Could it have been only a year ago that Meghan guest-edited the vaunted September issue of Vogue UK?
Yup - it was the September 2019 issue of Vogue, Meg's "Forces for Change" issue. She was so pleased with the issue that she handed out notebooks embossed with the Forces for Change message, accompanied by handwritten notes in her trademark dreadful calligraphy.
Fast forward twelve months - past a messy departure from the UK and a festival of lawsuits against the media.
Today the September 2020 issue of Vogue UK hit the stands. It focuses on Black activism, with a fold-out cover featuring 18 faces of influential Black celebrities.
Meghan, apparently, is not among them.
Ed Enninful used to love Meg
Has Meg fallen out with Vogue UK editor Edward Enninful? This time last year, Enninful was calling his co-operation with the Duchess "a special time in his editorship."
In a video clip that accompanied the 2019 issue, Ghana-born Enninful emotes, "I remember walking into Kensington Palace and I was so excited. And I was like, 'Lovely to meet you, duchess." And you were like "Call me Meghan."
Enninful doesn't seem so star-struck any more. In fact, he was recently quoted busting up Meghan's favorite narrative by saying that he doesn't feel that criticism of her was due to racism.
"She did get a very unfair treatment, I thought," Enninful told SkyNews last week. "It was harsh, it was harsh. But I wouldn't just blame it on racism."
That's rather unhelpful, at least from Meg's point of view, because the idea that Britain rejected her solely because she is (a little bit) Black flavors all of Meghan's multiple lawsuits and much of her publicity.
Portraying herself as a victim of racism is also Meg's best hope for US-based celebrity in a time when racial tensions have proven very profitable for the media.
Not really an activist
Anyway, Meg's apparent absence from the new September Vogue does make sense, because she isn't really a Black activist.
Arguably, she's not an activist at all, just a follower of the cause of the week. (Speaking of which, there have still been no arrests in the Althea Bernstein case, and apparently no new information over the past three weeks either.)
But it raises a bigger question - now that Enninful appears to have moved on, precisely who is still in Meghan's corner?
Bad news for celebrities who back Meghan
A year ago, Meg still had the support of celebrities like Ellen DeGeneres and Jessica Mulroney, both of whom have had their own falls from grace since then.
Serena Williams, who is currently preparing for the US Open tournament beginning August 24, wasn't pleased with Meg's stoned-looking appearance at the 2019 Open, which included an incident in which Meg apparently showed her panties to Serena's husband.
It's a good bet that Meg won't be welcome in Serena's box at this year's open.
Even Oprah, who has been in the news recently talking about racism, doesn't seem to be in Meghan's corner any more. The last statement Oprah made about the Sussexes - defending their decision to leave the Royal Family - was in January.
Are there any powerful people still backing the Duchess of Sussex?
Comments
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/12233532/prince-harry-meghan-markle-inside-botswana-camp-third-date/
magical
Guests stay in tents decorated with vintage maps and trunks, with an en-suite and a seating area out front to watch the incredible views and wildlife.
There’s even daybeds and sun loungers decked out in the camp’s signature vintage style, along with an al-fresco dining area.
Later describing their magical trip, Prince Harry said they stayed in a tent in the “middle of nowhere"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8614577/Meghans-got-royal-masterclass-Queen-saw-Prince-Charles-second-father.html
Interestingly parts of the gag-inducing blurbs about how religious M is could have been copied straight from the infamous PEOPLE article. How could the same friend say exactly or almost exactly the same things? Often when the exact same words are used more than once to describe a past situation a false narrative is involved. Of course, Scobie could have just copied the article too.
"Her relationship with God and with her church is extremely important to her. That's something most people do not know about her. It plays a central role in her life, as an individual, as a woman."
Meghan Markle saw Prince Charles as a 'second father' according to the new book Finding FreedomCredit: Getty - Pool
A source told the authors that Meg did not consider Charles as a father-in-law but rather a “second father.”
The authors write: “Meghan had her own reasons for admiring her father-in-law, who had poignantly walked her down the aisle when her own father let her down.”
Prince Charles, who walked Meghan down the aisle in absence of her own father Thomas Markle in 2018, is said to be just as fond of his daughter-in-law.
A friend of the heir said he had “taken a real shine to Meghan. She's a sassy, confident, beautiful American.
“He likes very strong, confident women. She's bright, and she's self-aware, and I can see why they've struck a strong rapport 🤮
The Prince of Wales of course walked Meghan down the aisle in place of her own father Thomas Markle on her wedding dayCredit: AP:Associated Press
Finding Freedom claims revealed today include:
Meghan felt like people wanted her to serve her child "on a silver platter" after Archie was bornPrince Harry was "delightfully surprised" when Meghan reportedly peed in the wood on their luxury camping trip in BotswanaHarry was stunned after Meghan's estranged family gave a series of interviews criticising the duchessMeghan had to undergo kidnapping training after an unusually high number of threatsThe Duchess of Sussex saw Prince Charles as a 'second father'
“He likes very strong, confident women. She's bright, and she's self-aware, and I can see why they've struck
I can almost see Scobie with a notepad and a camera in the said woods, because they didn't cooperate with the book, did they?
DM rarely makes me laugh but that article did.
I plan to cash on my Masai DNA and immediately demand retribution from every country. Why the heck not?
Life will get considerably easier for me as every failure and every mistake is not my fault any more. It is all racism.
The book, out today and co-authored by journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, claims the Duchess of Sussex's first husband Trevor Engelson, 43, liked his actress wife to be 'dependent on him'.
It suggests the American couple - who were married from 2011 to 2013 after seven years of dating - grew apart once Meghan 'found fame' in US legal drama Suits.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8615389/TV-producer-husband-liked-actress-wife-Meghan-Markle-dependent-biography-claims.html
Bizarre. Who's spilled the beans? Not Trevor, I don't think. Could Megsy have tired of him? Maybe she thought the grass was greener in Toronto (it was obviously greener in London)
I also think M and Trevor did a little more than "date" for those 7 years. The only time we've ever heard M lived in her own place (not Doria's, not Thomas's, not a dorm/sorority house, not with Trevor) was when she moved to Toronto in 2011 at about age 30. What an "independent" woman!
Now he is married to a woman with more money than him, so I dont think Trevor has any problems having an independent wife.
I think fame changed her a lot. You can see she gets high and forgets everything around ger when she is getting attention from the public and the press. Remember the photo of Harry and Meghan, were Meghan lets go of Harrys hand and just walks towards the cameras with that horrible look in her eyes and Harry is standing there with his empty hand:
https://www.google.com/search?q=Harry and Meghan south africa&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg%3ACeKIE0pXYAN-Yfnb151YQIOz&client=ms-android-samsung&prmd=inv&hl=sv&sa=X&ved=0CBIQuIIBahcKEwjAleHdlJPrAhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQCA&biw=412&bih=708#imgrc=0Jc007G2cJMkYM
Maybe Meghan changed.
Why does she always have to blame everyone else?
It would be good to hear Trevor's side of the story but he has class and is a gentleman so won't talk.
MM always has to blame everyone else because nothing is ever her fault and she's a perpetual victim.
If more vomit inducing bilge comes out of Scooby Doo's book, I really do hope the Queen & Charles take very firm action henceforth.
@ WBBM
I plan to cash on my Masai DNA and immediately demand retribution from every country. Why the heck not?
Life will get considerably easier for me as every failure and every mistake is not my fault any more. It is all racism.
Yep, I'm one of those paleish green-eyed types that have Scandinavian and German and Irish and Scots ancestry, but I also have a small percentage of north African and west African. Maybe I should start claiming that as well! We're all freakin' mixed race, particularly when we factor in Denisovan and Neanderthal ancestry. I think there's a new one, too, that I don't remember.
Neanderthal lives matter! (I think I'm going to make some T-shirts that say that.)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8615211/New-biography-reveals-Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-raising-Archie-away-spotlight.html
"Baby Archie joined the royal couple on their final tour as working members of The Firm, with the authors writing how he continued to grow and learn during the trip.
