I hope to write a new blog post in the next couple of days.
Until then, here's a spot to discuss new developments in the Sussex saga.
Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce. And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before? which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)? There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away". That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice. But does he? He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance. Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of bei
Comments
"Joe Budden, one of Spotify’s biggest exclusive podcasters, is leaving the platform. He and his show will no longer be exclusive to Spotify after September 23rd, he says in his most recent episode while also seemingly suggesting it might not be available on Spotify at all.
September 23rd, I cannot tell you where this podcast will be,” he says. “But as it stands, I can tell you where it will not be, and that is Spotify.”
"He takes the announcement as an opportunity to scorch Spotify and detail his history with the company, which, in the years since he signed his deal, has become a sizable competitor in the podcast field. He claims his show exceeded Spotify’s audience reach expectations by 900 percent to the point that his listeners crashed the platform.
Still, he says he never received a bonus, and the company wouldn’t allow him and his team to take vacation days on Christmas and New Year’s Eve, because that would have required them to miss two episodes. While the company wouldn’t pay them actual bonuses, it offered to give them Rolexes instead, only to say the watches they picked out were too expensive. Then, he suggested Spotify give money away to their fans for Christmas instead. The company declined."
https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/26/21403282/joe-budden-spotify-exclusive-leaving-host-podcast
His main accuser was over the UK's age of consent at the time. Doesn't justify his behaviour but not a crime according to the law. Please correct me from the States?
Markle's so called friends stepping into trial by social media and still retaining contacts with her burns more bridges for both Harry and Markle.
How would Andrew, Queen, York sisters and their husbands react to Markle's "best unhinged friend Jameel" calling Andrew a paedophile? The Queen already signalled her strongest support to both Eugie and Bea, they are popular with Brits.
MArkle may think she is deflecting attention by focusing on Andrew's "crime" but she is a very bad strategist and doesn't understand Brits.
https://www.nydailynews.com/snyde/ny-joe-budden-breaks-with-spotify-accuses-streamer-pillaging-audience-20200828-yicrag6rgjew5pat3e4tasszhq-story.html
How would Andrew, Queen, York sisters and their husbands react to Markle's "best unhinged friend Jameel" calling Andrew a paedophile? The Queen already signalled her strongest support to both Eugie and Bea, they are popular with Brits.
MArkle may think she is deflecting attention by focusing on Andrew's "crime" but she is a very bad strategist and doesn't understand Brits.
Indeed. She certainly has a bug up her butt about Andrew and the sisters. It is almost like she targeted him first, but he turned her down rudely. Probably not, though. It would be just too good not to leak.
Joe Rogan got a great deal with spotify
Joe Rogan Signs Exclusive $100 Million Podcast Deal With ...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/joe-rogan-signs-exclusive-100-million-podcast-deal-with-spotify/ar-BB14jDHC
May 19, 2020 · Rogan announced the move on Twitter on Tuesday, saying his podcast, "The Joe Rogan Experience," will hit Spotify on September 1, before being exclusively available on the streaming …
What a shame. I will not be getting spotify. Rogan interviews some good people.
Re various online jetsam and flotsam calling Andrew a paedophile. His connection with a sex trafficker billionaire is morally wrong on so many levels. Andrew is a a very unpleasant spoilt arrogant individual. But until the court finds him guilty of the crime he is innocent.
His main accuser was over the UK's age of consent at the time. Doesn't justify his behaviour but not a crime according to the law. Please correct me from the States?
_______________________________________
You are correct.
IMO, the fact that Prince Andrew doesn't seem to have too many redeeming qualities, and has rather a sketchy record regarding business contacts, coupled with instant decisions made even more instant in the age of the internet, means he is already judged in the court of popular opinion. Of course, this has happened throughout history. But the Rule of Law has set in stone the presumption of innocence.
This is also my opinion -- The Queen has opted on the side of caution as regards Andrew. She would rather die than publicly strip him of all his honors, titles, etc. So he is laying low. It is hoped that one way or another, his guilt or innocence will be well and truly established (sooner, rather than later, I hope). It is my private belief that the girls were carefully chosen to go to "Lolita Island" to be barely the age of consent, as the fetish for teens is well-known among a subset of men (including our "esteemed" former president, Bill Clinton). Doesn't make it illegal -- but it is unsavory, to say the least. And as I say, coupled with Andrew's already unsavory reputation, tarnishes him for good as a Royal representative.
Having said all that -- for Markle's "pal" (no saint, to say the least) to come out and publicly trash the Duke of York is unconscionable, with Markle's tacit approval. This Jameel person certainly has no leg to stand on, if her connection with the "Mermaids" charity Markle sponsored did indeed participate in minors getting transgender surgery overseas.
If HM The Queen allows even Harry to attend the Trooping of the Color given past, present, and who-knows-what-to-come behavior, whether by Harry himself or his wife, she will invite a Republic with open arms. Just my opinion.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/meghan-markle-and-jessica-mulroneys-timeline-fast-friends-to-falling-out/ss-BB17yndi?li=BBnb7Kz
Seems Jessica is toast now. May account for her deleting the post of her son at the wedding which another Nutty posted in the first 200 of these comments (sorry, I forgot to note your name!) This article says it's because Jessica referenced Meghan in her own defense when called out by Sasha Exeter for what the article says is "allegedly 'very problematic behavior and antics' within the fashion community" (so maybe there was more than just the one late night post...?) Anyway, here it is. There is a slide show on MSN of their friendship, 15 slides.
Meghan Markle and Jessica Mulroney's Timeline: Fast Friends to Falling Out
by Meredith Nardino
Ousted from the inner circle. Meghan Markle and Jessica Mulroney were once inseparable, but their friendship recently took a turn for the worse.
The former Suits star and the stylist became fast friends while the USA show was filming in Toronto, bonding over shared interests like fashion, fitness and female empowerment. Mulroney eventually lent a hand in selecting the wedding dress that Markle’s character, Rachel Zane, wore in her final episode of the legal drama.
Over the years, the pair spent time traveling the world and pursuing their dreams together. The Canadian fashion expert was one of several special guests at Markle’s May 2018 wedding to Prince Harry in England, and her twin sons, whom she shares with husband Ben Mulroney, took on the role of page boys at the royal ceremony.
“Proud friend. Proud mom,” Jessica later captioned an Instagram photo of her boys with Markle on the big day.
Though Jessica was ready to show her support for the California native at any turn, their friendship faced a bump in the road after Markle and her husband made their royal exit. In June 2020, the former Good Morning America personality came under fire when influencer Sasha Exeter called her out for her allegedly “very problematic behavior and antics” within the fashion community. Jessica later apologized — and tried to use her friendship with Markle to her advantage.
“As I told you privately, I have lived a very public and personal experience with my closest friend where race was front and centre,” she wrote via Instagram in response to Exeter’s claims. “It was deeply educational. I learned a lot from that. I promise to continue to learn and listen on how I can use my privilege to elevate and support Black voices.”
Days later, a source told Us Weekly exclusively that the former duchess wasn’t happy to have been involved in Jessica’s drama.
“Meghan could not get over that Jessica brought up her relationship with Meghan when she commented about her ‘closest friend’ in the discourse with Sasha,” the insider said at the time. “That was hugely offensive to Meghan and the deciding factor for her. Meghan considers the relationship to be done.”
"The theory that he pitched a fit and got kicked out as an official paid royal resonates with me. I like it. I like it a lot. Yes, he can go back as a family member, just not doing any duties or appearances."
Agreed! Maybe he didn't really like all the duties and appearances, until he found out they did give him something to do and a guaranteed way to get attention which he really didn't mind that much (because he could tell people how to live and feel important thereby).
Wait -haven't we heard this before? Remember how, when they were staying in Tyler Perry's house, that neighborhood was overrun by drones with cameras trying to get a shot of them? How MM cannot bring little Archie to any moms-and-babies activities because she is just too famous?
Montecito is home to some A+++ listers, very famous people in the entertainment industry, but somehow no paparazzi or tourists have ever been interested in them? I smell a rat.
Having said all that -- for Markle's "pal" (no saint, to say the least) to come out and publicly trash the Duke of York is unconscionable, with Markle's tacit approval. This Jameel person certainly has no leg to stand on, if her connection with the "Mermaids" charity Markle sponsored did indeed participate in minors getting transgender surgery overseas.
Jameel is a very unsavory character and dedicated Twitter troll. I have seen her twitter spats with Piers Morgan and he always has the superior put down. He always comes out on top.
One example:
https://pagesix.com/2020/02/24/jameela-jamil-and-piers-morgan-in-vicious-twitter-feud-over-caroline-flack/
Jameela Jamil and Piers Morgan in vicious Twitter feud over Caroline Flack
By Nicki Gostin February 24, 2020
British television personality Piers Morgan is accusing actress Jameela Jamil of bullying former “Love Island” host Caroline Flack, who died by suicide earlier this month.
On Sunday, Morgan published old messages that Flack had allegedly sent to him last year, in which she agonized that Jamil was “aiming hate” at her.
The former “America’s Got Talent” judge said he felt compelled to release the messages because of Jamil, 33, speaking out about online bullying.
“Jameela Jamil is having a lot to say about online harassment, so in the interests of balance, here is a message Caroline Flack sent me last October after the same Jameela Jamil led an online pile-on against her regarding a new TV show she was doing,” Morgan, 54, tweeted alongside a screenshot of Flack’s alleged messages.
Last year, Jamil — who often speaks out on body positivity — criticized a British reality show called “The Surjury,” which was to be hosted by Flack and involved a panel deciding if a person should receive plastic surgery. The show has since been pulled.
Jamil swiftly responded to Morgan on Sunday, writing, “I simply said I found the show ‘surjury’ (not her) problematic for kids to watch. And that love island needed some more diversity. Both times Caroline instigated debate with ME even though I was not targeting or blaming her at all. I always just politely explained my point.”
