The most interesting news about the Sussexes this week hasn't been about the Sussexes.
It's been the ugly case of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, as their volatile relationship is dragged through the court system as part of a civil trial in Depp's case against The Sun newspaper.
Several humiliating photos of Depp have appeared in court, including one of him passed out and covered in melted ice cream.
In addition, several obviously staged photos have been introduced into evidence, including a very neat photo of some nicely-arranged lines of cocaine on a glass table near several other attractively posed objects.
Perhaps Depp got Martha Stewart to cater his orgies. Or perhaps Amber set him up.
As a regular reader of Mail Online, Meg can't help but notice.
It's been the ugly case of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, as their volatile relationship is dragged through the court system as part of a civil trial in Depp's case against The Sun newspaper.
Several humiliating photos of Depp have appeared in court, including one of him passed out and covered in melted ice cream.
In addition, several obviously staged photos have been introduced into evidence, including a very neat photo of some nicely-arranged lines of cocaine on a glass table near several other attractively posed objects.
Perhaps Depp got Martha Stewart to cater his orgies. Or perhaps Amber set him up.
As a regular reader of Mail Online, Meg can't help but notice.
Blogger Meg and her camera
Meg has had an interest in taking photos of the Royal Family since the very beginning.
There has long been a rumor that she was tossed out of Kensington Palace and sent back to Canada while dating Harry, after a staffer caught her taking photos of a private area of the palace.
It's also not hard to imagine that Meg's fondness for taking photos was one reason the Cambridges did not want the Sussexes to live next door to them at Kensington Palace.
The Cambridges are very careful about the privacy of their three children. Would you want blogger Meg to live next door?
What photos does Meg have?
Given that Meg has been living with Harry for nearly three years now - and that Harry is a known drug user and heavy drinker - it seems likely that she has some photos as embarrassing as the Depp images that she could threaten to release as part of a court case.
Photos of passed-out, pants-wet Harry, or video of a drunken Harry saying God knows what about his father or brother, would be terrible for the image of the Royal Family.
Concept: Meg insists on getting her way when it comes to a monetary settlement, custody settlement, or specific title, using the photos as leverage - with or without a court case.
Of course, aristocracy has been behaving badly for centuries. But as little as 50 years ago, they could largely impose upon the British press not to print unflattering images.
In the age of social media, that's no longer true.
A few taps on the keyboard and Harry's worst moments could be around the world in an instant, badly damaging the British Royal Family's brand value.
Images that would damage Harry most
What type of images do you think would damage Harry most?
Comments
I’m glad you see it too. I studied what we could see if that fuzzy photo for a long time. The child is very big, and I can’t help noticing how small and tight the little shirt is that he/she is crammed into. Probably the size of shirt that Archie should Be in as an ostensible 14 month old. Those little car strollers are suitable for at least up to three years, and frankly this kid looks like he’s closer to three then one. Are those blonde ring lights I see peeking out from under the hat? I couldn’t tell if it was hair or just the line of the hat with sun shining on it. I am fallible of course and don’t have any more information than any of you guys, but I just have such a certain feeling in my gut that Meg is scrounging up A number of babies to stand in for Archie whenever she needs a photo op. This one is a very healthy child who seems even bigger than the boy we saw in the Mother’s Day video. Of course that was over two months ago now and children this age do grow fast, but maybe not quite this fast. This kid seems to almost have outgrown the stroller already. And it’s hard to tell with the hat and the angle but despite the larger body this child has a more delicate looking almost triangular shaped face, which makes me think we might be looking at a little girl who is about 2 1/2. Not the same little girl who stood in for Archie for the New Year’s photo, but the Harkles are so arrogant And sloppy, they let hairy hold a little girl wearing wool in tights and a skirt and a little girls palm hat and seriously thought we wouldn’t notice any different. I believe this is why she released that claptrap Last spring about how they were determined to raise Archie “gender neutral”. Laying aside the fact that it would be very difficult to give a non-binary person a royal title, I think Meg said this to cover her ass because She knew she wasn’t going to have access to the same baby all the time to stage Archie photos. This child has very wildly in size and appearance in just ostensibly over one year of life. We may have seen at least six different kids when you tote them all
up.
This is a level of Devious crazy that normal sane people cannot cope with or even conceive of. That’s why she seems like she’s getting away with it… All her paid PR outlets just take the photos and publish them regardless of what kid is featured. Witness all of the hats, it’s scaring camera angles Photoshop funny business, rejection of official palace photographers etc. etc.
The queen and Philip had to skip the christening so they could have plausible deniability That a christening and photo didn’t actually occur. I really do think Meg is insane; How long O Majesty are you going To give in sanity free reign?
I agree that this child could be a 2 1/2 year-old girl. Also, this child’s legs are very chubby, whereas the Duck Rabbit child had longer and thinner legs.
I truly wonder why they keep pushing the ‘Doria is living with us’ scenario. Is it supposed to prove that there’s one person in her life with whom she can get along?
She is truly insane!
So the photo is probably recent.
The Step2 buggy looks like an older model that was recalled in 2010- odd. https://money.cnn.com/2010/05/12/news/companies/Step2_toy_recall/
The baby doesn't look like Duck/Rabbit Archie.
That child is so blonde. It would be worth finding out how long those car strollers have been around. Not long enough for the child pictured to be Samantha Markle, though the blonde hair fits. Tom’s older children were already teens by the time Doria came on the scene. She was only 23, so she’s only about nine years older than Samantha. Meg was in middle school before Doria did a runner; Could this be when is Samantha or Tom juniors kids from when they were younger? I think these car strollers have been around since the late 1980s. I didn’t really think the paving stones looked very new or cared for...One set of Southern California hacienda tiles is pretty much like another. But there is something both so staged and so old-fashioned about that scene.
Can you think of a plausible reason why a stroller model that has been recalled a decade ago would be on Tyler Perry’s property right now? Mr. Perry is a bachelor with no children, and has an even lived at that property for several years, being based in Atlanta. Since the Harkers didn’t import a bulky child stroller from Vancouver where they were allegedly living before, The stroller would have had to have been some thing which was bought or borrowed since they’ve been in LA. They might be running through Harry’s inheritance, but surely they have enough to get some new toys for Archie. It’s really not Meg’s jam to let her precious little prince use some other kid’s 20 year old hand me down. Dori I could have cleaned out her garage I suppose and brought it over, but the whole photograph just has a ring of inauthenticity about it, because it is after all a Meg project,
@Sandie
You’ve been a meg supporter since day one, and I think you really want to believe in the image which Megan is presenting to the world. As respectfully as I can, since it contradicts your view of the integrity of the Sussexes, I can only say that it is not at all apparent to me that we’ve been seeing the same baby since May of last year in all of Archie’s appearances. I wish I could share your certainty, because if it was absolutely beyond a shadow of a doubt that Meg has not been engaging in photographic shenanigans for the last 14 months, well further back still if we include the 10 months that she was pregnant, I would feel better about the state of her mental health. And frankly mine, since figuring out what Meg’s end game is is consuming way too much of my time and energy. Yours is certainly the most natural and straightforward explanation. Except that this woman does not go for natural and straightforward. She only wants us to think that, but based on the growing negative press in the fact that the larger world is coming around To some revelations about Megan which we have been discussing here for the last two years, I’m not the only one who doesn’t think she’s pulling off her act successfully.
I agree that the kid is poured into that toy car in a way that most kids that alleged age would not pull off.
I'm having difficulty locating where the photo is supposed to have taken (somewhere north of the curved fountain area and the walk to the house). it isn't the arrow in the insert as there is that black something (which looks like a french drain in place of guttering and a curb behind it).
https://jerseydeanne.com/
I can place some of the style of driveway in PT house
https://www.insider.com/photos-meghan-markle-harry-la-mansion-owned-by-tyler-perry-2020-5#heres-a-look-at-the-exterior-of-the-property-from-a-side-angle-1
and
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8297083/Meghan-Harry-living-Tyler-Perrys-18-million-hilltop-mansion-Beverly-Hills.html
This is a nice aerial shot
https://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/tyler-perrys-house-3/view/google/
there is no need for drainlike things in that area so it would appear that IF the photo was from that house, it would have been more likely at the other end of the house between the split wings (which look more like garage areas).
