Well, well, well.
The news is coming out that she might not be the most reliable of sources for information. (who would have thunk it?) And that she did, in fact, cooperate with the authors of the Finding Freedom book (really?). And that recollections may vary (with emails and texts to back things up).
Do you think the appeal will overturn the prior judgement?
If it doesn't, do you think her reputation of accuracy will be damaged long term? Sometimes wounds may not kill short term but do the damage long term enough to bring them down.
Could this damage her attempts for a trajectory of the new humanitarian shining star?
How do you think it will play out on Netflix? Or will it if it goes against her?
Comments
Ouch! And after all the $$$ Chas has given them. Ouch!
That cow would throw anyone under the bus to save one of her many faces!
I agree 100%!!
Man, you won't believe what x said to me! And then xx said...
So hard one by. Both of them.
Sorry folks. I'm really late to the party. :)
No idea if Page Six is reliable..
https://pagesix.com/2021/11/12/prince-harry-meghan-markle-stayed-at-un-building-in-nyc/?utm_source=P6Twitter&utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_medium=SocialFlow
Charles is the royal who advised her to write to her father, and the other royal mentioned would be?
https://archive.ph/SWWsE
Note the fury of the narc who cannot tolerate anyone telling her what to do. Note also that she shifts blame to Harry and Charles.
What I think really happened:
She had Harry riled up about coverage of her family in the media. She had ghosted everyone except Doria and as far as the narc was concerned, they no longer had the right to exist unless they were of use to her.
She was playing the victim, of her family and the media. Harry was exploding everywhere because 'he had to protect his wife'.
Charles was sympathetic but suggested that the best way to address the situation was to visit her father (he was probably bemused as to why Harry had never even met her father). When they refused to even consider doing that, he suggested writing a letter. It was the Harkles who bleated about Thomas engaging with the press (they are victims) and Charles would have rightly and tupically described the situation as 'bloody awful'. He was expressing sympathy, not complaining.
I suspect that the second royal was Camilla and Charles asked her to step in as he was at the end of his tether.
Do you think Charles calls in Andrew and tells him to make Sarah stop engaging with the media and talking about the royal family while promoting her historical romance book (or whatever product she is promoting)?
I'm sure I read somewhere that it was the Queen herself!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10195709/Meghan-Markle-texted-aide-say-Harry-faced-constant-berating-royal-family.html
I'm sure the whole family is more relaxed now that they've seen the back of them. I just pray they don't let them come back!
------------
Doesn't sound like she ever visited her father, either.
He moved to Mexico in 2011. She said that she had never been to his residence in Mexico. Doesn't sound like he traveled much, being a recluse, and a leg injury in 2015.
So I'm that thinking that she hasn't seen him at a minimum since 2011. Five or six years?
With all of her money, she couldn't go see daddy every few months?
https://www.businessinsider.com/meghan-markles-dad-is-a-total-recluse-living-in-a-cliff-top-house-in-mexico-2017-12
“Even if they choose not to use it, they should hear what it was like from someone who was in the thick of it.
“So if you aren’t planning on telling them, can I ?!”'
(in the Mirror)
So what exactly had she been through? Woe is me.
And Doria (DM article) felt unsafe because of those "egregious paps". TBW doesn't seem to find them egregious. And she can't spell, saying that if TM leaks the letter, 'then that's on his conscious'.
May this be the beginning of the end.
I laughed yesterday when I saw the (sic) after the word conscious!
Whip smart, my arse! LOL
Maneki Neko - thats what a Northwestern education gets you ;-)
Even after a week with his dad and endlessly explaining the situation, his family seem to forget the context - and revert to 'can't she just go and see him and make this stop'
I wonder if H made the same accusation against Thomas to his family that the emissary did to Lady C?
https://mobile.twitter.com/BarkJack/with_replies
-----
What we know: Markle ran a PR scheme (“5 friends defence)” by Palace Officials who were dead set against it. Meghan went & did it anyway.
-----
However, if this is true, why did ANL not present evidence from Jason? They planned to put forward the case in the original trial that Meghan orchestrated the People article. Would such evidence not support the claim that she wanted the letter to be published, and thus her privacy claim is questionable?
OFF THE MARK-LE Meghan Markle’s biggest fashion faux pas – from terrible tailoring to tags, stylist reveals her simple style slip ups
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/16717652/meghan-markle-biggest-fashion-faux-pas/
It's not her day, is it?
As Meghan apologises for misleading a British court, we reveal the lengths to which staff went to save the Sussexes from themselves
By Camilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR
12 November 2021 • 7:40pm
Full article here:
https://archive.ph/fYOQ1
What the fluff is going on, surely the Americans know that is wrong. They do not represent the UK.
Thank you for posting the video of the Thomas Markle interview. I must admit that I had not watched any previous interviews with him. I tried a couple of times, in the early days, but gave up because I felt so sorry for him. This one was much easier. He comes across as a well spoken, kind and decent man. He is clearly at a loss for why his daughter turned her back on him and he definitely thinks Harry is a fool.
I so hope that Thomas is vindicated and that all of Meghan and Harry’s lies are revealed in their own text and email messages. That would be a satisfying victory!
I actually wrote to them and the answer was; it was requested and approved ,You don't do that if you have anyone from another country!! Only if they represent the other country, or represent the Queen!!!These two are nobodies and they are also Not from another country!!
You are very welcome ☺️
Thanks for the fantastic Difficult Duchess link. I learned a lot more about that whole situation. I hadn't kept at it but glad I am catching up. 👍🙌
I don't know whether ANL will win. It looks as though it will be decided on some carefully applied narrow point of law. ANL has to show that Warby made a mistake in the law. I've watched a bit of the proceedings, & it seemed at one point that Justice Vos, the presiding judge, was begging QC Caldecott, ANL's lawyer, for some simple clear point of law which showed Warby had made a mistake. Caldecott admitted that the case was complex. ANL's position is that roughly that * had instigated hurtful remarks about her father in the press with her machinations, (they tried to avoid the word 'defamatory'), & Mr. Markle had the right to reply. Caldecott spent a lot of one day painstakingly citing case law which showed how someone could lose the protection of Article 8, Britain's strict privacy laws. He seemed to be trying to convince the judge that because of *'s withholding evidence, Warby was not fully informed when he granted the summary judgement. I don't know whether Caldecott met the threshold of proof, but I thought everyone was doing their best to take the whole mess seriously & do a decent job.
That being said, I think *'s credibility is pretty shot. She's just one of many obnoxious celebs in the US, & no one is very interested in her, but apparently on Morning Joe, a fairly left leaning talk show on very woke MSNBC, covered the court case recently, & said * had lied. Joe Scarborough, the host used the word 'lie' three times. If * has lost MSNBC, she's done.
The Knauf emails are hilarious, & I could go on & on about their implications, but two things about some of the more recently released ones impressed me. 1) When the RF, not exactly a 'normal' family, but a reasonably close one despite all the exotic privilege, wanted * to just talk to her own father, like a 'normal' person, she flipped her lid, & whined to poor Jason, & implied that the RF was being completely unreasonable.
2) Her emails clearly state that she wrote the letter so that she could cut off communication with her dad, and, in spite of the fact that she's suing because the Mail apparently printed too much of the letter's text, she admits that she deliberately wrote a letter by hand so it couldn't be cut & pasted like an email. I can only hope the judges can see the irony. This case is the gift that keeps on giving.
In the emails to Knauf, * also mentions "how much pain this is causing H." Her berating didn't just annoy him, but also hurt him . . . and she was 100% aware of it.
------
Kinda like she won't just accept that no one likes her?
She has to keep explaining until we do.
Is there likely to be any backlash from the media, the government or the monarchy? The Sussexes were there to represent themselves and their commercial interests in America. Stripped of his royal roles, Harry holds no special position in the armed forces and the Sussexes in no way represent the monarchy or the British people. Harry is still patron of the Invictus Games, but he was not there in that capacity.
I think the whole affair was a huge breach of protocol, followed by the royal visit the next day.