They write: 'After the trip he continued to achieve new milestones, including mimicking the sound of animals during their stay at the high commissioner's residence in Cape Town."
Archie was supposedly 4 1/2 months old at the time of the tour. There is no way he was mimicking animals noises at that age.
The article also talks about their efforts to baby-proofed the borrowed house in Canada because 6-month old Archie was "standing and shuffling along the edges of furniture" (cruising) but still wasn't walking nearly 6 months later? Huh? How old IS that kid?
1. When they moved into the Canadian mansion in autumn 2019, they baby-proofed it because Archie was walking along the edges of the furniture (we call that furniture-walking in the US). However, Katie Nicholl tells us in July that Archie is "taking his first steps". It took him 6+ months to go from furniture walking to actual walking??? He is either very slow meeting his milestones or something is off with those two stories.
2. When MeMe met William for the first time, he said "I couldn't wait to meet THE GIRL who put such a silly grin on my brother's face". Apparently no offense taken by Hapless. Yet, when his brother said "slow down and get to know THIS GIRL", for some reason great offense was taken. THe only explanation - first was a compliment and the second a criticism!
3. Izzy May has been pushed forward as a "close confidant' of Meme's and the only friend in London. Has she been overlooked as one of the 5 famous friends?
4. Are there "woods" in Botswana for MeMe to pee in? I could see a tree or bush behind which she did her business. While she did have the ensuite tent, I am assuming they left the tent and went on walks/hikes/tours and she was forced to pee au natural at that point.
5. Omid is very careful to point out that MeMe's faith is in God, family (?) and friends. He makes no mention of being a practicing Anglican, attending services, studying scripture. He does throw in her close relationship with the Archbishop, I guess to give the illusion he approves of her "journey of faith".
6. All these stories sound very similar to stories we have read in DM over the last two years. Some even seem verbatim. I think this confirms that MeMe wrote up her own PR stories, fed them to DM, then gave the manuscripts to Omid to write this book.
7. This entire book is blame and revisionist history to counter the "hate".
8. Lastly, these details are so intimate and way more intrusive than anything else she has sued over. I can't wait to hear what her excuse will be for not suing Omid.
There is talk of making this awful book into a movie? With Megsy producing I suppose?
Finding Freedom is #18 today at Amazon USA. The all books list.
Amazon UK it is #2
Seriously why is that critical to the story? Chapter 4 she craps behind a tree? Geezus . Sorry. I always just scrolled past stories in my feed, yes bit at some but I do not even want to see headlines anymore
I am taking a stand and hitting NOT INTERESTED. Lets see how long it takes for it to clear out. I am so over it. Of course I will continue reading here and few choice spots but I can honestly no longer endure her constant overshare and the headlines. It is exasperating. Is it just EVERYWHERE because we follow her? I get the book just came out but enough
No more Meg pr for me. You all will be my feed ;)
Internet OFF grrr
Neanderthal lives matter! I just spit my coffee!
I’ll buy one of your shirts :-) Off to the DM, I may need something stronger than coffee, it’s 5 o’clock somewhere.......
Shall we sum up intimate details that could only come from either Hazza or Mazza?
- expression on Archie's face upon emerging from her birth canal. My favourite.
- Megsy peeing in the woods outside of their luxury ensuite.
- Private exchange between Harry and William
- What Harry had for lunch with the Queen
- Drinks and snacks they had on their first date
- Megsy texting her father from a bath
- What yoga pose Megsy stroke after Harry proposed
- When exactly Harry started looking for the ring
- The Harkles wanted to ambush the Queen but Megsy changed her mind
- Details of tiaragate blaming Angela
Please add to the list. Only braindead can now believe Megsy didn't cooperate with Scobie.
Who said I love you first.
How quietly newborn Archie slept
—MM being upset about the brooch at the Christmas lunch
—The reason why Megsy & Trevor broke up
—MM’s strong faith
—MM being upset about the brooch at the Christmas lunch
looks lie a Megsy lie to me. I highly doubt she saw or was aware of that "racist" whatever brooch that an old Royal had on. Not at the actual lunch
But with M/H on their current anti-racism kick, today Megsy will pretend to be upset and for the Scooby book.
BTW -- When Megs and H go out these days with their generalized anti-racism spiels, they are also calling the BRF racists and same for the British people they had to flee from to Los Angeles.
1. He is so incredibly close to the grafted/grifted in daughter-in-law whom he met less than three years ago . .she's the longed-for daughter he never had. He loves her because she's "Sassy". (Meg most certainly is SASSY and thinks nothing of sassing Chas, his Mum the Queen, the Queen's dresser, Catherine, William & assorted courtiers. Yet somehow I doubt sassiness is regarded as a virtue in these circles.)
2. Yet at the same time that Chas is warmly embracing Meg, the sassy daughter he never had, his relations with his own son have grown so frosty that Harry is forced to ask David Foster, 'his new father-figure' in America to adopt him?
*********
Back in the 1980s and '90s, I was a real Diana watcher . . I read most of the magazines and books in which she appeared. The Internet was only just emerging around the time she died, so though never a month went by from 1981 to 1997 in which the Princess did not feature as the cover girl on a magazine somewhere, and a plethora of books were written about her, there was not this endless round-the-clock cyber coverage. Diana was undoubtedly the most famous, and most photographed and written-about celebrity figure of her time . . but it was possible for the average person to go several days or a week or two without hearing or seeing a story about her. No doubt, had she lived to see the cyber-age, she'd be as relentlessly covered as Meg is now, but don't you think the Royal coverage on the Internet is absolutely off the chain? Haz and Mess are the primary drivers, but there is so much recycled coverage of other royal figures . . with photos and stories dredged up from the family archives and reproduced over and over again.
The number of 'stories' on HAMS is truly sickening . . it's kind of come to the point where I log into my online news and there are only two stories: Royals and COVID, with the upcoming American election a distant third. What the heck. Surely the general public cannot be THAT interested in the Royals? We here are a collective with a special interest, but the media is completely saturated with Royal stories out of all proportion to their relevance/interest to the average person. It's so out of control. Don't you all think it's really excessive? I would expect it from Hello! or other British outlets, but for all of the American publications to be inundated with dozens of Royal (non)stories every day---including reheated stories/photos from years ago as though it's new stuff--even when Meg doesn't feature . . I can't really understand it.
I want a shirt too! Add me to the list.
George in particular is extremely private about his villa on Lake Como, so much so that he got a rare dispensation from the local council restricting access to the lake waters around the property. Wonder how he feels about all the details about his villa which we’ve never heard before, being blabbed by the Harkles??
Sycophant Scoobie Doo was on ITV lunchtime news - a boastfest of self-justification insisting that there been so many people willing to spill the beans on what went on between H&M, as observed first hand, that of course he hadn't heard it from the horse's mouth. He claimed to have been trying to show that they were `human' after all.
As if.
It also struck me that if anyone wanted to insult Scoobie, there are features which I'd expect to be thrown at him first, well before they got around to race.
I forgot my Neanderthal ancestry! I was red-head as a small child (hair the colour of conkers) and still have proper freckles (not warts, clogged pores or moles) on a pale skin that is reluctant to tan. Alas, the only colour my hair now has comes from a bottle. And the red gene is shared, it seems, not only with Neanderthals but also with foxes,squirrels and also the feathered dinosaurs!
I think it's a fair bet that the transactional relationship with the Clooneys is over. We haven't heard anything from George and Amal for . . .a year? I doubt Meglotron and Hapless will be invited back to Lake Como any time soon--if they were ever there at all. Frankly the story that Meg spent several weeks with the Clooneys in Italy sounds like more of her hogwash. The Clooneys were fairly near to Windsor in their Oxfordshire house and yet there are no tales of Meg visiting her besties there. I think Amal was instrumental in arranging a surrogate and the NYC baby shower was an elaborate blind having to do with picking up a baby/trying to pick up a baby. How silly of Meg to step out on the town having left her 'fetus' in the hotel suite . . very careless of her.
