Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce. And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before? which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)?
There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know. I'm not a lawyer.
One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away". That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice. But does he?
He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance. Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of being able to afford such a lovely bauble = although we still would like to drool looking at it).
Same holds true for the jewelry. (still drooling).
In reality, there can be things which are being "sold" which do not meet the minimum which is embarrassing but translates to no one wants this at this price. So ... it might make some sense to ask for cash ... but ...
But would he have that amount of cash? Maybe? He did, after all, need to borrow cash from his mother to be able to pay off Diana. Years later and the Dutchy did well under him, is one thing but hold that thought about Dutchy funds.
More recently, I seem to remember talk of the Queen Mother leaving debts and Queen Elizabeth quietly paying them off. But that was her mother, a woman of a different generation where women did not work, they married, men took care of the finances and women didn't get involved with that. That was then and this is now (pretty much everyone works in some way). But we really don't know because the estate stuff gets sealed.
Besides, there is rumor that The Queen has lent or given or something money to Prince Andrew so he could pay off Virginia or maybe it was the ski chalet or both. If any part of that is true, then that is a chuck of cash that isn't available.
I don't get to see the finances of how things roll but my guess is that the BRF are meeting their bills but soaking up a lot of extra is not happening. Things just cost more (and more and more) plus covid ripples affecting everyone PLUS the whole country is having serious belt tightening. And, the very public thinning of the monarchy (which actually started years ago). Or the cutting of the family subsidy (think Prince Andrew and so on). So ... they too, have been and are looking at cutting costs (which may or may not be sparked by a cash flow situation at the moment but more likely concerns of the potential for one in the future).
And then there is the we don't know the financial details but remember that the King gifted Angela Kelly a house which is not geographically close to Windsor. No idea about anything about the house but that was a kind thing for her. Was that cash out for him? Don't know.
One of the key things to remember (especially when the interest rate on savings is not even covering inflation) is to invest in things which bring you cash. And, they are usually linked to something people need. In short, you don't let cash sit around in some account earning pennies when it could be making way more for you somewhere else. Again, that may still be invested in something which is as illiquid as land once you buy it (think land like a parking lot in the middle of a big city where people always need parking. Or maybe a laundromat.).
So, when King Charles tried to have a conversation with his son about money (to consider having the future wife continue to work because at some point, the money from him would change) was actually an attempt to let them know (remind the son) that at some point, Prince Charles would be king and the Dutchy (which had been "helpful" to funding the son's needs up until that point) would then be under the control of PW. And that, would be that. He was thoughtful, as usual, thinking way ahead and trying to let them know ahead of time so they could plan/adjust now. The response to that early warning was not taken well or heeded (at that time or down the road as things started spinning out for them).
A question was raised about why would (somehow) legally KC be responsible for being the source of the money? (but) The real question is why should he? (Not like he's the one married to her - for richer or poorer and all that jazz.)
When then PC borrowed the money from his mother to pay off Diana at the time of the divorce, they (he and his mother) both knew that a) he would pay it back and b) that over time, the Dutchy would fund this repayment (I could be wrong about how I remember that explanation). But the Dutchy goes to the Prince of Wales and therefore is not a source of any money to people who are not in the immediate family of the Prince of Wales. So if money is borrowed by the son who is not the PoW (therefore does not have that income), what or how would a loan be paid back? A normal question by any bank loan officer. Or his father if his father were to bankroll a loan.
Thinking that the just the pure fatherly love would be enough to pay her off (just give her the money)? I don't think so. I suspect that the king not only saw how money was being spent on the lead up to the wedding, watching the bills from the first year of marriage, had vivid memories of funding his divorce and has advisors who are keeping him informed about the current and future state of the economy. We know he loves his son but would it really extend to such a huge financial payout? As of late, his public comments are few, far between and mainly come off as 'Thinking of you, Hope you are having a happy life over there.'
And, the claim of blackmail. Eh, yeah. That is a technical possibility. The problem with it is that once you pay anything - ever, there is nothing to stop them from coming back for multiple bites of the apple. And, having seen just the public behavior (not even what has been said behind the scenes, on phone calls, put in emails and texts - all that isn't coming out), would it make a lot of sense for the BRF to open themselves up for more or else I'll ... threats in the years to come?
The difficulty is having the courage to rip that bandage of blackmail off and release the information yourself, throw yourself on the ground, begging mercy and then ... you release the proof of blackmail (oh, my). People will gawk, tut-tut but your life will move on without the blackmail threat looming over your every waking moment while the blackmailer gets some tarnish at best and possible legal problems at worst.
People keep mentioning the need for an iron clad NDA. Who would really believe either could be trusted to follow an NDA and never talk about "the it" after a payout to go away quietly? Remember the court case where there were claims she/he didn't participate in the Finding Freedom? and so on. What does that past behavior tell us about the potential for the future?
Comments
The Todgers really do think they are the TRUE King and Kween of the UK Ruling in Exile.
Those two can be certified as lunatics.
Have the Sugars ever acknowledged H as King? We hear a lot about their Kween but I don't remember the term the `King' passing through their typing fingers. They really are clueless about how things work on the east side of the Pond.
And Heart of Invictus will be released this year. It will be interesting to see how much she features. Was that why she pushed herself front and centre at the last games and the mini tour in Germany? To get a starring role in the documentary? I wonder how much control Netflix has over the final cut.
King Charles 3: energy we think about which path to take, we delay a transformation, we wait for the right moment. With the tarot, there is a desire to communicate or modify the way the team works, we wish to modify the links or improve them, a change in behavior or communication.
Prince William: energy, he feels victorious or blessed about a wish in connection with his family or on a relational link.
tarot: still this victorious energy about a project or other (something that is not material) a decision was made which was not easy
Princess Catherine: energy, a lot of vitality and peace has returned, we are opening up to other possibilities. Ave the tarots I had the sun card, good news accompanied by a selfish energy with the 4 denier with the 2 deniers reversed + ace of cups + ace of swords + the devil = we made a petty choice here .
prince harry: energy, we move away from our money problems, we don't want to see the truth. With the tarot cards: it was hard to free ourselves or to find a solution in a marriage, so we hope for something from heaven
meghan markle: we are working on an objective project to detach and make a career for ourselves. With the tarot cards; an event of the tower, we hoped to get help or money but it didn't happen, we keep moving forward but we start to be stuck, we will accept a more "modest" job but which gives him the impression of moving forward.
https://mysteriouslytransparentwitch.tumblr.com/
Today:
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/prince-harry-attack-queen-camilla-080024490.html
Previously (I can't recall if I published the link or not
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/king-charles-frustrated-prince-harry-123454927.html
Here's today's:
The Daily Beast
Prince Harry’s Attack on Queen Camilla Sinks Reconciliation With King Charles
Tom Sykes
Fri, 16 June 2023 at 9:00 am BST
Photo Illustration by Elizabeth Brockway/The Daily Beast/Reuters
Royalist is The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday.
Relations between King Charles and his estranged son Prince Harry have descended to fresh lows owing to Harry’s attacks on Charles’ wife, Queen Camilla, and friends of the royals now suspect the two will never be reconciled.
While many inside the royal circle of trust have long discounted the possibility of Prince William and Harry ever setting aside their differences, there is now similar pessimism in some quarters about the relationship between Harry and his father, the king, who has been left dismayed by Harry’s brutal criticism of Camilla in his memoir, Spare.
Friends say that Charles was particularly hurt by the assault his son mounted on the character of Camilla in his book. He characterized her as single-mindedly determined to become queen, accused her of “sacrificing” him on “her personal PR altar” and told one interviewer she was “dangerous” and was prepared to leave “bodies in the street” in her quest to be queen.
Prince Harry: Camilla Was ‘Dangerous’ and ‘Left Bodies in the Street’
A longstanding friend of the queen told The Daily Beast: “How does she get past that? It’s one thing to call your stepmother a bitch privately or in a family argument. But to put it in a book which is catching up with the Bible on sales? I think Harry knew exactly what he was doing, and the result is predictable. Charles loves Camilla. He made her queen. He doesn’t react very well to criticism of her.”
Asked if they were saying that the attacks on Camilla, specifically, had generated a harder attitude towards his son from Charles, the friend of Camilla said: “It is a huge part of it. Charles has made it very clear that he loves both his sons so the door will never be bolted shut. But they are a very obstinate family and nobody is about to be the first to apologize. Charles certainly doesn’t believe he has anything to apologize for.”
The other problem, beyond the memoir itself, seems to be an obstinate refusal on both sides to make the first move in apologizing, or, indeed, accepting there is anything to apologize for.
One friend of the king and queen told The Daily Beast: “There is no plan for Harry and Charles to meet. There might have been a chance of reconciliation had it not been for the book. But Charles was dismayed and deeply hurt by what Harry said about him and about Camilla in his book.
“Personal feelings aside, Charles has to prioritize the job of being king. He can’t start having meetings with Harry now, it would be a distraction and very destabilizing.”
A bereaved friend of the late Queen Elizabeth recently told The Daily Beast that friends of Her Majesty, and the wider circle of royals, remain horrified by what they see as Harry’s disregard for and cruelty towards his grandmother by remorselessly attacking the institution she headed as she was suffering with painful terminal bone cancer in her final years. It is understood Charles was one of those who was left aghast by Harry’s timing.
The friend of the late queen’s previously told The Daily Beast: “By the time of the Platinum Jubilee (June 2022), she couldn’t see very much, she couldn’t hear very much, and she was easily confused. She barely moved from her apartments in Windsor Castle. Appearing on the balcony at the jubilee required a titanic effort. [Harry and Meghan] produced this unending stream of incredibly hurtful films and interviews attacking her life’s work. For Harry to announce he was writing a memoir when his grandmother was not just recently widowed but actually dying herself, as he must have known she was—well, the cruelty of it takes the breath away.”
Harry’s book was originally scheduled for the fall of 2022, but was then delayed and was ultimately not published until after the queen died. An intriguing report by the London Times’ royal reporter Valentine Low claimed that Harry told his publishers, to their dismay, that he was going to cancel the book after his trip back to the U.K. for the jubilee—but then changed his mind back again.
Charles was generally considered to have been more understanding of his younger son’s desire to speak out publicly, having done the same thing himself when he was interviewed by Jonathan Dimbleby in 1994, when he was in his forties.
However, while Dimbleby’s accompanying authorized biography of Charles contained some criticism of his parents—for example he accused his mother of being emotionally distant—it was as nothing compared to the furious attacks Harry unleashed on Charles himself, whom he painted as weak, vacillating, vain, and self-interested.
There is now a sense that Charles is becoming increasingly open about admitting, to his trusted inner circle at least, that the relationship with Harry is utterly broken. In a recent Sunday Times article, for example, a source in the king’s camp was quoted by the paper’s royal reporter, Roya Nikkhah, as saying: “The king brings Harry up every time I see him. I don’t think we’ve moved past sad and bewildered, but there’s a bit more frustration at his behavior, because it just keeps going.”
The comments echoed the most explicit, on the record remarks about the affair made to date, by the king’s oldest friend, Sir Nicholas Soames, who gave an apparently authorized interview to Times Radio just before the coronation.
