suggestion is worth considering. Given Meghan's tungsten-like insistence on going her own (f*ed Up) way in all things, I could totally see her absolutely refusing the Queen's 'pale, stale male' contingent of traditional practitioners and insist that she was going the holistic California way of home birth with doula/midwife, etc. I'm pretty sure the services of the Queen's physicians would have at least been offered, even if Meg could not be compelled to accept. There is no reason to assume outright that the Palace would have immediately known she was lying about being in early pregnancy and making her own arrangements for her prenatal care. This is a very hands-off family in the best of times and an expectant mother has every right to privacy in this situation.
Though, a Princess of the UK by marriage is not just an average mum-to-be. Harry's child is still important symbolically to the Crown, even though he/she is too far down the succession to matter constitutionally. Since Meg has always thought herself worthy of the the same Princess Treatment afforded to Catherine, it is quizzical then that she would not wanted to a) have had every attention paid to her during her pregnancy that C. got in terms of the best doctors and private suite in the Lindo Wing, and b) would have been determined to outdo Catherine in her post-partum showing off of her newborn. Meg refused to even take the field in this contest. Very likely (to me) because she *could not* compete, not being pregnant herself and uncertain when/if a baby would actually materialize. By announcing that she was choosing her own doctors and a home birth and refusing the traditional photo call, she could obfuscate her deception for as long as possible.
There was always going to be a reckoning--at the end of a certain period of time, she *had* to produce a baby. The million-pound question, apart from Archie's real origins is "How much did the RF know and when did they know it?" At the time of Eugenie's wedding, Meg was claiming they'd already had the 12-week scan, but was incredibly vague about her due date. Then it was off the next day on the Oceania tour. At the end of the first trimester, flying should be all right, though that is a colossal distance via air--24 hour flight or something like that. Of greater concern was the Zika virus in the region. Sending a geriatric mother, with a high-risk pregnancy on account of her age (37) alone on such a long trip to a region with Zika seems like a quizzical action. If Meg was given the opportunity to stay home, she did not take it, but rather used that tour for vacation freebies for her pal Mulroney. The bump she had Down Under seemed closer to a 5 month bump than a barely-three, but if HMTQ assumed that her granddaughter-in-law was 13 weeks pregnant at the time, she allowed her to fly to a Zika region while risking DVT as well.
In February, with Meghan ostensibly heavily pregnant in her 8th month, the duo flew to North Africa, another very long distance, at a time when no reputable physician would recommend his patient fly . . *for work*. The jaunt to NYC was unauthorized and strictly for Meg's jollies, though she seems to have left her bump behind in the hotel room for at least part of that trip.
The snafu of the birth announcement was down to the the Sussexes' employee, Sara Latham, and not coordinated with the Palace. I think SL fell on her sword, personally, since there's no way she could have worked for Hillary Clinton and been that incompetent. This was all Meg. If it is not the Queen's practice to insist upon oversight for other royal mothers-to-be, then she didn't do anything different for Meghan. Any bizarre-looking pregnancy photos of the Duchess of Sussex were allowed to stand without official comment from any Palace officials. What the actress got up to in staging photos of herself was not absolute proof that she didn't have a baby in there, though it got increasingly outlandish to watch Meghan's Bump defy all laws of physics.
ER doesn't run a fascist state. She respected the privacy of an expectant mother, because Meghan stressed that privacy was VERY important to her as she gamboled around multiple countries cupping her bump.
What matters to the Crown is not what they *knew* but what they can be *proven* to have known. Meg's secretive ways and multiple lies about her pregnancy and the birth give the RF plenty of deniability. I suspect they knew far more than they will ever admit to, but we will never know the full extent of their knowledge, unless Meg herself decides to spill. If she did that, she'd lose her bargaining chip against the RF so I don't 'spect she ever will do that.
Wow, "Royals at War" seems to be more explosive than Lady C's book. I'm too cheap to buy it but I will try to read as much as is available.
Almost $5k for numerology "classes"? Jeez, you can teach yourself tarot or astrology for free, if you're willing to invest the time.
I was just going to say the same thing!!
You can learn numerology for FREE just by Googling stuff & master it in 12 days 🤷🏻♀️🐈💜💜
It's just basic maths, really. 🍹
Unlike tarot (which can take years)
Advanced astrology (can take a whole lifetime)
Numerology you can DIY. For free.
Even if you're lazy there are free numerology calculators online.
12-week course of numerology readings costing $4835
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Who pays 4k for numerology readings??
It sounds super scammy either way.
Either some numerologist is overcharging them.
Or someone's marking costs up with some creative accounting.
Anyway I'm not trying to be disrespectful toward spiritual people, I learned the hard way that people ask for free readings & take advantage of you at odd hours. Most spiritual people are decent & honest.
I was younger than MM with my second child and was induced on my due date. It makes no sense for an older mother (sorry, it just doesn't) to engage in high-risk activity like a long plane ride to an overseas baby shower she doesn't need to attend.
