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
Meghan’s podcast breaks my heart with three words
Who is the mystery woman encouraging the Duchess of Sussex’s activism, asks Hilary Rose
And so we stagger towards what I hoped and believed would be the finish line of Meghan’s podcast journey. My spirits are low as I contemplate the coming 1 hour, four minutes and 53 seconds, but to be fair, that could just be the rain.
The die was cast with the podcast’s name, Archetypes, which doesn’t mean what she thinks it does, which is stereotypes, but this is Meghan’s truth and word meanings, like recollections, may vary. Either way, we are promised a “thought-provoking and energising” episode about “why activism in women is often deemed audacious”. I don’t think she means audacious, I think she means presumptuous, but this is Meghan’s safe space, where audacious can mean whatever she wants it to mean, because that is how language works.
“If you don’t stand for something, don’t fall for anything,” is our opening gambit, and I am positive I would find that energising and thought-provoking if I knew what it meant. However, I am striving to be a better person, so let us assume that the problem is me. The layers of my dimensionality may not be thriving, and may even be withering. Sometimes I wonder if I have any dimensionality at all. Again, it could be the rain.
We move on to the ways in which we serve up our activism, and to a woman who is “literally layering in activism at its finest”. This segues seamlessly into a discussion about the role of hiding vegetables in humanising policy, which has bothered me for years, and Meghan says that her children love vegetables, because of course they do, perfection is clearly genetic. Before you know it, we’re back to manifesting and Meghan says “Wow”.
“I want to take a detour back into history,” she says, and if my audacious manifestation was in better nick, I’d admit that this sentence is triggering for me. Meghan has found, to her surprise, that “women have been the force behind revolution and changes for generations,” and maybe we’re going to talk about Boudica, or the Dagenham women’s strike, I think, but then again, maybe not.
Time moves on, slowly. Meghan is congratulated on her love for humanity, and she says thank you and talks about the importance of not turtling and I sit up. She’s mentioned turtling before, and I thought I must be dreaming, but no: it means going back into the safety of your shell, which sounds like a terrific idea to me, but is apparently bad. Besides, we have 38 minutes yet to explore injustices in society, so stay tuned.
Meghan says that a few days before she got married, a “very influential and inspiring woman” told her, “Please don’t give up your activism, because it means so much for women and girls,” and a million pounds says it wasn’t Princess Anne.
It’s possible that she doesn’t name the person, because the last time she got too specific, it turned out she’d never met the man (the South African Lion King cast member who “told” her that they’d celebrated in the streets the day she got married, just like when Mandela was released).
When the noise from Montecito got too much, I scrolled idly through the Archetypes website and I never thought I’d say this, but I felt SEEN.
“If an Archetypes podcast brought up a feeling that you’re processing, now would be a great time to ask for help,” it reads.
“I am processing feelings that I think might be rage or depression, but definitely confusion,” I tell my editor. “Meghan has spoken for more than an hour, and it was in English, but I didn’t understand a word. Help.”
“Don’t worry,” she reassures me. “It’s your dimensionality. You haven’t got any.”
And then Meghan breaks my heart with three short words. “Until next week . . .”
Our battleships were the `wooden walls of England' made of oak - hence the song `Hearts of Oak'. It was the main building timber of England; the wood darkens and hardens with age -old pieces are regarded as being as hard as iron.
The photo reminds me of something an architect said of his charge, Winchester Cathedral a few decades ago:
`It won't last for ever but it's not done yet'.
I believe that can be applied to our new king as well as the oak - he's not done yet!
Referring to someone's spouse as their ally seems odd.
-------
I think she means he's got her back.
Cambridge dictionary definition: someone who helps and supports someone else.
I don't think H has much say in the matter, there would be hell to pay if he ever went against her or even disagreed with her. Maybe she wanted to stress that they show unity, possibly if rumours of a separation have reached her ears.
Not the dramatic love story that she's always trying to shove down our throats. Ally doesn't paint a picture of a big romance.
Inworried about this too. My understanding is that this was initially leaked by parents in the H'wood school run gossip circuit, potentially parents whose children were at the other end of the Markle Child having a panic driven episode where certain details had to be reported to the parents of other children involved. I'm not sure at all about any of that, but that's what I've recently heard .
I also heard today that Meghan has started bitching to others about the "official" and her suggestions which are now becoming mandates for Meghan, and Meghan allegedly doesn't appreciate it but may be worried about it. She is now the one telling her very limited but loudnouthed circle about everything that is wrong with Archie and even blaming it on the BRF. I do 't know who she's gonna blame Lili on.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/yv2f4s/comment/iwikfjo/
My understanding is that this [about Archie] was initially leaked by parents in the H'wood school run gossip circuit, potentially parents whose children were at the other end of the Markle Child having a panic driven episode where certain details had to be reported to the parents of other children involved. I'm not sure at all about any of that, but that's what I've recently heard.
I also heard today that Meghan has started bitching to others about the "official" and her suggestions which are now becoming mandates for Meghan, and Meghan allegedly doesn't appreciate it but may be worried about it. She is now the one telling her very limited but loudmouthed circle about everything that is wrong with Archie and even blaming it on the BRF. I don't know who she's gonna blame Lili on.
@Fifi @Maneki
Jameela Jamil made awful comments
about the Queen.
Latest plodcast title
‘The Audacity of the Activist’
Nah,
‘The Voracity of the Antagonist’
befits the twits!!
@Rebecca
Thanks for the Hilary Rose article
Dimensionally Delicious
Queen said, dearie dont quit your day job
Duchass talking to herself- mirror mirror on the wall (you know the rest)
Here's what I heard... and my circles swirl right into Disney... she fucked up the voice over. They wanted to pay the charity directly. Meghan said no as she wanted Archewell to get the tax credit. Understandable. So allegedly, Disney gave her the sum then repeatedly asked for proof it had been donated. Proof allegedly never came, so Disney donated also to the elephants. This is the point where they made it clear she was done with Disney by saying Meghan needs Disney more than Disney needs Meghan. And with that one line, Meghan, nor Harry, nor their children will EVER work with Disney again, nor their subsidiaries. Say Meghan Markle around a Disney producer and watch them laugh. Then they stop laughing and say, "those poor elephants. She fucked up that voiceover. It was so, so bad. And then she stole money (allegedly)... from ELEPHANTS..." She really is such a fraud.
What if he (providing he really does exist and does go to the school) showed up at the school with something which would qualify for a mandated reporting? Or close enough to have people err on the side of caution. A medical reason would be a good excuse if you wanted to hide it under HIPPA.
Disney: wow. talk about blowing up the bridge when you and your family, your family in the future are standing on it.
Re. Elephant extortion
Imagine being so greedy and blinkered that you’d keep $3 million in charity money even if it meant ruining your reputation and blowing up a professional relationship that could have translated into $300 million if you’d just kept your word and been a decent actress.
But It’s so typical of her. She obviously believed that she could hide the money and she’d never be challenged about it. After all, global humanitarians gotta get PAID. Our gal is cheap but she don’t work for free.
Why did Bob Iger ever agree to let Harry’s no-talent wife anywhere near a project, especially one that had already been completed? I’ve got no sympathy for Disney since they could’ve had Sigourney Weaver. I bet Madam was pissed that all they gave her was an elephant documentary when she thought she was gonna be the new Little Mermaid. Even though she was 40 and doesn’t sing.
Me-Gain’s reality is a truly magical place
101 Damnations
Dumbo the mendicant
and ‘effalump excrement
Begged for a part from Disney
With a jumbo pump trump
From his shrivelled up trunk
Bull calf told Bob Iger
Pigsare, for a fee
Bull and cow regret
Elephants never forget
Their names are now smeared
with dung on the set…
Reactive Alliterations
MM and JJ
friends of fair weather
Obnoxious dire harpies
both tarred with same feather
Think they’re special
superior, clever
Criticism met with racism or
whatever…
‘The Audacity of the Activist’
Perhaps the title of the latest podcast was a typo and was meant to read ‘The Audacity of the Arriviste’.
and she says thank you and talks about the importance of not turtling and I sit up. She’s mentioned turtling before, and I thought I must be dreaming, but no: it means going back into the safety of your shell
This part had me chuckling. From the way she worded it, I wonder if Hilary's brain went to the same place mine did at the term "turtling". It put me in mind of the previous discussions on this blog about the pair using slang (crocodile, waffle etc) - combined with Hilary's earlier quote in the article (but this is M’s truth and word meanings, like recollections, may vary), could this be an indication that some journalists also suspect this?
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/11/15/22/64584365-11432327-image-a-5_1668550490003.jpg
He turned up for a tree planting day, without her, even though it was 5 months after Archie's birth and she had happily jetted off to New York to watch tennis without him:
https://elephantswithoutborders.org/foster-a-forest-in-chobe-w-prince-harry-duke-of-sussex/
It is registered as a charity:
"Elephants Without Borders (EWB, Inc.) is a tax-exempt 501(c)3 public charity, registered in the State of New York, USA, incorporated under section 402, Type B, under section 201. Public Registered Charity # 41-30-49"
But, I cannot find financial statements on the website. I found this, which does not seem to reflect the claimed large donation from Disney or from TBW:
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/450595376
I am disappointed that Tom Bower did not do the research and find out who was paid for that voiceover and how much.
I was wrong! Thought she was hiding a pregnancy with the flowing kaftan-like dresses, but she does not look pregnant in latest outing!
-----
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/yw65gf/whats_the_status_of_the_contribution_to_the/
There is a discussion about the Elephants Without Borders episode above.
I think Disney did make a contribution to the charity, roughly doubling what they usually donate. She personally pocketed the rest. How much do you think that amount could have been?
Much was made at the time of the vast amount of money * could earn following the Disney deal. I'm afraid that wasn't to be.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/ywsnw3/why_tyler_perry_why/
Narcs do this. They can be very generous to people in need. But they do it for gratitude and control. Their reward is praise, adoration and ... control.
Look at what she did to the Royal family, and still does, and how she stole millions from UK taxpayers to see her true character.
As part of the royal family, giving to those in need was a duty, and all donations given and received are supposed to be carefully checked and in the control of independent people. She hated that.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11434463/Is-Meghan-REALLY-speaking-guests-podcast-Journalist-thanked-producer-interview.html
https://www.childrenscolorado.org/conditions-and-advice/parenting/parenting-articles/european-baby-formula/
I don't think that was ever revealed and remember, those two love to let us know when they make a donation.
______________
Too true. However, neither they nor the recipients EVER state the amounts of their donations. It has been suggested on more than one occasion that the amounts are paltry at best.
sandie. it’s a weird story so TP know no other organization/people in the UK? and even if it were during the jubilee all he had to do is check the midwest. baby formula could be found. also the crisis mostly resolved itself by July nationwide. just a bizarre story. did she smuggle back 2 cans? and called it good? also to make it be grand he would have used words like the Duchass helped us source shipments of baby formula from the uk and europe. it’s as if he was trolling her with the “meg go to tesco and see what you can find. no just the one in windsor no need to make too big of an effort”
Infant formula shelves are still sparsely stocked here. Most of the formula on the shelves are for toddlers, not infants. That makes sense because the toddlers are old enough to drink milk, and the formula is expensive.
I’ve never been able to stand the sight of her hands. She’s got weird spatulate fingers that are oddly shaped. All her digits are odd. The hands match the feet but she is very oddly proportioned. And his have always been a mess. H has small weak looking hands. Kiddie hands that he flaps around incessantly.
If Madam is experiencing stress I guess that makes her a garden variety Sociopath. Psychopaths do not experience fear or anxiety because their limbic systems are completely different.
Maneki,
In regards to the donation from Disney to the elephant charity, I believe they donated the salary that she would’ve been paid plus extra. She can say that she “asked“ them to do so, but the fact is that doing it for charity was the only way the queen would permit her to participate. As a full-time working royal supported by the Sovereign grant, she couldn’t take outside paid work which I’m sure pissed her off no end. Dutcharse Was never down with the “no gifts, no grafts” rule.
The train wreck never stops...
Number 29 and falling in the United States.
https://chartable.com/charts/spotify/great-britain-top-podcasts
Number 33 and falling in the UK.
https://chartable.com/charts/spotify/australia-top-podcasts
Number 38 and falling in Australia.
https://chartable.com/charts/spotify/canada-top-podcasts
Number 12 and falling in Canada.
The production of the show is way over the top in terms of how many people are employed to do it for her. I don't think the show can sustain the cost.
Her popularity in Canada intrigues me. I wonder if she will turn her attention back to Canada? She has alienated quite a few people in 'high society' there but still has the Trudeaus as friends and supporters.
