If you fear that anything you say privately may be revealed publicly, you cannot express yourself freely. You can't play with ideas, you can't think aloud, you cannot debate and discuss. You can only repeat concepts that have been approved by the authorities. Your mind is in prison.
When there is no distinction between public and private conversation, you can trust no one. Not even your family.
Which brings us to the Sussexes.
Taking a private conversation public
During Harry and Meghan's notorious broadcast last week, the couple gave contradictory statements about an unnamed family member who had - in a private conversation - expressed "concern" about the Sussex child's skin color.
Putting aside the fact that most families speculate about what an unborn child might look like, the revelation that someone had been "concerned" took what had been a private family conversation into the public sphere, where it was never intended to be.
Was it (supposedly) wrong that the speaker had felt concern or wrong that the speaker had expressed concern about the baby's looks?
(My guess is that we are probably talking about a throwaway remark like "Maybe we'll call him the Dark Prince" or some other dry humor blown out of proportion by the Sussexes.)
Anyway, if the speaker had simply wondered about the unborn baby's physical characteristics, was the "right" thing to do to keep it to himself or herself, even in front of close family?
If we cannot speak freely to our family, to whom can we speak freely?
A chat with William and Charles
On Tuesday, CBS anchor Gayle King revealed that she had been in touch with Harry, who said he had spoken to his father and brother after the interview.
Harry told her that the conversations were "not productive", said King, who added that what the Sussexes really wanted was for the Royal family to condemn the (supposedly) racist press coverage of the pair.
Once again, the Sussexes had dragged private conversations with the family into the public sphere, spitting on the family's attempts at de-escalation and reconciliation.
If I were William or Charles, I would be reluctant to ever again speak directly to Harry. The chance that he would repeat - if not record and release - whatever was said to him is simply too high.
Comments
If my D.M.’s could talk. I would hazard to say that 90 percent of the messages coming my way convey some degree of skepticism about the Sussexes’ latest antics. “I’d rather watch Coming to America 2 again,” says one man-about-town. “This makes Pinocchio look honest.” Another person, a socialite, wrote, “They say they want safety and privacy and then expose themselves on the biggest platform possible?” And a publicist added, “Meghan, who used to regularly call paparazzi on herself, says she doesn’t like the grandeur?” And finally a mutual friend wrote to say, “The woman who once emailed me her list of best restaurants in L.A. to get a chopped salad did not research the family she was marrying into?”
The Canadian press, which largely treated Markle with reverence during her royal ascent, has also cooled on her. The Sussexes’ two-month post-Megxit exile on Vancouver Island is partly to blame; there was a public outcry over the fact that Canadian taxpayers had been footing their security bill. The journalist Jen Gerson described the Oprah interview as “nothing more than a profile-building exercise for a young couple running through their inherited millions.”
A Toronto Sun columnist put it more succinctly: “This is a crock, bien sur.” At any rate, if things don’t work out in Montecito, don’t expect them to come back to Canada anytime soon.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9382821/Church-England-order-30-quota-BAME-clergy-leaked-report-demands-repentance.html
Snip: "The Church of England is set to introduce a 30 per cent quota for ethnic minority candidates on its leadership programme and carry out anti-racism training, it emerged last night.
Officials are also planning to provide information giving context to church statues which may have caused ‘pain or offence’ as part of plans to tackle discrimination."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9382663/Martin-Bashir-tells-inquiry-DIANA-came-smears.html
@Jessica..I never considered myself naive, but you are really opening my eyes re:SM and popularity! Frankly, it seems exhausting, but that is where the money is.
Nor have I ever had a statue cause me pain. Good find CG33!
Thanks to all for making this the best spot on the internet for news of the despicable duo. @JennS you are our archivist to be sure.
Oh yes, naming the squad: Something to do with fake sugar? Aspartame Asses, or Sucrose Savages?
And @WBBM I would love to hear about what you are doing while monitoring the Icelandic Volcanoes. I have picked up that you love Iceland, of course, and I know that you have been watching them recently, but today sounds like there is more afoot. That is a sight I would surely love to see.
No, it is William who would help me. Who learned from his childhood and waited until he was sure before marrying, despite massive pressure. Who now has a strong marriage that enables him to be the best he can be. Who has three happy, healthy, well-adjusted children. Who has - thanks to his wife - reached a graceful accommodation with the press, so that his children aren't strangers to those who will one day be his people.
I also want to mention Kate in particular. I have bouts of deep depression, when it is all I can do to get out of bed. Everything becomes a tremendous effort, so lockdown has been very difficult. What helps me these days is to think of Kate, who is always smart, always prepared, empathetic, smiling nearly all the time and properly respectful when required. She has improved by leaps and bounds in recent years, since she was given more experienced support. She listened. She learned. Now we are reaping the benefits. I like to see her out and about. She cheers me up. The shade Meghan has thrown her way is one of the worst aspects of this whole saga, but it is comforting to know many people now realise the scale of her contribution to the BRF. There is a close-up photograph of Kate in the pew at the Sussex wedding and she looks more emotional and agitated than I've ever seen her before or since. That to me is an indication of what Meghan put her through. Poor Kate, who had given birth only a month earlier and who, from then on, has been keeping the show on the road, with three small children and an increasingly distressed husband. She deserves a medal.
From Quora.
What do you think of Meghan and Harry’s Oprah interview?
https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-of-Meghan-and-Harry-s-Oprah-interview/answer/Michael-de-Werd?ch=10&share=01709d71&srid=ufzqaD
Thanks for sharing this fascinating analysis on the interview, Miggy. I have to confess that I never bought the theories that run wild on this site and beyond that Meghan was never pregnant but this article has cast serious doubt in my mind. Maybe I just didn't follow this train as it seemed ludicrous to me that the RF would play along with a farce? Now, seeing the bomb Harry has detonated, it becomes more plausible why the RF would have remained silent: black mail. You will go along with our scheme, or I would "out" you as racists, smear the entire family and sling mud at Kate. It also makes a lot more sense whey Archie has remained hidden. I dismissed it as a combination of their "ace in the hole" to score big bucks later on or Meghan capitulating to Harry's demand that Archie not be paid a public spectacle after what happened to his mother. But the author here raises an excellent point...wouldn't having Oprah interact with Archie on camera be the perfect time to make the maximum impact? I haven't followed the images and timeline but the pictures from her pregnancy on this page, if true, make it impossible to believe she was ever pregnant. Babies sell magazines and make their parents look sympathetic and relatable and doesn't Meg have ambitions in politics? Parading Archie, in itself, would make them look sympathetic in a way no celebrity interview could.
This article is a must read for the Nutties.
Re: Harry's foreword to a book for bereaved children - if I was a young, bereaved child, Harry would not be the public figure to give me hope for the future.
Well, I guess he could be used as an example of what could happen to you if you don't get help when needed. Here he is, 22 years later, still having learned nothing from the death. It would break his mother's heart that he stayed mired in that incident.
I think of how he is exceedingly depressed, rubbing his hands together, head hung low. If anyone is suicidal, it's him. At least in the presence of his spouse.
It's interesting that we never see him being happy and glowing about his baby. Or being happy that he escaped his horrible racist mean family with millions of $ in his back pocket.
And you're quite right that Catherine deserves a medal.
Maybe I just didn't follow this train as it seemed ludicrous to me that the RF would play along with a farce? Now, seeing the bomb Harry has detonated, it becomes more plausible why the RF would have remained silent: black mail. You will go along with our scheme, or I would "out" you as racists, smear the entire family and sling mud at Kate
----------
But Megalo has accused the BRF of racism and slung mud at Kate anyway. So even if what they did was to remain silent, it didn't work.
Thank you for your lovely post about Catherine. You have hit the nail on the head. Catherine seems poised, like her predecessor, the Queen Mum, to be the maternal, inspirational figure to her nation. She is only just beginning to come into her powers, and her power is in her traditional feminine strengths. Her role in years to come will be to project a support and nurturance to the nation as she does for her family. It’s a tall order, certainly more than is expected of other regular women. The situation with the Sussexes has turned into The War Years for William and Catherine. It feels as though they are at the start or a perhaps approaching the middle of a conflict that is going to be drawn out for some time yet. These bombs are all metaphorical, but the personal strain and crisis must be immense. God preserve the Queen and those who will come after her from this insidious threat.
Harry is a lost cause. He is the henchman of evil. There can be no appeasement. It’s time for D-Day. For the sake of William, Catherine, their children and the future of the monarchy, this can’t be drawn out war.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9380947/Prince-Harry-seen-time-explosive-Oprah-interview.html
I just looked in when I heard about the leaked CofE report.
It strikes me the maths is awry - quotas always leave a nasty taste anyway, as when they were used to keep women out of UK medical schools.
Funny how they ignore other inequalities.
https://www.churchofengland.org/about/leadership-and-governance/general-synod/bishops-information-house-and-college-bishops#na
MLK had something to sat about not judging (someone) by skin colour but by character (and I'd add soul and abilities).
Will they judge memorials to be offensive only if someone actually complains or will they take them down in they think somebody might complain? Will the Memorial Police come raiding? Bands of Vigilantes attack?
Are we going now back to the period of 1534 - 1660 now? We call that iconoclasm.
Iceland
Excellent webcam at https://www.livefromiceland.is/webcams/geldingadalur---volcano/
Look at all the locals going to have a look at what's happening! (Iceland is on GMT all year but being so far west, it gets light/dark several hours later than it does in UK)
https://www.vedur.is/ is a good place to start , Icelandic Met office - good links to all sorts of earthquake sites.
Himself is glued to the screen - it gets obsessive!
plus https://www.livefromiceland.is/webcams/geldingadalur---volcano/
The one from Quora is good and I have not yet gotten to the comments. Basically did Megs have a baby??
https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-of-Meghan-and-Harry-s-Oprah-interview/answer/Michael-de-Werd?ch=10&share=01709d71&srid=ufzqaD
Meghan's wedding antics/Catherine/Charlotte crying/1 Drop Rule Oprah, Gayle
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHi_gacu-H0
Penelope Enemehr
31 minutes ago
Hello from Santa Barbara, Ca! I’ve seen the grotesque couple driving around with a car full of security. Let me tell you, it’s not needed. No one here is chasing them. I’ve seen Ellen without security at the stores, Oprah in Downtown Santa Barbara without security. They look like normal people and don’t stand out. Being surrounded by security makes you stand out from the crowd. Most people wish those people would go because they ruin the atmosphere in a peaceful city.
@WBBM - thanks for the Iceland links. Fascinating!
As for private security you do see them around every now and then but very low key. So if Ginger always travels with a security detail he will stick out like a sore thumb. Like when Big Wigs from DC are in town. Its basically a huge arrow pointing at him wherever he goes. Another reason for the locals to hate them.
The local news coverage since they arrived has gone to great lengths to totally ignore them. Its like they dont exist. Unlike the usual very low key coverage, or no coverage, that famous people normally get.
..........................
**@MusicDSPGuy
Thanks for the updates from Montecito!
