Did you catch Max Foster's excellent video segment about the Sussexes on CNN?
As @Royal Reporter Richard Palmer of the Daily Express wrote, "It's a break with much US television reporting on the subject."
It certainly was.
It used clips from the notorious Oprah interview beside basic fact-checking on Meghan's statements that she didn't know much about the Royal Family before her marriage, comparing them with quotes from her childhood friends about how she was fascinated by Princess Diana.
It paralleled Meg's complaint that she wasn't allowed to use her "voice" with video showing her speaking out about a number of issues during her time with the family..
It fact-checked her assertion that she married Prince Harry three days before their televised wedding, by showing the actual marriage certificate.
Did you see it?
Max Foster showed the actual 1917 letters patent from King George V to explain why Archie, a great-grandson of the monarch, was not automatically named a prince - something Meghan had attributed to racism.
Finally, he contradicted Meghan's assertion that she wasn't given much training assistance on arrival by showing several of the palace team members who had been involved with helping her, including the Queen's confidante and dresser, Angela Kelly.
The piece quoted a previous palace staffer as saying, "We bent over backwards for her."
Really, it was a great piece. Did you see it?
Because CNN took it down within 12 hours of its initial broadcast, at least in Europe.
EDIT: Miggy found a way to access the video, which is "unlisted" on the CNN YouTube site and unavailable via the CNN homepage. Here is is.
You can't handle the truth
It was probably no more than a coincidence that the video was removed within a few hours of the time US President Biden stumbled through his first live press conference.
Whatever you think of his politics, the poor man appeared to be overwhelmed and even frightened. He was given a "cheat sheet" of potential answers and even photos of the journalists he was supposed to call on.
And yet the reviews of his performance from establishment journalists such as CNN were rhapsodic.
"Americans who want a competent, coherent, focused President should feel reassured," wrote CNN analyst Frida Ghitis.
Both the delusional Biden reviews and the sudden disappearance of the Max Foster video suggest that someone at CNN doesn't think ordinary viewers can handle the truth - or even distinguish the truth from obvious falsehoods.
Comments
Thanks for the posting the article from LSA. Though I disagree with the author's take on Charles vis-vis Diana.
Dark Triad has been mentioned here before. But this time I felt compelled to understand it better. It almost sent a shiver down my spine. For all his faults, I now pity the circumstances he endures with Meghan. If we as spectators and commentators feel so weighed down by the highs and lows, the unpredictability of news about Harry and Meghan, a weaker person can only survive living it by offering complete compliance.
They say millennials have been raised to be narcissists with an amped up focus on doing, receiving and being judged for only what they like. Responsibility, honesty and duty are traps of the old. Makes me wonder if Meghan's theatre has the best audience she could hope for since many may see her as inspirational.
It might strike the cynical as Californian word salad akin to Aniston’s declaration, upon joining Vital Proteins, that: “Collagen is the glue that holds everything together. I’ve always been an advocate for nourishing your wellness from within.”
Yet as Alexi Robichaux, who co-founded BetterUp in 2013, points out, Harry does bring a unique perspective. “He comes from a very different background,” to other executives, he says, adding: “He’s synonymous with this approach of mental fitness and really investing in yourself. It was not a hard internal sale. He will obviously have the whole organisation sprinting to help him.”
Robichaux confirmed Harry was joining the company’s leadership team as an “officer of the corporation”, which suggests it is a paid role, although public relations expert Mark Borkowski thinks it “highly likely” he has been offered equity in the firm, which values itself at $1.73 billion.
“This previously unknown start-up has now got instant recognition,” he says. “I always said that if Harry and Meghan wanted to generate income, they should look to Silicon Valley. Getting eyeballs onto the company like this, with all the competition, is the hardest job in PR – but now the whole world is talking about it. That’s the effect signing up someone like Harry can have.
“If he’s got points in this firm and it goes gangbusters, he could make some serious money.” Borkowski cites the example of shares in Cellular Goods, the synthetic cannabis firm backed by Beckham, shooting up by 310 per cent after it launched on the London Stock Exchange in February following news of the star footballer’s investment.
“This is all about the ongoing narrative, now,” adds Borkowski, referencing the Oprah Winfrey interview in which the Sussexes raised serious concerns about the Royal family’s handling of racism and mental health issues.
“The impact of generating more connections to his brand is an ongoing struggle for him. But by taking that narrative, which is embedded with that interview along with mental health issues, then he can certainly have a credible corporate platform.”
Yet considering some of the discrepancies that have surfaced since the interview aired in the US on March 7, can Harry really be considered a reliable voice when it comes to combating what he has described as the “avalanche of misinformation”?
Critics have been at pains to point out that his appointment to the Aspen Institute’s new Commission on Information Disorder, a six-month project that will examine the “modern-day crisis of faith in key institutions” appears somewhat at odds with the Sussexes’ repeated insistence that they do not look at newspapers, magazines or social media.
Equally awkward is the fact that the Prince will be sitting alongside Kathryn Murdoch, who is married to James Murdoch, the former chairman of News of the World publisher News International, who resigned from his father Rupert Murdoch’s media empire last year.
As with Harry’s decision to appear on CBS, despite the US network once sparking outrage in 2004 for showing a “distasteful” photo of his mother after her fatal Parisian car crash, the move suggests the exiled Murdochs are now considered reformed characters thanks to their new found work on democracy reform and climate change.
As Harry himself put it, information disorder is an issue that demands “a multi-stakeholder response from advocacy voices” including, apparently, the wife of a man who was found by a Parliamentary report in 2012 to have shown “wilful ignorance of the extent of phone hacking” and being “guilty of an astonishing lack of curiosity” over the illegal practice that Harry, William and Kate were all subjected to along with Prince Charles, the Duchess of Cornwall and a string of palace aides.
It is not thought Harry is being paid for his work with the think tank, founded in 1949, which will look at everything from last year’s US election to vaccine safety and marginalised communities.
It is his listing on the Aspen Institute’s website, however, which perhaps provides the biggest clue to the sixth-in-line to the throne’s direction of travel as he settles into life in the US.
Referenced by his full title, Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, the soon to be father-of-two is described as a “humanitarian, military veteran, mental wellness advocate and environmentalist.”
Despite his blood-born Royal status, Shalit believes this repositioning is actually intended to put him on a par with his high-achieving wife. For unlike her husband, who left school with two A-levels before training at Sandhurst Military Academy, it is Meghan – a Northwestern University graduate with a successful acting career under her belt – who is arguably the more employable of the two, on paper at least. As an American, the pregnant mother-of-one also doesn’t carry the burden of Harry’s complicated visa and tax arrangements, amid confusion over whether he is living and working in the US as a “diplomat” or as a person with so-called “special talents”.
“I’ve met Meghan on a number of occasions and she is a hugely astute woman, very bright, incredibly impressive,” says Shalit.
“So for Harry to keep up with his wife, he’s got to find his own name and identity and this is the start. He doesn’t need celebrity. When you’re Royal, you’re the biggest celebrity in the world. But what this does is allow Harry to have relevance.”
When it comes to making an impact, Royal relevance is clearly going to be the jewel in the crown of Harry’s very LA relaunch.
Firstly Jonathan Shalit is past his prime as far as eras go. His heyday was 00s. His star client was Charlotte Church at her prime. I think he either discovered her or took her on soon after she broke out and propeloed her to global fame.
Secondly, he specialises in b-list celebrities. Entertainers who litter the TV screen in gameshows, TV and radio presenting, musival theatre and reality TV.
He is very nakedly trying to get Meghan as a client ever since Megxit. He frequently gives quotes to articles praising her and claiming she can make billions, is a global superstar and so forth.
He fails to understand that Jeghan is onpy interested in Hollywood. She'd never consider representation outside Hollywood even though her greatest successes in life have come from outside Hollywood.
It always seemed to me that she was going out of her way deliberately to do the wrong thing and mess up her duties, except when it suited her to win over her target audience. I now see her as engineering criticism for her bad behaviour so she could use it as ammunition in allegations that she had been badly treated.
Talk about the Games People Play... probably `Kick Me' & `See What You Made me Do', all saved up for a glorious round of `Now I've Got you, You Son Of a B*tch'.
See:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Games_People_Play_(book)
Thanks for posting the article.
---------------------------------------------------------
Despite his blood-born Royal status, Shalit believes this repositioning is actually intended to put him on a par with his high-achieving wife. For unlike her husband, who left school with two A-levels before training at Sandhurst Military Academy, it is Meghan – a Northwestern University graduate with a successful acting career under her belt – who is arguably the more employable of the two, on paper at least. As an American, the pregnant mother-of-one also doesn’t carry the burden of Harry’s complicated visa and tax arrangements, amid confusion over whether he is living and working in the US as a “diplomat” or as a person with so-called “special talents”.
“I’ve met Meghan on a number of occasions and she is a hugely astute woman, very bright, incredibly impressive,” says Shalit.
“So for Harry to keep up with his wife, he’s got to find his own name and identity and this is the start. He doesn’t need celebrity. When you’re Royal, you’re the biggest celebrity in the world. But what this does is allow Harry to have relevance.”
----------------------------------------------------
I read that and felt my jaw-clenching. Seems like the PR world - the person interviewed here is credited as a showbiz agent - is going to keep up this narrative, gaslight every sane person with basic sense. I would hate to be the one working out this fight in the Royal family.
Thanks for the perspective on Shalit. I was wondering if he was angling for a job.
Speaking of the alliterate one. Get this. That kissing ass of the state's A+ lister, has paid off. The state's A+ lister promised that if the ailing, aging senator retires that he will replace her specifically with a black woman. Guess who is on the short list. Yeah.
Meghan Markle/Gavin Newsom/Dianne Feinstein
somehow i don't think this will ever happen. She may think it will, but it wont
Regarding Meghan Markle getting a senate seat...
Even if that did happen wouldn't it be only temporary until an election was held? I thought a senator had to be elected by the people and could only be appointed if a temporary replacement is needed.
Regardless, we need the RF to take Markle OUT of action via info drops, charges, removal of royal privileges and rebuttals for the claims made against the monarchy NOW.
Any UK press or palace staff reading here - Would you PLEASE speed up the exposure of this woman's scams, lies and mental derangement.
Does anyone know if failure by the RF to reveal and/or covering up Markle's potential crimes could result in legal action against the monarchy if she is given a position in our government without this disclosure?
I agree.
No way Newsom will appoint Meghan as a US Senator. I do believe he's agreed to appoint a Black woman though. He was criticized for filling Harris's seat with a Latino man, after all. But at least Padilla had served on the LA City Council (including a term as its president), on the Senate of the State of California, and as California's Secretary of State.
Meghan got married.
@JennS, she could be given a temporary appointment to fill out the rest of the person who's stepping down's term. To stay in the seat, she would have to win the next scheduled election.
....................
Yes, this is what I said in my post but I don't want her to get a seat even on a temp basis. And it always seems to be an upside-down world with these two - they get what they want despite not earning or deserving it. Most recent example - Harry getting an Einstein work visa!!! How ludicrous is that!
I wonder how her British royal family title affects her political career??🤣
She should just settle into the instagram influencer plan.
SUNDAY, MARCH 28, 2021
Blind Items Revealed #2
March 21, 2021
Speaking of the alliterate one. Get this. That kissing ass of the state's A+ lister, has paid off. The state's A+ lister promised that if the ailing, aging senator retires that he will replace her specifically with a black woman. Guess who is on the short list. Yeah.
Meghan Markle/Gavin Newsom/Dianne Feinstein
*************
Have any other nutties seen this and one other (to follow in a second comment) of two CDAN blind item reveals today?
