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
This is not a good look for them as they attempt to sell their thread of a connection to The Queen and the rest of the family and the monarchy to the highest bidder. They are disgraced secondary members at best with absolutely no influence with the REAL royal family.
___
Truth right here!!^^^
I agree with everything said in this excellent post. Great summary HD.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUyL9C1cE9E
Meghan is likely smugly smiling, but she does not realize that she has won a battle, but in the ling run, the damage she inflicted upon herself by revealing more of her toxic personality to the public and prospective business partners and Archewell donors, will be remembered far longer than winning a settlement in a skirmish with the media.
In the short term, she has won a battle, but in the long term, she will lose the war.
I wonder if we will all be subjected to another smug statement from Harry’s wife.
Here is the statement from the MoS as reported by Newsweek:
“Statements printed on front page and page 3
A statement on the Mail on Sunday’s Dec 26 front page read: “The Duchess of Sussex wins her legal case for copyright infringement against Associated Newspapers for articles published in The Mail on Sunday and posted on Mail Online.”
Then, on page three, under the heading “The Duchess of Sussex”, was the statement: “Following a hearing on 19-20 January, 2021, and a further hearing on 5 May, 2021, the court has given judgment for the Duchess of Sussex on her claim for copyright infringement.
“The court found that Associated Newspapers infringed her copyright by publishing extracts of her handwritten letter to her father in The Mail on Sunday and on Mail Online.
“Financial remedies have been agreed.”
The amount paid has not been revealed. It is also not known what the Duchess plans to do with the money.”
At the risk of repeating myself ...
DM did not issue an apology, nor did it abide by the instructions re. font, size, placement and number of repetitions that the Duchess dictated, and Warby acceded to in his orignal summary judgment.
Only the copyright aspect of the case is referred to in the statement. What happened to the privacy aspect? Is DM going to pursue an appeal? She dropped the data protection nonsense when she changed lawyers.
Rumour on social media is that she did not get her full legal costs covered by DM, which is what happened to Harry in his court case (he did not recover his full legal costs as th judge said they were unreasonable).
She would want to crow about a big payout. Scobie and the SussexSquad are pushing the narrative of a huge financial payout, but I doubt this is the truth. She would want to publicize any donation to any organization. Perhaps she is getting over a Christmas hangover, and a gloating self-praising statement about the financial payout is to follow?
Thanks for the details about this settlement only pertaining to the copyright aspect of this case. I was thinking it was for everything and this was the end of the case.
If ANL still has avenues to appeal other aspects of this case, that they move forward to a higher court.
They both obviously lied to the public when they denied collaborating at all with the authors of Finding Freedom. Instead, the emails and statement from Jason Knauf revealed Meghan and Harry had participated in extensive collaboration with the authors of Finding Freedom.
That, along with them apparently signing contracts with the likes and Netflix and Spotify, which have produced little to nothing for either company, would make any executive with an ounce of common sense think twice about doing business with the Harkles, or associating their company or organization with the Harkles. They have already shown themselves that they are just not trustworthy.
That’s a bad foundation to base any relationship, be it a business, legal, professional, or personal relationship on. Nobody wants their partner to smile at them while simultaneously lying to them, or not fulfilling their part of the agreement.
Thank you for your compliment:-)
And thanks to whoever said `rotting produce' - now when I'm emptying my little compost caddy into the kitchen-waste collecting bin (the council collects it goes for gas production) and get a whiff of it, I shall think of them.
Of course :)
I like to validate other's great posts!
Merry Christmas Nutties! Just wanted to stop in to wish you all a glorious day and best wishes for a prosperous 2022. Special shout out to Nutty, of course, but to JennS as well. With you all in spirit. Many blessings and love 🎄
...............
@Lucy
Nice to hear from you! Hope you had a lovely Christmas. I'll send you a message to your gmail in a few minutes. Did you see the Harkle card with its Dali-esque background?
🤣🎅🤣
Oooh, thanks JennS
Sneaky bugger!!!
..............
@Magatha
LOL!
Yes, I realized this when I was looking at some older Nutty threads!
New name on old comments.
I didn't like the recent comment to H nor the one about the Queen dying from cancer a few weeks ago.
Love your clever Christmas Witties!
🤣
Found this on LSA. Makes me miss my mates on the Shankhill. Agggghh, miss that Belfast accent. 🙁
As a military man in the UK, he tears Haz a new one- as only someone from NI can lol😂
I don't know anything about him other than he states he's an Ulster man so I won't sanction his views until I learn more about him. Just found this very interesting and made me nostalgic for NI.
Warning he uses language...
Please note it's the MM UNappreciative thread.😀
I mean, I'm sure it isn't but you'd think someone would have noticed what is to me a rather morbid and ominous reflection. Or perhaps it's something inside the house, hopefully not as scary looking. Either way, they could have taken it out!
The children are cute, and I hope they're happy. The boy sure does look like Gavin in that shot we initially thought was he and *. I still think there is something odd about that whole thing.... what are the odds that someone in the media would have a baby that looked so much like Archie, and a miscarriage right around the time of *?
Doubt we'll ever know, but the both births seem odd to me.
The Harkles both know, and this especially holds true with Meghan, that they can't return to the UK and make any public appearance without being booed or having rotted produce tossed at them. They can only appear at events where the audience has been carefully screened to only allow sycophants in extremely controlled events.
I hope they never have the opportunity to choreograph any future appearance in the UK. And I would give anything to toss rotted produce at them.
I was just reading a review in the DM of the BBC’s new drama about the Duchess of Argyll, A Very British Scandal, and these lines made me think of *:
“ The Queen epitomises everything selfless, noble and honest about a traditional ruling class.
But strip away the sense of duty and decency, and what you are left with is the Duchess of Argyll [Sussex] – riches without real value, privilege without a raison d’etre.
Sex is all she is good for.”
I'm glad others see it, not just me. Definitely a woman ( veiled/wearing a mantilla?) on horseback.
I finally searched for the image again, so I check out the image. I definitely know what you mean about a heavily-veiled woman on horseback. And did someone else mention that this mysterious figure has a hook for a hand? I see that, too!
Even if it's just a pine tree in a shadowy thicket, it's a really odd part of the card. The sunny, snowy background that Harry, * and "Archie" get has been panned for being fake; but at least it's pretty and makes sense as a fake background for a Christmas card. The dark background behind "Lili" is just weird.
So bloody predictable.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle mourn the loss of Archbishop Desmond Tutu who died today aged 90.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex hailed the Apartheid hero as an "icon" who was "beloved around the world."
They wrote: "Archbishop Tutu will be remembered for his optimism, his moral clarity and his joyful spirit.
"He was an icon for racial justice and beloved across the world.
"It was only two years ago that he held our son, Archie, while we were in South Africa- ”Arch and the Arch” he had joked, his infectious laughter ringing through the room, relaxing anyone in his presence.
"He remained a friend and will be sorely missed by all.”
So predictable! They had to mention their visit to SA and the fact that the archbishop held Archie. And "he remained a friend".
The DM mentions Charlene paying tribute to him but at least she met him on 'numerous occasions'. No mention of the other two.
Has Archie ever been held , even just once like Archbishop Tutu, by his grandfather, Thomas Markle? Did * ever write about, phone family, or publicly praise her Uncle Markle who so kindly pulled strings to get her the Internship at the embassy in Brazil that she didn’t even complete? Will * ever publicly praise or even mourn the eventual passing of her own father?
Besides being predictable when an opportunity for self promotion comes along, * is cruel.
I wish Harry would question Thomas Markle, Sr about whatever lies * told him that resulted in his being rude and cutting off his father-in-law. By now, he has surely experienced firsthand how much she embroiders the truth and outright lies.
OT:
@WBBM - Glad you like my new profile pic! 😄
@LavenderLady - The Irish guy,(army veteran) is Trevor Coult. (He was awarded the Military Cross.) I've posted a few of his videos on here before with a WARNING... as he does love to swear! lol
He detests H and rants about him on a regular basis.
Just Chattin' - Harry & Meghan: Libel & Slander.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YFhRIeJ8Lg
How Meghan REALLY thought this FACADE would fool everyone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uwl-eCB4Lo
Trevor Coult gets a mention!
Good to know his name to see what he says. I used the wrong word to say I can't *promote his videos until I know more about him. Where I got the word *sanction from is beyond me just I was exhausted from Christmas doings.
Lol those guys and the f word. They cracked me up back then Sigh...
