The stories still keep coming out. Some are true, some we know this can't be right and then there are those somewhere in between. And no definitive end of them either in sight apparently.
Will we find out what happened about the house they allegedly bought and may have sold? Where would they move to next? Montecito was always kind of funny choice for what ever the direction they were trying to move in back then (more towards her having lots of acting options which seemed a lot less likely in that particular geographic spot - farther from centrality of action).
Will we see more pictures of any of the kids?
Is Spotify a lost cause? What about the Netflix venture? Supposedly getting some help to bring Pearl to fruition (thanks to David). Not much about that lately, right?
And book releases? Tom Bower's. And the one to be written by Harry. Tom's will come out but will Harry's?
January can be such a let down kind of month after all the franticness of the holidays and New Year build up.
Chatting to be continued.
General reminder of rules:
Nutty and Mods strive
as much as possible to make this a welcome and friendly blog. Please do
keep in mind that everyone posts with the risk of potential dissent,
criticism, and unpopularity. We depend on Nutties
to keep this place respectful and hopefully fun.
Guidelines for this blog is as follows:
-Keep discussions on the
Sussexes. Politics must be strictly related to their involvement. Off
topic subjects are permissible but should be limited and are subject to
the discretion of Mods.
-Be civil and courteous in discussions.
-Anonymous posts are not allowed.
-Do not discuss the blog, blog history, or other posters.
-No personal attacks both direct and indirect.
-Please de-escalate "fights" by dropping the subject.
Mods do their best to
ensure the guidelines are met. However, lapses happen because moderating
this blog is a 24/7 responsibility and we all have jobs and families to
care for. If you see overlooked issues, please
feel free to message us so we can address them.
Please get a screen name (not anonymous or unknown) if you do not have one. Other requirements of names: not political or otherwise upsetting/divisive. This is in keeping with the friendly blog.
Instructions:
-Click on your "Unknown" name where you last posted.
-You
should arrive on your profile page where you can then click the "B"
icon; once clicked, you should arrive at the Blogger Info Page.
-Next click the dropdown menu to the left of the "B" icon and click on "Settings" and then click "User Profile."
-Scroll down to "Display Name" and type your name.
-Hit "Save Profile" at the bottom.
-Finally, you can add an image/avatar on this page if you wish; make sure to save any changes if you choose to.
Thank you again for all your patience and support.
Comments
/Sorry, India.
I wonder if they feel they are getting their money's worth out of him.
Personally, I think that England has far bigger things to worry about than a princeling with delusions of adequacy and his wannabe wife.
New York. no one would care if they were there. you can walk down the street and see celebs all the time and no one bothers them. she would hate that. plus most buildings are co-op. who would approve them ever in one of those.
my guess is miami.
Im torn...will they move to New York which is super expensive but loads of people to feed the narcissist personality. Serena doesn't seem like she wants to be associated with M anymore. What about Las Vegas, H has a history there and knows how to keep himself entertained. Some more taboo pics would be a great set up for divorce. Maybe back to Canada, old friend Trudeau may be willing to pay their security now that the world is distracted with Covid. M knows all the hot spots and has connections there.
New York is increasingly seen as extremely unsafe as well as being extremely expensive. California/same. They should move to some of those small communities in flyover country that pay people to move there, but I doubt the population would be sufficiently impressed by them.
Thanks to all for the kind comments welcoming me in the old post.
i think Bottoms Up hired harry so they could increase visibility and maybe raise capital.
New York. no one would care if they were there. you can walk down the street and see celebs all the time and no one bothers them. she would hate that. plus most buildings are co-op. who would approve them ever in one of those.
my guess is miami
BITE YOUR TONGUE! I personally like Miami (grin), but left a job that would have required me to relocate there. 6 and * don't have the personal wealth, IMO, to run with the big dogs there.
If everything had worked out according to last year's plan, she'd be in a glitzy New York penthouse by now.
However . . .
@snarkyatherbest
New York. no one would care if they were there. you can walk down the street and see celebs all the time and no one bothers them. she would hate that. plus most buildings are co-op. who would approve them ever in one of those.
She can always keep paying for paps to create the illusion of popularity. That would hurt her ego, though.
I don't know much about how co-ops work, but it's hilarious to me that * might indeed have tried to get a NY home . . . and been thwarted by the very neighbors whose prestige she hoped to hitch her cart to.
I know very little about this city except that The Golden Girls was set there and it has a vibrant Latin-American scene. I'm afraid that I mostly associate it with retirees! What kind of social climbing would * be able to do here?
The @dnaroyals Instagram account just posted a side-by-side comparison of one of Catherine's portraits and a portrait of Queen Alexandra when she was still Princess of Wales:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CYjxYu2MCnH/
I know Catherine's portrait was meant to be a nod to the past and to tradition . . . but the likeness to a woman who held two titles that Catherine will also hold someday is making me look forward to the future!
PEARLS of Stupidity - @NETFLIX should jump ship.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyQ3F7-Z3IE
Thanks for the link to Circle 33 youtube channel. She does have something there. I hope @OprahWinfrey and @GayleKing finds out about her deceit - pushing all the blame to Oprah and CBS while they were once again, just victims of this big bad world.
@Enbreth
I apologise for my comment,
sorry, I misunderstood your
reasoning. No excuse X
It's all right! I wasn't offended, just a bit confused. I'm happy we've sorted it out and can concentrate on roasting the Harkles!
https://archive.ph/jIovz
It certainly gives one more food for thought, where images of Catherine are concerned. I especially appreciated this anecdote from early in her royal "career":
When Kate made her first public speech in March 2012, at the Treehouse hospice in Suffolk, she wore a high-street dress that her mother, Carole, had previously worn to Royal Ascot. “There she was meeting with hugely vulnerable children and families, and the dress was the story,” says the friend. “She said she found it ‘a bit demoralising’.”
That might not seem like a big deal, but I'll bet it was a negative enough experience for Catherine to be ambivalent toward her wardrobe afterwards. We know that she puts a lot of thought into what she wears (e.g., picking dull colors when out with the Queen or wearing local styles/designers on foreign tours), but what she wears for the Crown may not necessarily be what she truly wants for herself. She hasn't had the freedom to express herself through fashion in about a decade, and for the most part, she makes the sacrifice with grace. But on occasion, a bit of healthy willfulness pokes through. Such as, the article seems to argue, the portrait by Paul Emsley -- or her "country casuals" Vogue photo shoot. Those were unusually unvarnished images of her.
It's interesting to see the new portraits in this fuller context. Did she know that her bone structure and blunt features would contrast strongly with the ornate dresses and soft waves in her hair and the trimmings? Was that the intention: To show a highly modern woman who nonetheless embraces tradition? Are we still seeing "just [her]" -- this time, not with a complementary wardrobe and colors, but with a contrasting one?
Thanks for sharing the article, @Sandie! And for explicitly saying that those of us who didn't like the new portraits might get a lot out of it.
Clemmie Moodie
22:28, 10 Jan 2022Updated: 22:45, 10 Jan 2022
I sense that the writer finds the Duchess of Cambridge annoying, but can't help acknowledge that she has succeeded where the Duchess of Montecito failed. The piece includes an anecdote from the past:
"Yet in 2007 — still four years away from her wedding to William — Kate was nailing shots in London’s Raffles nightclub and doing “the worm”.
Desperate to strike up a conversation with the future royal, my equally drunken mate bowled up to Kate and asked where her top was from.
At which point, a steaming Kate replied: “Oooh, I don’t know. Hang on . . . look at the label.”
She then proceeded to hold up the collar of her (very West London) top and happily declared: “It’s Reiss!” Those sloshed days, and those high-street labels, have largely gone."
I have been waiting for The Body Language Guy to have a look at the video from that event where she tried to barge in where she was not supposed to be! I hope he looks at the rest of the coverage of the event. There is a photo of her doing buffalo stance between Anne and Harry, who are talking to each other. In the cropped photo that the media used, she is laughing and it looks as if she is happily chatting to Anne. In the full photo, you can see that she is being ignored but pretending to be part of the conversation. It is bizarre!
I am wondering if they might wait to see the cities in which Earthshot will be holding events. If they happen to "live" there, then they would definitely use all their PR to get Will and Kate to "stay with family" and therefore mooch off of all that press.
I've seen the video of the 50th anniversary of Prince Charles's Investiture many times and Mr. Rosas still managed to point out details I had missed -- like Charles very definite order for the Harkles to remain where they were. And *'s angry side-eye at Catherine.
