Well now. Megyn Kelly has publicly called someone else a liar.
Wow.
Just wow. And, the internet is talking about it.
Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event? Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th? Oscar's - March 10th? In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US. The IRS just never goes away. Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on). There's always another one. Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California. That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales. Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere. But. The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.
Comments
The Times's take on Liar's podcast today
https://archive.ph/y8UqI
Tiffany Trump being on the front page of the Daily Mail with her preparations and parties prior to marrying a billionaire must have been like fingernails on a chalkboard to *, then.
Bet the wedding dress will be fantastic.
The Daily Beast:
Princess Leaves Royal Family to Marry American Shaman as Europeans ‘Don’t Want’ a Black Royal
Barbie Latza Nadeau
Tue, 8 November 2022 at 1
:21 pm
LISE ASERUD
Claims of racism and scandal have ripped apart a royal family after one of the heirs fell in love with an American star. No, not that royal family.
A Norwegian princess—who is soon to marry a bisexual shaman from Hollywood—has announced that she will leave her royal duties after an explosion of media interest in her love life.
I don't know about the `racism' but I can see I can see three other likely reasons why the Norwegian royals may think this union might not be a very good idea.
Best not read while drinking coffee... that is, if you value your keyboard!
It’s impossible to ascertain what might be ailing young Master Archie, up to and including the severe handicap of non-existence, since we honestly cannot rely on his purported mother to have ever shown a real image of her alleged son. Which of the myriad incarnations of Archie are the ‘real’ kid, because he looks different every time we see him. More than three years after his birth, we are left wondering if, on at least three separate occasions if he hasn’t been an inanimate doll. Why would Mommy pose with a live, cute baby on his christening day, but 2 weeks later make that deranged papp appearance at the polo ground with an inert baby like object? The cute tyke from the christening picture met Bishop Tutu in South Africa…but a few months later suddenly became a black haired Asian looking child in the Christmas card that year. Then a month after that the couple published a photo of H holding a little girl. Fast foward to May 2020..Duck Rabbit Arch. Another happy little kid albeit not the one from 8 months earlier, even accounting for growth, the shape of a child’s head does not alter like that. We have never again seen either of these Archies.
The reports of Archie being pulled from a preschool there’s no independent corroboration that he ever went to (handy that no school in the area would be able to confirm or deny the presence of any student—once again Meg is exploiting privacy laws to aid her cons) are a precursor to Arch being sent away to a residential program for children with special needs. Fellow Narc Mom extraordinare Kate Gosselin got rid of her problem child Collin in a similar manner. Out of sight out of mind. Collin’s emotional needs were interfering with her on camera presentation as the perfect mother. Collin Gosselin is a real boy who is now happier living with his dad and sister Hannah who also resisted Narc Mom’s mind control. My wish for Archie is that he not be a real boy, because if he is, his life is already ruined. * needs a cover for why this child is never seen, and it’s getting urgent.
Attendance at preschool is not mandatory; in two or three years however, the state of California will be expecting to see some proof of enrollment in kindergarten for master Archie, or alternatively a home schooling plan filed with the state. Something tells me that Archie’s mom would go with option #2, Presuming that she’s still maintaining the ruse by that time. But by then it will be starting all over again with “Lili”. It really feels patently obvious to me that she concocted these children with an aim toward extorting more funds out of the royal family, And to compete with the Cambridges in having titled children to burnish her status—and to secure a bargaining chip in a future divorce settlement. But after the temporary narc high of the pregnancy con, she was faced with having to display a living growing child. She really hadn’t planned that far, and now that the royal family seems to have called her bluff, forced them into exile and is refusing to pay them or title these children, the con has become troublesome to sustain. Especially now the merching opportunities have dried up. There would be no impediment to selling photos of their children now, and they are desperate for money. So why no money shots? With every day that passes, her children if they exist become less and less valuable as commodities. Megatron badly miscalculated her entire strategy: the ONLY reason she or her children were of interest was their connection to Royalty. Without it, who cares?
I always enjoy Hilary Rose’s reviews of *’s weekly snore fest. So surgical and hilarious at the same time.
Last week, Rose referred to * as “the random word generator” because her word salads are basically incomprehensible. Love that.
WHY ARE THE CHILDREN NEVER SEEN?
https://youtu.be/Za1cwJQebC8
Christmas is a’comin in…What will she concoct for this year’s Christmas card? Neither half of this couple has the faintest clue about normal child development and appropriate milestones at various ages. Archie uttered words like hydrated crocodile waffle maker by his second Christmas, while Lilibet is struggling to walk at the same age. She took steps more than 6 months ago according to her father But has been in developmental limbo since then. Apparently she is just learning how to make sounds, too. If these children exist, based on the reports of their parents, Archie is some kind of savant with crippling anxiety and Lili exhibits fairly profound motor and verbal delays. Or… Neither adult has a clue How to realistically describe children they are making up as they go along.
It really makes me wonder what kind of a scenario the author of The Cut article witnessed and described in such unsettling detail in her piece. Her descriptions of ring is false as anything the Harkles have said. So was that entire piece an invented fiction, Including visiting Montesh*tshow at all? She might’ve spoken to the doyenne of Montesh*tshow on the phone And made up all that other guff about Doing the school run, witnessing an impromptu act of kindness toward a homeless man, and etc. Or, What is a tableau staged for her benefit…? Either way, it stinks. Would she actually get in trouble for making shit up for a piece of infotainment? Journalistic integrity is not what it was when Woodward and Bernstein we’re trying to break up in the Watergate scandal at the WashPost. Nothing about the author’s description of her visit chez Suxxit rings true to me.
/However, there have been enough cases of 'homeschooling' parents (well, usually singular parent) that were using the kids for free babysitting that the government felt that they had to get involved for the good of the children and society as a whole. This resulted in setting some some standards.
-----
So does his supposed mother. It must be a genetic thing.
Like the X-files, I trust no one. Yellow journalism has existed for a very long time. So has propaganda.
Re the shaman, from the link you added: 'Verrett has claimed that he will become the first black person who becomes a part of a European royal family.' I thought that title belonged to our esteemed duchess? I did think of her when I read about him. They have much in common...
At https://uk.yahoo.com/news/prince-andrew-accuser-says-she-221445516.html but from the Telegraph.
This is really interesting.
Lady C's latest, hints of Meghan trying to `poison the pond' just before Coronation
I think most of her behaviour is driven by unconscious thoughts and desires. She thinks she is in control, and much of her behaviour is deliberately planned, but she is always going to self sabotage. She has no control of the lies, for a start.
The word spin in her podcasts has reached beyond absurd levels (except for the stupid people). Is it deep fear that prevents her from facing the truth about herself? She obviously loves being papped, but she will never admit it. She obviously does not love her husband, but clings to the fiction of the greatest love story ever seen. She has zero talent for politics, activism, producing ... whatever, but she puts herself out there as brilliant at it all.
When she does 'admit' to any fault or weakness, all evidence shows she is talking complete baloney. No, she is not a shrinking violet hiding in the shadows but a barges in and pushes aside ... just one example.
Why do I feel sorry for her? I think she is an awful person who does harm to others. But, there is a high possibility that she is going to end up alone, with toy boys for company, looking like a wax doll after all the plastic surgery, overweight and with a wig askew on her head, still doing pap walks. That is sad and I much rather the young and stupid had an example of a flawed person doing the hard work of honesty and correcting major character flaws.
Slow day for news of the duo, other than the normal chatter ... But I do wonder about the story behind the following:
She claimed she was booked for the Jimmy Kimmel show but had to 'postpone' because the Queen died. No rescheduling?
She claimed she was getting an award and would be a special guest at the GQ event in London, but she has disappeared without explanation.
She claimed she was returning to social media, but that has not happened.
I have no idea who this guy is, but this is supposedly from 2018. He was spot on!
“It can only be a matter of time before Meghan gets her just reward for marrying a royal and saying “humanitarian” a lot.“
Apparently, * believes that a love for Jeopardy adds to her ‘intellectual’ credentials, much like playing Wordl and Scrabble. There are millions of everyday Americans who love the show, which explains why it has been on the air since 1964. So, being a fan doesn’t make her special or smart. The entire country was sad when host Alex Trebek passed away, so * wasn’t alone in her grief…. He was a real gentleman and had hosted the program since 1984. I seriously doubt that a friend sent her a sympathy card.
I find it a fascinating study of human behavior to watch her desperate attempts to connect with people, when it’s obvious that she has no idea what others think, because she only cares about herself. I’m certain that their string of PR Execs conducted more than a few(very expensive) market research studies to develop strategy and content. The results were probably presented in multiple ways to help their two ‘whip-smart’ clients understand it. Yet, in spite of all of that valuable data, she is sticking with her own strategy because she knows best. This bizarre focus on feminism and stereotypes is so outdated and it only serves to portray women as perpetual victims. That victimhood is her comfort zone, where she “stands firmly in her knowing.”
Hikari. spot on. she’s trying to extricate the children problem. the whole post from reddit seems suspicious. most states wouldn’t be taking that kind of parenting interest unless the child harmed others or was being physically harmed and certainly not this kind of intervention with well to do parents (more likely they recommend resources). i still think perhaps she is trolling Brynn over possible autism issues with Gavin? as she is probably not letting them rent a child for a day for the christmas card. i also thought the part of the CUT interview which was retracted was the pick up from school. the writer acknowledged she wasn’t there but at the house confining madam is giving over the stories for content homeless person in montecito more likely harry looking a little rough 😉
“If Meghan wants to rebrand as intellectual, deleting her podcast would be a good start. It's been shockingly revealing - she's not well-read or thoughtful. She's shallow, relies on cliches, and self-involved even when interviewing people exponentially more complex than her.”
@Mel. LOL X 2!
Lady C said the suggestion was Maggot wants Mole’s book published just before the Coronation to upset the King etc, but Mole refused. This is all part of ruse or narrative put forward why Mole wants to separate. Lady C still doesn’t wholly believe these latest stories to be true…and when repeating what she’s said, it’s important to mention that. 🤗
That is interesting about Virginia. I always thought she is a fantasist
looking for attention and a big payout. I have no doubt that she was hired by Epstein to provide sexual favours, and that she took her chance and fled when she could. Gislaine dragged her back into the mess when she contacted her. Andrew probably settled to shut down the scandal and protect the monarchy (and maybe felt sorry for her and felt bad about what his friend had done). Depending on the jury, she probably would have been exposed as a fantasist in a trial. Poor Andrew probably sees a way back now, but there isn't one. He was arrogant and turned a blind eye to or was okay with what he saw even if he did not participate. Others like Clinton (who seems to think it is all a joke) and Gates got away with their tawdry role in the Epstein debauchery, although Gates has admitted at least that he had very poor judgement. I doubt that teenage girls will be protected by such exploitation in future or present, when Andrew and the two Bills could have made a huge difference.
I just gave the link and tried briefly to suggest what it was about. It was up to you to watch it and decide for yourself, I made no assertion as to the veracity or otherwise.
Why did I bother?
-----
Yep. Something unnerving happened, imo.
I think you're right about Mm pulling a Kate Gosselin with the invisible boy.
She has to have some explanation for why the kid is never seen.
The Collin Gosselin thing was heartbreaking. I can't fathom how she got by with all that and no consequences. But I think that's exactly how the Archie thing will play out. No consequences for bad behavior by the mother.
------
I wasn't aware that anything was retracted. Any links for that?
I'd seen some discussion about it, but it was speculation only, someone saying I bet she had to retract, but with no proof of a retraction. I'd like to read the magazine's retraction, to see how the magazine phrased it.
I don't have a link to the article.
Guesses: ButterUp probably has an apartment in San Francisco that he uses as a bolthole. They need time out for the marriage to survive. When she was his booty call in Canada, they saw each other every two weeks at the most, and did not have to deal with day-to-day living and working together. Since they bolted from the UK, they have been living together, working in the same space, and have had the pressure of children and an estate that is their responsibility (no royal family and UK government to coddle them).
They have also been quite isolated, without old friends and family to ground them, except Doria. The pressures on that relationship must be huge. At first, having a romantic partner to hold hands with in public must have been intoxicating, but they were both in their thirties and had an established independent life when they met each other. Until they bolted, he would do trips to Africa on his own, and initially she would take trips to Canada or New York on her own.
Taking time out from each other and having separate projects has been necessary for them. She needs complete control so she will drag him into her podcast somehow, and she will insert herself into everything he does.
I think the biggest sign that the marriage is over is when she finds a new man to add to her trophies. If he messes around with someone else, she will reel him back in and have even more control of him (the children). The tarot reader Aphrodite did a reading months ago where he said that she would not mind him messing around as long as he stayed in the marriage, but I don't see her tolerating not being the one and only, and being continually adored. Time out is the best she will give him, and it will be in the guise of work or playing polo (ButterUp have done well in keeping her at arm's length).
