We have had a lot of discussion about the Prince Andrew updates.
The main topic of the blog is the couple in Montecito but let us talk about this for a while.
Points to consider that this is not just about his case or how it impacts his family short or long term.
Or how it will likely continue to be brought up through out the Jubilee (so not looking forward to that amid the festivities).
The Queen may be somewhat funding part of this (as the ski chalet has not sold yet apparently). But she did something similar for Prince Charles when he was cash short and needed to pay to Diana a boatload of money for the divorce. So there is some precedence there.
Some things take time. These kinds of agreements are highly technical as legal documents so they probably took time to draft on their own. And, now the will may have changed as well to accommodate that she may not be around when she is to be repaid. As well as she, or any of the players, is not likely to have that amount of cash on hand.
The Queen, either directly/indirectly or no doubt consulting with other main players, is appearing to line up her ducks and leaving nothing to chance for her Jubilee or when she passes.
How could this all impact the Montecito Duo?
Less cash available?
Is it possible that long term plans were to really move so there could be some sort of political run where it would be a soft entry to start the new life? That takes cash, to get out of the house (if it really is theirs), get into a new one and then to fund the campaign.
Some sort of warning shot across the bow about how we handle even family who create long term problems or their problems threaten us?
Or something else?
MODERATION WILL BE OFF
Comments
Guidelines and Rules 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. Or not bullying.
-Anonymous posts are not allowed.
-Do not discuss the blog, blog history, or other posters.
-No personal attacks both direct and indirect. And no name calling.
-Please help de-escalate "fights" by dropping the subject.
-Please remember that the focus of the blog is on others, not any individuals posting here. So if your name is not attached to something posted, please begin with the idea that what is written is not likely to be directed at you if it upsets you.
-If you feel something should not have been posted, please contact a moderator privately with details. It will be reviewed and a final decision made by the moderator.
-If you want to send a message in general to the moderator, please use the same method.
-Disruptive posters will be asked to stop posting and will have their posts removed.
How to contact a moderator:
Go to the prior blog post and send a comment as you normally do. It will not post because the blog post is closed (no longer sending messages on automatically). It will be re-read and reviewed before a decision is made.
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. Again, if you see overlooked issues, please feel free to message us so we can address them.
Thank you again for all your patience and support.
Virginia, she's now doing the happy I've got victory because I'm going to get a lot of cash dance.
She has been mentioned as acting in procurement of other women as she said was done to her.
Before, she wasn't worth suing for this as she didn't have money. With this big win (even with what her lawyer takes), will other lawyers look at her as worth pursing?
It’s already been said in the British press that Andrew will have no part in the upcoming Jubilee celebrations. He could even have his Ducal title stripped by then. Maggot and Mole are the two biggest stains on the UK and Monarchy, 😟
@Embre
Reply for the last blog post…
Giuffre’s reputation was already sullied and her credibility was already extremely questionable. The fact she accepted yet another payout just enforced the above view of her by many. 🤔 I like Mr. Rosas and could definitely see where and how he was trying to warn others.
When a baby appears in Monte$hit$how she can falsely claim she was “heavily pregnant” and didn’t want all the press at Super Bowl to be on her, so she stayed away. Another fake pregnancy and new vinyl infant doll would also give her an excuse to not attend any events this year in U.K. A new fake child appearing at an opportune time would allow her to save face (she thinks) with the world at large.
The new vinyl doll would likely be chosen to be a boy doll, and the name would be Philip Charles, or Charles Philip. Gotta curry favor and hope for big inheritance and continuing secret $ gifts from those holding the money bags, dontcha know.
Or maybe she won't be so quick to jump on that bandwagon this time lest more questions get asked about just exactly how she knew him.
According to a report by The Telegraph, Meghan is “horrified by the manner in which the Duke of York dismissed allegations that he had sex with a teenager.”
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/celebs/a29895631/meghan-markle-horrified-prince-andrew-teenage-sex-allegations/
Prince Andrew's ex Lady Victoria Hervey calls Virginia Giuffre a 'scam artist' who 'settled very fast' as she shares another strangely edited version of THAT notorious photo with the Duke showing Ghislaine Maxwell alone
I don't normally see photoshopping in every H/*/A photo but I must say this photo showing Ghislaine Maxwell standing alone looks a bit suspicious. Her right hand, visible on the 'original'photo, seems to have disappeared. It looks like A and VG have been edited out rather than in as per Victoria Hervey's comments. VG claims she's not in possession of the original photo, which is convenient. What do other Nutties think?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10518737/Prince-Andrews-ex-Lady-Victoria-Hervey-calls-Virginia-Roberts-scam-artist.html
I rather think they were Breton Nationalists, collaborators with the Third Reich on the grounds that `my enemy's enemy is my friend', who had slithered off to Parisian anonymity at the end of the war. They had no love for the British and I was only there on sufferance. Didn't encounter ang wonderful cuisine, rather more a case of being kept on short commons.
I was 16 at the time.
My answer: the Montecito duo will be enraged at the belief that HMTQ is saving Prince Andrew’s hide by agreeing to pay Virginia. It doesn’t matter if it is true, or not.
Megsie and Hazbeen’s default setting is entitlement, and a desire to punish anyone who has gotten a lucky break that these two think should belong solely to themselves.
Megsie and Hazbeen will again press for bigger and more frequent payments from daddy Charles and granny Lilibet, saying “hey, Andrew was in a tight spot and you helped him. We’re in a tight spot, so pony up money for us, too.”
I may be in the minority here, but I still am confident that Charles is secretly paying his son tons of money in order to enable him, and if TBW happens to benefit from the secret fund, so be it. Funneling millions to those two is the lesser of two evils.
I bet The Dollar duo are watching carefully and noting that HMTQ has not stripped Andrew of his titles, particularly ‘Duke of York’. If the time comes that the dukedom is stripped from Andrew, then the Duke and Duchess of Suxxxxx will steel themselves for a fight in the courts to retain their own, undeserved, ill-gotten titles.
This is all my conjecture, of course, but I bet I’m pretty much on the mark.
I saw the article and saw the photos. Ghislaine’s hands are in a slightly different position in the 2 photos. Whilst Giuffre’s pose is the same in both but minus Andrew in one. Victoria said there was a body double for Andrew. Ghislaine pose suggests to me there were 2 photos taken a few minutes apart, hence the slight change of pose. 🤔
I’m suspicious of what Victoria says, but I do think there’s been some photoshopping, I do think Giuffre’s was photoshopped into the photo. Lady C said it was photoshopped a while back. 😟
If the Queen and Parliament revoke Andrew’s ducal title, there’s nothing a court can do to prevent ducal tithe being removed from Mole. Maggot and Mole would be left with the titles of Prince and Princess Henry. 🥴
And if that theory is true, it doesn't absolve him of lying down with dogs and getting up with fleas, but it does hint that there's a redeemable human being in there, somewhere.
Now I'll go out on a limb and ask those who have been royal watchers for longer than I have: If we didn't know anything about Andrew's private life and had to judge him only by his public conduct, would we think of him as a hardworking, dutiful senior royal whose lifetime of service to the Queen meant he deserved a spot on the balcony during her Jubilee?
In the light of last thread's call to forgive and forget when it comes to Camilla, I have to wonder whether anyone would extend the same grace to Andrew, who has decades of service on his sister-in-law. After all, the case is over. Nobody got justice, much less the truth, but sometimes life is like that. What does anyone gain by continuing to bring it up? (I mean, we don't continue to bring up Charles's friendship with Jimmy Saville any longer, because we know that it's simply pointless.)
My language may be satirical, but my questions are sincere. I see double standards being applied and I find that unfair.
Mostly though I'd think it's just not worth it. Either they don't already have two kids and faking it must be exhausting or they do have 2 young kids and even with household help that has to be exhausting mostly because of the need to hide their true selves from the help. NDAs are dandy but any credible gossip leaking about serious drug use around their kids or serious mental health breakdowns and whatever they are trying to sell loses value. Plus it's a matter of diminishing returns (in lots of ways). It is with any couple. With W&K there was the most interest in George as the heir, Charlotte as the girl, and Louis mostly because it took so long to name him. But maybe M's trying to copy A. Jolie or M. Farrow.