(My own favorite part of the video was what it picked up of Prince William's voice. He seems to be saying angrily: "You're not allowed.")
Wow. Thanks for that explosive link Circle 33! It seems def on to something.
If she thinks she can get away with any ole bit of crap she's deluded. People are sniffing her out like hounds. Ha ha. That snark about the garbage truck that will dump them in NY was classic. I love it!!😂
---
As far as where they are going to live next, I'm uninspired at this point. I know where they are NOT going to live and that's in the UK...
* is the type who doesn't work outside of her comfort zone, so I deduce she'll stay in Cali but will come up with some bougie, cool new digs that seems prestigeous but not as expensive and exclusive (!) as Montecito.
🤔 Hmmm where will that be?
Blogger Enbrethiliel said...
Re: Miami
I know very little about this city except that The Golden Girls was set there and it has a vibrant Latin-American scene. I'm afraid that I mostly associate it with retirees! What kind of social climbing would * be able to do here?
Well, it isn't known as the capital of Latin America for nothing! When I spent time there, I was a working stiff, ate at Mami and Papi restaurants, and a lot of people were recent immigrants and did not speak English (or my version of Spanish which was waaaay too slow..bwaaaaaynos deeeeeyus, y'all). But, I've never had problems getting by in pantomime. That was mostly before the Venezuelan Hugo Chavez debacle, though, when the wealthy families that had the means fled. There are lots of pied-a-terres in Miami and vicinity for people flying in monthly or so to do business, get medical care, and/or to flee in case of revolution.
I should have clarified that when I said "Miami", I meant "Gold Coast". The lower west coast of Florida (Naples) is quite wealthy.
I hope I didn't phrase that idea too awkwardly, gotta run.
I definitely missed the Mm glance to see where C was. I also missed PC pointing to the doorway line on the floor when he said stand back. That was definitely a sign of anger.
I think he didn't stop to chat in order to stay behind the Queen, though. He was angry and was telling the Harkles off. You could see him bristle the instant he saw the Harkles standing there. He was mad. And H condescendingly motioning him to go ahead *really* enraged him.
Some bloggers suspect the Douchess is still under-the-radar buddies with Messica Julroney, plus she actually had successfully infiltrated a “happening, plugged in” young crowd when she filmed there for Suits, including becoming acquainted with Justin Trudeau and wife. The Douchess is so lacking in appropriate human emotions that she probably thinks she can wiggle, with Handbag H, and with no apologies, right back into her former crowd’s social scene, carousing at Soho House, sitting at Corey Vitiello’s right hand at chic private dinner parties etc… Even if that crowd did accept her back, the bracing pre-Covid zeitgeist is gone forever, so her visions of presiding at the top of the Canadian social heap are only another delusion.
Canada is part of The Commonwealth, and I suspect I’m in the minority here, but I believe Prince Charles continues to secretly send hefty sums of money to son and d-in-law, and would love to have them in The Commonwealth so he could more easily pull strings to get them monarchical placement in jobs where the public purse has to pay for security, palatial housing, and everything else that the two think they’re entitled to via a “half-in, half-out” situation as originally demanded by the dastardly duo. Maybe Charles and his advisors (wrongly) think they might be able to exert some control if they allow the twosome to be half-in, half-out, and explicitly on the payroll. Didn’t Harry ask his father and the Queen originally to name him the ceremonial Governor General of Canada? Don’t do it, Charles! It won’t work.
We Commonwealthers don't want them in the Commonwealth.
And, the Queen doesn't get to name Governor Generals anymore. She only assents to the choice of the PM. We are no longer in the 18th century which is something that the 6s don't seem to understand, as well as other people. Commonwealth countries are no longer colonies.
* is American. Let her stay in her own country.
I doubt they will move to Toronto. Toronto is fun for her because she was working there, but there is a limited market as Canada has a small population. The weather is also pretty cold there.
As for Governor General, the current one is an Innuit (Eskimo for Americans) woman who speaks no French and has gotten flack for that. Do you think that anyone is going to go backwards and replace her (she just started her term) with the grandson of the Queen of England who speaks no French and barely speaks English, and with a non-Canadian accent? We are no longer in Victorian times.
As mentioned in my previous post, it’s my opinion to which you’re welcome to disagree, I think Prince Charles still would like to get Harry back into the fold and is flailing about, looking for ways to get him back into a paid regal position.
I gave reasons why I thought the Sussex duo might consider moving to Toronto, and I must not have made clear that the move would not give them the success they continue to search for.
- - - - - - - -
@Fifi LaRue, I do hope you’re right that Charles isn’t sending money, they wanted to be out so let them stay out. Fingers crossed.
I think the Queen should name Harry to be governor of the colony of Virginia or the Commonwealth of Massachussetts.
I doubt Harry would be so stupid as to think that he could become GG of Canada, but I think that * is. She believes she can force herself into any situation of her desire. Being besties with Messica Baloney would give her more insight into the political situation in Canada, because Messica is married to the son of an ex-PM, but Messica is probably lying about her influence to build herself up in *'s eyes.
* is the type who doesn't work outside of her comfort zone, so I deduce she'll stay in Cali but will come up with some bougie, cool new digs that seems prestigeous but not as expensive and exclusive (!) as Montecito.
�� Hmmm where will that be??
Perhaps Palos Verdes Estates or Newport Beach areas??
Ritzy, Cool, "lowkey," a lot of well-known pro athletes and TV stars live in the area... (can speak for PV Estates! Tiger woods car-crash area). In LA, close enough to downtown (40 mins, better than 2+ hours!) and lots of BEACHES and OCEAN (the most gorgeous, but I say that because love my town!)
Ah, yes--those heady post-Megxit days when the Sussexes must have actually believed for a hot minute that the citizens of Canada would be clamoring to have Harry be the boss of them as her Governor General.
What. A. Larf. Ginge was decent at prep-school rugby by all accounts, more on account of his utter recklessness than anything else, but Harry barely graduated high school, and that by cheating and being given a bye for being a Royal prince. He's never earned a single d*mn thing in his life on merit. Even before he tanked his popularity into the the toilet where it is now, Haz never had the nous for a diplomatic job like that. All the elements of the hated Royal duties, innit . . dressing in a suit, photo ops with the PTSD-triggering snappers; gladhanding dignitaries, sitting in dull meetings where people use big words he doesn't understand. That was an insult to the people of Canada for it even to have been suggested.
These two . . what a pair. Folies a deux for sure.
When considering the OP, my mind went to Toronto as well. Farkle does return again and again to the familiar. Einstein's aphorism about insanity being doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results really does apply to her but then--she is clinically insane in my non-professional opinion. Depends on how firmly the bridges are burnt with the likes of Messica Baloney and Markus. (Markus has dropped completely off the radar . . .has he gone to join Jimmy Hoffa, one wonders . .?)
I have only visited New York City a few times but my impression is that if there's a major American city where all the egos reside, it's definitely L.A., not New York. The New York scene wouldn't tolerate her plastic B.S. Celebrities of major wattage stroll routinely down the street and no one bothers them. As huge a cult failure as Farkle is in L.A., it'd be more of same--worse--in NYC. I can't think of any other place apart from these two places where she'd condescend to park her fabulous self though. Toronto would represent going backwards to her, I think . . but it would edge her that much closer to London if they are really thinking they can ingratiate themselves with Charles again. If William were Prince of Wales right now, this nonsense would be entirely shut down. I hope that once the Queen passes, William will be able to be forceful enough to curb Chas's more excessive impulses where the two traitors are concerned.
I nominate Harry for Governor of Roanoke Colony. He'd be smashing. CROATOAN!
The BLG was just great on the 50th anniversary vid. Enlightening and commentary is so interesting. * thinks she can do whatever she wants and have whatever she wants. I hope * has received the message, no, not so fast. We have been here a lot longer than you.
Do not think 6 will be getting any new appointments from HM and he should stay out of US colonies. Ha!
Hope and pray that PC stays strong and keeps the Duchy funds cut off. Do not believe they are being funded.
Brilliant comment as always. Totally agree.
Megiana Trench
Ascension Island
has a nice royal ring
Maybe Alaska
is where they’re moving
Plenty of space
in the Megellan Strait
Always the Falklands
tho’ summer’s often late
Wherever she goes
whatever she does
I hope there’s much distance
between them and us
@Magatha
I too have been thinking of the Falklands for H and * 😆.