In another tweet, the “Good Place” actress added, “Piers using a dead woman who I was friends with, as a weapon to try to create further harassment for me as I’ve JUST explained publicly that last week I felt suicidal… is why he is this industry’s most problematic. My criticizing a *show* did not aim any hate at Caroline.”
Jamil went on to say she wouldn’t continue the conversation because Flack “can’t respond or speak for herself.”
“She would be disgusted her personal messages were shared and weaponized against a woman, by a bullying parasite she thought was her friend. I’m out. ✌��” she wrote, adding, “To sell your dead friends private messages for clicks is a low I’ve never imagined anyone capable of.”
Morgan followed up on Monday, commenting on Jamil’s recent online backlash, in which she was accused of having Munchausen syndrome, “Delighted to see Jameela Jamil has miraculously found the strength from her myriad afflictions to brand me a ‘bullying parasite.’ This is such a valuable contribution to the #BeKind movement & I wish her well with her continued recovery from Hypocritical Twerp Syndrome.”
Morgan and Jamil have long sparred on Twitter and she had previously blocked him.
It has been a difficult couple of weeks for Jamil, who was slammed for her casting on HBO Max’s new ballroom voguing competition show, “Legendary.” She was then accused of suffering from Munchausen syndrome, a mental disorder in which a person acts as if he or she is physically or mentally ill without acting really being sick.
She has claimed in interviews to being partially deaf, having a severe shellfish and peanut allergy, spinal damage due to running into traffic to avoid a swarm of bees, celiac disease, have suffered anorexia nervosa, a suicide attempt, a breast cancer scare and mercury poisoning from teeth fillings.
“I’m now being accused of munchausens?” she tweeted. “By an unhinged idiot who didn’t even realize in all her ‘research’ that my car accident injury stories are ‘different’ because they were about TWO SEPARATE CAR ACCIDENTS 13 years apart? You can keep it.” She also added that she suffers from Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, which “means always having people doubt your illness and injuries because you look okay.
Hebephilia - Wikipedia
Search domain en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebephiliahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebephilia
Hebephilia is the strong, persistent sexual interest by adults in pubescent children who are in early adolescence, typically ages 11-14 and showing Tanner stages 2 to 3 of physical development. It differs from pedophilia (the primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children), and from ephebophilia (the primary sexual interest in later adolescents, typically ages 15-19).
So Andrew is more of a ephebophile than a paedophile. I don't expect changes in the way Nutties refer to him since we are so used to the other term and it's all kind of icky.
Lady C has said she tried to correct Piers Morgan, but once she got the words "he is not a paedophile...." out he would not let her finish, "he is an ephebophile!" and shouted her down. So, next time, start with what he IS....
"My no.1 husband was very much a pongo. I gather it's reference to apes, rather than BO!"
I don't know how "pongo" came up, I haven't read all the comments; I did find these:
Pongo | Definition of Pongo by Oxford Dictionary on Lexico ...
www.lexico.com/definition/pongohttps://www.lexico.com/definition/pongo
'Sailors noted the similarity of the sand-apes' colour to the rough brown uniform of the British Army, thus soldiers are known as Pongos.'
Pongo - definition of Pongo by The Free Dictionary
Search domain www.thefreedictionary.com/Pongohttps://www.thefreedictionary.com/Pongo
n , pl -gos 1. an anthropoid ape, esp an orang-utan or a gorilla 2. military slang a soldier or marine Noun 1.
Blogger unknown said...
Meghan is going to use Archie as her excuse for everything. wait for it.
I have a relative that operates like this.
August 31, 2020 at 8:51 PM
She already does--we have to leave and get our privacy back, to raise our child (and only permit pictures we are paid for).
Britain passed new laws in 2008 to allow British men to be charged and convicted in Britain for going to Thailand for underage sex.
-Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008
I have two things to say about this person.
1) Ugh. I don't want to look at her any further.
2) Her association with Markle should be the FINAL NAIL IN THE COFFIN for the Royal Family.
Ebe, Hebe, tanner, whatEVER phile. I don't want to know about it.
I don't want to know about it. Let it remain on the FAR margins of our society.
Thinks me, anyway. Just allowing the slightest tendrils of my thought to touch these disgusting things makes me want to take a shower for the next month.
No, Andrew is not guilty by law.
Jameela Jamil Unloads On Piers Morgan Over Meghan Markle Vogue Cover Criticism
https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/piers-morgan-reports-jameela-jamil-14173898
ALSO>>> https://twitter.com/search?q=piers%20jamil&src=typed_query
Also from twitter>>>>
Tiana Lowe
@TianaTheFirst
Nov 27, 2019
I don’t agree with every entry, but I died at Piers on Jamel’s Jamil: “She’s so woke I’m amazed she ever sleeps, virtue-signalling her self-righteous thoughts on Twitter in such a vile, abusive way that it makes a mockery of her supposed concern for everyone’s mental health.”
Someone asked I can't remember who what the age of consent is in the states and it varies by state. Many states are 16. I know NC is.
These topics come up over and over and it fascinates me how MM and JH are running roughshod over the RF every week. It doesn't look as if they are going to be reined in before the elections either which means the RF seems to be complicit with their obvious political pandering and they must know this looks very bad.
Of course I certaintly would not want Catherine to experience hyperemesis gravidarum again. I just read it was reported that she had it with all three pregnancies. Interestingly enough that is not the usual case.
Three out of four women who suffer the severe form of morning sickness that afflicted the Duchess of Cambridge do not experience it in subsequent pregnancies, according to a Finnish study....Of the 333 women in the study who had more than one pregnancy after their first, 11 percent suffered hyperemesis gravidarum every time, highlighting the need for close follow-up and prompt treatment of symptoms. Nurmi, from University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, said the study’s findings align with data from other Nordic studies.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-pregnancy-morningsickness/morning-sickness-that-plagued-duchess-doesnt-usually-recur
I had bad morning sickness twice out of three pregnancies but I would suffer anything to bring a little bundle of joy into the world (but of course that is me). I almost lost my life with the last one, which could have been made into a horror movie
Of course Catherine did the "heir and a spare" (I absolutely cringe at that expression how I dislike it) plus one. Catherine is a real trooper and I admire her! But you can't fault a Royal lover for wishing for more Cambridges! Lol
I agree Andrew is a sleaze but no pedo. And why is he the only one targeted in this fiasco? I am team York sisters and I like Fergie, too. MM and Harry aren't winning any brownie points with the Queen by hanging out with ppl who call her son a pedo.
Someone asked I can't remember who what the age of consent is in the states and it varies by state. Many states are 16. I know NC is.
These topics come up over and over and it fascinates me how MM and JH are running roughshod over the RF every week. It doesn't look as if they are going to be reined in before the elections either which means the RF seems to be complicit with their obvious political pandering and they must know this looks very bad.
I think PA is quite useful to a wide variety of bad actors to divert attention from their association with Epstein et al. I don't know that they are running roughshod; I think it may be a symptom of increasing desperation because their plans aren't working out. Incredibly stupid, though, how they seem to be simultaneously begging to return while throwing male bovine excrement at Andrew and by extension, his entire family through intermediaries. I don't think that doe-eyed "Oh, it wasn't me, it was somebody else!" is going to help her cause.
Of course he was incredibly stupid to allow Emily Maitlis of all people to interview him. She is a real hustler, a lefty and easy guess, an anti-Royalist. She had it in for him. Andrew should have lined up a softball interviewer, even better just kept his big mouth shut. Emily Maitlis' twitter was very left oriented, but due to criticism of her being biased she has toned it down.
i’ve never really cared for jessica M and think she’s just another thirsty climber, but she and MM were friends, apparently ‘faux’ friends, for years. MM used JM to get ahead in the Canadian social scene, JM’s husband was son of an ex-prime minister and and tv show host. MM used that relationship and contacts to climb climb climb. she continued to use it once she hit the BRF to get her friend to drop gossip tidbits to the press and pressure others to do MM’s bidding, like drop negative press stories. then JM privately makes gets into a squabble with some troll that gets made public. MM often had JM use their friendship for various leaks and opportunities like getting designer clothes or merching.
MM ghosting JM like that is no surprise. JM should have been expecting it based on MM’s ghosting of her Dad, family and friends.
I really hope JM gets her revenge, and i admit im hoping it comes durig the trial.
I always agree with your astute observations.
Prince Andrew should stay in England and be as invisible as he can for some years. So far he is doing a good job at this. He would be crazy to ever come to US for questioning by the FBI and whatever US prosecutor wants a big fame score at Andrew's expense. If he submits in any way it should be that the US sends FBI/whatever to England to question him. The BRF paying the expenses.
Concur. And if he consents to speak to the FBI in England, he should have a US and British attorney present advising him re the differing laws and what he should answer.*
*Nothing. It's a trap!
i almost feel sorry for him. living in the real world is harsh and i don’t know that he’s up for the harsh realities of working & selling to make a living.
almost. but then i remember his Markle Debacle, and don’t.
Thank you for the information from Finland - presumably the variation in how much women suffer emesis in pregnancy is another of those `bell' or `normal' curves - most undergo it to some extent but few are at the extremes. As you say, it can be better with subsequent pregnancies
I was really thinking of those critics who say that Catherine `doesn't do much' when I was commenting on the size of the Cambridges' family - I apologise if it didn't come over quite right.
Not having been in that position, I've no idea how I would feel about it but I sympathise with anyone who does have to endure the vomiting. I know it's said that the joy of having a new child eclipses the memory of any labour pain or other `extreme discomfort', for want of a better term, and I'm glad that you found that this was so.
Your saying about how you almost died is a welcome reminder that pregnancy is not risk-free. This ties in with a thought that crossed my mind about the morality of surrogacy. Is a woman choosing surrogacy acting morally in paying another to take the risks of pregnancy for her? Obviously, nobody is obliged to be a surrogate.
