According to the New York Times, Harry and Meghan have signed a contract with Netflix to make documentaries, docuseries, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming.
In a statement quoted in the Times, the couple say, "Our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope. As new parents, making inspirational family programming is also important to us."
Ted Sarandos, Netflix's chief content officer and co-chief exec, added, "We're incredibly proud they have chosen Netflix as their creative home and are excited about telling stories with them that can help build resilience and increase understanding for audiences everywhere."
What do you make of this development?
Comments
Yes why can't some parent at that school sue the Harkles for invasion of privacy of the children that had to endure their visit. Certainly Harkles would be a 'deep pocket' defendant.
Currently we have our family narc going through a horrendous experience (of their making). One family member who has been around many in AA recovery told me that the difficulty is that we want to help them but they are quite resistant to any assistance. Another family member told me that they are afraid that if we do let them hit that bottom they talk about in AA, the fear is that they will be unable to ever recover to functioning human again (because of all the prior bad choices boxing them in to limited options).
It is a very paralyzing position but no matter what you do/don't do, you can't unto their choices for them (they have to live with their consequences), they don't want your help (until they decide they do), they are one angry volcano and you are left wondering if and when that anger will go off.
Exactly
All you can do is save yourself and leave them to it. Accept it's their responsibility, not yours. One isn't being being selfish by accepting that one's powerless to help.
Comments are on moderation. I will approve when I wake up.
Can the board/management at Invictus Games remove Harry as patron? His latest actions are completely unacceptable ... not only to withdraw his support as a patron, for personal and private commercial gain, but to do so through a
lawyer. There is no honour in that and is perhaps the most shameful episode of the Harkles soapie.
I've known several people who had a bad depression (one was my employee) but forced themselves to go to work, take care of their children and meet their everyday obligations.
----------------
Maybe but sometimes depression can be so severe that you simply cannot function and you just cannot force yourself to do anything. I speak from experience (long time ago now).
@Unknown
Please take care of yourself and don't remain alone x
HOWEVER..... there is a seperate but related document written at the same time, that gives the Monarch sole control over all titles belonging to HRH's. Meaning because Harry is a HRH the Queen can give or strip titles from him without any need for Parliament's approval or permission. New letters patent could simply be issued removing them, once that was done the HRH would be the last thing to go. Which would also leave Archie out in the cold regarding inherited titles.
I am pretty sure that would never happen because it sets up a precedent which could be the thin edge of the wedge for the monarchy itself..... 'nothing special about these people why don't we just take all their titles away?' an act of Parliament could very well do that and the RF is very aware of it, so it's best not to rock the boat or give anyone ideas.
As for Meghan, if the marriage should come to an end she would still get to keep the titles until Harry remarried , that's why we still have Sarah, Duchess of York prancing about. If Harry should pre decease her she then becomes Meghan, Dowager Duchess of Sussex.
So in a way the title is glued to her as well, it would be interesting to see what she would do with the titles if she stands for a US government position, or even Mayor of Santa Barbara. Would she be required to legally cut the titles adrift in order to stand for office in the USA? I wonder how that would be accomplished, as there is actually no legal frame work to do that in the UK . I suppose the thinking in 1917 was 'what woman in her right mind would freely want to give up a noble title - no need to draft a law about that absurd possibility'.
Harry is Britain's most toxic export since Piers Morgan. LOL
Prince Harry is so far gone that no reconciliation with the BRF is possible
Surely the BRF knows good propaganda and good PR. Can they get ELF to advise? Get a few of the Royals out there taking Mudslide Harry's place. It doesn't have to be just Wills or another.
About Mike Tindall and Zara Phillips taking over Invictus - there was a poll on Twitter and they got 75% of the votes.
A little tip: Not sure how long it will last for this time... but I am once again able to use Adblock on the DM website.
I'm making the most of it whilst I can. :)
Also, I wanted to ask if other Nutties have noticed glitches in Blogger recently? Comment if you can. I've been noticing issues last couple of days.
Thanks everyone!
I've had the 'error' page a couple of times when refreshing.
I agree with you royals are cowards. At least the top ones.
Not sure about Anne and Wills, they appear to have guts.
Oh, my, looks as though poor Charade earned her money last night! (heh) We do so appreciate you.
Mimi, so happy to "see" you and sad to hear about your being surrounded by wildfires. (Very sad that I went to bed at a somewhat early hour in preparation for small grandson arriving this morning at 6 a.m. and didn't get a chance to "chat".) I pray that your weather changes for the better soon, your house is spared, and you will have A/C. I saw that Colorado is supposed to have some record-setting snow storms (road trip?) while the tropics are all lined up in a conspiracy to blow our houses away in the southeast (road trip here not recommended).
I'm sitting here this morning trying to remember what my New Year's resolutions were for 2020. I'm pretty sure that wearing a mask everywhere and sanitizing everything that doesn't run away wasn't on the list. Then I realize that it could be worse. I could have teenagers in the house. I had a friend call this morning who woke me (combining Pink Moscato and melatonin makes for a very sound sleep) to ask me if I'd ever hated my children and regretted coming off the pill. "Which teenager is it, and how old?" "The 14-year-old (boy)." I assured her that it would get better. I didn't tell her that it wouldn't be until he was in his 20s.
For everybody out there that is struggling to just get up and go on in the morning, I sympathize more than you know. Especially if you have teenagers.
About Mike Tindall and Zara Phillips taking over Invictus - there was a poll on Twitter and they got 75% of the votes.
I believe that they would do very well with it, too. Far better than Harry, but that is an awfully low bar.
Whatever one does when trying to deal with even a `straightforward' narcissist risks the action rebounding on oneself. *They are masters of twisting everything to their advantage*,
_______________________________
Readers: Astericks in above quote are mine.
Truer words were never spoken WBBM. I'm a retired social worker who spent my career working in the mental health field and with other vulnerable populations. I had a loved one who suffered greatly until he chose to leave this world. It's a very tough thing to deal with whether it's as a professional or a family member. Very tough.
Some say they think Harry may be suicidal. I hope not for his grandparent's sake, for William and Catherine (and Archie, if he exists). And for Harry's sake as well.
As for Meghan, I don't ever wish bad on people but one thing I've learned over the 2 and a half decades of my career is this: narcissists generally do not suicide. They will use that card (and attempts as a form of manipulation) but I have never personally and professionally known of one to actually do such a thing. I won't analyze the why's-it's not rocket science to figure out why they don't.
I guess my point is she will outlive Harry. Hell, she will out live all of us. She's like the cockroach that survives an apocalypse and like the capos who survived the prison camps in WWII re: Viktor Frankl author of "Man's Search For Meaning". They will do *anything* and *everything* to survive...
As a result, the BRF have themselves in a horror of a pickle which can cause ramifications for decades to come if they do not find a viable and sound solution for the situation. My bet is money. Lot's of money. A stream of money... which will never dry up.
As much as I hate to say it, MM may go down in history as the one person who systematically destroyed the BRF from within.
I have a former co-worker, now friend, who said quite soberly "what the IRA couldn't do Meghan Markle has done". I will never forget her saying that. It literally made me shudder.
Sorry for the dark tone Nutties. Mental Health a subject that's not pretty even if the H&M's would like to make a wokey jokey $$$ scheme out of it.
"the capos who survived the prison camps in WWII"
AKA Kapos. Although Viktor Frankle called them capos.
Prince Harry is so far gone that no reconciliation with the BRF is possible
The Royal Family should act now:
--Have another Royal replace the Gruesomes as Commonwealth Ambassadors.
-- Have other Royals take Hapless's role in Invictus
--Strip what titles you can now, especially Meghan's
-- Strip more titles along with Parliament's action after the March review.
Matter of fact no review needed. They need not fly to England. No one wants to see the mugs.
Have HMTQ's legal representatives text or email the Gruesomes -- "You are fired!This is your final notice" "And don't bother with Frogmore. Queen is granting residence to Eugenie and her family."
@LavenderLady
Lol, I wouldn't say Markle is pear shaped- she's more of an upside down bottle of Tignanello.
Sponge Bob up top, then those teeny legs. ;)
Tig-shaped. heehee
______________________________
Ha ha ..lol... true.
