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
Maybe she will ultimately blow it all, and sink like mud back down to her natural level, hawking cheap jewelry, basic wine, recipes for toast.
Maybe somewhere deep in the muck of her disorder, she knows she can’t cut it as actress, royal, fashion star or producer, and fears having her lack of ability discovered. And so she argues, fights, demands, pouts, and dithers — anything to appear like a victim instead of a scared incompetent failure— then, she bolts.
You yourself are poison, bringing in nothing but merching pennies and meanwhile blowing through mountains of money on PR, invitations to video-speak, surgery, lawyers, surrogates, mansion rental, clothes, jets, sets, cars, security. Your attempt to get some funds out of your husband’s pregnant (younger mother) cousin is thwarted. Your father-in-law seems unusually distant, and your husband’s grandmother isn’t returning calls. Your big law case is getting messier and your law firm is calling about added hours and late invoices. You also just hired a pile of public relations and marketing staff, who want their checks.
What do you do? Tell your husband no? And go broker?
Tell him yes, and plan to pull the strings in private, thinking no one will notice?
I wonder if MM will say one of their dogs has been injured or is sick?
I doubt it. She didn't even want to share the spotlight with her dogs back in the UK, if dumping one and possibly killing the other is any indication.
But I vaguely recall a mention of the Harkles wanting to get a dog for Archie. So maybe we'll get an update on that and see the dog. (We won't see Archie, though.)
If she does try to milk this in a way that really flatters her, we might get a leaked story about the time she met Lupo and how quickly he took to her. (Animals are so attracted to Meghan, you see. She's practical a Diesneyp rincess) And then William yanked Lupo back violently, calling him a "bad dog" for spoiling Meghan's skirt. Which led to Meghan standing up for Lupo . . . and Lupo loving her even more for it! Later, "Aunt" Meghan had a wonderful time playing with her nephews and niece and their dog. Everyone just loved her! And now she really misses Lupo. And Lupo, up in dog heaven, probably misses her, too!
For example, the tiara.
If you see a lot of the pomp ceremony photos (full of robes from and glittering jewels) from People magazine (USA sources) and don't get on the local evening news photos of the 2 piece dressy suit and matching hat from the garden party or the ribbon event in tiny village, you might conclude that is most of the day to day life is big dress up party after party.
So tiaras are not probably going to be a guy thing so my guess (if he was even asked), he may have told her that she would basically be allowed to pick what she wanted (maybe because he didn't know/care, it seemed like that was what his mother had done while he was growing up or that he didn't want to disappoint her and was counting on the relationship between he and his grandmother to smooth things over). She asked to take one on the Down Under tour and told no by PC - and that was after the wedding tiaragate.
I think he understood some of them (like curtsy to higher) as that would have been drilled in from when he first was able to bow. But others, not so much - like the difference between what properties HM owns (excepting B), his father's properties and intentions for them, what is owned by the Crown or how grace and favor works and how to listen to the staff to keep yourself out of a faux pas. My impression is that as a party boy rep, he would have been able to easily dodge the "you need to know this" that William could not.
Just as she may not have told him everything about herself, he might have not told her everything about him (like how well the palace had made his reputation look great by various pieces and carefully managed events which took a lot of time to build up) ... he might have wanted to impress her about what he had to offer and made it all sound so much more glam, the fancy lifestyle available than it really was or what strings came with it as they hadn't really started pulling a lot on his strings since there were so many others already filling in as needed.
So, I'm thinking that part of why things seem so haphazard for them is that he didn't know how to use the system, she's making decisions based on how she thinks things work and then having it all blow up. Add into it that they aren't stopping to analyze what and why it went wrong, they keep repeating the same mistakes but in slightly different ways. Not helping is that the advisors seem to be American so they don't see/hear/understand the understated British way of doing/saying things or the meaning behind the words like HM will be wearing a hat.
it would be a shame if they lost any good standing found recently by throwing their lot in with the Markles and taking possession of a Crown property in an underhand way.
I agree! I think that after the stunt Meghan pulled at Princess Eugenie's wedding alone, Eugenie would be very wary of cutting a deal with Meghan that would amount to hustling her own family.
And I think that Meghan and Edo's ex Daria are cut from the same drama-loving, chaos-creating cloth. Princess Beatrice had had to deal with Daria for about a year before meeting Meghan. I'm sure she'd counsel her sister against getting involved with snakes.
Eugenie and Jack lived in Ivy Cottage at Kensington Palace - Crown property.
However, they have always paid rent.
I don't know why the Sussexes made such a big deal in their manifesto about paying for FC. That is how the system works. They were not doing anyone any favour.
An interesting fact is that although Edward and Andrew live in Crown property on the Windsor Estate, both have always paid rent. Edward is and Andrew was a full-time working royal.
Harry was always given special treatment that did not fit in with the system that everyone else adhered to.
A further issue is that Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle, St James Palace, Kensington Palace, Clarence House are all working residences. They include offices and rooms for receptions and working dinners and cocktail parties. Harry and Megsy were paranoid about FC being private and did not even have any staff living on the property.
Blogger SwampWoman said...
Hikari said: This smacks of the Palace washing their hands of Harry. There may not be so much as a camper van awaiting him if he ever decides he’s had enough of LaLaLand.
"Well, this certainly explains the petulance of not publicly (or privately either, I expect) wishing Daddy a happy birthday or a happy anniversary to HRH and PP. I wonder what it was that earned them the final royal boot applied firmly to a**...
"I expect that a veritable floodgate of suppressed information may be about to break forth."
November 21, 2020 at 6:57 AM
Blogger jessica said...
"If BRF cut them off for good, there’s no chance her angle at involving them in her court case with ANL is going to work out in her favor at all. "
If the BRF has cut them off for good, SwampWoman's veritable floodgates may indeed break forth. If they are finally cut loose, there is nothing to be gained by keeping quiet anymore. Anytime, guys!
The lack of birthday greeting and anniversary best wishes....just flat out COLD. All that posing in the cemetery, got time for that! But no Zoom call or anything. I am sure if the Dysphoria Duo even mailed a dollar store birthday card, it would have been mentioned somewhere by somebody, and better than nothing.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13262972/harry-meghan-frogmore-cottage-deal-secret/
The Sun also has the same report...That Eugenie brokered a clandestine deal to take over the cottage and pay the Harkles directly, “blindsiding” the Palace.
I call bollocks to that.
Let us consider:
1. Harry is not his own landlord.
2. Eugenie has a very good relationship with her grandmother. Look at the reverential curtsy she gave her majesty at her wedding. A courtesy that low has only been done by Fergie and Diana before her. Would E. Really jeopardize the love and trust of her grandmother, not to mention William and Kate, by aligning her self with the two Sussex traitors,..All for the sake of moving into a home that Meg and H. didn’t even want?
3. Megs PR is Attempting to completely erase her betrayal at E’s wedding, Swanning in with her huge maternity coat and announcement. I actually credit Eugenie with being a bigger person, and not letting such theatrics completely ruin her day—Even though the media delighted at the time and reporting how she was in tears and beside herself. But momma Sarah was certainly loaded for bear. If E got into bed with Meg, she’d have to answer to Mom, not just Granny. No, I think it’s safe to say that the entire York family hates Meg with the heat of 1000 sons and would not do anything to line her pockets indirectly.
4. E and J already reside in a Crown property, or did, at KP. Even though they are ready for a larger place, it was hardly likely that they were going to have to stuff their newborn in a dresser drawer at Ivy cottage. They could certainly afford to go through official channels to request a larger home at the Queen’s discretion. A more likely scenario is that the Queen has given her granddaughter FC with her good wishes. And Mdme. Suxxit cannot stand it.
Hmmmm. If the compilation in this tweet is halfway representative, the sugars doth project too much:
https://twitter.com/KatesRangers/status/1330577983585857538
I remember that quote as well.
I only read his roasted chicken/Soho House post after Nutties here commented on incorrect info regarding the RF/firm sprinkled within his other submissions.
It seems his Soho House/Chicken tea has really taken off! I'm seeing it repeated everywhere and have come across it all over Twitter, other blogs, etc. The guy himself claims on Quora that he is now getting all kinds of messages over this "tea".
Now today I see he has joined LipStick Alley under the name "Doopheus". He only left a couple of comments so far, but he seems to be discussing and defending the origin of his tea.
Here is his first post:
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/page-5882#post-65211446
I know little of Royal arrangements but for what I take to be a grace and favour property I find the notion of subletting somewhat unlikely. Can one sub-let a council house? Would the Harkles be making a rental profit?
Suppose the Duke had married Markle under duress that would make the marriage voidable (I think rather than void) but being misled would not have that effect on the legality of the union. Many men have married assuming their future wife to be more virginal than they have been led to believe and many women have married men far more impecunious than they likewise had been assured but that does not affect the validity of the marriage.
We don’t much bother about virgin brides any more, but I’m sure neither Harkle expected that condition, With the way those two got around. But isn’t fraud grounds for annulling a marriage? In the context of this union, if Harry was coerced into going through with a wedding through threats of blackmail, and/or if he were under the influence when he agreed to it, Wouldn’t either of those be an impediment to his ability to consent, legally? Or doesn’t nervous groom literally have to be held at gunpoint for it to be considered coercion?
The whole Harkle debacle smacks of some kind of undue and shady pressure being brought to bear on Harry to go through with this marriage. I’m not sure that Harry’s free well was in play in this decision, so I’m wondering what sort of recourse if any he’s got if he ever decided to come clean about what got him to the altar. If there’s any truth to the allegation that William refused to sign the register as a legal witness, that really set alarm bells off to me. He doesn’t like Meg, But he was the best man. He stood up before God and witnessed a ceremony take place With the Archbishop of Canterbury presiding. If it was truly a legal union made without impediment on his part, Williams personal feelings about the bride are immaterial. But what if he knows some thing which would render this marriage fraudulent? No wonder he didn’t want to attach his signature to the register as a future monarch. But that leads to the question, What have her Majesty and the Archbishop of Canterbury participated in, and what did they know? If William knew something that would invalidate these vows, Why not tell the queen and get this entire travesty canceled? This sucker is truly like an onion with layer after layer.
