Hello from vacation, where I've just noticed the Sussexes truly dreadful Christmas card as profiled in the New York Post.
My immediate guess was that Meg used Photoshop's dry brush filter to hide any traces of photo manipulation and, perhaps, the insertion of a substitute Archie.
What a mess. What was she thinking?
And how does it help the Sussexes build their brand?
They're supposed to be multi-million-dollar Netflix producers and Spotify podcasters, yet they're releasing something that looks like the very best product of a night school art class at a provincial community college.
All the bases
"The original photo of the family was taken at their home earlier this month by the Duchess's mother," according to a statement by Archewell.
Not that Doria has ever been known as being a keen photographer before, particularly when it comes to what was clearly a posed shot. (All three family members plus two dogs in the same frame, all smiling? This must of been one out of at least a hundred posed shots.)
The statement continues: "The small Christmas tree, including the homemade ornaments and other decorations, were selected by Archie, and the tree will be replanted after the holidays."
We're covering all the bases here, aren't we?
"Homemade ornaments" for the instagram influencer points, and the replanted tree for environmental street cred. Plus a guest appearance by the mysterious Doria.
Charitable contributions
The card was released through Meghan's dog patronage Mayhew - the one she visited during her pregnancy, a visit best remembered for her ability to squat down in stiletto heels and spring up again lightly despite being quite far along in her pregnancy.
Comments
Absolutely loving Rebecca English revealing it was in fact The Queen who slapped down Harry’s wreath request. BRF is coming out strong today. Wonder if this is a sign of things to come. Clearly, there is a reason they are starting to have a public backbone. Perhaps beyond restrictions, Harry and Meghan have breached their severance agreement and are about to face a lawsuit?
I still maintain legal battles and costs will be Harry and Meghan’s downfall.
Yes. Very disappointed re article stating titles would not be pulled.
I disagree. Strip them of all titles, and let them hang out to dry.
I always knew the Queen would not revoke the titles, however devoutly that is to be wished. Harry is Charles‘s son, a prince of the blood, and not only a prince of the blood, but a child of the future monarch. No matter what he has done, nothing changes that. Extending the title of HRH, princess Henry, Duchess of Sussex to a woman who was not a citizen of the UK, and therefore not a subjective her Majesty regardless of who she was married to is going to be a thorn in the side of the royal family forever. The queen could’ve stood on a technicality and said that meg could not be an HRH or a Duchess until such time as she became a full-fledged British citizen, because otherwise her loyalties were always going to be divided. They have been worse than divided… She has never for one day then pro-British for anything. The queen was really over a barrel, Because her 2 objectives: Placate Harry and keep him on side, and extend an inclusive non racist welcome to the woman of his choice hinged on him being granted everything William had received. Huge wedding, titles, Royal tours, patronages...the caboodle. All these efforts to keep Harry on side failed in the end, So to the royal family is everlasting regret, it’s a shame that HM did not require the couple to extend their engagement. That would’ve meant Harry touring Oceania solo, as had been originally planned for over a year. I think we can all agree that Madam did not add value to that tour whatsoever And in fact managed to insult everyone she came in contact with. If they had been compelled to postpone their wedding by a year Or even six months, I think Madame would’ve buggered right off In search of easier prey. Her plan was contingent upon a rush to the altar, and also their engagement was the standard royal length, those six months also constituted about half of their active relationship. What ever they may have shared initially in the first few months after they met, I am convinced it had flamed out By the time they reconvened at the Inskip wedding, And their entire relationship has been a showman e and scam from then on. It’s a shame that HM granted this insincere and grifting person a princess bride wedding and host of titles when it was a known fact that she was so untrustworthy, that she was permitted no access to Royal properties or jewelry.
The by now meaningless titles will stay...What needs to absolutely go is any form of royal funding whatsoever, And any links to the BRF in terms of invitations, patronages or tacit Royal support of the grift-by-Royal association. Perhaps the latest passive aggressive repeating nation of Harry’s royal paternity was in response to then being informed that Charles and or the crown would absolutely not be in any way shape or form funding megs ongoing litigation with male on Sunday. If she alone is responsible for that legal bill, Harry is going to be broke in about a year. Que sera sera, arseholes. Let them keep the titles, but not one more sovereign of royal coffers shall they have. Perhaps BP could place a few phone calls to execs at Netflux and Pontify, advising that any forthcoming projects from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not have royal approval, and will be pursued in litigation As slander if they reach broadcast stage.
Let’s see how many deals go through. The Sussexes are already failing in a high profile way with the titles. It’s been a year since they fled the UK and their time as a novelty Freakshow is coming to its end.
.
A year ago the Harkles didn't care. They were going to be global superstars with a billionaire brand. Who cared nothing for the royals and had no compunction about spitting on the queen publicly.
At some point during the late summer it finally dawned on them that their comnercial life wasn't going to be realised as they wished and so they pivoted back to royal. Or possibly their commercial deals required they demonstrate strong royal connections.
They began to soften their remarks towards the royals by adding cutesy references to Harry's "granny" in their Zoom calls.
Harry really started to lash out at any suggestions that he'd severed his UK links because that affected his royal links.
I speculate that they also began to plan to restore their royal lines with the Cenotaph as the first public event to do so.
They rebuilt the royal scaffolding around themselves to include the pompous sounding 'The office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex' with a press secretary, chief of staff, communications director to reflect a quasi-royal importance. Recently they re-hired actual ex-royal employees. They changed their interview efforts so that they appeared only with mainstream prestige media like Time or CNN instead of the numerous unknown media outlets they'd been appearing on throughout the summer.
They had their PR plant numerous articles claiming they were (almost) reconciling with the royals, particularly the Cambridges, Harry was returning culminating in the article that simultaneously asked for and denied an extension to the Megxit review with the magnanimous suggestion that Harry (and possibly Meghan) would travel to UK to discuss the final details.
These PR articles have been relentless despite the palace not responding.
I honestly think the mild palace sanctioned article in The Times from early December in which they were told not to bother went completely over their heads.
