"We have got to all put our stock in something that is true and we need to have reliable media and news sources that are telling us the truth," the Duchess of Sussex told Fortune's Most Powerful Women Summit in a video message on Tuesday.
If award shows still meant anything, that statement might win Meg a Best Irony award.
Fortune is no longer "Fortune Magazine"
First of all, Fortune is no longer the glossy Fortune Magazine that once lay on every CEO's mahogany desk.
It was purchased by the Iowa-based Meredith Corporation in 2017 as part of its takeover of Time, Inc. Meredith is best known as the publisher of Better Homes and Gardens, and it quickly went about selling off most of the Time Inc. magazine titles piece by piece to the highest bidder.
Fortune went to Thai billionaire Chatchaval Jiaravanon, head of the Chaoren Pokphand Group, a conglomerate with pharma, agriculture, and telecommunications interests.
The $150 million price was cheap for an established brand name. And the main asset was not Fortune Magazine's collapsing circulation and declining ad buys, but the Fortune 500 list of America's largest corporations.
Visit Fortune Magazine's website now and you'll find a sad little set of stories written by journalists who appear to be no-hopers. The stories have a strong pro-China and pro-Biden slant, which perhaps reflects the opinions of its Thai owner.
Meg wants flattering stories
Secondly, if anyone isn't interested in "reliable media and news sources that are telling us the truth" it is Meghan, who has lied to the media more times than most people can count, as well as lying to her own family, the Royal Family, to her past employers (I'm such a fraud!), past friends, past partners...the list goes on, and may or may not soon include the British judiciary if she is called to testify in person.
Meg wants media willing to tell flattering stories about her, and if necessary paid to tell flattering stories about her. Telling the truth isn't really a top parameter.
"It's about being authentic," Meg tells the interviewer from fake Fortune Magazine as part of a "summit" at which her PR people quite possibly have paid for her to be featured.
The (very light-skinned) interviewer, who writes "a newsletter on race", notes that Meg is one of many women who have had "a sitting president come after you, mobs come after you, powerful forces, try to take you down, try to disparage your message."
(What the hell is Meghan's message?)
A purpose-driven life, lived with authenticity
Anyway, Meghan responds: "If you don't notice all the noise out there, and just focus on living a purpose-driven life....the moment you are liberated from all these other opinions by what you know to be true...then I think it is very easy to live with authenticity."
Is this the person suing the Mail on Sunday for publishing a letter from her father, suggesting that it chose excerpts that put her in a bad light?
Is this the person suing a paparazzi agency for taking photos she clearly set up herself?
Is this the person who pays for bots to praise her?
A purpose-driven life, liberated from other opinions. Authentic. True.
That's worth the 2020 Best Irony award.
Comments
It's funny with H&M, they go to great lengths and expense to gain exposure but what ever they do is shadowed by a dodgy photo that the DM will show again and again until the next dodgy photo comes along. No Wonder Megs is so desperate to control use of her image.
We had Megs grimacing face in the car as they left the last military event, the green dress photos......
The hideous green dress photo. This bizarre outfit with green beret, green veil, green semi-cape. With her obvious breasts padding being featured and displayed due to fabric tightness. This is in heavy rotation at DM and commenters note this. Amusement, mirth, laughs all around. Some call this Megsy's caterpillar outfit.
You're welcome... and yes, she penned a tribute to Ruth Bader Ginsberg.
https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-ruth-bader-ginsburg-true-inspiration-to-me/
Spoof 'Meghan Markle for President 2020' website appears using her real quotes promising to bring 'equality, empowerment, and kindness' in the 'confrontational world we live in'.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8819627/Spoof-Meghan-Markle-President-2020-website-promises-world-equality-kindness.html#comments
Here's the website: https://www.meghanforpresident.com/
Yes, she did.
Following the sad news of Ginsburg's passing, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, has released a statement of condolence via her representatives. Duchess Meghan said, "With an incomparable and indelible legacy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg will forever be known as a woman of brilliance, a Justice of courage, and a human of deep conviction. She has been a true inspiration to me since I was a girl. Honour her, remember her, act for her."
William/Harry feud/rumour Diana's paternity & Lacey connections/royal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QZgdNDhrfs
I can't remember but did they try to use the late Ruth Bader Ginsberg? Thought I read that somewhere, Nutties.
In the eternal word of English pantomine:
`Oh, yes she did!'
Ostensibly it was tribute to RBG but really the aim was to `shine a light' on herself.
Perhaps we should all shout `She's behind you!' whenever a notable woman is in the news - MM is always lurking, ready to parasitise someone else's moment of attention.
Rebecca TaylorRoyal Correspondent'
Yahoo Style UKThu, 8 October 2020, 6:02 pm BST
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/fake-meghan-markle-for-president-website-encourages-spoil-ballots-170241757.html
------------------
Does this make sense to you, O Nutties?
Perhaps we should all shout `She's behind you!' whenever a notable woman is in the news - MM is always lurking, ready to parasitise someone else's moment of attention.
_____
Lol! So funny. I thought she did do something pertaining to RBG (just have a foggy brain right now...ugh).
Jaysus, whose next?-Rhetorical. :D :D I'm not giving her any ideas...
Is the Meghan for President site a spoof, or is it real via the sugars, and the DM is just exposing it to BRF and Parliament by characterizing it as such? It has stupid quotes but also donation button, comments (mostly negative” rolling in, and a Twitter account. Never underestimate a narcissist’s delusions or sociopathy, as you know. And remember she may still have money to burn. I won’t add “backers” or shall I?