He further claims, as he knows people at the Palace, that the palace staff official complaints were 80% Meghan.
He also claims the Letter lawsuit was Harry's idea and Meghan went with it.
I could 100% believe that. He probably assumed they'd roll over, and Charles has won a copy claim prior, AND he believes the non- shady version of events Meghan espouses to him.
I wonder if Harry has caught on that Megs is all an act yet.
She's still trying to sell the narrative to Harry. That's her only focus it seems.
Very expensive!
Besides, I am sure the Harkles need the stuff at FC to fill that mansion in Montecito.
What is strange is that it was done at night. Overtime just adding to the cost.
If he didn't want to sign off because he's a future monarch and thought the marriage was a fraud, he was willing for his father, also a future monarch to sign off. Did he share his concerns with Charles? And he was willing to stand up for Harry in front of God, his Queen, and the world while a fraud was committed....I think H&M just decided to do it the way they did (and maybe they didn't want Will "this girl" signing!)
In the deepest recesses of my mind I am now going searching (because I have no access to nor wish to remind myself of the law) as to the grounds for a marriage to be pronounced void that is to say despite all appearance to the contrary it never happened. The parties must not at that time be married to anyone else, they must be of different sexes (well that was the law I learned) they must be of legal age i.e. sixteen or over, they must not be too closely related e.g. you cannot marry your mother, they must be of sound mind and capable of making and comprehending the decision. I think that is more or less it. Duress makes, I seem to recall, a marriage voidable - after all they may decide later that they prefer being married.
It took one day of packing and loading, a week of travel, and the two days of unloading and unpacking with my mother ordering everyone where things needed to go.
I've moved a two bed flat around 10 years ago, from NYC to London. I did the packing and they did the loading. It was $3.5k.
You also tip 10-20% cash to each moving staff. They sit there with your stuff until you hand it over.
I had to store those goods for two months, which they did for $600 per month in a warehouse at the dock before they shipped it to the UK.
Giving an idea of costs. I don't think Royals blink twice.
On T. Perry's airplane, with only seconds to spare before the border closed?
I think one of them has been watching too many video games....
Going on my own experience, we’ve used such packers and so has another family member many times (to move abroad). Could they have packed us up in a night? Absolutely not, there was far too much stuff and some items had to be specially wrapped and packed. So with that in mind, I’m going with Opus’ theory with either the Duo didn’t have much to pack or there wasn’t anything there to move (if it was done in the dead of night and no-one saw not heard a thing).
"I actually know someone who used a deluxe removal service. They pack and unpack everything, down to toiletries in your bathroom and clothes."
I don't know anyone with that kind of money to spend (or who would trust their possessions to outsiders) but I don't doubt those services exist and royals can afford them. But packing at night? And packing not for ground shipment via truck but packing for overseas shipping? By boat, I assume? Or I guess maybe by private cargo jet? Either way it seems some of the furniture would need crating.
I do know people who've been packed up for moves by the US military. And it's often a hoot when the 100s of boxes get unpacked by the family as unpacking service isn't provided (at least not for the lower ranks.) Trash (not garbage but trash) sometimes gets packed as do empty cardboard boxes, old newspapers, paper towel rolls with one towel left, burned out lightbulbs, empty wire coat hangers.... everything goes! And the front door mat might be packed not with the backdoor mat but with pillows from the couch or towels. Kitchen pots might be packed with winter coats. Quite the treasure hunt when unpacking!
Also, sorry my parents employer paid those costs. It's common with relo, or taking a new position that the company will cover costs (even closing costs on homes and temporary housing).
Which brings me to question if they are on 'gardening leave'. They must have got a severance package (which may have included their moving costs), and further do they get a pension from the Crown?
Does anyone know?
Even at twice the price I am sure the BRF was overjoyed to pay the Gruesome's full eviction tariffs. This including all full shipping costs to Montecito for whatever the Gruesomes left behind at Frog Cot. Hopefully all her expensive couture was located and shipped out west too.
The Dastardlies living in far off California and having all their "stuff" sent there is a blessing. This gives a large break and some finality as far as these two Characters not being Royal anymore. William and Queenie know this even if Charles cannot. Look for titles to be stripped in the early new year of 2021.
It is a New Year to ring in Jack and lovely Eugenie at Frogmore to nest and produce love and babies.
She can step into Meghan's shoes and warmly be welcomed by the British public, after what they have been out through!!
It is very clever of the Crown to make this arrangement!
I want to know if they are truly living in Montecito. I haven't read of any sightings. Surely, if they were as famous as they think they are we would be seeing much more movement in the area. This leads me to believe they either don't live in montecito or they aren't very famous. :)
Having been moved three times by kind employers, the process is a beautiful thing to behold. So efficient. They send enough men to get it done during normal working hours. But they weren’t tasked with moving us in the dead of night, without the benefit of lights to ensure my obsession with secrecy was preserved and my forgotten paper bowl of rotten avocados weren’t harmed.
If Charles is sent a mammoth invoice, for late hours and special handling, he ought to look for Omid’s fingerprints on it, and send it on for payment to Harkle Villa, California, Home of the Sour Lemons.
The Crown and BRF are saying. ""You have relocated to California and from all we read at DM and the British tabloids (lulz) we can see that you are prospering with Netflix and your new White Russian Mudslide Mansion"
"Therefore as a last favor to you we are shipping all your scraps and other stuff to Montecito, all on the Royale tab"
"No need to return to ol' Blighty (racist soil) for your possessions or any kind of review. We can do a 20 minute cursory zoom review come the New Year or you can kindly bugger off in sunny Los Angeles" ---- You are being kicked out and being replaced by Jack and Eugenie.
SIGNED-- The Grey Men.
Yes, a house move at night... Good comparison with MM leaving for the Portland hospital at night without being seen.
Ha! So true! I look forward to seeing a DM article about how their Windsor neighbors and townspeople are encouraged to say hello.
And how Eugenie and Jack officially tore up the previously distributed Harkle list of “Don’t Look At Us Or Ask to Touch Our Wig or Feed the Sad Ginger” bylaws, and threw the bits into the road.
I am also familiar with @Beard_Club, thanks to a #Kaylor blogger on Tumblr. But I'm afraid I didn't come away with the best impression. I fancy that @Beard_Club thinks every relationship in the public eye is gay and that the only reason a couple would present a fake relationship to the public is to hide the homosexuality of one or both partners. To pick one example, @Beard_Club has also speculated that Prince Charles is gay . . . that all of the women he dated (and married!) to prove his masculinity to his father were beards, including Camilla . . . and that Diana was actually a butch lesbian who bearded first for Charles and then for Dodi.
The writing style also reminds me of Illuminati conspiracy blogs, referencing "templates" and a "playbook" for doing certain things. Even if some of the stories are 100% true, the rest of it reads too much like fevered fan fiction for my tastes.
Oh how I wish they would begin doing their silly photo ops in the deep dark unlit night as well.
@Sally1975
I am also familiar with @Beard_Club, thanks to a #Kaylor blogger on Tumblr. But I'm afraid I didn't come away with the best impression. I fancy that @Beard_Club thinks every relationship in the public eye is gay and that the only reason a couple would present a fake relationship to the public is to hide the homosexuality of one or both partners.
Agree, it reads like fanfic or slashfic, slightly malicious in tone.
She can step into Meghan's shoes and warmly be welcomed by the British public, after what they have been out through!!
It is very clever of the Crown to make this arrangement!
There is a very pointed contrast being made here. I guess Princess Eugenie is enough of a team player to take on the challenge of rubbing out the Harkles' stain on Frogmore Cottage. (Wouldn't it be interesting if we now see a full team at work on the house, and it is leaked that the whole place was still divided into separate apartments when Eugenie and Jack got it?) In Eugenie's shoes, I wouldn't want the association at all and would rent a "common" home for the rest of my life if FC had been all that were offered to me.
On more of tangent, I find it interesting how our perceptions of a resident (actual or presumed) affect our opinion of a property! When the Queen gifted FC to the Harkles, it was the shadiest home ever -- former servants' quarters on very swampy land only a stone's throw from Wallis Simpson's grave! But now that the Brooksbanks are getting it, no one is thinking that the Queen must be so disappointed in Eugenie, to be tossing her something that wasn't even good enough for the Harkles. Instead, we (very reasonably) assume that a blood princess who has proven to be hardworking, sincere and genuine is getting a lovely home in which to raise a (real) child and possibly a chance to be of more service to the Crown and to her country!
I can't imagine what would possess people to go online and make up stories about celebs. It's just so weird.
Perhaps it's a PR tactic? Get enough people "planting" truly implausible stories that don't check out and then no one will believe the crazier-sounding real ones?
Wasn't there a sensational story about her and Ashton Kutcher that came out pre-wedding, which Ashton then denied? (I can't find the story again using only their names as search terms. Am I remembering the wrong actor whom she once dated?) Having him defend her publicly when there was (seemingly) nothing in it for him called into question the credibility of every tabloid story about her. I wouldn't be surprised if the fake story was deliberately printed just so it could be debunked.
If a frog can turn into a Prince, then so can a Frogmore. Eugenie and Jack can do this and have confidence they can do this. Otherwise they would not have accepted this gift tenancy from The Queen.
Time will tell.
Is it boggy and soggy there. My guess is only in very rainy seasons and years. And if not so hospitable at Frogmore, then good training for a young and expecting couple.
I love the way you frame it!
It's extra appropriate after all the quips that Meghan is the first woman to kiss a prince and turn him into a frog!
People have been holding Catherine and Meghan up as contrasts, but what if the real showdown is between Eugenie and Meghan? (They were even married in the same year, so we could say they both left the starting gate at the same time.) I'm reminded of the fairytale of the two sisters: When one opened her mouth, jewels and flowers fell out; when the other opened her mouth, she unleashed snakes and toads! I do hope Eugenie gets a proper chance to shine in a royal setting so that I can have more support for my "thesis."