I agree wholeheartedly, however Megsie’s go-to action always seems to be SUE! SUE! SUE! And shockingly, she seems to win. Hazbeen goes along with whatever she wants to do, so I bet he would have no objection to her trying to use the court system to keep her titles.
Cheers!
You make good points, but you are reasoning as an honorable non-grifting human being. She, on the other hand, is always looking for an angle. She is also a proven liar.
I fear that when she finally reappears, she will assail us with a theatric tale of losing the apocryphal baby, while home alone, falling to the floor while heroically singing lullabies to both Aldi and Lidl. She comes up with tall tales that cannot be proven or refuted.
Occam’s razor suggests that her absence is actually due to additional plastic surgery healing time. She just won’t want to admit it.
I can give you a fairly short answer/opinion as why the British public are more forgiving towards Camilla and Charles, but it might not make much logical or moral sense. Charles is destined to be King, and Andrew is not so he’s expendable in that sense. 😳 It’s a bit more complicated than that, but that’s the size of it IMHO. 😟
As for Charles’ friendship with Jimmy Saville, I don’t think it was ever quite that. Charles knows an awful lot of people (because of charities and foundations etc) and he would’ve been in the dark about Saville like a lot of people were back then, so I’m passing over that one. 🤔😕
wonder how much andrew knows (from mom or friendly courtiers) and how much he is helping to push himself off the front pages and charles back on. he has nothing to lose at this point so why not make it uncomfortable for his bro
It's the ones who have nothing to lose whom we should really watch out for.
I'm toying with a theory that the main reason Andrew's case blew up the way it did and got dragged out for so long was not because the public was organically horrified by the charges against him, but because Charles wanted to destroy his brother. Had Charles been willing to hush it up (for their mother's sake), it would have been. He wouldn't even have needed to play an active role; had he been totally apathetic, it would have died a natural death with the rest of the #metoo media cycle. And even those of us who can go down research rabbit holes as if they're water slides might not have found the story especially sinister. (Just one accuser, who was 17 at the time, and who became a procurer herself afterward? Not very scandalous.) But instead, we got a seven-year media circus . . . only to find at the end of it that we're all still at square one. What was even the point?
Basically, Andrew's only proven "crimes" are being friends with a pedophiles and procurers, letting two of them make a mockery of his mother's throne, and taking money for private meetings like some common celebrity. Even if he did knowingly sleep with underage girls, the only one who has accused him has so little credibility that he probably would have been vindicated in a trial. I'm sure all of this was clear to the BRF in 2015 -- or became clear very soon after. But Andrew was still made to take a huge fall. And for something he probably wasn't even guilty of but that was easiest to milk for outrage in the media.
For the record, I think the things Andrew did with his friends were unconscionable -- and although he was never publicly disloyal to his mother, he certainly did a lot behind the scenes to make one question his respect for her. He's has definitely received some karma in the last seven years. But I also think that Charles made a pawn out of Andrew, possibly to distract from his own unsavory relationships.
This is why I predict we will see more of Harry and Eugenie together in the future.
Yeah, I could see M producing a tall tale about yet another miscarriage. M isn't especially creative and does tend to repeat things. And that could get attention without having to deal with the hassle of a living kid.
If there was a payoff I wouldn't put it past M to pop out another kid. But 3 won't provide much more leverage than 2 especially if the family members with money never see the children. And kids are alot of trouble. If it worked, sure, but except for the small group of rabid fans who call him King Archie, even Archie doesn't seem to generate that much interest these days for the Devious Duo. Either people don't care, or they fall into the sick fan group, or like me, they have only passing thoughts such as wondering why the hair of a child that age changes color and texture so often.
But we'll see!
But maybe M's trying to copy A. Jolie or M. Farrow.
I think it was Hilary Baldwin who wanted to beat Angelina Jolie. They're already tied at six. Who wants to bet Hilary will go for seven?
This just doesn't seem *'s style, though. She doesn't even like sharing the spotlight with the husband who is the reason she even has a title. She might think her own children exist for her glory as much as any narcissist mother, but she seems to prefer a different sort of grift.
Yikes! That was succinct, and scary, and gave me a shiver.
Charles knows an awful lot of people (because of charities and foundations etc) and he would’ve been in the dark about Saville like a lot of people were back then, so I’m passing over that one. 🤔😕
I'm actually willing to give Charles the benefit of the doubt on this one.
My point in bringing it up is that if someone had wanted to destroy Charles in the media, it would have been easy to keep dragging out the Savile connection for years. Maybe get one of the victims who sued the BBC to reject the compensation scheme and to produce a doctored photo of herself as a minor with both Savile and Prince Charles. The Andrew story was allowed to rage like a forest fire even though it was almost as much of a nothingburger as this one. My theory that it happened that way because Charles was all for it is my current answer to the question: Cui bono?
I'll add that I do see some logic in letting the monarch and the direct heirs get more tolerance than everybody else. The higher you are in the hierarchy, the more the entire country stands to be hurt if you must take the fall for something. But I also think such a system requires a popular, even beloved monarch -- and even then, it won't tolerate too many of these exceptions.
And I think Andrew was singled out is because there are very famous and powerful American ( as well as other nationalities, but mainly American) men involved, and while Andrew is certainly famous, and has certainly been shamed, he was the one with the least to lose overall.
His station in life was an accident of birth and it isn't going to change. The other men stood to lose everything.
Not saying Andrew had any say in it, just that he was famous enough that the average Joe knew him, and could see that someone was punished for whatever it is they were supposed to have done wrong.
I firmly believe the US Govt is covering up an enormous amount of things here, and I don't believe Epstein killed himself.
My take on Andrew being forgiven is that he was once very well liked, but over the years he seems to have been involved with a lot of shady deals, and no one minds not seeing him any more.
I doubt anyone really thinks much about him, and so long as he remains off the Civil List he can probably live a perfectly comfortable life as long as TQ is still among us, and I'm guessing she'll make sure he doesn't want for much after she goes to be with Philip.
People may well be too busy nitpicking King Charles (George VIII?) to be bothered over Andrew. I fear Charles won't have an easy time as Monarch. I hope not, I'm fond of the old boy, but few seem to share my affection.
I will admit it’s a mess, the monarchy is a mess. The royal family seem to be oblivious to how others see their mindset and actions. It seems to be one thing after another… but there are different strands to the mess spreading over decades.
The case with Andrew has mostly to do with both the British and American press. Many are anti-monarchists. So they’ve whipped up the Giuffre’s story, embellished it and given it legs. Andrew has a history of fraternising with very unsavoury types of people, none of this has helped him. Charles isn’t nearly as bad….but has shown some dodgy decision making, I think he’s gullible and prone to flattery. 🤔
There’s always been rivalry between Andrew and Charles. After the death of Diana there was a lot of positive stories about Charles and drip of negative stories about his siblings. It got pretty bad, I can’t remember how or why but I’m sure it suddenly stopped (I did watch a documentary about it, but it’s too long ago now).
Prince Charles wants a smooth transition to being the next monarch, he wants to remove any possible tarnish. I don’t think he’s added to the mess for Andrew the media has done that…he just wants him out of public view. I’m sure if the public had the choice they’d probably opt for William for a fresh start, but it doesn’t work like that.
Can we believe the mud throwing between Charles and Andrew etc has stopped? No not really, but with the anti-monarchists agenda with the press right now, both in the UK and USA, stories won’t be glossed over. Once the spot light is on one member of the royal family, the whole family are put under the microscope; which they obviously hate! I think the anti-monarchists
press and its agenda is a very troublesome factor now. Maggot and Mole has given this even more legs, serious consideration should be undertaken to completely remove them from the royal family. 😕
I’m off for a typing break, I’m always on my phone so it gets tiring. Typos are rife with me anyhow, but they get worse if I’m here too long! 😂
A leaked email from convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell appears to confirm a notorious photograph of Prince Andrew with his accuser Virginia Giuffre is real, it’s reported.
