Let's continue...
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.
Comments
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14761099/william-kate-tantrum-free-zone-petronella-wyatt/
PART ONE
PETRONELLA WYATT Prince William & Kate are a tantrum-free zone —
our nation is safe in their hands
25 Apr 2021, 22:01Updated: 25 Apr 2021, 22:10
AS the nation’s memory gropes backwards over the travails that have beset the Royal Family in the past year, it can comfort itself with one solar myth, one solid bond in the bank of our collective future.
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, whose marriage we celebrated in the tumbling April sun ten years ago on Thursday, have turned up trumps.
Amid the noisy departure of The Unhappy Prince and his Duchess, and the passing from this life of the stalwart Duke of Edinburgh, William and Kate have proved themselves to be the real deal — the 40-carat jewel in the Crown.
Natch, there have been doubters and naysayers, in the verdant hills of Montecito, California, with its 50 shades of green with envy.
This is a tale of two couples — and for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, the triumph of William and Kate is a bitter pill.
Did Haz and Megs not say that the words duty and fulfilment go together as badly as Oprah and good taste do to the rest of us?
William is a “trapped” man, as Harry remarked of his brother; careworn and pitiful.
As for Kate, she is constrained by a role so intolerable and distressing that she is forced to get her kicks from making Americans cry.
More than ever, post the funeral of Prince Philip, which saw Kate at her most gracious and William as impressive as the grandfather he was mourning, Meghan’s “truth” is at its most shopworn.
Does a trapped man display the regal bearing and apparent ease of Prince William?
Does a duchess who wakes each day to another bout of torment look quite so swan-like?
If Kate is unhappy, she should bottle it and make a fortune in the beauty industry.
There are only two kinds of royals in this world — the sanguine and the chronically unhappy.
The latter, like Harry and the Duke of Windsor before him, kick and squall against their fate.
They are almost proud of their unhappiness and consider it to be the only rational attitude for an enlightened person.
Then there are those like the Queen and, as is increasingly evident, William and Kate.
This sort of royal sees not what they can’t do but what they can; who perceive that public service is not a prison but a means of liberation from futility and pointless introspection.
In the ten years since their marriage, the Cambridges have rejected self-indulgence and embraced calmness and composure.
One only has to look at Kate’s charming photographs of her children, George, Charlotte and Louis, to see a couple who prioritise values that are both genuine and permanent.
Two boys walked behind the coffin of their mother, Princess Diana, in 1997.
PETRONELLA WYATT Prince William & Kate are a tantrum-free zone —
our nation is safe in their hands
At the time, and in the years after, we often made the mistake of thinking it would be William who had developed an Eeyorish attitude to life.
On occasion, he seemed palpably uneasy in the presence of the media, or performing royal engagements.
Then he went up to St Andrews University, of which he nearly dropped out, annoyed by the attention he was receiving.
For a while, Harry seemed the happy prince, with his mother’s charm and his cheerful derring-do in the Armed Forces.
Then William underwent an irreversible transformation.
Somewhere along the way, shored and ballasted by meeting a pretty girl called Kate Middleton, of solid and uncomplicated middle class background, he looked duty squarely in the eye and decided not to flinch.
Of all the moments in the history of our monarchy, this may prove to be one of the most significant.
For in choosing to save himself, William might be said to have saved the Crown.
Alas, poor Harry went in the opposite direction.
Last month, I predicted in this paper that Harry’s foolish decision to go along with Meghan’s tell-all Oprah plan, and to take a bovine pride in her attempts to paint the Royal Family as a camorra of racists and misfits, would be met by scorn, particularly with regard to any insults levelled at the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
And so it came to pass.
Throw any insult you like at William and Kate, but they always come out smelling as sweet as English roses.
“Catherine,” a friend of the couple once said to me, “not only has beauty, but an unflappable calm which nothing, including Meghan, can destroy.”
It is noteworthy that Kate will become the first English Consort since the 17th Century, when the non-royal Anne Hyde married James Stuart, later King James II. (Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother was unapologetically Scottish).
A glance at Anne shows parallels between her and Kate.
Born in 1637 to Edward Hyde, who came from a family of country lawyers, Anne was a radiant, unaffected brunette.
In 1660, she married James despite the opposition of many who deplored her humble birth (including her own father, who threatened to have her executed).
Nonetheless, she was described as having “loveliness, courage and energy almost as worthy of royal blood”.
One might say the same of Kate.
A real beauty like Kate is rarer than a flawless ruby.
PETRONELLA WYATT Prince William & Kate are a tantrum-free zone —
our nation is safe in their hands
Her chestnut hair seems always lit by the sun’s afterglow, her skin seems saturated by summer mists and her complexion is the envy of dermatologists.
As for her eyes, on the one occasion when I met her, I have never seen brown eyes quite like hers.
Usually they have dull flickerings of grey, but Kate’s are so bright they can look like sapphires.
She dresses simply, but there is always a dash of glamour, whether it is the bow on the coat dress she wore to Philip’s funeral, or the flirty cut of a circle skirt that makes you think of the late Princess Grace.
Our duchess is no dullard, however, clothed only in the sack and ash of discretion and premature middle age.
She is human, and, according to her friends and family, has a warm, mischievous side.
As befits a future queen, Kate has grown-up moments but she is not a figure in a stained glass window.
She knows it is better to sneeze and giggle with her husband, whose love and pride in his wife is plain to see.
Kate gives William confidence, not only because he adores her optimism and the warmth of the Middleton clan, but because she wants him to be happy,” confides another royal insider.
In essence, Kate puts her husband first, and it is significant that the first question she asked during their exchange of marriage vows was “Are you happy?”, in the genuine hope that he was.
Kate, unlike her fractious sister- in-law, has never tried to convince a cheerful William that he is, in fact, miserable.
It was Princess Diana who, in a rare moment of thoughtfulness, urged her sons not to rush into marriage and to ensure that their chosen bride was also their best friend.
William took heed, but when Harry met Megs he got lost in an emotional and sexual maze and dodged the facts.
PETRONELLA WYATT Prince William & Kate are a tantrum-free zone —
our nation is safe in their hands
In any marriage, teamwork is an essential component, and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have become more than the sum of their parts.
Meghan’s idea of teamwork is that everyone should work on a team for her, and if they demur she hurls a wrecking ball at her nearest and dearest, or at the very least drags them through the detritus for which she is largely responsible.
It is not surprising that she cannot keep staff or friends, and commands virtually no loyalty except from her husband and a few stooges in the American media.
Kate and William, on the other hand, are a tantrum-free zone. On one occasion, finding all the tables occupied in a pub near their Amner Hall home in Norfolk, the couple laughed and blamed their tardiness.
Thankfully, William has not inherited that male Windsor trait called social awkwardness, something from which George VI suffered and, to a certain extent, Prince Charles.
If William is not the man on the street, he knows what the man or woman on the street thinks and feels, and shares many of their concerns, be it on the subject of sport, education or social equity.
He gets a genuine kick out of helping people, and by embracing his destiny he has freed himself and can look in the mirror every time with the satisfaction of someone whose life has a purpose.
It is ironic that it is Harry, with his empty boasts of “finding freedom”, who resembles a man about to face an executioner’s squad, and that in fleeing “duty” for the backroom brawling of Hollywood, is forever trapped.
The Royal Family, composed as it is of human beings, can throw us some curveballs.
So far in its history, the British nation has overlooked these in the hope of getting something better in the future
The search is over.
In William and Kate, the Windsors have played a blinder.
Our future King and Queen have all the optimism of youth and the wisdom of experience.
Moreover, they share the love that springs up when two people have seen the worst of each other as well as the best, the bond that comes from camaraderie and putting others first.
Our nation is safe in their hands.
[ENDS]
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14761099/william-kate-tantrum-free-zone-petronella-wyatt/
PETRONELLA WYATT Prince William & Kate are
a tantrum-free zone — our nation is safe in their hands
...
This ---- This which is --- Length: 135mm/5.3in and clip on
OR
Shorter length stylus, cost less, that have no ball point pen but come in bright red and other bright colors ----
https://www.ebay.com/itm/264296182803?hash=item3d8947b413:g:geQAAOSw3DpdtAVY
All of these are found at Ebay or Amazon.
Isn't it!!!!??!!!!!! Those bursts of praise, and those utterly scathing grenades tossed at the Harkles!
To me this is the last shovel of dirt thrown atop the Harkle coffin.
It also seems to prepare the nation for a lovely reign by William and Catherine. It's so strong and so extensive, I have to feel it was published to do a great deal of "work" for the BRF/monarchy. It says "Yah, here's some gray rock in your face, dears."
Absolutely a a 4 goal victory. What wil Harry's wife and her team do now?!
I had the same reaction: WOW.
Can you imagine???? I think her screams of rage will be so intense and prolonged, they'll quite scare off the daily parade of Mudslide Manor burglars. The paps need to park outside not with cameras, but with recording and seismic devices for this one.
I remember how well the Middletons did on the wedding day ten years ago. All smart, healthy and composed. Strong. I hoped they would provide some much needed normality and they have fulfilled my hopes. Even James, who now seems to be leading a life true to himself. I have been impressed by the articles he's written about his life in the Highlands. You could almost be there. I don't think William would be the man he is without them. When we celebrate the 10th anniversary we should include Catherine's family in that.
I do hope M reads that article! Together with all the others for the anniversary. Makes her brief spell in the BRF look like an aberration. Which indeed it is.
I think because the Harkles keep yapping and showing up and dropping these fake stories about meeting with Charles, William and the Queen, the palace was aware that Harry's wife was trying to convince the public, the sugars, Netflix and her backers or political team that they are still one big hoofed foot in, and have a chance at victory by flashing their union jacks whenever needed.
But I think the appallingly disrespectful behavior during and after Philip's end of life, and the funeral week, and then this announcement of the "extra chapters" of FF were totally enough.
I think this time, Charles was finally as disgusted as William and Anne. I think the Queen is finally done as well. As I mentioned, my connected friend was emphatic there are NO more meeting, calls, etc going on, and even those supposed family Zooms w Philip etc never happened.
So, someone has likely decided to turn the lights off in this very public way, with this strong "slimmed down, get out of our car" statement from Charles.
Someone in the palace knows how the Harkles are making money. And I don't just mean the obvious Netflix, jobs for Harry, Oprah stuff. The royals probably know the sort of "contact" the Sussexes are banking on continuing to sell to Russians, or to Chinese businessmen, or Oprah, or places like Netflix and ButterCup.
Now they've yanked that recognizable royal rug out from under them for good, clearly, publicly.
Now the Harkle story will be the angry stupid broke exiles in the gaudy fabricated Italian palace. They've nothing to sell -- the information chain is broken, the backs are turned, the disgust is palpable.
Brilliant move.
I cannot help but think the Petronella Wyatt piece was timed to support it and clearly show, we HAVE two "young royals: and they are marvelous, and they are handling the future. And the Harkles are now quite redundant."
Yes, the Catherine praise was very rich and creamy and OTT, definitely. But I think it was the perfect strategic comeback to all the BS we've endured about saintly perfect beloved Harry's Wife -- the flawless paragon top actress philanthropist long-legged top model French-speaking fashion icon young mother savior & beauty.
...you know? It was high time someone soaped the Harkle's windows with ice cream & syrup right back.
And after the funeral and those gorgeous photos of beautiful impeccable Kate appeared, and those of her darling Louis, too....the timing was just right. I would have been standing there on the PR Formula One track looking at the photos, hearing the Finding Freedom car rev its oily engine again, and I too would have begin screaming "GO GO! too to Petronella at her keyboard.
SS will be flapping their jaws in panic tonight. Their grubby bizarre boss with the claw fist can't compete.
Thanks for the hint-I really like the phone cover and my new phone is arriving in 2 days so will definitely order one. I seem to always just dump my phone into my bag and go. I use it very little but it is handy at times and I still have a landline as so many people, accounts had my number. Switched to Ooma though so it only costs me $5.65 a month (taxes).
I'm in on the tiaras- just name a place and time!
Fascinating dream. I wonder what it means? I've never dreamt of this lot.