Did you happen to catch the story a couple of months ago about Rob Lowe and his 'sighting" of Harry out driving while both were stopped at a traffic light? Rob likened Harry to the Loch Ness Monster stating no one ever sees him in the area! Apparently, he was so startled to see him he followed him to his house to determine if it was indeed truly Harry - which he claims it was.
Are Harry and Meghan EVER seen in Montecito or the surrounding areas? Do Montecito residents believe the couple lives there? Some of us have a theory that they are not actually living there - at least not full time. Could it be that your local news is not ignoring them but that there is actually nothing to ignore?! And wouldn't someone notice if there was no one living/full-time at that property? I agree with Rob in his assessment of Harry's Loch Ness Monster status and find that very strange! Any light you can shed on whether or not you think they are actually living in the area would be greatly appreciated!
Sorry, wrong html tag! Worth a look at the driver's reflection in the wing mirror of Harry's security team. Very ghoulish.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9380947/Prince-Harry-seen-time-explosive-Oprah-interview.html
I once read that when the Nazis occupied Denmark and insisted that the Jews wore a Star of David, the King of Demark had the Star sewn onto his clothes to show his solidarity with his Jewish subjects. He defied them to take him first. The Nazis didn't dare touch him and I gather that not one Jew in Denmark went to the gas chambers.
Under the `one-drop rule' I'd count as black, for all that I'm a sort of piggy-pink and probably less than 1 part in 256 black. I wonder what the effect would be if I and all those like me were to claim to be black? Would that spike the racists' guns?
---------------------
Iceland: so far, this is what is known as a `tourist eruption'!
My daughters went to overnight camp which was next to Camp David. President George H. Bush, was a bicycle fanatic. He would take rides everyday outside of Camp David, and at times stopped at the camp to say hello. His SS agents were all on bikes, while the President rode on public roads. Of course, the road was probably checked ahead of time. But he never, in heavy traffic, was followed by a huge SUV gas guzzler, in which the security team could never get to Harry if somebody came up to him with a gun, or if a car even accidentally swerved into him. And his professional paps were shooting pics from a suv in front of him was insane.
When M visited New York City for a week to attend her tacky baby shower, she left behind not only her crumbs, but the fury of all the security she demanded from the United States. The Secret Service, State Department security people (Markle insisted on her jaunt to New York be listed as a diplomatic trip), New York State police and New York City police all felt used by her, and her nasty behavior and demands to be treated as though she was a celebrity, by changing entrances and back doors to hype her publicity. Over $1 million dollars, perhaps up to $3 million dollars was spent by American taxpayers on this nothing person. The State Department issued an expense report for just their people which was $1 million dollars. The report included how Meghan would change her mind every minute about her plans, had a terrible attitude about how security people had to behave in the ways she wanted, to highlight her. When nobody recognized her the first few days, she had sirens used with an entourage.
The two are such losers. Zero class. As my mother said “If somebody goes behind a family or family member and gossips or says anything unflattering, then break off all contact with the sneak. Anybody who trashes his/her family will trash you soon enough. Never trust a traitor to family, unless for safety sake. It shows the character of the sneak.”
I must say thanks to the Nutty or Nutties who told us how to speed up Lady C's videos. I put the playback setting at 1.25 or 1.5 -
Me, too! I didn't know it could do that.
I never watched you tube anything because the pace made me crazy. Upping the speed makes watching so much easier!
I just watched one on how to repair my snowblower. Very proud of myself that I not only knew which part to order, I installed it myself.
Like anything else on the internet, who knows if it's true or not.
21h ago
My brother-in-law has worked for the Royal Family for over 30 years, the Queen is an absolutely wonderful person to work for according to him, she is funny and very loving to her family, does not get angry with staff and she has helped Harry immensely and this is what she gets in return, ...
Look at the front facing photos. The cars seem fairly steady in both directions. Looks really like they are taken from the bike lane. So one would pretty much have to be standing in it as being parked in a car on a cross street wouldn't work - parked too close the corner or cross traffic a potential problem. Wouldn't this be slightly obvious? (that vest is not his best look).
Now the back side photos. (mirror image is scary). But now the camera is coming from a car right behind the other car. JH, OTOH, doesn't seem to have a care in the world.
And: people who work in hospitals tend to call non-helmet wearers: donor-cyclists.
What was soooo urgent about that?
They acted like it was so critical that that interview happen RIGHT NOW.
They couldn't even wait if PP were to die.
Or if he were to die, they would only postpone a short time. Like that's so much more kind to a 94 year old woman who has just lost her life partner.
What was said that couldn't have waited another 6 months or a year?
It had been a year already, what would another few months time matter?
They didn't say anything that wasn't already old news.
Tells you that it was either (or both):
1) to compete with the Commonwealth Service, which they didn't seem to realize wasn't happening
2) to manipulate the Queen into not removing titles and patronages, as in we said publicly it wasn't happening, so now you can't do it, haha.
I can recommend Dave McGarvie (vulcanologist with keen interest in Iceland at
https://twitter.com/subglacial
Was OU, now Lancaster University.
"I once read that when the Nazis occupied Denmark and insisted that the Jews wore a Star of David, the King of Denmark had the Star sewn onto his clothes to show his solidarity with his Jewish subjects."
That's a bit of a romantic version, it didn't happen.
https://archive.is/G2feq
Thanks for the Iceland link, I've passed it around:)
Will Harry and Meghan learn the A-list art of saying nothing at all? | Barbara Ellen
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/20/pipe-down-harry-and-meghan-if-you-want-to-hang-with-a-listers
"[...] are we forgetting that the couple may have become too noisy and leaky for the scrupulously private mega A-list ranks they evidently yearn to join? [...]"
The article points out that they've gone from "THAT interview" to leaking more to Gayle King:
"So, from speaking their truth to leaking their truth? That was quick. Is this a good look for the “global philanthropy”-minded couple? Put it this way: has Michelle Obama ever sat on a TV sofa bitching about her sister-in-law?"
Quite. Meghan is good at making a splash but people are sick of getting wet. As a letter to the editor of a Somerset local paper said this week. "I want Harry and Megan to just go away."
This is the Times article about William.
Will Harry and Meghan learn the A-list art of saying nothing at all?
Barbara Ellen
Considering where Meghan and Prince Harry wish to end up, are they blowing it big-time? In the commotion over who the Sussexes are upsetting (royal family, British press, British public, and the real victim in all this, Piers Morgan’s wife, who has him back, cluttering up the kitchen in the morning), are we forgetting that the couple may have become too noisy and leaky for the scrupulously private mega A-list ranks they evidently yearn to join?
The serious issues of race and mental health have been much discussed. But let’s look at this through the lens of the type of celebrity and status the Sussexes appear to be aiming for. First, that interview, where Oprah Winfrey was allowed to bash away at the Sussex piÃąata for headline-generating goodies. Now the leak from Oprah’s mate, Gayle King – about the couple’s “non-productive” talks with Prince William – presumed to emanate from Meghan.
So, from speaking their truth to leaking their truth? That was quick. Is this a good look for the “global philanthropy”-minded couple? Put it this way: has Michelle Obama ever sat on a TV sofa bitching about her sister-in-law?
Supporters and detractors alike perceive the Oprah interview as the Sussexes’ golden ticket into the US elite, but it’s not as simple as that. While it’s accepted that such behaviour is offensive to the royals, it’s forgotten that it’s also the antithesis of how the mega-rich, uber-influential, notoriously private elite conduct themselves. The Sussexes aren’t going after standard-issue celebrity: one doubts their game plan is to end up on Dancing with the Stars. This is about the higher echelons of fame, at least BeyoncÃĐ/Clooney level, maybe Obama/Gates, considering those philanthropic impulses, a bit of swishing around with earnestly normcore billionaires or trillionaires, tech moguls and the like.
Anyone who’s ever fleetingly ventured into such elite orbits will tell you that they’re a discreet breed, living in micro-managed worlds, operating a strict privacy-first code. Getting close to them is like pushing through plasma. If they give out personal information, it’s in a tightly disciplined way. These people are unlikely to feel true kinship with people who give explosive gut-spilling interviews, never mind leak private family conversations to showbiz journalists.
In such rarefied circles, the Sussexes simply don’t fit in. Whatever supportive platitudes are spouted, in private, eyebrows may be being raised at the oversharing.
I wish the couple only well, because – chrissakes! – why not? However, they may have catastrophically miscalculated reverting to Meghan’s Suits-level fame strategy (Push. Publicise. Repeat.). When (oh, the irony!) the royal family’s oft-maligned, tightly buttoned “never explain, never complain” reserve would have far better endeared them to the elite circles they wish to join. They say you should dress for the job you want, and perhaps, exposure-wise, the Sussexes should have maintained self-control for the social position they want. It’s a bit late now.
Just kidding.
But on a serious note, we weren't the only ones who noted Heidi N Moore's disgusting twitter campaign against Jason and MT.
Somebody else did, and the first article about it has been published publicly.
Won't take long for MSM to pick it up.
https://vote-watch.com/2021/03/19/guardian-journalist-posts-racist-tweets-calls-royal-family-white-supremacists-and-attacks-alleged-meghan-bully-victim/
Tomorrow I get to fill in (paper form for me) the 2021 census and I bet there's a question as to which sex I am to which I must tick either male or female and not which of fifty-one baskins and robbins flavours of gender do I presently assert myself to be. My birth certificate says I am male so that is what I will tick.
LOL! No not me! But I'm glad it's getting out there!
I saw that royal reporters were tweeting each other asking if something could be done about her so maybe they started the ball rolling. But what type of publication is Votewatch? I've never heard of it.
And I thought this Heidi person was also tweeting about Melissa as well?
And why in the world haven't royal reporters written an article on the sussex sq**d?
I often wonder if people on blogs/twitter etc are really people in the know under a pseudonym, things we all read years ago seem to be proved correct although dismissed by many at the time (not necessarily here but MSM etc).
As an aside for UK nutties or indeed anyone, tired of the racist narrative in our society, give Calvin Robinson a look. I dont agree wth all he says but interesting to get a perspective from a POC point of view of Great Britain.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9384591/Palace-aide-rubbishes-Harry-Meghans-claim-men-grey-suits-run-Monarchy.html
A reporter in Canada wrote one article about them 2yrs ago. Didn't gain much traction, but it popped up in royal forums and LSA.
https://www.macleans.ca/royalty/meghan-markles-twitter-bot-network-the-whole-thing-is-a-bit-insane/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9384489/William-upset-Harry-Meghans-interview.html
-------------------
Not really O/T:
A BBC reporter has said `The volcano has been dormant for centuries'. Alas we had forgotten that so-called `dormant' volcanoes are in the habit of waking up. Unless tectonic plates have shifted to the point that a volcano (ie a vent or fissure) is no longer above an active plate boundary or mantle hotspot, it cannot be truly extinct. It can always bestir itself into activity.