By the way, I spoke today with the connected client who made the old uncle Gary comment. At the end of our conversation, using the new exposure of her rich dirty 2013 friend and his photos as my super smooth segue, lol, I asked about it. . He said uncle G would certainly know, as many do, the people who are “extremely aware of the life of” our wig & twigs write-in candidate. He also thinks “she can’t run much further, can she? She isn’t a businesswoman, she doesn’t see that her past is really at her side now, more mobile than she is.” And, “Hiring American PR was a great blunder.” Interpret as you will. He thinks there is no way back, for either of them, that they are clawing air, and the newspaper case will be “devastating, my god, so devastating. The lions await.”
So.....I suppose we’ll see.
Boris Johnson on #Earthshot Prize: "The @EarthshotPrize is a fantastic initiative by @KensingtonRoyal, bringing together some of the brightest minds to find solutions to some of the world’s greatest environmental problems."
Harry on #Earthshot Prize (while being the "least eco-friendly royal) : "... giving out prizes doesn't make any difference these days".
Send your biggest, boldest ideas to @kensingtonroyal and @earthshotprize."
Harry and Meghan Get an Apology After Suing Paparazzi
A celebrity news agency in Los Angeles also agreed to turn over photos of the couple’s young son and destroy its copies after a settlement in an invasion-of-privacy case.
https://tinyurl.com/y4nq2fw2
Slip of the MASK
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjLlMyg2NRo
Can anyone confirm that?
It was an easy 'win' for them and unfortunately celebrities who do draw a clear line about the privacy of being on private property have to keep challenging the intrusions. Many don't, so I suppose paps think it is worth the risk.
Thanks for the NYT link. It's interesting the article says the company will pay "a portion" of H&M's legal fees. Sounds like they didn't get a big payoff to me. What do others think?
All it may prove is that Doria wheeled a small child around the property and they got the court to make the agency destroy the photos. For all we know this was a M-Doria-H planned scam...pose with rental, too-small child with feminine features and dark hair, in oddly old toy car, make fuss, get agency Some press and then say they agreed to destroy the photos. So now lots of doubters will believe that have an Archie “because this case!” — and hurrah, they silence doubt and rumor for another six months until.....well, until who knows what. Until a suitable child can be found, unto they come up with more cover up, who knows.
I continue to believe there is no Archie with them, and any surrogate child is elsewhere— and that is the most I will be willing to believe. I still think a doll and extended insane prank are not out of the question.
I dispense with all logic at the Harkles’ gate.
.
"The filing allowed their lawyer, Michael J. Kump, to send fact-finding subpoenas to the three biggest celebrity news agencies in Los Angeles: Backgrid, Splash News and X17.
The culprit turned out to be X17, which, according to a settlement agreement filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, has agreed to turn over the photos to the family, destroy any copies in its archives or databases and never again traffic in any photos of the couple or their son taken by similar means “in any private residence or the surrounding private grounds.”
X17 will also pay a portion of the family’s legal fees, according to Mr. Kump."
"She's urged Meghan to shut down the critics," they told, "and prove her authenticity -------
Cue the screeching record needle scratch! There's Meghan's new favorite word! And now we know who really leaked that. I wonder what Victoria Beckham thinks of having her name used.
Victoria Beckham is said to be so close to Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle that the two often trade wisdom, with the former encouraging the latter to share more of her private life. (WISDOM!!.??? Ha Ha)
I have read that David Beckham is very desirous of a Knighthood - perhaps this is what the Queen has asked him and Victoria to do for the crown - get MM to make even more of a fool of herself!!!
I suppose at this point, I would have to pick..... Suitcase B: insane crazy pranking. As in, we can get away with it because who would believe we would even try? I think she definitely did the pillow routine and H and the BRF had no idea how to respond or deal with such bold lunacy. I think there were possibly her machinations for a baby, by her alone as the boss in the relationship, with her old network especially Markus. I think this why we heard of anger in Australia, and “is it mine?” from Hazza.
After this, either the mother declined, or something went wrong, or the Royals intervened and took the child to raise in a more stable, drug-free, anger-free environment. Maybe that is part of the one year review, which is why the review is still on: prove you can parent soberly.
If there is an Archie, I doubt that both parents’ genes are represented. I think someone in the BRF knows this. If no baby, how to keep hiding it in a fishbowl? I think it is why she ran; you can live in the UK and still make strong movie and entertainment connections.
I think there is a reason this child is never seen, and reason for the ludicrous publicity bits about his growth and skills that are regularly cycled, and a reason why Archie cannot socialize with other tots or join In play groups, I think Katherine McPhee’s upcoming baby is going to present a challenge to MM, from her lack of parental skills to excuses about not getting the kids together — until now, under Covid, he would have been so easy to hide from any LA visitors with excuses.
There are so many, many weird things that suggest no baby, or no natural baby of the body, exists. I can’t think of one single thing that says there is a definitely a baby who is theirs, even if he is included in BRF lists so far. As we have seen, the BRF are too easy to fool. Because really, who expects crazy?
Puds, thank you so much for posting those articles. Very interesting!
I thought so, too (that they looked fake). Therefore, consider me surprised.
*sigh*
I don't know what it all means. I don't know what anything means!