If there is any truth to this blind (Enty gets it right on occasion) about Megalomaniac being on the short list to replace Dianne Feinstein, the 87 year-old (she will be 88 in June) US Senator from California if she decides to retire prior to the end of her current six-year term when it ends in January 2025, then there is one more reason to recall California Governor Gavin Newsom from office.
To fill non-Americans in, in most states, depending on the state’s constitution, if a sitting US Senator or US Congress Representative dies or resigns from office before their current term ends, the governor of the state is allowed by the state constitution to name a resident of their state to serve out the remainder of the vacated term in the US Senate or the US House of Representatives.
Senator Feinstein is currently the oldest member of the Senate. Due to a series of recent missteps, her health and ability to carry out the duties of her office have been questioned. At her age, she might not last until January 2025 when her term expires.
Perhaps Gov. Newsom is just trying to humor Meghan, but if the current effort to remove him from office fails, I shudder to think that someone like Meghan could waltz into a powerful seat in the US Congress, which could serve as a springboard to the US Presidency if she actually has aspirations to that office.
The only blessing that would likely result if she was named to serve out the remainder of Feinstein’s term is that the monarch would likely remove all of Meghan’s titles.
I can’t imagine the Crown or the British government allowing an American senior royal to keep the titles if Meghan accepted an appointment to a high US government office. The oath of office swearing allegiance to the United States above all other nations would likely cause the titles to be removed.
She'd have to give up all her titles, permanently.
Never happen.
We are in the middle of trying to investigate this....read up for the last few posts.
I'd like to know what background checks would be required for a position in the senate. I tried looking this info up and if I'm reading it correctly a temp spot doesn't need any check.
This is what I'm reading on security checks but I'm not sure if I have the correct doc...
5 CFR Part 731, Suitability - Govinfo.govhttps://www.govinfo.gov › content › pkg › pdfPDF
PART 731—SUITABILITY ... AUTHORITY: 5 U.S.C. 1302, 3301, 7301; E.O. ... 189; 5. CFR, parts 1, 2 and 5. SOURCE: 73 FR 20154, Apr. 15, 2008, unless.
My gut tells me this very well may happen - at least as a temp position. And then she will have her foot in the door. She will ride into this spot with identity politics with a sprinkling of royal magic for those impressed with that, and by some sort of exchange of favors. Even if she has to give up her title, Harry will still have his and Newsom may see some sort of advantage.
There are only 3 requirements to be a senator - 35 years old, be a citizen for at least 19 years and be a resident of the state you want the seat in.
But what is a typical background career of a US senate?
She doesn't seem qualified at all to me never mind the mental derangement and the possible criminal activity.
However if her background has not been revealed and was covered up by the RF then she may end up another Arnold Schwarzenegger.
I am not sure she'd have to give up her titles to serve in the Senate. The Constitution says people serving in the federal government cannot accept titles without Congressional approval but it is silent in the matter of previously awarded titles.
Further, there is nothing in US law that precludes dual citizens from serving in the Senate (or even as president) although 1. A candidate may decide to give up foreign citizenship for political reasons (ex: Senator Ted Cruz when he ran for president) and 2. The foreign country may decide to revoke its citizenship. (I know M is not a dual citizen but dual citizenship could be thought to pose allegiance issues.)
Meghan and Harry were given carte blanche to hurl a barrage of vile accusations without having to worry they’d be challenged even a tiny bit by Oprah. Predictably, the lack of any challenge from Winfrey confirmed a certain type of tacit imprimatur from her on the Sussex’s charges in the public eye.
As soon as the charges were uttered, an immediate and automatic cloud of guilt was cast over the monarchy and the Royal Family, which put them at a huge disadvantage in the court of public opinion.
Say what you want about Meghan, she is a cunning, expert manipulator — at least in the short term. I can only hope the palace will outdo Meghan in the long term.
Just as she exploits Harry’s vulnerabilities, Meghan has exploited a naive, feckless monarchy, that in spite of obvious warning signs, has been caught flat-footed as Meghan landed highly damaging if not potentially crippling blows to the monarchy, the UK, its citizens and non-minorities in general, all in the brief span of just two hours.
The only likely exception is William, who along with Kate, seemed to have sussed Meghan’s true agenda and her destructive potential well before the engagement.
My guess is any concerns or warnings about Meghan from William prior to the engagement, when the relationship could have been derailed by the Queen telling Harry to date Meghan for a few years, were likely ignored.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/meet-prince-julian-princess-sofia-153017261.html
Another baby for the Swedish Royal Family!!
From a Skippy repost of the-cat-with-an-emerald-tiara’s repost of DM comments...from a few days ago.
The key DM comment is as follows:
“I looked up Archewell as you can with non-profits. Here is what it said: ‘This organization cannot be evaluated by our Encompass Rating methodology because it files form 990-EZ as allowed by the IRS for charities with less than $200,000 annual revenue.’ Looks like they aren’t doing squat.”
So....where is the “Elephants” v/o $3 million from Disney?
And did all the royal foundation cash go to Travalyst?
And how are they paying all their dozen or so marketing staffers....from which pot where? Charles? What?
To know what kind of people would be cheering such a development, head over to youhavebeenmarkled.tumblr.com. There are posts of pictures Sussex Squad members have tweeted. One is a Meghan Harry shrine with Diana (doll figurines), another is a collage of pictures on the wall. Tells you all you need to know about the SS mental age and capacity.
What does the second blind actually say?
Do you have a link to it?
I feel like this is all a bad dream - it just doesn't seem possible.
I am so very angry with the RF right now.
I read today that the Sussexes had an agreement with Oprah to do that interview in exchange for a real estate deal! Who knows what that could mean??
Re Markle getting Fienstein’s seat based on zero effort (“Meghan got married” as @jdubya said so perfectly above)... a favor from the governor.
So she would attain this Senate seat without a vote,, and from there run for President. Similar to Kamala, who climbed up vis a favored relationship with a powerful man (though obviously Kamala has a law degree and work experience), and who may now soon be the US president not via direct votes (she barely got 1% of the vote in the primary and dropped out), but because of favors, details, powerful men.
Can it happen? Sure. Why do the Harkles keep failing upward with millions in their pockets and no tax or visa issues?
Backers want it thus way, in my opinion.
Where did you go?
Did you see the political blinds?
Unless the RF intervenes and exposes her I believe she will get this position in the senate.
Everything is lined up in her favor.
Does anyone know who the other black contenders could possibly be?
First, Meghan does not have dual citizenship. She never bothered to follow through on the application process to obtain British citizenship. Why bother jumping through all those bureaucratic hoops and wait five years for the entire process? She never planned to stay there in the first place?
Yes, you are right about the titles here on the American side of the issue. I’m thinking that on the British side of this issue, Senator Meghan, Duchess of Sussex would go over like a lead balloon with the monarchy, the entire political structure of the UK and the citizens of the UK. I highly doubt they would look kindly on Meghan being allowed to be a senior royal even if she is a non-workjng royal, AND hold a major political office in her home country on this side of the pond.
More than likely, her allegiance would cone into question from both countries, but the issue of Meghan holding political office and remaining a royal of any type would not be acceptable to anyone in the UK.
It doesn’t matter if US law says it’s ok to accept or hold a title from another country. The Brits are the ones who would hold the key to the decision as to if THEY will allow her to keep any of her titles.
If this lunatic gets the seat, we know the Harkles have powerful backers.
Perhaps the real estate deal is Oprah giving them a house on her land as we have suspected, or Oprah pays the mortgage and upkeep of Mudslide for a year.....or Oprah got her piece of flesh for housing help at Tyler Perry’s too.
Oprah is passé, her online magazine is a 90s retread bore, she is a billionaire searching for a relevant hand puppet and has picked Markle as her political/presidential run stand-in?
I know what you mean, so I thought about it.
I think Oprah has too many issues like Weinstein in her closet, and perhaps it is just easier to wind Megs up for the appearances, videos, travel, work while Oprah relaxes in Montecito and just lifts the phone as needed...no crowds, no danger, no being “on” all the time. She becomes The Godfather. The way Obama famously said he would love to have a third term by sitting comfortably “in his basement” talking to the frontman “through an earpiece”.
This woman ALWAYS gets what she wants and the titles are something that can easily be taken care of if she wants the politics and I think she does.
I think she would trade in that title - if necessary - for a seat on the senate.
Being called Senator Markle will be just as good for her as Duchess of Sussex.
What's bothering me is that it appears as I stated above that there is NO background or security check for a temp position even if it's for 4 years as this appears to be.
And she will have access and the low morals to rack up a corrupt bank full of money.
I am like JennS, just so spooked that we might end up with this psychopathic harpy as a Senator.
I do think Oprah is behind this.
Why else would she slam the monarchy and allow lies to be told? There has to be something more in it for her.
This Feinstein spot is the perfect way to get MM started.
Oprah will have a senator in her pocket.
And it does seem like the vast majority of our elected officials these days always end up way richer in office than they ever were going in. Sickening.
I truly believe there is a very good chance this will happen.
She wins every time. Look at what she did to the monarchy.
Remember how she won that lawsuit when we all thought it would go to trial.
And the monarchy moves like molasses - they allowed themselves and their country to be maligned and have permitted a psychotic grenade to be launched into our government.
I never said M has dual citizenship -- I specifically said she did not. I mentioned dual citizenship merely as a possible instance of divided loyalty not probihited for US Senators.
Of course, removing the titles is up to the UK. BUT most posts about Meghan and the Senate didn't seem to be concerned with the UK "removing" the titles but rather with Meghan having to give them up to serve in the Senate. I don't think she'd have to. I do think she wouldn't use them but I don't think from the US side she'd have to "give them up."
I also think there's an almost zero chance she'll be appointed. There are plenty of Black (and biracial) politically active women with experience in elective office who could be appointed assuming the need arises. Appointing a woman who has never been elected to anything except prom queen won't fly. Even in California.
Please may I have the links to the blinds - I find CDAN's site annoying to maneuver in.
Is there anyone willing to look into the security info I posted? I wasn't able to confirm if it was the right type that applied to senators or not and there seemed to be all kinds of exceptions. I would think there would be extensive background checks done for a seat in the Senate but I'm not certain if the exclusion for a temp spot is correct or not as I don't know if I have the right docs.
We never thought Oprah would set up an interview to malign the monarchy with falsehoods and then prevent the press from reporting the truth.
If MM is to become Oprah's puppet she just may get the appointment. CDAN has a good record with blinds in CA/Hollywood. And what about Arnold - he got the governorship.
If there is a real estate deal, that could be costly to them. In kind deal (real estate or something else) could be scrutinized by the IRS as a potential taxable event (1099 misc income?). If it were found to be a taxable, then they would have to come up with the cash to cover the taxes and the accountants and lawyers when it would have been better just to have taken the money and paid the taxes up front. This is under bartering and the IRS. It's not like they are participating in a babysitting cooperative where everyone takes turns and no cash is exchanged.
What is the difference between the therapy company JH joined and Talkspace? TS has been around since 2012. I don't know what other competition there is out there but I look at this BU, wonder what percentage of the market they need to be profitable and can they realistically compete with TS? meaning are there enough therapists out there willing to work for one of these and enough clients for the therapists to continue working like this? And, considering that most company health plans seem to limit therapy for 10 sessions or so, is there an impact of choosing to continue therapy once it is now out of pocket instead of insurance pocket?
"Is there anyone willing to look into the security info I posted? I wasn't able to confirm if it was the right type that applied to senators or not and there seemed to be all kinds of exceptions. I would think there would be extensive background checks done for a seat in the Senate but I'm not certain if the exclusion for a temp spot is correct or not as I don't know if I have the right docs."
I don't know how to do what you want done. But so far as I know, there is no government power that checks to see if a person can be allowed to run/serve in the Senate if the Constitutional requirements of age, citizenship, and residency have been met.