In January 2015 her lawyer (Alan Dershowitz) is said to have raised the issue in a message asking: ‘Dear G. Do you know whether the photo of Andrew and virginia is real? You are in the background.’
Shortly after she replies: “It looks real. I think it is,” the paper reported.
--------
The above was in reference to PA, however could equally be true for H.
H is worse, though, imo. Instead of private meetings for money, he goes on TV and trashes the family for money.
I'd rather he just did the private meetings.
`As for Charles’ friendship with Jimmy Saville, I don’t think it was ever quite that.'
I completely agree.
It's not uncommon for people who have had something to do with Royals to think they are now `friends'. In so-doing, they are confusing `friendliness of manner' with `friendship', something much deeper.
As for JS, he always struck me a being downright creepy but that in itself is not a crime. It's what one does, and can be proved to have done, that constitutes a crime.
He didn't intend for it to get so out of hand. He was just wanting to take PA down a notch in his his mother's eyes.
I don't know that PC started anything, but I could see him fanning the flames a bit.
Trying to take PA down a notch or two.
I could also see him fanning the flames with the Harkles at first, bigging them up to take the Cambridges down a notch where the press was concerned. Also maybe his mother.
But that backfired big time. Once again, he didn't intend for it to get so out of hand. He was just trying to help things along a little and it completely blew up.
I would kind of suspect that that all 3 houses were briefing against each other in the beginning. Each one trying to establish dominance.
But then the Harkles took it way too far. So then there was an alliance between the Queen and and PW, with PC joining them later.
It's been interesting. To be a fly on the wall...
Not only failed, but will be a source of mockery for months if not years?
I hate to say it, but Spare was pictured in the locker room with the owner of the winning team holding the trophy. In America that's quite a coup. Sure it's cringey but so many celebs would have loved to score that pic for the Instagram.
____
He's getting his ducks in a row for when he is officially single.
To quote the actor's line on "Versailles" the series, King Louie's brother says 'if you think it's hard being King, try being the King's brother". He was the spare. So Haz is going to do all he can to try to upstage his brother the future King; even make a pest of himself in HW and the celeb world.
The good news is, he's so thick that he can't see how he reeks of desperation. The wife has used him as her frontman and now she's in outer Siberia after the Camilla the Queen story hit.
Hmmmm. Very interesting stuff coming out.
So far there are two personnas non gratis in the UK, Andrew and Twit.
On a dramatic day of developments yesterday, it was claimed that Miss Roberts had lost the original copy of the image.
But that was disputed by her legal team, who said the hard copy was with the FBI and that Miss Roberts misplaced a CD containing a copy of the image.
I know that many of you, including Hikari, believe that * would have wanted to attend the Super Bowl and would not have been hanging out at home with Jack Brooksbank and the kids
___
Or if she was hanging out at home with Jack then maybe she was scheming to get into those rich trousers. Like the saying goes never let another woman into your home not even your sister. I wouldn't trust her if I was Eugenie.
I think it's bs she was there with Jack alone with the kids.
Not to go hide out with your lame cousin someplace, hoping no one boos you or recognizes you.
Mr. Brooksbank is the world-wide Brand Ambassador of Casamigos Tequila, a $1 billion and counting company. Maggot was nowhere near the Super Bowl game because she wasn't invited. There wasn't a seat for her. Think of all those rich celebrities Maggot didn't get to charm and hook with all her charms. Da*m! She must still be spitting tacks about not getting an invite.
Mr. Brooksbank was at the Super Bowl to glad hand the very, very wealthy. Casamigos Tequila is a lucrative investment. A bottle at Target goes for something like $37. Pretty outrageous for tequila, especially one with a promise not to give headaches nor hangovers, nor matter how much is imbibed.
BatterUp is a front for grifting, and they did not have Super Bowl tickets as give-aways. Smoke and mirrors.
Mr. Brooksbank provided a courtesy ticket for Twit, and not one for Twit's wife.
Considering that Granny bailed out PA, there doesn't seem to be any motivation for Princess Eugenie to stick a knife in anyone's back, especially Granny or Uncle Charles, or Cousin William.
I see your point that I am perhaps giving Prince Charles too much credit in this area. He likes to make himself look good by making others look bad, and he is famously resentful of his younger brother. But this getting dragged out for seven years is definitely more extreme than his usual style, even if he did do some fanning of the flames at the beginning.
And I admit that I tend to discount anti-monarchist angles in reporting. Among all the royal bloggers I follow on Tumblr, only one wants the UK to become a republic in her lifetime . . . and yet she makes a hobby out of blogging about the BRF! The most I was ever exposed to this angle was when * was trying her best to paint the BRF as racist, and even then it just seemed like woke outrage, interchangeable with all the other stories blown up in the US media.
I don’t think Charles has fanned the flames with Andrew, not with this case because it’s affecting the whole monarchy which he does care about and wants to protect. It’s the press that have given the story legs and more. Charles just wants the mess tided up. 😕Charles has got Fawcett the Fence to worry about now. A man he should have disposed of and completely distanced himself from years ago. 😟
We’ve had storm Dudley loom for most of yesterday and last night, tonight going into tomorrow we have storm Eunice. We are warned of winds up to 100 mph, these are extremely high winds for the UK. I’ve got to go and prep the garden etc and make we don’t have any potential flying missiles. 😟
"According to documents filed Tuesday in New York by David Boies, Giuffre's attorney, the two parties will file a dismissal upon Giuffre's receipt of the settlement, the amount of which is not being disclosed. The document also stated that Prince Andrew, 61, intends to make a "substantial donation" to Giuffre's charity in support of victims' rights.
The Telegraph reports that the total amount is upwards of $16 million and includes a contribution from the monarch from her private Duchy of Lancaster estate, which means it wouldn't be coming from taxpayers' money."
@Wild Boar
Are you all right where you are? Storm Eunice will hit your part of the country tomorrow if it hasn't already.
Fergie's will have to rein in her spending, because the Queen's bailout of Andrew is a one and done.
here's the link
https://www.speakoutactreclaim.org/about-us
only two board members (hmmmm, thats certainly not best practices). and several lawfirms are their partners
no link to financial (shades of Archwell)
and her partner is a communications expert who was hired by yes Monica Lewinsky on cyberbullying or and her partner is also doing work about covid vaccines
why do i think there is a whole bunch of funny business on both sides of this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1D0UwBOgcw
I didn't expect what he said our takeaway should be, which was: Focus only on the things that you can control.
Mr. Rosas says that Camilla knew she had no control over public perception or the feelings of individual members of the family she was marrying into. But she had full control of what kind of work she would do as a royal and how much of it to do. And it was by concentrating on the latter that she was able to change public perception and the feelings of her new family members anyway!
I think this is one of his best videos. He gives good advice in general, but there seemed to be an extra dollop of compassion in this one. Although Mr. Rosas has carved out a great niche for himself by satirizing *, I think he feels sorry for her, too, and wants her to do better and be happier. I'm moved by his belief that if * had the same kind of focus that Camilla does, in whichever area of the world she knows she can be (what's that word she likes?) impactful, she could still get people to change their minds about her. Not everyone, of course, but perhaps more than any of us would wager.
* does not have the self-awareness or humility to turn public perception about her around by working hard and serving others,IMO.
I agree with your analysis of how Camilla has succeeded at that, but Camilla is most certainly not a narcissist.
As for the mrs, i agree, she doesnt know how to work hard (although maybe she did in those missing years 😉) and doesnt have the humility to admit doing wrong. She gains sympathy from "miscarriages" "racists remarks" and "pap chasing" oh and occasionally baking an olive cake for some random charity
All credit to Jesus Enrique Rosas. It was his analysis.