That's a thought for those of us wondering about the Harkles - at the moment, they're being Stroboli, which has been lobbing lava bombs since Classical times. Even if they quieten down, she could be like Vesuvius, an ongoing threat which will erupt sooner or later. She's likely to be a pain in the anatomy for the rest of her life, unless she finds another `outlet' delivering a stream of cash...
Excellent commentary from plant, including a detailed analysis of Meghan as a narc and what she is likely to do next.
The two DM articles referenced above describe a royal family in charge and thriving. This will enrage the narc, so we may very well see her act out in some way.
"Supporters and detractors alike perceive the Oprah interview as the Sussexes’ golden ticket into the US elite, but it’s not as simple as that. While it’s accepted that such behaviour is offensive to the royals, it’s forgotten that it’s also the antithesis of how the mega-rich, uber-influential, notoriously private elite conduct themselves. The Sussexes aren’t going after standard-issue celebrity: one doubts their game plan is to end up on Dancing with the Stars. This is about the higher echelons of fame, at least BeyoncÃĐ/Clooney level, maybe Obama/Gates, considering those philanthropic impulses, a bit of swishing around with earnestly normcore billionaires or trillionaires, tech moguls and the like.
Anyone who’s ever fleetingly ventured into such elite orbits will tell you that they’re a discreet breed, living in micro-managed worlds, operating a strict privacy-first code. Getting close to them is like pushing through plasma. If they give out personal information, it’s in a tightly disciplined way. These people are unlikely to feel true kinship with people who give explosive gut-spilling interviews, never mind leak private family conversations to showbiz journalists.
In such rarefied circles, the Sussexes simply don’t fit in."
Thing is tho, turning a private matter into an ugly public spectacle over the monarachy and world's most famous family, is all they really have to trade. Meghan wasn't B list, nevermind A list. Most Americans didn't know who she was before she married a Prince and she didn't stick with him for long. Like Hikari said, Meghan was too dumb, too much of a loose canon, to stick it out a respectable amount of time, before becoming a diva to staff and burning her bridges. And Hapless Harry looks like Night of the Living Dead next to The Succubus Who Would Be Queen. They've used all their celebrity capital on this explosive interview and now the English hate them and Americans just don't care, nor should we. In America, more people care about Britney Spears and her career ended over a decade ago. Nobody here's saying "Free Meghan." Whose gonna tune in to listen to Harry, a man with no real public speaking skills, blather on about mental illness?
@JennS: Re: MSM reporting on the Sussex Squad.
A reporter in Canada wrote one article about them 2yrs ago. Didn't gain much traction, but it popped up in royal forums and LSA.
https://www.macleans.ca/royalty/meghan-markles-twitter-bot-network-the-whole-thing-is-a-bit-insane/
.............
**@Acquitaine
I'm familiar w/ the Macleans article but that focuses more on the bots. I'm talking about her actual psycho fans that tweet vicious garbage at the royal reporters, threaten them and their families, accuse them of everything from racism to attempting to make Markle lose her baby. They have nasty nicknames for all of them and call them clowns. I've seen photos of the RR's photoshopped with clown makeup regularly tweeted. Every time the RRs post anything about the Harkles they descent on them like a plague of locusts.
What I don't understand is why nothing is done about this like contacting Twitter, speaking to the palace to complain, calling the police, writing articles, doxing the perps, get lawyers involved etc.
**@Puds, Pantsface and KCM1212
Glad you liked the old Enquirer articles. Yes, there was a lot of good tea there some of which ended up getting authenticated and other parts that although still not verified do seem very possible.
I'm in the process of going through the older Times articles for interesting Harkle exposes.
@JennS - I do always take a pinch of salt on the "lookalike" Harry pictures, yes there maybe something in it, but I'm not convinced, for what purpose? Totally agree HotRob should be on the scene, he knows, and I think secretly he wants us to know, spill the beans HotRob, the Markles are trashing your community :)
.................
@Pantsface
LOL! Isn't it crazy how we have become suspicious of any sightings of the Loch Ness Monster of Montecito? Ever since those suspect pub photos when baby Archie appeared to be miraculously hovering over the luncheon table, I have been leery of their pap shots unless I can clearly see it is them. And even then, I wonder if they set them up and called the paps themselves. Actually I wonder if we have EVER seen a pap shot that was NOT set up by the Harkles themselves.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
@Jessica
Thanks so much for all the interesting info on bot farms and Twitter! Until I started following this Harkle story I was not interested in any of the social media aspects of following celebs. If I remember correctly I think I saw a pretty good recreation of how bots work on the series Homeland where a fake news farm was set up and operated by "sock puppets".
No one except the person they paid to take the photo's. Such a joke he has become. Not even funny, just sad.
On SiriusXM’s “The Jess Cagle Show” Katherine McPhee recounted that when she revealed the name of the new baby son she just had with David Foster to Hoda Kotb and Jenna Bush Hager on their morning show, she knew Foster might get mad that she announced it.
The baby’s name is Rennie David, an old Foster family name.
She mentioned that Foster might be mad she revealed the name, but said she ended up spilling because:
“We don’t want to be, like, that pretentious over the name...”
Zing! Your ex-pal just gotcha, Megs, and publicized the barb too. ðĪĢðĪĢðĪĢðĪĢ
.
It's the only article that's ever addressed the SS hive which is a mixture of bots and real people.
A source told the Sunday People: 'There is a lot of interest in showing the interview in full.
'The original programme was the biggest show of the year so far in the UK and was bought by firms around the world.'
They added: 'Oprah's production company know they're sitting on a goldmine so it's possible a deal could be done.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9384681/Harry-Meghan-drive-170-000-Range-Rover-just-like-ones-favoured-Royals.html
That is pretty much the exact reaction of anybody that finds out that I am following the Harkle debacle.
@JennS: That article should have been the start of a conversation about the SS because it came in the wake of doxxing anti-Meghan twitter accounts by the DM.
It's the only article that's ever addressed the SS hive which is a mixture of bots and real people.
................
@Acquitaine
Wasn't that odd that the DM doxxed those woman? - many had Tumblr blogs if we are talking about the same instance.
I remember that Serena had someone from her team help Markle with the negative press and commentary around that time and I thought she had a part in it. And the palace as well. But are you saying it was all the DM that doxxed those women on Markle's behalf - JerseyDeanne and all the others?
I wonder why that article didn't start a conversation about the sugars? Did Markle squash it?
"Acquitaine said...
@JennS: That article should have been the start of a conversation about the SS because it came in the wake of doxxing anti-Meghan twitter accounts by the DM.
It's the only article that's ever addressed the SS hive which is a mixture of bots and real people.
................
@Acquitaine
Wasn't that odd that the DM doxxed those woman? - many had Tumblr blogs if we are talking about the same instance.
I remember that Serena had someone from her team help Markle with the negative press and commentary around that time and I thought she had a part in it. And the palace as well. But are you saying it was all the DM that doxxed those women on Markle's behalf - JerseyDeanne and all the others?
I wonder why that article didn't start a conversation about the sugars? Did Markle squash it?"
We are talking about the same event.
Hard to say who directed DM to dox those women.
There was suspicion that it was done at the direction of Meghan / Palace because the journalist's father sat in the royal box next to Meghan on the night she claims to have been so suicidal that she was weeping whenever the lights went down during the performance.
It seems too far fetched a connection as the journalist's father is an establishment grandee who would have been in that box regardless of which royal was in attendance plus the article was too well researched to have been pulled together in a matter of hours as it was published the day after that Meghan outing.
I seem to recall that one of the doxxed ladies said she'd been contacted weeks prior by the journalist and led to believe that the intended article was an overview of public opinion on Meghan in the most general of terms. However, even if they were tricked, their views were publicly available for all to see on their tumblr blogs.
The MacLeans article didn't start a media conversation because the media was still dancing around Meghan and Harry's public opinion which wasn't entirely trashed at that point. Given how aggressively KP was supporting anti-cyberbullying drives at this time - their Be Kind Campaign was running around this time - the timing wasn't right.
IIRC, there were some weak articles about the aggressive Meghan vs Kate fandoms, but journalists framed it in a way that implied it was a battle between fandoms rather than SS targeting anybody and everybody, including themselves, who mentioned Meghan regardless of context.
Even now they don't discuss it publicly except to say that Meghan has vicious fans on twitter.
The closest they've come to discussing the SS in public was the articles revealing that Meghan and Harry had thanked one of the more vicious fans, but they qualified it by saying they were unsure if Meghan and Harry knew she was a vicious troll. Defanged the revelation with that one sentence and the story dropped out of the hews in one cycle.
"Earlier today it was revealed that more than 90 minutes of unseen footage from the Oprah interview could be aired to the public by ITV."
Harry and Meghan are idiots for not protecting themselves against a shark like Oprah.
So far, their claim to fame is incessant whining about what life has dished out for them, and the raw deal Charles has given them.
The Harkles are giving themselves The Kraken.
Be aware of people who claim to be your friend, but are making money every time you open your mouth to confide in them.
So, when Oprah said they are not being paid for this, she was omitting the back end deal and more, a lie of omission.
The Harkles are making money on this Oprah deal. Is anybody surprised by that?
What I think they don't understand is that Oprah now owns them.
Would that doxxing article be something that Markle could have paid for like a PR piece? I am quite sure it originated with a request from MM possibly from an idea formed by Serena's PR team.
Here are a series of DM articles regarding the 'trolling' of Meghan that provide some insight and proof the Duchess was less than honest during the interview about being silenced, getting help from the palace, on her claims of avoiding reading about herself and about her mood at Cirque du Soliel!
⭐Insiders claim Meghan had a SECRET Instagram account but shut it down at Christmas after seeing vile comments from trolls which left her feeling 'unsafe'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6612035/Meghan-fake-social-media-account-shut-Christmas-seeing-vile-comments.html
-This article came out on January 20 2019 and features pics of the Harkles at the January 16th Cirque du Soleil - the night she was supposedly feeling suicidal.
-During the Oprah interview they showed images of MM looking subdued at this event yet here there is footage of her laughing and acting quite normally.
-The story about MM having her own secret social media account lays open the fact that she was indeed aware of what was being written about her in articles and by commenters despite her false claims that she avoided reading about herself.
⭐Unmasked: The cruel trolls who spew bile against the Duchess of Sussex on social media, branding her a 'hooker' and 'trash'... and call for #Megxit
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6661499/Cruel-trolls-spew-bile-against-Duchess-Sussex.html
-This is the actual doxxing article published February 2 2019
-It contains info on Kensington palace's concerns about trolling on their Instagram account and the steps they were taking to combat the issue. This serves as documentation of one of the attempts to "protect" MM despite her claims they did not do so.
-I don't know if the palace had anything to do with the doxxing but if it was indeed Markle's idea then it was not true that she was "not allowed to defend herself".