------
Absolutely. My narc would do unasked for grand things for me....and then think I owed them big time for the rest of my life. For something I didn't even want or ask them to do.
They thought because they did this nice thing for me that now they owned me. I had to obey them from that day forward.
No idea if this has already been posted.
Just proves how fake her sad podcasts are. I still don't understand why Spotify (I have an account) continues with this rubbish.
She won't leave Spotify without grabbing another award!
Do you think Rogan is right about why she has been fading in popularity on Spotify ... she is not genuine? Personally, I think she is just annoying and shallow!
I finally got what a narcissist is, a black hole of neediness which attempts to get filled in a multitude of ways, depending on the person, and their level of introversion/extroversion.
Please check out this thread, which includes something posted by Kerry Kennedy. It is quite unbelievable.
She is basically saying the duo are saints who were cast out because they questioned the institution (the monarchy) about structural racism in the institution and how it misunderstood mental health.
The production of the show is way over the top in terms of how many people are employed to do it for her. I don't think the show can sustain the cost.
What this says to me is that Liar is so clueless about how to do an podcast that she's being taken advantage of by Gimlet Productions. All the pigs are lining up at the trough, lessening her eventual payday, and she can't challenge any of it because she doesn't really understand the process.
Ditto for Sunshine Sachs. They could charge her 10 times what they charged others because she was so ignorant of the cost of their services that she probably had no idea until she read about it on CDAN.
And here's Harry believing in her knowledge of Hollywood.
Thanks for the differentiation between a sociopath and a psychopath.
I finally got what a narcissist is, a black hole of neediness which attempts to get filled in a multitude of ways, depending on the person, and their level of introversion/extroversion.
I'm still trying to get a handle on it myself, really. Pathology can be considered a spectrum disorder, with varying degrees along a scale. We've all got a degree of narcissism, for example. A certain amount of self-interest is necessary to ensure that an individual survives. One can have narcissistic tendencies without being a full-blown sociopath; it depends if one is capable of empathy or a conscience. It was explained to me as sociopaths are made as a response to situational trauma, but psychopaths are BORN as their neurological wiring is so off kilter. If the trauma happens young enough (say, pre-age 5 or so) a psychopath could develop.
Well, they bought a turd and are trying to polish it to reduce their losses as much as possible?
Seriously, what is wrong with those people at Netflix and Spotify? Spotify didn't have her do a preliminary interview to demonstrate that she was capable of doing such before $$$ were proffered? I'm not sure WHAT she is supposed to be doing for Netflix.
I could not watch the whole video - a bunch of really stupid people saying how great the duo are. I suppose it is a different value system, but I find it very unpleasant.
Spotify and Netflix signed deals with the H&M duo in 2020. At that time, the duo was on a roll. They were talked about a lot when they were in the RF, thanks to the PR of the RF itself. After that Covid isolated everyone. Oprah's interview came, the pair's prestige plummeted, America didn't give them the expected welcome. They proved to be difficult to work with.
Disney after the elephant dubbing, went up the trunk and didn't work with them anymore! The Bench failed. MM, Pearl animation was cancelled, SS abandoned them. Previously signed contracts cannot be cancelled! Now it's a wait and see if anyone else wants to work with them
So ... let's pivot in a different direction for the discussion.
Thank you.
-------
Of course not.
Harkles said, we can get you Royal access. And, we'll spill secrets and inside stories.
Both Spotify and Netflix said, ooh! Sign here!
Nobody questioned or vetted anything.
In their defense, no one would expect that a Royal would lie thru their teeth, either.
https://twitter.com/artemisgoog/status/1592760621061529600?t=-M_X61H0nxUDMFttGO-fIQ&s=19
She says Friar's been back to the U.K. several times re the divorce, that he is "compliant" with a drug regimen and, very curiously, "they don't have the kids," because of their chaotic lifestyle.
Her original tweet is dated in June of this year.
*TBT*
MEG-A GONG Meghan Markle is being lined up for an honorary GQ Men of the Year award.
"Published: 0:18, 26 Sep 2022 Updated: 11:18, 26 Sep 2022"
MEGHAN Markle is being lined up to receive an honorary award at the 2022 GQ Men of the Year Awards.
This year’s ceremony will be held at the Tate Modern in London on November 16 – with Meghan Markle expected to attend in person.
The swanky showbiz bash is one of the most exclusive events in the UK calendar with David and Victoria Beckham regulars and the likes of Madonna, Dua Lipa and designer to the stars Donatella Versace all attending in previous years.
Insiders said Meghan, 41, was going to be celebrated for her charity work.
A source said: “Meghan has been offered one of the top awards of the evening so it’s a massive coup for her.
“She already has a close relationship with GQ due to her friendship with Vogue’s Editor-In-Chief Edward Enninful which is also owned by Conde Nast.
Edward is very much seen as a friend rather than a business acquaintance.”
The GQ Men of the Year Awards usually take place in September and were initially due to take place on September 7.
However earlier this summer the event, where tickets cost £5,999, was postponed with no further explanation.
Insiders said the change was put in place solely to accommodate Meghan and Prince Harry should they wish to attend.
The source continued: “Due to their mini tour of Europe Meghan wouldn’t have been able to attend if awards went ahead on their original date in September.
“Talks about the evening were already happening before The Queen’s passing so no doubt things will have to be re-evaluated to make sure it’s as respectful as possible.”
...
What happened here?
Did the article with your anonymous source come full of misinformation?
a) Was the Date not changed to accommodate H&M?
b) MM is no longer friends with EE?
c) Was there talk or not with H&M before the queen's death?
...
Maybe Meghan tried to do to GQ like she's doing to KC regarding the children getting titles. Put PR out about it to force their hand. That's his modus operandi, using media, anonymous sources to achieve what he wants. But GQ tore up the article and told him no!
The DM today lists all honorees
This event was yesterday - no sign of her.
Nominations for anything usually need just one person to nominate & one other to second that. In theory, anyone can get nominated for anything as long as they know 2 people.
It was another of her groundless claims.
The only new thing is that according to the Mail is that they are joining the Metaverse - whatever that may be.
//www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-creating-world-within-the-metaverse/SR3N5N4ZTBBNJHNB5TFSGKYF6A/#:~:text=Prince%20Harry%20and%20
You are a star for finding that article. I wonder how that misinformation got out? TBW does tend to talk a lot and 'make up' a lot of stuff. Was there ever an invitation or did she imagine it?
What I find most ironic is that the hapless prince, in his chat with the fake Greta, was most scathing about awards, yet him and his wife are now roaming the country picking up as many awards as they can! The cognitive dissonance in that household must be off the charts.
Does anyone else get the sense that every week there is another awards ceremony, with celebrities and wanna be celebrities posing in more bizarre and expensive wear only once outfits? It kind of reminds me of the hedonistic era that preceded the fall of the great Roman Empire.
So that's the mix of my thoughts on the podcasting future of TBW!
Besides, she is now supposedly eager to embrace the metaverse and enjoy galactic popularity.
'Podcast industry statistics show that an episode with 9,000 downloads across multiple streaming platforms earns a place in the top 5% of podcasts. To make it into the top 10% of podcasts, an episode should gain approximately 3,400 downloads.'
She is a success, but I doubt she will make the top ten or even top twenty.
Besides, the metaverse awaits the duchess ... another failure to launch on the horizon.
Yes, those dates are weird.
The Harkles were in England on the day the Queen died, 8th September, hence all the shenanigans over flights to Scotland. Whether the organisers postponed the awards because they anticipated her death happening sometime that week we don't know. To have proceeded with the bash risked being very disrespectful during the period of National Mourning.
In addition, there was a period of Royal Mourning for 2 weeks after the death during which they attended
The funeral was followed by a period of Royal Mourning a period during which they fulfilled only appropriate engagements, cancelling anything that would have looked like fun.
To me, it looks as if * chose to interpret the changes as being made to suit her when we know it was nothing whatsoever to do with her.
PDina spoke to Thomas Markle. Not sure when. I don't know if he is telling the truth. But didn't she make a solo trip to Canada soon after the wedding? Would she have transported frozen eggs back to the UK to be fertilized by husband, or transported frozen sperm from husband to Canada to fertilize the stored eggs? It all sounds too complicated to me.
Just checked and frozen embryos can be transferred from one clinic to another even if it is on another continent, as long as they are kept frozen.
Harry and Meghan have been working on the series as part of a rumoured $100 million (£88million) deal
Netflix was believed to have been set to push back release of show until 2023 amid backlash over The Crown
But a 'senior source' has told Page Six it will be out in December despite the Sussexes' apparent reticence
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11438155/Harry-Meghans-88million-Netflix-docu-series-air-MONTH.html
********* Let's hope this is true for Christmas. Let the chips fall where they may. Then comes the Hapless book in early January.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/19917602/meghan-markle-lined-up-honouree-gq-award/
....
Netflix
Xxxx
"Let's hope this is true for Christmas. Let the chips fall where they may"
I couldn't agree more!
However: there is something rotten in the kingdom of Montecito.
....
"There have been mixed reports in the US, with Deadline insisting the show will be delayed until the new year citing bosses being 'rattled' and 'blinking first' because of the backlash over Season 5 of The Crown.
But Page Six reports there will be no postponement and 'the show will go on' in December, citing a source close to the project. The insider said: 'As far as I am aware, the docuseries is still going ahead later this year.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11438155/Harry-Meghans-88million-Netflix-docu-series-air-MONTH.html
...
Netflix has already published its premiere catalog for the month of December/2022.
https://www.whats-on-netflix.com/coming-soon/netflix-originals-coming-to-netflix-in-december-2022/
...
Interestingly nothing about the H&M docu-series. For something that is still a go and being released in a few weeks there is zero confirmation from Netflix.
I mean they are in business to get viewers. Netflix would not be silent on something they are dropping in a few weeks. They are a paid service, they want new subscribers.
a) Why is NF silent about something that will be released in December? Did NF finally accept the project or is @Barkjack right when he says NF is not interested!
b) If NF will launch in December why the silence and lack of marketing about this series?
c) Because MM has already pulled out of the project, saying that their series won't be told as she wants and recent interview with The CUT she said otherwise.
It seems clear to me that the duo and NF will also start to to fall.
Then either
1) didn't have $ to pay for award, they didn't meet her flight/accommodation demands, or she made the whole thing up to get attention
or
2) the RFK award came thru later and she abandoned the GQ award, thinking the RFK award to be more prestigious, and time wise it would better compete with EarthShot. It's also associated with a Kennedy the same as EarthShot, making her seem more equal to POW.
Personally, I think RFK award emphasizes even more that the Harkles are lesser than POW. I would have gone with both.
I think that you are spot on in saying that the two Kennedy associated events being so close together emphasizes differences. The dastardly duo are going to look bad.
W&C will be gracious and fabulous, in re-wears (dress code for the evening). They are there to give awards to brilliant people who have innovative ways to help humanity survive climate change. The awards are huge grants, and there is a committee set up to assist the winners in using the money wisely to scale up their 'inventions'. The award ceremony is invitation only as it is not a fund-raising event. W&C will mingle with all at the event and seem to be quite happy to pose for selfies.
H&M will be wearing expensive designer gear, to be worn only once. They are there to receive an award, fraudulently. I assume the award is some kind of plaque or statue that they can display in their office. Attendance at the event is for the very rich, and the more you pay, the closer you get to the Kennedys and the duo. It is a fund-raising event. A photo with the duo will be strictly for those that they deem useful to them.
Have I missed any stark differences (other than the quality of speeches made by either couple)?
Since Netflix is absolutely silent on the self-promoting documentary rumoured to be released early December, I think all and any speculation is valid.
Do not let Mm speak. H either.
Suggestion appreciated! Everything can be true and false in the Harkle's world.😂
..
TBT -SEPTEMBER 02, 2021 -
Em 2021, Harry presented The Heroes of The Year Award at the GQ Men of the Year Awards. Appearing in London at the ceremony via video link from his home in Montecito.
He present the award to Professor Dame Sarah Gilbert, Dr Catherine Green and the team behind the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine.
https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/20210902120865/prince-harry-jokes-about-tuxedos-gq-awards/
...
TBT - 21 January 2022
"House, set on 2,000 acres and which Prince Charles has turned into a crafts and agricultural learning centre and wellness retreat, was hosted by His Royal Highness, Federico Marchetti, and Edward Enninful. Together, HRH and the roundtable members mapped out a major international event for early 2023, produced by Vogue and the Task Force, with support from The Prince’s Foundation, that will put green fashion front and centre. Details will be announced in the coming weeks"
https://www.vogue.co.uk/fashion/article/prince-charles-edward-enninful-sustainble-fashion-roundtable
EE was a few weeks ago at an event organized by KCIII
...