I was thinking recently as to Harry's announcement of the birth of Archie. You will recall the announcement was made by the stables with the two horses intrigued by what was going on and snorting like a Greek chorus behind the prince. The Prince seemed pleased. Why, I was wondering, would one make an announcement of the birth of the seventh-in-line to the throne in such a place when there must have been so many more salubrious places in or around the nearest royal palace to make the formal announcement of this significant event. Was this, I wondered, a way of telling us that what he was saying should be taken as no more than horse manure? In light of his engagement interview with its euphemistic emphasis on roast chicken - utterly irrelevant detail given prominence - not unlike his Uncles recollection of the Pizza restaurant - does the use of stables for a backdrop also carries a subtext?????
If Meghan and Harry had the power to rent out Frogmore Cottage on the free market to absolutely anyone for the right $$$ (for one, someone globally who may want The Queen as their English neighbor) why on earth would they rent it to Eugenie and Jack and 'give them a good deal'. LOL. We know how Meghan works.
Did you all see the article that referred to Meghan and Harry and Eugenie and Jack as the new 'fab four' ?! lol, Meghan's PR in overdrive, desperate to still be associated and realizing what is happening!
I'm in camp 'There's no way Harry and Meghan control Frogmore anymore', if they ever did in he first place.
Did you all see the article that referred to Meghan and Harry and Eugenie and Jack as the new 'fab four' ?! lol, Meghan's PR in overdrive, desperate to still be associated and realizing what is happening!
That's awful! And it's one of the things I worried about when I read that Princess Eugenie and Jack were going to be the new (and actual) residents of Frogmore Cottage. Is the association with Meghan really worth it to one's peace of mind?
Well, okay, Eugenie did seem able to take that stunt at her wedding in stride. We know that her mother was furious, but she herself seemed to have held on to her inner peace. Unlike the rest of us (Nutties in particular), she may associate many wonderful things with Frogmore Cottage (and Windsor in general) that have nothing to do with her cousin-in-law.
If Eugenie is allowed to become a working royal, they could flip the "new fab four" narrative on its head by letting the Cambridges and the Brooksbanks team up a lot. In which case I'll await the "Meghan has been advising Catherine and Eugenie" spin.
Sally, if the writer of the creepy accounts of M is indeed a sort of nutty anti-fan fiction writer, I would not be surprised either, and probably much is made up from some few truths. But what is interesting is that she is seen as someone who could be linked with such unfortunate actst, that someone saw it as plausible, if you see what I mean — that her displays of character or lack thereof allows the thought to exist.
I would love to see them touted as the new Fab Four, and be delightfully successful.
Plus I would like to see liberal use of the term “young mother” applied to every story about Eugenie, as follows:
Although she is a young mother (a rumoured dozen years younger than Meghan Markle who claimed a geriatric pregnancy in 2019), Eugenie has worked tirelessly as a star member of the royal family’s New Fab Four without missing a beat to the delight of people everywhere.
Good point! They sure don't have a problem with telling lies of any size.
Re. William refusing to sign the register
This is so extraordinarily out of the norm that I tend to give credence to this tidbit. It is not customary at all for the best man to refuse to do the main duty for which he is there. The law requires two witnesses to sign attesting to the marriage, and generally that is the maid of honor and best man. These positions carry a great deal if responsibility therefore and generally go to the two people closest to the bridal couple who aren’t parents. Any two signatures will do to satisfy the law, but it’s generally considered high honor to witness someone’s marriage. As we know, William tried his best to get Harry to delay the marriage, probably hoping that he would cancel it altogether, and when that didn’t happen, I doubt there was another person in England who wanted to be there less than William dead. I feel sure that pressure was brought to bear upon him to stand up for his brother at this wedding, Because Harry is his only brother, and he acted as Williams best man, back when things were good between them. How would the palace explain to the public a refusal to stand up for his only brother? That was the public role of the best man, and William was compelled to do it. But if he asserted his will out of the public eye to condone this marriage, then this is most certainly “a big deal” in my view. This is as big a vote of no confidence in this marriage as can be given by the person who is meant to be one of the chief witnesses, and the person who knows Harry the best in the world. I think that’s worth paying attention to.
@Opus
The infamous horse stable interview was so very odd. “Skulking” is the only word I can use for it. Here’s Harry, supposedly announcing the birth of his first child, A highly anticipated event, in front of one reporter and one cameraman, if they were not in fact one and the same person. OK, so it was their choice not to have the usual media scrum. But why was Henry creeping around the stables like a criminal? Why was he continually twisting around to look behind him, as though he was afraid of being caught out at something? His body language and demeanor throughout that interview indicates nervousness off the charts, and what could be read as a great deal of deception. If the couple were indeed happily ensconced at Frogmore Cottage, why not release a statement from there? Or at least another place on Windsor Castle crowns that wasn’t the backside of the stables? Frankly, it plays like harry knew he was not supposed to be there, and was trying to get it over with as soon as possible before he got interrupted and questioned about his activities. If the queen had gifted him a perfectly good house a few months before, seems like he would have met the price on his own property, no? The sub text of announcing at birth in front of a stable is not lost on me... was the birth of this child supposed to harken the second coming of the Messiah, or what? The royal Steeds Sir John and George found that absolutely hysterical.
------
I do think there are tax reasons for Harry to have a UK address. Guess it also matters for counselor of state.
There is a lot of smoke where Meghan is concerned, so I do see your point.
And I believe it was Hikari who wondered, on an earlier thread, whether Prince William's famous comment that he didn't care if one of his children turned out to be gay doubled as a coded message for his brother. In Prince Harry's case, I think it's just general kinkiness, though.
But if Eugenie does royal work I don't really see W&K creating a new Fab Four with E&J either.
As a match, I find it more unlikely than likely myself. (Also, it would seem odd for the Cambridges to team up with the Brooksbanks, leaving the Mapello-Mozzis out in the cold.) But my thought was a knee-jerk reaction to Meghan's PR scrambling. I believe the BRF has better things to do than to play stupid games to win stupid prizes (well, at least where Meghan is concerned).
Besides, Prince William is such a master of shade that he'll think of something more brilliant than I ever could. I can't wait for his follow-up to the megalodon tooth! (On the other hand, Princess Eugenie, as we all observed on her wedding day, can hold on to her peace and equanimity. She'll live her best life no matter what goes on in Montecito.)
You could be right about the signing of the register. It still doesn't seem off to me (especially in view of lots of other things about the Meghan-planned wedding!) As I said:
1. Will did stand up with Harry in front of millions of people so it seems to me to really be splitting hairs to then say "but I won't be a witness." And
2. Since M didn't have a maid/matron of honor, who would the 2nd witness have been if Will did sign as best man? Doria? That would have seemed weird to me. I guess Jessica could have jumped up? (Unless there's a need for the witness to be Christian?)
All in all, having her mother and his father sign seemed a smooth solution to me. Of course, we've never seen the signatures on W&K's since that's kept hidden per royal perogative, but it's my understanding Charles and Camilla, the Middletons, Pippa, James, and Harry all signed. That would have been overkill given Harry's rank, I'd think.
Are there legal implications if the witness doesn't put his signature to something? Not that anyone doubts that the widely televised wedding took place. I'm just wondering if there are any consequences to Prince William putting his foot down in private.
It's also worth asking how many times he had already done something like this for his brother -- publicly supporting Prince Harry but privately letting his brother know the latter couldn't demand everything. And more importantly, whether this moment was one of the last.
But would any celeb want those types of crazy rumors going around about themselves - stories that included murder?
You and I certainly wouldn't . . . but we seem to be reasonable people. ;-)
Ms. "Most Trolled Person of 2019" Markle would probably brag about being accused of murder by an anonymous troll. It would give her more ammunition for her stance against social media. In fact, the biggest argument against the stories being just a PR tactic is that she hasn't used them yet.
I did read part of the thread. The poster sounds truly unhinged. This comes across as a personal prank rather than part of a higher directive.
I guess it's a compliment to Meghan that even her sternest critics will draw the line at some stories about her!
He was on Joe Rogan’s podcast recently repeating their line ‘Meghan was the most trolled person of 2019!’
Joe had his fact checker look it up, live. They couldn’t find anything to support his claim. LOL
Tristan, the guy trying to prevent and control misinformation, spreading misinformation.....go figure!
As a mouthpiece for celebrities, People magazine prints the PR statements they receive so Sunshine Sachs and Megalo are in overdrive. Again!
As for the new “fab four”, it has the narcissist’s clumsy giant footprints all over it. The funny part being that the fabulous touch comes from Megalo’s association with the Royal family - not the other way around. She is that delusional!
@KC, CDAN regularly has stories about how Prince Andrew sells his daughters to other rich men including Jeffrey Epstein. Doesn't mean that they are true.
Yes, why I mentioned it was a blind from CDAN. That's where I encountered Nutty describing this blog, and Nutty has expressed skepticism about CDAN several times in earlier days. That was a carefully constructed story in any case.
@Maneki
I wonder if MM will say one of their dogs has been injured or is sick?
I doubt it. She didn't even want to share the spotlight with her dogs back in the UK, if dumping one and possibly killing the other is any indication
Yes. Remember when the beagle Guy rode next to the Queen and the Queen smiling at him, before the wedding...that might have made her jealous but the trap was not sprung so maybe she just enjoyed the image. I never actually read what
happened with Guy other than two broken legs....
Sharing the Tig spotlight with her rescue dogs was one thing; sharing the royal spotlight was apparently too much. That Guy got to be photographed in a car with the Queen before Meghan did must have been intolerable!
Yachting ... my understanding is that this term is used to refer to someone who provides 'entertainment' for a wealthy person on a yachting holiday and is paid.
The rumours of Meghan doing this are not true. There is a photo of her posing on a yacht with a group of female friends (including Misha). Not a man in sight and quite obviously a group of women who hired a yacht while on holiday.
There are photos of Andrew on a yacht with a few other older men, surrounded by very young women in bikinis and one or two even topless. None of the young women can be identified as related to or in a relationship with any of the men. That looks like a 'yachting' situation.