That area is still ripe with dissent even amongst Loyalists. The hard core bunch can turn on each other on a dime. I don't know where this fella is in his stand but spare better stay clear of the place, meaning NI. They detest traitors to the Queen. Right now with the threat to her life recently, they will be on high alert.
He may be just a vet and nothing more. I can see completely why Mr. Coult is p
o'd.
Haz is a fool.
Wow. Thanks. I'm headed over there now lol.
Here in the states, they are rampant during an election. To the point where it gets disgusting. I don't have cable TV so I avoid that crap but I know what they look like. S. M. H!
I know one thing: she will not get far. She is hated here too. She's dreaming if she thinks she will.
I'm leaving it there...
So did I, and couldn't fine one.
However, Neil Sean in this video claims the front page apology was at the bottom of the page, with further info on page 3.
Meghan New Legal Woes loom but what ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fDbqe3o-cU
Neil Sean also mentions Tom Bower's book and says a source has told him that Associated News Ltd, (MOS, DM Mail online) are going to buy the serialisation rights!
OMG - I so hope that's true!! 😅
Mail on Sunday prints front-page statement over Meghan´s copyright win
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-10345279/Mail-Sunday-prints-page-statement-Meghan-s-copyright-win.html
https://preview.redd.it/dfw8vnfobv781.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=56350b7d6cff1fc38e32aaefe694f9c49d3b68c2
Very brief and dry, as it should be.
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2021/12/27/ad-captandum-vulgus-and-the-sussex-christmas-advert/
Rod Liddle: Harry and Meghan doing 'untold damage' to the royal family | SpectatorTV
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-5bzmAtFS4
I have a paper copy of the MoS and can confirm that the apology is on page 3, top left-hand corner. It just says 'The Duchess of Sussex' and this is not in bold. I've found a photo of it:
https://preview.redd.it/dfw8vnfobv781.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=56350b7d6cff1fc38e32aaefe694f9c49d3b68c2
Very brief and dry, as it should be.
,,,,,,,,,,,,
@Maneki
Thanks for providing this info.
I haven't had the time to update this lawsuit info on my own blog just yet, but I don't know if I'm missing something. I still do not see an apology. I only see a statement about the outcome of the case. I thought ANL was going to be forced to print the words in some manner "We apologize to the DoS....." but I've seen nothing along those lines.
I'm wondering if ANL has been allowed to drop that original requirement of a public apology? Perhaps they negotiated the terms of ending the case including the "apology" and the amount of money.
Or am I misunderstanding? Is this the equivalent of an apology even without the words "apologize" or "sorry"?
Thanks for any help you or any other Nutties may provide in clearing this up for me.😊
You're right! I called it an apology as this is the word used by other posters upthread but it isn't an apology as such. It's definitely not what * wanted, nay, demanded, as Sandie mentioned yesterday 8.33 pm. I suppose this is the closest to an apology that * will get. The boxed statement merely says that ANL infringed her copyright bla bla and that 'financial remedies have been agreed'. I only hope that said financial remedies are not unduly high.
I'm glad it's not just me. I had a quick look and didn't read the whole Harry Markle article but I couldn't understand why she was having a go at the Cambridges. I'll read it more carefully tomorrow.
Having read Harry Markle's reasoning, I can see why she thought the Cambridges were pandering to the public. I agree that they were trying to appeal to British people, but I didn't find KP's Instagram activity "desperate" or "low." If anything, the intention was to make everyone feel united and festive. When KP shared other people's posts on its stories, it felt like a micro version of the Hold Still photography project.
The Cambridges' style seems to be very collaborative. They're creating the sense that we're all in this together -- and this is reflected in everything from their Instagram to the Earthshot Prize. This clashes a bit with Queen Elizabeth's style, but it's worth noting that she sets the standard in our minds mainly because she has reigned for so long. Every monarch has an individual style and I like what I see of the future King William's.
If anything, the big misstep was in the scheduling. I hadn't known the logistics at the time, but if they are what Harry Markle has described, then I agree with her that the symbolic closing of the church doors by controlling when and where the event would be screened sent a bad message.
My own very personal quibble is that I could have done without Catherine's piano playing. She wasn't holding her own as a musician; Tom Walker had to support her as much as she was "supporting" him, which shouldn't have been the case. Her part was very simple and she was drowned out by the rest of the arrangement anyway. The point of the event was to uplift us with music performed on a professional level -- not to humor amateurs. I'm sure that the intention was to show a senior royal in the humble position of supporting someone else and entertaining the rest of us . . . but it did come off as a PR stunt. If we took out Catherine's piano playing and kept the rest of the event exactly the same, it would have still been elegant and classy.
I disagree that Catherine's piano playing was bad. I think she did a very good job and it has certainly encouraged some people I know to take up their piano playing again.
A man armed with a crossbow has just sneaked into Windsor castle with the intention of assassinated the Queen in revenge for something that happened a century ago.
It's winter - church doors are usually closed when the service begins.
Strict limits are observed now on the number of people who can be admitted as a disease control measure. The days when I've sat on a cathedral floor for a carol service when there were no more seats. Those days are over now - those services were blamed for the New Year 'flu peaks even then.
As for Catherine's piano playing, it wasn't intended as `Art Song' in which voice and instrument are expected to be in dialogue.
She's a gem.
A man armed with a crossbow has just sneaked into Windsor castle with the intention of assassinated the Queen in revenge for something that happened a century ago.
__
Looks as if the DM is not allowing comments. If so, wise move.
Thanks for getting back to me. Yes, it appears that what ANL published was just a statement of the facts. Of course, MM's fans are crowing calling it an admittance of defeat and an apology.
I think what the DM published was negotiated down from what was originally requested.
I'm surprised and disappointed that ANL didn't take it to the Supreme Court.🤷♀️
And speaking of misinformation...People Magazine ran with this headline:
"Meghan Markle Receives Public Apology After Lawsuit Victory"
Baroness Bruck tweeted the following in response to the People article:
@BaronessBruck
Dec 26
"What "apology" are they talking about...?!???? All I saw was a footnote about a short summary of the current court rulings
Was the word "sorry" printed somewhere, and I missed it?"
🤣
@WBBM
Church doors? This was a by-invitation event, not public worship in the usual sense.
Yes indeed it was. And I’m not sure how they could have filmed the concert if there had been ambient noise from outside the Cathedral if doors had been left open. And remember, it was filmed on Wednesday, December 8 — more than two weeks before being aired.
A UK Tabloid Printed A Front-Page Apology To Meghan Markle For Publishing A Private Letter She Sent Her Father
The publishers of the Mail on Sunday and Mail Online were required to print a statement acknowledging Meghan's legal victory after losing a lawsuit.
A UK newspaper was forced to print an admission that it had violated the rights of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, on Sunday after losing a privacy and copyright infringement lawsuit.
The court-mandated apology and an unspecified amount of money in financial reparations mark the end of a multiyear legal battle between Meghan and Associated Newspapers Limited, the parent company of the Mail on Sunday and Mail Online
Hypocrite Harry complains about mis/disinformation via his Aspen group yet the Sussexes along with their sycophants continue to twist the Harkle narrative any way they can.
Open doors at Midnight Mass used to mean that everyone could come in to the service, including disruptive drunks from the pub at chucking-out time - although that may have been less of a problem once opening hours were extended!
Diana may have dazzled when dancing with Wayne Sleep but does anyone think that it would have been a good idea for Catherine Cambridge to wow the people with a virtuoso performance, even if she was concert-pianist standard? It wasn't about them - they leave that behaviour to other people, and let them fail.
The one bum note for me was the commercial break.
I seldom read HM these days.
Cheers Nutties 😘
Thank you all for getting me through
lockdowns and other tribulations!
This blog is much more efficacious
than panadol, but oh so addictive 😉
2022 the end of the Shrew!!!
Since I agreed with Harry Markle here, I'd like to explain my reasoning (and hers as I understand it). Neither of us is arguing that people should have been allowed in willy-nilly. The physical, temporal locking of the doors isn't the big deal here. It's a metaphorical locking by controlling the release of the footage, first by being petty with the BBC and then by picking a time most advantageous to the Cambridges. It begs the question: Was this intended to benefit the British people or to benefit the Cambridges?
I can also see why Harry Markle saw the event as using a church to promote the Cambridge brand. It overlaps somewhat with my personal view that Catherine's performance did not support the professional musicians, but instead forced them to carry her. It was for her own glory, not for the glory of the event (or you know, since this was a religious service, the glory of God).