And I agree....what started out as light entertainment has turned into all of us finding this an incredible sort of psychological study. I know it can seem to drag sometimes for some here, as we wait for "something to happen" --- but we are observing the real life version of events that history may talk about one day. @JennS has the right idea, collecting the evidence basically and theories into her new blog. The tale we are witnessing is truly as fascinating and educational as it is appalling.
Don't forget the dangling tendrils with the fake crown and hair scrunchie!
@musty,
That's my favorite of all of the royal tiaras. The drop pearls are so gorgeous and can be swapped for emeralds!
That makes sense I guess. I suppose in principle there has always been a way back for them if they agreed to play by the rules, however unbelievable that may be after Oprah and the constant leaking.
Perhaps this anticipatory coverage of Prince Charles' plans will be a message to H that his way back will be closing so he had better focus his mind on that and try to think clearly for once. He's basically in a flooding compartment with M but he just has time to squeeze under the descending watertight door if he moves now. After that, too late.
I'm still surprised by the princesses and puppies thing. M must have done a hell of a pitch on herself after that, to still believe megastardom was on the other side of the palace walls.
Sorry to make you repeat yourself, but how do I access your blog? Apologies for not writing it down when you posted it before. Now I’m sure I will never find it.
Funny about Omid's book denial. I think the publisher read public reaction to the idea and dumped it fast, even before Omid had a chance to order his new face. Poor Omid!
Just click on JennS's avatar, and then click on the path to her blogger page and there you will see the name of her blog to click.
Yes this all falls into place - many thanks. People have been pointing out that they seem very keen to stay in with the family they threw under a bus on Oprah. I wonder how the sugars work around that? It's like I said recently, H is now on the outside looking in, being treated with the kind of punctilious embarrassment the BRF showed to the Markle family before his own wedding. Was there ever a better example of that old saying "A son is a son 'til he gets a wife"?
I never understood how they could justify this theory, Seeing as he was the one who brought this contagion into his family to begin with. If he just kept it zipped up and stayed away from her, this wouldn’t be happening. Nobody knew who Markle was before each got involved with her. But how they can cling stubbornly to this idea that H is still their hero boy and Granny’s #1 Flies in the face of all known facts. His recent behavior is all about supporting his grandmother and the royal family? And he went back to it in California because why?
Doolally. Harry is in a cult of two.
You can click on my avatar and you will find a link on my profile page or use the address which is:
https://acacheofclues.blogspot.com/
😁
I meant to mention that during my virtual tour of the Kings Road in Chelsea last night, my tour guide took us past a large building that said Jigsaw on the front. I tried to get a picture, but he was moving too fast. I don’t know if this was a flag ship retail store, or if this might have been headquarters where Catherine worked as a part-time accessory‘s buyer just out of school. Kings Road is a mix of retail spaces and design studios, so it might have been either. It seemed rather too large to be just a store front, and had the heft of a headquarters.
Just thought you might find that interesting. Is anyone familiar with Chelsea to know for sure? Our tour guide was chasing down sites that were germane to the swinging 60s, and Jigsaw was not on his radar.
Meghan Markle's cruel attack on Kate and Wills!
Meghan is fuming after Prince Philip's funeral
https://www.newidea.com.au/meghan-markle-kate-middleton-cruel-attack
[...] instead of spending this week reminiscing over their historic Westminster Abbey wedding on April 29, 2011, [the Cambridges] were dealing with fresh attacks from Kate’s “jealous” sister-in-law, Meghan Markle.
“It wasn’t long after Harry had dropped his bags in the hall back in Santa Barbara, LA, that word reached Kate and William that Meghan was flipping out,” says a source.
“She’s furious that yet again, Kate has come out of a family event smelling like roses for apparently bringing the brothers back together, while Meghan copped column after column of press accusations that she tried to overshadow Prince Philip’s funeral.”
I hope you like the phone cover. What color will you get? I had a hard time deciding between the green or the blue.
As for the Nutty gathering, for the Brits, right in front of BP to let the BRF know how we feel. For the Americans, right in front of Mudslide Mansion. Can you imagine how the Harridan would feel if we all showed up in her tiara? Boom!!! Mudslide Mansion implodes!
****************************************
From Scoobie's Titter:
Omid Scobie
@scobie
·
12h
"A not-so-accurate report about Finding Freedom in the Sunday Times, who didn’t even bother asking for comment before falsely claiming a paperback edition will feature new chapters that will “reopen royal rifts”. Why let facts get in the way of a spicy story though, eh?"
Scoobie Do,
You call yourself a journalist, but can't even post a proper tweet. The Sunday Times is a "which, not a "who."
What part of his tweet is true/untrue? He has packed a lot of word salad into one tweet.
1. That it's a paperback book? OK, it is a hardcover?
2. That it will have new chapters? Or will he put it into the book, but not add on extra chapters?
3.That it will re-open royal rifts? What royal rifts have been closed/ended?
4. Is "not so accurate" the same thing as a lie? Does this mean that some of the Times article is true?
I still have a landline as so many people, accounts had my number. Switched to Ooma though so it only costs me $5.65 a month (taxes).
Here is a youtube video that better explains what I have posted below. How to get a free landline----
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9xQqRl6G9Y
_________
My cell phone I have to pay for. But my internet based landline costs me nothing. You buy an obihai phone device. $40 on up at Amazon. Obihai connects to your router. Your corded or cordless phone plugs into the obihai. If our have gmail then you can also get a free google voice phone number within your area code. You use this google voice with your obihai for your new landline. If you want to you can pay google $20 to transfer your long standing landline number over to this obihai/google voice arrangement.
For some Fun---
While you have your gmail open in one tab, do a search for google voice in another tab. Go to google voice. They will be offering (begging to give you) you your free phone number that is within your area code. Though I have seen Goog temporarily run out of these "your area code" numbers on rare occasions.
(this is the short version)
Scoobie doo is upset because the last few harkles scoops didnt come from him. He was nothing to update on Finding $
Baby names - since she is all about cash, it will be for the highest bidder. Guaranteed Rate Diana Windsor, Tropicana Lillbet Windsor, Markle Sparkle Windsor - she needs cash, this is the best way to get some!
Oscars - guessing no appearance otherwise there would be no need to pap walk with the rent a archie. also saw a comment on twitter, with the pap walk it probably means People 2 year old archie birthday pics are not happening - poor rach, cant ever catch a break
Hikari - love the Chimpo reference. Cant make this stuff up!
Guessing we will see never before seen harkles wedding pics on the Cambridges anniversary, or another lemon cake to someone it Turkey We know something is coming and whatever it is will be pathetic.
"even before Omid had a chance to order his new face. Poor Omid!"
Hahahaha!
I think Scoobie sent out a trial balloon to see if he could get a good reaction for a second book. He then discovered that nobody wants it. What publisher is going to give him a second book, when the first one hit the bargain bin within a couple of weeks of publication? The Times didn't need to call him about this if they have a copy of the second book contract or sources inside the publishing house.
In addition to the fake crown and fake hair, we will need to tie white sheets together to make 16-foot long trains.
From the tabs:
"Our dear Megsy Wegsy, since you screwed us and our readers, the British people too who were paying for you. By playing hide and seek with Arch, only releasing coy B&W photos, mostly of baby parts. We will pay you back by not helping you monetize #2."
If they use Avocado as a name, they must also use Banana as a second name! Avocado Banana Mountbatten-Windsor. Perfect!
But WILL Harry really be at the unveiling now? I have my doubts. Plus, the barkjack twitter account (aka Theresa Longo Fans) is often quite on with their gossip/celeb info, and they say they hear the baby is due in the end of June (close to Di's July 1 birthdate). Will Harry be allowed to leave for the UK at that time? I doubt it.
And by the way -- think about that. The recent photo of Harry's wife with that enoooooorrrrrrmous bump was then taken when she is approaching 7 months pregnant. If the Page Six photo is a date point, she is that large with two months and a week to go. She was equally large in the "holding Archie standing under the tree with Harry" image, so, that big at 6 months too. She will never get those bumps right, or understand pregnancy. And I will never cease to be amazed that people stoutly believe her.
@midge,
In addition to the fake crown and fake hair, we will need to tie white sheets together to make 16-foot long trains
We can't take any chances of being accused of being white sheetpremacists!
Good point. I didn't think of that. We'll have to figure out another fabric for the train.
Blogger Jocelyn'sBellinis said...
@swampwoman,
Good point. I didn't think of that. We'll have to figure out another fabric for the train.
Whatever fabric is chosen, I think we should embroider frogs on it in honor of the prince that turned into a frog.
Superb list of questions. Omid wasn’t expecting that someone would think to dissect and parse his indignant little tweet of denial.
Maybe lace curtains would work.
Lace curtains would be perfect!
Hmm. Maybe tweaked the spelling to “Avacado” ? After old Hollywood actress Ava Gardener — or the concept of “avarice”.
.so you have ....Diana Avacado Amazon Mountbatten Windsor. 🙌🏻
Blind Item #3
This is from the mouth of the very wealthy guy married to this permanent A++ list athlete. He says that he felt like the alliterate one was hitting on him hard at a US Open, and that is what caused the rift between the athlete and the alliterate one.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2021/04/blind-item-3_25.html
It was plainly obvious from the photos she was eyeballing Alexis.
I checked Omids companies house accounts. Nothing has been updated since 2018 when he was in the red.
Thank you for posting The Sun article.
It is brilliant esp the part of Catherine never bringing out that William was in fact miserable when he was happy, if it makes sense.
I can hear screams and plates being smashed in Montecito. Harry has locked himself in the dungeon for safety.
https://twitter.com/hrrysgreysuit?lang=en
They have some of the best photo-shopped pics I've ever seen.
WRT the name, I do like Wokeisha Diana. But I think that because their interview and funeral and Archie-carrying-photo experiences have backfired so badly, even H and M might have a clue that they are not popular and are in deep doodoo with the BRF. So perhaps they will go full suck-up and choose Elizabeth Philippa Diana.
As for wokeism, it is the most ridiculous way of looking at the world in, well, ever. It manages to be both misogynistic and misandrist. It is racist against all races , but in different ways: one race is responsible for all the evil in the world, and almost everyone of that race is racist themselves (except the woke allies, of course), and it impossible for other races to be racist against this race. Wokeism is racist against another race known for its achievement-oriented culture and attacks them, often literally, for daring to succeed. Wokeism is racist against all other races because it assumes that people of those races are incapable of achieving or even functioning in society without the help of the woke allies. We are all one race: human.
Wokeism sneers at people of all faiths but one, and excoriates those of certain political beliefs. It is abysmally ignorant and contemptuous of history and science if either or both of those contradict their beliefs. It has no desire for unity, just conformity, and it will go to any lengths to silence those who dare to disagree, because wokeism is illogical and indefensible, so no argument or dissent is tolerated.
It is entertaining to watch, however, as the woker-than-thou are already starting to turn on each other.
Charlenes Angles
Li’l Charlene
A name fit for a kween
With a nod to Grandpop
In the hope that they cop
Re-entry back on the royal scene
Do you remember the name of the woman MM met with in London pre-Harry to discuss her career/social climbing? Not her agent Gina nor Liz Cundy. It was someone I think she met for drinks and the woman spilled some tea about Markle afterward. I'm trying to find that info and I thought you briefly mentioned this meeting recently. TIA!
Love your latest - it's cute!
I do hope M reads that article! Together with all the others for the anniversary. Makes her brief spell in the BRF look like an aberration. Which indeed it is.
@Ava C: It’s my guess that through Sunshine Sachs, Harry’s wife uses a service with software that scours the Internet to aggregate articles about her on a daily basis and the results are packaged into a daily report for her.
As a narcissist, despite saying in the past that she doesn’t read about herself, I don’t believe one word of her tosh. Narcs are too self-absorbed to not read about themselves. She probably devours every article that hits her news feed, so yes, there has likely been been some tossed crockery mixed with a few choice words at the mudslide mansion, especially after reading this gem of an article from The Sun.
Sounds like Perry kicked them out of his mansion, and that's why they said they didn't like it, anyway.
Bookworm also says that her sources said that Oprah knew about the surrogacy, and that Harry's wife didn't want to discuss it during the interview. So Oprah knew about it all along, and she never said anything. Money doesn't buy integrity, Oprah and Gayle.
