Skip to main content

Are We There Yet?

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

Miggy said…
@Cindy, ,

You're welcome :)

As for TBW, she's as duplicitous as they come!
Fifi LaRue said…
Sorry if anyone's taking it personally, re: my opinions of the Glassbowl's homeownership. My comments are specifically about them, and no one else, and certainly not about anyone who rents an apartment. They have made a point of "owning" a mansion with 16 bathrooms, which, I'm convinced, they have never owned.
For some reason, this has come up again:

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/will-the-queen-abdicate-what-said-about-it-085123630.html

The conclusion is `No', as we have known all along. She might be eventually be in a position where having a Regent might be an attractive option but even so, she's still be monarch.
Girl with a Hat said…
@Fifi,

ok, thanks for that. But, you're not the only one.

A lot of people who own homes think they've achieved a level of responsibility and maturity no one else but a home owner can attain.
Maneki Neko said…
Moderators

I posted a comment earlier about H wanting to visit the family in the UK and introducing Lilibuck$. When I refreshed a couple of hours later, the comment was. I re-posted it and have refreshed and now it's gone again. The comment was no offensive in any way, what happened?
Maisie said…
OT:

GB News Television and GB News Radio at 5:59am will play God Save the Queen to kick off its live programming every day from now on, starting tomorrow.

The anthem used to be a regular feature at the BBC, who dropped it from their television service 24 years ago.

GB News will be the only British television broadcaster to play the anthem daily.

God Save the Queen!
snarkyatherbest said…
oh. i can’t remember who posted but i like the comment. did harry even know he was applying for a new decision. on protection. did the mrs contact the law firm and sneak something in front of hubby. he has gotten shredded over this and she has not. seems she always pulls something ahead of something of his to deflect away from her. or maybe he said he is going and she can’t (rumors she was kicked out of the country) and she doesn’t want him there. she is trying to destroy all of his connection to his family so i am thinking this one maybe her.
Fifi LaRue said…
@GWAH: I am so sorry if those comments were hurtful. I live in an area where it's mostly home ownership, and the center of the cities are rental units with young people gathering from all corners to converge on the large metro area

The Dollars have lots of $$$$$, or maybe he did at one time, neither works, and they are shiftless.
Fifi LaRue said…
Just read the new Harry Markle. It seems that Mr. Glassbowl has been quietly in and out of the UK, numerous times.
Maybe he has to show up in person to get his trust funds released from the bank.
Miggy said…
New humiliation for Andrew and Harry? Buckingham Palace officials mull ways of axing them as Counsellors of State who would deputise for an ailing monarch after they both lost right to use their HRH titles.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10412099/Palace-officials-mull-ways-axing-Andrew-Harry-two-four-Counsellors-State.html

Sippet:

A Buckingham Palace spokesman declined to comment, but sources suggested that Andrew and Harry could not be stripped of their roles without the law being changed.

An Act of Parliament would be needed to remove Andrew and Harry, perhaps replacing them with Princess Anne and the Duchess of Cornwall.

‘There could be events later this year which make such a change necessary,’ says the source, who declined to elaborate further.


That bit that I've bolded brings to mind what Lady C has said on numerous occasions, ie: that there are things are going on behind the scenes that the public are unaware of.
SirStinxAlot said…
Question: If H wins his lawsuit against the UK government, will the UK taxpayers have to reimburse his security costs for the past 2 years and continue to pay in the future? Or will the USA have to foot the bill since they live here? They are not working royals and are irrelevant in both countries.
Girl with a Hat said…
I retract my question about Harry not knowing about the legal action against the UK government for police protection. It seems that he was taking videos of the paparazzi last time he was publically in the UK and it may have been as evidence in his claim that he is in danger (accotrding to Harrymarkle)
DesignDoctor said…
Sources claim that Charles have invited the Dollars to stay with him...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10411709/Prince-Charles-invites-Prince-Harry-family-stay-hope-meeting-Lilibet-time.html
snarkyatherbest said…
Girl in the Hat. and because the misses wasn’t with him, do you think she called the paps and he knew to film it because it was a set up? sounds suspicious to me
snarkyatherbest said…
SirStinxAlot. the US government isn’t bound by uk courts so i imagine if they won they would have to have the uk authorities petition the us over it.
Fifi LaRue said…
@DesignDoctor: Charles wouldn't get within a 10-foot poll of Harry at Phillip's funeral. I don't think Charles trusts his errant son.
DesignDoctor said…
@Fifi
Totally agree. I was just posting the info. I think the Dollars have cooked their own goose with their continuous disrespect and antics they have pulled this year Radioactive is the word that comes to mind.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said…
@Miggy

‘There could be events later this year which make such a change necessary,’ says the source, who declined to elaborate further.

That bit that I've bolded brings to mind what Lady C has said on numerous occasions, ie: that there are things are going on behind the scenes that the public are unaware of.

Does anyone want to hazard a guess as to what that could be??
Anonymous said…
The publication of Harry’s book??
SirStinxAlot said…
@snarky. I just meant, if he is classified as an "international person of interest " by UK, would US be bound to pay his security. Could H persue reimbursement from USA because they were originally denied secret service entourage ( he was born "special" remember).Seems like opening a can of worms to me. They are not working royals anymore, D-List celebrities at best. If I recall correctly, Andrew lost his sovereign grant funding, palace offices, and security 2 years ago. Many other royals like the Yorks and Tindalls, Severn, and Louisa dont get security. Charles has been planning to slim down the monarchy for ages. Best to start in his own house.
If it's true that C has invited them here, could he be calling H's bluff? Demonstrating that they're only interested in getting Netflix footage from the Jubilee?
Maggot and Mole aren’t happy unless they are complaining about someone or something. The Gripes’! Maggot and Mole Gripe. 🤨

I’m hopeful Lady C does a new video today with her latest take. 😋
Miggy said…
I wonder if there's any truth to this?

Prince Harry Asking For Financial Help, But Prince Charles Is 'Not Budging': Report

https://www.btimesonline.com/articles/153196/20220117/prince-harry-asking-financial-help-charles-budging-report.htm
Miggy said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Miggy said…
@Rebecca,

The DM has updated its article and now states...

'There could be events later this year which make such a change necessary,' the source said in an apparent reference to the outcome of Andrew's court case in the US and the publication of Harry's forthcoming memoirs.
I think an act of parliament should be enacted to remove the ducal titles. Although I do not think Andrew is guilty, he’s acted recklessly and arrogantly which has undermined his reputation etc. 🙁

Lady C has indicated that action behind the scenes was about Maggot and Mole, with recent events any action could now affect both Mole and Andrew. 🤔
Enbrethiliel said…
@DesignDoctor
Sources claim that Charles have invited the Dollars to stay with him...

"Sources." ;-) We know who they are.

I think his name was dropped because he seems to be the "softest" one and they're testing the waters.

@WBBM
If it's true that C has invited them here, could he be calling H's bluff? Demonstrating that they're only interested in getting Netflix footage from the Jubilee?

To be honest, a play like that sounds like something up Prince William's alley, rather than Prince Charles's. But until we know more, my own guess is that Mrs. Dollar is doing more of her "manifesting." I'm a little surprised that the "sources" didn't say anything about Camilla baking "Lilibet" a birthday cake.
Enbrethiliel said…
@Maneki
I posted a comment earlier about H wanting to visit the family in the UK and introducing Lilibuck$. When I refreshed a couple of hours later, the comment was. I re-posted it and have refreshed and now it's gone again. The comment was no offensive in any way, what happened?

Not a mod, but this happened to me, too.

I rewrote my comment three times before it finally published. I suspect there was a word in it that Blogger itself has a problem with and that it wasn't an action by a mod. Since I can't read your lost comment, I can't guess whether it's disappearing for the same reason. But if there's a hot-button word there you think might be a problem and then rewrite the comment without it, perhaps it will successfully remain on the blog.
I just copied and re posted Maneki’s missing comment and it instantly disappeared. Hmmm odd, could be an anomaly with Blogger as Embre states. 😟
@Embrethiliel said "Mrs. Dollar is doing more of her "manifesting."

What a delightful thought - shades of a seance and Noel Coward's `Blithe Spirit'- - should we call her Elvira?
Enbrethiliel said…
@WBBM

We could, but then we'd have to change "Mistress of the Dark" to "Mistress of the Dollar" for accuracy!
Hikari said…
This is an older documentary that has only recently been reposted on YouTube. Narrator and on-camera personality is none other than HRH Edward, Earl of Wessex, though this was shot in 1996, three years before his marriage. Quite fascinating, and Ed has a very good voice for the reading. The Abdication is dealt with fairly quickly, with the bulk of the time devoted to David and Wallis's vapid 'cafe society' lifestyle in the Bahamas, New York and Paris. A number of former courtiers and governmental figures, by then very elderly people, share their reminisces of the Duke and Duchess. A few staunchly defend the former King against charges of being a Nazi collaborator, with an eye toward being reinstalled on the throne he threw away by a victorious Herr Hitler . . but there is enough evidence that Edward proposed precisely this that it's left hanging in the air like a bad smell.

Edward really and truly believed that after he reneged on his duty to his country in spectacular fashion that he could return to Ft. Belvedere with his Duchess and resume his party Prince lifestyle unimpeded, styling himself as a sort of figurative 'younger brother' of the younger brother he'd shoved unto the throne. HRH was told flatly by PM Stanley Baldwin that there could not be two kings in Britain, and he was never again allowed to reside in the UK, permitted only to visit for family funerals.

Harry is trodding down this path, except without Edward's money.

WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE WINDSORS?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmXfb99bAqM

A review from Wallis's home paper, the Baltimore Sun.
-----------------------------------------------------
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1996-04-13-1996104087-story.html
SwampWoman said…
Heh. I'm reading y'all's comments while I've decided to start doing my January decluttering session while hubby is out of town and not in the way to question my madness (grin). Some might call reading in lieu of working "procrastination". I call that "energy conservation". I started by watching some organizational experts. I've decided to start with the fridge. I will eat all the leftovers from the grandkids being here this weekend so that the fridge is easier to clean. Might as well start the day with success!

I think of the Royal Family's efforts to "streamline" as "decluttering". When I mention "decluttering", I don't necessarily mean the sock drawer (although that badly needs going through, too. I mean, if I haven't found those missing sock mates in the past YEAR, I should take those Left Behind and use them as stain applicators.)

Decluttering can be realizing that you would be much happier without having contact with a 'friend', relative, or even a spouse. When someone wants to spend the time you spend together criticizing you, the family pets, the children, how the children are defective in some way due to your lack of parental skills, the house has defects that are all your fault, and how everybody else that they know are better than you in every respect, time to declutter. Sometimes it is a job that is not a good fit but you landed there, the money is good enough, the commute is easy, but you do not like either the tasks, coworkers, or the boss. Time to declutter.

Usually, after a thorough decluttering, I wonder "What took me so long? Why did I allow myself to be so miserable for far too long?"

The bottom dollar duo abused the staff, the family, their 'friends', and then fled, apparently thinking that they were worth far more than they were. They are still abusing their family via social media and "press" apparently under the belief that being a giant PITA will convince everybody to take them back. While they might be freeloading and becoming the houseguest from hell in the states, I'm sure everybody in the UK breathed a sigh of relief.

The Royal Family has performed a pretty successful exorcism, excuse me, decluttering. Don't invite clutter back in. The number one rule in decluttering is not to allow clutter back in once it has been removed.
Fifi LaRue said…
@Hikari: Interesting about David and Wallis.

However, the Dollars could not emulate a "cafe society" lifestyle like David and Wallis. That kind of lifestyle demands style in all its meanings, interesting conversation, a gift of ranconteurship, wit, interest in others, cleverness, etc.

The Dollars can only offer whining, complaining, fake tears, petulance, and lack of any kind of style.

