The Sussexes see themselves as forces for great social good, and Harry's Invictus games originally seemed to be a great way to inspire wounded veterans.
Travalyst, his poorly-defined follow-up, has so far been less successful, and there have been questions its structure (it is a limited company, not a registered charity) and why it is getting influxes of cash from the Royal Foundation.
But Meg's charity efforts seem to have even been less successful, in part because she flutters from one to the next without much research or much committment.
Smartworks seems to be a well-defined, well-run charity to help women in need achieve a professional working wardrobe, but how much have they benefitted from Meghan's input?
(And now many women need a smart working wardrobe these days, given how many are now working from home?)
She did sponsor a dog kennel in Archie's name at Mayhew, a UK animal charity.
She's also released several charity videos with supportive messages, all so flatteringly blurry that they look like they were shot through the frosted door of her shower stall.
Has Meg actually helped any charities achieve their goals?
Travalyst, his poorly-defined follow-up, has so far been less successful, and there have been questions its structure (it is a limited company, not a registered charity) and why it is getting influxes of cash from the Royal Foundation.
But Meg's charity efforts seem to have even been less successful, in part because she flutters from one to the next without much research or much committment.
Hubb Kitchen the most famous
Hubb Kitchen is one of her most prominent patronages, and it produced a cookbook that sold well - but would they have produced a cookbook with or without Meghan?Smartworks seems to be a well-defined, well-run charity to help women in need achieve a professional working wardrobe, but how much have they benefitted from Meghan's input?
(And now many women need a smart working wardrobe these days, given how many are now working from home?)
She did sponsor a dog kennel in Archie's name at Mayhew, a UK animal charity.
Lots of encouraging videos
Since coming to the US, Meg has done at least one food delivery to homebound persons - not at all for the publicity value.She's also released several charity videos with supportive messages, all so flatteringly blurry that they look like they were shot through the frosted door of her shower stall.
Has Meg actually helped any charities achieve their goals?
Comments
__________________________________
Me, too. Just so long as the Mail on Sunday's QC asks, "How is it that each one of these 5 friends were able to quote your letter to your father nearly verbatim?"
Then calls each of them to testify, behind closed doors in deposition if necessary.
So if she had in mind emeralds, it seems she had to have wanted
The Greville Emerald Kokoshnik Eugenie wore
The Vladimir (which only queens wear)
Or possibly:
Marie Feodorovna's Sapphire Bandeau/Queen Mary's Sapphire Bandeau -- The sapphire is removable and Queen Mary sometimes wore it with an emerald. This one does have Russian roots for sure. And some think its acquisition by Mary was a bit iffy. Its not been worn since Margaret wore it. (QEII has never worn it.)
The reason that I think this might have been what she wanted is because of the "sunburst" center design...Rays of sun symbolizing California were used in their coat of arms (which M supposedly worked on.)
I can imagine some foot stomping if told no followed by an offer to "accept" the Greville instead. Then explosions all around.
The Necklace That Got Meghan Markle in Hot Water with Palace Aides
In Finding Freedom, authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand write that Meghan was scolded for wearing a necklace that caught the eye of the press
Michelle Tauber
July 29, 2020 11:00 AM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/people.com/royals/the-necklace-that-got-meghan-markle-in-hot-water-with-palace-aides/%3famp=true
______________________________
AT DM--
Meghan Markle agrees to pay more than £67,000 in legal costs after losing the first round of her legal battle against the Mail
Duchess of Sussex lost first round of High Court case against Mail on Sunday
Court documents revealed she has agreed to pay £67,000 towards legal costs
Meghan has asked the High Court to keep names of friends secret
Group briefed People in US about her and contents of letter sent to her father
Thomas Markle spoke to Mail on Sunday and shared the note to 'defend himself'
Associated Newspapers says not naming women defies principle of open justice
Hikari
What if? What if the reason she doesn't want the names out there was because someone called in saying "I'm X and blah, blah, blah" but wasn't really X.
I always assumed it was the Vlad that Meg wanted.
Stupid woman thought to herself that Catherine was too stupid to ask for the biggest tiara in the vault.
Megsy is very delusional. I would feel sorry for her, but unfortunately I get the feeling that she likes lying to make herself look good.
If you don't know much about Princess Anne, I can recommend the programme (probably not available abroad, though).
I loved your description of Scooby as “epicene “. I saw the yacht photos too and completely believe that OS was present to provide ‘companionship’ for the guests who prefer whatever gender he purports to be. It also fits in well with his claim of being only 33 when he is actually 39. Chickenhawks want twinks. Translated that means that there is a segment of older gay men who want only much younger partners. My understanding of the term twink is that it is taken from Twinkie, the snack cake. A soft cake that is full of cream filling. Amid Scabies (Lady C’s name for him) certainly goes the extra mile when it comes to making his face look like a baby’s bottom. He would have been upset for his real age to get out as it would hinder his chosen shopping ground.
I studied a picture of him at length the other day. Hard to believe he's 39 . . he looks baby-faced in all his pictures.
He also, if I'm honest, looks like a trans-man. Kind of like a younger, Asian k.d. lang if she'd had the reassignment surgery when she was younger. I'd call him gender-fluid for sure. So he used to knock boots with Marcus Anderson . . .one wonders if this was before, after or concurrent with MA getting involved with Edward Enninful, Brit Vogue editor . . and how does HE still have a job?
What were YOU doing on July 29, 1981? I know some of you weren't born. I was up before the bumcrack of dawn (4am) to catch all the festivities with my mother.
I much prefer the Queen's bright outfits now to the horrors she wore in the 1980s. Her suit for Charles' wedding is bilious . . it was the exact color of Comet toilet bowl cleaner. And the mother of the groom looked pretty glum. Not as much as at Harkle's wedding, but not smiling either.
To that I say, "Well, you pushed him into it . . ."
The work she does for her charities and the Colonel-in-Chief position is staggering - MM isn't fit to help her off with her riding boots - not that she'd need it! I was very deeply impressed - do watch it of you can.
It's genuine work FOR the charities - she is very self-effacing, there is no question of it - it's not about her.
How that jumped-up hussy thinks that she is superior is beyond me - I wonder if I could get that TTC footage of being shoved out of the way on the balcony by Anne onto an endless loop as my screen-saver? I could watch it all day!
I hope that many of you managed to see it - or can get it on some `catch-up' function.
Queen Victoria's emerald tiara is beautiful but it no longer belongs to the royal family. Here is some information about it.
http://royalwatcherblog.com/2019/05/09/queen-victorias-emerald-tiara/
It boggles the mind how anyone thought the Finding Freedom book would be a good idea. As well as fighting THE QUEEN over a tiara, the lawsuit and the five friends debacle and on and on. I hope Lady C has another book, a biography of all biographies, on MM in her scope. History needs all of H&M's snafu's documented. I've read several on Wallis and David and it gave me a good perceptive since I was not born when that whole thing happened.
I don't do a lot of commentary and sleuthing here because I don't have the energy for it. I'm not well. I am so grateful to all of the Nuttie's who do work so hard here so those like me can be in the know. Thank you!
Meghan Markle and now her SO Harry Windsor, are two very low vibration individuals. Unless they clean up their act and make a sincere effort to make amends, which consequently will raise their vibration and help mend their reputations (if it's not too late), they will soon be in a deep hole of their own making as so many have already pointed out. It's Karma, but that will open the door further in the republic talk and that is something I would hate to see.
But it has been hinted at before; that perhaps Harry has a secret desire for a republic as a form of revenge for his mother. Twisted, I know. And now he's settling scores on behalf of his wife.
It will not end well but we shall see what side prevails.
Sorry, I’m not techie enough to post the link. I can’t wait to hear everyone’s analysis! Is there a reason that MM cannot drop the case now?
One of our neighbours originated in Bilbao and someone asked why he, as a Spaniard, was there? Things were rather tense with Spain at the time, over Gibraltar and the Spanish king had not come to the wedding. I suggested that Pepe was representing Juan Carlos...
.