I agree with all of you, they certainly contributed to this, and I think soon it may blow up in their faces. This is better than most comedies.
https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1321306/Meghan-markle-prince-harry-finding-freedom-secret-interview-Omid-Scobie-lorraine-itv
re Amal - there was a report that she and M had had an afternoon jaunt together when in NY for the shower. The speculation though was that they were apartment-hunting for Meghan to have a place of her own, come the divorce. Didn't she fly back with Amal?
How convenient.
I do hope it's true that she is now persona non grata as far as the UK is concerned - presumably no visa (`presence not conducive to the good of the Realm'). I'd love to see photos of her being deported as an illegal.
The other nugget was how Megsy loves to brag about Archie, being in the 90th percentile for height (well of course, he had a 6 week head start on other babies the “same” age, lol), and she whips out her cameras to show them photos - umm, why wouldn’t she have the baby actually with her?! Have none of the “friends” seen the sprog in person?? Very telling...
`Eyewash' perhaps?
The nanny is unprofessional, but peeing in the woods? Even if she did it, and even if it charmed Hazza, there's no reason for it surface in a book. Disgusting. I think they were going for an "extremely relatable like Diana" anecdote here, but it doesn't endear them to me.
I hope anyone considering doing business with them in the future is hip to how they appear willing to drag everyone they know through the mud. Trevor has NEVER spoken ill of her, divorce happens but there's no reason for her to bring him up again. It looks like another example of her compulsion to control the narrative, even though this one has to be ancient by now. I think most of this is aimed at his new wife, who is expecting and a successful businesswoman. I believe this is why she has been wearing the bracelet from Trevor in her creepy Zoom videos.
Not for a second am I convinced that she was "too famous" for Trevor or her friends. Before I was married I would watch TV until my eyes bugged out (bad habit). I was aware of shows like 'White Collar' and 'Suits' but they are cable shows that are on the TV when you work out at the gym. But even me, typical American too-much-TV watcher and pizza eater, had no idea who she was until I watched a replay of their wedding. And I got the dumpster fire tabloid magazines in the mail and was very aware of celeb culture. Her family and friends have described how her perception of her fame was distorted.
No class, self-respect or dignity with divulging that. That’s just too much information and just plain gross, not to mention pretty far fetched to even make it a memorable moment in that way.
Thanks, that’s my tip of the hat to Dead or Alive (miss you Pete!)
Actually I laughed at your eyeshadow, I thought maybe you were referencing her horrible eye makeup and where it came from 😂
Hazza Mazza and Scuzza all need help pronto. They are mad
Like you I wish MM could be denied entry into the UK. Sadly, for US visitors "You won’t need a visa to come to the UK.
You can stay in the UK for up to 6 months without a visa."
I didn't read abt "Archie's face upon emerging from her birth canal" in the DM article, is it really in the book? The only reason it would be mentioned, bearing in mind H&M's quest for 'privacy' and the cloak and dagger operation surrounding Archie's birth, is to make us plebs believe in Megsy's pregnancy. I'm afraid that's not incontrovertible evidence.
Nothing so far has convinced me that M didn't ask for the Queens Vladimir emerald/diamond diamond tiara. The palace wouldn't show M tiaras not available to borrow. However, the Queens Vladimir tiara has been seen in public many times. So M just assumed she could ask for what she wanted when she didn't like what was offered. Eugenies Greville tiara was probably never even displayed because it was already earmarked. Sooner or later, the palace staff are going to get tired of being used as scapegoats and trashed I. SCOOBIES book. If M&H don't sue, the palace staff, like Angela, might.
Finding Freedom by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand review — the truth behind Megxit?
This new book gives the Sussexes’ side of the royal feud, writes Valentine Low
Valentine Low
Monday August 10 2020, 12.01am, The Times
-----------------------------------------
PART 1
In the years to come, when historians come to unravel the chain of events that led to the downfall of the House of Windsor, perhaps they will pay particular attention to this book. Finding Freedom purports to be the first proper attempt to tell the truth about Megxit: how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex went from the golden couple who were going to modernise the monarchy for a new, emotionally literate, socially aware generation to the pair who found their lives so filled with misery and rancour that they ran away to California.
It is quite a journey. It takes us from Meghan landing in London in June 2016 when, apparently, she was a woman on a mission: no, not to bag herself a prince — that was to come later — but to go shoe shopping. Off she goes to Selfridges where, we are told, she enjoyed looking at her favourite designers, including Stella McCartney, Chloé and Marc Jacobs.
In between shopping trips, she is busy networking. Within a few days she is being set up with a blind date with Prince Harry. “Do you know what you’re letting yourself in for?” her London agent, Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne, asks over lunch.
“Well, it’s going to be an experience,” Meghan says. “And at least it will be a fun night.”
Meghan was right in one respect: the evening did go well. They chatted for nearly three hours, over beer for him, martini for her; he spoke about his charity work, she talked about her rescue dogs. There was no goodbye kiss, but the romance was on; by the time she was back in her hotel room, Harry was already texting her.
Meghan did not know what she was letting herself in for. There were warning signs early on, when Harry was so furious with what he saw as the racism and sexism in the tabloid coverage of his romance that he issued an angry statement condemning the “abuse and harassment” of Meghan. Prince Charles, meanwhile, was on tour in the Middle East, and only had 20 minutes’ notice of Harry’s incendiary statement. He was not best pleased. It was another harbinger of how Harry and Meghan would come to fall out with the other royal households.
By the time Meghan was pregnant with Archie, it was not short of all-out war. According to the authors, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, senior courtiers in other households — the “men in grey suits” — were intent on reining in Harry and Meghan’s global popularity.
Who are these men in grey suits? It is never clear. They are not named. But they are a bad lot, it seems. The “establishment” even feared that Harry and Meghan’s popularity “might eclipse that of the royal family itself”. Really?
At this point the reader might reasonably ask, what exactly were these rotters doing? And how do we know? Scobie and Durand do not claim to have had interviews with Harry and Meghan, but they have spoken to them on occasions. They have also been introduced, with the help of the couple’s staff, to Harry and Meghan’s closest friends.
The result is that we get the pure, undiluted voice of H and M (as their staff call them). That makes this book an important contribution to the understanding of the biggest crisis in the royal family for more than 20 years. However, it is not necessarily an edifying experience, or indeed a reliable narrative. The main complaints, as far as one can tell, is that the Sussexes sometimes had to take a back seat in the royal pecking order when their proposals clashed with initiatives from Prince Charles or Prince William.
Did no one explain to Meghan that Charles is the heir to the throne, and William the next in line? And that the concept of monarchy is built upon the notion of hierarchy? If not, it was a woeful omission.
There are occasional attempts at balance, as when it is conceded that the way Harry and Meghan announced their plans to step down caused ill will in the rest of the family. Yet when Meghan is quoted as saying things such as “I gave up my entire life for this family. I was willing to do whatever it takes” one has to wonder about her capacity for self-awareness.
This is not to say that they weren’t genuinely unhappy, or that they did not feel unprotected by the Palace. They did. But this book has only one story to tell: how Harry and Meghan are the innocent victims of a wicked Palace and an even more wicked media, and it’s all everyone else’s fault. It cries out for a decent account of how things really fell apart.
The prose has its Mills & Boon moments. We learn that when Meghan moved in with Harry she immediately felt at home because “she’s always been able to bloom where she was planted”. When Harry took Meghan to Zambia, she “stretched her body into the perfect warrior pose”, which as well as being stunningly irrelevant raises the question: how did the authors know which yoga pose Meghan chose to adopt? Other than by her telling them?
Worst of all, on the evening she first visited Harry at Kensington Palace, we read that he was “every bit the gentleman” who would always gesture for her to go first. “The short walk from the living room would have been no different.” Please: too much information.