It is widely believe Mrs. Glassbowl was commenting heavily on D-Listed yesterday. The language! The delusion! The blaming and vindictiveness towards the BRF, and the Cambridges was beyond anything close to rational.
SwampWoman said…
Hikari, I thought David and Wallis were textbook examples of empty lives. I looked at the evidence and concluded for myself that David was a Nazi collaborator. I agree with the government's position of not opening the door once he was gone.
snarkyatherbest said…
swampwoman. when you are done can you come my way 😉

your procrastination did yield some good thoughts though. how many times did we distance ourselves from people who are drama. suddenly things are more “joyful” to take a term from Marie Kando. i imagine family get together are easier without. anticipating the drama watching the drama and feeling frustrated over the drama. we only see a sliver of what the BRF has been through.

as for the counselors of state. i imagine we are leading up to a charles transition. not that the queen will abdicate tomorrow but getting all things in place for when he officially takes over. then at the funeral and then the coronation the focus is on the queen ans then the new king and not the drama of andy or the dollars.
snarkyatherbest said…
FiFi and Hikari. you also forget the sordid sexual and possible drug details surrounding the Windsors. perhaps that is what they have in common with the dollars
Hikari said…
Swampie,

I prefer the term "Procrastireading". :)

The bottom dollar duo abused the staff, the family, their 'friends', and then fled, apparently thinking that they were worth far more than they were. They are still abusing their family via social media and "press" apparently under the belief that being a giant PITA will convince everybody to take them back. While they might be freeloading and becoming the houseguest from hell in the states, I'm sure everybody in the UK breathed a sigh of relief.

The Royal Family has performed a pretty successful exorcism, excuse me, decluttering. Don't invite clutter back in. The number one rule in decluttering is not to allow clutter back in once it has been removed.


I think exorcism is most apt in reference to the Montesh*tshow disasters. Clutter has a more benign aspect, even if it does create stress. The objects in themselves are not evil--it's just when thee is too much of anything it becomes hard to navigate smoothly. One man's trash is another man's treasure, so the saying goes. But the Harkles are just straight up toxic trash . . nobody's treasure except for sugars who have the worship of Princess Mug as their only hobby. Before the advent of the Krazy Kween and Covid, I never had any idea that there were that many certifiably insane people walking around under their own recognizance. I get frightened for my future when I dwell too long on how many nutjobs are ostensibly running things these days.

See my post above about Edward's documentary about his Great Uncle David's very similar attitude toward the line in bold. Well put; that's exactly what both royal morons thought, too. Edward's devaluation happened nearly instantaneously, both from his ersatz Duchess and his former subjects. He was so widely admired and adored as Prince of Wales, though God only knows why. He was a borderline imbecilic irresponsible shallow loafer from boyhood. The people who continued to support him in exile as the 'true King' were equivalent to Smeg Sugar monkeys today--both cohorts fell in love with the *image* of an impossibly glamorous 'cool' personage and stubbornly refuse(d) to be talked out of silly, blind devotion in defiance of established facts, or what the rest of us call 'reality'. If a former King-Emperor lost his luster so quickly upon ditching the Royal family, what makes HazNowt think he's ****more**** special than Great-Uncle David?

Thank God for the Royal Family back when David and Wallis were kicking up their ruckus that there was no social media. David's harassment campaign against his family took the form of nearly daily wheedling/accusatory/whining letters and phone calls to his brother, the King, b*tching about this that and the other--mostly on two themes: Money and George's failure to grant Wallis an HRH or receive her at court. It got so bad that Bertie begged him to stop and eventually stopped taking David's calls. I think Haz has been similarly cut off from direct communication with the BRF, but unlike David, he can harass them globally on the Internet. The minute they agreed to let him marry the Thing and leave, the Palace lost all ability at containment. The Harkles are radioactive now and their poisonous fallout is global.
Hikari said…
Well, snarky

I just spent some time composing a reply to you about David's boudoir problems and the potential nature of the Windsors' relationship. It posted and then Blogger blitzed it.

This is the second time in days that this has happened to me. The platform has been pretty lenient up til now but apparently not any more. I didn't use any vulgar words but it seems that it's going to be increasingly difficult to discuss the sordid nature of the Harkle's sham lives together without offending the software.

I agree that Harry and David share very similar physical and psychological problems that made them vulnerable to the corrupted charms of a certain type of exremely pushy and conniving American woman with vast experience of the carnal. It was also surmised that Wallis was a professional in Shanghai after the First War and we all know what Smuggy got up to before/during her marriage to Trevor/relationship with Cory.

The ultimate result of Great Uncle David's proclivities and limitations in the procreational area mean that even without the Abdication, Elizabeth almost 100% certainly would have been Queen anyway. The only thing that might have prevented that was her parents producing a son. Edward never was going to have his own children, no matter who he married. Most likely shooting blanks.
Lady C says there’s truth that there’s been discussion of Maggot being offered New York Senate. 😳
Elsbeth1847 said…

I don't think anyone has mentioned it but SueMe makes good legal points about where the claims for needing to pay for the security are actually headed. Once it is established that they need it (in the courts), then who pays for it falls apart and it must be maintained which translates to others on the hook.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuawUXzl_a8
Hikari said…
Lady C says there’s truth that there’s been discussion of Maggot being offered New York Senate.

Discussion amongst *whom*, one wonders? Smeg-stans? Smeg's multiple personalities?

Well, the ultra-'progressive' group behind Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez proves that if one spouts the 'correct' woke agenda and is photogenic, it is possible to be catapulted from working behind a bar in the Bronx to the United States Congress. It's not what you know, it's who you know, and Smug apparently knows some big names in the Democratic Party. All entirely morally corrupt individuals like Herself, but morally corrupt with deep wallets.

The Duckarse of Montecito could not stomach her *very onerous* (not) schedule of Royal engagements for even 2 years. She doesn't like protocol, refuses to acknowledge that it applies to her. As the junior senator from New York, a whole lot of people would be in front of Herself in precedence. Vice President Kamala Harris would no doubt be firmly in the sights as 'the New Kate'.

There are a few impediments to Duckarse being offered New York Senate, which Lady C. might not be aware of. Even if appointed to fill a vacancy in lieu of being elected to the seat, I believe an established New York residency would be required. Madam does not meet this and one weekend visit to the Mark Hotel three years ago does not qualify.

This is one of Duckarse's more delusional manifestations, in my view, but hey, weirder things have happened--she wormed her way into becoming a Royal Duchess for flick's sake.

Well, I invite her to go ahead and swing for that fence. The Senate Republicans will destroy her delusional self in a way that the Queen of Great Britain appears to be unable to do.
Hikari said, It's not what you know, it's who you know, and Smug apparently knows some big names in the Democratic Party. All entirely morally corrupt individuals like Herself, but morally corrupt with deep wallets.

She alluded to who Maggot knows, (plus there’s an anti-monarchists agenda mixed in; the Giuffre/Andrew stuff). So yes, you’re on the right track. 😳 I’m still listening to the video.
@Hikari

I don’t believe the story holds much merit, if any. It seems too far fetched to me. 😟😋
Fifi LaRue said…
@Snarky: Somewhere I read that as the David and Wallis marriage progressed, it became more odd. Only what I read and remember: Wallis would entertain her gay male friends at dinner and late after, while David went to bed. They made fun of him, etc. There wasn't a lot of respect.

There certainly has been conjecture here about what goes on with the Harkles, her male companion, what she's got on Ginge, videos maybe of S & M, Dom & Sub, etc.
Thank you, Hikari, for posting that video - there was so much in it that was fresh and fascinating.

I'm still sceptical about David's innocence with regard to the allegations of Nazi sympathies. As one is repeatedly reminded by tutors when doing any sort of field work, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. One just hasn't found the proof yet. PM Baldwin was certainly doubtful about her.
SwampWoman said…
Maybe, with Remainder, it isn't *who* she knows but *what* she knows. If she was indeed a party girl, she may know or have heard a lot. Is it enough to get her a cushy position in government or an unfortunate overdose accident?

/Knowledge can be dangerous
Maneki Neko said…
@Enbrethiliel and @ Raspberry Ruffle

Thank you so much for taking the time to write your posts re my disappearing post😊. There was absolutely nothing contentious in it, I didn't criticise anyone (apart from our duo). Not to worry, it must be a glitch. I'll see if this post stays on the blog.
Girl with a Hat said…
about * being offered to run as the junior Senator from NY State:

the Democratic party is crumbling under the ineptitude and woke agenda of the federal and state Democratic administrations

Even Latino voters, who were supposed to become enamored by the fact that illegal immigrants were flooding into the country unimpeded by the American authorities, have switched to the Republicans in large numbers

There are now more Republican registered voters than Democrats, and this, the first time in a long time.

Having * as a candidate parachuted into NYstate with no qualifications and her bad reputation, would just be the nail in the coffin, even in traditionally blue states like N
Y
Enbrethiliel said…
@SwampWoman
Maybe, with Remainder, it isn't *who* she knows but *what* she knows. If she was indeed a party girl, she may know or have heard a lot. Is it enough to get her a cushy position in government or an unfortunate overdose accident?

For the reasons mentioned by @GWAH, my own guess would be for an unfortunate accident of some sort. Which would be horrible, of course. I don't wish death on * -- and I hope, for her sake, that she isn't stupid enough to put pressure on those for whom expedience is valued more highly than morality.
@Maneki Neko

I reposted your comment twice, the 2nd time minus the Dollar sign, they both disappeared instantly after posting. 😟There was nothing contentious within the text, I even checked for possible symbols or signs that Blogger could possibly reject. Hopefully you can post and it stays! 😃
Girl with a Hat said…
I listened to Lady C's video and * might be offered the candidacy IF either of the two actual US Senators land on the Democratic presidential ticket thus liberating one of the seats, but then again, some people have remained US Senator as they ran on the presidential ticket in case they lost, they would retain their US Senate seat.
Maneki Neko said…
@Raspberry Ruffle

Thank you so much again😀. This is going beyond the call of duty! Other posters wrote Lilibuck$ with the dollar sign so I don't know. Just one of those things.

@Maneki Neko

😂😃I had to try for you, solve a puzzle as it were.
SwampWoman said…
GWAH, I do believe that VP elect Harris only resigned her Senate seat two days (?) before being sworn in as VP. How dilatory of her.
LavenderLady said…
@Hikari said,
I agree that Harry and David share very similar physical and psychological problems that made them vulnerable to the corrupted charms of a certain type of exremely pushy and conniving **American woman with vast experience of the carnal.

---

Just a thought. Let's not paint American women with such a brush. Many, many, many, of us are good people who walk in decency. Wallis was a woman, not just an American woman.

Ghislaine Maxwell is not American. So making a blank statement of all British woman using her as the model is a good example of this.

Just a thought. Not wishing to be offensive.
snarkyatherbest said…
just saw dailymail article quoting royal sources that harry and andrew are getting jubilee medals and megan is also getting. something. so hoping the sources are the dollars. doesn’t make sense if they just stripped andrew why stir the pot and give him an honor. and we all know what we think of the dollars. guess someone found some change in the couch for the pr😉
Girl with a Hat said…
@Snarky,

that's funny because just yesterday evening, I saw an article in the DM saying that neither Andrew or Harry would get the jubilee medals.
OCGal said…
@GWAH, I’m with you. I read an article this morning that assured the populace that Harry and Andrew would NOT be awarded medals at the Jubilee. The whiplash of stories pro and con The Dollars and Andrew make me dizzy. I can’t keep up!
I read the article about the non recipient of the medals too. It seems all royals will get one, non working and working royals. It said a a royal source gave the info, it remains to be seen if it happens. 🤔
snarkyatherbest said…
maybe the medal is like the gold watch on a forced retirement here it is don’t let thy e door hit you on the cat out and put your councilor off state has been reassigned. yep replaced by girls. 😉

as for the mrs. i just conjure up the kid catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. i’ve got candy my pretties candy for you. and a cage for mrs dollar (cage as in jail 😉)
Hikari said…
Lavender Lady,

@Hikari said,
I agree that Harry and David share very similar physical and psychological problems that made them vulnerable to the corrupted charms of a certain type of exremely pushy and conniving **American woman with vast experience of the carnal.

---

Just a thought. Let's not paint American women with such a brush. Many, many, many, of us are good people who walk in decency. Wallis was a woman, not just an American woman.

Ghislaine Maxwell is not American. So making a blank statement of all British woman using her as the model is a good example of this.

Just a thought. Not wishing to be offensive.


I know your comment comes from a well-intended place so I am going to endeavor to take it in that spirit and tell myself I am not offended, though my initial reaction was, a tad. Because I am an American woman myself and I am the very last person who would dream of tarring all *American women* with the same brush as the Duchess of Montecito. Why would I do that when I would be demeaning myself by association?

Please allow me to clarify that my remarks were pertaining to the two very specific women under discussion--Wallis Simpson and Harry's wife--who, I am sorry to say, shared a nationality and a gender with me but the similarities end there, I hope. I meant these two particular individuals when I used the phrase 'American women'. I'm sorry that wasn't as clear to you as I thought it was when I wrote it. Wallis and * sadly are not alone as exemplars of the shallow, materialistic, greedy, social climbing 'type' so prevalent today but such a type goes way beyond the parameters of any one nation. These are 'human' conditions rather than belonging to any one nation, but don't you find it a rather bizarre coincidence that *both* of the foreign interloper wives of the last century who have caused such internal crises for the Royal family have both been multiply-divorced Americans? What are the odds? The Queen was only a child when the first one blew onto the scene but she has studied her own family history enough that she's got to feel like she's in some kind of Groundhog Day dimension.