I also think they might buy a chalet or mansion in Aspen Colorado, which has a high-falutin’ social scene all four seasons. Plenty of billionaires, big names and Hollywood elite have secondary homes there. Remember, Harry flew to Aspen awhile ago to participate in a charity polo match?
I just wish they would move out of the USA but that seems to be my own pipe dream.
I welcome the quiet from the western front, so to speak. I open my DM every morning hoping to read HMTQ is alive and doing well and all in well with her family in Britain. It is a bright spot that I hope continues for years.
Let us all hope for an end to the pandemic and brighter days in 2022.
Mr. is just plain emotionally-behaviorally disturbed, and needs a full-time caretaker. Not being able to graduate from classes, cheating, no accomplishments, and especially, the recklessness on the rugby field are all clues to his mental disorders. Not to mention the alcohol and drug consumption. I've had many EBD students, elementary, and extreme anger, impulsivity, and recklessness are common threads.
Ha, never going to happen. You know who wants to live like a billionaire on a dwindling millionaire trust. If she were a billionaire, she would still be unhappy because she wasn't the most wealthy billionaire.
The House "isn't working"? perhaps it is the people in the house
---
Yup. Like the saying "wherever you go, there you are..."
They are on the move because they are running from problems when THEY are the problem!
Two separate PR pieces about how each of them are not attending the Oscars.
Hmmmm. Does anyone here besides me smell bulls*t? It sure stinks a lot.
Yes, I can smell the stink from Pluto.
It sounds like they did not receive any invite to the Oscars. Plain an simple.
Back in 2018 or early 2019, there was an article on the Harkles possibly living most of the year in Africa. Everyone I know who read it thought it was a warning shot from BP rather than a leak of true plans. For all her belated identifying with her black side and calling herself a "sister" to the women on the South Africa tour, I'm sure she would rather eat thumbtacks than live anywhere in Africa. It is she, not the BRF, who is the real racist and classist.
It isn't awkwardness that's causing hesitation on the part of the alliterate one to head to the Oscars. She only wants to attend if she can present an award. Wait until you get a listen to her new British accent.
THE AUDACITY. The only movie of "hers" most people have seen is Horrible Bosses, and she had a barely-there role. And if it's just an excuse for not going (to hide that she wasn't even invited), then she has once more misstepped terribly. She has just revealed to the world that the Academy doesn't actually want her.
Perhaps she thought it would be like the time she snatched Rosamund Pike's presenting gig out from under the more talented and charismatic woman's nose. Full entitlement, with no consequences. (I would have added "no shame," but everyone knows by now that narcissists are consumed by shame.) There were probably already some insiders turned off by how that spotlight grab went. She is simply reaping years' worth of narcissistic sowing.
In this one, he draws a direct comparison between * and Jeffrey Epstein:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4lEBQ5ByWk
She would wear something ill fitting and not at all suited to her body, but very expensive. And there definitely would be new jewellery 'with a message'. The ridiculous in the fashion industry would wax lyrical about 'the most stylish royal ever'.
Both would spout a lot of word salad that they think makes them important and powerful and knowledgeable, and would have people rolling their eyes.
She would latch onto him with both hands (when she is not draping herself all over any real stars, desparate for the photo ops), and give him the annoyed glare if he dares to try and have a conversation. This would be jarring for onlookers as they would definitely play the 'so in love card'.
He would get drunk and would likely say and do increasingly inappropriate things, with her fixed smile and grip on him increasing with each drink. He may even stumble and fall, taking her down with him.
Any real stars would flee the party and Elton John would be left with a group of wannabees with limited intelligence.
As the dust settles, we would be gathering the gossip and making a tally of all the lies told.
Would they name drop the Queen! Any other royals?
"When I asked my source to elaborate on their business arrangement of a marriage and if it’s no longer romantic between them, she said the following:
'It’s BEEN no longer romantic between them. At this point, Meghan is just hanging onto him because of his royal connection. Her title is essentially her main source of income in the marriage. I believe I told you that they sleep in separate rooms. It was alleged that Harry was upset with her after the announcement of their 2nd pregnancy and naming their daughter Lilibet because of the name and its significance. But she didn’t care, she just wanted to name her daughter after a living monarch because of $$$.'”
https://www.exposingsmg.com/blog/meghan-harry-dubbed-by-hollywood-weird-marriag
I think it was more rage and anger at not being allowed to do what she pleased. Body Language Guy had a comment posted under a video about how her way of modernizing the monarchy was more like a 60's college student disrupting a faculty meeting plus the fact that Catherine had royal percs she would never be able to have.
There are two things that have opened doors for her and got her attention, money (his money) and being married to a royal whose father and brother will be kings. Considering the latter, one would think that being on good terms with the Cambridges and Cornwalls would be high priority, but nope.
I can believe that she is deluded enough to think that she can always have plenty of money because of the children, and may even have another one. That her children did not get special treatment (even in the UK with her as a working royal, they were not entitled to security or an HRH prince/princess title) is something she will never forget. She is still furious about that, but has still not accepted it. A narc never comes to terms with reality when they don't get what they want.
I agree with @Elsbeth1847 that the name choice was an act of rage and revenge. She found a way to hurt the Queen in a way that no one anticipated or was any way prepared for. It was an attack as effective (if not more) than those she launched when she was still in the UK. I'm sure she gloated for a good ten days before the chickens (ha!) finally came home to roost.
Prince Andrew to face trial over Virginia Giuffre sex abuse claims
Kate Buck
Wed, 12 January 2022, 2:34 pm·1-min read
In this article:
Prince Andrew, Duke of York
Second son and third child of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh (born 1960)
Virginia Giuffre
Alleged victim of the underage sex trafficking ring operated by Jeffrey Epstein
Read more on this topic
The Duke of York ahead of the funeral of the Duke of Edinburgh at Windsor Castle, Berkshire. Picture date: Saturday April 17, 2021.
The Duke of York. (PA)
The Duke of York will face a civil trial in America over sexual abuse claims after a US judge dismissed his attempt to have the lawsuit thrown out.
Prince Andrew is being sued by Virginia Roberts Giuffre for rape after he allegedly sexually abused her when she was 17.
Andrew denies all allegations against him.
Outlining his reasons for denying the Duke of York’s motion to dismiss the civil case against him, Judge Lewis Kaplan said an agreement in the civil settlement between Jeffrey Epstein and Virginia Giuffre “cannot be said” to benefit him.
In his ruling, he said: “The 2009 Agreement cannot be said to demonstrate, clearly and unambiguously, the parties intended the instrument ‘directly,’ ‘primarily,’ or ‘substantially,’ to benefit Prince Andrew.
“The existence of the requisite intent to benefit him, or others comparable to him, is an issue of fact that could not properly be decided on this motion even if defendant fell within the releasing language, which itself is ambiguous.
“Thus, independent of whether the release language applies to Prince Andrew, the agreement, at a minimum, is ‘reasonably susceptible to more than one interpretation’ on the equally important question of whether this defendant may invoke it.”
O/T
It’s not a criminal trial, Andrew hasn’t been arrested. it’s a civil lawsuit about money. I’ve said it many times before, Andrew is sleazy with few moral values, but it doesn’t make him whet he’s being labelled as. The media can spin it all they like. 🤨 The judge should have upheld the 2009 private settlement/agreement between Jeffrey Epstein and Virginia Giuffre which she signed to say she wouldn’t go after others. We all know there’s many others.🤔
I also recall Spence saying that he won't agree to take on a client unless he finds he genuinely likes the person and would be devastated if the client lost. And although Sarah and their daughters stand by him, I can't see Andrew inspiring that kind of loyalty in anyone who isn't immediate family or a friend he has known for years.
This is my long-winded way of agreeing with @WBBM that Andrew probably won't get a fair trial. And even the biggest jerk in the world deserves a fair trial.
I can smell the stink from Pluto.
It sounds like they did not receive any invite to the Oscars. Plain an simple.
Mugsy's Oscar dream refuses to die. If she can't *win* an Oscar (for what??!) she d*mn well is determined to be on that stage holding a statue by any means she can, even if it's to give it away to someone else.