On the other hand, I did give my 4-year-old grandson some bright blue chalk to draw pictures on the driveway while I hung clothes up to dry (it was the first dry day in weeks). I turned around, and my vision was graced with what looked like big bright blue penises all over the driveway. "What's that a picture of?" I asked brightly. "That's my peepee!" he said. So, I have bright blue d*cks all over my driveway. Husband walked up from the barn, and said "Is that a...?" "Yes! It is a self-portrait of our youngest grandson's peepee." He looked over the rest of the driveway. "When is he going to daycare again?"
It forcefully occurs to me that if Archie is a year and a half old, there will be proof of life soon. Small active children can't be hidden well. If Duck Duck Rabbit Archie is real Archie (big assumption), then he is definitely active.
That obviously comes the day leaders as Obama, Bojo, Clinton praise William for the Earth shot Prize.
I DO NOT believe in coincidence ...
I’m guessing she was disappointed she had a boy when she had Archie, and she’ll be truly ticked off if she has another boy. Time’s running out, even if she is using a surrogate, plus they said they were only having two, but Meghan would get around that issue by saying the third child was a “surprise.”
At any rate, the older she gets, the less plausible it is to truly be pregnant or pretend to be pregnant
Blind Gossip had an item during the summer about monetizing Archie that made perfect sense to me.
Here’s the item:
Blind Gossip
Baby Needs To Start Earning
August 27, 2020
While this actress continues to put herself in the headlines on a regular basis, have you noticed that something has been missing for the past few months?
Her baby.
While she continuously pleads for privacy and talks about safety… it turns out those are not the primary reasons you haven’t seen her and her husband’s child!
“She believes that any appearance of the baby has significant value. She has been trying for months to strike a deal for a cover story for $2M+, but nobody has been wiling to pay that.”
“This is very frustrating for them. It used to be the family disapproval that stopped them from using the baby to make money, but that is not the problem any more. Now it’s the economy.”
It’s so sad that no one will pay them what they want. What they want, they should get!
“If she can’t get that deal done, she will find another use for the baby. One thought is a new photo/video to draw millions of followers when they launch their new social media site. Another is to do a staged appearance in conjunction with one of their projects.”
Which project? Who knows! Actress and Hubby have been jumping on and off so many bandwagons over the past few months that it’s getting a little hard to keep track of it all.
Their original plans went out the window, so at this point it’s just a series of weirdly random appearances accompanied by a lot of word salad.
In any case, $2M is a big ask.
Perhaps they are justifying that price by saying it will be donated to charity?
Perhaps to one of their own “charities”?
Hey, they need to start pulling in some money any way they can. Mansions don’t pay for themselves, you know, and neither of them has a real job.
Baby needs to start earning!
I’m guessing she was disappointed she had a boy when she had Archie, and she’ll be truly ticked off if she has another boy. Time’s running out, even if she is using a surrogate, plus they said they were only having two, but Meghan would get around that issue by saying the third child was a “surprise.”
At any rate, the older she gets, the less plausible it is to truly be pregnant or pretend to be pregnant
Blind Gossip had an item during the summer about monetizing Archie that made perfect sense to me.
Here’s the item:
Blind Gossip
Baby Needs To Start Earning
August 27, 2020
While this actress continues to put herself in the headlines on a regular basis, have you noticed that something has been missing for the past few months?
Her baby.
While she continuously pleads for privacy and talks about safety… it turns out those are not the primary reasons you haven’t seen her and her husband’s child!
“She believes that any appearance of the baby has significant value. She has been trying for months to strike a deal for a cover story for $2M+, but nobody has been wiling to pay that.”
“This is very frustrating for them. It used to be the family disapproval that stopped them from using the baby to make money, but that is not the problem any more. Now it’s the economy.”
It’s so sad that no one will pay them what they want. What they want, they should get!
“If she can’t get that deal done, she will find another use for the baby. One thought is a new photo/video to draw millions of followers when they launch their new social media site. Another is to do a staged appearance in conjunction with one of their projects.”
Which project? Who knows! Actress and Hubby have been jumping on and off so many bandwagons over the past few months that it’s getting a little hard to keep track of it all.
Their original plans went out the window, so at this point it’s just a series of weirdly random appearances accompanied by a lot of word salad.
In any case, $2M is a big ask.
Perhaps they are justifying that price by saying it will be donated to charity?
Perhaps to one of their own “charities”?
Hey, they need to start pulling in some money any way they can. Mansions don’t pay for themselves, you know, and neither of them has a real job.
Baby needs to start earning!
Draw flowers, draw monkeys, draw anything but DO NOT draw pee pee’s.
Sorry kiddo, I am not putting this one up on my fridge!!!!!!!!
Swampwoman - I noticed that the paps did not get the Fosters. How is it that we know they had dinner together? Perhaps the photos are from when they came in but not leaving?
The other thing I noticed was that she was just ever so slightly behind him or close to parallel but not shoving in front of him.
If H is returning secretly to the UK for a few days at a time, then wouldn't that "reset the clock" on his visa?
I think I saw something posted about that possibility somewhere but I cannot find it now.
Anybody else remember something about that? He could so easily take a private jet, fly in "somewhere" in the UK, stay the few days needed and then jet back.
When my son was that age we were riding in the car with my FIL when suddenly the boy yells "Grandpa, my penis is getting bigger!". Fortunately Grandpa was hard of hearing.
