Good morning! It's a work day here and I haven't been able to delve deeply into the Sussex interview with Oprah last night, but here are a few quick thoughts:
- If we're allowed to have Halloween celebrations this year, lots of couples are going to go dressed as Harry and Meghan.
Beaten-down redhead in a wrinkled grey suit, crying pregnant (?) woman with heavily-applied eyeliner and a black dress - it's an easy costume that anyone can manage.
- Talking about how a baby will look as a balance between its parents is a pretty common thing. Speculating on the baby's skin color when you have one biracial parent is also not an unusual thing. (I'm sure there was also some discussion about whether or not the baby would be a redhead.)
Anyway, the ladies at Lipstick Alley spent a lot of time trying to figure out how "Black" the baby would be.
Apparently so did Prince Philip. It's easy to imagine him saying something stupid about it. He's 99 years old.
- It makes no sense to anyone that the baby's skin color should determine his security status. What should determine his security status - and that of his parents - is "Do you live in the UK? Or have you left the UK by choice?"
No one should expect to be protected indefinitely wherever they choose to live in the world.
At any rate, do Lady Louise and Viscount Severn have security? They're not at all Black, but they are minor children who are minor Royals, as is "Archie".
- Charles really got thrown under the bus here, apparently for cutting off his 37-year-old son from an ongoing allowance and expecting him or his wife to work for a living.
There's already a lot of sentiment for skipping over Charles when it comes to the line of succession. Will this add to this sentiment?
- The palace response will have to be a doozy.
No more "Prince" Harry, no more Duchess of Sussex, and Archie (if he exists) can just be an ordinary boy.
Comments
God save the Queen.
-
The Grangle - I should have acknowledged you too - I agree.
A backyard wedding would not be legal per C of E rules --- and the Archbishop is strangely silent.
The church wedding was not legal, as their real names were not used (Rachel, Henry).
So she speculates if they are legally married, it must have happened on their "third date" in Africa.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVQ95Sgrykw
.
White House is praising Meghan and Harry.
I adore reading the insights of you all on here!! I think my husband would go certifiably mad if I didn’t have this blog as a MeGain&Hapless outlet to pour over! However, he does absolutely buy into the NWO theory that they are just stirring up chaos and distain for the monarchy in order to bring in some form of great reset…
Wow -- that is ridiculous but rather telling? Good for you for at least trying to post your opinions and comments in those media sources. I wonder if this will change after today and the UK media are less sympathetic to Meghan.
Meanwhile Boris Johnson is actually behaving reasonably well for once. A teeny tiny bit of statesmanship, staying above the fray. Maybe some will think he should be manning the barricades, but that is just what the Sussexes would want. Open warfare. Taking sides. They enjoy chaos. We do not. We're a small country with an ancient history. We don't care to have everything ruined by a couple of unemployable nobodies.
Welby must be held to account.
I was checking the comments throughout the night yesterday, and early this morning before I got up. Thanks to all the wonderful play-by-play (or blow-by-blow, for Rachel) transcripts and analysis, I can spare myself actually having to sit through any of it. I seriously fear I would projectile-vomit. That is not even an exaggeration.
I've been busy at work since and missed the start of the new thread. Everyone is on FIRE! today.
My feelings may be best summed up by my reaction to Serena's Tweet which AnT posted at the end of the last thread . . .
Serena tweeted support for Megs:
“Meghan Markle my selfless friend lives her life — and leads by example — with empathy and compassion / She teaches me every day what it means to be truly noble”.....
ARE . . .YOU . . .F#$%^ING . . KIDDING ME???????!!!!!!!
My level of incandescence would make Mr. McEnroe blush today.
I will endeavor to watch clips of Piers Morgan gleefully dismantling all of Smegs' lies, though. I knew that Smeagol had to be telling another colossal fib when she told that priceless gem about being 'married in the backyard by Archbishop Welby'. I got this vision of the trio swaying to 'This Little Light of Mine' rendered by Doria on the guitar, everybody barefooted and wearing love beads.
Except that Doria wouldn't even have been present three days before, at the special private ceremony, seeing as her daughter didn't send her her tickets and invitation until the last minute. I think 3 days before the wedding, Doria was still somewhere over the North American continent, en route.
I knew the top churchman in the United Kingdom, Her Majesty's ecclesiastical representative, would not be marrying anybody clandestinely 'in the backyard'. Questions for Smeg:
1. You say 'my backyard'--which 'back yard' would this have been? at NottCott? Or was this the Cotswolds place? Out back in the hotel grounds? The British say 'garden', not 'yard' but you were never bovvered about learning the lingo of your 'adopted country', were you, love?
2. If this was NottCott . .there isn't a 'backyard' as such. There is a sunken garden--is that what you mean? And I'm for damn sure that Rev. Welby did not pop off to the rural Cotswolds to marry you without the Queen's knowledge. He wouldn't have done that anywhere.
Question for the British barristers present: Would the Queen and Rev. Welby have grounds to lodge a defamation suit for slander based on this fantastical interview? The Dumbarses of Sussex made any number of claims (without evidence) that are profoundly damaging to the professional reputations of all concerned. Meg and Harry sat there and lied for 90 minutes straight and those lies were broadcast internationally as facts. I'm sure no one in their right minds wants to get any further involved in litigation with Markle, but are all her lies really going to go completely unchallenged? The Rev. Mr. Welby might have to face some questions about his discharge of pastoral duties. I'm sure the Queen and relevant parties know that there was no secret backyard wedding . . .but unless he issues a public denial, raftloads of the public are going to believe this gobshite.
I hope the Duchess of Cambridge is having a spa day from now til Wednesday.
Re: Comments being deleted on Daily Mail.
Several years ago I made a comment about Michelle Wolf regarding her abortion comments at the White House Correspondents Dinner in 2018. I thought her comments were very offensive and suggested that perhaps her parents did not want her and that is why she seemed to have a chip on shoulder. My comment was pulled for review and later reinstated. This is tactic of the sugars, to report comments they don't like 'offensive' so the comment is removed for review and later reinstated and gets buried in the older comments. Quite effective.
Celt News is mistaken. They did use their full proper names in the church wedding in their vows.
Why has this lit an ongoing media firestorm? Will Megs get deals out of this now...it doesn’t look like it will go away!
One last point, so we call her kate, the press calls her kate and now MM calls her kate. But william always refers to her as Catherine and i thought in the past harry did too. So maybe MM isnt that close to her after all
Just because something looks like a conspiracy theory, it doesn't mean it's not a conspiracy.
Are you sure their full names were used? I remember being surprised they weren't (at the time.)
I have little doubt that Boris and BP know exactly what is going on and will respond appropriately and as advised.
@Flore
@JennS
@TheGrangle
And, again reposting what others posted earlier today:
as millions of Americans struggle, here is the White House taking time for an attack on the Monarchy by defending Markle. I hope people understand what is going on. WHY would the White House take press time to support a couple of unemployed useless millionaires squatting in a Montecito mansion? Can it be because of Oprah the billionaire's friendship with many top Dem old politicians?
By doing this, they attack the female victims of Markle's abuse -- but that's ok apparently.
WHY ARE POLITICIANS serving an unemployed Z-list bit part cable actress during a time of world crisis?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9339315/White-House-praises-Harry-Meghans-courage-speaking-mental-health-struggle.html
"The goal is to destroy the BRF by any means. I have been following this saga closely. Lies are employed. There is heavy reliance on people being ignorant and unable to keep track of the lies as well as how many times their stories have changed."
She did a short reading after watching the interview, but for William and Kate (huge impact, but they will recover).
https://talkingtarot.tumblr.com/post/645086167294935040/tt-you-have-got-to-pull-some-cards-on-this
This isn’t going to go down well, at all.
Just checked ... yes, you are right. Harry. Meghan.
What the heck was going on in that church that day?!
I am incredibly angry that this good for nothing show boating failed starlet uses legitimate issues: mental health and racism, to further her own HOLD on Harry. Exploiting him and his family until their last breathe. THEY are the ones at risk. Their livelihoods, relationships, their mental health. Now she is using this bullshit to get speaking gigs on Mental Health. I swear to god this woman is lucky she doesn’t live near me.
She had options. Notice how she never got help. Truly suicidal people need intensive ongoing help.
For some time now, I've been following the posts & comments here, and I find the notion about Meghan being a narcissist or a sociopath particularly interesting - as it rings horribly true to me. I've got some personal experience of dealing with a sociopath, so I think I'm able to spot the telltale signs.
And I've got one comment here, re. Meghan going after the BRF with a flamethrower - narcs tend to destroy, what they want and cannot have. "Harry won't be king? well sod it, then William won't be either". I'm not so sure it's a political agenda, though.
Indeed, but why (or who)allowed it to gather speed and get to this point when the writing seemed to be on the wall from the outset?
Well done me, supper cremated!!
HELLO!!! have been waiting for you!!!! Honestly you would have lost your temper during the broadcast. I was so mad I had trouble sleeping, even after two l
ong days on a rush project deadline.