For so many people, that was the highlight of their lives, or of their careers. They proudly go to BP in their best finery, some of them probably buying something special for this great day of theirs. And because M&H decided they weren't getting what they wanted, they created a ruckus and ruined these people's greatest day. It's just disgusting.
latest MM blind gossip LOL
As I understand it, she can only drop the case if the other party agrees to let her off the hook.
From what we have seen so far, the other party will fight. They've already bared their teeth and scored over her. They've been accused of copyright infringement and need to clear this out of the way. Her approach seems to try it on, lose, pile on more garbage, realise she's made a mistake then backtrack and try to wriggle out of it.
Moreover, it's a bit late for the Plaintiff to realise that her case is a load of a rubbish and that she should have taken heed of the legal advice she has doubtless been given.
I hope her fear is giving her double incontinence; if not it should be. It's high time she learnt that actions have consequences, even for her. Especially for her this time - her Teflon coating is wearing very thin, very fast.
With any luck, the opposition will do the dirty business that others have held back from.
If she does attend court, she'd better take her broomstick with her - she may need to make a rapid exit, with her princely familiar riding pillion.
I look forward to what the Judge may say in conclusion - I bet it'd be worth making a poker-work plaque of the words, so we can hang it on the wall and enjoy it evermore.
Meghan has lost the first round with her legal battle against the Mail and must pay them £67,000.
I know the pressure of the TV cameras in the global audience watching was extreme, but I think the Archbishop of Canterbury should have had Diana repeat the first line of her vows so as to get the name of the groom correct. That would’ve saved all of the Monday morning quarterbacking after the fact with commentators wondering if the vows were legitimate. My thought was twofold: God how horribly embarrassing for her… She didn’t just trip over a few words, but arguably the two most important words in the whole ceremony. But I also thought, it’s OK, it’s the intent that matters and she knows her husband’s name. The Archbishop himself might not have even noticed in the moment if he was concentrating on his next line. It would’ve been better to do it over. When Barack Obama got sworn in as the nation’s first black president in 2009, The historic weight of the occasion undid Brand new chief justice John Roberts doing his first swearing-in And he muffed his lines. The ceremony carried on, but they had a private ceremony later and repeated the oath of office in the correct wording just said that there would not be any constitutional issues raised later. Apart from Diana’s bobble on Charles’ name, I was very impressed with her poise. She had only just turned 20 weeks before. I was also very impressed with Catherine, and indeed her whole family who were so poised at her wedding.
People is running a picture of the necklace that supposedly got Markle in trouble with the Palace When she wore it while dating Harry in 2016, On a fine and barely visible gold chain, they are two equally tiny and nearly invisible block letters, H and M. They aren’t even join together or engraved on a locket like you might expect. Just hanging by themselves On a choker length chain so tight on her neck that the letters are sideways. They look a bit like those tiny alphabet letters you get in alphabet soup. I’m sure it’s real gold and all, but the effect is there a cheap trinket that a seventh grade girl would buy at Claires. Even with an extreme close-up on her neck, those letters are barely visible. No way I would have no what he was looking at from 50 pieces away. Also I’m willing to bet my retirement pension that this staged Papp walk Was not to show off a gift from Harry. I bet she bought it herself. It would’ve had to have been a commission because who else would want a dink it’s a weird chain with the random H and M on it. Could’ve been Jennifer Meyer...But I really doubt harry bought it During the few months in 2016 that he was actually seeing her.
Sorry here’s the link, hope it opens. It’s in the online edition of people today.
if so, dont see how she can drop and get the DM to pay her a penny or a pound. they will wan t her to pay up, like she already has.
on the other hand, i could have seen the BRF trying to step in to prevent a public trial , but she just burned all her bridges to them. so maybe they’ll stay out of it and let the chips fall where they may.
i think the Blind is from a US source, maybe unfamiliar with UK law.
I too was astonished that their wedding was so long ago.
The rumour of their engagement went around Winchester pretty fast - somebody spotted them going in to a little jewellers known for bespoke goldsmithing- that was all we needed.
The quiet wedding at Crathie, the Church of Scotland parish church for Balmoral, was stroke of genius. The Kirk doesn't have a problem about marrying divorced people. Such a pity it wasn't taken as the model for the 2018 farce.
From what I know:
Yes, the emerald tiara that Eugenie wore at her wedding had already been reserved for Eugenie’s wedding, which was moved to October 2018 so the Harkles could get married in May 2018.
.
re: the investiture. I agree completely. The people present had probably been so chuffed to be able to attend this, had probably went out and purchased a new frock/suit etc. and these 2 gormless useless carbon units essentially spoiled it with their temper tantrum. Rude and disgusting behavior. It is obvious The Hazzards really do not give a shite about ' the common folk '.
haha, not for the faint hearted, if ugly feet disturb you.
I don’t know why some of you are fussing so much about it.
Correct link
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7493989/Jeweller-Meghan-Markles-H-necklace-nervous-spotted-design.html
https://twitter.com/kylieer/status/1288609471418302467/photo/1
!!!!!
That cheers me up! They about the same as mine but I've been pounding around on mine for almost twice as long as she has.
Better still, she has an even longer 2nd toe than I have - that must give her some discomfort! it's called Morton's toe/sign /foot but I see it's also called `Royal'.
Is that how she got the idea that she could out-royal-the-royals from? Her feet?????
If you are concerned with keeping your friends names out of a court case, dont sue a tabloid in a case that even the meanest intelligence can see the OTHER tabloid story will have a direct bearing on your suit.
Surely her own attorneys prepared her for the almost-certainty that those five friends will be called to testify.
I suspect MM doesnt want to give names because those five women are going to be very surprised to hear they spoke to People at all, much less without her knowledge.
Which may skew the version of events MM wants the court to hear.
The other obvious issue is that once the privacy has been breached, no matter what the rationale, there is no longer any privacy to protect.
She reminds me of the SNL character of Stuart Smalley who crooned into a mirror "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me".
MM must start every morning, in a perfect lotus position chanting "I'm famous enough, I'm rich enough and no F*king body is going to tell me what to do. I'm also a supermodel with mile-long legs".
The delusion is strong with that one.
Didnt The Mail offer to drop the suit back before the first disastrous (for MM) hearing? And she rudely refused? She had a bunch of extraneous miscellany thrown out by the judge, and that must have cost her the $68k.
From the "clarifications" she filed at the beginning of Juky (?) trashing the RF for that old wheeze of failing to protect her, it looked to me like she just added all the garbage back in. Something that must have just delighted the judge, as well as her own legal team. They just love that stuff.
Imagine trying to get all that word salad past a judge.
I always catch that stuff in the instant beyond hitting "publish", drat it.
Meg, not having an original bone in her body, would surely want to emulate the most famous actress of the time.
Angelina paired the emerald jewelry with a plain black gown, so the emeralds really popped. It was a stunning look. And don't forget, Meg and Angie are so similar- both such huge philanthropists! ;)
Meg similarly had a plain (bland) wedding dress- coloured jewels might have made the look more interesting.
Wouldn't be surprised if after being denied the emerald tiara she just wanted to make sure whatever one she wore was more valuable than the one Kate wore at her wedding.
https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/384846730637768065/
I know British law is different, but the minute that letter that she wrote was put out into the public domain via people magazine. Doesn’t it make her claim of owning the copyright to it basically a mute point?
There's a physiotherapist in London who specializes in fixing toes. She gives you these exercises to help with bunions and hammer toes, misalignments, etc. The exercises are tough but within a month, you're supposed to have your problems straightened out.
Often the second toe is longer than the big toe because the big toe is slanted from wearing confining high heels. This also causes bunions.
You can also have your toe shortened with surgery, but that may cause further problems with your feet.
So, it's kind of ironic that she left the only place on Earth where someone could have helped her with her biggest issue.
Excellent point about Meg wanting the Vladimir to be the envy of all. I can so see that.
I agree!