The website unveiling with Diana's picture may have been the straw that provoked the very strong, very clear,'HELL NO!" Palace Reaction from latest DM article. It sources The Queen and makes it completely and unequivocably clear to the Harkles and their sponsors that The Queen, Charles and William are on the same page and that The Harkles are out and have been since January, everything they've done in the past year has solidified that decision. Not only are they out in their official royal roles, they are also out as far as family relationships with William and possibly Charles. They are not even quasi-royals nor should there be any pretence that they are.
In one article the Palace has responded to all the Harkles' 3Mths of PR showing that it's been a complete waste of their bought PR.
The Harkles will respond in a few days or hours because they can't help themselves. The only question is how self-sabotaging their response will be.
Let’s see how many deals go through. The Sussexes are already failing in a high profile way with the titles. It’s been a year since they fled the UK and their time as a novelty Freakshow is coming to its end.
@Hikari: You are most likely right. Even though there is public outcry on both sides of the Atlantic to remove their titles, I also think it won’t happen. And the thought of Meghan possibly being called Princess Meghan is more revolting than the title of duchess.
Your line of thinking about the RF withdrawing ALL funding is what I’ve been thinking is the best route to take since Megxit took place.
Forcing Harry and Meghan to financially stand on their own with numerous restraints to protect the monarchy is reasonable, considering that without any restraints, the Sussexes could inflict massive, long-lasting (for generations) irreparable damage to the monarchy, the culture of the UK, and the world reputation and standing of the UK and the Commonwealth. I think Meghan, with Harry under her absolute influence and control, is THAT conniving, vicious, vindictive, and just plain dangerous. Look at all the havoc and damage she has already done since invading Harry’s life.
As you said, they are currently a novelty and curiosity and as time passes, being talentless one-trick ponies who latch on to the newest cause or news story is likely to be buried by someone who is the next big thing.
If the royal family plays its cards right, they can allow Meghan, who in many ways parallels Donald Trump, to be her own worst enemy. Without going into a litany, Trump’s unforced errors that he caused himself and refusal to take the most basic advice from advisors including his own family, cause him to throw away what could have been an absolute lock on a second term in office.
Meghan and Harry, but especially Meghan, will probably be her own worst enemy, and their main problems will likely revolve around money and a lack of it. Their lifestyle is solely based on being royals, and due to her entitlement, grandiosity, materialism, general greed, and need to always be the center of attention and have the best of everything to keep up with the many people she wants to compete with in lavish lifestyle fitting a royal, their need for money will outpace their ability to generate it.
People like Meghan can NEVER get enough. She will spend every dollar they bring in and much more than they will ever be able to generate.
They will likely end up in a financial ditch deeper than the Mariana Trench and eventually divorce so Meghan can look for a new wealthy man.
The longer the Queen and Charles fund the Sussexes, they are simply enabling a pair of people who have the potential to end 1,000 years of history and tradition that serves as one of the foundational identities of British culture. If you know someone hates you, then don’t keep providing them with a club to beat you with.
Meghan would likely lose her titles because unlike Diana and Fergie, Meghan is not a british citizen and never had any interest in becoming one.
As an American citizen and ex-wife of Harry, she would likely not have any reasonable argument to keep a title. But she would try, just as Trump is trying every legal action possible for a second term.
Wishful thinking, unfortunately, yes. The only person in the world powerful enough to stop this nonsense is The Queen--a woman in her ninth decade!
I did find a bit of glee in this paragraph though (from the article):
"Meghan's recent link up with her friend Oprah Winfrey to publicise her new range of vegan lattes — which led to the entertainment legend shamelessly plugging them on Instagram with a crown emoji — was seen in the opinion of many in the Royal Household as not just clumsy, but arguably a direct contravention of her and Harry's promise not to bring the monarchy into disrepute."
O has been Markled.
Do you think O, will be on the phone to M (and H) re Q?!
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markles-sister-samantha-markle-releasing-two-books
While Samantha has previously claimed her original memoir would be titled “The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister,” the two parts will now be called “In the Shadows of The Duchess.”
“My sister was not raised an only child, that is a PR lie,” she said. “I’m not fluffing anything nor am I insulting or out to disparage. Life is full of a lot of challenges and some really beautiful moments. My book is honest and human about a lot of things including my own accomplishments and shortcomings. It’s reality and anyone in a family can relate.”
Samantha claimed she is “not out to hurt my sister” but her revelations won’t be all positive.
“I have spoken the truth about my feelings but have never been out to hurt my sister,” said Samantha. “Any reasonable person would question what she has done to the entire family and this is not about mudslinging it’s about truth and reality. Call it whatever you want but until in the less you read it you have no idea and cannot judge. It is an honest, warm and witty and heartfelt memoir. Not a negative pamphlet.”
“(But) all positive? Subjective, I suppose, but most intelligent and reasonable people will like it,” continued Samantha. “Let’s just say the nasty gossip about her on the internet is negative and by comparison, my book is not. People seem to want dirt. My book is not dirt… but it’s not fluff either.”
so i find myself wondering if it will be the bold expose that most people are expecting/wanting. I have a feeling book 1 will be more turned towards Samantha and M's childhood. If it does well - then maybe we'll get a part 2 with real juicy stuff.
Guess we'll have to wait & see
ISBN-13: 9781666229905
Publisher: Barnes & Noble Press
Publication date: 01/17/2021
Series: The Diary Of Princess Pushy's Sister
Pages: 328
Product dimensions: 6.00(w) x 1.25(h) x 9.00(d)
https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-diary-of-princess-pushys-sister-part-1-samantha-markle/1138541465?ean=9781666229905
https://youtu.be/-LQTBOBfA18
Beluga Off! 🐳
Rule the Jonahs
Jonahs rule air-waves
Megsie and her plankton
Have been spayed
Whalespodcast/NetFish/Blubbering Shites
Spermed Wails
Megs and Harry have Royally been told
You’re not welcome back, not part of the fold
The pressure is on to cast their Net far
As dim pitied Haz, has just dissed his own Pa
They ain’t gonna get what they thought
that they oughta
The Queen has proclaimed that they’re
“Dead in the Water”
Cirque du LA
Roll up, Roll up, for the H & M show
Featuring Diana, his mother, you know
Words almost fail me, with their Archewell Front
Proving to all, he’s a base, cunning stunt!
xxxxx Megs is ‘banking’ on returning for
Trooping the Colour carriage ride.