But the rumours are intriguing ...
If HG Tudor is correct in his assessment of Harry’s wife, she is a “middle mid range Narcissist”, which means that she is incapable of self-awareness about what drives her. Her a very personality disorder itself protects her from understanding herself. She knows that she feels rage and jealousy and wants to hurt people, But she puts the blame for her anger and her lack of success on other people. They let her down and force her to respond to vindictively, but her psychosocial development is so shallow that she actually believes that she is a good person. When she talks about having compassion and being a humanitarian, because she does not experience deep emotions that are not self interested, she can only experience “compassion” as an intellectual construct. If she spouts word salad about caring, or buys some essential workers a box of donuts, or turns out I had a memorial for dead children to lay flowers in front of the cameras, these gestures are what she understands as being compassionate. She cannot feel authentically, she can only copy what she sees others doing. There is no real generosity there or identification with suffering. The pretense is all she’s got, but in the moment that she’s doing it, she believes that she is sincere. She cannot do you self analysis and ask herself questions like “was I really kind?“ Or “how could I have done that better?” Her narcissism prevents her from acknowledging any flaws.
She makes me angry but when I consider that here is a mind that whether through nature or nurture or a combination of the two is too profoundly damaged to grow behind its extremely limited parameters or know itself at all, I can feel a speck of sympathy. Ultimately what she is though is a predator walking around in a skin suit of humanity. She is devoid of any of the qualities that elevate human beings above animals. So we can’t evaluate her in the light of how other people behave, or continue to think that if only she could change, or accept the right kind of help, she could become a better person. She cannot and she will not, because her brain is broken in a fundamental way. There’s no reprogramming her at this stage. The best the royal family can do is to contain the tiger so it does not bite off their heads. Harry’s wife is going to roam the earth as a restless beast until the day she dies. But that’s how I look at her now, a being simulating human but not fully human. Everything that looks human about her is only surface. It’s tragic really, but I have to reserve most of my sympathy for all the people that she has hurt and will continue to hurt due to her profound birth defect of sociopathy.
ARTICLE IN FRENCH:
https://archive.ph/hCadI
TRANSLATION:
Married for five years, but it looks like the story of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry won’t last the course. Is their relationship on the verge of imploding? For one German magazine, there's no doubt. Because she’s already cheated on him.
We are all talking about The Duke of Sussex at the moment, for several reasons including the release next January of his book, Spare. And, according to Us Weekly magazine, he shouldn't hold back with his revelations, one of which is a bombshell.
"It's worse than everyone thinks," a source told Us Weekly magazine. "Harry is critical of everyone and mentions intimate details of his childhood as well as his disagreements with his family. For him, it is simply a question of telling his story”. While his truths might offend his family members, the German magazine, In Touch thinks it is more about an implosion of the Sussexes.
According to the magazine, Archie's kindergarten reportedly called the house just after three in the afternoon. "Meghan forgot to pick up her son, her cell phone was off," the magazine reports.
The second son of King Charles who was in an isolated wing of their house in Montecito reportedly ran in panic.
“Harry rushed to the car with Lilibet in his arms, buckled her up and shouted at a hysterical Meghan that he wanted an immediate divorce. The American wore only a tight silk coat.
And it wouldn't be until minutes later, after Prince Harry left, that bodyguard Chris Sanchez left the house. Interestingly, that day, he was not in service.
In Touch concludes that the wife of prince Harry is having an affair with his bodyguard.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/yqka16/french_tea/
@WBBM
That is interesting about Virginia. I always thought she is a fantasist
As far as Virginia Giuffre goes, this is my understanding. She had already years ago gotten a settlement of about $500,000 from Epstein. She was living happy and peaceful enough in Australia. When she was approached by the David Bois (age 80 or so) law firm to start a new assault on Prince Andrew. They approached her. Many American lawyers are anarchists who like to see things burn down. In this case, the British monarchy.
The Bois law firm was very savvy to time this with the Queen's Jubilee. Of course, after Andrew was foolish enough to do That Interview, thus weakening him and the BRF. So (obviously) to clear the decks for the Platinum Jubilee, the BRF forked over 12 million or so to Bois and Virginia Giuffre. Which she probably got 70%. Bois did this for more fame. American lawyers are addicted to this.
So why does VG need any more "hassles" with Alan Dershowitz? So she told/instructed David Bois. She has enough millions for a few lifetimes. Plus for her family which has three children iirc. Life in far off Australia is good!
@Hikari
That explanation of her character flaw is spot on but also rather sad. It is like she operates on autopilot and does not know how to reprogramme herself. She can only respond by defending and attacking because she lacks the ability to stay out of trouble in the first place. What kind of idiot talks and behaves like that in an interview? Especially one who pays heaps of people to assist her in building and maintaining her image. I know that the vulgar spilling of all in public has become immensely fashionable, and most people excuse themselves by claiming that by sharing their story they are helping others (no they are not), but I don't think she is trying to help anyone but herself.
That was a very insightful analysis. You’re absolutely correct in your assessment that there is no successful clinical treatment available for this condition - no pharmacological or psychoanalytical therapies have been successful. The predator visual is a safe way to view narcissists. Thank you for verbalizing this so succinctly.
I will remain solidly in the they do not have possession or custody of any kids camp. Everything we’ve seen has been frequently pulled by others in Hollyweird circles...TW was so batshit nasty and pathological to each surrogate that the one in the UK exercised her right to deny adoption and in the US they hounded the poor girl to escape out of state and lawyer up.
Meanwhile Meghan’s “fertility specialist” lady doc who supposedly oversaw her last pregnancy, who has a physician husband who specializes in surrogacies, mysteriously shut down her business a few months ago. Not eager to continue with the charade and the heat focused on her, perhaps.
I have always been drawn to psychological thrillers in movies and books and true crime shows which feature sociopaths. But it wasn’t until the advent of Harry’s wife on the scene that I started to get interested in the clinical indicators for narcissism. They’ve been a part of the human race as long as there have been humans, but I think we are seeing the advent of narcissism and other sociopathic traits becoming much more common in the general population due to societal factors, the breakdown of the nuclear family, rising chemical dependency and environmental pollution, and the rise of the digital media culture cannot be underestimated. Now every preteen with a camera phone and an Instagram account is basically encouraged to be narcissistic 24/7 for likes.
I’ve consulted many sources, but I have to credit HG Tudor for illuminating the Narc mind and classification system for me. Those who follow his channel know that he calls himself The Ultra—classic Narc move, innit— which represents the pinnacle of the self actualization pyramid for this personality disorder. I’ve had plenty of moments of wondering whether this wasn’t all an elaborate put on, that he was either an actor or a psychotherapist who had hit upon a way to make money on the Internet using his knowledge. Because his level of candor is such that it’s akin to a Magician telling his audience exactly how he does every tech. Why would a narcissist give all of his secrets away? Well, for the reasons that a narcissist does anything: attention, admiration, to provoke reactions from awe to shock and horror… Control, fuel in the form of admiring comments and numbers of subscribers… Financial gain, although he says he has another job which forces him to hide his identity and even alter his voice on his channel, But he sells books and even offers private consultations to help people extricate themselves from narcissistic relationships. There is a bit of supreme irony in the fact that a person who claims to be antagonistic to people is actually engaged in a helping profession and is giving people the tools to heal their lives. He would of course say that’s not like he’s doing it, helping people as a primary motivator. It amuses him and he’s carved out a unique niche and a nice little earner for himself. I think what he really gets off on is depriving other narcissists of their fuel sources and in the case of Harry’s wife, relentlessly mocking one of his own kind Whom he obviously regards as a cut rate, Hollywood Hillbilly semi-retarded version of himself. He is evolved to know exactly why he acts like he does and can describe it to us typicals. For a fictional female Ultra, I always revert to Glenn Close as the Marquise de Mertuil in Dangerous Liaisons. Such a Narcissist plays the long game… For years, decades if need be. She is always immaculately groomed and dressed. She has such self control, the mask does not slip. She revels in playing with people for sport. Our Madam is much more reactionary. She will toss out a careful plan in favor of instant gratification in response to perceived sleights, Even if doing so is self-destructive. She’s all Id and Ego. Anything for momentary attention, no matter how self defeating or ridiculous. And ultra would have not squatted and sucked out of a baby bottle on the Ellen show.
Safe to say, if Harry’s wife were an Ultra, she’d still be biding her time in the RF, giving Catherine a run for her money in the style pages And nobody would’ve twigged her yet. She might have even talk to King Charles into Giving her Frogmore House. Silly childish rabbit pitched a fit and ran away before she could get any of the really good stuff. No patience, ultimately no game. The fact that their rival court and grandiose Plans have gone down the toilet in only two years points to H and M being abject failures even as soulless sociopaths.
For example, if Friar and Liar really are in divorce talks and they've filed something in London, which requires all parties to shut up, there's no way a British court could compel a European newspaper to reveal its source for an article that broke that gag order.
I really want this article to be true, but even in the U.S., In Touch is a pretty low-brow publication. I'm not sure what to think. Plenty of people in London have a grudge against Liar. But not that many would have access to this -- if true -- really inside information.
If M didn’t answer her phone, why didn’t they try H’s phone? Who has a “house phone” In this day and age when there are already multiple cell phones in the household? Older people still like land lines, but millennials don’t use landlines anymore. Particularly if they don’t actually reside at their address of record, it would be much easier to maintain the illusion that they are living somewhere if they are only reachable by cell phone. So where is the nanny? If they’ve got a nanny, why would harry have to rush around in a panic and bundle Lili into the car? Have they not authorized any other assistants to go pick up the child? Who picked Arch up from school every day during the three weeks they were in England? Doesn’t Meg have a PA to remind her of appointments? What happened to all those business meetings she’s constantly having?
If Harry is at home, isn’t it a bit risky to have his bodyguard come over during off duty hours for some hanky-panky? If H is in residence, shouldn’t the bodyguard be on call in case Harry wanted to go out or needed to go out suddenly, like picking up a child from school? With him as obsessed with security as he supposedly is, why would his bodyguard have the day off? Is there a photograph of this event, because otherwise how does the “source” know exactly what Harry’s wife was wearing or that she was “hysterical”? Forgetting one time to pick your toddler up from school would not be grounds for immediate divorce.
This interlude makes TW look pretty bad—so cui bono? Who benefits? It establishes that H is:
1. In residence— Reports of him in some San Francisco bolt hole hooking up with guys have been greatly exaggerated.
2. H is a deeply committed father. A regular Mr Mom
3. H wants out. TW is promiscuous and irresponsible.
If H is painted as a devoted Dad in crisis, is This to take the heat off the negative publicity his book is already receiving? Is she getting ready to divest herself of H and the kids and bolt? It’s just one tabloid story, so I’m not hanging any expectations on it. It is not pro-TW in the least. But as for the affair, if that part is real I don’t think H gives a crap. I think they have an open arrangement where both of them get to sleep with other men. TW Would not tolerate other female partners for H probably, but if he’s gay, Other men aren’t competition for her— They are blackmail opportunities.
Just more Narc fuel drama on an endless loop of High to Lovand back again. It was just last week wasn’t it that papers for full of them canoodling over Burmese food in Ojai, where it was reported they looked so in love? Fast forward a few days, and TW is balling the hired help in the middle of the afternoon and Haz is screaming at her in the driveway that he wants a divorce right now? The look of love sure didn’t last long.
The article could be based in some truth: cleaner makes some money 'selling' stories to a hack, but elaborates to make them more valuable; hack elaborates to make it more sensational; editor elaborates further to feed readers voracious for gossip.
I have no doubt that she is demanding and unreasonable, seasoned with a huge amount of manipulation. My guess is that he believes that if papa had adored mummy no matter what happened and been completely devoted to her, she would not have died. So, he is saving mummy by choosing a crazy wife and proving he is the man he could not be for mummy. I suppose it is also easier to choose a partner that accepts and encourages your weaknesses and faults, instead of doing the hard work of character building. All the being a good boy did not get him a wife, after all.
I am also drawn to psychological thrillers and mysteries, getting my start on the Trixie Belden books in my childhood and progressing to John Douglas books about profiling serial killers. I’ve often thought that if I had not become a nurse, I would have been happy as a homicide detective or FBI profiler. I guess that’s why I have been so determined to sort out Harry’s wife. You have become quite the expert. I’m very impressed by the knowledge you’ve acquired in a relatively short time.
HG Tudor is a fascinating character who is very knowledgeable about his field. Although I have not watched all of his YT content, your assessment of him is spot on. His dramatic flair and exhaustive knowledge of narcissism lead me to believe he probably is an Ultra narc (that IS the perfect label for one), who enjoys the accolades that feed his self esteem. No matter how evolved, he needs that energy from others.
Thank you for sharing the knowledge you’ve acquired. It’s helpful to those of us who are compelled to understand how someone like M thinks.