IF YOU LOVE A GOOD MYSTERY/EXCELLENT AT KEYBOARD RESEARCH. HERES YOUR CHALLENGE
To all you deep dive researchers--there was a pap photo right around the time they moved to LA, taken in front of Doria's house. It was of an older black man and I think he was unloading some toys from the trunk of a car (?). IIRC he was black and there was speculation that he had toys for his own grandchild and he was a relative of Doria. The photo was only up for a very short time, maybe a day, because it wasn't considered interesting (no Archie, etc, just Doria and a relative). I've searched and can't find it but I know I saw it.
"If her plan was to monetize little Archie, why didn't she agree to a title for her son (not to mention a proper name and not a nickname). I think she could get a lot more for pictures of HRH Prince Archibald of Wales than of plain old Archie..."
I'm pretty sure Archie was not offered a title although the spin is that he was and H&M turned it down. As to why "Archie," who the heck knows. As an American I'd think the name would remind her of either the comic book character or TV's Archie Bunker. Or at best her dead childhood cat. (I'd not name a child after a pet but maybe people do.)
If H is returning secretly to the UK for a few days at a time, then wouldn't that "reset the clock" on his visa?
I think I saw something posted about that possibility somewhere but I cannot find it now.
Anybody else remember something about that? He could so easily take a private jet, fly in "somewhere" in the UK, stay the few days needed and then jet back.
Yes, I read that too but can't recall if it was a comment under an article or in the article itself! If Hazard has been back to the UK - I doubt we'd ever know.
Does the Queen have a sense of humour or what?!
A full-blown narcissist would still be holding a grudge about that. Maybe the name Archie itself was something the parents came up with while plotting revenge over a bottle of Tig?
I was reading Lady C's `People of Colour and the Royals' in the small hours and discovered that Lady Davina Windsor, daughter of Richard, Duke of Gloucester, married a Kiwi of Maori origin and their son is called Tane Mahuta.
My immediate reaction was `They named him after a tree????????'
Indeed, there is a magnificent kauri of that name in North Island (location marked on Google Earth) but, to be fair, the tree is named after the god of the forest, so I imagine the child is as well.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Tane+Mahuta&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBGB890GB890&oq=Tane+Mahuta&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Davina & husband have since divorced, citing `cultural differences'.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6815659/EDEN-CONFIDENTIAL-Lady-Davina-Windsors-14-year-marriage-Maori-sheep-shearer-husband-ends.html
Byw, Tane Mahuta is a very impressive specimen; kauris presumably were the source of the gum that gave Lepage's gum its distinctive smell/taste , if any older British Nutties remember that product. I was a kid at the time and would get covered in the stuff.
I cautiously tasted the fresh gum that I got on my fingers a few years ago when in NZ - what a memory! Much of the commercial source of the gum was dug up in ancient lumps from deposits near Dargaville:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dargaville
Is this the photo you were referring to?
https://www.alamy.com/los-angeles-ca-exclusive-doria-raglands-half-brother-joffrey-ragland-is-spotted-dropping-off-supplies-at-meghan-markles-mothers-los-angeles-home-on-easter-sunday-joffrey-arrived-at-dorias-house-with-a-woman-and-baby-he-carried-several-items-into-the-house-and-left-observing-las-stay-at-home-order-there-was-no-sign-of-doria-or-meghan-pictured-joffrey-ragland-backgrid-usa-12-april-2020-byline-must-read-backgrid-usa-1-310-798-9111-usasales@backgridcom-uk-44-208-344-2007-uksales@backgridcom-uk-clients-pictures-containing-children-please-pixela-image352969293.html
That we do not see security in the photo does not mean that they were not there, but that would have been a giveaway to the photographer that it was actually Archie.
Otherwise, who are the child and woman?
Forget his name, but Doria's half brother is about the same age as Meghan, lives in LA and is a graphic designer.
.There was a pap photo right around the time they moved to LA, taken in front of Doria's house. It was of an older black man and I think he was unloading some toys from the trunk of a car?
@Mustysphone
Could this be part of the picture ? Taken at Easter time
Los Angeles, CA -
*EXCLUSIVE* - Doria Ragland’s half brother Joffrey Ragland is spotted dropping off supplies at Meghan Markle’s mother’s Los Angeles home on Easter Sunday
https://images.app.goo.gl/qhZytPt9CNnha9m46
https://www.alamy.com/los-angeles-ca-
exclusive-doria-raglands-half-brother-joffrey-ragland-is-spotted-dropping-off-supplies-at-meghan-markles-mothers-los-angeles-home-on-easter-sunday-joffrey-arrived-at-dorias-house-with-a-woman-and-baby-he-carried-several-items-into-the-house-and-left-observing-las-stay-at-home-order-there-was-no-sign-of-doria-or-meghan-pictured-joffrey-ragland-backgrid-usa-12-april-2020-byline-must-read-backgrid-usa-1-310-798-9111-usasales@backgridcom-uk-44-208-344-2007-uksales@backgridcom-uk-clients-pictures-containing-children-please-pixela-image352969289.html
One is worth looking at closely as you can see a separation pattern in the child’s darker curly hair, which seems very unlike the hair of Fauxchie. The woman has the back of her head to the camera, and stands to the far left of the image, holding the child. Sweet little child, but, not Fauxchie, though possibly the child in the Doria/toy car images the German outlet ran.
