Skip to main content

The Sussex saga: We were right about Meg's bullying. What else were we right about?

 Just a few weeks ago, the Sussex saga was a bit dull. Over the past week, of course, it's exploded.

First there was Harry's ridiculous bus-top interview with James Corden, in which he hopelessly flubbed his scripted lines and flopped his arms about like a man who is accustomed to not being taken seriously.

Of course, stopping at the exterior location home of a long-dead sitcom and then asking, on camera, to use the bathroom is an indication of a man who should not be taken seriously. 

It's a good thing the protocol-loving Queen Mother isn't around to see the Corden show. She might have asked for her inheritance back. 

Rushing through his dialogue

Then there was a quick clip from Oprah's upcoming interview with the Sussexes. Meg is shown sitting silent, plastic-faced, in an unflattering dress, looking somewhat like a showroom dummy of herself. 

Harry, meanwhile, is babbling on again like a man who is accustomed to not being listened to, as he again draws parallels between his wife with his mother. (John Lennon had a terrible habit of doing this as well; he mixed his mother's name with his wife's in the otherwise gorgeous love song Julia.)

"My biggest concern was history repeating itself," he says. "I'm really relieved and happy to be sitting here talking to you with my wife by my side because I can't begin to imagine what it must have been for her going through this process by herself all these years ago."

He's speaking prepared dialogue, but he's rushing through it like somebody is going to cut him off at any moment. Which probably tells us a little bit more than what we want to know about life at Sussex Manor.

Earrings from MbS

Then there was the revelation that the earrings Meg wore to a royal event in Fiji - along with that simple blue dress that was one of her few great fashion moments - were an unreported wedding gift from Saudi leader Mohammed bin Salman. 

MbS, as he's referred to in the diplomatic community, is a controversial figure who was involved in the death of propagandist-not-journalist Jamal Khashoggi just three weeks earlier.

Wearing the earrings would have been bad enough style given the timing, but apparently Meghan lied about their provenance as well, saying they were "borrowed." (At the time, I believe, a Hong Kong jeweler took credit for loaning them to her.)

Receiving the earrings was not, quite frankly, improper, since MbS is a member of another Royal family. 

But the timing of their public debut was awful, and the dishonesty about where they came from - was she lying just to the press? or also to the Royal staff assisting her? - was unsettling.

What else are we right about?

Of course, at this blog and at other non-sugar Meghan blogs, we've been saying for a long time that Meg is a liar.

We've also been saying for quite some time that she is a bully, information that is just beginning now to officially emerge from Kensington Palace, where an investigation is underway.

This raises the question: what else were we right about? 

Yachting? Trevor? Corey? The hockey player? The dogs? Joseph Gordon-Giuliano? Meg's drug use? Doria's prison record? Meg's lack of a university diploma? Meg's real birthdate? Markus Anderson? Nicole?

Archie?

Comments

I think we have unpicked the whole sorry mess here. Thanks to you for bringing us all together. I hope this is the start of the great reveal.
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Posted on last thread before I saw that Nutty had posted about this new article. There's tea over at Skippy's about the tea throwing incident at Admiralty House in Australia. They do switch between "Admiralty House" and "Australia House", so who knows.
ReallyDonna said…
Propagandist-not-journalist? I don't understand. What does this mean Nutty?
Christine said…
You cannot pick and choose your narrative as a 'famous person'. If you are a sh*t person pretending to be a good one (in Meghan's own words, I'm a massive fraud), you WILL get found out. The very people she hates, the men in the gray suits, are the very ones who have kept these bad stories at bay until finally, with her out of control narcissism, ego and desire for money and power, she went too far. The love that Charles and William have for Harry can no longer protect him and we'll be seeing that more and more.
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
OKay said…
Copied and repasted from the previous thread:

@Teasmade said...
I just saw this on Twitter, posted two minutes ago: "Heather Wong, former Travalyst Director, one of the only TWO WOC under Meghan's +10 strong PR team..."

(I don't understand all the capital letters, but I cut and pated verbatim.)
_______________
The "two" capitalization is just for emphasis, and WOC means women of colour...so, not a good look for Meg there either.
@Flore said…
She is such a devious creature. It’s unsettling. I know the BRF are no ordinary family but I do feel sorry for them, William and Catherine in particular. Having someone like her infiltrate your family is heart wrenching. She will stop at nothing.

@Nutty
Receiving the earrings was not, quite frankly, improper, since MbS is a member of another Royal family.

I agree. After all, MBS is KSA’s acting royal sovereign. But I do find his choice of gift rather telling. Why would someone as conservative as MBS gift the bride diamonds? MBS’s wife could have gifted her but it was MBS’s personal gift. This is not considered acceptable or appropriate from a cultural perspective. Gifting the groom or gifting the couple would have been the only acceptable option. Showering another man’s bride with diamonds is not culturally appropriate. Hapless proved himself to be spineless by letting her wear them in front of the whole world. MBS proved one thing: Cruella has a price and it’s not that high...
@Flore. Maybe he's better acquainted with Megz than we think and it was a personalised kind of gift. He appears to own a super-yacht.
What about her skin tone?

The DM article on Yahoo home page toady uses this photo of her (but not when you click on the article)

https://s.yimg.com/uu/api/res/1.2/d9XbEPUQVzxWT23HdIY7Iw--~B/Zmk9c3RyaW07aD0zODg7cT05NTt3PTcyMDthcHBpZD15dGFjaHlvbg--/https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2021-03/53979b30-7c4e-11eb-bfe9-a04f30725381.cf.webp

- I thought `Ah, the perfect English Rose - or is it an Irish one? Pale skin like porcelain, cheeks delicately flushed with pink.

Then looking through the images that I'd turned up, I saw it used for an Irish Times article headed `How Irish is Meghan Markle and does really it matter?

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/abroad/how-irish-is-meghan-markle-does-it-really-matter-1.3561110

She looks a real Rose of Tralee:

Though lovely and fair as the Rose of the summer,
Yet 'twas not her beauty alone that won me;
Oh no, 'twas the truth in her eyes ever dawning,
That made me love Mary the Rose of Tralee.

In reality, she's more like Mary O'Leary, the shopkeeper of Craggy Island

https://fatherted.fandom.com/wiki/Mary_O%27Leary
Teasmade said…
@OKay! I know what WOC means (although I do thank you for explaining it for the non-US readers who are probably not accustomed to seeing it--I should have done so). It was the "has left for a New Position" that got me -- I'm an editor and I correct people's excessive capitalizations all day long!

And then I went and made and typo with "pasted" LOL.

But as for this new topic, what we were right about, I'd still like to know about the fabled, or so-called, $9M that was "laundered" to a bank account of Doria's, supposedly to hide merching profits. THAT'S what I'd like to know about. "Laundered" is in quotes because I was sharply lectured a while back by a former poster, a queen bee with accounting experience, who explained that it's not really laundering. But I mean -- hiding ill-gotten large sums.
Sylvia said…
Do Nuttues feel that Charles
by doing nothing enabled the bullying behaviour by not dealing with it ? C
This is what's poster stated on tumbler ..

'As he gives them millions upon millions of pounds to spend on PR which attacks his other son’s family'



'Clarence House (Prince Charles) received the complaints and did nothing
The responsibility lies squarely on Prince Charles and his household. They made the decision to ignore the complaints. They are the ones that are culpable, as well as Meghan for being a bully and Harry for trying to cover it up (and succeeding? Did Harry beg daddy Charles to do nothing about the complaints?)

William protected his staff.
@WBBM, how funny! One of my former roommates was a Rose from Toronto. And the actress that played Mary just passed away the other week. Was so sad to read that. You are bang on about her being like Mary O'Leary!
Christine said…
Sylvia- 100% AGREED
Sylvia said…
*Nutties
Kate too stood up for her staff against MM
@WBBM. Or Molly Malone,fishmonger/lady of the night? Handling cockles by day and c**** by night.
Nutty Flavor said…
@RealDonna, most of Khashoggi's articles were ghostwritten.

https://english.alarabiya.net/features/2018/12/23/Washington-Post-reveals-how-Qatar-Foundation-shaped-their-pieces-by-Khashoggi

He was an agent of the Qatari government.
Sylvia said…
Wild Boar battle-maid 🤣
You made me and my husband roar laughing.
Sandie said…
@Sylvia

My understanding of the story is that those serious allegations of bullying never got to HR in CH or BP as a formal complaint, so it is highly possible that Charles and the Queen were unaware of how bad things were.

I would say the organisational problem that they seem to have is that staff are unable to go directly to HR but go to a line manager in the office. That line manager is often invested in protecting the principal and thus conflicted. HR is supposed to protect staff.
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
I posted this on the last blog before I saw that there was a new one:

I've got work to do, but am checking in regularly as things are moving along quickly. sorry if this has been posted before.

The Harkles have created a list of items to put on your frige to do good works for women.

Here are some pearls from this list and the link:

-achieve "birth justice" for all women, not just some?

- buy from a woman owned restaurant. (forget the men?).

-help a woman be her best at a crucial time?

The list is ridiculous. It completely leaves out men and their need for support, too. It also gives no solutions, except to "support women." It reads as if a child had written it, and, personally, it's pi**ing me off.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14199423/meghan-markle-prince-harry-good-deeds-queen-service-universal/

jessica said…
Bit rich of Harry and Meghan to go on Oprah and talk about their mental health issue on the UK caused by what Harry deems are fake articles, when they were the perpetrators in real action.

A lack of taking responsibility never ends well.
AnyaAmasova said…
I guess we now know what PP told Charles a week or so ago in hospital. Time to take out the trash and that might include the nit-wit, H or Haz; take your pick. PP had had enough of Flower disrespecting Cabbage. Charles can waffle, but I believe he respects his father. After all, upon landing in the UK from NZ in fall of 2019, it was reported that Charles drove directly to see his father at Sandringham, bypassing BP and/or Clarence House. This was in response to Prince Andrew's car crash on the television but probably included issues about the nit-wit.

This has only just begun, unless the nit-wit voluntarily shuts it down completely. It is laughable that Flower thought she would win this. Her fate will be decided far above her pay grade. This might end up being as fun as a Plantagenet family feud. I am not sure Flower knows anything about British monarchical history. For that matter, the nit-wit probably knows little as well.
Animal Lover said…
I wonder if Oprah will edit the interview to ask about these allegations? CBS may like this controversy as it could help ratings.
Many foreign heads of state give jewelry to new members of the royal family. Diana got a lot of jewelry, as did HMTQ at her marriage.

The problem isn't that the gift was given, it's that MM wore them. They should have been put away because of the association they carry.

Either MM knew of their provenance or knew nothing about the entire situation, meaning that she does not read the news. Not reading or simply misunderstanding a huge news story, and she wants to be president of the US?
Sandie said…
@JennS

Yes, I think your description in bold is correct.

I have been making a fundamental error when saying that the leaks are coming from KP or CH and BP have nothing to do with it. BP is head office for the Firm; KP and CH are fully functioning in their own right but are essentially branches of the Firm.
JennS said…
Puds said...
@ Jenn's, you found Farchy! Quick sell to Hello, Megs and Farchy on Oprah first pictures! So funny, well done.
....................

@Puds!!! LOL!!!
Are you referring to my updated avatar??
That is HARRY - Meghan's ventriloquist's dummy sitting on the Queen of the Narcs' lap.
He's all set for the interview and will say whatever she wants him to!
I have a bigger version of my avi coming up soon.
🤣🤪😲😵😲🤪🤣

I wonder if Oprah will have to re-edit for a third or fourth time now that Buck Palace is backing up the bullying claims. (They don't admit them but they don't deny them. They do say they need to be investigated - so that means they are supporting the claims!!!)
👏👏👏
Button said…
I don't think this will be swept under the carpet by The Palace. I do wonder if Horrid Grip finally pushed to far with the ' I want the DM to run an apology to me ' on their front page for six months, etc? It is quite ironic isn't it, that perhaps finally she will be exposed after blathering on about compassion and kindness. I truly hope she is not on the receiving end of any kindness nor compassion. I hope all of her rotten to the core self is exposed. All of it. I wonder if the press will finally be able to do a complete core dump of all they know. If the bread crumbs will finally be led to the Archificial farce. Oh wouldn't that be lovely?
NeutralObserver said…
@JennS, It's not clear who actually was behind the revelations in the London Times. I've seen speculation elsewhere that Palace NDAs were violated when Megs started suing the MOS. (She may have brought this on herself when she tried to drag the RF into the composition of the letter, so MOS got to question staff.) So, the theory is, since Megs got their NDAs smashed, the staff felt free to talk. Some think Charles, who is the ultimate boss of KP, & CH, looks terrible because he did nothing to protect staff, although Jason Knauf did all the right things in going to KP HR, & CH HR, & there was official communication on Megs' bullying between the two HR depts, but no one followed up on it. It was pushed behind the curtains. The BP investigation, may be just CYA after the fact. This is one theory. I have no idea what is true. But it seems to indicate that Charles was too dithery to take any action.