Doggerel
I’ll take Difficult for five hundred
Naming all that she’s plundered
Traducing both sides of the ditch
Put herself in Jeopardy
With her tossed tautology
And the myriad ways
to say Bitch…
UK 21 and dropping
USA 14 and dropping
CANADA 5 and dropping
AUSTRALIA 28 and dropping
NEW ZEALAND 29 and dropping
I only looked at English-speaking countries (as first language).
I guess she still is popular in Canada! Is she going to turn her PR efforts to that country?
If a podcast is in the top 100, Spotify will keep it, I reckon, and she will earn something. But, I don't know if she can keep it up if she can't be the most popular. Maybe she enjoys hearing herself talk and will want to keep going ... plenty more women, mostly comedians, 'of colour' that she can have has guests!
Her over the top marketing with billboards was perhaps a brave bit of marketing, but with each podcast episode she falls down the chart, and it looks a bit silly now.
Even if her podcasts were good and were actually about archetypes, I don't think she would have the success of someone like Joe Rogan. Too niche. But there is a podcast that I know nothing about called The Psychology of Your 20's (sic), which is doing very well. Someone like Lex Fridman is very intellectual and he also does well in the charts.
I think she is just boring and annoying. I feel quite sorry for her because she is trying so hard ... over acting perhaps, but focusing on black women, many of whom are relatively unknown. She can't even get a huge following among black people?
https://podcastcharts.byspotify.com/
The thing is she can't stop talking about herself, because if she does, she has no podcast. She doesn't have the calibre of guest who can talk about the subject of archetypes in an informed or informative way. She is a lousy listener and interviewer. The whole show is over produced and mostly a load of stupid nonsense. She also over acts (she also does this when she is modelling.) However, she does have fans and she is giving them exactly what they want. I think she has enough fans to sustain a weekly podcast, as long as she does not aspire to be the most popular, best, most influential podcast ever, in any category.
But, she gets criticsm from most people and that really distresses her, so she can't settle for simply providing shallow self-centred prattle for the fans she does have.
Although I haven't even tried to listen since her first two episodes, I have read a number of detailed accounts online. It does seem that she now has some awareness that she should accept that not everyone will like her. (That is normal unless you are a dictator preaching to the hypnotized masses like Hitler.) But, I think that she still thinks that any and all criticsm, dislike or disagreement has no validity at all. It's kind of like insisting on driving way above the speed limit, and then choosing to give up driving, complaining constantly, to avoid the speed fines rather than adjusting driving habits. (Probably a bad example!)
Here is the link:
https://youtube.com/user/samvaknin
Ran across something which I thought was interesting information about the corporate philosophies (and to some degree financial investment played into) apple versus NF.
Apple and NF, unlike the other streaming options didn't have a library to tap into (think of what Disney had to start the first day).
But Apple played things very safe politically in terms of drugs, smoking and so on to the point where they did almost nothing for a long time. They had one show set in the 60's and corporate was all over them about how they should not show anyone smoking cigarettes. They were finally overruled but it was very very difficult on the producer/production/writers/everyone to be able to get that final touch of very real normalacy of that time.
And, controlling. In one show, all kinds of trouble but everyone had and worked from an Apple product. Apple Music came out with the censored versions of songs. Clean wholesome image.
NF had a different mindset. They backdoored it from the DVDs to really inventing binging. Up until them, the mindset for a show release was really one at a time, make people wait. Same for movies. NF said: why not just make it easy for someone to keep going. And, by offering it that way, people could watch a whole season. And, all those seasons were available. And easy for families to watch different shows easily at the same time.
Change is good. Edgy is good (and very few times corporate would step in either).
And a willingness to throw money into getting what viewers wanted plus an ability to track/see what people were watching and for how long they did it.
Things may be different now. NF is alleged to have some fiscal issues. I'm still barely into this but it is nice background.
hikari. yes mrs doesn’t want to look bad but she needs a way to dump the “kids” problem on harry so he can deal with it and she is off the hook unless he comes completely clean. her response will be problems conceiving, felt like a failure so had to keep it going, BRF took them away or were pressuring her for heirs (yeah right) etc. actually she’s betting he won’t say a word she walks away (with $) and buys time for another victim/grift etc and like scarlet o’hara will deal with (the kids question)tomorrow
Taz watches the podcasts and then gives feedback. Link to her latest above.
Who called her a b***h? She really seems bothered by that. The tabloids she hates have not labelled her with that as far as I can recall. Maybe someone from that photo shoot in Canada? (Bower book - has she read it or did she read the tweet someone from that photo shoot sent out a few years ago?)
Something Taz points out is that the latest podcast was recorded in June so that explains why Lilli had only just started walking. Sloppy production to miss something like that (editing 101).
Someone got hold of the floor plans of the Montecito mansion and gives a detailed description of all the bathrooms!
"Meghan's Playing a Dangerous Game"
It seems that Meghan and Harry 'are already doing damage control on the backlash they're set to face.'
Heat focused on her interview with Variety in which she said of their reality show: 'It's nice to be able to trust someone with our story...even if it means it's not the way we would have told it...We're trusting our story to someone else, and that means it will go through their lens.'
Apparently this hasn't thrilled Netflix: 'The Sussexes are trying their best to swerve blame as their Netflix premiere draws closer. It's causing havoc at the streaming giant as Meghan, in particular, stirs the pot. 'They've ruffled feathers with some, who are annoyed at the suggestion they've steamed in with plots the Sussexes didn't like.' The source goes on to say that Meghan won't be getting the final sign-off 'and it's been hard for her to have to watch others edit their life journey.'
According to the source: 'There are some people at Netflix who aren't impressed with their attitude and point out they've paid a fortune for this documentary. They say it will be produced with integrity, and that at no point have they left the Sussexes in the dark.'
The Sussexes unsurprisingly want to have their cake and eat it too: 'Both the memoir and the docu-series -- for which the pair have signed multi-million dollar contracts -- have the potential to blow up in the Sussexes' faces...[but] the pair are keen to keep both Netflix and the royal family on side when it comes to the show.' According to the source: 'All Meghan and Harry can do is hope and pray it doesn't put too many backs up since they're acutely aware that the stakes have never been higher. Not just where their status and access to the royal family are concerned, but also their popularity on both sides of the Pond.'
Liar truly knows how to burn bridges wherever she goes. If this article is true, it sounds like Netflix won't do business with them again. (This also confirms what our favorite Redditor has said about the Sussex-Netflix relationship.) So long to that $100 million contract!
https://twitter.com/Anni_UKBC/status/1590567771976650753?t=rsboxDIE7SI6g3pZzz1fzA&s=19
Very bizarre Netflix commercial, apparently for the Crown, with Harry's face on all the stars' bodies. Very weird. Has anyone seen it on their channel?
I guess Friar is doing everything he can in order to fulfill their side of the contract. Seems very desperate.
https://twitter.com/LouLouLa10/status/1590804934961684480?t=y8TTL7VFa--GsjTKCAqG5Q&s=19
I’d think that by now, Meghan has proved herself to be so untrustworthy that anyone who is anybody would not trust her or want to work with her on any project of consequence when it took her nearly two years to produce something. And what she has produced is a continuation of her mediocrity and self-centeredness.
Crazy Days And Nights
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2022
Blind Item #13
Apparently the alliterate one is ready to move in to the rental in town right away, but her husband is having second thoughts.
`...Harry packs his bags'
HGT's latest, posted here without comment.
BLG discussing Lady C's video of 6 days ago, in case anyone missed it.
Again, no comment
🎤
Apologies:Lerner & Loewe
Wouldn’t it Be Loverly
My Fair Lady
Pity she’s so Slovenly
All she wants is a billionaire
Fed up with her hard up spare
With her fixed rictus glare
Aw, she, just ain’t loverly
Lots of peeps for her to cheat
Lots of lies to bleat, repeat
Chapped face, clawed hands
big feet
Argh, she, is always slovenly…
@Henrietta
That’s a good spoof,
the crown clown, hahaha.
As for haz returning to the UK
for Remembrance
Poppycock 😉
https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity-news/1694880/Piers-Morgan-David-Walliams-britains-got-talent-twitter-scandal-recording-leaked
You can't hide/airbrush your true nature forever, and the bigger the fraud, the bigger the downfall will be. Sooner or later someone is going to catch the duo, singly or together, on tape ...
-----
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1694647/royal-family-live-meghan-markle-letter-prince-harry-king-charles-latest-news
I can't pinpoint why, but there is something laughably tacky about her flourishes and use of the royal monogram. Her fame and ability to barge through doors that would otherwise be closed to her come from her connection to the Crown, but her authority does not. She is not a representative of the Crown or the UK in any way. I would not be impressed if I got a letter that like this, even if she was not a well-known awful person. I suppose some are impressed, some find it a joke, and some are enraged by her tacky boasting of being 'royalty'.
----
Slow day for gossip and news?
@Henrietta
Great piece of gossip you shared! I have no doubt that the couple are a nightmare to work with under all circumstances. I suspect that the Netflix documentary will portray them as popular, immensely compassionate and brilliant in everything, a blissfully happy couple, hugely influential philanthropists and humanitarians - a complete fiction. Perhaps the 'unhappiness' of the duo is simply because they hate not having control over every detail, or maybe Netflix resisted the Hallmark schmaltz that she loves.
An interesting exchange, but could be from someone completely making stuff up. The poster found a link between a sugar and the duo that suggests that the duchess us indeed in contact with sugars.
Latest Palace Confidential . I think they are rather kind to the duchess in terms of her denial pfy the bullying claims. It is not just that she bullied women but that among those women are seasoned professionals who can and have handled difficult people.
Do you think the King will change the rule about first 6 in line of succession having to ask the monarch for permission to marry? At the moment, the prince and his son are 5th and 6th. When William becomes king, if he has no grandchildren, they will be 4th and 5th. William and Catherine will have to have three grandchildren to bump the Californians off the list of top 6. It will happen, but maybe not by the time William becomes king.
The headline is very misleading as he actually praisesal and supports The Crown's version of events. This is a good indication of what the hapless prince believes about his parents?
I find the whole concept rather weird, and am tired of all the awards and lists that flatter the egos of celebrities. They certainly are not like lists I like: easter eggs (mince pies, whatever) rating on taste and price; financial products or service providers rated and compared ... you get the gist!
Is Jordan Peterson saying, indirectly, that the duchess herself is a 'crazy' woman who is impossible to control? If he is, I agree!
Re. The permission to marry rule
The aim behind the statute is to give the monarch discretion to disallow alliances which would prove injurious and/embarrassing to the Crown. #5 paid lip service to this rule, for all the good it did. The Queen gave her assent and we see the result of her generosity. If ever a marriage should have been denied, it’s this one, but it wasn’t, since the couple was able to manipulate current social trends to their advantage. Plus historically Harry never having been told no in his life, and Granny wasn’t about to start when he was 33. The precedent has been set now; Future problematic couples can always claim discrimination of one sort or another and went to the papers. I really cannot envision either King Charles or William exercising their right of veto. The Wessex children at least will certainly come of marriageable age under KCIII… Possibly the Phillips girls as well. The Tindall children and Beatrice and Eugenie’s offspring will Come under the auspices of King William V probably.
Our favorite Redditor has postulated that Archewell Productions has not turned over the footage to Netflix, possibly by using some kind of loophole in their contract. This doesn't make sense to me. I think Netflix already has the show and is getting it ready for release while still pondering whether to release it. The only thing I can speculate is delaying the release is if Netflix somehow believes the docu-series will jeopardize The Crown. Not sure how it would do that other than so alienate royalists that Netflix believes they gave to pull The Crown in order to not damage their brand. The Crown really is a successful show for Netflix, but the docu-series, not so much.
Worth a look f you haven't seen it already.
Thanks for the link to Archewell's reviews. Practically all are dire. Two are positive, one saying 'the vitriol going on here has nothing to do with their website' (deluded). There is a heading above the review that says 'Only the latest review will count in the company's Trustcore'. It's dated September and is not the latest one.
Yes, Mrs. could have given Catherine a run for her money, style wise. But she dressed so terribly all the time. Outlines of her underwear, dresses way too big, dresses way too small, dirty mud-caked shoes, bronzer misapplied. It just goes on. Her outer appearance is descriptive of her inner brokenness. Run-of-the-mill narcissists are not usually immaculately put together. The apex predatory Narcissists are well put together, however. I've known a few of each kind.
An example of an apex predator is the one married to the Swedish royal. All one needs to do is look at his eyes...creepy.
Mrs. got that article in The Cut before Sunshine Sachs dumped her sorry, broke a$$.
Thomas Sr. raised * while mother was "away." He had no clue how to raise a child, having left that to the first Mrs. Markle while he was busy supporting the family. That video of * when she was 10 or 11, mouthing "What? snapping her head, and rolling her eyes at Thomas Sr. * should have been slapped into the next week.
