With people about to receive their copy, it seems a good time to start a new post.
Happy reading.
Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce. And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before? which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)? There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away". That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice. But does he? He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance. Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of bei
Comments
Nutty and us 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.
-Please try to keep the conspiracy theories down.
-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.
-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.
-And, thank you posts are nice.
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.
Thank you again for all your patience and support.
Moderation still on.
here is the fox link
And what about Meghan stalking Kate's fashion choices? It's giving me Amber Heard at the trial vibes. She is full on obsessed with Kate, poor thing. And yes. Kate wore it better. It must be hard to try to compete. To quote Mister T, I pity the fool. What The Claw doesn't realize, and will never get, is that every time she tries to pit herself against Kate, she loses. And not because she's biracial but because she's crass and transparent like Amber Heard and Robin Givens. I ain't sayin' she's a gold digger...
A couple of pages from the book. These stories have already been shared and/or speculated on, but the extra little details paint a much richer picture.
* She always has been a diva and bully.
* She has always not done the work when given a choice, but expected the reward anyway.
* She throws tantrums when she does not get her own way. She has always done this.
* She had boyfriends giving her stuff from an early age.
* Doria was not an engaged parent (but she sure pushed Thomas out the way and made sure she got attention once her daughter had bagged a prince).
I am sure everyone will find something here and there that confirms, informs and/or enlightens.
But the point about blackmail is that it’s effective; cornered people will end up paying or doing what the blackmailer demands in order to not have their weaknesses, foibles or unlawful acts splashed out for the world to witness.
I continue to fervently believe that Cringe has plenty of proof against Ginge, and probably also against the Royal Family. I suspect she isn’t releasing the proof because the Royal Family in order to keep her schtum continues to support their sumptuous millionaire lifestyle, no matter what they proclaim. I suspect Ginge and Cringe’s anger was that the unlimited firehose-quantity funds slowed a bit after the one year revisit, but continues in main part.
I believe Charles’ hinky money dealings with no official oversite partially fund Ginge and Cringe’s lifestyle.
No-one has yet convinced me otherwise.
OCgal. they certainly have money from somewhere the pr has been in full force since the “dating phase”.
Usually, narcissists always think they are superior and if they copy someone it is because they want to humiliate that someone.
Someone in Australia has the book and is sharing nuggets as she reads. It is a rambling thread but if you scroll through quickly, the info in the book will jump out.
Netflix has lost all hope. Everything she proposes to them is shared with the most enthusiasm possible, like this bit will be the most grown-breaking [sic] ever seen, and then they go, and then it sucks. So far as I can tell Netflix has zero aspirations for Harry and Meghan and if this book is as promising as it seems to be, it may be the straw that broke [sic] the camel's back.
I've seen very reliable revelations that this deal was made with Netflix before megxit was announced, which I think will cause some big problems for H&M. They essentially sold themselves to Netflix as Royals, right as they were leaving the Royal Family. I would think NF would have at least an unfair business practice/fraud suit against th[em], but that is just my speculating. I am told, however, that the charade won't last much longer. We can all allegedly expect the announcement for the broken NF contract within three months, or so.
-----------
What else has been shared from the book that jumped out for me?
* She was always asking Trevor to get/give her parts in movies. When he did not, she would have meltdown tantrums.
* She made Trevor destroy all the photographs and the video from their wedding. The photos we have seen are from Thomas (and probably some other guests) who took photographs without her knowing. She must have been incandescent with rage when those photos appeared in the tabloids!
* Trevor wanted a baby; she did not.
* When she ended the marriage to Trevor, she told her parents that Trevor had abused her, shouting and physical. (To a narc, not giving them what they want is abuse ... think Amber Heard.)
* Cory was relieved when the relationship ended. He always suspected that she was two-timing him with a golfer guy named Rory. (That chapter has not been shared yet so do not know how the relationship ended.)
* She has been 'collecting' wealthy, older, influential men all her life it seems. The one is a philanthropist (Irish) who has connections to Charles. He owns a hotel in New York and she used to stay there. He is the guy who took her to the White House where she briefly net Obama. This guy was very excited about hanging out with some young woman from Suits at the wedding. He still gushes about TBW.
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/spare-heir-harry-achieved-dream-life-proved-palace-critics-wrong-122253189.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QxLaV3oP2c&t=3s
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2022/07/blind-item-3_19.html
The Duchy of Cornwall is a private estate established by Edward III in 1337 to provide independence to his son and heir, Prince Edward. A charter ruled that each future Duke of Cornwall would be the eldest surviving son of the Monarch and heir to the throne. The current Duke of Cornwall, HRH The Prince of Wales, is the longest serving Duke in history. The revenue from his estate is used to fund the public, private and charitable activities of The Duke and his immediate family.
https://duchyofcornwall.org//
...
Prince of Wales, title reserved exclusively for the heir apparent to the British throne. It dates from 1301, when King Edward I, after his conquest of Wales and execution (1283) of David III, the last native prince of Wales, gave the title to his son, the future Edward II. Since that time most, but not all, of the eldest sons of English sovereigns have been given the title. It is specifically granted by the sovereign, and in due course the recipient is invested as prince of Wales. The title ceases to exist when a prince of Wales becomes king, until a monarch bestows it upon a son.
....
https://www.britannica.com/topic/heir
...
In short by law, William will be the Duke of Cornwall and probably Prince of Wales as well as Prince Charles, Duke of Cornwall and Prince of Wales until he became King.
If you want to watch that video, I think it's worth it just for the Oprah clip.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8_u3mEsC78
In separate video, BLG guy is speculating whether Meghan set up Hapless Harry to fail and whether she actually wrote his speech. He plays a short video of eerie parallels between Harry's speech and his brothers from May 2021 in Scotland. If Megsybaby wrote the speech, could she be trying to stalk the Cambridges by intentionally cribbing that particular part of the speech and also setting up Harry to look like a fool?
I feel like she's doing everything she possibly can to get the attention and annoy the Cambridges with her stunts. Add to this the jumper she wore to dinner that was obviously chosen in the hopes of side by side parallels between her and Kate and we've got some real guerilla warfare/childhood playground theatrics going on between The Claw and the Cambridges. This really is stalker creepy now.
Now, on the heels of the disastrous UN performance, I have to wonder if Megsybaby isn't doing a Robin Givens and setting up ole Harry boy before kicking him to the curb. The set up before the getaway car moment?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11032677/I-nearly-wrote-speeches-Meghan-Harry-hopes-Queen-strips-titles.html
I've just realised what that grin in the accompanying picture reminds me of - Peter Brough's ventriloquism dummy called - wait for it - Archie Andrews. (lots of online pics).
- Is the son's name another joke/attempt to get one over on us? Was the Jackson Hole photo an old one, with that lad called Bryn Gringas? Is their `Archie' being nothing but a doll that looks like his `Mommy'?
@Henrietta, At this point, I wouldn't consider "secondhandcoke" any kind of source. She said The Claw and her Inmate for sure weren't coming to the Jubilee and that was wrong...Bower, on the other hand, is spilling lots of hot tea...
I don't think this is an either/or. SecondhandCoke has always been clear who her source is, whether he's heard anything or not, and what is just her conjecture. A lot of things she shares are things among Hollywood elites that readers like us just wouldn't know like how isolated Harry and Meghan have become, the men Meghan is hitting on, how they faked the Oprah visit, etc. She's never pretended to be an investigative reporter like Bower. I thoroughly intend to enjoy both her gossip and Bower's book!
The Prince of Wales (Prince Charles) became the 24th Duke of Cornwall on The Queen's accession to the throne in 1952.
Prince William is not currently the Duke of Cornwall. But Duke of Cambridge
Your device has you listed as Unknown or Anonymous. Rules are no anonymous or unknown.
From somewhere on FB, the 6s have announced a "secret" project with the Nelson Mandela foundation.
Twat really gets stuck on "secrets." It's the same old, same old, of a lot of bluster and a big nothing as a result.
LOL! Another lie on Oprah. Her son does have a title. She just does not like it.
https://mobile.twitter.com/aryamrosi/status/1549698628951982085
There was another book, that was never published.