Prince Philip turns 100 on the 10th June,
Trooping on the 12th. Two birds with one claw?
Although Philip has said he wants no celebration.
I hope the Queen stands firm #saynotomegs
The move must have been a very public slap in the face for H&M and Megalo will be enraged. I had a look at other papers, the Express says 'Prince Harry is believed to have been “deeply saddened” by the Queen’s decision, according to the Daily Mail's royal correspondent Rebecca English', (although I couldn't find that statement). Not a peep in the Telegraph.
@Acquitaine, Happy Camper: very well said and written.
@Magatha: you've started the year in great form again!
If this is the case, may I suggest Foetal Alcohol Syndrome?
On the other hand, wasn't there a report, allegedly from the Palace, that he was `safe with the family that loved him'? That is, not with her.
----------------
Given that both H$Ms claim to be their mother's child, and by implication nothing to do with their fathers, can we say that the apples didn't fall very far from the tree?
---------------
Much as my English Civil War sympathies would have been with the King, I am proposing to repurpose the toast from Conan Doyle's Micah Clarke of 1889, with reference to Harry, from this time forth until the SH$Ms are cast down:
`Perdition to Faithless Princes!'
Thanks Maneki 😘
I agree, it’s disappointing HM not removing
their titles, but not unexpected.
The Queen, I’m sure, would love to demeg her,
but, she has to play it safe.
Megs knows this and will play it till her end.
Her end will come, just not as quickly
as we would like.
Good to see the removal of the velvet glove,
one finger at a time...
@WildBoar
The pernicious Prince, has shown his Quince?
And it’s all gone pear-shaped...
Pond Life
For all that we reckoned
The Queen took two seconds
Dismissing all that they’ve said
They are but a joke
Another pig in a poke
They’ve dirtied the waters, once tread
Dropped Arches/Aitches
Poor old Archie, bagatelle
Show him soon, or what the hell
Poor old Archie in the mix
Soon to feature in Megflix
Not much left in this old scam
Apart from seeing Arche, I Am
I am applauding...also feel like the verse of Dropped Aitch and especially the line of “Poor old Archie in the mix” has a sort of rhythm within, like a catchy street ditty from Shakespeare’s day that would be shouted at Megs’ passing carriage. That phrase will certainly be stuck in my head now every time he comes up now.
He is indeed a poor old little phantom tot, unseen, age unknown, a fable stuck in their messy mixed-up lives.
I posted the details of Samantha's book much earlier. I got the details from Samantha herself on twitter. You're welcome.
Kieran is hilarious. Thank you for posting that link.
Sorry, I've missed your contribution, I remember you posted earlier. You were the first to mention Samantha's book.
Great observations. A faithless prince, indeed.
Speculation summary about Archie including some bits I’ve read here and on other blogs and Tumblr, and in the LSA forum:
*She expected to give birth to a new Princess Diana and was appalled when the surrogate delivered a big pink Tom Markle instead
*She is still waiting for the 1994-style five-million dollar baby picture payoff, which is long-dead trend
*As a narcissist she cannot bear to share the spotlight, just wanted the holy young mother tag to use to pontificate & get royal payouts
*As a narcissist, she will have told Harry the child is flawed, to gaslight H and control him by beating him down with sperm guilt
*no baby
*It is Markus’s and he is hanging onto it for cash rental
*The surrogate hated M over time and refused to sign the child over
*Parental substance use cased issues
*in M’s twisted narc mind, hiding the child is the way to punish the world for not giving her more, like the Queen’s crown
*in M’s twisted narc mind, she is punishing the baby for existing — all must be sad and cower to crazy MM
*in M’s spoiled preteen mind, babies are gross and boring and annoying, and all other kids are stupid, so....
*M and Markus sold the baby, and H thinks it is being raised by a nanny somewhere and the rental kids fool him easily
*i don’t believe H has any say in anything, so, this is not about his desire to “protect” or hide the Archie doll
*child raised secretly by a friend of the Messica variety, but less known to us, to foil BRF attempts to retrieve him, and keep his mess away from her white sofa, and make sure H cannot bond with him
I am sure there are other theories I have missed.
But that’s probably enough to help us understand what sort of issues we are witnessing when we see our favorite duchess lecturing us, propelling Harry, bent double laughing, holding “Archie” like a stranger, or curling her hands into claws at wedding receptions while exhibiting a vampire mouth grimace.
'Allow me to share the Narcissist’s perspective on the topic of love, written by John Howell:'
A Narcissist’s Love Letter
When I say I’m in love with you, I mean I love the way I feel when I’m with you. I love myself through you. I love seeing myself through your eyes. I love seeing myself through my eyes imagining how I look through your eyes. I love having someone new to tell my stories to, to express my opinions, and to share my profound theories and beliefs about the important things in life. I love hearing myself say these things as I imagine how they sound to you, and how enthralled with me I imagine you are.
When I say I’m in love with you, I love having someone beautiful to wear, like a new outfit. I love the way you feel on me. I love the way I feel about me when you are with me.
When I say I’m in love with you, I love not being alone. I love not being that tree falling in the forest. I love having a full-time, personal audience.
When I say I’m in love with you I mean I love being your mystery, your riddle, being what keeps you up at night, your obsession. I love being your altar, your sacrament, your icon, your miracle. I love being your answer. I love being the object of your sacrifice. I love being your pain.
When I say I’m in love with you, I mean I’m in love with being your sun, monopolizing your orbit, being your gravity, keeping you drawn back to me no matter how hard you try to jump or fly, keeping you down. Keeping you mine.
When I say I’m in love with you, I mean I’m in love with breathing your air, sucking your blood, eating your dreams. I’m in love with being your drug, your dagger, your suicide note.