Jason Knauf is CEO of William's Royal Foundation, so it seems not impossible that the two communicated in some way about this. This story is getting better than fiction in all of the intrigue, & ins & outs.
lucy said…
Nutty wrote "Meg is shown sitting silent, plastic-faced, in an unflattering dress, looking somewhat like a showroom dummy of herself.."

LOL! Nice.

I admit I have not been around (this next question proves it?) but what happened to Meghan's mole? The one above her lip. Has it been filtered out? Removed?

As mentioned above " the men in gray suits" wasn't majority of Meg's staff women? I realize there is abundance of staff between all but I had impression her "core" was female . writings imply bunch of men strong armed her at every turn..

To Nutty's question, I believe we are right about Archie. Meg did not birth that baby. Game Over if ever revealed ?

I hope everyone is well 🙂
Button said…
If I was a betting person I would say Wills might be behind this coming out now. Charles is to much of a wimp to actually do anything. Bloody good thing that Wills was the firstborn.
NeutralObserver said…
@Sandie, Your nice summary of the MOS case, @JennS' posting of the London Times article on the lawsuit, @Opus' post explaining that an appeal would depend on the MOS lawyer's showing that Judge Warby made a mistake in deciding a point of law, all give me faint hope that an MOS appeal might succeed, but then, I thought Warby might rein her in, & was totally wrong. Megs has so muddied the water with her conflicting claims of copyright, dropping various claims, etc, it seems possible that in all the confusion, Warby made a mistake. I'm probably wrong, but apparently, the MOS' lead barrister got a first in theoretical physics from Cambridge, so he probably likes thorny problems.
Natalier said…
@ JennS, thank you very much for typing in all The Times article. They have been read and well appreciated by me and I am sure, everyone else here. Thank you again.
NeutralObserver said…
@Animal Lover, Thank you for posting the Camilla Tominey piece from the Telegraph. Did you see the one Tominey wrote on why Megs is not Diana? She says that Megs didn't recognize that she was a 'bit player in someone else's drama.' It was very good.
lucy said…
I am not seeing link to video Puds mentioned of Meg's "teeth slipping out while saying goodbye" please post again! (sorry)
The Brookings Institute, one of the most famous conservative think tanks in the US, has greatly changed since its inception. My father, as a lawyer and a Republican, did some work for them in the 1970s, working on the legalities of proposed new laws by members of Congress. I remember seeing a long row of leather-bound books in his home office that just read, "The Brookings Institute," on their spines.

There are many, many departments in the Brookings Institute, and one department didn't know what the other is doing to keep the work they were doing as private as possible. It's possible that one dealt with middle eastern affairs, but they usually only look into the ramifications of foreign policy, but they didn't enforce it or put it into action.

I wonder how that's changed in recent years. I'd definitely need more than one source (actually more than one. several) to unravel all that the Brookings Institute covers today.

@lucy,

I wonder why MM hasn't had dental implants to keep her "teeth" from slipping. Maybe she can't afford it? My dental implants are great- the best thing I ever did, and I had my whole set of teeth replaced by implants.
OKay said…
This just in from BG - interesting...

[Blind Gossip] If you are a fan of the movie Mean Girls, you may remember a scene in which some of the characters devise a plan of attack on The Plastics.

Janis Ian (played by Lizzy Caplan) and Damien (Daniel Franzese) befriend new student Cady Heron (Lindsay Lohan).

They tell her about a terrible group of girls called The Plastics. They then work together to take down The Plastics, methodically listing each point of attack.

There is a similar war going on right now in real life between two famous parties.

The Mean Girl in this case is a TV actress who married well but wants more. In order to elevate herself, she has been painting herself as the pure and virtuous protagonist… and everyone else as the horrible and evil antagonists.

She’s a victim, yo!

The victim of what? Everything! Misogyny, classism, racism, whatever.

Where the heck is Actress’ husband in all this?

He seems to be in some sort of haze and relegated to the role of her accomplice.

The Actress’ list of antagonists is long and distinguished: her own family, her husband’s family, the media, the people of an entire country, etc.

Let’s focus on her husband’s family, as they are The Antagonists of The Week who are currently being dragged into battle with her. And they are none too pleased about it.

The Family believes they rolled out the red carpet to Actress and welcomed her into the fold.

However, according to Actress, they treated her badly, they didn’t train her, they didn’t protect her, they didn’t let her do what she wanted, etc. While she won’t label them directly, she clearly wants you to think of them as bad people. Misogynists, classists, racists, whatever.

Her husband’s family are not about to let those assertions go unanswered.

While they can’t directly defend themselves (it’s complicated), they can attack back in a less direct manner.

They are basically taking the Mean Girls approach!

While they ordinarily would not go on the offensive against [a member of their own family], her appalling actions have left them little choice but to lay bare her hypocrisy.

Every characteristic that [The Actress] considers part of her virtuous and superior “brand” will be dismantled piece by piece.

That means that there is a list. A list of behaviors and actions that expose who she really is and undermine her brand.

Cady Heron could not attack The Mean Girls directly and all at once. However, she could methodically chip away at them bit by bit. So she did.

After defeating the Mean Girls, Cady Heron wound up Homecoming Queen, complete with a crown on her head.

Let’s see who takes the crown in this war!
NeutralObserver said…
@xxxxx, Thank you for your poem on Megs & Oprah on the other thread. Your line about haoles struck a chord. I was lucky enough to spend several of my younger years in Hawaii. In recent years I have disliked going to Hawaii because it was painful to see all of the most recent development, some of which is not at all attractive. Hawaii is a small place, & ecologically fragile.

I was inspired by all of the talk of Oprah jetting back & forth from Hawaii to Santa Barbara to look up Oprah's house, which of course, is huge. It's in Hana, Maui, which might be one of the most beautiful places on earth. It used to be very private & exclusive because it was so hard to get to. Charles Lindbergh, who has been described as a racist or something on this blog, retired there with his wife, & is buried there. He wanted to get away from the press & public scrutiny. (Two things Oprah loves, LOL.) You used to be only able to get to Hana on a tortuously twisting, pot-holed, one lane 'highway.' I've done it several times, & I always was delighted to see the little Filipino children of plantation workers playing in inlets & shoals that millionaires would envy. I often thought, one day, this road will widened, smoothed, houses & hotels will be built, & the only ones who can afford to enjoy this beautiful place will be the very wealthy. I haven't been back to Hana in many years, but my guess is, that's now the case. Aloha.
I should add that my father worked for the Brookings Institute for a short time because the workload from them took too much time away from his private practice.
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
@neutral observer,

I think you're right about Hawaii. My grandparents had a vacation home in Honolulu, and I remember how it looked in the 50-70s. Everything was bright, shiny and beautiful. The last time I went there with my husband, I was appalled by how it had changed. When I was there as a kid, there were no lights between downtown Honolulu and Diamond Head. Now, there are houses going all the way up Diamond Head, poverty on the streets, crime, etc. I have no desire at all to return there.

My ex-husband moved there about 10 years ago, and Hawaii has changed so much that he's thinking of leaving. Maui is no different than any large city with their Chanel, Gucci and Ferragamo stores lined up. You might as well be in any major city. It's just a huge tourist trap now.
jessica said…
Nutty,

Spot on about Harry’s gestures and how it reveals his insecurities of not being heard. Wonderful writing prompt, as usual!
jessica said…
Interesting that there hasn’t been a clap back from Meghan’s PR today after BP said they’d investigate the claims. Does she think they will shield her? She was a bit too quick to blame BP....
Maneki Neko said…
This sounds serious. Has Megalo met her match?

Royals' Meghan 'bully' crisis: As Buckingham Palace launches an unprecedented investigation into sensational bullying claims against Meghan, make no mistake this is a crisis that echoes the Abdication, writes RICHARD KAY

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9323093/Meghan-Markles-bully-claims-worst-royal-crisis-abdication-writes-RICHARD-KAY.html
CeeMoore said…
The Sussex Survival Survivors Club ~ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbqELWIQ2h4&ab_channel=talkRADIO

Ty to all the great posts and this topic thread, Nutty. @Sandie, you made my day yesterday breaking the news. After the "Justice" Warby decision, was just feeling there never was any.

Karma is never a bitch unless you are!
CeeMoore said…
Oops, do not know why link did not go to DM ~ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9323183/Revenge-Sussex-survivors-club-inside-story-fairytale-turned-nightmare.html
CeeMoore said…
Then Rebecca English stating she saw so much of it ~ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9323183/Revenge-Sussex-survivors-club-inside-story-fairytale-turned-nightmare.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ico=taboola_feed
SwampWoman said…
Jocelyn'sBellinis says: I think you're right about Hawaii. My grandparents had a vacation home in Honolulu, and I remember how it looked in the 50-70s. Everything was bright, shiny and beautiful. The last time I went there with my husband, I was appalled by how it had changed. When I was there as a kid, there were no lights between downtown Honolulu and Diamond Head. Now, there are houses going all the way up Diamond Head, poverty on the streets, crime, etc. I have no desire at all to return there.

*sigh* Same way with Florida. Florida has a very delicate ecosystem, and there are too many people for the carrying capacity of the land. Too many people means saltwater intrusion in our water, not enough water for south Florida, and water companies bottling our spring water. Farmland and pastures and citrus groves are being paved over daily as an influx of dissatisfied people from up north are moving here so that they can tell us how much better everything is in New York and New Jersey.
NeutralObserver said…
@JennS, Without having any experience working for royals, it's only a guess, but I doubt Jason Knauf wouldn't have have given William at least a head's up on what was going down. Charles seems to be the primary royal who looks bad in this fiasco. Megs & Hegs are have obviously blotted their copybook in the UK, but the low attention span USA public, unfortunately, might buy their sob story. The MSM loves conflict, so they may parrot the Harkle schtick. Conflict increases clicks. The DM exploits conflict as well, but you know it's a money-making joke for them.
NeutralObserver said…
@Jocelyn'sBellinis, Yes, you remember what it was like, peaceful, beautiful.
lucy said…
Thanks for link Puds! hehe this came up with it https://youtu.be/b7GA7skBZqc

@Jocelyn not sure why she continues with substandard dentistry. Perhaps she has bone loss so the implants cannot be properly "affixed"? Has to be something major as surely she can afford them ????

My thanks too, to all that post various links! I feel latest brouhaha reflects poorly on Royal Family but wow am I ever enjoying Meg taking this hit 😉

Sandie said…
Valentin Low is the one who broke the story. He insists that this is coming from former staff, not the Palace, and the timing has more to do with the court case but that the upcoming Oprah interview does play a role. Once the interview is broadcast, it 'owns' the story and any revealations from former staff will be dismissed and not get the serious attention they are now getting.

I think it may be a case of one person deciding enough is enough, to hell with the NDA. Valentin Low then starts probing and more people start walking through that door that has been opened.

What I am finding astonishing is the outpouring from reporters. They had all witnessed it, were told stories by staff, and did not report it at the time. The very people that the Sussexes will attack in the interview (the media and courtiers) are the ones who protected them. The article by Rebecca English is very enlightening.
SwampWoman said…
CeeMore, that article would appear to be devastating to Harry and Yak Hairy's claims of being bullied. I completely believe it, but we've been watching her staff bail for awhile.
xxxxx said…
@NeutralObserver
Thanks Observer!
I used to play on the shores of Shelter Island as a child of plebs. (Rented and Summer only) Now only the wealthy have homes there such as Billy Joel. Or he famously used to. We children ran free and amuck. One memory is 2 inch lobster hatchlings in a pool by the ocean lapping. We ate many blow fish caught by the men. You fillet them and not too much flesh is yielded.
But we were all shielded during such happy days. America was different.
We ate those blow fish to no end

Thanks to our host
The Nutty Most
This blog is not PC
Will never be

You are one of the top ten literate here
Have no fear
You are among friends
To the end
My doggerel
Is purely to amuse
Y'all Please don't accuse
Just pass the popcorn
And minimize the scorn
At my musings
Sandie said…
This is from the Rebecca English article and it intrigues me:

"The newspaper reports how Meghan cut short a visit to a market in Fiji because she was concerned about the presence of a UN organisation promoting women, with which she had worked before and made clear she no longer wished to have anything to do with.

At the time officials had suggested that it was because it was humid and the crowd was oppressive in the market.

I was there at the time and witnessed Meghan turn and 'hiss' at a member of her entourage, clearly incandescent with rage about something, and demand to leave.