There is "security clearance" when serving. And a party probably would not back a candidate if it was known that person couldn't get the usual security clearance. That doesn't mean though the person couldn't run and serve if he/she won.
-----
@JennS wrote:
"We never thought Oprah would set up an interview to malign the monarchy with falsehoods and then prevent the press from reporting the truth.
If MM is to become Oprah's puppet she just may get the appointment. CDAN has a good record with blinds in CA/Hollywood. And what about Arnold - he got the governorship."
I'm not sure how Arnold being governor is relevant. But I think alot of people thought Oprah's piece would be a hit piece. We may have been surprised by some of the specific content, but I don't think the tone was at all surprising.
The difference here is the Black community wants a credible Black woman appointed. Even if Oprah says that's Meghan, I don't think the California Black political community will buy that. But we'll see.
Many on here are upset with the Queen, but she can't take a chance on being shut down like DT. She is a wise woman and knows whose side the big tech guys are on and it ain't the "racist" Monarchy. What I find the most incredulous is Harry's behavior. I wonder if Charles and William knew the extent of what appears to be his rage and jealousy towards them?
Also, a bit off topic, are MM and Biden wearing the same contacts?
@Ian’s Girl,
Her ascent scares me as well. She has the backing of CBS, Oprah and Gayle (who if they continue to support MM will smash any critics of her and suppress any questions. CNN has squashed the Max Foster report on Megs, so they may be fond too. We see what happened to Piers, and other journalists don’t seem to question anything about Meghan’s back story even if they remark on the royal interview.
I assume she will be accepted as pitched without question, and that the bizarre two-hour special was a freebie from Oprah to throw Megs’ panama hat in the ring. Will she give up her royal titles to be a Senator? Sure. She probably knows they’ll be taken away soon anyway.
I keep circling back to the amazing luck of Meghan Markle.
Try these. To get to the page where these are listed, please copy and paste this URL:
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/?m=1
OR....for the reveal about Meghan being on the short list for the US Senate position if Feinstein retires early, please copy and paste this URL:
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2021/03/blind-items-revealed-2_28.html?m=1
And.... for the one about Oprah giving the Harkles a free pass:
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2021/03/blind-items-revealed-1_28.html?m=1
Megs is fIr game now, and the only digging and stories are on blogs like this and Tumblr and LSA. I have no hope that the press,
or reporters now afraid of cancel culture and losing their jobs (nice pre-set up for whatever is apparently coming), will speak about this woman/WOC/young mother/abuse victim/philanthropist/humanitarian/feminist/saint, when billionaire Oprah is signing the checks.
I hope I am wrong.
The other two URLs take you to each individual reveal.
Meghan is adjacent in the news when she decides to cry victim. There are many other people that will re-enter the PR game with real work soon. Plus, she’s supposedly pregnant and having a kid.
That said, what are a list of new things Meghan can concoct to stay in the news? I saw a hilarious allegation on Quora that she will try to attempt a faux kidnapping. All of her recent PR has been pretty lame, que up the ‘Meghan for President, Meghan for senator’.... we need more controversy!
good point about titles. Question is, is "wokeness" worth offending the UK, this time in a fairly official (US Senate) capacity as opposed to Grip and Drip offending them personally?
Would the US insult one of its closest allies over the vanity of this woman?
Besides marrying Drip has she done any thing, absolutely any thing, that would qualify her for office?
I agree with above that Newsome is probably just humoring her.
While Harris had some experience, certainly more than Obama did in terms of actual work done in office, she was mainly chosen ( in my opinion ) because she cotuld bring the SV tech money in.
I don't see Nutmeg bringing so much as a crumb to this particular table. Even if she were in fact a beloved member of HM's family, and had been Princess Perfect for years, the royalty thing is more about the rarefied air and mystique that hangs about them rather than anything concrete in terms of value added for the state of California, if that makes sense. They have celebrities out the wazoo already. A British Prince and Princess would certainly be lovely accessories to have in one's company, and the publicity would be great for a while, but California just doesn't need any more Beautiful People who have nothing other than their celebrity to contribute.
Diana in her heyday would have been a catch, because she undoubtedly had contacts all over the world, and she had 1000 times the combined star power of Ginge and Cringe.
I agree that Nutmeg herself is probably planting all these blinds, but JennS is absolutely right; the pair of them keep getting away with an appalling amount of bullcrap, and I fully admit to being increasingly creeped out by what is going on.
I believe there is a background security check on people who work in the government. Upon googling various combos of terms trying to locate what that would look like I found these docs:
5 CFR Part 731, Suitability - Govinfo.govhttps://www.govinfo.gov › content › pkg › pdfPDF
PART 731—SUITABILITY ... AUTHORITY: 5 U.S.C. 1302, 3301, 7301; E.O. ... 189; 5. CFR, parts 1, 2 and 5. SOURCE: 73 FR 20154, Apr. 15, 2008, unless.
I don't understand what you are saying about a person still being able to run without security clearance.
I think you must get clearance before running...wouldn't that make sense?
I wanted to find out if the background check might disqualify her.🤣
However, I wasn't sure if I had the right doc, or whether I was correct that it wouldn't apply to a temp position (although if this one is 4 years it may require one after all).
I was asking for others to take a look and help me interpret the doc. And if it's not the right one, then let's find the correct one and see what background she might have to pass.
I think it's the secret service and the FBI that does the check.
They can't possibly allow anyone to step in without checking them out. They could be criminals or agents working for another country etc. Or psychopaths whose sole goal is to line her pockets!🤣
I mentioned Arnold because he was a Hollywood person who crossed to politics...as did Reagan and Sonny Bono.
Normally I would agree with you re a more qualified black person getting the position. But we are already strangled by being forced to accept a POC and a woman instead of the best person for the job. She has the current narrative as a victim of the evil monarchy who had the strength to tear herself away from the terrible suffering she underwent in the palaces. Add to that Oprah's backing. I think she may just get the job.
I found this online:
According to Sterling, a company that deems itself "the global leader in background and identity services", writes in an article on background checks in politics:
However, there is not a specified background screening program for politicians. During every election cycle, candidates from all parties and walks of life have been caught hiding embarrassing information from the voters.
Here is the link to their article:https://www.sterlingcheck.com/blog/2017/01/background-checks-in-politics/
I agree that Nutmeg herself is probably planting all these blinds, but JennS is absolutely right; the pair of them keep getting away with an appalling amount of bullcrap, and I fully admit to being increasingly creeped out by what is going on.
......................
And the appalling amount of bullcrap is just too much to overlook!
Of course it doesn't make sense that she should end up in our government but look at how our world is turned upside down right now with nothing making any sense, people afraid to speak out and lies being told without even a sense of unease. Perhaps O has decided she wants to punish the RF for the slave trade and colonization - she wants reparation and for her it just might be seeing them destroyed. Taking the daughter-in-law that they supposedly mistreated and making her into a political puppet could be her goal.
Thank you - the sterling link was the first one I came up with but for some reason could not get into it. I'll try your link.
I can't believe though that there is nothing. What if someone was working for another country or foreign/terror organization.
When I worked for a large aerospace company, I had to get clearance, and they interviewed my friends, family, etc. They ask all kinds of questions like if you ever seemed to suddenly come in to large amounts of money for no observable reason, or if you seem to live above your means, etc. One of my friends said that the only thing she could think of that was unusual about my spending habits is that I always bought fresh flowers for the house, even if there was no money left for food!
Also questions about where you may have traveled, odd or foreign people you might have known or spoken about, drug or alcohol issues, stuff like that. And something along the lines of are you aware of anything they could be blackmailed over (And this was 20 years ago, it may have all changed!)
It may be just that simple; there have been many shady connections to Presidents that one wold think would have surfaced during a background check, but who really knows what goes on behind the scenes?!
"I don't understand what you are saying about a person still being able to run without security clearance.I think you must get clearance before running...wouldn't that make sense?"
It doesn't make sense to me. Sorry. In a democratic society (or rather a representative democracy) I don't think there is a government agency that checks the backgrounds of people before they are "allowed" to run for office. Or there shouldn't be. The State Board of Elections in each state plays a role on who gets on the ballot. But not in the way you are describing. Opponents can always try to bring up iffy background issues. Parties can refuse support. But ultimately the choice belongs to the voters. Security clearance after an election is a different issue. While lack of clearance could hamper effectiveness, I don't believe there is a mechanism to remove a duly elected senator unless a recall election is possible.
@JennS also wrote:
"I mentioned Arnold because he was a Hollywood person who crossed to politics...as did Reagan and Sonny Bono."
There's a big difference between the Senate and a governorship.
Reagan didn't come out of nowhere anyway. He served as SAG president (elected) and that's a big deal. He also had a conservative following for years before running for governor. Arnold was active in the Republican party (state and national) for almost a decade before being elected governor. Plus, people from various walks of life have been elected as governors. Not so likely the Senate.
I also don't think Oprah is a big king-maker. People often say Obama wouldn't have been elected in 2008 except for Oprah. I disagree. He'd been elected as a state senator in Illinois. Then elected (not appointed) as a US senator. He hadn't served long in the US senate but in the primaries he was running against HRC who many think was not a likeable candidate. And John Edwards who even before his cheating with Rielle was known, was thought to be slimy. And his Republican opponent in 08 was McCain! I'm sure BO was glad for O's help but I think he'd have won without it. She may open doors to $$$ (Oz, Phil, and other yucky characters) but politics? Only if she chooses more carefully than M IMO. Of course, Newsom did marry Kimberly Guilfoyle!
@jessica,
Megs is fIr game now, and the only digging and stories are on blogs like this and Tumblr and LSA.
....................
AnT
What do you mean by fir game - did you mean fair game? But that means open season...may be Piers Morgan would be willing to do a true investigative piece on her.
I assume they'd need Top Secret ( or whatever they call it now) and Q; Q I think goes through the DoE, because of the nuclear stuff.
Am I the only one that thinks it doesn't make sense to do a background check after the person has been appointed or elected?
A check might reveal suspect use of funds in the Harkle foundation and the scam she pulled on the RF marrying in and taking a great deal of money to set her up as a working member of the family all while planning to leave. And if the surrogate story is true - this is a big deal - it would mean she tried to pass off a child who was not off the body as one deserving to be in the line of succession. And she paraded in front of the entire world for the longest pregnancy eva cupping and preening like a mad woman. Today I found a tweet from Samantha saying MM was an escort - if this is the truth would that or any of the other possible allegations still mean she would be an appropriate candidate for a senator's seat?
"Teachers and police are checked - I can't believe someone who will represent us in government would not be checked!"
Their access to information may be restricted per after-election security clearance level. Not their ability to hold office. Of course, a governor charged with appointing someone can use background information to make his/her choice. And I'm sure all do. Plus lots of info is public record for those who bother to look.
But let's say senators should be checked before being allowed to run. Who should do the checking? That would be a pretty powerful position...some might even say it would be like an absolute monarchy!
And what should be checked? College behavior? High school? Cheating on spouses? Sexual behavior? Whether they inhaled? Should the same standards apply in say, California, as Alabama?
The details get kind of tricky. That's why restriction and control of information (for those voters who want to be informed) is scary.
"JennS, Kamala traded sex for political power. That would make her a prostitute.
One could say that.
And didn't Joe Biden admit he'd plagiarized in a law school paper (5 pages) but told the faculty it was "an accident?" Didn't that derail an earlier run for president? He was also accused of plagiarizing speeches (but I'm not sure he admitted that.)
I meant checks for major criminal issues not affairs or inhaling Doria's favorite substance!🤣
Although hopefully they would check for substance abuse.
"Nutties
I meant checks for major criminal issues not affairs or inhaling Doria's favorite substance!