I know that * is a narcissist, as does everyone in our community. But Mr. Rosas's video had such a powerful spirit of generosity and compassion for all of his viewers that I felt I could extend some of that in *'s direction as well.
She gains sympathy from "miscarriages" "racists remarks" and "pap chasing" oh and occasionally baking an olive cake for some random charity
I missed the olive cake! I'm glad that * is at least breaking out of her "banana messaging" template!
More seriously, I like your summary of her own "technique" of changing public perception. Not only did none of them really work, but they all backfired. She thought it would be easier to make us feel sorry for her, but the reality is that no one likes a complainer. Camilla took a longer, harder road, and many years later she has respect . . . and dare I say it . . . also love.
* does not have the self-awareness or humility to turn public perception about her around by working hard and serving others,IMO.
I agree with your analysis of how Camilla has succeeded at that, but Camilla is most certainly not a narcissist.
Watching Jesus' video is on my lunchtime docket today.
Mr. Rosas is a better person than I maybe, if he is capable of feeling compassion for *. Or Harry. But if I dig reaaaallly deep, I can acknowledge that one must feel a bit sorry for two individuals whose profound personality and mental dysfunctions were hard-wired in childhood. These are two very sick, very bleeped up people who are incapable of change or personal growth, in my opinion. They make a twisted sort of sense together because they are two peas in a pod. Despite vastly different circumstances in their respective upbringings, both were raised with similar negative influences viz. the parenting they received, or didn't receive and the kinds of negative behaviors that they were rewarded for, which only encouraged them to continue. Both seem to have developed with a complete lack of moral compass and value the most shallow, materialistic and self-serving of lives.
It's too late to go back and rewind their childhoods, more's the pity. They are what they are and will continue to be so. The question is . . will they continue to get attention and perks and free passes for being what they are? Imagine being a person without a single redeeming quality. *That* is a tragedy worth a tiny bit of pity. They create their own private hell, because they can never escape being themselves. They both think that if they just get 'enough'--money, adulation, power, photo spreads, titles, celebrity friends, the stuff that money can buy--they will finally 'arrive' and be blissfully happy in themselves. They will never find what they seek, because discontent is their default setting. They are corrupted and therefore corrupt everything they touch.
Camilla has done admirably since she became Duchess of Cornwall. She really could not have done more or better in her conduct within the Firm. HM has even been won over, and I suppose she and Catherine may have bonded a bit over their similar situations--both commoners who married in, both deemed 'not good enough' for the blood royals they married, though Camilla has had it worse. She has got to be the opposite of a narcissist after having been by Charles's side officially and non-officially for most of the last 50 years. There's really only room for one narcissist in a relationship.
We UK Nutties (and any Irish ones as well) certainly need to batten down the hatches tonight. Ever since I encountered 100mph winds in Iceland when camping (couldn't stand up, have to throw oneself on the ground or be knocked down - like being under fire- we ended up trying to get some sleep in a sheep scrape as the tents were destroyed) I've hated high winds. Apparently, we get most tornadoes (little ones) near Basingstoke, of all places!
@Raspberry Ruffle - I hope you've come through Dudley OK? Eunice sounds like an even more severe test.
@Maneki Neko -Thank you for asking, so far so good.
We're within sight of the sea, on the `sheltered' side of Dartmoor, but about half a mile inland and 100'or more up. I expect the tide gates are closed already. It's sheltered compared with Cornwall and N. Devon. No wind at the moment but we've had rain in the air. The heaviest seas are when it's an easterly as it's the longest `fetch' of wind over water.
There's a large Austrian Pine (P nigra) in the garden which, should it fall, God forbid, ought just to miss the house. It's had getting on for 100 years of being stressed by by the storms so its roots and trunk should be used to it by now. It's inspected and `dead-wooded' regularly and the chap from the council reminded me that it's a species that `frays out' from the ends of the branches rather than doing anything too dramatic - I hope.
Even so, I think we'll sleep in a room on the east side of the house tonight...
Stay safe, Nutties.
@Snarky, you are also 100% right about Prince Charles. He has done a lot of good himself as Prince of Wales and doesn't get half the credit he probably deserves. But he gets envious of other family members so easily and has such a sneaky side when it comes to getting respect. I think that people pick up on this and it simply turns them off.
The corollary to Mr. Rosas's latest advice seems to be that the best way to get respect is to stop courting it.
O/T
Glad to hear you’re fine, we’re okay so far. I had a restless night but only a new fence panel come out…again! 🥴By the time Eunice hits we’ve already had Dudley for two days, I’m a bit worried its force has already loosened a lot of trees etc. We’ve checked and prepped what we can, and just have to hope. Stay safe in the South West and hope everyone comes out unscathed. ❤️
I’m just off to listen to Lady C’s latest video. 😃
She faces up to 10 years in prison for fraud and a $100,000 fine.
Here is the link.
So where is the mrs? is shy playing a coy game so we suddenly see her later or is she busy figuring out her next grift. Or has she been papped and no one is playing ball and buying the pics/publishing the pics. Its almost like there is a media lock on anything related to her. By her choice or by others hmmmmmmm
Maybe her latest round of plastic surgery was botched. My, what a shame that would be.
The corollary to Mr. Rosas's latest advice seems to be that the best way to get respect is to stop courting it.
___
I agree 100%. I would add popularity to this statement as well. I always told my children as they grew into adulthood there is no peer pressure when you are an adult.
Often times we sacrifice the respect of the collective when we take a strong stand on a hot issue. Camilla played the long game exceptionally well and she won her prize. She was in no position to actively denounce things as according to her conscience and her faith.
For us nobodies, I see it as necessary to speak my truth and hold my ground. It is in my DNA, And in these modern times, I am allowed the privilege. Therefore I will take it. It's been a long time in coming...
I wish safety for those experiencing scary weather. The One we love silences the stormy seas. This is always my comfort.
Thank you for posting the story about the woman who faked a pregnancy. Very informative. How in the world did she think she could get away with that fraud????
Well someone with a higher public profile already got away with it!
A question for the Mail Online readers: Does the site frequently publish unusual stories like this? By "unusual," I mean that the people in the story have no connection to the UK and aren't even celebrities with British fans. If so, then this story might just be there to give a break from the usual fare. If not, then maybe the gloves are really coming off (empowered by the thought of the future Queen Camilla?) and the editors want us to think of another woman whose lower stomach had "come away" from her body and who had no medical records of pregnancy or delivery.
O/T
We UK Nutties (and any Irish ones as well) certainly need to batten down the hatches tonight. Ever since I encountered 100mph winds in Iceland when camping (couldn't stand up, have to throw oneself on the ground or be knocked down - like being under fire- we ended up trying to get some sleep in a sheep scrape as the tents were destroyed) I've hated high winds. Apparently, we get most tornadoes (little ones) near Basingstoke, of all places!
Oh, my gracious! Please take care! I'm keeping you in thoughts and prayers. Our trees here, due to the high water table, have a very shallow root system. (How shallow? A HUGE maple tree behind our sitting area went down a couple of weeks ago. The roots came up, too. There is a wide but shallow depression that I'll be able to fill with a wheelbarrow of dirt.) I envy you your trees with actual roots that go deep into the ground but 100 mph winds can still snap trees right off regardless of root systems. I hope your electricity doesn't go out but mine has never stayed on during high winds!
I'll be watching here anxiously until all y'all in the storm path check in as safe.
I've been viewing/listening to A Celebration of New Orleans Blues with Hugh Laurie. I'll probably let him sing me to sleep tonight (unless/until he wakes SwampMan).
Friday Singalong 🎤
Apologies:Cliff Richard
Living Doll
Valley of the Dolls
Got himself a lying, stalking,
cheating, rorting
Livid Moll
Tries to do his best to please her
and appease her
Sili-con dolls
She’s got evil eyes, that emphasise
she has no soul
Got the one and only
flaming, flagrant Living Troll
Take a look at her wig
have a feel
Nothing about her is real
All her lies to debunk
Not in the trunk
way up in front on her knee
Got the one and only
faking, fatal Shilling Toll…
@Swampie
I love Hugh Laurie and his
slightly sardonic smile, sexy😉
@Enbreth
DM has UK, Aus, and US sites,
commingled.