The Serene quote: I will keep saying there is a game with backers until I am proved wrong. I guess they got Serena too. :-(
Tell me, do you think Welby is in on it? I totally do, based on his past and connections....almost as atypical and snarled and unstable and murky as Megs:
Welby worked for eleven years in the oil industry, five of them for the French oil company Elf Aquitaine based in Paris. In 1984 he became treasurer of the oil exploration group Enterprise Oil plc in London, where he was mainly concerned with West African and North Sea oil projects. He retired from his executive position in 1989 and said that he sensed a calling from God to be ordained.[21]
Justin Portal Welby was born in London, England, on 6 January 1956,[2] almost nine months after the marriage of his mother Jane Gillian Portal (born 1929) to Gavin Bramhall James Welby (1910–1977).[7] Jane had served as a personal secretary to Sir Winston Churchill from December 1949 until her marriage to Gavin Welby in April 1955, soon after she had a brief relationship with the private secretary to Churchill, Sir Anthony Montague Browne (1923–2013).[8] Justin believed that Gavin Welby was his biological father until paternity testing in 2016 showed that he was Browne's son.[7]
Gavin and Jane Welby were both alcoholics. They divorced in 1959, when Justin was three years old,[14] and he was placed in Gavin Welby's custody. In 1960 Gavin Welby was engaged to the actress Vanessa Redgrave, who called the engagement off after her mother Lady Redgrave wrote to Vanessa's father, Sir Michael Redgrave, that Gavin Welby was "a real horror ... a pretty rotten piece of work".[15] Gavin Welby died in 1977 of alcohol-related causes.[14]
Welby's mother stopped drinking in 1968, and in 1975 married Charles Williams, a business executive and first-class cricketer who was made a life peer in 1985. Williams was the nephew of Elizabeth Laura Gurney, a member of the Gurney family of Norwich who were prominent Quakers and social reformers.
So sorry about your brother.
I didn't watch but I read transcrits. So many different things but I'd like to discuss Meghan's discussions of Kate. How unbelievably sociopathic and aggressive her comments were even though she veiled them with comments like "She's a good person".
Read this-
"Meghan was also asked whether a trip to watch tennis at Wimbledon with the Duchess of Cambridge was 'what it looked like ... helping you adjust'.
But the Duchess replied: 'My understanding of the past four years is it's nothing like what it looks like.'
Oprah then attempted to further probe into their relationship.
Referring to a day the pair spent together at Wimbledon at 2019, she asked: 'Did you feel welcomed by everyone? It seemed like you and Kate at the Wimbledon game where you were going to watch a friend play tennis?'
'Was it what it looked like? You are two sisters-in-law out there in the world, getting to know each other. Was she helping you, embracing you into the family, helping you?'
However Meghan appeared to dodge the question, saying: 'My understanding and my experience of the past four years is it's nothing like what it looks like."
Meghan is actually far, far worse than I ever dreamed or thought. She is a master gaslighter.
Kate, Charles and William to a lesser were completely targetted in this interview.
It actually didn’t even hit me until an hour ago. Only when I’m seeing this ongoing serious talk of a suicidal Meghan did it even occur to me I had dealt with this. If she wants to talk seriously about suicide, then she should. I’m listening and waiting. Using suicide and the fact she just magically ‘got over it’ and is ‘thriving now’. What. How. Explain lady.
She has a lot of explaining to do.
As was said on McDonald and Dodds t'ther day - it was clearly `outside their bandwidth' that one person could prefer their second name and that `Harry 'is often used for Henry - `King Harry' and `Bluff King Hal' both refer to Henry VIII.
I am so deeply sorry for your heartbreaking loss -- please accept my condolences. There are no words.
My sister-in-law's 17-year-old niece committed suicide a few years ago, and it was just as you said. You are right to be infuriated by the callous lies of MM, who flippantly makes a mockery of something that serious and tragic, for her own PR story. It is sickening.
Please know you and your late brother will be in my thoughts.
I have a feeling that William is going to destroy Meghan now.
In their manifesto, they loftily said they would forego funding from the Sovereign Grant, even for the half-time working royal deal they wanted. As non-working royals, they were not entitled to any kind of funding from the Sovereign Grant.
Charles did help with funding (e.g. paid for Meghan's exorbitant wardrobe of clothing, household expenses) ... money that came from the Duchy of Cornwall. He could no longer give them this funding if they were not working royals as this is effectively taxpayers' money and I think there is some kind of treaty governing how this money is used.
They received the two lots of funding described above up until the end of March even though they effectively stopped being working royals in November, other than two expensive and short trips in January and March.
The Foreign Office would have funded any tours they did overseas while they were working royals.
Only full-time working royals get taxpayer-funded security. This is well known.
Why were they surprised and upset when all this funding was withdrawn?
That Charles seems to have declined to dip into his private income to support them is surprising as the story in the media was that he did for the first year.
I just checked the video.
Do you Harry take ...
I Harry take ...
Do you Meghan take ...
I Meghan take ...
In all other royal weddings, full and proper names are used for these vows.
Interesting to see how many have personally had to deal with narcs either personally or professionally (i have a relative and also a boss so I get two but I survived it better than most since i can be kinda bitchy myself)
My heart does break with those that lost loved ones to suicide. Its disgusting to me that she would use her platform as a pity party. If she truly felt this way and now that she is out from under the BRF thumb, she could do wonders for others with talk of being in therapy in California, feeling free, and frankly looking happy. Or just say I still struggle even now but instead it was a big blame game (hence why i think she never contemplated it) That once again she uses something so heartbreaking and serious (like the miscarriage) to shine attention on herself is so unhelpful to so many. For this and many other transgressions, William take her down.
Looking forward to your report ---- and yes, the White House!!!!!!! .....as I say, my old tin tiara is now heavy gold, firm on my head, bedecked in amazonite truth stones.
@Wild Boar Battle-maid,
Exactly -- it's only a conspiracy theory until it's proven. Anyway, the CIA invented that term specifically to make people's thoughts seem stupid if they were getting too close to the meat of a secret matter. I may not believe in UFOs, aliens or lizard people yet, but I do believe Markle was a plant on a mission. And her many lies have been disproved one by one over the last years. So what seemed like theory seems more like reality daily. Last night plus the WH statement today.....
First they need to go back due to recent news that the giver, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, has been determined to be the person who ordered the killing of Jamal Khashoggi a Saudi dissident journalist and columnist for the Washington Post. He was ambushed, suffocated, and dismembered. The body parts were removed from the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Turkey in suitcases. Meghan wore the glamorous earrings to a dinner during the October tour Harry and Meghan took in October 2018. I’d say murder and dismemberment is a valid reason to not accept such a gift.
The second reason is, as enty points out, that uber feminist Meghan should be permanently outraged over the harsh treatment and lack of rights of women and girls in the Saudi kingdom. Meghan should be offended to own odious jewels such as these.
And of course, she lied about them.
MONDAY, MARCH 08, 2021
Blind Item #3
Since the alliterate one is all for women's rights all over the world, I'm sure she returned the wedding gift from the leader of one of the world's worst violators of women's rights. Oh wait, no, she kept it and wore it three weeks after he ordered the killing of a reporter, and then she lied to the press about the origin of the gift. I'm sure she has returned it by now though, right along with a strongly worded letter. Nope.
@WBBM,
Exactly --- I too went "huh?" earlier as you did, doubtful, and referred to the video. Celt was right. And so.....not a legal or valid wedding ceremony by C of E law.
I hope the Palace is digging into this too, since Welby et al are being coyly silent thus far.
By the way --- does anyone else have the word "treason" rolling around ni their head today?
To be fair to the White House Press Secretary, she was asked about H&M by reporters and they tried to get her to comment on the racial aspect. Instead she praised M for talking about her mental health. The press secretary could have said no comment, but we don't know which reporters asked those questions. Biden won the presidency thanks to Black support, maybe they felt they had to say something.
I originally thought Harry and Meghan were trying to imply William was the racist, but they may also say Kate. MMM has a real hatred of her.
@tatty,
I always enjoy your comments because you try to be factual and non-biased while others including myself are speculating. However, this is a gossip blog focused on MM not a peer reviewed journal. Bloggers can post what they want unless mods delete it.
I'll check other US papers, not People or other celeb magazines to get the reaction.
Enty has another blind up about the harpy saying she had a Diana coffee table book.
If Biden is an IRA supporter, he'd be incredibly foolish to say it publicly! That would be political suicide.
I agree with your assessment that this is indeed political (EVERYTHING in the US now is divided straight down the middle. I am a centrist so I can see points on both sides). But political in the sense that Smeg wishes to take down the BRF and would be proud to do so!
I've said this before; what the IRA couldn't do to the BRF, Meghan Markle has...she will go down in infamy and she will take it like she's a Bonnie Parker type...the woman has no soul. To think, that demon was allowed to marry into the BRF.
I think the tin foil tiara 'conspiracy' is full on now. With the "Lying Biden" administration on board, a Congressman supporting her bring down the monarchy comments and the labor party calling for an investigation...I just hope MI5 and MI6 are capable enough or even actually willing to support the monarchy.
I am deeply sorry to hear of the loss of your brother. Hugs.
Bringing an action for defamation is always possible but there are many reasons why someone like the Queen or The Archbishop might refrain from so proceeding. Defamation proceedings like all proceedings can go badly wrong as both Oscar Wilde and Jonathan Aitken can aver. It is one thing for a showman like Liberace to take his chances and as he put it cry all the way to the Bank it is quite another matter for our Head of State to run the risk of being humiliated by a spectacular loss at the hands of another Warby J. albeit in an American court as I presume it would have to be.
My view is that the interview Of Markle was so unhinged, Prince Harry's public attack on his own family so appalling that eventually this will be seen as a spectacular own goal by the Harkles. There is after all not a shred of evidence to support the accusations they make. They have had their moment in the sun; their fifteen minutes of fame: they have jumped the shark. Harry is like the pub bore who wants to tell you his life story. Markle is the woman for whom even everything is not enough.
It is of course a great pity from Britain's point of view that Mr Trump - a man who said that he did not know that Markle was 'nasty'* - and who was not anti-British - is not still the lawful president but President's come and President's go.
*I know what that also means in American.
I am so sorry about your brother. Listening to her lies must have been incredibly difficult for you.
She is a disgusting creature using mental health and racism to portray herself as the ultimate victim. Anyone who has been discriminated against for whatever reason (skin color, religion, sexual orientation etc) should be insulted by her allegations. She is a disgrace.