On and on it goes, detail after exhausting detail: the food they ate, the designers she wore, the finer points of Meghan’s packing technique. There are some exclusive nuggets, such as the fact that they got engaged several weeks earlier than anyone has realised. The name of their labrador, kept a secret for so long, is Pula.
However, for a book that sets out to put the record straight, there are curious omissions. There is nothing on the controversy over why they refused to divulge the names of Archie’s godparents, or what happened when she had an apparent meltdown on an official engagement in a market in Fiji. Their decision to set up their Megxit website on the sly without telling any of the royal family is skimmed over.
Some of it is just plain wrong. When they flew to Canada to get away from everyone in November last year, it wasn’t on Air Canada, as the authors claim, but a private jet (whoops). The authors use a couple of jobs undertaken by the couple to berate the press, complaining that coverage of their first trip to Wales omitted to point out that the reason they were an hour late was because their train was delayed. Not true: every newspaper said that their train was late. Instead of the couple being “pummeled with criticism”, the coverage was overwhelmingly positive. The Daily Mail, bête noire for Harry and Meghan, said she passed her initiation “with flying colours”.
A few days later, she wore a trouser suit to an awards ceremony. The book says she was “lambasted” for her fashion choice — in fact, she was widely praised. Laziness by the authors, who could have checked? Or cynicism?
Harry and Meghan had so much to offer. He was a popular and charming member of the royal family, with a drive and a sincerity that reached parts other royals could never reach. Meghan had glamour, intelligence, initiative and a fresh approach that could have transformed the monarchy. They could have done so much, which is why their departure was such a loss. They deserve a better account than this.
I refuse to read any of the articles on DM re the book, but am finding the comments to be entertaining.
What do you think will the long term fallout be? I worry that PC’s apparent weakness will continue to sustain Harry and Meghan’s assault on the Monarchy.
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. Meghan's doctor was Penelope Law, the Duchess of Bradford. For some reason, the Sun has now pulled the article but I have a copy of it.
Thank you for the Valentine Low review of Finding Freedom.
Here is one from the Telegraph
Finding Freedom review: Harry and Meghan whinge for Britain in a self-pitying, juicy moanathon
3 out of 5 stars
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have an extraordinary ability to take offence, if this schmaltzy account of Megxit is to be believed
By Harry Mount
Finding Freedom is one massive moanathon – a one-sided, highly biased, self-pitying account of the relationship between Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. And it’s utterly gripping.
The authors deny they’ve interviewed Harry and Meghan. Still, their authors’ note acknowledges they have been “accompanying, observing and interacting with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex”. The juicy details are so precise and private that they can only have come straight from the horses’ mouths.
The Sussexes’ main whinge is against the press’s skewed view of their relationship. But when the Sussexes air their one-sided account in this extraordinarily sycophantic book, somehow that’s OK.
Two worlds – and two forms of PR – collided when Harry and Meghan got together. One is the American, schmaltzy, gushing, self-serving, highly litigious world – and this book is clearly written for the American market (“Harry deeply craves normalcy”). The other is the Queen’s world – never apologise, explain, give interviews or go to law. One form of PR led to the departure of the Sussexes from royal life after barely a year. The other has seen the Queen reign peerlessly for 68 years.
But then the Queen doesn’t take offence like the Sussexes do – on an Olympian scale. For example, there’s Prince William’s innocent advice to his brother soon after he met Meghan: “Don’t feel like you need to rush this. Take as much time as you need to get to know this girl.”
In the words of “this girl”, according to Scobie and Durand, “Harry heard the tone of snobbishness that was anathema to his approach to the world… There was a thin line between caring and condescending.”
The supposed slights continue. Meghan refused to go to Pippa Middleton’s wedding service because of the Sun splash that day - “It’s Meghan v Pippa in the Wedding of the Rears”.
The final straw came at this year’s Commonwealth Day service at Westminster Abbey. William and Kate sat with their backs to the couple, only chatting with Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex, also behind them. Meghan apparently tried to make eye contact with Kate but the duchess barely acknowledged her. According to a friend, after that cold shoulder, she never wanted to set foot into “anything royal ever again”.
Harry and Meghan (or Meg, as he calls her) go ballistic at the slightest slight, like Henry VIII on a bad day. Yes, the tabloids can be pretty rough but, actually, the British press – and the British people (barring a few disgusting racists) – welcomed Meghan with open arms. But if you’re looking for offence, you’ll always find it.
Before their wedding, Harry went nuts when Angela Kelly, the Queen’s trusted dresser, didn’t get a tiara to her for a “tiara hair trial”. The tabloids said Meghan insisted on spray-bottle air fresheners to spritz around “musty” St George’s Chapel. In fact, according to Meghan's version in this book, “the discreet, Baies-scented air diffusers… had been okayed by all parties involved.” If you’re going to pick a row, why have one over Baies-scented air diffusers?
‘Extremely organized, Meghan immediately impressed Harry with her packing skills. She has always taken pride in being a great packer – going as far as layering dryer sheets in between her clothes to keep them smelling fresh and no matter her destination always bringing tea-tree oil for bites, cuts and pimples – and her skills were appreciated by the prince.' This just keeps getting better.
@WBBM~ Thanks for the London tour. I always stayed in that area, some great times on Tottenham Court Road and Marble Arch. Met some Wonderful people. Once things calm down, I’ll tell the Itsy Bitsy Spider story.
Meghan Markle’s son Archie was delivered by The Countess of Bradford – The Portland’s poshest consultant
https://thegreatcelebrity.com/fashion/meghan-markles-son-archie-was-delivered-by-the-countess-of-bradford-the-portlands-poshest-consultant/
Whatever the truth is, you won’t get an objective account from this book. It lauds the “go-get-’em approach Meghan has had ever since, aged 11, she wrote a letter of protest to national leaders, including Hillary Clinton, over a sexist soap ad”. We hear about “Meghan’s willingness to help others and her drive to excel”.
Like so many rich and famous people used to getting their way, they’re astonished when they don’t. Harry tells a friend, “I’m tired of people covering engagements and then going off to write some rubbish about what someone is wearing.”
Surely Harry realises he can’t dictate his own headlines? Meghan isn’t much brighter, judging by the bons mots from her lifestyle blog The Tig: “Being yourself is the prettiest thing a person can be”; “Travel often – getting lost will help you find yourself.”
In their pampered bubble – sashimi is delivered to their cottage at Soho Farmhouse; they sit by an open fire tended by a butler at Babington House, Somerset – they can’t bring themselves to defer to the royal system that delivers those privileges.
At their crucial Sandringham meeting with the Queen, “Harry felt as though he and Meghan had long been sidelined by the institution and were not a fundamental part of its future.” That was reflected, he thought, in the pictures on the Queen’s desk in her Christmas message: the Cambridges and their children, Charles and Camilla, Philip and George VI, but nothing of the Sussexes or their baby son.
They wanted a future as semi-working royals – having their cake, eating it and not accepting the diminishing returns you get the further you get from the throne. The Queen made it clear it wouldn’t work.
What a needless, never-ending nightmare that fairytale wedding has turned into. As Meghan herself said in March this year, as she hugged Omid Scobie, “It didn’t have to be this way.”
Interesting but I don't think so.
I don't know London at all but unless I'm looking at Archie's BC wrong, the only place I see "Paddington" listed is for Harry's place of birth. And I think St. Mary's is in Paddington.
I think it may be homemade too but think they copied parts from the York princesses BCs as they were born at Portland.
The book also goes after her first husband, Trevor Engleson. Apparently the breakdown of the marriage was all his fault, because he wanted her to remain dependent on him and couldn't cope with her fame when she landed the role on Suits. I haven't actually read the book, just the DM account, so I don't know whether it mentions that she let him know the marriage was over by mailing her engagement and wedding rings to him, or that he was completely blindsided and devastated by her actions. Probably not - it would spoil the victim narrative.
I wonder why she is going after Trevor now, seven years later. They've both moved on, so why humiliate him like this?