EE's party - launch of his book, in London, was on 07 sept.. (I think) H&M were in London that day and, curiously, with an empty agenda, because Well Child would be on 08 sept. and they weren't invited by EE.
MM and GQ - Sep/2022
In the article, the anonymous source (named Meghan) explicitly cites EE and her deep friendship with MM. But why?
The source added: 'She already has a close relationship with GQ due to her friendship with Vogue's Editor-In-Chief Edward Enninful which is also owned by Conde Nast. (...) "Edward is very much seen as a friend rather than a business acquaintance."
Another curious detail is this statement in the article:
"Talks about the night were already going on before the Queen's death" Conversation with whom? With EE?
...
My opinion
MM was throwing shade at EE. And "maybe" telling him that she know he was the one who barred your name to be honored. Knowing that HE has projects with the KCIII and the award would be almost on King's birthday
Crazy theory? 😛 Yeah! But I'm following this trail.
...
Remembering: RFK and People's Awards will be held on the same day. What event will MM appear in?
Gentle Reminder:
Let us be careful about how we discuss how we talk about the various topics and how we state what we observe.
If I write something about how I know Meghan did X on boats because I have seen a picture of her on a boat wearing a hat - then some of the problems are that the picture itself is not proof of anything other than at one time she was on a boat and someone took a picture of a bunch of people. Another is that there can be some very very good photoshop. So unless I was personally on that boat and I saw/heard evidence that she did X on this boat at this time, I need to refrain from saying I know she .... or She is ....
This is from the guidelines (they do updated periodically).
-Posts which may be deemed too many flat statements/too provocative may not posted on the blog.
It is about not playing hard and loose with facts. We can have opinions but they need to be stated better as I think, I have seen several times that instead of she is or I know that.
Let's take a lesson from those who were doxxed. People of all different opinions read the blog. Not everyone likes what they read here.
so saw on another blog that one of the kennedy girls is married to a former IRA member so sticking it to the brf is probably what some in the family would like. RFK family drama kinda like the harkles.
https://www.whats-on-netflix.com/coming-soon/whats-coming-to-netflix-in-december-2022-11-16/
and like the theory she’s throwing shade at EE. i still think the tyler perry one is shade on her. could you bring back some baby formula from the uk? that’s like me asking for some good darjeeling when a friend goes overseas
Detailed description of the TMZ documentary at the above link. There does seem to be differences of opinion on some things.
Meghan Markle: America’s laziest interviewer
The Duchess of Sussex doesn’t actually bother to speak to her guests
By Cockburn
Remember Oprah Winfrey’s bombshell “interview” with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry earlier this year, in which she stroked her subjects’ egos and failed to probe them on any of their hyperbolic claims? Well, Cockburn has found an even worse interviewer than Oprah: Meghan Markle.
Listening to Archetypes, Meghan’s podcast about “dissecting labels,” Cockburn found it a little weird that the guests never spoke over each other. You’d think that as the interviewees they’d try and get a word in edgeways through Meghan’s babbling. After labeling the show a “candid conversation” it seems the conversation is actually happening without Meghan.
One of the podcast guests has revealed that she didn’t actually speak to Meghan for the show in an Instagram post. Allison Yarrow from New York appeared on the Duchess’s show last week in an episode called “To ‘B’ or not to ‘B'” where she spoke about the word ‘bitch.”
In her post, Allison shared a photograph of herself in front of a sign for Gimlet, the audio production house run by the ex-Obama staffers behind Pod Save America, and thanked a producer, Farrah Safarfi, for being ‘an excellent interviewer.” But in the show, Allison’s comments are interspersed with comments from Meghan herself.
This isn’t the first time people have questioned whether Meghan actually speaks to her interviewees. After an episode with Justin Trudeau’s wife Sophie, an old Markle friend from her Suits days in Montreal, it was clear that the conversation was recorded in separate studios, as podcast producer J.P. Davidson tweeted, “Thrilled to finally share that Sophie Grégoire Trudeau was in our studio with producer Will for her interview with Meghan Markle.”
Even after leaving the British royal family, Meghan Markle has found a new way to get paid for doing nothing. Cockburn can’t help but admire the chutzpah.
That is, the same amount but adjusted upwards to take account of inflation, which in turn means the same, only different.
so saw on another blog that one of the kennedy girls is married to a former IRA member
--------------
I don't know what blog that was but the information is incorrect. Paul Hill married Courtney Kennedy in 1993. He was not, however, an IRA member. This is very irresponsible of that blog. He was wrongly accused and convicted, along with another three, of the bombing of a pub in Guildford [frequented by British soldiers] and they were subsequently named the Guildford Four. He spent 15 years in prison in solitary confinement and moved from prison to prison. The four were released after 15 years after an IRA unit confessed to the bombing.
A detail, perhaps, but it needed to be pointed out.
One of the podcast guests has revealed that she didn’t actually speak to Meghan for the show in an Instagram post. Allison Yarrow from New York appeared on the Duchess’s show last week in an episode called “To ‘B’ or not to ‘B'” where she spoke about the word ‘bitch.”
In her post, Allison shared a photograph of herself in front of a sign for Gimlet, the audio production house run by the ex-Obama staffers behind Pod Save America, and thanked a producer, Farrah Safarfi, for being ‘an excellent interviewer.” But in the show, Allison’s comments are interspersed with comments from Meghan herself.
This isn’t the first time people have questioned whether Meghan actually speaks to her interviewees. After an episode with Justin Trudeau’s wife Sophie, an old Markle friend from her Suits days in Montreal, it was clear that the conversation was recorded in separate studios, as podcast producer J.P. Davidson tweeted, “Thrilled to finally share that Sophie Grégoire Trudeau was in our studio with producer Will for her interview with Meghan Markle.”
Even after leaving the British royal family, Meghan Markle has found a new way to get paid for doing nothing. Cockburn can’t help but admire the chutzpah.
(mic drop) BOOM!
Wow. What a way to run a podcast. Through the wonders of technology, it's easy to have people in different parts of the world chatting to each other, and given the logistics (ie, Sophie Trudeau being in Ottawa, M in California--I didn't assume that * was actually cozied up with all her guests on the same couch. Though I suppose with L.A. based friends like Serena, I assumed they were sharing a soundbooth. Great conversations can happen remotely but if * isn't even interacting with her guests at all, just reading canned patter off a script (her script, naturally) . . that is veddy, veddy interesting Who would have insisted on this arrangement? Herself? Or Spotify? There are definite issues of control here--but whose? * wouldn't like it if a guest tried to speak over her or contradicted her in any way, so refusing to actually have a conversation with them but force them to respond to prompts to be added later would ensure that nobody steps on her marvelous lines and also that whatever they say will fit acceptably into the way * wants it to go. No one can be allowed to speak spontaneously to her face and maybe challenge her in some way.
Or, from Spotify's point of view--if * is not *allowed* to interact with the guests and they simply pre-record her twaddle and insert guest comments later, they retain control of the outcome to the extent that they can control it. It's not *good* because they are still letting * run at the mouth untrammeled. But maybe they are able to edit her down a bit, and things would go much more smoothly in the studio at the guest end if * isn't there to interfere. Since the project is losing money most likely, after the grandiose investment in a whole lotta nothing Spotify put forth, keeping control of the guest segment means that they can do it efficiently without catering to Madam's ego and spending money to shuttle the guests to her.
The post-Christmas weeks are usually a bunch of gray dreary blah, but it makes a novelty to actually have something to look forward to in January. I can't wait to see just how very badly H is going to ruin what remains of the shreds of his life. God bless King Charles and the whole Royal family, and give them the strength which they will sorely need.
Thank you for correcting the record re: Paul Hill. That case really was a horrible miscarriage of justice. It shouldn't be compounded with false stories.
The Kennedy family is large & high-profile so there are going to be some negative standouts. The older generation of Kennedys were allegedly subjected to "closet" discipline by Rose and their weights were carefully monitored with food intake supervised. And we know Rosemary was lobotomized in the 1940s with a disastrous result. Supposedly Joe Sr was afraid she might get pregnant and harm a presidential run for Joe Jr (JFK only after Joe was killed in WWII)
In the next generation the most negative stories come from the RFK branch. Stories do abound about the way Ethyl raised her children. But that was the biggest branch too and losing a husband to violence when pregnant with your 11th child would be overwhelming to most people. . People have said Jackie raised her 2 kids well. I guess that's true but JFK Jr's plane crash that killed two other people was an avoidable mishap. Lack of instrument training, flying at night in questionable weather, flying with a very recently healed broken ankle, refusing to let a willing flight instructor come along.... And Caroline has acted entitled in political circles IMO.
Kerry Kennedy is now worshipping at the altar of Harry and Meghan and is slinging racism claims against the BRF on the Sussexes' behalf. She doesn't seem to have great judgment IMO. She married Andrew Cuomo, after all. (The Luv Guv) She has described herself as "a mom" in multiple professional situations so that may be one reason she likes MM. ("I think of myself as a human-rights advocate and as a mother.")
The Kennedy family had always had an extremely strong Irish Catholic identity. *There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.* But it's possible in Kerry's case that might have affected her views of H&M and their purported (but hardly real) rejection of the BRF.
Sussexes’ original Netflix director left ‘over creative differences’
By Keiran Southern in Los Angeles
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex clashed with the director originally appointed to work on their Netflix documentary series, prompting her to leave the project, according to reports in the US.
The documentary series is one of Netflix’s most eagerly awaited releases of the year.
The couple signed a high-profile deal with the streamer in September 2021 which involved producing documentaries, scripted shows and children’s television.
Harry and Meghan are understood to have hired Garrett Bradley, an Oscar-nominated film-maker known for a Netflix series on the Japanese tennis star Naomi Osaka, to oversee their show with the streaming giant.
However, Bradley, 37, could not agree with them on a tone for the series and departed over creative differences, according to the New York Post. She was replaced by Liz Garbus.
“Garrett wanted Harry and Meghan to film at home and they were not comfortable doing that,” a source told the publication. “There were a few sticky moments between them, and Garrett left the project.
“Harry and Meghan’s own production company captured as much footage as they could before Liz Garbus was hired.”
A representative for Harry and Meghan has been contacted for comment. Bradley has also been contacted for comment.
Garbus, 52, a prolific documentary film-maker whose work includes films on Nina Simone, the American singer-songwriter, and American democracy, has been described as left-leaning politically. Meghan, 41, and Harry, 38, were believed to want to make edits to their documentary series after the Queen’s death amid concerns that “truth bombs” would be poorly received while the royal family was in mourning.
Meghan conceded she would not have made the same decisions as Garbus.
Cameras have since been spotted filming the duke and duchess while capturing material for the series on their post-royal family life.
Meghan has disputed claims that it will resemble a reality television show.
“The piece of my life I haven’t been able to share, that people haven’t been able to see, is our love story,” she told the website The Cut.
“The piece of my life I haven’t been able to share, that people haven’t been able to see, is our love story,” she told the website The Cut.
Well, if THAT wasn't gag inducing, I don't know what is! WHAT love story? They haven't even made it five years yet and, according to them, have been unhappy most of the time, blaming it on the family that showered them with riches that we could only imagine while expecting them to shoulder some of the responsibilities of the family business. How horrific, and how brave of them to flee, whining about how daddy cut off their allowance.
When is it going to stop??!
The lunatic Kennedy who's an anti-vaxxer--he might be the same one who is the cheater and abuser.
The Kennedy Camelot was a lot of bullish*t.
I remember the governor of Massachusetts waiting on Caroline Kennedy's decision to become the state senator due to some kind of opening; he was very polite, but she wasn't suited for the job.
9h
I stand by that. December or bust. But I don't think it's coming out in December. I think this is Megan running a puff piece out of one of her mouth pieces, because now she will have been told by netflix that they are optioning out of the project. So what she will do or is doing is trying to make it look like it's coming out in December just like we promised when really it's not coming out at all. This seems like a ploy to try to make a power-play on Netflix but I don't think it's going to work. If netflix were releasing this project they would've released a date. Until I hear a date I don't believe anything about this project or it's being released in December.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/yxwguu/comment/iwrfxus/
Netflix set up an entire team to work on Pearl, which was then cancelled, so I suppose it is not completely unprecedented that they may cancel a show about the couple, even though a team has been working on filming and editing for ages.