There are several problems with Meghan being “on trend”
1. Trends in fashion are generally for the young. Meg wore this necklace four years ago, but even then she was a lot closer to 40 than 20. Maggie is terrified of getting older, because her body and her looks are what she’s used to get ahead in life. She has no other substantial talent. Her style choices are almost universally there is more suitable for a 24-year-old girl, And not a mature woman who claims to be a sophisticated style icon. I don’t care what dinky jewelry she chooses to wear, but I hate deception and grandiosity. Since the necklace is so minimalist us to be completely invisible in a photograph snapped at a distance, I would bet you $1 million that after Meg hired the Pap to take this picture, she anonymously emailed the pictures to Buckingham palace just so they would be aware. Do you still really believe that Harry’s relationship with her is genuine? I believe that he was set up on a date with her by friends from the Soho house crowd who knew that he could have sex with her. Meg has manufactured the rest, and that’s what hairy looks like a soul in torment.
2, Megan never grasped, nor did she ever have any intention of doing so, that Royals are above trends. To be “trendy” is to be the very opposite of Royal. That certainly describes Meghan.
They have hung themselves well and good with this book. It’s going to be interesting to see what happens once the book is actually published. I think the 12 month review. It’s going to be shoved forward with haste. This abuse in libel of a 94-year-old woman and her entire family is enough.
https://youtu.be/Z8Ia5nKGxnI
"Didnt The Mail offer to drop the suit back before the first disastrous (for MM) hearing? And she rudely refused? She had a bunch of extraneous miscellany thrown out by the judge, and that must have cost her the $68k."
I'm not sure. I didn't think MoS could offer to drop anything since they are the defendant.
What MoS did offer (& stated the offer was because of COVID) was to not ask for attorney fees for the hearing prep IF M would forego that hearing and agree to drop those parts of the suit that were being contested. She refused. And as you point out she lost on those points and has to pay their attorney fees.
I love the necklace and think it is very on trend.
I don’t know why some of you are fussing so much about it.
_____________________________
You sound indignant and annoyed that some of us may not like the necklace.
Everyone is entitled to their individual opinions without being chastised about it!
What MoS did offer (& stated the offer was because of COVID) was to not ask for attorney fees for the hearing prep IF M would forego that hearing and agree to drop those parts of the suit that were being contested. She refused. And as you point out she lost on those points and has to pay their attorney fees.
____________________
I remember this...and there was also something about the MOS wanting to save on the expense of having to set up the court under covid guidelines and she refused. I'm so glad she has to pay all that money now.
Benjamin Franklin and The Sisterhood
[Blind Gossip] There is an old expression about secrets.
In the July 1735 issue of Poor Richard’s Almanac, Benjamin Franklin said, “Three may keep a secret if two of them are dead.”
This TV actress is learning this the hard way.
Her attempt to secretly promote herself has completely backfired and has devolved into a legal morass from which there is almost no escape.
We have a couple of interesting things to share with you about the case.
The first is that the defendants are not behaving the way she thought they would!
She is quite shocked that this is not going the way she thought it would. She thought that she was being smart to court one media source and attack the other. She was 100% sure that the [the second media source] would be intimidated and back down and settle with her. That didn’t happen.
No, it certainly did not. In fact, the second media source is enjoying the attention this case brings and is reaping the rewards of publishing multiple articles every day about her.
This stopped being about the original legal claim a long time ago. This is now a referendum on HER behavior. If anything, a trial would stretch this out and be a real coup for the media company.
Another shock to her is the impact this is having on several of her friends.
It was dumb for her to involve so many people and it was really dumb for her to deny her involvement. It is clear that she is in charge of the group and that they all take their marching orders from her. There are too many emails, texts, phone conversations and video chats to coordinate the messaging for her to pretend that she had nothing to do with it.
Will all of her friends act in unison to protect her?
Not a chance. The sisterhood is breaking. Each of the friends has now had to hire and pay for their own attorney. Most of them are not celebrities themselves so this is very stressful for them. At least one attorney advised their client to temporarily cut off contact with the plaintiff until the case is resolved.
Will she protect her friends?
She may be able to protect their identity, but only if this does not go to trial. If this goes to trial, she can’t protect them. They are likely key witnesses and will certainly be deposed and exposed.
What will the friends do?
Look, this isn’t the Mafia. This is a bunch of women who were unwittingly involved in a public relations effort gone awry. There is no attorney on earth who would advise them to perjure themselves for [Actress] on such a ridiculous matter. They will not all lie for her.
What’s the big deal if they tell the truth?
The big deal is that it will uncover the plaintiff’s big lie. She claims that she had no involvement in them contacting the media or in the messaging. She can’t afford to have that lie exposed. The public would turn on her.
That ship may have already sailed.
An additional and potentially bigger consideration is that once the friends are on the stand, other secrets and lies about her life and how she manipulates the press could be rooted out.
What is your overall opinion about how Actress has handled this?
She entered into this thinking that she was a credible and sympathetic figure and that she could walk away with a couple of million and the media firmly in her control.
These were all serious miscalculations. She overplayed her hand and this will not end well for her.
What will happen?
This will NOT go to trial.
She might try to get some small sort of settlement from the media company to cover her costs and to pretend she got a win, but the media company would actually be better off dragging this out as long as possible.
Very high probability that she will drop the case and walk away with nothing but a stack of legal bills.
ediavine
How will she spin it?
She will likely try to make herself look good by claiming that she is dropping the case to protect her friends… but it’s really to protect herself.
If MM’s personal Fantastic Five each have their own lawyers, they are being advised to CYA. Once again, I’m impressed with how badly MM misjudged the situation and how blindly Hapless followed. I’m sure the Royal Family are eagerly waiting to support the dynamic duo - snort.
What MoS did offer (& stated the offer was because of COVID) was to not ask for attorney fees for the hearing prep IF M would forego that hearing and agree to drop those parts of the suit that were being contested. She refused. And as you point out she lost on those points and has to pay their attorney fees.
------
Yes,of course, Lizzie!
Thanks for the clarification!
So has the whole Court case been a PR exercise for Meghan to get her 'narritive' of various events, many completely unrelated to the case, out in the public domain.
How much would Sunshine Sach charge for the sort of coverage Meghan has got for this Case? More importantly will she be able to put the cost of the Court case down as expenses, say brand protection, in one of the Foundations? And will she sue 'Suits' for poor legal training? She will argue she thought it was real?
...............
Good Points!
There has been a rumor going around for a while that MM has a big case brewing that's being handled by an anti-cyber-bullying group. She may want to get as much of her story out as possible no matter the avenue. People who don't follow the story closely and don't realize what an alleged scam artist she is may believe she was mistreated.
Your question about using the foundation to write off expenses for her lawsuits is interesting and doesn't sound out of the realm of possibility! We have to hope the MOS/DM continues to reveal more negative info about her through this suit.
I for one think the 5 friends should be made public. They are witnesses in the case and if she wins this quest to keep their names out then we name not get the true or full story. Keeping the names private may hamper the public's ability to continue following the case, and if she lied about who they are or how much they were involved her falsehoods may not come to light in the public domain.
I wonder why the Times pulled that Roya article? It was the one that told the palace's side of the Thomas/wedding story.
But then what will she do to get the money to pay for all those legal fees?
*pops popcorn*
Thanks Jdubya!!
I hope the case does go to trial.
Can she (still) do that?
I have read here on the Nutty Flavor blog that Meghan can not drop the lawsuit. Is this true? If I were the defendant, I would want to cook her goose! Would Associated Newspapers allow this to be settled out of court?
The Royal Family would seem to have nothing to lose by letting this all play out. Would they really care at this point if Markle were raked over the coals in a trial? Especially after the publication of FF?
https://twitter.com/kylieer/status/1288281556788928512/photo/1
IIRC in UK its loser pays all. If this goes to trial and MeMe loses, she pays her legal fees and MOS legal fees. All of them. If this goes to trial and MOS loses, they pay all legal fees. If MeMe decides to withdraw (drop) case it is considered the same as losing--she must pay all of MOS legal fees (as well as her own) unless a private deal is worked out (as in MOS gives her enough money to pay their legal fees or whatever). Not a doubt in my mind she says something along the lines of "send the bill to the Palace". Hopefully the Palace says "Nope, you wanted to be independent, be independent. You are not Royal anymore so we don't pay your bills".
That being said, this latest of having to pay £67,000 for MOS legal fees over the last flap would actually be, I'm guessing, around half of what she owes because she has to pay HER legal expenses as well. The £67,000 was for MOS so if hers is comparable then she owes at least £134,000 in legal fees just for that one dust up (over the inadmissible/not relative stuff).