Her level of delusion is really off the charts. Ever since she hooked up with Harry she's been weaving this same tired tale. We know that she thinks everyone else is stupid and woudln't have a clue about Oscar protocols (oh, dear, that tiresome word again . . the Royal Family isn't the only organization with protocols foiling Duchess Dumbarse). Smug grew up in Hollywood, with a father in the business; she ought to know that not just any old body gets a ticket to the Oscars (or a presenter role) by dint of having a famous husband. Seating is limited and not even the nominees can bring unlimited numbers of people with them. Smug has not acted in 5 years and even when she was working, she was a galaxy away from any awards podiums. She calls herself an 'executive producer' I suppose--but to date, what has she produced? Everyone in the auditorium is a friend, spouse, family member or agent of a nominee or is in some way affiliated with the Hollywood film industry. Oprah doesn't have any major feature films under consideration this year, so who exactly is gonna invite the Harkles to be his/her plus-twos? That would be a waste of their limited tickets.
Presenters generally are film industry f*cking ICONS, or else are the previous years' winners, awarding this year's winners. What area of achievement in the film industry would Smug be representing? She is exactly like a little kid who thinks dressing up in a dimestore tiara makes her a real princess. In her mind, bulldozing her way onstage because she's the Duchess of Sussex to stand there, gormless with her rictus smile, clutching someone else's Oscar is every bit as good as winning her own statue. All she cares about are the Instagrammable moments of Herself at the Oscars.
She is a fantasist who refuses to accept the reality that doesn't showcase her as the most fabulous human being ever. She bluffed her way into the Royal family and she crashed the British Fashion Awards and forced them to let her present an award to her wedding dress designer, humilating Rosamund Pike who'd actually already been hired for the job. Rosamund was left to present 'the Duchess' who presented the award. The glow of that victory has long worn off and Madam is looking for another hit.
What a piece of work she is.
If they left * get her grubby hands on an award to give to someone else, they will have to pry it out of her hands. LOL
“tell me who your friends are, and I will tell you what you are.” It's even in the Bible-in a different form but same message.
I'm not trying to convince anyone on my point of view; I know that is futile. I just wish to help peeps who read this blog to know all that glitters is not gold. PA was rubbing elbows with Jeffry Epstein and that Maxwell woman; who are known for trafficking young girls who were not fully cognitively developed. Thems the facts.
Even if he isn't guilty, which I believe he is, the optics of the whole thing stinks to high heaven.
I think it's high time people of privilege get roasted when they act in a debauched way. A prince of the Realm and he's been acting like a gutter snipe all of his life, and with impunity...
Now Harry does the same. When will it stop and when will the Royal hammer come down? My motto as a parent and as a woman has always been "Do NOT reward bad behavior". It doesn't take a Phd in psychology to know what happens when we do.
Here's a question (rhetorical only to stimulate thoughts) Does anyone think Andrew is a narc?
Ok, I've said my peace to whomever is reading but not participating on the blog. I've done my bit.
They may want him to present an award for Spencer, but there is no guarantee that the movie will win any awards. And the gossip mill says the obedient pet does not want to attend the Oscars nor give Spencer any kind of recognition.
Hikari has her number in the above post, as does Girl With A Hat in the following post! She can see herself on stage holding that golden statue with Hollywood stars giving her a standing ovation. She has dreaming about this since childhood and feels the dream is so close. Can she make it happen?
@LavenderLady Age of consent in New York is 17, and I believe that's where Andrew "met" Virginia. If I were his lawyer I'd demand proof that he had any way of knowing she was trafficked, which of course does not exist. I don't like Andrew. He's arrogant and yes, narcissistic (but I don't see him as a malignant narcissist; just terribly self-involved). But it's precisely for that reason that I have no trouble believing he honestly held the opinion that these pretty young women were lining up to sleep with him of their own free will, just because he's a prince and (used to be) good-looking. It's certainly interesting that he's the only one Virginia is going after; he almost certainly was not the only one she spent time with. Andrew's a putz, no doubt about it, but I don't quite see him as a predator for the reasons outlined above.
I am not going to say anything further on this topic because it's beyond the scope of the blog.
I agree that Andrew saw and knew a lot, but did not think any of it was wrong. He brought this on himself.
I am highly suspicious of Virginia's motives, and do believe that at the time, she was a willing participant and was excited to sleep with a prince. At some stage the penny dropped that she was being exploited and abused so she bolted and built a new life for herself. She got dragged back in when Epstein and Maxwell tracked her down and she struck a deal with them. The payouts they gave her and the attention she got (and the deals meant she could not hold Epstein or Maxwell accountable) set her on this road. Being a victim does not make her a nice person with pure motives.
Why Andrew? She has a photograph as evidence, she fantasises that she can get a huge payout from him, and accusing him gives her maximum global attention. Despite getting married, having kids and building a new life when she escaped from Epstein and Maxwell, I think she is damaged. Far too many people, especially the rich elite, have gotten away with the exploitation and abuse of vulnerable teenagers.
Andrew will lose. Does he have the funds to pay her and all her legal fees? He is selling his only asset - the ski lodge. The expensive car he drives may well be leased. Even the horses he rides don't belong to him. He does have a wealthy son-in-law. (Note that palace aides have corrected the reports in the media that the Queen is paying his legal bills.)
A psychic has predicted that damning phone evidence will emerge, and that he will leave the UK. It has also been predicted that he will be in a car accident. We will see!
Overall, the damage to the monarchy is huge. There is a long line of accusers waiting to go after royals. You don't have to have any evidence - you just have to say you were raped and possibly have been in the same place at the same time. (Guess who are the most unprotected? Yep, the Harkles, who love showing off how waelthy they are!) At least the Queen is setting a precedence that she will not be giving any of them millions to go away. But, we will see ... she may well pay for a way out of the courtroom for Andrew.
That she is going after Andrew is interesting. Makes me more inclined to believe in his innocence.
* Grandiose sense of self-importance
* Lives in a fantasy world that supports their delusions of grandeur
* Needs constant praise and admiration
* Sense of entitlement
* Exploits others without guilt or shame
* Frequently demeans, intimidates, bullies, or belittles others
https://www.helpguide.org/articles/mental-disorders/narcissistic-personality-disorder.htm
----------------
Andrew does not tick all the boxes for me, but most traits can be seen in him. He also was taught good manners growing up, belongs to a family that is dedicated to service, and served time in the navy, so I think he is much better at containing/managing his narcissism than TBW is. She went way overboard when she got that ring on her finger! The article referenced above is the most accurate description of her that I have ever seen.
She can't prove her allegations, and she has also made claims that have been disproved, but the judge and jury will ignore all that. Andrew is guilty before the trial starts. He has no way of proving that her allegations are false, and the circumstantial evidence against him is enough to find him guilty.
I do think everyone in the BRF is now at risk and 'victims' are lining up. If Andrew is so vulnerable being inside the fold, imagine how vulnerable the dastardly duo are, especially with her record of perjury.
Yes I know about the legal age. I am referring to the scientific proof that shows people do not fully form cognitively until they are 25. Google it.
Exploits others without guilt or shame
---
Yes this is what he has done to VG. He exploited her. His grinning photos that we've seen lately shows he feels no guilt nor shame. His grinning shows his sense of entitlement.
For Virginia, I am sceptical that she can overcome the damage. The victim gets attention and can extort huge sums of money from whoever she can go after. Maybe she will surprise me and become a champion for protecting and helping vulnerable teenage girls who, like her, lack education and protective parents for guidance and/or a safety net.
The Harkles also traded on victimhood, and they may find it difficult to overcome that, even if they 'see the light' and want to. (Victimhood is usually built on very valid grounds but can become a trap.)
From what I have read of narcissism, TBW will accept no responsibility or fault in the huge mistakes they have made that are hurting the brand they are trying to build. I don't even know anymore what that brand is supposed to be.
Sarah writes books, has a video channel for reading to children and has lent herself to all sorts of enterprises, but in every interview, all anyone is interested in is the royal family. That is her identity trap.
Andrew still believes he did nothing wrong. Unbelievable! (I can't remember where I read it, but years ago, Virginia was open to accepting an admission and apology from Andrew.)
As for the Andrew mess, I hope that there is serious attention paid to genuine paedophilia and the exploitation of teenagers (different issues). I have seen and experienced myself how older men see teenagers as fair game. The age of consent is not taken seriously and society does not understand why it is necessary, even though we have frequent stories in the media about grooming and exploitation, and even the prosecution and imprisonment of some relatively famous people.
Then, on a British astrologer's site, this bit of opinion: "It appears that according to reports, Andrew was allowed to ride roughshod over any kind of protocol and took full advantage of his favoured position. An ill-mannered, entitled boor whose rudeness and limited intelligence appalled all who met him, sheltered by a dated institution which views any kind of public scrutiny as an impertinence."
I'm going with entitled boor.
