Skip to main content

Meg and Kamala

Although I haven't been around much recently, I've enjoyed reading the comments. Recently the group was discussing whether or not the Sussexes would release a Christmas card this year, given what Meg's tragic miscarriage last summer (if you believe the official version of events) or their lack of access to the baby playing the role of Archie (if you don't).

I was struck by Enbrethiliel's suggestion that if the Sussexes do a Christmas card this year, it might include a quote from Kamala Harris.

Birds of a feather

Actually, I'm surprised that Meghan hasn't tried harder to publicly associate herself with Harris. 

Both women are biracial, both California natives, both "woke" Democrats. They even have similar hairstyles and fashion preferences. Both are fond of big, airy language with minimal substance, and both are openly ambitious. 

In fact, there's quite a bit of chatter suggesting that Joe Biden will have quite a short presidency and quickly resign in favor of Harris, perhaps for health reasons or some connection to his troubled son's business dealings. 

Wouldn't Meghan love to be connected with the first female president? Maybe even pose Archie in a "Harris and Harrison" photo to go with has "Arch and Archbishop" Bishop Tutu? 

Harris went after Meghan first

Ironically, in the past it has been Harris who has worked hard to associate herself with Markle. 

In October 2019, on her official Senate account, Harris commented on Meghan's weepy video statement in South Africa, in which Meg suggested that the Royal Family rarely asked how she was doing. 

Harris' Tweet read: "This is incredibly important. We must remember that it's a sign of strength to show emotion. Meghan, we are with you."

(The boldface is in the original).

In 2019, Harris was running in the Presidential primaries and might have thought she could benefit by associating herself with Meghan. (She eventually dropped out without winning a single delegate.)

Time Magazine brought them together

In June 2020, Harris again used her official Senate account to comment on Meghan's (apparently unrequested) graduation video for students of her alma mater, discussing racial justice.

Harris wrote, using boldface again, "The only wrong thing to say is nothing. Thank you, Meghan, for this powerful statement."

At the time, Harris was out of the presidential race entirely, although certainly aiming for the vice president job. 

Meghan's video bears a Time Magazine watermark, and Harris also has a long association with Time Magazine, a onetime Republican stalwart that has gone ultra-woke after its acquisition by a Silicon Valley billionaire.

Time put Harris on the cover in 2019 - "Her Case: Presidential candidate Kamala Harris fights for a path forward" - and this week there was another cover naming her and Joe Biden, bizarrely, "Person of the Year." (Are these two individuals somehow just one person? Or was Joe, as President-Elect, not significant enough to get his own Person of the Year cover?)

It's hard to know if the June tweet was Harris supporting Meghan, Harris cementing her relationship with Time Magazine, Harris promoting herself, or all of the above.

The wrong cards

Given Kamala Harris' come-up, there's little doubt that Meghan would now be eager to associate herself with the vice-president elect. 

However, as a leader-in-waiting, Harris has little incentive to annoy the Royal Family by publicly linking herself to Meghan.  

There don't seem to be any publicly-available photos of the two of them together, and there probably won't be if Harris can help it. 

Looks like Meghan's played her cards wrong again - even if she does put a Kamala Harris quote on her 2020 Christmas card. 



Comments

Anonymous said…
@JDubya

It would be wonderful if it were true Kate is pregnant with twins. But In Touch magazine is nearly as bad as the Globe.
Jdubya said…
https://twitter.com/hrrysgreysuit?lang=en

Dec 14th post

"the warmth of a meal can feel as comforting as a much-needed hug" - Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, 2020.
"It gives you a feeling of comfort. It's like having a pair of arms around you" - Diana, Princess of Wales, Panorama interview, 1995:
AnT said…
Wait.

Remember when Meghan was supposed to be weighing major studio offers, and starring in a new big budget Marvel franchise superhero movie by now (films are being made again)?

But it is mid-December now, and she is just pushing basic laxative oat drinks and taping gibberish for free for Spotify.

Aw! She really IS trying to become irrelevant!

And when Harry is busted for working in the US without a work visa, he will become insolvent.

Then, they can be very private! I get it now.

Good Morning Britain (ITV) has just played clip of the podcast.

Cut to Piers M with head in sick bucket.

Susanna R said she thought it was a spoof until she saw the transcript.

Kevin McGuire (Exec. Ed The Mirror) said he wouldn't be surprised if they were to be filmed lying on a sofa, advertising haemorrhoid cream.
Spanner said…
Netflix and now Spotify - is there anyone left on the planet who still believes that 'they gave it their best shot (of being Senior Royals) but they were forced to leave for because of the evil RF, racist Brits and the hateful British media.

Everything they have done is so transparent, pretending they wanted to live in Canada, needing privacy etc when they had already started LA house hunting even before their SA tour.

Clvr Oat Milk Latte, sounds vile but will probably sell well despite the price, look at how big the vegan ready meal market now is, and the market is expected to boom in the future. Personally if I want to eat healthier I'd cook it myself from scratch not buy something precooked and bung in the microwave but there we go. It reminds me of a WholeFood/Wellness brand that sells cornflakes as gluten free and charges a fortune for them when ALL cornflakes are gluten free.

Salad Tossing - so I looked that up and what an eye opener! But how does that fit in with the gruesome twosome?...
replying to Spanner -

It's said to have been one of her specialities when she was, allegedly, a `working girl'. Along with the `Golden Showers'.

All speculation, nasty rumours, pure fiction, of course...
At it simplest, `oat milk' is uncooked gruel, as fed to paupers in the workhouse - think `Oliver Twist'.

The cost of the `instant' oatmeal/porridge that comes in packets is, in my view, extortionate.

Take the cheapest commodity you can think of, dress it up, give it a fancy name & make a fortune.

Sandie said…
https://mobile.twitter.com/RoyalReporter/status/1339140738051870722

Richard Palmer always has a rational and reasonable viewpoint.

I know people are still upset about the titles. Scobie keeps using Duchess Meghan, and Princess Meghan pops up here and there. Oops, the HRH is used and then removed from an announcement.

I think someone close to the BRF needs to get interviews with all major American talk show hosts and ...

Explain what the HRH means and why the Duke and Duchess titles are empty without it (no land, no property, no heirlooms, just the privileges that come with the HRH);

Explain that Archie actually does have titles he can use but until he comes of age his parents are entitled to not use his titles, unless he successfully sues them before then;

Explain that there is no such person as Duchess Meghan or Princess Meghan;

Explain that it is British royalty and thus why it is so disrespectful to trade on the word 'royal' outside the UK and illegal inside the UK;

Explain why getting involved in politics is so problematic for royals.

...

They need someone articulate, charming, very presentable to do the rounds with every major talk show host and TV show. Taking away the titles will just make them victims and people like Scobie and all the sugars will keep using them anyway.
Maneki Neko said…
@Mel said 'I can only imagine that the harkle Podcast will be extremely boring and gag inducing.' But, Mel, the podcasts are meant to be 'uplifting'! How old anyone be bored?
..............

Personally, I dislike the phrase 'you guys' and Harry uses it a lot, which grates. Indeed, more people are apparently seeing 'you guys' as problematic for women, so what has our arch 😉 feminist got to say about it?
..............

Oat milk? Many of these 'milks' have a lot of additives and oat milk is higher in calories and carbs than other non dairy milks. It also contains gluten and sugar, although there may be gluten free and sugar free versions. Maybe MM will market her own brand?

It seems MM has a finger in every pie but cannot excel at/ master anything.


Sandie said…
@WBBM

My sentiments exactly re. the instant oatmeal latte! There are plenty of niche 'alternative health' products on the market, but unless it becomes mainstream, none of them are worth billions and a lot of effort goes into making, distributing and selling the product. Depending on how many owners there are for the brand, Meghan has to share the profits (what is left of income after all costs and taxes are covered) with others.

The Netflix deal is not worth the hundred millon breathlessly announced in headlines. There are huge costs and a lot of work involved in producing successful shows, and you have to keep repeating the successes and be able to cushion yourself against the inevitable poor performing shows (every one has them in a career). The Sussexes are not known for consistent, long-term hard work, neither do they have any of the talents required.

Ditto for the Spotify deal. The shows may be much easier and cheaper to produce, but they need a massive audience and regular shows to bring in the kind of advertising revenue to earn after tax hundreds of millions.

I think they are running out of platforms they can hijack so that they can stroke their egos. The had to create their own. Besides, Meghan wants to dominate and control - be in charge. Harry probably has more money than we think he has and all these deals are about their ego and self importance, and at best bring in the money to cover her plastic surgery costs

Yes, I know the Kardashians have become very wealthy simply by making themselves famous and getting a lot of followers to corrupt with materialism and shallowness (and then the merching and endorsements and own brands). Privacy, lawsuits, lack of focus, preaching, dishonesty, bad people skills ... just some of the disadvantages for the Sussexes.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Magatha Mistie said…

The Gruellers Grift

The first Gruel, the Harkles did say
Was to market their porridge as cafe latte
Gruel, Gruel...
Spanner said…
@Wild Boar Battle-Maid said 'The cost of the `instant' oatmeal/porridge that comes in packets is, in my view, extortionate. Take the cheapest commodity you can think of, dress it up, give it a fancy name & make a fortune.'

Thats very like the shampoo scam to double profits 'shampoo then rinse and repeat' - I haven't seen that on shampoo bottles for years (here in the UK) so I guess that shampoo manufacturers aren't allowed to put that on their bottles any more.

Clvr Oat Latte - There appears to be a number of medical benefits listed on their packaging though, I know its all 'may help' 'could' 'might' but is this allowed? I know that it isn't FDA approved but I didn't think it was legal to make these sort of claims.
SwampWoman said…

Blogger Magatha Mistie said...

The Gruellers Grift

The first Gruel, the Harkles did say
Was to market their porridge as cafe latte
Gruel, Gruel...





ROFL, girl, you are KILLIN' IT as per usual!

Blogger Spanner said...Clvr Oat Latte - There appears to be a number of medical benefits listed on their packaging though, I know its all 'may help' 'could' 'might' but is this allowed? I know that it isn't FDA approved but I didn't think it was legal to make these sort of claims.


As long as they use those "may, could, and might" qualifiers and not something absolute or promissory such as "cures", they're good. If somebody dies as a result of ingesting their product because of a reaction to an unlisted ingredient, qualifiers will not protect them. They should probably have something on the package to the effect that the consumer should consult a physician if they have a condition (such as constipation) lasting more than 7 days, etc.

In the UK I'm sure it's OK to say something `may help', on the understanding this should be read as `may help but equally may not'! The vaguer the better, like `traditionally used to/believed to...'

It's not on to say it does or will help unless the statement can be backed by peer review of properly controlled double-blind trials (as if!). After all, it's food, not medicine.

It's like those ads saying `9 out of 10 cats prefer our brand of catfood' - they don't say which 10 cats were chosen, nor how many were already known not to like their competitors offering. They just imply that the moggies were selected at random.

Not that anybody's law would stop our Megsy.
I am now warbling `Gru-u-el, Gru-u-el'

Thanks Magatha! That's a good laugh.
Sandie said…
https://mobile.twitter.com/scobie/status/1338951714137845761?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1338951714137845761%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=

Anyone offering to take one for the team and listen to the Scobie podcast?
Sandie,

The Kardashians had a plan and executed it. They have stuck to the same routine for years. They have a very specific brand that sells to a very specific audience.

"Harry probably has more money than we think he has." I'm starting to think this, too. I think Meghan *can* spend it all, but I also think they have a year of severance funding and haven't started using their private funds, yet. I think the idea of actually spending their own money to support themselves is beyond Harry's comprehension. Once they need to I can't imagine it will go well.

These very monetarily low risk/ low effort initiatives such as cemetery photocalls, nearly defunct coffee promoting, free spotify rants, zoom-bombing are a complete waste of time. It keeps them in the news, sure, but the low value broadcast strategy isn't sustainable because they have no real perimeters.

I don't really know who they are as a couple after all this time. I should be able to pick out three things I *know* they stand for. Which, brings me to a new conclusion: that they just don't really have any audience and this stuff is mainly for EGO first. Coupled with the fact Meghan will be fully expecting Sugar Daddy Charles to bail them out if it get's moderately challenging, the zero direction Ego-Floating will continue. They are both about status and without it they will turn on each other.

I think they are delusional and cannot accept they don't have interested consumers. I also think the Clevr coffee experiment was low risk on purpose to see if anyone would actually buy it to then take that data to larger brands. I also don't think it worked. This is the biggest sales month of the year for coffee, but who is going to impulse buy overpriced experimental coffee from an unknown brand from an untrusted source, when they could just head to Starbucks and get the full holiday experience?
Maneki Neko said…
@Magatha

...their porridge as cafe latte
Gruel, Gruel...


I'd say cruel, cruel (to the poor customers)
Maneki Neko said…
Ha ha! Seen in the DM:


Meghan Markle is copying the Queen’s rhetorical style to make herself sound ‘presidential’ in their Spotify podcast trailer, a behaviour expert has claimed.

The Duchess of Sussex, 39, said 'my husband and I' when referring to Prince Harry on the recording, in a move reminiscent of the Queen and former First Lady Michelle Obama, who often use the same rhetorical technique, according to a UK-based body language expert.


I wonder if she's practising for when she's at the White House (God forbid). I hope she doesn't read the article, her head will get even bigger (having said that, it's grammatically correct and better than 'me and my husband'.
).
Sylvia said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sylvia said…
Have any Nutties seen this 'new' picture of Archie onSkippy tumblr blog ? Is it a spoof? There isn't much info ?
https://64.media.tumblr.com/6deeaeee50e10ea9fbec2bf527920a24/7d675758bb5e0f66-03/s1280x1920/1fa48ed0ee216ffbfb222fbf196a6b644ee4cc09.jpg
Sandie said…
@Not Meghan Markle

The Kardashians did the work and let themselves be managed by the right people and had focus. Have you ever seem a photograph of Kim with a label dangling from her clothes at a high profile occasion? And so on. I hate the values that the Kardashians sell and that they have influenced a generation of shallow materialism, but Meghan fails to live up to their standards on every count and depends on her word salad, royal connection and huge misplaced entitled ego. In a way, she reminds me of the self help movement of about 20 or so years ago that sold the idea that not only could you have whatever you wanted but it was your divine right.

The Queen has a large personal fortune. The Harkles are counting on getting some of that. In turn, Charles has a large personal fortune and a huge chunk of that will go to Harry when he dies. I bet the Harkles believe Harry is entitled to all of it as William will have other sources of personal funding as king. In the meanwhile, if Charles withdraws his personal funding, Meghan the hustler will get what she wants with merching deals, and the two of them will always hustle for free rides in private jets, holidays on mansions in exotic places, and so on. It will be interesting to see if post virus we see Harry playing polo, and if the Harkles get invited to high profile society events. Meghan will be hustling with designers to merch their outfits too!
AnT said…
@Not Meghan Markle,

I fully agree. And, two other points about the Kardashian model versus the Harkle model would be:

(1) the Ks began years ago in ancient times, when reality was young. The Hs are late, late, late to the game.