And, BOMBSHELL ALERT, Tyler Perry's aunt said that if it comes down to it, Harry's wife will say that the BRF *forced her to have surrogates* because they didn't want a black child in the family!
Bookworm says she got the same info from at least three different sources, one on a long phone call. The tea is spilled in the last third of the video, but the earlier part tells about how Bookworm got all of this info.
Bookworm says that the BRF needs to acknowledge the first surrogate immediately, before Harry's wife begins her blackmail plan, especially since H came back from the UK empty-handed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D8MyeB_HHs
Oh, and horror of horrors, Bookworm believes the bumps for both pregnancies are fakes, and her source, a doctor, said it looks like Harry's wife is big enough for twins or, OMG, triplets! No, please, no.
Tyler Perry has Harry's wife figured out now, so maybe he can influence Oprah and Gayle?
You can program your phone to alert you anytime your name appears in the media. I bet that Harry's wife has one phone for just that. It's also a good reason to not use her name. Using "Harry's wife," rather than her real name, has caught on, on various blogs now, so she probably has that programmed into her phone by now. We'll need to think up a new name to keep ahead of her.
Wow, those are major theories - who is Bookworm2? I don't think I've heard of her before. Is Lady CC saying anything similar at this point? Gosh, I would certainly love this to finally come out.
Also what is the idea behind 'Harry's wife'? Why not MM or M - it's much faster and easier to type.
And if we don't use the real names we won't attract new readers to hopefully educate about Markle's scams nor be found by journalists, palace staff, etc.
...............................
@Sconesandcream
Thank you so much! I couldn't remember her name. 😁😁😁
What you saw on the King's Road is a store, the head office is in Richmond, a very nice suburb described as affluent (it is). If you look on Google map and street view, you can see inside the store (or any other).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
@Magatha
Nice poem. Let's hope the gruesome twosome don't 'cop re-entry back on the royal scene'.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On another note, we were wondering if the latest pregnancy is real. I've read that being in a chicken coop is dangerous for pregnant women, in fact "pregnant women, and adults 65 years or older should not handle or touch chicks, ducklings, or other live poultry." (WSAVA, World Small Animal Veterinary Association). Plenty of other websites say the same. As usual, the witch didn't do her homework.
That must have been when I had a long break from this blog, as the possibility of her blaming the BRF never occurred to me. I always thought that if/when the truth comes out it will totally destroy whatever reputation she has left but, yes, I can absolutely see how she could turn it around now.
If that happens, the BRF brought it on themselves by letting such a ridiculous charade continue unchallenged. It would be because they didn't want to alienate H I suppose. Well that was a wasted effort if ever there was one.
By the way, I was refreshing my memories of the moonbump - but also see the fake tan and bronzer she piled on here:
https://madworldnews.com/meghan-magic-baby-bump-queen/
When you trawl through articles during her BRF phase it really hits you, how she played that up. I haven't seen a single mention of it in the MSM yet it's so obvious. Never like that before the BRF and never like it since. Inescapable evidence, right in front of you, that she planned this from the start and racism was to be her nuclear weapon. The dark face on the balcony. If she'd been her 'normal' self sans bronzer, I expect some of the outdoorsy, ruddy Windsors would have outdone her in the balcony game. I do wish someone would call her out on that, but it's such an incendiary area I can see why no one wants to go there.
She truly gets all the breaks in this woke universe. No matter how crassly she did things, they can be turned against us. If this were Robin Hood, she'd be Basil Rathbone as Guy of Gisborne (she has to be him - he's the ultimate villain) coming at us with her sword and we'd be Errol Flynn fighting back with our sword but holding the wrong end! She can grab the hilt at any time and push it back on us.
Of course Errol Flynn wins in the end, as we will, because they'll simply run out of funds. They'll be conspicuously scrounging around, getting more and more desperate (the small-scale merching has already returned) and that's just not a good look for the sugars. They want world domination for their sparkly princess. Who isn't getting any younger.
She will age and fail to deliver for Netflix and Spotify (to justify the grandstanding $100M). H will continue to lose his hair and his face will travel further down the Prince Andrew road to paunchy, scowly entitlement. Then those superficial, fair-weather sugars will drift away. I just wish it wasn't taking so long.
He is a cross between Thomas Markle and Harry. Infact i'd say he leans closer to Markle than Harry.
Unless Harry's wife is secretly keeping relations with the Markle side of the family and specifically the network of females relations directly begotten of Thomas it seems unlikely that her baby would mysteriously look like Thomas without that biological connection.
A surrogate revelation is a circular firing squad for the family because it would be very hard to believe thst they didn't know.
However, over the past year and indeed in the Oprah interview, Harry's wife has proven herself a liar and someone who exergerates things.
That will definitely work in tue family's favour as far as a surrogacy reveal especially if the family reminds everyone that they didn't know a baby was born until 8hrs after the fact and had unintentionally made a series of misinformed announcements after the Markles gave them the wrong information.
Plus the final announcement made very clear that the family had *heard the news* of a birth as opposed to knowing for sure that a baby had been born via the Palace's own system of royal doctors who act as their witnesses.
On this issue as with all schemes concocted by the Markles, Harry's wife finds ways to sabotage herself.
"@AnT
Do you remember the name of the woman MM met with in London pre-Harry to discuss her career/social climbing? Not her agent Gina nor Liz Cundy. It was someone I think she met for drinks and the woman spilled some tea about Markle afterward. I'm trying to find that info and I thought you briefly mentioned this meeting recently. TIA!"
Do you mean Katie Hind?
Jigsaw HQ is in Richmond, an area further west than Chelsea.
I think I will just use She and Her from now on.
I watched the Moonbump Show with growing horror as what appeared to be an insane woman brazenly paraded her ever changing fake stomach for the world to see. Not a peep was said in any quarter besides this one how oddly Her belly was behaving. I realize got a woman’s pregnancy and changing body is a delicate area; I can understand how She may have gotten away with it in early days. But if she were carrying an heir to the throne of Britain, and had announced that publicly, I am mystified got the official position of the
BP was to leave her steadfastly alone, without providing medical proof of her condition. Her baby isn’t just Her baby—as a Royal Duchess carrying a grandchild of the next King, She was a vessel of State. Regular “privacy” rules governing her medical condition shouldn’t extend to Her refusing to provide the Queen of England with any information about her pregnancy, including who would attend Her and where.
The hands off MO of the royal households has bitten them in the arse. She never should have been allowed to proceed so far with her ruse.
I am sure that Catherine, and Sophie and all the other royal women have kept the Queen Apprised of their health And the progress of the babies when they were expecting. That is normal to do with family members even when the babies aren’t in the line of succession to a crown. Her failure to comply with this should have been a glaring warning that she was up to nothing natural—And it should’ve been subverted long before the events of May 2019. It should’ve been put to Her that a statement regarding surrogacy was going to be released with it without her involvement, and it would be made clear that this child would be welcomed as a family member, but he/she could not be awarded titles or a place in line. If the RF had acted swiftly, immediately after the Oceania tour, they may have been able to head her off before her monstrous plan grew to fruition. As it is, they have played directly into her hands with her joint narratives of racism and mental health. She will indeed claim now that being in such a fragile mental state due to the racist bullying which was unrelenting even during the engagement, that she felt compelled to act out this role of expectant mother and the RF knew the entire time and did nothing.
“Archie” Is very pale… So if it can be proven that he isn’t hers, because otherwise he would have come out “too dark”, even though She is probably the palest black woman going, Then legitimate questions must be raised, is he Harry’s either? And her narrative of blaming the RF
Wouldn’t really work in the case of impending Princess Avocado—How did the RF force her to have another fake baby in America after they had already quit the family?
If it does turn out that the RF has colluded in the Tale of Archie—To save face, to try and aid an obviously disturbed woman—this really could end them. Not because Her spawn is crucial to the family but just the size of this lie. She is a tawdry blackmailer, and they have given in to Her.
✨✨✨✨✨✨
@JennS,
Sorry just got back on, WiFi issues in our area — the name of the journalist Harry’s wife had early-on drinks with, pre-Harry, in attempt to find U.K. fame and meet rich Englishmen was Katie Hind. She has a Twitter or google “Katie Hind Meghan” to see a list of her MM articles. Or for the specific article we were talking about, “The night Meghan Markle asked me to help get her into the tabloids” (Oct 26, 2019 publication date) — which in my mind should have been presented in the ANL case, had not Justice Warby been, huh hm, one of MM’s likely warblers.
Ooh excellent tea from Bookworm (about Tyler Perry’s aunt). I hadn’t listened to that one yet.
To me, it makes sense because my set design friend in LA said word was last year they’d been asked to pack and go from Tyler’s house, and scrambled to find a new landing spot — though again, rumor was they went straight into a house owned by Oprah. (And because of odd delivery srories, which have also landed in the rumor press, my friend and her friends/colleagues still don’t think the pair live in Mudslide manor.)
Kate Middleton’s Instagram play gives her an edge over Meghan and Harry
https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/kate-middletons-instagram-play-gives-her-an-edge-over-meghan-and-harry/news-story/84d6cdcc89a45e37fc58091c8a1853cc
Excerpts below buy do read in full if you have time and enjoy the gorgeous photos!
Kate is simply nailing the social media game right now.
Sure, her look might be relentlessly stuck somewhere between 1976 and 2014 (how can one person spend so much money to look so inoffensive?) but the duchess has proven she knows a thing about wielding power 2021-style.
See, while royal news over the last year has nearly been wholly consumed by the ongoing Sussex melodrama, all TV tears, pouting, posturing and eye-popping business deals, something very interesting has been going on back in the UK. That is, while the eyes of the world were by and large glued to the Harry and Meghan Show, Kate has been revolutionising the royal social media game.
[...] how about last year’s Father’s Day images, which also happened to fall on William’s 38th birthday. In one lot, he was shown with his three children gloriously piled on top of him in their Norfolk garden in a fit of giggles; in another all three grinned while perched on a swing.
Elsewhere, there was a totally mold-breaking image of William with his arm around his father Prince Charles’ shoulder. It is not hyperbolic to say that this was a truly extraordinary shot: Never before have two future Kings been photographed with such intimacy and warmth; never before have two future Kings been portrayed with such cockle-warming realness.
[...] Essentially, over the last 12 months, William and Kate’s former regimen of stiff posed pictures, generally pulled from Getty Images and which were all rictus grins and waving Union Jacks, has been supplanted by something far more subversive and quietly radical.
William and Kate’s social media transformation is emblematic of a far more significant intellectual shift in their journey towards the throne. Basically, this is them positioning themselves to rule – and rule in a way that will change the crown forever.
In essence, what we are witnessing via the Cambridges’ social media accounts is an acknowledgment that for the monarchy to survive, it will require a new royal modus operandi predicated on a common humanity.
That is, imperious and enigmatic is out; openness and realness are in.
If 'openness and realness are in', the Sussexes are in deep trouble.
Love that “Kate Middleton’s Instagram play” story, especially the last line as you pointed out — openness and realness are in.
That’s like announcing he next football match will take place in water, and the opposing team suffer from aquaphobia.
Of course the article’s author doesn’t quite grasp royal fashion, photographed-for-history role fashion (or classic fashion), but, that’s ok.
I love Harrys Grey Suit as well. The Oscar "performance" by H is absolutely stellar! How did they get the makeup on him?
If you move down a bit to Piers Morgans name, there is a very funny brief video of the interview. Def worth a peek
https://twitter.com/i/status/1386419221748355072
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1428033/Meghan-markle-latest-prince-harry-news-duchess-of-sussex-royal-family-news-queen-latest-vn
Excerpts:
MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry have been branded a "terrible combination" for the future reputation of the Royal Family.
... it is going to be a running sore to the Royal PR team.
"And in the case of Meghan and Harry, they just seem to like speaking out.
"So that is that's the kind of terrible combination."
Mr West ['political commentator Ed West'] went on to compare Prince Harry to his "embarrassing" grand-uncle Edward VIII, who abdicated the throne in order to marry his American lover Wallis Simpson.