As for her suicidal thoughts, she has no moral boundaries. She didn’t get the help she begged for?? As if! I think it was also a cheap shot at Catherine since her brother was going through depression and possibly considering taking his own life.
The second reason is, as enty points out, that uber feminist Meghan should be permanently outraged over the harsh treatment and lack of rights of women and girls in the Saudi kingdom. Meghan should be offended to own odious jewels such as these.
*
Exactly! Also many don't wear diamonds because of the cruel labor issues in the diamond mines-most in their "beloved" Africa (including child miners)!! But there she is lil Miss I'm an activist...
Happy Days - they need to keep up pressure on those because I bet she sold them and spend the $ and that would be a taxable event.
@Snarkyatherbest: Ooo, that’s an interesting thought. She very well could have sold them, because they are tainted on two fronts.
But my money is on them sitting in a safe somewhere or they will be taken apart and reconfigured into another piece/ pieces. Meghan will say they were a push present from Harry for the second baby.
After all, she is cunning, diabolical and super materialistic, especially if it’s free stuff. And like most narcissists, lying is as natural to her as breathing.
She will keep them one way or another.
I take comfort in my faith, knowing that we enter this life with nothing and we leave it with nothing. And we each have a life review in the next world where each person is asked What did you do in My name? Meghan will probably not be able to get around that question with a word salad. What you do for others in His name without trumpeting it to the world largely decides your lot for eternity.
I’m far from perfect, but I still wouldn’t trade places with Meghan in this life or the next life for all the expensive, shiny trinkets on earth.
What we are doing on this blog is a form of documentation of the misdeeds of the D&DoS. I am convinced many journos and others with influence are reading this blog.
They are shamelessly showing the world how happy they are now that they have thrown Hapless’s family under the bus!
@jessica I am so sorry for your loss. I wish you and everyone impacted much healing.
I do not want to go at length about how my life was touched by suicide but it was similar to what @jessica described. Those who are suicidal need lifelong help and you have to fight hard so they won't disappear altogether before they attempt that final step.
While Rache is relatively small in the grand scheme of things, my heart drops when she discusses serious topics in ways that make me distrust her. I don't want to distrust someone who opens up about their suffering. However, Rache is a reminder to me that humans are capable of going very low. It sobers the little hope I sometimes feel about the world.
We are at that, and I kind of hope you are right. I think we are better sleuths than many journalists lately, because we bring so many viewpoints and caches of information or research skill sets to the table.
Who was it on here who called us nearly"Kremlinologists" They weren't wrong.
DM is doing a fact check on the bombshells.
@Charade,
thanks so much for your leadership!
I think you're absolutely right.
And while it's extremely difficult to wriggle free of the clutches of a sociopath all by oneself, Harry's case seems particularly hopeless, as he doesn't strike me as a sharpest crayon in the box (to be charitable about it).
Further, it says a lot that he had no plans to leave, Meghan realized this and decided to go scorched earth with threats to herself and her unborn (without getting any help).
"The impact of the [Andrew Morton] book was harmful to the royal family, but for the Princess it was catastrophic. However gratifying it may have been to her sense of victimhood, any view in which detached logic played a part – and this, to be fair, was not her strong point – would have shown her that all efforts I and others might make to reinforce her image as an independent but still royal operator were now ultimately bound to fail." [...]
"Once she had cast herself as victim, getting her story across was her priority at whatever cost. If people knew her story, her argument went, then their support and understanding would follow automatically and so, crucially, would their affection. For this end she was ready to risk anything. Even her normally acute sense of self-preservation could be bypassed temporarily. It was not a death wish exactly; she was just blind to the consequences, so driven was she by the need to be noticed. She succeeded in this, of course, but only in the long term and only with those who were her natural supporters anyway. The benefit was never going to be worth the cost she paid, let alone the cost she exacted on the institution into which she had married." [...]
"After Morton’s revelations, any success or satisfaction she created by operating independently would inevitably be short-lived. This was partly because the Princess did not have the stature or the intellectual capacity wisely to employ the opportunities she now had, whatever her other gifts, and partly because the establishment would now be compelled to expel her as a dangerous foreign body." [...]
"The damage was not limited to a single, cataclysmic event. It was a slow-acting poison. From my perspective, the process that began with Morton ended three and a half years later with Panorama. [...]
"The irony was that, with perfect clarity, she saw her priority as being survival against the forces that had so nearly suffocated her. In choosing a path of high-profile indulgence, however, she only accelerated the result that her enemies had been trying so vainly to bring about."
[This last bit is Meghan's MO - Harry truly found a replacement for his mother.]
"The Princess had an obsessive concern that others should think well of her. Her misdemeanours, which she lacked the self-discipline to prevent, must therefore remain undiscovered. If by bad luck they were discovered, then the consequences must be pre-empted or other distraction offered to draw attention away from them."
and Piers Morgan was on Martha Macallum's 3:00 pm FNC show. Says that essentially, H&M are accusing the Queen of being racist, as the ability to grant titles lies with her. (I thought it was the edict from George V that she was following?).
Wonder what "press" the duo will leak to parry off the latest accusations?
Is she ok now?? Are they thriving?? Because we were so worried about them after the whine fest aired! What a pair of entitled mean brats🤮
DM doing some fact checking, but they missed some.
I am so sorry that suicide in some form affected your life and view as well. Know you are not alone. I understand how Rachel and her ugly games and perpetual advancement in spite of all logic can diminish one's hope in the world --- but look at it this way: you are a moderator of a forum bringing a better part of the world together to think, discuss, share and support thoughts. Together we stand, together we are a powerful force as well, and you help make that happen. It helps us "see" through people like Rachel more clearly, or put two-and-two together in our own lives, and we all get wiser. And wisdom makes us able to take on more. Even if it shows us we cannot trust some, it also showe us who we can trust, or maybe how to see what "real" is in a better way? Does that make sense? For every disappointing Rachel type I've known or dealt with and felt "ugh, people!" over, there have been three more whose trueness and honesty and clear directness was a pleasure. So I just view people like Rachel like extra school lessons in identifying what to avoid. Had I not experienced a few crazies in my life, I might have fallen into traps set by even worse people. But my "senses" were prepped, so to speak, and my discontent improved. The world is kind of a jungle but after you identify the snakes to enjoy, it's a beautiful place.
If in small ways we help each other even here, through this unfortunate time or frustrations at what we see, if we learn. And if we can talk, or laugh or see another side. I think maybe this makes us stronger even if we are disheartened at first. You are a huge part of that goodness here, and perhaps that is sort of your life work too, as we struggle together as Nutties, to find logic and new hope in the world, no matter how crazy things get. Me, I think of resilient Kate, little ball of fire Charlotte, the way William has grown into nobody's fool.....the windy snark of Camilla! And I know they'll find the way through this too, and Rache will end up making a grand mistake and get booted by her backers, or slide back down to the Z list.
Autocorrect is now mocking me! LOL
Your latest post at 11:10. So very well said... Thank you yet again for saying what I feel but am unable to articulate it. You are amazing. :)
* Palace lays on holiday parties for journalists. (RRs are saying 'why wasn't I invited?)
Blogger Martha said...
@theGrangle....thank you for your post. Also, @lucy. I’m firmly of the belief that she is a weapon, a political weapon.
I agree that Markle is being used as a political weapon. I didn’t watch the interview—just the sight of Markle and her pet monkey sicken me—but I have been taking in much of the reaction to her performance. Today on a popular conservative political podcast here in the US, there was a discussion about the Oprah debacle. One of the four panelists was Rahim Kassam, former chief adviser to former UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage. Kassam agreed with the two women on the panel who felt that Markle was lying (badly) throughout the broadcast, while Harry was described as “a disaster” and “simp city” (ouch). Kassam did say though, that even though MM is a joke and shouldn’t be taken seriously (“She spent less time in the UK than I have on vacation in Costa Rica” and was ignorant of the British constitution and British history, her interview with Oprah is important geopolitically because she is part of the Woke movement that is trying to take down and destroy traditional “patriarchal” institutions. Kassam said M clearly believes that the Royal Family IS the problem with Great Britain (because of its resistance to change and its inherent racism). He then referenced Emmanuel Macron’s recent criticism of the US exporting Wokism to Europe and other parts of the globe, and the need to actively resist it before it obliterates French culture (with GB also at risk.)
Jessica, ConstantGardener, any others: I send condolences, support and love. Meg cares not one whit about everyone’s heavy things, but here we are, trying to hold her responsible for her destruction and supporting one another in the process. She talks about “community” in the woke way of people today, but she has no idea what it really means. Looks to me like there is a good one right here, Meghan be damned!
I think this refers to the fact that the Queen chose to give Charlotte and Louis titles as only George is automatically entitled to a title. Meghan would therefore reason that the same could be done for Archie.
In fact it is perfectly reasonable to give Charlotte and Louis titles as they need to grow up 'royal' as the immediate spares for George. There's a history of younger sons reaching the throne. Henry VIII. George V and George VI to name a few. The Queen's father and grandfather no less.
We may have been spared a lot of trouble now if care had been taken to prepare Harry properly, just in case, when he was a child. He wouldn't be so shamefully ignorant when it came to informing a prospective bride about what was expected and he would have taken time and care before deciding on marriage, as William did (though we do need to allow for Harry's lesser natural intelligence here). Diana made so many mistakes bringing him up. That doesn't absolve him as he's an adult now, but it helps to understand the origins of this.
I am so sorry about your brother, who you seem to have been very close to. Suicide can affect families and friends. Thank you for sharing this. Take care x
There are approximately 350M of us spread over 3.8M square miles. The UK has approximately 88M spread over 94,000 square miles.
A "hit show" making money for a studio might have a handful of millions of weekly viewers. The Big Bang, arguably the most successful weekly show in the past couple of decades crested at 18M viewers for its Grand Finale. That is it.