Does it make a difference if the reasons are trivial (eg vanity, personal convenience) or medical (if someone has had to have her womb removed)? I assume that those opting to be surrogates have a history of producing their own babies with ease - is that always the case? Does it make a difference if it's done for payment rather than out of love?
Strange, isn't it, how both HM and Catherine have been criticised for opposite `offences' when it comes to child-rearing - the one for not doing enough, the other for doing too much, the difference being that one bore the duties of state herself but the other is wife to an heir to that position.
Did you - or anyone else - watch the TV programme called "Meghan Markle - A Father's Story"? I wonder if he said anything never previously disclosed.
You were wondering about the reasons for surrogacy "Does it make a difference if the reasons are trivial (eg vanity, personal convenience)" etc and I thought that if MM went down that route, it might have been vanity and personal convenience. If she did give birth, it wasn't by caesarian section or she would have spent at least one night in hospital, I think, so I'd say we can rule that out. The only other option then is that she had a vaginal birth but I'd imagine she's the type who would want to keep her nether regions 'intact' and 'undamaged' (no tears etc), as some women do. Ergo the need for a surrogate.
Indeed. If there were any actual feminists out there, it seems that they should be outraged that what is/was being criticized is QE's fitness to rule because she bore children (See! She may be a good monarch, but she's an ABSENT MOTHER so she's unfit!) as well as Catherine's fitness to be a consort on the grounds of being female and, having borne children, wanting them to be raised in a stable home environment such as what she knew. (Look! She's spending too much time with her children so she's LAZY!)
It doesn't matter if they are heads of state or CEOs or brain surgeons, women at the top of their fields are always criticized through their children. This is probably because it hurts the most.
Does it make a difference if the reasons are trivial (eg vanity, personal convenience) or medical (if someone has had to have her womb removed)? I assume that those opting to be surrogates have a history of producing their own babies with ease - is that always the case? Does it make a difference if it's done for payment rather than out of love?
That sounds like it could be a discussion of prostitution as well (grin).
If we bring the questionable morality of encouraging young lower economic-class women into becoming gestational carriers for the wealthy and perhaps undergoing long or short-term health risks as a result, then we will be castigated for condemning couples with no womb available to childlessness.
There are only a few years available for women to (legally) rent their uterus so hardly a career option; a woman in her 20s would be optimal. I believe the marketplace will reign for the short term. Those that can afford it will be able to use it; those that can't, won't. Reproductive technology in the future will, IMO, obviate the need for such services.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1329843/meghan-markle-pictures-meghan-markle-news-meghan-markle-whole-foods-shopping-royal-news
The low key Duchess of Sussex cut a casual figure as she shopped in Whole Foods in Canada. The photograph, taken back in January just after Meghan Markle and Prince Harry left the Royal Family, shows the duchess with a trolley full of goods from the upmarket supermarket.
Is this a pap photo she's hung onto so she can publish it at a later date? I'm just wondering because it seems a bit strange that a random member of the public would hang onto it for 8 months before sharing it with a "Duchess of Sussex fan page".
Direct link to the photo for those who don't want to open the article:
https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/106/590x/secondary/meghan-markle-2645728.jpg?r=1598954992010
He's not used to such heavy criticism, but surely he had to know that such coming from him towards HM might backfire.
I still believe like some on this blog and elsewhere, that for whatever the reason, they are trying to destabilize the Monarchy.
Imo, they have been successful in making the RF look bad if for no other reason than the RF's unwillingness to admonish them for all the political bs during a very turbulent election year.
As for the York sisters, on the one hand, they should be livid with Harry, but on the other, he surely has kept the spotlight on himself and off of PA for the last year. MM and JH were not happy about being pushed in the corner on the balcony by PA and it is ironic that after that appearance he is no longer likely to be seen standing there again.
My guess would be she released it through her PR. I do wonder why there aren't more of these pics released, but maybe they would feel they had to sue for breach of privacy. lol. In any case, they surely have managed to keep themselves on the front page everyday.
Thanks for the photo.
I agree it's odd for a blurry snap like that to surface so long after the fact. I'm not 100% sure it's even M although the ratty hair (albeit about 8 inches longer than in their Christmas card from the previous month), huge feet, and lack of hose/socks (in January, in Canada no less) match. But the nose doesn't resemble hers to me. And I'm surprised she owns a "dress coat" that isn't a belted style.
The article contains quotes from a "fan page" and one is “For those having doubts you can actually see her security detail behind her!” Is the guy looking out the window with his hands in his pockets supposed to be her "security detail?"
The monarchy has modernised itself very gently throughout HM's reign; PP has done much to achieve this.
Nevertheless, they have done it cautiously; whenever in the past they have moved too fast and too far, it has backfired - I'm thinking of the Royal Family TV film in 1969 and the dreadful `It's a Royal Knockout'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Family_(film)
For Royal Knockout, just search the title and take your pick of the reviews - they're dire.
Can any identify the food in what seems to be her trolley? It looks like frozen stuff to me.
Her security guy doesn't very good at his job, does he expect an assassin to crash through the window? Meanwhile, someone has sneaked a picture...
Wild Boar Battle-maid said...
"If she did try to take `her place' at the Diana unveiling/ToC, would it reveal her hypocrisy to the world or would the sugars see it as vindication?"
Oh, vindication 1,000%
Just by being there.
The world already sees her hypocrisy, i think.
just read the cdan thing about just harry the awful wrier.
i almost feel sorry for him. living in the real world is harsh and i don’t know that he’s up for the harsh realities of working & selling to make a living.
almost. but then i remember his Markle Debacle, and don’t.
My tin hat theory is that Markle and Scooby Do wrote the scripts and sent it in under Harry's name, banking on Hollywood to be mesmerized by the royal title and welcome it with open arms and wallets. Like all their crackpot schemes it failed miserably. Hollywood demands quality. And authentic talent. Not weird, vague word salad.
I guess JH expects everyone to fall at his feet with love and adoration like they did in Britain and the Commonwealth before MM convinced him she knew better than HM and that everyone would worship them for their woke views and faux humanitarian photo ops.
Perhaps he was taking courses such as script writing and creative writing in order to improve himself during quarantine lockdowns. If at first you don't succeed, etc. etc.
What is sad, to me, is that he may well have some talent for writing and/or comedy. I know that we should all have high aspirations but aiming above our (present) ability can be so shattering that we never try again.
I was in a painting class that was for far more gifted/talented painters than I was when I was much younger. It was supposed to be fun. I found out quickly that I was such a bad painter that I have never painted anything besides walls to this day. I came home, packed up all of my brushes and paint, put them in large storage bins, and never looked at them again.
"Just stumbled across this article:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1329843/meghan-markle-pictures-meghan-markle-news-meghan-markle-whole-foods-shopping-royal-news
"'The low key Duchess of Sussex cut a casual figure as she shopped in Whole Foods in Canada. The photograph, taken back in January just after Meghan Markle and Prince Harry left the Royal Family, shows the duchess with a trolley full of goods from the upmarket supermarket.'
Is this a pap photo she's hung onto so she can publish it at a later date..."
Reactions:
1 she looks depressed, her hair is untidy--in other pap shots I have seen it was neater, smoothed together or covered entirely with a hat of some kind. I just got the feeling: depressed.
2 she does have really slenderrrrrrr legs.
Maybe it is a grab shot from a phone with a good camera. I don't get the feeling she is aware of the lens and i usually get the sense she is very very aware. She would be posed differently.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8685433/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-surprise-children-replant-garden-Preschool-Los-Angeles.html
I don't know anything about cards or how they are interpreted, but this Daily Empress person seems to think that the Spotify thing is going to bite them in the butt (not her words).
I had heard that Jackie Chan's mansion was seized and sold by the mainland Chinese and information on THAT was what I was looking for. So much of the MSM doesn't dare to publish anything negative about the CCP.
I was reading the DM article about how JH misses being able to be at Balmoral this year but that MM is quite content to stay home and redecorate.
What is interesting is that it is possible for him to go (if he quarantines both directions). but yet it would be difficult. It would be inconvenient.
Many a family has someone who made a decision not to visit a family member (not even as old as HM or PP) and then there were no more chances. Regretful and not able to do anything about it.
The other side of me wonders if it really is that MM is more concerned that if he goes he might not come back because he realized how much he's left behind. OTOH, seeing his father, Bank of Dad, is a good move sometimes to keep the connection that it isn't just a relationship about money flowing one direction.
There is no shame or sense of decency with that woman. She is already choosing her designer outfit for the unveiling of Diane's statue, the ideal occasion to reveal (through Scobie, if he has not been ghosted) that she is pregnant with a girl who will be named Diane Meghan, or some combination of those two names.
My guess would be she released it through her PR. I do wonder why there aren't more of these pics released, but maybe they would feel they had to sue for breach of privacy. lol. In any case, they surely have managed to keep themselves on the front page everyday.
Correct but not for all Megs product placements, she is using many PR agents in an ever shifting landscape of PR agents that get hired and fired on a whim. Some of her PR agents are real ones and some are just friends and acquaintances that like Megs and want to have some fun. And sometimes malicious media bombings and giggles as in Prince Andrew. Megs would love an Instagram account but she is achieving the same and perhaps even better with her many leakers.
Megs is too ADD disorganized to do this so she farms this out
Megs's product appears on so many media outlets these days it is astounding. The largest part of what she is spending via Bank of Charles is on PR. 50 thousand per month? This all might pay off if/when Covid lifts from California and the greater Hollywood region/penumbra, which Montecito is part of.
Meanwhile Megs carries Harry. He is a non-participating afterthought/ Maybe sperm provider for #2. An obvious fish out of his waters. But still plenty of seduction there with her delicious avocado toasts, done home cooking style by Megs. What else is there to do as they rattle around their Marvelous Montecito Mudslide Mansion? California is avocado land so super cheap there. And Mexican Hass plantations are very huge these days and very on line, sending to the USA. Did I almost forget Megs alleged roasted chicken, lifted from Cory's recipe.