It was supposed to be a double metaphor ie: What About Dick? (now on Netflix in USA. An impossible act to follow for the DUMBartons!) :D :D :D
Like the millennial's say,
Noted...
:)
In a complete lizard face move, they have betrayed Invictus for Netflix. If it happened the way that is alleged, it wouldn't surprise me if Her Royal Rodentness was behind it. Harry is now cut off from every support system he had, and they hate him. It sets the stage for a divorce, because the public is utterly repulsed by him now. As a narc, it will be very important that she has public sympathy if (when) they split.
The "HRH" sweatshirt merched by Meghan's Mirror is just another example of their outrageous greed and disrespect for the monarchy. Were she not behind this, she should have issued a cease and desist straight away. But they are willing to cheapen the blood and souls of the RF for a quick buck. Check the pictures of them at that wedding in Jamaica where she is hissing in his ear. She looks evil.
Nutties, for further research:
"the capos who survived the prison camps in WWII"
AKA Kapos. Although Viktor Frankle called them capos.
___________________
They were about the worst specimens ever conceived.
There are probably shouting matches going on behind closed doors between those that want to try to save Harry by detaching her, and those that want to save themselves by cutting both MM and JCMH free.
I have read the accounts of those who were caught up with a narc and the difficulties that they had in extricating themselves and how it took great mental fortitude to accomplish. I don't think that Harry has that mental fortitude. If I had a vote, I'd vote to expose the both of them and cut them free.
Previous posters have suggested Zara and Mike. They seem pleasant and popular and are definitely sports-minded, but like the Yorks have been somewhat removed from the active list. I wonder how much any of them feel they must do for no pay, to put it crudely. Just the cost of one of M's maternity dresses would make a nice yearly stipend.
@LavenderLady and the "ramifications for decades to come": Here's another ramification: Think of the scheming of the QM to marry off Charles to the dim and unstable Diana, which quickly resulted in the dim and unstable H. Of course we could go back further and further in time like this with what-ifs. Many would begin with Mrs. Simpson and the abdication, without which there would have been no QM. Sigh. Discouraging to contemplate.
@Lavender Lady: If it is difficult for us to watch and shake our heads over, I can only imagine how difficult it must be for his family members even if they are enraged at his incredibly bad judgement.
_____________________________
I think I'll just leave that one there.
Bad.
Judgment.
That leaves so many lives so affected. Eh, what's a few bad judgments.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8706359/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-insist-Invictus-Games-fundraiser-axed-Covid.html
Kapos- yes. prisoners who turned/were turned against their fellow prisoners - their crimes made worse by their treachery.
_____________________________
I would have HAPPILY thrown myself on the electric fence rather than dishonor myself and my family.
HAPPILY, knowing I kept my honor.
Something a specimen like Markle will never understand.
I have read the accounts of those who were caught up with a narc and the difficulties that they had in extricating themselves and how it took great mental fortitude to accomplish. I don't think that Harry has that mental fortitude. If I had a vote, I'd vote to expose the both of them and cut them free.
__________________
Having lived my whole life with a narc family member, I believe this is the only way and it does divide families, but is the only way to obtain peace of mind, imho.
That was certainly quick, wasn't it. They are reading their own press. So much for her insisting that she doesn't "read anything."
@ Lavender... I have always wondered if their January departure had something to do with too many questions about their son, in addition to a desire to be "allowed" to merch.
_____________________________________
Excellent Point! Just like they glossed over their wacked out visit to the pre school-during a pandemic!- with their 'news" of the Netflix deal.
Cockroaches the both of them.
Hi Lt. Uhura!
"They were about the worst specimens ever conceived".
Affirmative! :)
@SwampWoman,
@Lavender Lady: If it is difficult for us to watch and shake our heads over, I can only imagine how difficult it must be for his family members even if they are enraged at his incredibly bad judgement.
There are probably shouting matches going on behind closed doors between those that want to try to save Harry by detaching her, and those that want to save themselves by cutting both MM and JCMH free.
______________________________
I know right? Damn if there isn't some doozies of a throw down over that idiot Harry's mess; which he brought upon his family and a much loved institution (by many). My guess is his Gran will win. Once she's gone, the net will be cast for those two weed fishes. I hope I am alive to see it (rubs hands together)!
@Teasmade,
@LavenderLady and the "ramifications for decades to come": Here's another ramification: Think of the scheming of the QM to marry off Charles to the dim and unstable Diana, which quickly resulted in the dim and unstable H. Of course we could go back further and further in time like this with what-ifs. Many would begin with Mrs. Simpson and the abdication, without which there would have been no QM. Sigh. Discouraging to contemplate.
_____________________________________
I can't argue there. Too much drama. I suppose it's a form of entertainment (not the sadistic Roman Colosseum/Gladiator type), with the towers and dungeons/cloak and daggers of the past. It serves to remind the plebs that the Royals are human after all, therefore making the supporting of them less obnoxious.
I'm no saint so it would be fun to see H&M tossed into a clinker and fed bread and water for a few days. I don't wish the actual guillotine on them but the French are known to pull out an old chopper just for the effect. Ha ha...those would be some mighty soggy pants and panties (she is now cackling like the ol hen she is) LOL...
One thing I learned working in Belfast, we had to embrace some dark humor or else it just all got to be too much...
Bring on the Guillotine! :D :D
I would have HAPPILY thrown myself on the electric fence rather than dishonor myself and my family.
HAPPILY, knowing I kept my honor.
_______________________________
Me too-triple affirmative!
Honor is something that so many have put to the side. It's a great attribute to strive for.
Decency and honor
Thank you.
Will not be surprised that this infighting is a factor in decisions made now. Charles will never agree to lessen Harry's status and will probably obstruct more prominent roles for younger siblings as well; doing so would obscure Harry further and put his succession status under scrutiny. I am pretty sure Charles is the reason too why Anne was still not made the Royal Patron of the Marines instead of Harry.
For what it is worth I checked foreign media (non English) and reports mostly focus on diminishing respect towards the royals family, national indignation with Harry and danger of the situation for Will's future. Nobody seems to approve the Queen's current appeasement policy.
see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Benn, - especially para headed `Peerage reform'.
Princess Margaret would have had to have given up her place in the succession had she gone ahead and married a divorced man; Duke of Kent kept his place because his wife converted to Catholicism after they were married.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katharine,_Duchess_of_Kent.
The position of their children is interesting, given a more recent change in the law.
Duchess Katharine is `HRH the Duchess of...' but just uses `Duchess of Kent' She's always been a most gracious person - there was tragedy in her life which affected her deeply but she has made a real contribution to other people's lives. I think it was our English mistress who smuggled her transistor radio into class so we could listen to the marriage in 1961 at York Minster - at the end, she told us how she'd found the Duke's `manly voice' `really thrilling'!
Swamp Lady and Haiku are my favorite posters.
$3.95. Today only.
https://www.audible.com/pd/Lady-in-Waiting-Audiobook/1549127187?mi_u=amzn1.account.AEUNHV3KO5AXD75EK5VWEXVP5QMQ&mi_sc=t&mi_cmp=0b1caa2b60b075e5&ddDate=07+September+2020&mi_ecmp=531382970&source_code=AUDOREM0405189NA9
Welcome here! :)
To Lavender Lady, Thank you, I feel kind of slow, but I so appreciate your welcome!
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle insist glittering Invictus Games fundraiser to be shown on Amazon Prime was axed because of Covid and NOT their £112million deal with rivals Netflix.
Somebody finally figured out that that was a bombshell of negative PR. How about that. Good luck walking that back.
/No, I don't believe her for a minute.
To Lavender Lady, Thank you, I feel kind of slow, but I so appreciate your welcome!
It's okay with me.
I would appreciate discourse on various matters. Chiefly, matters which mean matters.
Please do participate and don't worry about not posting due to negative comments. If you get them, ignore them, and wear them as a badge of courage. It just means that your verbal insights are hitting the target.
Those are tough words, I know, perhaps I should have said `influence of her death' but that seems too mealy-mouthed for what we're going through.
G-d knows what Archie will be brought up to believe. Frankly, I hope he doesn't exist at all.
It's all very medieval, almost Shakespearian. Windsor and Markle, two houses - but not alike in dignity and honour?