(2). the Ks raked in the cash by having no shame, and no secrets. Even when they made it up and scripted it, every bunion and fight and full-throttled narcissist spewfest was out thereon the table. Their audience relished their screaming, imperfections and absurdity and overt materialism and stupidity and cocktail guzzling and ballers. None of this can translate to the Hidden Harkles. The secretive Hs live in a hidden or nonexistent world with a white cheap sofa and some mail order catalogue art. There is nothing to see, nothing they are willing to show, except the rented sofa studio and the old garden bench. A giant yawn. Meghan only wishes to be photographed as a queen if righteous perfection (her idea of perfect, not ours) for minutes per week through a heavily greased lens with holy Vatican lighting. Nothing they do must be seen as wrong or imperfect (though yah, we nutties see all the sweat and knobs and laugh). Worse, she is a class A bore with zero personality. And he’s the bitter middle manager lunch-drunk in the next cube.

All the preaching and secrets with images of nothing through greased blurry lenses laden with drab gob kindness quotes won’t sell reality tv. So, podcasts, with just the drab babble left to flog us. M may be thinking K only because she is angling to have the tax shelter of becoming a church, as Kris K did for her family finances. Doria is probably being certified online as a minister as we speak. But as for a televised program, the Hs have no core, no retinue, no outlandish amusing sibs or friends, no amusing shocking people to incorporate to add to their dreadful preachy duo-logues. No one us goin to quote them the next day except to mock the snoozefest and that will grow old even faster.

So, they aren’t the Obamas, or even the Ks. Just my opinion. And Oprah is scraping for relevance too.



Sandie said…
@Sylvia

Yes it is a spoof. Archie is older than that baby in the picture.
Sylvia said…
@Sadie
Thanks for putting me straight On second look the child in the picture us too young ..
Sandie said…
Did you see this video of the Queen on a Zoom call? She has to struggle to hold back the tears and keep her composure.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1373100/queen-news-video-queen-elizabeth-ii-prince-charles-charity-princes-trust-royal-news

Ignore the headline and article and just watch the video. It was a genuine moment.

@AnT
Yep, the Harkles, especially Meghan are not real. She is always conscious of her image, but then messes up with something simple like a label hanging from her dress.
AnT said…
@Sandie, lol! Yes! Ah, the Day of the Dangling Tag!

Oh, another way the Ks and the Hs are miles apart:

The Ks are selling sex. Sex and clothes, sex and drinks, sex and cars...sex.

The Hs have a negative sex factor now. I seriously mean that; a friend works for a big research firm and as of late September, the Harkles, and Meghan individually weren’t scoring in a top 50 or top 100 lists of her influencer project (of sexy, exciting, desirable people) for a corporate client. Wonder if word spilled out in NYC, so they bought Harry his Sexy Man berth to cheer him up?

Even all her old burger grilling didn’t get her to rank anymore. I am not surprised, but their media partners didn’t notice this?

The drab holy preaching dead-mommy, mean-daddy, miscarriage schmaltz is all they have now, I suppose. Ad sponsors for that?
SwampWoman said…
Wild Boar Battle-maid said...
O/T Balancing risks: Short- versus long-term.

It depends on one's age - the older one is, the more sharply the short-term risk rises, whereas the long-term risk becomes increasingly irrelevant.

My dentist told me my teeth were good for another 20 or 25 years.
My reply? `I just hope the rest of me lasts that long'.


Exactly! Balancing risks is something that "we" as humans do daily. Some are much better at it than others (grin).

Klaxon warning! *OFF TOPIC ALERT!*

My state has given the medical people either treating COVID patients or who are in elevated danger of coming in contact with COVID patients the first *shot* (sorry!) at the vaccines. X number have been allocated to them. The next group of people that will receive the vaccines are the people that have been designated as the strike force that will be going into the senior care homes and administering the vaccines, then the seniors in the care homes because that is where the majority of our deaths occur/come from. The state doesn't have enough vaccines to vaccinate *all* the medical people or *all* of the seniors in care homes; that is another aspect of where the risk balancing is going to come in.

Speaking of risk balancing, our senior deaths in the skilled nursing facilities where the frailest at-risk seniors live has been going up. The seniors had been sequestered for many months per state government as a protection; the families/seniors successfully petitioned the governor to allow visitors even with the increased risk and exposure on the grounds that many or most of the seniors did not have much time left. Some had cognitive deficits such as dementia and may no longer recognize their spouses/children by the time the COVID threat is over.

As of our latest county update yesterday at 11 a.m., 20.6% of our COVID-19 deaths were in the age groups of 35-64. (Nobody IN MY COUNTY under the age of 42 has died from the virus.) Of those, 14% were in the 55 to 64 age group. The age groups of 65 and above have 79.4% of the COVID-19 deaths. (That is only the risk of death; it doesn't include things such as long-term organ damage due to the virus because that is yet unknown.)

Important Note: Our county latitude is the same as north Africa. Those of us that do not live in cities or work night shift *probably* have enough vitamin D to protect us from the virus; however, older people do not make D3 as efficiently as younger people. Anybody that lives at latitudes above 35N* needs D3 supplementation and, the darker the skin, the more supplementation is required. A vitamin D blood level and physician consult is advised.

*While this 35N latitude information was in a medical lecture, I disagree. If you have darkly pigmented skin, I believe you are in danger even at my latitude of 30N.






CookieShark said…
Are they signing up as much as possible while they still have titles? Once titles are revoked will there be a podcast with her sighing and saying "It wasn't necessary, but I'm trying to move forward"
When you read transcripts of what they say, it really makes no sense.
When I talk to someone, I don't immediately apply what they say to my own life or experience. That's actually quite a self-centered way to live.
People laughing that they have "blindsided the Palace" should examine how they would feel if their own family or employees "blindsided" them. That is also a very aggressive and immature way to behave.
Is it true Michelle Obama is already signed up to be a guest on their podcast?
Or is this a case of putting a story out there and hoping to get a call from her?
@Sylvia & @Sandie:

The wee lad in the pic on Skippie's Tumblr a/c looks more like the infant Harry to me.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I agree with the view that the Dire Duo are now in vulture mode, circling, waiting for the Grim Reaper to free up riches so far beyond their reach.
SwampWoman said…
I actually think that if Meghan gets to be wildly successful at happy joyful podcasts full of positive messaging, it may give Harry the opportunity/opening to leave. If she is successful in her merching and her "investing" and her podcasts, fantastic. I don't think she'd be capable of managing a small retail shop, so it would get her away from a place where she could do some real damage.
SwampWoman said…
Blogger Wild Boar Battle-maid said...
I agree with the view that the Dire Duo are now in vulture mode, circling, waiting for the Grim Reaper to free up riches so far beyond their reach.


I'd be very surprised if some wills have not been rewritten. If Harry is as dim as has been reported*, I believe that there will be some entails placed on his inheritance.

*I have no idea about the intellect; I'm judging him by his actions.
Girl with a Hat said…
please no covid posts. Can we have the moderators remove these please?

There is covid everywhere and I want to get away from it for a few minutes every day by coming here. Some people just don't believe in respecting the rules.
Christine said…
Hello!

I've been contemplating oat milk lattes. Strange I know. Imagine Pippa filming something where she opens a gift basket given to her by 'K' and she specially pulls out oat milk lattes and showcases them. People would be horrified. To merch things when you are super wealthy especially when so many people are so badly off right now. I guess I don't know what to feel about Harry's level of wealth. One thing is for sure...it's no where near where they want it to be to be peddling oat milk lattes.

Anyone buying this new story that William and Harry are back to speaking and bonding over their anger over the Diana interview fallout? I feel like every few months Meghan pushes a story about how the brothers are speaking again. I think Meghan has realized she needs to have the brothers back together again since the public has a lot of anger at her for splitting the brothers up. Hell, she'd love to cozy up to them again, I think. Charles's wallet would open up wider if peace reigned. The problem is that both men are very obstinant. Plus after the fallout with the Rose affair story, I do not see Kate pushing for a reunion as long as Harry is married to Meghan.
Girl with a Hat said…
Actually podcasts are really hard to do because people only have 1 sense with which to judge you. No visual distractions. You have to have a plethora of qualities to engage and keep their attention - intonation, speed of speech, emotion, engaging content, appropriate vocabulary, endearing personality or image. All of these can take a long time to master if they don't come naturally, and I can tell you that neither of these two possess any of these qualities at this moment.
Girl with a Hat said…
Did you all read that Oprah turned off comments on her Instagram post about Meghan's gift of poo tea?
Another way to look at this:

Oprah refused to say M's name aloud. Oprah mentioned it should have been in her annual best things list. = Distance from the disaster.

Also, the more important bit: If Meghan and Harry are marketing to Women, which they are, then why aren't they signed to OWN? Oprah's platform is the perfect place for their woke nonsense with kitschy shit.

Conclusion, if Oprah doesn't think taking a multi millions bet on Harry and Meghan in media makes sense, neither do Spotify and Netflix.

Lastly, if they do have these insane $$ deals, why are they sitting around zooming? That kind of money takes WORK and they'd have new bosses.
98% of podcasts don't make money. It's something like pennies on the thousands of listens.
I certainly hope wills have been rewritten. Was it Bob Newhard? Mort Sahl? Or someone else who did a comic monologue about a Will reading?

In character as the solicitor/attorney, he read out the bequests to the assembled family:

`...and to Louie, who asked that he be remembered in my Will, Hello Louie!'
Christine said…
I wonder how Oprah got out of what was most definitely some kind of request to work with H&M?

"Ummmmm Stedman and I are retiring" or "We are only doing charity work from now on"
Sandie said…
Come on folks! Very occassionally someone will post off topic with a clearer warning. It is no hassle to scroll past. If the conversation then completely veers off on another direction, the moderators pull it back.

@WBBM
Hilarious! I wonder how many people give good wishes to someone in their will. I would campaign for special sainthood for the Queen if she did that to the Harkles ... to Harry and Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly known as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, formerly HRH, who always remained cherished family members to me, I leave good wishes for their life of merching and podcasting in America. (To my great grandson Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor, Viscount Dumbarton ... )

What would the Queen bequeath to Archie? An annual all stations pass for the Tube on London, season tickets to the Highland Games in Scotland ...?
Sandie said…
Since it is nighttime here and soon sleep time and since I do not want to be targeted as tatty was recently, I'll be signing off here until my chores for tomorrow are done.

Stay safe everyone!
SwampWoman said…
AnT said: I fully agree. And, two other points about the Kardashian model versus the Harkle model would be:

(1) the Ks began years ago in ancient times, when reality was young. The Hs are late, late, late to the game.

(2). the Ks raked in the cash by having no shame, and no secrets. Even when they made it up and scripted it, every bunion and fight and full-throttled narcissist spewfest was out thereon the table. Their audience relished their screaming, imperfections and absurdity and overt materialism and stupidity and cocktail guzzling and ballers. None of this can translate to the Hidden Harkles. The secretive Hs live in a hidden or nonexistent world with a white cheap sofa and some mail order catalogue art. There is nothing to see, nothing they are willing to show, except the rented sofa studio and the old garden bench. A giant yawn. Meghan only wishes to be photographed as a queen if righteous perfection (her idea of perfect, not ours) for minutes per week through a heavily greased lens with holy Vatican lighting. Nothing they do must be seen as wrong or imperfect (though yah, we nutties see all the sweat and knobs and laugh). Worse, she is a class A bore with zero personality. And he’s the bitter middle manager lunch-drunk in the next cube.

All the preaching and secrets with images of nothing through greased blurry lenses laden with drab gob kindness quotes won’t sell reality tv. So, podcasts, with just the drab babble left to flog us. M may be thinking K only because she is angling to have the tax shelter of becoming a church, as Kris K did for her family finances. Doria is probably being certified online as a minister as we speak. But as for a televised program, the Hs have no core, no retinue, no outlandish amusing sibs or friends, no amusing shocking people to incorporate to add to their dreadful preachy duo-logues. No one us goin to quote them the next day except to mock the snoozefest and that will grow old even faster.

So, they aren’t the Obamas, or even the Ks. Just my opinion. And Oprah is scraping for relevance too.


Oh, I completely agree about their being late to a genre that has been done to death already (reality shows).

I disagree somewhat about Oprah scraping for relevance; she's on the sidelines because she wants to be. She's a woman who came from nothing and created a billion-dollar company in a *very* competitive industry. I think that she has made a lot of ruthless decisions in her time that she may be worried about (her coziness with Harvey Weinstein comes to mind). That touchy/feely persona that she has cultivated is a mask.
SwampWoman said…
Sandie said...
Since it is nighttime here and soon sleep time and since I do not want to be targeted as tatty was recently, I'll be signing off here until my chores for tomorrow are done.

Stay safe everyone!


G'night, Sandie! Rest well; see you tomorrow.
SwampWoman said…
Christine said: Anyone buying this new story that William and Harry are back to speaking and bonding over their anger over the Diana interview fallout? I feel like every few months Meghan pushes a story about how the brothers are speaking again. I think Meghan has realized she needs to have the brothers back together again since the public has a lot of anger at her for splitting the brothers up. Hell, she'd love to cozy up to them again, I think. Charles's wallet would open up wider if peace reigned. The problem is that both men are very obstinate. Plus after the fallout with the Rose affair story, I do not see Kate pushing for a reunion as long as Harry is married to Meghan.

No, I am not buying what they are selling either. At this point, I assume that all the stories that come out about H&M are fiction unless proved otherwise.
AnT said…
@SwampWoman,

Let me explain my thought. I give Oprah full credit for what she accomplished as a self-made woman, with a canny business and marketing sense. I used to read her magazine, note her book club books. An absolutely impressive career, and level of success.

But, at this point in time, she just doesn't have the first-thought impact she used to have in the marketplace.

She will always have her fans. She will matter. But, there are too many other people grabbing attention across channels.

She is rich, comfortably stetted with homes, interests, important friends. She is the CEO of a production house, and a network. That is huge. She doesn't have anything to prove. BUT, still. she isn't as relevant as she was back in the 80s or 90s. She will always be a name, but she is no longer the first name that comes up all the time as a point of reference in a changing world. Even her close friend Gayle King is much more in the news.

Oprah is not without influence, or power, she is still A+, she was a fine actor, she thought of national book clubs, etc, but still, she isn't as relevant to busy people today, or to a younger audience.

It has happened to her entertainment peers, from David Letterman, to Hollywood stars like Clooney. Always a name, but not as relevant anymore.

Maybe she is just having some fun with oat lattes and Harry's future. I see it more as trying to get a little fresh PR to get attention back on her network or investments from those audience segments she thinks M&H may deliver.
xxxxx said…
Yes thanks Wild Boar Battle-maid ..... What is see on the Duos podcasts are advertisements for Hemorrhoids creams. To ward off painful hemorrhoid operations per Swamp woman. You get this op you cannot laugh, sit, walk, laugh, belch, tell off color jokes when all we want is humor and laughs in these panic plandemic times.

Don't let our amazing Swampie fake you out. (joking) I am Very south of her, we have rational Covid policies under Governor Ron Desantis (this guy is a real go-getter) (very energetic)

And Tatty all should and must go good on your ops. Blessings!
jessica said…
Oprah is hardcore. She might not be popular but she is not about family, she is about work and being Queen Bee. She’s built up a large enough following, fortune, audience, and non controversial ‘brand’ to do whatever she wants now I guess. But Oprah? I’d be scared as Meghan probably is IF this friend of Harry’s wasn’t endorsing me.

