This is what happens when I take too long to write a post. My original idea - that Meghan and Harry should consider purchasing one of the "cheap old houses" popular on Instagram and fix it up as part of a reality series - seems to have been overtaken by events.
Page Six is reporting today that Meghan and Harry already have a house in Santa Barbara, near Oprah and Ellen's pads, and in fact have been living there for at least six weeks. (This is not entirely unexpected; Harry's most recent hostage video had a different background than usual.)
"This is the first home either of them has ever owned," writes the couple's PR agent via Page 6. "It has been a very special time for them as a couple and as a family - to have complete privacy for six weeks since they moved in."
They could probably still be having complete privacy if the couple's PR team wasn't leveraging their real estate news in order to promote the new book "Finding Freedom" - which the Sussexes, of course, insist they had nothing to do with.
Bad timing
Meg must be a little peeved that the timing of the house announcement conflicted with bigger news about another biracial Californian; it was announced late yesterday that Kamala Harris would be the Democratic nominee for US Vice President.
You can almost hear Meg's screams in her publicity team's hastily-concocted story headlined Meghan Markle reveals why she's voting in the 2020 election. (Spoiler: it's because she wants her "voice to be heard.")
Roughly 130 million Americans voted in the last election, so I look forward to Page Six's in-depth accounts of why the other 129,999,999 will be voting this time.
Paired with the fact that Megan Thee Stallion is rapidly becoming America's most famous Megan (with Meghan McCain probably in second place) and the news cycle just isn't being kind to the Duchess of Sussex.
Comments
- 9 million dollar mortgage granted by the Russian seller. His is figuring he will repossess in 2-3 years after mortgage default.
- Downpayment of 5 million plus come from Harry's inheritance and Travalyst. People here say that under the Travalyst charter the Harkles can buy a house with the Travalyst money. After all, it is of prime importance that Travalyst owners have proper housing. Prior to the house purchase, the Disney donation, donations to Sussex foundation, other stray donations were shifted into Travalyst. So far I believe that Charles did not pay anything for their Grande White Elephant of Montecito.
Stockholm Harry is limited on dipping into his trusts (inheritance) but he was able to dip in for lets say 3 million.
That makes sense. The only reason someone would want a biracial egg, is if they or their partner are biracial.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7962859/Newborn-Valais-blacknose-lambs-dubbed-worlds-cutest-sheep-worth-10-000-each.html
My question is this...Do you (or any other Nutty) in your capacity as an online journalist know whether the programs that are used to search for copyrighted photos as well as other resources like articles, legal documents, etc are able to probe private blogs?
I have my blog set right now to private, and it's my understanding that the blog itself will not show up in google searches but I don't know enough about this to be confident of the privacy settings.
Any info you or any other Nutty may be able to provide would be greatly appreciated. TIA!
---------------------
IT'S ALL ABOUT THE ALGORITHMS. No *privacy settings* can stop them.
Algorithms are mathematical equations that identify stuff on the internet. They operate much like the software that identifies fingerprints. The earliest ones were formulated by Google to target ads toward consumers (still do) and to determine placement on searches -- but have evolved to identify written copy (originally for teachers/university professors worried about student plagiarization/cheating) -- and photos.
*Privacy settings* can't stop them -- but steps CAN be taken.
- Don't attach a NAME to a saved item of copy. Keep it in a separate file that is NOT on the internet. Use a Word document to keep track. Then back everything up on a jump drive.
- When you copy/paste something on the internet, usually there's no problem. But DOXXING has become a thing, that is, the identification of someone's actual identity, including name, address, workplace and family, friends and associates. This usually takes place by targeting an IP ADDRESS of a computer or phone. Once this happens, there is little to be done to protect privacy. The PARAMOUNT thing is to NOT get to this point!
- Allow your instincts to be your guide. A single sentence can be tracked down, much less a paragraph -- the way the words are strung together is what is tracked. If you are worried at all about the source of your copy/paste, rearrange the wording (but be sure you make that clear to readers down the road).
- When you do share something, you'll get the feel of *fair use* on the internet. After all, look at Twitter! BUT ... when in doubt, obfuscate to the extent possible to make it hard for someone to track the original person. Say things like "Seen on a forum" or "Seen on the internet" -- and change the wording if what you are sharing is unique or bomb-dropping -- and tell your readers that "wording has been rearranged to protect the author but content is the same." This is usually only an issue in rare cases.
- Photos are usually not a problem, at least personally. You are not likely to be prosecuted. What usually happens is the copyright-holder will use an algorithm to find a photo anywhere on the internet and have it removed. There are times, however, that copyright-holders prosecute. At my publication that I work for, we avoid this by looking at how the image is marked on the web -- if it has a "dot-com" designation, we avoid it. If it has a "dot-org" designation, copyright is not usually an issue. It's the difference between a money-making operation and a not-for-profit.
I wish I knew more about algorithms and how they work -- none of us do but nerds. All we can do is frustrate them to some degree.
The BRF would do themselves a favor and be utterly transparent about Frogmore. Account by account. Terminate the lease. Collect the debt from Harry, with interest and repay the UK taxpayers. Then advertise the property to someone who wishes to pay a FMV rent and who would love to live there and care for the property.
------------------------
Frogmore Cottage sits on the Frogmore Estate, part of the Crown Estate. It is not available to just anybody.
Murky Meg has a very good video today about Meghan's birthday party and the guests who were allegedly invited. Oprah, Gayle King and Tyler Perry, mostly. But no sign of Archie. No photos displayed of the little one and no mention of him at all. Considering it was an early party in the afternoon, I am surprised no one thought this weird. It's not like he could be asleep the whole time.
Prince Charles texted Meghan and she immediately showed everyone the conversation. She also said that the Queen had sent Her best wishes but didn't call. William and Kate sent flowers but didn't call. She told this to everyone.
My best to everybody, especially Aquagirl, whose comments are my thoughts about to be written, except Aqua girl writes it first. Also Lt. Uhura, WBBM, and most everybody.
WBBM, I know much about Yad Vashem, Righteous Gentiles, and more, as my mother’s family were honored by Israel for hiding over a dozen Jews in their estate from the Nazis. The husband of my mother’s aunt’s family were ex-royalty in Europe, and thus they decided not to leave Europe. After two years of hiding Jews, during which time a baby was born, one of their neighbors f..Ed them over, revealing the site the Jews were hidden, and the Nazis sent the Jews to death camps. The newborn baby was thrown up in the air for target practice, along with a toddler. My family was sent to concentration camps, not death camps, because they were ex-royalty, and one cousin was a hero with the Red Baron during WW 1, another cousin was a 1936 Olympian, and she was part of the assassination attempt, along with Rommel, on Hitler. She was not put to death because of family, but the Jews were then exposed. Remarkable story. I have lived, went to university and visited Israel eight times. Our family converted to Judaism when I was a small child.
My father fought for over two years in the South Pacific. He is Seen in films shown on the documentaries “World at War” narrated by Laurence Olivier, and “Victory at Sea” with music by Richard Rodgers. His legs, at age 97, are still strafed.
It is very easy to do the right thing. There is a price to pay for everything, good and evil. However, my parents say they could sleep at night, knowing they were honest, raised good kids, and never cheated or tried schemes to part a man and his money for any selfish reasons. To sleep peacefully is only for people who have done the right things. By the way, my parents and family never talked or bragged about themselves. Americans, up until ten or fifteen years ago, were strivers, hard-working, and proud to be American. We were not victims. We left the “old Countries” to work and succeed in life.
---------------------------
Oh dear Lord.
G-d has already blessed you. May He bless you every moment of your life.
@Lt N Uhura
Harry rubbishing the older generation shows just what an ignorant twerp he is - a dangerous one as well.
________________________
And William addressed the nation yesterday to honour veterans on VJ Day.
Every single chance Harry gets to TRULY show his care for the military, he falls flat from the fact that his soul is empty.
Private money is one thing; public money is different. Americans found out about the millions we spent, from Secret Service, State Department, New York Police and New York State protection that the HAMS insisted upon during her stay in NYC, just one time (there have been many visits, but none exposed) when Megs flew private to the city for her “baby shower” aka bringIng home tightly wrapped suitcases filled with entertaining stuff. The U.S. has a freedom of information, and boy, oh boy, the agents, especially, were highly insulted by her, they said she wanted to be a Jackie Onassis, although Jackie never had after being First Lady, public police funding, and her kids either, after they turned sixteen. JFK, Jr. was extremely polite with the paps, and they respected his privacy since he treated them as friends. John, Jr., if he could while bicycling, would always wave hello to known taxi drivers, or strangers who called out his name. He always had a smile when strangers came up to him. He was much more popular than Harry, but never showed off, or his sister Caroline. When he secretly married Carolyn Bassete, she was papped, but since she deliberately wore the same clothes every day, she became boring.
Funny how the most family man in the world, JFK Jr., whose father and uncle were assassinated, never had bodyguards or private police. But who is paying for the back of the queue Royal, his weird wife, and a kid never seen?
Anybody receiving public funds must have the payments acknowledged and open to scrutiny by citizens, unless such info is seen as harmful to the HAMS. And why is Charles paying Duchy funds to Harry, even a pence, as the Duchy money only goes to Charles, Camilla, and more importantly, upkeep and growth of the lands. Harry is illegally being paid from Duchy monies. Why can’t the royals, and British government, break down payments to a traitor, who hates the people who pay taxes for him, living in an incredibly tacky, over the top fire, mud and earthquake American state.
You are basically correct, except, as usual, it gets complicated in real day to day life...
Monetcito, like Isla Vista, and for the longest time Goleta (most of), are technical unincorporated but you will find that you have almost all the usual encouragements of city government - school districts, water districts, and more importantly, a planning dept.
The one in Montecito is like nothing else that to be found in the US. As so many outside developers have found to their cost in the past. Just ask the many developers who tried to fight the planning dept over the redevelopment of the Miramar Hotel how that went. That battle lasted decades and when the last in a line of developers capitulated the place was finished.
Then there are all the well heeled neighbors with very aggressive lawyers on retainer. I am not exaggerating when I say that a simple pool reconstruction and hot tub upgrade can involve a multi years process. Which includes a report signed off by California Coast Commission. If you want to do any construction in Montecito, no matter how minor, you better have absolutely all your ducks lined up (and there are plenty) before you think of even starting the process.
Then private litigation by neighbors can add a whole new dimension of expense and delay to the process. These lawsuits have a very long and illustrious history. Going back 140 years plus by this stage. I am not sure if the Oprah neighbors dispute reached actual litigation stage but I know that after the first serious contretemps with the huge disruption her private parties caused to local people afterwards she had to bus in her guests. And even then there was a lot of bad feeling with the neighbors due to the size and ostentation of her parties. Very un-Montecito.
There again Santa Barbara has a long history of not being pushed around by bossy outsiders. Individuals or government agencies. For example for decades the only stop lights on the 101 freeway between LA and San Francisco were in Santa Barbara. Where Pearl Chase and others stopped the freeway builders in their track in the 1950's. It was only after Pearl died that they finished the freeway. And it was done very very carefully by the state roads agency CalTrans with the minimum of disruption to the city. Built exactly the way the city wanted it.
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1988-04-19-mn-1396-story.html
Santa Barbara has a quiet self confidence based on the fact that it has been an important town going all the way back to the days of the Californios. When both San Francisco and Los Angeles were both little more than small run down forts, a small dilapidated mission and a bunch of shacks around the main town square. Only Monterey the provincial capitol at the time has a history quite as long and distinguished.
Santa Barbara is a pretty unique kind of place.