That site you recommended is interesting. Most people see them for what they really are, but what is most damning for them is that this ultimately effects their ability to raise funds through Archewell. It's not being trashy or talentless that is the problem (plenty of people like that getting attention and making money), but being annoying hypocrites and liars and not nice people who are not even entertaining.
The Wessex and Tindall children are unlikely to ever be affected by the rule. It only pertains to the first 6 in the line of succession. Under King Charles, they are William, George, Charlotte, Louis, Harry, Archie. When William becomes king, Lili moves into position 6. (Beatrice and her daughter, then, Eugenie and her son are next in the list, in that order.)
I assume that other royals have the courtesy to inform the monarch in advance before announcing an engagement.
I can see the duo and their children making a big noise, for major press attention, of informing the monarch but not asking permission. They want the royal connection but also to proclaim themselves superior. The response from the monarch in private will probably be 'whatever' but in public will be the 'wish you well', and there will be a gift sent.
You’re right; I got carried away envisioning the next batch of Royal weddings. By the time Williams children are old enough to marry I’ll be an old lady. Unless Catherine has another baby, Archie will be the only child that would need to seek permission. But I take it as a default that there actually are no Sussex children. I know others doubt this, but the very names of those children are like inside jokes. I guess as more time passes, either one side or the other of the argument for or against the existence of Sussex kids will be vindicated. It’s one thing to hide them away when they are very little, but as time passes and it becomes time for Archie to select a college, or join the army or find a girlfriend, it’s going to be really really weird if there’s never any mention of him or his sister.
I can’t now recall where I read this tidbit, possibly on a YouTube channel if not here and we can take it with a grain of salt, but the suggestion has been made that there were two surrogate moms— One for the first faux pregnancy in the UK, And another in California for the second. It’s claimed that the UK mother exercised her right to deny the adoption and kept the baby, And the weather in the US lawyered up and achieved the same end. The fertility specialist responsible in Santa Barbara mysteriously shattered her practice and left the state. In both cases, the birthmothers were frightened Due to continual harassment, And instability exhibited by Harry’s wife. That the tea.
I really think the next six months to a year at most are going to see the dénouement of this sick drama, however it ends. But I maintain that if there are children in the world with Harry’s DNA, they do not reside with a couple and there are no parental rights. They’ve really painted themselves into a corner.
She hauled out the rental kid in public in South Africa. The child that no one in the RF had ever laid eyes on. That must have made every hair on every member of the RF stand on end.
She is a lunatic in the worst meaning of the word.
"Is it mine?" infamous statement from Hairy.
I don't think we can assume Harry is "sterile." As an infant he reportedly had surgery for **one** undescended testicle. His other one had made the journey to its proper place naturally. So that wouldn't say he's sterile. Even if both had had to be repositioned it wouldn't. Either situation might have lowered his fertility somewhat but not to the point of sterility.
When H&M married, M was 36. That's hardly too old to get pregnant. Heck, it seems every other day someone is suggesting soon to be 41 years old Kate is pregnant again. I do think it was very odd MM got pregnant so quickly after the wedding with Archie and reportedly so quickly with Lili after miscarrying. I really doubt those pregnancies happened naturally. If M didn't have IVF it's possible surrogates did.
Lots of oddities when MM was supposedly pregnant with Archie & oddities later. I agree with those who question the "introduction of Archie to the Queen" photo from May 2019. And there are definite oddities with the July 2019 christening photo and the infant Archie at polo with Kate and Louis in the background photo. But I don't really think we have evidence that by the time of the tour to SA (Sept 2019) no one in the RF had ever laid eyes on Archie.
I can't explain the oddities. But I just don't think, for example, the attendance of Charles & Camilla and Will & Kate at a fictional christening would have been recorded in the Court Circular. That's an official record for historical purposes. It's one thing to not publicly question how Archie came into the world and to record his place in the LoS. Given his place in line it's very unlikely it matters much. It's quite another to say the RF had known for over 30 years Harry couldn't have children but kept quiet when he claimed to have fathered his first child in the UK. Did all the things that needed to be done for a christening by the Church of England-- allowed the use of the Queen's private chapel, ordered the gold baptismal font to be moved, lent out the family baptismal gown. And then senior royals (excluding the Queen & PP) claimed to have participated in a christening that may not have ever happened (but if it did happen and they were there, they'd seen Archie.) Even W&K were observed arriving in Windsor that day.
I do not understand why the couple are doing what they are doing, unless it was for commercial gain, or, a phobia of discovery and the children being in danger.
I cannot believe that the RF (from HMTQ down) would accept and perpetuate a fraud of that nature that they have no children. Nope. I just cannot believe it.
HMTQ spoke of the "nystery" of the Family: not being in the public eye 24/7. That was her concern with autobiographies etc. Everything she released was under tight control. The world of social media and instant news caught up with her, yet for herself, she was able to keep the mystery.
I would like to believe that H would ike to given his children that privacy that he was denied, being in the line of sucession.
I remember when Harry had the surgery to retrieve the undescended testicle. It was reported to be just one testicle, not both.
Men who have had this can still be fertile, but they sometimes do not have a high sperm count. As adults, men who had one of both testes undescended are at a higher risk for testicular cancer. All men should check their testicles on a monthly basis.
That said, if Harry had a low sperm count and Meghan being in her late 30s when she married him, they might have had to resort to IVF or as I suspect, surrogates to produce two children who might be 100 percent genetically theirs, or 50 percent genetically theirs or 100 percent not genetically their children.
I do not believe either of their children were home made, so to speak. I believe they had some sort of medical technology assistance.
Indeed. By the age of three, the fertility of that testicle would have been permanently impaired*, but he had a 'spare' unless he had two undescended testicles and the story of one was a polite fiction. With the way Harry spread his favors, so to speak, surely he should have have some seed falling in fertile ground. Excess alcohol, marijuana, and cocaine use can also reduce fertility (at least temporarily).
As for her, she is of an age where fertility falls off the proverbial cliff for many women, particularly if she had been on birth control substances for years. She was at risk of things such as pelvic inflammatory disease from STDs which can cause internal scarring of the fallopian tubes. She was in a high-risk environment for such if you believe the 'pay to play' stories of the stars and starlets, both male and female. She is also of an age where there are increased genetic anomalies in ovum that are reaching their expiration date.
*By permanently impaired, I didn't mean that he would produce zero sperm, but a permanently lower level of sperm.
/OMG, am I really speculating on the health of the well-used reproductive parts of those two?
I remember when Harry had the surgery to retrieve the undescended testicle. It was reported to be just one testicle, not both.
Men who have had this can still be fertile, but they sometimes do not have a high sperm count. As adults, men who had one of both testes undescended are at a higher risk for testicular cancer. All men should check their testicles on a monthly basis.
I remember when Harry had the surgery to retrieve the undescended testicle. It was reported to be just one testicle, not both.
Men who have had this can still be fertile, but they sometimes do not have a high sperm count. As adults, men who had one of both testes undescended are at a higher risk for testicular cancer. All men should check their testicles on a monthly basis.
That said, if Harry had a low sperm count and Meghan being in her late 30s when she married him, they might have had to resort to IVF or as I suspect, surrogates to produce two children who might be 100 percent genetically theirs, or 50 percent genetically theirs or 100 percent not genetically their children.
I do not believe either of their children were home made, so to speak. I believe they had some sort of medical technology assistance.
The children are American, growing up in America, with no interaction with the royal family, no idea of the traditions and duties and values of being royal, no idea of being in the public eye. The duo want all the privileges of the position but refuse to prepare their children to fulfill a position they claim they might inherit. It is most annoying.
For about the next 20 years the Sussex family will be in the top 6 (father and son at present, daughter when Charles dies and William becomes king). It will be about another 20 years before the children of the Prince of Wales marry and have children and the Sussexes embark on their inevitable slide down the line of succession to obscurity. That is why so many royal fans want the Prince and Princess of Wales to have another child, and please let it be twins! Despite all the psychic predictions that this will happen (dates given and then go whizzing by), I see no signs of another pregnancy.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-11418389/Im-Celebrity-2022-Mike-Tindall-forgets-line-throne-wife-Zara-is.html
Zara was 6th in the line of succession when she was born ... she is now 30th! The late Queen had 4 children, 3 of them being sons; the present King has only 2 sons, so the descent of the Sussexes will not be as dramatic, but it will inevitably happen.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tv/20402206/princess-diana-the-crown-paul-burrell/
A great article, where Burrell points out exactly where and why The Crown gets it so wrong about Diana.
Do you think the American royals will get in line for a payout?! Or advertise a $100 bonus for domestic staff?! Or have tantrums in private at this evidence of the personal wealth of the King that they can't get their hands on, unless they butter him up ...will the sugary PR include sweet visits with grandchildren?!
This is spreading all over social media.
That is not her in the photograph. That is not her smile.
She was still married to Trevor in 2012, and was working on Suits.
What an odd article ...
Would you call your hairdresser staff?
How would this hack know what jewellery Charlotte inherited from the Late Queen (although I do believe there would have been a small personal inheritance a d it probably was jewellery)?
Why is this supposed feud between Camilla and Catherine being promoted? Camilla has grandchildren of her own so is quite used to having a younger generation around. She has spoken about the huge generational gap with her own grandchildren but she is highlighting differences not finding fault. She seems to be a very tolerant person to me - must be to still be happily married to fussy Charles!
Our monarchs rule by consent of the people. It seems to me, from following the Accession Council meeting carefully, that this is the mechanism for ensuring that no scurvy knave, even if he is the son of the previous king, puts his arse on the throne for much more than one day. The Accession Council includes all members of Parliament, both houses, as well as others of the Great and Good.
Having removed 2 monarchs in the 17thC, there's no way we would allow any known unworthy king's whelp to have Absolute right to the throne - that's why the Council exists.
* needn't think that a Queen's crown will sit on her head in the event of that crash she so fondly imagines.
The person who wrote that article doesn't know the difference between `employed' and `seld-employed'.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex lead special nominations in HELLO!'s Kind List 2022
Lily Waddell
Fri, 11 November 2022 at 10:07 am·
From Hello!
https://uk.yahoo.com/style/duke-duchess-sussex-lead-special-100719777.html
I doubt much of anything in the RadarOnline article is true.
Having a hairdresser cut Charlotte's hair at home every couple of months hardly sounds like having a hair stylist "on staff." I wouldn't expect Kate to drag any of her kids to a regular shop for haircuts. And if it's the same person who cuts, colors, and styles Kate's hair, then she's not Charlotte's staff anyway. We know PC has her own pony so it's not surprising she has a riding instructor. But I'd be surprised if that person is employed full-time just to be available for the occasions when PC is out of school and wants to ride. I expect he/she has other duties.
It's quite possible HMTQ did leave Charlotte earrings but I expect she left things to other great-grandchildren too. The article seems to suggest TQ was favoring PC over everyone else and I tend to doubt that is true.
Personally I doubt Camilla is constantly "berating" Kate about her kids. She apparently was irritated by PC at the funeral. It appears to have started when George pinched Charlotte. But then Charlotte whirled around ..
Clip here:
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/frustrated-camillas-words-kate-naughty-28028921
I expect Camilla was tired AND she had a broken toe and those can hurt like crazy when wearing shoes & walking. Plus, the way they lined up at the Arch, PC and PG were lined up even with Camilla. That may have irritated her. It would have me. Not because of rank but because of fear one or both might step on my broken toe if they got at all rambunctious. So I expect that was the issue for Cams. Not Kate's parenting.
More "positive thoughts" to guide her life.
It's highly doubtful * is getting any "Kind Person of the Year" award from any organization/publication.
The only awards * will be getting are the ones she can buy with Hairy's money.
Since Sunshine Sachs dumped her, * no longer has a PR company to trolll for/buy awards for her.
In another irony with the last American Duchess, both TW and Wallis were the same age when they married into the Royal family. As an indication of how times change, at 36, Wallis was deemed middle-aged and too dried up to have a child with David, though the spectre of that happening probably kept the RF up at night. Apparently the couple was told under no circumstances were they to conceive a rival heir for the Princess Elizabeth and to not even think of it. I suspect, owing to an, em, athletic love life, both with her legal husbands and others, Wallis had taken measures to never have any children and she didn't, that are known about at any rate. Or perhaps she couldn't for a variety of reasons, congenital or as a result of her aforementioned vigorous and international love exploits. And there's me trying to keep it delicate. :)
I expect Harry's wife to have taken similar measures. Trevor very much wanted a child with her but she was focused on her career at that juncture. There were intimations from Nanaki according to one source that TW had actually terminated Trevor's baby as a precursor to sending him his rings in the mail. Nanaki was still in the friend circle at that time apparently but claimed later that this incident--TW's callous treatment of Trevor, whom Nanaki liked very much--that caused her to end contact with TW, not the other way 'round. Prior to setting her sights on a Prince of the United Kingdom, procreation was not something that would have been in her best interest before, so it's pretty likely that she may have had herself surgically sterilized, if she wasn't already incapable of getting pregnant. But along came Harry and . . .whoopsie . .bit problematic if she'd taken herself out of the reproductive sweepstakes prematurely. But even though she was nearly 37 (and holding, perhaps) before 'producing' her first (that we know of) child, she still got to market herself as a 'young, vulnerable new mother'. She's still milking the 'young mother' label as far as I can see, like she's still 25 years old.