I later saw that same – female – highly distressed member of staff sitting in an official car, with tears running down her face. Our eyes met and she lowered hers, humiliation etched on her features.

At the time I was unable to document anything as I couldn't conclusively link the two incidents together, despite my suspicions. I have subsequently found out from other sources that my instincts were right."

Does anyone have any idea of what the history is of Meghan's dealings with that UN organization? What enraged her so much about them?
KCM1212 said…
@Puds

I remember a story Harry Markle reported on and I believe Lipstick Alley or Quora also mentioned:

IIRC, A photographer hired for a photo shoot with Megs. The shoot was cancelled for some reason, but the PA the photographer was working with completely lost it and went on an insane email rant that sort of frightened the photog because it was so crazy.

Megs apologized but the photog realized, based on the email address/IP address of the PA, that the PA was Megs herself.

Maybe the PA was actually supposed to be the agent Puds. Its been a while.

Anyone with a better memory correct me?

I must say, I hope that Kraken is at the day spa getting facials and such. She needs to be ready for her closeup.

Thank you Nutties for the hilarity of the past few days. Its gotten me through a rough patch.

AnT said…
@JennS,

As I recall, there are some circumstances under which you can deviate from an NDA, particularly if you feel you signed under duress.

SwampWoman said…
I can see why those staffers that were subjected to bullying behavior from Yak Hairy would be LIVID at her for claiming to be the victim of the type of behavior that she was dishing out to her own staff.

I would also like to say that I'm astonished at how extremely unprofessional this woman has been in managing subordinates. It is very apparent that she has *no* interpersonal skills. She does not get to blame her subordinates for her shortcomings. If she messed up, she needs to 'fess up. She does not get to rage at employees. She acted like she owned them, not employed them. She does not get to curse at them or hiss at them. She doesn't get to correct or order about somebody else's employees, just like she can't randomly strike other people's children or pets. The only person she gets to speak to is the manager or employer of the employees she has ordered to do something which is not in job description.

How in the world did she get to be so old not knowing these things?



@lucy,

I had significant bone loss, and they can fix that, too, but it's very expensive. My mouth is worth about $100,000, plus at least a year of dental appointments, including many surgeries. I understand that the prices are coming down now as more dentists are getting into that field.

@KMC1212,

I hope you're doing better, and that the rough days are behind you.
abbyh said…
So, where are the earrings now?

jessica said…
KCM1212,

OMG! Yes I remember that!! They found it was Meghan pretending to be all these different people and her own PR rep who was screaming via email at the photo shoot/ mag organizer. The person who met her in person said something along the lines of being able to tell something was extremely ‘off’ about her!

I was just thinking about that instance the other day and I don’t know where it is. Maybe LSA?
KCM1212 said…
Have discussed this National Bullying Hotline yet? Apologies if this is a duplicate. The actual twitter shots are on the Cat in an Emerald Tiara tumblr blog. I can't grab them because they have been deleted, at least the most damning one.
@NationalECrime is the twitter handle.

In response to the bullying allegations they say:

"We dont believe Meghan bullied staff at KP. Do we believe staff 'felt bullied' by her strength of character and determination? Quite possibly. What matters is how they, and
Kensington Palace responded at the time. None of this means bullying occurred!"

Nice chat from an anti-bullying group!

They backpedaled of course, and tried to say what they "really meant" which is basically the same bs but they also support victims..ha!

The interesting thing is 1. They follow a bunch of sugars (!) and 2. remember the "anti-bullying charity" Megs pledged the settlement from the letter suit to? Could this be the group?

They are apparently also not a real charity. Could they be a monetary launderomat??

Things to ponder.

https://the-cat-with-the-emerald-tiara.tumblr.com
KCM1212 said…
@Jocelyn'sBellinis

You are a very kind woman. Thank you!

@Sandie @Jessica
Sandie, you may be the resident LSA expert. Do you remember seeing the story?

@Puds😁



xxxxx said…
^^^^^^^DM in full unleashing. Plus pics of Melissa Tobouti and Jason Knauf. Just in case you are curious^^^^^^

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9322505/Buckingham-Palace-launches-probe-allegations-Meghan-Markle-bullied-royal-staff.html

Buckingham Palace will launch an investigation into allegations that Meghan Markle bullied royal aides.

The Duchess of Sussex is accused of 'driving out' two PAs and shattering the confidence of another member of Kensington Palace staff - with one former aide branding Harry and his wife 'outrageous bullies' in The Times today.

It also claimed the monarchy's 'men in grey suits' were aware of the purported actions of the duchess - but did 'absolutely nothing to protect people'.

Meghan has denied the allegations and accused the newspaper of being 'used by Buckingham Palace to peddle a wholly false narrative' about her.

Royal officials initially refused to comment, with sources telling MailOnline that aides and senior family members are focused on Prince Philip's health problems in hospital.

But tonight, the Palace confirmed that its HR team will 'look into' the allegations, saying it 'does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace'.

A spokesperson said: 'We are clearly very concerned about allegations in The Times following claims made by former staff of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

'Accordingly our HR team will look into the circumstances outlined in the article.

'Members of staff involved at the time, including those who have left the Household, will be invited to participate to see if lessons can be learned.

'The Royal Household has had a Dignity at Work policy in place for a number of years and does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace.'
KCM1212 said…
And @JennS

Thank you so much for the articles!!
And the Sunday night watch fest.
Although it might be getting more interesting now.

JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
SwampWoman said…
I would surmise that she would interview and hire those people that she judged would be vulnerable to bullying. I've seen it before.
KCM1212 said…
okay, I'll stop...

BUT
The IRONY of Megs being apparently protected by the men in grey.

How is she going to paint them as her tormentors in the interview now? Oprah has to go after this. This is the first time we have seen realities collide. Someone has to come out of this as a documented liar. And we know who that will be.

And thank you, Puds. I hope that kraken has her mascara on. Its showtime!
The race card is being thrown down via Scoobie. Figure we all knew this was going to happen.
KCM1212, I hope things get better for you soon. You have good company.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/uknews/14227959/meghan-markle-palace-racism-bullying-claims/
JennS said…
@KCM1212
Nice to see you here. I hope you are feeling better and that you will stay with us for the explosion of Kraken we are awaiting!
I too remember that photographer's/agent's story from LSA and I think I might have saved it. I'll look for it asap. @Puds too.😁

@AnT
Loved your special news story!!! I have to go back and read it again. I didn't finish catching up with posts from the last thread yet.🤪
KCM1212 said…
And I'll bet the reason the show was extended to two hours is to address the bullying stories.

AND the looks on their faces in the car
lucy said…
Ha! I wish to read that whole photoshoot story again. I recall it being incredibly comical at the time. Sure did make the "assistant" sound crazed. Is that not what birthed the "rachel with a hotmail account" musings?
..

Could have sworn I recently read Meg saying she was completely unaware anyone surrounding her were made to sign NDA. Quick internet search disproves that. There is even story Arod and Jlo were made to sign one prior to dinner date (but we all believe that meal was fake so..)

But here is one regarding nanny that states Queen Elizabeth does not require NDAs. I find it odd she wouldn't

https://www.latintimes.com/why-meghan-markle-asked-her-team-sign-non-disclosure-agreement-unlike-queen-elizabeth-440171

I like how Piers suggested Meg lift the NDAs to give past and present "their voice" in order to clear this all up (haha!)

I bet there is not one staffer she consistently treated well, not one. Where is her fitness coach of years ago now? Lmao remember the run of randoms recalling how "nice" she was, like 10 years ago for 2weeks

On more somber note I imagine Meg willing the passing of PP to knock all this out of the news. Morbid I know, but I honestly do not doubt it.
Tamhsn said…
https://blindgossip.com/the-mean-girls-strategy/#more-102052



YESSSSSS!!
@Swampwoman,

Great point. She looks for the weak ones that she can bully easier. I've seen that before, too!

@Jenn,

Those poor women in Fiji. They put on the best clothes that they had in respect to her, spent time making sure that everything was as perfect as they could for her, and she just walks off because they don't meet her standards? What a humanitarian. What does she think humanitarianism is?

She only wants to be a humanitarian to women who wear Prada and Chanel and get a regular blowout at the local salon?
Catlady1649 said…
It's taken me all day,on and off, to read through all the posts from yesterday and today.Let's hope the end is nigh.
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sandie said…
@JennS

Thanks for the info on Meghan's involvement with the UN women's organization. Hilarious that Meghan collided with her past in a market in Fiji!

@Puds

Thanks for remembering that story about Rachel with the Hotmail account. When she was a small fish, she could bury the lies and bad behaviour and move on, but she must be so very deluded to have thought she could do that as a working royal.

Many thanks to those who answered my question about Phillip and treatment and painful procedures. Strangely, it does give me hope that they can treat him and are doing so and he will return to the Queen at WC.
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
SwampWoman said…
JennS said: Regarding the UN excuse...I just recently read that MM worked with a UN women's organization on menstruation education in India. I think it was pre-Harry. She apparently dropped this group and activity because she was disgusted by the women's lack of hygiene. I don't know how true this is and I can't remember where I read it.

If she spotted people at the Fiji market that she used to work with from the UN feminine hygiene group and had ditched them for such a highly insensitive reason, then I suppose that is why she ran out of there like a bat out of hell.


Hmmm. Wasn't one of her 'good deeds' supposed to be menstrual health and education for women and girls? Why yes, yes it was!
Jdubya said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Acquitaine said…
@JennS said....
"Am I correct in thinking that "the gray-men", "the courtiers", "the palace staff", "the royal aides", "the royal household" are all terms for ANY/ALL palace employees...people working for the Royal Family?

And is it correct to assume that any references to "The Palace" or any specific palace (BP, KP, etc) refers to the Royal Family/The Firm?"

The Gray-men, the courtiers, the royal aides = All Palace employees working on the *business* of the palace ie their offices.

However, The Gray-Men was the term Fergie and Diana coined for courtiers working for BP. In those days they ruled the entire show. No rogue autonomous offices for different royals. Each royal could have a dedicated staff and office of sorts, but they all operate(d) under BP.

Charles is at fault for creating his own autonomous office at CH that speaks independently and sometimes contradicting Buckingham Palace. He then compounded this error by financing an independent operation for William and Harry at KP. You can see why Harry felt entitled to his own court as a result.

All three should have stayed under the umbrella of BP. The Queen is at fault for allowing Charles to do this even if he could afford to fund the 2 extra offices.

The end result is you have 3 palaces; BP (The Queen and all the other royals), CH (Charles and Camilla) and KP (William, Kate and the Sussexes)

After the Sussexes were kicked out of KP, they were put under BP as they should have been all along.

Palace Staff and The Royal Household = ALL Palace employees, but Palace staff tends to refer to the office staff while Royal Household is domestic staff. It can be confusing when these 2 terms are used interchangeably especially when referring to everyone as Royal Household.

The Palace = usually taken to mean BP unless otherwise specified.

When reading articles, note whether it references KP (William), CH ( Charles) or BP.

BP is the big daddy of them all. Anything that references BP is assumed to be authorised by The Queen.

After they joined the BP umbrella, The Sussexes took advantage of this interpretation of BP authority in public communications because they released information under the banner of BP which was assumed to have The Queen's authority when in reality it was their office at BP speaking eg the birth announcement.

The confusion of the Archie's birth announcement became clear in the days afterwards when Sarah Latham was blamed for it. Until then, it was assumed that BP ( The Queen's comms) was releasing and messing up the comms about this birth announcement.

The only thing BP (The Queen's comms) contributed to this event was the easel outside BP.

Usually if the other royals under the BP umbrella wish to communicate without using The Queen's comms, they make it crystal clear that it's coming from *their office at BP*, but it's not The Queen's comms.

The Sussexes never followed that protocol and frequently put out statements that implied The Queen's comms instead of their office.

The Firm = Working royals and Business of Monarchy

The Royal family is all the royals regardless of whether or not they are working royals.


SwampWoman said…
JennS said...
Check these fighting words from the Sun article CG33 just posted:

ROYAL ROW Meghan Markle’s pal accuses palace of racism after bullying claims & says Duchess ‘knew it would get ugly’ before Oprah

A FRIEND of Meghan Markle last night sensationally accused the Palace of racism as the Queen ordered an investigation into claims she bullied staff.

So the press is now directly saying it's the QUEEN behind the probe.
Any retorts from Markle are volleys directed at the QUEEN.
She is accusing the QUEEN of racism.