I agree on the club membership. Also, super-exclusive clubs like this are not just "joined". There is a strict process to go through, no matter how wealthy or influential you are. You must be nominated by a minimum of at least two members in good standing (or more, depending on the club's rules), who write letters asking the board to consider them for membership. Then the board looks at your background, assets (ability to pay initiation and membership fees), the possibility of how you will "fit in" with the other members, if you will be an asset to the exclusivity of the club and will be able to purport yourself correctly while at the club. Then, the board votes at a monthly or quarterly board meeting, and your are either accepted or rejected for membership.
A club that is limited to 600 members usually has a long waiting list for membership, and their rules for membership are probably even stricter. Sometimes, you are interviewed by board members during the process, as they check you out for any faux pas such as bad table manners, being too loud or a myriad of other minor sins. Also, they will want to get an idea of how much you will be spending on food, drinks, pool, cabana or green fees each month. If it looks like you won't be spending enough money each month at the club, you'll be rejected. Sometimes, they will even ask for personal financial statements.
All of this takes time, and I doubt that this could be accomplished within six weeks.
Wullie'sBucket said...
@MusicDSPGuy
What did you think of the Daily Mail article describing all of Harry and Meghan's neighbors? They gave a lot of info about each of them! Wouldn't folks purchasing in a private community be unhappy about the content of this article?
___________________________________
Me too..... ?
@Aquagirl
There are several articles available that mention the moving vans. Here is one of them: https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1231806/meghan-markle-prince-harry-move-to-vancouver-island-canada-queen-megzit-deal-royals
I seem to remember one article that showed pictures of several vans on the roadway but so far have not located that one.
Harry would be proud of me for making progress against my ingrained white privilege bias, since it did not occur to me until your comment that healthy viable gametes would be undesirable because the donor was biracial. Maybe this will be changing in our newly Woke Up culture and ordering oneself a boutique baby who is racially different than oneself will signal one’s Wokeness better than any Instagram posing.
Meg clearly would have been keeping her eggs in reserve for a future anchor baby with a wealthy man, and et voila. At the time they would’ve been harvested, she was still trying to convince everyone she was 100% Caucasian, but I don’t suppose that fooled the medical professionals who told her that her eggs were unequivocally part African-American. Seeing as this woman sees dollar signs attached to everything that she does, if she thought about selling, or try to sell her genetic material, that would be in character. It’d be interesting to know Meg’s reaction were she told that nobody wanted her mixed race eggs. Seems like she’d have to sue the clinic for racism. Why not, as she’s suing everybody else for it.
The prospect of Smeg’s motherhood gives me a physical pain along with severe nausea, so I hope with every fiber of my being that she and Harry are not and will never be responsible for bringing life into the world.
Its only the Coral Casino. Which always had a real whiff of the louche and nouvous riche about it since it was founded in the 1920's. I never got the impression it had much social cache. Always thought it was full of the people who had those multi-million dollar condos in Bonnymeade next door. Or people staying the Biltmore. From what I remember its part of the Biltmore but the impression I got from people I knew who worked in both places while high-school / college students was the Biltmore was a great place to work, really nice people, whereas the Coral Casino right across the street was pretty unpleasant. Full of stuck up people from out of town. Mostly a winter crowd.
I think the story that epitomized the Coral Casino for me was the story of its main swimming pool. They very deliberately built a 49 meter pool so that they would not be asked by local swimming clubs etc to host amateur or professional competitions. There being no suitable 50 meter pool in the area at the time. Whereas other local hotels and businesses were very civic minded and happy to host such events if they had suitable facilities. I think the Polo Grounds did a lot of this back then.
That for me always summed up the Coral Casino and its clientele.
If you sit on the wall at Butterfly Beach and watch the comings and goings in the Biltmore across the street you get a pretty nice vibe about the place. Look to your right towards the Coral Casino, a very different vibe. Kinda creepy, in my opinion. Actually more vacuous than creepy.
There was talk earlier about the Montecito mudslides and fires. I live 90 minutes to 2 hours north of Montecito (depending how bad the traffic is) and the smoke was so bad from the fires that it reached all the way up here to San Luis Obispo. The sun was a dull orange blob behind all the soot in the air, ash covering houses and cars, and needless to say, the air quality was terrible. (When the Covid-19 outbreak started I had leftover masks on hand from the fires.) The mudslides came down like a freight train and over 20 people died and at least two children were never found. IIRC, the main North-South highway through town, The 101, was closed for 2 weeks and commuters had to take hours long detours. Make no mistake, Montecito is beautiful, but it’s most recent reputation is for devastation and disaster. Cue the Harkles slinking in.
At first I thought the alleged house was an improvement on the other Russian oligarch house in Canada, but I took a gander at the photos in some shelter mag that couldn't be scrubbed, & decided it was almost as bad, although the views seem nice. It's a perfect area for anything Mediterranean, Mission, Spanish, French Provincial, etc.& lots of beautiful examples of those styles have been built in California, as well classic mid-20th-century California ranch houses. There are many people with money & taste in California, but that house isn't an example of it. It looks like an empty spec house that tv studios rent as sets for Hallmark tv movies. You can see why it's been empty for so long. As for Megs & Hegs sheltering themselves from default to their mortgagee with their LLCs, from the looks of their seller's wife in the Daily Mail, I'm not sure they're absolutely safe. He is nicknamed 'Scarface.'
I actually thought Megs had better taste than this. There were a few snaps of what supposedly was her Toronto place in the very early days of her relationship with Harry, & they looked appropriate for a not too famous actress. Don't know if they were actually pics of the Toronto bfs place or not. Didn't pay attention.
My area has been pretty hot & humid this summer, & I've been keeping cool streaming Scandinavian shows. The Swedes seem to use the word 'Russian' to telegraph 'bad taste' or 'new money.' Are the Swedes being racist against Russians? And Swedes seem so nice!
@Hunter
"Harry would be proud of me for making progress against my ingrained white privilege bias, since it did not occur to me until your comment that healthy viable gametes would be undesirable because the donor was biracial."
This reminded me of an article from a few years back about wealthy individuals from South America who would come to the U.S. for their reproductive health care. They specifically wanted a more European looking child as the sperm and ovum from South American donors had a higher potential of mixed-race ancestry.
In the tv show Mexican Dynasties the cast members, at times, would wear blue-tinted contacts to change their eye color. I thought at the time that they wanted to appear more European.
I gave a rundown here yesterday or the day before of Murky Meg's video about the birthday yparty, and she was very careful to say that she was not sure that MM let guests listen to texts from Prince Charles. She says she takes that part with "a pinch of salt."
Murky said that although she got the party info from a trusted source, that she has doubts as to the veracity of that part of the story.
Also, she never said that Tyler Perry was at the party. She also questions whether the party even happened, or if it was just another one of MM's PR stories.
@MusicDSPGuy,
Thanks for all of the insider info on Santa Barbara. I'm learning a lot about the area from you.
Also @Aquagirl and who pointed it out - Hikari!
About the baby - Now that Hikari showed the stark difference between the wording ("we heard there was a baby" vs "there is a baby"), I'm less invested in the Baby Abroad idea (that the royal family is quietly raising OG Archie).
The reason I'd initially embraced the idea (I remain on the fence), is because it seems there IS/WAS a child procured by MM at one point, as made clear by the birth announcement. However, I've always suspected during the two days (weeks?) following her "birth" the BRF uncovered her shenanigans and took ownership of the situation.
At that point, if I were in charge, I would have adopted the anonymous infant to another decent British family, perhaps one of strong lineage just to give the chap a leg up - the family may never know his provenance.
OR they kept the child in-house (raised quietly) which would be a real bitch of a thing to keep quiet over time.
I really don't know, I'm starting to lean toward no baby but LCC's book strongly suggests there was a surrogate baby which must have landed SOMEWHERE.
Given that the reason why a lot of people are in Montecito precisely to get away from the LA fishbowl I would guess that the Harkles have made instant enemies of not only the neighbors but pretty much the whole town. In less than a week. That's what the Noozehawk guy was alluding to. We value our quite life. If you upset it your welcome will be very very short lived.
The unwritten rule for famous people from LA is that while they are in LA they will be LA. The whole pap thing etc. But while in Montecito their privacy is completely guaranteed. The local dont make a fuss and the LA people are expected to keep the LA world completely out of Montecito in return. Break that agreement and, well, people will be counting the days till you move on
Just thinking back the only person who had any kind of dispensation was Jonathan Winters. To draw attention to himself. But he was a very special case. If he wanted to give an impromptu performance he had a willing and understanding informal audience. Everyone kept an eye out for him. If he was having a bad day people were quietly supportive. If he was having a good day then you might get one of those very special riffs. Far better than Robin William because never any dark undertow. Just pure joy and kindness. Truly a magical person. Despite his demons.
Do you mean an actual casino? What an odd place for an "exclusive" club, unless it's a high-roller's club with benefits like the pool? I guess it's not as exclusive as reported. Again, thanks for the info.
@Mango,
Thank you for your info about the area, too.
I never got the impression it was ever a gambling casino, the name was just an historical holdover with 1930's Hollywood Movie Stars associations.
The story seems to be that the original idea was the place had a pier and customers could be ferried out to ships beyond the 3 mile limit so beyond the county ban on gambling. My guess a variation on the "booze cruises" that went out to Catalina Island and beyond during Prohibition. Neither idea seem to have survived long.
I seem to remember one article that showed pictures of several vans on the roadway but so far have not located that one.
------------------------
All I could find is this
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1231806/meghan-markle-prince-harry-move-to-vancouver-island-canada-queen-megzit-deal-royals
Thanks again. What an unusual area with an interesting past. I'm trying to liken it to another US city and the closest I can get is Carmel/Pebble Beach area before the hordes moved in and nobody lived in the Carmel Valley.
If the Harkles want sheep worthy of their palatial estate they should acquire the World's cutest sheep which fetch up to $10,000 each. Valais Blacknose Sheep. Warning: Cuteness Overload!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7962859/Newborn-Valais-blacknose-lambs-dubbed-worlds-cutest-sheep-worth-10-000-each.html
I can tell you really do have livestock. I am sorry for whatever I said last month that I did not believe you. These Dumbarton dopes spend 15 million in the wrong way. Instead spend one million on a working farm (hobby farm) and live there. This is what Princess Ann does on her Royal land, and she does have sheep. Horses and everything else. Smart!
Charles offered Megs/Hapless an estate in Herefordshire that Charles had labored over for one of his sons, I think it was offered to Wills and family first. Charles renovated-renewed this estate near Wales. But the Dumbarton dopes were too stuck up, clueless vain Millennial Kind of stuck up, to agree to it. And really not so isolated because they could have lived in London half the year at Frogmore for social life. As in the BRF has a fleet of Land Rovers to cover distances quickly and chauffeured, as in the security man driving. So zero stress to travel to and fro.
Scobie will also spark controversy by revealing in the interview with The Royal Beat TV show that Charles is supportive of Harry and Meghan’s decision to sue the Mail on Sunday over publishing the Duchess’s letter to her estranged father Thomas.
But Charles, he claims, is “too afraid” to say so publicly.
He says: “He quietly supported Harry and Meghan’s decision to sue the Mail On Sunday over the letter. But did he publicly support them?
"No, absolutely not. As a future king it’s important for him to have a healthy relationship with the Press.”
And...
Scobie also revealed Harry is intending to open up about his own racially-insensitive behaviour in the past, including calling an army friend the P-word and dressing as a Nazi at a birthday party.
He said: “He’s on a journey at the moment and I do think that at some point we’ll hear him talk about that journey.”
Could this be true?