Should the UK ambassador step in and talk to some people at a higher level?
In my country, the defence force does not do engagements with celebrities (actually, the poor sods don't even get glitzy gala dinners or concerts). They are there for opening of parliament each year and for important state funerals, otherwise they pretty much get on with doing their job without fanfare.
My hunch is the Sussexes have gone scorch earth rogue and their shennanigans are going to get worse unless someone finds a way to stop them.
And of course it's the ones who don't accept the "explanations" who are in the wrong. Possibly because we're all racist misogynists.
One of these days she'll fall into her hole.
The "endlessly explaining" to the RF. Sounds more like she was the one constantly berating any member of the RF.
That being said, I think *'s credibility is pretty shot. She's just one of many obnoxious celebs in the US, & no one is very interested in her, but apparently on Morning Joe, a fairly left leaning talk show on very woke MSNBC, covered the court case recently, & said * had lied. Joe Scarborough, the host used the word 'lie' three times. If * has lost MSNBC, she's done.
Lol. That's rich! I'll have to look for that clip. Thanks for the tea :)
____
I can attest to the majority of Americans not caring one iota about TBW and her balless wonder of a husband (this explains why I am here, as I was so cordially(!) asked a few weeks ago). And yes they are obnoxious as H.
So true, we are constantly bombarded with obnoxious "celebrities", lately Adele being one of them with her shameless PR stunts and her caterwalling she calls singing. My oldest sister was complaining that now Oprah is pushing Adele on us. She's a fan of the Big O. Ugh.
I'm sick to the back teeth of Adele and James Cordon as well as the duke and duchess of Who The F Cares...
So far the only thing I can find on MSNBC and ANL discussion is a post on LSA's Meghan Markle Unpopular Opinions thread stating as such. No receipts as of yet, but dang, that place is a G.O.L.D M.I.N.E.
:D
To me, there is something do sad about all this. Megsy is so sloppy with details and likes to turn up for the speech and for photographs but hates doing the hard work over many years. She found the perfect environment where she had access to huge wealth and global fame that she would never get through her own hustling, but also where she had an entire staff to protect her and cover up for her and take care of all the details for her. She didn't have to wear inappropriate and ill fitting clothes because she could have had an assistant who would make sure that did not happen. Camilla, Sophie, Catherine are not silenced and play a significant role in the causes they support.r
Meghan Markled herself!
The Body Language Guy:
https://youtu.be/cYLK_rMeimY
River has a couple of new videos:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHI8xE-za9g7lUu3JefJQ9Q&ved=2ahUKEwiJkfi9yJT0AhWRoFwKHXppCPEQFnoECAgQBw&usg=AOvVaw0-zQFzD-zMRaeTBxY4Ub5I
New Palace Confidential show:
https://www.mailplus.co.uk/tv/palace-confidential
Part 1
Speaking her truth’ has been one of Meghan Markle’s USPs – and what an absolute disaster it’s been, leading inevitably to the low point she has now reached this week, after she apologised to the Court of Appeal for ‘forgetting’ information about the Finding Freedom biography. For there are not different truths for different people; there is one true version of events.
The Windsor’s motto ‘Never complain, never explain’ was thought to have been introduced by the Queen Mother in 1936. A few years before she said, when it was suggested that the princesses Elizabeth and Margaret should be evacuated to a safer place like many British children of the time, that ‘the children won't leave without me. I won't leave without the King – and the King will never leave.’ This was probably one of the most outstanding examples of duty on the part of a ruling family ever witnessed, and one which has been practised to the nth degree by the Queen. This is one of the reasons why even blood-thirsty republicans such as myself admire her. She has carried out her work without complaint for 70 of her 95 years, understanding that massive privilege negates the right to complain. The never explaining bit is more problematic and can make her seem remote. But imagine if she did step in, sleeves rolled up like the late Barbara Windsor in EastEnders, to defend one of her ghastly sons: ‘My boy nevver touched ‘er - ‘e’s a good boy, ‘e is!’ It would be hilarious – but very unQueenly.
Meghan Markle, on the other hand, was raised in California, a place where letting it all out is presumed to be healthy. At first I found Meghan refreshing; it was lovely to see a woman marrying into such a staid family declaring herself a feminist, and indeed more than 70 female MPs wrote an open letter castigating the media for its misogynistic treatment of this multi-cultural breath of fresh air. When the Duchess won her case against Associated Newspapers, which publishes the Mail on Sunday, many fair-minded people believed that justice had been done.
How naive this seems now. Though the Duchess had been assumed to have quit her acting career in order to spend more time with her merchandise (Lilibet Diana Ltd becoming a beloved younger sister to Archewell Inc) perhaps she was actually performing her most convincing role yet; that of a loving daughter unwillingly estranged from her darling dad, distraught when the clammy claws of the press got their hands on private correspondence.
But now her former communications secretary, Jason Knauf, has thrillingly blabbed that the letter the duchess wrote to her father appeared to have been stage-managed for public performance, having texted him ‘Obviously everything I have drafted is with the understanding that it could be leaked, so I have been meticulous in my word choice.’ And then of course her poor addled dad hit back; it’s like when the Beatles broke up and John and Paul kept recording bitchy songs about each other rather than sit down in a room and have it out.
When Diana: Her True Story was published, we knew right away that the princess had whispered directly into Andrew Morton’s ear; you could hear her troubled yet brave voice clearly. Similarly, the sickly fan-fawn Finding Freedom, though ostensibly written independently by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, carried the see-how-I-suffer stamp of the Duchess’s expensively-shod foot all over it.
And now, despite her denial of any involvement with the book, the Duchess has had her memory jogged after Mr Knauf testified that the book was discussed ‘on a routine basis’ by the Duchess. Some particularly sickening messages from Markle to Knauf on calling her father ‘daddy’: ‘Given I’ve only ever called him daddy it may make sense… and in the unfortunate event that it leaked it would pull at the heartstrings’. And: I ‘toiled over every detail which could be manipulated... and if he leaks it then that’s on his conscious (sic) but at least the world will know the truth. Words I could never voice publicly.’ She also appears to have briefed the authors on her relationship with her half-siblings, including that her half-sister Samantha had lost custody of all three of her children by different fathers, which Samantha disputes. Let’s hear it for sisterhood!
The Duchess has provided several excuses for denying any contact with Scobie and Durand during the Associated Newspapers case. But I think it more likely that she is habitually ‘perpetuating falsehoods’ as she so ickily accused the Royal Family of doing during the Oprah interview, without even knowing she’s doing it. When she claimed that she and Prince Harry had had a private wedding before the nasty big common one that supposedly cost us plebs £30 million, was she telling the truth? When she said she had never had any interest in the British Royal Family, was she being honest? Her close childhood friend Ninaki Priddy has said, ‘The Royal Family was something she found fascinating. She had Diana: Her True Story on her bookshelf. I wasn’t shocked or even surprised to hear about Prince Harry. I know she used to love The Princess Diaries — films about a commoner who becomes part of a Royal Family. She was very taken with that idea.’
Markle has used, albeit amateurishly, many people on her rise to – well, what? The Sussex cred is rapidly falling in celebrity circles; the Royal Family are reportedly disgusted by the Netflix deal which will take the dollar from the company which made The Crown.
Dishonourably, Markle has used the very real evils of racism and misogyny to conceal her true mission – ceaseless promotion of herself to a level of sainthood, or at least Oprah-hood. But the curtain has been pulled aside and, as with the Wizard of Oz, we see the C-list actress, growing old in a profession obsessed with youth, manipulating a damaged and dim young man for her own ends. In short, what I memorably named ‘The Grabdication.’
The Telegraph writes: ‘Her admission that she misled the court in a sworn statement also raises the issue of whether she committed perjury though legal experts suggest her actions have not crossed the threshold for what is a criminal offence that carries a maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment’ – giving the possibility of being detained at Her Majesty’s Pleasure an entirely new spin. Either way, recollections will be unlikely to vary when Meghan Markle goes down in history.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/meghan-has-been-found-out
That really was a great article you posted! Thanks :)
“There's been criticism of Meghan for getting involved in politics and now we are seeing the possibility that Prince Harry himself has been getting involved.”