It makes even less sense for this new mother to leave her infant on another continent(!) to watch a tennis match. Indeed, I believe Serena's coach even made some comment like MM attending would be a distraction (I'm paraphrasing). And she STILL went.
https://www.channel3000.com/family-of-althea-bernstein-provides-update-week-after-alleged-hate-crime/
I’m interested to see how the investigation goes.
This is going to get superheated very fast.
And who is going to get caught up in it? Prince Harry for sure. MM won't care what that does to him or his family.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8468059/Black-Lives-Matters-UK-twitter-account-sparks-outrage-Free-Palestine-message.html
$7,871 raised of $500,000 goal 184 donors ONLY 755 shares and ONLY 184 followers
Mind you, I have a farm and could really use $500.000 too, but there are fed. govt programs through the USDA specifically to get minorities and women into farming. You can apply for a loan not only to buy the land, but the equipment and even your animals or seeds for crops!
By the low numbers of donors and donations, it is my opinion people may find this suspect. The storyline clearly says she and her family does not want donations for the attack. Hmmmmmmm! The two other GoFundMe fundraisers for her injuries have only raised $526 and $895 for her education.
It has now been the 8th day after the attack and I think the FBI and the police should be coming close to completing an investigation although with 859 traffic cameras maybe it is rather time-consuming> But they know where she said it happened and she should be able to tell them the route she traveled home, afterall, she goes to college 2 blks from Graahm St/State Street where the incident happened.
Prince Harry: 'I Am Sorry' We 'Haven't Done Enough to Right the Wrongs of the Past'
Stephanie Petit
People5 hours ago
aka `Harry Steps In' - into the doggydo methinks
Returning to the Althea Bernstein story from earlier this week, independent journalist Steven Sailer has written a long piece about why it is probably a hoax.
Warning: Sailer is a nasty man and this is a nasty, hateful article. You have been warned.
https://www.takimag.com/article/putting-out-the-fire-with-lighter-fluid/
July 2, 2020 at 12:32 AM
I saw @CatEyes mentioned the GFM page now speaks of buying a farm. I think the page just used to say AB would use the money for animal rescue and this part of the page has been added recently:
"Althea envisions a place for kids to come and work with the rescue animals and also young adults who are having trouble and need a healthy place to work for a while. She envisions a farm of healing for all."
What happened to being a firefighter?
Then those troubled kids she envisions working on her farm would definitely be a good source of labor for the farm. Heck, she wouldn't even have to get her hands dirty with a bunch of young people available; maybe they would all be volunteers so none of her gifted money would be spent on wages. What a well thought out Plan...
We follow the BBC programme `Escape to the Country' where townees/suburbanites are looking for nice big houses to escape from the busy-ness of contemporary England.
Nine times out of 10, they want land for alpacas/ponies/glamping enterprise; or expect to be able to convert a paddock or field into a garden without knowing about `change of use' planning regulations; or contemplate a nice cheap smallholding without knowing about `agricultural restrictions' (designed to stymie `hobby' farmers) which stipulate that at least one person has to be engaged in practical agriculture on the holding, full-time.
Sometimes, they love the house but haven't a clue what to do with the acres that come with it - completely ignorant of the fact that grazing is always in demand and livestock folk will pay good money for it!
They inevitably want a `farmhouse kitchen' - somewhere impressive in which to entertain friends, not something you can enter without taking your boots off! Nor do they consider how abysmally slow the Internet is in rural England, or whether you can get a phone signal!
They've certainly never given thought to the work involved.
It's pure fantasy. I prefer my version - a largish plot in a town, given to a country-style garden where I can pretend as much as I like - as in the music-hall song `If it wasn't for the 'ouses in-between'by Gus Elen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ok9GOazc6iE
That's doubtless how my London forebears used to speak!
When I took it back in 1979 there was a test where they placed a big heavy backpack on your back and you had to repeatedly run up and down multiple flight of stairs in the heat. Another tough test was that you had to pick up a complete roll of heavy firehose off the ground and lifting it back up on top of the fire truck over and over again. These were also timed. Also there was a running test. All in all too tough that any woman testing it in 1979 did not pass.
Now I have seen relatively small women but they could have been very athletic and strong. Althea is a pretty girl but seems more marshallow not a toughie.
Yes, she would be required to be able to climb ladders, run up flights of stairs, carry somebody (or assist in carrying somebody) and to be able to do all that in while wearing heavy equipment. Most of the women in my rural area wrestle livestock, toss around bales of hay, load and unload sacks of feed, carry plywood, chainsaws, tires... In other words, we have some hard muscle.
As you said, she looks "soft". I expect that if you poke her in the arm, your index finger would sink in to the second knuckle. If you poke my arm, your finger would bounce off.