I'm pretty sure that David was firing blanks or had some other profound sexual dysfunction that meant he couldn't function in a normal relationship. That's why he pursued only married women--they were 'safe' and didn't have expectations of a child, and if his mistress were to turn up in the family way, it was sure to be Hubby's if my surmise is correct. I think it's plausible that his great-grandnephew has similar difficulties.
If Catherine were to conceive again at 41, the fact that she's already delivered 3 children would actually serve to make her more fertile, not less as she reaches the end of her childbearing years. The Queen didn't have Edward until she was 38, and that was really late in those days. Catherine could possibly have another baby but based on her sylphlike figure in the close-fitted wool coat in Wales, there's no visible sign of anything like it. I think they are done but a little sister for the brood would be adorbs.
The apparent official acceptance of 'Archie' and later 'Lilibet' (Invisibet, I like to call her) by the Queen and their listing in the LoS does throw a spanner in the works of the 'no-kids' theory. If there are conceived-by-surrogate kids in their custody, even if such children aren't genetically Harry's (or his wife's for that matter) there must be good tactical reasons why the official line is as it is. As WBBM has previously observed . . this could be a very delicate, but necessary tactical operation in wartime, and the RF is engaged in an all-out social media/cuture/race war.
If the christening of Archie has been officially listed on the Court Circular, then we must accept the the official position is that it happened. There were reports of the Cambridges arriving in Windsor, though Catherine was reported to be in a blue dress. If there was a private ceremony for the child TW presented as hers, either those present refused to pose for an official commemorative portrait of the day or TW refused to allow one to be taken. If the latter, it'd be oddly counterproductive to her brand. The only photos we have of the purported gathering were copyrighted and released by Sussex Royal so the Palace has no official role in those, nor do those photographs carry the official imprimateur of Buckingham Palace.
As ever with any Sussex-related developments, we need to consider if something actually occurred if we have only TW's word (or Photoshopped projects) for it rather than official statements from the Palace. Other photos of Royal christenings are trademarked to BP. Not Archie's. Therefore I have made up my own mind about the veracity of the photos released supposedly of that day. Even if nobody had minutely studied the metadata . . Catherine would not have recycled a Christmas outfit for a July christening. 'Nuff said.
Whether or not members of Archie's Royal family had officially met him prior to his debut in South Africa, something was precipitated by the couple's actions on that tour. If not the baby, who was trotted out the once and never seen again, but his parents of record sure were as they spilled to Tom Bradby in separate interviews after trampling on various sensitive cultural and political customs--as soon as the couple returned to England they were packed off to Canada almost immediately . . precipitating Megxit just a couple months later. Something came to an intolerable head directly after SA, so one is curious what that could have been.
Without stating it explicity this article clearly shows the difference betwen the couples.
The Prince and Pricess of Wales: invitation only awards and hefty grants given to those who have the best practical innovation to alleviate climate change. Backed by the uber wealthy and the entire project overseen by an international group of people. Rich people are desparate to buy tickets at any price, but none are for sale.
The Royals of Montecito: pay a hefty price for tickets and the more expensive the better the access to royals. Vanity awards given out for whoever has the best PR, sinply to add to their collection.
I wonder if the hapless one sees the difference and feels shame that his wife has reduced him to this.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope gala in New York on December 6, which honours people for their humanitarian and philanthropic efforts.
Hosted by President John F. Kennedy's niece Kerry Kennedy, the gala has a top-tier 'Pioneer' package that costs a cool $1 million and will include four seats at the top table where the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are expected to be seated.
Another award. What for, pray? I can't recall any 'humanitarian and philanthropic efforts'. And who would be stupid enough to pay such an eye watering amount of money to be seated at the top table with those 2?
With a bit of luck, no one will want to pay that amount of money to sit with the dooke and duchass.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11420535/Rich-Americans-spending-1MILLION-rub-shoulders-Meghan-Harry.html
Henceforth, I will be appropriating "Dooke and Duchass", as it's too perfect.
I double-checked the urban dictionary re. 'Dookie' . ..
What does Dookie mean in slang?
feces
Noun. dookie (uncountable) (US, slang, African-American Vernacular) feces
As a title for H, Dooke fits like a glove.
Well, whew . . the other thing I had to double-check was the timing of William's visit to Boston for the Earthshot Prize awards. That ceremony will take place on December 2nd. So I fully expect the Dook(i)e and his DuchASS to descend upon NYC several days early in order to orchestrate as much media chaos at the same time as the Waleses visit as possible. If they are SO CLOSE to Boston at roughly the same time, expect lots of manufactured articles about the Fab Four reuniting for tea or some such twaddle. After a non-response from the Wales camp we will be treated to a fresh spate of articles about how William and Catherine rebuffed the Dookies' 'olive branches' and etc. I can see it now.
https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2022/11/03/prince-william-earthshot-prize-boston-what-to-know/
Duchess in the doghouse
Cockburn’s spies hear that Meghan Markle is in hot water with her husband after she outed Prince Harry on her podcast for having failed the UK citizenship test. The prince was apparently “hurt” that his wife told the world that he had “no idea” about some of the questions, as it “fueled the press.” Good thing you don’t need to take a test to be a royal…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DFRusvri3c
This YT video may be of interest to some. Christopher Bouzy, owner of Bot Sentinel, is being sued by many people. He has defaulted on one lawsuit due to lack of response for months after being served.
Most importantly, a case against Bouzy was brought to the attention of the Justice Department for lying on bankruptcy papers. He claimed on bankruptcy papers filed in a court of law that he did not own any companies allowing the bankruptcy to stand which slowed the process of Bouzy and his girlfriend from being evicted from their rental home and avoid other creditors (they owed the owner of the house $10,000,). Nate the lawyer filed papers proving he owned Bot Sentinel. Now this is where Meghan Markle and Amber Heard come in. Nate wants discovery on Bot Sentinel including payments, client information, National/international activities. MM is/was a client of Bot Sentinel.
Here’s the interesting tidbit: C Bouzy is being represented by a very hard-hitting, very expensive law firm who Nate the Lawyer believes someone else is paying for the legal services. A Heard is broke so could MM be funding the defense to keep her bot shenanigans away from public view?Still early stages, maybe next Jan-February for discovery
Do appropriate "Dooke and Duchass" by all means. Unlike *, I don't have a copyright © claim on it 😉
Hollywood gossip!
The prince married trash and she dragged him down to her level. I don't regard her as trash because of social class or economic standing of her family and how she grew up, but because of her character.
I'm not sure that his dream was to be pals with A-list Hollywood stars. I think he genuinely wanted a quiet private life with some close loyal friends with whom he shares interests. He can't have that though because he needs to bring in a fortune to keep the wife happy and provide for himself and the children. Her? She doesn't regard A-list Hollywood stars as her ideal social set because she believes that now that she is royal she is superior to them in status. To her, friends are simply people she can control and who tell her how wonderful she is. She always finds friends like that; she doesn't always keep them around.
She really has no clue, has she?
No need for permission, feel free to use 😁 (should it be douche arse?)
No, she hasn't got a clue. It's not future guests she needs to re-think, it's her unremarkable interviews. And she thought 'she'd be asked by networks for more in-depth answers'. She can't provide any. Somehow, I don't think Spotify will rush to renew her contract. She needs a more original format and interesting topics, and less focus on herself (a tall order).
More "positive" thinking by the Duchass.
"Catherine would not have recycled a Christmas outfit for a July christening."
Maybe, maybe not. Kate's clothing choices do sometimes surprise me. And the outfit doesn't look very Christmassy anyway. Yes, there's a red headband & red shoes. But salmon pink doesn't say Christmas. And the dress doesn't look wintery. I wouldn't wear red and pink together and we don't know that Kate did that either at Christmas. While we can't see her feet, clearly she did *not* wear the red headband seen in the christening photo to the 2018 Christmas lunch. And at the time (Christmas) there was debate over whether the dress was by Stella McCartney & first worn in June 2011 to Philip's birthday party. If so, it is likely a summer dress and had been "recycled" once already. (I tend to think Kate had the 2011 dress reproduced in a less shiny fabric. She does have designer dresses remade in different fabrics fairly often.)
https://whatkatewore.com/2018/12/19/kate-is-in-the-pink-for-christmas-luncheon/
The earrings worn at Christmas were not Diana's nor are they the ones worn at the christening that probably were Diana's. The Christmas earrings were by In2Design. So if Kate has been photoshopped into the christening photo (a general possibility IMO), her head didn't come from a photo taken at the Christmas lunch. And so far as I can see, there are no *public* photos of Kate in that (probable) Juliette Botterill bespoke headband other than the christening photo although she went through a definite "headband period" that predated Archie's christening and lasted at least until Easter 2022.
Kate's dress color doesn't say baby boy. But Sarah McCorquodale and Doria are wearing more "girly" colors too. And Doria's outfit likely would have been under Meghan's control. So maybe she didn't demand the traditional blue and white color code some say Kate wanted for Louis's service?
I do agree the report Kate arrived wearing blue raises doubts. But so does the photo of her arrival.
https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/2019070675015/prince-william-kate-arrive-archies-christening/?viewas=amp
There is pink showing on the front of Kate's body. So it could be she is wearing a light jacket or coat in blue over the pink dress. But if that pink is her skin, that blue dress is VERY low cut. I doubt she'd wear something low cut to a church service. But also look at Will's spread collar. (He's not wearing his suit jacket in the car.) The collar is very tall, much taller than what he wears in the christening photo. Also it doesn't look very starched compared to the christening photo. So they could have changed clothes.
Apologies: Elvis
Return to Sender
Spamalot
Very early this morning
woke by dookes hack
Got a missive via email
tried to answer back
Return to sender
Mailer-Daemon
Unknown number, burner phone
We had a quarrel, a difficult chat
I’m trying to resign
but my memo keeps coming back
Return to sender
address unknown
No such person, in ‘cito zone…
`However, keen royal fans were also gathered for the event, with Royal Historical Society member Chris Imafidon saying: "It's fascinating, a great thing. You can't have a public or private christening. A christening is a public event, but every mother wants to protect their baby especially because of the shadow looming over them... What's fascinating is that this is the first baby that can be a king, potentially an American president, an African president. No baby is like this baby. He embodies all different countries." '
Words almost failed me at the ignorance and idiocy of the final statement so I checked out this guy - some `thinky thought'!
He seems somewhat dodgy:
- Univ. of Oxford has never heard of him and has disowned him;
- I can find no reference to his claimed scientific work (no mention of which discipline he worked in;
- if he were a `professor' in the British sense (an eminent academic with a `Chair' in university and entitled to the title of `Professor' there'd surely be something about him online.
- There's a Guardian photo of him at Windsor with an alleged Knight of the Realm (Sir Somebody or other) whom presumably the College of Heralds has never heard of either.
The only statement that rings true is that he's Nigerian. Yet his `cv' is repeated verbatim with nobody doing any checking.
I'm not sure if even the BBC checked him out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUIiw-_lEXo
His company `Excellence in Education Ltd' doesn't seem to exist outside its own website and not known by Companies House.
At least he doesn't claim to be a Nigerian prince.
I thought we'd long ago concluded that the whole photo was fake.
Eggcollections Ovary
She’s always preferred white
not the yolk
When choosing mates
for a hard boiled poke
Well over easy
eggs debauched
Decided to scramble
shell out for poached…
@Maneki
I love ‘douche arse’ 😜
@lizzie
The ‘pink’ looks like Catherine’s
arm to my blind eyes?
It is not unusual to become passionate about a certain cause, have some seed money, and then establish a foundation to manage and disburse donations from targeted fundraising events. Or is it? I don't have enough knowledge and experience of raising funds for a cause on such a large scale.
That foundation they set up seems to be a tax avoidance and money laundering scheme. I do not have the knowledge to know exactly how this works, but it all seems very odd.
Eurotrashed
Queen Margrethe of Denmark
and King Harald of Norway
Watched with horror
markles display
United together
with the UK
They’ve told their errant kids
to go their own way…
How on earth could Archie be an African president? The 'professor' is a fantasist! Funnily enough, in Southern Africa, Nigerians are typecast as scam artists. He fits the stereotype perfectly. Do media outlets not do any research, require no verification?