Although hopefully they would check for substance abuse."
Criminal records are public already. Those will be found by the opposition party if not by the press. And if the issue is the government using "suspected" criminal issues to bar a person from running for office, that would seem to raise legitimate issues of due process. Finally, "substance abuse" is a vague term IMO. Who decides if abuse has taken place in the absence of criminal charges for use? (e.g., DWI, public intoxication, drunk and disorderly) Does substance abuse mean getting plastered to the point of unconsciousness once in a person's lifetime? Twice? Or does it mean using substances and then engaging in reckless behavior? Does it mean a pattern? How many instances over how long a period of time equal a pattern? Is there a "statute of limitations?" Even psychologists don't agree on those issues.
I get your concern. I really do. But I don't think having an office of "the government" decide who can run for election could ever work, especially the way things are today, And it would seem inconsistent with our general approach to government and elective office in the US.
`Today I found a tweet from Samantha saying MM was an escort - if this is the truth would that or any of the other possible allegations still mean she would be an appropriate candidate for a senator's seat...'
Are we forgetting that being an `escort' would allow her to accumulate all manner of embarrassing details with a view to blackmail?
Thanks for all your help. I was basically thinking out loud while trying to find a solution and didn't intend for my words to be taken so literally.
Yes criminal activity would leave a record but what about a case such as what we have here where a foreign government may have scrubbed records of old crimes, and current ones have been covered up?
Something very odd is going on here.
Think about how the RF doesn't answer to their own laws and how much of her behavior was covered up in the UK including serious workplace harassment, potentially hiding a surrogacy, siphoning funds etc.
I've said here many times over the last year or so that I thought she was heading for politics and was told how she would never survive all the digging up of her dirt here in the US. Now here we are - and I'm being told there may be no way to dig up that dirt after all.
Perhaps she's pulling our strings and released the blinds herself, but I'd like to look into some possible ways to fight back and make some preemptive moves just incase her delusions are really that grand.
"@SwampWomen wrote:
"JennS, Kamala traded sex for political power. That would make her a prostitute.
One could say that.
And didn't Joe Biden admit he'd plagiarized in a law school paper (5 pages) but told the faculty it was "an accident?" Didn't that derail an earlier run for president? He was also accused of plagiarizing speeches (but I'm not sure he admitted that.)"
A previous presidential bid was derailed when it was revealed that he'd plagiarised a keynote speech from Neil Kinnock, the 1980s leader of the Labour party in the UK.
And an even earlier presidential bid wad derailed after he boasted of being in the top percentile of his law school only for it to be revealed that he was actually in the bottom percentile.
Over and above the expected gaffes of a 47yr career in the same job, Biden is verifiably corrupt to a disturbing degree, has never met a war he didn't like and publicly support, was mentored by a grand wizzard of the KKK and was making derogatory racial remarks throughout his campaign last year.
All of that said, it was pretty obvious by december 2019 that he was sunsetting. The swiftness of his detrioration in the 6mths between July 2019 when he announced his candidacy and christmas 2019 was alarming.
The steps taken by the DNC to ensure he won the nomination and eventually the presidency should alarm all Americans regardless of their personal politics.
And what is happening right now is elder abuse.
I thought he'd last at least a year before they swop him out for Kamala as per the original plan, but he looks really bad and is barely holding it together for the stylised, super rehearsed, super choreographed public appearances and remarks he makes.
I'll be surprised if he makes it to the end of the summer and that's being very generous.
"I mentioned Arnold because he was a Hollywood person who crossed to politics...as did Reagan and Sonny Bono."
Arnold didn't come out of nowhere. Ditto Reagan and Bono.
They were all involved in local politics and built up a network of political connections that got them elected.
Arnold went as far as marrying a Kennedy when that still meant something in politics even if he represented the opposite party.
Unlike meghan who thinks she can simply charm one big poombah and that will be enough to get her in.
She has no political capital to trade for anyone to elect her into a seat.
And she's already failed a public service role that was extremely cushy and didn't rely on voters to have influence. She severed that connection which might have been an attractive trade for the right political party.
Not to mention her handling of her public life which included betraying the big power in that public life. No party will appoint her seeing how easily she betrayed her handlers.
She'll keep putting out PR implying she's on the verge of getying into political life, but doing voting PSAs is the closest she'll get to real political power.
More seriously: in those days there was no I.D. check as to the students taking the exams and I do not doubt that certain people (perhaps struck off lawyers) would make a nice little earner out of sitting the exam for some wealthy but under-studied student. These days students believe (so my once significant other, an academic, tells me) that if they have paid for the course they should be passed. I once phoned the professional body having come across a lawyer whom I was certain was not the person he claimed to be and thus not a qualified lawyer. Not wanting to defame this person (for I might have been mistaken and worse I had no substantive proof and did not wish to put my self in the firing line for slander) I merely hinted massively but the representative whose pay grade was not that high failed to grasp that they ought to look into matters immediately. What more could I do. Shortly thereafter my suspect fled the country a warrant being issued for his arrest.
The elite regard the likes of us as pond-life and we are not privy in their power struggles to their machinations. The RF seem helpless as against Markle. Even so, presidents come and presidents go; that after all is the system as arranged by America's founding fathers. The power even of the American President is very much constrained - more so I think than that of the British Prime Minister. Biden may be a liar but so too was Blair as was his one time opponent Ian Duncan Smith. Jeremy Thorpe was lucky not to have been convicted of attempted murder, Jonathan Aitken was imprisoned for perjury caught pimping for the arabs and Profumo lied to parliament and then there was John Stonehouse the paymaster general who faked his own death. These are people whom in your life you would avoid like the plague. We plebs just have to bugger-on.
Re. Joe not lasting more than a few months in office
Over the weekend I read a piece on the vice president’s home on the grounds of the Naval Observatory, a bucolic spot about 2 1/2 miles from the White House. It has been undergoing extensive renovations allegedly since the Pences left— so extensive that the residence needed to be vacant. For the last 2+ months Kamala and Doug have been staying at Blair House, the President’s guest house for foreign dignitaries and other visitors to Washington. It is fully staffed at all times and appointed like a luxury hotel, but the article said that Kamala was getting very tired of living out of suitcases and anxious to get into her own home. Evidently she’s an avid and prolific cook and can’t do that without her own kitchen. Her love of cooking and general domesticity was really laid out so very like another woman of color we know who is always going on about her skills in the kitchen with lemon olive oil cakes and banana breads and so forth.
Well these repairs to the vice presidential mansion might be legit, there also now arises a distinct possibility that the VP couple is being kept on standby across the street from 1600 Penna Ave for another reason. Perhaps they will not be going to the Naval Observatory grounds after all, but just moving straight into the White House after another couple of months at most and everyone wants to spare the Aggro of doing two major moves in such a short period. If I were getting used to a new high profile job, I sure wouldn’t mind being waited on hand and foot add a luxury hotel and have other people do the cooking, but that’s me. I’m sure the vice presidents residence comes fully stocked with staff as well, but I just find the fact that it was perfectly fine for the Pences for 4 years but suddenly needs major work done rather suspect.
Something very odd is going on here. Think about how the RF doesn't answer to their own laws and how much of her behavior was covered up in the UK including serious workplace harassment, potentially hiding a surrogacy, siphoning funds etc.
Whoa steady on. This is totally unsubstantiated. You make the U.K. and our royal family sound resoundingly corrupt, however, perfect it most certainly isn’t. What crimes of Megsy’s are there? They are just rumours. The royal family like any powerful family have always had very powerful PR, but covered up crimes, siphoning funds? Unless someone is tried in a court of law there’s no truth in this unless proven otherwise. The work harassment wasn’t covered up, it was still acknowledged by the palace but kept private....it isn’t now.
All countries have institutional flaws. As much as I hate to admit it, I for one won’t be surprised if the Megsy gains even more traction....it just isn’t going away, the current political and social climate is ripe ammunition for her. If Megsy gets a sideways appointment into US politics, it will more than likely indicate she has backers, and thus showing corruption is well and truly alive in America as it is unfortunately so in many other countries as well.
The woke leaning American press has been mud slinging the U.K. for almost three years, Biden’s British hating (woke) office isn’t going to worry about throwing either the British or our royal family under a bus if Megsy gains more traction and/or a political office. Why would they? Both Megsy and Harris are potentially their poster woke women. Regardless of what political side of the fence you sit on, politics is a dirty and corrupt game, to think otherwise is naive.
Both America and Britain have a problem, a nasty thorn in our sides due to institutional fragilities and social changes. We can only lay the blame at gormless Harry for bringing a Trojan Horse with a belly full of dynamite into one of the oldest institutions and countries, and then for the royal family allowing the fuse to be lit. :o(
I, too, read the Kamala domestic goddess piece. I thought it was very strange, but in light of your commentary it makes sense they are trying to ‘soften up’ her image. Didn’t she just have a PR blunder when a reporter asked about her visiting the border crisis and she laughed in response (clearly it wasn’t malicious, but it was stupid).
I think the Dems have a lot of issues with cleaning up rough Kamala. She didn’t get anywhere near the nomination for a reason.
Did Kamala's Thanksgiving rental story come out before or after Meghan's Beverly Hills Thanksgiving rental story? Both were pretty stupid but M's was the dumber one IMO. Cooking spaghetti or making a simple meal is one thing. But the last thing I'd want to do in a short-term "fully furnished" rental is cook a big holiday meal. I suspect even fully furnished luxury rentals lack preferred cooking tools. Plus having to find where all the stuff is stored! Ugh.
She's the only politician i have seen who has such an obvious tell that Immediately signposts when she's about to tell a lie or reveal information that she knows will hurt people.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/jared-and-ivankas-security-clearance-scandal-what-we-know.html
I have two friends in DC; my best friend has a friend and a close family member in DC; another friend, a docent, has a son in DC; a fourth friend worked for CNN until a few years ago and still has close contacts in DC. All in solid gov-related jobs. Independently of each other, without my even thinking to ask, I have been told it’s strange that It appears no one has moved into the VP residence or the WH. Last comment like this occurred two weeks ago, and was a very concerned observation from a Biden-Harris voter. I assumed redecorating or debugging or similar, didn’t think much of it, but your comment today makes me wonder. If indeed Pelosi pushed through the 25th to be able to remove Biden more easily, maybe all moves are off until that happens.
and yes, Megs trying to be relatable on any level is a joke.
"Acquitane informs us that the President of the United States of America cheated by way of plagiarism in his law exams."
Here is video of him admitting plagiarism during his law exams.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yj2ph2LM4N8
And here is the side by side video link of his Neil Kinnock plagiarised speech
Video link below for the side by side comparison
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x9cIkAiVNXI
A longer video summarising the plagiarism and then repeated embellishment of his academic record.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0xX_2zxlrL8
These exposed lies derailed his presidential campaigns of 1988.
Everybody must scarf!
However, with time, it's easy to see that she meant it for Biden.
Kamala was the preferred establishment candidate right from 2019 or whenever she decided to become a Senator, but unfortunately the voters in the primaries with help from Tulsi Gabbard saw right through her and refused to vote for her.
They figured out a different way to get her to the presidency and it should come as no surprise to anyone when they invoke the 25th to get her into the top seat.
"And didn't Joe Biden admit he'd plagiarized in a law school paper (5 pages) but told the faculty it was "an accident?" Didn't that derail an earlier run for president? He was also accused of plagiarizing speeches (but I'm not sure he admitted that.)"
A previous presidential bid was derailed when it was revealed that he'd plagiarised a keynote speech from Neil Kinnock, the 1980s leader of the Labour party in the UK.
And an even earlier presidential bid wad derailed after he boasted of being in the top percentile of his law school only for it to be revealed that he was actually in the bottom percentile.