When I say I’m in love with you, I mean I love the story I can tell to my next lover, about my ex-lover, about how beautiful things were, how intense, how storybook, what a couple we were, and how you gradually, inexplicably, painfully, bit by bit, disappeared
That is at once beautifully written, terrifying, and scarily accurate (for those of us who have dealt with a narcissist). Thank you for posting it. I intend to share it with a friend who is trying to sort herself out after recently escaping a narcissist. I think it will help her.
Thank you . I really hope the letter helps your friend.I was overwhelmed reading the words.
@AnT These words were chilling ...
' I’m in love with being your drug, your dagger, your suicide note.'
Grip to Drip? (terrifying for anyone..)
Agree with all that Rebecca English article seems to be pretty significant, & that the RF seems to really want to distance their brand from the Harkles. I also agree with those who are underwhelmed by the Harkles' latest initiatives, although I did see that the Harkle podcast is supposedly at #11 on Spotify, which is at least respectable.
https://chartable.com/charts/spotify/united-states-of-america-top-podcasts.
Some of that may be interest in hearing 'Archie's' voice, but unless they plan on utilizing him regularly in some interesting way, that won't be enough to build up listener numbers. 'Archie' doesn't even have to really exist to become a podcast participant, as we all know, but they would have to make him seem appealing.
I know that other Nutties will be outraged by this, but I actually agree with the UK 'royal expert' who said that the Harkles don't need the Royal Family for their brand. They are now household names all over the world. They are 'Harry & Meghan.' Many members of generation Z probably can't find Britain on a map, much less know anything about the British royal family. So, they have name recognition, but what do they do with it? The 'real' royal family are like a high end niche brand, which is prized for its exclusiveness, but that's not the Harkles. They're a Walmart mass brand, which is where the real $$$ is.
The Harkles are not unlike the Kardashians in that they have no talent for anything other than self promotion. Like the Kardashians, they're not very attractive, (but will spend a fortune to make themselves look better), they're not interesting. They can't sing, dance, act or write, but they know how to keep themselves in the public eye, & hype their supposed success with smoke & mirrors. The Ks had their long-running reality show to keep them in the spotlight, & they seem to have parlayed their fame into a huge fortune. This is the Harkles' sweet spot. If the Ks can do it, why can't Hegs & Megs? I'm beginning to wonder if that's what the Harkles hold over the RF, the threat that they'll cheapen the brand of the 'real' royals with their constant attention seeking antics, reducing the Windsors to the level of the Kardashians. If HM & Charles don't continue to pay up, Grip & Drip will drag them down with them.
When the Harkle engagement was announced, without knowing much about Megs, I thought that if the marriage failed, she could at least launch some sort of lifestyle brand, a la Martha Stewart, or B.Smith. There were articles on her blog, which seemed bland & unobjectionable, so why couldn't Megs do something on travel, food, style, etc.? After the 'Archie' mystery drew me to blogs like this one, I've learned so much about both Megs, the royal family, public relations, brand building, advertising, etc. The one thing about Megs that sticks out is that she has terrible taste. Martha Stewart has or had a genius for the boomer consumer zeitgeist. She knew exactly what boomers want to buy, & she worked very hard to find it for them & market it to them. Megs doesn't have the taste or work ethic to build a consumer brand. Others may disagree with me, but apart from a little British designed handbag she carried early in her royal rollout (& which was probably suggested by a palace aide), I haven't seen a thing that she has worn, or shown as furnishings, that I would want to buy, ever, even if someone gave it to me free. A lifestyle brand seems beyond her, but pics of a scantily clad Megs in the Daily Mail might at least get her the kind of income the Kardashians & Paris Hilton seem to manage. Perhaps this is what the Royal family fear? No lurid secrets, but association with, horror of horrors, VULGARITY. LOL.
and how you gradually, inexplicably, painfully, bit by bit, disappeared
----------------
What an interesting post. I will be sharing with my friend.
That's exactly what happened to me, eventually it seemed like there wasn't any 'me' left. The narc completely merged his circle into and over mine. And when he finally erased me, he ditched me.
And that's what mm has done to H. Erased him. As soon as she feels like he's of no more use to her, she'll ditch him. As soon as his name and title no longer open doors, no longer get her the deals she wouldn't get otherwise.
I think you might be right to some degree, that they no longer need the Royal Family for their brand. Everyone knows who they are. The losers who are trying to Royal while in the USA.
Although once people see that they can't deliver, they may have to go back to using the Royal Family as a means of opening doors that wouldn't otherwise open.
But even that window is closing. It has a short life. Once they have a reputation of not delivering anything worthwhile, even the Royal connection isn't going to help them.
Meghan and Harry have nothing to offer. Boring, not intellectual, not interesting, no insights, no humor, entitled, extremely full of themselves. Did I mention boring?
The Royals are Rolls Royces and Cadillacs. The Harkles are Yugots on a used car lot.
That poem gave me shivers. If that is even remotely true of a narcs emotional state, I want to weep. All of you here that escaped from such ghouls are to be congratulated and feted as heroes. What a horror.
Thank you for sharing that.
@Neutral Observer
since the opening day podcast stats had the Sussexes below the singing whale sleep cast, I suspect the Douche and Douchess are simply buying listening streams.
https://granitegrok.com/blog/2020/12/how-to-improve-your-spotify-statistics
I agree that the RF have suffered far more from their association with the Sussexes than the Sussexes have from their sojourn with the RF. And will continue to do so, even if the Sussexes collapse beneath the weight of their own egoes. The RF has to act and be seen to act. And do it quickly. I am not sure whether there is really a year-end review. But I do know a lot of people have their opinion of the RF pinned to some type of decisive action by tge end of March. They may have to explain this one.
My favorites - Oscar de la Renta black and white bird dress. Trooping of Color pinky/peach Carolina Herrera outfit and hat. Christian Dior’s indigo silk blue dress. Givenchy taupe dress the cover color of mud. Great dress, bu vomit color; Black pants suit with high heels. Oscar de la Renta floral dress at the banana writing charity. Lavender Zoom blouse (I have the same one), yellow sheath dress, her coat at the US cemetery disaster; red gown with Harry’s military event; and one or three more. Her shoes and jewelry are atrocious.