It was odd and highly unusual for a royal wedding. Although she invited a lot of famous people she had never even met, Meghan also did have a handful of close friends at her wedding. Any of them could have acted as witnesses and did not even have to CoE to do so. It simply emphasised the dearth of family at her wedding. She probably thought she was portraying an image of a strong independent biracial women, but people knew that she did have lots of family and that they were part of her life when growing up.
I would claim with confidence that the minimum legal requirement of witnesses and who they would be was Meghan's decision. If William was a witness, Meghan would have to choose a second witness. Who would that be? (She can fly to New York for a tennis match a month after the birth of her son, but could not arrange to meet with her father once she met Harry? She did not care that her father would not be at her wedding but enjoyed the drama that was created when he supposedly 'let her down'.)
I would be interested to read what everyone could offer as reasons. Why did Meghan choose to have the minimum number of witnesses?
The dog was one of Her Maj's Dorgis.
Good old Lainey supplied the falsehood in her column and the story spread all over!
Here is an article on Snopes about the false tale:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-beagle-queen-to-royal-wedding/
Excerpt:
"The story appeared to originate the same day in a post on LaineyGossip.com about Guy traveling with the Queen. While it is true Queen Elizabeth was spotted traveling with an unidentified dog prior to the wedding, she also owns two “dorgis,” or dachshund-corgi mixes. Queen Elizabeth arrived at the ceremony in a different vehicle and unaccompanied by a dog, and claims about her travels with on the day of the royal wedding appear to be inferences based only on brief footage captured a day before the wedding."
The story about Tristan on the Joe Rogan show is hilarious but also worrying.
A few posts back, Nutty asked who does Meghan influence and how. This is the result of her influence ... ignoring reality and buying into a falsely constructed story.
------------
Whether there's any/much/no truth in the allegations is hard to assess. Gruesome thing do happen. My difficulty is that we have seen how they are prepared to go lower and lower in what they do in full public gaze (and I'm sure they haven't finished their descent yet), with the result that there's no limit to the speculation about what they may do when nobody is looking.
We have said repeatedly that we wouldn't put anything past her and thus nothing seems to be beyond the realms of possibility.
As one of us said recently `If you can think of it, it can happen'.
Thanks - I agree that the MM yachting story is weak on evidence.
There's an interesting article written by a young actress (not Markle) who was recruited along with a large group of women to spend the summer yachting. I'll have to see if I can find it.
I've seen those two pictures you mentioned. I think there's a third one as well.
But what I don't understand is how that story got legs. I wonder where it came from. Is there some kernel of truth that got it started or is it an example of a wild tale someone spun? Could it really have started due to those pics?
I'm not trying to defend Markle (ugh!), but that is one part of her storyline that doesn't have any real foundation/background to it. Just folks repeating it over and over.
I remember reading a lot of reasons put forward by observers at the time of her wedding. She could have invited family from her Mother’s side to act as witnesses, but she didn’t. She was embarrassed or ashamed of her family. They all knew too much about her. She isn’t close to her family and a combination of the above. Megsy instead preferred to show off and pretend she was an A-lister. What she didn’t know was how so many could see right through her facade, how could a z list actress who no-one had ever heard of, know the Clooney’s, Oprah etc enough (or at all) to invite them to their wedding? They were all using each other...it’s what makes Hollywood come across as it does. All smoke and mirrors and fake.
I think most of the yachting rumours came from the twitter posts of Adam Haun.
See: https://tinyurl.com/y2uqaped
Subletting a council house without permission is illegal. This could at one time be given if one was taking in a lodger in need. (When I was 10, we had to find temporary accommodation - all that was available was lodging in a council-owned property with the official tenants in residence as well (sharing kitchen & bathroom), and we had to wait for permission to be given. That was in an 17th century house awaiting demolition). I've no idea if this is still possible.
There's a big problem in London with official council tenants moving out in order to let their heavily-subsidised homes to subtenants at a handsome profit. This came to light on a grand scale following a disaster, the one taken advantage of by MM. This type of subletting is completely illegal.
Witnesses 2 witnesses are required by law for a marriage and can be anyone as long as they understand that they may be called upon to say that they were there and saw the ceremony take place. Period.
An extreme example, a couple may book in at a Register Office and before the ceremony ask a two passers-by in the street if they can spare the time to act as witnesses. Usually though it's one witness from each `side', perhaps both fathers, but there's no rule about that.
Even witnessing a Will has another condition - 2 witnesses are necessary and they must not be beneficiaries. (If a beneficiary unwittingly signs a will in which they are left something, they unfortunately and don't get it! This happened to my uncle and it added to his load of bitterness at life!)
I'm off to bed now but I just thought of something - do you remember if there were any old MM 'blinds' about yachting?
I came to this later than most of you, so perhaps others will know the answer?
Goodnight :)
I’ve been reading BlindGossip for a few years and I personally don’t recall any yachting blinds alluding to Megsy. The only time I’ve read or heard about the yachting rumour was within the DM comment section.
I know a lot of models and aspiring actresses do it, so I wouldn’t be surprised if Megsy did do this to earn an extra income.
Her 'reading' on the Harkles is something along the lines of (with a lot of my interpretations and opinions thrown in) ...
For her happiness, Meghan needs to be authentic. Everything about her is smoke and mirrors, constructing a narrative, worrying obsessively about the optics, adopting goals of her partner/best friend (Trevor: Hollywood; Cory: foodie; Jessica: socialite; Harry: royal). The authentic Meghan does pap walks, has a fabulous lifestyle blog, merches, does fabulous photo shoots, flaunts sexuality but also plays the 'kittenish girl', loves holidays and selfies with major celebrities ...).
For his happiness, Harry needs to heal wounds and be honest about addressing character weaknesses. Even William admitted that the grief of losing his mother never goes away. Meghan exploited that in Harry. He has shown throughout his life to be easily influenced to cross the line. Meghan exploited that. He misses the tactile love from his mother. Meghan exploited that. He is lost as the 'stupid spare no longer needed' without the direction and foundation of the royal machinery. Meghan exploited that ...
I first came across the yachting reports in Jerseydeanne, well before I found Nutty (& I lurked here for quite a while before contributing).
A very useful timeline from anonymoushouseplantfan on Tumblr.
I’ve been reading BlindGossip for a few years and I personally don’t recall any yachting blinds alluding to Megsy. The only time I’ve read or heard about the yachting rumour was within the DM comment section.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2018/01/blind-items-revealed-3_6.html
https://nuttyflavor88.blogspot.com/2019/01/yachting-tweet-screen-shot.html?m=1
CDAN isn’t BlindGossip and I’m not referring to that site. The former is mostly (if not all fabricated) and the disclaimer and the bottom of the website states as much.
LOL...there's a tweet that connects her to the Bronfman sisters so getting closer :)
1. Harry doesn't have an "official residence" in UK any more. Unless he has other properties he will have to come as a guest of other royals or rent.
2. The Queen is OK with it. There is no way she is not aware and doesn't understand the implications.
3. Palace PR immediately jumped at the opportunity: public is positive about Eugenie, she is pregnant and the new baby will be presented according to the royal protocol. Bad Archie aftertaste will be gone. Frog House will be associated with the "normal" royal couple in great contrast to the Harkles.
4. Charles probably did eventually pay for the cottage renovations to help Harry save face.
5. Royals are totally desperate to leave Markle debacle behind them and get to normal status quo. Bye Harry, bye Megsy
Cannibalism?
Well, there was a hint in Toronto Papers 1 by means of a reference to a very sinister- sounding restaurant:
https://twitter.com/torontopaper1/status/1286061749293260801
I'm not endorsing this, merely saying the tweet exists.
2. The Queen is OK with it. There is no way she is not aware and doesn't understand the implications.
Concur. They are California's problem children now. Interesting that this all happened approximately two or three weeks ago. I believe this explains the lack of interaction with PC and HRM for his birthday and their anniversary, respectively. The temper tantrum must have been EPIC. How DARE the Queen and Prince Charles not cater to their every whim? No good wishes for their birthday or anniversary, THAT will show them! We all know that public petulance and disrespect is a winner for their public relations. Perhaps their computers were malfunctioning.
I am happy to see that they could get their computers working so that they could congratulate themselves for allowing Eugenie and Jack to move into what they considered their property. Funny how something becomes more desirable when somebody else is in possession of it.
@Swampwoman
Cannibalism?
Well, there was a hint in Toronto Papers 1 by means of a reference to a very sinister- sounding restaurant:
https://twitter.com/torontopaper1/status/1286061749293260801
I'm not endorsing this, merely saying the tweet exists.
ROFL, I stand corrected!
Well, if I were MM and Harry and and doing a Netflix documentary on their lives, I'd probably have a "What the public thinks we dine on" episode with a bowl of liquid and a hand sticking out, maybe some submerged dry ice giving the eerie fog effect. There could be cute fat puppies and kittens on a platter as though they are about to be placed in an oven with a chef standing by and a voice yells into the kitchen "Master wants to dine in an hour!" versus roast chic....I mean, vegetarian peanut butter jelly sandwiches on gluten-free bread. Maybe showing them doing a grocery store run and she's asking the clerk "What do you MEAN I can only have two rolls of toilet tissue OR paper towels? I can call Gavin and he'll tell you that it is okay because Hollywood has been exempted from restrictions!" (oh, wait, that's actually mostly true) versus them scrubbing toilets and moaning "Why, WHY did we want so many bathrooms?"
I'm actually expecting Netflix to announce that they are regretfully no longer in partnership with the dysfunctional duo because financial negotiations are at an impasse.
The story about Meghan's dog Guy the beagle riding in a car with the Queen was another one of vile Megalo's porkies.
Good grief! Imagine the nerve one must have to tell a whopper like that!
@Sally1975
The story about Meghan's dog Guy the beagle riding in a car with the Queen was another one of vile Megalo's porkies.
Good grief! Imagine the nerve one must have to tell a whopper like that!
Indeed! If the Queen WERE riding around with her dog, it was probably because she rescued it.
Your gruesome soup for a Gruesome Twosome sounds hilarious - such a pity she's had a sense of humour bypass.