⭐'She needs the big guns': Insiders reveal Meghan's pal Serena Williams has offered Kensington Palace the services of her PR team to deal with increasing abuse from cruel trolls
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6668729/Serena-Williams-offers-Meghan-Markle-PR-advice-amid-trolling.html
-This article discusses what I referenced earlier - that Serena had loaned her PR team to help handle the 'trolls'
-Published on February 5th 2019-after the doxxing article, but that doesn't mean Serena's team didn't suggest the idea.
-Contents include more info on the palace trying to help with the Instagram comments.
-Whether Markle pushed the palace into putting this article out or did it through her PR, the idea that Markle was "SILENCED" is not exactly true! She had many ways to be heard via her PR team and this is one very good example.
-The issues with Kate are mentioned here as well.
Be aware of people who claim to be your friend, but are making money every time you open your mouth to confide in them.
............
@Fifi
You remind me of one of those old carnival fortune-teller machines that spit out little cards with proclamations of fate and destiny!
You dart in and out of the blog to drop off your latest Harkle forecasts and it's quite entertaining!ð
ððŪ⭐ðŪ⭐ðŪð
See here:
https://www.thepinballcompany.com/product/zoltar-fortune-teller-premium-version/?gclid=Cj0KCQjwutaCBhDfARIsAJHWnHsxm72iSOaD7UHC7c000UAN_QJIo8jMhY0e7s8qP2qtBqd7WBhW0UYaAp6vEALw_wcB
What exactly does the DM mean when they say that Serena "offered the services" of her PR team? PR agencies don't loan out their services. Are they saying that Serena paid for their PR? How do you "loan" a PR agency or the people who work for it to another person/persons? Who signed the contract, if there was one, as there should be?
If they mean that Serena paid for it, that's a very weird way of saying that. If The Harkles signed with her PR agency, why doesn't the DM just say that?
I think they're being consciously misleading with those words, which don't mean anything.
“It’s easy to occupy the “moral high ground” and not perform when a) you have absolutely no fans or career and b) you were not booked anywhere.”
Made me think of Meghan. Lol.
No offence meant.
@Jocelyn'sBellinis said: re: Serena's PR company loan to Meghan.
At the time, lots of articles in the media about Meghan' negative behaviour. Meghan was frustrated that the palace wasn't creating her style of countering PR so Serena very publicly claimed to be "lending" Meghan her PR people to do just that.
Of course the royal watchers knew this to be bokum since Meghan had never let go of Sunschine Sachs, and Serena was a client, but the public didn't know this and simply took the statement at face value and as truth.
Shortly afterwards the people magazine article that included details of letter to Thomas appeared. Serena posted an IG photo of herself drinking tea in a conspiratory manner on the day the story appeared.
IMO, is that Serena was heavily promoting her fashion line around the same time and did a transactional deal with Meghan to appear to be supporting her publicly regardless of the reality. Serena gave cover for Meghan to openly use Sunshine Sachs where she had used them covertly prior to that.
Btw, Serena's help extended to throwing that babyshower at which Serena very publicly merched her own fashion line throughout, covertly via the papstrolls and explicitly by taking IG pics in the bathroom during their stay at the hotel.
I think the DM reported the Serena PR story exactly as directed whilst knowing the real story. It's how they frequently report stories from 'sources' knowing full well that the subject of the article is the 'source' giving them full details.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9385077/William-angry-Harry-Meghans-insulting-disrespectful-response-Queen.html
'That was it for William, he felt they'd blindsided the Queen in such an insulting and disrespectful way,' a source close to the prince told The Sunday Times - in a piece which interviews numerous allies and makes the second-in-line to the throne's feelings clear
Can someone please post The Times article. TIA>
Accepted.
Instead, the Duke of Cambridge, who is second in line to the throne behind his father, has 'accepted' his role and 'the path set for him', royal sources say.
'He is very much his grandmother's grandson in that respect of duty and service,' the source, who is close to both brothers, told the Sunday Times.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9385495/Prince-William-not-trapped-British-Monarchy-sources-close-royal-family-say.html
Thank you Hikari ðððð
I posted the link to the Sunday Times article, but here it is again
https://archive.is/G2feq
The link is to the archived document, so you do not need a subscription.
Thank you! :)
However, I'm looking forward to see how the RF will deploy it's PR going forward to counter the Sussexes smear campaign especially outside the UK. What do you think
@Jocelyn
“Moist Moments” is all
I can offer?
I’m still working through the comments!!!
@Maneki
He is very much his Grandmothers
grandson.
Said it all. Thanks.
⭐Insiders claim Meghan had a SECRET Instagram account but shut it down at Christmas after seeing vile comments from trolls which left her feeling 'unsafe'
Perhaps someone can explain to lil' old me how you can have be harassed on a Secret Instagram account?? If nobody knows about it, how can anyone harass you. M$H really are not good at keeping secrets.
Q: If nobody knows about it, how can anyone harass you?
A: The same way she is plagued by paps - she arranges it.
Allegedly.
Oprah achieved what she wanted with the excerpts in the aired interview - racism accusations against the monarchy in the times of BLM and McCarythism-level 'wokeness'; further trashing Harry, who used to be a very popular royal; casting suspicion on Welby of the CoE for that 'secret wedding'; attempts to stir up and support Republicanism in the UK (millions spent on a trashy couple) ...
She either has more explosive footage to be used for another attack on the BRF, or she has footage she can manipulate to sustain the attack on the BRF; or she released the best stuff and will only release the rest to maintain attention for herself.
William tweeting while watching a rugby match!
Firstly, can he live with himself for this enormous betrayal of his family? Secondly, will the rulers (tech giants) put MM in the White House?
https://www.euroweeklynews.com/2021/03/21/meghan-markles-sister-calls-her-psychopath-says-windsors-keep-harry-away/
QUENTIN LETTS: Happy Harry, the hog-whimpering pheasant bagger, has been denuked and colonised
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9385087/Happy-Harry-hog-whimpering-pheasant-bagger-denuked-colonised.html
* They both have the character, connections and experience to get real high-paying, high-level jobs ... real jobs.
* They have a home on the Queen's private property (actually, one at Sandringham and one at Balmoral), and William will eventually inherit all of her private property.
* Catherine comes from a wealthy family, so, combined with William's personal wealth, they are far better off financially than the Harkles.
Those who would be hugely negatively affected by the monarchy being abolished:
* The Harkles. No safety net to bail them out. While they still have the lease on Frogmore Cottage, they have a home in the UK, but it is Crown property so they can never sell it and the conditions for them living there would be dependent on a republican government.
* The Wessexes, the Yorks (including Eugenie and Jack), the Gloucestershire's, the Kents (Duke and Duchess and Prince and Princess), and a few others who live on Crown property would either lose their homes or have to pay rent to a republican government.
Charles, like the Cambridges, has homes that are not part of Crown property, and no doubt he has a large nest egg in terms of private investments.
By the way, abolishing the monarchy will not save a huge amount of money for taxpayers. Crown property would have to be maintained, and a huge amount of staff would still be required. A president would cost as much as the Queen, and ex-presidents would require security and all kinds of other perks.
"So HM has now hired a diversity czar."
The oddest thing about this is that the Royal household has employed BAME individuals since the 90s across all households at every level.
During the later quarter of the 90s/early 00s, Charles had a BAME press secretary, Colleen Harris, who also handled William and Harry's press at the time. It was claimed that the boys loved her as she was a very motherly type.
There were several BAME people at BP working within the individual offices of the other royals as well as the overall structure.
The Sussexes had 3 publicly known BAME aides, originally hired by the Palace long before they were assigned to the Sussexes, Heather Wong, Melissa Toubati and Natalie Campbell.
The Cambridges also have BAME aides in their household.
And of course the recently retired Queen's Equerry, Major Nana.
It's absurd to announce a diversity drive when you've been quietly hiring for over 2 decades just because your idiot grandson never noticed all these diverse people around him and went on tv to call you a racist.
Thanks for the volcano-cam! Its fascinating.
A good article by Jan Moir
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/article-9378695/JAN-MOIR-Double-act-cashing-royal-soap-Oprah.html
@JennS
Thanks for the headlines. Its saddening to see that the RF may have been (at least) complicit in the doxxing.
I am so weary of lies perpetuated in the name of branding.
Every time I copy and paste that DM link you posted into my browser it comes up with the DM home page. I can't even find the article by Jan Moir via the search bar. Odd! :(
I really enjoyed that Times piece. Thank you!
Odd!
I was able to pull it Googling this:
JAN MOIR: I've admired US media queens Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King for years, but NOT now they've cloaked themselves as superhero apologists for Meghan and Harry
Exactly and I thought the exact same thing. It’s just showing the ignorant (and blatant liars like Harry and Megsy) that they were ahead of the game, but here we are reminding you (Harry etc) what you failed to take note of. It’s the exact same thing when he said he never saw or mixed with BAME etc individuals. Both Eton and Sandhurst all had BAME etc pupils and recruits, he also lived in London which is one of the most diverse cities in the world. He must go around with his eyes closed and brain permanently switched off.
For those of you who watched Lady C's latest video, I'm curious what you think. She read the tumblr post from the insider who claimed to have a cousin at Givenchy. Lady C said the story was submitted to her, not that she found it anywhere online.
I was surprised she read it because I don't think the information has been confirmed or verified by anyone close to the situation? On the other hand, maybe her reading it was her way of confirming what she's heard but was legally prevented from writing about?
Also, to the Nutty who suggested increasing the playback speed of YouTube videos, thank you! That tip is a game changer. My apologies for not remembering your name to give you credit.
Here’s the link from Jan Moir’s article on Oprah and Gayle. ;o)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9378695/JAN-MOIR-Double-act-cashing-royal-soap-Oprah.html
Got it. Thanks :)
Busy reading it now. :)
I listened to it. A fellow Nutty posted the exact same story on this post a few days ago (before Lacy C’s YouTube video) Unsure of the Nutty, possibly either Rebecca or Jessica. ;o)
For those of you who watched Lady C's latest video, I'm curious what you think. She read the tumblr post from the insider who claimed to have a cousin at Givenchy. Lady C said the story was submitted to her, not that she found it anywhere online.
I was surprised she read it because I don't think the information has been confirmed or verified by anyone close to the situation? On the other hand, maybe her reading it was her way of confirming what she's heard but was legally prevented from writing about?
Also, to the Nutty who suggested increasing the playback speed of YouTube videos, thank you! That tip is a game changer. My apologies for not remembering your name to give you credit.
Yes, I was wondering about that too!
I believe the poster who suggested increasing the speed on the videos was Hunter? (I think that's her name)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9385895/Centrepoint-boss-says-hes-never-seen-hint-racism-Prince-William.html
I was thinking earlier, that maybe the BRF wanted MM to be silent (or just tone it down) because they were protecting her? Since she's "used her voice" she's certainly put herself under a tremendous amount of scrutiny. For her to think she knows better than the BRF just illustrates her arrogance.
@Hunter, thanks for the tip!
Have I been too hard on him?
Just supposing they'd used the Botswana `marriage' as a lever for the Windsor wedding to go ahead -
Was the RF trying to extricate H almost at the 11th hour and had found that no such ceremony took place? Did Bridezilla think the Chapel service was still at risk and was desperate to seal the deal, lest it be cancelled at the last minute?