American wives haven't been the only bane of the Royal family's existence in the 20th and 21st centuries. There's Fergie . . .as British a girl as they come.

Hikari said…
P.S. And of course, Diana. Not just a British girl but one with bluer blood than that of the family she was joining. So 'breeding' and socioeconomic class and nationality are no guarantee that anybody isn't going to be an utter disaster in many ways. Just think what * could have done for not just the Firm but for being an aspirational role model for girls everywhere had she truly been a quality person--hard-working, loving, humble, teachable, loyal--who came from a relatively humble, multiracial, American background. If she had been even half what she pretends to be, this community would not exist. As it is, I fear she is an inspiration only to other grifters like her who want to see how far they can milk the system so they never have to work another day in their lives, too.
Maneki Neko said…
I haven't seen this posted so apologies in advance if anyone has.

Martin Luther King's daughter Bernice thanks Harry and Meghan for 'honouring her father' after the couple buy meals from black-owned food trucks to give to volunteers at The King Center on MLK Day

One paragraph states 'The Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, who live in a $14million mansion in Montecito, California, supported staff at The King Center for Nonviolent Social Change in Atlanta by buying meals from black-owned food trucks who then gave them out to those helping with Monday's events.'
. . .

:Bernice King also shared a message to her Twitter thanking Harry and Meghan writing: 'I’m so grateful for your graciousness in honoring my father.''

Sorry, Bernice, nothing to do with MLK, more to do with self-promotion.

As usual, this is very vague. How many meals did they buy? 50? 100? And as usual, the world has to hear about it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10413543/Martin-Luther-Kings-daughter-Bernice-thanks-Harry-Meghan-honouring-father.html
Girl with a Hat said…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2SZP3AFwl8

Ashli from Danja Zone shows you the enhancements that prove that the children were added to the Christmas card photo
Maneki Neko said…
They've been busy!!

EXCLUSIVE: Harry and Meghan are setting up a complex network of 11 companies - named after the Duchess's freckles (Peca), a South American river (Orinoco) and their 'babymoon' (Hampshire) - all based in tax haven Delaware

These names are cringe. More ways of hiding their 'earnings'. I haven't got the will or the energy to read the article, or not yet anyway.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10390847/Harry-Meghan-setting-network-11-companies-Delaware.html
snarkyatherbest said…
Maneko. sounds like you don’t have to do the sleuthing. sounds like daily mail has and will continue to do so. hmmmm what else have they dug up 😉
Girl with a Hat said…
@Maneki Neko,

MLK's family just came out for the update to the voting laws in the USA which will allow anyone to vote without ID or even being registered until the last moment, so they've lost any respect I had for them.
Elsbeth1847 said…
11 companies?

Why on earth would you need that many? It's not like they have really committed any one humanitarian effort. There is such a thing as spreading yourself too thin (as in not enough coming in to make any of it viable.

It makes better sense to start with 1 (or maybe 2) good idea(s). Build them up and then produce your next 1 or 2. You have the reputation solidly behind you to pull of expansion because you are a known quantity of value.

So (I know they could think of it as a way to spread the money trickle here and there with the law behind them to do it) but to pull that off, you have to have momentum in a lot of different directions. And that momentum is difficult to sustain because the energy and direction is not concentrated.

Neither of them really do well on that maintaining the sustaining part.
Maneki Neko said…
@Girl with a Hat OT

Thanks for the update. I can understand you lost any respect you had for them. I've actually just seen an article in the Guardian about it. So I presume H & * are fine with that.

Este said…
I'm not worried about Meghan's political ambitions. Lady C may have drawn comparisons between her and Hillary but Hillary was the President's wife and won a seat in Congress before her ill fated runs for President. Maybe Lady C was making the point that Hillary couldn't win so what chances does Megsy-baby. As for being told anything, politicians schmooze and lie for a living so anything she was told about being considered for a plum senate position is just blowing smoke up her #ss. They were probably floating the idea realizing she has some influence right here/now, so why not use it for their own PR. But Meghan has no influence in America. The past year's demonstrated that. Those staged photo ops in NY were embarrassing. Even the corrupt Demo-rats know a sinking ship when it's time to flee.

PS: I don't believe Meghan or her Handbag Hairdresser were invited to Obama's 60th party or they would have been sure we knew they were invited. They couldn't hold back such a GET given these political delusions.
Girl with a Hat said…
@Elsbeth,

they have 11 companies because they will be doing the shell game. Passing the profits from one company to another, and trying to obfuscate their steps that way.
LavenderLady said…
@Hikari,
Thanks so much for responding to my comment so nicely and for letting me know you are American. Knowing this changes my perspective completely. I can't always remember who is or not. I'm not here so much anymore.

We do hear about "those Americans" often and I know why. Americans can be boorish and we say what we think.

I was raised in a subculture so I'm not all in as being mainstream "American" (and, I can call myself a yank but if anyone from outside of the states does, I see it as coming from a mocking place).

Anywho,
Thanks again for being a lady about it. :)
I appreciate your posts!
SwampWoman said…
GWAH, "shell game" is exactly what I thought, too. I wonder what they have set up overseas.
DesignDoctor said…
Hikari
Thanks for the link to the Windsor video. Fascinating! I could not help but draw comparisons between the Windsors and the Dollars. I totally agree with the person who said the Dollars could not be part of the cafe society because they lack the requisite social skills of farm, storytelling, etc. Bravo to whoever wrote that eloquent post!
NeutralObserver said…
I am actually hoping that #6 & * win their right to British security. If I see them & their sprogs on the balcony with the rest of the Royal Family at the TTC, it will settle once & for all the question of whether or not those children actually exist (at least for me). As it is, the issue of security is a very convenient way for both the #6, * & the Royal Family to kick the can down the road & evade the issue. They don't seem to have taken up Charles' generous offer of shelter at Clarence House, where they would presumedly be afforded the same standard of protection he has. So, if the California branch doesn't show up en masse for the Queen's Jubilee, it makes the existence of actual children less likely to me. The publication of Harry's request for a Judicial Review just draws attention to a plausible excuse for the non appearance of * & her offspring.

For me the Christmas card, with its subjects moving in all directions, reminiscent of the Mannerist era in art, raised more questions than it answered. Why was Archie thinner, smaller & more red-haired than in previous iterations? Why did Lily look so much like the baby * held over her head in South Africa, & what was with the weird hands & feet? I won't go into #6's much thicker, redder hair, but I will admit that *, like the woman who is suing Prince Andrew, seems to have become quite matronly in her late thirties, early forties manifestation.
snarkyatherbest said…
Este. and HRC is know. as a mega fundraiser for herself and for the party. dollar’s wife is a slender not a raiser
Elsbeth1847 said…
I hear what you are saying about it as a shell game (and I agreed).

However, how much are we thinking there could still be left as seed money to start trickling downward into all the different little purses? The Elephant gig? Maybe the foundation money which used to be shared with PW? and what else is there? and why would we think it hasn't been spent already?

That's my point. Eventually, there won't be a lot to trickle down because there are no great money rainmakers for the world to follow them like the Pied Piper where everyone will just throw money at them because it solves some previously unsolvable world problem or something which no one else offers.

Vax? maybe but that costs money to make money and then if the distribution is not set up perfectly then it may not be as useful a money maker as they thought (which doesn't create repeat business). They ran into distribution issues in the USA and that's a first world country. Why would countries buy from them unless the pricing was lower than the competition? Not like the aura of royalty helps fight viruses better/faster? Plus they would be fighting to get up and running with everyone else who is already farther along in this (everywhere).

Yes it would make for some splashy footage for Netflix but it would wind up being like Spotify: what do you do next with it?

This is why if they were going to show the world how successful they really are, they would have picked one or two and worked/leveraged up.

Enbrethiliel said…
In this Body Language Guy short, Mr. Rosas gives Harry a friendly suggestion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKKY4s8D5Rc

Just as Prince Charles hired retired police officers to provide security for Camilla before they were married, why can't Harry (who presumably knew about this old arrangement) do something similar? Retired police officers know all the protocols and may even have direct experience protecting other Royals.

It's a win-win scenario, especially since Harry is willing to pay for protection (or at least claims that he is). And he can't say that it's second-rate security, because it was good enough for his own father when it came to the woman who is arguably the love of his life. If we believe the story that Charles has told Harry that the latter (and his family?) will be welcome at Clarence House, then we can also definitely assume that Charles has brought this up.

I can't decide whether Harry wants a good excuse not to go so that he can avoid telling the truth ("I will just be booed and I can't prove that I have children"), in which case he has already been outmaneouvered . . . or whether he understands that he needs to go and wants to know if his family will help him cover up his lies again.
Enbrethiliel said…
And there was definitely a knowing twinkle in Trevor Coult's eye when he suggested that Harry hire "your ex-Special Forces buddies. You know, the ones who looked after you in Afghanistan?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOnG5amh6Ws
Magatha Mistie said…

Slush Funders

Filtering funds
through the Banks of Orinoco
The latest ruse from
Waz and Pinocchio
Wazzer and his little Peca
Are preying that
they’ll soon do better
Hiding behind an empty shell
Foundation floundering
not swelling too well
Just another Con-duit
For flaccid twit
and his piece of s..t!

BTW - here's something from next week's Radio Times that might interest Nutties. It's from a piece by Anite Lasker-Wallfisch, a cocentration camp survivor, now in her late 90s:

`Charles is very concerned with the Holocaust...and he gets that interest from his father:(whose) mother actually hid a Jewish family at her home in Athens during the N*** occupation.

`By coincidence, one of the schools at which I have told my story is Eton, when Princes William and Harry were there. Of courseHarry wsn't taking it seriously - just another boring lady who comes to talk about boring thing - but William is a different character altogether.'
Sandie said…
Anyone here with the sort of knowledge that I am lacking and thus resort to guessing? Why so many companies?

My guesses:

Limits damage if they get sued.
Limits tax by being below thresholds for each company.
Hides money by washing it through different companies. But why?
Lots of places to bill expenses as business expenses and thus cover their costs. This limits income that can be taxed in California.

It seems that all of this is common practice in America, and probably elsewhere, for the elite, except for Elon Musk.

Shouldn't global philanthropists and humanitarians rather focus their energy on how effective tax is in being used in their state to eradicate poverty and homelessness and lack of effective medical and social care? Rather than overblown publicity on itty bitty bandwaggoning 'donations' that do nothing about the underlying problem (hey, here is lunch for the day!)?

In my country, there is a populist politician (who lives the life of a multi-millionaire) who seeks major publicity for 'building a house for a homeless person' (he sends minions out to do the work but might make a photo op appearance). It is pathetic. First, we have a major housing programme that has built and continues to build millions of houses for the poor. Second, a very effective organisation called Habitat for Humanity is active here. It makes a real difference. The prospective homeowners must raise some of the capital themselves; the company making the donation also has their workers on site for a day assisting in the building (pass bricks, mix mortar with a spade and put it in a wheelbarrow to take to the bricklayers) and the prospective homeowner provides lunch. Some wealthy people from Hollywood have participated in such schemes elsewhere in the world.

Back to the financial shennanigans ... aren't they at risk of getting into a heap of trouble? What about the IRS? And how the heck does Doria's shell company fit into all of this?
JHanoi said…
if the harkles have enough money to set up 9 or 11 new companies in Delaware, they can afford to pay for their own securitty
OCGal said…
@Magatha Mistie, Slush Funders: brava! I continue to be in awe of your facility with language, ability to connect the dots for us of the loathsome twosome’s persistent underhandedness, and your poetic genius. I do actually consider some of your works genius, yes. Thank you.
Sandie said…
@WBBM

Thanks for sharing that very interesting information about the different reactions from the brothers at Eton. It is as if, no matter how much love and guidance and assistance he got, he was always going to end up with someone like that awful wife and do what he has done. But maybe all this ridiculous acting out (threatening to sue HM government being the latest) is a cry for help?