Later, when Tom Walker put up a video of the performance on his own YouTube channel, using "The Duchess of Cambridge" in the title, it became for his own glory, too. And it looks even more as if the Cambridges are shucking and jiving for clicks, views and GoogleTrends data. The timing of other world events doesn't help much: Catherine's title coming before Walker's name, when she was merely a "supporting" musician looks even worse after the Harkles got their names put before Archbishop Tutu's in all their PR about his death. Again, for whose glory and honor is this intended to be?
I do love the Cambridges and am a particular fan of Catherine's. But her performance (or rather, the use of it) isn't something I'm 100% happy about.
@Enbreth
Petty, or not, I think it’s about time
the BBC were brought down a peg,
or ten, well overdue.
As for the timing, Christmas Eve
7.30pm, perfect family viewing time.
I’ve only seen clips, my mum
thoroughly enjoyed it.
Last Carol
Sludge Fund
Dumb bells ring
no-ones listening
On mudslide, meg is piddling
She gave us a fright
Takes her teeth out at night
Hawking in the Harkle Hinterland
I've thought for some time that Harry Markle was getting entirely too mean spirited and struck her from my reading list. If we are going to prevent anybody that isn't a 'professional' from playing a piano in church, that would be a sad world.
If HM is married, I feel for her poor husband. I doubt that anybody could fulfill her lofty ideals and that she would would be doomed to perpetual disappointment. I doubt that she even attends church. She would be bound to be disappointed to find out that the congregation, as well as the clergy, are not perfect in every way.
To be perfectly candid, the "feud" between the BRF and the BBC hasn't been a big deal to me. And if I had to pick a side without knowing the full story, I'd pick the BRF!
I'm also not so hung up on the metaphorical locking of the doors as Harry Markle is. For me, the truly problematic issue was Catherine's participation at the piano. But while Harry Markle and I focus on different points, we seem to agree that the event was seemed to be for the Cambridges rather than for the British people, for frontline workers and aid organizations, or even for God.
@Enbrethiliel
Perhaps you and the Harry Markle blogger are not aware that Catherine did not perform at the Christmas Carols event. She recorded the song with Tom Walker about 2 weeks before the event, and the video of that pre-recorded song was released after the Christmas Carols event. Perhaps some people got confused because she wore that same red dress, and the song was recorded in the same venue, and Tom Walker did perform at the event, but with a different song.
As much as I do not want to fall into the trap of defending the working royals at all costs, Catherine will be Queen, consort of the head of state. The Cambridges have got things wrong in the past, and no doubt will make more mistakes, but they actually do have an official role to play that requires them to be in the public eye.
The Sussexes have nothing to offer and no legitimate platform of their own (an official role, a substantial foundation, a major corporation or NGO, any kind of academic credentials or work experience ... they don't even dress well ...) that would justify these endless 'official' statements and overblown appearances. I accept the interest as being on par with that given to the Kardashians, the Beckhams and their children, a bizarre-looking woman called Katie Price ... but they are entertainment, and not particularly talented and only interesting because of the connection to the royal family. A lot of the media still gets it wrong in terms of how they cover them, and thus contributes to the dumbing down of the younger generation.
So far, two lies have been identified in that statement:
During that short PR visit to get photos, Archbishop Tutu never held Archie. If he had held him, even briefly, there would be photos. None of that short meeting was private and away from the cameras.
Archbishop Tutu did not come up with 'Arch meets Arch'. That either came from the media or was planted by Sussex PR, or was a mixture of both.
Change of topic ... did you see that the Australian authorities, with the assistance of the FBI, are gathering evidence to charge Amber Heard with perjury? I wonder if the Harkles are aware that they have a threat hanging over their heads, and all the lies they tell in interviews and statements are not helping them at all. If there is any hint that they will be charged with perjury, they will go after the Queen. (My opinion)
When Paul Burrell was charged with theft of Diana's personal belongings, on the day the court case/hearing started, the Queen, while being driven to an engagement, suddenly remembered that she had given Burrell permission to take items of his choosing and phone calls were made. That was the end of any prosecution of Burrell. No one was going to question the Queen. (not even if she had the right to give such permission).
Because of this incident from the past, the Harkles will think they have the perfect weapon to prevent proscution for perjury. I think they are wrong and if they try to destroy the Queen to save themselves, it will blow up in their faces.
Ah, thank you for the clarification. It seemed somewhat out of character for Catherine, with her shyness, to be performing at a public event. That makes more sense. I always thought that the only reason that she would have done it would be if she were earnestly requested to do so.
I also thought it might be her tribute to Prince Philip as well as all the others "who can't be here". That perhaps the song moved her and that is why she wanted to be a part of it.
Perhaps you and the Harry Markle blogger are not aware that Catherine did not perform at the Christmas Carols event. She recorded the song with Tom Walker about 2 weeks before the event, and the video of that pre-recorded song was released after the Christmas Carols event. Perhaps some people got confused because she wore that same red dress, and the song was recorded in the same venue, and Tom Walker did perform at the event, but with a different song.
Thank you for the clarification. That does make it better. Harry Markle and I were unfair to hold that, at least, against the Cambridges.
I do still find it very stunt-y, though. I did from the very beginning (when the teaser video of Catherine sitting at the piano came up on my Instagram feed) and when I heard the song I was not impressed. It sounds like a Eurovision reject. But I'm also done being Scrooge for the day. This would be the dumbest hill on the world to die on!
We all make mistakes. I don't think we should be afraid to express our thoughts here but I have learned the hard way here on the blog that some things cannot be expressed. At least when I express them...you said something unpopular about Catherine and got a pass. That's freedom.
I'm very happy that the blog has grown to be more thoughtful (and I include myself here) in how we respond. Being aware of the spirit of the blog and staying in tune (versus staying in step) makes a big difference.
How this post by me is received, will indicate just exactly what I am saying.
I enjoy your posts!
I have no idea what the context of these photos are, but I am rolling on the ground with laughter! (TBW in a loo paper dress and fascinator.)
In the one photo, she looks unimpressed (Should I be doing this? Don't I look ridiculous?) Was she desperate for attention/the limelight?Considering her performance for the Ellen show, she seems to revert back to what could have been written off as foolish mistakes we made when we were young, but now just do not make sense for a woman in her forties.
In the age of the narcissist and the 'me generation', it must be difficult to adapt to change but retain the Queen's values. The Queen loved to dance and perform in pantomimes and probably plays the piano quite well, but she would never have put on a performance at the piano as Diana and Catherine did, nor dance on stage as Diana did. She observes, and, now and then, plants a tree. Catherine and William, and other working royals, get stuck in and participate in public events (other than the traditionally acceptable polo or sailing), which the Queen never did.
Modernising the monarchy, or adapting to changing society, is a tricky line to walk that probably takes a lot of commitment and the wisdom to accept that mistakes will be made, and to learn from them with humility and courage, but listen to the best advice. The Harkles were all grandiose talk but lacked the strength of character to actually stick around and do the work.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10349525/Inside-Cambridges-Christmas-Prince-William-gifted-Kate-beautiful-bracelet.html?ito=social-twitter_dailymailUK
Who is this insider source and why would they be talking to US Weekly?
Odd ...
Why Harry's Memoir Will DESTROY His "Career"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAL9UDwgH1o
It is a difficult path. On the one hand, having rival courts/centers of power are bad; I believe that this is what would happen if * and 6 are invited/allowed to return. They cannot allow *any* of the royal family to have their causes without attempting to stomp all over them. *sigh* Diana was a separate power center, and I don't think the UK wants that drama all over again. On the other hand, a united power couple is so much stronger than each are separately. I think the heir/future monarch must clearly be in charge.
If I had suppressed my unpopular opinion, I would never have learned which part I was basing it on that was wrong! With respect to the song itself, personal taste is personal taste, but I'm glad I was corrected on the most egregious charge.
Thanks for your kind words!
Thanks for that info. I'm pretty clueless about American tabloids! Do people actually believe this stuff, or do they have enough critical thinking skills to work out that it must be made up?
At the risk of stirring the pot ...
@Enbrethiliel
I have no idea why Catherine did that pre-recorded performance with Tom. It did send Tom rocketing up the charts and reminds me of the history of royalty in Europe, where the monarch would choose a favourite court musician/composer and bestow patronage on him. If you were a favourite chosen by the monarch, you were financially supported; if you were out of favour, you could starve!
Talking about getting stuff wrong ...