He said: "Edward VIII didn't really say much, I mean he was a bit of an embarrassment.
"Everything about him was embarrassing as a king he was just unsuitable.
Mr West continued: "Harry is unfortunately of similar ilk.
"You need a certain characteristic to be a successful royal.
"You have to be slightly bland, you need to be someone who can cope with this kind of mad Truman Show world they are in.
"And not go off the rails and not particularly want attention."
He added: "You know, treat just like another job.
"Well, he and Meghan have a kind of combustible urge to be in the news but also hating it."
I know this is still just from that ever growing army of 'experts' but there is a definite momentum building up. William and Catherine are being boosted virtually across the board.
I've read quite a few comparisons to the Duke and Duchess of Windsor recently. If they keep popping their heads up we'll know this is a serious campaign to counter the Sussexes. It's astonishing how powerfully imprinted the Abdication is on our national memory. My grandmother and her friends wouldn't allow 'that woman's' name to be mentioned, even decades later. I thought they were unduly harsh but now we have M I entirely understand. If I ever have great nieces or nephews I'll be saying the same thing!
The Cambridges page is painful to see because it has so much potential and they are the most popular royals. But their page handler lacks creativity. He needs to go or be redeployed to a another office. He's so mediocre.
In an online article dated today (Monday, April 26, 2021) Newsweek magazine is reporting that the Mail on Sunday has filed the appeal of Justice Warby’s summary judgment in favor of Meghan in the case of Meghan’s August 2018 letter to Thomas Markle that was first revealed in People magazine and then later on in the MoS.
https://www.newsweek.com/tabloid-appeals-meghan-markles-victory-private-letter-lawsuit-1586318
DM article about how PC may be "ditched" from the BRF as a cost saving measure. It has Angela Levin speaking, mentions FF 2.0 and so on. But I don't recall there being a whole lot of articles out there in the public mentioning this as a real possibility. We talk about it but there hasn't been a real movement to publicly address the idea. Maybe this is part of the public roars and then HM is "forced" to respond (the various divorces pattern).
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9510217/Harry-Meghan-ditched-Royal-family-Prince-Charles.html
maybe we could use: them for both, him for JH and her for the wife (and ignore grammar). would make a key word search crazy
I've been following Bookworm 2 for about a year. She seems to be internet friends with most of the well-known anti-Harkle bloggers. I think she has a good head on her shoulders and is careful to let readers know what is fact or what is conjecture on her blog. That's all I know about her.
*************************************
I'm going to continue to use Harry's Wife as my name for "her". The point of not using her name or initials is to de-legitimize her, as if she doesn't exist. It's an attempt to completely erase her from the history books, and to try to get the newspapers to stop writing about her. It also removes any power she may have, as her name is necessary for her personal PR. Several bloggers have started using made-up names for her, so I'm going to stick with that one, and others can figure out what they want to call her.
I'll be interested in the names people choose, if they wish to join in.
This made me wonder how widely this story is running so here's a little list where the story has featured recently. Some of it is just syndicated but that doesn't matter. All that matters is that more and more people are getting it on their radar and, more to the point, the Sussexes will get the clippings.
Metro
Daily Mail
Daily Express
Daily Mirror
The Sun
Cornwall Live
Daily Star
Geo.tv
The International News
Cambridgeshire Live
Bristol Live
Derbyshire Live
Wales Online
Bristol Post
British Heritage
Derby Telegraph
Cambridge News
Birmingham Mail
Entertainment Daily
7News
Irish Post
London News Today
I'll finish with Sydney News Today - my favourite headline - Prince Charles plans to “throw away” Harry and Megan to reduce costs, royal biographers claim. They've even got her name wrong! Delicious.
I LIKE that one! It really does put her in her place, doesn't it?
Hopefully it will improve, although for all we know it may be the style they want. Fuddy duddy. In time, royals get praised to the skies for the slightest things. One day we wake up and discover we love a royal for X simply because they've been doing X, unchanged, for a long time. Like the Queen reading her speeches in that way she has. It used to be thought amateur and that she would become less stilted and more natural in time, but she never has.
At the time of her Golden Jubilee everyone discovered they love her way of delivering speeches, that it's a subtle form of genius and they wouldn't change a thing. We are such an odd country sometimes. Like a picturesque little kingdom in a children's story book. Especially now our Queen is in her castle.
xxx
My hapless 3 hubs, so nice and so dumb
So easy to get them under my thumb
Have always owned my husbands
But always made a fair trade
In the bed that we made
I was always Big Audio Dynamite
Yes, you got that right!
With revved up fake orgasms and more
I was never a bore
Was their fantasy whore
So I always left dear hubs
Wanting more, more and more
So....
Always racking up my score
Of what they owed me
Everything from A to Z
I am no fool
So from them I got beaucoup
Jewelry and cash
I always had them under my lash
Diamonds are a yachting girl's best friend
Is how this true poem ends
Thanks for the satisfying pro-Kate article, but I find this bit quizzical . .
Sure, her look might be relentlessly stuck somewhere between 1976 and 2014 (how can one person spend so much money to look so inoffensive?) but the duchess has proven she knows a thing about wielding power 2021-style.
Normal women don't generally desire to spend boodles of money to look offensive--that is a special Hollyweird talent. Harper's Bizarre, is what I call one of Her favorite outlets. Real money and class do not advertise themselves loudly; quality speaks for itself. As a future Queen, Catherine can't afford to be offensive . . even a slightly daring hem or decolletage sparks a frenzy of controversy in the papers. Nobody wants her to be Charlene of Monaco, except maybe Her.
I think we've established that Catherine has upped her style game a lot since 2014 when she was still wearing the lightweight High Street dresses that flew up in the wind, coupled with her collegiate hairstyle. I hope she's ditched the Erdem, except maybe once a year when she goes to the Chelsea Flower Show.
Indidentally, my Chelsea tour guide pointed out the London abode of Sir Richard Starkey, which is on the Kings Road. He expressly wanted to be close to the flower show because he is a great fan of plants . . some of them medicinal (lol) but the pretty ones, too.
Of course you're absolutely right. I never understand these people who just don't get it. Mind you, the fashion world has always perplexed me. Alexandra Shulman at British Vogue used to be my biggest bugbear as she looked so ordinary to be in her position, telling us what was what.
It's like those who try to nag Catherine into cutting her hair short. Yes, it used to be a little OTT - the ringlets at the Cenotaph was the low point for me - but she's beautiful as she is.
There's an excellent little story about a girl persuaded to cut her long hair by someone she thought was a friend. It's a disaster but she gets the most perfect revenge. Called 'Bernice Bobs Her Hair' by F. Scott Fitzgerald and you can download a PDF here:
https://public.wsu.edu/~campbelld/engl494/bernicebobs.pdf
I was talked into cutting my long hair when I was 19 and cried for several days. It was like the end of the world to me. Now I just do what feels right to me.
I just hope Catherine keeps on as she is. Her style is evolving as required but it's always her style.
I think Catherine will keep her hair long for quite a few years because it's easier to do an updo, which looks really great on her.
That photo of her in the car at PP's funeral with the black mask and her beautiful dark eyes is going to be an iconic photo for her, printed time and again throughout her life. She looks absolutely, stunningly beautiful.
I’ll be interested in the names people choose, if they wish to join in
Harry’s Future Ex Wife (HFEW)
I've seen lots of blogs starting to use "Harry's wife", too. I hope it catches on. It really does reduce her to nothing, a nobody, just somebody's wife with no identity of her own. She got where she is today because she is no more than H's wife, and everybody knows it, so why not call her exactly what she is- H's wife.
It's catching on, referring to madam as Harry's wife; it's how posters are referring to her on CDAN.
Some Tarot card readers are doing it as well (Harry's wife, Harry's first ex-wife, etc.)
I like it! Harry's Future Ex Wife (HFEW).
what colour would you say Catherine's eyes are? I have trouble finding a word to describe them.
Meghan Markle faces another court battle over letter to father Thomas after new appeal
just watched the ricky gervais golden globes monologue that was epic
it is interesting the UK papers didnt post about the pap walk Will be curious if anything else gets ghosted by the press. Finally, were they waiting for one year and then prince philip died and had to wait? love the ghosting of her
The pap walk was originally released to Page Six but an "exclusive" usually means they are the first to report it, not the ONLY ones to report it.
Indeed I have seen it reported in numerous other media outlets but they refuse to publish the photo. Question is why - why would she release a photo and not allow it to be widely distributed?
Perhaps the truth is these outlets are sick of her and don't want to give her money and/or (!!) they no longer believe the photos are genuine (genuinely Archie).
Would love some input from journalistic/media Nutties who are more familiar with how this actually works.
I think the BRF is in the clear because they were simply shown a baby that H and his wife presented to them as Archie, born of her body. What family would think to question that? It was only later that they found that they were lied to by both H and his wife.
Ricky Gervais's monologue WAS epic, wasn't it? I wonder what they had to bleep out. He really went after some people, and the look on Tom Hanks face showed that he didn't approve at all.
@GWAH,
I'd say Catherine's eyes are a hazel/green, so beautiful with her English rose complexion and dark hair.
"Berniece Bobs Her Hair" is a great story. Of course, the bob was the most coveted hairstyle in the flapper era. It can look stunning/cute on a person with the right bone structure. Such an angular cut works best on a small face with defined features. Catherine has nicely chiseled features and I think she could rock any hairstyle, but with her height, she needs longer hair for balance, IMO.
When Sophie Wessex got married and for several years after, she was rocking a short cut very reminiscent of Diana's signature style--was accused at the time of imitating Diana because it really was very similar. But--it looked great on her. I've been wishing she would go back to it, really, or a slightly longer version of it. Now that she's grown her hair long, it's much more nondescript and rather than make her look younger, she looks like an older woman trying to do young(er) hair. Long hair does provide more options for updos with tiaras and other formal occasions, and the majority of men prefer longer hair on their ladies, no matter how cute/stylish a short cut can be.
Most women have a hair length/style that is going to be *most* flattering on them. I don't foresee Catherine ever having really short hair.
And her eyes are very unique. If eyes are the windows of the soul, Catherine's soul shines out of hers. I've always wanted green eyes; have to make do with plain old brown. Catherine has the best of both in her eyes . . like the moss in an English wood.
I think the BRF is in the clear because they were simply shown a baby that H and his wife presented to them as Archie, born of her body. What family would think to question that? It was only later that they found that they were lied to by both H and his wife.
I'm sure that is the line of plausible deniability open to the RF which they will use. If She comes at them with a 'driven to it by fragile mental health/pressure to reproduce an heir/they knew the whole time', the RF can counter with . . "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex refused at all stages to release any information to us. After the Duchess refused the Queen's doctors, the best attending obstetricians in the land our hands were tied. Help was offered and repeatedly refused, despite recollections to the contrary." They might also add "Repeated attempts were made to contact the Duchess to inquire after her health and that of her unborn child; all attempts at communication were declined and the actual whereabouts of the Duke and Duchess were often unknown."
Here's the thing, though, which I have mused over--As Harry's wife, She was not just another expectant mother. Her baby was, in the broadest terms, property of the Crown. It boggles my mind that the RF would take the word on something so important from a person who'd already demonstrated that she was untrustworthy and a known liar. But just in the normal course of things . .wouldn't proofs be required well in advance of 'the birth' of such an historically significant event? I'm sure all the other Royal mums would have not only informed the Queen of their joyful condition but also provided the Palace with regular updates on the health and progress of their pregnancies, along with the doctors caring for them . .and what the birth plan would be--who was attending and where. This is a Royal baby, not an episode of Call the Midwife. Surely it was apparent pretty early on that the Duchess of Sussex was not observing ANY of these normal courtesies. Did no one in power think to question why? The hands-off approach . .'Oh, you're pregnant? Well, good luck, dear. Do let us know when you drop the kid, won't you? Snaps optional. In the meantime, while you are pregnant with an heir to the succession of Our Crown, we shall send you to several known Zika areas 24 hours by air away and pop you on a plane to North Africa in your 8th or 9th month as well. Being the trouper you are, We are sure you will hold it in until the child can be born on British soil but til then We don't need to know anything about it . .and even then, the less said, the better! Ta!"