Oprah is about the RF, Oprah is not about ‘M’.
AnT said…
@SwampWoman,

And yes to Oprah's business mask.
AnT said…
@Jessica,

Agreed. Oprah will be on the side of the RF.I will assume this means she will continue to support H, but, not necessarily Meghan.
jessica said…
If Meghan had the audacity to throw the Queen under the bus with her Megxit power- crazed list of demands, and then tell the Queen she doesn’t own the word ‘RoYaL’, imagine what she would do to Oprah if Oprah didn’t always cave to Meghan’s whims and wishes OR became her boss, as the Queen was. Oprah is shrewd and hardcore. Meghan cannot be trusted.

Meghan loves to tear down other women by stabbing them in the back while smiling to their face.
jessica said…
Oprah never had children and for whatever personal and professional reason has a soft spot for Harry (and the RF). This seems to be more of a personal relationship that was once a merger of powerful brands (the Stable Trusted BRF and Oprah). Meghan in the mix? Ehhhh. More like Oprah’s playing the long game here. Maybe Oprah will be the one to introduce Harry to his future wife.
xxxxx said…
Megs who looks whiter every day, her current strategy. She admired Oprah from afar. Oprah was therefore invited to the wedding but they never had any connection. Oprah doesn't mind helping the transactional Montecito Mudslide duo but she is wary of them _plus_ lazy in her own way. With her billions what is there to get excited about anymore?
Hikari said…
@AnT,

Oprah rose to prominence circa 1986, when her Chicago-based show was syndicated nationally. That was also the year she gave a stunning performance as 'Sophia' in The Color Purple. O. has a broadcast journalism degree, I believe, but she wasn't a trained actress, so her powerhouse performance really blew my socks off. As did Whoopi Goldberg's turn as 'Celie'.

O. just got bigger and bigger throughout the 1990s. I couldn't often catch daytime television, but I watched her program whenever I had the chance. She seemed charismatic and genuine at the time. When she went on that crazy crash diet and got Size 8 skinny and wheeled out a wagon full of fat, things started to turn a bit for me. Of course, the weight zoomed right back on, and more. On a level, this made O. relatable to regular women. But the quest to lose weight over the last 30 years has been, in a word, obsessive. Oprah's continual pursuit of weight loss has turned into a really nice little earner for her and has launched the careers of a number of her health team hangers-on, most notably, Bob Greene. All the cookbooks and fitness books and life coaching books followed, which I'm sure O. gets a cut of. I've been trying to lose 40 pounds since the new Millennium turned over and they are still my constant companions, so I am the last person to fat-shame anybody . . but I submit that a multibillionaire who's got not just one or two, but a *team* of chefs, personal trainers, home gyms in each of her homes and furthermore who is the national spokeswoman for WW should be able to lose and maintain a smaller weight *if she really wanted to.* So maybe being Fat Oprah is part of her overarching business plan. Which is savvy in a way, because if she *were* successful and became Skinny size 8 Oprah again, she'd lose a lot of her core audience. Being heavy and constantly struggling with it disarms a lot of the criticism she might otherwise get about her immense privilege, because in this one area at least, it seems that all her money doesn't give her a charmed life where her appearance is concerned.

But continually making weight loss and healthy lifestyle part of her platform, she can be assured of audience retention and picking up new viewers of women who are likewise adipose-abundant. But for all the ladies who struggle to lose weight while living their lives as working moms, possibly on welfare or in menial minimum wage jobs, who've got small children and have got to stretch the grocery budget, who have to subsist on mac and cheese and can't afford fancy gyms or personal trainers or $500 Lululemon workout attire or personal organic in-home chefs . . .their struggle to lose weight feels just a wee bit more challenging than O's.

Hikari said…
Oprah looked like a giant vacuum packed flamingo at Meg's wedding. So many kinds of wrong, that dress, but I figured that we hadn't seen the last of her where the Harkles are concerned. O. started her eponymous magazine in 2000, and at first, it seemed like fun. But as the years have gone on, I view it as a gargantuan ego project. Like Meg's word salad appearances, only of course produced to a much higher standard. Oprah is an attractive woman, when she employs every aid to beauty which her phalanx of stylists and photographers can dream up. At her age, which is now 70 or near it, I say she shouldn't have to worry about losing weight any more. What for? She's 'Oprah!' She's got Stedman. She's got Gayle. She's got her billions. Why not enjoy it? Stedman is obviously a man who likes a little sumpthin, sumpthin to hold onto. She can buy beautiful designer clothes made just for her. If they aren't in a small size, who cares? She may be the only one.

Magazines aren't as influential as they once were, in our digital age. Is she still publishing 'O'? I thought I read that it had been hemorrhaging money. She bought herself a magazine for the express purpose of putting herself on each and every month's cover because she'd always had a fantasy of being a cover girl with her non-standard body. Rather like someone else we know. Meg made the Tig for the same reason, to indulge her supermodel lifestyle influencer fantasy. As I read on through the pages of 'O' it became blatantly obvious that the only altar O worships at is her own. She's created herself as a deity. It's very like Scientology, in which the perfection of the self is held up as the ultimate goal . . 'god is within you', yada yada. Yes, I think it's safe to say that Oprah is also a narcissist, albeit a much higher-evolved one than Markle. O was happy to prance around at a Royal wedding when she'd never met the bride in her life, but she's too savvy to get embroiled with Meg now.
I can see Oprah getting the big 'Harry abused by Meghan 'Tell-All' interview', 100%. All she has to do is remain trusted and friendly with the guy.

I would actually pay to see that: Harry confessing all to Oprah.

It would be a huge moment for TV and for abuse victims and sufferers.
AnT said…
@Jessica,

Oprah seems to rely on a small, tight friend group she knows she can trust. She’s smart, so I assume she’s seen through Meghan, too.

I think you’re right. Oprah May have some soft spot for Harry, as many did, and might still be willing to deal with him, but not as a package deal with Megs. I wonder if Megs senses this, and is fawning harder (the basket of latte packs gift).

She isn’t smart enough to understand how people at Oprah’s level work. I wonder if she understands she is still just the plus-one, even when Harry is this weak, drab, and plucked.
AnT said…
@Not Meghan Markle,

I would pay to watch that program as well.
Hikari said…
I can see Oprah getting the big 'Harry abused by Meghan 'Tell-All' interview', 100%. All she has to do is remain trusted and friendly with the guy.

I'm sure this has probably crossed O's mind as well. She was friendly with Harry long before Markle came on the scene, which is why Madam was never billed as part of the joint mental health documentary with H that was being pitched.

At this point, leaving Merch and throwing her under the bus in a well-produced 'tell all' with his warm and sympathetic pal O might be the only way back for Harry. It could even have the blessing of the RF so long as he refrained from saying anything derogatory about them. If Just H went on Oprah's couch to describe 3+ years of debasement and mind control at the hands of his ruthless Narc captor, and played up that Stockholm Syndrome, people would gain sympathy. Is it true? I say, maybe 60/40. There is definitely an element of that I'd say, and Harry would have been susceptible to such control by a stronger personality. He's spoiled, lazy and dim. He bought her vision of their lives together because at bottom, he's an entitled little prat who doesn't want to work and who has almost zero life skills required to function as a regular adult.

But we can rest assured that if Harry tries this tack, regardless of the truth of the allegations, Madam is going to counter with some vile Amber Heard-esque stories of drug binges, marital violence, bestiality, sex with children, no holds barred.

Our mate 'arry is in the doo-doo but good.


Girl with a Hat said…
@AnT - Oprah once described Meghan Markle as "the daughter I never had".

AnT said…
@Hikari,

Great points. I wonder what happens when a skilled, successful, composed narcissist like Oprah meets a clawing, climbing, ruthless but talentless malignant narcissist like Megs?

Did M jump on Oprah’s latte bandwagon after hearing she was involved, then play innocent investor? Did Oprah think, “yah, I see what you are doing, Zee-ghan, but I will still plow on with this latte and see what it does for me, while seeing if your Z-level powers can pull anything, or if we should just move Harry into a guest cottage on his own for a detox”?
lizzie said…
I think Oprah's mag is only digital now, not print.

She's still got power, no doubt. And I do admire her success in some ways. But I don't think her power is what it used to be. A few really bad book choices for her book club (American Dirt, for example), Harvey W, Dr. Phil, the scandal at her school, the car "giveaway" that seemed to benefit her much more than the hand-selected audience members, and her coyness a few years ago about running for president...no thanks. And honestly, I can't imagine people who buy over-priced instant oatmeal mushroom lattes are Oprah fans. But maybe that's because I can't imagine anyone would be these days. The 1990s is SO long ago.
AnT said…
@Girl with a Hat,

There was a great tweet on a Murky Meg thread about that comment a few months ago. It went like this:


Oprah: MM is like the daughter I never had.

Interviewer: why didn’t you reach out to her while she was on Suits?

Oprah:


I can't wait for Megs PR costs to skyrocket next year as real celebrities get back to work promoting Disney, Marvel, et al. and their own investment ventures.

I wonder what sort of tactics Meghan will drum up to stay in the news, cheaply?
Anonymous said…
Meghan Markle and Harry's mega-deals that have earned them £150million - full list

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mega-deals-raked-150m-prince-23178971
Hikari said…
@Girl w/Hat

@AnT - Oprah once described Meghan Markle as "the daughter I never had"

I wonder how long O spent in Markle's company prior to making that assessment, and how long after the wedding that would have been. Prior to May 19, 2018, the two women had never met. Certainly Markle was too insignificant to be a gnat on Big O's radar before that wedding invite arrived in the mail, seeing as all of Meg's extensive humanitarian and social media efforts and stardom on a cable show filmed in Canada eluded the notice of Big O's talent spotters.

As ever, Harry remains the draw, even in his sadly tarnished condition. It's a great thing for humanity that Oprah discovered this long-lost daughter she never had on account of Harry's marrying her. Otherwise, this profound spiritual connection professed by O would have gone undiscovered forever and O would have had to go to her grave childless.

Such faux-maternal warmth seems to have completely evaporated since whenever that comment was made seeing as O did not see fit to even mention her soul-daughter by name in this latest little venture. Of course, the Harkles could very well be staying in Big Mama O's pool house in Montecito, and if it's ever proven that O did offer them rent-free shelter from paparazzi and heck, even loaned out her living room for Zoom videos, I will retract my disbelief in O's maternal feelings. Wonder how Doria feels about this high profile second mother Meg has gotten herself.

Maybe rather than collecting celebrity moms, Meg could see fit to go see her one and only father. Sure, and Santa Claus will launch a peppermint oat milk latte venture before that ever happens.

Oprah is as maternal as Meg, which is to say . . not at all. Kids drool and get their sticky hands all over the white furniture and are very unpredictable around wigs and dangly jewelry and such.
Magatha Mistie said…

“Hi, I’m Harry, and I’m Meghan”
They sound like the Wiggles.
Expected to see Doria the Dinosaur
and Captain (scoobs) Feathersword
join them.
“The Fiddles”


Grisham said…
A woman on CNN today had on nearly the exact same blouse in the same color today. So is MM an influencer, or is a silky pussy now retro blouse back in style? https://ibb.co/Tk5rkkb the picture isn’t so great, but it’s the same or nearly the same color.

I think this style of blouse is back in fashion right now.
Magatha Mistie said…

The silky pussy blouse is
more Mrs Slowcombe
“Are you being served”
Grisham said…
I googled the superlattes and here are the small amount of product: https://clevrblends.com/collections/lattes

I’m not a big coffee drinker— just 1/2 cup in the morning for the benefits. Maybe a cup, but usually it’s cold at 1/2 cup and I lose interest.

I could see this as a good travel product since it’s instant and has everything you need and monkfruit sweetener, which is the sweetener I use. (I don’t use Splenda lol). The probiotics are a plus IMO.
Magatha Mistie said…

Slocombe, need more tea!
Although Slowcombe could be the
name of Megs hairdresser.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Christine
I feel like every few months Meghan pushes a story about how the brothers are speaking again. I think Meghan has realized she needs to have the brothers back together again since the public has a lot of anger at her for splitting the brothers up.

It must grate for Prince Harry, but he's more interesting as brother to Prince William than as an individual in his own right. Even when the Hero Harry PR was at its height, part of his appeal was that he seemed better suited to be a leader than the diffident older brother who was born to it.

Since it has been clear to me for some time that the brothers' relationship was showing cracks long before Harry met Meggy, I haven't thought of her as "Woko Ono" in a while. And when I do, the emphasis is on the "woke." I'm also used to discussing Megxit with people who think the same. It's actually surprising for me to read that there are still people holding the brothers' split against her. (To be honest, I'm more accustomed to people blaming Prince William for it!) While I hold Meghan accountable for her actions and decisions, I don't blame her for Harry's.

If Meghan wants the brothers back, it only because she knows it makes Harry -- and by extension, her -- more appealing to the people she wants to attract.
Grisham said…
Thanks, magatha, I looked her up. Lotta memes lol. Maybe I can watch some episodes while I’m at hospital.
Miggy said…
There's a new HARRYMARKLE
Enbrethiliel said…
Oprah was happy for Meghan to be "the daughter she never had" when that daughter was also in the bosom of the British Royal Family. It made her a black Carole Middleton of sorts.

After Megxit, it was very clear to Oprah which Harkle she'd most like to keep custody of in the event of a divorce.

She reportedly became good friends with Fergie after the latter did an interview with her. But this means she already has a divorced, disgraced duchess in her collection of famous friends; she doesn't need another.

I think that if Oprah were truly supportive of Meghan, we would have seen more evidence of that by now. That they're both "investing" in an oat milk latte company at the same time doesn't count.
Enbrethiliel said…
The "daughter I never had" line also reminds me of the more famous: "the family she never had."

Total coincidence?
Girl with a Hat said…
Oprah once told the story about how a friend and the friend's child came to dinner at Oprah's place. The child took out their chewing gum and stuck it to the side of the dinner plate to have dinner.

After her friend had left, Oprah told the maid to throw out the plate that the child had used.

I don't think a person like that is very maternal for the following reason:
Jordan Peterson has a very interesting take on this subject of Disgust. He links disgust to authoritarianism and says in a video on youtube that Adolf Hitler used to bathe 4 times a day.
Hikari said…
@Embre

It must grate for Prince Harry, but he's more interesting as brother to Prince William than as an individual in his own right. Even when the Hero Harry PR was at its height, part of his appeal was that he seemed better suited to be a leader than the diffident older brother who was born to it.

I've been following the progress of Diana's boys through life since they were in utero, and I really never once had the impression that Harry was more of a natural leader or had the temperament better suited to be King. Never. Diana seemed to be pushing that narrative, but I always viewed that as a passive-aggressive dig at both Charles and the Crown. From the moment William was conceived, he belonged more to the Crown than to his non-Royal mother. So when Di threw herself down the stairs while pregnant with Wills in a fit of pique/bid for attention or whatever was going on, that could be read as a treasonous act as well as a bat-sh*t crazy, inhumane one. If she'd had a miscarriage as a result . . she might have been institutionalized or the marriage annulled on the grounds of insanity. Or both.