Questions for those of you who would know the answers:
I have read here on the Nutty Flavor blog that Meghan can not drop the lawsuit. Is this true? If I were the defendant, I would want to cook her goose! Would Associated Newspapers allow this to be settled out of court?
The Royal Family would seem to have nothing to lose by letting this all play out. Would they really care at this point if Markle were raked over the coals in a trial? Especially after the publication of FF?
.........................
I've become a bit unsure now about who can, and who tried to drop this letter lawsuit.
I seem to recall at the beginning MM expecting the MOS/DM to not take the case to trial and to pay her a settlement.
I believe this is how the tabloids usually handle these situations as it is less expensive to settle than go to trial.
The MOS/DM however stood firm much to the delight of many!
They very well may want to cook her goose and feel they have a leg to stand on.
In addition, they are earning a great deal of interest in all the stories printed on this subject.
Now it seems the MOS can connect the Finding Freebies book in support of their case with Markle according to some of the opinion pieces that have recently been written.
I too thought I read that MM can't drop the case and I think I remember a story a while ago about her trying to end the suit and the MOS refusing.
I wonder what UK law states regarding this type of case and who is allowed to withdraw.
I do think the RF would be happy to let her sink her own ship at this point.
Thank you for the link to the 2Taz video blog. Hilarious. I love the video clips and doctored photos that accompany her commentary.
At that point in time they are long distance dating. The Palace calls her up and scolds her about the possible hint that she’s dating SadSack Harry. 36-37 years old, and though she is traumatized by the phone call, she marries him anyway. She goes on international television and proclaims she’s ready to work, etc. Diana, for all her faults, was a very sheltered 19 year old. Yet, Meghan quits in a huff due to intolerable conditions, such as second choice tiaras & the audacity of Catherine sending her thoughtful, no doubt beautiful flowers.
Oy vey.
But I do get it. Hollywood is not a healthy place to grow up, and I say that as a native. If you have HBO, there’s a recent documentary by Alex Winter called Showbiz Kids. (Alex is best know as Bill of Bill & Ted trilogy with Keanu Reeves. It “shines a light” on how twisted it is to be a kid in a movie or TV set and just the city itself as a cesspool of ambition.
Now Los Angeles is not all bad, of course, I love parts of my hometown, but Markle is a familiar type, Eve Harrington in All About Eve, Michael Douglas in Wall Street, a toxic brew of greed, ambition and desperate need for attention. Shudder. Still, it’s also on the BRF for letting the Soho crowd suck Ol’ Dimwit into their lair.
So delighted to watch the Finding Funding fiasco confirm all the worst aspects of their characters.
I do think the RF would be happy to let her sink her own ship at this point.
Here’s hoping! 🤞
🤞🤞🤞🤞
Maybe the MOS does have a countersuit. Could it have something to do with her hypocritical use of the tabloids when allegedly calling in stories herself or arranging paps? Or for defaming the tabloids LOL!!! Maybe it's just a countersuit for the money they have to spend wasting time on her frivolous claims...while they make plenty on the articles!
Whether intentional or not, Rache put signage on her body, basically advertisement, and commercialized consumption of "her and Harry's love" via photos and clicks.
Old-money tends to be very against wearing logos of any kind. They dress with quality and privacy in mind and avoid flashing their wealth and personal lives at all costs. Why do you think Kate doesn't haul around LV embossed bags and accessories around?
Doing what Rache did is considered extremely vulgar and will get you ostracized from that crowd. I can understand why the royal courtiers were livid. She made the BRF look cheap in front of aristocrats while destroying their carefully laid plans to always keep the press at arm's length from the BRF.
After the stunt she pulled at Princess Eugenie's wedding, however, they had to admit that they had sorely miscalculated.
.................
Oh yes! I was following the story then and the Harkles flew off on their Aussie tour right after Eugenie's wedding. The RF/palaces were oddly quiet about her pregnancy announcement at first and there were whispers they were upset...that the announcement should have come more formally through the RF.
There weren't as many places to follow the story then but I remember people on Skippy's blog and comments on tabloid articles agreeing she had announced then to suck-up all the attention throughout the tour. Many thought she was lying and would claim she lost the baby. Harry was acting weird. He was photographed sitting on some steps by himself looking depressed shortly after they arrived in Aussie and then there were the stories about them fighting.
The weirdest part of course was the incredible changing size pregnancy belly during the tour with photos showing substantial differences sometimes just in one day.
@Charade
That sounds like a good theory. The tiara story certainly has become very convoluted.
re: Emerald tiara
I don't have anything to support this theory but I've wondered about tiara-gate.
I am not so sure she wanted the same tiara as Eugenia but she certainly wanted emeralds. I think the problem the Firm had with Rache's choice was three-fold.
First, there are clearly protocols who gets to wear what, where, when, and how. I imagine upholding hierarchy and curtailing any type of competition is first priority. Turf wars would destroy that fragile balance. That may be why although loaned, royal women tend to have exclusive use of specified royal jewels. They don't really share and if Eugenia was already permitted use of a specific tiara, Rache could not override what was carefully decided on. I don't believe Lady C's account that Eugenia didn't wear the tiara she planned. I think that is being said so no criticism falls on her for being a Bridezilla, jealous of Rache, or any other nasty mud Rache might sling at her.
Second, Rache wearing an emerald tiara was in stark contrast to other royal brides marrying into the family and who have for the recent past worn diamond tiaras. She would have been perceived as differentiating herself from other royal brides and trying to "outshine" them.
Third, Eugenia as a blood princess has license to distinguish herself from other royal brides. Not only that, she had precedence because her wedding was scheduled before Harry's and she likely decided on the emerald tiara years before Rache was even a gleam in Harry's eye. The courtiers likely would have also wanted to avoid headlines like "Eugenia gets fashion lessons from Meghan." The York girls have been humiliated enough about their fashion choices.
Tiara-gate was supposed to be a lesson to Rache that she was behind Kate and without Harry, behind Eugenia and Beatrice.
`Nymph, nymph, what are your beads?
Green glass, goblin. Why do you stare at them?
Give them me.
No.
Give them me. Give them me.
No...'
Full text at https://allpoetry.com/Overheard-on-a-Saltmarsh and other poetry sites.
Strange how old memories are triggered by all this.
Also, Kermit and Miss Piggy were interviewed on The One Show, BBC 1 7pm 29th July yesterday evening, for anyone who can get it
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000lbmx/the-one-show-29072020 (12:12 - 16.28).
In it, Miss Piggy was confirmed as the top female actress.
There was discussion of films she and Kermit might remake - `The Kerminator', `Pirates of the Amphibian' but best from our viewpoint had to be `Fifty Shades of Green'.
I'd love to watch Miss Piggy interviewing MM - I reckon the Pig would win!
I don’t know why some of you are fussing so much about it.
The most important thing here is that royal girlfriends are not supposed to advertise their relationship with the press/public. Any Brit with refined taste would consider it tacky and trashy; even dead common looking. So goodness knows what the royals thought. ;o)
Again, Megsy was going against protocol and the expected behaviour even before she got her foot in the door.
******************
Re tiara gate.
There was a documentary on the royal brides (it was certainly about the royals regardless) shown here in the UK within the last few months.
They said neither Eugenie or Megsy got to wear the tiara they wanted. It sounds. a little too PC to me and not sure I believe it.
I can’t evidence or reference this, give a link or state the title name of the programme, or channel as I didn’t note it down. It’s one of the numerous telly programmes about the royals that I watched. :o)
I agree with you that I don't believe the "official" story that both Rache and Eugenie didn't get the tiaras they wanted. I believe it was just Rache that got denied her choice. However, public knowledge of that transpiring would be problematic.
The thing for me was Megsy purposely flaunting her relationship in public, this was so tacky and very immature in everyway.
The tiara story was far too politically correct. I can’t remember whether it was just before Megixt or just after. Either way, the truth would have been very problematic! ;o)
NB as published in US, via Pakistan, main points selected:
"Prince William breaks silence on Meghan...
`Prince William is finally giving his two cents...'