Flower and the nit wit and Oprah got less than The Big Bang Finale. Yes, The wack jobs on The View will talk about it, all week, and then something else will outrage them. And the usual celebs will tweet something inane about the two. But how many people are still taking about The Big Bang, or did talk about it three days after the show? This will be a distant memory soon, unless they syndicate the interview into re-runs.
Assume roughly 333M Americans know nothing about this and do not care and would not care about a former Prince living in Montecito in a house with lots of toilets, with his Puff Adder wife.
I'm so sorry to hear about your brother. I can understand how devastating that is, and hope that you can heal over time. We're here for you, if you need us. This goes for all Nutties. We're here for you.
My mother attempted suicide after my sister died. Mom lived, but only because she wanted to go out in style. She took the pills with a bottle of champagne, and eventually threw it all up. Mom told me about this several years after the fact, and I got her to a psychiatrist pronto.
I think the thing that is so enraging about MM's "suicidal ideation," which I don't believe is true, is that she triggered so many people who are hurting with her claims. Look at the number of people here who have had horrible memories dredged up by her, and if there are this many here, imagine how many around the world are triggered and feeling emotional pain and deep sadness today. There must be millions of people who were triggered by her words.
I wonder how many people actually went though to suicide last night or today after the interview. Meghan could have blood on her hands because of this.
If the birth date is right around the first of July, I bet she would have the "baby" "born" on the Fourth of July. Independence Day, and, of course, all of the fireworks around the world will be for the birth of the new baby. The script almost writes itself.
Thank you for the very pertinent excerpts from Andrew Morton's book. Megsy would have done well to read it. Maybe she did but of course didn't think the same would apply to her. I really hope this is the beginning of the end for her. There's no coming back from this. I can't imagine anyone willing to work with them after such a demolition job on the BRF.
I can't remember if she (or her sugars) said the 'stress' might cause a miscarriage but equally, the stress could cause a relapse of Philip's heart problems, unless he's been spared all the sordid details. Have Harry and the harridan thought of that?
I don't believe M is telling the truth obviously. But Harry is supposed to believe her. And it's possible she did make manipulative threats to him. (People keep saying she's a Narc and I see some of that for sure. But I also see Borderline traits.)
Either way, how in the world could Harry claim in his court case that Royal Marines would commit suicide because of the newspaper's claims he'd not been in touch from California? He couldn't even get help for his own wife when they lived together in London. He's going to save unknown Marines from 5000 miles away?
Harry certainly is a total POS.
So sorry about your brother. You must miss him terribly. My sincere condolences.
The sugars said it. I posted a blurb last night from the Mayo Clinic that says stress doesn't cause a miscarriage:
"While excessive stress isn't good for your overall health, there's no evidence that stress results in miscarriage. About 10 to 20 percent of known pregnancies end in miscarriage. But the actual number is likely higher because many miscarriages occur before the pregnancy is recognized."
Another lie from MM.
DM fact checking article ~ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9338421/Royal-revelations-test.html
Ty to all informative and entertaining comments,
What you wrote for jessica and charade is beautiful, fun in a great cheering way. Good thoughts like that need to be shared, especially today.
@Jocelyn’sBellinis,
Your comment actually gave me a shiver. Sadly, you are probably right. I really, really want to be watching when William or real karma gets Meghan once at for all. Or when Charles steps out and says, “Yah, here is the DNA, he’s Hewitt’s kiddo but I was trying to be nice. Thus and what ho, pip pip, bye b*tches.”
I have been thinking of you Jessica, ever since I read your post about your brother and my heart goes out to you. As others have written here, you have our support and best wishes and you will stay in our thoughts.
Jocelyn'sBellinis' comment I think the thing that is so enraging about MM's "suicidal ideation," which I don't believe is true, is that she triggered so many people who are hurting with her claims sums up exactly how I feel. Meghan has brought back the worst times for so many and summoned up the demons we have battled with before, just to manipulate people and evade accountability for her own failings. At least we can take comfort in being here for each other.
Has the sentiment between them changed now that they’ve branded the institution racist? An unnamed member, which could be him? And the lack of support...
This could be just another lie on MM's part. The unnamed member could just be a made up story to play the race card against the BRF, like all of her other lies in the interview. I don't believe a word that she says.
@ConstantGardener33 I am so sorry for your losses. May there be healing from all that tragedy.
Brilliant comment as usual. -- thank you for bringing up and laying out the fact that HE was the depressed, troubled one (as was his mother) -- and she coolly hijacked that and put it on as an interview dress.
I guess we now see why she wore black.....Triste, the color of sadness and dark corners.
The new black and white "Archie" photos are once again a ludicrous example of her extreme narcissism. Kid as limp faceless prop (WHY ARE KISD ALWAYS LIFELESS WHEN SHE HOLDS THEM?), Harry as shabby faceless prop, Meghan laughing in her state of control over both.
A friend pointed out awhile ago that narcissists always make one child the victim. Always. Will it be Archie or Diana Junior? I think Diana Junior, who will be used for merchandising, but who will be seen as a dangerous feminine rival by her mother. God help those children if Harry shows them too much attention or affection. There are at least two dogs who found out how dangerous that is in the cracked, frenzied world of Rachel Meghan Markle.
Did you get to listen to Dan Wootton on the podcast of Megan Kelly today? It's on his twitter thread too. Brilliant and emphatic. Kelly isn't fooled, nor is Dan.
I hope the Palace takes its time and then, and then --- and then, suddenly, snaps, like....well, a crocodile.
Wonder what William is doing at this precise moment? . . Punching some walls, possibly. I'm sure he got briefed earlier and has had nearly 24 hours to bring his blood pressure under control. I really hope Catherine put Nanny Maria in charge and went off to a spa retreat and a big vat of wine.
PP can never be told what went down--it would finish him off. Even if they had to take a sledgehammer to every TV in King Edward's Hospital.
At this moment, I wish that we could go into a time machine, to a time before TV and Internet was invented. Then we could finagle events to ensure that these two sociopaths not only would never meet, but would never have been born.
Never before in Harry's miserable life have I ever believed or wished for him to be James Hewitt's son. I do so now, to spare Charles the humiliation that he's living through. Sadly, Halfwit is a Mountbatten, though Chas and PP both must be wondering how to disinherit and cancel that dumbass traitorous little gobshite.
What does Harry truly think people think of him now? Is his head so far up his ginger arse that he thinks he's still everybody's favorite Royal?
.
So, let's see:
1) Grip was suicidal when preggers. ( Just like Diana ) check.
2) Grip was lying so much it is amazing that her lashes or her eyeballs did not fall
out.
3) Grip is very much pissed off because faux archie did not get titled prince, and
that plodding wanker Drip is really upset because his allowance was cut off.
4) Fake pregnancy number 2 is underway.
5) The RF and the UK are so racist, even though the UK welcomes people from all
over the world.
6) Someone or something are supporting Grip and Drip. There is a something much
bigger going on behind the scenes that us ordinary plebs are not aware of.
7) Plodding wanker Grip states he loves and respects his Gran. Really areshole, is
this what you call love and respect?
and on and on and on.
.
I remember a comment I made made a very long time ago that the RF will never be free of these two. The Queen will go to her deathbed knowing that her grandson is a traitor and that these two rotten to the core people will have been a huge blemish on her reign. This is just sickening.
The unbearable victim complex of Meghan Markle
The Oprah interview was an emotionally manipulative performance designed to consolidate Harry and Meghan’s power.
Brendon O'Neill
Part One
The set-up bordered on nauseating. Here was a duke and duchess in the unimaginably luxurious surrounds of a Californian mansion talking about how difficult their lives have been. In a country where 40million people lost their jobs as a result of lockdowns, this pair who get paid millions for making naff podcasts moaned to billionaire Oprah Winfrey about their oppression by the establishment. Meghan was wearing a $4,500 dress. She’ll probably never wear it again. That’s more than twice the amount that desperate Americans will get in their stimulus cheques to keep them afloat in the next few months. It’s perverse.
Then there’s the hypocrisy on the privacy question. Harry and Meghan detest the invasive media – they referred to it as a ‘monster machine’ – and insist they just want a private life. Yet they’re constantly revealing all. They’ve given us minute details about the miscarriage Meghan suffered. In the Oprah chat Meghan opened up about her suicidal thoughts while ‘trapped’ in the royal family. Nobody invades Meghan Markle’s privacy as much as Meghan Markle does. The problem isn’t us, the grubby, tabloid-reading public, pestering Harry and Meghan for info about their lives; the problem is them forever foisting their most intimate experiences down our throats. How about you leave us alone?
But there’s something else going on, too, something that goes far beyond Harry falling out with his dad or Meghan vs Kate. More fundamentally we’re witnessing a culture clash. A conflict between the contemporary cults of victimhood and identity politics, as now keenly represented by Harry and Meghan, and the older ideals of duty, self-sacrifice, stoicism and keeping your shit together, as embodied by the queen, and as aspired to by most Brits in recent decades. This internecine clash between the Sussexes and the Palace is really an unspoken civil war between post-Diana New Britain and Old Britain. Last night’s interview, facilitated by that doyen of the new elites, Oprah, was essentially a power grab by Harry and Meghan – their attempt to seize the throne of the victim industry and consolidate their cultural power in the post-traditional world.
There is no question that the Oprah interview represents a serious blow to the monarchy. It will badly damage the monarchy’s international reputation, which had held up pretty well even during the divorces, scandals and anni horribiles of recent decades. The interview will contribute to the chipping away of the monarchy’s sense of mystery. The monarchy’s great power traditionally lay in its ability to insulate itself from the external world, to depict itself as being above the flotsam and jetsam of changeable daily life. But that has unravelled in recent decades. The pressures of mass media, social media and, more importantly, the now dominant culture of revelation, of always signalling one’s virtue and advertising one’s wounds, have slowly pushed at the doors of the once mysterious palace.
