If you throw a coin up in the air 100 times, you would expect it to come up "heads" somewhere in the area of 50 times, based on the laws of probability.
Life never goes as expected, of course, so in your real-life experiment, it's quite possible that heads would come up 40 times or 60 times.
On an unusual day, it might come up 30 or 70 times.
How, then, can it be that Meghan and Harry's coin comes up tails every single time?
It's statistically improbable, almost impossible, but they never seem to do anything right.
Own goals
Having been away from the Sussex story for awhile due to a work-related focus on the US presidential election, I quickly skimmed developments from the past week or two and found myself shaking my head at fiasco after fiasco.
Harry's made the most prominent own goals - from popping up on a lowbrow reality show (Britain's "Strictly Come Dancing"), to a self-pitying PR campaign about how the Royals refused to leave a Remembrance Day memorial wreath on his behalf, to bringing a celebrity photographer to a graveyard on Veterans' Day to shoot him looking solemn and wearing all his (mostly) unearned but shiny decorations.
Meghan was, comparatively, less obnoxious, although one has to assume her advice was behind some of Harry's dumb initiatives.
Little hope for PR hires
Meghan's media instincts are reliably bad, which means there's not much hope for her latest PR hire Christine Schirmer, a "top PR" woman with a cv that includes roles at Pinterest and Apple.
Since Meg is known for being unwilling to listen to advice, why such a supposedly successful PR presence would want to work with the Sussexes - and how they will get the money to pay her - is an open question.
(There's also the possibility that this particular hire may be one of those empty suits that goes from corporation role to corporation role, interviewing well enough to land top jobs but failing to produce much.
Schirmer has a remarkably empty LinkedIn profile for a woman working in the tech industry in San Francsico, and even her Pinterest page is meager, considering she worked there for 6 years.
She did attend Meghan's university, and online databases describe her as 44 years old, the same age Meghan is rumored to be. Some reports say they were members of the same sorority; could they have known each other at university?)
Magic bullet
A few stories about the PR hire suggest that Meg knows the Sussexes are no longer a "golden couple" (if they ever were) and that they will have to work harder to attract attention.
Yet strangely, they still seem reluctant to bring out their "magic bullet" which would guarantee them some immediate positive publicity - their son Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, supposedly around 18 months old right now, and entirely unseen for at least six months.
Why is that? And why are there never any signs of Archie in the Sussexes' multiple videos from home?
As many other media parents working from home have discovered, children do tend to turn up in work-from-home online appearances.
Not only does Archie never appear and is never heard in the background, but there are no stray toys, crayoned walls, or juice stains on the white furniture, the sort of things with which parents of "real" children are quite familiar.
If the Sussexes want a publicity "win", or at least something resembling one, their best approach is probably to bring out Archie.
If they can.
Comments
I don't have a legal background and am trying to understand point 11:
The defence to this claim will not rely to any great extent on evidence from witnesses
to particular events. [ are the witnesses the 'famous five'?] In the main, it depends on allegations about the claimant’s own
behaviour, and documents.[what 'behaviour'?]
Also, T Markle "has been identified as a potential witness for the defendant." Potential? Then Warby says "I had wondered quite how
important Mr Markle’s evidence really was to the defence case." Very important, I would have thought. The he goes on to talk about TM' "subjective thoughts". Aren't Megalo's subjective??
Sorry if my questions sound stupid...
12yrs old was the year his mother died. He wants that Diana association.
Mobile phones in the 1990s were grown up things. It wasn't the norm to give your children or teens mobiles. Everyone still used landlines or pay phones. Instead you gave them pagers.
His father's staff would have had mobiles, but not him.
Harry was very publicly acting out. He was badly behaved at his local pubs in Gloucestershire and when he was in London he was also badly behaved. Paps knew were to find him because that's what paps do. No need to phone hack when he went to the same places every time.
His original writ said it was Chelsy's phone that was hacked. Did she tell him to leave her out of this?
Chelsy was horrendously stalked by the paps to a degree that almost matched his mother's harrassment, where is his energy for her suffering?
@Rasperry
I agree, I comment via my phone,
slowly going blind!!
No way would I compose letters/documents
in Notes.
@Enbreth
Calligraphlie
Brilliant! I grew up in a bubble where composing poetry was a normal thing to do, but it has been years since I encountered a bard and especially such a talented one.
----
Manaki Neko, Thanks for the Lesotho photo I hadn't seen it before. He certainly was hirsute in all the visible hairy places. Perhaps it all depends on the light. I'm still not convinced though that there's not a double involved.
Harry's bearing these days doesn't seem very military - the undoubted one stands around `like a half-shut knife ', to use another felicitous saying of my husband's. Could that constitute another `tell' when it comes to the supposed double.
------
It's at the stage where `if you're not confused, you don't understand the situation' - for someone who claims not to `have a voice' she makes a remarkable amount of noise.
---------------
The letter strikes me as a stinking pile of self-justification and passive aggression - nothing conciliatory or apologetic about it at all. If she was told to make up with her dad, she's used it as an excuse for an attack.
Straight out of the Narcissist's Playbook.
https://reachoutrecovery.com/the-narcissists-playbook/
@Sandie, thank you, you’re very kind.
I ain’t no bard, just enjoy extracting the urine
from our *Mokita Megs.
*Mokita: Papua New Guinea/Kivila language.
“ The truth we all know, but agree
to not talk about?”
Much like the papers?
Thanks so much for the redacted court doc info.
I agree the reporting of the "quite rightly" comment makes it sound sinister. But I don't think it really was, especially seeing the judge's words.
He may be drinking M's Kool aid. But from a non-lawyer perspective I think the judge is saying the legal case for copyright violation against ANL doesn't revolve around Thomas's reasons for giving the letter to the MoS. Personally, I think moral questions do, but from a legal perspective his actions aren't central. His role might matter so far as the privacy violation charge goes but with the latest revelations from her side that M had input writing the letter and that she "expected" the letter to be made public, it seems to me that charge is rapidly weakening.
- initially claimed exclusive ownership of the letter content. Now claims KP staff contributed to it
- initially claimed privacy violation. Now claims she wrote "anticipating the letter would be made public"
- initially claimed "very few" had known about the letter. Now claims she herself approached at least two members of the royal family regarding the letter. (I saw that she approached Charles, Camilla, Jane, Eugenie who all advised she should get in touch with her father)
- initially categorically and vehemently denied any involvement with FF. Now admits she has authorised a "mutual friend" to share at least one aspect of her private life with Scobie and Durand
- initially claimed she texted and called her father, then that he didn't own the phone, now appears to return to her original statement.
Perjury or what?
Megsy always plays the victim and deflects responsibility for what she says and does. It is not surprising that she now infers that she wrote the letter on the advice of two senior members of Harry's family, and that she was assisted by a senior member of KP staff that is now working for the Cambridges. But, these revelations have been couched in ambiguous language.
As for copyright, it is accepted and legal practice to give credit to the source of ideas and information that are not your own. This case is most interesting as a person would not normally cite references in a private letter, but she seems to be admitting in an obscure way that she did receive assistance from staff and did refer to media articles without acknowledging sources, but then insists it is all her original creation.
She needs to blame someone else for the mess because she is always the victim, but she also needs to assert that the letter was private and confidential and her creation because that is the whole basis of her lawsuit, and she needs to create a cover story just in case she does have to hand over all her emails and texts and cannot make the damaging ones disappear before that date.
This is Harry's ideal woman ... the great love of his life for whom he has given up everything. Why did he seriously date Chelsea and Cressida then, and look happy doing so? They are very different women.
I agree that 'having a reason' to ignore the law with regard to copyright is not relevant and so the testimony of Thomas is not crucial for the defence. Also, Thomas could have defended himself without reproducing such a huge chunk of the letter. People magazine stayed well within the bounds of copyright in their article; MOS did not. I wonder if they 'had her number' by then and knew that she would create drama and a lot of stories for them? Did they deliberately goad her or did they just get bad legal advice?
@Fairy Crocodile
I am just as astonished that the judge is pandering to her convoluted manipulation of the truth and demands for privacy and special treatment. It reminds me of the Depp trial. I am not saying that he did not get violent during drunken drug-fuelled binges, and may have blocked it out as so out of character that he cannot face what he did. However, she is not an innocent victim and obviously did not care for him at all. For the sake of protecting women, a woman must never be blamed in any way when a man gets violent and must always be viewed as a victim, but this has the effect of not empowering women. Heard made no attempt to get Depp to seek professional help. Heard paraded her triumph outside on the streets for the paps. Her 'victory' was at the expense of battered women, specially those that do not have her privilege.
Unfortunately. narcissists live in their own version of reality and their behaviour is consistent with the mental framework they have built for themselves; it is `their truth'.
Not so long ago, there was a prominent British politician, a former PM no less, who was called out on what many of the British public perceived as his lies. Yet he was cleared, on the grounds that he believed what he was saying was the truth and was not deliberately creating falsehoods, despite the rest of us accurately perceiving that it was false.
I ain’t no bard
------------------
You're too modest. You do have a way with words. Keep it up :)
MM is clearly the "guilty potty" and perhaps she is now "more wronkled and higgerd than usual!".
We can add to this her "sharing" details via "a friend" with FF also casts doubts on her claim that she had not been aware and had not in any way encouraged her "friends" speaking to People magazine.
Astonishing arrogance from MM.
From today's Telegraph, in a piece about the `Balmoral Test':
"There was endless speculation ahead of the Sussexes’ first trip to Balmoral. It’s rumoured that Meghan visited the Queen back in 2017 in the early days of her relationship with Harry. But the first official visit came a couple of months after they got married. While little is known about how well Markle passed the test, she is famously opposed to hunting and field sports in general, which is by all accounts one of the main pastimes at Balmoral." (my emphasis)
We were told that she didn't go shooting because she disapproves of blood sports, so she wouldn't have been snapped out with the guns on the moors. Nor does she appear to have attended `Church Parade', although I don't think she's ever missed any other chance of being seen going to church. So pious, don'tcha know?
Has anybody, anywhere, seen any hard evidence of her actually being there?
Did she hide inside? Or was everyone sworn to secrecy as it was all so ghastly?
Or was she simply not there? Did she forget to photoshop her image onto a picture of heather?
There is no way on earth that they would have blithely reproduced that much of the letter without their copyright lawyers making sure it was ok especially when they were dealing with a member of the royal family who was thought to be in good standing with the family in public. Messing with Meghan in that way was tantamount to messing with the family.
The Guardian, BBC and the DM was sued in years past for copyright to mixed results so this is not their first rodeo.
Also, prior to this particular letter, Thomas gave the MoS other notes, letters and photos from his private collection that were published in their entirety. These exposed her drug use at her first wedding, they exposed that Thomas was present at that wedding where everyone had assumed he was absent due to lack of public evidence and they exposed the fact that she gave him $2000K.
The difference is that THIS letter showed Meghan in a bad light and exposed her where those previous letters showed her to be a good daughter.
She let the good letters slide and never complains about breach of copyright or misuse of private information.
This letter showed her to be self-absorbed, callous and ridiculous and so she sued.
...but all of it would have been carefully vetted by MoS's copyright lawyers.
And by the way, people are always suing the MoS for copyright. With rare exception they always win. That's why they keep copyright lawyers, criminal and litigation on retainer to make sure their articles pass the legal test. They are a trusted source as far as verification and fact checking their articles. Their team is quite separate from the DM (print edition) and the DMonline. Of the 3 separate teams, the DMonline is the tabloid juggernaut that has conquered the world, but remains careless as far as verification, sourcing, grammer etc. If anyone sued the DMonline, they'd highly likely to win because that team isn't as careful as the MoS. Infact Melania Trump sued and won the DMonline a couple of years ago for that reason.
https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-takes-meghan-markle-to-scottish-hideaway-did-she-meet-the-queen/
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/853822/prince-harry-meghan-markle-wedding-introduced-queen-balmoral
This story is from 2017. I recall reading at the time that Harry ha not participated in hunting because Markle did not approve.
