Skip to main content

A Return? Maybe?

 Recently there was an article about how it is unlikely that Harry will return for the Jubilee. The thought was that he would have difficulty looking at his family while knowing what is about to be unleashed against them in the upcoming book.

Other thoughts are that if he did show with the kids (with or without Meghan) that the whole focus would shift to be on them instead of on the long years of work by Her Majesty.  

As a side note, think about how different the kingdom has become since her first day on the throne?  What has change(s) have you seen?

The security has not resolved so if he does come, what does that say about the future of the lawsuit?

But at the same time, what about that idea that they might be able to come back when Charles takes the throne since the Queen put a kibosh on that return quite decisively? 

As always with these things, it is an unnamed source.  So how reliable have those sources been in the past?  Really.  Can you come up with statement(s) which later came true?

As with the can't face them thought, would Charles really be all that willing to accept them back if Camilla is totally trashed in the book?  Or he is as well? Would he do this knowing that William would be highly unlikely to allow it to continue (meaning leaving a messy family situation for William)?

By claiming that Charles would be open to it because he is more modern - would that label does that put on the current ruler without actually saying it in print but leaves it in the mind?

Could it be like BLG mentioned, the idea of trying to smear the joy out of the jubilee? 

Or a disinformation leak knowing that even it there is some truth to it, the motto of "Never complain, never explain." would continue to allow the idea to be batted about the social media for clicks without a public comment by the Palace. 

All of the above or something else?

<b>MODERATION WILL BE ON (sorry)<b>

Comments

Did anyone else notice what a sour expression John Sentamu, former archbish of York, now Lord Sentamu, had at the Commonwealth Service? I wonder why?
Mel said…
Looks like the info about the Archewell woman being related to the Jamaican pm is not verified. Wait and see.

The Bahama welcome...wow! Catherine seems to have gotten her energy back. Bet they're gonna be glad to get back home to their children, though. This trip must have been exhausting.

Imagine a school visit in the morning, where she did NOT read her own stupid book, but made it about the students.

Then on to a parade. Then went sailing. Now onto to an evening event, dressed wonderfully. Doing a great job representing the Queen.

Versus Mm...wearing clothes that don't fit, never would go sailing, suing everyone in sight, smearing not only Catherine but the Queen herself at every opportunity Yep. That girl is making a difference in the world.

Snippy said…
Katherine once again looked STUNNING in that gown. As compared to someone else who wears the most ill-fitting clothing that makes her look like a tank. There will be no crockery left on the shelves in Montecito tonight!
snarkyatherbest said…
Mel. jamaica has had lots of issues. i know some hoteliers down there arbitrary covid measures arbitrary operating rules have made it difficult to operate in last few years. that their government ministers are all over the place does not surprise me. this tour and a lot of what they have been doing in the last few years will impactful western investment with Dominican republic and bahamas more than happy to pick up the slack.

so oscar nominees/presenters getting covid. does this mean that there may be an opening or two to give awards? two days for sure but we aren’t hearing much on that rumor.

been a lot of controversy around the cambridge trip. it’s prob good for them. willi isn’t taking over for a while but they will learn a lot from this which will only help future tours and eventually reign.
Maneki Neko said…
@Mel

Not only did they do all the above but they went scuba diving when in Belize. Can you imagine the other two trying? The big difference is that Catherine seems to be game for anything and to genuinely enjoy meeting people and doing various activities, instead of faking interest.
I gather the Netflix offering, Diana the Musical, won Razzies (Golden Raspberry Awards , for `cinematic underachievement') for the worst film and worst actress.

Does one's heart good, doesn't it?
Fifi LaRue said…
Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, really proved to be the sport going scuba diving. That's quite adventurous!

What a contrast to Trotter who, while in a foreign country, when offered dates from a plate, touched them with her nasty, dirty fingers, then didn't take one.
lizzie said…
It's nice they could go on a "scuba diving date" but neither Will nor Kate is new to the sport. In 2015 KP announced Kate had earned her advanced scuba qualification while vacationing with her family in Mustique. Will already had advanced training.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3182768/Duchess-Cambridge-obtains-advanced-scuba-diving-qualification.html
Rebecca said…
I think *’s jealousy of Kate’s beauty and sophistication on display in the photos from the Caribbean tour would be exceeded by her perverse pleasure in reading about the perceived gaffes and missteps being reported in the media. Personally, though, the only image that struck me as being odd was of Kate and William in the Jeep/Landrover/? during the military parade. I realize it was meant as affectionate homage to the Queen and Prince Philip, but it seems to have become a point of contention. Still, the Cambridges acquitted themselves with dignity, grace, and good humor throughout the trip. They are winners.
Mel said…
Interesting that the Land Rover thing was known about some time earlier, and was actually lauded as a tribute to the Queen.