Meghan Markle is paying for her multi-million pound California mansion from Suits reruns on Netflix
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12419629/meghan-markle-paying-for-multi-million-pound-california-mansion-suits-reruns-netflix/
The monarch is making the 67th anniversary this year
10 incredible photos from the Queen's Coronation in 1953
JUNE 02, 2020 - 12:42 BST
HELLOMAGAZINE.COM
https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/gallery/2020060290788/the-queen-1953-coronation-in-pictures/9/
^^^^^^ Tons of post-war pageantry. How it was done in 1953. The Brits sure know how to put on a show!
Thank you very much, your words mean a lot to me. I am also sorry for things I wrote to you!
I would give my eye teeth to own some of those Valais Blacknose sheep. However I just purchased a pr. of registered Texels which I bet Prince Charles may have some as they are very popular used as terminal sires in the UK although they originated in the Netherlands. I mention this in case some British or Aussie poster owns them, it would be neat to know.
Oh that Herefordshire estate Charles offered was to die for. That has to be one of the stupidest mistakes the Harkles will ever have mad, to turn down the gift of a lifetime. It could have been a legacy for their family and provided all the privacy they needed and income to boot. A poster here a few months back wrote all the ways it would have benefitted them and the list was significant. They would have been grounded too, as most people who depend on the family land are.
Also in the Sun:
Could this be true?
Meghan Markle is paying for her multi-million pound California mansion from Suits reruns on Netflix
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12419629/meghan-markle-paying-for-multi-million-pound-california-mansion-suits-reruns-netflix/
Not true. Suits residuals cannot be that great plus she was a second tier actor on Suits, thus get less than the prime Suits actors. More bs put out by Megsy's PR people. Megs does not have to lie when she employs people to do it for her.
Miggy said…
@Barbara from Montreal,
@ Miggy: If that report is true, and they really have joined that super-expensive club, then they really are throwing around money like drunken sailors. How in the world do they plan on paying for all of this?
I have no idea! Probably the same way they are paying for everything else?
Where's Inspector Clouseau when you need him!?
@Miggy and Barbara from Montreal,
They could be paying members and be writing it off as a business expense.
But they probably can’t write off the entire amount, so somebody’s going to cough up some cash one way or another.
As for being invited to join s super-exclusive beach club, even if it was a gift, you’d probably still have to wait to be voted in by the membership committee or perhaps the entire membership.
You also must be discreet, which is a problem for Meghan the Mouth. But they were probably a shoe-in lest Meghan toss the race card at the club membership the probably consists of many like-minded woke elites.
Narcissists like Meghan are world-class spenders of other peoples’ money, especially if the source is a romantic partner or spouse.
My guestimate is that the Harkles will quickly get into deep financial trouble that Charles and the Queen will not dig them out of it lest they do even more damage to the future of the monarchy by paying off the debts of these two wastrels.
Meghan has such huge senses of entitlement and grandiosity that she will feel she has the right to spend as much as she wants to keep up with Oprah and the other uber wealthy people they plan to hang out with.
Narcissists can never get enough.
They always want more.
Her greed is boundless.
She will not stop.
Ever.
I was deeply moved by your account of your family's suffering under the Third Reich.
There were a lot of Jewish lads in the first school where I taught in North London, possibly a third of the school population, - very bright. their families originated all over Europe, some came well before the war, others got out in the nick of time. Some from families who had fled the Soviets later, including from Prague after 1968. Yet more, often from Lithuania originally, fled S.Africa, thanks to their opposition to Apartheid.
I have always hoped that I would have the courage to help by hiding persecuted people if it ever came to that again.
It's possible that I have some Jewish ancestors, certainly some with same surname as my Sussex ancestors came over from Amsterdam in the 18th century. I've certainly been on the receiving end of really nasty anti-semitic abuse from someone I'd considered a friend and many of my pupils never imagined I wasn't Jewish.
The experience broadened my vocabulary but sadly Yiddish isn't widely understood around here.
So to get on back on topic, I shall take this opportunity to say I found this distinction between a schlemiel and a schmuck: `The schlemiel is similar to the schmuck but... a schmuck can improve himself while a schlemiel is "irredeemably what they are".'
Thank you Google.
I hope it's not cultural appropriation to suggest we can agree that H is in the latter category!
MM residulas- I’m sure she gets some pittance, OK more than a pittance, maybe she’ll be able to pay the water or electric bill.
Jen Aniston in her later ‘friends’ years was making 1 mill an episode, plus she gets great reesiduals. she can afford a place in Monteceito and a fabulous 2nd home or 2. I’d love to MM’s check after her agent, manager, and uncle sa take their cut :)
wonder if they already realize they are in over their head , hence the thirsty PR drops
The lead actors on a major hit TV series such as Friends and Seinfeld can make millions on residuals, but the second-string actors like MM on a Canadian cable show don't make much at all.
Here's what S. Epatha Merkerson says about her royalties on Law and Order after 19 years on the show:
S. Epatha Merkerson, who played Lt. Anita Van Duren on the show from 1991 to 2010, told Huffington Post in 2015 that sometimes she received royalty checks that were worth less than the postage used to send them.
I think Scoobie is over-inflating MM's acting career again, and she certainly doesn't have the acting chops of S. Epatha Mererson.
MM was in no way a major TV star, and Suits was not a major hit show.
My guestimate is that the Harkles will quickly get into deep financial trouble that Charles and the Queen will not dig them out of it lest they do even more damage to the future of the monarchy by paying off the debts of these two wastrels.
You're faith in Charles is far greater than mine!
Well I guess her pr is in overdrive again. There is absolutely no way that she makes enough money from the reruns of suits to pay for that mansion.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12419549/prince-william-didnt-speak-to-harry-for-months-after-he-and-meghan-revealed-their-megxit-plans-online/
I think that Meghan will be like some of the rockstars and professional athletes who make tens of millions of dollars or even lottery winners who win hundreds of millions of dollars and blow through every bit of if. Her exception will be that she won’t have hundreds of millions. She’ll have maybe ten or perhaps 20 to $30 million, spend that, then spend Harry’s trust when he gets access to it at 40, put the rest of it on credit and go bankrupt like both of her parents.
I also fear that if he’s not already a more than occasional drug user, Harry could end up addicted. And we all know what often happens.
Texels are very abundant around here. I still can't get over how much they look facially like a cross between a reindeer (something about the muzzle/) and a Staffordshire Bull Terrier!
I've not seen Valais Blacknose but they really do look gorgeous.
I'd have thought Charles would have gone for rare breeds - there are 2 breeds of Dartmoor native to the Duchy, the Grey Face and the White Face. There's the Devon and Cornwall Longwool as well (I gather that the black-dyed sheepskins as used under some Household Cavalry saddles are from this breed)
A friend living near the Devon/Dorset border lets his orchard for grazing and hosts a small flock of Portland sheep from the island of the same name. The lambs are cinnamon-coloured - another lovely breed.
I must stop waxing lyrical and go to bed. Good night all.
True story: when one of my kids was a freshman at Princeton, one of his eating club buddies managed to get his girlfriend, also a Princeton student, pregnant. As one of my friends said, 'You'd think if they got into Princeton, they'd know how to not get pregnant." Duh, guess not. There were a lot of jokes about plonking the baby on the internet, 'a double Ivy-League, white baby!'At the time couples were offering millions to Ivy League women for their eggs. The baby was put up for adoption, the couple remained at Princeton. In my husband's time, Princeton would kick you out for being married.
Below is a link to a Telegraph article about a black UK rugby star with a bi-racial family. His kids are beautiful, they don't look black, but Hollywood is now full of bi-racial actors who do look black.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/08/15/exclusive-england-rugby-star-courtney-lawes-calls-government/
@Tatty, I think your cottage garden sounds lovely. Phlox and hydrangea are among my favorites. Lovely pastel colors.
Let the law deliver the first blows, then come in with a coup de grace? If only.
My gripe is that we will never really know the true wealth of the Royal Family.
Us mere plebs are only told enough to keep us placated.
I do agree with Meghan blowing whatever money she's either given or earns like there's no tomorrow. For her, it's a case of easy come, easy go!
She's ruthless - in every sense of the word!
I do not understand the term “cultural appropriation.” A good example of why it is silly to say you stole my heritage (I am talking about the PC stupidity and lunacy, not you WBBM) can be refuted by my following experience, on a trip to one of my much-loved places, Scotland. Whilst having dinner at Cameron House, a Scot in full dress, started piping during dinner (90 percent of diners were Americans) and asked the diners where do bagpipes come from, Scottish male hair braids, and Scottish kilts. Nobody had any idea. Well, our Scottish bagpiper said look at the skirts of Egyptians, Greeks, Jews, Romans, and more people, mostly warriors. The plaids of the Scots began as colors, to distinguish family, turning into plaids for smaller clans.. The bagpipes began in India, with a single pipe for snakes. The puffy Scottish shirts come from the Eastern European/Ottoman countries. Braids are thousands of years old, and Europeans and Americans hair braids are associated with the Swiss Heidi, or any Northern European country.
I love Indian food, French perfumes, South Korean Beaty products, plaid clothes, Capri/Roman sandals, Motown singers,Egyptian cotton; Indian films; every culture’s contribution to the world, and makes everybody realize we are not one, but one of many great or good thousands of history. Nobody owns a culture. We celebrate and use our family, friend and neighbor life.
First it was Harry and Doria cooking a three course meal (with just Harry, MeMe, Doria. and Archie present) and big chocolate birthday cake and with Doria babysitting so they could have "couple time" (pass the sick bucket).
Then it was a five course dinner with Oprah, Gayle, TP, Harry, and MeMe (no mention of Doria or Archie)
Soooooo I guess the five friends that helped her before with the whole People article aren't special enough now to be invited to or to host a party for her? Is it to prevent witnessing tampering, has she ghosted them, or were they all a figment of her imagination? Anywho they we're important enough or close enough to be a part of her very special birthday.
Her sugars often point out that she was a "millionaire" before she married Harry, and this may be true, but much of that $$$ probably came from her divorce settlement.
I will say what I always say about Suits. I watched a LOT of TV when I worked nightshift and was recovering the next day. I never knew who she was until she and Harry got married.
Suits is the kind of show that comes on when you check into your hotel or you're on the treadmill at the gym. The USA network has a lot of shows that blend together and are vaguely often in the background. But it was never as famous like NCIS or Grey's Anatomy.
Thanks for the link. Interesting!
I knew you would know about sheep, and Texels to boot! What an apt description. Before I bought mine, I read somewhere that they looked piggish but you have a more flattering take on them. 'Bubba' and 'Betty', my Texels are as big as barrel of beer. My others are Dorper crosses. I'm off to look up the breeds you mentioned; cinnamon-colored is unusual and pretty. I just lovvvvvvvvvvvvvve sheep. I tell people that sheep are so wonderful that is why Jesus used them in his stories in a positive light while goats er, I better leave it unsaid (and my experience with the wiley creatures).
Goodnight, and 'count sheep' ;)
sorry for reposting your info about the party. My computer is acting up so I cannot spend as much time here as I would like. I think I may even have your name wrong. Sorry
@xxxx, when I look at videos of the coronation, I realize how serious a subject this monarchy business is. It's not like being crowned Miss USA
https://twitter.com/BabyBasicsUK/status/1291419026212761601/photo/1
Also, Baby Basics, the charity that Catherine has been helping has reported on twitter that they have been tagged in some very vile tweets (by Meghan's sugars of course). How vile can one get?
Check out formerlyroyal on tumblr.