They grabbed him and chucked him into the muck heap. There was, however, no mention of action taken against the grooms, perhaps he kept quiet about it.
I probably mentioned before that, when I was 13, one of my father's trusted friends/ colleagues (nearer 60 than 50) grabbed me and kissed me savagely. Most unpleasant. I didn't tell my parents - I realised that my father wouldn't be able to believe me (though he'd have wanted to kill anyone else) and my mother was always ready to accuse me of being untruthful. I still believe that was the best I could do under the circumstances.
Do I think Prince Andrew is a narcissist? Maybe. I'm not as confident about saying so as I am in *'s case, simply because I've never paid that much attention to him. But he certainly came across that way in his disastrous last interview. And H.G. Tudor has claimed Andrew as a fellow narcissist, which is a pretty damning "endorsement."
Do I think Virginia is going after him for reasons other than justice? Yes. Even if he is guilty (and as @LavenderLady points out, his associations, which endured for years make it highly unlikely that he is innocent), he's certainly not the only one she should be naming. I believe she's going after him because he's rich and unlikeable, and because she has that incriminating photo. (I'm pretty sure there are other photos of other men. Why stop at trafficking young girls to older rich men, when you can blackmail those men later, too? But those other guilty parties are doing whatever it takes to stay out of the news. I wonder what Andrew finally failed or refused to do that got him in hot water.)
@SwampWoman is also likely correct that Virginia is guilty of some awful crimes herself and she is not naming other big names because she will be outed for those crimes herself if she does.
If Andrew goes down for this, it will be akin to getting Al Capone for mail fraud or O.J. Simpson for robbery. It won't exactly be justice, but we might call it karma.
Campbell mentioned recently that the reason why Virginia went after Andrew, was to deflect attention from the American pols and big wigs that partook of the forbidden fruit of underage girls. Andrew is the sacrificial goat, the dumb, boorish fall guy. The other guilty individuals hope the masses will be satiated and move on.
This is plausible to me because we've seen this play before.
There's a great case to be made that the fall of Harvey Weinstein and the subsequent #metoo movement were distractions from the true unspeakable evil of Hollywood, which is the sexual abuse of child actors. Someone had to go down dramatically, and Harvey drew the short straw. Four years later, it's business as usual for young starlets in casting rooms again. And perhaps things never changed for children behind the scenes.
I don't think Prince Andrew is happy in his role of sacrificial goat and speculate that this is a form of punishment rather than just a backstabbing. (That is, he wasn't picked because he made sense, but because he failed "to pay up" in some way when he was blackmailed.)
Now, I'm no fan of Andrew's. While I disinterestedly wish that everyone could receive a fair trial, it doesn't really matter to me if he goes down in an unfair trial. As I've said in a recent comment, if people don't get justice, they can at least get karma. The only thought that gets me halfway excited is the possibility that he will decide to take * down with him. That would be epic.
Still waiting for tax troubles with those two.
I hope they go somewhere outside the US, unless it is to jail for fraud.
This is a great line.
Life is much better than it was last year!
And I taught my new phone who I was on blogger so everyone knows that I am not she who won't be named in disguise
as for our favorite subject. she’s radio silent. something is brewing. we always think divorce but then she pulls out the christmas card or the new york “tour”. so not holding my breath. she’s prob workin on another royal tour or will announce she’s pregnant on Feb6 for the queen’s jubilee.
My Mum wanted to get married at 17 (very young but true), her parents said she couldn’t till she was 18 otherwise the neighbours would talk. 🥴 The era as it was back then. So she married a week after 18th birthday. My Mum was fully aware of the commitment etc and my parents remained married until my Father’s death in 2018. I don’t think I need to tell my 77 year old Mother she wasn’t in full control of her mental faculties because she hadn’t yet reached 25! 😳
@ OKayExactly and I concur.🤗 Are we supposed to give those under 25 a free pass for all their misdemeanours and idiotic deeds etc?! 😳
I read that Andrew and Fergie have the Swiss Chalet up for sale. That's how he'll get $$$ to pay his attorney fees. The Queen is letting Andrew sink or swim with his legal and financial troubles.
What exactly are the charges against Andrew? Are Virginia and her lawyer doing a Meghan Markle and throwing everything they can think of at him in the hope that some of the charges will stick? How does one prove rape after all this time?
And why is Virginia's lawyer doing all these interviews? Surely everything about the case should be sub judice as the verdict will be decided by a jury?
Oh, and it seems she did take Maxwell to court for defamation (when Maxwell called her a liar). How did that case pan out?
I never said peeps are knuckle dragging Neanderthals before 25. The data certainly indicates that decision making skills can be compromised.
I only brought it up because it wasn't being considered in the PA discussion.
___
At this point I couldn't care less what VG's motives are. Just hoping the big wigs get brought down for their crimes. PA is the start. Bill and Hillary Clinton need the same treatment...as do many others(!). If PA is made the example, good! His social circle was toilet scum.
@Embre,
I agree! Whatever it takes. Al Capone was taken down for tax invasion.
My big hope is The Douches of Montecito get the thumb screws as well! Me thinks someone's holding their breath in Santa Barbara..
I wrote a lengthy post in response to ladies yesterday. It posted for a hot minute and then disappeared . .? . .so I'm trying again. This time I will shorter, just in case.
Now, I'm no fan of Andrew's. While I disinterestedly wish that everyone could receive a fair trial, it doesn't really matter to me if he goes down in an unfair trial. As I've said in a recent comment, if people don't get justice, they can at least get karma. The only thought that gets me halfway excited is the possibility that he will decide to take * down with him. That would be epic.
Yes, I hate to find myself in the rather ooky position of having to defend Andrew, even slightly. I'm sure he availed himself of everything his friend Epstein plied him with, but if he was a guest, he was not the active agent who was procuring these young women. Your host sets out a gorgeous buffet, so what do you do? You eat. The ethically-aware pause to reflect where this food may have been sourced from, but Andy's not the reflective type. He grew accustomed to having lots of female attention as a Prince, and he was still good-looking at the time of the Roberts incident . . and single. He's a high-profile fish, but not the only one. Bill Clinton was also a frequent guest to Jeffrey's special island, and that surprises me not at all.
OKay,
@LavenderLady I'm well aware that the prefrontal cortex does not fully develop (or "fuse together") until age 25. But that hardly means that people are only drooling idiots with zero common sense right up until that time. The point I was making was only that Andrew did not break the law, so far as he was aware.
They seem to have only known about the prefrontal cortex not being fully developed until age 25 until recently because until the last couple of generations, it was routine for people to marry, buy property or build it with their bare hands, launch careers and have several children by the age of 25. Life expectancies were shorter, so one had to crack on and make a life a lot sooner than age 25 if one was going to be dead by 45.
I'm a product of the 1980s, and still personally know classmates who married out of high school. I think it's important to distinguish between a true young teen and a 'legal adult within months'. Somebody like Samantha Geimer, who was Roman Polanski's victim was truly exploited at the age of 13. She and her mom were offered a fashion shoot as a guise, not tens of thousands of dollars like Virginia received, and of course, those photos never appeared anywhere. Ms. Geimer, now a married suburban mother had to go to court several times against her rapist, and has forgiven him on the record. She has not extorted him for money as far as I am aware. Both she and Virginia came from bad home environments and negligent parenting. The true child victim has done her best to move on. I'm not saying Andrew doesn't deserve consequences but it will be a Phyrric victory for Ms. Guiffre. What happened, happened no matter how much money she amasses and the man who really and truly exploited her is beyond justice.
Please refer to my above post/reply at 3:59 pm.
___
I have made my points on the PA scandal. I have nothing more to say on the subject.
@abbyh,
Please check in. Thanks!
PS looks as if our most recent posts crossed in the mail.
Perceptive! I look forward to seeing the 'new her'! Liposuction (maybe even a hugely expensive special diet), definitely facial work ...
Perhaps she has gone into narc collapse. She said in the past (pre-prince days and the global humanitarian makeover) that when she was unsuccessful in an audition, she would take to her bed to drink wine and cry - for days.
There is quite a lot of information on narc collapse ...
"Signs of Narcissistic Collapse
When someone with NPD doesn’t get the attention or success they want, they often react with narcissistic rage. They can’t appropriately cope with this unmet need. Not everyone with NPD experiences collapse or even copes with it the same way. But to the outsider, it can seemingly occur at a moment’s notice, and even a slight infraction may trigger it.