First few chapters at the link.
This I have understood - the wife does not like being found out and so she's unpredictable, throws tantrums and bullies. It's her way to obfuscate facts that people come into as they go about experiencing her. That's how far her play with control goes. It's like how we innocently break into laughter when we startle someone with an unexpected 'Boo!'. She delights in degrading, dehumanising people and better still likes to spring it on them. It's like okay let me see if I can make this person shake and cry.
She hates paying for anything. Her rules are it better come free or someone else pays for it. It's a thrill for her to own things and have experiences that way. Anything or anybody that either creates an expenditure for her or obstructs anything being free is an enemy to her. Worst is the one who stands in the way of her money-making.
This person was created in devil's pit.
I swing between loathing and then fearing for H - like after seeing those UN pics and clips. But reading in excerpts that he was party to it all and used his proximity to threaten his family - let him burn.
When is the fire from Bower's Revenge going to spread? I am a bit perplexed as to why all of this seems confined to only fora discussing the BRF and the these two. Does anybody know?
Fox news humorist ...
Greg Gutfeld (and his usual crew) is absolutely hilarious in his assessment of lame Hawwy and nothing Nutmeg. I was grinning so hard!!!
Thanks for the link and the laugh.
Dumb and Dumper
Numb nuts and Smug sl*ts
Neutered prince and failed actress
Her back has more divots
than a ten year old mattress
Thinking she’s all that
dynamite
Back to her roots
Dimeanite…
What’s black and white
and tred all over?
Back editions of Polho’s
cruise paper…
Of course, it happened when King Geo VI died & Princess Elizabeth simultaneously became monarch - my apologies.
It's often stated that he was 4 but he was born 14th Nov '48 and the the Queen's Accession was 6th Feb '52. I make that 3years, 2 months and 19 days (assuming I can still count).
Apologies Nutties I'm often not able to reply individually, but when I get some time the exchanges are like 400 messages away and even new posts are up. One detail though: as soon as I made that comment doubting Delfina Blaquier's feelings for *, a weird tweet appeared on exactly this matter on her account, which for me confirmed that the Countess of Dumbarton reads this blog and reacts to it or makes his clique react.
My narc was my bridesmaid over 50 years ago and she sabotaged the wedding. I assumed she'd had successful treatment for whatever mental illness she had and got back into contact with her about 10 years ago. 4 years ago, she was eager to help me with another project and then proceeded with a sabotage attempt when it was too late for me to do anything about it.
That was when I learned about narcissism.
Modus Oprahendlie
Bower exposed
the bridesmaid lie
‘twas meh that made
Catherine cry
Let’s see if she’ll sue
Doubt it, it’s true…
@Hikari
Harking back to Shetland,
love it, and Jimmy Perez,
bit of all right!
I also love Vera.
Not so sure about
Mathew Venn,
Ann Cleeves latest.
Love her earlier books/tv,
not this.
- no surprises there.
'She made it pretty clear to all her friends and people who work for her not to talk to me, so it was quite an uphill struggle but I got enough people to speak to me, more than enough, I got about 80 people.'
However he insisted that the biography was unbiased, adding: 'I sifted through, I never put in stuff that isn't true and can't be checked.'
sandie. interesting tea about the tears. Catherine just had louis. she would have been a bag of hormones and tears anyways. wifey lied. she knows the cambridges wouldn’t come out publicly on the story.
It would certainly suit the *'s purposes.
at Yahoo News just now:
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/prince-harry-finished-writing-memoir-book-childhood-meghan-exclusive-omid-scobie-103642932.html
The who cried story is leading on the DM (top and center on line or the equivalent of front page/above the fold).
DO NOT PURCHASE THE BOOK Review of Tom Bower book Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors
It's just a synopsis of the two or three sections of Tom Bower's book which were published in the UK papers.
I got the free kindle version of this book and it wasn't worth the price - free!
The duo struck a deal with CBS to film the Queen meeting Archie for the first time and his christening.
If this is true, all three people in the Oprah interview were holding a grudge against the BRF.
I read a note somewhere on Twitter saying that the writer had seen an unsubstantiated report that H had made suicide attempts in the past and that's what his family's afraid of now. It seems feasible, given that he has such anger against them and probably wouldn't think twice about traumatising them further.
It would certainly suit the *'s purposes.
If he *really* wanted to kill himself, he would have. Attempts are cries for help or attention seeking.
1. She demanded first class tickets and a hair and makeup artist and photographer from World Vision.
2. She took several suitcases of fashion outfits.
3. She and the 3 assistants traveled in 2 air conditioned mini vans from her 5 star hotel to site.
4. Made these demands when she was a D list actress doing a charity video!
-------------
Did she get the hairdresser and make-up artist? From the photographs I have seen, it does not look like it!
@snarkyatherbest - thanks for the link to the Fox personality snippet. I love Greg Gutfeld's take on lame Hawwy and nothing Nutmeg. He and his usual crew pretty much sums up how most Americans feel about those two clowns.
Revenge by Tom Bower.
@scobie
Sounds like Mr Bower has the measure of Omid. He will be furious 😁
https://mobile.twitter.com/UnlikelyBot/status/1550040395442262017/photo/1
...
Bower, however, told Newsweek he briefed Kashner on the contents ahead of publication.
"During a long telephone conversation with Sam Kashner on May 31, I read out to him all the quotations I had used of his interview with me for my book—and also conveyed to him much of the chapter. He did not make a single objection or correction," he said.
https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-biography-revenge-dispute-tom-bower-1726292
They'd heard nothing of publication delays.
Yes possibly it just a handful few bothered. But she pulled strings through some powerful people very publicly. Politicians, power brokers, media giants, celebrities, activists, lawyers - have commented on her made-up stories, aided her destruction, enabled her plans, funded her delusions. (All the while knowing the truth to her.) That matters and must be accounted for. For instance this contract with Oprah is no joke when Oprah's media might has been used to slander and silence at whim.
I do believe the BRF has paid a heavy, heavy price. It may survive, but how many chinks can a even a centuries old armour endure without injury.
The duo are morally bankrupt - they don't see the world with the conventional right and wrong. It's either they were wronged and/or they have rights - the worst distillation of wokery. So regret won't come from them.
Instead of pictures of her swanning around NY. I want to see her squirm under the same public scrutiny she weaponised. I wish your wish comes true!
I am only reading excerpts and book reports, and I am disgusted.
Sorry for missing out on responses to comments made much earlier - few blog posts earlier. I am terribly behind on reading the commentary here.
Those who blabbed (hotel staff I guess) said there were broken china cups and plates. LMAO. This crap just writes itself.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2022/07/blind-item-2_21.html#disqus_thread
Tom Bower did say of * “She didn’t want to be possessed”. But the interesting bit is the next sentence: He added: 'If necessary, Suits was her get-out card from the relationship.'
This goes to show how calculating she is - not that we doubted it but it's confirmation. I'm sure she's already got her get-out card from her relationship with H.
I'm not able to post the link about the CBS case. On twitter there is information - CBS Chapter 29. Pitching
If this doesn't help a US person THIS time, maybe knowing this will help for another purchase for another book.
I'm going to go try anyway. Actually, I should have done so before posting . . .
Havent commented in a while, but reading all along.
Since theirs was not a blind date ( I hope i know what that is) and she sent her photos to him , I am curious as to what photos he saw , that got him snagged ?
Out of curiosity, I checked Tom Bower's book on amazon.com and couldn't find Revenge. I ordered mine on Kindle on amazon.co.uk - I am in the UK - and it's £7.10 and of course, instant and free delivery. I need to charge my Kindle, though...
I am picking up bits and pieces about how they actually first met. Does anyone have the full story?
--------
Supposedly it was Camilla who made a comment about prospective children having afro red hair and this was before the engagement. It was weaponized as racist and elaborated on by TBW and the hapless Prince went along with it.
-----------
@GWAH
There was definitely something up when they visited the UN for the speech. TBLG covered one instance when she took his hand to hold it and he disengaged so she reached across, pulled his arm right onto her lap and held it there in the two-claw grip. There was another instance where she took his hand and he pulled away his hand then put his hands in his lap and intertwined his fingers to stop her from grabbing him again. This was just when the cameras were on them so who knows what happened the rest of the time.