I wonder if this scramble to pretend they are passing along a house they have no rights to falls in the same throw out-the-Zara realm in her head? Triggering her “I have a Russian mansion rental now, I don’t need FC” kind of response in the press (but this time, passing on FC was not her choice). Farewell Frogmore. Much much later, Megs.
B*tch, please. When you were a little nobody in Toronto, trying to climb the social ladder, you latched on to Jessica because of her society connections - JM is the daughter of a multimillionaire retailer, the wife of a television host and the daughter-in-law of a former prime minister, with connections to the Canadian political and social elite. Once you married into the BRF you decided that you no longer needed her, so it was Bye! Jessica.
However, and this is a big however, there do exist bizarre groups of crazy people even at high levels who have sinister habits.
I know this not from reading but from something that happened when I was younger and sharing a house with two other women,alll of us in the first years of our careers. One was an interior designer who had trained in Switzerland and now working for a large corporation. She was assigned to design rooms in the new lavish home of the new CEO. Did the living spaces, guest wing, children’s rooms, home theatre. Fine. She was winning local design awards, had a magazine write up, offers to do fine homes and offices. She was so happy. She was a lovely cheery sort of girl anyway, always helping people and striving and life was brilliant. She even had lunch with a writer of romance, chick-lit books, who was interested. Her BF threw a big party. She was young and hardworking and fun and sparkling, a success.
But then three quarters of the way through the project, probably a year in, she was shown a large sub-basement level room one day by the CEO himself, not his assistant or wife, and told he wanted a room with black tiled walls and bench type stadium seating, around a central tiled floor that sloped down to a large elaborate grated drain with a raised iron grate or grill above the drain on legs, removable the the standing grate or grill to measure 3 feet x 6 feet, the tile had to burn-proof and easy to clean and especially that liquids and fluids of all types and thicknesses had to be able to be wiped from the tile and go down the drain, which would have a special large cache pot and some sort if piping, burning, incinerating system. There was to be a standing stone station for knives and a sort of separate fire pit thing with an airway out of this windowless basement room. He gave her a sheet of symbols he wanted on the walls. Then he took her hands and told her if she ever talked about this project he would make sure she never worked again, anywhere.
My roommate and I got home from work and found her balled up under a quilt, crying, hysterical, having a panic attack. I called a paramedic friend who lived nearby, and her boyfriend. They calmed her down and we sat and listened to this. She showed us the balled up sheet of symbols, was beyond hysterical saying it was a sacrifice room. We sat up with her all night. We went from thinking she had been mistaken or was having a stress episode, to realizing it was true. She had never been like this before. Heard the story over and over. We all discussed it, because this was a big corporation and he was powerful. I talked to a trusted friend higher in the corporation, no details, but she confirmed the man was considered dark, very odd and deviant by his staff. My friend resigned from her well-paying prestige job the next day and from that point on only did work for herself, luckily the chick lit writer signed on so she was able to weather the break but was so jumpy and nervous for at least a year. I think it was her BF who somehow identified the symbols as cult like or similar.
So, who the heck knows what people do.
What do you think the bill was for a fully furnished Frogmore Cottage and midnight service? (which I suspect isn’t true because Jack and Eugenie would need furniture for their rental house, so they probably rented it with the furniture in it).
The Sun claims Eugenie and Jack are just house sitting, so you are probably correct that whatever furniture there stayed.
Another day, another sugary puff piece in the DM. Today, it's that MM regularly checks in with Jessica Mulroney because JM is "suicidal" even though the two are no longer friends because they "grew apart" and MM felt that JM was "using" her.
B*tch, please. When you were a little nobody in Toronto, trying to climb the social ladder, you latched on to Jessica because of her society connections - JM is the daughter of a multimillionaire retailer, the wife of a television host and the daughter-in-law of a former prime minister, with connections to the Canadian political and social elite. Once you married into the BRF you decided that you no longer needed her, so it was Bye! Jessica.
I was wondering how people in Canada viewed the "Let's throw Jessica under the bus!" efforts of MM. It would have been so easy to say something like "Obviously, this is not my experience with Jessica as she is my friend. We can all get frustrated and say things that we don't mean. While I do not condone her actions, I will be here for her", etc. etc.
"What do you think the bill was for a fully furnished Frogmore Cottage and midnight service? (which I suspect isn’t true because Jack and Eugenie would need furniture for their rental house, so they probably rented it with the furniture in it)."
I think the bill would have been in the many thousands of pounds/dollars especially for eventual overseas shipping.
I doubt it's true too. But I don't know if E&J would have rented furnished. It kind of depends on how long they expect to live there. If they are house-sitting, maybe it is furnished. But if it's a long-term rental, I'm not so sure.
Both E&J had lived on their own prior to marriage. So they likely have some stuff of their own in storage. And they do have money to furnish a home. I'm not so sure I'd like M's Soho House designer's taste myself assuming the house really was ever completely furnished. I'd certainly want to furnish my own nursery. And I'd certainly want my own kitchen stuff, china, glassware, etc. And once some stuff has to be removed....
Here is a pic I found by google, dated 5/18/18: https://www.eonline.com/news/936761/meghan-markle-s-dog-gets-a-ride-with-queen-elizabeth-to-royal-wedding
As someone here once pointed out, MM seems to exist in opposite world. So, perhaps it is MM who is the frantic mess, and JM, surrounded by her Toronto support system, who is calm, but not calling.
An attempt to attack or set up JM’s mental health and mental state in a certain way, so she cannot testify (“confidentially speaking, my biggest witness is suicidal at the moment judge, so we need a delay”) — or so the MM lawyers can dismiss all her statements as hysterical fluff?
The crying makeup man says Guy was staying there at the hotel. But even if that is true (not sure I'd have taken my dog with me that day especially if I had staff to care for him at home) I honestly don't think that means the Queen transported him.
While we know M contributed to FF, I'm not ready to believe everything in it is true. I think it's what M wants us to believe. Including that the Queen transported her dog for her.
SNOPES says it happened the day before the wedding.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-beagle-queen-to-royal-wedding/
Awhile ago, Snopes, the claims investigation site, deemed the dog story false. They say it was likely another of the Queen’s family dogs, and that all the UK tab reports about were merely repeating the tale from a post by a single gossip blogger, who we all know: Lainey of Lainey Gossip, member of the old MM wolf pack.
Just as the Queen wasn’t “popping in” at Frogmore, she wasn’t ferrying dogs around for Meghan Markle.
The snopes link says it was false that they were headed to the wedding. There's a video on the link and it's the day prior.
***forgot to say, and I'd certainly want empty closets!
Eesh, I would as well, plus I forgot that Soho House was involved (allegedly) in the design. I, uh, wouldn't want the interior designer of a hook-up location and restaurant to design the interior of my house. If the house design is supposed to reflect the person, MM and JCMH were likely pleased.
It was chilling and I rarely talk about it because it is disturbing even all these years later. I suppose it made me realize that crazy things could possibly be true, so I tend to keep a tiny window open to allow for strange truths. That is why I decided to mention it here.
Who knows what the truth is about MM or Soho House etc. I do think those stories are probably mostly wild fictions concocted out of some small kernels of fact. I think her rise is peculiar, her friend group is odd, her Russian connections sinister, her baby story a pack of lies.
Hello magazine also has a PR article about FC, with a picture of Frogmore House and a description of FC facing a picturesque lake.
What deranged nonsense is this?
I thought the idea of a new "Fab Four involving H&M and E&J was ridiculous. (Thought the old Fab Four was dumb too.) But if Eugenie does royal work I don't really see W&K creating a new Fab Four with E&J either
...
It was really started in the press, easy headline, etc., i think, and the RF would have run with it as fun and good publicity but then the breakup of the foundation and so forth happened.
It was like making Mouseketeers out of them, really. Little Mickey Mouse toys.
The queen riding with not a dorgi but a beagle, who looks nothing like a dorgi: https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a20744463/queen-elizabeth-meghan-markles-dog-guy-ride-to-royal-wedding-windsor/
"It’s clearly a beagle and looks exactly like Guy, so... Guy. And it was the day before wedding. I mean, put the pieces together."
It doesn't look like a beagle to me. It looks like lots of pics I've seen of Candy. Like this one.https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7736031/amp/The-Queen-joined-furry-companion-leaves-Buckingham-Palace-Windsor-Castle.html
And to me, Archie isn't the "spitting image" of Harry as a baby that some people see either.
"Putting the pieces together" doesn't mean I can change what I see. Nor does it make it likely in my opinion the Queen left her dogs in London to transport M's dog to and from a hotel in Windsor.
Sorry, @tatty.
I do foster for dog rescues, so I have had many breed and mixes of dogs in my house. A beagle is a beagle and is not a dorgi, a corgi or a daschund.
We can disagree. 🌹
@Ant
Yes, unidentified. Pointing out that the "event" happened the day before not the day of the wedding.
Also, if Eugenie and Sarah et al were pissed at HAMS for bringing up the pregnant at her wedding, this is certainly a way to pay them back and smooth things over.
Everyone wins.
Good luck with your hip!
Apologies for the lowercase. My days of typing accurantly are behind me.
eonline for one. It's out there.
https://www.eonline.com/news/936761/meghan-markle-s-dog-gets-a-ride-with-queen-elizabeth-to-royal-wedding
The Express has a PR article about the FC situation. One of the claims is that Harry and Meghan fell in love during long walks in the grounds of Frogmore House!
Hello magazine also has a PR article about FC, with a picture of Frogmore House and a description of FC facing a picturesque lake.
What deranged nonsense is this?
Sandie, I am shocked, SHOCKED at your lack of romantic imagination! Just imagine the musical peeping of the frogs and the whine of the mosquitoes while she tottered along on long walks in her stiletto shoes, sinking into the ground and trodding on graves, while clutching onto Harry for dear life. They could steal kisses in the mausoleum. Surely nothing could be more romantic!
/I think I should write bad romance novels.
Lol! Fantastic. Write it! I’ll buy a copy!