Did she assume that English law on weddings was the same as in US? So she `asked' for the garden ceremony to tie H down before the Big Day.
Welby would have had to say `Sorry, no. I'm not allowed to do it.'
I think we can imagine how she might react: `You're only saying that because I'm black!'
The usual threats may have followed - A of C sees his position and that of the Church as delicate, so offers to go through the service again (presumably he's already done it as part of the preparation, plus a run-through in the Chapel.)
Perhaps he qualified it by saying something like `I'll hear the vows you've written yourselves and if you then think of yourselves as married in the eyes of God, so be it...but it won't be according to the law and you've still got to have the big do.' He risked compromising his integrity but assumed they keep it to themselves and all would be OK in a few days.
He may have thought he'd covered himself against allegations of performing an irregular marriage but didn't realise that, to a narcissist, anything can be twisted to their advantage and they have no qualms about telling the world what was said in confidence.
I wonder what he thought when she spilled the beans?
Assuming that's how it was.
Found a tidbit on our sister blogger over on Tumblr: There’s a suggestion that After Markle met H in May 2016 as Hazza’s pay-for-play at Soho House during the Invictus visit, his Flock chain restaurants were subsequently purchased for him in exchange for his discretion. Here’s at least one reason why he’s been so schtum about his ex.
@WBBM,
Re. Welby
What you suggest is plausible, but there would certainly be wiggle room for the Archbishop to deny that he performed any sort of binding rite in the garden. I could see him saying, let’s run through your vows, and I will give them my blessing if I think they’re suitable, and we’ll say a prayer that God will also bless your upcoming marriage...A private mini run through before the big rehearsal, in a word. He may have been offering some pastoral counseling and talking Harry down from the ledge, and Markle had chosen to interpret this as ‘a secret wedding’. Without witnesses, this was not a wedding ceremony, but Markle has never allowed reality to interfere with her bespoke version of what is ‘her truth’. If she was purposely aiming to throw Welby in the soup, we have to ask why. Casting doubt on the legitimacy of her church wedding that the whole world saw wouldn’t seem to be in her interest, but in whatever passes for Markle’s mind, there is some method to her madness.
As we all recall, chef Cory catered the Invictus dinner in May 2016, an event which occurred two months prior to the alleged July 2016 meeting in London which is the official story. I think the real story is that Markle was screwing Harry during his entire Toronto visit most likely with her boyfriend’s knowledge. The restaurants were the price for letting her go without a fuss and stating quiet. Exactly WHO put up that money is a fizzy question, though.
"Perhaps he qualified it by saying something like `I'll hear the vows you've written yourselves and if you then think of yourselves as married in the eyes of God, so be it...but it won't be according to the law and you've still got to have the big do.' He risked compromising his integrity but assumed they keep it to themselves and all would be OK in a few days..."
You could be right about Welby. But that doesn't let him off the hook for me.
Perhaps being an American I don't fully understand the role of the COE. But if the AoC did what you've hypothesized & said something like "You can consider you are married in God's eyes but you still need to satisfy the law" that would seem to threaten the very intertwined essence of the church and government. And while we all have weaknesses including ministers, a minister who (essentially) says to two church members "I'll do X but don't tell anybody" is disappointing to me. It's also not plausible that he said it was a rehearsal as some have argued strongly on Quora. So far as I know, the COE doesn't allow the couple to write their own vows. So they couldn't have been rehearsing for the "real wedding" with home-written vows. And would God recognize those vows according to the COE?
And this was no ordinary wedding. Obviously the AoC was heavily involved-- it's been reported he suggested Curry. That may not be true but I am quite sure neither Harry or Meghan came up with him. Doria either. And I'm pretty sure he wasn't a last minute addition.
Supposedly the AoC also did the instruction for Meghan before baptism and confirmation. And he thought it was perfectly ok for him to speak up and say H&M "deserved" a sabbatical in 2019. I think it's more likely he was unduly influenced by something besides the race card.
I'm confused as to why H&M are taking this approach rather than publicizing their Netflix content (if there is any).
In the run-up to the wedding, William is increasingly putting out fires for the Harkles at KP, and Harry is still not completely captured (up until a few months after the wedding, he was apologizing to staff and 'having chats' with Meghan about her behaviour at the office), so Meghan ups the love bombing and pulls Harry a little deeper into the silo, where he will eventually be completely isolated with her.
So, she comes up with the idea of a secret wedding (I am sure she dressed up in some way for it), calls Welby, who rushes over to wherever they are. Welby tells them it is not a legal marriage (Meghan blocks her ears when anyone tells her what she does not want to hear), but in the eyes of God ...
I wonder how elaborate this secret ceremony was? They exchanged vows, and Welby said his part and gave a blessing. Did Welby go so far as to offer communion, even though that wouod be against church law? Did they take photographs?
None of the three thought of how disrespectful this was to all the people who would be at the wedding, all the people who had worked so hard to put it all together, and the British taxpayers (and Harry's family) who paid many millions for the wedding.
Three narcissists colluding ... Welby needs to resign, but not before apologizing to the Queen and the people of the UK. I am most disappointed in the response from the church (it was the dress rehearsal - no, it wasn't), and in the media for not going after Welby.
The need for security is completely at odds with their "we want to live a normal, private life" mantra. I don't believe it. MM's ego is so out of control, losing the security was a huge blow to her. It was telling her, in essence, she is not a Cambridge, she is not a Biden or Harris, and I think she can't tolerate that reality.
@CookieShark: Meghan is likely the type of persons who think they need to have a large security detail to emphasize how important they are. These people also are often they types who show up with a large entourage of security, a handler, a personal assistant and hangers on to attempt to enhance their importance.
I believe Meghan is one of this type of person. A favorite description from my brother about this type of person: Once a sphincter, always a sphincter.
H.G. Tudor on narcsite.com would label these narcissistic behaviors as grandiosity and character acquisition, which are two of Meghan’s go-to narc behaviors.
A DM article from when Meghan was still in Toronto where the videographer doing the photo shoot described Meghan as “According to the professional cameraman, Meghan would bring a large entourage with her on set and laid down a strict set of rules – including not to shoot her feet.”
“The Suits actress also insisted on having expensive champagne used in the shoot, demanded she be given full approval over all the footage and acted like she was a 'superstar'.
'She was very high maintenance and rude,' the videographer explained. 'She was difficult and demanding.'”
“The videographer, who wished to remain anonymous because he still works in the industry, said when he worked on a promotional project with the Duchess in Toronto, Canada during her Suits days, she had already garnered a reputation for being difficult.”
“‘People told me, ''get ready because she is a lot''. They used to call her ''the princess'',' he said.”
“‘When I saw her, right away from the moment she arrived, I didn't even know who she was and she was acting like a diva.
'It was the attitude, how she talked to people, the rules.’”
“‘She came in wearing a (baseball) cap, hiding her face and she had her head down and just walked back towards the make-up room.’”
“‘It was like it was the big diva coming in, and she doesn't want people to see her, like you would do if you're walking in the street and you don't want the paparazzi to take your picture.’”
They continued, “‘So I was like, ''wow''. I wasn't impressed. Everyone thought, ''she is acting like an A-lister when she is not even a D-lister''. But it was kind of like a caricature of someone playing the superstar, you know, because a real superstar, generally unless it's a super bad day, they will play it naturally and be generous with their presence.’”
The May 2020 DM article headline is:
EXCLUSIVE: 'After the camera stops, she's not the most friendly.' Meghan Markle had strict rules not to shoot her funky FEET, videographer reveals and was already called a 'princess' for her 'diva' behavior
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8265055/Meghan-Markle-called-princess-diva-behavior-set.html
We were catching up and chatting and she said, “Do you know who Prince Harry is and his wife, she is kind of strange, they moved to LA from England?”
Me: yes....
“They are such losers. Anyway Prince Harry and his wife said all this stuff about his brother and family, he’s completely s***. X (her BF) is super happy because he says it is like him and his younger brother who is this f***-up jerk, and how X felt like he had to sort of watch out for his brother and clean his messes up his whole life, so their parents didn’t find , out and even hide his (X) own successes and internship work so his brother wouldn’t get mad. This is for years! Then last year before Covid his brother wrecked out on a good opportunity and was being a jerk and didn’t care, he is an ultra whiner baby like Prince Harry and his wife are, But X finally got so mad he just decided not to deal with his brother anymore at all, he was sick of it. It has bee so bad, really, forever, so I can see why, and his brother is even mean to me. And then X decided he would just be himself and just do all his good stuff and focus on us for a change. So even with the pandemic he got promoted. And he is way happier than he has been the last five years since we met. It is so great. He said Prince Harry being such huge sh****** to his brother made him see he did the right thing walking far away from his, because no matter how much you do some people are just hateful narcissists who suck you dry, It’s like he can breathe now and live without trying not to upset his brother. So he said watch, Harry’s brother will probably find out he can be happier too and just do what he wants and not hide his ideas or work either. Anyway we are moving into his house together now because he doesn’t have to worry about his brother being jealous an mean anymore, so, sofas....”
I asked what she thinks about Meghan?
—- it’s like how can she be for real? so bizarre. Everyone I work with thinks she’s crazy. She acts like she was Brie Larsen or Jennifer Lawrence. The guys say she is why they are afraid to get married, what if you end up with a sociopath? Who makes a prince leave his whole country? But they think Prince Harry was a loser before her, to be so stupid to let her act like she is his boss....
Of course the royal watchers knew this to be bokum since Meghan had never let go of Sunschine Sachs, and Serena was a client, but the public didn't know this and simply took the statement at face value and as truth.
.............
**@Acquitaine
You didn't acknowledge the Serena-lends-her-PR story when I first mentioned it and I didn't realize you knew the "inside scoop". I went looking for those troll-bullying stories in order to show you something I thought you weren't aware of as well as to establish more proof of MM's interview lies to post here on the blog.
I had no idea the Serena story was a screen although there is always the chance that Serena may have worked with specific agents within SS that she recommended to MM. I remember at the time this story came out both Markle critics and sugars wrote about the Serena PR aide as if it were true.
I hope I managed to at least emphasize some of MM'S lies in my post.
Markle certainly managed to speak out quite a bit for someone who claims to have been 'silenced' while 'trapped' within the Firm!
I think if MM's copyright/privacy case had gone to trial these shenanigans with her contrived article submissions would have been uncovered and made public.
Justice Wobbly was a huge disappointment!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
SirStinxAlot said...
Insiders claim Meghan had a SECRET Instagram account but shut it down at Christmas after seeing vile comments from trolls which left her feeling 'unsafe'
Perhaps someone can explain to lil' old me how you can have be harassed on a Secret Instagram account?? If nobody knows about it, how can anyone harass you. M$H really are not good at keeping secrets.
................