So, now she's threatening and bullying a 94-YO-great grandmother whose husband is in the hospital in life-threatening condition? My gracious, what a unique way that she has chosen to show that the bullying charges are not true!
@Jdubya re BG article: if that is the case, then I'm going to guess we can look forward to more coming out over each day. Chip chip chip.
Animal Lover said…
Go to Youtube and enter Valentine Low on ITV in the search bar. It brings up the 6 minute interview. He stresses several times the bullied staff are still very emotionally fragile. He also says a reason for the delay in staff reporting was the lawsuit MM filed against MOS and ANL.

Ziggy said…
"Sussex Survivors Club" Ah my fellow nutties... this is the week we've been waiting for :D
jessica said…
The racist angle is what she’s programmed her bots and 10 sugars to promote. If you’re a truly awful person, it doesn’t matter if you’re black or white or purple. Character isn’t skin deep.
MM didn't learn one of the very basic life lessons:

"Be kind to people on your way up, because you'll meet them on the way down."

Now, she's reaping the rewards of her petty, mean, devious and selfish attitudes toward others. Queen Oprah isn't going to help this matter at all. She also loves for people to grovel at her feet.

MM is finally getting exactly what she deserves. Harry, too. That info about his beating women doesn't surprise me at all. However, I believe that MM is the batterer in the Harkle household. Poor Archie, if he exists, to be so small and to be the recipient of her rage.

It truly frightens me that there is a child in that house. MM cannot control her rage.

Somebody should call the police for a welfare check on Archie.
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
xxxxx said…
Revenge of the Sussex survivors' club : The inside ... - Daily Mail
https://www.dailymail.co.uk › news › article-9323183
3 hours ago — Revenge of the Sussex survivors' club: The extraordinary inside story of how a fairytale turned into a nightmare of 'traumatised' staff - by Royal ...
__________

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9323183/Revenge-Sussex-survivors-club-inside-story-fairytale-turned-nightmare.html

It is the one royal group that no one wants to join. Referred to only half-jokingly as the 'Sussex Survivors' Club', its membership is sadly rising.

But its select band of members have one thing in common: all have worked for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and lived to tell the tale.

Joking aside, some even believe they may have a form of post-traumatic stress, defined by doctors as an anxiety disorder caused by distressing or frightening events.

Such experiences, of course, are now widely acknowledged not to be limited to soldiers who have undergone traumatic experiences on the battlefield, but also to people at work.

Even if that work is in a palace.

And today, many former palace staff look back on the moment that Prince Harry introduced to the world his beautiful, intelligent and passionate bride-to-be as the beginning of one of the most traumatic periods in their lives.........
abbyh said…
Unknown,

Rule about no unknown names. Please redo with a different name.

thanks

Directions from Charade.

Instructions:
- Click on your "Unknown" name where you last posted.
- You should arrive on your profile page where you can then click the "B" icon; once clicked, you should arrive at the blogger info page
- Next click the dropdown menu to the left of the "B" icon and click on "Settings" and then click "User Profile"
- Scroll down to "Display Name" and type your name
- Hit "Save Profile" at the bottom
- Finally, you can add an image/avatar on this page if you wish

Alternative Instructions:
- Get a gmail account, preferably unique to this blog for extra security.
- Google the phrase "Google Accounts." You will land on the page where you can sign into and make updates to your account. If you don't have a gmail, you will be prompted to create one.
- Go to the Personal Info tab. In the Profile section, you can click on "Name" and change to whatever you like.

KCM1212 said…
@Sandie

So this is even MORE stress for Prince Philip.
And the Queen.

Thank you @constantgardener. You are most kind 😊

This is another situation Lord Geidt could have handled.
It must have been pretty impossible for the staff. Aside from reading the riot act to Meghan, what could anyone do?

Fire her?

I think Megxit was, in part, punishment for the harkles. It had to be a huge relief to the RF to get rid of them. Remember the six week "rest" announced right after the SA interview? I dont think the sussexes asked for that.

I think the only contention was in what the harkles role would be. We know the harkles expected to keep all the goodies and remain "royal". The Hollywood version of a royal court.

The Queen couldn't allow that. There was no way to keep those idiots out of trouble thousands of miles away. As they have proven.

The issue now is that nobody communicated to the staff that this was the result of the madness and the resolution needed to save face.

Perhaps the RF were too generous in letting the sussexes pretend Megxit was their desire.

I think Buckingham West was their idea and the plan all along, but they were not able to manifest their vision or pad their pockets fully. This was certainly not their timeline.



Acquitaine said…
Before the royals cleaned up their image and started actively managing it with a royal rota team, PR and crisis managers, reporters like Lynda Lee Porter wrote articles like this one:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-94973/Spoilt-brat-Harry-The-truth-admit.html

This is the kind of royal reporting i grew up with. Not the sycophantic, obsequious drivel we have seen in the last 15yrs or even the last decade.

Lynda Lee Porter's death and eventually James Whitaker's death took the fangs out of royal reporting and now we only get take downs like today's Rebecca English article about the Sussex survivor club after everyone is sure Harry and Meghan are hated by the public and the Palace approves 100% of the article.
@jenn,

The biggest reveal of who MM is, is her own Sussex Squad. Any rational woman in her position would have publicly called for her sugars to back down and to be civil. She, and they, are the ones spewing hatred- even against "the family she never had."

Now that the truth is coming out, I wonder if any of the sugars will ever admit that they have been backing a truly horrible human being.
Acquitaine said…
JennS: Re: Times articles and Valentine Low......

What took them so long?

This is the result of the Palace being pissed at Justice Warby's decision to grant Meghan the SJ.

The Palace was 100% behind the palace 4 having their say with clean hands.

But i also think that line in Oprah's teaser,'silent or silenced' was a provocation. Together with press saying Meghan was going to speak about her time in the family and reveal how poor orphan Annie struggled to survive the unsurvivable told the Palace that she was going to throw them under the bus. No doubt.

The Palace voided their NDAs and went official with the Times because no one can accuse that outlet of being a tabloid.

I think Valentine Low is digging for more gold because this exchange just happened on his timeline on twitter. Christopher Wilson is a reputable royal biographer. Royal Lodge is Andrew and Fergie's home at Windsor.

https://mobile.twitter.com/TheWislon/status/1367056813288534025

The lady is responding to Christopher Wilson & Valentine Low. First tweet:

“I wouldn’t put it past her. She’d keep a battalion of lawyers in their Armani slippers for years. Still, a friend of mine’s daughter was staying at Royal Lodge when they were at Frogmore Cottage. The talk was all about the bullied staff at “the Cottage”.”

Then when Wilson urged her to speak out, she wrote a second tweet:

“We are talking gossip here; but on this particular weekend a young woman who was employed to help look after baby Archie had run off in the middle of the night because she “couldn’t stand it a minute longer”. Hope it helps, Mr. Low.”
SirStinxAlot said…
Does anyone else remember the rumors about Meghan going ballistic after being told her child would not get a title. Someone supposedly taped the loonacy when it happened. Please let that slip out next. Or a video of the tea throwing incident. H$M are bonkers and living in some weird alternate reality where their behavior is acceptable.
KCM1212 said…
@Acquitaine..Thank you for the Lynda Lee-Porter article. It is so good (and so revealing, I am going to paste it here.
Also your Royal Staff clarification is terrific. Thank you!

Part One
'Spoilt brat Harry: The truth no one will admit'
by LYNDA LEE-POTTER, Daily Mail

Prince Charles has been praised as a wise and loving parent. Harry has said: 'Sorry, father,' and the Queen has issued a statement saying she fully supports the handling of her grandson's drink and drugs saga.
It's been said that most teenage boys behave like Harry and that the poor boy has had a difficult life. The fact that he is only third in line to the throne has also been used - absurdly - as an explanation for his unacceptable behaviour.

In reality, he is an immensely privileged teenager with, potentially, a glittering future. If he wants to travel he can go anywhere in the world. His inheritance from his mother has left him hugely rich.

When he's decided what he wants to do with his life, every door in the land will be open to him. He skis, shoots, sails, windsurfs and plays polo. He has his own den complete with bar and sound system in the basement at Highgrove, and has been known to drawl: 'Come back to my palace for a drink.'

Prince Harry, it has been said, is just like any other teenager. But how many teenagers have their own bar and how many fathers are stupid enough to allow it?

There are great dangers in the damage limitation reporting of this seedy royal story with its undercurrent of whitewash and media collaboration. The Press has been flooded with commentators-anxious to say that Harry's behaviour was utterly normal and that drugs are part of almost every teenager's development, but I don't accept this convenient myth.

The vast majority of adolescents who want to have a good time are sensible enough to know there are more enriching ways to do so than destroying their bodies and minds with drugs. Prince Charles appears to have treated Harry with remarkable leniency and merely sent him to spend two hours at a drugs rehabilitation clinic.

A father surely needs to be much tougher when his under-age son takes drugs and drinks to such an extent that he's sick and expects servants to clear it up. At his father's 50th birthday party, Harry ran around naked and was banned from the local pub after getting drunk and calling the under manager a F****** Frog.

On holiday in Cornwall, he vomited outside a pub and threw empty bottles into the road. I don't call this normal high-spirited teenage behaviour, and if he'd done it on a Liverpool council estate he'd have been arrested. Harry has behaved like a spoilt, rich, drunken yob, but nobody seems prepared to say so.

The danger of refusing to be condemnatory gives the impression that there is nothing fundamentally wrong in such nasty behaviour and sadly this attitude is gradually seeping into our culture.

Widespread public contempt can provide a powerful restraining influence on louche and reckless teenage boys. So often, these idiots feel smart, but they need to be made to feel stupid. Anybody who takes drugs or regularly drinks till they're ill is puerile and pathetic - and society needs to spell this out.

KCM1212 said…
Part Two

The past few days must have had the illegal drug industry gleefully clapping their greedy hands since drug-taking has been made to sound normal, not a destructive evil that ruins lives, destroys health and shatters families. It's not cool or clever or smart.

Prince Charles appears to have been too busy with his own love life and selfish interests to notice that his son was often drunk. In the end, it took a member of staff to point out that there was a smell of cannabis in the house.

One of the most unseemly aspects of the whole affair is that there have been attempts to lay the blame for Harry's own stupidity on another young man who is said to have led him astray, as though he hasn't got a mind of his own.

Undeniably, Prince Charles is a caring father, but he hasn't emerged as either a sensible or a very dutiful one. He seems more concerned with protecting Harry than censuring him. However, there comes a time in any teenager's life when parents need the courage to be angry. They should never confuse indulgence with love.

The tragedy is that Harry may well feel he's got away with things and that when the current furore blows over he will revert to his dangerous, seedy lifestyle.
KCM1212 said…

@Jocelyns Bellinis
"The biggest reveal of who MM is, is her own Sussex Squad. Any rational woman in her position would have publicly called for her sugars to back down and to be civil. She, and they, are the ones spewing hatred- even against "the family she never had."

Now that the truth is coming out, I wonder if any of the sugars will ever admit that they have been backing a truly horrible human being."
---+
Dead on!!
Button said…
I have traveled a great deal round the world and have visited markets like the one in Fiji where Horrid Grip was supposed to stay and visit. The people are so genuine, lovely, and welcoming. I had read about her turning on her heel and walking out and recall a photo of her grinning like a cheshire. I recall whilst reading that that I just wanted to slap her, hard.
.
Racism? Christ on a stick, is that all that idiot DooDoo can come up with?
I hope that everything doesn't come out about MM all at once. I'd like to see a slow release of The Harkles misdeeds, maybe one every few days, but not on a regular schedule. That will prolong the reveal of the long list of The Harkle's horrible actions and mistreatment of others, just as she has been doing for more than two years.

I believe that there should be a syndrome called Meghan Markle Fatigue. She been hounding us through the press for more than two years. It's time she got some of her own medicine back.

I'd like her to know that many more negative things will be revealed about her, but she'll never know when it's coming, and that will keep her very frightened and on edge. That's payback, MM.

A slow, painful reveal of her disastrous reputation and misdeeds is worse than a quick one.

I feel like Snidley Whiplash, twirling his mustache in glee.
KCM1212 said…
Some were tryong to get the word out. This is from last August.


Meghan Markle: a ‘diva’ from her early days
By Paula Froelich

August 1, 2020 | 11:52am

Before Meghan Markle drove the royal family to distraction, she frustrated coworkers on the Toronto set of “Suits.”

Years before she was the Duchess of Sussex, Markle gained a difficult reputation for holding up filming and photoshoots if everything wasn’t perfect or if she wasn’t getting enough of the spotlight.

“She was always having to be coaxed out of her dressing room during promotional shoots because she didn’t think she looked pretty enough, or her outfit wasn’t right or she felt she wasn’t getting prominent enough placement (in the promotional pictures),” a source on set told the Post while sighing. “There were always tears. Every time.”