Lurking With Spoon
My guess would be she released it through her PR. I do wonder why there aren't more of these pics released, but maybe they would feel they had to sue for breach of privacy. lol. In any case, they surely have managed to keep themselves on the front page everyday.
______________________________
@Portcitygirl -- I'm beginning to get the idea that PR is the only somewhat *original* path the Harkles have to take in life. Everything else is copying off of everyone else, especially those people they *admire* or seem to think have the *right answers.*
If that makes sense!
Well monarchy is not entirely blameless either. Some bloggers posted an article in the National Enquirer (not reliable, I know, but still) claiming special service went with the eraser over Markle's past paying people who knew her off and forcing them to sign NDAs.
If there is some truth in this royals had been very well aware who they would be welcoming into their family.
It just makes me so much more disgusted over the whole affair and waaay less sympathetic towards the crown. They were asking for trouble and they got it.
I think their photos are copyrighted.
So, complete strangers show up at your children's school to take pictures and then make money off of these copyrighted pictures.
There's no reason why their discussions of "healthy eating" could not have been done remotely, but then we'd be subjected to their creepy Zoom videos.
I'd be very upset if this were my children's school. They didn't pull this at a more elite institution.
Harry and Meg plant some flowers.
Wild Boar Battle-maid said...Strange, isn't it, how both HM and Catherine have been criticised for opposite `offences' when it comes to child-rearing - the one for not doing enough, the other for doing too much, the difference being that one bore the duties of state herself but the other is wife to an heir to that position.
Indeed. If there were any actual feminists out there, it seems that they should be outraged that what is/was being criticized is QE's fitness to rule because she bore children (See! She may be a good monarch, but she's an ABSENT MOTHER so she's unfit!) as well as Catherine's fitness to be a consort on the grounds of being female and, having borne children, wanting them to be raised in a stable home environment such as what she knew. (Look! She's spending too much time with her children so she's LAZY!)
It doesn't matter if they are heads of state or CEOs or brain surgeons, women at the top of their fields are always criticized through their children. This is probably because it hurts the most.
___________________________________
I wonder .... if Meg had put The Queen on the cover of "her" Vogue issue, as an influential feminist for the ages, would she be the pariah she is now, and ever shall be.
"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle planted forget-me-nots in honour of Princess Diana during a visit to a preschool in Los Angeles on the 23rd anniversary of her death yesterday.
.................
The couple could be seen digging with trowels into dirt and planting flowers as they visited the at risk children in Los Angeles, with Prince Harry and Meghan also planting forget-me-not-seeds in memory of Princess Diana.
According to the couple's biographer Omid Scobie, the couple went on to play nursery rhymes in the garden with the youngsters and also spent time reading books about gardening and vegetables.' "
Couldn't Harry do this himself? MM never knew Diana, although I'm sure her presence was needed (according to her). And a photographer just happened to be there. This should have been a private moment. As for Scabies, did he tag along or did MM brief him?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8685433/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-surprise-children-replant-garden-Preschool-Los-Angeles.html
Thinks me, anyway. Just allowing the slightest tendrils of my thought to touch these disgusting things makes me want to take a shower for the next month.
Aye aye, Lt.!
As i said, it's all icky.
They weren't likely to miss this opportunity...
Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Plant Flowers With Children To Commemorate The Anniversary Of Diana’s Death
The couple coordinated their outfits for the occasion
BY KATIE O'MALLEY
01/09/2020
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have surprised children in Los Angeles by spending the morning planting flowers at a learning centre.
On Tuesday, the children and women’s support organisation Assistance League of Los Angeles shared several photos on Instagram of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex planting shrubs and flowers at its Preschool Learning Centre garden.
According to the charity, the visit took place on Monday, 23 years after Princess Diana died in hospital after being injured in a motor vehicle accident in a road tunnel in Paris.
‘In addition to helping the children replant the Preschool Learning Center's garden, they spent time with them, sharing their appreciation for nature and helping to instil the importance of healthy eating. We truly appreciate their time and care for our students,’
the League captioned photos of the couple planting flowers on Instagram.
This content is imported from Instagram. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.
Royal reporter Omid Scobie explained on Twitter that Archie's parents also sang nursery rhymes in the garden and spent time reading stories to the children.
The Sussexes are believed to have previously volunteered at the centre, which is located close to where Meghan attended school.
This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.
Scobie reports the couple and children reportedly planted some forget-me-not seeds, which were famously the late princess’ favourite flower.
The flower featured in Meghan’s wedding bouquet at her nuptials in 2018.
In 2006, Harry and Prince Seeiso of Lesotho jointly co-founded the AIDS charity Sentebale. The name 'Sentebale' derives from a a literal translation of ‘forget me not’ in Lesotho dialect, according to the website Diamonds Do Good.
Not afraid to get their hands dirty, Meghan and Harry coordinated their laidback looks for their green-fingered morning.
The mother-of-one wore a denim shirt with the sleeves rolled up, denim skinny jeans and black pumps for the occasion while her husband wore a navy blue shirt, jeans and brown lace-up shoes.
The couple also wore masks for the outing during the Coronavirus pandemic.
According to the Leagues’s website, its mission ‘is to improve the lives of impoverished children in our community through philanthropy, dedicated service, and compassionate programs’.
------------
More virtue signalling...
"...then JM privately makes gets into a squabble with some troll that gets made public."
_______
Point of order - Sasha Exeter is NO troll. She simply called out JM on being a complete b!tch towards everyone she considers beneath her - which is everyone, apparently. And good on her!
A friend, similar age to me, who writes physical-science textbooks, recently went shopping for a new calculator in a university city.
The shop (a well-respected national retailer) was short on supplies and the male assistant (I was going to say `young' but he was almost bound to be younger) asked if she really needed a scientific one?
_________________________
Actually, your experience is two-fold ... yes, the blatant misogynism shown, but also the underlying anti-scientism, which crosses all boundaries, male and female.
Back in my undergraduate days, when I thought studying biology would solve universal mysteries, I had to buy a specialized calculator that could compute variances. Part of our classwork was conducting mock studies and presenting statistical data to support our theses, and the only way to efficiently make use of commonly used algorithms was to have a machine with this capability built-in. Otherwise, you'd be at it till the cows came home.
Nowadays, no one seems to care about the fact that maths underly everything. I haven't tried to find a similar calculator since my undergraduate days. I am afraid to, now.
Equally scary is the fact that it is no longer a man/woman thing.
If you ask me, Markle seems to epitomize this whole "reality? What reality?" thing going on. And her cuck husband, pardon the language.
Thank G-d, being impulsive, I joined the Army, and had a good old time serving my country and my comrades, LOL -- then became a journalist, of all slimy things, LOL (not that my readers, being veterans, seem to mind :)
Lt. Nyota Uhura said.
Thinks me, anyway. Just allowing the slightest tendrils of my thought to touch these disgusting things makes me want to take a shower for the next month.
Aye aye, Lt.!
As i said, it's all icky.
_____________________
Icky. Yes. That's one way of putting it.
CookieShark said…
The school they showed up at is for low-income families, I believe.
I think their photos are copyrighted.
So, complete strangers show up at your children's school to take pictures and then make money off of these copyrighted pictures.
There's no reason why their discussions of "healthy eating" could not have been done remotely, but then we'd be subjected to their creepy Zoom videos.
I'd be very upset if this were my children's school. They didn't pull this at a elite institution.
............
I'd be very unhappy to have two strangers and their entourage come in and possibly expose my kids to Covid.
Aren't schools more careful than that?
What benefit did Duke and duchess offer more than someone already connected with the school? They didn't make a donation. The publicity does nothing for the school.
What benefit did they offer that would outweigh exposing kids and staff to Covid?
And H's mask was barely on correctly.
Gotta agree with you that this is pretty classist.
Seems unfair to risk exposing low income students to Covid, when they're the ones most likely to have a congested living situation.
Our internet is spotty today and I've already lost one response I typed. Fairy C I agree with you about the Crown and Swampy, Lt., and xxxxx I agree with your comments as well😊
I would and so would many other love to have another Cambridge but I think she's done having babies. HG isn't a piece of cake. I'm glad she only experienced it in the first trimester of each pregnancy. My aunt had that all throughout her 3 pregnancies but it lasted all 9 months for each. I was 7 years old with her first one and 13 when she had her last one. She lived next door and I would come home after school everyday and walk over to relieve my grandmother for a few hours. By her 3rd pregnancy, she was bed bound for all 9 months on top of HG. I don’t recall having learned of the name of the condition back then but I do now. It was horrible to watch.
Possibly different, not necessarily better though.
I gather that Diana's life post-divorce may have been somewhat off the rails for the mother of a future king - the loose cannon was still rolling around the gundeck, according to some of the reports I read at the time.
She seemed willing to get involved not only with chaps like Will Carling and James Hewitt, but also with some whose affiliations were different from the majority population of this country.
(See the list at https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/princess-dianas-seven-lovers-who-13231169 - )
-there were more, Bryan Adams and Teddy Forstmann ("Friends allegedly claimed Diana had fantasies of Theodore Forstmann – who died in 2011 running for the US Presidency with herself as First Lady")
see https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/princess-dianas-affairs-revealed-how-14234893),
Even then, I wondered how she might have influenced the boys. Charles had custody but, as we see now, she'd already made a potential IED of Harry.
9/11, and all that followed from that, may have been 3 years into the future when she met her end but we'd already had the chilling response to Salman Rushdie's book `The Satanic Verses'.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Verses_controversy#Western_mainstream
I was saddened by her death, it was a horrible way to die, especially as her life had seemed so full of bright promise. I have to admit, though, that I felt a measure of relief that worse outcomes might have been averted.
Now, I consider that relief somewhat premature.