**@SirStinxAlot and WildBoar
That headline is silly, isn't it?ðĪĢ
I think what MM was saying in that article was she established this secret account to follow her friends on social media but while online she was exposed to (and couldn't help but read) all the negative articles written about her as well as the massive amount of negative comments from the public. Therefore she is claiming that she had to stop going online altogether.
That article is interesting for a number of reasons some of which I already laid out but also because it may be an example of MM trying to establish a record of both her unhappiness at being a member of the Firm and how much the tabloids and commenters supposedly hurt her.
It's also ironic since she claimed many times that she didn't read about herself.ðĪĢ
Instead, the Duke of Cambridge, who is second in line to the throne behind his father, has 'accepted' his role and 'the path set for him', royal sources say.
'He is very much his grandmother's grandson in that respect of duty and service,' the source, who is close to both brothers, told the Sunday Times.'"
I have no doubt that if PW announced that he and his family were leaving in a lurch, that JHAMS would be on the first flight back.
Sandie, I hadn't thought much about it but you do make a good point that most of the senior BRF will come out well the monarchy went away.
What JHAMS haven't figured out yet is that: if something like that happened, they would be even less likely to get any money now/future as those with it would be wanting to make certain it all lasted enough for them (and therefore unlikely to risk sharing much of anything to the people who helped end the former lifestyle - perhaps not so much as spite but as a recognition of what the lifestyle costs them now out of their own pocket/not wanting to come up short in 20/30 years).
The phrase Cutting off your nose to spite your face (sorta comes to mind).
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14388423/affairs-madness-and-its-a-knockout-royals-survive/
He is not used to having to do anything himself. The planning etc. He has always had security, secretaries, assistants, aides etc to handle things. He's the over-indulged spoiled child that used to just snap his fingers and things were done for him.
The author of the post that Lady C read could have been sent it to her, along with having it first printed elsewhere. Any person who came across it could also have sent it to Lady C, who used it as a starting point to teach the lesson of the day.
@Acquetaine,
I can't find your reply to me about Serena, so will try to wing my reply.
Yes, she coordinated the party for MM in NYC and merched her clothing line. I think all of us caught that.
Serena's ramped up her PR because she knows she is close to the end of her tennis career and, being the narc that she is, is looking for ways to merch her own clothes and be a spokesmodel for other businesses. Money doesn't matter, as she and Alexis have plenty. It's now the fame that drives her, that she wishes to keep and capitalize on.
Have you ever heard of Duper Delight? It's a facial body language movement that military intelligence, police and the alphabet agencies look for when interrogating a prisoner or suspect. It is also used in everyday life by people who have been trained to spot it. It indicates somebody who is lying, but who is also extremely enjoying the lie, believing that they have put one over on the interrogator.
Serena's tea-sipping video is a prime example of Duper's Delight, which is why I never believed that she had backed away from MM. Serena had that sly smirk which indicated a woman who was playing with the truth and getting enjoyment out of (what she thought of as) fooling others (us). It was so obvious that she was toying with the audience, like a cat plays with a mouse.
Serena was obviously on MM's side in a mean girl way in that video. She got evil pleasure out of sipping tea and saying she didn't know MM, and the pleasure she got was because she was toying with the audience with an "I know something you don't know" smirk, a very childish display. She might as well have ended with, "Ha ha! So there!," accompanied with her sticking out her tongue at the audience.
Re-watch it when you can, and I think you'll see it. MM has displayed Duper's Delight, too.
"Duper's Delight is a particular micro expression a person will display that betrays a sense of enjoyment they are getting out of controlling and deceiving another person. It is a very important expression to watch out for in catching dishonesty in a person. In fact it is a form of body language pretty much exclusively reserved for pathological character types.
The phrase was coined by the psychologist and body language expert Dr Paul Ekman and was defined by him as “the pleasure we get over having someone else in our control and being able to manipulate them”.
Duping delight most often manifests as a grin or a smirk which will flash across a person’s face, and is usually completely inappropriate to the situation or the topic that is being spoken about. The person is either about to lie, or is lying to someone and they are believing it, and the smirk is a leaked expression of pleasure that they are getting away with it."
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2021/03/blind-item-3_21.html
Item #3
This is why you can never trust any interview with the permanent A+ lister. She lets obvious lies just go with no followup, because she wants to get the big interviews. She knows there is no singing in a mosque, but just nods anyway and lets it go. It is why the alliterate one knew she could say literally anything and nothing would be challenged. If it is not challenged, then it is accepted as fact.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2021/03/blind-item-4_21.html
lind Item #4
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.
Beyond what you said about Harry wanting security, I think he wants it as a show of power in a place where he really has no power, and external things such as having private security propels him into a higher category of wealth and power (he thinks).
I'm waiting for the day when The Harkles are out in their Range Rover with two little flags flapping in the breeze from the hood of their car, like the heads of state that they believe they are.
A proper rehearsal, in church, is about where one stands for what, when one lets go of the flowers and takes them back again, when one faces the front & when the beloved, takes hands or kneels closer to the altar, and where the Register will be.
In their case, it would include where PC would greet her and where HM will be sitting.
Yes, she's dropped Welby into the doggy-doo - I wonder why, unless it was to demonstrate power over him to retaliate for some perceived slight. Inviting Bp Curry(for all that he's ECUSA's presiding Bishop and AofC's `opposite number', might have been offensive to her, as was the choir. How dare they imply she had anything to do with Black culture!!!
My husband reckons that Welby won't return to his post after the sabbatical. He has diabolical egg all over his Archipiscopal face.
I think that CDAN blind is referring to Senator Diane Feinstein from California
I read somewhere that Charles stopped taking Harrys calls because he would just ask for more and more money. No parent wants to be Bank of Dad. Im proud of Charles for cutting them off financially. I think most adults are. Imo
@Jdubja
I think that CDAN blind is referring to Senator Diane Feinstein from California
Yes, I agree. The Congress have moved so far left into Woke Joke territory that she is almost seen as a centrist (therefore she must be destroyed). There have been stories leaked about dementia/Alzheimer disease (which may be accurate) but they are busily quashing the same rumors about Biden so those have been apparently tabled for the nonce. The knives are still being sharpened.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1412851/Prince-Harry-Royal-Family-news-leaks-Meghan-Markle-Gayle-King-latest-vn
Royal Family taken aback as Prince Harry threatens to use 'unprecedented' pressure tactic
I can't find our original conversation either, but i agree with your comment re: Duper's delight and Serena's tea sipping.
I think i was trying to explain why the DM would write an article stating that obvious lie that Serena "lent" her PR peopoe to Meghan.
DM is not above playing people magazine's game where they get paid to print a publicist's line.
In this case that Serena had 'lent' Meghan her publicists to craft a rebuttal to all those mean articles that didn't reflect dear sweet Meghan.
Such an obvious lie when they were both Sunshine sachs clients and that PR firm is infamous for synergising it's clients for mutual benefit.
My take on the matter touches on your point re: Serena's fashion line and fame.
A deal made for a mutual PR arrangement that allows Meghan to break cover over her use of Sunschine Sachs that gives her plausible deniability and Serena gets to use Meghan's royal fame to push her fashion line.
Soon after that we started to see the results, from people magazine to baby shower and more.
If Meghan wasn't such a self-sabotaging narc, she could have maintained that plausible deniability by using them in a lowkey, organic way instead of bludgeoning us all with the endless articles and events designed to show how sweet and kind she is.
from https://spectator.com.au/2021/03/a-handy-guide-to-marklism/
"Anyone know what this is all about?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1412851/Prince-Harry-Royal-Family-news-leaks-Meghan-Markle-Gayle-King-latest-vn
Royal Family taken aback as Prince Harry threatens to use 'unprecedented' pressure tactic"
I think the express is late to this story.
Gayle announced that Oprah has a further 90mins- 2hrs of unscreened interview footage that can be shown as heeded. The UK media interpreted this as blackmail threats to BRF that if Harry and Meghan don't get what they demand then this extra footage will be leaked. Inference is that it is damaging to the royals.
In many of Wallis biographies about her life in exile, it's often repeated that she was very diligent about recreating and maintaining the lifestyle David had led after abdicating.
She went to great lengths to maintain a household and accroutrements of his former life. I think she wrote to the royal family to send her the royal insignia of his former life, in particular as King, so that she could adorn his private quarters with it.
It makes for very sad reading of an incredibly stressful life in exile.
I don't think Meghan gives that kind of thought to Harry's comfort in exile.
Please see my response to you at March 21, 2021 at 7:55 PM.
I also recalled another piece of the puzzle - wasn't there talk about MM no longer using SS at one point back in 2019? Something about one of the owner's just offering some advice off the books? Since I come from a very different background and training (thank God) I don't know what this sort of deal would be called. But perhaps this could be why Serena's offer of her PR would make some type of sense - or my other idea of Serena using different agents within the company who she felt might have some better ideas on how to handle the situation? While I agree it could have been an exchange of favors between MM and SR, I definitely remember at the time that people following the story thought her PR offered some temporary help to MM.
Meghan Markle is the "alliterate one" on CDAN.
I remember that, too, about Ken Sunshine being a "friend" of MM, and that she didn't pay him, but he offered his "services" to her for free. Who knows if that's true or not.
I try to look at things the opposite way sometimes. I wonder if MM "offered her services" to Ken Sunshine in return for PR with no monetary payment.
I don't think that she can help it. She appears to have always sowed chaos wherever she went. She gives lip service to being "kind" but, if given several situations and asked to pick the one that demonstrated "kindness", I do not think that she could pick out the correct answer. She has never been kind to her family, former husband(s) or men that she has used, or people that have worked for her.
Something about her is broken and cannot be fixed. She constantly craves more, whether it is attention or money, but cannot care for what she has.
Please keep us UK nutties informed what goes down stateside, I have a feeling we don't get to hear it all, a lot is sanctioned, I need to change my browser :) I don't thnk the USA gets sloppy seconds as regards the Markles, you guys are their target audience after burning the bridges over here. We were never good enough for her!
OWN floundered until Oprah made a deal with Tyler Perry to do some work for the channel (from another article).
https://www.forbes.com/sites/maddieberg/2020/12/22/oprah-winfrey-just-sold-most-of-her-stake-in-her-own-cable-network/?sh=3859216a2546
The 2019 story about ditching Sunshine Sachs was a sleight of hand where Sunschine Sachs was 'dropped' for personal representation, but kept for commercial and charity representation of Sussexroyal and Travalyst. Paid for by the Disney $3M fee for that Elephant documentary as tweeted by Chris Ship at ITV.
However, when Megxit happened and in the subsequent months, we've discovered that Meghan is still under the care of the same person at Sunschine Sachs as always. There was never a break.
I suspect she's still under their care despite hiring her own press secretary in The office of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
Absolutely. I can't imagine how this is all going to end as she keeps on getting worse, spreading more and more pain and chaos. Lady C warned last night that this is not going to turn out well. This hanging the extra interview footage over the heads of the BRF, for all the world to see, reminds me of thumb screws they used in the Tower of London. Tightening day by day. When we are talking about a 94-year-old woman and her 99-year-old-husband just out of hospital. Words fail me. I don't understand how so many Americans can continue to support her.