I do not want the Queen to be complicit in something shady but I fail to see how she could not have demanded proofs from Harry and Meghan of their impending legitimate parenthood *before* announcing the product of the world's longest and most bizarre pregnancy to the world as #8 in line to her throne, can you? In short, it doesn't fly to say 'We only knew what Meghan told us and we never pressed for more." Would Elizabeth Regina, the woman whi micromanages hosiery and nail polish and hats be so devoid of concern about when where and how Meghan's baby was going to arrive? That doesn't seem to be in character at all.
I think had I been the Queen, after the stunts with the tiara and that ostentatious train She had actually been forbidden to wear, I'd have assigned Markle a full-time MI5 tail to report back to me at all times. The RF apparently counted on good behavior and decency from its newest member in lieu of actual oversight and look where it's gotten them.
The pap walk was originally released to Page Six but an "exclusive" usually means they are the first to report it, not the ONLY ones to report it.
Indeed I have seen it reported in numerous other media outlets but they refuse to publish the photo. Question is why - why would she release a photo and not allow it to be widely distributed?
Perhaps the truth is these outlets are sick of her and don't want to give her money and/or (!!) they no longer believe the photos are genuine (genuinely Archie).
That photo was like a pebble in a pond, wasn't it? One small plop and then gone! I was surprised too that it wasn't widely disseminated. Instead, numerous outlets 'described' the picture in detail, including all the purchasing information for her clothes and 'Arche's' lunch bag . . without actually running the picture.
She must be quite livid. Her huge splash timed to ruin Louis's birthday . .Her 'FU!' to the RF for not sending H home with an airliner full of pounds sterling . . pffft!
Either the outlets are wise to her finally--the last agency/papers that published a photo of 'Archie' and his mother walking outside got sued, the papp agency into bankruptcy. So this is her proposed income stream: call the papps on herself. Pose for maximum merching effect and clicks. Pretend outrage at invasion of her son's privacy and sue. Collect the merching proceeds AND the litigation income.
Or--she herself issued a Picture Kill like the Christmas Frankenbaby photo. She seems to do that when she realizes that she's gone too far.
Funny, I've got green eyes and I've always wanted deep brown eyes like my grandmother.
I agree with you about Sophie. She's almost my age and I'm always interested to see how she dresses etc. What mystifies me is her house. It's absolutely enormous. Looks like a public school (for American Nutties that means the opposite to what it means for you). It has 57 rooms in 87 acres and is the biggest house of any of the Queen's children. Always reminds me of the Duchess of Devonshire saying what a nightmare it was if she mislaid her car keys somewhere in Chatsworth (mind you she had 300 rooms).
I always thought the Wessexes were in an insecure position financially, because PC would edge them out. Sophie dresses very expensively and they have a grand lifestyle. Now, thanks to the Sussex failures, their future looks decidedly brighter. I'm pleased for them. They didn't deserve to be cut out in favour of the shambolic, disloyal Sussexes.
Thank goodness we still have two steady, likeable, youngish families to fall back on, to say nothing of Princess Anne. All I want after that is for Eugenie and Jack to be taken on board. Although that would fill up the balcony again. PC is hyper-aware of that crowded balcony and the ensuing complaints about costs. He doesn't have to send them all out though.
As others have been saying, if PC cuts down too much, the charity work will shrink to a tiny selection and then the BRF could be perilously close to being unnecessary. It seems George V's charity model for the BRF is with us forever now. I can 't think of an alternative justification unless it was just meeting and greeting and state dinners, in which case they only need PC and Camilla and William and Catherine.
Kevin O'Sullivan: "'I think he may have been a bit shocked by the cool reception he got from his family, which begs the question, will he come back for the unveiling of the Diana memorial with his brother in July? Or will he pull out of that?'"
I beg to differ. If he was shocked at how he was treated, then the question is: Why would he think otherwise? Why would he think they would have all these warm, friendly loving thoughts after the saga ending with the interview and be glad to see him?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9513225/Prince-Harry-pull-Princess-Diana-statue-trip-royal-expert-claims.html
**@Jocelyns Bellinis
Thanks for the info about Bookworm. I like her theories!
Re the numerous code names for Markle - perhaps you missed the discussion we already had here a week ago about using numerous nicknames, abbreviations, initials, etc for Harry and Markle being extremely problematic for numerous reasons including the fact that people could not figure out who posters were writing about and the idea that everyone’s work on the blog wouldn’t show up in search results.
To be honest I literally can not read the blog with all these various nicknames and initials. I have numerous medical issues including problems with my eyes, migraine headaches including ocular migraines that were being triggered when trying to decode here while reading.
Encouraging folks to think up and use their own unique code names for the Sussexes will prevent me from engaging here.
Here is the post I left a week ago:
JennS said...
@Nutties
I have a favor to ask.
If folks don't want to call Harry and Meghan by their names anymore could we just refer to them as H and M?
The blog has become so hard to read with everyone using different names and sets of initials for the vile pair I can't follow what people are writing.
The initials are particularly confusing and don't allow for a smooth read when we already abbreviate so much (RF/QEII/PC etc) and use text-speak as well.
I'm finding myself constantly trying to figure out which set of initials is a designation of which person and with all the new nicknames it's just impossible to know who/what anyone is talking about. It takes me a lot longer to read here and I'm already spending too much time on the Harkles without having to try to decipher a code.
In addition, I thought a good part of the reason we provide our time here is to try to spread the word about the Sussexes. Anyone stopping by to read would think we were talking in some kind of code and would definitely not understand much of what we are writing about.
I don't want to spoil any enjoyment anyone is getting out of these various code names but it really seems to defeat part of the purpose of the blog.
I hope everyone will consider returning to calling them by their names or actual initials and that y'all understand the reasons why I'm asking.
💓😁💓
April 19, 2021 at 11:13 PM
Several Nutties posted replies in agreement and since then we were limiting the nicknames and using H and M or their actual names.
I wish you had seen these prior posts.
Hiding who we are talking about seems to defeat any attempts to expose Markle.
Although I fervently wish the media would stop accepting her PR, I thought the hope was that the same media would continue to investigate and expose her with more Kraken-level articles. I have no desire to discourage that and have purchased subscriptions to both the Times and the Telegraph in order to get these Kraken articles.
So many of us have spent a tremendous amount of time contributing info on the Sussexes and I for one do not want to feel my time was wasted because my posts are buried and lost and nothing will turn up in search results.
No one says we have to do what folks on Twitter or elsewhere are doing.
To be honest, this refusal to call her by name being spread all over is reminding me of woke-agenda patterns and how folks are forced into following trends.
I think it's a shame that CDAN posters are not using her name as that will make it not only harder to find the blinds about Markle within the site but it will also prevent exposure of the blinds in search results for anyone trying to learn more about the Sussexes. This will happen with any site following this code name trend.
Once she is exposed and defanged I will enjoy participating in erasing her from the history books but certainly not before she has been exposed completely.
There is much to discuss about the Sussexes and old topics need to be looked at again with a fresh eye that current knowledge about the couple brings. Better opportunities to piece together all the parts of the puzzle are presented to us now.
Also, I thought if we could become more organized we might consider contacting journalists like Valentine Low, and Camilla Tominey, author Tom Bower, media folk like Piers Morgan and peripheral but interesting parties like Rob Lowe to visit and read the blog.
I was hoping that starting a tandem satellite blog would enable us to work together to organize our info, resources and theories to help end this whole Markle Debacle. I have some medical problems that need focusing on and a business that is opening back up again. I can still find time to devote to the Sussexes but not if it has no purpose.
Maybe you or someone else could create another satellite blog for a spot to post creatively about the Harkles and use humor to roast them. I certainly would enjoy that. I have had a lot of fun naming the Sussex child all manner of Markle-roasting monikers from Wokeshia to Avocadoria and have written a couple of satires. A separate humorous blog off-shoot could also be a place to do Harkle themed bingo, our own polls, and for off-topic posts!
I think they knew she was up to a lot shady and felt hands were tired because of Harry and his mental health. Better to turn their backs, somewhat, and focus on other things. a bit of ghosting perhaps? and when it was time, i am convinced they paid off the surrogate who likely now has the baby. They can still swoop in use her mental health issues line and thought what was best for the child was not to be raised in a coke fueled household in need of inpatient commitment. and they can fall back on it is a painful private family matter. I think as you pointed out Harry is detached from this kid wherever the kid is I just think the truth makes harry and his wife look far worse than the family. and since she and he have become so hated, there maybe some sympathy now with what the family was dealing with.
For the sake of the RF and 'Archie', if that poor little blighter really exists, I hope you are correct on all counts. Particularly about some loving family having the product of Her little scheme. I really do believe that she did engage a surrogate, or try to. The clandestine solo trip to Toronto within weeks of her marriage when H was on engagement somewhere . . . the rapidity with which she would have 'conceived' . . 6-8 weeks after her wedding . . come on. Even 20-year-old Diana took a bit longer than that, according to what Meg claims. This too-good-to-be-true superwoman pregnancy with the anchor baby so soon, without an ounce of struggle--when She had told other men in her life previously that she couldn't have children is just that--too amazingly aligned to all of Her goals to be entirely natural and real.
Remember during the engagement interview when they talked about possibly being the first Royals to adopt? That was my first hint that very possibly either or both is infertile, knew it and this was their trial balloon viz. adoption as a possibility. They must not have liked the answer they received as to the potential for getting titles and increased status and wealth out of adopting kids . . possibly surrogacy too was shot down, if they'd broached that officially. The 'of the body' rule was hammered home--No titles, no perks unless it is your and H's natural child, out of your body and no other.
But--she can't get pregnant. Or doesn't want to. Or H is shooting blanks. Determined on surrogacy, she forged ahead, not recognizing the words "You cannot". Only now she knows she's got to hide it. So she embarks on the biggest, showiest most ridiculous, drawn out pregnancy stunt known to womankind. She was daring the RF to call her out . .knowing they wouldn't, out of embarrassment/decorum. And she knew she'd get away with it, to a point. Nobody, least of all the Queen was going to demand that she strip and show underneath her dress. Even if people *knew*, they couldn't accuse her. Maybe she hoped they would, to add fuel to her victim narrative. But she smirked and flaunted her way through getting more and more egregious with it. Not only was she lapping up the attention, she was saying "See? I'm getting away with this and you can't stop me."
But if the RF had successfully intervened to save an innocent baby from a life of unimaginable hell with a Narc mother and a cokehead father who doesn't know what day it is . . how were the Harkles able to stage various photo ops 'round Windsor Castle with 'their baby' including meetings with the global press, and the Royal grandparents? These have me stymied. The christening photo is an obvious fake, and the presentation one deeply suspect as well. Jury still out on whether the babe H was holding that day was actually alive. But someone had to have let them in to do all this and reports reached the ear of the Queen. What was with H's 'they change so much in two weeks' comment? Why let them 'borrow' a baby they weren't allowed to keep for the very same photo ops crowing to the world that they were new parents?
I don't understand how any of it was allowed to be perpetrated upon the Queen, but geez, Ghislaine Maxwell and Kevin Spacey have sat their depraved backsides on the thrones of England, so equally distasteful things have happened when the Queen wasn't looking.
Little (not so little) impending Dorita Avocadoria is Markle issuing a nyah nyah nyah from afar . . 'Ima doin' it again and this time you really can't stop me you meddling bastards!'
It's evident that the RF was unprepared for just how relentless she would be. They yell 'Checkmate!' and she just goes off-board and invents her own game. Let us see if BP issues any sort of statement including Dorita Avocadoria in the line of succession. They have even less oversight that this pregnancy is real than they did the first time. At least then, some members of the family saw her at close range during 'the pregnancy'. Now she could 'give birth' to a clown car full of clowns and they wouldn't know any different. But how many times can a made up child be inserted into the succession?
One of these days, don't know when but eventually, I believe 'Archie' and any 'siblings' will be quietly removed from the line. Along with their 'father' quite possibly. It's what he deserves.
Omid backtracking the Meghan PR of Finding Forever? Shocker.