It's really odd but I can't seem to find that photo of the house in my search (but I have missed things and can make mistakes).
now the buggy. Good catch on this is a way older model. This are the current ones
https://search.step2.com/search?w=push%20around%20buggy
My question is: where did this come from? not at the house (that was built in like 2004) and so would that likely be just sitting in an attic somewhere waiting for a kid (technically TP has a kid who was born in 2014)? Would her mother have likely kept it waiting for MM's grandkids or picked it up at a yard sale still looking pretty good after all these years? And, if someone thinks they are way too important to join a regular Mommy and Me, would they really be all that accepting of using something that old in a photo op?
I now wonder if it could be MM with her mother photoshopped onto the driveay?
Forgot about being too famous for Mommy and Me. Thanks for the laugh!
His response? "FALSE"
He responded the same to stories Jessica is writing a tell-all book about her exploits with la Markle.
Now she has the family of the former PM of Canada gunning for her. Ghosting Jessica may be a mistake she will bitterly regret.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BenMulroney/status/1282344643510833152
https://etcanada.com/news/667620/ben-mulroney-puts-an-end-to-report-that-jessica-mulroney-is-writing-a-book-about-meghan-markle/
Yes I figured those stories were put out by Meghan to make her look better than Jessica. I think that’s why Ben spoke up.
Sounds like they hate Meghan, and maybe Meghan ghosted her a while ago.
As for the book? Maybe Jessica views Meghan as a small fry (and probably like Serena can’t believe she treated the royal family that way....)
Most fiendships aren’t forever.
Although single,Tyler Perry does have a son, Hikari. He has been in a relationship with Gelila Bekele for a long while.
She is the boys mother.
https://people.com/parents/tyler-perry-son-aman-fatherhood-exclusive/
Not that it really matters.
"Most fiendships aren’t forever."
Especially with Meg!
😊
Yeah, none of us like Harry any more since you came along Meg... Bogart was clearly ahead of the pack.
I find it funny- do you remember how they used the story of the Queen's dogs taking instantly to Meghan, and at the time most of us thought "aww, that's a good sign!" Lol, oh we were so young and naive then, still hadn't caught on to her tricks. ;)
I do wonder though, since Bogart was a rescue... which was worse- his first home, or his life with Markle?
Wouldn't be surprised if she tried to get Bogart back (what a grand photo-op!) and the dog cowered before her and his second rescuers were like "eff that."
I was wrong.
It looks like the 10 edition may have come out in 2014 or 15 (I looked at the date from the instructions and there was youtube for a slightly different version but was listed as a 10 edition).
So that dating would be wrong for MM. But Doria has family who may have kids or the kids of a very close friend.
I don't know (like so many things about this whole saga) I just don't see MM being up for used toys at all, let alone the idea of risking a potential photo op showing less than perfection. Perfect baby, perfect address, cars, house, lifestyle and then a used toy?
How would the the baby respond to a drone that an adult would not (especially if she knew that there had been prior issues with drones and that MM is a real stickler for control of image)? Wouldn't she be moving faster and and away from a drone, not toward it (if it was from a drone)?
Thank you for the information about Tyler Perry’s partner and son, who is now six. The two partners seem like they are still very much together, At least there is no mention of a break up on Tyler’s Wiki page. I assume they are all together in Atlanta. Mr. Perry bought the Mulholland Estates house in September 2017, Less than three years ago, and it’s unclear whether he’s ever actually lived there. He has bought and sold several properties in the Atlanta area in recent years. If Tyler‘s little boy ever lived in that house, He would’ve been over three at the time and probably too big for the car stroller, especially since his father is 6’5”. He apparently left all the furnishings, so there might of been some old little boy toys in the garage or house. Still this particular model car was brought out more than four years before Tyler Perry’s son was born, and I assume the recall what happened not too long after it was released. This seems like a dinky thing to worry about, And the corona is making everything Unusual. If this little car predates even Mr. Perry’s ownership of the house how does 10 years old and has been hanging around in the garage since then, it seems like it would’ve been pretty dusty and dirty and used. Arriving in the middle of lock down it would’ve been impossible to do a run to a toy store, but making do with what’s on hand, and being happy to do so doesn’t really seem like a Meg MO. This is a woman Who spend 1,000,000 pounds of clothing should never wear more than once.
segment I am referring to starts atound 17:30 ,check it out
Desmond Tutu baby and Duck Rabbit baby who I think are the same child was most definitely not a blonde let alone a strawberry blonde. Those babies were brunettes. I've heard of babies coloring and features darkening but not lightening over time.
I don't think you can see Archie's hair in the Buggy pics. I could be wrong but it looks like he is wearing some sort of headband underneath the cap to protect his ears while swimming. Something like this:
Swimming Headband
I also thought the buggy baby had a headband or toque or something under the hat.
She should really sprinkle some on Harry’s pate.
And on their bank balance! Lol
Whatever this Archie is wearing, he looks too big for this outfit.
Beyond that, Meg sells all their photos. Doria is a shadow figure in her life. In and out, in and out. Thomas had a lot to say about Megs. Where did he go?
The Archie debacle is due to his incompetent mother, not sharing enough detail of a private/public royal child to make the narrative at least normal.
She flew from house to house in his first supposed year. The larger family doesn’t acknowledge him at all. It’s all very strange behavior, if you want to kill speculation.
I agree that the Archie story is strange, particularly since Meg has never used him to merch.
She does love to merch, and baby clothes are a profitable market.
I saw a production of this last year - the actor playing drag queen Lola was much prettier and had far better legs than Meghanprettier
Yes, I too have difficulty trying to locate where the photo of Archie & Doria was taken, I can't see that drain either. I've looked at a satellite photo but nothing corresponds with it. The house is at the southern end of Hastain Trail if you want to look at the satellite photo.
On another note, since Archie is walking shouldn't he have lost some weight? Usually baby lose some fat when they start walking.
Bogart was a 6 week old puppy when she acquired him. I think you may be correct in thinking she tried to get him back and the new owners refused to hand him over. Neve believed the story about HM's dogs taking instantly to Meghan - those dogs rarely took to anyone and HM does not like other people to pet and make a fuss of her dogs.
I also enjoyed "Kinky Boots". Wayne Brady, the very heterosexual US game show host, played the Lola role for a while as well.
While ordinary people may have been locked down in LA for a few months after their arrival there, they didn't seem to be. Recall we have those pics of H&M driving with security guards to a park to walk their dogs (despite living on a multi-acre private property.) Plus they pranced all over to do one-off charity activities with their security. And I'm sure they've done plenty of online ordering. M's cheap white linen dress screamed mail order and no ironing. And just about everything else we've seen her wearing in California (from those hideous green food-delivery cargo/parachute pants to her various madonna looks to the blue silk top from this season) we've not seen before so she's managed to shop for herself somehow. Harry not so much.
While I don't believe everything I read, we've had Archie's "organic" upbringing (organic cotton blankets, vegan nursery paint, organic foods, no-sugar added birthday cake) shoved down our throats enough to think M is behind that view of baby-raising. So seeing him in an old plastic push buggy? One that if from 2009-2010 probably didn't belong to Tyler's child who was born in late 2014. And yes, someone could have given TP a used toy too, but do friends/relatives of people who live in $18 million houses usually pass on used toys? Maybe, I guess, but it seems odd. The utility bills for that house must run over $1000 a month so worrying about the environmental effects of filling the landfill with cast-off's or worrying about saving on a $50 toy seems a bit unlikely.
It also seems odd to me Archie (supposedly 14 months) looks almost too big to fit into a buggy that's supposed to fit kids up to 3 years old. (If the child were standing, it looks like he'd come up to nearly Doria's waist. At 14 months? Doria is short but at this rate Archie will be taller than she is by age 7.) His sweater seems too small too and why is he in a long-sleeved sweater when Doria is in shorts and tank top? For sun protection?