Maybe I should listen to Hikari and give up the delusion that he can be resecued and rehabilitated in some way! I feel so sorry for his family. The genuine love and care they have always had does not just go away.
LavenderLady said…
@Sandie said,
Back to the financial shennanigans ... aren't they at risk of getting into a heap of trouble? What about the IRS? And how the heck does Doria's shell company fit into all of this?
___

Well, if they are detested as much as they obviously are then it's easy to conclude the IRS doesn't exactly love them either. They are playing with fire to stir the attention of the IRS. I think it's part of the Kraken that the 11 business have come to light...
Doria has pulled a runner looks like.

___

About TBW being appointed to a Senate seat: when pigs fly. I'll believe it when I see it. If she does, she'll mess it up in record time.
___

@Magatha,
Wazza and his little Peca LOL!!! 😂😂😂😂
HappyDays said…
Either the earlier media reports were wrong or someone in the UK has come to their senses.

Media reports in the UK are now saying Andrew and Harry will NOT receive medals for the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee. The first report I saw is from The Telegraph on Yahoo news.

I’m hoping the public outrage over what would look like rewarding bad behavior by Andrew and Harry and his controller has finally started to sink in at the palace.

The lovely part is now that the Harkles and Andrew are being lumped together, it is far more difficult for the Sussexes to throw down the race card again and say they are being singled out due to Meghan’s ethnic background. No dears, you are being singled out along with Andrew because you were all given the gifts of massive privilege and status and you are using it in a manner that is tarnishing the Queen’s life of service as well as damaging the institution of the British Monarchy, the source of that great status and privilege.
LavenderLady said…
P.s
Looks like Delaware is a low tax state so many "companies"
register there. I agree with some of the comments on the DM article. A person can register multiple companies; it doesn't mean they'll make any real money. And if they do the money management team and the lawyers will suck them dry (as is known historically and currently in the music recording industry...)

I am gathering that the Douches of Montecito really are incredibly stupid and naive. So much so, the sharks are circling.
No wonder Doria booked it
Sandie said…
Neil Sean reports that it is news to senior members of the royal family that Charles has invited them to stay with him at Clarence House!

Remember that manifesto that they blindsided everyone with and then the Queen said no to just about everything they demanded? I don't think she ever let go of any of it and is still trying to manifest it. He has always thought that they are entitled to everything they demanded. What did they want and what did they get?

International Protected Persons status. Nope.

Taxpayer funded royal protection officers? Nope, no RPP at all.

Part-time working royals with office at BP? Nope.

Lose funding from Sovereign Grant (about 5% of their costs I think it was)? Yep, they got that!

Not in manifesto, but obvious it was the expectation in private: continued funding from Charles. One more large payment, then no more. (Their half-in-half out would have been their justification for getting funding from the Duchy of Cornwall.)

SussexRoyal and HRH, the former which they had trademarked all over the place? Nope, and their beloved IG account had to go as well.

Perhaps they are deluded enough to want a high-profile royal tour in 2022, in the UK, funded by taxpayers, believing it will boost their brand. They are always messy, so their strategy so far seems to be guaranteed to shoot them in the foot and send their low popularity plummeting. But I am seeing opinion pieces saying 'come back Harry and we will forgive you and welcome you'. Expect a lot more of the same in the next few months.
Sandie said…
@LavenderLady

Are you an American? I am not sure how politics works in America, but my reaction to the stories about her being given a senate seat is that it is absurd. I can imagine her delusions are behind this, but how can someone living in California who has never done any work for the DP expect to be handed a New York senate seat? Even if they can ovecome all the obstacles, why would the DP put in all that effort for that woman on a deluded power trip? As a voter, her pathetic claims of activism and international connections on her CV would not fool me. What does she know about New York and the needs and views of the people there, or anywhere in America other than the bubble of Hollywood that she has always wanted to get inside but never has, even with a Prince in her firm grip?
Enbrethiliel said…
Out of the blue today, I was reminded of the German Märchen (loosely translated as "fairytale") The Fisherman and His Wife.

When the story begins, the fisherman and his wife are very poor. They live in a tiny hut by the sea. One day, the fisherman catches a talking fish that can grant wishes, and he wishes that their home would become a nice cottage. His wife is very pleased at first, but a short while later, all she can think about is how he could have wished for something better. So she sends him back to ask the fish for a castle. He obeys, the fish grants the second wish, and his wife is happy . . . until she realizes she wants more. And more. And more. And more! It ends with her wishing that she could be God Himself, at which point the fish gets fed up and zaps her right back into the tiny hut.

Harry is very much like the fisherman -- except that instead of asking nicely, he makes demands and throws tantrums in the press. And of course * is very much like the fisherman's endlessly unsatisfied wife. While she initially seems like the worse of the two, they are actually equal when it comes to poor character. She may be envious and avaricious, but he has absolutely no spine or maturity.

If Prince Charles has been the fish up until this point, let's hope that he gets fed up very soon and zaps these two "fishers" where they belong!
Hikari said…
@Sandie

Thanks for sharing that very interesting information about the different reactions from the brothers at Eton. It is as if, no matter how much love and guidance and assistance he got, he was always going to end up with someone like that awful wife and do what he has done. But maybe all this ridiculous acting out (threatening to sue HM government being the latest) is a cry for help?

Maybe I should listen to Hikari and give up the delusion that he can be resecued and rehabilitated in some way! I feel so sorry for his family. The genuine love and care they have always had does not just go away.


I would like nothing better than if H would have a Damascus moment and turn his life around. Unfortunately, I think it's gone way beyond just being a spoilt entitled brat who never had any expectations put on him. That's definitely a substantial element of H's bad character but I think to a large degree he's a lost cause because he's got severe mental and emotional problems from childhood that have only worsened as he's gotten older. There must have been innumerable conversations about "What to Do About Harry?" as he was growing up, but no satisfactory conclusion was reached because how H has been allowed to run rampant since his teens was the very worst possible thing they could have let him do.

Losing his mother at such a vulnerable age was absolutely terrible for both boys, but while it seems to have been the making of William to a large degree, that loss has become the undoing of H. The child that placed a card to 'Mummy' on Diana's cortege has grown into a man who misses no opportunity to pick over her figurative carcass and beloved memory like a carrion vulture. If that's not irredeemable, I don't know what would qualify.

Instead of being sent to Eton, where I think the fracture between the brothers first started, H needed something altogether different. He should have been enrolled in an Outward Bound style school somewhere in the Commonwealth where he'd spend time in the great outdoors, learn skills and be removed from the Palace atmosphere. If he'd learned essential skills in Africa or Australia, he might have been able to have a meaningful life contributing to service that way. Too late. He's on his great-Uncle David's trajectory now, and it only remains for him to continue to age into a sad, embittered, worthless, pointless, pathetic waste of space. I would consider it a mercy, really, if H's life in this toxic limbo of his own making doesn't last for decades more.

Unless of course, he is a real, bona fide father of two. Then he's got something to live for.

Sure.
Midge said…
@Enbrethiliel
Perfect analogy- the fairy tale come to life!
Sandie said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8563043/DOMINIC-LAWSON-real-bombshell-little-Harry-not-Meghan-grasped-monarchy.html

The article is from July 2020. Although I agree that he may be stupid and hotheaded, I think the author fails to see how she has used and manipulated that. A woman of more character would have not rushed into the marriage nor pushed herself forward the way she did. A woman of more character who claimed to be so smart would have taken the time to find out and learn and heeded the advice of the superb staff she was gifted with, like Samantha Cohen, and been far more careful and listened more (appearing at Trooping the Colour in an off-the-shoulder cocktail dress was a ridiculous mistake that should have been avoided). A woman of more character would not have gone on the wild spending spree she did, starting with that smaltzy engagement photoshoot in the hugely expensive dress.
Sandie said…
@LavenderLady
I wasn't criticising you, but basically asking if she could get a senate seat, even though the idea makes no sense. You seem to think it is not possible, and, with my limited knowledge, I fail to see how that cannot be true. The idea must be as absurd as you say it is.

In my country, we vote for a party, who then decides who has a seat in parliament or the council of provinces (like the senate but with less power perhaps) or in the ever-growing cabinet. We end up with the most appallng people at all levels of government. But, in America, voters choose the candidates, and each candidate has to run an election campaign.

Surely she could not get the backing for a political run, nor win an election?
Sandie said…
@Hikari

I never understood why he was not sent to Gordonstoun (sp?), as were Phillip, and Anne's children. Charles and Edward as well? (Especially useful for someone who often displays great difficulty in being still and focusing, although I think the army training helped with that.) He must have struggled at Eton and countered the inferiority complex with entitled royal arrogance. But maybe he is not as thick as everyone thinks he is, and is just lazy and entitled?
Enbrethiliel said…
@Sandie

I always assumed that Prince Charles decided to respect Diana's rule that the sons be treated as equally as possible.

And he himself had wanted very much to go to Eton as a boy -- a choice that both his mother and his grandmother wanted for him, too. Perhaps seeing a very motherly Diana insist on Eton for their son touched that part of his heart.
Charles detested Gordonstoun. It may have suited his father but P was a very different character from C. Spencers were traditionally Etonians.
Mel said…
I don't know about a senator seat. A representative seat is pushing it, imo, although maybe within the realm of possibilities.

Especially a senator seat in a state where she doesn't live. And, she wants it handed to her. No intention of earning the spot.

I don't know. You'd think the people who have been working their way up for years, waiting their turn, would be in an uproar about this nobody getting handed anything.

She has nothing to offer. No $, no ideas.

OTOH, some other things seemed completely out of the realm of possibility and they happened. Hard to say, I guess.
Snarkyatherbest said…
Mel - I agree it is curious that it keeps coming up and the comparison to Hilary Clinton. If makes me wonder if its not about Dollar's wife getting a senate seat as much as she knows something on the Clintons or Hillary Clinton (and her senate seat) and this is pr code for "open doors for us, we know your secrets". Its just such an odd assumption that someone who doesnt live in the state, who cannot raise money for the broader party is even being considered in PR for something so unattainable. This one is a head scratcher
Snarkyatherbest said…
Hmmm now its emerging that they wont go to england for the Philp memorial. That one you would nt necessary take the kids. Maybe only he is invited and she is making sure that no one goes. Or they were invited with a strict no netflix cameras, no wires allowed. Surely she doesnt want him there without her since there is a possibility they could "invite" him into some inpatient rehab.
Sandie said…
Behind a paywall, but looks interesting ...

The brutal truth is that Harry and Meghan are no longer relevant to the state – so don’t qualify for security
Being able to ‘buy’ the police is a worrying prospect. If the Sussexes are concerned about taxpayers’ money, they might reconsider legal proceedings against the Home Office, writes Salma Shah

https://www.independent.co.uk/independentpremium/voices/prince-harry-meghan-security-b1996092.html
Sandie said…
Found it! The full aricle referenced above can be found here:

https://archive.fo/iJAkP

Thanks for the feedback about why he did not go to Gordonstoun (sp?). Just seems like a perfect fit for him to me. Would have knocked the entitled arrogance out of him, that's for sure!
LavenderLady said…
@Sandie,

No worries, my dear I didn't think you were criticizing me. I was pondering the discussion of her possibly being offered a Senate seat and snorted "when pigs fly".

Just another thought, if peeps had to vote for her then for sure she would lose her shirt...and her shit! LOL

When I want to address someone directly, I leave out the break, ____ or ---- between the quote and my thought. If the break is there, it means I'm not making a response to the poster of the quote, just referencing it.

Hope that helps! I've learned to do it so I don't step on toes.
Sandie said…

Private Eye Magazine
@PrivateEyeNews
·
2h
Downing Street officials offered to waive restrictions on mourners for Prince Philip’s funeral. The Queen refused, on the grounds she wanted to set an example rather than be an exception to the rules.
------------------------
Hikari said…
Samdie wrote>

I never understood why he was not sent to Gordonstoun (sp?), as were Phillip, and Anne's children. Charles and Edward as well? (Especially useful for someone who often displays great difficulty in being still and focusing, although I think the army training helped with that.) He must have struggled at Eton and countered the inferiority complex with entitled royal arrogance. But maybe he is not as thick as everyone thinks he is, and is just lazy and entitled?

Embre wrote:

I always assumed that Prince Charles decided to respect Diana's rule that the sons be treated as equally as possible.

And he himself had wanted very much to go to Eton as a boy -- a choice that both his mother and his grandmother wanted for him, too. Perhaps seeing a very motherly Diana insist on Eton for their son touched that part of his heart.


Wild Boar wrote:

Charles detested Gordonstoun. It may have suited his father but P was a very different character from C. Spencers were traditionally Etonians.