He added: “I think that the idea that he is some sort of political adviser is interesting.
“What's also quite interesting is that he says that that's the last time he ever heard from Jack Dorsey.
“I’m not sure why they would be taking political advice or even business advice from Prince Harry.
(bolding mine)
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1520710/prince-harry-twitter-jack-dorsey-capitol-riots-queen-royal-family
-----
Am I reading that right and Dorsey basically dropped H after his "warning"?
Harry himself said so... in a video clip.
Joking apart, who else suspects her nasal septum is/has been under attack?
Quote from the Julie Birchill
piece.
---
When Lady C opens her vids with the song "Letter to Daddy" from Whatever Happened to Baby Jane, I get such a chuckle, but also a chill...
What a foreboding view of her future as a nobody duchess on paper only. That and Gloria Swanson's "Sunset Strip". Her fading away into obscurity in her Montecito Mansion, Harry the prince of Darkness long gone.
I posted a good while back how the whole saga of the two is captured in a black and white photo of Wallis as an demented old woman dressed in black clothing sitting in the window of her "palace" looking like a lost old blackbird.
(I can't help but wonder if she* will be buried at Frogmore, carted to her graveside in the car she rode to her wedding. Or maybe stuffed and promoted and propped in front of the gates of Buckingham Palace with a derby at her feet to collect tourist coins).
Oh the irony of the thought: her bright, young self clinging to those gates, dreaming of a life with a Prince of the realm.
Wallis whom it is said didn't want the wife role as much as the mistress. Meghan who clawed, spit and scraped for her role in the Firm only for it to swallow her whole. Coming to a theatre near you lol.
Awesome article @Maneki. Thanks.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10198233/Harry-Meghan-visit-Afghan-refugee-families-military-base-son-Archies-favourite-song.html
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2021/11/13/public-appearances-photos-and-pr-while-knauf-talks/
Thanks for the latest. As usual, it's to keep the focus on themselves. I bet they'd never heard of Dari before their visit. And they had to mention the invisible Archie 🙄
Harry and Meghan visit Afghan refugee families at US military base and reveal two-year-old son Archie's favourite song is 'heads, shoulders, knees and toes'
@Miggy: The refugee visit serves as nothing more than useful filler for the Harkles. They are desperate to come up with content for Netflix, but essentially, this will be like the coverage on Entertainment Tonight or any if the other Hollywood/celebrity shows that show softball interviews and fawning news clips of celebrities at charity events such as the military gala earlier this week in New York or completely manufactured custom photo ops like this visit or the Harlem school visit.
These allow them to exert nearly total control at one-off photo ops masquerading as news and humanitarian compassion. But at the core, these are explicitly created for and tailored to the Harkles’ specific image enhancement requirements.
They are using the refugees as props. Remember that narcissists like Meghan view ALL people as objects to be used. They are tossed away when no longer useful. My guess is that as some token of appreciation to enhance their humanitarian creds, a donation, perhaps made via one of their sponsors like Procter and Gamble to the refugees in the photo op or to some wider pawn organization such as the United Nations.
But be sure that Harry and Meghan will be by far the ones who benefit the most because the get image points and have a $125 million contract with Netflix.
Beatrice Cardenas
@RealBetyCardens
·
20h
We have an exiled member of the UK royals on our soils attempting to silence Americans. This is a BIG DEAL. As their current UK lawsuit shows, they operate w deception & using other people.
All members of Congress need to be aware
@SenGillibrand @SenatorCollins
https://twitter.com/RealBetyCardens?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
Does she have any influence ?
Checked in to ask a question (why the pseudo royal appearances and mini tours ... it comes across to me as quite disturbing) and found your post, answering my question!
And thanks to you too for your post.
Beatrice Cardenas is a Republican so this is why she's going after them. She's on Facebook as well.
I don't care what position she takes. Whatever it takes to bring them down bwahaha😏
Of course they hadn't...they had to ask the teachers! lol
And they had to mention the invisible Archie
Little Archie, who's probably not so little anymore! I wonder when they will finally mention their daughter? I remember posting on here that I'd read someone say that under CA Surrogacy Laws... a photo of the child can't be published until 6 months has passed by. (or something similar) I have no idea if that's factual... but if a pic does happen to pop up in the very near future... then one has to wonder!
The trip this week is meant to distract from the court case and Remembrance Day.
Yes, they're in full-on distraction mode now. It will be interesting to see what they scramble to wave in our faces.
@HappyDays
They are using the refugees as props. Remember that narcissists like Meghan view ALL people as objects to be used.
At least the schoolchildren in Harlem had their parents to stand up for them. And of course anyone who was filmed or secretly recorded at the UN would be lawyered up to the gills. But the refugees are totally at the Harkles' mercy here.
On the bright side, at least we've learned which new bandwagon they've decided to hop on next. Though if this is a temporary distraction, we at least see how they think. Are there other groups of people they can take advantage of for their documentary?
I agree! 😁
On an American Military Base by two private citizens? Who are using it to profit for themselves?
Filming people without permission is abusive and an attack.
Marjorie Orr, British astrologer, has an interesting post today, re: * and husband.
MEGHAN's COMEUPPANCE/WILLIAM releases KNAUF 2 speak/FATHER'S REPLY 2 her LIES/The JUDAS KISS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyCYvjGxT_4
At the recent Salute to Freedom event, someone confronted H and maybe M as well about them being there.
There are pictures of a man being held back.
He was told to go back home.
Also a vetron who was expected to be honored refused to attend..
I was just this minute reading about that on LSA. It definitely looks as if the guy is being held back from saying something to H. Also, have you seen the video of them entering the room where they're all sitting at the tables? There's very mild applause... and then nothing! (even with a screen welcoming the DOS & Prince Harry and prompting them to clap!)
Notice also... her name came first!
------
I was wondering why there were only 4 honorees when it had been said to be 5 beforehand.
It's unfortunate that Bon Jovi was getting a lifetime achievement award there, and no mention of that particularly. All overshadowed by the Harkles.
The only place I saw that was on FB which had a copy of a tweet with a photo of the guy who looks like he is getting in H's face and a couple of arms are out holding him back. I am hearing that Sunshine Sachs is a big contributor to the event. Honestly, as an American, I'm so angry about what these two are allowed to get away with. And now they are getting involved in our politics and military.
https://variety.com/2021/music/spotlight/intrepid-museum-gala-jon-bon-jovi-iheartradio-bob-pittman-veterans-1235105256/
I just checked @NaomiSky15's Twitter feed and there are no photos. There are also only four tweets, which date back to October. Did you mean a different user?
Yes I did see that video...
As she doesn't hold a title in her own right, wondered why her name came first.
Forgetting the two frauds,.. America has hosted members of the royal family over many years.
Why is it now that they have no idea about protocol.
I was wondering why there were only 4 honorees when it had been said to be 5 beforehand.
It's unfortunate that Bon Jovi was getting a lifetime achievement award there, and no mention of that particularly. All overshadowed by the Harkles.
Well, this really shows what the gala's priorities are. How sad and insulting to the honorees who actually deserved it.
@Artemesia19
I am hearing that Sunshine Sachs is a big contributor to the event. Honestly, as an American
If so, it just gets worse and worse. This means the organizers accepted what was essentially a bribe to shove Ginge and Cringe forward at the expense of two people whom the event was supposed to be about.
What may have been a short-term win will result in long-term losses. Their popularity will sink even further. And for what? The ugliest dress of the year!
He and his wife contribute time, money, energy. Show up appropriately dressed, appropriately humble.
All to be overshadowed by Markle with her boobs out.
Notice also... her name came first!
I've been noticing this since they were both working royals and the obviousness of it is breathtaking. Does * really think that having her name come before him will con people into believing she is more important and more popular than he?