Over and above the expected gaffes of a 47yr career in the same job, Biden is verifiably corrupt to a disturbing degree, has never met a war he didn't like and publicly support, was mentored by a grand wizzard of the KKK and was making derogatory racial remarks throughout his campaign last year.
All of that said, it was pretty obvious by december 2019 that he was sunsetting. The swiftness of his detrioration in the 6mths between July 2019 when he announced his candidacy and christmas 2019 was alarming.
The steps taken by the DNC to ensure he won the nomination and eventually the presidency should alarm all Americans regardless of their personal politics.
And what is happening right now is elder abuse.
I thought he'd last at least a year before they swop him out for Kamala as per the original plan, but he looks really bad and is barely holding it together for the stylised, super rehearsed, super choreographed public appearances and remarks he makes.thought he'd last at least a year before they swop him out for Kamala as per the original plan, but he looks really bad and is barely holding it together for the stylised, super rehearsed, super choreographed public appearances and remarks he makes.
I'll be surprised if he makes it to the end of the summer"
***
I'm sure there is some merit in this statement (somewhere) but for the most part, it's all speculation...
A, for someone so well versed in UK history you seem to be inundated by the brown stuff in this particular analysis re: US politics. Please. The conspiracy theory route is beneath you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj8Ojd7j7D4
Acquitaine and others including yes, me, have been responding with comments we are writing, trying to relate to that original post. As with everything on this blog, some thoughts involve some speculation and dot connection and references to videos, comments, history and articles.
Trying to brush all of this off by using the all-purpose phrase “conspiracy theory” seems out of place on this blog. Particularly in this thread, and particularly since conspiracy theories cease to be conspiracy theories when proven true, be it discussing a confused-seeming President or the Watergate break-ins or Epstein island shenanigans or an American actress saying she loves a prince and just wants to hit the ground running for the U.K.
For example: The “conspiracy theories” about Boris Johnson’s 4-year relationship with (another American woman coincidentally) Jennifer Arcuri involving financial boons for her business, shared information about meetings on government trips, and an affair seem to be looking true per a soate of tell-all articles appearing in the Mirror over weekend and today as Ms Arcuri spills the beans. Some are calling for an investigation at Number 10 today and demands for investigation of Boris. Those who discussed this in the past in the U.K. may be feeling vindicated.
Sometimes, theories are more than theories, and branding uncomfortable things one doesn’t like as “conspiracy” can seem doe-eyed and coy or archaic, in a world that is in fact not a fairytale garden, but a rough and clawing world where power is the prize and hardcore or uncomfortable things happen. A German scientist friend worked with Eastern Bloc scientists through university contact early in his career. Many were threatened for their science-related “conspiracy theories” as he learned when they finally were able to come to the west.
The grandparents of my German village friends told of the times they were warned in school not to entertain ridicule theories of activities at concentration camps existing a few miles away.
Declaring that speculation is beneath someone, but wrapping the sentiment in the conveniently scary hot-button blanket phrase “conspiracy theory” does not seem to fit this topic thread. And this is a blog based on speculation and discussion of the Harkles’ lives, motives, journey or plans, populated by thoughtful people who are intrigued, trying to parse what they see, and who are willing to investigate and do the research.
We may disagree with one another, to the glee of some, but in the end people are here trying to find answers and share thoughts.
31 March, 2021 ~ The Sussex Review
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2021/03/29/31-march-2021-the-sussex-review/
I have stated many, many times over and over again, I am a centrist. I would rather have someone else as President than Biden, I do not care one bit for Kamala. Therefore because I am in the middle, I can see things that those who are swayed by their party line cannot.
I will state this again once more: I do not appreciate someone insinuating that I show disrespect to my elders by abusing them as was stated by Acquitaine in her lengthy commentary above, concerning individuals like myself who felt the desperate need to vote for Biden.
Let me repeat, I would NOT have allowed my vote to be used if I felt Biden is as demented as everyone here seems to think he is. I read both sides when it comes to news and this theory-that he is demented- is from the right.
My professional opinion on his cognitive abilities stands. The day he is removed from his post as unfit to serve is the day you can put me in the stocks and throw rotten eggs at me. I will smile sheepishly as you do so.
Since you have reminded us about the theme of Nutty's current post, I can state with all assurance, I am in the boundaries of the theme-which I think is a very good way for Nutty to test her target group and to see how her followers are affected by certain subjects and more importantly, **where they stand.
Well, I stand in the middle as is my right as a free American covered by my Constitution. We saw what a disaster the Covid thread was and yet here we are...
One more thing...
My grandparents spoke of the removal from their ancestral lands to the reservations. We were enslaved and experienced genocide as well. So I know something of not allowing our heads to be in the sand. This old Native woman has her ear to the ground, always listening for the sounds of the Iron Horse...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9414297/PIERS-MORGAN-Im-not-racist-neither-Sharon-Osbourne.html
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deez_Nuts_(satirist)
After you win the job of doing background checks and clearance begins. All politicians do not get the same clearance of classified information. Also, NOT all scandals are illegal. Some are just blown out of proportion by media and opposition. As we saw in the Oprah interview, it is easy to insinuate wrong doing even without proof. Some people are just easy to manipulate. According to Meghan, the "racist" conversations were in private with Harry. She wasn't even present. No names were given, nor what was said in context to the conversations. Yet loads of people are attacking the RF. That's politics for ya.
Which is exactly why so many discounted it.
That's what happens when you lose a war. People of Scots, Irish, Russian, Polish, Jewish, well, just about every background knows.
I am swayed by neither right nor left. My view is one of a centrist who takes in both accounts before making a determination. I do not use emotional thinking in my decision making.
Magical thinking= children do this
Emotional thinking= some adults do this
Logical thinking= I do this
Um, I have been thinking a lot about this topic of labels and how often something we don't like or want to make it less appealing is to label it in a way which diminishes it.
One example: calling M a yacht girl. We have seen pictures of her on a yacht and we have heard of people claiming that she was pay for play (even names) but that is a dotted line linkage and not a solid in boldface highlighted line.
Or we define X as blah blah blah which totally disagrees with someone else's definition. If we can pull back, write in conversational tone something about how we believe it is more like this because (cite references) instead of Y. It can help de-escalate some of the more striedent I am right tone which is not proof (fwiw as volume does not equal validity - especially for those of us who have been beaten over the verbal head with by a narc know).
Or calling something a conspiracy theory. It may well be. Or it may be "disinformation". Or it could be nothing but just a coincidence.
Let us try to be aware of where what is a known truth ends and our opinion begins and not confuse the two.
This is a touchy question raised so let's remember this when writing. Be kind in the same way we were all taught to use "the magic words". It is hard sometimes to realize how what isn't being posted is the tone of voice we are using when when writing. Or the body language. That's why it can be easy for someone to get upset by something you wrote.
Rarely has anyone ever written of how their opinion was changed by a rant off the internet.
Thank you for reading from one of the moderators
Maybe Meghan would be an improvement to California government.
I’ve been thinking about this MM political “career” and honestly, I’m not buying it. I remember when the rumor was Oprah was going to run for President back in the day. I think MM planted the story about the senate seat because that’s the only way she could get anyone to consider her in the first place. She wants all the publicity from the rumor but none of the scrutiny from actually running. Plus she’s desperate to remain a relevant talking point.
What @abbyh just said...
@Abby,
Thanks!
As for conspiracy theories - we are all dancing around one with regard to Markle and supporters who could be backers. Anyone reading this blog for the first time would be wow. I have a friend who thought MM was that breath of fresh air and now cant stand her and is even thinking something doesnt smell right with the Oprah side of it. So could Joe be demented and insiders support that for the power yeah that could be too. Theories abound. My friend initially didnt want to think she was wrong about markle, but alas has tossed her cookbook. Things change as we see more.
I have two friends in DC; my best friend has a friend and a close family member in DC; another friend, a docent, has a son in DC; a fourth friend worked for CNN until a few years ago and still has close contacts in DC. All in solid gov-related jobs. Independently of each other, without my even thinking to ask, I have been told it’s strange that It appears no one has moved into the VP residence or the WH. Last comment like this occurred two weeks ago, and was a very concerned observation from a Biden-Harris voter. I assumed redecorating or debugging or similar, didn’t think much of it, but your comment today makes me wonder. If indeed Pelosi pushed through the 25th to be able to remove Biden more easily, maybe all moves are off until that happens.
Wow, this is the first I'm hearing that no one's moved into the White House. ???? Is this solid intel? If the Bidens aren't living in the WH residence, where are they? Do they just prop Joe up in the Oval for random photo shoots (rather like the SHaMs staged Zoom videos in their sterile Montecito living room with the birds nests on the wall and the curated book displays, innit?).
Then I remember that after a huge pre-Inaugural push about the First Dogs, and how Major was going to be the first rescue pup in the White House and blabity blah blah . . the two dogs were packed off back to Deleware in just a couple of weeks after Major allegedly bit a staffer. Imagine the upheaval for the two pets, being moved out of their home to the White House, a giant unfamiliar place packed with strangers, many of them in uniform, being walked by strangers, etc. A young rescue dog already coping with past traumas and his elderly canine brother. Champ's first home was the VP mansion only vacated 5 years ago by the Bidens, but he's now 13 years old. A very old man for a GS, and he deserves some peach and quiet in his last years.
Was moving the dogs to D.C. all for show, and will their master and mistress soon be following them back home to Delaware?
This is a decidedly bizarre situation. Not since William Henry Harrison caught pneumonia at his inauguration and expired a month later has the top job seemed so precarious. Who is calling the shots? Who's got the launch codes? Why does the United States of America now feel like some rickety corrupt tin-pot banana republic dictatorship?
My unease is verging into something a bit stronger.
And I do know how to spell Delaware, but I may have had too much coffee this morning.
Politics is especially personal to me because i come from a political family with several members involved in the politics of UK and USA countries.
If it were appropriate here, i'd give you a blow by blow timeline complete with publicly verifiable references of everything that led me to draw the conclusions in my comment.
I would not post a comment if i couldn't provide proof.
And i stand by Biden elder abuse comment because the difference between Joe Biden circa April 2019 when he announced his presidency and the Joe Biden we see today is night and day.
The man belongs on a porch at home surrounded by his grand kids and family enjoying his old age and that's not because i disagree with any of his policies or even object to his age. Look at Nancy Pelosi. She's 80yrs+ and still spry.
I watched Biden's first speech as President this morning just to make sure. He was on point. He did not have the demented blank stare. Perhaps he is just in need of rest. Ronald Reagan's mental decline was covered up so maybe it's possible, but I don't see it quite yet...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9411617/Kamalas-frustrated-living-suitcases-Blair-House-VPs-mansion-undergoes-renovations.html
@abbyh mentioned being kind to each other. I have seen this blog become kinder. What is so wrong with that? Is this not what we were taught as school children? I don't let the wokeratti and their distorted view of "kindness", especially the hypocrite Meghan Markle, dictate to me their illusions...
For the record, I never watch CNN nor Fox nor any other political show. I read my news from many different sources. I make an effort to stay balanced.
We have all gotten your point - you don't think Biden is as impaired as the rest of us do.
This blog is about the Harkles.
Some come here for the gossip others come because they are trying to do something about the danger the Sussexes may pose to the UK and the US.
I am respectfully asking you to stop clogging the blog with multiple posts about the same tangentially related issue because you seem determined to defend your position on Biden's degree of impairment.
I'm hoping once you get caught up that you will give us your take on the latest CDAN blinds about Markle possibly getting Feinstein's seat in the senate. As I mentioned above I have a bad feeling about this and am very concerned it may happen.
Thinking Lt. O'Hura was right.
What abbyh said...