Charles swore that his sons would go to Eton . . one of the few subjects upon which he and Diana agreed. Since it turned out that Eton was as poor a fit for H as Gordonstoun had been for Charles, one wonders if it had ever even been considered to offer H other alternatives for his schooling. Insofar as parental love is concerned, all kids should be treated as equals--but since H's future was always going to deviate massively from William's codified role, and temperamentally they were so different besides, Eton was probably the worst choice they could have made for him. The top prep school in the world, probably (apologies to Harrow) and the cradle of so many past rulers and Prime Ministers--it was the best preparatory ground for William without question. But as much as his kid brother wanted to copy him in everything, H was not even minimally equipped to cope with that academically rigorous environment. Only his status as a Royal prince kept him there, where his daily struggles were never public knowledge. What did he learn at Eton, other than he could force the adults to cheat on his behalf and lie about it and there would not be any consequences for his HRH self? Until about 5 years ago, I had always assumed that whatever H lacked in academic strengths was balanced out by his winning personality, athleticism and natural leadership on the sports ground. I figured he had average grades at best but was well-liked, with many mates, and 'EQ'--all traits much more important to his future role than being a classroom grind. Of the two brothers, I would have said that H had the greater ease with people on the social front.

Well, all of that was just a load of codswallop--part of the useful PR of H as the 'People's Prince', hail fellow well met type. He must not have been liked much amongst his age group if he felt that William should have functioned as his social secretary and horned his way into all the upperclassman functions. What else was that besides entitlement, because at the secondary level, the younger classes don't mix with the older ones. I think H blames William for his own failures at school, which is just typical of how he has continued to behave ever since.

Hikari said…
At the very least, having H at Eton should have been reevaluated after the first year or two. If H had been a better-adjusted individual, it would have been fine, but it was not fine. That's when he started to seriously go off the rails, so having him at school close by to to home did absolutely zilch in terms of supervising his debauched behavior.

When H was about 14, he spent part of a summer at a dude ranch in Australia, where, no doubt he behaved as a little plonker, behind the scenes of the smiling photo shoot in his jackaroo hat. But he might have shaped up better if he knew that he wasn't leaving in a few weeks but was there for the long haul. We will never know now. There are a lot of excellent structured programs for adolescents with psychological problems/learning difficulties that would have been available to a parent with Charles's means. Surprised that PP didn't lobby for a Semester at Sea or similar. He might have thrived at Gordonstoun as an alternative and deepened the relationship with his grandfather that way--had Charles been able to entertain such an idea.

A lost child grows into a lost man, and that's what we are seeing now. Harry drifted on William's coattails without any strong sense of self. Partly that is an institutional failure of 'putting all the eggs in one basket'--showering everything upon the direct heir without a specific role or set of expectations for the spare and other children. It's not a recipe for a strong sense of self-esteem. Despite being an arrogant, entitled ***, H's self-esteem is actually non-existent. His choice of wife is proof of that. He's a vacuum which has been filled up with Princess T**t.
LavenderLady said…
@sandie said,

Are you an American? I am not sure how politics works in America, but my reaction to the stories about her being given a senate seat is that it is absurd. I can imagine her delusions are behind this, but how can someone living in California who has never done any work for the DP expect to be handed a New York senate seat? Even if they can ovecome all the obstacles, why would the DP put in all that effort for that woman on a deluded power trip? As a voter, her pathetic claims of activism and international connections on her CV would not fool me. What does she know about New York and the needs and views of the people there, or anywhere in America other than the bubble of Hollywood that she has always wanted to get inside but never has, even with a Prince in her firm grip?

You are 100% correct in your analysis on Americans and voting! To answer your question, my nationality is American. I was born in America but my spirit is not in alignment with the American system and it's societal culture.
Sandie said…
Some tea from an IG account from someone whose brother is supposedly working on Pearl. Hope this link works, because it is very interesting:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CY7EZPJP-8U/?utm_source=ig_embed&ig_rid=0e027445-78ff-4676-b9c5-56a2a66c4b2d
If H comes back to the UK with all his cash used by*, and if nobody will subsidise him, might he have to claim Universal Benefit?

Now there's a thought to play with...
See you down the Food Bank, Hazza!
Sandie said…
Summary of tea referenced above, if the link does not work:

Thinks it won't ever come out.

Art style a Disney copy.

When initial concept art of main girl sent for approval, came back with 8 pages of typed notes and lots of photographs for reference. Photos were of MM aged about 9 or 10, but also pictures of Disney Pocahontas, Geena Davis in A League of Their Own.

Voice recordings made by MM also sent to the creative team, using a 'breathless, cutesie Marilyn Monroe, booptiboop voice'. Poster claims that they listened to the recordings over Christmas and were rolling on the floor with laughter.
LavenderLady said…
@Sandie,
The link worked for me and it's damning ha ha!

I don't have instagram so can't lurk but what other gems may be found is an intriguing thought.
LavenderLady said…
@WBBM,
Maybe Hazza will get some bananas with inspirations sharp-ied in. Lol.
Maneki Neko said…
Re Harry at Eton, as far as I remember I think he had a hard time of it because William was already well established there and had his own friends so wasn't really interested in Harry joining his own circle of friends. Harry went in 1998, so only a year after Diana's death. I too think Gordonstoun would have been a better fit for him.

Sending the two brothers to the same school was equal to treating them equally. The best thing would have been to send them to a school whose ethos would benefit them according to their character and aptitudes.
Girl with a Hat said…
Also from that instagram link, * made everyone call her "the Duchess" when she was on Ellen, and only some people could address her.
Enbrethiliel said…
@snarkyatherbest
Hmmm now its emerging that they wont go to england for the Philp memorial. That one you would nt necessary take the kids. Maybe only he is invited and she is making sure that no one goes. Or they were invited with a strict no netflix cameras, no wires allowed.

My guess first guess was that she doesn't want the world reminded that he called her a "degree wife." And of what he said about actresses.

My second thought is that Prince Philip, even at his most elderly, actually scared her. That's why she waited until he was dying to shoot the interview. She's still kind of scared of him today; she's not going to attend an event that his spirit (metaphorically speaking!) will be looming over.

Surely she doesnt want him there without her since there is a possibility they could "invite" him into some inpatient rehab.

Whenever there is a possibility of Harry returning solo to the UK, I remember a blogger I occasionally read. (Not linked here because I don't want to take responsibility for unleashing his ideas into the wild!) This blogger used to write a lot on narcissism and particularly his own experience with narcissistic abuse. Last year, when mentioning Prince Philip's funeral and Harry's attendance without *, the blogger delved into that topic again, saying that that this was the prime opportunity for the BRF "to save" Harry.

The second Harry's plane takes off from LA, the blogger wrote, he will start feeling lighter than he has felt in two or three years. By the time it lands in London, he will feel amazing, though he probably won't understand why. And during the few days with his family, they will get an opportunity like no other to remind him what normal people and true loving family is like. He may not consciously make the connection at the moment, but it will be a data point he might not have had before. Then, when he gets on the plane for his return flight, he may notice that he is starting to feel bad again; and when it lands in LA, he may feel heavy and horrible once more. The hope is that he will put two and two together, and realize that the source of his terrible feelings is *.

That blogger definitely gave Harry a lot of credit for being an innocent victim rather than a willing participant -- and misunderstood that the BRF themselves might not want him back. I'm sharing it here in case anyone else knows someone in a relationship with a narcissist. In a nutshell: Put as much geographical distance between them and the narc as possible, and then make sure they're surrounded by normal people having normal interactions the entire time they're with you. Easier said than done, of course. But for those with means, good luck!
Miggy said…
Free Speech and Bouzy's final final final report. (Sue Smith )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAwdTHs_s_w
Sandie said…
@Enbrethiliel

Thanks for your post above. I must admit that I have long held onto the belief that this is how H could be rescued (other than being kidnapped and de-programmed by an elite squad of some sorts!). But, I now think that it is not possible for him. He is in too deep, has burned too many bridges, has unleashed the worst of his character without restraints, but, most of all, gets encouragement and support not only fom TBW, but also lawyers, and powerful and famous people (always another one to move onto), plus he gets huge attention from the media, even if it is negative, still has ButterUp job and Invictus Games to make him feel important ...

Perhaps he will go crawling home if everything crashes around him ... to be farmed off to some remote royal property and perhaps be given a job as a gamekeeper. Perhaps their greatest threats are the IRS (perhaps I have been influenced by movies, but I am in awe of the IRS!) and spiralling lawyers' bills.
Sandie said…
Supposedly the IG account that spilled some tea on Pearl (true or not) has suddenly closed. It sounds so in character, so seems true. She seems to be a crazy-making control freak full of misplaced hubris, so if Pearl is good, she would deserve any accolades, but not so much as those who worked with her to create the series!

Enbrethiliel said…
@Midge

I missed your message earlier. You're welcome! Isn't it juicy that we've finally found a genuine fairytale equivalent for * ?
Svetlana said…
When TW leaves his sorry ass — and she will — I hope karma makes a big delivery to Harry and he lives out the rest of his life a lonely little man child with zero people in his life who give a care about him. Childhood issues or no, he absolutely had/has the resources to make it his best life instead of what we’re seeing. 10, 20, 30 years from now I hope he has nightmares about these five years.
Hikari said…
Svetlana,

I've said it before, and I'd like to be proven wrong, but considering H's rapid deterioration, mentally and physically since his wedding to TW, I predict that H doesn't have 10, 20, 30 years left. She's going to destroy him totally and leave nothing left. His only shot at a semblance of a life post-TW is to be taken back into the bosom of his family but I really don't see that happening, especially once King William ascends. Harry's bridges are burnt.

I suspect that the separation has to be permanent, whether or not the toxic couple splits due to the shenanigans about the "children", I really do. Haz and Mess have given bone-headed, incredibly mean and incendiary interviews to the likes of Tom Bradby and Oprah, which were unforgiveable in themselves, seeing as they were full of lies, but the unforgiveable sin had already been committed with the advent of Moonbump Montbatten-Windsor and 'Archie'. 'Lilibet' is just a lame coda, a reheated con that allowed the noxious pair of delinquents to wound the recently bereaved Queen in a particularly personal way, since she has remained firm in not ceding to all their demands.

Go back and watch William and Catherine's demeanor on the day that Princess Tw*t supposedly "gave birth". They mouthed all the usual words of happiness at supposedly welcoming a new royal nephew. I wish Jesus Enrique Rosas would deconstruct their body language. I'm only an amateur, but to me they both looked . . . rattled. Even more: scared. Practically babbling, both of them. Not their usual demeanor at all. Certainly William escaped the interrogation as soon as possible and seemed like he almost wanted to drag his wife to the car, so anxious was he to avoid having to expound any more on how happy he was to be made a first-time uncle.

Hikari said…
After that circus, TW's goose was cooked, I believe. But the Palace had to trod softly, softly to maybe pry H away from her with the least amount of damage possible. Or, the machine was set in motion to separate the couple from any Royal supports whilst advice was sought. The 'birth' was just the beginning of a summer of increasingly escalating outrageous behavior from the couple. The fake photographs of 'Archie' allegedly meeting his Royal family and being christened--all images manipulated and owned by Sussex Royal. The jet-setting hither and yon via private jets to Ibiza and Nice and Italy in a manner unbefitting 'parents of a newborn'. What tore the biscuit was the South Africa tour, in which a baby no one in England had ever seen in the flesh was presented as the great-grandchild of the Queen to a hosting world leader. The Bradby whinefest was only icing on that cupcake.

Immediately upon their return from SA, the Harkles were told to take garden leave, commencing immediately and they could call it 'going to the States to visit Doria for Thanksgiving', except they wound up in a Russian mobster's mansion in Vancouver Island instead, many hundreds of miles away from TW's mom in L.A. They only returned to make a public spectacle of their bolting, to frame it as 'our decision to step back, not step down'.

I do not believe they had a choice. TW certainly did not as a guest foreigner who'd worn out her welcome, and H didn't either after throwing his unrepentant lot in with hers. They had to be kicked out of the RF due to the Kraken which is Archie .. and then they doubled down on their treason with another 'child' conveniently 'gestated' in the United States, thousands of miles away. This elaborate show we are seeing from H and TW about security for the Jubilee visit is entirely to obfuscate that THERE ARE NO CHILDREN, and to twist the odious pair's failure to attend and show off their kids as entirely the racist meanie RF's fault, and principally, the Queen's, whose occasion is being celebrated.

It's due to his collusion in treason with Her that H can never come back to England. He is toast. Done. Finis.
Mel said…
Not their usual demeanor at all. 
------
Yeah, that caught my eye, also.