The first thing that actually registers is the awkwardness of it. When a couple is introduced, we're used to hearing the man's name come first, as in "Mr. and Mrs. ___" -- because, as @D1 pointed out, the women usually take their husband's last names and (when applicable) titles.
Now, I can think of exceptions, when it would be proper for a woman's name to be said first. For instance, if she were the reason why the couple were at an event. But the entire world knows that the only reason * even got an invitation was that she married into royalty. If either of them is the reason for the invitation, it is he. And yet her name comes first again. Causing so much cognitive dissonance in even the most neutral hearers that her narcissism is exposed yet again.
Bonjovi is the real deal. A very smart man. He and actor Gary Sinese have done a geat deal for veterans and they don't have a camera crew following them around. They do their work quietly.
Also, have you seen the video of them entering the room where they're all sitting at the tables? There's very mild applause... and then nothing! (even with a screen welcoming the DOS & Prince Harry and prompting them to clap!)
@Brandon, let's go
Many military members have hearing loss from their service. That wasn’t a prompt to applaud. It was closed captioning for hearing impaired.
Fair enough, but the question remains: Was the applause as unenthusiastic as Miggy described it? If so, the hearing impaired attendees would have been all in on the message.
I just read a lot and then follow a lead.
Thanks! I'm looking at the photo now and withholding judgment until we know more. Yes, the expression on the man's face and the positions of other people's hands makes it look as if he is berating Harry and being held back. But I'd also like to see video or perhaps get a version of events from a source who was there.
Thanks for the new link, Lady C
____
@15:04 she says concering TBWs stating she didn't remember certain details about the letter to daddy, she is flat out lying because she remembered as an 11 year old every detail of a letter she wrote to Proctor and Gamble and who remembers the price of salad in a bar(at Sizzler) back in the day. BOOM! Lol...
Well, we know she makes up all the preposterous details as she goes along.
Rachel Campos-Duffy
@RCamposDuffy
·
1h
How did these two get permission to go on a base to meet with refugee CHILDREN & their PR team@with cameras?? Ted Cruz & other members of Congress had difficulty getting access to inspect conditions of child detention centers at our southern border.
It will be interesting to see how it pans out. https://youtu.be/Nxuf5_VckHU
Bonjovi is the real deal. A very smart man. He and actor Gary Sinese have done a geat deal for veterans and they don't have a camera crew following them around. They do their work quietly.
----
Exactly. Isn't that how H said good works should be done?
And then H completely takes over an event honoring people who have quietly done good deeds.
Really frosts me that he claims to be friends with BonJovi...and then does this to him. Did H ever even acknowledge the BonJovis? Or the award he was given?
Beatrice Cardenas bit her child’s lip on Thanksgiving day and was hauled into court for parental abuse. She received 17% of the vote in the election she ran for. This is in the public record if you google. She is a horrible person.
___
Eww poor kid. That's horrible. Ugh. Politicians.
I don't care one twat about this politician (maybe you know I am apolitical-GO Kevin Costner!) BUT if she helps bring down the House of Montecito then yay.
Whatever it takes.
The Sussexes had at least one still photographer with them on the trip because some of the photos from the military gala that appeared in the Daily Mail were copyrighted images that the DM credited to Archewell and the images contained a copyright notice of “©PA” in the bottom left corner of the photo. My guess PA is short for Photo Archewell or something similar.
In addition to at least one still photographer, they most likely had at least one more person to shoot video and perhaps someone doing sound.
***********************
The first blind item listed on Crazy Days and Nights today:
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2021
Blind Item #1
There were multiple veterans at an event this week that had to be restrained when they told the ginger haired one to go back home.
***********************
I hope the people who allowed these two to appear realize they were being used for commercial purposes by Harry and his puppet master to generate content because they are under pressure to cough up useful content for their $125 million contract with Netflix.
I plan to contact members of the Armed Services Committee in the US Senate and the US House of Representatives to voice my displeasure at the United States military being used for commercial purposes that will benefit the Sussexes far more than any of the people who appear in their copyrighted content for the financial gain of the Sussexes.
If they want to portray themselves as cheerleaders for the military, they should do it in the UK where Harry was a member of the military and not force themselves upon the military here.
Oh wait, they probably wouldn’t be allowed to parade around with their own photo and video team for commercial purposes with military service members in the UK.
Head
Lowered
Kneels
And Blows…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10198749/William-Kate-join-Charles-Camilla-years-Festival-Remembrance.html
The royal family is ‘frustrated’ after the Duchess of Sussex was forced to apologise for misleading a court
https://archive.ph/sBXyQ
US showbiz reporter Kinsey Schofield asks is Meghan Markle a 'liar'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ7Sz4CQyak
@Maneki @Miggy
Great articles from
Julie Burchill, Roya Nikkhah
Thanks 😊
Tilly the Con
Little Myth Silly
Also known as
Tripe Tilly
Casting untruths
willy nilly
Her mouth always moving
Not in sync with her truthing
Lip Lying Meme Vanilli*
*Milli Vanilli Lip syncing scandal
PA is the standard abbreviation for the former Press Association, a British news agency with a good reputation for reliability, more or less on a par with Reuters, I gather. See https://www.pressassociation.com/news/.
Nothing to do with Archewell - Daily Mail is involved with it, so no friend of Meghan!
Now we see why royals shouldn’t scrap with commoners in court: it just isn’t a fair fight
When does royalty stop being royalty? Answer: when everything is dragged through the courts. For centuries the family has avoided this form of scrutiny, not only because it is embarrassing but because of the awkward grey areas it creates and the basic bad messaging.
You can’t pretend to be above everything — neutral, apolitical, even godly — if you are scrapping with the plebs in some lowly court. But, similarly, is any royal ever truly treated like an ordinary citizen? Mix royals and legal proceedings and it is a recipe for serious anger and a sense that justice is not being done. For example: in the case between the Duchess of Sussex and The Mail on Sunday, do you really think Meghan is going to be treated like a normal person, or a duchess?
They were at it again last week: the paper supplied new evidence in its appeal against the ruling in Meghan’s favour in February. To say the material given by her former press officer at Kensington Palace was dynamite is to totally understate how much he confirmed what some of us already suspected about this grasping, image-obsessed couple. They’re just like everyone else, is what they’re always telling us. Sadly, this has turned out to be more than true — they are actually worse.
To recap: the duchess won a case against the paper nine months ago, after it printed extracts of a letter she had written her father, which the judge ruled was “private”. It was a surprising ruling — crashed through in a summary judgment, when half the world knew palace aides were queueing around the block to give evidence at trial. I remember saying at the time: if that isn’t special treatment, I don’t know what is.
Anyway, life comes at you fast. It now looks as though the duchess misled the court — although I have another word for it. She claimed she hadn’t helped the people who wrote Finding Freedom, a book about her and her husband, when in fact she had. The press officer, Jason Knauf, who now works for Prince William, revealed she “authorised specific co-operation” for him to meet the authors in 2018, giving him a list of “background reminders” of things to discuss. If you want to know what is embarrassing, it is sending your press officer a list of pathetic corners to fight, including “how the tiara for her wedding had been selected”, and letting him know he should slut-shame her sister Samantha by saying she had children with “different fathers”.
The duchess apologised to the court, claiming she “had not remembered” email exchanges with Knauf about the meeting — but, again, who’s going to believe that? For any normal person an apology for misleading the court would be the death knell for their case. They could face six months in jail for making the mistake. Will Meghan?
My instinct is she will be saved a trial. The appeal judges will conveniently ignore the fact she had to apologise, preferring to focus on the holes in what Knauf said. No one really wants a trial: not the royals nor the judges — they won’t want to rat on their colleague in such a high-profile case. So Meghan will probably swerve this one yet again, just because she’s a member of a family she is meant to hate.
It is tempting to say: who even cares? Nothing about it is serious, and support for this couple is waning anyway. Even in the deepest enclaves of white north London many people reached a turning point last week. Structural racism may make you do many things but it does not make you conveniently forget.