Someone has done an actual drive-by of their supposed new house, and is showing pictures of their drive, gate, guardhouse etc. The person(s) writing detail how they know the feel of the area....and don't think that there is anyone living there! Moreover, no sign of security at ALL.
Oh what a tangled web we weave....
I live on a private drive and in my state, you will be met with a gun.
Probably going to see cameras soon, if they aren’t already there and hidden...
Us Texans might meet people with a gun if someone trespasses but we even know a Private Road here means the road is not a gov't County road or a sanctioned Farm-to-Market road hence the people on the road must maintain the road themselves as it doesn't have the benefit of government maintenance. Thus driving down a private road is not trespassing, not unless you drive into someone's driveway (their actual property).
It’s treapassing also in my state to be on my road without a homeowner permission. From the look of that, it seems it is the same in Montecito. It might be section 1833.... it’s blurry and hard to read when blowing it up.
Code of ordinances, Santa Barbara County
“Private road" means any roadway having private ownership, privately maintained, and used for vehicular travel by the owner and those having express or implied permission from the owner but not by other members of the public.“
Re: Private roads. My former house was on a private road, you can't keep out snoopers, even with 'security.' There was a security guard who made occasional sweeps. Most people are too polite to intrude, thankfully.
1- PC quietly approving of the HArkles lawsuit against the MOS, and. the cambridges thinking it was a bad idea. Sure when they first presented the idea he was proably fine, because he believed them/ MM and her sweetenss and light BS. but now after it comes out she probably approved the 5 friend artcle and has for years been doing her own PR/ pap walks and press droppings, and there will be lots of testifying, wonder how he feels about that now? i know i’m glad she sued, it’s entertainment for me :)
2- Tiaragate - whine whine whine, the palace courtiers are all against MM ! AK won’t give Meghan free reign of the tiara. perhaps if MM or her PA scheduled an appt, she would have had access to the Tiara earlier?
3- PA resignation- not sure which PA they whined about, but i’m guessing it was HM long term highly valued worker. apparently the Harkles disliked her from day one , probably felt she was a plant from BP, and wanted to get rid of her. perhaps if they had used her palace knowledge and protocol advice, insead of hating her from the get go, they would have adapted to RL or at least avided the horrible dramas they caused. of course MM thrives on drama, so that was out
im not sure if Scooby’s interviewer Kate something asked him serious questions and countered any of the whiney complaints or if she just let him yap. she should have at least asked if the main source to the book was MM’s jourmal/ notes!
“Private road" means any roadway having private ownership, privately maintained, and used for vehicular travel by the owner and those having express or implied permission from the owner but not by other members of the public.“
You just cited the definition section (Sec. 23-2) of the Ordinance (Chapter 23). The meat of the ordinance goes on to state specific roads covered naming streets in the Hope Ranch (Sec. 23F-3) and Pepper Hill (Sec. 23F-4) subdivisions. I DID NOT see Rockbridge Rd. on which Meghan and Harry live listed in these sections of the Ordinance. Not to say there may be a newer u[date on the ordinance (I was using the one you cited).
Not that this is true, elsewhere, but I have seen people put up 'No Trespassing' signs which weren't worth the metal they were printed on. Usually to prosecute for trespassing (here in Texas) you must tell someone to get off your property and have a law enforcement officer issue a 'trespass notice' right then, thereafter if the person comes onto your property they can be arrested.
I had a flock of Texels for a little while. Since I also had a full-time job and was working on a degree and raising children, they were a bit too much trouble for me. Those short legs, broad heads, and muscular shoulders meant that (for me), I had to have my arm up a ewe's backside far more frequently than I wanted. I prefer less drama and easier deliveries. (My poor husband wasn't much help; his giant hands were NOT able to slip in past a head swollen from being stuck to find a foreleg or forelegs that might be stuck back over the pelvic rim and eased forward so that lambie could come into the world.) And the trainwrecks that were twins and triplets with various legs presenting that did not belong with the head. Oy. On the plus side, they have superior loin size and a good disposition.
I actually recognized the difference in the birth announcements (Sussexes vs. Cambridge’s and York’s) the day that ‘Archie’ was supposedly born. That, combined with the faux pregnancy, the secrecy behind the ‘birth plans’ (home birth vs. hospital, no hospital step photos, etc.), JH’s weird stable announcement, the presentation of the Darren doll, the fake birth certificate, and the photoshopped Christening photos are what made me think that no baby existed. But I have been open to the fact that either the surrogate refused to give him/her up or that the child was living elsewhere. Still don’t know for sure, except that JH & MM definitely do not have custody of a child.
Does anyone have access to the Telegraph? They have a story about Harry is probably going to have a huge tax bill from the US Internal Revenue service.
I could only read the headline, reporter, and lead:
Headline: Prince Harry faces prospect of hefty tax bill, expert warns
By Victoria Ward
16 AUGUST 2020 • 7:22 PM
The Duke of Sussex faces a significant financial hit from the “zealous” US tax authorities, a royal financial expert has said, warning that the couple had not "thought through” the high cost of California life.
————————-
NO KIDDING!
You have just given me heart failure and a permanent anxiety state. I do not know if my ewe is pregnant (just had her 3 months) and I am beginning to think 'Bubba' may not be up to the job (pun intended). I have yet to have to deliver any lambs (thank you St. Francis) and am praying I won't now. Oh no...........But thank you for the heads up (I will start watching YT videos on how to do it). Bubba is so friendly he just follows me around like a puppy and wants me to constantly pet him.
So true with HAMS.
Abraham Lincoln also was quoted as I would not join an organization that wants me. Why have a Kentucky born, poor man who married above himself? I refuse to believe it is because I am President.
Some have also mentioned $ from the Queen Mum’s estate, but she didn’t own a lot in her own right as most of her hubby’s property would have gone to the Queen and the Queen even had to quietly pay off the considerable debts the Queen Mum left behind. So, Queen Mum may have said she was leaving more to Hapless because William would get the throne, but she really didn’t have much to give.
Megsy may have made $5 mil total from all her 7 years on Suits, but as others have pointed out, take 20% off the top for agent/manager/lawyer fees, that leaves $4 mil, take 2 mil off that for income tax (that may be a bit high, if any accountant types want to weigh in), that leaves $2 mil divided by 7 years gives her 300k a year to live on. With rent, clothing, travel, wigs, Tig at $300 a bottle, p.r., she would have had very little in the bank when she met Hapless. Also explains to a certain extent the yachting, and her excited posts on the Tig when she merched and got free shoes.
The only way I can see that they would take such a financial gamble on a house they can’t really afford, is that Charles either guaranteed the mortgage (or holds it for that matter) or it’s a vendor take-back to that shady Russian and “favours” have been promised or they’re counting on a bailout from the RF when they default, like Andrew and Fergie’s white elephant ski chalet.
If Charles was involved, my theory is (since I saw the pap photo of her in the white potato sack dress) she is preggo with #2 and Hapless whined and cried to daddy that she needs another extended mat leave so can’t “work”, they need a home, William has xyz and poor Hapless has nothing, blah blah blah.
I am prejudice so I would not say sheep are dumb, in fact I think they are pretty smart (figure out which trash can holds their feed, comes when called, hears my voice from way off and they start to "baaaaaaa" for me), but the poor dears are truly subject to predation (enough said). I find them to be sweet animals unless there is the occasional mean ram with horns. I used to like lamb meat but now I can't bring myself to eat it. Warning for animal lovers, don't buy cashmere sweaters from China as the goats are often treated horribly and the fur is harvested in winter sometimes leaving the animals to freeze to death.
Have to sign off now, it's getting too late for me.
People whine that Harry Hasnut will be a son, then a sibling of a king, and thus above the average taxpayer. The Queen has four children. Charles is the heir. The three siblings knew that they were going to be nothing special. When Charles is King, William will have one sibling. William is careful about not messing with taxpayer money; he is furious about what Charles is giving Harry, as the Cornish tenants should come first, and not illegal money given to a traitor.
Harry and Charles, Queen and company must tell the truth about Harry. As an American, I am pi’s..d off about millions spent to protect a nothing, nobody woman, who now looks, forgive me, like a Shetland pony.
Here is the article from the Telegraph
Prince Harry faces prospect of hefty tax bill in California, expert warns
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s new lifestyle in California is likely to cost several million a year in bills, security and tax
Part I
The Duke of Sussex faces a significant financial hit from the “zealous” US tax authorities, a royal financial expert has said, warning that the couple had not "thought through" the high cost of Californian life.
The Duke and Duchess spent more than $14.6m on an impressive estate in Montecito, California, where they plan to live long-term and raise their son, Archie, in relative normality.
But once Prince Harry has spent 183 days in the US over a three-year period, he will be considered a resident for tax purposes and liable for tax.
David McClure, author of forthcoming book The Queen's True Worth, said: “California is a high tax state and he’s likely to get a hit.
“I don’t think Harry and Meghan have totally thought through the financial consequences of their exit from the Royal Family.
“The more their expenditure rises in California, the greater the pressure to generate their own income in more downmarket, commercial deals. That’s always been the worry of the palace.”
Mr McClure said that the Duke would have to hand over much more detail about his personal finances and earnings than he would ever have had to do in the UK.
“The US taxman is much more zealous than his UK counterpart and for that reason, Harry will have to watch his step on the income he generates,” he added.
The Sussexes are estimated to have a joint worth of between £16m and £20m. The combined outgoings of property tax, mortgage repayments, staff, security and the £18,000 a month they are repaying the UK taxpayer for the refurbishment of Frogmore House in Windsor, are vast, and have been estimated to reach up to £5m annually.
Their Santa Barbara estate was purchased through a shell company listed at the Los Angeles address of Meghan’s long term business manager, Andrew Meyer.
There are no names attached to the trust but the same address was used by the Duchess when she set up her other companies, Frim Fram and MM Global, which Mr McClure said could suggest they are worried about the tax implications of any association with Prince Harry.
The type of visa he has travelled on will be key in determining his tax status.
It has been suggested he is unlikely to apply for a Green Card or citizenship, which would require him to renounce his titles and would make him liable for tax on worldwide income, including UK-held trusts.
Foreign citizens who marry an American and intend to reside in the US must obtain a US immigrant visa to become a lawful permanent resident.
It is possible that Prince Harry used diplomatic status to enter the US but given that he is no longer working on behalf of the Royal Family, it is thought unlikely.
Another option could have been a 0-1 extraordinary ability visa, which he could have gained with the help of high profile backers and reliance on his unique status or the founding of an event such as the Invictus Games.
A spokesman for Prince Harry declined to comment but insisted they would “follow the same legal requirements as everyone else.”
Love the Just Horrible moniker, and, yes, a Shetland pony is a good descriptor.
Your numbers on Meg sound about right. The income tax might be high, but it is possble as she was a resident of Canada and actually paid a 50% rate on her net take-home (figure about $540K/year). Clearly, she lost 20% off the top. Such is show biz.
I never believed the numbers the tabloid press liked to throw around regarding her net worth. Most of the writers for these periodicals have no idea how to calculate such things. My guess is she had less than say $500K to $750K in the bank when she met Haz and no other assets. She also probably had credit card debt and perhaps some other obligations that were taken care of.
With respect to Harry's trust, a good rule of thumb is untouched well managed (for principal protection) money can double every 10 years. Some use 7 years, but considering the internet bubble, the financial crisis and now the Rona, I will stick with 10. He could actually have a number approaching $30M, but probably not more. I just do not know how UK Trusts are taxed particularly if they are untouched. Most likely taxes will still be owed on interest, dividends and capital gains on an annual basis.