On average, Charles has an life expectancy of 13-14 yrs... though we don't know where he is on that bell curve, nor what the Standard Deviation/root-mean-square deviation might be.
I can't see H lasting that long, although the expectancy tables give him over 40 years.
Long live Prince William.
Ugh, I have been a human on this planet forever, and I can tell you, you do NOT want a Markle -- NOWHERE NEAR YOU. This is not a human. This was spawned, and I am sorry for her "parents."
I never thought I could feel this way.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8706695/Prince-Harry-pays-2-4million-Meghan-Markle-owed-renovating-Frogmore-Cottage.html
I wonder how many generations the Curse of Diana will hang over the House of Windsor?__________________________
Indeed YES ... What brats do Britons do to themselves, LOL
Hahaha, I'm only an American, but loving Briton as I do, is a millstone around my neck!
"Keep those Cat Eyes on. You're going to need them."
LOl You had me laughing on that remark! Thanks!
I just wish I could "See" into the future and find out how the HAMS will get their comeuppance, I would be Really Happy!
Now we hear they paid back the Frogmore expenses so darn, they have somewhat secured their commitment to the BRF. How convenient; I wonder if Meghan objected to this and Harry insisted to keep it as his official residence. Maybe he is unsure of how things may go with Megsy in the future. Or maybe it is an advantageous tax situation for him to be a resident of GB? Since Archie likely has dual citizenship maybe Harry has been advised to keep the residence as his address in the vent of a divorce. Of course, Meg may have seen the handwriting on the wall and feel their titles were threatened if they didn't maintain the simplest of attachments to the family/UK, the least effort possible.
I guess they got some ample spending change out of that huge Netflix deal to buy the mansion themselves, pay off Frogmore expenses and proceed to live the life of a billionaires. Now probably enough money to seek out real talent, good screenwriters to produce worthwhile content for Netflix. There is no stopping them now it would appear. Even nasty characters are successful in Hollyweird.
I wonder how many generations the Curse of Diana will hang over the House of Windsor?
Interesting to contemplate. I, too, hope there isn't an Archie but, if there is, that he doesn't have Harry's genetic material.
Anyone think paying back Frogmore costs is just a distraction from the Invictus backlash?
Kinda like how the Netflix news was right on the heels of the negative reaction to their daycare fiasco?
Now that they have the Netflix deal, think they'll stop with the 'surprise', drop-in, one-time visits to unsuspecting charities?
I've stayed away for months but had to come back as just seen Telegraph headline that Harry and Meghan have paid back the £2.4M for Frogmore. However when you read the statement from the dreadly duo it says:
*****
A spokesman for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said: “A contribution has been made to the Sovereign Grant by The Duke of Sussex.
"This contribution as originally offered by Prince Harry has fully covered the necessary renovation costs of Frogmore Cottage, a property of Her Majesty The Queen, and will remain the UK residence of the Duke and his family.”
****
'A contribution' is so vague and how do we know they haven't redefined the term 'necessary renovation'?
Online comments from DM readers in the past few days have been angrier than I have ever seen in my life. Moreover the royal family has a history of closing ranks to protect themselves from dangerous levels of public unrest. They will do anything to avoid scrutiny of their wealth, where it comes from and where it goes. Yesterday the UK Parliament's Public Audit Committee was even getting involved.
George VI had to hide the Duke of Windsor's financial depredations in the interests of protecting the Windsors, even though he was furious with his brother's concealment of the money he had salted away as PoW (Duchy of Cornwall) which meant George VI had given him an unjustified level of financial support immediately after the abdication. Protecting the family came first, regardless of the behaviour of individual members. Elizabeth II remains George VI's dutiful daughter.
My gut feeling is they have paid a lesser amount to shut this issue down and get off the hook, and the BRF desperately need to shut this down too. Either that or Prince Charles has paid it indirectly.
Infuriating the Telegraph is not allowing comments. A few days ago they unbelievably allowed comments on a Markle article and Telegraph readers piled in, just as angry as DM readers but writing at much greater length, with more destructive prose! I think the Palace are getting the jitters, just as they did that first week of September 1997, when I stood in front of that sea of flowers outside Kensington Palace and heard the crowd turning against the Queen.
Probably. She probably believes that if she throws some crumbs to the hoi polloi, they will forget about everything that came before, like the daycare/preschool visit during COVID.
Welcome back, you’ve been missed! I hope your house move is still on, or you’ve been lucky and moved. ;o)
Welcome back from me too.
Wondering the same as @RR and hoping all went well for you re your move.
I will bet my pants as well, Fairy Crocodile.
I see an avalanche of stories in quick succession. There was the school visit last week, which was rightly criticized by parents. The Netflix deal was revealed soon after, perhaps meant to quiet buzz about the school story. But with that came news of the Diana musical, and the Invictus fund raiser being scrapped. Now, suddenly they've paid off Frogmore?
I doubt it. It reeks of a parent paying off their college kid's credit card.
Happy to see you and so glad to know you are doing well!
When will it end? As someone else mentioned, I'll be Lon dead if the truth ever comes out. It boggles my mind that the Firm covered up so many years of Harry's misdeeds and ultimate character. Several years ago, I thought Harry was sort of cute, but as he unveiled himself, he is now slovenly and holy to me and darn right ugly to me!!
Mary Stonehouse
Oh, that sounds wonderful.
So glad to hear that everything worked out well for you and that you've found such a beautiful spot to reside in.
Wishing you many happy years there. :)
That was certainly quick, wasn't it. They are reading their own press. So much for her insisting that she doesn't "read anything."
Yes, I agree. (she's a liar) :)
I think the Palace aids are reading the comments too and reporting back to Her Maj.
Things are now moving too quickly now for it to be a mere coincidence!
Demand receipts!
I’m thrilled you got to move at last and how wonderfully idyllic your new life sounds. Just the thing for times of stress...with the Sussex’s pulling out all stops, you’ll be like Olive Oil in no time at all. Lol ;o)
That should say Palace aides!!
https://www.newsinenglish.no/2019/08/07/princess-to-stop-exploiting-her-title/
King of Sweden removed the titles from his grand children recently too.
Why is Parliament and the Palace stalling so much?? This is 2020. The Disastrous Duo will only cost more money and cause more damage.
I would like your opinion on the following: Sussex success.
We all continue disliking Megsy because we saw what she is and we finally discovered what Harry is, but they seem to get what they wanted. They cut off royal duty they loathed, got themselves a Palace in Hollywood, got somebody idiotic enough to spend many millions on them, got themselves a platform to speak from, will roll with glitterati as always wanted, have enough money to instantly repay the renovations, have a PR machine at their back and call plus an army of sycophants. They seem to insist on retaining Frog as their UK's "base" which tells me they fully intent to show off as part of the royal family too.
I must say the whole thing looks like Megsy 1 UK royals 0
Prince Harry pays back the £2.4million owed to Royal Household for work on Frogmore Cottage thanks to the '$150m' Netflix deal he and wife Meghan Markle signed
A spokesman for the Duke of Sussex confirmed the bill will be paid in full by contributing to Sovereign Grant
Sources say the repayment has been made possible by the huge agreement struck with the streaming giant
The spokesman also confirmed the property, a gift from the Queen, will remain the family's UK residence
__________________
Very bad news! Now The Gruesomes have a place to stay when they come to the UK to swan around, to rub their Netflix numbers in everyone's noses. And they will come back a few months a year in order to keep up the illusion that they are still Royal. To maintain that Royal connection for Hollywood money earning purposes.
Come to think of it, that's probably why the royal family was at Balmoral. They would gather at breakfast, the papers would be read, and they would all have to go outside and walk for miles because they were so spitting mad at JCMH and MM. If they were hunting for the table, they probably called the dinner targets Meghan. "Where are you going?" "Hunting Meghans for the chef." "Can I go too?"
I wonder how much it cost to send Megantionette's $6000.00 copper bathtub to Santa Barbara????
I wonder how much it cost to send Megantionette's $6000.00 copper bathtub to Santa Barbara????
When she sued the MOS about her letter to her father, she also submitted some other DM and MOS articles that she claimed were false... and if I'm not mistaken, I believe the copper bath was one of them?