The article's author, "Harry Mount", sounds like a pseudonym for a porn star.
"I wonder why she is going after Trevor now, seven years later. They've both moved on, so why humiliate him like this?"
Because she knows people think sending him her rings back by Fed Ex was a really tacky way to end the marriage. This book is to revise her history to her satisfaction. Wonder if there's info about the poor dumped dog too? Of course, a few weeks ago we were told that was Harry's fault so maybe it didn't make the book.
WBBM, well spotted. As a Londoner I'm ashamed to say I didn't see the mention of Paddington. Yes, Marylebone is more like it, Paddington it's certainly not. Curiouser and curiouser.
Have they been rumbled? This might be the last straw for the BRF if it proves to be a forgery.
Here is a photo of the birth cert. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48315300
Good find!!!!!
I had a child at St. Mary’s Lindo Wing, March 2019.
I will check the birth certificate, lived right near Marble Arch!
Meghanns Archie birth certificate says Paddington Westminster and there was absolutely zero chance if you’re born at the Portland hospital it would say Paddington let me get my birth certificate out and I’ll let you know what it says when a child is born at Saint Mary’s
What an amazing find.
"Her relationship with God and with her church is extremely important to her. That's something most people do not know about her. It plays a central role in her life, as an individual, as a woman."
I agree that this is ludicrous. First of all, what is "her church"? We've never heard her mention a specific denomination or congregation.
Secondly, the tenets of Christianity haven't come up in any of her stream-of-consciousness Word Salad.
If she were a real believer, wouldn't that have been part of her social justice mix tape? She could have referenced Bible passages or the sermons of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, for example.
I wonder why she is going after Trevor now, seven years later. They've both moved on, so why humiliate him like this?
Because she likes to "win", although she's going at it the wrong way 'round, particularly if she wants a career in Hollywood.
Real stars usually say only nice things about the people they're associated with, because they want to keep working. Thus the usual Hollywood fountain of flattery. (Even Angelina Jolie, a big star, has suffered from being perceived to have back-stabbed Brad Pitt.)
As if Meg's Hollywood career wasn't dead enough, being seen as being unkind to Trevor will make it even more unsalvageable.
You'd think so! I'm not even sure she mentioned Christianity during her graduation "speech" to students at her Catholic high school. (Not sure if that's the social justice tape you meant-- there have been several!) And her proclivity to wear amulets and talismans isn't really consistent with most biblical teachings. So I'm not sure about the identity of "her" church.
Yes, you're absolutely right, the Paddington reference is for Harry. I have googled Beatrice's birth cert and it only mentions Westminster.
I think my favorite review so far has been in The Guardian. (There are several, but I like this one best: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/aug/10/finding-freedom-by-omid-scobie-and-carolyn-durand-harry-and-meghan-and-the-making-of-a-modern-royal-family)
It points out that while Kate is targeted with catty remarks in the book, the real villain of "Finding Freedom" is William.
This is probably intentional, since he is the Royal Family's best adult asset at the moment. (It's a little early to go after George, Charlotte, and Louis, but if Meg is still around in 2032 or 2035 I'm sure she'll be happy to do so.)
People seem to like William, he's popular, so Meg the destroyer is trying to chop down the tallest tree in the forrest, and her weak, jealous husband is happy to help.
You'd think so! I'm not even sure she mentioned Christianity during her graduation "speech" to students at her Catholic high school.
Or, you know, she could mention Jesus. He tends to be popular among Christians.
I know a lot of people "mix and match" their spirituality these days, and yoga also has a spiritual element, but I see no indication that Meg has ever had any interest in Christianity at all. If she has any religion, it's the "woke" religion popular these days on the political left.
There is talk of making this awful book into a movie? With Megsy producing I suppose?
Good luck to her, trying to get that one financed. She can't even get a reality series greenlit.
I still say she should try to do some sort of YouTube series. She could build up an audience that way and work her way back into show business as a sure thing.
The problem is, she has no sense of humor about herself, which is something the best YouTube stars have a lot of.
‘Theirs was a love story that took hold in Africa – where now Meghan, on the last day of an incredible three-week stay, stretched her body into the perfect warrior pose. She quietly took in her surroundings from the grounds of their final home away from home on this trip, a modern villa in Livingstone, Zambia, just under ten miles upstream from Victoria Falls. The rising sun washed over her makeshift yoga garden, while an exotic flock of birds that looked as if they had just had their tails dipped in pots of colourful paints serenaded her.’
Doesn't this sound like classic Markle writing???? She clearly contributed to this book. What did she do, slip papers under Scoby's door and then run away? He's out and out lying by saying she did not contribute. For some reason, Meghan's writing style is highly obvious to me. I can make it out in many of Harry's speeches, practically everything that's written on their sites, etc.
I need to back-read on this site so maybe some of you have discussed this and I will read later on. I just wanted to quickly throw this out there. You'll never convince me that Meghan Markle didn't pen most or all of the content in Finding Freedom.
Remember just a short time ago Megsy was swanning around London and UK is a million dollars worth of fresh couture and jewelry? I think at least 50% was to show the folks back home (Hollywood) who rejected her at auditions. To show them she had married (actually bagged) an English Prince and now had the most glamorous life, despite all you evil Hollywood meanies. Add in the super expensive Royal Wedding as far as this equation goes, which is Megsy getting revenge on all who had wronged her by not recognizing how talented she is.
Stage two was ramping this up by returning to the LA area and becoming madly wealthy by marketing her Royal Sussex title. The Queen, her lawyers put an end to this scheme. Covid too.
****Of course putting Kate down was the other motivation for the displaying her newly acquired (thanks bank of Dad!) treasure trove of high level clothing and baubles.
Wasn't Countess P. Lawe a name that was thrown out after the "birth' and she quickly denied it?
But I think most Christians consider baptism to be a really big deal (whether it's a "sacrament" in their church or not.) One doesn't choose to do it to please other people and it's not done to "try out" a religion. And I'm pretty sure when an adult is baptised in the COE, part of the ceremony involves professing Christ as one's Savior. But according to FF:
"Meghan's choice to be baptised before marrying Harry was apparently her choice out of respect for the Queen and a step forward on her own spiritual journey."
Nutty -
the comments about M and her idea of Christianity - on target. Thank goodness I wasn't drinking anything when I read the part about mentioning Jesus being popular with the Christians. really good, really funny
I am sure Meghan sees this as an opportunity for herself.
@Uhura, thanks for copying the Times article. Always interesting to hear what Valentine Low has to say.
I think my favorite review so far has been in The Guardian. (There are several, but I like this one best: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/aug/10/finding-freedom-by-omid-scobie-and-carolyn-durand-harry-and-meghan-and-the-making-of-a-modern-royal-family)
It points out that while Kate is targeted with catty remarks in the book, the real villain of "Finding Freedom" is William.
This is probably intentional, since he is the Royal Family's best adult asset at the moment. (It's a little early to go after George, Charlotte, and Louis, but if Meg is still around in 2032 or 2035 I'm sure she'll be happy to do so.)
People seem to like William, he's popular, so Meg the destroyer is trying to chop down the tallest tree in the forrest, and her weak, jealous husband is happy to help.
__________________________________
You're quite welcome :)
Indeed, yes, she'll never forgive William for foiling all her plans! Nor the fact that she knows he has her number, nor how plainly he shows how contemptuous he is of her (richly deserved). "Scarfing" will go down as one of the best tidbits of the whole circus, if you ask me ;)
Just wait till he's in charge of the purse-strings (if Markle is still around then) ...
Yes, The Guardian was quite acerbic (for them), I must say! Not looking at all good for Ms. Common and Mr. Wealth. If the Harkles lose the broadsheets, they've lost the war, IMO -- all this pathetic blitzkrieg of PR on the book notwithstanding.
My favorite from their article was:
(I could just about stomach Harry and his “famed ginger locks”, but details of his and Meghan’s glamping trip to Botswana, on which “their days were spent getting closer to nature and their evenings, closer to each other” made me briefly furious that the book hadn’t come with a health warning).