Our source’s information jibes with an earlier report from the Daily Mail in which a videographer was warned, “People told me, ‘get ready because she is a lot.’ They used to call her ‘the princess.’”



“When I saw her, right away from the moment she arrived, I didn’t even know who she was and she was acting like a diva – It was the attitude, how she talked to people, the rules,” the videographer continued.

“She came in wearing a (baseball) cap, hiding her face and she had her head down and just walked back toward the make-up room. It was like it was the big diva coming in, and she doesn’t want people to see her, like you would do if you’re walking in the street and you don’t want the paparazzi to take your picture.”

The videographer wasn’t impressed, telling the Daily Mail, “Everyone thought, ‘she is acting like an A-lister when she is not even a D-lister.’”

Representatives for Markle did not respond to requests for comment.

Miz Malaprop said…
@JennS

Thank you so much for posting the delicious articles.

This quote really stood out for me: One of the sources who revealed the complaint said: “We will finally be able to tell the truth. It’s not going to be easy, but this is very welcome and long overdue. We don’t have to be silent any more.”

I would like to think that William visited the MI6 to arrange keeping an eye on the troublesome twosome, as he recognized the threat to the Crown. He's waited until now to release a well-orchestrated return fire for the inevitable bashing Meghan was going to unveil.

I suspect that after the bully allegations landed at Clarence House, Harry convinced Charles to drop it or that was the impetus for the Frogmore move. Certainly does nothing for Charles' image, after the Netflix inspired bashing, I wonder if he'll ever let it be known that he's bothered.
Elsbeth1847 said…
...Now that the truth is coming out, I wonder if any of the sugars will ever admit that they have been backing a truly horrible human being."

Probably not.

It would require each person to recognize that everything they believed (about MM) was not what they thought. That level of change in thinking is up there with the earth is not flat, the world will end on a certain date and so on.

They want to believe and it is really hard to give up firmly held beliefs in general. This kind of "proof" is soft as in they can easily tell themselves, this is made up/manufactured/created to make her look bad and therefore easy to explain away.

You might make a slight dent in the thinking if there is irrefutable video showing the bad behavior but people who want to believe, will find a way to continue as long as they want to believe. And those who do leave, will probably do so very quietly so as to not be noticed (avoiding having anything pointed in their direction for no longer being willing to believe).
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
ShadeeRrrowz said…
Oh, here we go...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9323959/Theres-lot-thats-lost-Meghan-slams-Firm-perpetuating-falsehoods-us.html
JennS said…
Miz Malaprop said...
@JennS
Thank you so much for posting the delicious articles.
...............

Oh you're very welcome Miz Malaprop
and to everyone else who expressed thanks...

Yes that quote stood out to me as well for two reasons. It made me really feel for the staff members who were bullied and who now face accusations of being the bullies.
And it gives me hope that more info will come out!

I wonder how much her aides know about Fauxchie!🤣
Elsbeth1847 said…
Pushing back at the BRF

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9323959/Theres-lot-thats-lost-Meghan-slams-Firm-perpetuating-falsehoods-us.html

I was looking this
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9313587/Meghan-Markle-planning-bombshell-interview-Oprah-two-YEARS.html
and noticed the smaller headline about the feeling of being handcuffed. This ties in well with the comments in FF about how her friends talked of how she was getting her voice, stronger and so on.

On a slightly different note, CBS is paying out a lot of money about the Les Moonves alleged assaults. hmm, could be part of why they are pushing the special as up there with the Superbowl.
Lytton Park said…
Someone elsewhere suggested consulting the Urban Dictionary about two of the odd elements in Harry's gag interview with Corden: Crocodile & Waffle Maker (as well as the famous engagement interview Roast Chicken). The images with them in mind are not pleasant! All I can say is that it must be a deliberate joke on their part, and that they truly are as immature as teenagers, as staff have claimed.
CeeMoore said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
AnT said…
Tweets from UK radio talk reporter Dan Wootton,

17h
Retweet of Christopher Wilson: Superb and timely valentinelowe scoop in the times. Sad that if it had appeared in any other paper it would have been howled down by this troublesome individual’s spokespeople. But the chances of a libel writ against The Times? Zero.

13h
Retweet of Piers Morgan: And still the deranged obsessive Meghan/Harry fans scream abuse....try reading The Times revelations about your hard-dine-by heroes, then come back to me about who the real bullied victims are in this saga.

7h
Why is Buckingham Palace only just investigating the bullying claims against Meghan now? Many people there have known about the situation for over two years. The Queen’s confidante and dresser Angela Kelly was mortified by Meghan’s behaviour even before the wedding.

7h
Don’t forget I reported in November 2018 that the Queen had warned Prince Harry over Meghan’s behaviour and attitude. This was an open secret — and Kate was horrified about how Meghan behaved.

7h
As one of the journalists in the forefront of reporting on the fallout between Meghan and Harry and the Royal Family, make no mistake that William is aware of a great deal of what went on. It played a significant role in the breakdown of his relationship with his brother.

7h
Much of the establishment wanted to cover it all up. So too did many journalists who are enslaved to the royal PR machine. But it’s satisfying to see some of the reality — often denied by the Palace when it was reporting on it — start to emerge.

7h
And remember this (image of cover of The Sun, headline story: Harry & Megs 3 nannies in 6 weeks)
.
Sandie said…
If anyone is any doubt about what Oprah will do ...

https://mobile.twitter.com/scobie/status/1367293740637954052?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1367293740637954052%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=
Fifi LaRue said…
Great post!

I think Nutties are accurate that Archie is a doll, and the Harkles don't have custody of him.

There is probably very little that is redeeming of Markle's character. So most everything we think of her is most likely true.

The best thing would be to have a secret audio recording revealed of Markle verbally abusing staff.
AnT said…

New cover story in the Sun

Out of Fashion: Meghan Markle ‘had furious rows with palace aides over freebie designer clothes’ at time of staff bullying accusations


see https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14226625/meghan-markle-rows-palace-designer-clothes/

🔥😁

JennS said…
So in the new video clip from the Oprah interview, they make it clear that the palace will be attacked. Big Baby Megalo has to release this now as an angry volley back at Buck Palace!
Stand strong Angry Cabbage!
Send some shots back, please!

The delusional Queen of the Narcs claims that the palace is perpetuating falsehoods about them and if talking out now means losing more...well they have already lost a lot anyway!!!!

Oh but she doesn't care about Harry losing his whole family or that family losing Harry.
And never mind poor PP!

Take them out of the line of succession.
Take their Sussex titles and the HRH
NO more Duchy money, Charles!!!

Send them to the tower!!
Off with their heads!!!

I have a new question for Oprah to ask...
You're positively glowing! May I touch your belly?
AnT said…
@Sandie,

Thank you for that info. And I see the last few hours on Twitter that Harkle flack Omid Scobie doubling down quoting unknowns who swear in Toronto they heard Meghan was lovely to work with 🙄🤮

Start job hunting, Scoobs, it isn’t looking too good for team mean girls.
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
AnT said…
@JennS,

I hope Angry Cabbage hears you!

I love your new Oprah question. Meghan would flip climbing over the back of the chair to avoid letting Oprah feel that Unit 6 gel pack!
AnT said…
@JennS,

The reworked Oprah video trailer? Yes. “I don’t know they could expect...if that comes with risk of losing things..”. Meghan working her poor me suffering act....the sugars will eat it up,

I can see in it the schoolgirl who convinced the nuns she hadn’t bullied anyone. She lives her lies. This is a lying pro.

The palace needs to volley more and more and more now. More, daily, including every detail about the Archie lie.




jessica said…
The new clip isn’t convincing. A lot lost? You quit the Royal family. What did you think would happen?

She comes across as severely delusional.
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
AnT said…
@jessica,

I think you are right, but we know things. I think sugars and those who know less or who aren’t discerning might believe her — except for those reading everything coming out now. That is why I hope the Palace keeps throwing revealing grenades at the press. Now is the time.

The great part is that this clip will show the world her full act when she tricked the palace, and others, initially. The world will get to see what a narcissist looks like and acts like while lying to your face.

Trevor, Corey, Ninaki will all see their lying Megs in action. They will be aware of the bullying stories now and they will see precisely how she managed to fool them all. I think this is what will be dissected next week, not just “her truth”.



AnT said…
@JennS,

That new avatar! I am howling — oh my god I want it on a t-shirt or a coffee mug. Brilliant, you have outdone yourself!
Little puppet Harry! 👏👏👏👏

I think HotRob would love it too. I think he is in Montecito this evening, laughing his bum off at the whole burning mess. He can wave after their mansion is repossessed in your avatar print hoodie.

Ian's Girl said…
The gossip at Royal Lodge about bullying seems to confirm a real Archie, doesn't it? (The young woman hired to watch him leaving in the night because she couldn't stand it any more?)

Belated thanks to JennS and others who have been posting the Kraken links, as well as you clever ladies with your poems and parodies! AnT, I am still bursting into laughter at inappropriate times (am staying in the hospital with my mom) over your delicious Nutty Flavor Times report!

brown-eyed said…
New trailer advert for the Oprah interview. Megan talks about how the Firm is “perpetuating falsehoods” about them. Honestly, I’m just shocked. What is her game plan? How can Harry believe something like that?

https://twitter.com/cbs/status/1367288345789788160?s=21
R_O said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
R_O said…
Now Meghan is directly attacking the Palace and the Queen saying they're lying about her. Who does she think she is and why will the palace go out of their ways to lie about them before? Why is Harry allowing her to do that to his own Grandmother? The Queen is 94 years old and doted and protected Harry all his life. I maintain my belief that she is trying to end the monarchy because she can't accept she won't be queen. Her claims against the RF is racism, misogyny and that it's old-fashioned. She will in the future run for politics saying she's a modern feminist who fights for equality for all people regardless of color.
@Nutty,

As a former reporter, I was shocked at your recent post about Khashoggi's murder. The Washington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos, and it is not the well-respected newspaper that it once was. Many of my former reporter friends have left the WP because of this.

I've sent your comment to the Reporters Without Borders Middle Eastern bureau. I'll be interested to hear their thoughts on your comment. Khashoggi was a well-respected journalist, but maybe the news is handled "differently" in Estonia.

Nutty Flavor said...
@RealDonna, most of Khashoggi's articles were ghostwritten.

https://english.alarabiya.net/features/2018/12/23/Washington-Post-reveals-how-Qatar-Foundation-shaped-their-pieces-by-Khashoggi

He was an agent of the Qatari government.

March 3, 2021 at 10:54 PM
AnT said…
@JennS, @jessica, @Puds,

Can you even imagine the anger, scramble, midnight oil, phone calls and shouting going on in Oprah’s world this week?

She tried to raise this insect to exalted status and blam, windshield, before her two hour comeback even begins. I have to believe at least a few advertisers are pulling out due to the bullying-against-women charges,

I wonder if CBS will go after Oprah for not vetting her subject thoroughly, or if they think this flaming disaster is going to be good for business?
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ian's Girl said…
JennS, read it here, upthread a bit. Here is the bit about the baby and timestamp:

Then when Wilson urged her to speak out, she wrote a second tweet:

“We are talking gossip here; but on this particular weekend a young woman who was employed to help look after baby Archie had run off in the middle of the night because she “couldn’t stand it a minute longer”. Hope it helps, Mr. Low.”

March 4, 2021 at 3:37 AM
AnT said…
@Ian’s Girl,

I have often wondered if the night nanny left because it was simply creepy being told to sit and mind a child you never saw. A baby kept behind a locked door, perhaps, by a Young Mother who was both crazy and abusive. Or, by parents who weren’t ever even there. So you are sitting there alone in froggy bottom, in a dark empty creaking house, told to mind an invisible silent baby? I would leave fast too.

And thank you, I am so happy the stories give you a laugh, particularly when you are with your mom at the hospital (I have been through that) and I send you both a hug and hope she feels better. Will try to write another to keep you cheered. 💕
HappyDays said…
Puds said…
There was a story a while back of someone hiring Megs for a job pre Harry and this person came to believe that Megs was acting as her own agent. Something happened and the agent (possibly Negs) had a full blown hissy fit that astonished the person doing the hiring. Megs was not hired for the job. Anyone recall the details of that story?

@Puds: I believe I have a copy of the guy’s actual post. I have to find it and a couple of bullying reports in my files, but I am swamped at work and will likely not get to it until the weekend.
@Jenn,

That is a great avatar. Now we need one with the earrings!
Ian's Girl said…
AnT, that would be beyond creepy! Especially so given the mother's position as a Royal.