We all continue disliking Megsy because we saw what she is and we finally discovered what Harry is, but they seem to get what they wanted. They cut off royal duty they loathed, got themselves a Palace in Hollywood, got somebody idiotic enough to spend many millions on them, got themselves a platform to speak from, will roll with glitterati as always wanted, have enough money to instantly repay the renovations, have a PR machine at their back and call plus an army of sycophants. They seem to insist on retaining Frog as their UK's "base" which tells me they fully intent to show off as part of the royal family too.
I must say the whole thing looks like Megsy 1 UK royals 0
Take heart, Fairy Crocodile. We do not know if ANY of those things or true or if it is just more PR piling the bullsh*t deeper.
1) They cut off royal duty they loathed My opinion is that they were cut off because they were a disgrace.
2) got themselves a Palace in Hollywood In a location known for wildfires, landslides, and high taxes, but *not* Hollywood. Most buyers gave that house a hard pass. Do we even know beyond a shadow of doubt that they purchased it?
3) got somebody idiotic enough to spend many millions on them, Nobody pays more than what somebody is worth. There are going to be all sorts of contingency clauses. If they don't generate multiples of what they are being paid, they will be cut off PDQ IMO.
4) got themselves a platform to speak from Oh, I think that chain they're on now is going to be yanked a lot harder than the BRF ever did.
5)will roll with glitterati as always wanted, They can roll in cow sh*t for all I care. If they're doing pictures for Netflix, it is because the studios do not think they are a viable (or profitable) proposition. Most of the Netflix offerings are really dreadful.
6) have enough money to instantly repay the renovations I don't believe that they paid it back. I'm not sure that it was ever completely renovated or that the Dreadful Duo ever spent time there. Probably PC or HM quietly paid it to avoid the embarrassment and humiliation. If the duo did pay it, I would say that was really the only thing they ever did for England or the family, which makes me doubt it.
Btw, I was a property manager of five shopping centers for several years, then the leasing agent for commercial office mid and high rises. Granted, it was in the US and commercial property, but basic rules apply. The HAMS, in order to keep Toady shed, must pay the rent to the taxpayers. These payments should be audited by the government on behalf of the taxpayers. I do not believe that the couple, who have a huge mortgage on a California property, could suddenly overnight pay off the millions for Toad outhouse.
Welcome to the blog!
@Ava C
Glad you're back, I remembered your house move to Scotland and wondered how it went. Your new house sounds lovely.
When she sued the MOS about her letter to her father, she also submitted some other DM and MOS articles that she claimed were false... and if I'm not mistaken, I believe the copper bath was one of them?
____________________
Thanks Miggy!
The key phrase is "She claimed were false"...
She can claim her vajayjay is coated with 24 karat fairy moon dust, but if her lips are moving, she's lying IMO.
But I get what you are saying. I'm just p o'ed at the audacity of those two :/
Found this article
https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2019/11/8845863/meghan-markle-denies-spending-taxpayer-money-on-a-copper-tub-yoga-studio-in-new-lawsuit
Meghan Markle Denies Spending Taxpayer Money On A Copper Tub & Yoga Studio In New Lawsuit
KATHRYN LINDSAY
NOVEMBER 19, 2019 8:54
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are on the offensive, filing a third lawsuit against a British press outlet for publishing "untrue" stories to portray the Duchess "negatively." Markle first sued the Mail and its parent company, Associated Newspapers, last month for publishing excerpts of a private letter she wrote to her father, and Prince Harry sued News Group Newspapers, owners of The Sun and the now-defunct News of the World, for alleged phone hacking. Now, Markle's team has hit Associated Newspapers with another lawsuit, this time targeted at specific claims they made about Markle, particularly regarding her baby shower and the house she moved into with Prince Harry, Frogmore
Specifically, Markle denies using taxpayer money to fit the house with a $6,500 copper bathtub, private yoga studio, tennis court, and guest wing for her mother, Doria Ragland. Markle also denied that her mother wasn't invited to her baby shower. The lawsuit reads: "The claimant’s mother was of course invited, and the claimant also offered to buy her airline tickets. However, her mother was unable to attend due to work commitments."
Speaking of that baby shower, Markle has a few bones to pick about that reporting as well. The lawsuit states the New York City event “actually cost a tiny fraction” of the $300,000 that the outlet reported, and that the guests — such as Amal Clooney, Gayle King, and Misha Nonoo — were not invited for purposes of showing off, but were instead "close friends," some of whom "close friends," some of whom had known the Duchess "for over 20 years
@Swampwoman - so glad you're still around!
There's a good new article in the Daily Telegraph by Celia Walden about the increasingly frequent parallels being drawn between the Sussexes and Obamas (but let's not get into US politics here). Not sure if paywall still down but here it is:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/stop-comparing-meghan-michelle-worlds-apart/www
Choice extracts ...
*****
Suddenly Michelle isn’t just an “inspiration”, “mentor” and “friend” – as she [Meghan] shmoozily described the former First Lady in her Vogue Q&A – but a kindred spirit and fellow ceiling smasher: a woman whose slow, steady and selfless push towards a better world is a triumph over adversity.
Only there’s a problem with these parallels. Namely that they are lazy, preposterous, baseless guff. Growing up as a privately educated schoolgirl in Hollywood is unlikely to have given Meghan the same insights as the ones Michelle gleaned being raised in a cramped apartment on the wrong side of Chicago.
Equally, struggling to get roles on daytime telly soaps thanks to her “ethnically ambiguous” looks is a rather smaller violin to saw away on than defying every high school teacher’s expectation to win a place at Princeton University, where Michelle was made to feel “like a visitor on campus”, before going on to excel at Harvard Law School.
One of these two women met her husband at the Chicago law firm where she was one of just two African Americans in the department; the other was set up on a blind date by a member of London’s society set, after allegedly putting the word out that she was keen to land a “famous British man.”
Then there’s the small matter of intellectual rigor. Meghan may have been described as “Hollywood smart” in the past, but Hollywood smart to Michelle Obama smart is what dog years are to human years. [Love it!]
[...] Whereas Michelle resolutely refused to whinge throughout her years in the White House, knowing that her voice would be heard in time, Meghan has done nothing but complain from day one [...]
*****
The DT veers between mindless sycophancy towards the Sussexes in their fashion section to the other end of the spectrum with their established columnists like this. I wonder if they ever meet?
Anyway, I'm repeating myself, but I heard a rumor that the Firm has allowed Megan/Harry to bring down the monarchy! The monarchy has always hidden their $$$ and I wonder if that has a bearing on this mess...and added sex scandal book coming up?
I would like your opinion on the following: Sussex success.
...
I must say the whole thing looks like Megsy 1 UK royals 0
_________________
Yes, it does look that way. Things may change, though. What I don't know is with what money did they repay the renovations? They bought the house in Montecito, now they've repaid the work on Frogmore. Sorry for asking a stupid question (again!) but how come they're suddenly flush with money? I'm sure they haven't had a cent from Netflix yet.
The BBC news states that the repayment "comes days after the couple announced they had reached a deal with Netflix to make a range of programmes, some of which they may appear in." ( my italics). I thought they were going to be producers, not appearing in their own programmes. Perhaps I misunderstood or missed it.
To Lavender Lady, Thank you, I feel kind of slow, but I so appreciate your welcome!
It boggles my mind that the Firm covered up so many years of Harry's misdeeds and ultimate character.
____________________________________
You are most welcome! I read for a long time too before I was brave enough to post. Come on in. In the water is fantastic :)
Yup it can be crazy making lol...like today with the "news" about Frog House. The cat and mouse that Meg the Merch likes to play, the giant mind Fu(k that she pulls on the citizens of GB, every chance she gets is just sick IMO.
The good news is, Karma is a big B with an itch. She will get her comeuppance is my theory.
Have fun!
The key phrase is "She claimed were false"...
Point taken! :)
@Sylvia,
Specifically, Markle denies using taxpayer money to fit the house with a $6,500 copper bathtub.
Thanks for the article.
So she paid for it herself, did she? lol
Meghan may have been described as “Hollywood smart” in the past, but Hollywood smart to Michelle Obama smart is what dog years are to human years. [Love it!]
_____________________________________
LOL...my laugh for the day. Thanks)
Maneki Neko, Sorry I referred to you as "Haiku", one of my favorite commentators. I love Haiku poetry.