I’m sure they enjoyed printing
that false pregnancy article!
Did we ever find out what that
Super-injunction entailed???
`When I hear that littl bl**der
and compare him with Aida,
Nausea!'
@Ian’s Girl
I’m fond of Charles too.
Erudite, sensitive, misunderstood.
I don’t see him as a conniving,
machiavellian type character.
@WildBoar
Verdigris…
The only X film I sneaked into before I was 16 was Expresso Bongo - apparently the B-word was the reason for the X-rating! Dad's sister used to have her meat delivered by `Bert Rudge', as Harry Webb, prior to becoming Cliff Richard. He was so scared of their large German Shepherd that was loose in the garden he'd chuck the meat over the gate, with inevitable consequences, or so the family tradition has it.(All unsubstantiated rumour, of course, Cliff)
PS: it's relatively quiet here though the wind is accelerating. No overnight catastrophes.
A grudge against Bert Rudge!!
Hahaha!!
Make that four of us - Charles is not without some faults (who is?) but I do have a soft spot for him.
OT - the wind's picking up here but it's fairly sunny. I hope things remain fairly quiet in your neck of the woods.
Agree not without faults etc but who among us . . .
When I got in last night (US Central time) I read that a power line had gone down and electrocuted 13 dogs in a kennel, not sure where. That would have been in the wee hours UK. The helplessness of those who can't prepare and don't know what's happening to them is always the most tragic for me. Best wishes to all.
I'm sure he must have looked happy at times but we weren't shown those photos, only the solemn/glum ones. Anne had the advantage of a mop of blonde curls.
Yes, it happened in N. Yorkshire, near Ampleforth - at a breeding kennels for working retrievers and cocker spaniels. There were 13 fatalities, between 6months and 7 years of age. Terribly sad.
There are many overhead powerlines still, especially in rural areas, despite efforts to get them put underground. I recall the macabre sight, on a local-authority housing estate near us, of a grey squirrel that had touched 2 of the 3 wires of an urban power supply simultaneously - the little corpse dangled there for months.
Prince Harry begins High Court legal battle against Home Office: First hearing set to be held today over Duke of Sussex's demand for police protection when he and Meghan visit UK
Note the article says 'The Duke of Sussex wants to bring his children to visit from the US', with no mention of *. What makes him so special? It's not as if he'll take the tube from Heathrow and in any case he'll be staying at BP/Windsor etc where there is security. He's not as important as he thinks.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10526793/Prince-Harry-begins-High-Court-legal-battle-against-Home-Office.html
---------
@Teasmade
The 13 dogs electrocuted were in Ampleforth in North Yorkshire:
BBC News - Storm Dudley: Falling power line kills 13 dogs in North Yorkshire
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-60422957
Spare is quoted as saying the UK will always be his home.
Where's TBW? Is he worming his way back in? Dollars to donuts he succeeds. Are they starting to feel they need him back?
So many questions, so few real answers.
Note the article says 'The Duke of Sussex wants to bring his children to visit from the US', with no mention of *.
@LavenderLady
Where's TBW? Is he worming his way back in?
He could only worm his way back in without her!
If they are separated, then this explains why she wasn't at the Superbowl. But in this case, she is probably doing the hoover of her life!
But I think even Harry would know that if he wanted back in, he'd get security for himself and not have to sue for it. That he's still going through with this crazy scheme that she probably cooked up to have an excuse not to go is the strongest argument that they're still together.
I'm currently on the fence.
After all, that's what he said he wanted and he has probably had it spelled out clearly to him many times already, in beautiful printing just in case he can't read joined-up writing.
He could only worm his way back in without her!
Oh, I sooo agree with this!
Great point about the security law suit. Meaning, it makes sense that he would get security but not her. But what about the "children"?
I get it because he thinks he needs it to show up for the Jubilee (not that it may be settled by then - who knows considering how long it took for her trials to work their way through the court dockets).
I think all those who said or thought the lead up the Jubilee would now be smooth were - wrong. Or forgetful.
I feel sadness for her HM. She's been at this all so long, this is supposed to be a wonderful look back at all her hard work through the years. And some burr surfaces and takes away some of the shine. After that one is gone, then there is another.
I forgot about that! I agree with this and I think they are treasonous in several capacities.
Trevor Coult on the C*nt's case against the Crown for protection
I should have added that Aldi and Lidl are indeed born of H$M's gonads, also that there is no b*stardy elsewhere in their line of descent from Charles and Diana. No turkey basters or other glassware involved, nor other individuals providing children for adoption.
I should have added that Aldi and Lidl are indeed born of H$M's gonad
Yes, I do believe this is a logical approach.
The rules are listed and are clear.
You have been asked to follow them and you have chosen not to.
Please stop posting permanently.
If you do, it will be deleted. Full Stop.
Dear readers,
I'm sorry but we will be on full moderation for a while here.
I ask the following of you.
Please be understanding while this is going on.
We don't speak badly of posters.
We've been on moderation for a couple of minutes and it has started.
As for me, I will choose not to let this live inside my head rent free.
I will be choosing to do fun things like read a book (I have several deadlines for book groups), watch some movies, bake cookies and not so fun (cat to vet).
I will be checking the blog frequently to forward messages.
Thanks for the support. Cheers, and the blog will go on.
FULL MODERATION IS ON
I suspect that there is some hinkiness as to just exactly how he got into the US.
Suspecting some lying went on there.
In addition to tax issues and wanting security paid for.
The DM article says 'They [lawyers for the Home Office] also vowed to make him fork out for 'excessive' legal costs caused by the case - which could total up to £400,000 - playing out through the High Court.' I'd say he needs to think about his options very carefully.
---------
@LavenderLady
He could only worm his way back in without her!
~~~~
Actually this was written by Enbrethiliel but I agree with the comment.
Prince Harry attacked for failing to show ‘respect’ in row over refusal of police protection
The Duke’s claim that he offered to pay for security on visits to the UK is challenged by the Government and described as ‘irrelevant’
The Duke of Sussex’s claim that he offered to pay for his own police protection has been challenged by the Government, as it accused him of not showing officials enough “respect”.
As the Duke began legal action against the Home Secretary for refusing to provide him with police protection, lawyers for the Government launched an extraordinary attack claiming his offers to reimburse the taxpayer were “irrelevant”.
Robert Palmer QC said that the Duke had “failed to afford the necessary measure of respect” to Priti Patel and a panel of experts from the police, Home Office and Royal household “as the expert, and the democratically accountable, decision-maker” on security and risk assessment.
In documents handed to London’s High Court, Mr Palmer also noted that the Duke still has a “form of exceptional status”, whereby he will be given protection depending on the reason for his visit.
However Shaheed Fatima, the Duke’s QC, said that the UK would “always be his home” and that he wanted to return to see family and friends, but did not feel safe.
Duke argues for protection 'on all occasions'
Prince Harry is challenging the February 2020 decision of the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures (Ravec) to withdraw the police protection that he and the Duchess of Sussex enjoyed as senior royals.
The Duke argues that the decision made by Ravec, comprised of representatives from the police, Home Office and Royal household, was wrong as “he falls within the immediate line of succession”.
In the case of “Queen on application of Duke of Sussex versus Secretary of State for the Home Office”, he says that he should have police protection “on all occasions” in the UK and that he has even offered to pay for it himself.
In a statement released on behalf of the Duke in January, it was claimed that he first offered to “pay personally for UK police protection” for himself and his family in January 2020 at Sandringham, but the offer was refused. The Duke did not state who the offer was made to.
However, the Government said that the offer - which is now in his witness statement - is “irrelevant”, as it “was notably not advanced to Ravec” when he visited in June 2021 or in any of the immediate correspondence which followed.