Princess Diana, of course, played a key role. She was a lightning rod for the late 20th-century victory of emotionalism over stoicism. Who can forget the explosion of takes following her death in 1997? From the broadsheet media, academia and Downing Street itself, then inhabited by Tony Blair, the cry went out: Diana represented a New Britain. One that was more in touch with its feelings. One that worshipped at the altar of the self rather than bending the knee to the demanding, stressful call of public duty. Meghan clearly sees herself as continuing the Cult of Diana’s work, as heir to the victimology and studied ‘authenticity’ that Diana came to represent.
This is why she namechecked Diana in the Oprah interview. She, together with Harry, of course, aspires to embody the cultural power that was invested in Diana by the new elites. But in an even more intensified form. Now it won’t only be the cult of victimhood and emotionalism – there’ll be identity politics, too. Witness Meghan’s vague, unsubstantiated reference to a member of the royal family wondering how dark her son Archie’s skin would be. We have no idea whatsoever if this was an innocent, curious comment or an openly racist one. I suspect very much it was the former. But it instantly gets folded into the narrative that best serves Harry and Meghan’s power grab – the narrative of their being ‘victims’ of the old establishment, of the culture of racism, of the ‘colonial undertones’ of the modern media, as Harry put it, which is rich coming from someone who took part in the occupation of Afghanistan.
The Oprah chat came wrapped in blather about Meghan telling ‘her truth’. In reality this was a coronation of two leading members of the neo-aristocracy. Harry and Meghan have successfully positioned themselves as key figureheads of the new feudalism in which cultural power resides in the hands of small numbers of very wealthy people around Silicon Valley and Hollywood, and in which the little people’s role is to receive moral instruction from the likes of Facebook, Netflix, Oprah, Harry, Meghan… That’s the great irony of Harry and Meghan juxtaposing themselves to the monarchy, and being witlessly cheered on by the left for doing so: these two behave in a far more old-world monarchical fashion than the queen does. Their punishment of the disobedient media; their conviction that they must instruct the rest of us on how to live, how to travel, how many kids to have; their eye-wateringly arrogant mission of ‘building compassion around the world’ – they make the actual British monarchy, politically neutered by centuries of political progress, seem positively meek in comparison.
What we see in Harry and Meghan is the strange, contradictory power of the victim industry. Power today often comes wrapped in claims of suffering. Publicly professed weakness is a precursor to dictating to everyone else that they must open up, change their attitudes, become more ‘aware’. Victimhood is the soapbox from which the new elites, whether lip-trembling politicians or ‘suffering’ celebs, presume to instruct society at large about the right way to think, emote, feel, be. This is why Meghan’s confession of suicidal thoughts was so important. It felt manipulative. It was in essence a declaration of emotional authenticity. Meghan has the right kind of emotional history to inherit the crown of the post-Diana world – that was the message.
The new feudalism
PODCAST
The new feudalism
SPIKED
Even a republican like me can see there is nothing progressive in the current rage against the palace. That there is nothing to celebrate in the shift from a world of self-control and stoicism to one of incessant self-revelation, and from a democratic era in which the power of monarchy had largely been curbed to a new, woke feudalism in which a select few wield extraordinary cultural influence over the rest of us. These developments harm the freedom of the mind and our sense of moral autonomy, by always cajoling us to bow down to the cult of emotionalism, and they shrink the space for open, democratic debate by investing so much power in the woke feudalists of Big Tech, NGOs, the Oprah set, and so on. Harry and Meghan aren’t fighting the establishment; they are the establishment now. Meet the new aristocrats, even worse than the old.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/08/the-unbearable-victim-complex-of-meghan-markle/
A Democratic President/White House that didn't comment on a black female experiencing all this alleged racism and bs suicidal thoughts, let alone the first black princess in the BRF, would have been run out of office.
We are Woke Central over here, and constantly being lectured about what racists we are. Some folks are all in on it, and some folks let it go in one ear and out the other.
This interview didn't change anyone's mind; those who liked her still do, those who disliked her still do.
Not going to change anyone's opinion about HM and the BRF, either. People are either Royal watchers or they're not; the hardcore Royal watchers will never stop loving them. I suppose there are some #TeamDiana types, as I assume you have there, that might be happy to believe crap because they're still mad about the way they perceive she was treated, but they are in the minority.
And as far as how we feel about the UK? Same thing... Woke crowd will never shut up about Colonialism, but most of us admire our cousins across the pond however puzzled we may be about undercooked bacon, cold toast and beans and grilled tomahto for breakfast!
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2021/03/blind-item-1_8.html
Blind Item #1
They can say what they want, and of course the A+ lister won't, because of their business partnership, but go look where the funds came from for the house. It all goes back to the dad. Every single penny. But apparently that is cut off.
Ha ha, not being American I forgot 4th July! Yes, Archie born on 4th July, with the whole country rejoicing (in your dreams, Meg). I mentioned 1st July as it's Diana's birthday.
I do remember your post re. her stans and a possible miscarriage - or 'mythcarriage' as the July one was described. I just hope the Harkles' vile outbursts won't cause Philip's early demise.
Blind Item #3
Since the alliterate one is all for women's rights all over the world, I'm sure she returned the wedding gift from the leader of one of the world's worst violators of women's rights. Oh wait, no, she kept it and wore it three weeks after he ordered the killing of a reporter, and then she lied to the press about the origin of the gift. I'm sure she has returned it by now though, right along with a strongly worded letter. Nope.
Blind Item #5
The leader of this religion is being asked to resign because of what was revealed last night. It is a tenet of the religion there are no fake weddings. It is deceiving to those who attend. It is lying to those attend.
But it's not the first betrayal or horror or sadness she has been through, and I pray with all my heart she hasn't been hurt too much.
Long may she reign, we all need her more than ever. (And I am as American as it gets!)
Blind Item #9
I guess the alliterate one, who doesn't use Google, also forgot about the time she said that while in her 20's she had a coffee table book about her mother-in-law.
AND, another one. Look up oat milk. The second reference.
she starts plugging her new narrative of ‘everyone has a story and I’m here to share my story so everyone can see you can overcome things and share your story with us blah blah blah blah.’
That statement! It is the "sizzle reel" for their speaking engagements. That's what this whole interview was about. Hire us, and we'll tell you all about how we were hurt. Its got everything! Romance! Bigotry! Royals! Fortunes! Babies! Culture Clashes! Meddling In-laws! Mental Health Crises! Fairy tail endings!
But guess what? A Fortune 500 crowd doesn't want to hear that stuff. You know who does? Impoverished non-profits who love the kumbaya and who can't afford to pay MM & H any more than a boxed lunch.
Well played Meg.
I’ll just briefly mention some feedback from Canada. Although I’m not on Twitter, I read Twitter on Rebel news...the ONLY reliable news source in this country.
I was heartened to read that most commenters have their number, and realize them for the liars, users, evil ones that they are.
Mainstream media here is just that...mainstream. It’s impossible to read anything real, at all.
And, of course, they are good friends with Trudeau, our crooked prime minister who is ruining the country. They attended the WE charity fiasco here, which enriched Trudeau and his family. Quite possibly the Dumbartons, also.
Canada DID pay for their security, until the public unleashed upon them. I signed many petitions to that effect.
I'm just annoyed today. By a lot of the BS, from the interview and some of the interpretations and any support they are getting.
Condolances to those that have lost loved ones, I sadly have lost friends, not the same as close relatives I know, but each of their circumstances were totally different, from a beautiful happy (so it seemed) mother of 2 whose husband was a respected GP, A close colleague who couldn't live with the stillbirth of a much waited for and wanted baby and a young man who had drug issues, there is no telling what life throws at you and how individuals deal with it, we never really know what's going on inside and FWIW I don't think they are selfish, I think they probably feel complete and utter hopelesness and eveyone would be better off without them, but I don't know, I have thankfully never been in that situation and for those that are, please talk to someone, anyone x
Megs is confused,
the taking of passport, keys, licence,
happened to Doria,
when she went on ‘Retreat’ 😉
(1)
Isolating an individual away from their family and friends, using suicide threats to get what you want— these are CLASSIC signs of an emotionally abusive relationship but we are supposed to suspend rationality because “racism”.
Dear Harry: Meghan is not the victim. YOU are:
8:18 AM · Mar 8, 2021
(2)
I don’t know who needs to hear this but if a woman threatens to kill herself and your unborn child, you are in an emotionally abusive relationship.
3:29 PM · Mar 8, 2021
Statues will be visited with a reunited family, Cousins will be besties sharing new baby tips and Zoom calls will be had by all. Archie and Baby Diana Sussex will pop up to the wonderment of the family. And if the family disagree they are horrible racists who are jealous of the Harkles' popularity.
MEGHAN Markle slammed the door in Kate Middleton's face
when the duchess came to apologise to her, it was claimed today
The Duchess of Sussex claimed she was the one left in tears - saying Kate had been "upset about something" over the flower girl dresses in the lead up to the Royal Wedding.
And while Meghan said she had forgiven Kate, The Times today claimed that the 39-year-old slammed the door in her sister-in-law's face when she took flowers to Nottingham Cottage - the Sussex's home at the time.
In the explosive sitdown chat with Oprah, Meghan said: "There wasn't a confrontation and I don't think it's fair to her to get into the details of that because she apologised, and I have forgiven her.
"What was hard to get over was being blamed for something that not only I didn't do, but that happened to me."
In November 2018, it was reported “Meghan left Kate in tears” over her demands for Princess Charlotte’s bridesmaids dress during a “stressful” fitting.
It was then subsequently claimed that the “rift” began when Kate said the bridesmaids should follow royal protocol by wearing tights which Meghan disagreed with.