Although not explicitly identified as a surrogate for the king, Soames had likely been authorized to speak by the king’s office, and appeared to have a talking point that Harry’s behavior, in publishing a memoir and giving interviews that have attacked the family, had deeply wounded and upset the king.
Soames told Times Radio, in the course of a 30-minute interview praising the king, “In respect of Prince Harry, I just think it’s the most tragic. I mean, I can’t put myself in the position where my own son, if he did something like that to me, it would just be the cruelest… and one would mind.”
Soames was asked later in the interview how Queen Camilla felt about Harry but dodged the question saying he hadn’t discussed it with her, returning instead to how Harry’s public attacks on the family had affected Charles, saying, “Of course it was hurtful, you could see it, written all over his face. Put oneself in his position. It was just painful beyond words.”
Camilla’s chief “companion”—the role she has chosen to replace that of ladies-in-waiting—the Marchioness of Lansdowne is the only person to to have publicly spoken out on the record on Camilla’s behalf after Harry’s book was published, saying that while it had “hurt” Camilla, she wasn’t the type of person to make a fuss, believing that “least said soonest mended.”
On this, as on so much else, Charles and Camila are likely to be united: Charles will want to spend as little time as possible talking about the destroyed relationship with Harry over the coming months and years—and that might just mean cutting him loose entirely.
The offices of Prince Harry and King Charles did not respond to requests for comment on the state of their relationship.
Archetripes
Wasn’t able
to shake off her label
The megative negativity
she brought to the table
Spotalie bought Archehypes boak
Mutual greed
wrapped up in woke cloak
Bad seed turned to weed
They had to concede
They’d been sold a
Pig in a Poke…
...
The Daily Mail’s Royal Editor Rebecca English points out that combined with the lease on his Frogmore Cottage property running out, it adds to his ‘rootlessness’ and the pair’s distance from the country they once called home. (DM)
Harry might have called the UK home, at least until he married TBW, but * certainly never called it home. She couldn't wait to decamp to the US.
The DM article showed a photo of some ugly insect which is an ad by a pest control company to get rid of bed bugs. Quite appropriate, I'd say.
Singalong, muchly quickie 🎤
Apologies: The Angels
Am I Ever Gonna See Your Face Again
The Wisdom of Oz
I never wanna see megs face again
(Crowd response)
No way, get fu*ked, fu*k off…
Thank you for your insight. I'll condense this as much as I can so as not to clutter up the blog but my narc sister is the middle of 3, I am the youngest. Our parents are both now deceased. Our father, an obstetrician and GP, was convinced she had a personality disorder. Our parents were good people, with human frailties but not bad people. Something had always felt "off" around my sister, she sucked the attention and energy out of any situation. Behaving badly as a child/teen morphed into a victim narrative as an adult. But we put up with it for the sake of harmony and to not spoil the times we had together. Easy to wonder why nobody spoke up, but when you only see your family a few times a year and for a few days at a time you don't want to sully that time with a huge argument - our parents would have been the ones left to deal with the fallout as she never moved far from home unlike my brother and me. This is what she relied on. With hindsight, our parents were simultaneously the source of her fuel and the target of her emotional bullying. It was only after their death and when she targeted her manipulation on me and my brother that "the scales fell from our eyes". I am now estranged from her (my decision to go no-contact) - it has taken a while but I am now at peace with that decision and my brother and I still have each other.
I'll leave this now so the blog can get back on-topic - thank you for allowing me this space
@Vetus
I doubt there are many
underprivileged kids in the
Monte area?
Peddleho’s
Good onya Charles
keep the feckers out
Trooping the Colour
for those without doubt
God Save the King
Desperately spinning again to try and manage the Spotify news. If one is telling the truth, one simply has to state it once. The truth does not change, over and over again.
`Spotalie bought Archehypes boak'
Brilliant! Thanks to Ian Rankin, I ken fine what you mean!
'Archehypes boak' - very good 😂
@Wild Boar
Know what you mean too
https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/4046789-hurricane-harry-is-bearing-down-on-king-charles-iii/
"Harry’s hurricane-force shenanigans risk badly destabilizing the constitutional monarchy if not jeopardizing its very survival. "
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/14b76j4/spotify_exec_says_some_hurtful_things/
and here
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/14az34b/markle_clapback_in_5_4_3/
Spotify exec calls the dastardly duo "fu**ing grifters"
"The f-cking grifters. That’s the podcast we shoulda launched with them,” he said. “I gotta get drunk one night and tell the story of the Zoom I had with Harry to try and help him with a podcast idea. It’s one of my best stories.”
...
Simmons did not hold his tongue about the royal couple even during the time they were under contract with Spotify. Last January, he blasted Prince Harry, saying it was “embarrassing” to be affiliated with the same company.
“Shoot this guy to the sun,” Simmons groused, according to the Big Lead post. “I’m so tired of this guy. What does he bring to the table? He just whines about sh-t and keeps giving interviews. Who gives a sh-t? Who cares about your life? You weren’t even the favorite son. … You live in f-cking Montecito and you just sell documentaries and podcasts and nobody cares what you have to say about anything unless you talk about the royal family and you just complain about them.”
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are called 'f*****g grifters' by Spotify exec Bill Simmons after their $20M Archetypes podcast is axed
Spotify and the Sussexes's audio production company Archewell Audio on Thursday night said they have 'mutually agreed to part ways'
The announcement marks the end of their $20 million deal, signed three years ago: they produced 13 episodes of Markle's podcast, Archetypes
The Wall Street Journal said they did not meet the productivity benchmark to receive the full $20m payout: she is said to be working on other projects
I understand his POV; there is nothing there, and Mrs. Todger demanding more and more just wasn't worth it for anyone involved. The Todgers will NOT be given access to anything Royal, so listen up potential suppliers.
I came here to say the same! It's a headline in the DM and also and Reddit and Twitter.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are called 'f*****g grifters' by Spotify exec Bill Simmons after their $20M Archetypes podcast is axed
Bill Simmons is 'a top Spotify podcast executive'. He also said 'I've got to get drunk one night and tell the story of the Zoom I had with Harry to try and help him with a podcast idea. It's one of my best stories.' This should be interesting.
Last January, he blasted Prince Harry, saying it was 'embarrassing' to be affiliated with the same company.
'Shoot this guy to the sun,' he said, according to sports website The Big Lead.
'I'm so tired of this guy. What does he bring to the table? He just whines about s*** and keeps giving interviews.
'Who gives a s***? Who cares about your life?
'You weren't even the favorite son. You live in f****** Montecito and you just sell documentaries and podcasts and nobody cares what you have to say about anything unless you talk about the royal family and you just complain about them.'
What a ringing endorsement!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12204399/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-called-f-g-grifters-Spotify-exec-Bill-Simmons.html
Hurricane Harry is bearing down on King Charles III
BY MARK TOTH AND JONATHAN SWEET, OPINION CONTRIBUTORS - 06/15/23 7:00 AM ET
SHARETWEET
It is hurricane season again in the Atlantic. Although it is exceedingly rare, hurricanes — or at least their extratropical remnants resulting in strong winds — have battered the United Kingdom in the past.
One hurricane of a royal familial sort already struck hard earlier this year in the form of Prince Harry, the duke of Sussex. The ensuing gale force torrents of air produced by Harry were fueled, in part, by the clash of hot Montecito air he exhaled when, in a written statement, the self-exiled son of King Charles III brashly condemned his father’s government in the polar arctic air of a British courtroom in London.
The destructive force of Harry’s words was of a Category 5 nature, at least in terms of the damage they immediately caused — and are causing — to the United Kingdom.
It is one thing for him to pursue his legal claims, as is his right, against alleged illegal media activity. It is quite another for him to attack His Majesty’s government, declaring it to be “at rock bottom.”
Harry has, in fact, just breached an inviolate British convention whereby the royal family remains above and apart from the fray of domestic politics. The 38-year-old prince who grew up as the grandson of Queen Elizabeth II and served his country in Afghanistan as an Army helicopter pilot apparently missed that block of instruction.
He clearly has no grasp of the gravity and responsibility of the affairs of state. Or, perchance, if he does, then he clearly does not care how his words and actions, in pursuit of personal goals or vendettas, actively undermine the national well-being and security of the country of his birth.
This naïveté, if that’s what it is, began with his Oprah Winfrey interview in March 2021. He and his wife Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, implied that someone in the royal family was racist — an implication not disowned until 21 months later, when Harry denied it in an interview with ITV’s Tom Bradby in December 2022.
Notwithstanding the damage Harry and Meghan Markle did to the Commonwealth of Nations and the UK’s standing within it by allowing that implied accusation to hang in the air, the troubled duo greatly compounded the harm they had caused by subsequently permitting Afua Hirsch’s derisive description of the 56-member alliance as “Empire 2.0” to be associated with them during the “Harry & Meghan” Netflix series.
As such, perceived royal familial grievances were blindly allowed to turn into an insinuation of a UK malevolently intent on exploiting its Commonwealth partners.
It is bad enough to play into the hands of Russian and Chinese disinformation in this fashion. But now Harry’s crusade against his family has created a constitutional crisis in the UK. Fortunately, for now, at least from King Charles’s perspective, calmer heads are prevailing.
Despite being the target of Harry’s courtroom ire and blindsided by it while traveling in the U.S. to meet with President Joe Biden to discuss the war in Ukraine and other vital bilateral matters, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak temporarily defused the situation by saying, “As you know, we have a long-standing convention that prime ministers don’t comment on members of the royal family.”
This respite aside, “Hurricane Harry” is still a tropical depression bearing down on King Charles and not going away any time soon. Charles is a monarch, but he is also a father. No doubt he was moved by his youngest son coming close to tears on the witness stand, making his case to the court why his phone and voicemail-hacking claims for monetary damages should be allowed to proceed against Mirror Group Newspapers.
But by breaking royal protocol and attacking his own father’s elected government, Harry is undermining the sacrosanct equivalent of a U.S. separation of powers, wherein the royal family does not involve itself in the workings of His Majesty’s government. This understood separation of powers is the bedrock of the relationship not only between king and parliament, but between king and country as well.
Harry’s hurricane-force shenanigans risk badly destabilizing the constitutional monarchy if not jeopardizing its very survival. As it is, public support for the British monarchy is at an all-time low, according to a poll by the National Center for Social Research. The survey found “45% of respondents said either it should be abolished, was not at all important, or not very important.” Alarmingly for British royalists, only “12% of 18-to-34-year-olds view the monarchy as “very important.
While it is ultimately up to the British to decide their form of government — and as Americans, we should take no position — it is clear that the added damage Hurricane Harry is creating could not come at a worse time. Europe — indeed, all of the West, including the U.S. — is in an existential fight in Ukraine and potentially soon in Taiwan, wherein either liberal democracy or the Russian and Chinese form of autocracy will conquer all. Harry, accordingly, must rise above being the man and the son he has been thus far on the world stage.