Hairy, it's YOUR $$$ the *itch is spending.
Have you received the Revenge e-book? Was it delivered to your device?
Bower quotes a lot from The Tig. I wonder if she is going to sue him for copyright infringement and claim a huge slice of his royalties. Surely the publisher did due diligence and made sure the book remained within the rules of fair use? Although, even if that is the case, I can imagine her suing anyway.
Still early in the book but she loved to party, to hustle for fame and collect useful people as friends. Not the faithful type in relationships (reading through the lines).
She probably did have the millions that she claimed when she met the Prince. She was always wheeling and dealing for freebies, and was earning money in addition to what she got from Suits.
When he returned to his seat, all smiles after the speech, lip readers said she said”you could have done better”. His smile vanished.
“You could have done better”
Classic narc comment!
How awful. I hope Harry escapes.
Sounds as though Bower’s book isn’t going to confirm what is most important to me: did she use a surrogate for Archie? Everything else is window dressing for me. We know she isn’t a nice person. We know she’s a liar. None of that is news. But the children fit into the line of succession. It’s critical to know if a con was performed on the Royal Family.
Sadly, I didn't expect it. He can only confirm what people will testify to in court, and I doubt very much that the Duplicitous Duo's surrogates would be legally free to testify.
I wonder if people are on the record saying that they didn't think she was ever pregnant, though.
He’s got a great voice and makes valuable observations as to the narcissistic behaviors that have driven Meghan since she was very young.
Harry brought a cancer into his life.
Yes, I've received the book, it was delivered to my Kindle yesterday (21st).
Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors by Tom Bower
This 400-page long demolition job is so relentless you begin to feel sorry for the Duchess of Sussex, says Melanie Reid
As is the celebrity way, the Duchess of Sussex has created her own mythology. She has curated some of her past to fit her future, spinning the good, excising the unsuitable. Up against Tom Bower, a biographer famous for unauthorised skewerings of the famous, her controlled and carefully burnished image does not survive beyond page five.
His book depicts Meghan as a merciless opportunist who found in Harry the perfect vehicle for personal advancement, and in doing so caused irreversible damage to a thousand-year-old monarchy. It’s an undeniably gripping read, but it’s also brutal and ultimately sad.
We knew Meghan Markle came from a dysfunctional family. But her early life, Bower suggests, has been reframed to portray her as a brave mixed-race child, precociously activist, who overcame racism and hard times. From the age of five Meghan lived with her father, an Emmy-winning lighting director, who spoilt her rotten. Friends said she always got what she wanted. Far from tough realities, she grew up in affluence in Los Angeles. Thomas Markle owned a large house in a good neighbourhood and sent Meghan to a racially diverse private Catholic school, where people assumed she was Italian because of her pale skin tone, and her closest friends were white. “My self-identification was wrapped up in being the smart one,” she recalled before she was well-known.
Bower depicts Meghan as shallow and lacking rigour. He says she was rejected by Princeton University. Instead, she studied drama at Northwestern University in Chicago, “a private, highly selective college favoured by rich, well-connected white students, where she joined the Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority, famous for its Midwestern blondes”. Her father, quoted by Bower frequently, and whose veracity we must make up our own minds about, paid the annual $45,000 fees.
Bower writes she failed to get into the US foreign service. She also turned down the chance to study the stagecraft of acting. Like thousands of other beautiful girls, she wanted to be a famous screen actress, but according to Bower’s sources, hadn’t got it. Directors found her unexciting and ordinary. “Like the vast majority of wannabes, Meghan portrayed her own wants and needs . . . She could not convincingly become another person.”
If not a great actress, Meghan was certainly a grafter. Revenge paints an extraordinary tale of hustling and tireless self-promotion. Eventually, in 2011, she landed a role in the cable show Suits, which gave her minor fame. She reinvented herself as an influencer. By her thirties, like many in Hollywood, she was paying an agency $7,500 a month to be transformed into a global star.
Her relationships with men and women are described as transactional. She sought celebrity and a rich and famous husband. Britain became a new hunting ground in her thirties. Bower implies she had a brief friendship with the golfer Rory McIlroy. In one of the book’s small killer details, Bower claims she unsuccessfully tried to become a contestant on Strictly Come Dancing.
People, he suggests, saw through her. She was rejected in her attempts to become an ambassador for the UN. Her humanitarian visits to Rwanda — on one she demanded first-class flights — involved changing into lots of outfits for photos with the suffering. She “opportunistically orchestrated the trip to pose as a philanthropist”.
Her activism, he says, lacked substance. The totality of her speeches “was to urge her audience to admire her own personal experience and adopt her mantra of togetherness”. Bower accuses her of parroting the chat-up lines of her first husband (Trevor Engelson, a TV producer) — “Don’t give it five minutes if you’re not gonna give it five years” — as her philosophy of life ten years later.
Celebrity friendships appear a gruesome business. Sweet-talking herself into Serena Williams’s company, Meghan then boasted online of their friendship. Later, to a journalist, Williams denied friendship, and said she was just an acquaintance. Cynics might note it didn’t stop Williams attending the royal wedding.
Bower didn’t get where he is by being nice. He interviewed more than 80 people, including former girlfriends and agents ghosted by Meghan, to hammer home his message about how mean, narcissistic, self-centred and strategic the duchess is. When she met Harry, Meghan claimed she knew little about him or his family. Old friends, however, are quoted as saying that even in her twenties she kept a copy of Andrew Morton’s book Diana: Her True Story on her bookshelf.
And before the fateful date, Meghan told the agent Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne she had googled Harry. “I’ve gone deeply into his life.” Nelthorpe-Cowne believed she knew the prince was volatile, unhappy and seeking a soulmate. Once they became an item, Meghan told Nelthorpe-Cowne she needed “to prevent Harry escaping. She was not going to let him get away.” The agent warned her it was the end of her normal life and privacy. “ ‘We’re going to change the world,’ Meghan said solemnly. ‘With Harry by my side, we can change the world.’ ”
Within two weeks of their relationship going public, Harry and Meghan were in an unprecedented battle with the media. Bower believes she embraced victimhood. Harry’s family and friends didn’t like her, he says. He claims Harry was warned off by Diana’s brother and sisters. Prince William is said to have expressed his anxiety. Harry’s hooray mates took to calling him “the Hostage” (although I have a sneaking admiration for Meghan for calling out their sexist bantz). The Duchess of Cornwall saw her for “a minx”. After the marriage, as family upsets grew and rows with the press increased, Megxit became a matter of when not if.
The ever-pushy Meghan saw much through a prism of personal business opportunity; she wanted global stardom. If this theme has more than the ring of truth, it’s the case that in all royal biographies, especially negative ones, facts can be marshalled to fit the plot. Every royal writer knows painfully well there are few fresh revelations, just the endless recycling of old stories. Bower does, though, spring a few enjoyable zingers, new at least to me.
There was nearly a royal Wagatha Christie. Meghan suspected Victoria Beckham of leaking stories to the media. Harry called David Beckham. Outraged, Beckham’s (truthful) denials damaged their relationship. Then Meghan appeared to be so jealous of the Duchess of Cambridge being on the cover of Vogue that she wanted the same when she guest-edited an edition. Staff recall the decision not to feature her had to be forced on her.
And then we come to the royal “racism scandal”. During their vengeful Oprah Winfrey interview, the couple alleged someone had speculated what a future child would look like. Proof appears fluid. Bower claims: “In one version, Camilla remarked, ‘Wouldn’t it be funny if your child had ginger Afro hair?’ Harry laughed. Subsequently, Meghan’s reaction to that conversation turned Harry’s amusement into fury.”
At some point Meghan, seemingly having reconsidered her past, presented herself as a survivor of racism. Hence the respinning of childhood, hence the bombshell on Oprah. Through assiduous networking, Meghan has forged relationships with black America’s leaders. This year the lawyer and academic Anita Hill described the duchess as a historic figure in black women’s empowerment. Yet noticeably — another bitchy zinger — the Sussexes were not among the 400 guests invited to Barack Obama’s 60th birthday.