And thanks for your hug and kind thoughts! She fell Sunday night, and is only bruised, but she's been hallucinating ( she has dementia) and so we are tucked up in the geriatric psych ward, lol! You have to laugh. Can't tell you how much you lovely folks have helped relieve the tedium and worry. Bless you all!
JennS said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
@Ant,

Remember that story about MM going to a photo shoot in Toronto, bringing an entourage, demanding expensive champagne, and basically taking over the shoot from the photographer?

Not all people in Toronto think that MM is a nice person. I'm sure more will come out in the next few week.

I'm having trouble getting links to work on DM articles, but look up "Photographer slams Meghan Markle for 'diva' behavior." May 5, 2020
JennS said…
Thanks JocelynsBellinis! I did try to put a pair of Diana's earrings on her but didn't like how it looked.
@Ian's girl,

My mother had dementia, so I know what you're going through. I wish you the best, and hope that this is not too hard on you. Dementia is a horrible disease.

Please try to treat yourself well, and know that I am thinking of you, your family and your mother.
DeerAngels said…
Will has his kraken's flexing their muscles. While gaining real time expierence in King's duties. The first of many kraken's has hit the traitor's. In solidarity the Krackens allowed US California's Condors to share the first shot. Wait until the Archie kraken is released. That will come from the Queen. Meg has just blasted them to that special penguin sanctuary. Really, really!! You actually accused The Queen of Britain in the news of starting a smear campaign against them. These precious group of royals, the real one's, are dealing with a legend fighting for his life. They are in family mode, something those two know nothing about.

She held her hand hiding her belly pillow & had the dress pulled in such a manner it was hard to see which she was wearing. Harry now has a good start growing man boob's & a belly. His belly looks like he's more pregnant than his wife.
Fifi LaRue said…
@AnT: You have a very good point there. Working for the RF is considered a privilege, and it doesn't seem plausible that a nanny would run away in the middle of the night. Not if there was a real baby there. I don't think there was a baby at all, just a big fiction that a nanny couldn't sustain and keep her sanity.
@jenn,

I bet the earrings would look better on your avatar than on MM!

As for the US papers favoring MM, could it be that she has bullied them into silence, too, not wanting to get into a lawsuit with a lowbrow social climber?

I think most people in the US just don't care about The Harkles. We have bigger problems right now. I don't even tell my friends that I follow the Harkle Debacle, because they would think I'm nuts for wasting my time. My boyfriend doesn't understand why I find this so fascinating.
@Ian's girl,

Can you imagine a new babysitter being briefed by MM, then being told to go into the nursery and change Archie's diaper, only to find a large doll in the crib? I'd be running for the hills!
lucy said…
@Jenn Meg's portrait is amazing! Nice touch with the birds too 🤣🤣

How come Harry isn't sitting next to Meg in latest teaser? Seriously. It will be interesting to see how they explain him away from first hour..

I am left astonished by latest clip. Time to bring out the hidden video(s)
I think I would somehow be satisfied if she was ended on the bullying alone. If Archie does exist, he is going to grow up with enough drama as it is. But to me that is just the thing something so massive cannot stay hidden forever. Over the course of her 11 month pregnancy *someone* had to walk in on her changing or even spending extended amounts of time with it one would easily discover it's fakery. If anything, she is a HORRIBLE ACTRESS. Find myself really feeling for Archie in all this (and second coming of Diana) Thisis his parents legacy to him. All the other players are adults. I am young enough to see 20 years old Archie, rather surreal thought if he is indeed real. Will he have plastic surgery face or over rebelling in England? Hope nothing but best for the kids

I wonder if video of teapot incident does exist and if so is it CCTV or someone inside the room filmed it on their phone. How would that happen? Perhaps she had been raging for half hour (hours?) prior to - causing someone intense need to document.

Only other incident I recall with possible video was the infamous dress fitting with Catherine. Could you imagine if *that* was released? 'Never' going to happen but it does lend more credence to the claim and in spontaneously splitting the households they protected their own but cringe as it seems that is all that came of it

Everything hidden comes to light but wow the audacity of her (their) behavior. Forever knew she is a snake and surely a monster to work for, but now that it is being so publicly shared? The vindication is obliterated by the reality of what her "underlings" endured. I suppose they could have quit, which they did.

The Times ran with this story. It is a gamechanger. They have more than just an email and couple of "disgruntled ex-employees" . They probably even got 10+ off the record testimonials as collaboration but I bet it was The Video that sealed this deal. As read over at Plant's "this went straight to her lawyers" 🤞
AnT said…
A parody for @Ian’s Girl, and @JennS...

Secret Recut of Oprah’ Meghan Interview Trailer Accidentally Released in Iowa

Residents of DesMoines were startled on Wednesday evening when their local CBS affiliate began running a new trailer touting Sunday’s Oprah Winfrey interview with Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan. The re-edited trailer showed new portions of the much anticipated two-hour royal interview, but it advertised the show as the launch of Oprah’s new Women We Hate and the Men Who Marry Them series of “thought-provoking profiles in greed, narcissism, gaslighting, abuse, stupid relationships, and bad hair.”

The new clip montage is introduced by HotRob Lowe, noted film and tv actor and lean-hipped heartthrob, who shoots a melting blue-eyed gaze into the camera and growls, “Crazy people are everywhere, and listening to them is crazy fun too, so let’s go on tonight’s hot ride with my friend and neighbor Oprah as we get to be flies on the wall - instead of on a wedding veil - as she tries to listen to the verbal stylings of the Evita of Montecito, Rachel Maddog Markle, whose husband did have a ponytail and whose kid is, for real, a doll!”

The video cuts to a clip of the Duchess on the garden terrace with Oprah, but rolling on the ground ripping at her $6000 black mourning gown and saying, “why should I stay silent? Why! They took my things! I lost my things! The tiaras should be mine! William should be mine! Windsor should be mine! That stinky church was mine! Elton John was mine! Prince Charles’ left nut, mine! That is how it works in Meghan world! Just ask Rachel! You want me to bring Rachel forth now? Rachel has the Hotmail list of things that were mine!”

An image of a bespectacled and nervous looking Oprah is seen, then another of Meghan holding Harry’s hand as he says, “—so they didn’t make ten copies, so yah, she beat the marmite out of them, but she wasn’t there to make friends, she was there to help me jack all the money out of the foundation, wasn’t she? I love - I loved watching her every time she told a worker they were fat and ripped some hair out of their head or made them sit on the floor. She uses her power to change ladies’ lives, eh?” While Harry speaks, Meghan is shown humming the theme song from The Brady Bunch while attempting to catch a flitting hummingbird with her teeth. The video trailer ends with a shot of Oprah leaping from her $4500 handwoven LeMew Rattan Loungechair to try to stop Meghan from choking a frantic Harry with her ankles.

“Well, I think he’s the son of the Queen over there, he’s the one who had a head accident with a horse once, and she is that opera singer who dated Frank Sinatra?” mused DesMoines resident Mrs Emily Flinderlander after seeing the trailer air at the diner she was in with her husband, Oscar. “No, we won’t watch, she scares us. We prayed they would not move here next to us!” Diner waitress Becky Brown said she was “surprised the show is going to be so revealing. I like watching shows like that for a laugh, especially if it seems like they will arrest her at the end!” Added another patron, Richard Masters, “I’ll watch, I do marketing for the company that made their kid.”

CBS admitted the trailer was an “option” that ran “in error” but added it will be sending a copy “free of charge” to the Palace “because we were told the royal ladies, Kate, Sophie, Camilla, and Anne, are big Oprah fans!”


AnT said…
@Jocelyn’sBellinis,

Yes — I absolutely remember! the story of her viciously berating that person over the phone, being impossible to deal with, horrible behavior, the calling to apologize and being caught out posing as her own assistant. Absolutely bonkers. I will try to find it, I feel like I emailed a link to a friend.
I think it's time to get some sleep. I just said, "Good boy!" to my Roomba!
@Ant,

I'm glad you remembered it.

Just search for Daily Mail "Photographer slams Meghan Markle for diva behavior." May 5, 2020"

Good night everybody! See you tomorrow!
AnT said…
@Jocelyn’sBellini’s,

Lol!! Goodnight, sweet Harkle-free dreams! I’m off too.
Sandie said…
What CBS and Oprah are ignoring is that the 'Palace' and royal reporters knew just how bad the Sussexes' behaviour was and they covered up for them.

Royal reporters are now unleashed and are telling all. Did BP orchestrate that? Maybe. But they are not making up stories. It is absurd to believe that there is a vast conspiracy involving so many people from different places, plus receipts in the form of e-mails dating back to the early days of Meghan at KP. Sooner or later royal reporters are going to be questioned for not reporting honestly at the time.

The 'Palace' is acting hastily to try and address issues that should have been addressed long ago. The implication is that they knew how bad it was and did not do enough.

It really is an awful mess! But why did the Sussexes go full throttle in attacking Harry's family? I just do not understand their mindset. Starting a war with the BRF, Harry's family, is so destructive, especially on a personal level for Harry. His family and friends, and even the public, who really liked him, must be hurting so much, and at a time when Phillip is in hospital, the Queen is alone in WC, and the country is fighting a lethal virus.
@Sandie said. "It really is an awful mess! But why did the Sussexes go full throttle in attacking Harry's family? I just do not understand their mindset. Starting a war with the BRF, Harry's family, is so destructive, especially on a personal level for Harry. His family and friends, and even the public, who really liked him, must be hurting so much, and at a time when Phillip is in hospital, the Queen is alone in WC, and the country is fighting a lethal virus."

Thank you for this. It is exactly what I've been thinking but could never articulate it as well as you did.
ShadeeRrrowz said…
So with all of the drama going on, I managed to get back here and read everyone’s insightful thoughts.

What is their end game? What is it that they think they’ll “win?” In full-blown narc mode, I get that Megs might believe she can win against the BRF, but Harry must understand this won’t end well for them.

We all know these two don’t do anything unless they have something to gain. What is it that Haz and Mugs think they will gain by taking on the British Monarchy? Supposedly they weren’t paid for this interview, so what else could it be?

I’m also curious which members of the BRF will actually watch this Monday night.
lucy said…
I found it!!

I couldn't paste author's name. Written by yellowberryblue April 2020 in this thread!

https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/serena-williams-shades-meghan-markle-i-dont-know-her.3432815/page-14#post-56997558


knew/ had a business interaction with Meghan Markle before she became an A-list celeb. My god, the amount of wild drama that ensued from her end...


I’m not here to trash Meghan. I’m not a hater. I was one of those people who truly wanted to stan Meghan Markle (before and after her engagement to Prince Harry). I met her 1 year before she started dating Prince Harry. I can’t say the line of work I was in...but let’s just say I needed to work closely on a photo shoot with her. I was a c-level exec for a certain company that contracted Meghan to do a photo shoot. I hand selected her for the photo shoot. I believed she was going to become HUGELY successful in the future, that’s why I chose her. We had everything lined up (world class vogue photographer, stylists, location, hotels booked... the works!). Meghan agreed to do the shoot. We spent many weeks discussing the shoot with her and her “PR” (a mysterious woman that we couldn’t call. We could only speak to via email ). Meghan had a lot of outrageous demands for someone that very few people actually heard of at the time... . Nevertheless, we gave her what she requested.

Everything went well up until 1 day before the photo shoot. Next thing you know (skimming over a lot of the story here), Meghan’s “PR” is freaking out at us because someone from our team (Mind you, this person received previous authorization from HER PR) posted a social media post about the upcoming shoot. My god, the friendly, mysterious PR turned into a down right psychopath overnight. She cursed us out, threatened us, and acted damn right insane (all via email). When I say insane, I mean INSANE. Discombobulated sentences, all caps, 10 pages of PURE, incoherent madness. Long story short, the photo shoot ended up being cancelled! We had to scramble to find a new celeb last minute. FF to a few months later, I met up with Meghan at an event. She was nice and lovely (as she portrays herself to be on camera... But I have a very sharp intuition when it comes to people. Every-time I spoke to her, she seemed off... contrived to me as if she was hiding something). I told her about her PR’s behaviour and she seemed genuinely shocked. She claimed to have no idea that her emotionally unstable PR ruined the photo shoot OP with us. She claimed to have been genuinely interested in the gig and mentioned that her PR said we were the ones who cancelled the contract. That day, I spoke to a friend of mine who worked for another company. Their company contracted Meghan for a photo shoot as well and shared a similar story of Meghan Markle (mind you, the companies that my friend and I represented at the time were big league brands that worked with several MUCH bigger celebs in the past). After the event, Meghan sent me an apology email. I had a nagging suspicion about her and ended up cross checking the location stamp of her email as well as the one from her PR (for those of you who don’t know this, it is very easy to trace the origin of an email)... Guess what? Both emails originated from the exact same computer and location (her home in Toronto).
lucy said…
2/2

This woman has serious issues. Her cancelling the photo shoot is not the part that bothers me. How she did it creeps me out. No sane person behaves that way! If you saw the email, you would understand what I mean. I was not exaggerating when I said the email was totally psychotic. The person who wrote it was clearly having a mental break down. I strongly believe she wrote that email. For the longest time I didn’t want to accept what I found out about her. Even after what she did to us, I wanted to Stan her as the first “black-ish” princess. It wasn’t until I read about her constantly loosing staff at the palace, and the tempestuous relationships she would have with people, that I realized she really must have psychological issues.
Thanks x 101 LOL! x 14 Skeptical x 12 WTF!
Sandie said…
@lucy

Many thanks for finding that story. It is so bizarre and I have never been able to work out what kind of person acts like that,
@Lucy:

Thank you,

We did have a post about that sort of behaviour once before IIRC, not so detailed, not on such a huge scale, nor with the tracking of the emails to her computer at home.