I had my niece's picture on my desk for years. Years. Everyone would comment just how much she looked like me. She really looked like me! One problem. She was adopted. Zero shared DNA.
Just saying you can't always go by what you see or what you think you see.
The dog in the car looks like Candy the dorgi to me and always did even back in 2018. I can't believe the Queen was doing taxi service for Guy
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a20746115/meghan-markle-dog-queen-windsor/
Scroll down to the twitter screen cap, there he is.
Her dogs were likely at home wherever they are whenever she goes out without them. Dorgis have the herding instinct so they may have tried to herd him. The queen doesnt have beagles--maybe she liked him and wanted to do a so on to be daughter in law a favor. Back when they were trying to make it work.
The dog in the car has floppy hanging ears like a beagle, dorgis from what i see have stand up ears or shorter floppy ears. But it seems like they can vary from pup to pup.
I couldnt find a picture that was captioned as Candy so I don't know what she looks like--more corgi or more daschhund.
Re: Beaglegate
I had my niece's picture on my desk for years. Years. Everyone would comment just how much she looked like me. She really looked like me! One problem. She was adopted. Zero shared DNA.
Just saying you can't always go by what you see or what you think you see.
Yes, this. My former DIL and her husband are told ALL THE TIME how much my oldest granddaughter looks like him. Nope. She is the picture of her dad (my son), albeit a feminine version.
Yes, chilling.
My first thought when I read the description of that basement was that it sounded like an anatomy theatre. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that this was indeed its purpose - similar allegations have been made against Epstein, of course.
Sometimes malefactors act so outrageously that nobody accepts that the reports might be true - `too far-fetched' they say. `Could he just have been getting a kick out of scaring the wits out you?'
Too often there are cases of animal mutilations here which seem to have a ritual purpose (horses out grazing being particular targets) so human victims aren't so unlikely. Do the perpetrators of such acts enjoy having, as they see it, the power of life and death? The idea of such a person pursuing a medical career, for example, in order to have such power is repellent but we know that it can happen and may be not be discovered until some legal irregularity is detected.
On the other hand, crazy people do make up all sorts of stories and get innocent people into trouble, therby reducing credibility of genuine reports. We live in a sick world.
What a horrible experience for your flatmate - poor woman. That sounded like a death-threat from the client, absolutely terrifying. Did you ever hear anymore about it? Was your friend OK long term?
I think her head is smaller and her snout a bit smaller and more elegant that a beagle's which is a bit boxy.
Regardless of where we come down on this we can agree that both dogs are adorable.
Over the years the few of us who knew did consider a range of things as you’ve mentioned. Impossible to know, but creepy rumor about the man continued to swirl from people who had no idea this had happened. If it was a prank, my flatmate certainly took it as real, and she is a person with a very level head, not into peculiar things or conspiracy theory. Because of who she is, and the rumors about him from unrelated sources, I tend to believe something was off about his request, but who knows what. She was jittery for awhile, as I mentioned. We all were, since we shared a house, and we had boyfriends staying with us in turn for a couple of months, but luckily nothing happened and she was never contacted. Her former friend immediate manager did come over for dinner one time with us and apologized for “putting her in that position” so I certainly feel he knew something, as he didn’t try to downplay her experience. Her father wanted to sue the company and CEO but she was afraid.
She was fine eventually, as she had/has a big supportive affluent family, and has a very level head. She married her BF, an ex-military businessman who certainly made her feel safe, and has two children and started a successful business of her own. Friends stood by her and her priest believed her, too, and maybe that helped as well. She wasn’t patted and told get over it, it is silly. But I think all of us lost some measure of trust in the world, or our naïveté. I have always hoped the guy was just a sociopathic jerk, and nothing came of his weird plans. But even the fact he would dare put a staffer through this after working with her for about a year is quite sick. So, who knows. His public persona remained positive, no one knew, so, it was pretty cockeyed altogether.
"...MM is increasingly becoming irrelevant and desperate, as we've seen.
See this comment on Knockoff Duchess (after the one on Lupo, the Cambridges' dog). https://monstermarkle.tumblr.com/
I wonder if MM will say one of their dogs has been injured or is sick"
As a struggling actress she would have been looking for publicity all the time anyway so this seems normal to her. I am sure she will say something about how sad she was giving up Bogart and how much she koves her current dogs because "they give unconditional love which is so important, I find the love and acceptance of my rescue dogs that i rescued, invaluable to me as I pursue my goal of not being controversial."
(And look at it this way, you will have something in common with Madonna, who had her hip op not long ago!)
Don't you think Eugenie has money for her own furniture though?
This is why I think it's a crown arrangement. I doubt Eugenie *needed* a home rental at this point in her life. I think she's being promoted. And I personally, like that Frogmore is moving beyond the Harkles.
First of all good luck with the op. I know people who had hip replacement and they say a) the op pain is manageable and goes away quickly (though you will need physio) b) surgical techniques and materials have improved vastly c) surgery will make you feel a thousand times better, you will have your life back in full!
As for Eugenie and royal presentation: on all official occasions she behaved impeccably and followed protocol - that lovely curtsey!!
Royal protocol re babies is roughly following:
- queen learns about the birth first, before anybody else
- royal moms DO NOT have baby showers
- royal midwives are always involved (Kate had three)
- royal pregnancy is not announced until after the first trimester (very sensible)
- Lindo wing is the default place (let's see if Eugenie follows this rule)
- royals "present" their baby right after birth (Diana, Sarah, Anne, Kate, Sophie all did)
- the baby's gender doesn't normally get revealed in advance
- once Queen is notified the royal official runs from the hospital to put out the info on
the easel
Extra ones: royal moms dress modestly and do not show their toes, apparently (and wear modest heels too!)
So far I do not see Eugenie violating any of these rules, perhaps a good indication she will follow them through?
I could see Eugenie at that point asking Queen if they could live someplace more isolated for a while.
Queen says, of course, let's see...oh yes, there's this empty place down the road. Newly renovated. Why don't you stay there for a few months or so.
Requests staff to box up previous renter's personal belongings and ship to them.
Previous renters call up in a huff. Demand to talk with Queen. Queen is busy, talk to staffers. You did what???
Staffer says, you aren't coming for Christmas, trial is delayed, the place is empty, you have no need for it. It’s been reassigned to someone else. Don't call again. Ta ta.
Normal to be uneasy, but this is one of the easiest replacements that they do.
My mom was up and about the same day. My sil had both hips done, said it was a piece of cake. She's on her fourth knee replacement. Those are a real challenge.
Good luck with it!
I much like your suggestion of Eugenie's promotion.
You mention rentals. I think a brief history of British rentals might elucidate further: Following the great war parliament passed acts improving the position of tenants with things known as regulated tenancies. It was one of those ideas and with the best of possible intentions that had terrible consequences for it wrecked the rental market and made rentals as rare as hen's teeth. You see, Landlord's not only could not repossess their property but could not obtain a commercially viable rental income during the tenancy and after the death of the tenant the property could pass to the tenant's resident daughter. Inevitably property owners preferred to sell rather than to let and the rental marked dried-up. This led in the 1960s to men like Rackman resorting to illegal methods to recover property from difficult tenants. They were much vilified such that to call someone a Rackman is or was a common insult but the Landlords had no other realistic choice. The situation was rectified during Mrs Thatcher's premiership. Before I purchased I had (complete piece of luck) found a place to rent. The kitchen was fairly modern but the other rooms had clearly not been repainted in decades, part of the wooden flooring of this 19th century property had worn through and the carpets such as they were, were threadbare. There was no furniture, no curtains and no heating or double-glazing - and for the eighteen months I was there that remained the position. No one then would have thought this odd. I eventually left when the landlord wanted his property back - and was much surprised by my reciting to him the legal position but he had been kind to me and I was not looking for a fight and frankly feared illegal behaviour from him and moved. There was (I forget now) a legal distinction between furnished and unfurnished tenancies which remains the case - certainly with those old tenancies which still exist. My rent was even so about half what one would now pay allowing for inflation, although it never at the time seemed to me to be cheap - accounting for about one sixth of my income. Today no one would consider living as austerely as I then did.
The reason I was thinking Eugenie is using their furniture is because if it’s not their final home, maybe they don’t want to buy furniture that will fit this house. I mentioned my small house. When that dining room table got to this house, it looked like Barbie furniture. I would think they want to use the furniture that is already there to the scale of that house (and the rooms and the walls etc) and then when they get to their purchased home, they will then buy furniture for that house.
Of course, with that family, maybe people donate furniture to relatives who need some. I love to get rid of stuff I’m over. Lol I can’t wait until one of my kids wants my bedroom suite.
Thanks again, everyone, for the good wishes.
So much reading, my eyes are bugging out. Great stuff, some of it weird, but great stuff nonetheless.
Re. the FrogCott drama. Someone ( I like Ant's idea that it was Fergie) leaked the move out/in story and got ahead of H&M. That explains the semi reasonable announcement followed by Meghan's attempt to clean up the narrative. Here's what I see happening. Firstly- As many have said, it's 100% correct that Eugenie would never go behind her grandmother's back, so I think we can take that as truth. The Queen has probably been working at the puzzle of her grandson Harry and Frogmore and then Eugenie and the Queen started the discussion about how Eugenie and Jack would put the house to great use, that started the narrative. The only thing I can't work out is whether Harry paid the Queen back for Frogmore but I believe he did pay it back when they got their Netflix money. Frogmore was back in the Queen's hands fully, as a grace and favor prop. The whole scenario makes sense if Frogmore is now paid for.
I think the Queen brought the subject up to H&M saying that she was letting Eugenie and Jack move in to Frogmore. The only person that H&M don't seem to be able to get around, is the Queen and that includes Charles. Thus, the Queen had spoken and Eug and Jack were to move in. I think it makes sense that the Queen maybe told Harry to contact Eugenie to make arrangements for the moving of each of their belongings. I do think H&M had belongings there but I don't believe they were barely ever there. That is where Meghan came up with the spin that the couples made the 'deal'. Classic Meghan is to take one tiny aspect of the truth and change it. Harry and Eugenie probably had a decent and pleasant conversation so Meghan releases how close the couples are. The new Fab Four....classic Meghan Markle bullshit.