It didn't look like an arm to me but the photo is quite blurry. But if it is an arm, the exposed length would suggest Kate is wearing short sleeves. I'd kind of doubt she'd plan to wear a short-sleeve dress to a church service. Admittedly, we've mostly seen her going to church in colder months--Christmas, her birthday weekend, Commonwealth Day.. Maybe she had a jacket in the backseat like a Smythe one with the cut-out back she used to wear alot.
I'm not saying the christening photo is necessarily real. But I'm not convinced Kate wouldn't have dressed in that outfit for a summer service. And if it is fake, I'm pretty surprised Clarence House posted it on their Instagram with a note saying Charles and Camilla were there. I guess there might be reasons to not dispute the photo when the Sussexes released it if it were fake. But posting it? I guess staff might not have known better.
@Hikari mentioned the Sussexes retained copyright on the photo. That's seems to be true. But I looked back at the photos from the from W&K's kids' christenings. And it looks like the particular photographers hold copyright. For Louis's, Matt Holyoak, for Charlotte's, Mario Testino, and for George's, Jason Bell. So I'm not sure that's a big deal.
I have Observant One to thank for enlightening me. 😄
It must be difficult for the hapless prince ... being outside that structure with its protocols and traditions and huge support staff. I wonder if he feels that separation keenly or if he is still angry and affronted that everyone won't fall in line with what his wife wants.
Re. The christening photo
I certainly concluded long ago the photo was a fake. I’m not a specialist in manipulating digital media myself, but this picture is an obvious cut and paste job. If you look at the eyeliners of the principals… it’s very odd. No one seems to be looking in quite the same place. Camilla particularly is not looking directly at the camera and seems tipsy. Not that I would blame anyone for having a few fingers of something stiff if they were actually forced into attending some debacle micromanaged by Harry’s wife.
I revisited the picture last night and realized that I had forgotten what a pale shade of pink Catherine’s dress is. Due to the more vividly colored headband and shoes, I had been remembering the whole ensemble as a bit more raspberry in feeling. The pale color, short length, and lightweight feel of the dress Actually make it more appropriate to a summer christening than for a holiday luncheon in mid-December when it was originally worn. But even taking into account Catherine’s propensity for often wearing her favorite outfits— She consistently displays an awareness of occasion in her fashion choices. Would she really have selected pink for a baby boy’s christening, And particularly an outfit that she had worn two seasons prior? Especially if she were photographed arriving in a blue dress? The car ride from London wouldn’t have been more than an hour so why would anyone have needed to have brought changes of clothing? A blue dress was most appropriate and I think a blue dress is what she wore.
Interesting that Doria and Lady Sarah are also in shades of pink— Doria in more of a salmon and Sarah in a very pale pink suit. Camilla is in cream, and Charles is sporting a pale blue tie suitable for a boy— It’s been suggested that he wore the identical outfit to Louis’s christening. Lady Jane Fellowes sticks out like a giant banana in her ultra casual yellow ensemble. Without saying anything about metadata, or the gargantuan size of Catherine relative to her standing 6 foot two husband, or how very very very odd Charles’s hand looks resting on the back of the gilded sofa.. I submit that there’s no way that an aristocratic lady who’s husband served the Queen Would’ve dressed like that For an ecclesiastical ceremony in the Chapel. Her outfit is too casual for Ascot. May be suitable for a day at the regatta.
At the time of the infamous transatlantic exercise and conspicuous consumption and extended pap called the baby shower, There was speculation that a girl was expected. My surmise is that TW whipped up this little tableau and had it ready to go, just inserting the Unholy Family at the center. Particularly if the metadata can be trusted and this image was actually created on the same date as the presentation tableau in May, rather than eight weeks later when it allegedly happened.
I just don’t see why TW would have to fake a picture if all the assembled company were there in person on the day in question. I guess I am just too prosaically sane to grasp such subterfuge.
Going a step further in the subterfuge, the child depicted in the B&W photo of the Unholy Family outside, released with the color photo is not the same baby. I’ve studied and studied it; this child has fair coloring, a completely differently shaped head and seams a little bigger. The adults are wearing the same clothes but I think this was taken at another time with another baby.
Yes, originally I wrote dooke as this is the American pronunciation, which does sound rather funny to a Brit. I didn't know about dookie and its meaning either...
I did wonder and glad I’m not alone.😛
I had to look it up, the slang word according to Google sources is American. The alternative meaning is rather apt! 😂
'We share a bond..because we share in having lost a parent': Prince Harry pens letter to bereaved children of members of the Armed Forces to mark Remembrance Sunday, telling them 'you are not alone'
He's no one now, not part of the military or the RF. And this is again about losing his mother. Diana was not a member of the Armed Forces, what does she have to do in all this? How many more times are we going to hear the same broken record? He's not helping the bereaved children he wrote to and certainly not himself either. He'll never heal.
https://tinyurl.com/2c5z3zkc
Maybe she would wear a pink dress to a boy's service as "payback."
Personally I do not believe Kate or her staff told Meghan she should wear blue or cream to Louis's christening. I say that for two reasons. First, obviously there were no color schemes or most people ignored them for both George's and Charlotte's christenings. Why would Kate suddenly decide a color scheme was needed? Some say she would because she's so sensitive that history is being created. Yeah, maybe but frankly not nearly so much by Louis. Not the heir and not the spare and not Diana's first granddaughter. I'm not saying he's lesser to the family but he is lesser for the history books unless something bad happens. But second, even if Kate did decide she just had to have guests follow a color dress code, given what we now know was going on behind the scenes (the christening was only about 6 weeks after the wedding) no way she'd try to tell Meghan what to wear. Some say she had to have since everyone else wore cream or blue and the men wore blue ties. I think the men could have done that on their own, Camilla wears cream alot in summer, Kate always wears cream/white for her kids christenings, putting George & Charlotte in blue was easy, and that just leaves Pippa and Carole. But whether Meghan was told or not, I suspect Kate would have thought she'd wear cream or a pastel. Not dark olive green. A pastel would make sense and Meghan had been wearing cream and pastels since the wedding anyway. So maybe some payback?
I can't see a difference between the baby in the color group shot and the baby in the BW shot with H&M. But is the baby in that BW shot the same as the baby in the BW shot with Harry and Charles? The one here?
https://www.insider.com/baby-archie-prince-charles-birthday-meghan-markle-prince-harry-2019-11?amp
Charles has used that shot on his Instagram too.
https://twitter.com/Rileydo73362981/status/1591938661356294145?t=1YJJmYUgCbOwyWDr4JEnhg&s=19
Apparently this Tweet has pictures of him at the USS Arizona Memorial this weekend.
Clearly the gossip he was in the UK and wanted to participate in Remembrance Sunday was wrong.
------
As for the risk of him ever becoming king, take heart folks:
I'm wondering if there might be some wriggle room about the succession of a monarch. From listening carefully to what was said about the Accession Council, and watching what goes on there, I think it's by no means a foregone conclusion that H would end up on the throne in the dreadful event of there being nobody in line ahead of him.
A new monarch's position has to be confirmed by the Accession Council; not only must the new King/Queen sign legal undertakings, the Council has to consider him/her to be a fit person for the job. For over 300 years since the Act of Settlement, the question of whether the heir is fit for the role has not arisen immediately, although I suspect it may have been a close-run thing with Edward VIII, given his playboy lifestyle and political leanings even while the old king was still alive.
English law consists of layer upon layer of legislation, with many subordinate clauses, abounding in `ifs, buts & howevers' and I can't think that there is no provision anywhere in the rules for the removal of a grossly unsuitable monarch.
Click on the Twitter link. He was indeed in Pearl Harbour, without the claw.
Down the rabbit hole! Signatures do change. Mine did. Perhaps this is an indication of how his mental and emotional state has changed. Anyone know enough about handwriting analysis to work out what the changes mean?
IIRC, H wanted to go to the UK for Remembrance Sunday, so the papers said. I don't think that was even confirmed.
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/prince-harry-pens-letter-military-153347653.html
This bit struck me:
One of the ways I've learned to cope has been through community and talking about my grief...
He keeps his grief alive by talking about it, as if he regularly takes it out of the cupboard of his memory to give it a good polish, so it still looks not bright but angry and raw. More of a rubbing of salt into the wound. His grief resembles a corpse he had exhumed and which he is trying to restore to life.
While he continues to do this, he is not coping with his grief - doesn't he get bored by it all?
God Save the King!
Didn't Wallis refer to Edward as `the Dooke'?
……………………
She did as that's the American pronunciation. H must be also be a 'dooke' in the US. Somehow, calling him dooke and not Duke (British pron.) makes him a different person, at least to me, not a member of the BRF. Dooke sounds a completely different word and suits him, he's not the H we knew. Dork might also be an acceptable variant of Duke?
-----
What started as a romantic date night in an idyllic mountain town ended in disaster for Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex.
According to reports out of the US, the couple were seen treating themselves to dinner last week without the kids at The Dutchess, a low-key Burmese bakery-restaurant in Ojai, California, but sources say their relaxing evening soon turned sour.
“They were having a nice time, chatting over some tandoori chicken about the kids and school and the upcoming US election – you know, usual husband and wife stuff,” says a source.
“They blended in at first. But then things got frosty between them.”
The source further reveals that the 38-year-old British prince “got up and walked out” toward the end of their meal, leaving the 41-year-old former actress – and their fellow diners – stunned.
“The Dutchess is a fairly intimate sort of place, where it’s hard not to notice if the people at the next table are bickering. Ojai is a celebrity-friendly place, but it was a surprise to see them there given they have all of Santa Barbara’s best restaurants outside their door.”
A source close to the Sussexes say this is just the latest in a long list of rows the couple has had following a hectic couple of weeks.
“They are stressed – they have a few big projects coming out soon and Harry, who has always been loved by the public, is particularly nervous about how he will be received given he seems to have lost his golden touch,” says a source.
“Meghan, meanwhile, is fixated on Harry’s family and whether they’ll allow her children to have and use their royal titles. For Harry, that’s the least of his problems, and he’s getting sick of talking about it when there’s bigger things going on.
“If she brought up the prince and princess stuff for Archie and Lili, especially in public in a small town where gossip spreads like wildfire, there’s no doubt he would’ve got huffy,” the source explains.
https://www.newidea.com.au/prince-harry-meghan-markle-fight
-----
sorry but it’s pretty quiet at the Windsors
I will watch the energies around the coronation (even though I saw the world map and the star) of King Charles 3 after the state dinners (end of November, I believe?!)
again yesterday, i saw meghan getting agitated to attract the gaze of journalists and the brf but the brf continues on its way.
I repeat myself but the announcement of King Charles 3 (William becoming Prince of Wales and therefore Catherine becoming Princess of Wales) and Harry and Meghan not returning to the active BRF but continuing their life abroad really cut a lot of things in their life. They are officially seen as has-beens.
we will see some agitation on their part but that’s all.
The British showed the eyes of the world that they loved their monarchy (remember on social media) some people were convinced that no one loved or respected Queen Elizabeth… their behavior and the behavior of Commonwealth members showed a another story and very real
-----
Another short reading here, from the same person:
https://mysteriouslytransparentwitch.tumblr.com/post/700835396033167360/interesting-i-wanted-to-see-the-energy-around
-----
In general, tarot readers are seeing that TBW really wants titles for the children and to get closer to the King. She is being blocked.
The couple are not on the same page, so not all happy with them. (I saw them on separate paths in tarot readings months ago, but it did not come across as a separation or divorce. I'll do some more spreads this week and see if I see any changes for them.)
The memoirs will not do well.
As always, Catherine will soon be pregnant again!
I don't think it's the same pocket square. Similar for sure. Here's a better picture of Charles arriving for Louis's service.
https://www.heart.co.uk/news/royals/incredible-photos-from-prince-louis-christening/royal-christening-prince-louis-7/
The pocket square at Louis's service has less white in it than the one at Archie's. But it's similar. He's wearing a red lapel flower both times too. Looks a bit like Dianthus at Louis's event and two small buds, maybe roses, at Archie's.
Camilla's outfits are similar but not identical. And after Louis's service it was reported she'd worn the same outfit to an elephant charity event a few weeks before. I think it's just her summer look.
Very wise words about grief.
Prolonged and unresolved grief has a detrimental effect on health, and mental and emotional well-being.
He may very well be feeling grief that has been unidentified and untreated: grief over the loss of his family, friends, country, life ...
But maybe he is simply using a word that he has been programmed with and does not actually understand the meaning.
True, it's CR III's birthday today. Long live the king!
Incidentally, I did mention H's letter to military children yesterday (8.52 pm) and your words more or less echo mine - great minds think alike!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11425991/Harry-Hawaii-Duke-Sussex-solo-surprise-appearance-visit-Pearl-Harbor.html
Why? He has American children, and it seems like a good idea to learn about American culture and history. Maybe he wanted to be as far away as possible from TBW?