I too have read that the Queen Mum had more debts (~$70M) and few liquid assets. Her reported grand gestures of providing gifts to great grandchildren might just be PR. Interestingly, her mother-in-law, Queen Mary, who had one of the most fabulous jewellery collections (Granny's Chips), left all the loot straight to HMTQ.
It is a jumbo mortgage (non conforming.) I doubt a US Bank would accept a UK Trust as collateral. That leads me to believe it is a private mortgage or what we call in RE, "hard money lending." It could be from the seller or someone else. That means the terms will be more onerous that a conventional mortgage. Higher interest rate and shorter term, with a BIG FAT BALLOON PAYMENT not too far in the distance.
Texels are fall breeders. You *might* get some late December lambs if the beginning of Autumn is cool but, in Texas, I'm doubtful. It's usually hotter'n hell here interspersed with hurricane-force winds. I will keep my fingers crossed that your ewe will not need any help, but, uh, you better record the breeding, count the days, and be out there just in case. If you're prepared, they won't need help. If you aren't, they will (grin).
Someone I know in public relations who has worked in the film and television industries once told me that the numbers we see bandied about are often an educated guess at the total of wealth of a particular actor, actress, or producer director etc. Those numbers are based on estimates or known amounts the person has earned during their entire career.
So I’d think that Meghan could have earned a total of $5 million during her entire career after college, with the bulk of it her earnings from Suits.
But when you start to subtract fees for her publicist, agent (who usually gets a flat percentage), fees for legal representation, clothing, including the $40,000 shoe collection Meghan touted on the Tig, fees for web hosting, photography services, web design and maintaining her blog, costs for hair including, hair relaxing treatments, hair color, extensions and weaves, facials, makeup, a stylist, plastic surgery including tuneups with Botox and lip fillers, gym and fitness trainer and Pilates training costs, travel, storage of her personal belongings, tent in Toronto, a car, auto insurance, car maintenance and repairs, food, health insurance, home furnishings, pet costs including vet checkups and boarding when she traveled, dining out, food and utilities at her townhouse, SoHo club fees, recreational drugs, yoga class fees and who knows what else. Oh yes, and TAXES.
I’ve read that Meghan was anywhere between down to her last $350,000 to being totally out of money when she was dating Harry, which would not surprise me. Narcissists are not good money managers. They are good at spending, but not managing it.
At any rate, I have never believed Meghan had a net worth of $5 million when she was dating and married Harry.
One interesting tidbit: There was a HarryMarkle post of an email in the HarryMarkle Timeline section that HarryMarkle received about six weeks before the wedding that has since been removed.
It was an email to Harry Markle from someone who HarryMarkle said was a reliable source.
I’m not sure why HarryMarkle removed it, but I thought it was worth copying at time I read it. I can easily access it for you and publish it on this thread if you wish.
The source told HarryMarkle that Harry and Meghan were fighting all the time after the engagement. It also says she was flat broke by the time of the engagement. It goes on to explain some of what she was doing to make money, which got back to Harry.
Let me know if you want me to publish it here.
1) H doesnt need Charles money for his new house. He has a new Daddy to pay for him. Whatever his name is who’s 6th? wife is Megs friend from school.
2) arent the rich and famous the ones who are always spruiking liberal politics. Why are they now fleeing LA if they have the governance they wanted?
3) how come some articles about M & H in the DM have comments moderated and some dont
4) if Doria owns a house in California and M is Californian wouldnt she have some idea of how much the taxes are that have to be paid in the state?
5) I read that there is now 50% of FF but if you google funding freedom PDF there are sites where you can download if for free like the Lady C book
6) can anyone name 1 actor in 1 movie that got 20M$ because they acted like a robot but could get bums on seats
https://twitter.com/artemisgoog
@HappyDays, I remember reading Harry Markle saying she was pulling files for the book she is writing (had hoped she would compile her work) but said she will be replacing whatever she pulls, so the articles will be back on her blog.
Apologies for the dot points and not adding names to my comments. Im working to a deadline
1) H doesnt need Charles money for his new house. He has a new Daddy to pay for him. Whatever his name is who’s 6th? wife is Megs friend from school. Sergei Grishin?
2) arent the rich and famous the ones who are always spruiking liberal politics. Why are they now fleeing LA if they have the governance they wanted? They want to destroy, DESTROY Life. Get the most out of it, for their own pleasure, then DESTROY.
3) how come some articles about M & H in the DM have comments moderated and some dont Good question. Milking the story for all it's worth, is my guess.
4) if Doria owns a house in California and M is Californian wouldnt she have some idea of how much the taxes are that have to be paid in the state?Yeah. Doria is a sinister component of this whole equation.
5) I read that there is now 50% of FF but if you google funding freedom PDF there are sites where you can download if for free like the Lady C book Good!!!
6) can anyone name 1 actor in 1 movie that got 20M$ because they acted like a robot but could get bums on seats Nope, LOL
Secondly, The Crowns of Britain has a new posting from August 12th. Watch for the GIF of the woman with her head under a horse’s rear end, with predictable results.
Symbolism
The blue background of the shield represents the Pacific Ocean off the California coast, while the two golden rays across the shield are symbolic of the sunshine of the Duchess's home state. The three quills represent communication and the power of words. Beneath the shield on the grass sits a collection of golden poppies, California's state flower, and wintersweet, which grows at Kensington Palace. The songbird with wings elevated as if flying and an open beak represents the power of communication.
And the RF really didn't forsee problems?!?!?!?!
Sorry to interrupt this wonderful thread, but back to Megain and H.s monikers for a moment:
Did anyone mention one of my favorites, Woko Ono?
As you were...
I so agree (and mostly with your full comment too). I’ve only known him getting access to his funds at 30 (William too). I do think his wealth is probably a little exaggerated, but truly we don’t know what amount his trust was worth at the time he had access to it. However, I do wonder how depleted it is.
To me, it looks as if the DM goes out its way not to criticise her themselves but to let the Great British Public do it. Her gripe is that they don't censor anything as long as it falls within the law - she wants to censor lawful expression of opinion.
I agree DM has a responsibility not to support "hate speech" through reader comments. But I don't think those are the only comments that get deleted, not by a long shot.
I don't comment anymore on DM but I did in the past. And I'd say about 1/2 of my comments got deleted because of "complaints." Other times my comments never appeared. And yet other times large "chunks" of comments disappeared (not necessarily including any of mine.) For example, there might be a run of negative comments posted and the entries say posted about 25 minutes ago. Five minutes later, the time stamps show only comments posted 40 minutes ago and 20 minutes ago. The negative comments that would now be 30 minutes old are just gone.
To a large degree, I realize hate speech can be in the eye of the beholder. But I truly don't think my comments were hate speech. And I think the concept of hate speech is trivialized if it is applied equally to threats/demeaning comments related to someone's race and criticism of an overpriced wrinkled dress. So I don't really know what DM is doing.
1. There has been a lot of conflict with Charles. They have made peace but it is a fragile one.
2. Harry came up with/will come up with the money. He thinks it will make her happy, but I kept hearing 'Here is where the marriage ends'!
3. Meghan is deceiving Harry (came up for 3 of the cards), is feeling very confident and is involved with another man in some way.
Cultural appropriation?
I wasn't sure if if was still OK to use Yiddish words, even if one is a shiksa - yes, I had one Jewish boyfriend and I don't think his mother realised I was a Gentile. Even some of the Jewish lads at the first school I worked in told me I `had' to be Jewish because of my colouring - so kind of them not to mention the nose.
Scottish male hair braids? That's a new one on me! Sounds like New Ageism! Heaven help any English person who braids their hair in corn rows. Perhaps the difference is that there aren't many Blacks in Scotland?
For the history of the modern pleated kilt, see
https://www.highlifehighland.com/inverness-museum-and-art-gallery/about-us/
https://greatscotscotland.com/blogs/news/the-rawlinson-myth-did-an-englishman-really-invent-the-modern-kilt-3-min-read
Most Scots are very laid back about who wears what tartan but I imagine some of the more rabid nationalists may go down the path of getting at non-Scots who presume to wear tartan.
Even the Cornish have a tartan now and dress up as Highlanders, never mind that their language is closer to Welsh & Breton, than the Gaelic which came from Old Irish - see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_languages
As a 14yr-old I tried teaching myself Gaelic. Didn't get very far.
I can understand the hurt caused when sacred symbols are misused - I didn't like it when the cross became a fashion statement but Christians (along with anyone perceived as `posh') seem to be the only ones who are not allowed, in some quarters, to complain in contemporary British culture. I almost lost my job once through objecting to a student wearing T-shirt with a slogan describing Jesus with a taboo word - never mind that the student could have been arrested had he worn it in public. I was quite surprised at how deeply I felt it. Clearly being nice to the little sh*t was more important to the authorities than what he'd done.
People never cease to surprise me - I was astonished at the depth of the vehemence I got from a geologist (yes, a scientist) when I mentioned I'd visited the stone circle at Callanish - he was a Pagan and believed that non-believers should be excluded from the site. Whoops!
I don't suppose there could be a policy of deleting, say, every 20th comment, just to say they do delete some? Nah, that wouldn't account for Nutties being banned.
Or have we been identified from this blog? If I commented, I wouldn't use WBBM. Has anyone been taken down after posting under their Nutty pseudonym and then using a different one? If so, could it be the computer that's been recognised?
I only know what happened to me obviously. My DM experience largely predated my experience here on NF and I was using a different but similar pseudonym. But after a comment is deleted there may be more attention paid to comments from that account (or an unofficial banning for a period of time.) I don't think I was "officially" outright banned though as I was still able to comment pretty often if I tried to. That wasn't recently though.
I think M sugars report negative comments and some get deleted for "complaints" but obviously not all do. I think there may have been a concerted effort by the Sussex team to get comments deleted when they still had a UK team. But I'm not sure how decisions are made at DM. Some pretty strong negative comments remain today mostly about the Cambridges including George. I'm not sure why saying a biracial woman's hair looked a straggly mess at an official event is less acceptable than saying Kate is ugly, too thin, wrinkled, snobby, old, mean, stupid, disgusting, contemptible, and so on. But apparently it is. Of course, worse things about Kate may have been deleted.
I am now convinced she had been told she would not be able to return to UK. She dropped all restraint.
Prince Harry faces prospect of hefty tax bill in California, expert warns
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's new lifestyle in California is likely to cost several million a year in bills, security and tax
By Victoria Ward
16 August 2020 • 7:22pm
----------------------------------
PART I
The Duke of Sussex faces a significant financial hit from the “zealous” US tax authorities, a royal financial expert has said, warning that the couple had not "thought through" the high cost of Californian life.
The Duke and Duchess spent more than $14.6m on an impressive estate in Montecito, California, where they plan to live long-term and raise their son, Archie, in relative normality.
But once Prince Harry has spent 183 days in the US over a three-year period, he will be considered a resident for tax purposes and liable for tax.
David McClure, author of forthcoming book The Queen's True Worth, said: “California is a high tax state and he’s likely to get a hit.
“I don’t think Harry and Meghan have totally thought through the financial consequences of their exit from the Royal Family.
“The more their expenditure rises in California, the greater the pressure to generate their own income in more downmarket, commercial deals. That’s always been the worry of the palace.”
Mr McClure said that the Duke would have to hand over much more detail about his personal finances and earnings than he would ever have had to do in the UK.
“The US taxman is much more zealous than his UK counterpart and for that reason, Harry will have to watch his step on the income he generates,” he added.
Harry's new daddy is David Foster whose wife Katharine McPhee who is a friend of MM's (for the time being).