In any event, the court documents note, “personal protective security is not available on a privately financed basis” and Ravec does not make decisions on security on the basis of payment.
Prince Harry DIDN'T offer to pay for police protection before he took Government to court over the issue, Home Office says as it accuses him of not showing 'necessary respect' to Priti Patel and officials
Prince Harry did not offer to pay for police protection when he visited the UK, the High Court heard as the Duke's latest legal battle kicked off today.
The Home Office claimed his offer was 'notably not advanced' to the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec) when he came for the Diana statue unveiling in June.
Lawyers for the department also slammed the Duke for 'failing to afford the necessary measure of respect' to Home Secretary Priti Patel and Ravec.
He rubbed the Home Office up the wrong way and they won't bend. Their lawyers also slammed him - I bet he doesn't feel too clever now.
Ms Fatima said that because of the security provided to him on that date, the “Duke does not feel safe when he is in the UK”.
“It goes without saying that he does want to come back to see family and friends and to continue to support the charities that are so close to his heart,” she said. "This is and always will be his home.”
However, Ms Fatima was rebuked by Mr Justice Swift, who told her: “Can you just focus on the issues in dispute?”
The Duke is arguing that his private protection team in the US does not have adequate jurisdiction abroad or access to UK intelligence information which is needed to keep his family safe.
But in his submissions, Mr Palmer told the court that his “form of exceptional status” meant that the Duke is already considered for personal police protection when he returns “with the precise arrangements being dependent on the reason for his presence in Great Britain”.
It suggests that were he attending on official business, rather than in a personal capacity, the Duke would likely receive police protection.
The Home Secretary also warned the Prince that they would seek to recover all cost to the public purse from the case, as they were “considerably in excess” of those typically awarded.
The Duke also submitted his arguments in the case to the court, but they were confidential and therefore not made available to the press or the public.
Ms Fatima had said that she wished to address why their arguments were being made in secret whilst the Home Office made its arguments publicly. However, she was told by the judge that it was a matter for the parties to decide what to release and that she should “move on”.
It was one of a number of heated exchanges between the judge and the QC. At one point, Mr Justice Swift noted: “Court proceedings are not a platform for people generally to tell their story, rather it is the forum for people to resolve legal disputes.”
The hearing, held largely behind closed doors, was to decide what material in the case should be withheld from the public on the grounds of national security.
Police do not reveal the details of personal protection, as it is feared that if public it could aid terrorists or “hostile actors” launching attacks on public figures.
The judge is due to give his ruling on what material can be released on due course.
The Duke’s bid for a review of the Home Office decision was filed in September and has not yet been granted or denied permission for a full hearing.
Deep in taxes so I'm thinking about all the tax implications of everything they have now done. (broohaha).
So, their tax situation is complicated (tactful) so they can't just toss data into some computer generated program to get an easy answer to keep nosy people from looking.
So this adds all kinds of people who all need to sign DNAs to be able to look at the return and the back up. This is assuming they know where all that paperwork is. it is accessible and is in some format to hand off to them.
Or all the money flowing here and there? Money from his trust (if it is still intact). Or from his family. Or where what money they did receive for all the deals exactly went.
Kids? claimed or no?
There are the tax returns for all the businesses as well. All those returns would have some complicated parts (with all the shuffling) so the costs for preparing all the returns will start to add up ... now. So what ever they might be saving in taxes may be losing large bites from the "profits" by paying accountants instead.
This comment published in the Daily Mail made a lot of sense to me, about why Hazmat is pursuing action in the UK courts to have security above his station (given he is no longer royal in name or conduct).
"Violet, Peak District, United Kingdom,
They need to fullfil their contract with Netflix and provide royal content and for that they must come here. But, big but, the royal family will not tolerate him filming them, recording them or being followed around by a film crew. (I'm not convinced they'd tolerate him at all, the public certainly don't.) So he's now got a big problem and he has to find a reasonable excuse for not filming and if he can make himself look like a victim at the same time, well, that's even better. Have to hand it to them, at least one of them has read Machiavelli."
--------
I read elsewhere that another possible component to all this is that if he is denied this protection, he will claim that he doesn't feel safe in the UK, and will then try to claim asylum in the US.
Something about if he claims asylum it impacts his tax and immigration status.
They think it's just a it's ruse to get out of paying taxes.
Thoughts?
It seems a little out there, but I wouldn't put anything past them either.
Sorry chum, whatever you might think, I bet the RF made sure that the Sandringham Summit arrangements were legally binding. If you were too bone-headed not to have them explained in words of one syllable, possibly picked in poker work with a nice little ribbon so you can hang them on your wall next to your wedding vows, that's your look-out.
Looks like the IRS could get you coming or going and you are to pay taxes no matter what.
https://citizenpath.com/us-taxes-immigration-consequences/
If he pays UK taxes, that can impact his status. If you return to your home country while claiming asylum, it can impact your status.
Claiming asylum is specific as in it looks like you have to be coming in originally as a refugee (oh how are you being persecuted?) and you have to started residency stuff within the first year after entry. (Hmm dates unknown but certain that assorted news groups know them by memory)...
https://controller.richmond.edu/payroll/international/refugee-asylee.html
Specifics about the UK side
https://www.bdo.co.uk/en-gb/insights/tax/private-client/leaving-the-uk
What is clear (in the sea of IRS and residency requirements) is that you need a specific attorney (immigration) to guide you and that it is shockingly easy to suddenly lose your direction by doing something in error and get yourself booted out legally.
Sounds like popcorn time if there is such a play in action or about to start one.
"I read elsewhere that another possible component to all this is that if he is denied this protection, he will claim that he doesn't feel safe in the UK, and will then try to claim asylum in the US."
Anything is possible with H&M. I'm pretty sure the lawsuit isn't because H really wants to pay on-duty officers of Metro Police to act as his personal bodyguards. Even he would know they aren't for sale plus he's too cheap to pay anyway. But I'm not sure the asylum in the US idea makes any sense. Who knows what the US Gov't might do at any point for any reason. But a wealthy individual not having the bodyguards of his choice in his home country doesn't seem to fit the accepted reasons for asylum. Doesn't the granting of asylum usually require the person have a credible fear of persecution? Not a fear of clicking cameras or the publishing of uncompensated photos? I really don't know how asylum would benefit him anyway-- I guess he couldn't be deported until his hearing but I doubt he's on a list to be removed anyway. But I'm not a tax expert so maybe there could be a benefit there.
It could relate to Netflix and be a cover for his and Meghan's inability to deliver. Or just be more victimhood for both. For general PR or to try to make the RF look bad.
Why didn't they throw themselves onto the mercy of Canada?
If the rumour about their `asylum seeking' is `well-founded', they're going to be laughed out of court in any Western country they run to.
Is it just another case of them not caring whose tragic circumstances they try to devalue by claiming it for themselves, such as those who can't face living a moment longer or who flee for their lives as the Taliban approaches? Or are they thinking of those who flee murderous relatives who give `blood diamonds' as wedding gifts?
We used to use a word, now taboo, to describe economic immigrants who claim refugee status - `B*g*s'
Whatever adjective applies (well-founded, credible, etc) how could H possibly make the case he is in danger of "persecution" in the UK? (With or without bodyguards) I'm not getting it or I don't understand the use of the term "persecution" in the context of refugees seeking asylum.
I thought refugees sought asylum because of fear of or actual persecution on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or a membership in a particular social group. I'm not sure where H could fit his whining. Being exposed to unpleasantness like photographers in public places, "mean" comments in the DM, or even hearing publics boos wouldn't seem to fit. And isn't the eventual big "reward" for asylum a green card? Something Harry already has? Or could easily get?
Perhaps he believes the RF is out to do him in? Or we `persecute' him for his ridiculous, ignorant utterances?
HM Government not agreeing to what he demand - political persecution?
Afraid of extremist attack? Probably no greater than than that faced by the rest of us.