Meghan and Harry are now powerful celebrities in the US, their status and income dependent entirely on media exposure. In 2021 they made the Time 100 influential people list, and Bower claims media outlets run scared of their influence, citing how CNN, at Meghan’s request, withdrew a report exposing her inaccuracies and contradictions in the Oprah interview.
The jury remains out. Have the Sussexes transformed the royal family into a beleaguered institution uncertain of its future? Have they, singlehandedly, and for considerable financial gain, hurt the Queen and jeopardised Charles’s succession?
“Thank goodness Meghan is not coming,”the Queen apparently remarked to her aides before Prince Philip’s funeral. Is it true? The Palace declined to comment. I doubt we’ll ever know. Recollections may vary, as the Palace once memorably put it, but propaganda creates its own truth. Meghan may indeed be a piece of work, a scheming adventuress, but by the end of this eye-popping character demolition, one feels almost sorry for her.
Interesting.
No denial that the Queen said 'Thank goodness Meghan is not coming'.
Immediate denial that Camilla made a joke about children with red afro hair.
I wonder how Bower knew what was said in a meeting between Charles, Camilla and Harry. (She was still the girlfriend but had moved in with him. Harry was sent to ask for 24-hour Scotland Yard protection and funding through the SG or DoC.) I wonder if the source for this story is not someone who used to be associated with the duo. Or were there aides in that meeting who then spoke to Bower?
If tea is hot on the alleged fight right before UN speech, it helps us to interpret his visible misery and her smugness and double clawing him as retaliation. She wants him to fail as punishment for not making her a co speaker if she can't be the only one. Must have burned her to know the UN wanted her husband but not her. Plus she can now blame Halfwit for disastrous performance and reception because SHE wasn't there to save him. If she can't be center stage at all times, there will be hell to pay! Get with the program Halfwit!
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2022/07/22/prince-harry-wins-bid-review-home-office-police-protection-ruling/
The Duke of Sussex has won the right to a judicial review of the decision not to grant him automatic police protection whenever he is in the UK.
Mr Justice Swift ruled on Friday that the case could proceed. "The application for permission to apply for judicial review is allowed in part and refused in part," he said.
Prince Harry launched legal action against the Home Office, arguing that he was denied a "clear and full explanation" of the composition of the government committee responsible and others involved in its decision making.
He said that Sir Edward Young, the Queen’s private secretary, should not have been involved in the decision to deny him police protection in the UK due to the "significant tensions" between them.
Shaheed Fatima QC, for the Duke, told the High Court he was not informed that members of the Royal household were involved in the decision.
She said it was not "appropriate" for them to have had any say on the matter, complaining that the Duke had been told the Home Office committee responsible was "independent".
This is a breaking story. More to follow.
He said that Sir Edward Young, the Queen’s private secretary, should not have been involved in the decision to deny him police protection in the UK due to the "significant tensions" between them.
Shaheed Fatima QC, for the Duke, told the High Court he was not informed that members of the Royal household were involved in the decision.
She said it was not "appropriate" for them to have had any say on the matter, complaining that the Duke had been told the Home Office committee responsible was "independent".
Call me crazy, but I'd think that Sir Edward Young would have been there to confirm that the two were not going to be engaged in any official business. If he hadn't, the Pilfering Pair would use the part-time argument and, of course, they do so many 'secret' charitable things (insert cat coughing up a hairball sound here), that they could argue that anything is an official engagement.
Hapless just won a pyrric victory in court. He won the right to whinge before he court on a case by case basis.
If tea is hot on the alleged fight right before UN speech, it helps us to interpret his visible misery and her smugness and double clawing him as retaliation. She wants him to fail as punishment for not making her a co speaker if she can't be the only one. Must have burned her to know the UN wanted her husband but not her. Plus she can now blame Halfwit for disastrous performance and reception because SHE wasn't there to save him. If she can't be center stage at all times, there will be hell to pay! Get with the program Halfwit!
I don't recall ever hearing a great speech from HER (perhaps because I try to avoid things that make me nauseous). Everything that I have heard is puerile and sounds as if is coming from a young teen. I envision her speech notes adorned with hearts and unicorns and writing her name with the last name of various rich sugar daddy candidates (Meghan Musk has a nice ring; so does Meghan Murdock).
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Duke-of-Sussex-v-Home-Secretary-judgment-220722.pdf
I doubt that he is going to win this one, but he is going to have legal fees to pay. Basically, if I am reading the judgment correctly, he should have been allowed to present his case to RAVEC before they made their decision.
Tom Bower spilled some tea about the Jubilee Service at St. Paul. Remember there was a issue because H&M arrived late and then wanted Beatrice and her husband to move down. When the usher informed him that he must sit in the middle, Harry asked "says who" and the usher replied "The Queen."
I may be slightly prejudiced in this matter, however. Hubby told me, while grandchildren slept, that he was going to get his oil changed in his truck and tire fixed because he had to make a drive to Daytona Beach tomorrow. I asked why, since he had already bought an old metal lathe to make metal parts (that are currently unavailable) for some of his projects. Did he find a used milling machine, too, to put into his workshop? No, he is taking the 15-year-old grandson to pick up a motorcycle that he is going to purchase. "WHAAAT? DID YOU CHECK WITH HIS MOTHER?" "He said he mentioned it to her." I texted daughter while husband is getting oil changed and grandson is sleeping, and she said that this is the first she's heard of it. (I believe in trust but verify.)
The reason for my suspicion is that daughter, his mother, has done the very same thing when she was a teen. I expect that the RF is well aware that the current Dumbarton title holders have their own version of the truth which is diametrically opposite of what everybody else perceives.
It turns out she did have backers, but they did not have an anti-royal agenda and did not hide in the shadows.
Anderson from Soho House got her to places and parties where she could mingle with A-listers. He was often her escort to social events and for holidays, and was her confidant. Soho House was also her preferred place to stay. Discount or freebies? (Interesting snippet: he turned up at her house near the end of the interview for the VF 'Wild About Harry' article and cover.)
The philanthropist Irish guy who owned the hotel (much older than her) gave her access to parties with A-listers and the White House, and a place to stay in New York in luxury (freebie or discounted?). He was rewarded with a wedding invitation.
Jessica (entrance to Toronto society), Oprah (free housing in LA and the global attention from the interview, plus some useful plugs online), Ellen (the interview that bombed), Violet (who introduced her to Eugenie and got her that date with the Prince) ...
English law protects children born of surrogacy - it's a matter of confidential medical records.
FWIW, I'd say the evidence we've seen is not inconsistent with Archie being born of a surrogate. It seems to me that the unstamped `birth certificate' may well indicate an adoption, see:
https://www.cafcass.gov.uk/grown-ups/parents-and-carers/surrogacy/
ie the official site setting out the need to have surrogate children adopted in the UK and note the bit about surrogacy conducted abroad. That may even affect whether they can bring `Lilibet' into the UK - tho' that's just my speculation.
Such `adoption' birth certificates are issued to spare any embarrassment up until the child is 21 (I think the age is, I haven't checked it, it may be 18 now) the `real' birth certificate with the names of the biological parents is kept sealed and locked away until then, when the now-adult offspring can open it and trace their birth parent if they so wish.
People who are in the know are bound by law to keep quiet, I believe, or risk heavy penalties - probably this is why TB makes no mention. If ever we see a child that actually resembles H, we may have our answer.
and then explain. This is good for DNP (do not publish) or you have a problem for the moderators.
thanks
He lost his bid to say that the process was unfair because he did not know who was on the committee and that it was prejudiced because a member of the royal household had a grudge against him. However, he said it was unfair because he did not have the opportunity to state his case personally to RAVEC before they made the decision. So the judge said that may have been unfair so he can now argue why he had the right to personally present his case to RAVEC and the government (Home Office) can argue that the procedure followed, as in all cases, was fair.