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/10/asia/black-gold-hair-products-forced-labor-xinjiang/
Anything even slightly "off" about him is due to his mother being disappointed in him (for being male?) and wanting to punish him. And her figuring that if she couldn't get the publicity she wanted, at least she could have some notoriety.
Archie will never be able to look up news stories of his birth and see that a nation was proud of him and wished him well. It will just be story after story about his parents' odd demands for privacy -- and many pages of archived comments wondering if he even exists.
He will never be able to see a name that points back to noble ancestors (unless we count the "Harrison"). But he will learn that his mother once had a pet with his name.
He will notice that loaded diaper one day and realize that his mother thought it was okay to show him to the world that way.
This is pure narc devaluation and Meghan did it to a baby. Presumably her own baby.
One of the main reasons Archie isn’t seen is that Meghan is still hoping to monetize him, especially by selling photos of him. We all know that as a narcissist, ALL people, including her own child, are objects to be used and then discarded if they cease to be useful. Yes, even Archie, whom I think will be shoved aside if Meghan manages to produce a baby girl in 2021 or 2022.
_________
This is why she is is keeping him/Merchie/Fauxie very well hid (American slang) Merchie is her supreme product placement to be shown very sparingly in Backgrid Paps and Netflix.
Dumb Harry was her prize. Now it is the alleged Merchie/Archie. No wonder Hapless was and is an accessory meaning Royal sperm donor. Though figure in his most not-attractive balding pate and his kidnapped look on screen. Haps is her controlled zombie reject except for his British title.
My understanding is that Archie was never offered a title. Like the Wessexes, their son can use the 'subsidary titles' of his father, which would be Archie, Earl of Dumbarton or Archie, Baron Kilkeel.
Does the Queen have a sense of humour or what?!
A full-blown narcissist would still be holding a grudge about that. Maybe the name Archie itself was something the parents came up with while plotting revenge over a bottle of Tig?
@Sandie: I think you may be right about HMTQ never offering Archie a title and the Sussexes putting forth the story that they wanted no title for him so he can grow up normal and live a private life. I’m calling B.S. on that story.
However, if Charles eventually takes the throne, then Archie will become Prince Archie because he will be the grandson of the King. I hope Charles never takes the throne because I think be is weak and will not improve the standing of the monarchy. I think he will further weaken it .
I am hoping HMTQ outlives Charles and William becomes the next monarch. Archie will never become a prince and neither will any of Archie’s siblings, which will irk Meghan to no end.
I also think William will be a top notch King and Kate will be an excellent Queen Consort, thus renewing the vitality and respectability of the British monarchy, which for the moment, has been heavily damaged by Harry, Meghan, and Prince Andrew.
Anything even slightly "off" about him is due to his mother being disappointed in him (for being male?) and wanting to punish him. And her figuring that if she couldn't get the publicity she wanted, at least she could have some notoriety.
Archie will never be able to look up news stories of his birth and see that a nation was proud of him and wished him well. It will just be story after story about his parents' odd demands for privacy -- and many pages of archived comments wondering if he even exists.
He will never be able to see a name that points back to noble ancestors (unless we count the "Harrison"). But he will learn that his mother once had a pet with his name.
He will notice that loaded diaper one day and realize that his mother thought it was okay to show him to the world that way.
This is pure narc devaluation and Meghan did it to a baby. Presumably her own baby.
______
This! Brilliantly stated. I feel sad for him (if he exists).
I feel very sorry for the child If there is one, at this point. And perhaps that is partly why I slide to Team No Baby or Team Baby Being Raised By Surrogate/Guardians.
If there is a child, and the child is with them in their custody, nothing, no amount of whining or Diana tears, absolves JH from allowing this child to be raised in isolation fro house to house, except for merching photo pops, even before they fled, even before Covid.
Feeling so tired of the infantilism of this man and his petulance as he drags around as a depressed, envious, weak, whining man in rumpled clothes who is a father approaching 40, living in family-money with a bossy narcissist who things she can be president.
Poor, poor Fauxchie.
An Anon on Tumblr just brought up the news that someone named "Katharine McPhee" living in Los Angeles, CA, who describes her job as either "actor," "singer," or "self-employed" has donated thousands to the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
I don't know whether I believe it. The donations total only 3,000 US dollars -- and if McPhee were really a Republican supporter, surely she would have donated a lot more than that.
On the other hand, if it's a prank, it's an expensive one. Three thousand dollars may be chump change to Mrs. David Foster, but a lot for average Joes and Janes.
Then there's the very slim third possibility that there is another woman named Katharine McPhee who lives in Los Angeles and sings and acts.
I really, really want the first scenario to be true, just to see what happens to Meghan's narrative!
https://twitter.com/_emmahinchliffe/status/1314577196279832577
This will be part of our @FortuneMPW Next Gen Summit next week! It's a private event for rising women leaders, but we'll cover the session (and press can register).
Give me strength. She's everywhere! :(
I don't think anyone could see much in favour of this interpretation back then but is it worth thinking about again now?
Also, on another occasion, I wondered if the child had been conceived, born (not necessarily to her) and kept in the US - we have never been shown a convincingly alive child in the UK nor Canada. `Dead-frog' Archie of the pap-photos on the Bear trail, or whatever it was called, being nothing more than a stuffed onesie and the pretty child in the pompom hat being the daughter of a friend, photo having been taken in Turkey, IMO.