Doesn't really look like the Duck Rabbit Archie to me. But the photo is blurry and push-buggy Archie's face is lop-sided... it looks puffy-cheeked only on one side. Doria's left hand looks odd too so I don't know that it's unaltered.
https://goo.gl/maps/4BvnLmPBtPbVj7Jj8
(I'm also assuming I have the right house in the first place lol)
Happy Birthday to Camilla, and me.
She must be a good un,
we share the same birth date 😉
Prince George turns seven on Wednesday,
no doubt new photos will emerge of Archie,
cleaning the pool, sweeping leaves?
You could be right about the black stripe. I do think you've got the right house. But if you look at the Doria/Archie picture up in the upper right corner, it doesn't look like the black stripe is in the center of that space as is shown in the satellite photo. I don't know how to tell on my phone when a satellite photo was taken. But this one doesn't show the tacky fencing H&M added. So maybe whatever the black line is was added more recently? I don't see anything else in the satellite photo it could be though.
Husband's mother was cook to the local `Big Hoose' in the 1930s; he remembers having things that his parents couldn't possibly have afforded - a rocking horse and a tiny violin, for example. I gather that Royal ladies pass on clothes in a similar manner - only these then go quietly into the `dress agency' market as it would be a very big gaffe for the recipient to wear them.
What happens in the US?
Could this have any bearing on the subject?
Very nice Lurking. I think you've got it (an overhead was better than the angle shot I found).
still unanswered
why a used toy?
when was this taken (remember the comments about how hot it was recently)?
What is it with the idea of dressing the kid in clothes that are too small much of the time?
Everyone is making excellent points. Megs is a merching machine. Looks like Harry is no go on that with Archie. Both wanting him to be raised ‘normal’. Please that’s Harry all the way. Also, it’s Meghan number 3452, who tells Harry she wants Archie to be private as well because her Ego is enormous and cannot live in a house with 2 blood Royals without remembering she is common! Lol! Meghan does have a story for everything.
It got me thinking today about Harry and Meghan. It occurred to me she possibly didn’t know Harry was this dim. Sure, he had money and jets and Botswana and uber Fame, but when you marry someone As fast as they did, you figure out Who they are afterwards.
So what if What we are actually seeing here is Meghan reacting to how utterly incompetent Harry is? It would explain a lot of the charged and erratic behavior, especially with a newborn. The husband can’t earn his own keep, he doesn’t know how the world works, and according to Meghan doesn’t know how the monarchy works. If I were her, rushing into things like marriage, I would be freaked out too.
Now we know Meghan is a controlling narcissist, so that’s the bigger play here causing the chaos, but I do think she realized how dim Harry was after the fact and it sent her panicking. She just comes across as someone panicking to success to me.
And wow, Harry eligible bachelor #1, exposed for who he is. Doubt he’d be able to get a date nowadays!
We've been told this is Doris (that's what I call her) - but are we certain? It could be Doris but have we ever seen her from this angle before? OK, she's got the same bunions but I always thought she was more, er, substantial than this.
Speaking of which, perhaps the child's bulkiness is because it drives everywhere.
Nothing is what it seems with these people, especially if they tell us what they want us to believe. Remember photo of `Harry with little boy in Canada' which many of us suspect was really `Harry with little girl in Turkey'?
To me, this could be almost any black help with almost any white child.
The best birthday present any of us could wish for is Megsie getting her comeuppance. Bring it on!
For mundane or more worn items, we have charities like you do, substitute Goodwill for Oxfam, where people donate, slight refurbishment is done by the handicapped, and the items are sold in a bare-bones shop. Then there are the other charities who act like charities but who probably tear up the clothes and sell the fabric for rags. These are the ones who solicit heavily and send trucks around every other month.
It's the nouveau riche, the flashy, the insecure, dare I bring up again the Kardashians, that constantly buy and display new things. Above and below them, items are re-used one way or another.
Hot news from DM
Bea and Edo married in secret ceremony (with the HM there)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8533575/Princess-Beatrice-marries-Italian-property-developer-Edoardo-Mapelli-Mozzi.html
Thank you @WildBoar
Reckon Megs needs to steady on with
her bronzer.
She may be mistaken for Archies nanny...
Q. Who might this be?
`He also campaigned vigorously against the slave trade based in the city of Bristol. At the time people who could not pay their debts were being sold into slavery in Ireland. (He) spent time in Bristol, preached sermons attacking slavery and eventually slaves held captive in Bristol were released. At the time slavery wasn’t considered immoral, so his stand was a brave one.’
Ans. Wulfstan of Worcester ( became Bishop of Worcester in 1062) the only Anglo Saxon Bishop allowed to remain in place after 1066
http://www.bbc.co.uk/herefordandworcester/content/articles/2007/03/13/aboliltion_wulfstan_feature.shtml
Q.Who else was involved in this cause as well?
Ans: Lanfranc
`The first Norman-appointed Archbishop of Canterbury, Lanfranc, convinced a reluctant William the Conqueror to prohibit the lucrative slave trade. Yet like most of Europe Britain lived with a memory of institutionalized slavery, the byproduct as well as the catalyst of endemic internal and external warfare.’
http://www.inthemedievalmiddle.com/2007/06/medieval-race-and-slavery.html#:~:text=The%20first%20Norman-appointed%20Archbishop%20of%20Canterbury%2C%20L
Hearty congrats to Bride and Groom!
Well done Bea
Is Megs now going to announce Marchess,
due around the megxit exit?
Pictures please!
Thank you for mentioning these two fine churchmen. I would just like to add for edification that they were Catholics and in the case of Lanfranc was Archbishop of Canterbury in the Catholic faith not Church of England. Notably St. Patrick when young was a slave. Notably the Catholic Church was one if not the first institution to take a stand against slavery eventually the Pope issued an edict that anyone owning slaves would be excommunicated.
and then Meghan said: - "Yes, thank you"
Happy Birthday Camilla!
Congratulations Bea-Edo! I cannot wait for the wedding pics. Thank goodness Rache was on another continent and couldn't pull a pregnancy jacket flick on their special day. Here's hoping she doesn't try to take over the internet in retaliation.
Happy birthday! 🎂
I have no issue with used toys whatever a family's income level. In fact, I support it because it is best for the environment. What I find interesting is how Meg manages a 180 for everything Archie. Something bizarre is going on with his childrearing.
Happy Birthday girl! Thank you for keeping us laughing!
From Buckingham palace: A photograph will not be released until tomorrow because the couple do not want to overshadow Captain Sir Thomas Moore's investiture at Windsor Castle this afternoon.
Oh, my, I certainly hope so, too. I don't want to see them in any pictures.
Megs is not in competition with Beatrice so no big deal to Megs that she and Harry were not invited. Out of sight and out of mind, and a continent away. Missing out on Edo&Bea might bother Harry a bit, but he chose a wayward life in California.
Thankfully, Meghan wasn’t able to show up in a loose-fitting outfit to flick her coat and steal the spotlight from the bride and groom because she and Handbag likely weren’t even notified it was happening.
And if they had been notified by being invited, even if it was only as a courtesy, Meghan would have done SOMETHING to try to tweak the RF, like spending time at her pool in a tiny bikini after notifying her favorite LA pap agency to fly a drone over Tyler’s house to cause a fake furor by “invading her privacy” to capture the moment in one of her patented self-serving attempts to overshadow the wedding and any wedding photo releases that may come from the palace.
Way to go, Beatrice and Edo. Congratulations!
Touche, Beatrice!
That's right - almost everybody in England was Catholic (apart from Jews) for nearly 900 hundred years. This came about in 673AD, when the whole of what would become England opted for the Catholic, as opposed the Celtic, church. It was more independent of Rome though than the church we oldies might recall from before the Vatican Council of 1963.
This might help to explain why some of us have a very long view of history.In Bridport, Dorset for example, there's a family firm of butchers that dates back over 500 years, possibly earlier still, before Columbus got to America, if records of market stall-holders are reliable.