I wish he'd take to heart the maxim that it's better to keep quiet and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth, thereby removing all doubt in the matter.
The only bright aspect of this is that he's not pleading for protection for wifey. Perhaps he's happy for terrorists to get her?
The woman who faked the pregnancy in Georgia did it not once but TWICE !!!! The second time she got caught. Her co-workers became suspicious not only because of the shifting baby bump but because after she had supposedly given birth, she sent photos of her newborn to the co-workers. After examining the photos, they concluded that they were not photos of the same child, due to differences in skin tone. She didn't work for a private company, she worked for a state government agency so I guess they had to investigate instead of just shrugging it off and saying "Oh, that Robin !!!!"
To quote Yogi Berra "It's deja vu all over again!"
"Another point is that technically one is expected to claim asylum in the first safe country one arrives in, being choosey isn't a good look. (Let's not go any deeper into that...)
Why didn't they throw themselves onto the mercy of Canada?"
Well, that's easy. They hadn't thought of it yet. :)
The woman who faked the pregnancy in Georgia did it not once but TWICE !!!!
Like another woman we could name!
The freaking audacity, right? The parallels are actually pretty striking. I've said before that * isn't even original as grifters go, when it comes to ensnaring wealthy men; but even I'm kind of floored that there also appears to be a con artist's "template" for faking pregnancy and babies.
I'm not convinced he's going for "asylum" but if he is, maybe as a member of the Commonwealth Canada wasn't seen as a safe place. Their "friends" (mouthpieces) certainly spoke about their very narrow escape from Canada before the border closed in March 2020...Flying off in a huge private jet sent all the way from Atlanta..escaping with not much more than their clothes, wigs, shoes, jewelry, one kid, & two dogs. (Cue the closing music from The Sound of Music or the opening scenes from Casablanca)
IMO the Dollars need footage for their Netflix contract. It needs to look jazzy, and not boring, because right now all they have is boring.
~ ~ ~
It certainly is extremely boring and needs to look jazzy but usually it's only the Queen who rides in a car with the royal standard IIRC. Anyway, once the BRF are in a car it's very difficult to know who's inside. Even if H & * were in a convoy of cars, they'd be difficult to spot. Anyone interested in this pageantry can watch it on YouTube. I fail to see how they could muster interest for that sort of thing of this is what they're going for. It's not very original and could only work - if it does - as a one off. Back to the drawing board, Harkles.
-----
Well, H was only allowed to bring his one grey suit with him.
Also, Mickey has had her pups and they are real cuties. ♥
https://www.yahoo.com/news/prince-harry-renews-lease-frogmore-175807042.html
Charles would not be the first person betrayed by subordinates or used for personal gain because of his position. People have lost fortunes investing in questionable schemes, machinery, or industry based on advice from a trusted source.
For every rich person wishing to buy influence, there are thousands of hungry wolves lying in wait to take a chunk of his or her flesh to feast on. (The lyrics of Material Girl come to mind.)
Perhaps since the amount changed, PC might not have made the connection or was aware that the other did not go through to Sentebale. Or even if he did know it was not made, that doesn't mean that, with the rather silo effect of the various groups, that reason was mentioned to him or even any of his staff about why this did not happen.
Thanks Rebecca for the article.
I was reading the comments on the DM about the legal quest for security when visiting the UK. Very funny. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10526793/Prince-Harry-begins-High-Court-legal-battle-against-Home-Office.html
All I can think of: Good luck with that dude.
EXCLUSIVE: How Prince Harry tried to keep his legal fight a secret https://mol.im/a/10531291
All I can think of: Good luck with that dude.
I've been contemplating why, if a certain somebody (or somebodies) "feel(s)" unsafe, he/they feel as though he/they are entitled to state-provided security. In the spare's case, he *used* to have security when he was on state business as a symbol of whatever it was that he was a symbol of. Now he'll be on vacation in a country no longer his own. (* was probably provided security to attempt to keep her from sexually assaulting any aged rich men that she might meet. It was cheaper than sending an ambulance along.)
Welcome to the side of town where no-one knows your name, dearie. You can have anything you want but YOU will be paying the bill, not the taxpayers, not granny.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjlFR0ZdGcU
The true tragedy of the Duke of Windsor was that he was intellectually incapable to understand the core difference between the "king-emperor" and the private person "David".
When he had forced his younger brother Albert (George VI) to take care of "the heavy burden" of the kingship and the tedious and boring work that position demanded, he fully expected to come back to England and continue his life as the First Gentleman of the Kingdom and Empire with all the Pomp and Circumstance he knew so well, but this time totally free from the hated work parts.
He spent the rest of his life (36 years) out of England with a vacuous sad face without understanding what happened to this glorious plan.
Maybe H did not do family history in Eton...
From Harry’s actions against his family he appears to be utterly ruthless.
He writes a tell all about his family and then talks of serving the Queen, after having harmed her, laden her with stress as she mourns, having helped kill Prince Philip, stabbed Charles, where does his perfidy end?
And so I imagine this move by Harry, has motives that are in no one’s interests but his malevolent own. EDITED
He would have a "place" in the UK just in case he ever did come back. From there he could try to justify that he might be at risk since he would "live" in a known location where someone could sneak in and try to hurt him.
BLG did something about how they should not ever justify this even if he were to supposedly play for this as it would set some sort of president for him "needing this" period. From there, he could then claim that because he needs this, he should not have to pay for it at all.
He gets what he (or she) wants and at the price they want.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_RNHcUap3M
How Harry LOST The "Sport Royal" Title To Catherine
Mr. Rosas's takeaway for the rest of us: Don't despair if you gave a bad first impression. First impressions may be important, but they are not everything. The first step to changing them is to remove your own focus from what you don't like about yourself and to move it to what you do like about yourself.
Again, excellent advice for Harry and * . . . if they could ever have the grace to take it. But I also wonder what an honest answer from both of them would be. I feel that Harry is too full of self-loathing to like anything about himself. And of course * is a narcissist.
It looks as if he needs a UK address to keep that designation. I reminds me of the old practice here of trying to claim residence in a parish (with an attractive church) rather than one's own (with a hideous church) in order to get married somewhere nice. It is said that grooms/brides-to-be could leave a suitcase of clothes in the care of a friend in the nice parish to claim they lived there. (Nowadays, the rules are less strict).
It's the converse of tax dodge of the stinking rich who claim to live abroad for tax purposes but are really resident here - they `leave' the UK, apparently, by taking off in their private jets, flying around just outside UK airspace for a bit overnight (10 minutes around midnight?), without landing anywhere else. Thus they come back the `next day'.
There's a new YouTube channel from 'Keep NYC MegaTrash Free' called 'The Royal Grift'... where she will continue with her clever and hilarious animation videos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8tfJ7gvPSk
The Queen has covid.
(oh, dear me).
Again, excellent advice for Harry and * . . . if they could ever have the grace to take it.
-----
Correct but not just the grace but first of all the intelligence to recognise negative traits need to be changed and the humility to want to effect the change. We know that intelligence, humility and grace are in short supply with H & *.
I'm not seeing anything on my side (I have missed things before though).
Could you please give more details about when, or it was after this post or between this and this so I can look some more at it?
Thanks
The Queen tests positive for Covid
The Queen has tested positive for Covid, Buckingham Palace has said.
The monarch is experiencing "mild cold-like symptoms" but expects to continue "light duties" at Windsor over the coming week, the palace said.
"She will continue to receive medical attention and will follow all the appropriate guidelines," it added in a statement.
The Queen, 95, had been in contact with her eldest son and heir, the Prince of Wales, who tested positive last week.
It is understood a number of people have tested positive at Windsor Castle, where the Queen resides.
The announcement comes weeks after the UK's longest reigning monarch reached her Platinum Jubilee of 70 years on 6 February.....................