"We can add to this her "sharing" details via "a friend" with FF also casts doubts on her claim that she had not been aware and had not in any way encouraged her "friends" speaking to People magazine."
True.
I'd also want to know when she claims to have shared the info with Scobie for FF via a third party. If it was before the MoS article was published in Feb 2019, that does suggest she was willing to have the letter in the public domain. It also suggests she very well might have been willing to funnel information to PEOPLE via 3rd parties. Finally, it could suggest there was an overall strategy to take down Thomas in multiple ways. And it certainly suggests Scobie was lying when he claimed his info about the letter came from the MoS articles.
If she shared the info after the MoS article was published, then how can she argue the MoS article was a big deal? Why even deny cooperating when the book came out a year and a half after the MoS article? Why not say then that she gave her side of the Thomas story to Scobie via a friend? (I think we all know she gave more than that including pee in the bushes and details of their first meeting. Wait staff would never remember that two years later.)
The timing may not be relevant re: copyright but it seems it would impact the privacy claim (a claim I'm not sure I understand anyway.)
I agree, there isn’t any evidence to show or suggest she’s ever been. Photos of Diana, Sarah and Catherine were in the press when they all visited for the first time. The only thing we have is the PR piece she put out about being invited to Balmoral for her birthday. I don’t recall reading she’s been to Birkhall or Castle May either though. Surely there would have been headline news articles about a visit if the case? Did I miss these?
There were headlines at the time in 2017:
https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-takes-meghan-markle-to-scottish-hideaway-did-she-meet-the-queen/
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/853822/prince-harry-meghan-markle-wedding-introduced-queen-balmoral
It would have been difficult for Markle to bring her paps along to Balmoral. Don't think that the Queen would have approved.
OT - as you have either a hard copy or the DT or subscription, could you tell me on what page the info is re MM at Balmoral? I can access all sorts of papers including foreign ones on Press reader with my library card but cannot find the article in today's DT. Many thanks.
"Ok, ok, wait,
"So she tearfully told some who is in the BRF or Kensington Palace her secret “daughter’s narrative” to pass on for FF—
"Then casually threw in that she peed in the bushes in Africa and does the warrior pose after sex.
"Ok. Don’t mind me, hun, just taking notes"
😄😆😅🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Thanks, AnT, for making sense of it all!
Then how and why did photos of 3 other senior royals appear in the press in recent decades and prior to their weddings? These 3 women didn’t or couldn’t invite the paps, and The Queen wouldn’t have allowed photos, but the press still got photos and lots of them. Both The Express and The People newspapers aren’t known for their factual reporting, and The Express is known to be Megsy’s mouthpiece.
From Lady Diana to The Blairs and Meghan Markle: who passed the Balmoral Test, and who flunked it?
An excruciating episode of The Crown sees Mrs Thatcher visit the Queen at Balmoral, making a terrible impression. How did others compare?
ByRebecca Reid19 November 2020 • 2:29pm (Today’s date but may be earlier – I followed a link from article re` The Crown’)
The best (and most uncomfortable) episode of series four of The Crown is titled The Balmoral Test. It sees PM Margaret Thatcher and husband Denis decamp to Scotland for the compulsory “holiday” that all heads of UK government are obliged to undertake. Because, when you’re working a 100 hour week running the country, what could be more relaxing than a week at your boss’s house in Scotland?
The episode is called The Balmoral Test in honour of the complicated and unspoken code of conduct for all visitors to the Scottish castle. In this episode the rampantly suburban Thatcher fails miserably, coming down dressed in black tie at six o’clock in the evening. Diana, who arrives just as Maggie is heaving a sigh of relief and heading home, passes with flying colours.
Guests are apparently expected to join in outdoors activities (mostly field sports) with enthusiasm, change outfits up to five times per day, and throw themselves in to all the eating, drinking and party games – all while remembering royal protocol and making sure not to tread on any of the dogs.
The BMT goes back further than you might imagine; in fact Prince Phillip and Elizabeth Bowes-Lyons were both apparently subject to it. According to Michael Patterson, author of A Brief History of the Private Life of Elizabeth II, Prince Phillip passed the test on the basis that he had been at school in Scotland and loved all things outdoors. The Queen’s mother, Elizabeth Bowes-Lyons pleased everyone, and Wallis Simpson failed quickly by remarking that the tartan carpets would “have to go”.
Doing well at the BMT doesn’t always mean you’re going to be a perfect fit for The Firm, though. The Crown makes much of the fact that Princess Diana went down such a storm on her first visit to the castle that pressure was put on Charles to pop the question.
Unfortunately her enjoyment of the place didn’t last. She was subsequently “unhappy and bored” at Balmoral, telling Andrew Morton: “Instead of having a holiday, it's the most stressful time of the year. It's very close quarters.”
Exactly this! ;o)
Kate Middleton (as was) made her first visit to Balmoral in 2009, two years before she married Prince William. According to Katie Nicholls, author of Kate: The Future Queen, during this visit the Queen apparently told Middleton that she was welcome to take photographs on the estate – something which is usually forbidden, which suggests that the trip was a success.
The Duchess isn't the only Middleton to have undergone the test. In 2010 her parents were invited to a shooting weekend at Balmoral which was widely (and correctly) regarded as a sign that an engagement was forthcoming. The Middletons must have passed muster at least well enough to have been invited back: in 2016 Carole Middleton was seen being driven back from a shooting lunch by the Queen herself. Being chauffeured by HM is widely considered to be one of the biggest stamps of approval you can get while visiting Balmoral.
There was endless speculation ahead of the Sussexes’ first trip to Balmoral. It’s rumoured that Meghan visited the Queen back in 2017 in the early days of her relationship with Harry. But the first official visit came a couple of months after they got married. While little is known about how well Markle passed the test, she is famously opposed to hunting and field sports in general, which is by all accounts one of the main pastimes at Balmoral.
The Queen, The Duke of Edinburgh, The Prince of Wales, Prince Andrew, Prince Edward and Princess Anne at Balmoral Castle during the Royal Family's annual summer holiday, 22 August 1972
Perhaps the most impressive spousal Balmoral faux-pas belongs to Sarah, Duchess of York. Fergie was staying at Balmoral for the summer when The Sun ran pictures of her having her toes sucked by John Bryan. This presumably made for a relatively uncomfortable family breakfast.
It’s not just potential love interests who are subject to the BMT, though. Margaret Thatcher got off on the wrong foot by arriving without any outdoor shoes (something The Crown uses as a weighty metaphor throughout the Balmoral episode). She then allegedly spent much of the trip working, which the family found distasteful and inappropriate. The feeling that the trip wasn’t a success was clearly mutual because, according to the Queen’s biographer Ben Pimlott, Thatcher likened her visits to “purgatory” and an official noticed that she “couldn’t get away fast enough”.
Cherie Blair reportedly wore trousers to lunch, refused to curtsey and took a dim view of field sports. According to Paul Scott, author of Tony & Cherie, she made the cardinal mistake of not drinking much, and compounded that by commenting on how much everyone else was drinking. To top all this off, Alastair Campbell claimed in his diaries that she asked the Queen whether it was true that Queen Victoria had an affair with Balmoral Ghillie John Brown, although Blair herself denies any awkwardness between her and the Queen.
Blair later told the world that the conception of her son Leo happened because she was too embarrassed to pack what she referred to as her “contraceptive equipment” when staying at Balmoral, as she knew that staff would unpack her bags for her. While it’s unlikely that there’s an official rule about bonking at Balmoral, it’s not a stretch of the imagination to think that her Majesty wasn’t best pleased that the details of a Balmoral conception were shared with the world.
The most controversial Balmoral attendees of recent years have been Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who went with fiancée Carrie Symonds. Their visit was political as Johnson was the first person to attend publicly with a partner to whom he is not married.
Previous to Johnson’s visit, unmarried couples were expected to spend time at the house during the day, but to sleep off site. Johnson and Symonds did, however, stay overnight. The Queen was reportedly “uncomfortable” with this arrangement, owing to her position as the head of the Church of England.
Given that the Queen describes Prime Ministers as “nobly enduring” the games at Balmoral, and that she by all accounts values her private, uninterrupted holidays to Scotland, one might question why this tradition continues. It sounds like the only people really benefiting from this combination of politicians, romantic prospects and royals are the makers of The Crown.
here is her parody interpretation of the letter from her newest cartoon.
(Words illustrated in hilarious curlicue script):
“Daddy
You have broken my heart into pieces. After multiple heart attacks you still haven’t croaked. How unkind! Did you really think you, an old fat white, be welcome to my racism awareness event/wedding? When I had dumb Chuck to sashay me down the aisle. I am AA now, a sick old white father is not good optics. Don’t press to see Archie. No one sees him, not even me. I have been patient. Be kind. STFU!! Admit you sold the letter. Admit I’m a fkg good daughter you p***k. Your flower always.”
.....I think this parody prob captures the spirit of it all, eh?
I think there are parts of Balmoral that can be seen and photographed with a long lens from adjoining properties or even public property. The paps know where these spots are and probably sit there waiting for days to get photos.
The royal family do a lot of outdoors stuff at Balmoral (riding, fishing, picnics, walking, shooting and, for the young ones, sports on the lawns and so on), so the chances of getting photos are good, plus there is church on Sunday.
There is no way Megsy would have passed up a photo op at Balmoral with the Queen. Plus, the paps watch the local airport at least when the Queen is in residence at Balmoral. There is no way the Sussexes would have travelled by train or driven all that way.
There were stories in the media about the Sussexes joining Charles and Camilla at Castle Mey I think it is, but the Cambridges declined to join them. There are never pap photos of royals there and I assume it is because it is remote and completely private. It would be interesting to check maps ...
I think that it was probably difficult to hide who she really was when people are that close.
I have to say that I would fail spectacularly and gloriously! I'd be out at the stables mucking out stalls, talking to the shepherds and admiring their sheep and dogs, checking out the people that maintain the old buildings and, instead of shooting birds, I'd be seeing if I could help out in the kitchens which would no doubt annoy the professionals there no end. Plus, if I had to change clothes five times a day, I would quickly go through everything I'd packed for the week and the clothes would all be comfy. In other words, I've no interest in the party life. I like to see the way things work. I don't think all the bureaucrats in the world could whip me into shape to be a suitable royal visitor.
We all know MM and the Queen love to bake birthday cakes!
No paps in the kitchen when the Queen is up to her brooches in fondant and cream, now, and MM is mashing bananas, and they are giggling like close sisters with frequent side hugs. Aw. I am getting weepy. All those birthday cakes for so many royals! Those two crazy cute gals.
Because I adore the humorist Artemis,
here is her parody interpretation of the letter from her newest cartoon.
(Words illustrated in hilarious curlicue script):
“Daddy
You have broken my heart into pieces. After multiple heart attacks you still haven’t croaked. How unkind! Did you really think you, an old fat white, be welcome to my racism awareness event/wedding? When I had dumb Chuck to sashay me down the aisle. I am AA now, a sick old white father is not good optics. Don’t press to see Archie. No one sees him, not even me. I have been patient. Be kind. STFU!! Admit you sold the letter. Admit I’m a fkg good daughter you p***k. Your flower always.”
.....I think this parody prob captures the spirit of it all, eh?
ROFLOL! Yes, I believe that she captures the meaning of the letter EXACTLY!
"I use my phone a lot, but if I had to write a letter about a matter I considered very serious, I would switch to either my laptop or to a pen and paper. Meghan is either lying (again) or has a very strange writing process"
100% agreed. I vote for lying, or "creating."