I saw the latest clip within the last half-hour. Hard to tell whether it's a recent addition or made earlier, prior to yesterday's news. Had she been tipped off? Was she going to say that anyway?

Her voice has changed - very heavy on the `vocal fry', creaking like an old gate or loose floorboard. Most unattractive to my English ears.

Little Miss Hyde is quite a case, for all she can act the perfect Mrs Jekyll. I'd like to paraphrase a gag I heard on a repeat of `High Table, Lower Orders'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Table,_Lower_Orders

It was ostensibly a question from the Philosophy final exam:

`If a liar believes her own lies, is she still a liar? Illustrate with silly drawings of the Duchess of Sussex.'

Of course, this originated in 2005-6, and referred to then Prime Minister, who was found not to be lying as he genuinely believed his falsehoods.

If someone says she's a fraud, is she lying?

For those of us familiar with pathological narcissists, the reports of her behaviour ring all too true.
Curious said…
I believe the employees ... but even if I didn’t, I wouldn’t support MM because who wants the taint of uncertainty (at best)? This might be the nail in the coffin for MM. I can’t see organizations hiring her, giving her production deals, etc., even if it’s not clear whether MM is at fault. I hope this finally gets queen to remove their titles, line of succession, and $$. I also hope the royal family doesn’t take Haz back if there’s a divorce - he’s equally at fault and has shown his true colors.
Curious said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
lucy said…
@Sandie you are welcome! It sure is a hoot to read and frankly I 100% believe it! Perhaps "10 pages" was an exaggeration but what if it wasn't? ALL CAPS can consume a lot of space, maybe it was just 5 😳
Can you imagine watching that shoot out of a printer? Neither can I! 🤣


I would really enjoy an expert analysis of her behavior. One of those shows that critique the way a lip curls when someone is lying or how a certain muscle in the face reacts to a question. fascinating entertainment!
Although botox and fillers may muck it up. Maybe that is whyshe cannot get proper teeth .Too many metal plates and plastic stuffed up in there 😆Goodnight!

lucy said…
Apologies @WBBM I just saw your post! I definitely agree Meg is a narcissist but I honestly wonder if there is some sort of psychotic riding on along with it. The creepy eyes and the blinking , those dagger stares.

In my opinion, Meg believed her own hype/lies long ago. I honestly believe she genuinely feels wronged andfeels zero culpability in any of it, zero. One of those that could pass lie detector machine as their lie is their truth

I haven't investigated second video, no opinion yet but surely this has to be addressed, whatever was filmed couple weeks ago (and again) will seem like old news (again). I wonder if this was reason for original reshoot? Hehe she had to put that dress back on.

I think to museums and castles with historical gowns on display and then think to everything she ever wore, 90% of it. She chose merching above EVERYTHING. Could she have possibly thought she looked good? Years beyond now she will be mere footnote but how could she step out looking like that knowing that could be the look preserved for all eternity. (actually she probably has contract on file for her official photo, grasshopper dress) with photoshopped umbrella. Jimminy Cricket comes to mind but he had a better body 😀
HappyDays said…
Nutty said...
This raises the question: what else were we right about?

Yachting? Trevor? Corey? The hockey player? The dogs? Joseph Gordon-Giuliano? Meg's drug use? Doria's prison record? Meg's lack of a university diploma? Meg's real birthdate? Markus Anderson? Nicole?

You left out the suspicions that Archie was carried and birthed by a surrogate, the suspicions that Meghan didn’t have a miscarriage last summer or that it was actually a failed IVF procedure she later characterized as a miscarriage after she saw the outpouring for Chrissy Teigen and John Legend after hospital photos from Chrissy’s miscarriage were published in October. It was coincidentally followed a few weeks later in November by Meghan’s claim of a miscarriage in the New York Times to garner attention and sympathy for herself.

I believe her narcissistic personality is so profound and that she has such a psychological steel grip on Harry that her behavior has no boundaries.
@Lusy - Jimminy Cricket ROFLMAO!

-----------------------

Q1: What do they hope to gain by this behaviour?

A: The destruction of the Royal Family, the Monarchy, the Crown, the British Constitution.

Q2:Why?

A: Two reasons -
1.Vengeance on an entire nation
2.Because if she can't be `Kween', nobody can.

Q3: Why?

A: Because that's what pathologically-jealous, narcissistic, people do. If you have something they want but can't have, they will do their utmost to take it away from you, even if it entails the destruction of what they yearn for.

It doesn't have to be anything material - they will wage psychological warfare if it's your beauty or brains they envy. They aim to destroy your total sense of self-worth.

-----------------

I agree with the view that this is on a level with the Abdication, if not worse. It'll still be analysed 100 years from now, if that's permitted under a new regime.

Kween Wallis-Diana probably doesn't know that we once had a Republic but it only lasted for 11 years.
Happy Days says:

`I believe her narcissistic personality is so profound and that she has such a psychological steel grip on Harry that her behavior has no boundaries.'

I second that.

HappyDays said…
lucy said...
Apologies @WBBM I just saw your post! I definitely agree Meg is a narcissist but I honestly wonder if there is some sort of psychotic riding on along with it. The creepy eyes and the blinking , those dagger stares.

In my opinion, Meg believed her own hype/lies long ago. I honestly believe she genuinely feels wronged andfeels zero culpability in any of it, zero. One of those that could pass lie detector machine as their lie is their truth.

@Lucy: You are describing narcissistic personality disorder. Read the 15 posts that are titled “A Very Royal Narcissist” up to Megxit in January 2020, which were then modified in subsequent posts to “A Not So Royal Narcissist” on narcsite.com by H.G. Tudor. They are intermittent posts from just a few days before the wedding up to his most recent post last May. However, in light of recent drama with the Harkles, I hope H.G. posts something new soon. He does a good job analyzing Meghan’s narc behavior and her relationship with Harry, the royal family, and even her role as a mother.

The site is not well-organized, but if you search A Very Royal Narcissist, that should get you there without having to hunt on his site for this series.
Opus said…
Truly amazing: Some two or three years after the incident Buckingham Palace declares that it will not tolerate bullying and will launch an investigation. How come it took so long for something so heinous. I almost empathise with Markle. My own experience of life is that bullying is so common that not to be experiencing it is a rare event - bullied by my Father, by my schoolmates (or some of them) by my employers and some colleagues and supposed friends and now sent to Coventry by my G.P.'s surgery for refusing to be jabbed being my latest experience thereof. Not that I care or ever did and they can all go run up their leg.

I am however saddened to hear about Hawaii. Never been there but for me Hawaii is Paradise Hawaiian Style; Paradise Suzanna (Leigh) Style. Let's go on a moonlight swim, rock-a-hula, Queenie Wahini. Here is my solution: Hawaii U.S.A. which should secede needs Travelyst!

@JennS

A small point which I think you may appreciate: You refer to QE2 as being Queen of Great Britain. That is not quite correct. I am not expert in her titles but as I have always understood things she is QE2 of England and QE1 of Scotland (not sure about Wales which has a Prince and N. Ireland) but we don't say Queen of Great Britain. I stand very much open to correction.
Acquitaine said…
Having watched the 2nd teaser, i'm genuinely alarmed that this woman is willing to smear the Palace on a global stage without compunction.

I thought the lies told to a court was bold, but people lie all the time to courts and the police to try to get better outcome so i wasn't necessarily alarmed though i thought she was very lucky not to be reprimanded by the courts.

To see her tell one giant lie in an interview to be broadcast globally is simply amazing.

In hindsight she lied in her engagement interview. The entire thing was a lie, but we didn't know she was lying, and those lies were relatively harmless to the rest of the world because she had to prove herself equal to those lies.

She has since told many harmful lies which she had to walk back, but she always used surrogates or PR which gave her plausible deniability. This one is big.

I hope any friends she has can see what a liar she is because how do you say the Palace lied about you when it has either been silent or you confirmed as true the tabloid stories written about you in a book that you ghost-wrote yourself!?!

In an interview recorded a week before the Palace revealed that you were a bully which is the first time they've said anything about you directly?


@JennS:

`Britain' is a geographical term for the main island of consisting of England, Wales
& Scotland, plus its immediate islands, from Shetland to Scilly. It was dubbed `Great Britain' under James I & VI when he ascended the throne of Elizabeth I. That King saw himself as a new King Arthur, king of a single `British' kingdom.

`Great' Britain also refers to the French concept as Brittany being `Bretagne'(Land of the Britons) and the island being `the big land of the Britons' ie Grande Bretagne. The name `Bretagne' came about when many of the Dumnonii tribe migrated there from SW England (Dumnonia = Devon) under Saxon pressure following the withdrawal of the Roman Legions (after c410AD) They took their language, related to Welsh, with them. Those who stayed still spoke the Celtic language, in Devon until the C10, in Cornwall much later.

`Britain' per se doesn't include the island of Ireland - that was Hibernia. `Gt.Britain', in the political sense, included the whole of Ireland until 1922.

Nowadays, HM is Queen of the `United Kingdom of England ,Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland'.

`British Isles' is a much looser term - geographical rather than political - some geological authors use it, with apologies, to cover the whole of Ireland as well.

I hope that's a bit clearer and explains how both abbreviations ,GB & UK, came about. (GB£s because Ireland had the `punt', ie its own pound, before before being bounced into the Eurozone.)
The BBC did a CYA in the 10pm news yesterday, ending their Sharkles coverage with a black female spokesperson, with an African-sounding name I didn't grasp, insisting very (cough) `assertively' that whenever a black woman speaks up, she's accused of bullying.

`I'm not surprised', I thought.

They must have had second thoughts about that, the repeat report this morning didn't include it.
Acquitaine said…
@Jocelyn'sBellinis said...
"@Nutty,

As a former reporter, I was shocked at your recent post about Khashoggi's murder. The Washington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos, and it is not the well-respected newspaper that it once was. Many of my former reporter friends have left the WP because of this.

I've sent your comment to the Reporters Without Borders Middle Eastern bureau. I'll be interested to hear their thoughts on your comment. Khashoggi was a well-respected journalist, but maybe the news is handled "differently" in Estonia.

Nutty Flavor said...
@RealDonna, most of Khashoggi's articles were ghostwritten.

https://english.alarabiya.net/features/2018/12/23/Washington-Post-reveals-how-Qatar-Foundation-shaped-their-pieces-by-Khashoggi

He was an agent of the Qatari government."

I'm not a reporter, but i follow several political blogs and think tanks.

I'm astonished that a professional reporter as you identify yourself doesn't know Khashoggi's background.

@Nutty isn't condoning what happened to the man, but it's extremely naive and to assume that he was targeted by KSA for simply writing afew irritating op-eds about KSA. What she says is true and it's common knowledge if you read up on ME affairs particularly those on the Muslim Brotherhood.

He is/ was as much a journalist as those WMDs in Iraq.

Superfly said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Superfly said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ròn said…
Did anyone see the Twitter storm caused by the Uk’s National Bullying Helpline ? They’ve since deleted it but they tweeted the following:

“It is unlikely that Meghan deliberately bullied staff at KP. Staff may have ‘felt’ bullied by her strength of character and determination. Possible ! What matters now is how they and KP responded at the time. None of this means bullying occurred.”

WTH !! From a bullying helpline ! I thought at first someone had hi jacked their Twitter account but then I checked out who they follow and it turns out that they follow most of the Sussex Squad trolls. I wonder who is on the board of this not-for-profit or whether MM has given them a donation or a mention somewhere. My niece works for an organisation that signposts clients to this place. She’s going to notify their policy team, so they should expect a call...
Maneki Neko said…
@Ròn

I did post this last night! It was in the Cat with the Emerald Tiara
https://the-cat-with-the-emerald-tiara.tumblr.com/. No one mentioned it.