They must have been caught by surprise on that one because usually they have their deflection techniques nailed down ahead of time.
Hikari said…
@Mel

Not their usual demeanor at all.
------
Yeah, that caught my eye, also.

They must have been caught by surprise on that one because usually they have their deflection techniques nailed down ahead of time.


Wills and Catherine might be forgiven for not being completely prepared for that question on that particular day, since the Duckarse of Suxxit had been "pregnant" for the previous year, felt like. H's comment to a reporter that 'She's got a big baby in there' sure seemed ridiculous when "Archie" finally appeared and he was barely 7 pounds. That isn't big baby under normal circumstances. A healthy size, but definitely on the petite side, especially for a male baby with a tall father who was at least 2-3 weeks overdue. Babies that late generally are 9-10 pounders. But they had to be aware that it might be coming. By the looks of them both, they stumbled through the charade of answering while hating every second of it and just wanting it to be over. Generally, I believe, the natural reaction of persons of character being forced into an untenable position in which they were expected to lie, repeatedly and in a very public forum.

Charles and Camilla, also on engagement abroad were similarly ambushed and gave bland, jolly congratulations. That can be chalked up to being more seasoned at fielding uncomfortable questions through maturity and experience . . .or else being more insulated from what was actually occurring. William had to live next to the connivers for months and saw a lot more of them. He and Catherine were in the crosshairs with H and his bunny-boiler of a wife, who was fairly upfront about wishing harm upon Kate and the children. The stress on William had to have been extreme. But he was, and is, still not senior enough to override the official Palace party line. However, late that same evening of the press ambush, there appeared a statement on the Kensington Royal website to the effect that the Duchess of Sussex had engaged a surrogate and there were sincere apologies for any misunderstanding. The statement was taken down as swiftly as it had appeared but some canny folk captured screenshots of it, one of which I saw.

Hikari said…
Now, it's possible, of course that this posting was made without William's knowledge or consent by some staffer, maybe one who the Duckarse had bullied, but the consequences of doing so unauthorized would have been grave. I think William either posted it himself or directed one of his staff to do it, just as a shot across the bow to the deceitful Duchess that this was now war. He (or his agent) got it out there, if only briefly. Regardless of who posted it, the upshot is--people who were in close proximity to TW during her elephantine 'pregnancy" KNOW THE TRUTH. Even ones who only met her very briefly. There is footage somewhere of then-PM Teresa May staring pointedly and quizzically at TW's miraculous ever-inflating/deflating/shifting belly. People know. As to why the Palace is officially bolstering the existence of two heirs to the succession of Great Britain . . I think it's known as 'the long game'. Another scandal of this magnitude for the Queen after what she's already having to deal with would sink the whole ship. The feeling must have been to focus on getting the Harkles away from her as far as possible, out of the country, in the hopes that the brouhaha would fade and 'Archie' could be relegated to a paper heir that everyone would gradually forget about. Harry's kids will never factor into the succession for real so 'What harm' if they were names on a website and indefinable figures in some doctored photographs?

But if the Palace and the Queen herself has knowingly perpetrated TW's fraud by colluding in it . . . this is the kind of betrayal of the public trust that topples empires for good.
Will there be an official revision to the succession/party line after the passing of this Queen? It remains to be seen, but Harry and his mercenary s**g are Out.
Teasmade said…
Hikari is on fire today. If only you had a PR firm on retainer; you could turn all this into a guest essay for the New York Times.

Two of *my* little points from all your hot takes today:

1. Someone could put a bug in Jesus's ear, maybe as a comment on a video, alerting him to the presence of that awkward William/Catherine interview (which I do remember.)

2. Sorry, all, but I DO think the palace and thus the Queen ARE complicit in hiding this fraud. I don't care HOW quickly they were dispatched to Canada, how "fragile" H is, none of it. They know. And no one has stood up to say the emperor (ha!) has no clothes.

I'd like to see that Teresa May clip!
@Teasmade

What might have been the reaction had the RF pointed out that * is, as someone in America said, `an f-ing lunatic'? There would have been an immediate outcry that they'd treated a person with `mental health issues' appallingly.

Whatever the * does, she manages to impose a double bind on those she seeks to control - they are damned if they do, damned if they don't
Teasmade said…
WBBM: I think that part you quoted was from a Hollywood type who was explaining why they weren't getting hired. And that the first part was something like "he's a nobody with no skills." I read it here (of course!)

Yes, she definitely had/has them cornered, what with the race card and now the crazy card. (Then there's the Diana card . . . )

I don't know WHAT they could have done, but I'm only one person with limited knowledge, and not skilled with psychos. Maybe early on, leak an article about the fake baby bumps? Force H on penalty of no more allowance to say "Just kidding, folks!" Somewhere, somehow, lifted the curtain so we could see the great and powerful Oz manipulating the public?

It just makes them look so weak and, yes, complicit to accommodate these crackpot grifters. But I repeat myself : )
LavenderLady said…
To insist there are no children means the Queen, Charles, Camilla, William and Catherine, meaning HM and all her closest heirs to the throne are dishonorable liars. I don't think they are lying and covering up for The Douches. And I don't believe the moon is made of green cheese...

Why in God's name would the Queen risk her legacy for such an emboldened LIE? To suggest this means a disloyalty to HM and her reign. JMHO.

I think the children are from a surrogate and yes they are keeping that info from public consumption but I will never believe they agreed to support the idea of fake kids.

The audacity of arrogance if they did. I mean, really!
Sandie said…
Our opinions differ, but it adds many layers of interest for me, so I have no wish to silence anyone as I enjoy reading your different points of view. I do think the children are real and Archie is the same kid in every photo we have seen of him (and assume that it will be the same for the girl).

Surrogacy I can believe. That first pregnancy was so weird. They were so secretive and refused to co-operate with normal procedures, and who would know if he turned up at the registry office to register Archie's birth and gave her name as birth mother when she actually wasn't? But, a number of other people would also know and how could they keep them all silent?

It seems that for the second child, the official went to the hospital to register the birth. The bizarre way the father's name was recorded on that birth certificate must surely indicate that the information supplied came 100% from the deceitful fantasist? What happens if your father's name is given incorrectly on your birth certificate?
LavenderLady said…
@Sandie,
I have no wish to silence others either. I just call it as I see it. If it's illogical, I will say so.
DesignDoctor said…
Don't forget in the first public viewing the baby acted as if he did not know "his parents"...
DesignDoctor said…
I am speaking of the visit outside of England.
Fifi LaRue said…
"Archie," in all his incarnations, and appearances, has never acted like he knew either of his supposed parents, the Dollars.
SwampWoman said…
It was sadly obvious that PP was in a bad way and failing fast. Would children lie to their parents to protect them from pain at a time like that? Absolutely. We've done our share of deception when loved ones were dying, so who am I to judge others? Just in our families, deaths were not mentioned, hospitalizations were concealed, as were miscarriages and divorces. When SwampMan's parents were dying and he was caring for them, I likewise lied through my teeth and told him that everything was "fine" here. If the house had burned down and I was living in a tent out in the yard in a hurricane, I would have told him that everything was fine because why worry him with something that is insignificant in comparison to caring for his parents as they were dying?

The Queen appears quite fragile and I fear that she is also in ill health. If her family members (and people that work with her) chose to conceal the horrific reality of the depth of Harry's perfidy from her, I would not be at all surprised. I don't think the witch was ever pregnant. Whether they purchased or merely rented a child remains to be seen.

I believe that both of them are entirely inconsequential as are their "children", if any.
SwampWoman said…
FiFi LaRue, and she had no idea about how to hold or interact with children.
taylorz2294 said…
REGARDING THE HOUSE.


https://kristinamorales.com/property/765-rockbridge-road-santa-barbara-ca-93108/

the listing in this comment is what i saw two weeks ago and not it is now up.
https://tattle.life/threads/harry-and-meghan-103-william-inherits-the-throne-harry-gets-the-bench.19466/page-34

that listing from Lauren had ALL of the photos from the house.
LavenderLady said…
FiFi,
Perhaps the child has a disorder that we are not privy to. Atypical behavior points to that.
LavenderLady said…
@taylorz2294,

According to mlslistings.com/California there is currently only one house listed in that community?

Also the link you posted doesn't have any dates other than 2003 and says that house has 13 full bathrooms and 6 half. This doesn't fit the reported (urban legend?) that their house has 16 bathrooms.

I suppose a call to Ms. Morales (the number is listed on the page you linked) could confirm if that house is on the market currently. Of course she wouldn't divulge the seller's names.
LavenderLady said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
LavenderLady said…
Edited
@Swampwoman,
it was sadly obvious that PP was in a bad way and failing fast. Would children lie to their parents to protect them from pain at a time like that? Absolutely

___

Yes it's possible but not probable. They are huge public figures with reputations to protect. We regular plebs are not. Maybe the history buffs on this blog can point to a **modern royal lie of that magnitude to cover indiscretions within the BRF? The only one I can think of as a mere yank is the photo evidence of the Windsor's with Hitler. But what do I know right?
Hikari said…
@Lavender Lady

To insist there are no children means the Queen, Charles, Camilla, William and Catherine, meaning HM and all her closest heirs to the throne are dishonorable liars. I don't think they are lying and covering up for The Douches. And I don't believe the moon is made of green cheese...

It's a head-scratcher all right. Normal people assume that things proceed normally and truthful persons do not expect deception. I think in the beginning, we all wished Harry the best with his new life and were happy at the prospect of him becoming a father. Despite the antics at Eugenie's wedding and the subsequent Australia tour, Moonbump wasn't yet outlandish. I figured she was padding herself for attention because it was far too early to make such a public announcement, but she was actually pregnant, possibly with some assistance in the fertility area. At 36 years old, she conceived *very* quickly, within 6-8 weeks of her marriage. I think even 20-year-old Diana took a bit longer than that.

When she turned up for her first solo engagement at the retired actors' home with Square Bump in the summer garden party dress that was 2 sizes too small, I knew she was faking, and also had confirmation that Haz had made a terrible mistake in his choice of partner.

Obviously decisions have been taken at the highest levels to cover up some aspect(s) of the Duchess's alleged pregnancy. The alleged second child was out of the purview of the Palace, which is exactly how * wanted it. We don't know the extent of the cover-up, but if a massive one is in progress, I don't regard William and Catherine as 'dishonorable liars'. They are foot soldiers in service to their commanding officer and they follow orders, even if they are distasteful to them personally. William, or someone on his staff released perhaps the most truthful information we've had about this miracle baby, and it was swiftly squelched. William may be a future King but until that future arrives, he's got to do what Granny says. Charles and Camilla too, despite Charles's greater autonomy as PoW. For a matter as grave as the potential tampering with the succession everyone had to present a united front. I think it's been ongoing crisis meetings at the Palace ever since the Harkle wedding, but the whole succession mess got shoved to the back burner with the myriad legal woes the RF is embroiled in between Harry's lawsuits, *'s lawsuits and Andrew's ongoing mess.

Hikari said…
Why in God's name would the Queen risk her legacy for such an emboldened LIE? To suggest this means a disloyalty to HM and her reign. JMHO.

It is hard to believe, I agree. The Queen has always been a devout person who has lived her own moral life impeccably. But I do think there is a wide gulf between her and her children and grandchildren vis. how much time she spends with them or knows about their daily lives and goings-on. The Harkles have blown off most of the family Christmases and other holidays since their marriage and I think that's when the Queen catches up with her family, to the extent that she ever does. At this stage of her life and reign, maybe she just has ceased to care about what H and his b*** get up to. She has condoned the use of her image and that of her heirs in pictures purporting to be of 'Archie' so I am stumped at this. But I also think that we have to be open to the possibly that the public has never been included in the 'need to know' circle. The Windsors have a history of keeping dirty family laundry hidden. It's a survival tactic. I understand that subjects of the Queen would feel themselves disloyal to voice such thoughts, and be hesitant to do so. As an American, I am under no obligation of loyalty to ER as such or the extremely dysfunctional family of which she is head. Most of the headaches facing her Majesty thoughout her reign have been caused by her own family. I admire the Queen's longevity and her commitment to her people. She has not let them down, but her kids and their kids have let her down more times than is possible to count.

I think the children are from a surrogate and yes they are keeping that info from public consumption but I will never believe they agreed to support the idea of fake kids.

If the child(ren) are via surrogate, then the Palace has colluded in maintaining the fraud that * gave birth herself. If this information had been released straight upfront, the situation would not be so fraught with weirdness. Obviously if * had been honest about her intentions with everyone from the start, the resulting children would never have been accepted into the line of succession or given titles. * was counting on both for increased cash and glory and a way to keep her hooks into the RF forever. I don't know why the Palace won't set the record straight. Which is why I think there's credence for it actually being worse.