Re the pics of the Harkle Hitching - it could be to stop her whingeing/cut the ground from under her feet in case she tried moaning to the court again that she was being discriminated against.
The Mail can say - `Look, we're being nice to you but it's the public that hates you!'
By the way, the country greatly approves of the release of the wedding pics tomorrow in order not to overshadow the Colonel Tom's investiture.
I am no longer surprised they managed to create a hero Harry image from the pile of manure. That royal PR people are blooming geniuses.
I made my mention not because you didn't know...because you know what seems like every bit of history of Great Britain and I am always impressed! I just made the statement as many assume when they hear 'Archbishop of Canterbury' and naturally think of COE when discussing things relating to church history in England. As always thanks for the historical discussions!
TQ, PP, PA, Fergie, Eugenie, and Jack are 6 from her side. No way H&M were invited or, I suspect, even told in advance. W&K may not have been invited either. (I'm not sure how close Will and Bea have been in recent years anyway.) Bea & Edo may have had good friends they wanted to include plus his immediate family, of course.
Yes, I forgot about Wolfie's mother. I didn't count Wolfie because I wasn't sure if he should count as a "guest" as I assumed he was still the "best man" as was the initial plan.
But counting the two of them, and counting his parents and their escorts, and counting a best friend or two, there wouldn't have been room for either the Sussexes or the Cambridges, IMO.
About that stroller, it does look rather used, perhaps Doria got it from a thrift srore or it is a hand-me-down from a neighbor or church. It looks like it has spent many days in a yard in full sun.
Or if you do believe Archie is a baby for hire, maybe the stroller came-with, the way Barbie's outfits come with accessories (or they used to, years ago.)
It looks to me like the baby is looking in front of him, not up as some have said...i saw the photo on jerseydeane, i think it was. Actually, Doria looks pretty fit for any age really, a slight outit like that hides nothing! Yoga is her friend.
Markle was not going to ruin another York bride’s day with her antics. I’m betting the Sussexes knew nothing about it. Harry used to be close to his York cousins, But he’s turned his back on his family and chose the enemy, so he is no longer entitled to know about Family business. The Toxic Two are terrible company at any social occasion, so it must be a relief to not be obligated to include them at family functions anymore.
If the Cambridges were absent, perhaps it’s because HM has been entrusting William with the investiture for some time now. Maybe he was busy knighting Col. Tom? I have never seen Charles doing an investiture, and he would be the logical next in line to do them in his mother’s stead. Giving William that responsibility displays a stamp of approval upon his current and future authority. He does look very regal when passing them out.
The Queen knighted Sir Tom herself. Makes sense to me she'd do it herself if at all possible given his age and kind of contribution.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-53442746
Things have kind of collapsed on account of my supplier and the 'rona and my finances so ha it's real bad. :)
But thank you for asking. I now need to climb up out of this hole and find a job while trying to get my product to the USA from India. It breaks my heart. Thanks again.
today moves Harry and Megsy closer to obscurity. Amen
A latte to you for your drill suggestion of “Active Toddler Archie, Sold With Accessories!” ROFL
@WBBM
Garage sales, or yard sales as we call them, are a fixture every weekend When the weather is decent, or they were pre-Covid, and probably will be again. Children’s items, including clothes and toys are always huge sellers. We’ve also got thriving children’s consignment stores that deal and gently used children’s items. Even moms that can afford new patronize these, because kids grow so fast, a lot of nicer clothes can be barely worn before the kid moves onto the next size. And children’s items get passed around among family and friends, from church jumble sales (we usually call them “rummage sales” stateside)...There are any number of ways Hand me down kids’ stuff is in circulation. If Meg were a normal mother, I wouldn’t think anything of it. Doria may have brought over that stroller from someone she knows. I’m all for a perfectly good stroller not going to waste, Even if it’s a bit worn, a baby doesn’t know the difference between used and new, And there’s still fun to be had with the item. I just think from what we know of Meg that she A. Will have cut ties long ago from any LA based friends Who would’ve had a baby stroller to lend her, regardless of who she may have gotten to email People magazine on her behalf Last year when she was living in England, and B. Having Arch photographed in a visibly used older model item Is pretty useless for merching purposes...Unless this photo is crafted as part of Meg’s ongoing victim narrative—Look, grandpa Charles—We are reduced to having Archie’s barefoot grandma push him around in a used buggy—send more money!
If this were a normal family, I’d be like “oh, how nice… Look at grandma and Arch enjoying some time together.“ The fact that the wagon was a used wouldn’t even compute. But it’s Meg we are talking about so I remain deeply suspicious about the authenticity of the experience reportedly captured in this fuzzy image from a drone. Meg could take a page out of Catherine’s book and take a nice clear close-up shot of Archie and grandma playing herself. Why doesn’t she? The suggestion that hairy is adamant about denying her permission to do so, and she’s actually listening to him is droll. Harry may object strenuously to photos of Archie, particularly if Archie is fake...But why would anyone credit the Handbag that trails listlessly behind Meg in a daze, Or the Robo zombie that delivers his filmed messages against a brown wall With having enough agency And testicular fortitude to prohibit Meg from doing anything where their son is concerned? Harry seems to be a victim of Stockholm syndrome; The captive does not give orders to the captor...That’s not how it works.
Did they state a reason why they weren’t there? ;o/ I don’t think it was because of Harry. Only up to 30 was allowed to attend so it’s very likely they kept the wedding as small as possible due to Covid.
Also no way they were even told in advance about the wedding as they have shown themselves time and again to be deceitful schemers. Megsy would’ve been papped going out in a giant maternity coat looking all coy and smug.
I loved HM's outfit - if only my life had occasion for a hat like that, said she, wistfully.
Of course the wedding had to be in accordance with the current distancing guidelines - presumably the total number of people allowed would include the clergy and organist. No choir because it's `no singing allowed' or `aloud', come to that. Tough on the Cambridges though - again, don't want to give That Woman anything she can twist to her advantage.
The Harkles can't have known about it - they haven't pulled any stunts.
----------------
Thanks, CatEyes, I don't know all that much - Often I know what to look up and where to find it it but this time I'd just received an email from the British Pilgrimage Trust with a `virtual' pilgrimage to Worcester & that led to the good bishop, who I then looked up and found the fascinating snippet about slavery!
https://britishpilgrimage.org/the-bpt/
Wulstane even has his `own' chant: Wulstane presul inclite. It's on `Chant in Honour of Anglo Saxon Saints' on Youtube
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_mfp2B1uRz66OxT3NXRlUAB6z_H7tJZrI0
Very soothing - just what we need.
I think it's sweet it was Wolfie, her parents, Prince Phillip, and HTMQ. I also think it's a lovely touch that HMTQ gave her blessing to Bea-Edo when there was no need to give it.
https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/2020071793691/queen-wedding-gift-princess-beatrice/
I see that the Cambridge's did. Hmmm....
Cayman Islands bank account? We don't know why she was refused a bank account with Coutts. In these days of electronic transfers, that account could have become a fast conduit to move money out of Britain and hide income.
$3 million from Disney? Heck, half that could have bought a lot of bots and followers.
I think the stroller as hand me down would come through Doria who is not uber rich and would accept it in the spirit it was given; not from a friend offered to Meghan, MM would want a freebie to merch, pretty much like a YouTuber or Instagram influencer.
As too the toy stroller, IIRC months ago there was a quick and disappeared article about one of Doria's relatives visiting her with a child (step child, grandchild, can't remember) and the article went out of its way to point out the child wasn't Archie. Perhaps Doria's relatives donated some toys.
I just can't believe MeMe's vanity would allow her (true) child to accept used toys--she's a Duchess after all! We've seen a few pictures/videos of MeMe with Archie but they were PR pieces with Archie as an attention drawing prop. Have we ever seen a picture of MeMe (or even Harry) actually playing with the child, interacting lovingly as normal parents do? No. (I'm thinking like Kate at the polo match playing with Louis and her sunglasses).
Only Doria has been pictured having normal interactions with a child.