If he wins, he gets to present his case to RAVEC (why me and my family must be protected by Scotland Yard when we visit). So they hear him out and then say nope you have not convinced us! Request denied! (Note that when they made their decision it was not simply based on his new status as a non-working royal but also based on an assessed risk to him and his family based on intelligence and on an evaluation of his importance to the monarchy, i.e. consequences of harm to him.)
How much further is he prepared to take this?
`The Queen!'
I love it! I bet that went all the way up the chain of command to HM herself.
Thank you for posting the Times review of Revenge. It confirms for me that Bower hit the mark and accomplished his goal of exposing her for who and what she really is. I don’t feel sorry in the least for her. I do worry that it won’t effect any change in how the Royal Family deal with her and Harry, though. Does anyone believe members of the RF will read the book? Or will they simply have their staff peruse it and report back to them about its contents?
Meghan Markle revealed for what she really is — a Kardashian
By Maureen Callahan
After a fresh humiliation by booing crowds at the Queen’s jubilee, here comes another blow to the Duke and Duchess of Woke.
“Revenge,” the much-anticipated book by British investigative reporter Tom Bower, may not offer much new information, but it shines as a deep dive into their psyches.
The folie á deux on display here is worthy of a Highsmith novel: Two very broken people stoking each other’s rage, grievances and delusions of grandeur, believing in their unstoppable rise even as they fall ever downward.
What other modern-day couple would wear their expulsion from the British royal family so dementedly, like a badge of honor, while clinging to their royal titles?
The great question is how such privileged people got this way. Bower provides some answers.
Of Meghan’s early life, we learn that she was always a fabricator. Her childhood memories of the Rodney King riots: “I remember rushing back home … seeing ash fall from the sky and smelling the smoke and seeing it bellow out of buildings and seeing people run out of buildings carrying bags and looting.”
Well, maybe she saw that on the news. According to her estranged father, Thomas, he drove young Meghan to Palm Springs on Day One of the riots. Meghan, Thomas makes clear, wanted for nothing — except her mother, who spent several years of Meghan’s life off doing her own thing, leaving Thomas the primary parent.
For those armchair psychologists wondering about the roots of Markle’s narcissistic injury, we have a working theory: Maternal rejection at a formative age.
Harry, of course, was traumatized by the death of his mother, his rage compounded by ranking as the royal spare.
“I’m not the important one,” he once said. Harry’s grief and anger manifested in substance abuse, depression, the destruction of fellow students’ property, and his poor treatment of girlfriends Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas.
“He lacked class, was unromantic, unserious, short-tempered and imperious,” Bower writes. Both women found him “ungenerous”; Bower calls him “feckless towards women.”
Harry is also painted as quite dim, struggling — despite great help and leeway — with passing his classes at Eton, a D student at best.
It makes all his unending pontificating, most recently to a thin crowd of stragglers at the UN, that much more insufferable.
As for Markle — whose motto, it can never be said enough, is “Be kind” — the higher she climbs, the worse she treats others. It’s like she has imposter syndrome: Lacking talent, charm, intelligence or class, her only way up through marriage, Meghan lashes out at the very people paid to make her life easier, better, happier.
Relish Bower’s detail from her early days, Markle dreaming of becoming “the face of L’Oreal,” saddled instead with spokesmodeling for a midlevel Canadian clothing chain, her frustration unleashed on the poor crew.
“Ignoring the flower displays, bottles of her favorite wine and a special calligraphy pen laid out on the tables, she criticized the hotel’s Tempur-Pedic bathrobe and slippers. She wanted Dior. The tea was the wrong blend and the vegan green juice was warm.”
The humanity!
Remember, everyone: Be kind!
There’s more great stuff: Meghan telling Harry her Vanity Fair cover was pegged to her TV show on basic cable, with absolutely nothing to do with their romance (cover line: “She’s Just Wild About Harry!”); Serena Williams telling Meghan’s profiler that despite Meghan’s claims, they were not close friends; Princess Diana’s sisters telling Harry that despite what he saw in her, no, Meghan was nothing at all like his mother; the longtime friends of both Harry and Meghan who learned, day of, that they were invited to the wedding but not the reception (unlike Oprah and the Clooneys, total strangers); the staffers who fled from Meghan’s employ in tears, even Prince William intervening and telling Harry that his wife’s behavior was “unacceptable”; Harry watching “The Crown” and blabbing to an acquaintance that his family and royal life in general is “much worse than that”; Harry and Meghan’s hissy fits at the Jubilee, desperately needing to provide Netflix with actual royal content yet getting kicked to the proverbial curb.
And Harry and Meghan still see themselves as the Obamas 2.0!
If anything, this book ratifies the world’s growing disregard for these two hypocrites, so divorced from reality that they surely believe their Netflix reality show — excuse me, docuseries — will elevate their brand rather than reveal it for the cynical, resentful, grasping entity it truly is.
Meghan is no humanitarian. She’s a Kardashian.
“I gave up my entire life for this family,” Meghan gripes toward the end of Bower’s book. “I was willing to do whatever it takes. But here we are.”
Well, for the moment. If there’s one thing Harry and Meghan do successfully, it’s continuing to sink lower than we ever thought they could.
Also, just how creepy is it that they pull this stunt while Oprah's father is dying and how eerie is it how closely it parallels what they did to their own fathers?
Well spotted! This time, they at least have the excuse that they don't know what's going on in Oprah's private life. But so much for Oprah's description of * as "the daughter I never had"!
What really seems karmic, though, is that Oprah released the interview while Prince Philip was dying . . . and now she has the experience of the Dollars taking advantage of her while her own father is dying.
However Bower claims Meghan flew to Rwanda first class, was accompanied by fashion photographer Gabor Jurina and had her own hair and makeup artist.
...
However Bower, who admits to speaking to people who were not close to Meghan for his book, claims that after filming with the children playing with a water tap, Meghan 'disappeared' with Jurina to take photographs with some of the youngsters.
He penned: 'At the end, Surminski was puzzled. Celebrities using a desolate African village as the backdrop for a fashion shoot was 'mind-blowing.'
...
Bower wrote that after filming with the children playing with clean water, Meghan 'disappeared' with the fashion photographer.
...
Presenter Ben Shephard asked how the story could be an unbiased account if the author had interviewed people who dislike the Duchess of Sussex.
Bower responded: 'Because I sifted through, I never put in stuff that isn't true and can't be checked.'
Is it my one track mind or did they 'disappear' for something not work related? And she would have been living with Corey at the time. Anyway, who brings her own hair and makeup artist on a charity mission in Africa?
Not at all bad for a person who is at the most only moderately talented and moderately attractive on a good day with lots of effort applied. But you have worked hard to maximize yourself to the best of your ability and you are just grateful for your opportunity and your friends. As a successful working actress and model, you are in the top 3% of your industry. Life is good; you know you are blessed. This is what your attitude would’ve been if you were not the alliterate one.
Who really is the most ungrateful grasping cow.
-------
Mind blowing _____? The same thing she suckered H with?
Mr Bower said: “I mean, what was a really remarkable story that I heard was that Meghan and Harry were late to get to St Paul’s Cathedral [for the Platinum Jubilee service].
“They had done that deliberately so they could make their own grand entrance.
“As they are walking down the aisle, they get to their seats, nine and 10, and they say well everyone should move up so they can be on the aisle itself.
“‘No’, says the usher to Prince Harry. ‘No. You’re to sit at nine and 10.’
“‘Who told you to tell me where to sit?’ [said Harry] ‘Your grandmother’, says the usher. And then Prince Harry goes in the middle.
Most eloquently postulated…
@Mel: She was doing everybody behind Cory's back, and denying it.
@Golden Retriever: That is absolutely delicious. Thanks.
Eugenie and her hubby met with the douche and douchess at a restaurant back in February, I thought E may be acting as a bit of a double agent. Now, I just saw a pic of Beatrice planted at St.Paul’s making it necessary for the sussest to continue to their lesser seats recently. So (please indulge me here) I half imagined Sarah Ferguson summoning her daughters, in a, slightly more civilized, Macbeth scenario, conjuring a plot with Eugenie (pro) and Beatrice (con) to hedge her bets for the future.
‘Double, double toil and trouble.’