I believe that * engaged surrogates or attempted to, or tried to broker a baby somehow and it fell through. Either because the surrogate mother(s) decided to keep their babies, or because Maggot and Mole were deemed unfit parents or because the Palace made sure it didn't happen, trying to reign them in. * resumed the same script, different casting in America, far from the reach of the Men in Grey. This is my opinion, for entertainment purposes only. I have no proof, but *'s version of reality is far stranger than fiction. Too strange for me to accept. At all.

The audacity of arrogance if they did. I mean, really!

Yes. That's exactly how she rolls, though. This is the con of her life and she's gonna triple down on it. Expect another miracle geriatric pregnancy event to overshadow the Jubilee events they won't be attending. Despite the remark about 'only 2 kids for the planet', * has got to keep score with the Cambridges. She might even pop out 'twins' next time, as even she has got to realize it's her last shot at this. Unless she proposes to present the world with another new phantom child every couple of years until she's 50. Maybe she and Haz will field a cricket team of sibs for Archie.
LavenderLady said…
@Hikari,
With all due respect I see your POV as a conspiracy theory so I simply will never agree to it or other poster's here including, @Swampwoman, @GWAH, @Fifi etc. To me, it's the equivalent of people believing the Royal family are lizards and eat babies sacrificed to Satan.

I believe I have said this before so let this be for the record and we can agree to disagree.

I appreciate your understanding in discussing this with me today. I appreciate a civil tone. Probably because I can get emphatic and direct/logical to the point of madness and come across as the opposite. My ability to engage in civil discourse is improving. I've learned so much from the Nutties. So thanks!
LavenderLady said…
@Hikari,
P.S.
I do agree there has been some funky stuff going on but I relate that to the surrogacies. I think to hash it all out and try to unpack the why's is a rabbit hole I don't have time for. But I enjoy reading what everyone here has to say.
LavenderLady said…
P.s.s

My audacity comment was coming from the view of the Queen and her heirs. We know TBW is arrogant but for HM and co. to lie to such a degree would be an extreme show of arrogance. I do not feel for one minute HM would do something of such repugnancy.

I too don't consider myself as a loyal subject of the BRF. I rather see myself more as a William Wallace of Scotland in spirit but I adore HM and think she is an amazing role model. One who doesn't create and abet monumental porkies.
SwampWoman said…
LavenderLady said: Yes it's possible but not probable. They are huge public figures with reputations to protect. We regular plebs are not. Maybe the history buffs on this blog can point to a **modern royal lie of that magnitude to cover indiscretions within the BRF? The only one I can think of as a mere yank is the photo evidence of the Windsor's with Hitler. But what do I know right?

Seriously? The bigger the reputation, the *less* likely that the truth will out.
snarkyatherbest said…
Cover up? I think it is possible. No reporter will want to break the gossip of this story and lose all access to the BRF Kinda like the US reporters of late who wont ask tough questions of the president for fear of being cut off not only by the white house but to be frozen out of the social circles in DC. I imagine its like that in London. You have an elderly queen and a likely change in the throne in the next few years. Who wants to explain why a whole news outlet is frozen out because of running a story. And who would confirm it internally. No one at the palace would risk their jobs and future employment going after this. The family never said the kids were from a surrogate because no one has asked directly (darn queen does not have press conferences). Perhaps the family initially talked to some reporters privately (like Dickie Arbiter - remember how off his game he was in reporting about the birth) and expressed concern that there were some mental health issues they are dealing with internally. No one is going to push fragile people over the edge.
Sandie said…
https://www.mailplus.co.uk/edition/news/146511/the-royal-poll-thursday-january-20-2022?utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=organic_twitter&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1642694520-1

Quick and easy to vote (and anonymous).
LavenderLady said…
@Swampwoman said,
Seriously? The bigger the reputation, the *less* likely that the truth will out.


Members of a family with the standing of the royal family do not have to lie and most likely will not create a web of lies because if they do and they are outed then well let's just say Epstein and Maxwell territory...

So yeah. Seriously. Sounds like you got it! Lol.
Mel said…
I feel like *something* caused the Harkles to skedaddle. Questions were either gonna be asked, or had already started being asked, about something that they didn't want to answer.

Hard to say if it was related to the imaginary children, absconded funds, or something we haven't thought of yet.

You'd like to think that eventually it will surface, but maybe not.

I think they were told to take 6 weeks off, think about what they wanted (because the palace did not want any more 'no one asked if I'm ok' interviews), and then come back for discussion. They were to have proposed plans in writing to discuss with PC.

Instead, a reporter got wind if it, so they quick had to whip up the megxit statement and get it out there first.

There was something hinky with Dan Wooten finding out about the plans and outing them. I don't remember exactly now. Something about his boyfriend, or ex boyfriend, was pals with PW's personal secretary or something like that. Those details were buried right quick. I just remember something weird about how Dan Wooton found out about it, and it had something to do with PW's staff.

Would be interesting to know more details there.
DesignDoctor said…
I recently saw an old video of * at a social event which I had never seen before. The way * treated a child who offered her a cupcake, was unbelievable. * did not want to have anything to do with the child. Obvious by her body language and facial expressions. I do not believe * is a mother:. Do not believe there were pregnancies.
I know the whole scenario is far fetched, but I have seen operators like her. I don't put anything past them.
I also agree with the Nutty upthread who stated "different children in different photos."
Fifi LaRue said…
Re: the child clinging to Twit's leg in Harlem. When Twit flung/knocked/punted the child off his leg it said everything that Twit was not a father of any child. No father would act like that.

Neither of the Dollars is a parent. Mrs. Dollar may have given birth as a teenager, but there is absolutely nothing maternal about her, and nothing paternal about Mr. Dollar.

Once Her Majesty, The Queen is gone, more rumors and leaks are going to come out about the Dollars. It's already started with Andrew.
Svetlana said…
Sometimes I lean toward surrogacy because completely absent human beings would require a conspiracy that beggars belief. That the BRF went along with surrogacy is halfway tenable, in deference to a request by JH and TW who wanted to keep it private. After all, wasn’t the birth certificate different than the norm? Providing an out for later?
Also it has just occurred to me that the real reason TW has ghosted her family is due to absent/adopted children.
snarkyatherbest said…
children of questionable lineage have been a thing for centuries of nobility and kings/queens. heck even The Crown tried to play into the rumors that andrew was not philips. i still find it odd we have few pics or interaction between Harry and the kids. all of it is just odd to me
Magatha Mistie said…

Friday Singalong 🎤
Apologies:Peter, Paul and Mary
Puff the Magic Dragon

H.R. Rufnguf

Ruff the Drastic Gorgon
lives on one knee
Bollock naked, often pissed
in their land of surrogacy
Little Chunga Changa
loves that Rachel Ruff
She pulls his strings
and dips his wings
in all that roasting stuff

Together they’ll unravel
on a tug without a sail
Chunga keeps a bleary eye
on Ruffs climactic fail
Noble Queens and Princes
all turn their backs and run
Whene’er they see these two
despite being Charles son

Gorgons live for drama
use dirty sneaky ploys
Plastic wigs and nipple rings
and dodgy adult toys
One fine day it happened
Chunga Changa came no more
And Ruff, that Tragic Gorgon
was booted out the door…

@Magatha-

Brilliant as ever!

Does Megdusa live in the Land called Me-Me-Me?
This story has been floating around for a few days:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10422789/Fraudsters-use-fake-endorsements-Harry-Meghan-promote-scam-bitcoin-investment-adverts.html

Criminal activity of course but I find it ironic that fraudsters are making money out of them.
Magatha Mistie said…

@WildBoar
Land down under
With her prince of Chunder 😉

Magatha Mistie said…

Hahaha WildBoar
#Bitchcoin, Schadenfraud😜

Have a shufti at this, Magatha:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messalina

Remind you of anyone?
Magatha Mistie said…

Frau-dulent

Li’l Rachel rough as guts
Made her mark
on many mutts
Used her bits to make a coin
Along with Wazzers
dampened loin
Ironic that the bilking broad
Has now been scammed
pure Schaden-fraud


Wild Boar Battle-maid said…
This story has been floating around for a few days:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10422789/Fraudsters-use-fake-endorsements-Harry-Meghan-promote-scam-bitcoin-investment-adverts.html



That puts me in mind of those adverts I was seeing a couple of years ago when playing games on my iPod. I can't remember them being specifically about bitcoin (I never followed any of them to the source as I didn't want to get a virus from a dodgy ad), but they were definitely about "investments" or something along those lines and used photos of the two/mentioned them by name. I wonder why it's only getting complained about now?

(I think I took screenshots of them at the time, although I have no idea how long it'll take me to find them if needed)
Maneki Neko said…
@Magatgha

Love Fraud-ulent 😉. Glad that the creative juices are still following. Derision is all they deserve.
Magatha Mistie said…

WildBoar, yes, Messalina
A good read, thanks.

Caveat Emptor

The decline and fall of Megsalina
Will end as it started
her playing with wiener
Her empire lost
no emperor son
And the gates are now closed
to the Royal Kingdom





Magatha Mistie said…

Derision, perfect Maneki 😘

Sad to see Meatloaf has died,
remembering kisses by the
dashboard light 🙏
Sandie said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sandie said…
Mods, someone trying to derail the thread with an unacceptable personal attack on someone. I have had it happen to me and won't stand by while it is done to someone else.

Many thanks for keeping this an interesting and lively place, as you always do and so sorry you have this trainwreck to have to deal with.

Back to regular programming:

I see that the duo have issued a denial that they are selling their property via some local rag (if it is not their spokesperson, it's not true - how is that working for you H&M?!). Someone speculated that they started the whole thing in trying to raise the value of their property to borrow from the mortgage. Possible.
Sandie said…
Harry wants to have his cake and eat it!’ Our top team give their expert views on ALL the royal news as the Sussexes run into ANOTHER legal minefield - in this week's unmissable Palace Confidential


Prince Harry’s decision to try to get his lawyers to overturn the Home Office’s decision not to offer him police protection in the UK has, says Rebecca English, created ‘another legal drama involving the Sussexes and another unwelcome situation for the Royal Family’.

The Daily Mail’s Royal Editor tells the programme that the Palace was keen to stress that this wasn’t its decision rather one made by the Government. However, she adds: ‘The mood music is that even if it was a matter for them, they wouldn’t be minded to help Harry in this, I have to say.’

One man who knows a lot about looking after the Firm is former royal protection officer Ken Wharfe, who used to guard the late Diana, Princess of Wales and Princes William and Harry as children.

He thinks that even though Harry offered to pay for the protection himself, he could have handled the whole situation in a more careful way.

‘He knows that to ask for funding, the taxpayer – rightly in my view – is going to object to that,’ he says.

‘I think his approach to this is the problem. There are ways round that that he could have taken that I think would have taken him away from this adverse publicity.’

Richard Eden has little sympathy for the duke, who swapped royal life for a multimillion dollar media career in California.

‘He moved to America to earn a lot of money and it was made very clear to him at the time that would involve giving up [his] security,’ he says. ‘So he really is trying to have his cake and eat it.’

PLUS After the extraordinary events that saw Boris Johnson apologise to the Queen after parties were held in Downing Street the night before the funeral of the Duke of Edinburgh, Daily Mail columnist Robert Hardman looks at the curious relationship between prime ministers and monarchs. He explains when the Government has the upper hand and when politicians have been forced to show contrition to the Palace.

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLPGq-TFOZMWP-r8pNWvcvgZpQYnMg6Z6n
LavenderLady said…
@abbyh,
My opinion and disagreeing in a respectful manner is not derailing a thread. As you know, I am not one to Polly parrot other's thoughts as I am a free thinker.

What I find more intrusive to the blog is some here possibly taking direction from another blog and bringing that direction here...
abbyh said…
Blog is on moderation for the moment.

I got the messages. And it is easier to put it on moderate to keep it from spinning out while
I am going to go make a pot of coffee (forget this drink tea and be calm shhhhht) and think about what I want to say and how to say it.

thank you for your patience
Sandie said…
@abbyh

Thanks. Hope the coffee is good (life would be unberable without coffee!).

Although I disagree strongly with some views shared here, without them I would have a very limited and increasingly warped view of the dastardly duo. Please let us not shut up or chase away anyone just because we do not agree with them.