William belonged to the Crown, but Harry was hers to spoil and she sure did. I don't think that by the time Diana died, she really knew her boys all that well any more. They had been subsumed by the boarding school culture and the bulk of their lives were spent at school. After the separation of the the households, which happened when William was 10 and Harry only 8, they would have had to spend at least half of all their holidays with their father. So the amount of time Diana actually had to observe the development of her sons' personalities and characters and interests from little boys into the young men they were becoming in the very last years of her life was quite small. It suited her to maintain the emotional fiction that Harry, her youngest, the one more under her control and very much like herself in her birth family, a 'spare' in the cogs of inheritance, was the 'true' (secret) better-suited King. Harry obviously shares her opinion, even though there's no merit to it. He hasn't got the stuff to lead. Thanks to ELF, we all swallowed the Hero Harry, fearless Captain Wales charging in and leading his men heroically against the Taliban.

Right. All those photos we've got of Harry on active duty were staged. The truth seems to be more along the lines of 'Captain Wales was an insubordinate, racist tosser.' "Seems" is right. The power of 'Seems' has been what has gotten him and his wife as far as they have.

If either of the Hapless Harkles put the 'Be's & Do's' behind the "Seems", we wouldn't have a blog because they would be admirable figures. They provide us with hours of free entertainment so I guess that's one (sorry-ass) thing they are good for.

Hikari said…
William may have been 'diffident' toward his destiny when he was younger. Can we blame him? Going to school with regular kids, meeting Catherine and her family, showed him what his life could be like without the burden of the Crown looming in his future. How many young men are absolutely thrilled to be told from a time before they had double digits in their age that they *would* be taking over the family business, and that was non-negotiable. He's got no autonomy; it's all been decided, and when his superiors want his opinion, they will give it to him. Safe to say that William has grown into his destiny and with his queen by his side and three loving children to support him, it maybe doesn't feel as onerous to become the Prince of Wales and monarch in due course as it did when he was in his 20s and a bachelor. The idea that Harry was ever more cut out for the life of service, duty and protocols which will comprise William's life going forward . . endless dull meetings and investitures and superficial meet-and-greets of the public . . it's ludicrous. Harry couldn't hack it for even two full years--he only became a full-time working Royal in 2017. He is a dilettante and a waster. Great-great Uncle Edward all over again, with even less acumen. Can we imagine Hazza plowing through a Red Box? Having an audience with the Prime Minister to discuss Brexit and British foreign policy? I hardly think so. Hazza can't focus from the beginning to the end of one of his word salad sentences.
NeutralObserver said…
Well, I don't think a single Nuttier agreed with my suggestion that the Harkles had at least a slight chance at making money on Spotify. Since they are so boring & inept in their preachy zooms & videos, I would have to agree. I do think, that if they dropped the pose of do-gooders, & went full on Kardashian, or Housewives mode, they could make a lot of dosh. We all kind of suspect that's the kind of people they are privately anyway. It's easier to imagine them throwing plates at one another, than sitting around trying to figure out how to save the world.

Harry has a pleasant voice when speaking conversationally, & not rambling preachy nonsense, & in the very brief Spotify clip Megs managed to sound flirty, while at the same time subtly condescending to Harry. Flirty banter works, if the actors are good at it. They reminded me for a few seconds of the old 1990s Taster's Choice ads with Anthony Head. For those too young to remember:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9Za2zKddkw

If I were the Markles' agent I'd try to get them a gig where they could build on a flirty love-hate relationship, or let them scream & throw stuff at one another. Obviously, the royal schtick would have to be completely dropped. People aren't buying it anyway, in their case. Not sure if the RF would go for this, but the Harkles probably could make money.

I was intrigued by Megs' matronly blowfish look in the CNN video. Not sure what that was in aid of. It was a flashback to the 50s, & didn't really channel Kate or the royals, maybe because it was so inauthentic to Megs. Her apparent pudginess makes me think she must be trying IVF. I thought she was doing that in the months subsequent to Archie's 'birth.' She ballooned up, had the pit stains, etc. which apparently sometimes happens with IVF. I figured someone had whispered in Megs' shell-like that Archie's iffy genesis might make things complicated for him down the line because of the 'of the body' rule, & she had her heart set on trying to give birth herself for real. I agree with Jdubyah, that she may have failed in an IVF attempt, & counted that as a miscarriage. If she does manage to have a baby, she must have access to Windsor DNA in some form, as there is no earthly advantage for her in having a baby that doesn't have Windsor DNA. There are several ways she could have obtained Harry's DNA. A male partner could have even collected it for her during one of those sessions involving references to poultry. Fathering children through fair means or 'fowl' is a hazard of being a wealthy & famous man.
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
KC said…
@jessica...
"My husband overall thinks podcasts are a waste of time as a source of revenue. I could get his thoughts on that more later today."

Yes, a lot of them use patreon where you pay directly for content. They may set giving levels where you get access to special content or something like that. You have to be VERY good at connecting with your audience for this to work. I don't see H & MM doing that very well as yet. For most I think it is a side hustle, not the main meal ticket.
Magatha Mistie said…

They’re perfect for a remake of
“George and Mildred Roper”

Girl with a Hat said…
wow, interesting blind item

https://blindgossip.com/their-marriage-is-over/

Their Marriage Is Over
DECEMBER 16, 2020 BLIND GOSSIP LEAVE A COMMENT

[Blind Gossip] We are hearing that this actress’ marriage is over!

Her most famous gig was a principal role on a successful TV series that ran for several seasons.

In the past couple of years, though, her personal life and her behavior have received the lion’s share of the attention.

They had a very big and very beautiful wedding complete with celebrity guests.

This was followed by the birth of a baby.

The whole engagement/wedding/pregnancy/birth happened in a relatively short period of time and should have been a very happy period of their lives.

Unfortunately, our actress found herself mired in controversy… much of it of her own making.

People seem to either really love her or really hate her, and the criticism of her behavior has been overwhelming.

Although our actress has a big ego and normally loves attention, this can’t be the kind of attention she had in mind.

While we do not know the exact reason for the breakup of her marriage, the criticism must have been stressful for her husband, too.

It’s been a rough year. They are trying to work out the details of the divorce before making any sort of announcement.

We do not know exactly when that announcement is coming. However, this whole relationship moved along so quickly that we would not surprised if the divorce takes longer than their actual marriage!
KC said…


 Enbrethiliel said...

The "daughter I never had" line also reminds me of the more famous: "the family she never had."

Total coincidence?


Oh that is doubtless where she got it front, as a sop to Harry. "See, I was listening."

Grisham said…
When is Eugenie due? DM posted an article, and she looks really pretty and very late term pregnant. Soon?
Hikari said…
Tatty,

I think E is due some time in January so she’s got 4-6 weeks to go. I can’t wait for the announcement and some wholesome some happy news to offset the Harkles nonsense.
AnT said…
Did a last check on work emails and just noticed that one from my fun older, “connected” client ends with this postscript:

“if you’re a betting woman on Boxing Day, place no large wagers on Miss Markle. — A Friend”

Lol! Aw, I think he is enjoying my side-eyed interest in all this.
Jdubya said…
Girl with a Hat - just read through the blind. Sure sounds like it could be them, but with the recent announcements etc, it's hard to believe. When the time does come (if ever), i hope he works behind the scenes on it and then takes off with Archie while she's out and about. Gets home back to the UK before she knows he's gone.

I have been thinking about Marcus Anderson - he sure has been quiet for a long time. wonder what sort of dastardly deeds he's up to?
SwampWoman said…
Hikari said...
Tatty,

I think E is due some time in January so she’s got 4-6 weeks to go. I can’t wait for the announcement and some wholesome some happy news to offset the Harkles nonsense.


Thanks from me, too. The only thing I read was "early in 2021" which I interpreted to mean January or February.
Hikari said…
AnT,

How cryptic. What do you think it means? There will be no church work this year at Sandringham, since the queen will be Christmasing at Windsor. Due to Covid, I suppose this means that the other Royals, including Kate and William will all be at their own homes for Christmas. Markle will no doubt concoct something to try and upstage the announcement of Eugenie’s baby in the New Year, As well as the release of other royal Christmas cards from Clarence House or Buckingham palace. Zara’s happy news cannot be left unmolested, either. Otherwise, I can’t think of anything huge happening on Boxing Day that Madam would have to upstage, can you?

Perhaps there will be a release of a star studded Christmas party in Montecito featuring Harry’s adoptive father David Foster, his pregnant wife, and Soul Mama Oprah. Apart from interfering in upcoming baby news from the house of York, I suppose Meg’s gimlet eye will be focused on obtaining an invite to the upcoming virtual Inaugural ball festivities. This see you en tea would upstage the Inaugural itself if she could.

I do so look forward to this psychological case studies of this ravening mental case when they are forthcoming.
PaulaMP said…
That Blind Gossip article sure sounds like it could be them
SwampWoman said…
tatty said: When is Eugenie due? DM posted an article, and she looks really pretty and very late term pregnant. Soon?

I went and looked through the DM to try to find the pic. The first thing I thought was how pretty she looked.
Girl with a Hat said…
@JDubya, yes, it does sound like them... very interesting to think about what is going on behind the scenes.
NeutralObserver said…
Re: Eugenie
I'm not a royal family groupie, so don't know that much about them, but to me, Eugenie's video for the Teenage Cancer Trust is an example of 'modernizing' the royal family. A pretty, fresh-faced woman with little or no makeup, with a background of autumn plants, talking about a cause anyone could sympathize with, without making it about herself, beats Megs' bleats hands down.
SwampWoman said…
Blogger PaulaMP said...
That Blind Gossip article sure sounds like it could be them


Heh. The only thing I have to say about that is that we've all talked about the same scenario. I expect a lot of people are looking at Harry and speculating the same thing. I would not be surprised if it turns out to be true.
Girl with a Hat said…
The Royals try to portray themselves as a reflection of our better selves.

Meghan tries to portray herself as better than we are, and in a way that most of us can never achieve. I highly doubt I will ever wear a bespoke $100k Christian Dior caftan, for example. Or to have hair so thick that half a dozen Indian women had to contribute to the effort.
SwampWoman said…
Hikari said: How cryptic. What do you think it means? There will be no church work this year at Sandringham, since the queen will be Christmasing at Windsor. Due to Covid, I suppose this means that the other Royals, including Kate and William will all be at their own homes for Christmas. Markle will no doubt concoct something to try and upstage the announcement of Eugenie’s baby in the New Year, As well as the release of other royal Christmas cards from Clarence House or Buckingham palace. Zara’s happy news cannot be left unmolested, either. Otherwise, I can’t think of anything huge happening on Boxing Day that Madam would have to upstage, can you?


AnT said:
“if you’re a betting woman on Boxing Day, place no large wagers on Miss Markle. — A Friend”


Hmmmm. I'm not sure that AnT's tipster was telling her that MM was going to compete with the RF. I took it to mean that something negative about her would be coming out and she was not going to prevail.
SwampWoman said…
Puds said...
I wonder if Megs wanted the Spotify deal done and dusted before revelations of a split, but I think that might be wishful thinking, though hearing the rumours Spotify and Netflop are probably digging out the contracts to see who signed them, Megs or Harry.


I imagine that there is a lot of consternation at the moment *if* this hasn't been widely discussed.
KCM1212 said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Grisham said…
The problem is, for instance, I have no idea who Sandie Shaw is, but nearly everyone in the world knows who Prince Harry is. I also doubt they are getting paid as much as is reported. Just some thoughts...
Grisham said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
JHanoi said…
BG does sound exactly like the Harkles. it is. strange though considereing this Spotify thing.
but BG does say the divorce will probably be longer than the marriage.

if it is them PH is in for a world of hurt after moving to Hollyweird CA. doesnt that make him / them uunder CA rules for custody agreements and money splits?
SwampWoman said…
Puds said...
I expect Megs and Harry sign as a Company probably for tax purposes, but should someone cancel a contract because only Megs was available she would probably sue and get Harry to pay for it. They moved a lot of their holdings around into each others names after a complaint to the Charity Commission about funds being moved from a charitable to a non charitable trust (wander what happened to that complaint). It would probably be a bit of a nightmare for Netflix and Spotify, but you are right in thinking they must cover themselves for only one person fulfilling a contract signed by two.

One of the management agents says the Spotify deal is worth 17 million spread over several years. It seems (from DM) some music artists are up in arms about the deal as they get paid so little each time their music is played. They are asking where this money is coming from and how can H&M accept a deal knowing how badly the artist are treated. Sandie Shaw is one speaking out.


I have wondered about this extra special contract myself considering that I have seen *nothing* from the M&H show that would warrant that level of compensation. Must be very frustrating for the people that are being screwed over. But, as tatty says, maybe it is just all about name recognition.
SwampWoman said…
G'night, Puds, I will follow you through the virtual door into the evening. I, too, wonder what new revelations are on the way.
Crumpet said…
@Magatha!

Mrs. Slocombe is so Madam! The PUSSY bow (hers always had to be the biggest), the PUSSY quotes (I had to thaw me pussy out before I came, it had been out all night!) the big awful hair, the overdone eyes and lips, the AIRS with that means streak that comes out sideways. The big difference, Mrs. Slocombe could take a joke and give it and had friends and feelings.

I will have to find some episodes of Are You Being Served on Youtube.
xxxxx said…
Now we know what 5G will be good for. To fill the cell towers and the internet with useless podcasts. Spotify dominates the music streaming. Now it wants to sign up interesting people to podcast for them. Lets say they aim to create a stable of 50-100 of them.

Megs/Hapless are just one of them. If their podcasts don't catch on then they will not get paid much. I read the transcript of their first podcast. The UK Mail called it heavily scripted. I figure M/H will hire some skilled talent to write scripts they will read to the Spotify plebs. It would be torture for me to listen. I am guessing primetime to listen to a podcast is commuting to work, while exercising, sunning by the pool, pulling up weeds and other work that does not require much thought.
moz said…
I started laughing when I saw Meghan in purple. She wore that color on purpose. People tend to forget that purple is the color of royalty. Well, she did look like a royal clown.
Mel said…
Her royal purple shirt was several sizes too big, and she'd colored outside the lines with her lipstick. Looked like a two year old had applied mommy's lipstick.
Magatha Mistie said…

Bad Tidings

‘Twas the night before Christmas,
and Megs and her spouse
Started to ponder,
can they afford this big house
Haz has forgotten all thoughts of the throne
He’s more concerned with who’ll pull his wish bone
The cupboards are bare,
no hope for a mouse
As megs struts her stuff
in her puce pussy blouse
Grisham said…
@mel I did wonder if she overlined her lips like some people do these days. Seems like you noticed the same thing.
Magatha Mistie said…

Audio Furphy

Easy to identify
“Who’s on first” on Spotify
Cannot wait, I’ll not deny
To call ‘em out on Spotalie
Magatha Mistie said…

@Crumpet

“I’m Free”
I think all the cast are now dead.
But Mrs Slocombe and her pussy live on! 🐱 🎀

Magatha Mistie said…

Sandie Shaw also sang “Always something there to remind me”
good song.
Apt for Megs and all those she’s ghosted.
I think the challenges of the past 9 months will see more people finding support from Alcoholics Anonymous than Archewell Audio.
I doubt if MM has ever heard of Mrs Slocombe - `the feline' references are so appropriate. There was even a book (c 2000) about `Are You Being Served?' entitled `Mrs Slocombe's Pussy' - we had it in the Media Studies section of the VIth form college library where I had a make-do job.