@WBBM
I think you would know ... Were the Queen, Charles and Anne more likely to participate in public engagements when they were younger? I think I remember Anne, when she was younger, getting into some lethal armoured vehicle and driving it. So, perhaps the Cambridges are not walking a different path because of changng times, as I have stated, but are simply much younger and ae still free of positions such as Prince and Princes of Wales, or King and Queen?
https://mobile.twitter.com/richardaeden/status/1476096056135933953?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1476096056135933953%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=
The song itself aside, I think KP thought that getting Catherine on the airwaves would be great Christmas PR. And perhaps it is! What do British Nutties, who actually get to hear the song on the radio, think of it?
I think a bunch of things were at play here. This was probably intended to be an organic extension of the development of Catherine's personal brand since Hold Still came out. The book was one uniting, comforting thing to come out of the lockdowns; this Christmas carols event in honor of frontline workers was meant to be another one. I can't really blame Team KP for wanting to make Catherine's participation extra memorable, though the song still raises an eyebrow for me. Something else I noticed immediately was that Catherine's dress was a red version of the black dress she wore to Prince Philip's funeral, which gives extra poignancy to the idea of "those who can't be here." This was meant to wrap up a hard year in a beautiful way and to be something we could all look back on when these times are over. For the most part, it seems to have succeeded.
You're most welcome! 🙂
George VI competed at Wimbledon, as Dk of York, in 1931 in men's mixed doubles.
https://www.history.com/news/wimbledon-tennis-tournament-facts
Anne: `Her first public engagement was at the opening of an educational and training centre in Shropshire in 1969'.(Wkipedia') She would have been 18 or just turned 19 then. Competed in Montreal Olympics 1976.
Have a look at her Wikipedia entry.
Charles went into the Navy after Cambridge, (where he'd been involved in Am Dram- see
https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/prince-charles-as-student-at-cambridge-university-in-a-news-photo/80752057)
Can't remember any notable public engagements before his marriage. Then Di stole his thunder.
I heard that someone who'd sat next to Anne at a university dinner (before Di came along) cheekily asked her about C -
`Oh, you mean Action Man- ', she said.
-----
PinkVanilla
@PinkVanillaDice
·
4h
Those are the names that keep coming up.
DMW
@DMW9699
Replying to
@PinkVanillaDice
@SiggyStardust80
and 6 others
I have a friend at a US entertainment news outlet who just received an email from a squadie, well ex squadie, who is willing to sell their communications from Sunshine Sachs and payment history for these attacks. Things are getting interesting.
-----
Thanks. I knew you would have the info!
Rather than walking the tricky line of 'modernising' the monarchy, the Cambridges may perhaps be following a path well trodden by the older generations!
I did not know that about George VI. Fascinating!
I had forgotten about Princess Anne competing in the Olympics, as did Zara. The Cambridges are starting to look as safe as the Queen!
I was thus reminded of the emperor's new clothes for we must of course praise the Duchess as we do a child who has just achieved some - for an adult simple - feat but Royals as Princess Grace would have been able to explain must not become Royal if they seek to pursue art for what are we then praising, their art or their status? Kate did a musician out of a gig.
I haven’t heard her play, so I can’t comment on that. I remember Diana doing that dance for Charles and that felt too public (as in look at me )as it was for him, so that came off as cringy to me. Although Catherine’s performance wasn’t in anyway personal in that sense and I know it was for the Christmas Eve service at Westminster, it just seemed out of character for her in a way it was perhaps too gimmicky and showy. 🥴
It was gimmicky. If we had heard about her piano playing before, it would have felt more natural; but as things were, it was entirely off brand. (Compare it to the Hold Still project, which made sense because we've been seeing for some time what a talented portrait photographer she is.) I do get the good intentions behind the performance and I grant that it always takes courage to put oneself out there musically. It was just a bad fit to me.
The first time I saw the performance, I thought it would have been better to have Catherine performing with a small choir of children. An amateur with amateurs. And it would have fit what we know of her brand! But a performance like that couldn't also be a pop single, I guess. Anyway, I'm mostly scratching my head over Tom Walker. I had never heard of him before now. Do any British Nutties know why he got the privilege of using Catherine's title to promote his music?
I’m a British Nutty and I’ve not heard of Tom before either, you aren’t alone. I’ve had to Google him! 😛
I totally agree, a smaller and more intimate setting with children and other amateurs would’ve given off a different vibe. 😃Her intentions were very genuine I’m absolutely sure of, but for me the scene and setting didn’t work.
Again, there is nothing new here, these rumours started a few years ago, the British tabloids largely ignored them – which, ahem, is so unlike them – and because of that there’s been no follow-up which is the point that so many have made: the Mail and the Sun put so much energy into tearing down Meghan for nothingburgers but selectively decide to play the integrity and respect card with other members of the royal family.
Interestingly enough, some are saying that even Twitter is joining the game. Because for whatever reason, the #PrinceWilliamAffair hashtag is no longer showing up on trending lists, even though it’s generating enough trending traffic, and instead it’s been replaced on the trending list by the much simpler hashtag #PrinceWilliam. And now you’re all caught up in case you were wondering what this was all about.
from lainey Lui's web site, aka the woman with her tongue up *'s ass.
Snipped from the DM...
Asked how the performance with Kate came about, he said: 'I've met the Duchess a couple of times at various different charity events and the last one we did together was for Action on Addiction, and she gave a speech at that particular one and I sang my song Leave A Light On and performed it live.
'Afterwards she got in touch with me and my team and said would you mind performing this live at the carol service? And I said absolutely no problem, but I've actually written a Christmas song this year that nobody's heard yet, I'll send it over, why don't you listen to that because it might be more suitable for the service?
'Anyway, she heard the song and absolutely loved it and asked if I could come down and perform that. And then about a week later, her team got in touch and said she was really keen to play the piano on the song.
We have never seen her in quite such a public performance mode before, it's true, so in that sense, it was 'out of character'--but look at the reason for the carol service to begin with: comforting grieving families who have lost loved ones, particularly during this cruel pandemic. These last 2 years have been a period 'out of character' for the entire world. In the context of the more personal loss within the Royal family, I viewed her participation in this as a loving and lovely tribute--a gift to both the Queen and to the memory of the Duke of Edinburgh. Criticisms of her not being up to scratch as a musician or being a show-off seem awfully mean-spirited to me. It's precisely because Catherine has never been a show-off that we didn't even know she played an instrument until now. I'm no music teacher but she sounded lovely to me. I've had a year of piano lessons as an adult and I know it's bloody hard to even plink out a simple melody without goofs. She sounded lovely to me. Accompanists are supposed to be in the background and not call attention to their parts, unlike a soloist. Whether or not she is accomplished enough to be a soloist is beside the point as that was not her objective. I thought she was brilliant. I don't view it as helpful or even necessarily true that she only did this so that she could 'compete' with her sister-in-law in the Montesh*tshow Follies. Any notion of a competition is solely in *'s twisted mind and abetted by a thirsty media that loves to set public figures up just to knock them down as many pegs as they can. It's an ugly sport, just like everything associated with the SixSh*ts is ugly, petty and entirely self-centered.
Perhaps it was a special one-off thing that will never be repeated in this particular venue, due to the unprecedented circumstances this year, but I think we should get used to seeing more appearances like this from Catherine as she grows ever closer to her role as Queen Consort. It's not the Queen's way, that is for sure, but William and Catherine are the royals for the 21st century and they know that if the institution they will soon be the head of is to survive, they have to be more accessible to the people . .more 'normal', if you will, than the more remote and chilly style epitomized by the Queen these last 70 years. I have affection for the Queen, for her dignity and indefatigable spirit that has carried her through so many trials and turbulence during her lifetime. She is a great lady, the like of whom we will not see again. But there have been some grave deficiencies in the way she has handled things on an interpersonal level within her own family which have led directly to the present situation. What has worked for the Queen all these years is just not going to work for anyone else in the same way. Elizabeth is the product of her times, which are passing, and William and Catherine have to walk the tricky line of embodying what their generation's idea of royalty should be. They have never striven to hide their humanity away behind starchy formal facades and they won't start now. Nor should they.
Catherine embodies loveliness and grace. I know she works awfully hard at it at times, but she would not be so successful if she were not also a genuinely good person with a good heart, who has not forgotten her roots, even if she will be Queen one day. I would like to hold onto that slice of goodness in our shabby, increasingly bitter world without the cynicism of our age creeping in to taint it as it has everything else.