The Sussexes are estimated to have a joint worth of between £16m and £20m. The combined outgoings of property tax, mortgage repayments, staff, security and the £18,000 a month they are repaying the UK taxpayer for the refurbishment of Frogmore House in Windsor, are vast, and have been estimated to reach up to £5m annually.
Their Santa Barbara estate was purchased through a shell company listed at the Los Angeles address of Meghan’s long term business manager, Andrew Meyer.
There are no names attached to the trust but the same address was used by the Duchess when she set up her other companies, Frim Fram and MM Global, which Mr McClure said could suggest they are worried about the tax implications of any association with Prince Harry.
The type of visa he has travelled on will be key in determining his tax status.
It has been suggested he is unlikely to apply for a Green Card or citizenship, which would require him to renounce his titles and would make him liable for tax on worldwide income, including UK-held trusts.
Foreign citizens who marry an American and intend to reside in the US must obtain a US immigrant visa to become a lawful permanent resident.
It is possible that Prince Harry used diplomatic status to enter the US but given that he is no longer working on behalf of the Royal Family, it is thought unlikely.
Another option could have been a 0-1 extraordinary ability visa, which he could have gained with the help of high profile backers and reliance on his unique status or the founding of an event such as the Invictus Games.
A spokesman for Prince Harry declined to comment but insisted they would “follow the same legal requirements as everyone else.”
I replied to London Gent without checking to see if anyone else had. Apologies for duplicating your post.
The blue background of the shield represents the Pacific Ocean off the California coast, while the two golden rays across the shield are symbolic of the sunshine of the Duchess's home state.
------------------
Perhaps "the two golden rays" represent her golden shower? They fall appropriately on the grass. Any other representations for her coat of arms?
Ọya (formerly Duke of Edinburgh Fan) 🇺🇳
@fanofprincephil
·
12m
I’d give money to this. Calling on #SussexSquad techies to launch a Project Harriet Tubman dedicated to freeing up the truth in the #MeghanAndHarry saga, and revealing the utter vileness of online trolls and British media. Make the videos.
Quote Tweet
Ọya (formerly Duke of Edinburgh Fan) 🇺🇳
@fanofprincephil
· 10h
Replying to @switisani
We need a Project Lincoln type effort to expose the abuse which Meghanhad been faced with. Project Harriet
Blogger Sandie said...
My personal opinion, based on reason, is that the marriage will endure. Financially, Meghan needs Harry. She also needs him for status, and I think her ego loves having a husband she can control, dominate and manipulate. He will never leave her (severe Stockholm syndrome!) and has left a wake of destruction behind him in following her to where they are now. Perhaps the more ridiculous the debacle becomes, the more attention they will get and the more in demand they will be on the social scene (let's invite the crazy prince and his awful wife for fun, at their expense).
Women that were acceptable or suitable wife material wouldn't have Harry. I wouldn't want to be shackled with a mentally-ill man with reportedly limited intellect even if the chains were made of gold rather than steel. I'd rather waitress at a local BBQ restaurant and be my own person rather than live in bondage to anybody else. I wouldn't fault any woman for running screaming for the exit, even MM.
MM has a loooong history of using, abusing, and discarding anybody that she no longer has use for whether it is male lovers or female friends. I don't see this as a huge love match. My opinion is that this marriage will last exactly as long as Harry is of use to her, no longer. When Harry's money or status runs out, I don't see her happily supporting him in the style in which he is accustomed.
I believe that if she were a better actress, she could have pulled off the public appearances and charity work. She could have put her heart and soul into them, worked her butt off and then, in the inevitable breakup, would have been regarded with great sympathy by the public and probably financially rewarded by the family.
Oh, well.
Yes... More like MM threw a hissy fit and got Harry to have a word with Angela Kelly.
Wonder what the interview is (who with, what about, where, when).
Blogger Sandie said...
My personal opinion, based on reason, is that the marriage will endure. Financially, Meghan needs Harry. She also needs him for status, and I think her ego loves having a husband she can control, dominate and manipulate. He will never leave her (severe Stockholm syndrome!) and has left a wake of destruction behind him in following her to where they are now. Perhaps the more ridiculous the debacle becomes, the more attention they will get and the more in demand they will be on the social scene (let's invite the crazy prince and his awful wife for fun, at their expense).
Women that were acceptable or suitable wife material wouldn't have Harry. I wouldn't want to be shackled with a mentally-ill man with reportedly limited intellect even if the chains were made of gold rather than steel. I'd rather waitress at a local BBQ restaurant and be my own person rather than live in bondage to anybody else. I wouldn't fault any woman for running screaming for the exit, even MM.
MM has a loooong history of using, abusing, and discarding anybody that she no longer has use for whether it is male lovers or female friends. I don't see this as a huge love match. My opinion is that this marriage will last exactly as long as Harry is of use to her, no longer. When Harry's money or status runs out, I don't see her happily supporting him in the style in which he is accustomed.
Yeah. I agree, sadly.
I believe that if she were a better actress, she could have pulled off the public appearances and charity work. She could have put her heart and soul into them, worked her butt off and then, in the inevitable breakup, would have been regarded with great sympathy by the public and probably financially rewarded by the family.
Oh, well.
Yep. Well, some of us have other ideas in mind to poke the Harkles to the point they don't get to enjoy any kind of sycophancy whatsoever.
Wonder what the interview is (who with, what about, where, when).
It's an interview with Kate Thornton, about the book, on True Royalty TV... today!
Let’s hope that’s the case, but she’s never has shown any restraint IMHO. My Mother who’s in her mid 70s (and a monarchist) says they need to be completely cut lose from the Royal family. Money, titles, their line in succession, the lot. She even agreed that the royal family cannot carry on ignoring the pair, that is, the old ways and playing the long game just isn’t working with these two. She also said Andrew needs to be cut free from the family too.
The longer this hideous saga is allowed to carryon, the more the royals look weak, ineffective and surplus to requirements.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/12421322/prince-harry-yelled-what-hell-queen/
Fairy Crocodile said, I am now convinced she had been told she would not be able to return to UK. She dropped all restraint.
---------------------
This is starting to turn out to be a very bad, BAD situation.
"This woman needs to make this work for my future wife" is interesting phrasing. I believe that he would know the name of "this woman" as well as that of his future wife. I hope that our UK friends can enlighten me as to whether they think that the conversation as reported seems authentic. Personally, I think he should have had a word with MM about scheduling things, not bothered HM about MM and her penchant for doing things on the spur of the moment as though the Queen's Dresser has no other duties but to drop everything she may be doing at any time because MM felt like doing something with no notice.
You have a very wide mother. She just summed up the opinion of all long term monarchists who make sure monarchy still exists today. Ignoring their opinion will result in decline for the crown
Yes, over the months there’s been a lot of discussion about how Harry has squandered a lot of his trust money. I suspect there’s truth to it too.
A lot of the royals are money orientated and like to live like multi billionaire Kings, look at Andrew and his relationships with very dodgy people....hmm all for money!
/Should have started two hours ago instead of catching up on reading.
Should have been...
I suspect there’s truth to it to
Just wanted to let you know that the Telegraph article about the tax burden Harry will face had already been posted. :)
SirStinxAlot said, didn't someone comment on a previous thread that H had squandered nearly half of his inheritance away over the years. With his history of misbehavior and shenanigans it wouldn't surprise me.
Yes, over the months there’s been a lot of discussion about how Harry has squandered a lot of his trust money. I suspect there’s truth to it too.
A lot of the royals are money orientated and like to live like multi billio/i>naire Kings, look at Andrew and his relationships with very dodgy people....hmm all for money!
The Harkles are in trouble, however you look at it.
@Lt. Nyota
Just wanted to let you know that the Telegraph article about the tax burden Harry will face had already been posted. :)
Thanks, Rebecca. Apologies to all here for duplication.
I agree, and if the Duo aren’t in serious trouble now, they very soon will be. The overall running costs of their wanted lifestyle isn’t sustainable long term. Pray they come a cropper very soon!
Thanks for the details of the interview :)
LOL
Sorry for not scrolling up to find your name, but this thread is getting really, really long!
I meant wise of course, sorry! Will switch off the damn autocorrect
Lol it’s fine, I knew exactly what you meant. Besides, I make more typos (of every kind) than anyone, so no apology necessary. ;o)
https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary-workers/o-1-visa-individuals-with-extraordinary-ability-or-achievement
Yes, Charles is being blamed for funding the mansion without any proof that he has done so.
Personally, I don't think the BRF had any idea that this purchase was happening. That's been MM's MO all along- to do what she wants, and then inform the BRF later or not inform them at all.
Part 1.
What is required of the British monarchy?
The answer is obvious, though it is both painful and embarrassing to admit: It is a willingness to be consumed. Sometimes, as when I watched the 12-year-old Prince Harry walk behind the coffin of his mother, Princess Diana, I think monarchy is less a national enchantment, or hoax, than a national sickness. I have done a jigsaw puzzle of the queen’s face. I bought it at the gift shop at Sandringham, the queen’s country home. What is that but an act of control by the subject of the object?
It is hard for outsiders to know what British people want from the royal family. Sometimes even members of the family, for reasons of self-preservation, do not allow themselves to know. And if Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, know what it is, then they are disenchanted.
The couple retired from royal life earlier this year and have retreated to California, from where they have sent a list of instances in which they have been harmed by the British media and the royal household. The list is called “Finding Freedom,” the new biography of the couple by Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie, published this week. It is a book Harry and Meghan obviously endorse — and, I suspect, may have written passages of. It feels like autobiography.
It is a plaintive document with fascinating detail. For instance, that Meghan was accused by the British media — less a nemesis than a mean girl, an ever-watchful frenemy — of wearing the wrong color of nail polish (too dark) to the British Fashion Awards. But, Ms. Durand and Mr. Scobie write, “There was no nail polish protocol.” Meghan asked Queen Elizabeth II’s dresser Angela Kelly, the queen’s working-class friend, for a hair with tiara rehearsal before her wedding. The dresser ignored the request until the queen intervened. We learn that Meghan “has always taken pride in being a great packer” of clothes and that Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, still colloquially known as Kate Middleton, sent Meghan flowers on her birthday but that “Meghan would far rather have had Kate check in on her during the most difficult times with the press.”
The couple retired from royal life earlier this year and have retreated to California, from where they have sent a list of instances in which they have been harmed by the British media and the royal household. The list is called “Finding Freedom,” the new biography of the couple by Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie, published this week. It is a book Harry and Meghan obviously endorse — and, I suspect, may have written passages of. It feels like autobiography.
It is a plaintive document with fascinating detail. For instance, that Meghan was accused by the British media — less a nemesis than a mean girl, an ever-watchful frenemy — of wearing the wrong color of nail polish (too dark) to the British Fashion Awards. But, Ms. Durand and Mr. Scobie write, “There was no nail polish protocol.” Meghan asked Queen Elizabeth II’s dresser Angela Kelly, the queen’s working-class friend, for a hair with tiara rehearsal before her wedding. The dresser ignored the request until the queen intervened. We learn that Meghan “has always taken pride in being a great packer” of clothes and that Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, still colloquially known as Kate Middleton, sent Meghan flowers on her birthday but that “Meghan would far rather have had Kate check in on her during the most difficult times with the press.”
No royals are explicitly abused in the book. Prince William and Catherine emerge as cold (when they are merely English) but nothing worse. Prince William called Meghan “this girl.” Catherine went shopping without offering Meghan a lift in her Range Rover, although both were going to the same street.
Throughout the book, Prince Harry’s disgust with Britons’ treatment of royalty is visible. He said as much when he filed a lawsuit against a newspaper for publishing a letter Meghan wrote to her estranged father, Thomas Markle, which he then leaked: “Though this action may not be the safe one, it is the right one,” Harry said in a statement. “Because my deepest fear is history repeating itself. I’ve seen what happens when someone I love is commoditized to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.”