I was always suspicious of the name "Archie". Yes, I know birth certificate and all that but "Archie" isn't a royal name at all. Nor is Harrison. I wonder if it was a place holder name or a cover name and the real child is named something more suitable.
Or its the name you give your child when you're high as a kite.
@Mimi. A dear friend once said, with apologies to the late Jerry Garcia, "Kids, what a trip!"
@Ron. Good point about merching. Remember the merching/advertisement they appeared to make with H&M on the SA tour? Perhaps that is why no showing of Archie in anything merchable.
@Sandie. It was thought at the time no title was offered and they were given the chance to save face by refusing one. The tint theory was the baby is genetically Harry and MeMes but carried by surrogate. So genetically a royal but not "legally" so. But I don't really buy this theory as no titles is one thing but still given a place in succession is another. Unless HM believed they'd never have to go to the 7th in line so....
that photo isn't the one I'm remembering. the one I remember was from the back, showing the man unloading the trunk. it could be from the same batch. what was interesting was the "dropping off of supplies" as I seem to remember lots of baby things. but I could be wrong.
I also think William will be a top notch King and Kate will be an excellent Queen Consort, thus renewing the vitality and respectability of the British monarchy, which for the moment, has been heavily damaged by Harry, Meghan, and Prince Andrew.
----------------
Quite. There is a big difference, however, between H&M and Andrew. Andrew has been in the background and wasn't even in Beatrice's wedding photos. He's been keeping a very low profile, as he should. The other two have been pushing themselves to the front with their (unwanted) non stop videos and messages.
In honour of #WorldMentalHealthDay, Harry and Meghan joined the @TeenagerTherapy
podcast for a discussion about prioritising mental health, removing the stigma around the issue, and how we can all contribute to a healthier world: physically, mentally, emotionally, holistically.
https://twitter.com/TeenagerTherapy/status/1314575370511806465
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle set to make their podcast debut on World Mental Health Day as they talk with teenagers about 'removing stigma' and 'contributing to a healthier world'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8823863/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-talk-removing-stigma-mental-health-teenagers.html
Thanks!
I'm on Team Surrogate myself. I think the Harkles have custody, but leave all the childcare to someone else.
On another topic Sophie, the Countess of Wessex is self-isolating at home after coming into contact with someone who was tested positive for Covid.
Re the photo of Archie and Harry in Canada, I think he does look like MM as a baby. Compare the photo in Canada with a photo of MM as a baby:
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/reports/a30592341/archie-canada/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6916877/Meghan-Markles-photograph.html - scroll down, MM is sitting on a bench in a white top and red leggings.
The Canada photo might be of Turkey instead but the light and the sky are more like what yo see in Scotland (or Canada).
I think she probably used a surrogate but the child is genetically theirs.
Indeed she is. Here's another planned appearance.
From Omid Scobie: "In honour of World Mental Health Day Harry and Meghan joined the @TeenagerTherapy podcast for a discussion about prioritising mental health, removing the stigma around the issue, and how we can all contribute to a healthier world: physically,mentally, emotionally,holistically.
The Sussexes learned about @TeenagerTherapy from a recent @nytimes article.'They listened to a few episodes and were so impressed with the show and the grace and honesty of the young hosts,' says a source. 'They knew immediately that they wanted to support their important work.' "
Guess now they're searching the papers for their next appearances!
I agree with your concise assessment of Prince Charles. But he also seems to take many years -- maybe even decades -- to win people over. If he had become King in the 2000s, he might be reaping those fruits of goodwill today. We'd still be a tad critical of his parenting of Prince Harry . . . but only in the muted way that people are critical of the Queen's parenting of Charles and Andrew. And Andrew is probably worse than Harry in everything except whinging to the media.
(Camilla as Princess Consort would have helped a lot. After the War of the Waleses, I expected to loathe her forever . . . and now I love her a little more every month!)
As things stand, I think King Charles III will have a short reign, during which he will get blamed for a lot of things that aren't his fault, just because he isn't his mother. Future historians will be much fairer to him. And I think his son and grandson, when they each take their turns, will generously point out that a lot of their projects are an extension of something he started while he was still the Prince of Wales.
You can have dual citizenship but I have never heard of anyone having more than two. Even dual citizenship is discouraged for legal reasons.
----------------
You certainly can legally have three nationalities and I don't know why dual citizenship would be discouraged, especially 'for legal reasons'(?). I know quite a few people with dual and triple nationality. This is perfectly legal in the UK. Some countries, though, don't allow or recognise dual nationality.
As for Harry possibly flying back and forth to the UK in order to renew his visitor visa, as others have mentioned, if this is what the case, then that can only be a temporary measure. If so, he's only ever a visitor, not a 'resident' as far as the immigration authorities are concerned.
"Why would H need to fly back to the UK to reset his visa? He is a citizen of UK."
Well, we don't really know that. But for a host of reasons he most likely doesn't have a Permanent Resident Card ("green card") for the US. So his visa likely requires him to leave and many visas require the holder to return to his home country. As a citizen of the UK he'd qualify for the Visa Waiver Program but that only allows visits of 90 days or less.
Why would H need to fly back to the UK to reset his visa? He is a citizen of UK. You cannot give up your citizenship without attaining another first (my understanding). You can have dual citizenship but I have never heard of anyone having more than two. Even dual citizenship is discouraged for legal reasons.
I think the poster you are replying to means Harry's visa to the United States.