I also don't think she was advised by anyone in KP to write him a letter. She appears to be totally unable to ever accept responsibility. So now she is saying she did it, but someone else told her to. Has KP call confirmed/denied this?
I beg to differ. You would be the biggest hit with the Queen of them all. She would likely sigh in relief, would put on her scarf and wool skirt, and be out there chatting dogs with you. Then a solid drinks table later with Phil, discussion of horses, bloodstock, etc. Even trading jokes.
MM in her heels, and piles of cheap rings, cackling her wig off, snapping away with her phone camera, not so much.
I totally agree with your comment.
The paps know exactly know where to spot photo opportunities at Balmoral. Catherine was spotted watching William fly-fishing (I think that’s what he was doing) ). The press would have known if The Sussex’s were ever there. Agree, Megsy world have never passed up on a visit with The Queen nor missed a possible photo opportunity, and this is why I believe she nor Harry have been invited as a couple and most certainly not on her own.
"No paps in the kitchen when the Queen is up to her brooches in fondant and cream, now, and MM is mashing bananas, and they are giggling like close sisters with frequent side hugs. Aw. I am getting weepy. All those birthday cakes for so many royals! Those two crazy cute gals."
Well, the Queen does enjoy doing the washing up. When they have their family barbecues she does all the dishes herself and doesn't let anyone help. I think it is Anne Glenncover who wrote this but it might be the late cousin of Her Majesty, in the autobiographies they published.
Don’t forget the matching marigolds when they’re washing-up. ;o)
There is no way I would use Notes to create giant wordy documents. Too many files needed for most of us normals (character count issues). I have my laptop for such things. My guess is she has no laptop, instead is using her phone like a teen, a yachter on the hoof, or a grifter perching with roving eyes in a hotel lobby or cocktail bar. I asked a couple of colleagues.....none use Notes that way, for serious things, unless on location/off site, for quick jots. MM barely leaves her cave of plots, or Soho House, so...? Everyone’s different, yah, but.....
Like eating a seagull for dinner: you can do it, but why would you.
IMO, she is perpetually scared of being discovered in her lies and grift, loves her “secrets” like all sociopaths, and tries to keep her nonsense on her phone safe in her claw, handbag or bedside table. If she is stupid enough to rely Notes for everything, no wonder she is terrified of turning her phone over. She probably keeps it under her pillow at night.
Matching Marigolds! Haha, yes, of course, with pearls on the embroidered elbow cuffs, naturally! No diamonds in the country!
Make a fuss of the dogs, enthuse about the ponies.
Anne & HM would approve of the mucking out; Charles would like you chatting to shepherds, ghillies & drystone wall builders. Showing an interest in old buildings, be they `polite' or `vernacular' would make you a `Wow!' Swampman needn't worry about not having `black tie, aka dinner jacket/tuxedo'. Just as long as he scrubs up well for dinner.
I imagine you could take down quite a few grouse with a shotgun, to say nothing of going out with a ghillie to stalk and shoot a stag (not shotgun work).
Am not sure if Scottish dancing's on the programme in the summer but no problem - it's like square dancing that's been refined a bit. I daresay you could tolerate the Balmoral Games too, all those cabers and sword dancers.
The RF are countryfolk at heart and Scotland means a lot to them. Judging from MM's face on the Edinburgh visit, she hated the place. Diana, on the other hand, pretended to like it as much as they did - not a good move, she hated it really. It's not for townees.
There are a couple of good stories about HM not being recognised when out walking (in headscarf & gumboots). On one occasion a lady said `I hope you don't mind me saying this, but you're awfully like the Queem'.
To which HM replied `That's very reassuring...'
Why do I/the machine? keep doing a double post?
Good to know, probably why our MM leaves the baking pans to the Queen and simply sits nearby in quiet camaraderie as the Fairy bubbles rise from the deep hot sink, flipping over the teacups and plates to see who made them and what they might be worth. Domestic felicity the cameras would never see. How she must miss it.
(copy & paste)
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-admits-giving-information-to-finding-freebies-authors.4113268/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8965835/Prince-Charles-used-Princess-Dianas-love-fashion-against-new-royal-book-claims.html
Part 3
Cherie Blair reportedly...made the cardinal mistake of not drinking much, and compounded that by commenting on how much everyone else was drinking.
___________________
Frankly, the RF come off like a bunch of frat boy bullies with this.
Wild Boar Battle-maid said...
Part 3
Cherie Blair reportedly...made the cardinal mistake of not drinking much, and compounded that by commenting on how much everyone else was drinking.
___________________
Frankly, the RF come off like a bunch of frat boy bullies with this.
To me, it sounds as if Cherie Blair was an obnoxious Karen. How was it any of her business what the family chooses to do in their own house?
If anything needed to be said, it was Cherie Blair who was being extremely rude to her host. I’d never insult my host by commenting on what they drunk or ate (for that matter).
Agree...Cherie sounds like the wet blanket, purse-lipped auntie in this story. Rude guest behavior.
(Apropos nothing, she always reminded me of a snippy parakeet somehow.)
Rather hope they short sheeted her bed and removed the biscuits.
@OKay,
If anything needed to be said, it was Cherie Blair who was being extremely rude to her host. I’d never insult my host by commenting on what they drunk or ate (for that matter).
Thank you. I am so tired of people thinking that it is perfectly appropriate to go into their host's house, insult everybody there, tell them what they should be thinking, eating, comment on their pets (or lack thereof), and tell how their house should be redecorated, how something isn't sustainable, and I don't even want to get into their thoughts about whatever the latest dietary fad is. Too bad they were too polite to chuck her into the nearest muckpile.
Off topic so I’ll leave there. ;o)
I concur!
I think most people have had guests from Hell, thankfully most of us never have to invite them again. Unlike the Royal Family.
New I'm a Celebrity/The Queen's Press Sec in Crown/her reputation as writer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78BrbAjKx5Y
To me, it sounds as if Cherie Blair was an obnoxious Karen.
----------------
Indeed. She refused to curtsey to the Queen. She also told Princess Anne, on first meeting her, that she could call her Cherie, to which Anne said 'No, I think it would be better if I called you Mrs Blair’. Good old Anne, tells it straight like her father.
Yes, the Blair son is called Euan but it's the youngest one, Leo, who was conceived at Balmoral ;)
We are of the same feather. We were at a weekend party a few years ago at the lovely old refurbished country house of friends who had purchased and redone the house as a sort of work of restoration passion.. It was idyllic. But one guest, the new significant other of a old friend, found fault loudly with everything, from window glazing to decor to the type of gravel in the drive and garden. A know-it-all, disdainful boor. Our hosts were a little crestfallen but soldiered on and we all did our best to drown this rude man out for three otherwise wonderful days.
When we were all leaving, I went up and privately thanked him for coming. As he began to puff and preen, I added, “because you are the sort of enormous pulsing horse’s ass we will laugh about for years to come. I will dine on tales of you, by name, forever.”
At future events, he never said a word. It was the only time I ever did such a thing, but I have no regrets.
Inside Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan’s Scotland Getaway With Prince Charles and Duchess Camilla
By Sarah Hearon
August 21, 2018
Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan’s summer of travel continues! The royal couple spent five days at Castle of Mey in Caithness, Scotland, with Prince Charles and Duchess Camilla, multiple sources confirm to Us Weekly.
Royals Are Just Like Us!
According to one source, the August getaway marked the 33-year-old prince and Meghan’s first visit to the castle, a spot that Charles, 69, and Camilla, 71, both “love.”
“Charles and Camilla care deeply for Harry and Meghan, and with all that has been going on with Meghan’s family, they wanted to get them out of the city and to the coast of Scotland,” the source explains.
Harry and Meghan returned to London “feeling restored” after their Scotland trip.
"It’s beautiful at the castle, with amazing views of Orkney Islands,” the source adds. “It was five days of time outdoors, long walks, good food and quality family time.”
Outside of their other trips and travel, Harry and Meghan have been based at their Oxfordshire house all month.
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/prince-harry-meghan-markles-scotland-trip-with-prince-charles-duchess-camilla/
Well
Well. I will just leave this here, from the DM today:
“Oprah reveals the VERY clever green screen technology that
made it look like Obama was with her
in her Santa Barbara living room
when he was actually in D.C.”
“* The video made it look like the pair are both in her Montecito home”
...
Three sons, actually! Euan, Nicholas and Leo and a daughter, Kathryn.
It's pretty amazing she insisted on telling the world her son Leo was an accident and was conceived only because she was too embarrassed to pack her usual contraceptive and her husband couldn't keep it in his pants for a whole 3 days (nor could they apparently come up with a "creative" outlet that didn't require contraception.)
Wow. Poor kid.
Don't worry, it happens to me too!! All this stuff about MM lately is enough to addle the brain ;)
"Judging from MM's face on the Edinburgh visit, she hated the place. Diana, on the other hand, pretended to like it as much as they did - not a good move, she hated it really. It's not for townees."
Oh, Diana pretended, even sat on a riverbank watching Charles fish for some hours, til she got the ring--wedding, not just engagement, either. Then her true colors showed--townee all the way!
Such persistence for a goal--mm does not have it.
"“Oprah reveals the VERY clever green screen technology that
made it look like Obama was with her
in her Santa Barbara living room
when he was actually in D.C.”
“* The video made it look like the pair are both in her Montecito home"
Indeed, indeed, as several Nutties speculated about, with authority!
Re Tony Blair, 'her husband couldn't keep it in his pants for a whole 3 days'. I remember he informed the nation that he he was a 5 times a night guy. I checked the info although I was sure and this was in no less than the Guardian.
Tony, asked by the Sun whether he could have sex five times a night (despite suffering from a slipped disc at the time)
At least. I can do it more, depending on how I feel (2005)
Perhaps it was said tongue in cheek but he was Prime Minister at the time 😳
I have never been to Balmoral nor am I likely to receive an invitation to do so and that is just as well as I do not wish to be the guest from hell and frankly house parties are just not to my homely tastes.
There is however an accepted way of explaining that Bojo could not organise a drinking session in a brewery or a lockdown in a pandemic without in any way revealing ones political leanings.
"Re Tony Blair, 'her husband couldn't keep it in his pants for a whole 3 days'. I remember he informed the nation that he he was a 5 times a night guy. I checked the info although I was sure and this was in no less than the Guardian."
Thanks! Wow again. Now I feel sorry for all four of their children.
Of course, you know what they say...the more a guy talks about his prowess in bed, the more likely it is that he is seriously lacking.
The paps know exactly know where to spot photo opportunities at Balmoral. Catherine was spotted watching William fly-fishing (I think that’s what he was doing) ). The press would have known if The Sussex’s were ever there. Agree, Megsy world have never passed up on a visit with The Queen nor missed a possible photo opportunity, and this is why I believe she nor Harry have been invited as a couple and most certainly not on her own.
Exactly. That's why I made my bold assertion that Mugsy has never set a mud-caked stiletto on Balmoral grounds. The summer holidays in 2017 where several months before their engagement. They were engaged over Christmas-New Year 2017, and Meg was invited to Anmer Hall, but I suppose the Balmoral activities are much the same in winter as summer, only of shorter duration. I can well imagine Megalo pitching a fit and refusing to go up to Balmoral, forcing him to choose, not for the first nor last time, between his family and their old familiar traditions which he loved--and her. Meg was not able to contain her vocal boredom for more than 20 minutes at *the* Royal garden party of the season--in honor of her new Pa-in-law's birthday--and her formal debut as the Duchess of Sussex. I can't for the life of me imagine her going willingly to spend days in a drafty Scottish castle while her in-laws roamed around and shot small animals.