It is weird to feel that royalty is dragging you down to its level. This is before we even get to the letter: the most preposterous turducken of a literary endeavour ever created. I feel ashamed of the way we are being induced to accept this manipulative document as remotely “private”. It is private in the sense that the Trojan horse was a convenient mode of transport. It looked like a letter and felt like a letter, but in fact it was something else entirely: her way of getting her “truth” out. “Words”, as she put it to Knauf, “I could never voice publicly”.
We know from Knauf, who helped Meghan draft the letter, that she had been “meticulous in her word choice” because she believed it would be leaked. She numbered the pages specifically so that people other than Thomas Markle would know how long the letter was. She ended pages halfway through a sentence so no one could reproduce it partly. Most despicably, she addressed her father as “Daddy”, according to Knauf, because “in the unfortunate event that it leaked it would pull at the heart-strings”.
How “unfortunate” do you think she thought it would be if it did actually leak? After she had written the letter, she sent a message to Knauf: “Honestly Jason I feel fantastic. Cathartic and real and honest and factual.” I feel factual. I mean, really — put it on the letterhead. If we have any kind of contract with the royals, it is this: we are happy to celebrate them, lionise them, confer on them enormous power and respect, on the sole condition they don’t let us know how much they look down on us. Meghan did that.
'Meghan Markle’s half-sister has vowed to sue her for "defamation" after bombshell emails revealed she helped brief the authors of the biography Finding Freedom.'
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/16728423/meghan-markles-half-sister-sue-defamation/?rec_article=true
After numerous reports that the Queen will not miss the Cenotaph service today, she is missing it because of a sprained back. As someone who has a weakness in my back and have sprained it more than once, I know that no way could she stand on that balcony today. But, she could appear in a wheelchair. Just saying!
someone is already planning her funeral attire (posted to megs mirror of course)
haz must be fuming. they laid a wreath on behalf of the duke of kent.
charles better hold firm on the line with those two.
just saw the balcony pic. i know they are suppose to look somber but there were a lot of teary eyes on the balcony where camilla catherine and sophie were standing. camilla looked the saddest
Meghan's father kept letter secret for six months - until it was revealed in People article that 'vilified' him.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10199109/Meghans-father-kept-letter-secret-revealed-People-article-vilified-him.html
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/16727441/meghan-in-witness-box-catastrophe-for-royals/
This paragraph struck me:
"The saga of Meghan’s risk of heading towards a downfall has some way to run, but this week saw the first cracks in the walls of secrecy she built over the past five years to conceal her true nature."
I think there is a lot more to be uncovered about the Sussexes. IMO, the DM read her right (they knew they were breaching copyright in the articles), knew how she would react, and saw a lawsuit as the perfect vehicle for digging for and revealing the truth about her. Profits must be soaring with all this material she provides.
IMO, if this lawsuit was about justice, she would have sent a legal warning to the DM to remove the articles and apologize, and then issued a statement about copyright and privacy. If DM had refused, she would have been in a much better position in taking them to court. Everything with her, even the outfits she wears, is always so messy and so controversial, and she shoots herself in the foot repeatedly. It seems to be spinning out of control now that she does not have the protection of the palace.
Seems that Harry had a phone consultation with one of Diana's psychics. She told him he would marry a dark-haired woman. She also predicted that their marriage would 'last forever'. Many pschics have and do predict the opposite (about the marriage lasting). Bit like watching a tennis match with these psychics ... someone will win; someone will be 'accurate' in their predictions!
just saw the balcony pic. i know they are suppose to look somber but there were a lot of teary eyes on the balcony where camilla catherine and sophie were standing. camilla looked the saddest
---
I noticed that as well. Could it be because this is a somber remembrance service? They are facing their first holiday season with out Prince Phillip.
I can't even imagine the void he has left in their family especially HM. It has to be a really difficult time for all of them. No one can ever fill his boots. Sad just thinking about it.
All the wreaths from royal family members are on behalf of parts of the defence forces that they represent.
Many thanks for posting.
I'm so looking forward to his book!
Well, it's not supposed to be an all-singing-and-dancing affair and sombre sober demeanour is called for.
Even so, Charles looked even more sad than usual (I usually have many lump after lump in my throat and have to reach repeatedly for a tissue). Camilla looked drawn and tired, I thought. The Duke of Kent (Queen's cousin, just turned 85) and his sister, Princess Alexandra, a year younger, shared one balcony. It's so sad when age catches up with people when one can remember what they looked like in their prime. (I've changed a bit since I was teenager, come to that!).
Better for HM not to appear than to be seen to be in anything other than rude good health but I still feel it's an ominous sign. It's now less than 3 months to Accession Day, I pray that she makes it and doesn't succumb to the Markle curse.
I wonder what the attitude will be to the H$Ms appearing for the funeral? They are so bloody cruel. I'm sure that if William had his way, they'd never be allowed to show their faces here again.
Both Cambridges displayed the very essence of regality.
I thought the Bower article was rather odd - too strong a hint of Doom for the Royals, rather than *.
Whatever pans out, it'll be ghastly because she'll make every allegation she can think of, credible or not. We just have to hope that everyone will say they don't believe a word of it.
Has Bower turned his coat?
I have just reprimanded myself for having gloomy thoughts and wondering if the Sussexes would turn up for the Queen's funeral, how much they would disrupt the proceedings, and how they will be contained. Isn't it customary for family members to take turns in standing guard around a king or queen's coffin when it is lying in state? Who the heck would want to be part of a group with Harry?
Tom Bower doesn't actually take sides. He just digs for the truth. Unfortunately for the Sussexes, they have enough skeletons to fill an entire house, and insiders at the Palace are now ready not only to talk but also to produce proof. But I think he dug up some 'dirt' for his book on Charles, so I don't think his views on the Sussexes is because of support for other royals. But, I do find that he annoyingly still goes on about the 'fabulousness' of the Sussexes as if it was real rather than a major con. Surely he has found enough evidence of that?
This article in The Telegraph is a good read about the possible wide-ranging fallout and damage if ANL wins its appeal and Meghan’s lawsuit goes to trial. It pairs well with the Tom Bower article about Meghan possibly ending up in the witness box.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2021/11/13/royal-family-secrets-could-spilled-court-confidential-emails/
Reading this article in The Telegraph reveals that Meghan obviously gave little thought as to the can of worms she could be opening for the monarchy that even though on one hand she hates it, because it has rules she believes she is above and her huge sense of entitlement leads her to believe she should be in control, the monarchy IS the source of everything she has in her life. Palace staff reportedly warned against filing this lawsuit, but she went ahead anyway.
I think she believed the newspaper would crumple and fall on its knees and beg for forgiveness. It would allow her to take a very public victory lap while simultaneously throwing herself the world’s largest public pity party as the poor little put upon royal to solidify power to lie, deceive, manipulate and control control events and people the royal family as well as on the world stage.
Meghan’s constant need for everything “NOW” with disregard for future ramifications has resulted in her publicly shooting herself in the foot in this court case. Unfortunately, she could cause serious collateral damage, which she also does not care about, to a monarchy that has lasted over a millennium. This may also tarnish the reign of a Queen who has lived a relatively quiet life of decades of dignified service to a country and people she loves.
As often happens to narcissists, and as it has happened to famous narcissists through history and narcissists who are not famous, her overblown senses of entitlement, grandiosity, lack of boundaries and feeling that she is above the rules of proper behavior in life generally followed by most other people, she is likely to end up as her own worst enemy.
And don’t forget, Harry has a book coming out next year, and her fingerprints will be all over it.
If ANL wins the appeal and this case goes to trial revealing negative information about the Sussexes to the public, I wouldn’t be surprised if Harry’s book is held back for revisions to attempt repair any damaging revelations about the Sussexes.
Harry and Meghan will go to their graves with the belief that they are victims of Harry’s family, her family, the worldwide media, and public opinion. They will likely never admit they are both largely the source of their own problems. It they eventually divorce, I’d bet money they will also blame the end of their marriage on the aforementioned groups without taking any responsibility themselves.
if they lose the lawsuit harrys book may be held back as the lawyers and fact checkers will need to make sure things are carefully worded since it may very well be proven he and the wife are liars.
i’m guessing if something happens to the queen only harry will be invited and the wife will be “pregnant” with number 3.