I spent six years in Japan on a guest worker visa. My visa was a full-time employment visa vouched for by the Ministry of Education, so I did not have to leave the country to renew. I had the paperwork from my local board of education in order. Other types of visas, such as temporary employment visas, tourist visas or provisional spousal visas have to be reapplied for at an American consulate *outside of the U.S.* This is to prevent temporary guest visa holders from overstaying their welcome. They can reapply, but there is a limit on the number of consecutive days that these types of visas are good for. Harry need not fly all the way back to London to reapply . . .he could go back to Vancouver and get it done there, or go to Mexico, or probably get it done in the British Virgin Islands. He has to be outside of American soil to reapply for another visa. I suppose this gives the host country right of refusal to issue another, but usually these visa renewals are just routine bureaucratic paperwork.
For Harry, there are additional issues of tax liability in the U.S. as he approaches cut-off date after which he will have to declare all his income, foreign and domestic, to the IRS. Can a British Nutty clarify for me if the Royals are required to pay the Inland Revenue . .or whatever the new name is? If so, Harry is on the hook for the tax man in two countries. The U.S. will have a piece of his British wealth and presumably the Inland Revenue can also take a chunk of his Netflix megamillions--which you can bet Uncle Sam will be taking a keen interest in also.
Any sane adult person would take advice from his accountants before plunging headlong into such a convoluted tax situation which is not going to be to his benefit at all. But of course Harry wouldn't have. I don't think Hazza can do basic maths even. But it's a sure thing that Meg is going to protect *her* financial interests while draining Harry to a dry husk. He will be a broke and a broken man before she's done, and the process has already started.
I look at Harry as someone like Britney Spears--the pop princess suffered an infamous breakdown 13 years ago brought on by severe mental illness and substance addiction. Britney's 39 years old now and is still deemed mentally unable to manage her own life in any respect. She spends most of her time twirling around her living room in skimpy costumes and posting videos on TikTok. It's very sad. If she didn't have the money she's got, that's paying for her to be babysat inside her lavish California mansion, I think Britney would be institutionalized. I wonder the same about Harry.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8823807/amp/Congressman-demands-UK-government-strip-Meghan-Harry-titles-election-interference.html
Yes, in light of 'Archie' coming out a boy, her 'embryonic kicking of feminism' comment makes her sound like a real mug. She had definitely primed everyone for a girl baby, including an awful lot of pink at that baby shower, though I do remember seeing some blue peeking out of the gift bags too.
That she seemed *so sure* of a girl lends credence, in my view, to there having been a surrogacy arrangement with a mother who was confirmed to be expecting a girl . . that for one reason or other, went sideways. There might have been a miscarriage, which would have been very sad. Or the legal adoption of such a child was derailed. To me the best case scenario would be the intervention of the BRF made sure that any child conceived by such means was cared for by competent and loving people--either the baby's own mother or another loving adoptive family. The extreme weirdness surrounding Archie convinces me that if a child called Archie exists, he is not of Harry's body. Otherwise--if this child were a bona fide Royal Windsor baby, I would suppose that the Family would be more visibly enthusiastic about him and would have ensured that he remained in the UK where he could be protected and raised properly.
If Archie is truly in the line of succession, then is he not, technically speaking, a ward of the British State? Harry is an adult and has willingly given up residency in the UK, but it boggles belief that the Queen would be so cavalier about allowing one of her most vulnerable heirs to be spirited away (kidnapped, why don't we say) and held hostage in a series of unstable living arrangements in North America, with two people who are demonstrably too emotionally unstable to be fit parents?
I accept that Meg has willfully generated maximum theatre around this child, including all the peekaboo with the Bump gymnastics and showing us pieces and parts of a baby and keeping everything 'secret'. But surely even she can see that it is not in her interest at all to present 3, 4, 5 completely different renditions of 'Archie'--I'm not counting the dolls here--and expect her motherhood to remain unquestioned? For him to be her ace in the hole ,he has to be an *unquestioned* heir to the British crown--Harry's lineage. Never mind his paternity; she's got the world questioning whether he even exists.
*The deaths being reported now are backlogged reports from other counties where our residents died. Florida has some *very* good treatments (now) BUT the Regeneron treatment looks to be curative.
Also, on another occasion, I wondered if the child had been conceived, born (not necessarily to her) and kept in the US - we have never been shown a convincingly alive child in the UK nor Canada. `Dead-frog' Archie of the pap-photos on the Bear trail, or whatever it was called, being nothing more than a stuffed onesie and the pretty child in the pompom hat being the daughter of a friend, photo having been taken in Turkey, IMO.
There was something definitely hinkey about that NYC baby shower jaunt. So many things. She flew over on the Clooneys' private plane with Amal. George Clooney was among the guests, but it is unclear whether he was aboard from the UK or if he was already in New York. The couple has a bunch of homes all over the place. Markus Anderson was there too . . of course he was, because he is one of the lynchpins of this whole enterprise. It is not usual at all for guys to attend a baby shower, usually, unless it is a shower for the expectant couple and the father is present. These are getting more popular, but the usual custom is for the father-to-be to clear off and spend the afternoon with his mates or off doing something and then turn up at the end of the party with flowers for his blooming partner. Baby shower games and such . .just not that much fun for a guy. These are very estrogen-centric affairs.