Signs of narcissistic collapse include:
Stonewalling the other person (completely withdrawing from the conversation, often without warning)
Gaslighting
Repeatedly accusing someone or something else for hurting them
Signs of depression (apathy, intense sadness, withdrawal from others)
Compulsive behavior, like drinking, using drugs, or gambling
Ending relationships spontaneously without much explanation
Intense anxiety
Anger outbursts
Smearing another person or seeking intense revenge
Making threats of self-harm or suicide"
https://www.choosingtherapy.com/narcissistic-collapse/
Not everyone who shows frustration are narcs. I have had my fair share of living and dealing with narcs and it's devestating and causes a lot of emotional trauma.
Wanting to bow out of an upcoming storm means in my case I would rather preserve the peace. Are you trying to insinuate that I'm a narc?
Because you seem to post these lists after I share something that could be interpreted wrongly... Just saying.
I'm asking nicely.
Generally speaking, people who inherit money, live on trusts, and are not working for the money, most often mishandle that money.
Thank you :)
also curious. Angela Levin retweeted a post yesterday which was a copy of a anonymous posting on tumblr. talk about 10 degrees of separation. it made a lot of accusations about Princes Eugenie being the mole for the Sussexes and the cambridge’s and wessex found out. then it goes on trying to trash Eugenie’s relationship with her sister. to me it reads like a sugar or the mrs herself trying to cause discord.
oh and angela levin just retweet a pic of the mrs in her $30,000 caftan first with a belly and then with a hugely inflated belly. she’s starting to go there. maybe she is tempting someone to sue ?
if i can figure out how to copy and paste the link i will.
I’m trying to decipher what’s going on at Montecito, she said there’s big problems and she doesn’t know whether they’re surmountable. There’s also very serious problems between the UK (I’m guessing within the royal family) and Montecito. It’s not clear whether they’ve sold the house, Maggot wanted to have the house to flip but she said it’s worth less now, since when it was bought. I’m still listening to today’s video. 🥴
Wow, where did that come from?
I think it is you that has a problem with me.
Nothing in your posts indicates narcissism to me.
Wow. Just wow!
I gather she has always treated it as sacred, a day of remembrance and quiet reflection. In other words, * would be particularly gleeful in trampling all over it.
We all have narcissism in us. It comes from the ego. 'Normal' people can display the behaviours listed under NPD, but usually under appropriate circumstances (e.g. a performer on stage) or under very stressful circumstances (e.g. a melt down). It is the cluster and the pervasiveness and how it interferes with daily life and relationships that make it a disorder.
All disorders, like cancer, are the normal that are out of control and cause problems to self and others.
Yes, I know. I've studied the issue a lot because I've had harmful narcs in my life. Some family, some husband, bf, etc. It can be hell. I've learned No Contact and avoiding baiting is very effective.
This is why I know most of the YT channels for the subject. I do avoid HD Tudor however because his voice alone trigger me.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59987935
Harry should follow suit.
Queen cuts Andrew adrift: Duke of York is stripped of ALL his military titles and royal patronages, will no longer use HRH in official capacity and is told he will have to face sex assault lawsuit as a 'private citizen'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10399083/Veterans-demand-Queen-strips-Andrew-military-honours.html
So much depends on perception doesn't it? It's too easy to visualise him at over 60, as he is now, having it away with her as she was then - pretty yuk!
-----
I think that's what certain people are counting on. Trying to portray PA in his 60's, preying on a young teen. Except that he wasn't in his 60's and she wasn't a young teen.
I'm very sorry for your experience as a young teen.
I gather she has always treated it as sacred, a day of remembrance and quiet reflection. In other words, * would be particularly gleeful in trampling all over it.
Yep. I think Mm takes great pleasure in causing pain. One of the few things that makes her happy.
Kinda like saying they were married 3 days earlier. She delighted in the pain that would cause. Or saying C made her cry. Or that someone said something she perceived as racist.
All things said were designed to cause pain. And she gloats as she says them. You can see it in her body language.
Yes, I hate to find myself in the rather ooky position of having to defend Andrew, even slightly.
It is an awful position, no matter how detached one tries to be! I personally find all the players in this drama unsavory, including Virginia herself. If we apply to her the same heuristic of lying down with dogs and getting up with fleas that is so damning to Prince Andrew, then her own long association with Epstein and Maxwell doesn't inspire confidence.
@snarkyatherbest
i think she and her lawyer have already settled a bunch of cases and as part of it not to reveal the “john’s” names. only Andrew didn’t play ball perhaps thinking the crown would protect him.
And to think I was grudgingly admiring of Andrew for refusing to give in to blackmail. (He may be guilty as sin, but I think that Virginia, far from being a crusader for justice, would have let him "get away with it" if he had just paid her.) Well, I take that back now! And may my penance be the humiliation that comes from publicly admitting it here. If Andrew didn't give in, it was hardly on principle. (Does he even have any?) It was out of his arrogant sense that he could get away with anything, because Mummy would always protect him.
Thinking of Virginia now: I have great sympathy for any woman from a bad family environment, who was preyed upon by rich p*rvs using gifts and cash. I understand why she would want to go after as many of her former exploiters as she could. There is a sense in which they owe her, and if "settling" with them helps her to heal, then I'm happy that she has got some of that. But this civil case has been dragging on for years, with her painful, humiliating past being dredged up again and again in the press. I can't see how it would bring anyone peace or healing. She may get her pound of flesh from Prince Andrew in the end, but at a greater cost to her than she may have reckoned when she began. @Hikari has used the term "Pyrrhic victory" and I think that's the most succint prediction of how this will play out.
I haven't listened to Lady C in some time because her videos are so long.
I do remember someone saying somewhere, I think it was CDAN, that the house was sold for $32 million and the broker's web site had the info of the date and price, etc.
So, I am confused about whether the house has already been sold or not.
https://twitter.com/angelalevin1
Wow! Wow! And thrice Wow!
i see he has been stripped or HRH and military titles. needed to be done. we need the focus to be back on the queen ans the jubilee.
However the healthiest decision for Virgina, now that the Queen has stripped everything from Andrew, would be to get her pound of flesh in cash. The Queen's action is basically akin to the apology she has said she wanted...perhaps even better. Now she should do whats best for herself and her family to close this chapter and walk away.
Do we need to remind people that something written is not always put down in the voice you have decided to "hear" it?
If we cannot move on from internal I'm making it personal (which I have seen from multiple people) then is moderation the answer for a while?
Or maybe just not talk about our personal histories with narcissism for a while? Most of us fit in the has history category. It's sad that it happened but just as there are claims of how racism is used to justify certain responses, perhaps using our history in that way doesn't make it somehow ok for us either. If you have not gotten help about what happened or it has been a while, maybe going for some maybe a helpful thing for you and the life you want to have - not being bound up by looking at how the past is still coloring the present and the future.
Just move on to the next post please.
I listen to them on 1x25 speed and the videos are still long, I have a break inbetween. The sale really isn’t clear nor the price, I was sure Lady C said it dropped to $9 million, but I couldn’t decipher whether it was sold or not, she can be a little too vague at times. Maybe the gossip site is right. 🥴
The Queen has finally acted. Andrew has lost all his patronages and honorary positions, and he may no longer use the HRH.
@LavnderLady
Wow, where did that come from?
I think it is you that has a problem with me.
Nothing in your posts indicates narcissism to me.
Wow. Just wow!
Maybe from being accused before on this blog of the exact thing and not in a nice way. I know we are not to bring up the past and I don't anymore but yeah, I tend to walk on eggshells at times on this blog, (as this is something a narc will create in us, and when past trauma triggers us).
I enjoy your posts but did see more than once that when I state my unpopular opinion, you come out with a list of narc traits. Maybe it's just a coincidence but I hope you understand that several of us here have first hand experience with narcs and those narcs have used that very thing against us. And yes, it triggers though I have worked VERY hard to do better here on NF blog.
I'm sorry if I upset you up.
We've all been clamoring for the Queen to take action against Prince Andrew for years . . . but I still pinched myself multiple times when reading the article! She has indeed "cast him adrift"!
Apart from that, what I found most interesting were all the hints that Andrew and Virginia might be able to agree on a settlement, after all. Andrew may be thoroughly disgraced by now, but he might be able to save himself from the last few humiliations.
I was thinking: "I'll bet Andrew regrets not settling quietly when he had the chance, even if what she had asked for seemed totally unreasonable at the time . . ." -- when the parallel with the Harkles' situation struck me. I'm sure there were also many times when the BRF regretted not taking * up on her offer to dump Harry for 100 million. But now we see that both of those decisions were correct.