Yes, that article is all over the Net.
All the outlets appear to be copy-pasting the CNN story verbatim.
(CNN)It has been more than two months since Kamala Harris was sworn in as vice president of the United States, a historic moment for the country, as Harris is the first woman and the first woman of color to hold the second highest office in the land. Yet, Harris -- along with her husband, Georgetown Law professor Douglas Emhoff -- is still, ostensibly, living out of suitcases, unable to move into the private residence reserved for the vice president because it's still undergoing renovations.
It's unclear why the renovations are taking so long, said one administration official, but it's a situation that has left Harris increasingly and understandably bothered, according to several people who spoke to CNN about her situation. "She is getting frustrated," said another administration official, noting with each passing day the desire to move in to her designated house -- a stately, turreted mansion two-and-a-half miles from the White House -- grows more intense.
The second couple continues to live in temporary housing at Blair House, the President's official guest quarters, just across Pennsylvania Avenue from the White House.
The administration has provided no official explanation for the delay, and a spokesperson for Harris did not respond to CNN's request for comment prior to publication.
Since the piece details how very intensely frustrated home cook and domestic diva Harris is getting at 'having to live out of suitcases'--after being sure to remind everyone that she is the first woman of color elected to the office of the Vice-President . . and yet, neither Harris nor any of her spokespeople made themselves available for comment to CNN for this story . . begging the question, how did the writers glean the exact intensity of her frustration with 'her situation'?
Renovations to a Victorian mansion of that size and age are not entirely unexpected, and it's not uncommon either for high-level executives to be temporarily accommodated at very nice hotels after a major relocation move while they await a permanent residence to be either found and/or prepared--though 10 weeks might be pushing the envelope of 'usual' in these situations. There's a new wrinkle here though beyond just an historic old home needing some updates before the new occupants can move in.
If in fact there is a clandestine plan to invoke the 25th Amendment and have Mr Biden removed from office citing incapacity in the near future, and you are the newly-elected VP in the slot to benefit the most from this development, what would be the purpose in squawking 'to friends' about how unhappy, how very frustrated you are to be living out of suitcases and 'barred' from 'your own home'? Does this not simply serve to draw unwanted scrutiny over the unconventional way this Administration is rolling out so far? Why not just a breezy comment--if one was even asked for or required that "Doug and I are looking forward very much to getting into our new home just as soon as some needed maintenance work is taken care of. Meanwhile, the staff at Blair House is taking excellent care of us, and we are focusing so hard on settling into our new roles that we are grateful that everything is being taken care of for us."
Right? Downplays the minor inconvenience of the wait while displaying gratitude for being provided with luxurious temporary accommodation. Somewhere the ghost of John Adams is saying, "Yeah, cry me a river, lady. I had to live my *entire Presidency* in a construction site."
You must have missed the parts where Lt. U'Hura was posting long strings of unhinged nonsense. Either a bot or it was badly in need of antipsychotic meds.
@JennS,
What abbyh said...
Well, bless your heart.
If she truly gets into politics, that's gonna be bad, in so many ways.
And I'm sure that all of us will have plenty to say about that.
However, for now, we seem to have veered off into broader territory, kinda due to the latest post header.
I was a little surprised at the latest header because of where it would lead. Sigh.
I realize scrolling is good, which I have advocated for many times when people tire of conversation about cats, Covid-19, vaccines, etc.
Or maybe taking a break until the topic returns to Mm and H.
Either of which I will do.
OTH, maybe a new post would be good.
My thought is that there are plenty of places to discuss the broader political views one might have.
I look at this blog as a place to get away from that and just have fun speculating about the dastardly duo.
Maybe we could have a new post on the topic of H's new jobs, for which he is remarkably unqualified.
Cheers to all.
Actually you've described several here.
I do miss those who stayed on task
1. Does she plan to cry 'racism!' because she, the nation's first black female VP was kept out of her designated home for weeks and weeks? Like, if she were white, she wouldn't have been kept at a luxurious full-service guesthouse just across the street from her job? Replacing things like boilers at the VP mansion would seem to be rather important.
Or
2. Is this some kind of ploy to hasten the handover of power by reminding people that she isn't getting too comfortable in the VP slot . . not even moving into that house . . for a reason? When even CNN uses words like 'ostensibly' . . that gets me thinking. Is this Harris's announcement to the Bidens that she's going to be a squeaky wheel until she gets what was promised . . the promotion?
All scenarios that make me go . . Hmmm. Presently this mystery is of even greater interest (and certainly of import) than what the Mudslinging Faux Duchess of Montecito is doing.)
Kamala Harris's own hometown CBS affiliate in the Bay Area has this story filed under the headline "VP RESIDENCE RENOVATION MYSTERY".
So even ultra-liberal media outlets in the tank for Harris are using provocative language to throw doubt on this delay being caused from normal run-of-the-mill reno on a mansion built in the 1890s. Stay tuned.
I will only observe that if carefully media-managed whining as a means to getting her way is a purposeful strategy from the Harris camp, it is so very similar to the tactics employed by Herself in Montecito. Two peas in a pod.
I am really and truly not trying to censor anyone on this site but I just don't think it's right to try to shut down politics on this board because you don't agree with what appears to you to be the consensus of the group. I think that's Nutty's place, not ours to limit the scope here. After all, this is her blog, not ours. Let's try to agree to disagree and not take things we can't control too too seriously. Peace out.
This blog moves fast and furious. And moderators are not always standing by and swooping in to comment like we have nothing else to do in our lives.
You must have missed the parts where Lt. U'Hura was posting long strings of unhinged nonsense. Either a bot or it was badly in need of antipsychotic meds.
.......................
**@SwampWoman
I remember that. At the time I thought she might have been inebriated.
Lt Uhura never returned after those strange posts. I really liked her and have been concerned about her since her disappearance.
Another poster said the other day that the Lt. left due to discussions on politics. I don't think it was for that reason and I hope she is ok.
😍
In the DM (I checked and didn't see these descriptions in WBBM posts this morning):
'Prince Harry is 'trying to keep up' with 'very bright' Meghan Markle, a celebrity agent who knows the Duchess has claimed.
On Tuesday, the Duke of Sussex, 36, who is currently living in his $14 million mansion in California, announced his first job in the corporate world by revealing he had taken an executive position at a Silicon Valley start-up that claims to be worth $1.7billion.
Speaking to The Telegraph, Jonathan Shalit said Prince Harry may have taken up the post to put himself on par with Meghan, 39, whom he called 'a hugely astute woman, very bright' and 'incredibly impressive.'
The celebrity agent explained: 'So for Harry to keep up with his wife, he's got to find his own name and identity and this is the start.'
Etc.
---------
Megsy is 'whip smart', we know, but 'hugely astute' and 'incredibly impressive' is a new one. I wonder if he's even met her. And I don't know how Harry can be 'on a par' with wifey when she doesn't really have a proper job, apart from b!tch and moaner-in-chief.
The posted article today was supposed to be about their opinion of what might happen in March 31. Then they fails to state their opinion. They do state everything should go and the Queen looks weak, but does not state why they *think* might happen.
Anyway, I stopped reading the stuff a while ago because it reads like someone yelling at a wall. I get their frustration, but much prefer the nuanced speculation of ‘why’ and ‘how’ and ‘where’ we have here.
Maybe his/her blog is for new readers to the saga.
Plus not a peep from the RF over the ‘miscarriage’ story.
‘How Harry is trying to keep up with *impressive* Meg’ in the DM.
Oh yeah ‘meg’? That’s not what the Silicon Valley cos had to say about giving you a job offer!
She can’t stand it!! Hahahahaha
This blog has been extremely right wing for some time, and it's getting worse. This is exactly what Nutty wants. Look at the threads way back when Nutty was pushing her right wing agenda about the Tawana Brawley case. That's when quite a few people left- because of all of the rabid right-wingers spewing right-wing propaganda here. But we're not supposed to discuss politics. Right Nutty? there's one rule here for people who agree with Nutty, and an entirely different set of rules for people who disagree with her.
I've often wondered if this blog is a plant to push a right-wing agenda, as Nutty will alLow the most inane comments to remain, such as today's post that Biden was educated by the KKK? How absurd is that? Yet it will remain, because that's exactly what Nutty wants.
I can also tell you, as a former reporter, that the Estonia beat is just about as low as you can go in terms of a journalistic beat. There is no reporter in the free world, who says, "Oh, thank God, I got the Estonia beat!" It's akin to being sent to Siberia for any reporter. It's the lowest rung on the journalistic totem pole, and these people here fawn all over her extremely racially and politicially biased posts (Tawana Brawley). LT. Uhura left at that time, because as a journalist herself, she could see what was happening on Nutty's blog.
I stuck around a bit longer because I wanted to see just how impartial Nutty was on her blog, and these past few days have given me the answer. Nutty is not impartial at all. This is what she wants on her blog- a bunch of right-wing posters who will outright lie about politicians they don't like. And still, Nutty let's those posts stand.
Those of us with a brain have noticed that Nutty doesn't keep consistent rules about what's posted here. If it favors her political stance, it's allowed to stay, no matter how outrageously right-wing the comment may be.
First, Nutty said that she wanted no political talk here, then puts up posts intended to rile up the right-wing crowd here to talk about right wing politics. To other reporters, such as Lt. Uhura and me, we can spot right-wing propaganda when we see it, and we can see exactly how Nutty is going about it. Hmmm. It almost seems like she's been trained in inciting a right-wing agenda.
So, I'm leaving here. I don't want to be aligned with Nutty's extremely right-wing views that she pushes here, and who has allowed this blog to descend into a right-wing free-for-all.
Her COVID blog went into such a shambles of right-wing propaganda that it self-imploded. Well, not SELF-imploded, because Nutty was pushing that agenda, and the COVID blog descended into such right-wing rhetoric and infighting that she allowed to happen.
With nobody left to try to keep this blog as a neutral space to discuss the Harkles, I wish you good luck, everybody. You're going to need it.
Given that Meghan has made things political, I think politics is fair game on this board.
I am really and truly not trying to censor anyone on this site but I just don't think it's right to try to shut down politics on this board because you don't agree with what appears to you to be the consensus of the group. I think that's Nutty's place, not ours to limit the scope here. After all, this is her blog, not ours. Let's try to agree to disagree and not take things we can't control too too seriously. Peace out.
..................
I agree that the political topic can't be avoided. How could it be when the subjects of the blog have made it clear they intend to use politics to further their grift?
What seems to cause problems here is when people discuss their own partisan viewpoint on our current politics. Perhaps if we tried to avoid that angle we would be able to handle discussing the possibility of Senator/President Megalomaniac.
I disagree that we have no control over what happens. I think there are things we can do one of which is spreading the word via this blog.
It was so bizarre, it’s true she never came back after that episode. :o/ She had left once before, but obviously did come back.
Seriously can we please have a separate place to post without American politics..
Most of us have either no knowledge nor interest in your politicians etc.
No offence meant.
No offense is taken, but I'm going to suggest that now that Harry and Meghan are no longer even pretending to hide their bald-faced agenda of inserting themselves into the American political landscape for fame and money, we cannot continue to discuss their activities with zero reference to the American political climate, including some of that climate's major players, both current and of the recent past. For the worse, the sHAMs' story is now an American story because this is where they are living and meddling now. If Harry had denounced the Royal Family in favor of getting appointed to a Labour constituency of an outgoing MP with an eye toward taking over 10 Downing Street, we Yanks would have to get conversant with your political players. Talking about Meg and Harry's future is like trying to discuss the fallout from Brexit without any reference to Boris Johnson.