Just my opinion, but I think the duo have a real problem. I am sure there is a name for it ... they are full of ideas, which they present to whatever company, dressed up in a lot of word salad (which may sound impressive to someone who thinks that if you use big words, even if you don't use them correctly, you must be 'the smartest person in the room'). The company more or less knows what sells and the initial meeting is very agreeable but in reality the couple and the company are thinking and talking about different things. The contract gets signed. The couple cannot deliver on anything unless the company employs a huge team to get something done, but even then, the entire process is fraught with problems. In my opinion, the big problem is that they do not produce an end product that is amazing or groundbreaking. Difficult people who achieve amazing things are very different from difficult people who are mediocre to hopeless.
I think both could have achieved real lasting success in America if they had found the right people to manage them and let themselves be guided, much like she would not do as a working royal, and look how badly that turned out. To me, the problem then is that his only talent is being a royal and Diana's son, and I am not sure what can be done with those assets that is not destructive and mediocre. (He has become surly and pathetic since he has been with her, in my opinion, so he has lost his people friendly stardust.) I am not sure what talents she has that can be managed and monetized in a useful and non-destructive way, but surely there must be something?
We’ve had their “love story” forcibly jammed down our throats for the last 5 years…and she says she hasn’t shared it? Wasn’t Finding Freebies Supposed to be their love story? What about the to date three Hallmark movies about their “love story”?
When is it going to stop??!
------
Yep!
Like how she endlessly prattles on about being silenced and not having a voice!
Thank you for correcting the record re: Paul Hill. That case really was a horrible miscarriage of justice. It shouldn't be compounded with false stories.
--------
There were others at the times, e.g. the Birmingham Six. We had a twenty-five year bombing campaign on the mainland, actually England and a lot of it in London and the Irish were fair game. I couldn't let that wrong information pass, be it carelessness, lack of research etc on the part of that blog. I suspect it must have been written by a non British person.
Believe me, people with zero talent, skill or knowledge can bluff their way through life…until the day the truth dawns…either by the discovery of actual evidence or realisation by those around them (and/or working with them) ! 😳
Mole’s family had his back, and with that, he had superb good PR. Once he met Maggot who filled his little head with grand ideas, we started to see the real Mole.
Maggot and Mole have so obviously overplayed their hand and now those blind fools (at Netflix etc) are seeing the truth before their eyes, only it’s being played out on the world stage for all to witness. 🫤😂
Something from the past that is interesting. Barkjack insists that the original source for the leak about Megxit was someone in Canada (while they were 'taking a break and planning world dominance there'). From what I can recall, the only staff they took with them were security and the nanny. Jessica was still a friend, as were Markus and Lainey. Speculation!
New Palace Confidential.
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2022/11/16/using-remembrance-weekend-for-pr/
This goes into some depth about recent H$M events and is worth a read I think.
keep thinking about this netflix docudrama in december. we know she doesnt like how their story is presented. is she putting it out the docudrama is done when it isn’t and promising it publicly to slap the director liz grabus? puts grabus in a corner especially during the holiday. we would have product if this inept person did their work so netflix can’t blame us. now i can see that a narc would do that.
back to kerry kennedy. 1) have to be a piece of work to be married even for a minute 2) the rfk side of the family certainly are considered the second cousins versus the jfk side ethel herself was mocked by jackie allegedly in more elegant language essentially as a breeder 3) could ethel have been slighted by the brf? we she not invited to something? 3) irish catholics of at least the last generation were hugely anti britian maybe that still carries through. no matter the more ms kennedy speaks and the more we hear she is truly a piece of work.
This is interesting ...
Why were they 'uncomfortable'? Was there something they didn't want the film maker to see? Or perhaps they don't live there, who knows. I suppose the creative differences mean that * didn't get her own way and didn't like it. You have to obey or else.
Incidentally, have a look at the film maker, Garrett Bradley, in the article below. He's * doppelganger!!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11443741/Harry-Meghans-original-Netflix-director-quit-creative-differences.html
Oh dear! No, it wasn't a typo, I just skimmed the article and thought Garrett was a man's name... She does look like *, though.
...
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Netflix Docuseries Has a Release Date—And It’s Sooner Than You Think
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's highly-anticipated Netflix docuseries from Oscar-nominated director Liz Garbus will reportedly premiere in December. Find out all the details here.
It's a Christmas miracle: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's docuseries is hitting Netflix before the holidays.
The highly-anticipated show, helmed by the Oscar-nominated director Liz Garbus, will premiere on the streamer this December, People reported Nov. 17. Netflix hasn't responded to E!'s request for comment.
Markle, who signed a multi-year deal with Netflix alongside her husband in 2020, acknowledged the docuseries for the first time in october 2020, acknowledged the docuseries for the first time in October, telling Variety about how much she admired Garbus.
"It's nice to be able to trust someone with our story—a seasoned director whose work I've long admired—even if it means it may not be the way we would have told it," Meghan said of the director. "But that's not why we're telling it. We're trusting our story to someone else, and that means it will go through their lens."
Previously, the couple had only confirmed a documentary on the Invictus Games.
The update comes amid conflicting reports about major edits to the show and changes to the release date after Queen Elizabeth II's death in Sept.
In the Oct. Variety cover story, Markle went on to say that the filming process reminds her of her previous life as a star on Suits, where she played paralegal-turned-lawyer Rachel Zane from 2011 to 2018.
It's interesting," she noted. "My husband has never worked in this industry before. For me, having worked on Suits, it's so amazing to be around so much creative energy and to see how people work together and share their own points of view. That's been really fun."
Harry and Meghan's docuseries, whose name has yet to be revealed, will hit Netflix in December.
...
Detail:Netflix hasn't responded to E!'s request for comment.
Some lively anecdotes about royals ... the duo and their children have cut themselves off from the inner circle, filled with a lot of very interesting characters and the stories they have to tell.
The GQ Awards came and went, and no madame did not get Woman of the Year, she wasn't even invited.
* could hustle her way into Canadian celebrity, but that's as far as her hustle could take her. She was way way over her head with the BRF. She only infiltrated them because Hairy is as dumb as doorknob.
Instead, King Charles will keep the title himself, although not use it, a courtier explained.
They said: 'The King wants to slim down the monarchy, as is well known. That means it wouldn't make sense to make the Earl the Duke of Edinburgh. It's a hereditary title which would then be passed on to the Earl and Countess of Wessex's son, James, Viscount Severn.
Yes, it makes sense if Charles wants to slim down the monarchy but I 'm not sure this is right. Edward and Sophie have been steadfast, solid and reliable. And yet H is a duke, sorry, dooke now and his wife a douche arse.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11445435/King-tears-Queens-pledge-hand-Duke-Edinburgh-title-Prince-Edward-slim-effort.html
"Hairy is as dumb as doorknob."
Hold up Fifi...
You are insulting doorknobs. Atleast doorknobs have a useful necessary purpose in life. H doesn't seem to be useful for anything really.
William can give Edward his due when he is King. If that’s what has to happen, then I hope William accedes sooner rather than later. Charles is reneging on a promise made by both his parents which he himself agreed to uphold. If this is true.
That’s the word is in every organization: the hardest working most loyal employees are the ones that get dumped on.
If that intel about Charles refusing to bestow the DoE title on Edward is true, then I am very disappointed in Charles.
BUT, it probably isn't. More Douchass sh*t stirring would be my guess to change speculation about Harry's bolting the love nest or about CPS investigating 'Archie' in California.
When PP died, his title passed to his eldest son as is the custom. So from April 2021 til September this year, Charles was Duke if Edinburgh in addition to his other titles. Now that he is sovereign, the Edinburgh title goes into abeyance until he officially bestows it again. Or William could, eventually, if it remains inactive until then.
Edward has largely taken over the bulk of his father’s charities since 2017, including Philip’s pet project, the Duke of Edinburgh awards. He deserves the title. His parents both thought so and wanted him to have it. That’s why he was bestowed the lesser title of Earl upon his marriage because he was eventually supposed to have that Dukedom. He should’ve had the Ranger of Windsor Great Park as well, seeing as he lives there—Charles took that for himself too.
I’m hoping that this report is spurious and Charles is waiting until after the coronation to give his little brother what he was promised. James currently holds his fathers subsidiary title of Viscount Severn. If Edward is made Duke of Edinburgh, then James will still move up to be Earl of Wessex, because that will then be his father’s lesser title. The children are not working Royals and having another title needn’t change that. The queens youngest cousin, the Duke of Gloucester retired from a career as an architect; he’s a Duke but he’s never been supported by the Sovereign Grant. I think he paid rent on an apartment at Kensington.
As it stands now with “Archie”, the semi invisible boy, he is officially the Earl of Dumbarton, which is his father’s lesser title. Theoretically, should Harry retain the Sussex title, Archie would become the Duke of Sussex after H shuffles off this mortal coil. This is the possible although at present rhetorical situation, pending a lot of things, not least of which is the actual existence of Harry’s children.
The late Queen outlived her husband by a year and 5 months. If she was going to bestow the title i8n Edward, one would think she would have done so in her lifetime (perhaps a year after her husband died), or would have made some sort of statement as she did with Camilla becoming Queen consort when she died. That she did not indicates to me that whatever the decision was, the Queen, Charles and Edward all knew what it was and were in agreement. That they did not say anything to the public was probably to avoid public debate, which of course did not happen!
My guess is that Edward is not getting the title. If he did, it would pass on to his son, who perhaps does not want a royal life and is far down in the line of succession. The title is probably going to be bestowed on one of William's children. Louis? Or a rule change so that it is bestowed on Charlotte?
If Charles wants to keep to his slimmed down monarchy, then I’m all for it. The DoE title is the King’s by right; I personally don’t think Edward will be bestowed it. 🤗
Good article about M Obama's book, The Light We Carry. Michelle offers such sage reflections as 'fear can keep us safe, but fear can keep us stuck'. Eh? 'We practise, we learn, learn and practise, we make mistakes then start over again,' she writes. If we 'recognise our light, we become empowered by it'. It does sound like *'s word salad and Amanda Platell does say she reminds us of * and that they're not true feminists. They both married well although arguably, Michelle Obama had a much, much better education and job before marriage than *.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-11445617/PLATELLS-PEOPLE-Michelle-Obama-Meghan-Markle-true-feminists-did-just-marry-well.html
Valid argument that the hapless one has titles that are hereditary and thus get passed on to the American Archie, and that the Duke of Gloucester (and Duke of Kent) have ducal titles that will be passed on to sons who will never be working royals and are way down in the list of succession.
My speculation is that James, who is shy, does not want to inherit the Duke of Edinburgh title, which would make it more difficult for him to live a private life. Louise seems to have been close to her grandfather and would serve the title well if she inherited it, but, even though she is the older sibling, the title gets passed in to a male. King Charles would really upset the apple cart if he changed that custom during his reign!
Agreed that Michelle Obama was a successful working professional when she met and married Obama, and she supported him financially in their early years. She also has more grace and dignity than TBW could ever have (and I love her natural hair look). But I suspect that the two couples have a lot in common, especially about feeling like victims of racial prejudice.
I find this narrative quite repulsive. My personal view is that Diana would not have liked TBW or got on well with her. TBW would have set herself up in competition with Diana, and her overriding need to control and manipulate would have caused clashes. Diana becoming another Doria? That is the only way she could have a relationship with her son and grandchildren.
"My guess is that Edward is not getting the title. If he did, it would pass on to his son, who perhaps does not want a royal life and is far down in the line of succession. The title is probably going to be bestowed on one of William's children. Louis? Or a rule change so that it is bestowed on Charlotte?"
You could be right. I admit I think the title should have gone to Edward since that has been the understanding he had with his mother for nearly a quarter of a century. He has also taken on the work associated with the DoE Awards. But if Charles is so hung up on his slimmed-down monarchy idea, I recognize he has the right to withhold it. (I sort of doubt the decision has to do with James's preferences as a teenager. But I could be wrong.)
I don't follow the thinking though that the title is likely to go to Louis or Charlotte (with a rule change.) Unless something happens to George, they aren't really a permanent part of the slimmed-down monarchy either. They will be children of a monarch just as Edward was. But their children will be as unimportant as Edward's are from a LoS perspective once George has kids. So if the concern is that hereditary titles could go too far afield, hereditary titles can't be allowed to go to children of either Charlotte or Louis. In fact, if the concern is that titles could be inherited by the "wrong people" who aren't in the slimmed-down inner circle, it would seem titles can't be given to anyone except direct heirs. But how many titles does Will or George need? The whole idea of titles would start to seem meaningless and silly IMO.
-------
And yeah, MO & MM do have some things in common.
Thanks for the explanation. I thought the title of Duke of Edinburgh was bestowed on Prince Philip as he was a Prince Consort and on his death the title reverted to the Crown and held in abeyance until further appointment by LP.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/yzbf4w/fresh_tea_drink_at_your_own_peril/
Above is about moving to Bel Air.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/yzbqqz/the_merch_gates_are_open/
Above is about contacting people saying they can send her free stuff now.