I'm also not happy about this Diversity Tsar. To me it looks like giving her ammunition. It's not needed.
@Acquitaine - I was interested in your point about Wallis Simpson after the Abdication. Looking after Edward was a full-time job and she never stopped working at it. I've mentioned Richard Burton's diaries before, when he would attend dinners in their Parisian house. No matter how small the group, you never forgot he used to be King and Emperor. People found it secretly amusing but it was absolutely essential to their marriage and life together, that Wallis maintained all the trappings he expected. Harry of course was never in that position but he is just as sensitive and obsessed about his position. Perhaps even more so, as he is seeking something he was never entitled to, even before the Cambridge children came along. His ego, false entitlement and self-absorption never let up. Meghan is the last woman on earth to pander to his needs, once he no longer meets hers. I keep wondering how long this will take, before Harry gets his just deserts? Will his grandparents live to see it? Also, how much can they protect the Duke of Edinburgh from all this, now he's home again?
Yes, "Meghan Markle is the "alliterate one" on CDAN.", I am well aware of what alliterate means. I was responding to @Jdubya's comment about whom she might be replacing.
Thank you for reminding me why I never comment ...
I'd assume she'd be looking for a more lucrative partnership with the other streaming players.
@jenn,
I remember that, too, about Ken Sunshine being a "friend" of MM, and that she didn't pay him, but he offered his "services" to her for free. Who knows if that's true or not.
I try to look at things the opposite way sometimes. I wonder if MM "offered her services" to Ken Sunshine in return for PR with no monetary payment.
..............
@Jocelyn
Thank you for backing up that memory from Harkle history. I spend some time putting together my earlier post with links to the articles on the doxxing/Serena-PR/troll-complaints and didn't think my thoughts on possible ways Serena could have been involved deserved to be totally blown off - twice. And my responses ignored. I may not have known much about the PR business before Meghan Markle entered my world but I have been following this story since September 2017 and recognized her as a phony social-climbing gold-digging scam artist as soon as I began to pay attention.ðĪĢ
I get no response on many of my comments, so I understand your pain. It's just the way things go around here, especially when posts are flying fast and furious. Please know that people do read your posts, but they be working on another aspect of the Harkles or they just don't have anything to add.
I tried to find a post that @Acquetaine wrote to me last night, so that I could respond to her, and I couldn't find it. She couldn't find her comment to me, either. When it gets up to 400-500 comments, it gets extremely difficult to find and respond to posts.
Please know that your research and comments are very much appreciated.
I think it was Patrick Jephson (Diana's private secretary) who wrote that the BRF is essentially a group of separate households and although you could be talking about fathers and sons, familial ties never stopped the essential rivalry between those households and their dealings with the media. In particular, Charles would always resent whoever took attention away from him. I hope this is not going to affect their ongoing response to the Sussexes. The last couple of days that response has looked a little messy.
I would prefer William to lead as the response to him by the public is less complicated. For Charles it is fraught with all the problems of the 1990s, for those who can remember, and he can come across as defensive and a little pot-calling-the-kettle-black, especially when you think of the Dimbleby interview when he acknowledged adultery to millions of people.
William leading the fight back would highlight the essential tragedy of all this. Two brothers. Both bereaved. The contrast in what they have done since then would show a significant part of this mess is Harry's inability to deal with problems in an adult way. He is punishing us all for his failings. William has always behaved well. He is doing his job. He stepped up to the plate during this pandemic. Harry could have done the same. No one was stopping him. He ran away.
Of all the Windsors, William is on the strongest ground to respond. He is the future. I'm afraid I have little time for the Queen here, due to her repeated weakness dealing with those she loves who have damaged the monarchy. She needs to step back a little. When you look at the response from Canadian polls especially, the only thing that can save this now is a strong focus on a better future. One worth sticking around for.
I find a good feature to use when trying to locate posts or info on a blog page is to utilize "contol+F" to find whatever I need. I do that when looking for specific posters or for my own name to check for replies. I also use it for topics...I could type doxxing if I want to see all the posts on this page related to that particular subject. For me, each page is way too long and there is always a jumble of conversations going on making it difficult to navigate without a 'find' feature.
Speaking of doxxing and Markle's PR - I remembered that Nutty did a post on the doxxing incident back in February 2019 so I grabbed a copy to paste an excerpt here. It's worth a re-read now considering everything happening in the present.
Part 1
By Nutty Flavor:
Meghan Markle vs the Bloggers
February 04, 2019
"One might think that a princess in a palace would have better things to do than go after a disabled middle-aged woman living in a trailer park in Florida.
Apparently not, if you are Princess Henry, the Duchess of Sussex. The former Meghan Markle's highly-paid PR team - and it's not clear if that team is paid by the British taxpayer or from Meg's merching income - placed several stories in high-circulation British newspapers over the weekend of February 2, 2019.
The stories "named and shamed" several bloggers who have been Meghan detractors, including Deanne Masters, who blogs under the name JerseyDeanne.
Deanne is a two-time cancer survivor living with fibromyalgia who passes the time blogging in a relatively innocent way (no profanity) about hunky Superman actor Henry Cavill, make-up tips for ladies over 50, her love for the British Royal Family, and her disdain for Meghan Markle.
Here's Deanne as described in the Daily Mail article:
Deanne Masters, from Florida, uses her blog, Jerseydeanne.com, to share outrageous anonymous posts from others, including fake claims Meghan has slept with people for drugs. ‘She is a public servant who was not elected and people do have a right to criticise their representative,’ Masters said.
Deanne has a WordPress blog, so one could argue that her words are public and could be quoted. She does not use her full name on the blog, however - that was revealed to the public in the Daily Mail. In addition, the photo that ran in the Daily Mail appears to come from a personal Facebook page. (It originally included her husband, who would have an even better invasion of privacy case against the Daily Mail.)
Five other middle-aged lady bloggers, including two African-Americans, were also named and in some cases their photos were shown, all apparently without their permission.
A couple of quick thoughts.
First of all, who authorized this? Unlike Meghan, these ladies don't have security teams. And Meghan's fans can be pretty vicious - one reportedly threatened to call the electricity company and shut off the juice for Deanne's respirator. Can you imagine the blowback on the British Royal Family if any of these women were harmed?
Secondly, whoever did this was a professional PR team with access to legal advice. No one living in the European Union was targeted, presumably because of the EU's stringent privacy laws known as GPDR. (As an EU resident myself, I can't read many prominent US websites because their code doesn't properly protect my privacy. Big websites, like the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune).
Meg and her people clearly didn't want to deal with a GPDR complaint. All the women named live in the USA or Canada.
Thirdly, hasn't anyone on Meg's team heard of the Streisand effect? Before the stories ran this weekend, the general public had no idea that there was an underground network of bloggers who deeply disliked Meghan Markle. Now they do. The bloggers named say their traffic has been going through the roof since the article ran.
The DM article plus similar stories in the Sun, Express, and the Daily Telegraph - sometimes called the "Palacegraph" because it is so often used by the Royals to send messages - was an incredible miscalculation.
The DM quotes a Kensington Palace source as saying, "We take any threats and abuse raised to our principals very seriously," but it's hard to argue that an elderly lady in Canada who calls the Duchess of Sussex a "flopsy floozy" is much of a threat to national security.
The mantra "Never complain, never explain" has worked well for the Royals for generations.
But Meghan Markle is a divider, a splitter, and a natural creator of chaos who apparently has plenty of time to read tiny blogs (including, I assume, this one) and try to frighten their authors into self-censoring what they write.
Meg's approach to public relations is apparently based on the old song from Evita, "You Must Love Me." But the job of the populace is not to adore her. She works for them; they don't work for her.
This won't end well for Meghan."
Thanks for the control+f info. That will come in handy.
I don't have a clue as to why the DM would dox those people. Who gave the go-ahead on this? Who pulled the strings? It's just bizarre that a news org would do this.
"So HM has now hired a diversity czar."
@Acquitaine
"The oddest thing about this is that the Royal household has employed BAME individuals since the 90s across all households at every level." and then goes on to name people.
How like HM to be already doing this years before the current wave of SJ began talking of the importance and value.
I guess that because it was not titled in an obvious way such as Diversity Directions or Promoting Multi Sensitivity that for those who are looking for racism and failing to find flashy promotionals like memos, stickers, tea mugs and posters in the tea room and titles on business cards stating that as existing, they must be coming to the conclusion that racism and insensitivity is (therefore) systemic to the organization.
To me, it makes Her Majesty look weak. It is sad to see all of this and someone is running a smear campaign on Charles now as well. I wish Charles would abdicate the throne to William, but I know William probably wants more time with his children before taking on the heavy burden of Monarch. But then, HM was in her mid twenties.
It will be a sad day for all when she and PP are gone.
Ah, c'mon, comment away!
I wasn't posting about alliteration to you. There were several people who mentioned two other women who didn't have alliterative names.
Maybe it IS best if you don't post if your feelings get hurt for no reason.
I don't think that she can help it. She appears to have always sowed chaos wherever she went. She gives lip service to being "kind" but, if given several situations and asked to pick the one that demonstrated "kindness", I do not think that she could pick out the correct answer. She has never been kind to her family, former husband(s) or men that she has used, or people that have worked for her.
Something about her is broken and cannot be fixed. She constantly craves more, whether it is attention or money, but cannot care for what she has.
That is such a perfect and perceptive description of her!
I can't tell you how many times I've reached for the thumbs up button on here. I also wish we had one.
And as everyone else says, this list moves so fast . . .
https://www.datalounge.com/thread/26150776-blind-item-from-twitter-
This says she kept her PR
(her legs! are indeed odd)
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/1902936/meghan-markle-calls-it-quits-on-showbiz-career-following-engagement-to-prince-harry/
Sorry if repeat
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6668729/Serena-Williams-offers-Meghan-Markle-PR-advice-amid-trolling.html
Thought this may be of interest for notes. History of companies /future "supporters" maybe
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/news/pr-firm-sunshine-sachs-promotes-duo-partner-posts-020504398.html
☕
https://blindgossip.com/public-relations-chaos/
Random creepy gif of Meg staring at Catherine I found in a thread
https://mobile.twitter.com/things_royal/status/1263829813829173250?s=20
I don't mind searching for stuff if Iknow what to look for. I appreciate what you post and will help if I can ð
I just looked back at my post about alliteration. I didn't put @annie, so I don't know why or how you think that was addressed to you. My comment was also not just under your comment, so there should be no reason to think that I was addressing you, unless you have sort of self-persecution complex.
LSA very difficult for me to navigate
Also was reminded (somewhere) where Meg demanded she "break the internet" with new PR ð
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/page-4895
That is such a perfect and perceptive description of her!
Heh. I was being diplomatic. She reminds me of a dog rescued from the pound that would be a good dog for several days and then suddenly turn on the rescuer and savagely attack.