I loathe her hats, her tied at waist coats, the dress that showed her back fat whilst visiting seniors; her mumums; the Oscar de la Renta blue/white dress, with the white tissue on head, the heavy Ederm dress at a Jamaica wedding...
Fascinating post. I agree that this seems like Rebecca English delivered some mail from the Queen to the Harkles and the world there. A very clear: (a) nice to know you, until it wasn’t; (b) so you’re not getting inside these walls or hearts or bank books or tiaras again; and, (c) be very very very careful now, children, because sending this shot across your bow was damned easy, and rather fun.
(I almost feel that, in a scene reminiscent of the Hugh Grant Christmas card moment in Love Actually, the Queen opened a big lovely thick Christmas card from William that signed off with “time to destroy them, Ma’am, and have a happier new year, because if you can’t say it at Christmas, when can you? F**k them. I am after all, your Bill.” And she read it twice and got the look of steel in her gaze and rang her assistant and said, send my statement to that English girl in the dodgy end of Fleet Street! Let rip, eh! Let rip!” And Philip slapped his knee and chortled with glee, “ Well done, cabbage! I lived to see it! Huzzah!”
Also, your point about Martha Stewart is so true. What style does Megs have? Their house “set” is uninteresting and shows no unique ideas or taste. Frogmore was invisible. Her food choices are nothing new. Her grubby yachting hat, and loose soiled shoes, wrinkled clothes....
Which brings me to the fact that I am not sure I think the Harkles can muster up the star power of the Kardashians.
They are not young enough now, they are certainly not “sexy”, are much too secretive and so unwilling to show their foibles (except by pure accident and they are not fun). They are not extending reach toward headline-worthy disrupters in music or sports, they haven’t the money to blow for lavish travel, or parties, or over the top choices for lifestyle fans (uh, oat milk latte hour, anyone)...they can’t afford splash cars.
No, they are grim and boring. The Kardashians were loud, stupid, shameless for laughs and endless shame-walk clicks. And comparing unseen silent Doria and invisible uninteresting infant in a soiled diaper or too-small onesie — versus bold Kris and the already stylish little North with her glam pink butterfly dream bedroom and handbags...
Then, Kylie’s cosmetics, Kendall’s modeling, the new younger Ks taking up the franchise....all the fights and bad hook-ups, the almost drag queen makeovers,....heavy emphasis on love messes....they cleverly acted out hugely during their era without blinking, all to carve a niche and rake in cash from those who found in them an exhilarating change from everyday life.
Kardashians fighting and getting bikini drunk and slap fighting on an Adriatic yacht vacation vs another hour of sour Harry whining from his sofa that his mum died decades ago, and daddy was mean...? Very different fandoms, I think.
The Kardashians have nothing to worry about. The grim, worshipful sadsacks who absorb the Harkles teachings from cemetery walks to gelled zoom lenses ...I don’t think the Harkle fans will be spending enough rubles from their Ukrainian bot farms on oat lattes to challenge the Kardashian fortune or fame or “reality royalty” level. Yapping from a sofa or tramping down a sidewalk is not intriguing. They are sliding into the gray dusk if their last little “we are woke and depressed” niche.
I could be proven wrong, but right now, that’s how I see it.
@YankeeWally, Yes, now that you remind me, some of the stuff she's worn has been ok, but she kills its appeal with bad tailoring, or just picking something unbecoming to her. She seems to wear anything that someone will pay her to wear, without having any innate style of her own, unlike Diana, Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy, or Jackie O, or Iris Apfel, for heaven's sake. She looks like a walking Matisse! I could never get away with the stuff she wears, but I love seeing her wear it, & you'll always notice her.
Agreed — Megs has absolutely no idea how hard Oprah worked to create that empire! She was an absolute original. I knew someone who worked at her studios in Chicago and said the intense hard work Oprah did and expected from her loyal team was staggering. Some loved her, sone did not, but no one disputed her genius and sheer effort. She, Oprah, is the truly whip smart original. Plus she showed a natural persona, or developed a persona, that people loved and were hungry for. The world knew her name.
Megs and Harry could never hope to do anything even near this orbit. I am not a diehard Oprah fan, there are those questionable picks and moments. But I respect her work, and love that she did all that, put out a solid magazine for years, was smart enough to market via those covers, and developed a book club that changed more people back into readers and discussers of thought at that time, with some lasting effect. Her power in publishing too was enormous then (a friends brother was a young NYC editor in awe of her ability to pick a winner).
Megs’ odd smug hostility, tacky holiday card and derivative nature alone show she lacks the coding to ever be an Oprah. If Oprah has been trying to scout a sort of figurehead successor, she needs to keep looking.
Blind Items Revealed #3
December 24, 2020
Want to have a tour of the underground "recording studio" the permanent A+ lister used to molest kids? Well, if you belong to this private club, you will soon have a chance. They are also going to make the bedroom where he molested children into a suite where members can stay.
Ron Burkle/Soho House/Michael Jackson/Neverland Ranch
I. imagine it's like finding & reading a psychopaths diary . . then it slowly dawning that you know the person ..
Just because Meghan has attention doesn’t mean she can sell much. I think the Grenfell cookbook numbers prove this. There’s a big difference between advertising, which is what Meghan is playing around in, and marketing. To be able to actual sell sustainably (instead of all this one shot stuff) she needs a brand to market. Her brand is abysmal, which is why they have realigned with PR around how they are on the good side of the Royals. They DO actually need the Royal cache to move sales and better market themselves. Harry and Meghan destroyed their own brand being horrible people towards the country and Queen they hailed from and we have the internet, everyone knows. Plus, they don’t really have the name recognition you’d expect so far (in America). It’s still a sideshow they are trying to parlay into hard sales.
I mean, if they had any good ideas they wouldn’t have an ‘idea submission form’ on their new website. This is where they are at.
Happy New Year to all!
"Stars turning 40 this year".....with a picture of Grip! LOLOLOL
Thoughts?
and how you gradually, inexplicably, painfully, bit by bit, disappeared
This is the worst part- after 20 years (my entire adult life) I feel like I don't even know who I am, what I actually like, what my opinions are on things. I'm trying to get to know myself again.