--------------------------------------------
https://www.thedailybeast.com/will-prince-william-and-prince-harry-make-peace-in-2022-dont-bet-on-it?ref=scroll
I think Harry's entirely lost to the Dark Side, I really do.
Stories like this make me want to eat my own liver in frustration.
Some real doozies in here . . unabashedly laying ALL the fault at the feet of the cold, unfeeling, racist family, of which William is the chief bully and chief racist, according to H. But! the Sussexes 'incredible activism' and 'immense popularity in the United States' will see them though, concludes whichever sycophant wrote this drivel.
I know . . I choked on my tongue too.
It really is Edward and Wallis all over again . . but worse. The Duke and Duchess of Windsor had their everlasting grievances, many of which where concocted, just like the Montesh*tshow Mountebanks's are. But the Windsors didn't have the 24/7 social media cycle, a slavering media that shows no deference any more to the institution of monarchy . . oh and Wallis didn't have a black mother to play as a trump card all the time. It's so rich that systematic 'racism toward Meghan's children' is a major plank in their arsenal of contention . . . the children we have been shown (which is not to say they are necessarily M's, but y'all know where I stand on that score) are two of the most blindingly Caucasian looking kids in Christendom. Murkletroid knows DAMN WELL why her alleged spawn will never be made Price or Princess and it has nothing to do with Doria being a black woman. In my unscientific opinion, Doria's DNA does not touch upon those children at all and it's equally likely that Haz's and *'s don't either.
a "disaster from start to finish" and one of the "biggest c***-ups" in the royal family's history.
However did the Queen approve this shambles to begin with? Was it because it was her baby, Edward, asking? Rare misjudgment from the Queen which turned out to be yuge.
Compared to that, Catherine kept it very classy and I think she was a credit to the Firm.
Modesty and humility were the order of the day for the Royals - such a shame it's elicited so much mean-spiritedness.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Brittney281904/status/1475907717910908930?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1475907717910908930%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=
It is most interesting.
For all their grand PR, this is the reality.
It is a good thing to mobilize people to be generous in supporting some of the organizations across the world that depend on donations.
However, the only influence they seem to be left with and support they can mobilize is a questionable group of people who attack and threaten anyone who dares to not worship their queen, and who threaten the royal family and royal reporters. Sooner or later, someone is going to do something crazy and the Sussexes are going to be part of the mess.
Screwed and Skewered
In 2022
One thing will remain true
The Harkles still clawing
at doors to get through
They’ll beg and bang on
their tramp to Washington
But their options are limited to
Fewer and Few
Too true!
Actually quite sad that two people with wealth, privilege, global public recognition, previous support of the monarchy, unearned opportunities ... etc. have messed up so badly, and don't seem to understand that they are the problem.
I keep thinking they must get something right in 2022. Law of averages and all that. But the pitfalls are so many and they have a pattern of making bad choices.
She really doesn’t have anything to lose now if she lets it be known that Harry’s wife was intimately acquainted with many of her clients…who may have availed themselves of her services But found her grasping, insatiably thirsty and repellent with her clothes on. Imagine—Out of the ranks of all of the potential multi millionaire bachelors she might have snagged, she wound up with the RF’s village idiot. But in terms of causing maximum chaos and drama, HazNowt Was an inspired choice, due to his family connections. A talentless alienating zero like a * did not worm her way into HazNowt’s circles without help. Maybe Ghislaine could shed some light on how a toxic wannabe like Farkle wound up attending parties with a Princess of York.
Our times will only get more interesting one feels.
I suspect that Ghislaine Maxwell will suffer an unfortunate "accident" or "commit suicide" in prison. I also believe that the 'accusers' that testified in court will suffer unfortunate accidents or just 'disappear' because they want their privacy.
If people didn't know that Catherine played the piano fairly well, they haven't been paying attention to her. Even I knew that...and I live in middle America, and wasn't even a big fan of the BRF prior to recently. The only reason I started paying more attention to them was when Mm came smugly onto the scene.
The song itself is perhaps not top notch but the staging and setting, accompanied by the DOC, did wonders for it. I say good for her. It was a gift she was offering without being ostentatious, look at MEEEEEEE!
I like that she hasn't said a word about it. It was intended as a kind offering, imo. Take it in the spirit in which it was intended.
I thought it was both elegant and endearing, while retaining her regal grace.
We can only hope that Maxwell sings like a Maria Callas canary.
Singalong 🎤
Apologies: Frank Sinatra
You Make Me Feel so Young
Tongue Stung Clung
Haz and M
Are just two idiots
Running across the country
Picking up lots of had and havenots
She made him feel well hung
She made him feel
that s.it should be flung
Balls have been wrung
More malodorous dung to be sung
She makes him heel, well strung!
Thank you! For those who know the story, it's incredibly straightforward. And perhaps many British viewers knew it before the performance, too -- though, as @RaspberryRuffle has noted, it wasn't a clear connection to everyone. The more I know of the story behind the performance, the less discordant it seems. Perhaps in a few years, when the Cambridge style is more of a given than an emerging surprise, moves like this will also be the norm.
@Hikari
Your defense of Catherine is wonderful. I'm a huge fan of hers, too, and wish that she were universally loved. I'm rather angry at myself for still hating the song. But I can love and respect her anyway.
Panhandlers
Without a pot to p.ss in
They’ve realised they’re missin’
The glow of Monarchy
Whatever they rorted
From the Mail has been sorted
Paid out to PR, a fat fee
Now back to merching and
mouthing more moaning malarkey
@Swampie
You and I should get together
for a Singalong.
I’ll provide the grog,
you can provide the voice,
I can’t really sing,
doesn’t stop me 🥴
@Sandie
I’m hoping Karma finally
catches up with madam next year!
@Elsbeth
Who is Doria, where is she?
The image of her licking her lips
in the wedding chapel.
Nerves, or salivating over
what’s to come?
December 2020, the multi-million deal with Spotify is announced, and Archewell Audio is also announced on their website. They release one podcast that month, featuring pre-recorded bits and bobs from various 'friends', including Elton John, and Archie makes an appearance. It was so forgettable that I do not remember what the podcast was about.
10 months ago, which would be February 2021, and two months after they supposedly set up Archewell Audio, they release this bizarre video talking about the amazing content they are going to produce. She looks smug. He looks miserable. (Note that she must have been 5 months' pregnant at the time.)
https://youtu.be/X7HiaZlGggQ
5 months ago, which would be July 2021, and 7 months after they supposedly set up Archewell Audio, and a month after the arrival of the daughter, they hire some hot young person to produce their podcasts. Nothing happens. What the heck happened to this person?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9756589/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-hire-new-Head-Audio-produce-Archewell-podcast.html
If Spotify has any integrity or backbone, they would fire the person who signed them and handed over any money to them, and would sue the Sussexes to recover any advances paid.
I do hope Tom Bower digs deep and devotes an entire chapter to this, one of many, disgraceful episodes in the Sussex saga.
Harpo-oned
Mouth Organ Grinders flunkey
Also known as Chimpo monkey
Is hoping for a stint on
Cordens show
Neither Dory, or Winfrey
Elevated madam Simpy
He must know he’ll
be dealt same fatal blow…
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/psychics-2022-predictions-meghan-markles-25762380
(She gets a new presenting role - something in stage? More amusement for us? Marriage grows in strength, another baby, but in the future, not next year.)
https://torontosun.com/news/national/braun-fearless-celebrity-predictions-2022
(These psychics are seeing him missing the UK and his family, and a separation and divorce for them.)
If Maxwell was going to sing,
she would have sung.
She’s gone down for many men,
shame on them.
swamp woman my husband’s genes prevailed and my kids sing in the same tone deafness that he has. thankfully we have taught them to appreciate other people’s talents
will be interesting what 2022 will bring for the harkles. i’m guessing more fireworks around Catheriens’s bday in about a week, more excuses not to return for the queen’s jubilee. another pregnancy, miscarriage, archie busy and can’t watch lilibuck$ for a week when mom and dad are away. one or both kids have covid maybe i’d he starts to leave her she lets out he has covid so he can’t travel. somehow i don’t think i am thinking creatively enough for 6s wife
I think we've all thought there would be a separation long ago.
I saw just by chance an article about the body language expert Jesus Enrique Rosas where he analyses the Harkles' faces during the wedding ceremony.
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/meghan-markles-subtle-expression-change-25817477
If Maxwell was going to sing,
she would have sung.
The prosecution didn’t offer her any deals before trial. She will likely remain tight-lipped until her appeal is denied, then start to negotiate.
I hope she stays alive until then.