I agree with another poster that said that Eugenie is a positive person who is likely excited about the new place, nesting and getting ready for their baby. I think Eugenie wanted to make her Grandmother happy also. While her Majesty is incredibly wealthy, she can also be frugal. I can see that big renovated mansion sitting there vacant would probably irritate the Queen when she knows her expectant Granddaughter is in the small house. So.... voila!
Lastly, the Queen knows she must begin to make moves when it comes to Harry and Meghan. This is one beginning move that she has made. The Harkles are moving further and further away from the Royal Family. Now they will have to stay either in a hotel, or one of the royal homes when they come to England. They are outsiders, more and more.
I view the Frogmore Cottage hand off as a very good sign.
What the others told you about the hip vs. knee replacement was appeared to be correct. The hip replacement people were nearly dancing down the hallway with the physical therapist the day after surgery saying how much better they felt; the knee replacement people were giving the hip replacement people the "I HATE you almost as much as I hate my surgeon and the physical therapists!" stare.
I do think H&M had belongings there but I don't believe they were barely ever there. That is where Meghan came up with the spin that the couples made the 'deal'. Classic Meghan is to take one tiny aspect of the truth and change it. Harry and Eugenie probably had a decent and pleasant conversation so Meghan releases how close the couples are. The new Fab Four....classic Meghan Markle bullshit.
This PR barrage about Frogmore Cottage has the stench of Mugsy's mitts all over it.
Meg never does anything out in the open--she loves 'secret' deals that 'blindside' people. So when I read that Eugenie 'went behind the Queen's back to make a secret deal with Harry and Meg that blindsided the Palace', I was like . . sure, Jan.
Eugenie would never dream of blindsiding her 94-year-old Grandmother and Queen, for whom she has respect, unlike someone else(s) we could mention. I would wager my pension that Eugenie would not even take Meg's calls at this point, nor Harry's. If the cottage was offered to Euge, that offer came from the Queen, or the Queen's agents. And I doubt highly that Harry would have been entrusted with making any 'arrangements' with his cousin for the removal of the Sussex belongings, if any.
I think it's possible that Meg went apeshizz in the Soho House catalog and ordered a bunch of housewares and possibly furniture too, even though she knew she had no intention of staying . . she would have done it just to waste that money, because she'd been given carte blanche to decorate. Maybe she even envisioned turning FroggyCott into an AirBnB for her friends to stay in, while pocketing cash for rent. This is how her money-grubbing mind works. Most likely scenario: Her Majesty authorized the transfer of the property to E. & J. Sent a memo to Charles informing him of such and telling him to make arrangements to have the Cottage packed up and sent to the Dubious Duo on the Left Coast that didn't even send birthday greetings. Charles would likely do this at his own expense--his kid, his mess--and that is the end of the Sussex association with FroggyCott. They can certainly find another smaller place to stick Harry in if he returns to the UK.
No, I don't think this would be acceptable. I would hope for E.'s sake that this offer is a more permanent one and the dreadful Sussex pair will never be back, expecting to use the house. Based on the terrible squawk and flap Meg's PR is making in the media over this, I'd say the Harkles are O.U.T. One of the British papers, forget which now ran a headline--"Prince Harry--Exile!" That sounds pretty definitive.
It should be mentioned that appearing hand-in-glove with "We, the Magnanimous Benefactors are 'Allowing' Princess Eugenie to use Our Manor House Until We Once Again Grace You Peasants with Our Presence' is a resurgence of the story 'Prince William actually stole the Ring that By Rights Belonged to Harry's Wife but Harry is such a Great Guy, so Kind! So Giving! that he Let William take His Greatest Treasure because He is Just That Kind of Brother!"
https://i.prcdn.co/img?regionKey=hF7cLg8GEyPKQONjRY44%2FQ%3D%3D
@Tatty
Good luck with the op. I'm sure it will improve your quality of life.
@SwampWoman
Yes, you should write bad romance novels. They'd be a damn sight better than H&M real romance! Maybe you could mention the stroll in the garden interrupted by MM's call of nature - plenty of bushes for her needs.
https://pagesix.com/2020/11/21/meghan-markles-pal-jessica-mulroney-was-suicidal-after-she-was-cancelled/
In 2015, pre-Meghan, William did an excercise about bullying with people at the Diana Award. On a large cut-out of a hand, you write the names of the 5 people you go to who you can trust ... when you are in crisis or distressed and you want someone who will listen, not interrupt, and simply be there for you. William's list? Grandmother, grandfather, father, Harry, Catherine ... and Lupo added to one finger.
https://talkingtarot.tumblr.com/
Losing Frogmore to the winds of Royal change and shifting Royal whims, as to who gets the graces and favors. Their prestige and bankability have thus been taken down a few notches in Hollywood. This severe dent in their Royal status has got to make Meghan very angry. As they say, "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes"
Well done Queenie! And strip titles come January 2021!
https://blindgossip.com/eagle-and-goose/#more-100779
"CE rules state evictions occur six months of rent arrears unless an agreement is in place. [emphasis added]
CE rules state you cannot sub let, people don't seem to understand that Frogmore does not have public access.
"Hence I did the timelines assuming that the couple would not pay the rent. The Queen does not own it and cannot grant rent free.
"It is delicious that Eugenie that Meghan trolled... gets the property.
"Again there is only one official statement and that is between the CE and Eugenie and Jack no mention of the Sussex couple.
"It's the same.
"I do not see a single fact supporting their proxies claims and all the evidence points to the eviction that I predicted."
So, from what others have said, there is a 50-50 chance H&M were either evicted or scuttling out ahead of eviction, but subletting seems to be a nonstarter.
In 2015, pre-Meghan, William did an excercise about bullying with people at the Diana Award. On a large cut-out of a hand, you write the names of the 5 people you go to who you can trust ... when you are in crisis or distressed and you want someone who will listen, not interrupt, and simply be there for you. William's list? Grandmother, grandfather, father, Harry, Catherine ... and Lupo added to one finger.
It is devoutly to be wished that one's only sibling would earn a spot in the circle of trust . . and up until 2015, it was probably true. So much can change in 5 years . . :( This whole stressball mess with Harry's treachery, and now, losing his beloved dog far too soon . . was there any indication that Lupo had cancer? Such a small dog as he should have been able to look forward to another 6-8 years, I'd have thought. Our larger breed dogs all made it to 16+, and I'm sure Lupo had the very tops in dog food and vet care.
Anyway, the encroaching burden of his kingship must be starting to weigh heavier on William, now that his brother, for all intents and purposes, is lost to him. Had Harry stayed loyal, he would have been a very important advisor and support to William. The grief must be pretty heavy right now. In time, the Cambs will get another dog . . but William can never get another brother. This kind of betrayal that Harry is engaged in isn't something to be gotten over easily. I feel incredibly bad for William. Now he is experiencing what General Washington must have felt when betrayed by Benedict Arnold.
Well we can congratulate Harry and Meghan for having what amounts to Mikki Mouse Title. They don't have any property in Sussex, any Duchy or any crown estate, Sussex is associated with them on paper only, they are not working royals, Harry does not represent anything but himself and has no influence over anything.
They behaved so horribly and lied so blatantly they are now essentially pariahs.
On the other side it makes the Crown look bad because this non-entity is still in line to succession as well as his strange invisible kid. So the British crown is a bit lopsided now
People and all the other American magazines are simply recycling the story that has already appeared in the British tabloids--the Daily Mail and the Sun, to name two.
I'd say, yes, definitely--this is a face-saving move by Smeg's PR. IF Her Majesty was open to having FC occupied on a subletting basis by another grandchild and her spouse, I'm sure it would have been handled more discreetly and officially than what Meg would have us believe--that she and Eugenie brokered some backroom secret deal that 'blindsided' the Queen.
Does Eugenie seem at all the type to 'blindside' anyone? She's in HM's good books and I'm sure would like to stay there. Meg on the other hand loves to blindside people as it gives her the Narc fuel she craves--a sense of power, however sad, juvenile and misguided it is. Meg is not capable of decency or caring toward others--she is profoundly broken on the inside and does not feel emotions like a normal person. For her, life is an endless series of one-upmanship type mental games, and she assumes that *everyone* thinks the same way she does. Why would Eugenie have to sneak around and make secret deals? She could very easily write to Granny or request a phone call to seek information about the status of FC. Why would she have all this contact with Smeg, in distant California--the same Smeg who took obvious smug delight in attempting to derail Eugenie's wedding?
The York girls were always on good terms with their Wales cousins, but call me crazy--I don't think anyone in the family is taking Meg & Harry's calls anymore, and certainly not the Yorks.
Eugenie is pretty heavily pregnant by this point--I think she's probably due in January or February. If there's one thing an expectant Mum is not keen on doing, it'd have to be couch surfing. If Eugenie has taken the house, I'd expect the arrangement to be more permanent than just a year. She wouldn't want to get a nursery ready only to have to pick up sticks again and move before the baby's first birthday.
Meg and Harry are desperate to be seen as still having ties to the UK and to the Royals. Their Netflix deal and any other future deals hinge on it. But I think they put the nail in that coffin by their public statements meddling in the U.S. election. If E. and J. have already been in FC for over two weeks, that predated the Remembrance Sunday snit fit and cosplay walk. Maybe even initiated that public act of pathetic pique. Also the reason why Prince Charles got no Happy Birthday on the 14th or Harry's Grandparents, no Happy Anniversary wishes a week later. The other issue may be the Mail on Sunday court case.
It appears Harry has made his choice and his family are cutting him loose. In the unlikely event he ever makes it back to Blighty for even the funerals of his grandparents, he can stay in his old bedroom at Highgrove. Or a cupboard under the stairs--fewer people would have to see him then.
According to the AKC, English Cocker Spaniels have a life expectancy of 12-14 years. So at 9+ years Lupo died earlier than would be expected for his breed but not that early. They are also more prone to hip dysplasia than many smaller breeds as well as some adult onset neuropathies that affect mobility. So he could have been euthanized as there's only so much money can do. I am sure the family misses him.
