Netflix - Part Two

Those first episodes - wow.  Not a good look (and holds that since the drop).  The silence is deafening from people in high places who previously would at least do blog mentions of support.

 People will remember the curtsey probably the long after this is over.  It was the essence of just how disrespectful she/their actions was/were to his grandmother, everything the Queen did, stood for and to the people of the UK.  

And, as someone pointed out, the only unintended parts were that HM passed early but the intention was that she should know and see it.  And, that they both wanted to be there (near HM) right before she passed.  

We knew, just like the interviews, that there would be a lot of editing out or deliberate misinformation by implying X when next showing Y while saying Z.  So we can expect more of the same for round two.  

An example from the trailer is that their security was cut but, as one poster put it, they are omitting that when you leave a job, they take away the company car and corporate credit cards. 

Or that cut of the Queen's promise of service from long ago.  That was something else (apparently) intending for HM to hear.  And yet so easily found by people who are just looking for these "actions which are not as they appear to be".  It is like watching Lost.  You always had to be paying attention to the whole picture because while they were pointedly waving their right hand, you had to also be tracking the left and scanning the background.

What's remains is their story of how remarkable their relationship is, their meeting, dating but how many different versions can there be?  Or what is left for their Show and Tell to the world? What's the encore after this and the book?  

Every negative claim is always so vague and nothing ever seems to have legitimate receipts attached to it.  And that someone (I read that one was Gail King before and now *'s attorney) claims to have seen these proofs of the links between the Palace and the stories which seemed to cause distress in *.   People can say anything short of screaming fire but is there really something which could be taken to a court of law?  As one poster put it - something about how even if the Palace had done such a thing, doesn't mean those stories aren't true.  Or that if it only says Palace on the caller ID but no specific phone extension, it could also mean that the source could have just as easily been *.  Or, someone using someone else's phone.  

Good point about possible trying to draw the Palace into a protracted legal battle.   

And yet the Palace machine keeps rolling forward without appearing to have any of this register as something worthwhile to respond to.  An unaltered trajectory by all appearances.  

I read somewhere that they may actually believe that they can reunite with his family at some point down the road.  

Given the couple are  making all kinds of claims about the monarchy and the people who work within it, limited access to show and teach their kids anything of the centuries of the country's history, customs and traditions (ahem, cough), aren't living in the UK or a Commonwealth, having so much difficulty with his family, nor serving the king in public duties  - one wonders what the British Royal family would really gain from the reconciliation show as directed by the couple after so many attempts to appear to undermine the very institution they allow, no insist on maintaining contact (photos, articles and so on) of themselves to be tethered to.  I don't have a clue about that.