It's dreary, I know. None of us wanted this to happen. It was good brainless fun when we could just jeer at Meg's overpriced ugly outfits and the HAMs' charity cosplays and Hazza's nonexistent knowledge of world geography. But post-Oprah interview, the stakes have gotten a lot higher. We are now forced to confront the possibility that the same dark forces which installed a 78-year-old man with obvious dementia to the Oval Office--*where he has nuclear launch codes and is Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces* might also propel a talentless z-list cable hooker to a seat in the United States Senate.
It seems fantastical, I know. Can you conceive of a scenario where someone like Katie Price could slide into a job in the PM's Cabinet? How do you fancy her for Home Secretary?
Kamala Harris and Meghan both have in common being biracial women who have parlayed identity politics and advantageous romantic attachments to high-profile men into elite circles which on their own they never would have ascended to. Ms. Harris attended Howard University, an historically black university in Washington, DC before obtaining her law degree from the University of California on an affirmative action scheme for minority students. She served as President of the Black Law Students' Association and appears to have passed the bar on her first attempt, so I'd say she's a lot smarter than is Meg by demonstrable measures. Still, the same cultural and political circumstances that aided Kamala on her rise to national politics could potentially aid Mugsy who really is all hat, no cattle, to use a Texan metaphor.
The best thing that can happen now is that the Queen removes Harry's Dukedom and he willingly or under compulsion removes himself from the line of succession. Their fauxmanitarian celebrity brand will be appealing to nobody when Haz is demoted literally to 'Just Harry' Windsor of Montecito. He's got to relinquish the HRH Prince as well or else Herself will go 'round calling herself Princess Meghan of Wales. But even if that happens, Megalo has a very powerful cadre of Hollywood backers, chief among them Oprah. Oprah has as much, possibly more, money than the Queen of England, and if she's decided to make a pet project out of Meghan, there's no telling how this could play out. Talking about Meg's next moves are therefore all tied up with what's currently going on within the Democratic party. Meg-Hydra and her Red Skull, Oprah (MCU reference) can still wreak a lot of havoc on the political landscape here even if the Royal titles go bye-bye. Probably better for those twisted political ambitions if they do go bye-bye.
If she and Oprah are entirely discredited and their plan all falls down, then we can entirely divorce current American politics from this space, but we are still in the phase of uncertainty where they might actually succeed at at least some piece of this dastardly plan. Markle may succeed in becoming a bigwig in California politics, based on her backers and how much of her sordid past they are willing to help her erase and keep buried. I know it feels boring and distant to those not in America, but trust me, there will be ripple effects felt 'round the world if conditions are such in Washington right now that Markle could ever be raised as a viable appointee to the U.S. Senate. She will make Sarah Palin look like a brain trust. If she could get an unearned, unelected appointment to the the U.S. Senate, there is little to stop her going higher with the right 'friends'.
Imagine how powerful a narrative to the SJW woke brigade to have *two* relatively young, black women in the two most powerful positions in the land. Kamala is 55 years old, which in Presidential politics is practically a kid. If Mugsy got some political experience on her resume through filling a vacated seat ***with no election required*** she could be considered as a future VP candidate for a future Harris bid, assuming, as seems kind of likely at the moment, that VP Harris would become President for an ailing Mr. Biden.
That's a nightmare scenario which rational people don't want to see happen. But anything might happen in the current crazy atmosphere. Meg and Oprah have made this political. In the absence of decisive action from the Palace to sever the Harkles from all Royal associations and neutralize their damage to the monarchy, Mugsy's meddling in American politics has rushed in to fill the void.
I’ve had this opinion up until most recently. As Snarkyatherbest said things change as we see more . This is so true, for example, she partially won her court case, many thought she wouldn’t. She’s done the Oprah interview...I didn’t think she would. Some of the dreaded things have come true. So now I sit on the fence and watch, because I’m not so certain anymore.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/08/the-unbearable-victim-complex-of-meghan-markle/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
"these two behave in a far more old-world monarchical fashion than the queen does. Their punishment of the disobedient media; their conviction that they must instruct the rest of us on how to live, how to travel, how many kids to have; their eye-wateringly arrogant mission of ‘building compassion around the world’ – they make the actual British monarchy, politically neutered by centuries of political progress, seem positively meek in comparison."
Finally, who cares? Everyone is here discussing and all opinions matter for discourse.
@jenn,
I admire that work you've put into the Harkle story, but I think that you can see that this bog has changed in the last year or so. I just wish that there was another blog where you could post your work. Because of the unfair and unbalanced posts here, the reputation of the blog has descended into such a sad state of affairs that nobody will take this blog seriously. Some of the ridiculous comments here will push a new, bipartisan reader to leave as quickly as they can. Nobody is going to look Nutty's blog for real news. That train left the station long ago.
The only reason that people are writing about politics is because Nutty set up a blog post to discuss it. That could have been avoided completely by just writing on another Harkle subject. There are plenty to choose from.
From Nutty's post:
"You can't handle the truth
It was probably no more than a coincidence that the video was removed within a few hours of the time US President Biden stumbled through his first live press conference.
Whatever you think of his politics, the poor man appeared to be overwhelmed and even frightened. He was given a "cheat sheet" of potential answers and even photos of the journalists he was supposed to call on.
And yet the reviews of his performance from establishment journalists such as CNN were rhapsodic.
"Americans who want a competent, coherent, focused President should feel reassured," wrote CNN analyst Frida Ghitis.
Both the delusional Biden reviews and the sudden disappearance of the Max Foster video suggest that someone at CNN doesn't think ordinary viewers can handle the truth - or even distinguish the truth from obvious falsehoods."
Nutty began this post by writing about The Harkles, then it descended into her comments above. None of this has anything to to with The Harkles, but has everything to do with right-wing propaganda.
I don’t think Nutty is pushing an agenda for the Right. I think she’s mostly pointing out Meghan’s leftist extremism.
Agreed. Calling Nutty 'right-wing' is extremely unfair. Right wing as in "Hitler Youth"?
C'mon now.
If not jumping on the Meghan Markle for President Kool-Aid bandwagon is enough to get one labelled a right-wing fascist, then I guess I'm in that club, too.
We are all adults here, and it should be possible to read differing political views, even those you differ with vehemently, without having to take smelling salts or storm off in a huff. What is best for the blog is if everyone stays and offers their own viewpoints in the spirit of equal opportunity and balanced discourse among people with varied opinions but a similar bond in common (the Harkles).
Can we just be a big happy dysfunctional family together? I think we all have a shared hope/vision for Meg and her damage to the monarchy to be discredited and for the both of the Montecito grifters to just Go Away. Can we focus on what unites us rather than our differences?
Thanks to Nutty and her moderators for carrying on and allowing us to gather here and kvetch. We really like coming here though some people pretend they don't.
Hear hear! Huge emoji clap. I'm with you and all the others who have left. I do come back only when I feel a great injustice is done but I see now that it is of no use. The echo chamber that is this blog will continue their bile no matter how hard a person tries to bring some balance.
@SwampWoman, you must be a very unhappy woman as to call out other's weaknesses continually. Others in your own online community. I won't even mention your callousness towards certain groups of people. Go for it. Say what you want to say with impunity. Many, many, many people are reading this blog and can see the inconsistencies you and @JennS bring to the table. All for 'content'...what ever that means...
@abbyh the only standard we have on this blog is you the moderators. Now you are back peddling on your request for us to be kind? Your need to mollycoddle the likes of @JennS and @Swamp Woman is concerning and raises many questions that I will leave unasked.
@Jocelyn I know this is what those that rule this blog want, is for anyone with a different point of view to leave. So I have done. But maybe I will come back on occasion when I feel I have to add my piece because this blog is documentation. Surely Nutty knows this. It's for posterity.
Good luck @Jocelyn. There is life outside of NF Blog...
I give up. There are too many people on here are who are completely nuts. Did you read the clip of Nutty's blog post that I just put up? And nobody here can see that it's right-wing commentary?
Goodbye and good luck. I have better things to do than to disagree with these people.
Meghan, not Nutty, met with Newsome. Meghan, not Nutty, sticks to leftist propaganda (and is quite bad at it). Meghan, not Nutty, teases running for President. Meghan hired Clinton and Gates staff. Meghan Meghan Meghan championed voting for Biden, as a titled member of the Royal family. These actions have repercussions for the US, UK and beyond. I would be much much happier if Meghan hired staff from both sides and acted sane with realistic goals for world compassion, kindness, and goodness. She has picked a side, thus discourse is framed around if what she is doing is OK, what it could lead too, and her unwillingness to tell the facts while spreading misinformation is a worry considering she represents the Left as an unelected mouthpiece of extreme left ideals. This is a political discussion because Meghan unfortunately made it one. She has no other career option. She’d be a terrible reporter, perpetuating false news and narratives of ‘her truth’ only.
If there are backers, then Political Meghan (not Nutty) will be a problem for society, like those who say Trump is extreme and a problem for society.
I just don’t understand the pushback. Nutty seems to be trying to center the conversation that Meghan started. I enjoy everyone’s opinions here.
I've noticed your bullying towards Nutty as I'm certain others have here as well. I don't read everyday or weekly even, but can def figure out your politics. Nutty has been more than tolerant here with all the bloggers and if you don't like her diplomacy I for one will be more than happy to see your exit.
that celebrity agent sure was up the duchess's butt trying into get into her good graces, or maybe get her as a client, now that she dumped her long term agent.
PH may not be the brightest bulb in the box, but MM is just as dimwitted as he is lol. A match made in heaven....or hell depending on your view point.
Please see my previous post which I wrote before seeing yours.
You have always been one of my favorite posters here and I respect your journalist's knowledge.
I do think however that since you left the blog for a while that you may have misread some issues or you might be mistaken on some points.
Please hear me out...I don't think Nutty has some right-wing agenda going on...I believe she no longer has time for the blog and thus this space is rudderless. The moderators can only delete and can't lead discussions.
Not everyone here is rightwing - I am registered Independent and I vote for the person, not the party. What I abhor is this cancel culture and I would actually be very interested in learning about your feelings on that trend. It could be that the extremes of cancel-culture are what unite us all no matter what our politics are. Also, if you see anything here that you believe to be incorrect why can't you just refute it?
I believe you are wrong about why Lt Uhura left this blog - see Swampie's and my own previous posts about her. Also Lt. Uhura's politics leaned to the right.
I try to value opinions here whether right, left or in the middle. I personally only have issues with those very few who may go to extremes or who appear to troll the blog and instigate trouble.
I hope you will still continue to read here and perhaps return after taking a break. IMO Markle is attempting to move into our government and we could use your help in trying to put a stop to her delusions.
💓😁💓😁💓
Thanks, but I have to leave. I just can't listen to the type of people who are the main posters here who are allowed to bring up, "Hitler Youth," if you don't agree with them.
There are plenty of other blogs about the Harkles that don't descend into name-calling and pushing the limits of fair play, but I guess some people here learned that type of rhetoric from their Cheeto leader. You know, the one who pushed his followers to storm the White House, killing people and desecrating the very foundation of our government.
Why on earth would I want to be associated with them?
and, quite frankly, towards the main subject of this blog - M & H. Yup. the name calling, making up crazy stories. Etc. I chuckle on occasion and think, well that poster just proved Meghan right with the off the wall made up story. I'm particularly annoyed when people post possible scenarios with anyone dying.
But, i just ignore those posters and scroll on down. I am avoiding this current chain of posts because of the political slant. I had more than enough of that during election season (American here) and so i am just popping in, doing a quick scroll thru, maybe posting something on topic and then out I go again.
Nutty's latest post did come as somewhat of a surprise. She has never posted anything quite so political before. I remember her posting about being super busy during the elections.