Sorry. Retry?
maybe harry needs the security because he told the mrs he’s flying back to the jubilee but really is plotting to leave her. she in a rendition of the old face turns up in london and starts stalking him. yeah i’d be scared too. orr even one of her sugars or even a scobie do himself. this could be legit 😉
Will there be a response/reaction from Montecito? If anything, it'll be the former, not the latter.
harry announcing he’s renewing frogmore. well that certainly makes him more vulnerable from a security perspective. like announcing when you are coming to town with flight number attached.
in all seriousness we are coming up on the anniversary of Prince Phillip’s death. this maybe weighing heavily on the queen.
Poor Charles. Maybe the Queen did catch COVID from him but the BBC article also says a number of people at Windsor Castle have tested positive recently. And it was 12 days ago she saw Charles. If she really didn't test positive until today, just what variant is going around in the UK? Omicron usually has a shorter incubation period than that.
One to three day incubation period here. It wasn't Charles. Most likely one of the Windsor castle staff. No doubt it will be used as a cudgel to further beat Charles.
Saw this in Newzit in the Mirror:
Prince Harry has renewed the lease on his £2.4 million UK home - so he can deputise for the Queen if she falls ill.
First of all, how can he deputise if he's in the US? Unless he's planning on coming back permanently. Secondly, I'm sure Charles or William are more than up to the task should the Queen be too unwell to work. Thirdly, does he really think the Queen would let him deputise for her after the way he's treated her?
H might be 'domiciled' in the UK of he's got a lease on a property but in effect he resides in the US. Both he and Andrew should be removed as counsellors of state.
I wonder if that will make the front page of the DM.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvOmZpLg0wY
Thanks for the info on Scabies reported to the Met. He has form as he got her banned from Twitter last year. What a despicable individual.
https://www.thesteepletimes.com/movers-shakers/yankee-wally-steeple-times/
I had no idea I had double posted until I came back inside. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
Miggy said…
There's a new YouTube channel from 'Keep NYC MegaTrash Free' called 'The Royal Grift'... where she will continue with her clever and hilarious animation videos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8tfJ7gvPSk end quote
I watched it and loved the preview. I can't wait for more from her.
I noticed that 'Keep NY mega trash free' has churned out way more content in a short time than the nasty twosome from Montecito has presented the world since they signed the multi million dollar contracts (in 2020 I think) with Spotify and Netflix.
Those two grifters make me ill. Long live NuttyFlavorBlog, The Royal Grift, and all the other bloggers and vloggers who are clear-sighted enough to see and explicate for us the mega con the two Montecito grifters are pulling.
I simply am shocked the grotesque duo keep getting away with it. When will this charade end?
Keep NYC Mega Trash Free created a short clip for Yankee Wally of her chopping tomatoes in her kitchen. She/he did this because Wally was saying she was saving tomatoes to throw at the gruesome 2some if ever they set foot on Blighty's shores. Wally uses the clip as an introduction to her own videos now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkrbPz8xJEE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkrbPz8xJEE
Why Meghan Will SOON Return To The UK
Mr. Rosas explains everything so succinctly and clearly. And if we thought the way the Counselors of State are set up was already a headache, the arrangement will be even more of a tangle! This is something that can be legally changed, however. And I think, given the unpopularity of Harry and Prince Andrew, that no one would really mind if it were changed in the near future.
But @ British Nutties, what do you think?
https://rumble.com/vv7qa2-harry-and-meghans-facade-for-the-camera-princeharry-meghanmarkle.html
Film of the H$Ms & NYC dignitaries masking up for the photoshop - implying that Covid only infects us peasants - the elite are immune?
It seems to be a very commonly held belief...
In her mind, a true royal is seldom seen in public hence she is limiting her sightings.
Good grief. The Queen is incredibly generous about sharing her time with her subjects, and she seems to have passed on this value to her children in various degrees. I remember reading that she started wearing neon suits for events that drew crowds so that she would catch the eye more easily and people who had traveled for miles to see her wouldn't go away disappointed. She is all about service and being there for the public. If anything, * is being the very opposite of royal.
those china tea cups in her 40-40 video
It was as much a joke as the smashed tea service on the double-decker bus in James Corden's "interview" of Harry.
Many years ago, a blogger who called himself The Last Psychiatrist said that narcissists don't understand that true identity comes from within, so they're always surrounding themselves with external totems "to prove" that they are who they say they are. * has a British prince for a hostage and maybe one tea cup she hasn't smashed in a fit; in her mind, that's more than enough to make her Catherine's equal. Why don't the rest of us see it???
Many thanks for the link to the BLG video explaining the difference between residence and domicile. The Harkles' link to a UK domicile seems tenuous to me, considering they have spent fewer than two weeks per year in the UK. And how would * reconcile [potentially] relocating to the UK with her statement that she didn't want to even visit the UK? God help us if they do come back!
I rather think * blundered there. To my eye, the drinking vessels looked like coarse earthenware, not even the traditional ironstone ware sold in street markets. The pattern were heavy and crude. Overall, it was barely student-mug quality. Nobody with the slightest pretention to being Somebody would touch such rough items.
It has to be fine bone china, or porcelain, for one to maintain one's social credibility.
BTW that's how the delicate question of whether one puts milk into one's cup before or after the tea arose. Ordinary folk had earthenware which was likely to crack from heat stress if the tea went in first. The rich could show off their superior cups by pouring the milk second.
I an irredeemably MILF (milk in first). I justify it as I heard a Twinings tea-taster explain that the chemical interaction between the milk and the tannin depends on the order in which it's done (just as diluting conc. acid with water has to be done the right way around for safety). He maintained that milk-in-first gives the better flavour - so that's good enough for me.
I started drinking tea very late in life and usually make it in a mug with a teabag. So the tea is already in there when the milk goes in. (I remember horrifiying a Kiwi friend when I put the milk in before taking the teabag out! It was the last time I made that faux pas.) But I'm starting to try more loose leaf teas and can now experiment with the milk going in first.
I use a loose tea that's mainly Assam with a small amount of Kenyan, put together by a local blender.
Funnily enough, with tea bags, it always tastes OK the other way round. I wonder if it's because the tea has cooled slightly as one waits for it to brew? Add the milk too soon and you stop it brewing.
I wonder how much is in one's mind?
Harry, The Super Bowl, And The Home Office
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2022/02/21/harry-the-super-bowl-and-the-home-office/
According to Lady C, Maggot has been told to keep a low profile by their PR peeps and advisers, because any public appearances etc. made by her has so far backfired, and it’s ruining their brand. 😳😂Tis why we are only seeing Mole.
O-o-o-oh dee-aaar, my heart would bleed for her...!
It would be too much to hope for to never have to look at her again. But something is suppressing her. The Greta Garbo act is not sustainable for Narcs…they MUST BE SEEN. It’s the oxygen they require. Not so much as a papp sighting or a Zoom promo since the Christmas stunt—and even that was supposed to have been 2 months earlier. Meaning, Shelob has not been seen in any form since her November appearance on Ellen—Which may have been taped earlier. Something is up. With so much activity emanating from London, only Hazard has been seen or heard from for months.
Weird.
I agree that H has to have concrete proof that he's not safe....it can't be just that he doesn't "feel" safe.
However, does CA being a sanctuary state affect what he needs to prove in the way of safety vs danger?
I don't quite see how CA's stance on anything much matters. Federal law should prevail re: immigration. I realize things haven't been seeming to work that way recently but it seems at most CA might aid H in a quest to avoid being deported. CA can't grant him US asylum.
But if H were to get asylum (I personally can't see that working over the kinds of fears he's described like fear of cameras/photographers) what does it get him? He must already have a green card or if somehow he's managed to work without getting one, he can easily get one being married to an American citizen. I doubt he's in fear of being deported so he doesn't need that stayed until a hearing. Somebody please tell me what I'm missing.
MILF means something completely different here in the US! The most polite way to say it would be "hot mom" ;)
-----
I hadn't thought of that. Could make sense of why not much publicity around his attendance.
If he was a late ask, how humiliating.
I was thinking that I'd get in the habit of putting the milk in first, just to call myself a MILF! ;-)