But this weekend, a source claimed to the The Telegraph that the Duchesses fell out after Princess Charlotte‘s bridesmaid dress didn’t fit – which meant they had to schedule more fittings ahead of the big day.
During the interview with Oprah, Meghan said that Kate was a "good person".
But she said she had struggled after reports of the incident surfaced several months after the wedding - saying it had been a "turning point".
The Duchess of Sussex told Oprah Winfrey that “nothing is what it looks like” as she made a string of explosive allegations about her life in the Royal family.
The sisters-in-law attended the final of the tennis championships in July 2019, and were famously pictured laughing together in the royal box during Serena Williams' showdown with Simona Halep.
Referencing the Wimbledon trip, Oprah asked: “Was it what it looks like? You are two sisters-in-law out there in the world, getting to know each other.
“Was she helping you, embracing you into the family, helping you adjust?"
Appearing to dodge the question, Meghan replied: “My understanding and my experience for the past four years is that it’s nothing like what it looks like.”
re: CDAN
LOL!!!
These are the latest US stories:
Hollywood Reporter
Mental Health Charity Confirms Talks With ITV Over Piers Morgan's Meghan Markle Comments
3:18 PM PST 3/8/2021 by Alex Ritman
The charity Mind said it was "disappointed and concerned" with Morgan's claims that he did not believe Markle when she discussed having suicidal thoughts, adding that it was in discussion with his employer ITV, which it has teamed with on a mental health campaign.
Oprah Winfrey's explosive interview with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry aired across the Atlantic on Monday, effectively on home soil given its subject matter.
A day after Oprah with Meghan and Harry: A CBS Primetime Special was broadcast in the U.S., the two-hour special with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex — which laid bare the inner workings of the royal family and the couple's reason for stepping away — landed on Brit network ITV, which had won a bidding war for the interview.
The U.K. broadcast came after the bombshell revelations had already dominated the British press, where they received nearly blanket coverage for much of the day, including a significant amount of hostility from certain elements of the media. Among the most outspoken was Piers Morgan, who used his Good Morning Britain breakfast news show — also on ITV — to attack both the royals.
A long-time and very public critic of Markle, Piers said that Prince Harry had "been spray-gunning his entire family on global TV." and that "Prince Charles has been bankrolling that couple for the last five years" in a show that was effectively dedicated to the interview. Morgan was heavily criticised on social media, but among his most controversial statements was that he didn't believe Markle when she revealed she had felt suicidal, provoking an outpouring of criticism.
"I don’t believe a word she says," he said. "I wouldn’t believe her if she read me a weather report."
Among those to react was the British mental health charity Mind, which just happens to be a supporter of ITV’s mental health campaign, Get Britain Talking. Just prior to the interview airing on the network in the U.K., it put out a statement.
"We were disappointed and concerned to see Piers Morgan's comments on not believing Meghan's experience about suicidal thoughts today," it said. "It's vital that when people reach out for support they or share their experiences of ill mental health that they are treated with dignity, respect and empathy."
Mind added that it was "in conversations with ITV about this at the moment."
TOURRE BAKAHAI Twitter:
So Meghan Markle can drop multi-millions on London lawyers pursuing her vanity litigation, but she's not allowed to go and see a doctor or psychologist of her own choice....What absolute garbage!!! Why can't Buckingham Palace call out these obvious mega lies???
A REPLY:
Linda Boland *NHS*
@LalaBean1
Replying to
@TourreBakahai
The Royals have their own medical team. Specialists are often used: PH has had mental health treatment for example. There is nothing stopping any member seeking help from elsewhere. They just have to make a phone call. Who goes to HR fir medical help?
6:00 PM · Mar 8, 2021·T
AND, DID HARRY LIE ABOUT THE MONEY TOO? HIS BIG LIE EXPOSED?
The Toadours Sunflower
@TheToadours
·
8h
Harry received a payment from the Duchy in March 2020 he was not cut off, that was for the year. Every year in March he gets it. He wanted more. It’s like giving your kid 100 $ and they want more.Charles also subsidized their security. A big fat lie that he was cut off last year.
Prince Charles is ‘in a state of despair’ after Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s Oprah interview: report
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's televised interview with Oprah Winfrey will air Monday evening in the U.K.
By Stephanie Nolasco | Fox News
Prince Charles is allegedly "in a state of despair" after his youngest son Prince Harry gave a bombshell interview to Oprah Winfrey with Meghan Markle on Sunday night.
The televised sit-down is scheduled to air in the U.K. Monday evening.
Royal author and Vanity Fair correspondent Katie Nicholl made the claim to the outlet on Monday.
"As Vanity Fair reported on Sunday, Harry was emailing his father to justify why he and Meghan had done the interview," Nicholl wrote. "Charles was said to be ‘in a state of despair’ according to a friend."
PRINCE HARRY SAYS MOM PRINCESS DIANA WOULD FEEL 'VERY ANGRY,' 'SAD' ABOUT ROYAL FAMILY FALLOUT
For Prince Harry to say that he felt let down by his father must have been a difficult thing to say and hard for Charles to hear," royal author Sarah Gristwood also told the outlet.
"Now, just at a time when by and large Charles had started to look more like a popular king than one would have guessed, here’s a major blow to his reputation," she shared. "That his son felt let down by him. It’s hard to know if Harry is aware of the damage this has done. Did he actually intend to cast this damaging light on his father and his family? We don’t know."
According to Nicholl, the palace will reportedly respond to the televised interview. However, she said they will take their time "and choose their words carefully."
Charles, the son of Queen Elizabeth II, is first in line to the British throne.
PRINCE HARRY SAYS NETFLIX, SPOTIFY DEALS WERE NECESSARY TO PROVIDE SECURITY FOR MEGHAN MARKLE AND ARCHIE
Sources told Nicholl that Charles, along with Harry’s older brother Prince William "are very concerned" by the claims that were made in the interview. She also claimed palace aides were also caught off-guard by the allegations that were made by both the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
Thanks for the heads up on new LCC vid. Just in time for my tea! :)
Palace aides had feared the interview would make them look out of touch, but sources say they have been shocked by the severity of the allegations," wrote Nicholl. "The various households will be locked in crisis meetings for most of Monday as they work out the next steps."
Nicholl also shared that Elizabeth, 94, has not seen the interview, "but was brief by aides over breakfast Monday morning." Her husband Prince Philip, 99, remains hospitalized.
Charles, 72, previously faced backlash for another televised tell-all. Twenty-five years ago, Princess Diana gave a shocking interview to Panorama where she candidly discussed her marriage to the Prince of Wales.
The late royal famously said, "there were three of us in the marriage so it was a bit crowded," referring to Charles’ relationship with his current wife, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall.
A rep for Charles did not immediately respond to Fox News’ request for comment.
Harry, 36, told Winfrey, 67, the royal family cut him off financially at the start of 2020 after announcing plans to step back from his roles. But he was able to afford security for his family because of the money Diana left behind.
He said his relationship with Charles has been impacted. He even noted that Charles had stopped taking his phone calls.
There is a lot to work through there," Harry said about his relationship with his father. "I feel really let down. He’s been through something similar. He knows what pain feels like. And Archie is his grandson. I will always love him, but there is a lot of hurt that has happened."
Harry also acknowledged that he does not have a close relationship presently with his brother William, 38, who is heir to the throne after Charles. He disputed rumors that he intentionally blindsided the queen with his decision to split. He suspected the rumors came from the institution.
"I’ve never blindsided my grandmother," Harry said. "I have too much respect for her."
Harry and Markle, 39, married at Windsor Castle in May 2018. Their son, Archie, was born a year later. Harry and Markle's departure from royal duties began in March 2020 over what they described as the intrusions and racist attitudes of the British media toward the duchess.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
I have no doubt there is a global effort to launch us all into the reality show version of 1984; it began a long time ago and is happening now. I have never been so glad I don't have children.
But if I were going to send someone in to singlehandedly take down the most prestigious and beloved Monarchy in modern times, it would NOT be Nutmeg. She is not attractive enough, she is nowhere near charismatic enough, she does not take direction well, she has no loyalty, she likes her drugs, etc etc etc.
Harry was an easy mark, and I don't argue that it seems like however little she fits the type who could snare the most eligible bachelor on the planet ( well, one that comes with a lot of lovely perks, at least) she has nonetheless done so. So who knows?
RF cannot battle these accusations. Theyare designed that way, he said/she said. Their only recourse is to discredit the source. Good start with the DM fact check article. More facts!
She probably paid for it to be in there too
"2014"
https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/celebrity-news/meghan-markle-the-tig-blog-post-611897/amp?__twitter_impression=true
I'm wondering how the great British public will react to the interview, which is on ITV tonight. Whose side will they take? A lot of people are too young to remember Diana's interview, & she was one of their own. Will the Harkles estrange younger Brits from the RF? I don't know.
For those of you who have strong stomachs, Megs has released another b & w photo of the little Montecito family. (She read all of our comments about how come no 'Archie' in the 'tree of life' photo, & is even California casual in it. She definitely visits us regularly!) It is unintentionally hilarious. Megs is the centerpiece, natch, she's holding poor Archie in a death grip & his little head is severely twisted to one side so that it's completely obscured. Princess Harry is behind her with his head twisted so that his face is completely obscured. Megs is grinning maniacally, & she's wearing the 10-month baby bump. Her sled runner feet are in evidence. The same guy who took the tree photo took this one. I saw it on the Telegraph website, then lost it, but of course, Megs' Hearst mouthpieces have it.
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a35769299/prince-harry-meghan-markle-archie-family-photo/
@Jessica, @Charade, you have my sympathies for the tragic losses you have suffered.