With all their screaming about Archie's privacy, it is astounding the privacy of other children means so little to them.
Even before COVID, in my area schools were pretty careful about campus visitors. And with COVID, I thought LA schools were closed for in-person classes anyway. I see though LA elementary schools can ask for a waiver with extra COVID precautions in place. (I wouldn't say those photos look like extra precautions are being taken.)
Me it doesn’t possess one single redeeming trait. She brings nothing of interest to any discussion, event or cause because of her inauthenticity. She’s only interested in herself and is incapable of anything but the most basic of pleasantries. She has nothing to say, nothing to add...she has nothing!
And yet, day after day after day we are besieged by this person. I hate masks, but I’m all for muzzling her with one, I’m concerned that she will be allowed back into the fold, along with Harry. They cannot afford life in the States and by the trial year’s end, I can’t see them having drummed up any sort of paying work.
She is a monster, though. What life must be like with her! ExhAusting, and the poor child.
I dunno, I’m exhausted by the ceaseless vying for attention, the nonstop put downs of life in Britain and on and on and on.
Once again, all this writing is stellar. Thanks for the good reading. I swear some of you must work behind the scenes in the RF.
Re. Andrew- I agree with the majority of you. I think Andrew was just a naive, conceited fool who loved the lifestyle of Epstein. Not making ANY excuses for him whatsoever. To have sex with a 15-17 year old girl as a grown man in the public eye is incredibly wrong, immoral and just shows horrid judgement. I always knew Meghan would jump on Andrew's sitch and make it a part of her victimization routine, which she promptly did. Andrew is finished. However he'll stay in the UK and live a quiet life of luxury out of the public eye. He gets to have his part time relationship with Fergie and enjoy his daughter's and sons in law and any kids that they will have. He is very, very lucky he probably won't have to face the music in the US.
This article posted in the DM about how Harry wants to go back to the UK but Meghan is decorating their new house and isn't missing out on anything......is hysterical. You have to laugh at the DM. They do post these incredibly unflattering stories about them sometimes and it whips the commenters into a angry frenzy all over again. The Daily Mail needs a high five today. IF I was H&M, here would be my list of enemies 1- The Daily Mail, 2- The Racist Public 3- The Men in Gray Suits 4- The Friends Who Betray Us. Whereas it should be 1- Us, Ourselvs, Harry and Meghan.
As just a side note, Harry is going to be one sad charactor when something happens to his Grandfather and Grandmother. Regret is a bitter bill and he'll never get that time back with them.
I think Andrew was just a naive, conceited fool who loved the lifestyle of Epstein. Not making ANY excuses for him whatsoever. To have sex with a 15-17 year old girl as a grown man in the public eye is incredibly wrong, immoral and just shows horrid judgement. I always knew Meghan would jump on Andrew's sitch and make it a part of her victimization routine, which she promptly did.
I have always believed that it is a very strong likelihood that Randy Andy crossed paths with MM before she was an 'official girlfriend/fiancee' of his nephew. Given how far the seedy tentacles of Meg's acquaintance reach, and her yachting proclivities . . I'd go out on a limb and say that she and Andrew may have attended some of the same 'parties'. Why not?--it seems like a for-sure thing that Harry's mates Tom Inskip and Guy Pelly knew MM from the yachting. Their objections to Meg seemed to be more substantial than just finding her abrasive upon a short encounter.
The animosity between the Duke of York and Markle seems to be pretty deep rooted as well . . in more than simply Andy's pique that the show-offy American is stealing thunder from his girls. He very visibly did not like Markle even before Eugenie's wedding. I feel like they must have mutual dirt on each other in regards to an Epstein connection. When Megsie first arrived on the scene, Andrew's involvement with Epstein was just starting to trickle out. Coincidental, merely?? Or is there some ulterior reason that Meg's marrying into the family was followed immediately by Andrew's spectacular fall from grace--and his Mummy's so-called favorite, too.
Meg would have probably been too long in the tooth even 12 years ago for Andrew, but we know that Meg has milked the 'hot young thing' act well into her 30s. If she didn't actually sleep with Andrew, I think he knows about her past, and probably knows guys who did sleep with her on that circuit, if he himself didn't. There was no benefit to Meggy in antagonizing Andrew, especially through his daughters, so I think something went down between them. Or someone. Megsie's good at that.
MM and JH were not happy about being pushed in the corner on the balcony by PA and it is ironic that after that appearance he is no longer likely to be seen standing there again.
The same we must fervently hope will be true of the Harkles.
Andrew is at least abiding by the agreement that he keep a low profile. When given a direct order by the Queen (Mummy), he obeys. Whatever his demeanor is like behind the scenes (he can't have been best pleased to be invisible at his own daughter's wedding just past--for the purposes of the Royal-approved photos, Beatrice was an orphan--he keeps out of sight. He'll not be angling for any invitations to ToC or the Sandringham church walk--he knows not to. Meghan respects no such boundaries, and if she wasn't supposed to horn in last year when she was still nominally part of 'the Family', all the more reason for her to bash her way in next year, just to prove that nobody's got the balls to stop her. It's imperative to her plans that she still be able to exploit the Royal connection. I'm sure Haz will be a right pillock and insist that his wife be part of the Diana memorial. Hope Wills has got his gladiator garb ready.
Not content with inventing her own achievements, now Meg's got her PR attributing achievements to Harry. The idea that Haz is now a screenwriter (of multiple scripts) and he's now shopping them around is just . . I can't . . ludicrous doesn't even begin to describe it.
Harry failed high school, let's just call it like it is. The only subject in which he managed a grade not through cheating was Geography with a 'D'. He could not complete an Art project without having his teacher do it for him. The Harry we have seen via Zoom since they Found Freedom has looked increasingly baked. Is this man capable of formulating even a single idea, never mind half a dozen screenplays?
Never having worked consistently hard at anything to become any good at it, neither of them seems to realize that it takes TIME to develop talents. One does not wish for a bankable screenplay on a Monday, put it in a PR blurb on a Tuesday and by Friday have 6 completed scripts and be shopping offers. Writers of great skill and industry experience labor for months on a first draft and maybe years for a finished product.
Every time I think she's running out of gas, the Duck-Arse of Suxxit comes up with a new way to insult our intelligence.
Already the outfit details from her visit to the school are being merched on Meghan's Mirror.
I have soooo many questions. For example, why, oh why would anybody need the details about where to buy a chambray shirt and a pair of jeans? Are they looking for locations to perform free landscaping? I need to put in a fall flower garden, but I want free flowers and a share of the picture revenue.
Is she merching Harry, too? Can Harry do anything besides basic yard work? Is Harry available for children's birthday parties? Can he do balloon animals? The clown cancelled, something about being around too many pestilent children in a time of pandemic.
Why would preschool children be interested in healthy eating and nutrition? Oh, wait, they aren't. I'd like to hear THAT presentation complete with child gagging noises!
Is this just another thing that The Harkles haven't though through? also, Harry needs to either stop using his dead mother for publicity or just grow up and act like every other adult who has lost a parent at a very early age. Planting her favorite flower was just another sleazy PR stunt that played on Diana's death. It could have easily been kept private, just for Harry to make a gesture on his mother's birthday. MM needed to not be involved a all. She never knew Diana, except for all of the research she did beforehand to hook Harry by trying to be Diana 2.0.
How sad is he really that he can't go and visit Granny? He swerved Balmoral last year because "Arch" was too young to travel but managed to hot foot it across to Europe on private jets with his son, can't remember if he went the year before - Has the Markle ever been to Balmoral despite Queenie offering to bake her a cake?
Another load of baloney
He says it's obvious what they are doing. Basically, they are spending 18 months trying to rewrite their online image to ONLY positive articles of 'good works'. This way, brands will work with them and start paying for their PR through brand initiatives. Nothing they are doing today, this week, or this month is going to change anything and all we will see are these kinds of articles ad Infinium.
So it's time of the essence with access to Charles' and Royal cash.
Then they can present the case study to new partners next year.
He said we have to look at it this way, the people that don't like them, like us here, will eventually tire of them and just go back to our lives. Whereas the majority of america and the world don't even know about them. They are trying to gain those people, as a positive audience.
He said it works most of the time, with long term high budgets.
They won't get deals with Coke and the like, but midtier and small companies.
I asked if it will sustain the 'holier than though, mega rich mansion' objective and he said no, they won't make money on that level due to the conflicting messaging. but they will evenutally be making money as celebrity influencers, just on a smaller scale than meghan is prepared to accept.
I'd be very angry, too, if these outsiders (The Harkles), who have nothing to do with the school, took photos of my children and posted them online. School is a place meant for safety for children, and not for a photo op. Did The Harkles get permission from the parents to have their children's faces photographed and then plastered all over the internet?
Say whatever else you want about Andrew, but he definitely knows to listen to Mum. He's clearly the apple of her eye. Charles has a ton of clout with the Queen now so I suspect he was the one came in and said...Andrew's done after that fascinatingly horrible interview that Andrew did. Now Andrew is a punching bag for Meghan, but he really can't be because he's wisely staying completely out of the public eye. If your not seen, there's nothing to say about you! (Something Meg could never do) So Andrew is holed up getting his tea and crumpets and feet rubbed (toes sucked?!) by Fergie and keeping silent, so the story doesn't go anywhere.
Hey maybe Meghan will start some kind of Anti Andrew press campaign.
I spoke with my husband who is a CMO, working in NYC and London. I talked to him about the M&H situation.
He says it's obvious what they are doing. Basically, they are spending 18 months trying to rewrite their online image to ONLY positive articles of 'good works'. This way, brands will work with them and start paying for their PR through brand initiatives. Nothing they are doing today, this week, or this month is going to change anything and all we will see are these kinds of articles ad Infinium.
So it's time of the essence with access to Charles' and Royal cash.
Then they can present the case study to new partners next year.