Seeing as Meg left her 'fetus' in the hotel room in order to go out on the town drinking, this makes me think the weekend had an ulterior motive .. maybe like picking up a newborn? Flying home on a private jet would be handy in that case. This was at the end of February, 10 weeks before she allegedly gave birth in May. Even those who believe that she legitimately gave birth to Archie when she says she did need to explain why her stomach was as flat as a pancake on that Saturday night in February, and she was trying to hide her lack of bump behind a huge handbag. Arriving and leaving the Mark that weekend, she sported a cute little basketball bump. Only to balloon like the Octomom a week later in Morocco in the 100K designer caftan.
Maybe the surrogate child was 'kept here' and has never actually been anywhere in the UK, including when he was presented to the Queen and christened at Windsor. That would certainly go a ways toward explaining the wording on the birth announcement to the effect that 'we heard through the grapevine that a child has been born' issued by the Palace.
Ambushed by the press while on engagement, William and Catherine tried to express happiness at Harry's fatherhood without out and out lying through their teeth. It was very painful to watch. If you are correct and Archie has never been outside of the United States, where he was born to a mum who was not Meghan, then his meeting a constant stream of celebrity and Royal visitors to the unfinished Frogmore Cottage is likewise a packet of lies, innit.
😂
Sorry don't know how to post s link and apologies if this has been posted already.
I hate her favourite draped over the shoulders jacket look.
OMG @SwampWoman... Your grandson chalk peepee story is hilarious- thanks for sharing!!
I told son that his youngest was either a budding artist or a future U.S. Marine (grin).
Harry is probably a low-key (non publicized) green card holder at this point. (Perm resident). This allows him to come and go freely and would have been easy to get being married to a US Citizen, Meghan. It takes about a year to get.
Meghan's status in the UK is unclear, I think they rushed her leave-to-remain status, which she can keep for a few years.
Harry, of course, will never become a citizen of the US, and likewise for Meghan of the Uk.
Considering their 'elevated' status, I don't think they really thought through the implications of their marriage in legal terms.
I've been through both processes myself a US Citizen, and my husband a UK citizen.
I suppose MM had a spouse visa and then could apply for indefinite leave to remain. Her indefinite leave, however, will lapse if she stays outside the UK for 2 or more years at a time. Let's hope...
If it takes a year to get a green card, Harry is at most halfway through the residency requirement. The process could have been expedited for him, of course, but actually I would expect his Royal status to present more of a hindrance than a help in that regard.
England is a friendly nation and ally, but Harry is not by any stretch just a regular citizen of the United Kingdom. His grandmother is a foreign head of state and Harry is both prince and Counsellor of State. Granting permanent residency at this very early stage to the blood relative of a foreign power might be problematic on a number of levels. I'm sure the State Department would have had to have been in contact with the Palace in this matter, lest extending Harry permanent residency in the U.S. create a potentially diplomatically sticky situation. It will be a matter for the Queen and Parliament to sort out whether it is permissible for a blood royal and counselor of State be a permanent resident in the U.S. Harry is likely going to have to choose--permanent residency in America OR his place in the line of succession. Also, what happens to Harry's green card status presuming he has it now or will get it in the near future if his American wife divorces him? He must be prepared to show a means of support in the U.S. I don't see Hazza making a go of it in the States if Meg casts him out of of Mudslide Manor.
I hate her favourite draped over the shoulders jacket look.
If she actually *wears* the jacket, she can't merch what's underneath.
Meg and I are the same height. So it amuses me no end when I see her attempting to wear clothes that have been manufactured for somebody the height of Catherine or Charlize Theron. Meg considers herself to be a 'supermodel' . . only, supermodels aren't 5'4" tall.
Harry was happy even if Meghan wasn't.
"Harry is probably a low-key (non publicized) green card holder at this point. (Perm resident). This allows him to come and go freely and would have been easy to get being married to a US Citizen, Meghan. It takes about a year to get."
Maybe. In addition to the points Hikari made though, if it wasn't expedited do we really think last Oct Harry was busily applying for permanent residence in the US even prior to the "6-week" sabbatical and before a hint of the 6 months in, 6 months out "North America," UK proposal? Secure in the knowledge the monarchy wouldn't find out? I sort of doubt that.
Above is one of many articles regarding dual citizenship disadvantages and why its discouraged. Below is other pros and cons of dual citizenship.
Thanks for the above info but this is from an American point of view. On the whole, there are advantages to having dual nationality.
Apart from the fact that we know a girl baby belonging to one of Harry’s pals has an identical hat, I was convinced Harry was holding a girl after I’d checked out the differences between male and female skull. (Previously, I was thinking of the work of the Centre for Anatomy and Human Identification, University of Dundee but gave the wrong name – I’d meant Prof. Sue Black).
Anyway, the Smithsonian explains it perfectly, as one would expect:
https://naturalhistory.si.edu/sites/default/files/media/file/wibskeletonmaleorfemalefinal.pdf
In this instance, the chin that's critical. Pointed chins are rare in males and square ones in females, assuming that nothing has gone awry in the individual’s development.
Apparently, the first comment ever to be made about my appearance came from the nurse who showed me to my mother - once she’d deigned to enter the delivery room and untangled me from the cord.
`You’ve got a really determined one here.’ She said. `Just look at that chin!’
Yes, it's quite pointed. Mind you, according to Mum, I’d already demonstrated my determination to survive, coughing and spluttering, trying to fight free on my own.
Btw, Generally, I can also tell the sex of most dogs or cats from the face alone, without looking underneath.