Sometimes it gets so confusing. Remember her at polo in that khaki tent? Bizarre ... the way she held the baby, the way the baby never moved at all (was it a baby that was drugged?), the way she never interacted with the Cambridges, the way people were looking at her, the way she never interacted with the baby! (Video from the event confirms what the photographs show.) Except for social media sites like this, everyone looked the other way and pretended a very abnormal situation was perfectly normal! Either that was a doll and no one thought to call mental health professionals, or she was mistreating a newborn and no one thought to call child health services.
Maneki Neko said…
Andrew's former maid has spoken about her time working for him and his tantrums. Wish some of the 6s' former staff talked to the press, it would certainly be a lot juicier.
abbyh said…
I am reminded of the meme about you don't have to join every fight you are invited to.

You don't have to respond to every comment you read. (And if you feel an itch that you have to respond because you have to let someone know just how much you disagree (ie how wrong they are), that is actually a good indication that you probably should not start typing away as very few people ever change their minds when blasted sideways by the force of a cannonball of words.)

This is supposed to be a friendly kind of place. As in real life, there are several difficulties.

It's topic. So with the subject matter, there is a distinct possibility for conspiracy theories to come up (labeled as such or not). I do not believe that this is the kind of place where it can/had/is/should be taken to snakepeople and so on. Let's keep it from going to that level please. If you don't like one you read, that's fine. Just keep reading and move on. If they continue to be a problem, ... I don't know but to keep them out because always out means full time moderation and moderators deciding if something written qualifies as a conspiracy theory, a potential theory or not. So think long and hard about endlessly sharing an opinion about everything you disagree with. So > next below

It's just words. We put our own inflections (based on our life experiences) to what we read. I could read something and it won't upset me but someone else might have so it raises an itch like a mosquito in them.

It's just words. No body language. This is really hard (thanks BLG). We have no way of reading any response which may tone down or alter our response to it.

It's people. Just as in real life (outside of bloggerworld), there are lots of personalities. Some you like. Some you love to hear their thoughts and can't wait. Some are more like the pesky little sibling who is jumping on your last nerve trying to join what you think of as your friends. And there are always some who just set your teeth on edge like nails running down a chalkboard.

It's lack of being able to easily offer feedback. The only way this allows feedback is for someone to tell someone publicly that their behavior is on being a jerk level in their opinion. And, how well would you take to being told you were being a jerk in front of everyone here?

And sometimes people are jerks (or heading in that direction). The difficulty is when and how to tell them that they are getting a little out there, a little over the top to try to change their trajectory.

As A moderator, I try to balance all these personalities.

If you don't like something, if you are not the moderator, please ask for moderators to step in. (I do have insomnia but there are times I do get sleep so it may not be an immediate response).



I also feel I should not be called upon as a cop to justify behavior from someone who has managed to piss off someone else. But it is difficult to say "Ah, actually I'm not in your corner about your behavior this time. I agree with them.". Just as it is difficult to say to someone else, "No baby. They are the jerks here, not you." Comments from a moderator have a different weight than from another poster. But if it comes from another poster, then it can easily slip into a name calling fight which is not the kind of place this is supposed to be. I think that frustrates all of us.

I'm going to keep it on moderation for a while today.

Let's think about this during on moderation. If you have private comments, please make a note that you do not want it published (PDNP).

I will send a message out before it will be lifted so be looking for that at some point today (re private messages before sending).

Thank you.
snarkyatherbest said…
abbyh. forget the coffee. go straight for the espresso
I believe that whatever the Palace may have said or done, either way, would have been twisted to rebound on them. That's the nature of the enemy. It's what narcissists do. Even at the most trivial level they rig the system so they win. masters of the Double-Bind.

I've been there. I had to deal with my now-ex by not letting him speak to me - I changed my phone number and went ex-directory. If I saw him on the street, I turned about and went the other way. Had email existed then, I'd have blocked him & if that didn't work, I'd have started a new account. I gave him nothing he could twist, even if it meant having my solicitor write to him on my behalf.

So please, may we have less of the allegations about the Palace `lying'. It's an impossible situation. If it was an easy solution, it would have been solved already.
Fifi LaRue said…
Re: The Christmas photo of the Dollars: They are absolutely unable to sit as a family, and have a family portrait taken. Notice that the actor playing Lillibet is shown sideways, we don't get a look at the child. Also, notice the actor playing Archie. Again, a sideways photo, so no one really know what the children look like. Lady Colin Campbell defended the photo because it was taken by a photographer known in society/royal circles. Yes, but. Mrs. Dollar paid for the photo and its negative. The Dollars are simply unable to show their supposed children in an innocent, simple human family portrait. Because there is no family.
DesignDoctor said…
@Magatha: Brilliant as always. You have a way with words!

@WBBM: Totally agree. Narcs will twist and turn any situation to suit their twisted narrative.

@FiFi: All smoke, mirrors, and Photoshop.

@abbyh: Thank you for your tireless moderation work.

@snarkyatherbest: Agree with you on the rationale Re:cover up.
abbyh said…
Comments:

Thank you.

Thank you.

I may need more coffee soon. Espresso? Sounding good.

Why? I don't know. Maybe? Sometimes I wonder about things too.

No. Will not and it's not favorites. In a deleted post, one of the parts I liked was that it mentioned (although it specified someone which was a problem I didn't like) that my point had been not everything posted was directed at another specific blogger and so not to take some thing personally. This post I am not passing onto the group could have been read as a continuation of making a post personal or could it somehow be directed at you. So ... I'm not allowing it to continue in public. Full Stop.

Moderation is still on. (sorry)
Maneki Neko said…
Netflix is shedding more than $50 billion in market cap after ‘borderline catastrophic’ forecast

I wonder if the Montecito duo have played a small part in this?😁
Elsbeth1847 said…
IDK about Netflix. A lot of businesses make a series of bad decisions which create an avalanche at some point with the only question of when will it tip?

OTOH, not good things do seem to follow in their wake with an uncanny consistency.
Miggy said…
New HARRYMARKLE

The BBC ~ Markled

https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2022/01/21/the-bbc-markled/
Girl with a Hat said…
Danja Zone's Ashli says that Tyler Perry is going to do a satire of The Crown for Netflix and make fun of the series and the BRF. Apparently, his character whatever her name is, (Medea?) will be The Queen. It's beginning to look like their stay in his mansion might have been a quid pro quo and the 6's may have given him some juicy tidbits to use in his series.
Blue Dragon said…
I have been following all the conjecture about the existence of the children. I agree that some of the photos of the first pregnancy are odd particularly the red dress and purple coat one. If she did have a surrogacy and hid it that was a shame as infertility causes real heartache and she could have championed this cause.

From observation the Royal Family make up their rules as they go along and an IVF baby well down the line of succession could have been accommodated in this day and age. The selection of Queen Victoria as our Monarch as always baffled me. An IVF baby would be more understandable.

I just don't think that a Registrar would fake a Royal Birth certificate as generally our Civil Service isn't like that.

If they had an adoption (adhoc surrogacy) the baby's original birth certificate is held in a confidential index by the General Register Office and a new certificate issued when the court has made an adoption order. The baby can access the original birth certificate on reaching 18 when he or she becomes an adult. I could see a court granting a quick adoption for a royal couple and family cases are often heard privately.

If they had a surrogacy the baby born to the surrogate mother needs to be registered initially as the child of the woman who gave birth. Then the commissioning parents apply to the courts for a Parental Order. This allows them to re-register the birth and be named as the child’s parents. This is done when the baby is six weeks to six months old. On issuing a Parental Order, the court notifies the General Register Office automatically, who re-register the birth. This new record will supersede the original. So the child gets a lot of privacy which is as it should be.

On another topic the latest Private Eye indicates that it was William who pushed Brenda to deal with Andrew. Allegedly William holds a grudge because Andy treated Catherine badly for being a commoner when she first came on the scene. I feel sorry for Andrew. Most commentaries that I have read about the Falklands War say he pulled his weight. There is one tale about him where he is flying some SBS soldiers to a destination in the UK and they wanted a proper cup of tea. As you may be aware tea stews when left in a Thermos flask. So he landed his helicopter at one of his Mum's houses and took them for tea with his Mum and an unnamed Duchess. The room was quite hot and the Queen said they could undo their combat gear. The one solider couldn't because he had a very rude T-shirt on under the combat gear and didn't want the Queen to see it. I hope he wins but fear the cards are stacked against him.
Miggy said…
OPEN PUBLIC LETTER TO HRH PRINCE WILLIAM @The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=um-qLbK2cHA
SwampWoman said…
Oooh, Magatha! LOVED the Friday sing-a-long. (Puff the Magic Dragon will never be the same for me!) Did you do "I did it MYYYYYYY Way" for them? I think you may well have.

Abbyh, I am sending virtual cafecito and pastelitos your way.
Interesting that our initial speculation about backers has re-emerged. Even Mr Palidrome gets a mention.
Teasmade said…
@Girl With a Hat:

I saw the mock-up of a mock(?) poster for the Tyler Perry satire "The Frown." I could never find it again on Twitter but just did a search and if you go to YouTube and look for the Our Kind of Entertainment page, there's a picture of it there.

If they did indeed trade temporary housing for info on the family, well, wow. Pretty reprehensible.

snarkyatherbest said…
SwampWoman. i have to take issue. no reason to ruin a perfectly good Frank Sinatra song by associating it with the dollars. frank’s my boy. back off 😉

Sandie said…
Spotify and Netflix are advertising for people to produce for the dastardly duo. The advertisements are most interesting. Basicallt, I think Netflix and Spotify keep trying to rescue something to justify the upfront millions the dastardly duo were given.

-----
A production designer for Pearl ...

https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/2883884088

We are seeking a Production Designer for Pearl, a CG heartfelt adventure comedy series. Pearl comes from the mind of Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex and centers on the adventures of a 12-year-old girl who finds inspiration in a variety of influential women throughout history.

The Production Designer will help to develop, create, and support the aesthetic vision of our Executive Producer Team, working closely with the Show Runner to design multiple worlds representing various time periods throughout history.

An accomplished artist themselves, the Production Designer must convey direction and visual communication through applied artistic skills. They will work with the CG Supervisor to ensure that the design is compatible with scope, the pipeline and the talent of the partner studio, sharing responsibility to define artistic boundaries and generate clever solutions to work within them.
------

A contract (6 months) associate producer for the podcasts

https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/2853133195

... We’re currently assembling a show team that will build and launch a new original show with Archewell featuring the voices of high profile women.

The Job

We’re looking for a creative, self-motivated Associate Producer to help develop and produce an exciting new weekly show. The AP will work collaboratively with the show team to help produce strong episodes on tight deadlines. They will support the team in every asset of episode production. This involves researching and pitching ideas, booking talent, cutting tape, and creating transcripts. The ideal candidate has experience working with high profile talent and an interest in history, social activism, and popular culture. Above all, this person is genuinely excited about making a new show out of scratch, as well as learning and perfecting their production skills.
------
abbyh said…

In about an hour or so, I will lift moderation.

This just a warning.

Popular posts from this blog

A Quiet Interlude

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

As Time Passes and We Get Older

 I started thinking about how time passes when reading some of the articles about the birthday.  It was interesting to think about it from the different points of view.  Besides, it kind of fits as a follow up the last post (the whole saga of can the two brothers reunite). So there is the requisite article about how he will be getting all kinds of money willed to him from his great-grandmother.  There were stories about Princess Anne as trustee (and not allowing earliest access to it all).  Whether or not any or all of this is true (there was money for him and/or other kids) has been debated with claims she actually died owing money with the Queen paying the debts to avoid scandal.  Don't know but I seem to remember that royal estates are shrouded from the public so we may not (ever) know. However, strange things like assisting in a book after repeated denials have popped up in legal papers so nothing is ever really predicable.   We are also seein...

The Opening Act of New Adventures in Retail

 I keep thinking things will settle down to the lazy days of spring where the weather is gorgeous and there is a certain sense of peacefulness.  New flowers are coming out. increasing daylight so people can be outside/play and thinking gardening thoughts.  And life is quiet.  Calm. And then something happens like a comet shooting across the sky.  (Out of nowhere it arrives and then leaves almost as quickly.)   An update to a law suit.  Video of the website is released (but doesn't actually promote any specific product which can be purchased from the website).  A delay and then jam is given out (but to whom and possible more importantly - who did not make the list?).  Trophies almost fall (oops).  Information slips out like when the official date of beginning USA residency.  (now, isn't that interesting?) With them, it's always something in play or simmering just below the surface.  The diversity of the endeavors is really ...