_______________
Don't worry! I thought you meant Hikari!! (all these Japanese words). If you love haiku, you must love Magatha's witty poems.
In response to your call for our opinion about the so-called “Sussex Success” — Presently, it does seem like Meg and Harry are having all their dreams come true in Hollyweirdland.
With emphasis on *seems*. It is far too soon, and tales of the Sussexes ‘ glittering success far too new, To trust that whatever she’s promoting is actually real. We have not known M and H not to F*ck everything up as long as this travesty called their relationship has been rolling—Why should they break precedent now all of a sudden? Just a month ago, they were still freeloading at Tyler Perry’s house, staging their desperate Zoom calls (all gratis) and pathetic papp walks to the dentist and “Archie sighting”. But all of a sudden, within a few weeks, they’ve suddenly purchased a mansion and are Netflix moguls? They are 7.5 million in hock to Russian mobsters for that mortgage on Landslide Towers and thus *own* nothing—mortgaged up to their eyes and no guarantee they can pay that off before the house slides down a cliff. This vaunted $150 million deal with Netflix is only their potential worth—they have got to actually present Netflix with finished programs to purchase for that fee. If Netflix is advancing them some seed money against future proceeds, look for that money to disappear into their personal expenses just like the 3 million from Disney with not a brand to show for it in terms of output. Harry has just proven what kind of a collaborator he is by publicly ditching Invictus. What kind of productive artistic collaboration is going to be possible with these two clowns? If Netflix is foolish enough to give them millions upfront for nothing, they deserve to lose it. Maybe Netflix is actually paid for the long deferred amount outstanding on Frogmore. They are going to expect some return on investment.
Why should Meg still be staging pathetic attention grabs at schools and donation drives if she is now a successful media producer? The Sussex Success is a mirage just like everything else they claim to do. I will be shocked if they manage to produce one single program. Meanwhile they now owe money to some dangerous people. Meg’s new Hollywood life is built on an earthquake fault. Just a matter of time before it all comes tumbling down. Look how fast “Finding Freedom” sank and died. My take is that this Netflix deal will be the same; Good for a month or two of publicity but it will ultimately go nowhere because Meg and H are not equipped, talent wise, resource wise or in terms of work ethic. They simply do not have the capability to produce anything substantial. The only thing she has ever been good at is generating buzz. Behind the buzz there Has to be something real, or it’s all just spin. Megs ultimate goal has really always been to live extremely well in exchange for nothing. It’s the grifter’s MO—she will never change her stripes. Talk and pretense and paid PR does not produce anything worth $150 mill.
Love it:<3 It's up there with "noted"...Lol ;)
If someone wrote a screenplay about the Harkle news, people would say, it was too farfetched!
Look at it this way, she and harry will forever be subsidized because the queen has more to lose
I agree with so much of what SwampWoman has said. I don’t believe all the stories, so much of it is PR stuff and bluff. As many Nutties have stated, I too don’t believe they’ve repaid Frogmore’s renovation costs, I think it’s Palace or the Duo’s damage limitation at play.
I said the other day that I think apathy will kill off the Duo’s dreams of delusion, I still think this. The royal family don’t have to do a thing, just sit back and wait. I do however oscillate between the latter and thinking the royal family should just cut them completely loose. Enough is enough, they are dragging everything (they are connected to) downwards to a utterly vulgar level.
Too much going on in real life to worry about these two greedy lying freeloaders. I’m pretty much fatigued by the Duo, I’m just watching, hoping and waiting for the tide to change. ;o)
By FREDERICA MILLER
08:43, Mon, Sep 7, 2020 | UPDATED: 09:30, Mon, Sep 7, 2020
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1332245/prince-charles-king-news-archie-harrison-prince-meghan-markle-harry
I really don't understand why it's only readers not journalists picking up on the gulf there is between that vague Sussex statement about 'a contibution' being paid and the media reporting it as 'the £2.4M has been repaid'. The Sussexes never said that. It was their usual opaque communication technique in action. Why isn't the media asking questions and digging deeper? We want proof THEY paid the full amount that has been due all this time, down to the last penny.
_______________________________
Yup. Upthread I am saying the journalists need to demand receipts. Thanks for validating I'm not the only one who feels that whoever is stating it is NOT enough.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-54062799
My turn to apologise, I realise I called you Mary Whitehouse!! (In case you're not from the UK, Mary Whitehouse was a campaigner against a permissive society in the seventies).
Meg’s new Hollywood life is built on an earthquake fault. Just a matter of time before it all comes tumbling down. Look how fast “Finding Freedom” sank and died. My take is that this Netflix deal will be the same; Good for a month or two of publicity but it will ultimately go nowhere because Meg and H are not equipped, talent wise, resource wise or in terms of work ethic. They simply do not have the capability to produce anything substantial. The only thing she has ever been good at is generating buzz.
____________________
Like the proverbial house of cards...
It can't happen fast enough for me. Sigh :|
Finding Freedom is #12 on NY times best seller non fiction list. https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/2020/09/06/hardcover-nonfiction/
LL, finding freedom didn’t sink and die. It’s still on the best sellers list
______________________________
Wasn't my comment, but it's dust on NYTimes Best Seller's list. It's not on Amazon's list of best sellers either. What list are you looking at?
If FF is on that list, well all I can say is, so is Glennon Doyle's...lol.
I will leave it with this:
“Everywhere I go I'm asked if I think the university stifles writers. My opinion is that they don't stifle enough of them. There's many a best-seller that could have been prevented by a good teacher.” - Flannery O'Connor
How do we know what Harry 'originally offered'? Knowing him I bet it was less than the £2.4M deemed by officials/BP to be due from him.
How do we know that what are deemed 'necessary' renovations' today are identical to the ones that were carried out around two years ago, intended for repayment by the Sussexes? 'Necessary' may now be more narrowly defined, allowing Harry to get off the hook once again. He's been bailed out his entire life.
When dealing with the slippery Sussexes, we all need to think like lawyers. Pin them down. Establish the facts. I'd give anything to see them cross-examined in a court of law.
Thanks! :)
https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/nielsen/HardcoverNonfiction.html
Finding Freedom is also currently #23 on Publishers Weekly nonfiction best sellers list.
____________________________
That a hella sugar coin. Ha!
:)
Best-sellers rank #1,801 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
#3 in Biographies of Royalty (Kindle Store)
#4 in Biographies of the Rich & Famous
#5 in Biographies of Social Activists
This is the rating for FF on Amazon:
Best-sellers rank #1,801 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
#3 in Biographies of Royalty (Kindle Store)
#4 in Biographies of the Rich & Famous
#5 in Biographies of Social Activists
___________________________
Thanks, I stand corrected. As I've stated in the past my eyesight is not good now. The NYT page I am looking at says MO's book is #12 but the date is Sept 13 2020? I've tried to c&p the link but it won't let me :(
If I knew how to post a screen shot, I would, so y'all would see I'm not being inpertinent.
In any event, thanks for the correction :)
Hardcover Nonfiction- September 13, 2020
Best Sellers Lists Navigation
Select Fiction
FICTION
Select Nonfiction
NONFICTION
Select CHILDREN’S
CHILDREN’S
Select MONTHLY LISTS
MONTHLY LISTS
See previous Best Seller list
September 13, 2020
See next Best Seller list
Hardcover Nonfiction
When you purchase an independently ranked book through our site, we earn an affiliate commission.
NEW THIS WEEK
HIS TRUTH IS MARCHING ON
by Jon MeachamRandom House
The Pulitzer Prize-winning biographer creates a portrait of Representative John Lewis, the late civil rights leader and congressman for Georgia’s Fifth Congressional District.
BUY ▾
HIS TRUTH IS MARCHING ON by Jon Meacham
4 WEEKS ON THE LIST
LIVE FREE OR DIE
by Sean HannityThreshold Editions
The Fox News host offers his assessment on what is at stake in the 2020 election.
†
BUY ▾
LIVE FREE OR DIE by Sean Hannity
Ranked 2 last week
4 WEEKS ON THE LIST
CASTE
by Isabel WilkersonRandom House
The Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist examines aspects of caste systems across civilizations and reveals a rigid hierarchy in America today.