By the next summer, the newlywed Duchess was already knocked up, so she says, 2019 saw tge vulnerable and not OK young mum watch her birthday come and go with no special confections or Balmoral party wing being offered by Her Majesty. They certainly weren't around in 2019 for the Christmas visit, having chosen the Russian oligarch's hideaway mansion in Canada. Grasping bunt has never darkened the gates. And for someone who makes a big deal about her yogi lifestyle and poses for papp shots while modelling suitably rugged winter gear, Mugsy doesn't strike me at all as the 'outdoorsy' type. Too bad Harry didn't make her go one year--she might have frozen solid and we'd be shot of her. As would he.
@Sylvia,
As for the Suxxits' trip to Castle Mey in August 2018, related by the esteemed US Weekly, I suspect it's more PR piffle. Caithness is even more remote than Balmoral, I imagine. This castle belonged to the Queen Mother; an episode of The Crown, Season 1, focuses on her discovering it was for sale while visiting friends and buying it as a retreat for herself.
Considering how very close Charles was to his granny, if the castle passed to him upon her death, it's kind of odd that he would have never brought both of his sons there even once in the 16 years between her death and Smeg's entre into the family, isn't it?
If Camilla were truly forced to play hostess to Smeg for 5 days, I can only imagine how well that went over.
Raspberry Ruffle mentioned that Cherie conceived her son at Balmoral, 'albeit rather more coarsely put by her.'
If any of you Nutties want to find out more about the Blairs' coarseness, have a read of this article (May 2005). Remember, TB was in office at the time.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-347444/The-man-took-country-war-chatted-times-night-manage-sex-Cherie.html
"if I had to change clothes five times a day"
FIVE? Humph...in Queen Victoria's time it was seven times a day...when Consuelo Vanderbilt as Duchess of Marlborough (and bankroll for the Duke) went with her husband, she needed 49 dresses to make it through one week, because of course one NEVER wore the same dress twice in front of the Queen (or anyone who would tell her you had "reworn."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-347444/The-man-took-country-war-chatted-times-night-manage-sex-Cherie.html
Definitely PR piffle 😏
Thought it was a bit of a stretch of the truth too especially this..
"five days of time outdoors, long walks, good food and quality family time.”
Same article appeared in others of their paid for PR Hello & Harpers .
I think it's a fair enough test for someone who proposes to join the family--let them see what they are really letting themselves in for, to see if they can stand it. Likewise it's reasonable enough to so 'test' anyone who would want to be considered a close friend of the family, on a personal level--you want to chum around with us? This is what we *do*.
Inviting One's Prime Ministers, spouses, assorted members of the Cabinet (the Foreign Secretary, eg.) on an alleged 'holiday', which is really a gauntlet running in which the rules are never made plain and work or talk of work is forbidden in order to make fun of any gaffes seems like a particularly unhelpful form of entertainment. I'm sure the PM can hardly refuse the invitation of his/her sovereign and must go. But there seems little value to me in ritually humiliating a PM from the middle classes for bringing the wrong sort of shoes or getting dressed for dinner too early. A memo helpfully outlining the weekend's activities and the appropriate attire for each would foster more harmonious working relationships, no? Maggie T. and the Queen did not Get On, as they say, a state of affairs hardly assuaged by the RF making the Thatchers laughingstocks during the Balmoral weekend.
Since Boris has flouted tradition by bringing his girlfriend (whilst still technically married to his latest wife) for overnight stays, I wonder if Her Maj has come to regard Mrs. Thatcher's failure to bring wellies in the same egregious light as she did back then.
@Maneki,
I haven't seen The Crown, S4 yet, but I think the exchange between Anne and Maggie has been taken verbatim by Peter Morgan:
MT: Call me Maggie.
PA: I'd rather not. That's not how I was raised.
Bazinga! Yes, the Philip is strong in his daughter. That's why she's the favorite.
- the French penfriend we we obliged to have for 4 weeks one summer, as part of a school exchange scheme, in return for my 3 weeks in France that Easter? I felt as if I was being held personally responsible for the bombing of the French Fleet, after the Fall of France in 1940, before I was born. (I suspect they may have been collaborators).
In the UK, Penfriend was a silent sour-puss who never uttered more than an emphatic snarl of `Non!' She too kept a `secret' diary - Dad read it, using his 1st WW French - entries about how many times we bathed, for instance!
- or my most recent narc?- any excuse for a dig at us, then getting on her high horse to criticise what she deemed to be my breach of manners (it wasn't).
Found more piffle reminders the earlier demands lies shennanigans of the Sussits
Article includes details of supposed renovations to frog cottage and the alleged visitors
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s First Royal Home Choice Wasn’t Frogmore Cottage
By Morgan Halberg • 08/21/19 8:00am
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle weren’t originally planning on moving to Frogmore Cottage.
Late last year, it was announced that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle would relocate from Nottingham Cottage at Kensington Palace over to Frogmore Cottage at Windsor. Prince Harry and Meghan’s decision to leave behind London and move over to Windsor was in large part impacted by their wish for more privacy and security, especially with Archie.
They were also already quite familiar with the locale, as they tied the knot at Windsor Castle last year, and Prince Charles hosted their wedding reception at Frogmore House.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t end up settling into the home until just before Archie was born, and completed millions of dollars worth of renovations to convert the residence into a fittingly regal abode. But it turns out that Frogmore Cottage wasn’t actually the Sussexes’ first choice of lodgings.
Apparently, Prince Harry and Meghan originally wanted to move inside of Windsor Castle, reports The Sunday Times, and spoke with Queen Elizabeth about potential living arrangements inside the imposing palace, as there are reportedly a few empty private apartments or even spare residences on the grounds.
Windsor Castle is one of Queen Elizabeth’s official residences, and she spends a good portion of her time there, including most weekends during her working year. Alas, the Queen allegedly wasn’t too into the idea of the Sussexes moving into the castle, potentially thinking that the massive residence wasn’t conducive to raising a young family.
Queen Elizabeth suggested Frogmore Cottage instead.
Instead, Queen Elizabeth “politely but firmly” suggested Frogmore Cottage, located elsewhere on the Windsor estate, as a suitable replacement for the then-newlyweds. It ended up working out quite well, as the Sussexes have since entirely transformed Frogmore Cottage, adding soundproofing, a carefully designed nursery, Soho Home accents, regal art and custom designed pieces. They’ve also hosted many a famous face—past guests include George and Amal Clooney, Jane Goodall, Jessica Mulroney and, of course, quite a few royals, as Queen Elizabeth, Prince Charles, Prince William and Kate Middleton have all stopped by
Sure Jan!
https://observer.com/2019/08/prince-harry-meghan-markle-wanted-to-live-windsor-castle-queen-elizabeth-frogmore-cottage/
Unbelievable, such an idiot.
"Thought it was a bit of a stretch of the truth too especially this..
"five days of time outdoors, long walks..."
And yet in both Canada (helping with selfie-stick) and LA they tried to convince us they are both big-time "hikers"...Think the collapsing beagle that had to be carried back from the hike in LA called that into question. (Although to be fair, he was probably not used to hot weather and is probably nearly 10.)
@Razzie--i think, Raspberry Ruffle?
"The paps know exactly know where to spot photo opportunities at Balmoral. Catherine was spotted watching William fly-fishing..."
YES! And Diana sat behind a tree, watching Charles fish,except she took out her compact and used the mirror to spy on the press across the river. James Whitaker was there as a royal reporter for a tabloid, forget which--i believe tbis was Whitaker's scoop. He said that he thought, this lady is very clever! And of course, that is the view Diana grew to care about most--the press watching her.
As a result of Whitaker and photographer hanging around across the river waiting to photograph Di and scoop everybody else, and after all the other stuff that had gone on, the Queen had the newspaper editors summoned and complained about the constant stalking, especially about Whitaker.
"@Tourre Bakahai has just retweeted (from Murky Meg)that Harry will `insist' The Crown will stop before it comes to his era.
Unbelievable, such an idiot"
Hear, hear! It's fictionalized to some extent, anyway, the producers have said so--just as Game of Thrones was a fictionalized story inspired by/based on the Tudors. Wonder who Murky Meg's source was....
_______________________________________________
The rule of thumb is that when it comes to sexual intercourse women tend to downplay by half and men to triple the true number (in Manosphere terms: their N). The more one talks of ones alleged accomplishments the less likely they are to be true.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8965259/Prince-Harry-said-insist-Crown-ending-reaches-time.html
What would be worse for Meghan, is family with boundaries showing up on screen every single day to remind the U.K. and the USA that Meghan is, in fact, from a predominantly white family.
I never understood their motive to be so public and now I think that is it, especially after reading the comments here today.
Notice how in the letter to Thomas, she doesn’t accuse him of being racist.
Windsor Castle is one of Queen Elizabeth’s official residences, and she spends a good portion of her time there, including most weekends during her working year. Alas, the Queen allegedly wasn’t too into the idea of the Sussexes moving into the castle, potentially thinking that the massive residence wasn’t conducive to raising a young family.
Well, of course Mugsy took it as her *due* that she be granted a luxurious suite inside a castle as befits the Princess she knows herself to be! She wasn't going to be happy with anything that was less grand than Anmer Hall and the newly renovated KP #1, abodes of the future Prince of Wales. But what better way to illustrate that the Queen truly loves her best, more than her own heir, by taking up residence in Windsor Castle itself? I suppose she also envisioned having meals with the Queen waited upon by a phalanx of liveried footmen. Mugsy saw Cinderella a few too many times in her childhood.
Instead, Queen Elizabeth “politely but firmly” suggested Frogmore Cottage, located elsewhere on the Windsor estate, as a suitable replacement for the then-newlyweds.
The 'suggestion' of Frogmore Cottage (Royal 'suggestions' have the force of commands, really. Not that Meg ever let that stop her) must have come as a real shock. Shunted off to the staff quarters . . and ones in such bad repair at that? As I understand it, Frogmore House is also part of the Crown Estate and is opened to the public for tours at certain times of the year to raise money for charity. Smeg would have made this difficult, to say the least. The FH website shows a very attractive view of the house and gardens and the masthead says "A favourite Royal retreat for over 300 years." Smeagols not welcome.
Oh, I bet she was plenty firm. We get the sense, do we not, that HM was subjected to a lot of whining, demands and otherwise crass juvenile behavior about the Sussexes' projected move and where they felt was good enough for their Royal asses? Not forgetting that they had turned down flat their very own estate on the Welsh border lovingly prepared for them by Charles. He'd offered it to William first, who had turned it down also. I think Wills is coming along well with his Duchy internship, but still, it must be an ongoing source of hurt to Charles that his sons do not embrace the soil of England with the same fervor he does. Here's this lovely organic farm going to waste. Can he afford to hold onto it until George evidences some interest? Maybe a good berth for Louis when he grows up . . or Charlotte, no reason she couldn't take it. Harry and Meghan squandered so many opportunities, because they are such selfish tossers, neither with any interest apparently in what makes Britain great.
Along with the provenance and whereabouts of Archie, FroggCott is one of life's great mysteries where the Sussexes are concerned. Hiding/Obfuscating the birth and subsequent whereabouts/routine of a baby is possible, if only just. But it's a lot easier to hide the existence or non-existence of one small human who supposedly has nannies taking care of him than it is to hide from the taxpaying public of Windsor and the global media a massive structural renovation of many months' duration on a house that size and yet, have people from the area report that *nothing is heard, seen or smelled* for a project of this magnitude. Tres strange. The biggest mystery of all is: Where did all that money go?
As we all know by now, FrogCott had been converted many years ago into 5 interconnected staff dwellings for Windsor employees. A couple of these were large enough to accommodate families, while the other three were suitable for a couple, or singles.
I personally think Meg furnished a fantasy vegan nursery/orangerie/yoga studio/barbecue pit because not only is none of that stuff there, the couple themselves have never lived there. From April 2019 to their abrupt departure six months later (several weeks of this period being taken up with various jollies abroad, Ibiza, Nice at Aunty Elton's house, and a 10 day work tour to South Africa), the only signs of life ever spotted by anyone in Windsor and duly tweeted by Richard Palmer were: one open window and one sighting of a vehicle (black) that looked like the car sometimes driven by Prince Harry . .but doesn't one black SUV look pretty much like another?