The start of the podcast reminds me of broadcasts aimed at little children - it's a wonder they didn't ask their listeners `Are you sitting comfortably?'

---------

`Modernising the Monarchy':

Harry grew up believing he was more entitled to be King than William, thanks to Diana's poison dripped in his ear; and Meghan deludedly assumed the crown should go to the most `go-ahead' Royal ie her. The conceptual framework of each enmeshed perfectly with the other's.

Neither bothered to check the facts.

The was an excellent documentary on BB2 last night about George VI - `The Reluctant King'. it explored his relationship with elder brother David, right through to his death.

It was made some years ago (1990s?) and included interviews with many, now long dead, who gave first-hand accounts. It was very thought provoking and I found it very moving, more so than any other film I've seen on the subject.

Apparently, the breaking point between David/Edward VII and Baldwin was when Edw. tried to blackmail the PM by saying if he, the PM, opposed the marriage, he'd abdicate. The point was made that it demonstrated that Edw. had no understanding of the nature of our Constitutional Monarchy - the Monarch does not tell the PM what to do.

The film also made a point of stressing the great responsibility/burden of kingship. I knew that at the start of the War, Intelligence hadn't trusted the king, thanks to his preferred option of appeasement (anything to avoid another war). When push came to shove, though, and the King had demonstrated how solid and reliable he was, he was told everything, no matter how secret.

The thought of someone like Harry being in that position is chilling.
Maneki Neko said…
Piers Morgan has done a spoof Harkles radio podcast. It's too long to paste here but here is the link for you want a good chuckle (scroll down past 4 or 5 photos):

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9059521/PIERS-MORGAN-Hypocrite-Harry-wife-Meghans-Radio-Woke-podcast-parody.html
----------------

@Crumpet

The difference is, Mrs Slocombe was funny, certainly funnier than MM (not difficult).




AnT said…
I think the Blind Gossip item is them — based on the BG clue use of the words “lion’s share” (referencing their infamous carpet walk at the Lion King in London where Harry began his public begging cup routine for the missus).

@Hikari, I hadn’t particularly noticed his use of “Miss Markle” instead of calling her the duchess, or Duchess of Sussex. But you’re right, it is odd for him, thinking back, so yes, it might mean something, unless he used that simply as a little dig. If a clue, it would be about loss of titles, would be my top guess, and he is someone who hears the chat about things like that due to his relationships. But I just don’t know if I see the royals doing that, even though I think they should. (And, cut every penny of taxpayer support to these braggart fake LA millionaires too!)
Re Archewell sites:

It's certainly a very bad sign if one can't unsubscribe, I assume it's mandatory in UK but haven't a clue about US Federal or State law.

I've just completed a donation form for a UK charity (a thoroughly reliable one) which states that `your information is processed, stored, archived and destroyed in compliance with the General Data Protection Regulations 2016. Further details are available on our website' (ie that of the charity? The charity also gives its Freephone number if one has a query).

Financial Law here requires the charity to keep any financial data for a minimum of 6 yrs eg details of income; this is to check that all is above board - I think it's 10yrs for a business, less for private individuals.

I strongly suspect that what they are doing is illegal under UK Law, not that that would make any difference to them.
AnT said…
Mrs Slocombe forever! Her ever-changing hair color! God I loved that. My mother had the boxed set and often rewatched episodes. When I need a smile I still find old episodes on YT — “The Apartment” is a fun, Mrs Slocombe-centered one.

Maybe Meghan needs to find a Young Mr Grace and go off into the ancient millionaire sunset.
Acquitaine said…
"Girl with a Hat said…
@AnT - Oprah once described Meghan Markle as "the daughter I never had"."

That is a meaningless statement from Oprah. She describes alot of women that way. When she was younger she used the reverse age order to say the same thing about famous older women she associated with eg Maya Angelou or Toni Morrison. Each was the older relationship she never had.

For awhile both Maria Kennedy Shriver and Julia Roberts were the absolute besties she'd never had even if Gayle was right there with her.

Gayle was pushed forward after Oprah retired from her talkshow and Gayle became her surrogate above all others.

Every so often Oprah hitches her wagon to the latest messy famous person in a way that ultimately serves her interests before dropping them when they do not pan out. She did it to Fergie, Lindsay Lohan and now the Harkles.

If you review the pattern, she appears all in with each of these people when she is championing them, but in reality she connects very lightly and always in a way that makes her look better and their saviour.

What is interesting about Oprah and Meghan in context of that particular quote is the degree to which Oprah has distanced herself from Meghan and frequently uses Gayle to emphasise the weakness of any friendship or professional ties. I'm inclined to think that her endorsement of Meghan's tea includes some form of payment for herself as well rather than any bond of friendship especially because of the coy way she pretended her ad for the tea was just a random entry on her IG.
Acquitaine said…
WBBM: In the UK and in Europe, it's against the law to sell or pass on private information acquired via websites or marketing tools or in general without your permission.

It came about in the mid-00s when websites and catalogues were out of control as far as selling private details of their customers which was a lucrative sideline for them.

The laws were tightened in 2018 to include new media which is why your charity was required to reveal how they deal with your information. They are required to do so by law.

When i see the disclaimers on US websites saying they can or will pass on your information to 3rd parties i wonder why Americans are so blase about this sort of thing.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Puds

Why bother to sign up at the Archewell Audio site when you can wait for it to be available on Spotify or some other platform?

I'm not a huge consumer of Podcasts, but even I know that signing up shouldn't have to be necessary. Or do they think they're such hot stuff that they can keep their content behind a firewall and people will still take the extra steps to access it?
SwampWoman said…
@AnT @Hikari, I hadn’t particularly noticed his use of “Miss Markle” instead of calling her the duchess, or Duchess of Sussex. But you’re right, it is odd for him, thinking back, so yes, it might mean something, unless he used that simply as a little dig. If a clue, it would be about loss of titles, would be my top guess, and he is someone who hears the chat about things like that due to his relationships. But I just don’t know if I see the royals doing that, even though I think they should. (And, cut every penny of taxpayer support to these braggart fake LA millionaires too!)


Thanks for your thoughts/update! Fascinating, isn't it, that people read the same short sentence but got entirely different ideas of what it could be about. I would propose that we meet boxing day with our leftover rum eggnog, if any (sadly, there is no such thing as leftover rum eggnog here) and decide what it really meant but, with us in different timezones, that would be difficult.
Acquitaine said…
The Spotify money numbers mentioned by the Sussex PR is bokum. That complaining singer, Sandie Shaw, has obviously bought the PR instead of trying to understand how podcasts and indeed Spotify makes money which is then paid to the talent.

Spotify makes money via advertisers. Podcasts are paid via advertisers. It's the advertisers who nickle and dime the artists whether it's the musicians or podcasters.

For podcasts, the average advertiser payment is $20 for 1000 downloads.

The Sussexes are putting a figure on their spotify contract which translates to millions ×1000 downloads to realise even though the most views of their PR-d Zoom calls was 2000 views. That translates to just $40.

Fantasy and bokum.

Joe Rogan was paid upfront his fat contract because he has over 1500 episodes with veriable views / downloads in the millions. His Elon Musk episode has 19M views which is slightly higher than his Dave Chapelle episode at 17M views. His least viewed episodes in the past year still had an average of 7M views.

His audience is cult-like in their devotion to his content because he keeps it interesting. You might not like some topics or guests, but eventually he'll bring on someone who will peak your interest.

His audience is so large and reliable that the good, great, famous and infamous are clamouring to go on the show. He doesn't need to beg anyone to go on his show.

The only reliable guests the Sussexes could hope for are each other. SS can't seem to pull out the celeb squad to support them like they used to do. Not even Jamila Jameel.

Finally, neither Harry nor Meghan have the stamina to work on anything that requires day to day application for years on end as a podcast requires. To date for to different degrees, someone took their ideas or sourced ideas, did all the research and development, realised the idea and then wheeled them out to PR the finished product with 2 or 3 talking points. Each product either being a one and done deal OR once a year repetition.

If they want to realise those Spotify millions they will have to work intensely every week throughout the year on the podcast as well as the PR for it to drive up numbers.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Acquitaine
That is a meaningless statement from Oprah. She describes alot of women that way. When she was younger she used the reverse age order to say the same thing about famous older women she associated with eg Maya Angelou or Toni Morrison. Each was the older relationship she never had.

This stirred up a memory for me, so I went googling and found this famous quote from Oprah:

"She is the mother I never had. She is the sister everybody would want. She is the friend that everybody deserves."

I don't remember whom she said it about and won't keep looking. It doesn't matter, anyway, if she just says it about someone new every year or so. But does Meghan at least have the distinction of being the first daughter whom Oprah never had?

What we know about Oprah's family comes mostly from her -- and if any of them can contradict the story Oprah tells, well, she did a better job of keeping them quiet than Meghan did with the Markles. But there's something of narc devaluation in saying that someone was the parent or sibling you never had, when your parents and siblings are still alive for you to reach out to. And what kind of honor is it to call someone a son or daughter, when you've already said you never wanted to be a mother because you weren't "mothered well"? Does this make Meghan an unwanted child who wasn't properly raised?

It also occurs to me that this may be a great love-bombing tactic. "You're the _____ I never had" can make someone feel really special and valued. Until it's time for them to be discarded, at which point someone else will be told "You're the _____ I never had," and the relationship in the blank will be what the first person supposedly was.
SwampWoman said…
Acquitaine said: What is interesting about Oprah and Meghan in context of that particular quote is the degree to which Oprah has distanced herself from Meghan and frequently uses Gayle to emphasise the weakness of any friendship or professional ties. I'm inclined to think that her endorsement of Meghan's tea includes some form of payment for herself as well rather than any bond of friendship especially because of the coy way she pretended her ad for the tea was just a random entry on her IG.

Yes, it appears that she has the same "core" group but everybody else is limited and transactional in nature. I can only imagine what it would be like when *everybody* wants to be your friend because of what you can do for them, not because of any particular affinity for you and your core values. She would have to limit access if for no other reason than self-preservation. She may want to link herself to trendy causes to stay in the public eye but in a limited way to discourage clingers.

MacKenzie Scott is in the headlines here for donating $10 million to Goodwill Industries in north Florida. (She gave $4 billion to 384 nonprofits this year.) Can you imagine the pleas for funds that she must endure on a daily basis since her divorce made her an independent multi-billionaire? I'm actually surprised that MM hasn't wanted to be her BFF since she has more money than Oprah. I can't think of a bigger "eff-you", though, than to take her share of the company money acquired in the divorce and give it away, thereby demonstrating that the money is as meaningless as he is. (MacKenzie Scott is the nice woman that Jeff Bezos of Amazon, in an amazing demonstration of mid-life crisis, dumped for the woman who has made a career of man-climbing.)
There's an international art project called `Empathy Museum' which operates on a `pop-up' basis

https://www.empathymuseum.com/

"WHAT IS EMPATHY MUSEUM?
Empathy Museum is a series of participatory art projects dedicated to helping us look at the world through other people’s eyes.

With a focus on storytelling and dialogue, our travelling museum explores how empathy can not only transform our personal relationships, but also help tackle global challenges such as prejudice, conflict and inequality."


MM has been beaten to it - will she plagiarise their work?
Has anyone seen the video of the Pantoland event at the London Colosseum yet? It’s a real treat!

I shan’t say anymore, because I don’t want to spoil it for you. It's a Christmas Surprise – it’s in this article:

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/kate-middleton-prince-william-christmas-card-2020-220059981.html

(I did see a version where the children meet Santa and tell him their wishes but it seems to have been cut - perhaps someone can find the version I saw first?)

MM won't be incandescent with rage, she'll be absolutely apoplectic, I'm delighted to say!
SwampWoman said…
WBB-m said: With a focus on storytelling and dialogue, our travelling museum explores how empathy can not only transform our personal relationships, but also help tackle global challenges such as prejudice, conflict and inequality."


That entire paragraph ticks my bullshit meter into overload. That word salad does seem to be MM's forte.
Nelo said…
@aquataine, your explain Michelle Obama and Kim K's deals?
Enbrethiliel said…
@SwampWoman
I'm actually surprised that MM hasn't wanted to be her BFF since she has more money than Oprah.

Maybe like really does attract like? MacKenzie Scott seems like an intelligent, wholesome, classy woman who is happy with her looks and doesn't care to be in the spotlight.

Meghan would want to be Lauren Sanchez's BFF.
SwampWoman said…
Thanks for the Pantoland link! I shall save it for my return from a supply run into the industrial areas of J'ville. (Some industrial supplies manufactured in China are becoming unobtanium again, and I'm going to be looking into smaller retail spaces that are not online.) I'll probably need some cheering up when I return!
CookieShark said…
I do not believe the People story where a "friend" of Kate spoke to the press. We know whose friends, however, do speak frequently to People.
Miggy said…
New Lady C video...

Meghan, Harry, Eugenie & Frogmore; Morgan/Lacey inventions.
Hikari said…
@Swampie & AnT

Thanks for your thoughts/update! Fascinating, isn't it, that people read the same short sentence but got entirely different ideas of what it could be about. I would propose that we meet boxing day with our leftover rum eggnog, if any (sadly, there is no such thing as leftover rum eggnog here) and decide what it really meant but, with us in different timezones, that would be difficult.

Actually when I called that post about 'Miss Markle' cryptic, I wasn't even thinking about the 'Miss'. Smirkle would no doubt object to 'Miss' . . If she can't be the Duchess or Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor any more, she sure as heck wouldn't go retro with 'Miss'.

My eye was caught more by the Boxing Day reference. I was wondering what of personal or 'brand' devastation could come her way on December 26th and what this guy might know. In America, December 26th is merely "The Day We Return all the Gifts that Didn't Fit to the Mall and also Rip down the Christmas Decorations if We've had them up for a month already". The Boxing Day tradition is lovely and I wish we observed it here. Despite being still Christmas week, it's considered a regular work day for business, not a bank holiday or anything. Schools are on holiday break but federal buildings are open. I assume this means the courts as well, though Covid has wreaked havoc with the dockets, due to staff out and hearings postponed, etc. Meg's court proceedings are in the U.K. and I would expect that the courts there would be on a holiday recess? The day after Christmas is not the time to launching any big new projects, because most people are still in holiday mode and have taken the day off to be with family.

If the courts in L.A. are doing business as usual, is this supposed to be a hint that Harry could file for divorce then? I don't see how he, a non-citizen on a non-resident visa, presumably, could file to end a marriage contracted in England. The U.S. would recognize a legitimate foreign marriage, with the appropriate documentation, but would an American court have the right to dissolve the marriage of a British royal? It seems like this would be a matter for the English courts, given Harry's extraordinary situation and who he is. Certainly the Queen needs to be informed if that's what's happening.

I shall be awaiting the announcement, whatever it is.
@Hikari

Not to throw water on your parade of possible Boxing Day ideas but December 26 is on a Saturday this year. Courts are closed on Saturdays.