Anyway, if this space is going to turn into a pro-right blog then I'm clearly in the wrong place. I've enjoyed coming here and venting about the Harkles and being amused and horrified by the posts of so many brilliant writers. But as Indians would say, 'it's time to say ta ta bye bye.now'
This is to me the best evidence that these events did not happen. There was no fanfare after, photos or posts of her leaving the hospital with Archie, etc. And I suspect that's why she made the preemptive strike of criticizing DoC for taking photos with her children when she left the hospital. She knew she wouldn't be able to do it
You've hit the nail in her head for me - it's a kind of `Dog that didn't bark in the night' situation.:
The Dog That Didn't Bark In The Night: Appellate Court Of Connecticut Uses Sherlock Holmes To Solve Hearsay Mystery
The stories of Sherlock Holmes, of course, have had a huge impact on both criminal and civil trial, and you will frequently see judges and lawyers citing to the fictional detective and his powers of detection. Without question, though, the Sherlock Holmes story that courts cite more than any other is "Silver Blaze," which the Appellate Court of Connecticut cited in its recent opinion in State v. Rosado, 2012 WL 1003763 (Conn.App. 2012), to answer a hearsay question.
"Silver Blaze" is the story of the disappearance of the titular race horse. It is believed that a stranger stole the horse, but Holmes is able to pin the horse's disappearance on the horse's late trainer, John Straker, because a dog at the horse's stable did not bark on the night of his disappearance. The following exchange takes place in the short story:
Gregory (Scotland Yard detective): "Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?"
Holmes: "To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time."
Gregory: "The dog did nothing in the night-time."
Holmes: "That was the curious incident."
The URL is hopeless - find the post by Googling the title of the post.
`The Dog That Didn't Bark In The Night: Appellate Court Of Connecticut Uses Sherlock Holmes To Solve Hearsay Mystery'
-----
Re Shalit - I decided to leave that for somebody else - sometimes I think I say too much.
-------------------------
Thank you CookieShark for reminding us we often need to listen for what is not said.
new CDAN blind
I know you're not right wing. I can tell from your posts. I also agree that there is no moderation on this blog. It, as you say, has been rudderless for some time.
You're right about Lt. Uhura. I believe that she was conservative, but she also knew about fair play. She left when Nutty went after the Brawley case. Think about it for a minute. She chose the moniker Lt. Uhura for a reason. What reason do you think that could be? Let me give you a hint. Lt. Uhura was the only black woman on the ship.
You said:
"I personally only have issues with those very few who may go to extremes or who appear to troll the blog and instigate trouble."
I agree with that, also, but they are taking over the blog just as they did with her deceased COVID blog, and Nutty has allowed that to happen yet again.
You know what they say about doing the same thing over again and expecting a different outcome.
Let's be honest - what is really left to discuss about the Harkles after 31 March? If TQ pulls the rug out from under them, there will be a hugh backlash from Montecito. She won't do that. Maybe nothing will happen. Then there is no reason to hang around waiting for TQ to act because she clearly will not do anything publically. UK residents will have to protest outside BP to make any further moves. Or, the Harkles will say they are giving up HRH, but keeping Dukedom, but won't use in professional work, but will use in charity work or some other appeasement announcement. THe only thing left to discuss is the possiblity of them in politics - so now it will be a political blog which will be much less interesting to the majority of commenters.
I'm glad that you've seen what's been going on here. It's been happening slowly over the past six months or so. Yes, it's now a right-wing blog. If you don't agree with people here, they bring up Hitler Youth? Who wants to be associated with people like that?
Look around on online, and you'll find many other more balanced blogs to enjoy and where you can post your views without being attacked.
All my best to you!
Cheeto Leader?
How is this not offensive and condescending?
Don't get offended if you cannot be diplomatic.
Back to reading and scrolling...
"People are missing the elephant in the room. Lack of participation and the introduction of a controversial topic, one that breaks a standing "rule", tells me Nutty wants to get out of the blog business. The topic is doing exactly as expected - driving away people who support Biden and those who don't want to discuss politics."
I see that you've seen the light, too. Join the ever-growing crowd. This blog has become as right-wing as can be.
Best of luck and happy days to you!
That's why she failed at being a royal. She looked at the glamour and nothing else.
It's odd that she didn't adjust once she understood that they are public servants because her PR told us she was a humanitarian plus she spent time in Argentina working at the Embassy and no matter how short-lived must have received basic training. Not to mention her international studies at Northwestern even if thst was a long time ago.
It seemed so stupid to complain about having to learn the national anthem of a different country after stepping into a position thst represents the citizens.
If she couldn't cope with the cushy life of a royal, how will she cope with the hard slog of politics? She'll have a meltdown at tye first hustings.
You've gotta admit that Trump looks like he's been in the sun bed for far too long, but at least he's lightened his hair a bit.
Isn't this blog supposed to be for everyone? Somebody posted "Hitler Youth," in response to my comment, and you can only come up with this? That's the best that you can do? Gah!
I am not "offended." I am angry. I think that you can understand the difference? There is one rule for people who blindly follow Nutty's right wing rhetoric and another rule for everybody else.
So do we wait out this possibly political hiatus until she returns to her usual way of entertaining(!) the world? I have only recently returned so I don't feel I have a say. But I do think we could have a fruitful discussion reviewing Meghan's time in the BRF and after and trying to decide if this was long-term strategy or flying by the seat of her pants. I think the latter, but it's tough to decide. Needs a lot of thought. I find psychological discussions really fascinating. Looking at the evidence that's before us and interpreting it as best we can. That would keep us occupied long enough for Meghan to quickly run away from any possibility of having to answer questions from proper, investigative journalists. She's avoided that entirely to date.
I’m not a journalist, but facts do matter!
Althea Bernstein is the latest liar, Twana Brawley was the hoax led by Al Sharpton!
Is it right-wing to call a liar a liar? I find the left-wing the instigators of leading the racist cry at every conceivable opportunity.
Jump all in before the facts. SMH
B: Meghan made it political.
C. Meghan and Harry are torching the monarchy using race politics.
D: People are losing their jobs and being silenced based on politics.
E: These days, politics are divisive. Period.
F: It's okay to be a right winger.
G. If you let the politics on here get you offended or angry, that's on you.
H. If you don't own this blog, you have no right to try to tell others what to post.
I. You are always free to leave and start your own blog.
J. Whatever you do, choose happiness
Please no one should use my words as deflection. They were not meant to be used to justify stopping any particular person or comment. I was trying to send a message out generally to redirect some of the conversation.
This blog moves fast and furious. And moderators are not always standing by and swooping in to comment like we have nothing else to do in our lives.
Wait, what, you have a LIFE? WHO SAID YOU COULD HAVE ONE? (LOL) It's a beautiful day at the beach here.
"Acquitaine - I look at how much time and energy Megs puts into her PR and all her maneuvering, if she just put a tenth of that into the job on hand she would have been mildly successful from the beginning and it would have built over time. She really doesnt have a long attention span on anything, well other than herself ;-)"
So true.
Also, the scattergun approach to her causes de jour. So bizarre given what she wants out of life because no one knows what she stands for as she jumps from one trendy cause to another.
Btw, Has JH mentioned Sentebale or conservation or Invictus since he left the royals?
I feel like he's joined one or two podcasts / Zoom calls instigated by them, but it feels like they are chasing him rather tyan tye other way around, as he goes about his new life in california.
If being a mod is too much for you and takes too much of your time, maybe it's time to rethink being a mod. If you're going to do a job, even if it's a volunteer position, it's best to look at your schedule to see if you have time to do that job completely and correctly.
"I don't have time" is not a good excuse. It just shows that you have time management problems, even worse than those of Nutty who has shunted the work off to you, and you took the bait to run her blog for her. So, Nutty just sits back and lets you do the work for her. And you see no problem with your actually running somebody else's blog when you have time issues of your own?
If this was an office, you'd be getting Nutty coffee and emptying the wastebaskets. UNPAID.
Re. Harry Markle
Maybe his/her blog is for new readers to the saga.
I think Harry Markle in her current state of high dudgeon would scare away new readers, but back circa 2018-19, she was my gateway dealer into this insanity. I don't remember the exact date I first joined this blog, but it had to be post-Archie, during the week that Nutty posted her "Who Greets the World Press Wearing a White Dress Two Days After Giving Birth?" piece.
I knew right then that I had to get in on this action.
I think it would have been shortly after the wedding that I stumbled into Harry Markle's blog, and as the 'pregnancy' with Moonbump Mountbatten-Windsor progressed, I dove pretty deep into her archives. The whole 'Timeline of the Harkle Debacle' was very instructive. Up until the wedding day, I had pretty much swallowed the pre-packaged Meghan Cinderella story and even, to my everlasting shame, watched the first Hallmark movie dedicated to the 'Royal Romance'. Then all that weird stuff started happening with Markle's family, and that Corpse Bride wedding show was just so bizarre, I started to think not all was right in Kensington Palace. The very early reports of her deluging staff with emails at 5AM and making Harry give up beer and shooting, etc. I chalked up to 'California/growing pains'. Americans do tend to have a direct workplace style in comparison to other cultures. I lived for 6 years in Japan where people contort themselves into knots to avoid giving too direct a response or a 'no' and being labeled 'pushy/rude/not a team player.' In Britain as in Asia, I imagine, a more circuitous, diplomatic way of phrasing requests of one's staff so they don't sound like demands is desirable. I thought maybe the new Duchess was coming across as demanding to a staff used to a softer approach from their bosses and if Meg was asking a lot it was because she was so eager to 'hit the ground running' and achieve things as a new Royal.
I always give people the benefit of the doubt until they show me they don't deserve it, see. With Meg, this lasted until Eugenie's wedding, and then I was done making excuses for her. The extent of the calculated plan to ensnare Handbag was laid out very convincingly by Harry Markle.
I noticed though that the posts began to get monolithically long and super-repetitive around about the time of the whole Frogmore mystery. She was on the tail of Markle as a cold-hearted grifting snake from even before the engagement--one of the first, I think--but her posts used to have more brevity. Now she writes at a Tom Wolfe-sian length, repeats herself over and over and seems ready to stroke out with anger with every word. Makes me wonder if she's gone off some much needed medication. She claims to be employed but I don't see how she's got the time for a job with the sheer amount of verbiage she cranks out weekly. Not to mention all the research she does into various legal documents pertaining to the case. I do appreciate the inclusion of those as they provide scaffolding of fact for the various theories.
I still have a periodic look-in to see what she's got that's new, but I only scan. Reading it all meticulously is major heavy lifting. Nowadays, when I'm not here, I'm watching According2Taz or reading the Knockoff Duchess on Tumblr.
"An interesting article. Don't recall it being posted here earlier, but I might have missed it.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/08/the-unbearable-victim-complex-of-meghan-markle/amp/?__twitter_impression=true"
The blog has a youtube channel with weekly discussions about topics in UK.
They are a left of center political blog and one says he is a marxist, but it's amusing that they now say that Harry, and especially Meghan, have turned them into monarchists purely because of the transparent agenda the Harkles are pushing.
It's assumed that leftists in the UK are republicans so their aboutface on the monarchy is interesting and amusing because when they speak to it during the podcast, they sound bewildered to find themselves in this position.
Outside of topics on the monarchy, their podcast is quite enjoyable and worth a listen.
The only person killed was unarmed protester Ashli Babbitt--by a police officer whose name is still unknown. Has that ever happened before?
I'm OK with political "discussion," but kindly don't spread false information.
When it becomes too politically conservative for me, I go to Datalounge which tends toward the liberal side. The posters there also have a wicked, bitchy sense of humor at the Sussexes expense. I agree Nutty is getting bored with this blog as world economies open up and she becomes more busy. Also the Sussexes have left the BRF. What remains is how much damage do they inflict on the BRF and how successful are they not being part of it.