Funny enough- when do we see Meghan *alone*. At this point I’d expect the woman to really be pushing her solo brand. Appearances, glamour, something, anything.
So far, it’s the same dull and worn out Royal Reject story.
No Oprah, we can all see how insufferable the two ‘truthers’ are. No one wanted them in the Monarchy any longer. Clear as day.
@Acquitaine @Raspberry Ruffle
I never watched and don't ever plan to watch The Crown but I thought it was just Americans who *believe* it. Most are new to British television and culture so they take it as faithful representation. Something similar happened when Downton Abbey was popular. The Americans I knew who watched thought it was classy and high-brow art. Instead it was a frothy soap opera whose cast cringed at the material they had to act out. The costumes and sets were glorious though.
I don't know what can be done about making people know The Crown is fantasy. A similar thing is happening with the K-Pop wave and people thinking South Korea is exactly like K-Dramas. :-/
--
I'm not really sure why people are claiming it's a total "fantasy". Did Elizabeth love Phillip? Yes. Was he a 3rd class "royal" with no country? Yes. Did she ascend to the throne? Yes. Did Margaret love Townsend? Yes. Was her love life a total shit show? Yes. I could go on and on. Were there scenes that were recreated in the wrong location to make it more interesting? Yes. Were exact words changed to make it more salacious? Yes. But overall, most of the events happened. Maybe not exactly, but in general, they happened. Churchill wanted to remain in control. Pres.Johnson was a total Texas Ass (I'm from a small town near All Things Johnson in Texas.... he was an insecure asshole and a philanderer). Charles was always misunderstood, a sensitive introvert, and always loved Camila (blech). Ann was always a bad ass. Andrew was always a pompous cad. Please tell me where The Crown is "total fantasy". I think most viewers are savvy enough to know when a scene might've been embellished or sensationalized. I just don't understand why people are now poopooing The Crown. I have always loved it for the set design, the wardrobe, the casting, the era, the drama, and how world history is woven in so effectively. I don't understand the hate.
Will everyone here discount The Crown if by some miracle it continues to MeAgain Era, and they portray her as a social climbing grifter and a liar? No.
Suggestions? Kate? LMAO
@hunter
The pap walk was originally released to Page Six but an "exclusive" usually means they are the first to report it, not the ONLY ones to report it.
Indeed I have seen it reported in numerous other media outlets but they refuse to publish the photo. Question is why - why would she release a photo and not allow it to be widely distributed?
Perhaps the truth is these outlets are sick of her and don't want to give her money and/or (!!) they no longer believe the photos are genuine (genuinely Archie).
_____________________
Hikari said,
That photo was like a pebble in a pond, wasn't it? One small plop and then gone! I was surprised too that it wasn't widely disseminated. Instead, numerous outlets 'described' the picture in detail, including all the purchasing information for her clothes and 'Arche's' lunch bag . . without actually running the picture.
She must be quite livid. Her huge splash timed to ruin Louis's birthday . .Her 'FU!' to the RF for not sending H home with an airliner full of pounds sterling . . pffft!
___________________
Some of all of the above, I think. I am a non-entertainment-focused journalist, so I can't speak definitively, but my guess is she's become radioactive.
All those phony pap lawsuits, British tabloid suits, thumbing noses at the press in general, no one wants any part of it anymore. Plus, no self-respecting photographer wants to be called in like a tame pet every time Madame snaps her fingers. It's almost suicidal to deal with her. Even poor old stalwart Scooby Doo is being left out in the cold.
Plus, that latest moonbump photo is being dissected and debunked all over the place. Wouldn't surprise me if real paps didn't spot it right away. All of this is JMO!
And as @ Hikari alludes, this has got to be resulting in truckloads of smashed crockery at "Montecito" (if they indeed live there), due to the fact that all she has is visibility. What I like is the fact that not only is she being ignored, but Catherine is being bombarded with love and gorgeous photos. :)
HarrysGreySuit
@hrrysgreysuit
·
1h
https://tatler.com/article/surrogacy-and-peerages-legal-issues-family-law-marchioness-of-bath
Tatler March 2021 issue, Coincidence? Credit the-empress-7 tumblr
Perhaps a paper plate company should have either Real Harry or Faux Harry in a commercial for their products, showing an angry woman with yak hair throwing actual China, then showing how happy the man was after switching to buying paper plates.
I think other publications don’t want to buy the photo when they can’t verify who the kid is to avoid being sued. Page Six probably bought it directly from Meghan.
:)
Jenn, if you think that’s bad my hubs was building a Meghan Markle name blocking extension so her name never appears anywhere! LOL we just haven’t decided what should replace the name.
Suggestions? Kate? LMAO
__________
Wow @ jessica, how awesome is that!! Hahaha!
I've kept up with the name suggestions, but stumped as to any one in particular I'd choose, except possibly "Mercherella." ;)
Am I alone in thinking that the gruesome twosome are being monitored whether by the RF "grey suits" or indeed MI5 or whoever. This is such a constitutional crisis that I can't/won't believe there is nothing going on behind the scenes. Of course we will probably never know, but I doubt the RF are about to be taken down by a briefcase girl and her petulant husband, there is too much at stake.
__________
Agreed. I can't help but think that MI5 and 6, being one of the premier such agencies in the world (with the possible exception of the Mossad) are on top of it, and are only staying mum because being mummer than mum is what they do. All will be revealed, someday, but my guess is the Palace and Whitehall have to get their ducks exactly in a row.
I certainly understand ocular migraines as I get them myself. I also have macular degeneration, so my eyesight is not good.
As for the nicknames, it was just a suggestion.
Lt. Nyota Uhuru
I think other publications don’t want to buy the photo when they can’t verify who the kid is to avoid being sued. Page Six probably bought it directly from Meghan.
April 26, 2021 at 11:37 PM
Blogger jessica said...
And what else is Page Six except one of the fabulous gossip relics from her favorite decade- the 90s!
_________________
Good point. She has dug herself in so deep, China is about to ship her back.
Re Wessex house:
It has 57 rooms in 87 acres and is the biggest house of any of the Queen's children.
I always thought the Wessexes were in an insecure position financially, because PC would edge them out. Sophie dresses very expensively and they have a grand lifestyle. Now, thanks to the Sussex failures, their future looks decidedly brighter. I'm pleased for them. They didn't deserve to be cut out in favour of the shambolic, disloyal Sussexes.
So much for Andy being the Queen's favorite, eh? The Queen's 'baby' has got the grandest pile and is in line to receive his late father's title--a Dukedom of great prestige.
I've seen photos of Ed's pile and it is indeed nice, but I assumed all the Queen's kids had nice houses. Charles owns Highgrove outright because he bought it and renovated it. Apparently Edward did a lot of reno/repairs to his current property in lieu of a higher rent.
Sophie always looks appropriately dressed for the occasion. I'm sure her rather sedate Royal wardrobe is expensive, but . .more expensive than anyone else's? Though the lowest ranked within the Elite 8, she does have 22 years in The Firm, so I imagine she is able to spend more on her clothes now than when she and Edward first married, or even at 10 years in, like Catherine. To be honest, most of the time I see Sophie she is very casually dressed--working in a food pantry parceling out food or hauling bags of garbage on the beach with her family during clean u . Service projects. If her more formal attire is very much more expensive than others', it's triumph of taste because it doesn't look it, to me. She doesn't come across as a 'grand' person, even with the 'grandest' home. Are they known for entertaining lavishly or driving a bunch of Rolls Royces? I haven't heard anything like that about them. I've seen Ed and Sophie on walkabout greeting crowds and he looks like a retired history prof heading down to the pub . . cordoroys, loafers a tweed jacket and she will match him in something suitably country/tweedy. Apart from church occasions, I'm not sure I've even seen Ed in a suit.
Top notch country clothes are a pretty penny, too--built to last for decades of country sport. When I think of either of them 'clotheshorses' don't spring to mind. Not disagreeing that their lifestyle costs a lot but within that sphere they seemed down to earth as it's possible to be. Sophie didn't demand to give birth in the Portland, but had her babies at Frimley Park, not 'posh'.
Fellow Crown enthusiast here. I have always approached it as 'entertainment' based on history, not documentary. It is embellished for dramatic effect but the skeleton of events it hangs upon is historical. Thanks to the series I now have more context for events early in the Queen's reign before I was alive. It should be viewed as a launch pad into those subjects, not the final world. Peter Morgan has had to imagine all of the dialogue between characters, and this is a very dialogue heavy show. Rather than 'complete fiction' I prefer 'speculative retelling' because as you point out, it is not 'complete fiction'.
My two favorite characters are King George VI and Prime Minister Harold Wilson, the Labour PM who was said to be a warm favorite of Her Majesty, surprising even herself.
Charles shines rather in Season 3 as a very sympathetic figure before the events of Season 4 make him a dog once again. While neither he nor Camilla wish to be reminded of their mutual role in the failure of the royal marriage, they did carry on as depicted, callous toward any feelings but their own. Diana was really that unstable and food-disordered, by her own admission. I'm not sure if HM was so at odds with Mrs. Thatcher as was depicted, but they did cross swords on occasion.
The character of Philip is depicted as often chafing in his role as consort and it is alluded to that he consorted with other women while in the company of his Private Secretary Mike Parker and other hommes des mondes PP hung with--booze, fast cars, flying machines, et al--while his wife was busy Queening. PP's alleged affairs in the earlier years of his marriage have had a decorous veil drawn over them and have not been, to my knowledge, officially confirmed. Given PP's zest for life, how handsome and gregarious he was, how desirable and how often at a bit of a loose end given the preoccupations of State which ket his wife busy, not to mention his membership in the aristocratic class where such things are as common as breathing . .it would have been a matter for more extraordinary comment if PP had had no affairs, ever. King George III was steadfastly faithful to his Queen and even his doctors thought that bad for the constitution of a regal man.
The plane crash that killed his family and his early years of displacement; his mother's mental illness . . these are all painful topics that are touched upon. Should we not look at the painful things? I think as William and Catherine are proving, the more effective way forward in our century and the ones to come is for the Royals to not be remote serene marble figures on Olympus, unimpeachable, but to show by their humanity that they do care about their subjects' suffering because they too experience the full range of human frailties.
"The gorgeous George, Charlotte and Louis, mother and papa were very happily, playing in the new Sandringham play area today. There is a photo but unfair to share, without their knowledge. A member of the public took it, the family were unaware 🤨 naughty naughty !
I shall add... extremely happy"
The last clothing cost article I saw was in Jan 2019. That's the one that showed in 2018 M outspent all the royals in the UK and Europe at £427,972 or ~ $594,752.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/8127236/meghan-markle-royal-women-spend-clothes-fashion-europe/amp/#aoh=16194706902156&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s
That year Kate spent £71,825 (~ $99,815)
and Sophie spent £77,589 (~$ 107,825)
The estimates don't include M's wedding dress or the bespoke pieces for any of the women. Both M and Kate were pregnant that year. All these women did tours abroad during the year including Sophie. (We don't always hear about Sophie but that year she traveled to Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, France, Malta, & Sri Lanka, for example. She also attended a very large number of dinners in the UK as a patron or representing the Queen. See Court Circular.)
Hi, guys! I'm here to tell you about an awesome discovery I have made since living my best life in America. Chinet (TM) is a line of plates made entirely out of paper. Growing up trapped in the Royal family, I never knew plates could be made of paper. We had footmen taking care of the crockery at KP and I never paid any attention. The great thing about Chinet is they are sturdy enough to load up with your favorite tinned beans and sausages, what have you, but if they accidentally get dropped on the floor or hurled against the wall when the wife finds you eating sausages when you made a blood oath-pinky swear to go vegan (Hi, honey!) nothing breaks! It's really cool. Sure, beans do get all over the wall, but no worries . .we just let Archie and the dogs lick it off and everyone's had lunch! Couldn't do that with china plates, 'cause they might swallow shards and stuff.' And I can't tell you, the peace of mind it's given us, living on an earthquake fault as we do, that our plates are indestructible! Saves us a lot of dosh on having to keep replacing the china, and money's a bit tight these days, so that helps a lot. My Petal, you know, she's passionate. She's opened up my noggin a few times when she was making a particularly emphatic point during our 'Impact Meetings'. With Chinet, I don't have to duck, I can just take it head on. They are harder to aim properly, being so light, but if they are piled up with a vegan Full English, she can really lob them a treat.