American courts recognize a British marriage but I don't believe that those same courts can issue a divorce (even if one person is American citizen) simply because it would give precedence that one country could "undo" the laws of another.

I firmly believe a divorce would have to be in the UK as it was a UK "contract" if you will therefor governed by UK laws not US laws.
So, the spotify thing will be a sponsorship experiment. Basically, they give a fee for a year (?) to M and H to show up and speak at Gimlit (It's in brooklyn) and Gimlit arranges the interviews, and branded content themselves.

Meghan doesn't have control of this venture, which is incredibly interesting!
Christine said…

Magatha- Haz has forgotten all thoughts of the throne
He’s more concerned with who’ll pull his wish bone- ahahaha! Perfect

Hello Friends-

What do any of you make of the fact that apparently Jack and Eugenie are now not moving into Frogmore and are back at Kensington Palace? Some DM commenters seem to believe they were just staying there while Ivy Cottage was renovated. I don't believe that for a minute. Ivy Cottage just isn't suitable for a growing family. I am trying to make out what could have happened with the whole situation. I am going to watch the Lady C video.

What took place that caused Eug and Jack to leave Frogmore?
CookieShark said…
Can listeners be bought for Spotify, the way they can be bought as viewers on YouTube?
lizzie said…
@Christine wrote,

"Ivy Cottage just isn't suitable for a growing family."

I guess size is relative. Many couples with one infant could live quite nicely in a 3-bedroom house. Even Nott Cott that was supposed to be "so small" apparently has two large parlors/living rooms. Especially in cities, many families live in spaces with smaller footprints.

I'm not convinced E&J ever moved to FC. I don't believe we ever had confirmation they had except through H&M.
Christine said…
Lizzie- Oh agreed about Ivy Cottage, I should have said in the Royal's eyes Ivy Cottage isn't suitable.

Whatever happened, I'm sure Eugenie didn't appreciate being caught up in H&M's bs. Just crazy how destructive Meghan is.

I know some of you have mentioned it but now just reading this leaked story about how Kate's life is totally normal. She runs the kids to school in trainers, etc. Has Meghan's fingerprints allover it. I'm glad to see so many DM commenters seem to be able to sniff her out in these types of stories.

The toxicity!! Imagine your just minding your own business in the Royal family, ie... raising your family or trying to get your ducks in a row to have a family and you get pinged by Meghan Markle. I wish some courageous ex friends would speak up more about her. I think she really can be quite mean and nasty.
Christine said…
CookieShark- yes I believe followers can be purchased through Spotify.
JHanoi said…
maybe just harry is moving back to frogmore......alone!
"CookieShark said...
Can listeners be bought for Spotify, the way they can be bought as viewers on YouTube?"

Yes. Spotify, like Netflix, with increased competition is having trouble keeping marketshare. I don't subscribe to Spotify or Netflix.

Spotify has the 'freemium' model and are trying to keep in the news with flashy contracts. Basically, advertising. Meghan is being used as a branding exercise with the current attention they are drawing in Media (regardless of the negative aspect). Meghan and Harry are cashing in on their front and center platform right now, however small, while they can. Notice how the fee, for one of the most famous couples in the world right now, is relatively small compared to other large deals they have done. Spotify was smart to bake it into YEARS and KPIs (meaning, reach these goals of listeners, get paid x amount). Will it be sustainable? No. All the big players will move onto other flashy items and projects.

As for the Blind...Harry and Meghan will divorce and she will continue to create controversy to stay in the news. I think that will be her main driver to divorce Harry (publicity and the narrative of being a victim), second will be to limit what she views as her 'own' success and brains ($) going to a Prince (she will start to view all of the work she is doing that benefits Harry as unfair, considering Harry can always just go home to his billionaire family).
There's still a high probability that Harry is the one to divorce Meghan and go home. It's really hard to do what he is doing (immigrate and start over) regardless of who he married.
To Swampwoman - sorry to disappoint you but that Empathy Museum blurb is standard lingo in the art world, sometimes known as Art Bollocks!

See http://www.eyemagazine.com/opinion/article/agenda-artspeak

Plenty of relevant sites, also known as artybollocks.

Perhaps MM should try being a Contemporary or Conceptual artist - there are plenty of rich people happy to be taken for a ride by it. It worked for Yoko Ono, I believe.
I've always understood that any friend of Wm's who spoke to the press could say goodbye to his friendship. I bet that goes for Catherine's friends too.
Crumpet said…
Hello Nutties,

And in another kingdom.

A few months ago, she was pictured on a jet ski with a joker mask (silly, stupid, or I'm laughing on the outside but crying on the inside)?

Now, Princess Charlene of Monaco's haircut in the news. Sorry. It is ugly, not edgy, IMHO. Is it a Brittany cry for help?, mid-life crisis or an excuse for the Prince and Princess to start the separation process?

WE always heard, even before the marriage, it was all for show--produce some legit heirs and then you can go.

Perhaps, it looks better for the grey suits to say, look the wife is a nutter, we will get a divorce, than, I am a jerk and we are getting a divorce?

Whichever, the House of GRIMaldi has always been more of a clown prince than a real prince for many, despite the fairy tale.
JHanoi said…
ugh... reading the comments for the BG blind. while most think or hope it’s the toxic Harkle, the other guess is Lea Michele and whoever her hubby is.

I’m thinking BG pruposely wrote it so the Harkles could fit but it’s actually LEa or some other thristy TV actress. they barely mentioned the hubby and didnt bring up the ‘famous family’ they normally do for Harkle blinds.
plus Harry still seems a Stockholm victim or co-conspriator to MM.espicially with the latest Spotify BS.

oh well :(
Mom Mobile said…
Swamp Woman said, “MacKenzie Scott is in the headlines here for donating $10 million to Goodwill Industries in north Florida. (She gave $4 billion to 384 nonprofits this year.) Can you imagine the pleas for funds that she must endure on a daily basis since her divorce made her an independent multi-billionaire? I'm actually surprised that MM hasn't wanted to be her BFF since she has more money than Oprah. I can't think of a bigger "eff-you", though, than to take her share of the company money acquired in the divorce and give it away, thereby demonstrating that the money is as meaningless as he is. (MacKenzie Scott is the nice woman that Jeff Bezos of Amazon, in an amazing demonstration of mid-life crisis, dumped for the woman who has made a career of man-climbing.) “

@Swampwoman, I love you. Team MacKenzie!!,
Hikari said…
@Musty

Not to throw water on your parade of possible Boxing Day ideas but December 26 is on a Saturday this year. Courts are closed on Saturdays.

The idea of Harry reclaiming his testes and filing for divorce is more a fond hope than a parade, but if it ever occurs, darn tootin' I will get the marching bands out. Dumping Markle is a best-case scenario for Harry. Wonder if he's so dim he really hasn't wised up to the fact that in this toxic merger of theirs, *she* alone gets *all* the benefits. Nothing but degradation and loss on his side of the bargain. If holidays in LaLaland were what he was after in all this, he had plenty of money and time off to holiday wherever he wanted. Markle was an unnecessary appendage. I guess she will bugger off only after she's spent all of Harry's money on plastic surgery.

You're right about the calendar this year. All courts will be shut on Saturdays. I think in the normal course of things, if the 26th falls on a weekday, some court business may still go on, even for a half-day, but they probably wouldn't schedule any big hearings or trials for then.

Hikari said…
It's too soon for the couple to divorce, with all these irons in the fire they've got going--podcasts, oat-milk merching, tossing word salad . .busy, busy. Harry must be thinking with regret of all those Boxing Day shoots he will never again participate in. It would be cancelled this year in any case. I think with Covid shutting down so much of 'regular life/business' and cancelling so many events that the Harkles have been more insulated from the impact of their rash decisions than they would otherwise be. They are sequestered wherever it is they are living . . along with everyone else. She can absolutely script and control their Zoom appearances and she can continue to crank out BS PR by the raftload to make it seem like they are actively pursuing their best celeb lifestyle. She can get all the nose jobs and boob jobs and skin peels she wants because she can lay low at home and be seen by no one. All of these digital platforms aid her in her quest to promote themselves as more in-demand than they are.

Imagine if there'd been no Covid when they landed in L.A. If red carpet premieres and regular show biz production was still going on. If Ellen had not been disgraced and now at home with the virus . . . Would anybody have given them the time of day? Would they have been invited on all the talk shows, right off the bat? I highly doubt it. We would have had dozens of more staged papp walks inflicted on us as Meg desperately tried to get noticed 'round town, ala Kardashian. As it stands now, she can hide where she's living; she can hide the child she hasn't got, she can pretend that the reason she's not been seen more is all due to Covid, not their inherent box office poison status.

I have an e-pal, an older gentleman living in Utah, who occasionally comments on the Harkle Debacle from what I consider an 'average man on the street' perspective. He said in his most recent message something along the lines of, "I keep seeing Harry and Meghan everywhere. They must be irritating the Queen." Oh, honey--I could give you a 6-hour seminar on all the ways she has irritated the Queen. People who only encounter their media blitz in the most casual way really have no clue how very bad it is.

American courts recognize a British marriage but I don't believe that those same courts can issue a divorce (even if one person is American citizen) simply because it would give precedence that one country could "undo" the laws of another. I firmly believe a divorce would have to be in the UK as it was a UK "contract" if you will therefor governed by UK laws not US laws.

These were my thoughts, too. Harry's eventual divorce from his Wallis is going to be as messy as their tax situation. He's never going to be free of her altogether because she will have her hooks into his family's financial affairs for as long as she draws breath.
Girl with a Hat said…
@JHanoi, I disagree about Lea Michele because the blind item mentions a very grand wedding and that wasn't the case with Lea Michele.
AnT said…
@Crumpet,

This will sound completely bonkers, but a man I know in Italy has sworn for years that Charlene was a pawn in erasing some debt her family had been hit with due to a shady business deal with the wrong people. The idea was she would catch Albert’s eye, move there, pursue and obey and “date” him, and find out whatever they told her to, whatever is worth finding out about the business of Monaco. Because Albert, in spite of his title and mother, is a creepy geeky repellent loser (confirmed by many things including takes of an old coworker who was at Smith when he was at Amherst), it was easy —— She was not a stripper, was a nice sporty girl, not a woman he felt he had to hide. She moved there, and bombarded him for help based on one meeting, he fell for it, she then played girlfriend and got her Albert-selected surgeries.

Unfortunately she is not smart or a self starter or even street clever, and she couldn’t deliver much of use other than some basics. So when Albert decided to keep her, although her family debt was cleared by whatever she did manage to learn, those who got her into the situation had walked away, and she couldn’t get out.

All alllegedly!

So whenever I see “crazy Charlene” that is what I think of, shame on me, though it is just a rumor. With this Hunger Games haircut (Natalie Dormer), who knows what she is trying to tell the world at this point. I think she popped a gasket years ago, walking up the aisle.
AnT said…
The clue word in the Blind Gossip item is “lion” = yellow carpet walk of shame with pimping Hazza at the Lion King. Such is my vote.
AnT said…
@Hikari,

I think you are absolutely right. The pandemic has allowed them to hide their irrelevance and failure and surgeries and baby-free lifestyle. The pandemic did not harm them. It made it seem normal that they are rarely seen, have no actual friends, and that no film was looking for an actress at M’s low cable skill level. It has been the perfect excuse to do the only possible work they can do: Zooms they pay to be part of, silly PR, world salad stunting.
Crumpet said…
@AnT,

I just do not understand.

There are PLENTY of WAG types, models, Real Housewives of Whereever types--love fashion, love decorating and big houses, love to throw parties, love make up, love to be on show with their man, will pop out a few kids out of their own bodies, no problem, so long as they get all the plastic surgery they want done, they get this beautiful lifestyle in exchange for looking good next to their man! If their man is a bit creepy, plays around, who cares. Each party plays their role and understands the limitations, most of the time.

I don't get it. Why do princes end up picking shady or neurotic women?
Hikari said…
@Christine

Re. the Saga of FroggyCott

Whatever happened, I'm sure Eugenie didn't appreciate being caught up in H&M's bs. Just crazy how destructive Meghan is.

The news that Eugenie was moving to Frogmore Cottage to await the birth of her baby never passed the smell test for me. On the one hand, *IF* (a huge IF) the house had been restored to a single family dwelling and is finished and just standing vacant, why shouldn't Eugenie and Jack have it . . IF they want it and IF it was ever offered to them by the appropriate party (HMTQ--NOT Hapless's right to make some shady backdoor 'secret' subletting deal with his cousin. Eugenie would not do that. End of. She's in favor with the Queen and I'm sure she wants to keep it that way. Who do we know, however, who is really fond of SECRET deals that 'Blindside' people and cause them great inconvenience and angst because they are not proper? Her name is NOT Eugenie.

This whole breakneck rush into new home to await birth of baby sounds too similar to how FC was promoted for the Harkles. Two years it's been since it was announced that they would make their home there and we still have no transparency about what has actually been done to the property and if they ever lived there at all, even for a matter of weeks. This abandoned property is *most likely scenario* still unfinished as far as reno goes. IF it was intended for the HAMS initially, they made it clear very early that they were not in the working royals' stable for the long haul. Scuttlebutt has it that they were actively looking for L.A. properties even before the disastrous South Africa tour .. which was the summer after their marriage. 12-14 months is all they lasted in the Firm, really. So I can see any renovations to turn this into their family home would have been halted with the 'family' for all intents and purposes living in North America permanently.

The planning applications made prior to 2018 show that the intent was to restore FC to its configuration as 5 separate apartments, suitable for staff housing. Under this configuration, it was known as Frogmore CottageS. The incredibly extensive structural work to convert it back to its original structure as a one-family large house would have required many months of work--if they had to rip out most of the interior walls and rewire the entire house and put a new roof on and recover all the existing floors? Madam thought she was going to get a double staircase put in like the one at Froggy House? And all this was somehow achieved by fairies who were invisible and made zero dust or noise or required shipments of building materials from December 2018 to April 2019, when the expectant mum moved in to await her blessed delivery? It had to have been fairies, to get so much done in so brief a space--and Madam decorated and furnished this magical house that allows her a view of the lawn bowls court a quarter mile away, behind tree cover?

No. Just no. I don't believe a word that has been published about Frogmore, apart from there being a rather dilapidated building of that name very close to public access in Windsor. Eugenie would be familiar with the building, having grown up in Windsor just a few miles away at Royal Lodge. It would have been staff quarters during her childhood. Given this history and the more recent notoriety with its alleged most recent occupants and the disappearing 2.4 million pounds . . why would Eugenie want to move in, really? Bad juju. The relentless drip of articles proclaiming "Princess Eugenie moves out of Frogmore Cottage just six weeks after moving in!!" make her sound like a flake, presuming one believed the initial report of her moving in in the first place. I saw a fresh round just yesterday--same headline, different publications, a new picture of Eugenie than the one previously used. Who benefits from painting Eugenie as a flake? The one whose PR is reheating these tired fibs, is who.