Too, too much detail inundating us daily in the press for it to be real, IMO. Meg cannot resist over-gilding the lily of her lies.
What I think is true is this: the BRF is proceeding quietly with the original plan to restore the building in its 5-unit configuration so it can once again be let out to staff. The smallest, single unit is being retained as Prince Harry's official UK address. The BRF knows that Meg never had any intention of staying in England and is never coming back. That was evident even before the wedding. Why would they underwrite a lavish renovation into a family home when the Sussexes were never going to stay? Even if they had been, to suggest that the house would have been ready for a couple with a newborn in 4 or 5 months (December 2018 - April 2019) in so short a window is ludicrous. Physically impossible, even with round-the-clock work by a hundred workmen--and if that were the case someone in Windsor would have seen evidence of this work, right? Nary a work van or a single human being has ever been spotted for the record near or in the cottage.
They’ve also hosted many a famous face—past guests include George and Amal Clooney, Jane Goodall, Jessica Mulroney and, of course, quite a few royals, as Queen Elizabeth, Prince Charles, Prince William and Kate Middleton have all stopped by
Sure Jan!
Let's not forget Ellen DeGeneres and Portia di Rossi, Hillary Clinton & Priyanka Chopra! Abigail Spencer, too. One of the above denies flatly that she has ever visited Windsor fo for the purposes of meeting Archie. If one celebrity visit is entirely made up, why not ALL of them? I say so.
The Queen does not 'stop by'. Did she 'stop by' to KP or Highgrove House when Diana had her babies? Did she drop in on Anne and Mark Phillips when Anne gave birth? William is the future King--did we hear how Her Majesty took a casserole to Anmer Hall to help out the new mum? No, we did not. When people want to show their babies to the Queen, they bring them to her, that's how it works.
It wouldn't surprise me, there were a couple of times when there was something definitely funky about their videos. Something was clearly 'off', which could easily have been explained by a split screen.
On the other hand, from reading the article about all the technical stuff that needed to be done for the Oprah/Obama green screen interview, it would seem that all of that is far beyond the expertise of the Markles.
Everything they do is so amateurish. See: her with only one leg in the cemetery photos. And they don't appear to be able afford the staff for such an endeavor either. See: recent low end pr hires.
Once again, just like the baby scenario, no one theory explains all the clues.
Would be interesting to know. With Oprah doing the green screen thing and getting publicity for it, mm might feel the need to brag that she had done it first/too.
The only thing I can add is the royals created Markle, manipulated the public opinion and now reap what they fully deserve.
I refer to the persistent rumours (indirectly confirmed by the media pundits and the likes of Colin Campbell) about the huge clean up of the Markle's past the royals ordered to make her look "suitable".
I also refer to manipulating public opinion to create a "hero Harry" image.
I can add to the above an absolute breakneck speed at which the Dismal Duo had been given roles to represent UK abroad (all of which turned into the absolute hot embarrassment) despite reservations regarding Markle that had been expressed.
There is no doubt Markle had had reasons to believe the royal family will clean all her messes in order to avoid disaster for themselves. This may partially explain her breathtaking arrogance we can all observe.
What the royal did will come to haunt them for a long time because Markle goes nowhere soon. She is firmly attached to the royal family via Harry.
Move to California..check
Overpriced mansion...check
Paparazzi photos..check
Invites to actually celebrity gigs...check
Continued funding from Bank of Dad...check
Extravagant wardrobe....check
Security entourage...check
Unnecessary assistants and staff...check
Merching deals.. check
Netflix deal..check
Private jets..check
Disney voice over...check
Royal titles to merch and brag on...check
Opportunities that would have never been afforded to a gifter like Meg...check
Loving how the top story in DM is Brad Pitts PR explaining that Brad has handed out goods and volunteered with that specific ORG over 30 (!!!) Times recently without publicity.
Harry's PR put out his 'handouts' story and Brad's PR realized it cheapened Brad's efforts earlier in the week and retaliated, riding on Meghan's insane PR spend this week (doing good works in private) is genius.
Brad's team> MH Team
We can expect other celebs to start doing this. Taking the heat and attention from MH with hard facts to boost their brand. I'm here for it.
Is there verifiable visual proof of a tennis court at FroggCott? Ie, an aerial view? Otherwise, I can't believe it. It goes right up there with the orangerie, the avocado garden and the floating yoga floor.
Even if it was renovated as stipulated, the couple didn't live there for more than a few months, absolute tops. Personally, I don't believe they ever lived there. Meg probably refused as it was not grand enough for her. Servants' quarters, overlooking the burial site of the last American Duchess. The Queen really knows how to throw awesome shade.
I need a diversion and it is here. To all in the US have a great thanksgiving with as many family and neighbors as you like. Do not obey in the UKI!
Talk about dumping all over Harry’s parade! Hysterical! Good ole Brad. Maybe the ghastly duo will get the message with.... Anything we do, others will do so much better
I wonder if Meghan knew, either from her extensive research on Diana or through pure instinct, that if she had had to spend three seconds at Balmoral before the wedding, Prince Harry would have seen the light and called it off.
Perhaps the force of Balmoral is so strong that she feared visiting even as a newlywed, in case it led to an early divorce.
I'm probably a townee myself, but I thoroughly enjoyed a trip to New Zealand I made a couple of years back, during which my host made sure I got as much hiking and picnicking done as we could fit into my itinerary. So I don't think I'd mind taking the BRF's "Balmoral Challenge". If they will be okay helping a complete n00b learn how to shoot and to fish, then they can send me an invitation any day. ;-)
What would Meghan need that for? The interiors and garden in which she has filmed videos are so generic that they could be anywhere. Also, why bother with a green screen if she can rent the Montecito mansion by the hour anyway?
The real bombshell would be if she had used technology to make it seem as if she and Prince Harry filmed their videos together. Do they touch at all on the bench in the garden? How about on the couch during Malala's interview?
I personally don't think it has come to this yet. Even if the separate rooms in Australia have become separate houses in California, I think they still come together when they need to. They're marketing themselves as a package, after all, and they need to stay true to the brand!
I submit that your observation about sexual prowess, “the more you talk about your accomplishments, The less likely they are to be true” is it as succinct A summation of Murky’s MO as I have seen. Substitute any area of endeavor for sexual prowess: educational attainment, humanitarian work, standing ovations by the General assembly of the UN, dish soap advocacy, supermodel stats, healthy vegan yoga life Style, motherhood, lavish home decorating, trips to Scotland, royal birthday parties, celebrity friendships, foreign languages spoken, abilities at calligraphy, etc. etc. and anon. Yes indeed, Murky has whips of many words salads for our consumption about all her fantastic accomplishment, Possessions, and personal qualities that simply do not exist. Meg doesn’t actually want to put the work in. She either attributes to herself the magical power of making something real simply by talking about it endlessly and learning on copious and outlandish details, or the alternative is she just thinks the entire world is completely stupid and will swallow whatever she’s paid to have written about herself. Had she not hooked H, She could’ve made a decent living as a cheesy romance novelist. Something along the lines of a Danielle steel or a Judith Krantz. The more over the top, the better. Nobody expects realism in pulp fiction. That’s all Meg is, a Pulp fiction construct. There’s nothing underneath to anchor it in what we call reality.
https://people.com/royals/queen-elizabeth-prince-philip-73-anniversary-photo-card-kids/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab&utm_content=algorithm
Let us leave off from the Sussex assholes for a moment To appreciate how cute her Majesty and prince Philip are as they look at a homemade card from the Cambridge children.
Oh, no. I fear you've summoned the demon of Sussex. I expect we're going to see the picture that "Archie" drew for HRH and Prince Philip tomorrow.
Do we all need to read the new book, Leaders Who Lust: Power, Money, Sex, Success, Legitimacy, Legacy, by former actress and scholar Barbara Kellerman —- about 21st century leaders’ total immoderation in each category?
“Leaders who lust have an appetite so enormous and relentless it impossible to ever fully satisfy. ...It is leaders who lust who mostly make history.”
Trivia: Movie fans may know author Kellerman, of Manchester, as the deadly German spy love interest of Sir Roger Moore in The Sea Wolves, and also as the White Witch in BBC’s adaption series of Narnia. Now, she is a noted leadership scholar.
'the demon of sussex' made me LOL
That beautiful photo of the Queen and Prince Philip looking at the card created by the Cambridge children is everything— thanks for sharing that link. Making a very very late cup of cham tea and this is the perfect sweetener.
I look forward to Archie’s forthcoming artistic efforts celebrating the great grandparents whom he has never met and who never have met him either.
I have no definitive proofs, But I feel in my waters that Archie has been acknowledged in the line of succession despite not actually existing, because the alternative… Admitting that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have perpetuated a gargantuan fraud on the world is too incendiary To admit to. If “Archie” is going to be raised in America, never to darken the borders of Blighty, And never ever to be seen by the general public as he grows, it was probably deemed more politic and easier and to let him be in the line of succession on paper then to expose how the Duchess of Sussex perpetuated a gigantic fraud on the British public and the world. It’s easier to go along with this then to try to explain how the palace could have been so deceived, or we seem to have gone along with a gigantic fraud. Frankly I find it impossible to accept that a narcissist on the level of Meg Would be capable of keeping her real child under wraps this long and this hard-core. She may have had a plan to withhold him for mega bucks in the millions in terms of photo spreads and merching opportunities when she first designed the idea of “being pregnant“. That whole maternity show circus was strictly to feed her gigantic ego. Now Archie is nearly 2 years old allegedly, and we have barely seen him. Even she must realize that his market value as a commodity decreases with every passing day. If she had a cute blonde kid to compete with the Cambridge children, I don’t think she would b. e able to restrain herself from showing him off for whatever money and attention she could get. And damn the torpedoes, whether she was “allowed“ or not. This is a woman who was so desperate for attention for her “motherhood“ that she paraded around with dolls in public, grinning at the camera like the insane attention hog that she is. Where is Archie now? It’s been over six months since the duck rabbit video. If she really and truly had a cute blonde toddler in her possession, he would have featured in some if not all of her activities from California. I just really cannot believe that she has a child, or even access to a child. Now she’s teasing a “top-secret“ secret pregnancy. That is really her last ace in the hole to get attention in the absence of any sort of interest from Hollywood, and to distract from the fact that she’s having her ass handed to her in this mail on Sunday lawsuit. The more the Sussex is go on and on about how much they adore being parents, and how great their kid is And how she is most likely pregnant with another… The more Opus’s theory holds; if something is real, we don’t need to talk about it all the time as a convincer. If she really had Archie, she would show him. It’s been over a year since they fled to North America, and what have we seen? Affect up Frank and baby Christmas card, A picture of Harry holding a little girl in front of a lake—Both of these nearly a year old, and a six month old video of Meg demonstrating that she has no idea how to read to small kids who. Show zero evidence of knowing her. And she tried to slip in a picture of Doria pulling her around in a vintage plastic stroller circa 1984 as proof that Archie was live in Tyler Perry’s house and grandma. With a woman who stage is Pap walkswith dolls really be able to restrain herself from cashing in on a biological Royal baby? She’s reduced to schilling candles online. Even as severely reduced payday for pictures of Archie would be better than nothing… And yet she has not done it. She doesn’t have a kid, that is occam’s razor here.
You’re right....the demon of Sussex....probably winging around the turrets in fury. What will the next days bring?
You set out perfectly why I find it utterly impossible to believe she/they have a child. I think a scam or deal fell through, or she simply wanted more attention and to trap Harry (was he perhaps restless already) and the RF into the stickiest lie imaginable. As a sociopathic narcissist, she wouldn’t care about residual effects of such gross trickery.