Okay, guys, well, it's time for me to go be the Chimpo at BetterUp so I guess I'd better change my shirt since this one has beans on it. One of our Japanese VPs christened me the Chimpo--he says it means 'big shot' in his language and that I'm fulfilling everyone's expectations. So I guess that's some good news, with everything that's been going on.
Peace out, laters!
Not meant to tease, just saying how happy they all looked, how relaxed, a genuine family time
.
Lol! Brilliant. A word from Just Harry may need to be a regular thing, please! It's like Bridget Jones's Diary, in real ex-royal time!
...And it reminds of another possible baby name: the famous "Flower", yah?
Aside from his April Fool's posts, which we can discard for the fantasy they are, there have been a number of straight blinds which are clearly about the Harkles.
I'm particularly thinking about a recent one outlining how the surrogate babies are ABSOLUTELY the DNA mix of the two parents in question. I found it to "protest too much" if you know what I mean.
I can also say from personal experience with site managers that if you (I) send in a gossip blind item - it will likely/often be published without any verification.
I mistakenly sent something to Skippy which turned out to be dead wrong once and she posted it no problem. I felt bad later when I realized I'd been wrong and it made me think twice about believing everything anybody sends in.
I also sent a blind to CDAN once (something I'd found on reddit so it was secondhand) and he published it (as a Reader Blind) but regardless - it went up without issue.
My point is simply that I'm super SKEPTICAL of any of Ace's items on this particular couple - while he's been accurate on many issues especially Royal Family stuff regarding them from two years ago, I do wonder about anything specifically which seems to come from MM's own camp.
You and I can put our chips on Flower. God I wish we had a baby naming pool the way men arrange their Fantasy Football crap. All of us haters across LSA, FB, Nuttyville, the Skippyverse, Harry Markle fans and elsewhere could all throw money into bets.
Ugh, if only I were more ambitious I would arrange this for us. Maybe JennS can rig us up a voting panel for predictions on her site.
I am skeptical to believe anyone pays full retail for these designer duds so when these budgets come out I am always super suspicious because it seems so unlikely.
You are probably right. But the figures may be useful from a "relative" standpoint. If anything, younger royals probably have an "edge" in getting reduced rates because they get more press coverage.
I doubt that lunch bag had any food in it, too. All of that was just another merching march and an FU to the Cambridges to try and use Archie to spoil Louis' birthday. Didn't work though. Backfired splendidly.
_____
Ya! Totally! She surely does protesteth too much! Harry's wife is like Lady MacBeth x1000.
"Out damn spot!"
No, of course it isn’t all fantasy, but quite a few scenes and storylines have been fabricated (off the top off my head things about Princess Anne etc). Not everyone who watches knows what’s factual and what’s fiction.
In Britain there’s usually a disclaimer stating scenes etc have been added for dramatic purposes, I don’t know if that happens in other countries. So the concern is, unless you know what’s truth or written in for dramatic reasons, it can all get taken as truth .
If it's good enough for Meghan, it's good enough for Edward! Now the Wessexes arrive in St Moritz by £24,000 private plane for a skiing holiday days after the Duchess of Sussex raised eyebrows with her £100,000 New York flight
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6734207/Prince-Edward-Sophie-arrive-St-Moritz-24-000-private-plane-skiing-holiday.html
The Countess of Couture! Inside Sophie's VERY expensive wardrobe - with its £1,925 frocks, £400 heels and bags that are made just for her
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3115097/The-Countess-Couture-1-925-frocks-400-heels-bags-just-inside-Sophie-s-expensive-wardrobe.html
Below is a useful list, showing Sophie as the third most expensively dressed royal (the Queen doesn't feature on such lists). However M blows all that out of the water with an eye watering sum. I know she was a new royal who needed to build a royal wardrobe but nothing can excuse spending at the level shown here. I've pasted figures for the top five.
I should emphasise I like Sophie and think she does a good job, but costs will need to be reined in a bit. There's a raft of articles online about how much more expensive the BRF is to the taxpayer compared to European royalty. As cuts from the pandemic begin to bite, PC needs to tread carefully to avoid more damage to the BRF. Unfortunately he's not really the ideal person to impose economies.
Which royals spent the most on their wardrobe in 2018?
1. Meghan, Duchess of Sussex: £406,915.43 ($515,879.65)
2. Crown Princess Mary of Denmark: £88,999.57 ($112,831.96)
3. Sophie, Countess of Wessex: £73,570.41 ($93,271.17)
4. Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge: £68,334.23 ($86,632.84)
5. Crown Princess Mette-Marit of Norway: £52,307.18 ($66,314.05)
Is his place larger than Gatcombe Park? And Anne own hers outright,whereas Edward leases??
TexxMaam,
Fellow Crown enthusiast here. I have always approached it as 'entertainment' based on history, not documentary. It is embellished for dramatic effect but the skeleton of events it hangs upon is historical. Thanks to the series I now have more context for events early in the Queen's reign before I was alive. It should be viewed as a launch pad into those subjects, not the final world. Peter Morgan has had to imagine all of the dialogue between characters, and this is a very dialogue heavy show. Rather than 'complete fiction' I prefer 'speculative retelling' because as you point out, it is not 'complete fiction'.
My two favorite characters are King George VI and Prime Minister Harold Wilson, the Labour PM who was said to be a warm favorite of Her Majesty, surprising even herself.
---
I guess my point was the fact that many on here are now saying "The Crown is total fiction"..... when we know it's not. If they depicted HMTQ having sordid sexcapades with numerous men, then yeah.... I think we could all agree on the fact that it's a satirical or a farce at best. Dialogue is made up, of course, even the dumbest American knows that. I just don't understand where the many comments are coming from all of a sudden, that's all.
I loved Harold Wilson, and I did a deep dive on who the female was in some of the scenes where he was given a proper dressing down. As a lowly American, none of this was on our radar. At first, I assumed it was his wife, but then I remembered them commenting that he was never married. Interesting stuff. And King George VI / Jared Harris - aka Lane Pryce from Mad Men - I'll always have a soft spot for him. His portrayals are so full of emotion covered up by the very-British Stiff Upper Lip. And, I know this will be highly controversial, but I did NOT like Olivia Coleman. I've loved her in many things, but I felt she mostly delivered a wet blanket performance. Claire Foy, on the other hand...... ooooof. I could FEEL her pulse quicken with fury while she held it all together. Brilliant performance.
I never want The Crown to end. Just like I never wanted Mad Men to end. They are the balm my soul needs.
Blogger Jocelyn'sBellinis said...
@jenn,
I've been following Bookworm 2 for about a year. She seems to be internet friends with most of the well-known anti-Harkle bloggers. I think she has a good head on her shoulders and is careful to let readers know what is fact or what is conjecture on her blog. That's all I know about her.
*************************************
Can you give a little more info re: Bookworm? I've tried googling, and all I get are sites that encourage reading, and one tawdry romance novel blog.... LOL
Thank you in advance!!
Here are all of Bookworm's videos.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCC6H-xh8UTbcCn5ntESzFFw/videos
Thanks for the links.
Despite the "flaming" headline about Sophie's "VERY expensive wardrobe," the article leads off discussing an outfit she wore to a reception for Queen Alexandra's Royal Army Nursing Corps at BP.
It cost £1,225 (~$1700) and included a £225 dress, a £415 pair of Prada shoes and a £100 pair of earrings and a jacket. A total price DM says is "not inconsiderable."
Frankly, that's not shocking to me (except that I'm not a shoe person so pricey shoes mystify me.) An outfit including shoes and jewelry that costs $1700? I could almost afford that for a very special occasion! (Assuming I'd probably wear all of the pieces lots more times, especially the shoes and the jewelry.) I certainly could afford a $310 dress. Not that I buy things that expensive often. At all. But that's hardly super-luxury. What should Sophie wear? The UK equivalent of Target? What should she (& Kate) be spending? They spent about the same that year ($7K difference isn't much for a year Kate was on maternity leave.) it seems to me some of the problem is that so much is new every year. Recycling or not, alot of new clothes are bought. The problem isn't $300 dresses but one-time use $300 dresses.
And why does it seem so many (most, not all) pap pictures occur when Harry is away? Dead frog Archie in Canada and this latest one (probably taken day before or day he got back)? All the solo paps of her in Canada were when he was away. Can't think of any paps of Harry until CA.
Finally, I don't believe Harry had any intention of staying for his granny's birthday (unless ££££ was offered) because of his lunch the day after he got back to LA. I'm assuming Wallis whatever doesn't drop everything to lunch with Harry on a whim. I would assume it was set up weeks before (while PP was still alive). Wonder what Wallis thought of Harry then?????
"Angel Flower" I bet. Total California woke versus English classical, I am guessing. But you can be sure she is seething with resentment that not only did Catherine steal her rightful engagement ring, Catherine was first with her daughter, and she appropriated Diana’s name too.
Something tells me she will go with alliterative name to match “Archie”.
Archewell will become Archangel wirh a website relaunch festooned pictues of oversized baby feet against clouds.
@Jenns
Enjoying “Cache of Clues” 👌
Love the old images.
I’m currently reading
Tea Time - Gina
dunking a ginger nut in my tea, perfick!
@Maneki
No re-entry, quick march out
Pass a Doobie 😉
Emmy Grammia Oscarina Tonia
How can you have a $10million deal with Spotify when you don't produce any podcasts?
As JH once said....”BOOM!”
@Ava C,
Thanks for the links.
Despite the "flaming" headline about Sophie's "VERY expensive wardrobe," the article leads off discussing an outfit she wore to a reception for Queen Alexandra's Royal Army Nursing Corps at BP.
It cost £1,225 (~$1700) and included a £225 dress, a £415 pair of Prada shoes and a £100 pair of earrings and a jacket. A total price DM says is "not inconsiderable."
Frankly, that's not shocking to me (except that I'm not a shoe person so pricey shoes mystify me.) An outfit including shoes and jewelry that costs $1700? I could almost afford that for a very special occasion! (Assuming I'd probably wear all of the pieces lots more times, especially the shoes and the jewelry.) I certainly could afford a $310 dress. Not that I buy things that expensive often. At all. But that's hardly super-luxury. What should Sophie wear? The UK equivalent of Target? What should she (& Kate) be spending? They spent about the same that year ($7K difference isn't much for a year Kate was on maternity leave.) it seems to me some of the problem is that so much is new every year. Recycling or not, alot of new clothes are bought. The problem isn't $300 dresses but one-time use $300 dresses.
FWIW, Lizzie, I agree. I looked at the price and was asking myself "whuuuut?" I've spent more on an ensemble 20 years ago.
Blogger tatty said...
I’m going with something bland and normal for their name choice— Mary-Alice Elizabeth Mountbatten-Windsor
*sigh* A couple of nieces were named after soap opera characters. Hopefully there are no soap operas anymore.
Perhaps she might use Ruth Joan Bader Ginsburg's name for inspiration?
PAGE SIX May have been the only outlet to run the most recent photo, but they seem to be having some snarky good fun at Markle's expense. In my newsfeed just now, directly under an article from Cosmo about how Catherine style is changing “as she prepares to become Queen, There are two from Page Six right after the other: Will Harry and Meghan Be Kicked Out of the Royal Family for good? And “20 celebrities who have used Surrogates”.
"As she prepares to become Queen"? Sounds like poor Charles and QE II are going to have a joint funeral!
@Hikari
Yes, Archangel, daughter of Archback
Agreed! One podcast using others' recordings shouldn't be worth much. I don't think the "real" numbers £ were released. But again if I were PC I'd say something along the lines (publicly) "delighted Harry and his wife are financially independent. It was their goal and they have achieved it spectacularly. Hence forth we will no longer fund them in any way and they. are responsible for their bills". Then PC smiles and walks away......
hee hee.
This is not the first scoop she has given to Page Six though I forget the earlier one/s. Page Six is certainly an east coast voice unlike all the others she seems to use. It is a strange outlet for her to choose and now I kinda wonder if the other ones wouldn't publish it?