Now is not the time for a recalcitrant prince crassly conflating fleeting Hollywood celebrity with statesmanship. This critical moment in global history calls for some level of gravity. It is not the moment for exaggerated paparazzi taxi chase stunts, high school-like social drama over Harry’s attendance at his father’s coronation and the “worldwide privacy tour” by Harry and Meghan, memorably lampooned by South Park.
Rather, it is high time Harry recognizes that he can no longer keep placing his father, and by extension the United Kingdom and the U.S., in the eye of his storm. The hurricane-like damage to national security is becoming too great and potentially irreparable.
Hurricanes eventually run their course. Harry’s has gone on long enough.
The End.
---------
Well, that pretty well sums up my darkest fears, which arose as soon as she opened her gob about the Referendum, almost within hours of their engagement being announced.
Continuing appreciation for and enjoyment of your clever verse 🙂
____
The scathing remarks of Spotify exec Bill Simmons are everywhere today. I wonder if this will hasten Meghan’s plan to cut Harry loose and go it alone?
The predictable pap walk!
She has not been this skinny for years.
Bronzed up face ... marked difference between hands/feet and face/neck.
Why such a large bag? For a quick shopping trip to buy a small bag of luxury items?
Thanks for the link. * does look very slim, or,is it the right black jeans? Not sure about makeup free, certainly not bronzer free. The handbag is very big but there again it's a statement bag, there to be noticed, a '$5,400 Fendi Peekaboo ISeeU bag'.
She doesn't have a smile plastered on her face for once but then if Spotify had just ended their $20 million deal - by 'mutual agreement' - and she and hubby were called 'f*****g grifters' by a top Spotify podcast exec, she has precious little to smile about. I'm actually surprised she isn't hiding somewhere. But then today is Trooping the Colour.
We know ILBW never dresses for the weather and this is no exception. She was wearing a thick (cotton?) jumper on top of a long sleeved T-shirt in very warm weather.
Has she had a moment of perceiving reality?
Meanwhile, back in the Old Country, TTC was a great success. HM's horse didn't behave herself too well but he coped admirably. HM the Queen looked terrific in a red dress like a long Guards tunic, with a neat military style titfer with plume, by her favourite Hatter; it was entirely suitable for a Colonel in Chief of the Grenadiers; Edward Edinburgh looked well and happy, Sophie was radiant, Catherine, in green as Col-in-C Irish Guards, was and in some profile shots reminded me of the bust of Nefertiti. The Children were dressed charmingly although Charlotte could have been suffering from hayfever - there's a lot of it this year.
Something else that struck me was the number of women in high-ranking military posts who were interviewed - with each one, I thought `that's what I call a powerful woman!'.
And, from there, it will trickle out. The dam just got a leak. High viz. Public.
So, to me, this is the Kraken we have been expecting at some point - rising up and making itself known. For the first time, someone is publicly calling them not nice names and not afraid to say it.
Ditto. I had a script for Ozempic and I lost 22 lbs in four weeks. * is likely an Ozempic addict. Lol. But it still can't make her lose her nastiness...
Poor baroness did not succeed in coming as number one today. In DM's pictures she looked old, worn out and unhappy. Not wanting to sound unfeeling, she has used every ounce of compassion I have and I don't believe I am the only one.
All staged.
Just took a look at the photos. The entire outfit was transparently for merching purposes. I actually like the outfit. She does casual much better than her sad attempts to be 'couture', because she is far too short for high fashion. She looks particularly tiny next to the bespectacled guy with the Dad bod accompanying her. I can't think of what other function this man would have other than security detail, but surely he isn't the source of the "having it off with her new bodyguard" rumors? He's far better looking than her current husband but not enough of a side-piece to suit her; he looks like he could be her accountant, rather than her bodyguard.
The sweater is far too warm for Montecito this time of year but the problem isn't the outfit; it's the glowering smacked bum face over the top of it. Imagine making the effort to call Backgrid on yourself for flattering PR and this is the best they could do. If these are the least-bad shots they could get of her, Madam must really be in a foul temper. The older she gets the more she looks like Doria. Just imagine the amount of plastic surgery she's had, only to still wind up looking like her mother no matter what she does. Can't outrun our genetics, though we try. The Ozempic has done its work; she's not been this slim since her engagement, but I've gotta wonder what abusing pharmaceuticals off-label for decades for weight loss does to the body. The boutique drug for weight management used to be Adderall. I think an Adderall/cocaine cocktail kept her slim thorough her 20s and 30s. I've read that so many people are demanding Ozempic for weight loss that patients who legitimately are diabetic cannot get the supplies of their medication that they need. Our world is f'ed up.
Lisa Marie Presley suffered irreversible heart damage and died as a result of a crazy weight loss scheme in advance of her last awards show appearance. Her desire to 'look good' at that event directly killed her. My sister had a high school friend who was very heavy; in her 20s, she jumped on the bandwagon of a now-banned stimulant drug for weight loss and dropped 100 pounds. One day, at a reunion lunch with some friends from school, she collapsed and died at the table as a result of a massive coronary brought on by that drug. She was 27. Who knows what *'s system is like on the inside and what her various substance abuses over the years have done to her organs? I ask the same thing about her husband.
Has she had a moment of perceiving reality?
Neither she nor Harry are capable of assessing reality and their own active part in their failures, so I would not be hopeful that she's starting now. I think what we are witnessing is Narcissistic collapse. Their brand empire has disintegrated. The corporate deals are over. Lawsuits aren't going well. Harold has committed the most egregious no-no a British Royal can commit--disparaging the government about which they are to remain strenuously impartial. No more Royal invitations. The Kraken beastie has awoken, if the formerly sycophantic media is now plastering "f***** grifters" everywhere. Her rage must be extreme. As for Harold, any attempts at Royal training in discretion and decorum obviously fell on rocky and inhospitable soil and died a lonely unfruitful death. Harry was barely manageable before, under the auspices of the Royal machine. Now he's just completely out of control. Together they are the spirit of Anarchy unleashed on the world. I do wonder how much longer this can go on.
@Fifi
I didn't get a smirking vibe this time; this is definitely pouting. Are we supposed to feel sorry for the poor widdle rich girl with her $5400 brag-bag and her $250,000 diamond ring from her fake marriage? She looks quite miserable and p*ss*d off, but considering that she's basically paying for these pictures, I wonder if she thinks she looks 'pensive & sad' ala Princess Diana in front of the Taj Mahal. Where's Harry and the kids, Mugsy, and who is this random guy you're with? Scared the hordes of 'fans' on the streets of Monte (or wherever) might crush you to death?
Lest I give TBW any bloody ideas, I'm rather surprised that she hasn't staged a Princess Anne-style 'car-jacking at gunpoint' to show Charles how they are such high-profile targets, the Royal protection is a matter of life and death. That's what the 'catastrophic car chase' in NYC was supposed to do and we see how well that went.
I look forward to the next installment of the South Park 'Worldwide Privacy Tour!' The Todgers have provided so much primo material lately, it could make an entire series on its own.
Mrs. Todger is, as she would remind us, a world-renowned Supermodel. That must be why her poses with her freebies-to-merch always look so breathtakingly *natural* . . .! She always looks so stiff and awkward like she's having a conniption fit, holding her arms and hands in such bizarre ways. Like we are SO STUPID we couldn't possibly not believe she doesn't just insouciantly stroll around town this way all the time, you know, as you do. Maybe she's got tetanus.
@Fifi
I didn't get a smirking vibe this time; this is definitely pouting. Are we supposed to feel sorry for the poor widdle rich girl with her $5400 brag-bag and her $250,000 diamond ring from her fake marriage? She looks quite miserable and p*ss*d off, but considering that she's basically paying for these pictures, I wonder if she thinks she looks 'pensive & sad' ala Princess Diana in front of the Taj Mahal. Where's Harry and the kids, Mugsy, and who is this random guy you're with? Scared the hordes of 'fans' on the streets of Monte (or wherever) might crush you to death?
Lest I give TBW any bloody ideas, I'm rather surprised that she hasn't staged a Princess Anne-style 'car-jacking at gunpoint' to show Charles how they are such high-profile targets, the Royal protection is a matter of life and death. That's what the 'catastrophic car chase' in NYC was supposed to do and we see how well that went.
I look forward to the next installment of the South Park 'Worldwide Privacy Tour!' The Todgers have provided so much primo material lately, it could make an entire series on its own.
Mrs. Todger is, as she would remind us, a world-renowned Supermodel. That must be why her poses with her freebies-to-merch always look so breathtakingly *natural* . . .! She always looks so stiff and awkward like she's having a conniption fit, holding her arms and hands in such bizarre ways. Like we are SO STUPID we couldn't possibly not believe she doesn't just insouciantly stroll around town this way all the time, you know, as you do. Maybe she's got tetanus.
I personally don't believe a narcissistic person need to have suffered any trauma to become narcissistic. I think it's entirely possible to have been born with those traits, and to have had them made worse by the way one was reared. I think it's exactly the case for Our Megsy. Her mother teaching her to use people and her father spoiling her, coupled with growing up on the fringes of Hollywood and craving that limelight made her what she is today. She's neither beautiful nor talented enough to overcome her basic and highly unpleasant personality.
For most of the pictures she had on her little orphan Annie look. The one that she used for the funeral walkabout. Poor little orphan girl, no family, all alone in the world. Such a little waif is she.
But that one pic, with her head sideways, she's smirking/grinning to herself.
A duper's delight kinda look.
You can tell from her pose, upraised arm, etc., that she thinks she's being sexy.
I'm sure narcissists can be born as well as made or a combination of both. Would you agree that being born with a personality devoid of fundamental human traits like a capacity for empathy and the ability to develop a moral conscience could be considered a birth defect? If somebody is a sociopath, that condition is permanent and inalterable, in the same way that a chromosomal disorder is. These people really can't change, but perhaps they can be forced to endure consequences for their antisocial behaviors. I don't want to give * or Handbag a free pass for their mutual awfulness but they aren't going to change into decent people. It's decent people who will continue to suffer at their hands. On the one hand, they do what they do 'on purpose' and take delight in it, but on the other hand . . if their brains are wired such that they are incapable of moderating their behavior in more socially-acceptable channels, it's like expecting somebody to overcome Down's Syndrome and go to Harvard if they just try hard enough. It's a real mess.
I did some freelance writing over several years for a successful woman in the cosmetics industry. She was in therapy for narcissistic personality disorder, or some such thing. She did truly try to engage. She would start out each and every call very conscientiously by asking how I was, how my husband was, my mother. If the answer was ever anything but "fine", you could tell it was killing her to have to keep up the conversation, but she did try. She was awful to work fir, because she would constantly call and talk for literally hours bout herself, and then be pissed that my copy was never on time. She also had the added irritant to this Southerner of being from Brooklyn, and was very blunt and aggressive and just kind of obnoxious, but I did understand that that was really more of a culture clash than anything.
All that to say that she did at least try and never understood why she was so disliked. She was a very hard worker, very focused on her business,very driven. I often think of her when Nutmeg starts acting unhinged, because it's very similar to the behaviour I saw with this lady. And I do believe Nutmeg is constantly obsessed with her "business ", image, etc. But mostly herself!