Finally, re Bogart the dog not liking Harry. The headline was " "Meghan 'won't take her beloved rescue Bogart back because he doesn't like Prince Harry'" " should read as follows:
"UK won't take the beloved Prince back because we don't like Meghan"
Happy Birthday!! 🎂🎈
I am very glad Meghan does not have instagram/twitter :)
Picture to be released tomorrow, and I am certain we will see one from Bea and Edo too, right Meg? 😐
Mel: Meghan and Harry does not have twitter or instagram so they can't post a birthday greeting to Camilla.
.........
Ah, yes. I forgot about that.
Interesting that they didn't hijack some unsuspecting charity's account for it, though.
I can't figure out why they don't just open accounts under their own names. It would be sooo much easier.
@Justharry
@Meghanthemagnificent
The media reports there were only 20 guests. So, Queen and Duke of Edinburgh, Andrew, Sarah, Edo's parents, Eugenie and husband, Wolfie and his mother come to 10. Who else was there? We will probably know tomorrow.
They really kept it to the absolute bare minimum. Great from at least three points: COVID, taxpayers money, no need to invite the Harkles. Still disappointed Wills and Kate were not there, as well as Charles and Camilla. Or perhaps Charles was? Future King is the uncle after all
"Still disappointed Wills and Kate were not there, as well as Charles and Camilla. Or perhaps Charles was? Future King is the uncle after all."
Whether it's true or not, it's widely believed there's some tension between Charles and the Yorks and that Charles kept the York sisters from being working royals. And as others have said, there are reports there's been tension between the Cambridges and the York princesses. I don't believe W&K invited Fergie to their wedding either. And that was a huge guest list and not a state wedding. If none of those folks were invited it wouldn't surprise me. The advantage of a tiny guest list is nobody in the family should be offended IMO.
It was reported that Fergie was not invited to W&K wedding because PP refused to be in the same room as her. He has (had?) never forgiven her "indiscretions" that caused embarrassment for BRF. Either he has softened his stance or the rumours about dementia are true and he had no clue who she was at the wedding. Either way, I'm happy Be a had her grandparents there and M&H weren't there. Really what other kind of wedding could they have had? Limiting the guest list to 20 solved a lot of problems.
OT. as I was typing this I put down M&H but then I thought of all the other monikers used. Please please please feel free to add as I've forgotten some of the more humourous ones:
Cringe and Ginge
Woke and Joke
Yes, I knew PP was supposedly still upset with Sarah. But it was also reported W&K had free reign of the guest list so I don't know. But I kind of doubt PP currently doesn't know who Sarah is. Or was so far gone with dementia when he attended Eugenie's wedding in 2018 he didn't know her back then either. But I agree with you it's very nice their grandparents could attend both of the York princesses' weddings.
Put some shoes on.
Happy Birthday!
your take on the Duo,
is always so true, oh,
and pithy and funny, hee, hee!
Bea issued a statement that she would only release the wedding photos tomorrow so as not to overshadow her grandmother knighting Tom (now Sir Thomas) Moore. Classy and just the opposite of what MM would do. Hard to believe that she and her sister were actually raised by PA and Fergie.
Hijackals
Absolutely perfect in this case.
Meghan and Harry does not have twitter or instagram so they can't post a birthday greeting to Camilla.
Ah, yes. I forgot about that.
I can't figure out why they don't just open accounts under their own names. It would be sooo much easier.
It must be killing Megsy that she has no social media, no twitter or Instagram outlet. The reason H/M don't, is that the negative comments would sink both accounts. It would be as bad as their DM comment section. They would have to hire people to weed out the Instagram comments. With their retired Instagram the BRF paid for these monitors/deleters. With Twitter, you can block people but it sounds tedious.
Thus--- No social media for Megs. No Tig 2.0 either, it would be a magnet for ridicule and abuse.
In contrast, the British public like Beatrice and Edo because they behave well. They received very nice DM comments today.
So, I just read that Megan won't be taking back her dog, Bogart, because he does not like Harry. Is she STILL a patron of an animal welfare charity, Mayhew? How will they spin that? Someone should set up a Bogart youtube account with a hostage dog talking to the camera in front of a beige wall telling all kinds of tales.
Bea marrying a guy more wealthy than Prince Harry.
After Meghan threw her tantrum in her lawsuit over Bea, there is no chance she was invited! And, of course, they had to keep it from Harry. They figured out it was Meghan leaking everything! She didn’t know about this, at all. She must be fuming. It’s so funny. Can you imagine being an HRH duchess And not being invited to the exclusive secret Princess and close cousin of your husband’s wedding?
The RF are geniuses and all class. This is what happens when you listen to those men in suits, Meghan. They elevate you.
It is so profound that they pulled this off, and are letting the Harkles deal with the consequences of their atrocious behavior. You know society is going to be abuzz that Harry wasn’t invited and everyone knows it is because of low rent Meghan, pulling Fergie antics before a divorce.
Harry knows what this means in terms of Society. Harry is going to start really feeling the pinch in the coming months.
After all the slights, Eugiene’s wedding, the court case throwing them under the bus, disrespecting their beloved Grandmother, humiliating their cousin Harry in front of all aristocrats and friends.
This is only the beginning. And I’m totally here for it!
Congratulations to Bea. Her headshot was beautiful and now it’s all making sense!
And she could set up a new Tig blog and not allow comments on it.
Maybe he decided to be in the same room with Fergie is better than being in the same room as H or MM. Remember, he was seen being driven away from Windsor Castle before the summit for Megsxit started.
Lattes and birthday cake all around to celebrate Magatha’s birthday & Also the long-awaited nuptials of Princess Beatrice of York & her Edo.
I’ll even spring for Champers and I look forward to seeing any pictures forthcoming of the happy occasion. I’ve always said Bea would regret it Terribly if her grandfather passed away before she got married. PP has stared the Grim Reaper in the face and said, “Go away, you bastard—I’ll send for you when I’m good and ready.” So glad he could attend. Weddings are important to him; he endured Harrys despite being in excruciating pain from hip surgery.
Magatha, I enjoy your witty limericks so much—you inspire me to try some myself, but you have a gift! Hope your Covid birthday yields some good things, And you have a better year to look forward to. I wish that for us all. Except for the Harkles. For them, I wish they get what’s coming to them.
@lizzie
I believe that William had invited his Aunt Sarah to his wedding, along with the rest of the York family, but the Queen forbade her to attend owing to more financial shenanigans Fergie had pulled. She had been caught selling access to Andrew for trade deals, and was in the doghouse again. It’s true Philip does not tolerate her at family gatherings, but in this case, the queen had the final say, despite William’s Intentions for his aunt to attend.
If Bea had gotten a ceremony like Eugenie’s, The Cambridges probably would’ve attended, but given the limited space of this event, their absence allowed for two other guests who may be closer to the couple, like some of the groom’s friends.
I had the same thought! How that must sting Hairy
Royal heartbreak: Kate Middleton’s ‘cold relationship’ with Eugenie and Beatrice exposed
KATE MIDDLETON apparently struggles to get along with Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, and an unearthed report claims Prince William's cousins have felt overshadowed by the Duchess of Cambridge for years.
By KATE NICHOLSON
00:01, Fri, Apr 17, 2020 | UPDATED: 15:41, Fri, Apr 17, 2020
Kate had a long eight-year romance with William prior to their wedding in 2011, meaning she had plenty of time to get to know the rest of his family. However, many have speculated that there is a lukewarm relationship between Kate and William’s cousins. The Duke of Cambridge used to spend plenty of time with Prince Andrew’s daughters in his youth, but since he married Kate, the two younger royals have been pushed out of the spotlight.
According to reporter Catherine Ostler writing in the Daily Mail in May 2016, there is a clear division between the future Queen Consort and Beatrice and Eugenie.
Discussing a particular image from 2016, where Prince Andrew’s daughters are seen walking behind instead of next to the Duchess of Cambridge, she noted there was clearly “a rather chilly relationship”.