I absolutely think she substitutes a sort of insane movie plot that runs in her brain for the reality the rest of us know. Her bumbling mediocre life filled with cheesy plastic people and sleazy adventures with pimps like Markus and at best, basic Toronto “names” was to her the glittering climb to riches and fame. Her rushed stalker marriage in a dark carpetless church, was a coronation in her mind. Fake baby bumps, Elton John, private planes with the dolt Prince was her brain’s five star 1996 movie star grand tour. The boring part was the job and having an actual kid around so the plot petered out, right about there, into fakery, Doctored photos, baby models, stories. And then escape.
The Baby Episode got her what she wanted. Attention away from Eugenie, media, costly new clothes she and Messica could turn into cash, a lot of media, the pregnant Diana card for her stalker scrapbook, and a chance to be the most perfect pregnant woman ever, better than Kate, better than any celeb or everyday mom-to-be effortless in five-inch heels, gaining not an ounce thanks to faux bumps. The pregnancy ran long because they had no game plan or knowledge, got bored and forgot normal gestational laws of nature, or had issues buying a baby, all because they are unethical idiots. Harry decided to play along at some point, and so the RF did too, more fool they.
Rental babies notwithstanding, they had to flee. You cannot raise a phantom in a palace. The movie plot has changed in her head, from being Diana to being Goop, to being a Marvel series movie star to being Oprah to being Madame President, and probably the baby slipped her fevered mind. I think at most they show the Queen a doorframe marked with lines standing for phantom Archie’s growth. But there is no baby.
As you say, she wouldn’t be able to stand not merching her child. Especially now, when desperate for cash.
There is no child, and I don’t think she is pregnant now. I think they told the judge they have to finish a program to submit to Netflix for money to pay lawyers. Or she has tax and passport issues to resolve, I think otherwise she lied to the judge. That he keeps allowing this nonsense is a troubling sign. But I think MoS is watching, taking notes and ready to pounce.
The only thing I can add is the royals created Markle, manipulated the public opinion and now reap what they fully deserve.
I refer to the persistent rumours (indirectly confirmed by the media pundits and the likes of Colin Campbell) about the huge clean up of the Markle's past the royals ordered to make her look "suitable".
I also refer to manipulating public opinion to create a "hero Harry" image.
I can add to the above an absolute breakneck speed at which the Dismal Duo had been given roles to represent UK abroad (all of which turned into the absolute hot embarrassment) despite reservations regarding Markle that had been expressed.
There is no doubt Markle had had reasons to believe the royal family will clean all her messes in order to avoid disaster for themselves. This may partially explain her breathtaking arrogance we can all observe.
What the royal did will come to haunt them for a long time because Markle goes nowhere soon. She is firmly attached to the royal family via Harry.
I wholeheartedly agree. The royals have one of the best, most clever PR I have ever seen. They have weathered so many scandals and yet here they are! Hapless was a fictional creation: the cool funny guy next door who happens to be a war hero as well. But it worked. People believed this PR version of Harry. Until Meagain came along. I am sure they cleaned up her messes in order to make her look suitable. They had to publicly bless their union or else! It was a trap anyway and I think they were aware it was too late to save hapless so they did their best to save their public image. They had to deal with her. She is any family’s nightmare really, let alone the Royal family! She will haunt them forever, even if she becomes Harry’s widow or ex wife. She’s never going away. Their best bet is that she becomes irrelevant to the public and despite all her efforts she seems steadily but slowly heading into oblivion.
Choosing Sunshine Sachs over the PR people of the BRF shows how stupid Megalo is!
If there is an Archie, surely her PR has juicy details to drop every now and then that would relate her motherhood to her supposed market.
Surely we would see PR promos of Megs favorite buggy/stroller, Megs favorite nappies/diapers, Megs favorite soothing baby nighttime cream, Mega favorite nursery scents (and an article about musty Windsor Castle smelling like atrociousness which inspired her to create her own eco friendly baby line of scents...call me Meg, really lol)
Instead we get zero dad-bag merching, favorite travel destinations even a Royal baby loves, best parks, and cars to lug your Royal bundle around.
We already know she throws in partnerships before people want to associate with her (Liza minelli comes to mind), so what would stop her from rubbing elbows with brand elite?
There's so much more than missing baby -sorry, child- Archie, and that's Mom and Dad shit.
KC: Re Game of Thrones. It's inspired by the War of Roses not the Tudors. The author revealed this in various interviews.
Oh, right! Thanks for the correction...Lancaster (red rose) v. York (white rose). The Tudor rose is a combination of those, symbolizing unity, so, later. I knew I had read it was based on actual English history, got the wrong era.
"Not Meghan Markle said...
Ya know, it IS strange that all of Meghan's PR is about her days pre-Royalty."
When she was so much more interesting we all wanted to know about her. So much better than, oh, I dunno, ROYALS.
Maybe she is hitting reset on her PR to give us all a second chance to realize the error of our ways and beg her to let us be her friend...or trying to pretend those bad times of 2018-2020 never happened and it's as if she is just bursting onto the scene.
And if it happens it is all just about her, that will be gratifying to her. It was never about Harry, it was all about Meghan.
KC: Re Game of Thrones. It's inspired by the War of Roses not the Tudors. The author revealed this in various interviews.
I meant to add, how fitting that you are the one to point it out, with a name of such solid historical renown.
I watched the Harry stables video announcing the non-named, late arrival, baby. Harry looks mischievous, charismatic, happy, delighted, sales-y, and well, normal. I then decided to watch Harry from The Hero’s fundraiser video this week. The change in Harry is shocking. It made me sad. There is no one behind the eyes anymore. Harry’s joy has been stolen from him. I’m not a big Harry fan due to his choice of wife, but looking at the two differences in video is alarming. Something happened over the last 18 months that has taken the human out of this guy. It is very sad to see.
Seeing how it is all about Meghan all the time, and she did the runner after she supposedly had Archie, as well as hearing nothing about this child I can only assume Meghan as a Narc is out to destroy the bond Harry has with his child. That child took center stage, is in line of succession, and Meghan could not tolerate sharing Harry’s attention. Thus, the downward spiral from hell ensued. She threw her fit, left the country, ego bruised yet not tolerated, and threatened Harry.
The only viable reason Harry could have done all of this is Archie existing and Meghan threatening to withhold him. So, another theory I do consider is that Harry is doing everything he can to stay near Archie. He had a kid with a crazy person whose ego is too fragile to be responsible for a baby and to be able to put a baby first. This happens to some people and it looks like it may have happened to Harry.
Also explains why we never see Archie. Archie would upstage Meghan. She can’t have that. As a typical Narc, in Meghan’s world Archie does not exist. She feels like she deserves the attention. After all, she’s the one who did all the work to meet Archie’s dad and bring him into existence. A hallmark of Narc parents is competing with their child. Normal empathetic concern doesn’t exist.
Meghan is running from herself and destroying other people along the way. I really hope Harry reads this blog and gets the help he needs.
Enjoying the comments!
They saw quite early that she is, in that succinct British phrase, stark staring raving bonkers. Genuinely insane. Was she was `cleaned up' under the generous assumption that she'd repented of her dubious past and was acting in good faith? After all, she seemed to be able to make H happy and they were delighted to have him `settled' at last.
What could they do when the ugly truth became all too apparent - that neither she nor H function remotely like the majority of people?
To have bitten the bullet and incarcerated either or both under the MHA could have been just as disastrous. They might have got away with hiding H - had he been willing to go along with it. She, however, is a US citizen, capable of screaming the place down. The days of dumping someone like her in a dungeon and forgetting her, drowning her in a barrel of wine, public execution in Whitehall, or something nasty involving a red-hot poker, are long gone.
Even detaining her in the kindest, most luxurious, facility could result in an embarrassing diplomatic incident, for all that many of her fellow countrymen(persons?) would be delighted to see the back of her.
Throw in the R card, possibly/probably blackmail as well - might it have been better to wait for her get into a situation she can't get out of, something from which the RF can't rescue her eg the US procedure equivalent to sectioning under the MHA, or gaoled for drug offences. Then say `We realised she was mad but our hands were tied because she's American, in the US, under American laws- so crazy she faked pregnancy and invented a child. What, politically, could we do, apart from humouring her?'
It's appeasement, which has never worked. In this case though, the alternative seemed worse still.
You're right about narc parents - a child known as Archie may well exist, regardless of his provenance (tbh, I don't believe she was ever pregnant in the way most of us understand it. I'm undecided, however, as to whether there's a child born of a surrogate or if he's a figment of the imagination played by actors/dolls or a surrogate child we've never seem but is played by actors...)
A thought about Tonka Toy baby - if it was an old photo of M & D (as I too suspect)- was the whole thing a fake, where the pap agency was in cahoots with her, legal case not withstanding?
Meghan competing for attention in the U.K. with Prince Harry’s cute SON was too much for her. Harry isn’t as atypical as Meghan. He’s had a wild life, sure, and is entitled as most trust fund kids are. He had stability and loving family and friends his entire life.
I think she did the runner so soon because she knew Archie would have to be shown publicly for RF events and she knows deep down she has a) no time for that and b) everyone would be able to see she doesn’t care about her own kid. So she has to hide him and convince Harry it’s for privacy. Screwed up people are generally well aware they are different from others. She knows this about herself. She couldn’t let the public see that she doesn’t bond with her own kid as he got older. The South Africa situation was the nail in the coffin for her (of course pre planned). She had to show Archie, and knew it would continue. She also didn’t want to show him for free. This also explains her weird detached speeches about ‘the little one’ and ‘family’ and ‘first fall’. She has no verbiage for something she wants nothing to do with and can’t be gained off of. Unless that Charles money of course!
Harry had a kid with a crazy person and is paying the very steep price. It’s so sad. He needs help.
If Archie is not real, and that comes to light I don’t think anyone will trust the Monarchy again.
Why bother trying to make Megsy look suitable if she wasn’t? She truly wasn’t. However we know from the discussion on this blog why...it would have looked far worse for the royals if they had said a flat out no to the union. Recent history could have looked so very different if they had the gumption to.
I imagine it will be something like, both parties to the marriage must reside in the U.K. for a total of two consecutive years prior to an official engagement or publicly funded wedding. Something like that.
Good idea!
It'd have to be verified residence too - none of the old trick of leaving a suitcase with a relative or friend who really does live in the parish with the pretty church, where you want to marry but where neither your or your intended was a parishioner.
Nowadays, one isn't stuck with the choice of parish church, nonconformist church with Registrar in attendance or the local none-too salubrious Register Office. (I saw one once where the entrance was directly off the town car park - handy but not so good for photos.)
It worries me that someone in line to the throne, which is based on the constitution, was able to be compromised (what if she was a foreign agent...). There has to be rules! It doesn’t make any sense he was allowed to date a foreigner with busy schedules and pop the question and move her over all within 12 months of meeting. If they don’t want anyone marrying in haste (I agree with this) just make a rule. It’s government controlled anyway. Free to leave the institution if one doesn’t want to abide. At least this way leaving would happen before duties were undertaken.
I wonder if Meghan knew, either from her extensive research on Diana or through pure instinct, that if she had had to spend three seconds at Balmoral before the wedding, Prince Harry would have seen the light and called it off.
--------------------
MM moved to the UK in October or November 2017, IIRC, so too late for Balmoral that year. In any case, maybe she thought if Diana didn't like Balmoral then she wouldn't? She doesn't strike me as a country girl.
Just a quick reminder I quoted Fairy Crocodile (typing on my phone and forgot the brackets) and I wholeheartedly agreed with her.