Why such a large bag? For a quick shopping trip to buy a small bag of luxury items?
@Sandie: It’s full of Ozempic and more bronzer. Oh yes, and her race card in her wallet next to her driver’s license, but I think it has probably expired quite some time ago.
With her reputation of looking like carp in good clothes, and a whiney, divisive, victim personality, it's doubtful that the $5400 bag was a freebie.
Her thing with the phone, cold-calling celebrities wanting to hang out?
There's the thing people used to do in sales, was to sell the product before being hired as a salesperson just to show their dedication. I knew someone like that briefly. Not a lot of integrity.
As rebrandings go, this one is being handled with the precision of a military campaign.
When the news ricocheted around the world that Meghan Markle's Spotify podcast had been axed – amid bitter accusations that the Duchess and husband Harry were 'grifters' (American for 'con-artists') – her high-octane Hollywood team were already on a war footing.
Headed by powerhouse agent Ari Emanuel, the charismatic chief of talent agency William Morris Endeavor (WME), the mission to re-invent Meghan is already well under way, The Mail on Sunday has learned.
If the rumours swirling around LA are true, she may be on the brink of signing a major deal with French couture house Dior to make her a face of the company, alongside global stars such as Rihanna and Jennifer Lawrence.
'Meghan is all anyone is talking about,' a prominent Beverly Hills socialite said last night.
'There have been rumours for weeks that she's about to sign a deal with Dior which has put the gossip mill into overdrive. If she pulls that off, then no one will remember that her silly little podcast got cancelled after one season.'
etc. ...
According to a source at WME, they've 'been working on the rebranding of Meghan for weeks.' I'd say it's take a huge effort and and a major overhaul to rebrand madam. They can't change her personality and it's too late as everyone has seen the real person behind the plastered smiles.
Although I mostly skim read the article, and not even all of it, one sentence struck me: 'Meghan is wise to distance herself from her husband's toxic dramas. She was certainly happy to be part of Harry's dramas, if not being a major instigator, so is now she's detaching herself from them? Is she also detaching herself from him?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12206159/Is-Meghan-mega-bucks-Duchess-Dior.html
One is the teenage one we all know, the other a full-face one from the DM's recent offering. It's strange, because despite all the time, money and effort she's put into facial modification she looks just the same but older.
One eagle-eyed Sinner remarked on the way the corner of her mouth has dropped and speculated that she has had a stroke. I wonder if it was perhaps `just' a TIA, aka `mini-stroke' which should be taken more seriously?
https://www.health.harvard.edu/heart-health/anger-or-emotional-upset-may-trigger-stroke
(ie `apoplexy' in both senses)
Has she thrown one plate too many? Could that explain her odd demeanour on this outing? Rage doesn't do one's blood pressure any good anyway.
The new face of French fashion house Dior? Not unless they are launching a selection for older women! Have a look at their website:
https://www.dior.com/en_int/fashion
Restarting the Tig and earning through merching? That is actually the only way she can secure an income, in my opinion.
That the King posted a photograph of him with both his son's is not an olive branch. He is the father of two sons, and royals do not ruthlessly ghost family members who turn out bad.
'Meghan Markle could become world's highest-paid influencer: Duchess could rake in £200,000 per post after befriending guru behind Cindy Crawford and JLo's beauty lines and could rival Kim Kardashian's Dolce & Gabbana campaign if she signs Dior fashion deal'
'Could' being the operative word here. In your dreams, Megs.
That says much about the current state of where the couple is at. Coupled with the Spotify dump, no wonder M is willingly to been seen looking stressed in public.
It might be a good thing for her to snag a contract with Dior in that as a narcissist, it’s very likely she will view whatever she makes as “her money.” She likely views what Harry has made from Spare and the assets he brought into the marriage as also hers. Narcissists often have the viewpoint of “What’s yours is mine and what’s mine is mine.” In marriages, they often have a skewed view of how finances and income should be managed, that being everything should be managed for the benefit of themselves.
From personal experience, my parents were married for nearly 30 years when my mother died from breast cancer that had spread to her brain. My dad married a woman on the rebound who was likely a narcissist. She had an upper level management job with the US federal government and had money of her own. My dad and mom worked their asses off during their marriage to accumulate a nest egg together to allow them to be comfortable in retirement.
His new wife’s demands that he change his estate plan was the move by this woman that finally set off alarm bells in my father’s mind. During their entire relationship, my father paid for almost everything and she contributed little. even though she was in good financial shape herself, and like my father, was still working full time.
To fill this out a bit, after a courtship of a year and a surprise wedding, his rebound wife wanted my father to change his will and estate plan so that if he died before her, she would be the sole benefactor of his estate, leaving nothing for my brother and me.
When my rather shocked father asked her if she was willing to do the same with her estate if she passed before my father did, and leave everything to him, she told him she and her two adult children needed the money more than my brother and me. To top it all off, when they divorced after only three years of marriage, my father discovered she was still in a relationship with her boss that she had been in for several years prior marrying my father, which she continued behind my father’s back throughout her marriage to my father. She continued the relationship with her boss after she and my father divorced.
She reminds me of Harry’s wife in that she had likely targeted my father, who had only been widowed a few months when he was introduced to her by a friend of his. He was emotionally vulnerable, and while not wealthy by any measure, he had funds that had been intended for the use by him and my mother for a comfortable retirement that wife #2 felt entitled to have for herself and eventually for her adult children while leaving nothing for my brother and me.
Without going into greater detail, his second wife was incredibly pushy and manipulative. She exploited my father’s grief to her advantage and looking back on it had many if the narcissistic behaviors Meghan exhibits with Harry.
My guess is that Meghan likely views any money she brings in while married to Harry as “her money” and not their money as a married couple. She will make sure Harry is made to feel like the lesser financial partner in the marriage in that she will view herself as the breadwinner and Harry as even more of a lesser partner in their marriage than he already is. He has always been an object to be used by her, but his usefulness may soon end.
She will spend every dollar she makes from Dior, as an influencer through The Tig or any other deals she is able to ink on promoting and benefitting herself. If they divorce, she will use California being a community property state and the two kids to attempt take every penny Harry has before he returns to the UK with no money and only limited access to those two children. Her overblown sense of entitlement demands it,
If Meghan is able to forge a lucrative lifestyle for herself, Harry will be left in the trail of discarded people who have served their purpose and became useless.
Jennifer Lawrence was the face for Dior. There's just no way Mrs. Todger can compete with beauty, talent, and style.
Mrs. Todger ain't got no beauty, no talent, and certainly no style.
It's way too soon for Mrs. Todger to rebrand herself. Look at Chrissy Teigen, she had to wait almost a year to get her brand going again, then she ruined it soon after by publicly insulting someone. She's another person who can't keep her foot out of her mouth.
Folks are holding up that Spotify exec as a hero; others are trashing him. He is simply a guy holding a cup or two or more of hot tea and is not bound by an NDA. There are lots more like him out there. He also seems to be kind of reckless so he is going to talk
The PR wheels must be furiously spinning in Mudslide Manor. And that Spotify executive has become a target to them ... they will hold a grudge and seek revenge for the rest of their lives. I think that is one of the reasons why more people do not spill the tea they have ... the duo are vindictive and will go after anyone ... not even Elizabeth II was safe, not while mourning the death of her beloved husband nor while suffering the painful and debilitating effects of bone cancer.
-------
Botox mishap.
https://uk.yahoo.com/style/duke-sussex-accused-bungling-career-230100557.html
Dior need to be careful. Chanel's constant price rises as quality issues are becoming a problem have positioned Dior to be the new power luxury brand of the hoi polloi; there are billions to be made in this shifting of loyalties, and they don't need to risk getting Markled just now.
OT: has anyone else noticed that Catherine seems to look slightly different in her face? If she's had work done, it's very subtle, because I can't even pinpoint what looks different, but right around the time of the Jordanian royal wedding, I've seen photos and even one very grainy video where I had to look twice to confirm it was, in fact, her. Could it just be different makeup? Her eyebrows seem heavier. Or perhaps her face is thinner? I can't imagine her bothering to have anything done, but there's almost a mask-like quality to her face at times.
Re: Catherine face change; I had to look twice to recognize her also. Especially in the pics of her at Trooping the Color ceremony while she was in a green dress. I saw the same, bigger eyebrows it seemed, but there was another aspect. Pretty dress but I think her new different look in the face was not flattering, .but she is still just so gorgeous!
As for Meghan being a face for Dior...oh my, that can't possible be true IMO. She's hideous in those recent photos showing her angry on the phone walking about in Mondeceito. I can count on 1-2 fingers she wore a formal dress that looked really good on her. But I guess I'm biased a bit.
SUNDAY, JUNE 18, 2023
Blind Item #8
Remember the really rich guy from the well known wealthy family who had lunch a couple of months back with the A list mostly movie actress and everyone was guessing whether they were a couple. Yeah, he had lunch in the past ten days with the alliterate one. She certainly enjoys hanging out with single billionaires.
I'm kind of intrigued by the idea of * being the face of Middle Aged Dior. Would she accept that? I just don't see her as someone a woman of any age would aspire to be. All the nasty behaviors aside, she just doesn't have any sort of special attraction. Zero It factor. Merely average looks, not ugly but nothing especially pretty. Nothing whatsoever to make her stand out, even if you knew nothing about her train wreck with the BRF.
We've heard rumors of Hazmat wearing Dior and perhaps being a face as well; could she be trying to push her way into that, even take it from him?
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2023/06/blind-item-8_18.html#disqus_thread
Dior tested the water with an ad that showed the suit Harry wore at the Coronation was made by them - they got a lot of backlash from the public as being really tacky (which it was).
This is a planted story by their new PR company (with Dior's approval) to see what kind of feedback they get. I would be gobsmacked if they went with her and/or him. They'll probably still get free clothes but no paid for campaign - I mean, who are their customers exactly?
(he's referring to that big story in the Daily Mail about * possibly becoming a Dior spokesperson)
https://twitter.com/sage1411/status/1670544258640621570
that seems a bit over the top, even for Harold. I mean, he grew up in the BRF so he must have had an idea about how things worked. Has anyone heard this rumour before?
https://twitter.com/ShivaBur/status/1670335570600660992
some interesting comments here on Dlist about the f**king grifters story.
there's one post analyzing *'s wardrobe choices.
https://youtu.be/_6ni4IRttMQ
I dislike the matching wide brimmed hat as it serves to make her face look droopy. I don’t see how anyone directly behind a lady in such a wide brimmed hat can see anything. Catherine seems to have embraced the current heavily penciled eyebrow Instagram trend. For someone who had well defined dark eyebrows already, it’s too much. I think she should explore a softer color palette for her eyes because she’s always used the same dark eyeshadow and it is starting to look a bit hard on a woman in her 40s. Her smile does seem a bit stiff, but I can’t decide if it’s because she feels a bit uncomfortable in the bilious green dress and hat or if she might’ve had a bit of Botox done. There’s a lot more pressure on her this year, as the newly promoted princess of Wales and colonel of the Irish Guards. I give top marks to Camilla’s more streamlined military homage in her red ensemble.