He said we have to look at it this way, the people that don't like them, like us here, will eventually tire of them and just go back to our lives. Whereas the majority of america and the world don't even know about them. They are trying to gain those people, as a positive audience.
He said it works most of the time, with long term high budgets.
They won't get deals with Coke and the like, but midtier and small companies.
I asked if it will sustain the 'holier than though, mega rich mansion' objective and he said no, they won't make money on that level due to the conflicting messaging. but they will evenutally be making money as celebrity influencers, just on a smaller scale than meghan is prepared to accept.
____________________________
We here in Nutty-Land are ever closer to culling the wheat from the chaff, vis-a-vis the Harkles.
Time after time, and as you and your husband have amply added to it, the concept of MONEY seems to be the binding thread.
I, and others, seem to think (hope? LOL) that the Harkles' income is outstripped by their outcome.
(@Martha -- Yes, it is more than tiresome watching this train wreck. *sigh*)
All we can do is watch, and wait, it seems.
BTW -- was it you, with the new Narc website? If so, nicely done :)
Yeah Harry wants to plant trees, seeds, whatever for his mother, God rest her soul. Drum up a lot of attention and play on the publics one remaining soft spot for him, that is his mother Princess Diana. But he can't hop on a plane to go to beautiful Balmoral and see his Grandparents for what, and I grealy hope not, will be one of their last years.
Wouldn't a better tribute to Diana have been to plant flowers, at your own house so you could see them every day, with your son who is also DIANA'S GRANDSON? As opposed to strangers, at a school your child will never frequent, at a school you will never see again, .......
No doubt he will spend 5 minutes planting their favorite flowers in 20 years from their death anniversary in another pity party about how sad he is.
.........
You forgot her pumps.
Personally I was thinking a nice pair of tennis shoes would work better when gardening.
Maybe she took the pumps off after pictures were done. Like how she did with Ms. Steinem, to indicate how comfy she was with the lady. I hope she didn't go barefoot with those little kids.
@unknown...yes, I suppose they are targeting those people. As much as I’ve invested in this story, most people have not, unfortunately. When I broach the topic to friends, family acquaintances it’s as if they don’t know of whom I speak! They’re not on their radar at all. So, this is probably a microcosm of the world, in which most people have very superficial knowledge of this couple, and most people don’t know anything about Markle.
Has the Markle ever been to Balmoral despite Queenie offering to bake her a cake?
The Markle has been to Balmoral as many times as Doria has been to Sandringham for Christmas.
She only lasted in the Firm long enough for two Balmoral seasons. They blew off the invite in 2018 (if they were invited to begin with. I know it's an 'open' invitation on the part of the Queen but all indications are that HAMS blew it off two years running. Meg's distaste for blood sports being well-known, she no doubt would have coerced Harry into staying away with her. Then last summer, Archie was too young to fly up to Scotland--but not too young to fly to the South of France to Elton John's house--and then just a month later, fly to Johannesburg on a Royal tour. (If 'Archie' did go either place. Not forgetting the Bank Holiday pub lunch he also enjoyed with his parents.)
Meg never wanted to go to Balmoral at all, which is why her insistence that the Queen was throwing her a birthday party there so quizzical. If one neither rides nor shoots, nor is fond of rambles on the moors, in the rain . . there is nothing to do at Balmoral except change clothes for every meal. Diana loathed it as well, fetching honeymoon photo shoot to the contrary. I wonder how many days (hours) Charles was married before he realized that his marital life was going to be untenable. Diana at least went to Balmoral for all the dutiful family holidays.
The lack of ‘scoop’ has me rethinking my position.
"I hope that The Harkles planted those forget me not seeds in a very shady area, and that the school has plenty of water to keep them going. While forget me nots can be planted in California, they like very mild climates, such as GB. GB has the perfect mild climate for forget me nots, which is an entirely different climate than sunny and hot LA."
Good point. I wondered too as where I live it's way too hot for forget me nots.
I couldn't tell what else they were planting but it looked like some were petunias. And according to Town&Country mag:
"In addition to the Forget-Me-Nots, Meghan and Harry helped the kids replant their garden for fall with a mix of flowers and vegetables, such as petunias, California wildflowers, tomatoes, squash, sweet peas."
Most of those things will need more sun and have have different water needs than forget me nots.
-----
@Jess wrote:
"In all fairness, leaks about MM and H have all but gone away since they quit the royal family."
Huh? I'm not sure if that was written tongue in cheek? If not, we've heard Archie needs a buddy, M is pregnant (including many months ago but she doesn't yet show in pics), M is too famous for Mommy & Me groups, Harry's writing scripts, M's getting "cheesy" movie offers, M wants to be president, Spotify offer, Harry bicycles many miles to the beach from TP's, M's residuals bought the new house, Harry misses Balmoral, Harry bonded with Adele, the tale of M's multiple birthday parties, Archie does XYZ, etc etc etc.
If you mean we aren't hearing as many "misbehavior" stories, that's true. They aren't in the UK to do those things. But I'm not sure how that implicates W&K? Plus a number of those stories appeared in FF which suggests to me they were true.
Maybe I'm missing the point?
I got into it with him about, 'yeah, really, who is going to buy what they are selling?'
They need a longer-term $$$ source, and his idea is that they are using the entire Royal budget this year (from last year, part of the deal) hoping it sticks in time for a shift in new users and public opinion, which would be positive. This is why Meghan was obsessed with the fact she couldn't control the media narrative in the UK. To her, press = $$, but only the press you are selling ala Kardashians and everyone in LA. Not, lol, royal life which is totally above it all.
She's doing this the hard way. The easy way would have been to overcome her history with good works in the UK and then after 5 years leave the institution with her reputation intact and strike deals without being royal, simply owing to the fact she paid her dues and is a liked person.
Now, his point is that they are winging it with Charles' big budget. They are trying to get to that point where they can sell themselves to brands since they would have built a new following of people that don't know their past and who they stepped on to get there. Will it work? Thats TBD. I'm doubtful, and even he is doubtful. They won't ever get the Cokes of the world, like Serena, to sponsor them and then take on their massive PR spend. But this is what they are attempting.
This is why we see Harry say weird one liners 'We're here to change the world in a positive way'. Corporate America and Brands do not want negativity that's been trailing them everywhere.
Even Disney said Meghan ended up being too controversial.
So this whole saga starts and ends with an aging woman desperate to be an 'influencer' in America, as if she achieved something other women want (marrying Royal, being a mediocre actress, having a Royal baby) not realising the Royal part makes her message extremely conflicting.
Anyway, will a big brand pick up Meghan's (and Harry's ) PR bill next year? Doubtful.
In all fairness, leaks about MM and H have all but gone away since they quit the royal family. Are they (or she) really bad, or is it more likely that Lazy Katie and Do Little Willy we’re threatened? We’ve got to be fair and ask the hard questions. Maybe they all are terrible? Maybe HM aren’t that bad but we’re just thrown under the bus?
The lack of ‘scoop’ has me rethinking my position.
Bwahahahaha. I am convinced. MM's ghosting of her entire family, black and white, except her mother before the wedding, her dumping of her husband(s?), boyfriend, and most of her friends and coworkers and her USA reputation as an unpleasant b*tch even before she met Harry is totally the fault of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge using their time-traveling machine. It was probably with the assistance of the Tardis and the Doctor* because he always liked the British better anyway. How dare they interfere to keep her from achieving fame and fortune in Hollywood! I am outraged, I tell you! And the way they kept her from achieving respect and success in England because they stole her hosiery and tangled her wigs and shrunk and wrinkled her seasonally inappropriate clothing before her official appearances was just pure eeeevil genius. Was it the Duke or Duchess of Cambridge that threw the pot of tea at the servant? Who ordered the people out of the seats at Wimbledon? Obviously it was THEM, Catherine and William. Because of jealousy.
*High fives to the D and D of C as well as the Time Lord, not the present Dr. Who, but my favorite Dr. Who, David Tennant, for their time traveling adventure. The big hole in this theory, of course, is that if she had been able to achieve fame and fortune in Hollywood, she would not have schemed to achieve infamy by snagging William's gormless brother. I do believe that they need to fire up the Tardis, go back in time, and twist some arms to have MM in the starring role of Mr. and Mrs. Smith. Brad Pitt was destined to be unhappy anyway, and they might have spared a nation and an entire forest of moon bumps. At the very least, they could leave a message from the past for HM to be opened before the wedding advising her to avoid a lot of difficulty and refuse her permission for a big fat expensive wedding for Wallis Simpson 2.0, and make them wait in line behind Eugenie.
The hard question is, what justification do you find in labeling the Cambridges “do-nothing”!and “lazy”, in 2020?
That view is decidedly circa 2012. I think your sugary roots are showing.
I believe it is valuable to have genuinely robust conversation in here. I would be happy to concede your point of view if you can demonstrate in what specific ways the Cambridges have been less productive since their marriage than Meg and Harry have been since theirs. I know it doesn’t seem to matter to the Cambridge detractors that They had a light schedule of royal duties the first half of their marriage with the express blessing of the Queen. In this family, going off one’s own bat Without a royal directive or permission is a recipe for mistakes and sometimes outright disaster. Kate has not only borne three children for the crown, but she has earned her monarchs respect, and has the honors to prove it. ER is Satisfied with her performance, and that’s really the only opinion that holds water. William saved some lives when he was in the helicopter rescue pilots. I would place that above some speeches and ribbon-cuttings myself. How many lives has Harry personally saved during his tenure? I’m sure if there were some Meg would have found a way to tell us about it by now.
Defending the Sussexes’ indefensible behavior by running down the Cambridges with a nearly decade-old argument is not an effective strategy around here. It is a tried and true one of the Sussex camp though. Tell Meg we say hello.
"In all fairness, leaks about MM and H have all but gone away since they quit the royal family. Are they (or she) really bad, or is it more likely that Lazy Katie and Do Little Willy we’re threatened? We’ve got to be fair and ask the hard questions. Maybe they all are terrible? Maybe HM aren’t that bad but we’re just thrown under the bus?"