I remember seeing the smirk at the wedding and thinking it wasn’t in anyway a good or a positive sign. I equally didn’t have a good feeling when I saw her stride out in ripped jeans at the Invictus Games either. The smirk just confirmed what I thought was coming. 😳☹️
I subscribe to The Language Guys YouTube videos….just not had a chance to listen to this one about the smirk yet. 😛
I should have specified that it was just an article and not a video.
I didn't watch the wedding as we were away that day and I was hoping against hope that H wouldn't marry her. Like you, I didn't have a good feeling when I clapped eyes on her at the Invictus Games, complete with ripped jeans, 'husband' shirt (a subliminal message for H?) and that smug face and her smirk. Then it went from bad to worse with the Vanity Fair article and the so-called tailing by the paps 😧
There will be no divorce until JCMH turns age 40 and 6 months and gets his hands on his full assests (the trusts). TBW is after the money. Unless, JCMH learns something so reprehensible that divorce is the only way out.
Re: Catherine’s piano performance… beautifully stated on your part. Catherine’s performance was very likely a special gift to the Queen. Catherine has been working through her fear of public speaking, but playing an instrument to accompany a well-known singer in front of a huge audience had to have brought on a new level of nerves. She did remarkably well.
i was leading through a Holiday Celebrations magazine from Better Homes and. Gardens. the merry and bright section has a boy prob 5 but with curlyish red brown hair and the same eyes hmm how could i take their pic and zoom in for the ear. i’m that could tell me more
child model? either they used one or archie is one. mrs is making the little man earn his keep.
To briefly go back to the harkles weird photo, I kind of liked it at first glance, it seemed out of character for them though. Then I noticed a creepy face in the window behind Hairy of a man with grey hair and a black fu manchu moustache. I thought at first it was a reflection of the photographer, but the angle is wrong for that.
Then people on LSA started pointing out all the anomalies. You covered most of them here, but I didn’t see mention of that baby’s flat forehead. Blow up the photo enough to see how the forehead is cut off at the window frame, and you also get a good view of baby Bettys ET fingers. Archie looks so uncomfortable too, if that kid is really him.
Really bad photoshopping.
Don’t mind my typos, I’m on my tablet. Small font and spellcheck does strange things that I can’t see too well.
Who wants to be a billionaire? Meg does
Have flashy flunkies everywhere? Meg does
Who wants the bother of a country estate?
A country estate is something she'd hate
Who wants to wallow in cocaine*? Meg does
Who wants the finest private plane? Meg does
Who wants to journey on a gigantic yacht?
A gigantic yacht would give her top spot
Who wants to be a billionaire? Meg does
And go to every swell affair? Meg does
Who wants to ride behind a liveried chauffeur?
A liveried chauffeur would be right for her
Who wants to spill the apple cart? Meg does
Who wants to blow the Net apart? Meg does
Her target’s the Throne
To be all her own…
*allegedly
Wealth is no protection against mental health issues but I imagine that it can buy a more comfortable hospital.
The comments are as to be expected. Lots highly supportive or defending her but not all. One which was not: Well people with low self esteem tend to polish themselves up with overpriced clothes to caress their egos.
Had not heard it ever put quite that way before but could see it.
Nice article about how much * spent last year on clothing despite not having royal duties. (more than Catherine who did) in the DM.
___
Same old dusty "jewels"...ugh.
Duchess of Cambridge: 115
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10285551/A-wardrobe-fit-Queen-Kate-Middleton-showed-frugal-amid-Covid-19.html
Duchess of Sussex: 24
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10305075/Meghan-Markles-DOUBLES-pricetag-wardrobe-2021.html
Even though her jewellery and accessories are included in the count, her spending is staggering.
What is she going to do when she has spent all Harry's money?
By the way, she cannot claim any of his inheritance when she divorces him, but she can make sure she spends whatever she can lay her hands on on stuff she can keep. They are well-known freeloaders, but from what they said on the Oprah interview, they had been spending his mother's money.
Harry got full access to the capital from his mother's inheritance when he turned 30.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/trialandheirs/2014/09/16/as-remainder-of-princess-dianas-estate-passes-to-harry-troubling-questions-remain/?sh=5ff331b75f05
I wonder how much is left?
I was reading the article and realised you've mentioned it. TBW spent £58,000 on new clothes in 2021. I'd say this is a paltry sum considering how much she spent in her first year as a 'royal' - wasn't it near the £1M mark? - but then Charles was footing the bill. In any case, however much she spends, it never looks right and she never looks good.
Let's forget about her for a minute. Happy New Year to all the Nutties.
Wishing you all a Happy New Year, hoping 2022 will be better
Magatha, you deserve a big gold star for keeping us all laughing.
Cheers xx
A good article about Ghislaine Maxwell from the New Yorker. Reading about her makes my blood run cold, and her demeanor and absolute control freakery and cold sociopathic stares are SO like Harry’s wife. It’s chilling. Really two peas out of a pod. Except that * is the lowest rent version of GM. TBW’s fundamental immaturity and inability to control her own facade means that she outed herself to her targets almost immediately. The damage she’s causing now is bad, but the only reason she still has any support from any people who don’t actually know her personally is because of having the dumb luck of being a biracial woman at precisely the best time in history to exploit such a background. The primary weapon in her arsenal is being born to a black mother, and does not require any skill or sophistication on her part to keep that particular victim narrative going. But imagine how much more damage she could’ve caused if she had been In Ghislaine Maxwell’s tier of Narcissism. Madam G is a modern day Marquise de Mertuil, a really top grade sociopathic operator. But just like the fictional Marquise, G is on the precipice of an epic fall. I don’t suppose she will be able to maintain those looks or that haughty froideur in federal prison. TBW is a two-bit grifting,arrested development carny freak show. Let us hope this outcome for Jeffrey Epstein’s Madam presages an equally deserving downfall from her lofty perch for Madame Montesh*tshow.
May you each be healthy, happy, and prosperous in the New Year.
Just picked up this on another blog. Apparently The Hs are headed for the Oscars.
https://www.btimesonline.com/articles/152957/20211231/meghan-markle-prince-harry-make-big-american-debut-oscars-report.htm
happy new year hunkering down to bad weather but lots of good eats. enough alcohol to get us through and a few more storms 😉
saw betty white died. just aimed up 2021. it kinda sucked
Wishing you all the best for 2022. 🎆🎇🎆
and @snarky - I agree with your point!
Back to lurking.....
@SwampWoman. Yes, I did read that Virginia recruited one of the girls. That was interesting.
It certainly shuts down her "victim" narrative and moves her into "exploiter" territory.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CYKH5wBNdhT/
For royal watchers, I can't think of a better image to close 2021 and to encourage us to look forward to 2022 and all the years to come. The power of the Bond premiere, embodied by Catherine in her gold dress, was just the beginning. I don't see the "just" the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge in that photo, but a King and Queen in waiting. And while I'd love for Queen Elizabeth to remain with us a bit longer, I feel that the future is in safe hands.
The whole thing stinks to me - no trial, let alone a fair one, all unproven allegations from someone who was in it up to her neck. A's personality may leave a great deal to be desired but that should not deprive him of fair treatment. It all looks like a witch hunting attack on the RF and the British Constitution, in which attention is being diverted from US miscreants.
Also, re sweating, don't the accusers know that it's impossible to prove a negative? It's up to them to prove that he does sweat.
Andrew has said repeatedly that Maxwell could clear him. If he is as pure as the driven snow re sexploitation, the 'sealed' evidence may well have cleared him (or, conversely, there would be graphic evidence to the contrary).
Regardless, I do believe that all of the royal family (as a symbol of England) is under attack daily by enemies foreign and domestic.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/mystic-veg-fortune-tellers-tips-25823487
The Asparagus Lady is back!
She predicts scandal for the Royal Family. Well, that wasn't too difficult!
The Andrew saga is going to get worse. He is tripping over the lies he told in that interview, and a jury may want to 'stick it to the royals', so all the contradictions from Virginia and all the lack of evidence will be ignored. Virginia will go after a HUGE payout, and the Queen will gave to dig deep because Andrew does not have the money. Worse is that the win will encourage a flurry of lawsuits against Royal Family members as dozens line up to try to get their fortune so that they can live like a multi-millionnaire and get lots of attention, like Virginia. (I do believe she was exploited by Epstein and Maxwell. A teenager can't be counted on to make the right choices, especially if she does not have good parents to protect her and is bedazzled by wealth. But, instead of using her experiences to teach and mentor other teens just like her, she is going for money and attention in the most destructive way. Whoever wins this ugly battle, no one wins.)