Charles looked very well. I think he’s enjoying being the King finally.
that's a good comment over at the thread at DListed about the grifters story.
Dior and the rumors of a contract about to be signed. Immediately I think of others in the past like HM, TQ will bake a birthday cake ...
And I agree with whomever said it's the mouth that seems off, maybe also her cheeks, but I can't see any difference. She's always had prominent cheekbones and even if she got some subtle fillers there, would it affect her mouth? She didn't need a face-lift, which is the only other thing I can think of that would affect the area near her mouth. Maybe some very subtle lip filler? It doesn't really look like that, either.
Magstha, you have me howling in laughter, and always make my day with your wit! Ditto to whoever made the comment about her giant bag of Ozempic and the race card next to her expired driver's license!!
One can only hope Dior are scouring the internet to see firsthand how ridiculous it is to even think about the Harkles representing the brand. It beggars belief.
My mother is in respite care for a few days, so I've had free time to comment. Thank you all for putting up with my rambling, and for all your insights and tea. Such a bright spot in the midst of what can be difficult and boring days. Special thanks to abbyh and Nutty (?) for providing this space for us.
I thought Catherine's green outfit was 'Irish green' as she is the Colonel of the Irish Guards, in fact she was wearing a shamrock brooch. I liked the colour but I agree the ornaments on her dress were too much. I thought the eyebrows were heavier than usual and I noticed that her eye makeup is heavy, as it was at the Jordanian wedding. You are right in saying she should wear a softer colour palette for her eyes.
A minor point re Edward. I don't think he failed his Royal Marine basic training as as such, simply he didn't not wish to make the service his long-term career so left after completing one-third of the training. The training is extremely rigorous and challenging physically and mentally and he did really well having gone that far.
Yes, I heard it sometime ago. The notion of a joint monarchy seems to have been planted by Diana, who called him `Good King Harry' and tried to treat him the same as William as a way of handling his jealousy. He clearly coped with the cognitive dissonance of simultaneously believing he could do what he liked as he wasn't going to be king.
I also read that he wanted half the Duchy as his right before it became apparent that ERII wasn't long for this world. When that eventually came about, I was waiting for it to come up again. Now, I wouldn't be surprised if he fed the belief to * in the first place
Comments on the link you gave may be roughly 50:50 (I haven't counted) with those doubting the story saying he must be mad. Well, nobody has ever said that he isn't. He probably believes that Pa is a deity in a cargo cult, just as some South Sea islanders believed Prince Philip to be, and probably still believes in Santa Claus. He's like a young children denying the obvious, insisting that someone else committed a misdemeanour when they've been caught red-handed for instance. His logic seems stuck at aged 5 years.
Even if he had been the first-born, with this track-record, I'm sure that Parliament and/or the Accession Council would reject him a king - certainly the People would, as I'm sure they would if the worst happened.
@GWAH Apologies, I was thinking of the Duchy, not the monarchy. This is the first time I’ve read that he asked/demanded the Crown to be passed to her.
IMO, it’s feasible that he did so. I reckon his thinking went like this:
1.Mummy said I was equal to Wm and was Good King Henry and I could be joint monarch.
2. I mentioned this to * before I married her
3. She saw that a joint monarchy could be turned into a single one
4. She showed me that she was better than I was
5. Therefore it makes sense that she should become Queen Regnant. She used her veil as a signal that she should take over from Granny – she nailed her colours to the mast and will never surrender.
IT has an internal logical consistency if one accepts the premise, planted by Diana, that he and Wm are equals. It’s just a series of baby steps. Completely crackers.
Dior? I can see a couple of major problems: No matter how slim she gets, she has a boxy figure. So unless Dior is planning a collection for short middle-aged to old women with a thickening waist, she is not suitable as a model. And, she just does not get invited to the A-lister events, so not enough lucrative exposure for fabulous outfits. The royal link is gone ... they just do not get invited. And, Dior risks alienating all other royals (European royals may just boycott the brand if they strike a deal with her). Anna Wintour probably would rather suck lemons than feature her in Vogue, which Dior really needs Perhaps they can use her as a brand ambassador for a new perfume: Betrayal ... empowered women make sure they are always the betrayers and never the betrayed.
She really is trying to manifest the Dior deal though. She has often worn the brand for royal events, and this is not the first time that she has put out the rumour that she is in negotiations to become the face of Dior.
I think he could still be worth something to Dior, but perhaps a deal with him will not manifest as she will insist on being part of the package?
-----
I see Elon Musk's sister has her own streaming service for romantic movies, which she produces herself. That family has an unbelievable work ethic, so I don't see TBW taking on Hallmark and Elon Musk's sister and becoming a successful producer of the romance genre, specifically romantic comedy.
Someone in the know on CDAN has stated stated that WME with Dior's approval floated the idea of Mrs. Todger representing the brand. Dior wants to get a feel for its customer base. Maybe not clothes, but perhaps cosmetics? Because Mrs. Todger ain't no model as evidenced in her latest photos. She does not exude glamour, rather whiney rich victim.
Recent GB News had on one Sam Dowler, described as a political broadcaster and commentator, who said:
‘People that I know, not at Spotify, elsewhere, that have had these conversations with Meghan and Harry, via Zoom about the content they need to be producing. And everything that they’ve said was ridiculous, as in like people don’t want to hear that; people aren’t going to be interested in that. For example, Meghan has like this sense of control over her own public image that’s crippled her, I think.’
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/14deg9h/until_bill_simmons_gets_drunk_and_tells_about_his/
She's looking much older than she is. Harsher make-up maybe? Stronger, anyway.
She looks better with more muted make-up, imo. But maybe she was bored with that after doing it for so many years.
She was looking like a young 30's woman, but lately looks like mid 50's.
The Spartans always had two Kings (though not Queens).
I've seen some photos from the pap-walk of the Duchess on Saturday and although I usually cannot stand her looks on this occasion I thought she was looking quite appealing which is most impressive for nearly forty-two.
Dr Starkey says that since the restoration we have been a Royal Republic and adds that Parliament should have been at the Coronation rather than the five hundred or so members of the public whom he says should not have been there. As she cannot be a sole Queen perhaps Markle would like to be the first Lady Protector.
@soproudofher
Jun 18
My sources at @dior tell me that the #meghanmarkle brand ambassadorship is a fait accompli. Prepare to see Queen Meghan at every bus stop, social media platform, and fashion magazine. They are planning for an all-out Markle blitz: a MASSIVE campaign, unlike any in history.
https://twitter.com/soproudofher/status/1670407279567421440
'I also read that he wanted half the Duchy as his right . . . Now, I wouldn't be surprised if he fed the belief to * in the first place'
I think it's entirely possible that * fed Harry the belief.
-------
Re ILBW and Dior, where /how is she going to be an ambassador for Dior? As @Sandie remarked, 'Anna Wintour probably would rather suck lemons than feature her in Vogue' (very funnily observed). What's left? She's far too old and too short for the catwalk. As for Dior makeup, maybe they'll launch a range for darker skin? Not that she's dark, but this is something she'd love to promote. Maybe they're expanding their bronzer range.
This is a post likening * to Del Boy in `Only Fool's and Horses', constantly saying that next year she'll be in the money. For Nutties who've never seen this BBC sitcom, the title refers to a belief that only fools and horses actually work for a living.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Only_Fools_and_Horses for some interesting parallels.
`Has Meghan chosen driver who is spitting image of the late Henri Paul? Disturbing!'
has pointed out that Meghan's appointed a driver who has a remarkable resemblance to Henri Paul. Coincidence or what?
Henri Paul http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7200366.stm
Celt News https://www.youtube.com/shorts/zQBkGSxM4Uk (undated)
“Happiness is the secret to all beauty; there is no beauty that is attractive without happiness.”
Meghan Markle faked podcast interviews, her voice added later: sources
(I’d provide a link but it would just take you to the current rolling edition)
Since the passing of the Queen, a lot of members of the RF have been looking more haggard. Charles and Edward both have more stamina than is visibly apparent, riding in the parade.
Catherine was blessed with wonderful bone structure and an enviable frame for wearing clothes. She’s very athletic and I know she works hard to maintain her slim figure, but with such low body fat, and certainly none to spare in her face, I feel that she is going to age more quickly then someone with more cushion under her skin. I can’t even begin to imagine the punishing scrutiny that she is under constantly. But the constant pressure to be impeccable at all times, and all the smiling she has to do at Public engagements Is starting to take a toll I think. I’m not sure of the decision for the heavier eye make up; a summer event would call for lighter tones to go with her dress. The British royals have a history of aging precipitately. Even the queen, who study genetics are beyond dispute Morphed from a young beauty into a decided matron in only five or six short years. Same thing happened to Princess Anne. And was a blonde dish in her youth and as a young mum. It seems like one day in the 80s she woke up and had become a mirror image of her mother. The men fare even worse, Balding in their mid 20s. For a family that has the tops in medical care, beauty treatments and nutrition it’s a curious phenomenon. The stress must be incredible and all their luxuries can’t overcome it.
Since the passing of the Queen, a lot of members of the RF have been looking more haggard. Charles and Edward both have more stamina than is visibly apparent, riding in the parade.
Catherine was blessed with wonderful bone structure and an enviable frame for wearing clothes. She’s very athletic and I know she works hard to maintain her slim figure, but with such low body fat, and certainly none to spare in her face, I feel that she is going to age more quickly then someone with more cushion under her skin. I can’t even begin to imagine the punishing scrutiny that she is under constantly. But the constant pressure to be impeccable at all times, and all the smiling she has to do at Public engagements Is starting to take a toll I think. I’m not sure of the decision for the heavier eye make up; a summer event would call for lighter tones to go with her dress. The British royals have a history of aging precipitately. Even the queen, who study genetics are beyond dispute Morphed from a young beauty into a decided matron in only five or six short years. Same thing happened to Princess Anne. And was a blonde dish in her youth and as a young mum. It seems like one day in the 80s she woke up and had become a mirror image of her mother. The men fare even worse, Balding in their mid 20s. For a family that has the tops in medical care, beauty treatments and nutrition it’s a curious phenomenon. The stress must be incredible and all their luxuries can’t overcome it.
Since the passing of the Queen, a lot of members of the RF have been looking more haggard. Charles and Edward both have more stamina than is visibly apparent, riding in the parade.
Catherine was blessed with wonderful bone structure and an enviable frame for wearing clothes. She’s very athletic and I know she works hard to maintain her slim figure, but with such low body fat, and certainly none to spare in her face, I feel that she is going to age more quickly then someone with more cushion under her skin. I can’t even begin to imagine the punishing scrutiny that she is under constantly. But the constant pressure to be impeccable at all times, and all the smiling she has to do at Public engagements Is starting to take a toll I think. I’m not sure of the decision for the heavier eye make up; a summer event would call for lighter tones to go with her dress. The British royals have a history of aging precipitately. Even the queen, who study genetics are beyond dispute Morphed from a young beauty into a decided matron in only five or six short years. Same thing happened to Princess Anne. And was a blonde dish in her youth and as a young mum. It seems like one day in the 80s she woke up and had become a mirror image of her mother. The men fare even worse, Balding in their mid 20s. For a family that has the tops in medical care, beauty treatments and nutrition it’s a curious phenomenon. The stress must be incredible and all their luxuries can’t overcome it.