Being able to recognise what a narc has done/is doing to you is the first, and biggest, step, I reckon. Cling to the belief that there's nothing wrong with your perception of reality, despite what a gas-lighter tries to do.
It didn't take long for my ex to get me into a state where I felt I had to cling on to my sanity, as if I were slipping over a cliff edge and grasping at the flimsiest bits of vegetation - as he stamped on my fingers.
I didn't want to admit I'd made a terrible mistake but in the end I had to - and left him to stew in his own juice. That was almost 40 years ago and I was able to find the truly loving man I've been with for the last 30 years.
Mind you, it wasn't until 2 or 3 years ago that I really found out about narcs and how they work, having encountered a few more since. I know the warning signs now!
Many other Nutties have had similar experiences.
So do I.
I can't see them agreeing to what I'd insist on, were I HM; `Go away and never, ever, darken my door again!'
@Wild Boar battlemaid
Thank you for your responses
I hesitated to post the copy of that.narc letter I found
I was aware of how so many posters (including myself) here have been badly hurt by relationships & contact with narcissistic individuals
and unfortunately still are maybe
I am truely very sorry if the words phrases in the letter opened up old wounds .
I had at first hoped that MM would be more recognisable in the letter .
Then after posting worried about other posters .
I was however reassured by posters who mwntioned that the letter could help people they know .
I really do hope so .
I also hope that everyone who has suffered like @Ziggy I believe will find their peace and find themselves again .That is my wish for all
That all posters who have shared their harrowing experiences here about the effect a narcissist and their behaviour have endured that hopefully the mire that is read & shared the more awareness there is finally stops the worst effects of the narcissist by as
@Wild-Boar battle maid says it it so well.
'Being able to recognise what a narc has done/is doing to you is the first, and biggest, step, I reckon. Cling to the belief that there's nothing wrong with your perception of reality'
@AnT, We seem to be on the same page on many fronts. LOL. The Kardashians are authentic, whatever we may think about them.
________________
I don't know in what context you are referring, but there is NOTHING authentic about the Kardashians. Every messy relationship and interaction is entirely contrived, and don't even get me started on their looks...
The latest in the Sussex saga (following on from 'the Queen has spoken, through the DM, not her usual goto media outlet but one that both Meghan and Harry are suing', and 'here comes Samantha's book to ruffle the feathers of baby sister') seems to be Meghan-planted PR about BP feeling uncomfortable about Meghan's trial and what it may reveal about 'royal operations'. Personally, I think the only person who is going to come out of the trial looking bad is Meghan but she wants to create the false narrative that the BRF are afraid. Perhaps to create a reason for her to 'sacrifice herself' and throw in the towel?
The story is all over the tabloids, but this is from The Mirror:
"A trial would be traumatic for Meghan and Harry, it will expose palace operations, members of staff would be dragged into it on the witness stands ..." a senior royal source told the newspaper.
"It would be deeply uncomfortable for the institution."
The trial was supposed to take place in January but following representation from Meghan's legal team, it will be postponed till the autumn.
I think MM’s narc lobe thinks she is the world’s queen; but I think the rest of her knows she is nothing, a big zero, a failed Z lister who had to yacht for money without her captive prince. She just hopes that we don’t know, and that her sugars won’t figure it out. Once Netflix and Pontify figure it out, it’s over.
@Neutral Observer,
What I think is that the Kardashians are balls of plastic-wrapped, plastic-filled trash whose Intelligent but sociopathic mother found a way to to carve them up and exploit them ruthlessly as largely uneducated moneymakers while pimping them out for press and to produce the next generation of cash cows, while founding a “church” to shelter their cash haul — but they seem to quite boldly live their self-absorbed, circus act lives for the amusement of others as a public celebration of, and education in, Californian narcissism and OTT materialism. If that to you is authenticity, then, yes, we are on the same page.
Catherine has been named the UK’s top fashion influencer of 2020.
“Queen of chic! Kate Middleton beats Holly Willoughby and Meghan Markle.....”
Cue press release insanity from the house of Montecito in 3, 2, 1....
Stellar line ^^^^ from a new Telegraph article (“How America has changed Prince Harry”) about the duo, as found on the Murky Meg Twitter comments.
They are just wannabe celebrities here. Dime a dozen , especially on west coast. I believe them both to be mentally impaired as well. They make worst choices ever
Sure they will make some money but not enough to sustain their flamboyant lifestyle. What are they even earning now? Not for a minute do I believe Netflix quote. Podcast makes nothing, another thing that won't last. Free coffee? They are a joke to anyone that pays attention and to everyone else a non-issue
Happy New Year!
Samantha's tweets are currently visible to all. :)
https://twitter.com/TheMarkleSammy/with_replies
Yes — five thumbs up!
I was pondering the ludicrous bit of treacle she put out with the Harkle Christmas card, where she said her family (including 'Archie'), had made a donation (a chintzy one) to some charity 'for all of you,' (her legions of imaginary fans). She surely knows she pays for all of those bots & clicks. This woman has employed paid pr for most of her adult life. A journalist friend of one of my kids did a long story on click farms in the Philippines almost 10 years ago. Are her imaginary fans real to her in her deluded state, or is she just laughing at all of us? That's as mysterious to me as 'Archie' is.
Elsbeth 1847 - My sister-in-law has a friend who worked for Martha Stewart. NOBODY works harder than her.
In 1983 I knew Wendy the very hard working Alpha (in a good, honest broker and nice way) woman at the restaurant called 7th Inn in Boston. She said relaxed and laid back (as she smoked a Marlboro cigarette) she was going for the summer to work on an herb farm in Connecticut. This was how she described Martha Stewarts place.
Can you believe how immune people used to be to liquor and ciggies and now they all drop like flies with Covid or alleged as Covid.
Meghan has admitted she doesn’t take what happens online personally (true or false who knows). I think she only cares about attention. She thinks on a long enough timeline people will buy whatever she tells them. This is a truly manipulative person (see court case for hard evidence) that feels she has all the time and possibly money to *Markle the next suspects in her ideal story of unending fame and adoration. I would call this mentally ill. Where she comes from (Hollywood) she’s attempting the Gold Standard of 1990s entertainment value: be popular and the money flows.