Great comment about MM as a dog who turns on its owner!
Thanks for the nice messages. I'm sorry if I seemed grouchy - I was actually just a bit peeved with one particular poster who left me hanging.
@Puds
"Find in page" is the same shortcut as "control plus F". Aren't they great for this forum? I've been using the c+f ever since the blog changed formats and you could no longer respond directly to someone's post.
It would be helpful too if everyone got an avatar. The avatars help show where posts start and end and they also help locate a specific person.
If anyone needs a picture for an avi just let me know - I have a ton of them!!ðĪĢ
@Jocelyn
I'm quite sure that the doxxing plan/desire originated with MM but why the DM agreed to go along with it I don't know. The reporter was a woman - Erica Doyle Higgins. I remember one of the women targeted said she had been misled. Everyone was warning all the Megxiteers to avoid/hang up on any unfamiliar calls since the reporter might quote you if she was able to reach you.
@Puds, @Mom Mobile, @Jocelyn's Bellinis, and @Teasmade
Thanks for the nice messages. I'm sorry if I seemed grouchy - I was actually just a bit peeved with one particular poster who left me hanging.
I hope it wasn't me! I've had four grandchildren here this week (yay spring break!) and got my second COVID shot Thursday which kicked my butt. (Or maybe it was the getting knocked down by the sheep when a grandchild scared them and they decided to get to the other side of me by running through my legs as I was walking that kicked my butt.) I'm pretty sure that I left a *lot* of people hanging who answered questions that I was no longer here to read.
I looked up Erica Doyle Higgins. She isn't a reporter anymore, but is going to school at Kings Inn. She sounds like a freelancer. All of her reporting jobs lasted one year, except for the Irish Sun where she was for two years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King%27s_Inns
Thanks for the PR posts! That blind from 1/2020 is good as it confirms what I was saying earlier about how she was suddenly no longer with SS at one point. Everything w/ Markle is always so murky and I think I have had enough of her murky world tonight.
Oh except for this....did anyone else grow more suspicious about the Harkles' location after the Montecito poster paid us a visit again yesterday? He said he didn't recognize any of the roads Hapless was peddling on and no one is seeing them around. WTH?
Yesterday I tried looking in local Montecito news online and the only mentions they have of the Harkles is what we already know. Apparently, the one time they were seen in town was when they dined out with the Fosters.
I agree that all should feel free to post, including @annie. However, I think she should look at her attack on me for absolutely no reason as a learning experience.
I'm just going to make myself believe that she's having a bad day and needed to take it out on somebody, and that was me.
Feel free to post, @annie. I'm looking forward to hearing what you have to say.
@JennS, at.11:46 pm, March 21
Hi—The one thing I can respond to is I remember for sure SS was said to no longer work for Meghan, because I read it way back when On Twitter and someone I work with heard the same thing from her brother in PR.....so I just looked it up and yes — it was posted on Twitter by the poster who goes by “#yacht girl”, on January 20, 2020 - - you can still see it —- “Sunshine Sachs says it no longer represents Meghan Markle...”
Okay back to work, late night — thanks to you and everyone for posting so many articles and great finds. Dying to read it all!
No LOL it wasn't you! And I remember you said you'd be gone for a while busy with your grandkids.ð
I forgot to mention in my post above that Harry was of course also spotted by HotðRob at a traffic light! So I guess that is 2 x the elusive royals have been seen in their hometown!!!!
@Jocelyn
I guess that doxxing job was something that a freelancer would take? I thought I remembered that one blogger said a man called her but maybe Higgins also had someone else cold calling. That whole thing was very creepy and cruel of Markle!
@Lucy,
Ugh never mind glanced up and see @Lucy already provided the info on SS and you saw it—
Sorry, shouldn’t have posted til I had time to read everything here!
I hope you're feeling better! I haven't had the shot yet, so am interested in your side effects. Would you tell me what your symptoms were?
This is a trying time for everyone, so all of us can get grouchy at times. Just know that we love you here as one of our most prolific posters- with a great sense of humor!
Was I the poster who left you hanging?! If so I apologize— I have been drowning in an addition to a project since a work emergency Friday and haven’t had a chance to read and catch up other than a post on something a former intern said to me, If it was me, sorry, let me know and any response needed? I am hoping to sit and catch up tomorrow evening, I am way way behind!
Thanks for that info on SS!ð
I have been thinking about your post on the Foster name announcement snark! Notice they still have not said anything to back up the murky one. He he he!
I recently saw something else about the Fosters and thought she was complaining about him a bit. It made me wonder how long that marriage will last. I don't think he is an easy person to be with - I watched him on Real Housewives of Beverly Hills when he was married to Yolanda and I remember when she had guests over they all had to be 'silent' and completely attentive while he played the piano - which was covered with his Grammys.ðĪŠ
Did you see the post from the Montecito resident?
She is very young, so maybe she didn't have the experience behind her to say no to doxxing people? I know that if I was a freelancer, and some paper asked me to dox people, I wouldn't do it. That's where ethics comes in. She could have done it as a freelancer and sent it to the DM on spec, but why they would print it is another matter. An editor had to approve it before publishing.
Was this in the print version of the paper or just online? If it was just online, maybe she could have slipped it in without an editor noticing, but that's a big stretch. Look at her photo and tell me she's not a MM fangirl.
Oh I feel so bad - no, it was Acquitaine.
Please don't worry.
@Puds what is a puds?
@AnT I look forward to you catching up tomorrow!
ððð
Whoops! I'm sorry! I gave the wrong reporter's name - I must have grabbed it off another DM article that I had been looking at.
The correct name for the doxxing reporter is CHARLOTTE WACE.
Here is the article:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6661499/Cruel-trolls-spew-bile-against-Duchess-Sussex.html
I need to figure out where I grabbed the freelancer's name from...
@swampwoman,
I hope you're feeling better! I haven't had the shot yet, so am interested in your side effects. Would you tell me what your symptoms were?
Sure! I had the Pfizer shot so, if you get another shot, your side effects may be different (or have none at all). First shot, as the day wore on, my arm felt like I'd been hit by a baseball bat. Since I've been hit in shoulder by a baseball bat before, I think it is a fairly good description. By the evening of the first day, I had problems lifting my arm as high as shoulder height. Since exercise is supposed to help, I raised and lowered the arm several times, with weights, and it was much better the second day.
For the second shot, husband said his arm was not nearly as sore, so I was hopeful. I was WRONG! I got the shot in the left arm this time instead of the right, and that sucker was even more sore. I worked it regardless of pain. I had trouble sleeping that night because my entire body ached. By morning, I was running a low-grade fever. Then, of course, I got run over by sheep as I was out feeding. I was tired, grumpy, sore and taught the sheep and the grandkids new bad words.
By the evening, I was feeling well enough to show the grandkids how to make concrete hands by mixing portland cement, sand, some acrylic paint for color, and water then packing it into medical gloves to dry. The girls kept trying to wiggle the fingers as it was drying (oops) so I have broken concrete fingers to peel out of the gloves. I figure we may go ahead and make some concrete zombie heads to go along with the hands with the broken fingers and maybe line the fenceline like they're coming up out of graves. The new neighbors should really appreciate that (heh).
Left arm is still a bit sore, nothing much, and it looks as though I have a couple of blister-like lesions at the injection site. There was nothing to warrant skipping the vaccine. I haven't even acquired any additional eyeballs or the ability to leap short sheep in a single bounds.
Ok I figured out what I did - I was actually NOT exactly wrong! Erica Doyle Higgins did indeed write the doxxing article but it was for the SUN. It was the same exact story that she quotes from the DM...so I'm guessing the story originated with the DM writer Charlotte Wace. Both reporters wrote about it.
Here is Higgins version:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8341290/meghan-markle-trolls-social-media/
Did you see the old post from Nutty that I pasted here on the last page? She said that the pr team would have had legal advice in order to make that move. I just seems despicable all around. I do think that Deanne started some sort of legal action. She had extra incentive because they originally made the mistake of posting a photo that included her husband.
Charlotte Wace went into a woman's home and filmed her and her child with a hidden camera.
https://hackinginquiry.org/the-mail-on-sunday-and-danielle-hindley-proof-that-nothing-has-changed/
She worked for the MoS as a royal correspondent for four years then moved to the Times in Jan 2020.
If I have the right Wace family, she comes from extreme wealth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Wace
https://www.responsesource.com/bulletin/news/role-change-for-charlotte-wace/correspondent.
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/one-britains-richest-men-spotted-2163780
You'd think they would have counsel before printing this, but who knows what's going on. No reputable paper or reporter would do this. I wouldn't allow it when I was an editor. However, if she is part of one of the richest families in Britain, maybe she has pull that other reporters don't, and she went to the top to get an ok? Puzzling.
Okay! I was worried, i am sorry I disappeared, work snarl, somebody wanted as extra thing that is actually simple but everyone in Client-land bickering with each other and we are cranking solutions to try to soothe all warring factions, lol. I am dead tired and so over it.
Foster sounds a dreadful sort of spouse to me, cranky and caustic and narcissistic, and also disinterested in wives and young offspring. She must have thought an industry connection was worth it. Ugh. He seems to move on so who knows. I once read a remark from a former Foster coworker complaining Foster failed to give creative credit where due. So, he sounds like a peach, huh? She’s earning that living.
Missed the post from the Montecito resident! Can hardly wait to read everything tomorrow!
I can understand a mix-up, but I didn't address her at all. I was addressing several people who mentioned Nancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein as having alliterative names. It was obvious that several people either missed the alliterative part or didn't know what alliterative meant, so I explained the definition. Where she got the idea that I was addressing her, I have no idea. It takes all kinds, I guess.
Then, out of the blue she attacks me with for no reason, and that isn't right. It's also not right that she didn't apologize to me for her attack.
Pffft!
Let's just drop it. Her post is a mere blip in my life.
Did you see my post about how Higgins was involved after all? Sorry about the mix-up but both reporters did write about the doxxing.ðĪŠ
@Puds
That's so cute! I have 2 feline friends who are currently climbing up onto my lap. I always love a cat lover!ð
@AnT
The person I believe is a Montecito resident is MusicDSPGuy. He posted here when they first moved to the area and provided a lot of interesting info. Now he showed up again to make some comments about the photos of Hazza on his bike. I think they are a couple of pages back.
Signing off for now...ð♀️
See y'all tomorrow!
Yes, I saw that. I was writing about the second woman when you posted it. Did you see my post about her family? Take a look at the yacht. It's a beauty! I like the older wooden boats more than the sleek modern ones.
******************************************
@Puds,
Please put Puds as your avatar. We need kitties!
Nite everybody! See you tomorrow.
It created more divide, confusion, and I’d say less interest in them. They’ve had no follow up, very little response from The Palace, no other articles or interviews and the majority of what they’ve claimed has been debunked for several news cycles since then.
Anyone have any idea if it was worth it? What their aim was? And if we will see them again soon now that they’ve placed their cards on the table?
What’s, left?