Dior are rather nonplussed as to how this rumour started, because there is no truth in it!
https://archive.ph/2023.06.19-172650/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/royals/dior-meghan-markle-prince-harry-deal-history-royals/
She is just too stupid and common to understand the relationship that Dior has with royalty, especially continental royalty. She does not fit the profile for Dior. If she is willing to pay full price for any of their merchandise, they will happily sell it to her, but they have no interest in her being their ambassador.
Harry’s wife: I’m about to sign with Dior and it will be the biggest campaign ever.
Dior: we just signed two people not named Harry’s wife.
Would reply more fully, only am arguing with computer. If I go silent, folks , it's because I've been locked out.
a comment over at CDAN:
MONDAY, JUNE 19, 2023
Blind Item #1
The recent quotes from the huge talent agency seem to be throwing the ginger haired one under the bus and backing it up and do it all over again and blaming him for everything that is wrong with the brand and that the alliterate one doesn't need him or his toxic mess. So, to me that means divorce, or him no longer doing anything in public.
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2023/06/blind-item-1_19.html#disqus_thread
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/14dksfq/oh_the_diorama/
While the uniquely American term, meaning someone who engages in small-scale swindling, was never used by courtiers during the three painful years the Sussexes were officially part of the monarchy, similar words were, as the pair found ways to blame everyone but themselves for their perceived lack of success.
'Entitled', 'rude', 'lazy', 'delusional' and 'afraid of hard work' were some that popped up between members of the 'Sussex Survivors Club' regularly, as H&M looked for spurious reasons to get out of public service commitments that they didn't think benefited them.
It culminated in the now famous moment in Fiji, on a rare royal tour where work was actually required on daily walkabouts, where Meghan suggested she should be compensated financially for such hardship.
...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-12211467/DAN-WOOTTON-Royal-courtiers-thought-Sussexes-entitled-lazy-afraid-hard-work.html
It's been a little worrisome about some of the royals since the Queen's death. I feel like it threw the whole family for a loop.
Sophie looked devastated for the first few months.
Prince Edward was beyond devastated. He really worried me for a while there. But he's looking better now.
PW looks drawn sometimes.
And Catherine, my heart goes out to her. She can't even breathe without excessive scrutiny. Every stinkin' move she makes is analyzed.
She's held 100% accountable for the kids, besides.
She can't wear anything but what it's compared to Diana or Mm.
And then we have the King and Queen. They both look tired.
Although when it's smaller events and KC is greeting crowds, he does look happy and contented. It's a pleasure to see him looking so happy.
It's the bigger more formal events where they both look uncomfortable. There's a lot of discomfort there for some reason. Maybe afraid of putting a foot wrong.
And on top of all that, they have the Harkles lobbing grenades from abroad e ery few days.
They must be really getting tired of the Harkles.
I cannot believe Mizz Todger keeps humiliating herself with these grandiose claims she clearly pushes. I do not believe Dior ever once considered her for anything, at least not after seeing how she looked in their clothing. One cannot help but notice that Givenchy have had nothing to do with her since she made such a mess of their wedding gown. Tales of her obnoxious behavior during the fittings would have made the rounds at all the couture maisons, as well.
I find it ever so slightly more believable they considered Hazmat for a bit. I have certainly seen him look as though he smells as bad as Johnny Depp is alleged to, and they may have toyed with the idea of a Royal Rebel. There were rumors of the Duo trying to rebrand him as a sex symbol. Dior acknowledged that he wore a suit of theirs at the Coronation. They may have provided it. More likely that Nutmeg had someone ring up and ask for one. It is also very easy for me to believe that Dior initially made inquiries about Harry, which thrilled his wife until she decided that her own fabulous self would be even better. I bet it was the first thing she told WME to work on.
Saw pictures of Catherine’s outfit at the Order of the Garter ceremony, and she looked more relaxed and like herself, I thought. Her polkadot dress evokes a nearly identical look Diana wore to Royal Ascot in 1988. I prefer Catherine’s look because the black polkadots are very small. Diana’s were a lot larger giving more of a Dalmatian effect. Catherine has the patrician bone structure and the upswept hair to pull off these millinery confections that harken back to the 18th and 19th centuries. The theme of the dress is continued in the ornamentation on the hat. Her eyebrows looked more normal on this occasion so she’s turned down the eyebrow pencil. It’s really not necessary because her natural brows were perfectly flattering to begin with. I think with the extremely wide brimmed green hat she went heavier with the eye make up Because the heart was so overpowering. It might have been a charming look at a summer garden party but I felt that that hat was too large for both the streamlined silhouette of her dress, even though it matched the color perfectly, but it was also out of scale with Camilla’s headpiece. Too showy in my opinion for the event, a bit frivolous. The black and white hat is better. Headgear should serve to complement the outfit and the face underneath and not be the star attraction to the point where it’s distracting.
Catherine was still using her signature of brown eyeshadow With a heavy hand, and I think that that more than anything is making her look kind of tired. I am sure that shades of brown complement her hazel eyes but she needs to do something lighter and more taupe. Her smile looked more natural in the most recent pictures. She’s got impeccable posture and grooming in these very formal events but she’s definitely most relaxed and happy in the casual family environment at home. I hope after the glut of ceremonial events she’s had to do recently that the family gets to enjoy their annual vacation in the sun pretty soon.
Changing gears to the Duchess of Edinburgh for a second, I was viewing some older pictures of Sophie with her shorter hair that I really liked. I think the shorter hairstyle really suited her small features and made her look much younger. I guess longer hair does offer more options for styling in terms of updos for the very formal occasions, but these do not represent the bulk of their time or appearances. A woman Sophies age… And she and Edward are about 18 months older than me… Risks looking a bit dowdy with long hair when it just hangs. She normally wears it down on regular engagements and I think she would look fresher if she would consider taking it shorter. Diana must have been pressurized to grow her hair out but apart from a brief period around the birth of Harry when she experimented with slightly longer hair, she kept it resolutely short for her entire royal career and beyond. Good tiara is important but long hair doesn’t suit every woman.
https://youtu.be/C1ryjl5UeCk
Neil Sean reports that 🕯️ and 🪶 have threatened to sue Bill Simmons if he doesn't retract his comments calling them "F***ing Grifters"
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/14e2mco/lets_not_be_too_unkind_she_has_been_in_a_brand/
I think she can get a good gig going if she will only be realistic about who she really is.
Kelly Osbourne tells it like it is and the Sinners love her for it. They haven't forgotten what happened to Kelly's Mum, Sharon.
Lientery
The interviews that weren’t her
Another bout of Dior-rhoea…
`Sussex fans frequently insist their critics are racists. No! As 🇬🇧 BLM activist Imarn Ayton passionately stated, they are disliked because they used and abused support from the black community as a PR tool.'
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/14dwtfp/sussex_fans_frequently_insist_their_critics_are/
IMO WME will continue to take Mrs. Todger's, er Harry's, money until she does harm to WME's reputation.
WildBoar & Maneki
I’m boaking at the thought of
Diordrama 😉
@Rebecca- Thank you
@Ian’s Girl- Cheers
Can’t be easy looking after
your mum
God Bless X
I can't think of something witty to write with the word diorama:
a model that shows a situation, such as a historical event or animals in their natural environment, in a way that looks real:
Dioramas are three-dimensional.
(Cambridge dictionary)
Perhaps your talents could produce something?
Another SMM post of considerable importance: it invites journalists not restricted by UK law to investigate all the mysteries that we have pondered, eg where's money said to be destined for specific charities gone? Was * the ultimate source of the problems with the Wales's Caribbean tour? And so on.
Can any Nutties add to the list?
I can only think of minor things like:
`How many roles did she get fraudulently by claiming to to be a union member? How much did she benefit?
Is her stated descent from Edward III definite or is does it contain links based only on circumstantial evidence/mathematical probability?
What is the real story of her mother's absence from her early life? Her business activities since 2017?
The inset in the second photo here is very strange. Perhaps it should be captioned `Take your Son, Sir!'?
As it is, she seems to have her forearms on back-to-front - is that the result of hypermobile joints?
Of course they are! I think H has got 5 separate lawsuits going already by himself so maybe she will pick this one up since Spotify was her brainchild.
This show provides a never-ending supply of popcorn, doesn't it? Since litigation is their primary income-generating stream going forward, the smartest thing for everyone in the world would be to completely stop speaking to them, writing about them, tweeting or looking at them.
We can dream . . .
If it comes to a court case, the judge, the jurors, the bailiffs, everyone all can nod their heads, and go "uh huh, that's right, that's what they are, uh huh, they are, grifters."
We can all hope the Todgers sue so all is revealed.
has anyone seen this clip of * modeling for a pretend perfume ad?
the clip is extremely short but long enough to see that her acting is horrible
'litigation is their primary income-generating stream going forward'
It certainly looks that way. Litigation, however, is eye-wateringly expensive and there is no guarantee of success, although so far * hasn't done too badly. I think the outcome of Harry's court case will be announced next week. Just look at Rebekah Vardy here in the UK, a footballer's wife who took another one to court. I'm not interested in their disputes but it was announced that R Vardy had to pay her opponent's £1.8M legal bill and is now disputing the amount. She refused to settle out of court and insisted on going to court...
TUESDAY, JUNE 20, 2023
Your Turn
Will Meghan and Harry still be a couple a year from now?
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2023/06/your-turn_20.html#disqus_thread
opus. agreed. they did throw it all away and no getting that back
so many dior wasn’t about dior but door as in doordash. perhaps the couple/grifters/couch potatoes were angling for being spokespersons. when you are so famous and need security just to pick up lunch why not just tap tap and go and have it delivered to your gatehouse. now need for hair extensions, makeup, shoes or children to be arranged. 😉
now, * is trying to make us believe it's Cartier that's interested in her as a spokesperson, not Dior.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/14evtjj/why_i_think_dior_made_a_huge_mistake_a_sweet_nod/
When you think about it, the tabloids and social media went into meltdown about the completely fabricated story of Dior and their non-existent partnership with the Duchess of Montecito. She may have been able to grift her way into such a deal 5 years ago, but that was a brief moment in time.
Who the heck is now trying to palm her off onto Cartier?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtSbCBnhSzQ
This is the link at SMM
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/14eqg0j/lady_c_tea_youtube_62023_a_few_nuggets/
Folk on SMM are saying they can change their name to anything they like. Period.
I don't know US law on this one but in English law that's true but with the a condition, namely that it's not for criminal purposes...
ArabellaL
@ArabellaRober19
Tom Bower has revealed that mm and Harry want to change their last names to Spencer. Ok, go for it. Get out of the LoS and return all of your titles, Mr. and Mrs. Henry Spencer.
https://twitter.com/ArabellaRober19/status/1671381326019084288
that slide show is hilarious.
https://archive.ph/2023.06.21-132022/https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/salt-in-the-wound-new-pictures-of-king-charles-and-his-stepson-a-major-blow-for-prince-harry/news-story/456bd6c06c436a3ca55a34c94ed8a0c9
Let me introduce you to a nice chap called Tom.