Really like the cupboard under the stairs option.,
I believe the tales of our little miss, little miss can't be wrong, our Ms. Whip Smart whipping out her phone and taking photos all over the Kensington grounds and perhaps even the Cambridge's children. When caught and banned from any more photos, this is when the bad blood began between Meghan and the Cambridges. Of course no way did Will and Katherine want the Megs/Harry duo living near them in Kensington. So they got exiled to Frogmore and wherever else they lived with their taxpayer funded security running cover for the Gruesomes.
Talk about a very thirsty and common American tourist. Megsy did her Royal UK tour, now she is back home in California where she belongs.
Most Canadians just don't care about either MM or JM. There's far more written about MM and JH in the UK than in Canada, and whenever there's an online media story about the Harkles, most of the comments say "so what - stop writing about these two!"
Most Canadians just don't care about either MM or JM. There's far more written about MM and JH in the UK than in Canada, and whenever there's an online media story about the Harkles, most of the comments say "so what - stop writing about these two!"
So, much like here, then! I wasn't sure if Jessica was a popular person there, or just another mean girl like Meghan.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, England have officially joined the ranks of the UK homeless. They no longer have a home in England. No place they can call home there. So then how exactly are they still a duke and duchess?
Losing Frogmore to the winds of Royal change and shifting Royal whims, as to who gets the graces and favors. Their prestige and bankability have thus been taken down a few notches in Hollywood. This severe dent in their Royal status has got to make Meghan very angry. As they say, "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes"
Well done Queenie! And strip titles come January 2021!
Hear, hear!
Not before time, either.
I'm sure the good people of Sussex are celebrating in some measure. Techinically the title Sussex remains but it doesn't seem like the citizens of the namesake county are going to be troubled by ever having to see their patrons again. The Dukedom is kind of a made up one since it comes with no lands or ancestral home attached. Harry is only a paper Duke. I suppose he will get to keep it, as the Duke and Duchess of Windsor got to keep theirs, and they never lived in England again. Residency does not appear to be a requirement. The HRH is likely there to stay as well; the removal of these does not appear to be a hill ER wishes to die on. But if she has revoked duties, home, military associations, uniforms, patronages, financial support and the right to be near the Royal person at public events . . the Sussexes are basically toast. They really have been since they whined to Tom Bradby that they weren't OK. There's no recovering from how they have behaved since decamping to America, particularly in these last couple of months. They promised to not embarrass the Queen as a condition for retaining *some* of their privileges and they have failed to uphold that promise.
They never wanted that house, never lived there, I'm prepared to say, but now it's vastly desirable as a symbol of their connection to the royal family. ER is under no obligation to house traitors, unless she proposes to give them a nice suite of rooms in the Tower--permanently.
Yes, I recall letting our house in the 1970s when the law put the tenant into the driving seat even more firmly. - husband had been posted and we had to live in quarters. I needed a proper contract stipulating that the tenancy was short term (6 months). The only way to move a tenant who wouldn't go, even so, would have been with a court order, having proved I needed the property more than they did, I understand.
I mentioned the street with a bonfire in an early post - Stonefield St N1. There was a notorious case there c.1968 of a private bailiff taking a wrecking ball to the front wall of a house to `winkle' the tenants out because the Cloudesley Estate wanted vacant possession. The `heavy' did time for assaulting the tenant, IIRC.
https://twitter.com/BarkJack/status/1330996138904793088
Not really, Eugenie is still in good odor if you will with the Queen et al. Accusing Eugenie of what MM is believed by some to do herself...it all backfired and now they are likely trying to pretend that is not in the book.
Also, Sussexes releasing an actual amount themselves is tacky. IMO
Harry Markle had an account of H meeting a tattooed wheelchair athlete who took off his a shirt so H could admire the thoracic artwork.
H thereupon tweaked the competitor's nipples.
I once received some very sick nuisance phone calls, threatening the sort of injuries that could be sustained in the basement AnT told us about. Vile how some people's minds work.
Just because some allegations prove to be false, it doesn't mean that they all are. There were the ones made against Neil & Christine Hamilton, and those perpetrated by someone calling himself `Nick' both of which were proved to be packs of lies, but not before they had caused profound distress. It doesn't follow though that J Saville was innocent.
It can be very difficult to distinguish truth from falsehood.
Harry Markle had an account of H meeting a tattooed wheelchair athlete who took off his a shirt so H could admire the thoracic artwork.
H thereupon tweaked the competitor's nipples.
I once received some very sick nuisance phone calls, threatening the sort of injuries that could be sustained in the basement AnT told us about. Vile how some people's minds work.
Just because some allegations prove to be false, it doesn't mean that they all are. There were the ones made against Neil & Christine Hamilton, and those perpetrated by someone calling himself `Nick' both of which were proved to be packs of lies, but not before they had caused profound distress. It doesn't follow though that J Saville was innocent.
It can be very difficult to distinguish truth from falsehood.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8978195/Queen-secures-planning-permission-new-Sandringham-adventure-playground.html
What can MM be said to have inspired?
This was in LSA under Doopheus, supposed to be Christopher Jones of Quora fame...
.................
I left the information here yesterday about the Quora tea-dropper Christopher Jones joining and posting on LSA but I'm not sure how many saw my post other than Opus and KC.
Do you guys think this makes him seem more reliable?
A lot of the LSA posters seem to be accepting his stories although they are like us also pointing out the mistakes in some of his info about royal protocol, etc.
You can see his posts at the link in an excerpt from my original comment below. He hasn't added any additional posts other than the first two left yesterday.
A couple more thoughts on how we now think the Harkles were using the 'roasted chicken' story as some sort of secret subtext during their engagement interview.
It was always considered very strange that she brought that up. She was supposed to be vegan and they were so secretive about everything else, why mention such minutia?
That story ended up at the time getting repeated over and over in tabloid articles - Harry proposed over a roasted chicken. Knowing now that it was possibly a reference to a sexual position, it disgusts me to think how the UK citizens and the tabs were "tricked" over this detail. The tabs and magazines all wrote about it as if it was a romantic gesture and many people were charmed by it. Ugh!
I think the original theory regarding the weirdness of the engagement interview chicken comment revolved around her ex-boyfriend and chef Corey. He apparently specialized in roasted chicken (the real thing not the sexual kind!) and some talk went around at the time that this subtext involved him in some way and her having stolen his recipe. There was an article that came out about her taking credit for a pasta dish of his so I guess stealing recipes is not beneath her. The 'Corey roasted chicken specialty' just adds another bizarre layer to the story.
And lastly, I was reminded of another appropriate chicken-related story on LSA today. I remember when Cosmo and other type mags would run stories recommending a woman cook a roasted chicken for her boyfriend if she wanted to get him to propose! Supposedly this would cause him to see you as wife material. LOL!
It certainly would be diabolically ironic if Markle was thinking of that old recommendation to induce a proposal while actually referencing a sexual trick.😱
.....................
Sally1975 said...
I'm not sure what to think about the Quora poster and his "tea".
I only read his roasted chicken/Soho House post after Nutties here commented on incorrect info regarding the RF/firm sprinkled within his other submissions.
Now today I see he has joined LipStick Alley under the name "Doopheus". He only left a couple of comments so far, but he seems to be discussing and defending the origin of his tea.
Here is his first post:
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/page-5882#post-65211446
November 22, 2020 at 10:37 PM
True,very true.
It was pretty odd even if she did mean a nicely-browned cooked fowl, stuffed with nothing more bizarre than lemon-&-thyme forcemeat. As a hostess who had planned and prepared a beautifully balanced 3-course meal, the last thing I would want a guest to give me at the door would be a greasy packet of cold meat.
Flowers, wine or chocolate? Yes please! But another course? What is one supposed to do with it? Hand it round with the nibbles?
What sort of dinner parties does she go to? Don't answer that!
have you seen this reference to Jessica being suicidal? Someone asked if maybe her health was one of the confidential reasons used by M for postponement?
https://pagesix.com/2020/11/21/meghan-markles-pal-jessica-mulroney-was-suicidal-after-she-was-cancelled/
...................
I posted that story and link here yesterday and yes, I'm wondering if JM's issues could be the confidential reason for the postponement.
But I also saw a weird post on anonymous houseplant about her 5 friends not being willing to testify for her. Has anyone read anything about that?
LOL! Maybe Megalo is obsessed with roasted chicken - of all types!
I agree - you don't bring the main course as a guest!
@AnT
That is one creepy story!
I had thought I might use online sites to start dating again when Covid finally lets up but tales like that make me not want to ever leave my home again.😱
If they really weren't cooking when Harry proposed or were cooking something "unacceptable" for a foodie like hot dogs, I can see M spontaneously throwing in that untrue detail, particularly if she had read the Kate story. If it wasn't true, I can see H looking startled. Obviously they hadn't planned out their story very well before that interview since they could even seem to agree on when they met!
I don't think M claims to be vegan. (She has hundreds of leather handbags and shoes and wears leather and lambskin skirts after all.) I think she once said she ate vegan during the week. I doubt that's even true but maybe she didn't eat meat during the week when she was on Suits.
and as said above, asking for a (confidential) continuence due to JM’s mental health is a puzzle piece that fits perfectly into this tangled spiderweb story.
MM is the gift that keeps on giving.
JCMH - is he a dupe/ dimwit / cult follower / whipped victim / easily maniupulated or is he a 100% willing participant & planner to his homemade dramas? what happened to the guy that wanted to live in a hut in Africa and save be a conservationist, working with the Elephants/ wildlife? he’s now living another elitist, privileged life in sunny California, taking favors from oligarchs and scrapping around for a quick buck. he’s the 21st century PA.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDzU4Ki1q-w
Celt say she is hearing two things that in a more normal world seem to me to to mutually exclusive of each other, but then this is the Harkles, so anything could happen:
Celt is hearing...1) There is a second baby in the works, either naturally or via a surrogate and
2) She is hearing that Meghan is behaving toward Harry the way she behaved toward Trevor prior to dumping Trevor.