@AnT, @JennS, the two of you have been some of our most energetic & insightful posters, but you were both quiet for a bit. I was afraid Meg's perfidy had finally gotten to be too much for you. I'm quavering & wanting a 'safe place' after seeing her absolutely & poisonously lethal treatment of poor Kate. Her envy of the Cambridges is bunny boiling level. Yikes!
"Charles did help with funding (e.g. paid for Meghan's exorbitant wardrobe of clothing, household expenses) ... money that came from the Duchy of Cornwall. He could no longer give them this funding if they were not working royals as this is effectively taxpayers' money and I think there is some kind of treaty governing how this money is used."
The duchy money definitely has restrictions as to how it is used despite the strident misleading PR that it is for Charles to use as he pleases with it.
The wording in the royal charter for it specifies that the money is strictly to be used for the Duke of Cornwall who is a declared HEIR APPARENT to the throne in service to the Crown.
Until Charles, everyone followed this wording to the letter. When there was no duke of Cornwall, heir apparent the money was simply put into a trust to be held until the next duke of Cornwall, heir apparent showed up.
When the Queen was growing up, she was declared HEIR PRESUMPTIVE which is the same status as William currently enjoys. She was never HEIR APPARENT.
Not being Heir Apparent or Duke of Cornwall, she couldn't touch the money from the duchy of Cornwall. Her uncle, David, enjoyed it until he was made King. After he abdicated it went into trust because he father went from Duke of York to King in about 5mins.
When Charles was declared Heir Apparent, Duke of Cornwall at age 3yrs old, he could access the money, but it was strictly given for his use, but not for his siblings. He therefore grew up wealthy compared to his siblings and his own parents.
The point of this background history is to point out how much Charles blurred the lines in order to fund the Dukes of Cambridge and Sussex.
Clearly he and his team know they are breaking the law in openly funding dukes that are not Cornwall or Heirs apparent and so they hide it in the accounts as 'other household expenses / expenditure' rather than a properly vetted set of accounts listed for the Dukes of Cambridge and Sussex.
Further they fudged some more by saying any money he gave them was in their service to the Crown just like him.
If this was kosher there would be no need to hide them in 'other household expenses / expenditure'
As long as the PR did it's job, no one looked too closely at the Duchy accounts.
Then the Sussexes Megxited.
They put a spotlight on the funding arrangement on the world's stage in their Megxit statement where they proudly boasted of their income coming from the duchy of Cornwall. Didn't have the foresight to frame it as money used in service to the crown.
This was not a good look for Charles and he is very lucky the people at Republic didn't catch onto that bit of information when Charles has gone to great lengths to hide his financial information behind exemption from FOI laws.
Charles very quickly put out PR saying he was funding them from his private investments and not the duchy money. He has repeatedly put out this statement whenever Sussex funding has popped up in the past year.
It would have been scandalous to appear to be dipping into the duchy money for Sussexes when they obviously no longer working for the crown AND the duchy rents being raised which is a story he's worked hard to quash.
My guess is that he did cut them off during that first quarter because there were reports that he'd given them a big chunk of money for security or leant it to them depending on which source you read. That chunk of money was given around the time there was a kerfuffle over security arrangements in LA.
I think he gave them a year's allowance in one go to be used for security as per repirts, something he could still hide in the 2020 accounts which are published in June of each year, and then cut them off.
So she admits to faking everything the last 4 years, what makes todays any different than yesterday and why should anyone believe her now?
Shes an actress and knows no 'production' is what it seems from the outside. Theres all kinds of behind the scenes planning to manage.
Heck her/their 'interview' is all stage managed and rehersed. None of that is real life... it didnt even happen at oprahs or dumbartons mansion! Does mm always where 5000 dollar givenchy funeral dresses to chit chat with a thristy friend?
What’s interesting is that Harry has found his voice, and mimics Meghan in behavior. He is not his own person. He is her person. His voice is used to tear down others, as if he is 12 and going through hormonal puberty and needs guidance and lessons learned. Unfortunately, his mother is Meghan.
The path of self deluded destruction he is on is very worrying. His family does love him and I don’t believe they are going to let this end the way Meghan hopes. They need to totally discredit her, they need to show Harry who she is...
And to @charade, @constantgardener33, @AnT for your losses.
It seems to me that it's one of those things that is deeply private, deeply painful. I'm so sorry that all this has brought painful memories back to the surface for you.
Thank you, that’s very kind x. I was honestly shocked, mouth agape, shouting towards my husband when she went IN on Kate. Everything else paled in comparison (he other accusations without targets were far too exaggerated for me). Nowhere else, except for the tidbit around her petulance around Archie’s title -no decent explanation was given so she then went nuclear with the racism claims- Nowhere else did I see the amount of hatred and contempt she had for Kate. According to her, the actions and apology flowers did not at all equate Meghan’s supposed ‘forgiveness’ of Kate. She wasn’t mad at the press. She was mad at Kate, to the point of hatred.
The issue here is I would LOVE to see Kate politely stick up for herself and share her truth. At the same time, it would open a can of worms which is exactly what Meghan wants. She wants them to talk and hit back, so she can remain in perpetual PR Volley with the Royals.
I guess the brf decided thry needed to rip off the bandage rather than give jnto mm s blackmail
https://blindgossip.com/the-enemy-diaries/
https://blindgossip.com/alarming-around-the-children/
https://blindgossip.com/only-one-way-back-for-fredo/#more-102086
Hapless admitting that he didn’t know he was trapped before Megalo came along and that he would have never left if it wasn’t for her is very revealing. They should have never said that but over sharing with Oprah might let unflattering things slip away. She is his guru of the woke cult he joined to escape the shackles of the racist institution. He was targeted for sure. Was it only by a z list hustler or by something bigger?
Blabbing about how his father and brother are trapped makes him sound like a lunatic. He is a petulant ungrateful entitled man child but he is in an abusive marriage. He went for her because he knew she will play dirty with his family. What he doesn’t grasp is that he has never been in charge of anything in this dysfunctional relationship.
MustySyphone said...I had the exact same thought. Archie was not going to be given the title prince until Charles becomes king. period. that's the way it goes.
Mmhmmm. Those two better pray that they don't give Charles a coronary because if he dies suddenly before the Queen and William becomes Prince of Wales, bye bye titles for their 'kids'. (Or am I wrong?)
@SwampWoman: I believe you are right. If Charles takes the eternal celestial dirtnap before HMTQ, William will become. POW and the monarch after Granny passes on to her eternal reward.
Harry and Meghan are probably in the top two places for life on the sh!t lists of William and many others following the Oprah interview, so their children would not receive titles in case Charles never takes the throne. Diana said she thought he probably wouldn’t be a very good king anyway.
Grandchildren of the reigning monarch are styled prince or princess, and for Harry’s kids that wound have to come via Charles on the throne. No Charles means no little prince or princess for the Harkles.
Meghan would just grind her dental veneers all the way down to the stubs of her natural teeth.
How sad is THAT?
Not one bit sad. Those kids will be incredibly messed up as it is. William could tell Harry he’s
doing their children a favor and that Harry will thank him one day.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2021/03/blind-item-5_8.html#disqus_thread
Supposedly the archbishop of cantbury has been asked to resign. Cdan so who knows if its true
See what it looks like after the interview
https://morningconsult.com/2021/03/04/royal-family-favorability-harry-meghan-oprah/
Camilla tanked. I would unfortunately agree she is still viewed as the villain. Crown didn't help this year, probably by design.
One would think week or so without H&M backing up their slanderous accusations with a name,Americans would move on. But that doesn't seem to be the narrative . Really hope RF makes a move. It already feels too delayed as it's a day out over here . No statement , action
I, too, had a brother who is a malignant narcissist with sociopathic tendencies. He made my parents and family’s life a living hell for years. He hated me with the heat of a million suns because I never let him get away with it. When my father passed two years ago, the family cut him out completely. He was even removed from the family ancestry accounts and bible. Also, I have lost several people close to me through suicide. One was my ten year old friend who rode her bicycle into a Mac truck rather than deal with her stepmother. Ten years old. Rachel Markle is a right c&#t and karma can’t be instant enough for me.
Harry seemed so proud of himself for standing up for his family. He felt he could finally tell dad, no. Just like Meghan taught him. Notice how angry he was that Charles told him to put it in writing. They knew Meghan would hate having to clarify her plans or thoughts (Oprah even seemed irritated at this for the audience- notice how she distanced herself today from all of it, she was truly ‘shocked’).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good catch. Ambiguity is Meghan's power source - you don't know exactly what she will say do or what she means, where she stays, who she is, what she wants, it's like having an upper hand over all who have to wait for her 'reveal' - so we may all delight in being bestowed the privilege of this knowledge. For her to take a professional approach to putting down on paper what her plans is like handing over the house keys. It takes away her power, and also it challenges her psychotic mind and ego.
Look at the closeup photo of the Harkles and the Archbishop. He's looking at MM like he's
about to drop trou and ravish her right at the altar. All women know that look.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9337999/Church-vicar-says-Meghans-claim-Harry-secretly-tied-knot-earlier-easily-verified.html
William won’t ever speak to the guy again. William represents The Monarchy. Harry is a bizarrely pussy whooped traitor of epic proportions. They can see he’s not in charge.
I think that people think that Camilla was the person whom Harry said he would never talk about what was said.
MM has been gunning for Camilla for a long time. I don't think anybody said anything like that, and it just another one of MM's "poor me" lies.
I'm sure that MM knows that Camilla has her number, so she looked for a way to bring her down.
Lots of people like and admire Camilla. This is just a bump in the road for her. She'll bounce back.
I was just listening to Lady C's latest video. She says that if MM went to HR about this, she was dead wrong in doing so. HR is for employees of The Firm and the palace. MM is not an employee. She is a member of the royal family, and not an employee. There really was nothing HR could do about it.
Again, I think this was just another lie on her part.