Hikari said…
Eugenie is due pretty soon. Might be 6-8 weeks or even less. If she's expecting earlier in January, it might be only 3-4 weeks to go. Why would she submit herself to the upheaval of a new home and move to Windsor which is that much further away from the London hospitals right now? Particularly if FC is not in move-in condition. A better plan would be to wait until after she's had the baby and then settle into a new home. I'm sure they could manage with three bedrooms, one a temporary nursery for a few weeks or months until a bigger place could be prepared for them. She and Jack have been quite content at Ivy Cottage for over two years so I don't see Eugenie that preoccupied with 'status' to even want to rush into Meg's castoff place because of the baby's arrival.

There are just way too many IFs surrounding Frogmore. I'm sure it could make a lovely home IF it has been finished, and if Euge doesn't mind the damp, the sounds of frogs, airplanes cruising overhead at all hours and a lovely view across the front garden to the resting place of Great-Great-four times removed Granny Victoria. And that other American Duchess.

Everything around Frogmore stinks as bad as Archie's nappy.

All of this confusion and the absolute dearth of corroborative evidence that renovations this extensive were ever carried out at FroggyCott has led me to consider another theory which frankly sounds more plausible than anything we have actually read in print about this poor misbegotten property.

Hikari said…
I submit that after the terrible schism between the households which occurred in the fall of 2018--witness, just 5 months after the wedding--after her performance at Eugenie's wedding, when the couple was in Australia, so they weren't in the country to kick up a fuss--they were removed from William's foundation and also were removed from Kensington Palace. The locks were changed on NottCott and the Harkles were informed that they would henceforth be lodged at Frogmore Cottage. But not the grandly re-envisioned bucolic family home for an expectant couple--No, they were to be given one of the existing staff flats. This is how demoted they were in the Firm, due to their egregious behavior, and no doubt Megs had been up to her old tricks trying to take photos and audio of the Kensington Palace areas. She, and by extension, Harry, who was colluding with her needed to be removed from the premises. FC is a Crown property, and it could be spun that the Duke of Sussex was being given the whole thing, as an upgrade befitting a Duke and a dad-to-be . . but in actuality, they would have had to rub elbows with Windsor Palace working stiffs. Do you remember Megs pitching a fit that the staff carpark was 'too disruptive' and staff weren't allowed to park there? I think the Queen DID put them in staff quarters and said, "Like it or lump it; this is what you are getting."

Why did Harry make a video with Ed Sheeran in *Eugenie and Jack's* home of Ivy Cottage? Not his own ostensibly beautifully renovated larger estate of Frogmore or even his somewhat larger former bachelor pad of NottCott just across the way at KP? Why did he announce the birth of Archie from the back of the Queen's stables so furtively like he was a criminal doing something he oughtn't? Slinking aound in front of the horses, and nervous as a cat in a room full of rocking chairs?

Because . . . he'd been locked out of NottCott, though presumably let in to visit his cousin. Because .. he did not and never has lived at FroggyCott, of which he may have only been granted a flat, and he wouldn't have wanted anyone to see that. Maybe because nothing had been done to it and the rooms were empty?

Hikari said…
So all this folderol about Eugenie sneaking behind the Queen's back to enter into a leasing arrangement in which she was going to pay her cousin 10,000 pounds a month for a house which he does not own and was not his to lease, either, only to flee the situation after a few weeks to go back to Ivy Cottage, all while heavily pregnant? Why would she in any way 'reach out' to help financially a couple who'd treated her like dirt at her own wedding? She was close to Harry when they were growing up but they aren't kids any more. He's a grown ass-hat who has thrown his lot in with a wife who hates her family. None of this computes.

My scenario would pretty much rule out the existence of an infant Sussex who would have been residing at this address. Which leads to the theory that the BRF knew the pregnancy was fake from the off. When they got back from Australia, where she'd paraded a Bump (only on some days) that looked to be 5 months along when she'd only announced it the previous week . . but completely flat stomached on the days she wanted to wear a leather skirt--they were presented with their demotions and realized that they were busted. That's why both of them stopped giving two f*cks about their appearance or demeanor at engagements, why they looked slovenly and publicly high, why Harry blew off his supposedly beloved Marines, why they acted so disgusting while on tour on behalf of the Queen and ran away right after their whinefest interview. They got severely dressed down for their conduct and said, "Well, we're not having any more of that! We're out!'

Meg's number has been had from Day One. I think they tried to work with her until the debut of Faux-Bump and after that they were on their own.

Harry does require a residential address at which he can officially receive mail in the UK in his capacity as counsellor of state. I can imagine a bit of royal amusement being had when telling One's ass-hat, disrespectful and traitorous grandson that henceforth he could receive his mail at Frogmore Cottages #5, the studio apartment. That would be sufficient to the needs of a Prince who's got a mansion in Montecito, if all he legally requires is a mailing address. He can also sleep in it after the divorce. As observed below . .

JHanoi said:
maybe just harry is moving back to frogmore......alone!


I am leaning towards exactly this! All speculative of course but I think it's closer to the truth of what's going on with that property than what we've been fed so far. The mystery of the 2.4 million pounds allegedly paid back by Hazza (we know it was really Charles . .) Maybe that was for them to purchase another flat elsewhere and they pocketed the money instead?

I remain agnostic that s*d all has been done to Frogmore Cottage(s) or that it's been inhabited by anyone recently, least of all Eugenie.
Girl with a Hat said…
I once read an article written by a security expert who went to work in Monaco to help Prince Albert beef up the physical and cyber security of the principality.

He said that Albert pretends to be very implicated in the running of Monaco but nothing could be further from the truth. He is a childish person who is obsessed with cart racing and would find any excuse to get out of meetings to indulge in this hobby.

I know a lot of rich young men who have dreams of becoming F1 drivers who start out in this racing world and spend lots of money trying to improve their skills.

Crumpet said…
@AnT

Your story re Princess Charlene is fascinating! It would seem an utter fantasy if you had repeated this story five years ago, but now, with the all we know about Madam and her shady stalker self, sounds totally legit!

You and your tin hat tiara (as you said)!
Maneki Neko said…
@Hikari

'Harry does require a residential address at which he can officially receive mail in the UK in his capacity as counsellor of state.'
--------------------

Harry could use Nottingham Cottage as his address? As far as I know, no else lives there (please correct me if I'm wrong).

I wonder if he'll be going to the UK soon if there's trouble in paradise.
SwampWoman said…
Crumpet, that Princess Charlene hairstyle is *exactly* the hairstyle that my second youngest granddaughter wanted to wear to first grade three years ago. Not exactly cutting edge (grin) anymore. (Youngest granddaughter didn't get her hairstyle wish at that time but I told her to cheer up. As fast as her hair grows, she will have LOTS of opportunities to make her parents crazy!)
SwampWoman said…
@Hikari, your scenario for Frog Abode sounds more realistic than anything else that has been put out. Besides, I like it because it shows that they were marginalized long ago and there will be no review begging them to return.

*sigh* Okay, I admit I like it because I want it to be true.
lizzie said…
@Maneki Neko wrote:

"Harry could use Nottingham Cottage as his address? As far as I know, no else lives there (please correct me if I'm wrong)."

I don't know if anyone is living there. But even using it for a mailing address might be a little too close for comfort for Will. And it was so odd (if the reports were true) that H&M moved out of Nott Cott before FC was ready for move-in. That did make it sound like they were kicked out (or maybe they didn't want to be near the Cambridges I guess.)
Appreciate your thoughts Hikari!

It is incredible the timing of everything. I agree that the bump caused the stir and Meghan refused to come clean with the BRF about where the baby was coming from. She sights 'privacy' as her cart blanche excuse for everything and she probably invoked this with the RF. To the point they were like, 'what is wrong with this woman?!' and hence forth all we ever heard from Meghan was they needed to protect their 'privacy'. Which just means, 'Fauxarchie'.

It all adds up.

SwampWoman said…
@Mom Mobile, Team Mackenzie all the way! (Sending pandemically-correct elbow bump your way.)
Hikari said…
@AnT,

Re. Charlene of Monaco

Until quite recently, and I think it was through this board, or maybe another of our sister bloggers on Tumblr, I knew very little about Charlene. Albert has never been anything to look at, unlike his sisters, who are both beautiful. The Kelly genes passed her son right on by. Didn't know much about his creepy proclivities or his multiple illegitimate children, either. I figured he was just a socially awkward guy who couldn't get women because he was a tubby balding unattractive guy who maybe had a sweat problem or other unpleasantness about his person. Quite the Don Juan apparently, demonstrating that a certain type of amoral woman will sleep with any guy who's got enough money.

Is Albert too gross to tempt even the likes of Meghan? A fruitless surmise, but I could see Megsie living it up in Monaco.

I knew Charlene was an Olympic athlete and was very attractive. I figured there was a transactional bit of 'arranged marriage' aspect to the union but I didn't realize that she was so miserable she actually tried to seek asylum at the South African embassy in Paris when she went there for her wedding dress fitting. Sounds like an espionage thriller. Goons came and collected her and took her passport away. She was a hostage to the House of Grimaldi, literally. Small wonder she sobbed throughout her wedding. Apparently the conjugal night was spent in separate hotels. The couple did come together to procreate so they have slept together since the marriage. One wonders what the maternal love would be like toward a child basically conceived through a breeding program, under duress, if not actual marital rape.

The picture of 'Santa' and his elf passing out toys is frankly disturbing. Charlene looks maniacal with her shaved head and crazy eyes. If I were a child, I think I'd back away from this demented lady, even if she was holding out a free toy. She's scary. I can't think her husband is happy about this haircut. It looks like something Avril Lavigne might have done circa 1999, not befitting a 42-year-old mom of two who is the Princess Consort of Monaco. She really looks like she's lost whatever remained of her marbles.

Their marriage reminds me of the movie "Muriel's Wedding" . . are you familiar? Muriel (Toni Collette) an overweight social pariah/high school dropout from a provincial town fantasizes about becoming a bride all the time. She moves to Sydney (City of Brides) and goes to bridal shops and tries on the dresses, conning the saleswomen into taking Polaroids of her in the dresses to 'show her poor sick mother who's undergoing treatment for cancer and that's why she couldn't come with me'.) She has an entire album of these. She answers an ad in the newspaper for a young man seeking a wife--he's a South African swimmer training for the Sydney Games and he's got immigration problems. The deal: she marries him so he can get Australian citizenship and not be deported. She gets to have a nationally televised dream wedding and move into his condo. He's not interested in having sex with her because she's zaftig and weird, but before they can be busted for marriage fraud she comes to her senses and leaves.

Albert married a South African swimmer, too. He must be really gross if she's this miserable. Arranged marriages can work if the couple eventually comes to at least like each other. Evidently that's not happening in this case and all the riches of Monaco can dull the pain. Lucky for her that she got her heir and spare in one go .. her two are twins. But one's a girl, so Albert probably wants one more boy just in case. She's 42 so I doubt that will be happening. My sis was 41 when her only child was born, so it could happen. Not likely though if she really can't stand her husband.
Crumpet said…
@Girl with a Hat and @Hikari,

It sounds like Prince Albert in a Can might the man for the job! He sounds about as emotionally fit as Hairy, he IS the only Prince in Monaco, and perhaps he has more money than Hairy? Plus, he hangs out with lots of celebs, sports figures and other minor royalty!

Could he be the NEXT one for Princess Meghan? Perhaps she should go yachting this summer. This would solve all of our problems--Hairy goes back to England, Meghan gets another massive wedding (I just realized how similar their wedding dresses are), and the French speaking world can be inflicted with woke word salade des mot! Princess Charlene can swim back to South Africa, and the twins get an evil step-mother. Archiefaux gets a family!
AnT said…
@Hikari,

Muriel’s Wedding! That was the first Toni Collette movie I ever saw, and I thought she was amazing in it. Wow, what an odd similarity (swimmers, fake marriage, dad in trouble) between that quirky film and the set-up story I heard about Charlene.

You know, even if Albert was a dazzler, I am not sure someone like Charlene would be able handle the role if she was coerced to be there in the first place. A couple of friends in Antibes curl their lips and say she got what she pursued, and she can live with it, no sympathy even if there’s truth in the odd tale. Plus apparently she is disliked for still having no ability to speak French. They say she is seeing another former swimmer romantically through some organization she is allowed to support, so maybe the cut was for him, a sign. But I do think she is in need of some mental health care, and I hope she gets it. I hope her children are healthy; rumors there too.

I can totally see Meghan going for a suddenly single Albert, with his principality fortune bigger and looser, and wrapped around Russian and Chinese funds, and of course, Cannes. Yes. She would go there fast. But...but...I think this time, Caroline would have the prospective Mrs Grimaldi’s legs broken at the door, and then ring up Princess Anne on the secret Princess hotline and say, “Yah, this is how you stop a snake, hun, see?” I think Caroline is done with rank amateurs. Maybe she would shoo a Megs toward hideous Ernst for amusement.

If Meghan is still entertaining thoughts of politics and being Kamala’s future VP, no. But all the “Meghan and Kamala will be best friends” press stories than ran in the US between the end of September and November 11 have dwindled away into nothing and she is on the latte laxative train. That will leave her free for a Charlene-free Albert (I think the haircut portends something soon). But I still think our Megs wants some Jeff Bezos in her inevitable ceiling mirror.
Hikari said…
@lizzie

I don't know if anyone is living (in NottCott). But even using it for a mailing address might be a little too close for comfort for Will. And it was so odd (if the reports were true) that H&M moved out of Nott Cott before FC was ready for move-in. That did make it sound like they were kicked out (or maybe they didn't want to be near the Cambridges I guess.)

Harry was by all accounts very happy batching it at NottCott prior to Meghan. He was close enough to KP #1 that he could pop over at will and raid the Cambridges' refrigerator, as Will pointed out in his reaction to Harry's engagement. Still playing the role of the jocular elder bro, he cracked "I'm really happy because it means that he will stop coming over and eating all my food."

Whether Meg stayed at NottCott with him for any length of time either before or after the wedding is questionable. A roast chicken dinner of the wholesome nutritional variety never occurred either, I'm pretty sure. If chickens were roasted, I think that occurred in a Soho house property and not in the kitchen, either. The couple were extremely fond of hotels and they probably had their own permanent suite at Soho House when they were ostensibly at FC.

I believe William went to the Queen with his list of grievances and asked that the Harkles be tossed out of KP. He probably had a lengthy list, with evidence. Owing to his status as the heir to the heir, his concerns had enough weight with HM to be effective, particularly if he could demonstrate how Kate and the children were being adversely affected by living so close to the duplicitous duo. Maybe Meg was up to her old tricks, trying to take pictures, ambushing Kate, 'dropping by' . . none of it friendly or trustworthy . .all with an agenda. That would have been a high stressor for Catherine. It was 'round about the time the Harkles got kicked out that we started to have tea like 'Prince George is a holy terror' (implied: Catherine and Wills are terrible parents with no control over their kid, who is a brat), etc. That was revenge. Oh, and a little item about William and Rose Hanbury as well.

Meg is poison, but even before she was on the scene, Uncle Harry had turned up drunk or stoned one too many times and was not invited over to play with his niece and nephew. Together, they make the houseguests from hell and are not to be trusted.