Camilla swallowing hard to suppress her emotions. Sophie looked like she'd been crying. Catherine had her emotions firmly tapped down, just like her husband did.
Edward always has the most military bearing. He stands so straight. And PW...doing his best not to show anything. And poor PC, unable to swallow all the tears.
This reads hysterical, but only because Edward is the only royal who hasn’t served his country, he dropped out during his Royal Marine training. To be fair, he was never ever Marine material, the course is one of the hardest and longest training regimes in the world. 🤗
@Miggy: Because no one in the US cares one iota about them. No one. They don't sell magazine covers, they don't sell news, they don't sell anything.
Exactly! The only 'interest' they elicit is of the laughing and pointing variety.
It comes as Harry and Meghan are believed to be in talks to sign with crisis PR guru Howard Bragman, who has worked with both accusers and accused in the #MeToo movement.
A source said: “Bragman is one of the most sought after PRs in the US.”
Mr Bragman and the Sussexes did not respond to a request to comment.
By JENNIFER ORIEL
11:00PM November 14, 2021
Martin Luther King Jr believed we should be judged not by the colour of our skin but the content of our character, which could be bad news for Meghan Markle.
The TV actor found fame in the arms of Prince Harry, a royal “spare” in every sense of the word. Together, they showed the world the brave face of bi-racial champagne socialism and decried British culture while feeding off the proceeds of empire.
But the enduring myth of their victimhood has been dealt another blow with news that Markle forgot to tell the whole truth in her legal battle with The Mail on Sunday.
New court documents came to light last week that went to the heart of Markle’s case against the newspaper. She sued the publisher of the paper for printing a letter she wrote to her father, on the broad grounds that it violated privacy and infringed copyright.
In his judgment, Lord Justice Warby found for Markle in her claim for misuse of private information.
Warby described the letter as “inherently private and personal”, and said “the claimant had a reasonable expectation that the contents of the letter would remain private. The articles interfered with that reasonable expectation”.
READ MORE:Royals resist ‘I told you so’ over Meghan’s backtrack|When royals scrap with commoners it just isn’t a fair fight
He also found the publication had infringed her copyright. In her response, Markle opined: “The world needs reliable, fact-checked, high-quality news … We all lose when misinformation sells more than truth, when moral exploitation sells more than decency.” Indeed we do, which is why Markle must be held to the same standard of truth she demands of others.
Texts submitted to the court last week by the Sussexes’ then communications adviser, Jason Knauf, reveal that Markle not only anticipated the publication of the letter, but chose wording that would cast her in a favourable light against her father.
She told Knauf she had been “meticulous in my word choice” and admitted that she addressed the letter to “Daddy” because “it would pull at the heartstrings” if the letter were leaked. If true, the documents will raise questions about Markle’s credibility.
It is possible to be clever and calculating, or naïve and victimised, but improbable to be both. It appears that Markle is more strategic than the defenders of her virtue believe, and smarter than her detractors concede.
America’s liberal media has treated the Sussexes like refugees from the British empire. The lack of scrutiny applied to their claims of racism and bullying from unnamed members of the royal family plays well wherever the lowbrow politics of identity, victimhood and emotionalism has overwhelmed public reason.
In Britain, the battle for the rule of reason still rages.
Media regulator Ofcom ruled that Good Morning Britain did not breach broadcast standards when Piers Morgan scrutinised Markle’s claims of racism and mental cruelty in the House of Windsor. Morgan felt vindicated and his supporters celebrated the ruling as a victory for freedom. But the Ofcom decision was less a fairytale about freedom of speech than a cautionary tale of its gradual demise.
The Ofcom decision is difficult to read as a repudiation of political correctness. The regulators made clear that they did find Morgan’s comments offensive but cited co-workers and panellists who defended Markle as the reason the broadcaster was not found in breach. They considered that Morgan’s disbelief of Markle’s mental health claims could cause “harm and offence to viewers”.
They found his “potentially harmful and highly offensive comments” were justified because they were challenged on air. Moreover, the regulator supported the view of TV presenter Trisha Goddard who told Morgan that on account of his white skin, he was not allowed to discuss racism.
The lesson of the Ofcom decision is that to defend itself against claims of offence on the grounds of race or mental distress, a media company should prevent such offence. It is not a win for reason. It is a victory for identity politics and pre-censorship.
Whatever one thinks of Piers Morgan, his criticism of Meghan Markle was neither racist nor sexist. He should be able to scrutinise her claims without being falsely accused. But mental health has become a powerful shield for public figures wishing to prevent media scrutiny and factual reporting. It transforms the liar into a victim and the truth-seeker into a bully. Worse, it gives the profoundly dull a false sense of their importance.
For all his faults, Morgan can be hilariously funny in his pursuit of the abysmal and the absurd. The same cannot be said of Markle, whose dreary tales of woe are boring the educated world to tears.
She lectures the plebs on poverty while living in a $19m mansion and wearing a ring estimated to be worth $350,000.
She traduces the royal family yet has used the title “duchess” to lobby politicians and market her moral virtue. She berates the press for violating her privacy but tirelessly promotes herself on TV, the internet, at public events and in fashion magazines as the Duchess of Sussex no less.
The hit to Markle’s credibility in court last week was preceded by a history of dubious claims, ad hominem attacks and vivid hypocrisy, which means she will not get a free ride in the free press, but has a bright future in American politics.
END
https://www.britishpathe.com/video/the-last-salute-aka-king-george-vi-lies-in-state
In all the shots, the guards are members of the Household Cavalry and members of the Sovereign's Body Guard of the Yeoman Guard Extraordinary, a different body from the chaps at the Tower, although their dress is similar.
It certainly brings it all back for me, although at the time I was too young to grasp just how much love and respect the people had for him and why. The Abdication was a national trauma and I recall even as late as c1960 the vehemence of some who thought he wasn't entitled to the throne.
I've said before that I've never forgotten the photo of the three mourning Queens:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2018/08/11/sacred-mysteriestheres-veils-meets-eye/Catafalque
Charles may well have difficulties arising from `contamination by association with JS'. He was a very weird and creepy character but at the same time very popular from `Jim'll Fix it.' I couldn't stand him but those more tolerant than I may have found him entertaining company. Rumours were beginning to seep out though, even before he was rumbled.
I read one report about the time when he was DJ-ing, regarding his claims in relation to under-age girls.
so wasn’t it Just Harry that was supposed to be at the Intrepid event. and then suddenly it’s both of them. he is probably pissed she stole the show from him 😉
i am worried about the queen. we have less of the “her majesty is resting comfortably” lingo from the palace. i think everyone is rightfully worried. and BJ stating the queen looks good on Wednesday doesn’t mean a damn thing if she fell/injured herself yesterday. i think there is real worry in the background.
on a more positive charles thought. as a dad i think he may be indulgent with the twosome but as monarch he will not want anyone to tarnish what would be a not so long reign. the montecito two matter watch it. could be papa bear becomes king bear and doesn’t want teapond well to being poked
I'm with @snarkyatherbest. I think your comments are great contributions!
Your analysis of the red dress is especially insightful. Yes, it would be just like a narc to wear the worst possible color for an event, not just to grab attention but also to distress people on purpose. That it wasn't even a nice dress was to add insult to injury. This reminds me of her mosque visit, when she made herself as slovenly as possible under that headscarf. She knew it would offend people and she was happy about it.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BarkJack/with_replies
"Prince Charles will be entrusted with new responsibilities; watch for this in January 2022. (Not to worry, HMTQ is well rested and healthy as of today’s date, given her advanced age.)"
"The Queen missed today’s Remembrance Day Ceremony because of an ongoing sore back and knee. She is otherwise in good spirits!"
"...Not to be alarmed. It’s nothing grave."