I kind of know what you mean about the Kardashians (and the only way I know about them is because they are everywhere). They never tried to sell themselves as anything other than materialistic merching folks famous for being famous and shameless in invading their own privacy. I am not sure about authenticity though because I do not think Kim is stupid nor Kanye without artistic talent. I have never followed them carefully though and perhaps Kim did not claim to be stupid ever and I am simply conflating shallow materialism with stupidity.
Meghan is all an act and Harry is her puppet, so he is not being authentic either. How can someone 'sell' kindness and compassion and action when they do not include those values/traits in how they live their own life? Meghan is even not authentic in the 'global style icon' image she tried to 'sell' - so many times her tailoring was sloppy, her outfits were ridiculous, and she seemed to equate the price of an item with style (not with her accessories though where she went cheap and lots of it).
I agree with your assessment of their success chances. Unless Megs can talk Harry into riding into space with Elon Musk, they will fade into the ranks of hundreds of other “remember them” wannabes.
@gfbcpa,
I worked with a talented man who also did work for GQ. One day, Martha got into the elevator car with him. He made small chat with her, but he was so overwhelmed by her star power and work reputation, he began trembling, then shaking, so he quickly got out alone on a random floor and promptly fainted. (He would quickly add he had been crash dieting before a trip to Barbados, so I will add that note for him.)
@NeutralObserver,
Honestly, though I think she is a narcissist and certainly seems massively unhinged, I also think she is 100% a classic mean girl, a hateful cruel sort of person. So I believe, in that vein, she is mostly laughing at us, at the royals, at Hollywood, at Royal reporters, at succubi like Omid and Ship, and even at the few human sugars. I also think, though, that her Achilles heel is the way she reacts to William and Kate; they can somehow emotionally unravel her and anger her simply by being who they naturally are in the jobs they have. She knows they are smart enough to see through her — so I don’t think she laughs at them. I think she throws things and screams, hence the attacks. I think she fears three people: Markus, Messica and Doria,
Excellent points. Oh, and I also agree, I don’t think Kim is stupid, or that Kanye is untalented. I do think they are working the angles with Kris.
They screwed up and she misunderstood that she didn’t actually need to promote herself as apart of the BRF, and Harry’s wife to continue her ‘brand’ come up. Those were just facts that gave her social credit. If she wasn’t so blatantly using them she’d be able to stand on her own and keep a solid slow roll with her own initiatives, while profiting on a public ‘Prince Harry’ profile.
*ARCHIE 'LEADING ENID BLYTON LIFE' IN CALIFORNIA *
THEY may have stepped down as senior members of the Royal Family in search of a more private life - but that hasn't stopped Meghan Markle and Prince Harry from releasing their annual Christmas card.
The couple shared a sweet illustration of themselves posing in the garden of their Montecito mansion with 19-month-old son Archie.
Picture Credit: Reuters
Analysing the Sussexes' latest card, body language expert Judi James claims the couple have made a conscious effort to protect their privacy while also presenting an idealised version of their new life in California.
She told Fabulous: "This digitalised picture seems to glorify the Enid Blyton-style childhoods of vintage storybooks, suggesting a very besotted-looking Harry and Meghan are set on creating a look of idyllic, rustic intimacy rather than posing up the garden in their multi-million dollar mansion.
"There is a suggestion from the pose that Meghan wants to contain and protect her precious family unit. Harry sits inside the tiny playhouse here, holding his face close to Archie’s and grinning at his son, who he holds with both hands
*Edid Blyton lifestyle* ie picture perfect idyllic childhood! Really !
More MM PR
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/13595076/meghan-markle-prince-harry-bombshell-book-samantha-markle/
As far as Meghan, she’s 40 (?), and attempting some of the same tactics because the approach is over a decade old now and what she knows, but beyond that there’s no real ‘driving force’ behind her antics in the same way that Kris and that family had.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/13595076/meghan-markle-prince-harry-bombshell-book-samantha-markle/
TODAY, 10:29
MEGHAN PRIVACY TRIAL COULD BE 'TRAUMATIC' FOR ROYALS
Coming face to face with her estranged dad in court could be "traumatic" for both Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, Royal sources have warned.
The couple are suing Associated Newspapers claiming a breach of privacy, after the Mail on Sunday published extracts from a letter Meghan sent her dad Thomas, 76, in August 2018.
“A trial would be traumatic for Meghan and Harry, it will expose Palace operations, members of staff would be dragged into it on the witness stands," a source told The Sunday Times.
"It would be deeply uncomfortable for the Royal Family
Meghan Markle's sister Samantha, 56, will release tell-all book in US next week
The bombshell memoir will be titled 'The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister Part 1'
Promises to expose 'hidden truths as a royal fairy plummets from the tea towels'
By MONICA GREEP FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 06:19 EST, 3 January 2021 | UPDATED: 06:45 EST, 3 January 2021
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9108121/Meghan-Markles-half-sister-Samantha-finally-release-bombshell-memoir.html
Almost 4K comments
****** The bomb is dropping. MM is going to wish she paid off Sammy and invited her to the wedding
LOOK for more Harckle heat and Harkle adjacent (everyone is going to get burned) heat in the New Year. The heat which has only just begun.
ARCHIES UNCONVENTIONAL GIFT
MOST kids will wake up on Christmas meorning to piles of presents – but not little Archie.
According to insiders, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle chose not to get their son any gifts this year, instead making a kind-hearted gesture in his
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/13595076/meghan-markle-prince-harry-bombshell-book-samantha-markle/
* This statement I think somewhat contradicts the 'Enid Blyton lifestyle 'Archie 'is reportedly living !
In my opinion it sounds more like
Louisa M Alcott Little Women
The March children's lifestyle
I recall the introduction by Jo March
'Christmas won't be Christmas without any toys' '
I never thought of it that way, but what you say makes complete sense.
Meghan did not relate at all to the 'Harry brand', and Harry has become her sidekick puppet by giving up all that he was and had (although I think Meghan manipulated him so much that he ended up not knowing who he really is). So, she has lost the prestige of being Harry's wife and he has been so devalued and his sidekick role makes everything she does look ridiculous.