In his place, I think I'd bore myself to tears talking endlessly about about my grief. Of course, nobody in the world suffers like a narcissist, they have to keep telling us about it as if it were a proud achievement.
Do you think she is frantically trying to get the attention of Bezos? I think Bezos already helps to fund the Earthshot Prize. Lauren may look like a creepy wax doll but I think her and Bezos can smell a lying grifter a mile away, so I don't think either of the duo will have much luck. He seems to be being very careful in how he doles out the money and has hired a professional team to help him get it right. The guy is not doing it for publicity.
Some obscure tweets that seem to be about the duo in this account. Can anyone make sense of them?
----
Major discussions ongoing behind Palace walls that many of you will be tickled pink over. We are potentially years ahead of it.
To say more would potentially identify our solid Palace source (through the yrs, enabling us to break news ahead of MSM), Cannot risk saying much but...
-----
We try not to be vague but you should ALL know
- there are at least 2 ongoing investigations
- results of one investigation to be an instrument for
enacting the consequences of the 2nd investigation.
Public may not be privy to all details.
We will fill in where needed.
-----
Red Faced' headline bunk! He didn't "leave RF connections to rely on hers & now unhappy".
WHAT?! 🤣
Tabloid fodder.
New arrangement thrilling. Polo. R&R. 0 pressure of RF. Loves it.
What are they ACTUALLY at odds over?
-BRAND (ing)
-Vision
-Direction
-----
They are DOOZYs when you think about it.
The pair cannot stay inside 4 walls forever and are branching out more which is how we are able to provide an accurate picture ... of the current contentions!!!
-----
Conclusion why lead in with such fodder?
> There's a book to promote.
Unfortunately for us all, many industry executives predict more dramatic falsehoods in the coming 45 days.
Yes folks, the Christmas Countdown we never asked for.
Fasten your seatbelts.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-11426207/DAN-WOOTTON-watching-series-five-Crown-Prince-Harry-quit-Netflix.html
Not just Hawaii, but Pearl Harbor.
Akin to trampling graves in the national cemetery that they did last year.
They really need to stay away from our military grave sites.
Re: Alleged fight in The Dutchess when allegedly Harry got up and walked out. (Did I say alleged often enough? I'll pepper it in here a few more times if I feel the need.) Two questions come to mind. (1) Did he leave her to settle the bill? Bwahahaha. (2) If he left separately, they probably arrived separately. Isn't that a big no no for the climate champions, which they allegedly are?
Apparently, CRIII has written to the House of Lords to get the Princess Royal and the Earl of Wessex appointed Counselors of state, amending the Regency Acts of 1937 and 1963. Is there a reason he didn't go through the Prime Minister and the House of Commons for this? As an American I feel like I'm not grasping the difference between your two legislative houses.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/yv4rej/breaking_kc3_has_written_to_house_of_lords_saying/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Happy Birthday was played at the Changing of the Guard today, and a new photograph of Charles was released for his birthday, marking his new appointment as Ranger of Windsor Great Park, a post previously held by Prince Philip from 1952 until his death. Perhaps Charles will now spend more time at Windsor; it didn't seem like he was that keen on it before, at least he wasn't in Windsor very much compared to the Queen.
It must be a matter of sadness for Charles to accept that neither of his sons care about agriculture and gardening as much as he does. When Charles passes on, what will happen to the fabulous gardens at Highgrove, planted by Charles in consultation with his landscape architect? Perhaps there is hope in the next generation with Lady Louise, who chose to work in a garden centre this past summer before starting university. Catherine likes gardening so maybe she can encourage some of her children to pick up the banner of organic land husbandry. William is thinking 'Big Picture' with his Earthshot Prize, which is doing good, but on a more micro level, I'm sure Charles would like to know that his gardens at Highgrove will continue to be tended well.
https://www.instagram.com/p/Ck8T_3fM9M5/
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/king-charles-just-posed-stunning-163303447.html
I think it is up to the House Of Commons to actually change the law, or get government to propose an amended law, and then the House of Lords to debate and agree on the amended law, and then the King to assent.
It seems that the issue was raised in the House of Lords because the government refuses to deal with it. I may be wrong.
But it is interesting that the King has made his wishes known to the House of Lords - add Anne and Edward to the list of Counsellors of State. Interference? Surely the King must have spoken to the Prime Minister (whichever one) in his weekly audiences?
I've been told no, that Netflix was holding firm on December or bust, but haven't had an update yet this week. I personally expect an announcement that Netflix is dropping the project to come out right around the release of Harry's book. NF was somehow shocked at how often Meghan's own words from the book contradicted what she said in the dickumentary. I don't know how anyone can be shocked to learn she's a lying liar who lies, but apparently some people still are... including Prince Harry. I heard (disclaimer that this is all gossip and we'll see if it is true in time) that NF sat down with them and went lie by lie showing Meghan's direct quotes from the book alongside Meghan saying something contradictory in their little show. This is rumored to have been the last straw for Harry who had already been directly shown some damning stuff by Big Daddy Chuck the Third only to have that disturbing info followed by lies in print and on tape pointed out to him by a group of sane people who haven't been gaslighting him for the last six years.
Again, not 100% sure it's true, though I have it on good authority, but just wanted to add that that is a powerful moment for the victim of a narcissist: when other people validate that what you have been seeing and hearing is actually true, and that the narcissist is truly the one in the relationship who is disturbed.
Unless someone has been in a relationship with a narcissist or is aware of the narcissistic dynamic, it is hard to understand Prince Harry's sudden change in personality, betrayal of his family, and the sudden change in his memory of past events (like that it was Meghan who first got him into therapy, when he's on tape pre-Meghan saying it was William and Catherine, and that Diana was killed because she was dating a man of color just like Harry is with a woman of color that he believes they are trying to kill [or will not stop until Meghan is dead]). Narcissists can get you so mindfucked that it's hard to know what's real. I am a very strong-minded somewhat intelligent person who often fought back against the lies, and it took me a while to get deprogrammed. I can't imagine how easy it would be and how much more confused a narcissist could make a weak-minded, damaged, and notoriously unintelligent man like Harry.
Anyway, I have heard that between Charles's alleged revelations and the alleged Netflix meeting revelations that Harry has "seen the light." And if that's true, it's a very powerful moment for a victim of a narcissist and I hope he is in the process of leaving her.
Again, all tea above is gossip. I think but don't know if it's true. We will just have to wait to see if it is confirmed or not.
saw the barkjack stuff on twitter this morning. so two new investigations? or bullying plus one. financial misdeeds in the UK (sadly no US jurisdiction) or origins of A + L? sounds like we won’t know all of it but we will know the consequences? hmmm can’t wait. and i have a huge bag of popcorn at home just waiting for this!!
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/princess-royal-earl-wessex-deputise-170126285.html
The PA is one of the 2 most reliable news agencies in the UK; the other is Reuters.
I would think that the approach to the Lords is a matter of Rank and protocol. It is also called the House of Peers, from the historical, `titled', nobility being considered relatives of the monarch, in Shakespearian days being addressed as `cousins' ie in the wider French sense as `relatives', even if they are not the children of the monarch's uncles and aunts. `Peers' means `equals', as in `peer group', so peerless = unequalled.
All the rest of us are commoners and are constituents of MP's in the House of Commons. That is the route we would have to use to address the legislature. Juries are composed of one's peers, so in theory at least a baron or above could insist on having a case against them being held in front of an aristocratic jury, though I don't know when that last happened. Reports of the Montagu trial in 1954 are silent on that point.
BTW, you may come across `commoner' being used with a capital `C' which is different. These Commoners are to be found in country places where there are ancient grazing rights which go with certain old houses, such as on Dartmoor or in the New Forest. These allow them to graze livestock on the open land in these places, so many ponies, cattle, sheep, pigs or geese, say, or cut turf or take `moor stones' for building.
Sir Roy Strong had a similar problem over his garden, The Laskett, in Herefordshire (that county again!). The National Trust was quite snooty about it when he offered it to them. (There's a quiet rebellion going on within the NT membership about how the high-ups are focussed on pushing wokery in their interpretations at their properties, when we think they should stick to their real mission of protecting historic houses and the natural landscape.)
Perhaps if Sir Roy, a former Director of the National Portrait Gallery, had owned a few slaves they would been thrilled at the thought of using it to damn him and to educate the wrong-thinking membership.
Anyway, it is now in the safe hands of Perennial, a horticultural charity supporting gardeners and any other horticulturalists who have fallen on hard times.
The proposed amendment to the Regency Act was also read out in the House of Commons by the deputy chamberlain of the Royal
Households. As this is just an admendment to the existing Acts it does not have to be presented in The Commons first and then on to The House of Lords to be approved. (unlike a completely new piece of legislation would have to be i..e. if KC111 wanted to remove PH and PA from the COS roles completely.)
LOVE LIVES
Hallmark’s Kristoffer Polaha Recalls Telling Meghan Markle to Dump the Guy She Dated Before Prince Harry
By Yana Grebenyuk November 9, 2022
“She was dating a guy in Toronto and she wasn’t really into the dude and I was like, ‘You just got out of a marriage, why are you jumping into another relationship? Go be single, be free,'” the actor, 45, told SheKnows in an October interview, referring to Meghan’s marriage to Trevor Engelson.
He continued: “She texted me in January and she was like, ‘I took your advice. I’m single, I’m free. I’m going to see who’s out there.’ In March, I get this other text and she’s like, ‘Well, I met someone.’ I said, ‘Do you like him?’ And she said, ‘I kinda do.’ And then of course, it was Harry.”
Is Kristoffer person obediently spouting lines provided by TBW or is he throwing her under the bus, ie, outing her in more of her lies viz the official start of her relationship with HazNowt?
's possible that 'the dude' TW 'wasn't really into' immediately after her marriage was some brief fling before Cory Vitiello . . Remember Cory?---> the handsome and very well-connected Toronto chef that basically introduced M to Soho House society and gave her the idea to launch The Tig? The guy she lived with for two years, appropriating many of his recipes (and a number of his kitchen appliances that were housewarming gifts) as her own? The one whose parents were shocked that the couple had broken up because their son had told them not long before that he planned to propose marriage to his live-in girlfriend of 2 years? He is the nameless guy that she wasn't very into?
There are no dates attached to this vague recollection but in 'January' TBW takes the advice to stay single and see what's out there! In 'March'--he does not say, "In March a year later . . ." but March as in two months later . . TBW texts that she's met . . Harry?
I'm confused or K. is. I always thought the official meet was May 2016 when the guy she lived with but wasn't into (obviously) cooked the Invictus dinner. Or maybe . . TBW pulled Haz at the Soho House bar two months earlier still. Which is four months earlier than their 'official' meet story of July.
Interesting to know what the origin of this article is. If the intention is to wound Cory by breezily demoting him to 'some dude she wasn't that into' and not even mentioning his name . . He's well out of it. Did he cooperate with Tom Bower? I confess I haven't made it that far. . . .Life . . conjunctivitis . .stuff. Seems Madam is feeling vindictive toward the man who she nearly got engaged to before H. Who can keep up? Nobody sane.
Lady C said the 2 Kennedy awards etc (cough) are in competition with each other. The one Maggot and Mole are attending you have to pay, the other with William and Catherine…it’s invite only, with a much higher calibre of guests etc. 😀
Harry´s Wife 104.67 The Million Dollar Duchess Dinner (Meghan Markle)
https://youtu.be/7-u3CjBUr0Q
Usually and when changes (or new laws) are made to our laws, they need to be passed by both Parliament and The House of Lords. 🥴
If I’m wrong in anyway, I’m sure another fellow Brit Nutty will oblige. 😃
Kristoffer Polaha, Meghan Markle, and Prince Harry. Shutterstock (3)
Looking back. Hallmark star Kristoffer Polaha recalled offering Meghan Markle advice on her personal life — months before she met now-husband Prince Harry...
... “She was dating a guy in Toronto and she wasn’t really into the dude and I was like, ‘You just got out of a marriage, why are you jumping into another relationship? Go be single, be free,'” ... ... He continued: “She texted me in January and she was like, ‘I took your advice. I’m single, I’m free. I’m going to see who’s out there.’ In March, I get this other text and she’s like, ‘Well, I met someone.’ I said, ‘Do you like him?’ And she said, ‘I kinda do.’ And then of course, it was Harry.”
Great minds! I noticed the same thing at the same time. :)
Her house of lies is crumbling like dust in the wind . . .
No matter how you slice or dice it, January March does not fit even the Wild About chronicles.
(maybe this is the kind of stories that NF was given and they hired someone to verify things after they saw the interview fallout).
I was actually expecting the King to revise the acts completely, but maybe he went for the more expeditious legislative course because he's expecting a lot of travel next year to all the "realms."
What I know....
UK Parliament
The UK Parliament has two Houses that work on behalf of UK citizens to check and challenge the work of Government, make and shape effective laws, and debate/make decisions on the big issues of the day.