Here’s my comment :
“I wholeheartedly agree. The royals have one of the best, most clever PR I have ever seen. They have weathered so many scandals and yet here they are! Hapless was a fictional creation: the cool funny guy next door who happens to be a war hero as well. But it worked. People believed this PR version of Harry. Until Meagain came along. I am sure they cleaned up her messes in order to make her look suitable. They had to publicly bless their union or else! It was a trap anyway and I think they were aware it was too late to save hapless so they did their best to save their public image. They had to deal with her. She is any family’s nightmare really, let alone the Royal family! She will haunt them forever, even if she becomes Harry’s widow or ex wife. She’s never going away. Their best bet is that she becomes irrelevant to the public and despite all her efforts she seems steadily but slowly heading into oblivion.”
Choosing Sunshine Sachs over the PR people of the BRF shows how stupid Megalo is!
Also, I think you’re right they did not have a choice really other than bless their union and deal with the consequences later.
She attempted to project an image of a cuddly liberal. After all, who wouldn't say they believe in equality, racial harmony and world peace - all Good Things, like Motherhood and Apple Pie?
She played the Humanitarian Card for all she was worth, which isn't much as it's turned out!
We had little idea about `Woke' over here; I'd heard of Intersectionality only because it's crept into the world of Contemporary Art (I painted landscape but was expected to discuss to what extent the countryside is `gendered'.)
Her professed ideas seemed not too unreasonable - even now I doubt we know where she really stands on the political spectrum, nor how much is deliberate political thinking and how much pure selfishness. Is she being used, wittingly or unwittingly, by extremists/regimes unfriendly to UK? Or does she just make it easier for them? I still haven't a clue on that.
Prince Harry has been voted the world's sexiest Royal by People Magazine poll.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8969773/Prince-Harry-crowned-Sexiest-Royal-People-magazine-poll.html
Just popping in to share an interview with Prince William I stumbled across. It was published in May 2018. William was still working as an air ambulance pilot. It was about a year since Harry met Meghan and she was full into transferring her life to the UK, even though it would be almost 6 months until the engagement was announced.
The brothers seem to share such a close bond and feelings about media scrutiny, being royal, their mother ... Yet, William comes across as so much more grounded, honest and sensible than his brother as Harry is now.
I feel that there is something sad about this interview. William must feel the loss of his brother keenly. Harry had a chance of living a decent life of service under the guidance of his brother, courtiers and other family members, but he threw it all away to live in a mansion in Montecito with Meghan, trapped in the ever-spiralling cost of PR.
On Twitter today the scuttlebutt is that our friend is having "screaming fits" reading about herself online, unable to control the narrative.
Opus said, I have never been to Balmoral nor am I likely to receive an invitation to do so and that is just as well as I do not wish to be the guest from hell and frankly house parties are just not to my homely tastes.
There is however an accepted way of explaining that Bojo could not organise a drinking session in a brewery or a lockdown in a pandemic without in any way revealing ones political leanings.
Being a house guest be it at Balmoral or otherwise pretty much appeals to me like a hole in the head, probably far more so, knowing I’d be expected to keep changing my outfits (and more) for a Balmoral visit. It would be a very uncomfortable visit for me.
No matter what side of wealth or social divide you’re from, good manners costs absolutely nothing, and even if you weren’t brought up to know them, you can learn them. So any house guest should know and show good manners no matter who you are. Cherie B is no exception. As a ranking QC I would expect better and more of her. Her behaviour in that respect is worse than Megsy’s, I would find it hard to think even she would be quite that rude towards the royals, to their faces at least.
Whatever side of politics you lean, and the side currently in State is the one you voted for, it doesn’t mean you can’t or shouldn’t be an objective thinker about them, we don’t have to like or approve everything they do or say.
Sadly we have no such vote or say about our royals and we are either stuck with them or we outright reject them all.
They either need an urgent visit to Specsavers or the Duo paid People Magazine!
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/psychic-who-predicted-covid-explains-23040188
He sees Meghan doing a tell-all interview about the royals in 2021. (My favourite tarot reader also saw this ... trying to change her image and out of spite, but it will do her no good).
Will this be before or after separation and filing for divorce, or is this a toxic relationships that will last?
Good grief!
Prince Harry has been voted the world's sexiest Royal by People Magazine poll.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8969773/Prince-Harry-crowned-Sexiest-Royal-People-magazine-poll.html
I wonder how much THAT cost? ROFLOL, just no.
"Being a house guest be it at Balmoral or otherwise pretty much appeals to me like a hole in the head"
I dare say you would have been just fine. You would need to change several times a day but nobody would expect you having new outfits for all days of your stay. You would need a breakfast dress/skirt and jumper or blouse, walking outfit, pre-dinner drinks outfit (skirt and blouse or cardigan) and a formal dinner attire, normally a longer dress with some jewellery. To be honest even I (a woodland doggy dweller) could manager this. They wouldn't expect you to wear state of the art make up or elaborate hair, a light make with a touch of eyeshadow for the evening perhaps.
The absolute must is the love of great outdoors. This is what this is all about. They wouldn't force you to take part in hunting, you could get a dog and go walking, bird watching, castle visits and such. The main thing is being outside in pretty much any weather and enjoying it. Country folk see nothing wrong with it; city dwellers may think it boring.
You would need some basic etiquette knowledge (like when to start and finish meals, how to read the Queen's signals and so on but guests normally get this info from staff). If you are confident in your own skin you would have no difficulty following it.
Conversation may present a bit of a challenge, because you would be expected to avoid sensitive subjects like politics, health and etc but an animal lover, a gardener, UK traveller, a history lover or architecture enthusiast would have no problem finding a subject to talk about at the dinner table or around the house. The Queen is the least self-obsessed person in the world and she doesn't like self-centred people, so talking about something other than yourself is very much a must!
You would be absolutely fine if you are a sincere and polite person.
I got most of the above from various reads and from talking to people, may be something missing but the you get the generic idea! If you are interested in people and a listener you may even find it enjoyable, being a part of a truly historic WORKING household for a while.
You can see why somebody like Markle found these country visits unbearable.
Exactly. It would be a bombshel if discovered a green screen was used at some point to fake them being together, or suggest that there is a child in the room. I doubt they have the wherewithal to pull it off, but Oprah might share, if still halfheartedly protecting her Harry investment.
Just another little toolbox addition for our fraud notebook.
Well I love the countryside, outdoor pursuits and activities (I moved back to remote Norfolk a place I spent my teenage years) and animals, history gardening etc all yes. I’m just not a natural house guest, I listen but I don’t talk very much. I guess I’d be fine. ;o) Lol
A little year ago, Harry won as People’s sexiest dad even though there is no baby or sign of comfortable interaction with a child.
This year he is an ex royal, winning for sexiest royal.
All out of M’s high school plot book. First to make it she married the best dad, and now to make it seem she got the better prince. Wait til Kate heard, oh my! So stupid. H & M are two dumb 13 year olds.
Aha! would you mind if I ask for your advice re Norfolk? We are thinking about moving from the Midlands to the remote Norfolk; possibly North Norfolk. Do you have any advice what place is remote, rich in nature, quiet?
Thank you!
(Gossip on Twitter) ...'our friend is having "screaming fits" reading about herself online, unable to control the narrative.'
---------------
The thing is, she could control the narrative if she wanted to. If she changed her behaviour, was less self-absorbed, not so money driven etc (the list is too long), then she would be a better person and better liked. But as she's never at fault and is a permanent victim she can't see it.
Good points ... sexiest dad minus the child; sexiest royal now that he is an ex-royal, or royal in name only, minus the HRH!
I wonder how important this People PR is to the Sussexes?
Do you think Harry made that comment about good deeds done in private as PR strategy? They have used every 'good deed' platform to Zoom in and get publicity. Does he not feel like a hypocrite saying these things that Megsy tells him to or encourages him to? All about 'the optics'. So shallow. Successful for some celebrities who have become very wealthy, but I think most people can see it for what it is. And you have to keep pumping the PR and media exposure to fill the coffers to feed the never-ending spending.
I read her take on the revelations that Meghan got help writing the letter to her father. Crazy Lainey thinks that the Mail on Sunday has evil intentions in all of this, when they were the ones who got sued. The way Lainey writes it, they are evil and nefarious because more info about Meghan is going to come out of the suit, when, in fact, it was Meghan who was hoping for a quick payout when she filed a suit against them. Always the victim!
I have spent the time since my last post reading and absorbing all the comments and analysing the various scenarios re the Sussex duo and I have thought of a comment made over 2,000 years ago that seems to sum up the Markle Debacle exactly:
"Youth ages, immaturity is outgrown, ignorance can be educated and drunkenness sobered but stupid lasts forever" - Aristophanes.
Boy, he sure has them taped - and here's another of his "gems" that I find very apt (and I wish the Harkles would take note):
"Open your mind before your mouth"!
re ArIstophanes
They can't have listened to the Croaking Chorus at Toad hall - or was it all Greek to them?
Brekekekèx-koàx-koáx ...
Oh my off-topic question.
I live in South Norfolk. Another Nutty Puds I believe lives near to Sandringham, she might know more about the North and have more detailed knowledge. ;o)
When I moved up here previously a family member owned a holiday cottage, so we knew the area and got to know the people. I’d advise you visit the area and travel around (if you haven’t already) and see what you prefer. There’s a lot of nature’s reserves and open gardens and the endless country lanes to explore.
I have a friend from the Midlands who recently spent a month in her campervan travelling around Norfolk. I thought she’d prefer the North more, but she preferred the South, she didn’t really explain why! I think she preferred the smaller quieter towns which there’s oodles of. She went kayaking local to me.
I personally love Holt, Sheringham (but neither particularly small nor quiet especially in the summertime) and any of the fabulous beaches along the coast, Wells-Next-the-Sea. Budget is dependent and some of the nicer towns or villages aren’t cheap. I honestly don’t think you can horribly wrong wherever you chose, but if remoteness you want it’s very easy to achieve. However, it has its downsides which should be considered IMHO. I live just outside to a tiny medieval market town and the nearest train station to me is 9 miles away, the nearest hospital is 26 and we have next to no bus services and no local taxi service and it’s pitch black at night because there’s no street lights. We get completely cut off from the outside world in bad weather. I’m remote but not as remote as I’d like despite it being totally impractical! Lol
They have quite a few on H&M including supposed a source about screaming fits on bad publicity. They have have a post at Sept 27th that they will"officially retire" at one year review as there is no going back.
Also the letter being reviewed by the palace -
Key correction to this: she ran it by Royal PR CJ at the time, he KNEW, didn’t approve: it violated Royal Protocol in every sense of the word. She was delivered press instruction to respect RF protocol & concierges by not blindsiding them — ignored all, then #Megxit happened.
I suppose MM simply replaced ELF with MM+SS.....and so H does as he’s told. They tell him there is cash at the end, perhaps. He is a mental box of rocks, anyway. And, like her, has a fetish about reading comments about himself, they say. Maybe he sees bad comments, and now his Stockholm Syndrome kicks in to do more of whatever M and SS say, on their rage grows. Every day they say do THIS AND YOU WILL BE A HERO, then it flops. Over and over as they drill their bad reputation deeper down into the earth’s crust.
Side note: PR people I know in NYC have said for awhile now that SS made themselves look like B list incompetents over this never-ending game, even if they are cashing a few royal checks. Their competition apparently is quietly prospering from SS’s public PR fiasco. (If your clients is stubborn and makes you look bad, you should dump them.) Plus everyone knows about the bots etc. It is poor work. Markled.
Meltdown news:
It is the Theresa Longo Fans Twitter, celeb gossip tweets, people are referring to about M’s meltdown per a little inside bird. Says she is whinging to friends and scrambling: “...Dominating the days: putting out fires, spending more on PR, strategizing and FIXING IT! In other words, pure stress!”
<—- no mention of childcare in there, eh? juggling a baby with PR work, exhaustion from baby Archie and doing this....