A classic west London sort, he looks like he knows his way around a decent steak and kidney pud, probably drives a mud-splattered Range Rover and his biggest concern seems to be if there might be any decent claret left in his Fulham cellar.
He also happens to be the stepson and son of King Charles and Queen Camilla.
What I always find delightful is the fact that Tom and his sister Laura Lopes might be children of a bona fide, actual-crown-to-her-name Queen, but by and large, they fly entirely under the radar.
They are not stalked by the press, they have day jobs and are entirely responsible for remembering bin night.
Which is what made the appearance of Tom, 48, with his royal mum and her other half at Ascot quite the surprise.
There was the well-respected food writer on Tuesday, doing a good bit of yelling at the gee-gees alongside the King and Queen. (I’m assuming Camilla had a ton on race number five).
And just like that, 8500km away, Tom’s stepbrother Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex’s hellish week after years of hellish weeks just got that much more brimstone-y.
Tom’s Ascot outing caps off what would have to be one of the roughest stretches for Harry, with so many things going wrong on so many fronts for him, I’m not even sure where to start here.
Cont. ...
Maybe with his career seeming to have cratered? That he and wife Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex lost millions of dollars last week when Spotify dumped them? That questions are being raised over how much longer Netflix might want to be tied to the increasingly whiffy Brand Sussex? That back in the UK, the Home Office is “furious” with Harry’s courtroom foot stomping over his security which is set to cost taxpayers more than $1.8 million? That according to a new report he will “never be reconciled” with his father?
And now comes the cherry on this miserable sundae: estranged from his dad, now here is his stepbrother playing happy Royal Families.
The lesson we should all take away is just when things seem like they could not get any worse for the Sussexes, then hey presto! They can and often do. (It’s enough to think that Harry should invest in a rabbit’s foot, some new crystals and enough sage to start a brush fire).
Let’s start with Aitch’s career, a novel concept he only got around to becoming acquainted with at age 35, having previously only ever had two jobs – army, working HRH – and both working for his Granny.
For a while there, things looked smashing for the Sussexes professionally. The big deals! The huge contracts! The dollar figures attached to everything so large they would have made Prince William choke on his morning coddled egg!
Except that in the years since then, Harry and Meghan have discovered that despite their adjacency to the British throne, large entertainment companies still want them to, prepare yourself, actually do some work.
They want them to actually produce something besides reams of emails with typos in “compassion” and grandiose claims about how they are going to inspire the masses any minute now.
Last week, Spotify parted ways with the duke and duchess, with only Meghan ever having managed to get around to recording a series for them. (And man, what a series that was, an intellectually bereft example of wannabe-feminist shaped noise that took a 28 person team – really – to make).
Over the weekend came the first stirrings about the Sussexes’ future with Netflix, with The Sun reporting that the billion-dollar behemoth is “unlikely to renew” their deal.
A source said: “There is a less friendly attitude from some at the top. The feeling is that the lemon has been fully squeezed”.
If the entertainment giant was to also cut the cash cord with the couple, then what the dickens would they do? They need to be earning many millions a year in “basic” living costs, having saddled themselves with a 16-toilet monster of a faux-Tuscan estate.
And yet, which companies with pockets deep enough to do business with the Sussexes would be eager to be associated with them?
More than 40 months on from Megxit, the Sussex name is synonymous with family dysfunction, unhappiness and a low general whine that never seems to end – hardly the vibe that sells midsize family cars or dog food or whatever the hell a snack cake is.
Having spent years having a prolonged tantrum* about the royal family, the Sussexes have managed to not make any real inroads philanthropically or to achieve anything of real note off their own bats. (*Making the occasional good point).
The duke and duchess have yet to demonstrate any talent or creativity or any real skill set aside from their ability to emote from greige sofas while red recording lights flash.
If corporate America isn’t thrilled with Harry, then the sorts back at the Home Office in the UK are reportedly even more upset with the defector duke.
The Sun, via a freedom of information request, has discovered that Harry’s legal challenge to the decision by the Metropolitan Police to no longer provide him with security will cost taxpayers $1.8 million (£1 million). Even if the Home Office prevails, he will not be forced to pay costs due to an “unspecified loophole”.
Meanwhile, the current state of things between the Duke of Sussex and His Majesty sounds like it’s going from bad to uh-oh-everything-is-on-fire worse.
Tom Sykes in the Daily Beast has reported that friends of the King and Queen “suspect the two will never be reconciled”.
One regal pal told Sykes: “There is no plan for Harry and Charles to meet. There might have been a chance of reconciliation had it not been for the book. But Charles was dismayed and deeply hurt by what Harry said about him and about Camilla in his book”.
Given this situation, those photos of Tom Parker Bowles yucking it up with Charles take on a whole new salt-in-the-wound dynamic.
But let’s pause here and zoom out. Let me ask you – what is going right for Harry and Meghan right now?
In May, what should have been a PR slam dunk – the done-up glam duchess collecting a gong in New York – became an absolute disaster after they claimed they were involved in a “near catastrophic” paparazzi chase. The city’s mayor and police department failed to back up their claims.
Also last month, as the couple marked their five-year anniversary, the Telegraph reported that, according to “the owner of a leading hotel chain in Montecito”, the establishment has “a room set aside for Harry where he occasionally stays on his own” and that the secretive members club San Vincente Bungalows is Harry’s “escape place”. (A representative for the Sussexes denied the claims).
Then, while the Sussexes might have gotten prince and princess titles for their children, the royal family blanked both Archie and Lili on their recent birthdays. (Incredibly bad form Charles!)
Royal biographer Christopher Wilson recently reported that Harry’s book deal “requires him to produce at least one more book, and soon”. I am truly at a loss about what he could write about that would sell unless he dredges up more royal drama.
It’s at this point I should get into Harry’s 87 various courtroom fights as he does battle with the British media, but news.com.au has only so much server space.
So, I’ll ask again. Aside from the fact that Harry and Meghan have two adorable kids, what is actually coming up Sussex?
And did Tom Parker Bowles win a tenner on the last race of the day?
The way things are going for Aitch, he probably took home the trifecta.
as for latest Bower story about the duo asking to borrow a house for a stay, well i have experience on this. my cousins come from a side of the family that has more money than my side. they are constantly looking for freebies from staying with people they barely know so they can go on vacation to taking food off buffet tables to bro g home (without telling the hostess). not surprised they are constantly asking for freebies.
as for latest Bower story about the duo asking to borrow a house for a stay, well i have experience on this. my cousins come from a side of the family that has more money than my side. they are constantly looking for freebies from staying with people they barely know so they can go on vacation to taking food off buffet tables to bro g home (without telling the hostess). not surprised they are constantly asking for freebies.
Charles, Earl Spencer was a godson of the late Queen and his grandmother, Lady Fermoy, was, of course one of the chief engineers of Diana's bid to become Princess of Wales, being in cahoots with the Queen Mum. Charles Spencer, by many accounts an odious little sh*te just like his ginger Wales nephew didn't let the Queen being his godmother as well as his sovereign prevent him from slagging her off in church in front of a worldwide audience of millions at that verbally abusive tirade he called a eulogy at his sister's funeral. I haven't got much if any use for this guy, though he has mostly kept a low(ish) profile since then. His chief occupations seem to consist of getting divorced and remarried to a phethora of wives (he's on #3 or #4, can't remember) and penning a series of historical books that have actually been well-received. The Earl is visibly absent at any Royal court events attended by his sisters. I really do not think that he is welcome at court after his performance in 1997, whereas the ladies are not blamed for that infamous speech. Lady Jane's husband Lord Robert Fellowes was former equerry to HMTQ. The Queen was quite a forgiving person but I don't think Charles is, particularly. And nor do I believe that Earl Spencer has a current relationship with his adult nephews. During their schooldays in the wake of the loss of their mum, I think they did spend school holidays quite a few times at Althorp, but we're talking more than 20 years ago.
Would Earl Spencer really want to stick his head above the parapet again and risk Royal fire for colluding with the Montecito traitors? There's the ongoing rumor that Charles Spencer offered TBW the Spencer tiara for her wedding at Harry's behest (prodded by TBW, no doubt.) She is voracious to get her hands on anything of Diana's as 'her right' as she sees it. Deprived of Diana's engagement ring--an endless source of rage--I would totally expect her to obsess about Diana's wedding tiara . . property of the Spencer family for use by Spencer brides--both daughters of the house and women marrying a blood Spencer man. Harry's half Spencer, but since lineage is through the male line, he's not a Spencer man for tiara-borrowing purposes. TBW was a Wales bride and as such the Crown provided the tiara. It would have been a gross breach of etiquette to reject a Royal tiara in favor of the Spencer one, and while TBW wouldn't care a fig about that, Earl Spencer would certainly know that he could not in all propriety loan out his family tiara to his nephew's fiancee. Not done.
But I can totally see this machination by TBW . . "I'm a Spencer now--it's in my name, so I demand the tiara for my next corporate shilling event!" I know that's how her rancid wheels are turning. She doesn't own a tiara and never will, unless she buys herself one. I bet she's harassed Cartier to be their new spokemodel in exchange for some free ice too.
I'm going to give Earl Spencer the benefit of the doubt, even though I don't care for the man. He presides over one of the oldest aristocratic dynasties in the Kingdom. He's smart enough to keep a vast distance between himself and his drug-addled expat nephew who he probably hasn't seen in 10 years and his calculating American hussy. The Earl certainly does not need that association, but the Harkles do.
This is the tea that Tom Bower shared in GB interview. She sidled up to a very wealthy man at a social gathering and walks away with his phone number. The next day, the very wealthy man gets two phone calls from hapless (not her - she got husband to do this). In the first, hapless asks if they can use his beach house. In the second, he asks if they can use his private plane to get there. Bower claims he has impeccable sources.
How bad is this going to get for them?
Thanks for the Daniela Elser article. I enjoyed reading it.
a)it'll give Reddit the excuse to shut them down
b) i's potentially libellous (I'm not sure why).
Best wait and see what emerges.
Announcement on his brother's birthday! Earthsot Prize is in Singapore, but in November, three months after the hapless polo event.
He says MM approached a wealthy person at a gathering saying they should hang out, and got their contact info. The next day Harry calls and asks if they can borrow their beach house. They were told yes. The following day Harry calls again (notice Meghan made the contact and then Harry was tasked to make the calls to ask favors). This time Harry asks if they can use the person's private plane to get to the borrowed beach house.
Bower said Netflix and Spotify were both fed up with the nonstop grifting they put up with from the duo.
Bower stands by his sources.
https://twitter.com/storiesbyjemay/status/1671585374282424362
so I think that Spotify were also fed up with the constant demand for freebies as well as the lack of work ethic from the alleged (LOL) grifters.
https://twitter.com/greco_show/status/1671671728144285698?t=9YI0ulmkUyero9QYy8YKqw&s=19
I don’t care for Charles Spencer either, but I’ve been listening to a podcast he hosts with two other Brits, Rabbit Hole Detectives. It’s interesting and I especially enjoy his contributions because he speaks so well.