She explained: “The three women weren’t walking together, gossiping companionably, as you might imagine, say, Zara Phillips, Beatrice and Eugenie might have done. [Edited to add:Kate was walking the required three steps behind William. The picture appears in the story, link is below this excerpt]
“More than that, the Princesses were giving the Duchess what would appear to be some rather chilly looks.”
Gathered for a celebration of the Queen’s 90th birthday, Kate was pictured walking alone ahead of the two sisters.
Ms Ostler continued: “Poor Beatrice and Eugenie, despite being dressed up to the nines in a £1,700 Burberry dress and a £300 Alice + Olivia printed skirt respectively, simply couldn’t compete.
“As a result, the atmosphere between the three young royal women looked decidedly cool.
“Some say that this froideur, on what was supposed to be an idyllic occasion, a celebration of the Queen’s 90th birthday, is not new.”
The article pointed out that these tensions are “rooted in far more than mere sartorial competitiveness”, with resentment growing over what the York sisters see as Kate’s “preferential treatment” by the rest of the Firm. [End excerpt]
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1269090/kate-middleton-news-princess-beatrice-princess-eugenie-distant-relationship-spt
And Prince Andrew resented it too, constantly complaining because his daughters were princesses of the blood unlike some other people. Edward has been said to insist on his privileges too at least as much as Charles although Edward was, to some,decidedly superfluous to requirements as far as the succession goes. Sophie may have restored some lustre to his coronet (earls don't wear tiaras, do they?) through her steady good works after she got past her own PR kerfuffle.
"I believe that William had invited his Aunt Sarah to his wedding, along with the rest of the York family, but the Queen forbade her to attend..."
Wow. Never heard that. Sounds tacky.
I mean, I understand royals getting upset with Fergie but 1) I didn't realize by 2011---16 years after the divorce--- people still would pay her for royal access (except that PA must have been complicit if it happened.)
And 2) since nearly 2,000 people attended W&K's ceremony, uninviting somebody was pretty extreme. I could see not inviting her to a reception since many of the ceremony guests weren't invited to W&K's 600-person reception (I believe Fergie wasn't invited to H&M's reception either) But rescinding an invitation to the ceremony? Wow. If the story is true, it makes me wonder more than I had about TQ's somewhat soft treatment of H&M.
I don’t believe anything published in the Express.
If Kate and William were not at the wedding, there is surely an innocent explanation.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5140059/Meghan-Markles-parents-Tom-Dorias-wedding-revealed.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5130473/Meghan-Markles-upwardly-mobile-family.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5773077/Meghan-Markles-great-great-uncle-played-against-legends-Babe-Ruth-Lou-Gehrig.html
Re. Fergie
I agree wholeheartedly that it seemed especially cold for the Queen to bar Fergie from attendance at her nephew William’s wedding. Her absence was much commented upon, and her present family members would have felt the embarrassment keenly I’m sure. I remember thinking that Beatrice and Eugenie looked a bit forlorn sitting by themselves. I felt that the queen should have buried the hatchet for the day at least. TQ Is actually quite fond of Sarah, and invites her to Balmoral during the weeks PP will not be in residence. But at the time of the wedding, Sarah‘s latest discussion was pretty fresh, and since Williams wedding was an occasion of state, I suppose HM could not be seen to condone Sarah‘s actions by allowing her to be present. Even though it’s been 16 years since the divorce, and Sarah has absolutely no official function at court, she and Andrew resumed their relationship long ago unofficially And Sarah lives with Andrew at Royal Lodge most of the time, although she was staying somewhere else at the time of Wills’ wedding. It’s an open secret that she’s there, and she just takes care to steer clear of Philip, which isn’t too hard these days since he was living at Sandringham. But now he’s in Windsor again, so QT is the word. I’m sure he’s well aware that York divorce didn’t really take; As long as he doesn’t have to be in the same room with that woman, it is what it is. Despite mutual affairs on both sides… John Bryan and Epstein’s girls, et al... Andrew and Sarah seem to be a real love match, and I don’t know if they’re interested in getting remarried again, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they did after Elizabeth and Philip are gone. Despite the scandal, I don’t think the divorce was their idea in the first
place. So Fergie very much still has his ear, and I’m sure they have spent time planning their daughters weddings together. Now that Andrew is in the royal doghouse too, I suppose he will clean to her tighter. Who else does he get to see much of any more?
The Queen didn’t bar Fergie to William and Catherine’s wedding. It wasn’t a state wedding and The Queen allowed them to invite who they wanted. ;o)
One thing--like @Raspberry Ruffle, I didn't think W&K's wedding was a state occasion... I mean, it was a big deal, of course, but not a state occasion.
--------
Has anyone mentioned this article from today? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/17/meghan-markle-blames-deterioration-close-relationship-father/
I'm not sure why much of the financial information is relevant re: the lawsuit, but I found this very interesting:
"While the young Meghan Markle was at college, they said, her father did not “pay for all” tuition fees, with her mother also contributing, along with a scholarship and “work-study programme whereby income she made from working on campus after class was applied directly to supplement and lower her tuition costs”.
While Mr Markle took out a loan from Northwestern University for tuition costs for his daughter, his daughter “began making voluntary financial contributions to her father” once she started earning to given “personal financial support”.
As she started out as an actress, it is claimed, the Duchess “always maintained full-time jobs while auditioning, both as a professional calligrapher as well as working in a restaurant”.
What happened to she paid for her own education? And how did Doria contribute while filing for bankruptcy? And later M was employed as a full-time calligrapher? Yeah, right.
Probably more to do with the lies she told Harry coming back to haunt her. No family.
Obviously finances and payments and support is going to come up in the lawsuit prove that her father was a pretty good dad to her. Megan going to the PR to twist things as just to get in front of it with Harry.
Her whole life is about keeping one lie in front of another at this point.
I agree. But if the article is accurate about the court filings, that means
1. She outright lied in her SA speech about paying for her education herself. I'm sure whatever the scholarship she got was worth, she counted that amount as a "payment" she made. And gee, how generous later on she sometimes reimbursed Thomas for payments he was still making on HER student loans ..
2. She seems to be saying that since Thomas got paid for interviews, and he talked about her, that's the same as her giving him money for his hospital bill (and apparently is an admission he did have a hospital admission close to the wedding) I guess that is along the lines of saying even if her wedding cost the taxpayers, "the public" made money on the wedding. Creative accounting indeed.
I can see the older children being unhappy if their dad paid for college and a wedding for the youngest child but didn't do the same for them. (I have no idea what he paid for for his older children.)
If he truly did not pay for the same things for his older children but did for his youngest child, that seems unfair to the older children.
@KC
I don’t believe anything published in the Express.
If Kate and William were not at the wedding, there is surely an innocent explanation.
"They don't like each other that much" is not necessarily evil. But I do take note of your opinion about the Express. And everyone here usually quotes the Daily Mail although that may have to do with interest in the lawsuit.
July 17, 2020 at 11:58 PM
I think the TRUTH happened. Lady C mentioned Thomas having receipts for payments. Court date for the lawsuit might be drawing near....
@ Lizzie and @ Raspberry Ruffle (and any other NUtty who's interested)
I think you'll find that W & C's wedding was a state occasion.
This is why they had Westminster Abbey and the red carpet - William is the 2nd heir to the throne. This is also why PA had his wedding there - at the time he was also the 2nd heir.
Do you remember all the crowned heads (I thought Queen Maxima's outfit was particularly nice) and the foreign Heads of State? That's why they were all gathered there - it was a state occasion.
In the meantime, US magazines are printing sugar-sweet pieces without a hint of the real Meghan and minus any info on the trail of destruction she leaves behind her.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1269090/kate-middleton-news-princess-beatrice-princess-eugenie-distant-relationship-spt
Multiple sources from Wikipedia to The Guardian say W&K's wasn't a state occasion. Will wasn't (and still isn't) the heir apparent. Therefore it wouldn't have been a state occasion. Supposedly it was a "semi-state" occasion (which isn't really an official category so far as I can tell.)
Prince Andrew was not 2nd in line for the throne when he married. By the time he married in 1986, both Will and Harry had been born pushing Andrew down to 4th. I do remember at the time there was some criticism that Andrew's wedding was "too grand" for the 4th in line.