----
I couldnt disagree more, Jess. We are subjected to a constant barrage of leaks regarding the Sussexes, many of them laughable attempts to make MM and JH successful, in-demand, and on the brink of great success. The sources sre always an "insider" or "a friend".
However, to illustrate the point: Omid Scobies daily reveal regarding the Sussexes, especially those regarding MMs upcoming lawsuit against the MOS. Even Justice Warby called her out for it.
"Defending the Sussexes’ indefensible behavior by running down the Cambridges with a nearly decade-old argument is not an effective strategy around here. It is a tried and true one of the Sussex camp though. Tell Meg we say hello. "
I am mentally hitting that like button as hard as I can!
🏆🏆🏆
""In all fairness, leaks about MM and H have all but gone away since they quit the royal family."
Because MM and Harry have left the family so the leaks go with them. MM is/was the leak and we all suspect it.
She’ll believe everyone is there to see her and She’ll think she’s better than all of them. When she hears the inevitable boos from the public she’ll tell harry that it proves they were right to leave and that the royals aren’t as popular as they think. She’ll leave the event smirking to herself with little idea she has yet again behaved appallingly and with Harrys balls secured in her ghastly handbag, suitably chastised for speaking to any member of his family.
That’s how I see it playing out.
@Jess
""In all fairness, leaks about MM and H have all but gone away since they quit the royal family."
Because MM and Harry have left the family so the leaks go with them. MM is/was the leak and we all suspect it.
__________________________
Or, that *leaks* aren't accomplishing the result they/she hoped for.
I do hope so.
The leaks were all Meghan.
Agree to say Hi to Meghan. She no doubt reads this blog.
I would if I were her LOL!
DON'T LET HER DO IT.
No leaks come out about the Cambridges, and they have a lot of kids in the picture.
The leaks were all Meghan.
Agree to say Hi to Meghan. She no doubt reads this blog.
________________
Really?
Who was it that said they'd imagined MM typing away, letting the press know, all the gossip, only to have it confirmed that that indeed is what had been happening. IIRC, the stream of leaks dried when then were kicked out of KP.
Now, I'll wade into the morass of allegations I found way back:
In the days before I discovered Nutty, I'd read Jerseydeanne and I was left with the impression from her, rightly or wrongly, that Andrew had indeed `had' Megsie. Ditto for Skippy.
There was even the assertion that Skippy recruited Megsy as `one of the girls' for a party, possibly at sea, only to discover H had invited her as his girl friend - something like that. `Whoops!' in any case, if true.
Jerseydeanne even quoted a rate of $500 per hour. I've no idea if this is true or not.
All unsubstantiated allegations, I should stress. To be taken with a large pinch of salt.
Are you OK, Megsie?
Catherine let's her expert team do their jobs, whatever it is (arranging her diary, buying and planning for her wardrobe, and so on ).
Meghan thinks and acts if she knows best about everything, gives out instructions and throws tantrums if she does not get what she wants.
Catherine gathers an expert team of advisors (using her position to be able to pick the best), spends a lot of time researching all available studies, and slowly builds something that has generational impact, intertwining royal access where she can (such as using Chelsea Flower Show), and, with William, has private gatherings, as Charles does, to schmooze donors.
Meghan rushes everything, wanting results and publicity, thinking she knows everything after reading one book. The capsule collection, the Vogue edition, the Grenfell cookbook are all very high profile but have no generational, or even wide, impact. She has also not learnt how to collaborate and defer to experts. She is stuck in IG lifestyle influencer and merching mode.
The thing is all royals mess up in some way when they start their public role, and some, like Andrew, never seem to learn and have to be put out to pasture. Catherine was very young with no experience in anything about her role other than being the girlfriend when she got married. It took her time to find her way. Sophie and Edward both messed up hugely in their own way so they kept their heads down, had a couple of kids, created a home, built good and strong relationships with the family and slowly built a public role and meaningful focus, which for Sophie is really starting to show as significant.
Meghan never intended to stay or serve. She always intended to use the BRF and the UK to raise her profile, make her famous and give her access to wealth, power and influence. I cannot believe that a woman of her age and supposed intelligence who really loves her husband would have been incapable of overcoming mistakes and settling into a meaningful role in the BRF.
Catherine is like the invention of electricity. Meghan is like annual fireworks.
How do you define yachting? She used men in long-standing relationships and to escort her to events where she could get publicity but nothing in her history or MO indicates that she hired herself out for short-term entertainment. Her relationship with Trevor got her a few small roles but she did not have the talent to build an A-list acting career in Hollywood. Her relationship with Cory had her selling herself everywhere as a foodie but no big career there either. Then there was Jessica, who got her wanting to be a global fashion icon, and Harry, who set her on the path of global humanitarian. No lasting achievements in either field.
This gossip about Meghan and Andrew is pure fabrication. There is not one shred of evidence that they were ever in the same place at the same time before she got Harry. There is also no evidence at all that she met Weinstein or Epstein. (She has never had the talent or bankability to interest the first and she has always been to old and domineering for the latter.)
Lily the Pink, The Scaffold
Megsy the Skink
We’ll sink a drink, I think
To Megsy the skink, the skink, the skink
The saviour of all feminists
She’s invented ridiculous verb(i)age
Not efficacious, unless your pissed
Henry the ‘nth’
I’m Henry the ‘nth’ I am
Henry the ‘nth’ I am, I am
I got married to a well known wh.re
She’s been married several times before
Second verse, same as the first
Little bit louder and a little bit worse
I’m Henry the ‘nth’ I am
Henry the ‘nth’ I am, I am
I got suckered by a dame on her knees
I’m just worried she wokes up, then flees
Since, obviously, you or your PR peeps are reading here and we know you dissect every Daily Mail article about you or the BRF, may I direct your limited attention span to the article about Ricky Gervais? I can summarize it for you. He talks about how he would never worry his elderly parents about his lack of financial resources. Let me repeat. He talks about how he would never worry his elderly parents about his lack of financial resources. He further states that he never complained to them either. He always appeared to be, or is, a happy person. That is because he is an adult who takes responsibility for his own decisions in life. Now let that sink in. Of course, you will wholly reject it and make that weekly phone call to Pa. Because you and your husband are c u next Tuesdays (sorry Nutties but it’s true).
Sincerely and with emphasis,
Weekittylass
P.S. You have my permission to share this with your friends, People magazine and anyone else.
Whoa Ho Tungsten Lining
You’re everywhere and nowhere Megsy
You’re just not ‘that’
Living on a sliding hillside
In your silly hat
Flying across the countries
Merching naught but tat
Saying everything is perfect
Whilst looking like a prat
And its whoa ho tungsten lining
Anywhere you go now Megsy
We see your constant whining
You’re such a wuss, that is obvious
Re- Army Pongos, the banter was wherever the Army goes, the pong goes.
As for Russians, my daughters friends father is a Russian Orthodox priest,
they’re a lovely family.
I also have a Russian friend, she’s fun, we bonded over our love of ‘Meerkats”
I love Sergei, simples!
@WildBoar
The first leak I knew of was Megs moaning to Lainey
about Kate not giving her a lift to the shops, pre marriage/Christmas.
Could only have come from madam.
.
@Jess is either taking the piss or she is a Meghag Sugar troll. I am going to go with Meghag Sugar troll.
IIRC, It was before that, before most of us had even heard of her - snippetts/tittle-tattle about other members of the RF, who'd be doing what and when, things like that I believe, direct to the Press, before BP went public on it.
I'm sure it was one of the RRs who commented (Richard Palmer? Dan Wootton?) - who said something like `BP has always been tight-lipped/ leak-proof, then suddenly, we get this flow of information...' or wtte.
It was jokingly suggested that it was H's new girlfriend, her feet freshly planted under his table (in Nott Cott?) who was passing info, presumably from him.
Then they found out that it was indeed her...:
That was the gist of the assertions I read.
PS I don't think much of the definition of the phrase about `feet under the table' from the Collins Online dictionary - `Betty from Northallerton' gets the flavour of it better:
`It means to establish yourself, or to get comfortable, within a particular situation - as though you were sitting down to dinner as guest, who is fed for free, and loath to leave.'
It's not value-neutral; it suggests something a bit sneaky, another was of saying `not entirely above board' where `board' literally means table!
I'd use it of my father's step-mother - Dad's mother died in the December 1900 By the time the National Census (1901) was taken the following March, the chit who had previously been employed as the `skivvy' was listed, along with her illegitimate daughter, as being present overnight as a `guests'. She and Grandad married soon after - the daughter was considered as `nothing to with us - she came with Annie'.
@Lieutenant - sorry I couldn't get anywhere with your pdf - my lack of IT skill.
Re. Megsy's feet under the table
What are your thoughts as to where Meg was domiciled pre-engagement & indeed, after the wedding?
We've had the stories about the bended knee proposal in the kitchen at Nott Cott, just as Meg was bending over the oven taking out a roast chicken. Harry must be inspired hugely by the sight of her bent over . . or maybe he sprang the most important question of his life when her hands were stuffed up the chicken's butt?
Either way, it decidedly lacks romance. Would a Prince who had access to romantic spots like a luxury resort in Botswana, or the ability to jet Megs off to Paris for the weekend really grovel around on his own kitchen floor for that very important moment?
Harry is, as we have always been told, a real salt-of-the-earth bloke, and such a very low-key proposal might have appealed to him. The support in favor of its veracity is that from Meg's perspective, that proposal would have been really lame. If she had a fantastic proposal story from the top of the Eiffel Tower ala Katie Holmes, she would have trumpeted that around. I'm surprised she didn't make up a better story than 'roast chicken dinner'.
I've got more to say but I need to put that in another post.
"An' every ONE was an 'Enery...
_____________________
Hahahahaha!