I read 'Harry's interviews' at the end of the article on Tom Parker Bowles at Ascot. I had to suspend disbelief for a minute. H said among other little gems "I'm very, very happy. I'm very at peace. I am in a better place that I've ever been and I think that probably angers some people, infuriates others". I don't know when he said that but 'very, very happy' and 'at peace'? You could have fooled me.
--------
@Hikari
I echo your sentiments re. Charles Spencer. I found his eulogy at Diana's funeral very offensive.
I don't know if he's in touch with his nephews, he didn't attend both his daughters' weddings.
If ILBW wants a tiara, she can always pop into Claire's accessories.
New business blow for Meghan and Harry as US officials REFUSE to grant the Archetypes patents - barely a week after $20million Spotify deal was ditched
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have had a trademark application for their podcast name rejected, records show.
The couple had their application for exclusive rights to 'Archetypes' - the name chosen by Meghan for their podcast - refused by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office because of the 'likelihood of confusion' with an existing brand.
They sought exclusive use of the name in categories like 'downloadable audio recordings and podcasts' for anything concerning the 'cultural treatment of women and stereotypes facing women'.
But it was refused due to an existing trademark by Arizonian firm Archetypes LLC, which sought exclusive use in 2015 for a series of books and articles about 'nutrition, fitness, sexuality, psychological self-improvement' and more.
The couple's lawyer, Marjorie Witter Norman, of Los Angeles firm Willkie, Farr & Gallagher, has applied for another three months in which to finesse the Archetypes application.
They also both failed to sign their own application to the regulatory body, records show.
Meghan made the same mistake last year when she applied to reactivate 'The Tig' trademark — the name she favoured for the lifestyle blog she wrote before marrying Harry. etc...
Things are not going well, are they? As for failing to sign their application, how business minded are they? (rhetorical question).
https://tinyurl.com/yc5wazwf
To put this in context for non UK Nutties, Sir Trevor Phillips is black and a former head of the Commission for Racial Equality (now replaced by the Equality and Human Rights Commission) as well as a very respected broadcaster. He was talking as today is the 75th anniversary of the arrival of HMT Empire Windrush, a ship carrying migrants from the Carribbean.
Trevor is still hopping mad with Harry and Meghan and all their self-indulgent silliness.
‘They could have been a beacon of discovery and reconciliation! Not just to Britain, but the whole world,’ he says.
‘Instead, they completely squandered a golden opportunity to show everyone what this country is really like in matters of race — a country where no one disturbs themselves about a marriage across the lines of race and ethnicity,’ he adds, getting crosser and crosser.
‘But they constructed this completely ridiculous and unpleasant story about how maltreated they were — which, frankly, no one believes. No one cared about Meghan’s race. They could have made things different for millions of people and they chose not to. That’s unforgivable. In my book, that’s a sin.’
I'd say this is *'s doing and H was probably happy to go along with it. It just shows that she didn't know the UK at all, nor did she make any effort to know the country and its people, which we've always known. 'Their self-indulgent silliness' aptly describes their attitude. * had a golden opportunity to do something positive and 'of service' to the country. She really is not 'whip smart'.
This just illustrates how unbalanced and damaged she was, and is, that everything she does is ultimately a fail. Nothing positive ever emerges.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12220585/Sir-Trevor-Phillips-claims-Britain-NOT-racist-says-Meghan-Harry-squandered-opportunity.html
thanks for the link; it's hilarious.
quora comment about Montecito newspaper story about Harold collapsing in a Montecito restaurant during huge argument with *
'Meghan and Harry En Route To Oceangate Titanic Rescue Area??' There's nothing funny about that.
Meghan Markle is more unpopular than ever: Seven out of 10 Brits have a negative view of Duchess of Sussex, as poll shows Anne, Kate and William are best-loved royals
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/royals/article-12223639/Meghan-Markle-unpopular-new-poll-reveals.html
The comments on the Quora piece are somewhat sceptical.
The comments on the Quora piece are somewhat sceptical.
It seems hapless had many ideas for various podcast shows ... about childhood trauma, fatherhood, and major societal conversations, such as climate change and religion. He would interview people such as, wait for it, Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump, Mark Zuckerberg, Pope Francis ...
It seems that Spotify (or the many many people he phoned to ask for advice, which he then ignored) did not have a problem with the interviews (such guests would guarantee a huge listenership), but the unlikelihood that any of these people would agree to an interview with him.
My opinion: the duo were much better off in the safety of the royal family. Give two reckless toddlers too much money and a global platform and the results are pretty predictable.
“Harry spoke with multiple producers and production houses, these people said, to discuss possible shows. Along the way, Harry listened to various ideas from others but mostly stuck by his own — including one about childhood trauma. The concept: Harry would interview a procession of controversial guests, such as Vladimir Putin, Mark Zuckerberg and Donald Trump, about their early formative years and how those experiences resulted in the adults they are today.
Harry also had an idea, the people said, for a show centered on fatherhood. Another one would have tackled major societal conversations episode by episode, ranging from climate change to religion. For the latter, Harry hoped to have Pope Francis on as a guest.”
Found this tidbit on Reddit SaintMeghanMarkle regarding why * has not signed any of her applications for trademark:
‘ They don't sign them. That gets them a free extension, one they don't have to pay for. If they sign and it's rejected, they must reapply. When you reapply, you pay a fee. This is just their childish game to get extra time without having to pay for the extra time. MM especially uses it every single time.’
I guess this is a smart move suggested by lawyers. However , this is also their MO not to pay fees as well as all their tax shelters to avoid paying their fair share. Finding Freebies is truly an apt title for the Sussex blueprint.
Pillocks podcast:
To Trump
“why were you mean to megz”
To Putin
“megz wondering, any unclaimed
tiara’s from Great, great… cousin Nikki”
To the Pope
“how does megz become a Saint”
Canardization
Good points about Windrush 'immigrants' being British subjects (but they were not citizens).
-------
@Elskainga
Thank you for the 'tidbit' on Reddit. That's really *'s level, childish games and stalling for time.
-------
@Magatha
I think the questions for H's podcasts would have had to be scripted but I like your suggestions😉
Pillocks podcast answers:
Trump
“Her mien, in sooth”
Putin
“Nyet”
The Pope
“I cannot beatify the Beast”
“ The concept: Harry would interview a procession of controversial guests ….. about their early formative years and how those experiences resulted in the adults they are today.”
In other words, use his sister-in-law’s Early Years initiative as inspiration. Sicko.
Were Windrush arrivals immigrants?
Etymology, my dear chap! Latin prepositions suggesting directional movement tacked onto a verb meaning movement from place to place, nowt to do with nationality or identity.
They moved across the Atlantic ie they were migrants.
They left the W.Indies - they were emigrants.
They came into Britain - they were immigrants.
Even moving from one region/county/ town to another counts. To the locals where I now live in the SW region, I'm an `immigrant' from the SE. Technically, they are correct.
in which it is suggested that the security obsession is intended to prevent anyone taking unauthorised photos of them. I interpret this as preventing the production of photos to which she cannot claim copyright, thereby denying them payment for publication.
The billionaire whose beach house and private jet they scrounged has put the Scroungers on his no contact list. That would be Mark Cuban. Apparently Mrs. Scrounger made Mr. do all the calling and asking, and they borrowed Cuban's private jet several times a month. She called the paps to take photos at the beach house, violating Cuban's privacy. (I never saw those photos.).
Mrs. Scrounger sure knows how to hustle deals, and then bites the hand that feeds her. She really is stupid.
How solid is that report? I can believe the couple had a huge screaming fight while out somewhere because that's how they roll, but if Harry needed an ambulance, that's deeply concerning. I've said ever since he took up with her that I do not expect him to make it to 40, so if (when) the inevitable news comes, I will be saddened but not surprised. Not one iota. His substance abuse has been untrammeled ever since they ran off to America. In truth, I think that was the attraction of her to him. While endlessly promoting her healthful vegan yogi lifestyle and how she 'helped' Harry to live clean too (B#ll$pit) . . actually she has been aiding and abetting him in all his bad habits--either joining in or making sure he had endless supply of drugs and drink, to keep him malleable and also for future blackmail material.
King Charles must be heartsick; I think William has written Harry off entirely, but still, the pain of losing his only sibling to the Dark Side must be immense. Harry's an out-of-control addict and has been since he was 14 years old. But it's only ramped up in the last 5 years. There is no pretense any more that Call Me HRH is sober and in control of his faculties when he appears anywhere. Presumably he was less altered than usual in court recently but probably still On Something. I don't think he can function without substances any more.
The best possible future for Harry is that the Succubus leaves him and he goes to a treatment facility, maybe in Australia . . somewhere far, far away and stays there. Permanently. He's really not good for anything at all in terms of work, but at least that might keep him alive.
from Hello!
`... first wore when she was 27.'
Good for her! She is now 72 and it still fits perfectly.
how much * charges for a speech
Unbelievable!! Who would pay indeed? The site says 'Speaker’s Fee Range: $100,000 or More' but this is extremely vague. $100,000 for how long? On what topics? The extra fees, 'more' (?) - actually start at $5,000-10,000 and go up in $10,000 increments. It says 'travels from LA' but presumably if you're some distance away she'll need a private jet?
And she has the gall to call herself 'Member of the British Royal Family'. Not you're not, Megsy, not any more. You left, remember?
'Given their distance from the crown, the sheen Harry and Meghan once lent show-business projects is dimming. It helped cost them what was intended to be their first project with Netflix, an animated show about powerful women of history called “Pearl.”
The children’s show was developed when Meghan was still a working royal. It was created with help from David Furnish, who knew the royal family through his husband, Elton John. When the couple left the Palace and signed their Netflix deal, “Pearl” was the first show announced.
Netflix canceled it in May 2022. Executives decided that few children would care if the show they were watching had been produced by a duchess.'
https://archive.ph/2023.06.24-041155/https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/prince-harry-meghan-markle-spotify-netflix-deals-hollywood-dbf1b6ed
https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/14hlg4h/prince_harry_interviewing_putin_just_imagine_what/
https://archive.md/2023.06.24-060638/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2023/06/24/prince-harry-putin-podcast-spotify/
Big cheer for this article ... I am also tired of the narrative that royal ladies are copying each other's style, and as for 'sweet nod' ...!
But ... Other than the IG series, this is the project they are working on:
"Harry and Meghan are also developing a TV show for Netflix called “Bad Manners” based on Miss Havisham, a Charles Dickens character from “Great Expectations.” The prequel would recast the lonely spinster as a strong woman living in a patriarchal society, though it is unclear whether the show will get a green light from Netflix."
----
Why? Yes she lived in a patriarchial society (check when the novel was written you stupid woman), but she is certainly not a poster girl for strength. First, Miss Havisham actually adopted a child, so she had a daughter. Second, she was very wealthy. Third she was so bitter about being jilted that she stopped the clocks, wore her wedding dress, and kept her wedding feast (especially the cake) laid out gathering cobwebs. What's with the revisionism? And are they going to make it a comedy?