Harry could have used his brand for fundraising and great projects for his causes - Invictus Games, AIDS orphans on Africa, conservation, the WellChild organization and so on, but only as brand Harry and not sidekick to Meghan Harry.
Meghan could have used the fame she had gained by capturing Harry to merch the lifestyle brand she used to peddle on the Tig (all the other stuff was grandiosity and building a CV to capture a prince). The authentic Meghan thinks shoes, holidays, drinking wine, eating at restaurants, getting selfies with famous people and so on are fabulous and she could authentically sell all of that.
I am with you — tiny kids can be encouraged to think of others while also being given gifts to stimulate their creativity or bring joy.
Exactly how did the Grasping Bunt deny herself anything the last few years? So who there a fit over a tiara, bought $100,000 dresses, draped herself in cheap jewelry, flew in private jets, took holidays in ultra expensive retreats? Who had to live in an energy-sucking mega mansion with piles of security guards she treated as fast food servants...who couldn’t cope with the “difficulty” of finding avocados around London Per one story because she is that ignorant, and is paying twelve people to do her PR?
Wasn’t she herself raised as a pampered spoiled brat?
Didn’t someone here point out the little Wendy house actually came, pre-used, with the property by the way?
And didn’t they make a big deal about supposedly sending gifts to the Cambridge kids? So, we are to believe they did that, but nothing for superior invisible Archie?
This is a cheap, mentally ill narcissist who is already putting her child (if you believe he exists; I do not) into the devaluation stage along with her husband. I think she is angry that she even invented the Archie story and this is one more way to brush him aside and spend all the dimes on herself. Mommy needs a new $100k Zoom wardrobe, and Mommy and Daddy were too lazy and burnt by their hobbies to shop, too.
So, to summarize today: Archie doesn’t need friends, cousins, fresh air, sunlight, visits to tree lots or toys. He must be home toddling around cleaning their bathrooms for fun.
What horrid, sick people.
I submit that one does not buy gifts for a child they ‘have’ in name only. Now they are selling “Archie” as a brand, but we have not seen a living child for nearly 8 months. No clue who little blond man was in the Duck Rabbit video—which some sharp eyed viewers say exudes a “social services supervised visitation” vibe. That might account for the underdressed baby with the full diaper and Meg’s sweaty, frazzled sloppy appearance. She didn’t have full control and maybe they were only permitted to see him for a half hour and that at short notice.
I don’t know why any loving custodial parent would pimp out her baby for photos ops with the Harkles, so perhaps there is a DNA tie of some kind. Maybe the birth mother was obliged to let the DNA donors have contact until his first birthday, which would explain why he hasn’t been seen since. The arty representation of a 3 year old with PG’s head on it is zero proof that a child like that lives with the SHAMS. If they can rent a mansion with a preexisting playhouse, they can stage all kinds of tableaux there. Or rent a playhouse and/or people to assemble it. Then they can say they are so kind and charitable that they will give presents to needy kids. All while ostensibly living in a mansion with 16 bathrooms and having a chauffeur driven Escalade and 12 PR staff. A toddler would be thrilled with a $15 toy car. Meg would deny her kid a Christmas present but requires $50,000 worth of designer clothing to do Zoom chats from a rented couch?
Nothing these two do has any sense attached. But it makes me howl with laughter that Sméagol and Handbag STILL think they are selling the compassionate humanitarian bulls—-.
`Champagne for my real friends and real pain for my sham friends!'
Somehow, I feel it can be applied to the H&Ms.
Kayleigh Roberts
Marie Claire Sun, 3 January 2021, 4:47 pm GMT
--------
Let's hope this proves to be true.
I don't understand what press about Archificial not receiving gifts does except make the pair look exceptionally stupid.
They only ever put out press that makes one question how a child in this state is not horrifically abused and neglected.
Why would anyone want that idea associated with themselves is beyond me, unless he just doesn't exist.
Wonder which idiot came up with that story? Better to have claimed they didn't buy presents for each other. Still would have been stupid (& quite unbelievable) but it wouldn't have had a big hint of child cruelty thrown in. Not that an 18-month old would know the difference IMO. Every day is Christmas at that age (assuming a good home.) But if they are willing to claim they did this to him at 18 months, I hate to think of the future.
None of the Archie mystery makes any sense for any purpose unless it's a trigger for Harry and devaluing Archie constantly while exploiting him, is her supply.
Screwed up family no matter how you slice it.
@AnT, yes, I think you're spot on re: Megs' feelings toward Kate & William. Just the sight of them must make her ultra aware of her own deficiencies, as well as her husband's. (If I were Markle, I'd kill for Kate's legs, hell, I'd kill for them anyway, LOL.) Kate & William seem to be just about as grounded & comfortable in their own skin as any royal could ever be, & their children are all adorable. No one has any doubts that the kids are real, & it just took a few photos, & three birth announcements signed by doctors. That's all it took. No hide & seek with images, no oddly worded announcements, no typed birth certificates. Kate's baby bumps seemed to expand realistically. Why was it so hard for Megs?
I think the most recent blurb about the upcoming trial being so dreaded by the palace is another Hail Mary from Megs. If palace aides have to testify, so be it, is probably the thinking. I think the RF is washing its hands of involvement with this. They know it's a mistake to antagonize the British press. Judging by their treatment of Wallis & Edward, the RF is pretty thorough about ghosting. They make Megs look like an amateur. I kind of feel they are done with these two. Again, like 'Archie,' this didn't have to be such a s**t show for the Harkles. Why did they work so hard to antagonize the palace? How on earth did Megs enhance her end game by treating everyone so poorly?
I totally agree with you.....it Is Megs and her team panicking about the court case, not the royals. I think they are done with the Harkles, and will feel nothing as she is ground into dust by the MoS legal team and her own lies and histrionics.
Megs put this story out to attempt to make them, this powerful family with massive legal protection and harvest baskets of information on her, worried? It shows how little she learned during her months in the U.K., and ultimately, how stupid she is. No one in the BRF spilled their cocktail when they read this.