`According to Us Weekly, Prince William isn’t pleased with the contents of the book, which he thinks is a tool for Meghan and Harry to control the narrative.'
“... calculated way of controlling the narrative... they took advantage of their entertainment contacts so they’d be painted in a favorable light,” a source revealed.
The book also sheds light on a tiff between Harry and William over Meghan when the latter said that he wanted to “make sure that Harry wasn’t blindsided by lust” before going public with his relationship with the Duchess.
“the bad blood between William and Harry (has) taken a whole new turn.”
“William’s the voice of reason ...” the first source claimed.'
Original report at
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/prince-william-thinks-new-finding-freedom-book-is-calculated/
I bet PW does think the book was highly calculated but I'm not certain that he would choose to say that now and to a US based magazine. He's not known for speaking out (never complain) and why choose a US not UK to print it?
I know it’s ridiculous to apply logic to Smirky’s life story BUT regarding the H&M necklace.
At that point in time they are long distance dating. The Palace calls her up and scolds her about the possible hint that she’s dating SadSack Harry. 36-37 years old, and though she is traumatized by the phone call, she marries him anyway. She goes on international television and proclaims she’s ready to work, etc. Diana, for all her faults, was a very sheltered 19 year old. Yet, Meghan quits in a huff due to intolerable conditions, such as second choice tiaras & the audacity of Catherine sending her thoughtful, no doubt beautiful flowers.
Oy vey.
But I do get it. Hollywood is not a healthy place to grow up, and I say that as a native. If you have HBO, there’s a recent documentary by Alex Winter called Showbiz Kids. (Alex is best know as Bill of Bill & Ted trilogy with Keanu Reeves. It “shines a light” on how twisted it is to be a kid in a movie or TV set and just the city itself as a cesspool of ambition.
Now Los Angeles is not all bad, of course, I love parts of my hometown, but Markle is a familiar type, Eve Harrington in All About Eve, Michael Douglas in Wall Street, a toxic brew of greed, ambition and desperate need for attention. Shudder. Still, it’s also on the BRF for letting the Soho crowd suck Ol’ Dimwit into their lair.
So delighted to watch the Finding Funding fiasco confirm all the worst aspects of their characters.
____________________________________________
Miz M,
You've touched on something I've had in the back of my head for some time, and as a native of L.A., I'm hoping you can elaborate on your post a bit more. I think it's very important to understanding MM and her motivations. Everyone expects her to behave *normally* like the rest of us, but she can't or won't, and I'm guessing a lot has to do with the atmosphere she grew up in.
Tho American, I've only got a dim understanding of the unique bubble that is the Hollywood scene. (I can well understand that our British cousins must really be scratching their heads!) Everyone there (even children of lighting directors like Thomas Markle) grows up presenting some kind of facade, seems to me. The facade is everything -- the person has no idea of who they are. You get a whole microcosm of society of no one knowing who he is, and they just seem to only be able to compare themselves with one another, with no deep human connections nor values. Insecurity galore.
I can't help but feel that it was pointless for the BRF to expect Markle to behave like a real person, tho they didn't know it in the beginning. They just wanted Harry to be happy. (Harry himself is no prize in the values department, but he's THEIR no-values person.) Now here are the pair of them, spouting borrowed, meaningless platitudes while throwing endless tantrums.
Just my observations from the outside looking in! Hoping you can share more of your experiences. Thanks in advance :)
Eugenia's wedding should never been delayed. Eugenia should have gone first. This was case number one of Megan getting spoiled and indulged by Charles. Yes I will blame Charles for pushing ahead of Prince Andrew. For screwing Andrew this way in a proxy war of royal weddings. Can you imagine the pressure Megsy exerted through her Hapless sock puppet? So that she would get married and pregnant ASAP?
Megsy sucked in foolish Charles in so many ways, Charles was repaid in disrespect and venom. Megsy figured, "You are a pushover and a jerk" "I don't even like you"
I'm really enjoying Lady C's book.
She brings out how insulated the couple became from the engagement on. How they did not want to separated at dinner parties, lots of PDA and that JH took on the role of not just letting her do what she wanted (instead of guiding her from making a mistake) but defending her right to do what she wanted to anyone who suggested anything to the contrary. Thin skinned to anything critical and not enough applause.
She doesn't say it exactly this way but that together they had an endless feedback loop about how they were humanitarians which allowed them to preach this to everyone. How she didn't tolerate anything other than complete/total buy-in from any staffer (and if not, you were gone).
She brings out that M was polished in some ways that most of the BRF was not (and that she was shiny/new) which encouraged them to believe their positive press of how wonderful they were which became the seeds for they are trying to keep us from reaching our true potential because we will outshine them all.
This lead into the whole crazy belly grabbing for dear life we observed. JH went to his father and grandmother and asked for their help in controlling the press about the belly grabbing and so on. His idea was that you made an agreement when my mother was pregnant with William to back off and you did so with us when we were growing up as kids so I want you do this for me (more or less).
He was told that they really could not help (freedom of the press) which then became the seed of not being supporting in the time of need. And, she dryly mentions that actually stopping the behaviors would have ended that criticism without needing to try to control the press.
Lady C is clear that she was rooting for M to succeed which I hadn't thought of but is kind of nice. She does point out ways that M has strengths and how that may/may not have been helpful in trying to fit into the BRF. And, Lady C is good about pointing out why this or that outfit was not appropriate. And, she does state that Angela (who allegedly dragged her feet about which tiara as if Angela would have gone against HM's wishes on the choice) was the one to call M to let her know that HM was wearing a hat (code for what was expected from M) for their shared outing only to be told that M would not. She doesn't say it but I suspect there could be a correlation.
It’s been discussed before ;o), but Harry is more senior in terms of line of succession and that’s why his was first. It wasn’t anything to do with Megsy getting her way etc. Although the duo could have had a quiet and small private wedding in Scotland. ;o)
Now they are just thumbing their noses at the BRF!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8575601/Prince-Harry-makes-appearance-biography-Finding-Freedom-claims-Travalyst-summit.html
The video gave trouble as it was loading but got there eventually.
I didn't listen to what he said, rather I focused on body cues, not helped by sound seeming odd -out of sync? muffled? He seemed to be in a higher class of cupboard this time.
What else I noticed :
-He kept biting his lip
-pupils dilated
-glimpses of furred tongue & thick oral mucus
- general mood very low, little enthusiasm, more like a hostage speech than anything I've seen so far.
Long pauses, trying to keep himself together?
Have we any medics, psychology-buffs who could comment more professionally?
He struck me as a very unhappy man who is not at all well.
Admit you got it wrong, old chap. Come home but without her.
'Before the pandemic unfolded we witnessed more and more young people expressing an interest in authentic travel experiences and an ability to partake in trips that are greener, that allow them to support local communities, uphold heritage and protect destinations and cultures.'
The usual word salad (written by wifey). I'm not sure young people are interested in "authentic travel experiences and an ability to partake in trips that are greener" etc. If anything, it's probably older people who have more money to spend. Younger people usually go on line for cheap holidays (I think).
And today, Tui (travel agents) announced the closure of 166 of their high street stores.
I agree that there weren't that many young people interested in such trips even before we were hit by the virus. Large numbers wanted sun and sex on the cheap; if they'd wanted holidays which are `authentic'and low-impact there were plenty of trekking companies to meet their needs already, albeit at a price. These offered a good foot-slog, frequently poor sanitation and basic food. Plus creepy crawlies, terrifying river crossings and a good soaking in relentless rain, not necessarily in a warm climate.
In short every inconvenience but not much alcohol. The sort of holiday you enjoy more in retrospect than at the time!
It's fair enough to prefer a good bed and en suite loo as one ages but, as far I can make out, many of those youngsters who want the `authentic' experience of wild camping in the Lake District, Snowdonia, Dartmoor - (in fact anywhere one could go for trips to complete basic Mountain Leadership requirements) are now the last people who should be let loose in such places.
It's very evident from the disgusting mess they leave when `roughing it' that they have no concern whatsoever for the environment or their fellow humans, to judge from how they dispose of their own waste. Moreover, they seem to have learned their arrogance from Ms Markle.