Of course, the Sussex duo will wade into controversy after controversy. Serious pitfalls for them are the bullying investigation as staff may be given the quiet go-ahead to tell their stories to the press, and the Sussexes are going to run out of money sooner if they sue everyone! I also think that they are in danger of financial 'exposure'. At best, it will simply be exposed that their only funding comes from the toxic Sussex Squad. At worst, they will have crossed a line and will find themselves in court. Most sensational would be revelations about her two pregnancies!
All the Americans (and there are a number of prominent ones among them) involved with Epstein are being protected.
I think some of the evidence seized from the raid on Epstein's properties (photographs) have been used in the Maxwell trial, but I may be wrong and they may have been found in the raid on Maxwell's home.
Andrew should ask to have access to all the evidence seized. It would take a while to sift through it all! But, there are far more photographs of Americans with Epstein's 'girls' than Andrew. Why would Andrew be the only one who had sexual encounters with one of the girls?(And she was not under age so she is claiming rape, three times, at different times and in different places, and, like Meghan, is throwing in any other charge she can find.) I suppose it all boils down to if Virginia and Andrew testify and how they come across to the jury.
Spend, spend, spend!
She buys jewellery like a teenager, and none of it will become valuable heirlooms (provenance, workmanship, uniqueness, link to grand royal occasions). It's all expensive trinkets.
She had a decent upbringing and went to good private schools. Why does she behave like trailer trash that hit the jackpot?
Virginia interviewed three years' ago. Interesting!
Aristo scum, political scum. Vile lowlife vermin who should be outed for their crimes. Some will pay, some won't, but now the whole world knows even royalty or government office shouldn't be held with impunity.
There. I said it.
Happy New Year Nutties!
Hear, hear! All this case against A is just about money. Extortion is the word, I believe. It's all hearsay, he said/she said, and A is an easy target, easy to find and easy to get money out of. What about all the other men?
Meghan Markle vowed 'unladylike' habit would be ditched but gave up 'after a few drinks'
A New Year means a fresh start and today many of us will be pledging to make big changes for our New Year's resolutions.
But while we are always initially full of good intentions, it can sometimes be hard to stick to - just ask Meghan Markle, who once revealed she makes the same resolutions every year as she struggles to keep them.
According to The Mirror, Meghan made the confession on her blog The Tig in January 2016 - just months before she met her future husband Prince Harry.
And one of the habits the Duchess said she wanted to ditch was - according to her - "unladylike".
She wrote: "Run a marathon. Stop biting my nails. Stop swearing. Re-learn French. These make my New Year’s resolution list nearly (AKA actually every) single year.
"The marathon hasn't happened. The swearing comes in lulls triggered by being overworked or feeling mighty cheeky after a couple of drinks.
"Then there's the French – a language I studied through high school and then lost as I immersed myself in speaking Spanish with the Argentinians during my stint in Buenos Aires.
"I have put my little Rosetta Stone headset in my eager ears every year, resolving to do interviews en français, but much to my chagrin, it hasn't stuck.
Etc.
So she 'studied [French] through high school and then lost'? "I have put my little Rosetta Stone headset in my eager ears every year, resolving to do interviews en français, but much to my chagrin, it hasn't stuck". But, but, I thought she was fluent in the language?? 🤥🤣 We knew she was lying and she's admitted it. Can't even keep track of her lies. And the swearing is very ladylike. 'Triggered by being overworked'? She can't have been swearing much lately.
Ah well, the article was fun to read.
Farkle claimed during the infamous Craig Ferguson interview that she was confidently conversant in “Argentinian Spanish“ which was a special brand of Spanish that only natives and exceptionally gifted foreigners like herself can master. I have no doubt that there are some regional dialectical differences in the Spanish spoken in Argentina to its Latin American neighbors..Each country is going to have its own Unique linguistic flair—But for someone who grew up in Los Angeles, Farkle displayed zero hint of facility in any kind of Spanish even as she was regaling CF’s audience with her brags about her fluency. She might’ve offered to say a few words in this exotic brand of Spanish, but she did not. I only had four semesters of collegiate Castilian Spanish, but My professor it was excellent, and I call bullshit on Farkle. It’s my understanding that her internship at the Argentinian Embassy was supposed to last six or eight weeks, and she wasn’t at the embassy for more than three or four days before she got her claws into a married man and ran off with him, ditching her ‘job’ altogether and humiliating her uncle who had arranged this opportunity for her. She might have a limited and very situation specific vocabulary of Argentinian Spanish words, but none that would’ve been suitable for broadcast on the CBS network even at 12:30am.
Even if she completed her commitment to the embassy, six weeks is not long enough to be fluent in anything. Farkle is the colossal fraud of our time, the fact that she’s acknowledged herself and yet—She’s still getting attention. What a liar, and not even a good one.
I hope she gets what she has coming to her for being **victimized and exploited** when she was still a dumb, very young girl.
I refuse to give those entitled , debauched fully matured (age wise) people a pass. They are low lifes.
Ok. Back on the ranch☺️
@Hikari
I know. What's another lie?
Here is an excerpt from People.com (June 2020), to be taken with a pinch of salt no doubt but it must have a grain of truth.
'Meghan Markle put her Spanish-speaking skills to good use during a recent charity visit in L.A.
To the surprise of the room, Meghan, 38, also began speaking in Spanish with one of the participants.
“She spoke Spanish perfectly with one young woman,” Father Greg Boyle, the group’s founder, tells PEOPLE. “She just went right into Spanish, which was a revelation — and it was very good.”
After double-majoring in theater and international Northwestern University, Meghan interned at the U.S. Embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina, where she learned Spanish.'
Are we supposed to believe that her Spanish, learnt in Argentina, is the same as spoken in LA? Again, we know the truth, i.e. that she didn't stay the course and that she legged it with a married man.
Yes, a colossal fraud, and someone should go through her life and expose every single lie. As you say, 'what a liar, and not even a good one.'
I wonder if any Nutty-minded Argentinians ever commented on her. I tend to think that *'s notoriety hasn't gone too far beyond the Anglo world, but people have BS detectors in every culture and *'s BS is exceptionally strong. I recall someone on Tumblr snorting at her "fluent" French in Morocco, but nothing on the Spanish. Possibly because she never actually spoke any. But it would be interesting to get a reaction on her description of "Argentinian Spanish" from a native speaker.
Bless Father Boyle for being generous toward a woman whose real intentions and nature he probably hadn't sussed out yet.
There are several "Celebrities speaking another language" compilations on YouTube. We can bet everything we've got that if * actually could speak Spanish or French or Klingon with any degree of fluency, she would have given the world enough footage to have been included in one of those. What it must have done to her narc ego not to be able to grab the limelight that way after Prince Philip's death, when a video of him speaking German (with complimentary comments from native speakers!) went viral.
In short: Her foreign language skills are almost as non-existent as her children.
https://twitter.com/Knesix/status/1476925592729751555?s=20
Stop making stupid people famous!
Who could have predicted that *'s great nemesis would turn out to be Jesus Enrique Rosas?
If he hasn't picked apart *'s Spanish and French yet, I hope he will!
After her junior year, she secured an internship as a junior press officer at the American embassy in Buenos Aires, reportedly with the help of her uncle Michael Markle,[22] and considered a political career.[23][24] However, she did not score high enough in the Foreign Service Officer Test to proceed further with the US State Department,[25] and returned to NU. She also attended a study abroad program in Madrid.[21]
References:
[22] Fowler, Bella (November 30, 2019). "Meghan Markle's uncle lashes out in bizarre, scathing interview". The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved October 7, 2021.
[23] Willgress, Lydia; Boyle, Danny (September 21, 2017). "Who is Meghan Markle? Everything we know about Prince Harry's girlfriend". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on January 7, 2017. Retrieved April 22, 2017.
[24] Vesey-Byrne, Joe (December 5, 2017). "Meghan Markle was an intern for the US embassy in Argentina. But you probably didn't hear about that". Indy100. Retrieved October 21, 2020.
[25] Morton, Andrew (April 1, 2018). "Meghan Markle exclusive: Diana's biographer Andrew Morton on how the Suits star made it to the heart of the Establishment". The Times. London. Archived from the original on April 4, 2018.
[21] Swartz, Tracy (May 9, 2018). "Meghan Markle recalled as dignified, charitable during her Northwestern days". Chicago Tribune. Archived from the original on May 13, 2018. Retrieved May 13, 2018.