Having his mail sent to NottCott would give Harry access to that property again and he'd probably try to take it over, given the opportunity. That would not be acceptable to William. And, if another occupant is found for the cottage, they'd be getting Harry's mail. Not sure why he couldn't use BP as his address. The Queen has plenty of spare rooms to put him up for a few nights if required. I think a clear message is being sent, though. It's not that the Queen doesn't have plenty of places she *could* offer Harry. But to do so would be to extend a favor which they have proven themselves unworthy of, so the Queen declines. Harry can use his own money to lodge himself from now on, so they've excised him from any properties with Royal connection. Maybe there's a gameskeeper's cottage up in Scotland going spare he can have, in exchange for doing estate work. That's Harry's level now . . and he must know it, so he clings onto Meghan's Montecito fantasy as the better alternative. For now.
Christine said…
Hikari, thanks for the wonderful commentary on Frogmore and Eugenie. If ALL of that was completely false and planted, I keep wondering, to what purpose. What is Meghan's end game here? I also wonder too why Eugenie would not have released some kind of statement back saying that in fact she and Jack were going to be staying at Ivy Cottage for the time being.

I can usually sense Meghan's mind but in this story I cannot. I wonder too if the story is partially true. Meaning that the Queen and Eugenie had discussed Frogmore as a possibility and HAMS threw a shit fit over it, wanting large sums of money, reimbursement or whatever, went to retrieve their remaining belongings in the night and released the stories. Maybe during the dust up Eugenie was like.... um forget it, I want nothing to do with Frogmore or them. Last comment, I sense Harry's involvement here. Meghan really couldn't give a f about Frogmore but Harry still clings to whatever he views as 'his' from the Royal Family. Plus he is more likely of the two to through a fit to his family. Whatever. I'll drop it but I've been puzzling over it for days. Bah! The Mind F-- that are Harry and Meghan and their Shenanigans.


AnT said…
Plus...We know that Albert knows his way around hiding a child from the public. A creepy bonding point for Albie and Young Mother Megs.

After the divorce, l can see Harry with a oat-crusted fish’n’chips food truck on the studio back lots. His partner will be a blonde with one name.




I like your thinking, Hikari.

It's entirely plausible and could explain much that we've been scratching out heads about. There were reports of her being seen in W. London and rumours of a flat somewhere in that locality, on her own. Also, how they `went' to the Portland for the `birth' without being seen by those with cameras keeping watch on Toad Hall.

The Scarlet Pimpernel is an amateur by comparison.
Crumpet said…
@AnT

Plus, Princess Grace of Monaco would be the grandmother she never knew. I bet Madam is reading Grace Kelly bios as we speak.
Christine said…
Puds, I hadn't thought of those scenarios. Yes caution is definitely warranted here. Thankfully Eugenie and Jack bowed out of whatever game Meghan was playing, if they were ever even involved at all.

Frequently Meghan releases PR where something had been discussed, heck maybe once over the phone and it's released as having happened or happening. I think that tactic has thrown KP off many times.
AnT said…
@Hikari and @Christine,

With regard to Harry, the Cambridges, Nott Cottage..

I’ve said it before and will ask it again: where is any, ANY, imagery of Uncle Harry having a normal play date with or visit with George, or Zara’s kids....? Not behind them on a balcony. Engaged with them in a normal friendly Uncle way. Horsing around, sweaters, normal.

The only image I know of, a young beardless Harry and George, looks like a clunky photoshop paste-up. Am I missing some?

So I too think “you know how Uncle Harry gets” got him banned, then got the Harkles tossed into the frog bog.
Christine said…
AnT- I think in the past people have wanted to see Harry as this jolly Uncle. So many traits have been put on Harry that frankly, he doesn't possess. Okay to be fair, he possessing them at certain times but his other qualities over shadow them.

In fact the only thing that comes to mind was that cute interchange where that little girl was stealing Harry's popcorn at a soccer game I believe.

I bet that Wills and Kate thought he'd be a better Uncle too.
AnT said…
@Crumpet,

Ooooooooooh, Crumpet, stellar point! I hadn’t thought of that! Oh my god!

Yes, and Omid tanning himself by the Med and writing that “movie star Megs is possibly even more like her new MIL, Grace, who also left Hollywood for royalty and also loved poetry [paging Magatha Mistie! What would Markle Kelly Grimaldi poems sound like....]...”

Are we ready for Megs in a blonde bob, chiffon scarf and pearls? Agh, but she has no waist for belts and twin sets.
AnT said…
Christine— that little popcorn exchange is the only thing I can think of, too.

Funny that even ELF couldn’t make it happen. Which says a lot.
Perhaps H could use some sort of accommodation address/poste restante for his mail? I realise that security would be an an issue but who is going to trust him with secret matters now?

There are plenty of options for an accommodation address, not just at the local Post Office, although a branch occupying space in a branch of WH Smith is about his level now.

We had an oleaginous estate agent set up in our town, a one-man outfit aimed at flattering potential vendors into thinking he attracted the same sort of prestigious purchasers as Hamptons or Knight Frank Rutley. He claimed to have a `Mayfair office' - very swanky. Not being convinced, as he was one-man start-up, I checked him out, especially as I thought he'd overvalued the property of my dear neighbour, a lovely old gentleman of well over 90, just to get him on the his books.

As I'd suspected, the Mayfair address was one of those smart offices in the business of forwarding mail for outfits that wanted to look good but had no substance. It was just an office with post boxes. (Needless to say, my neighbour was treated shabbily by his purchaser - the final sale price was well below what it should have been; the purchaser had lied about being a cash buyer; but my neighbour was committed to moving into a retirement by a specific date. Both purchaser and estate agent had him over a barrel.)

Perhaps H could have his post sent somewhere like that `Mayfair Office', even if he's living in a camouflaged Land Rover behind the bushes in a Royal Park?
Girl with a Hat said…
@Hikari, I think that they don't want to give Harry a Buckingham Palace or Windsor address because that would mean that Markle might set foot there and they may not have any legal recourse to stop her.

I once made the mistake of taking in an ex-bf who was in a difficult situation. I allowed him to stay and one week turned into a month, and then 6 months and I couldn't evict him for the life of me. I actually had to move to get him out.

Be very careful of who you allow to use your address as their legal residence.
AnT said…
hahahahaahahhahahha
Hahahahhahahhaaha
Hahahhahahahhaha

A new quote about Harry from singer Noel Gallagher, in the DM:

“Prince Harry, surely no one takes him seriously? He’s just a mad little kid,” he said, speaking to The Matt Morgan Podcast. “I don’t like do-gooders in general, they wind me up.”

Pure gold and.....on a podcast! Noel, you reminded me to take a moment, and to really listen to you. Thank you. I feel connected to you now, Noel, I really do.
lizzie said…
@WBBM wrote

"Perhaps H could use some sort of accommodation address/poste restante for his mail?....Perhaps H could have his post sent somewhere like that `Mayfair Office', even if he's living in a camouflaged Land Rover behind the bushes in a Royal Park?"

Haha!

I think the issue is that a counselor of state has to be "domiciled" in the UK. So that means he has to have a residence. A residence also provides a mailing address and so a mailing address could--sometimes-- be evidence of a residence. But not if it was of the Post Office box type or other accommodation.
Hikari said…
@Crumpet

It sounds like Prince Albert in a Can might the man for the job! He sounds about as emotionally fit as Hairy, he IS the only Prince in Monaco, and perhaps he has more money than Hairy? Plus, he hangs out with lots of celebs, sports figures and other minor royalty!

Could he be the NEXT one for Princess Meghan? Perhaps she should go yachting this summer. This would solve all of our problems--Hairy goes back to England, Meghan gets another massive wedding (I just realized how similar their wedding dresses are), and the French speaking world can be inflicted with woke word salade des mot! Princess Charlene can swim back to South Africa, and the twins get an evil step-mother. Archiefaux gets a family!


It is quizzical to me that Albert did not choose a French-speaking bride. There must have been numerous other women besides Charlene who would have been willing to become Princess Consort of Monaco to a man they didn't love and were only pursuing for his money and position. Charlene was Markle'ing before we'd ever heard of Markle. But she was forcibly kidnapped and deprived of her passport and her liberty to make sure she went through with the wedding after she had second thoughts. I can't condone this, no matter how hard she chased Albert to get free plastic surgery. She's refused to learn French they've been married . . 10 years? That's passive-aggressive. He never should have chosen her in the first place.

Megsy might speak a tiny bit of schoolgirl French (French I, back in 1996 or thereabouts). Possibly a bit more than Charlene then, but not enough to actually say she 'speaks French'.
"My wife will now speak French" was the only flash of the old cheeky Hazza we've had since this nightmare started. I will always remember that little barb fondly.
Christine said…
Noel Gallagher wins the day!! I'm off the clock, you all have a lovely night. Don't forget to get the holiday shopping done.
Girl with a Hat said…
@Hikari,

Prince Albert's French isn't that good. He has an English accent when he speaks and he isn't fluent. He doesn't speak like a native speaker of French. I think he spoke English at home with his mother for many years and he only learned French from school. In any case, it's not his maternal or dominant language.

He and Charlenese communicate in English, but I don't think that's much of an issue for him. He prefers it that way, from what I hear.
Hikari said…
@Girl

Wow, that surprises me, that the Crown Prince of Monaco isn't fluent in French. I would have expected him to be raised bilingual, given his position. Certainly Rainier spoke French?

I studied French via Babbel during lockdown and now I can confidently order wine and nuts in a bar! I love learning languages so this befuddles me, that neither of them are good at French.

Charlene and Grace sort of had the same deal, did they not? I think Grace was charmed by Rainier and he with the beautiful American movie star, but it's not like they knew each other well at all before he rushed her down the aisle. For her family's part, they were most anxious to find her a husband and settle her so she'd stop whoring around Hollywood and bringing shame on the family name. Grace was beautiful and quite the alley cat with her married co-stars.

She also seemed very unhappy with her lot. She retired from movie stardom at her zenith at the incredibly to us in 2020 young age of 26. Her life after that was largely ornamental and not very interesting. Charlene knows about that. Grace was definitely more dignified in her demeanor though.
Girl with a Hat said…
Charlene - not Charlenese
Girl with a Hat said…
@Hikari, Albert speaks French and can have a very long conversation in the language of Moliere, but he doesn't have a French accent when he speaks. It's kind of an accent of an English person speaking French but not as heavy. He also doesn't speak quickly, doesn't use the same intonations as a French person, speaks kind of haltingly, and it's obvious he's not all that fluent in French.

His vocabulary is that of a French person, so he has studied in French, but doesn't seem to use it all that much.

I read that Grace spoke to her children in English and as she got older and became more fluent in French, would speak more French. Stephanie and Caroline speak French like Macron does.
Girl with a Hat said…
@Hikari, I think that what really made Grace unhappy was Rainier. He was quite the womanizer despite his appearance. She became an alcoholic after she was neglected by him. Her son takes after his father. They keep discovering his illegitimate children.

jessica said…
I think after Archificial was born, it sent Harry and Meghan into an uptight mess of loss of control. That’s how it looks to me. He was probably happy at first, which Rachel couldn’t stand and then the power struggle ensued. Let’s be honest, they were a wreck for months after Archie. Then they fled with a baby at 4-5 months old? Total batshit behavior.

I don’t think he was doing the BRF any favors and they wanted him gone. People have a much harder time with way less support. To publicly complain then do a runner? Batshit.
Magatha Mistie said…

Christine, thanks.

GrimAlbie

From ‘Cito to Monaco
Megs will put on a show
Showing to all her Cannes-Cannes
To the House of Grimaldi
And Albie, the baldy
She’ll enter his court with a Bang-Bang
Acquitaine said…
Purely Rumour, but occasional articles are consistently written to think there is substance to Rumour.

Albert of Monaco's true love is a woman called Nicole. She is the mother of his 2nd child and an unconfirmed rumour around the time of his wedding to Charlene was that Nicole had birthed another child.

A self-satisfied Nicole took a very public papped walk through Monaco a day before the wedding when this rumour and Charlene's very public distress were at their height.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2009911/Look-whos-turned-Mother-Prince-Alberts-illegitimate-son-spotted-strolling-Monaco--day-gets-married.html

Nicole was rumoured to have been banned from the Monaco Palace and royal events in the months after the wedding.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2025366/Monacos-Princess-Charlene-bans-playboy-Albert-seeing-mother-lovechild.html

She now lives in London, had a clothes store, and is rumoured to receive lots of visits from Albert.

https://www.spearswms.com/nicole-coste-knightsbridges-discreet-designer-hourglass-creations/

When you google pictures of her with Albert, body language is very different compared to his wife.

Nicole was never a suitable bride for one very simple reason, she's black. In 2020 it may not matter anymore, but in the 00s and definitely whilst Ranier was alive it mattered.

Charlene appears to have embarked on this adventure thinking the love would come later, but it's interesting to see how much less sympathy she receives compared to any brides from other royal houses with similar circumstances.

Perhaps it's due to Charlene being older and the world already knowing what a player Albert was/is. Anyone who married him couldn't possibly go into that situation hoping for better circumstances, right?

Then again, if the rumours of Charlene's own dalliances are true then she's done better out of a bad situation.

We seem to have less sympathy for these royal ladies nowadays theorizing they went in with eyes wide open or in Charlene's case with her passport confiscated and a negotiated contract of an heir and *separate living arrangements starting with honeymoon.

Then you have former Queen Poala of Belgium whose husband's lovechild has used the courts to force her way into the family and is now forced to participate in 'happy families' photo shoots with the said child.

*@Hikari: i think those Mobaco babies were a petri dish arrangement and multiples of different gender to tick the box on the contract to get it over and done with at once.

Popular posts from this blog

A Quiet Interlude

 Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event?   Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th?  Oscar's - March 10th?   In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US.  The IRS just never goes away.  Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on).  There's always another one.  Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California.   That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales.   Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere.  But.  The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.  

As Time Passes and We Get Older

 I started thinking about how time passes when reading some of the articles about the birthday.  It was interesting to think about it from the different points of view.  Besides, it kind of fits as a follow up the last post (the whole saga of can the two brothers reunite). So there is the requisite article about how he will be getting all kinds of money willed to him from his great-grandmother.  There were stories about Princess Anne as trustee (and not allowing earliest access to it all).  Whether or not any or all of this is true (there was money for him and/or other kids) has been debated with claims she actually died owing money with the Queen paying the debts to avoid scandal.  Don't know but I seem to remember that royal estates are shrouded from the public so we may not (ever) know. However, strange things like assisting in a book after repeated denials have popped up in legal papers so nothing is ever really predicable.   We are also seein...

The Opening Act of New Adventures in Retail

 I keep thinking things will settle down to the lazy days of spring where the weather is gorgeous and there is a certain sense of peacefulness.  New flowers are coming out. increasing daylight so people can be outside/play and thinking gardening thoughts.  And life is quiet.  Calm. And then something happens like a comet shooting across the sky.  (Out of nowhere it arrives and then leaves almost as quickly.)   An update to a law suit.  Video of the website is released (but doesn't actually promote any specific product which can be purchased from the website).  A delay and then jam is given out (but to whom and possible more importantly - who did not make the list?).  Trophies almost fall (oops).  Information slips out like when the official date of beginning USA residency.  (now, isn't that interesting?) With them, it's always something in play or simmering just below the surface.  The diversity of the endeavors is really ...