Theoreticaly, Charles inherited all his father's titles. Or did they all revert to the Crown when he died? Either way, Charles confirmed that his titles passed to his eldest son, but said nothing about his father's titles, which are now merged with the Crown. Thus, the King decides if he will bestow those titles elsewhere or not. If he chooses not to, which seems to be the case, when William becomes king, he can bestow those titles on someone in the family or elsewhere if he chooses to do so. But no, a grandson does not inherit a title from a grandfather unless his father is dead, so Phillip's titles do not pass to William. When William becomes king, he can do what he likes with those titles.
Perhaps it was too painful for the Queen to pass on any of her husband's titles. She made it clear that she wanted Camilla to be Queen consort, but said and did nothing about her husband's titles, as did Charles when he became king.
I see nothing wrong with them refusing access to their home.
But they are selective: they film from their home office, which is a bad idea in my opinion as they all look like the room has been gutted, painted white and then poorly and sparsley furnished and decorated. They have also filmed in their grounds sitting on a bench, and on various couches in the house. And, they filmed in their grounds and the chicken coop with Oprah.
So, they tend to be messy about making and keeping rules.
I wonder if there was another reason why they did not want the film crew on their property and in their home?
Saturday 19 June 1999 00:00
Buckingham Palace (National)
TITLE OF HRH THE PRINCE EDWARD
TITLE OF HRH THE PRINCE EDWARD The Queen has today been pleased to confer an Earldom on The Prince Edward. His titles will be Earl of Wessex and Viscount Severn. The Prince Edward thus becomes His Royal Highness The Earl of Wessex and Miss Sophie Rhys-Jones on marriage will become Her Royal Highness The Countess of Wessex. The Queen, The Duke of Edinburgh and The Prince of Wales have also agreed that The Prince Edward should be given the Dukedom of Edinburgh in due course, when the present title now held by Prince Philip eventually reverts to the Crown. The Queen has also decided, with the agreement of The Prince Edward and Miss Rhys-Jones, that any children they might have should not be given the style His or Her Royal Highness, but would have courtesy titles as sons or daughters of an Earl.
...
As the wife of Prince Philip, the Queen held the title of Duchess of Edinburgh. Only when the Dukedom reverts to the Crown and that happened in September upon the demise of The Queen.
The Buckingham Palace Press release of 19 June 1999 was very clear - 'eventually reverts to the Crown.'
It is understood that DoE is not hereditary and if CE is named DoE, so will the title of DoE, upon his and Sophie's death reverts to the Crown. And it will depend on the appointment of another monarch as happened with the title of Prince of Wales
I did tô search on the title DoE and found this..
Saturday 19 June 1999 00:00
Buckingham Palace (National)
TITLE OF HRH THE PRINCE EDWARD
TITLE OF HRH THE PRINCE EDWARD The Queen has today been pleased to confer an Earldom on The Prince Edward. His titles will be Earl of Wessex and Viscount Severn. The Prince Edward thus becomes His Royal Highness The Earl of Wessex and Miss Sophie Rhys-Jones on marriage will become Her Royal Highness The Countess of Wessex. The Queen, The Duke of Edinburgh and The Prince of Wales have also agreed that The Prince Edward should be given the Dukedom of Edinburgh in due course, when the present title now held by Prince Philip eventually reverts to the Crown. The Queen has also decided, with the agreement of The Prince Edward and Miss Rhys-Jones, that any children they might have should not be given the style His or Her Royal Highness, but would have courtesy titles as sons or daughters of an Earl.
...
As the wife of Prince Philip, the Queen held the title of Duchess of Edinburgh. Only when the Dukedom reverts to the Crown and that happened in September upon the demise of The Queen.
The Buckingham Palace Press release of 19 June 1999 was very clear - 'eventually reverts to the Crown.'
It is understood that DoE is not hereditary and if CE is named DoE, so will the title of DoE, upon his and Sophie's death reverts to the Crown. And it will depend on the appointment of another monarch as happened with the title of Prince of Wales
@Sandie I would argue that you've seen a room, a bench, some couches and...some chickens. NONE of it screams "home."
Sort of like a TV set, right? (Except for the chickens.)
If the Duke of Edinburgh title is hereditary, it passed to Charles (as oldest son) when his father died. When he became king, the title merged in the Crown, as did any titles he had as Prince of Wales. In his first speech as King, he bestowed titles on William. That he did not do so for the Duke of Edinburgh is indication to me that he is not going to bestow it on his brother Edward.
I had actually not expected Charles to make that announcement during his first speech. Given current events relating in no small part to the renegade faction residing in California, it was imperative to KCIII that he assert his new authority and also continuity in the passing of the torch which he held for more than 50 years to William. The creation of a new Prince of Wales is directly relating to the stability of the Crown and of the state. The Edinburgh Duchy is more in the vein of a family gift and does not have the same weight of importance to warrant it being included in that speech. It might have been seen to dilute the impact of his primary announcements which were the creation of Camilla as Queen Consort and William as Prince of Wales. There must be a number of other more minor titles which are now in his gift to grant, but he was streamlining that speech to the most important ones.
With Christmas coming up, wouldn't be be a lovely time to give his brother the gift of his long-awaited title? The whole family will gather for the sovereign's Christmas luncheon if he keeps that tradition going. There could be a spot of investitures before dessert and coffee. Alternatively, might Charles be waiting either for the New Year's Honor list or until after his Coronation? There's just been so much chatter, starting directly after the passing of the late Duke that Charles was going to withhold that title from his brother. Until this is 'officially' announced by Buckingham Palace, I will hold out the hope that Charles will cede with full heart to the express wishes of his father and mother. To do otherwise would blot his barely-started reign which has begun on a high note (minus a few attempted egg peltings.) I don't see why being generous in this would cost him anything and he'd reap much goodwill, not only from the public but more importantly, from within his ranks. How would embittering the Wessex family over this snub be fruitful for the Crown? Edward and Sophie are already supported by the Sovereign Grant as full-time working members and they have earned their stripes. It's not like making him a Duke would cost more. And--they are already saving money by not supporting a certain shiftless Duke and his golddigging Duchar$e in Cali. and the Duke of York likewise. So if anything, there should be extra money in the Sovereign Grant coffers if promotion to Duke warrants a rise in pay for the Wessexes.
The Crown has certainly been getting its money's worth out of Ed and Sophie for the last decade or so . . each taking on tons of engagements, charities and foreign visits which often fly under the radar as they don't get excessively promoted in the press. The Wessexes are workhorses who do the job with very little in terms of personal glory, nor do they seek personal glory. Awarding the Ducal title would be a mark of respect from Edward's own brother and King that his service to the Crown is recognized as valuable. And *it's what Philip and the Queen wanted*. I don't see any circumstances that would have changed their minds about this, especially since Edward has only displayed more value to the Firm with every passing year since that promise was made at his wedding 23 years ago. Charles (Scorpio that he is) is a legendary grudge-holder and there were some tensions with Edward in the early Oughts re. Ed trying to film William at St. Andrews in contravention of the media blackout. Sophie had her little hiccup as well. But--those infractions happened 20 years ago and have been repented of. The Wessexes have been exemplary since then.
The late Queen was an absolute stickler for protocol (though she certainly did a 180 from her earlier position re. Camilla). Rumor has it that she had a soft spot for Edward, her baby, as did his father, who seems to have been able to enjoy being a parent to the younger boys in a way he couldn't with Charles. So I'm doubtful that she had her mind changed or her heart turned against making good her earlier promise to her lastborn about his father's title. From my point of view, it would have been such a lovely and meaningful gesture for HMTQ to create her youngest the Duke of Edinburgh after the year's mourning period for her husband had passed. Apparently that is Not the Way Things Are Done. Historically the successor to the Crown awards those titles and the Queen was not going to tamper with that tradition. Though, had she had recourse to issuing a Letter Patent to change that, perhaps she ought to have done, knowing better than anyone the rocky relationship Charles has always had with his younger brothers. There must be some provision for the reigning monarch to re-assign a title under certain circumstances . . .but in the case of Philip, tradition dictated that his eldest son have all his titles. Coals to Newcastle in Charles's case but that's how things stand. An announcement by the Queen would have shed some clarity on the current thinking. Because I find it hard to fathom that she would have wanted to deny Sophie the title which had previously been occupied by herself before her life irrevocably changed forever. Who better to be Duchess of Edinburgh than the daughter-in-law who was like a second daughter to her? If Charles deprives Edward out of some spite dressed up as 'cost saving measures', then he hurts Sophie, too. I can't see the Queen agreeing to that.
My guess is that Edward is not getting the title. If he did, it would pass on to his son, who perhaps does not want a royal life and is far down in the line of succession. The title is probably going to be bestowed on one of William's children. Louis? Or a rule change so that it is bestowed on Charlotte?
Let's hope your surmise doesn't come to pass. James definitely will not have a Royal life but he hasn't had one up to now and he's had a title since he was born. If Edward is not created Duke of Edinburgh, his son will still become Earl of Wessex upon Edward's death. He'll be an Earl with a civilian job, most likely. Just as well. Even before their children were born and before their temperaments were even established, Edward and Sophie could probably see which way the winds were blowing. They followed Anne's lead in declining titles for their kids. Far better to grow up with the awareness that they would NOT be treated specially or not have to work a regular job than be like Andrew and Fergie's girls who were HRHs from birth and raised with the expectation that they would be working royals and fully supported by the Crown. It was quite the nasty shock to be told after university that this wouldn't be happening and that not only would they not officially be working Royals but they weren't even entitled to a protection officer anymore. Nothing good has come out of making enemies of the York branch for Charles. Edward and Sophie are of far superior character and would continue on as they have been in terms of their work ethic, I imagine . . but to be denied that which was promised all those years ago and which has been a hope for the future since then would be a bitter pill to swallow for James's parents.
The current Viscount Severn could have an additional title without it impacting his life that much. If the title holders do not accept any Royal monies or duties attached to it then it's basically decoration only with no price tag for the Crown. I suppose he could give it back if he really does not want to be the Duke of Edinburgh. He'd have to give back Edward's Earldom as well, since he will be the next Earl of Wessex in the normal course of things. It'd be a shame for Edward to have to forgo an honor because his kid has no interest in it, so I'd hope there would be a more compelling reason.
A lady Earl or Duke might be a bridge too far in 'modernizing the monarchy' and it hadn't even crossed my mind, but Lady Louise would be an asset to the Firm in any capacity which was mutually agreeable. I've got no proof at all, just call it an educator's intuition but I've been wondering for several years if James is on the autism spectrum. Just a vibe I get from his photographs and a lack of visible engagement or emotion generally, even in casual snaps with his family. He comported himself excellently during the grandchildren's vigil for HMTQ, so I certainly don't know if he's got any challenges of the sort. Is this possibly a factor? Who knows . .
I think the DoE title is hereditary. What I believe happened was the title passed to Charles (as the eldest son) upon the death of Philip. I think, but am not at all sure,that even though the Queen was the Queen, the title of Duchess of Edinburgh was a courtesy title for her.
At any rate, once QEII died, Charles became King and the hereditary DoE title he held merged with the Crown. So the 1999 blurb is correct in that the title did revert to the Crown. It was foreseeable Charles would *eventually* inherit it & when he *eventually* became King it would revert. So it is hereditary IMO.
I see that Karla has found that Edward's titles are NOT hereditary. Therefore the wishes or temperaments of his children OR their future support under the Sovereign grant as title holders need not be a consideration at all for Charles. The titles are for this generation only. Prince Louis is four years old and would not cede to any Dukedom prior to his marriage, probably 25 years hence. If Uncle Edward is still living as DoE at that point, then Louis could have another title and be made Duke of Edinburgh at a later time. Traditionally he'd be made Duke of York but that title has become quite tainted and problematic now. King Charles, please make Edward Duke of Edinburgh now! There are other vacant Duchies for George and Louis. Is Clarence taken? Avondale? Why does it have to be Edinburgh?
I see that Karla has found that Edward's titles are NOT hereditary. Therefore the wishes or temperaments of his children OR their future support under the Sovereign grant as title holders need not be a consideration at all for Charles. The titles are for this generation only. Prince Louis is four years old and would not cede to any Dukedom prior to his marriage, probably 25 years hence. If Uncle Edward is still living as DoE at that point, then Louis could have another title and be made Duke of Edinburgh at a later time. Traditionally he'd be made Duke of York but that title has become quite tainted and problematic now. King Charles, please make Edward Duke of Edinburgh now! There are other vacant Duchies for George and Louis. Is Clarence taken? Avondale? Why does it have to be Edinburgh?