BUY ▾
CASTE by Isabel Wilkerson
Ranked 3 last week
25 WEEKS ON THE LIST
UNTAMED
by Glennon DoyleDial
The activist and public speaker describes her journey of listening to her inner voice.
BUY ▾
UNTAMED by Glennon Doyle
Ranked 1 last week
7 WEEKS ON THE LIST
TOO MUCH AND NEVER ENOUGH
by Mary L. TrumpSimon & Schuster
The clinical psychologist gives her assessment of events and patterns inside her family and how they shaped President Trump.
BUY ▾
TOO MUCH AND NEVER ENOUGH by Mary L. Trump
Ranked 4 last week
NEW THIS WEEK
HOAX
by Brian StelterOne Signal/Atria
The CNN anchor and chief media correspondent examines the inner workings of Fox News and its relationship with President Trump.
BUY ▾
HOAX by Brian Stelter
26 WEEKS ON THE LIST
HOW TO BE AN ANTIRACIST
by Ibram X. KendiOne World
A primer for creating a more just and equitable society through identifying and opposing racism.
BUY ▾
Read Review
HOW TO BE AN ANTIRACIST by Ibram X. Kendi
Ranked 5 last week
100 WEEKS ON THE LIST
BETWEEN THE WORLD AND ME
by Ta-Nehisi CoatesOne World
Winner of the 2015 National Book Award for nonfiction. A meditation on race in America as well as a personal story, framed as a letter to the author's teenage son.
BUY ▾
Read Review
BETWEEN THE WORLD AND ME by Ta-Nehisi Coates
Ranked 9 last week
132 WEEKS ON THE LIST
EDUCATED
by Tara WestoverRandom House
The daughter of survivalists, who is kept out of school, educates herself enough to leave home for university.
BUY ▾
Read Review
EDUCATED by Tara Westover
Ranked 10 last week
9 WEEKS ON THE LIST
BLITZ
by David HorowitzHumanix
The author of “Big Agenda” explains why he thinks President Trump will be re-elected.
†
BUY ▾
BLITZ by David Horowitz
Ranked 11 last week
6 WEEKS ON THE LIST
THE ANSWER IS ...
by Alex TrebekSimon & Schuster
Who is the Canadian-American game show host whose pronunciation of the word “genre” has been shared widely on social media?
BUY ▾
THE ANSWER IS ... by Alex Trebek
Ranked 7 last week
90 WEEKS ON THE LIST
BECOMING
by Michelle ObamaCrown
The former first lady describes how she balanced work, family and her husband’s political ascent.
VESPER FLIGHTS
by Helen MacdonaldGrove
A collection of observational essays by the nature writer on themes of captivity, immigration and freedom.
BUY ▾
VESPER FLIGHTS by Helen Macdonald
26 WEEKS ON THE LIST
THE SPLENDID AND THE VILE
by Erik LarsonCrown
An examination of the leadership of the prime minister Winston Churchill.
BUY ▾
Read Review
THE SPLENDID AND THE VILE by Erik Larson
Ranked 15 last week
2 WEEKS ON THE LIST
EVIL GENIUSES
by Kurt AndersenRandom House
The author of “Fantasyland” looks at the economic, cultural and political forces to which he ascribes the undermining and dismantling of the American middle class.
BUY ▾
EVIL GENIUSES by Kurt Andersen
RELATED COVERAGE
THE NEW YORK TIMES BOOK REVIEW
Elena Ferrante Returns With ‘The Lying Life of Adults’
In her first novel in five years, the author of “My Brilliant Friend” revisits old themes.
When you purchase an independently ranked book through our site, we earn an affiliate commission.
BEST SELLERS METHODOLOGY
A version of this list appears in the September 13, 2020 issue of The New York Times Book Review. Rankings on weekly lists reflect sales for the week ending August 29, 2020. Lists are published early online.
More about our methodology
BEST SELLERS SYMBOL KEY
Up in Rank since last week
Down in Rank since last week
If a book is not in a rank since the previous week, it will not have an arrow. The last few titles on the list known as the extended list, never have arrows.
An asterisk indicates that a book's sales are barely distinguishable from those of the book above it.
A dagger indicates that some retailers report receiving bulk orders.
Follow New York Times Books on Facebook and Twitter (@nytimesbooks), sign up for our newsletter or our literary calendar. And listen to us on the Book Review podcast.
Weekly Best Sellers Lists
FICTION
Combined Print & E-Book Fiction
Hardcover Fiction
Paperback Trade Fiction
NONFICTION
Combined Print & E-Book Nonfiction
Hardcover Nonfiction
Paperback Nonfiction
Advice, How-To & Miscellaneous
CHILDREN’S
Children’s Middle Grade Hardcover
Children’s Picture Books
Children’s Series
Young Adult Hardcover
Monthly Best Sellers Lists
Audio Fiction
Audio Nonfiction
Business
Graphic Books and Manga
Mass Market
Middle Grade Paperback
Young Adult Paperback
Site Index
Go to Home Page »
NEWS
OPINION
ARTS
LIVING
LISTINGS & MORE
Site Information Navigation
© 2020 The New York Times Company
NYTCoContact UsWork with usAdvertiseT BraudioYour Ad ChoicesPrivacyTerms of ServiceTerms of SaleSite MapHelpSubscriptions
There are ALL sorts of shenanigans involved in manipulating the bestseller lists (Amazon especially). None of them truly represent "best sellers" but are numbers gathered from selected retailers. For true sales numbers, there's a pricey subscription service. (The NYT page notes that "lists are posted early online" so that's why it's pre-dated.The book section is also mailed out separately ahead of time.)
I didn't check for "FF". Was that the original point? I fear so, so I am off-topic.
Well, Im off to count the traffic lights or crosswalks . . .
JH has filed a legal complaint against the Times.
They really are rattled at the moment. Can't wait to see how this pans out!
@Lavender: I do indeed see Becoming as #12 in the NYT Hardcover Nonfiction list, to corroborate you. I also took a screenshot, thinking I'd temporarily change my avatar to that, but I don't think it's worth it.
and,
There are ALL sorts of shenanigans involved in manipulating the bestseller lists (Amazon especially). None of them truly represent "best sellers" but are numbers gathered from selected retailers. For true sales numbers, there's a pricey subscription service. (The NYT page notes that "lists are posted early online" so that's why it's pre-dated.The book section is also mailed out separately ahead of time.)
_________________________________________
Thank you! I appreciate that! Very kind of you :)
I get all my books from my local library so I don't bother with those lists. I'm grateful we have a great selection of Large Print for the sight impaired (and me, the partially sight impaired).
Ha ha! I'm off too. To count how many angels can stand on the head of a pin :D
I don't have time to give a long response, but I think it "looks" like UK/US 0 HAMS 2.
1. The announcement of the cancellation was made by their own lawyer, who explicitly said it was because of a "conflict of interest".
2. This came right after news of their deal with Netflix broke. Coincidental timing? I don't think so.
3. The fundraiser was supposed to have been held next June - that's 9 months away. Are they so prescient that they can predict that the coronavirus will still be disrupting events then? What makes them so sure a vaccine won't be found in the next few months (labs around the world are rushing to develop one).
4. Finally, it's been clear that Harry has lost interest in Invictus in the last couple of years - there were plenty of reports that said that whenever he went to for an Invictus-related event, he invariably showed up late and stayed for only a short time.
Yes, I agree 100%.
That's why it will be interesting to see what response the Times comes up with.
On Sunday, the Times of London ran an article by a royal reporter who wrote that the fundraiser for the Invictus Games next summer was scuppered because of the Harkles' deal with Netflix (since rival Amazon Prime was to have streamed it). There was a lot of very negative reaction to the news, with people criticizing JH for choosing commerce over charity. Well, the gruesome twosome have hit back. JH has filed a legal complaint against the Times, and there is a lengthy article in the DM and other tabloids in which the Harkles insist the event was cancelled because of the coronavirus and it has nothing to do with their Netflix deal.
Wait, what? The original account I read was that the schedule of Invictus Games conflicted with Netflix schedule. I doubt that a lot of places are cancelling next summer events for a virus that may well be vaccinated out of existence by then.
But I think the statement is also written to be snarky.