As you said, TBW's red dress in NYC was wholly inappropriate. Remember she attended the Mountbatten Festival of Music at the Royal Albert Hall in London with the band of the Royal Marines in a bright red dress while H was in his dress uniform as Captain General of the Royal Marines with a bright red jacket. As an aside, it confirms she was wearing something that is out of season - it's 'for the pre-fall 2022 line' (the Metro) - like all the ill fitting clothes she wears. She's not making a faux pas, which could be forgivable, she knows full well what she's doing.
I was just thinking about that dress (Royal Marines aka the last gasp event). I remember something about not wearing red so not upstaging the people in dress clothes.
I hope and pray Her Majesty is really ok and will continue to be ok. I would like to think the glum faces were that they were thinking that this time, next year, same people present but she might not be.
And now this:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10199403/Royal-family-told-sue-Netflix-hit-portrayals.html
It would be quite interesting if they do go that route.
I can't help thinking that if HM shows any sign of weakening, the Montecito vultures will circle ever more closely and do everything they can to hasten her demise.
Truly horrible people. To be attacked from within by such a treacherous couple must be a pain almost beyond bearing.
NBC news in the US, seems they are very sympathetic to TBW
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/uk-royals-berated-harry-meghans-father-thomas-markle-texts-duchess-sus-rcna5515
Cunning Stunt
We’ll always remember
That day in November
Red dress and poppy Thot
The major reason
We’ll remember their treason
Is the bra madam forgot…
Bonfire of the Vanities
Apologies: Remember, remember
5th November.
Camillia looks like she’s losing weight and looks a lot thinner.
Kate looks regal, beautiful and appropriate as usual.
Are you in the UK, US or elsewhere?
Why have you only just appeared?
Where did you hear this rumour?
Do you think the source is reliable?
We are all mortal.
God Save the Queen.
Yesterday was Charles’s 73rd birthday.
I noticed he has looked near to tears at previous Remembrance parades. Whether yesterday's expression means anything more, or not, we don't know.
The first year after becoming a widow is the most dangerous, it seems to me, but I pray that HM will not leave us yet. Philip didn’t quite make it to 100 but I sincerely hope her Majesty achieves her 70 years .
Not that * will be troubled by the fact that she and her slave have made the last few years of their lives a misery. Narcissists do not have consciences.
Just tuned into "Adele, One Night Only." Melissa McCarthy in front row, Oprah hosting, * and ball and chain nowhere to be seen. Oprah is highly aware those two do not make good party guests.
I almost wish that the Harkles had been invited to Obama's birthday party, just so * could have alienated hundreds of a-listers in multiple industries/fields in a single go. Word of mouth is powerful, but there's nothing like experiencing someone's pathology for yourself.
It makes one wonder what * did to turn off Oprah, doesn't it? Despite * desperately wanting an Oprah interview, I don't think she was able to suppress her bad behavior every last time she interacted with Oprah. She would have done something as bad as what she did during the Salute to Freedom gala -- like "innocentely" embarrassing Oprah in front of Oprah's staff -- just so she could still be the bigger "star" in the room. Well, she won the battle and got her interview . . . but lost the war and will never get to ride on Oprah's coattails again.
Re: Cunning Stunt
Hilarious! I can think of other reasons we'll remember that awful dress, but your brevity is wittier, as usual!
We make the mistake of assuming that very wealthy/famous people are intelligent, and swallow the story they put out there about how influential and important they are, and caring, generous and charitable of course, but that is not so.
Like the Harkles, Oprah will spin Meghan's perjury (twice, not just once) as racism, misogony, a social media campaign of hatred, the royal family trying to destroy her ...
Or, Oprah may just quietly move on and pretend the interviews full of lies never happened, and that she never manipulated headlines to accuse the British of racism!
To Remember, remember etc. I'add part of the rest (with a change of word)
We see no reason
Why Harkles treason
Should ever be forgot!
You did mention the rest and treason!🤦 Anyway, it's worth reiterating. They just get more repugnant by the day.
Not the most reliable source but they’ve been sued and lost . but they get things right a lot or exagerate the stories.
I agree that Oprah is very opportunistic and will keep partnering with the Harkles while she can suck more out of them . . . but I also think she's smart enough to realize that they've got nothing that's worth pissing the BRF off for. The interview wasn't well received and now * has been exposed as a liar whose own sister may sue her for defamation. It might have been really compelling TV when * accused one of the most visible families in the world of being racist, but for her to play the same card against individuals like Knauf and Samatha would be laughable. * has fewer and fewer supporters each month. Oprah got what she could, while she could, but I think she is cutting line now.
And if I'm wrong, well, at least I'll always have the Nutties to discuss the latest developments with!
@Enbrethiliel
Typo - Cunning Stunt! 😉
@Maneki
A reason for treason
She was never in season
No child was ever begot
Watching “Bancroft”
she’s spooky,
many similarities to madam!!
Oooh, I'm embarrassed I missed it!
She was never in season
No child was ever begot'
Magatha - that's pure gold!
Dear Kenny Everitt - would that he were with us now... I thought of his `Cupid Stunt' leg flip at the American Open (the tennis wasn't the only thing `Open' then) but I really do think that all photos of * should at least have the screaming slogan `All in the Best PossibleTaste' emblazoned on them.
Meghan Markle is all for the photo ops
The former Miss Markle — who gave the back of her hand to her father, her once-best friend, her prince of a husband’s relatives and gave the finger to Her Majesty the Queen — now springs only for publicity. And lawsuits.
In NYC — to make a film about themselves — she and her princelet sponged at 860 UN Plaza. No neighbors witnessed sparkle Markle hauling out the garbage. Or lumbering in and out. The freebee place belonged to lawyer Barry Bloom who once worked for Loews and the Tisches. So commoners couldn’t actually see this body she knew how to work she schlepped up and down on a freight elevator.
Me-Me-Markle’s become a specialist in that department. Nobody in England wants to see her either.
Re that rumour. I thought the same thing regarding the National Enquirer article, because not so long ago I would have completely poo-pooed the piece, but we know Maggot like to leak stuff. I’m not saying I believe the article, but I am suspicious that it’s a leak with some credibility. ☹️🧐
Re the leak to the National Enquirer, anything is possible with * but surely it would point the figure at either her or H. Who else would be in the know and capable of such a vile thing? She thinks she's so clever but she's not as 'whip smart' as she thinks. Fingers crossed the rumours are baseless.
I could see them trying to pull this out to make it look as if things had the potential to be fixed before the death (their actions and talk). Then in an interview after the passing, that kind of talk might look good (we tried but they had hard hearts, showed their true colors). It would allow for another interview plus try to do some of the damage O got when the various lies started going around the world.
Oprah is pals with Melissa McCarthy as she had a front row seat at the concert. Oprah set up * with McCarthy for that juggling stupidity.
When Oprah had her regular daily network show, she had on a lot of questionable people with bizarre (later proved false) stories.
Oprah is in show business, and the interview with * and ball and chain was low theatre of the bizarre.
Listened to Lady Colin Campbell's latest video. In two of the most recent videos she's twice said that Harry has contacted her with bizarre claims, hoping LCC would put that on her channel. She didn't. One of the things Harry told her was that *'s father abused her in the most vile vile way. LCC calls * the Dark Triad, Evil, Evil, Evil.
Re that rumour. That’s my point, any rumour really regarding the royal family would leave me to now think either Maggot or Mole leaked it, predominately in any American media. I’m sure it’s baseless, but I’m open to thinking it might not all be, nowadays. ☹️
... undo some of the damage O got when the various this is a lie/here is the truth started going around the world.
Ah, but I checked the poster's handle - it has US political connotations which I'm not going into.
It could be to show it's `not' her, or or may have another agenda. Handle with care.
I will copy and paste the recommendations so that you don't have to go to Archewell.
Recommendations to increase transparency
PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH
Implement protections for researchers and journalists who violate platform terms of service by responsibly conducting research on public data of civic interest.
Require platforms to disclose certain categories of private data to qualified academic researchers, so long as that research respects user privacy, does not endanger platform integrity, and remains in the public interest.