Many thanks for finding that info. So, it is not a hereditary title, and each monarch can confer it on whom they wish. I just get the feeling that if Charles was going to honour that agreement, he would have done so already.
@OKay
From the bits and pieces I have seen of their dwelling, it looks so basic. It certainly is not like the residences where he grew up. Most of all, there is nothing personal in what I have seen and none of it has the look of quality. Personally I do not understand why someone would spend so much money on ill-fitting outfits to wear once and not buy quality stuff for the home. (By quality, I mean handmade superbly crafted solid wooden items, specially ordered fabrics to cover couches and to make curtains, imported handwoven rugs, a brushed leather armchair, family heirlooms and pictures on side tables and the mantle piece ... of course, they will never get their hands on any of the art sitting in royal vaults, but seem to prefer posters and pictures that are not even vintage or one-off items.)
Re. Casa Montesh*tshow
I have always held the position that the couple does not live there. They might have access to the property for photo shoots and Zoom calls and other little tableaux to bolster the narrative that this is their house . . but we've seen * at a desk and the couple sitting in front of birds nests' on a bland sofa in a very bland room. There's some green space and a chicken coop . . but they could literally be *anywhere*. There aren't enough features to tell if they are actually at the house pictured.
The room we see them in has been curated in primo Millennnial Instagram style. The stuff is probably cheap--maybe she got it at Pier One Imports or Home Goods. It's just the stage set where she pretends to be a SoCal bigshot, it's not where they *live*. They might even rent it by the hour for these little shoots. She has moved around like a tumbleweed, appropriating various other people's houses, possessions, etc. as her own for a temporary period. And Harry fled England with the clothes on his back and his Gameboy. So there's no personal touches because the two are boring sinkholes of nothingness.
That's my opinion.
I wasn't wild about the CA house as it looked in the real estate ads available when they bought it. But it did have a mostly cohesive look between the interior and exterior. And to me that was definitely an Italian/Tuscan look. But they had much of the woodwork painted white. And had the walls painted a flat uninteresting shade of white (vs the warmer, still mostly neutral light yellows, tans, and creams that were there)
I like some color in my interiors and not everyone does. And that's fine. But an Italian villa style house with Italian Cypress trees doesn't go with stark all-white interiors to me. And even if I were rich, and even if I liked the all-white look, I don't think that's what I'd want with 2 toddlers and 3 dogs.
I agree with almost every opinion posted here. I'll see if I can find the George VI LP naming Philip as DoE. I understand that the LP is an irrefutable document. And if I find it I'll post it here.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1692950/meghan-markle-us-president-donald-trump-democrats-republicans-joe-biden-dxus/amp
Frontrunner for 2024 presidential bid!!! Gag, lol, gag
I could name a dozen democrats who have a better chance than her..Gavin Newsone, AOC,Raphael Warnock, anybody literally!!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_of_Edinburgh
Re: the DoE title
"The title was first created in the Peerage of Great Britain on 26 July 1726 by King George I, who bestowed it on his grandson Prince Frederick, who also became Prince of Wales the following year....Upon Frederick's death, the titles were inherited by his son Prince George. When Prince George became King George III in 1760, the titles merged in the Crown and ceased to exist."
So it sounds like it was created as an hereditary title. I don't know if that can be changed?
If it wasn't still hereditary, I wonder why QEII didn't give it to Edward after Philip's death? I thought we were told she couldn't because Charles inherited it. But that he would award it after it merged with the Crown. Otherwise, I wonder why the blurb from 1999 mentioned the PoW agreed it would go to Edward? There was really no reason to think Philip would outlive the Queen.
The Duchass certainly does not have refined taste in home furnishings or clothing. She does not seem to understand that a historic home filled with valuable art and priceless antiques is typically preferable to a McMansion with SOHO Home brand furniture and a trendy CA beach vibe. She covets a middle class, casual vibe with brands she has heard her coworkers talk about. You can bet she did not hire a decorator. She could not allow someone to see that she is not experienced or knowledgeable about home decor.
In addition, she has no idea what to wear, because she covets what others wear and tries to make that work with her body. We all know how that works out for her. I’ve noticed her attempts to copy Kate’s hairstyles, especially the wavy curl look. I feel a bit of pity for her because it’s clear that her personality disorder consumes too much of her mental energy and prevents her from maturing beyond age 14 or 16. I hope this makes sense….
But then we heard the story of the maid who was kicked out of the house by Ducharse without her purse, and had to go to the neighbor's for help.
Dookie did leave with his medals. We've seen those medals when Dookie and Ducharse walked all over American graves a couple years ago.
" The children of the Earl of Wessex
On June 19, 1999, at the time of Prince Edward's wedding, it was announced that The Queen had decided, with the agreement of Prince Edward and Miss Rhys-Jones, that any children of their marriage should not be given the style of His or Her Royal Highness, but would have courtesy titles as sons or daughters of an Earl (see the press release from Buckingham Palace).
At the time, many people have expressed the notion that a press release was not sufficient to modify the Letters Patent of 1917, and that Louise could not be deprived of her "rights" without letters patent. The fact is that royal styles and titles are a matter of royal prerogative, that does not require the advice of the government (the Letters Patent of 1917 were issued without any such advice). The sovereign's will and pleasure is all that matters, and she can change styles and titles as she pleases (see the documents concerning the style of the Duke of Windsor's wife and issue, in particular the view of the Law Officers that "the right to use this style or title, in our view, is within the prerogative of His Majesty and he has the power to regulate it by Letters Patent generally or in particular circumstances", their view of the "undoubted powers of the Sovereign from time to time to determine the ambit within which the style and title of Royal Highness should be enjoyed", and the opinion of Sir Geoffrey Ellis that "precedence not regulated by law is substantially that granted at Court and this is a question for the Crown"). How that pleasure is publicized, by letters patent, warrant, press release or verbal declaration, is immaterial.
https://www.heraldica.org/topics/britain/prince_highness.htm#Wessex
....
What can we learn from the text?
In summary, Sir George claims that the sovereign's will expressed either by LP, letters and communiqués or directly verbally (as KCIII fe did by naming PW as PoW in a press release) are sufficient to communicate the sovereign's will. On this premise the 1999 QEII communiqué (and there is no record that this communiqué was invalidated) is understood to mean that QEII upon the death of Prince Philip instituted the return of the DoE title to the Crown. As such, she designated it as a non-hereditary title. And practically made CE the future Duke of Edinburgh
My opinion
Let's just wait for the EC appointment.
Shedunnit
Always a mystery
Worthy of Agatha Christie
Bane Markle and Ridicule Sorrow*
More smoke and crazed mirrors
Red herring roast dinners
Hallmarkles next plot
Who-dunno…
*Jane Marple Hercule Poirot
But for those who think the DoE title is *not* hereditary, what happened to it when Philip died? Did it merge with the Crown then? If not, where was it? Off in the ether somewhere?
If it did merge with the Crown when PP died, then QEII could have given it to Edward while she was alive. And that likely would have been very emotionally satisfying (and sad) for all parties concerned. No reason to wait for Charles to award the title IMO *unless* it had passed to Charles through inheritance when Philip died and it wasn't free to be given by the Queen. But if it was free, and it wasn't given, Edward must know why. Surely he's not expecting it if he could have had it any time between April 2021 and Sept 2022 but wasn't given it. So if Charles or even Andrew browbeat QEII into not giving it, or she suddenly changed her mind and reneged on a promise to Edward (and to the nation) that was nearly a 1/4 of a century old, he must know why and must have known he would not get that title that long ago.
If, an LP can change the "conditions" of a title, then it's definitely BS that Charles won't give it to Edward because James would inherit it. (Per current stories in the press from "a source.") And according to reports Charles doesn't want James to have it because that wouldn't fit his slimmed down ideas. Total BS if Charles can change the terms. It also doesn't make sense to me that 14-yr old James is determining his father's destiny if any inheritance can be removed with the King's pen.
Who is CE? Did you mean PE?
Rhetorical questions following:
If titles and styles are bestowed at the Sovereign’s will and pleasure, and a simple announcement is sufficient to make their will clear… and if the reigning monarch is “The Crown” in living form, then when titles “revert to the Crown”, that seems to me that the monarch should have discretion over them in his/her lifetime. If the Queen had passed Edinburgh to Edward it would have had so much more meaning. Is a reigning sovereign really forced to defer to his/her heir in this matter? That seems to run contrary to how everything else works. There would’ve been a Lovely symmetry in the queen Bestowing the Edinburgh title upon her son as her father had created her consort DoE. I realize that’s not the practice, but it’s a nice thought.
By Victoria Ward
Duke and Duchess of Sussex to receive human rights award for 'heroic stand' against royal 'racism'
Couple hailed as 'exemplary leaders' but critics say they are ‘a bewildering choice’
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be honoured with a prestigious human rights award after taking a stand against “structural racism” within the monarchy, it has emerged.
The couple will receive the Ripple of Hope award on Dec 6 at a glittering gala ceremony that honours “exemplary leaders” who have demonstrated “an unwavering commitment” to social change.
The annual event is organised by the Robert F Kennedy Human Rights foundation, named after former president John F Kennedy’s younger brother, who was assassinated in 1968.
Challenging the royal ‘power structure’
It is hosted by John F Kennedy’s niece, Kerry Kennedy, who said the Duke and Duchess will receive the award after having the courage to challenge the Royal family’s “power structure”.
She said the couple had been “heroic” by standing up against such an ancient institution.
The Sussexes are expected to attend the ceremony, with other award recipients to include Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian president.
Ms Kennedy told Spanish online news website El Confidencial that during a visit to South Africa in 1966 her father had spoken about the problems in getting people to talk about racial justice.
“He also spoke of moral courage, saying that few would have the courage to question their colleagues, family and community about the power structure they maintained,” she said.
“And this is what Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have done.”
‘Told them what they were doing wrong’
Ms Kennedy, a lawyer and human rights activist, added: “They went to the oldest institution in UK history and told them what they were doing wrong, that they couldn’t have structural racism within the institution; that they could not maintain a misunderstanding about mental health.
“They knew that if they did this there would be consequences, that they would be ostracised, they would lose their family, their position within this structure, and that people would blame them for it.
“They have done it anyway because they believed they couldn’t live with themselves if they didn’t question this authority. I think they have been heroic in taking this step.”
Previous winners of the Ripple of Hope award include Joe Biden and former presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, as well as former Democratic presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Al Gore, U2 singer Bono and Desmond Tutu.
Prof David Nasaw, author of the Pulitzer Prize-nominated book The Patriarch, about John and Robert’s father Joseph Kennedy, said he found the idea that the Sussexes had been honoured with the award “somewhere between sublimely ridiculous and blatantly ludicrous”.
‘A bewildering choice’
He has been quoted as saying: “What in God’s name have they done to merit this? What percentage of Harry and Meghan’s wealth is going to worthy causes?”
Robert Kennedy Jr has also described it as “a bewildering choice”.
The gala will take place four days after the Prince and Princess of Wales attend the Earthshot prize in Boston, inspired by John F Kennedy’s Moonshot.
Prince William has partnered with the JFK Library Foundation to host the ceremony. Caroline Kennedy, John F Kennedy’s daughter, has said: “There is no more important Moonshot today than repairing the planet and no better place to harness the Moonshot spirit than the city of Boston.”
By Roya Nikkhah
Harry and Meghan trashed the monarchy. Can William and Kate win back American hearts?
The Prince and Princess of Wales want to repair the royals’ stateside image after the devastating allegations made by the Sussexes
“We now have a US problem,” an exasperated senior courtier told me in the aftermath of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s excoriating interview with the American talk show host Oprah Winfrey last year.
After 90 minutes of prime-time royal annihilation, watched by 49 million people, the monarchy’s image was seriously tarnished.
In ten days, a visit to the US by the Prince and Princess of Wales, viewed in royal circles as one of the most important overseas trips for years, aims to get the House of Windsor firmly back on the front foot across the pond.
It comes just in the nick of time, with Harry and Meghan, currently the loudest royal voices in America, expected to steal the headlines next month with their Netflix show, billed by Meghan as a “historical documentary” to “share” their “love story”. Harry’s “intimate and heartfelt” memoir Spare, promising “raw, unflinching honesty”, is published on January 10. The monarchy is flinching at the prospect of both.
The couple’s engagements will cover sport, green tech, vulnerable young people, climate change and Kate’s interest in the early years. They will attend the second Earthshot Prize awards ceremony in Boston, which will be shown on December 4 on the American public broadcaster PBS, Multichoice in Africa and the BBC.
The spotlight won’t stay on them for long. Two days later, on December 6, it will be back on the Sussexes as they attend the Ripple of Hope gala in New York to receive an award for their humanitarian and philanthropic work.