Google maps:
Hollywood Hills, California
to
Malibu, California
Details:
via US-101 N
Fastest route, the usual traffic
53 min....38 miles
via CA-1 N
Slower traffic than usual
1 h 3 min....41.4 miles
If Harry was in shape and used to bike riding such a trip even this one would not be a problem but he would need a good bike. The traffic would be scary and how would the 'Dimwit' easily follow the route as he could not ride on the freeway system of Hwy 101 or Hwy 1 and instead have to take a convoluted set of winding streets through the many, many hills some of which is private enclaves and one can't gain entry to traverse their streets.
Your description although examples of things at play in the UK regarding farming are all so true here! City folks (or anyone not previously having the experience of raising farm animals or crops needing a tractor) generally have a romanticized view of farming. Wisconsin known for their huge production of cheese which the state is know for still does not give its residents a realistic view of what it takes to farm (like in my state known for Texas BBQ the avg. resident could not probably identify a diary cow versus beef cattle breeds known for meat.)
We have the same restrictions here regarding what can be done where with many buying what they think is an acre or two to have some chickens maybe a goat or cow only to find out the zoning won't allow them or the fancy Homeowner/subdivision rules prohibit such activity. And yes we have the agricultural property tax exemption which mandate your property must be engaged in ag activities even with some counties dictating a min. of how much you must earn off your land (although Texas is good in that if you let the land go fallow and use it as a wildlife habitat it qualifies for ag exemption).
Althea is to be commended for her interest in pursuing animal rescue, and if she intends to rescue farm animals I can see her needing a farm. However I am skeptical as I have not seen a need for rescuing farm animals. If they are ill or too old the humane thing here is to euthanize them instead of letting them suffer arthritis or so and the animal can be humanely used to feed others. We even have a program in Texas whereby, deer hit on the roads are to be reported and the game warden goes out and picks it up and if it is deemed viable it is butchered and the meat given to the poor.
Where she had marks on her face still does not make sense to me. Unknown if there is any traces of anything on her clothing or in the car.
CatEyes - you are quite right about how people think they can have this or that animal and are so shocked to run up against zoning laws. I know someone who mentioned that she was trying to figure out how she might be able to keep them in the back yard and not have the neighbors know. She gave up (I think) when she realized that with the kids running in and out of the house all the time, the chickens would become known sooner or later and someone would report her (it was that kind of neighborhood).
Steve Sailer wrote another couple of short posts about it today:
Althea Bernstein was set on fire by "classic Wisconsin frat boys" wearing Hawaiian shirts. What will the next roving racist hate criminal gang be wearing? Dockers? Brooks Brothers sports coats?
https://twitter.com/Steve_Sailer/status/1280274191879516161?s=20
Monday marks the 12th day since the horrifying and widely publicized news that a roving gang of Hawaiian-shirted white racist frat boys had set on fire Althea Bernstein, a biracial young woman in Madison, Wisconsin.
Even more alarmingly, the white-dominated news media, such as the New York Times and Washington Post, have completely stopped talking about this racist enormity perpetrated on the body of a young woman, Althea Bernstein, just for being biracial.
It's almost as if journalists, deep down, racistly suspect that Althea Bernstein's Hate Crime of the Century was actually merely just another hate hoax of the week.
https://unz.com/isteve/12-days-and-counting-since-classic-wisconsin-frat-boy-lighter-fluid-attack/
Meanwhile Matt Walsh, another conservative blogger who has 12x as many followers as Sailer (393,000 vs 32,000) also took up the case today.
Two weeks ago, the media breathlessly reported the story of Althea Bernstein, who claimed she was set on fire by four white men as she sat in her car at an intersection at 1 AM. She says they somehow shot lighter fluid into her car and then tossed a lighter.
The story is extremely bizarre. This roving band of racists was wandering around the city in the middle of the night with a spray bottle full of lighter fluid? And there are no other reported attacks by this terrifying gang? Nobody else witnessed them?
If this happened, it should be easy to prove. She should still have the lighter with their prints. And there should be some noticeable fire damage in her car. And given that this happened supposedly at an intersection in a city, there should be all kinds of surveillance footage.
Yet we've heard nothing about this case for two weeks. No video has been released. No witnesses have come forward. No one else had any encounter with the murderous, flame-wielding white supremacist gang. They have apparently vanished. It's almost like they never existed.
https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1280473667139506177?s=20
I'm a little confused. The newspaper article says a lit lighter was thrown. My experience with lighters is that they only remain lit as long as you hold the lever down. As soon as the lever is released- say to throw it- the flame goes out. Perhaps the news report is incorrect and it wasn't a lighter but some other device.
My response:
Zippo-style lighters don't have that lever on them. There is a lever, but it is in the hinged-lid of the lighter and when the lever is moved by closing the lid, is the only time that flame is extinguished. That style of lighter would definitely stay lit for the length of time it would take to throw it into the car. Those lighters are more expensive than the typical Bic-style lighter, but their flames don't go out nearly so easily.