Another thing to bear in mind is that there are fewer safe places in which to travel than there used to be, in the Old World at least. In the 1960s, for instance, it was possible to do an `authentic' overland trip driving all the way from UK to India and beyond - now many of the countries through which one would pass are too dangerous to the innocent abroad.
All of this is forgetting that international travel has been a major factor in the spread of Covid 19; the virus is going to be around for while yet and, as has been pointed out here, travel firms are in deep trouble, as are the airlines.
Any sensible person would think very carefully about the risks and whether it'd be better to stay nearer home.
Sorry, Harry, you've got a dead duck there - I really can't imagine how Travalyst can possibly help..
Voice was different too, inexpressive. Zombified. It was the odd flash of the white tongue that suggested something wrong? Was he just dehydrated? Hadn't bothered to clean his teeth?
Might it be thrush...?
Was he under the influence?
Has he at last realised the mess he's in? That the game's almost up?
For some reason, i have been fascinated by his hair recently. Obviously doing something different with styling but I want to see it from the side or back to see if he is having hair transplants or something. I know, that sounds kind of weird but we don't see his bare head any more. Always wearing a hat or only a front view. With the work M is having done, i wonder if he is too. And yes, something is weird with his front teeth that i haven't noticed before. Maybe the recent dentist visit was for him, not her.
I did wonder if his 2 front teeth were askew/more prominent that they were.
It's painful to watch someone with such a red complexion. You know it's not healthy.
His father also has this, also doesn't appear healthy
On the other hand, leaking through a lawyer hasn't really been Meghan's style, either. She normally finds a way to do it through the tabloids.
"Mr. Trudeau’s wife and brother earned more than $200,000 over the past four years for speaking engagements with the charity. Mr. Morneau’s daughter works there, and his family has traveled overseas with the charity twice in recent years."
Trudeau Goes Before Parliament to Face Questions on Charity Scandal
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/30/world/canada/justin-trudeau-we-charity.html?action=click&module=Latest&pgtype=Homepage
Tyler Perry apparently faked a bad connection with Gayle King after she asked about Meghan and Harry.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/tyler-perry-pretends-to-lose-connection-after-harry-meghan-question/
Trying to avoid the Markle curse no doubt
With H, I wondered if there was a paler border to it, as if it had been shaded by hair that had then been trimmed back.
Was there a vagueness in his delivery, too many moments when he seemed to be waiting for a word to come to mind? Lack of emphasis, as if his brain was ticking over at only half speed?
Daily Express & the Sun are featuring the Markles being invited tot he nuptials of Brooklyn next year. Do you think they'd dare show their faces?
Please God, let there be no Royal passing away until the we can keep M out of the country. She is no friend to the people of Britain. (IMO)
I know that RF is not like others families but the choice should be simple, who the first gets engaged, the first one gets married. Nice and simple. Specially if Eugenie chose her wedding day.
And another thought: people from UK often mocks both princesses, but for me Eugenie and her dress - with open back and with scar, and Beatrice with her vintage dress and small wedding with her gradparents during pandemic are the best examples how the RF should behave.
Thanks, Dallas Alice. You've answered question about my Covid 19 making it it worse?
Sorry about that - I was amending the post to add something to it - now I've left your answer without the question - trying to be too clever!
I was going say that I see exactly what you mean - he doesn't look right. At best, he looks a good few years older than his current 71,(72 on 14th November coming) instead of less than 2 years older than Anne.
Perhaps he has been genetically unlucky, even though both parents seem to have been given `good hands' when the genetic cards were `dealt out'.
No worries, @Wild Boar Battle-maid. It happens to the best of us. 😀. I used to work in med/surg and ICU. Our bread and butter, it seemed, were “lifestyle diseases”. Type II diabetes, COPD and CHF as well as the latent effects of heavy drinking and drug use. Certain things just kind of “stick out”, if you will, when you see someone with what are considered hallmark symptoms.
@Sarah, I had no idea he was a heavy drinker.
"Dressed as Robin Hood". Half Robin Hood, they already started taking money from the rich but have not started giving it to the poor.
I thought MM's cheap H&M necklace was the sort of thing a 13 year old would wear to 'advertise' who her boyfriend is. Then I saw this comment in the DM:
Gracie_D, Malta
Awwww how sweet. And did she scratch Meggsy luv 'Arry on a park bench, or was it just a toilet door.
😂😂
I've just found photos from Charles's visit to the Gurdwara Bangla Sahib, very distressing especially if you accept the medical opinion in one of the Australian articles about it.
It makes the Harkles behaviour even worse than we thought.
When Charles and Camilla married, I was in conversation with a woman who was making a fuss about the possibility of Camilla being given regal rank when Charles succeeded. My reply was, wwtte, that HM could have a similar constitution to that of her mother and, if she also made it to 100, Charles might predecease her. Far too soon to get upset about it.
That was 15 years ago...
Not wearing a hat at that engagement was half the problem. She also looked absolutely dreadful, her hair is complete mess. The Queen must have fought to keep her composure; she is not used to such sloppiness on display within the family.
I’ve read several places that Charles is a heavy drinker. I’ve always assumed that would impact his health and appearance
I have never read anything about it, but going by UK Daily Mail photos and his red flushed face, he shows this sometimes. He fluctuates. Back when Megsy was allowed to infiltrate the Royal Family. One reason was that Charles was in a weak phase back then due to drinking. It made him a little too nice and gullible. This is my theory. Charles should have blocked Harry especially if the BRF had MI6 reports on "the actress". And why would they not receive such reports?
Pre-Covid Charles would be touring spots in the UK. If on the itinerary there was a brewery, distillery or pub, he was a too eager to try the samples. I base this on the photos I saw at the DM.
I bet PW does think the book was highly calculated but I'm not certain that he would choose to say that now and to a US based magazine. He's not known for speaking out (never complain) and why choose a US not UK to print it?
------------
Just FYI, US Magazine is a rag that makes stuff up constantly.
@Dallas Alice, do you remember at their last appearance in the UK, at Westminster where she dressed as Robin Hood
________________________________
LOL! Personally, I like "Praying Mantis"
I agree and I agree that both the Princesses are often if not mostly mocked for their dress sense etc. They both looked gorgeous on their wedding day. However, Beatrice wins the day for me, no public spectacle and no cost to the British tax payer, Eugenie’s was criticised for that, particularly because she’s far down the pecking order. Simple but lovely private royal weddings was the norm over a century ago, I pretty much feel we should revert to that. ;o)
He brings his own gin when he travels https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1287554/prince-charles-favourite-drink-camilla-parker-bowles-gin/amp
I recently saw a photo retrospective of Charles as an undergraduate at Cambridge. There were several good shots of his hands and yes, at 19 years of age, his fingers looked sausagey then, too. He also had his signature pinky signet ring as well. He's gained weight since he was at university and his fingers are bigger now, but they were always chubby. He's inherited the Saxe-Coburg physique, not the Montbatten one. He does have a high color that has concerned me, but I think he tends to natural ruddiness and does spend a great deal of time outside. As he ages, he reminds me more and more of his ancestor George III, called 'Farmer George' by his subjects for his love of agriculture.
Chas and Cam do enjoy hitting the drinks cabinet for cocktail hours . .probably the only thing keeping them sane . . but when Charles recovered from COVID-19, I breathed a bit easier about his health. Surely a 71-year-old guy with cardiac issues and/or a heavy drinking problem/liver damage would not have bounced back so quickly, recovering at home? Charles came out of Covid better than Boris, a man 16 years his junior. I think despite appearances, Charles is fitter than he looks. Camilla has mentioned that he's like a mountain goat with the walking and does miles every day. He's got that formidable longevity on both parental sides.
I’ve read several places that Charles is a heavy drinker. I’ve always assumed that would impact his health and appearance.
------------
I understand that heavy drinking is kind of the "thing" in Britain. Jamie Oliver has talked about how he only drinks on the weekends now, lost some weight and got healthier, but he also mentioned he gets a lot of side eye from everyone else when he's not drinking.