*chuckle*
The article's author, "Harry Mount", sounds like a pseudonym for a porn star.
I thought so too!!!
I did put a post up about this a few days ago.
This is more or less what I said then:
Yes, Law is an important Obs/Gynae Consultant at the Portland.
Had Archie been born at the Portland, she doubtless would have been involved.
We have had no confirmation of this, however.
Fortunately for the Harkles, were Dr Law to be asked about this, medical ethics would prevent her either confirming or denying whether Markle was one of her `ladies'.
Yet again, we have been fed a half-truth in the hope that we would jump to a conclusion that suited the Markles.
I do not believe that Markle gave birth to a child at the Portland Hospital in Marylebone, even if Dr Law could have been in attendance had Markle been there.
That is presumably why the Sun pulled the article.
Sorry folks, egg on my face.
You're quite right - it's Harry's birthplace. Harry was born at St Mary's.
I'm not having a very good day - 2 funny turns when I thought I'd found a way of dealing with them.
I stand by my comment on Dr Law though - even if they categorically state that she delivered Archie we have no way of confirming or refuting it.
Also, I'll stick with the lack of the official stamp as an indicator that all is not as it might seem.
MM and her class mates calling her fake them being jelouse of MM due to her being 'well rounded'
Isn't that a copycat version of Kates experience in highschool being bullied?for being "too perfect" story?
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/8079640/kate-middleton-switched-schools-bullied-too-perfect/
I am going to do some more reading and research on this book. One thing I can see is that DM readers aren't buying any of it.
This is the birth cert:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48315300
All the photos of the birth cert are the same. I realise that although it's typed up, including Harry's signature, the registrar has signed and dated it in longhand. It's dated 17th May, so 11 days after the (official) date of birth. If born by surrogate he would have had to be born about 6 weeks before I'm order to be adopted - they may be a process involved. I'm afraid we're no further forward.
_____________________
@Puds
The birth certificate also gives Archie's home as Frogmore Cottage but then it gives Windsor Castle postcode not the post code for Frogmore Cottage which is different.
The birth cert gives the postcode as SL4 2JG. I checked and it is the correct one for Frogmore Cottage. The one for Windsor Castle is different.
per Scoobie, over 100 sources , so they asked staff a question or to, maybe to verify timelines or travel..... but the 2 person authentication? MM and Scoobie! or maybe , MM writing/ chatting/ handing over her romance novella, JCM Mute H, sitting hostage against the wall.
he must be mortified on how this book turned out.
according to the excerpts, Princess Eugenie. and he were more than cousins and good buddies, as PE was LOYAL, honest, great fun. I guess come to find out, that LOYAL part only went one way, PE to PH/ MM, not the other way around PH the most DISLOYAL son, brother, cousin, buddy, friend. how could he be so disloyal and spill all that stuff? and about family and frineds, Amal and clooneys como house, etc, etc. wonder if they will ever get another invite anywhere!
it always seems like MM is. “reaching out” to organizations to glom onto, and no one reaching out to her for her help.
harry the hazbeen, so sad to see what his true colors/ personailty.
I'm wondering - if Dr Penelope Law was Meg's obstetrician then why was this not mentioned on the Palace announcement? Why couldn't she mention it then?
In Scooby’s book it says Harry had studied her photos on instagram and elsewhere on the internet before they met.”…
A quote from Finding Freedom in today's Daily Mail: "By not partying like most of her normal college kids. Her friends would never run into Meg, as they called her, at a bar in the middle of the week. Friday nights, when her sorority sisters were all going out to parties, Meg was headed to professors’ houses to babysit." Too bad DM didn't include those photos of Meghan in her L.A. Days being hugged by the mystery man at a bar, looking partied out with her blouse wide open no bra books hanging out!
I looked back to see what I could find to answer your question. No denial yet but did find this article from May 2019 which seems to be the same article just released by The Sun and then withdrawn: https://thegreatcelebrity.com/fashion/meghan-markles-son-archie-was-delivered-by-the-countess-of-bradford-the-portlands-poshest-consultant/
I'll keep looking.
Thanks for the Fabulous Digital report but I still can't swallow it.
The author admits at the end that she's a `Meghan Look-alike' and will call her child `Archie' . Is she unbiased, do you think?
`... a royal source told Fabulous Digital... `The 57-year-old mum stepped in after an overdue Meghan was driven to the London hospital on Sunday night,'
Which royal source? Meghan? Harry? Omid Scobie?
not sure when that practise started BUT, assuiming it’s true, perumably their staff would signed, so they would have had to gve their blessing to staff, neighbors, etc to break those agreements in order to speak to Scooby about the book or anything to do with them.
based on this book, i guess they really dont want to live a private life and want to live a public life where the public knows intimate details about their lives. doesn’t letting the public know Archie’s expression when popping out the birth canel in a way negate their privacy claims and silver platter whining?
Nice observation JHanoi.
Their sanctioned book/defense show these two up as shameless, self-pitying, narcissists completely detached from reality. Meghan hails from an industry where you have to develop a tough skin to deal with all the rejection that's coming your way and yet she lost her cookies over a necklace or a tiara when she was marrying into a powerful and famous family that would catapult her celebrity. Every slight, no matter how trivial, is documented. These two aren't losing any opportunity to be offended. It's amazing that they think this book actually makes them look good when it makes them look petty AF.
We don't need Jessica piling on here, not that I'd mind having her expose Meghan's lies and hypocrisy over the letter and the lawsuit but do we need this when we have a book that lays bare their intentions and their shallow inconsequence? Being dropped off Vogue's list of the influential is only the beginning of their slow fade into irrelevance. They have no talent and no charisma. If they stayed positive and played their cards right they might have been a force but they over estimated their worth and overplayed their hand. Their impatience cost them everything.
The only thing I'm wondering now is how long before Meghan divorces him for Bezos or Musk cuz I don't see her sticking with this losing pony.
We don't need a window into her soul to see some of the Commandments that she regularly fails to observe and, moreover, for which she shows no remorse:
Old Testament:
Thou shalt have no other gods before me (Mammon?)
Honour thy father and thy mother (Mother yes, father - certainly not)
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour (Quite a few whoppers here)
Thou shalt not covet ( "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house (Windsor Castle? )thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife (doesn't say anything about husband's brother), nor his manservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's." Perhaps she thinks coveting a tiara is OK)
New Testament:
Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength... and love thy neighbour as thyself. (That's a `No' then)
Confession? Would she ever admit, even to herself, that she has done those things which she ought not to have done and left undone those which she ought to have done?
Her philanthropy - giving to the poor? Only if someone else has provided the money.
I wonder what Justin Welby thinks of her now?
...................
Persona non grata trumps right to 6 months' stay. Has to be declared by the Government but means they can be turned back at immigration.
I see from Wikipedia's list that a number of Americans have been banned - the citations include "fostering hatred which might lead to inter-community violence".
At https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_banned_from_entering_the_United_Kingdom
Time to turn in now -Goodnight Everybody
Very liberating to end MM force feed. They kept pushing her. After 4 articles they tried slipping in just Harry. He actually took a bit longer to quell. I have been gone all day so ready to settle in and read truth. Thank you all so much!!
After disrespecting Cam and HM the way she did, why on Earth would anyone greet her? Not to mention once again going against protocol and dressing like an aggressive caterpillar for the service.
I cannot imagine pulling half of the stunts she allegedly did and then expecting people to greet me warmly. She seems to have s much rage towards those who see through her.
As many here have said, it is insufferable, the constant mewlings of this couple.
I should take notes when I read, because I can’t recall who said what...
But, I know Christine said she recognized Meghan’s sentence constructions: as do I. And this book is heavily laced with her style. It’s completely absurd for the “authors “ to say it was written without input from the duo! Meghan and Scobie share similar styles, but I can say with conviction that Meghan is the force driving this drivel.