I don't know. Page Six doesn't exactly run PR stories, they prefer to embarrass people if it's an option (hence the surrogate story placement ha!).
I've been considering the comparisons with Harry and the Duke of Windsor. Recall how DoW went to visit and hang out with Hitler when he was unhappy with the way BP treated him and his wife. I can picture Haz feeling rejected by his family, urged on by his wife, to make some shady deals with say, Chinese businesses or closely connected to Russian Oligarchs, or some other clandestine connections with big $$$ payouts in exchange for their appearances.
Thanks!😍
How about Ariel? ( Would make her stupid comment comparing herself to a Disney cartoon slightly more understandable. Well, not really, but can't you just see her teasing a name like that?!)
Does anyone doubt she'd name it Rachel after herself?
@JennS, your blog is fantastic, thank you for all the time and effort that went into it.
https://www.newsweek.com/tabloid-appeals-meghan-markles-victory-private-letter-lawsuit-1586318
************************************
I agree with those who think the prices for Sophie's clothing aren't out of line at all. They are very good prices for an occasion like that. I, too, have spent more than that on a nice outfit for an event. These are middle to upper middle class prices, not anything exorbitant.
************************
As for a name for the new "baby," how about Diana Warby Welby Windsor, since they seem to be such fans of hers.
Even without the statute, why hasn't Harry's wife sued over these photos, as she has done before?
Also, I noticed that Harry's wife just happened to take off her sunglasses when she is in full sun in the newest photo of her with Archie. Obviously, she did that wanting her face to be shown in the photos, which she knew were being taken.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUn1yRhTm2M
Off to bed now. Night, everybody.
I think Rachel is a lovely name but RMM rejected it for herself so I don’t think she likes it at all. It doesn’t sounds like she ever went by Rachel at school or within the family. I wonder if it is a family name in Thomas's family, As it really doesn’t seem like something Doria would choose on her own. Or Meghan, really. “Archie” was out of left field so I think this one is gonna have to be something equally unexpected.
Ralph,
Charles Spencer has a Charlotte Diana, too? If she was born in 2012, she’s only 3 years older than William’s Charlotte. Wonder if the Spencers are put out by that. Charlotte is a very common name for little English girls but having two cousins so close in age with the same name would be awkward at family reunions. Just as well that there will never be any family reunions. I think neither of Diana’s boys have anything to do with their Spencer relatives, despite the Spencer aunts being jammed into Archie’s christening photo. Something tells me Earl Spencer is not welcome in Windsor. Lady Jane and Lady Sarah may be welcome but if they were actually in that christening photo, I’ll eat a pinecone.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/california-recall-enough-signatures-ballot-222405217.html
Harrys wife is going to have a tough time latching onto his coat tails to make her White Jouse dreams come true.
"Hello, I would like to apply for the role of senior communications officer. I pride myself on my discretion."
https://www.lipstickalley.com/attachments/scobieheadshot-760x954-jpeg.2507265/
����
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9516349/DAN-WOOTTON-Kate-Middleton-forgiven-Harry-William-forgive-Meghan-Markle.html
"I think Rachel is a lovely name but RMM rejected it for herself so I don’t think she likes it at all. It doesn’t sounds like she ever went by Rachel at school or within the family. I wonder if it is a family name in Thomas's family..."
I agree with you Rachel is unlikely as a baby name. But I don't know if all you've written is true. In her high school yearbook MM was Rachel in 11th grade and Meghan in 12th grade.
https://theblast.com/meghan-markle-yearbook-photos-lawsuit/
Maybe the 11th grade listing was a typo?
I don't know if Rachel a family name from Thomas's side. I can't find it if it is. Going back (online including Wikipedia) to Thomas's great great great grandparents' generation, besides Thomas there are plenty of Biblical names to be found-- For example, Mary (and Maria), Anne (and Ann), Ruth, Issac, Jeremiah, Jacob, David, Moses, Sarah, Daniel, John, and Adam but no Rachel.
Them's some learned courtiers!
With no cash from Charles
Haps only got quarrels
And squabbling.
Not even any bling
Podcasts are very easy to assemble. They are so non-productive they cannot even manage this.
It was reported that Prince William calls his daughter “Mignonette” as an endearment. Overheard In the 2019 Flower Show video of them enjoying Catherine’s garden, uttered while he was pushing Charlotte on a swing.
Refers to “cracked pepper” in French, and originally referred to a sachet of spices used in cooking, ie, mignonette sauce.
To annoy the Cambridges and try to keep getting the attention of the Marvel casting agents, maybe M will choose Pepper Potts as the name.
What does mignonette mean in French?
The name Mignonette means Favorite, Darling and is of French origin. Mignonette is a name that's been used primarily by parents who are considering baby names for girls. Diminutive form of the name Mignon.
Darling sounds more affectionate than calling Charlotte a cracked pepper! LOL
Now hun, do we want M to stride forth from the Days Inn with a baby named sweetly "darling" or, cracked pepper? I will even settle for Lamb or Meatbite.
from
https://www.recipetips.com/glossary-term/t--37553/mignonette.asp
1. A very small, round tender piece of meat that is generally an inch or so in diameter. This term is most often used in reference to lamb meat and may also be called a medallion of lamb or a noisette.
2. A coarsely ground mixture of peppercorns, seasonings such as coriander and occasionally herbs which is referred to as Mignonette Pepper. Both white and black peppercorns are commonly mixed together to make the spice. It is most often used to enhance the flavor of roasted meat such as beef, lamb, veal, or poultry.
3. A term used to describe a type of sauce made with a sherry vinegar, peppercorns, possibly wine, and minced shallots.
Back to the Biblical names on Thomas's side. I looked up Rachel (no, it doesn't mean Darling). Rachel was someone who competed with her older sister and used surrogates. Here we go, be prepped to faint, my little mignonettes:
When Jacob goes to Mesopotamia to find a wife from his mother’s family (the line of Terah), he meets the shepherd Rachel at a well. He waters her flock, kisses her, and announces their kinship, for Jacob is both Laban’s nephew (through his mother Rebekah) and his second cousin (through his father). Rachel runs home to tell of his presence, and Laban invites Jacob to the house (Gen 29:9–14). Jacob loves Rachel and arranges to marry her and to work seven years as her bride wealth. At the wedding, however, Laban substitutes Leah, his older daughter, for Rachel. Explaining that it was not the custom to give the younger in marriage first, he promises Rachel to Jacob at the end of the week of the wedding feast, on the proviso that Jacob work another seven years to pay off a second bride price (Gen 29:15–30).
Like Sarah and Rebekah before her, Rachel experiences a long period of barrenness. The infertility of the matriarchs has two effects: it heightens the drama of the birth of the eventual son, marking Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph as special; and it emphasizes that pregnancy is an act of God. For when God “saw that Leah was unloved, he opened her womb” (Gen 29:31), giving Leah four sons (Gen 29:32–35). Rachel, envious of her sister, forcefully demands children from Jacob: “Give me children or I shall die!” (Gen 30:1). Jacob is incensed, declaring that he can do nothing because it is God who has denied Rachel children (Gen 30:2). As a consequence of her demand, Jacob agrees to her plan, to give Bilhah, whom her father had given her (Gen 29:29), to Jacob as a wife. Jacob already has children, but Rachel herself wishes to acquire children through her surrogate (as does Bilhah). The plan works, and Rachel names the child Dan, explaining “God judged [that is, vindicated] me” (Gen 30:5–6). Still competing with her sister, Rachel has Bilhah bear another son, whom she names Naphtali (meaning “I have prevailed”), in reference to the “contest” with her sister that she has been waging and winning (Gen 30:7–8).
The competition between the sisters/co-wives continues as Leah gives her maid Zilpah in turn. Despite the birth of children to these surrogates, Rachel and Leah still want to conceive their own. A turning point comes when Leah’s son Rueben finds mandrakes. A mandrake root, which looks like a newborn baby, was often considered a fertility charm and an aphrodisiac. Rachel wants the mandrakes, and she has something that Leah wants even more than mandrakes. She has occupancy of Jacob’s bed and trades a night with Jacob for the mandrakes. When they reach an agreement, Leah announces to Jacob that she has “hired” him (Gen 30:14–16). Co-wives are normally rivals, which is perhaps why biblical law forbids a man from marrying sisters (Lev 18:18). But when the co-wives cooperate, Jacob, like other husbands, complies with their wishes.
https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/rachel-bible
All that talk of tender sweet lambs has made me think of M as a scraggy old piece of mutton.
LOL!!! yes! perfect!!!! -- like that classic fashion world jibe, "She's mutton dressed as lamb"!
Yay! We are experiencing "Nutty Mind Meld" like Vulcan Mind Meld (Star Trek), only way better!
Perhaps we can concentrate now, and enter her mind and make her name the baby "Shishkabob" instead of "Diana"?
Kate's country casuals! Duchess dons her trusty khaki jacket and £475 boots she's had for 17 YEARS as she clambers on to a tractor and pets lambs on farm visit...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9516197/Kate-Middleton-Prince-William-visit-farm.html
Kate seems to be getting lots of positive PR in the run up to her anniversary.
Hahahaha!!! Not sure my laptop screen will survive much longer at this rate. 😄😅😆
Love mignonette. They look so lacy and pretty in a garden esp in a breeze, and smell so heavenly. I think they are included in the blend of Houbigant's old QuelQues Fleurs.
"Small and fringed creamy-white flowers deliver a wonderful spicy-sweet perfume. Blooms are carried in dense spikes from mid-summer until frost. Fresh or dried, White mignonette is an excellent cut flower, and even retains fragrance."
This does not strike me as a good move on Andrews part: going into business with another who had to step down over sexual abuse allegations.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9514755/Prince-Andrew-sets-firm-banker-resigned-following-storm-sexual-harassment-claims.html
@Hikari
The Chinette piece was hilarious!
A good name for Hs daughter would be Jocasta.
HA! That is the third time in a week that I swear the DM are reading here.
Come on, DM dears! We love you! Start mining our more shocking, in-depth findings too! Hire @JennS and her crocodile file!
Maybe the palace press team and Royal Foundation CEO Jason Knauf are so fed up and annoyed about M's crying and bullying lies (allegedly), that they finally decided to go full throttle to support Catherine's brand.
PS: Can't you see Harry cooing "my little Shishkabob is only three months old, but she's walking!" on the next Oprah?
The surrogate sisters!!!
That is a little freaky. Perhaps TM is prescient.
#VaxLive is almost here! On May 8, join us, @SelenaGomez, Prince Harry and Meghan, Duke and Duchess of Sussex, @JLo, @FooFighters, and more for a show with big names and an even bigger message: everyone, everywhere deserves access to a COVID-19 vaccine. http://glblctzn.me/gcvaxlive
https://twitter.com/GlblCtznCAN/status/1387014671471943680
You have made me want to hunt down my bottle of QuelQues Fleurs! I am quite the perfume tart, ( 100s of bottles ) but haven't worn it in a while and want to see if I can make out the mignonette.
"I was a hostage!!! I couldn't go anywhere!! Except to Amsterdam, France, Canada, New York, Australia, New Zealand, Tonga. And the offices of Vogue and the offices of SmartWorks and to the post to send gowns back to Messica. And to Africa and to Uncle Elton's and the US Open. Without my passport, I had no way to be free until I flew to Canada without a passport to escape in the belly of Amal Clooney's private jet -- well, yes, this makes the Clooney's guilty of smuggling an undocumented passenger, which is why I have hired her as my Human Rights Lawyer to sue England, the Queen, and Jason!"
Here's the tape in this article. I've always heard Will asking Charlotte "Have you been on it?" What do others hear?
https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/entertainment/a27542202/prince-william-princess-charlotte-video/
I love perfume too! But I only have a few currently due to allergies. I find the classics more comfortable to wear.
Due to the much-too-soon passing of designer Alber Elbaz this week, I was thinking about this one:
https://perfumesociety.org/tag/alber-elbaz/
And this article about his concept of fragrance creation...I love the headline which I think was a direct knock on Coco by Chanel....
https://www.wmagazine.com/story/alber-elbaz-frederic-malle-superstitious-fragrance