But it’s clear that the main purpose of this book is to serve as Meghan’s testimony. She is a perfectionist, and her failure to succeed at royalty clearly grates. This book says: I did my best. I could not have done more. But the truth is, she did too much. The best insight in “Finding Freedom” is from a former senior courtier, who compares Meghan with the silent — and therefore now adored — Catherine. Meghan “talks about life and how we should live,” the courtier told the authors. “That’s the way in America. In Britain, people look at that and go, ‘Who do you think you are?’”
The royal family is a sacrifice at the center of Britain’s national life, fuel for the creation of a national soul because we can’t think of anything better. Sometimes it works. Often — and increasingly — it doesn’t. We dress them up in coronets. We play with them like toys. It has nothing to do with admiration or love. They submit to us, not we to them.
And if they are to survive this monstrous game? They do what is required. The women put weights on their hemlines, so that they do not swing in a breeze. The men are discreet and they are pliant. They allow the nation to project what it wants on them.
The Sussexes did not understand this. Harry confused sacrifice with service. Meghan confused it with fame.
I always thought Harry chose a woman, however subconsciously, who would free him, and “Finding Freedom” seems to confirm it here: “‘Fundamentally, Harry wanted out,’ a source close to the couple said. ‘Deep down, he was always struggling within that world. She’s opened the door for him on that.’”
“He was also sick,” the authors write, “of the hypocrisy of the media outlets that glorified Meghan one day and tore her down the next.” It is not hypocrisy; it is cynicism. The newspapers do not love Meghan, and they do not hate her. One day she is an inspiration. The next she is a torment.
It would eventually have settled, if they had. I think it is admirable that they didn’t.
Tanya Gold writes for Harper’s Magazine.
Re: twitter handles. It has been surmised that MeMe uses/used "Strongwrite", "This little petal" among others. It has been postulated that she would comment on DM articles under the name "Pinkdye" among others.
The woman was a Senior Royal and yet had time to flame other commenters??? Was this part of her "work"? Egads!
I agree and said as much on the previous thread. However, Charles hasn’t issued a denial either. I think it’s time the royal family changed tactics and need to start being rather more transparent too. Leaving the British public to wonder especially if tax payers money (via the Duchy or otherwise) is being used to fund the Dubious Duo is not okay or acceptable. This includes their security costs, which there’s been an eerie and deafening silence on as well.
Thanks for the shout-out. Yes, this is exactly what I'm afraid of. Meg probably convinced Haz that investing in this Russian mob house would be the way to show his family that the Harkles can too make it on their own without hand-outs from Daddy.
I have to believe that behind closed doors at BP furious crisis meetings are in progress. The Queen denied a tiara on the grounds of 'provenance' . . ie, 'Russian'--(though I think the provenance excuse was just a civilized way of telegraphing 'Harry's grasping bint is NOT getting her mitts on this tiara, ever.'--if this is the Vladimir tiara we are talking about, the Queen wears it fairly often and provenance is not at issue.
But now Thick-Headed Harry and his Narco showgirl are in hock to the Russians for millions of dollars. I hope their security detail is taking extra training, that's all I can say. Meg's MO her whole life has been welshing on her debts and letting some man take care of them for her--her daddy, her first (second) husband, her boyfriend, now her dim (third) husband's family . . but maybe Madam will learn at firsthand what happens when one attempts to welsh on financial obligations to the Russian underworld.
When the Firm let Harry go off and find his bliss in North America last year, they *had* to know it would come to something like this. Harry is the dumbest member of the family, and he's been turned loose on his own recognizance with evidently plenty of access to Charles/Duchy money and a wife in whose best interests it is that he stay stupid and just do as he's told and sign what she shoves in front of him. Things must have been indeed absolutely intolerable back home in England for those two to have been set free/kicked out.
I suppose the monarchy will survive this bobble. History is long and the family has dealt with worse. In the scheme of things, Herr Hitler was worse than Meghan. They should put that on a T-Shirt and maybe they could sell a couple million of those and put the proceeds toward the "Free Harry!" fund. But I am increasingly concerned that Harry will not survive this. There's a very fair chance that this marriage will endure . . .for as long as Harry endures. The way he's going, and the way he looks now? I wonder if he will see 40.
I think MM is purposely pushing their buttons, trying to get the BRF to respond. That's one trait of a narcissist. To push people into saying or doing something they don't want to do.
I'm reading Lady C's book, Daughter of Narcissus, in which she discusses her mother, who was a narcissist. The book was published in 2016, a month before The Harkles "allegedly" met, so the book has nothing to do with MM, but the parallels between Lady C's mother's narc actions and those of MM are eye-opening.
The BRF shouldn't have to lower themselves to a public gutter fight with a lowlife like MM. You just don't win with narcs like MM because they will always go one step lower than you ever imagined anybody could do.
If I was a member of the BRF, I wouldn't publicly respond, either. MM is doing a stellar job of ruining her own reputation and becoming one of the most reviled people in the world. I'd just let her and her minions dig themselves deeper and deeper.
However, because I think they have some sort of contact for the one year deal, after that one year is up, I'd completely disown them and remove all titles and privileges. That will show where the BRF stands on The Harkles.
However, Charles hasn’t issued a denial either. I think it’s time the royal family changed tactics and need to start being rather more transparent too. Leaving the British public to wonder especially if tax payers money (via the Duchy or otherwise) is being used to fund the Dubious Duo is not okay or acceptable. This includes their security costs, which there’s been an eerie and deafening silence on as well.
Agree wholeheartedly that the BRF's MO of "Never complain; never explain" is no longer a viable strategy in our digital age as exemplified by Meg. Once upon a time, when the news cycle was more sedate, and there was more or less universal deference still showed the family by journalists, this strategy enhanced their dignity and gravitas. Unfounded rumors (or even founded ones) withered and died on the vine if the Family refused to engage.
Things are vastly different now. There has to be a clear and unequivocal statement (along with a willingness to release financials) that the Crown is no longer supporting the Harkles in America with any Duchy monies. Charles has agreed to fund the security costs, which he should do--Harry is still a blood royal and this is his father's obligation. It's Harry's obligation to make his own hires from local talent. Now that the Harkles are in bed with Russian financiers, they have introduced an element of danger into their lives that steadfastly was not there before. That's Harry's problem now.
Any other expenditures relating to the couple's lives in California should be completely on them *as per their stated wish during Megxit.* If this house deal falls through and they wind up living in a caravan on the beach--so be it. The security can live in a pup tent outside of the caravan.
The Palace rarely speaks, but now it must, unless they want Elizabeth II to be the last sovereign of the United Kingdom. The rumblings are getting louder. The courtiers need to revisit France at the time of Marie Antoinette and her Louis and realize that the current situation is very similar.
If ER is the last, they went out with a bang, but want a sad finish to an almost impeccable reign. I really think the Queen has withdrawn largely from the sordid day-to-day details and left the managing of the Harkle snafu to her son and heir. Is he just sweeping it all under the carpet, to his detriment . . .or are they polishing the big guns as we speak. The final review is in a few months' time. If BP is determined to let that run out, as per their word, I hope they are ready to move swiftly the minute the year is up. Harry is a lost cause--Charles and his mother must accept this, however painful. The future of their dynasty is at stake.
I think there is some obvious reason why the Harkles hooked up with the Russians. Not to disparage the Russians (as my heritage ion mother's side is Russian/Polish) but these Billionaires have usually been involved in some kind of illegal money schemes because the average Russian earns a very lowly pay (I correspond with a lady there I met through the internet). So its because of the reputation that I don't think Charles has anything to do with the purchase of the house owned by a Russian billionaire. Just my feeling folks. Also that the RE transaction is sent to Meghan's business agent/gr seems like a clear indication the Harkles bought it themselves and hence the PR bragging they bought it themselves. I am reminded of an old saying though, "when you lay down with dogs you get fleas" and the Harkles will be lucky if things turn out well for them.
I would guess that Markle convinced Harry the purchase was a good investment and worth the risk. Afterall the mansion was bought at such a hefty discount, but was it. The Russian it appears originally paid too much for it. So he had it on the market and it didn't sell because it was extremely overpriced. But I could see how Meghan cajoled Harry saying "oh Honey, we are getting such a great deal, and we are paying millions of dollars below what it is worth". Well they may have paid approximately what its value is according to market comparisons.
I personally find the estate unremarkable in that the bones of the house are ok, the interior decoration on the side of ugly (not worthy of Architectural Digest material) and although the grounds are lush the landscape design is mediocre and I do mean average (despite hundred yr old olive trees which my folks house in Diamond Ba, CA had supplied by the track home developer. lol). However, the home could be improved if they put some money into it and maybe Meghan is already working on that. I had to laugh when a Nutty wrote the home looks like it would be stinky and I imagined that yes, the Russian oligarch probably smoked his big fat Cuban cigars throughout the house thus imparting the stench in the drapes, the furnishings, the carpet, etc... But of course, Meghan can install her aroma infusers to rid it of its 'mustiness'.
I can see why no one saw any moving vans move-in the home because they bought a turn-key mansion with all the furnishings. That's not my cup of if tea to sleep in someone else's bed and look at their choice of art (the horse head picture could be picked up at your average art show held in the grocery store parking lot on the weekend. A few days ago I wrote that Harry will love the game room (with all the video/pinball arcade like games) and I was corrected by a Nutty stating that the furnishings did not go with the house. I think I was right and Harry will like his man cave, probably a bit too much for Meghan's liking. While she is on the phone talking to attorneys he will be playing to his heart's content, because he probably never ever had the opportunity to do such a thing while a royal, even his military service didnt allow him to squander his life away like he has now. Perhaps he is making his constructive zoom meetings but what do they entail, a few hours of time every few weeks. He may earn a new nickname, 'Pinhead Harry', er no wait, 'Pinball Harry'. and his wife is 'Meg McMansion'.
Continued...
I feel sorry for them (not really) for they are like many Americans chained to a mortgage and will feel the financial bite if they can't make regular payments but I am not as Tatty may think we are jealous...no, because I bought within my means and just paid off my mortgage so the Harkles can envy me and I don't hire gardeners, my sheep keep the lawn mowed. Lol. Charles need to ship a few of his sheep as a Christmas gift, as interesting enough in California people in wildfire areas rent goats to keep their hillside brush down (except Montecito probably doesn't allow it.) Little Archie could have a lamb as a playmate since the little tyke wont be going to 'Mommie and Me' playgroups due to Meghan's being so notorious, no wait, so famous. Things so often seem to be opposite of what they are with the Harkles. Now we see what could be a wonderful purchase of a 'home may now become a millstone around their neck.
I can hardly wait to see what they will do to earn the money to support their home. A poster had a brief blurb about Meghan inquiring (?) about the possibility of being appointed to Kamal Harris Congressional Senate seat (if Biden wins). Well, Newsome would have to have his head examined if he even took the call from Meghan for such a preposterous action. Meghan wouldn't even get on the local school board IMO. She has no credentials and I suspect the good people in Montecito probably have enough sense not to vote for her. And that is the thing, Meghan has megalomania and could never start at the bottom, as she as many point out, has NPD and probably think she is qualified for a state or federal level spot. But it would be sure fun to see her run for something as the media and her opponents would make mincemeat out of her. In any even this election year cycle is out but she could poise herself for the 2022 one.