King Charles moved last week to elevate the Princess Royal and the Earl of Wessex as counsellors of state, a role his eldest son already holds, but William and Kate remain the monarch’s highest-profile asset on the global stage. Their three-day trip to Boston, Massachusetts, from November 30, is the first royal visit across the pond since “that interview” with Oprah, when Meghan claimed Kate made her cry and Harry said of William: “The relationship is space, at the moment.” The young royals had been dubbed the “Fab Four” because of their close bond.
The trip will be focused on William’s annual Earthshot Prize, a decade-long £10 million project awarding a £1 million prize annually to green visionaries creating pioneering solutions to global environmental problems. Inspired by President John F Kennedy’s Moonshot project, this year’s awards will be held on December 2 in Boston, the heartland of Kennedy’s legacy and an opportunity for the royal family to align itself with America’s most revered first family.
Those in royal circles know the US trip is a big opportunity for William and Kate to sprinkle the stardust many Americans love and elevate the monarchy above entertainment news, before another narrative from the alternative Californian royal court hits headlines again.
“When the prince launched Earthshot, he was very ambitious about the platform it would achieve, and is really looking forward to going out there and talking about the urgent optimism around it.”
When it comes to the elephant in the room — or on the West Coast — royal sources insist the couple “won’t be distracted by what others are doing or other activities that are coming up”.
The largely positive reaction in the US to Harry and Meghan’s Oprah interview, which drew support even from the White House, highlighted the transatlantic divide. The US was then largely pro Team Sussex, but many in the UK were more sceptical and there was more questioning of the couple’s claim of racism within the royal family, and of mental health struggles being batted away by the institution.
Yet there are signs the US pendulum is swinging. In Meghan’s interview with The Cut magazine in August, she suggested she and Harry were forced into exile because “by existing, we were upsetting the dynamic of the hierarchy”. A New York Post front page carried an image of a pouting Meghan on a mock-up of a child’s beauty pageant outfit, with the headline: “Toddler and Tiara.”
In The Washington Post, columnist Alyssa Rosenberg wrote: “Meghan and her husband Prince Harry fled one toxic dynamic in the United Kingdom only to land themselves in another here . . . the only way for the Sussexes to build a truly new life, and have a wider impact on the causes they care about, is to stop making themselves the centre of the story.”
Dr Christine Harlen, a lecturer in US politics and international political economy at the University of Leeds, who is from Massachusetts, says William and Kate’s visit to her home state is especially timely. “The Oprah interview undoubtedly damaged the image of the monarchy in the US, but there is a lot of excitement about this visit,” she said.
“Their support for and leadership on the environment is seen as a more progressive aspect of the royal family. It appeals to the values of Americans who are left of the political spectrum and to the younger generations — people who are more sensitive and sympathetic to some of the concerns raised by Harry and Meghan with Oprah. So it might help neutralise some of the antagonism and interest people who are a bit younger than those who usually follow the royals.”
That assessment will be music to courtiers’ ears at Kensington Palace, where reaching younger audiences is top of the agenda.
Last week Kate comforted families displaced by the conflict in Ukraine during a visit to the Reading Ukrainian Community Centre, telling a tearful mother who fled the country with her three-year-old son: “I wish we could do more.” The princess is also working with Ukraine’s first lady, Olena Zelenska, on how to support the mental health of Ukrainians fleeing the war, after the pair met at Buckingham Palace in September.
Harlen also thinks the US visit will help rehabilitate the image of UK plc. “After Liz Truss and that mini-budget, a lot of people and media in the US were like ‘What is going on with Britain?’,” she said. “It got a lot of negative attention. A royal visit brings a positive message.”
But Tina Brown, the New York-based former editor of Vanity Fair and the author of The Palace Papers, thinks they might need to turn the temperature up a bit to re-captivate the US. “While Harry and Meghan have captured the tabloid imagination here, interest in William and Kate is low boil,” she said. “I would like to have seen them hit more cities than Boston, where sizzle factor is quiescent to say the least. To win America, I would recommend a White House dinner, with Kate hitting the dance floor with [the actor] Bradley Cooper, as Diana did with [John] Travolta, preferably in the dress Kate wore to the James Bond opening.”
Aides are keen to emphasise the Boston visit is a “trip, not a tour” and “part of their more modern approach to statesmanship”, which is about “going into the heart of communities and promoting the issues that are close to their hearts, not just going to the White House”.
Queen Elizabeth’s death and the pitch-perfect spectacle of the ensuing fortnight fascinated many Americans and has low-boil interest simmering once again, according to Daisy Prince, the founder and editor of The Digital Party newsletter in the US.
“People here were riveted by it all,” she said. “There’s a huge sense of admiration for them, for going through that marathon of grief without putting a foot wrong. And there’s an extra dignity to William and Kate’s new titles, which is seen as a big promotion here, and people take that seriously. Yes, they’ve had some family troubles, but it all adds to their relatability, it’s what makes them so appealing and keeps everyone engaged.”
Boston is a city famous for its 18th-century revolt against British rule, but Prince believes the royal couple will go down a storm. “Boston is a city that loves its history,” she said. “They’ll get a lot of attention while they’re here.”
Karla 😘
@lizzie
The Queen was Duchess of Edinburgh.
She would have become Dowager Duchess
if she had passed the Dukedom to Edward
whilst she was alive.
A title not befitting the Queen.
@Rebecca
Thanks for the latest articles.
Galahs* Galore
The ripple of hope
Abbreviation Trope
Could be the start of the
slippery soap slope
All well aware
of the Kennedy curse
And the ripple effect
of being markled, much worse
Left to themselves
dope and grope
Will cancel each other
Just give ‘em enough rope…
* Galah-OZ slang for idiot
I have to say, the last place I want to see Will & Kate is at the White House with Kate imitating Diana's dance with John Travolta by dancing with Bradley Cooper. Ugh. Maybe Tina Brown hasn't noticed the contentious political climate, staggering inflation, the distaste many Americans have for Hollywood, the continuing COVID pandemic now complicated with flu and RSV, the spiraling costs of staying warm this winter, and the fact that those sorts of taxpayer-funded gatherings have been relatively rare in recent years. Biden is hosting the Macrons Dec 1 and that's the first state visit of his nearly 2-year old presidency.
I guess she could be right an American tour would be good for Will and Kate. I've lost objectivity & think tours are kind of passe. At any rate, I wouldn't think an American tour could be thrown together in the next few weeks to coincide with the Earthshot visit.
Old news! I had a look at the link and the article looked familiar. It's dated 7 November. I posted about it that day at 9.33 am but in fact, it's @Rebecca who found it and posted a link at 2.09 am. I remember it gave me a good chuckle. It's utter bilge.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be honoured with a prestigious human rights award after taking a stand against “structural racism” within the monarchy, it has emerged.
--------
Please, tell us this is a joke! I haven't yet read yesterday's Telegraph but perhaps the article is from today's. The award is worth as much as a chocolate medal. On what criterion was this decided? I despair, I truly despair. A 'heroic stand', and Volodymyr Zelensky is another recipient - obviously on the same level as * & H 🙄. * must have paid for the award.
FWIW, there was another Duke of Edinburgh - Alfred, 4th child & 2nd son of Victoria, aka `Affie'. The question of whether or not the title is hereditary did not arise as he had only 1 son, also Alfred, but he predeceased his father.
Meanwhile, if I've grasped this correctly, Affie's elder brother (`Bertie',Pr of Wales) had renounced his right to the Duchy of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, so Affie inherited that title. His son, Alfred, died 6 weeks after shooting himself after a family row. When Affie died, the S-C-G title passed to his cousin Charles Edward, Duke of Albany, son of Leopold, Victoria's 4th son. (Her 3rd son Arthur, Duke of Connaught, had renounced has claim, and that of his son, to the S-C-G title).
The Hanoverian kings of Britain had simultaneously been rulers of S-C-G but this was under Salic Law, which prevented females inheriting titles, so there had been a parting of the ways in 1837 when Victoria came to our throne but not the German duchy.
Where is/was Albany? No, not in NY or even London W1 (ie area around Gt Portland St) - it's Scotland! All is explained, from a US viewpoint at:
https://www.scotlandshop.com/tartanblog/duke-of-albany
There is no Duke of Albany today but it looks as if it hasn't been recreated thanks to its German associations. Whether these will fade sufficiently for it to be used again remains to be seen. Meanwhile, like `Windsor', it's out in the cold.
I knew the term "dowager" can be used to differentiate the present wife of the title holder from the widow who holds a courtesy title.
But my understanding of the term is that it truly means "an honor, title, or property a widow derives from her deceased husband." Period. If that's true it seems either 1) QEII would have been a dowager duchess regardless of whether the DoE title was passed to another man. Queen or not, she derived the title from her dead husband. OR 2) Due to some peculiarity of that title or because it was a Queen Regnant holding the courtesy title, upon Philip's death the title did merge with the Crown. But if so, she wouldn't have been a dowager if it was awarded to anyone. So it still puzzles me but thanks!
Shamalot
Kerry Kennedy
needs to shut the f..k up
Berating family, couldn’t make
this shit up
Needs to look at her own family
Before disparaging the Royals
and country…
Thanks so much for the article. It lays out the facts and invites the reader to form one's own judgment. I do think Tina Brown, although she is British, is closely aligned to the values held dear by TBW. The British monarchy serves the UK and the Commonwealth nations, not America. However, there is huge wealth in America and some of the biggest donors for the Earthshot prize are American, so William knows that partnership is vital for the programme to work. Catherine is always keen to learn how early childhood and mental health programmes are run in other countries, and she seems to be taking the opportunity to learn what she can from Americans during the visit. Perhaps we are seeing a new way of doing tours, which is rather different from what Tina Brown sees as important.
@MM
Hallmarkles ... brilliant!
@Karla
Thank you so much for helping me, at least, to sort through the confusion of royal titles. It seems that though there are rules, the monarch actually decides. So, although the rules say the children of the Hallmarkles are entitled to be called prince and princess, without consent from the monarch, they can't. I wonder if the Hallmarkles have realized how important it is to be on good terms with the monarch, and that William will be king one day? I don't think Charles is spiteful so I doubt that what is in the Memoirs determines if the American kids get to be prince and princess or not. I think that is already decided because the parents do not serve the monarchy nor uphold the values of the monarchy or the British people. The children are thus not likely to either. For heaven's sake, TBW complained about having to learn the national anthem, among many other things!
@lizzie
What is perplexing is that the Queen, Prince Phillip and Prince Charles all signed a public statement that the Duke i6f Edinburgh title would be passed on to Prince Edward on his father's death. No one in the royal family has explained why this has not happened, so the door is wide open for speculation.
@Fifi LaRue
Ducharse/Duchass and Dookie ... equally brilliant!
@Observant One
I agree that the Duchass is stuck in her early teen years. I won't try to unravel the psychology of that, but she does behave like a teenager. QueenTT on Tumblr has not done any readings for the duo for a long time, but when she did, she said that their relationship is karmic in that her lesson is to be authentic and his is to grow up basically. I don't think either have achieved that! She seems to be moving closer to the merching, classless influencer who loves being papped. I think he restrains her from fully being herself, but she has managed to get some photos published recently of her sitting on a couch and lounging on a bed (sparsely furnished rooms that look cheap, to me). He is so impressionable and has not learnt that he needs his family and courtiers to protect him and guide him in the right direction.
@Hikari
At the time they bought the house (ownership has been traced to a company with the same address as her lawyers), there were many photos of the house and grounds online as many estate agents were trying to sell it. The photos we have seen of them match those photos. They do live in that house on that property and have bought the house (deposit and huge loan) through a company they set up. I agree that she does have a history of 'moving on', so I doubt that mudslide manor is their forever home.
@lizzie
I think it is Clarence House where one room is painted using four or more shades of white. To me, that is the only way to use white, but I do not have the expertise for that so I use colours to provide warmth or light or space or height .... whatever ... to a room. The Duchass just does not have the style and expertise for interior decorating, but I suspect she insists on being in charge and making all the decisions anyway. They purchased a house in outdated style and she has cheapened it, in my opinion.
Re the award to the despicable pair.
Only from what I read and hear, only in NYC, because it’s the one place where you can rebuild your reputation and it’s seen as predominantly Woke. 🫤
From the DM article:
British Professor David Nasaw called it 'blatantly ludicrous' that the couple should be honored.
‘If you look at the people who have been awarded the Robert Kennedy prize in the past – Bill and Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi [Speaker of the US House of Representatives], Bishop Desmond Tutu – and then you have to ask what are Harry and Meghan doing here?