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/g28690847/prince-charles-cambridge-trinity-college-photos/
William and Harry have very different body frames. Strapping Wills has the robust Spencer build--big boned and tall. Harry is almost as tall as his brother, but he's got a much reedier frame--especially now since I suspect he's doing drugs in lieu of eating much. He has literally wasted away since meeting Meghan. During his service days, he was quite robust. But William has always been bigger. Harry's got the Montbatten frame. I wouldn't say chubby fingers are a feature of that.
I understand that heavy drinking is kind of the "thing" in Britain.
It's gotta be the weather . . .
Prince Charles does look quite sweet in the second photo. <3
I agree that he isn't naturally photogenic -- quite a cross to bear when you're in the public eye that much! He looks better now than he does when he was younger. I see more of Prince Philip in his face now.
Meg's blog may be nauseating, but the commenters are not stupid:
'Janey
November 28, 2017 at 8:30 pm
This is the kind of feature article you hope someone writes about you–it is NOT the kind of thing you write about yourself, if you have any kind of awareness. She comes across as incredibly self-aggrandizing here. The thesis of this piece appears to be “why am I so awesome?” It sounds like her parents did not teach her how unbecoming it is to blow her own horn. That will not go down well with the Brits. I hope, for Harry’s sake, that she truly loves him, but this piece, and all of her charity stories that she shares, are all about HER, and not about the people she says she wants to help. Even the bit about the little girl who wrote her a letter–I would be waaaay more focused on “wow, look at what this girl is doing” and NOT “wow, I have inspired this girl” (because I am so inspirational and awesome). This blog post is deluded, and points to Media Meg being fake, fake, fake.*
:-D
My own nose never recovered from the sunburns of childhood. It has long had the visible veins of a drunk's nose, but I've never been more than tipsy, and that was 40 years ago.
Prince Charles does look quite sweet in the second photo. <3
I agree that he isn't naturally photogenic -- quite a cross to bear when you're in the public eye that much! He looks better now than he does when he was younger. I see more of Prince Philip in his face now.
Philip & Lilibet's features combined awkwardly in all of their children, and nobody took the brunt of it more than Charles. It didn't reflect well on him that he was so jealous of the adoring attention his young wife received, but it must have been galling to have been in the public eye for 33+ years and tried his very hardest and best to represent his mother and be engaging with the people, only to have Diana prove such a natural and so photogenic and winsome with no training in the media glare at all.
Charles has his mother's coloring and gets his build from her stumpier side of the family tree, but in the face, definitely a Mountbatten, as Harry is. Remarkable that Harry's parentage was ever questioned. Through and through Philip's grandson, though he's not behaving like it.
I love the floppy-haired photo where Charles is sheepishly looking at the camera. One gets the sense of a more candid shot, the hair escaping its rigorous parting for once. That was a good head of hair. He doesn't look like the heir to a crown there; just another hopeful fresher-about-town.
Charles may have people dressing him all his life, but he's always turned out impeccably. Beautiful clothes. We are not going to see that again, people caring that much about their public presentation. If the Prince of Wales would like to extend the arm of amity towards American trade, I'd like to ask him to make a sizable donation to save venerable American haberdashery Brooks Brothers from going under. BB has been outfitting American gentlemen, including Presidents and other luminaries since 1818. It survived two World Wars, a Civil War, a Great Depression & the hippie era. COVID and the general trend toward permanent casual Fridays have nearly killed it. It just filed Chapter 11.
More than any other, this really does look like a hostage video to me.
More than any other, this really does look like a hostage video to me.
I've just attempted to watch that video via three separate outlets. The resolution is so poor, I can't really comment on whether Harry's teeth look different or if there's a white coating in his mouth or the state of his pupils. They do resemble two black holes in his face in the manner of a primitive 1940s era cartoon, but the entire image is fuzzy. It looks like he's in a study of some kind with all the blinds drawn and the light is extremely low.
He is enunciating extra-carefully, but it might just be all that multisyllabic word salad that's shooting out of his face. Frankly, I'm impressed that he can even read/repeat that many big words, *especially* if he's doing it under the influence.
It's not the brown wall again, but that was better lit. Why not against the trees again?
As to the 'content' .. I gave up. Despite, or maybe because of my degree in English, I couldn't make sense of this syntactic scramble he was spouting. Enough ornate Latinate words strung together eventually cancel out any meaning in the sentence.
He looks terrible, what we can see of him, but until he realizes this himself, there's nothing that can be done. Harry's got to want to climb out of his own hole.
Abigail Spencer
"Enbrethiliel" is the result I got after entering my name into a Middle-earth name generator! I do wish I had reconsidered before making it my main monicker. Most people I've interacted with online have called me "E" or "En."
I do have other Blogger accounts I could use, but on a forum like this, I figured: The longer I can prove I've been on Blogger, the better!
@Christine
Yes, Jdubya mentioned upthread that it was Abigail Spencer's name that slipped out.
And I'm quite intrigued! This doesn't seem like the sort of error a seasoned solicitor would make . . . but if it's a deliberate leak, nor is it Meg's style. Is this a sign that Abigail is willing to go all the way and perjure herself? Or has she said no to Meg in private and reaped this revenge?
Kim Kardashian flies on private jets and she's roundly criticized for it. You don't see her deciding to form an eco tourism charity! She'd be laughed off the stage. Harry just needs to go back to basics. Work the Invictus charity. Focus on it and don't start some new, utterly stupid charity that everyone laughs at him for.
Ohhh wait I forgot, likely Harry doesn't profit financially from Invictus. They need something to funnel the money through. Like the Clinton Foundation.
I'd like to hear Meghan's spin on this when talking to these friends.
It's really pushing it to call Spencer a "young mother" (as if that status has legal relevance) but I'm sure that's how M sees herself. M shares a birthday with AS--both turn 39 next week, but Spencer's child turns 12 in September.
I was told by several long-time customers that new owners embraced the two-sizes-too-small look a decade ago. I don't think that sells to any man over 35. IMO it looks terrible on everyone.
painless laser treatments to get rid of that problem
I've had 3 skin cancer surgeries, 20+ mole removals, and many freezings at my annual inspections, but no dermatologist has brought that up. Must not be something they do. Next year, I'll ask.
Binge drinking seems to have become the norm among many of the young, on vodka. Older people can surprise you though.
During the 1960s, booze was very expensive - the only problem most people had with drink was that they couldn't afford it.
At the universities I knew, beer was the main tipple of the students and few could stretch the budget to spirits. At parties, there might be a small keg of beer, Lutomer Riesling (`Yugoslavian' white wine) and an Australian `burgundy'. Real sophisticated stuff, sorry Magatha! And of course, sherry.
The good stuff was brought out at formal dinners - I attended one rather grand one and was quite astonished at the amount I put away yet had a perfectly clear head the next morning. It was the done thing to be able to hold one's drink - to be visibly incapacitated brought forth scorn. That said Bumps Suppers were pretty boozy by all account.
Now kids (anyone under 30 to me!) drink to get get drunk - I can't understand that.
One friend was up at Trinity at the same time as Charles - knew him vaguely, it's a very large college with a huge intake compared with many others. My friend has never mentioned him drinking to excess.
The dustbin photos would have been when he was in the Samuel Becket play `Endgame'- I can't identify the boater-and-mac production.
The relative cost of alcohol has decreased astonishingly since those days. For example, a bottle of whisky that cost £2.65 in 1967 now can be got for £13.00, a rise of less than a factor of 6, Tio Pepe sherry has gone up less than a factor of 10 times. Everything else has gone up by at least 30-60 times, if not a hundred times or more if you're talking about houses.. My first annual salary was £1,100; today's equivalent is £30,480, not quite 30 times.
Crazy!
What the devil is a Dorm? No such thing at Cambridge! Another photo is in a gyp room, not a kitchen. Robes, be d@mned! That's a `gown', the medieval usage.
Enbrethiliel - The Leak (oh my)
Could it really be an accident (given that this is supposedly an experienced solicitor)? Maybe. People can do dumb things.
If she did say no to potentially perjury, then putting her name out there might not be such a bad thing from AS's point of view. She has no down side (at this point) and a lot of upside with texts, calls, emails to speak the truth and who could stop her?
I was thinking what if it were a message to any of the others about getting in line but when I started thinking upside, I don't think of it as a message anymore.