Brilliant!
She did very well considering her lack of 'star' talent. But, nothing is ever enough for her.
I am still reading the book. Bower outlines in more than one place how much money she spent and how little 'royal' work she did. The Cambridges were relentlessly criticised for being work shy but it turns out that Catherine was doing research and unannounced visits that built a foundation for her early years work. She now has a research centre and it informs government policy. William was flying a helicopter and rescuing people and no doubt coming to terms with and thinking about the role and future of the monarchy. Now, the couple are popular and effective.
Another thing that is laid out clearly in the book is the view the dastardly duo have of work (especially her) is to show up to do speeches, get a lot of attention, and make money from it.
Oh, Bower says that she had 1 million when she got married, not the 5 million the media claimed she had. I calculated that she could have had 5 million because she has always been good at getting stuff for free. One example: she got a free trip to Malta to promote the country (Malta paid for it all) through Elle (who she had persuaded to do a piece on her based on the Malta story). Her connection to Malta was a lie and the piece she wrote had nothing to do with Malta but focused on her mixed race. The photographs surfaced years later, after she had colonised the prince.
Just came across this! Haven't got to that part of the book yet.
It has been suggested that the York sisters have had a falling out over Eugenie’s Continued contact with the Sussexes, though of course this is only rumor. Also only rumor is Eugenie being cold and snotty to William and Kate, in contrast to her sister. Who knows? It wasn’t Beatrice’s wedding the Claw upstaged. The fact that Beatrice and her husband were seated in the same row as the Sussexes with Eugenie and her husband was totally up to Her Majesty, and Sarah (Under the circumstances, unsurprisingly not present) Would not have influenced the seating arrangements. Is that what you mean? It was inconvenient for Bea and Edo and the others to have to Stand up when they were already seated, Which is why I twit and twat were supposed to walk in with them. But it was absolutely delicious that Harry’s imperious manner Did not succeed in getting everyone to shove over so that he and his wife could have the premium aisle seats. Who knows what E. And her mother might be concocting, but I doubt that Beatrice is involved. She seems to be The most respectful of the queen and content in her situation than anyone else in her family. With Eugénie’s move to Portugal, She is likely going to be seeing less of twit and Twat than she has been. I can’t believe anybody could be in their corner anymore, especially no grandchildren who had always enjoyed a respectful relationship with her grandmother before. Aligning with the Sussexes can do absolutely no good for anybody—their toxic disastrousness is off the charts.
Isn't Misan Harriman the photographer that Lady C said she knew and said she doubted that he would be involved in any shenanigans? or was that for the Christmas card with Lillibucks?
He is the Nigeria-born photographer who took the first birthday photographs of Lili. He is a friend of the duo.
https://people.com/royals/princess-beatrice-princess-eugenie-sarah-ferguson-team-up-video-call-teenage-cancer-trust/
we have long speculated that there has been a lot of drama behind the scenes. the book seems to tease at it. the brf are better actors that the missed. i think of catherine and the christmas walk which was well post wedding and seemingly so nice and chatty to “pregnant” six’s wife would have been a huge effort. unless she was peppering her with. isn’t it great to be pregnant feeling the baby kicking. how excited husbands are with the first likely knowing for sure what is going on. or maybe she was going on about charlotte. that would have been me. 😉
Thinking back to who may really be behind Malignant Meghan, Machiavellian Markus and Diabolical Doria were `fingered' by Harry Markle in one of her very earliest post, hinting at a criminal conspiracy. The shot of them on a sort of balcony (IIRC) in Toronto suggested them being in the Dock at the Old Bailey and there was one photo captioned `Is Markus threatening Harry' (again IIRC).
Harry is a modern day Dr Faustus who needed a longer spoon when he supped with Mephistopheles - he is now probably d*mned for all time and his chances of escaping with his sanity battered and bruised but still capable of healing are becoming vanishingly small.
His expression suggests brain damage to me - honestly, I do feel for the poor s*d.
...
(...) Bower also predicts that Harry’s memoir, expected this fall and ghostwritten by American journalist J.R. Moehringer, will further explore the divide between Harry and Camilla. Meghan was expected to help the ghost-writer understand the pain inflicted by the royal family on herself and Harry,” Bower writes. “Among the targets besides William, Kate and Charles would be Camilla. Meghan had identified her as racist.”
Bower writes of Prince Charles: “Camilla, he suspected, would be cited in Harry’s memoir as a reason for the couple to turn away from Britain.”
The book also claims that the Queen’s announcement back in February that Prince Charles’ wife will one day be made Queen Consort was met with “stony silence” from Harry. Harry’s refusal to acknowledge the Queen’s decision foreshadowed the problems to come,” Bower writes. “Charles had good reason to fear that Harry’s dislike of Camilla had been re-energized by Meghan.”
According to Bower, “Easily persuaded, Harry edged towards betraying his father, Camilla, the Cambridges and even the Queen … To earn out the publisher’s advance, nothing and no one had been sacrosanct.”
https://pagesix.com/2022/07/21/camilla-parker-bowles-may-be-why-harry-meghan-left-uk-book/
Nobody wants to sully their own names with reference to the Sukkits. Professional people want to maintain and keep their pristine professional reputations. We'll have to wait until someone retires, or has enough $$$ or power to just say, "Eff it! I'm telling it all in my memoir."
Mrs. Dumbarton isn't out of the woods, and never will be. There will always be someone willing to blab, and blab anonymously. It could go on forever.
In the beginning of her YouTube video today, Lady C. agrees with me that the RF might intervene for #6 in his security case. She says they might do so in order to protect Mr. 6's 'mental health' because #6 is so paranoid. (I had speculated that Charles might want to save himself from the prospect of shelling out for their security.) She agrees with me that it would be a big mistake if the RF does so. If the 6s get IPP status, other countries would have to pay for their security when the 6s are in them. As they live in the USA, I suppose US taxpayers would have to foot the bill. This would not likely go down well with most Americans. Canada is a loyal Commonwealth country, & their citizens objected being stuck with the 6's security bill & Trudeau ended it. I think if Charles does intervene, he's likely setting up a headache for not only RAVEC, but the Home Office & the Foreign Office.I believe the drain on the Met's finances was an issue when this was first brought up. The UK police are stretched thin as it is. The Foreign Office would have to smooth ruffled feathers. Dumb move if the RF does it.
I felt the wording of the most recent ruling showed that the judge was not happy with the claimant, but he felt compelled to show deference. We've seen the same pattern in all of the 6's legal proceedings. The judges are fed up, but they give them their way, because, royalty.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rgmpG9qe2o
New Palace Confidential (from Thursday actually). I have not watched it yet but no doubt Revenge is a main topic.
I have finished reading the book. I think its real value is that all the information is in one place. And, a book is durable and gets passed on.
My understanding of the judgement is that the only point he 'won' was that by not being allowed to engage with RAVEC/Home Office directly he was treated unfairly. The case will now be heard only on that one point. If he 'wins', then the Home Office has to review the decision and he has to be allowed to present his case to them.
Scotland Yard does assess risks for him and provides security if required, but it is not the automatic 24-hour he used to have. Remember they claimed IPP status, which would ensure them of government funded and arranged security 24/7 anywhere in the world with no cost to them.
The only way Charles can intervene is if him and the Queen decide that the representatives for the monarchy on RAVEC must present a case that the Sussex family must get full Scotland Yard protection. Even then, the government makes the decision.
As for paying for his security - what a devious act. His lawyers know darn well that the government cannot accept that and so he is in no danger of having to pay for anything. That part of the legal challenge was simply virtue signalling PR.
The body language guys latest, posted four hours ago, is an 18+ minute deep dive into the legitimacy of the presentation photo of Archie to the queen 2 days after his alleged birth.
It’s not quite the full Kraken yet— After all Jesus is still just a Vlogger. But… If Some proper investigative journalist at dateline or 60 Minutes or somewhere decides to take this further into the actual public domain… To “one of Harry’s tired old hits… “BOOM!” The royal family cannot be seen to directly address this question, but little by little it is slipping out. Just wait until she tries to dangle the kids as bait in a divorce settlement… Then the RF will have more leeway and the judge certainly well to demand absolute proof of the existence of provenance of these children. 4 years, her con is almost up. Too bad tar and feathering and locking her in the public stocks for pelting with rotten food, stones and insults is no longer thing. Were this this 300 years ago, she’d be done for witchcraft.