Before I forget...I read somewhere that Corey’s mother is her great cheerleader! It was difficult to read her singing the praises of this person; the only negative she imparted was that Meghan brought her dog(s) on the Christmas visit. As for her handling of Trevor in the Book, I concur with others who say she’s just covering her A$$ to refute that she fed exed the ring back to him.
She is a manipulative, cunning person with zero acting ability. When she references the life she gave up (????), it most certainly didn’t entail thespian affiliates.
Insofar as her comments regarding the birth of Archie-that she felt he should be served up on a Platter. What did she expect? She’d been serving the entree for months, and months and months.
Ah, so it hasn't been rude and inappropriate of her to walk/barge in front of him, he insists on it.
Wouldn't be surprised if she had a list of every complaint about her and then attempted to counter it in this book.
I seriously cannot get over the sheer MADNESS of these two. I didn't deign to read the wall of coverage on the DM this morning, but finally tried to read the 26 toe-curling things. I couldn't get through it!! It's like Ipecac!
LOL that people thought Meg was fake because she was so perfect and well rounded (or some shit like that.) Sure Meg, that's why people think you're phoney, because you're just so perfect!
No, Harris' father is from Jamaica, not America, though he became a professor at Stanford. He did not seem to favor her candidacy earlier in the year.
It is a sight better than her own house and they need the illusion of a nanny if not an actual nanny. Which makes me wonder where the pictures of Archie and her were taken and when?????Because the windows behind the latest hostage harry video look like the windows in the new house not TP.
Would also like to point out that the taxes on a 6 million dollar house, upkeep, garden, pool, chef, etc are pricey. What are they doing for income besides the bank of Pa? Or is Pa (and really the British taxpayer) funding this for the foreseeable future? did he buy it for them? Is he paying upkeep?
Guess harry isn't expect back any time soon.
To handle that. I know some who have 10k sq feet and I’d imagine that’s where her ‘ideas’ of a home lie at the minimum. How would they actually get privacy at that address?? Doesn’t make sense. Stranger things have happened but I don’t believe that is their home. It is very ‘English Garden’ though....
Hmmmmm.
Maybe it is. It took over 2 months to close, so i doubt it was a cash purchase. Plus they knocked off 500k from ask. And the owner sold at a 2mm loss.
I wonder if page six has this correct.
Ah, so it hasn't been rude and inappropriate of her to walk/barge in front of him, he insists on it.
If this is true, why does she need to sharply rap his elbow when he forgets and starts to walk ahead of her. Much like a trained dog.
Being as he's the prince you'd think he should go first when they're on the job.
At home being another story.
I copied this from Tiaras and Houseplants
Found M&H new house on Zillow, it's on Middle St they paid 6.38M (What happened to the 20m ahah)
OMG, you may be right. That may be the window. Cute, and cheaper than I expected.
https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/165-Middle-Rd-Santa-Barbara-CA-93108/15879602_zpid/
interesting perspective! Would you think it an odd choice for Meg and Harry?
For the average American it is a lovely large property and house. I actually think the yard is very nice. One of the issues with the properties higher up the hill is that many have no flat land. I looked at a property years ago next to the house owned by Julia Louis-Dreyfus, (Elaine from Seinfeld). It had incredible views but very little flat land and thus the house you were able to build was limited in square footage. It had an old cottage on it, but anyone interested in the property would have built new. However, Louis-Dreyfus ended up purchasing it to protect her privacy. Smart move on her part and of course she is extraordinarily wealthy (father.)
I think Megs probably thinks it is a step down. ~6K square feet, ~$6.4M. Not a grand BH or Bel Air manse; most of which are ugly by the way. That is the thing about LA and much of California. Property is expensive, but so many houses are pit ugly. Not all, but a lot. There are really no gated communities in Montecito save for one with an older golf course, the name of which escapes me at this writing. Montecito is closer to LA than Santa Barbara, but it is not like you would want to drive to the TV studios (Studio City/Burbank/San Fernando Valley) everyday. That would get exhausting. So is she starting to give up on an entertainment career?
Generally, I love Montecito, as it is much quieter and more beautiful than the west side of LA. I am just not sure that was Megs' preference. But, $6.4M goes further in Montecito than BH & Bel Air, and Brentwood, Pacific Palisades and Malibu for that matter, because it is further away. The 1.8 acres was key and not affordable for them closer to LA.
I love old, beautiful, gracious, traditional, sublime and quiet. Much of Montecito is just this, until the fires/mud slides come. I would never have guessed Megs' would chose a property like this. Maybe $6.4-$6.5M was the absolute max budget and maybe she felt her house in Montecito would look more stately than what that amount would cover in LA.
https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/165-Middle-Rd-Santa-Barbara-CA-93108/15879602_zpid/
Sold: $6,375,000
Sold on 07/30/20
I am not fond of the current decor, but I do see many possibilities for a new hostage wall or two.
lol.... You are right that "Nothing is ever straight-forward with the Harkles." We have clashing information and NY Post leaks here. Two other sites list the sale as July 31st.
FWI this house is 50 miles from Los Angeles
Thank you so much. Sounds like a lovely town for a regular well-to-do person. Maybe Harry had more of a say than Meghan. It looks like a home he would want as the features are more in line with a traditional historic home. She will position it as 'see we are down to earth'.
Now, I'm sure they wont be able to keep up with costs as they run around $30,000 per month on 6MM, for years on end. $360k per year, not including life. They must really think they will become public paid speakers and edge out 100k a month. But that will get old fast. Add in taxes, cali and us, and anything over 150k being taxed also by the UK. Scary amount of money needed.
https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1639-Fernald-Point-Ln-Santa-Barbara-CA-93108/15878865_zpid/
very few are on this timeline that i can see
LMAO
fail!
i get it, life goes on, maybe some of you all moved as well....
but wow, it's surprising to me!
Hinting at the birthday party didn't work. So she 'took out' a full page ad in PAGE SIX. You can't make this up.
So, now that the world knows where Prince Harry lives, is this because she can't stand not having attention and stalkers, or is it that she's trying to get attention *security* issues, to file more lawsuits for income and also force Harry to move after 6 weeks, again. I'll go with the former. She can't. stop. moving.
It's funny though. Sort of a good scheme shes got running if Charles really is as dumb and loose pocketed as she pegged him. 'Oh Harry, we'll have to rent this one.' 'Told you we needed more privacy, just call Dad #2!'
Hope they have some trees.
Just one other thought before I leave this subject:
As the crow flies, it's almost 20 miles from Frogmore Cottage to the Portland Hospital (19.92 miles according to Google Earth's ruler.) Online estimates of the distance vary between 24 & 28 miles and the time taken 1 hr 5mins plus.
That's assuming that traffic's moving fairly well (about 20mph) and no delays. A police car with `blues and twos' could get her there very much faster in the middle of the night - and early morning would be be ideal for this. At a bad time (weekdays, going to work, or Sunday evening, with all the World and his Wife returning to town from a weekend away - not a good idea.
That's why London has daytime Helicopter Emergency Medical Services (HEMS) for major trauma incidents.
Were they really at Frogcott, Frimley Park Hospital would have been a far better idea - babies don't consider traffic conditions when they choose to arrive. Choosing any central London hospital when you are supposed to be in Windsor is not a good plan, it seems to me. More so when one is apparently very overdue.
She was lucky not to end up giving birth on the hard shoulder of the M4...
I know that many pregnant women in the UK live a long way from the nearest maternity hospital and traffic conditions can be horrendous (that's why we have air ambulances) but deliberately choosing to take the risk? I don't think so.
Unless she considered herself so important that a helicopter would be provided. Was she somewhere else at the time? Did all this really happen?
I'd have believed it all had Dr Law signed it off according to normal procedure.