----------
What I find odd is the following:
There are no photos of her in Argentina or Spain. Nohing at all!
Her time in Spain seems like a black hole, but, on her blog or in an interview, she did mention being in a convoy of sorts during rioting in Argentina. Her PR is very good at digging up people to gush over her and support her outrageous claims, but nothing from Argentina or Spain.
My suspicious mind wonders what she is hiding (other than the supposed affair with a married man at the embassy).
The Daily Record - never heard of it '
It's a Scottish tabloid which occasionally comes up with a real gem - like `outing' Jack Vettriano for copying his people from a Dover book of copyright free images for commercial designers.
Thanks for enlightening me about The Daily Record :). If it's Scottish then that's why.
Meghan and Harry say only their official press team at Archewell will comment - or not - on any stories concerning the couple"
https://archive.ph/YNBTO
Perhaps because I am tired, or perhaps because I am so cynical about the couple ... But I do not believe them, and I sense there is a contradiction in what they said.
So, they want the media coverage, and if the source of a story is unnamed:
The story may be true, and they do not comment.
The story may be true, and they issue a confirmation.
The story may be false, and they issue a denial.
The story may be false, and they do not comment.
That sorts out all disinformation about them then (not)!
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/us-news/harry-meghan-send-archie-nursery-25831438
(My question: so there are pre-schools who don't teach this to kids?)
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/us-news/meghan-harry-not-over-moon-25831111
(Words fail me ...!)
Selling the house? that makes no economic sense when you think about the costs of selling the house if true. From what I've read, renting is cheaper if you will only stay for 3 to 5 years.
They don’t know his parents are royalty, and probably wouldn’t care – unless Meghan was a Disney princess.
Is this shade? It doesn't seem like a line * would have signed off on, had she had more creative control. Why remind everyone of one of her most public embarrassments?
The Mirror article makes no sense.
She is not royalty. She married royalty.
Children at a preschool are much too young for British royalty to mean anything to them.
Of course the people at the school know who they are!
Parents of children at the school may not have met them because of coronavirus restrictions, but of course they know who they are and what British royalty is.
I agree that this is the sort of meaningless nonsense that would come from her. The big clue is the mention of the Disney princess.
I think it’s very important that you make your own decision about what you are. Therefore you’re responsible for your actions, so you don’t blame other people.
The Duke of Cambridge
Whoops! I forgot - * & the Sock Puppet know nothing about either.
Well, who the h*ll said everyone has a right to be "over the moon" about every aspect of their home? Sure, I understand that if you (or someone else on your behalf) pays upwards of $14mm for a property, you'd expect it to be pretty darn close to perfect, but the suggestion that they are so unhappy with this property that they need to move smacks of (continued) entitlement.
So you don't like a feature of your gazillion square-foot house? Don't use that bedroom or bathroom!
Their assumption that they deserve to be "over the moon" about their abode screams of entitlement.
How many of us are 100% "over the moon" about where we live? My goodness, my first house had a primary bathroom filled with gold-mirrored tiles on the walls, peeling laminate, and a crap vanity for over 10 years before I had the finances to redo it. I certainly wasn't "over the moon" about the bathroom, nor with the peeling laminate on the kitchen floor, the drop ceiling in the family room, the horrible backyard. I CERTAINLY wasn't "over the moon" with the low-class meth users next door, one of whom had most unfortunate diagnoses including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder and who fixated on me, but you know what? I could afford this house. It was a solid home in a middle-class neighborhood for me and my dogs in which to live. I could afford my monthly payments on a single income. It was a relatively close commute to work (without the use of helicopters, I may add. I used lowly public transit).
Sometimes I want to SLAP these two and their sugars across the face and say "YOU AREN'T THAT SPECIAL! SNAP OUT OF IT!" but it would do no good.
It's absolutely unbelievable to me that they would encourage anyone, even their paid mouthpiece Scooby-Doo, to promote how unhappy they are with a $14mm home in one of the most exclusive enclaves in the US.
Do they really, genuinely expect anyone to feel a shred of sympathy for them? If so, their delusion is so entrenched they need to be hospitalized, because that is living completely outside of reality.
Welcome! This is the clip that @Hikari and I often mention:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EM2xi5Jnd0
She starts describing the Spanish spoken in Argentina at 2:15 and says a few words that might be Spanish but might also be gibberish. What do you think?
How many of us are 100% "over the moon" about where we live?
Nailed it.
Even if it's not a true story and is just something to keep their names in the news, it's incredibly tone deaf. It all boils down to: "They want to move because they don't like where they live." Which kind of kills the relatable image she wanted to project with her Sizzler salad story just a few months ago. How many human beings on the planet get to move just because they don't like their current home?
Then we read that the property they're not happy with has nine bedrooms, 16 bathrooms, a gym, a tennis court, a tea house, a private playground, a library, a spa (with saunas!), a wine cellar, and 7.5 acres with many beautiful trees. Just what does it take for this couple to be "over the moon"?
Wrong move, *. You should have complained about paparazzi stalking you, but I guess you weren't able to because the paps show absolutely no interest in you unless you pay them beforehand.
So the Gruesome Twosome may want to move because they are "not over the moon" about their current multi-million dollar house?
@Mischief Girl:
I have family who have built numerous houses for themselves and friends in the home design, home renovation, and interior design businesses. I’ve also done multiple major renovations to various hones I’ve lived in through the years.
I have to chuckle that I have yet to meet anyone, including people who work with professionals to get the home of their dreams who after the project is finished, doesn’t discover after actually living in it that there are changes they’d like to make ranging from minor tweaks to correct annoyances they didn’t think of to major changes such as knocking out more walls.
I have to wonder if Meghan wants something more opulent and just as she convinced Harry he needed to move from the UK,
now she has manipulated and convinced Harry they need a different house, which of course will be chosen based on HER desires with very little input from Harry. My guess is she wants something uber sleek and modern.
The other possibility is they are having money problems and can’t afford the massive mortgage, taxes, insurance, and the number of service people they need for the daily upkeep and long-term maintenance of the house and grounds of a property like that.
The monthly cost has to be massive and they might be finding out they can’t write it off on their taxes or somehow make Archewell pay for everything.
Their outgo must me incredible when you add up what we have just learned she has spent on jewelry and clothes for herself in the past year. That doesn’t include beauty, dental, healthcare, preschool tuition, security, food, clotges for the kids, furniture for that house plus cost of an interior designer, automobiles and maintenance and insurance, and so on.
It takes a lot of money to live like that, and compared to their neighbors and the elites they want to emulate, the Sussexes are on the low end on the scale of living for elites.
I have often observed that to say or have said of one that one is classically trained is seen as the musical equivalent of being musical royalty even if one is merely pumping out the latest X factor tune. There was a young girl-group singer whose name I now forget who on some show played a part of the slow - the easy bit - from Beethoven's Quasi Una Fantasia better known as the Moonlight Sonata. She played it and the audience were falling over themselves with praise no doubt in disbelief that the pop-star could play at all. I then not being over impressed (this was on YouTube) called up the same music at random as played by Rudolf Kempff. I have to say that the difference was that between playing the notes and playing the music. On one matter however the popette won out - Kempff was hunched over his pianoforte whereas the shape of the pop-singer's back was to die for.
I have no dog in this fight as I have never either attempted to play the piece or even seen the score.
etta, Bristol, United Kingdom, about an hour ago
Perhaps his own parents could attend these emotional literacy and kindness lessons. They might learn something.
A very good point and anyway, it should be the parents who reach kindness and emotional literary, assuming, of course, that they're capable.
https://www.lipstickalley.com/attachments/screenshot-2022-01-02-at-16-18-57-png.3230626/
Someone on LSA posted photos of the sale agreement for Mudslide Manor. The images are too small for me to read the text. If anyone can read it ...
We know the house was bought through a trust. Was it always some kind of money laundering deal?
If my calculations are correct, 6 houses in 4 years, none of which they owned.
Engagement late 2017, marriage May 2018, now January 2022
Nottingham Cottage (Crown Property)
House in Cotswolds (privately owned)
Forgmore Cottage (Crown Property)
Canadian mansion (owned by Russan through a trust)
Los Angeles mansion (owned by Tyler Perry)
Mudslide Manor (bought from a Russian through a trust)
Is this a typical narc trait? To never be satisfied? Or is there something else behind these rumours?
Maybe they want to move because they finally got the memo that their neighbors hate them. :D