"This contribution as originally offered by Prince Harry has fully covered the necessary renovation costs of Frogmore Cottage, a property of Her Majesty The Queen, and will remain the UK residence of the duke and his family."
The statement makes these points:
1. Harry offered to pay, nobody made him.
2. Harry considers the payment a contribution to the UK (as was the huge amount of money generated by their wedding and all their other magical acts including breathing in the UK.)
3. The Queen owns the property (which I don't think is quite true of Crown Estate properties.)
4. The renovations were necessary and certainly weren't an extravagance.
5. It wasn't Harry's fault the home needed renovations but rather the property owner's.
I think whoever wrote the blurb was caught up in all the hidden messages and forgot to check for writing errors. I'm pretty sure if all the embedded clauses are taken out of that run-on sentence, it actually says "This contribution will remain the UK residence of the duke and his family." (I make writing errors on posts here all the time but that's hardly the same as having errors in a press release.)
Harry has a Progressed Venus in Sagitarrius, very unfortunate for those who lack attention to detail, lack attention to the machinations of others, they ignore every red flag in their personal relationships.
Meg has Natal Venus at 13 Virgo, conjunct Harry's Sun; now her Progressed Sun is at 13 Virgo.
Harry's Progressed Sun is at 28 Libra, conjunct Meg's Progressed Venus at 29 Libra.
These two are a match. They mirror each other.
Meg's Progressed Venus is in the 2nd house, meaning $$$$ is at the depth of her values. And Love.
Love comes in and out of her life, like the tides; and money comes in and out of her life like the tides.
You should see some of the spelling mistakes and factual errors on the network news' websites! (I'm talking about ABC, CBS, NBC.) People get LIVID over their errors. I've gotten to where I just look in the comment section without reading the story to get the facts from people that live in the area. If they're (network affiliates) promulgating outright fiction and not a mistake due to ignorance or laziness, the comment section will be closed.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8707289/RICHARD-KAY-pretence-gone-Harry-Meghan-no-Royal-future.html
Harry and Meghan will not be 'immune' from scrutiny after paying back £2.4m for Frogmore Cottage and stopping taking money from Charles, say Royal sources - and $150m Netflix deal makes Prince 'more of a public figure than ever'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8706695/Prince-Harry-pays-2-4million-Meghan-Markle-owed-renovating-Frogmore-Cottage.html
The Mail has been told that the decision to suddenly pay back the money in full came as a surprise to royal officials. One well-placed source said that the Sovereign Grant money had always been a 'sore spot' for Harry, who – rightly or wrongly – felt that it was used as a means of 'controlling' him by members of his own family, and by the media.
The Sovereign Grant is the money given by the Treasury to support the Queen as Head of State. It meets the running expenses of her official household, as well as the maintenance of properties owned by the Crown Estate.
The source told the Mail yesterday that Harry 'made very clear from the start that he wanted to repay that money because he felt that if he handed it back then no-one would have the right to control him.' They added: 'But while he uses the word control, many see this as a desire by Harry to escape criticism under a fair and free Press.' The source added that Harry had never seemed in 'any rush' to repay the sum in its entirety.
'This has come as something of a surprise,' they admitted, 'and it can only be assumed this has something to do with the Netflix deal. Maybe it now means he can afford to pay the money back in full at once or maybe he has been irritated by the criticism that the deal has led to of his finances. No one really knows.
'But if he thinks that it will make him immune from public and media scrutiny, he is misguided.
'This new, highly visible media role that he is seeking in the US makes him more of a public figure than ever.'
Also, as the progressed planets move, the partnership will change.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8706695/Prince-Harry-pays-2-4million-Meghan-Markle-owed-renovating-Frogmore-Cottage.html
Netflix will screen controversial 'Diana' the musical that features the Queen labelling her a 'TART'
Prince Harry is being urged to get a Netflix musical about his mother pulled, days after he signed a huge deal with the streaming service.
Netflix will screen the controversial musical, named 'Diana: A New Musical', which features a fictitious scene where the Queen labels her a 'tart'.
Other controversial lines include the Queen saying to Diana: 'In the old days we would have chopped off your head,' while another scene sees Diana in bed with James Hewitt.
Now a former bodyguard of the late princess is calling on her son to get the musical pulled from the streaming service.
Ken Wharfe, 72, Diana's former bodyguard, The Sun: 'The Diana musical, soon to be premiered on Netflix, presents a huge dilemma to them both.
'If the critics are to be believed, this musical story is not a joyous journey of love with a happy ending but an episodic account of untruths, scandal and sex.
There's more if you're interested, I only had a very quick look but can't stomach more. Mind you, if Diana was 'a tart' and as MM models herself on her, now we know why...
@Barbara - I'm going to throw this out - Netflix might have told them to straighten out the issues because Netflix don't want to be associated with people with bad reputations. Lord knows that the Harkles didn't try to fix the situation because of their own conscience.
I agree. I said up above to Fairy Crocodile that I believe Netflix is going to yank their chain a lot harder than the BRF did. The chain has been yanked to get their attention, and they have had their noses rubbed in the mess on the carpet.
I'm off to look into this latest lawsuit but just wanted to ask for your opinion on the other one most recently in the news...re the paps photos taken in the Canadian woods. I posted excerpts from a Times article here which cited the Rowling case regarding photos taken of children. (Please see 2 of my previous posts)
Do you have any commentary on how The Harkles could use that case to their advantage despite the involvement of three different countries in their suit?
And if you could also comment on how laws about child photo privacy would transfer to dolls hanging limply in a carrier while the carrier of said doll poses for the pap, that would be great! (grin)
I believe Netflix is going to yank their chain a lot harder than the BRF did.
Something ardently to be wished!
But what would Netflix be likely to consider bad PR?
Is there a producer with a similar deal whom we can hold as a standard to Meghan?
I hate to break the news to Netflix, but that train has already left the station.
The C(o)unts of Montecito
And their sugar lode placebo
Are planning to inflict us
More damage than Invictus
They’ll get back what they sow
From the dark side of WEHO
I'm off to look into this latest lawsuit but just wanted to ask for your opinion on the other one most recently in the news...re the paps photos taken in the Canadian woods. I posted excerpts from a Times article here which cited the Rowling case regarding photos taken of children. (Please see 2 of my previous posts)
Do you have any commentary on how The Harkles could use that case to their advantage despite the involvement of three different countries in their suit?
@swampwoman said
And if you could also comment on how laws about child photo privacy would transfer to dolls hanging limply in a carrier while the carrier of said doll poses for the pap, that would be great! (grin)
And KC says
And I would love to hear your thoughts regarding the Sussexes barging into a school during a pandemic and then using the photos of the children to enrich herself. She has certainly walked all over the privacy rights of those children when they were splashed all over SM. And the Sussexes own that copyright. They brought the photographer.
It seems to me that an astute litigator could. draw a lot of comparisons between Sussex and Splash behaviors and privacy.
So glad the house turned out so well. It sounds lovely
my apologies Puds! I missed that you had already made the point about the privacy of the children at the school.
We shall see eventually what befalls the Harkles, wherever Venus is in their charts.
"You're forgetting the potential damage the Harkles can cause here in America with their calls for anarchy, political machinations and ultra woke sensitivities."
********************************************************************************
I have not read they are calling for anarchy. Please elaborate or can you provide a quote(s) as we would be interested to hear. I will use it in a letter to my congressman and the President and the Queen (already wrote her a letter last December).
Our freedoms here guarantee they are allowed to have ultra woke sensibilities. Political machinations also allowed as long as it is not criminal. I am turned off by their hypocrisy and 'woke' sensitivities but view them as mostly impotent loons.
You mentioned it is not right to know whether the HAMS paid back the money for Frogmore. I don't know why a UK persona can't submit a 'Freedom of Information' request (like we have in the US) to find out the info about the specific amount allegedly repaid by Harry/Megs. I will provide a link below. Here is a statement from the site:
"You have the right to request information from any publicly-funded body, and get answers. WhatDoTheyKnow helps you make a Freedom of Information request. It also publishes all requests online."
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com
'Maybe some nice Nuttie will do this and report back to us.
Harry and his fatal attraction
Is down to Megs knee-jerk reaction
As he now well-knows
Ahoy! there she goes
Lips together, and bows low to the blows
LOL!!! LOL!!!