Presumably they have a nice little `pension pot' by way of being `Duchy retirees'?
We have to ask how much is it worth to the RF to keep them out of the way? is it cheap at the price?
"Also the letter being reviewed by the palace -
Key correction to this: she ran it by Royal PR CJ at the time, he KNEW, didn’t approve: it violated Royal Protocol in every sense of the word. She was delivered press instruction to respect RF protocol & concierges by not blindsiding them — ignored all, then #Megxit happened."
Interesting. Of course, there was a long and mostly painful to watch 1 year and 4 months between the sending of the letter and the Megxit announcement.
It's years since I was last in Norfolk but, under present circumstances, I'd say avoid the coast, literally like the plague.
I live in a holiday area in Devon within sight of the sea. We got off very lightly in the first lockdown (lots of older people who are used to following rules) but our numbers are climbing now, partly on account of students from up-country but particularly, we believe, holiday makers coming down the M-way from Tier 3 areas.
We suspect they're attracted to a nearby `holiday park'. (It's huge, from across the bay the white roofs of the `mobile units' look like a gannet colony, guano plastered over the landscape.)
So, while SE Norfolk has most of such places (Yarmouth to Hemsby) there must be others. The Broads too will attract 'em. If you can cope with the drawbacks of country life, go inland! North Norfolk is said to be popular for second homes as well - lots of problems with those in Cornwall.
Their plans are strictly `for the Birds' - they don't live in Montecito but in Nephelokokkygia, ie "cloud-cuckoo-land".
Off-topic
A lot of coastal towns attract outsiders even out of COVID times, Southwold is not what it used to be and gets packed out with out of towner’s during the Summer and you can’t move. Hemsby is lovely, again it gets too busy in the Summer season.
Norfolk is very popular for second homes. I’m inland and although we get second homes in the area it’s not rife. It’s very quiet and safe too. I’m from London and not at retirement age, but I totally agree about knowing whether you can hack remote country life. It’s fine until something goes wrong. I’d never retire to a remote area unless I knew the place beforehand.
Ladies thank you so much for your advice re Norfolk! You can't even imagine how great your help is!
1/ November 17, 2020: People Mag released sexiest man alive cover 2020: Michael B Jordan. I have seen this stuff everywhere on social media/ gossip mag...
2/ Nutmeg is delusional but she knows Harry can't compete with young Brad Pitt, John Legend, young Clooney, Idris Elba so she asks her 12 PR aids to get (=buy) a small consolation price.
4/ November 19, 2020 : according to People Mag: Harry sexiest royal alive.
I wonder which she hates most - straightforward criticism or being laughed at world-wide?
Can’t stop laughing either🤣
You have to give them that: in these difficult times, they can give us a few good laugh occasionally!
Southwold is of course in the County of Suffolk and I always understood was populated by retired Admirals and the like except for its festival when Londoners turn up to listen to music about small boys. No love lost there methinks between the locals and the Musos.
To your list you can certainly add Prince Carl Philip of Sweden, also Frederik, Crown Prince of Denmark.
I think if MM has pushed for Harry to be voted sexiest royal, it's because it reflects well on her and she can bask in his glory. What next, Megalo sexiest woman alive?
@ KC : I'm obsessed with the plantagenets. A drama filled era that make the Tudors seem like amateurs in comparison.
The first 2 seasons of GoT was de ja vu for me as far as historic inspirations. Easy to see which character is inspired by which historic figure in England and in Europe.
Felt vindicated when i looked up the author and he mentioned that he was inspired by the War of the Roses which as you know was the end period of the plantagenet era.
Bringing it back to our currently misbehaving royals, i used to think that Harry and Meghan had a similar relationship with Henry 8 and Anne Boleyn as far as both Henrys being obsessed with a woman to the detriment of all else and willing to change the world to please/ suit the woman.
The woman is assumed to have extraordinary powers of seduction and persuasion and intelligence and yet it's simply singular focus on the one man, play him like a fiddle to do your bidding, sic him on any and all perceived enemies, cry victim all the way until you have all the power. Pop out baby asap to seal the deal. An opportunistic arrangement on one side and obsession on the other side. Woman willing to risk her very soul to get what she wants and then is reckless with the acquired gains followed by swift downfall.
The idea that Anne was super intelligent just because she had read Erasmus is idiotic. Anyone who read Erasmus and thrown off the old ways of thinking and superstition was deemed intelligent. She never contributed any new thoughts or ideas like Katherine Parr, but merely parroted what she read or heard. She never contributed to the arts except to reflect the court of Queen Margaret of Austria at whose court she'd spent formative years.
Along the way she teaches the man to tap into his inner tyrant and see enemies in the bushes.
Right now she cowering as Anne cowered in Palaces scared to go out in London because the people hated her. Sending out Henry to make them love her.
For Megsy's sake, i hope it doesn't end with her complete distraction even though we know that the minute Henry walks away, her reputation will be torn to shreds in a modern version of Anne's fate. And Henry will play the 'i was bewitched by a devil woman' card to the hilt even if he never regains his public standing.
These days i see Harry as George Plantagenet, Duke of Clarence. The jealousy, envy and resentment. The willingness to betray his brother and family. The easy seduction and susceptibility to flattery from various external parties who wish to harm his family or just using him to farther their own interest. The delusion that he should be equal or better still, King instead of his brother. The inflated ego and self-regard beyond his actual status.
George took it too far once too often and ended up in the tower never to be seen again though Shakespeare immortalises him in his Richard play by having him drowned in a barrel of wine.
As for my username, it's a nod to the greatest royal woman in my opinion. Eleanor of Acquitaine. My obsession with her knows no bounds!!! She's currently re-imagined in the TV show Empire starring Taraji Henson as Eleanor (Cookie). The show itself is a modern re-imagining of The Lion in Winter which is itself the tale of Eleanor and her second husband, Henry 2 of England (the 1st Plantagent)
Plus Nutmeg always wants to be the "1st", "the most", "the best". That is her major weakness because her espérances de grandeur doesn't fit reality.
It wreaks of amateur hour.
Going up against the BRF? Daily? They cannot sustain the PR push that entails.
https://www.quora.com/q/themarkles/I-am-often-asked-about-Soho-House-I-have-been-both-a-member-and-also-worked-for-them-as-a-contractor-I-refrained-from-p?
It’s not really a secret Meghan met Harry in Toronto at Soho House, she was a member and I saw her there several times. Markus even introduced her and a few friends to our group (my guests are prominent in the industry and were checking out the Toronto production facilities, I just happened to be in Toronto for work).
Harry was in Toronto for the Invinctus games preperation and and was taken to Soho House as a private place to eat and party. Markus did the introductions and of course the spin started early with the whole blind date narrative etc. Trying to present the romantic storyline, rather than the truth she and her group approached them in a bar.
Markus told us the story and the staff who were there also said they same, so since it is the only thing that works from a diary perspective, it must be true, I know it’s boring right, not worthy of a Royal Romance This has never been denied and it is what Markus does and he now often lives with the couple.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13257133/prince-harry-meghan-markle-possessions-frogmore-cottage-princess-eugenie/
H&M gave Frogmore to Eugenie - moved all possessions out and to CA
The secretive switch saw treasured items and furniture packed off to the Sussexes’ home in California.
Grade II-listed Frogmore technically remains the Sussexes’ UK residence but it is unlikely they will live there as a family again.
A source said: “Removal vans pitched up in the dead of the night and cleared out the cottage. They definitely did not want to be seen.
“Emptying their home and handing over the keys is a pretty strong sign Harry and Meghan have no plans to return.
“It appears they are tying up loose ends as they plan to extend their stay in the US perhaps permanently.”
It was on Quora I read that Harry didn't know about the Vanity Fair "Wild About Harry" feature, they were not together exclusively at the time and he was "bemused" by the episode. It is just like her to put the narrative out there and then let the dust settle.
More thoughts about the letter, KP's involvement, and her father. Note she is the one approaching BP saying she was distressed about the media and her father. I view her as an unreliable narrator. It's always according to her and she is claiming to be stalked, burglarized, white powder sent to her, her father being chased by paps....etc. She brings her chaos/crazy/delusions. Police in fact investigated the break in and white powder, I believe, and they could not establish any leads.
How cute is this? Since they are normal they will love FroggyMore and make it their own little nest. I highly doubt Megs/H ever paid off the Frogmore renovations. Why should they have, now that this house is in new and more reliable hands?
there was a story recently about the Queen had told the aides to "get Frogmore ready for Harry". Well, sounds like the aides were packing the place up and getting it ready for Eugenie.
I wonder where all the stuff is? Who paid to ship it to CA? Lots of weird stuff going on with those two.
Harry has released a statement from his office saying he is receiving updates and closely following developments in the investigation ( Chris Ship ITV twitter)
Simultaneously he has released a statement ( i'm paraphrasing the salient points) to People magazine saying that
1. the backlash to his silence on the matter in light of Willuam speaking up is dangerous and could drive a wedge between the brothers (too late mate!!)
2.
He doesn't need to publish a statement to show his private thoughts (that wasn't a problem when he was denied at Remembrance!!!)
3. At any rate, he remains immensely grieved and hurt by the loss of his mother. (this isn't about you Harry you numpty!)
Very weird stuff going on
Great find. Makes sense. Spin cycle on overdrive!
Markus from Soho House would have know Harry was going to be a guest there for months. He and Meghan had plenty of time to prep.
That commenter is right, it was boring, but it wasn't without a lot of plotting planning scheming drugs and alcohol. I doubt Harry agreed to a date with Meghan without being totally shit-faced at the bar. He probably did think it would be a one night dinner affair. They probably recorded the whole thing and are using blackmail. Harry doing hard drugs would fit the bill.
I suspect as these people got their grip into Harry it has become harder for him socially to withdrawal.
He had decent judgment (although I question anyone that hangs out at Soho House as having good judgment), and as usual was being his party prince self, but since he wandered away from the higher end private clubs he got ensnared in a tacky soap opera with a group on the grift.
Also, explains Omid's continued involvement.
What a mess.
No worries, I’ve done the same. I’m sure Fairy Crocodile will see the comment. I love the beach and the wide open countryside....I’ve chosen the latter. Not as windy and you know that lazy cold East wind we get here. ;o)
So we and the readers of Quora know - who else I wonder?
The tea seems to be seeping out under the door - how long before they've upset so many people that the truth about all their scams comes out in a rush, without the RF having to say anything?
It looks as if the denouement approaches. Are you reading this Harry? I do hope so - the game's up - no point in trying to hide it now.
It can't get much worse, unless you see her and Markus heating a poker. In that case, flee for your life. We were talking about Game of Thrones earlier and medieval kings. You don't want to end up (if you'll pardon the expression) Edward II to the C**ntess of Dumbasston's Isabella, She-Wolf of France.
Translation: they sub-let Frogmore Cottage to Eugenie.
One rule for the elites another for everyone else. ;)
Re point 3 "he remains immensely grieved and hurt by the loss of his mother." No one is denying it but how many more times he is going to say it? How much mileage can he get out of it? And William, too, feels her loss.
I don't know whether to believe it or not!
Secret movers in the middle of the night - moving WHAT exactly, when the Harkles never lived there?
Is this how Harry is going to make money by renting the place to his cousin?
And since when does the history of the Harkles state the Queen allowed them the use of FrogCott as of April 2018 before they even married? I thought the decision to get them out of KP happened after the Oceania tour in the fall of 2018?
On a somewhat separate note - I wonder where Markle's huge taxpayer-funded wardrobe is being housed? The wardrobe that was supposed to be worn as a working royal that she spent millions on - despite knowing she would be leaving the firm as well as the country that paid for all the (mostly) hideous garments?
New HaryMarkle.
Harry’s Veteran ‘Quest’