....
House of Commons
The UK public elects 650 Members of Parliament (MPs) to represent their interests and concerns in the House of Commons. MPs consider and propose new laws, and can scrutinise government policies by asking ministers questions about current issues either in the Commons Chamber or in Committees.
...
House of Lords
The House of Lords is the second chamber of UK Parliament. It plays a crucial role in examining bills, questioning government action and investigating public policy. It is independent from, and complements the work of, the elected House of Commons. The Lords shares the task of making and shaping laws and checking and challenging the work of the government.
The King's Speech is delivered in the House of Lords during the State Opening of Parliament. The House of Lords also has a Church of England role, in that Church Measures must be tabled within the House by the Lords Spiritual. Lord True replied that he would not discuss any private conversations he has had with King Charles III.
So, it is understood that King Charles opened conversation with him directly.
How members are appointed
Members of the House of Lords are appointed by the King on the advice of the prime minister.
https://www.parliament.uk/business/lords/whos-in-the-house-of-lords/members-and-their-roles/how-members-are-appointed/
...
Consideration of amendments
Each House considers the other's amendments
When a bill has passed through third reading in both Houses it is returned to the first House (where it started) for any amendments made by the second House to be considered.
What is ping pong?
If the Commons makes amendments to the bill, the Lords must consider them and either agree or disagree to the amendments or make alternative proposals.
If the Lords disagrees with any Commons amendments, or makes alternative proposals, then the bill is sent back to the Commons.
A bill may go back and forth between each House until both Houses reach agreement on the exact wording of the bill – this is known as ‘ping pong'
What happens after consideration of amendments?
When the exact wording has been agreed by the Commons and the Lords, the bill is ready for royal assent. Once a bill receives royal assent it is made an Act of Parliament (the proposals in the bill become law).
In exceptional cases, when the two Houses do not reach agreement, the bill falls. If certain conditions are met, the Commons can use the Parliament Acts to pass the bill, without the consent of the Lords, in the following session.
https://www.parliament.uk/
- there are at least 2 ongoing investigations
- results of one investigation to be an instrument for
enacting the consequences of the 2nd investigation.
Public may not be privy to all details.
We will fill in where needed.
Our favorite Redditor thinks this may have something to do with Archie: that because he had to be removed from school due to his anxiety and panic attacks, this was reported to an official agency that opened or triggered possibly two different investigations. Maybe one into the nursery school and another into his home life?
This is possible. Panic attacks are no fun, and it could have caused his nursery school to call an ambulance because he would have appeared to have breathing problems. It's possible this triggered some kind of inquiry into the nursery itself and then, shortly thereafter, into Archie's home life.
That poor kid.
This is possible. Panic attacks are no fun, and it could have caused his nursery school to call an ambulance because he would have appeared to have breathing problems. It's possible this triggered some kind of inquiry into the nursery itself and then, shortly thereafter, into Archie's home life.
That poor kid.
Maybe possibly thinking that he was having an asthma attack?
Yet the parents are anywhere but home.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/prince-harry-meghan-markle-reportedly-010011726.html
It says H$M don't want their docuseries released before Xmas and they postponed Spare atleast once til January 10, 2023. Wonder if they have something nefarious planned for Xmas 🤔 There is a standing invitation to be with the family at Xmas, it would be a great opportunity to try and corner KC3 about titles for A$L. Or get some behind the scenes recordings or photos on their phones for future exploitation. Jmo
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11427021/RFK-Jr-baffled-Harry-Meghan-receiving-humanitarian-award-Kennedy-charity.html#comments
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Kristoffer Polaha
Kristoffer Polaha (5983197878).jpg
Polaha in 2011
Born Reno, Nevada, U.S.
Education New York University Tisch School of the Arts
Occupation Actor, director, author
Years active 2001–present
Spouse Julianne Morris (m. 2003)
Children 3
Kristoffer Polaha is an American actor and author.[1][2] He is known for his starring roles on television as Jason Matthews in North Shore, Nathaniel "Baze" Bazile in Life Unexpected, and Henry Butler in Ringer.[1] Polaha had a minor but notable role as Handsome Man in the superhero film Wonder Woman 1984 (2020) directed by Patty Jenkins.[3][4][5]
Since 2016, Polaha appeared in 7 Hallmark movies and a seven-part series of Hallmark Movies & Mysteries films titled Mystery 101,[6] saying "as an actor, I am leaning into Hallmark because it's fun to sit with my seven-year-old and show him what I do for a living. These are family-friendly movies. I'm leaning in because my 91-year-old Nana finally thinks I've made it in Hollywood because I'm on Hallmark."[7]
Reminder: places in the House of Lords were once hereditary. Membership was effectively `one out, one in', varying only when a title became extinct or a new hereditary peerage was created. This was deemed undemocratic, especially as the hereditary peers tend to have large estates and larger bank balances than the rest of us. It was decided the reform was necessary.
Thus Life Peerages were set up in the mid 20thC, so the seat in the Lords wasn't passed to descendants. In theory, these go to those deemed to have useful experience and wisdom to help guide decisions.
Beware of Unintended Consequences, however:
They didn't take account of the decline in the death rate, nor the fact that it allowed rich political toadies, of all parties, to be rewarded. That's not to say that there aren't people who fit the original concept there but there have been some really extraordinary appointments.
The membership of the House of Lords just goes on increasing.
The article rehashes last week's episode, so the headline is misleading
Yawn!
The podcast series has nothing to do with archetypes (a term she tried to own by trademarking). It is about negative stereotypes, and an opportunity to get friends to gush about her and for her to talk about herself, plus attack her critics and tell a lot of porkies.
She is boring and shallow and annoying, and has a completely over inflated and unrealistic view of herself and her accomplishments. She hit the jackpot when she found a stupid man of weak character, who was also very wealthy and very famous, and got him to fall in love with her, marry her, and let her take control.
Archetypes - Podcast. Interestingly, Archetypes has always been in the top ten on the US Top charts. And entered the People Awards, Pop category. After his nomination, he dropped out of the top ten in the United States.🤔🤔
...
Meghan and Harry were announced as the recipients of the Ripple of Hope Award in October. Which will also take place on December 6th in New York.
...
I'm curious to know which event the duo choose to participate in or if each will participate separately in both events
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9_KUg3QuMU
***********
TBW has got her husband so mind-f***ed that he acts like a limp rag/kicked dog even when she's not in the same country. H's body language was more confident in the very early days (pre-wedding) when M was still playing the coy ingenue who needed big strong Hawwy to save her widdle vulnerable orphan self from the ravening press. She love-bombed him until she got that wedding and then I think he was immediately devalued, a process that's been ongoing for the last 4.5 years now.
Hawwy's expressions of confidence were always a put-on, though, in my opinion. He's never been confident in himself and his image was a carefully constructed facade. When he was in the RF, his handlers made certain to orchestrate his appearances so that he could shine in his very limited array of skills. Mostly visits to sports charities, brief and undemanding. Kick a ball around with some cute kids, have it documented in photos and if HRH absolutely had to say a few words, keep his remarks brief, manageable, anodyne and easily memorized. They would have continued to protect him if he'd stayed loyal. He is completely unequipped for the life he's now living . .hustling for deals off his titles in lieu of any personal charisma or substantial achievements or talents of his own.
He glommed onto TBW because she told him what he wanted to hear: that HE is the true and rightful star of the Royal family; that HE deserves to be King, that HE is Diana's champion and the son most like her. And that's why I think he will continue to stick with his awful choices, even though the woman he thought he was 'saving' as his Mummy stand-in has now tossed him on the trash heap as well. I don't believe he's 'seen the light' at all, unfortunately. And even if he'd admit to regrets over his behavior toward his family, it's too late, things have gone too far. He made his grandparents' final years more stressful and unhappy than they otherwise would have been, and now both are gone. No apologies or goodbyes are possible now. His ego won't allow admission of yet more failure and bad judgement on his part, which leaving TBW would mean. Once this book comes out, would Charles even have him back under any circumstances? All indications are that it's going to be savage toward both him and Camilla. I really hope it doesn't throw Charles into a heart attack from the stress of it. Being pelted with eggs will feel like a ticker tape parade once the contents of Spare's vengeful b*tchfest are revealed.
Ally implies that they wouldn't have to partner with you, but do because of similar interests. Like a ghost writer.
Creating more Counsellors of State
Published Tuesday, 15 November, 2022
Insight
...
The King has requested that Princess Anne and Prince Edward be made Counsellors of State, so they can act on his behalf if he is absent from the UK
King Charles III has sent a Message to Parliament requesting an increase in the number of Counsellors of State who can act on his behalf.
This Insight looks at current provision for Counsellors of State under the Regency Acts 1937-53 and the King’s requested change.
Who are the Counsellors of State?
Section 6 of the Regency Act 1937 allows the Monarch to delegate certain royal functions to Counsellors of State if he is absent from the United Kingdom (ie on an overseas visit) or unwell. Letters Patent (a legal document) specifies the duties these Counsellors can carry out, which can include holding Privy Council meetings or granting Royal Assent to legislation.
Under the 1937 Act, the five Counsellors of State are the Sovereign’s spouse and “the four persons who […] are next in the line of succession to the Crown”. They must be aged 21 to serve, except the heir to the throne who has to be 18. This means the current Counsellors are the Queen Consort, Prince William, Prince Harry, Prince Andrew and Princess Beatrice.
Two Counsellors usually act jointly to fulfil certain royal functions. For example, in March 2022 the King (when Prince of Wales) and Prince William opened Parliament on behalf of Queen Elizabeth II, who was unwell.
Academic commentators have suggested the “pool” of Counsellors is too small and ought to be expanded. The Duke of Sussex cannot act as a Counsellor as he does not currently live in the UK. Also, if the King was to leave the UK on a state visit, it is likely that the Queen Consort would accompany him, leaving just three available Counsellors. The Duke of York is also no longer a working member of the Royal Family.
At 4.07pm Jo Churchill MP, the Vice-Chamberlain of the Household, also delivered the King’s Message to the House of Commons. It was read by the Speaker.
Penny Mordaunt, the Leader of the Commons, then informed MPs they would have the opportunity to consider a response to the King’s Message on Tuesday 15 November. She also said there would be legislation relating to the Message “in due course”.
On 15 November, the Leader of the Lords, Lord True, will move that an Humble Address be presented to the King, thanking him for his Message and assuring “His Majesty that this House will, without delay, proceed to discuss this important matter and will provide such measures as may appear necessary or expedient for securing the purpose set out by His Majesty”.
A similar motion appears on the Commons Order Paper, to be moved by the Prime Minister.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/creating-more-counsellors-of-state/
Some brief tarot readings:
TBW
a lot of fuss from meghan, is she coming back from vacation? (I mean vacation or rest maybe spa) but her part of creativity is at half mast, she tries to take the world by storm with her communication but the world doesn’t pay attention, which gives her a broken heart, she would like to do so many things but she doesn’t know how, she is sad
-----
The hapless prince
quite strange, harry have defeated themselves, he wants to leave a situation but he doesn’t know how, the strange thing is that he has opportunities as a prince but he wants emotional healing, it’s like we gave him money and he shrugged his shoulders saying I prefer emotional healing
-----
Princess of Wales
ok, i must have picked up a discussion because catherine thinks of harry or talks about harry, she thinks of harry’s impulsiveness, his impatience, his lack of reflection, dictated by the lack of glory, of money. She sees he’s still imprisoned by his old demons
-----
The Prince of Wales
the energies of william, an energy comes to the surface, we think about a decision, we can’t see it any more clearly, we would like to heal from certain family ties and come out of there victorious but there is always this fighting energy
-----
The King
energy of king charles 3: he feels victorious, things are going well, the british are at the appointments, he feels blessed, he is able to mourn and open up again, he does not feel the need to do more to create more, he feels stable in his new role
Reference for tarot teadings ..
It's gonna be hard if H ever accepts (which may never happen) that Mm used him, that she believes none of what she told him during the love bombing phase.
And he's done/said too much bad stuff to ever be back with his family.
Makes a person concerned for what might happen when he realizes *no one* values him. Thrown onto the top of the garbage pile.
Annoyed in Europe
54 MIN AGO
Message Actions
Woke is…woke. Woke feeds injustice, prejudice, damages the lives of young people who, encouraged by woke, damage their young bodies because of woke gender ideologies. Woke politics have infiltrated and taken control of free thought in schools, universities. Woke politics pander to the poor, promising “free everything” for life as long as they continue to sell their souls, their votes and their children to the same woke politics. Denigrating and “cancelling” anyone with brain enough to see through the propaganda.
Woke doesn’t raise people up from poverty and lack of education, instead it deprives them of the means, desire and will to escape and improve the lives of their families.
Congratulations to Meagain for promoting woke while enriching herself at the expense of free will.
Rant over.