What the devil is a Dorm? No such thing at Cambridge! Another photo is in a gyp room, not a kitchen. Robes, be d@mned! That's a `gown', the medieval usage.
Town & Country must be an American publication, I'm guessing. American university students live in 'dormitories'. This isn't the Dickensian type of orphanage dorm with the beds in long institutional rows. Students have their own rooms or suites shared with roommates. En suite bathrooms usually for the upperclassmen. Freshmen often have to use a communal bathroom. There will be communal kitchen/lounge/TV/Study rooms in each dorm, sometimes by floor.
A 'gyp room' is a new one on me. Not a kitchenette? Do you still use the term 'common room'? We'd probably say 'study lounge'.
Those gyp room photos are totally posed, because if you notice, Chas is using that sharp knife to cut the loaf of crusty bread with his *left* hand, the one facing the camera. Chas is right-handed, and I don't peg him for making his own sandwiches in any case. Surely you'd use your dominant hand when using sharp knives.
1) I believe she sees herself as a "young mother" and is trying to capture sympathy as such. There is a big difference between a 21 year-old and someone nearly 40, I am sorry, there just is. A previous poster described her likely extreme need for sympathy and this is just another example.
2) The detail actually makes the whole story less credible. Five "young mothers" are really going to all get together, decide to actively talk to the press about a LETTER written to someone else's father? All five of these people are so concerned for their friend but they don't bother to let her know they are about to do it?
I have noticed a pattern of her "needing to tell her side of the story" ever since she came on the scene. About EVERYTHING. It seems to me there is an extreme need to convince the public at each and every turn. Gaslighting/lying?
"Could someone remind me what is the importance of the "young mothers" in this court case?"
I certainly can't! :-) Makes no sense to me to claim adults involved in a court case, any case, should be treated differently based on their age, sex, and past reproductive success. The most I can gather is that those "young mothers" might be stressed out and that could affect their children. IMO they should have thought of that before they blabbed to People in a coordinated attack on an elderly man who is also a father.
------
Could be the "slip" of AS's name was used to illustrate to the judge the feeding frenzy that would result from release of all the names. Of course, so far as I know there hasn't been one (yet) but I suppose there's nothing to stop M's side from claiming there was. Still, that would be pretty questionable behavior from an attorney....
I can't imagine though AS welcomes this. Seems she's permanently in a custody battle with her ex and has accused him of bullying her (although some do take his side.)
There are many places that do it, and not by medical professionals necessarily.
The laser zaps the blood vessel. You might feel a little heat.
Well, it's worked up tIll now, right. RIGHT????!
(Not attacking you, Cookie!)
If she'd wanted the Vladimir circles, someone would/should have leaked the simple explanation that only the Queen wears it. Those emeralds were won in a lottery, of all things.
If you look at the letters on the food packaging, the photo has been reversed. The cello is also played the other way 'round, so that one is, too. I wonder is that was T^&C's error or if they were originally published wrongly.
No proof on Abigail but tons of speculation. Maybe with all the buzz people are trying to induce her to come out and 'fess up about being one of the 5 and maybe the organizer since she had a connection (photos) with Jess Cagle who ran People back then
Here is what twitter search shows for Abigail Spencer.
https://twitter.com/search?q=abigail%20spencer&src=recent_search_click
Good pts. That's why I wondered about Marie Feodorovna's Sapphire Bandeau/Queen Mary's Sapphire Bandeau that was sometimes worn by Mary with a center emerald instead of the sapphire.
It seems M's choice would have had to be shown in an online listing of royal tiaras or M wouldn't have known about it. Surely Angela Kelly wouldn't have allowed H&M to just paw around in the vault like they were at a sale in Filene's basement and neither would anyone else charged with safe-guarding the royal jewelry vault I wouldn't think. Still, Harry was there and he seemed kind of sheepish when they talked about the tiara selection months later...he did say he really shouldn't have been there...so maybe there was pawing.
what if the 5 witnesses don’dt want to testify, can they be compelled to testify if they aren’t from the UK?
PA has certainly resisted testifying or even speaking to US authorities, couldn’t the witnesses, imcluding Mr. MArkle, choose to do the same? they can’t be extraditied for civil case can they? or can they chose to give a video depositon instead?
"@Lizzie Queen Mary wore the sapphire bandeau with the carved emerald brooch. HM actually wears this as a brooch so it would not be made available to Meghan."
Thanks. I didn't know what emerald was involved but I do know some say the acquisition of the tiara by Mary was a little iffy. And it hasn't been worn for many years. So that would fit with the story that the reason for the denial was there were questions about the history of the piece.
Seems if she wanted the Vladimir or anything worn by the Queen, that should have been an easy denial. Of course, we don't really know what happened and if there was a denial (and I believe there was) what reason was given.
Hello! I read back but can't see if any of you mentioned the name of one of the 5 friends that was mistakenly blurted out by MM's attorney? If I missed it I apologize. Anyone know this yet?
@Christine: Abigail Spencer’s name got dropped in court. And as I recall, she has a connection to someone at People magazine and would make for a convenient conduit for Meghan to do a public hit job on her father.
I thought Jessica Mulroney had also been confirmed as one of the 5, so we now know of two names both of which were the easiest to guess...one for her past history of getting involved in trying to shape media stories about Meghan (JM contacted Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne to try to influence her DM interview about MM) as well as her heavy general involvement in the entire affair. And the other for her connection to the previous editor at People magazine.
I have a copy of the original People magazine print article and only one friend mentions Thomas' letter. The others defend MM against the negative stories that were in the media at the time...sort of like the Finding Freebies book tries to do!
Re the wedding dates for Harry vs Eugenie:
At the time of Harry's wedding, it was stated in the news that Eugenie's was moved due to Harry's planned Oceania tour.
That tour had been planned for quite some time.
When the Harkles insisted upon getting married so quickly it was decided to plan the wedding dates around that tour. The tour was at least one of the reasons (and perhaps the biggest one) for moving things around and putting Harry's wedding first.
This is where I feel some of the blame for this mess can be laid at the feet of the BRF. As I've said before (and Lady C has also claimed) I believe they felt MM's biracial background would be a positive aspect for the monarchy and liked the idea of her being included on the Oceania tour.
Unfortunately, they were Markled. And as we've discussed here in the past, if they had told him to take things slower (even in the face of his angry cries of "go suck it") Markle would never have married him without the royal approval. Either they would have actually taken a longer engagement or MM would have left him.
Eugenie's date was moved in order to allow for H&M to be well married before that tour. And it was also scheduled just in time to allow H&M to attend before they left for Australia - although I'm sure Eugenie regretted that after MM used her ceremony to announce her pregnancy and pave the way to turning the focus of the tour on herself instead of the people of Australia, Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand.
in a case like this or Johnnie Depp’s. who pays the travel expenses for the witnesses?
what if the 5 witnesses don’dt want to testify, can they be compelled to testify if they aren’t from the UK?
...........
I think due to the pandemic the witnesses would be asked for video depositions or perhaps written interrogatories.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/uknews/12265440/prince-harry-travel-industry-green-travel/
https://twitter.com/KjerstinSommer/status/1288951605543542788
http://disputeresolutionblog.practicallaw.com/the-use-of-video-link-in-civil-proceedings/
The judge might, however, want the witnesses to appear in person.
He told MailOnline: ‘I am afraid his credibility on the subject is lacking over his own jet setting, which undermines his case.
‘The message is fine, but the messenger is wrong – it’s like a carnivore advocating vegetarianism.'' (DM)
The video went down well, then.
I did wonder at the time whether that 'husband shirt' (what a stupid name!) was a not so subtle hint that MM wanted to marry H. Now we know. And it's all coming out in dribs and drabs. I wonder what else will be revealed tomorrow.
These two clowns are exasperating.
Has anything ever been straightforward with those two? I don't think they've told the truth from day one.
I have mild rosacea caused by sun damage over the years. My dermatologist told me that laser treatment would cause my very fair skin (I am a blond, blue-eyed Anglo Saxon) to look mottled with white spots. So I think you have to have a bit of melanin in your skin for it to do the trick.