How do you do it???
Aye yer a right clever lassie!!!
🤣🤣🤣
From Soho and Gomorrah
To a house of cracks, and horror
Our unconscious couple
Whose lies are not so subtle
Should be aware
We’ll all be there
For judgment day on Quora
Remember how "the planets aligned". Are they still aligning??
I don’t know about calls for anarchy, the pair are not that relevant nor that important, this seems too far fetched in my view. I can think and name of far more dangerous people in the world than these two.
As I said at the bottom of my longer comment which you didn’t cite...
Too much going on in real life to worry about these two greedy lying freeloaders. I’m pretty much fatigued by the Duo, I’m just watching, hoping and waiting for the tide to change. ;o)
This still stands as I have better and more important things to worry about.
@Maneki
More like “plans maligned” 😘
More like “plans maligned"😘
-----------
Yes, it does look that way! 🤣
Tweedledumb and Tweedlefee
Are up for a fall
It’s plain to see
When they get their fall from grace
Megs will blame it all on race
I for one can’t wait for this
All her dis will seem like bliss
As we sit and watch with glee
Together we can say Teehee!
Frogmore Cottage
My understanding is:
Renovations had already been planned and approved for a grade listed Crown property (that was subdivided into 5 cottages uses by Windsor staff). Rewiring had to be done, and so on. The floating floors may have been part of this renovation as a quick and easy way to repair rotting wooden floors, and fixing the roof as well as painting might have also been part of the original essential work.
When the Queen decided to give the cottages to the Harkles, they submitted plans and got approvals for a whole lot of extra work. The five cottages had to be converted into one house, they had a special boiler installed, they used special paint, and I think window frames were replaced. How many bathrooms and kitchens did they keep and did they modernize them? Plus, they had landscaping done and wasn't there a conservatory added?
So, the Sovereign Grant should have been used for some of the work and, from the start, they should have paid for all the additional work. Unlike Kensington Palace, Clarence House, and so on, they always kept Frogmore Cottage very private and never used it for any of their duties as working royals at all. That they were originally not required to nor did they pay rent is also appalling. Andrew paid for all renovation to the Royal Lodge and pays a lower rent because of that. Edward used Sovereign Grant money to pay for renovations at Bagshot Park (sp?) and pays a higher rent because of that. They both have lease agreements that are public record. With the Harkles, everything was a secret. It was always unacceptable that the Sussexes had the deal they had. That they then decamped to the US to buy a grandiose property there and leave Frogmore Cottage standing empty is so very bad.
Everything with the Sussexes is always so very messy and their reaction to valid questions and criticism is childish. They should be feeling shame and be apologizing. The Queen also has egg on her face because of this debacle as she is the ultimate caretaker of Crown property.
Prove it.
I'm not a conspiracy type at all. But the finances of the RF are dodgy as hell. And then you add the extra dodginess of these two shysters. I want to see proof because this doesn't fit with what we know about them.
Sadly, only a small proportion of the UK population sees the Harkles for what they are. Anyone even vaguely left of `centre-right Tory' swallows the cowpats whole. They also despise readers of the DM. (In the last FE college I worked in, the library subscribed to the DM - it was interesting to see how many members of staff sneaked a peek at it when they thought nobody was looking!).
There seems to be a general view that MM wasn't given a chance yet when I persuade folk to look st the evidence (say, the video of her elbowing H out of the way, or the pregnancy squats) they are appalled.
Prove it.
I'm not a conspiracy type at all. But the finances of the RF are dodgy as hell. And then you add the extra dodginess of these two shysters. I want to see proof because this doesn't fit with what we know about them.
I totally agree, it’s just spin on spin. Too many negative stories regarding the Sussex’s, they didn’t like the backlash regarding Harry and pulling out the Invictus Games fundraising, negative response to their Netflix development deal, so here comes the PR spin to try and counteract the criticisms. Even if he did pay back any money it would have been a nominal amount not even noteworthy.
One of the news articles I’ve read is that they’ve already received this years stipend from Charles, so it’s so easy to add that to their generosity to the British tax payer and say they aren’t receiving any income from Charles, (but only after it’s already been handed out).
The Queen of tarts
Is well known for her parts
Nothing to do with the stage
She’s had a good run
With that daft second son
We don’t give an eff, and won’t be bereft
As she departs, and megxits, stage Left
Sovereign Grant money was used for Frogmore Cottage. Those financials are released to the public and there is a press gathering where journalists can question representatives of the Queen. That won't happen until next year.
There is still a lot that is hidden. How detailed will those financials be? How much of their own money did the Sussexes spend? Do they have a lease agreement, like Andrew and Edward, and where is that?
I can certainly relate to this, I too worked in an FE college and the newspaper 'de rigueur' was the Guardian. No way would you admit to being a Telegraph reader let alone a DM one.
@Golden Retriever ......I don't think Bea or Eugenie would take on Frog cottage.
It's pretty awful really, and was only cobbled together for H&M when they were turfed out of Kensington Palace. (Yes they were turfed out apart from the falling out with William, there were many complaints by the other residents living there .... none of that mentioned in the FF book though).
The Gloucester's 20 room apartment that H&M were due to move into at KP is now refurbished and vacant , perhaps the sisters could take on that one. Not to mention that Andrew's 75year lease on the very grand 30 room house 'The Lodge' also stipulates that when he dies his daughters can take over the remaining years of the lease on the same favourable terms. So they can look forward to having a good 40years of low rent living in a mansion house on the Windsor estate at some point.
Remember early on when the Harry/Meghan move was first floated one insider said that Meg thought she and Harry were agreeing to move into Frogmore House (home of her wedding reception) , she got quite a shock when faced with Frogmore Cottage, basically servants quarters built on swampland with a cemetary at the bottom of an ill kept wasteland of a garden, accompanied by the sweet sounds of frogs and low flying Heathrow planes passing directly overhead every 15 minutes. (No one can doubt the Queen's sense of humour after that). Then there was some palace leak about her wanting to move into Windsor castle itself, because the house would take so long to fix, which the Queen scuppered instantly and the Frog cottage renovations were rushed through.
The words of her Majesty "she gets what I give her" come to mind. I do believe Her Maj was dropping a very large hint to the cronic complainers by putting them in Frog Cottage and instead of mending their ways they just doubled down on their madness.
"low flying Heathrow planes passing directly overhead every 15 minutes".
______________
Actually, every 90 seconds. Poor Megs, not the house of her dreams (and Wallis's grave at the bottom of the garden).
Regardless, now that she has a deal worth *potentially* millions, I don't believe that she will be advocating for seizing Other People's Things because she will be one of the Other People Whose Things Will be Seized. She'll probably be dropping all of their "SURPRISE!" video visits, charities, etc. I can definitely see the upside to the Netflix deal.
It's pretty awful really, and was only cobbled together for H&M when they were turfed out of Kensington Palace. (Yes they were turfed out apart from the falling out with William, there were many complaints by the other residents living there .... none of that mentioned in the FF book though)
Thank you for mentioning that. I read that Frogmore Cottage was pretty ghastly. I can't imagine that even with the renovations (which were badly needed) that it would be suitable for Their Royal Heinies the Sussexes to reside in.
While it does sound like it was neglected, I'm sure the bones of original structure are still pretty nice. And some of the pictures make it look quite nice. The one we see the most though-- the rear view with overgrown grass-- doesn't look nice.
But I agree with @xxxxx , didn't H&M look at it first to notice the negative aspects? After all, Will supposedly didn't accept the first apt that was offered at KP.
I think that they are using the Frogmore cottage renovation money reimbursement to fix their image. Along with Prince Charles and the Queen who don't want them dragging down the BRF. No money was reimbursed. And the BRF isn't going to expose them.
I believe this - my understanding is that Netflix will only pay them if and when the Harkles deliver an acceptable project. There is no way Netflix would just hand them a blank cheque in advance, unless it's a retainer to cover expenses. So they might be facing crash crunch, if not now, then in the near future.
It makes me question the other announcement they made, that they have 'decided' not to accept any further funds from the Duchy of Cornwall, aka the Bank of Pa. Was that 'voluntary' as well? Or did PC, blindsided by the announcement that the duo had signed a $150 million deal with Netflix, finally decide that enough was enough?