The problem with throwing money at a bad situation is that it never actually solves the issue. If Andrew had paid Virginia, he'd still be a spoiled, entitled, arrogant manchild swaddled in privilege, luxury, and impunity. If the BRF had paid *, Harry would also still be a manchild swaddled in the same things. Much better in the long run that the facade was ripped off. Now the BRF members who actually are mature, loyal and dutiful can stop working around the family members who are just liabilities.
Commparisons to dear 6: the same. At present, they still have their titles: they are still a "duke".
@abbyh,
Sorry I just read your last post. I'm headed out the door so a bit scattered in catching up.
I agree the talk about narcs is triggering and brings out not the best spirit of the blog.
Thank again.
Agree. If The Queen can publicly cut Andrew loose then the same (publicly) must be done for Maggot and Mole. 🥴
I don't think Andrew should pay VG anything as it would be an admission of guilt. He's just a sitting duck, she knew where to find him and that she could get money out of him/the BRF. It's too easy, what about all the other men? And she isn't exactly snow white in all this. What a tawdry tale.
He may truly believe that his intentions were above board and his actions perfectly innocent ("It was a convenient place to stay," anyone?), but even the kindest people can screw up. And anyone can regret an innocuous choice, if unintended consequences from it hurt a loved one. Does he feel any regret at all?
Rhetorical questions, of course! These are very private, psychological matters that we may never be privy to. Even if the plot twist is that Andrew ends up being the one growing and healing from this, I don't think he will ever come out and say so.
Sometimes not reading for a while may be what can be needed to avoid triggering as it's kind of hard to get away from narcissism as it seems to drive the blog posts.
Commparisons to dear 6: the same. At present, they still have their titles: they are still a "duke".
@ Humor Me: The Queen seems to be playing the long game with Andrew and the Harkles. Yes, Andrew is still a Duke and Harry is still a Duke, and Meghan is still a Duchess. But what I think this does is that now Andrew and the Harkles are on an even platform and the likely next step is removing the gifted Ducal titles, which from what I understand, must be done by Parliament. But if these three people keep up their behaviors, which are damaging the future of the monarchy, it might not be all that problematic for HMTQ to accomplish that.
The Queen’s latest act makes it far more difficult for the Harkles to play the victim card and claim they are being singled out.
It also serves as a warning to all other royals to behave properly…. or else!
The Queen’s latest act makes it far more difficult for the Harkles to play the victim card and claim they are being singled out.
This is true. I'm so tired of the "What about Prince Andrew?" excuse for a rebuttal from the Harkles' flying monkeys.
And it would make it harder for PC to walk back for his son but not his brother. Easier to say sorry but my hands are tied (as there maybe concerns he might still try to still appease/bring them back into the fold).
Sometimes not reading for a while may be what can be needed to avoid triggering as it's kind of hard to get away from narcissism as it seems to drive the blog posts.
Great point!
I'm not the most prolific poster on this blog and I catch up every couple days or more in my reading. But if after I state an unpopular opinion then I bounce...
well you get my point.
I don't mind discussing narcissism as I find it very helpful to hear other's stories and yes TBW is raging so yeah it's an integral part of the blog BUT when it goes on and on and on then I feel it becomes a potential area of contention.
Exercising discernment in posting is a valuable ability that I am getting better at.
It is what it is and will stay that way until it's changed but that's a different kettle of fish.
You are correct. The Queen and Charles, if he becomes King, they now have more latitude to treat the Montecito renegades more strictly if they stray, such as monetizing their two children under Royal guises. These days the Royals are pulling for H/M to make enough money in far away Hollywood to support their extravagant lifestyle. Out of sight and out of mind.
Imagine if the Harkles were still in England. This would be 100x worse.
I think the Queen must have listened to her advisors re Andrew. She didn't really have much of a choice. The BRF has taken a battering with the antics of the Monte$hit$how 2 and Andrew. It must be terribly painful for her at her age and will tarnish the end of her reign.
I wonder if Prince Andrew is at all sorry that he has hurt his mother this badly.
Pretty shocking news Re. Andrew. HM had little choice now; she's already defended him for too long by softening the blow. All this time he's retained his titles and his patronages so long as he agreed not to appear publicly. To send her by all accounts favorite child to Siberia (Coventry is the Costa del Sol in comparison) must wound her to the quick. Though I certainly hope not, the shame and scandal of this might ultimately be the end of her.
Charles has always detested his younger brother and the feeling is mutual, so he might have a bit of schadenfreude for a hot minute--until he realizes that Andrew's disgrace is going to reflect that much more upon the double standard of sorts that is in play for Charles's wayward wastrel of a second son. The perception remains that Hazza has not faced full penalties for his treachery and is still being propped up by Dad and Granny. Despite blatantly abusing the terms of the Megxit agreement to not commercialize their titles, that is ALL they have done. Yet they are still swanning around plastering 'Duke and Duchess of Sussex' all over everything they touch.
If this is the definitive "Something Has Got to Be Done" about Andrew . . when's Harry's turn?
So it's OK to commercialize the titles as long as the 'commercial product' is not sold in retail shops, but instead are 'ideas' like podcasts and faux charitable foundations and made-up titles of fuzzy start-ups like 'Chief Impact Officer'. Andrew created another scandal earlier with his 'Play @ the Palace' initiative . . from where I'm standing, the CHIMPO of ButterUP has peddled his royal title for a kickback and self-PR. This is different how?
My question is rhetorical and really directed more towards Her Majesty and her advisors rather than anyone here. Harry is engaged in Andrew's same shady behavior under different names but one senses he's getting away with it because he was born to Charles and no other reason. That would grind anybody's gears in a lower-born position. Peter Philips was excoriated for using his position way down at #13 to peddle milk in China but milk is at least a wholesome thing, even if you can get in in a shop. So much more wholesome than what the 6Sh*ts are up to.
There's 'The Stench'--for an example of a retail product with 'The Duchess of Sussex' plastered on the front cover. I guess since it sold so few copies and raised so little money for the Duchess that HM is gonna let that one slide. I suppose MeGain may have told the Palace that all proceeds from the sale of her book would go towards charities for vulnerable children.
Yeah, right.
If the Montesh*tshows are currently 'succeeding' I'd sure hate to see what failure looks like. And they are Royal PITAs from all the way across the North American continent and the Atlantic Ocean. That is the only skill they collectively possess.
@Hikari
@Girl with a Hat
It was me who posted here about the potential sale of the Harkles' Mudslide Manor. We have been doing a deep dive into the Montecito story on my blog but I may have jumped the gun in thinking the property had been recently sold.🙃
I apologize for any misunderstanding my previous post may have caused which I have since deleted. I've been trying to confirm the original information but it still hasn't been verified by the Santa Barbara online property databases.
The house did initially turn up on a realtor's website appearing as if it had been sold via an off-market listing for $32.5m. The realtor is a well-known broker of high-end properties in Montecito / Santa Barbara and the posting of the Harkle property included the information that he had represented both the buyer and seller which is usually what happens in a private sale. There was a date from October 2021 for posting the property info, the property was labeled as 'sold' and the page it was on had an updated year of 2022. There are a number of explanations for the much higher price...so I believed the house had probably sold.🤷♀️
No information for this supposed sale however has turned up on the Santa Barabara assessor's database. The database does have info from the June 18, 2020 sale but nothing since then.
There is a chance the 'sale' may still turn up on the assessor's site and if it does I will let you all know. I do however now doubt the whole tale of this off-market sale especially since the Daily Mail has not picked up on the story!🤣
In the meantime, the purpose of the broker's posting of the property making it appear to have been sold remains a mystery...it's yet another weird angle in one of so many when it comes to the Sussexes!🤪
Thanks for your excellent work and your excellent post.
Also, for clearing up the confusion as best you could, which is always difficult when it comes to these two.
https://www.geo.tv/latest/392980-prince-harry-thinks-america-has-got-his-best-interest-he-is-struggling
Would all the details from a privately-handled sale, particularly one involving VIPs be immediately available for public review like on the assessor's site?
You may not have been wrong; maybe all the papers have not yet been filed. Or--probably more likely--the Harkles are blowing smoke about this $32 million hoping to drive up the price on Mudslide Manor when they eventually do sell it? Because even if that $32 million figure hasn't been corroborated, multiple media outlets have reported about how the Harkles aren't 'over the moon' with the property and are looking to sell. We know you didn't make that up.