Yes, the archbishop looks so creepy with that grin on his face while looking at MM.
I think we've all had the same thought. That's all I'm going to say.
-------------
I've been trying to unravel Welby's connections - he has links to the Portal family (makers of paper for bank notes, the Butlers (largely senior churchmen originally but RA Butler, `RAB', said to be the best PM we've never had, was his uncle).
The Butlers in their turn were linked by marriage to the Courtaulds, the textile magnates, who are also linked with Trinity, where RAB ended up as Master (the consolation prize it was said), and Welby's a Trinity man too.
Do read this -
https://thetab.com/2016/02/21/conversion-justin-welby-75865
As you may have gathered, I'm not an Evangelical, but I'd say that's a pretty accurate picture of CICCU. Welby's `conversion'(1975) suggests he's `born again'.
I have no idea how that squares with his work in the oil industry (Wikipedia details his business career.) He was ordained deacon in 1992, becoming AofC in 2013.
His rise within the Church seems rapid, especially as his feet had hardly touched the ground in Durham Cathedral but the time scale from Deacon to most important job is not so very different from that of another Trinity man, Richard Chartres, former Bishop of London. Not an Etonian but a grammar school boy, who went up to Trinity in '65, where he became a friend of PC, then to theological college, ordained deacon in 1973, having been confirmed Anglican in 1966. He was later one of Diana's executors, and preached the sermon at William & Catherine's wedding.
As for Rache, I can only imagine that she gave a convincing impression of someone who'd accepted the Lord Jesus into her heart
This looks interesting:- from Amazon website -
calendar 1965
Archbishop Justin Welby: Risk-taker and Reconciler - The First Major Biography 24-Jun-2014
by Andrew Atherstone
( 18 )
£7.99 £18.99
When the search for a new Archbishop of Canterbury began, Justin Welby had been a bishop for only four and a half months. He had little media profile and barely figured in the early speculations about Rowan Williams’ successor. Welby claimed that it would be ‘a joke’ and ‘perfectly absurd’ to appoint him because he had such little episcopal experience. The Crown Nominations Commission disagreed and in March 2013 he was enthroned as the 105th Archbishop of Canterbury.
This, the first major biography of Welby, critically examines the words, actions and impact of his first year as head of the Anglican Communion, including his active political engagement and his tackling of controversial issues such as same-sex marriage, women bishops and the emergence of GAFCON.
Biographer Andrew Atherstone also analyses Welby’s theological, strategic and pastoral qualities and, through extensive archival research and interviews with the archbishop’s friends and colleagues, presents in-depth accounts of his unsettled childhood, the experiences that influenced his conversion to Christianity at Cambridge University, his successful career in the oil industry, his personal and professional links to Africa and his rapid rise through the ranks of the Church of England.
What emerges is a portrait of a global Christian leader deeply motivated by gospel values, unafraid of risk and committed to tackle issues of division within both church and society.
Archbishop Justin Welby: Risk-taker and Reconciler is more than twice the length of Atherstone’s 2013 biography, Archbishop Justin Welby: The Road to Canterbury. It contains four new chapters that examine Welby’s first year at Lambeth, 16 pages of photographs and incorporates much of the text of the earlier book, substantially expanded, revised and updated.
Curiouser and curiouser...
Agreed. Harry came off as an embarrassing dimwit, as if he’s a joke character in a sitcom. Happy until his scary creepy girlfriend tells him he isn’t, so he marries her. He even believes left him money because “she knew this would happen” so I am imaging some psychic or tarot sessions with someone Megs paid in a London back alley. The way he limply played with a chicken like a child with issues while Megs and Oprah yapped it up next to him was painful to see....Like, the lost diminished child-man whose guru is his cable actress hooker wife.
✨⚡️
@NeutralObserver,
I am sure JennS is busily researching. I was also looking things up while working, sending a couple of questions to people I know who might have inside info this week, plus grabbed a break after ten days of minimum sleep for a rush project. I am also letting this roll around in my head. I feel for the royals, the staffers, and the U.K. people and press—everyone these two cretins have bashed, kicked, spit on, ruined.
The royal instinct would be to burn the Harkles down with massive shocking reveals, and I am ready for it. But they will probably settle for absolute title stripping. In a few hours, Thomas Markle will let his feelings out but I think it will be mealy-mouthed, and unimportant to the bigger cause of how to un-Harkle the universe. Anyway, part of the world now sees TM as Dr Frankenstein, creator of this soulless she-monster The BRF have to ignore him or nicely explain to him that his daughter is a plasticized agent for the hell club, and just prepare the torpedoes.
The royals (William, maybe Sophie, and Anne) can do it, but, it will the age-old delicate, deftly handled balance of opening a market or horse race with ribbons and flowers while having someone else out in the country removing a pretender’s fingernails until he signs a confession.
What I mean is, they can’t settle this in the media with lists of truths. They need a big arse confession from Harry. He is mental mush now; with their own agent, military or private, they could get it.
Or have I got him confused with an earlier AoC?
She gives a blow by blow, absolutely brilliant analysis as we can imagine. Many new points. Well worth the watch! I will not even begin to go into what she says. It's quite in depth. She crescendos in her opinions of H&M then ends ends on a positive note.
22/11/2020
The Archbishop of Canterbury will be taking study leave from May until early August next year. He will return to work in early September after some leave.
https://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/news/news-and-statements/archbishop-justin-welby-take-study-leave-2021
the US folks will be on to something else by the end of the week. the PR team for H&M as well as O will try to keep it alive for a while with additional PR and releases. it is said the actual interview was approx 3 hr 40 minutes long. I'm sure they'll try to keep the interest going but............... any interest will be dying down on this side of the pond very soon.
What Jdubya said. We've got real problems here. HUGE. It wouldn't take much for widespread violence to break out by people that are really, really good at it.
Well, that was fast! So the archbishop has temporarily been put out to pasture. He sure does need a lot of "further study."
Would HMTQ have done this as the head of the CoE? If so, good for her taking immediate action.
About Welby — I wouldn’t trust him as far as I can throw him. I think he is part of the Markle Opportunity.
@Ron,
I understand what you mean about feeling so protective or defensive of our little “shrinking” elders, and in connection, the Queen.
@TheGrangle,
Why did they let it get this far? I think Charles stupidly bought into the game plan and allowed everything to please whoever is running the game. Now he possibly is waking to the cold reality that he was used and discarded - or, he is still playing the game. We will find out, I guess.
He's just been benched. This is getting very interesting.
Is anyone keeping track of the debunked lies from the broacast?
1) Married three days earlier - debunked in the DM by a vicar.
2) Archie not a Prince because of his color - see Geroge V decree. Title of Prince could (operative word) be bestowed when Charles ascends the Throne.
3) We did not want to do deals - we had to / PC cut them off. Hmmmmmm - what about Sussex Royal and all the trademarking. What about the Lion King request? Why wasn't this asked?
4) Kudos to the poster as to the time line and MM's pregnancy with Archie - posted above. Things do not line up with her narrative.
5) Her passport was taken - so how did she travel to NYC for the shower?
6) I could not go anywhere....so how do you manage the Vogue assignment, or showing up unannounced at some of the charities?
7) Harry could not get MM mental health - I believe everyone on the blog called BS on this one, as Charles was able to obtain the services of a therapist for younger Harry back in the day. Word would have gotten out if MM was asking for mental health help. Someone would have said something to the couple.
I hope someone at Legal in the "Firm" is combing through the interview and the out takes with a fine tooth comb.
8) Where Meghan met the Queen. FF says BP, but Oprah interview says Royal Lodge.
9) Archie’s first word. Previously they said it was [ ] I forget, but in Corden interview it is “Crocodile”.
I did not watch it, but reading the quotes I think Harry sounded very stupid. He really had no idea his family would cut funding, security, charities, and military honors if he buggered off to America? A key quote is when Harry said he had no idea he was trapped until he met Meghan. This is proof (to me) that she pursued him and played him. He gave up hunting. He gave up his friends. Turned his back on his family, country, military, and sovereign. He left with nothing but a grey suit, holey brown shoes, and fled to Meghan’s birthplace to become A list, influencer glitterati. He drank the flavor aid, and is now wallowing in its aftermath. I think this interview and it’s aftershocks will hurt the RF in the short term, but will hurt the Sussexes more in the long term. What businesses will partner with them after this dual victim statement/attack? I agree that there were undercurrents of blackmail here. Money is clearly a problem for them.
A of C is benched? Seriously? Wow. I take that as a good sign, actually. Ex oil executive trained in holiness in the bash camps? Nope.
So....are they saying that she was pregnant before they were married?
Also, who's taking bets that they were married the first time in Botswana?
I call it benched as in baseball, @WBBM called it "put out to pasture" but now @Ian's Girl is saying the article about his 'leave" is from last November. Things are moving so fast right now. I need to slow down and pay better attention.
Yes on the bash camps. He reminds me a little too much of Ian the Devil Himself Paisley. Nope is right!
Lots of folks have wondered this...including me. But it doesn't seem that likely if you look at the marriage laws there. I guess it might have been a religious marriage? M does belong to a large number of religions!
https://www.gov.bw/civil-registration/marriage-registration#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20Marriage%20Act,or%20any%20other%20Religious%20right.
Meghan was a catalyst for the typical racism talk today, and celeb virtue signaling of mental health support. Meghan’s going to come calling for the $$$ now for Archewell. No one will go to bat with her.
Still utterly confused at her ‘strategy’ especially as she tries to merch another dress today.
@Acquitaine, what say you? I wish I had a time stamp of when she said it. It's too long to go back at this late stage, I'm winding down for my bed. She does reference her book People of Color and the Royals if that helps.
Thank you in advance!
Clarity on my comment 'yes on the bash camps'. It's always those holy men that get embroiled in the worse doo doo seems like.