Re- Army Pongos, the banter was wherever the Army goes, the pong goes.
As for Russians, my daughters friends father is a Russian Orthodox priest,
they’re a lovely family.
I also have a Russian friend, she’s fun, we bonded over our love of ‘Meerkats”
I love Sergei, simples!
_______________________
Ummm..... yeah :)
In all fairness, leaks about MM and H have all but gone away since they quit the royal family."
__________________________
Really? And what do you call the endless drivel that we are subjected to from them? Scooby Doo exists only to reveal the 'surprise' exploits that she invents in her crazy quest for global stardom.
The leaks began with her and they continue through her. Please credit us with some functioning brain cells.
Agreed. A stunning new nickname there, Hikari.
She just did not socialise in the circles where she could have met Andrew and all her merching and self promotion did not put her in his path either.
She only got to Harry through Soho House connections and, if the timeline put forward by Harry Markle is correct, her Mulroney connections because they were the ones who connected with Harry when he was in Toronto for the Invictus Games.
I always wonder if lack of self-awareness enabled Meghan to believe that she really does love Harry or if she knew that she was in love with what she could get from him and was always acting. Her relationships all seem to be so self serving and transactional.
I'd got the impression that she'd shacked up with H at his pad at KP as soon as she possibly could - but who knows?
We were told that she was at a hotel for the night before the wedding (the most expensive one she could find, would be my guess). They are supposed to have lived in the Cotswolds at one point - just long enough to build a case against the paps?- but I've seen nothing convincing about the honeymoon.
They seem to have actually been in residence at KP after the wedding, long enough to annoy the other residents with wild parties and loud fireworks late at night - goodness knows after that.
I've seen nothing to suggest they ever set foot in Toad Hall. What did they do when removed from KP? There was a hint (Harry Markle?) that she had been picked up by the police, at various points in Windsor in a state of inebriation - `drunk as a skunk' was IIRC the phrase.
Was s/he/they at Soho House?
Were they even together? I read one suggestion that she had a flat(apartment) in S Kensington; no clue about Harry unless he bedded down at night on the muck in the Cavalry Stables.
All he would have had to worry about was being out of the way when the ordure was gathered up to be taken to Kew Gardens to be composted.
(My father assured me that the best night's sleep he had on the Western Front was on a Belgian dung heap - he spread his gas-cape out over the turds and had a soft, warm bed to rival the best feather mattress.)
Meanwhile, she could have packed her bags and gone home to mother, for all I know.
Frankly, I haven't a clue. These must be among the `secrets' they're not sharing with the world.
Also, for a Diana statue unveiling, I am going to assume that there is an Archie and he is in line to the throne for as long as it’s on royal.uk website. That makes Archie Diana’s grandson, and Meghan the mother of Diana’s grandson.
I believe Catherine, Meghan and the children have a right to be there at any unveiling (if it ever happens).
Off topic: I know this isn’t an airport and I don’t like to announce my departures, but I just wanted to let you all know that I seriously have a good month of clean up after this storm, and I am also fostering dogs displaced by the hurricane (and I am in the transport crew— rescues that were untouched are taking in dogs from the SW and W parts of the state) so if I’m not around, I’m totallly ok. Just super busy and likely playing preschool or round up with my dogs plus displaced dogs. It’s a lot of work. I have one getting spayed this morning, so at least I have a break (it’s a hyper puppy).
I have been sincerely touched by everyone’s concern and good wishes. Thank you.
I’ll be in and out, but I might very well be more out than in. Take care, everyone! I’m around.
Funny, that.
Rumours of MM as a yacht girls
I feel there have been far too many of these rumours for them to be dismissed completely. Of course, we don't have any incontrovertible evidence but we have heard the same stories many times. Tom 'Skippy' Inskip, for instance, is rumoured to have introduce MM to Harry or even to have booked her for him. She is also rumoured to have been, maybe briefly, on Epstein's yacht and to have bumped into Andrew.
There have also been rumours that none other than Steve Mnuchin, United States secretary of the Treasury, was another of her "acquaintances".
These are all rumours, I grant you, but it would be something very difficult to prove as they need to be suppressed, for obvious reasons. There are quite a few websites that mention these allegations.
I am not into tarot at all but found this YouTube video (tarot by Jeanine.com) where she talks about MM being on yachts, knowing Epstein and Andrew.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_Ud1ZsQjlE
There's also Joseph Magi, who a couple of Nutties mentioned not long ago, although the videos stress it's for entertainment purposes.
All allegedly, of course, but too much of it to dismiss, methinks.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_Ud1ZsQjlE
All these rumours of them having all these high-profile friends but no evidence of them socialising with anyone. They were at an outdoor restaurant, but alone (where was Doria?). Even the Queen and Prince Phillip, still in a highly protected bubble, have been to a wedding and have got together with family.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have founded a yet-to-be-named production company and signed a multiyear deal with Netflix, which will pay them to make documentaries, docu-series, feature films, scripted shows and children’s programming — giving the couple a global platform six months after their dramatic decampment from the House of Windsor.
Harry and Meghan may appear on camera in documentary programming. But she has repeatedly made it clear that she has no plans to return to acting, having last appeared in the cable drama “Suits,” which concluded its run in 2019. Their content will be exclusive to Netflix.
“Our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope,” the couple said in a statement. “As new parents, making inspirational family programming is also important to us.” They added that Netflix’s “unprecedented reach will help us share impactful content that unlocks action.” Netflix has 193 million subscribers worldwide.
It is unclear how much Harry and Meghan will be paid, given their lack of producing experience. A Netflix spokeswoman declined to comment.
The streaming service, however, is known for backing up Brink’s trucks when it wants to be in business with high-profile people, particularly when other entertainment companies also want their services. In recent months, Harry and Meghan have quietly talked with Disney and Apple. Variety reported earlier this month that they had met with NBCUniversal.
"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have announced they have signed deal with Netflix.
.........
The couple have founded a yet-to-be-named production company and signed a multiyear deal with Netflix, which will pay them to make documentaries, docu-series, feature films, scripted shows and children’s programming, according to The New York Times."
Another bright idea? Will the programmes be about Diana/feminism/empowerment/racism etc? And children's programming? A film version of duck rabbit?
Harkle leaks are never ending and haven’t ‘gone away’ since they left the UK.
For monthes we’ve been tortured with their leaks, PR, thirsty press shenianghans in order to attempt increase their profile and to denigrate the profile of the Cambriges and other members of BRF.
The source of most of the ‘leaks’ has been MM, her PR firms, and her thirsty ‘friends’.
An occasional ‘royal insider’ aka grey suit, comments on something but the Harkle authorized Scooby bio, ( personally, i still think, direct from MM’s journal she was keeping at KP and Frogmore) has been weeks of Harkle authorized leaks. sure intended by the Toxic Haz’s,to gain sympathy but in reality showed them for their true vain, narcissitic, egotical, tempermental selves.
and the endless leaks about housing in Canada, LA, SB, lawsuits, charities, BMX, Sussexroyal, Archwell, mutli million $ production projects, EGOT Acting projects with creme de la creme directors, zillion $ podcasts, zillion $ speaking tours, Covid focus, racial injustice focus, female empowerment focus, use your voice focus, zoom speaking, childhood development focus (copying Catherine?), Celeb B-day monteceito parties, Dora the award winning designer, everyday another thirsty Sussex provided ‘leak’ to stay relevant.
Meghan's alleged connection to yachting is based on one photo of her on a yacht with a group of girlfriends.
Not strictly true--there was a text message conversation making the rounds prior to the wedding, leaked by .. CDAN? . . in which a gentleman was seeking confirmation from MM that she was available for an engagement during the 'season'. Apparently her answer was 'No', because by that point she'd set her sights on Harry. This exchange has since been scrubbed.
While this posting on CDAN could have been made up, there are so many anecdotal accounts of MM participating in that lifestyle (lots of free time to jet-set, since Suits only filmed for about 4 months out of the year) that this cannot be entirely discounted. Until MM, I was unaware that 'yachting' was a thing.
How do you define yachting?
In this context, being hired by wealthy gentlemen who own yachts to provide decorative, scantily-clad companionship on their boats in order to entertain his friends aboard, both above and below-decks. How's that?
She used men in long-standing relationships and to escort her to events where she could get publicity . . .
Apart from the relationships with Trevor and Cory, I have only seen her pictured at industry events alone, or in one case, post-Trev, there was an event circa 2013 where she was accompanied by another man. Those were the pictures where she looked suspiciously full in the tummy area. If you know of others, you have more info than I do about who Meg may have seen or used with her clothing on.
This is 'being escorted' in the old-fashioned non-carnal sense of being squired to a dressy event by a gentleman friend. This is not the type of escorting I am referring to.
. . . but nothing in her history or MO indicates that she hired herself out for short-term entertainment.
Well, we don't really have access to all of her history, seeing as the British security services has scrubbed most of the unsavory pictures and other digital files. Given the complete dearth of persons from her past willing to talk about her, they were exceedingly effective. Meg has been identified as an escort by her own sister. I know those two don't get along, but I think Sammie knew her ammo was live.
How exactly do *you* define Meg's MO? I would be interested to know. Do you find it contradictory that a woman who in your own words 'used men in longstanding relationships and to escort her to events where she could get publicity' might find it a very short leap to being paid for her time to provide nubile companionship aboard luxury yachts? I don't. Meg's MO as we have come to know it consists of monetizing everything she can, exploiting her sexuality for fame and profit and chasing the luxurious lifestyle of multimillionaires.
*If* MM were well-compensated to don a bikini and flirt (and more) with wealthy men in exchange for unlimited free drinks, food, gifts, fun in the sun all gratis--I would say that is *exactly* her MO.
A couple that we shall call HaMs,
Got into a bit of a jam.
They spent all their money,
And then they got chummy,
With Russians that no one can stand.
What a nightmare that would be.