Personally I think the whole 'not over the moon' story is indicative that either, 1. They've defaulted on the mortgage because they could never afford that place, even for the amount they allegedly paid which was less than half of $32 million. They only closed, supposedly, two years ago? A house on an earthquake fault that's been vacant for what--11 years?--isn't going to double in value in two years because those two asses moved in. I smell Mugsy projecting again. Or--2. Their rental/squatting agreement was always going to be short term. Mugs has never kept a boyfriend, husband, friend or domicile for more than 2 years so this is a pattern. Or else they have pissed off whoever was letting them stay there (shades of Tyler Perry) and have been kicked out because the neighbors complained so much.
That's my read on it anyways.
If this is the definitive "Something Has Got to Be Done" about Andrew . . when's Harry's turn?
___
Amen. My question as well.
Funny, I read the same thing in an article in the Star shown in Newzit 😁.
I think the important point was 'Richard Hillgrove, a PR consultant who has worked with a number of high profile celebrities, claims Harry has been beset with a number of difficulties since leaving, and is struggling to settle in America.'
...
“He doesn't look like a happy person at all. He looks jaded.”
So life in the US with * is not all it's cracked up to be.
https://www.geo.tv/latest/392980-prince-harry-thinks-america-has-got-his-best-interest-he-is-struggling
I rather doubt that the RF would bend to any kind of blackmail. Perhaps maggot's demands of $100 million to go away gave further testimony to her madness, vileness, and bottomless pit of filth.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10399083/Veterans-demand-Queen-strips-Andrew-military-honours.html
I'm sooo hoping she'll do the same for The Morons of Montecito.
I saw a different theory elsewhere. That it's a contract for deed with the previous owner. No (or low) monthly payments, but instead lump sums due periodically at agreed upon times. Or possibly a balloon payment due now. And the Harkles have missed the payment. Not only missed it, but are unable to make it at all.
Thus they lose whatever they've paid so far (if anything), and also have to vacate.
Definitely has possibilities as a scenario. Could explain why no information in the county database?
I also think there might be more than one weird thing at play here. It doesn't have to be one scenario explains all the clues.
One scenario could be the contract for deed. A second scenario could be money laundering on her part. She needs to convert as much of H's dollars as possible to joint (or her) assets.
@Hikari
Thanks for the responses.😊
Yes, it's possible that the house did sell and the information has not reached the online databases yet - that's why I've been checking there every few days and will continue to do so as that will probably be the best source of info for when it does.
I agree that the leak that she is not 'over the moon' about the property is indicative of some sort of a problem with their living arrangements. All your theories sound plausible. We've been discussing the same types of things too.
The press must have found the info that they wanted to sell plausible since they all ran with it once The Mirror broke the news.
There have been some other strange angles that we haven't fully investigated yet.
And I'm still wondering why they dissed the property in the Mirror article. Why make negative comments about a property you are trying to sell? I thought the recent silly story in OK about the children running around enjoying the property was supposed to be a lame attempt to walk-back her insinuation there was something wrong with the estate.😂
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50P1-DUtJ1c
Can't wait to read all the comments posted while I was working.
Apologies:Humpty Dumpty
Humping Dumping
Randy Andy
scapegoat for all
Rumpy Pumpy
deserved a great fall
All the Queen’s courtiers
all her grey men
Couldn’t help Numpty
for his choice in women
Thanks for the info and encouragement!
I was wondering how long it normally takes to post to the county sites.
I still lean toward doubting that $32.5m house sale though.
But yes I agree there are definitely multiple situations at play!!
I actually had to take my blog "house file" back to draft because I found so much info to post that I needed to decipher and sort it before sharing it again with the rest of the blog.
Will come back to let Nutties know anything we figure out.
I'm thinking they are on the way out too and are trying to save some face about it. You would think that in as small a place as HW is that someone would be wanting the spill the beans if for no other reason than they got pissed off by them one too many times. Maybe the only reason they aren't is because this knowledgeable person has a better plan which calls for waiting.
Hmm. back to the house thoughts. Aren't the Cams supposed to be having an American tour this year? sometime? maybe part of the negative spin is to be able to say some sort of problem with the house so won't be able to host them there (not the Palace would likely schedule there as a rest day for Cams and everyone traveling with them)?
With the news today about Andrew ... I wonder if this changes any of their plans or thoughts? Not likely to ever know unless some real insider writes a tell all but it would be interesting, agree?
Saw this headline on Buzzfeed:
‘After Dropping "Jonas" From Her Instagram Name, Priyanka Chopra Addressed Social Media "Speculation" About Her Personal Life’
A big deal was made about it when she added Jonas to her name after the gigantic wedding.
See you Latte Percolator
Wake up and smell
Maxwell House coffee
‘John Does’ should be named
no grounds for privacy
Times Up, no more filters
and grinding over Bill
There’s an awful lot of beans
to roast and spill…
@GWAH
I’m surprised, assumed
they have numerous credit cards,
all with a similar debt!
Love your version of Humpty Dumpty 😆. Very apt!
----------
This Andrew saga will take the heat off the other 2 in Monteshitshow for the time being.
Where is the male blogger who was a Montecito resident and knew a lot about the area and real estate around it?
Friday Singalong 🎤
Apologies: Queen
Bohemian Rhapsody
Reptilian Blues
This is her real life
She lives in fantasy
Caught in a mudslide
No escaping her perfidy
Opened Haz eyes
Made him cry with her lies, easy
She’s just a poor narc
needing much sympathy
Because she’s needy as
pleading poor
Often high, blowing low
Any way the gloat shows
look at me, it’s all about me
Mamaaa
Just bagged a prince
Took him to my bed
pulled his trigger
Now he’s mince
Papaaa
Con had just begun
But now I’ve gone and
blown it all away
Oprah oooh
Didn’t mean to cause backfire
The rotten Royal Family
wouldn’t play the game my way
They carry on, carry on
as we don’t really matter
To them…
I see a little
Shitter Spitter of a man
Hazadouche, Hazamooch
You’ve played your last Nintendo
Love it, brilliant :)
Hahahahaha 😂😅😂 Surely one of your best to date. Well done! 👏👏👏
I agree with @D1. Brilliant is the perfect word for this Friday's sing-along👍 Thanks for that. It made my day😀
Thanks
Maneki, D1, Miggy
I rather enjoyed it!! 😘
As for madam ming,
I agree with others, she’s
busy with her latest face/body
assault. But, I’m sure Andrew,
and his lofty fall from grace,
has served as a reminder.
The Crown comes first, always.
God Save the Queen
@OCGirl - thank you too for your kind words. I still think I took the wisest course, in view of all the factors involved.
I've no idea why my mother assumed I was untruthful - it'd crop up in the must unlikely situations, as when she accused me of dyeing my hair (all through my 20s & 30s!) - she was convinced my `proper' colour was the deep red-chestnut of my early childhood - she refused to believe it had darkened of its own accord. Then when I `lightened' it to something reddish, she insisted that it proved she was right...
Cheers LL & WildBoar
Glad you enjoyed it 🥰
I’m not holding my breath
over release of ‘John Does’
names. So very, very murky,
too much power/money, sickening.
As for the markles,
skint/miserable/mental,
just about sums them up!
But, I’m sure Andrew,
and his lofty fall from grace,
has served as a reminder.
The Crown comes first, always.
___
Yes! I bet they are quaking. But maybe not, they think they are above it all don't they?
I hope they are dirtying their drawers lol 😂
*Uncle-umfortable
The dicktaker of Monte-repo
May be worried she’ll be
named as ‘Jane Doe’
How well did she know
her Uncle-in-law
Prior to poking daft lad with a hoe?
*Sorry, had to 🥴
I do believe their bottom cheeks
are churning LL, major move
from the Queen regarding Andrew.
The Queen, and her Knights,
are in position, checkmate.
His "next appearance" for BetterUp as its chief impact officer (gag) will be to (what else?) discuss mental health in a free, virtual event with other speakers. A cause near to his and *'s "hearts."
Sorry, these grifters just annoy me. They are the LAST place I'd go for mental health advice, which I'm sure goes without saying here.
Also, as to the idea that * has disappeared in order to have more body modification done. I know it's a popular time to do this for actual stars in Hollywood, in the lead-up to awards season. But if she does much more to her face she's going to look like a combination of Michael Jackson and Mary Tyler Moore. As for the body . . . I would think calf implants would be debilitating. Anything else would require the breaking and re-setting of bones.
sorry, I can't find the story online. Just the cover, which I will post later.