I'll shut up now.
https://assets.sothebyshomes.com/photos/9A5982F8-E055-F035-DD84-01A04E348179_1050x700.jpg
I don't know how property works in the USA, but could the previous owner have already applied for planning permission to split the land with the potential to build a second house? I know here in the UK you can apply for planning permission for things like this and then sell the property with the planning permission in effect even if you haven't done the work yet.
lol
they are both passive-aggressive with each other
1. The leafy wallpaper in the dining room looks like the wallpaper in "Blanche's boudoir" on the TV show "Golden Girls."
2. The John Doe photographer lawsuit filed on July 23 states on page 4 under Parties:
Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, is an individual, who resides in the County of
Los Angeles....
Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, is an individual, who resides in the County of Los
Angeles....
The Middle Road house is in the County of Santa Barbara according to the Zillow information. Page Six quotes a "spokesperson for the couple who asserts they've lived in the new house for 6 weeks since early July.
We know they lie. But lying in a court filing? I know those court papers weren't filed the day they consulted the attorney. But still seems odd.
3. Way too many coffered ceilings for my taste. I guess they could be original but still.
A source told the authors pregnant Meghan felt 'vulnerable' in the countryside and it prompted their move back into London.
The source said while the area was safe 'being out in the middle of the countryside, where you don't know who is out there at night or if someone has managed to sneak nearby' was enough for them to move out.
anyone else seeing Meghan's pattern for needing chaos and attention?
MONDAY, AUGUST 10, 2020
Blind Item #6
A worker in the garden who this former actress must have suspected didn't speak English, because she would assume such things overheard her calling her husband n idiot and that he can't even get a two minute speech memorized. She has to have it written out for him which makes him look dead in the eyes.
LOL!!
We just have to wait for the butt ugly security screens to go up lol
George: "Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Cambridge was safely delivered of a son at 10.01 am today.
Her Royal Highness and her child are both doing well."
The other two are the same.
Archie: "The Queen and the Royal Family are delighted at the news that Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Sussex was safely delivered of a son" etc.
Maybe that's me nitpicking but at the news sounds as if it's just something they heard and not a hard fact. Maybe it was just H&M wanting to be different, who knows.
After the kerfuffle about the book has died down, what next for hapless & clueless?
Yeah, I've always thought the idea of a quiet, unnoticed "quick commute" from Frogmore Cottage to Portland Hospital in the middle of the night with M in labor to be pretty unlikely. While they could have snuck into the hospital through a private back entrance, I'm not sure how they could have driven out of FC without notice since reporters were camped out. And given the commuting time to return back to Windsor in the daytime when presumably there would be more traffic than at midnight, that means M's actual time in the hospital was really brief for a geriatric overdue first-time "royal" mom. (And even if she did have a baby as a teenager/young adult as some say, that was a really long time ago.)
I guess they could have taken a helicopter. But I'd not be anxious to transport an infant a few hours old that way myself. Plus, there'd be getting into a car to be driven to the landing area (unless there's a heliport on the roof?), loading into the helicopter, flying to Windsor, getting out and into a car to be driven to FC...Lots of ups and downs..ouch. Sure sounds easier to throw on a dress and pose on the hospital steps after a good in-hospital rest.
I get the impression that private hospitals tend to like straightforward elective surgery - the easy stuff. Portland specialises in women & children
The royal family has form with Hollywood. Hairy married a B actress from Suits. But he was seriously upstaged by his great-great Uncle Eddie who married one of the Simpsons.
I'm now wired up for a 24hr ECG and have been told to take it easy & keep out of the heat today. Also `Press the button if you have a turn' - I think it puts a marker on the record. The kit won't be taken off until I go back to the medical centre tomorrow & it's bloomin' uncomfortable already.
If it's not my heart playing up, perhaps it's an argument between brain and gut! Panic attack?
Maybe thats what happened to the Sussex Royal $$$? Prayers for their neighbors.
The house purchase is a lie.
It was sold on 31st July 202. That's not even two weeks ago.
How then have they been living there for around 6 weeks, if they didn't own it.
I am a bit over all the MM stuff, I think I will go and find a life that doesn't include the most fame-hungry and mentally unbalanced woman who ever walked the earth.
The last gasps of the A&C movement occurred around where I live - of those houses, I can think of at least 3 `Butterfly' plan ones, dating 1890 - 1930.
Externally, it's rather nice although when I saw the pic of the veranda my first thought was of the church hall in Dad's Army!
Internally, to my eye, the decor introduces a strong note of vulgarity. The ghastly wallpaper is perhaps a Californian take on any Wm Morris classic you can think of.
As for the trophy heads, I assume that as the elephant(s?) are too small, they are not real; I hope the same goes for the Crane over the fireplace - if it's any reassurance, I can't find any crane with a red crown like this. European & Japanese cranes have red on their heads but the African Crowned Crane has golden topknot.
The garden too references English gardens of the first half of the 20th Century - even the swimming pool nods towards ponds at Lutyens/Jekyll properties. Anyone familiar with Hidcote would feel comfortable there. If you're interested in this period, I recommend Jane Brown's `Gardens of a Golden Afternoon'.
Perhaps Charles is trying to keep them on his side for when he ascends the throne. It was said that he hated the attention Diana got when he was the real invited guest. Also, that she resented being expected to walk 2 paces behind him. They are enacting Diana's dream here.
Perhaps Charles fears worse damage to the monarchy if he upsets them - G-d knows what she's got on the RF.
But I just read the passage provided by Christine LOL! I am still laughing
If everyone could quit talking for 3 hours so I can catch up that would be great. I am joking of course :)
It has been great reading
Is "everyone" just forgetting that Scobie said he was writing this book with MM. Something to that effect even before they got married? He stated as such in an interview or blurb on GMA wasn't it?
Keep at it ladies, enjoying it all!
Maybe Dr Penelope Law was not the consultant involved with the' birth of Archie ' maybe this consultant as she is involved with surrogacy in the USA
Miss Clare Mellon
'Her gynaecological practice includes co-ordination with fertility clinics in USA and other countries for surrogacy'
'In her obstetrics practice she deals with anything ranging from complicated caesarean section deliveries to water birth deliveries. All her private patients deliver at The Portland Hospital'
https://www.clairemellon.co.uk/
Cindy Adams column
at the bottom of the page, a short thing on JCMH fluashing away his life and his wanna-be around, maybe he’s named Pula.
they also could have negoitiated something with the original home owner to. rent to own for a month or linger.
of course the original homeowner needs to be careful becaust the harkles are very litigious and will sue them if there are any problems with the house.
i like the house and gardens. the loud wall paper need to go. all that paneling and ceiling beams are huge dust collectors htough, but they’ll have staff to deal with that.
but i don’t know that i believe the PR release. it had MM hand in the writing, ‘they will be able to plant roots’ blah bkah blah.
she loves to make up stories, balmoral, montecito b-day party, etc etc for publicty
My opinion about Charles improved considerably after Diana's death but it did a nosedive again. He can't read the public mood and this is absolutely essential for a King. Charles will not make a good monarch.
"Let’s make one thing clear: There’s a huge difference between exchanging a few words with a member of the Royal Family on an official engagement or tour to actually interviewing them.
The amount of nonsense doing the rounds right now is unreal."
I didn't know you were not well. Do rest and take care, especially in this heat. Should you read anything about the gruesome twosome? Think of your heart! Take care.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8619049/Prince-Harry-draws-bank-Dad-8m-Santa-Barbara-mansion.html
@WBBM, I hope you feel better soon. Take care.
Santa Barbara also hosts a Woke Men meet-up twice every month for them to explore and explain their feelings.
Sounds right up Harry's street! If he's short things to say, his wife can prepare a few points and ideas.
https://pagesix.com/2020/08/11/colin-firth-talks-hollywoods-umpteenth-secret-garden-remake/
`The savant who left country, queen, career, brother, family, friends and sanity.'
Ouch! `Savant' - whether that's meant in the original French sense `learned or erudite' or the English way for the the French `idiot savant', that's not nice.
Either way it's very sarcastic!
True idiots was savants may have an IQ or 70 or less, but they still have special skills.