EXCLUSIVE: 'Prince Harry gave me his pants on infamous Las Vegas night out - now I'm selling them'
Former stripper Carrie Reichert claims Prince Harry gave her his pants during his infamous wild night in Las Vegas 10 years ago. She is now selling them after describing the Duke of Sussex as 'such a bore'
sure, the Queen has invited the twats to Balmoral and is baking a cake for twat's birthday /snark
Agree with your point, but still am suspicious of SF orchestrating anything she can for leverage. And if not for anything else but the image of the three huddled over a cauldron.
"A Balmoral insider said: “Staff have been told to expect the full list of royals including Harry, Meghan & their children Archie and Lilibet
… But another source told The Sun on Sunday: “I would be stunned if they did turn up” >
....
This could be their PR because we have seen in other cases them saying they were invited but “chose not to go” and in the end, they were never invited in the first place!!
Yes. For me, file under quite possible.
The Queen is, from what I have read, a woman of faith which would viewed as a chance to reach out (meaning towards them yet again). It does show repeated attempts to show familiar love. (don't know if the ABoC would have the (insert word you like here) to remind her that Jesus did not come down hard on the wise maidens for not automatically helping the not wise ones just because they "asked").
It could, actually, be quite the sifting of the flour in ways they might not expect.
For him, the pain of all the memories of past visits contrasted by all the constraints of how his life has evolved. Harsh.
This isn't exactly the kind of place she might appear to be comfortable in before anyone gets into the whole past history, what has and has not been said or by whom. I could be wrong but I think the isolation, strong family history of which she is not part of, fishing, maybe hunting?, nature, natural beauty around are not her thing (I'm thinking more like malls and shopping). In that way, she really could be like Diana.
The kids? It wouldn't be just them and kids I suspect. It would be all the others who would need to travel with them and the kids.
I'm on team possible not theirs so that could be more people around (and with it, more opportunities for a slip up from a kid or an adult to a trusted BRF employee). If they think there could be something which they can't control (meaning increased chances of a bad slip up) then you could see just him, but not the kids or her.
Side note: Remember how when they first had Archie, they didn't feel a need for nannies, etc = you know like certain others who had more staff/live in staff? Bringing lots of people now means that they have moved back on that without any public recognition that they needed help.
It was (claimed) a Balmoral source. So that's kind of interesting (as in, that seems to be new). Usually we see the words Royal source without a clue of that provenance. OTOH, nothing with them ever seems to come out in normal channels as it does for any other family member.
The other thing is, that it could be a different kind of summit than the last big negotiation one he had with her. And we all know how well that went for the negotiations.
So, superficially, it is a visit or vacation. Layered is the how are you? how are you really? Are you safe? And so just him might be risky - he realizes just how much he's lost and might he may risk a break? She could be holding the life preserver to toss?
Or maybe none of the above. Not accepting the invitation does not make them look better (actually worse to the world, more like ungrateful kids tossing their toys out). Very few world leaders probably would turn down an invitation there ... so why would they?
So maybe, in the end, what we see is not an invitation accepted. That seems to happen again and again for them so it's kind of hard to say if it is real or just a wish put out in hopes it is heard/acted upon.
Sad. The Queen is unlikely to have many more trips there. And then, they won't have her to call on for any type of help (deus ex machina?). Many fewer options for them at that point. PC will have many more pressing matters and PW will as well. C and K will have their hands full to boot.
I am impatiently watching for my copy to be shipped.
"We were wondering when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would be making their way up to Balmoral, but apparently Prince Harry and Meghan never actually had any plans to go there at all. Prince Harry and Meghan declined the Queen’s invitation due to Archie being too young, according to the Sun"
...
Lili is now the same age as Archie in 2019.
...
My thoughts....
H&M and Scobie (which after TB case VF's answer keeps silence)are silent about the Book of TB.
But TB saying that the Queen was grateful that MM was not at Prince Philips' funeral may have been a blow to the Sussex brand. And to say that the queen invited H&M and sons to Balmoral, is a sly way of saying that the TB's book claims are not true.
"It’s a shame he’s all po-faced and serious these days. Even as a married dad of two, he should still let his hair down now and again – what’s left of it any way"
...
Po-faced and serious‘
Oh Harry. When you’ve lost the support of the stripper you gave your underwear to in Vegas, you’re done.
Has anyone in the US received their copy of Revenge from Book Depository yet? I ordered mine 7/15 and it still says my Order Status is “processing.” Any one else in the same boat?
Yes, I'm still waiting. Don't remember when I ordered, but my delivery message said it would take 5-8 days.
TBLG: OMG! The photo of Hairy after the UN speech. He looks like a demented troglodyte.
A long time ago I had a job, before photo shop, working with photos, etc. to make them print worthy.
I can tell that the christening photo, in the old days was called ruby lithed. It had to do with using clear red film over photos.
Prince Phillip, The Queen, and whoever, were ruby-lithed, or photo-shopped. Clues? Everyone's hair is perfect, there are no fly-aways. There are no shadows. The Queen is superimposed on Hairy. Etcetera.
Tom Bower said the Palace released that photo? Wow. That is complicit in a lie.
TBLG got it wrong at the 4th in Wyoming, and he's got it wrong again. But, he's right most of the time.
@Karla, Lili is a year older than Archie was in 2019. He was born in May 2019. And the Sussexes claim Lili was in London last month so I doubt they'll say she's too young to go to Scotland.
Meanwhile, I'll pop down to the local WH Smith's...
----
I'll believe they've been invited to Balmoral when I've seen a convincing photo - the BBC quoted the Sun - not a necessarily a source of `pukka gen'. `Balmoral source' could be the lady in the local general shop or a ghillie with a sense of irony.
See my post at 6.28pm - no problem.
Hymn 🎤
Apologies: Walter C. Smith
Immortal, Invisible
God only wise
Mehsiah Complex
Immoral, derisible
so many why’s
Her lies, inexorable
glow in her eyes
Accursed, vainglorious
hard wired in her ways
Flighty, spurious
pray her name’s soon erased…
If the duo accept the 'invitation' for them and their children, they will be motivated by greed. She has no interest if a visit does not guarantee photos she can use to support whatever story she is selling of herself and a guarantee that there will be a major inheritance when the Queen dies.
There are two places they can stay: Craigowan Lodge or Balmoral Castle. But the estate has dozens of cottages as well, some of which are available for holiday rentals so they could be offered one of those.
It will be a nightmare if they turn up. His family do not want their summer break in Balmoral ruined by the duo, and any appearance of the couple and their children will generate huge interest from paparazzi and social media and tabloids. So much for a fun private summer holiday enjoying family get togethers, walks, riding, fishing, picnics ...!
@Fifi
There was a photo of
Marcus, Doria, & Megs cajoling
Harry. WildBoar mentioned it,
early days, Invictus?
Bower may not
tackle the surrogacy claims.
No-one in their right minds would!
`Immoral, derisible...'
I shall have that going through my mind for at least a week! I shan't be able to stop singing it. Very many thanks.
Another rhetorical question: Do you think the Queen now has enough olive branches to plant a grove on one of her estates?
One can but dream...
That was when both Justin Trudeau and H seemed aghast at * popping up. Presumably she had something on each of them?
--------
Senior moment for me - remind me please, who's SF? I can think of a soubriquet for * (2nd word `face') but we haven't sunk quite that low yet.
...
Lili
It was ironic to compare Lili's age to Archie's.
H&M PR bombarded us with news last week about how busy they were to go to Balmoral.
....