HIGH REACH CONTENT DISCLOSURE
Create a legal requirement for all social media platforms to regularly publish the content, source accounts, reach and impression data for posts that they organically deliver to large audiences.
CONTENT MODERATION PLATFORM DISCLOSURE
Require social media platforms to disclose information about their content moderation policies and practices, and produce a time-limited archive of moderated content in a standardized format, available to authorized researchers.
Recommendations to Increase Transparency cont.
AD TRANSPARENCY
Require social media companies to regularly disclose, in a standardized format, key information about every digital ad and paid post that runs on their platforms.
Recommendations to build trust
TRUTH AND TRANSFORMATION
Endorse efforts that focus on exposing how historical and current imbalances of power, access, and equity are manufactured and propagated further with mis- and disinformation — and on promoting community-led solutions to forging social bonds.
HEALTHY DIGITAL DISCOURSE
Develop and scale communication tools, networks, and platforms that are designed to bridge divides, build empathy, and strengthen trust among communities.
WORKFORCE DIVERSITY
Increase investment and transparency to further diversity at social media platform companies and news media as a means to mitigate misinformation arising from uninformed and disconnected centers of power.
LOCAL MEDIA INVESTMENT
Promote substantial, long-term investment in local journalism that informs and empowers citizens, especially in underserved and marginalized communities.
Recommendations to Build Trust cont.
ACCOUNTABILITY NORMS
Promote new norms that create personal and professional consequences within communities and networks for individuals who willfully violate the public trust and use their privilege to harm the public.
ELECTION INFORMATION SECURITY
Improve U.S. election security and restore voter confidence with improved education,transparency, and resiliency.
Recommendations to reduce harms
COMPREHENSIVE FEDERAL APPROACH
Establish a comprehensive strategic approach to countering disinformation and the spread of misinformation, including a centralized national response strategy, clearly defined roles and responsibilities across the Executive Branch, and identified gaps in authorities and capabilities.
PUBLIC RESTORATION FUND
Create an independent organization, with a mandate to develop systemic misinformation countermeasures through education, research, and investment in local institutions.
CIVIC EMPOWERMENT
Invest and innovate in online education and platform product features to increase users’ awareness of and resilience to online misinformation.
SUPERSPREADER ACCOUNTABILITY
Hold superspreaders of mis- and disinformation to account with clear, transparent, and consistently applied policies that enable quicker, more decisive actions and penalties, commensurate with their impacts — regardless of location, or political views, or role in society.
AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 230 OF THE COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT OF 1996
Withdraw platform immunity for content that is promoted through paid advertising and post promotion.
Remove immunity as it relates to the implementation of product features, recommendation engines, and design.
Which category is Harry? He is not a policy expert, researcher ...? Oh, he thinks he is a philanthropic leader! LOL!
Gossip, fake news, bullying, terrorism ... it all existed before the Internet, and was just as harmful if not more so. But benefits of the Internet far outweigh risks.
Hold superspreaders of mis- and disinformation to account with clear, transparent, and consistently applied policies that enable quicker, more decisive actions and penalties, commensurate with their impacts — regardless of location, or political views, or role in society.
Is Harry going to hold himself to account?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10204187/Prince-Harry-issues-fake-news-action-plan.html
Only posting for the comments!
In my opinion, she has the posture associated with Osteoporosis. This can cause back pain, compression fractures of the vertebrae and a tendency for injury. Maybe it’s wishful thinking, but I feel it’s likely that the back strain statement is likely accurate. In addition, she recently began using a cane, which also points to back issues. She has also had a miserable year of emotional pain and grief.
Prince Harry issues fake news action plan: Duke of Sussex releases report from left-wing US think tank designed to tackle 'avalanche of misinformation'
LOL. Straight to the comments baahaha 😉
They don't disappoint! 😅
The comments are priceless. And now this one:
mishmashgirl, London, United Kingdom, 15 minutes ago
I heard they were hiring a Crisis Consultant to help with their image after her lies to the court were revealed last week
------------
A crisis consultant, really? If it's true, they have no shame. I'm afraid their image has been irreparably tarnished. You can't polish a turd.
The comments are a hoot. 😂😅😂
For real. They are ass chapping!
Lol 😂
Here's my favorite so far. From down under. Sweet and simple but bites with condensed truth:
"Meghan is a proven liar in the media and even under Oath"
I think this comment sums it up quite well:
pip , squeak , United Kingdom, 2 minutes ago
I think you have just created a tidal wave of pushback from the public Harry. You've just rubbed the last tolerant people up the wrong way by putting yourself forward as the self-appointed 'slayer of misinformation' in the same week your wife lied to cover up another lie that she told a high court judge. She blamed her miscarriage on forgetting that she worked with the authors of a book and that she wrote a plethora of emails detailing what she wanted to be shared with said authors, whilst failing to come up with a reason as to why she did not correct this 'misinformation' in the past year where she would have been thinking more 'clearly'.
They can't come back from that.
Even River mentioned the crisis consultant.
If Howard Bragman takes them on, he must really love a challenge.
I saw that post from 'Pip' and thought it excellent. He, (or she) regularly comments on the Harkles and always hits the right note. :)
Democracy is in crisis, faith in institutions is at an all-time low. The public's trust in our leaders has collapsed; cynicism is all around. Which pillar of integrity can save us from the morass and rescue our crumbling polity? Step forward erstwhile aristo Prince Harry, the hereditary hedonist reborn as a fearless fighter of fake news. Since joining the beautiful people in LA eighteen months ago, the exiled royal has gone round collecting pseudo-jobs like a less employable George Osborne.
Eco-warrior, occasional podcaster, ethical banker and interminable speech-giver: there are many hats now worn by the dilettante Duke. And today it was the turn of Commissar Harry to adopt his Ushanka in his role as a member of the Aspen Institute's Orwell-esque 'Commission on Information Disorder.' The Institute has concluded a six-month study into an 'avalanche of misinformation' online, with the 37-year-old prince setting out 15 demands on his foundation website, Archewell, for how to deal with this problem.
The report calls for 'increasing social media transparency and disclosure', with suggested 'solutions' including 'community-led methods for improving civic dialogue and resisting imbalances of information power'. Harry is quoted as labelling 'the mis-and disinformation crisis' as 'a global humanitarian issue' which 'affects not some of us, but all of us.' The millionaire monarch's grandchild expresses his desire for such 'recommendations' to to become law, writing: 'I hope to see the substantive and practical recommendations of our Commission taken up by the tech industry, the media industry, by policymakers, and leaders.'
But Steerpike was most taken with the section of the report summary labelled 'superspreader accountability.' It demands that leaders:
Hold superspreaders of mis- and disinformation to account with clear, transparent, and consistently applied policies that enable quicker, more decisive actions and penalties, commensurate with their impacts — regardless of location, or political views, or role in society.
With delicious timing, the report comes just five days after Prince Harry's wife Meghan was forced to admit to a British court that she had made a misleading statement in her privacy case against the publishers of the Mail on Sunday newspaper. The Appeal Court heard on Thursday that the Duchess of Sussex had asked an aide to pass on information to the authors of a biography – despite having earlier said she 'did not contribute'.
If superspreaders of misinformation are to be held to account – regardless of their 'role in society' – perhaps Harry could start with addressing the claims of his wife. Speaking her truth or spreading fake news? Steerpike will leave it to his readers to decide who is 'perpetuating falsehoods' – to borrow a phrase from Meghan's Oprah interview.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/prince-harry-declares-war-on-disinformation
And yes, the comments are both highly entertaining and exactly on point.
Not that I care about the Aspen Institute, but this goes beyond bad PR into Markling territory for them. Harry has made a mockery of their Commission on Information Disorder. (Just typing that sentence felt like writing satire!) I doubt any of them will be eager to work with him again in the future.
We know that Knauf would have revealed the truth anyway, but what do you think of the possibility that someone behind the scenes knew in advance what the Aspen report would say and planned the timing accordingly? This is one of the biggest, directest blows at the Harkles yet -- and it seems a shame to chalk it all up to coincidence.