As someone who was bullied in the workplace, I feel very strongly about bullying. Nutties, do read the sections about deception and manipulation in the link below. They're an exact description of Megalo.

https://www.bullying.co.uk/workplace-bullying-resources/the-traits-of-the-bully/
@Flore said…
After seeing the “new” trailer where she accuses the Firm of perpetuating lies about them, I am pretty sure that Hapless is convinced that the BRF and PP orchestrated his mother’s accident and death. “Diana was silenced” believed a few lunatics. IMO, he is one of them. Cruella must have been pushing him to the point of no return by repeatedly telling that they (not the tabloids but his family) would have her killed to silence her too.
Ròn said…
@Maneki Neko - sorry to hear you were bullied. It’s a rotten situation to be in. I’m a nominated staff counsellor- people can come to me to just talk or I can go to management on their behalf. I’m so disgusted with the Helpline- they broke every rule in the book. Unbelievable.
lucy said…
Geez in reading that workplace bullying link I realize what I experienced 15+ years ago is rather comparable. He didn't make me cry, 'merely' infuriated me on daily basis. I immediately thought to him when up thread WBBM was speaking of liars. This guy actually came to work on a Monday saying he just returned from out of state Superbowl held previous day. The logistics were impossible and that's when he added he commuted by helicopter (😒)

He stirred up more drama than adolescent teen. Constantly creating stories and pitting employees against eachother. He was the training manager even and day before I was set to be "released" he tried to pull some stuff to imply I wasn't ready and needed to remain with him longer. I nearly lost it. Had I not been so irate I probably would have cried. Incredibly frustrating 8weeks. The lies though.. Took a week off and claimed he went rafting in Africa. I think the flight to and from would take 4 days alone. Absolute ridiculousness. Whole time looking you dead in the eye and you stand there knowing he is full of (censored) . Almost comical aside from the way he created chaos between employees, rough stuff

Sorry I am rambling but kinda got to me seeing all those boxes he checked

Regardless of outcome, Meg is done. Their "brand" is mute. Even if public sentiment leans their way there will be no heavy hitters pairing up with them. I will be amazed if we hear anything more regarding spotify or Netflix, aside from them being "quietly" dropped. If they weren't poison before, they surely are now.

I haven't watched any television coverage over here, no idea of US reaction but we are weary nation at moment . This will definitely bump up views (i thought maybe 4 million prior to this?). But bullying is hot topic . That will generate conversation more so than the whining of 2 entitled brats.

Actually I will say this I was picking up a carryout when morning news show cut to bullying revelations. I was standing next to Joe Schmo America when Harry came on screen in chitchat Joe remarked "he seems like an ok guy" I said uh not really then blurt out "his wife faked a pregnancy in front of the whole world" he gave me the most bizarre look and then my order was up 🤷‍♀️
Maneki Neko said…
@Ròn

Thank you for your kind words. I wish I'd had someone like you! I suffered from a form of PTSD and it took me a few years to be back to 100% normal. All these articles about the witch have brought it back.

If any Nutties want to find out more about bullying - and like many, I didn't realise at first that I was bullied - you could have a look at this website below that was my 'bible' and a lifesaver.

https://www.bullyonline.org/

I really hope M is exposed for what she is and that the Palace staff get justice (bullied people rarely do).

Miggy said…
Apologies if this has already been posted as not had tome to scroll back and look.

Scooby posted this earlier...

It seems that not everybody will be watching on Sunday, including the founder of @OneYoungWorld, a youth-focused global forum that the Duchess of Sussex has been involved with for years...

Sugars replying to him are full of vitriol at the news.
Natalier said…
Someone needs to release a video or audio of her "losing it". Think Amber Heard/Johnny Depp. Many people believed that narc Heard until the audios started coming out. Now, the world knows that Amber Heard is a liar and Judge Nichol is corrupted.

Someone, release the video/audio!
Natalier said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Some good news: my first consignment of B.Pym paperbacks have arrived, the ones I read years ago. Gosh, I need to immerse myself in her world for some soothing. (Besides the Harkle Debarkle, we are wrestling with a very dodgy pv panel provider and my medical problems).

I can't do better at this point than quote the opening of `Some Tame Gazelle' -

`The new curate seemed quite a nice young man, but what a pity it was that his combinations showed, tucked carelessly into his sock, when he sat down.'
TTucker said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
TTucker said…
Dear Nutty, I am surprised at your statement on Khashoggi. Firstly, because the source you quote belongs to an emir of the Saudi Arabia royal family (Al-Arabiya), so what can they say... and it is an article quoting another article. If you can copy the Washington Post one in extenso, it would be appreciated. Secondly, because you probably know that one journalist is killed every 4 days on average, mostly in countries not in conflict, and usually under various accusations. Ninety percent of killings of journalists remain unsolved. You probably didn't mean to, but whether propagandist or not, your phrasing kind of bleaches the seriousness of killing a journalist, and I feel it undermines the fight against impunity for crimes against the press while not adding anything necessary to the thread in your post.

This said, Megalo should not have accepted the gift from the Saudi Prince since she has profiled and pictured herself as defender of the rights of Saudi oppressed women; and because she supposedly reads The Economist. I also thought it bad taste to wear yellowish diamonds to a cyan dress, unless you are representing Sweden or another country with those colours on its flag.
The other thing - beware of `Bullying' sites which go in for gas-lighting.

Then there's ` Thank you for coming in for our little chat. Thing is, we've had a complaint about you. I don't know the details but can you tell us about it?'

That's happened to me a couple of times - it's police state tactics. If I've been on the ball I've just said, `Sorry, I don't what you mean. At least give me a clue about what I'm supposed to have done.'

I've then brought in the Union.

Too many employers expect loyalty upwards but don't give it downwards.
Acquitaine said…
@Wild Boar Battle-maid said…
"The BBC did a CYA in the 10pm news yesterday, ending their Sharkles coverage with a black female spokesperson, with an African-sounding name I didn't grasp, insisting very (cough) `assertively' that whenever a black woman speaks up, she's accused of bullying"

We've successfully imported the American tenets of racism and it's sad to see that it's the younger generations perpetuating these falsehoods.

American society developed differently and has different experiences and tenets around race. We do not.

Yet somehow our younger generations talk about race as if we are living in the American south and under Jim Crow laws.

And they dismiss the people who lived through those terrible times to claim their version of racism and or race based bullying as the worst of all times.

Every time i see Afua Hirsh's name in print or tv credits, i skip completely because it's all couched in race baiting terms.
SirStinxAlot said…
Was listening to the radio on my way to work this morning, apparently they are Towing the "Sussex Victims" narrative here in the USA.
The Metro's go full on with this:

https://metro.co.uk/2021/03/03/why-black-women-are-so-frequently-accused-of-bullying-14177850/

So are some of the universities.

It doesn't mean they're not bullying, the one I saw was hectoring like crazy.
jessica said…
It really bothers me that they promote this racist propaganda when Meghan herself does not identify as black.
Animal Lover said…
Below is from a story in The Telegraph about MM's alleged bullying. I'm not printing the whole story as it just rehashes what we know. Just look at the count!


Key figures at the centre of the Duchess of Sussex bullying claims

Buckingham Palace is to investigate claims that the Duchess of Sussex bullied members of her staff.

These are the key figures at the centre of the allegations.

Simon Case
Briefly director of strategy at GCHQ before going on to work for the Duke of Cambridge as his private secretary.

He then returned to government, first as permanent secretary in Downing Street to Boris Johnson and then more recently as Cabinet Secretary.

Melissa Touabti
Personal assistant to the Duchess of Sussex for six months before moving to work as a nanny for billionaire Richard Livingstone.

The 39-year-old, a French national, had previously worked for X Factor judges Robbie Williams and his wife Ayda Field.

Sara Latham
Former head of communications for the Sussexes who previously worked for Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

Hired when the Sussexes divided their household from that of the Cambridges. She now advises the Queen's private office on special projects.

Katrina McKeever
Former Kensington Palace deputy communications secretary. Had a key liaison role with the Duchess of Sussex's family, including her father Thomas Markle.

In Finding Freedom, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand say McKeever "left on a good note with the Sussexes".

Reports of Meghan shouting at one of the Duchess of Cambridge's team allegedly referred to Ms McKeever, who left in 2018.

Amy Pickerill
Worked at the Royal Bank of Scotland before joining the Royal family as a senior communications officer for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and the Duke of Sussex. She became the Duchess of Sussex's assistant.

When she left the position, a Kensington Palace source said Ms Pickerill would stay in touch with the Duchess of Sussex and be on hand for any advice needed in the future.

Samantha Cohen
The Queen's former private secretary and a long-serving royal adviser.

Ms Cohen served as private secretary to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex before leaving the royal household to work for the charity Cool Earth, joining as co-chairman of the board of trustees.

She was present at the Duchess of Sussex's first official event alone with the Queen.

Jason Knauf
Former communications secretary to both the Sussexes and the Cambridges.

Mr Knauf advised Meghan as she wrote the letter to her father that was at the heart of her privacy action against the Mail on Sunday.

Now chief executive of the Royal Foundation.

Christian Jones
Former communications secretary to the Cambridges.

Previously chief press officer at the Treasury under George Osborne and Philip Hammond.

Working as the Duke's private secretary but set to join private equity group Bridgepoint as a partner.



I'll also print an article by Angle Levin the relationship of the two brothers if Nutties are interested. Just let me know.

OKay said…
@Animal Lover Count me as interested!
TheGrangle said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
TheGrangle said…
@Flore I think you may be right. They have confirmed via 'A source' that despite Prince Philip having just come through heart surgery and clearly with a very worrying few days still to come, that they won't be canning the broadcast and they are hiding behind CBS who they say have no intention of pulling it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9325545/Meghan-Harry-confirm-Oprah-interview-ahead-despite-Prince-Philips-health-battle.html

Given the weeks' events and the enormous pressure on them to cancel it out of common decency, I struggle to believe that Winfrey and King would go ahead without seriously reflecting on the possible ramifications for them and at a time when Winfrey is looking to make a big come back.

Clearly Harry no longer cares a jot for his grandparents ( nor the rest of his family)to let this go ahead. It's an appalling, inhumane thing to do and would indicate that not only does he not care, but actually wants to add to their distress.

Makes me wonder what is to be revealed that is so important that neither H&M, nor CBS and Winfrey are pausing for breath and are still digging their heels in.

AnT said…
@lucy,

Thank you for finding and posting that story about MM and her pretend assistant. Yikes! Worse than I remembered it.
SwampWoman said…
Blogger Jocelyn'sBellinis said...
@jenn,

The biggest reveal of who MM is, is her own Sussex Squad. Any rational woman in her position would have publicly called for her sugars to back down and to be civil. She, and they, are the ones spewing hatred- even against "the family she never had."

Now that the truth is coming out, I wonder if any of the sugars will ever admit that they have been backing a truly horrible human being.


From the unhinged/psychotic writing of some of the squad (which appears to be strangely similar), I suspect that Meghan is a big contributor. Different 'names', same ranting.
AnT said…
@AnimalLover, thank you, and count me as interested as well.

@jessica, yes, and another question could be: why does it say Caucasian on your CV, why did you let people think you were Italian, and even if those were ‘not your fault’ why have you had repeated cosmetic surgeries to erase your natural features, while straightening your hair?

@TheGrangle, everything yo said + why THIS Sunday, why March 7? The palace’s main event was postponed/revised. The only answer might MM launching yet another “business” next week, or Oprah is desperate for attention since she relaunches O magazine as an O online “bookazine” a week later. I think Oprah, who is associated with Harvey Weinstein without apology, is past caring what people think. All $$$.

1 – 200 of 1243 Newer Newest

Popular posts from this blog

Is This the REAL THING THIS TIME? or is this just stringing people along?

Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce.  And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before?  which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)? There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know.  I'm not a lawyer.  One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away".  That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice.  But does he? He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance.  Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of bei

A Quiet Interlude

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

Christmas is Coming

 The recent post which does mention that the information is speculative and the response got me thinking. It was the one about having them be present at Christmas but must produce the kids. Interesting thought, isn't it? Would they show?  What would we see?  Would there now be photos from the rota?   We often hear of just some rando meeting of rando strangers.  It's odd, isn't it that random strangers just happen to recognize her/them and they have a whole conversation.  Most recently it was from some stranger who raved in some video (link not supplied in the article) that they met and talked and listened to HW talk about her daughter.  There was the requisite comment about HW of how she is/was so kind).  If people are kind, does the world need strangers to tell us (are we that kind of stupid?) or can we come to that conclusion by seeing their kindness in action?  Service. They seem to always be talking about their kids, parenthood and yet, they never seem to have the kids