Last week their PR was all about how they are “ too busy” for Balmoral
https://twitter.com/MeghansMole/status/1551067959468036097?s=20&t=oyCCHpPh2BFMSHtzuX1hXg
Re. Balmoral invite
Despite the Suxxits’ continual efforts To paint themselves as somehow singled out by her majesty for “a special relationship “, invitations to Balmoral have long been understood to be open to the entire extended family for the entire summer period Her Majesty is in residence. I can believe that she would not specifically exclude her grandson from coming to the place he always loved— It might be seen as a last ditch effort to woo him back to the fold, And it cannot be far from the minds of her majesty and everyone else that the holidays remaining to her to go to her beloved Balmoral are very limited now.
Practically speaking though, considering the Jubilee behavior from the egregious duo, It’s a short bet that no one in the family particularly wants them there. The tensions wherever they are run high and not and nobody wants that on their summer break. If they are included in this year’s invitation, it’s pro forma only and I can’t imagine them accepting, Even as desperate as they are for Content for their Netflix masters. They were entirely thwarted in that goal during Jubilee weekend, and I do not disbelieve that the Queen actually invented some illnesses to preclude the duo from getting anywhere near her. To my way of thinking she could have eliminated the necessity for that and for sitting out most of her own Jubilee events by not inviting them in the first place. Perhaps for majesty is tired of being seated at Jubilee‘s and just wanted to stay home in front of the Tally, and actually having a Sussex is there gave her an excuse to do so. If that’s the case, ma’am has earned the right to sit things out which she does not want to attend. But she loves Balmoral and if the Suxxits were there, Everyone would have to be on high alert constantly and it would ruin everyone’s vacation. The fact further is that Harry has not attended Balmoral ones since he got together with the Claw. I believe sadly that most of his family reviles him now and he’s got to know this.
I am no tarot card reader but I predict they will be no shows. I doubt Harry will ever see Balmoral again in his sorry lifetime. They are most assuredly not welcome even if they are not publicly excluded.
You just keep on outdoing yourself with your fab writing. You need to publish a book!
The 6s' wedding photographer is Alexi Lubomirsk.
@Karla
Oh Harry. When you’ve lost the support of the stripper you gave your underwear to in Vegas, you’re done.
---------
Poppycock! Does anyone really believes this? And now, 10 years later? Anyway, how can the stripper/'high end dominatrix' prove the underwear was H's, even if it's true? Did his have his name sewn inside?
**********
Re the invitation to Balmoral, I doubt it. Either the Queen has genuinely invited them, knowing full well they won't come - as far as I know, * has never condescended to go to Balmoral (too boring for her), although recollections may vary, or else this is in the same vein as the Queen baking * a birthday cake. In any case, it was stipulated that no one else in the BRF was going to be there at the same time. I suppose the Queen wants peace and quiet and no infighting. * wouldn't last 1 day at Balmoral with just the Queen in residence.
Oh Harry. When you’ve lost the support of the stripper you gave your underwear to in Vegas, you’re done.
---------
Poppycock! Does anyone really believes this? And now, 10 years later? Anyway, how can the stripper/'high end dominatrix' prove the underwear was H's, even if it's true? Did his have his name sewn inside?
Perhaps she has a storage unit filled with souvenir men's underpants in alphabetical order?
/Guess she never heard that "diamonds are a girl's best friend!" but the best that * could do was a pair of dirty drawers.
If I were THE QUEEN and I had a cottage for them, I'd leave them a map to the nearest grocery stores so that they can purchase and cook their own groceries. Unfortunately, the latest COVID variant means that none of Her Majesty's staff will be able to interact with them because they must protect Her Majesty's health. So sad that all their interaction must be via Zoom.
With technological advances in DNA testing, the undies ownership could possibly be established without the “off to summer camp” requisite name tag sewn inside.
I ordered ‘Revenge’ on 13 July from same vendor and today my status was still processing. I noticed that the book is now unavailable from Book Depository. Lady C said yesterday that US publishing houses did not want to touch it because of the woke brigade. I’m thinking that ours are arriving from overseas publishers and then shipped individually from BD?
Wondering now about the timing of the revelation of HMTQ’s comment re * coming to The D of E’s services and a few days later the ‘invitation to Balmoral’.
Think they are extending an invitation and discouraging acceptance?
(I would not like to spend time with someone who was happy because I did not attend a prior gathering, but then I’m not *.)
@WBBM
I used SF to refer to Sarah Ferguson
@BarkJack_
Publishers on the inside tell me: H book (after a bound galley was produced Q1 2022, it's now back in massive revision mode) will not try to compete with Michelle Obama release. H Memwa release *likely* pushed to 2023 (awaiting Official confirmation).
---------------
Interesting, but ... book publishing has not used galleys for decades, and proofs are not bound. However, the information in this tweet implies that the memoir got to typeset stage (if it was bound, then the book has been printed because that is where binding happens ... at the printer). In trying to translate this tweet into modern language, I would surmise that the memoir has been typeset and he has been sent first proofs to sign off. The publisher must be tearing their hair out if he his making revisions on proofs!
This report sounds more credible.
Supposedly the docuseries (reality show) the duo have done for Netflix is 'boring' and 'underwhelming'.
Prince Harry is reported to have completed his eagerly awaited autobiography, with the final manuscript said to have been already signed off by lawyers.
Publisher Penguin Random House is aiming for the book to be out in time for Thanksgiving and Christmas Holidays, when it could be marketed as a gift.
Ghostwriter JR Moehringer apparently finished the manuscript in recent weeks, The Sun reports.
'Eagerly awaited'! 'Marketed as a gift'! There you are, Nutties, now that's your Thanksgiving/Christmas present list problem sorted.
All over the tabloids today. This is junior school behaviour from them ... dredging up old news so that they can show that 'they are not safe'.
You do not have to be a multi-millionaire to install adequate security. Why have they not done so after 'multiple' break-ins? (Serious question: does America not have private rapid response services? We have heaps and they are affordable.)
Can you believe that the hapless ginger is related to the Queen and Princess Anne? The last thing those two women would do is whine about security!
@SwampWoman
I like your suggestion ... a remote self-catering cottage on the Balmoral Estate, use of a jalopy for trips into the local town (oh, okay, you can borrow one RPO just for an hour), a 10-minute visit with the Queen (who will be surrounded by ladies-in-waiting because those ladies are tough and connected), free to use whatever you need for fishing and horse riding on the estate.
-----------
Isn't she supposed to be making a podcast series? Maybe she will let the husband and children go to Balmoral without her. Nope, last couple of outings have shown interesting body language - I doubt that she will feel happy about letting him visit family without her. Karma for a woman who has a history for hunting for the next man before dumping the present one, and who has never valued fidelity as something she should ascribe to.
The court case in the UK (50 cents says this will be mentioned in court) and, if it is true about them leaving that house for a different one, this could be a reason cited.
One poster on the DM article mentions that it isn't SB police (as it is an unincorporated areas) but sheriff's department who would have been called). Appears to true in a quick look.
How a narcissist REALLY sees you: Doctor of psychology (who's also narcissistic!) reveals your emotions make them feel weak, you mean 'nothing' to them and they discard you to get back at their mother…
Learning How To Leave: A Practical Guide To Stepping Away From Toxic & Narcissistic Relationships by Michael Padraig Acton reveals common narcissistc traits. Not every below trait has to match for a person to be considered a narcissist. M
* A lack of humility. True narcissists are 'never wrong' and never feel remorseful. Although they may apologise for a situation, this will almost always be accompanied by a thinly-disguised excuse with the victim blamed in some way.
* Since they believe they are never wrong, narcissists often react angrily when criticised.
* Narcissists are skilled at commanding the attention and admiration of others, often boasting about their achievements.
* Narcissists are so disconnected from themselves that they can't even begin to relate to others on an emotional level. Empathy and, by extension, love are alien concepts to them, although they are often able to put on an act to cover up this deficiency
* Narcissists will often call and/or text their partners excessively. This controlling behaviour is often misconstrued as a sign of love and commitment.
* Narcissists without attention will become either sulky, depressed or angry.
* Narcissists despise normality and see themselves as above everyday concerns (which rarely provide them with the special attention they crave).
* This can mean they fail to hold down a job or handle finances responsibly, often deliberately engineering crises to direct attention onto them.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11036059/How-narcissist-REALLY-sees-you.html