No one put up a fuss until afterwards when the reporters were jumping on the let's find anything negative to amplify, it's racist bandwagon.

https://twitter.com/daily_express/status/1502934580722077696?s=21
https://twitter.com/telegraph/status/1502719544174989312?s=21
snarkyatherbest said…
my guess. some of the reporters are truly woke. some are just playing up the tour controversies because it puts eyeballs on the articles. if it were a royal tour without a problem then maybe there wouldn’t have been as many clicks or maybe the editors say no we won’t cover them send a pool reporter instead. controversy drives clicks
SwampWoman said…
OKay said...
Harry Markle is not reliable, and I'd be VERY curious as to which sources she deems credible. IOW, I don't believe a single word about the idea of the DoE title being reserved for Harry.


I stopped reading it some time ago because it seemed that the train left the track, veered off into fantasyland, and just keeps chugging along.
Mel said…
I guess this was OK?

https://t.co/21E9fPJp5t
Those Tweets show a complete perversity in referring to that vehicle as a `Jeep'. That was corrected back in 1953-4 - it's very insulting as a matter of fact - the Jeep was American made by Willis. Named from `GP vehicle' ie General Purpose.

It's always very irritating when people who should know better misname the Land Rover. I automatically thought less of anyone who referred to my old LR Defender as a Jeep. Jaguar Land Rover may, sadly, be no longer British-owned but it still ain't American.

In many respects, it's European equivalent was the Renault 4 - for domestic/agricultural use - could pull a plough but also allowed Breton farmers to take their wives to Mass on Sunday without ruining their head-dresses. The LR crawler gear allowed it to run at walking pace on its own as the farmer collected haybales & chucked them into the back.

It'd always been my ambition to drive one and and a threatening encounter with another, sinister, road user (who must have had a thing about lone women drivers) decided it for me. As the salesman said `You won't get trouble with this - for all they know, you may have a very large dog - or a loaded shotgun - in the back...'

Thereafter nobody chased me nor tried to force me to reverse a long way in a narrow lane when there was a passing place right behind them. There's something to be said for a vehicle that blocks out the sun...
Natalier said…
I read this article about the reporting of the royal tour on a blog "It's a Lawyer's Life" and found the below paragraph to be very true and frightening at the same time:

.....But currently the coverage by some media is Orwellian. We are being asked to ignore the evidence of our own eyes and ears in order to buy the narrative of the kind of people who insist that milk and rice are ‘racist’.

the rest of the article basically debunked all he negatives printed about the tour. If you wih to read it, it is here:

https://www.itsalawyerslife.com/sets-views-lies-and-videotape/
I thought that the HM piece from 24 Mar was straightforward.

Opus, what is your view of the legalities of it?
Natalier said…
It is really disconcerting the past few weeks to read about the time when Charles becomes King.

First, I think it was Murky Meg that said Charles still has hopes of the 2 grifters returning to the "firm" and he still has plans for Harry. Then, we now have Harry Markle's DOE title, possibly kept for Harry. Charles rumblings to the reporters about the clash of his trip to Ireland with the Cambridge's Commonwealth tour.

I don't know - could Charle's of jealousy overcome his sensibilities? Perhaps he thinks Harry and TBW can dilute the Cambridge's popularity. The latter have not put a foot wrong and this recent tour has cemented them as a most glamourous and great future King and Consort team. It would break my heart if Charles tries to dampen their popularity.
Oldest Older 401 – 418 of 418

Popular posts from this blog

New Year (and what's next?)

 Another year and what will it bring for them (and us who watch)?   One thing I thought of is control of their image for appearances.  It isn't just that they have lost so many people in such a fairly short time period but who they lost.  The people who advised, handled details to make the events happen - road trips to volunteering.  We've been saying all along that each loss is a ripple of warning towards a potential new hire coming in.  New hires, yes but what about fund raising?  Cash flow?  This, from SMM, is an interesting read: https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1puzsvh/impact_report_990_review_from_a_nonprofit/ Which leads us to money.  Keeping their image engine running costs a lot.  No doubt there are a lot details, paperwork, contracts to negotiate and find new groups to partner with.  Hence the need for a good team. The duo could do some of it or all but for how long?   side note: the peopl...

So, when does the dirt on Meghan come out?

"This is only hearsay, but in London a Brit socialite who knew her way around money, Europe, royalty told me - and my companion, so I wasn't alone in hearing this - that Meghan was known in the old days. 'She was around the famous playgrounds Europeans visit...and known to be shopping for a rich husband.'" That's a quote from Cindy Adams in yesterday's New York Post . Cindy is old - so old that she interviewed the original Duchess of Windsor. "Who was also American,"  writes Cindy.   "She was not happy afterward. She was tough. I interviewed her. She was constantly looking to negotiate some sort of financial betterment." So, when does the dirt start coming out? How about now. Who will drop the information? We've had more than 1200 comments since the Sussex summit on Monday, so please allow me to repeat part of my answer to a question hidden somewhere within that forest of text. A regular commenter asked for my input ...