As much as I dislike Meghan, and as much as I think she unfairly targets members of the RF, I don't think the stories about a chilliness between Kate and the York princesses can be laid at Meghan's feet.
See below for a link to a DM article from May 2016 (the absolute earliest M may have met Harry) that says the same thing the April 2020 Daily Express article said (plus more).
The story about Kate's 2008 roller derby charity event and Bea not being told it was a 1980s "costume party" and ending up crying in the bathroom has been around since 2008. I don't know if it's all true (Kate would have been about 27 years old, Bea only 20 at the time) but that one isn't M's fault. And the story about Pippa not wanting to sit in the second row is hardly new either. Maybe M got the Express to republish old stuff but she didn't create the stories.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3613581/A-chilly-relationship-s-picture-spoke-volumes-frostiness-Kate-Fergie-s-girls-reveal-lies-it.html
What you say may very well be true.
I didn't post the DM 2016 article for the truth of it (I have no idea what's true), but simply to point out that the things said in the 2020 DE article pre-dated Meghan and to point out many other things had been said about the York-Kate relationship in real time long before M. I was responding to a post that suggested the DE article was simply M shooting at Kate from across the pond.
While it's speculative to suggest it because I have no real evidence, it does seem to me M is jealous of Kate. But the DE article is just a rehash of the 2016 DM article so the DE stories didn't originally come from M or from her henchmen (unless we're going to veer into real tin-hat territory and think the "capture Harry" plot started long long ago!)
------
Noted.
I think just because Meghan considers herself a spin master, unfortunately for her, it doesn’t make it true. I have a relative that is the same exact personality as Meghan. She has done horrible twisted things to me and others, under the guise that she thinks it’s ‘what’s best’ for people. Absolutely zero self reflection. They cannot accept any criticism whatsoever, it’s always twisted into a completely different narrative.
If these people were healthier, we would see more Barack Obama’s. Whatever anyone thinks of the guy, he’s a great orator, and he motivated a lot of people. That’s Meghan if she wasn’t so screwed up and focused on stealing from others. At the end, that’s what’s going on here, she steals and claims it was rightfully hers for whatever reason she can muster.
Regardless, her spin of her finances is clear. Her dad took out his own personal loan for her college and she may or may not have sent him money in the future for ANYTHING (maybe Christmas and a birthday, right?) and she will claim it was for her student loans. She apparently did lie in the speech in SA. Why? Because it made it look like she suffered hardship. Funny that should show Harry this woman is just a massive fraud.
I digress.
Actually, I remember the stories about the York girls and Kate at the roller derby and that they predated Markle's reign of terror over the royal family.
I'm sorry I wasn't more clear...I meant that it was possible MM dredged up old gossip and sent a current shot across the pond with it. I agree with you that Markle could have gotten the Express to do a piece on this old gossip. The Express has been doing her bidding for a while now and I believe that reporter, in particular, is a sugar.
I could imagine Meghan (or her lackeys) scouring all the old tabloids for stories to mine and recycle for use in hurting various members of the royal family. Wasn't there a time during the fairly recent Markle-era where there was a sudden flush of stories rehashing the old Waity-Katie tales?
I also agree with Golden Retriever about the DM and their gossip. I'm not sure I believe there are any real problems with Kate and the York girls.
I do however think the DM can be counted on for some good info on Markle. They have printed a lot of background on her that has apparently been true...Lady C used some of it in her book. I've learned to sort of "grade" the DM's articles on the RF and look for their agenda at the time of publication.
This is why they had Westminster Abbey and the red carpet - William is the 2nd heir to the throne. This is also why PA had his wedding there - at the time he was also the 2nd heir.
Prince Charles wedding was a state wedding/occasion because he’s the next direct heir to the throne. William is not.
William is on televised record saying they he (and Catherine) were unsure who to invite. The Queen said to invite who they wanted; friends. Foreign royals are often invited to other royal weddings it does not make it a state wedding. Certain protocols are observed for a state wedding. It only takes a little research to verify a state wedding.
This is from Wikipedia:
The ceremony was attended by the bride's and groom's families, as well as members of foreign royal dynasties, diplomats, and the couple's chosen personal guests. After the ceremony, the couple made the traditional appearance on the balcony of Buckingham Palace. As Prince William was not the heir apparent to the throne, the wedding was not a full state occasion and many details were left to the couple to decide, such as much of the guest list of about 1,900.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedding_of_Prince_William_and_Catherine_Middleton
@KC
I don’t believe anything published in the Express.
I absolutely agree and have repeatedly said so on this blog. :o/ It’s a comic of a newspaper and also Megsy’s mouthpiece.
The Queen has always had a warm and cordial relationship with Fergie. Fergie also has stayed nearby to Sandringham on many occasions since her divorce from Andrew. Fergie also attended Eugenie’s wedding with Prince Philip in attendance.
William’s relationship with Fergie is another matter entirely, it’s been said and reported (books etc) he never forgave her for how she treated his Mother (she mentioned Diana in her book) . Other than that I have no idea why he didn’t want her at his own wedding, but it wasn’t down to The Queen’s request .
"I hear that Westminster Abbey will not ring its bells for Meghan’s birthday next month.
To add insult to injury, it did ring them for the birthday of beleaguered Prince Andrew in February, even though he’d stepped down from royal duties.
They are due to ring for Princess Anne’s birthday, 11 days after Meghan’s."
She's out of the UK now so why would Westminster Abbey will ring its bells for her? Not sure it did before. Hope she gets annoyed.
Dual posting - I'm easily confused by my machine - it takes me to the message from Nutty and it's a real game trying to get back here!
Here goes:
Blogger Wild Boar Battle-maid said...
From NZ Herald - just when you thought it was save to go into the water:
Meghan Markle 'will run for President', royal commentator claims
16 Jul, 2020 11:25am
"Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, said women can look up to PM Jacinda Ardern in the way she “brought New Zealand together to swiftly and boldly tackle Covid-19".
Meghan Markle has her sights set on the White House, according to one royal commentator.
Beverley Turner told UK Channel 5's Jeremy Vine she "has it on good authority" that Meghan is planning a run for the presidency, according to the Daily Star.
She couldn't provide a timeline for Meghan's supposed plans for the presidency, currently held by Donald Trump.
"She will run for President, I have no doubt about it. I have no doubt, I think this is all part of the plan," Turner claimed.
"It may not be very soon but it will be."
Vine replied, "That is the first time I have ever heard anyone say that."
Turner claimed that she "had it on fairly good authority" that Meghan would like to run for president.
"There may be worse Presidents, I would like to see a mixed-race woman in the White House, I would."
It comes after Meghan's speech during Girl Up's Women in Leadership summit, in which she encouraged young women to take inspiration from world leaders like New Zealand's prime minister Jacinda Ardern.
"Another thing about those lawmakers, leaders and executives that I mentioned earlier - many of them better or worse do not listen until they have to," Meghan said.
"Because the status quo is easy to excuse and hard to break but it will pull tightest right before snapping.
"Women have always historically got a lot of 'that is not how it is done or that is an idea but we are going to do this instead' but when do we hear that as women?
"We hear that in the moments when we challenged the norms."
Some saw the speech as connected to her and Prince Harry's decision to leave royal life earlier this year. They now live in LA with their baby son Archie.
Daily Star Online has approached Meghan's representatives for a response."
"It may not be very soon but it will be."
"There may be worse Presidents, I would like to see a mixed-race woman in the White House, I would."
................
OK, Time for the RF to leak what they have on her before she uses BLM and the current climate to propel herself into a position in our US government.
Don't think it can't happen with the way the US media is currently presenting her.
It doesn't matter how far fetched this political scheme may sound. It needs to be stopped now before more people take it seriously.
Gee, maybe Biden will pick Megalomaniac Markle as his running mate.
I hear you WildBoar!!
Reposting from other page
Thank you Nutties for your kind wishes.