‘What in God’s name have they done to merit this? What percentage of Harry and Meghan’s wealth is going to worthy causes?' he said on Good Morning Britain on Monday.
It's unclear when they were first considered as laureates for this year's award.
Rory Kennedy, Kerry's sister, runs a film production company with Liz Garbus, the director behind Harry and Meghan's Netflix docuseries, but she has not confirmed whether she had any role in deciding who should be honored.
Others have suggested a more straightforward motive - driving ticket sales.
Harry and Meghan will be honored at RFK Foundation's NYC gala
https://mol.im/a/11448401
Thank you Rebecca for copying and pasting the original article from The Telegraph. 🤗
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9h86i3yvYW8
He makes case that the christening photo was legit. What do you think?
Could it be that Diana's sister was demonstrating what she thought of the entire business?
BTW, the Anthem dates from when Charles Edward and his highland army were still marching south and London was in a panic. The story goes that at the end of a performance at the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane, an actor came onto the stage unexpectedly and sang the verses to stiffen the morale of the audience.
As for *, did she rely on the teleprompt for Suits? Her other, notorious, film role presumably did not feature much dialogue...
Galahs Galore is brilliant and I fully agree with your suggestion to Kerry Kennedy. STFU, indeed! Her hatred for the British is driving this and she looks like a fool. The RFK clan is using this award to insult the English.
@lizzie and Maneki
Your comments on the RFK Ripple of Hope awards are spot on. The comments/suggestions from Tina Brown are ill informed, at best. I find them to be equally insulting to the BRF and the majority of Americans.
Roya Nikkhah must be living in LaLa Land, if she believes there was widespread support for the Double D’s, (Dookie and Duckass) after the Oprah interview. There are very few Americans who believe that hogwash. Did she forget that the media dissected Duckass’s claims and provided substantive proof of at least 17 lies?
Thanks for Shamelot👏. I think Scamelot would also be appropriate 😁
If she not done so, that title being hereditary would have been PoW.
Notice that in the statement, she gives two instructions.
a) Upon the death of PoE the title reverts to the Crown.
b) In due course (???) EoW would be named DoE. What would be the appropriate time? I think only she, PoE and Charles know. I will defend KCIII here. Perhaps, he is waiting for the "due time" stipulated by the Queen herself.
And as Sandie observed, we are speculating or right or wrong, because the absolute truth of the facts we do not have (and I include here a good part of the media as well)
I close the debate on the DoE title so as not to wear out the others.
...
Magatha I love you ❤️
KK shut up 😂😂
good piece on ms kennedy cuomo i guess the other day she came out and said the award was for stepping up against institutional racism in the british monarchy. not even a faux humanitarian award (as originally touted) all based on a claim on oprah. it does pigeon hole the twit and tear. you are receiving an anti monarchy award guess titles for you and the “kids” aren’t important. it is curious. is the wife pushing this angle. truly cut off her husband and his connections. she knows the titles are prob gone as are any for the kids. she always likes to get ahead of things and pushes her angle. hope ms kennedy gets markled. people are. ow looking into the foundation’s financials realizing it’s not giving out much in grants. sounds familiar
Is any other Nutties tired of the non stop clothing comparisons? "_______(insert * or C here) takes a page from Diana." We know * has made a conscious (conspicious) effort to chanel TOS's mother. Why would C want to do that when she has her own style? Did anyone else say 'Diana who' when C stepped out in that gold dress at the BAFTAs?
Let W&C sparkle - they are monarchy and the future. The Moneceito duo are emblems of finding freedom while trashing what made them famous.
We have the Dowager Duchess of Westminster, her son inherited the title upon his Fathers death who died too young. Once he marries, his Mother will still be the Dowager Duchess of Westminster, despite his new wife being the The Duchess of Westminster. 🤗
...
Bitter' Kerry Kennedy uses charity named for her father 'to travel and party with celebrities and has become erratic and unhinged'
Robert F. Kennedy's daughter Kerry is 'unhinged' and acts like the dictator of a banana republic at her father's eponymous Human Rights charity while she enriches herself off its coffers and has no real direction or talent - at least according to several former employees
RFK's seventh child, 56, is the subject of the scorching allegations in Sunday's New York Post, which quotes multiple unnamed sources in a lengthy evisceration of her role as the 'human rights activist and lawyer' president leading Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights.
According to the report, Kennedy treats staff poorly, acts erratically and her actions have led to nine employees to leave the charity in the past year alone.
She did not respond to the paper's multiple calls for comment.
'She treats them so badly, belittling and embarrassing them in front of others,' a former three-year employee told the Post, adding, 'She can't follow up and can be very vague. Sometimes she would get frustrated but couldn't convey where her frustration was coming from.'
The employee claims that while she was always hard to work for, her behavior got worse in early 2015.
According to its website the charity is a 'group of experts and advocates passionate about realizing Robert F. Kennedy's dream of a more just and peaceful world.'
But the multiple former employees say that the reality is Kennedy uses foundation funds to lavish herself and party with famous people.
The Post reports that tax filings show she paid herself a whopping $357,340 in 2014.
She also flies only business class, changes and no-shows on tickets at costly whims and only stays at four star hotels, including when in Paris staying at the same $500-a-night hotel as John Kerry - all billed to the charity.
And the Paris trip was for the sole purpose, the disgruntled former employees claim, of screening a movie with Javier Bardem.
A trip earlier this year to South Africa to give a speech honoring her father's legacy and the end of apartheid was really a 'travel party' for her family, according the Post.
She spends much of her time, according to the sources, asking for money and writing thank you notes to people giving money, and trying to wrangle celebrities to foundation events and is barely seen reading newspapers or magazines or anything on current events.
She recently took a foundation trip to Mexico to build a house and brought along one of her teenaged daughters, who wanted to write about the trip for Teen Vogue.
The piece never ran and the building homes in Mexico is not, sniffed a source to the Post, the purpose of the charity anyway.
The past decades have been rocky for Kennedy.
Her brother David died of a drug overdose in 1984.
She married now-governor Andrew Cuomo in 1990, but they divorced in 2005 following a 2003 separation and reports she was having an affair with polo playing businessman Bruce Colley.
On New Year's Eve in 1997 her brother Michael, her next oldest sibling, died skiing into a tree.
In May 2012 her best friend sister-in-law Mary Kennedy, Robert Kennedy Jr's estranged wife, hanged herself in the middle of a bitter divorce battle.
In July 2012 she was arrested on drugged driving charges when she side swiped a tractor trailer and then had trouble speaking and was swaying after 'mixing up' her prescriptions and taking a sleeping pill earlier in the day. She was acquitted of the charges on February 28, 2014.
She has endured repeatedly tragedies since her uncle and father's assassinations when she as a young child, and disgruntled ex-employees no doubt pales in comparison to those within her family, but may be catching up.
'Her staff fear her, as she has a wicked temper and is quite entitled and belligerent,' one of thee-employees source told the Post, 'She has become bitter, mean and angry - and now, clearly, publicly depressed.'
Kerry graduated from Brown University and Boston College Law School and is the mother of three daughters, Cara, Mariah, and Michaela, with Cuomo.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3716966/Bitter-Kerry-Kennedy-uses-charity-named-father-travel-party-celebrities-erratic-unhinged.html
The BLG does not get it right all the time. He misidentified the woman at Jackson Hole as Ducharse. With all the hair straightening she gets, her hair is thick and wavy. Highlights, lowlights, straightening all thicken hair, and give it more body. The woman's hair was very fine, very straight, and brown, not black.
So The BLG saying the christening photo was legit is simply his opinion. Readers here have done a much more thorough job of dissecting the photo, and identifying the inconsistencies.
Agree about TBLG, he doesn’t get it right all the time and I’ve noticed from some of the comments under his videos that I’m not alone with those thoughts. 🫤
Seems like he's getting a little carried away sometimes lately.
Kerry Kennedy Says Ambien 'Overtook' Her, Causing …
https://abcnews.go.com/US/kerry-kennedy-ambien...
Feb 26, 2014 · Kennedy, 54, took the stand to testify in her own defense today in her drugged driving trial. She is accused of driving under the influence of …
Estimated Reading Time: 6 mins
***** By the way. When Tiger Woods crashed his SUV, this was probably due to taking Ambien. You can take this to go to sleep. Then waking up you can be in mildly hallucinogenic state.
The Kennedy's are an Irish Family, and even though they have been Americans for generations, there is an inherent bias against the English and Northern Ireland. I have an Irish grandmother and when I attended Catholic schools in the early 60's, we were discouraged from wearing the colors black and orange. That was a very big no no on St. Patrick's day. It is symbolic, but honoring the Markles with such harsh words against the monarchy is a middle finger to the Palace. Internationally, there are a lot of games afoot.
I think that she was placed to bring problems to the Monarchy by influencing Harry. He is a weak link in the family. I also think that Andrew's arrogance put him in a position to be compromised. I believe Charles understands NOW what game is at play.
@Raspberry Ruffle
Thanks to each of you for the reposting, and additional information.
Kerry Kennedy may also be a narcissist. Let's see which narcissist will "win" at the Kennedy awards: Ducharse vs. Kerry Kennedy.
We as individuals are not responsible for the sins and crimes of our forefathers and should no the treated as if we deserving punishment. Yet people are willing to believe a pack of Markle lies if it fits their world view.
I still tend to agree with Peridot about what's really going on here. According to my Army officer husband (no 1) decades ago, one particular regime was believed to be supporting any cause which threatened to destabilise the UK, regardless of what the cause itself was fighting for - ie get someone else to do the dirty work and then, when they've succeeded, rub them out.
No names, no pack drill.
I don’t entirely disbelieve this. However, history could say otherwise. Kathleen Kennedy married into the British aristocracy, namely to the then heir (The Marquess of Hartington aka William Cavendish) the Duke of Devonshire. Which is not only very British but Protestant at that. Her Mother Rose Kennedy might not have been too happy, but after Kathleen’s tragic early death, her brother JFK came to pay his respects to her grave on the Cavendish’s estate at Chatsworth. 🤗
The Daily Mail is filled with Andrew stories today. What a mess!
kinda looking forward to the competing galas. we know the mrs will get an uber expensive i’ll fitting designer dress maybe she should have one like Michelle Obama’s made of african prints just to be obvious. we know there will be extra bronzer and someone will shove her husband aside for the microphone. then we will have classy and understated in Boston.
can’t wait for the state dinner in london this week!!!
Several of RFK’s offspring have been fairly outspoken supporters of Northern Ireland. In the 1990’s, Representative Joe Kennedy II led a boycott of Queen Elizabeth’s speech to protest “the English occupation of Ireland.” Another one of RFK’s kids, (Courtney?) married a member of the Irish Republic Army. I think it’s plausible that Kerry is being defiant toward the BRF. it makes her look foolish, but I doubt she cares.
Did you not read my post on 17 November 11.27pm? @snarkyatherbest mention reading in a blog that Courtney Kennedy was married to 'a former IRA member'. I corrected the statement - not @snarkyatherbest's fault but the blog's ignorant writer's - and @lizzie thanked me. Is this wrong information prevalent in the US? For the record, Paul Hill was never an IRA member. He was a Northern Irish and was arrested with another three for a pub bombing. They were coerced by police into confessing and spent 15 years in prison. Paul Hill was in solitary confinement during that time. An IRA active unit eventually confessed to the bombings.
This was such a travesty of justice and this wrong information makes my blood boil because although the bombing itself is nebulous (that was in 1974) I certainly remember when rumours started the four were innocent and then when they were freed. We lived with about 25 years of IRA bombing campaigns in England - mainly but not exclusively in London - so it's hard to forget. Not your fault in any way but I wish some blog writers - not here! - would research facts before writing. End of rant.
Peridot said, I think that she was placed to bring problems to the Monarchy by influencing Harry. He is a weak link in the family.
I forgot to add, the problem is, the ideology of Woke. Maggot and Mole have made it their mantra and they have supporters of that ideology. One of prime aims of Woke, is to attack and weaken establishments and institutions, the British Monarchy is one of those such institutions. Maggot is just a chancer who went out of her way to hook a stupid and gullible fool. 🫤
Just had a thought--what if she infiltrates the Kennedy family? As in, have an affair, dump the Chump, etc. Hmmm. Possibilities. After all, the Kennedys are used to spendthrift Ethel Kennedy. She was in mega debt from her compulsive spending. Spendthrift Ducharse will fit right in.
Tantalizing but let's let this part of the equation rest for a while. There is still quite a number of days before the gala (or ... something else gets revealed).
Thanks
Not your fault at all as I explained but obviously some websites have wrong information and should know better. Don't beat yourself up over it 🤗