I do absolutely agree I really do, but and it’s a big but. I think not doing anything, be it issuing any kind of statement or otherwise isn’t a wise move for the royals right now. Playing the long game has always been the royal family’s MO (and to date it’s worked), but we’re not even 6 months in after the Duo’s departure and look at the absolute shite thrown at the royals and Britain in that short time. This isn’t going to get better anytime soon, I suspect it will continue and quite possibly get much worse. The yearly review is too far ahead, something needs to be done now IMHO, with or without informing the British public. :o/
The BRF shouldn't have to lower themselves to a public gutter fight with a lowlife like MM. You just don't win with narcs like MM because they will always go one step lower than you ever imagined anybody could do.
If I was a member of the BRF, I wouldn't publicly respond, either. MM is doing a stellar job of ruining her own reputation and becoming one of the most reviled people in the world. I'd just let her and her minions dig themselves deeper and deeper.
However, because I think they have some sort of contact for the one year deal, after that one year is up, I'd completely disown them and remove all titles and privileges. That will show where the BRF stands on The Harkles.
I think the Palace should issue a statement absolving themselves of any involvement in funding the Harkles' Hotel California, but it need not be a gutter fight. The less said the better--but the bare minimum should be said. Just the barest refutation and repeated daily/as often as required. They don't have to elaborate much . . just reassure people that British taxpayers' money is not continuing to be lavished on the renegage wastrel pair. A fuller statement can be forthcoming after the 12-month review date.
I hope that part of the preparations for this is feeling Parliament out upon the matter of the titles. H & M did not honor the terms of Megxit to not exploit their royal titles, for starters. It's the only spar they have left to cling onto in their rapidly disintegrating raft of grandiose ambition for worldwide celebrity. Too freakin' bad. Harry will always be a birth prince, but the Sussex has to go away. Harry is no longer part of the Firm nor is he resident in the country of his Duchy. The ersatz Duchess is not and never will be a British citizen. Bye-bye, Sussex. And beyond a stipend for security costs, bye bye any funding from across the Pond. Now that they are bragging they are homeowners, their vaunted 'self-sufficiency' has been achieved. Bye bye royal teat in any form.
After the divorce, Harry may come crawling back and might be given a gameskeeper's cottage in Scotland as an alternative to living on Skid Row. Dumb pillock's life isn't going to be worth a bucket of Meghan's scented dew by the time she's done with him. I'd say it's not worth much now. In years to come, there will be books written about this Shakespearean tragedy. I can feel the scribes sharpening their pencils. That can be Tom Bower's second volume after his expose on Snarkle.
I liken The Harkle/BRF situation to those who have serious alcoholic or drug addict in the family. Harry will continue to publicly cry about his mental health issues because it gets MM and him what they want from the BRF. MM is well aware of this, and The Harkles are taking great advantage of it.
Of course, the BRF deeply worries and cares about their grandson and brother, but eventually, if the addict is so out of control and repeatedly refuses his family's help, the only thing they can do is to let the addict go. They are beyond help, and I believe Harry has reached this stage.
I agree that he looks like he will not reach his 40th birthday, but he has to help himself. Nobody can do it for him.
Yes, it is hard-hearted and extremely devastating for the family, but when the addict repeatedly refuses family offers of help with their addiction or mental illness, it is time to let them go, especially when they are being controlled by a narc. Besides, Harry is a married adult, and they can't section him. Only MM can do that now, and all of us know that she is not going to get Harry the help he needs. She needs him to be in this condition to control him.
MM says she's trying to help Harry through diet, yoga and meditation, but he's far beyond that now. There are also rumors that she took him off of his medications. Look at how he's devolved in just a few months.
Seen on a forum: IMDB says she was in 108 episodes of Suits. So if it's $1,000/episode then she gets $108,000/year before taxes. Not shabby, personally I could live off of that LOL, but that won't even cover Megs Botox bill.
Yes I felt crappy mentioning that about the biracial bit but it is what it is and there are more white people who can afford IVF and of course they want white babies.
It is MORE important to point out Meghan Markle would not be a viable donor as she is well over 35. Personally I was cut off at 33, a sad day because it meant I would not get another $8000 check and my recipient couple would not get a matching sibling.
This is because prior to every donor round, the donor is freshly tested for her hormonal viability to make sure she is still an optimum candidate. At 33 I was called in to do a sibling donation and after they ran the test they said womp womp you no longer qualify.
They said it didn't mean I couldn't have babies (I don't want any) but that I was no longer in the target range for donors.
Again, no eggs are donated prior to a recipient requesting the match. It is not a sperm bank, the donation happens at the same time as implantation, if the recipient wants to fertilize and freeze additional zygotes that is their choice/expense.
She did not donate her eggs, they are too old.
Is that $1,000 per episode residual a published figure that's verified or are you just throwing it out there? That sounds vastly inflated, if, as was previously published, S. Epatha Merkerson's residuals checks were 'not enough to cover the postage to mail them'. I frankly can't believe her residual income is that low, because L&O is syndicated all over the world. At any given time, there must be dozens of channels worldwide airing a L&O episode. And Ms. Merkerson was in a lot more than 108 episodes over the 20-year run of the program.
She was also a well-respected and established actress apart from this whose agent probably negotiated top fees for his/her client. Megs was just lucky that anybody would give her work, given her abysmal level of talent. She should have been paying the Suits producers for the privilege of having a recurring role. $1000 is far too high based off of whatever her regular fee would have been. $100 sounds more like it, if that isn't still too generous. Maybe it was more along the lines of $10. I don't think she was in the show all that much.
To my mind, there is NO WAY residuals from "Suits" would pay for anything besides the grocery bill.
the only exception to that would be security (limited) PH was born royal and is son/ borhter of future Monarchs, i could see the BRF still lobbying for MODEST security, not MM style bazillion dollar security. i believe PE, PA, and PA all get a security officier as they are HM’s kids. but i don’t believe their spouse or children, Eug, BEa, Phillip, Zara, the wessex kids get security, though i could be wrong.
and i think some tough love is needed, cut them off due to their disloyalty to the crown/ BRF, at least right after the review, but that PC and HM decisions.
@Lt Nyota Uhura. at 2:52
Re: twitter handles. It has been surmised that MeMe uses/used "Strongwrite", "This little petal" among others. It has been postulated that she would comment on DM articles under the name "Pinkdye" among others.
I do remember that commenter, Pinkdye, who then changed her name and location but I knew she had to be the same one as her spelling was atrocious and the spelling mistakes were the same! Not sure it was MM, though, as Pinkdye wrote sycophantic drivel. I think MM would have written more elogious prose.
After which we were treated to the Well Child debacle (and the arrival in separate RRs, with a quick fight in the backseat of one caught on camera after the event) and the dramatic "Let's Make A Deal" parade walk down the center aisle of the theater in the lavender/purple dress and new wig, followed by hugging some poor woman up on stage. She was RAGING at that point.
So, when Megs was stupid enough to hit the send button and make public for the world to see her manifesto/her list of demands of HMTQ, the BRF said to Harry it is either divorce or you go too. Harry told us this in his Sentebale dinner speech. It is interesting that Megs thought she had one last chance to strike some sort of compromise deal. That is a real testament to her grandiose sense of self.
Megs did not leave, she was kicked out and I do believe that the UK apparatus will not let her back in for along time. And rightly so. All the preening during the Commonwealth visit was to protect the family. There is more to come. Harry was never all that, and he certainly can not be trusted ever again.
I read somewhere that Harry and Sparkles paid for the down payment without Charles help, but where did they get that money?
@MustySyphone
@Lt Nyota Uhura. at 2:52
Re: twitter handles. It has been surmised that MeMe uses/used "Strongwrite", "This little petal" among others. It has been postulated that she would comment on DM articles under the name "Pinkdye" among others.
I do remember that commenter, Pinkdye, who then changed her name and location but I knew she had to be the same one as her spelling was atrocious and the spelling mistakes were the same! Not sure it was MM, though, as Pinkdye wrote sycophantic drivel. I think MM would have written more elogious prose
__________________________________________
Maneki not saying this is what you are suggesting but I've been on enough forums to know there are always those few "sleuths" who like to connect certain posters to the person they detest whether it's sugars, stans, cleaners, minions, etc. etc...
So, no I am not La Markle (spit spit spit. Oy as my little maternal bubbie would do) :D
I love peonies and was looking at a vase of pinks when I had to come up with a handle for this blog.
Nutty has My IP address. She knows how to find me.
@Hikari
The BRF shouldn't have to lower themselves to a public gutter fight with a lowlife like
Very well said totally agree however
@Rasberry Ruffle
'But big but I think not doing anything, be it issuing any kind of statement or otherwise isn’t a wise move for the royals right now'This us a real issue
This could be how this non action by the BRF to the Harkes behaviour their constant PR attacks on the BRF with no comment could be perceived by all
'Silence means consent - Idioms and phrases - The Free Dictionary
silence means consent. If you do not voice your objection to something, then it is assumed that you support it.
Silence means consent - Idioms and phrases - The Free Dictionary
'silence means consent. If you do not voice your objection to something, then it is assumed that you support it.'
When action was taken to remove the Sussex Royal it appeared to be applauded and see as as decisive by the public
@Pink Peony said,
And Harry's sperm?
Is it viable?
If so, could he get a fortune for it?
How could it be clandestinely harvested?
Would it even be allowed per Royal laws?
This is just begging for a poem :)
Qui tacet consentire videtur, ubi loqui debuit ac potuit (He who is silent, when he ought to have spoken and was able to, is taken to agree)
— Latin proverb
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Silence_and_consensus
Oh I remember Pinkdye!!! Other DM commenters used to call her Pinkeye and all sorts! Lol She was truly awful and used atrocious language! She stated her location at either Birmingham or Liverpool (I can’t remember).
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G13v8NbRBO0
When silence does nt mean consent Unsurprisingly, one may run into a discussion between two editors with a dispute who keep repeating and reiterating their thoughts; sometimes this occurs because they are afraid that if they stop, their failure to respond will be misconstrued as a sign that they consent. This interpretation is based on the false assumption that "a huge unending row" is the only alternative to "silence". This is not the case. As far as the difference between dissent and silence is concerned, if you voice dissent, failure to make your dissent heated and continuous does not constitute silence and therefore does not constitute consent. Withdrawing from communication with a tendentious or quarrelsome editor does not give that editor consent to do what they like. Similarly, in the presence of a revert, there is neither silence nor consensus'
Wikipedia:Silence and consensus
This could be how this non action by the BRF to the Harkes behaviour their constant PR attacks on the BRF with no comment could be perceived by all
'Silence means consent - Idioms and phrases - The Free Dictionary
silence means consent. If you do not voice your objection to something, then it is assumed that you support it.
Silence means consent - Idioms and phrases - The Free Dictionary
'silence means consent. If you do not voice your objection to something, then it is assumed that you support it.'
When action was taken to remove the Sussex Royal it appeared to be applauded and see as as decisive by the public
_____________________________________________
Or, silence can be viewed as one very powerful edge of a double sided sword.
the true value of Harry's sperm.
would it be money well spent
or even make an ovum dent
I for one not lay a cent
on his swimmers
be they potent and regal.
Sorry Magatha I could not resist a poem for Peony..
LOL...thanks for that. It's fantastic! I'm sooo bad at making poems. :D
Thank you. It's not hard if you try...but I'm not as good as Magatha by far. :)
I agree with all of the comments about how treacherous the Harkle's alleged mortgage arrangement could be for the royals. Harry has supposedly indebted himself to people of the same ilk as the ones who did away with his family's relations, the Romanovs, as I pointed out in an earlier post. If this mortgage is real, it makes my blood run cold. Families are really like litters of puppies, or crops of apples, some turn out really good, some not so much.