Lunch at the beach, posh fish n chips
and watermelon margaritas 🍹
Chilly, but invigorating. Perfect 👌
Megs has rung many bells
all to the same tune, Kerching!!
The clapper strikes her (for)tune
but its taken its toll...
@Unknown
She couldn’t handle criticism in the UK press.
How would she survive US political criticism/unveiling
of the true madam Markle?
Then again she has more balls than brains.
There's a `tradition' of aristocracy distrusting the middle classes as `pushy' ie too close for comfort, although those I would call `gentry', with excellent connections, often describe themselves as `upper middle class'.
Perhaps B & E need to remember that their mother was a commoner, albeit daughter of someone whose occupation brought him into contact with the RF, and that she has hardly covered herself with glory.
On Catherine's father's side, which is still `what counts', the Middletons are sound upper middles with good connections. Her mother's family lived in more modest circumstances but, were socially mobile and `bettered' themselves, to use the academic and polite terms. It may be the success of their business venture that has made them targets for the sneers of `new money' from those with `old'.
The York girls may not have realised that there is a distinct lack of protestant princesses for a chap so close to the throne to marry and that marrying into the aristocracy can involve destructive dynastic ambitions on the part of the bride's family.
Pure speculation of course.
Politically, everyone is supposed to be in favour of social mobility now - I write as someone who'd be living on a sink estate in London if my fairly recent ancestors hadn't escaped the Holborn rookeries and the workhouse. One great grandfather, born c1829, possibly when George IV was still on the throne, lived in the world that inspired `Oliver Twist' and I guess he was a real-life Artful Dodger.
It hit me very suddenly at some point after the wedding when it became clear she had no intention of belting up - I had one of my `turns' (possibly anxiety, triggered by Topiramate -for migraine, avoid it like the plague, folks) and thought I was shaving a heart attack.
I stopped the medication - the overwhelming anxiety disappeared like magic but the suspicion that MM had political plans has never left me.
Meghan discovered friends were behind article after publication, documents claim
Tony Jones, PA Court Correspondent
13 hours ago
"Meghan discovered friends were behind article after publication, documents claim
The Duchess of Sussex only discovered a friend had spoken to a US magazine to defend her from tabloid “bullying” during her baby shower, court documents have revealed.
Five of Meghan’s friends were interviewed anonymously by People Magazine and one revealed the details of a letter which is the subject of legal action brought by the duchess.
A confidante told the American publication about its content: “She’s like ‘Dad, I’m so heartbroken. I love you. I have one father. Please stop victimising me through the media so we can repair our relationship’.”
Meghan is suing Associated Newspapers, publisher of The Mail On Sunday and MailOnline, over articles which featured parts of the “private and confidential” letter from the duchess to her estranged father, Thomas Markle.
The duchess’ legal team have released further background details after requests from Associated Newspapers (Yui Mok/PA)
Meghan’s lawyers have argued she only knew about her friend’s actions after the article was published on February 6 last year.
Her legal team has responded to requests from Associated Newspapers’ lawyers for further information about when the duchess discovered the five confidantes, only identified as A-E, were behind the article.
The document submitted to the High Court states: “The claimant realised Friends A, B and C had given anonymous interviews to People magazine upon learning that the article had been published.
“Her belief that they had been involved was confirmed during phone calls via FaceTime on the day of publication and the following day.
“The claimant learnt Friend D was one of the anonymous sources for the People magazine article on or around February 19 2019 when the two of them met in person.
“She subsequently learnt of Friend E’s involvement a few days later during a celebration with friends to mark the forthcoming birth of her son.
“This discussion also took place in person.
“All of these conversations took place post publication.”
Meghan was seven months pregnant with son Archie when she spent several days in New York with A-listers including Amal Clooney and Serena Williams for her baby shower.
The former Suits actress celebrated the impending arrival of her child in what was reportedly the most expensive hotel room in the US, the Penthouse Suite in the five-star Mark Hotel, which at the time cost 75,000 dollars (£57,000) per night.
Lawyers acting for Associated Newspapers have argued that her five friends brought the letter into the public domain when it was referred to for the first time in their US magazine interview.
They maintain Mr Markle revealed the letter to correct the “false” impression Meghan’s friends had given about his actions in their interview.
Earlier this month the duchess applied to the High Court to stop Associated Newspapers from naming her five confidantes but a spokesman for The Mail On Sunday said the paper had “no intention” of identifying the friends but the question of their anonymity should be considered by the court.
The duchess is seeking damages, which she has said will be donated to an anti-bullying charity, from Associated Newspapers for alleged misuse of private information, copyright infringement and breach of the Data Protection Act.
Associated Newspapers wholly denies the allegations, particularly the claim that the letter was edited in any way that changed its meaning, and says it will hotly contest the case."
@WildBoar
Old fashioned snobbery, possibly.
The curse of the curtsy?
Kate has to curtsy to B & E when solo
B & E have to curtsy to Kate
when she’s with William.
Same for madam M.
"William’s relationship with Fergie is another matter entirely, it’s been said and reported (books etc) he never forgave her for how she treated his Mother (she mentioned Diana in her book). Other than that I have no idea why he didn’t want her at his own wedding, but it wasn’t down to The Queen’s request."
It seems there are many explanations out there for why Fergie wasn't invited to W&K's wedding including that she was invited by Will and then uninvited by TQ!
@Raspberry Ruffle's explanation suggests Will hadn't forgiven her for how she treated Diana (although IMO Diana wasn't always fair to Fergie either.) Still, children often don't forget perceived mistreatment of their mothers. I can understand that as it's usually easier to forgive an action against us than one against one of our loved ones. So it's quite possible Bea hasn't forgiven Will either. I don't mean there's a huge rift but when it came down to creating her wedding guest list of only 20 vs Will's list of 1900+, W&K may not have been a hard cut for Bea to make.
And nobody seems to think it was strange other first cousins like Peter and Zara weren't likely invited to Bea's wedding either. Will and Harry were reportedly close to the York girls and to Fergie growing up partly because Diana and Fergie were close and the families would vacation together. But that was a really long time ago. Much longer ago than W&K's 2011 wedding. And I always had the feeling Harry had remained close to the Yorks and Will hadn't.
It's "just" the ceremony that matters; they wouldn't have been invited to a city hall event either. They can all celebrate either.
<> I'm just not seeing any evil intent here.
We didn't discuss it here (too much else to talk about, like where to find vintage strollers) but there was a report yesterday (UK media) that said that the monetary value that royalty added to their patronages was nil. Isn't that one of their main gigs?
I come clean on here all the time here that I'm American so perhaps I don't get a vote. But as an old person, a student of history, and a concerned citizen of the world? Maybe I do. I'm not considering just the beloved-on-here Windsors but royalty worldwide. It's an absurd concept and the world, if it survives, has much more to concern itself with.
Regarding the Express article written by Kate Nicholson, I would not attach too much importance to what she says. KN is supposed to be a royal reporter but is so far up MM's backside it's untrue.
Whenever MM or JH are caught out telling "porkies", KN has rarely been heard to say an admonishing word - she spends so much time sitting on the fence where those two are concerned that I'm surprised she hasn't done a vital injury to her "lady parts".
As with Omid, KN has ties to Vanity Fair so we shouldn't be surprised, I suppose, at her brown-nosing of MM.
Just to add to the mix concerning Catherine's relationship with the York sisters, I recently saw a video of when W & C were on tour in the USA. W & C were shown into a crowded room at some function and Catherine and Eugenie greeted each other with hugs, etc, like long-lost friends. They seemed equally glad to see each other and this rather exercises my mind as to the veracity of any statements as to the coldness that is supposed to exist between the Cambridges and the Yorks.
As said undies weren't worn until the gauzy dresses of the Directoire/Regency period, it was just as well!
She does a half ass curtsey, the least amount possible, because no way is she going to show respect to the queen.
I'm glad she's out of the family. I hope she stays out. H, too.
What sort of friend goes to People with their private friends personal family matter? Lol. Oh, friends getting paid, that’s who.
She can’t win that case.
She can’t sue people.
What a joke.